DOJ-OGR-00020140.jpg
527 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
3
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court order / legal opinion (page 13 of 22)
File Size:
527 KB
Summary
This document is page 13 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020 (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), denying release/bail for the Defendant (contextually Ghislaine Maxwell). The Court argues that the Defendant poses a significant flight risk due to her French citizenship, the difficulty of extradition (specifically mentioning Israel), her extraordinary financial resources, and her proven ability to avoid detection. The Court explicitly rejects the Defendant's argument that waiving extradition rights indicates an intent not to flee.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Defendant | Defendant |
Subject of the detention order; referred to as 'she'; possesses French citizenship and extraordinary financial resour...
|
| Esposito | Legal Citation Subject |
Referenced in case citation United States v. Esposito.
|
| Khashoggi | Legal Citation Subject |
Referenced in case citation United States v. Khashoggi in the footnote regarding extradition waivers.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned as a location from which extradition would be difficult.
|
|
|
Implied by references to 'French citizenship'.
|
|
|
Implied jurisdiction.
|
Relationships (1)
Court reviewing defendant's arguments for bail/detention.
Key Quotes (3)
"The likelihood that the Defendant would be able to frustrate any extradition requests—even if she were correct that she would be unable to stop extradition entirely weighs strongly in favor of detention."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020140.jpg
Quote #1
"the Defendant's extraordinary financial resources also continue to provide her the means to flee the country and to do so undetected."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020140.jpg
Quote #2
"her experience avoiding detection (whether from the government, the press, or otherwise), do bear significantly on the flight risk analysis."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020140.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,212 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 106 Filed 12/30/20 Page 13 of 22
extradition from Israel (or any other country) would be, at best, a difficult and lengthy process
and, at worst, impossible.").
and, at worst, impossible.").
Having carefully reviewed the experts' reports and the cases cited by the Defendant,² the
Court's analysis of the relationship between the Defendant's French citizenship and the risk of
flight remains fundamentally unchanged. Its reasoning is guided in part by the substantial legal
questions regarding the legal weight of anticipatory extradition waivers and the likelihood that
any extradition would be a difficult and lengthy process (including, for instance, the likelihood
that the Defendant would contest the validity of those waivers and the duration it would take to
resolve those legal disputes). The likelihood that the Defendant would be able to frustrate any
extradition requests—even if she were correct that she would be unable to stop extradition
entirely weighs strongly in favor of detention.
Court's analysis of the relationship between the Defendant's French citizenship and the risk of
flight remains fundamentally unchanged. Its reasoning is guided in part by the substantial legal
questions regarding the legal weight of anticipatory extradition waivers and the likelihood that
any extradition would be a difficult and lengthy process (including, for instance, the likelihood
that the Defendant would contest the validity of those waivers and the duration it would take to
resolve those legal disputes). The likelihood that the Defendant would be able to frustrate any
extradition requests—even if she were correct that she would be unable to stop extradition
entirely weighs strongly in favor of detention.
In addition, the Defendant's extraordinary financial resources also continue to provide
her the means to flee the country and to do so undetected. To be sure, this factor alone does not
by itself justify continued detention. But as the Court noted at the initial bail hearing, the
Defendant's financial resources, in combination with her substantial international ties and
foreign connections and her experience avoiding detection (whether from the government, the
press, or otherwise), do bear significantly on the flight risk analysis. See Tr. at 88:6 88:23
(distinguishing this case from United States v. Esposito, 309 F. Supp. 3d 24 (S.D.N.Y. 2018),
her the means to flee the country and to do so undetected. To be sure, this factor alone does not
by itself justify continued detention. But as the Court noted at the initial bail hearing, the
Defendant's financial resources, in combination with her substantial international ties and
foreign connections and her experience avoiding detection (whether from the government, the
press, or otherwise), do bear significantly on the flight risk analysis. See Tr. at 88:6 88:23
(distinguishing this case from United States v. Esposito, 309 F. Supp. 3d 24 (S.D.N.Y. 2018),
__________
² The Defendant also argues that "a defendant's waiver of the right to appeal an extradition order
has been recognized as an indication of the defendant's intent not to flee." Def. Mot. at 27
(citing United States v. Khashoggi, 717 F. Supp. 1048, 1052 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). The Court places
little weight on this argument. Under the Defendant's theory, a defendant could strategically
offer to waive the right to extradition while intending to resist any subsequent extradition that
might result. The Court is unpersuaded.
² The Defendant also argues that "a defendant's waiver of the right to appeal an extradition order
has been recognized as an indication of the defendant's intent not to flee." Def. Mot. at 27
(citing United States v. Khashoggi, 717 F. Supp. 1048, 1052 (S.D.N.Y. 1989)). The Court places
little weight on this argument. Under the Defendant's theory, a defendant could strategically
offer to waive the right to extradition while intending to resist any subsequent extradition that
might result. The Court is unpersuaded.
13
DOJ-OGR-00020140
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document