PT/BC/ 13 March 2011 Telegraph Media Group Ltd., 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London SWIW ODT. FAO: The Editor. The Daily Telegraph cc Arthur Wynn Davies. Legal Manager — A rthu r.wvnn-davies tele ra Dear Sirs, We have been consulted by Jeffrey Epstein in relation to your grossly inaccurate and persistent references to him being a "paedophile", in particular in your editions of 7'" and 10th March under the headlines "Duchess of York admits Duke arranged for convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to pay off her debts" and "The Duke, his paedophile guest, and the most unusual use of an RAF base" respectively, and on your website. Our client is not, as your headline article alleges, a convicted paedophile. Although he has been convicted of soliciting prostitutes, and procuring a person under 18 for prostitution, he has served his time for that offence ....While in the UK, as you are aware, the age of consent is 16, in the United States it is 18. This young woman was just a few months shy of her 18th birthday. Thus, the offence for which Mr. Epstein was convicted of in the U.S. would not have been a crime in the UK. Furthermore, the false and distorted terminology used by you to describe our client in your vitriolic attack on his character is in stark contrast to your coverage of the recent scandal involving Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, where we can find no reference in your reports to him being described as a paedophile in the face of similar charges. We cite this example not by way of condoning either our client's nor PM Berlusconi's PAST actions (the allegations against Mr. Epstein all antedated the fall of 2005) but to highlight the outrageous and totally unjustified description of our client as a "paedophile" which simply is not true on any interpretation of the word. He has not been convicted nor been accused of being a "paedophile", a pejorative that has a very specific medical definition', apart from by certain elements of the