EFTA00183448¶
Marie - In reviewing your December proposal, there are a couple of things I don’t understand.¶
What limits are placed upon individuals who proceed under 2255 as if “Mr. Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense.” In other words, what individuals would have this right? And would these individual only have this right if they proceeded exclusively under 2255? Also, to what enumerated offenses do you think would Mr. Epstein have to make constructive admissions of conviction? and how many such offenses? And against whom? Remember that while you may have investigated various offenses, he only plead guilty to certain state crimes.¶
Finally, would paragraphs 8-10 of the September Agreement still be operative?¶
I am trying hard to understand what you have intended by the December letter. Alex has says he thinks it benefits Jeffrey, and I am open to understanding it that way. But I would like some clarity on these issues.¶
Thanks — Jay¶
Hi Jay – I forgot to mention that I can no longer argue that the Court shouldn’t force us to produce the agreement because we have already provided the victims with the relevant portion when I now understand from you that I have NOT provided them with the relevant portion.¶
1¶
EFTA00183449¶
Assistant U.S. Attorney¶
The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of Kirkland & Ellis LLP or Kirkland & Ellis International LLP. Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to postmaster@kirkland.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments.¶
2¶
EFTA00183450¶
EFTA00183451¶
The fourth document I have attached is a copy of a Declaration that I have filed in connection with the victims’ lawsuit filed against the United States. This Declaration sets forth our understanding of the Agreement and again quotes from the U.S. Attorney’s December letter. Messrs. Goldberger and Tein are aware of this Declaration and have filed copies of it in connection with their¶
The third document I have attached is a copy of one of the notifications that was provided directly to a victim. Copies of all of the notifications have been provided to Mr. Goldberger, and neither he nor any other attorney for Mr. Epstein has ever stated that the letter misrepresents the Agreement between the parties or the benefit that the Agreement bestows upon the victims.¶
Following that, I have attached the July 9, 2008 response from Mr. Goldberger. I have highlighted two portions. The first is where Mr. Goldberger (presumably with the approval of Mr. Tein) approves of the portion of my proposed Notification that quotes directly from the U.S. Attorney’s December letter to Lilly Ann Sanchez. The second portion is where Mr. Goldberger provides his interpretation of the Agreement, and nowhere mentions that he does not believe that the December letter is operative. I note that Mr. Goldberger’s letter contains a notation showing that Mr. Epstein was provided with a copy.¶
The first document attached hereto is the June 30, 2008 proposed Notification, which was hand-delivered to Jack Goldberger and Michael Tein shortly after Mr. Epstein entered his guilty plea.¶
As per your request, I am attaching several documents related to Mr. Epstein’s performance of the Non-Prosecution Agreement.¶
Dear Jay:¶
Re: Jeffrey Epstein¶
New York, New York 10022-4675¶
153 East 53rd Street¶
Citigroup Center¶
Kirkland & Ellis LLP¶
Jay P. Leifkowitz, Esq.¶
DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE¶
August 13, 2008¶
Facsimile:¶
(561) 820-8711¶
West Palm Beach, FL 33401¶
500 S. Australian Ave, Ste 400¶
United States Attorney Southern District of Florida¶
U. S. Department of Justice¶
EFTA00183452¶
cc:¶
Please contact me tomorrow morning so that we can resolve this issue.¶
efforts to stay all of the civil litigation. Again, neither of them ever expressed to me – or to the Court – that it inaccurately describes the Agreement between the United States and Mr. Epstein.¶
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ.¶
AUGUST 13, 2008¶
PAGE 2 OF 2¶