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

cuss ... allegations of criminal acts and [DOJ's] decisions to prosecute or not prosecute"') (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3)); see also, e.g., In re Antrobus, 563 F.3d 1092, 1097 (10th Cir. 2009) ("The CVRA contemplates that individuals asserting victim status may bring a motion in the district court eve

at procedural steps you think we need to bring this matter to a conclusion? That way we can work with you to avoid unnecessary procedural wrangling. The Justice Department is, of course, statutorily obligated to use its "best efforts" to "see that crime victims are ... accorded the rights described in [the CVRA]." 18 U

for these courts (including courts of this Circuit). See, e.g., In re Stewart (I Ph Cir. 2008) (CVRA enforcement action commenced by motion); In re Antrobus (10th Circuit 2008) (same); In re Dean (5th Cir. 2008) (same). Indeed, in an important case in the District of Montana involving enforcement of vict

at procedural steps you think we need to bring this matter to a conclusion? That way we can work with you to avoid unnecessary procedural wrangling. The Justice Department is, of course, statutorily obligated to use its "best efforts" to "see that crime victims are ... accorded the rights described in [the CVRA]." 18 U

for these courts (including courts of this Circuit). See, e.g., In re Stewart (I Ph Cir. 2008) (CVRA enforcement action commenced by motion); In re Antrobus (10th Circuit 2008) (same); In re Dean (5th Cir. 2008) (same). Indeed, in an important case in the District of Montana involving enforcement of vict