8
Shared Docs
7
Same-Page
23 / 15
Mentions
21321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3,2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-291E(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 11 United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) 11, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United
d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-J-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *3-4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
hat cannot be addressed by any bail conditions. English, 629 F.3d at 319 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Deutsch, No. I 8-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. July I, 2020). And regardless of the presence of the presumption or the nature of the charges
cognized, "[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where "no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appea
No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (MN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Peres, N
21321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3,2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-291E(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 11 United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) 11, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United
d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-J-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *3-4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
hat cannot be addressed by any bail conditions. English, 629 F.3d at 319 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Deutsch, No. I 8-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. July I, 2020). And regardless of the presence of the presumption or the nature of the charges
cognized, "[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where "no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appea
No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (MN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Peres, N
21321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3,2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-291E(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 11 United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) 11, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United
d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-J-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *3-4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
hat cannot be addressed by any bail conditions. English, 629 F.3d at 319 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Deutsch, No. I 8-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. July I, 2020). And regardless of the presence of the presumption or the nature of the charges
cognized, "[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where "no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appea
No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (MN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Peres, N
21321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3,2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-291E(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 11 United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) 11, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United
d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-J-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *3-4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
hat cannot be addressed by any bail conditions. English, 629 F.3d at 319 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Deutsch, No. I 8-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. July I, 2020). And regardless of the presence of the presumption or the nature of the charges
cognized, "[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where "no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appea
No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (MN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Peres, N
21321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3,2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-291E(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 11 United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) 11, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United
d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-J-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *3-4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
hat cannot be addressed by any bail conditions. English, 629 F.3d at 319 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Deutsch, No. I 8-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. July I, 2020). And regardless of the presence of the presumption or the nature of the charges
cognized, "[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where "no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appea
No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (MN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Peres, N
d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-.1-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *34 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
421321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-291E(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 1 I United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) II, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United Sta
hat cannot be addressed by any bail conditions. English, 629 F.3d at 319 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020). And regardless of the presence of the presumption or the nature of the charges
cognized, "[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where "no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appea
No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (AJN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Veres,
21321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3,2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-291E(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 11 United States v. Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) 11, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United
d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-J-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *3-4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
hat cannot be addressed by any bail conditions. English, 629 F.3d at 319 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Deutsch, No. I 8-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. July I, 2020). And regardless of the presence of the presumption or the nature of the charges
cognized, "[i]n our society liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception." United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 755 (1987). Pretrial detention is appropriate only where "no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the appea
No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (MN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Peres, N
421321 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3,2011) 10, 18 United States v. Crowell, No. 06-CR-29IE(F), 2006 WL 3541736 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2006) 11 United States v Deutsch, No. 18-CR-502 (FB), 2020 WL 3577398 (E.D.N.Y. July 1, 2020) 11, 18 United States v. DiGiacomo, 746 F. Supp. 1176 (D. Mass. 1990) 14 United
Page: EFTA00018517 →No. 10 Cr. 4 (JL), 2010 WL 309679 (D.N.H. Jan. 26, 2010) 18 United States v. Sabhnani, 493 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 2007) 9, 10, 16, 18 United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987) 9 United States v. Stephens, 15-CR-95 (AJN), 2020 WL 1295155 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2020) 5, 6, 7, 8 United States v. Peres,
Page: EFTA00018518 →d that defendants rebutted the presumption and imposed appropriately strict bail conditions in cases involving alleged offenses against minors. See Deutsch, 2020 WL 3577398, at *5-6; United States v. Veres, No. 3:20-CR-18-J-32JBT, 2020 WL 1042051, at *3-4 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 4, 2020); Conway, 2011 WL 34213
Page: EFTA00018536 →Entities connected to both Deutsch and Salerno

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
United States
LOCATION
Julie K. Brown
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
Michael Jackson
PERSONthe Southern District
LOCATION
Colorado
LOCATION
Stephen Hawking
PERSON
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATIONJeffrey Pagliuca
PERSON
United Kingdom
LOCATION
Michael Cohen
PERSON
George W. Bush
PERSON
Denver
LOCATIONCourtney Wild
PERSON
Hanson
PERSON
George Mitchell
PERSON
Mattis
PERSONBoustani
PERSONSecond Circuit
ORGANIZATION