DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
908 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
5
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
7
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
908 KB
Summary
This legal document details the federal handling of victim notification in the Jeffrey Epstein case in late 2007, specifically around his state plea hearing. It reveals that federal officials, including Villafaña, did not inform new victims of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) because they believed Epstein would still be federally charged. The document also outlines the coordination and communication challenges between the U.S. Attorney's Office and the State Attorney's Office regarding who was responsible for notifying victims for the state court proceedings.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Villafaña |
Mentioned throughout as a key figure who acknowledged not telling new victims about the NPA, reported to supervisors ...
|
|
| Mr. Epstein | Subject of investigation |
The subject of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and state plea hearing discussed in the document.
|
| Acosta | Supervisor |
One of the supervisors to whom Villafaña reported on November 16, 2007.
|
| Sloman | Supervisor |
One of the supervisors to whom Villafaña reported and to whom she provided a draft victim notification letter.
|
| Belohlavek | Assistant State Attorney |
Mentioned as wanting the USAO to notify victims of the state plea hearing, and later telling OPR she did not recall t...
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| FBI | government agency |
Mentioned for its reports of victim interviews and for an FBI Victim Specialist sending a VNS form notice letter.
|
| OPR | government agency |
Office of Professional Responsibility, to whom Villafaña and Belohlavek provided statements.
|
| USAO | government agency |
U.S. Attorney's Office, mentioned in a section heading and in the context of being asked to notify victims of the sta...
|
| State Attorney’s Office | government agency |
The office of Assistant State Attorney Belohlavek, which reportedly wanted the USAO to notify victims.
|
| DOJ-OGR | government agency |
Appears in the footer of the document (DOJ-OGR-00021412), likely referring to the Department of Justice Office of the...
|
Timeline (3 events)
2007-10-12
The FBI Victim Specialist sent a VNS form notice letter to a victim who had been interviewed two days prior.
FBI Victim Specialist
a victim
Relationships (3)
Villafaña reported to Sloman, who was one of her supervisors, and provided him with a draft letter.
The document describes indirect communication and coordination efforts between Villafaña (representing the USAO) and Belohlavek (representing the State Attorney's Office) regarding victim notification for Epstein's state plea hearing.
Key Quotes (7)
"at that point we believed that the NPA was never going to be performed and that we were in fact going to be [charging] Mr. Epstein."Source
— Villafaña
(Explaining why she and case agents did not tell new victims about the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA).)
DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
Quote #1
"there were efforts to make sure that we had identified all victims of the crimes under investigation."Source
— Villafaña
(Stated to OPR regarding her knowledge of efforts to identify victims, despite being unaware the FBI had sent a specific letter.)
DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
Quote #2
"at this point we weren’t actively looking for additional charges,"Source
— Villafaña
(Telling OPR about the status of the investigation after the NPA was signed.)
DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
Quote #3
"the investigation wasn’t technically suspended until he completed all the terms of the NPA."Source
— Villafaña
(Explaining to OPR why the case could still be characterized as 'under investigation' in the FBI letter.)
DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
Quote #4
"[Belohlavek] would still like us to do the victim notifications. The State does not have a procedure (like we do Federally) where the Court has to provide a separate room for victims who want to attend judicial proceedings, so I do not know how many victims will actually want to be present."Source
— Belohlavek (as reported by Villafaña)
(A block quote from Villafaña's report to her supervisors about what she learned from FBI agents regarding Assistant State Attorney Belohlavek's request.)
DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
Quote #5
"would put the victim notification in writing."Source
— Villafaña
(Describing her decision on November 19, 2007, to avoid misconduct accusations from the defense.)
DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
Quote #6
"could not do victim notifications to all of the victims."Source
— Villafaña (describing the state's position)
(In a footnote, explaining her understanding of the state's position that they could not notify all victims because only one or two were involved in their case.)
DOJ-OGR-00021412.jpg
Quote #7
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (3,416 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 77, 06/29/2023, 3536038, Page240 of 258
SA-238
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 238 of 348
SA-238
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 204-3 Filed 04/16/21 Page 238 of 348
NPA.310 The FBI reports of the victim interviews do not mention the NPA or indicate that the victims were asked for their input regarding the resolution of the case. Villafaña acknowledged that she and the case agents did not tell any of the “new” post-NPA-signing victims about the agreement because “at that point we believed that the NPA was never going to be performed and that we were in fact going to be [charging] Mr. Epstein.”
On October 12, 2007, the FBI Victim Specialist sent a VNS form notice letter to a victim the case agents had interviewed two days earlier. This letter was identical to the VNS form notice letter the FBI Victim Specialist sent to other victims before the NPA was signed, describing the case as “under investigation” and requesting the victim’s “patience.” The letter listed the eight CVRA rights, but made no mention of the NPA or the § 2255 provision. Villafaña told OPR she was unaware the FBI sent the letter, but she knew “there were efforts to make sure that we had identified all victims of the crimes under investigation.” In response to OPR’s questions about the accuracy of the FBI letter’s characterization of the case as “under investigation,” Villafaña told OPR that the NPA required Epstein to enter a plea by October 26, 2008, and “at this point we weren’t actively looking for additional charges,” but “the investigation wasn’t technically suspended until he completed all the terms of the NPA.”
D. The USAO Informs the Defense That It Intends to Notify Victims by Letter about Epstein’s State Plea Hearing and the Resolution of the Federal Investigation, but the Defense Strongly Objects to the Notification Plan
In anticipation of Epstein’s state court plea, Villafaña reported on November 16, 2007, to Acosta, Sloman, and other supervisors that she had learned, from FBI agents who met with Assistant State Attorney Belohlavek, that the State Attorney’s Office wanted the USAO to notify victims of the state plea hearing.
[Belohlavek] would still like us to do the victim notifications. The State does not have a procedure (like we do Federally) where the Court has to provide a separate room for victims who want to attend judicial proceedings, so I do not know how many victims will actually want to be present.311
Belohlavek told OPR that she did not recall the conversation referenced by the FBI nor any coordination between her office and federal officials to contact or notify victims about Epstein’s state plea hearing.
On November 19, 2007, Villafaña decided that to avoid any misconduct accusations from the defense about the information given to victims, she “would put the victim notification in writing.” She provided Sloman with a draft victim notification letter, in which among other things,
---
310 Not all the individuals interviewed qualified for inclusion on the victim list. For example, one would not cooperate with investigators; a second claimed to have simply massaged Epstein with no sexual activity; and a third claimed she had no contact with Epstein.
310 Not all the individuals interviewed qualified for inclusion on the victim list. For example, one would not cooperate with investigators; a second claimed to have simply massaged Epstein with no sexual activity; and a third claimed she had no contact with Epstein.
311 Villafaña told OPR that she understood the state took the position that because “there was either only one or two victims involved in their case,” they “could not do victim notifications to all of the victims.”
212
DOJ-OGR-00021412
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document