Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 115 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/31/2011 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRa JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. REPLY IN SUPPORT OF SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING BY PROPOSED INTERVENORS ROY BLACK, WEINBERG, AND JAY LEFKOWITZ The plaintiffs contend that they need the plea negotiation letters for two reasons: First, to get an apology from the government, but of course they do not need the defense plea negotiations to get an apology from the government. And second, to seek "invalidation of the non-prosecution agreement so that they can confer with the government about the possibility of actually prosecuting Epstein." [DE 106 at 9]. The plaintiffs are not entitled to the plea negotiation letters to seek invalidation of the nonprosecution agreement. This is a remedy that the plaintiffs cannot obtain as a matter of constitutional law. Mr. Epstein has performed his side of the bargain with the government, and when a bargain is based "on a promise or agreement of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to be part of the inducement or consideration, such promise must be fulfilled." Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (1971). Failure to enforce the government's side of a plea bargain violates Due Process. United States v. Yesil, 991 F.2d 1527, 1532-33 (11th Cir. 1992). The plaintiffs knowingly sat on their CVRA claims for years as Mr. Epstein served a prison EFTA02753621