Epstein Denial of Bail - Court Order | Remand (Detention) | Bail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Government, - ag ai nst - JEFFREY EPSTEIN , Defendant.
x
A. Background USDCSDNY DOCUMENT
ELECTRO
NI
C LLY FILED
DOC :
--.......,,.,---~=~..-.-
D TE
FILED:---L.,._._~~-----
19 CR. 490 (RMB)
DECISION
&
ORDER REMANDING DEFENDANT
This ruling follows the
Court s
bail hearing held on July 15 , 2019. Th e issue before the Court is whether the Defendant should continue to be remanded (incarcerated) pending trial or whether he sho uld be granted release while the case proceeds.
No
matter the answer to this questi on and no matt er what has been said in Cou rt in analyzing the matte r, this is a criminal case and the Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is innocent
of
the Federal charges alleged against him
now
and until such time,
i f
it comes, that a
jury
or the Co urt finds ( after fair and th orough consideration
o f
the facts and the law) that he is guilty. See Transcript, dated July
8
2019 ( 7/8/19 Tr. ), at 2-3; Transcript, dated July 15, 2019 ( 7/15/19 Tr. ), at 40. It should also be borne in min d that the Court has not (yet ) been presented with a motion to dismiss the Indictment. This is a federal as o pposed to a state case . We proceed un der federal law and federal rules . Th e key federa l statute that applies here is
18
U.S.C. § 1591 which sets forth the crime
o f
sex trafficking with whic h Mr . Epstein is charge d. Mr . Ep stein is also charged with conspiring with others to commit sex trafficking under
18
U.S.C. § 371. With respect to the issue
ofremand
versus release,
18
U.S.C. § 3142 applies. It sets forth a presumption in favor
o f
remand,
an
exception to the presump tion in most cases which favors
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed 07/18/19 Page 1 of 33
pretrial release. § 3142 states that:
i f
there is probable cause to believe that the person committ ed an offense involving a minor victim under section 1591, th en
it shall be presumed that
no
condition or combination
o
conditio ns will reasonably assure the appearance
o
the person
s
required and the safety
o
the community.
18
U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(E) (emphasis added); see United States
v
Martir, 782 F.2d 1141, 1144 (2d Cir. 1986) . The Ind ictment in this case was returned by a grand
jury
thus establishing probable cause that the defendant committed the crimes
of
sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy. See United States
v
Contreras, 776 F.2d 51,
55
(2d Cir . 1985) ( [A]n indictment returned
by
a duly constituted grand
jury
conclusively establishes the existence
o f
probable cause for the purpose
o f
triggering the rebuttable presumptions set forth in § 3142( e ) ). In most federal cases the rebuttable presum ption tha t applies favor s pretrial release, not remand. There is anoth er very important issue to be considered i n this case .
t
has to do with victims
o f
the crimes charged in the Indictment. Victims refer to t he min or girls who a re alleged to have been sexually trafficked by the Defendant. Under
18
U.S.C. § 3771, victims are entitled to be heard in court, including
on
the question
o f
whether the defendant is to be released or remanded. Victim s have, among o ther things, been given the opportunity to testify at the bail hearing.
B. Counsels' Submissions
The Government's letter application, dated July 8, 2019, requests that the Court remand Mr. Epstein.
t
argues that Mr. Epstein poses
[]
an acute danger to t he community and, grounded
in
past experience with this Defendant, that
i f
[M r. Epstein is] allowed to remain ou t on bail, the defendant could attempt to pressure and intimidate witnesses and potential witnesses in this ca se, including victims and their fam ilies, and otherwise attempt to obstruct justic e. Dkt .
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed 07/18/19 Page 2 of 33
11, Ex. 1 at
1
The Govern ment also contends that [i]n light
o
the strength
o
the Government's evidence and the substantial incarceratory term the defendant would face upon conviction [
45
years], there is an extraordinary risk
o
flight, particularly given the defendant's exorbitant wealth, his ownership
o
and access to private planes capable
o
international travel, and his significant international ties. Id . The Government also provides the following background information: In or about 200 5, the defendant was investigated by local police in Palm Beach, Florida, in connection with allegations that he had committed similar sex offenses against minor girls. The investigation ultimately also involved federal authorities, namely the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District
o
Florida and the FBI's Miami Office, and included interviews with victims based in the Palm Beach area, including some
o
the alleged victims relevant to Count One
o
the instant Indictment. In the fall
o
2007, the Defendant entered into a non-pr osecution agr eement ( NP A ) with the Southern District
o
Florida in connection with the conduct at issue in that investigation, which the non-prosecution agreement identified
as
including investigations into the defendant's abuse
o
minor girls in the Palm Beach area. Id . at
3.
In June 2008, the defendant pled guilty in [Florida] state court
to
one count
o
procuring a person under the age
o
18
for prostitution, a felony, and one count
o
solicitation
o
prostitution, [also] a felony. As a result, the defendant was designated as a sex offender with registration requirements under the national Sex Offender Registration and Notificatio n Act. Id . The Defense moved on July 11, 2019, for pretrial release
o
Mr. Epstein, arguing that Mr. Epstein's strict compliance with the various monitoring requirements associated with his sex-offender registration actually decrease[
s]
any danger that he might otherwise pose and also that Mr. Epstein has never once attempted to fle e the United States. Dkt. 6 at
1
12.
The 3
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 32 Filed 07/18/19 Page 3 of 33