Prosecutorial decisions in Jeffrey Epstein case raise questions of wealth‑based justice

girls. Prosecutors did not pursue charges against Mr. Epstein reflecting the age of the victims because they assumed a jury would view the girls not as victims but as promiscuous, untrustworthy, willing participants. The presumption is offensive. Mr. Epstein, a 53-year-old Manhattan money manager who has hired Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz and defense attorney Jack Goldberger, has denied knowing how old the girls were. But police interviews with five alleged victims and 17 witnesses under oath, as well as phone messages, a high school transcript and other items that police found from searching Mr. Epstein's trash and 7,234-square-foot waterfront home, provide evidence that he knew the girls were teenagers. One girl couldn't show up when Mr. Epstein wanted because she had soccer. Another time, Mr. Epstein had to wait for his "massage" session because the girl he wanted was still in class. Why didn't State Attorney Barry Krischer let a jury decide whether to believe the teenagers - including a 16-year-old who went to Mr. Epstein's house to "work" in December 2004 after being asked whether she needed to make money for Christmas gifts? Prosecutors gave greater weight to the details Mr. Dershowitz provided about the girls in an apparent effort to assail their character. Mr. Dershowitz pointed out to prosecutors that some of the teenagers had talked on myspace.com about marijuana and alcohol use. The 20-year-old Royal Palm Beach woman who told police she recruited girls for Mr. Epstein has a Web page on myspace.com that features one girl using the name "Pimpin' Made EZ." Although no charges of witness tampering have been filed, the parents of at least one of the teenage victims complained to police of being followed and intimidated by two men. Police determined that their vehicles were registered to two private investigators. Mr. Goldberger denied knowing anything about it. Police also note in their reports that the state attorney's office offered Mr. Epstein a plea deal that would have placed him on probation for five years, allowing him ultimately to walk away with no criminal record at all. I asked Mr. Krischer's spokesman, Mike Edmondson, why the case was referred to a grand jury instead of Mr. Epstein being charged and facing a trial before a jury. And shouldn't the victims' credibility be a factor to determine whether a crime's been committed, not whether a jury will convict? (After all, as Mr. Goldberger told The Palm Beach Post of Mr. Epstein, "He's never denied girls came to the house.") Especially, I asked Mr. Edmondson to explain: Why shouldn't the public look at this case and think there are two kinds of justice - one for the wealthy and one for the rest of us? Mr. Edmondson said he could not comment on the case because it is active, but on the latter point, he offered, for the sake of "philosophical debate": "Whether wealth buys a different standard of justice across the country ... the answer to that would, of course, be yes. But in this case, he said, "regardless of the battery of attorneys, the outcome would be the " same. Every issue that was debated in public was debated in our office before this case HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021765