DOJ-OGR-00021757.jpg

671 KB

Extraction Summary

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

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 671 KB
Summary

This legal document discusses an unusual co-conspirator clause in a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) related to Epstein. It reveals that Epstein's defense team initially proposed a broad immunity deal to protect third parties, including "four named female assistants" and other employees like Ms. Maxwell, from any future criminal charges related to the federal investigation. The Government found this proposal "unusual" and countered with a more limited offer confined to the Southern District of Florida.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Virginia Roberts
Mentioned as someone the Government interviewed but elected not to call as a witness.
Epstein
Central figure in the discussion of an immunity deal that would have insulated him from criminal prosecutions.
Ms. Maxwell Epstein's employee
Mentioned in a footnote as someone who would have been protected under the proposed immunity clause because she was E...
four named female assistants female assistants
A group for whom the defense sought immunity from future criminal charges in the first iteration of the co-conspirato...

Organizations (4)

Name Type Context
Government government agency
Refers to the prosecuting authority that interviewed Virginia Roberts, described the NPA clause as unusual, and respo...
SDFL government agency
Abbreviation for the Southern District of Florida, mentioned as the jurisdiction the defense sought immunity beyond.
USAO government agency
Abbreviation for the United States Attorney's Office, mentioned in the context of the Government's draft proposal.
a specific Epstein corporate entity company
Mentioned as part of the defense's proposed immunity clause, seeking to protect its employees.

Timeline (3 events)

The defense proposed the first iteration of a co-conspirator clause for a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) to grant immunity to third parties.
Epstein's defense team
The Government responded to the defense's proposal with a draft proposal to resolve federal criminal liability for co-conspirators in the Southern District of Florida.
Southern District of Florida
The Government interviewed Virginia Roberts but chose not to call her as a witness.

Locations (1)

Location Context
Mentioned as the jurisdiction for which the Government's draft proposal would resolve federal criminal liability for ...

Relationships (2)

Ms. Maxwell professional Epstein
The document states in a footnote that "Ms. Maxwell would have been protected as she was Epstein’s employee."
four named female assistants professional Epstein
The defense sought immunity for them in connection with their association with Epstein and his corporate entity, implying an employment or assistant relationship.

Key Quotes (2)

"unusual,” even “very unusual” and “pretty weird."
Source
— the Government (Describing the co-conspirator clause in the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA).)
DOJ-OGR-00021757.jpg
Quote #1
"preclude[d] the initiation of any and all criminal charges which might otherwise in the future be brought against [four named female assistants] or any employee of [a specific Epstein corporate entity] for any criminal charge that arises out of the ongoing federal investigation."
Source
— the defense (A quote from the first iteration of the co-conspirator clause proposed by the defense.)
DOJ-OGR-00021757.jpg
Quote #2

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,580 characters)

Case 22-1426, Document 87, 07/27/2023, 3548202, Page15 of 35
interviewed Virginia Roberts, who the Government elected not to call as a witness.
And, of course, a broader immunity deal for co-conspirators accomplished what
Epstein may not have been able to obtain more directly, namely co-conspirator
immunity that would have insulated Epstein from criminal prosecutions elsewhere,
where co-conspirators might otherwise have been forced to testify against him in
return for leniency.
There is no question that the NPA did not contain standard federal plea
agreement language. SA103 fn.120. The co-conspirator clause was, in the words of
the Government, “unusual,” even “very unusual” and “pretty weird.” SA194, SA212
fn.258. Not surprisingly, the first iteration of this clause was proposed by the
defense. SA95. It “preclude[d] the initiation of any and all criminal charges which
might otherwise in the future be brought against [four named female assistants] or
any employee of [a specific Epstein corporate entity] for any criminal charge that
arises out of the ongoing federal investigation.”⁵ Id. This demonstrates that, from the
beginning, the defense sought immunity for third parties beyond the SDFL. The
Government responded with a draft proposal that resolved the federal criminal
liability of any co-conspirators in the Southern District of Florida growing out of any
criminal conduct by those persons known to the USAO as of the date of the
⁵ Notably, even in this iteration, Ms. Maxwell would have been protected as she was
Epstein’s employee.
9
DOJ-OGR-00021757

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document