Epstein Secrets

foreign countries without extradition demonstrates Defendant poses a serious risk of flight." ); United States v. Epstein. 155 F.Supp.2d 323, 326 (E.D. Penn. 2001) ("The crucial factor, however, is defendant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition tr

endant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition treaty exists. In our view, his forfeiture of Slmillion worth of assets in the United States would not deter him from flight when in Brazil he has significant wealth, a lucrative job, the presence of his

foreign countries without extradition demonstrates Defendant poses a serious risk of flight." ); United States v. Epstein. 155 F.Supp.2d 323, 326 (E.D. Penn. 2001) ("The crucial factor, however, is defendant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition tr

endant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition treaty exists. In our view, his forfeiture of Slmillion worth of assets in the United States would not deter him from flight when in Brazil he has significant wealth, a lucrative job, the presence of his

foreign countries without extradition demonstrates Defendant poses a serious risk of flight." ); United States v. Epstein. 155 F.Supp.2d 323, 326 (E.D. Penn. 2001) ("The crucial factor, however, is defendant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition tr

endant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition treaty exists. In our view, his forfeiture of Slmillion worth of assets in the United States would not deter him from flight when in Brazil he has significant wealth, a lucrative job, the presence of his

foreign countries without extradition demonstrates Defendant poses a serious risk of flight." ); United States v. Epstein. 155 F.Supp.2d 323, 326 (E.D. Penn. 2001 ) ("The crucial factor, however, is defendant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition t

endant's lack of tics to the United States and his extensive tics to Brazil with which no extradition treaty exists. In our view, his forfeiture of Slmillion worth of assets in the United States would not deter him from flight when in Brazil he has significant wealth, a lucrative job, the presence of his