OHMYGOSH!! I JUST FOUND AN UNPUBLISHED 8-PAGE LETTER FROM KEN STARR TO ALEX ACOSTA REGARDING THE EPSTEIN PROSECUTION!
by Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. – (follow me if you want objective reporting of the facts and the truth about what’s going on in our legal system with this administration)
Ken Starr, former Solicitor General under GHW Bush, former special counsel, and former Federal judge, was part of Jeffrey Epstein’s defense team.
In this unpublished, in fact perhaps never before seen except in the private files of the DOJ, letter, Starr and colleague Jay Lefkowitz lay out all of the reasons they believe that not only should there not be a Federal prosecution of Epstein, but that in fact there *could not* be, based on the law and policy reasons that Starr lays out in this 8-page letter. (Notes from the Front members: this heretofore unpublished letter is in your inbox.)
Let’s remember that Acosta had only been in the office of U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida for 2 years, at most, at the time that all of this is going down. Previously he had been a U.S. Attorney in the Civil Rights division, also for just 2 years.
So, a total of just 4 years.
Previous to that he had been with the National Labor Relations Board. In fact, his area of expertise was primarily employment law.
My point is this: 2 years into being the U.S. Attorney in Florida, and only 2 years preceding that in the DOJ at all, imagine that he gets this letter from *Ken freakin’ Starr*. And Jay Lefkowitz, who is no slouch either.
Is this what persuaded Acosta to do the plea deal and the notorious non-prosecution agreement?
The letter was drafted on August 5, 2007, and sent the next day.
The non-prosecution agreement was signed by Epstein on September 24, 2007 (but not fully executed for many months).
The letter lays out all of the different reasons that the defense claims that the Feds not only shouldn’t but can’t prosecute Epstein. Therefore the state *must* be the one to do it.
In the letter you will see, among the other reasons, Starr refer to the Petite Policy. No, this isn’t a wee tiny policy. It’s named after the case Petite v. United States, and it’s basically an internal DOJ policy based on that case to not prosecute at the Federal level defendants who have already been prosecuted at the state level for the same crimes.
The Petite Policy generally only refers to charging decisions; in other words “Should we charge them with a Federal crime, or did the state (or another Federal agency) already charge them for the same crimes?”
Starr then goes on to say that at any rate the evidence is flimsy, saying that it is “of such poor quality that it is unlikely to sustain a conviction at trial. Consequently, even if federal charges were brought, it is unlikely that a federal conviction could be obtained.”
And that there was no credible evidence that Epstein knew that any of the girls were underage. (Remember how we’ve discussed that people like Haley Robson, when she was recruiting her classmates, always admonished them to say that they were 18 if asked – this was to give Epstein plausible deniability.)
In fact, there’s actually an entire section with the heading “The Evidence That Does Exist is of Poor Quality and Will Not Sustain a Conviction”.
I’m betting that when Acosta received this letter from the high-wattage Starr he was at least a little shaken, and Starr-struck (see what I did there?) This man had, after all, been the *Solicitor General of the United States*. *And* a Federal judge! So presumably he knew what he was talking about, and here he was leaning on Acosta. That’s difficult leverage against which to push back, even if you wanted to, and especially for such a relatively young U.S. Attorney.
Notes members, after you read this be sure to let us know your thoughts in our private chat thread about this post, you can access that here: https://substack.com/chat/5524460/post/cca47f14-9453-4511-a63a-14447596ec2a
Notes from the Front members: This otherwise unpublished letter is in your inbox now! Do NOT post it on social media, even if your account is locked down. But DO let us know your thoughts on it once you’ve read it!
If you’re not a Notes from the Front member this document is a great reason to join! For just $5 a month you can stop relying on this platform’s algorithms to show you my updates *and* get the included documents! *And* help keep me in that sweet elixer of productivity, coffee! :~) Join here now:
https://annepmitchell.substack.com/p/ohmygosh-i-just-found-an-unpublished
Don’t have the $5? You can also ensure that you never miss an update by getting them directly in your inbox for *free* (yes really) by signing up for my Notes from the Front Lite – it’s like Notes from the Front but without the documents and coffee. You can sign up for that here (it really is completely free, no ads, no spam, just also no documents or private chats): https://notesfromthefront.fyi
New by popular demand: Many of you have asked how you can support my work without subscribing to my $5 Substack (thank you for asking! ❤️), here’s how: https://www.annepmitchell.com/buy-anne-a-coffee/
P.S. If you actually read all the way to the bottom please leave a comment that includes the word “petite”. It will show me that my efforts aren’t in vain and that people actually *do* read these things, and it will drive those who just skim crazy wondering what everyone is talking about! ;~)
Source