From Ellie Leonard, Panicked, Substack:

“Hugs, Ken” – Starr’s Emails to Jeffrey Epstein

Ellie Leonard

Dec 14READ IN APP

Attorney Ken Starr is most well-known for having authored the Starr Report, which served as the basis for the Clinton impeachment proceedings. But in 2007, Starr joined Jeffrey Epstein’s defense team, which led to the notorious “sweetheart deal.” Starr remained Epstein’s friend until his death in 2019, often counseling Epstein and his friends on how to handle sexual misconduct allegations. This is their correspondence.

The Panicked Writer is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

11/10/2016 4:03 PM – 10:14 PM

JE: any new york plans

KS: Thanks for checking in. I’ll make some. What timing would work for you?

JE: you are always welcome. if you would like to visit caribean , I can organize. anytime with wife your call. otherwise new york dec . 6-9? \ interesting times. [Troubled woman with a history of drug use who claimed that she was assaulted by Donald Trump at a Jeffrey Epstein sex party at age 13 MADE IT ALL UP]

KS: Darn. On a cruise in the aforementioned Caribbean that week. Weekly Standard post-election cruise. Bad timing on our part. We’ll try for January-February in warm climate, or NY when you’re next there. Many thanks

JE: are you going to stop in st. Thomas on your cruise?

11/19/2016 8:36 PM – 11:11 PM

KS: Greetings! Just got my hands on the itinerary. Alas, no St. Thomas. Back to the drawing board. Hope you’re well. Best, Ken

JE: hope thanksgiving is peaceful . miss talking to you

KS: And to you as well. We’ll be at the Breakers en famille as of Tuesday evening.. Any chance to see you in the Sunshine State? Hugs, Ken

11/20/2016 5:32 AM – 11:00 PM

JE: I’ll be there wed

KS: Fabulous! May I buy you lunch?

JE: great great anytime at your convenience or you can come to the house ,

KS: Jeffrey, sensational! I’ll be there with bells ringing. High noon ok?

JE: perfect

12/18/2016 7:39 PM

JE: if trump fully supports jasta , does that make the constitutional challenge moot

12/25/2016 5:46 PM – 7:39 PM

KS: Hope Santa (swim trunks donned), reindeer and sleigh successfully made it southward. Yuletide hugs, Ken

JE: thx hope this year brings you true peace. you deserve it

KS: A prince art thou. Thank you. Just agreed to handle an appeal — billion-dollar jury verdict in federal court against Johnson & Johnson. Get ready: Representing the hip-replacement plaintiffs. Good friends on both sides. Love ya.

5/19/2018 10:01 AM – 8:25 PM

JE: my good friend Michael wolffe of Fire and Fury fame, .wanted to speak to you totally off the record. thoghts? he wanted some color on indicting a sitting pres, between us , he has seen a draft of one. . ) what does not subject to criminal process mean. ? I assume trump corp has none of the consiutuional baggage?

KS: Happy to do so. Feel free to give Michael my email address. Hugs, Ken

The following is a conversation between Jeffrey Epstein, Ken Starr, and Michael Wolff

JE: Ken – Michael , Michael/ Ken

MW: Ken, delighted to meet. Jeffrey has long told me about your friendship and the respect he has for you. If you send me your mailing address, it would be my pleasure to send you my recent book about the Trump White House. I’m now at work on a sequel focusing on the legal case against Trump and Trump’s response to it. Any counsel and background you might provide would aid me enormously and enrich the book. I, of course, would be willing to talk with you on an entirely off-the-record basis or under any arrangement that suits. Thanks in advance and I look forward to the chance to chat. All best, Michael

KS: Michael: Excellent. With thanks to Jeffrey, I’m delighted to come into your orbit, and look forward to our conversation. My mailing address is: [REDACTED] Warm regards, Ken

8/17/2018 10:14 AM – 10:18 AM

July 30, 2008 photo of Jeffrey Epstein in court in West Palm Beach – Palm Beach Post

KS: Good morning! Jed teaches crim law at Yale. Outspokenly strong on the need for procedural fairness in campus adjudicatory proceedings. Relevant to your friend’s unhappy situation? If so, happy to make the connection. Hugs, Ken

JE: thx

8/22/2018 12:07 PM – 7:17 PM

KS: Can you talk? Impt. [REDACTED]

JE: i vote yes as it makes you relevant to today rather than merely re- reciting an old tale. 🙂 or tail?

Ellie’s Coffee Fund

JE: I think scholarly but not too much so. no one above the law. . we begin leaving a kingdom. . unlikely to give king like powers to a president. on one above the law. I would like lunch pail joe to come away and think , this guy is smart . I understood . lets see what he writes about the clintons. someone suggested that trump could shoot someone on fifth avenue and not lose a vote. that is true , but would make little sense for him not to suffer an immediate consequence. the allowed civil depo setting precedent for criminal process , is a lawyers outline I might think of dumbing it down , again , and suggesting that you can sue your neighbor , even if your neighbor is the president. makes little sense that the you can be indicted for assaulting him but he cannot if he assaults you. low bar for civil higher bar for criminal. . at some point on your book tour I might point out how disappointed you were that the clinton and betty curries‘ trashcan story , was reopened . .

KS: Wise counsel. Thx!

12/13/2018 4:24 PM

JE: ken ,would you take a stab at the article for the law journal. ? thx

12/15/2018 11:24 AM

KS: Here goes: “Sweetheart deal! “ So goes the critique of the resolution of a long-ago case involving our former client — and now-friend — Jeffrey Epstein. The critique is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law or the facts, nor by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey, Jeffrey was subjected to an unprecedented federal intrusion into a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. His offense to the social order — involving sex for hire — was entirely a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. His conduct — a classic state offense —was being treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County, but the overweening federal government intruded where it did not belong. And now, over ten years after the fact, the current assault on federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then the United States Attorney in south Florida), condemns the federal authorities for not going far enough.

Alexander Acosta, former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida – AP

The critics are entirely wrong. Neither the facts nor the law support the misguided criticisms being leveled by journalists and politicians at federal offices from over a decade ago — including the highest levels of the Justice Department in Washington, D.C. .

Here are the key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history whatever, engaged in illegal conduct that amounts to solicitation of prostitution. That was wrong, and it was reasonably viewed as a violation of Florida state law. Although no coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs and the like were involved, the unsavory facts were carefully assessed by experienced state prosecutors who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses in the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney’s Office conducted an extensive 15-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by a state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution.

Share

During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility — or lack thereof — and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence. Then, after months of elaborate negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest — a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants,

Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney’s Office tried, to no avail, to fit Mr. Epstein’s situation into its vision of what it viewed as a commercial trafficking ring targeting minors. This was anything but. At long last, the federal authorities acknowledged that stark reality and grudgingly agreed to defer prosecution to the state. But there was a huge catch. In the face of our arguments sharply condemning their overreach, the federal prosecutors insisted on many unorthodox requirements that tugged at fundamental values of due process. For example, the agreement required Mr. Epstein to pay an undisclosed list of asserted victims $150,000 each. Even more, the feds insisted that Jeffrey pay for an attorney to represent such unidentified victims if any chose to filed civil litigation against him. When asked what possible legal authority supported this extravagant exercise of national power, the feds lamely cited a wildly inapposite case from Alaska involving cocaine and forced on-the-street prostitution. Apples and oranges.

Under the federally-forced deal, Jefrey was sentenced to jail. That would not have been the case under the agreed-upon state disposition of this non-violent, consensual commercial arrangement. Jeffrey complied, served that sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same as other state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct was exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities. He continued to work, including his many philanthropic efforts.

Our friend Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. He has also paid out millions of dollars to the asserted victims and their highly-creative lawyers. For over ten years, he has lived an exemplary life, including carrying on his wide-ranging philanthropies. Those of us who represented him in the Florida proceedings — for customary professional fees — now count him as a trusted friend.

Our nation faces vitally important challenges, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Voices are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about women in the workplace. But Jeffrey, an exemplary employer, has long been called to account by the criminal justice system for his misdeeds of yesteryear. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances, that unhappy chapter in Jeffrey’s otherwise-magnificent life should be allowed to close once and for all.