DOJ-OGR-00003255.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 79 of 348 CONFIDENTIAL PLEA NEGOTIATIONS TERMS OF EPSTEIN NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT Zz Epstein pleads guilty (not nolo contendere) to an Information filed by the Palm Beach County State Attorney’s Office charging him with: (a) lewd and lascivious battery on a child, in violation of FI. Stat. 800.04(4); (b) solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution, in violation of F1. Stat. 796.03; and (c) engaging in sexual activity with minors at least sixteen years of age, in violation of Fl. Stat. 794.05. a Epstein and the State Attorney’s Office make a joint, binding recommendation that Epstein serve at least two years in prison, without any opportunity for withholding adjudication or sentencing: and without probation or community control in lieu of imprisonment. x Epstein agrees to waive all challenges to the information filed by the State and the right to appeal. Ez Epstein agrees that, if any of the victims identified in the federal investigation file suit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255, Epstein will not contest the jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida over his person and the subject matter. Epstein will not contest that the identified victims are persons who, while minors, were victims of violations of Title 18, United States Code, Sections(s) 2422 and/or 2423. x After Epstein enters his state court plea and is sentenced, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office will close their investigations. V. THE USAO PRESENTS EPSTEIN WITH KEY TERMS OF A DEAL: PLEAD GUILTY TO STATE CHARGES REQUIRING A TWO-YEAR TERM OF INCARCERATION AND SEXUAL OFFENDER REGISTRATION, AND AGREE TO A MEANS FOR THE VICTIMS TO OBTAIN MONETARY DAMAGES Although the USAO term sheet was presented to Epstein’s defense team on July 31, 2007, it took almost another two months to reach a final agreement in the form of the NPA. The contemporaneous emails show that over the course of those two months, defense counsel offered multiple counter-proposals to the USAO’s stated terms, and alternated between working out the state plea disposition and seeking an alternative federal plea arrangement. The emails make clear that as the negotiations intensified in September 2007, the prosecutors became increasingly frustrated, particularly with what they perceived as the defense tactic of agreeing to terms and provisions but then backtracking or altering the agreed-upon terms in subsequent communications. It is apparent that the defense persistence achieved some measure of success, at least concerning 53 DOJ-OGR-00003255