11
Shared Docs
11
Same-Page
11 / 11
Mentions
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
bail in part because home detention with electronic monitoring "at best . . . limits a fleeing defendant's head start"); see also United States v. Casteneda, No. 18 Cr. 047, 2018 WL 888744, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2018) (same); United States v. Anderson, 384 F. Supp.2d 32, 41 (D.D.C. 2005) (same); United S
e 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 11 Filed 07/12/19 Page 12 of 14 Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge July 12, 2019 Page 12 IV. The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant Here Finally, the defendant raises certain legal arguments he contends he will litigate at the appropriate stage and which he further suggests miti
Entities connected to both Casteneda and The Defendant Raises Legal Arguments Not Relevant

Michael Jackson
PERSON
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
Anderson
PERSON
United States
LOCATIONGleeson
PERSONLaFontaine
PERSONMartin Weinberg
PERSON
Ferranti
PERSON
Reid Weingarten
PERSON
Harry Reid
PERSONPitman
PERSONLaskow
PERSONAnnabi
PERSON
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION
Prince Andrew
PERSON
U.S. Virgin Islands
LOCATION
Icarus
PERSONN.Y. Post
ORGANIZATION
Amber Southerland
PERSON
New York State
LOCATION