HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014065.jpg
1.51 MB
Extraction Summary
4
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
0
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal/academic article (law review) produced in government oversight investigation
File Size:
1.51 MB
Summary
This document appears to be a page from a law review article (likely by Paul Cassell) included in a House Oversight Committee production regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. The text critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically arguing that victims' rights should apply during the investigative stage (pre-charging) to prevent 'secondary victimization.' This legal argument is central to the controversy surrounding the Epstein non-prosecution agreement, where victims were not notified during the federal investigation.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Cassell | Author |
Listed in the header 'CASSELL ET AL.'
|
| Sen. Jon Kyl | Politician |
Cited in footnote 155 regarding a statement in the Congressional Record
|
| Susan Estrich | Author |
Cited in footnote 157 for the book 'Real Rape'
|
| Beloof | Author/Source |
Cited in footnote 157
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| OLC |
Office of Legal Counsel; criticized in the text for its interpretation of the CVRA
|
|
| Justice Department |
Mentioned as the location of federal prosecutors
|
|
| President's Task Force on Victims of Crime |
Cited in footnote 157
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT'
|
Relationships (1)
Text argues OLC interpretation contradicts the intent of the CVRA drafters.
Key Quotes (4)
"OLC’s failure to consider the purposes underlying the CVRA is a glaring oversight."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014065.jpg
Quote #1
"It would contradict the purpose of preventing victim mistreatment in the criminal justice system to artificially limit the right to fairness to the point at which charges are filed."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014065.jpg
Quote #2
"Clearly, many victims can and do suffer secondary victimization during criminal investigations, such as when sexual assault victims are treated inappropriately by law enforcement agents."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014065.jpg
Quote #3
"OLC acknowledges, as it must, that the CVRA’s coverage extends to any federal employee engaged in “the detection, investigation or prosecution of crime.”"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014065.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,604 characters)
86 CASSELL ET AL. [Vol. 104]
right.155 The reason for adopting such a broad right was that “[t]oo often victims of crime experience a secondary victimization at the hands of the criminal justice system. This provision is intended to direct Government agencies and employees, whether they are in the executive or judiciary branch, to treat victims of crime with the respect they deserve.”156 OLC’s failure to consider the purposes underlying the CVRA is a glaring oversight.
OLC never attempts to explain why the CVRA’s drafters would want victims to have a right to fair treatment once criminal charges were filed but possess no such right before the filing of criminal charges. Clearly, many victims can and do suffer secondary victimization during criminal investigations, such as when sexual assault victims are treated inappropriately by law enforcement agents.157 It would contradict the purpose of preventing victim mistreatment in the criminal justice system to artificially limit the right to fairness to the point at which charges are filed. The right to fairness logically applies at all stages of the criminal justice process.
C. OLC’S INEFFECTIVE RESPONSE TO THE CVRA’S COVERAGE AND VENUE PROVISIONS
At the end of its memorandum, OLC finally discusses what it identifies as the two strongest arguments for construing the CVRA as applying before charging: the coverage provision and the venue provision. OLC acknowledges, as it must, that the CVRA’s coverage extends to any federal employee engaged in “the detection, investigation or prosecution of crime.”158 Such employees “shall make their best efforts to see that crime victims are notified of, and accorded, the rights” afforded by the statute.159 Notably, this duty applies to individuals not just in the Justice Department (where all federal prosecutors are located) but other agencies as well, such
________________________________________
155 150 CONG. REC. 7303 (2004) (statement of Sen. Jon Kyl).
156 Id.
157 See SUSAN ESTRICH, REAL RAPE 50–51 (1987) (describing how a rape victim’s sexual history may be used against her in court proceedings); Beloof, supra note 38, at 309–10 (collecting examples of victims’ issues that arise during the investigative process); see also PRESIDENT’S TASK FORCE ON VICTIMS OF CRIME, FINAL REPORT, supra note 10, at 57–62 (making recommendations for how police should treat victims during the criminal justice process).
158 OLC CVRA Rights Memo, supra note 2, at 15 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1) (2012)) (internal quotation marks omitted).
159 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1).
155 150 CONG. REC. 7303 (2004) (statement of Sen. Jon Kyl).
156 Id.
157 See SUSAN ESTRICH, REAL RAPE 50–51 (1987) (describing how a rape victim’s sexual history may be used against her in court proceedings); Beloof, supra note 38, at 309–10 (collecting examples of victims’ issues that arise during the investigative process); see also PRESIDENT’S TASK FORCE ON VICTIMS OF CRIME, FINAL REPORT, supra note 10, at 57–62 (making recommendations for how police should treat victims during the criminal justice process).
158 OLC CVRA Rights Memo, supra note 2, at 15 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1) (2012)) (internal quotation marks omitted).
159 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014065
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document