DOJ-OGR-00021414.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
Case 22-1426, Document 77, A240 3536038, Page242 of 258
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 240 of 348
the USAO’s interpretation of the agreement and “the use of Section 2255.” The Starr and
Lefkowitz letter asserted it was “wholly inappropriate” for the USAO to send the proposed victim
notification letter “under any circumstances,” and “strongly urg[ed]” Acosta to withhold the
notification letter until after the defense was able “to discuss this matter with Assistant Attorney
General Fisher.”
The following day, Sloman sent a letter to Lefkowitz, with copies to Acosta and Villafafia,
asserting that the VRRA obligated the government to notify victims of the 18 U.S.C. § 2255
proceedings as “other relief” to which they were entitled. Sloman also stated that the VRRA
obligated the government to provide the victims with information concerning restitution to which
they may be entitled and “the earliest possible” notice of the status of the investigation, the filing
of charges, and the acceptance of a plea.*!4 (Emphasis in original). Sloman added:
Just as in 18 U.S.C. § 3771 [the CVRA], these sections are not
limited to proceedings in a federal district court. Our Non-
Prosecution Agreement resolves the federal investigation by
allowing Mr. Epstein to plead to a state offense. The victims
identified through the federal investigation should be appropriately
informed, and our Non-Prosecution Agreement does not require the
U.S. Attorney’s Office to forego [sic] its legal obligations.*!°
Sloman also addressed the defense objection to advising the victims to contact Villafafia or the
FBI case agent with questions or concerns: “Again, federal law requires that victims have the
‘reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in this case.’” Sloman advised
the defense: “The three victims who were notified prior to your objection had questions directed
to Mr. Epstein’s punishment, not the civil litigation. Those questions are appropriately directed to
law enforcement.”
Along with this letter, Sloman forwarded to Lefkowitz for comment a revised draft victim
notification letter that was substantially similar to the prior draft provided to the defense. The
letter stated that “the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein has been completed,” Epstein would
plead guilty in state court, the parties would recommend 18 months of imprisonment at sentencing,
and Epstein would compensate victims for damage claims brought under 18 U.S.C. § 2255. The
letter provided specific information concerning the upcoming change of plea hearing:
As I mentioned above, as part of the resolution of the federal
investigation, Mr. Epstein has agreed to plead guilty to state charges.
Mr. Epstein’s change of plea and sentencing will occur on
December 14, 2007, at a.m., before Judge Sandra K. McSorley,
314 See 42 U.S.C. § 10607(c)(1)(B) and (c)(3).
315 Emphasis in original. Sloman also stated that the USAO did not seek to “federalize” a state plea, but “is
simply informing the victims of their rights.” Villafafia informed OPR that Sloman approved and signed the letter,
but she was the primary author of the document. OPR notes that Villafafia was the principal author of most
correspondence in the Epstein case, and that following the signing of the NPA, regardless of whether the letter went
out with her, Sloman’s, or Acosta’s signature, the three attorneys reviewed and edited drafts of most correspondence
before a final version was sent to the defense.
214
DOJ-OGR-00021414
Extracted Information
Document Details
| Filename | DOJ-OGR-00021414.jpg |
| File Size | 940.9 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 94.2% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 3,535 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-03 20:12:21.162116 |