time which is against the law as found by a federal judge earlier this year. i want you to listen to part of his explanation. the concern and these are the words of the career prosecutor, that, quote, she did not 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 if she disclosed that, and the negotiations fell through, epstein s counsel would use this to question the victims credibility. what was your response when you heard him say that? well there is two problems with that argument. first of all, before the deal was at the point where epstein appeared in court and actually was sentenced, she didn t have to tell them that there was an that the restitution provision, which by the way i ve also been told was extremely unusual because they basically said that an attorney would be hired and paid for by epstein to
handle these restitution cases which is a conflict. you re having the perpetrator pay the legal fees for the lawyer who is supposed to get the women money. and that whole thing is another whole problem. but nevertheless, they didn t have to tell them early on that about the restitution provision, they could have still said we have a plea agreement and we re working on this plea agreement. number one. and number two, when they got to the sentencing part of it, then what is their excuse? they re not going to trial. what is their excuse then for not telling them about the whole plea deal. you could tell them at the point where you know you re not going to trial. and they didn t do that either. julie k. brown of the miami herald, congratulations again on the justice that you are bringing to the world because of your investigative series. it is really remarkable and i just want to thank you. thanks for having me, jake. coming up, much more on the breaking news. what secretary acos