Epstein Secrets

t none of these cases - United States v. 10 104 Turner, !9? Searcy v. Paletz, !°3 or Searcy v. Skinner -

y parole or other release of the criminal. The Task Force 4 18 U.S.C. § 3771(¢)(1). > Id. § 3771(d)(3). © See Douglas E. Beloof, Paul G. Cassell & Steven J. Twist, Victims in Criminal Procedure 3-39 (3d ed. 2010) (describing reforms from a historical perspective); see also, e.g., /8 U.S.C. § 377/(a) (2012). 7

heard orally at sentencing), and United States v. Turner, 367 F. Supp. 2d 319, 333 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (noting

yne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 834 (1991) (Scalia, J., concurring) (internal quotations omitted). See generally Douglas E. Beloof, Paul G. Cassell & Steven J. Twist, Victims in Criminal Procedure 638-39 (2d ed. 2005) (discussing the need for victims’ participation in the criminal justice system); see also Shirley

rged conduct under the CVRA. See United States v. Turner, 367 F. Supp. 2d 319, 327 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (conclu

05)). The CVRA was part of a much larger piece of legislation that addressed a variety of subjects, known as the "Justice for All Act.” See generally Steven J. Twist, On the Wings of Their Angels: The Scott Campbell, Stephanie Roper, Wendy Preston, Louarna Gillis, Nila Lynn Crime Victims' Rights Act, 9 Lewis & Cla

ions.'°! Yet none of these cases—United States v. Turner,'°? Searcy v. Paletz,'® or Searcy v. Skinner'°*—p

victims were treated in all stages of the criminal justice process, from the police investigation through 6 See DoucLAs E. BELoor, PAUL G. CASSELL & STEVEN J. Twist, VICTIMS IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3-39 (3d ed. 2010) (describing reforms from a historical perspective), see also, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a) (2012). T