Mega Edition: Alex Acosta And His Epstein Interview With OIG Inspectors (Part 1-3) (3/12/26)

Hey, this is Byard Winthrop, founder of American Giant.

Back in 2011, I was fed up, sick of cheap disposable clothes that fell apart after a few washes,

and even more sick of the fact that almost nothing good was made here anymore.

So I started American Giant to prove something that we could still make the absolute best hoodies,

t-shirts, and pants right here in America with American cotton, American factories,

and American workers earning real wages.

We exist to bring manufacturing home, create good jobs and towns that need them,

and build clothes that actually last.

No shortcuts, no overseas compromises.

Get 20% off your first order when you use promo code giant20 at American-giant.com.

That's 20% off when you use code giant20 at American-giant.com.

You know when you're wrapping up a long day in that what's for dinner panic hits?

Well, when you've got convenient everyday protein from Omaha steaks waiting at home,

that panic turns into your weeknight win.

And now's the time to buy during Omaha steaks bring savings event.

Save big on their exclusive lineup of mouthwatering steaks,

gourmet burgers, air chilled chicken, pork, seafood, and more.

All delivered right to your door.

Plus, get an extra $35 off with promo code audio

when you shop OmahaStakes.com today.

With over 100 years of unrivaled quality and variety,

Omaha steaks understands what you need to get dinner done.

Plus, every bite is backed by their 100% guarantee.

Omaha steaks is your weeknight win.

So get the world's best everyday protein during their spring savings event.

Go to OmahaStakes.com for an extra $35 off when you use promo code audio at checkout.

That's OmahaStakes.com promo code AUDIO.

Terms apply, see site for details.

What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles.

Ever since we first got the OIG report,

detailing their investigation into not only Jeffrey Epstein's death,

but into the non prosecution agreement.

I have been very, very interested in seeing the interview

that was conducted with Alex Acosta that was administered by the Inspector General's Office.

And after exhaustively searching through the new unsealed files,

I was able to put together this whole entire interview all 300 pages.

And obviously we're going to get it added to the catalog.

And then you can listen to this interview and then go back to the deposition

that Alex Acosta gave to Congress recently and see how it all lines up.

So with that said, let's dive in.

Examination by Mr. Dacted.

Question, so would you tell us your name please?

Answer Renee Alexandra Acosta.

Question and Mr. Acosta, you're accompanied by your attorney Gordon Todd.

Is that correct?

Answer, yes it is.

Question and Mr. Todd, would you identify the associate you have with you?

Yes, TJ Haran.

Mr. Dacted, H-E-R-R-O-N.

Mr. Haran, correct.

Mr. Dacted, thank you.

Mr. Acosta, I'm redacted.

I'm a council with the Office of Professional Responsibility here at the Department of Justice.

And with me are my fellow OPR council, redacted, redacted, and redacted.

And we are in a conference room at the Department of Justice main building on today,

October 18th, 2019, and we're starting at about 9.30 in the morning.

Before we start, I just want to put on the record that Mr. Redacted worked in the Civil Rights

Division at the time that you were the AAG heading that division, and I believe had an occasion

to briefly meet you in connection with the matter. The witness could I ask what section,

Mr. Redacted, I was in the special litigation section. The witness, oh okay, Mr. Redacted,

and I provided Mr. Acosta some talking points for a press situation that we had in that case.

The witness, 1-4-1-4-1, Mr. Redacted, yes.

The witness, probably, by Mr. Redacted, question, all right, thank you, Mr. Acosta, OPR,

is investigating two things. As you know, one, whether one or more federal prosecutors in the

Southern District of Florida, U.S. Attorney's Office may have committed professional misconduct

by entering into the Non-Prossecution Agreement or MPA in 2007 with Jeffrey Epstein, who at the time

was under investigation by that office and the FBI for engaging in widespread sexual misconduct

involving underage females. The second thing we're investigating is Judge Mara's finding in February

of this year, 2019, that the government may have violated or actually he found the government

did violate the CVRA, where Crimes Victims Rights Act, when it entered into the NPA without

first providing the victims with notice and a reasonable right to confer with the government.

You are subject of the OPR investigation, that is, one of somebody whose conduct is being

reviewed and evaluated by OPR, and specifically as U.S. Attorney at the time for the Southern

District of Florida, you had the ultimate authority over the Epstein. For a period of two and a half

years, as we understand it, from the time the line AUSA redacted first brief you and then criminal

chief redacted in July of 2006, and until you were formally recused from the case on or about

the 8th of December 2008, after notifying the executive office of the U.S. attorneys that you

are seeking employment with Kirkland and Ellis, a firm of which two attorneys Ken Star and J.

Lefkowitz had been representing Jeffrey Epstein. Is that correct? Answer we may, we may get into

it a little bit later, but I think the characterization of my seeking employment is not accurate.

We can talk about that a little bit later. Question all right, we have the documents that relate to that,

so that's what we're basing that on. Answer correct. Question and I believe the term that I used

is seeking employment. Answer that is the term used in the email. I think I addressed that

in I believe Mr. Todd addressed that in the letter that was sent. Question all right.

Thank you, so we recognize that you're no longer with the Department of Justice. Answer right.

Question and that it's your choice to come and talk to us and that we very much appreciate your

willingness to voluntarily do so and help figure this case out. OPR provided you with a few thousand

pages of records, emails and correspondence and some other documents that reflect your involvement

in the Epstein matter over that two and a half year period. Now that you've had a chance to

review, I hope those emails and other documents, we hope that you can be specific in helping,

us understand what happened. Have you in fact been able to review those documents? Answer yes,

I have. Question thank you. OPR asked you for a written response to certain questions and we've

reviewed and received a written response prepared and submitted, not by you but by your attorney,

Mr. Todd on your behalf. Have you reviewed his response? Answer yes. Question, you answer yes

I have. Question and will you now under oath subscribe to that response? As if you had submitted

it yourself. Answer so Mr. Todd spoke to me and conveyed the investigation that I provide him.

I believe he conveyed that the information accurately and the statements that he ascribes to me

in that letter, I believe are accurate. Question all right, do you have any changes or corrections

to the written response? Answer no, I don't. Question is there anything in it that you do not agree

with? Answer again, I think that the statement that he ascribes to me are accurate and I agree with

them. Question all right. So we're going to accept that statement as representing accurately

your what would you have responded if you had responded to us directly? Is that correct?

Answer yes, the statements he basically gives me positions and I believe that he gave my

positions accurately. Question perfect, thank you. So as we ask questions and refer to documents,

we would like you to correct any misstatements in our questions or any misstatements or errors

that are in the documents themselves because we want to make the entire record correct.

Also, there's been an enormous amount of publicity about the Epstein case,

particularly this year, including about the events and decisions made back in 2006 to 2010

that are the subject of our investigation. And so as best you can, we ask you to try to answer

today from your knowledge, understanding and recollections as of that time period. However,

to the extent you are asked or do speak retroactively, retrospectively, we'll just make it clear

that that's what you're doing. Answer all right. Question okay. Answer and if I could just say

one of the difficulties is with everything that all the publicity and all the documents that

have made it to the press and in litigation distinguishing between recollection versus the fact

question right. Acosta interjects speculation and I will try but I would appreciate reminders

along the way because it's it's an important distinction but it's kind of hard sometimes.

Question we recognize particularly the importance of it. Answer right. Question that that's

precisely the heart of the matter. So Mr Acosta your professional background is a matter of public

record. I have a couple of questions by what state bar are you currently licensed? Answer so

on an active I believe an active in Pennsylvania and also in DC. Question all right and not in Florida.

Answer not in Florida. Question so is it do I understand that you are not currently an active

member of any bar? Answer I would have to confirm with DC. I said not in active in Pennsylvania

and in DC because I'm not certain whether I'm currently active or in active in DC. I'm not currently

practicing and so I would have renewed under either active or in active. Question all right. Answer

we can verify that and get that. Question we would appreciate that if Mr Todd could let us know your

current status. I would also like to know the status your bar status in the period of 2006 through 2008.

Do you know what that was? Answer most likely I can speculate I don't know for a fact most likely

it was active in DC. Question uh-huh answer and an active in Pennsylvania question okay but likely

active somewhere right answer yes yes I think that's a requirement. Answer so it would be DC

the distinction between active and an active in DC is more minor as I recall than Pennsylvania where

there's a large fee difference. Question all right thank you and we look forward to hearing confirmation

of that from you from you Mr Todd so after serving nearly two years as the assistant attorney general

in charge of the department civil rights division you were presidentially appointed the NRM US

attorney for the Southern District of Florida in June of 2005 and then as we understand it you

were formally nominated as US attorney in June of 2006 and after being confirmed by the United

States Senate you were sworn in by the US attorney as US attorney in late October 2006 answer I think

that may be inaccurate I would have to confirm when you say presidentially appointed I believe it

may have been appointed by the chief judge at the request of the attorney general the chief judge

has a pointing authority question okay answer and you'd have to go back and confirm whether it was

either an AG designation or the chief judge answer all right question and I understand and again

I would appreciate if you could follow up on that question Mr Todd answer I'm not certain how to

confirm that that's something that in all candor the department would know. Tyler Reddick here from

2311 racing victory lane yeah it's even better with chamba by my side race to chamba casino.com

let's chamba no purchase necessary VTW group void were prohibited by law CT and C's 21 plus

sponsored by chamba casino craving the coffee flavor you love but without the caffeine

kachavas got you covered with their newest coffee flavor this all-in-one nutrition shake delivers

bold authentic flavor crafted from premium decaffeinated Brazilian beans quality nutrition

shouldn't be complicated just two scoops of kachavas all-in-one nutrition shake and you've got

25 grams of protein six grams of fiber greens and so much more whether you're craving that coffee

taste to kickstart your morning ritual or as a nutrient-packed reward to round out your afternoon

kachava keeps you fueled and satisfied wherever your day takes you plus it actually tastes delicious

no fillers no nonsense just the good stuff your body craves and for the times you feel like

switching it up you've got seven flavors to choose from all with the highest quality ingredients

treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves go to kachava.com and use code news

new customers get 15% off their first order that's kac hva.com code news mississippi is breaking

new ground for business at a historic pace amazon xai toyota milwaki tool and ge aerospace have all

tapped into our deep talent pool prime geographic location and welcoming communities this is bigger than

megacytes mississippi offers a thriving business ecosystem with affordability greater collaboration

with energy partners and record-breaking speed to market looking to expand break new ground at mississippi.org

question all right then we will pursue it my point is that there was a change in your status

from an interim to you you know the u.s attorney with the full confirmation how if at all did

the change in status affect your view of and your exercise of your authority as u.s attorney answer

is so it's difficult to recall now you're asking that just 10 years back but even further back

I was in a room for a sufficiently long period of time and by the time change in status took place

I would speculate that I was in my mind the you know acting as u.s attorney whether you have

a junctive interim or acting in front of your name or not you know I had great people I don't

recall when I came on board as a first assistant but he was my crimchief and I thought for the

continuity of the office it was important to promote him the first assistant question he was promoted

actually effective October of 2006 you made a series according to emails the announcement the

personnel announcement was made to be effective in October 2006 naming redacted as criminal chief

and are adapted as first assisted answer right and they they were both long serving professionals

within the office and basically as my recollection everyone just moved up one wrong question okay

answer you would know better than I because you have those records and so sitting here today I

don't recall any specific way in which that shift would have impacted question all right answer

my thinking question you had not served as a prosecutor before and didn't have direct criminal

experience is my understanding answer that's correct I had supervised civil rights for example

had supervised criminal prosecutions but I had not been a line prosecutor previously question

so as you as attorney supervising a couple of hundred answer right question line prosecutors

most involved in criminal work what interests did you most or appeal to you most as you undertook

and carried out your duties as you as attorney answer what interests did me and appeal to me so

the work of the office I mean it's a broad question but the work that office and any US attorney

office I think is incredibly impactful to any local community and I very much enjoyed being part

of the effort to bring folks to justice to move policy initiatives you know I recall early on

we identified health care fraud as one big one big area and we had one of the largest one of the

largest health care fraud initiatives you know we focus quite a bit on gun violence and we did a great

job on that and it's one of those jobs where people feel very good about what they do and it's

great to be a part of question that's helpful it just gives us answer yeah question some perspective

question was there any aspect of it that you particularly disliked answered to the extent

you're dealing with personnel issues I think personnel issues are rarely the preferred part

of any executive function question you mean the conflicts among attorneys things like that

or performance issues answer performance issues question all right answer and you know when

you've got in any large office you got personal issues disciplinary issues and those are never

those are never fun all right we're gonna wrap up this episode right here and in the next episode

dealing with the topic we're gonna pick up where we left off all of the information that goes with

this episode can be found in the description box what's up everyone and welcome to another episode

of the Epstein Chronicles in this episode we're gonna pick up where we left off with the Alex

Acosta interview with the OIG investigators question so we talked about the personnel high level

personnel changes you made sort of after your first year there redacted had we understand

been functioning de facto as a first assistant while redacted was not P we understand redacted

had been first assistant but he stepped away and redacted came in to essentially take over

his brief until he was formally appointed first assistant is that consistent with your memory

answer so you might have characterized that more strongly than I would have question okay answer

again it's difficult to recreate from back then but there was certainly a transition period for

Mr. redacted to Mr. redacted and if I could because when you said high level changes my intent

it was a great office great professionals my intent in elevating Mr. redacted was just you go

from criminal chief the first assistant and I don't recall Mr. redacted prior position but I know

that he was also elevated I think he might have been major crimes but question that's correct answer

I could guess it question we can verify that answer okay question yes what was your assistant

of redacted his capabilities his judgment and his working relationship with you on a day to day

basis answer outstanding he had been in the office for decades he was respected by everyone

he had a very good tone to him he was someone you know I wanted individuals around me

that were respected within the office and that were trusted and that had been there for a long time

and then I think I was very lucky to have that in my management team question as we understand it

your office as us attorney was sort of on the one side of the reception area and the first

assistant's office is on the other side is that correct answer that's correct question so did

you and redacted have any sort of easy back and forth question open door answer into each other's

offices multiple times a day question all right answer all right and given that he had

experienced throughout his career at the department in the criminal arena and you had not to what

extent would you rely on him among others for guidance perspective information and so on answer

I named the first assistant because I valued his guidance and his perspectives and I thought those

were valuable question okay you also as we pointed out appointed redacted to succeed redacted

as criminal chief effective October of 2006 and he served for about 10 months before he left

for private practice he left at the beginning of August 2007 what did you you said you didn't

recall as we sit here today what section he come from answer right I guess it was major crimes

question all right were you what was the assessment of redacted answer outstanding as well

and if I could say when I say I don't recall but I guess when you're going back 12 years sometimes

you get an impression but you can't say it's a recollection and that's going to come up multiple

times today just because it's a while ago question as long as we make that distinction both are helpful

answer right and so whether it's a recollection or a construction after the fact I can't say that

but you know I thought that one of the helpful factors with redacted is he had spent a lot of time

and major crimes is the most active active unit I assume you all know that the structure in the office

but major crime is not major crimes it's sort of the entry level crimes and I valued the fact

that he had trained and you know so many a USA's and really spent a lot of time reviewing the major

crimes chief as opposed to the other chiefs who spend a lot of time reviewing the work of a USA's

and so he would be someone who is very experienced and able to get into the weeds question

and he in fact was around during that time period had gone back in the courtroom if you recall

to actually try a major case do you recall that answer I didn't until you just said so question

major fraud answer I didn't until you mentioned it and now there's something in the back of my head

that's saying that sounds right but I can't give you more detail question all right what was your

assessment of redacted and sort of working style and particularly working with you answer you know

again positive you know we didn't I didn't see him as often as mr. redacted question was he

located on the same floor answer he was located on the same floor but not within the same

suite question mm-hmm answer and that affects interaction but a positive working relationship question

all right and to what extent would you as criminal chief was he relied on by you as distinguished

from redacted with regard to the criminal matters pending answer also relied on

depending that would depend almost on the matter question okay as in a typical situation

a cost of answers he would bring things to redacted who would then bring them to me along and so he

would bring things to redacted and then depending on their discussion they might both walk into my

office but he would typically run things through redacted before coming to me question were there

occasions when he would come to you directly answer sure that's why I said in typical answer it's

difficult to sort of recreate the interactions but he certainly could come by and come to me

directly and in some cases I would say probably would question again it's being a large office

with several physical locations and we understand it's a very high volume of cases and particularly

in the criminal context is it fair to say you didn't review every prosecution as it was brought

answer it's not just fair but accurate I recall a conversation with the US attorney from a small

district early on at one US attorney's conference where we compare notes and the interaction of an

office with 30 prosecutors is very different than one with a few hundred questions so when you

did engage on a criminal case would you whether it was planned prosecution or a case heading to trial

would you generally rely on written submissions or would you this is really an inquiry into your style

or would you have everybody together and talk about it or would you rely on your most immediate subordinate

to be briefing you which one of those kinds of approaches did you take answer I would say that

really depended and probably varied based on individual needs for the most part I would most

likely just speak with my first assistant and or criminal chief and assess what else needed to

be done question in other words you would sort of do it on a sort of verbal or based on oral

interaction and presentation as opposed to going through stacks of paper for the most part I would

say that that was typical I don't want to say that that case was every single time but that was

question alright and to that extent did you go out and about to encounter the line attorneys

or for example was that something that you were able to do and wanted to do answer yes and yes

and you know when I started I made it a point of walking every floor and meeting everyone

and towards the end of the day I would also if I could make it a point particularly of major

crime of just walking down to the floor and seeing who was there and what they were doing and sort

of popping my head in and just saying hi because I think that's the right thing to do question

okay was that a way to support the troops or was it more of a way for you to find to become

informed about what was going on answer probably a little bit of both to support the troops but

also to get the temperature of the office and see how matters are progressing question you at

the criminal or rather the civil rights division had experience with human trafficking and child

sex trafficking cases step into the world of power loyalty and luck I'm going to make him an offer

he can't refuse with family conoles and spins mean everything now you want to get mixed up

in the family business introducing the godfather at chambakasino.com test your luck in the shadowy

world of the godfather slot someday I will call upon you to do a service for me play the godfather

now chambakasino.com welcome to the family no for just necessary vgw group void we're prohibited

by law 21 plus terms and conditions apply certified plant genius here most people see a busy plant shop

but I see a perfectly balanced ecosystem thanks to genius from global payments inventory

tract payment seamless reviews in one place absolutely genius from sold out crowds worldwide

to running the shop genius grows with you your monster is potted healthy roots strong growth

just like this shop big lead reliability for your business that's genius finding great candidates

to hire can be like well trying to find a needle in a haystack sure you can post your job to some

job board but then all you can do is hope the right person comes along which is why you should try

zippercrooter for free at zippercrooter.com slash zip zippercrooter doesn't depend on candidates

finding you it finds them for you it's powerful technology identifies people with the right

experience and actively invites them to apply to your job you get qualified candidates fast so

while other companies might deliver a lot of hey zippercrooter finds you what you're looking for

the needle in the haystack see why four out of five employers who post a job on zippercrooter

get a quality candidate within the first day zippercrooter the smartest way to hire and right now

you can try zippercrooter for free that's right free at zippercrooter.com slash zip that zippercrooter.com

slash zip zippercrooter.com slash zip answer correct under your supervision we understand that you

brought that concern or your concerns about those issues with you to the US attorney's office

and that we know that under your tenure the US attorney's office had many successful

prosecutions involving conduct ranging from internet child pornography to international sex tourism

to victimizing children in particular in mid 2007 you according to press reports you set

up a new special prosecution unit to focus on among other things sex crimes against children could

you tell us what importance those kinds of cases help for you as US attorney answer sure if I

could if I could just back up a little bit because the question goes the special prosecutions unit

and let me address that part of it there are a few things that are embedded there answer there's

the special prosecution unit that was set up because there was some issue that that I thought

was important to pursue in particular and one of those was sort of trafficking issues another one

was the gun violence and the intent of special prosecutions was to have a group individuals

that would sort of be dedicated and not part of the usual major crimes group so it wasn't exclusively

I your question may have implied it was exclusively for sex crimes question they cut them off oh no

question no I understand it was not answer and so I thought it was sufficiently important

and so it was one of the one of the initiatives that we were certainly pursuing question

and was that something that you can to which you brought your experiences head of civil rights

division as well answer it was I think not I think I know when I was headed civil rights that

that's something that I put particular emphasis on and I thought civil rights really stepped up

and did a great job on that question did you yourself recognize you were never a prosecutor as

such answer right question but did you ever have experience being involved in a prosecution

that's sort of the nitty gritty of the prosecution of that kind of case sort of seconding yourself

to a trial team for example or an investigation answer so if by nitty gritty you mean seconding

myself to a trial team the answer would be no question all right answer there are a number of

cases that I recall being briefed on and talked about interrupted question but at that high level

answer correct question all right the department set up in 2006 a PSC program a project safe

childhood program focused on internet child pornography and appointed you as the first coordinator

and she was also of course the line attorney on the Epstein case how well did you know

redacted and can you can you give us your assessment of her capabilities judgment and her interaction

with you answer so a few things in there how well did I know her prior to appointment I don't recall

I'm not I don't think I knew her particularly well prior to appointment she was clearly respected

within the office and I don't recall but I can't speculate that she was appointed based on

recommendations of management and her interest in some combination and prior work and some

combination thereof you asked me to characterize and I think she was good strong professional

a USA question do you have any did you have any negative you know anything less than fully

positive in your assessment of her answer no question I think she was good strong and a dedicated

a USA all right folks we're going to wrap up episode two right here in the next episode dealing

with the topic we're going to pick up where we left off all of the information that goes with

this episode can be found in the description box what's up everyone and welcome to another

episode of the Epstein Chronicles in this episode we're going to pick up where we left off with

Alex Acosta's interview with the inspector general question do you have any did you have any

negative you know anything less than fully positive in your assessment of her answer no question

okay answer I think she was a good strong dedicated a USA answer all right question was the managing

USA at West Palm Beach office answer correct question at least and would redacted work there how

closely did you work with redacted and again that's an assessment question what was your assessment

of them answer so less so only because of geographic distance question aha answer I would also say

he was a respected professional he had a good reputation he went on to be chief of staff here at

the criminal division which I think speaks to how he was viewed within the department and so I

would say positive question okay so turning to the Epstein case answer yeah question now that your

recall has been refreshed by virtue of the documents that we provided before we get into the actual

sort of documents and some of the details of the events would you please give us a general overview

of what you currently remember refreshed about how the case came into the US attorney's office

how was assessed for prosecution and how and why the decision was made to resolve it with a two

year state plea that ultimately became an 18 month sentence answer okay and to that Mr.

Haran who is the lawyer for Alex Acosta pipes up before you answer the question let me just jump

in on the notion of refresher recollection which is of course has a very specific legal meaning

and I think to assert that Mr. Acosta's recollection has been refreshed generally probably overstates

it it's really a document by document issued by issued thing so I push back on that

he gets interrupted but he keeps going a little bit but the question is fair and accurate

misredacted if you're talking about handing him a document or a fresh and exhausted

recollection that's not the process we're talking about we're using it more in a late term that

you know if we ask you this before giving you all these documents you'd probably would have

not been able to be as full in your responses so we're asking for your full response Mr. Haran

we appreciate the opportunity to review the documents and Alex in your answers try to distinguish

what you actually recall in your own head versus what you saw in the documents and that would make

four he gets interrupted the cleanest record Acosta okay so three parts how did it come to my office

questions how was how did it come in answer right question how was it assessed for prosecution

answer right question and then how and how and why the decision was made to resolve it the way

it was answer so let's begin with how it came into the office putting all the documents aside I

can't say with certainty how it came in I can speculate how it came in and the way it would have

come into the office is I can speculate that the chief the chief writer from Palm Beach County

would have brought it to either the FBI or the Palm Beach office I'm not certain that I would have

asked who brought this case to the office as opposed to the case is now in the office let's discuss it

right the format or the mode in which it came in I think is important because my recollection is

it arrived to us in the position that the state attorney had negotiated a plea and that the reason

that we looked at it was that the plea was going to be that there had been an initial charge that

wasn't pursued and that required gel time and registration and that the plea was going to be taken

was a charge that didn't require gel time and didn't require registration and based on the

preliminary assessment of the facts that seemed that seems wrong so that's how it arrived the next

question was question how was it assessed for federal prosecution answer so it was assessed for

federal prosecution my recollection from very early on and I'm sure we'll talk about this some more

is you have a case that while technically it wasn't final at the state level but for federal

involvement would have been final and so from the earliest point we were thinking federal versus

state and petite and the contemporaneous record sort of shows at least the material that I got

the earliest communication was mr. redacted telling me that redacted is preparing a petite policy

waiver that misredacted is preparing a petite policy waiver and that's consistent with my recollection

of how it was assessed and then brought in assessed you know doesn't make sense to go forward yes

investigate and circle back and then and then the third part was question how and why the

disposition answer so my general recollection is the view was that if the state had followed through

on the original charge I don't recall which that call for gel time and that call for registration

that the local police or whoever brought it would not have seen the need to refer it and so that

was in terms of pre-indipement resolution a logical and reasonable place given all the other

sort of factors both the petite concerns the witness concerns and the legal concerns and to that

I would add a fourth concern which it had already been reviewed by a grand jury at the state level

is my recollection and so to some extent that's indicative of how some individuals may sort of view

this matter question okay we're going to pick that apart answer I figured question but thank you

for that answer you asked for an overview so I tried to be very he gets interrupted yeah

answer general question that doesn't that doesn't the second part of that last prong

was why a two year state plea in other words you talked about you talked about assessing the case

and why resolve it but why with a two year state plea answer so my general recollection is my

understanding if I was asked what is the best understanding that I have of why two years is that

is what would have been obtained in one of the original state charges question how do you know that

answer we gets cut off question how did you know that answer that's why I say general recollection

I'm reconstructing memories of that 12 years ago I can speculate that at some point the matter

came up and I or someone else said if you know what would the original what would the original plea

have you know what would the original charges have likely brought and someone said this amount

question who would have said that answer on speculating at this point I don't have a recollection

but that's that's my general understanding question all right we'll now unpack some of that question

and by the way my colleague we're all in this boat together so they're going to feel free answer

I know question to chime in as they see fit so the first thing going going to the intake of the case

we know from the records that and by the way we obviously have done a great deal of other investigation

and spoken to many people so redacted briefed you and redacted pretty much when the case first came

in in the mid 2006 after the FBI and indeed the office the US attorney's office in West Palm Beach

had opened the case but before Epstein was indicted so this first exhibit exhibit number one

that you have in your binder before you or in your folder before you is that email from redacted to

that you just referred to dated July 24th 2006 in which you sort of passing on the information that

Epstein has by now been arrested been indicted arrested and indicted by the state do you recall

anything about the original briefing from redacted answer I don't question all right did you know

at the time that the time she briefed you which is prior to exhibit one did you know who Epstein was

answer I did not question never heard of them to your knowledge answer to my knowledge I don't

recall having heard of them question and what did you understand at that early point the case

to be about answer so I don't recall the briefing and so I can't give an independent recollection

you know based on this I mean he gets cut off we're talking about exhibit one answer based on

exhibit one you know I can infer that this would have been my general understanding of the case

and you know and the key things that I point out here is pretrial diversion which is code for

no gel time and petite policy the question but this what exhibit number one does not make it clear

to you that this case involved allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had been enticing coercing whatever

verb you want to use young underage females we will for the record call them girls here as

opposed to women and these underage females were being paid to provide him essentially with sex

or sexual activity or conduct of a pretty salacious nature do you recall that is being essentially

what you were briefed on from the beginning answer again I don't recall the initial briefing

I take it based on your review that there was an initial briefing I can't say the degree of detail

I can't say what it was about tolerated care from 2311 racing victory lane yeah it's even better

with chamba by my side race to chamba casino dot com let's chamba no purchase necessary

BTW group boy we're prohibited by mom ct and c's 21 plus sponsored by chamba casino

finding great candidates to hire can be like well trying to find a needle in a haystack sure

you can post your job to some job board but then all you can do is hope the right person comes along

which is why you should try zippercrooter for free at zippercrooter dot com slash zipp

zippercrooter doesn't depend on candidates finding you it finds them for you it's powerful technology

identifies people with the right experience and actively invites them to apply to your job you get

qualified candidates fast so while other companies might deliver a lot of hey zippercrooter

finds you what you're looking for the needle in the haystack see why four out of five employers

who post a job on zippercrooter get a quality candidate within the first day zippercrooter

the smartest way to hire and right now you can try zippercrooter for free that's right

free at zippercrooter dot com slash zip that zippercrooter dot com slash zip zippercrooter dot com

slash zip warning the following zippercrooter radio spot you are about to hear is going to be

filled with f words when you're hiring we at zippercrooter know you can feel frustrated for

lore and even like your efforts are futile and you can spend a fortune trying to find fabulous

people only to get flooded with candidates who are just fine fortunately zippercrooter figured out

how to fix all that and right now you can try zippercrooter for free at zippercrooter dot com slash

zip with zippercrooter you can forget your frustrations because we find the right people for your

roles fast which is our absolute favorite effort in fact four out of five employers who post on zippercrooter

get a quality candidate within the first day fantastic so whether you need to hire four

40 or 400 people get ready to meet first rate talent just go to zippercrooter dot com slash zip

to try zippercrooter for free don't forget that's zippercrooter dot com slash zip finally that zippercrooter

dot com slash zip as a typical matter i wouldn't be briefed when a case comes into the office other

than being made aware this is the case this is what we're looking at question so then if you

or your understanding you don't remember the briefing is it fair to say you did not have some

understanding of the case that was the west palm beach was pursuing as of mid 2006 answer i

certainly had an understanding of the general facts of the case early on i can't speak to weather

it was mid 2006 versus late 2006 versus 2007 but early on i certainly had an understanding that

it was a case that involved you know a billionaire who was doing sorted things with young women or

girls who were minors question redacted and the records indicate that are concerned in bringing

this all the way to you and her first at the time criminal chief but sort of acting first assistant

redacted was because she was afraid of political pressure that might be brought to bear against

the u.s attorney's office in the case do you have any recollection of that being a concern that

was laid before you answer i don't again i don't recall the early that briefing i've reviewed

the email and i can you know i take it it would have been natural for me to say should we approach

the state attorney because we had lots of ongoing matters with the state attorney and it seems

that redacted said no for fear it'll be leaked straight to Epstein and i assumed i'd let it be at

that point question and do you know do you know what he meant by it being leaked Epstein by the state

by Barry Krischer the state attorney answers so based on context what i would assume

is that if the state attorney is cutting this kind of deal and it appears that things have already

leaked because you know there's clearly an article here with leaked so something has already leaked

question are you referring to exhibit one answer exhibit one other things would leak question

have you ever met Barry Krischer answer sure question what was your relationship with him

answer so there were multiple state attorneys within the district he was it was a professional

relationship question it was an elected position correct answer it was an elected position question

and what was your assessment of his aggressiveness as a prosecutor and his capabilities answer

on the public my most of my assessment with him was on the public corruption front and we had

brought several cases and i was a little disappointed that these were cases he could have brought

that he chose not to bring question right so can i am i accurate in inferring from that you didn't

regard him as a particularly hard charging prosecutor answer so with any state attorney i hesitate

to sort of paint a broad brushed stroke i don't think that's always fair but my experience

had been in the public corruption space and in that space i did not think whether it was him or whether

it was his office i can't speak but i did not think they had done as much as they could have done

question is there any area in which you thought he in his office did pursue aggressively answer so

as a recall we had we had emphasized gun crimes quite a bit and really had a lot of success moving

the ball in the gun crime space in Palm Beach but let me let me just say it's also very difficult

to reconstruct timeframes and so i hesitate because i don't know if that was 2006 or 2007 but you

asked in another area gets cut off question in this exhibit one you ask whether it's appropriate

appropriate to approach Barry krischer and give him a heads up as to where the u.s attorney's office

might go with the case answer correct question why would you want to extend that difference to him

why would it matter answer a colleague of law enforcement i thought it was important for the office

to work with with state attorneys as a general matter and i found that the office worked best

when it had good working relationships with state attorneys and with you know for that matter

the agency sacks and others but again you know rather than my asserting i'm asking redacted and

redacted was saying no and i don't know what the ultimate outcome was but i would guess that we

just defer and let it be right folks we're gonna wrap up right here and in the next episode we're

gonna pick up where we left off all of the information that goes with this episode can be found

in the description box teleredic here from 2311 racing game nights fun until someone spends five

minutes lining up one shot chalk breathe re chalk still aiming will they figure it out i fire up

chamba casino i can spin anywhere anytime and there's always a new social casino game every week

spins happen way faster than that shot play now at chamba casino dot com let's chamba sponsored by

chamba casino no purchase necessary vgw group board were prohibited by law 21 plus terms and conditions

apply warning the following zippercrooter radio spot you are about to hear is going to be filled

with f words when you're hiring we at zippercrooter know you can feel frustrated for lorne even

like your efforts are futile and you can spend a fortune trying to find fabulous people only to get

flooded with candidates who are just fine fortunately zippercrooter figured out how to fix all that

and right now you can try zippercrooter for free at zippercrooter dot com slash zip with zippercrooter

you can forget your frustrations because we find the right people for your roles fast which is our

absolute favorite effort in fact four out of five employers who post on zippercrooter get a quality

candidate within the first day fantastic so whether you need to hire four 40 or 400 people

get ready to meet first rate talent just go to zippercrooter dot com slash zip to try zippercrooter

for free don't forget that zippercrooter dot com slash zip finally that zippercrooter dot com slash