Acosta
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Villafaña
|
Supervisor subordinate alleged |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Informed by informs |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Communicated email |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Starr
|
Submitted documents to |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Submitted documents to |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Corresponded objected |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Corresponded replied |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Starr
|
Informed by letter |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Reporter supervisor |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Correspondent recipient |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Professional meeting correspondence |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
OPR
|
Reported to |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Sigal Mandelker
|
Communicated shared language |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Collaborated phone conversation |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-01-01 | N/A | Justice Department launched a probe into professional misconduct by prosecutors. | Washington D.C. | View |
| 2020-03-25 | N/A | Bail denied in US v. Acosta | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2019-07-19 | Resignation | Acosta resigned as U.S. Secretary of Labor. | N/A | View |
| 2019-07-12 | Resignation | Acosta submitted his resignation to the President. | N/A | View |
| 2019-07-10 | Press conference | Acosta held a televised press conference to defend his actions regarding the Epstein NPA. | N/A | View |
| 2017-04-01 | Appointment | Acosta became the U.S. Secretary of Labor. | N/A | View |
| 2017-01-01 | N/A | Acosta appointed as U.S. Secretary of Labor. | Washington D.C. (implied) | View |
| 2016-03-29 | Court ruling | In United States v. Acosta, the court denied the Government's detention application and granted t... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2011-01-01 | Public statement | Acosta issued a public statement explaining the federal role in the Epstein case. | N/A | View |
| 2009-06-01 | Career transition | Acosta left the USAO and became the Dean of the Florida International University College of Law. | N/A | View |
| 2008-12-08 | N/A | Acosta's recusal formally approved by the Department. | N/A | View |
| 2008-12-01 | Recusal | Acosta was formally recused from the Epstein matter, and Sloman became the senior USAO official s... | N/A | View |
| 2008-11-26 | N/A | USAO advised Department of Justice about Acosta's recusal from Epstein-related matters due to pot... | N/A | View |
| 2008-11-26 | N/A | Acosta recused from Epstein case due to employment talks with Kirkland & Ellis. | USAO | View |
| 2008-06-27 | N/A | Starr sends concluding email to Acosta regarding the Epstein matter. | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-03 | N/A | Sloman sent a lengthy letter to the Deputy Attorney General detailing negotiations with Epstein's... | N/A | View |
| 2008-05-28 | Meeting | Attorney General Mukasey had lunch at the USAO with Acosta and other senior managers for unrelate... | Miami | View |
| 2008-05-28 | N/A | Acosta presentation to DAG regarding case delays. | Unknown | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | CEOS Review | Unknown | View |
| 2008-05-19 | Meeting request | Lefkowitz contacted Acosta to request a meeting to discuss the Epstein case. | N/A | View |
| 2008-05-01 | N/A | USAO's Professional Responsibility Officer consulted with the Department's counterpart regarding ... | Harvard Law School (potenti... | View |
| 2008-04-18 | Complaint | Acosta and Sloman received a citizen complaint from an attorney regarding a perceived violation o... | N/A | View |
| 2008-03-06 | Communication | Acosta alerted Sloman and Oosterbaan that Starr and Lefkowitz had called him to express concern a... | N/A | View |
| 2008-02-01 | N/A | Villafaña becomes aware of notification requirement and prepares written notification. | N/A | View |
| 2008-01-07 | Meeting | Acosta and Sloman met with defense attorney Sanchez, who alleged misconduct by the USAO's media s... | N/A | View |
EFTA00033675.pdf
This document contains the Daily Lieutenant's Log for the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York for Thursday, August 15, 2019. It details shift activities, sensitive inmate information (including suicide watches), chronological events such as counts, alarms, and inmate movements, as well as operational metrics like counts and equipment checks across three shifts (Morning Watch, Day Watch, Evening Watch).
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.
EFTA00013916.pdf
This document is an email chain from May 2008 between FBI agents and USAFLS attorneys discussing the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. Key topics include frustration over delays caused by Epstein's defense team, the presentation of arguments to the Deputy Attorney General (DAG) by Acosta to prevent further stalling, and the urgency created by expiring statutes of limitations and grand jury terms. The emails reveal that investigators had identified over 20 known child victims, one of whom confirmed telling Epstein she was 14 or 15, to which he allegedly replied he did not care about age. The correspondence also mentions a plea deal reduction from 2 years to 18 months and concerns about private investigators harassing victims.
EFTA00013701.pdf
This document is an email chain from November 2007 involving Jay Lefkowitz (Kirkland & Ellis) and officials at the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAFLS), including Alexander Acosta (CC'd). Lefkowitz sends a response to a letter to 'Jeff'. The subsequent internal government emails discuss a Palm Beach Post article, with one official noting they 'especially like the part about how the feds were overreaching the whole time,' likely referencing public perception or a quote in the article.
DOJ-OGR-00000228.tif
This document outlines legal proceedings related to Epstein and a petitioner. It details the terms of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein, his 2008 guilty plea in Florida for two offenses, and his subsequent incarceration. The document also describes a 2019 indictment of Epstein for sex trafficking minors by the Southern District of New York and a 2020 indictment of a petitioner for offenses related to a scheme with Epstein, including facilitating sexual activity by minors and perjury.
DOJ-OGR-00000192.tif
This document excerpt, labeled 129a and part of a DOJ report, details OPR's criticism of Acosta's decision to approve a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and a specific provision within it. The criticism stems from Acosta's alleged failure to consider the potential consequences of the provision and to whom it would apply. The document also includes a reference to Section IV of the Part.
DOJ-OGR-00000190.tif
This document discusses the legal proceedings and agreements related to Epstein, detailing how his sentencing was handled and reduced. It highlights Acosta's role in approving the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and references an email exchange between the State Attorney and Villafaña regarding the resolution of the case. The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) concluded that the agreement allowed Epstein to resolve a federal investigation for an 18-month state sentence.
DOJ-OGR-00000164.tif
This document excerpt details key events in the Jeffrey Epstein case, including his arrest on July 6, 2019, his detention in the Metropolitan Correctional Center, and his death on August 10, 2019. It also covers the controversy surrounding Acosta's handling of the Epstein investigation, leading to his resignation as Secretary of Labor on July 12, 2019, following media and Congressional scrutiny.
DOJ-OGR-00023203.tif
This document is an excerpt from an OPR report analyzing the conduct of prosecutor Villafaña during the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. It concludes that Villafaña consistently advocated for Epstein's prosecution and victims' interests, despite a public narrative suggesting collusion with defense counsel. The report details Villafaña's efforts to protect victims' anonymity, expand the case scope, and draft victim notification letters, while refuting claims that she was 'soft on Epstein' based on witness statements and email context.
DOJ-OGR-00023198.tif
This document analyzes the circumstances surrounding a breakfast meeting between Acosta and Epstein's defense counsel, Jay Lefkowitz, on October 12, 2007, and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed on September 24, 2007. OPR concludes that Acosta did not make significant concessions during the breakfast meeting, as the key provisions of the NPA, including Epstein's 18-month sentence and sexual offender registration, were established prior to the meeting and not materially altered thereafter. The document also references a Miami Herald article critical of Acosta's involvement.
DOJ-OGR-00023190.tif
This document details ethical considerations and actions taken by various individuals involved in the Epstein case, particularly focusing on potential conflicts of interest for USAO staff. It highlights discussions and decisions made by Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Acosta regarding their relationships with Epstein's attorneys and their professional responsibilities. The document also mentions Acosta's recusal from the case due to potential employment with Kirkland & Ellis and a separate consultation regarding a possible professorship at Harvard while Dershowitz represented Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00023184.tif
This document is an excerpt from a report detailing witness challenges and concerns surrounding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. It includes recollections from individuals like Lourie, Menchel, Sloman, and Acosta regarding the viability of a federal prosecution, victim reluctance to testify, evidentiary hurdles, and the eventual negotiated result that led to Epstein serving time and registering as a sexual offender.
DOJ-OGR-00023180.tif
This document, an excerpt from a report, discusses OPR's investigation into whether Epstein's status, wealth, or associations improperly influenced the outcome of his case. It concludes that OPR found no evidence of such influence, despite news reports in 2006 identifying Epstein as wealthy and connected to prominent figures like William Clinton, Donald Trump, and Kevin Spacey. The report notes that FBI personnel initially unfamiliar with Epstein later became aware of his connections, including those who had been on his plane, and that his legal team's mention of Clinton in pre-NPA letters was contextual.
DOJ-OGR-00023175.tif
This document is an excerpt from a report by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) analyzing former U.S. Attorney Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It details OPR's findings that Acosta's decision to approve a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) requiring Epstein to plead guilty to state charges, resulting in an 18-month sentence, did not violate any clear and unambiguous standards or constitute professional misconduct, despite OPR criticizing certain decisions made during the investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00023171.tif
This document, an excerpt from an analysis report (Chapter Two, Part Three), discusses the public and media scrutiny following the Miami Herald's November 2018 report on the handling of the Epstein investigation. It focuses on the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), allegations of a 'sweetheart deal' by Acosta and the USAO due to improper influences, and OPR's investigation into these matters, concluding that Acosta reviewed and approved the NPA terms and is accountable for it. The report also mentions other individuals (Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Villafaña) involved in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00023153.tif
This document details events in November 2008 concerning Jeffrey Epstein's work release, which USAO official Villafaña believed breached his non-prosecution agreement (NPA). Villafaña communicated her concerns to defense attorney Black and other officials, leading to a notice of NPA violation and the recusal of Acosta from the case. The document highlights the ongoing dispute regarding the terms of Epstein's incarceration and the perceived special treatment he received.
DOJ-OGR-00023148.tif
This document details events surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's plea and sentencing from June 2008 to June 2009, including communications between various officials regarding the handling of his case and concerns about the terms of his plea agreement. It highlights discrepancies and objections raised by Villafaña regarding Epstein's proposed custody arrangements, suggesting a potential violation of the agreement's spirit.
DOJ-OGR-00023147.tif
This document details the internal review and communications surrounding the resolution of the Epstein case, particularly focusing on the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It highlights disagreements and varying interpretations among legal officials regarding Epstein's claims, the validity of the NPA, and the scope of federal involvement, including a reaction from Villafaña to the proposed 90-day jail term and Deputy Attorney General Filip's perspective on Epstein's arguments.
DOJ-OGR-00023144.tif
This document details a March 12, 2008 meeting involving Jeffrey Epstein's defense team (Starr, Lefkowitz, Weinberg) and Department of Justice representatives (Oosterbaan, Mandelker, CEOS Deputy Chief) concerning the Epstein case. It outlines concerns raised by the defense regarding USAO actions, including communication issues with state authorities and a purported relationship between USAO official Sloman and a law firm representing victims. The document also mentions Sloman's prior work in private practice specializing in sexual abuse claims.
DOJ-OGR-00023141.tif
This document details the Department's review of the Epstein case from February to June 2008, initiated by Epstein's defense attorneys. It highlights internal discussions and notifications within the US justice system, including a February 28, 2008, notification from USAO Criminal Division Chief Senior to the Civil Rights Division regarding an ongoing child exploitation investigation involving Epstein. The notification, prepared by Villafaña and edited by Sloman, assessed the case as not being of "national interest" and anticipated charges under specific U.S. Code sections.
DOJ-OGR-00023138.tif
This document details efforts by Acosta to revise the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with language concerning monetary damages for victims of Jeffrey Epstein, which was ultimately rejected by the defense. It highlights disagreements and frustrations between prosecutors and defense counsel regarding the interpretation and implementation of the Section 2255 provision, particularly concerning victim notification and Epstein's alleged delays in his guilty plea.
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-00023136.tif
This document details the efforts of Jeffrey Epstein's defense team in December 2007 to challenge the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and the federal investigation. It describes how defense counsel Starr and Lefkowitz sent letters and 'ethics opinions' to Acosta, criticizing the investigation and accusing an individual named Villafaña of improper conduct and federal overreaching, while Epstein reaffirmed his acceptance of the NPA.
DOJ-OGR-00023135.tif
This document excerpt details concerns raised by Acosta regarding the handling of Jeffrey Epstein's case, specifically about challenges to the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and the defense team's tactics. Acosta's letter expresses frustration over the lack of finality and issues being appealed to Department Headquarters, while also setting a deadline of December 7, 2007, for a decision on the Agreement. It also describes Acosta's discussions with OPR and a subsequent response to Acosta from Starr and Lefkowitz.
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
This document details communications and events surrounding a legal agreement, likely related to Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights disagreements over gag order provisions, the selection of a special master, and concerns raised by USAO representative Villafaña regarding the selection of a private attorney and defense attacks. The document mentions the signing of an NPA addendum by Epstein and his attorneys on October 29, 2007.
Disclosure of NPA
Acosta proposed a phone call to discuss 'about who we can tell and how much' regarding the NPA. OPR was unable to determine if the call took place.
[s]mall edits to "final" NPA
Acosta sent 'small edits' to the final NPA, including language changes regarding Epstein's guilty plea and sentencing. He expressed discomfort with requiring the State Attorney to enter a joint sentencing recommendation or the State court to stick to a timeline. He substituted language requiring Epstein alone to make a binding sentencing recommendation and use 'best efforts' for plea and sentencing.
Edits to the NPA
Acosta sent '[s]mall edits' to the 'final' NPA shortly after midnight, explaining he was not comfortable with language requiring the State Attorney's Office or state court to take certain actions.
Instruction to restore reference
Acosta instructed Villafaña to restore a reference to Epstein's wish 'to reach a global resolution of his state and federal criminal liabilities.'
Follow up on Epstein plea requirement
Lefkowitz emailed Acosta (cc: Sloman, Lourie, Villafaña) at 10:26 p.m. to follow up on a conversation and again ask to reconsider the registration requirement, citing a 'misunderstanding' from the September 12, 2007 meeting.
Follow up on conversation Friday, reconsideration of regi...
Lefkowitz emailed Acosta, with copies to Sloman, Lourie, and Villafaña, to follow up on their Friday conversation. He asked Acosta to reconsider the requirement that Epstein plead to a registrable offense, stating there had been a 'misunderstanding' at the September 12, 2007 meeting. He explained that Krischer and Belohlavek initially told them solicitation of a minor was not a registrable offense, but it turned out to be. He suggested Epstein enter two pleas: one to the Indictment and a second to a non-registrable charge.
Epstein's registrable offense
Acosta spoke with Lefkowitz by phone regarding Epstein needing to plead to a registrable offense.
Reaching out to Acosta
Lourie reached out to Acosta for a phone conversation after receiving emails from Sanchez.
Epstein's plea to a registrable offense
Acosta spoke with Lefkowitz by phone regarding the need for Epstein to plead to a registrable offense.
Filing charges against Mr. Epstein
Villafaña informed Acosta that charges would likely be filed against Mr. Epstein on Tuesday, and that the charging package was being reviewed by the West Palm Beach manager, asking if the Miami office needed to review it.
Epstein's sexual offender registration
Villafaña told OPR that Acosta called Krischer to tell him that the sexual offender registration was a non-negotiable term. This is supported by Villafaña's contemporaneous response to Krischer: 'I think Alex is calling you now.'
Forwarded email from Sanchez
Sloman, while on vacation, forwarded Sanchez's email to Acosta, who replied, 'Enjo[y] vacation. Working with [M]arie on this.'
Epstein's motive regarding registration
Lourie emailed Acosta about Epstein's desire to avoid sexual offender registration.
Response to instruction
'Ok will do.' Forwarded latest version of USAO draft 'hybrid' plea agreement.
Reply to update
Instructed to call him, say tactics are bad faith, but 'Try to work it out.' Stated it is worth trying to overcome annoying tactics.
Update on negotiations
Agreed with Marie (Villafaña), stated Jay's draft is 'out of left field', suggested rejecting counter offer and moving to case.
FW: Victim Consultation
Forwarded with note 'fyi'.
Fwd: [Villafaña's email]
Sloman forwarded Villafaña's email to Acosta with a note stating, "fyi."
Meeting with Epstein's attorneys
Acosta wrote to Sloman about his concern that Epstein's attorneys would go to DC on grounds of a "process foul" and proposed meeting with them to head this off.
Epstein case strategy
Acosta replied to Sloman, indicating that Epstein's attorneys were considering elevating their objections to DC and that they should strategize but not change their positions.
Rationale for meeting with defense
Acosta explained that the case would end up at 'the Department' anyway and that it was better to meet with the defense team to keep the matter local.
Plan for meeting with defense
Acosta explained his intent to meet with the defense, with Oosterbaan participating, 'to discuss general legal policy only'.
Resignation
Stating he would be leaving USAO effective August 6, 2007.
Emails related to the Epstein investigation
A significant gap was discovered in Acosta's email inbox from May 26, 2007, through April 2, 2008. OPR investigated this gap and concluded it was most likely the result of a technological error, not an intentional act to conceal evidence.
Data gap in email records
OPR identified a data gap in Acosta's email inbox from May 26, 2007, through November 2, 2008.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity