Re: federal statute

My read is that arranging for an unlicensed massage,
with some sex connection would be sufficient.. IT
doesn't say serious offense, as a minor could be
prosecuted for being unlicensed, They could argue that
I knowingly , arranged underage unlicensed massage.AS
the age defense relies on the proponderance of the
evidence, the number of massages would be a concern.

--- "Alan M. Dershowitz" dersh@law.harvard.edu
wrote:

To summarize Mr. Epstein's concern over 18 U.S.C.
sec 2422(b):

     The federal sex trafficking statutes, 18

U.S.C. secs. 2421-2423,
are designed to prevent the travel or transport of
persons across state
lines for commercial or illicit sexual activities.
As the Department of
Justice itself writes, "18 U.S.C. [secs.] 2421-2423
also cover interstate
and international sex trafficking, but generally
require that actual travel
across a state or international boundary or other
interstate activity has
taken place."

     The issue is with the "generally,"

suggesting that there is one or
more excpetion. As Epstein found, while sections
2421, 2422(a), and 2423
all require some sort of travel and intent to
solicit prostitution or
engage in illicit sexual activity, section 2422(b)
does not. The use of an
interstate facility or instrumentality, such as a
telephone or the
internet, is sufficient. The language is plain:

Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of
interstate or foreign
commerce, or within the special maritime and
territorial jurisdiction of
the United States knowingly persuades, induces,
entices, or coerces any
individual who has not attained the age of 18 years,
to engage in
prostitution or any sexual activity for which any
person can be charged
with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall
be fined under this
title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for
life.

18 U.S.C. sec. 2422(b).

     Though interstate travel appears to be

present in the majority of
2422(b) prosecutions -- and some judges, when they
informally describe
2422(b), sloppily include interstate travel -- there
is case law to show
that travel is not required for conviction under
section 2422(b). See,
e.g., United States v. Murrell, 368 F.3d 1283, 1288
n.3 (11th Cir. 2004),
cert. denied, 342 U.S. 960 (2004). Cases such as
Murrell confirm Roy
Black's assertion that 2422(b) is primarily intended
to serve as an
"internet luring law." Indeed, according to the
Modern Federal Jury
Instructions:

Section 2422(b) was originally enacted as part of
the Telecommunications
Act of 1996,and has rapidly become an important tool
in the federal
government's attempts to prevent sexual abuse of
children. Specifically,
the focus of this provision is on the use of the
Internet by adults seeking
out minors (mostly teenagers between thirteen and
sixteen) to persuade and
encourage these youngsters to meet the adult for the
purpose of engaging in
sexual activity.

This statute has been the subject of numerous
constitutional challenges,
all of which have been roundly rejected by the
courts. First, there is no
Commerce Clause problem with the statute as it
requires as an element the
use of an interstate facility (the telephone or
Internet) or the use of the
mails. Second, the courts have unanimously rejected
First Amendment
challenges to the statute, holding that it generally
regulates conduct, and
not speech, and to the extent that it regulates
speech, that speech is not
protected because it is intended to result in a
crime. As one court
recently stated, ''speech attempting to arrange the
sexual abuse of
children is no more constitutionally protected than
speech attempting to
arrange any other type of crime.'' Third, the
courts are agreed that the
statute is not unconstitutionally vague under the
Fifth
Amendment. Finally, the only appellate court to
consider the issue has
held that the fact that section 2422(b) incorporates
state law to some
extent does not violate the Tenth Amendment.

3-64 Modern Federal Jury Instructions-Criminal P
64.03 (2005) (internal
citations omitted).

     Significantly, however, the "knowlingly"

aspect of section 2422(b)
suggests that mistake-of-fact as to the alleged
victim's age is a valid
affirmative defense. The Eleventh Circuit appears
to take this view in its
pattern jury instruction:

First: That the Defendant knowingly used [the mail]
[a computer] [describe
other interstate facility as alleged in the
indictment] to attempt to
persuade, induce, entice [or coerce] an individual
under the age of
eighteen (18) to engage in sexual activity, as
charged;

Second: That the Defendant believed that such
individual was less than
eighteen (18) years of age;

Third: That if the sexual activity had occurred, the
Defendant could have
been charged with a criminal offense under the law
of [identity the state]; and

Fourth: That the defendant acted knowingly and
willfully.

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions,
Offense Instruction 80
(emphasis added).

     At any rate, insofar as it concerns

prostitution of minors, sec.
2422(b) appears to be largely redundant with 18
U.S.C. sec. 1591, except
that 2422(b) applies to the perpetrator who
"knowingly persuades, induces,
entices, or coerces," whereas sec. 1591 applies to
anyone who "recruits,
entices, harbors, transports, provides, or obtains
by any means" the
services of an underage prostitute. The language
discrepancies concern
specific intent ("knowingly") and the presence or
absence of various verbs
of procurement. Were Epstein found guilty of
solicitation of prostitution
of a minor, either one or the other federal statute,
or both, would be of
concern.

Sincerely,

Mitch

At 06:39 PM 8/31/2006, jeffrey epstein wrote:

WHy doesn't this apply??
Eighteen United States Code, section 2422 applies
to
defendants who coerce or entice either adults or
minors to engage in illegal sexual activity:

(b) Whoever, using the mail or any facility or

means of interstate or foreign commerce or within
the
special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of
the
United States knowingly persuades, induces,
entices,
or coerces any individual who has not attained the
age
of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any
sexual
activity for which any person can be charged with a
criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be
fined
under this title and imprisoned not less than 5
years
and not more than 30 years.

18 U.S

---

Do You Yahoo!?

=== message truncated ===

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com