Epstein Secrets

Memorandum SubjectDate Re: Operation Leap Year April 17, 2007 ToFrom R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney Jeff Sloman. First Assistant United States Attorney W

that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t

Memorandum SubjectDate Re: Operation Leap Year April 30, 2007 ToFrom R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney Jeff Sloman. First Assistant United States Attorney M

that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t

Memorandum SubjectDate Re: Operation Leap Year May I, 2007 (Revised 9/13/07) (2nd Revision 2/19/08) a ToFrom R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney Jeff Sloman,

that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t

Memorandum SubjectDate Re: Operation Leap Year (Revised 9/13/07) ToFrom R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney Jeff Sloman, First Assistant United States Attorney

that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t

Memorandum SubjectDate Re: Operation Leap Year April 23, 2007 ToFrom R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney Jeff Sloman. First Assistant United States Attorney M

that the person transported was, in fact, a minor, but need not prove that the defendant was aware of her minority. In conducting its analysis, the Jones Court relied upon cases interpreting sections of Title 21 relating to the distribution of drugs to a minor. See Jones at 540. Those cases have held that t