{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "8",
    "document_number": "169",
    "date": "03/22/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 169 Filed 03/22/21 Page 8 of 12\n\nthat the Defendant poses a significant risk of flight. Thus, the Court again concludes that there are no conditions of release that will reasonably assure her appearance in future proceedings.\n\nB. Pretrial detention continues to be warranted\n\nThe thrust of the Defendant's argument in her third motion for bail is that the two new proposed conditions vitiate the Court's concerns regarding the risk of flight. The Defendant first offers to renounce her French and British citizenship. Def. Mot. at 2. And she also proposes to have most of her and her spouse's assets placed in a new account that will be monitored by a retired federal judge, who would function as an asset monitor and will have co-signing authority over the account. Id. Those conditions are offered in addition to the bail package she proposed in December. See Dec. Op. at 16-17; see also Def. Mot. at 2. The new bail package does not disturb the Court's conclusion that the Government has carried its burden of showing that these conditions are insufficient to mitigate the flight risks, and the Court again determines that no set of conditions—including the two new ones—can reasonably assure her future appearance.\n\nThe Court begins with the Defendant's offer to renounce her French and United Kingdom citizenship. She notes that she can renounce her UK citizenship \"immediately upon granting of bail,\" and she informs the Court that \"[t]he process of renouncing her French citizenship, while not immediate, may be expedited.\" Def. Mot. at 4. As the Government notes, the offer is of unclear validity, and the relevance and practical impact of the renunciations is, at best, unclear. See Gov't Opp'n at 5. With respect to her offer to renounce her French citizenship, the Court is again confronted with dueling opinions on the correct interpretation of French law. The Government relies on the position of the head of the International Criminal Assistance Bureau of the French Ministry of Justice, who argues that \"the fact that the wanted individual is a French national constitutes an insuperable obstacle to his/her removal,\" and that \"[a]s long as said",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 169 Filed 03/22/21 Page 8 of 12",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "that the Defendant poses a significant risk of flight. Thus, the Court again concludes that there are no conditions of release that will reasonably assure her appearance in future proceedings.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "B. Pretrial detention continues to be warranted",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The thrust of the Defendant's argument in her third motion for bail is that the two new proposed conditions vitiate the Court's concerns regarding the risk of flight. The Defendant first offers to renounce her French and British citizenship. Def. Mot. at 2. And she also proposes to have most of her and her spouse's assets placed in a new account that will be monitored by a retired federal judge, who would function as an asset monitor and will have co-signing authority over the account. Id. Those conditions are offered in addition to the bail package she proposed in December. See Dec. Op. at 16-17; see also Def. Mot. at 2. The new bail package does not disturb the Court's conclusion that the Government has carried its burden of showing that these conditions are insufficient to mitigate the flight risks, and the Court again determines that no set of conditions—including the two new ones—can reasonably assure her future appearance.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Court begins with the Defendant's offer to renounce her French and United Kingdom citizenship. She notes that she can renounce her UK citizenship \"immediately upon granting of bail,\" and she informs the Court that \"[t]he process of renouncing her French citizenship, while not immediate, may be expedited.\" Def. Mot. at 4. As the Government notes, the offer is of unclear validity, and the relevance and practical impact of the renunciations is, at best, unclear. See Gov't Opp'n at 5. With respect to her offer to renounce her French citizenship, the Court is again confronted with dueling opinions on the correct interpretation of French law. The Government relies on the position of the head of the International Criminal Assistance Bureau of the French Ministry of Justice, who argues that \"the fact that the wanted individual is a French national constitutes an insuperable obstacle to his/her removal,\" and that \"[a]s long as said",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "8",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002774",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Defendant"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Court",
      "Government",
      "French Ministry of Justice",
      "International Criminal Assistance Bureau"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "France",
      "United Kingdom"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "03/22/21",
      "December"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 169"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is page 8 of 12."
}