Re: Meeting Confirmation

"Sweetheart deal!" So goes the =ttack on the resolution of a long-ago federal investigation involving =ur former client -- and now-friend -- Jeffrey Epstein. The attack =s profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law or the facts, nor =y the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, =effrey was subjected to an aggressive federal intrusion into what would =ypically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in =outh Florida. His offense — at its core, sexual =avors for hire — has long been treated as a matter =ntrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal =overnment. His conduct — while clearly unlawful =nd for which he has accepted full responsibility — =as a classic state offense and was being treated exactly that way by =ble, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, far =rom going "soft" on the matter and without =nvitation from the state, the federal government intervened. =ronically, now many for their own opportunistic reasons are criticizing =he federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of =abor Alex Acosta (then the United States Attorney in south Florida), =or not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. =nbsp;

Here =re the true key fads: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made =usinessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, engaged in =llegal conduct that amounts to solicitation of prostitution. His =onduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although =o coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of =he women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by =xperienced state prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal =aws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the =ublic order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's =ffice conducted an extensive 15-month investigation, led by the chief =f the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by a =tate grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of =rostitution.

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors =xtensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted =ictims, considered their credibility -- or lack thereof -- and =onsidered the extent of exculpatory evidence. After months of =egotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned =esolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest -- a =esolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other =imilarly-situated defendants. The system worked as it should. =nbsp;

Then, =n came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively =nd aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a =ommercial human trafficking ring, targeting minors. But that'= not what this was, and the federal authorities ultimately =cknowledged that, deferring prosecution to the state. But not =ithout conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on many =northodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's =ederally-forced deal, experienced Jeffrey was defense required =eam to request had never that seen the imposed =tate prosecutors on any defendant demand the anywhere. imposition =nbsp;Under of a jail sentence the and =ifetime sex-offender registration, which would not have otherwise been =equired under the previously agreed-upon state disposition of this =rostitution charge. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline =rosecution in deference to the state was reviewed and approved at the =ighest levels of the U.S. Department of Justice, across multiple =dministrations. Jeffrey accepted full responsibility =or his conduct, complied with the feds' demands, served =is sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same as other =tate-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was =xemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities. =nbsp;

Our =riend Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. He has also, =pon the insistence of the federal authorities, paid out millions of =ollars to the asserted victims and their lawyers. For over ten =ears, he has lived a good and law-abiding life, including carrying on =is wide-ranging philanthropies. Those of us who represented him in the =lorida proceedings -- for customary professional fees -- now count him =s a trusted friend.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving =he treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly =eing raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the =orkplace. But Jeffrey, an exemplary employer, has long since been =ailed to account by the criminal justice system for his misdeeds of =esteryear. He fully and faithfully has fulfilled every promise =nd obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. =nbsp;ln the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and =undamental fairness, that unhappy chapter in Jeffrey's =therwise-magnificent life should be allowed to close once and for all. =nbsp; =nbsp;

Forgot to include the informant part. Use this version.

"Sweetheart deal! = So goes the attack on the resolution of a long-ago federal =nvestigation involving our former client -- and now-friend -- Jeffrey =pstein. The attack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by =he law or the facts, nor by the structure of our constitutional =epublic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an aggressive =ederal intrusion into what would typically be considered a =uintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. His =ffense — at its core, sexual favors for =ire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to =aws of the several States, not the federal government. His =onduct — while clearly unlawful and for which he has =ccepted full responsibility — was a classic state =ffense and was being treated exactly that way by able, honest =rosecutors in Palm Beach County. Nevertheless, far from =oing "soft" on the matter and without =nvitation from the state, the federal government intervened. =ronically, now many for their own opportunistic reasons are criticizing =he federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of =abor Alex Acosta (then the United States Attorney in south Florida), =or not going far enough.

The critics are wrong on the facts and the law. =nbsp;

Here =re the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made =usinessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever (and who has never =cted as an informant), engaged in illegal conduct that amounts to =olicitation of prostitution. His conduct was wrong and a =iolation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, =lcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of the women he paid were =nder the age of 18. Those fads were carefully assessed by experienced =tate prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No =ne turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. =o the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an =xtensive 15-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes =ivision. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by a state grand jury on a =ingle felony count of solicitation of prostitution. =nbsp;

During=that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered =nd analyzed the =vidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered =heir credibility -- or lack thereof -- and considered the extent of =xculpatory evidence. After months of negotiations, the state =rosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the =atter that vindicated the public interest -- a resolution entirely =onsistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated =efendants. The system worked as it should. =nbsp;

Then, =n came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office extensively =nd aggressively investigated whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a =ommercial human trafficking ring, targeting minors. But that'= not what this was, and the federal authorities ultimately =cknowledged that, deferring prosecution to the state. But not =ithout conditions. The federal prosecutors insisted on many =northodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's =ederally-forced deal, experienced Jeffrey was defense required =eam to request had never that seen the imposed =tate prosecutors on any defendant demand the anywhere. imposition =nbsp;Under of a jail sentence the and

=ifetime sex-offender registration, which would not have otherwise been =equired under the previously agreed-upon state disposition of this =rostitution charge. Importantly, the feds' decision to decline =rosecution in deference to the state was reviewed and approved at the =ighest levels of the U.S. Department of Justice, across multiple =dministrations. Jeffrey accepted full responsibility =or his conduct, complied with the feds' demands, served =is sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same as other =tate-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was =xemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities. =nbsp;

Our =riend Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. He has also, =pon the insistence of the federal authorities, paid out millions of =ollars to the asserted victims and their lawyers. For over ten =ears, he has lived a good and law-abiding life, including carrying on =is wide-ranging philanthropies. Those of us who represented him in the =lorida proceedings -- for customary professional fees -- now count him =s a trusted friend.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving =he treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly =eing raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the =orkplace. But Jeffrey, an exemplary employer, has long since been =ailed to account by the criminal justice system for his misdeeds of =esteryear. He fully and faithfully has fulfilled every promise =nd obligation required of him by state and federal authorities. =nbsp;ln the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances and =undamental fairness, that unhappy chapter in Jeffrey's =therwise-magnificent life should be allowed to close once and for all. =nbsp; =nbsp;

Hi Jane,

Just confirming our meeting scheduled for tomorrow at 10 AM.

Best,
John

Hi John,

Thanks for the confirmation. See you tomorrow.

Best,
Jane