Your fact-checks will appear here
The impact of the non-prosecution agreement on the rights of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims and their subsequent civil litigation.
Allegations against Jeffrey Epstein have been both robustly corroborated in many core respects—by victim interviews, police evidence and FBI compilations—and repeatedly contested or debunked when indi...
’s victims cannot be captured by a single settled number: official investigations, journalistic exposés and recent reviews each produced different tallies — from dozens to more than a thousand — becau...
The 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) dramatically narrowed how the government treated and described Jeffrey Epstein’s victims: it confined federal exposure to only those victims “the subject of th...
The ’s internal review — principally the probe — concluded that the prosecutors who negotiated the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement () for exercised “poor judgment” but did not commit professional misco...
Victims seeking to vacate ’s primarily argued that federal prosecutors violated the (CVRA) by concealing the deal and denying victims statutory rights to confer with prosecutors and be treated with fa...
The (NPA) fundamentally shaped all later civil and criminal litigation involving by narrowing federal exposure, granting immunity to some potential co‑defendants, and triggering years of litigation ov...
A federal judge in ruled in 2019 that prosecutors violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA) by secretly negotiating the 2007 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA) that resulted in pleading to lesser sta...
Donald Trump was not the person who started the Jeffrey Epstein investigation; law-enforcement inquiries began with local police in Palm Beach in 2005 and led to a 2006 grand-jury indictment, and late...
A series of post-2019 legal battles, appellate rulings, Department of Justice reviews and document disclosures probed whether the 2008 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) that spared Jeffrey Epstein from ...