Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-24804House OversightOther

Kavanaugh‑Era DOJ Letter from Kenneth Starr’s Firm Requests Review of Federal Prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein

The fax shows senior former counsel (Kenneth Starr) and a DOJ Deputy Attorney General (Mark Filip) being asked to intervene in a federal case against Jeffrey Epstein, citing political pressure tied to Letter signed by Kenneth W. Starr (former counsel) on behalf of Epstein’s defense. Requests Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip to review a proposed federal prosecution. Alleges that the USAO in Miami

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #019221
Pages
3
Persons
7
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The fax shows senior former counsel (Kenneth Starr) and a DOJ Deputy Attorney General (Mark Filip) being asked to intervene in a federal case against Jeffrey Epstein, citing political pressure tied to Letter signed by Kenneth W. Starr (former counsel) on behalf of Epstein’s defense. Requests Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip to review a proposed federal prosecution. Alleges that the USAO in Miami

Persons Referenced (7)

Jay Lefkowitz

...nt. On Monday, May 19, 2008, First Assistant Jeffrey Sloman of the USAO responded to an email from Jay Lefkowitz informing U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta that we would be seeking your Office's review. Mr. Sloman's le...

Jeffrey H. Sloman

...m Jay Lefkowitz informing U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta that we would be seeking your Office's review. Mr. Sloman's letter, which imposed a deadline of June 2, 2008 to comply with all the terms of the current Non...

Mark Filip

...lantic Building 950 F Street, NW Washington. DC 20004-1404 VIA FACSIMILE CONFIDENTIAL Honorable Mark Filip Office of the Deputy Attorney General United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenu...

Jeffrey Epstein

...that your Office conduct an independent review of the proposed federal prosecution of our client, Jeffrey Epstein. The dual reasons for our request that you review this matter are (i) the bedrock need for integri...

Bill Clinton

...ho entered the public arena only by virtue of his close personal association with former President Bill Clinton. There is little doubt in our minds that the USA() never would have contemplated a prosecution in...

Kenneth Starr

Kenneth W. Starr Kirkland & Ellis LLP 777 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, CA 90017-5800 May 27, 2008 Joe D....

Alexander Acosta

...t Jeffrey Sloman of the USAO responded to an email from Jay Lefkowitz informing U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta that we would be seeking your Office's review. Mr. Sloman's letter, which imposed a deadline of Ju...

Tags

potential-obstruction-of-justijeffrey-epsteinpolitical-influenceattorneyclient-privilegenonprosecution-agreementfederal-prosecutionlegal-exposuremoderate-importancehouse-oversightprocedural-misconductdepartment-of-justice

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Kenneth W. Starr Kirkland & Ellis LLP 777 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, CA 90017-5800 May 27, 2008 Joe D. Whitley Alston & Bird LLP The Atlantic Building 950 F Street, NW Washington. DC 20004-1404 VIA FACSIMILE CONFIDENTIAL Honorable Mark Filip Office of the Deputy Attorney General United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Dear Judge Filip: This letter briefly supplements our prior submission to you dated May 19, 2008. In that communication, we urgently requested that your Office conduct an independent review of the proposed federal prosecution of our client, Jeffrey Epstein. The dual reasons for our request that you review this matter are (i) the bedrock need for integrity in the enforcement of federal criminal laws, and (ii) the profound questions raised by the unprecedented extension of federal law by the United States Attorney's Office in Miami (the "USAO") to a prominent public figure who has close ties to former President Clinton. The need for review is now all the more exigent. On Monday, May 19, 2008, First Assistant Jeffrey Sloman of the USAO responded to an email from Jay Lefkowitz informing U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta that we would be seeking your Office's review. Mr. Sloman's letter, which imposed a deadline of June 2, 2008 to comply with all the terms of the current Non- Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement"), plus new unilateral modifications, on pain of being deemed in breach of that Agreement, appears to have been deliberately designed to deprive us of an adequate opportunity to seek your Office's review in this matter. The USAO's desire to foreclose a complete review is understandable, given that the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section ("CEOS") has already determined that our substantive arguments regarding why a federal prosecution of Mr. Epstein is not warranted were "compelling." However, in contradiction to Mr. Sloman's assertion that CEOS had provided an independent, de novo review, CEOS made clear that it did not do so. Indeed, CEOS declined to examine several of the more troubling aspects of the investigation of Mr. Epstein, including the deliberate leak to the New York Times of numerous highly confidential aspects of the investigation and negotiations between the parties as well as the recent crop of civil lawsuits filed against Mr. Epstein by Mr. Sloman's former law partner. The unnecessary and arbitrarily imposed deadline set by the USAO was done without any respect for the normal functioning and scheduling of state judicial matters. It requires that Mr. Epstein's counsel persuade the State Attorney of Palm Beach to issue a criminal information Honorable Mark Filip May 27, 2008 Page 2 to a charge that the State Attorney has not, despite a two year investigation, determined to be appropriate. Mr. Epstein's counsel must also successfully expedite a plea of guilty to this charge on a date prior to July 8, 2008, which is the date presently set by the state court Judge. Further, the unnecessary deadline is even more problematic because Mr. Epstein's effort to reconcile the state charge and sentence with the terms of the Agreement requires an unusual and unprecedented threatened application of federal law. Thus, it places Mr. Epstein in the highly unusual position of having to demand that the State acquiesce to a more severe punishment than it had already determined was appropriate. We have attempted to resolve these and other issues through the USA() and CEOS, including raising our concerns about the USAO's inappropriate conduct with respect to this matter. But those avenues have now been shut down. Mr. Sloman's letter purports to prohibit any further contact between Mr. Epstein's defense team and U.S. Attorney Acosta, and instead requires us to communicate with the USA() only though Mr. Sloman's subordinates. While it pains us to say this, this misguided prosecution from the outset gives the appearance that it may have been politically motivated. Mr. Epstein is a highly successful, self- made businessman and philanthropist who entered the public arena only by virtue of his close personal association with former President Bill Clinton. There is little doubt in our minds that the USA() never would have contemplated a prosecution in this case if Mr. Epstein were just another "John." U.S. Attorney Acosta previously has stated that he is "sympathetic" to our federalism- related concerns, but he has taken the position that his authority is limited by enforcement policies set forth in Washington, D.C. As expressed in our prior communication to you, we believe that a complete and independent appraisal and resolution of this case most appropriately would be undertaken by your Office—beginning with the rescission of the arbitrary, unfair, and unprecedented deadline that Mr. Sloman demands to have imposed in this case. At the very least, we would appreciate a tolling of the arbitrary timeline imposed on our client by the USA() in order to allow time for your office to consider our request that you undertake a review of this case. Thank you for your time and attention. Respectfully submitted, , Q-1444 Kenneth W. Starr D. Whitley Kirkland & Ellis LLP Alston & Bird LL 05/27/2008 12:18 FAX II 001 ********************* *** TX REPORT *** ********************* TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 0439 RECIPIENT ADDRESS 912025140487 DESTINATION ID ST. TIME 05/27 12:18 TIME USE 0034 PAGES SENT 3 RESULT OK KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Fax Transmittal 777 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California 90017 Phone: (213) 680-8400 Fax: (213) 680-8500 Please notify us immediately if any pages arc not received. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, MAY CONSTITUTE INSIDE INFORMATION, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. UNAUTHORIZED USE, DISCLOSURE OR COPYING IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED AND MAY BE UNLAWFUL. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY AT: (213) 680-8400. To: Flonorab14.-! Mark Filip Company: Fax ft: Direct #: Office of the Deputy Attorney Cie/len:II United State$ Department of Justice From: Date: Pages w/cover: Fax #: Direct It: Kenneth W. Starr May 27, 2008 3 Message:

Technical Artifacts (4)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

FaxFax: (213) 680-8500
Phone(213) 680-8400
Phone(213) 680-8500
Phone12025140487

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Kavanaugh‑Era DOJ Letter from Kenneth Starr Seeking Review of Federal Action Against Jeffrey Epstein

The document is a privileged attorney‑client communication from former independent counsel Kenneth Starr to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip, requesting a DOJ review of a proposed federal prosecutio Starr requests Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip to review a proposed federal prosecution of Jeffre Alleges that the Miami U.S. Attorney’s Office (USAO) set an arbitrary June 2, 2008 deadline to for

3p
Court UnsealedNov 12, 2025

Epstein _ 001

yl . on on TRI ILITYUIY & JOHN CONNOLLY WITH Tim MALLOY A POWERFUL BILLIDNAIRE. THE SEX SEANDAL THAT UNDID HIM. AND ALL § THE JUSTIGE THAT MONEY CAN BUY: : | THE SHOCKING TRUE STORY OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN ‘ de HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010477 5 ~ I] i A { doit see what it adds to the Rf ¥ ? Bl pois atm Desc . rely . BY crn nal ” CRE! hat © MO — Ju, a that time, no criminal L : 2 a irs had been lnuached. And In fa od he curaors of Fpstein's dealings [5 > a 110 be just that — Tumors. a J ie lawyers, his ed

1935p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

(USAFLS)

(USAFLS) From: 'ent: fo: Subject: Esptei Itr 5 19 08. pdf r..on a a 2U00613A5FADS4)PM Epstein EFTA00225672 sure I do everything within my power to obviate a need for trial through a reasonable alternative resolution. Although it is clear that CEOS is not directing a prosecution here, and has stated only that you have the authority to commence such a prosecution, I am well aware that the decision whether to proceed, subject to any further process in Washington, is now within your discretion. I think the new facts should greatly influence your decision and accordingly, I hope you will agree to meet with me, both to discuss the new evidence and to discuss a resolution to this matter once and for all. I am available to meet with you at your earliest convenience subject to our mutual availability. Respectfully, Jay The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended onl

248p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

U.S. Department of Justice

U.S. Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 2053U June 23, 2008 Jay Lefkowitz, Esq. Kenneth Starr, Esq. Kirkland and Ellis LLP Gentlemen: This Office has completed a thorough review of the U.S. Attorney's handling of the matter involving your client, Jeffrey Epstein. We have received and reviewed your letters of May 19, June 3 and June 19, 2008, the attachments to the June 19 letter, as well as your submissions to the Criminal Division and the U.S. Attorney's Office. Additionally, we have reviewed an extensive set of materials provided by the U.S. Attorney's Office and conferred with a number of highly experienced Department attorneys about this matter. The Deputy Attorney General has also been briefed. As you know, the Department of Justice vests considerable discretion in its U.S. Attorneys, and the Deputy Attorney General will intervene in only the most unusual of circumstances. We do not believe such intervention is warranted here. Even if we were to substitute our

8p
DOJ Data Set 7CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00009116

0p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING INFORMATION RELEVANT TO THEIR PENDING ACTION CONCERN THE CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS ACT COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to produce the original or best copy of the items listed herein below for inspection and/or copying, pursuant to the Court's Order (DE #99) directing discovery in this case. BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in this case. The Government has declined. Accordingly, the victims filed their Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies (DE 48

13p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.