Epstein Secrets

or but instead undercover agent. Appellate court affirmed enhancement because pattern of activity used minor interchangeably with victim. U.S. I Manley, Slip Copy, 2007 WL 1379982 (11th Cir. 2007) Slip Copy Not for Publication Internet Internet chat room communications between father of 12 yr

Not Consummated Showed up for meeting Sling 55 EFTA00224189 COURTIIIIIIIIIIIII .11-Mr . FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION , a CHARGE11.„ U.S. I Rojas, 145 Fed. Appx. 647 (1 l'a Cir. 2005) Unpublished Internet No specific information available but implication is that this was intemet communica

r but instead undercover agent. Appellate court affirmed enhancement because pattern of activity used minor interchangeably with victim. U.S. v. Manley, • Slip Copy, 2007 WL Slip Copy Not for Internet Internet chat room communications between father of 12 yr-old boy and 2422(6); 2252A(a)(1) &

months. Conviction affirmed; sentence vacated & remanded because of Booker error. 2422(b) Not Consummated Showed up for meeting Sting U.S. v. Rojas, 145 Fed. Appx. 647 (11th Cir. 2005) Unpublished Internet No specific information available but implication is that this was internet communica

r but instead undercover agent. Appellate court affirmed enhancement because pattern of activity used minor interchangeably with victim. U.S. v. Manley, Slip Copy, 2007 WL Slip Copy Not for Internet Internet chat room communications between father of 12 yr-old boy and 2422(b); 2252A(a)(1) & (

nsummated Showed up for meeting Stint, Sentenced to 78 months. Conviction affirmed; sentence vacated & remanded because of Booker error. U.S. v. Rojas, 145 Fed. Appx. 647 (1 1th Cir. 2005) Unpublished Internet No specific information available but implication is that this was intemet communica

or but instead undercover agent. Appellate court affirmed enhancement because pattern of activity used minor interchangeably with victim. U.S.'. Manley, Slip Copy, 2007 WL Slip Copy Not for Internet Internet chat room communications between father of 12 yr-old boy and 2422(b); 2252A(a)(1) & (

5,000 fine, $86 restitution & $300 special assessment. Affirmed. 57 EFTA00226339 COURT CASES FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION. CIIARGE.S U.S. I Rojas, 145 Fed. Appx. 647 (11th Cir. 2005) Unpublished Internet No specific information available but implication is that this was internet communica