EFTA00206240¶
| From: | (USAFLS) |
| Sent: | Tuesday, January 18, 2011 2:33 PM |
| To: | (USAEO); Ratliffe,(USAEO) |
| Cc: | (USAFLS);(USAFLS) |
| Subject: | Ref: 2010-FLS-0004 |
Need help again 😊. Lit Hold 2010-FLS-0004¶
I don’t have Attachment 1 or 5 for Alex Acosta, Sloman, or all no longer with us. Acosta and Sloman served as USA and their email should be at TechOne. How do we go about finding out if archived email for and exist in our system.¶
How about getting Acosta and Sloman emails for review, I understand OPR is asking.¶
We do have copies of their N drives. departure was previous to USAMail.¶
Any help with this will be greatly appreciated.¶
Tuesday, February 15, 2011 6:46 PM¶
Kris,¶
On Thursday, February 10, 2011, Deputy Chief AUSA and I spoke with Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards regarding the status of the Crime Victims Rights Act case. I told them Cassell’s letter request for an investigation of the Non-Prosecution Agreement had been referred to OPR, and OPR had requested various documents from our office. I also told them the EOUSA General Counsel’s office advised that our office could go ahead and represent the United States in the CVRA lawsuit. (We had sought guidance on whether our office should be recused due to the allegation of improprieties in entering into the Non-Prosecution Agreement). I suggested that the parties were ready to move forward with filing documents with the court so it could resolve this case.¶
I asked whether it might be useful to engage in mediation in an attempt to resolve the case. Cassell told us they wanted the Non-Prosecution Agreement to be set aside. I told him that was not likely to happen. Cassell then suggested that the United States Government should step aside and allow them to “go after” Epstein to get the agreement set aside. I asked him how he expected that would be done, since the only parties to the Non-Prosecution Agreement were Epstein and the Government. Cassell said they would file their summary judgment motion, and the government would take no position on their motion. Presumably, Epstein would either intervene, or be brought in as a necessary party, and defend the Non-Prosecution Agreement. I told them this would have to be approved by the U.S. Attorney and Main Justice.¶
I have serious misgivings about not defending the Executive Branch’s prerogative to engage in a Non-Prosecution Agreement, free from supervision or oversight by the judiciary. If we stand by the sidelines,¶
EFTA00206241¶
Cassell will be arguing the Government was obligated to consult with the victims, and because we failed to do so, the agreement is a nullity. Whatever we may think of the Agreement, it was the prerogative of the U.S. Attorney’s Office to enter into it with Epstein, and we should be willing to defend what we did. The DOJ’s position is that the rights in the CVRA do not attach until there is a federal court proceeding. Since Epstein was never charged, we were not obligated to consult with the victims before entering into the Non-Prosecution Agreement.¶
We wanted to seek your views on Cassell’s suggestion before we responded to him. I can be reached at . Thanks.¶
Hi and These are the relevant items that I found in my stored emails. A hard copy also is coming to you via interoffice. In addition to my emails regarding the plea negotiations, I included a couple of things about¶
My understanding of what DC is looking for is:¶
(1) Correspondence showing an internal disagreement with the plea strategy¶
(2) Correspondence showing that FBI knew about the plea strategy (and any agreement or disagreement therewith)¶
(3) Any correspondence regarding notification to victims.¶
I have not been given any access to Alex or stored emails, and my understanding is that EOUSA no longer has or stored emails.¶
With respect to current DOJ employees, in looking over my emails, it is possible that may have relevant emails, too. I don’t think that will have any. and at CEOS in DC may have relevant emails.¶
If you want to obtain those records and have me or someone else review them, please let me know. Can we talk late this afternoon about what we are going to communicate to opposing counsel?¶
<<20110223121742706.pdf>>¶
Thank you.¶