Epstein Secrets

—and we needn't do so even in this case. We cite Professor Cassell's article here (and elsewhere) for several reason

agreement that these "proceeding"-focused rights apply only after the filing of a complaint or criminal charges. See Reply in Supp. of Pet. at 17; Paul G. Cassell, et aL, Crime Picini's' Rights During Criminal Investigations? Applying the Crime Victims' Rights Act Before Criminal Charges Are Filed, 104 J. of

they assert that the term "case" can "refer both to a judicial case before a court and an investigative case pursued by a law enforcement officer," Cassell et al., supra, at 72 (emphasis added).9 Although it's true, at least in the abstract, that the term "case" can mean either thing, in legal parlanc

391, 394 (5th Cir. 2008). The Sixth Circuit has deemed it "uncertain" whether CVRA protections apply "prior to [the] filing of ... charges." In re Acker, 596 F.3d 370, 373 (6th Cir. 2010). The district courts that have considered the question are divided. Compare, e.g., 1' United States it Oakum, No

"civil" case. 6 EFTA00177110 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 49 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 7 of 10 Letter from Wifredo A. Ferrer to Paul G. Cassell (March 15, 2011).3 Accordingly, the victims were left with no choice but to file a motion without stipulated facts. Contemporaneously with the filin

f the proposed "undisputed material facts" arc in fact disputed and, in many cases, wrong. 'The U.S. Attorney's Office also repeatedly reminded Mr. Cassell of the Justice Department's policy not to comment on the guilt or innocence of an unconvicted person. The ABA's Model Rule of Professional Conduct

trict court concluded that the violations alleged by the victims did not provide a basis for rejecting the plea agreement. Id. at 726-27; see In re Acker, 596 F.3d 370, 373 (6th Cir. 2010) (denying mandamus where petitioners sought to vacate plea agreement which made no provision for restitution in de

iscovery and admissibility as is set forth in the incorporated memorandum. Mr ;LETS DISCUSS - DOES THIS BROADEN THE INTERVENTION - WHAT EXACTLY HAS CASSELL ASKED FOR] Epstein also objects to any further , as-well-as-dieir-Footien-te disseminate the plea negotiation &communications or its content -to th

trict court concluded that the violations alleged by the victims did not provide a basis for rejecting the plea agreement. Id. at 726-27; see In re Acker, 596 F.3d 370, 373 (6th Cir. 2010) (denying mandamus where petitioners sought to vacate plea agreement which made no provision for restitution in d