Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / The Brad Edwards Affidavit In Support Of Epstein Related Transparency (Part 5)

Transcript

The Brad Edwards Affidavit In Support Of Epstein Related Transparency (Part 5) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're picking up where we
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: left off with Brad Edwards and the CVRA. Affidavid the
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: government's fiduciary duty to crime victims bars any privilege. I'm
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: familiar with the case law recited in our pleading regarding
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: a fiduciary exception also known as the Garner exception in
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: some filings to privileges. In this case, the government had
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: a fiduciary obligation to protect the CVRA rights a Jaine
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: Do number one and Jaine Do number two, specifically, because
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: they were recognized as victims under the CVRA, the government
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: had obligations to provide them rights under the CVRA, including
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: the right to confer, the right to notice, and the
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: right to be treated with fairness. Because of this fiduciary duty,
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: an exception applies to many of the government privilege claims
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: regarding in our actions with the victims. The fiduciary duty
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: of the government to the victims in this case is clear.
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: In two thousand, the FBI determined that both Jane Do
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: one and Jane Do two were victims of sexual assault
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: by Epstein. While there were miners, beginning when they were
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: approximately fourteen years of age and approximately thirteen years of age, respectively.
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: These sexual assaults involve use of means of interstate commerce
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: ie telephone and travel in interstate commerce. Both Jane does
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: were initially identified through Palm Beach Police Department's investigation of Epstein,
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: confirming the fact that the government had identified Jane do
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: One as a victim in its case. On about June seventh,
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, FBI agents had delivered to Jane
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: Doe number one a standard CVRA victim notification letter. The
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: notification promises that the Justice Department would make its best
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: effort to protect Jane do One and her rights, including
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: the reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: United States in the case, and to be reasonably heard
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: at any public proceeding in the district court involving a plea.
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: The notification further explain that at this time, your case
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: is under investigation. Similarly, on or about August eleventh, two
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: thousand and seven, FBI agents had delivered to Jane do
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: number two a standard CVRA victim notification letter. The notification
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: promises that Justice Department would make its best efforts to
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: protect Jane Doe number two's rights, including the right to
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: confer with the attorney of the US and to be
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: reasonably heard at public proceedings. Early in the investigation, the
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: FBI agents and the Assistant US Attorney had several meetings
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: with Jane Do number one, and Jane Do number two
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: was represented by council that was paid for by Epstein,
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: accordingly all contact or contract that was made through that attorney.
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: These meetings occurred because the FBI had obligations to protect
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: victims' rights under the CVRA. In October of two thousand
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: and seven, shortly after the initial non prosecution agreement was
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: signed between Epstein and the US Attorney's Office for the
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: Southern didstay strict to Florida, Jane Do number one was
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: contacted to be advised regarding the investigation. On October twenty six,
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, special agents e Nesbit, Kirkandal and
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: Jason Richards met in person with Jane Do number one
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: because she was recognized as a victim of Epstein's crimes.
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: In all of the dealings between the government and the victims,
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: as well as other dealings of a similar nature, the
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: government had a fiduciary obligation to protect the interests of
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: the victims under the Crime Victim's Rights Act. Accordingly, the
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: government is precluded from raising any privileged claim to which
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: a fiduciary exception applies, or at the very least any
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: privilege assertion would be outweighed by the victim's compelling need
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: for the material. An illustration of a situation where the
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: fiduciary duty exception applies is found on page one of
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: the Supplemental Privilege Log with regard to Supplemental Box number three.
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: The entry here reads seven eight eight email from Marie
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: Vilafauna to Alex Acosta, Jayson Slowman, k Atkinson, and FBI
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: reproposed response to Goldberger's letter Victim Notification. In responding to
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: defense Attorney Goldberger's letter about victim notification, the U. S.
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: Attorney's Office had a statutory duty under the CVRA to
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: protect the victim's interest. Accordingly, the office cannot assert privilege
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: when questions about whether it fulfilled its obligations to the
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: victims have arisen in this case, or at the very
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: least any privileged assertion would be outweighed by the victim's
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: compelling need for the material. Another illustration of a situation
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: where the fiduciary duty exception applies is found on page
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: sixteen of the first privileged log with regard to box two.
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: The entry reads file folder entitled rs RCCH Crime Victims'
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: Rights containing attorney research, henwritten notes, draft victim notification letter,
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: and draft correspondence to J. Lefkowitz. Here, again, the material
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: at issue go to the heart of the case. What
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: kind of notification were made to the victims and how
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: did the defense attorney's shape and limit those notifications. Moreover,
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: in evaluating victims' rights issues and determining what kind of
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: letters descend, the government was fulfilling legal duties that it
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: owed to the victims. Accordingly, the office cannot now assert
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: privilege when questions about whether it fulfilled its obligations to
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: the victims have arisen. In the case, communications facilitating crime
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: fraud misconduct not covered, I'm familiar with the cases cited
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: in our brief regarding an exception to various privileges when
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: the communications concern crime, fraud or government misconduct, Many of
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: the important documents about the treatment of the victims to
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: which the government is asserting privilege would fall within that
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: exception with regard to fraud the government misconduct. A number
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: of the documents in the government's privilege log concerned concealment
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: from the victims of the existence of the non prosecution
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: agreement between the government and Epstein. Reviewed a copy of
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: the non prosecution agreement signed on about September twenty fourth,
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: two thousand and seven by Epstein and his attorneys and
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: a representative of the US Attorney's Office. The text of
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: that agreement bar's disclosure of the agreement to the victims.
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: On about January tenth, two thousand and eight, my client's
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: Jane Do number one and Jane Do number two received
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: letters from the FBI advising them that this case is
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: currently under investigation. This can be a lengthy process, and
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: we request your continued patients while we conduct a thorough investigation.
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: The statement in the notification letter was deceptive because it
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: did not reveal that the case had previously been resolved
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: by the non prosecution agreement entered into by Epstein and
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: the US Attorney's Office discussed previously. Moreover, the FBI did
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: not notify Jane Do number one or Jane Do number
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: two that a plea agreement had been reached previously, and
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: that part of the agreement was a non prosecution agreement
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: with the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida,
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: and that the non prosecution agreement would resolve the federal
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: case completely. Whether the FBI itself had been properly informed
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: of the non prosecution agreement is also unclear. Were not
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: alleging misconduct by the FBI, but rather that the FBI
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: was not properly informed about the case or in any event,
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: was acting at the direction of the U s Attorney's Office.
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: In about April of two thousand and eight, Jane Do
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: number one contacted the FBI because Epstein's council was attempting
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: to take her deposition and private investigators were harassing her.
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: Assist in US Attorney Marie Villafauna secured pro bono council
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: to represent Jane Do Number one and several other identified
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: victims in connection with the criminal investigation. Pro Bono council
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: was able to assist Change No. Number one in avoiding
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: the improper deposition. Ausa. Vilafauna secured pro bono council by
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: contacting Meg Garvin of the National Crime Victims Law Center
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: in Portland, Oregon, which is based in the Lewis and
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: Clark College of Law. During the call, Miss Garvin was
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: not advised that a non prosecution agreement had been reached
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: in the matter. On May thirtieth, two thousand and eight,
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: another of my clients who was recognized as an Epstein
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: victim by the US Attorney's Office, received letters from the
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: FBI advising her that her case is currently under investigation.
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: This can be a lengthy process, and we request your
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: continued patients while we conduct a thorough investigation. The statement
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: in the notification letter was deceptive because it did not
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: reveal that the case had been resolved by the non
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: prosecution agreement entered into by Epstein and the US Attorney's
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: Office in September of two thousand and seven. In mid
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: June two thousand and eight, I contacted a USA Vilafauna
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: to inform her that I represented Jane Doe number one
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: and later Jane Doe number two. I asked to meet
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: to provide information about the federal crimes committed by Epstein,
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: hoping to secure a significant federal indictment against Epstein. AUSA
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: Vila Fauna and I discussed the possibility of federal charges
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: being filed. At the end of the call, Ausa Vila
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: Fauna asked me to send any information that I wanted
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: considered by the US Attorney's Office in determining whether to
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: file federal charges. I was not informed that previously, in
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: September of two thousand and seven, the US Attorney's Office
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: had reached an agreement not the file federal charges. I
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: was also not informed that any resolution of the criminal
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: matter was eminent at the time. Presumably the reason the
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: US Attorney's Office withheld this information from me was because
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: of the confidentiality provision that existed in the non prosecution agreement.
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: At this point, it's clear that Ausa Villafana was restricted
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: in what she was being permitted to tell me. On
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: July third, two thousand and eight, I sent to Ausa
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: Vilafauna a letter. In the letter, I indicated my client's
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: desire that federal charges be filed against defendant Epstein. In particular,
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: I wrote, on behalf of my clients, we urge the
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: Attorney General and our United States Attorney to consider the
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: fundamental import of the vigorous enforcement of our federal laws.
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: We urge you to move forward with the traditional indictments
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: and criminal prosecution commesurate with the crimes mister Epstein has committed,
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: and we further urge you to take the steps necessary
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: to protect our children from this very dangerous sexual predator.
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: When I wrote this letter, I was still unaware that
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: a non prosecution agreement had been reached with Epstein, in fact,
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: that continued to be concealed from me and the victims
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: by the US Attorney's Office. I only learned of this
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: fact later on, as alleged in the preceding paragraphs and
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: elsewhere in the affid David and in this case, deliverate
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: concealment from crime victims and their legal counsel of the
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: existence of the non prosecution agreement would be fraud in
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: government misconduct. Documents related to that fraud and misconduct would
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: then fall outside of many of the privileges being asserted.
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: An illustration of a document to which the crime fraud
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: misconduct exception applies on this basis is found on page
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: three of the Supplemental Privilege log. The entry reads file
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: folder entitled twelve five oh seven STARTO Acosta, containing drafts
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: of eleven thirty oh seven letters from Acosta to ken
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: Starr and from Jay Slowman to Jay Lefkowitz performance and
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: victim notification with handwritten notes and edits by Marie Vilafauna. Again,
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: these materials are central to the dispute in the case,
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: as they involve discussions between the US Attorney's Office and
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: defense attorneys about notification to crime victims, and given the
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: dates and communications, in all likelihood they would be related
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: to the deceptive notification that the government made to the
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: victims a few weeks later. All right, folks, we're going
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: to wrap up right here, and in the next episode,
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: we're going to pick up where we left off. All
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: of the information that goes with this episode can be
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: found in the description box.