Home      Login


It Takes a Village to Build an International Sex Trafficking Business  


Author:  Roslyn Myers, Ph.D., J.D..


Source: Volume 14, Number 02, Fall 2021 , pp.63-71(9)




Family & Intimate Partner Violence Quarterly

< previous article |next article > |return to table of contents

Abstract: 

In April 2020, the Eleventh Circuit denied relief under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act to Jeffrey Epstein’s victims. They sought to have the F.B.I. documents about Epstein released and to hold a public hearing on Epstein’s criminal case in Florida. The plaintiffs petitioned the Eleventh Circuit to order the district court to grant victims remedies that might include rolling back “the NPA’s immunity provisions, holding a public hearing on the case, release of documents, and an award of attorneys’ fees.” Wild and her co-plaintiff based their case on the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), which gives victims the right to timely notice of any public court proceeding involving the crime; the right to be heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving pleas or sentencing; and the right to confer with the attorney for the government in the case. Among other things, if the court had applied the CVRA, it could have voided the plea deal’s immunity provisions that protected Epstein and his alleged accomplices. The negative ruling was one disappointment in the 12-year legal battle by Courtney Wild, who was underage when Epstein sexually abused her, to get the cooperation of the federal government following Epstein’s sweetheart plea deal in Florida in 2008. Along with another victim, Wild sued the U.S. Attorney for failing to inform about and consult with victims regarding the plea agreement, as required under the CVRA, which reduced Epstein’s potential sentence of life imprisonment to 13 months in a private wing of the Palm Beach County jail. The appeals court held that the CVRA was not triggered because the government did not commence criminal proceedings against Epstein. The court acknowledged that Epstein’s victims were “affirmatively misled by government lawyers,” but victims’ rights under the CVRA “do not attach until criminal proceedings have been initiated against a defendant, either by complaint, information, or indictment.” The court wrote that their ruling was not “a result we like, but it’s the result we think the law requires.” This article reviews the opinion, which is being appealed, and traces the web of relationships Epstein is known to have used in his elaborate sex procurement scheme, with citations to primary sources.

Keywords: In Re Courtney Wild; Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA); Jeffrey Epstein

Affiliations:  1: Editor, Sex Offender Law Report.

Subscribers click here to open full text in PDF.
Non-subscribers click here to purchase this article. $23

< previous article |next article > |return to table of contents