EFTA00674725.pdf
PDF Source (No Download)
Extracted Text (OCR)
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant United States Attorney
WPB
Re Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Ms Villafana
Thank you for your letter of July 27, 2011 in regards to the request by
the New York District Attorney for copies of the NPA and the "victim
list" in regards to Mr. Epstein. We continue for the reasons stated herein
to believe that any such disclosure would violate the confidentiality
agreement between your Office and Mr. Epstein as well as the provisions
of F.R.Crim.P 6(e).
As to the NPA, you have repeatedly asserted in Doe v United States
9:08cv80736-KAM that the NPA was a confidential document. For
instance, in par 6 of document 14, your own declaration, you stated that
the NPA contained "an express confidentiality provision". In opposing
the Motion to Unseal the NPA that was filed by Jane Doe, you stated that
you had informed Judge Marra of the confidentiality provision during an
earlier telephonic status conference occurring on August 14, 2008 which
"the United States was obligated to honor", Doc 29, pg 1, and that "the
parties who negotiated the Agreement, the United States Attorney's
Office and Jeffrey Epstein, determined that the Agreement should remain
confidential", Doc 29, pg 2. The New York District Attorney, Ms Morse,
is representing the prosecution in an appeal regarding a sex offender
registration determination and any disclosure of the NPA to her has the
potential to result in its use in that appeal and the real risk that the
appellate court will unseal it. Both Mr. Lefkowitz, who is co-signing this
letter, and myself believe it to violate both the spirit and the most logical
interpretation of the NPA, par 13, for you to disclose it absent a subpoena
(which we could oppose in the jurisdiction from which it emanated), and
also believe that when parol evidence supplements the text of the
paragraph it is perfectly apparent from your prior submissions that you as
well as we believed the NPA to contain "an express confidentiality
provision" that your willingness to disclose absent court process violates.
As to the "victim" list, again, your own prior letters tie the list to the
Federal Grand Jury investigation and thus to the non-disclosure
EFTA00674725
provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e). On July 8, 2008 you wrote to Jack A
Goldberger and informed him that on June 30, 2008 "the United States
Attorney's Office provided {him} with a list of thirty-one individuals
`whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an
enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein'. On July 9, 2008 you wrote to Mr.
Goldberger in a followup letter that "the U.S. Attorney's modification of
the 2255 portion of the Agreement now limits our victim list to those
persons whom the United States was prepared to include in an
indictment. This means that, pursuant to Justice Department policy,
these are individuals for whom the United States believes it has proof
beyond a reasonable doubt that each of them was a victim of an
enumerated offense." (emphasis added). The names of witnesses that
either testified or were identified during Grand Jury proceedings are
subject to the secrecy provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e), SEC v Dresser
Industries Inc 628 F2d 1368, 1382 (DC Cir, 1982), Fund for
Constitutional Gov't v Nat'l Archives & Records Serv. 656 F2d 856, 869
(DC Cir, 1983).
EFTA00674726
Document Preview
PDF source document
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
Extracted Information
Document Details
| Filename | EFTA00674725.pdf |
| File Size | 134.4 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 85.0% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 3,357 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-11T23:27:44.306876 |