Brigham Young University Law Review
OrganizationRelationship Network
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017763.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 BYU Law Review article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically the victim's right against unreasonable delay in proceedings. It cites Senators Feinstein and Kyl, along with various state statutes, to argue that delays should not occur merely for the convenience of the court or parties. The document bears the name of David Schoen (a known attorney for Epstein) and a House Oversight Committee stamp, suggesting it was submitted as part of a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017759.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 BYU Law Review article (page 45 of a larger 52-page submission) discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and proposing 'Rule 44.1' regarding the discretionary appointment of counsel for victims. It argues that while the CVRA does not mandate counsel, federal courts possess the inherent authority to appoint it in the interests of justice. The document includes extensive footnotes citing relevant case law and concludes with the name of attorney David Schoen (a known Epstein attorney) and a House Oversight Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a submission to Congress regarding the Epstein investigation.
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_017734.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 BYU Law Review article, seemingly authored or submitted by David Schoen, discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and the obligation of prosecutors to inform the court of victim objections to plea agreements. It cites Senator Feinstein and the case *State v. Casey* (Utah 2002), in which Schoen notes he represented the victim. The document argues for a rule change requiring disclosure of victim objections in open court, relevant to the broader context of the Epstein case regarding the secret Non-Prosecution Agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017733.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 Brigham Young University Law Review article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and Rule 11. It argues for a rule change requiring prosecutors to notify victims of plea negotiations and for courts to consider victims' views before accepting plea agreements. The document bears the name of attorney David Schoen and a House Oversight Bates stamp, suggesting it was part of an investigation into the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement, which was criticized for violating these exact principles of victim notification.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017718.jpg
This document is page 4 of 52 from a production to the House Oversight Committee, stamped with the name David Schoen. The content is an excerpt from a 2005 BYU Law Review article discussing the history of the victims' rights movement, specifically the 1982 President's Task Force on Victims of Crime and subsequent state constitutional amendments (highlighting Arizona). The text analyzes the legal shift towards protecting victims' rights to be present and heard during criminal proceedings.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity