ion that crime victims had no right to confer with prosecutors until after the Department had reached and signed a plea agreement with a corporation (BP Products North America) whose illegal actions had resulted in the deaths of fifteen workers in an oil refinery explosion. Of course, this position meant that the victims co

g its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean , the government sought and obtained an ex parte order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultima

ment deemed was a "reasonable procedure to give effect to this chapter that does not unduly complicate or prolong the proceedings." United States v. BP Products North America, Inc., 2008 WL 501321 (S.D.Tex. Feb. 21, 2008) at * 2. The government announced to the court 29 EFTA00078863 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 62

prelude to the full unfettered exercise of their conferral rights at a time that will enable the victims to exercise those rights meaningfully. See BP Products North America, supra at *14 ("Section 3771(c)(1) requires government officials to use best efforts to give victims notice of their rights under subsection (1), i

that crime victims had no right to confer with prosecutors until after the Department had reached and signed a plea agreement with a corporation (BP Products North America) whose illegal actions had resulted in the deaths of fifteen workers in an oil refinery explosion. Of course, this position meant that the victim

g its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean, the government sought and obtained an ex parte order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimat

ment deemed was a "reasonable procedure to give effect to this chapter that does not unduly complicate or prolong the proceedings." United States v. BP Products North America, Inc., 2008 WL 501321 (S.D.Tex. Feb. 21, 2008) at * 2. The government announced to the court 29 Respondent's Exhibit A Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARR

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 v. BP Products North America, Inc., the district court reasoned that because § 3771(d)(3) provided for the assertion of CVRA rights "in the district court in which a defendant

g its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean , the government sought and obtained an ex parte order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimat

g its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean , the government sought and obtained an ex parte order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultima

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 v. BP Products North America, Inc., the district court reasoned that because § 3771(d)(3) provided for the assertion of CVRA rights "in the district court in which a defendant

g its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean , the government sought and obtained an ex parte order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimat

g its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean, the government sought and obtained an ex parte order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimat

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 v. BP Products North America, Inc., the district court reasoned that because § 3771(d)(3) provided for the assertion of CVRA rights "in the district court in which a defendant

ng its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean, the government sought and obtained an ex pane order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimat

ment deemed was a "reasonable procedure to give effect to this chapter that does not unduly complicate or prolong the proceedings." United States v. BP Products North America, Inc., 2008 WL 501321 (S.D.Tex. Feb. 21, 2008) at " 2. The government announced to the court 29 EFTA00230094 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 62

ictims a right to approve or disapprove a proposed plea in advance or to participate in plea negotiations." In re Dean on remand as United States'. BP Products North America, Mc., 610 F. Supp. 2d 655, 727 (S.D. Tex. 2009). Instead, "[t]he purpose of the reasonable right to confer is for victims to provide information to

ng its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean, the government sought and obtained an gh pane order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimat

sing its broad discretion." a at 395. In pear, the government sought and obtained an eK pane order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimat