Epstein Secrets

state statute and the more general statute is a federal statute, especially in an area traditionally prosecuted by the states. See United States v. Evans, 476 F.3d 1176 (11th Cir. 2007) ("prostitution [is] a vice traditionally governed by state regulation"). We believe with great conviction that Cong

he federal statutes would be applicable to Mr. Epstein's conduct, a lay person cannot be expected to make that determination. As confirmed by Judge Stern's conclusions regarding the application of § 2422(b), as well as the other relevant federal statutes, the conduct at issue is clearly not within the

ate statute and the more general statute is a federal statute, especially in an area traditionally prosecuted by the states. See f inired States v. Evans, 476 F.3d 1176 (11th Cir. 2007) ("prostitution Iisl a vice traditionally governed by state regulation"). We believe with great conviction that the a

of § 2422(b), as well as the other relevant federal statutes, the conduct at imam is clearly not within the predictable scope of jt 2422. See Judge Stern's Letter ("In sum. whatever sexual contact occurred. occurred face to lace. without the use of an instrumentality of interstate commerce to persuad

t amounted to, at most, the solicitation of prostitution, is unprecedented. Since prostitution is fundamentally a mute concern, (see United Stares' Evans, 476 F.3d 1176, n.1 (1Ith Cir. 2007) (federal law "does not criminalize all acts of prostitution (a vice traditionally governed by state regulation)

take positions during the investigation and negotiation of this matter that has led to unprecedented federal overreaching. In fact. Judge I lerben Stern's states " . . Alta federal authorities inappropriately involved themselves in the investigation by the state authorities and employed highly irregu

state statute and the more general statute is a federal statute. especially in an area traditionally prosecuted by the states. Sec United Stales v. Evans. 476 F.3d 1176 (11th Cir. 2007) ("prostitution I isl a vice traditionally governed by state regulation"). We believe with great conviction that the

n of F 2422(b), as well as the other relevant federal statutes, the conduct at issue is clearly not within the predictable scope of 2422. See Judge Stern's 1.etter ("In stun. whatever sexual contact occurred, occurred face to face. without the use of an instrumentality of interstate commerce to persu