Epstein Secrets

re. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States I Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base to minors, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 859(a)

ral prosecutors have pursued under the federal sta tes at issue here. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States I Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base

diction is necessary. See Tab 11, November 9, 2007 Letter from Justice Department Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski to the House Committee on the Judiciary, p. 8-9. 3 08-80736-CV-MARRA RFP WPB 001672 EFTA00209851 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Summon of the Law We have reviewed every repor

e. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States v. Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base to minors, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 84I(a)(1), and 859(a)

l prosecutors have pursued under the federal statutes at issue here. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States v. Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base

diction is necessary. See Tab 11, November 9, 2007 Letter from Justice Department Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski to the House Committee on the Judiciary, p. 8-9. 3 EFTA00210076 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Summary of the Law We have reviewed every reported case under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591,

e. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United Stares v. Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base to minors, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 859(a)

ion of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1); and sex trafficking of children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1591. United States v. Boehm, Case No. 3:04CR00003 (D. Alaska 2004). Boehm's actions, unlike Mr. Epstein's, also had a strong interstate nexus: Boehm purchased and distributed

hat Federal jurisdiction is necessary. See Tab 11, November 9, 2007 Letter from Justice Department Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General to the House Committee on the Judiciary, p. 8-9. 3 3505-019 Page 49 of 63 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00003321 EFTA00157703