Newly released documents expose severe flaws in 2006 Jeffrey Epstein case handling. What went wrong?
Palm Beach Post's 2019 lawsuit findings expose the flawed legal proceedings with two female victims in Jeffrey Epstein's 2006 indictment.
The notorious paedophile and sexual offender Jeffrey Epstein case that began in Palm Beach County in 2006 could end there as well. But the Palm Beach Post filed a lawsuit in 2019 to explain why it didn’t happen, citing confidential documents that reveal what happened 18 years ago when Epstein was charged with a single count of prostitution
In 2006, as a Palm Beach County prosecutor presented the case against Epstein to a grand jury, he asked one of the teen victims who testified if he realized he had “committed a crime,” according to the Palm Beach Post lawsuit disclosed in confidential text By the public.
The judges's release of the 150 pages of transcripts came as a surprise. Circuit Judge Luis Delgado ordered the release of this following Florida Governor Ron Desantis' bill sign.
“The details in the record will be outrageous to decent people. The testimony taken by the Grand Jury concerns activity ranging from grossly unacceptable to rape — all of the conduct at issue is sexually deviant, disgusting, and criminal,” Delgado wrote.
The Palm Beach Post's lawsuit stems from the findings of an investigation in 2019, which found then-Palm Beach County State's Attorney Barry Krisher ruined his case against Epstein in 2006. State prosecutor's letters regularly revealed that Krischer's office never interviewed any of the victims. Moreover, once Epstein's celebrity defence attorneys arrived in town, Kreischer's office stopped regular contact with police.
Delgado called Epstein “the most infamous pedophile in American history” in his order.
Why were Epstein’s victims treated harshly by the 2006 grand jury?
The newly released documents shed light on the legal process: Epstein was indicted on a single charge despite the seriousness of the charges. The documents miss a grand jury process that seemed to prosecute the victims more than expose Epstein.
The grand jury members, assistant prosecutors Lanna Belohlavec and Mary Ann Duggan, mirrored the accusatory tone, their questions sounding more sarcastic than probing
One juror asked the girl, “Do you have any idea, deep down inside of you, that you — what you’re doing is wrong?” The girl replied, “Yeah. I did.”
The juror then pressed, “Have you set the goals to not do it anymore?”
“Yes.”
When asked, “And you’re well aware that — what you’re doing to your own reputation?” to which the girl replied, “Yes. I do.”
“You’re aware that you committed a crime?” Belohlavek went on asking.
“Now I am.”
The manner in which questions were asked was aimed at painting the victims as liars and generally unsavoury characters instead of offenders or victims of Epstein’s alleged crimes.
ALSO READ| Judge releases transcripts of 2006 grand jury investigation of Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking
Jeffrey Epstein's 2008 plea deal resurfaces
In 2008, following a grand jury investigation, the notorious paedophile struck a deal with South Florida federal prosecutors. This agreement spared him from more serious federal charges and instead led to guilty pleas on state charges of procuring a minor for prostitution and solicitation of prostitution. Epstein received a 1.5-year jail sentence in Palm Beach County, followed by a year of house arrest. Additionally, he was mandated to register as a sex offender.
“For almost 20 years, the story of how Jeffrey Epstein victimized some of Palm Beach County’s most vulnerable has been the subject of much anger and has at times diminished the public’s perception of the criminal justice system,” Delgado wrote in his order, and added, "It is understandable that given those reports the public has a great curiosity about what was widely reported by news as 'special treatment’ regarding his prosecution.”
