DOJ-OGR-00020112.jpg
573 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
573 KB
Summary
This legal document, filed on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, argues against the government's assertions in a bail proceeding. It claims that a pre-arrest discussion of divorce with her spouse was a protective measure, not an indication of a weak relationship, and that their bond is a strong tie to the country. The document also defends Ms. Maxwell's financial disclosures, stating the government has not contested the accuracy of her detailed financial report and is instead baselessly arguing she deceived the Court and Pretrial Services.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
The central figure of the document, whose relationship with her spouse and financial disclosures are being defended i...
|
| Ms. Maxwell's spouse | Spouse of defendant |
Mentioned throughout the document in relation to discussions of divorce, his relationship with Ms. Maxwell, and their...
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| the government | government agency |
The opposing party in the legal case, whose arguments against Ms. Maxwell's bail are being rebutted.
|
| the Court | judicial body |
The judicial body presiding over the case, which had previously denied bail and was allegedly deceived by Ms. Maxwell.
|
| Pretrial Services | government agency |
An agency that the government argues Ms. Maxwell deceived about her assets.
|
Timeline (3 events)
An initial bail hearing for Ms. Maxwell took place.
Ms. Maxwell's arrest is mentioned as an event that occurred prior to discussions about divorce.
Ms. Maxwell and her spouse discussed getting a divorce prior to her arrest as a way to protect him.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in the context of arguing that Ms. Maxwell's relationship with her spouse is a powerful tie to the country,...
|
Relationships (1)
The document describes their marital relationship, stating they discussed divorce only to protect him from the consequences of her case, that neither wanted a divorce, and that their relationship is a 'powerful tie to this country'. It also mentions their joint assets being pledged for her bond.
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,786 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 103-2 Filed 12/23/20 Page 9 of 15
mistaken. Prior to her arrest, Ms. Maxwell and her spouse had discussed the idea of getting a divorce as an additional way to create distance between Ms. Maxwell and her spouse to protect him [REDACTED] from the terrible consequences of being associated with her. Nevertheless, in the weeks following the initial bail hearing, [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] She and her spouse therefore had no reason to continue discussing divorce, which neither of them wanted in the first place. Nor was there any reason for her spouse to refrain from stepping forward as a co-signer. In sum, the government has offered nothing but unsupported innuendo to suggest that Ms. Maxwell's relationship with her spouse [REDACTED] is not a powerful tie to this country.
The government's assertion that Ms. Maxwell must not have a close relationship with [REDACTED] is particularly callous and belied by the facts. (Gov. Mem. at 14). As her spouse explains, [REDACTED] (Ex. A ¶ 12). [REDACTED]
B. Ms. Maxwell Has Thoroughly Disclosed Her Finances and Pledged All of Her and Her Spouse's Assets in Support of Her Bond
The government's attempts to rebut the financial condition report are unavailing. Significantly, the government does not contest the accuracy of the report, nor the voluminous supporting documentation. In fact, the government has proffered nothing that calls into question the report's detailed account of Ms. Maxwell and her spouse's assets for the last five years, which addresses one of the Court's principal reasons for denying bail.
Rather than question the report itself, the government attempts to argue that Ms. Maxwell deceived the Court and Pretrial Services about her assets. (Gov. Mem. at 22-23).
5
DOJ-OGR-00020112
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document