Epstein Secrets

the district court in the Does case also rejected Government efforts to dismiss the action. The district court

(1), (5), (8), (c)(1) (2012). 213 See 42 U.S.C. § 10607(c)(2) (2006). 214 See Attorney General Guidelines, supra note 52, at 41-42. 215 Letter from A. Marie Villafana, Assistant U.S. Att'y, to Jane Doe #1 (June 7, 2007), reprinted in Jane Doe Motion, supra note 40, at ex. C. 216 Td, 217 Td, 218 See Victims' Right

upra note 52, at 41-42. 215 Letter from A. Marie Villafana, Assistant U.S. Att'y, to Jane Doe #1 (June 7, 20

onally entered into an agreement with the Federal Government acknowledging that approximately thirty-four (34)

s and the United States Prosecutors in a joint attempt to minimize Epstein's civil exposure. For example, on October 3, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney Marie Villafafia sent an email (attached hereto as Exhibit “D”) to Jay Lefkowitz, counsel for Epstein, with attached proposed letter to special master regarding handl

sonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government.” At least in the posture of this case (and we do

in state criminal justice systems. Nearly two-thirds of states have adopted constitutional provisions to protect victims throughout 715 Letter from A. Marie Villafafia, Assistant U.S. Att’y, to Jane Doe #1 (June 7, 2007), reprinted in Jane Doe Motion, supra note 40, at ex. C. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014076 --- PAGE BREAK

overning information subject to disclosure by the Government in criminal cases, nor any other federal rule or

phasis added). Courts have held that Brady obligations extend only to prosecutors, because the Supreme Court has not imposed this duty on others. See Villasana v. Wilhoit, 368 F.3d 976, 979 (8th Cir. 2004). w 4 See Brady, 373 U.S. at 88. w > 162 F.3d 937 (7th Cir. 1998). DAVID SCHOEN HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_01