Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: The CVRA Was Meant To Protect Survivors. It Did The Opposite. (7/13/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: The CVRA Was Meant To Protect Survivors. It Did The Opposite. (7/13/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

0:00
Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
0:05
In our last episode, we were talking about how the
0:08
whole entire situation down in Florida is absolute garbage and
0:13
how Palm Beach and Florida in general cleared everybody who
0:18
was involved of all of that garbage. Well, once again,
0:22
we're going to go back in time, hop in the
0:24
DeLorean and head back to twenty and sixteen and back
0:29
in twenty sixteen. Well, the lawyers for Epstein survivors were
0:34
not told of the sweetheart deal that Epstein received, So
0:39
right there, that alone should be enough to elicit the
0:42
absolute rage of the investigators in Florida. But the investigators
0:48
down in Florida, folks, I'm just going to be very
0:50
upfront with you, they were more concerned about covering the
0:54
asses of their buddies, of the state and of all
0:57
of the broken ass institutions, rather than holding people accountable
1:02
for their bullshit. Oh we can't ruin precedent. Oh we
1:06
can't go back and look at other cases these prosecutors
1:09
worked on. It's such a joke and it's honestly offensive
1:16
the way that these governments conduct themselves, these local governments,
1:20
federal government. Enough is enough. There needs to be some accountability,
1:25
and there needs to be some sort of investigative body
1:28
that comes in and looks at these investigations from a
1:30
federal standpoint, because you can't expect people who work together,
1:36
who are colleagues, to investigate each other and do it
1:39
the right way. I don't want to hear about, oh,
1:41
they're impartial, they're investigators. No, they're human beings, and human
1:46
beings are susceptible to all kinds of nonsense. So I
1:51
want a full and robust investigation from a federal level.
1:57
How about that gets initiated by the Senator Congress. You
2:00
think they could fit that in while they're out here
2:02
playing you know, political touch asks, you know things that
2:06
actually affect the people, that'd be nice every once in
2:09
a while, right, instead of them arguing and fighting like
2:12
the undertaker versus the million dollar man you know in
2:15
WWE back in the day. Because that's what it all is,
2:19
political theater. This is the kind of shit that they
2:23
should be going into, digging into Congress and the Senate.
2:27
How did this all happen and how are we going
2:29
to fix it? Instead, all we get are platitudes and
2:32
nonsense and the same shit continues to happen. Then, for
2:38
the grand finale of Injustice, you get this report from
2:41
Florida talking about, oh yeah, everything was on the up
2:44
and up here, there was nothing that went wrong. Meanwhile,
2:50
there's mountains of receipts that say the completely opposite. So today,
2:57
once again, we're gonna look at how the Florida prosecution
3:01
and how the prosecution overall failed these survivors. This article
3:07
is from NBC News headline Lawyers survivors not told of
3:12
sweetheart deal for Jeffrey Epstein. Lawyers for two teen survivors
3:18
of Palm Beach billionaire Jeffrey Epstein say thirty or more
3:21
alleged survivors weren't told of his lenient plea deal. So
3:25
that right there alone should be enough to make people
3:28
lose their jobs. And we have what five six, seven
3:32
fuck ups by Florida and the Florida officials throughout this
3:36
whole thing, but none of them are enough for the
3:39
FDL to come back and say, oh yeah, people need
3:43
to have their heads roll here. Instead, it's a cover
3:46
up operation. Oh we have a black eye. Instead of
3:49
telling everybody how we got the black eye, let's just
3:51
put some makeup on it. This article was originally published
3:57
on February twelfth of two thousand and sixteen, and the
4:01
author is Tom Winter. Prosecutors arranged a sweetheart deal for
4:07
jet set sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but never bothered to
4:11
tell more than thirty of the billionaires alleged survivors about
4:16
the agreement, say lawyers for two of the girls, and
4:19
we know that this is the case. Now, this is
4:21
not even disputable. There's no dispute about this. The girls
4:24
were not told that this deal was being signed and
4:27
that Epstein was getting off basically, so right there, they
4:32
violated the Victim's Rights Act, meaning the prosecution. So how
4:36
can it be on the up and up the financier,
4:40
you mean, the pedophile who partied with young women, partied
4:44
with young women at his Palm Beach mansion, you mean,
4:47
raped young women at his Palm Beach mansion. Listen to
4:49
the way they were reporting this guy in twenty sixteen,
4:52
as if he was just this big party guy and
4:55
people were coming to his house and they just happened
4:57
to be a little bit young. I mean, really, Epstein
5:04
pleaded guilty in a federally broken deal in two thousand
5:07
and eight to a state count of soliciting an underage prostitute.
5:12
So much wrong with that? How can an underage girl
5:14
be a prostitute? And how is it that he only
5:17
gets nailed with one count? But everything's on the up
5:19
and up in Florida. Folks, just trust them. He served
5:25
thirteen months of an eighteen month sentence. Prosecutors said in
5:28
court papers filed at the time that he may have
5:31
had as many as forty survivors. There is good reason
5:35
to believe that if the prosecutors had exposed their dealings
5:38
to scrutiny by Jane Doe number one, Jane Doe number
5:42
two and other survivors, says emotion filed earlier this week,
5:47
they would not have reached such a sweetheart plea deal.
5:49
And that's why they weren't told. What do you think
5:51
we're stupid? The prosecutors down there didn't tell these girls
5:55
because they were pressed by Dershowitz and Star and the
5:57
rest of those clowns not to do so. So they
6:01
didn't tell the survivors. They stepped all over the CRVA
6:06
and then they act like nothing's wrong, like they're absolutely
6:09
in the clear here. Well, I have to tell you
6:11
you are not. I don't care that Florida launched this investigation.
6:16
It's time for a real robust investigation into the investigation.
6:21
How about that Jane Does Number one and two were
6:26
fourteen and thirteen at the time of the abuse. Epstein,
6:30
fifty five at the time of his plea, served a
6:32
sentence in the county jail. Imagine thirteen and fourteen years old,
6:37
and this cocksucker only gets a couple of days in jail,
6:40
basically what it ended up being. Yeah, but everything's on
6:43
the up and up, folks. How dare you ask Florida
6:46
what they're doing down here? Work release allowed him to
6:52
spend most of his days at his office and nights
6:54
behind bars. He then served a year of probation and
6:58
was registered as a sex offender. Look, he didn't even
7:01
have to check in. Okay, not in New York and
7:04
not anywhere else, and forget about New Mexico. Dude could
7:07
have lived across the street from a school and it
7:09
wouldn't matter. He didn't have to be on the registry there.
7:12
Remember attorneys Brad Edwards and Paul Cassel, who called Epstein's
7:17
agreement one of the most extraordinarily lenient plea deal arrangements
7:21
in modern history. Represent Jane Does one and two and
7:25
filed a federal civil lawsuit in two thousand and eight
7:28
asking that the agreement be vacated. I mean, it is
7:33
literally one of the most egregious things I have ever seen. Now,
7:36
granted I'm not some legal scholar who follows this sort
7:40
of thing, but you should not get a plea deal
7:42
like this if you're a man like Epstein. I know
7:46
that's breaking news in all but this guy should have
7:48
served his full term. See what happens is you give
7:51
him this plea deal, and because he's such a sick
7:54
bastard who was broken right from the jump, he was
7:58
never gonna stop, and he kept molesting girls when he
8:02
should have been in your custody. So whose fault is that? Florida.
8:09
The motion they filed this week requested some rey judgment
8:12
prior to any trial, and on the grounds that prosecutors
8:16
violated the Crime Victim's Rights Act of two thousand and
8:19
four by failing to inform the survivors of the deal.
8:23
They most certainly did, and Judge Marra even said the
8:26
same thing. So how is it that Florida can come
8:30
out and with such confidence and such pizazz act like
8:34
they had this great long investigation and they uncovered everything
8:38
there was to uncover, When they really didn't uncover. Did
8:42
Lee squat? According to the CVRA, a crime victim in
8:48
a federal case has the right to reasonable, accurate, and
8:52
timely notice of any public court proceeding or any parole
8:56
proceeding involving the crime, not to be excluded from any
9:02
such public proceeding, and the right to be informed in
9:05
a timely manner of any plea bargain. Epstein's deal included
9:09
a non prosecution agreement for any federal charges and a
9:12
guilty plea in a state courtroom to a state charge.
9:16
State prosecutors added a second charge of procuring, to which
9:19
Epstein also pleaded guilty. So nobody told them and that
9:24
that right there is against the law. So how is
9:28
it that the Florida investigation can come out and say
9:30
everything's on the up and up? They think we forgot?
9:33
Do they think we're stupid? Do they think we have
9:35
memory loss? I mean, I know I took a couple
9:37
of wax to the head growing up playing football and shit,
9:40
But come on. Wes Oliver, a law professor at Duquanne
9:47
University said he believes that, based on Edwards in Castle's
9:50
motion and its citations, that the CVRA may have been
9:54
violated by prosecutors if the alleged survivors were not informed
9:58
that Epstein would be making a public plea. And we
10:01
know now that that is the case. So again, we're
10:04
just talking about this to reiterate here, to drive home
10:08
the point that shit down in Florida is not all fixed.
10:12
That you know we've come to a conclusion down here.
10:16
Hell no, we haven't, and things need to be looked
10:19
at once again. Oliver, however, notes that while the motions
10:24
ask for finding that the survivors were wronged by the government,
10:28
it is not at all clear there could be a
10:30
remedy for this wrong Yes, there is get rid of
10:33
the plea deal. That's the remedy for the wrong But
10:35
unfortunately all of these have a train Luis and have
10:39
a trained judges. They're all homies. This statute only creates rights,
10:48
said Oliver, but provides no method to sanction the violation
10:52
of those rights. He also said that asking to have
10:54
the agreement set aside would be an uphill battle, to
10:57
put it mildly, since prosecutors have a right to make
11:00
a deal and do not have to inform the alleged
11:03
victims of their negotiations or obtain their consent to the
11:07
pleas terms. Of course not, because that's how it's set up,
11:11
so that they can do whatever they want, whenever they want.
11:13
Speaker 2: To do it.
11:14
Speaker 1: Notice that regular folks, they don't ever get this plea deal,
11:18
They don't ever get the hookup. But Epstein does. Right,
11:20
Oh okay, in this case, said Oliver, the real question
11:26
is whether there is any remedy available and should be
11:29
addressed first. This motion really puts the cart before the horse.
11:34
The FBI, the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District
11:37
of Florida, and an attorney for Jeffrey Epstein did not
11:41
immediately respond to requests for comment. So, folks, as you
11:45
can see, this has been going on for years and
11:46
years and years now, and there's never been any proper
11:49
remedy and there's never going to be a proper remedy
11:52
unless we demand it. My hope is, and I know
11:56
it's a long shot, but I hope that after these
11:59
contentious elections done, that maybe we'll get some people in
12:02
DC that actually want to do the people's work, and
12:05
I think a good place to start would be hearings
12:09
and all sorts of investigation into what went down in Florida,
12:14
in New York, in New Mexico and everywhere else. Jeffrey
12:18
Epstein abused people. All right, folks, that's going to do
12:24
it for me. If you'd like to contact me, you
12:26
can do that at Bobby Kapuci at ProtonMail dot com.
12:30
That's Bo Bby capu Cci at ProtonMail dot com. Can
12:36
also find me on Twitter at bobbuy Underscore cap Ucci.
12:42
The link that I discussed can be found in the
12:44
description box.
12:46
Speaker 2: If you're looking for your next new truck, trust Rush
12:49
Truck Centers, the nation's largest commercial vehicle dealer network. Rush
12:53
Truck Centers has trucks and stocks throughout the country, including heavy, medium,
12:57
and light duty work vehicles. Plus they offer one range
13:00
of programs that helped coordinate, monitor, and expedite vehicle service
13:04
and repairs throughout their qualified service facilities. Check out their
13:08
online inventory today at Rush truck Centers dot com. That's
13:11
rushtruck Centers dot com. Expect more from Rush Truck Centers.
13:15
Please speak to your Rush Truck Centers representative for further details.
13:19
Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
13:24
In our last episode, we were talking about how the
13:27
whole entire situation down in Florida is absolute garbage and
13:32
how Palm Beach and Florida in general cleared everybody who
13:37
was involved of all of that garbage. Well, once again,
13:41
we're going to go back in time, hop in the
13:43
DeLorean and head back to twenty and sixteen and back
13:48
in twenty sixteen. Well, the lawyers for Epstein survivors were
13:53
not told of the sweetheart deal that Epstein received, So
13:58
right there, that alone should be aough to elicit the
14:02
absolute rage of the investigators in Florida. But the investigators
14:07
down in Florida, folks, I'm just going to be very
14:09
upfront with you, they were more concerns about covering the
14:13
asses of their buddies, of the state and of all
14:16
of the broken ass institutions, rather than holding people accountable
14:22
for their bullshit. Oh, we can't ruin precedent. Oh we
14:25
can't go back and look at other cases these prosecutors
14:28
worked on. It's such a joke and it's honestly offensive
14:35
the way that these governments conduct themselves. These local governments
14:39
federal government. Enough is enough. There needs to be some accountability,
14:44
and there needs to be some sort of investigative body
14:47
that comes in and looks at these investigations from a
14:50
federal standpoint, because you can't expect people who work together,
14:55
who are colleagues, to investigate each other and do it
14:58
the right way. I don't want to hear about, oh,
15:00
they're impartial, they're investigators. No, they're human beings, and human
15:05
beings are susceptible to all kinds of nonsense. So I
15:10
want a full and robust investigation from a federal level.
15:16
How about that gets initiated by the Senator Congress? You
15:19
think they could fit that in while they're out here
15:21
playing you know, political touch ass, you know things that
15:25
actually affect the people, that'd be nice every once in
15:28
a while, right, instead of them arguing and fighting like
15:31
the undertaker versus the million dollar man you know in
15:35
WWE back in the day, Because that's what it all is,
15:38
political theater. This is the kind of shit that they
15:42
should be going into, digging into Congress and the Senate,
15:46
how did this all happen and how are we going
15:48
to fix it? Instead, all we get are platitudes and nonsense,
15:52
and the same shit continues to happen. Then, for the
15:57
grand finale of Injustice, you get this report from Florida
16:01
talking about, oh yeah, everything was on the up and
16:04
up here, there was nothing that went wrong. Meanwhile, there's
16:10
mountains of receipts that say the completely opposite. So today,
16:16
once again we're gonna look at how the Florida prosecution
16:20
and how the prosecution overall filled these survivors. This article
16:26
is from NBC News headline Lawyers survivors not told of
16:31
sweetheart deal for Jeffrey Epstein. Lawyers for two teen survivors
16:37
of Palm Beach billionaire Jeffrey Epstein say thirty or more
16:41
alleged survivors weren't told of his lenient plea deal. So
16:44
that right there alone should be enough to make people
16:47
lose their jobs. And we have what five six seven
16:51
fuck ups by Florida and the Florida officials throughout this
16:55
whole thing, but none of them are enough for the
16:59
FDL to come back can say oh yeah, people need
17:02
to have their heads roll here. Instead it's a cover
17:05
up operation, Oh we have a black eye, instead of
17:08
telling everybody how we got the black eye. Let's just
17:11
put some makeup on it. This article was originally published
17:16
on February twelfth of twenty sixteen, and the author is
17:21
Tom Winter. Prosecutors arranged a sweetheart deal for jet set
17:27
sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but never bothered to tell more
17:31
than thirty of the billionaires alleged survivors about the agreement,
17:36
say lawyers for two of the girls, and we know
17:38
that this is the case. Now, this is not even disputable.
17:41
There's no dispute about this. The girls were not told
17:45
that this deal was being signed and that Epstein was
17:48
getting off basically, so right there, they violated the Victim's
17:53
Rights Act, meaning the prosecution. So how can it be
17:56
on the up and up the financier, you mean, the
18:00
pedophile who partied with young women, partied with young women
18:04
at his Palm Beach mansion, you mean, raped young women
18:07
at his Palm Beach mansion. Listen to the way they
18:09
were reporting this guy in twenty sixteen, as if he
18:12
was just this big party guy and people were coming
18:15
to his house and they just happened to be a
18:16
little bit young. I mean, really, Epstein pleaded guilty in
18:24
a federally broken deal in two thousand and eight to
18:28
a state count of soliciting an underage prostitute. So much
18:31
wrong with that? How can an underage girl be a prostitute?
18:35
And how is it that he only gets nailed with
18:36
one count? But everything's on the up and up in Florida. Folks,
18:40
just trust them. He served thirteen months of an eighteen
18:45
month sentence. Prosecutors said in court papers filed at the
18:49
time that he may have had as many as forty survivors.
18:53
There is good reason to believe that if the prosecutors
18:56
had exposed their dealings to scrutiny by Jane number one,
19:01
Jane do number two and other survivors, says emotion filed
19:04
earlier this week, they would not have reached such a
19:07
sweetheart plea deal. And that's why they weren't told. What
19:10
do you think we're stupid? The prosecutors down there didn't
19:13
tell these girls because they were pressed by Dershowitz and
19:16
Star and the rest of those clowns not to do so.
19:20
So they didn't tell the survivors. They stepped all over
19:23
the CRVA and then they act like nothing's wrong, like
19:27
they're absolutely in the clear here. Well, I have to
19:30
tell you were not. I don't care that Florida launched
19:33
this investigation. It's time for a real robust investigation into
19:39
the investigation. How about that Jane Doe's number one and
19:45
two were fourteen and thirteen at the time of the abuse. Epstein,
19:49
fifty five at the time of his plea, served a
19:52
sentence in the county jail. Imagine thirteen and fourteen years old,
19:56
and this cocksucker only gets a couple of days in jail.
19:59
Basically what it is ended up being. Yeah, but everything's
20:02
on the up and up, folks, How dare you ask
20:05
Florida what they're doing down here? Work release allowed him
20:11
to spend most of his days at his office and
20:13
nights behind bars. He then served a year of probation
20:16
and was registered as a sex offender. Look, he didn't
20:20
even have to check in Okay, not New York, and
20:23
not anywhere else, and forget about New Mexico. Dude could
20:27
have lived across the street from a school and it
20:28
wouldn't matter. He didn't have to be on the registry there.
20:31
Remember attorneys Brad Edwards and Paul Cassel, who called Epstein's
20:36
agreement one of the most extraordinarily lenient plea deal arrangements
20:41
in modern history. Represent Jane Does one and two and
20:44
filed a federal civil lawsuit in two thousand and eight
20:47
asking that the agreement be vacated. I mean, it is
20:52
literally one of the most egregious things I have ever seen. Now,
20:56
granted I'm not some legal scholar who follows this sort
20:59
of thing, but you should not get a plea deal
21:01
like this if you're a man like Epstein. I know
21:05
that's breaking news and all, but this guy should have
21:07
served his full term. See what happens is you give
21:10
him this plea deal, and because he's such a sick
21:13
bastard who was broken right from the jump, he was
21:17
never gonna stop, and he kept molesting girls when he
21:21
should have been in your custody. So whose fault is that? Florida?
21:26
The motion they filed this week requested somemary judgment prior
21:30
to any trial and on the grounds that prosecutors violated
21:34
the Crime Victim's Rights Act of two thousand and four
21:37
by failing to inform the survivors of the deal. They
21:41
most certainly did, and Judge Mara even said the same thing,
21:45
So how is it that Florida can come out and
21:48
with such confidence and such pizazz, act like they had
21:52
this great long investigation and they uncovered everything there was
21:56
to uncover, when they really didn't uncover, did squad. According
22:03
to the CVR, a crime victim in a federal case
22:07
has the right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of
22:11
any public court proceeding or any parole proceeding involving the crime,
22:16
the right not to be excluded from any such public proceeding,
22:20
and the right to be informed in a timely manner
22:23
of any plea bargain. Epstein's deal included a non prosecution
22:27
agreement for any federal charges and a guilty plea in
22:31
a state courtroom to a state charge. State prosecutors added
22:35
a second charge of procuring, to which Epstein also pleaded guilty.
22:39
So nobody told them, and that right there is against
22:43
the law. So how is it that the Florida investigation
22:47
can come out and say everything's on the up and up?
22:49
They think we forgot? Do they think we're stupid? Do
22:52
they think we have memory loss? I mean, I know
22:54
I took a couple of wax to the head growing
22:56
up playing football and shit, But come on, Wes Oliver
23:02
A law professor at Duquine University said he believes that
23:06
based on Edwards in Castle's motion and its citations, that
23:10
the CVRA may have been violated by prosecutors if the
23:14
alleged survivors were not informed that Epstein would be making
23:17
a public plea. And we know now that that is
23:19
the case. So again we're just talking about this to
23:23
reiterate here, to drive home the point that shit down
23:27
in Florida is not all fixed. That you know, we've
23:31
come to a conclusion down here. Hell no, we have it,
23:35
and things need to be looked at once again. Oliver, however,
23:40
notes that while the motions asked for finding that the
23:43
survivors were wronged by the government, it is not at
23:46
all clear there could be a remedy for this wrong. Yes,
23:49
there is get rid of the plea deal. That's the
23:51
remedy for the wrong But unfortunately all of these have
23:55
a train Luis and have a trained judges. They're all homies.
24:03
This statute only creates rights, said Oliver, but provides no
24:07
method to sanction the violation of those rights. He also
24:11
said that asking to have the agreement set aside would
24:13
be an uphill battle to put it mildly, since prosecutors
24:17
have the right to make a deal and do not
24:19
have to inform the alleged victims of their negotiations or
24:23
obtain their consent to the plea's terms. Of course not,
24:26
because that's how it's set up, so that they can
24:29
do whatever they want, whenever they want to do it.
24:32
Notice that regular folks, they don't ever get this plea deal,
24:35
they don't ever get the hook up. But Epstein does. Right,
24:38
Oh okay, in this case, said Oliver, the real question
24:43
is whether there is any remedy available and should be
24:47
addressed first. This motion really puts the cart before the horse.
24:51
The FBI, the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District
24:55
of Florida, and an attorney for Jeffrey Epstein did not
24:58
immediately respond to requests for comment. So, folks, as you
25:02
can see, this has been going on for years and
25:04
years and years now, and there's never been any proper
25:06
remedy and there's never going to be a proper remedy
25:09
unless we demand it. My hope is, and I know
25:13
it's a long shot, but I hope that after these
25:16
contentious elections are done, that maybe we'll get some people
25:19
in DC that actually want to do the people's work,
25:22
and I think a good place to start would be
25:26
hearings and all sorts of investigation into what went down
25:30
in Florida, in New York, in New Mexico and everywhere
25:34
else Jeffrey Epstein abused people. All right, folks, that's gonna
25:41
do it for me. If you'd like to contact me,
25:43
you can do that at Bobby Kapucci at ProtonMail dot com.
25:47
That's bo b b Y c apu Cci at ProtonMail
25:52
dot com. Can also find me on Twitter at bo
25:55
bbuy Underscore cap u Cci. The link that I discussed
26:01
can be found in the description box. Look what's up, everyone,
26:05
and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In
26:09
this episode, we're going to take a look at Judge
26:10
Mara's ruling when it comes to the complaint made by
26:14
Jang Do one and Jane Do two about their CVR
26:18
rights being disregarded. Case number zero eight DASH eight zero
26:24
seven three six DASH civ Dash Mara, Jang Do one
26:28
and Jane Do two Petitioners First United States of America
26:32
Opinion and Order this caused before the Court upon Jane
26:36
Do one and Jane Do two submissions on the proposed
26:39
remedies to the Government's response to petitioners submission on proposed
26:43
Remedies limited Intervener Jeffrey epstein Brief in opposition to proposed remedies,
26:48
Jang Do one and Jane Do Two's reply to the
26:51
Government in support of their submission on proposed remedies, Jane
26:55
Do one and Jane Do Two's reply to Intervener Epstein's
26:58
Brief and opposition to propose remedies. Jane one and Jane
27:02
Do two statements noting death pursuant to Rule twenty five
27:06
of the Federal Rules the Civil Procedure Response to Rule
27:09
twenty five Notice and suggestion of mootness. On February twenty first,
27:14
twenty nineteen, the Court entered its order DEE four to
27:18
thirty five, finding that the government violated the Crime Victims
27:21
Rights Act CVRA US Code eighteen, section thirty seven to
27:25
seventy one when it fail to confer with petitioners prior
27:29
to entering into a non prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein.
27:33
The Court permitted the parties to brief and present additional
27:36
evidence relative to the issue of what remedies, if any,
27:39
should be imposed by the Court. As a result, the
27:42
briefing was extensive and the Court has carefully reviewed all
27:46
the arguments. No additional evidence was presented by any of
27:49
the parties. Furthermore, during the time the matter was under advisement,
27:53
mister Epstein died, which resulted in additional briefing. The Court
27:58
will simply provide an abbreviated summary of the party's arguments,
28:01
given that the briefs are available on the public docket.
28:05
Petitioners initially requested the following remedies. One rescind the provisions
28:10
in the NPA between the US Attorney's Office in the
28:13
Southern District of Florida and mister Epstein that barred his
28:16
prosecution and the prosecution of his named and unnamed alleged
28:20
co conspirators. Two declare that the United States Constitution would
28:25
permit such a prosecution. Three enjoin the U s Attorney's
28:28
Office to fourthwith make its best effort to protect the
28:31
CVR A rights of Jane Do one and Jane Do
28:34
two and other Epstein victims. Four enjoin the US Attorney's
28:38
Office to fourthwith confer with Jane Do one and Jane
28:42
Do two and other Epstein victims. To provide them with
28:45
accurate and timely notice of future case events. And five
28:50
order a meeting for the victims with members of the
28:52
current US Attorney's Office and former US Attorney's Office, including
28:56
former US Attorney Alexander Acosta. Six Conduct a court hearing
29:02
for victims, requiring the attendance of mister Acosta. Seven. Provide
29:06
various information to the victims, including information in the government's
29:09
possession about why it did not prosecute Epstein's crimes, grand
29:13
jury material information from the FBI, seal materials submitted to
29:18
the government to the court, and material filed by the
29:20
government in d E four fourteen and D three forty eight.
29:25
Eight require the Justice Department to conduct a course of
29:28
training for employees in the U s Attorney's Office in
29:31
the Southern District of Florida about the CVRA. And nine
29:35
order the government to pay monetary sanctions, restitution attorney fees
29:39
and costs. The government asserts that these remedies are not
29:43
authorized by the CVRA. The government, however, states that it
29:47
should have communicated more effectively with petitioners and proposes the
29:51
following remedies. One, the Department of Justice will designate a
29:55
representative to meet with petitioners and other victims to discuss
29:59
the decision to resolve the Epstein case. Two, the government
30:03
will participate in a public court proceeding in which petitioners
30:06
can make a victim impact statement. And three, all criminal
30:09
prosecutors in the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District
30:13
of Florida will undergo additional training on the CVRA, victim
30:17
rights and victim assistant issues. Prior to his death, mister
30:22
Epstein addressed the recision remedies proposed by petitioners, asserting that
30:26
they were unauthorized by the CVRA, precluded by contract law,
30:30
the doctrines of judicial and equitable estoppel, substantative due process,
30:35
separation of powers, and ripeness. Mister Epstein also opposed the
30:39
government's proposed remedy of a proceeding in which unadjudicated victims
30:43
make impact statements about a person who has not been
30:46
convicted of or facing sentencing for a federal crime. Petitioners
30:52
provided the court with a reply memoranda addressing both the
30:55
government's arguments as well as those of mister Epstein. On
30:59
August twelve, twenty nineteen, petitioners filed a statement noting mister
31:04
Epstein's death as part of that notice. Petitioners argue that
31:08
mister Epstein's death rendered all of his objections to petitioners
31:11
proposed remedies moot one. Moreover, petitioners contend that most of
31:18
the government's objections, which were predicated on protecting Epstein's interests,
31:22
are also moot. Based on this theory, petitioners urge the
31:26
court to grant all petitioners proposed remedies, including invalidating the
31:30
provisions in the NPA that precluded prosecution of Epstein's alleged
31:34
co conspirators. Mister Epstein's attorneys responded that is death rendered
31:39
petitioner's request for recision of the NPA moot. Petitioners have
31:43
asked the court to strike this response, since Epstein is
31:46
dead and therefore he should no longer have a voice
31:49
in this proceeding remedies against Jeffrey Epstein and the alleged
31:53
co conspirators, Jane DO one and Jane DO two seek
31:57
an order finding the provisions in the NPA barring the
32:00
prosecution of Epstein's alleged co conspirators null and void to
32:03
the extent they prevent their prosecution for federal crimes committed
32:08
in the Southern District of Florida against Jane do one
32:11
or two, or any other victim of a federal sex
32:13
crime offense committed by Epstein's alleged co conspirators within the
32:17
Southern District of Florida. Article three of the US Constitution
32:21
grants the judiciary the authority to adjudicate cases and controversies.
32:26
In our system of government, courts have no business deciding
32:29
legal disputes or expounding on law in the absence of
32:32
such a case of controversy. An actual controversy must exist
32:37
not only at the time the complaint is filed, but
32:40
through all stages of the litigation. To qualify as a
32:43
case fit for federal court adjudication, an actual controversy must
32:48
be extent to all stages of review, not merely at
32:51
the time the complaints filed. A justiceable case or controversy
32:57
must be present at all stages of review. Here, there
33:00
is no longer an Article three controversy permitting the court
33:03
to address the appropriateness of the remedy of recision. As
33:07
a result of mister Epstein's death, there can be no
33:09
criminal prosecution against him, and the court cannot consider granting
33:13
this relief to the victims. Mootonist demands that there be
33:16
something about the case that remains alive, present, real, and
33:20
immediate to that of federal court can provide redress in
33:23
some palpable way. Likewise, the court without jurisdiction to grant
33:29
Petitioner's request for recision of the NPA provisions with respect
33:33
to mister Epstein's alleged co conspirators. That request invites the
33:37
court to render an advisory opinion. Strict application of the
33:40
rightness doctrine prevents federal courts from rendering impermissible advisory opinions
33:46
and wasting resources through review of potential or abstract disputes.
33:52
While the constitutional aspect of the rightness inquiry focuses on
33:55
whether Article three requirements of an actual case or controversy
33:59
you're met, the prudential aspect asked whether it's appropriate for
34:03
this case to be litigated in a federal court by
34:06
these parties at this time. By requesting a decision of
34:10
the NPA with respect to the alleged co conspirators, petitioners
34:13
seek a ruling affecting the rights of non parties to
34:16
the case. If the court granted such relief and a
34:19
criminal prosecution was to be instituted against the alleged co conspirators,
34:23
they would be free to assert the benefits if any
34:26
which inerred to them under the NPA as a bar
34:29
to any prosecution. The question of the validity of the
34:32
non prosecution provision of the NPA as they relate to
34:36
the alleged co conspirators will have to be litigated with
34:39
their participation if any prosecution against them is ever brought.
34:43
Any decision by this Court on the question is meaningless
34:46
without the participation in this proceeding. Mister Epstein chose to
34:51
intervene in this case relative to the question of an
34:54
appropriate remedy, and thus he would have been bound by
34:57
any ruling issued by the Court. The alleged COCNE did
35:00
not intervene, nor were they obligated to do so. Moreover,
35:05
no party to this proceeding sought to join them in
35:08
the case. Since the alleged co conspirators or not parties
35:11
to the case, any ruling this Court makes that purports
35:14
to effect their rights under the NPA would merely be advisory,
35:18
and is thus beyond this Court's jurisdiction to issue a
35:22
hypothetical will serve to buttress this conclusion, as was noted
35:26
in the brief of the parties. This action was initiated
35:30
by petitioners on July seventh, two thousand and eight. Four
35:33
days later, the court held a hearing on Petitioner's request
35:36
for relief. Shortly thereafter, on August fourteenth, two thousand and eight,
35:40
Petitioner's council chose not to pursue the request to invalidate
35:44
the NPA at the time, but rather sought production of
35:47
the NPA to evaluate it and decide how petitioners wish
35:50
to proceed. Thereafter, there was no activity on the merits
35:54
of the case for two years, during which time mister
35:57
Epstein performed under the NPA. The court then issued an
36:00
order to show cause as to why the case should
36:03
be dismissed for lack of prosecution. After receiving the petitioner's
36:08
response to the order to show cause, the court permitted
36:11
the case to proceed and let the parties begin to
36:13
litigate the case on the merits. Let us assume at
36:16
that point in the litigation, at which time mister Epstein
36:19
had not intervened, rather than challenging Petitioners' claims, the US
36:23
had decided that it erred in failing to advise the
36:26
victims of intent to enter into the NPA, and agreed
36:29
to settle the case with petitioners. Petitioners and the United
36:33
States then entered into a settlement agreement which provided, in
36:37
relevant part, that they would submit a joint stipulation to
36:40
the Court for entry of a consent decree, a provision
36:45
of which would hold that the NPA was invalid and
36:48
the non prosecution in the NPA was null and void.
36:51
The consent decree would further provide that the U. S
36:54
Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida was free
36:57
to prosecute mister Epstein for any federal crimes which he
37:00
may have committed relative to the victims. Let us further
37:03
assume that the court approved the settlement and entered a
37:06
consent decree consistent with it. The US Attorney's Office for
37:10
the Southern District of Florida, armed with the dissent decree,
37:13
holding that the NPA was invalid, then proceeded before the
37:16
grand jury and obtained an indictment against mister Epstein. Mister
37:20
Epstein is then arrested and a criminal case against them
37:23
proceeds under this hypothetical set of facts, could anyone seriously
37:28
contend that mister Epstein would be bound to the consent
37:30
decree which was entered in a case to which he
37:33
was not a party in which he has no opportunity
37:36
to be heard. Of course, not any such contention would
37:39
be absurd. The consent decree would have been advisory only
37:44
and not binding in any way against mister Epstein. The
37:48
validity of the NPA would have to be litigated within
37:51
the context of the criminal case brought against them. That
37:54
is precisely the case with which the alleged co conspirators.
37:58
The United States Attorney's Office for this Southern District of
38:00
Florida can make an independent judgment as to whether it
38:03
believes it's bound by the non prosecution provision of the
38:07
NPA as it relates to the alleged co conspirators and
38:10
proceed accordingly. If the office concludes it's not bound and
38:14
chooses not to pursue criminal charges against those individuals, the
38:17
validity of the non prosecution provision will appropriately be resolved
38:21
within the context of those criminal proceedings. All right, folks,
38:25
are going to wrap up episode one right there, and
38:27
in the next episode, We're going to finish this bad
38:29
boy off. All of the information that goes with this
38:32
episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone,
38:36
and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In
38:40
this episode, we're going to get right back to it
38:42
and finish off Judge Mara's order. When it comes to
38:45
the CVR a request for injunction, petitioners requests at the
38:50
Court issue an injunction requiring the US Attorney's Office in
38:53
the Southern District in Florida to make its best effort
38:56
to protect the CVR rights of mister Epstein's victims, to
39:00
infer with Jane DO one and Jane do two and
39:02
other Epstein victims who request it, and to provide them
39:05
with accurate and timely notice of future case events. The
39:09
Court denies the request for the issuance of such injunctive relief.
39:13
Petitioners only show past exposure to illegal conduct and do
39:17
not show continuing present adverse effects. City of Los Angeles
39:21
Verse four sixty one US ninety five one oh two.
39:25
In discussing standing to seeking injunctive relief, the United States
39:28
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has explained the
39:31
doctrine in the following way. Because injunctions regulate future conduct,
39:36
a party has standing to seek injunctive relief only if
39:39
the party alleges and ultimately proves a real and immediate,
39:43
as opposed to a merely conjectural or hypothetical threat a
39:47
future injury. Logically, a prospective remedy will provide no relief
39:51
for an injury that is and likely will remain entirely
39:54
in the past. Although past wrongs or evidence bearing on
39:58
whether there is a real and immediate three thheat of
40:00
repeated injury, past exposure to a legal conduct does not
40:04
in itself show a present case or a controversy regarding
40:07
injunctive relief if unaccompanied by a continuing present adverse effect
40:13
Church City versus Huntsville, nineteen ninety four. At this point,
40:18
as to mister Epstein, there are no present or futures
40:20
CVR rights of victims to protect as to any alleged
40:25
co conspirators. The United States has agreed to confer with
40:28
the victims regarding its decision relative to mister Epstein's case.
40:32
It is further willing to participate in a forum where
40:35
the victims may express how their interaction with mister Epstein
40:38
and his alleged co conspirators affected them. The government has
40:42
also agreed to provide training to its prosecutors regarding the
40:45
rights of victims under the CVRA. The Court has no
40:49
reason to doubt the government's representations to the Court and
40:52
no reason to believe that will not follow through with
40:54
these commitments. Hence, the Court concludes that there is no
40:58
real and immediate threat of repeat violations of the CVRA,
41:02
and that any injury that occurred in this case will
41:04
remain entirely in the past. Thus, the Court finds that
41:07
the granting of injunctive relief is not warranted in this case.
41:12
Meeting with former US attorney and court hearing. The Court
41:16
has no jurisdiction over Alexander Acosta, the former US attorney,
41:20
who is now a private citizen. Therefore, the Court denies
41:23
petitioner's request that it order mister Acosta to appear at
41:26
a meeting with the victims. Given that the government has
41:30
agreed to arrange a meeting with government representatives for petitioners,
41:34
the Court will not enter in order directing this meeting.
41:38
As indicated previously, the Court presumes and fully expects that
41:41
the government will honor its representation, and it will conduct
41:45
this meeting. The Court also declines to conduct a court
41:48
sanctioned proceeding to allow mister Epstein's victims an opportunity to
41:52
address the Court on these topics. First, it is a
41:55
matter of public knowledge that the United States District Judge
41:58
who is presiding over the criminal case brought against mister
42:01
Epstein in the Southern District of New York, already provided
42:05
that opportunity to mister Epstein's victims. Second, now that mister
42:09
Epstein has deceased, any investigation regarding his criminal culpability has
42:13
ended to the extent any investigations are continuing as to
42:17
mister Epstein's alleged co conspirators. This Court and play no
42:20
role in these investigations or their resolution, and the victims
42:24
will have their opportunity to express their views to the
42:27
US Attorney's Office and other representatives of the US Department
42:31
of Justice, who will have the ultimate say on how
42:33
those investigations proceed. Production of documents. The parties have already
42:38
engaged in discovery, and the Court has previously made rulings
42:41
concerning privilege and work product. The finding by the Court
42:45
of a violation of the CVRA does not avoid its
42:48
finding on the privileged material. These privileged documents include those
42:52
relating to the government's decision to enter into the NPA
42:55
with Epstein. To the extent the petitioners seek production of
42:59
FBI files relating to its investigation of mister Epstein and
43:03
his alleged co conspirators is also a matter of public knowledge,
43:07
and there is an ongoing investigation by the Department of
43:09
Justice relative to those individuals. The FBI's documents, to the
43:13
extent they were not otherwise protected by attorney client or
43:17
work product privileges, in all likelihood, are relevant to that
43:21
ongoing investigation. The court's ordering of production of those documents
43:25
could adversely affect and interfere with that ongoing investigation. Thus,
43:30
the Court will not order their production. Furthermore, to the
43:33
extent petitioners seek to remedy based on their argument that
43:37
the Court never ruled on whether the government violated the
43:39
petitioner's right to be treated with fairness and to receive
43:43
notice of court proceedings, the Court rejects this theory. These
43:47
rights all flow from the rights to confer and were
43:50
encompassed in the court's ruling finding a violation of the CVRA.
43:54
Thus there's no basis for further production of documents. Lastly,
43:59
with respect to beatifitioner's argument that they are entitled to
44:01
grand jury records to obtain information as to why there
44:05
was no prosecution of mister Epstein, the court denies this request.
44:09
The traditional rule of grand jury secrecy may be set
44:12
aside under certain circumstances, as set forth by Rule six
44:16
Z of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, The party
44:19
seeking disclosure of the grand jury material must show a
44:22
compelling and particularized need for the disclosure. Furthermore, the private
44:27
party must show circumstances had created certain difficulties peculiar to
44:31
the case, which would be alleviated by access to specific
44:35
grand jury material without doing disproportion and harm to the
44:39
purposes of secrecy embodied in the grand jury process. Here,
44:44
petitioners have not shown that they will suffer an injustice
44:47
if they are denied access to grand jury material, nor
44:50
have petitioners shown that access to these materials is compelling
44:54
or particularized or their asserted interests under the CVRA. Additionally,
45:00
materials may be relevant to an ongoing investigation relating the
45:03
alleged co conspirators, the disclosure of which would interfere with
45:07
the investigation. Therefore, the Court denies petitioners' access to the
45:11
material over which grand jury secrecy applies. Under Rule six
45:15
E of the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure. Educational Remedies,
45:21
Petitioners seek an order requiring a course of training for
45:24
employees in the U. S. Attorney's Office for the Southern
45:26
District of Florida about the CVRA. The government does not
45:30
oppose providing such training. Once again, the Court presumes and
45:34
fully expects the government will honor its representation that it
45:37
will provide training to its employees about the CVRA and
45:41
the proper treatment of crime victims. Thus, the Court finds
45:45
the issuance of such order not necessary or warranted under
45:48
the facts of the case, and once again fully believes
45:51
and expects the government will honor its representation. Monetary sanctions, restitution,
45:57
and attorney fees. The parties agree that the CVR does
46:00
not authorize a cause of action for damages. Petitioners seek sanctions,
46:04
claiming that sanctions are a traditional means for enforcing rights
46:08
for failure to comply with the law. Courts have inherent
46:12
power to impose sanctions based on the court's need to
46:15
manage its own affairs so as to achieve the orderly
46:19
and expeditious disposition of the case. The power, however, is
46:24
to manage and address actions that have taken place while
46:27
litigation is pending before the court, not to address actions
46:30
taken prior to the litigation. See Woods versus Barnett Bank
46:35
of Fort Lauderdale, eleventh Circuit nineteen eighty five. See also
46:39
Lamb Construction versus Nebraska Power Hub nineteen ninety seven. Also
46:44
see Tower Ridge Incorporated versus Towl Incorporated nineteen ninety seven.
46:48
In contrast, remedies serve to address or wrong that occurred
46:52
prior to the litigation. Notably, the cases cited by petitioner
46:56
in support of the imposition of sanctions involve conduct that
46:59
area during the course of litigation, and not conduct engaged
47:04
in prior to the institution of the lawsuit. Here, petitioners
47:08
seeks sanctions as punishment for the government violating the CVRA,
47:12
which is conduct that occurred prior to the institution of
47:16
this lawsuit authorized remedies, not sanctions or therefore the appropriate
47:20
conduit for such relief. Petitioners also seek an award of restitution.
47:25
Petitioner's request is improper for several reasons. First, it essentially
47:30
is a request for money damages from the government, which
47:32
is not allowed under the CVRA. Second, although petitioners claim
47:36
the CVRA permits the right to a full and timely restitution,
47:41
under the CVRA, restitution is limited only to those circumstances
47:45
provided in law. Hence, petitioners would have to point to
47:48
a specific statute that authorizes an award of restitution. The
47:53
Court also rejects petitioner's requests for attorney fees to the extent.
47:56
Petitioners seek fees by claiming the government acted in bad
47:59
fits or vexatiously. The Court rejects that position. While the
48:04
Court concluded that the government violated the CVRA, the Court
48:07
did not and does not find that the government acted
48:10
in bad faith throughout this litigation, nor does the Court
48:13
find any basis to draw such a conclusion on the
48:16
record before it. Although unsuccessful on the merits of the
48:19
issue of whether there was a violation of the CVRA,
48:22
the government asserted legitimate and legally supportable positions throughout its litigation. Thus,
48:28
there is no basis to grant petitioners attorney fees as
48:30
a sanction, nor is there a basis to grant petitioners
48:34
attorney fees because the litigation efforts directly benefited others. This
48:38
theory relies upon a line of cases that permits the
48:41
allowance of attorney fees out of a fund which created, increased,
48:46
or was preserved by an attorney service, and for which
48:49
equity courts historically permitted compensation for the attorney's successful efforts.
48:54
This theory is simply inapplicable to the facts of this case.
48:58
For these reasons, the Court denies Petitioner's request for attorney
49:02
fees motion to strike. The Court denies Petitioner's motion to strike.
49:06
The legal arguments made by mister Epstein's attorneys simply provide
49:10
the current state of the law that the Court is
49:12
obligated to follow, whether or not mister Epstein's attorneys provided
49:16
the Court with a memorandum of law conclusion. This order
49:20
brings an end to the lengthy and contentious litigation. Recent
49:23
events have rendered the most significant issue that was pending
49:26
before the court, namely whether the government's violation of petitioners'
49:30
rights under the CVRA invalidated the NPA moot. Other reliefs
49:35
sought by petitioners was either beyond the jurisdiction of the
49:37
court to grant unavailable under the law, or in the
49:41
exercise of the court's discretion, and under all the circumstances
49:44
of the case, unnecessary or unwarranted. So, despite petitioners having
49:49
demonstrated the government violated their rights under the CVRA, in
49:54
the end, they are not receiving much, if any, of
49:57
the relief they sought. They may take solace, however, in
50:00
the fact that this litigation has brought national attention to
50:03
the Crime Victims' Rights Act and the importance of victims
50:07
in the criminal justice system. It also resulted in the
50:10
United States Department of Justice acknowledging its shortcomings in dealing
50:14
with crime victims and its promise to better train its
50:17
prosecutors regarding the rights of victims under the CVRA in
50:21
the future. And rulings which were rendered during the course
50:25
of this litigation likely played some role, however small, it
50:28
may have been, in the initiation of criminal charges against
50:32
Epstein in the Southern District of New York and that
50:34
office continuing investigation of others who may have been complicit
50:38
with them. In view of all the foregoing It's hereby
50:42
ordered and adjudged as follows. One, the Clerk shall unseal
50:46
docket Entries one nineteen and one thirty four. Two, Jane
50:50
DO one and Jane DO two's motion to strike response
50:52
to Rule twenty five notice is denied. Three. This order
50:56
shall constitute a judgment for purposes of fed oar Civis. Four.
51:01
The Clerk will close the case and all pending motions
51:04
are denied as moot done and ordered in Chambers of
51:07
West pom Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, the sixteenth, this
51:11
day of September twenty nineteen, signed by Kenneth Marra, United
51:15
States District Judge. All of the information that goes with
51:19
this episode can be found in the description box.