_ ~ : 5 . ; ay > Bi on F = : es 3 ( more : Mis * y iE f; Et ; a =. l © a * 1 : af ) , 7NhU/ae | .—— , > r ce \ ‘ — = . a | » : ¥ cw 4 '\¢ oon » & z . Vv, gs a ' Se Py : ae . 4 ‘ - Fo ~ ‘ . ‘ " . 4 — 4 \ > y —s i ae i A ~ So ies HER -— pr artes mat | hes ; , ah ‘) = Boe 5 o dm ' Cr ; * ‘x ¢ J = v Cy, * 4 / f,{ aa re — =~, = ty AN Ae 2) <P Re be: The girls who were abused by Jeffrey Epstein and the cops who championed their cause remain angry over what they regard as a gross injustice, while Epstein's employees and those who engineered his non-prosecution agreement have prospered. BY MARTA OLIVER CRAVIOTTO & | EMILY MICHOT & | JULIEK.BROWN & By December, Epstein had still not agreed to a date for his plea hearing, and was technically in violation of the September agreement, which required him to appear in court by November, Acosta noted in a letter to Kenneth Starr in December 2007. “The [U.S. attorneys] who have been negotiating with defense counsel have for some time complained to me regarding the tactics used by the defense team,” Acosta wrote. “It appears to them that as soon as resolution is reached on one issue, defense counsel finds ways to challenge the resolution collaterally. ... Some in our office are deeply concerned that defense counsel will continue to mount collateral challenges to provisions to the agreement, even after Mr. Epstein has entered his guilty plea and thus rendered the agreement difficult, if not impossible, to unwind.” And that’s exactly what happened. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016453