Thursday, July 11, 2019

Alexander Acosta Is A Liar!

Examining Acosta’s Claims on the Epstein Prosecution

R. Alexander Acosta, the labor secretary, defended his handling of a sex crimes case against the financier Jeffrey Epstein over a decade ago. 

The labor secretary, R. Alexander Acosta, rebuffed calls for his resignation by Democrats, who criticized his decision as a prosecutor in 2008 to accept a lenient sentence for the financier Jeffrey Epstein.





At a news conference in Washington, R. Alexander Acosta, the labor secretary and a former United States attorney in Florida, on Wednesday gave his account of how federal prosecutors dealt with allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had abused young women and girls, a case first handled by state prosecutors. Here’s how his version of events stacks up against what we know.
What Mr. Acosta Said
“Simply put, the Palm Beach state attorney’s office was ready to let Epstein walk free, no jail time, nothing.”
Prosecutors who worked with Mr. Acosta said that the federal case presented them with legal challenges that made the matter more suited to a state court. Federal laws, they said, would have required the United States attorney’s office to prove that Mr. Epstein, a financier, crossed state lines with the intent to commit the acts.

Nonetheless, federal prosecutors had legal firepower and resources not available to a local prosecutor. That was especially important for a case that presented such complex legal and logistical challenges, involved a large number of victims — up to 40 at the time of the deal — and the prospect of facing the best defense lawyers and private investigators Mr. Epstein’s money could buy. Local law enforcement officials and the F.B.I. referred the case to Mr. Acosta, in part because they feared Mr. Epstein would face no more than a single state charge related to prostitution, which warranted a fine and no jail time.

Investigators involved in the case were hoping Mr. Acosta could pursue a case that would impose a more substantial penalty on Mr. Epstein. The outcome negotiated by Mr. Acosta’s office was a plea deal with state prosecutors on two prostitution charges that led Mr. Epstein to serve 13 months in the Palm Beach County jail and be registered as a sex offender. During his sentence, he was permitted to participate in a work-release program that allowed him to go to his office six days a week for 12 hours a day. 



Barry Krischer, the former top prosecutor for Palm Beach County, said on Wednesday that Mr. Acosta was trying to “rewrite history” by suggesting that state prosecutors were going to be even more lenient toward Mr. Epstein.

“I can emphatically state that Mr. Acosta’s recollection of this matter is completely wrong,” Mr. Krischer said in a statement. “Federal prosecutors do not take a back seat to state prosecutors. That’s not how the system works in the real world.”

If Mr. Acosta believed the state deal was so terrible, he should have filed a federal indictment instead of conducting “secret negotiations,” Mr. Krischer said.
What Mr. Acosta Said
“She talks about the challenges faced, she talks about the victims being scared and traumatized, refusing to testify, and how some victims actually exonerated Epstein. Most had significant concerns about their identities being revealed. The acts that they had faced were horrible and they didn’t want people to know about them.”
Mr. Acosta was referring to a federal prosecutor on his staff and the possibility that victims might not be willing to testify against Mr. Epstein. Adam Horowitz, a lawyer who represented some of the victims, said that Mr. Acosta’s arguments at the news conference were disingenuous.
He said that the young women were scared to testify, but that it was because the prosecutors had terrified them.


“The prosecutors were saying, ‘These defense lawyers are going to go through your whole personal life, dig up your bad acts and your sex life. When they heard that from prosecutors, sure, they were intimidated,” Mr. Horowitz said. “They kept saying, ‘Are you sure you want to do this?’”

Eventually, after years and under different circumstances, many of the victims did talk — to a Miami Herald reporter — telling the paper that they were dissatisfied with the efforts of Mr. Acosta’s office. 

In a pool of victims so large, it is inevitable that some of them will resist going through to trial, said Spencer Kuvin, a lawyer for three of the victims. But two of his three clients gave depositions and were “willing and ready” to testify, he said.
What Mr. Acosta Said
“We believe that we proceeded appropriately, that based on the evidence and not just my opinion but I have shared the affidavit. Based on the evidence, there was value to getting a guilty plea and having him register.”
It is impossible to know how members of a jury might have responded to the evidence if it had been presented to them in a federal trial — or whether efforts by Mr. Epstein’s team to pressure the victims or intimidate prosecutors would have worked. But Mr. Acosta’s decision to accept a plea deal was widely — but not universally — supported by his own team at the time.
A. Marie Villafaña, the lead prosecutor in the case and one of the few women in Mr. Acosta’s leadership team, pushed him to bring charges even if it risked losing in court. She was eventually overruled, and helped Mr. Acosta work out the logistics of the plea deal.
What Mr. Acosta Said
“When it was finally clear that Epstein would comply with the agreement, she talks about how she made efforts to notify the victims, how that was a Friday afternoon at 4:15 and that she learned that the state had scheduled the plea for 8:30 the following Monday. And she talks about how over the weekend, she made every effort to notify the victims at that time.”
Mr. Acosta was referring to efforts by Ms. Villafaña to reach the victims. His office began directly negotiating a plea agreement with Mr. Epstein’s lawyers in August 2007, according to The Miami Herald. They reached an agreement on Sept. 24 of that year, but talks continued until June 2008, when Mr. Epstein pleaded guilty in court.

From the time the F.B.I. began investigating Mr. Epstein in 2006 to Sept. 24, 2007, Mr. Acosta’s office “never conferred with the victims” or informed them that such an agreement was under consideration, a 2019 federal court ruling shows. The ruling notes that Mr. Epstein’s lawyers sought assurances that the victims would be kept in the dark.



Mr. Acosta cited an affidavit from Ms. Villafaña, who stated that she did not notify victims because she was worried about negotiations over a provision that would allow the victims to obtain monetary damages. She said she was concerned that Mr. Epstein’s lawyers would undermine the credibility of the victims if negotiations fell through and the case went to trial.

Even after the agreement was reached with Mr. Epstein, the prosecutors kept the details from victims.
The victims received letters from the F.B.I. in January 2008 informing them that the case was still under investigation, but not disclosing the agreement. Six months later, a lawyer for the victims, Bradley Edwards, met with a prosecutor to discuss the case — again, the agreement was left unmentioned.

On June 27, 2008, Mr. Edwards was informed that Mr. Epstein would plead guilty in court, but was not told that the state plea would be the resolution to the federal case. Mr. Horowitz said nobody reached out to any of his seven clients before Mr. Epstein pleaded guilty on June 30, 2008. And Mr. Kuvin said that lawyers had to fight in court for months to learn the details of the deal.
What Mr. Acosta Said
“The meeting that was alleged was a breakfast meeting that took place after the agreement was negotiated, not before. The agreement was signed in September.”
Mr. Acosta is correct that the meeting he had with Jay Lefkowitz, one of Mr. Epstein’s lawyers, took place about two weeks after the plea agreement was reached in September 2007. It is less clear what they discussed.

In a letter to Mr. Acosta, Mr. Lefkowitz noted the meeting took place on Oct. 12, 2007, and thanked Mr. Acosta for his “commitment” to not contact any victims or witnesses.

After the meeting, Mr. Epstein’s lawyers continued to negotiate an addendum and objected repeatedly to notifying the victims.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/10/us/politics/acosta-epstein-fact-check.html


5 comments:

  1. Mr. Ross Perot
    (two-time USA Presidential candidate) said:


    “Israel is a beacon in its part of the world
    in terms of its democratic government.

    It is a role model to the others there…”

    SOURCE: Remembering Ross Perot’s
    relationship with Israel and the American Jewish
    community
    by Jackson Richman, 2019 July 10
    www.jns.org/remembering-ross-perots-relationship-with-israel-and-the-amreican-jewish-community/

    ===================================

    Lord Ian Livingston of England said:

    “Whilst the Israeli Defense Forces are not
    perfect, the obsession of focusing on them
    despite being the most moral and professional
    army in the Middle East is very strange.”

    SOURCE: Ten Baroness Tonge
    Pilloried at House of Lords Session She Initiated
    on Israel’s Treatment of Palestinian Children

    by Benjamin Kerstein, 2019 July 8
    www.algemeiner.com/2019/07/08/itiated-on-israels-treatment-of-palestinian-children/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Shmuckie Schumer6:54 PM, July 11, 2019

    It's geshmak for us Democrats to beat up on Acosta right now but as soon as Epstein starts singing mit chazzonus on his co-conspirators like Bill Clinton, we will have to find a distraction!

    Nancy Pelosi should keep quiet instead of Tweeting the other day how painful it's gonna be when big Democratic names start hitting the fan!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm sure that authorities in Florida just took a page from the Charlie Hynes sefer hashkofos that they wanted to spare the so called "victims" from further agony despite all the tawdry tales they had been spinning.

    I'm just not sure why Cy Vantz & the NYPD are going to farentfer for their own cover up in NY including the scandal just revealed today of Epstein never reporting to his parole officer. But I'm sure they also have a gutta terutz!

    I am aghast that even some yeshivaleit are giving any credibility to the rumors, but they wonder how Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of Robert Maxwell, birth name Leiby Hoch, was shafting zoynos for him, including pre-teens. Well, even if there was any truth to such disgusting speculation, none of Maxwell's kinder are apparently Yidden according to halacha, unless that is there was some kind of quickie conversion by Lookstein.

    I just don't understand where the nosei b'oil im chaveiro has gone. Even Victoria's Secret billionaire Les Wexner has abandoned Jeffrey (& Shmuely Boteach has the nerve to tell me that's still his favorite gesheft!).

    The one yochid out there with a hartz, billionaire Leon Black, is the only mentch left who is still being mekarev Jeffrey.

    Yetzt farshtait men why Yudel Shain, who he & UOJ think they are on similar crusades, has been criticizing R' Leon:

    http://yudelstake.blogspot.com/2019/04/lakewood-chometz-after-pesach.html

    The Fresh Market supermarket chain in NJ & many other States is owned by the slippery billionaire Leon Black who is probably no longer shomer Shabbos.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Nadler

    Black's shvogger is that shvantz Nadler who tried to be mevayesh R' Malkiel over Grama's sefer

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_M._Black

    Black's father was the YU rabbi Eli Blachowitz who had a shul in Woodmere before leaving the rabbonus for a get-rich-quick scheme.

    Treif is the new Black? said...
    A yungerman tells me he called the OU about suspected mislabeling at Black's gesheften which the OU investigated & confirmed to him a few months ago that the store label product takka carried an unauthorized OU. But the OU hasn't been mefarsem this on their alerts. Could this be because there is protekzia for YU valedictorian Rabbi Blachowitz or for Nadler attacking BMG & trying to get all their government funding pulled? Or is the OU just afraid that they might get dropped for another shady, money grubbing organizatzya like Star K?

    In another inyan that did make it to OU alerts, they say that goji berries "may be" infested & give instructions how to be (supposedly) boidek, a bee that their base of moderner & andera fressers can still enjoy alla taynugim.

    OU Eyepopper said...
    1:52 pm is azoy excited!!!

    But it's zicher letoyeless about Black because many people don't realize that a Yid is baal habus of that supermarket chain through the investment fund listed as the official owner.

    And the OU-YU chevra of all people have a history with the Blacks so they should know better than anyone that it is no davar pushet to get involved with him.

    Black's fund also owned Empire Kosher poultry at one point. Black cleverly lured J.W. Childs into buying Empire just as Rubashkin started slashing prices which almost put Empire under the ground.

    As far as the ex-Woodmere rabbi father, who the NY Times unwittingly reported in 1975 was possibly no longer himself shomer Shabbos, despite that & the fraud scandal and that he sent zein zun Leon to the goyishe Fieldston School in Riverdale, YU's Dokter Rabbiner Samuel Belkin shockingly still spoke of him as a chusheve Yid.

    The grandfather Bentzion Blachowitz was a shoichet on the Lower East Side.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Leopold Margulies10:59 PM, July 11, 2019

    Avi batchi,

    Takka geferrrlich vus UOJ prrrobirrrt tze bashmitzen dee yingerrrman Epshteen azoy vee errr hut gemacht a gantze cheerrrben mit tayerrra Yidi Kolko.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm the REAL victim of the #MeToo tekufa

    By the way, does anyone know of any new kiddie water parks that've opened up?

    ReplyDelete