HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017341.jpg
1.53 MB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
4
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal statement / article draft / memorandum
File Size:
1.53 MB
Summary
This document appears to be a draft statement or article dated April 2, 2012, written by a defense attorney (contextually Alan Dershowitz) defending the legal strategy regarding Jeffrey Epstein. The text details the shift from a state-level plea deal to a federal investigation initiated by dissatisfied local police, and justifies the controversial non-prosecution agreement by characterizing the federal statutes as 'draconian' and disparaging the victims as willing participants in a 'business.' The author argues the client is not truly a sex offender and expresses doubt that a victim advocacy group's lawsuit to rescind the plea deal will succeed.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Narrator | Defense Attorney |
Author of the text; represented 'the man' in plea negotiations. (Contextually likely Alan Dershowitz based on the spe...
|
| The Man / My Client | Defendant |
Accused of sexual contact with underage girls; agreed to plea bargain. (Contextually Jeffrey Epstein).
|
| Local Prosecutor | Prosecutor |
Initial prosecutor with whom the narrator negotiated a 'no jail time' deal.
|
| Local Police | Law Enforcement |
Dissatisfied with the initial state resolution; referred the case to the US Attorney's Office.
|
| Alleged 'Victims' | Victims / Witnesses |
Underage girls involved in the case; described disparagingly by the narrator as 'anything but victims' who sought out...
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States Attorney's Office |
Federal prosecutors who took over the case after local police referral.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the document stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT'.
|
|
| Unspecified Victim Advocacy Group |
Described as 'A group that brings lawsuits on behalf of the victims of sex crimes'; sued the federal government over ...
|
Timeline (4 events)
2008 (Contextual)
Final Plea Bargain / Sentencing
Federal/State Court
The Client
Federal Government
Post-sentencing
Lawsuit against Federal Government
Court
Victim Advocacy Group
Federal Government
Unspecified (Historical)
Initial plea bargain negotiation
State level (implied Florida)
Unspecified (Historical)
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location where the alleged crimes occurred (Contextually Florida).
|
|
|
Location where the client was called by victims and where he served house arrest.
|
Relationships (1)
whom I had known for several years, to help represent him in the matter
Key Quotes (5)
"the alleged 'victims' were anything but victims—they sought out my client and repeatedly called his house asking for more business."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017341.jpg
Quote #1
"register as a sex offender (which he really isn’t)."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017341.jpg
Quote #2
"Had my client been convicted under them, he could have received a sentence of 25 years for each separate massage."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017341.jpg
Quote #3
"We thought the case was over, until we learned that the local police were not satisfied with this resolution"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017341.jpg
Quote #4
"unusual plea bargain, under which the federal government would not prosecute him if he agreed to plead guilty to a state crime"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017341.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,963 characters)
4.2.12
WC: 191694
WC: 191694
I was called by the man, whom I had known for several years, to help represent him in the matter.
I conducted extensive research on the policy of the local prosecutor with regard to such cases,
and learned that no one had ever gone to prison under similar circumstances. I then met with the
prosecutor on several occasions and we worked out a plea bargain, in which my client would
plead guilty to contributing to the delinquency of a minor but would get no jail time. We thought
the case was over, until we learned that the local police were not satisfied with this resolution and
were bringing the matter to the attention of the United States Attorney's Office, thus turning it
into a federal case.
I conducted extensive research on the policy of the local prosecutor with regard to such cases,
and learned that no one had ever gone to prison under similar circumstances. I then met with the
prosecutor on several occasions and we worked out a plea bargain, in which my client would
plead guilty to contributing to the delinquency of a minor but would get no jail time. We thought
the case was over, until we learned that the local police were not satisfied with this resolution and
were bringing the matter to the attention of the United States Attorney's Office, thus turning it
into a federal case.
The federal statutes governing sexual contact with underage girls are draconian. Had my client
been convicted under them, he could have received a sentence of 25 years for each separate
massage. This could have resulted in life imprisonment. We probably could have won the case
had we decided to litigate, because there was no interstate aspect to the alleged crimes: all the
girls were local and everything happened within that state. Moreover, the alleged "victims" were
anything but victims—they sought out my client and repeatedly called his house asking for more
business. But the risks were simply too high, in light of the possible sentence if he were to be
convicted.
been convicted under them, he could have received a sentence of 25 years for each separate
massage. This could have resulted in life imprisonment. We probably could have won the case
had we decided to litigate, because there was no interstate aspect to the alleged crimes: all the
girls were local and everything happened within that state. Moreover, the alleged "victims" were
anything but victims—they sought out my client and repeatedly called his house asking for more
business. But the risks were simply too high, in light of the possible sentence if he were to be
convicted.
For that reason, we entered into an unusual plea bargain, under which the federal government
would not prosecute him if he agreed to plead guilty to a state crime that resulted in 18 months
imprisonment and the need to register as a sex offender (which he really isn't). He served only a
few months in jail and the rest under house arrest. A group that brings lawsuits on behalf of the
victims of sex crimes then sued the federal government for being "too lenient" and tried to get the
plea bargain rescinded. I doubt they will succeed.
would not prosecute him if he agreed to plead guilty to a state crime that resulted in 18 months
imprisonment and the need to register as a sex offender (which he really isn't). He served only a
few months in jail and the rest under house arrest. A group that brings lawsuits on behalf of the
victims of sex crimes then sued the federal government for being "too lenient" and tried to get the
plea bargain rescinded. I doubt they will succeed.
254
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017341
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document