Alleged Non‑Prosecution Agreement (NPA) Shielded Jeffrey Epstein from a 53‑count indictment and kept victims uninformed

CHAPTER 50 Jane Doe: February 2008 s a result of the non-prosecution agreement, a fifty-three- count indictment that federal prosecutors had prepared against Jeffrey Epstein—one that claimed he'd abused dozens of underage women—never was filed. But as far as lawyers representing Epstein’s victims were con- d, the fact that those victims were not consulted about the The “government cerne non-prosecution agreement was inexcusable. deliberately kept crime victims ‘in the dark’ into a plea arrangement designed to prevent the victims from raising any objections,” they would argue, in documents filed on February 10, 2016. For nine months, the lawyers cl the time that the NPA was signed, on Septembe Krischer’s office, “doing Epstein’s bidding, [ NPA’s existence from vic so that it could enter 7 aimed, from a r 24, 2007, a had] concealed the 7 tim|[s]” and continued to do so until the q moment that Epstein had finally did June 30, 2008. In the interim, accordi were only told, “This case i A lawsuit that Bradley ‘ Fort Lauderdale, filed in fi Rights Act, or CVRA (title which states that “victims ing the right to be heard ir be precluded from court pr fairly.” According to him, pros« of the victims. Edwards, y knew that this suit against monetary recovery of any : also knew that if the goven entered into a contract thai rights of Epstein’s victims, have been improper in anc remedy would have been tc while it is difficult to know contract is overturned, one could prosecute Epstein fo statute of limitations on tho At the time of this wr through the courts. It has q Bleak House —the Charles I » *8So massive and so comple _ €veryone involved into the n HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010531