Acosta has been criticized for his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case as U.S. attorney.
Acosta resolved the federal investigation through the NPA.
Acosta made the decision to resolve the federal investigation of Epstein through a state-based plea.
Acosta approved the NPA that resolved the investigation into Epstein.
Acosta decided to resolve the investigation into Epstein through a State Plea and NPA.
EFTA00011475.pdf
This document is an Executive Summary of a November 2020 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility report investigating the 2006-2008 federal handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case by the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. It details the negotiation of the controversial Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) approved by then-US Attorney Alexander Acosta, which allowed Epstein to plead to lesser state charges, and examines the failure of the government to consult with victims under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The report concludes that while Acosta and other attorneys did not commit professional misconduct by definition, Acosta exercised 'poor judgment' in resolving the case via the NPA and the government failed to treat victims with necessary forthrightness.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023006.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a House Oversight Committee report featuring a photo of Alexander Acosta and a text entry for 'October.' The text details a meeting between then-U.S. Attorney Acosta and Epstein's lawyer, Jay Lefkowitz, at a Marriott in West Palm Beach to finalize a non-prosecution agreement. Key terms agreed to included canceling grand jury subpoenas, sealing the deal, and agreeing not to notify the victims.
DOJ-OGR-00021195.jpg
This document is a Table of Contents (page xix) from a Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It outlines findings that prosecutors (Acosta, Villafaña, Lourie) did not act on improper influence or provide improper benefits based on relationships with defense counsel. However, section V explicitly states that Acosta exercised 'poor judgment' in resolving the investigation through a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and a state plea deal based on flawed policy applications.
DOJ-OGR-00021370.jpg
This document is page 170 of a DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report evaluating Alexander Acosta's conduct regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case. It concludes that Acosta exercised 'poor judgment' by prematurely resolving the federal investigation through a state plea and Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) based on a flawed application of the 'Petite policy.' The report notes that Acosta failed to strengthen the federal case (e.g., by obtaining Epstein's missing computers) and that the crimes involved substantial federal interests including the sexual exploitation of children and interstate travel.
DOJ-OGR-00021486.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report evaluating U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's conduct regarding the Jeffrey Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The OPR concludes that while Acosta did not commit professional misconduct or act on corruption, his decision to resolve the investigation via a state-based plea constituted 'poor judgment' and relied on a 'flawed mechanism.' The report notes Acosta failed to consider the difficulties of relying on state officials and agreed to 'unusual and problematic terms' in the NPA.
Entities connected to both Alexander Acosta and Jeffrey Epstein
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein relationship