That subordinate was then-federal sex-crimes prosecutor Marie Villafaña, who Bloomberg reported Friday had “begged” Acosta – who would later go on to become President Donald Trump’s labor secretary during his first term – to “urgently” arrest Epstein, but to no avail.
“I’m having trouble understanding – given how long this case has been pending – what the rush is,” wrote Matthew Menchel, Acosta’s chief criminal prosecutor, in a 2007 email to Villafaña that was released recently by the Justice Department. “This is obviously a very significant case and [Acosta] wants to take his time making sure he is comfortable before proceeding.”
While Epstein was eventually convicted, Acosta’s office had agreed to not pursue federal charges against the disgraced financier, and instead offered him a generous plea deal that saw him plead guilty to the state-level crime of soliciting prostitution from a minor.
The plea deal, which Acosta reportedly said was offered because he was told Epstein “belonged to intelligence” and that he should “leave it alone,” allowed for Epstein to leave jail for up to 12 hours a day during his 13-month sentence, and granted him and any potential co-conspirators broad immunity, and in spite of the FBI having identified at least 40 potential minor victims.
But behind the scenes, Villafaña was growing increasingly “frustrated” as her superiors dismissed her calls to hold Epstein accountable, Bloomberg reported.
In one instance, Villafaña expressed frustration in an email dated July 4, 2007 over what she said was Acosta and Menchel’s “inappropriate” handling of the office’s investigation into Epstein. Menchel did not take kindly to the email.
“Both the tone and substance of your email are totally inappropriate,” Menchel wrote in an emailed response. “In combination with other matters in the past, it seriously calls your judgment into question.”
Villafaña fired back, telling Menchel in an emailed response that she had hit a “glass ceiling” preventing her from “moving forward” in her investigation into Epstein, and that evidence suggested that Epstein was “continuing to engage in criminal behavior."
“Disagreements about strategy and raising concerns about the forgotten voices of the victims in this case should not be classified as a lapse in judgment,” Villafaña wrote.
Villafaña recounted her clashes with Acosta and Menchel in a “detailed first-hand account” written in 2019, which was also made public for the first time recently as part of the DOJ’s publication of Epstein-related files.
In her 2019 write-up, made public by the DOJ as part of its recent publication of Epstein-related files, Villafaña wrote that she felt “pressured, intimidated, threatened, [or] coerced” in nearly 20 instances to take positions on the Epstein probe that she opposed. In the same write-up, Villafaña also detailed her shock at the ultimate outcome of the investigation.
“Allowing a federal defendant to plead guilty to state charges also is completely unheard of,” Villafaña wrote. “No one ever explained to me where the idea originated from.”
