Epstein Secrets

ther authorized or helped negotiate the resolution of the matter. See, e.g., United States' Second Supplemental Privilege Log filed as Dkt. 329-1 in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 v. United States, No. 08-CV-80736 (S.D. Fla.) (the "CVRA litigation") (illustrating the number of prosecutors involved in the dec

alleged sex acts. Mr. Epstein's conduct, however, is akin to consumer or purchaser behavior and should be outside the ambit of 18 U.S.C. § 1591. See Fierro, 2012 WL 13042630, at *4 ("[T]he TVPA is inapplicable to individual purchasers of sex from trafficking victims...").1° I° While Fiero represents th

n of the statute as a whole indicates that it is meant to punish those who are the providers or pimps of children, not the purchasers or the johns." Fierro v. Taylor, No. 11-CV8573, 2012 WL 13042630, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D.

at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D. Jan. 4, 2012)) (emphasis added). In Fierro, the district court found § 1591 inapplicable to consumers or purchasers of sex acts. Here, the principal conduct underlying the indictment is Mr.

ther authorized or helped negotiate the resolution of the matter. See, e.g., United States' Second Supplemental Privilege Log filed as Dkt. 329-1 in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 v. United States, No. 08-CV-80736 (S.D. Fla.) (the "CVRA litigation") (illustrating the number of prosecutors involved in the dec

n of the statute as a whole indicates that it is meant to punish those who are the providers or pimps of children, not the purchasers or the johns." Fierro v. Taylor, No. 11-CV8573, 2012 WL 13042630, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D.

alleged sex acts. Mr. Epstein's conduct, however, is akin to consumer or purchaser behavior and should be outside the ambit of 18 U.S.C. § 1591. See Fierro, 2012 WL 13042630, at *4 ("[T]he TVPA is inapplicable to individual purchasers of sex from trafficking victims...").1° I° While Fiero represents th

at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D. Jan. 4, 2012)) (emphasis added). In Fierro, the district court found § 1591 inapplicable to consumers or purchasers of sex acts. Here, the principal conduct underlying the indictment is Mr.

ther authorized or helped negotiate the resolution of the matter. See, e.g., United States' Second Supplemental Privilege Log filed as Dkt. 329-1 in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 v. United States, No. 08-CV-80736 (S.D. Fla.) (the "CVRA litigation") (illustrating the number of prosecutors involved in the dec

n of the statute as a whole indicates that it is meant to punish those who are the providers or pimps of children, not the purchasers or the johns." Fierro v. Taylor, No. 11-CV8573, 2012 WL 13042630, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D.

alleged sex acts. Mr. Epstein's conduct, however, is akin to consumer or purchaser behavior and should be outside the ambit of 18 U.S.C. § 1591. See Fierro, 2012 WL 13042630, at *4 ("[T]he TVPA is inapplicable to individual purchasers of sex from trafficking victims...").1° I° While Fiero represents th

at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D. Jan. 4, 2012)) (emphasis added). In Fierro, the district court found § 1591 inapplicable to consumers or purchasers of sex acts. Here, the principal conduct underlying the indictment is Mr.

ther authorized or helped negotiate the resolution of the matter. See, e.g., United States' Second Supplemental Privilege Log filed as Dkt. 329-1 in Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 v. United States, No. 08-CV-80736 (S.D. Fla.) (the "CVRA litigation") (illustrating the number of prosecutors involved in the dec

n of the statute as a whole indicates that it is meant to punish those who are the providers or pimps of children, not the purchasers or the johns." Fierro v. Taylor, No. 11-CV8573, 2012 WL 13042630, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D.

alleged sex acts. Mr. Epstein's conduct, however, is akin to consumer or purchaser behavior and should be outside the ambit of 18 U.S.C. § 1591. See Fierro, 2012 WL 13042630, at *4 ("[T]he TVPA is inapplicable to individual purchasers of sex from trafficking victims...").1° I° While Fiero represents th

at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2012) (quoting United States v. Bonestroo, No. 11-CR-40016, 2012 WL 13704, at *4 (D.S.D. Jan. 4, 2012)) (emphasis added). In Fierro, the district court found § 1591 inapplicable to consumers or purchasers of sex acts. Here, the principal conduct underlying the indictment is Mr.