The deal: Acosta and the non-prosecution agreement

Under the non-prosecution agreement, signed on 24 September 2007, Epstein would plead guilty to two state charges, serve 18 months, register as a sex offender and not contest civil claims by victims who sued under a federal statute. In exchange the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida would not bring federal charges. Prosecutors had drafted a 53-page indictment, according to the Herald. [1][2]

The agreement went further. It promised not to prosecute four named women who worked for Epstein, and “any potential co-conspirators.” That clause is the source of the endless question: who else was covered? Federal prosecutors in New York later argued, and courts agreed, that the Florida agreement did not bind other districts, which is how Epstein could be charged in 2019 and Maxwell in 2020. [1][3]

Federal law gives crime victims a right to confer with prosecutors and to be told of developments. In this case, prosecutors negotiated in secret with Epstein’s lawyers, and some victims were told the investigation was still open after the agreement had been signed. Two women, later joined by others, sued in 2008. [1][2]

In February 2019, after more than ten years of litigation, Judge Kenneth Marra ruled that the government violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act by concealing the agreement. He did not throw out the deal. After Epstein died the case was dismissed as moot, and the full appeals court later held that the law’s rights do not attach before charges are filed. The Justice Department’s own review found victims were not treated with the “forthrightness and sensitivity” they deserved. [1][2][3]

Acosta’s explanation, given at a press conference in July 2019 and again to Congress, is that state prosecutors were ready to let Epstein walk with no jail time, that a federal trial was risky because victims were reluctant to testify, and that the agreement at least forced jail and registration. He said his office “proceeded appropriately.” [3][5]

The Herald found a different picture: an aggressive defense team that included Alan Dershowitz, Kenneth Starr and Jay Lefkowitz, a former colleague of Acosta’s at the law firm Kirkland & Ellis; repeated concessions; and prosecutors who kept the deal quiet. The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, after two years, found Acosta had “exercised poor judgment” but had not committed professional misconduct and was not influenced by Epstein’s wealth or connections. It was the department reviewing itself. [1][2][4]

Then there is the famous line. In July 2019 Vicky Ward reported that a former White House official said Acosta had told Trump transition interviewers he had been told Epstein “belonged to intelligence” and to leave it alone. The source was anonymous and second-hand. Asked directly by House investigators in 2025, Acosta said he had not said that and had never been contacted by an intelligence agency about Epstein. See the intelligence question. [5][6]