Acosta's Epstein Deal: Lawful Or Unlawful?

In 2008, US attorney Alexander Acosta approved a plea deal that allowed Jeffrey Epstein to plead guilty to a single state charge of solicitation, in exchange for a federal non-prosecution agreement. Epstein, a politically connected millionaire, was accused of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls. The deal was kept secret from the victims, and Acosta resigned as US Secretary of Labor in July 2019 following Epstein's arrest on new child prostitution charges and the torrent of criticism that ensued. While the Justice Department's internal disciplinary arm concluded that Acosta exhibited poor judgment, it found no professional misconduct, and Acosta himself has defended his handling of the case.

Acosta's 2008 plea deal with Epstein

In 2008, US Attorney Alexander Acosta approved a plea deal with Jeffrey Epstein, allowing the child-trafficker to plead guilty to a single state charge of solicitation, in exchange for a federal non-prosecution agreement. This deal was kept secret from the victims and the public. Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution, and was required to register as a sex offender and pay restitution to his victims.

The deal was the result of negotiations between Acosta and Epstein's defence lawyer, Jay Lefkowitz. Lefkowitz later wrote to Acosta, thanking him for committing to keeping the deal confidential and for assuring him that his office would not contact any of the victims or potential witnesses.

In 2019, a federal judge ruled that the non-prosecution agreement was invalid and that prosecutors had violated the victims' rights by keeping the deal secret. The Crime Victims' Rights Act of 2004 (CVRA) requires that victims be notified of the progress of federal criminal cases, and the judge ruled that the victims should have been notified of the Epstein non-prosecution agreement in advance of its signing.

Acosta resigned as US Secretary of Labor in July 2019, following Epstein's arrest on new child prostitution charges and a wave of criticism over the 2008 deal. An internal review by the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility found that Acosta had shown "poor judgment" in granting Epstein a non-prosecution agreement and in failing to notify Epstein's alleged victims about the agreement.

Acosta's resignation

In 2008, as the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Alexander Acosta approved a plea deal that allowed Jeffrey Epstein to plead guilty to a single state charge of solicitation, in exchange for a federal non-prosecution agreement. Epstein, a politically connected millionaire, was accused of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls. The deal required him to register as a sex offender, pay restitution to victims, and spend 13 months in a work-release program. Notably, the deal was made without consulting the victims, and Acosta later faced intense criticism for his role in it.

In 2017, Acosta was nominated for Secretary of Labor by President Donald Trump. During his confirmation hearing, his handling of the Epstein case was discussed, but he was still confirmed by the Senate. However, in 2019, Epstein was arrested on new sex trafficking charges, and Acosta's role in the 2008 plea deal came under renewed scrutiny.

On July 19, 2019, amid intense criticism and public outcry over his involvement in the Epstein case, Acosta resigned from his position as Secretary of Labor. His resignation came after a federal judge ruled in February 2019 that the non-prosecution agreement with Epstein was invalid and that prosecutors had violated the victims' rights. Additionally, the Justice Department's internal disciplinary arm concluded that Acosta had exhibited "`poor judgment`" in approving the deal for Epstein but did not find evidence of "professional misconduct."

In his defence, Acosta stated that he wanted to see Epstein go to jail and that his office intervened to ensure that happened. He also argued that the decision was made by a group of prosecutors and not solely by him. However, critics pointed out that the deal was too lenient and that Acosta failed to adequately explain certain provisions, such as the immunity granted to unnamed co-conspirators of Epstein.

Acosta's defence of the deal

In 2007-2008, US Attorney Alexander Acosta approved a plea deal that allowed child-trafficking ringleader Jeffrey Epstein to plead guilty to a single state charge of solicitation, in exchange for a federal non-prosecution agreement. Epstein served time in jail but was granted daily work release, allowing him to leave each morning and return in the evening. Acosta claimed he was unaware that Epstein would qualify for work release.

Acosta defended his actions by arguing that without his team's intervention, Epstein would have only faced one charge from state prosecutors and would have avoided any jail time. Acosta also stated that at the time, a trial would have been difficult because witnesses would have faced intense scrutiny from a team of defence attorneys. Acosta's lawyer released a statement saying that had Acosta "known then what he knows now, he certainly would have directed a different path".

The deal's violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act

In 2008, US Attorney Alexander Acosta approved a controversial federal non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein, allowing him to plead guilty to a single state charge of solicitation, in exchange for a federal non-prosecution agreement. This deal was made without consulting Epstein's victims and was later ruled illegal by a federal judge for violating the Crime Victims' Rights Act.

The Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) of 2004 grants victims of federal crimes an array of rights, including the right to be treated with fairness, respect, and dignity, as well as the right to be reasonably protected from the accused. Crucially, the CVRA also mandates that victims be notified of any public court proceedings, plea bargains, or deferred prosecution agreements. In the case of Epstein, this did not happen, and the victims were left in the dark about the plea deal.

Acosta's handling of the Epstein case came under intense scrutiny and criticism, ultimately leading to his resignation as US Secretary of Labor in July 2019. A federal judge ruled that the prosecutors, including Acosta, broke the law by not notifying Epstein's victims of the plea deal. This violation of the CVRA denied the victims their right to be informed and potentially have input on the terms of the agreement.

The CVRA was relatively new and untested at the time of the Epstein agreement, and there were complexities regarding its applicability in this case. However, the ruling in February 2019 clarified that the CVRA did apply, and the victims should have been notified in advance, allowing them the opportunity to influence the agreement's terms. This ruling sent a strong message regarding the importance of upholding the rights of crime victims and ensuring their inclusion in legal processes.

While Acosta's actions were deemed to show "poor judgment," investigators did not find evidence of professional misconduct or corruption. Nonetheless, the violation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act had significant consequences, highlighting the critical need to protect the rights and interests of victims in legal proceedings.

The Justice Department's investigation

The Justice Department's internal disciplinary arm, the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), investigated then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. The investigation was prompted by a formal request from members of Congress and public criticism of Acosta's role in the case. The OPR reviewed hundreds of thousands of records and conducted over 60 interviews.

The investigation concluded that Acosta exhibited "poor judgment" but did not commit "professional misconduct" in approving a generous deal for Epstein. The report acknowledged that Epstein's victims were treated poorly and chastised Acosta's judgment, but found no evidence that his decision was based on "corruption or other impermissible considerations, such as Epstein's wealth, status, or associations." The OPR determined that Acosta had the authority as U.S. Attorney to resolve the case as he deemed necessary and that his decision was not influenced by improper factors. However, it criticised Acosta for failing to ensure that victims were made aware of the proceedings and treated with dignity and respect.

The investigation also looked into whether prosecutors failed to keep victims adequately informed about developments in the case. It concluded that prosecutors did not commit misconduct in their interactions with the victims as there was no "clear and unambiguous duty" to consult with them before entering into the non-prosecution agreement. Nevertheless, the lack of consultation was deemed to reflect poorly on the Justice Department.

In response to the OPR's findings, Acosta's lawyer released a statement saying that Acosta would have directed a different path if he had known then what he knows now. However, the statement also noted that neither Acosta nor his staff had the benefit of the full record available today when crafting their strategy.

Despite the OPR's conclusion that Acosta did not engage in professional misconduct, the investigation's findings were met with criticism from various parties, including victims' attorneys, politicians, and the public. Many believed that Acosta's actions constituted more than just poor judgment and that he should be held accountable for his role in allowing Epstein to escape harsher punishment.

Frequently asked questions