EFTA00075182 Case 1520v47433uAPmeDocument1078-520File107729/20gePlaced81209161 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 22 Filed 07/13/20 F UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. # THE GOVERNMENT’S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF DETENTION The Government respectfully submits this reply memorandum in further support of its motion for detention, dated July 2, 2020 (the “Detention Memorandum”) (Dkt. 4), and in response to the defendant’s memorandum in opposition (the “Opposition Memorandum”) (Dkt. 18). The charges against Ghislaine Maxwell arise from her essential role in sexual exploitation that caused deep and lasting harm to vulnerable victims. At the heart of this case are brave women who are victims of serious crimes that demand justice. The defendant’s motion wholly fails to appreciate the driving force behind this case: the defendant’s victims were sexually abused as minors as a direct result of Ghislaine Maxwell’s actions, and they have carried the trauma from these events for their entire adult lives. They deserve to see her brought to justice at a trial. There will be no trial for the victims if the defendant is afforded the opportunity to flee the jurisdiction, and there is every reason to think that is exactly what she will do if she is released. For the reasons detailed in the Detention Memorandum, and as further discussed below, the defendant poses a clear risk of flight, and no conditions of bail could reasonably assure her continued appearance in this case. Among other concerns: (1) she is a citizen of a country that does not extradite its own citizens; (2) she appears to have access to considerable wealth 1 EFTA00075183 Case 61s520v207433DAPmeDocument071078-520File807729/20gePlaced820f161 EFTA00075184 Case 1520v47433uAPmeDocument1078520File90729/20gePlaced8309161 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 22 Filed 07/13/20 domestically and abroad; (3) her finances are completely opaque, as her memorandum pointedly declines to provide the Court with information about her financial resources; and (4) she appears to be skilled at living in hiding. These are glaring red flags, even before the Court considers the gravity of the charges in this case and the serious penalties the defendant faces if convicted at trial. Instead of attempting to address the risks of releasing a defendant with apparent access to extraordinary financial resources, who has the ability to live beyond the reach of extradition in France, and who has already demonstrated a willingness and ability to live in hiding, the defendant instead proposes a bail package that amounts to little more than an unsecured bond. Among other things, the proposed bail package contemplates the defendant pledging as the sole security a property that is beyond the territory and judicial reach of the United States, and which therefore is of no value as collateral. She proposes six unidentified co-signers, an unknown number of whom even reside in the United States, and none of whose assets are identified. The Court and the Government have no information whatsoever regarding whether these co-signers would be able to pay the proposed $5 million bond should the defendant flee – or if, of equal concern, the co-signers are themselves so wealthy that it would be no financial burden whatsoever to do so. The defendant does not identify what residence she proposes to live at in the Southern District of New York, nor does she identify any meaningful ties to the area. And most importantly, the defendant’s memorandum provides the Court with no information whatsoever about her own finances or her access to the wealth of others, declining to provide the Court the very information that would inform any decision about whether a bond is even meaningful to the defendant – and which the Government submits would reveal the defendant’s financial means to flee and live comfortably abroad for the rest of her life. 2 EFTA00075185 Case 61s1520v207433DAPmeDocument071078-520File807729/20gePlaged8409161 EFTA00075186 Case 1520v07433uAPmeDocument1078-520File80729/20gePlaced8509161 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 22 Filed 07/13/20 Finally, the Government recognizes that the COVID-19 pandemic is – and should be – a relevant factor for the Court and the parties in this case. However, the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) is taking very significant steps to address that concern, and the defendant has offered no reason why she should be treated any differently from the many defendants who are currently detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center (“MDC”) pending trial, including defendants who have medical conditions that place them at heightened risk. Inmates at the MDC are able to assist in their own defense, especially long before trial, through established policies and procedures applicable to every pretrial detainee. This defendant should not be granted the special treatment she requests. The defendant faces a presumption of detention, she has significant assets and foreign ties, she has demonstrated her ability to evade detection, and the victims of the defendant’s crimes seek her detention. Because there is no set of conditions short of incarceration that can reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance, the Government urges the Court to detain her. ## ARGUMENT Each of the relevant factors to be considered as to flight risk – the nature and circumstances of the offense, the strength of the evidence, and the history and characteristics of the defendant – weigh strongly in favor of detention, and the defendant’s proposed package would do absolutely nothing to mitigate those risks. ## I. The Defendant's Victims Seek Detention As the Court is aware, pursuant to the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (“CVRA”), a crime victim has the right to be reasonably heard at certain public proceedings in the district court, including proceedings involving release. 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(4). Consistent with that requirement, the Government has been in contact with victims and their counsel in connection with its application for detention. Counsel for one victim has already conveyed to the Government that 3 | EFTA00075187 | | :--- | :--- Case 1s1520v207433.DAPmeDocument1078-520File807729/20gePlaced86209161 EFTA00075188 Case 1520v07433 Document 1078-520 Filed 07/29/20ge Placed 8720161 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 22 Filed 07/13/20 Pac their client opposes bail for the defendant, and has asked the Government to convey that view to the Court. The Government also expects that one or more victims will exercise their right to be heard at the July 14, 2020 hearing in this matter, and will urge the Court not to grant bail. More generally, as noted above, the Government is deeply concerned that if the defendant is bailed, the victims will be denied justice in this case. That outcome is unacceptable to both the victims and the Government. ## II. The Government's Case Is Strong The defendant’s motion argues, in a conclusory fashion, that the Government’s case must be weak because the conduct charged occurred in the 1990s. That argument, which ignores the many specific allegations in the Indictment, could not be more wrong. As the superseding indictment (the “Indictment”) makes plain, multiple victims have provided detailed, credible evidence of the defendant’s criminal conduct. And while that conduct did take place a number of years ago, it is unsurprising that the victims have been unable to forget the defendant’s predatory conduct after all this time, as traumatic childhood experiences often leave indelible marks. The recollections of the victims bear striking resemblances that corroborate each other and provide compelling proof of the defendant’s active participation in a disturbing scheme to groom and sexually abuse minor girls. In addition to compelling victim accounts, as the Government has explained, the victims’ accounts are corroborated by documentary evidence and other witnesses. In particular, the victims’ accounts are supported by contemporaneous documents and records, such as flight records, diary entries, and business records. The powerful testimony of these victims, who had strikingly similar experiences with Maxwell, together with documentary 4 EFTA00075189 Case 1s1520v207433.DAPmeDocument1078-520File807729/20gePlaced80760161 EFTA00075190 Case 1520v07433DAPmeDocument1078-520File80729/20gePlaced8920161 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 22 Filed 07/13/20 Page 6 of 19 evidence and witness testimony, will conclusively establish that the defendant groomed the victims for sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. $ ^{1} $ The defendant’s motion alludes to defenses in this case, all of which are legal or procedural in nature, and none of which pass muster, let alone counsel in favor of bail. To begin with, the notion that the defendant is protected from prosecution by the Non-Prosecution Agreement (“NPA”) between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida (“SDFL”) is absurd. That agreement affords her no protection in this District, for at least three reasons. First, the defendant was not a party to that agreement nor named in it as a third-party beneficiary, and the defendant offers no basis to think she would have standing to claim any rights under the NPA. Tellingly, the defendant cites no authority for the proposition that an agreement she was not a party to and that does not even identify her by name could possibly be invoked to bar her prosecution. Second, and equally important, the NPA does not bind the Southern District of New York, which was not a party to the agreement. See United States v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam) (“A plea agreement binds only the office of the United States Attorney for the district in which the plea is entered unless it affirmatively appears that the agreement contemplates a broader restriction.”)); United States v. Prisco, 391 F. App’x 920, 921 (2d Cir. 2010). This rule applies even when the text of the agreement refers to the signing party as the “Government.” Annabi, 771 F.2d at 672. Third, and perhaps most important, even assuming the NPA could be read to protect this defendant and bind this Office, which are both legally unsound propositions, the Indictment 1 Additionally, and beyond the strong evidence set forth in the Indictment, in just the past week, and in response to the charges against the defendant being made public, the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") and the U.S. Attorney’s Office have been in touch with additional individuals who have expressed a willingness to provide information regarding the defendant. The Government is in the process of receiving and reviewing this additional evidence, which has the potential to make the Government's case even stronger. 5 EFTA00075191 Case 1s1520v207433uAPmeDocument1078-520File80729/20gePlaced90209161 New York prosecutors said in a filing Monday this was evidence that Maxwell was 'skilled at living in hiding' and should be denied bail Proposed Bail Conditions. In light of the above, we propose the following bail conditions, which are consistent with those that courts in this Circuit have imposed in analogous situations: (i) a $5 million personal recognizance bond, co-signed by six financially responsible people, all of whom have strong ties to Ms. Maxwell, and secured by real property in the United Kingdom worth over $3.75 million; (ii) travel restricted to the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York; (iii) surrender of all travel documents with no new applications; (iv) strict supervision by Pretrial Services; (v) home confinement at a residence in the Southern District of New York with electronic GPS monitoring; (vi) visitors limited to Ms. Maxwell’s immediate family, close friends and counsel; (vii) travel limited to Court appearances and to counsel’s office, except upon application to Pretrial Services and the government; and (viii) such other terms as the Court may deem appropriate under Section 3142. Her bail request (pictured) was filed in the US District Court in Manhattan and claims she was not 'hiding' from authorities, is not a flight risk and is at risk of contracting COVID-19 if she continues to be held in the Brooklyn jail The case against her is 'strong' and multiple victims have provided 'detailed, credible evidence of the defendant's criminal conduct' - with more women coming forward in the past week. The victims have made clear they want Maxwell remanded in custody and say they were 'directly abused as a result of Ghislaine Maxwell's actions'. The document states: 'While that conduct did take place a number of years ago, it is unsurprising that the victims have been unable to forget the defendant's predatory conduct after all this time, as traumatic childhood experiences often leave indelible marks. EFTA00075192 Case 1520v47433uAPmeDocument1078-520File80729/20gePlaced91209161 'The recollections of the victims bear striking resemblances that corroborate each other and provide compelling proof of the defendant's active participation in a disturbing scheme to groom and sexually abuse minor girls'. The prosecutors said that it was 'curious' that Maxwell claimed to have access to millions of dollars had not offered 'a single dime' as collateral for her bond. They claimed that Maxwell's finances were 'completely opaque' and she had not even indicated which properties she would use for her bond. Some of the co-signers are 'themselves so wealthy that it would be no financial burden whatsoever' if they lost their $5 million by Maxwell skipping bail, the document states. Epstein's victims have long demanded Maxwell's arrest and lawyers for them say that a slew of new accusers have come forward since she was apprehended. Prosecutors will likely be looking to do a plea deal with Maxwell to lighten some of the six charges against her, two of which are perjury for allegedly lying during depositions. They will be questioning her about powerful men in Epstein's orbit including Bill Clinton with whom she flew on Epstein's private jet, called the 'Lolita Express', on a tour of Africa in 2002. Maxwell was also good friends with Prince Andrew and one of Epstein's victims, ims she was loaned out to the Duke three times for sex when she was 17.