DOJ-OGR-00021336.jpg
1010 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
6
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
1010 KB
Summary
This legal document from an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report analyzes the decision by former U.S. Attorney Acosta to use a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) to resolve the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. OPR concluded that Acosta did not commit misconduct, as there was no clear and unambiguous statute or policy in the U.S. Attorneys' Manual (USAM) that prohibited the use of an NPA in circumstances like Epstein's, where it was not in exchange for cooperation. The document affirms the broad discretion prosecutors hold in making such decisions.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Acosta | U.S. Attorney |
The subject of an OPR investigation regarding his decision to use a non-prosecution agreement to resolve the federal ...
|
| Epstein | Subject of a federal investigation |
The individual whose federal investigation was resolved by a non-prosecution agreement initiated by Acosta.
|
Organizations (6)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| U.S. Attorney | Government agency |
The role held by Acosta, granting him prosecutorial discretion.
|
| USAM | Government policy manual |
The U.S. Attorneys' Manual, which OPR found did not contain a clear standard prohibiting Acosta's actions.
|
| OPR | Government agency |
The Office of Professional Responsibility, which investigated Acosta's conduct and found no misconduct.
|
| Department | Government agency |
Likely referring to the Department of Justice, whose policy was not found to be violated.
|
| Executive branch | Branch of government |
Mentioned as the branch where the authority for prosecutorial charging decisions fundamentally resides.
|
| Fokker Servs. B.V. | Company |
A party in the legal case United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., cited as precedent.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The court mentioned in the citation for United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., 818 F.3d 733 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
|
Key Quotes (5)
"plenary authority"Source
— The document, referencing federal law and the USAM
(Describing the authority Acosta had as U.S. Attorney to resolve the case as he deemed necessary.)
DOJ-OGR-00021336.jpg
Quote #1
"afford a middle-ground option to the prosecution when, for example, it believes that a criminal conviction may be difficult to obtain or may result in unwanted collateral consequences for a defendant or third parties, but also believes that the defendant should not evade accountability altogether."Source
— United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V.
(Explaining the rationale for using non-prosecution or deferred prosecution agreements.)
DOJ-OGR-00021336.jpg
Quote #2
"resides fundamentally with the Executive branch."Source
— United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V.
(Stating that the choice to use a non-prosecution agreement is a prosecutorial charging decision belonging to the Executive branch.)
DOJ-OGR-00021336.jpg
Quote #3
"impossible or impracticable."Source
— USAM § 9-27.600 (comment)
(Describing circumstances where alternatives to full immunity are not feasible, typically in exchange for cooperation.)
DOJ-OGR-00021336.jpg
Quote #4
"cooperation"Source
— The document, referencing the USAM
(Describing the typical reason for a non-prosecution agreement, which was noted as not being the case for Epstein's agreement.)
DOJ-OGR-00021336.jpg
Quote #5
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document