HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129.jpg
2.94 MB
Extraction Summary
7
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
News article/report excerpt within congressional record
File Size:
2.94 MB
Summary
This document, part of a House Oversight collection, contains text from a news report analyzing the fallout of the Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement. It features quotes from prosecutor Sloman admitting terms should have been harsher but denying corruption, and details former US Attorney Acosta's 2011 defense of the deal against Epstein's 'army of legal superstars.' The text also highlights the victims' lawsuit against the government for sealing the deal and includes criticism from law professor Marci Hamilton regarding the failure to charge co-conspirators.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Sloman | Federal Prosecutor (likely Jeffrey Sloman) |
Wrote a response defending the office's actions regarding Epstein's plea deal but admitting terms should have been ha...
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Perpetrator |
Subject of the criminal case, sentencing, and non-prosecution agreement.
|
| Marci Hamilton | Law Professor / Executive Director |
Professor at UPenn and Director of Child USA; criticizes the plea deal and failure to charge co-conspirators.
|
| Alexander Acosta | Former US Attorney |
Defended his 2011 decisions; described the aggressive tactics of Epstein's defense team.
|
| Roy Black | Defense Attorney |
Listed as part of Epstein's 'army of legal superstars'.
|
| Kenneth Starr | Defense Attorney |
Listed as part of Epstein's 'army of legal superstars'.
|
| Alan Dershowitz | Defense Attorney |
Listed as part of Epstein's 'army of legal superstars'.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Herald |
Newspaper (likely Miami Herald) that published the 'Perversion of Justice' series and interviewed victims.
|
|
| University of Pennsylvania |
Employer of Marci Hamilton.
|
|
| Child USA |
Organization advocating for children's civil liberties, directed by Marci Hamilton.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' footer stamp.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location where defense attorneys would appeal the local office's decisions.
|
Relationships (3)
Acosta described a 'yearlong assault' on prosecutors by Epstein's legal team including Black.
Sloman responds to the Herald's 'Perversion of Justice' series.
Epstein's Victims
→
Legal/Adversarial
→
Federal Prosecutors
Victims filed a federal lawsuit alleging prosecutors violated federal law by keeping the deal secret.
Key Quotes (6)
"As additional details about Epstein’s crimes have emerged, it is clear to me that we should have pushed for much harsher terms"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129.jpg
Quote #1
"Nothing could be further from the truth."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129.jpg
Quote #2
"They cut a deal which they have to know was a failure"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129.jpg
Quote #3
"The horror of this is if you don’t hold all the ‘Johns’ accountable, then it doesn’t stop."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129.jpg
Quote #4
"That’s a trafficking organization."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129.jpg
Quote #5
"They would obtain concessions as part of a negotiation and agree to proceed, only to change their minds, and appeal the office’s decision to Washington"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129.jpg
Quote #6
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,834 characters)
“As additional details about Epstein’s crimes have emerged, it is clear to me that we should have pushed for much harsher terms,” Sloman wrote. “That said, some have mistakenly suggested that our office kowtowed to Epstein’s high-priced defense lawyers or, worse, that his lawyers corrupted or intimidated us into submission. ... Nothing could be further from the truth.”
Sloman did not directly address the chief complaint brought by Epstein’s victims, who are now in their late 20s and early 30s. Those who spoke to the Herald said they felt betrayed by federal prosecutors, who sealed the non-prosecution agreement from public view so that they wouldn’t find out about it before he was sentenced. It would be almost a year before they were successful in having it unsealed. By then, it was too late to try to derail it.
They allege, in a federal lawsuit filed against the government, that prosecutors deliberately kept the deal secret — in violation of federal law — to prevent them from appearing at Epstein’s sentencing to possibly undo the deal. Nor did Sloman address why prosecutors also gave immunity to a number of Epstein’s co-conspirators, who have never been identified.
“They cut a deal which they have to know was a failure,” said Marci Hamilton, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and executive director of Child USA, which advocates for children’s civil liberties. “ They kept it secret and they didn’t charge the co-conspirators. The horror of this is if you don’t hold all the ‘Johns’ accountable, then it doesn’t stop. This case involved multiple girls, multiple men, multiple recruiters, multiple times and he recruited girls to get other girls. That’s a trafficking organization.”
Acosta has not commented since 2011, when he defended his decisions in a publicly issued letter that can be found in the federal court file. In it, he described what he called a “yearlong assault” on prosecutors by Epstein’s “army of legal superstars,” including Roy Black, Kenneth Starr and Alan Dershowitz, among others. In four long paragraphs, Acosta detailed how defense attorneys relentlessly worked to manipulate the negotiation process, often frustrating prosecutors.
“They would obtain concessions as part of a negotiation and agree to proceed, only to change their minds, and appeal the office’s decision to Washington,” Acosta wrote, adding that their tactics included delving into the private family lives of individual prosecutors in an effort to discredit them and get them removed from the case.
Wrote Sloman: “The Herald’s ‘Perversion of Justice’ series presented a heartrending portrait of Epstein’s victims and made a strong case that he should have gone to jail much longer, but never explained or substantiated its accusation that we schemed with Epstein’s lawyers.”
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023129
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document