Subject: RE: Epstein matter¶
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 21:45:14 +0000¶
Importance: Normal¶
Confirming receipt – thank you for conveying.¶
best,¶
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2019 17:40¶
Subject: RE: Epstein matter¶
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2019 2:23 PM¶
Subject: Re: Epstein matter¶
Thank you. Yes, the information I provided via text stands. The only addition is a date: extended to include February 21, 2019.¶
In December 2018, there was an earlier sighting (and the first to my knowledge) which I reported to former PB Chief of Police, Mr. led the original Epstein investigation, in 2005.¶
EFTA00100416¶
Mr. mentioned there are cameras on the PB bike path and that registered offenders are not allowed on the bike paths accompanied or unaccompanied, in the island of Palm Beach. A sighting of an offender according to Mr. would make Mr. Epstein’s incident a police matter and subject to investigation. He said the video tapes are usually reviewed every 3 months and then erased. Mr. was uncertain if the PB police would still have the video of the November 2018 sightings.¶
My questions are:¶
-
Why would an offender and/or predator with a criminal record (understand there is a difference in the degree of culpability and risk) be allowed in any area (park, bike paths, school, etc.) where children congregate?
-
Would a sighting in an area where children congregate be sufficient cause for a police investigation or arrest given danger a serial offender/predator poses to children and adolescents? Specifically a serial offender/predator.
-
Federal and state laws differ however, could it be possible when investigating and prosecuting a predator/offender with a prior criminal record, that federal and state laws concur in the prosecution of the predator for the safety of the child/adolescent?
Thank you.¶
Thank you for your prompt response.¶