DOJ-OGR-00002783.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 171 Filed 03/23/21 Page 3 of 18

▪ On-premises 24/7 private security to prevent Ms. Maxwell from leaving the
residence without pre-approval by the Court or Pretrial Services and to
escort her when authorized to leave the residence;

▪ Visitors to be pre-approved by Pretrial Services;

▪ Strict supervision by Pretrial Services;

▪ Such other terms as the Court deems appropriate.

The government goes to great lengths to oppose bail arguing technicalities and
offering unfounded innuendo ripped from the tabloid headlines to avoid addressing the
merits of Ms. Maxwell’s exceptional bail package, which puts at risk everything she has,
including the assets of her spouse and the financial security of her family and closest
friends.

The Court Retains Jurisdiction to Decide Matters Related to Bail

The government asserts that the Court should not consider the present bail motion
because appeal of denial of the Second Bail Motion, not yet briefed, is pending before the
Second Circuit. (Dkt. 165 at 2-3). It is ironic that the government takes this position given that it
created this problem by opposing Ms. Maxwell’s request for an enlargement of time to file a
notice of appeal to the Court’s denial of her Second Bail Motion. Indeed, Ms. Maxwell sought
the extension to avoid this very issue. (Dkt. 109). The government should not now be allowed to
turn that procedural sword into a jurisdictional shield to prevent the Court from considering the
instant motion.

Divestiture of jurisdiction in the district court while an appeal is pending is not a per se
rule. Rather, it is a judicially crafted rule rooted in the interest of judicial economy that is
designed to avoid confusion or waste of time resulting from having the same issues before two
courts at the same time. Divestiture of jurisdiction, therefore, should not be automatic, but

2

DOJ-OGR-00002783