DOJ-OGR-00001259.jpg
716 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / legal memorandum (case 1:20-cr-00330-ajn)
File Size:
716 KB
Summary
This is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated March 23, 2021, arguing for the release of Ghislaine Maxwell on bail. The text argues that Maxwell's offer to renounce her French and British citizenship negates the flight risk concerns regarding extradition protection in France. It cites a Mr. Julié to interpret French Article 696-4, asserting that one who loses French nationality is not protected from extradition.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the bail application; offering to waive British and French citizenship to prove she will not flee.
|
| Mr. Julié | Legal Expert/Authority |
Cited for his conclusion regarding the interpretation of French extradition law (Article 696-4).
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States Government |
Party to the extradition treaty; opposing bail.
|
|
| French Courts |
Referenced regarding deportation precedents.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated by the footer stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2021-03-23
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of the trial and extradition treaty partner.
|
|
|
Jurisdiction of the extradition treaty partner and citizenship discussion.
|
Relationships (1)
Mr. Julié's interpretation of French law is used to support Ms. Maxwell's argument for bail.
Key Quotes (3)
"Ms. Maxwell’s agreement to give up both British and French citizenship and waive any and all right to contest extradition is a formidable challenge to the assertion that Ms. Maxwell would likely flee"Source
DOJ-OGR-00001259.jpg
Quote #1
"Mr. Julié concludes: “[I]t cannot have been the intention of French lawmakers that Article 696-4 be construed as meaning that a person who has lost French nationality would still be entitled to be protected from extradition.”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00001259.jpg
Quote #2
"her willingness to forfeit citizenship birthrights exceeds what is necessary and profoundly demonstrates her commitment to abide by conditions of release and appear at trial."Source
DOJ-OGR-00001259.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,082 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 170-1 Filed 03/23/21 Page 5 of 18
The language of the extradition treaty between the United States and France and the
applicable French statues are clear that anyone seeking to contest extradition on the basis of
French citizenship must be a French national at the time of the extradition request. (Id. ¶ 11).
The provisions on which the government relies were not intended to apply in cases where the
person whose extradition is sought had lost French citizenship. To the contrary, it was
designed to apply to individuals who had acquired French citizenship subsequent to the
commission of the alleged crime “in order to avoid fraudulent nationality applications of
offenders seeking to escape extradition.” (Id. ¶¶ 15-16). If the person is no longer a French
national at the time of the request, the provision does not apply. The government cites no case
where the relevant statute was applied to protect a formerly French national from extradition,
and we have found none ourselves. (Id. ¶¶ 19-21). By contrast, there are numerous examples
of French courts deporting individuals who have lost French nationality following the
commission of an offense. (Id. ¶ 21). Accordingly, Mr. Julié concludes: “[I]t cannot have been
the intention of French lawmakers that Article 696-4 be construed as meaning that a person
who has lost French nationality would still be entitled to be protected from extradition.” (Id.
¶ 26).
applicable French statues are clear that anyone seeking to contest extradition on the basis of
French citizenship must be a French national at the time of the extradition request. (Id. ¶ 11).
The provisions on which the government relies were not intended to apply in cases where the
person whose extradition is sought had lost French citizenship. To the contrary, it was
designed to apply to individuals who had acquired French citizenship subsequent to the
commission of the alleged crime “in order to avoid fraudulent nationality applications of
offenders seeking to escape extradition.” (Id. ¶¶ 15-16). If the person is no longer a French
national at the time of the request, the provision does not apply. The government cites no case
where the relevant statute was applied to protect a formerly French national from extradition,
and we have found none ourselves. (Id. ¶¶ 19-21). By contrast, there are numerous examples
of French courts deporting individuals who have lost French nationality following the
commission of an offense. (Id. ¶ 21). Accordingly, Mr. Julié concludes: “[I]t cannot have been
the intention of French lawmakers that Article 696-4 be construed as meaning that a person
who has lost French nationality would still be entitled to be protected from extradition.” (Id.
¶ 26).
Ms. Maxwell’s agreement to give up both British and French citizenship and waive
any and all right to contest extradition is a formidable challenge to the assertion that Ms.
Maxwell would likely flee if released from custody and goes above and beyond the
“reasonable assurances” that the Bail Reform Act requires to grant bail. While we
maintain that Ms. Maxwell’s written waivers of the right to challenge extradition should
suffice, her willingness to forfeit citizenship birthrights exceeds what is necessary and
profoundly demonstrates her commitment to abide by conditions of release and appear at
trial.
any and all right to contest extradition is a formidable challenge to the assertion that Ms.
Maxwell would likely flee if released from custody and goes above and beyond the
“reasonable assurances” that the Bail Reform Act requires to grant bail. While we
maintain that Ms. Maxwell’s written waivers of the right to challenge extradition should
suffice, her willingness to forfeit citizenship birthrights exceeds what is necessary and
profoundly demonstrates her commitment to abide by conditions of release and appear at
trial.
4
DOJ-OGR-00001259
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document