EFTA00605732

COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 3 
EFTA00605732

Eleventh Circuit rules that discovery can move forward on my Crime Victims' Rights Act... Page 1 of 3 
Print 
Eleventh Circuit rules that discovery 
can move forward on my Crime 
Victims' Rights Act case 
By Paul Cassell Updated: April 21 at 9:41 am 
On Friday the 1 1 th Circuit ruled that discovery can move forward in an important 
Crime Victims' Rights Act case that my co-counsel, Brad Edwards, and I are 
pursuing. The narrow issue before the court was whether prosecutors and defense 
attorneys could assert some sort of "privilege" to prevent crime victims from 
reviewing the correspondence that lead to a plea bargain. More broadly, the ruling 
means that the victims will have a chance to return to the district court and seek to 
invalidate a plea agreement that (we alleged) was consummated in violation of their 
rights. I hope that the case will ultimately set an important precedent that federal 
prosecutors can't keep victims in the dark about the plea deals that they reach. 
Here are the important facts, taken from the 11th Circuit's opinion: The case arose in 
2006, the FBI began investigating allegations that wealthy investor Jeffrey Epstein 
had sexually abused dozens and dozens of minor girls. The U.S. Attorney's Office for 
the Southern District of Florida accepted Epstein's case for prosecution, and the FBI 
issued victim notification letters to my two clients, minors Jane Doe No. I and Jane 
Doe No. 2, in June and August 2007. Extensive plea negotiations ensued between the 
prosecutors and Epstein. On Sept. 24, 2007, the prosecutors entered into a non-
prosecution agreement with Epstein in which they agreed not to file any federal 
charges against Epstein in exchange for his guilty plea to minor Florida offenses (e.g., 
solicitation of prostitution). Not only did the prosecutors neglect to confer with the 
victims before they entered into the agreement with Epstein, they also concealed its 
existence for at least nine months. For example, the prosecutors sent post-agreement 
letters to the victims reporting that the "case is currently under investigation" and 
explaining that "R]his can be a lengthy process and we request your continued 
patience while we conduct a thorough investigation." 
On June 27, 2008, the prosecutors informed my co-counsel, Brad Edwards that 
Epstein planned to plead guilty to the Florida charges three days later. But the 
prosecutors failed to disclose that Epstein's pleas to those state charges arose from his 
federal non-prosecution agreement and that the pleas would bar a federal prosecution. 
As a result, the victims did not attend the state court proceedings. 
On July 7, 2008, Edwards and I filed a petition alleging that Jane Doe No. 1 was a 
victim of federal sex crimes committed by Epstein and that the United States had 
wrongfully excluded her from plea negotiations. We also alleged that the federal 
prosecutors had violated her rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) — 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/04/21/eleventh-circuit-r... 5/2/2014 
EFTA00605733

Eleventh Circuit rules that discovery can move forward on my Crime Victims' Rights Act... Page 2 of 3 
specifically her rights to confer with the government, to be treated with fairness, to 
receive timely notice of relevant court proceedings, and to receive information about 
restitution. The United States responded by claiming that it used its "best efforts" to 
comply with the rights afforded to victims under the CVRA, but that the act did not 
apply to pre-indictment negotiations with potential federal defendants. 
After Jane Doe No. 2 joined the initial petition, the district court (Main, J.) found 
that both women qualified as "crime victims" under the CVRA. The district court 
later rejected the government's argument that the act only applies after the filing of a 
federal criminal indictment. (I've written a law review article about the issue of how 
early crime victims' rights attach in the criminal process, which can be downloaded 
here.) 
Among other relief, we sought rescission of the non-prosecution agreement as a 
remedy for the violation of the victims' rights. To make the case for such a remedy, 
we moved for discovery of the correspondence between the U.S. and Epstein's 
attorneys during the plea negotiations. Epstein's attorneys intervened, arguing that 
Federal Rule of Evidence 410 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 create a 
privilege for plea negotiations, barring release of the correspondence. They also 
argued that the court should find that the materials were protected under the work 
product doctrine or, alternatively, should be protected under a new "common-law 
privilege for plea negotiations." 
The district court first ruled that rescission of the plea agreement was a possible 
remedy under the act. The court then ruled that we were entitled to review the 
correspondence, rejecting all of Epstein's arguments. 
On Friday, the llth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that we could review 
the plea correspondence. At pp. 18-22 of its published opinion, the court concluded 
that there was no basis for restricting access to such correspondence when crime 
victims have a legitimate need to review it. The court rejected, for example, the work 
product argument because plea discussions are not confidential: 
Disclosure of work-product materials to an adversary waives the work-product 
privilege. See, e.g., In re Chrysler Motors Corp. Overnight Evaluation Program 
Litig., 860 F.2d 844, 846 (8th Cir. 1988); In re Doe, 662 F.2d 1073, 1081-82 (4th Cir. 
1981). Even if it shared the common goal of reaching a quick settlement, the United 
States was undoubtedly adverse to Epstein during its investigation of him for federal 
offenses, and the intervenors' disclosure of their work product waived any claim of 
privilege.. . . 
The court also declined to recognize a new privilege for plea bargaining, finding the 
relationship between prosecutors and defense attorneys did not need special 
protection: 
As a last-ditch effort, the intervenors contend that "[i]f more is needed in addition to 
the plain language of Rule 410 to preclude disclosure of the correspondence to 
plaintiffs, it can be found in the conjunction of Rule 410, the work-product privilege, 
and the Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel in the plea 
bargaining process," but this novel argument fails too. As explained above, Rule 410 
5/2/2014 
EFTA00605734

Eleventh Circuit rules that discovery can move forward on my Crime Victims' Rights Act... Page 3 of 3 
does not create a privilege and the intervenors waived any work-product privilege. 
The intervenors concede too that the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment had 
not yet attached when the correspondence was exchanged. Lumley v. City of Dade 
City, Fla., 327 F.3d 1186, 1195 (11th Cir. 2003) ("[T]he Sixth Amendment right to 
counsel ordinarily does not arise until there is a formal commitment by the 
government to prosecute," such as a "formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, 
information, or arraignment."). The "conjunctive" power of three false claims of 
privilege does not rescue the correspondence from disclosure.... 
The Supreme Court has identified several considerations relevant to whether a court 
should recognize an evidentiary privilege—the needs of the public, whether the 
privilege is rooted in the imperative for confidence and trust, the evidentiary benefit 
of the denial of the privilege, and any consensus among the states, Jaffee v. Redmond, 
518 U.S. 1, 10-15 (1996)—but none of these considerations weighs in favor of 
recognizing a new privilege to prevent discovery of the plea negotiations. Although 
plea negotiations are vital to the functioning of the criminal justice system, a 
prosecutor and target of a criminal investigation do not enjoy a relationship of 
confidence and trust when they negotiate. Their adversarial relationship, unlike the 
confidential relationship of a doctor and patient or attorney and client, warrants no 
privilege beyond the terms of Rule 410. See Jaffee, 518 U.S. at 10. But the victims 
would enjoy an evidentiary benefit from the disclosure of plea negotiations to prove 
whether the United States violated their rights under the Act. 
Moving forward, this case raises the important issue of what kinds of remedies are 
available for violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Our complaint alleges that, 
prodded by Epstein, the federal prosecutors deliberately concealed the sweetheart 
plea deal they had reached with him to avoid public criticism of the deal. 1 am 
hopeful that in future district court proceedings, we will be able to prove that clear 
violation of the CVRA and then obtain the remedy of invalidating the illegally-
negotiated plea deal. 
O The Washington Post Company 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/04/21/eleventh-circuit-r... 5/2/2014 
EFTA00605735

Appeals court rules against sex offender I 
Page 1 of 3 
Follow us on 
Friday May 2.2014 356 I. 
Subscnbe Today's paper I Customer care 
Sign In I Register 
F3Pagh Da Hi NPVIS 
the shiny sheet 
Posted- 12 00 a.m. Monday. April 21. 2014 
Appeals court rules against sex offender 
Attorneys for underage victims seek to overturn 'sweetheart plea.' 
Related 
By Michele Dargan 
Daily News Staff Writer 
Underage victims of billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are entitled to correspondence between federal prosecutors and 
Epstein's attorneys related to his sweetheart plea deal, a federal appeals court ruled Friday. 
This is one more step in the fight by victims' attorneys Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell to overturn the secret deal. which 
saved Epstein from facing serious federal charges and serving significant prison time. 
If Epstein had been found guilty on federal charges, statutory penalties ranged from 10 years to life in prison. 
Instead, the sealed pact was part and parcel of Epstein's acceptance of a state plea deal. Epstein pleaded guilty to 
soliciting a minor for prostitution and soliciting prostitution. He received an 18-month sentence. in a vacant wing of the Palm 
Beach County Stockade, and was lel out on work release six days a week for up to 16 hours a day. 
Edwards and Cassell represent Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2, who say the U.S. Attorney's Office violated the Crime 
Victims' Rights Act by signing the federal non-prosecution agreement in 2007 without notifying the victims Their case is 
pending in U.S. District Court in Wesl Palm Beach. 
The 24-page published opinion says U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra did not err in his June 2013 ruling, when he ordered 
the correspondence turned over to the victims. 
"Sweetheart plea' 
`We're now going to get a complete picture of the negotiations that led to this sweetheart plea arrangement.' said Cassell, a 
former federal judge. 'We think it will show the part of the discussion to keep the victims n the dark about what was 
happening. If that's what the correspondence shows, we'll use that as part of our argument for throwing out the plea' 
Cassell said he anticipates that 500 pages of correspondence should be released early this week. 
The opinion by the three-judge panel ruled against Epstein's arguments that the correspondence was protected by an 
attorney's work-product privilege. The court says privilege was waived when attorneys voluntariy sent the correspondence 
to federal prosecutors during negotiations. 
'Disclosure of work-product materials to an adversary waives the work-product privilege; the ruling says. 
hnp:/Avww.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/news/local/appeals-court-rules-against-sex-offe... 5/2/2014 
EFTA00605736

Appeals court rules against sex offender I 
Page 2 of 3 
The ruling also dismissed Epstein's claims that a federal rule of evidence protects his plea correspondence. That rule 
applies only to defendants who withdraw a guilty plea. Because he pleaded guilty, that doesn't apply, the ruling says. 
'While respectful of the panel's decision, given issues of overriding importance to the criminal justice system regarding the 
need for continued confidentiality for communications between defense lawyers and prosecutors, we wil be petitioning the 
court of appeals for further review,' said Boston based attorney Martin Weinberg. who represents Epstein. 
The U.S. Attorneys Office failed to notify victims prior to striking a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein on Sept. 24, 
2007, and didn't tell them of the agreement's existence for at least nine months, the ruling says. 
On June 27, 2008, the U.S. Attorney's Office told the victims that Epstein planned to plead guilty to state charges three 
days later. But federal prosecutors failed to disclose that his pleas to the state charges arose from his federal non-
prosecution agreement and would bar federal charges. 
Jane Does No. 1 and No. 2. who were. respectively, 12 and 13 at the time they were victimized,received confidential 
monetary settlements in civil cases. 
They are among more than two dozen underage girls who filed lawsuits or settled claims against Epstein. All alleged they 
were lured to his Palm Beach mansion to give him sexually charged massages and/or sex in exchange for money. 
•A well-connected billionaire got away with molesting many girls' Edwards said. •These girls should at least know how and 
why he was able to get away with these crimes. This ruling wdl allow us access to the documents that will provide Insight 
into how that happened. I suspect that the answers revealed by these documents will ultimately allow us to invalidate that 
agreement and permit prosecution of Mr. Epstein' 
More News 
We Recommend 
From Around the Web 
• Appeals-court decision in Epstein case rights a 
terrible wrong (Palm Beach Daily News) 
• Memorial service set for former 'Daily News' 
reporter (Palm Beach Daily News) 
• Ernest S. Johnston Jr. (Palm Beach Daily News) 
• Choosing plants? There's always something new 
(Palm Beach Daily News) 
• Slate restripes Royal Palm intersections (Palm 
Beach Daily News) 
• Eunice Penny" Jacobs (Palm Beach Daly 
News) 
Comments 
If you would like to post a comment please Sign In or Register 
Cancel I Edit comment 
2 Comment(s) 
Comment(%) 1-2 of 2 
• Bad Neighborhoods: How to Read the Warning 
Signs Before You Move in (reallor.com) 
• The 5 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. (AARP) 
• Stunning Photos Of Leonardo DiCaprio's For 
Sale Home (Lonny Magazine) 
• Rosie O'Donnell is Buying Olivia Newton-John's 
Florida Estate For $5.8 Million... See The 
Pictures (Lonny) 
• Andy Griffith's Widow to Raze His Home (AARP) 
• Supermodel Held Klum's Kid Is Growing Up 
Gorgeous (StyleBislro) 
• Posted by THEPALMBEACHERI at 3:02 p.m. Apr. 21, 2014 
• Report Abuse 
Its inconceivable to see articles like this!' USUALLY, one gets charged with statutory rape, child molestation, etc., and its 
Guaranteed that they will do prison time.. Now, If your a "BILLIONAIRE*. you can BUY yourself freedom, and throw money 
to the victims and say adiosl!!! Its OBVIOUS, payments, kickbacks, DONATIONS, financial promises are al part of this 
deal.. Where is the JUSTICE SYSTEM? Where is the State Attorney, The JUDGES? People go to jail for petty thefts, illegal 
drugs, assault, battery, domestic violence, but this case is PROOF that the LEGAL system can be BOUGHT for the right 
price!!! Its OBVIOUS this individual has a severe mental problem, a sexual predator, who would ship young girls like human 
trafficking back and forth via his private jets.. Its no different than "THE BACKPAGE" girls being exploded by their pimps 
5/2/2014 
EFTA00605737

Appeals court rules against sex offender I 
Page 3 of 3 
being housed in cheap motels along federal hwy for GUY LIKE THIS to get their sexual perversions satisfied!! Read the 
entire case and see that young girls flowed thru Palm Beach South Ocean Blvd and South County Rd ,to his El Brillo 
"MANSION OF PERVERSION" with this guy as its Master!! For people to think "Palm Beach" has the "Elite', the -Upper 
Crust" of society, it also is home to some of the worst thieves, sexual predators, financial criminals the world has ever 
known!! Mr Epstein has Billions of Dollars. and can afford the Best Criminal Attorneys, yet Can't or WON'T get Professional 
Menial Help with his sexual desires and fascination with young girls. And the Court systems goes along with him!!! 
Unbelievable.. 
• Posted by Adios at 3:12 p.m. Apr. 22.2014 
• Report Abuse 
I agree with the post by the palm bleacher. This guy is a pery and needs to sit out of society. When listening to his 
depositions, he pretended to be insulted by the questions being asked of him and his lawyer shut it down quickly. What 
remains to be seen is if the soon to be released files will bear the fruit we all hope it does. My worry is that the tracks wiU be 
covered and he will not get his due. 
His opinion of himself allows him to think he did nothing wrong and these BABIES he molested were not of his place in 
society and were simply objects to be thrown away. What would he think d someone did that to his BABIES if he has any? I 
can bet that the full force of his money would work against whomever played with his kids 
bloody gross! 
2 Comment(s) 
Comment(s) 1-2 of 2 
p=recruemediallc&type=gif&segmentr 848add=true 
. <img height="1" width="1" src="http://segments.adap.tv!data/? 
5/2/2014 
EFTA00605738

Victims win right to see negotiations that led to 'lenient' plea agreement for billionaire sex... Page 1 of 3 
20140421,0,6594687.story 
Sun Sentinel 
Victims win right to see negotiations that led to 'lenient' plea 
agreement for billionaire sex offender 
Latest in legal saga involving Jeffrey Epstein, 61, financier convicted of procuring 
minor for prostitution 
By Brett Clarkson, Sun Sentinel 
7:43 PM EDT, April 21, 2014 
Did a Palm Beach billionaire being investigated for having sex with young girls use his 
wealth to negotiate a lenient and secret agreement that saw him avoid federal 
prosecution? 
advertisement 
Attorneys for two victims, known only as Jane Doe 1 and 2, may soon get an answer thanks to an 
appeals court ruling against financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, 61. 
The ruling, issued Friday, orders federal authorities to disclose the correspondence that took place 
between Epstein's attorneys and federal prosecutors when they were negotiating a 2007 agreement, 
which allowed him to escape federal prosecution if he pleaded guilty to state charges that carried a 
lesser penalty. 
"We're trying to figure out if Epstein used his political connections and great wealth to secure this 
kind of arrangement, that was unheard of, frankly, if you look at these charges," said Paul Cassell, an 
attorney for the women. 
Epstein is a native New Yorker who according to media reports built a huge fortune as a money 
manager and owns several properties including a primary residence in Manhattan, a Palm Beach 
mansion and his own island in the Caribbean. At one point he counted among his friends former 
President Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and other high-powered figures. 
The appeal court decision described the background of Epstein's case, stating that in 2006, the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation "began investigating allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had sexually abused 
several minor girls." 
In September 2007, federal prosecutors struck the non-prosecution deal with Epstein, but didn't tell 
the victims, court filings say. 
"Not only did the United States neglect to confer with the victims before it entered into the agreement 
with Epstein, it also failed to notify them of its existence for at least nine months," Circuit Judge 
William H. Pryor wrote in the appeals court decision. 
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-jeffrey-epstein-federal-court-of-appeals-2... 5/2/2014 
EFTA00605739

Victims win right to see negotiations that led to 'lenient' plea agreement for billionaire sex... Page 2 of 3 
In June 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to a state charge of procuring a person under the age of 18 for 
prostitution and was sentenced to 18 months in prison. He spent 13 months behind bars, and is 
registered as a sex offender in Florida. 
The situation also resulted in civil suits being filed against Epstein, who according to media reports 
settled claims from about two dozen young women who alleged he paid them for sexual massages at 
his Palm Beach mansion, some as young as 14, according to media reports. 
To the attorneys who represent the Jane Does 1 and 2, the sentence was much lighter than the years, 
or possibly decades, that Epstein could've spent behind bars had he been prosecuted in the federal 
system. 
They're hoping that the correspondence, ordered released by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, 
will shed light on what they say is an unusually lenient deal. 
"I can say that I've been teaching criminal law for more than two decades and I have never seen a plea 
agreement as lenient as this one, for hands-on sex offenders," said Cassell, who is based in Salt Lake 
City. 
But one of Epstein's attorney's, Martin Weinberg, based in Boston, disputed those characterizations. 
Weinberg said Monday that the plea agreement was "reached in good faith" and that "it's not a fair 
conclusion" to describe the agreement as either improper or tainted by Epstein's wealth. 
"It's Mr. Cassell's hope that this correspondence may support that theory, but the reality is that the 
U.S. Attorney's Office made a responsible judgment in how to implement the law," Weinberg said. 
Weinberg said he was concerned about the potential impact the ruling would have on the ability of 
criminal defense attorneys and prosecutors to communicate confidentially. 
He also said he and Epstein co-counsel, Miami criminal defense attorney Roy Black, will ask the 
Atlanta-based appeals court to review the decision. 
As for the Jane Does, who are now over 18, it's just the latest development in a long legal saga, 
another one of their attorneys said. 
"They're pretty numb at this point to favorable news because they've heard this before and nothing's 
happened," said Fort Lauderdale attorney Brad Edwards. 
Edwards and Cassel said their goal is to have Epstein's plea agreement deemed to be in violation of 
federal victims' rights legislation and invalidated. Edwards said Epstein should face a new 
prosecution. 
Edwards also said he was first told by the U.S. Attorney's Office that he would receive the 
correspondence documents on Monday, but was then told that they weren't ready yet. Cassell said the 
documents number 500 pages. 
In an email, Annette Castillo, spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of 
Florida, said the office couldn't comment. 
bsclarksotatribune.com 561-243-6609 or Twitter ®BrettClarkson._ 
5/2/2014 
EFTA00605740

Victims win right to see negotiations that led to 'lenient' plea agreement for billionaire sex... Page 3 of 3 
Copyright O 2014, South Florida Sun-Sentinel 
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-jeffrey-epstein-federal-court-of-appeals-2... 5/2/2014 
EFTA00605741

5/2/2014 
Appellate ruling could force feds to reccnsider sex charo es... I 
Help 
84° 
11:8? 
L74' 
© Friday, May 2,2014 
The Palm Beach PostREAL NEWS STARTS HERE 
Sign Out 
[ Search Site 
HONE I NEWS 
—1C 
0 
03 
.0 
0 
0 
IL. 
forPmthSerrerl 
Resize text A 
A 
A 
Appellate ruling could force feds to reconsider sex charges against Palm 
Beacher Epstein 
Posted. 925 pin Monday. April 21. 2014 
BY DAPHNE DURET - PALM BEACH POST STAFF WRITER 
A federal appellate court has moved two young victims of billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein a step closer 
to wiping out a plea deal that prosecutors made behind their backs. 
Thellth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the underage victims were entitled to see all 
correspondence between federal prosecutors and Epstein's lawyers regarding a secret 2007 plea deal that 
kept Epstein from federal charges in exchange for an 18-month work-release sentence in state prison. 
The plea negotiations took place as Epstein litigated a series of now-settled civil claims surrounding 
allegations that he had sex in his Palm Beach mansion with dozens of underage girls. 
The two victims who are seeking the documents are not identified in court documents. They were 12 and 13 at 
http/Awm.neipalmbeachpoSicem/ne...sinews/appellele-ruling-cadd-forceleds.lo-recceolder-se/ntrtynci& pep intetnallink nbpl:pmitatonbok feb2014_99cda 
tie 
EFTA00605742

92/2014 
Appellant ruling could force fees to reconsider sex charges. I 
the time of their liaisons with Epstein. who pleaded guilty to two prostitution solicitation charges. The girls 
reached an out-of-court settlement with him. 
In ruling that the correspondence should be public, the appellate court authorized the release of more than 
500 pages of documents. The victims' lawyers would use the documents to prove that, by keeping the 
agreement secret, prosecutors violated a federal act aimed at protecting victims' rights. 
A win in that battle could invalidate Epstein's agreement with federal prosecutors, allowing them to 
reconsider criminal charges, but this time with input from the victims. 
Epstein's lawyers argued that the correspondence constituted confidential plea negotiations and therefore 
should not be shared with the victims' lawyers. 
"Although plea negotiations are vital to the functioning of the criminal justice system, a prosecutor and target 
of a criminal investigation do not enjoy a relationship of confidence and trust when they negotiate." the 
appellate justices wrote, calling the prosecutor-defense attorney relationship adversarial. 
They upheld a 2013 ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth Marra. He ordered the release of all the plea 
documents, but only federal prosecutors complied. 
The victims' attorneys. Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell, have called the ruling a victory for the rights of victims 
to be heard, even in cases like Epstein's, where federal prosecutors ultimately never filed charges. The victims 
were unaware of the plea agreement until three days before Epstein pleaded to the state charges in June 2008. 
A federal deal had been in place for nine months by then. 
Had prosecutors filed charges and negotiated a plea with Epstein in federal court, they would be barred from 
seeking any additional punishment against him. But because his plea agreement to a sex solicitation charge 
came in state court, federal prosecutors theoretically could charge him again. 
Still, Epstein's lawyers could argue that the only reason he agreed to the state sentence was because he 
believed it would free him of the federal charges for good. Edwards said Epstein's attorneys have made parts 
of those arguments in pretrial hearings, and he expects them to appeal Friday's ruling. Epstein's Boston-
based attorney. Martin Weinberg. told the Palm Beach Daily News he would appeal. 
"While respectful of the panel's decision, given issues of overriding importance to the criminal justice system 
regarding the need for continued confidentiality for communications between defense lawyers and 
prosecutors, we will be petitioning the court of appeals for further review," Weinberg told the paper. 
Invalidating Epstein's plea would force federal prosecutors to meet with the alleged victims to hear their 
comments on whether to pursue charges against Epstein. They still could decline. 
"You can't force the federal government to prosecute anyone." Edwards said. "But we're hoping that if maybe 
htte./Nomospairrbeachpost.conYneesInees/appellate-ruhng-caid-forcefedelereconsider-serelvincidspibp internallink romtpinvitatiortox feb2014_99cda 
2/6 
EFTA00605743

52/2014 
Am elia° Wing cadd bye fads b reconsider sex chafe es . I 
we get some new eyes on the case and the circumstances are different, things will change." 
In this Section 
Palm Beach CountySheriffs Office offers salute to 16 fallen in the line of duty over the decades 
\77) 
j't 
kJ? 
Free movie at Boy ton's Dewey Park on Friday 
Boynton Beach officers stop to investigate Camaro. witness theft of BMW; pursuit ends In crash 
Greenacres single-family home development moving forward 
Our Economy. Gardens complex lands 3 sizeable businesses 
Morning commute on 195, turnpike clear of crashes from Boca to Vero 
And out how to work on the Riviera Beach marina development 
Royal Palm Beach Publix sells Fantasy 5 ticket now worth more than $111K 
Sun, rain today and mostly rain Saturday in Palm Beach County. TCoast 
3 NYPD officers arrested in separate gun incidents 
PREVIOUS: 
NEXT: 
LOCAL 
OPINION 
Tequesta crash sends seven people to 
Commentary: Has GM pulled a Pinto? 
hospitals 
Popular on 
All Comments (o) 
Post a Comment 
COMMENTS 
Post comment 
http:lMmw.rnwelnbeacrposlcmYne sinews/appekale-rolirg-coulddace-reds-larecomider-se/nfily cid•pbp irdernallink rrwl:cirnitationtcoc feb2014_99cda 
3/6 
EFTA00605744