Epstein Secrets

ghts for crime victi~s, including th~ right i fo be informed about plea agreements and the right to appear at sentencing. :U.S. District Judge fot the Southern District of Florida, Kenneth A. Marra, ruled in 2019 that federal prosecutors violated the CVRA by faili_ng to notify Epstein's victi111s b~f9re allowing him to p)ead g

nd (ix) the _additional need for maintaining secrecy in the particular yase in question. Kut/er, 800 F. Supp. 2d at 47-48 (quotingJn re Petition of Craig, 131 F.3d 99, 106 (1997)). 6 103. The v~st majority of these fact.ors support disclosure in this case. First? the party seeking disclosure does so

-9 ("a number of districts outside the Southern District of Florida (e.g., the Southern District of New York ...) share jurisdiction and venue with the Southern District of Florida over potential federal criminal charges based on the alleged sexual acts committed by Epstein against [Jane Doe 1 and 2]. Epstein is thus subject t

terpreting plea agreements. Indeed, numerous cases hold that such agreements are unenforceable when they deviate from legal requirements. See, e.g., Craig v. People, 986 P.2d 951, 959-60 (Colo. 1999) (court cannot enforce a plea agreement that waives the mandatory parole period); State v. Garcia, 582

till potentially be pursued in other districts, such as the Southern District of New York . . .."); DE 205-2 at 8-9 ("a number of districts outside the Southern District of Florida (e.g., the Southern District of New York ...) share jurisdiction and venue with the Southern District of Florida over potential federal criminal ch

terpreting plea agreements. Indeed, numerous cases hold that such agreements are unenforceable when they deviate from legal requirements. See, e.g., Craig v. People, 986 P.2d 951, 959-60 (Colo. 1999) (court cannot enforce a plea agreement that waives the mandatory parole period); State v. Garcia, 582

of a Remedy The United States of America, by Byung J. Pak, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and Special Attorneys for the Southern District of Florida, files this notice outlining the Government's proposed schedule for determining the issue of what remedy, if any, should be applied based on the Co

oc. 403-18 ¶ 12]. The government thus believes it is essential to understand these victims concerns prior to recommending a remedy. See Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836, 852,110 S. Ct. 3157, 3167 (1990) (recognizing the government's "compelling" interest "in the protection of minor victims of sex crim

uld handle victim impact statements in the context of a criminal sentencing. • All criminal prosecutors in the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL) will undergo additional training on the CVRA, victim rights, and victim assistance issues to be completed no later than one year from t

(holding that complete rescission of plea agreement was only permissible remedy when defendant was induced to enter plea based on mistake of law); Craig v. People, 986 P.2d 951, 966 (Colo. 1990) (noting that if plea was induced by illegal promise, proper remedy was defendant's option to withdraw fro