A (0:00)

What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to pick up right where we left off with the Marie Vilafana emails with the other prosecutors down in Florida and with Jeffrey Epstein's lawyers as they try to hammer out the plea deal. Email sent on September 17, 2007 by Rolando Garcia to Marie Vilafana. Marie, Marie, where are we in the plea negotiation? The next email we have was sent by Marie Vilafana to Alex Acosta, Andrew Laurie, Rolando Garcia and CeCe to Karen Atkinson and John McMillan. Hi all. I think that we may be near the end of our negotiation with Mr. Epstein and not because we have reached the resolution. As I mentioned yesterday, I spent about 12 hours over the weekend drafting informations, changing plea agreements and writing factual proffers. I was supposed to receive a draft agreement from them yesterday, which never arrived. At that time, they were leaning towards pleading only to stay charges and doing all of the time in state custody. Late last night I talked to Jay Lefkowitz who asked about Epstein pleading to two 12 month federal charges with half of his jail time being spent in home confinement pursuant to the guidelines. I told him that I had no objection to that approach, but in the interest of full disclosure, I did not believe that Mr. Epstein would be eligible because he will not be Zone A or B. This morning Jay called and said that I was correct, but if we could get Mr. Epstein down to 14 months, then he thought that he'd be eligible. My response? Have him plead to two separate informations. On the first one, he gets 12 months imprisonment. On the second, he gets 12 months with six served in home confinement to run consecutively. I just received an email asking if Mr. Epstein could do 12 months imprisonment instead. As you can see, Mr. Epstein is having second thoughts about doing jail time. I would like to send Jay an email stating that if we do not have a signed agreement by tomorrow at 5, negotiations will end. I've selected tomorrow at 5 because it gives them enough time to really negotiate and an agreement if they're really serious about it. And if not, it gives me one more day before Jewish holiday to get witnesses lined up for Tuesday's grand jury appearance. Then I plan to present the indictment and it gives the office sufficient time to review the indictment package. Do you concur? Next email from Marie Vilafana to Rolando Garcia, Alex Acosta, Andrew Laurie and Karen Atkinson and John McMillan were cc'd. Hi all. I just spoke with Jay Lefkowitz. He reports that as of now, they are leaning back towards pleading only the state charges with a non prosecution agreement. They're doing some legal research and talking with the state and Jay thinks that they should have a proposed agreement by late tonight or early tomorrow morning. I'm going to send them our last version of the non prosecution agreement so that he has a template to work from. Jay has my number in case I need to go home early and any questions come up. As soon as I know something, I'll pass it along. Next message was from Alex Acosta to Marie Vilafana, Rolando Garcia and Andrew Laurie with Karen Atkinson and John McMillan cc'd. Please make sure that they know it's only a draft and that we still need approved final. The form and language may need polishing. Next email from Marie Vilafana to Alex Acosta. Absolutely. There were a lot of problems with our last attempt. They tried to reopen all the loopholes that I had sewn shut. Next email from Jay Lefkowitz to Marie Vilafana. Marie, please look this over and see if we can identify any issues that we need to discuss in greater detail. Since you can't go to only one count of obstruction, but 18 would become about 15 with gang time, I've made a proposal of a total of 24 month sentence based on two informations. This would include a period of home detention. We can then follow with an alternative to what we discussed just now that might plead to one count of 1512 serve 12 months plus supervised release which would be one year of home detention if we can make that work, followed by two years of probation in the state on the state charges with the first six months being community control. Next email from Marie Vilafana to Andrew Lori and Rolando Garcia with Karen Atkinson cced. Andy and Rolando, please review below so you understand my frustration. This document is redacted different from what Jay just told Andy they would agree to. He has it written as 16 months imprisonment followed by eight months of federal supervised release. He wants us to recommend an improper calculation of the guidelines and he wants to waive the PSI so he can keep all the information confidential. I've already told Jay that the PSI language and other language in his agreement was unacceptable to our office. I'll send back a plea agreement that that reads consistent with what Jay represented to Andy. But I don't believe that this will be resolved by Tuesday unless they come down here and we have a group contract writing session with the State Attorney's office and the decision makers. Next email was sent by Marie Vilafana to Andrew Lowry and Rolando Garcia with Karen Atkinson cc'd. He also removed any promise to plead to a registerable offense and the promise related to the girl's damages claims. Next email from Marie Vilafana to Jay Lefkowitz. Hi Jay. I was hoping there would be things for me to read this morning, but I'll try to remain patient. I believe that there are only two types of agreements that would apply to this case. One, a plea agreement to a federal charge or charges and two, a non prosecution agreement which is really a deferred prosecution agreement because the defendant agrees that if he violates the agreement the US can prosecute him. A plea agreement is part of the court file. It's not accessible online via pacer, but someone can go to the clerk's office and obtain a copy. A non prosecution agreement would not be made public or filed with the court, but it would remain part of the case file. It probably would be subject to a Freedom of Information access request, but is not something that we would distribute without compulsory process on the obstruction charges. Many of the facts I included in that first proffer were hypothesized based upon our discussions and the agent's observations of Ms. Groff. We still need the interviewer to confirm the accuracy of those facts. And on a second account we could rely on the incident where Mr. Epstein's private investigators followed Redacted's father forcing him off the road. Or if there is something more recent related to any grand jury subpoenas, we could consider that. Hope this helps. Marie Villefana. The next email that was sent was sent by Marie Vilafana and it was sent to Andrew Laurie and cc'd Rolando Garcia. I just got their Redline version. I'll forward it to you. Here are the issues that Rolando and I specifically discussed with them and rejected that that they have reinserted into the agreement. 1. We agreed to recommend that no PSI be prepared. 2, they have converted it into an ABA plea as though we wouldn't notice. 3, they want us to agree the incorrect calculation of the guidelines. Four, Instead of agreeing that the girls can sue Epstein, they cannot sue him and instead are bound to apply to a trust administered by the state court. Jay and I have addressed this at least three times and and it keeps appearing in his versions. 5. They change the state charge that he has to plead guilty to a non registrable offense and that he doesn't have to plead to the charge until after he finished serving his federal sentence. Six, they want us to not oppose the request for a prison camp designation 7. They have re added paragraph 17 through 19, all of which are addressed by paragraph 2. There are other problems too, but. But these are the highlights. This is not a good faith negotiation. Next email sent by Marie Vilafana to Andrew Laurie and Rolando Garcia. We're still waiting for a red line of the agreement that they seemed happy with yesterday. Barry and Lana and Epstein's attorneys are coming to our office on Monday to finalize everything with the plan of getting them at least arraigned on Monday afternoon. They tried to drag it into Tuesday and and I said no. Next email from Andrew Laurie to Marie Vilafana. Can you send me a copy of the last thing you sent them? And this was sent on September 19th. Next email by Marie Vilafana to Andrew Laurie. FYI, the Palm Beach Post reported the whole deal in today's paper and claimed to have a federal source and a spy in Epstein's camp. Next email from Jay Lefkowitz to Marie Vilafana. Good job. A few thoughts. I would eliminate the first sentence of paragraph two. Is there another way to deal with the issue in paragraph 3? Without this in the plea agreement? Do we need paragraph 10? Isn't paragraph 11 sufficient? Without 10, is it our place to include paragraph 13 in this agreement? I think it belongs in the state agreement and it looks out of place here. I think you should include Roy or another member of the Florida Bar on the plea agreement so we are not slowed down at the last minute by pro hawk stuff. The next email we have is from Marie Vilafana to Andrew Laurie and Rolando Garcia with Karen Atkinson as the cc. Andy and Rolanda, this is my proposed response below. I know that you can keep saying he's going to plead and and he will plead if we cave on everything, but I really don't think that Mr. Epstein is going to engage in serious negotiations until he sees the indictment and shows up in mad court, preferably in flip flops. In reviewing the indictment package, if you would like to maintain flexibility for the future, we could indict Mr. Epstein just on count one, the conspiracy charge. And if he won't plead to five years at that time, supersede with the remaining counts and just go to trial. But we gave them an initial deadline of early August with a 24 month sentence. We are now seven weeks later and we are just spinning our wheels. J the same problems that I emailed you about on Sunday and discussed yesterday with you and Rolando and that you discussed with Andy are still here. Paragraphs 4, 7, 8, 9, 11 have specifically been discussed and rejected. Paragraph 17 and 19 have been addressed in paragraph 2 and will not be repeated. You've removed our paragraph 4 regarding the application of the Sentencing Guidelines and 18 appeal waiver, both of which are specifically required by the Office's Appellate Division. You have replaced Mr. Epstein's plea to a registrable offense to one that does not require registration. And you have again delayed the plea until after Mr. Epstein completes his federal prison sentence. Rolando and I specifically told you that was unacceptable. And Barry Krisher also informed us that he will not keep his case open for that period. You also have inserted that this is a Rule 11C1C plea, which binds the judge, which, you know, we have specifically rejected. There are other smaller changes that the office probably cannot agree to. But the bigger issues are these. If you or your client insists on these, there can be no plea agreement. Alright, folks, we're gonna wrap up right here. And in the next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.