EFTA01080086

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd 
Page I of 6 
LRJ 
U.S. District Court 
Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) 
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Doe v. United States of America 
Assigned to: Judge Kenneth A. Marra 
Cause: no cause specified 
Petitioner 
Jane Doe 
V. 
Respondent 
United States of America 
Date Filed: 07/07/2008 
Jury Demand: None 
Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other 
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government 
Defendant 
represented by Bradley James Edwards 
Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos 
& Lehrman PL 
425 N Andrews Avenue 
Suite 2 
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 
954-524-2820 
Fax: iiiiii
iiii 
Emai 
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED 
Jay C. Howell 
Jay Howell & Associates PA 
644 Cesery Boulevard 
Suite 250 
Jackscaliali
m
Email 
PRO HAC VICE 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED 
Paul G. Cassell 
Email
PRO 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED 
represented by Ann Marie C. Villafana 
United States Attorney's Office 
500 South Australian Ave 
Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRot.pl'1546487993442289-L_560_0-1 
3/21/2011 
EFTA01080086

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd 
Page 2 of 6 
Fax: ■ 
Email: 
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED 
Dexter Lee 
United States Attorney's Office 
99 NE 4 Street 
Miami, FL 33132 
Fax: 
Email: 
LEAD ATTORNEY 
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED 
Date Filed 
# 
Docket Text 
03/21/2011 
a Plaintiffs MOTION Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Motion to Use 
Correspondence to Prove Violations of the Crime Victims' Right Act and to 
Have Their Unredacted Pleadings Unsealed by Jane Doe. (Edwards, Bradley) 
(Entered: 03/21/2011) 
03/21/2011 
a) 
Plaintiffs MOTION Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Motion for Order 
Directing the U.S. Attorney's Office Not to Withhold Relevant Evidence by 
Jane Doe. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Text of Proposed Order 
PROPOSED ORDER)(Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 03/21/2011) 
03/21/2011 
42 
Plaintiffs MOTION Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Motion to Have Their 
Facts Accepted Because of the Government's Failure to Contest Any of the 
Facts by Jane Doe. (Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 03/21/2011) 
03/21/2011 
48 
Plaintiffs MOTION for Summary Judgment REDACTED- Jane Doe #1 and 
Jan Doe #2's Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act 
and Request for Hearing on Appropriate Remedies by Jane Doe. Responses 
due by 4/7/2011 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-SEALED, # 2 Exhibit B, # 2 
Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 1 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 2 Exhibit G, # a 
Exhibit H, # 2 Exhibit I, # LQ Exhibit J, #11 Exhibit K)(Edwards, Bradley) 
(Entered: 03/21/2011) 
03/18/2011 
42 
ORDER granting 46 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge 
Kenneth A. Marra on 3/18/2011. (ir) (Entered: 03/18/2011) 
03/18/2011 
46 
Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages of Statement of Facts in 
Support of their Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Right 
Act by Jane Doe. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Edwards, 
Bradley) Modified on 3/18/2011 (ls). (Entered: 03/18/2011) 
12/17/2010 
41 
STATUS REPORT by United States of America (Villafana, Ann Marie) 
(Entered: 12/17/2010) 
10/28/2010 
94 
ORDER REOPENING CASE. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 
https://ectfisd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRot.pl?546487993442289-L 560._0-1 
3/21/2011 
EFTA01080087

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd 
Page 3 of 6 
10/28/2010. (ir) (Entered: 10/28/2010) 
10/28/2010 
43 Clerks Notice to Filer re 41 Status Report. Two or More Document Events 
Filed as One; ERROR - Only one event was selected by the Filer but more 
than one event was applicable to the document filed. The docket entry was 
corrected by the Clerk. It is not necessary to refile this document but in the 
future, the Filer must select all applicable events. (Is) (Entered: 10/28/2010) 
10/27/2010 
42 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Jane Doe. (IsXSee Image at 
DE #11 ) (Entered: 10/28/2010) 
10/27/2010 
41 
STATUS REPORT by Jane Doe (Edwards, Bradley) Modified to add missing 
event 42 Response to Order to Show Cause on 10/28/2010 (Is). (Entered: 
10/27/2010) 
10/12/2010 
40 
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE for lack of prosecution. Show Cause Response 
due by 10/27/2010. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 10/8/2010. (ir) 
(Entered: 10/12/2010) 
09/13/2010 
39 
NOTICE by Jane Doe re 21 Administrative Order In Response to 
Administrative Order Closing Case (Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 09/13/2010) 
09/08/2010 
la 
Administrative Order Closing Case. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 
9/8/2010. (tb) (Entered: 09/09/2010) 
04/09/2009 
21 NOTICE by Jane Doe of Change of Firm Affiliation (Edwards, Bradley) 
(Entered: 04/09/2009) 
02/12/2009 
3 
ORDER denying a Motion to Unseal Document. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. 
Marra on 2/12/2009. (ir) (Entered: 02/12/2009) 
12/22/2008 
25 
AFFIDAVIT signed by : A. Marie Villafana. re 14 Affidavit, 13 
Response/Reply (Other) Supplemental Declaration by United States of 
America. (Attachments: # 1 Certification Certificate of ServiceXVillafana, Ann 
Marie) (Entered: 12/22/2008) 
12/09/2008 
34 Clerks Notice of Docket Correction re 33 Sealed Document. Error(s): Sealed 
Document Filed in Wrong Case; Correction - Original document restricted and 
refiled in correct case. (rb) (Entered: 12/09/2008) 
12/05/2008 
SYSTEM ENTRY - Docket Entry 32 restricted/sealed until further notice. (dj) 
(Entered: 11/03/2010) 
12/05/2008 
33 Sealed Document. (rb) (Entered: 12/05/2008) 
10/17/2008 
Clerks Notice of Docket Correction and Instruction to Filer re 30 
Response/Reply (Other), Response/Reply (Other) filed by Jane Doe. Error -
Wrong Event Selected; Correction - Redocketed by Clerk as Reply to 
Response to Motion. Instruction to Filer - In the future, please select the proper 
event. It is not necessary to refile this document. (ls) (Entered: 10/17/2008) 
10/16/2008 
31 REPLY to Response to Motion re 2a MOTION to Unseal Document Non-
Prosecution Agreement filed by Jane Doe. [See Image at DE #30] (Is) 
(Entered: 10/17/2008) 
https://ecf.fisd.uscourts.gov/cai-bin/DktRpt.pl?546487993442289-L 560_0-1 
3/21/2011 
EFTA01080088

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd 
Page 4 of 6 
10/16/2008 
30 
RESPONSE/REPLY to 22 Response in Opposition to Motion to Unseal Non-
Prosecution Agreement filed by Jane Doe. (Attachments: # I Exhibit October 
9, 2008 letter from Brad Edwards, Esquire to AUSA Dexter Lee, # 2 Exhibit 
October 15, 2008 Letter from Brad Edwards, Esquire to AUSA Dexter Lee) 
(Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 10/16/2008) 
10/08/2008 
29 
RESPONSE in Opposition re 28 MOTION to Unseal Document Non-
Prosecution Agreement filed by United States of America. (Villafana, Ann 
Marie) (Entered: 10/08/2008) 
09/25/2008 
28 
MOTION to Unseal Document Non-Prosecution Agreement by Jane Doe. 
Responses due by 10/14/2008 (Attachments: # I Text of Proposed Order) 
(Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 09/25/2008) 
08/22/2008 
27 
TRANSCRIPT of Hearing held on 8/14/2008 before Judie Kenneth A. Marra. 
Court Reporter: Stephen Franklin - phone number 
25 pages. 
(abd) (Entered: 08/25/2008) 
08/21/2008 
26 
ORDER TO COMPEL PRODUCTION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed 
by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 8/21/08. (ir) (Entered: 08/21/2008) 
08/20/2008 
24 NOTICE of Instruction to Filer: re 22 Notice (Other) filed by United States of 
America Error: Wrong Event Selected; Instruction to filer - In the future please 
select the proper event. (Is) (Entered: 08/20/2008) 
08/14/2008 
25 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Kenneth A. Marra: Status 
Conference held on 8/14/2008. Court Reporter: Stephen Franklin- phone 
number 
(ir) (Entered: 08/21/2008) 
08/13/2008 
23 
ORDER Setting Status Conference: Status Conference set for 8/14/2008 03:30 
PM in West Palm Beach Division before Jude Kenneth A. Marra. Parties may 
contact the courtroom deputy at 
to make arrangements to appear 
telephonically. Signed by Judge enne 
. arra on 8/13/08. (ir) (Entered: 
08/13/2008) 
08/13/2008 
22 
NOTICE by United States of America re 19 Response/Reply (Other), 
Response/Reply (Other) Government's Response to Petitioners' Request for 
Non-Prosecution Agreement and Report of Interview (Lee, Dexter) (Entered: 
08/13/2008) 
08/13/2008 
21 ENDORSED ORDER granting Jay C. Howell 2Q Motion for Limited 
Appearance, Consent to Designation and Request to Electronically Receive 
Notices of Electronic Filings. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 8/12/08. 
(ir) (Entered: 08/13/2008) 
08/08/2008 
22 
MOTION for Limited Appearance, Consent to Designation and Request to 
Electronically Receive Notices of Electronic Filing for Jay C. Howell, Filing 
Fee $75, Receipt #724591. (cw) (Entered: 08/12/2008) 
08/01/2008 
12 
RESPONSE/REPLY to Goverment's Notice to Court Regarding Absence of 
Need for Evidentiary Hearing and Motion for Production of Non-Prosecution 
Agreement and of Report of Interview filed by Jane Doe. (Attachments: # 1 
Exhibit Proposed Stipulation, # 2 Exhibit July 17, 2008 Letter, # 3 Exhibit July 
3, 2008 Letter)(Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 08/01/2008) 
https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?546487993442289-L....560_0-1 
3/21/2011 
EFTA01080089

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd 
Page 5 of 6 
07/30/2008 
18 ENDORSED ORDER granting Paul G. Cassell 16 Motion for Limited 
Appearance, Consent to Designation and Request to Electronically Receive 
Notices of Electronic Filings. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/29/08. 
(ir) (Entered: 07/30/2008) 
07/29/2008 
17 
NOTICE by United States of America To Court Regarding Absence of Need 
for Evidentiary Hearing (Lte, Dexter) (Entered: 07/29/2008) 
07/28/2008 
16 
MOTION for Limited Appearance, Consent to Designation and Request to 
Electronically Receive Notices of Electronic Filing for Paul G. Cassell, Filing 
Fee $75, Receipt #724532. (cw) (Entered: 07/28/2008) 
07/17/2008 
15 
TRANSCRIPT of Hearing held on 7/11/2008 before Jude Kenneth A. Marra. 
Court Reporter: Victoria Aiello- phone number 
32 pages. (abd) 
(Entered: 07/18/2008) 
07/11/2008 
II 
ORDER Denying Motion to Seal re 7 Sealed Document, 6 Sealed Document, 8 
Sealed Document. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Main on 7/11/2008. (Is) 
(Additional attachment(s) added on 7/15/2008: # 1 docket sheet) (bs). 
(Entered: 07/14/2008) 
07/11/2008 
10 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Kenneth A. Marra: 
Miscellaneous Hearing held on 7/11/2008. Court will issue order to unseal 
W
ings. Court Reporter: Official Reporting Service- phone number 
(ir) (Entered: 07/11/2008) 
07/11/2008 
9 
REPLY to Response (under seal) re 1 Complaint/Emergency Petition, and 
Objection to Government's Motion for Sealing of Pleadings filed by Jane Doe. 
(Is) (Entered: 07/11/2008) 
07/10/2(ns 
5 
ORDER SETTING HEARING: Petitioner's Emergency Petition for 
Enforcement of Crime Victim's Rights Act set for 7/11/2008 10:15 AM in 
West Palm Beach Division before Judge Kenneth A. Marra. Signed by Judge 
Kenneth A. Marra on 7/10/08. (ir) (Entered: 07/10/2008) 
07/09/2008 
14 
UNSEALED DECLARATION signed by : A. Marie Villafana. re 13 Response 
to Victim's Emergency Petition by United States of America. (previously filed 
as 8 sealed document) (bs) (Entered: 07/15/2008) 
07/09/2008 
. 
II 
UNSEALED RESPONSE to 1 Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime 
Victim Rights Act filed by United States of America. (previously filed as 7 
sealed document) (bs) (Entered: 07/15/2008) 
07/09/2008 
12 
UNSEALED MOTION to Seal Response to Victim's Emergency Petition by 
United States of America. (previously filed as 6 sealed document) (bs) 
(Entered: 07/15/2008) 
07/09/2008 
8 Sealed Document. (rb) UNSEALED see DE 14 . Modified on 7/15/2008 (bs). 
(Entered: 07/10/2008) 
07/09/2008 
7 Sealed Document. (rb) UNSEALED see DE 11 . Modified on 7/15/2008 (bs). 
(Entered: 07/10/2008) 
07/09/2008 
6 Sealed Document. (rb) UNSEALED see DE 12 . Modified on 7/15/2008 (bs). 
https://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.p17546487993442289-1,560_0-1 
3/21/2011 
EFTA01080090

CM/ECF - Live Database - flsd 
Page 6 of 6 
(Entered: 07/10/2008) 
07/09/2008 
4 
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Dexter Lee on behalf of United States of 
America (Lee, Dexter) (Entered: 07/09/2008) 
07/07/2008 
2 
ORDER requiring U.S. Attorney to respond to 1 Complaint filed by Jane Doe 
by 5:00 p.m. on 7/9/08. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/7/08. (ir) 
(Entered: 07/07/2008) 
07/07/2008 
2 
CERTIFICATE OF EMERGENCY by Jane Doe re 1 Complaint (rb) (Entered: 
07/07/2008) 
07/07/2008 
1 
EMERGENCY PETITION for Victim's Enforcement of Crime Victim's Rights 
Act 18 USC 3771 against United States of America Filing fee $ 350. Receipt#: 
724403, filed by Jane Doe.(rb) (Entered: 07/07/2008) 
PACER Service Center 
Transaction Receipt 
03/21/2011 16:28:15 
PACER Login: fw0694 
Client Code: 
80743 
Description: _ Docket Report Search Criteria: 9:08-cv-80736-ICADA 
Billable Pages: 4 
Cost: 
10.32 
hups://ecf.flsd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRot.pl?546487993442289-L_560_0-1 
3/21/2011 
EFTA01080091

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 
Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 1 of 42 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson 
JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 
v. 
UNITED STATES 
JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF 
THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING ON 
APPROPRIATE REMEDIES 
COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and 
through undersigned counsel, to move for a finding from this Court that the victims' rights under 
the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3771, have been violated by the U.S. 
Attorney's Office, and to request a hearing on the appropriate remedies for these violations. 
The victims have proffered a series of facts to the Government, which they have failed to 
contest. Proceeding on the basis of these facts,I it is clear that the U.S. Attorney's Office has 
repeatedly violated the victims' protected CVRA rights, including their right to confer with 
prosecutors generally about the case and specifically about a non-prosecution agreement the 
Office signed with the defendant, as well as their right to fair treatment. See 18 U.S.C. 
3771(a)(5) & (8). 
It is now beyond dispute, for example, that in September 2007, the U.S. Attorney's 
Office formally signed a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein that barred his 
The victims are contemporaneously filing a motion to have their facts accepted by the 
Court. 
EFTA01080092

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 
Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 2 of 42 
prosecution for numerous federal sex offenses he committed against the victims (as well as 
against many other minor girls). Rather than confer with the victims about this non-prosecution 
agreement, however, the U.S. Attorney's Office and Jeffrey Epstein agreed to a "confidentiality" 
provision in the agreement barring its disclosure to anyone — including the victims. For the next 
nine months, as Epstein was well aware, the U.S. Attorney's Office assiduously concealed from 
the victims the existence of this signed non-prosecution agreement. Indeed, the Office went so 
far as to send (in January 2008) a false victim notification letter to the victims informing them 
that the "case is currently under investigation." In fact, the U.S. Attorney's Office had already 
resolved the case three months earlier by signing the non-prosecution agreement. Again on May 
30, 2008, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent yet another victim notification letter to a recognized 
victim informing her that the "case is currently under investigation" and that it "can be a lengthy 
process and we request your continued patience while we conduct a thorough investigation." 
Then in June 2008, on the eve of consummating Epstein's state guilty plea that was part of the 
non-prosecution agreement, the U.S. Attorney's Office asked legal counsel for the victims to 
send a letter expressing the victims' views on why federal charges should be filed — not 
disclosing to the victims' legal counsel that this was a pointless exercise because the non-
prosecution agreement had already been signed some nine months earlier. 
These actions and many more like them constitute clear violations of Jane Doe ill and 
Jane Doe #2's rights under the Crime Victims Rights Act, including the right to confer with 
prosecutors and the right to fair treament. The only argument that the U.S. Attorney's Office 
advances is that the CVRA does not apply because no indictment was formally filed in this case. 
But this position is inconsistent with both the CVRA's plain language, see, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 
2 
EFTA01080093

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 3 of 42 
3771(c)(I) (Justice Department agencies involved in the "detection" and "investigation" of 
federal crimes covered by CVRA), and with persuasive case law, see, e.g., In re Dean, 527 F.3d 
391, 394 (5th Cir. 2008) (victims should have been notified before pre-indictment plea reached). 
Moreover, the U.S. Attorney's Office itself was 'idly aware of its obligations to notify the 
victims in this case, as e-mails from the Office and other evidence make perfectly clear. The 
only reason that the Office concealed the existence of the non-prosecution agreement from the 
victims was not to comply with some legal restriction, but rather to avoid a firestorm of public 
controversy that would have erupted if the sweetheart plea deal with a politically-connected 
billionaire had been revealed. 
The Court should accordingly find that the U.S. Attorney's Office — in coordination with 
Jeffrey Epstein -- has violated the Act and set a briefing schedule and hearing on the proper 
remedy for those violations. 
STATEMENT O1? UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS 
Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 offer the following statement of undisputed material facts. 
If the Government disputes any of these facts, the victims request an evidentiary hearing to prove 
each and every one of them:2
1. Between about 2001 and 2007, defendant Jeffrey Epstein (a billionaire with significant 
political connections) sexually abused more than 30 minor girls at his mansion in West Palm 
2 The Court should accept all these facts as true for reasons the victims explain in their 
contemporaneously-filed Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doc #2's Motion to Have Their Facts Accepted 
Because of the Government's Failure to Contest Any of The Facts. The Court should also direct 
the Government to produce all evidence that it possesses supporting these facts, for reasons the 
victims explain in their contemporaneously-filed Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Motion for 
Order Directing the U.S. Attorney's Office Not to Withhold Relevant Evidence. 
3 
EFTA01080094

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 
Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 4 of 42 
Beach, Florida, and elsewhere. Among the girls he sexually abused were Jane Doe #1 and Jane 
Doe #2. Epstein performed repeated lewd, lascivious, and sexual acts on them, including (but 
not limited to) masturbation, touching of their sexual organs, using vibrators or sexual toys on 
them, coercing them into sexual acts, and digitally penetrating them. Because Epstein used a 
means of interstate commerce and knowingly traveled in interstate commerce to engage in abuse 
of Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (and the other victims), he committed violations of federal law, 
including repeated violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2422. See, e.g., Complaint, E.W. v. Epstein, Case 
No. 50 2008 CA 028058 XXXXMB AB (15th Cir. Palm Beach County, Florida); Complaint, 
L.M. v. Epstein, Case No 50 2008 CA 028051 XXXXMB AB (15th Cir. Palm Beach Count, 
Florida). 
2. Jeffrey Epstein flew at least one underage girl on his private jet for the purpose of 
forcing her to have sex with him and others. Epstein forced this underage girl to be sexually 
exploited by his adult male peers, including royalty, politicians, businessmen, and professional 
and personal acquaintances. Complaint, Jane Doe No. 102 v. Epstein, No. 9:09-CV-80656-
KAM (S.D. Fla. May 1, 2009). 
3. In 2006, at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation opened an investigation into allegations that Jeffrey Epstein and his personal 
assistants had used facilities of interstate commerce to induce young girls between the ages of 
thirteen and seventeen to engage in prostitution, among other offenses. The case was presented 
to the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, which accepted the 
case for investigation. The Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office was also investigating 
4 
EFTA01080095

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 5 of 42 
the case. See generally U.S. Attorney's Correspondence, Exhibit "A" to this filing (hereinafter 
cited as "U.S. Attorney's Correspondence" and referenced by Bates page number stamp). 
4. The FBI soon determined that both Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe f42 were victims of 
sexual assaults by Epstein while they were minors beginning when they were approximately 
fourteen years of age and approximately thirteen years of age respectively. Jane Doe #1, for 
example, provided detailed information about her abuse (and the abuse of Jane Doe #2) to the 
FBI on August 7, 2007. Exhibit "B." 
5. More generally, the FBI through diligent investigation established that Epstein 
operated a large criminal enterprise that used paid employees and underlings to repeatedly find 
and bring minor girls to him. Epstein worked in concert as part of the enterprise with others, 
including Ohislane Maxwell and Jean Luc Brunel, to obtain minor girls not only for his own 
sexual gratification, but also for the sexual gratification of others. The FBI determined that 
Epstein had committed dozens and dozens of federal sex crimes against dozens of minor girls 
between 2001 and 2007. They presented information to the U.S. Attorney's Office for criminal 
prosecution. See Exhibit "B"; U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 47-55. 
6. On about June 7, 2007, FBI agents hand-delivered to Jane Doe #1 a standard CVRA 
victim notification letter. The notification promised that the Justice Department would makes its 
"best efforts" to protect Jane Doe #1's rights, including "fflhe reasonable right to confer with the 
attorney for the United States in the case" and "to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding 
in the district court involving . . . plea . . ." The notification further explained that "ft* this 
time, your case is under investigation." That notification meant that the FBI had identified Jane 
Doe #1 as a victim of a federal offense and as someone protected by the CVRA. Jane Doe #1 
5 
EFTA01080096

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 6 of 42 
relied on these representations and believed that the Justice Department would protect these 
rights and keep her informed about the progress of her case. See Exhibit "C." 
7. On about August I 1, 2007, Jane Doe 112 received a standard CVRA victim notification 
letter. The notification promised that the Justice Department would makes its "best efforts" to 
protect Jane Doe #2's rights, including "(title reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the 
United States in the case" and "to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district 
court involving . . . plea .. .." The notification further explained that "[a]t this time, your case is 
under investigation." That notification meant that the FBI had identified Jane Doe #2 as a victim 
of a federal offense and as someone protected by the CVRA. Jane Doe #2 relied on these 
representations and believed that the Justice Department would protect these rights and keep her 
informed about the progress of her case. See Exhibit "D." 
8. Early in the investigation, the FBI agents and an Assistant U.S. Attorney had several 
meetings with Jane Doe Itl. Jane Doe #2 was represented by counsel that was paid for by the 
criminal target Epstein and, accordingly, all contact was made through that attorney. 
9. In and around September 2007, plea discussions took place between Jeffrey Epstein, 
represented by numerous attorneys (including lead criminal defense counsel Jay Lefkowitz), and 
the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, represented by Assistant U.S. 
Attorney A. Marie Villafafia and others. The plea discussions generally began from the premise 
that Epstein would plead guilty to at least one federal felony offense surrounding his sexual 
assaults of more than 30 minor girls. From there, the numerous defense attorneys progressively 
negotiated more favorable terms so that Epstein would ultimately plead to only two state court 
EFTA01080097

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 
Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 7 of 42 
felony offenses and would serve only county jail time. Many of the negotiations are reflected in 
e-mails between Lefkowitz and the U.S. Attorney's Office. See generally Exhibit "A." 
10. 
The evidence supporting these 
charges was overwhelming, including the interlocking consistent testimony of several dozen 
minor girls, all made automatically admissible in a federal criminal sexual assault prosecution by 
operation of Fed. R. Evict, 414. U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 4. 
12. The correspondence also shows that the U.S. Attorney's Office was interested in 
finding a place to conclude a plea bargain that would effectively keep the victims from learning 
what was happening through the press. The Office wrote in an e-mail to defense counsel: `E 
allninial. 
The 
7 
EFTA01080098

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 8 of 42 
U.S. Attorney's Office was aware that most of the victims of Epstein, including Jane Doe #1 and 
Jane Doe #2, resided well outside the Miami area in the West Palm Beach area. The Office was 
also aware that the chances of press coverage of a case filed in Miami would be significantly less 
likely to roach theTalm Beach area. U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 29. 
13. On about September 24, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent an e-mail to Jay 
Lefkowitz, criminal defense counsel for Epstein, regarding the agreement. The e-mail stated that 
the Government and Epstein's counsel 
U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 153 (emphases added). 
14. On about September 25, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent an e-mail to Lefkowitz 
stating:nne 
U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 156. 
15. On about September 26, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent an e-mail to Lefkowitz 
in which she stated: firliallealarna 
8 
EFTA01080099

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 9 of 42 
Apparently the 'agreed 
to between the Government and Epstein's 
defense counsel was that no mention would be made of the non-prosecution agreement between 
the U.S. Attorney's Office and Epstein, as no subsequent mention was made to the victims of the 
non-prosecution agreement and a confidentiality provision was made part of that agreement (as 
discussed below). U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 359. 
16. On about September 25, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent a letter to Jay Jefkowitz 
in which it suggested that the victims should be represented in civil cases against Epstein by 
someone who was not an experienced al: 
SMINNIIIIIIM 
U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 157. The U.S. Attorney's Office continued to 
push a different attorney in part because it would reduce publicity, explaining that 
Id. 
17. On about September 24, 2007, Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office formally 
reached an agreement whereby the United States would defer federal prosecution in favor of 
prosecution by the State of Florida. Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office accordingly entered 
into a "Non-Prosecution Agreement" (NPA) reflecting their agreement. Most significantly, the 
NPA gave Epstein a promise that he would not be prosecuted tbr a series of federal felony 
offenses involving his sexual abuse of more than 30 minor girls. The NPA instead allowed 
Epstein to plead guilty to two state felony offenses for solicitation of prostitution and 
9 
EFTA01080100

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 
Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 10 of 42 
procurement of minors for prostitution. The NM also set up a procedure whereby a victim of 
Epstein's sexual abuse could obtain an attorney to proceed with a civil claim against Epstein, 
provided that the victim agreed to limit damages sought from Epstein. To obtain an attorney 
paid for by Epstein, the victim would have to agree to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. § 
2255 (i.e., under a law that provided presumed damages of $150,000 against Epstein — an 
amount that Epstein argued later was limited to $50,000). The agreement was signed by Epstein 
and his legal counsel, as well as the U.S. Attorney's Office, on about September 24, 2007. Non-
Prosecution Agreement, Exhibit "E." 
18. Epstein insisted on, and the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed to, a provision in the non-
prosecution agreement that made the agreement secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The 
parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United 
States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding 
the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstein before making the disclosure." 
By entering into such a confidentiality agreement, the U.S. Attorney's Office put itself in a 
position that conferring with the crime victims (including Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2) about 
the non-prosecution agreement would violate terms of the agreement — specifically the 
confidentiality provision. 
Indeed, even notifying the victims about the agreement would 
presumably have violated the provision. Accordingly, from September 24, 2007 through at least 
June 2008 — a period of more than nine months — the U.S Attorney's Office did not notify any of 
the victims of the existence of the non-prosecution agreement. Epstein was well aware of this 
failure to notify the victims and, indeed, arranged for this failure to notify the victims. Id.; U.S. 
10 
EFTA01080101

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 11 of 42 
Attorney's Correspondence at 270; Transcript of Hearing in this case on July 11, 2008, at 4-6, 
18-19, 22-23, 28-29 (hereinafter cited as "'Fr. July 11, 2008"). 
19. A reasonable inference from the evidence is that the U.S. Attorney's Office — pushed 
by Epstein — wanted the non-prosecution agreement kept from public view because of the intense 
public criticism that would have resulted from allowing a politically-connected billionaire who 
had sexually abused more than 30 minor girls to escape from federal prosecution with only a 
county court jail sentence. Another reasonable inference is that the Office wanted the agreement 
concealed at this time because of the possibility that the victims could have objected to the 
agreement in court and perhaps convinced the judge reviewing the agreement not to accept it. 
20. The Non-Prosecution Agreement that had been entered into between the U.S. 
Attorney's Office and Epstein was subsequently modified by an October 2007 Addendum and a 
December 19, 2007, letter from the U.S. Attorney to Attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez. The U.S. 
Attorney's Office did not confer with any of the victims about these modifications of the 
agreement (or even notify them of the existence of these modifications) through at least June 
2008 — a period of more than six months. See Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafafla 
(doe. #35, at 1); U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 234-37; Tr. July 11, 2008, 18-19, 22-23, 28-
29.3
21. In October 2007, shortly after the initial plea agreement was signed, FBI agents 
contacted Jane Doe #1. On October 26, 2007, Special Agents E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendal I and Jason 
Richards met in person with Jane Doe #1. The Special Agents explained that Epstein would 
3 On about August 14, 2008, Epstein's defense counsel told the U.S. Attorney's Office 
that they did not consider the December 19, 2007, letter to be operative. 
1I 
EFTA01080102

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 
Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 12 of 42 
plead guilty to state charges involving another victim, he would be required to register as a sex 
offender for life, and he had made certain concessions related to the payment of damages to the 
victims, including Jane Doe HI. During this meeting, the Special Agents did not explain that an 
agreement had already been signed that precluded any prosecution of Epstein for federal charges 
against Jane Doe #1. The agents could not have revealed this part of the non-prosecution 
agreement without violating the terms of the non-prosecution agreement. Whether the agents 
• themselves had been informed of the existence of the non-prosecution agreement by the U.S. 
Attorney's Office is not certain. Because the plea agreement had already been reached with 
Epstein, the agents made no attempt to secure Jane Doe #1's view on the proposed resolution of 
the case. Exhibit "E," Tr. July 11, 2008 at 4-6, 18-19, 22-23. 
22. Jane Doe #1's (quite reasonable) understanding of the Special Agent's explanation 
was that only the State part of the Epstein investigation had been resolved, and that the federal 
investigation would continue, possibly leading to a federal prosecution. Jane Doe #1 also 
understood her own case was move forward towards possible prosecution. Tr. July 11, 2008, at 
4-6, 18-19, 22-23, 28-29. 
23. On about November 27, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeff Sloman sent an e-mail to 
Jay Lefkowitz, defense counsel for Epstein. The e-mail stated that the U.S. Attorney's Office 
had an obligation to notify the victims 
12 
EFTA01080103

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 
Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 13 of 42 
U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 255 (emphasis rearranged). 
24. On about November 29, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent a draft of a crime victim 
notification letter to Jay Lefkowitz, defense counsel for Jeffrey Epstein. The notification letter 
would have explained: 
The letter then would have gone on to explain 
that Epstein would 
The 
letter would not have explained that, as part of the agreement with Epstein, the Justice 
Department had previously agreed not to prosecute Epstein for any of the numerous federal 
offenses that had been committed. U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 256-59. 
25. Because of concerns from Epstein's attorneys, the U.S. Attorney's Office never sent 
the proposed victim notification letter discussed in the previous paragraph to the victims. 
Instead, a misleading letter stating that the case was "currently under investigation" (described 
below) was sent in January 2008 and May 2008. At no time before reaching the non-prosecution 
agreement did the Justice Department notify any victims, including for example Jane Doe PI, 
about the non-prosecution agreement. The victims were therefore prevented from exercising 
their CVRA right to confer with prosecutors about the case and about the agreement. Epstein 
13 
EFTA01080104

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 14 of 42 
was aware of these violations of the CVRA and, indeed, pressured the U.S. Attorney's Office to 
commit these violations. Tr. July 11, 2008, at 9. 
26. On about December 6, 2007, Jeffrey H. Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney sent a 
letter to Jay Lefkowitz, noting the U.S. Attorney's Office's legal obligations to keep victims 
informed of th
 The letter stated: 
U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 191-92 (emphasis added). 
27. Despite this recognition of its obligation to keep victims 
about the non-prosecution agreement, the U.S. Attorney's Office did not follow through and 
inform the victims of the non-prosecution agreement. To the contrary, as discussed below, it 
continued to toll the victims that the case was "under investigation." Tr. July 11, 2008, at 4-5, 
18-19, 22-29. 
28. On December 13, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent a letter to Jay Lefkowitz, 
defense counsel for Epstein, rebutting allegations that had apparently been made against the 
14 
EFTA01080105