September 30, 2019
Wild appealed the district court's rejection of remedies by filing a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wild | person | 46 | View Entity |
DOJ-OGR-00021446.jpg
This legal document details the aftermath of the Jeffrey Epstein case concerning victims' rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). Following Epstein's death, a district court denied the victims' (petitioners') motion for remedies, such as rescinding the non-prosecution agreement, deeming the issue moot. The document also covers an appeal by a victim named Wild and the government's legal arguments that its CVRA obligations were not triggered because charges were never filed in the original district.
Events with shared participants
A judge permitted victim Wild to receive access to the NPA pursuant to a protective order.
2008-01-01
The FBI interviewed victim Wild but did not inform her that a potential outcome of the case was a state plea.
2007-01-01
The FBI told Wild and two other victims that the case had been resolved.
2007-01-01
Wild received a letter from the FBI stating the case was under investigation, contradicting the October 2007 information.
2008-01-10
Villafaña and the FBI interviewed three victims, including Wild. The emotional toll on the victims was significant, and Wild expressed her willingness to testify.
2008-01-31
Wild received a letter from Villafaña inaccurately stating she was a federal victim entitled to CVRA rights.
2007-01-01
The FBI interviewed Wild but did not tell her a potential outcome was a state plea.
2007-01-01
The FBI sent Wild a victims' rights letter indicating the case was under investigation.
2008-01-10
Villafaña re-interviewed Wild, telling her the case was under investigation but not specifically mentioning the NPA.
2008-01-31
Wild received access to the NPA pursuant to a protective order.
2008-08-01 • Court
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event