Where Sloman appears
38 total
…hat meeting, the records show, when Acosta agreed to keep the deal secret. The correspondences also show that Sloman sought several times to have Epstein’s victims notified about the deal, as required under the Crime Victims Rights Act. But...
3: 36. 37. 38. a 40. KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Sloman’s demand, other than to protect prospective plaintiffs from being interviewed prior to their retaining an attorney (including, as it tumed out, Mr. Sloman’s former law partner) to bring civil...
oceeding against Mr. Epstein. Thus, the decision of whether As recently as two months ago, Mr. Sloman was still listed publicly as a part of his former law firm. While we assume this was an oversight, Mr. Sloman's identification as part of...
…iscretion by proceeding against Mr. Epstein. Thus, the decision of whether As recently as two months ago, Mr. Sloman was still listed publicly as a part of his former law firm. While we assume this was an oversight, Mr. Sloman's identificat...
ent's staggered requirement that Epstein plead and be sentenced by October 26, and "begin serving his sentence not later than January 4, 2008." We are, like most attorneys seeking Depai___Luient review, without access to the USAO prosecutio...
On February 29, 2008, Mr. Sloman responded to Mr. Lefkowitz's e-mail to Mr. Acosta, stating that Mr. Sloman was acting out of frustration, but "[p]lease be assured that it has not, and never has been, this Office's intent to interfere or re...
…d the Office's misleading disclosure and apparent conflict-of-interest. 10. TIMETABLE FOR MOVING FORWARD. Mr. Sloman's Letter: • "On February 25, 2008, I sent you an e-mail setting forth a timetable for moving forward in the event that CEOS...
…ould be in if Mr. Epstein were convicted at trial. 9. ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHT TO SELECT LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE. Mr. Sloman's Letter: • "Prior to any issues arising concerning the implementation of the 2255 provision, the SDFL unilaterally agreed...
those it identified as victims; it attempted to create compensation rights for those it identified, without imposing on them the burden of proving that they were in fact victims under § 2255. o In the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, the SDF...
…trol or any other alternative in lieu of incarceration. DPA, 2(a). 7. SUGGESTION OF ADDITIONAL STATE PLEA Mr. Sloman's Letter: • The parties considered: "as suggested by [the defense], a plea to state charges encompassing Epstein's conduct....
…t with substantial practical and legal hurdles to its implementation. 6. THE SDFL DID NOT DEFER TO THE STATE. Sloman's Letter: • "[T]he SDFL indicated a willingness to defer to the State the length of incarceration." Id., p. 2. The Truth: •...
…the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, but, to date, the SDFL has failed to do so without any explanation. • Mr. Sloman refuses to provide the requested factual allegations, which the State cannot furnish, and now demands a two week deadline t...
reement was never modified by U.S. Attorney Acosta's December 19, 2007 letter. Oddly, Mr. Sloman acknowledges this on page 4 of his May 19 letter, where he writes that Mr. Acosta "proposed" this modification and that "[Mr. Lefkowitz] reject...
… massage took place. We admitted that there was sexual conduct, and argued—not that it was "innocuous" as Mr. Sloman alleges—but that it was mostly Mr. Epstein's own self- pleasuring, which did not satisfy the requisite federal element of c...
…garding potential claims of government witnesses. See Tab 39, November 28, 2008 Email from J. Lefkowitz to J. Sloman. o The letter cited to an inapplicable statute (the Justice for All Act of 2004) as its justification for being sent. Id. A...
…extricably intertwined with the impropriety of the investigation. Id. at 1. 2. NOTIFICATION OF WITNESSES. Mr. Sloman's Letter: • Mr. Sloman dismissed the totality of the defense's objections to the inappropriate notification the SDFL propos...
… of 2007, he opined that he so believed in the prosecution that he "would try the case myself." • Indeed, Mr. Sloman acknowledges that Mr. Oosterbaan had previously opined on this matter, stating: This particular attack on this statute [18...
…ble of conducting, before any decision to prosecute is permitted. 11 HOUSE OVERSIGHT 012170 RESPONSE TO FAUSA SLOMAN'S LETTER HOUSE OVERSIGHT 012171 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Response to Letter by FAUSA Sloman Dated May 19, 2008 In a May 19, 200...
t to your attention not to require any disciplinary action or review by the Office of Professional Responsibility. Although we have been told that some of this misconduct has been self-reported (only after we raised these complaints in writ...
…were all adults, there could be no lawful justification for Mr. 7 HOUSE OVERSIGHT 012166 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Sloman's demand, other than to protect prospective plaintiffs from being interviewed prior to their retaining an attorney (includi...
