Epstein Secrets

atters), the extradition should not take place". 33. Although some of the conduct alleged in the superseding indictment is said to have occurred in Londonm, three of the `specified matters' are likely to weigh heavily against a finding that extradition would be barred by forum. First, it appears that th

t 2003, s. 114(4). ” Extradition Act 2003, s. 115(1). 34 Norris v Government of the United States of America [2010] 2 AC 487. 38 ECHR, Art. 34 and European Court of Human Rights, Rules of the Court, r. 39. 36 ECHR, Art. 34. 1922623.1 5 EFTA00065607 An overview of the timeframes in relation to US extradition requests 12. The timescales app

atters), the extradition should not take place". 33. Although some of the conduct alleged in the superseding indictment is said to have occurred in Londonm, three of the `specified matters' are likely to weigh heavily against a finding that extradition would be barred by forum. First, it appears that th

t 2003, s. 114(4). ” Extradition Act 2003, s. 115(1). 34 Norris v Government of the United States of America [2010] 2 AC 487. 38 ECHR, Art. 34 and European Court of Human Rights, Rules of the Court, r. 39. 36 ECHR, Art. 34. 1922623.1 5 EFTA00154419 An overview of the timeframes in relation to US extradition requests 12. The timescales app

atters), the extradition should not take place". 33. Although some of the conduct alleged in the superseding indictment is said to have occurred in Londonm, three of the `specified matters' are likely to weigh heavily against a finding that extradition would be barred by forum. First, it appears that th

t 2003, s. 114(4). ” Extradition Act 2003, s. 115(1). 34 Norris v Government of the United States of America [2010] 2 AC 487. 38 ECHR, Art. 34 and European Court of Human Rights, Rules of the Court, r. 39. 36 ECHR, Art. 34. 1922623.1 5 EFTA00073551 An overview of the timeframes in relation to US extradition requests 12. The timescales app