FBI notified alleged Epstein victims of victim rights before non‑prosecution agreement, suggesting DOJ’s early acknowledgment of CVRA applicability

2014] CRIME VICTIMS’ RIGHTS 97 wanted to treat victims unfairly. Given its repeated and professed commitment to crime victims, here too this obligation should not be burdensome. And finally, with regard to providing notice of CVRA rights to victims, the fact that the Department currently provides notice of VRRA rights indicates that it should not be difficult to provide notice of CVRA rights as well. Indeed, it is possible that the Department’s notification letters under the VRRA already include this information. Interestingly, in the Epstein case, the FBI notified Jane Doe Number One and Jane Doe Number Two that they had rights in the criminal justice process. As early as June 7, 2007—more than three months before it concluded a nonprosecution agreement with Epstein—the U.S. Attorney’s Office sent a notice to Jane Doe Number One stating “your case is under investigation.””’> The notice also informed Jane Doe Number One that “as a victim and/or witness of a federal offense, you have a number of rights.””'° Among the rights that the U.S. Attorney’s Office told Jane Doe that she possessed was “t]he reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case.”’!’ Of course, she would not have had those rights if she was not covered by the CVRA. The FBI therefore apparently assumed that the CVRA already applied in the Epstein case. It was only later, when the matter went into litigation, that the Department of Justice reversed course. This change in course underscores the problems arising out of the OLC memorandum and the Department’s current interpretation of the CVRA. D. STATE LAW EXTENSION OF PRE-CHARGING RIGHTS The focus of this Article so far has been crime victims’ rights in the federal system. But in concluding, it is instructive to note how a number of states offer parallel nghts for crime victims, including the right to confer with prosecutors. In fact, several states have extended such nghts prior to formally filing of charges against defendants—without reported difficulty, so far as we are aware. This confirms our inference that extending CVRA rights to crime victims before the formal filing of criminal charges is both feasible and desirable. A general overview of state laws illustrates the broad protections afforded to victims in state criminal justice systems. Nearly two-thirds of states have adopted constitutional provisions to protect victims throughout 715 Letter from A. Marie Villafafia, Assistant U.S. Att’y, to Jane Doe #1 (June 7, 2007), reprinted in Jane Doe Motion, supra note 40, at ex. C. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014076