Epstein Secrets

s used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States' Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a pers

6 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 9 of 24 LAW OFPIcES OF GERALD B. LEFCOURT. BC. Jeffrey Matthew Esq. Andrew !Anne Es . Escl• e nite tates Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida July 6, 2007 Page 8 the mail, phone, etc., would be an unnatural and grammatically inaccurate reading of the

used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States v. Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a pers

RENATO C. STABILE FAITH A. FRIEDMAN BY FEDERAL EXPRESS July 6, 2007 Esq., First Assistant United States Attorney Esq., Chief, Criminal Division tates Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 99 NE 4u' Street Miami, Florida 33132 De uty Chief, Northern Region Assistant United States Attorney e nit

used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States v. Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5* Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a perso

the exercise of sentencing discretion, allowing the punishment to fit both the crime and the EFTA00284178 LAW orfKC• OF GERALD B. LEECOURT. PC tates Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida July 6, 2007 Page 5 perpetrator. Section 2422(b), with its ten-year mandatory minimum is far too blunt a tool