Back to Network
11
Shared Docs
11
Same-Page
11 / 11
Mentions
Document Mentions (11 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (11th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUSIO
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
ly applies to those who attempt to purchase underage sex, not merely the pimps of actual exploited children") (citing United States v. Roberts, 174 F. App's 475 (1 I th Cir. 2006) (in which defendant was convicted under sections 1591(a) and 1594(a) even though no actual children were involved)). CONCLUS
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (96)
Entities connected to both Casteneda and F. App's
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON35 w/ Casteneda·14 w/ F.
Michael Jackson
PERSON35 w/ Casteneda·14 w/ F.
Anderson
PERSON35 w/ Casteneda·14 w/ F.
United States
LOCATION31 w/ Casteneda·14 w/ F.
MW
Martin Weinberg
PERSON29 w/ Casteneda·14 w/ F.
GL
Gleeson
PERSON32 w/ Casteneda·9 w/ F.
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION27 w/ Casteneda·14 w/ F.
LA
LaFontaine
PERSON31 w/ Casteneda·9 w/ F.
Ferranti
PERSON31 w/ Casteneda·9 w/ F.
the Southern District
LOCATION26 w/ Casteneda·14 w/ F.
Reid Weingarten
PERSON28 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
PI
Pitman
PERSON28 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
Harry Reid
PERSON28 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
LA
Laskow
PERSON27 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
AN
Annabi
PERSON27 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
Prince Andrew
PERSON27 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
U.S. Virgin Islands
LOCATION27 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
Icarus
PERSON27 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
N.Y. Post
ORGANIZATION27 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.
New York State
LOCATION27 w/ Casteneda·11 w/ F.