EFTA00191264

Bates Range 
Description 
Privilege(s) Asserted 
Box #3 
P-012168 
Thru 
P-012170 
Ex Parte Declaration Number Two in Support of 
United States' Response to Motion to Quash 
Subpoenas 
6(e) 
Investigative Privilege 
Box #3 
P-012171 
Thru 
P-012173 
Supplement to Ex Parte Declaration Number One 
in Support of United States' Response to Motion 
to Quash Subpoenas 
6(e) 
Investigative Privilege 
Also contains information 
subject to privacy rights of 
victims who are not parties to 
this litigation 
Box #3 
P-012174 
Thru 
P-012176 
Draft of September 2009 letter from Marie 
Villafafia to Roy Black regarding breach of Non 
Prosecution Agreement with handwritten attorney 
(Villafafia) notes 
Work Product 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
Deliberative Process 
Box #3 
P-012177 
Thru 
P-012178 
Undated handwritten attorney (Villafafia) notes 
regarding negotiations and allegations 
Work Product 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
Deliberative Process 
Box #3 
P-012179 
Thru 
P-012188 
File Folder entitled "FBI G.J. Log" containing 
copy of FBI grand jury subpoena log with 
attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes 
6(e) 
Work Product 
Investigative Privilege 
Also contains information 
subject to privacy rights of 
victims who are not parties to 
this litigation 
Box #3 
P-012362 
Thru 
P-012451 
File folder entitled "Key Documents" containing 
correspondence between AUSA and case agent 
regarding indictment prep questions, victim 
identification information, corrections to draft 
indictment, indictment preparation timeline, key 
grand jury material 
6(e) 
Work Product 
Attorney-Client privilege 
Investigative Privilege 
Also contains information 
subject to privacy rights of 
victims who are not parties to 
this litigation 
Box #3 
P-012451 
Thru 
P-012452 
File folder entitled "Victim List" containing list 
of victims with dates of birth and age information 
Work Product 
Investigative Privilege 
Also contains information 
subject to privacy rights of 
victims who are not parties to 
this litigation 
Page 20 of 23 
EFTA00191384

Bates Range 
Description 
Privilege(s) Asserted 
Box #3 
P-012453 
Thru 
P-0 I 2623 
Complete indictment package marked "Originals 
12112/07" 
Work-product 
Deliberative process 
6(e) 
Also contains documents 
subject to investigative 
privilege 
Also contains documents 
subject to privacy rights of 
victims who are not parties to 
this litigation 
Box #3 
P-012624 
Thru 
P-012653 
Folder entitled "(Victims) Additional 302's" 
containing reports of interviews conducted in 
June 2007, October 2007, and March 2008. 
Investigative Privilege 
Also contains documents 
subject to privacy rights of 
victims who are not parties to 
this litigation 
Box #3 
P-012654 
Thru 
P-012864 
3-ring binder entitled "Child Molesters: A 
Behavioral Analysis" with attorney (Villafa0a) 
handwritten notes 
Work-product 
Box #3 
P-012865 
Thru 
P-013226 
Indictment preparation binder containing: 
witness/victim list with identifying information, 
sexual activity summary, telephone call summary 
chart, attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes, 
302s, portions of state investigative file, attorney 
(Villafafia) typed notes, relevant pieces of grand 
jury materials, telephone records/flight records 
analysis charts, victim/witness photographs, 
DAVID records, NCICs, and related materials for 
persons identified as Jane Does #9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 
14 
Work Product 
Deliberative Process 
6(e) 
Also contains documents 
subject to investigative 
privilege 
Also contains documents 
subject to privacy rights of 
victims who are not parties to 
this litigation 
Box #3 
P-013227 
April 23, 2008 Memo from Jeffrey Sloman to 
Office of Professional Responsibility re Self 
Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously 
submitted April 21, 2008 Letter to OPR 
Privacy Act 
Box #3 
P-013226 
Thru 
P-013230 
April 21, 2008 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to 
Office of Professional Responsibility re Self 
Reporting 
Privacy Act 
Box #3 
P-013231 
Thru 
P-013239 
April 22, 2008 Letter from A. Marie Villafafia to 
Office of Professional Responsibility re Self-
Report of Allegation of Conflict of Interest 
Privacy Act 
Page 21 of 23 
EFTA00191385

Bates Range 
Description 
Privilege(s) Asserted 
Box #3 
P-013240 
Thru 
P-013247 
April 21, 2008 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to 
Office of Professional Responsibility re Self 
Reporting with attachments 
Privacy Act 
Box #3 
P-013248 
Thru 
P-013251 
Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant 
General Counsel, Executive Office for United 
States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First 
Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of 
Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide 
Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated 
August 24 and August 29, 2011 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
Box #3 
P-013252 
Thru 
P-013253 
Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant 
General Counsel, Executive Office for United 
States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First 
Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of 
Florida, regarding Recusal matter, dated July 28, 
August 3, and August 24, 2011 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
Box #3 
P-013254 
Thru 
P-013257 
Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant 
General Counsel, Executive Office for United 
States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First 
Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of 
Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide 
Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated 
August 24 and August 29, 2011 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
Box #3 
P-013258 
Thru 
P-013259 
Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant 
General Counsel, Executive Office for United 
States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First 
Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of 
Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide 
Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated July 
28 and August 3, 2011 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
Box #3 
P-013260 
Thru 
P-013262 
Email from Richard Sudder, Assistant General 
Counsel, Executive Office for United States 
Attorneys, to Wifredo Ferrer (U.S. Attorney, 
SDFL), Robert O'Neill (U.S. Attorney, MDFL), 
Benjamin Greenberg, (FAUSA, SDFL), and Lee 
Bentley (FAUSA, MDFL) regarding Formal 
Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern 
District of Florida dated August 24, 2011. CC's 
David Margolis (ODAG), Jay MadaSAEO), 
Thomas Anderson (USAEO), 
Tapken 
(USAEO), James Read (USAEO) 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
Page 22 of 23 
EFTA00191386

Bates Range 
Description 
Privilege(s) Asserted 
Box #3 
Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
P413263 
General Counsel, Executive Office for United 
Deliberative Process 
Thru 
States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First 
Work Product 
P-013271 
Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of 
Florida, regarding recusal of Southern District of 
Florida, dated July 29, 2011, with attached 
memorandum from A. Marie Villafafla to 
Benjamin 
Greenberg 
summarizing 
Jeffrey 
Epstein Investigation 
Box #3 
Emails between Peter Mason, Executive Office 
Attorney-Client Privilege 
P-013272 
Thru 
for United States Attorneys, and Dexter Lee, 
Southern District of Florida, seeking advice 
P-013278 
regarding office-wide recusal, dated December 16 
and 17, 2010, with attached letter from Paul 
Cassell to Wifredo A. Ferrer, dated December 10, 
2010 
Page 23 of 23 
EFTA00191387

• ...... .• 
•:z666:66  
To: 
[email protected] Bi imaaol.comj; 
Subject: 
RE: 
Sent: 
Tue 
4 2006 5:51:08 PM 
From: 
Villafena, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
Hi Jim -- Thank you for the e-mail, and I will even forgive the football reference. I was 
just set for trial, so the earliest I will be able to reschedule the testimony will be after 
Thanksgiving. I will give you a call to discuss theibrity Issue but I am concerned 
about other things we have talked about -- if Ms. 
is given immunity, will she be 
forthcoming and answer the questions? Or am I going to jump through hoops to get her 
immunity and then have to worry about filing motions to compel, motions for orders to 
show cause why she shouldn't be held in contempt, etc., etc.? 
As always, thank you for your assistance. 
Regards, 
Marie 
A. Marie Villafana 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
561 209-1047 
Fax 581 820-8777 
ann. ma [email protected] 
From: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 12:00 PM 
To: Villafana, 
(USAFLS) 
Subject: Re: 
Sorry I 
t get back to you sooner. I have been out of town for several weeks. As 
to Miss 
she still does not wish to testify in this case and has a Fifth Amendment 
basis for er position. She wishes not to accept the "proffer letter " cover of Immunity, 
which again is her right. I think it Is a waste of time to have her appear Friday to just 
take. the Fifth. I suggest that you huddle with your people. (It is football season). If 
you want to push the issue you will have to get formal immati. I will accept service 
now and In the future for you so you don't have to chase 
down. Jim Eisenberg 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
P-013875 
EFTA00191388

Memorandum 
Subject 
Re: Jeffrey Epstein Investigation 
Date 
July 26, 2011 
To 
From 
Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S. Attorney 
A. Marie Villafafia 
I. 
Introduction 
This memorandum summarizes the conflict of interest related to the investigation 
by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") of additional crimes committed by Jeffrey 
Epstein ("Epstein"). The memo begins with a brief overview of the original investigation 
of Epstein, dubbed "Operation Leap Year"; summarizes the resolution of Operation Leap 
Year by the Southern District of Florida; and addresses the events following the 
resolution of Operation Leap Year, including the basis for the conflict. Lastly, the memo 
briefly addresses the additional crimes that the FBI wants to investigate. 
II. 
'Operation Lean Year' 
The investigation of Jeffrey Epstein initially was undertaken by the City of Palm 
Beach Police D artment in response to a complaint received from the parents of a 
14-year-old girl, 
from Royal Palm Beach. When 
and another girl began 
fighting at school because the other girl accused 
of being a prostitute, one of the 
school principals intervened. The principal searched 
urse and found $300 cash. 
The principal asked 
where the money came from. 
initialiiimed that she 
earned the money working at "Chik-Fil-A," which no one believed. 
then claimed 
that she made the money selling drugs; no one believed that either. 
finally 
admitted that she had been paid $300 to give a massage to a man on Palm Beach island. 
parents approached the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD") about pressing 
charges. 
PBPD began investigating the recipient of the massage, Jeffrey Epstein, and two of 
his assistants, Sarah Kellen and Nadia Marcinkova. PBPD identified 27 girls who went to 
EFTA00191389

Epstein's house to perform "massage service? (not including one licensed massage 
therapist). The girls' ages ranged from 14 years' old to 23 years' old. Some girls saw 
Epstein only once and some saw him dozens of times. 
The "massage services" 
performed also varied. Some girls were fully clothed while they massaged Epstein; some 
wore only their underwear; and some were fully nude. During all of these massages, 
Epstein masturbated himself and he would touch the girl performing the massage, usually 
fondling their breasts and touching their vaginas — either over their clothing or on their 
bare skin. Epstein often used a vibrator to masturbate the girls and digitally penetrated a 
number of them. For the girls who saw him more often, Epstein graduated to oral sex 
and vaginal sex. Epstein sometimes brought his assistant/girlfriend, Nadia Marcinkova, 
into the sexual activity. One of the girls described Marcinkova as Epstein's "sex slave". 
On October 18, 2005, PBPD obtained a search warrant with the assistance of the 
Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office ("PBSAO"). By this time, PBSAO had 
already been contacted by Epstein's cadre of lawyers. When PBPD arrived at Epstein's 
home two days later (10/20/05) to execute the search warrant, they found several items 
conspicuously missing. For example, computer monitors and keyboards were found, but 
the CPUs were gone. I 
Similarly, surveillance cameras were found, but they were 
disconnected and the videotapes were gone. Nonetheless, the search did recover some 
evidence of value, including message pads showing messages from many girls over a two 
year span. The messages show girls returning phone calls to confirm appointments to 
"work." Messages were taken by three of Epstein's "personal assistants." 
Photographs taken inside the home showed that the girls' descriptions of the layout 
of the home and master bedroom/bathroom area were accurate. PBPD also found 
massage tables and oils, the high school transcript of one of the girls, and sex toys. 
'During a meeting, two of Epstein's attorneys, Gerald Lefcourt and Lilly Ann Sanchez, 
admitted that attorney Roy Black instructed Epstein to have the CPUs removed although they 
insisted that those instruction were given well in advance of the execution of the search warrant -
not in response to a "leak." 
2 
EFTA00191390

In sum, the PBPD investigation showed that girls from Royal Palm Beach High 
School would be contacted by one of Epstein's assistants to make an appointment to 
"work." Up to three appointments each day would be made. The girls would travel to 
Epstein's home in Palm Beach where they would meet Epstein's chef and Epstein's 
assistant-usually Sarah Kellen-in the kitchen. The assistant would escort the girls 
upstairs to the master bedroom/bathroom area and set up the massage table and massage 
oils. The girl sometimes was instructed to remove her clothing. The assistant would 
leave and Epstein would enter the room wearing a robe. He would remove the robe and 
lie face down and nude on the massage table. Epstein would then instruct the girl on 
what to do and would ask her to remove her clothing. After some time, Epstein would 
turn over, so that he was lying face up. Epstein would masturbate himself and fondle the 
girl performing the massage. When Epstein climaxed, the massage was over, and the girl 
was instructed to get dressed and to go downstairs to the kitchen while Epstein showered. 
Epstein's assistant would be in the kitchen and the girl would be paid-usually $200-and 
if it was a "new" girl, the assistant would ask for the girl's phone number to contact her in 
the future.2 Girls were encouraged to find other girls to bring with them. If a girl 
brought another girl to perform a "massage," each girl would receive $200. Each time a 
girl returned to the house, Epstein would pressure the girl to go further sexually, 
advancing to oral sex and sexual intercourse. Epstein would pay more for these acts - in 
the words of one girl, "the more you do, the more you make." 
The PBPD investigation consisted primarily of sworn taped statements from the 
girls. When PBPD began having problems with PBSAO, they approached the FBI. The 
investigation was formally presented to the FBI and to the U.S. Attorney's Office after 
PBSAO "presented" the case to a state grand jury and the state grand jury returned an 
indictment charging Epstein only with one felony count of solicitation of [adult] 
prostitution. 
After the matter was presented to the U.S. Attorney's Office and there was a 
determination that federal statutes had been violated, FBI, ICE, and the U.S. Attorney's 
Office opened files. The federal investigation focused on the interstate nexus required 
for all of the federal violations, so a number of grand jury subpoenas were issued for 
telephone records, flight manifests, and credit card records. The federal agents also 
re-interviewed some of the girls. The agents delved into Epstein's history and interviewed 
other girls and obtained records to corroborate the girls' stories. FBI also interviewed 
2Sometimes Epstein made the payment and asked for the phone number, sometimes it 
was the assistant. 
3 
EFTA00191391

girls who came forward after the PBSAO indictment was reported in the papers and the 
additional girls identified through those interviews. 
The attempt to handle secretly the federal case was doomed from the start when 
the Chief of the Palm Beach Police Department gave a letter to each of the victims 
identified through his investigation telling them that, because of his disappointment in the 
way that the PBSAO had handled the case, the matter had been referred to the FBI. 
Almost immediately, Epstein's attorneys began calling to request a meeting with the U.S. 
Attorney's Office. When one attorney was unable to schedule a meeting, Epstein hired 
another attorney who called up the chain of command until someone agreed to a meeting. 
Between January and May 2007, an indictment package was prepared, charging 
Epstein and three of his personal assistants with a number of child exploitation offenses. 
The case agent made several appearances before the grand jury. Attorneys for Epstein 
made several presentations to the U.S. Attorney's Office to convince the Office not to 
prosecute, and made allegations of prosecutorial misconduct against the line Assistant and 
the First Assistant U.S. Attorney. Epstein also challenged the legal analysis behind the 
prosecution, both within the U.S. Attorney's Office (up to the U.S. Attorney) and to the 
Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section at the Justice Department. All of Epstein's 
challenges were considered and rejected. 
III. 
The Resolution of "Operation Leap Year' 
On September 24, 2007, Epstein signed a Non-Prosecution Agreement wherein the 
U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida promised not to prosecute 
Epstein for the crimes that were the subject of the grand jury investigation if: (1) he pled 
guilty to two crimes in state court - the state felony prostitution charge and a state charge 
of procuring minors into prostitution, which would require Epstein to register as a sex 
offender; (2) he were sentenced to at least 18 months' imprisonment, and (3) he agreed to 
pay damages to the victims of his offenses. After signing this Agreement, Epstein and 
his counsel decided that they were dissatisfied with its terms, and again complained to the 
Justice Department, seeking review to the Deputy Assistant Attorney General and the 
Deputy Attorney General. 
After those attempts also failed, on June 30, 2008, Epstein entered his guilty plea 
in state court and began serving his sentence. 
IV. 
Post-Resolution Events 
A few days before the plea and sentencing (in state court those occur on the same 
4 
EFTA00191392

day), the Assistant U.S. Attorney handling the matter contacted counsel for three of 
Epstein's identified victims and informed him of the upcoming court date, encouraging 
his clients to attend and be heard. They did not appear. On July 7, 2008, two of those 
victims filed suit against the United States in federal court claiming that their rights had 
been violated under the Crime Victims' Rights Act because they had not been consulted 
before the Office entered into the Non-Prosecution Agreement. (This will be referred to 
as the "CVRA Action.") 
After an initial flurry of activity, the Petitioners obtained a copy of the confidential 
Non-Prosecution Agreement, and the Court ordered that it be shared with all of the 
identified victims. After it was provided, the Petitioners and most of Epstein's victims 
focused on their civil suits against him. 
In 2009, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Fort Lauderdale initiated an investigation 
into a Ponzi scheme operated by Scott Rothstein through his law firm. As part of his 
Ponzi scheme, Rothstein told investors that his law firm represented several of Epstein's 
victims and that Epstein was willing to pay huge sums of money to avoid exposing his 
criminal activities. The attorney representing the victims in the CVRA Action, Brad 
Edwards ("Edwards"), worked at the Rothstein firm. Epstein sued Edwards, alleging that 
Edwards was part of the Ponzi scheme, and alleging that Edwards' attempts to subpoena 
some of Epstein's high-powered friends were done to increase the value of the Ponzi 
scheme, rather than for legitimate discovery purposes. 
In the summer of 2010, most of the civil suits against Epstein were settled, 
including the suits filed by the two victims in the CVRA Action. All of the settlements 
were confidential, so it is unknown how much each of the victims received. 
In September 2010, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra, who handled most of the 
civil cases and the CVRA Action, issued an Order closing the CVRA Action. Almost 
immediately thereafter, the Petitioners filed a Motion to Reopen, stating that they had 
obtained discovery through their civil suits against Epstein that showed that the U.S. 
Attorney's Office had violated their rights as victims. 
For several months, attempts were made to resolve the matter. In short, the 
victims have asked that the U.S. Attorney's Office disavow the Non-Prosecution 
Agreement, on the basis that the CVRA was violated, and bring charges against Epstein. 
Edwards has said that one of his clients repeatedly calls and asks him when Epstein is 
going to jail. One of the other attorneys on the case has suggested that emails he 
5 
EFTA00191393

considers to be embarrassing to the Office will not be disclosed if we re-open our 
investigation of Epstein and prosecute him. 
Herein lies the conflict. If the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of 
Florida re-initiates a grand jury investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, it will be perceived -
correctly or incorrectly - as having been done at the insistence of the victims in the 
CVRA Action. And Epstein will allege that any prosecution arising therefrom will have 
been undertaken in an effort to resolve the CVRA Action, not based upon the merits of 
the investigation itself. 
I. 
The FBI's Current Investigation 
The main focus of the FBI's current investigation is a victim, M, 
who 
refused to speak with agents during the "Operation Leap Year" investigation. Based 
upon her debriefing, Epstein engaged in several additional crimes in the Southern District 
of Florida and, more important) in several other Districts, with 
and other minor 
females. Epstein transported 
in his private airplanes to engage in sexual activity 
with him. Epstein also "pimped" 
to several of his other important friends, and 
transported her to those sexual encounters. This activity was not part of the initial 
investigation. 
also reported that, during the "Operation Leap Year" investigation, she 
was contacted by Epstein's investigators, lawyers, and Epstein himself, and offered 
payment to remain silent when contacted by the police. 
FBI agents are seeking grand jury subpoenas at this time to corroborate 
statement. They also are asking for permission to approach one of Epstein's "personal 
assistants," who was served with a target letter during the "Operation Leap Year" 
investigation, to give her a "de-target" letter and interview her. 
There are several other Districts that may have jurisdiction over the additional 
crimes under investigation. Epstein lived and still lives in the Southern District of New 
York; he engaged in sexual activity with 
in the S.D.N.Y.; and it is believed that 
he made the calls from the S.D.N.Y. to 
wherein he offered to pay her to keep her 
from speaking to law enforcement. When Epstein would fly into and out of New York, 
however, he used the airport in Teterboro, New Jersey, so the District of New Jersey also 
has jurisdiction over charges related to traveling in interstate commerce to engage in 
illicit sexual conduct and transporting minors in interstate commerce. 
reported 
6 
EFTA00191394

that Epstein engaged in sexual activity with her on his private island in the U.S. Virgin 
Islands and also had her engage in sexual activity with one of his friends on that island, so 
the District of the Virgin Islands also would have jurisdiction. 
also reported 
frequent sexual activity with Epstein in the District of New Mexico and the Central 
District of California. In both of those Districts there is evidence (from 
or other 
witnesses) of Epstein engaging in illegal sexual activity with other underage victims, as 
well. 
7 
EFTA00191395