Back to Network
5
Shared Docs
5
Same-Page
5 / 5
Mentions
Document Mentions (5 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
nterpreted "to have real and substantial effect," Stone v. I.N.S., 514 U.S. 386, 397 (1995), there can b
"[T]he government must show that the criminal sexual act was a dominant purpose of the trip, not a merely incidental one.") (citing United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 638 (3d Cir. 2004)) (emphasis added). That interpretation of the law is obviously correct. While § 2423(b) is relatively new—it firs
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
nterpreted "to have real and substantial effect," Stone v. I.N.S., 514 U.S. 386, 397 (1995), there can b
"[T]he government must show that the criminal sexual act was a dominant purpose of the trip, not a merely incidental one.") (citing United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 638 (3d Cir. 2004)) (emphasis added). That interpretation of the law is obviously correct. While § 2423(b) is relatively new—it firs
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
nterpreted "to have real and substantial effect," Stone v. I.N.S., 514 U.S. 386, 397 (1995), there can b
"[T]he government must show that the criminal sexual act was a dominant purpose of the trip, not a merely incidental one.") (citing United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 638 (3d Cir. 2004)) (emphasis added). That interpretation of the law is obviously correct. While § 2423(b) is relatively new—it firs
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
nterpreted "to have real and substantial effect," Stone v. I.N.S., 514 U.S. 386, 397 (1995), there can b
"[T]he government must show that the criminal sexual act was a dominant purpose of the trip, not a merely incidental one.") (citing United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 638 (3d Cir. 2004)) (emphasis added). That interpretation of the law is obviously correct. While § 2423(b) is relatively new—it firs
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
nterpreted "to have real and substantial effect," Stone v. I.N.S., 514 U.S. 386, 397 (1995), there can b
"[T]he government must show that the criminal sexual act was a dominant purpose of the trip, not a merely incidental one.") (citing United States v. Hayward, 359 F.3d 631, 638 (3d Cir. 2004)) (emphasis added). That interpretation of the law is obviously correct. While § 2423(b) is relatively new—it firs
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (304)
Entities connected to both Oliver Stone and Hayward
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON1,079 w/ Oliver·19 w/ Hayward
LB
Leon Black
PERSON346 w/ Oliver·15 w/ Hayward
Marc Rich
PERSON329 w/ Oliver·13 w/ Hayward
George W. Bush
PERSON320 w/ Oliver·9 w/ Hayward
Donald Trump
PERSON264 w/ Oliver·3 w/ Hayward
Prince Andrew
PERSON245 w/ Oliver·6 w/ Hayward
United States
LOCATION221 w/ Oliver·18 w/ Hayward
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON223 w/ Oliver·9 w/ Hayward
Richard Kahn
PERSON216 w/ Oliver·4 w/ Hayward
Alan Dershowitz
PERSON208 w/ Oliver·8 w/ Hayward
Stephen Hawking
PERSON212 w/ Oliver·2 w/ Hayward
Joe Biden
PERSON197 w/ Oliver·3 w/ Hayward
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION189 w/ Oliver·6 w/ Hayward
Virginia Giuffre
PERSON157 w/ Oliver·18 w/ Hayward
New York
LOCATION145 w/ Oliver·7 w/ Hayward
Lesley Groff
PERSON145 w/ Oliver·2 w/ Hayward
Michael Jackson
PERSON132 w/ Oliver·5 w/ Hayward
Scarlett Johansson
PERSON126 w/ Oliver·6 w/ Hayward
ET
Emmy Taylor
PERSON119 w/ Oliver·10 w/ Hayward
Alfredo Rodriguez
PERSON113 w/ Oliver·6 w/ Hayward