OPR
location 46 mentions 60% confidence
Document Mentions (46)
| Document | Volume | Page | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| 059.pdf | - | 62 | ttee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts, sent a December 3, 2018 letter to OPR, citing the Miami Herald's report and reque... |
| 059.pdf | - | 65 | the evidence that a subject attorney violated such a standard intentionally or recklessly. Pursuant to OPR's analytical framework, when OPR concludes ... |
| 059.pdf | - | 104 | he documents she had promised, and Villafana wanted "the documents not the pitch." Lourie explained to OPR, however, that it was his practice to grant... |
| 059.pdf | - | 117 | ects' memories of particular conversations about this topic were unclear, but from their statements to OPR, a general consensus emerged that there wer... |
| 059.pdf | - | 131 | d ... gobs and gobs of cases." 83 In commenting on OPR's draft report, Acosta's attorney asserted that OPR's use of Acosta's quote, "a little bit more... |
| 059.pdf | - | 142 | , Menchel was uncertain whether the computer evidence would have been useful, but also acknowledged to OPR, "You always want more as a prosecutor." On... |
| 059.pdf | - | 148 | having directly with Alex Acosta, and Alex Acosta agreed to 18 months. Villafana further explained to OPR: Regarding going from 24 months to 20 months... |
| 059.pdf | - | 153 | use he "did not want people to believe him to have committed a variety of crimes." As she explained to OPR, Villafana believed the NP A did not need t... |
| 059.pdf | - | 214 | withheld information that would have influenced his decision, and Acosta did not make such a claim to OPR. As Acosta affirmed in his OPR interview, th... |
| 059.pdf | - | 247 | , "I don't think it hurts us." In a reply email, Lourie responded to another issue 237 As set forth in OPR's factual discussion, early in the negotiat... |
| 059.pdf | - | 252 | prosecution would have interfered improperly with the state's authority. He explained his reasoning to OPR: 245 In 2008, the Office of Enforcement Ope... |
| 059.pdf | - | 260 | state charges." He elaborated, 255 In commenting on OPR's draft report, Acosta's attorney objected to OPR's conclusion that Acosta knew or should have... |
| 059.pdf | - | 286 | n not to consult with the victims before entering into the NPA. 294 Ultimately, Acosta acknowledged to OPR, "[C]learly, given the way it's played out,... |
| 059.pdf | - | 290 | of occasions, she did not recall receiving any information about Epstein's guilty plea. In a letter to OPR, "Jane Doe #14's" attorney stated that alth... |
| 059.pdf | - | 298 | m. 321 OPR was unable to locate any records indicating that such allegations had ever been referred to OPR. Villafana told OPR that "Catch 22" was a r... |
| 059.pdf | - | 311 | ited Edwards to provide her with information, "[n]othing was provided." 349 Edwards did not respond to OPR's request to interview him, although he did... |
| 059.pdf | - | 337 | d a clear and unambiguous standard applying the CVRA before criminal charges were brought. Pursuant to OPR's established analytical framework, OPR doe... |
| 059.pdf | - | 341 | nto the decision not to consult with the victims before entering into the NP A, but he acknowledged to OPR, "[C]learly, given the way it's played out,... |
| 059.pdf | - | 349 | Reiter contacted, and no victims were present in the courtroom. No victim who provided information to OPR, either in person or through her attorney, r... |
| 059.pdf | - | 350 | tigation." See 42 U.S.C. §§ 10607( c )(1 )(B) and ( c )(3)(A). 423 Through counsel, Acosta argued that OPR's criticism of him for "electing to 'defer'... |
| 059.pdf | - | 353 | n about the 428 As noted, in his comments on OPR's draft report, Acosta's counsel strongly objected to OPR's finding of poor judgment with respect to ... |
| 059.pdf | - | 369 | , to their knowledge, anyone else made any efforts to intentionally delete the emails. In addition, at OPR's request, EOUSA conducted an analysis ofre... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report Executive Summary.pdf | - | 6 | ttee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts, sent a December 3, 2018 letter to OPR, citing the Miami Herald’s report and reque... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report Executive Summary.pdf | - | 9 | the evidence that a subject attorney violated such a standard intentionally or recklessly. Pursuant to OPR’s analytical framework, when OPR concludes ... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 7 | ttee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts, sent a December 3, 2018 letter to OPR, citing the Miami Herald’s report and reque... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 10 | the evidence that a subject attorney violated such a standard intentionally or recklessly. Pursuant to OPR’s analytical framework, when OPR concludes ... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 49 | he documents she had promised, and Villafaña wanted “the documents not the pitch.” Lourie explained to OPR, however, that it was his practice to grant... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 62 | ects’ memories of particular conversations about this topic were unclear, but from their statements to OPR, a general consensus emerged that there wer... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 76 | . . . gobs and gobs of cases.” 83 In commenting on OPR’s draft report, Acosta’s attorney asserted that OPR’s use of Acosta’s quote, “a little bit more... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 87 | , Menchel was uncertain whether the computer evidence would have been useful, but also acknowledged to OPR, “You always want more as a prosecutor.” On... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 93 | having directly with Alex Acosta, and Alex Acosta agreed to 18 months. Villafaña further explained to OPR: Regarding going from 24 months to 20 months... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 98 | use he “did not want people to believe him to have committed a variety of crimes.” As she explained to OPR, Villafaña believed the NPA did not need to... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 159 | withheld information that would have influenced his decision, and Acosta did not make such a claim to OPR. As Acosta affirmed in his OPR interview, th... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 192 | , “I don’t think it hurts us.” In a reply email, Lourie responded to another issue 237 As set forth in OPR’s factual discussion, early in the negotiat... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 197 | prosecution would have interfered improperly with the state’s authority. He explained his reasoning to OPR: 245 In 2008, the Office of Enforcement Ope... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 205 | state charges.” He elaborated, 255 In commenting on OPR’s draft report, Acosta’s attorney objected to OPR’s conclusion that Acosta knew or should have... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 231 | on not to consult with the victims before entering into the NPA.294 Ultimately, Acosta acknowledged to OPR, “[C]learly, given the way it’s played out,... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 235 | of occasions, she did not recall receiving any information about Epstein’s guilty plea. In a letter to OPR, “Jane Doe #14’s” attorney stated that alth... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 243 | m. 321 OPR was unable to locate any records indicating that such allegations had ever been referred to OPR. Villafaña told OPR that “Catch 22” was a r... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 256 | ited Edwards to provide her with information, “[n]othing was provided.” 349 Edwards did not respond to OPR’s request to interview him, although he did... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 282 | d a clear and unambiguous standard applying the CVRA before criminal charges were brought. Pursuant to OPR’s established analytical framework, OPR doe... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 286 | into the decision not to consult with the victims before entering into the NPA, but he acknowledged to OPR, “[C]learly, given the way it’s played out,... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 294 | Reiter contacted, and no victims were present in the courtroom. No victim who provided information to OPR, either in person or through her attorney, r... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 295 | investigation.” See 42 U.S.C. §§ 10607(c)(1)(B) and (c)(3)(A). 423 Through counsel, Acosta argued that OPR’s criticism of him for “electing to ‘defer’... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 298 | n about the 428 As noted, in his comments on OPR’s draft report, Acosta’s counsel strongly objected to OPR’s finding of poor judgment with respect to ... |
| 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf | - | 314 | , to their knowledge, anyone else made any efforts to intentionally delete the emails. In addition, at OPR’s request, EOUSA conducted an analysis of r... |