EFTA00030231.pdf
242 KB
Extraction Summary
13
People
9
Organizations
3
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Email forwarding a law360 news article
File Size:
242 KB
Summary
This document is an email dated June 26, 2019, forwarding a Law360 article titled 'Gov't Says Epstein Victims Can't Scrap Nonprosecution Deal.' The article details the federal government's response to a lawsuit by Epstein's victims (Doe v. U.S.), where prosecutors argued that while the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA) was violated by Alexander Acosta in 2008, the nonprosecution agreement cannot be undone. The government proposed a meeting and a public hearing for victims to be heard, a remedy the victims' lawyer Brad Edwards criticized as insufficient.
People (13)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Billionaire sex offender |
Subject of the criminal case and nonprosecution agreement.
|
| Carolina Bolado | Author |
Author of the Law360 article.
|
| Alexander Acosta | Former U.S. Attorney / Labor Secretary |
Signed the nonprosecution agreement with Epstein; found to have violated the CVRA.
|
| Kenneth A. Marra | U.S. District Judge |
Ruled that prosecutors violated the CVRA; rejected government claims regarding victim notification.
|
| Brad Edwards | Attorney |
Represents the victims; criticized the government's response as a 'slap in the face'.
|
| Jay C. Howell | Attorney |
Represents the victims.
|
| John Scarola | Attorney |
Represents the victims.
|
| Paul G. Cassell | Attorney / Professor |
Represents the victims; affiliated with University of Utah.
|
| Byung J. Pak | Government Representative |
Representing the government in the case (Northern District of Georgia).
|
| Jill E. Steinberg | Government Representative |
Representing the government in the case.
|
| Nathan P. Kitchens | Government Representative |
Representing the government in the case.
|
| Kelly Duncan | Editor |
Edited the article.
|
| Jane Does | Plaintiffs/Victims |
Two anonymous victims who sued the government.
|
Organizations (9)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Law360 |
Publisher of the article.
|
|
| U.S. Department of Justice |
Federal agency involved in the case.
|
|
| U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida |
Office that prosecuted Epstein originally and signed the NPA.
|
|
| U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia |
Representing the government in the current civil suit.
|
|
| Miami Herald |
Published investigative report exposing the exclusion of victims from the plea deal.
|
|
| Edwards Pottinger LLC |
Law firm representing victims.
|
|
| Jay Howell & Associates PA |
Law firm representing victims.
|
|
| Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley PA |
Law firm representing victims.
|
|
| University of Utah's S.J. Quinney College of Law |
Institution associated with attorney Paul G. Cassell.
|
Timeline (3 events)
2008
Epstein pled guilty to state charges involving solicitation of prostitution; victims sued regarding CVRA violation.
Florida
2019-02
Judge Marra granted summary judgment to victims, ruling prosecutors violated the CVRA.
U.S. District Court
2019-06-24
Federal prosecutors stated Epstein's victims are not entitled to reopen the criminal case but offered a hearing.
Federal Court
Federal Prosecutors
Epstein Victims
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of the original case and current lawsuit.
|
|
|
Location of Epstein's mansion where crimes allegedly occurred.
|
|
|
Jurisdiction of the government attorneys currently handling the case.
|
Relationships (3)
Acosta signed the nonprosecution agreement with Epstein.
Brad Edwards represents the victims.
Victims claim he lured them to his mansion to engage in sexual acts.
Key Quotes (5)
"The past cannot be undone; the government committed itself to the terms of the [nonprosecution agreement], and the parties have not disputed that Epstein complied with its provisions."Source
EFTA00030231.pdf
Quote #1
"The pleading was the type of slap in the face that we expect to see from Mr. Epstein."Source
EFTA00030231.pdf
Quote #2
"The expansive context of the CVRA lends itself to only one interpretation; namely, that victims should be notified of significant events resulting in resolution of their case without a trial."Source
EFTA00030231.pdf
Quote #3
"The remedy should have a nexus to the purpose of the CVRA, which is to give victims a voice but not to give them decision-making authority over prosecutors."Source
EFTA00030231.pdf
Quote #4
"While the court cannot unwind the past, the remedies proposed by the government would give the victims a meaningful opportunity to have their voices heard."Source
EFTA00030231.pdf
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (6,182 characters)
From: [REDACTED]
To: "[REDACTED]" <[REDACTED]>
Subject: Gov't Says Epstein Victims Can't Scrap Nonprosecution Deal - Law360
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 10:41:37 +0000
Importance: Normal
To: "[REDACTED]" <[REDACTED]>
Subject: Gov't Says Epstein Victims Can't Scrap Nonprosecution Deal - Law360
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 10:41:37 +0000
Importance: Normal
ov't Says Epstein Victims Can't Scrap Nonprosecution Deal
By Carolina Bolado
By Carolina Bolado
Share us on: https://www.law360.com/articles/1172511/gov-t-says-epstein-victims-can-t-scrap-nonprosecution-deal
Law360 (June 25, 2019, 4:07 PM EDT) -- Federal
prosecutors said Monday that billionaire sex offender
Jeffrey Epstein’s victims are not entitled to the relief
they’re seeking — namely the reopening of the
criminal case against Epstein and an apology — but
offered to participate in a hearing at which victims
can provide statements.
prosecutors said Monday that billionaire sex offender
Jeffrey Epstein’s victims are not entitled to the relief
they’re seeking — namely the reopening of the
criminal case against Epstein and an apology — but
offered to participate in a hearing at which victims
can provide statements.
The government said the Crime Victims Rights Act,
under which two of Epstein’s victims sued to
challenge the nonprosecution agreement, does not
provide for the relief they want, which includes a
detailed explanation from prosecutors about their
decision, an apology and monetary sanctions.
under which two of Epstein’s victims sued to
challenge the nonprosecution agreement, does not
provide for the relief they want, which includes a
detailed explanation from prosecutors about their
decision, an apology and monetary sanctions.
The court found in the victims’ favor in February and
ruled that prosecutors, including then-U.S. Attorney
and current Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta,
violated the CVRA when they signed the
nonprosecution agreement with Epstein without
notifying his victims.
ruled that prosecutors, including then-U.S. Attorney
and current Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta,
violated the CVRA when they signed the
nonprosecution agreement with Epstein without
notifying his victims.
In its response, the government admitted that it
should have communicated with the victims in a
more straightforward and transparent way but said
that does not mean the decision to not prosecute
Epstein was improper. The remedy should have a
EFTA00030231
should have communicated with the victims in a
more straightforward and transparent way but said
that does not mean the decision to not prosecute
Epstein was improper. The remedy should have a
EFTA00030231
nexus to the purpose of the CVRA, which is to give
victims a voice but not to give them decision-making
authority over prosecutors, according to the
government.
victims a voice but not to give them decision-making
authority over prosecutors, according to the
government.
“The past cannot be undone; the government
committed itself to the terms of the [nonprosecution
agreement], and the parties have not disputed that
Epstein complied with its provisions,” the
government said. “A number of Epstein’s victims
subsequently invoked the NPA to enter into civil
settlements with Epstein and, in that respect, also
relied on its terms. Any remedy for the CVRA
violation should thus serve to give the victims a
voice, even though the prosecution decision remains
out of their hands.”
committed itself to the terms of the [nonprosecution
agreement], and the parties have not disputed that
Epstein complied with its provisions,” the
government said. “A number of Epstein’s victims
subsequently invoked the NPA to enter into civil
settlements with Epstein and, in that respect, also
relied on its terms. Any remedy for the CVRA
violation should thus serve to give the victims a
voice, even though the prosecution decision remains
out of their hands.”
The government instead proposed a meeting with the
two plaintiffs, as well as any other Epstein victims
who want to attend, at which a U.S. Department of
Justice representative will discuss the government’s
reasoning in resolving the Epstein case.
two plaintiffs, as well as any other Epstein victims
who want to attend, at which a U.S. Department of
Justice representative will discuss the government’s
reasoning in resolving the Epstein case.
The government said prosecutors would also
participate in a public court proceeding at which any
Epstein victims can make statements. In addition, all
criminal prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for
the Southern District of Florida would undergo
additional training on the CVRA and victim
assistance issues.
participate in a public court proceeding at which any
Epstein victims can make statements. In addition, all
criminal prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for
the Southern District of Florida would undergo
additional training on the CVRA and victim
assistance issues.
“While the court cannot unwind the past, the
remedies proposed by the government would give the
victims a meaningful opportunity to have their voices
heard and to understand, if not accept the decisions
made in this matter,” the government said.
“Petitioners’ requested remedies, on the other hand,
run afoul of the remedial scheme contemplated by the
EFTA00030232
remedies proposed by the government would give the
victims a meaningful opportunity to have their voices
heard and to understand, if not accept the decisions
made in this matter,” the government said.
“Petitioners’ requested remedies, on the other hand,
run afoul of the remedial scheme contemplated by the
EFTA00030232
CVRA, are contrary to law, and may cause
unintended harm to the victims whose interests are
also protected by the CVRA.”
unintended harm to the victims whose interests are
also protected by the CVRA.”
U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra granted
summary judgment in February to the two victims,
listed as Jane Does, who sued the government in
2008 alleging that prosecutors had violated the
CVRA with the Epstein deal. The judge said the
government’s decision to hide its intentions and to
tell victims to just be patient with the investigation
was “particularly problematic.”
summary judgment in February to the two victims,
listed as Jane Does, who sued the government in
2008 alleging that prosecutors had violated the
CVRA with the Epstein deal. The judge said the
government’s decision to hide its intentions and to
tell victims to just be patient with the investigation
was “particularly problematic.”
Judge Marra rejected the government’s claim that the
CVRA requires victims to be notified only of a plea
bargain or a deferred prosecution agreement, both of
which are more common than a nonprosecution
agreement. That reading of the law is "inconsistent
with the goal of the CVRA," according to the judge.
CVRA requires victims to be notified only of a plea
bargain or a deferred prosecution agreement, both of
which are more common than a nonprosecution
agreement. That reading of the law is "inconsistent
with the goal of the CVRA," according to the judge.
"The expansive context of the CVRA lends itself to
only one interpretation; namely, that victims should
be notified of significant events resulting in
resolution of their case without a trial," Judge Marra
said.
only one interpretation; namely, that victims should
be notified of significant events resulting in
resolution of their case without a trial," Judge Marra
said.
The CVRA grants crime victims a number of rights,
including the right to be informed of public court
proceedings and not to be excluded from those
proceedings. The Miami Herald, in an investigative
report published late last year, printed emails
showing the alleged victims were deliberately
excluded from the deal cut between Acosta, who was
then the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of
Florida, and Epstein's defense team.
including the right to be informed of public court
proceedings and not to be excluded from those
proceedings. The Miami Herald, in an investigative
report published late last year, printed emails
showing the alleged victims were deliberately
excluded from the deal cut between Acosta, who was
then the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of
Florida, and Epstein's defense team.
Brad Edwards, who represents the victims, said his
clients are disappointed by the government’s
EFTA00030233
clients are disappointed by the government’s
EFTA00030233
response.
“After sifting through self-serving statistics and
variations of the same excuses we have heard for
years, the government took no responsibility for its
clear wrongdoing and suggests that no remedy is the
appropriate ruling,” Edwards said. “In fact, it acts
like it is doing the victims a favor by offering to have
its attorneys voluntarily attend training courses. The
pleading was the type of slap in the face that we
expect to see from Mr. Epstein.”
variations of the same excuses we have heard for
years, the government took no responsibility for its
clear wrongdoing and suggests that no remedy is the
appropriate ruling,” Edwards said. “In fact, it acts
like it is doing the victims a favor by offering to have
its attorneys voluntarily attend training courses. The
pleading was the type of slap in the face that we
expect to see from Mr. Epstein.”
Epstein's alleged victims — numbering in the dozens
— claim he lured teenage girls to his Palm Beach,
Florida, mansion to engage in sexual acts. They have
not had the opportunity to testify in court in any
proceeding thus far, according to the Herald report.
— claim he lured teenage girls to his Palm Beach,
Florida, mansion to engage in sexual acts. They have
not had the opportunity to testify in court in any
proceeding thus far, according to the Herald report.
Epstein pled guilty in 2008 to state charges involving
solicitation of prostitution and procurement of minors
for prostitution. He spent 13 months in prison and is
registered as a sex offender.
solicitation of prostitution and procurement of minors
for prostitution. He spent 13 months in prison and is
registered as a sex offender.
The victims are represented by Bradley Edwards
of Edwards Pottinger LLC, Jay C. Howell of Jay
Howell & Associates PA, John Scarola of Searcy
Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley PA, and Paul G.
Cassell of the University of Utah's S.J. Quinney
College of Law.
of Edwards Pottinger LLC, Jay C. Howell of Jay
Howell & Associates PA, John Scarola of Searcy
Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley PA, and Paul G.
Cassell of the University of Utah's S.J. Quinney
College of Law.
The government is represented by Byung J. Pak, Jill
E. Steinberg and Nathan P. Kitchens of the U.S.
Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of
Georgia.
E. Steinberg and Nathan P. Kitchens of the U.S.
Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of
Georgia.
The case is Doe v. U.S., case number 9:08-cv-80736,
in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Florida.
EFTA00030234
in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Florida.
EFTA00030234
--Editing by Kelly Duncan.
EFTA00030235
EFTA00030235
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document