EFTA00177701.pdf

Attorney Directory - Attorney Details New York State Unified Court System Welcome Attorney PCOUrr Search Attorney Detail as of 06 20 2008 Resources Registration Number: Attorney Registration WHITE & WHITE E-Courts NEW YORK, NY 10021-0406 United States Contact Us Year Admitted in NY: 19% Appellate Division Department of Admission: 2 Law School: ST JOHNS UNIVERSITY Due to reregister within 30 days of Registration Status: birthday Next Registration: Jul 2008 The Detail Report above contains information that has been provided by the attorney listed, with the exception of REGISTRATION STATUS, which is generated from the OCA database. Every effort is made to insure the information in the database is accurate and up-to-date. The good standing of an attorney and/or any information regarding disciplinary actions must be confirmed with the appropriate Appellate Division Department. Information on how to contact the Appellate Divisions of the Supreme Court in New York is available at www.nycourts.gov/courts. If the name of the attorney you are searching for does not appear, please try again with a different spelling. In addition, please be advised that attorneys listed in this database are listed by the name that corresponds to their name in the Appellate Division Admissions file. There are attorneys who currently use a name that differs from the name under which they were admitted. If you need additional information, please contact the NYS Office of Court A ministration, Attorney Registration Unit at www.NYCOURTS.0ov https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/attorney/AttorneyDetails?attomeyld=5504834 6/20/2008 EFTA00177701  LAW O 1 1, I C I • AND ASSOCIATES July 17, 2008 United States Attorney's Office on a West Palm Beach,l 401 Re: Proposed Stipulated Facts for In Re Jane Doe Dear Thank you for your recent proposed stipulation of facts in this case. I believe that we have considerable common ground. At the same time, however, it appears to me that a few areas of potential disagreement are arising. In view of that, and to avoid any misunderstandings, I thought it might be useful to send a short letter outlining several requests and issues for resolution before I send you back my proposed stipulated facts. I. I am working with two other attorneys on this case — Jay Howell in Jacksonville, Florida. and Professor Paul Cassell in Salt Lake City, Utah. Because they were not in court for the hearing last Friday, they will need to review a transcript of the hearing before our legal team can agree to any stipulated facts. I have requested a transcript. but the preparation of it will apparently take several weeks. Do you have any way of expediting the preparation of the transcript by requesting it yourself? Also, as you know, my clients are indigent. As part of the Government's responsibility to use its "best efforts to see that crime victims are . . . accorded[] the rights" in the CVRA, 18 U.S.C. § 3771(cX1), I was wondering whether the Government would be willing to pay for the transcript. 2. Your proposed stipulation indicates that in September 2007 the U.S. Attorney's Office reached an agreement with Epstein to resolve the case, which was then modified in Ontober and December of that year. While this seems plausible, to stipulate to the facts, I would obviously need to see copies of those three agreements. Moreover. because the circumstances surrounding the initial agreement and its later modification are now the subject of litigation, my client is entitled to see them. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(aX8) (victim's right to "be treated with fairness"). In addition, your proposed stipulation states that: "On July 9, 2008, sent a victim notification to Jane Doe #1 via her attorney, Bradley Edwards. which is attached as Exhibit 6 to the Declaration. That notification contains a written explanation of thefull terms of the agreement between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office." I am puzzled by this proposed stipulation, as your July 9 letter explicitly noted that it was covering only some of the provisions in the agreement. Perhaps the fact that I have not yet received the agreement is all just an oversight on your part. and you had intended to give me the "full tents" of the plea agreement that was ultimately reached. In any event, the simplest way to proceed at this point is for the plea agreement •• and the earlier versions -- to be provided to me so that I can review HOLLYWOOD, FLORIDA 33020 EFTA00177702 United States Attorney's Office Page 2 them with my clients. Of course, no possible harm to the Government can come from the release of the documents, as this criminal matter is now concluded — at least from the Government's perspective. 3. I am wondering about your position on the confidentiality provision in the agreement. As I understand things from your proposed stipulation, in September 2007 you "reached" an agreement with Epstein's attorneys that "contained an express confidentiality provision." Are you taking the position that this "express" provision barred disclosure of the substance of the agreement to my clients? And, if so, would you stipulate that the FBI agents and your office complied with the provision up through June 30 when, I assume, the confidential provision expired as Epstein entered his guilty plea in open court? 4. Your proposed stipulation indicates: On October 26, 2007, Special Agents and met in person with Jane Doe #1. The Special Agents explained that the investigation had been resolved, that Epstein would plead guilty to state charges, he would be required to register as a sex offender for life, and he had made certain concessions related to the payment of damages to the victims, including Jane Doe #1. During this meeting, Jane Doe #1 did not raise any objections to the resolution of the matter. From the drafting of this proposed stipulation, it appears that you may be working from a Report of Interview with my client (i.e., an FBI 302). My client has a differing recollection of some aspects of that meeting. Of course, she did not take notes of the meeting. Therefore, I ask that you provide me (the relevant parts of) any report of this meeting as well as reports of any other meetings relevant to the matters at hand. I believe that my client is entitled to a copy of (the relevant parts of) the reports of interviews with her. Of course, a criminal defendant would be entitled to such documents. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1XA) & (B). As an innocent victim in this matter, my client should be treated with at least the same consideration. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(8) (victim's right to "be treated with fairness"). 5. I am hoping that the Special Agents' and my client's recollections about one point of the October 26th meeting coincides: that she was never told that the agreement blocked all federal prosecution for the crimes at hand. Is a stipulation on that point agreeable? HOLLYWOOD, FLORIDA 33020 EFTA00177703 United States Attorney's Office Page 3 6. You mention your assistance in securing pro bono counsel for Jane Doe #1 to help prevent harassment. I trust that you would be willing to stipulate that you did not mention the federal non-prosecution agreement to this counsel and that you did not mention that a plea agreement had already been reached. Professor Cassell has spoken to Meg Garvin, Esq., at the National Crime Victims' Law Institute, and that is her recollection of the events. 7. I think that your proposed stipulation regarding my contact with the office is somewhat abbreviated. I wonder what you would think about the following: In mid-June 2008, Mr. Edwards contacted to inform her that he represented Jane Doe #1 and, later, Jane Doe #2. Mr. Edwards asked to meet to provide information about the federal crimes committed by Epstein, t to secure a significant federal indictment against Epstein. ulis and Mr. Edwards discussed the ssibility of federal charges being filed. At the end of the call, asked Mr. Edwards to send any information that he wanted considered by the U.S. Attorney's Office in determining whether to file federal charges. Because of the confidentiality provision that existed in the plea agreement, Mr. Edwards was not informed that, in September 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office had reached an agreement not to file federal charges. Mr. Edwards was also not informed that any resolution of the criminal matter was imminent. On July 3, 2008, Mr. Edwards sent toaa letter, a true and correct copy of which is attached. In the letter, Mr. Edwards indicated his desire that federal charges be filed against defendant Epstein. In particular, he wrote on behalf of his clients: "We urge the Attorney General and our United States Attorney to consider the fundamental import of the vigorous enforcement of our Federal laws. We urge you to move forward with the traditional indictments and criminal prosecution commensurate with the crimes Mr. Epstein has committed, and we further urge you to take the steps necessary to protect our children from this very dangerous sexual predator." When Mr. Edwards wrote this letter, he was still unaware that a non-prosecution agreement had been reached with Epstein. Mr. Edwards first learned of this fact on or after July 9, 2008, when the Government filed its responsive pleading to Jane Doe's emergency petition. That pleading was the first public mention of the non-prosecution agreement and the first disclosure to Mr. Edwards and his clients. 8. I trust that you will agree that the Government had probable cause to file a multiple count federal indictment against Epstein, including an indictment charging crimes HOLLYWOOD, FLORIDA 33020 EFTA00177704 United States Attorney's Office Page 4 against Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2. In asking for this stipulation, I realize that you have taken the position that you would not have filed an indictment involving Jane Doe #2, presumably because you thought that you could not carry the Government's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. At the same time, though, I trust you will concede that the evidence in that case was strong enough to pass the probable cause standard. 9. Finally, in light of the fact that you have been sending letters to Jane Doe #2, which was obviously done because you believed her to be a "victim" in this case, and since she has been added in this matter as a victim, we would like some assurances that she will be protected, as the other victims have been, in your agreement with Mr. Epstein. Thank you very much for considering these issues and concerns. I look forward to working with you to reach a stipulation that covers as much common ground as possible in this case. If you think that further discussions might be helpful, I would like to try and set up a conference call with you and my co-counsel to discuss these issues further. Sincerely, BE/sg Brad Edwards Enclosure cc: United States Attorney's Office 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 EFTA00177705  LAW OFFICE /X - ( e kerrieWteerti% AND ASSOC I ATES July 3, 2008 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL United States Attorney's Office RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 7007 2680 0002 5519 8503 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Dear As you are aware, we represent several of the young girls that were victimized and abused by Jeffrey Epstein. While we are aware of his recent guilty plea and conviction in his State Court case, the sentence imposed in that case is grossly inadequate for a sexual predator of this magnitude. The information and evidence that has come to our attention in this matter leads to a grave concern that justice will not be served in this cause if Mr. Epstein is not aggressively prosecuted and appropriately punished. Based on our investigation and knowledge of this case, it is apparent that he has sexually abused more than 100 underage girls, and the evidence against him is overwhelmingly strong. As former Assistant State Attorneys with seven years' prosecution experience, we believe that the evidence against Mr. Epstein is both credible and deep and that he may be the most dangerous sexual predator of children that our country has ever seen. The evidence suggests that for at least 4 years he was sexually abusing as many as three to four girls a day. It is inevitable that if he is not confined to prison, he will continue to manipulate and sexually abuse children and destroy more lives. He is a sexual addict that focused all of his free time on sexually abusing children, and he uses his extraordinary wealth and power to lure in poor, underprivileged little girls and then also uses his wealth to shield himself from prosecution and liability. We are very concerned for the health and welfare of the girls he has already victimized, and concerned that if justice is not properly served now and he is not imprisoned for a very long time, he will get a free pass to sexually abuse children in the future. Future abuse and victimization is obvious to anyone who really reviews the evidence in this case, and future sexual abuse of minors is inevitable unless he is prosecuted, tried and appropriately sentenced. Money and power should not allow a man to make his own laws, and he has clearly received preferential treatment at every step up to this point. If he were a man of average wealth or the abused girls were from middle or upper class families, then this man would spend the rest of his life in prison. In a country of true, blind justice, those distinctions are irrelevant, and we really hope he does not prove the point that a man can commit heinous crimes against children and buy his way out of it. If the Department of Justice's recent commitment to the protection of our children from child molesters is to be more than rhetoric, then this is the time and the case where the Department must step forward. We urge the Attorney General and our United States HOLLYWOOD, FLORIDA 33020 EFTA00177706 United States Attorney's Office Page Two Attorney to consider the fundamental import of the vigorous enforcement of our Federal laws. We urge you to move forward with the traditional indictments and criminal prosecution commensurate with the crimes Mr. Epstein has committed, and we further urge you to take the steps necessary to protect our children from this very dangerous sexual perpetrator. We will help you to do this in any way possible to ensure that true Justice is served in this case. Sincerely, Brad Edwards, Esquire Jay Howell, Esquire HOLLYWOOD, FLORIDA 330R0 EFTA00177707 • Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. O Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse ' O Addressee so that we can return the card to you. C. of Dellvey • Attach this card to the back of the timepiece, or on the front if space permits. oP D. Is delivery address different from kern ? • Yes 1. Attie Addressed to: If YES, enter delivery address below: O No United States Attorney's Office Ice Typo West .e . 1.119.1. 1 Certified Mall O Express Mail O Registered O Return Receipt for merchandise O Insured Mall ❑ C.O.D. 2. Altos Number Mansfer from service 'ober) PS Form 3811, February 2004 Dan eetla Seem Receipt 102595424A-1540 1 U.S. Postal Service., CERTIFIED MAIL:, RECEIPT '(Domestic Mall Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at vovw.usps.comu FICIAL USE Postage Certified Fee Retina& Rerun Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Here Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Pequired) Total Postage 8 Fees EFTA00177708  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: IN RE: JANE DOE, Petitioner. VICTIM'S PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF CRIME VICTIM'S RIGHTS ACT, 18 U.S.0 . SECTION 3771 COMES NOW the Petitioner, JANE DOE (hereinafter "Petitioner"), by and through her undersigned attorneys, pursuant to the Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 ("CVRA"), and files this Petition for Enforcement in the above styled action as follows: 1. Petitioner, an adult, as a minor child was a victim of federal crimes committed by JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Defendant"). These crimes included sex trafficking of children by fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591, use of a means of interstate commerce to in entice a minor to commit prostitution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422, as well as wire fraud, violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The Defendant committed these crimes within the jurisdiction of the Southern District of Florida in Palm Beach County, Florida. 2. Upon information and belief, the Defendant is the subject of a federal criminal investigation conducted by the United States of America in the Southern District of Florida. The Defendant has recently been prosecuted and pleaded guilty, on June 30, 2008, in the Circuit Court for Palm Beach County to various similar state offenses including solicitation of minors for prostitution. 3. Upon information and belief, the Defendant is engaged in plea negotiations with the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida concerning federal EFTA00177709 crimes which he is alleged to have committed against minor children, including the Petitioner. Such negotiations may likely result in a disposition of the charges in the next several days. 4. Under the CVRA, before any charges are filed against the Defendant, the Petitioner has the rights (among others) to notice of her rights under the CVRA, to confer with the prosecutors, and to be treated with fairness. As soon as charges are filed, the Petitioner has the rights (among others) to timely notice of court proceedings, the right not to be excluded from such proceedings, the right to be heard at such public proceedings regarding conditions of release, any plea, and any sentence, the right to confer with the attorney for the government, the right to restitution, and the right to be treated with fairness and with respect for her dignity and privacy. 5. The Petitioner has been denied her rights in that she has received no consultation with the attorney for the government regarding the possible disposition of the charges, no notice of any public court proceedings, no information regarding her right to restitution, and no notice of rights under the CVRA, as required under law. 6. The Petitioner is in jeopardy of losing her rights, as described above, if the government is able to negotiate a plea or agreement with the Defendant without her participation and knowledge. WHEREFORE, for the reasons outlined above, the Petitioner respectfully requests this Court to grant her Petition, and to order the United States Attorney to comply with the provisions of the CVRA prior to and including any plea or other agreement with the Defendant and any attendant proceedings. 2 EFTA00177710  MEMORANDUM I. THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT MAKES CRIME VICTIMS INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANTS THROUGHOUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS. In October 2004, Congress passed and the President signed into law the Crime Victims' Rights Act, Pub. L. No. 108-405, 118 Stat. 2251 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3771). Because this appears to be the first case involving the Act to come before this Court, a bit of background may be in order. A. The CVRA Gives Crime Victims Rights to Participate in the Criminal Justice Process. Congress passed the CVRA "to give crime victims enforceable rights to participate in federal criminal proceedings." Opinion at 14. Congress was concerned that in the federal system crime victims were "treated as non-participants in a critical event in their lives. They were kept in the dark by prosecutors too busy to care enough ... and by a court system that simply did not have a place for them." 150 CoNG. Rec. 54262 (Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein). To remedy this problem, Congress gave victims "the simple right to know what is going on, to participate in the process where the information that victims and their families can provide may be material and relevant ... ." Id. The CVRA gives victims of federal crimes a series of rights, including the right to notice of court proceedings, to be heard at plea and sentencing hearings, and to reasonably "confer with the attorney for the Government in the case." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a). Victims also have a "right of access to the terms of a plea agreement ... ." In re Interested Party 1, 530 F.Supp. 2d 136, 2008 WL 134233 at *7 (D.D.C. 2008). The CVRA also assures victims broadly that they will "be treated with fairness." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(8). 3 EFTA00177711  Of course, these rights would be of little use to most crime victims unless they were told about them. To ensure that victims are notified of their rights, the CVRA directs employees of the Justice Department "and other departments and agencies of the United States engaged in the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime" to use their "best efforts to see that crime victims are notified of ... the rights described [in the CVRA]." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1) (emphasis added).1 B. The CVRA Gives Victims Rights During the Investigation of a Crime. The CVRA gives victims rights during the investigation of a crime. The Fifth Circuit recently reached this conclusion, holding: The district court acknowledged that "[t]here are clearly rights under the CVRA that apply before any prosecution is underway." BP Prods., 2008 WL 501321 at *11, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12893, at *36. Logically, this includes the CVRA's establishment of victims' "reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(5). At least in the posture of this case (and we do not speculate on the applicability to other situations), the government should have fashioned a reasonable way to inform the victims of the likelihood of criminal charges and to ascertain the victims' views on the possible details of a plea bargain. In re Dean, 527 F.3d 391, 394 (5th Cir. 2008). The position that CVRA rights apply before charges have been filed is consistent with the Justice Department regulations under the CVRA, which explain that government officials "must advise a victim [about their rights under the CVRA] ... at the earliest opportunity at which it may be done without interfering with an investigation." A.G. GUIDELINES FOR VICTIM AND WITNESS I Further supporting this requirement is another statute, 42 U.S.C. § 10607(c)(3), which directs government officials to provide victims with "the earliest possible notice of," among other things, "the filing of charges against a suspected offender." 4 EFTA00177712 ASSISTANCE 23 (May 2005). And the plain language of the CVRA undergirds this conclusion, as it applies not simply to prosecutors but to government agencies "engaged in the detection [and] investigation ... of crime ... ." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1). Indeed, if there were any doubt, the plain language of the CVRA extends victims' right to situations "in which no prosecution is underway." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3). II. PETITIONER IS A "VICTIM PROTECTED BY THE CVRA. Under the CVRA the crime victim is defined as "a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of a Federal offense ... ." 18 U.S.C. Section 3771(e). In particular, Defendant called Petitioner when she was a minor over a telephone (a means of interstate communication) requesting that she perform a massage in exchange for payment. As Defendant well knew, that request was fraudulent, as he not only intended to receive a massage, but also intended to have her perform sexual acts in exchange for a cash payment to Petitioner. Only when Petitioner arrived at a Defendant's mansion as directed by Defendant, did Defendant reveal his true purpose of obtaining sexual favors in exchange for payment. This conduct violated 18 U.S.C. § 2422, which forbids using a means of interstate commerce to knowingly "induce" or "entice" a minor "to engage in prostitution." In addition, this conduct was both a use of "fraud" to obtain a commercial sex act, in violation of 18 U.S.0 § 1591, and use of wire communications to perpetrate a "scheme and artifice to defraud," in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. It appears obvious that Petitioner was "directly and proximately" harmed by these crimes, thereby making her a victim under the CVRA. It should be emphasized that the CVRA "was designed to be a `broad and encompassing' statutory victims' bill of rights." United States v. 5 EFTA00177713 Degenhardt, 405 F.Supp.2d 1341, 1342 (D. Utah 2005) (quoting 150 Cong. Rec. 54261 (daily ed. Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein)). Congress intended the CVRA to dramatically rework the federal criminal justice system. In the course of construing the CVRA generously, the Ninth Circuit observed: "The criminal justice system has long functioned on the assumption that crime victims should behave like good Victorian children -- seen but not heard. The Crime Victims' Rights Act sought to change this by making victims independent participants in the criminal justice process." Kenna v. U.S. Dist. Courtfor C.D. Cal., 435 F.3d 1011, 1013 (9th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, because the CVRA is remedial legislation, courts should interpret it "liberally to facilitate and accomplish its purposes and intent." Elliott Industries Ltd. Partnership v. BP America Production Co., 407 F.3d 1091, 1118 (10th Cir. 2005) (noting remedial legislation should be "interpreted liberally to facilitate and accomplish its purposes and intent"). The CVRA itself suggests this conclusion by requiring that courts must treat crime victims with "fairness." United States v. Patkar, 2008 WL 233062 at *3 (D. Haw. 2008) (citing United States v. Turner, 367 F.Supp.2d 319, 335 (E.D.N.Y. 2005)). Not only must the CVRA as a whole be interpreted liberally, but its definition of "crime victim" requires a generous construction. After reciting the direct-and-proximate-harm language at issue here, one of the Act's two co-sponsors -- Senator Kyl -- explained that "[t]his is an intentionally broad definition because all victims of crime deserve to have their rights protected ." 150 Cong. Rec. S10912 (Oct. 9, 2004) (emphasis added). The description of the victim definition as "intentionally broad" was in the course of floor colloquy with the other primary sponsor of the CVRA and therefore deserves significant weight. See Kenna, 435 F.3d at 1015-16 (discussing significance of CVRA sponsors= floor statements). 6 EFTA00177714  The definition of "crime victims" must thus be construed broadly in favor of Petitioner. She obviously qualifies as a "victim" under the CVRA. III. PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TO NOTICE OF HER RIGHTS, AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONFER WITH THE PROSECUTORS AND TO BE TREATED WITH FAIRNESS. Because Petitioner is a "victim" under the CVRA, she has certain protected rights under the Act. Most important, the Act promises that she will have an opportunity to "confer with the attorney for the Government in the case." To date, Petitioner has not been given that right. This raises that very real possibility that the Government may negotiate and conclude a plea agreement with the Defendant without giving Petitioner her protected rights.2 Petitioner is entitled to have this conference with prosecutors before any final plea agreement is reached. The Fifth Circuit reached exactly this conclusion in a very recent case. In In re Dean, 527 F.3d 391 (5'h Cir. 2008), the Government negotiated a plea agreement with the well-heeled corporate defendant without conferring with the victims. When the Government's failure was challenged in the Fifth Circuit, the Fifth Circuit concluded that the Government had indeed violated the CVRA. The Fifth Circuit observed: "In passing the [CVRA], Congress made the policy decision-which we are bound to enforce-that the victims have a right to inform the plea negotiation process by conferring with prosecutors before a plea agreement is reached." Id. at 394. This Court is obligated to protect the rights of Petitioner. The CVRA directs that "[i]n any court proceeding involving an offense against a crime victim, the court shall ensure that the 2 On information and belief, roughly the same crimes were committed against several other young females. These victims, too, are in danger of losing their right to confer under the CVRA. 7 EFTA00177715 crime victim is afforded the rights described in [the CVRA]." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(b)(1). The CVRA also confers on crime victims the right to "assert the rights described in [the CVRA]." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(1). Therefore, this Court has its own independent obligation to intercede and ensure that the Government respects the rights of Petitioner under the CVRA. CONCLUSION The Petitioner requests the intervention of this Court to ensure that her rights are respected and accorded, as promised in the Crime Victims' Rights Act. DATED this 7th day of July, 2008. Respectfully Submitted, THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD EDWARDS & ASSOCIATES, LLC Brad Edwards, Esquire Attorney for Petitioner 8 EFTA00177716  CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing has been provided by United States mail and via facsimile to: United States Attorney's Office, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, this 7th day of July, 2008. Brad Edwards, Esquire Attorney for Petitioner Florida Bar No. 9 EFTA00177717  Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 2 FILPFAike Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 ELECTRONIC D.C. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JULY 7, 2008 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA STEVEN M. LARIMORE CLERK U.S. OUST. CT. S. D. Of FLA. • MIAMI CASE NO. 08-80736-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON re; ic,,,,e. Pot Plainlift v. frm'red €10.-res of Ame#4.691 Defendant CERTIFICATION OF EMERGENCY I hereby certify that, as a member of the Bar of this Court, I have carefully examined this matter and it is a true emergency. I further certify that the necessity for this emergency hearing has not been caused by a lack of due diligence on my part, but has been brought about only by the circumstances of this case. The issues presented by this matter have not been submitted to the Judge assigned to this case or any other Judge or Magistrate Judge of the Southern District of Florida prior hereto. I further certify that I have made a bona fide effort to resolve this matter without the necessity of emergency action. Dated this_ day of it)/ , 20 Signature: Print Name: rrend Florida Bar Number: Telephone Number: ***************• ***MO ************** ******** **** ****** ******** ***** ********•******* I hereby certify that the Judge assigned to this case is unavailable for this emergency (a copy ofhis/her notification to the Clerk is on file). In accordance with Local Rule 3.7, the Honorable was randomly drawn from the Emergency Wheel. Dated: STEVEN M. LARIMORE Court Administrator • Clerk of Court By: Deputy Clerk tat EFTA00177718 Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA NO. 08-80736-CIV-MAFtRA/JOHNSON IN RE: JANE DOE, Petitioner ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim's Rights Act (DE 1), filed July 7, 2008. It is hereby ORDERED that the United States' Attorney shall file a response to this petition by 5:00 P.M. on Wednesday, July 9, 2008. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 7th day of July, 2008. KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge Copies furnished to: R. Alexander Acosta, United States' Attorney all counsel of record EFTA00177719  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: IN RE: JANE DOE, Petitioner. VICTIM'S PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF CRIME VICTIM'S RIGHTS ACT, 18 U.S.0 . SECTION 3771 COMES NOW the Petitioner, JANE DOE (hereinafter "Petitioner"), by and through her undersigned attorneys, pursuant to the Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 ("CVRA"), and files this Petition for Enforcement in the above styled action as follows: I. Petitioner, an adult, as a minor child was a victim of federal crimes committed by JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Defendant"). These crimes included sex trafficking of children by fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591, use of a means of interstate commerce to entice a minOr to commit prostitution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422, as well as wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The Defendant committed these crimes within the jurisdiction of the Southern District of Florida in Palm Beach County, Florida. 2. Upon information and belief, the Defendant is the subject of a federal criminal investigation conducted by the United States of America in the Southern District of Florida. The Defendant has recently been prosecuted and pleaded guilty, on June 30, 2008, in the Circuit Court for Palm Beach County to various similar state offenses including solicitation of minors for prostitution. 3. Upon information and belief, the Defendant is engaged in plea negotiations with the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida concerning federal 1 EFTA00177720 crimes which he is alleged to have committed against minor children, including the Petitioner. Such negotiations may likely result in a disposition of the charges in the next several days. 4. Under the CVRA, before any charges are filed against the Defendant, the Petitioner has the rights (among others) to notice of her rights under the CVRA, to confer with the prosecutors, and to be treated with fairness. As soon as charges are filed, the Petitioner has the rights (among others) to timely notice of court proceedings, the right not to be excluded from such proceedings, the right to be heard at such public proceedings regarding conditions of release, any plea, and any sentence, the right to confer with the attorney for the government, the right to restitution, and the right to be treated with fairness and with respect for her dignity and privacy. 5. The Petitioner has been denied her rights in that she has received no consultation with the attorney for the government regarding the possible disposition of the charges, no notice of any public court proceedings, no information regarding her right to restitution, and no notice of rights under the CVRA, as required under law. 6. The Petitioner is in jeopardy of losing her rights, as described above, if the government is able to negotiate a plea or agreement with the Defendant without her participation and knowledge. WHEREFORE, for the reasons outlined above, the Petitioner respectfully requests this Court to grant her Petition, and to order the United States Attorney to comply with the provisions of the CVRA prior to and including any plea or other agreement with the Defendant and any attendant proceedings. 2 EFTA00177721  MEMORANDUM I. THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT MAKES CRIME VICTIMS INDEPENDENT PARTICIPANTS THROUGHOUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS. In October 2004, Congress passed and the President signed into law the Crime Victims' Rights Act, Pub. L. No. 108-405, 118 Stat. 2251 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3771). Because this appears to be the first case involving the Act to come before this Court, a bit of background may be in order. A. The CVRA Gives Crime Victims Rights to Participate in the Criminal Justice Process. Congress passed the CVRA "to give crime victims enforceable rights to participate in federal criminal proceedings." Opinion at 14. Congress was concerned that in the federal system crime victims were "treated as non-participants in a critical event in their lives. They were kept in the dark by prosecutors too busy to care enough ... and by a court system that simply did not have a place for them." 150 CONG. REC. S4262 (Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein). To remedy this problem, Congress gave victims "the simple right to know what is going on, to participate in the process where the information that victims and their families can provide may be material and relevant ... ." Id, The CVRA gives victims of federal crimes a series of rights, including the right to notice of court proceedings, to be heard at plea and sentencing hearings, and to reasonably "confer with the attorney for the Government in the case." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a). Victims also have a "right of access to the terms of a plea agreement ... ." In re Interested Party 1, 530 F.Supp. 2d 136, 2008 WL 134233 at *7 (D.D.C. 2008). The CVRA also assures victims broadly that they will "be treated with fairness." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(8). 3 EFTA00177722  Of course, these rights would be of little use to most crime victims unless they were told about them. To ensure that victims are notified of their rights, the CVRA directs employees of the Justice Department "and other departments and agencies of the United States engaged in the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime" to use their "best efforts to see that crime victims are notified of... the rights described [in the CVRA]." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1) (emphasis added),I B. The CVRA Gives Victims Rights During the investigation of a Crime. The CVRA gives victims rights during the investigation of a crime. The Fifth Circuit recently reached this conclusion, holding: The district court acknowledged that "[t]here are clearly rights under the CVRA that apply before any prosecution is underway." BP Prods.. 2008 WL 501321 at *11.2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12893, at *36. Logically, this includes the CVRA's establishment of victims' reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government." 18 U.S.C. 6 3771(a)(5). At least in the posture of this case (and we do not speculate on the applicability to other situations), the government should have fashioned a reasonable way to inform the victims of the likelihood of criminal charges and to ascertain the victims' views on the possible details of a plea bargain. In re Dean, 527 F.3d 391,394 (5th Cir. 2008). The position that CVRA rights apply before charges have been filed is consistent with the Justice Department regulations under the CVRA, which explain that government officials "must advise a victim [about their rights under the CVRA] ... at the earliest opportunity at which it may be done without interfering with an investigation." A.G. GUIDELINES FOR VICTIM AND Wrn4ESS I Further supporting this requirement is another statute, 42 U.S.C. § 10607(c)(3), which directs government officials to provide victims with "the earliest possible notice of," among other things, "the filing of charges against a suspected offender." 4 EFTA00177723 ASSISTANCE 23 (May 2005). And the plain language of the CVRA undergirds this conclusion, as it applies not simply to prosecutors but to government agencies "eng