Relationship Details

This document is a page from a legal filing detailing an investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) into a significant gap in the email records of an individual named Acosta, specifically from May 2007 to April 2008. The investigation, which was related to the Epstein case, involved questioning witnesses and analyzing data from multiple U.S. Attorney's Offices, the FBI, and other Justice Department divisions. OPR concluded that the email gap was most likely due to a technological error rather than an intentional act to conceal evidence.

This document is a table of contents from a legal filing related to Case 22-1426, dated June 29, 2023. It outlines key events in Jeffrey Epstein's legal case from 2008-2009, including his guilty pleas, custodial sentence, and a review of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) by Acosta. The document also lists applicable legal standards and policies from sources like the United States Attorneys' Manual and State Bar Rules.

This document is a page from a legal filing detailing former U.S. Attorney Acosta's explanation to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) for his office's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. Acosta justifies the decision not to pursue a more aggressive federal prosecution by citing the Petite policy, which presumes deference to state prosecutions, and arguing the federal role was only to prevent a "manifest injustice." He also expresses concerns that a federal trial would have set unfavorable legal precedent regarding solicitation versus trafficking and would have been traumatic for the victims.

This legal document is an excerpt from a report by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) analyzing the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) in the Jeffrey Epstein case. The OPR concludes that U.S. Attorney Acosta did not violate any clear standards or commit professional misconduct by resolving the federal investigation through the NPA, which required Epstein to plead to state charges. The report affirms that Acosta had the authority to make this decision and that the attorneys involved exercised sufficient competence and diligence.

This document is a table of contents from a legal report, likely by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), concerning the federal investigation of Epstein. The report's findings, as outlined here, conclude that U.S. Attorney Acosta and other subjects did not violate any professional standards or policies when they entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein. The document also indicates the report found no evidence that the subjects were improperly influenced by corruption or by Epstein's status and wealth.

This document is a page from a legal report detailing former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's testimony to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) regarding his decision not to federally prosecute Jeffrey Epstein. Acosta justified his actions by citing the Petite policy, which respects state sovereignty, arguing the federal role was only to prevent a "manifest injustice" like no jail time, which did not occur with Epstein's two-year state sentence. He also expressed concerns that a federal trial would be traumatic for victims and could set a bad legal precedent by conflating state-level solicitation with federal trafficking charges.