Epstein Secrets

efore the Court on Plaintiff's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim's Rights Act (DE 1), filed July 7, 2008. It is hereby ORDERED that the United States' Attorney shall file a response to this petition by 5:00 P.M. on Wednesday, July 9, 2008. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach

Palm Beach County, Florida, this 7th day of July, 2008. KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge Copies furnished to: R. Alexander Acosta, United States' Attorney all counsel of record EFTA00177719 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: IN RE: JANE DOE, Petitioner.

gned to be a 'broad and encompassing' statutory victims' bill of rights." United States v. 5 EFTA00177744 Jul. 7. 2008 3: 13PM No. 1613 P. 7 Degenhardt, 405 F.Supp.2d 1341, 1342 (D. Utah 2005) (quoting 150 Cong. Rec. S4261 (daily ed. Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein)). Congress intended t

thers. In September 2008, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 filed motions in the federal action to unseal the non-prosecution agreement and addendum (A-3). The United States Attorney's Office opposed disclosure noting its confidentiality provision, the movant's right to access the agreement, and Judge Marra's protective

er a victim under the CVRA. It should be emphasized that_the CVRA "was designed to be a 'broad and encompassing' statutory victims' bill of rights." United States' 5 lot 00 EFTA00231181 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 Page 6 of 10 v Degenhardt, 405 F.Supp.2d 1341, 13

s' bill of rights." United States' 5 lot 00 EFTA00231181 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 Page 6 of 10 v Degenhardt, 405 F.Supp.2d 1341, 1342 (D. Utah 2005) (quoting 150 Cong. Rec. S4261 (daily ed. Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein)). Congress intended t

thers. In September 2008, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 filed motions in the federal action to unseal the non-prosecution agreement and addendum (A-3). The United States Attorney's Office opposed disclosure noting its confidentiality provision, the movant's right to access the agreement, and Judge Marra's protective

bill of rights." United States v. 5 50110 EFTA00232301 Case 9:08-cv-60736-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 Page 6 of 10 %so Degenhardt, 405 F.Supp.2d 1341, 1342 (D. Utah 2005) (quoting 150 Cong. Rec. S4261 (daily ed. Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein)). Congress intended t

6, 1998, at BS. 22 Victims' Rights Amendment. Hearing on S.J. Res. 6 Before the S. Judiciary Comm., 105th Cong. 64 (1997) (statement of Janet Reno, U.S. Att'y Gen.). 30 See www.nveap.org (last visted Dec. 30, 2007). 3! For a comprehensive history of victims' efforts to pass a constitutional amendment,

able to reflect the new role of victims throughout the Rules. Moreover, Congress intended the CVRA to be "a formula for success" and a "model for our States." + The only way the federal rules could serve as a model, I argued, was by fully implementing victims’ rights. I then proposed twenty-eight specific

. 2006) (looking to legislative history to interpret CVRA); United States v. Cienfuegos, 462 F.3d 1160, 1165 (9th Cir. 2006) (same); United States v. Degenhardt, 405 F. Supp. 2d 1341, 1344 (D. Utah 2006) (same); United States v. Ingrassia, 2005 WE 2875220 (E.D.N_Y. 2005) (same). 94 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b) (2006)