Epstein

Calling in 15 min.

I have two other options. Both are retired circuit court judges, who do mediation now,l and

Any thoughts?

I am available around 4 pm today. Not precisely sure of the time yet. I will speak with my client in the interim.

Thanks, Jay. Can we make it 4:15 or later? I have a 3:30 that might run more than a halfhour. And let me know about sending Ben the agreement language. That might aid our discussions because the firm will have a better idea of what the litigation will entail.

A. Marie Villafaña
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777

• Meaning no disrespect to these distinguished gentlemen, one of my criteria is that, if negotiations with you don't work out, they have the stamina to take you all to trial, so I politely decline your suggestion.

Assistant U.S. Attorney

lill rie - I appreciate your taking a stab at this. There is a lot here, and I don't want to give you any reaction before I speak with my client. I will let you know as soon as I do so we can speak about it. But 4 pm will certainly be too soon.

Jay

That is fine. I'm sorry I didn't get your e-mail sooner. Since I am out of the office, the best way to reach me is on my cell, or you can send an e-mail (which becomes a text message)
to

Tomorrow I am available early in the morning (7:00 to 7:45), or at 8:30, or at 5:00, or after 6:45.

Thanks.

A. Marie Villafaña
Assistant U.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777

Marie - I, too, am interested in speed. But I really need to go over this and then discuss with Jeffrey. So please do not send this to any Special Master before we discuss the next steps.

Thanks -- Jay

Hi Jay -- That was simply a draft for discussion purposes. I am hoping that we will send such a letter jointly, once we have finalized the process and pick a master. Thanks.

Good morning, Jay. We need to resolve the attorney issue today. It has been weeks since execution of the contract, and there is no need for further delay.

As far as the five attorney names that we will be providing, I propose Bert Ocariz, Katherine Ezell at Podhurst Orseck, Stuart Grossman. Ed Rogers, and Walter Cobath.

If you would like to use the same Special Master to resolve fees disputes as well as to handle the selection of the attorney, I would recommend that we use retired 11th Circuit Judge Joseph Hatchett instead of Judge Davis because of Judge Davis's health problems. (No one has contacted Judge Hatchett yet, but one of the District Judges in Miami mentioned him as a good choice.)

I am available for a conference call between 9:00 and 10:00, and between 3:15 and 6:00. Please call me on my cell (561-601-2301) and let me know which of those times works best for you.

Thank you.

Marie,

Attached is a letter responding to your latest proposals. For your convenience, I've also attached your prior e-mails and attachments regarding this matter so that you can easiy see what I am responding to (see the chain below). If you are avaiable, I'm free to talk at 5:30 this evening. We can use my usual call-in number at (866) 462.0164. The code is '4464970*.

Thanks,
Jay

Jay,

The Judge Davis issue is a non-starter. We've beaten that horse to death. Regarding your contention that "the attorney representative be told clearly that Mr. Epstein has agreed to pay the lawyer's hourly rate only for the time he or she spends working to effectuate settlements for the identified women," Alex and I agree that paragraph 7C is sufficient, Regarding the other points, we have made the following concessions:

1. Regarding the language concerning a lawyer whose firm is sizeable enough to litigate multiple trials simultaneously, I have removed paragraph 4 on page 3 of the letter.

2. Regarding the 150k statutory limit language, I have included a footnote which should satisfy your concern.

3. Regarding language there may be discovery to test the claims of alleged "victims", please see new paragraph 4 on page 3 which now states as criteria that the firm should have "Experience litigating against large law firms and high profile attorneys who may test the veracity of the victims' claims."

I have attached the Addendum and the revised letter to Judge Davis. Jay, this needs to be concluded. Alex and I believe that this is as far as we can go. Therefore, please advise me whether we have a deal no later than COB tomorrow, Tuesday, October 23, 2007. Thanks,

Jeff

Jeff -- I will review these materials this evening and be in touch with you tomorrow with the expectation of wrapping this up by the end of the day. One question I have, however, is why you say that Judge Davis is a non-starter. I understood that he was ready, willing and able to serve as the attorney representative. If you have had conversations with him and that is not the case, please let me know.

I will go over the other issues you raise in your email and will look forward to speaking tomorrow.

Thanks -- Jay

Jay,

Pursuant to our conversation, here is the revised letter and a new addendum. The only change to the addendum is that I renumbered the new paragraphs from A,B, and C to 7A, 7B, and 7C. Once you approve, I will contact Judge Davis and send him the letter. Please execute the addendum, PDF the executed original to me as soon as possible and Fed Ex the original to me thereafter.

Jeff

Jay,
Here is the latest and hopefully final version of the letter to Judge Davis.

Here is the latest and hopefully final version of the letter to Judge Davis.

Jeff

Thanks Jeff.

I haven't heard anything from Judge Davis. I assume he is still willing to take on the role you asked him to take on, but can you please let me know if that is not the case?

Also, we are beginning to think about what discovery we may need to take to verify any claims. I am assuming that your office does not want to be copied on any subpoenas or anything related to discovery. But please let me know if that is an incorrect assumption.

Thanks - Jay

Jay,

Regarding your statement that "we are beginning to think about what discovery we may need to take to verify any claims", I remind you that paragraph 8 of the agreement states that 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 USC s 2255 and agrees to waive any other claim for damages ...." That being said, you are correct in assuming that we do not want to be copied on anything related to discovery. Monitoring the status of the negotiations/litigation by this Office is limited to insuring that the terms and conditions of the Non-Prosecution Agreement are not breached.

Jeff

Jeff - was in court all day yesterday and in chicago today. But I am responding to your letter and will get it out to you later today. Please rest assured we have no intention of not complying with the agreement.

Thanks Jay

Jeff - Beyond my letter the other day, and your email to me from a few weeks ago, is there anything else you need from me regarding the plea and sentencing dates.

As we discussed, and as we have confirmed, the Court has told us she will handle both at the same time (plea before sentencing, obviously), and to the agreed-upon counts, on Jan 4. I trust I have cleared up any confusion regarding Jan 7.

Thx. Jay

Jay,

Please accept my apologies for not getting back to you sooner but I was a little under the weather yesterday. I hope that you enjoyed your Thanksgiving.

Regarding the issue of due diligence concerning Judge Davis' selection, I'd like to make a few observations. First, Guy Lewis has known for some time that Judge Davis was making reasonable efforts to secure Aaron Podhurst and Bob Josephsberg for this assignment. In fact, when I told you of Judge Davis's selection during our meeting last Wednesday, November 21°, you and Professor Dershowitz seemed very comfortable, and certainly not surprised, with the selection. Podhurst and Josephsberg are no strangers to nearly the entire Epstein defense team including Guy Lewis, Lili Ann Sanchez, Roy Black, and, apparently, Professor Dershowitz who said he knew Mr. Josephsberg from law school. Second, Podhurst and Josephsberg have long-standing stellar reputations for their legal acumen and ethics. It's hard for me to imagine how much more vetting needs to be done.

The United States has a statutory obligation (Justice for All Act of 2004) to notify the victims of the anticipated upcoming events and their rights associated with the agreement entered into by the United States and Mr. Epstein in a timely fashion. Tomorrow will make one full week since you were formally notified of the selection. I must insist that the vetting process come to an end. Therefore, unless you provide me with a good faith objection to Judge Davis's selection COB tomorrow, November 28, 2007, I will authorize the notification of the victims. Should you give me the go-ahead Podhurst and Josephsberg selection by COB tomorrow, I will simultaneously send you a draft of the letter. I intend to notify the victims by letter after COB Thursday, November 29th. Thanks,

Jeff