DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
76.7 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
5
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
10
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Report/analysis
File Size:
76.7 KB
Summary
This document analyzes R. Alexander Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein prosecution, critiquing his use and interpretation of the Petite policy. It details Acosta's reasoning for federal non-intervention, his view on the state's role, and his concessions during an OPR interview that the outcome was not an appropriate punishment. The text also references the Ashcroft Memo and mentions an estimated sentencing range for Epstein by Villafaña.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| R. Alexander Acosta | U.S. Attorney |
Mentioned as having authority, made decisions regarding Epstein's prosecution, interviewed by OPR, wrote a letter ref...
|
| Epstein | Subject of prosecution |
His prosecution by the state, potential incarceration, registration as a sexual offender, investigation details, and ...
|
| Villafaña | Estimator |
Estimated the applicable sentencing guidelines range for Epstein.
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| OPR |
Office of Professional Responsibility, interviewed Acosta regarding his decisions.
|
|
| USAO |
U.S. Attorney's Office, intervention mentioned in relation to state prosecution.
|
|
| PBPD |
Presumably a police department, mentioned as not bringing Epstein to the FBI's attention.
|
|
| FBI |
Federal Bureau of Investigation, mentioned as a potential originator of the investigation.
|
|
| The Daily Beast |
Online publication where Acosta's letter was published.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Acosta's decision to employ Petite policy analysis in Epstein's case, aiming to avert a 'manifest injustice' by requiring the state to do more.
OPR interview of Acosta regarding his decisions in the Epstein case, where Acosta conceded the NPA did not represent 'appropriate punishment' or 'best outcome'.
Relationships (3)
Acosta made decisions regarding Epstein's prosecution and incarceration.
Acosta was interviewed by OPR regarding his handling of the Epstein case.
Key Quotes (10)
"[The prosecution] was going forward on the part of the state, and so here is the big bad federal government stepping on a sovereign state, saying you're not doing enough, [when] to my mind . . . the whole idea of the [P]etite policy is to recognize that the []state . . . is an independent entity, and that we should presume that what they're doing is correct, even if we don't like the outcome, except in the most unusual of circumstances."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #1
""absent USAO intervention," the state's prosecution of Epstein would have become final, and accordingly, it was "prudent" to employ Petite policy analysis."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #2
""the federal responsibility" in this unique situation was merely to serve as a "back-stop [to] state authorities to ensure that there [was] no miscarriage of justice.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #3
"USAO could avert a “manifest injustice" by forcing the state to do more and require Epstein to serve time in jail and register as a sexual offender."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #4
""miscarriage of justice" or "manifest injustice""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #5
"there are any number of instances where the federal government or the state government can proceed, and state charges are substantially less and different, and . . . the federal government stands aside and lets the state proceed."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #6
""the best sentence.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #7
""the most serious readily provable offense""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #8
""the state to do a little bit more""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #9
"an "appropriate punishment" in the federal system, nor even "the best outcome in the state system,""Source
DOJ-OGR-00023210.tif
Quote #10
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document