Epstein Secrets

ority of the bars that might be relied upon by Ms Maxwells require the extradition judge to make a finding

ts, a review that formed the basis of changes to the 2003 Extradition Act. (Id. Annex B ¶ 3.1). In Mr. Perry's opinion, it is "highly unlikely that Ghislaine Maxwell would be able successfully to resist extradition to the United States" in connection with this case. (Perry Rep. 12(e)). After concluding that none

ide any answer on this issue. 2 The DOJ Memorandum and the Peterson Case In support of its argument that the French government would not extradite Ms Ghislaine Maxwell to the USA, the government relies on the case of Mr Hans Peterson, a dual French American citizen whose extradition to the US was denied by

seding indictment dated 7 July 2020. In addition to those conclusions, the following three points may be made. 3. First, as noted in the Opinion2, Ms Maxwell's waiver of extradition would be admissible in any extradition proceedings in England and Wales. While such a document cannot compel a requested pers

r, CO 80203 Phone: Bobbi C. Sternheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim 33 West 19th Street - 4th Floor New York, NY 10011 Phone: Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell II EFTA00093319 cailase:20-agloDacument ntlinfiAtIllf0891, 806E128B2Blage34figrl 3tI 4 Exhibit A EFTA00093320 Ckast.20-U-0003.00dblit DOditrehlei

articular the obligations arising from the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and from the case law of the European Court of Human Rights). In any event, the principle of non-extradition of nationals is a principle of extradition law from which France has never deviated outside the fr

ion is provided pursuant to instructions from Peters and Peters Solicitors LLP I dated 12 August 2020 in the context of bail proceedings relating to Ms Ghislaine Maxwell before the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. Subsequent instructions have confirmed that Ms Maxwell will execute a waive

of time since the alleged commission of the offences62. The courts have upheld orders for extradition in cases with similar timescales to those in Ms Maxwell's case, including two cases involving historic allegations of sexual offending where the relevant time period was 20 and 33 years. In both cases, the

d States prior to trial and in breach of bail. The following documents were annexed to the instructions: (a) Superseding Indictment United States v Ghislaine Maxwell dated 8 July 2020; (b) a transcript of the arraignment and bail hearing that took place on 14 July 2020; (c) the Motion to Detain the Defen

rior to trial and in breach of bail. The following documents were annexed to the instructions: (a) Superseding Indictment United States v Ghislaine Maxwell dated 8 July 2020; (b) a transcript of the arraignment and bail hearing that took place on 14 July 2020; (c) the Motion to Detain the Defendant date

; in the past ten years, only one US extradition case has been considered by the Supreme Court". 11. In some cases, a requested person may apply to the European Court of Human Rights and seek an injunction to prevent the extradition from taking place until the application is determined". Such applications, which must be based on

ion is provided pursuant to instructions from Peters and Peters Solicitors LLP I dated 12 August 2020 in the context of bail proceedings relating to Ms Ghislaine Maxwell before the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. Subsequent instructions have confirmed that Ms Maxwell will execute a waive

of time since the alleged commission of the offences62. The courts have upheld orders for extradition in cases with similar timescales to those in Ms Maxwell's case, including two cases involving historic allegations of sexual offending where the relevant time period was 20 and 33 years. In both cases, the

d States prior to trial and in breach of bail. The following documents were annexed to the instructions: (a) Superseding Indictment United States v Ghislaine Maxwell dated 8 July 2020; (b) a transcript of the arraignment and bail hearing that took place on 14 July 2020; (c) the Motion to Detain the Defen

rior to trial and in breach of bail. The following documents were annexed to the instructions: (a) Superseding Indictment United States v Ghislaine Maxwell dated 8 July 2020; (b) a transcript of the arraignment and bail hearing that took place on 14 July 2020; (c) the Motion to Detain the Defendant date

; in the past ten years, only one US extradition case has been considered by the Supreme Court". 11. In some cases, a requested person may apply to the European Court of Human Rights and seek an injunction to prevent the extradition from taking place until the application is determined". Such applications, which must be based on

ion is provided pursuant to instructions from Peters and Peters Solicitors LLP I dated 12 August 2020 in the context of bail proceedings relating to Ms Ghislaine Maxwell before the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. Subsequent instructions have confirmed that Ms Maxwell will execute a waive

of time since the alleged commission of the offences62. The courts have upheld orders for extradition in cases with similar timescales to those in Ms Maxwell's case, including two cases involving historic allegations of sexual offending where the relevant time period was 20 and 33 years. In both cases, the

d States prior to trial and in breach of bail. The following documents were annexed to the instructions: (a) Superseding Indictment United States v Ghislaine Maxwell dated 8 July 2020; (b) a transcript of the arraignment and bail hearing that took place on 14 July 2020; (c) the Motion to Detain the Defen

rior to trial and in breach of bail. The following documents were annexed to the instructions: (a) Superseding Indictment United States v Ghislaine Maxwell dated 8 July 2020; (b) a transcript of the arraignment and bail hearing that took place on 14 July 2020; (c) the Motion to Detain the Defendant date

; in the past ten years, only one US extradition case has been considered by the Supreme Court". 11. In some cases, a requested person may apply to the European Court of Human Rights and seek an injunction to prevent the extradition from taking place until the application is determined". Such applications, which must be based on