This document is a transcript from a court hearing on July 16, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. The discussion centers on pretrial matters for a Mr. Epstein, including clarification that he has one effective passport and a debate over whether a pretrial report indicates he refused to provide financial information or was simply incomplete. The judge also questions another attorney, Mr. Rossmiller, about allegations of witness tampering by Mr. Epstein, confirming these will be part of the government's bail submission.
This document is the final page (14) of a government filing dated July 12, 2019, addressed to Judge Richard M. Berman, arguing against bail for Jeffrey Epstein. The text provides legal precedents establishing that sex trafficking laws (Section 1591) apply to consumers/buyers, not just suppliers, refuting the defense's legal arguments. The conclusion explicitly requests pretrial detention based on Epstein's wealth, flight risk, possession of lewd photos of minors, and history of witness interference.
This legal document is a filing arguing against granting bail to a defendant accused of a years-long scheme of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls. The prosecution contends that the defendant's proposed bail package is inadequate, he is a flight risk due to his wealth and private jet, and he poses a danger to the community. The document details the allegations, including that the defendant paid victims and victim-recruiters in cash in locations like New York and Palm Beach, and urges the Court to order him detained pending trial.
This document is page 12 of a defense filing arguing for Jeffrey Epstein's pretrial release. The defense argues that Epstein's 'tier-one' sex offender status in the U.S. Virgin Islands indicates low risk, and cites legal precedents (Sabhnani, Hansen) where wealthy defendants with foreign ties were granted bail. A significant footnote asserts Epstein is solely a U.S. citizen, his only foreign residence is in France (which has an extradition treaty), and the majority of his assets are in the U.S.
This document is page 4 of a court filing (Document 6) dated July 11, 2019, outlining proposed bail conditions for Jeffrey Epstein. It details a substantial bond package secured by his $77 million Manhattan home, his private jet, and properties owned by his brother Mark Epstein and friend David Mitchell. The document also notes that Epstein sold a second private jet in June 2019 and proposes strict house arrest conditions including 24/7 monitoring by trustees.
This document is page 3 of a defense filing arguing for Jeffrey Epstein's release on bail pending trial. It asserts that Epstein has complied with all sex offender registration requirements for 10 years, argues he is not a danger to the community, and proposes strict release conditions including home detention in Manhattan, GPS monitoring, and the surrender of his passport. The defense specifically disputes a government claim that Epstein holds three active passports, stating he had only one which has been surrendered.
This document is page 18 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The text details the Court's rejection of bail arguments, stating that the Defendant's significant wealth and assets (including $4 million in a hedge fund) would allow her to flee and compensate any bond supporters for their losses. It further outlines strict proposed release conditions, including home confinement, GPS monitoring, and security guards, which the Court ultimately finds insufficient to mitigate flight risk.
This document is page 16 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court denies the Defendant's request for release, citing a 'lack of candor' and 'woefully incomplete' financial representations made to Pretrial Services. Consequently, the Court concludes the Defendant remains a flight risk and rejects the proposed $28.5 million bail package.
This page from a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) argues against granting bail to Ghislaine Maxwell, citing her lack of US employment ties, significant foreign connections, and flight risk. The text details her history of providing 'incomplete or erroneous' financial information to Pretrial Services, specifically noting a July 2020 incident where she underreported assets at $3.5 million and misrepresented her ownership status of a New Hampshire property. It references a report by the accounting firm Macalvins intended to clarify her finances.
This document is page 15 of a court filing (Document 106) from December 30, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The text argues for continued detention, citing Maxwell's lack of employment ties to the US, significant ties abroad, and a pattern of providing incomplete financial information to Pretrial Services, specifically underreporting assets by omitting spousal assets and trust accounts in July 2020. It references a financial report prepared by the accounting firm Macalvins and disputes Maxwell's defense that her financial misrepresentations were due to lack of access to records while detained.
This legal document is a court's analysis of a defendant's motion for release, focusing on her ties to the United States as a factor in determining flight risk. The court considers letters of support from friends, family, and her spouse, but finds them insufficient to alter its conclusion that she remains a flight risk. The court highlights a key contradiction: the defendant now emphasizes her spousal relationship to argue she has strong ties, despite having claimed she was getting divorced at the time of her arrest.
This document is page 6 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), denying a renewed motion for bail. The text outlines the Defendant's proposals for release, including paid private security, waivers of extradition from the UK and France, and arguments regarding COVID-19 conditions in jail. Despite these arguments and new financial information, the Court concludes that no conditions can reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance.
This legal document is a page from a court filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, dated December 30, 2020. It outlines the Defendant's arguments for release from detention, citing new information such as family ties in the U.S., a detailed financial report, waivers of extradition from the UK and France, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these arguments, the document concludes with the Court's finding that no conditions could reasonably assure the Defendant's appearance.
This legal document is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, arguing against the government's characterization of her finances. The defense contends that Ms. Maxwell has been transparent about her assets, including those shared with her spouse, and that the government's claims of her having 'unrestrained funds' to flee are untrue. The document refutes accusations of hiding assets by pointing to disclosures on joint tax returns and the difficulty of liquidating certain funds.
This page from a defense filing (dated Dec 23, 2020) argues that Ghislaine Maxwell accurately disclosed her assets to Pretrial Services despite being in jail without records. The defense rebuts the government's claim that she is hiding wealth or has 'unrestrained funds' to flee, citing a negative pledge on her London property and the illiquidity of $4 million controlled by her spouse.
This document is page 9 of a legal filing (Document 103) from December 23, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The text argues that Maxwell and her spouse only discussed divorce prior to her arrest to protect him from 'terrible consequences,' not because the relationship was failing, and asserts that the spouse is willing to co-sign her bond. It also defends Maxwell's financial disclosures, stating she has pledged all her and her spouse's assets and that the government has not successfully challenged the accuracy of her financial report.
This document is a defense reply filed on December 23, 2020, in support of Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed bail application. The defense argues that Maxwell has strong ties to the U.S., including a spouse who has come forward as a co-signor and friends willing to pledge assets, contradicting the government's claim that she is a flight risk. The filing addresses a contradiction regarding her marital status, acknowledging she previously told Pretrial Services she was divorcing, while her spouse now asserts a committed four-year relationship.
This document is a defense reply filed on December 23, 2020, in support of Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed bail application. The defense argues that Maxwell has strong ties to the U.S., including a spouse who has come forward as a co-signor and friends willing to pledge assets, contradicting the government's claim that she is a flight risk. The filing addresses a contradiction regarding her marital status, acknowledging she previously told Pretrial Services she was divorcing, while her spouse now asserts a committed four-year relationship.
This document is a page from a Government filing opposing bail (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It argues the defendant is a flight risk due to sophisticated financial maneuvering, specifically transferring millions of dollars into trusts for her spouse to hide her true wealth ($20M+) while claiming to have only $3.4M. It highlights a lack of candor with Pretrial Services regarding her assets and the ownership of her New Hampshire residence.
This document is a Government filing from December 2020 opposing the defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) bail application. It argues she is a flight risk who has sophisticatedly hidden her wealth by transferring millions into trusts for her spouse over the preceding five years. The text highlights a financial discrepancy where she brought over $20 million to the marriage while her spouse contributed only $200,000, and notes her 'lack of candor' with Pretrial Services regarding property ownership.
This legal document is a filing by the Government arguing against a defendant's proposed bail package. The Government contends the defendant is a flight risk due to substantial, previously underreported assets of approximately $22 million, including a $2 million London townhouse and millions in unrestrained funds. The argument is further supported by the fact that two proposed co-signers are UK residents, which would make the bond effectively worthless and unrecoverable if the defendant were to flee.
This legal document is a filing by the prosecution arguing against granting bail to a defendant. The government contends that the defendant, who possesses approximately $22 million in assets including a $2 million London townhouse, is a significant flight risk and has previously been deceptive about her finances. The filing also asserts that the proposed bail package is inadequate, particularly because two co-signers are UK residents, making it practically impossible to recover the bond amount if the defendant were to flee.
This document is a page from a Government filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) opposing bail for the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). It details her evasion of FBI agents during her arrest, including fleeing and wrapping a phone in tin foil, and argues she prioritized private security over law enforcement. Additionally, it asserts she was deceptive with Pretrial Services regarding her finances, possessing 'vast resources' far exceeding the $3.8 million she initially disclosed.
This legal document argues for the defendant's detention by highlighting her deceptive behavior and flight risk. It cites her knowing disobedience of FBI directives when she fled, her attempts to evade law enforcement by wrapping a phone in tin foil, and her significant dishonesty regarding her financial assets, which are believed to be far greater than the $3.8 million she disclosed to Pretrial Services.
This page from a government filing (opposition to bail) argues that the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell) is a flight risk. It highlights that her marriage is not a sufficient tie to the US, noting she lived alone while hiding in New Hampshire and that she and her spouse listed themselves as 'single' on bank trust account forms in 2018. The document also dismisses the defense's offer to waive extradition rights, particularly noting that France generally does not extradite its own nationals.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity