DOJ-OGR-00005196.jpg
691 KB
Extraction Summary
0
People
5
Organizations
4
Locations
3
Events
0
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
691 KB
Summary
This document is a legal argument from a court filing, dated October 12, 2021. The author contends that certain federal statutes, like 18 USC § 3299 and § 3509, intentionally exclude child pornography and exploitation from the definition of sexual abuse, a fact the Justice Department has allegedly always known. The argument is supported by citing 1990 legislative history (VCAA) to claim that Congress intended these laws to apply specifically to federal enclaves.
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Department | government agency |
Mentioned as being aware that sexual exploitation is not included in the definition of "sexual or physical abuse".
|
| Supreme Court | government agency |
Mentioned in the context of 'Supreme Court precedent' mandating repose.
|
| House | government agency |
Mentioned as part of Congress, along with the Senate, stating the VCAA was for enclaves. A House Report is also cited.
|
| Senate | government agency |
Mentioned as part of Congress, along with the House, stating the VCAA was for enclaves. The Congressional Record from...
|
| Congress | government agency |
Mentioned as having stated that the VCAA (Victims of Child Abuse Act) was for enclaves.
|
Locations (4)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Quoted from a 1990 Congressional Record as a place where children should be protected under the VCAA.
|
|
|
Quoted from a 1990 Congressional Record as a place where children should be protected under the VCAA.
|
|
|
Quoted from a 1990 Congressional Record as a place where children should be protected under the VCAA.
|
|
|
The document argues that Congress intended the VCAA to apply to federal enclaves.
|
Key Quotes (1)
"... Protect children in Federal Courts, in Federal Facilities, and on Federal lands"Source
— Cong. Rec. Senate
(A quote from the June 28, 1990 Congressional Record used as evidence that the VCAA was intended for federal enclaves.)
DOJ-OGR-00005196.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,193 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 338 Filed 10/12/21 Page 18 of 22 13
When 18 USC § 3299 was passed in 2006 it was not made retroactive, presumably because it included the new offenses. It also has no physical abuse because as explained physical abuse is a part of 109A. This solution leaves all §3283 terms accounted for. Lockhart supra.
Summary
Whether or not the §3509(a)(8) definition of sexual abuse is used, child pornography / exploitation offenses are not included, and the repercussion of this should not be understated. There is compelling evidence showing the Justice Department has always been aware of it. As demonstrated, sexual exploitation is not included in "sexual or physical abuse" and sexual exploitation was removed from the proposals! Adding child pornography offense via §3509(a)(8) causes superfluity. Repose is mandated by Supreme Court precedent, if precedent means anything at all.
Finally, in both the House and Senate congress said the VCAA was for enclaves. see Cong. Rec. Senate June 28, 1990 P. 16238 "... Protect children in Federal Courts, in Federal Facilities, and on Federal lands, and House Report No 101-681 (I), Sept 5, 1990 P 6572.
DOJ-OGR-00005196
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document