Epstein Secrets

ne system was a facility of interstate commerce." United States v. Roberts , 2006 WL 827293 n.1 (11th Cir. Mar. 30, 2006). See also United States v. Strevell , 2006 WL 1697529, *3 (11th Cir. June 20, 2006) (finding that a defendant's placing of "numerous phone calls from Philadelphia to Miami in order to

h individual counts of violating Section 1960 for each Western Union transfer and for each ATM withdrawal that occurred immediately prior to one of Banasiak's documented payments to one of the girls. I decided not to include these charges because I felt that the charge would confuse the jury or make the

ne system was a facility of interstate commerce." United States v. Roberts , 2006 WL 827293 n.1 (11th Cir. Mar. 30, 2006). See also United States v. Strevell , 2006 WL 1697529, *3 (11th Cir. June 20, 2006) (finding that a defendant's placing of "numerous phone calls from Philadelphia to Miami in order to

h individual counts of violating Section 1960 for each Western Union transfer and for each ATM withdrawal that occurred immediately prior to one of Banasiak's documented payments to one of the girls. I decided not to include these charges because I felt that the charge would confuse the jury or make the

ne system was a facility of interstate commerce." United States v. Roberts , 2006 WL 827293 n.1 (11th Cir. Mar. 30, 2006). See also United States v. Strevell , 2006 WL 1697529, *3 (11th Cir. June 20, 2006) (finding that a defendant's placing of "numerous phone calls from Philadelphia to Miami in order to

h individual counts of violating Section 1960 for each Western Union transfer and for each ATM withdrawal that occurred immediately prior to one of Banasiak's documented payments to one of the girls. I decided not to include these charges because I felt that the charge would confuse the jury or make the