EFTA00190318

Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
From: 
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) <AVillafana@usa.doj.gov> 
Sent: 
Thursday, June 26, 2008 6:41 PM 
To: 
Brendan White 
Subject: 
RE: Grand Jury Appearance 
Dear Mr. White: 
I have not received any such confirmation. At this time, we are still on for July l a. I recommend that you make 
your travel plans for Monday afternoon or evening and if things change, I will call you right away. 
Thank you. 
A. Marie Villalidia 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
Phone 561 209-1047 
Fax 561 820-8777 
From: Brendan White [mailto:brendan@whiwhi.comj 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:00 PM 
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance 
I've learned from Mr. Epstein's attorney that the plea is scheduled to take place on Monday morning. In understand, of 
course, that you need confirmation of this before withdrawing the subpoena, but it might make logistical sense to consider 
putting the contingent appearance off for another week at this point, to avoid our having to make an unnecessary trip to 
Florida. Although I am confident that things will proceed as scheduled, should there be a problem, we would then be able 
to appear at a later date. 
Brendan White 
 
Original Message 
From: Villafana. Ann Marie C. (USAFLSI 
To: Brendan White 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:55 AM 
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance 
Dear Mr. White: 
If Mr. Epstein enters a guilty plea in accordance with that agreement on Monday, then the subpoena will be 
withdrawn. At this point, I have not received confirmation that the change of plea is going to occur, nor have I 
received information confirming that the lea will be in conformance with our agreement. As such, at this 
time, I still intend to present Ms. 
testimony to the grand jury on Tuesday. With respect to the 
immunity question. I refer you to my e-mail of June 23nd, which is shown below. 
If the situation changes, I will contact you. 
Thank you. 
112 
EFTA00190498

A. Marie Viliafann
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
Phone 561 209-1047 
Fax 561 820-8777 
From: Brendan White [mailto:brendan@whiwhi.corn] 
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:38 AM 
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance 
Dear Ms. Villafana: 
I understand that there has been a recent development with respect to Mr. Epstein in that he intends to plead guilty in 
Florida state court on Monday pursuant to a deferred prosec 
ment with your office that has already been 
executed. Since this would seem to obviate any need for Ms 
to testify, please let me know what is going on 
with respect to this Tuesday. Do we still need to come down t ere an , if so, will she receive court-ordered 
immunity? Thanks. 
Brendan White 
---- Original Message 
From: Villafana. Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
To: Brendan White 
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:09 PM 
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance 
Dear Mr. White: 
Please feel free to make your own travel arrangements, but if you would like Ms 
travel costs to be 
reimbursed, they must be made through the government's approved agency on the approved carriers. 
Regarding the immunity, at this point, without a written proffer from you regarding 
nce of her 
anticipated testimony, I believe that the more prudent course will be to question Ms. 
to determine the 
limits of her Filth Amendment exposure and, if necessary, to apply to the Court at that time. If you provide 
me with a written proffer that summarizes her anticipated testimony and explains how she will be exposed to 
criminal liability, then I can make tic motion ahead of time. Your written statement, would be treated as an 
attorney statement made in the course of confidential plea discussions and related negotiations, and would be 
governed by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(f) and Fed. R. livid. 410. 
A. Marie Villafaila 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
Phone 561 209-1047 
Fax 561 820-8777 
From: Brendan White [mailto:brendan@whIwhi.corn] 
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:45 PM 
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS) 
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance 
113 
EFTA00190499

so
We will be there, and I will make the travel arrangements. I am assuming 
" 
I be done in connection with an 
order of immunity. Please let me know if that is correct so I can advise Ms 
Thanks. 
Brendan White 
 
Original Message ---
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
To: Brendan White 
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS) 
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:27 AM 
Subject: Grand Jury Appearance 
Dear Mr. White: 
Ms 
will need to appear before the grand jury on July 
to give testimony. Please conta 
assistant, lawn Ball, at 561 820-8711, ext. 3037, to make travel arrangements. I expect that Ms. 
testimony will begin either in the late morning or early afternoon, but she should be available fort e w oe 
day. 
Thank you. 
A. Marie Villajafia 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
Phone 561 209-1047 
Fax 561 820-8777 
114 
EFTA00190500

Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
From: 
Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS) <JSIoman@usa.doj.gov> 
Sent: 
Saturday, June 28, 2008 7:38 AM 
To: 
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
Cc: 
Acosta, Alex (USAFLS); Senior, Robert (USAFLS) 
Subject: 
Re: Agreement 
I agree. Ask Jack to make that change. 
 
Original Message 
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS) 
Sent: Fri Jun 27 21:28:46 2008 
Subject: Agreement 
Hi Jeff— Hadn't heard back, so I figured this would be easiest way to communicate. 
21-1/ 
I got a call back from Jack Goldberger, incensed that I was somehow accusing him of trying to get out of the agreement. I was taken 
aback because the response was completely out of line with the questions I was asking. From my dealings with Jack, this just made 
me more suspicious than I was originally. 
Anyhow, Jack said that "this was the only way to do the consecutive jail time." And he "swore" that Epstein would be in custody 24-
hours-a-day during the community confinement portion of the sentence. He also insisted that Epstein had been charged with a 
substantive procurement offense, not attempt. 
lie did, however, let it slip that Epstein would not be at the jail, he would be at the stockade out on the fairgrounds (a low security 
"camp"). Since we specifically discussed this at the meeting with Barry Krishcr months ago that Epstein would be at the Gun Club 
facility (the jail), this certainly violates the spirit of the agreement, if not the letter. 
I talked toM 
Millian, who used to be with the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office before joining our office. She said, 
first, that it was extremely strange to call it the "Palm Beach County Detention Center," rather than the jail, but I explained that I 
thought Epstein's people were trying to make us believe he was going to the jail even though he wasn't and this was their way to 
"finesse" the situation. 
also explained that the normal way for the plea agreement to read is a consecutive term of six months imprisonment to be 
followed by one year of community control — in other words, Goldberger's statement that this was the "only way" to do the 
consecutive sentence is false. I did find a statute that says that if two sentences are imposed consecutively that result in a sentence of 
greater than one year, the jud
posed to send the defendant to a state prison rather than a county facility, so that may be why 
they are wording it this way. 
also said that typically the term "community control" means home confinement, and she has 
never seen imprisonment used as a condition of "community control." She has seen such a condition in connection with a sentence of 
probation, but not community control. 
Also, she and I did a state guideline calculation for Epstein's plea, and, if done correctly, lie should be looking at 51 months. The only 
way that Lanna could avoid that calculation is if she tells the judge that there was no sexual contact. That, of course, would be 
completely false. 
In short, something smells very bad. My suggestion is to ask that we ask them to add one word to the second sentencing paragraph of 
the plea agreement with the state, as follows: the Defendant is sentenced to 18 months Community Control I (one). As a special 
condition of this Community Control, the Defendant must serve the first 6 months INCARCERATED [or IMPRISONED) in the Palm 
Beach County Detention Facility . . . 
If they object to this small change — which according to Goldberger is intended by the language already there — then we will know that 
something is extremely fishy. 
116 
EFTA00190501

What do you think? 
A. Marie Villafafia 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
Phone 561 209-1047 
Fax 561 820-8777 
117 
EFTA00190502

Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
From: 
Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS) <JSIoman@usa.doj.gov> 
Sent: 
Thursday, July 03, 20081:12 PM 
To: 
Villafana, Ann Marie C (USAFLS) 
Cc: 
Acosta, Alex (USAFLS) 
Subject: 
Re: Epstein 
Thanks 
-- Original Message ---
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS) 
Sent: Thu Jul 03 II:36:42 2008 
Subject: Epstein 
Hi Jeff— I just got an earful from the last of the victims' lawyers. He is a former Broward County ASA and he represents three 
victims. He says that his clients can name many more victims and wanted to know if we can get out of the deal. I told him that, at this 
time, assuming that Epstein performs the last piece of the agreement, we are bound. He asked that, if there is the slightest hesitation 
on Epstein's part of completing his performance, that he and his clients be allowed to consult with our office before making a 
decision. 
I also couldn't remember if I told you about our meeting with the Sheriff's Office about the jail. Epstein is out at the stockade, not the 
jail. Goldberger and some psychiatrist have already met with him and have told him that, if he receives any less favorable treatment 
than others, Ken Starr and the whole crew will sue. He also told me that Epstein was "brilliant" and that he has already offered to 
teach GED classes. I sort of cocked my head at the "brilliant" comment and said, you know he only has a high school diploma, 
right? (I used my best, "don't believe the hype" voice. He was clearly shocked, and I explained that Epstein usually claims to have at 
least a master's degree, but other than a few college courses, he had no education above a high school diploma, which I think makes 
him ineligible to teach a GED course.) He also told us that Epstein is eligible for work release and will be placed on work release — in 
direct contradiction to what he told the agents a few months ago. 
A. Marie Villafafla 
Assistant U.S. Attorney 
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
Phone 561 209-1047 
Fax 561 820-8777 
168 
EFTA00190503

Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
From: 
Lee, Dexter (USAFLS) <Dlee@usa.doj.gov> 
Sent: 
Tuesday, July 08, 2008 4:29 PM 
To: 
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) 
Subject: 
FW: Epstein CVRA Case 
Attachments: 
Villafana Declaration re victim notification.wpd; DE1_080707_Petition.pdf 
Marie, 
Can you scan the letters and send them to me by e-mail? Thanks. 
Dexter 
From: Neal, Kristina (USAEO) 
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 4:02 PM 
To: Lee, Dexter (USAFLS) 
Cc: Herd, Kim (USAEO) 
Subject: FW: Epstein CVRA Case 
Good Afternoon. 
Kim and I are taking a look at the petition and affidavit that you sent and were wondering if it would be 
possible for you to send us a copy of the letters that were sent to the victims in this case. The AUSA refers to 
attached copies in her affidavit at #3. 
We are working on this and will respond to you ASAP. 
Thanks. 
Kris Neal 
Kristina Neal 
Attorney Advisor 
LECC/Vie t i lll Witness Staff 
EOUSA 
(202) 305 2538 
From: Lee, Dexter (USAFLS) 
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 1:37 PM 
20 
EFTA00190504

To: Herd, Kim (USAEO) 
Subject: Epstein CVRA Case 
Ms. Herd. 
Attached please find the emergency petition filed yesterday afternoon, and a draft declaration from the 
AUSA. Our response is due on Wednesday, July 9, 20O8, at close of business. 
Thanks for your assistance. 
Dexter Lee 
(305) 961-9320 
«Villafana Declaration re victim notification.wpd» «DE1_080707_Petition.pdf» 
21 
EFTA00190505

DRAFT 
DRAFT 
DRAFT 
DRAFT 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson 
JANE DOE 
1. 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
DECLARATION OF A. MARIE VILLAFAAA 
1, 
I, A. Marie Villafana, do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of 
Florida. 
I graduated from the University of California at Berkeley School of Law (BoaIt .) 
in 1993. 
After serving as a 
judicial clerk to the Hon. David F. Levi in Sacramento, California, I was admitted to practice in California in 1995. 
I also ant 
admitted to practice in all courts of the states of Minnesota and Florida, the Eighth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of 
Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Minnesota, and the Northern District of 
California. 
My bar admission status in California and Minnesota is currently inactive. 
I am currently employed as an 
Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida and was so employed during all of the events described 
herein. 
2. 
I was the Assistant United States Attorney assigned to the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. 
The case was 
investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"). 
The federal investigation was initiated in 2006 at the request of 
the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD") into allegations that Jeffrey Epstein 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 
EFTA00190506

other offenses. 
PRPD had asked for federal assistance after it perceived that Mr. Epstein was receiving preferential treated 
from the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office ("SAO"). 
3. 
Throughout the investigation, when a victim was identified, victim notification letters were provided to her 
both from your Affiant and from the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist. 
Attached hereto are copies of the letters provided to two 
of Bradley Edwards clients, T.M. and C.W.' 
The letter to C.W. was hand-delivered by the FBI agents. 
The letter to T.M. was 
hand-delivered by myself to T.M. at the time that she was interviewed. 
4. 
Throughout the investigation, the F81 agents, the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist, and your Affiant had 
contact with C.W. 
Attorney Edwards other client, T.M., was represented by counsel and, accordingly, all contact with T.M. 
was made through that attorney. 
That attorney was lames Eisenberg, and his fees were paid by Jeffrey Epstein, the target of 
the investigation! 
'Attorney Edwards filed his Motion on behalf of "Jane Doe," without identifying which of 
his clients is the purported victim. Accordingly, I will address facts related to both C.W. and 
T.M. Both of those clients were victims of Jeffrey Epstein's while they were minors beginning 
when they were fifteen years old. 
2.the undersigned does not know when Mr. Edwards began representing T.M. or whether 
T.M. ever formally terminated Mr. Eisenberg's representation. 
-2-
EFTA00190507

S. 
In the summer of 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("the Office") decided 
to enter into negotiations with Epstein to resolve the investigation. 
In September 2007, an agreement was reached. 
Pursuant to that agreement, Epstein was required to enter into negotiations with the SAO to enter into a guilty plea to the 
indictment already pending against him in state court, which charged felony solicitation of prostitution.3 
Epstein also would 
have to convince the State Attorney's Office to file an Information charging him with a more serious offense, that is, an offense 
for which sex offender registration was required, specifically, the procurement of minors to engage in prostitution, and Epstein 
would have to plead guilty to that offense. 
Epstein also would have to negotiate a harsher sentence than the one requested 
by the State Attorney's Office, that is, eighteen months imprisonment, to be followed by twelve months of home confinement. 
Finally, Epstein would have to agree that the victims identified by the United States would be entitled to damages under 
federal law as though Epstein had been convicted at trial. 
This last provision was included at the Office's insistence, to put 
.the victims in the same position that they would have been if Epstein had been convicted at trial. 
6. 
Prior to the final resolution, the agents and your Affiant made contact with several of the victims to advise 
them of this result. 
One of those victims who was contacted was T.M., via her attorney, James Eisenberg. 
Your Affiant 
informed Mr. Eisenberg that T.M. was on a list that would be submitted to Epstein of victims whom the Office had identified as 
being entitled to seek damages against Epstein. 
Your Affiant does not know whether Attorney Eisenberg ever provided this 
information to his client. 
However, less than twenty-four hours after this conversation, and before anyone from the Office 
had communicated the victim list to Epstein, attorneys for Epstein made contact with the Office complaining of the designation 
of T.M. as a victim. 
Epstein's attorneys used the designation of T.M. as a basis to allege prosecutorial misconduct against 
3The indictment contained no reference to the victims' ages. 
-3-
EFTA00190508

your Affiant, the agents, and others in the Office, and to raise those claims throughout the Office and up to the Department of 
Justice in Washington, D.C. 
7. 
After the signing of the deferred prosecution agreement. your Affiant drafted a victim notification letter 
informing each victim of the resolution of the matter, the terms of the Agreement, and the date of the scheduled change of plea 
in state court. 
The Office provided a copy of that letter to Epstein's attorneys, who again complained about improper 
conduct by your Affiant and the agents. 
Epstein's counsel further argued that the CVRA did not apply because the 
proceedings would be held in state court, not federal court. 
The Office agreed to leave the issue of victim notification 
regarding the change of plea hearing to the State Attorney's Office, and your Affiant's letter was never sent to the victims. 
8. 
Following several months of delay by Epstein's counsel, Epstein finally agreed to perform pursuant to the 
terms of the deferred prosecution agreement. 
On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximate 4:15 p.m., your Affiant received a 
copy of the proposed state plea agreement and learned that the plea was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. 
Your Affiant, the agents, and the Palm Beach Police Department all attempted to provide notification to the victims, and your 
Affiant specifically called Attorney Edwards to provide notice to his clients regarding the hearing. Attorney Edwards informed 
your Affiant that he could not attend but that someone would be present at the hearing. 
Your Affiant attended the hearing, 
but none of Attorney Edwards' clients was present. 
-4-
EFTA00190509

I declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 that the foregoing is true 
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 
Executed this 
day of February, 2007. 
A. Marie Villafafia, Esq. 
EFTA00190510

Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Document 1 
Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 Firtaglyi DiD  D.C. 
ELECT R 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
08-80736-Civ-MARRA/JOHNSON 
CASE NO.: 
IN RE: JANE DOE, 
Petitioner. 
JULY 7, 2008 
STEVEN M. LARIMORE 
CLERK U.S• DIST. CT. 
S.D. OF FLA. • MIAMI 
E:ners enc y VICTIM'S PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF 
CRIME VICTIM'S RIGHTS ACT, 18 U.S.0 . SECTION 3771 
COMES NOW the Petitioner, JANE DOE (hereinafter "Petitioner"), by and through her 
undersigned attorneys, pursuant to the Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 
("CVRA"), and files this Petition for Enforcement in the above styled action as follows: 
I. 
Petitioner, an adult, as a minor child was a victim of federal crimes committed by 
JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Defendant"). 
These crimes included sex trafficking of 
children by fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591, use of a means of interstate commerce to 
entice a minor to commit prostitution, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422, as well as wire fraud, in 
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The Defendant committed these crimes within the jurisdiction of 
the Southern District of Florida in Palm Beach County, Florida. 
2. 
Upon information and belief, the Defendant is the subject of a federal criminal 
investigation conducted by the United States of America in the Southern District of Florida. The 
Defendant has recently been prosecuted and pleaded guilty, on June 30, 2008, in the Circuit 
Court for Palm Beach County to various similar state offenses including solicitation of minors 
for prostitution. 
3. 
Upon information and belief, the Defendant is engaged in plea negotiations with 
thc Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida concerning federal 
I W10 
EFTA00190511

Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Document 1 
Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 
Page 2 of 10 
v 
crimes which he is alleged to have committed against minor children, including the Petitioner. 
Such negotiations may likely result in a disposition of the charges in the next several days. 
4. 
Under the CVRA, before any charges are filed against the Defendant, the 
Petitioner has the rights (among others) to notice of her rights under the CVRA, to confer with 
the prosecutors, and to be treated with fairness. As soon as charges are filed, the Petitioner has 
the rights (among others) to timely notice of court proceedings, the right not to be excluded from 
ilich proceedings, the right to be heard at such public proceedings regarding conditions of 
release, any plea, and any sentence, the right to confer with the attorney for the government. the 
right to restitution, and the right to be treated with fairness and with respect for her dignity and 
privacy. 
5. 
The Petitioner has been denied her rights in that she has received no consultation 
with the attorney for the government regarding the possible disposition of the charges, no notice 
of any public court proceedings, no information regarding her right to restitution, and no notice 
of rights under the CVRA, as required under law. 
6. 
The Petitioner is in jeopardy of losing her rights, as described above, if the 
government is able to negotiate a plea or agreement with the Defendant without her participation 
and knowledge. 
WHEREFORE, for the reasons outlined above, the Petitioner respectfully requests this 
Court to grant her Petition, and to order the United States Attorney to comply with the provisions 
of the CVRA prior to and including any plea or other agreement with the Defendant and any 
attendant proceedings. 
2 
20110 
EFTA00190512

Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Document 1 
Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 
Page 3 of 10 
MEMORANDUM 
I. 
THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT MAKES CRIME VICTIMS 
INDEPENDENT 
PARTICIPANTS 
THROUGHOUT 
THE 
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS. 
In October 2004, Congress passed and the President signed into law the Crime Victims' 
Rights Act, Pub. L. No. 108-405, 118 Stat. 2251 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3771). Because this 
appears to be the first case involving the Act to come before this Court, a bit of background may 
be in order. 
A. 
The CVRA Gives Crime Victims Rights to Participate in the Criminal Justice 
Process. 
Congress passed the CVRA "to give crime victims enforceable rights to participate in 
federal criminal proceedings." Opinion at 14. Congress was concerned that in the federal system 
crime victims were "treated as non-participants in a critical event in their lives. They were kept 
in the dark by prosecutors too busy to care enough ... and by a court system that simply did not 
have a place for them." 150 CoNG. REC. S4262 (Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein). 
To remedy this problem, Congress gave victims "the simple right to know what is going on, to 
participate in the process where the information that victims and their families can provide may 
be material and relevant ... ." Id. 
The CVRA gives victims of federal crimes a series of rights, including the right to notice 
of court proceedings, to be heard at plea and sentencing hearings, and to reasonably "confer with 
the attorney for the Government in the case." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a). Victims also have a "right 
of access to the terms of a plea agreement ... ." In re Interested Party 1, 530 F.Supp. 2d 136, 
2008 WL 134233 at *7 (D.D.C. 2008). The CVRA also assures victims broadly that they will 
"be treated with fairness." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(8). 
3 
3 of 10 
EFTA00190513

Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Document 1 
Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 
Page 4 of 10 
isv 
Of course, these rights would be of little use to most crime victims unless they were told 
about them. To ensure that victims are notified of their rights, the CVRA directs employees of 
the Justice Department "and other departments and agencies of the United States engaged in the 
detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime" to use their "best efforts to see that crime 
victims are notified of ... the rights described [in the CVRA]." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1) (emphasis 
added). I 
B. 
The CVRA Gives Victims Rights During the Investigation of a Crime. 
The CVRA gives victims rights during the investigation of a crime. The Fifth Circuit 
recently reached this conclusion, holding: 
The district court acknowledged that "[tJhere are clearly rights 
under the CVRA that apply before any prosecution is underway." 
BP Prods., 2048 WI...501321 at *11,2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12893, 
at *36. Logically, this includes the CVRA's establishment of 
victims' "reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the 
Government." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(5). At least in the posture of 
this case (and we do not speculate on the applicability to other 
situations), the government should have fashioned a reasonable 
way to inform the victims of the likelihood of criminal charges and 
to ascertain the victims' views on the possible details of a plea 
bargain. 
In re Dean, 527 F.3d 391, 394 (51h Cir. 2008). 
The position that CVRA rights apply before charges have been filed is consistent with the 
Justice Department regulations under the CVRA, which explain that government officials "must 
advise a victim [about their rights under the CVRA) ... at the earliest opportunity at which it may 
be done without interfering with an investigation." A.G. GUIDELINES FOR VICTIM AND WITNESS 
I Further supporting this requirement is another statute, 42 U.S.C. § I0607(c)(3), which directs government officials 
to provide victims with "the earliest possible notice of," among other things, "the filing of charges against a 
suspected offender." 
4 
4 *110 
EFTA00190514

Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Document 1 
Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 
Page 5 of 10 
vet 
ASSISTANCE 23 (May 2005). And the plain language of the CVRA undergirds this conclusion, as 
it applies not simply to prosecutors but to government agencies "engaged in the detection [and] 
investigation ... of crime ... ." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1). Indeed, if there were any doubt, the plain 
language of the CVRA extends victims' right to situations "in which no prosecution is 
underway." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(dX3). 
IL 
PETITIONER IS A "VICTIM PROTECTED BY THE CVRA. 
Under the CVRA the crime victim is defined as "a person directly and proximately 
harmed as a result of the commission of a Federal offense ... ." 18 U.S.C. Section 3771(e). 
In 
particular, Defendant called Petitioner when she was a minor over a telephone (a means of 
interstate communication) requesting that she perform a massage in exchange for payment. As 
Defendant well knew, that request was fraudulent, as he not only intended to receive a massage, 
hut also intended to have her perform sexual acts in exchange for a cash payment to Petitioner. 
Only when Petitioner arrived at a Defendant's mansion as directed by Defendant, did Defendant 
reveal his true purpose of obtaining sexual favors in exchange for payment. This conduct 
violated 18 U.S.C. § 2422, which forbids using a means of interstate commerce to knowingly 
"induce" or "entice" a minor "to engage in prostitution." In addition, this conduct was both a use 
of "fraud" to obtain a commercial sex act, in violation of 18 U.S.0 § 1591, and use of wire 
communications to perpetrate a "scheme and artifice to defraud," in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 
1343. 
It appears obvious that Petitioner was "directly and proximately" harmed by these crimes, 
thereby making her a victim under the CVRA. It should be emphasized that the CVRA "was 
designed to be a 'broad and encompassing' statutory victims' bill of rights." United States I. 
5 
Sof TO 
EFTA00190515

Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Document 1 
Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 
Page 6 of 10 
Degenhardt, 405 F.Supp.2d 1341, 1342 (D. Utah 2005) (quoting 150 Cong. Rec. S4261 (daily 
ed. Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein)). Congress intended the CVRA to dramatically 
rework the federal criminal justice system. In the course of construing the CVRA generously, the 
Ninth Circuit observed: "The criminal justice system has long functioned on the assumption that 
crime victims should behave like good Victorian children -- seen but not heard. The Crime 
Victims' Rights Act sought to change this by making victims independent participants in the 
criminal justice process." Kenna'. U.S. Dist. Court for C.D. Cal., 435 F.3d 1011, 1013 (9th Cir. 
2006). 
Accordingly, because the CVRA is remedial legislation, courts should interpret it 
"liberally to facilitate and accomplish its purposes and intent." 
Elliott Industries Ltd. 
Partnership'. BP America Production Co., 407 F.3d 1091, 1118 (10th Cir. 2005) (noting 
remedial legislation should be "interpreted liberally to facilitate and accomplish its purposes and 
intent"). The CVRA itself suggests this conclusion by requiring that courts must treat crime 
victims with "fairness." United States'. Patkar, 2008 WL 233062 at *3 (D. Haw. 2008) (citing 
United States.. Turner, 367 F.Supp.2d 319, 335 (E.D.N.Y. 2005)). 
Not only must the CVRA as a whole be interpreted liberally, but its definition of "crime 
victim" requires a generous construction. After reciting the direct-and-proximate-harm language 
at issue here, one of the Act's two co-sponsors -- Senator Kyl -- explained that "[t]his is an 
intentionally broad definition because all victims of crime deserve to have their rights protected 
150 Cong. Rec. SI 0912 (Oct. 9, 2004) (emphasis added). The description of the victim 
definition as "intentionally broad" was in the course of floor colloquy with the other primary 
sponsor of the CVRA and therefore deserves significant weight. See Kenna, 435 F.3d at 1015-16 
(discussing significance of CVRA sponsors= floor statements). 
6 
ono 
EFTA00190516

Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM 
Document 1 
Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 
Page 7 of 10 
vet 
The definition of "crime victims" must thus be construed broadly in favor of Petitioner. 
She obviously qualifies as a "victim" under the CVRA. 
HI. 
PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TO NOTICE OF HER RIGHTS, AN 
OPPORTUNITY TO CONFER WITH THE PROSECUTORS AND 
TO BE TREATED WITH FAIRNESS. 
Because Petitioner is a "victim" under the CVRA, she has certain protected rights under 
the Act. Most important, the Act promises that she will have an opportunity to "confer with the 
attorney for the Government in the case." To date, Petitioner has not been given that right. This 
raises that very real possibility that the Government may negotiate and conclude a plea agreement 
with the Defendant without giving Petitioner her protected rights.2 
Petitioner is entitled to have this conference with prosecutors before any final plea 
agreement is reached. The Fifth Circuit reached exactly this conclusion in a very recent case. In 
In re Dean, 527 F.3d 391 (5th Cir. 2008), the Government negotiated a plea agreement with the 
well-heeled corporate defendant without conferring with the victims. When the Government's 
failure was challenged in the Fifth Circuit, the Fifth Circuit concluded that the Government had 
indeed violated the CVRA. The Fifth Circuit observed: "In passing the [CVRAJ, Congress 
made the policy decision-which we arc bound to enforce-that the victims have a right to inform 
the plea negotiation process by conferring with prosecutors before a plea agreement is reached." 
Id. at 394. 
This Court is obligated to protect the rights of Petitioner. The CVRA directs that "IiIn 
any court proceeding involving an offense against a crime victim, the court shall ensure that the 
2 On information and belief, roughly the same crimes were committed against several other young females. These 
victims, too, are in danger of losing their right to confer under the CVRA. 
7 
of 10 
EFTA00190517