2020 DOJ OPR Report on Jeffrey Epstein
 2020 DOJ OPR Report on Jeffrey Epstein  | |
|---|---|
| Type | report |
| Publication date | November 2020 |
| Author(s) | Office of Professional Responsibility |
| Subjects | Jeffrey Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein/Affair |
| Original title | Investigation into the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida’s Resolution of Its 2006–2008 Federal Criminal Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein and Its Interactions with Victims during the Investigation |
| Source | Link |
The 2020 DOJ OPR Report on Jeffrey Epstein was an investigation into the handling of the first investigation that lead to Epstein's sweetheart deal.
Criticism
The DOJ’s OPR report drew sharp criticism as a “whitewash”: the Department initially released only an executive summary to the public (the full report later surfaced via the Washington Post), and it recast what many viewed to be clear professional misconduct as mere “poor judgment.” Critics of the report included the lead prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida. In court, victims’ counsel also argued that DOJ had withheld key documents and failed to retrieve critical records — despite acknowledged victim-notification failures and the premature closure of the federal probe.
The report downplayed a “data gap” in Alex Acosta’s email inbox that lasted between May 2007 to April 2008—a crucial period, spanning from the time when Acosta’s Office prepared a draft indictment against Epstein to shortly before Epstein pleaded guilty in state court, during which Epstein’s lawyers aggressively lobbied federal prosecutors to end the federal case. As former judge Paul Cassell, one of the victims’ attorneys, said, “The gap seems to have surgically struck on exactly the time period when most of the big decisions were being made. I was stunned because you would think if there was ever a case where the Justice Department would have been very careful to make sure they had complete records and things weren’t missing, this would be the one.” But mention of Acosta’s missing emails were only in a brief section in an appendix on “methodology” in the report.
Victims rebuked the OPR report as a “slap in the face” and said they were giving up hope of ever achieving real accountability.[1]
