Alleged Violation of 2007 Non‑Prosecution Agreement in Renewed Federal Grand Jury Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein
Summary
The passage outlines a claim that the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office reinstated a grand jury subpoena despite a 2007 Non‑Prosecution Agreement that should have protected Epstein September 24, 2007 Non‑Prosecution Agreement allegedly bars further federal prosecution of Epstein a A new grand jury subpoena in New York is claimed to violate that agreement. The document cites a D
This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (2)
Tags
Related Documents (6)
Allegations that Federal Grand Jury Subpoenas Violate Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non‑Prosecution Agreement
The passage outlines a potential breach of a 2007 Non‑Prosecution Agreement (NPA) by the U.S. Attorney’s Office (USAO) and federal grand jury, suggesting a procedural misstep that could be pursued for Epstein entered a Non‑Prosecution Agreement on Sept. 24, 2007 with the USAO. The NPA stipulated that pending federal grand jury subpoenas would be held in abeyance unless the ag A new grand jury subp
Letter from Kirkland & Ellis urging a de novo federal review of Jeffrey Epstein prosecution
The passage reveals internal legal strategy to challenge a federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, cites a non‑prosecution agreement, and mentions a subpoena issued by Assistant U.S. Attorney Villafan Kirkland & Ellis argues the Department's prior review was limited and not de novo. Reference to a Non‑Prosecution Agreement (NPA) that should have precluded further federal action. Assistant U.S. Att
Internal memo discusses federal prosecution strategy for Jeffrey Epstein and applicability of the petite policy
The document reveals that a U.S. Attorney's Office is evaluating whether to pursue federal charges against Jeffrey Epstein despite state proceedings, indicating potential high‑level prosecutorial deci Memo evaluates federal jurisdiction over commercial sexual exploitation of children in Epstein case. Discusses the 'petite policy' and its inapplicability due to overlapping state charges. Mentions t
U.S. Attorney’s Office discusses deadline extension for Jeffrey Epstein case with high‑profile defense team
The passage reveals internal communications about a potential federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, mentions a deadline tied to a 2007 agreement, and lists a roster of prominent attorneys (including Email from First Assistant U.S. Attorney refusing a request for pre‑indictment information Reference to a September 24, 2007 Agreement that Epstein must obey if prosecution proceeds Deadline extensio
Epstein Non‑Prosecution Agreement with U.S. Attorney’s Office includes immunity for co‑conspirators and alleged violations
The passage reveals a federal non‑prosecution agreement that shielded Jeffrey Epstein and his co‑conspirators from federal charges, mentions direct involvement of U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and s Epstein signed a non‑prosecution agreement on Sep 24, 2007 with the Southern District of Florida, av The agreement allegedly protected co‑conspirators, including Nadia Marcinkova, from prosecution. A
Debate Over Whether Jeffrey Epstein’s Federal Non‑Prosecution Deal Violated Victims’ Rights
The passage reveals that U.S. attorneys concealed a federal non‑prosecution agreement from alleged victims and possibly violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, suggesting a potential prosecutorial mis Federal non‑prosecution agreement with Epstein kept secret from victims in 2008. U.S. attorneys sent letters to victims describing an ongoing federal investigation despite the agree Assistant U.S. At
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.