HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017604.jpg
1.99 MB
Extraction Summary
11
People
6
Organizations
2
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal academic article / law review journal (document production)
File Size:
1.99 MB
Summary
This document is the first page of a 2014 legal article published in the Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, co-authored by Bradley J. Edwards (a key attorney for Epstein victims). The article argues that the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) should apply during criminal investigations before charges are filed, explicitly referencing a 'notorious federal sex abuse case' (the Epstein case) where victims were deprived of rights due to the DOJ's narrow interpretation. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp and the name David Schoen, indicating it was part of a production to the House Oversight Committee.
People (11)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Paul G. Cassell | Author |
Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law, S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah
|
| Nathanael J. Mitchell | Author |
Associate, Snow, Christensen & Martineau
|
| Bradley J. Edwards | Author |
Partner, Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman (Known attorney for Epstein victims)
|
| Jon Kyl | Former Senator |
CVRA Senate cosponsor who wrote a letter to the Justice Department
|
| David Schoen | Unknown (likely custodian) |
Name appears at the bottom of the document near the Bates stamp
|
| Douglas Beloof | Acknowledged Person |
Thanked for assistance
|
| Patricia Cassell | Acknowledged Person |
Thanked for assistance
|
| Meg Garvin | Acknowledged Person |
Thanked for assistance
|
| Jay Howell | Acknowledged Person |
Thanked for assistance
|
| James Marsh | Acknowledged Person |
Thanked for assistance
|
| Stephen Twist | Acknowledged Person |
Thanked for assistance
|
Organizations (6)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| University of Utah |
Academic affiliation of Paul G. Cassell
|
|
| S.J. Quinney College of Law |
Academic affiliation of Paul G. Cassell
|
|
| Snow, Christensen & Martineau |
Law firm affiliation of Nathanael J. Mitchell
|
|
| Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman |
Law firm affiliation of Bradley J. Edwards
|
|
| Justice Department |
Government body criticized for its memorandum on CVRA
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied recipient of document production via Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT
|
Timeline (1 events)
Winter 2014
Publication of legal article regarding Crime Victims' Rights Act
Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location of Snow, Christensen & Martineau
|
|
|
Location of Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman
|
Relationships (3)
Listed as co-authors on the article
Listed as co-authors on the article
Kyl sent an 'angry letter' attacking the DOJ position
Key Quotes (3)
"illustrating how dozens of victims in a notorious federal sex abuse case were deprived of the ability to participate meaningfully in the criminal process when federal prosecutors narrowly interpreted their responsibilities under the Act."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017604.jpg
Quote #1
"The issue of whether crime victims have rights in the criminal justice process recently came to a head when the Justice Department released a memorandum contending that the CVRA does not extend crime victims any rights until prosecutors choose to file formal criminal charges."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017604.jpg
Quote #2
"specifically when federal law enforcement agencies have identified a crime with sufficient precision to send a 'target' letter to a criminal defendant."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017604.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,885 characters)
CRIMINAL LAW: CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS DURING CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS? APPLYING THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT BEFORE CRIMINAL CHARGES ARE FILED
Winter, 2014
Reporter
104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 59 *
104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 59 *
Length: 23898 words
Author: PAUL G. CASSELL*, NATHANAEL J. MITCHELL** and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS***
* Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law, S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah.
** Associate, Snow, Christensen & Martineau (Salt Lake City, Utah).
*** Partner, Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman (Fort Lauderdale, Fla.). The authors thank Douglas Beloof, Patricia Cassell, Meg Garvin, Jay Howell, James Marsh, and Stephen Twist for their assistance with this Article.
Highlight
This Article addresses whether crime victims should have rights during criminal investigations, using the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) as the focal point for our discussion. This is a critical issue, as many criminal cases may never proceed to formal charging. If crime victims have no rights during criminal investigations, then many crime victims will never have any rights at all.
The issue of whether crime victims have rights in the criminal justice process recently came to a head when the Justice Department released a memorandum contending that the CVRA does not extend crime victims any rights until prosecutors choose to file formal criminal charges. This led the CVRA's Senate cosponsor, then-Senator Jon Kyl, to fire off an angry letter to the Justice Department attacking its position. In our Article, we side with the Act's cosponsor. We believe that, properly understood, the CVRA does extend crime victims' rights during criminal investigations.
Our Article proceeds in four parts. First, it highlights the importance of applying the Act before the formal filing of charges by illustrating how dozens of victims in a notorious federal sex abuse case were deprived of the ability to participate meaningfully in the criminal process when federal prosecutors narrowly interpreted their responsibilities under the Act. Second, the Article reviews the purpose, text, structure, and history of the CVRA, concluding that they all support the conclusion that crime victims have rights during criminal investigations. Third, our Article critiques the Department's memorandum, demonstrating that the Department's analysis is unpersuasive. Fourth and finally, the Article provides a specific approach for determining when rights should attach - specifically when federal law enforcement agencies have identified a crime with sufficient precision to send a "target" letter to a criminal defendant. We also observe that federal and state prosecutors have already accorded rights to victims before formally filing charges, which further undermines the Department's overly narrow construction of the Act.
Text
DAVID SCHOEN
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017604
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document