Epstein Secrets

ated her. JD#3 stated that she was usually contacted by MI, via her cellular phone, to set up appointments. would sometimes call from New York or the U.S. Virgin Islands stating, "we will be coming into town, can you work?" Sometimes would call when they already were in town EFTA00229882 asking if JD#3 was able t

activity must have not been merely incidental to the trip. United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 637-38 (3d Cir. 2004). See also United States v. Garcia-Lopez , 234 F.3d 217, 220 (5th Cir. 2000) (The district court did not err in instructing the jury that "it was sufficient for the Government to prove tha

ctivity must have not been merely incidental to the trip. United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 637-38 (3d Cir. 2004). See also United States v. Garcia-Lopez, 234 F.3d 217, 220 (5th Cir. 2000) (The district court did not err in instructing the jury that "it was sufficient for the Government to prove that

7. On August 25, 2004, Defendant to be made to a telephone used by Jane Doe #4. 42. On October 2, 2004, Defendants EPSTEIN, , and traveled from the U.S. Virgin Islands to Palm Beach County, Florida aboard the Boeing 727 aircraft owned by Defendant JEGE, INC. caused one or more telephone calls to caused one or mor

activity must have not been merely incidental to the trip. United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 637-38 (3d Cir. 2004). See also United States v. Garcia-Lopez , 234 F.3d 217, 220 (5th Cir. 2000) (The district court did not err in instructing the jury that "it was sufficient for the Government to prove tha

ated her. JD#15 stated that she was usually contacted by M, via her cellular phone, to set up appointments. would sometimes call from New York or the U.S. Virgin Islands stating, "we will be coming into town, can you work?" Sometimes would call when the already were in town asking if JD#15 was able to work the same

activity must have not been merely incidental to the trip. United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 637-38 (3d Cir. 2004). See also United States v. Garcia-Lopez , 234 F.3d 217, 220 (5th Cir. 2000) (The district court did not err in instructing the jury that "it was sufficient for the Government to prove tha

ated her. JD#14 stated that she was usually contacted by M, via her cellular phone, to set up appointments. would sometimes call from New York or the U.S. Virgin Islands stating, "we will be coming into town, can you work?" Sometimes would call when the already were in town asking if JD#14 was able to work the same

activity must have not been merely incidental to the trip. United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 637-38 (3d Cir. 2004). See also United States v. Garcia-Lopez , 234 F.3d 217, 220 (5th Cir. 2000) (The district court did not err in instructing the jury that "it was sufficient for the Government to prove tha

ated her. JD#3 stated that she was usually contacted by MI, via her cellular phone, to set up appointments. would sometimes call from New York or the U.S. Virgin Islands stating, "we will be coming into town, can you work?" Sometimes would call when the already were in town asking if JD#3 was able to work the same