Epstein Secrets

expertise to the offender. Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, Commentary (2006) at 4,1 5; see also People v. Ferrer, 69 M.3d 513, 514 (1st Dept. 2010) (observing "the risk level designated in the RAI is merely presumptive, and a court may depart from it as a matt

his SORA designation reflect that fact. B. The Level 3 Calculation by the Board Is Not Supported by Facts or the Law Curiously, the reviewer from the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders recommended that Jeffrey Epstein be designated a Level 3 offender, notwithstanding the absence of any key factors that suggesting that he might pos

citizens of New York. See Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, Commentary (2006) at 4, ¶ 5; see also People v. Ferrer, 69 A.D.3d 513, 514 (1st Dept. 2010) (observing "the risk level designated in the RAI is merely presumptive, and a court may depart from it as a mat

th to abide by the law unconditionally, and the reasoned determinations of other jurisdictions having greater contact and control over Mr. Epstein, the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders in New York has recommended that Mr. Epstein be categorized as a Level 3 sex offender. Such a harsh designation would subject Jeffrey Epstein to a

xpertise to the offender. Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, Commentary (2006) at 4, ¶ 5; see also People v. Ferrer, 69 A.D.3d 513, (1st Dept. 2010) (observing "the risk level designated in the RAI is merely presumptive, and a court may depart from it as a matte

his SORA designation reflect that fact. B. The Level 3 Calculation by the Board Is Not Supported by Facts or the Law Curiously, the reviewer from the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders recommended that Jeffrey Epstein be designated a Level 3 offender, notwithstanding the absence of any key factors that suggesting that he might pos

xpertise to the offender. Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentaiy, Commentary (2006) at 4, ¶ 5; see also People v. Ferrer, 69 A.D.3d 513, 514 (1st Dept. 2010) (observing "the risk level designated in the RAI is merely presumptive, and a court may depart from it as a ma

& ELLIS LLP demonstrated a commitment to go beyond what is demanded of him to remain in full compliance with the law. Curiously, the reviewer from the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders recommended that Mr. Jeffrey-Epstein be designated a Level 3 offender, notwithstanding the absence of any key factors that even remotely suggesting

PAUL G. CASSELL Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law Telephone: September 29, 2011 Re: Follow-up on leffre,y Epstein Dear Mr. Ferrer: As you know, Brad Edwards and I represent Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 in their efforts to protect their rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act

ror based, in part, on the following: (1) the Court improperly relied on untrustworthy double and triple hearsay contained in the recommendation of the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders, even though the District Attorney, as the party appearing on behalf of the State, rejected much of the Board's recommendation as not constituting

onald N. Boyce Presidential Profes.f Criminal Law Telephone: [email protected] September 29, 2011 Re: Follow-up on Jeffrey Epstein Dear Mr. Ferrer: As you know, Brad Edwards and I represent Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 in their efforts to protect their rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act

ror based, in part, on the following: (1) the Court improperly relied on untrustworthy double and triple hearsay contained in the recommendation of the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders, even though the District Attorney, as the party appearing on behalf of the State, rejected much of the Board's recommendation as not constituting