[0:22]good afternoon let me start by reiterating that I'm pleased that the
[0:33]New York prosecution is going forward they brought these charges based on new evidence against Jeffrey Epstein who is now a registered sex offender and this
[0:44]is a very very good thing his acts are despicable and the New York prosecution offers an important opportunity to more
[0:54]fully bring Epstein to justice in 2008 a major newspaper described the obscene
[1:03]prosecution like this a florida grand jury that is a grand jury convened by the district attorney of Palm Beach
[1:12]County had charged Epstein with the lesser offense at that time the Epstein legal team was elated he would have
[1:21]avoided prison altogether but then the United States Attorney's Office in Miami became involved Epstein got an ultimatum plead guilty to
[1:32]a charge that would require jail time and registration or face federal charges and that was the week more than 10 years
[1:43]ago that Epstein went to jail times have changed and coverage of this case has certainly changed since that article
[1:52]facts are important and facts are being overlooked this matter started as a state matter who is prosecuted initially
[2:03]by the state of Florida and not by the US Attorney's Office in 2006 a grand jury convened by the state attorney the District Attorney of Palm Beach County
[2:13]reviewed the evidence and recommended a single charge and that charge would have resulted in no jail time at all no registration as a sexual offender and
[2:25]no restitution to the victim further the State Attorney's Office allowed Epstein to
[2:33]self-surrender and arraigned him the following morning simply put the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office was ready
[2:43]to let Epstein walk free no jail time nothing prosecutors in my former office found this to be completely unacceptable
[2:54]and they became involved our office became involved our prosecutors as this 2008 article recounts presented the
[3:03]ultimatum plead guilty to more serious charges charges that require jail time registration and restitution or we'd
[3:13]roll the dice and bring a federal indictment without the work of our prosecutors Epstein would have gotten
[3:21]away with just that state charge now many today question the terms of that ultimatum what's called the
[3:31]non-prosecution agreement good prosecutor will tell you that these cases are complex especially when they involve children and even more so in
[3:41]2006 I've shared with those in this room today and will make available publicly an affidavit filed by the career prosecutor in a civil matter related to
[3:52]the Epstein case she talks about the challenges faced she talks about the victims being scared and traumatized
[4:01]refusing to testify and how some victims actually exonerated Epstein most had significant concerns about their
[4:12]identities being revealed the acts that they had faced were horrible and they didn't want people to know about them
[4:22]and she goes on to write that quote after the fact people allege that Epstein would have been easily convicted as the prosecutor who handled the
[4:34]investigation she says in this affidavit these contentions overlook the facts that existed at the time her description
[4:44]of these facts are corroborated by the FBI case agent whose affidavit I've also shared today thousands of prosecutors
[4:54]around the nation this week are weighing guilty pleas versus trials these cases have I said or hard they require
[5:06]prosecutor to ask whether it plea that guarantees jail time and guarantees registration to ask whether that plea
[5:16]versus going to trial how do you weigh those two if going to trial is viewed as
[5:24]the roll of a dice the goal here was straightforward put Epstein behind bars ensured he registered as a sexual
[5:35]offender provide victims with the means to seek restitution and protect the public by putting them on notice that a sexual predator was in their midst this
[5:46]case people have said was unusual and it was it was complicated by the fact that this matter started as a state
[5:58]investigation a state grand jury brought that single completely unacceptable
[6:06]charge a state official allowed Epstein to self surrender and so it is unusual because it's unusual for a federal
[6:18]prosecutor to intervene in a state matter such as this we've seen cases recently different set of facts different I don't want anyone to see
[6:29]them comparing these cases but we've seen other cases where state prosecutors let folks go with no sentence and people shake their heads in this case the
[6:41]federal office intervened before the plea was taken and said stop because if that plea is taken at the state level you're gonna face serious federal
[6:51]issues today we know a lot more about how victims trauma impacts their testimony and this too is important our juries are more accepting of
[7:03]contradictory statements understanding that trauma impacted memories work differently and today our judges do not
[7:13]allow victim shaming by defense attorneys I have viewed the victim
[7:21]interviews they're hard to watch because I know that my former colleagues the men and women of my office wanted to help
[7:32]them I wanted to helpful that is why we intervened and that's what the prosecutors of my office did they insist
[7:43]that he go to jail and put the world on notice that he was and is a sexual predator
[7:51]Epstein's actions absolutely deserve a stiffer sentence for years there been rumors of Investigations in other
[8:00]jurisdictions and he should be prosecuted in any state in which he committed a crime if there are other
[8:10]states in which he committed crimes if there other states that can bring state charges they should consider those as well and so I absolutely welcome this
[8:20]New York prosecution it is the absolutely right thing to do and I'm happy to take questions Eric right how would you describe your
[8:35]relationship with the president the news cycle here with AB Steen is changing that my relationship with the president's outstanding he has I think
[8:45]very publicly made clear that that I've got his support he spoke yesterday in the Oval Office he and I have spoken let
[8:55]me add I keep reading about articles about my relationship with me and mr. Mulvaney and he called me this morning to say if I've asked that our relationship is excellent too and then
[9:07]any articles to the contrary are in his words BS and and so it's I'm here I'm
[9:17]defending this case that's my job Tom yamas ABC News secretary a lot of
[9:28]people are watching this news conference including several young women who say they were teenagers when Jeffrey Epstein sexually assaulted them they say they went to you looking for help and they
[9:39]didn't hear back from you until it was too late do you owe them an apology so you're raising the issue of victim
[9:47]notification and in the documents that I've circulated I've addressed the issue of victim notification as well the
[9:57]career prosecutor in this case had a difficult decision to make and she didn't make it alone she made it in consultation with the FBI and she
[10:07]made it in consultation with the office the agreement that had been negotiated had an unusual provision even though
[10:18]this was a state case the victims would have the opportunity to receive restitution Epstein would be required to
[10:28]pay for them to hire a lawyer to bring a case against him a case in which he would have to plead no contest and
[10:38]provide them with restitution and the concern and these are the words of the career prosecutor that quote she did not
[10:47]want to share with the victims that the office was attempting to secure for them the ability to obtain monetary compensation because she is aware that if she disclosed that and the
[10:58]negotiations fell through Epstein's counsel would use this to question the victims credibility and her concerns were not hypothetical
[11:09]what if Epstein's attorneys had already asked one of the victims quote now tell me about when the federal prosecutors told you about getting money and so when
[11:20]the agreement was signed shortly after the agreement was signed Epstein's counsels indicated that Epstein may not comply with the agreement and the agreement was appealed at various levels
[11:30]within the Justice Department and she details in this affidavit an affidavit that's also corroborated by the FBI case
[11:38]agent how she and he and the office was concerned that Epstein might not comply
[11:47]and we would have to go to trial and we had to weigh the issue of how much to disclose against the issue of Liffe we
[11:57]have to go to trial we want to win we want to put Epstein away and talking about this would allow him to make the
[12:08]argument at trial that their testimony was compromised and so when she was finally when it was finally clear that Epstein would comply with the agreement
[12:19]she talks about how she made efforts to notify the victims how that was a Friday afternoon at 4:15 and that she learned
[12:29]that the state had scheduled the plea for 8:30 the following Monday and she talks about how over the weekend she made every effort to notify the victims at that
[12:41]time so again I would refer you to the
[13:49]documents I've provided there is a big gulf between sufficient evidence to go
[13:56]to trial and sufficient evidence to be confident in the outcome of that trial and so so if I could and I'll give you a
[14:07]follow-up in a minute but if I could and so when this case and if I provided a letter that outlined some of the
[14:15]timeline of this in July of 2007 the career staff from my office met and they said these are the four points that you
[14:25]will have to do in state court and if not we will proceed federally they were very serious that they would proceed
[14:37]federally that does not mean that they were confident in the final outcome and one of the tough questions in these cases what is the value of a secured
[14:47]guilty plea with registration versus rolling the dice and I know that in 2019 looking back on 2008 things may look different
[14:59]but this was the judgment of prosecutors with dozens of years of experience if you look through that letter you'll see this was not a single person making
[15:10]those decisions I do not think that the
[15:49]office violated the ABA standards by negotiating strongly and forcefully everything you could you got the best
[16:05]deal you could get and you have no regrets we believe that we proceeded
[16:14]appropriately that based on the evidence and not just my opinion but I've shared the affidavit based on the evidence there was value to getting a guilty plea
[16:26]and having him registered look no regrets is a very hard question at my confirmation hearing I was asked a
[16:36]similar question of one of the one of the issues that I raised as we expect a lot more transparency today as you watch
[16:44]these victim interviews it's very obvious that the victims feel that this
[16:53]was not a sufficient outcome these victims were traumatized we can't begin to understand what they went through and they look at this and they say but why
[17:05]and so you always look back and you say what if what I can say is time and I've provided a timeline of provided information about the
[17:16]individuals involved this was the view of the office there is a value to a sure
[17:26]guilty plea because letting him walk letting what the state attorney was ready to do go forward would have been
[17:37]absolutely awesome yes Ben pen from Bloomberg law you know
[17:47]in light of the attention this week on on your handling of back in 2008 victims of sex trafficking I wanted to ask about your role today as a labor secretary of
[17:58]labor you have oversight through the wage and hour division of certifying visas for victims of human trafficking including sex trafficking and just last week your wage and hour division issued
[18:09]a new policy that would essentially allow the agency it's being criticized by a lot of people I talked to for allowing the agency to completely remove itself or to virtually remove itself
[18:19]from continuing to certify these visas by referring them agencies how can you what was the purpose of that so so that that is if you read the policy that is
[18:29]not what it does our wage and hour administrator after she was confirmed came in and she reviewed the policies and she put in place a requirement that
[18:39]a criminal prosecutor be consulted any time one of these issues is brought to the divisions attention and that seems very reasonable don't we want criminal
[18:51]prosecutors to be consulted whenever someone says that they are a victim of trafficking and that prosecutor will be consulted and even if that prosecutor
[19:02]says this is not a case that we are going forward with the division will still consider whether to issue that visa on the facts so that is a
[19:12]mischaracterization of her decision and her policy yes we're detail about where and how you
[19:23]exactly negotiated this deal did you meet with Epstein's attorney alone at a Marriott hotel so you know I've read this and one of the things I find
[19:32]interesting is how how facts become facts because they're in a newspaper as
[19:40]opposed to the record I pulled up I I found out the details of that meeting because I scratch my own head about it and I've provided you a time line in a
[19:51]letter of the negotiations that make it very clear that this was negotiated by career prosecutors the I'm gonna answer your question the meeting that was
[20:01]alleged was a breakfast meeting that took place after the agreement was negotiated not before the agreement was signed in September after the agreement
[20:12]was negotiated one of Epstein's attorneys passed for a meeting asked for a hearing I was giving a speech of a staying at a hotel I agreed to have a brief meeting I believe at 7:00 a.m.
[20:23]rather than open the office I spoke with that attorney and then I referred that attorney to the career prosecutors nothing changed in that agreement they
[20:34]continued to litigate the matter they continued to peel the matter to Washington and nothing changed with one one exception there was an addendum that made clear
[20:43]that Epstein had to pay for any attorney that a victim that represented a victim
[20:52]in the cases against Epstein and so yes I met with opposing counsel it was a breakfast meeting because I was staying at the hotel it was after after not
[21:03]before and not part of the negotiations but it was after the agreement had been negotiated and that could be confirmed simply by looking at the date on the
[21:12]agreement and the date on the meeting so number one the agreement had already been locked in place so the agreement
[21:22]wasn't going to change before that agreement you know I was very careful to not negotiate this our career attorneys negotiated the agreement secondly I'd point out we live in a
[21:33]see where people have breakfast meetings all the time you don't open an office at 7 o'clock in the morning just to have a meeting you have it over breakfast yeah let me let me let me do this I I had I'd
[21:50]called you and I'll come back to you I'll come back to you younger I I wanted to give in an opportunity I'll come back to you in a minute thank you sir you've mentioned several times that you and the prosecutors in
[22:02]your office weren't sure that you could secure a win in this case but the very purpose of the of the CVRA is to give
[22:11]the victims an opportunity to weigh in and a federal judge ruled that you broke federal law by not doing so do you think that your thinking would have been different had you followed the law and
[22:22]consulted the victims so first let me let me point out we follow Department policy department policy at the time
[22:31]made very clear and this is in a written statement that was subsequently issued by what is called the office of legal counsel which is the chief policymaking
[22:42]the chief legal arm of the Department of Justice that these situations with non prosecution agreements are not covered
[22:51]by the CVRA at the time because the CVR a according to department policy does not attach until a case is actually
[23:02]brought now I understand that the judge had a different view and I understand that the judges view was that department policy did not comply with the law and
[23:11]that's the way our system works our system works in that a judge can say what the department policy is is not consistent with the law now let me also
[23:22]point out since then a few years ago Congress amended the CVR a and Congress amended it explicitly to say that non
[23:31]prosecution agreements would be in fact covered and that is a good thing as I said at my confirmation hearing you know we expect a lot more transparency if we
[23:42]had had more transparency perhaps this case would have gone too I've laid out the reasons why there were
[23:52]concerns about providing all the details to the victims before Epstein fled but
[24:02]the Department of Justice has been very clear throughout multiple presidential administrations throughout multiple attorneys general that the department's position is that there was no violation
[24:13]of the law would you make sorry you're naming and quicker with I'm Kaitlin Collins for CNN would you make this same
[24:24]agreement today so these questions are always very difficult because we now
[24:32]have 12 years of knowledge and hindsight and we live in a very different world
[24:42]today's world treats victims very very differently today's world does not allow some of the victim shaming that could have taken place at trial 12 years ago
[24:53]today's world understands that when interviewing victims when a listening testimony that testimony can be sometimes contradictory that memories
[25:04]are difficult and so I don't think we can say you know take a case that is
[25:12]this bold and fully know how it play out today I understand what the victims say
[25:22]and I'm not here to try to say that I can stand in their shoes or that I can address their concerns I'm here to say
[25:33]we did what we did because we wanted to see Epstein go to jail he needed to go
[25:40]to jail he needed he needed he needed to go to jail and that was that was the
[25:51]focus Jon fun Jon
[25:54]John dozens of girls were allegedly molested why didn't you just keep
[26:05]investigating so the victims of which we
[26:15]were aware were part of this and and under the agreement in the Southern District of Florida the investigation ceased and they had the opportunity to
[26:26]proceed Sibley that does not mean that the investigation had to cease nationwide and as we see today as we saw New York investigations could certainly
[26:36]and obviously have proceeded in other districts Secretary of Labor given your
[26:46]history with this case so I have been I started one of the first human trafficking task forces at the Department of Justice I have been
[26:55]aggressive prosecuting human trafficking we stood we stepped in in this case and we stopped a bad state plea and so I
[27:06]understand from today's perspective that people scratch their heads and they say why here's the question to ask how many other times have you seen a US
[27:18]Attorney's Office intervene in a state matter and say stop the state plea
[27:26]because it is in sufficient yes earlier
[27:37]this year it was disclosed that they're going that they're doing a review into how you and other prosecutors in your office handled this matter what is the status of that what exactly are they looking at will you submit to an interview even though you're no longer
[27:49]with the Justice Department and if they find any misconduct will you resign first I don't know what the status of that is I would refer that to the Office of
[27:59]Professional Responsibility I don't speak for them I will clearly submit for an interview even though I don't have to I think what they do is important the Office of Professional Responsibility
[28:10]will have access to the full record they will have access to all the facts they all have access to the FBI reports they'll have access to the victim introduced they can look at this matter
[28:21]in its totality and and so I think it is important that they proceed I will gladly be part of it and and I think what they will find is that the office
[28:31]acted appropriately yeah Casta it's yummy shelf endureth PBS
[28:42]newshour as labor secretary you've tried repeatedly to cut a program that deals with with human trafficking in the Labor Department by up to 80 percent going before Congress advocating for that why
[28:53]should people trust you to focus on human trafficking and protect victims if you've done that and I'm like a follow-up question so you're referring to grants that go to
[29:01]foreign countries for foreign country labor related work as part of the budget every year those grants have been
[29:11]removed as have other grants for foreign countries and let me just add as part of the budget every year those grants are put right back in by Congress this is what happens in Washington and I fully
[29:21]suspect that those grants will remain in this year your follow up sources told me that the president encouraged you to
[29:32]hold this press conference can you speak a little bit about what the president told you ahead of this press conference and whether you're you're here to give a message to the president are you fighting for your job or are you trying to send a message to victims and if so
[29:43]what is the message to victims who say they don't trust you anymore so first I'm not about to talk about conversations with the president and I'm not here to send any signal to the
[29:53]president I think it's important a lot of questions were raised and I this has reached the point that I think it's important to have a public airing I think it's important that these
[30:02]questions be passed and answered and and as to a message to the victims the message is you need to come forward I heard this morning that another victim
[30:13]came forward and made horrendous horrendous allegations allegations that should never happen to any woman much
[30:23]less a young girl and has victims come forward these cases can be brought and they can be brought by the federal government they can be brought by state attorneys and they will be brought we
[30:34]have seen in the last few years cases brought against individuals that got away with things for well over a decade and you know it's it's important to realize that people who are getting
[30:44]away with these people were not going to jail at all and we're aware of those high-profile cases and we've seen as victims come forward how the justice
[30:55]system deals with them and so the message to victims is come forward hi mr. secretary a virgin madam seeking
[31:06]me you just said victims need to come sorry Richard Madden with CTV television you just said a moment ago the victim should come forward but you still haven't offered an apology to them why
[31:17]is that so the victims should come forward because the justice system needs to hear from them and what the victims went through
[31:27]is horrific what the victims continue to go through is horrific I've seen these videos I've seen the interviews I'm sorry I've seen the interviews on on television of these
[31:39]victims and in their stories and and so it's hard but I also think it's important that we understand that the
[31:48]men and women of my office going back to 2006 and 2007 and 2008 have spent their career prosecuting these types of cases
[31:58]and in their heart in our heart we were trying to do the right thing for these victims and so this is horrific this is awful
[32:10]each one of these cases is just devastating and saddening but I also think it's important to realize that the
[32:19]prosecutors were trying to do the right thing sir yeah Jeff Roe from Daily Mail how are you um are you aware of alleged
[32:29]obstruction of justice by mr. Epstein it seemed to be been mentioned in that image in a note and a bail memo by New York prosecutors and did he take every student to intimidate prosecutors and if
[32:39]he did or harass witnesses cannibal witnesses if he did that why would he get what's been beautiful what's been called a sweetheart I'll I I can't I can't comment on the New York case that
[32:48]that would not be appropriate there is a pending your case in in New York I can't comment sir I'm curious who it mean
[32:59]justice at Neal McKay one American news who at main justice reviewed this case or your decision and did you have any interaction with robert muller at the
[33:08]time so I shared a letter that I wrote to one of Epstein's defense attorneys and I shared that letter in part because it shows much of the timeline it shows
[33:19]how initially the the meetings that took place were between the in July between
[33:30]the first assistant the criminal chief the Palm Beach the Palm Beach office chief and a line attorney and two FBI agents with absence attorneys you'll notice that the initial meeting has
[33:40]outlined in this letter who are all career attorneys how they presented the terms how Epstein's attorneys were dissatisfied and asked for a meeting with me how I subsequently returned YZ
[33:52]along with all the career officials how at that meeting we then invited the chief of the Child Exploitation obscenity section from the Department of Justice to travel down because one of
[34:04]them you know one of the things we wanted to make sure of was that he had going back to the earlier question about the ABA rule that we had sufficient evidence to proceed ethically and then
[34:16]it details a little bit on how Epstein's counsels appealed the decisions to Washington I'd refer you to the record you know one of the really disturbing things about this case is there's a
[34:27]record here the documents that I shared today we've shared previously with media yet I've seen no reference to any of these documents in the
[34:37]respective of some of these prosecutors there is a record all these documents are publicly available and could have been pulled up by anyone in this room
[34:48]and so and and and so you know there there is a record that will you know I wasn't at main justice I do not have a
[34:57]full list of the individuals that that reviewed this matter at main justice I can tell you the individuals reference in this letter and and I would refer you to the record because I this was 12
[35:09]years ago I do not have a full list of the individuals that review this at main justice well as the record makes clear individuals from main justice were
[35:19]involved fairly early on and we're certainly aware of it and and I think if you look at the record it will become clear that our decisions were appealed
[35:28]again and again to two main justice served so the deal that you negotiated resulted in two things one is that the
[35:40]case ended with mr. Epstein pleading to state prostitution charges and another thing that did was I immunized his co-conspirators so two questions did you consider his victims in that case to be
[35:51]prostitutes and why did you immunize his co-conspirators so the answer to were the victims prostitutes no victims
[36:02]they were victims end of story they were victims the second part of that is in the purpose in this case was to bring
[36:12]Epstein to jail to put him behind bars and so there were other individuals that may have been involved that in any type
[36:23]of conspiracy they're individuals around someone the focus really is on the top player and that's where our focus appropriately was let me uh let me also say something because a lot has been
[36:34]said about this 13 month when we proceeded the expectation was that it would be an 18-month sentence and the expectation was that it would be served
[36:45]in jail and so this work release was yes and I've been on record as far back as 2011 saying that it was not what was
[36:56]bargained for and it was not what we expected but this was a state court plea and because it was a state court plea the terms of confinement were under the
[37:07]jurisdiction of the state of Florida and so the outrage over that 13-month you know getting to to leave jail is
[37:16]entirely appropriate when we entered into this we I at least fully thought
[37:26]that he would be spending the time in jail that's what we mean by someone
[37:31]going to jail in Spanish I would really appreciate it
[37:41]I'll tell you what if you answer the you want if you ask me a question in Spanish I will answer in Spanish is that fair I
[37:47]was trying to get nuestro pickling
[38:01]atheist Korean Gaeta Senor we're a la cárcel we're incredibly important a que él fuera a la cárcel
[38:10]okay yes well done Ella tenía que da e bonito DeSoto persona en el pais in
[38:18]knowing notice okay sex while I pour xox
[38:27]emo a theory of that victim a pregunta last witness and so Freda mucho an
[38:39]atheist a yo a me Rado algún of the law saying the lost interviews the law say ayuda me they introduced a de la gente
[38:49]vistas en una sinto muy muy difícil para la mean have a mess traffic al a
[38:58]trataron de hacer lo que podían con look at them young at the castle just a
[39:08]question already victims was to come forward what's your message specifically
[39:19]to those who did come forward and felt let down by you they can't look the victims came forward and there were several victims you know I believe that
[39:31]in one of the filings the Department of Justice talked to several of the victims and some of the victims just didn't want
[39:40]any any public notoriety other victims have provided interviews and said they felt left but down that they were left
[39:48]out these are really hard cases the prosecutors in my office and I were focused on putting him in jail I
[39:59]provided information from the career tourney as to why there were concerns if we went to trial and it became clear
[40:09]that they were going to receive money if he was convicted how that would impeach their credibility and and today that would proceed very differently because the victim shaming is is just not
[40:20]accepted but the circumstances of trials and what juries would consider 12 years ago was different and so these were the judgments that were made I understand
[40:32]that that individuals will look at these judgments and say well maybe a different judgment should have been made you know you can always look at a play after the fact and say should it have been the safe play or should you have gone for
[40:42]the big score and ask which is the right outcome but I provided these documents so that you could hear from the prosecutors themselves how these talk
[40:54]how this was being weighed sir Jesse's a grand business did the Miami Herald reach out to you last November and if so why don't you set the record straight on the breakfast meeting then
[41:06]so media has reached out to me over the years about this I think it's very important the Department of Justice is the entity that is litigating all these matters
[41:16]and quite honestly until until recently I haven't commented on this since 2011 because I think it's important for the United States to litigate cases through
[41:26]the Department of Justice and if former US Attorney's responded to media inquiries about pending cases and this is a pending case there was a live and
[41:37]there still is a live civil matter the former US Attorney's responded to media inquiries all the time we'd have havoc in our justice system you can't have a Department of Justice as a litigating
[41:48]entity with US Attorney's giving press statements now your follow-up question may be why am i talking today and the answer is this has clearly reached a level where I thought it was important
[42:00]to have this kind of press conference to take questions and to provide these facts and these perspectives and I understand that individuals may say this
[42:10]was not enough but this is the way it was viewed not only by me but by many
[42:18]back in 2008 one thing yes you said that
[42:29]the victims were not prostitutes but the agreement was he was jailed for prostitution charges not for child support for sex trafficking can you just
[42:41]oh the the agreement the agreement was this was a state here's here's why why this is hard this was a state case he
[42:51]was arraigned he a state grand jury returned a prostitution charge against him a solicitation charge if I recall
[43:01]that was a state grand jury he was allowed to self surrender by the State Attorney's Office as a result of that single charge that would have resulted
[43:10]in no jail time and ultimately what the agreement did was say you have to go back and you have to plead to a more
[43:19]serious state charge that requires jail time that requires registration and under this Agreement you'll have a mechanism for restitution
[43:29]the agreement itself you know ultimately the state of Florida and the State Attorney's Office in Florida is a separate sovereign the US Attorney does
[43:38]not determine how those offices run themselves or what charges they bring I do not consider the victims prostitutes
[43:47]I think that is insulting to them these were victims they were not just women victims they were children victims mr.
[43:57]secretary um I'm Debra Saunders with the Las Vegas review-journal since mr. Epstein left jail he's been a
[44:06]public figure he's been a man about town he hasn't seemed particularly contrite about what he did what have you thought when you've seen him
[44:16]you know what I've thought is I keep reading these paper articles about pending investigations here or there you know if if someone does a Google search they'll see that there were rumors of Investigations going on for the last 10
[44:27]years and New York finally stood up and stood up and they took one of those investigations and they brought charges and in all candor I wish it would have happened I'm glad to see that it's
[44:39]happening now you say you know he's a bad man and and he needs to be put away and you know based on additional allegations that I saw this morning
[44:50]there are there multiple jurisdictions whether federal or state that that he's going to have to answer to of a few a few more a few more questions yes with
[45:01]Miami Herald I wanted to ask him follow through your answer the earlier question about the potential co-conspirators were you confident at the time that any potential additional co-conspirators
[45:10]didn't commit sexual abuses against underage girls like Epstein did even if it may have not have been same scale because some of those victims have accused others of doing similar acts to
[45:21]them so let me see how I can address your question without running afoul of
[45:27]Department of Justice guidelines if my office had been aware of individuals who
[45:38]committed acts such as sexual abuse you know my office it would not have been my position that those individuals should have been part of
[45:50]that kind of immunity it's not even a Muni deal should not have been part of that paragraph and so so I know that there are a lot of rumors about who
[46:00]those individuals may or may not be I think those rumors are misconstruing the acts of the office with respect to that particular paragraph one more question
[46:11]Richard Lardner from The Associated Press Secretary will you ever made aware at any point your handling of this case mr. Epstein was an intelligence asset of
[46:21]some sort so so so so there has there has been reporting to that effect and and let me say there's been reporting to
[46:31]a lot of effects in in in this case not just now but over the years and and again I would you know I would hesitate
[46:40]to take this reporting as fact this was a case that was brought by our office it was brought based on the facts and and I
[46:51]look at that reporting and others I can't address it directly because of our our guidelines but I can tell you that that a lot of reporting is just going
[47:02]down rabbit holes a few a few a few more questions a few more questions have you asked a question yet okay how about that in front of you yes sorry I'm trying to
[47:12]do it one question per person okay go ahead hi Katie Rodgers at the New York Times I'm just wondering what makes you so confident that the president is going to continue to have you serve there have
[47:23]been several advisors of his who he stands he stands up for initially but you're about at the level where he has backed away before so what makes you so confident so um look I am here to talk
[47:34]about this case I'm doing my job if at some point the president decides that I am NOT the best person to do this job I respect that that is his choice I serve at the pleasure of the president I
[47:46]thought yesterday he was kind and any showed great support but we have to remember we are here because we are
[47:56]part of an administration that is creating jobs that is creating growth that is really transforming our economy and focusing it on you know the the
[48:07]forgotten man and woman and if at some point he says look you know you're not the right person for this right now or for you know you're standing in the way
[48:16]I respect that to say to these victims beyond you should come forward that place is a lot of burden on children what else do you have to say you've
[48:28]avoided addressing these these people directly why so so to be clear that is not all I said you know I think if I recall and I obviously don't have a
[48:40]transcript here but you know what I've said previously is I have seen these interviews and I can't I generally we can't begin to fathom
[48:51]what these victims have been through I don't think that anyone that has not been in this situation can begin to fathom the closest I can come is to think what would I feel like if one of
[49:02]my girls was going through this and I would be you know I'm not sure I can say the way I would feel and on television but but even that is different than what
[49:13]the victims themselves went through and so the point I'm trying to make is everything that the victims have gone through in these cases is horrific and
[49:24]and their response is entirely justified at the same time I think it's important to stand up for the prosecutors of my
[49:35]former office and make clear that what they were trying to do was help these victims they should not be portrayed as
[49:45]individuals that just didn't care because they have spent a lifetime of bringing cases like this they are
[49:53]individuals who really really do care yes oh hi I'm Nikki Schwab New York Post
[50:04]how much of this do you think was Epstein getting special treatment because of his enormous enormous wealth and also political connections so you know I've heard a lot about that and if
[50:16]you go through the record you will see that in July he was presented with certain terms and and I laid this out in a letter an open letter that I wrote to address some of these questions in 2011
[50:28]and he was presented with terms and the office throughout this entire negotiation and it took several months from July to what December through these
[50:40]five months of negotiations stuck to those terms you go to jail you register
[50:48]and you provide restitution the original term was two years the office ultimately agreed to 18 months register it had to
[50:59]be an effect it had to be an offense where there was registration because the world needed to be unnoticed that he was a sexual predator and it had to be a
[51:11]situation where the victims could seek restitution because it wasn't just enough for him to go to jail and let me also say you know I restitution is also
[51:22]not enough you can never put victims in the place they were before they were victimized you can't unwind history but restitution is important thank you very
[51:32]much his his attorneys certainly filed
[51:48]several appeals with main justice I will again restate when the career attorneys met with him they presented certain terms and the office stayed true to
[51:59]those terms throughout those terms did not change the agreement did not change no level of Appeal to main justice
[52:08]changed the terms of these initial
[52:13]points in those agreements for you and the proposed remedies from Jane Doe and
[52:24]one and to one of their requests is to can they just meet with you I know you're not apologizing today but would you be willing to meet with them you know that's a really that that's a really good question um this is
[52:33]currently in litigation and so I I don't want to I don't want to interfere with that litigation but let me just say I
[52:42]have monitored this litigation without you know I haven't monitored day-to-day I have never pulled the full record but I have watched it and I have seen what
[52:54]these victims have gone through and and whatever this litigation is concluded I've always had an open door policy and I've always welcomed the opportunity to sit down and I think it'd be really
[53:05]healthy for prosecutors to sometimes circle back and and really hear about what happened because we all have to learn you know one of the one of the questions that came up at my
[53:16]confirmation hearing was what would you do differently and I alluded to this and I said the world is much more transparent we expect a lot more from government we are a less trust in
[53:27]society we can wonder whether that's right or wrong but we are a less trusting society today in part because
[53:35]our culture expects transparency and so to sit down and hear from victims how
[53:46]this impacted them I think would be healthy for prosecutors generally I can't commit in this particular case it's in litigation but I think that would be healthy for prosecutors
[53:57]gentlemen thank you very much