- This video was made
possible by Tab for a Cause. Raise money for charity
just by opening tabs, which you were going to do anyway. Link in the description. It sounds like the synopsis for an episode of Law & Order SVU. A billionaire financier is
arrested for human trafficking in New York after the
FBI uncovers evidence that he lured underage girls to his house where they were molested, assaulted, and worse by the billionaire,
and his famous pals. The public is shocked that the
billionaire was investigated for the same conduct 15 years ago, and got away with everything. The billionaire happens to
have a little black book containing the contact
information for those powerful people in America, including former, and current presidents. This is not in fact an episode of SVU. This is real life. Let's look into the multiple prosecutions of Jeffrey Epstein. (upbeat jaunty jingle) Hey, legal eagles, it's
time to think like a lawyer, and today we are gonna
talk about Jeffrey Epstein, who is under indictment again
for potential sex trafficking. Jeffrey Epstein is a billionaire
financier who is friends, and associates with several rich, and powerful people including
President Donald Trump, who once called Epstein, a quote, "terrific guy who likes
beautiful women as much as I do, "and many of them are
on the younger side." Epstein has been investigated
repeatedly for trafficking children who were then forced
to have sex with Epstein, and his famous friends. There's evidence that the
president may have known about, or have seen red flags
associated with Epstein, and that president Trump's
now former labor secretary helped cover up some of these crimes. Now before I go too much further, a quick disclaimer about
indictments versus convictions. It is far too easy to assume
that someone who is indicted of a crime is guilty of
the underlying offense. Too often that is not the case, and everyone in America is
entitled to a fair hearing, so we should look at facts
as they are disclosed to the public with a grain
of salt, and with skepticism. Here, there is both a pending indictment as well as a plea deal
that covered at least some of this alleged conduct. So there's less of a potential issue in this particular case, because some of the facts
have been admitted to, but it's still important to recognize that people who have been
indicted are not guilty until proven beyond a reasonable
doubt in a court of law. So with that understanding, let's first define what we
mean by human sex trafficking. The Justice for Victims of
Trafficking Act of 2015, or JTA defines sex
trafficking as recruiting, harboring, transporting,
providing, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of an individual
through the means of force, fraud, or coercion for the
purpose of commercial sex. However, it is not necessary
to demonstrate force, fraud, or coercion in
sex trafficking cases involving children under the age of 18. The term commercial sex act
is defined as any sex act on account of which
anything of value is given, or received by any person. It is illegal to have sex with
someone who is under-aged. I probably don't need to explain that, but in this day, and age it's better to be safe than sorry. So keep that in mind when
you hear some of the offenses that refer to allegations of consent. Children cannot consent to the acts that Epstein has allegedly committed. So the allegations, and admissions relevant here
are broken up into two phases. The first is in the early 2000s. In 2005 a 14 year old girl, and her parents told Palm Beach,
Florida police detectives, that Jeffrey Epstein had paid
her, and a classmate for sex. The Palm Beach Police Department started investigating Epstein for soliciting underage
girls for prostitution. They alleged that
Epstein's two assistants, Haley Robson, and Sarah Kellen
would recruit teenage girls to give Epstein massages in the bedroom of his Palm Beach mansion. Once inside the house, Epstein would order the
girls to strip naked, and he would assault them
during, and after the massage. The Palm Beach Police did trash pulls where they went through his garbage, and found trash with the girl's names, and cell phone numbers on it. Epstein's assistant actually telephoned one of the victims while
she was talking to police. As the police investigation continued, more victims were identified. The police promptly issued
a probable cause affidavit, which normally is all that's needed to arrest a person in Florida, but in a highly unusual move, the district attorney's office referred the charges to
a grand jury instead. The local prosecutors
only presented evidence that Epstein assaulted one of the girls, and they failed to ask
the jury to indict Epstein for having sex with a minor. Instead, Epstein was indicted for solicitation of prostitution, which is a much less serious charge. Epstein's legal team swooped
in to negotiate a plea deal that would have allowed Epstein to enter into a pretrial
diversion program, and served no jail time. In other words, the local
prosecutors were being pressured to just give Epstein a slap on the wrist. The Palm Beach police were not
happy with this negotiation, and they referred the case to the FBI, which opened a case file
on Epstein for activities with underage victims in Florida,
New York, and New Mexico. A 53 page federal indictment was prepared, but not filed with the
Florida district court. At the same time, Epstein's lawyers were
negotiating a plea deal with the U.S. attorney in Miami, Alex Acosta, who later became president
Trump's labor secretary. At the time, Epstein's lawyers
included Alan Dershowitz, and Ken Star among other
legal stall boards. Dershowitz is most famous
for defending OJ Simpson. While Star was the independent prosecutor who investigated Bill Clinton for having an affair with Monica Lewinsky. Later Star became president, and chancellor at Baylor University. Allegedly during the negotiation, Star was working overtime for Epstein. Star told Alex Acosta again, the U.S. attorney for Miami at the time, that his client would not agree to being classified as a sex offender, which is normally mandatory
for anyone convicted of a sex offense. Star also objected to an
addendum to the agreement that said that the victims would be able to sue for compensation. Star worked his connections
in the Department of Justice to request a review of the agreement. The review went on for more than a year, and during this time the
FBI continued to investigate starting up more victims, and more evidence against Epstein. The FBI's new allegations
included information showing that Epstein preyed on runaways
as young as 13 years old, paying them for nude
massages that led to sex. The investigation apparently
revealed how Epstein preyed on poor children
using his assistance to find vulnerable teen girls who they then paid to recruit other teens. Of course, minors cannot
legally consent to sex. All in all, investigators turned up at
least 80 under age victims. Importantly, prosecutors also
found that some of the girls were given work with a
Manhattan modeling agency, while they were also living in an apartment owned by Epstein. While a new indictment was prepared, prosecutors reported
that Epstein's lawyers had been harassing the victims. However, Acosta was firmly in
charge of the negotiations, and agreed to give Epstein what can only be called
the plea deal of a century. So let's talk about this
non-prosecution agreement. Epstein pleaded guilty to a single count of solicitation of prostitution, and a single count of
prostitution with a minor under the age of 18. The court sentenced him
to 18 months in jail, and adjudicated him as a
convicted sex offender. The agreement granted Epstein, and incredibly his unindicted
co-conspirators immunity from federal charges. This is unbelievably unusual. You don't give pleased to
people that you haven't named in an indictment. The federal non-prosecution agreement was also marked by other things
that were highly irregular, and borderline unethical. For example, Epstein's
somehow managed to remove his computers from his main residence before the FBI was able
to search the house. Secondly, although subpoenas were prepared for the computer records, law enforcement never
required Epstein to comply with any of the subpoenas, and finally, although
the plea negotiations typically include several
Department of Justice lawyers, allegedly Acosta met
with Epstein's lawyers one-on-one without any
backup from the DOJ. The end result was a highly unusual, some would say disastrous
non-prosecution agreement that would only be made public
more than 10 years later. In exchange for Epstein's guilty pleas to Florida's criminal
solicitation charges, the Department of Justice
agreed not to pursue criminal charges against Epstein for all of the other allegations. Acosta used his authority
to lead prosecutors to drop all other investigations
into Epstein's conduct. Further, it appears that Acosta
agree to hide the agreement from the victims, and other
witnesses in this case. He granted Epstein's,
unindicted co-conspirators, and employees blanket
immunity from prosecution. Some of these people were named, and some were completely anonymous. Acosta also canceled the subpoenas, which is highly problematic. From the time the FBI
started investigating to the time of the agreement was struck, the victims were never notified about a potential
non-prosecution agreement, nor were they ever told
that it was a possibility. In possibly the most unbelievable
fact of this entire case is that after the agreement was signed, the government lawyers led by Acosta started negotiating on
whether the government would even comply with the Crime
Victims Right Act, or CVRA. The purpose of the CVRA is to keep victims in the
loop about the investigation, and prosecution of criminal defendants. Certain victims have a right to know what's going on with
the federal prosecution, and it appears that both the DOJ lawyers, and Epstein's lawyers knew that there was a
compliance requirement. However, one of Epstein's
lawyers wrote an email directing Acosta not to
have anyone from his office reach out to the victims in any way. After this email, Acosta
then went out for breakfast with the Epstein lawyer where he promised that the government would not in fact contact the victims. The agreement also gave
Epstein unprecedented control over whether the victims
could sue him in civil court. The agreement stipulated
that Epstein's attorneys would be permitted to
select the civil lawyers for each victim, and an Epstein would pay those lawyers, and that he would not contest liability. The whole purpose of these agreements was to prevent any of the
information from becoming public. Acosta also allowed
Epstein to stipulate that paying off the victims was not an admission of guilt whatsoever. Acosta also agreed that if
anyone requested public records under the state, or Federal
Freedom of Information Acts, the government would notify Epstein before making the required disclosures. Thus, the deal made sure
that Epstein's lawyers were always completely
informed of what was going on, while the victims were
completely in the dark, Epstein wasn't put in jail
in the traditional sense. He spent his nights in a Florida jail, but during the day he was on work release where his private driver
picked him up each day, and drove him to his office downtown where Epstein was able
to visit with friends, and colleagues for 12 hours a day. Meanwhile, the victims
were waging a legal battle to have the plea agreement unsealed. Epstein was released from jail
five months early in 2009. Although Epstein's probation
prohibited him from travel, the Miami Herald reports that Epstein regularly traveled between
Florida, Manhattan, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. I probably don't need to tell you that this is highly irregular. If any other criminal
defendant had done this, they would have been sentenced
for a probation violation, but Epstein continued life unscathed, even hanging out around
the beach in Florida when he was supposed to be at the office. Epstein's probation officer
said it was fine for Epstein to walk around the beach when
he was supposed to be at work. He was allowed to get some exercise according to the probation officer. Additionally, Epstein failed
to register as a sex offender as required by the plea deal, which again, if any other
criminal defendant had done that, they would have been subject
to a probation violation. By late 2009 dozens of victims had filed civil lawsuits against Epstein. Meanwhile, Epstein's ex
butler, Alfredo Rodriguez, had possession of
Epstein's little black book of important people, and tried to sell it to enrich himself. Rodriguez was charged with
obstruction of justice for not giving the black book to police. He served federal prison
time, and died in 2015. Now, convicted sex offenders
are required to register in any jurisdiction where they live. Enter Manhattan district
attorney Cy Vance. You may have heard of Cy Vance
for his questionable handling of high-profile sexual assault cases, including allegations
against Harvey Weinstein. But in 2010 a prosecutor
from Vance's office appeared in New York State Court to argue that Epstein's
sex offender classification should be reduced to a lower level so that he would have more freedom. I've never heard of this happening before. Prosecutors are not in the
habit of telling judges to help sex offenders get
a lower classification to crimes they have already
admitted to committing. Just listen to what the judge had to say. Quote, "I have never seen
the prosecutor's office "do anything like this. "I have done many cases, much
less troubling than this one, "where prosecutors would never "make a downward argument like this." Vance's office claims that one prosecutor made a rookie mistake, and that he didn't even know
that Epstein was appearing in New York court to argue about his sex
offender classification, but that probably doesn't
make a whole lot of sense. By this point in 2010
Epstein was a billionaire whose escapades had received
considerable press attention. Epstein tried to rehabilitate
his image in 2011, and 2012 by donating large sums of money, and waging a PR campaign. However, in 2012 a woman
named Virginia Roberts alleged that she was forced
to have sex with lawyer Alan Dershowitz, and Prince Andrew, although victims, and alleged victims continued to file civil lawsuits, and fight for the Florida
indictment to be unsealed, in 2016 Donald Trump
was elected president. His connections to Epstein
made mild headlines in June of 2016 when a woman going by the name of Katie Johnson said that the president had raped her at a party at Epstein's mansion in 1994, when she was 13 years old at the time. Trump, and Epstein deny those allegations, and the lawsuit never went anywhere. Because 11 days before
the election in 2016 Johnson dropped her lawsuit alleging that she had been threatened. Around the same time, shortly
after the inauguration, president Trump nominated Alex Acosta to lead the Department of Labor. Although lawmakers
briefly questioned Acosta about the Epstein affair,
Acosta was confirmed. Flash forward to today. In 2019, victims finally won
an important court battle. The 2006 Florida indictment was unsealed, revealing publicly for the first time, how deeply involved in human trafficking Epstein appeared to be. Victims also won their lawsuit
alleging that Acosta's office had violated the Crime Victims Rights Act by failing to notify them. Under the CVRA victims have a right to be reasonably protected
from their assailants, to be notified of any
public court hearings in a timely fashion, to be informed in a timely
manner of any plea bargain, or deferred prosecution agreement, and to speak at any court
hearing involving a plea deal, or sentencing. Several victims sued in federal
court alleging that Acosta, and the DOJ had failed to follow this law by keeping them in the dark about how the case with
Epstein had progressed. Now, under the CVRA, a victim may make a
motion to reopen a plea, or sentence only if the
victim has asserted the right to be heard before, or during
the proceeding at issue, and such right was denied, the victim petitions the court of appeals for writ of Mandamus within 14 days, and in a case of a plea, the accused has not pled to
the highest offense charged. The Federal District Court
judge ruled the prosecutors had violated the CVR by not
letting the more than 30 identified victims know of the deal so that they could have
a chance to oppose it. The judge rule that the government gave deliberately misleading
information to victims, and promised Epstein's lawyers not to notify the
victims of the plea deal. The judge rule that the government led the victims to believe
that the investigation, and prosecution was ongoing, when in fact the
agreement had been signed, and Epstein had already been sentenced. However, the judge did
not reopen the plea deal. Instead, he gave the
Department of Justice 15 days to come up with a settlement proposal. The DOJ argue that there was nothing wrong with how Acosta handled the case. It's against this legal backdrop that prosecutors in New York are taking aim at Epstein once again, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York charged Epstein recently
with child sex trafficking in violation of 18 U.S.C 1591, which outlaws sex trafficking activities that affect interstate,
or foreign commerce. The new indictment refers back to the allegations in Florida, New York, and New Mexico that were the subject of the earlier agreement, and now, although those events happened between 2002, and 2006, there was no longer a
statute of limitations for child trafficking cases. The statute of limitations
was originally five years, but before Epstein's statute
of limitations had run, lawmakers changed the rule so that there was no longer
a statute of limitations for these particular cases, which means that Epstein
will not be protected by any effective statute of limitations. Now, whether Epstein's original
plea deal will protect him, and give him immunity is
a bit of an open question. Normal practice is to
include a clause saying, and only binds the local
U.S. Attorney's Office, which signed the agreement, not any of the other
U.S. Attorney's Offices, which may seek to press charges, but the plea agreement drafted by Acosta does not include this clause. This is of course, incredibly
unusual, and highly irregular, although Epstein's lawyers
will surely try to argue from this broad language that the entire federal justice system
cannot prosecute Epstein for the conduct occurring in
Florida in the early 2000s, there's other language
in the plea agreement, which more specifically
says the prosecution cannot take place in a
specific federal district. If this particular plea
agreement is litigated, it's very likely that a
judge would find in favor of the Department of Justice, and find that this plea
agreement does not bind every other U.S. district. Epstein's alleged crimes
took place in New York as well as Florida, so federal prosecutors
in the New York district probably have the right
to prosecute Epstein for the conduct that
occurred in that district. As for concerns that
prosecution on old allegations violate the double jeopardy
clause of the U.S. constitution, the new indictment
apparently includes crimes which were not charged in the older case, including Epstein bringing
victims across state lines. There are also new factual allegations against Epstein as well. When the government searched
Epstein's New York home, they allegedly seized
hundreds of photographs of nude under range girls. The photos were kept on several CDs, with labels such as girl picks nude. That's something that's so on the nose, you're not even going to
see that in an episode of Law & Order SVU, but that's what happens
when a criminal defendant thinks that they are
immune from prosecution for the rest of their lives. So what happens next? Well, there are a number
of unanswered questions. The first of which is
what's going to happen to Jeffrey Epstein in the new prosecution in the southern district of New York. Will the courts allow the old plea deal to provide any kind of immunity, or will they just simply throw it out? Additionally, we don't
know what the remedy for a violation of the CVRA is. Does that undo the plea agreement itself? Meanwhile, Acosta has
argued that the evidence wasn't particularly strong at the time, and that the Miami
prosecutors had said that if the DOJ didn't get an
admission of guilt from Epstein, that the prosecutors were simply
going to let Epstein walk. So having the DOJ get the
plea agreement that they did with jail time was better
than nothing at all. But one thing is for certain, Alex Acosta is now out of a job after a press conference where
he heaps blame on victims, and local Miami prosecutors for the Epstein non-prosecution agreement. - Simply put, the Palm Beach
State Attorney's Office was ready to let Epstein walk free. No jail time, nothing. Without the work of our prosecutors, Epstein would have gotten away
with just that state charge, and as to message the victims, the message is you need to come forward. - The writing was on the
wall, and Acosta had to go, Acosta resigned and President
Trump defended him, stating-- - Do you know what I know about Alex? He was a great student at Harvard. He's Hispanic, which I so admire, because maybe it was a
little tougher for him, and maybe not, but he did an unbelievable
job as the Secretary of Labor. That's what I know about him. I know one thing, he did a great job,
and until this came up, there was never an out the
problem with this very good man. - What? Today there is no witty
remark, or pithy segway. When I cover stories like these, it makes me want to do as much good for as many people as possible. If this video leaves you wanting to do some good in this world, I'd recommend Tab for a Cause, which lets you raise money for charity just by opening up tabs,
and browsing the Internet, which you were going to do anyway. Tab for a Cause is a
Google Chrome Extension that allows you to pick
the charity of your choice, and then every time you open up a new tab, instead of there being a blank page, it displays a beautiful
new customizable tab with a couple of tiny ads. The money that you generate is
then donated to your charity. The gorgeous new tab is customizable. And my favorite option is
that it shows you how much you are generating for
each specific charity. After you've opened up a tab, or two, you can then choose the actual charity you want the money to go to. It's like a game, except you are actually changing
the world that you live in. There's absolutely no charge to you, and it makes a positive
difference in this world. Tab for a Cause users like you have raised hundreds of thousands
of dollars for charity. It is the easiest possible
way to donate to charity, and make the world a better place. So just click the link in the description, and download the extension, and do some good by doing what
you were going to do anyway. Do agree with my analysis? Didn't Acosta handle things correctly, or was he right to resign his post? Leave your objections in the comments, and check out this link over here with all of my other real law reviews where I cover everything that is going on in the world
from a legal perspective. So click on the playlist, and I'll see you in court.
This is a reminder about the rules of /r/media_criticism:
All posts require a submission statement. We encourage users to report submissions without submission statements. Posts without a submission statement will be removed after an hour.
Be respectful at all times. Disrespectful comments are grounds for immediate ban without warning.
All posts must be related to the media. This is not a news subreddit.
"Good" examples of media are strongly encouraged! Please designate them with a [GOOD] tag
Posts and comments from new accounts and low comment-karma accounts are disallowed.
Please visit our Wiki for more detailed rules.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Submission Statement:
Good overview of the Epstein case, the lawyer provides good background information, describes the legal aspects of the situation.
You don't get detailed analysis of this sort on your regular news network.