This Document Sheds Light on Perpetuation of Acosta’s Stand Down Order, Assistant Prosecutor was Ordered to “Stand Down” on Obtaining Computer Evidence Against Epstein in 2007 – Unknown Source

 This Document Sheds Light on Perpetuation of Acosta’s Stand Down Order, Assistant Prosecutor was Ordered to “Stand Down” on Obtaining Computer Evidence Against Epstein in 2007

On August 8, 2007, Villafafia informed Acosta that she had spoken with Oosterbaan, who
was willing to join a meeting with the defense; although he could not do so in person until after
August 21, he was willing to participate by phone in order “to stay firm on our August 17th
deadline.” Villafafia also reiterated that she wanted to contact Epstein’s assistants in New York
and to interview some of Epstein’s colleagues and former employees there. Noting that “there was
some concern about [taking the proposed investigative steps] while we are trying to negotiate a
plea,” Villafafia asked Acosta for guidance. Lourie also emailed Acosta and Sloman, asking that
the USAO “stick to our deadline if possible.” Lourie pointed out that CEOS “has no approval
authority” and opined it was “a bit extreme to allow the defense to keep arguing this [case] to
different agencies.” Acosta replied, “This will end up [at the Department] anyhow, if we don’t
meet with them. I’d rather keep it here. Brin[g]ing [the Chief of CEOS] in visibly does so. If our
deadline has to slip a bit … it’s worth it.”
As a result, the investigative steps were postponed. On August 10, 2007, Villafafia emailed
Lourie inquiring whether she could “still go ahead” with the New York trip and whether she could
oppose Black’s request to stay the litigation concerning the government’s efforts to obtain
Epstein’s computer equipment until after Acosta’s meeting with the defense team. Villafafia was
reluctant to delay the litigation and reported to Lourie that agents recently had interviewed a girl
who began seeing Epstein at age 14 and who was photographed in the nude by an Epstein assistant.
On August 13, 2007, Villafafia advised Black that the USAO was not willing to agree to a stay of
the litigation. However, reached out to Lourie on August 22, 2007, and obtained his
agreement to a joint request for a stay until the week after Acosta’s meeting with defense counsel,
which was scheduled for September 7, 2007.
Villafafia told OPR that, in her opinion, the defense efforts to put off the litigation
concerning the computers was “further evidence of the importance of [this] evidence.”” Villafafia
suspected the computers contained evidence that “would have put this case completely to bed.”

She believed that access to the computer evidence would strengthen the government’s negotiating
position, but that her supervisors “did not seem to recognize that.” Villafafia said she did not
understand why her supervisors were uninterested in determining what the computers contained.
Instead, they instructed Villafafia to “keep calling the judge” to ask for a delay in the litigation
proceedings.
Sloman told OPR that he recalled an issue about the computers, but did not recall “what
the thinking was at the time” about pursuing that evidence or why Villafafia was “ordered to stand
down.” Acosta, Menchel, and Lourie all told OPR that they did not recall Villafafia’s effort to
obtain the computer evidence or that there had been litigation relating to it. Lourie, however, told
OPR that the computers might have contained “very powerful evidence” that possibly “could have
changed our advice to [Acosta], or his decision making.” In his OPR interview, Menchel was
uncertain whether the computer evidence would have been useful, but also acknowledged to OPR,
“You always want more as a prosecutor.”
On August 31, 2007, in preparation for the upcoming September 7, 2007 meeting with
defense counsel that he planned to attend, CEOS Chief Oosterbaan traveled to West Palm Beach
to meet with Villafalia and the case agents and to examine the case file. He explained to OPR that
he wanted to see the file before meeting with the defense so that he could best “represent[] the
interests of the prosecution team,” and that he was in favor of going forward with the case.

READ FULL ARTICLE: This article originally appeared on Unknown Source

Share on Telegram