Epstein Attorneys Argue for Home Detention, Lay Out 14 Conditions for Release
In a letter to U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman of the Southern District of New York, Epstein's lawyers proposed the use of surveillance cameras, GPS monitoring, as well as deregistering his private jet and other forms of transportation to ensure that Epstein would appear for trial on sex trafficking and conspiracy charges.
July 11, 2019 at 04:09 PM
4 minute read
Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein, arguing for their client's pretrial release, on Thursday laid out at least 14 “highly restrictive conditions” to counter concerns that he may flee or present a danger to the community, if released before trial.
In a letter to U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman of the Southern District of New York, Epstein's lawyers proposed the use of surveillance cameras, GPS monitoring, as well as deregistering his private jet and other forms of transportation to ensure that Epstein would appear for trial on sex trafficking and conspiracy charges.
They also said Epstein would post a bond secured by his massive residence on East 71st Street on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, which was valued at roughly $77 million, and said his jet could be pledged as further collateral.
“Mr. Epstein respectfully submits that his conduct over the past 14 years proves that he poses no risk of flight or threat to the safety of the community,” the filing said. “Even if the Court should have concerns to the contrary, there clearly exist a combination of conditions that would be sufficient to assure his presence as required and/or the safety of the community, including but not limited to some or all of the conditions proposed.”
Federal prosecutors had argued that the former fund manager's vast resources and history of sexual offenses made him a danger to the community and a threat to flee the country.
According to the U.S. Attorney's Office, Epstein consented to detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center ahead of a bail hearing scheduled for July 15.
Prosecutors in Manhattan alleged in an unsealed indictment Monday that Epstein paid dozens of underage girls from 2002 to 2005 to perform nude or semi-nude massages on him at his residences in New York and Palm Beach, Florida.
According to the indictment, the encounters became “increasingly sexual” in nature, with Epstein often masturbating and molesting his victims. U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman alleged that Epstein would also pay some victims “hundreds of dollars” to recruit other young girls to the network, allowing Epstein to create “an ever-expanding web of new victims.”
At a press conference, U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said his office was not bound by an earlier non-prosecution agreement Epstein reached with federal prosecutors in Miami just over a decade ago in a case that involved similar allegations related to minors.
As a part of that deal, Epstein pleaded guilty to two state felony prostitution charges, served 13 months in a Palm Beach County jail, and registered as a sex offender.
Epstein's attorneys on Thursday argued that the NPA was a “global settlement” that barred prosecutors in New York from pursuing new charges that stemmed from the same conduct covered under the earlier agreement. Epstein, they said, planned to fight the charges on the merits, as well as on due-process process.
The filing also claimed that Epstein had “potent legal defenses” to the government's prosecution under the federal statute driving the indictment. According to Epstein's attorneys, the law was intended to “prevent slavery, involuntary servitude, and human trafficking for commercial gain” applied to pimps of children and not to those who paid for commercial sex acts.
“Here, the principal conduct underlying the indictment is Mr. Epstein's payment of money for massages that purportedly escalated to alleged sex acts. Mr. Epstein's conduct, however, is akin to consumer or purchaser behavior and should be outside the ambit of of 18 U.S.C. § 1591,” they said.
Epstein is represented by Reid Weingarten of Steptoe & Johnson, Martin G. Weinberg and Marc Allan Fernich.
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBig Law Partner Presented With State Bar's Scheindlin Award
'A World of Credit': Ex-FTX Executive Gary Wang Sentenced to Time Served Following Cooperation
Manhattan Prosecutors Say They Will Oppose Efforts by Trump Legal Team to Dismiss Case
Trending Stories
- 1Why Is It Becoming More Difficult for Businesses to Mandate Arbitration of Employment Disputes?
- 2The Whys and Hows of a Mediator’s Proposal
- 3Litigators of the Week: A Trade Secret Win at the ITC for Viking Over Promising Potential Liver Drug
- 4Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 5'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250