DOJ-OGR-00023249.tif
Extracted Text (OCR)
and thanking Acosta for agreeing on October 12, 2007, not to “contact any of the identified
individuals, potential witnesses, or potential civil claimants and their respective counsel in this
matter.”°°7 Shortly thereafter, Sloman drafted a response to Lefkowitz’s letter, which Acosta
revised to clarify the “inaccurate” representations made by Lefkowitz, in particular noting that
Acosta did not agree to a “gag order” with regard to victim contact. The draft response, as revised
by Acosta, stated:
You should understand, however, that there are some
communications that are typical in these matters. As an example,
our Office has an obligation to contact the victims to inform them
that either [the Special Master], or his designee, will be contact[ing]
them. Rest assured that we will continue to treat this matter as we
would any similarly situated case.3°*
In a November 5, 2007 letter, Sloman complained to Lefkowitz that private investigators
working for Epstein had been contacting victims and asking whether government agents had
discussed financial settlement with them. Sloman noted that the private investigators’ “actions are
troublesome because the FBI agents legally are required to advise the victims of the resolution of
the matter, which includes informing them that, as part of the resolution, Mr. Epstein has agreed
to pay damages in some circumstances.” The same day, Villafafia emailed Sloman expressing her
concern that “if we [file charges] now, cross-examination will consist of- ‘and the government told
you that if Mr. Epstein is convicted, you are entitled to a large amount of damages, right?””>”
C. October — November 2007: The FBI and the USAO Continue to Investigate,
and the FBI Sends a Notice Letter to One Victim Stating That the Case is
“Under Investigation”
Although Villafafia and the FBI case agents decided to stop informing victims about the
NPA, the FBI continued its investigation of the case, which included locating and interviewing
potential victims. In October and November 2007, the FBI interviewed 12 potential new victims,
8 of whom had been identified in a “preliminary” victim list in use at the time Epstein signed the
307 Villafafia later emailed Sloman stating that she planned to meet with the case agents to have a “general
discussion about staying out of the civil litigation.”
308 Sloman’s draft also stated that Acosta had informed the defense in a previous conference call that the USAO
would not accept a “gag order.” OPR recovered only a draft version of the communication and was unable to find
any evidence that the draft letter was finalized or sent to defense counsel.
309 Subsequent records also referred to the prosecutors’ concerns about creating impeachment evidence and that
such concerns played a role in their decision not to notify victims of the NPA until after Epstein pled guilty. In August
2008, the AUSA handling the CVRA litigation emailed Villafafia, Acosta, and Sloman expressing his understanding
that the “victims were not consulted [concerning the NPA]... because [the USAO] did not believe the [CVRA]
applied.” Acosta responded: “As I recall, we also believed that contacting the victims would compromise them as
potential witnesses. Epstein argued very forcefully that they were doing this for the money and we did not want to
discuss liability with them, which was [a] key part of [the] agree[ment].”
211
DOJ-OGR-00023249
Extracted Information
Document Details
| Filename | DOJ-OGR-00023249.tif |
| File Size | 68.4 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 95.0% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 3,424 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-03 20:35:39.931544 |