mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00002109.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "14 of 29",
    "document_number": "97-21",
    "date": "12/14/20",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 97-21 Filed 12/14/20 Page 14 of 29\n\nspecific concerns, such as access to medical care. In those circumstances, it is highly unlikely that Ms Maxwell would be able to rely on Article 3 to defeat a request for her extradition.\n\nArticle 6 (fair trial)\n\n37. Article 6 ECHR protects the right to a fair trial, and the European Court of Human Rights has noted that Article 6 is \"strikingly similar\" to the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution. An issue may exceptionally be raised under Article 6 in an extradition case in circumstances where the requested person risks suffering a flagrant denial of justice in the requesting country. The test of 'flagrant denial' is particularly high, requiring a court to find not only that the trial would be unfair, but that there would be \"a total nullification of the right to a fair trial\". In practice, this threshold is rarely overcome in extradition cases and it has never been met in a US extradition case. In those circumstances, it is highly unlikely that Ms Maxwell would be able to successfully invoke Article 6 to resist her extradition.\n\nArticle 8 (private and family life)\n\n38. Article 8 ECHR protects the right to private and family life. In assessing Article 8, the court is required to conduct a balancing exercise where factors in favour of extradition, including the \"constant and weighty\" public interests in honouring extradition treaties and ensuring that people accused of crimes should be brought to trial, are weighed against any personal or other factors that would render extradition an interreference with private or family life. The test is whether any interference would be disproportionate to the legitimate aims pursued by extradition. In practice, the more serious the offence, the more difficult it is to establish that extradition would be disproportionate. Given the nature of the charges that she faces, it is highly unlikely that such an argument would succeed in Ms Maxwell's case.\n\nConclusion\n\n39. In conclusion, if the United States were to request Ms Maxwell's extradition in circumstances where she had absconded to the United Kingdom in breach of bail conditions imposed in the United States, it is extremely unlikely that she would be granted bail and highly unlikely that she would be able\n\nSee, for example, Miao at para. 37 where the court stated that: \"Assurances are commonly given in extradition cases in order to mitigate risks which might otherwise bar extradition. It is common for assurances to be given in respect of conditions of detention and the treatment of physical and mental illness (and associated suicide prevention) and they form an important part of extradition law\".\n\nAhmad v United Kingdom 51 EHRR SE6, para. 133.\n\nOthman v United Kingdom (2012) 55 EHRR 1, para. 258.\n\nOthman, para. 260.\n\nR (on the application of HH) v Westminster City Magistrates' Court [2013] 1 AC 338, para. 30.\n\n1922623.1\n13\n\nDOJ-OGR-00002109",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 97-21 Filed 12/14/20 Page 14 of 29",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "specific concerns, such as access to medical care. In those circumstances, it is highly unlikely that Ms Maxwell would be able to rely on Article 3 to defeat a request for her extradition.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Article 6 (fair trial)",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "37. Article 6 ECHR protects the right to a fair trial, and the European Court of Human Rights has noted that Article 6 is \"strikingly similar\" to the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution. An issue may exceptionally be raised under Article 6 in an extradition case in circumstances where the requested person risks suffering a flagrant denial of justice in the requesting country. The test of 'flagrant denial' is particularly high, requiring a court to find not only that the trial would be unfair, but that there would be \"a total nullification of the right to a fair trial\". In practice, this threshold is rarely overcome in extradition cases and it has never been met in a US extradition case. In those circumstances, it is highly unlikely that Ms Maxwell would be able to successfully invoke Article 6 to resist her extradition.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Article 8 (private and family life)",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "38. Article 8 ECHR protects the right to private and family life. In assessing Article 8, the court is required to conduct a balancing exercise where factors in favour of extradition, including the \"constant and weighty\" public interests in honouring extradition treaties and ensuring that people accused of crimes should be brought to trial, are weighed against any personal or other factors that would render extradition an interreference with private or family life. The test is whether any interference would be disproportionate to the legitimate aims pursued by extradition. In practice, the more serious the offence, the more difficult it is to establish that extradition would be disproportionate. Given the nature of the charges that she faces, it is highly unlikely that such an argument would succeed in Ms Maxwell's case.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Conclusion",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "39. In conclusion, if the United States were to request Ms Maxwell's extradition in circumstances where she had absconded to the United Kingdom in breach of bail conditions imposed in the United States, it is extremely unlikely that she would be granted bail and highly unlikely that she would be able",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "See, for example, Miao at para. 37 where the court stated that: \"Assurances are commonly given in extradition cases in order to mitigate risks which might otherwise bar extradition. It is common for assurances to be given in respect of conditions of detention and the treatment of physical and mental illness (and associated suicide prevention) and they form an important part of extradition law\".",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ahmad v United Kingdom 51 EHRR SE6, para. 133.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Othman v United Kingdom (2012) 55 EHRR 1, para. 258.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Othman, para. 260.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "R (on the application of HH) v Westminster City Magistrates' Court [2013] 1 AC 338, para. 30.",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1922623.1",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "13",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00002109",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "European Court of Human Rights"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "United States",
      "United Kingdom"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "12/14/20",
      "2012",
      "2013"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "97-21",
      "51 EHRR SE6",
      "55 EHRR 1",
      "[2013] 1 AC 338",
      "1922623.1",
      "DOJ-OGR-00002109"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the extradition case of Ms Maxwell. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is well-formatted and the text is clear."
}