Epstein Secrets

interpretation of the remedy provision in *1316 § 377I(d), which refers back to those § 3771(a) rights. Indeed, both the Majority and Chief Judge Pryor's concurrence examine the CVRA as a whole and look to various subsections of the CVRA to support their conclusion that § 377I(d) does not grant Ms.

until, at the earliest, a suspect's initial appearance before a judicial officer. U.S. Const. Amend. 6. *1246 On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, D.C. Docket No. 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Attorneys and Law Firms Paul Cassell, University of Utah Co

words of the statute as they are commonly and ordinarily understood and must construe the statute so each of its provisions is given full effect." P United States it McLymont, 45 F.3d 400, 401 (I I th Cir. 1995). Therefore, "[w]e do not look at one word or term in isolation, but instead we look to the entire

nt Venture, 245 F.3d 1217, 1222 (11th Cir. 2001). We are bound to "presume that Congress said what it meant and meant what it said." Id. (quoting P. United States it Steele, 147 F.3d 1316, 1318 (11th Cir. 1998) (en bane)); see alsol° Keene Corp., 508 U.S. at 208, 113 S.Ct. 2035. Therefore, under the plain la

the Majority, Judge Tjoflat's concurring opinion, and I agree that the Executive has exclusive and complete authority over charging decisions. See? li United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 693, 94 S.Ct. 3090, 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1974) ("[T]he Executive Branch has exclusive authority and absolute discretion to deci

e its protection because he entered a guilty plea and the victims intend to use the correspondence against the United States, not against Epstein," Pryor wrote. He was joined in the unanimous decision by Judge Beverly Martin and U.S. District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell of Orlando, sitting by de

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 I. UNITED STATES JOINT STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS The parties hereby stipulate and agree that the following facts are not in dispute and may be accepted as true

ensued between the United States and Epstein. Despite the investigation revealing that Epstein had molested more than 40 minor girls, in Late 2007, the United Stales entered into a non- prosecution agreement (NPA) with Epstein - esseNiatly egree:ng to immunize Epstein for al of the Federal Sex crimes he committed

copy of the terms was not provided. A notification was not provided to Jane Doe #2 because the agreement limited Epstein's liability to victims whom the United States was prepared to name in an indictment. As a result, Jane Doe #2 never received a notification a letter about the agreement. The-rietifieation4id-net

on the [NPA] when seeking civil relief against Epstein . . . and affirmatively advanced the terms of the [NPA] as a basis for relief from Epstein." United States' Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Doc. 205-6 at 12-13. After reaping the benefits of the NPA, the

BI): ASAC Parlave supervised GS Ortiz. She attended the July 26, 2007 meeting where Criminal Chief Menchel announced the two-year plea offer. S/A Pryor: S/A Pryor participated in the interview of in Australia. S/A Gavin Gumbiner (still at FBI): S/A Gumbiner was the case agent on Operation Stolen

k that physical force against the person . . . or another may be used in t the course of committing the offense." 18 U.S.C. § 16(b). Post-Johnson v. United Sta , U.S. 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), a court might decide differently. See, e.g., Menendez Whitaker, 908 F.3d 467 (9'b Cir. 2018). Even if not a crime

considered for work release. At some point after the NPA was signed, USA Acosta was recused from the Epstein matter. AUSA John McMillan (still at USA0): Early in the investigation, I asked AUSA McMillan if he would serve as co-counsel on the case. Before I joined the West Palm Beach Office, AUSA M

rate contact with Epstein. (See Exhibit A-1.) One of the subpoenaed victims was Individual #28, who is referred to as Jane Doe #2 in the Jane Doe' United Stales litigation. When approached for an interview, Individual #28 refused to speak with the agents, and I remember S/A Kuyrkendall telling me that she fe

GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS SEALED ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO DISCLOSE GRAND JURY MATERIAL THIS MATTER has come before the Court on the United States' Sealed Application for Permission to Disclose Grand Jury Material and for Entry of a Protective Order. The Court has considered the Motion and find

District of Florida Court, No. 9:08-CV-80736-KAM, ordered disclosure. The inter- venors filed interlocutory appeal. Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Pryor, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) Court of Appeals had jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal; (2) plea negotiations were not protected from disclosur

rring admission of plea negotiations; the alleged victims intended to admit the evidence of the plea negotiations to prove violations of the CVRA by the United States, not to be used against the alleged perpetrator. Fed.Rules Evid.Rule 410, 28 U.S.C.A. [12] Federal Civil Procedure 170A f=1604(2) 170A Federal Civ

s. United States I. Cartwright, 413 F.3d 1295, 1299 (11th Cir.2005). We also review de novo the interpretation of the Federal Rules of Evidence. See United States I. Campa, 459 F.3d 1121, 1174 (11th Cir.2006); Pickett I. Iowa Beef Processors, 209 F.3d 1276, 1279 (11th Cir.2000). And the issue of whether to r

e its protection because he entered a guilty plea and the victims intend to use the correspondence against the United States, not against Epstein," Pryor wrote. He was joined in the unanimous decision by Judge Beverly Martin and U.S. District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell of Orlando, sitting by de

istribution. The Elaenth Circuil explaned that the %foams should 'entry an esiCenttary benefit from the osclosure of plea negotiations to prow where the United Slates Waned thee rights under the [Owns Victims Rights) Act' Upon literrang 01 the ruling Allomey Brod Edwards stated: The Worn, hako bight hard for almo

l Senses account Other records. except Stoat tar dooperrd. conuinng waling data should not be ;Wed upon If you Wore twan an a Or 02161.01. plethe Pryor n vernediaety it wring to theersch Matapie of the off ce siningyour swum Athcagh al no teeth are intended as be ia<0.010. somas exa mouth rot be

a IM end of ttws dxurnem for more infornnon. Cash Cash and money balances Cash and mosey balances may Ind tcle avaltile cash balances, UBS Sant. USA &posit account balances, UBS AG Standard Branch deposit account balances and money market mut rad fund sweep balances. UBS Bank USA deposit account b

g Sarah Kellen le. Fittuy Ricw The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record,” the document concludes. “If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agree- ment, it will provide notice to Epste

he quality of the evidenc: at trial. With a federal c: considerations. First, a hom it may concern: ; ; Tow Y requires that the crime be Iserved as U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida em an interstate nexus. Secoi e . : | fi m 2005 through 2009. Over the past weeks, I have read ; charge

day. “During the meeting, Rodriguez produced a small bound book and several sheets of legal pad paper containing handwrit- ten notes,” Special Agent Pryor would say in her statement. She continues: Rodriguez explained that he had taken the bound book from his former employer’s residence while employed

GHT_022013 --- PAGE BREAK --- CHAPTER $5 R. Alexander Acosta’s letter to the general public, March 20, 2011 To whom it may concern: I served as U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida from 2005 through 2009. Over the past weeks, I have read much regarding Mr. Jeffrey Epstein. Some appea

day. “During the meeting, Rodriguez produced a small bound book and several sheets of legal pad paper containing handwrit- ten notes,” Special Agent Pryor would say in her statement. She continues: Rodriguez explained that he had taken the bound book from his former employer’s residence while employed