EFTA00804080.pdf

1. In the State investigation of Jeffrey Epstein's case, the Palm Beach Police interviewed dozens of women who came to JE's Palm Beach home to perform massages on JE in exchange for money. With one exception discussed below, the ages of the witnesses interviewed by State investigators ranged from 16 or 17 years of age up to 62. Sworn testimony from the witnesses interviewed confirmed that a majority of them were 18 years old or over each time that they came to JE's home. 2. All of the women confirmed to police that they voluntarily performed massages for JE at his home, and that each time they did so, they received money in exchange. The women told police that they were brought to JE's home by their friends. Many of the women who initially gave massages later brought other friends to perform massages so that they could receive additional money from JE and their other friends could receive money as well. Some of them testified that a parent or a boyfriend accompanied them to JE's home. A great many of the women left messages at JE's home seeking to return. 3. The evidence gathered in the State's case included sworn corroborated testimony from multiple witnesses that the 16 or 17 year old women who came to JE's home were specifically warned to lie about their ages and tell JE that they were 18 years old or they would not be allowed in his home. Consistent sworn testimony given to police by these witnesses was that in fact they did lie about their ages and told JE that they were 18 years old. 4. The one 14-year old witness, SG, who gave rise to the investigation, and whose age is often cited as the basis for the erroneous assertion that the Palm Beach Police determined that JE targeted young children, gave sworn testimony flatly refuting this. As corroborated by the Palm Beach Police report, in a sworn interview with Palm Beach Police Detective Michelle Pagan and in a sworn deposition before the lead State prosecutor, Lanna Belohlavec, then a 13- year veteran prosecuting sex crimes for the State Attorney's Office in Palm Beach County, this witness testified that: • the person who brought her to JE's home told her to lie that she was 18 years old or she would not be allowed into the house; • JE specifically asked her age and she did in fact lie to him that she was 18 years old; and • she had a single encounter with JE and emphatically denied that JE had any sex with her of any kind during that single encounter. 5. JE submitted to a lie detector test, the results of which verified that JE had no sexual contact of any kind with this witness, never threatened her in any way, was told by her that she was 18 and believed her when she told him she was 18. 6. Additional evidence compromising the credibility of this witness included: • A MySpace page at the time of the State investigation, which contained highly provocative photos of the witness and in which the witness represented that she was EFTA00804080  18 years old, used drugs, was not a virgin, shoplifted, earned $250,000 or more and had been in trouble with the law. • Prior police reports indicating that the witness had a history of abusing alcohol and drugs. • The persons who first informed police about this witness were her father and stepmother, both of whom had criminal records. The father served 21months in federal prison for bank fraud and the stepmother had a State conviction for identity fraud. Shortly after going to the police, they held a press conference on the courthouse steps announcing their filing of a civil lawsuit against JE seeking substantial monetary recovery from JE. The press conference and lawsuit were initiated without the witness's knowledge or consent and the lawsuit was subsequently withdrawn. • The witness and her mother then promptly filed their own civil lawsuit against JE seeking their own substantial monetary recovery. 7. Negotiations with State Attorney were conducted at arms length and at times in an atmosphere of mutual hostility. At no point was JE granted any sort of a break in the case due to his wealth, political affiliations or the prominence of his lawyers. If anything, those factors worked against him. State prosecutors devoted enormous resources to prosecuting JE in this lengthy 15-month investigation. 8. But there were significant problems with the case. The State's key witnesses had major credibility problems, including damaging histories of lies, illegal drug use and crime. After personally interviewing many of the witnesses, herself, the prosecutor for the State Attorney's Office, who then had served 13 years as an experienced sex crimes prosecutor, stated that she found "no real victims" in the case, and that some of the women were "causing trouble in the hopes of getting money" from JE. Moreover, this was an unusual case at best. The State had never before prosecuted a case involving erotic touching unless the victims were far younger than the witnesses alleged they were in this case, or were vulnerable or in a relationship of trust. None those things were reported to the police during the State investigation. Prior cases brought by the State involved demonstrably far more egregious conduct than that which was alleged to State investigators. Any suggestion that JE received preferential treatment or that the State prosecutors engaged in any misconduct is completely false. 9. In light of concerns regarding the relative strength of the Epstein case and the unprecedented nature of a prosecution based on the facts alleged to State investigators, the State Attorney took the evidence he had to the grand jury. Based on that evidence, the grand jury returned an indictment against JE for a single count of solicitation of prostitution, an offense for which the mandatory punishment was a form of probation and no jail time. 10. There are women, now identified as victims in the Epstein case, who have been particularly vocal about the failings of the State's prosecution. However, they did come forward to State investigators during the investigation, and in a one case, the witness refused to speak even with federal investigators until well after the State investigation had been concluded. Others, who did initially speak to investigators gave them a far different version of the facts than those they know use to condemn the government EFTA00804081 As an example, TM, a witness who now condemns JE as a serial pedophile and sexual abuser, refused to give any statement to investigators until she was granted full immunity. And after she was given immunity, she swore under oath that she never had any type of sexual relations with JE: Q: Did he at any point kiss you, touch you, show any kind of affection towards you? TM: Never, never ... Q: So he never pulled you closer to him in any sexual way? TM: I wish. No, no, never, ever, ever, no, never. Jeffrey is an awesome man. TM gave sworn testimony to the FBI that she always carried fake identification on her and lied to JE that she was 18. Like others in this case, she also testified that the woman who brought her to JE's home told TM "make sure that you're 18 because Jeffrey does not want any underage girls." TM also brought her friends to JE's home and told the FBI that: None of my girls ever had a problem and they'd call me. They'd beg me, you know, for us to go to Jeffrey's house because they love Jeffrey. Jeffrey is a respectful man. He really is. I mean, and he all thought we were of age always. This is what's so sad about it. When asked by federal investigators whether she had anything more to say about JE and the case, TM replied: I hope Jeffrey, nothing happens to Jeffrey because he's an awesome man and it really would be a shame. It's a shame that he has to go through this because he's an awesome guy and he didn't do nothing wrong, nothing. II. The media's assertions regarding JE's favorable sentence and the manner in which he served it are completely inaccurate: • From June through October 2008, JE was held in a solitary confinement cell in a special housing unit that is usually reserved for dangerous prisoners, though Epstein posed no such danger. He was confined to that unit 23 hours a day and allowed outside one hour a day for exercise. • JE served his sentence in that manner for nearly four months until he was granted work release on the same terms and conditions as were available to all similarly situated prisoners who served the required period of time before qualifying. • The date of Mr. Epstein's release from jail into supervised house arrest was determined based on Mr. Epstein's good conduct and granted solely on the same terms and conditions as were applicable to all prisoners. EFTA00804082