Overview
Paul Cassell, a former U.S. District Judge who left the bench to become a law professor at the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law, took on the representation of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims in the CVRA litigation beginning in 2008. Together with attorney Brad Edwards, Cassell pursued the case for over a decade, ultimately winning a landmark ruling that the government had violated victims’ rights — one of the most consequential victim rights decisions in federal law.
Background
Cassell had been a dedicated advocate for crime victims’ rights throughout his legal career. He served as a federal district judge in Utah from 2002 to 2007, then returned to academia. His expertise in federal procedure and victim rights law made him particularly suited to the CVRA challenge, which required sustained federal court litigation over a decade.
The CVRA Case
Working with Brad Edwards at Farmer Jaffe Weissing in Fort Lauderdale, Cassell represented multiple Jane Doe victims who challenged the 2008 NPA on CVRA grounds. The core argument was that prosecutors had violated 18 U.S.C. § 3771 by:
- Failing to notify victims before finalizing the NPA
- Denying victims the opportunity to confer with prosecutors
- Failing to provide victims the right to be heard regarding the resolution
The litigation was prolonged because the government disputed virtually every aspect of the victims’ standing and the applicability of the CVRA to the pre-charge NPA setting.
Judge Marra’s 2019 Ruling
In February 2019, Judge Kenneth Marra ruled that the government had violated the CVRA. The ruling validated years of Cassell and Edwards’s work. However, Marra declined to provide a remedy that would unwind the NPA, leaving the violation acknowledged but uncorrected.
Subsequent Litigation
Even after the Marra ruling, Cassell continued to pursue legal avenues seeking remedies for victims and to establish the evidentiary record that the NPA had been concluded improperly. The litigation contributed to eventual DOJ policy changes on victim notification in major cases.
Significance
Cassell and Edwards represent the reality that sustained, expert pro bono or contingency-fee litigation by committed attorneys can produce legal accountability that institutional channels fail to provide. Without their decade of work, the government’s CVRA violation might never have been judicially established.
Sources
CVRA litigation record; Judge Marra’s 2019 opinion; Cassell’s law review articles on victim rights; Brad Edwards’s public statements; journalism on the CVRA case history.