Epstein Secrets

of jurisdiction because judge knew that she could depart downward. 19 EFTA00224153 COURT CASES FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE U.S. I Bailey, 228 F.3d 637 (6s Cir. 2000) Internet Defendant contacted minors through Internet; used graphic language describing how he wanted to perform o

computer. 2252(aX1) Not Consummated Appealed sentence because expert testified that acts depicted in photos would cause pain. Affirmed. U.S. I Tillmon, 195 F.3d 640 (11" Cir. 1999) Internet Internet communications with "14 yr- old"; defendant attempted to persuade her to meet him in motel to e

t she could depart downward. 17 EFTA01729501 • COURT .. .... r %. • AS' - -.. *AMITY :. OO)$/g.PNOWNICAtI0N, ' ' , COAR.qE..- , U.S. v. Bailey, 228 F.3d 637 (61h Cir. 2000 ) Internet Defendant contacted minors through Internet; used graphic language describing how he wanted to perform

cause expert testified that acts depicted in photos would cause pain. Affirmed. 2422(b); 2252(a)(2); 2252(a)(1) Not Consummated atgr • U.S. v. Tillmon, 195 F.3d 640 (11th Cir. 1999) Internet Internet communications with "14 yr- old"; defendant attempted to persuade her to meet him in motel to

e to the statute: "The statute only applies to those who 'knowingly' persuade or entice, or attempt to persuade or entice, minors. United States v. Bailey, 228 F.3d 637, 639 (6th Cir. 2000). See United States v. Panfil, 338 F.3d 1° Indeed, this last problem is best illustrated by any call may claim t

t. 1338 (2006); United States v. Orrega, 363 F.3d 1093 (11th Cir. 2004); United States v. Miranda, 348 F.3d 1322 (I 1* Cir. 2003); United States v. Tillmon, 195 F.3d 640 (I I* Cir. 1999); United States v. Poe!, supra, 338 F.3d 1299 (11* Cir. 2003); United States v. Garrett, 190 F.3d 1220 (11° Cir. 1999

e to the statute: "The statute only applies to those who `knowingly' persuade or entice, or attempt to persuade or entice, minors. United States v. Bailey 228 F.3d 637, 639 (6th Cir. 2000). See United States v. Panfil, 338 F.3d 10 Indeed, this last problem is best illustrated by any calls may claim to

Ct. 1338 (2006); United States v. Orrega, 363 F.3d 1093 (11th Cir. 2004); United States v. Miranda, 348 F.3d 1322 (11° Cir. 2003); United States v. Tillmon, 195 F.3d 640 (11th Cir. 1999); United States v. Panfll, supra, 338 F.3d 1299 (11° Cir. 2003); United States it Garrett, 190 F.3d 1220 (11° Cir. 19