Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta01265910Other

5=2019

DOJ EFTA Data Set 10 document EFTA01265910

Date
Unknown
Source
Reference
efta-efta01265910
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

DOJ EFTA Data Set 10 document EFTA01265910

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
5=2019 Prosecutors Broke Law in Agreement Not to Prosecute Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Rules - The New York Times ghe New pork at us Prosecutors Broke Law in Agreement Not to Prosecute Jeffrey Epstein, Judge Rules By Patricia Mazzei Feb. 21, 2019 MIAMI — Prosecutors led by Alexander R. Acosta, who is now the secretary of labor, violated federal law when they failed to tell victims about an agreement not to prosecute Jeffrey E. Epstein, a wealthy New York financier accused of molesting dozens of underage girls, a federal judge ruled on Thursday. The agreement not to pursue federal sex trafficking charges, negotiated in secret while prosecutors told victims that a case against Mr. Epstein was still possible, violated the federal Crime Victims' Rights Act, ruled Judge Kenneth A. Marra of Federal District Court in West Palm Beach, Fla. He gave the government and the two victims who sued 15 days to discuss what remedy should apply in the case. Federal prosecutors had initially drafted a 53-page indictment against Mr. Epstein, but under the deal negotiated in 2008, he pleaded guilty to lesser state charges of soliciting a minor for prostitution and served 13 months at the Palm Beach County Stockade. While there, Mr. Epstein was allowed to leave custody and work out of his office six days a week. The court's ruling on Thursday could nullify the non-prosecution agreement and subject Mr. Epstein and any co-conspirators in the case to new federal charges, said Jack Scarola, a lawyer for the two victims who challenged the agreement. But even if the deal is set aside, prosecutors could draft a new, similar agreement, this time with full disclosure to the victims, Mr. Scarola said. Mr. Epstein's accusers have sought justice for years. Interest in the case was renewed in the MeToo era, after some women publicly detailed Mr. Epstein's assaults in a report published by The Miami Herald last year. The Justice Department said earlier this month that it had opened an investigation into potential professional misconduct by prosecutors who negotiated Mr. Epstein's plea deal. You have 2 free articles remaining. Subscribe to The Times https:/NAvyi.nytimes.corn/2019/02/21/usrjeffrey-ee R. hNTIAL SDNY_GM_00005911 1/3 EF1'A_00119974 EFTA01265910 5=2019 Prosecutors Broke Law in Agreement Not to Prosecute Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Rules - The New York Times Mr. Acosta was the United States attorney in Miami at the time the agreement was negotiated. Mr. Epstein's accusers were mostly teenage girls at the time of the abuse; because prosecutors did not notify them about the deal in advance, they were unable to object before it went into effect. In his ruling, Judge Marra called it "particularly problematic" that the government had concealed the existence of the 2008 agreement and misled the victims "to believe that federal prosecution was still a possibility" "When the government gives information to victims, it cannot be misleading;' he wrote. Investigators found that from 1999 to 2005, Mr. Epstein, a former hedge fund manager with powerful friends, including President 'frump and former President Bill Clinton, lured girls as young as 14 or 15 years old into his mansions in Palm Beach, New York and the Virgin Islands. He paid them cash to engage in nude massages, masturbation and oral sex. In some instances, he asked girls to recruit other girls into his sex ring, the accusers told police. In a statement responding to the court ruling on Thursday, a spokeswoman for the Labor Department said the decisions made by Mr. Acosta's prosecutors had been defended by the Justice Department for more than a decade "in litigation across three administrations and several attorneys general." "The office's decisions were approved by departmental leadership and followed departmental protocols," the statement added. A spokeswoman for United States attorney's office in Miami declined to comment. Fresh outrage over the case in recent months has prompted congressional inquiries and a digital advertising campaign from Allied Progress, a progressive group that is urging the Senate to authorize an investigation by the Justice Department's inspector general. The current Justice Department investigation, announced earlier this month in response to requests by Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska, is led by the department's Office of Professional Responsibility. The two victims who sued to challenge the non-prosecution agreement are identified in court papers as "Jane Doe 1" and "Jane Doe 2," though The Herald has identified Jane Doe 1 as The women's lawyer, Bradley J. Edwards, settled a separate lawsuit against Mr. Epstein in state court in December, days after the Herald report was published. As part of that settlement, Mr. Epstein said in a statement delivered by one of his lawyers that he apologized for wrongfully suing Mr. Edwards in an attempt to hurt his reputation and stop him from pursuing the current case based on the federal Crime Victims' Rights Act. Mr. Edwards did not immediately respond to phone or email requests for comment. Mr. Scarola said several other aspects of the case remain to be decided, but the ruling on Thursday was important for the victims. -e httpsiMnsAanytimes.com/2019/02/21/usffeffrey el Fi hNTIAL SONYGM_00005912 2/3 EFTA_00119975 EFTA01265911 512212019 Prosecutors Broke Law in Agreement Not to Prosecute Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Rules - The New York Times "We've been waiting for a long time," he said. "It is one significant step in the right direction, though we still have a ways to go?' A version of this article appears in print on Feb. 21, 2019. on Page A20 of the New York edition with the headline: Judge Says That Prosecutors Led by Acosta Broke the Law -e€ httpsiNAyw.nytimes.corn/2019/02/21/usijeffrey e ReENTIAL SDNY_GM_00005913 3/3 EFTA_00119976 EFTA01265912

Technical Artifacts (2)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Domainhttpsimnsaanytimes.com
Phone12212019

Related Documents (6)

House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Extensive court filing outlines alleged Jeffrey Epstein abuse network, non‑prosecution deal, and potential ties to high‑profile figures (Clinton, T...

The document provides a dense compilation of alleged facts, emails, deposition excerpts, and discovery requests that link Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual‑abuse operation to a “pyramid” recruitment scheme, a Epstein allegedly ran a “pyramid” scheme paying underage victims $200‑$300 per recruited girl. A 2007 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA) with the U.S. Attorney’s Office allegedly shielded Epstein fr Ema

39p
House OversightNov 4, 2011

Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse

Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse The passage merely references a prior deposition where Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment, offering no new names, transactions, or actionable details beyond what is already public. It confirms existing allegations but provides no novel leads for investigation. Key insights: Cites Epstein's deposition on March 17, 2010; Notes Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked about sexual preferences; Mentions adverse inference doctrine in civil procedure

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation

The complaint provides a dense web of alleged connections between Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA). It cites specif Roberts alleges she was trafficked by Epstein from 2000‑2002 and forced to have sex with Dershowitz. Dershowitz is accused of helping draft and pressure the government into the 2008 NPA that shielded

87p
House OversightApr 17, 2019

[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation

[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation The complaint provides a dense web of alleged connections between Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA). It cites specific actions (e.g., alleged drafting of the NPA, defamatory statements, settlement confidentiality) and dates that could be pursued for documentary evidence, witness interviews, and financial‑flow analysis. If substantiated, the lead would expose potential prosecutorial misconduct and high‑level collusion, generating major public outrage. Key insights: Roberts alleges she was trafficked by Epstein from 2000‑2002 and forced to have sex with Dershowitz.; Dershowitz is accused of helping draft and pressure the government into the 2008 NPA that shielded Epstein and co‑conspirators.; Acosta, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, approved the NPA; later became Trump’s Secretary of Labor.

1p
House OversightJan 17, 2014

Bradley Edwards’ Opposition to Jeffrey Epstein’s Summary Judgment Motion – Claims of Abuse of Process, Witness Tampering, and Links to High‑Profile Figures

Bradley Edwards’ Opposition to Jeffrey Epstein’s Summary Judgment Motion – Claims of Abuse of Process, Witness Tampering, and Links to High‑Profile Figures The filing enumerates numerous specific leads that, if verified, tie Jeffrey Epstein to a wide network of powerful individuals (Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell, etc.) and to alleged obstruction of federal investigations, witness intimidation, and a non‑prosecution agreement. It also references concrete documents (exhibits, deposition excerpts, flight logs, FBI emails) that could be pursued for forensic analysis, discovery requests, or FOIA requests. The combination of high‑profile actors, alleged criminal conduct, and detailed procedural allegations makes this a strong investigative lead. Key insights: Edwards alleges Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering substantive questions, creating adverse inferences.; The motion cites a “Holy Grail” journal allegedly listing underage victims and high‑profile contacts (Trump, Clinton, etc.).; Claims that Epstein’s attorneys (including Alan Dershowitz) may have helped suppress victim testimony and influence the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Bradley Edwards’ Opposition to Jeffrey Epstein’s Summary Judgment Motion – Claims of Abuse of Process, Witness Tampering, and Links to High‑Profile...

The filing enumerates numerous specific leads that, if verified, tie Jeffrey Epstein to a wide network of powerful individuals (Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell, etc.) an Edwards alleges Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering substantive questions, creati The motion cites a “Holy Grail” journal allegedly listing underage victims and high‑profile contac

84p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.