Palm Beach billionaire Jeffrey Epstein could face new criminal
charges if lawyers for his alleged former teen “sex slaves” succeed in
an unusual effort to overturn a 2008 plea deal that gave him house
arrest, despite accusations he pimped the girls out to his rich and
powerful friends.
Attorneys for two of the 30 girls Epstein, 63,
allegedly prostituted on his private jet, in his Florida mansion and at
his private island hideaway are attempting to open up - and potentially
overturn - the government’s secretive agreement with Epstein that
critics say left him with just a slap on the wrist for pleading guilty
to soliciting an underage girl for prostitution.
If they succeed, many of Epstein’s powerful friends could find themselves in the public spotlight.
“This is absolutely a groundbreaking case,” said Meg
Garvin, executive director at the Oregon-based National Crime Victim Law
Institute. “The victims are fighting to truly make victims’ rights
meaningful – to ensure that victims are informed and have a voice at
every critical decision point.”
Florida attorney Brad Edwards and retired federal
judge Paul Cassel filed the civil case against the federal government in
U.S. District Court in Southern Florida in 2008, claiming federal
prosecutors conspired with Epstein to keep the details of the plea deal
under wraps in violation of the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act.
Epstein reached financial settlements with both
women, who are now 28. Their current suit is against the Department of
Justice, and a federal judge has only recently ordered the two sides to
intensify settlement negotiations.
By law, the women cannot receive financial damages
from the government, but they are seeking "fundamental changes" to the
justice system, Edwards said.
Edwards said the women still hope that federal
prosecutors, or a judge, will consider invalidating Epstein's
non-prosecution agreement and consider filing criminal charges against
him. They could also seek an apology from prosecutors or fines against
the U.S. Justice Department which could benefit a crime victims' group,
Edwards said.
“This legal challenge is incredibly unusual -- I have
never heard of this happening before,” said John Malcolm, a former
prosecutor in the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division, now
director of the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal
and Judicial Studies.
The investigation of Epstein and the plea deal that followed was a complicated matter involving multiple jurisdictions.
The Palm Beach Police Department opened an
investigation into Epstein in 2005 after parents of a 14-year-old girl
claimed the girl gave Epstein a “massage” at his Palm Beach estate for
money. A subsequent investigation by the FBI allegedly found Epstein had
paid at least 30 underage girls for sex.
The girls told police they were molested at Epstein’s
$6.8 million Palm Beach mansion beginning in 1998 “regularly on a daily
basis, and in most instances, several times a day,” according to court
records. Girls claimed they were paid between $200 and $300 for each
visit with Epstein.
A subsequent investigation by the FBI allegedly found
Epstein had paid at least 30 girls ages 14 to 17 to “engage in illegal
sexual activities.” That probe resulted in an 82-page prosecution
memorandum and a 53-page indictment against Epstein and his female staff
members. Although he was the target of state and federal
investigations, it was state prosecutors who ultimately hatched the plea
deal.
Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 to one count of
prostitution with a minor, registered as a sex offender, and spent 13
months in prison and home detention.
Under state and federal law, victims have a right to
be present and “reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the
district court involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole
proceeding.” Not only did the alleged victims not attend hearings
regarding Epstein’s plea deal, key evidence assembled by authorities has
remained sealed, Edwards said.
None of the parties would comment on the ongoing mediation.
“The government deliberately kept crime victims ‘in
the dark’ so that it could enter into a plea arrangement designed to
prevent the victims from raising any objection,” Edwards argued in court
documents.
Those familiar with the criminal case against Epstein
say the plea deal was extraordinarily lenient, and some suspect his
friendship with powerful allies played a role.
One powerful friend of Epstein is former President
Bill Clinton, who FoxNews.com first reported took 26 trips around the
world aboard Epstein’s Boeing 727, dismissing his Secret Service detail
for five of the trips.
Virginia Roberts, who claims that at age 15 she was a
“sex slave” for Epstein and his friends, and is one of the plaintiffs
in the ongoing civil case against the federal government, claims the
plane was outfitted with a bedroom for orgies, earning it the name
“Lolita Express.”
“Epstein required me to describe the sexual events
that I had with these men, presumably so that he could potentially
blackmail them,” Roberts said in an affidavit filed with the court.
“Based on my knowledge of Epstein and his organization, as well as
discussions with the FBI, it is my belief that federal prosecutors
likely possess videotapes and photographic images of me as an underage
girl having sex with Epstein and some of his powerful friends.”
One key piece of evidence from Epstein’s case was
released last week by the Forida State Attorney General’s Office: a
one-hour video showing the Oct. 20, 2005, search of his mansion. The
video captured numerous salacious photos of young girls, some totally
nude, as well as a photo of a child around 5 years old bending over in a
short dress, adorning his walls.
Other Epstein items documented in the police video
include a small stuffed teddy bear by his bedside, a professional dental
chair and drill set in his bathroom, and Epstein in a photo standing
next to a Catholic pope, but not shown are the hidden cameras found on
his property.
Whether more evidence comes out now depends on the current lawsuit.
Kenneth Lawson, co-director of the Hawaii Innocence
Project and faculty member at University of Hawaii Law School, believes
the lawsuit has merit.
“The victims’ attorneys are alleging the government
conspired with the defendant’s attorneys to circumvent their rights,”
Lawson said. “This flies in the face of the Crime Victims Rights Act,
and it shows bad faith on both parties -- the defendant’s attorneys and
the government attorneys.”