This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, where an attorney is arguing against their client being a flight risk. The attorney distinguishes their client's case from the U.S. v. Zarger case cited by the government, noting their client was in New Hampshire at the time of arrest and not making plans to leave the country. The attorney also references a prior felony conviction of a Mr. Epstein and a previous proceeding before Judge Berman.
This court transcript from April 1, 2021, details a discussion between The Court and Ms. Moe, representing the government, regarding the legal relevance of victim statements in a bail analysis. Following a point raised by Mr. Cohen, The Court seeks the government's position. Ms. Moe clarifies that while victims have a right to participate under the Crime Victims Rights Act, their statements are not part of the government's motion, and their substance should not be considered by the court for the bail analysis.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, from Case 21-770 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues that the defendant poses a flight risk and has failed to meet the burden of production to rebut the presumption of detention, citing recommendations from Pretrial Services and victims' requests. The Judge questions Ms. Moe regarding defense attorney Mr. Cohen's arguments about the government's burden of proof regarding flight risk.
This is a page from a court transcript (part of an appellate filing for Case 21-770) where a government prosecutor argues against bail for a female defendant (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell). The prosecutor asserts that Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) does not bind the current office or shield the defendant. Arguments for detention include the defendant's extensive international ties, unknown finances, and lack of candor regarding resources.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021) recording an argument against granting bail to the defendant (identified by case number as Ghislaine Maxwell). The speaker argues that the defendant has been untruthful about her finances, claiming ignorance of her own wealth ('millions of dollars'), and poses a flight risk involving potential foreign travel documents. The prosecution explicitly compares her situation to the case of Jeffrey Epstein, citing Judge Berman's decision to deny Epstein bail based on flight risk and dangerousness.
This document is a court transcript where a speaker, likely a prosecutor, argues against the notion that the defendant would have surrendered if asked. The speaker asserts the government arrested the defendant due to a serious flight risk and points to the defense counsel's uncooperative behavior in a separate civil case as further evidence of untrustworthiness. The speaker concludes by noting the lack of a substantive response regarding the defendant's finances.
This document is a partial court transcript from April 1, 2021, where Ms. Moe, representing the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, addresses the court. She asserts that the government's presentation of the defendant's conduct, detailed in an indictment returned by a grand jury, consists of undisputed facts and evidence, not 'spin.' Ms. Moe highlights the chilling conduct described in the indictment, involving an adult woman cultivating underage girls for sexual abuse and exploitation by an adult man, and also mentions the defendant's undisputed actions of living in hiding and financial matters.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. An attorney, Mr. Cohen, is making a concluding argument to a judge to grant bail for his client. He argues that the government has failed to meet its burden of proving the client is a flight risk, distinguishing the current case from others and citing a precedent from Judge Raggi in the Sabhnani case before formally requesting the court to grant bail.
A page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, featuring arguments by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney. The attorney argues that the government's citations of 'dangerousness cases' are irrelevant to Maxwell's situation and emphasizes the impossibility of preparing for trial while Maxwell is detained during the COVID-19 crisis, citing lack of in-person access to the client due to BOP restrictions. The Judge attempts to interject at the bottom of the page.
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021. A defense attorney is arguing for the release of their client (inferred to be Ghislaine Maxwell) on the grounds that reviewing voluminous electronic discovery for 'conduct that's alleged to be 25 years old' is impossible while the client is in custody during the pandemic. The attorney notes the client is in 'administrative seg.' (segregation) because authorities are 'afraid of what happened with Mr. Epstein' (referencing his death in custody).
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, in which an attorney, Mr. Cohen, argues that his client's detention has limited his access to her, making it difficult to gather financial information. He contends it is unreasonable for Pretrial Services to expect his client to recall details of a real estate transaction offhand, citing complications from the COVID crisis and legal precedents. Mr. Cohen also informs the court that the government requires until November to complete discovery.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, featuring defense attorney Mr. Cohen addressing the Court. Cohen requests more time to arrange sureties for a bail package, citing extreme difficulties caused by his client's (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) harsh detention conditions at the MDC. He describes these conditions as equivalent to solitary confinement, including constant lighting, isolation, lack of showers, and confiscation of legal materials.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues for bail, claiming the government's indictment of conduct from 1994-1997 is tactical and lacks physical evidence like tapes or video. He asserts that the client has been kept in custody 'by design' and references the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA).
This document is a page from a court transcript (filed 04/01/2021) appearing to be from the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 21-770). Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues during a bail proceeding that the government's indictment relies on 25-year-old conduct specifically to circumvent the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). He cites the 'Annabi case' regarding the scope of plea agreements and claims the prosecution's strategy is tactical.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, capturing an attorney's argument during a bail hearing. The attorney contends that stringent bail conditions can mitigate flight risk without a prolonged hearing on the defendant's assets, citing an observation by Judge Raggi in a previous case. The attorney also informs the presiding judge of forthcoming significant motions that could challenge the indictment itself, urging the court to consider this when weighing the evidence for the bail determination.
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021) where a defense attorney argues against the detention of their client. The attorney asserts that transferring funds after being dropped by a bank and filing required disclosures (SDAR) with the Treasury Department in 2018 and 2019 regarding a foreign bank account are acts of compliance, not evidence of hiding assets or intent to evade. The defense also begins to cite Judge Raggi's opinion in the Sabhnani case regarding physical restraint.
This document is a court transcript in which an attorney refutes the government's allegations about their client's finances. The attorney argues the government has exaggerated the number of bank accounts, explains a $500,000 transfer as a maturing bond, and attributes another large transfer to the financial fallout their client experienced after Mr. Epstein's arrest.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021, concerning a bail application. The defense attorney argues against a deep investigation into the detained client's finances, specifically addressing a 2016 real estate transaction of $15 million (likely Ghislaine Maxwell's townhouse sale). The defense disputes the government's claim that the client retains $14 million in liquid assets, citing liabilities and litigation expenses, while referencing legal precedents (Khashoggi, Dreier) regarding bail amounts.
This page is a transcript from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021 (Case 21-770), likely related to Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal regarding detention. The defense attorney argues that the defendant is not a flight risk ('opposite of hiding') and contends that the perjury charge—stemming from a denial of guilt during a deposition—should not heavily weigh the 3142 analysis against release. The attorney notes the government has been investigating the case for ten years.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, regarding Case 21-770. Defense counsel is arguing before a judge regarding Ghislaine Maxwell's 'risk of flight' status. The defense contends that Maxwell's use of tinfoil or Faraday bags was to prevent phone hacking, not to destroy evidence, and describes a security sweep where agents confirmed with a security guard that Maxwell lives at the house and relies on the guard for groceries.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021) where a defense attorney argues against the government's claim that the defendant is a flight risk for changing her contact information. The attorney explains that the defendant changed her email and phone number because she was hacked and received 'strange e-mails' after the Second Circuit unsealed civil case documents—revealing her personal data—around the time of Jeffrey Epstein's arrest in August 2019. The attorney asserts she kept the hacked phone to preserve evidence for ongoing civil litigation.
A transcript page from a court proceeding (dated April 1, 2021) where a defense attorney argues that the government is misrepresenting the circumstances of their client's arrest to influence the judge and media. The attorney details that the client (likely Ghislaine Maxwell based on the description) was in pajamas with one security guard, the doors were unlocked, and she moved to another room as a safety protocol rather than attempting to flee when FBI agents raided the property.
This document is page 117 of a court transcript from Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues before the Court that his legal team (including Haddon Morgan) had informed the government they were available for the voluntary surrender of their client, Ms. Maxwell, should an indictment occur. Cohen expresses frustration that the government arrested Maxwell without contacting them first and criticizes the government's reply brief for attempting to 'throw dirt' on his client.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. A defense attorney, Mr. Cohen, argues that his client has remained in the U.S. and that counsel has been in frequent contact with the government, suggesting a voluntary surrender could have been arranged. The judge interrupts to seek explicit clarification on whether the defense actually offered to arrange a surrender in the event of an indictment.
This document is page 115 of a court transcript from April 1, 2021, involving a defense attorney arguing before a judge regarding bail conditions for a female client (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell). The attorney rebuts the government's claim that the client is a flight risk or 'hiding out,' arguing instead that she has been actively litigating civil cases since 2015 and denying impropriety regarding Mr. Epstein. The attorney also notes that a plaintiff seeking millions of dollars had spoken earlier in the proceeding.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity