{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "26",
    "document_number": "2017-003",
    "date": null,
    "document_type": "Court Document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "this Court already weighed in favor of detention, and confirmation of that deception only reemphasizes that this defendant cannot be trusted to comply with bail conditions.\n\nNow, the defense has submitted a financial report that reflects the defendant has approximately $22 million in assets—far more than the figure she initially reported to Pretrial Services. (Def. Ex. O). Accepting the financial report at face value, it is clear that the defense's proposed bail package would leave the defendant with substantial resources to flee the country.\n\nNot only would she have millions of dollars in unrestrained assets at her disposal,6 but she would also have a $2 million townhouse in London, which she could live in or sell to support herself. In other words, even with the proposed bond—which is only partially secured—the defendant would still have millions of dollars at her disposal. She could absolutely afford to leave her friends and family to lose whatever they may pledge to support her bond, and then repay them much of their losses. In fact, the defendant could transfer money to her proposed co-signers immediately following her release,7 given the large sums of money that would be left unrestrained by her proposed bail package.\n\nMoreover, the schedule provided by the defense is notably silent regarding any future revenue streams to which the defendant may have access. The financial report only addresses the defendant's assets without detailing her income at all. The defendant has similarly provided the Court with no information about what resources her spouse might have access to on a prospective\n\n6 In particular, according to the report, the defendant would have more than $4 million in unrestrained funds in accounts, in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars of jewelry and other items. Moreover, the Government presumes the defendant has not yet spent all $7 million of the retainer paid to her attorneys, which would still belong to the defendant if she fled.\n\n7 The Government notes that two of the defendant's proposed co-signers are citizens and residents of the United Kingdom, against whom the Government could not realistically recover a bond amount. These co-signers have not offered to secure this bond with any cash or property, and as a result, such a bond would effectively be worthless if the defendant were to flee.\n\n23\nDOJ-OGR-00001168",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "this Court already weighed in favor of detention, and confirmation of that deception only reemphasizes that this defendant cannot be trusted to comply with bail conditions.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Now, the defense has submitted a financial report that reflects the defendant has approximately $22 million in assets—far more than the figure she initially reported to Pretrial Services. (Def. Ex. O). Accepting the financial report at face value, it is clear that the defense's proposed bail package would leave the defendant with substantial resources to flee the country.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Not only would she have millions of dollars in unrestrained assets at her disposal,6 but she would also have a $2 million townhouse in London, which she could live in or sell to support herself. In other words, even with the proposed bond—which is only partially secured—the defendant would still have millions of dollars at her disposal. She could absolutely afford to leave her friends and family to lose whatever they may pledge to support her bond, and then repay them much of their losses. In fact, the defendant could transfer money to her proposed co-signers immediately following her release,7 given the large sums of money that would be left unrestrained by her proposed bail package.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Moreover, the schedule provided by the defense is notably silent regarding any future revenue streams to which the defendant may have access. The financial report only addresses the defendant's assets without detailing her income at all. The defendant has similarly provided the Court with no information about what resources her spouse might have access to on a prospective",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "6 In particular, according to the report, the defendant would have more than $4 million in unrestrained funds in accounts, in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars of jewelry and other items. Moreover, the Government presumes the defendant has not yet spent all $7 million of the retainer paid to her attorneys, which would still belong to the defendant if she fled.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "7 The Government notes that two of the defendant's proposed co-signers are citizens and residents of the United Kingdom, against whom the Government could not realistically recover a bond amount. These co-signers have not offered to secure this bond with any cash or property, and as a result, such a bond would effectively be worthless if the defendant were to flee.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "23",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00001168",
      "position": "bottom"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "defendant",
      "defendant's spouse",
      "defendant's attorneys",
      "defendant's co-signers"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Pretrial Services",
      "Government"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "London",
      "United Kingdom"
    ],
    "dates": [],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "2017-003",
      "DOJ-OGR-00001168"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing discussing the defendant's bail package and financial situation. The text is printed, and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is likely a page from a larger filing, as indicated by the page number '26' at the top."
}