Sloman
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Belohlavek
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
A victim's attorney
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
West Palm Beach FBI squad supervisor
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Roy Black
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Superior subordinate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sanchez
|
Defense prosecution negotiation |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Herald
|
Subject of reporting critic |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Senior team |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Professional subordinate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Supervisor subordinate |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Business associate |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Supervised by |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Senior decision maker |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Black
|
Communicated |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Instructor instructed |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Informed |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Discussed document |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Robert Senior
|
Supervisor subordinate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Collaborated phone conversation |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
State Attorney's Office
|
Distrust |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Communicated proposed addendum |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
US v. Epstein Case
|
Involved party |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Correspondent |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-08-07 | Planning | Acosta wrote to Sloman proposing a meeting with Epstein's attorneys to prevent them from escalati... | N/A | View |
| 2007-08-06 | Communication | Sloman emailed Acosta about a call from Kirkland & Ellis, and Acosta replied with strategic conce... | N/A | View |
| 2007-08-03 | N/A | Menchel raised concern about victims exaggerating stories for damages from Epstein during a discu... | N/A | 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 | Meeting | Sloman, Menchel, Lourie, Villafaña, and FBI agents meet with Epstein’s counsel to propose two-yea... | 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 |
| 2007-07-26 | N/A | Meeting in Miami regarding the Epstein case direction. | Miami | View |
| 2007-07-18 | Communication/endorsement | CEOS Chief Oosterbaan emailed Sloman, Menchel, and Lourie, endorsing Villafaña’s legal analysis a... | N/A | View |
| 2007-07-03 | Communication | Villafaña emailed colleagues about her intent to initiate plea discussions with Sanchez. | N/A | View |
| 2007-06-26 | Meeting | Sloman, Menchel, Lourie, Villafaña, and FBI meet with Epstein’s counsel. | N/A | View |
| 2007-06-26 | N/A | Meeting: Defense presents legal issues, investigation improprieties, and federal jurisdiction issues | 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 |
| 2007-05-23 | Communication | Villafaña drafted an email to Sloman and Menchel expressing her disagreement with meeting defense... | N/A | View |
| 2007-05-15 | Planned law enforcement action | The FBI planned to arrest Epstein and hold a press conference, but the plan was halted by Miami m... | N/A | View |
| 2007-05-01 | Meeting request | Defense attorneys requested a meeting with higher-level supervisors Menchel and Sloman to present... | N/A | View |
| 2007-01-01 | N/A | A victim gave a video-recorded interview to the FBI favorable to Epstein. Villafaña told OPR she ... | N/A | View |
| 2007-01-01 | Absence | Sloman was on vacation in the week preceding the signing of the NPA. | N/A | View |
| 2006-10-02 | Appointment | Sloman becomes First Assistant United States Attorney; Menchel becomes Criminal Chief. | N/A | View |
| 2006-07-24 | Legal action | The State Attorney's Office charged and arrested Epstein. The FBI in West Palm Beach formally ope... | West Palm Beach | View |
| 2006-07-14 | Briefing | Villafaña first briefing to Acosta and Sloman. | N/A | View |
| 2001-01-01 | Career change | Sloman briefly left the USAO to go into private practice with a Miami attorney specializing in se... | Miami | View |
EFTA00013527.pdf
An internal email from an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of Florida (USAFLS) dated November 13, 2007. The email discusses a 'Revised Epstein Letter' and includes an attachment named '071113_Sloman_Ltr_to_Lefkowitz_v2.wpd,' suggesting correspondence between a government official (Sloman) and defense counsel (Lefkowitz). The sender notes a change regarding the 'naming of counsel.'
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-00023189.tif
This document discusses the legal defense strategies employed by Jeffrey Epstein's extensive team of attorneys, highlighting their ability to secure concessions despite initial USAO requirements. It details how prominent lawyers like Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr influenced prosecutor Alex Acosta, and addresses assertions from individuals like Menchel, Sloman, and Lourie that their relationships with Epstein's counsel did not affect their actions, while noting the significant financial investment in Epstein's defense.
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-00023156.tif
This document details events surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's compliance with his home detention and supervision terms between 2009 and 2010. It highlights his alleged violations, efforts to transfer his supervision to the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the USAO's opposition to these requests, ultimately concluding with Epstein completing his sentence in Florida on July 21, 2010. The text also addresses the veracity of claims about Epstein's cooperation in the Bear Stearns case, which officials in the Eastern District of New York denied.
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-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.
DOJ-OGR-00023129.tif
This document details negotiations and communications surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's guilty plea and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) addendum in late 2007. It highlights disagreements and strategies among prosecutors (Acosta, Sloman, Villafaña, Lourie) and defense counsel (Lefkowitz), including the postponement of Epstein's plea and concerns about Epstein's alleged attempts to discredit victims and influence the legal process. The text also includes Acosta's perspective on not dictating to the state attorney's office.
DOJ-OGR-00023127.tif
This document details discussions and events surrounding the settlement process for victims related to Epstein. It highlights disagreements between Lefkowitz and Villafaña regarding victim communication and legal procedures, and records meetings and email exchanges between Acosta, Sloman, and Lefkowitz concerning an addendum to a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and a breakfast meeting in West Palm Beach in October 2007.
DOJ-OGR-00023122.tif
This document details the finalization and signing of Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) on September 24, 2007. It highlights the edits made by Acosta, including changes to Epstein's plea and sentencing requirements, and communications between various parties like Villafaña, Lourie, and Lefkowitz regarding the agreement's language and confidentiality. The document also notes the USAO's duty to redact protected information before disclosure.
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-00023094.tif
This document details changes made by Menchel to a draft letter by Villafaña regarding Jeffrey Epstein's potential plea deal, focusing on the shift from a federal plea to a state imprisonment term. It highlights the involvement of several individuals including Acosta, Sloman, and Lourie in discussions and decisions surrounding the Rule 11(c) plea, with an email from Villafaña to Sloman on September 6, 2007, suggesting Acosta's ultimate decision to nix the federal plea.
DOJ-OGR-00023325.tif
This document is a review of documents obtained by OPR from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAO), the FBI, and other Department components related to the Epstein investigation and the CVRA litigation. It details the types of records reviewed, including emails, correspondence, and investigative materials, and notes a data gap in Acosta's email records.
History of negotiations with Epstein's counsel, NPA, Epst...
A lengthy letter recounting in detail the history of negotiations with Epstein's counsel culminating in the NPA, and addressing Epstein's claims of professional misconduct. Included prosecution memorandum, proposed charging documents, NPA with addendum, and Acosta's December 19, 2007 letter to Sanchez.
Deadline Postponement
Notified that the plea deadline was postponed pending DOJ review.
Communication protocol and NPA deadline
Stated Acosta would not respond personally; set June 2 deadline for NPA compliance.
Fwd: CEOS review of the Epstein matter
Sloman forwarded his email to Lefkowitz to Villafaña, who responded by questioning why Epstein would be allowed to keep his deal after the discovery of 6 new girls.
CEOS review of the Epstein matter
Sloman informed Lefkowitz that CEOS was ready to proceed with the review and outlined the consequences depending on CEOS's decision regarding federal prosecution of Mr. Epstein.
Written notification requirement
Discussed the notification prepared by Villafaña.
Civil litigation against Epstein and state's investigation
Attorney planned to file civil litigation, expressed frustration with state's investigation, asked about USAO filing criminal charges. Sloman declined to answer.
Postponement of Epstein's plea hearing
Sloman reported that Assistant State Attorney Belohlavek confirmed the plea hearing was postponed because the facts 'did not fit the proposed state charge,' a reason given by Epstein's attorney Goldberger.
Postponement of Epstein's plea hearing
Sloman reported that Assistant State Attorney Belohlavek confirmed the plea hearing was postponed because the facts 'did not fit the proposed state charge,' a reason given by Epstein's attorney Goldberger.
Plea hearing postponement
Confirmed plea hearing postponed because facts did not fit proposed state charge
Report on call with Belohlavek
Reporting on conversation with Belohlavek regarding Goldberger and state charges
N/A
Asked if there was anything she or agents should be doing; mentioned 'Catch 22' regarding victim notification and unrelated OPR investigations.
Hearing postponement
Asked whether to put off a September 12, 2007 hearing; Sloman told her to do so.
Unknown
Advising of Jan 4 plea hearing and requesting USAO 'hold off' sending victim letters.
Instruction to hold victim notification letter
Sloman responded to Villafaña's request by instructing her to 'Hold the letter.'
Epstein plea hearing and victim notification
Sanchez advised Sloman of Epstein's plea hearing date (Jan 4, 2008) and requested the USAO 'hold off' sending victim notification letters until further discussion.
Hold the letter
Instruction to hold notification to victims about state court plea hearing
Unknown
Instruction to 'Hold the letter.'
Complaint about victim notification
Complaining about plan to notify victims about § 2255 provision
Confirmation of Epstein's plea agreement terms
Sloman requested confirmation that Epstein would abide by the agreement for an 18-month sentence of continuous confinement in the county jail.
Concern about cross-examination
Villafaña expressed concern that if charges were filed, cross-examination would focus on the government telling victims they were entitled to damages upon conviction.
Complaint about private investigators
Sloman complained to Lefkowitz that private investigators for Epstein were contacting victims about financial settlements.
Continuous Confinement
Sloman argued NPA required continuous confinement; warned USAO would investigate if exception was granted.
Work Release Eligibility
Krischer stated Epstein was eligible for work release because registration hadn't taken place.
Correspondence restricting USAO communication
Sloman noted to Lefkowitz, "Your recent correspondence attempting to restrict our Office from communicating with the State Attorney's Office . . . raises concern."
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity