DOJ-OGR-00010707.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document675 Filed 06/25/22 Page16of21 role in the New York crimes of an expansive long-running sex trafficking conspiracy, Maxwell's criminal prosecution does not stand in a vacuum. Maxwell’s recent prosecution in this district followed the non—prosecution of her co-conspirator Jeffrey Epstein, Maxwell, and other unknown co-conspirators in the Southern District of Florida under highly unusual circumstances. As the Eleventh Circuit en banc recently stated, the facts involving the non—prosecution of Epstein, Maxwell, and other un—named and un—known co-conspirators in Florida “are beyond scandalous— they tell a tale of national disgrace.” In re Wild, 994 F.3d 1244, 1247 (11th Cir. 2021), cert. denied sub nom. Wild v. United States Dist. Ct. for S. Dist. of Fla., 142 S. Ct. 1188 (2022). In this Court, Maxwell will now be sentenced for conspiring with “one of this era’s most infamous child predators.” In re Wild, 955 F.3d 1196, 1247 (11th Cir. 2020), reb’g en banc granted, opinion vacated, 967 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir. 2020). But many questions remain about how and why the innumerable co-conspirators in an extensive international child sex trafficking operation have escaped justice for so long. In the Southern District of Florida, Epstein, Maxwell, and other co— conspirators arranged a secret non—prosecution deal that allowed Epstein to, in effect, take the fall for all involved and then to serve most of his prison time on “work release’—while the other co— conspirators (such as Maxwell) escaped prosecution entirely. See generally Jeffrey Epstein’s Wealth Allowed Him Many Perks While Serving Jail Time in Florida, WASH. PosT (July 19, 2019). The “preposterous” inexplicable non—prosecution agreement has left the sex trafficking conspiracy’s victims—and the public—to wonder why Epstein, Maxwell, and other co-conspirators were treated so favorably. Tung Yin, Learning from the Jeffrey Epstein Mess: Its Time to Add a Cause of Action for Damages to the Crime Victims Rights Act, 69 KANS. L. REV. 447, 489 (2021). As Eleventh Circuit 16 DOJ-OGR-00010707