DOJ-OGR-00001619.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 22 Filed 07/13/20 Page 9 of 19
make purchases for the property using the credit card. As these facts make plain, there should be
no question that the defendant is skilled at living in hiding.
The defendant asks the Court to ignore many of the obvious indicators of a flight risk by
arguing that she has lived in hiding because of unwanted press attention. This argument entirely
misses the point. First, the defendant’s conduct is clearly relevant to the Court’s assessment of her
risk of flight, because it evidences her readiness and ability to live in hiding, and to do so
indefinitely. As such, even if her behavior in the last year could be attributed solely to her desire
to avoid media attention, that should give the Court serious concerns about what steps she would
be willing to take to avoid federal prison. Second, the fact that the defendant took these measures
to conceal herself after Epstein was indicted in this District — and after the Government announced
that its investigation into Epstein’s co-conspirators was ongoing — cannot be ignored. To the
contrary, these measures are at least equally consistent with the notion that the defendant also
sought to evade detection by law enforcement.
In attempting to sidestep the evidence of her ability and willingness to hide, the defendant
points to her decision to remain in the United States for the past year while the Government’s
investigation remained ongoing. She claims that because she did not flee the country during an
ongoing investigation, she will not do so while under indictment. This argument ignores the world
of difference between believing that an investigation is ongoing and being indicted in six counts
by a federal grand jury. The defendant now faces the reality of serious charges, supported by
significant evidence, and the real prospect of spending many years in prison. The return of the
indictment fundamentally alters the defendant’s incentives and heightens the incentive to flee far
beyond the theoretical possibility of a charge during an investigation (one the defendant may have
wrongly believed would or could not reach her). That is especially so when the defendant has
DOJ-OGR-00001619
Extracted Information
Dates
Document Details
| Filename | DOJ-OGR-00001619.jpg |
| File Size | 740.6 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 95.7% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 2,225 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-03 16:14:06.820344 |