DOJ-OGR-00020380.jpg
556 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
556 KB
Summary
This legal document from May 27, 2021, argues that a renewed motion for Ghislaine Maxwell's release should be denied. It supports Judge Nathan's prior ruling that Maxwell is a flight risk and asserts that no new "compelling" reason has been presented to overturn the decision. The document also details Maxwell's extensive access to legal discovery materials and communication with her attorneys while in custody at the MDC.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Judge Nathan | Judge |
Mentioned as the judge who previously denied Maxwell's temporary release, concluding she was a flight risk. The docum...
|
| Maxwell | Defendant |
The subject of the legal proceedings, whose detention as a flight risk and denial of temporary release are being disc...
|
| Plugh | Party in a cited case |
Referenced in a legal citation, "Plugh, 648 F.3d at 123", likely as legal precedent.
|
Timeline (1 events)
Judge Nathan denied Maxwell temporary release, finding her to be a flight risk.
Court
Relationships (2)
Judge Nathan is the judge who ruled on Maxwell's detention, denying her temporary release.
The document states Maxwell is able to review discovery and communicate with her attorneys via 25 hours of video-teleconference calls per week.
Key Quotes (1)
"compelling"Source
— Unnamed (legal standard)
(The document argues that the renewed motion fails to present any "compelling" reason for the Court to reverse its prior decision to detain Maxwell.)
DOJ-OGR-00020380.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,258 characters)
Case 21-58, Document 92, 05/27/2021, 3109708, Page22 of 24
38. The only question even arguably before this Court at this juncture is whether Judge Nathan committed clear error when detaining Maxwell as a flight risk or abused her discretion when denying Maxwell temporary release. Nothing in the renewed motion undermines Judge Nathan’s conclusion that Maxwell poses a real risk of flight. Nor does the renewed motion explain how Judge Nathan’s careful consideration of the MDC’s nighttime security protocols and continued monitoring of Maxwell’s ability to access her discovery and communicate with counsel transforms the denial of pretrial release into an abuse of discretion. Simply put, the renewed motion fails to present any “compelling” reason for this Court to reverse its prior decision in this case. Plugh, 648 F.3d at 123.
to review her discovery. (See, e.g., Dkt. 235 at 7 n.4; Dkt. 196 at 1-2). Among other things, Maxwell has exclusive access to both a desktop and a laptop computer on which to review her discovery, thirteen hours per day, seven days per week. She is also able to review discovery with her attorneys during the 25 hours of legal video-teleconference calls she receives each week. (See Dkt. 196 at 1-2).
22
DOJ-OGR-00020380
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document