Epstein Secrets

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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

Supp. 3d 283, 292 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (Bianco, J.) (collecting cases). The Second Circuit has never directly addressed this issue. See United States v. Sablmani, 493 F.3d 63, 78 n.18 (2d Cir. 2007) ("The government has not argued and, therefore, we have no occasion to consider whether it would be `contrary

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