Epstein Secrets

g that France does not appear to extradite its own citizens. (Tr. 83). The defendant's supposed waiver of her extradition rights with respect to the United Kingdom should similarly be afforded no weight. Although an anticipatory waiver of extradition may be admissible in extradition proceedings in the United Ki

nited States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Or. 2019) 6, 25, 26 United States v. Chen, 820 F. Supp. 1205, 1209 (N.D. Cal. 1992) 15 United States v. Cilins, No. 13 Cr. 315 (WHP), 2013 WL 3802012 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013) 16, 19 United States v. Cirillo, No. 99-1514, 1999 WL 1456536 (3d Cir. July 13, 199

o United States v. Cilins, No. 13 Cr. 315 (WHP), 2013 WL 3802012, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013) ("Because France refuses to extradite its citizens, Cilins can avoid prosecution on this Indictment if he can reach French soil."). In other words, even assuming the Government could locate the defendant, i

argues that "the passport contains numerous ingress and egress stamps, including stamps that reflect use of the passport to enter France, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Saudi Arabia in the 1980s." Dkt. 30. By submis- sion dated July 18, 2019, the Defense ex- plains: "Epstein was given the passport at issue by

of flight ... this Court does not believe that that condition, even coupled with the additional conditions proposed, would be sufficient" U.S. v.Cilins, 2013 WL 3802012, at *3. • The Danger Posed By The Defen- dant's Release As demonstrated infra, Mr. Epstein's dangerousness is considerable and

g that Defendant poses "a serious flight risk and that no conditions can be set to rea- sonably assure his appearance for trial." United States v. Cilins, 2013 WL 3802012, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013). • Weight Of The Evidence The Government's evidence against Mr. Epstein appears strong. The evi

argues that "the passport contains numerous ingress and egress stamps, including stamps that reflect use of the passport to enter France, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Saudi Arabia in the 1980s." Dkt. 30. By submis- sion dated July 18, 2019, the Defense ex- plains: "Epstein was given the passport at issue by

of flight ... this Court does not believe that that condition, even coupled with the additional conditions proposed, would be sufficient" U.S. v.Cilins, 2013 WL 3802012, at *3. • The Danger Posed By The Defen- dant's Release As demonstrated infra, Mr. Epstein's dangerousness is considerable and

g that Defendant poses "a serious flight risk and that no conditions can be set to rea- sonably assure his appearance for trial." United States v. Cilins, 2013 WL 3802012, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013). • Weight Of The Evidence The Government's evidence against Mr. Epstein appears strong. The evi

g that France does not appear to extradite its own citizens. (Tr. 83). The defendant's supposed waiver of her extradition rights with respect to the United Kingdom should similarly be afforded no weight. Although an anticipatory waiver of extradition may be admissible in extradition proceedings in the United Ki

nship), including to the United States, and has never derogated from that principle outside the European Union. See Ex. C; see also United States v. Cilins, No. 13 Cr. 315 (WHP), 2013 WL "taken a number of surprising turns," including the "suppression of video evidence, the indeterminate stay of procee

llo did not mention in its opinion"). 16 EFTA00089170 3802012, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013) ("Because France refuses to extradite its citizens, Cilins can avoid prosecution on this Indictment if he can reach French soil."). In other words, even assuming the Government could locate the defendant, i

g that France does not appear to extradite its own citizens. (Tr. 83). The defendant's supposed waiver of her extradition rights with respect to the United Kingdom should similarly be afforded no weight. Although an anticipatory waiver of extradition may be admissible in extradition proceedings in the United Ki

nited States v. Boustani, 932 F.3d 79 (2d Or. 2019) 6, 25, 26 United States v. Chen, 820 F. Supp. 1205, 1209 (N.D. Cal. 1992) 15 United States v. Cilins, No. 13 Cr. 315 (WHP), 2013 WL 3802012 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013) 16, 19 United States v. Cirillo, No. 99-1514, 1999 WL 1456536 (3d Cir. July 13, 199

o United States v. Cilins, No. 13 Cr. 315 (WHP), 2013 WL 3802012, at '2 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2013) ("Because France refuses to extradite its citizens, Cilins can avoid prosecution on this Indictment if he can reach French soil."). In other words, even assuming the Government could locate the defendant, i

nduct, which will somehow prejudice the defendant. (Def. Mot. 4 at 13). The Court should not assume that the jury will speculate about principles of United Kingdom law and apply them to this case. The Court will properly instruct the jury on the elements of the offenses charged in the Indictment and the evidenc

lar). "Evidence should be excluded on a motion in limine only when the evidence is clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds." United States v. Cilins, No. 13 CR. 315 (WHP), 2014 WL 173414, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2014) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). B. Discussion The defense's