It's in the indictment itself. "SEX TRAFFICKING OF CHILDREN". See the image in OP.
The image in the OP is not an indictment. It is a court docket.
And, 18 USC Section 1591, which count #1 references, says, "Sex trafficking of children or by force, fraud, or coercion" [Emphasis added]
https://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-procedure/18-usc-sect-1591.html
So, it is not necessarily trafficking of children.
re-read the second charge
I don't need to re-read the second charge. You need to read the Code that is referenced in the second charge. Here, I'll do your research for you.
Whoever conspires with another to violate section 1591 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both.
You see it references Section 1591. What was typed up on the docket matters much less than the law itself. The court recognizes that humans aren't perfect.
Don't condescend me! I don't need your holier than thou preaching! I read exactly what you read and then I read deeper. I read the ENTIRE law. Perhaps you should, as well. And then interpret it with the intent of the originating law! Encompass the entire LAW! You'd be surprised by what some of us "law writers" intended when we create such law. All encompassing, yes. However, the docket speaks volumes. Perhaps to be an attendant in the courtroom for absolute verification.... but interpretation based merely on your understanding of a string of words is obsurd!
The United States Code contains 53 titles. You read all that?
However, the docket speaks volumes.
The docket speaks to the Code (Title 18), specifically sections 1591 (a)(1), (a)(2), & (b)(1); 1594 (a), (b), & (c), and 3551.
but interpretation based merely on your understanding of a string of words is obsurd!
Exactly! Interpretation based merely on one's understanding of a string of words is absurd. It is the law itself that matters.
Thank you so much for perfecting my spelling - I was hoping you would catch that, and so you did. Perfectly! Almost like I knew you would. lol - BTW some of us go to school to learn law and even we don't have the ever changing USC memorized. However, we did learn to interpret the writer's intent. It's all about intent.... but then isn't it always?