From: (USAFLS)" To: (USAFLS)" alMIN> Bcc: (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Epstein Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 19:14:20 +0000 Importance: Normal Hi IM -- My trial is over, so I now have to time to focus back on this case and our e-mail exchange. There are several points in your e-mail that I would like to address, and I also would like to address where we are in the case. First, I wanted to address the comment about jumping the chain of command. After that concern was brought to my attention several months ago, I have tried ve hard to be cognizant of the chain of command, and, as was evident at the meeting with Epstein's attorneys, and I have discussed the case extensively. My oraal e- mail asking for everyone's input was addressed to you, and M, and was cc'd. and I also have discussed the case in great detail.) The response to your e-mail was addressed only to you because I thought you would want to discuss privately our disagreement. It was addressed to Was well because you said that you had Blackberry and it was a holiday when you would be out of the office. If there is a particular instance of violating the chain of command that you would like to discuss, I would be happy to discuss it with you. Second, the reason why I sent the original e-mail to everyone was to see if anyone had any objections to the proposed language. I waited several days to send out the e-mail to to et eve one's res nse. In our res nse ou did not raise an concerns nor did an one else. , you, and I all have discussed the greater flexibility of a pre-indictment plea. The statement that I have not respected position regarding the prosecution of the case demonstrates why you hear the frustration in the tone of my e-mail. For two and a half months I have been asking about what that sttion is. I have asked for direction on whether to revise the indictment, whether there are other issues that wants addressed prior to deciding, whether there is additional investigation that nee