Epstein Secrets

Page 28 of 36 the same act are intended to have the same meaning.") (quotation and citation omitted). Two Mann Act cases are particularly apt. In Hansen', Half, 291 U.S. 559 (1934), the Government charged the defendant with violating the Mann Act after she returned to the country with a man with who

subject matter, end Ea:kitty/Dives his rialst to contest liability and also waives his fight to contst damages up to an amount as agreed to between the Identified Individual and Epstein, so long as the identified individual elites to proceed exclusively under IS V.S.C. § 2255. and agrees to waive any other claim for da

with relatively little disruption, continue to operate their highly lucrative business from any number of overseas locations"); • United States v. Hansen, 108 F. App'x 331 (6th Cir. 2004) (affirming district court order of pretrial release of defendant, a resident and citizen of Denmark-from where def

subject matter, and Epstein waives his right to contest liability and also waives his right to comes' damages up to an amount as agreed to between the Identified Individual and Epstein, so long as the identified individual elects to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and agrees to waive any other claim for da

with relatively little disruption, continue to operate their highly lucrative business from any number of overseas locations"); • United States v. Hansen, 108 F. App'x 331 (6th Cir. 2004) (affirming district court order of pretrial release of defendant, a resident and citizen of Denmark-from where def

subject matter, and Epstein waives his right to contest liability and also waives his right to comes' damages up to an amount as agreed to between the Identified Individual and Epstein, so long as the identified individual elects to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and agrees to waive any other claim for da