Epstein Secrets

03/21/2011 Page 1 of 42 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-CW-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 I. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING ON APPROPRIATE REMEDIES

3 07/09/2008 15:13 FAX 5818059848 115110 WPB CONFRM Case 8:08-Cv-80736-KAM •ument 48-3 Entered on FLSD Diie1 03/21/ U.S. Department of Justice United Slates Attorney Southern District of Florida SOO South Australian Ave.. Suite 400 West Palm Beach. FL 3)401 (561)820-8711 Facsimile- (361)820-8777 Jun

1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 013-80736-Civ-Marrellohnson JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, I. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. MOTION TO INTERVENE OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR A SUA SPONTE RULE I I ORDER Comes now, Movant Bruce E. Reinhart, pursuant to Federal Ru

he agreement secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstei

overnment claims is troublesome, the Filth Circuit cited to the district court opinion under review, which had quoted all the words in the statute. See United States'. BP Products, 2008 WL 501321 at '7 (noting victims right to confer "in the case"), cited in In re Dean, 527 F.3d at 394. 28 08-80736-CV-MARRA 000

rifi-nationi to the Nom Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with than. Dated: BY: Dated: Dated: Dated: ifrjfa Ft. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UN: TED STATES ATTORNEY A. MARIE VILLAFJA ASSISTANT' U.S. A ITORNEY JEFFREY EPSTEIN GERALD LEECOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL 713 JEFFREY EPSTELN LILLY ATTORNEY FOR JEFF

y and non-monetary sanctions against both the lawyer filing the pleading and the lawyer's client. Fed: R. Civ. P. 11(c). 28 U.S.C. 61927 Title 28, United States Cod; Section 1927 states: Any attorney or other person admitted to conduct cases in any court of the United States or any Territory thereof who so mult

the University of Pennsylvania Law School. 4. After graduating from law school, I served as judicial law clerk to the Honorable Norma L. Shapiro, Unitqd States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 5. In 1988, I began working at the Criminal Division of the United States Department of

ement barring federal prosecution of their oases because of a deliberate decisions by the U.S. Attorney's Office, not mere "negligence or inaction." McCorkle, 321 F.3d at 1297. Accordingly, the Government is stopped from arguing that the Crime Victims' Rights Act does not apply to this case. IL THE COU

n federal income tax returns stated cause of action for dis- crimination among religions prohibited by establishment clause of First Amendment. 26 U.S.C.A. § 170; Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. Rule 12(b)(6), 28 U.S.C.A.; U.S.C.A. Conan. Amend. 1. 4. Constitutional Law 4=,84(I) Establishment clause of First Ame

injunction 36. United Stater v. Dionino, 410 US. 1, 17, 93 S.Ct. 764, 773, 35 L-Edid 67 (1973). 37. /I at 16, 93 S.Q. at 772 (quoting Stirone v. United Stater, 361 US. 212, 218, 80 S.Ct. 270, 273. 4 L.Ed.2d 252 (1960)). EFTA00191835 U.S. I BURZYNSKI CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 1313 ateas5M F.2d 1301 (Mb

ce which a prison has not commenced to serve. Ellison r. United State 263 F.2d 395 (10 Cir. 1969); Cain United States, 49 870 (8 Cir. 1 ). In Heflin United States, 868 U.S. 416, 79 S.Ct. 461, 3 L.Ed.2d 407 (1959), the Supreme Court stated that: "Section 2255 is available only to attack a sentence under which

violations, brought action to enforce terms of immunity agreement under United States Department of Justice's (DOJ's) corporate leniency program. The United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Pennsylvania, Timothy J. Savage, J., 352 F.Supp2d 553, enjoined prosecu- tion, and government appealed.

The Supreme Court has observed that the executive branch "has exclusive authority and absolute discretion to decide whether to prosecute a case," United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 693, 94 S.Ct. 3090, 41 L.Ed2d 1039 (1974), and the Gov- ernment therefore argues that courts lack jurisdiction to enjoin a

r dis- crimination among religions prohibited by establishment clause of First Amendment. 26 U.S.C.A. § 170; Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. Rule 12(b)(6), 28 U.S.C.A.; U.S.C.A. Conan. Amend. 1. 4. Constitutional Law 4=,84(I) Establishment clause of First Amend- ment prohibits denominational preferences, includi

ms Against the Government 131 Neither the United States, its agen- cies, nor its officials acting in their official capacities, may be sued without the United States' specific consent's The Federal Tort Claims Act 7 permits certain claims to be asserted against the United States, as sov- ereign, and its agents bu

tion of the chal- lenged activity if the actions are capable (1) of repetition and (2) of evading review. See, e.g., Super Tire Engineering Co. v. McCorkle, 416 U.S. 115, 122, 94 S.Ct. 1694, 1698, 40 L.Ed.2d 1 (1974). Finally, the existence of "a public interest in having the legality of the practice

ine, based on reliable evidence, that, during the period of the Agreement, Epstein willfully violated any of the conditions of this Agreement, then the United Slates Attorney may, within ninety (90) days following the expiration of the term of home confinement discussed below, provide Epstein with timely notice

nection with the investigation, you will bo nal t By: cc: Special Agent -F.B.I Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta United States Attorney Assistant United Stales Attorney 7 7 EFTA00229970 7 :-- Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 1 of 15 JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE SO'

he agreement secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstei

pstein hereby flits that he undersea-4s the cluifications to the Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with than. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UN: TED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: BY: Dated: Dated: Dated: ifrja JEFFREY EPSTEIN GERALD LF,FCOURT, &SQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTELN LILLY ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY

y and non-monetary sanctions against both the lawyer filing the pleading and the lawyer's client. Fed: R. Civ. P. 11(c). 28 U.S.C. 61927 Title 28, United States Cod; Section 1927 states: Any attorney or other person admitted to conduct cases in any court of the United States or any Territory thereof who so mult

the University of Pennsylvania Law School. 4. After graduating from law school, I served as judicial law clerk to the Honorable Norma L. Shapiro, Uniteed States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 5. In 1988, I began working at the Criminal Division of the United States Department of

ement barring federal prosecution of their oases because of a deliberate decisions by the U.S. Attorney's Office, not mere "negligence or inaction." McCorkle, 321 F.3d at 1297. Accordingly, the Government is stopped from arguing that the Crime Victims' Rights Act does not apply to this case. IL THE COU

dure do not allow them to intervene as parties to a prosecution." In re Amy Unknown, F.3d 2011 WL 988882 at *2 (5th Cir. Mar. 22, 2011). See also United Stases' Aguirre-Gonzalez, 597 F.3d 46, *Fed. R. Crim. P. 60 was adopted on April 23, 2008 and made effective on December 1, 2008. While this was after most

3/21/2011 Page 1 of 42 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 I. UNITED STATES I JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING ON APPROPRIATE REMEDI

he agreement secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstei

d the government. Movants rely on a decision from the Southern District of Texas for the notion that CVRA rights apply prior to any prosecution. In United States' BP Products North America, Inc., the district court reasoned that because § 3771(d)(3) provided for the assertion of CVRA rights "in the district c

ence with regard to the acts, conduct, or acquiescence; (3) detrimental reliance; and (4) affirmative misconduct by the Government. United States' McCorkle, 321 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 2003). Each of these four factors is easily met here. 33 EFTA00177041 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on F

place nor suppkniont the filing and seivice of pkadings or whet papers a by local mks of :oat. Tins form. approwed by the Judicial Conference of 'he United Stales In Septanba 1974. is required for the use of the Clerk tX Civil cockei nett SEE INSTRUC TIOVS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.' NOTICE: Attorneys MUST

n "ancillary criminal proceeding[]," DE 290 at 2, presumably not covered by a statute of limitations applicable to a "civil action commences against the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a). Even more surprising to us was your Office's failure to discuss the second sentence in § 2401(a), which provides that the si

ce with regard to the acts, conduct, or acquiescence; (3) detrimental reliance; and (4) affirmative misconduct by the Government. United States v. McCorkle, 321 F.3d 1292 (11a ' Cir. 2003). Each of these four factors is easily met here. 33 EFTA00210822 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on F

he agreement secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstei

overnment claims is troublesome, the Fifth Circuit cited to the district court opinion under review, which had quoted all the words in the statute. See United States' BP Products, 2008 WL 501321 at *7 (noting victims right to confer "in the case"), cited in In re Dean, 527 F.3d at 394. 28 EFTA00185036 One 2108

nce with regard to the acts, Conduct, or acquiescence; (3) detrimental reliance; and (4) affirmative misconduct by the Government. United States'. McCorkle, 321 F.3d 1292 (I l" Cir. 2003). Each of these four factors is easily met here. 33 EFTA00185041 Case 90B-cava7236-11CMil Banuarand 3162- etas* R

Justice Department would makes its "best efforts" to protect Jane Doe #2's rights, including "Nike reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case" and "to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving . . . plea . . . ." The notification further expla

ce with regard to the acts, conduct, or acquiescence; (3) detrimental reliance; and (4) affirmative misconduct by the Government. United States v. McCorkle, 321 F.3d 1292 (11'" Cir. 2003). Each of these four factors is easily met here. First, the Government made statements to the victims that induced r

he agreement secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstei

ce with regard to the acts, conduct, or acquiescence; (3) detrimental reliance; and (4) affirmative misconduct by the Government. United States v. McCorkle, 321 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 2003). Each of these four factors is easily met here. 33 EFTA00208406 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on F

e Justice Department would makes its "best efforts" to protect Jane Doe #2's rights, including "Rpm reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case" and "to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving . . . plea . . . ." The notification further expla

ence with regard to the acts, conduct, or acquiescence; (3) detrimental reliance; and (4) affirmative misconduct by the Government. United States. McCorkle, 321 F.3d 1292 (11'" Cir. 2003). Each of these four factors is easily met here. First, the Government made statements to the victims that induced r

he agreement secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstei

ce with regard to the acts, conduct, or acquiescence; (3) detrimental reliance; and (4) affirmative misconduct by the Government. United States v. McCorkle, 321 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 2003). Each of these four factors is easily met here. 33 EFTA00079025 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 48 Entered on FL