DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg

1020 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

6
People
5
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
4
Relationships
8
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 1020 KB
Summary

This document details the rationale behind Alexander Acosta's decision to pursue a state-based, pre-charge disposition in the Jeffrey Epstein case instead of a federal trial. Acosta explained to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) that his decision was based on federalism concerns, the weakness of the case, and a desire to act as a 'backstop' to the state prosecution, ensuring Epstein was registered as a sex offender. This contrasts with the views of other prosecutors, like Villafaña, who believed strongly in the federal case and wanted to proceed to trial.

People (6)

Name Role Context
Villafaña Prosecutor
Believed she could have prevailed in a trial against Epstein and repeatedly recommended proceeding with an indictment.
Epstein Defendant/Subject of investigation
The subject of a federal prosecution and investigation discussed throughout the document.
Oosterbaan null
Believed that the government would succeed at trial against Epstein.
Acosta Decision-maker (likely U.S. Attorney)
Assumed responsibility for deciding how to resolve the Epstein investigation, ultimately opting for a state-based, pr...
Sloman null
Discussed the Epstein case with Acosta. Also told OPR that Villafaña "always believed in the case."
Menchel null
Discussed the Epstein case with Acosta.

Organizations (5)

Name Type Context
USAO Government agency
United States Attorney's Office, which was handling the federal prosecution of Epstein.
OPR Government agency
Office of Professional Responsibility, which was investigating Acosta's decision-making process.
United States Attorney’s Office Government agency
Mentioned by Acosta as the type of office that would not typically get involved in a state solicitation case in 2006.
PBPD Government agency
Mentioned as the entity Acosta understood would not have brought the case to federal investigators if the state pursu...
State Attorney’s Office Government agency
The state-level prosecuting body that was pursuing a sanction against Epstein.

Timeline (2 events)

2006
Acosta stated that in 2006, it was highly unusual for a U.S. Attorney's Office to get involved in a state solicitation case.
null
2007-07-31
Terms for a state-based resolution in the Epstein case were offered to the defense.
null
Acosta USAO Epstein's defense

Relationships (4)

Acosta Professional Sloman
Acosta discussed the Epstein case primarily with Sloman and Menchel.
Acosta Professional Menchel
Acosta discussed the Epstein case primarily with Sloman and Menchel.
Villafaña Professional (disagreement) Acosta
Villafaña believed the case should go to trial and repeatedly recommended indictment, a view that contrasts with Acosta's final decision to pursue a pre-charge disposition.
Villafaña Professional Oosterbaan
Both Villafaña and Oosterbaan believed the government would succeed at trial, indicating they shared a similar view on the case's strength.

Key Quotes (8)

"in 2006, it would have been extremely unusual for any United States Attorney’s Office to become involved in a state solicitation case, even one involving underage teens,"
Source
— Acosta (Explaining his rationale to OPR for deferring to state prosecutors.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #1
"the province of state prosecutors."
Source
— Acosta (Describing his view on solicitation cases.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #2
"a preference for deferring to the state"
Source
— Acosta (Describing his approach to the Epstein case to OPR.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #3
"make it clear that [the USAO was] not stepping on something that is a purely local matter, because we [didn’t] want bad precedent for the sake of the larger human trafficking issue."
Source
— Acosta (Explaining his federalism concerns to OPR.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #4
"a polite way of saying[, ‘]encouraging the state to do a little bit more.[’]"
Source
— Acosta (Describing the USAO's role as a 'backstop' to the state's prosecution.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #5
"uncharted territory"
Source
— Acosta (Describing the Epstein case to OPR, highlighting the uncertainty of a trial outcome.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #6
"weighed against a certain plea with registration that would make sure that the public knew that this person was a sex offender."
Source
— Acosta (Justifying the decision for a plea deal by contrasting the risk of an unfavorable trial outcome with the certainty of a plea.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #7
"always believed in the case."
Source
— Villafaña (as reported by Sloman) (Footnote 220, where Sloman tells OPR about Villafaña's confidence in the prosecution against Epstein.)
DOJ-OGR-00021348.jpg
Quote #8

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document