DOJ-OGR-00023303.tif
76.4 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
4
Events
4
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Report excerpt
File Size:
76.4 KB
Summary
This document analyzes Acosta's decision regarding victim notification in the Epstein case, concluding that while he didn't violate clear standards by deferring to state authorities, he exercised poor judgment by failing to ensure federal investigation victims were notified. The report details the USAO's initial stance, Epstein's attorneys' challenges in late 2007, and the subsequent decisions made by Acosta, including a strategic postponement of NPA notification based on Villafaña and case agents' concerns. OPR's findings were met with strong disagreement from Acosta regarding the applied standard.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Acosta | US Attorney / Decision-maker |
Made decisions regarding victim notification, deferred to state authorities, exercised poor judgment according to OPR.
|
| Epstein | Subject of investigation/plea |
His state court plea hearing and sentencing, subject of federal investigation, victims sought monetary damages from him.
|
| Villafaña | Individual preparing victim notice / Case agent (implied) |
Involved in strategic concerns, prepared written notice to victims, exchanged edits with Sloman.
|
| Sloman | Individual giving instruction |
Instructed Villafaña to provide draft to Lefkowitz, exchanged edits with Villafaña.
|
| Lefkowitz | Defense attorney |
Received draft letter from Villafaña.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| USAO |
United States Attorney's Office, challenged by Epstein's attorneys, initially took position on victim notification.
|
|
| OPR |
Office of Professional Responsibility, analyzed Acosta's decision, made conclusions regarding his judgment, addressed...
|
|
| Department |
Refers to the Department of Justice, expected sensitivity in victim treatment.
|
Timeline (4 events)
Relationships (4)
Acosta made decisions concerning victim notifications related to Epstein's case.
Villafaña and Sloman exchanged edits of the draft letter.
at Sloman's instruction, she provided the draft to defense attorney Lefkowitz.
Key Quotes (3)
"ACOSTA'S DECISION TO DEFER TO THE STATE ATTORNEY'S DISCRETION WHETHER TO NOTIFY VICTIMS ABOUT EPSTEIN'S STATE COURT PLEA HEARING DID NOT VIOLATE A CLEAR OR UNAMBIGUOUS STANDARD; HOWEVER, ACOSTA EXERCISED POOR JUDGMENT BY FAILING TO ENSURE THAT VICTIMS IDENTIFIED IN THE FEDERAL INVESTIGATION WERE ADVISED OF THE STATE PLEA HEARING"Source
DOJ-OGR-00023303.tif
Quote #1
""strongly disagree[d]""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023303.tif
Quote #2
""never before expected of any U.S. Attorney.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023303.tif
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document