French courts
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006-01-01 | Legal case | France refused to extradite a French national who was also a U.S. citizen. | France | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001259.jpg
This is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated March 23, 2021, arguing for the release of Ghislaine Maxwell on bail. The text argues that Maxwell's offer to renounce her French and British citizenship negates the flight risk concerns regarding extradition protection in France. It cites a Mr. Julié to interpret French Article 696-4, asserting that one who loses French nationality is not protected from extradition.
DOJ-OGR-00001204.jpg
A legal opinion filed on December 23, 2020, by French attorney William Julié regarding the extradition of Ghislaine Maxwell. Julié argues that under French law and the Extradition Treaty (referencing a past interpretation by Senators Durbin and Obama), there is no absolute rule against extraditing nationals and that the French government would likely execute an extradition decree against Maxwell. The document also cites the 2010 EU-US extradition agreement as further justification for cooperation.
DOJ-OGR-00001198.jpg
This document is page 9 (filed as page 3 of 15 in a specific docket) of a legal memorandum in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The defense argues that contrary to government claims, Maxwell could be extradited from France because international treaties supersede national legislation, and that she would likely face extradition and be denied bail if she fled to the UK, supported by expert opinions from Mr. Julié and David Perry. The text refutes the relevance of a 2006 French non-extradition case and asserts that Maxwell's waiver of extradition would be a significant factor in foreign courts.
DOJ-OGR-00001162.jpg
This legal document argues against a defense submission by asserting that French law and practice systematically prohibit the extradition of French nationals to the United States. It refutes the defense expert's claim of no precedent by citing the 2006 case of Hans Peterson, a dual U.S.-French citizen who confessed to murder in the U.S. but was shielded from U.S. law enforcement by France. The document concludes that any anticipatory waiver of extradition by the defendant would be unenforceable in French courts.
DOJ-OGR-00002225.jpg
This document is the final page of a legal opinion by French lawyer William Julié filed in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330). Julié argues that French law does not absolutely prohibit the extradition of nationals and cites a past letter from Senators Durbin and Obama to support the interpretation that France has discretion to extradite. He concludes it is unlikely the French government would refuse to extradite Maxwell, especially given the 2010 EU-US extradition agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00002225(1).jpg
This document is the final page of a legal opinion by French lawyer William Julié filed in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330). Julié argues that French law does not absolutely prohibit the extradition of nationals and cites a past letter from Senators Durbin and Obama to support the interpretation that France has discretion to extradite. He concludes it is unlikely the French government would refuse to extradite Maxwell, especially given the 2010 EU-US extradition agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00002219.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal filing (Document 103) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on December 23, 2020. The text argues against the government's concerns regarding Maxwell's flight risk, utilizing expert opinions from Mr. Julié (French law) and David Perry (UK law) to assert that extradition from France or the UK would be legally permissible and likely, and that bail in the UK would be denied. It specifically refutes the relevance of a 2006 precedent where France refused extradition, arguing that international treaties prevail over French national legislation.
DOJ-OGR-00002219(1).jpg
This legal document argues against the government's position on the extradition of Ms. Maxwell. It presents expert opinions from Mr. Julié on French law and David Perry on UK law to contend that extradition from France is permissible under the existing treaty and that resisting extradition or obtaining bail in the UK would be highly unlikely. The document refutes the government's reliance on a 2006 case as precedent and clarifies the limited discretion of the Secretary of State to deny extradition.
DOJ-OGR-00002202.jpg
This letter from the French Ministry of Justice, dated December 11, 2020, is addressed to the U.S. Department of Justice via its Liaison Magistrate in Paris. It formally explains that French law absolutely prohibits the extradition of any individual who was a French national at the time an alleged crime was committed. The letter contrasts this with the practices of Anglo-Saxon countries like the U.S. and clarifies that when extradition is denied on these grounds, French courts are empowered to prosecute the individual under the principle of 'aut tradere, aut judicar' (either extradite or prosecute).
DOJ-OGR-00002202(1).jpg
This letter, dated December 11, 2020, is from the French Ministry of Justice to the U.S. Department of Justice. It clarifies that French law, specifically Article 696-2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, absolutely prohibits the extradition of any individual who was a French national at the time an alleged crime was committed. The letter contrasts this with the legal practices of Anglo-Saxon countries like the United States, which may extradite their own nationals.
DOJ-OGR-00002138.jpg
This document is a legal opinion by attorney William Julié analyzing the potential outcome of an extradition request from the United States to France for Ghislaine Maxwell, should she flee there. The analysis focuses on the general bars to extradition under French law, particularly the requirement for French courts to consider human rights violations in the requesting state. The author concludes it is highly unlikely that French authorities would refuse to enforce an extradition decree for Maxwell, despite her French citizenship.
DOJ-OGR-00002127.jpg
This legal document, authored by French attorney William Julié, provides an analysis of the potential extradition of Ghislaine Maxwell from the USA to France. Julié argues that despite her French citizenship, French authorities would likely grant an extradition request because the US-France extradition treaty does not prohibit extraditing nationals. He further states that factors like her US citizenship, a signed waiver, and the obligation for France to try her if extradition is denied, make her return to the USA highly probable, especially in a scenario where she had fled in violation of bail.
DOJ-OGR-00002126.jpg
This document is a legal opinion written by French attorney William Julié regarding the extradition of French nationals to the United States. It was requested by Olivier Laude on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team to support bail proceedings, arguing that French law permits extradition to the US and that Maxwell intends to waive her rights to fight such extradition in French courts. The document serves to assure US authorities that Maxwell would not be shielded by French non-extradition principles if she were released on bail and fled to France.
DOJ-OGR-00002785.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Document 171) from the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on March 23, 2021. The defense argues that Maxwell is not a flight risk because she is willing to renounce both her French and British citizenships and waive extradition rights. The text cites a legal opinion by Mr. Julié regarding French extradition law (Article 696-4) to support the claim that she would not be protected from extradition if she fled to France after renouncing citizenship.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity