DOJ-OGR-00004440.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 293-1 Filed 05/25/21 Page 143 of 349 Florida law treated work release as part of confinement; and the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office had discretion to grant work release to any inmate. Black also claimed that Acosta “recognized that Mr. Epstein might serve a portion of his sentence through the Work Release Program” and pointed out that the December 6, 2007 draft victim notification letter sent to Lefkowitz for review specifically referred to the victim’s right to be notified “if [Epstein] is allowed to participate in a work release program.” On December 3, 2008, in advance of a scheduled meeting with Black, Villafafia sent Sloman and Criminal Division Chief Senior an email about Epstein’s participation in the work release program: It appears that, since Day 1, Goldberger and Krisher [sic] . . . have been scheming to get Epstein out on work release. For example, the indictment incorrectly charges Epstein for an offense that would have made him ineligible for work release if it had been charged correctly. (Remember that Krisher [sic] also went along with letting us believe that Epstein was pleading to a registrable offense when Epstein’s folks and Krisher [sic] believed that . . . the offense was not registrable.) Krisher [sic] and Goldberger also told us that Epstein would be housed at the Palm [Beach County] Jail, not the Stockade, but he would not have been eligible for work release if at the jail. ... As part of his work release, Epstein has hired off-duty Sheriff's deputies to provide him with “protection.” It appears that he is paying between $3000 and $4100 per week for this service, despite the work release rules barring anyone from the Sheriff's Office (and the Sheriffs Office itself) from having “any business transactions with inmates . . . while they are in the custody or supervision of the Sheriff... .” Villafafia added that she and her immediate supervisor believed that the USAO “should not budge on the 24-hour-a-day incarceration” requirement. Referring to the CVRA litigation, Villafafia also pointed out that two victims had brought suit against the USAO “for failing to keep them informed about the investigation,” and the office had “an obligation to inform all of the victims upon Epstein’s release.” On December 11, 2008, Villafafia wrote to the Corrections Division of the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office to express the USAO’s view that Epstein was not eligible for work release and to alert the Sheriffs Office that Epstein’s work release application contained several inaccuracies and omitted relevant information. Villafafia pointed out that Epstein’s application identified his place of employment as the “Florida Science Foundation,” and the telephone number listed in the application for the “Florida Science Foundation” was the telephone number to the law firm of Epstein’s attorney Jack Goldberger. Villafafia also noted that the individual identified in the work release file as Epstein’s “supervisor” at the “Florida Science Foundation” had submitted publicly available sworn filings to the Internal Revenue Service indicating that Epstein worked only one hour per week and earned no compensation, but that same individual had represented to 116 DOJ-OGR-00004440