HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014072.jpg

2014] CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS 93

victims to those who have been "directly and proximately harmed."192
Finally, the formulation requires some federal officer or employee to
evaluate the evidence and reach the conclusion that a federal offense has
been committed that harmed the person in question. This determination
responds to the observation by the District Court for the Eastern District of
New York that the CVRA "cannot be read to include the victims of
uncharged crimes that the government has not even contemplated."193 At
the same time, such a formulation obviously does not require the filing of
formal criminal charges, or even the preparation of formal criminal charges.
Instead, all that is required is for the Department to recognize that a person
is a putative victim of a federal offense, just as all that is required for the
mailing of a target letter to a subpoenaed suspected criminal, is recognition
that he is a putative defendant in a federal case.

B. APPLYING THE TEST TO THE EPSTEIN CASE

To illustrate how the test would operate, it is useful to examine the
facts of the Epstein case. Applying the proposed test to that case produces
straightforward answers, which suggests that the test would be workable in
practice.

From 2001 to 2007, Jeffrey Epstein sexually abused more than thirty
minor girls in his mansion, including Jane Doe Number One and Jane Doe
Number Two.194 Initially, of course, his acts of abuse were secret, unknown
to law enforcement. During that period of time, the victims would not have
had rights under the CVRA.

In 2006, Epstein's acts of abuse came to the attention of the Palm
Beach Police Department, which began investigating the case.195 At this
point, once again, the victims would not have had rights under the proposed
CVRA test. The CVRA extends rights in the federal criminal justice
process. A state investigation does not trigger the CVRA (although it may
trigger certain state law protections, as discussed below).196

At some point in 2006, the Palm Beach Police Department asked the
FBI to investigate Epstein on federal sex offenses, such as using a means of

192 See id. § 3771(e).
193 United States v. Rubin, 558 F. Supp. 2d 411, 419 (E.D.N.Y. 2008).
194 As above, see supra notes 34–41 and accompanying text, this part of the Article
draws on the factual allegations made by the victims in this case—allegations that Epstein
has not intervened to dispute. See Jane Doe Motion, supra note 40, at 3–23.
195 See Probable Cause Affidavit, Palm Beach Police Department: Police Case No. 05-
368(1) (May 1, 2006), available at http://goo.gl/fAPFw5; see also Statement of Undisputed
Facts, Epstein v. Rothstein, No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG (Fla. Cir. Ct. Sept. 22,
2010), available at http://goo.gl/DzMbe8.
196 See supra notes 178–95 and accompanying text as well as infra Part IV.D.

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014072