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

ther sections of the Mann Act shows that Congress likewise did not intend to require proof of knowledge of age to violate those sections either. See Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc. , 513 U.S. 561, 570 (1995) (noting the "normal rule of statutory construction" that "identical worth used in different parts of the same act are in

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

ther sections of the Mann Act shows that Congress likewise did not intend to require proof of knowledge of age to violate those sections either. See Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc. , 513 U.S. 561, 570 (1995) (noting the "normal rule of statutory construction" that "identical worth used in different parts of the same act are in

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,

ther sections of the Mann Act shows that Congress likewise did not intend to require proof of knowledge of age to violate those sections either. See Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc. , 513 U.S. 561, 570 (1995) (noting the "normal rule of statutory construction" that "identical words used in different parts of the same act are in

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

ther sections of the Mann Act shows that Congress likewise did not intend to require proof of knowledge of age to violate those sections either. See Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc. , 513 U.S. 561, 570 (1995) (noting the "normal rule of statutory construction" that "identical words used in different parts of the same act are in

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

ther sections of the Mann Act shows that Congress likewise did not intend to require proof of knowledge of age to violate those sections either. See Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc. , 513 U.S. 561, 570 (1995) (noting the "normal rule of statutory construction" that "identical words used in different parts of the same act are in