DOJ-OGR-00002250.jpg
711 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
4
Organizations
3
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing (order/opinion)
File Size:
711 KB
Summary
This document is page 18 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The text details the Court's rejection of bail arguments, stating that the Defendant's significant wealth and assets (including $4 million in a hedge fund) would allow her to flee and compensate any bond supporters for their losses. It further outlines strict proposed release conditions, including home confinement, GPS monitoring, and security guards, which the Court ultimately finds insufficient to mitigate flight risk.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Referred to as 'the Defendant' and 'she'; subject of the bail hearing.
|
| Alison J. Nathan | Judge |
Implied by case number suffix 'AJN' and references to 'the Court'.
|
| Unspecified Family Member | Third-party Custodian |
Proposed to serve as custodian under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(c)(1)(B)(i).
|
| Unspecified Third Parties | Bond Supporters |
Pledged to support the bond.
|
| On-premises security guards | Security |
Proposed to prevent defendant from leaving residence.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court |
Implied by case header and 'the Court'.
|
|
| Pretrial Services |
Agency responsible for supervision and approval of movements.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated in Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00002250.
|
|
| Unspecified Hedge Fund |
Described as 'illiquid' holding $4 million of defendant's assets.
|
Timeline (1 events)
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Restricted travel zone.
|
|
|
Restricted travel zone.
|
|
|
Location where defendant would be placed with GPS monitoring.
|
Relationships (2)
Defendant
→
Custodial
→
Family Member
Proposed that family member would serve as third-party custodian.
Defendant
→
Financial Support
→
Third Parties
Third parties pledged to support her bond; Court notes she could compensate them for losses if she fled.
Key Quotes (6)
"the proposed bond is only partially secured."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002250.jpg
Quote #1
"vast amounts of wealth left relatively unrestrained by the bail package"Source
DOJ-OGR-00002250.jpg
Quote #2
"the financial package does not meaningfully mitigate the possibility of flight."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002250.jpg
Quote #3
"significant loans on the basis of a negative pledge"Source
DOJ-OGR-00002250.jpg
Quote #4
"$4 million is invested in an 'illiquid hedge fund that could only be liquidated with considerable difficulty'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00002250.jpg
Quote #5
"she would surrender all travel documents."Source
DOJ-OGR-00002250.jpg
Quote #6
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,113 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 106 Filed 12/30/20 Page 18 of 22
millions of dollars and other assets that she could sell in order to support herself. See Gov’t
Opp’n at 23. Furthermore, the proposed bond is only partially secured. Taking into account the
vast amounts of wealth left relatively unrestrained by the bail package, that amount, standing
alone, cannot reasonably assure that she would appear before the Court. Nor is the Court’s
conclusion altered by the fact that a number of third parties have pledged to support her bond;
the amount of wealth that she would retain were she to flee, in addition to contingent assets and
future income streams that are not accounted for in the bail package, would plausibly enable her
to compensate them, in part or in full, for their losses. And while the Defendant argues that she
has procured “significant loans on the basis of a negative pledge” over a property and that $4
million is invested in an “illiquid hedge fund that could only be liquidated with considerable
difficulty,” see Def. Reply at 6, these arguments do not alter the Court’s ultimate conclusion
that the financial package does not meaningfully mitigate the possibility of flight.
Opp’n at 23. Furthermore, the proposed bond is only partially secured. Taking into account the
vast amounts of wealth left relatively unrestrained by the bail package, that amount, standing
alone, cannot reasonably assure that she would appear before the Court. Nor is the Court’s
conclusion altered by the fact that a number of third parties have pledged to support her bond;
the amount of wealth that she would retain were she to flee, in addition to contingent assets and
future income streams that are not accounted for in the bail package, would plausibly enable her
to compensate them, in part or in full, for their losses. And while the Defendant argues that she
has procured “significant loans on the basis of a negative pledge” over a property and that $4
million is invested in an “illiquid hedge fund that could only be liquidated with considerable
difficulty,” see Def. Reply at 6, these arguments do not alter the Court’s ultimate conclusion
that the financial package does not meaningfully mitigate the possibility of flight.
The proposed conditions also provide that the Defendant would be released to the
custody of a family member, who would serve as the Defendant’s third-party custodian under 18
U.S.C. § 3142(c)(1)(B)(i); that the Defendant would be placed in home confinement with GPS
monitoring and that her travel would be restricted to the Southern and Eastern Districts of New
York and would be limited to appearances in Court, meetings with counsel, medical visits, and
upon approval by the Court or Pretrial Services; that she would be under the strict supervision of
Pretrial Services; and that she would surrender all travel documents. Id. at 2–3. Furthermore,
the Defendant would have on-premises security guards who would prevent her from leaving the
residence at any time without prior approval by the Court or Pretrial Services and who would
escort her when she is authorized to leave. Id. at 3.
custody of a family member, who would serve as the Defendant’s third-party custodian under 18
U.S.C. § 3142(c)(1)(B)(i); that the Defendant would be placed in home confinement with GPS
monitoring and that her travel would be restricted to the Southern and Eastern Districts of New
York and would be limited to appearances in Court, meetings with counsel, medical visits, and
upon approval by the Court or Pretrial Services; that she would be under the strict supervision of
Pretrial Services; and that she would surrender all travel documents. Id. at 2–3. Furthermore,
the Defendant would have on-premises security guards who would prevent her from leaving the
residence at any time without prior approval by the Court or Pretrial Services and who would
escort her when she is authorized to leave. Id. at 3.
18
DOJ-OGR-00002250
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document