PALM BEACH COUNTY GRAND JURY PRESENTMENT State Attorney Barry Krischer — July 2006
The Palm Beach County grand jury proceeding in the Epstein case became one of the most contentious chapters in the case's history, with the Palm Beach Police Department publicly accusing State Attorney Barry Krischer of deliberately weakening the case presented to the grand jury.
BACKGROUND — POLICE INVESTIGATION: The Palm Beach Police Department, led by Chief Michael Reiter and Detective Joseph Recarey, conducted a thorough investigation of Jeffrey Epstein beginning in March 2005 after a parent reported that her 14-year-old daughter had been paid $300 for a sexual encounter at Epstein's Palm Beach estate. Over the following year, detectives identified and interviewed multiple victims, executed search warrants at 358 El Brillo Way, and compiled substantial evidence of a pattern of sexual abuse of underage girls.
Detective Recarey, who led the day-to-day investigation, documented accounts from multiple victims who described a consistent pattern: they were recruited by other girls, brought to Epstein's mansion, taken upstairs to a massage room, and subjected to escalating sexual contact. Recarey's investigation identified at least 17 victims.
POLICE RECOMMENDATION: The Palm Beach Police Department recommended that Krischer's office charge Epstein with multiple felony counts, including lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 16, sexual activity with a minor, and related offenses. These charges, if pursued successfully, could have resulted in substantial prison time.
GRAND JURY PRESENTATION: When Krischer brought the case to the Palm Beach County grand jury in July 2006, the presentation differed significantly from what the police department had anticipated. According to subsequent accounts from involved parties and reporting by the Miami Herald:
1. Weakened charges — Rather than presenting the full scope of the evidence supporting multiple felony charges, Krischer's office presented evidence supporting a single charge of solicitation of prostitution — a less serious offense that characterized the underage victims as prostitutes rather than victims of sexual abuse.
2. Limited witness testimony — The number of victims called to testify before the grand jury was reportedly limited. Police investigators believed that presenting the testimony of multiple victims would have been far more compelling.
3. Characterization of victims — The framing of the case as "solicitation of prostitution" rather than sexual abuse of minors was particularly contentious. Victims' advocates and the police department argued that this characterization minimized the severity of the offenses and inappropriately shifted the narrative from abuse to a commercial transaction.
GRAND JURY RESULT: The grand jury returned an indictment on a single count of solicitation of prostitution, a significantly lesser charge than the police had recommended. This outcome was viewed by the Palm Beach Police Department as a direct result of the weakened presentation.
POLICE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE: In an extraordinary move, Police Chief Michael Reiter wrote a letter to State Attorney Krischer expressing his department's dissatisfaction with the grand jury presentation. Reiter subsequently referred the case to the FBI, requesting a federal investigation — a highly unusual step that reflected the depth of the department's frustration with the state attorney's handling of the case.
FBI INVESTIGATION AND FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT: The FBI's subsequent investigation, led by the Miami field office, expanded the scope of the inquiry and identified additional victims. The federal investigation ultimately produced the draft 53-page federal indictment that was later used as leverage in the Non-Prosecution Agreement negotiations.
KRISCHER'S POSITION: Krischer defended his office's handling of the case, citing the challenges of prosecuting cases involving reluctant witnesses and the legal complexities of the available evidence. He later stated that his office presented the strongest case supported by the evidence and that the grand jury made an independent decision based on what was presented.
SUBSEQUENT SCRUTINY: Krischer's handling of the grand jury presentation was a central focus of the 2018 Miami Herald investigation and subsequent public scrutiny. The episode raised fundamental questions about prosecutorial discretion, the influence of wealth on the criminal justice system, and the treatment of victims in cases involving powerful defendants.