Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00072560DOJ Data Set 9Other

(USANYS)"

From: (USANYS)" To: "MM, (USANYS) [Contractor]" <I a Subject: FW: Private and Confidential Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 19:18:41 +0000 S This is the email that forwarded to me for handling by us. Please let me know what you think is best approach that will give respect to the fact htat Ms. Sarnoff has been previously emailing her information to AG Barr directly and that also respects her efforts to be helpful. Thanks Fro To: William Barr Cc: Subject: Private and Confidential Dear Mr. Barr, In the Epstein case, one victim's testimony, describes how she was "trafficked" for sex. Given my understanding of that law, and under TVPA, the victim's testimony does not seem to match the criteria for sex trafficking. If I am correct, why are the courts allowing Ms. case to be defined as a child sex trafficking case? According to her testimony in the first complaint, Jane Doe 102 vs. Jeffrey Epstein, [filed May 1, 2009 in Southern District Fl] and later in a telephone interview

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00072560
Pages
2
Persons
3
Integrity

Summary

From: (USANYS)" To: "MM, (USANYS) [Contractor]" <I a Subject: FW: Private and Confidential Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 19:18:41 +0000 S This is the email that forwarded to me for handling by us. Please let me know what you think is best approach that will give respect to the fact htat Ms. Sarnoff has been previously emailing her information to AG Barr directly and that also respects her efforts to be helpful. Thanks Fro To: William Barr Cc: Subject: Private and Confidential Dear Mr. Barr, In the Epstein case, one victim's testimony, describes how she was "trafficked" for sex. Given my understanding of that law, and under TVPA, the victim's testimony does not seem to match the criteria for sex trafficking. If I am correct, why are the courts allowing Ms. case to be defined as a child sex trafficking case? According to her testimony in the first complaint, Jane Doe 102 vs. Jeffrey Epstein, [filed May 1, 2009 in Southern District Fl] and later in a telephone interview

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009

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.
From: (USANYS)" To: "MM, (USANYS) [Contractor]" <I a Subject: FW: Private and Confidential Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 19:18:41 +0000 S This is the email that forwarded to me for handling by us. Please let me know what you think is best approach that will give respect to the fact htat Ms. Sarnoff has been previously emailing her information to AG Barr directly and that also respects her efforts to be helpful. Thanks Fro To: William Barr Cc: Subject: Private and Confidential Dear Mr. Barr, In the Epstein case, one victim's testimony, describes how she was "trafficked" for sex. Given my understanding of that law, and under TVPA, the victim's testimony does not seem to match the criteria for sex trafficking. If I am correct, why are the courts allowing Ms. case to be defined as a child sex trafficking case? According to her testimony in the first complaint, Jane Doe 102 vs. Jeffrey Epstein, [filed May 1, 2009 in Southern District Fl] and later in a telephone interview with attorneys Jack Scarola and Brad Edward', filed 2011, Ms. claims she voluntarily agreed to several sexual activities without the use of force, fraud and or coercion: For example: 1. When Ms. first met Epstein (at his home) and Maxwell (at Mar a Lago), she returned to the sight of the crime [Epsteinms home] voluntarily while continuing to live with her family in West Palm Beach. 2. agreed to quit her employment as a bathroom attendant at Mar a Lago to earn more money having sex with Epstein, Maxwell and others while under the age of consent in Florida. She began at age 15 (dob August.1983) up until age 17 or 18. 3. Once Epstein proposed to rent an apartment for M, girl agreed to live in a separate apartment from Epstein and close to her family in West Palm Beach. The apartment paid for by Epstein according to deposition was her's independent of Epstein and Maxwell and close to her family house. 4. traveled to London, knowing and without the use of force, fraud and coercion to have a sexual experience with EFTA00072560 5. Each time Ms. was told by Epstein and or Maxwell to travel outside of WPB to have a sexual experience with or other alleged Epstein friend, did so voluntarily. 6. In the depositions and on air [NBC interview] never described her environment to be one where she was bound, shackled, forced to become drug addicted and or beaten in order to perform sexual activities with others. It appears from all her testimonies there was no Intimidation [outside a loss of income and lifestyle] physical force, abduction or even involuntary drug addiction put upon by Epstein and Maxwell to cause her into sexual activity with them or others, outsude of a loss of income and lifestyle. Perhaps there needs to be a clarification of the law and public conversation on the precise definition of child sex trafficking to help prosecutors and law enforcement and workers in the field, identify the crime and clarify the legal parameters. Thank you. Respectfully yours Conchita EFTA00072561

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedNov 8, 2019

Alan Dershowitz Extended Rebuttal to [REDACTED - Survivor] Allegations

Case 1:19-cv-03377-LAP Document 90 Filed 11/07/19 Page 1 of 37 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 19-cv-03377-LAP v. ALAN DERSHOWITZ, Defendant. ANSWER WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS Defendant Alan Dershowitz (“Dershowitz”) hereby answers the Complaint of Plaintiff [REDACTED - Survivor] (“Giuffre”) and asserts Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims as follows: ANSWER NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This paragrap

274p
Court UnsealedNov 8, 2019

Epstein Exhibits

Case 18-2868, Document 278, 08/09/2019, 2628230, Page1 of 648 EXHIBIT A Case 18-2868, Document 278, 08/09/2019, 2628230, Page2 of 648 6114:2016 Prince Andrew and girl, 17, who sex o?er?er friend flew to Britain to meet him Daily Mail Ontine Daily ail .com Home I U.K. Sports Showbiz [Australia [Femail [Health [Science [Money [Video [Travel [Columnists tr am .22: ,t Latest wisestii?tr?e Prince Andrew and the 17-year-old girl his 1 sex offender friend flew to Britain to

648p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Miami U.S. Attorney’s Office Recuses Itself from Jeffrey Epstein Case Amid DOJ Oversight Questions

The passage reveals that a federal prosecutor's office recused itself from the high‑profile Epstein victims’ rights case and notes a pending DOJ review prompted by Senate questioning of AG nominee Wil Miami U.S. Attorney’s Office formally recused itself from the Epstein victims’ rights case. The case was reassigned to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Atlanta. Sen. Ben Sasse questioned AG nominee Will

1p
Court UnsealedSep 9, 2019

Epstein Depositions

10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 16. 17. l8. 19. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards, et Case No.: 50 2009 CA Attachments to Statement of Undisputed Facts Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein taken March 17, 2010 Deposition of Jane Doe taken March 11, 2010 (Pages 379, 380, 527, 564?67, 568) Deposition of LM. taken September 24, 2009 (Pages 73, 74, 164, 141, 605, 416) Deposition ofE.W. taken May 6, 2010 (1 15, 1.16, 255, 205, 215?216) Deposition of Jane Doe #4 (32-34, 136) Deposition of Jeffrey Eps

839p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 107 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2009 Page 1 of 10 5/29/2009 4:41:55 PM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JANE DOE NO. 2, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119- MARRVJOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 3, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232- MARRVJOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 4, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380- MARRVJOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. EFTA00201180 Case 9:08-cv-80811-KAM Document 107 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/29/2009 Page 2 of 10 5/29/2009 4:41:55 PM JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381- MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 6, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994- MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. JANE DOE NO. 7, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993- MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. C.M.A., CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON Plaintiff, VS. EFTA00201181 Case 9:08-cv-80811-K

10p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Filing # 31897743 E-Filed 09/10/2015 12:44:35 PM

66p

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.