Epstein Secrets

entitled to reg- ular appellate review. See In re W.R. Huff Asset Mgmt. Co., 409 F.3d 555, 562 (2d Cir. 2005); Kenna v. U

DEAR ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER: I am writing about the Justice Department’s im- plementation of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act

was an obligation of “Colfficers and employees of the Department of Justice and other departments and agen- cies of the Unite

ent 85-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/17/2011 Page 3 of 4 S3608 U.S. SENATE, Washington, DC, June 6, 2011. Hon. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General; U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC. DEAR ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER: I am writing about the Justice Department’s im- plementation of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act--an act

ne 6, 2011. Hon. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General; U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC. DEAR ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER: I am writing about the Justice Department’s im- plementation of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act--an act that I co-sponsored in 2004. These questions relate to an Office of Legal Counsel (“OLC’’?)

ess could not have been clearer in its direction that using ‘“‘best efforts’’ to en- force the CVRA was an obligation of “Colfficers and employees of the Department of Justice and other departments and agen- cies of the United States engaged in the de- tection, investigation, or prosecution of crime . .? 18 U.S.C. §8771(c)

cccccccccesceessseesseesseesseeeseeessees 73 III. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S UNPERSUASIVE POSITION .........0....00000- 75 A.

CVRA rights attach when an officer or employee of the Department of Justice or any other department or agency of the United S

ns 71 C. Courts Recognize That Crime Victims Have CVRA Rights Before Charging .........ccccccccccccccccccccccesceessseesseesseesseeeseeessees 73 III. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S UNPERSUASIVE POSITION .........0....00000- 75 A. OLC’s Misreading of the CVRA’s Definition of “Victim” ........ 76 B. OLC’s Distortion of the CVRA’s

hat potential charges will never be filed. The issue of pre-charging rights has most prominently surfaced in connection with federal cases. In 2010, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) weighed in on the issue and released a legal opinion arguing that victims of federal crimes have no CVRA rights during

of 31 104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 59, *75 II. The Justice Department's Unpersuasive Position Despite the CVRA's broad r

cifically directs that "officers and employees of the Department of Justice and other departments and agencies of the United

hat potential charges will never be filed. The issue of pre-charging rights has most prominently surfaced in connection with federal cases. In 2010, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) weighed in on the issue and released a legal opinion arguing that victims of federal crimes have no CVRA rights during

, at 3 (S.D. Fla. June 19, 2013). DAVID SCHOEN HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017614 --- PAGE BREAK --- Page 12 of 31 104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 59, *75 II. The Justice Department's Unpersuasive Position Despite the CVRA's broad remedial purposes, its expansive language referring to investigations, and the unanimous case law ext

notice of their rights before charges are filed. The Justice Department's own guidelines provide that a victim must receive

Sen. Kyl) ("We authorized an appropriation of to assure ... that moneys would be made available to enhance the victim notification system, managed by the Department of Justice's Office for Victims of Crime, and the resources additionally to develop state-of-the-art systems for notifying crime victims of important states of de

tim's rights might be violated before charges are filed. In particular, the victim might not receive notice of their rights before charges are filed. The Justice Department's own guidelines provide that a victim must receive notice of rights "at the earliest opportunity after detection of a crime at which it may be done wi