Re: Skye Patrick

Jeffrey EpsteinRobert D. Critton Jr.Katherine W. Ezell

This is an email thread between Jeffrey Epstein, Robert D. Critton Jr., and Katherine W. Ezell regarding a case related to "Skye Patrick".

Key information:

Subject: Re: Skye Patrick / FW: Skye Patrick
Dates: May 12, 2009
Key Participants: Jeffrey Epstein, Robert D. Critton Jr., Katherine W. Ezell
Content: Discussion about claims of "$50,000 are sought," agreement on some points ("ok w item 2," "think 1 is inevitable"), and a potential disagreement on an issue going to a master. Katherine W. Ezell thanks Bob for a release and mentions minor clarifications.
Law Firm: Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman (associated with Robert D. Critton Jr.)

EFTA00774772

Third full paragraph on p.2: we do not want this to be able to be misconstrued as our agreeing that the statutory minimum is $50,000. We both know that this is an issue of law that will need to be resolved by the court or a special master. However, it need not be an impediment here, as Skye agrees to accept $50,000. We propose to add at the end of that paragraph: "First Parties do not agree that the statutory minimum is $50,000." Another easy way to fix this would be to simply remove the words 'claims of $50,000", so that the statutory minimum is referred to generally. Either way of modifying this is acceptable to us.
Last paragraph, line 1: We request that you insert that it is her obligation " between "agrees" and lo pay". Additionally, please insert "healthcare" between "any" and "liens" in line 2.

I would appreciate your making these changes and sending this back to me. Our client is waiting to sign.

Thanks, Kathy

EFTA00774773

Jeffrey Epstein

I agree with your basic intuition - criminal lawyers should not negotiate civil cases - we are numbed by decades of asymmetrical power where we are seizing on promises of freedom...