Jon Kyl
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Dianne Feinstein
|
Business associate |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Eric Holder
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Ronald Weich
|
Correspondence |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Eric Holder
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Eric Holder
|
Attempted correspondence |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
CVRA (Congress)
|
Legislative sponsor |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Justice Department
|
Adversarial political |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Eric Holder
|
Correspondence |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Justice Department
|
Adversarial critical |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dianne Feinstein
|
Legislative co sponsors |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Eric H. Holder, Jr.
|
Correspondent |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
CVRA (Crime Victims' Rights Act)
|
Legislative sponsor |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Crime Victims' Rights Movement
|
Advocate legislator |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011-11-03 | N/A | Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich sent a letter to Senator Kyl. | Washington D.C. | View |
| 2011-11-02 | Communication | U.S. Senator Jon Kyl sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder criticizing the 2011 Guideline... | N/A | View |
| 2011-06-08 | N/A | Statement of Sen. Jon Kyl reprinting letter to Eric Holder in Congressional Record | Congress | View |
| 2011-06-06 | N/A | Senator Kyl sent a letter to AG Holder complaining about OLC's distortion of legislative history. | Washington D.C. (Implied) | View |
| 2011-06-06 | N/A | Senator Kyl sent a letter to Attorney General Holder complaining about OLC's distortion of his re... | Washington D.C. | View |
| 2004-10-09 | N/A | Statement by Senator Kyl in the Congressional Record. | US Congress | View |
| 2004-04-22 | N/A | Statements by Senators Kyl and Feinstein in the Congressional Record. | US Congress | View |
| 2004-04-22 | N/A | Senate floor colloquy regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). | US Senate | View |
| 2004-04-01 | N/A | Victims advocates met with Senators Kyl and Feinstein to decide strategy. | Washington D.C. | View |
| 2003-01-07 | N/A | Senators Kyl and Feinstein proposed amendment as Senate Joint Resolution 1. | U.S. Senate | View |
| 2002-04-15 | N/A | Senators Kyl and Feinstein introduced the amendment. | U.S. Senate | View |
| 1997-01-21 | N/A | Reintroduction of the amendment in the 105th Congress. | Washington D.C. | View |
| 1996-04-22 | N/A | Senators Kyl and Feinstein introduced a federal victims' rights amendment. | Washington D.C. | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021443.jpg
This legal document details the Department of Justice's (DOJ) process of interpreting and revising the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) guidelines between 2010 and 2011. The central issue was the point at which victims' rights become active, with the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) maintaining that rights only vest after formal criminal charges are filed. This position was challenged in a November 2011 letter by CVRA co-sponsor Senator Jon Kyl, who argued to Attorney General Eric Holder that the DOJ's 2011 revised guidelines conflicted with the law's plain language by not extending rights to victims before charges were filed.
DOJ-OGR-00023279.jpg
This document is page 241 of a DOJ report discussing the legal interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) between 2010 and 2011. It details the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) determination that victim rights do not 'vest' until formal criminal charges are filed, a stance maintained in the 2011 Guidelines revision despite Senator Jon Kyl's argument that this conflicted with the Act's plain language. The text highlights the friction between internal DOJ policy regarding pre-indictment plea negotiations and the legislative intent of the CVRA.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017749.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 Brigham Young University Law Review article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues that victims should have access to presentence reports to meaningfully participate in sentencing hearings, citing statements by Senators Feinstein and Kyl. The document appears to be an exhibit submitted by attorney David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee, likely in the context of the investigation into the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case and the violation of victims' rights under the CVRA.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017729.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a 2005 BYU Law Review article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically regarding the government's obligation to notify victims of case events. It outlines specific rights such as notification of release, plea agreements, and sentencing, and includes a rationale section quoting Senator Feinstein. The document bears the name of attorney David Schoen and a House Oversight Bates stamp, suggesting it was part of a production related to the investigation into the handling of the Epstein case, particularly the failure to notify victims under the CVRA.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017727.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 BYU Law Review article included in a House Oversight Committee production (Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017727), bearing the name of attorney David Schoen. The text analyzes the legal definition of a "Victim" under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and proposes amending Rule 1 to align with the CVRA's broad definition. It cites various case laws (Hughey, Follet, Moore) and legislative acts (MVRA, VWPA) to support the rationale that the definition of a victim should be standardized and broadly interpreted.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017707.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article (page 72 of 78 in the production) bearing the name of David Schoen, a lawyer known for representing Jeffrey Epstein. The text presents a legal argument regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically arguing that victim status and rights should apply even to crimes that have not yet been charged, citing Senator Kyl's legislative intent. It criticizes the NACDL's proposal for fact-finding hearings to determine victim status and argues against the Advisory Committee's limitations on victims' rights in proposed rules. The document appears to be part of an evidentiary submission to the House Oversight Committee, likely related to the investigation into the handling of the Epstein non-prosecution agreement and the violation of victims' rights.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017703.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing, likely submitted by attorney David Schoen, which cites a 2007 Utah Law Review article regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The text argues for a broad interpretation of a victim's right to be heard in court proceedings, citing legislative history from Senators Feinstein and Kyl. It proposes a new rule (Rule 60(b)) regarding the enforcement of victims' rights and preserving claimed error.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017691.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article included in a House Oversight file associated with attorney David Schoen. The text analyzes the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), arguing that legislative history and judicial precedent (specifically United States v. Kenna) guarantee victims the right to speak orally at sentencing, rather than just submitting written statements. It cites Senators Kyl and Feinstein extensively regarding the congressional intent behind the Act.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017687.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article (likely submitted as an exhibit in a House Oversight investigation) discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The text argues that victims should have independent access to presentence reports and criticizes the Advisory Committee's view that prosecutors should control the flow of information to victims. The document bears the name of David Schoen, a known attorney for Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting this legal argument was used to advocate for victims' rights or, paradoxically, was part of the defense's legal research files regarding CVRA interpretations.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017649.jpg
This document is page 14 of a 78-page excerpt from a 2007 Utah Law Review article, likely authored by Paul Cassell, discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues for amending Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (specifically Rule 1 and Rule 11) to align with the CVRA, quoting Senators Feinstein and Kyl on the Act's intent to reform the legal culture surrounding victims' rights. The document bears a footer for attorney David Schoen and a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp, suggesting it was part of the congressional investigation into the handling of the Epstein case (where the CVRA was a central legal issue).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017641.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article detailing the legislative history of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It describes the transition from seeking a constitutional amendment to passing a federal statute in 2004, highlighting the roles of Senators Kyl and Feinstein and President Bush. The document appears to be a file produced to the House Oversight Committee, bearing the name of attorney David Schoen, suggesting its relevance to legal arguments concerning victims' rights violations, likely in the context of the Epstein investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017640.jpg
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.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017620.jpg
This document is a page from a legal journal article (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) likely submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee. It critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), arguing that the OLC ignored Senator Kyl's intent that victim rights apply before charges are filed. The text specifically cites the 'Epstein case' as a notable example where the OLC's interpretation allowed a non-prosecution agreement to nullify victims' rights to be heard.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017619.jpg
This document is a page from a legal text (likely a law journal or brief submitted by David Schoen) analyzing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues against the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) narrow interpretation that victims' rights only attach after charges are filed, citing a 2011 letter from Senator Jon Kyl to Attorney General Eric Holder where Kyl clarifies that rights were intended to exist pre-indictment. The text criticizes the OLC for deceptively quoting legislative history to support their position.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017615.jpg
This document is a page from a legal text (likely a law journal article or brief by David Schoen) submitted to the House Oversight Committee. It critiques a 2011 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum which argued that Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) rights only attach after formal criminal proceedings are initiated. The text argues this position is 'unpersuasive' and 'disingenuous' because the DOJ routinely identifies victims earlier, such as during grand jury investigations or under the VRRA of 1990.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017608.jpg
This document is a page from a legal brief or journal article submitted by attorney David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee. It discusses the legislative history and intent of the Crime Victims' Rights Act of 2004 (CVRA), contrasting it with the 1990 Victims' Rights and Restitution Act. It highlights the Congressional goal to ensure victims are treated with fairness, dignity, and are active participants in the legal system, citing various Senators and legal precedents.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017605.jpg
This document is a page from a legal article (Page 2 of 31) discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and whether victim rights apply before formal charges are filed. It highlights a conflict between a 2010 DOJ OLC opinion, which argued rights do not attach pre-charging, and Senator Jon Kyl, who argued they do. The text specifically uses the Jeffrey Epstein sex abuse case in Florida as a concrete example of the controversy, noting that victims argued they should have been consulted regarding his non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017604.jpg
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.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014062.jpg
This document page, bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp, is an excerpt from a legal analysis (likely a law review article) criticizing the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues that the OLC incorrectly concluded that victims' rights do not apply before an indictment is filed, contradicting the legislative intent of Senator Jon Kyl, a primary sponsor of the Act. The text highlights that even the OLC acknowledged their interpretation might contradict 'good practice' regarding pre-charging plea discussions, a critical legal issue relevant to the Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement controversy.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014061.jpg
This page from a legal publication (likely by Paul Cassell) critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues that the OLC deceptively quoted Senator Jon Kyl to suggest victim rights only apply after charging. The text cites a June 6, 2011 letter from Senator Kyl to Attorney General Eric Holder where Kyl clarifies that the CVRA was intended to provide rights to victims even before an indictment is filed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014046.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a legal review or academic paper (dated 2014) discussing the legislative intent behind Crime Victims' Rights, specifically the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It quotes Senators Jon Kyl and Dianne Feinstein regarding the need to prevent 'secondary harm' to victims and allow their participation in the justice system. The page concludes by introducing the Jeffrey Epstein case as a specific illustration of legal issues surrounding victims' rights during the pre-charging phase.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014045.jpg
This document is a page from a legal text or law review article (authored by 'Cassell et al.') included in House Oversight records. It analyzes the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), detailing the legislative intent to ensure victims are treated with fairness, dignity, and privacy, and to make them independent participants in the criminal justice process. The text cites U.S. Code and Congressional Records, specifically quoting Senators Feinstein and Kyl regarding the systemic neglect of victims prior to the Act.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014044.jpg
This document is page 65 of a 2014 law review article detailing the history of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It explains that in April 2004, advocates shifted focus from a constitutional amendment to federal legislation due to the difficulty of obtaining a supermajority. The text discusses the limitations of the 1990 Victims' Rights and Restitution Act and cites various legal scholars and Senators (Kyl, Leahy, Feinstein) regarding the legislative history. This document appears in the House Oversight collection likely as background material regarding the legal framework relevant to the Epstein case's non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014041.jpg
This document is page 62 of a legal article (Cassell et al.) included in House Oversight records. It argues that Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) rights should attach before formal charges are filed, explicitly using the Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement in Florida as a case study where victims were denied consultation because charges were not formally filed. The text critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) position and references a 2011 letter from Senator Jon Kyl to Attorney General Eric Holder supporting the broader interpretation of victims' rights.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014040.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a law review article (dated roughly 2014) included in a House Oversight investigation. It discusses the legal interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically focusing on whether victims' rights apply before formal charges are filed. It highlights a 2010 DOJ Office of Legal Counsel opinion which argued rights do not attach during investigations, and notes that non-prosecution agreements (NPAs) allow prosecutors to avoid notifying victims—a key legal issue in the Jeffrey Epstein case. The text mentions Senator Jon Kyl's objection to this DOJ interpretation.
Objection to Department's conclusions on CVRA rights
Strenuously objecting to the Department's conclusions regarding the timing of CVRA rights application.
CVRA Interpretation
Angry letter attacking the Justice Department's position on CVRA rights.
CVRA interpretation concerns
Holder never sent a response; Weich responded instead.
Criticism of DOJ CVRA position
Angry letter attacking the DOJ's position on victims' rights
Response regarding CVRA interpretation
A belated response that did not address Kyl's concern about his remarks being quoted out of context.
Response regarding CVRA interpretation
A belated response that did not address Kyl's concern about his remarks being quoted out of context.
Response to Kyl's letter
Described as a 'belated response' that did not address Kyl's concern about his remarks being quoted out of context.
2011 Guidelines revisions for the CVRA
Senator Jon Kyl sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder arguing that the 2011 Guidelines revisions conflicted with the CVRA's plain language because they did not extend rights to victims until after charges were filed.
Interpretation of CVRA
Expressing surprise that OLC quoted his remarks out of context and clarifying that CVRA rights apply pre-indictment.
Distortion of legislative history / CVRA interpretation
Expressing surprise that OLC quoted his remarks out of context and clarifying that victims have rights before an indictment is filed.
Objection to Department's conclusions on CVRA
Stated view that Congress intended to protect crime victims throughout the criminal justice process from investigative phases to conclusion.
Senate floor colloquy regarding CVRA scope
Discussing that the right to confer is intended to be expansive.
CVRA Scope
Discussion regarding the scope of the Crime Victims' Rights Act.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity