DOJ-OGR-00021217.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
Case 22-1426, Document ay ak ae 3536038, Page45 of 258
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 43 of 348
charge. Villafafia suggested meeting with the PBPD, but the case agent explained that before
formally presenting the case to the FBI, the PBPD wanted to see how the State Attorney’s Office
decided to charge Epstein.
1. The PBPD Presents the Matter to the FBI and the USAO
In May 2006, the lead Detective handling the state’s investigation met with Villafafia and
the FBI case agent to summarize for them the information learned during the state’s
investigation.'® At the time, neither Villafafia nor the case agent had heard of Epstein or had any
knowledge of his background.
According to Villafafia, during this meeting, the Detective expressed concern that “pressure
had been brought to bear on . . . Krischer by Epstein’s attorneys,” and he and Chief Reiter were
concerned the state would charge Epstein with only a misdemeanor or not at all.'? The Detective
explained that the defense had hired private investigators to trail Reiter and the Detective, had
raised claims of various improprieties by the police, and, in the view of the PBPD, had orchestrated
the removal of the Assistant State Attorney initially assigned to handle the matter, who was viewed
as an aggressive prosecutor, by hiring a defense attorney whose relationship with the Assistant
State Attorney created a conflict of interest for the prosecutor. Further, given the missing computer
equipment and surveillance camera videotapes, the Detective believed Epstein may have been
“tipped off” in advance about the search warrant.
During the meeting, Villafafia reviewed the U.S. Code to see what federal charges could
be brought against Epstein. She focused on 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 (enticement of minors into
prostitution or other illegal sexual activity and use of a facility of interstate or foreign commerce
to persuade or induce a minor to engage in prostitution or other illegal sexual activity) and 2423
(travel for purposes of engaging in illegal sexual conduct). As they discussed these charges, the
Detective told Villafafia that Epstein and his assistants had traveled out of the Palm Beach
International Airport on Epstein’s private airplane, and flight logs sometimes referred to
passengers as “female” without a name or age, which the Detective suspected might be references
to underage girls. However, the Detective acknowledged that he was unable to confirm that
suspicion and did not have firm evidence indicating that Epstein had transported any girls interstate
or internationally. Nevertheless, Villafafia believed Epstein could be prosecuted federally, in part
because of his own interstate and international travel to the Southern District of Florida to abuse
girls. Villafafia discussed with the Detective and the case agent the additional investigation needed
to prove violations of the federal statutes she had identified. She told them that if the evidence
supported it, the case could be prosecuted federally, but she assured them that opening a federal
investigation would not preclude the State Attorney’s Office from charging Epstein should it
choose to do so.
18 The Detective died in May 2018.
19 In his 2009 deposition, Reiter testified that after he referred the Epstein matter to the FBI, a Town of Palm
Beach official approached Reiter and criticized his referral of the investigation to the FBI, telling Reiter that the victims
were not believable and “Palm Beach solves its own problems.”
17
DOJ-OGR-00021217
Extracted Information
Dates
Document Details
| Filename | DOJ-OGR-00021217.jpg |
| File Size | 956.0 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 94.7% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 3,545 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-03 20:08:42.175410 |