This document is a page from a 2005 BYU Law Review article attached as an exhibit in a House Oversight investigation, bearing the name of Epstein attorney David Schoen. The text discusses the legal limitations of the Victims' Rights Act and the Crime Victims' Rights Act, specifically analyzing the *United States v. McVeigh* (Oklahoma City bombing) case where victims were denied certain rights despite statutory protections. It argues that statutory measures often fail due to judicial interpretation and bureaucratic inertia, leading advocates to push for a constitutional amendment.
This document is Page 5 of 78 from a legal filing, specifically an excerpt from a 2007 Utah Law Review article detailing the legislative history of the Crime Victims' Rights amendment between 1996 and 1999. It outlines the efforts of Senators Kyl and Feinstein to pass a constitutional amendment ensuring rights for crime victims, noting failures in the 104th and 105th Congresses despite support from the Justice Department and President Clinton. The document bears the name of David Schoen (Epstein's attorney) and a House Oversight Bates stamp, suggesting it was submitted as evidence regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) in the context of the Epstein investigation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity