What is document EFTA00021441?

This is an email from a victims' rights attorney representing Jane Doe 1 and 2 in the Jeffrey Epstein CVRA (Crime Victims' Rights Act) case. Sent on July 25, 2019, it discusses recent legal filings about whether the 2007 Florida Non-Prosecution Agreement extended to New York jurisdiction.

Who is mentioned in this document?

The document mentions Jeffrey Epstein, Judge Kenneth Marra (the federal judge overseeing the CVRA case in Florida), Martin Weinberg (referred to as 'Marty Weinberg,' Epstein's defense attorney), and Jane Doe 1 and 2 (victims represented by the email's author). The sender's name is redacted but was admitted to the Utah State Bar.

What does this document reveal?

The document reveals the victims' legal strategy: arguing the NPA only covered Florida crimes, leaving New York prosecutors free to charge Epstein. It also shows Epstein's defense was actively trying to expand the NPA's protective scope through additional court filings, and that Judge Marra was moving quickly on these motions—all occurring just weeks after Epstein's arrest in New York.

Why was the scope of the NPA important?

The Non-Prosecution Agreement's geographic scope became critical after Epstein's July 2019 arrest in New York. If the NPA covered all federal jurisdictions, Epstein could potentially argue the new charges were barred. The victims' attorneys argued the immunity was limited to Florida only, which is the position ultimately supported by New York prosecutors who proceeded with their case.

What was the outcome of the CVRA case?

Judge Marra ruled in February 2019 that prosecutors violated victims' rights by keeping the NPA secret, but ultimately closed the case in September 2019 without awarding damages or invalidating the agreement. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals later ruled that CVRA rights don't attach until charges are filed, meaning the victims had no enforceable rights under the Act since Epstein was never formally charged in Florida.

What is document EFTA00021441?

This is an email from a victims' rights attorney representing Jane Doe 1 and 2 in the Jeffrey Epstein CVRA (Crime Victims' Rights Act) case. Sent on July 25, 2019, it discusses recent legal filings about whether the 2007 Florida Non-Prosecution Agreement extended to New York jurisdiction.

Who is mentioned in this document?

The document mentions Jeffrey Epstein, Judge Kenneth Marra (the federal judge overseeing the CVRA case in Florida), Martin Weinberg (referred to as 'Marty Weinberg,' Epstein's defense attorney), and Jane Doe 1 and 2 (victims represented by the email's author). The sender's name is redacted but was admitted to the Utah State Bar.

What does this document reveal?

The document reveals the victims' legal strategy: arguing the NPA only covered Florida crimes, leaving New York prosecutors free to charge Epstein. It also shows Epstein's defense was actively trying to expand the NPA's protective scope through additional court filings, and that Judge Marra was moving quickly on these motions—all occurring just weeks after Epstein's arrest in New York.

Why was the scope of the NPA important?

The Non-Prosecution Agreement's geographic scope became critical after Epstein's July 2019 arrest in New York. If the NPA covered all federal jurisdictions, Epstein could potentially argue the new charges were barred. The victims' attorneys argued the immunity was limited to Florida only, which is the position ultimately supported by New York prosecutors who proceeded with their case.

What was the outcome of the CVRA case?

Judge Marra ruled in February 2019 that prosecutors violated victims' rights by keeping the NPA secret, but ultimately closed the case in September 2019 without awarding damages or invalidating the agreement. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals later ruled that CVRA rights don't attach until charges are filed, meaning the victims had no enforceable rights under the Act since Epstein was never formally charged in Florida.

EFTA00021441

An email from a victims' rights attorney to government officials discussing legal filings in the Jeffrey Epstein Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) case, specifically arguing that the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement only covered Florida crimes, not New York.

This July 2019 email provides insight into the active legal battle over the scope of Jeffrey Epstein's controversial 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The attorney representing Jane Doe 1 and 2 explains their argument that Judge Kenneth Marra should only consider remedies for Florida crimes because the NPA's immunity was geographically limited. The email also reveals that Epstein's defense lawyer, Martin Weinberg, filed a motion for a sur-reply to further argue about the NPA's scope—a key legal question since Epstein had just been arrested on new federal charges in New York that same month.

Key Highlights

•Attorney explicitly states victims were told in 2013 that the NPA did not extend to New York or other jurisdictions
•Martin Weinberg (Epstein's lawyer) filed a motion seeking to expand briefing on the NPA's scope, suggesting the defense saw this as a critical issue
•Judge Marra appeared to be moving quickly on the matter, asking for a rapid response to Weinberg's motion
•The filing came days after Epstein's July 6, 2019 arrest in New York, making the NPA's geographic scope suddenly urgent

Frequently Asked Questions

Books for Further Reading

Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story

Julie K. Brown

Investigative journalism that broke the Epstein case open

Filthy Rich: The Jeffrey Epstein Story

James Patterson

Bestselling account of Epstein's crimes and network

A Constellation of Vital Phenomena: A Novel

Document Information

Bates Range

EFTA00021441

Pages

Document Content

Page 1 - EFTA00021441

From: To:' Cc: 11.1.r>, Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 17:01:20 +0000 Attachments: VICTIMS_Reply_to_Epstein_Filed_Pacer.pdf; EPSTEIN_Motionfor Sur Reply.pdf HIM, I wanted to make you aware of a recent filing (on Tuesday) by Jane Doe 1 and 2 in the Florida CVRA case. See attached. You may find interesting our argument at pp. 3-6, in which we explain why Judge Marra must craft remedies in the case that relate solely to Florida crimes and Florida victims ... because the NPA only covers Florida. We filed our reply brief on remedies on Tuesday— and that should have brought all briefing on remedies for the CVRA violation to a close. But yesterday Epstein's lawyer (Marty Weinberg) filed a motion for a sur-reply. See attached. In point (a) on page 2, he argues that he should have an opportunity to file a sur-reply discussing, among other things, the scope of the NPA. On Monday, we will be filing an opposition to Weinberg extending the briefing further. It appears that Judge Marra is poised to rule rapidly on the motion for a sur-reply, as he asked for us to respond quickly. I wanted to make you aware of these developments. My clients were told back in 2013 that the NPA did not extend to New York or other jurisdictions — and that is the point we are making to Judge Marra. for Jane Doe 1 and 2 You can access my publications on CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message • along with any/all attachments • is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. is admitted to the Utah State Bar, but not the bars of other states. Any views he expresses in this email are his own. EFTA00021441