LaFontaine
PersonRelationship Network
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A bail revocation hearing in the LaFontaine case that lasted three days and involved a significan... | Court | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001491.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) arguing for the pre-trial detention of a defendant. The prosecution (Government) asserts that the defendant is an extreme flight risk and cannot overcome the statutory presumption for detention, citing the nature of the alleged crimes involving the sexual exploitation of minors. The document references specific U.S. statutes and case law to support its argument that detention is warranted.
DOJ-OGR-00001378.jpg
This is page 6 of a legal brief filed on April 19, 2021, in Case 21-770 (United States v. Maxwell). The text argues that the lower court failed to ensure the reliability of the government's evidence during bail hearings, citing legal precedents *LaFontaine* and *Martir*. The defense contends that unlike the *Martir* case, Ms. Maxwell actively challenged the government's 'flimsy proffer' through multiple hearings, but the court accepted the government's claims 'blindly' and 'uncritically.'
DOJ-OGR-00001377.jpg
This legal filing argues that the case against Ms. Maxwell is weak because the anonymous accusers' stories are contradictory, uncorroborated, and fabricated for money and fame, only emerging after Epstein's death. The document also contends that the district judge erred by accepting the indictment as proof of a strong case and that the government's reliance on legal precedents is misplaced due to a lack of meaningful evidence presented.
DOJ-OGR-00001335.jpg
This document is page 18 of a legal brief filed by the Government on April 12, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 21-770). The text argues against Maxwell's appeal regarding her bail denial, asserting that she poses a flight risk due to foreign ties and wealth, and defending the lower court's use of 'proffers' (evidence summaries) rather than full evidentiary hearings for bail determinations, citing Second Circuit precedents.
DOJ-OGR-00000950.jpg
This legal document is a portion of a court filing, likely a memorandum from the prosecution ('the Government'), arguing for the pre-trial detention of a defendant. The document cites U.S. legal code, specifically 18 U.S.C. § 3142, to assert that the defendant is an extreme flight risk and that a statutory presumption for detention applies due to the alleged offenses involving the sexual exploitation of minors. The argument focuses on the nature of the offense and the strength of the evidence as factors weighing in favor of detention.
DOJ-OGR-00000803.jpg
This legal document details Jeffrey Epstein's alleged failure to comply with New York sex offender registration requirements, citing a New York Post report. It also references allegations from an attorney, Brad Edwards, that Epstein continued to engage in sexual misconduct with female visitors while on work release from a Florida jail. The document notes that the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office disputes these claims about his conduct during work release.
DOJ-OGR-00000792.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for the pretrial detention of a defendant, Mr. Epstein. It establishes that rules of evidence are relaxed in bail hearings, giving courts wide discretion, and cites legal precedent that in cases involving sexual victimization of a minor under 18 U.S.C. § 1591, there is a presumption for remand. The document states that the burden is on Mr. Epstein to provide evidence that he is not a danger or flight risk, while the Government retains the ultimate burden of persuasion.
DOJ-OGR-00000791.jpg
This document is Page 8 of a legal filing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, likely US v. Epstein) arguing the legal standards for pre-trial detention. It cites multiple Second Circuit precedents to establish that a defendant can be detained based on dangerousness to the community or risk of flight, noting that witness tampering is sufficient grounds to revoke bail. The text outlines the four factors of the Bail Reform Act required for the release/remand analysis.
DOJ-OGR-00000480.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing by the Government in the criminal case against Mr. Epstein, filed on July 18, 2019. It argues that the standard rules of evidence do not apply to bail hearings and that for the specific charges involving sexual victimization of a minor, there is a legal presumption in favor of pretrial detention. The document states that while Mr. Epstein can rebut this presumption, the Government retains the ultimate burden of persuading the court that he is a danger.
DOJ-OGR-00000479.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing, specifically page 8 of 33 from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on July 18, 2019. It outlines the legal standards for a court to order a defendant's detention based on two separate grounds: dangerousness to the community and risk of flight. The text cites numerous legal precedents from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Bail Reform Act to support its arguments regarding evidence standards and the factors a court must consider.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity