EFTA00215526.pdf

U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 99 N.E. 4 Street Mat, Ft. 33132 (305) 961-9000 VIA FACSIMILE July 25, 2008 Brad Edwards Law Office of Brad Edwards & Associates 2028 Harrison Street, Suite 202 Hollywood, Florida 33020 RE: Jane Does 1 and 2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON Dear Mr. Edwards: We received your July 17, 2008 letter on July 21, and have reviewed it. At the conclusion of the hearing on July 11, 2008, the Court asked the parties if it was necessary to have evidenti hearin . Since there eared to be a factual dispute over what was told by FBI Agc asked the court to allow the parties to confer and determine if an agreement on the facts could be reached. In your letter discussing the draft stipulation the government provided, there appears to be a greater dispute over what occurred. You have requested copies of various doctuth as the agreements executed with Jeffrey Epstein; copies of any FBI 302's pertaining t well as the government's motivation for not disclosing the substance of the agreement to your clients. The government's position is that the "reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case," provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(5), is not triggered until an offense is charged in United States District Court. In our view, the relevant facts are (1) there are no charges in district court filed against Jeffrey Epstein; and (2) Epstein entered pleas of guilty in Florida State Court on June 30, 2008, was sentenced, and is now imprisoned in Palm Beach County. The first fact can be judicially noticed by the Court. The second fact can be established by public record documents, which we will provide to the Court. We believe that the time needed to address the matters you raised in your letter, in an effort to produce an agreed stipulation of facts, would be unproductive given the limited issue the Court must decide. We intend to file a notice with the Court that the two facts stated above are the only relevant ones, and the Court can decide whether any duty under 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a) was owed to petitioners by the Government. EFTA00215526 If you have any questions, please call me a Sincerely, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: Assistant U.S. Attorney -2 - EFTA00215527