EFTA00209047.pdf

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP • ANC APPILIMID PARTNUSHIPS Citigroup Cant 153 Ent 53rd Stem New York. New Yong 10022-4611 Jay P. talkoostr: P.C. Facaimaa: To Ci iic13/ lefkowazNkpnd.com la mint kirklancl.cOM Dlr. Fax: ConfidentlaL For Settlement Purposes Only, Pursuant to Rule 408. October 10, 2007 VIA E-MAIL It 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: • I write as' follow up to our conversation yesterday regarding the open issues that remain stein matter. As you are aware, we continue to have serious disagreements with Ms. Si 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. limits the scope of the attorney representative's representation. ignores Paragraph 8, which The longstanding intention of the parties is also consistent with our interpretation of the greement based on prior iterations of the Agreement, which only refer to appointing' trustee or i 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 ofRule 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 • KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND AIDIJAILD PART-Iv:U.5MP, Mora) Center 753 East 53rd Street Jay P. Lefkowitz, P C. New York, New York 10022-1811 Facsimile: To all Writer 'really. lelkovatzektrktand com www.kirkland.corn November 29, 2007 VIA E-MAIL 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: 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 federalizingi the state plea and sentencing in the same manner as woul the appearance and statements ofI 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 right I 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 • R. Alexander Acosta November 29, 2007 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 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 Mr. Josefsberg (though we hope to do so this week), we do not know that they will even serve in this capacity. Since I believe the role you are casting for these attorneys creates r identified individuals. Since we have not yet had the opportunity to speak with Mr. Podhurst or to 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 ofFlorida 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: 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. (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, or sentencing. (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case. (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law. (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. (8) 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 ofthis 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 ofFlorida 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 ofany 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. Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta United States Attorney By: 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) 680-8400 Facsimile . (213) 6804440 1213) 680-8500 kstarreitaltleideorn wwiekirklandtorn December 5, 2007 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: 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