Epstein Secrets

ii) surrender of all travel documents with no new applications; (iv) strict supervision by Pretrial Services; (v) home confinement at a residence in the Southern District of New York with electronic GPS monitoring; (vi) visitors limited to Ms. Maxwell's immediate family, close friends and counsel; (vii) travel limite

R-646 (AJN), 2020 WL 3440515 (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2020) 17 United States v. Alindato-Perez, 627 F. Supp. 2d 58 (D.P.R. 2009) 18 United States v. Bodmer, No. 03-cr-947(SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28. 2004) 16 United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2019) 20 United States v. Carr

ii) surrender of all travel documents with no new applications; (iv) strict supervision by Pretrial Services; (v) home confinement at a residence in the Southern District of New York with electronic GPS monitoring; (vi) visitors limited to Ms. Maxwell's immediate family, close friends and counsel; (vii) travel limite

R-646 (AJN), 2020 WL 3440515 (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2020) 17 United States v. Alindato-Perez, 627 F. Supp. 2d 58 (D.P.R. 2009) 18 United States v. Bodmer, No. 03-cr-947(SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28. 2004) 16 United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2019) 20 United States v. Carr

ronic devices. In addition, the materials with respect to the core of the case also include prior investigative files from another investigation in the Southern District of Florida among other items. With respect to the status of discovery, the government has begun preparing an initial production and are prepared

6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that are relevant to that, which I was going to get to, your Honor, are Khashoggi, U.S. v. Khashoggi, U.S. v. Bodmer, U.S. v. Hanson, and Sabhnani itself, all of which involve defendants with substantial connections. And I might follow up on your Honor's question

ii) surrender of all travel documents with no new applications; (iv) strict supervision by Pretrial Services; (v) home confinement at a residence in the Southern District of New York with electronic GPS monitoring; (vi) visitors limited to Ms. Maxwell's immediate family, close friends and counsel; (vii) travel limite

R-646 (AJN), 2020 WL 3440515 (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2020) 17 United States v. Alindato-Perez, 627 F. Supp. 2d 58 (D.P.R. 2009) 18 United States v. Bodmer, No. 03-cr-947(SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28. 2004) 16 United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2019) 20 United States v. Carr

ii) surrender of all travel documents with no new applications; (iv) strict supervision by Pretrial Services; (v) home confinement at a residence in the Southern District of New York with electronic GPS monitoring; (vi) visitors limited to Ms. Maxwell's immediate family, close friends and counsel; (vii) travel limite

R-646 (AJN), 2020 WL 3440515 (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2020) 17 United States v. Alindato-Perez, 627 F. Supp. 2d 58 (D.P.R. 2009) 18 United States v. Bodmer, No. 03-cr-947(SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28. 2004) 16 United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2019) 20 United States v. Carr

ii) surrender of all travel documents with no new applications; (iv) strict supervision by Pretrial Services; (v) home confinement at a residence in the Southern District of New York with electronic GPS monitoring; (vi) visitors limited to Ms. Maxwell's immediate family, close friends and counsel; (vii) travel limite

R-646 (AJN), 2020 WL 3440515 (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2020) 17 United States v. Alindato-Perez, 627 F. Supp. 2d 58 (D.P.R. 2009) 18 United States v. Bodmer, No. 03-cr-947(SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28. 2004) 16 United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2019) 20 United States v. Carr

that the government was considering any charging decisions against Ms. Maxwell. We were never given that opportunity, which is uncharacteristic for the Southern District of New York, nor were we given any notice of her impending arrest. 22 EFTA00093243

6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that are relevant to that, which I was going to get to, your Honor, are Khashoggi, U.S. v. Khashoggi, U.S. v. Bodmer, U.S. v. Hanson, and Sabhnani itself, all of which involve defendants with substantial connections. And I might follow up on your Honor's question

the £ieconb (Circuit UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Appellee, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Appellant. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 20-CR-330 (MN) Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell's Motion for Pretrial Release David Oscar Markus MARKUS/MOSS PLLC 40 N.W. Third Street P

ific and credible evidence, how Ms. Maxwell could manage to flee under the proposed bail conditions. Speculation is not permitted. United States v. Bodmer, No. 03-cr-947(SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2004) (where government's argument that no conditions could assure defendant's future presen

r release on July 14. 2020. the Court DENIES the Defendant's renewed motion for release on bail.' I. Background On June 29, 2020. a grand jury in the Southern District of New York returned a six-count Indictment against the Defendant, charging her with facilitating Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse of multiple minor

d, 369 F. App'x 152 (2d Cir. 2010) 26 United States v. Benatar, No. 02 Cr. 099 (JO), 2002 WL 31410262 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2002) 26 United States v. Bodmer, No. 03 Cr. 947 (SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. June 28, 2004) 28 United States v. Bohn, 330 F. Supp. 2d 960 (W.D. Tenn. 2004) 15 United States v

ii) surrender of all travel documents with no new applications; (iv) strict supervision by Pretrial Services; (v) home confinement at a residence in the Southern District of New York with electronic GPS monitoring; (vi) visitors limited to Ms. Maxwell's immediate family, close friends and counsel; (vii) travel limite

R-646 (AJN), 2020 WL 3440515 (S.D.N.Y. June 23, 2020) 17 United States v. Alindato-Perez, 627 F. Supp. 2d 58 (D.P.R. 2009) 18 United States v. Bodmer, No. 03-cr-947(SAS), 2004 WL 169790 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28. 2004) 16 United States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2019) 20 United States v. Carr