Two women accusing former financier Jeffrey Epstein of sexual abuse lost on several requests they'd made in their suit against the U.S. government over its infamous plea deal with the convicted sex offender.

The decision came from the same federal judge who had ruled that prosecutors broke federal law in handling Epstein's case more than a decade ago, when former U.S. Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta had negotiated the agreement as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida.

But Monday, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra of the Southern District of Florida refused to sanction the government, which he found acted in good faith during the litigation.

Epstein died by suicide Aug. 10  in a secure housing unit of the federal Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, while awaiting trial on charges charges he ran a child-sex ring out of his luxury homes in Manhattan and Palm Beach.

The plaintiffs, identified as Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, asked the court for money damages, attorney fees, a meeting with Acosta, production of FBI documents, educational remedies, a motion to strike a filing filed on Epstein's behalf after his death, and an injunction against the U.S. Attorney's Office, among other requests.

But Marra denied those requests in the suit that alleges the government violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act by giving Epstein a deal that shielded him and his accomplices from federal prosecution.

The judge's order acknowledged his own February finding that Florida federal prosecutors violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act by not informing the petitioners of the non-prosecution agreement Epstein reached with authorities that precluded him from facing more serious sex crime charges.

But Marra ruled the women could not receive damages because the Crime Victims' Rights Act did not allow it. He also rejected their motion for attorney fees.

"To the extent petitioners seek fees by claiming the government acted in bad faith or vexatiously, the court rejects that position," the judge wrote. "Although unsuccessful on the merits of the issue of whether there was a violation of the CVRA, the government asserted legitimate and legally supportable positions throughout this litigation. Thus, there is no basis to grant petitioners attorney's fees as a sanction."

|

Read the order:

Marra also denied the plaintiffs' requested restitution on the grounds "there is no real and immediate threat of repeated violations of the CVRA, and that any injury that occurred in this case will remain entirely in the past." He also reasoned their request for an award is "essentially a request for money damages from the government, which is not allowed under the CVRA."

"Petitioners would have to point to a specific statute that authorizes an award of restitution," he wrote.

Despite acknowledging that his order brought an end to "this lengthy and contentious litigation" and the plaintiffs "are not receiving much, if any, of the relief they sought," Marra asked the petitioners to take solace in the wider effects their case has had.

"This litigation has brought national attention to the Crime Victims' Rights Act and the importance of victims in the criminal justice system," he wrote, noting the case "also resulted in the United States Department of Justice acknowledging its shortcomings in dealing with crime victims," and prompted officials to publicly commit to better handling victims' rights matters moving forward.

"Rulings which were rendered during the course of this litigation likely played some role, however small it may have been, in the initiation of criminal charges against Mr. Epstein in the Southern District of New York, and that office's continuing investigation of others who may have been complicit with him," Marra added.

Byung J. "BJay" Pak, U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, called Marra's order "appropriate and a proper application of the law." In a statement to the press, Pak also noted the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida made internal changes in the wake of controversy over its handling of the case against Epstein.

"The additional training offered to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida is one part of the department's overall effort to support and protect victims of crime," Pak said. "Our team also will continue to work with the Southern District of New York to make sure the victims' voices are heard in this matter."

Attorney Brad Edwards—partner with the Fort Lauderdale-based law firm Edwards Pottinger—and former Utah federal judge Paul Cassell, a victims' rights advocate, represented the plaintiffs in the case. A joint statement by Edwards and Cassell said they are "exploring all options for continuing the fight, including the possibility of an appeal."

"As Judge Marra alluded to in his order, this case undoubtedly elevated public awareness of Mr. Epstein's crimes and played a vital role in his eventual arrest in New York," the statement said. "Of course, this is not the ending we had hoped for, but the enormous progression of victims' rights through this case will ensure that violations like this never happen again in this country. For that, the fight was worth it."

Related stories: