krischer 2

I was very sorry not to have you present at the meeting I had with Dahlia , Lanna and detective Joseph Recarey. I was told you had a last minute emergency, and hope the outcome of your meeting was more satisfactory than mine..Had you been there , I beleive you would now concur in my strong belief that charges, against Jeffrey Epstein should not be brought. ...I thought it appropriate to give you at least my version of what transpired at the meeting so as to make our scheduled meeting on thursday the 23, more productive. In a kafkaesque scenario, I find myself trying at the prosecutions request,to give evidence in an attempt to rebut charges, and allegations of specific "incidents" of wrongdoing, while at the same time being unaware of what those charges are. The prosecutors have continued to be unwilling to detail those allegations.. Astonishingly, even at this late date we have been unable to obtain, from them the details of the charges ,the names , place s, time and events under investigation, but are told "ALan , if you give us the evidence we will consider it....Lanna confirmed that she ,you and dahlia, had in fact considered a fair resolution, but that you had decided that due to Detecive recarey's , discontent,expressed to me by him at the meeting ,"but I've worked on this case for so long" to now send the case to be decided by a grand jury.However, As I had, responded to you on the phone,and now reiterate I trust your experience, balanced, mature view, of the overall circumstances , far more than I could the liklihood of a Grand jury arriving at a fair conclusion. As , the men and women would simply see , a young woman , who suggests wrongdoing, look at the statute, and have little choice but to indict. The woman obvioulsy not subject to even the slightest cross examination, and her history , lack of credibility, and in some cases, arrest, drug use, and in the specific case of Alexandra Hall ,what we understand to be the main witness, . confessed incidents of theft.would not even be brought to the attention of the grand jurors, as your investigator didn't himself know of these very relevant facts.IF I may remind you this girl was arrested for marijuana posession in september , did community service, in october, and immediatly upon completion of her service fell back into her well established habit of breaking the law.Seperate from her admitted drug use and web pages that we have previouly forwarded to you, we have in our posesions her e- mails where she refers to her " illegitimate occupation". I've attached the report contemporaneously prepared by her employers loss prevention officer , that we have now also turned over to Lanna , clearly illustrating these facts. You should be aware that I did this however after, much trepidation, over providing to your office, evidence that is clearly one of our most sensitive documents , certainly that wouldhave been used to totally destroy Ms. Halls' credibility in the unlikely event of a trial. This was provided in additionto the charge slip that confirms that when Ms Hall bought the strap on dildo, from her favorite sex shop. she had obviousy been above the age of eighteen.... I don't want to appear flippant where such an important matter is at stake, but If I were detective Recarey,I assume that prides himself on his abilty to judge character, and had been taken in by what is now the obvious lies of miss Hall, and understood yiddish, when I saw the copy of the incontrovertible proof to which we had referred, I would "plotz". ...I guess it's lucky he soesn't understand. I then spent some time at the meeting, reiterating my view, that I know that you share, that especially in instances of age related offenses, that both the responsibility and the precedent of your office is to excercise discretion with both breadth and justice.. I referred to the Supreme court of Wisconsin case where judge abrahamson made the relevant observation, In strict liability offenses, perhaps ...insert----...As I attempted to distingush Mr Epstein's case, from that of the e Harley case that you agreed, was not the case to which you had initally referred, I was surprised to hear Lanna still attempt to make a connection between Harleys forty plus year criminal history that began with strong arm rape, shooting into an occupied building, stolen merchandise etc. with Mr Epsteins history of philanthropy on a rarely found scale. Medicine , Israel. science, education, the arts, as well as his active participation in world bodies, including the Trilateral COmmision , and the Council on foreign Relations.. If there was ever a poster boy example for the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. this is it. Contrast this with the history of Alexandra hall who had on many occasions told others that she was determined to be really, really, rich and would do absolutly anything , to accomplish that goal... Her offering anal sex, or stealing the magazine detailing Mr Epstein's accomplishmnets, were simply steps she saw as part of her plan..She was turned down when she wanted to ride on his plane,( our guess, and only a guess, why Recarey as late as last week . appraochd Mr Epstein's pilot and told him quite unncessarily that he had been investigatin MR Epstein since 2004 and had asked informed him for the first time that there was an investigation regarding fourteen year old girls).. I believe it would have saved a great deal of time and trouble for both my client and your office had the detective taken even the basic step of checking to see if Alexandra had a juvenile record... we did , she did , and we informed recarey for the first time at the meeting....... As you have already acknowledged, we have been as cooperative as possible, but I must admit until today it's been quite a one way street, as the prosecutors, still refuse to even tell us the names of their suppossed witnesses... If they were in fact in Mr Epstein's house, he obviously must know them,, so why not tell him who they are.. At our first meeting you had specifically told me that you would never bring a touching, case,,, but when I ask if "there is more than that alleged, I'm met with "Im sorry there is an on-going investigation, and if you like to refute the still secret facts please do so as soon as possible.. This is obviously not fair.. Lanna responded to this concern with the statment , that this is always how it is with Grand Juries.. However, as you will certainly agree, as we can't find any precedent in your office, this is a case where a man even if all your alleged facts are to be believed, is in no position other than the recent massage parlor visitor, who in one instance said he had visited the establishment over two hundred times.and was never prosecuted.( the closest precedent we found). We have also been unable to find the case, to which you referred that you said began as an elderly abuse case.. In fact guy Fronsteins' office has had someone at the courthouse researching for two weeks, as well as my researchers for considerably longer, and neither of us, have found a similar case.. In this case there is no allegation regarding a person in position of authority,familial relationship or supervisory role, no coercion, no drugs , alcohol , or agression of any kind. In fact it is readily acknowledged that the girls were knowingly and voluntarily coming to Palm Beach to give a topless massage. It would be a setting a new precedent without comparision to charge a person in this circumstance.. Dahlia said at the meeting that the aggravating circumstance in this case was " volume"..." I responded that in fact if touching was not of interest to the office,(I recall the story of the fifteen year old stripper, that you said would never initiate a prosecution) then in fact "volume" was the best proof that my client could not in good concience be accused of anything more than that. ... As I'm sure you were told only a very few number of girls that may have accidently slipped through his precautions, have alleged anything more serious... This is not the pattern of Mr Harley , who would never pass up the opportunity to video tape his victims without their knowldge, then attempt to sell the tapes, and had a clear understanding that the girls were being paid for sex, and his only possible defense was I'm sorry but that man , naked on the video tape in my bed who shares my body , is not really me... ... In fairness the last half hour of the meeting seemed to be more constructive . It began by moving toward a mutual resolution .. Lanna had initially said that she and Dahlia had considered a plea to three misdemeanor charges of "contributing to the deliquency of a minor", , I was quickly adamant that we could not agree to that charge, as not only would it be grossly unfair to my client but a public sex related charge would not only damamge my client , but would harm innocent third parties, who would no longer be able to accept his well established charity... She then suggested something she referred to as pre trial intervention... I was unfamiliar with the concept.. but she thought this idea might lead to a possible solution.. I suggested that the charge would have to be be a non sex related charge as I think we agreed that a sex charge didn't add anything to the pound of flesh that your office appears to be focused on receiving.(i.e. simple battery) I said that I thought that an this unfair but expeditious resolution might however be in my client's best interest , especially in light of the threat of the aformentioned , one sided grand jury proceding . I suggested that in the interest in putting this behind us we might be able to agree to a deferred prosecution, .. Dahlia initally said she thought this was tantamount to getting nothing , but I immediatly and strongly disagreed, as did Guy. As Mr. Epstein would I believe agree to reasonable restrictions on his future behavior , without
effecting his charity. The contract, for this or a pre trial diversion, could be I believe ,be negotiated in good faith with your office to meet all our various needs ,justice , and also be done in a non-public way, giving everyone what appears to be a win- win situation.
I hope this letter is helpful , and thank you in advance for both your patience and consideration,, I trust I will see you on thursday.

I was very sorry not to have you present at the
meeting I had with Dahlia , Lanna and detective
Joseph Recarey. I was told you had a last minute
emergency, and hope the outcome of your meeting was
more satisfactory than mine..Had you been there , I
beleive you would now concur in my strong belief that
charges, against Jeffrey Epstein should not be
brought. ...I thought it appropriate to give you at
least my version of what transpired at the meeting
so as to make our scheduled meeting on thursday the
23, more productive. In a kafkaesque scenario, I find
myself trying at the prosecutions request,to give
evidence in an attempt to rebut charges, and
allegations of specific "incidents" of wrongdoing,
while at the same time being unaware of what those
charges are. The prosecutors have continued to be
unwilling to detail those allegations.. Astonishingly,
even at this late date we have been unable to
obtain, from them the details of the charges ,the
names , place s, time and events under investigation,
but are told "ALan , if you give us the evidence we
will consider it....Lanna confirmed that she ,you and
dahlia, had in fact considered a fair resolution, but
that you had decided that due to Detecive recarey's ,
discontent,expressed to me by him at the meeting ,"but
I've worked on this case for so long" to now send the
case to be decided by a grand jury.However, As I
had, responded to you on the phone,and now reiterate
I trust your experience, balanced, mature view, of the
overall circumstances , far more than I could the
liklihood of a Grand jury arriving at a fair
conclusion. As , the men and women would simply see ,
a young woman , who suggests wrongdoing, look at the
statute, and have little choice but to indict. The
woman obvioulsy not subject to even the slightest
cross examination, and her history , lack of
credibility, and in some cases, arrest, drug use, and
in the specific case of Alexandra Hall ,what we
understand to be the main witness, . confessed
incidents of theft.would not even be brought to the
attention of the grand jurors, as your investigator
didn't himself know of these very relevant facts.IF I
may remind you this girl was arrested for marijuana
posession in september , did community service, in
october, and immediatly upon completion of her
service fell back into her well established habit of
breaking the law.Seperate from her admitted drug use
and web pages that we have previouly forwarded to you,
we have in our posesions her e- mails where she refers
to her " illegitimate occupation". I've attached the
report contemporaneously prepared by her employers
loss prevention officer , that we have now also
turned over to Lanna , clearly illustrating these
facts. You should be aware that I did this however
after, much trepidation, over providing to your
office, evidence that is clearly one of our most
sensitive documents , certainly that wouldhave been
used to totally destroy Ms. Halls' credibility in the
unlikely event of a trial. This was provided in
additionto the charge slip that confirms that when Ms
Hall bought the strap on dildo, from her favorite sex
shop. she had obviousy been above the age of
eighteen.... I don't want to appear flippant where
such an important matter is at stake, but If I were
detective Recarey,I assume that prides himself on his
abilty to judge character, and had been taken in by
what is now the obvious lies of miss Hall, and
understood yiddish, when I saw the copy of the
incontrovertible proof to which we had referred, I
would "plotz". ...I guess it's lucky he soesn't
understand. I then spent some time at the meeting,
reiterating my view, that I know that you share, that
especially in instances of age related offenses, that
both the responsibility and the precedent of your
office is to excercise discretion with both breadth
and justice.. I referred to the Supreme court of
Wisconsin case where judge abrahamson made the
relevant observation, In strict liability offenses,
perhaps ...insert----...As I attempted to distingush
Mr Epstein's case, from that of the e Harley case
that you agreed, was not the case to which you had
initally referred, I was surprised to hear Lanna
still attempt to make a connection between Harleys
forty plus year criminal history that began with
strong arm rape, shooting into an occupied building,
stolen merchandise etc. with Mr Epsteins history of
philanthropy on a rarely found scale. Medicine ,
Israel. science, education, the arts, as well as his
active participation in world bodies, including the
Trilateral COmmision , and the Council on foreign
Relations.. If there was ever a poster boy example
for the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. this is
it. Contrast this with the history of Alexandra hall
who had on many occasions told others that she was
determined to be really, really, rich and would do
absolutly anything , to accomplish that goal... Her
offering anal sex, or stealing the magazine detailing
Mr Epstein's accomplishmnets, were simply steps she
saw as part of her plan..She was turned down when she
wanted to ride on his plane,( our guess, and only a
guess, why Recarey as late as last week . appraochd Mr
Epstein's pilot and told him quite unncessarily that
he had been investigatin MR Epstein since 2004 and had
asked informed him for the first time that there was
an investigation regarding fourteen year old girls)..
I believe it would have saved a great deal of time and
trouble for both my client and your office had the
detective taken even the basic step of checking to
see if Alexandra had a juvenile record... we did , she
did , and we informed recarey for the first time at
the meeting....... As you have already acknowledged,
we have been as cooperative as possible, but I must
admit until today it's been quite a one way street, as
the prosecutors, still refuse to even tell us the
names of their suppossed witnesses... If they were in
fact in Mr Epstein's house, he obviously must know
them,, so why not tell him who they are.. At our first
meeting you had specifically told me that you would
never bring a touching, case,,, but when I ask if
"there is more than that alleged, I'm met with "Im
sorry there is an on-going investigation, and if you
like to refute the still secret facts please do so
as soon as possible.. This is obviously not fair..
Lanna responded to this concern with the statment ,
that this is always how it is with Grand Juries..
However, as you will certainly agree, as we can't find
any precedent in your office, this is a case where a
man even if all your alleged facts are to be
believed, is in no position other than the recent
massage parlor visitor, who in one instance said he
had visited the establishment over two hundred
times.and was never prosecuted.( the closest precedent
we found). We have also been unable to find the case,
to which you referred that you said began as an
elderly abuse case.. In fact guy Fronsteins' office
has had someone at the courthouse researching for two
weeks, as well as my researchers for considerably
longer, and neither of us, have found a similar case..
In this case there is no allegation regarding a person
in position of authority,familial relationship or
supervisory role, no coercion, no drugs , alcohol ,
or agression of any kind. In fact it is readily
acknowledged that the girls were knowingly and
voluntarily coming to Palm Beach to give a topless
massage. It would be a setting a new precedent
without comparision to charge a person in this
circumstance.. Dahlia said at the meeting that the
aggravating circumstance in this case was "
volume"..." I responded that in fact if touching was
not of interest to the office,(I recall the story of
the fifteen year old stripper, that you said would
never initiate a prosecution) then in fact "volume"
was the best proof that my client could not in good
concience be accused of anything more than that. ...
As I'm sure you were told only a very few number of
girls that may have accidently slipped through his
precautions, have alleged anything more serious...
This is not the pattern of Mr Harley , who would never
pass up the opportunity to video tape his victims
without their knowldge, then attempt to sell the
tapes, and had a clear understanding that the girls
were being paid for sex, and his only possible
defense was I'm sorry but that man , naked on the
video tape in my bed who shares my body , is not
really me... ... In fairness the last half hour of
the meeting seemed to be more constructive . It began
by moving toward a mutual resolution .. Lanna had
initially said that she and Dahlia had considered a
plea to three misdemeanor charges of "contributing to
the deliquency of a minor", , I was quickly adamant
that we could not agree to that charge, as not only
would it be grossly unfair to my client but a public
sex related charge would not only damamge my client ,
but would harm innocent third parties, who would no
longer be able to accept his well established
charity... She then suggested something she referred
to as pre trial intervention... I was unfamiliar with
the concept.. but she thought this idea might lead to
a possible solution.. I suggested that the charge
would have to be be a non sex related charge as I
think we agreed that a sex charge didn't add
anything to the pound of flesh that your office
appears to be focused on receiving.(i.e. simple
battery) I said that I thought that an this unfair
but expeditious resolution might however be in my
client's best interest , especially in light of the
threat of the aformentioned , one sided grand jury
proceding . I suggested that in the interest in
putting this behind us we might be able to agree to a
deferred prosecution, .. Dahlia initally said she
thought this was tantamount to getting nothing , but
I immediatly and strongly disagreed, as did Guy. As
Mr. Epstein would I believe agree to reasonable
restrictions on his future behavior , without
effecting his charity. The contract, for this or a pre
trial diversion, could be I believe ,be negotiated in
good faith with your office to meet all our various
needs ,justice , and also be done in a non-public
way, giving everyone what appears to be a win- win
situation.
I hope this letter is helpful , and thank you
in advance for both your patience and consideration,,
I trust I will see you on thursday.

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com