Epstein Secrets

engage in a commercial sex act. United States v. Wild , 143 Fed. Ar.938, 942 (10th Cir. 2005). Epstein

er agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Elevent

internal citations omitted). Cf. United States v. Wild , 143 Fed. Appx. 938, 942 (4th Cir. 2005) (the p

er agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Elevent

engage in a commercial sex act. United States v. Wild , 143 Fed. AS8, 942 (10th Cir. 2005). Epstein's

er agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Elevent

internal citations omitted). Cf. United States v. Wild , 143 Fed. Appx. 938, 942 (4th Cir. 2005) (the p

er agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Elevent

internal citations omitted). Cf. United States'. Wild, 143 Fed. Appx. 938, 942 (4th Cir. 2005) (the pa

ver agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Eleven

internal citations omitted). Cl United States v. Wild, 143 7 EFTA02857530 Fed. Appx. 938, 942 (4th

ver agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Eleven

internal citations omitted). Cf. United States v. Wild , 143 Fed. Appx. 938, 942 (4th Cir. 2005) (the p

er agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Elevent

internal citations omitted). Cf. United States v. Wild , 143 Fed. Appx. 938, 942 (4th Cir. 2005) (the p

er agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Elevent

internal citations omitted). Cf. United States v. Wild , 143 Fed. Appx. 938, 942 (4th Cir. 2005) (the p

er agent's cellular telephone. Although both the defendant and the agent were in Georgia, the signals to the agent's cell phone had to pass through VoiceStream's Jacksonville, Florida switching center. The defendant argued that he did not know or intend that the call pass in interstate commerce. The Elevent