From: "Matthew I. Menchel" To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:28:25 +0000 > Jeffrey, As always, I enjoyed our get together. It dawned on me, after you mentioned your meeting with Tim Zagat, that sending you - a person who never goes out to eat - a Zagats is a totally useless gift. Kind of like bringing a nice bottle of wine to dinner for a guy who never drinks. Oh wait, I did that too. Thanks for the info on Trivers. I'll check it out. Not sure I agree about the parent/teacher distinction in terms of difference between biological vs adopted child. I can't imagine feeling any different about my son just cause he came from my same genetic pool and I doubt he feels any differently towards me. I guess time will tell. I will say, I wouldn't have it any other way. Keep in touch, Matt Matthew I. Menchel KOBRE & KIM LLP www.kobrekim.com New York I London I Hong Kong I Washington, DC I Miami I Cayman Islands I BVI From: Jeffrey Epstein [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 12:11 AM To: Matthew I. Menchel Subject: robert trivers , genes in conflict . blog found today . I also entertain the possibly that Sandusky is innocent. Why? Because I took the initiative to read the trial transcript and formed my own conclusions. I found nothing in the transcript that proved that Sandusky was innocent. I found nothing in the transcript that proved to me, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Sandusky is guilty either. The testimony of the victims is absolutely very sad. It's also inconsistent, and involves allegations that were brought to light often under very dubious circumstances (previously estranged family members hiring civil lawyers for them, psychologists uncovering repressed memories, questionable investigative and interview techniques, etc). I encourage you all to read the transcript yourselves, then compare it with the Grand Jury testimony. Is Sandusky innocent? Not nece