Epstein Secrets

flect that value. The government regrets that the manner in which it communicated the resolution of the Epstein case to the victims fell short. B. The Department of Justice's commitment to victims of human trafficking and child exploitation supports targeted remedies to give the Epstein victims a voice, an explanation, a

ust be rejected. CONCLUSION Regardless of what the CVRA required the government to do in this matter, the victims are right to expect better from their Justice Department. The government's commitment in the decade since this action was filed to combat human trafficking and child exploitation and protect victims of su

on FLSD Docket 06/24/2019 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT 1 EFTA00085741 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 462-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2019 Page 2 of 3 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Northern District of Georgia 600 us. Caseation IS Ted Tine Dna SW. Admit Genie X1103 May 7, 2019 Paul G. Cassell, . R

estion that Congress intended, but simply forgot, to provide additional remedies beyond those already specified. Courts agree. See United States v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 528, 542 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (holding that the CVRA's "carefully crafted and detailed enforcement scheme," provides "strong evidence that Co

v. United States, 817 F.Supp.2d 1337, 1341 (S.D. Fla. 2011). Epstein also fails to fully describe what the Justice Department regulations required the Justice Department to do during the investigative stage of a case. The 2005 Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance (hereinafter "2005 A.G. Victi

1(b)(1) (emphasis added). This Court also previously held that "[w]hile Epstein was within his rights to attempt to persuade higher authorities with the Department of Justice to overrule the prosecutorial decisions of the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, the CVRA was designed to give victims the

g enforcement of their rights in appellate courts had to shoulder the heavy burden traditionally associated with the "mandamus" relief. See U.S. v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 58, 532-33 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (discussing 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3) and holding crime victims had to satisfy high mandamus standards); United S

v. United States, 817 F.Supp.2d 1337, 1341 (S.D. Fla. 2011). Epstein also fails to fully describe what the Justice Department regulations required the Justice Department to do during the investigative stage of a case. The 2005 Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance (hereinafter "2005 A.G. Victi

1(b)(1) (emphasis added). This Court also previously held that "[w]hile Epstein was within his rights to attempt to persuade higher authorities with the Department of Justice to overrule the prosecutorial decisions of the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, the CVRA was designed to give victims the

g enforcement of their rights in appellate courts had to shoulder the heavy burden traditionally associated with the "mandamus" relief. See U.S. v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 58, 532-33 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (discussing 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3) and holding crime victims had to satisfy high mandamus standards); United S

es in responding to crime victims needs; (3) provide "disciplinary sanctions, including suspension or termination from employment, for employees of the Department of Justice who willfully or wantonly fail to comply with provisions of Federal law pertaining to the treatment of crime victims"; and (4) instruct that the "A

estion that Congress intended, but simply forgot, to provide additional remedies beyond those already specified. Courts agree. See United States v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 528, 542 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (holding that the CVRA's "carefully crafted and detailed enforcement scheme," provides "strong evidence that Co