On July 6, 2019, American financier, “philanthropist,” and registered sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was arrested (again). He is charged with one count of sex trafficking of minors and one count of conspiracy to engage in sex trafficking of minors in Florida and New York.
The federal indictment was unsealed and shared with the public several days ago. To read it, click here: Jeffrey Epstein indictment
The indictment states that Epstein sexually exploited many “minor girls” between 2002 and 2005 in Florida and New York. Some of the girls were as young as 14 at the time of the alleged abuse.
On Tuesday, we reported as many details as we could find on Epstein’s arrest and the charges. You can read that article here: An Unbiased Look at What We Know About the Epstein Scandal So Far.
Since Tuesday, a lot more information on the case has been published. We will provide as many updates as we could confirm in this article.
First, we will cover a bit of background on Epstein and the possible reasons he has remained a free man (until now) despite serious allegations and what appears to be a large body of evidence that supports his alleged victims’ claims.
Then, we will discuss new developments in the case.
Here is a condensed timeline of the Jeffrey Epstein case.
This timeline is based on a report that The Miami Herald (https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article221404845.html) published in November 2018. (For some reason, we aren’t able to post a live link to the Herald article, but you can copy and paste that URL in your browser to see the article.)
In 2006, after pressure from the Palm Beach police chief, the FBI opened a federal investigation into Epstein, dubbed “Operation Leap Year.’’ Documents list the possible crime as “child prostitution.’’ A few months later, the FBI began interviewing potential witnesses and victims from Florida, New York, and New Mexico.
In 2007, as the U.S. Attorney’s Office was preparing to present the case to a federal grand jury, Epstein’s attorneys requested a meeting to discuss the investigation. That June, a 53-page indictment was prepared by the U.S. Attorney’s Office as, simultaneously, plea negotiations are initiated with Epstein’s legal team. That August, Alexander Acosta, who was then the U.S. attorney in Miami, entered into direct discussions about the plea agreement. In September, federal prosecutors presented several federal plea agreements. They were rejected by Epstein and his attorneys. Epstein signed a non-prosecution agreement on Sept. 24, but his attorneys continued to delay his court appearance.'
Read more: More CONFIRMED Information on Jeffrey Epstein, His Homes, and His Powerful Friends
Jeffrey Epstein: prosecutors accuse financier of witness tampering
'Jeffrey Epstein, the American financier who was charged with federal sex trafficking crimes on Monday, transferred $350,000 to two close associates in late 2018 in what federal prosecutors say was an attempt to “influence witnesses”.
The payments were revealed in a letter to Judge Richard Berman on Friday afternoon in opposition to Epstein’s request to be released on bail while he awaits trial on charges of sexually exploiting, abusing and trafficking girls as young as 14 years old.
The US attorney Geoffrey Berman wrote that Epstein “has a history of obstruction and manipulation of witnesses” including incidents when he was under investigation in the state of Florida in 2006, but most recently following the Miami Herald’s publication of series of articles examining how that Florida investigation resulted in a controversially lenient 2008 plea agreement on state charges and a federal non-prosecution agreement.
On 30 November 2018, just two days after the publication of the first Miami Herald article, Epstein wired $100,000 to an individual identified as a “potential co-conspirator” in the non-prosecution agreement, according to financial records obtained by the prosecution. Three days later, on 3 December, Epstein wired an additional $250,000 to one of his employees, who was also named as a possible co-conspirator.
“This course of action, and in particular its timing, suggests the defendant was attempting to further influence co-conspirators who might provide information against him in light of the recently re-emerging allegations,” Berman wrote.'
Read more ...