Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-16579House OversightOther

Manhattan DA's office allegedly aided Jeffrey Epstein by downgrading his sex‑offender status

The passage links a senior prosecutor in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office to a concrete action that benefitted Jeffrey Epstein, a high‑profile billionaire accused of extensive sexual abuse. It Assistant DA Jennifer Gaffney, deputy chief of Cyrus Vance Jr.’s sex‑crimes unit, requested a downgr The request sought to move Epstein from Level 3 (most dangerous) to Level 1 (least restrictive). J

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #016462
Pages
1
Persons
3
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage links a senior prosecutor in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office to a concrete action that benefitted Jeffrey Epstein, a high‑profile billionaire accused of extensive sexual abuse. It Assistant DA Jennifer Gaffney, deputy chief of Cyrus Vance Jr.’s sex‑crimes unit, requested a downgr The request sought to move Epstein from Level 3 (most dangerous) to Level 1 (least restrictive). J

Tags

jeffrey-epsteinhigh-importanceprosecutorial-misconductfinancial-flow-potentially-linregistry-downgrademanhattan-district-attorneysex-crimeslegal-exposurehouse-oversightsexual-misconduct

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
METRO Manhattan DA sided with pedophile billionaire after botching investigation By Rebecca Rosenberg, Larry Celona, Susan Edelman and Isabel Vincent December 1, 2018 | 8:47pm | Updated Jeffrey Epstein The Manhattan DA's office once went to bat for billionaire pervert Jeffrey Epstein, after botching a review of his sex crimes and swallowing his lawyers’ claim that “there are no real victims here,” records obtained by the Post show. Assistant DA Jennifer Gaffney, then-deputy chief of Cyrus Vance Jr’s sex-crimes unit, in January 2011 asked a Manhattan judge to downgrade Epstein’s status in the New York sex-offender registry from the most-dangerous Level 3 to least-restrictive Level 1. The judge was stunned. “| have never seen the prosecutor’s office do anything like this,” Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Ruth Pickholz toid Gaffney. “| have done many [cases] much less troubling than this one where [prosecutors] would never make a downward argument like this.” Pressed by the judge, Gaffney admitted that she never spoke to the Florida U.S. Attorney who handled a sprawling sex-crime investigation into the financier.

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

(USANYS)"

From: (USANYS)" To: ' (USANYS)" c Subject: FW: SDNY News Clips Monday, August 19, 2019 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 21:17:23 +0000 Attachments: 2019 8-19.pdf According to WSJ, there were two prosecutors in DANY who handled Epstein's effort to get reduced sex offender level: Jennifer Gaffney and Pat Egan. Documents Show Efforts by Jeffrey Epstein's Attorneys to Sway Prosecutors WSJ By Joe Palazzolo 8/18/19 Local prosecutors in Manhattan labeled Jeffrey Epstein a low-level sex offender nearly a decade ago, against the recommendation of a state panel of experts and to the shock of a New York judge. Documents obtained through a public-records request provide new insight into how Mr. Epstein wielded influence within the criminal justice system, as his lawyers at Kirkland & Ellis LLP tried to prevent the financier from having to report to New York City police regularly or appear in a public sex-offender database. Attorneys Jay Lefkowitz and Sandra Musumeci recruited the former st

24p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' (USANYS)" To: ' (USANYS)" Subject: RE: SDNY News Clips Monday, August 19, 2019 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 22:11:19 +0000 Yes, I saw. From: (USANYS) < Sent: Monday, August 19, 2019 5:17 PM To: (USANYS) < Subject: FW: SDNY News Clips Monday, August 19, 2019 According to WSJ, there were two prosecutors in DANY who handled Epstein's effort to get reduced sex offender level: Jennifer Gaffney and Pat Egan. Documents Show Efforts by Jeffrey Epstein's Attorneys to Sway Prosecutors WSJ By Joe Palazzolo 8/18/19 Local prosecutors in Manhattan labeled Jeffrey Epstein a low-level sex offender nearly a decade ago, against the recommendation of a state panel of experts and to the shock of a New York judge. Documents obtained through a public-records request provide new insight into how Mr. Epstein wielded influence within the criminal justice system, as his lawyers at Kirkland & Ellis LLP tried to prevent the financier from having to report to New York City police regularl

24p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Government, - against - JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. • • x ~'/1WI/1e P— 1- t 13 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILEaft 19 CR. 490 (RMB) DECISION & ORDER REMANDING DEFENDANT A. Background This ruling follows the Court's bail hearing held on July IS, 2019. The issue before the Court is whether the Defendant should continue to be remanded (incarcerated) pending trial or whether he should be granted release while the case proceeds. No matter the answer to this question and no matter what has been said in Court in analyzing the matter. this is a criminal case and the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. is innocent of the Federal charges alleged against him now and until such time, if it comes, that a jury or the Court finds (after fair and thorough consideration of the facts and the law) that he is guilty. 5sg Transcript. dated

33p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

425 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT, 3d SERIES

306 425 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT, 3d SERIES t In short, the issue now before the Court has arisen only because Donziger unjustifi- ably has refused to comply with his discov- ery obligations. Had he done so — i.e., had he produced responsive documents as to which there was no colorable claim of priv- ilege, submitted a privilege log as to re- sponsive documents as to which there was such a colorable claim, and submitted any disputes for judicial resolution - there would be no need to examine his ESI. But he has not. And the Court thus must take appropriate action. His arguments to the contrary are meritless. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the Court has entered the protocol for imaging and forensic examination of Donziger's elec- tronic devices and media. SO ORDERED. the six months between being served with the document requests and the Court's eventual ruling, on October I8, 2018, that Donziger had waived any applicable privi- lege. Third, Donziger disregards the

25p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed 19 1 o4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, - against - JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Government, Defendant. —x • x USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 19 CR. 490 (RMB) DECISION & ORDER REMANDING DEFENDANT A. Background This ruling follows the Court's bail hearing held on July IS, 2019. The issue before the Court is whether the Defendant should continue to be remanded (incarcerated) pending trial or whether he should be granted release while the case proceeds. No matter the answer to this question and no matter what has been said in Court in analyzing the matter, this is a criminal case and the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is innocent of the Federal charges alleged against him now and until such time, if it comes, that a jury or the Court finds (after fair and thorough consideration of the facts and the law) that he is guilty. 5ss Transcript, dated July 8, 2019

33p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Government, - against - JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. • • x ~'/1WI/1e P— 1- t 13 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILEaft 19 CR. 490 (RMB) DECISION & ORDER REMANDING DEFENDANT A. Background This ruling follows the Court's bail hearing held on July IS, 2019. The issue before the Court is whether the Defendant should continue to be remanded (incarcerated) pending trial or whether he should be granted release while the case proceeds. No matter the answer to this question and no matter what has been said in Court in analyzing the matter. this is a criminal case and the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein. is innocent of the Federal charges alleged against him now and until such time, if it comes, that a jury or the Court finds (after fair and thorough consideration of the facts and the law) that he is guilty. 5sg Transcript. dated

33p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.