EFTA00209047

• 
• 
• 
Jay P. talkoostr: P.C.
To Ci
iic13/ 
lefkowazN k la 
pnd.com 
VIA E-MAIL 
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 
ANC APPILIMID PA RTNUSHIPS 
Citigroup Cant 
153 Ent 53rd Stem 
New York. New Yong 10022-4611 
It Alexander Acosta 
United States Attorney's Office 
Southern District of Florida 
500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 
Dear Alex: 
Facaimaa: 
mint kirklancl.cOM 
Dlr. Fax: 
ConfidentlaL For Settlement 
Purposes Only, Pursuant to Rule 408. 
October 10, 2007 
Re: Jeffrey Epstein 
I write as' follow up to our conversation yesterday regarding the open issues that remain 
Si
stein matter. As you are aware, we continue to have serious disagreements with Ms. 
regarding the nature of the settlement process for identified individuals' § 2255 claims. 
Legal representation in' lawsuit was never contemplated by the Federal Plea Agreement (the 
"Agreement"). 
Over the course of the negotiations of the Agreement, the parties worked 
diligently to create an alternative dispute resolution for those identified individuals seeking' civil 
remedy for the conduct at issue, in an effort to avoid long drawn out disputes over liability in 
public adversarial litigations. Initially, we proposed that Mr. Epstein create' trust whereby' 
trustee would be appointed by the Circuit Court to disperse the funds to the identified individuals 
based on' good faith showing of injury. In response, Ms. 
proposed the appointment of 
I guardian ad litem to represent the identified individuals, not an attorney, which suggests that 
litigation was never contemplated by either party. Ultimately, the parties agreed to Paragraphs 7 
and 8 of the Agreement, which allow for' single attorney representative to settle the claims of the 
identified individuals and create' procedural alternative to public adversarial litigation. 
In keeping with the parties' understanding of Paragraphs 7 and 8, you should know that 
we are in agreement with your choice of Judge Edward Davis, but we believe Judge Davis should 
act as the attorney representative to settle claims pursuant to the Agreement and the parties' 
longstanding understanding of the settlement process. Because the process we have agreed to 
does not contemplate litigation with respect to the attorney representative, Judge Davis can work 
to negotiate settlements with the identified individuals without further involvement by the 
government or its agents. Below, I've outlined our main areas of concern with the approach Ms. 
Chicago 
Hong Kong 
London 
Los Angeles 
Munich 
San Francisco 
Washington. D.C. 
RFP MIA 000001 
EFTA00209047

ConfidentiaL For Settlement Purposes Only, Pursuant to Rule 408. 
• 
• 
• 
R. Alexander Acosta 
October I0, 2007 
Page 2 
has taken regarding the role of the attorney representative and the settlement process for 
§ 2255 claims pursuant to Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Agreement. 
First Issue: The Settlement Process and the Role of the Attorney Representative. The 
settlement procedure we propose, and which we believe is made clear by the Agreement, is 
reasonable and consistent with the intention of the parties: 
the attorney representative will 
represent the identified individuals provided they opt to enter into' settlement agreement with 
Mr. Epstein with respect to their § 2255 claims. The attorney representative will negotiate' total 
settlement amount with Mr. Epstein. Once the United States has formally declined to prosecute 
Mr. Epstein in this matter, and each identified individual electing to settle has waived her right to 
pursue any other claims against Mr. Epstein, the attorney representative will distribute the 
roceeds in the manner he sees fit. If the identified individuals cannot settle or opt not to settle on 
I damages amount with Mr. Epstein, then the attorney representative may not continue his 
representation and is barred from filing lawsuits pursuant to § 2255 and the identified individuals 
would not be suing under § 2255 as contemplated by Paragraph 8. 
Based on the specific language in the contract and the intent of both parties, we believe 
that the Agreement clearly provides that the identified individuals may opt to make use of the 
attorney representative so long as they can reach' settlement agreement with Mr. Epstein. If the 
parties cannot settle on' damages amount with Mr. Epstein, then the attorney representative may 
not continue his representation and is barred from filing lawsuits pursuant to § 2255. 
The provisions of the Agreement make clear that the role of the attorney representative is 
limited to settling claims brought by identified individuals pursuant to the Agreement. While 
Paragraph 7 defines who may be represented by the attorney representative, Paragraph 8 outlines 
the scope of that representation. Paragraph 7 states: 
The United States shall provide Epstein's attorneys with' list of individuals whom it has identified 
as victims, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, after Epstein has signed this agreement and has been 
sentenced. Upon the execution of this agreement, the United States, in consultation with and 
subject to the good faith approval of Epstein's counsel, shall select an attorney representative for 
these persons, who shall be paid for by Epstein. Epstein's counsel may contact the identified 
individuals through that representative. 
Under Paragraph 8 of the Agreement, which provides the terms of the representation, the 
attorney representative is only appointed to protect the interests of those identified individuals 
who elect to waive any claim for damages other than the damages agreed to by the parties. 
Paragraph 8 states: 
If any of the individuals referred to in paragraph (7), supra, elects to file suit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 
§ 2255. Epstein will not contest the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern 
District of Florida over this person and/or the subject matter, and Epstein waives his right to contest 
liability and also waives his right to contest damages up to an amount as agreed to between the 
RIP MIA 000002 
EFTA00209048

Confidential. For Settlement Purpose, Only, Punuani to Rule 408. 
• 
• 
• 
R. Alexander Acosta 
October 10, 2007 
Page 3 
identified individual and Epstein, so long as the identified individual elects to proceed exclusively 
under IS U.S.C. § 2255, and agrees to waive any other claim for damages, whether pursuant to 
state, federal, or common law. Notwithstanding this waiver, as to those individuals whose names 
appear on the list provided by the United States, Epstein's signature on this agreement, his waivers 
and failures to contest liability and such damages in any suit are not to be construed as an admission 
of any criminal or civil liability.
Paragraph 8 addresses how Mr. Epstcin's waivers are triggered pursuant to' settlement 
with each identified individual. Paragraph 8 is clear that Mr. Epstein will only waive § 2255 
liability "so long as" each identified individual proceeds exclusively under § 2255 and agrees to 
waive damages other than "an amount as agreed to between the identified individual and 
Epstein." The Agreement's silence with respect to what happens if the partics cannot settle on' 
damages amount indicates that the parties intended for the scope of the attorney representative's 
representation to be limited to settling claims with Mr. Epstein, not representing these identified 
individuals in § 2255 lawsuits. 
Ms. 
, however, insists that the attorney representative's duties include pursuing' 
lawsuit under § 2255 on behalf of each identified individual in the event that settlement talks are 
unsuccessful. This interpretation is incorrect because Ms. 
ignores Paragraph 8, which 
limits the scope of the attorney representative's representation. 
The longstanding intention of the parties is also consistent with our interpretation of the 
i
greement based on prior iterations of the Agreement, which only refer to appointing' trustee or 
uardian ad litem to protect the interests of the identified individuals. Thus, legal representation 
in I lawsuit was never contemplated under the Agreement. Also, Mr. Epstein's agreement to pay 
the attorney representative's fees reaffirms that the parties never intended for the attorney 
repaesentative to bring lawsuits. § 2255 includes' provision for attornc 's fees, but only if there 
is I monetary recovery. If the Agreement contemplates, as Ms. 
suggests, that the 
attorney representative could file suit on behalf of each identified individual, Mr. Epstein would 
never have agreed to pay attorneys fees for those that being suit and lose. It is clear that Mr. 
Epstein agreed to pay the attorney representative's fees because he assumed that each identified 
individual represented by the attorney representative would recover something by settling on their 
respective damages claim. 
Ms. 
interpretation of the Agreement would also trigger profound ethical 
problems due to the conflicts of interests that would arise. For instance, if Mr. Epstein agrees to 
pay for the attorney representative's fees and monthly expenses in any potentially litigated matter, 
then the attorney representative would effectively be inccntivized to reject settlement under § 
2255 in an effort to draw out the lawsuits and incur more fees. If the lawyer were allowed to 
represent the identified individuals in' lawsuit, the best interests of each identified individual 
might not be served, because the attorney representative will always he more interested in 
pursuing lawsuits in lieu of settling claims against Mr. Epstein efficiently and fairly. This conflict 
RIP MIA 000003 
EFTA00209049

ContidestiaL For Settlement Purposes Only, Pursuant to Rule 40S. 
• 
• 
• 
FL Alexander Acosta 
October 10, 2007 
Page 4 
could compromise the attorney representative's duty of loyalty. See ABA Annotated Model 
Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.8(f) (1 lawyer shall not accept compensation for 
representing' client from one other than the client unless... there is no interference with the 
lawyer's independence of professional judgment or with the client-lawyer relationship"). And Mr. 
Epstein would essentially be paying the attorney representative to sue himself. Such' result is 
inappropriate and unconscionable. 
The attomej representative will face other conflicts as well. M 
general matter, multiple 
representation of I group of individuals that elects to settle on damages as well as one or more 
individuals who reject settlement carries with it the heightened potential for irreparable conflicts. 
For example, the ethics rules preclude an attorney from simultaneously representing parties that 
are likely to end up in conflict. See ABA Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 
1.7 (1 lawyer shall not represent' client if...there is' significant risk that the representation of 
one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client, 
former client or' third person or by' personal interest of the lawyer."). Here, I can imagine 
case where one of the identified individuals is called as' witness by Mr. Epstein to dispute an 
allegation by another identified individual who is' party to the case. The attorney representative 
would have to cross examine the witness, who is also his client. In another scenario, the attorney 
representative may receive privileged information from one identified individual, which precludes 
him from using that information with respect to another identified individual. In each scenario, 
the attorney representative will be simultaneously representing panics that may be in conflict, in 
violation of Rule 1.7. 
For these reasons, we believe that Ms. 
interpretation of the Agreement in 
connection with the attorney representative's role in the settlement process must be rejected. 
Second Issue: Waiver of Liability. Ms. 
incorrectly alleges that Mr. Epstein 
has waived liability even when claims are not settled. Pursuant to the Agreement, if the identified 
individuals choose not to settle with Mr. Epstein, he will not waive liability for those individuals 
whose claims are not settled by the attorney representative. Paragraph 8 is clear that Mr. Epstein 
will only waive § 2255 liability so long as each identified individual proceeds exclusively under § 
2255 and agrees to waive damages other than "an amount as agreed to between the identified 
individual and Epstein." (Paragraph 8, Agreement) Consequently, those identified individuals 
who choose not to settle with Mr. Epstein are not covered by the terms of the Agreement and will 
have to prove, among other things, that they are victims under the enumerated statutes. 
Tbird Issue: Communication to Identified Individuals. 'Ms. 
proposes that 
either she or federal agents will speak with the identified individuals regarding the settlement 
process. 
We do not think it is the government's place to be co-counsel to the identified 
individuals, nor should the FBI be their personal investigators. Neither federal agents nor anyone 
from your Office should contact the identified individuals to inform them of the resolution of the 
RFP MIA 000004 
EFTA00209050

Confidential. For Settlement Purposes Only, Pursuant to Rule 408. 
• 
• 
• 
R. Alexander Acosta 
October 10, 2007 
Page 5 
case, including appointment of the attorney representative and the settlement process. Not only 
would that violate the confidentiality of the Agreement. but Mr. Epstein also will have no control 
over what is communicated to the identified individuals at this most critical stage. We believe it 
is essential that we participate in crafting' mutually acceptable communication to the identified 
individuals. We further believe that communications between your Office or your case agents 
and the identified individuals might well violate Rule 6(eX2XFI) of the Federal Rules of Criminal 
Procedure. The powers of the federal grand jury should not, even in appearance, be utilized to 
advance the interests of party to' civil lawsuit. 
We propose that the following joint communication be made to Judge Davis, who will act 
as the attorney representative and communicate accordingly with the identified individuals: 
As counsel for the United States of America and Jeffrey Epstein, we jointly write 
to you to provide information relevant to your services as the attorney 
representative to represent certain identified individuals who may have' civil 
claim against Mr. Epstein. 
The United States has conducted an investigation of Mr. Epstein regarding his 
solicitation of females, some of whom the government alleges were underage, to 
engage in prostitution in his Palm Beach County home. 
Based on this 
investigation, the United States has identified certain individuals who may be 
eligible to seek' civil remedy against Mr. Epstein pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255. 
The United States and Mr. Epstein have agreed to' resolution of this investigation. 
As part of the resolution of this matter, the parties have agreed to I settlement 
process for these identified individuals. The parties agree that you will contact 
each identified individual and explain the nature of the resolution of this matter, 
including the settlement process, in accordance with' joint communication drafted 
by the United States and Mr. Epstein. The parties further agree that you will 
interview each identified individual to confirm that they have' viable claim 
against Mr. Epstein pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255. 
Pursuant to the resolution of this matter, you will represent only those identified 
individuals who elect to settle their claims with Mr. Epstein, and your duties will 
be limited to negotiating' settlement on the identified individuals' behalf and 
dispersing the settlement proceeds. Mr. Epstein has agreed that he will not contest 
jurisdiction in the Southern District of Florida, and he will not contest liability 
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255 for those identified individuals who elect to settle all 
potential claims against him regarding this matter. Mr. Epstein has also agreed to 
pay reasonable attorney's fees and expenses that you incur as' result of settlement 
negotiations and settlement administration of this matter. 
RIP MIA 000005 
EFTA00209051

Confidential. For Settlement Purposes Only, Pursuant to Rule 408. 
• 
• 
• 
R. Alexander Acosta 
October 10, 2007 
Page 6 
To settle these claims, the parties agree that you will negotiate' total settlement 
amount with Mr. Epstein for each identified individual who elects to settle. After 
the United States formally declines to initiate any prosecution against Mr. Epstein 
related to this matter and each identified individual you represent executes I 
waiver of all rights to pursue any litigation regarding this matter, you may then 
distribute the proceeds from the total settlement amount to the identified 
individuals in the manner you see fit. 
For those identified individuals who elect not to settle their claims, Mr. Epstein 
will not waive his right to contest jurisdiction, liability or damages. Furthermore, 
Mr. Epstein will not pay for their attorney's fees or expenses, and you may not 
represent these individuals in any capacity. Each of these individuals will be 
responsible for finding, hiring and paying for her own attorney. 
The details regarding the United State's investigation of this matter and its 
resolution with Mr. Epstein is confidential. You may not make public statements 
regarding this matter. If you have any questions regarding this matter, including 
the settlement process, you must contact Mr. Epstein's counsel and request a joint 
clarification from said counsel and the United States. You should not contact the 
United States directly. The parties will make every effort to answer your questions 
via 'joint communication. 
Alex, as you know, when Mr. Epstein signed the Agreement, he did so in order to reach 
finality with your Office and with the express representation that the federal investigation against 
him would cease. To that end, I would like your assurance that after you and I agree to the issues 
raised in this letter, that it will be the end of the United States' involvement barring' willful 
breech of the Agreement. Specifically, the government or any of its agents will not make any 
further communications to the identified individuals and will not make any ex parte 
communications with Judge Davis. 
I look forward to resolving these open issues with you during our 4:30 call today. 
Sincerely, 
P. Lefkowitz 
RFP MIA 000006 
EFTA00209052

• 
• 
• 
Jay P. Lefkowitz, P C. 
To all Writer 'really. 
lelkovatzektrktand com 
VIA E-MAIL 
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 
AND AIDIJAILD PART-Iv:U.5MP, 
Mora) Center 
753 East 53rd Street 
New York, New York 10022-1811 
www.kirkland.corn 
November 29, 2007 
R. Alexander Acosta 
United States Attorney's Office 
Southern District of Florida 
500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 
Re: Jeffrey Epstein 
Dear Alex: 
Facsimile: 
I am responding to the draft letter-Marie-MI to me last night, which purports to be' 
letter that you would sign and send to each of the individuals whom you have not even identified 
to us, and about whom the government has made clear it "takes no position" as to the validity of 
potential claims that these individuals may have against Mr. Epstein. I cannot reconcile your 
commitment to "take no position" regarding these potential claims with your intention to sign 
such' letter, which will surely find its way almost immediately into the press, refers to these 
individuals as "minor victims," refers to Mr. Epstein as' "sexual predator," misstates the terms 
of our federal non-prosecution agreement (the "Agreement"), and invites federal witnesses to 
attend Mr. Epstein's state sentencing in order to give victim impact statements, although they are 
in most respects not state victims at all. 
More fundamentally, we don't understand the basis for your Office's belief that it is 
appropriate for any letter to be . 
to these individuals at this stage — before Mr. Epstein has 
either entered I plea or been sentenced. We respectfully disagree with your view that you are 
required to noufy the alleged victims pursuant to the Justice for All Act of 2004. First, 18 U.S.C. 
§ 2255, the relevant statute under the Agreement for the settlement of civil remedies, does not 
have any connection to the J tice for All Act. The Justice for All Act refers to restitution, and 
§ 2255 is' civil remedy, not I restitution statute. 
We also believe that the draft letter could not diverge more dramatically from your 
statement last week that your Office would not intervene in the state process from this point 
forward, and that you would merely monitor it. Indeed, the letter as currently drafted invites 
!
federal witnesses to become participants in state proceeding, thus federalizingithe state plea 
and sentencing in the same manner as woul the appearance and statements of I member of your 
Office or the FBI. 
Chicago 
Hong Kong 
London 
Los Angeles 
Munich 
San Francisco 
Washington, D.C. 
RFP MIA 000007 
EFTA00209053

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 
R. Alexander Acosta 
November 29, 2007 
Page 2 
With that said, I respectfully identify below the specific objections we have with the 
proposed letter. 
First, it states that "Mr. Epstein has agreed that be will not contest jurisdiction or liability 
if [the alleged victims] elect to seek damages from him ..." This language implies that Mr. 
Epstein has agreed to concede jurisdiction and has waived liability whether or not each 
individual identified by the government as' "victim" of federal crimes ultimately settles her 
claim pursuant to the Agreement. The letter as drafted invites the witnesses to whom it is. 
to 
believe that they can litigate their claims without Mr. Epstein being able to contest jurisdiction or 
liability —' construction of the Agreement that is in direct conflict with its terms. The 
Agreement we entered makes clear that Mr. Epstein's waiver of jurisdiction and liability is 
limited to those instances where the identified individual settles with him pursuant to Sections 7 
through 8 of the Agreement and Addendum. As you are well aware, Mr. Epstein has no 
obligation or intention to concede jurisdiction or liability in any claim for damages - by an 
enumerated "victim" or anyone else — where that party fails to settle her claims pursuant to the 
terms of the Agreement. 
Second, there is no basis to refer to Mr. Epstein as "sexual predator." Pursuant to the 
terms of the Agreement, Mr. Epstein will be required to register as I "sexual offender," not' 
"sexual predator." Those are very different categories under Florida law. Mr. Epstein has 
agreed to enter' plea of guilty to two counts of violation of Florida Statutes §§ 796.03 and 
796.07. Under Florida law, those charges do not classify him as' sexual predator. See Florida 
Statute § 775.21(44. Rather, he is only' sexual offender as defined by Florida Statute 
§ 943.0435(14. To identify Mr. Epstein as' sexual predator, in this letter or elsewhere, is 
inaccurate and would irreparably harm him. 
Third, we find no basis in law that provides the identified individuals with either 
I
 
right 
to appear at Mr. Epstein's plea and sentence, or to submit' written statement to be filed by the 
State Attorney. According to Florida Statutes §§ 960.001(k) and 921.143(1), the sentencing 
court permits only "the victim of the crime for which the defendant is being sentenced . . . to 
tljppear before the sentencing court for the purpose of making I statement under oath for the 
record; and (slubmit I written statement under oath to the office of the state attorney, which 
statement shall be filed with the sentencing court." Florida Statute § 960.001(k) citing 
§ 921.143(1) (emphasis added). Here, Mr. Epstein is pleading guilty to, and being sentenced for, 
state offenses, not the federal offenses under which the government has recognized these 
identified individuals as "victims." The state charges for which Mr. Epstein will be sentenced 
are not coextensive with the federal investigation. Under Florida law, only those perso 
identified as victims of the state offenses may make' statement at the hearing or submit 
written statement. 
RFP MIA 000008 
EFTA00209054

• 
• 
• 
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 
R. Alexander Acosta 
November 29, 2007 
Page 3
With respect, encouraging these individuals to participate in the state sentencing will 
have the effect of creating' media frenzy that will surely impact the sentence Mr. Epstein 
receives — precisely what your Office promised to avoid. Such an intrusion into state affairs, 
when the identified individuals are not even victims of the crime for which Mr. Epstein is being 
sentenced is highly inappropriate. The federal investigation of Mr. Epstein has been concluded, 
and witnesses or civil claimants identified as purported victims of federal offenses have no place 
in the state proceeding. We also think it will likely promote spurious civil litigation against Mr. 
Epstein,' result that would be highly irresponsible to encourage. 
Fourth, we take serious issue with the assertion in the letter that the government has 
identified each recipient of the letter as' "minor victim." The term "minor victim" is notably 
absent from the Agreement. Section 7 of the Agreement states only that the government will 
provide' list of individuals "whom it has identified as victims, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2255." 
Indeed, you have told us that at least one identified individual is currently 24 years old, and thus 
would appear not to have been' minor at the time of the alleged conduct (and therefore is 
presumably not elisible to settle her claims under the Agreement). To confer on these women 
the imprimatur of government "finding" is both incendiary and unwarranted. 
Fifth, your letter mischaracterizes the nature of Mr. Epstein's liability under the 18 
U.S.C. § 2255 provisions of the Agreement. Your letter states that every individual who receives 
the letter is I victim of "certain offenses, including travel in interstate commerce to engage in 
prostitution with minors and the use of facilities of interstate commerce to induce minors to 
engage in prostitution." This construction implies that these individuals are all victims of both 
offenses (travel in interstate commerce to engage in prostitution with minors and the use of 
facilities of interstate commerce to induce minors to engage in prostitution.) Clearly that is not 
the case. Consequently, the language should be revised to reflect that the identified individuals 
may be victims of certain offenses, but not necessarily both offenses. Additionally, for the sake 
of fairness and candor, we believe the same language contained in your letter to Judge Davis, 
stating that Itibe United States takes no position as to the validity of any such claim under this 
statute," should be included in any proposed letter. 
Sixth, your letter states that Mr. Podhurst and Mr. Josefsberg may "represent" the 
identified individuals. Since we have not yet had the opportunity to speak with Mr. Podhurst or 
Mr. Josefsberg (though we hope to do so this week), we do not know that they will even r  to 
serve in this capacity. Since I believe the role you are casting for these attorneys creates 
significant ethical problem, specifically the conflict between counseling the clients to settle for 
the statutory amount and rewarding the attorneys for litigating rather than settling their claims, I 
would not assume that they, or any ethical attorney, would agree to accept this assignment as you 
define it. Whether that will mean that other attorneys will have to be sought, or you will realize 
that the role is untenable as described, either result will require modification of the letter. 
RFP MIA 000009 
EFTA00209055

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 
It Alexander Acosta 
November 29, 2007 
Pagc 4 
Seventh, the identified individuals should not contact lawyers in your Office or agents of 
the FBI. To encourage these individuals to contact federal law enforcement officials is entirely 
inconsistent with your promise that there will be no further federal involvement in this case. 
Moreover, such contact can only invite the possibility for impermissible or partial 
communications. Recently, you asked the defense not to contact potential witnesses in this 
matter in part because the Agreement contemplated the selection of an attorney representative. 
For the same reason there should be no continuing invitation for the witnesses to remain in 
contact with either your Office or the FBI. Any questions these individuals may have regarding 
their rights under the Agreement should be answered by Judge Davis or the attorney 
representative. 
Eighth, this letter should be mailed rather than delivered by hand. We see no reason for 
hand delivery, and mailing will ensure that there are no impermissible or partial communications 
made to the identified individuals upon delivery of the letter. If our Office insists on hand 
delivery of any such letter, however, it should only be made by I third party service, not by law 
enforcement agents. 
Finally, as you know, Judge Starr has requested' meeting with Assistant Attorney 
General Fisher to address what we believe is the unprecedented nature of the § 2255 component 
of the Agreement. We are hopeful that this meeting will take place as early as next week. 
Accordingly, we respectfully request that we postpone our discussion of sending' letter to the 
alleged victims until after that meeting. We strongly believe that rushing to send any letter out 
this week is not the wisest manna in which to proceed. Given that Mr. Epstein will not even 
enter his plea for another few weeks, time is clearly not of the essence regarding any notification 
to the identified individuals. 
Sincerely, 
itz 
RFP MIA 000010 
EFTA00209056

•' 
• 
U.S. Department of Justice 
United States Attorney 
Southern District of Florida 
500 South Australian Ave.. Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
(561) 820-8711 
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 
November 29, 2007 
DELIVERY BY UNITED STATES MAIL 
Miss 
Re: 
Crime Victims' Rights — Notification of Resolution of Epstein Investigation 
Dear Miss 
Several months ago, I provided you with' letter notifying you of your rights as' victim 
pursuant to the Justice for All Act of 2004 and other federal legislation, including: 
(4) 
(5) 
(6) 
(7) 
(8) 
The right to be reasonably protected from the accused. 
The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding 
involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused. 
The right not to be excluded from any public court proceeding, unless the court 
determines that your testimony may be materially altered if you are present for other 
portions of proceeding. 
The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court 
involving release, plea, or sentencing. 
The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case. 
The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law. 
The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. 
The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and 
privacy. 
I am writing to inform you that the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein has been 
completed, and that Mr. Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office have reached an agreement 
containing the following terms. 
First, Mr. Epstein agrees that he will plead guilty to two state offenses, including the offense 
of soliciting minors to engage in prostitution, which will require him to register as' sexual offender 
for the remainder of his life. 
RFP MIA 000011 
EFTA00209057

•!
• 
• 
MISS 
NOVEMBER 29, 2007 
PAGE 2 
Second, Mr. Epstein has agreed to make' binding recommendation of 18 months' 
imprisonment to the state court judge who sentences him. Mr. Epstein will serve that sentence of 
imprisonment at the Palm Beach County Jail. 
Third, Mr. Epstein has agreed that he will compensate you for damages you have suffered, 
under the following circumstances. That portion of the agreement that relates to those claims reads 
as follows: 
7. 
The United States shall provide Epstein's attorneys with' list of 
individuals whom it has identified as victims, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 
§ 2255, after Epstein has signed this agreement and been sentenced. 
Upon the execution of this agreement, the United States, in consultation 
with and subject to the good faith approval of Epstein's counsel, shall 
select an attorney representative for these persons, who shall be paid for 
by Epstein. Epstein's counsel may contact the identified individuals 
through that representative. 
8. 
If any of the individuals referred to in paragraph (7), supra, elects to 
file suit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255, Epstein will not contest the 
jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District 
of Florida over his person and/or the subject matter, and Epstein waives 
his right to contest liability and also waives his right to contest damages 
up to an amount as agreed to between the identified individual and 
Epstein, so long as the identified individual elects to proceed 
exclusively under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and agrees to waive any other 
claim for damages, whether pursuant to state, federal, or common law. 
Notwithstanding this waiver, as to those individuals whose names 
appear on the list provided by the United States, Epstein's signature on 
this agreement, his waivers and failures to contest liability and such 
damages in any suit are not to be construed as an admission of any 
criminal or civil liability. 
9. 
Epstein's signature on this agreement also is not to be construed as an 
admission of civil or criminal liability or' waiver of any jurisdictional 
or other defense as to any person whose name does not appear on the 
list provided by the United States. 
10. 
Except as to those individuals who elect to proceed exclusively under 
18 U.S.C. § 2255, as set forth in paragraph (8), supra, neither Epstein's 
RFP MIA 000012 
EFTA00209058

MISS 
NOVEMBER 29, 2007 
PAGE 3 
signature on this agreement, nor its terms, nor any resulting waivers or 
settlements by Epstein arc to be construed as admissions or evidence of 
civil or criminal liability or I waiver of any jurisdictional or other 
defense as to any person, whether or not her name appears on the I ist 
provided by the United States. 
Pursuant to the terms of the agreement and an addendum, to assist you in making such' 
claim, the U.S. Attorney's Office has asked an independent Special Master to select attorneys to 
represent you. Those attorneys are Aaron Podhurst and Robert ("Bob") Josefsberg with the law firm 
of Podhurst Orseck, ■. They can be reached at (305) 358-2800. I anticipate that someone from 
their law firm will be contacting you shortly. I must also advise you that you arc not obligated to 
use these attorneys. In fact you have the absolute right to select your own attorney, so you can 
decide not to meat with Messrs. Podhurst/Josefsberg at all, or you can speak with them and decide 
at any time to use different attorney. If you do decide to seek damages from Mr. Epstein and you 
decide to use Messrs. Podhurst/Josefsberg as your attorneys, Mr. Epstein will be responsible for 
paying attorney's fees incurred during the time spent trying to negotiate I settlement. If you arc 
unable to reach' settlement with Mr. Epstein, you and Mr. Josefsberg can discuss how best to 
proceed. 
As I mentioned above, as part of the resolution of the federal investigation, Mr. Epstein has 
agreed to plead guilty to state charges. Mr. Epstein's change of plea and sentencing will occur on 
December 14, 2007, at 
■., before Judge Sandra K. McSorley, in Courtroom 11F at the Palm 
Beach County Courthouse, 205 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, Florida. Pursuant to 
Florida Statutes Sections 960.001(1Xk) and 921.143(1) you are entitled to be present and to make 
'statement under oath. If you choose, you can submit I written statement under oath, which may 
be filed by the State Attorney's Office on your behalf. If you elect to prepare' written statement, 
it should address the following: 
the facts of the case and the extent of any harm, including social, psychological, or 
physical harm, financial losses, loss of earnings directly or indirectly resulting from 
the crime for which the defendant is being sentenced, and any matter relevant to an 
appropriate disposition and sentence. Fl. Stat. 921.143(2). 
You also are entitled to notification when Mr. Epstein is released from imprisonment at the 
end of his prison term and/or if he is allowed to participate in' work release program. To receive 
such notification, please provide the State Attorney's Office with the following information: 
1. 
Your name 
2. 
Your address 
3. 
Your home, work, and/or cell phone numbers 
4. 
Your e-mail address 
5. 
I notation of whether you would like to participate in the "VINE system," which 
RFP MIA 000013 
EFTA00209059

• 
• 
MISS 
NOVEMBER 29, 2007 
PAGE 4 
provides automated notification calls any time an inmate is moved. (To use this 
system, your calls must go to you directly, not through' switchboard.) 
Thank you for all of your help during the course of the investigation. If you have an 
questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me or Special Agent Nesbitt 
at (561) 822-5946. 
By: 
Sincerely, 
R. Alexander Acosta 
United States Attorney 
Assistant United States Attorney 
cc: 
Special Agent Nesbitt 
F.B.I. 
Ms. Clearetha Wright, Victim-Witness Coordinator, U.S. Attorney's Office 
RFP MIA 000014 
EFTA00209060

At/S00/VI 
AIM 14:0W P41* 1 613 660 6000 
KIRKLANIMELLIS 
LLR 
"002 
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 
AMC, APPLATID INWILRSHIPS 
777 South Figueroa Sheet 
Los Angeles. CaHemel 90017 
Kenneth W Stun 
To Call Writer Only. 
(213) 6804440 
kstarreitaltleideorn 
VIA FACSIMILE (305) 530-64.44 
Honorable R. Alexander Acosta 
United States Attorney 
United States Attorney's Office 
Southern District of Florida 
99 NE 4th Street 
Miami, FL 33132 
Re: 
Jeffrey Epstein 
Dear Alex: 
(213) 680-8400 
wwiekirklandtorn 
December 5, 2007 
Facsimile .
1213) 680-8500 
We are in receipt of your letter faxed to lay on December 4 and faxed to Ken today in 
Los Angeles, and write to inform you that we will respond in full to that letter no later than 
Friday, December 7. We take this opportunity to address I few of the initial issues. 
First and foremost., we reaffirm the Nor. Prc,stcution Agreement (the "Agreement"). Mr. 
Epstein has no intention of unwinding the Agreement. Indeed, he has already performed under 
the Agreement by directing his lawyers to urge the State of Florida to allow him to plead guilty 
to crimes more egregious than the State believes he committed, and to sentence him more 
harshly than the State still believes is appropriate. However, as you know, we take serious issue 
with your staff's interpretation and implementation of the Agreement, in particular the use of 
Section 2255, but also other aspects of your office's investigation and prosecution of this matter. 
As we have expressed to you on prior occasions — where you have made clear you have no 
objection — we hope to address these issues with Assistant Attorney General Fisher in 
Washington. 
Second, your letter makes reference to "certain filings" that you state are due to your 
Office by December 7 and to "certain events" that must occur before December 14. We have no 
knowledge of any such deadlines and in fact do not know what filings and events to which you 
arc referring. Please let us know what the December 7 and December 14 deadlines are, if any, so 
that we can make sure to comply with them. 
RFP MIA 000015 
EFTA00209061

sc , voini 
lnv 
ia:uu 
FAA 1 ZAJ 65U 50UU 
K RKLANDILELL I S 
LLP 
0 0 3 
Honorable R. Alexander Acosta 
December 5, 2007 
Page 2 
Finally, you state that you intend to issue the victim notification letters on Friday, 
December 7. ,vever, in' discussion late last week between Jeff 
and Lilly Ann 
Sanchez, Mr. 
indicated that your Office would send us a revised version of the 
notification letter, which we have not received to date..While we believe that it is wholly 
inappropriate for your Office to send this letter under arty circumstances, it is certainly 
inappropriate to issue this letter without affording us the right to review it. We strongly urge that 
you withhold the notification letter until after we arc able to discuss this matter with Assistant 
Attorney General Fisher. 
Yours 
Kenneth W. Starr 
la iL
wi4tz 
cc: 
Honorable Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General 
OISlreFint 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
RFP MIA 000016 
EFTA00209062

U.S. Department of Justice 
United States Attorney 
Southern District of Florida 
DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE, 
Jay P. Lefkowitz, Esq. 
Kirkland & Ellis LLP 
Citigroup Center 
153 East 53rd Street 
New York, New York 10022-4675 
Re: 
Jeffrey Epstein 
Dear Jay: 
99 N.E. e Street 
Miami. FL 33132-2111 
(30$) 961-9299 
Facsimile: (30.5) 530-6444 
December 6, 2007 
I write in response to your recent e-mails and letters regarding victim notification and other 
issues. Our Office is trying to perform our contractual obligations under the Agreement, which we 
feel are being frustrated by defense counsel's objections. The Office also is concerned about Mr. 
Epstein's nonperformance. 
More than three weeks ago we spoke about the failure to set' timely plea and sentencing 
date. At that time, you assured me that the scheduling delay was caused by the unavailability of 
Judge McSorley. You promised that' date would be set promptly. On November 15th, Rolando 
Garcia met with Barry Krisher on another matter, and was told by Mr. Krisher that he had just 
spoken with Jack Goldberger, and that Mr. Epstein's plea and sentencing were set to occur on 
December 14, 2007. Since that time, we have tried to confirm the date and time of the hearing in 
order to include that information in the victim notification letters. You continue to refer to the plea 
and sentencing as though it will be in January; Mr. 1Crisher's office has not confirmed any date; and 
Mr. Goldberger recently told Marie WIlefaile that "there is no date?" 
I must reiterate that' delayed guilty plea and sentencing - now more than two months 
beyond the original deadline - is unacceptable to the Office. As you will recall, the plea and 
sentencing hearing originally was to occur in early October 2007, but was delayed until October 26th 
to allow Mr. Goldberger to attend. It was delayed again until November to allow you to attend. 
Rather than using your best efforts to insure that the plea and sentencing occur in November, we 
recently learned that' plea conference had been scheduled with Judge McSorley for November 20, 
2007, but was canceled at the request of the parties, not the judge. Judge McSorley has not been 
away for any extended period, and there is no basis for your assertion that the judge is the cause of 
RFP MIA 000017 
EFTA00209063

• 
• 
• 
JAY P. I.EFKOWITZ, ESQ. 
DFCEMBER 6,2007 
PAGE 2 OF 4 
any past or future delay. Mr. Epstein currently has four Florida Bar members on his defense learn, 
so attorney scheduling is not an adequate basis for delay. 
Three weeks ago I also asked you to provide our Office with the terms of the Plea Agreement 
with the State Attorney's Office. It is now more than two months since the signing of the Non-
Prosecution Agreement and we have yet to see any formal agreement, or even' list of essential terms 
of such an agreement. 
Next, lel me address your allegation that attorneys in our office and agents of the FBI have 
leaked information to the press in an effort to affect possible civil litigation with Mr. Epstein. This 
is untrue. There has been no contact between-any member of the press and any employee of our 
office or the FBI since you incorrectly accused investigators of telling "Vanity Fair" about Mr. 
Starr's employment by Mr. Epstein several months ago. We intend to continue to refrain from 
commenting or providing information to the press. We would ask that your client and all of his 
representatives do the same. 
I also want to address your interpretation of several statements that were included in 
correspondence - at your insistence - as proof that the designated victims have invalid claims. Let 
me make clear that each of the listed individuals arc persons whom the Office identified as victims 
as defined in Section 2255, that is, as persons "who, while' minor, was' victim of I violation of 
section . . . 2422 or 2423 of this title." In other words, the Office is prepared to indict Mr. Epstein 
based upon Mr. Epstein's "interactions" with these individuals.' This conclusion is based upon' 
thorough and proper investigation - one in which none of the victims was informed of any right to 
receive damages of any amount prior to the investigation of her claim. The Office agrees that it is 
not' party to, and will not take' role in, any civil litigation, but the Office can say, without 
hesitation, that the evidence demonstrates that each person on the list was' victim of Mr. Epstein's 
criminal behavior. Mr. Starr's letter also suggests that the number of victims to whom Mr. Epstein 
is exposed by the Agreement is limitless. As you know, early drafts of the Agreement contained' 
numerical limit of 40 victims, which was removed at your request. The Office repeatedly confirmed 
that the number would not exceed 40; and the list is significant) / shorter than that. Once the list is 
provided to you, if you have' good faith basis for asserting that' victim never met Mr. Epstein, we 
remain willing to listen and to modify the list if you convince us of your position. 
Finally, let nic addrcss your objections to the draft Victim Notification Letter. You write that 
you don't understand the basis for the Office's belief that it is appropriate to notify the victims. 
Pursuant to the "Justice for All Act of 2004," crime victims are entitled to: "The right to reasonable, 
accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding ... involving the crime" and the "right 
'Unlike the State's investigation, the federal investigation shows criminal conduct by Mr. 
Epstein at least as early as 200 I , so all of the victims were minors at the time of the offense. 
RFP MIA 000018 
EFTA00209064

• 
• 
• 
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. 
DECEMBER 6, 2007 
PAGE 3 OE 4 
not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding . . ." 18 U.S.C. § 377 I(IX2) & (3). 
Section 3771 also commands that "employees of the Department of Justice . . engaged in the 
detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime shall make their best efforts to see that crime victims 
are notified of, and accorded, the rights described in subsection (I)." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1). 
Additionally,yursuant to the Victims' Rights and Restitution Act of 1990, our Office is 
obligated to "inform I victim of any restitution or other relief to which the victim may be entitled 
under this or any other law and [the) manner in which such relief may be obtained." 42 U.S.C. § 
10607(cX1XB). With respect to notification of the other information that we propose to disclose, 
the statute requires that we provide' victim with the earliest possible notice of: the status of the 
investigation; the filing of charges against 
I
 
suspected offender; and the acceptance of plea. 42 
U.S.C. § I 0607(c)(3). Just as in 18 U.S.C. § 3771, these sections are not limited to proceedings in 
I federal district court. Our Non-Prosecution Agreement resolves the federal investigation by 
allowing Mr. Epstein to plead to' state offense. The victims identified through the federal 
investigation should be appropriately informed, and our Non-Prosecution Agreement does not 
require the U.S. Attorney's Office to forego its legal obligations. 
With respect to your assertion that we are seeking to "federalize" the state plea, our office 
is simply informing the victims of their rights. It does not command them to appear at the hearing 
or to file' victim impact statement. In fact, the letter recommends the sending of any statement to 
the State Attorney's Office so that ASA Belohlavek can determine which, if any, statements are 
appropriate to file with the Court. 
Next, you assert that our letter mischaracterizes Mr. E stein's obligation to pay damages to 
the victims. To avoid that suggestion, I have asked AUSA 
to simply quote the terms of 
the Agreement directly into the Notification Letter. We also have no objection to referring to Mr. 
Epstein as' "sexual offender" rather than' "predator." 
We have no objection to using the conjunction "and/or" in referring to the particular 
offense(s) of which the recipient was' victim. We will not include the language that we take no 
position as to the validity of any claims. While the Office has no intention to take any position in 
any civil litigation arising between Mr. Epstein and any individual victim, as stated above, the Office 
believes that it has proof beyond 'reasonable doubt that each listed individual was' victim of Mr. 
Epstein's criminal conduct while the victim was' minor. the law requires us to treat all victims 
"with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(')(8). We 
will not include any language that demeans the harm they may have suffered. 
'Die letter's assertions regarding representation by the Podhurst firm and Mr. Josefsberg are 
accurate. Judge Davis conferred with Messrs. Podhurst and Josefsberg to insure their willingness 
to undertake this assignment prior to finalizing his selection. 
RFP MIA 000019 
EFTA00209065

• 
• 
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. 
DECEMBER 6,2007 
PAGE 4 OF 4 
Lastly, you object to personal communication between the victims and federal attorneys or 
agents. We have no objection to sendiashe letters through the mail? but we will not remove the 
language about contacting AUSA 
or Special Agent 
with questions or 
concerns. Again, federal law requires that victims have the "reasonable right to confer with the 
attorney for the Government in this case." 18 U.S.C. § 3774(5). The three victims who were 
notified prior to your objection had questions directed to Mr. Epstein's punishment, not the civil 
litigation. Those questions are appropriately directed to law enforcement. If questions arise related 
to the civil litigation, AUSA V illafaila and Special Agent 
will recommend that the 
victims direct those questions to Mr. Josefsberg. 
I have attached' revised letter incorporating the changes on which we can agree. Please 
rovidc any further comments by the close o f business on Friday. In addition, please provide us with 
I
 
definitive statement, signed by your client, of his intention to abide by each and every term of the 
Agreement by close of business on Friday, December 7, 2007. By that time, you must also provide 
us with the agreement(s) with the State Attorney's Office and I date and time certain for the plea and 
sentencing, which must occur no later than December 14, 2007. There must be closure in this 
matter. 
By: 
Enclosure 
cc: 
R. Alex 
.S. Attorney 
AUS 
Sincerely, 
R. Alexander Acosta 
United States A tomcy 
First Assistant United States Attorney 
'This is contingent, however, on being able to provide adequate notice of the change of 
plea and sentencing. The sooner that you schedule that hearing with Judge McSorIcy, the sooner 
we can dispatch these letters. If you delay further, we will have to rely on telephone or personal 
notification. 
RIP MIA 000020 
EFTA00209066