4
Shared Docs
4
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
intervention a high priority. See, e.g., United States v. Clarke, 159 Fed. Appx. 128, 2005 WL 3438434 (11th Cir. 2005Xunpublished); United States v. Strevell, 185 Fed. Appx. 841, 2005 WL 1697529 (11th Cir. 2006Xunpublished), cert. denied, 127 U.S. 692 (2006). No such federal interest is implicated in the
stretch the statute beyond what all understand is its modem day intended purpose. 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) — The Misconduct Alleged Does Not Fall Within the Ambit of the Statute In enacting the internet trolling statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), Congressional concerns were focused on a very specific and recent phenomenon: young
intervention a high priority. See, e.g., United States 'Clarke, 159 Fed. Appx. 128, 2005 WL 3438434 (It ch Cir. 2005)(unpublished); United States I Strevell, 185 Fed. Appx. 841, 2005 WL 1697529 (11th Cir. 2006)(unpublished), cert. denied, 127 U.S. 692 (2006). No such federal interest is implicated in th
tretch the statute beyond what all understand is its modern day intended purpose. 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) — The Misconduct Alleged Does Not Fall Within the Ambit of the Statute In enacting thentemebrolling statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), Congressional concerns were focused on a very specific and recent phenomenon: young peop
intervention a high priority. See, e.g., United States v Clarke, 159 Fed. Appx. 128, 2005 WL 3438434 (11th Cir. 2005)(unpublished); United States v. Strevell, 185 Fed. Appx. 841, 2005 WL 1697529 (11 h Cir. 2006)(unpublished), cert. denied, 127 U.S. 692 (2006). No such federal interest is implicated in th
tretch the statute beyond what all understand is its modern day intended purpose. 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) — The Misconduct Alleged Does Not Fall Within the Ambit of the Statute In enacting th(internerolling statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), Congressional concerns were focused on a very specific and recent phenomenon: young peo
ntervention a high priority. See, e.g., United States v. Clarke, 159 Fed. Appx. 128, 2005 WL 3438434 (11th Cir. 2005)(unpublished); United States v. Strevell, 185 Fed. Appx. 841, 2005 WI, 1697529 (11th Cir. 2006)(unpublished), cert. denied, 127 U.S. 692 (2006). No such federal interest is implicated in t
tretch the statute beyond what all understand is its modern day intended purpose. 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) — The Misconduct Alleged Does Not Fall Within the Ambit of the Statute In enacting th(mtemebrolling statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), Congressional concerns were focused on a very specific and recent phenomenon: young peop
Entities connected to both Strevell and the Ambit of the Statute

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
Costa Rica
LOCATIONEmmy Taylor
PERSONEvans
PERSON
United States
LOCATION
Cleveland
LOCATIONGerald Lefcourt
PERSONLeon Black
PERSON
Alexander Acosta
PERSONCriminal Division
ORGANIZATIONRoy Black
PERSONNorthern Region
LOCATION
Jennifer Lopez
PERSON
Palm Beach Police Department
ORGANIZATION
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION
George W. Bush
PERSON
Julie K. Brown
PERSON
Alan Dershowitz
PERSON
Ashcroft
PERSONJEGE, Inc.
ORGANIZATION