Epstein Secrets

]he only factual issue in the case was whether petitioners dominant purpose in making the trip was to facilitate her practice of prostitution. . .); Cleveland v. United States, 329 U.S. 14, 20 (1946) ("There was evidence . . . that the unlawful purpose was the dominant motive."). There is no basis for co

veled in interstate commerce on any of Epstein's planes to engage in any of the conduct alleged. 3. There Was No Intent To Engage in the Conduct at the Time of the Travel. Even assuming arguendo that any travel occurred for the purpose of getting massages from women, there is no evidence that at the time he was trave

T]he only factual issue in the case was whether paitioners dominant purpose in making the trip was to facilitate her practice of prostitution. . .); Cleveland I United States, 329 U.S. 14, 20 (1946) ("There was evidence .. . that the unlawful purpose was the dominant motive."). There is no basis for conc

veled in interstate commerce on any of Epstein's planes to engage in any of the conduct alleged. 3. There Was No Intent To Engage in the Conduct at the Time of the Travel. Even assuming urguendu that any travel occurred for the purpose of getting massages from women, there is no evidence that at the time he was trave

T]he only factual issue in the case was whether petitioners dominant purpose in making the trip was to facilitate her practice of prostitution.. .); Cleveland I United States, 329 U.S. 14, 20 (1946) ("There was evidence ... that the unlawful purpose was the dominant motive."). There is no basis for concl

veled in interstate commerce on any of Epstein's planes to engage in any of the conduct alleged. 3. There Was No Intent To Eneage in the Conduct at the Time of the Travel. Even assuming arguendo that any travel occurred for the purpose of getting massages from women, there is no evidence that at the time he was trave