HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012155.jpg

i KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP \ To the extent there is a similar, but more egregious, local Florida case on the books, it is . that of Barry Kutun, a former North Miami city attorney accused of having sex with underage prostitutes and videotaping the sessions. Mr. Kutun pleaded guilty on May 18, 2007 in a Miami- Dade County courtroom as part of an agreement with State prosecutors and he received five years probation and a withholding of adjudication with no requirement to register as a sex offender—all without a shred of involvement by federal prosecutors, who declined to prosecute him. Indeed, given the wide use of the telephone in today’s society, it gives a rogue prosecutor carte blanche to turn any local crime into a federal offense. Given the federal government’s decision to abstain from prosecuting that case, it is hard to understand how the federal prosecutors responsible for this case think that the State’s treatment of Mr. Epstein somehow leaves federal interests substantially unvindicated. There is simply no basis for the federal prosecutors’ disparate treatment of Mr. Epstein. Summary of the Evidence Finally, we wish to share new evidence—obtained through discovery in connection with the civil lawsuits filed in this matter—which confirms that further federal involvement in this matter would be inappropriate. This testimony taken to date categorically confirms that (i) Mr. Epstein did not target minors; (ii) women under 18 often lied to Mr. Epstein about their ages; (iii) Mr. Epstein did not travel in interstate commerce for the purpose of engaging in illegal sexual activity; (iv) Mr. Epstein did not use the Internet, telephone or any other means of interstate communication to coerce or entice alleged victims; (v) Mr. Epstein did not apply force or coercion to obtain sexual favors; and (vi) all sexual activity that occurred was unplanned and purely consensual. The women’s own statements—made under oath—demonstrate the absence of a legitimate federal concern in this matter, and highlight the serious practical difficulties an attempted federal prosecution would face. —~, fs e Mr. Epstein did not recruit or obtain these women in interstate commerce (necessary for a conviction under § 1591). fe) confirmed that she did not know Mr. Epstein and had absolutely no contact with him—be it through Internet, chat rooms, email, or phone—prior to their arrival at his home. See Tab 13 Tr. (deposition), p. 30. © [ERE has stated that (like many other women) she first met Mr. ' Epstein when her friend, introduced her to him. See Tab 14, Tr. A, p. 4-5. ° Mr. Epstein was told the girls were over 18. ° ume admitted to lying to Mr. Epstein about her age. See Tab 13, . (deposition), p. 37 (“Q. So you told Jeff that you were 18 years old, correct? A. Yes.”). o [RRM stated that she not only always made sure she had a fake ID with her and lied to Mr. Epstein by telling him she was 18, but that she \. 14 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012155