Lefcourt
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Epstein
|
Client |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Alan M. Dershowitz
|
Friend |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Client |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Adversarial negotiating |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Narrator
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dershowitz
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Andy
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Meeting | A meeting was held to discuss policy reasons for not prosecuting Epstein. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Signing of the final Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) | Unknown | View |
| 2007-12-14 | N/A | Meeting between Epstein's defense team and USAO officials | Miami | View |
| 2007-12-14 | N/A | Meeting: Defense presents federal jurisdiction issues, legal issues, and request for de novo review | Unknown | View |
| 2007-12-14 | N/A | Meeting in Miami between Acosta, USAO representatives, and Epstein's defense team (Starr, Dershow... | Miami | View |
| 2007-10-29 | N/A | Epstein and his attorneys, Lefcourt and Sanchez, signed the NPA addendum. | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-29 | Legal agreement | Epstein and his attorneys Lefcourt and Sanchez signed the NPA addendum. Villafaña’s name was prin... | N/A | View |
| 2007-09-12 | N/A | Joint meeting with Krischer / Belohlavek re state plea provision of NPA | Unknown | View |
| 2007-09-12 | N/A | Meeting between USAO, Defense Counsel, and State Attorney | Likely West Palm Beach (imp... | View |
| 2007-07-31 | Meeting | The USAO presented its plea proposal to Epstein's defense team. The defense countered, arguing ag... | N/A | View |
| 2007-07-31 | N/A | USAO presents NPA term sheet | Unknown | View |
| 2007-07-31 | N/A | Meeting: USAO presents NPA term sheet | Unknown | View |
| 2007-06-26 | Meeting | A meeting between USAO personnel and Epstein's defense team, where the defense presented their ar... | Miami USAO | View |
| 2007-06-26 | N/A | Meeting: Defense presents legal issues, investigation improprieties, and federal jurisdiction issues | Unknown | View |
| 2007-05-22 | Communication | Defense counsel Lefcourt emailed Lourie to confirm a meeting opportunity for Epstein's attorneys ... | N/A | View |
| 2007-02-20 | N/A | Defense presents witness issues | Unknown | View |
| 2007-02-20 | N/A | Follow-up meeting where defense counsel provided recordings. | Unknown | View |
| 2007-02-20 | N/A | Meeting: Defense presents witness issues | Unknown | View |
| 2007-02-01 | N/A | Meeting: Defense presents investigation improprieties and federal jurisdiction issues | Unknown | View |
| 2007-02-01 | N/A | Defense Counsel Meet with Lourie and Villafaña | USAO Office (implied) | View |
| 1970-01-01 | N/A | Narrator became the only plaintiff in the first lawsuit to declare abortion laws unconstitutional... | New York State | View |
EFTA00014163.pdf
An email dated June 3, 2008, with redacted sender and recipient fields. The subject concerns a 'Page 6 Article' regarding a letter from Lefcourt to Acosta, which is attached as a PDF. The body of the email reveals the unredacted filename 'Page 6 Article re Lefcourt Ltr to Acosta.pdf', identifying the recipient of the letter as Acosta.
EFTA00013882.pdf
An email dated June 3, 2008, from an Assistant U.S. Attorney in West Palm Beach to a colleague. The email discusses a potential conflict of interest or media strategy, noting that Jeffrey Epstein's publicist, Howard Rubenstein, also represents The New York Post, which had recently published an article quoting Epstein's lawyer, Lefcourt.
DOJ-OGR-00023137.tif
This document details interactions between Jeffrey Epstein's defense team and the USAO in late 2007, focusing on submissions, a key meeting in Miami on December 14, 2007, and the defense's threat to pursue a Department of Justice review. The discussions revolved around defense complaints, a proposed revised indictment, and a new argument by Epstein's attorneys regarding the applicability of the state charge he agreed to plead guilty to. The document also highlights the USAO's internal review processes and Acosta's communication with Assistant Attorney General Fisher regarding the case.
DOJ-OGR-00023120.tif
This document details communications and events surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's potential plea deal and sex offender registration in September 2007. It highlights objections from Sanchez and Lefkowitz to the registration requirement, citing a 'misunderstanding' at a prior meeting where prosecutors Krischer and Belohlavek initially stated the offense was not registrable. The document shows efforts by Epstein's defense to avoid registration and secure an 18-month federal camp sentence.
DOJ-OGR-00021374.jpg
This document is a page from an OPR report analyzing U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It criticizes the reliance on state procedures for the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), noting that the specific state charges selected allowed Epstein to avoid sex offender registration in New Mexico due to age-of-consent laws. It also details that Acosta was aware the Palm Beach Police Department distrusted the State Attorney's Office, yet he proceeded with a plea deal that relied heavily on state authorities.
DOJ-OGR-00021356.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing a chronology of meetings between the US Attorney's Office (USAO) and Jeffrey Epstein's defense team regarding the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It includes a table listing specific dates between February 2007 and January 2008, participants from both sides (including Acosta, Dershowitz, Starr, and Black), and the purpose of each meeting, such as discussing investigation improprieties, the NPA term sheet, and state plea provisions. The text specifically notes Alex Acosta's limited attendance at pre-NPA meetings and mentions a breakfast meeting between Acosta and defense attorney Jay Lefkowitz.
DOJ-OGR-00021293.jpg
This document page describes communications and actions taken in late October 2007 related to a non-prosecution agreement. It details an email from Acosta expressing frustration with negotiations, Sloman's subsequent communication with opposing counsel Lefkowitz that led to an agreement, and the signing of an addendum by Epstein's attorneys. The document also includes an email exchange between prosecutors Villafaña and Sloman discussing the propriety of selecting a private attorney for victims versus a Special Master, and Sloman reassuring Villafaña in the face of criticism from defense counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00021285.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal communications regarding the finalization of Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It highlights efforts by the prosecution team (Villafaña, Acosta) to limit the disclosure of the agreement's terms, specifically regarding financial damages, to the Palm Beach Police Chief and the public. The document outlines the specific provisions of the NPA, including the guilty plea to solicitation of minors, the 30-month recommended sentence structure, and the handling of victim damages.
DOJ-OGR-00021282.jpg
This legal document details communications from Jeffrey Epstein's defense team, specifically Sanchez and Lefkowitz, to prosecutors Acosta and Lourie on September 22-23, 2007. The defense vehemently argues against a sexual offender registration requirement, claiming it was based on a 'misunderstanding' from a September 12 meeting where they were allegedly told by prosecutors Krischer and Belohlavek that the charge was not registrable. The document contains excerpts from emails where the defense calls the registration a 'life sentence' and pleads for reconsideration.
DOJ-OGR-00021254.jpg
This legal document describes a meeting on July 31, 2007, between the USAO and Jeffrey Epstein's defense team to discuss a plea deal. The USAO presented a proposal that included a federal sentencing range of 188 to 235 months, while Epstein's attorneys argued for alternatives like home confinement, citing safety concerns in prison. Prosecutor Villafaña later expressed concerns to the OPR that the defense team could 'manipulate' a state-level sentence and that the USAO would be 'giving up all control.'
DOJ-OGR-00021235.jpg
This legal document details internal discussions and a key meeting related to the federal investigation of Epstein. It describes a June 26, 2007, meeting where Epstein's attorneys, led by Dershowitz, argued for the case to be handled by the state, an argument the USAO team found unpersuasive. Despite internal concerns about the strength of certain aspects of the case, the USAO team left the meeting intending to proceed, but the document concludes by noting that in July 2007, Acosta decided to offer Epstein a two-year state plea deal to resolve the federal investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00021232.jpg
This legal document details internal discussions within a prosecutor's office regarding the Epstein case. It outlines the author's opposition to meeting with the defense, led by Lefcourt, arguing it would undermine the prosecution. The document also reveals significant internal conflict, as prosecutor Villafaña expressed fears to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) about the case's direction and was cautioned by her supervisor about insubordination.
DOJ-OGR-00021231.jpg
This document is a page from an OPR report detailing internal DOJ deliberations in May 2007 regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights a conflict between prosecutors Lourie (who favored meeting with defense) and Villafaña (who strongly opposed it, arguing the case warranted prison time rather than probation negotiations). The text includes details of emails and a draft memo where Villafaña expresses concern that meeting with Epstein's lawyers, including Lefcourt and Dershowitz, would reveal too much prosecution strategy.
DOJ-OGR-00021225.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal deliberations regarding the federal indictment of Jeffrey Epstein in 2007. It describes AUSA Villafaña's 82-page prosecution memorandum dated May 1, 2007, which recommended a 60-count indictment, and the subsequent strategic disagreement by supervisor Lourie, who preferred a narrower strategy focusing on victims with fewer credibility issues. The text also highlights the unusual involvement of the Miami 'front office' in approval decisions typically handled by the West Palm Beach office.
DOJ-OGR-00021224.jpg
This document details internal DOJ conflicts and meetings with Jeffrey Epstein's defense team in early 2007. Prosecutor Villafaña disagreed with her supervisor, Lourie, about meeting defense attorneys Sanchez and Lefcourt, arguing it would reveal government strategy without gaining concessions. On February 1, 2007, the defense presented a 25-page letter attacking victim credibility, denying federal jurisdiction, and claiming violations of the Petite policy.
DOJ-OGR-00003266.jpg
This document details the plea negotiations in September 2007 between the USAO (represented by Villafaña, Acosta, and others) and Epstein's defense team. It outlines the drafting of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) proposing a 20-month jail sentence (reducible to 17 months with 'gain time') and notes a critical meeting on September 12 involving the State Attorney's Office to discuss state charges. The text also reveals internal USAO strategy, including preparing a revised indictment in case negotiations failed.
DOJ-OGR-00003233.jpg
This legal document from April 2021 details events from May 2007 concerning the federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, revealing significant internal disagreement within the U.S. Attorney's Office. Prosecutor Villafaña strongly objected to holding further meetings with Epstein's defense team, led by counsel Lefcourt, fearing it would compromise their strategy, and documented her dissent in a draft email to her supervisors, Matt Menchel and Jeff Sloman. The document highlights the strategic conflicts among prosecutors as they considered how to proceed with the high-profile case.
DOJ-OGR-00003228.jpg
This document contains an excerpt from a DOJ OPR report detailing internal communications regarding the initial federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights emails from prosecutor Lourie to Menchel discussing a 50-page prosecution memo, the strategy to use only 'clean victims' (those without impeachment baggage), and the assertion that the State Attorney's Office intentionally sabotaged their own grand jury case. The document also covers OPR interviews where Menchel recalls this as his introduction to the case, and then-US Attorney Alexander Acosta admits he likely did not read the prosecution memo, relying instead on his senior staff.
DOJ-OGR-00003227.jpg
This document details the internal deliberations within the USAO regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein in 2007. AUSA Villafaña submitted a comprehensive 82-page prosecution memorandum on May 1, 2007, recommending a 60-count indictment for sex trafficking. Supervisor Lourie acknowledged the thoroughness of the work and supported prosecution, but suggested a strategic shift to focus on victims with the highest credibility, while noting that final approval required Miami 'front office' involvement due to the case's profile.
DOJ-OGR-00023194.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing a timeline of meetings between the USAO (including Alexander Acosta) and Jeffrey Epstein's defense team (including Dershowitz, Starr, and Lefkowitz). It covers the period from February 2007 to January 2008, categorizing meetings as 'Pre-NPA' and 'Post-NPA'. The table logs specific participants and topics, including the presentation of the NPA term sheet, discussions of investigation improprieties, and the negotiation of state plea provisions.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026632.jpg
This document is an email printout dated November 1, 2016, forwarded by Jeffrey Epstein (using the alias 'Jeffrey E.' and email 'jeevacation@gmail.com') to himself. The email subject is 'contacts' and contains a raw, unstructured list of names including prominent scientists (Susskind, Dawkins, Gellman), tech figures (Thiel, Hoffman, Sergey), and political figures (Clinton, Kerry, Schumer, Ehud Barak, Prince Andrew). It also contains a line of apparent medical/personal notes regarding cholesterol medication (Crestor), prostate issues, and diet.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026631.jpg
This document is an email sent by Jeffrey Epstein to himself on October 30, 2016, with the subject line 'contacts'. The body of the email contains a list of high-profile names, including prominent scientists (Susskind, Minsky/Edelman context, Gould), tech figures (Hoffman, Sinofsky, Sergey), and politicians (Clinton, Richardson, Mandelson, Ehud, Andrew). It also includes a section seemingly related to health or medication (Crestor, prostatitis, protein, exercise) and obscure codes or abbreviations (LSJ, BBJ).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015067.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a narrative or memoir submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee (stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015067). It details the narrator's involvement as a plaintiff in a 1970 lawsuit challenging New York's abortion laws, their operation of an underground abortion referral service, and their reflections on Dr. Spencer (a provider who died in 1969). The text mentions 'Lefcourt' (likely attorney Gerald Lefcourt) recalling the legal history.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013417.jpg
A printed webpage from The Palm Beach Post (dated 2011, article from 2009) detailing the aftermath of Jeffrey Epstein's plea deal. The article highlights the tension between Police Chief Michael Reiter and State Attorney Barry Krischer, citing a 2006 letter where Reiter called the prosecutor's handling of the case 'highly unusual.' It also quotes attorneys discussing how Epstein's wealth allowed him to avoid federal prosecution through a 'back-room deal' involving high-profile lawyers like Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth Starr.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_030308.jpg
This document summarizes the 2005 police investigation into Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach, detailing allegations from a 14-year-old girl and others who were recruited by an associate, Haley Robson. It highlights conflicts between the Palm Beach police, who sought to arrest Epstein, and the state attorney's office, led by Mr. Krischer, which delayed proceedings. The defense, including lawyers Lefcourt and Dershowitz, actively worked to discredit the accusers.
Arguments for state handling of Epstein case
A letter from Epstein's attorney Lefcourt containing arguments that were echoed by Dershowitz in the June 26, 2007 meeting, suggesting the case should be handled by the state.
Arguments for state handling of Epstein case
A letter from Epstein's attorney Lefcourt containing arguments that were echoed by Dershowitz in the June 26, 2007 meeting, suggesting the case should be handled by the state.
Policy reasons against prosecuting Epstein
Lefcourt's letter, part of the indictment package, raised arguments against the federal prosecution of Epstein.
Revised NPA
Sent her version of the revised NPA.
Clarification
Clarified no promise to call before filing charges; suggested presenting to Menchel.
Request for meeting
Defense counsel Lefcourt sent a letter via email to 'confirm' that Epstein's attorneys would be given an opportunity to meet with Lourie before a final charging decision was made.
Clarification on meeting
Lourie clarified he had not promised to call Epstein's counsel before filing charges and suggested they make their next presentation to Menchel.
Letter attachment
Letter to confirm Epstein's attorneys would get a meeting before final charging decision.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity