DOJ-OGR-00021406.jpg

893 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

6
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
5
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 893 KB
Summary

This legal document details the aftermath of the signing of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein, focusing on the U.S. Attorney's Office's (USAO) failure to notify victims. OPR's Oosterbaan disagreed with the USAO's decision on policy grounds, while USAO's Sloman believed notification was planned for a later date. Ultimately, despite initial plans by case agents to inform victims, Acosta decided to delay notification about the NPA and its monetary provisions until after Epstein's state guilty plea in June 2008, following objections from Epstein's defense counsel and internal concerns.

People (6)

Name Role Context
Oosterbaan
Disagreed with the USAO's decision not to consult victims based on policy considerations, told OPR his perspective, a...
Andy Lourie
Mentioned in a quote as one of the people who was 'trying to do the right thing'.
Jeff Sloman
Mentioned in a quote as one of the people who was 'trying to do the right thing'. Also told OPR he perceived that vic...
Epstein Defendant/Subject of NPA
Mentioned in relation to the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), his state court guilty plea, and the NPA's nondisclosur...
Villafaña
Mentioned as having planned with case agents to inform victims about the resolution of the federal investigation afte...
Acosta
Mentioned as having made the final decision to defer to the State Attorney's discretion and not provide information a...

Organizations (4)

Name Type Context
OPR government agency
Office of Professional Responsibility, which received statements from Oosterbaan and Sloman regarding the USAO's hand...
CEOS government agency
Mentioned in a quote by Oosterbaan, likely referring to a component of the Department of Justice.
USAO government agency
U.S. Attorney's Office, which made the decisions regarding the Non-Prosecution Agreement with Epstein and victim noti...
State Attorney government agency
Mentioned in the context of Acosta deferring to their discretion on whether to notify victims about the state plea.

Timeline (2 events)

2007-09-24 - 2008-06-30
A period after the NPA was signed where the USAO made various decisions regarding victim notification, ultimately deciding to delay it.
USAO Acosta Villafaña case agents Epstein's defense counsel
2008-06
Epstein pled guilty in state court. Information about the NPA and monetary damages was not provided to victims until after this event.
state court

Locations (1)

Location Context
Where Epstein was expected to enter a guilty plea.

Relationships (3)

Oosterbaan professional USAO
Oosterbaan disagreed with the USAO's policy decisions regarding victim notification but did not believe their motivations were unethical. He later expressed regret for not being 'more aggressive' with them.
USAO adversarial/professional Epstein's defense counsel
The USAO consulted and negotiated with Epstein's defense counsel regarding victim notifications, and the defense attorneys 'strongly objected' to the government's plan.
Acosta professional (supervisory) Villafaña
Acosta made the final decision to delay victim notification, overriding the initial plans of Villafaña and the case agents.

Key Quotes (5)

"from a policy perspective,” CEOS would not “take a position that you wouldn’t consult with [the victims]."
Source
— Oosterbaan (Explaining his policy-based disagreement with the USAO to OPR.)
DOJ-OGR-00021406.jpg
Quote #1
"The people I know, Andy [Lourie], Jeff [Sloman], . . . were trying to do the right thing. . . . [T]hey weren’t acting unethically. I just disagree with the outcome . . . but the point is they weren’t trying . . . to do anything improper . . . it was more of this question of . . . you can let the victims weigh in on this, you can get their input on this and maybe it doesn’t sway you. You still do what you’re going to do but . . . it’s hard to say it was a complete, completely clean exercise of . . . prosecutorial discretion when [the USAO] didn’t really know what [the victims] would say."
Source
— Oosterbaan (Stating that he did not fault the USAO's motivations, only their process and outcome regarding victim consultation.)
DOJ-OGR-00021406.jpg
Quote #2
"I don’t think we had a concern about entering into the NPA at that point in terms of notifying victims. . . . I was under the perception that once the NPA was entered into and [Epstein] was going to enter a guilty plea in state court that we were going to notify the victims."
Source
— Sloman (A statement made to OPR about his understanding of the victim notification plan.)
DOJ-OGR-00021406.jpg
Quote #3
"maybe I should have been more aggressive with how . . . I dealt with [the USAO]."
Source
— Oosterbaan (A retrospective statement from footnote 295 about his interactions with the USAO.)
DOJ-OGR-00021406.jpg
Quote #4
"The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstein before making that disclosure."
Source
— NPA nondisclosure provision (The text of the nondisclosure provision from the Non-Prosecution Agreement, quoted in footnote 296.)
DOJ-OGR-00021406.jpg
Quote #5

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document