EFTA00235266.pdf
PDF Source (No Download)
Extracted Text (OCR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson
JANE DOES #1 and #2
I
UNITED STATES
STIPULATION
The parties to this action, that is, Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, and the United States
of America, by and through their undersigned counsel, do hereby stipulate and agree that
the following facts are true and correct and that no further evidentiary hearing is required
with respect to the pending AVictim=s Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime
Victim Right Act, 18 U.S.C. ' 3771.
1.
In 2006, at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (AFBI@) opened an investigation into allegations that Jeffrey
Epstein (AEpstein@) and his personal assistants had used facilities of interstate commerce
to induce young girls between the ages of thirteen and seventeen to engage in
prostitution, amongst other offenses.
The case was presented to the United States
Attomey=s Office for the Southern District of Florida, which accepted the case for
investigation.
2.
At the time that the investigation was opened, the Palm Beach County State
Attorney=s Office had presented evidence to a state grand jury, which had returned an
EFTA00235266
indictment charging solicitation of prostitution.
That charge made no reference to the
ages of the minor victims and, upon conviction, did not require sex offender registration.
3.
Jane Doe #1 is a woman with initials C.W., and Jane Doe #2 is a woman
with initials T.M.
Both were victims of Epstein=s while they were minors beginning
when they were fifteen years old.
Both Jane Does were identified through the Palm
Beach Police Department=s investigation of Epstein.
4.
Attached as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4 to the Declaration of
are true and correct copies of victim notification letters sent to Jane Does 1 and 2 from
the United States Attorney=s Office and the FBI.
5.
Throughout the investigation, the FBI agents and the Assistant U.S.
Attorney had several meetings with Jane Doe #1.
During those meetings, Jane Doe #1
never expressed a desire to be consulted prior to the resolution of the investigation. Jane
Doe #2 was represented by counsel and, accordingly, all contact was made through that
attorney.
That attorney never expressed that Jane Doe #2 wanted to be consulted prior
to the resolution of the investigation.
6.
In September 2007, Epstein and the U.S. Attorney=s Office reached an
agreement whereby the United States would defer federal prosecution in favor of
prosecution by the State of Florida, so long as certain basic preconditions were met, those
included a conviction on a state sex offense that reflected that the victims were minors at
the time the crimes occurred and that would require sex offender registration.
Another
key objective for the United States Attorney=s Office was to preserve a federal remedy
EFTA00235267
for the young girls whom Epstein had sexually exploited. The Agreement contained an
express confidentiality provision.
The Agreement was subsequently modified in
October and December 2007.
7.
Although individual victims were not consulted regarding the agreement,
several had expressed concerns regarding the exposure of their identities at trial and they
desired a prompt resolution of the matter.
At the time the agreement and the
modifications were signed in September, October, and December 2007, Jane Doe #2 was
openly hostile to the prosecution of Epstein.
8.
In October 2007, shortly after the initial agreement was signed, Jane Doe
#1 was contacted to be advised regarding the resolution of the investigation.
On
October
, 2007, Special Agents
et in
person with Jane Doe #1. The Special Agents explained that the investigation had been
resolved, that Epstein would plead guilty to two state offenses, 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.
Jane Doe #1 also was
advised that Epstein would be entering a guilty plea in state court on October _, 2007,
although the October change of plea did not take place.
During this meeting, Jane Doe
#1 did not raise any objections to the resolution of the matter.
9.
Jane Doe #1 misunderstood the explanation provided by the Special
Agents, believing that only the State part of the Epstein investigation had been resolved,
EFTA00235268
and that the federal investigation would continue, possibly leading to a federal
prosecution.
10.
When Epstein=s attorneys learned that some of the victims had been
notified, they complained that the victims were receiving an incentive to overstate their
involvement with Epstein in order to increase their damages claims.
Following the
signing of the Agreement and the modifications thereto, Epstein=s performance was
delayed while he sought to rescind the Agreement. Throughout that period, the FBI and
the U.S. Attorney=s Office maintained contact with the victims, to be prepared if Epstein
were to renege on the agreement.
11.
After Jane Doe #1 had been notified of the terms of the agreement, but
before Epstein performed his obligations, Jane Doe #1 contacted the FBI because
Epstein's counsel was attempting to take her deposition and private investigators were
harassing her.
Assistant U.S. Attorney
secured pro bono counsel to
represent Jane Doe #1 and several other identified victims in connection with the criminal
investigation. Pro bono counsel was able to assist Jane Doe #1 in avoiding the improper
deposition.
12.
In mid-June 2008, Attorney Edwards contacted AUSA 1.101. to inform
her that he represented Jane Doe #1 and, later, Jane Doe #2. Attorney Edwards asked to
meet to provide information regarding Epstein.
Attorney Edwards was asked to send
any information that he wanted considered, but did not send anything.
EFTA00235269
13.
On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximately 4:15 p.m., AUSA
received a copy of Epstein=s proposed state plea agreement and learned that the plea was
scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. AUSA
and the Palm Beach
Police Department attempted to provide notification to victims in the short time that
Epstein=s counsel had provided.
Attorney Edwards was called to provide notice to his
clients regarding the hearing.
14.
On July 9, 2008, AUSA
sent a victim notification to Jane Doe #1
via her attorney, Bradley Edwards, which is attached as Exhibit 6 to the at
Declaration.
That notification contains a written explanation of the full terms of the
agreement between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney=s Office.
A notification was not
provided to Jane Doe #2 because the agreement limited Epstein=s liability to victims
whom the United States was prepared to name in an indictment.
SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.
Dated:
BRADLEY EDWARDS, ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiffs Jane Does #1 & 2
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
Dated:
By:
ASSISTANT
U.S.
ATTORNEY
DEXTER LEE
Attorney for Defendant United States
EFTA00235270
Document Preview
PDF source document
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
Extracted Information
Document Details
| Filename | EFTA00235266.pdf |
| File Size | 286.6 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 85.0% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 7,095 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-11T11:55:09.760159 |