EPSTEIN
page 3 / 51 . OCR, unverified
United States that included Main Justice, Jeffrey
Epstein entered into a non-prosecution and plea
agreement (“NPA”) with the United States Attorney’s
Office for the Southern District of Florida. (App.24-
38). In return for pleading guilty to state charges in
Florida, receiving and serving an eighteen-month
sentence, and consenting to jurisdiction and liability
for civil suits under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, the United
States agreed not to prosecute Epstein in the Southern
District of Florida for the offenses from 2001-2007
then under investigation. In addition, after lengthy
negotiations, the United States agreed that “[i]n
consideration of Epstein’s agreement to plead guilty
and provide compensation in the manner described
above, if Epstein successfully fulfills all of the terms of
this agreement, the United States also agrees that it
will not institute any criminal charges against any
potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not
limited to [four named individuals].” (App.30-31).
This co-conspirator clause, containing no geographic
limitation on where in the United States it could be
enforced, was actively negotiated at the same time as
the terms of Epstein’s protection for his own criminal
prosecution, which was expressly limited to a bar on
prosecutions in the Southern District of Florida only
(App.26). A previous version of the co-conspirator
language limited it to the Southern District of Florida
before it was amended to refer more broadly to the
“United States,” and the co-conspirator clause was
relocated in the document. (App.95, 108-126). The
NPA also contained an express recitation that it was
not binding on the State Attorney’s office in Florida
(App.30), but it contained no such recitation setting
forth that it was not binding on other United States
Attorney’s offices.
Relying on the NPA, Epstein pleaded guilty in
Florida state court on June 30, 2008, and fulfilled all
his obligations under the NPA.
B. Criminal Proceedings in the District Court.
In July 2019, Epstein was indicted in the Southern
District of New York on charges of sex trafficking and
conspiracy related to conduct in Florida and New York
between 2003 and 2005. The NPA did not pose an
impediment to this indictment because Epstein’s
protection therein had been limited to charges brought
in the Southern District of Florida. Epstein died while
incarcerated on August 10, 2019.
One year later, after Epstein died in jail, Ghislaine
Maxwell was indicted in the Southern District of
New York for her alleged actions as a co-conspirator
of Epstein, on charges that were the same as had
been brought against Epstein. Initially, Maxwell was
charged with crimes in the 1994 to 1997 timeframe,
presumably in an effort to circumvent the time frame
covered by the NPA.
On March 29, 2021, the government added in its
superseding indictment an alleged sex trafficking
offense (Count Six) related to conduct and offenses
wholly within the timeframe and subject matter cov-
ered by the NPA. The sole complainant to the allega-
tions in Count Six had been presented to the Grand
Jury in the Southern District of Florida and her
evidence formed the basis of a conspiracy charge and
a sex trafficking charge in a proposed indictment of
Epstein that was dropped pursuant to the terms of
the NPA. Thus, the complainant’s allegations were
part of those for which Epstein pleaded guilty and
paid restitution, in exchange (in part) for his co-
conspirators to be immune from prosecution.
Maxwell moved to dismiss based on the express
plain language of the NPA which precluded charges by
the United States against any co-conspirator of
Epstein:
In consideration of Epstein’s agreement to
plead guilty and to provide compensation
in the manner described above, if Epstein
successfully fulfills all the terms and condi-
tions of this agreement, the United States also
agrees that it will not institute any criminal
charges against any potential co-conspirators
of Epstein, including but not limited to
[four named individuals]…
(App.30-31) (emphasis added). Alternatively, Maxwell
sought discovery and a hearing to establish affirma-
tive evidence of intent to bind the United States as a
whole.
Maxwell’s motion was denied without a hearing.
Although the district court did not order discovery, it
did order the government to disclose to Maxwell
“any evidence supporting a defense under the NPA.”
The government responded that its review “did not
include search terms relevant to the NPA, and the
Government has not searched [the SDFL prosecutor’s]
inbox for communications relating to the NPA.” It also
stated that it did not intend to request or review
emails for any other USAO-SDFL or Department of
Justice attorney or otherwise perform a comprehen-
sive review of the internal e-mails of that prosecutor’s
office from its wholly separate investigation, including