Our effort to bring transparency about the extent of Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal actions continues. Legal battles are set to bring to light an embarrassing trove of records associated with the deceased financial titan and convicted sex offender. In July 2019, Epstein was arrested in New York on federal charges related to child sex trafficking. He pled guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution in Florida, a state crime. His death by suicide while in custody raised a lot of questions that remain unanswered, making ongoing state and federal investigations and court battles inevitable.
Indeed, the FBI is presently fighting their own release of further documents related to Epstein’s case, on the grounds that such investigations are still ongoing. Former President Donald Trump has promised to unseal a huge trove of documents from the criminal Epstein investigation. This unilateral decision is causing even more tension between government agencies and government transparency advocates.
Attorneys representing Epstein’s victims have stepped forward to urge the release and are obtaining public support for transparency. Jennifer Freeman is special counsel at Marsh Law Firm. She represents Maria Farmer, another of Epstein’s accusers, who is now trying to obtain that information with a public records request. Sadly, her efforts have been largely fruitless so far.
In a recent decision, a Manhattan federal court judge ruled in favor of the FBI’s argument for withholding documents, citing legal exemptions. Radar, the media organization that took the lead in litigation, is busy working on the appeal. We believe this appeal is likely to be heard in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
“It’s a flimsy rationale and we are challenging it head-on in the court of appeals. Our only hope of understanding how the FBI failed to hold Epstein accountable for over a decade – and preventing future miscarriages of justice – is if the government releases the files.” – Roy Gutterman, director of the Newhouse School’s Tully Center for Free Speech.
Radar is incredibly seductive. In the meantime, continuing civil litigation against Epstein and his confidante Ghislaine Maxwell could open up a public trove of documents. Maxwell is now serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in Epstein’s crimes. Her case is indispensable to revealing the complete scope of their wrongdoing.
Spencer T. Kuvin is chief legal officer at GoldLaw and represents many of Epstein’s victims. He’s passionate about this, and with good reason. FOIA requests can be essential in revealing important information. He stated, “I think that the FOIA requests will absolutely assist in the disclosure of information. The DoJ has made blanket objections citing ongoing investigations, but through FOIA litigation, the courts can test those objections by potentially reviewing the information ‘in camera.’”
“This means that an independent judge may be appointed to review the information to determine whether the DoJ’s objections are accurate or just a cover.” – Spencer T Kuvin.
Even with this opportunity for transparency, hurdles remain. A spokesperson for Radar explained that Radar’s attorney was informed by the Department of Justice that they are staunchly against releasing any documents. They maintain that even the publication of one page might undermine their prosecution against Maxwell.
“The DoJ’s core argument against disclosure for the past six years has been that it would jeopardize their ability to put – and keep – Ghislaine Maxwell in prison,” said the spokesperson. “Naturally, any support they offer to release material undermines their claims.”
Legal experts warn that despite the surge in public interest in these documents, the process of obtaining them is daunting. Gutterman’s post underscores the crowded and confusing legal landscape surrounding these types of cases.
“This case is already complicated, and there were already too many cooks in the very crowded kitchen,” he stated. “It’s getting more crowded as more public interest grows in the grand jury materials as well as the now-settled defamation case.”
In that world of extreme skepticism about the government, they are not exempt from disclosure, Gutterman continued. He argues that these exemptions are improper because they potentially include unverified claims and possible grand jury materials.
“Using FOIA for FBI and law enforcement materials related to this case might be a creative newsgathering tactic, but the law enforcement exemption the government is citing might be legitimate because some of the materials are grand jury materials,” he explained.
At the same time, public mood continues to be impatient for justice and holding these officers accountable. Sigrid McCawley told the New York Times she was optimistic about upcoming disclosures that would shine light on Epstein’s operation.
“I am thrilled with the decision,” she remarked. “I am hopeful that this order leads to the release of more information about Epstein’s monstrous sex trafficking operation and those who facilitated it and participated in it.”
While these legal battles play out, how much information is made available is anyone’s guess. This would have the serious practical effect of hamstringing any active investigations that are underway. The stakes are incredibly high as advocates still try to demand transparency in a case that has drawn national attention.