DOJ-OGR-00020088.jpg
627 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
627 KB
Summary
This legal document is a filing arguing against a defendant's proposed bail package. The central argument is that the assets securing the bond, held by the defendant's spouse, were originally funneled from the defendant herself, meaning the spouse would not lose his own money if she were to flee. This, combined with the defendant's considerable financial resources, foreign ties, and legal precedent against a 'two-tiered' bail system, supports the position that she should remain in detention as a flight risk.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| defendant | defendant |
The subject of the bail hearing, who allegedly funneled wealth to her spouse. The document argues she is a flight risk.
|
| defendant's spouse | Spouse of the defendant |
The proposed co-signer of the defendant's bail bond, whose assets are argued to have originated from the defendant.
|
| Boustani | Party in a legal case |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79, 82 (2d Cir. 2019)'.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Court | judicial body |
The judicial body deciding on the defendant's proposed bail package.
|
| Government | government agency |
The party arguing against the defendant's release on bail.
|
| Second Circuit | judicial body |
A U.S. Court of Appeals whose legal holding on the Bail Reform Act is cited.
|
Timeline (1 events)
An original bail hearing where the Government established its position on the defendant's financial resources.
Court
Relationships (1)
The document states the defendant funneled the majority of her wealth into her husband's name, and he is the proposed co-signer for her bail bond. The argument is that because the assets originated with her, he would not be losing his own money if she fled, thus weakening the bond's effectiveness.
Key Quotes (2)
"the Bail Reform Act does not permit a two-tiered bail system in which defendants of lesser means are detained pending trial while wealthy defendants are released to self-funded private jails,"Source
— Second Circuit
(A legal holding cited to argue against the defendant's release under a special bail condition potentially involving a private security company.)
DOJ-OGR-00020088.jpg
Quote #1
"a defendant may be released on such a condition"Source
— Second Circuit
(A partial quote from a legal holding, with the remainder of the sentence redacted in the document.)
DOJ-OGR-00020088.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,283 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-56088-AJN Document 1002 Filed 08/28/20 Page 28 of 36
Setting aside whether the defendant’s spouse has additional assets beyond those included in the financial report, the vast majority of the assets contained in the report itself apparently originated with the defendant. (See Def. Ex. O at 10). Based on the report, it seems clear that the defendant slowly funneled the majority of her wealth to trusts and into her husband’s name over the last five years. As a result, if the Court were to grant the defendant’s proposed bail package and the defendant were to flee, her spouse would primarily lose the money that the defendant gave him rather than his own independent assets. In other words, were the defendant to flee, she would largely be sacrificing her own money and assets, thereby limiting the moral suasion of her spouse co-signing the bond. In sum, the defendant’s submission does not change the Government’s position at the original bail hearing that the defendant has considerable financial resources, and could live a comfortable life as a fugitive.
The combination of all these factors, including the defendant’s foreign ties, demonstrated ability to live in hiding, and financial resources, confirm that the defendant’s characteristics continue to weigh in favor of detention. Given the multiplicity of factors supporting detention, this is not one of the rare cases in which a private security company could conceivably be considered as a bail condition. See United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79, 82 (2d Cir. 2019). The Second Circuit has squarely held that “the Bail Reform Act does not permit a two-tiered bail system in which defendants of lesser means are detained pending trial while wealthy defendants are released to self-funded private jails,” and that “a defendant may be released on such a condition
[REDACTED]
The Court need not resolve this question, however, because regardless of whether the defendant’s husband may have additional undisclosed assets, as discussed herein, the key takeaway from the financial report is that the vast majority of the spouse’s reported assets, upon which the proposed bond is based, originated with the defendant, meaning he would not be losing his own money if the defendant fled.
25
DOJ-OGR-00020088
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document