Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Dismissal is required on the following grounds A review of the complaint allegations establishes that Plaintiff has failed to state the causes of action under U.S.C.A As discussed more fully below herein this statute does not allow for the Plaintiff to allege separate causes of action rather the statute allows for the Plaintiff to attempt to assert one claim In addition Plaintiff has failed to allege a violation of the requisite predicate act as identified in U.S.C in order to state a cause of action Thus Counts I through against EPSTEIN are required to be dismissed Rule Fla.R.Civ.P Count XI Sexual Battery is also required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action as Plaintiff has failed to allege the requisite elements of such claim The count fails to sufficiently allege whether it is being brought pursuant to common or statutory law Further in Count XI Plaintiff reincorporates in their entirety Counts I through such pleading is improper and requires dismissal under the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Supporting Memorandum of Law I Motion To Dismiss Standard As established by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp Twombly S.Ct a motion to dismiss should be granted if the plaintiff does not plead enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face Id at Although the complaint need not provide detailed factual allegations the basis for relief in the complaint must state more than labels and conclusions and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do Id at Further factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level on the Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true even if doubtful in fact Id On a motion to dismiss the well pleaded allegations of plaintiffs complaint are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff M.T.V DeKalb County Sch Dist F.3d 11th Significantly the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp Twombly abrogated the often cited observation that a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief Id abrogating and quoting Conley Gibson U.S S.Ct L.Ed.2d The Supreme Court rejected the notion that a wholly conclusory statement of claim can survive a motion to dismiss whenever the pleadings leave open the possibility that a plaintiff might later establish some set of undisclosed facts to support recovery Id As explained by the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp supra at While a complaint attacked by a Rule motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations ibid Saniuan American Bd of Psychiatry and Neurology Inc F.3d a plaintiffs obligation to provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do see Papasan Allain U.S S.Ct L.Ed.2d on a motion to dismiss courts are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level see Wright A Miller Federal Practice and Procedure pp 3d hereinafter Wright Miller The pleading must contain something more than a statement of facts that merely creates a suspicion of a legally cognizable right of action on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true even if doubtful in fact see e.g Swierkiewicz Sorema A U.S S.Ct L.Ed.2d Neitzke Williams U.S S.Ct L.Ed.2d Rule does not countenance dismissals based on a judges disbelief of a complaints Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page factual allegations Scheuer Rhodes U.S S.Ct L.Ed.2d a well-pleaded complaint may proceed even if it appears that a recovery is very remote and unlikely In discussing Twombly the Eleventh Circuit in Watts Fla International Univ F.3d th Cir noted The Supreme Court1s most recent formulation of the pleading specificity standard is that stating such a claim requires a complaint with enough factual matter taken as true to suggest the required element In order to sufficiently allege the claim the complaint is required to identify facts that are suggestive enough to render the element plausible Watts F.3d at quoting Twombly S.Ct at II Standard for More Definite Statement Pleading Motion to Strike Pursuant to Rule a party may move for more definite statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed where the pleading is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably frame a response The motion is required to point out the defects and the desired details kl As to the general rules and form of pleading Rules and a claim for relief must contain a short plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief Rule a and may contain alternative claims within a count or as many separate claims Rule and Pursuant to Rule Motion to Strike the court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant immaterial impertinent or scandalous matter Ill Counts I through U.S.C are required to be dismissed A U.S.C creates a single civil remedy or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant The civil remedy afforded is not on a per violation basis Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Contrary to Plaintiffs attempted assertion of separate counts pursuant to C1v1J Remedy for Personal Jn1unes this statute creates a single federal cause of action or civil remedy for a minor victim of sexual abuse molestation and exploitation Under the plain meaning of the statutory text does not create separate causes of action on behalf of a minor against a defendant on a per violation basis No where in the statutory text is there any reference to the civil remedy afforded by this statute as being on a per violation basis U.S.C a creates a civil remedy for a minor who is a victim of a violation of section or of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation See Smith Husband F.Supp.2d E.D Va Smith Husband F.Supp.2d E.D Va Doe Liberatore F.Supp.2d M.D Pa and the recent cases in front of this court on Defendants Motions to Dismiss and For More Definite Statement Doe No Epstein WL S.D Fla Feb Doe No Epstein WL S.D Fla Feb Doe No Epstein WL S.D Fla Feb and Doe No Epstein WL S.D Fla Feb There is no reported case supporting Plaintiffs tortured and nonsensical interpretation of In all of these cases cited above each of the Plaintiffs brought a single count or cause of action attempting to allege numerous violations of the predicate acts specifically identified in U.S.C gives victims of sexual conduct who are minors a private right of action Martinez White Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page F.Supp.2d N.D Cal emphasis added U.S.C.A merely provides a cause of action for damages any appropriate Urntea States D1stnct Court Id at See also Tilton Playboy Entertainment Group Inc F.3d fh Cir Jan District Court granted plaintiff the minimum actual damages prescribed by a wherein plaintiff alleged that defendants had violated three of the statutory predicate acts In improperly attempting to bring separate counts pursuant to Plaintiffs complaint alleges in part that beginning in approximately late May or early June of and continuing until approximately August of the Defendant coerced and enticed the impressionable vulnerable and economically deprived then minor Plaintiff to commit various acts of sexual misconduct These acts occurred on average one to three times per week from late may or early June of until August At a bare minimum these acts occurred twice a month from June until August of Am Complaint Plaintiff then claims the identical damages in each of the counts See and As well in Count XI entitled Sexual Battery Plaintiff claims the identical actual damages in that she realleges and incorporates each and every of the allegations in the prior counts It is well settled that in interpreting a statute the courts inquiry begins with the plain and unambiguous language of the statutory text CBS Inc Prime Time Venture F.3d th Cir U.S Castroneves WL S.D Fla citing Reeves Astrue F.3d th Cir and Smith Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Husband F.Supp.2d at When interpreting a statute a courts inquiry begins with the text The Court must first look to the plain meaning of the words and scrutinize the statutes language structure and purpose Id In addition in construing a statute a court is to presume that the legislature said what it means and means what it said and not add language or give some absurd or strained interpretation As stated in CBS Inc supra at Those who ask courts to give effect to perceived legislative intent by interpreting statutory language contrary to its plain and unambiguous meaning are in effect asking courts to alter that language and courts have no authority to alter statutory language We cannot add to the terms of the provision what Congress left out Merritt F.3d at See also Dodd U.S S.Ct Am.Jur.2d Statutes Title of the U.S.C is entitled Crimes and Criminal Procedure is contained in Part I Crimes Chap Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children U.S.C is entitled Civil remedy for personal injuries and provides a Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section or of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit including a reasonable attorneys fee Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than in value Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability not later than three years after the disability Reading the entire statute in context no where is there any language indicating that a minor plaintiff has a private right of action against a defendant per violation Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Under the statutory rules of construction had the legislature intended to give a plaintiff multiple causes of action against a defendant on a per violation basis the statute would have included such language Had Congress wanted to create such a remedy as Plaintiff attempts to bring it could have easily included language of per violation after the presumptive damages amount in subsection a By its own terms the statute provides for the recovery of actual damages the minor sustains and the cost of the suit including attorneys fees There is absolutely no language that allows for a plaintiff to multiply the specified or presumptive damages recoverable on a per violation basis The Plaintiffs position on puts a strained interpretation with an absurd result The absurdity of Plaintiffs position is further evidenced by Count XI Sexual Battery where Plaintiff reincorporates each of the counts and seeks the identical actual damages In Martinez White supra the defendants sought to dismiss plaintiffs U.S.C action based on forum non conveniens The Northern District of California Court relying on the rules of statutory construction rejected plaintiffs argument that Congress had intended to abrogate the forum non conveniens doctrine in a action the District Court noted that the statute does not contain a mandatory venue provision Had Congress wanted to get rid of the forum non-conveniens doctrine it would have said so in the statute Also in Smith Husband F.Supp and F.Supp.2d the plaintiff invoked the accompanying civil remedy for these criminal violations stating that she has sustained and continues to sustain physical and mental damages humiliation and embarrassment as a result of Defendants criminal acts In other words she Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page brought a single cause of action based on allegations of multiple violations of the predicate acts Furthermore the court refused to add a venue interpretation that simply was not written into the statutory text See other cases cited herein For an example of a statute wherein the legislature included the language for each violation in assessing a civil penalty see U.S.C entitled Penalties and injunctions of Chapter Bribery Graft and Conflict of Interests also contained in Title Crimes and Criminal Procedure Subsection of gives the United States Attorney General the power to bring a civil action against any person who engages in conduct constituting an offense under specified sections of the bribery graft and conflicts of interest statutes The statute further provides in relevant part that upon proof of such conduct by a preponderance of the evidence such person shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than for each violation or the amount of compensation which the person received or offered for the prohibited conduct which ever amount is greater As noted U.S.C does not include such language Accordingly Plaintiffs multiple counts brought pursuant to are required to be dismissed for failure to state multiple causes of action Also requiring dismissal Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the requisite predicate acts Also requiring dismissal of Plaintiffs purported claim is Plaintiffs failure to sufficiently allege any violation of a requisite predicate act as specifically identified in subsection a of the statute quoted above Relevant to Plaintiffs complaint U.S.C a creates a civil remedy for a minor who is a victim of a violation of section or of this title Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation See cases cited above herein Plaintiff has failed to plead any factual allegations whatsoever pertaining to violations of the specified predicate acts In paragraph Plaintiff makes reference by citation only to the following federal statutes U.S.C and See endnote following the Certificate of Service herein for the complete statutory text.i First Plaintiffs reliance on U.S.C in its entirety as a predicate act is improper it is a violation of subsection that is a designated predicate act A reading of the text of the other referenced federal statutes shows that no where in Plaintiffs Amended Complaint are there any allegations setting forth the requisite elements of the cited predicate act Further any attempted reliance by Plaintiff on other federal or state statutes not specifically identified in U.S.C is improper and fails to state a cause of action See of Am Complaint wherein Plaintiff references by citation additional Florida State statutes and thereafter incorporates such reference into her claim See Smith Husband F.Supp.2d and Supp.2d supra requiring allegations/evidence to establish predicate act under U.S.C in order to be afforded civil remedy Plaintiff appears to be relying solely on an agreement with the Federal Government as a basis for imposing liability under U.S.C See and of st Am Complaint There is nothing in Plaintiffs allegations that would allow for a claim to go forward without specifying the statutory predicate act and factual allegations pertaining to a violation of the requisite predicate act Accordingly under Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page the standard of pleading as established in Twombly supra Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege the requisite elements of a claim thus requiring d1sm1ssal tor failure to state a cause of action U.S.C does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages Thus Plaintiffs request for punitive damages under is required to be dismissed or stricken In each of the improperly asserted Counts I through Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages A plain reading of U.S.C quoted above herein establishes that the statute does not allow for the recovery of punitive damages Had Congress wanted to allow for such a recovery it could have easily written such language into the damages provision of the statute The legislative body chose not to write a punitive damages component into as it has done in other statutes affording civil remedies In relevant part reads Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit including a reasonable attorneys fee Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than in value See discussion of rules of statutory construction in part Ill.A herein See subsection of U.S.C entitled Certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child pornography also contained in Chapter Part I Crimes within which specific reference is made to compensatory and punitive damages in setting forth the relief which may be afforded to a plaintiff in bringing a civil action under Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Accordingly Plaintiffs claims for punitive damages are required to be dismissed with preJudIce or stricken In the alternative pursuant to constitutional law principles of statutory interpretation U.S.C is required to be interpreted as creating a single civil remedy or cause of action on behalf of a minor plaintiff against a defendant The civil remedy afforded is not on a per violation basis As set forth above it is Defendants position that the text of U.S.C does not allow a Plaintiff such as C.M.A to pursue the civil remedy and the damages afforded under the statute on a per violation basis See part Ill.A above In the alternative simply for the sake of argument if one were to assume that the language of were vague or ambiguous under the constitutional based protections of due process judicial restraint and the rule of lenity applied in construing a statute Defendants position as to the meaning of the statute would prevail over Plaintiffs view See United States Santos S.Ct As summarized by the United States Supreme Court in Santos supra at The rule of lenity requires ambiguous criminal laws to be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them See United States Gradwell U.S S.Ct L.Ed McBoy/e United States U.S S.Ct L.Ed United States Bass U.S S.Ct L.Ed.2d This venerable rule not only vindicates the fundamental principle that no citizen should be held accountable for a violation of a statute whose commands are uncertain or subjected to punishment that is not clearly prescribed It also places the weight of inertia upon the party that can best induce Congress to speak more clearly and keeps courts from making criminal law in Congres stead In Santos the Court was faced with the interpretation of the term proceeds in the federal money laundering statute U.S.C The federal money-laundering Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Ent red on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page statute prohibits a number of activities involving criminal proceeds Id at Noting that the term proceeds was not defined in the statute the Supreme Court stated the well settled principle that when a term is undefined we give it its ordinary meaning Id at Under the ordinary meaning principle the governments position was that proceeds meant receipts while the defendants position was that proceeds meant profits The Supreme Court recognized that under either of the proffered ordinary meanings the provisions of the federal money-laundering statute were still coherent not redundant and the statute was not rendered utterly absurd Under such a situation citing to a long line of cases and the established rule of lenity the tie must go to the defendant Id at See portion of Courts opinion quoted above Because the profits definition of proceeds is always more defendant friendly that the receipts definition the rule of lenity dictates that it should be adopted Id Plaintiffs position would subject Defendant EPSTEIN to a punishment that is not clearly prescribed an unwritten multiplier of the actual damages or the presumptive damages The rule of lenity requires that Defendants interpretation of the remedy afforded under be adopted In addition under the Due Process Clauses basic principle of fair warning a criminal statute must give fair warning of the conduct that it makes a crime As was said in United States Harriss U.S S.Ct L.Ed The constitutional requirement of definiteness is violated by a criminal statute that fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden by the statute The underlying principle is that no man shall be held criminally responsible for conduct which he could not reasonably understand to be proscribed Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Thus we have struck down a state criminal statute under the Due Process Clause where it was not sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to It what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties Connally General Const Co U.S S.Ct L.Ed We have recognized in such cases that a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law ibid and that No one may be required at peril of life liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes All are entitled to be informed as to what the State commands or forbids Lanzetta New Jersey U.S S.Ct L.Ed Thus applying these well-entrenched constitutional principles of statutory interpretation and application Plaintiffs separate counts brought under U.S.C are required to be dismissed IV Count XI Sexual Battery is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action In the alternative Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether she is attempting to allege a claim under Florida common or statutory law or some federal law and further allege the required elements and factual allegations In Count XI although entitled Sexual Battery Plaintiff improperly realleges and incorporates each and every allegation and each and every count which she previously attempted to allege resulting in a count that is paragraphs long and includes reference to Federal and Florida statutory law while also including language sounding in common law The count is such a hodgepodge of legal allegations that Plaintiff fails to state a legally recognizable or viable cause of action In Plaintiff alleges that the acts referenced in paragraphs through committed by Defendant against the then minor Plaintiff C.M.A were committed in violation of numerous criminal State and Federal statutes including but not limited to those crimes designated in U.S.C and criminal Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page offenses outlined in Chapter of the Federal Codes as well as those designated in Flo1ida Statutes a11d Plaintiff also alleges that Defendants tortious commission of sexual battery upon C.M.A were sic done willfully and maliciously Supporting Defendants position that Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action in Count XI U.S.C not in its entirety as discussed above is one of the predicate acts along with and designated in the federal civil remedy statute U.S.C Plaintiff attempted and failed to allege such a claim in the previous counts Defendant can find no criminal offenses in any Chapter of the Federal Codes which give rise to a civil cause of action The same is true for Plaintiffs reference to the Florida Statutes Not one of the statutes referenced creates a private cause of action or affords a civil remedy on behalf of the alleged victim of the criminal offense Except for Florida Statute all of the statutes referenced by Plaintiff are contained Title XL VI Crimes of the Florida Statutes The referenced criminal statutes set forth acts subject to criminal prosecution and the criminal penalties therefor if proven See generally Am Home Assurance Co Plaza Materials Corp So.2d Fla not every statutory violation carries a civil remedy Miami Herald Pub Co Ferre F.Supp S.D Fla violation of Floridas criminal extortion statute does not give rise to civil cause of Florida Statutes Procuring person under age for prostitution Forcing compelling or coercing another to become a prostitute which did not become effective until Oct Sex trafficking penalties Prohibiting prostitution etc evidence penalties definitions and entitled Definitions is contained in Title Judicial Branch Chapter Proceedings relating to Children Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page action for damages Mantooth Richards So.2d Fla th DCA per cunam D1sm1ssal of plaintiffs civil complaint affirmed where parental kidnapping statutes concerned only criminal violations and did not create a civil remedy As well the Count XX.XI allegations make absolutely no reference to any viable common law cause of action Defendant should not be required to guess or speculate as to the nature of Plaintiffs cause of action Even if Defendant were to speculate as to the supposed cause of action these causes of action common law or otherwise have not been sufficiently alleged On its face in accordance with the pleading requirements annunciated in Twombly supra Count XI is completely lacking as to any common law elements or the underlying factual allegations to support each element and thus Count XX.XI is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action In the alternative Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state whether her claim is being brought pursuant to federal or Florida statutory law specifically identify the statute it is being brought under or whether her claim is being asserted under common law Once Plaintiff identifies the nature of her claim she is required to sufficiently allege in accordance with Twombly the requisite elements of the identified claim along with sufficient factual allegations supporting the elements Conclusion Pursuant to applicable law Counts I through XI of Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint are required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action U.S.C does not allow for the Plaintiff C.M.A to allege separate causes of action against Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Defendant EPSTEIN but rather allows Plaintiff to attempt to assert a single civil remedy 1f she can prove a violation of any of the statutory enumerated predicate acts Further Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege a requisite predicate act under In addition does not allow for recovery of punitive damages Count XI is also subject to dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action as Plaintiff has failed to allege a legally viable or recognizable cause of action WHEREFORE Defendant requests that this Court grant his motion to dismiss Counts I through XI or alternative motion for more definite statement and motion to strike Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of recoffe identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of March Richard Horace Willits Esq Richard Willits P.A th Avenue North Suite Lake Worth FL Fax Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A reelrhw hotmail.com Jack Scarola Esq Jack Hill Esq Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart Shipley P.A Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach FL Fax Jack Alan Goldberger Esq Atterbury Goldberger Weiss P.A Australian Avenue South Suite West Palm Beach FL Fax jagesq bellsouth.net Counsel for Defendants Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen Bruce Reinhart Esq Bruce Reinhart P.A Australian Avenue Suite West Palm beach FL Fax Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page jsx searcylaw.com jph searcylaw.com Co-Counsel for Plamtiff i ENDNOTE ecf brucereinhartlaw.com Counsel for Defendant Sarah Kellen By ROBERT CRITTON JR ESQ Florida Bar rcrit bclcl w.com MICHAEL PIKE ESQ Florida Bar mpike bclclaw.com BURMAN CRITTON LUTTIER COLEMAN Flagler Drive Suite West Palm Beach FL Phone Fax Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein U.S.C.A Title Crimes and Criminal Procedure Chapter Sexual Abuse Aggravated Sexual Abuse With children.--Whoever crosses a State line with intent to engage in a sexual act with a person who has not attained the age of years or in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison or in any prison institution or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who has not attained the age of years or knowingly engages in a sexual act under the circumstances described in subsections a and with another person who has attained the age of years but has not Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page attained the age of years and is at least years younger than the person so engaging or attempts to do so shall be fined under this title and 1mpnsoned tor not less than years or for life If the defendant has previously been convicted of another Federal offense under this subsection or of a State offense that would have been an offense under either such provision had the offense occurred in a Federal prison unless the death penalty is imposed the defendant shall be sentenced to life in prison Sexual abuse Whoever in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison or in any prison institution or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency knowingly causes another person to engage in a sexual act by threatening or placing that other person in fear other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death serious bodily injury or kidnapping or engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is A incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct or physically incapable of declining participation in or communicating unwillingness to engage in that sexual act or attempts to do so shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life Sexual abuse of a minor or ward a Of a minor.--Whoever in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison or in any prison institution or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who has attained the age of years but has not attained the age of years and is at least four years younger than the person so engaging or attempts to do so shall be fined under this title imprisoned not more than years or both Of a ward.--Whoever in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison or in any prison institution or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who is Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page in official detention and under the custodial supervisory or dlscIphnary authority of the person so engaging or attempts to do so shall be fined under this title imprisoned not more than years or both Defenses In a prosecution under subsection a of this section it is a defense which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant reasonably believed that the other person had attained the age of years In a prosecution under this section it is a defense which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the persons engaging in the sexual act were at that time married to each other State of mind proof requirement.--ln a prosecution under subsection a of this section the Government need not prove that the defendant knew the age of the other person engaging in the sexual act or that the requisite age difference existed between the persons so engaging Chapter Transportation for Illegal Sexual Activity and Related Crimes Transportation generally Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or foreign commerce or in any Territory or Possession of the United States with intent that such individual engage in prostitution or in 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 or imprisoned not more than years or both Transportation of minors a Transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.--A person who knowingly transports an individual who has not attained the age of years in interstate or foreign commerce or in any commonwealth territory or possession of the United States with intent that the individual engage in prostitution or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than years or for life Travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct.--A person who travels in interstate commerce or travels into the United States or a United States citizen or an alien admitted for permanent residence in the United States who travels in foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than years or both Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of Case Document Entered on FLSD Docket Page of C.M.A Epstein et al Page Engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places.--Any United States citizen or alien admitted for permanent residence who travels in foreign commerce and engages in any illicit sexual conduct with another person shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than years or both Ancillary offenses.--Whoever for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain arranges induces procures or facilitates the travel of a person knowing that such a person is traveling in interstate commerce or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct shall be fined under this title imprisoned not more than years or both Attempt and conspiracy.--Whoever attempts or conspires to violate subsection a or shall be punishable in the same manner as a completed violation of that subsection Definition.--As used in this section the term illicit sexual conduct means a sexual act as defined in section with a person under years of age that would be in violation of chapter if the sexual act occurred in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or any commercial sex act as defined in section with a person under years of age Defense.--ln a prosecution under this section based on illicit sexual conduct as defined in subsection it is a defense which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant reasonably believed that the person with whom the defendant engaged in the commercial sex act had attained the age of years
36,830 characters
