EFTA00230437

U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Professional Responsibility 
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Room 3266 
Washington, D.C. 20530 
CONFIDENTIAL 
The Honorable Wifredo A. Ferrer 
United States Attorney 
United States Attorney's Office 
for the Southern District of Florida 
99 N.E. 4th Street 
Miami, Florida 33132 
Dear Mr. Ferrer. 
Assistant United States Attorney 
forwars 
to the Office of Professional 
Responsibility (OPR) a letter dated December 10, 2010 
you received from Professor Paul 
06 Oa 
„7t 
~nsjw 
-
Quinney College of Law," the University of Utah. In his letter, tab 
sell alleged 
misconduct by the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) in the criminal investigation of Jeffrey 
Epstein. OPR. has completed its inquiry into whe 
roper influences" resulted in the USAO's 
decision to enter into a non-prosecution agreement with Mr. Epstein. 
g
fi
Most, if not all, o 
=negations 
are currently being litigated on behalf of victims 
under the Crime Victim's Rights Act in Jane Doe #1 and Jane•Doe #2 v. United States, Case No. 
08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson (S.D. Fla.). OPR has jurisdiction to investigate allegations of 
misconduct involving Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys or law enforcement personnel that 
relate to the exercise of an attorney's authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal advice. It is, 
however, the policy of this Office to refrain front investigating issues or allegations that were, are 
being, or could have been addressed in the course of litigation, unless a court has made a specific 
finding of misconduct by a DOJ attorney or law enforcement personnel or there are present other 
extraordinary circumstances. Based on our review of Professor Cassell's correspondence, and the 
pleadings filed in the Doe case, we have determined that his allegations fall into this category. No 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013919 
EFTA00230437

• 
• 
• 
court has made a fmding of misconduct and there are no extraordinary circumstances. 
We have, therefore, determined that these allegations do not warrant further inquiry and we 
consider this matter to be closed. 
Wt. ha-ea- n .44 6: 
Co€1-2-c-tiR 
f 
(n l- dna'  ..-S;ncerely, 
Counsel 
-2-
--tr-5 94- 
rtme. 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013920 
EFTA00230438

::ODMA/PCDOCS/OPR/309807/1 
201100372 
Howard 
- 3 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013921 
EFTA00230439

U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Professional Responsibility 
950 Pennsylvania Avaue N.W. Room 3266 
Washington. D.C. 20530 
CONFIDENTIAL 
The Honorable Wifiedo A. Ferrer 
United States Attorney 
United States Attorney's Office 
for the Southern District of Florida 
99 N.E. 4ih Street 
Miami, Florida 33132 
Dear Mr. Ferrer. 
Assistant United States Attorney 
forwarded to the Office of Professional 
Responsibility (OPR) a letter dated December 10, 2010 that you received from Professor Paul 
Cassel), of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah. In his letter, Professor 
Cassell alleged misconduct by the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) in the criminal 
investigation ofleffrey Epstein. OPR has completed its inquiry into whether "improper influences" 
resulted in the USAO's decision to enter into a non-prosecution agreement with Mr. Epstein. 
Most, if not all, of Professor Cassell's allegations are currently being litigated on behalf of 
victims under the Crime Victim's Rights Act in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 v. United States, Case 
No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Jolmson (S.D. Fla.). OPR has jurisdiction to investigate allegations of 
misconduct involving Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys or law enforcement personnel that 
relate to the exercise of an attorney's authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal advice. It is, 
however, the policy of this Office to refrain from investigating issues or allegations that were, are 
being, or could have been addressed in the course of litigation, unless a court has made a specific 
finding of misconduct by a DOJ attorney or law enforcement personnel or there are present other 
extraordinary circumstances. Based on our review of Professor Cassell's correspondence, and the 
pleadings filed in the Doe case, we have determined that his allegations fall into this category. No 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013922 
EFTA00230440

court has made a finding of misconduct and there are no extraordinary circumstances. 
We have, therefore, determined that these allegations do not warrant further inquiry and we 
consider this matter to be closed. We have notified Professor Cassell of our decision. 
Sincerely, 
Counsel 
- 2 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013923 
EFTA00230441

::ODMA/PCDOCS/OPR/309807/1 
201100372 
Howard 
- 3 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013924 
EFTA00230442

U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Professional Responsibility 
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Room 3266 
Washington. D.C. 20330 
Professor Paul G. Cassell 
Quinney College of Law 
The University of Utah 
332 South 1400 East, Room 101 
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-0730 
Dear Professor Cassell: 
Your letter dated December 10, 2010 to United States Attorney Willy& A. Ferrer was 
forwarded to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). OPR has completed an inquiry into 
your allegation of professional misconduct by the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern 
District of Florida (USAO) in the criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. Specifically, you 
;do
question whether "improper influences" resulted in the USAO's decision to enter a non-prosecution 
it 
agreement with Mr. Epstein. 
Most, if not all, of the allegations set forth in your letter are currently being litigated on 
behalf of victims under the Crime Victim's Rights Act in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 v. Untied 
States, Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marrallohnson (S.D. Fla.). OPR has jurisdiction to investigate 
allegations of misconduct involving Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys or law enforcement 
personnel that relate to the exercise of an attorney's authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal 
advice. It is, however, the policy of this Office to refrain from investigating issues or allegations 
that were, are being, or could have been addressed in the course of litigation, unless a court has 
made a specific finding of misconduct by a DOJ attorney or law enforcement personnel or there are 
present other extraordinary circumstances. Based on our review of your correspondence, and the 
pleadings filed in the Doe case, we have determined that your allegations fall into this category. No 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013925 
EFTA00230443

court has made a finding of misconduct and there are no extraordinary circumstances. 
We regret that we can be of no further assistance to you. Thank you for bringing this matter 
to our attention. 
Sincerely, 
Counsel 
- 2 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013926 
EFTA00230444

nODMA/PCDOCS/OPR/309806/1 
Howard 
201100372 
- 3 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013927 
EFTA00230445

U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Professional Responsibility 
950 Pemuyhunia Avenue N.W, Room 3266 
Washington, D.C. 20530 
Professor Paul G. Cassell 
S.J. Quinney College of Law 
The University of Utah 
332 South 1400 East, Room 101 
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-0730 
Dear Professor Cassell: 
Your letter dated December 10, 2010 to United States Attorney Wifredo A. Ferrer was 
forwarded to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). OPR has completed an inquiry into 
your allegation of professional misconduct by the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern 
District of Florida (USAO) in the criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. Specifically, you 
question whether "improper influences" resulted in the USAO's decision to enter a non-prosecution 
agreement with Mr. Epstein. 
Most, if not all, of the allegations set forth in your letter are currently being litigated on 
behalf of victims under the Crime Victim's Rights Act in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 v. United 
States, Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson (S.D. Fla.). OPR has jurisdiction to investigate 
allegations of misconduct involving Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys or law enforcement 
personnel that relate to the exercise of an attorney's authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal 
advice. It is, however, the policy of this Office to refrain from investigating issues or allegations 
that were, are being, or could have been addressed in the course of litigation, unless a court has 
made a specific finding of misconduct by a DOJ attorney or law enforcement personnel or there are 
present other extraordinary circumstances. Based on our review of your correspondence, and the 
pleadings filed in the Doe case, we have determined that your allegations fall into this category. No 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013928 
EFTA00230446

court has made a finding of misconduct and there are no extraordinary circumstances. 
We regret that we can be of no further assistance to you. Thank you for bringing this matter 
to our attention. 
Sincerely. 
Counsel 
- 2 - 
44-
1 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013929 
EFTA00230447

::ODMA/PCDOCS/OPR/309806/1 
Howard 
201100372 
- 3 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013930 
EFTA00230448

N.. ,,,,,
4 
U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Professional Responsibility 
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Room 3266 
Washington, D.C. 20530 
Professor Paul G. Cassell 
S.J. Quinney College of Law 
Th.t..- University of Utah 
332 South 1400 East, Room 101 
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-0730 
Dear Professor Cassell: 
e 
Your 
our letteAto United States Attorney Wifredolerrer wits forwarded 
to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). OPR has completed an i 
uiry into your 
allegation of professional misconduct by the United States Attorney's 
r 
for the Southern 
District ofFlorida (USAO) in thc criminal investigation ofJeffrey Eps  in.(Speci malty, you st
ill...
L.:LSI—
us /1/4O'S
hat "improper influences" ostise-USACI resulted in thee  decision to e 
a non-prosecution 
agreement with Mr. Epstein fosegoing-feelerai-proseemien-of-sex-effermes.set &you tv., trAw 
in 0 s 
•-‘ • 4- 4-4-C2- 
itc 
arimity (at-ste-statemartsyntr rrraarm-support of y
 allegatios 
arikad by yogi], 
O
tt*litigatrat on behalf of victims under the Crime Victim's Rights Act in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Dok e, 7:11-'`II 
v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Mana/Johnson (S.D. Fla.). Titeseelti
athatLg 
J 
IOS 
a 
onaire; 
agreement; 
t vie ms were e 
era 
ahisabeaPcagagathisessesiatcaatlitstein after regrine film" the. r Te ea OPR has jurisdiction 
to investigate allegations of misconduct involving Department of Justice (Dal) attorneys or law 
enforcement personnel that relate to the exercise of an attorney's authority to investigate, litigate 
or provide legal a 
ce. It is, 
wever, the policy of this Office to refrain from investigating issues 
ti
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013931 
EFTA00230449

to our attention. 
be' ''7 
are' 
or allegations that werefintressegl or dim could have been addressed in the course of litigation, 
unless a court has made a specific finding of misconduct by a DOJ attorney or law enforcement 
personnel or there are present other extraordinary circumstances. Based on our review of your 
4-420 
correspondence, and the pleadings filed in Doe case, we have determined that your allegations fall 
into this category. No court has made a finding of misconduct and there are no extraordinary 
circumstances. 
ith respect to your statements that Mr. Epstein may have had advance knowl 6 of an 
impendin search wa 
t Burin the investigation, 
ave been 
very in civil 
litigation b 
against Mr. E tein, we hay 
ts do not warrant 
further inqu 
we consider this ma 
•e closed.: 
4 
kit 
We regret that we can be of no further assistance 'to you. Thank y 
for bringing this matter 
Sincerely, 
Counsel 
- 2 - 
z 
Nfr? 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013932 
EFTA00230450

::ODMA/PCDOCS/OPFt/309806/1 
Howard 
201100372 
- 3 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013933 
EFTA00230451

U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Professional Responsibility 
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Room 3266 
Washington. D.0 20530 
CONFIDENTIAI(TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY 
The Honorable Wifredo A. Ferrer 
United States Attorney 
United States Atto ey's Office 
for the Souther 
istrict of Florida 
99 N.E. 4i6 Street 
Miami, Florida 33132 
Dear Mr. Ferrer: 
On December 16, 2010, Assistant United States Attorney 
forwarded to the Office 
ofProfessional Responsibility (OPR) a letter you received from Professor Paul Cassell, S.J. Quinney 
College of Law of the University of Utah. In his letter, Mr. Cassell alleged misconduct by the 
United States Attorney's Office (USAO) in the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein for federal sex 
offenses. OPR has completed its inquiry into Mr. Cassell's allegation that "improper influences" 
on the USAO resulted in the decision to enter into a non-prosecution agreement with Mr. Epstein 
foregoing federal charges. 
Many of the statements made by Professor Cassell in support of his allegation have been 
raised in litigation on behalf of victims under the Crime Victim's Rights Act in Jane Doe #1 and 
Jane Doe#2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson (S.D. Fla.). Those statements 
include that: Jeffrey Epstein is a politically-connected billionaire; that the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation was not informed of the non-prosecution agreement; that victims were deceived about 
the non-prosecution agreement; and that a former Assistant United States Attorney had a conflict 
of interest when he represented an associate of Mr. Epstein after retiring from the USAO. OPR has 
jurisdiction to investigate allegations of misconduct involving Department of Justice (DO.1) 
attorneys or law enforcement personnel that relate to the exercise of an attorney's authority to 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013934 
EFTA00230452

•••••//#••.I.A. 
investigate, litigate or provide legal advice. It is, however, the policy of this Office to refrain from 
investigating issues or allegations that were addressed or that could have been addressed in the 
course of litigation, unless a court has made a specific finding of misconduct by a DOJ attorney or 
law enforcement personnel or there are present other extraordinary circumstances. Based on our 
review of Professor Cassell's correspondence, and the pleadings filed in the Doe case, we have 
determined that his allegation falls into this category. No court has made a finding of misconduct 
and there are no extraordinary circumstances. 
With respect to Professor Cassell's statements that Mr. Epstein may have had advance 
knowledge of an impending search warrant during the investigation, and that he has been denied 
discovery in civil litigation by victims against Mr. Epstein, we have determined that these statements 
do not warrant further inquiry and we consider this matter to be closed. 
Sincerely, 
Counsel 
- 2 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013935 
EFTA00230453

::ODMA/PCDOCS/OPR/309807/1 
201100372 
Howard 
- 3 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013936 
EFTA00230454

U.S. Department of Justice 
Office of Professional Responsibility 
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N. W. Room 3266 
Washington. D.C. 20530 
Professor Paul G. Cassell 
S.J. Quinney College of Law 
University of Utah 
332 South 1400 East, Room 101 
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-0730 
Dear Professor Cassell: 
On December 16, 2010, your letter to United States Attorney Wifitdo Ferrer was forwarded 
to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). OPR has completed an inquiry into your 
allegation of professional misconduct by the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern 
District ofFlorida (USAO) in the criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. Specifically, you alleged 
that "improper influences" on the USAO resulted in the decision to enter into a non-prosecution 
agreement with Mr. Epstein foregoing federal prosecution of sex offenses. 
Many of the statements you made in support of your allegation have been raised by you in 
litigation on behalf of victims under the Crime Victim's Rights Act in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe#2 
v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson (S.D. Fla.). Those statements include that: 
Jeffrey Epstein is a politically-connected billionaire; that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was 
not informed of the non-prosecution agreement; that victims were deceived about the non-
prosecution agreement; and that a former Assistant United States Attorney had a conflict of interest 
0-644"e" r 
t r`3 Antrrt-chm, %AS AO 
when he represented an associate of Mr. Epsteil OPR has jurisdiction to investigate allegations of 
misconduct involving Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys or law enforcement personnel that 
relate to the exercise of an attomea authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal advice. It is, 
however, the policy of this Office to refrain from investigating issues or allegations that were 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013937 
EFTA00230455

addressed or that could have been addressed in the course of litigation, unless a court has made a 
specific finding of misconduct by a DOJ attorney or law enforcement personnel or there are present 
other extraordinary circumstances. Based on our review of your correspondence, and the pleadings 
filed in Doe case, we have determined that your allegations fall into this category. No court has 
made a finding of misconduct and there are no extraordinary circumstances. 
With respect to your statements that Mr. Epstein may have had advanceji knowledge of an 
impending search warrant during the investigation, and that you have been denied discovery -te-
o-5 
whieitpu•-feelsentitled in civil litigation by victims far-damages from Mr. Epstein, we have 
determined that these statements do not warrant further inquiry and we consider this matter to be 
closed. 
We regret that we can be of no further assistance to you. Thank you for bringing this matter 
to our attention. 
Sincerely, 
Counsel 
- 2 - 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013938 
EFTA00230456