Epstein Secrets

rney assigned to the above-styled cause, found it appropriate to intentionally withhold ... information from the court.” <Sp_ Marie Villafana2.jpg> A. Marie Villafafia was the lead federal prosecutor in the Jeffrey Epstein sex case. The U.S. attorney’s office’s handling of the prosecution, which led to a plea to mi

tant United States Attorney assigned to the above-styled cause, found it appropriate to intentionally withhold ... information from the court.” <Sp_ Marie Villafana2.jpg> A. Marie Villafafia was the lead federal prosecutor in the Jeffrey Epstein sex case. The U.S. attorney’s office’s handling of the prosecution, whi

intentionally kept from his victims in violation of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act. While the two cases are unrelated, it shows that both Acosta and Villafana had been warned about the importance of victim disclosure in sex crimes cases before the Epstein agreement. They nevertheless forged ahead with a pac

--- PAGE BREAK --- write a treatise for the judge in an unsuccessful attempt to persuade him to soften the stinging language in his order. Senior U.S. District Court Judge William J. Zloch copied Acosta on his order, noting, “The court is at a total loss as to why the Office of the United States Attorney for the S

REAT FOODS SKYRIDE TO PARADISE POINT representing two of Epstein’s vic- tims in a lawsuit against the fed- eral government, Assistant U.S. Attorney Marie Villafana said she and her superiors were trying to help the traumatized young women when they agreed to let Epstein plead guilty to state prostitution charges

ted high-level to convict justice department officials. They challenged the terms of the non- prosecution agreement. Fearing it was falling apart, Vil- lafana said her office and the FBI resumed the investigation and in- formed the victims of that by letter in January 2008. In their lawsuit, the victims’ a

mment since 2007 when they negoti- ated a deal that allowed Epstein to escape federal charges — pros- ecutors filed hundreds of pages of documents in U.S. District Court, explaining what led to the now infamous non-prosecution agree- ment that has been decried as “a sweetheart deal.” Contrary to claims by attorneys

e counsel in this matter.” Marra quoted an equally pleasant note then-Palm Beach County State Attorney Barry Krischer sent to Assistant U.S. Attorney Marie Villafana, who was the lead prosecutor in Epstein’s case. “Glad we could get this worked out for reasons: I won’t put in writing,” Krischer wrote, shortly afte

at were exchanged dealt with prosecutors’ and Epstein’s lawyers’ shared desire to keep the deal secret from Epstein’s accusers. In a September email, Villafana asked Lefkowitz for guidance about what she should reveal. “And can wehave a conference call to discuss what I may disclose to ... the girls regardin

ds Not Guilty to Sex Trafficking, Conspiracy Charges In Federal Court In Manhattan" published on July 9, 2019, reporting on Epstein's appearance in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in which he "pleaded not guilty to charges accusing him of creating a vast network of girls as young as 14 th

ad prosecutor in Epstein’s case had concealed victim information in another underage sex crimes case, the Miami Herald has learned. The prosecutor, A. Marie Villafafa, was harshly rebuked by a federal judge in January 2007 for what he called her “intentional and/or serious lapse in judgment” when she failed to expl

utor in his office to write a treatise for the judge in an unsuccessful attempt to persuade him to soften the stinging language in his order. Senior U.S. District Court Judge William J. Zloch copied Acosta on his order, noting, “The court is at a total loss as to why the Office of the United States Attorney for the S

ad prosecutor in Epstein’s case had concealed victim information in another underage sex crimes case, the Miami Herald has learned. The prosecutor, A. Marie Villafafia, was harshly rebuked by a federal judge in January 2007 for what he called her “intentional and/or serious lapse in judgment” when she failed to expl

ith a 14-year-old girl, had a prior history of predatory behavior with minors, court records show. Acosta, her boss at the time, not only knew about Villafania’s breach — records show that he subsequently defended it. Acosta assigned another prosecutor in his office to write a treatise for the judge in an un

he judge in an unsuccessful attempt to persuade him to soften the stinging language in his order. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021729 --- PAGE BREAK --- Senior U.S. District Court Judge William J. Zloch copied Acosta on his order, noting, “The court is at a total loss as to why the Office of the United States Attorney for the S

California girl whom he brought to Texas and impregnated. He was also having another relationship with a 15-year-old girl at the time of his arrest, Villafafa admitted in court. The judge promptly sentenced McDaniel to 10 years — twice what Villafana recommended. Three months later, in January 2007, after

er prosecutors formally file [*68] criminal charges? Or do they attach at some earlier point in the process? Does v. United States, a federal case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, usefully illustrates the issue. *° In that case, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florid

(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

s and the United States Prosecutors in a jgint 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 hand

on behalf of his clients. These complaints are all public record and have not been attached, but are available in this Court’s files and the files of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. | 50. In addition to the complaints filed against Epstein in Florida, a female in New York, Ava Cordero, filed

ly limited to restitution, as many other CVRA rights clearly apply before conviction.''* Reviewing these two cases in an extended, published opinion, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas noted that reading these two decisions as standing for the proposition that charges must be filed for CVRA rights

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

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

ral courts have the inherent power to request attorneys to represent indigent crime victims. An illustration of this power is found in a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina in United States v. Stamper. *8 In this rape case, a dispute arose over the admission of certain psychiatr