Legal analysis of Crime Victims' Rights Act and its application to pre‑charging situations, citing the Jeffrey Epstein case

60 CASSELL ET AL. [Vol. 104 ability to participate meaningfully in the criminal process when federal prosecutors narrowly interpreted their responsibilities under the Act. Second, the Article reviews the purpose, text, structure, and history of the CVRA, concluding that they all support the conclusion that crime victims have rights during criminal investigations. Third, our Article critiques the Department’s memorandum, demonstrating that the Department’s analysis is unpersuasive. Fourth and finally, the Article provides a_ specific approach for determining when rights should attach—specifically when federal law enforcement agencies have identified a crime with sufficient precision to send a “target” letter to a criminal defendant. We also observe that federal and state prosecutors have already accorded rights to victims before formally filing charges, which further undermines the Department’s overly narrow construction of the Act. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ......0000cccccccccccccseessecsueeeseeueeeccseeescecsueesceesseesecessescesseeeeeesness 61 I. THE ISSUE OF RIGHTS FOR CRIME VICTIMS DURING CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS ....0c0ccccccccccccccceecececsseesceceeeeecetsusescessueeecetsasesestteesees 63 A. A Brief History of Crime Victims’ Rights .....0..00..0cccceceeees 63 B. The Crime Victims’ Rights Acti... ccccccccecceceeeeeeeeeneeens 65 C. An Illustration of the Pre-charging Issue: The Jeffrey Epstein CSC... eec cece ceeescenecceessesecseeeseeseceseeaeeeseesecaeeeseeseenaeeaeeeeesaeeneeeseeaes 67 II. THE CVRA’S APPLICATION BEFORE FORMAL CHARGES ARE FILED..... 69 A. The CVRA’S Purposes 00.0... ccccccccececceeceneecteecnsecsessseeeeeeseeeneees 70 B. The CVRA’s Plain Language ......00...0cccccccccccccccceeseeeseeeeeeneeens 71 C. Courts Recognize That Crime Victims Have CVRA Rights Before Charging .........ccccccccccccccccccccccesceessseesseesseesseeeseeessees 73 III. THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S UNPERSUASIVE POSITION .........0....00000- 75 A. OLC’s Misreading of the CVRA’s Definition of “Victim” ........ 76 B. OLC’s Distortion of the CVRA’s Structure and Legislative 1 US K0) 9 re 80 C. OLC’s Ineffective Response to the CVRA’s Coverage and Venue Provisions ........0cccccccccccccscccsseceeccnsecnsecssessessseesseeeseeessees 86 TV. WHEN PRE-CHARGING RIGHTS ATTACH UNDER THE CVRA ............... 90 A. A Test for Determining When Rights Attach.......0...000ccceeee 9] B. Applying the Test to the Epstein Case ..........ccccccceccccceceeeneees 93 C. Current Department Policy on Pre-charging Rights.................... 94 D. State Law Extension of Pre-charging Rights ........0..0..c cee 97 CONCLUSION uo... cccccccccccccssssesceceeseessecuseecsessecssesessssusseecsseeeessesnesesenseesesaes 103 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014039