DOJ-OGR-00000969.jpg
767 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
5
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal memorandum / court filing (motion for bail/release)
File Size:
767 KB
Summary
This page is from a legal filing (likely a memorandum in support of bail) arguing for the release of Ghislaine Maxwell. It asserts that the government has failed to prove she is a flight risk or that no conditions can assure her appearance, citing the Bail Reform Act and Supreme Court precedent favoring liberty. It also references the COVID-19 crisis and a footnote cites a letter regarding poor prison conditions hindering legal defense preparation.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the bail application; arguing for release pending trial.
|
| Sean Hecker | Attorney |
Author of a letter cited in footnote 8 regarding prison conditions.
|
| Margo K. Brodie | Judge (Honorable) |
Recipient of the letter from Sean Hecker mentioned in footnote 8.
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Supreme Court |
Cited in legal precedent (United States v. Salerno).
|
|
| Federal Defenders of New York, Inc. |
Party in a cited case regarding prison conditions (footnote 8).
|
|
| Federal Bureau of Prisons |
Defendant in a cited case regarding prison conditions (footnote 8).
|
|
| Second Circuit Court of Appeals |
Implied by citation '2d Cir. 2007' (United States v. Sabhnani).
|
|
| DOJ |
Referenced in Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR-00000969'.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2020-07-10
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Eastern District of New York, mentioned in case citation in footnote 8.
|
Relationships (2)
Letter of Sean Hecker to Hon. Margo K. Brodie cited in footnote.
Defending against government detention; 'The Government Has Not Carried Its Burden'.
Key Quotes (4)
"Ms. Maxwell must be released because she has met her limited burden of production showing that she does not pose a flight risk"Source
DOJ-OGR-00000969.jpg
Quote #1
"the government has entirely failed to demonstrate that no release condition or combination of conditions exist that will reasonably assure Ms. Maxwell’s presence in court."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000969.jpg
Quote #2
"[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000969.jpg
Quote #3
"it is only a limited group of offenders who should be denied bail pending trial."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000969.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,411 characters)
Case 20-770 Document 20-2 04/01/2021 3068520 Page 18 of 20
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 18 Filed 07/10/20 Page 13 of 28
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 18 Filed 07/10/20 Page 13 of 28
documents and other evidence from approximately twenty-five years ago and meaningfully assist
in the preparation of her defense. These restrictions are additional “compelling reasons”
justifying her release. See id.8
in the preparation of her defense. These restrictions are additional “compelling reasons”
justifying her release. See id.8
II. The Government Has Not Carried Its Burden Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142.
The grave concerns raised by the current COVID-19 crisis notwithstanding, Ms. Maxwell
must be released because she has met her limited burden of production showing that she does not
pose a flight risk, and the government has entirely failed to demonstrate that no release condition
or combination of conditions exist that will reasonably assure Ms. Maxwell’s presence in court.
must be released because she has met her limited burden of production showing that she does not
pose a flight risk, and the government has entirely failed to demonstrate that no release condition
or combination of conditions exist that will reasonably assure Ms. Maxwell’s presence in court.
A. Applicable Law
As the Supreme Court has recognized, “[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention
prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.” United States v. Salerno, 481
U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where “no condition or combination
of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the [defendant].” United States v.
Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63, 75 (2d Cir. 2007) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)). The Bail Reform Act
provides that a court “shall order the pretrial release” of the defendant (18 U.S.C. § 3142(b))
(emphasis added), but may impose bail conditions if “such release will not reasonably assure the
appearance” of the defendant in court. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c). Where conditions are necessary,
such release shall be “subject to the least restrictive . . . set of conditions that [the court]
determines will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required.” 18 U.S.C. §
3142(c)(1)(B) (emphasis added). Consequently, “[u]nder this statutory scheme, ‘it is only a
limited group of offenders who should be denied bail pending trial.’” Sabhnani, 493 F.3d at 75
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.” United States v. Salerno, 481
U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where “no condition or combination
of conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the [defendant].” United States v.
Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63, 75 (2d Cir. 2007) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)). The Bail Reform Act
provides that a court “shall order the pretrial release” of the defendant (18 U.S.C. § 3142(b))
(emphasis added), but may impose bail conditions if “such release will not reasonably assure the
appearance” of the defendant in court. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c). Where conditions are necessary,
such release shall be “subject to the least restrictive . . . set of conditions that [the court]
determines will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required.” 18 U.S.C. §
3142(c)(1)(B) (emphasis added). Consequently, “[u]nder this statutory scheme, ‘it is only a
limited group of offenders who should be denied bail pending trial.’” Sabhnani, 493 F.3d at 75
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
__________________________________________________________________
8 See also Letter of Sean Hecker to Hon. Margo K. Brodie (July 8, 2020), Federal Defenders of New York, Inc. v.
Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al., No. 19 Civ. 660 (E.D.N.Y.) (Doc. No. 78) (detailing absence of in-person
visitation, highly limited VTC and telephone call capacity, and issues pertaining to legal mail and legal documents).
8 See also Letter of Sean Hecker to Hon. Margo K. Brodie (July 8, 2020), Federal Defenders of New York, Inc. v.
Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al., No. 19 Civ. 660 (E.D.N.Y.) (Doc. No. 78) (detailing absence of in-person
visitation, highly limited VTC and telephone call capacity, and issues pertaining to legal mail and legal documents).
9
DOJ-OGR-00000969
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document