at rational distinction also demolishes DiVarco's suggestion of discriminatory enforcement based on the government's having sought detention of DiVarco and Ignoffo but not of their four codefendants (as to whom the government said it had no information indicating Page 10 danger to other perso

convincing evidence that he was not likely to pose such a danger. Accordingly Ignoffo was ordered detained in accordance with Sec- tion 3143(a) P4 DiVarco's hearing was not concluded because his doctors recom- mended he be hospitalized.no However, given the testimony to this point (iimplicating