MAXWELL PRE-TRIAL DETENTION ORDER Case No. 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) — Southern District of New York Order Issued July 14, 2020
Following Ghislaine Maxwell's arrest on July 2, 2020, at her secluded estate in Bradford, New Hampshire, U.S. Magistrate Judge Alison J. Nathan (who would later preside over the trial as a district judge) conducted a bail hearing and ordered Maxwell detained pending trial. Maxwell's defense team proposed multiple bail packages, each of which was rejected.
ARREST CIRCUMSTANCES:
FBI agents arrested Maxwell at a 156-acre property in Bradford, New Hampshire, that she had purchased in December 2019 for approximately $1 million in an all-cash transaction through a limited liability company. The property was registered under the name "Granite Reality LLC" and was purchased using funds wired through an attorney. Maxwell had been living at the property in relative seclusion, and investigators noted that she had wrapped her cell phone in tin foil in an apparent effort to evade electronic surveillance. She was reported to have moved to the property shortly after Epstein's death in August 2019.
DEFENSE BAIL PROPOSAL:
Maxwell's defense attorneys proposed a bail package valued at approximately $5 million, offering to post the Bradford property as collateral, surrender her passports, submit to GPS monitoring, and accept home confinement with private security. In subsequent filings, the defense increased its proposed bail package and offered additional conditions.
FACTORS SUPPORTING DETENTION:
Judge Nathan found that Maxwell posed an extreme flight risk and that no combination of conditions could reasonably assure her appearance at trial. The court cited the following factors:
Wealth and financial resources: Maxwell had access to substantial financial resources, including more than $20 million in various accounts. The government presented evidence that Maxwell had moved money through more than 15 bank accounts in the period following Epstein's arrest and death.
International ties: Maxwell held citizenship in three countries — the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. France does not extradite its citizens. The court found that Maxwell's international connections and multiple citizenships provided her with both the means and the opportunity to flee.
Efforts to evade: The circumstances of Maxwell's arrest — living under an assumed identity at a property purchased through a shell company — demonstrated a pattern of efforts to conceal her whereabouts. The government argued that these steps showed a consciousness of flight risk.
Seriousness of charges: The charges against Maxwell carried a potential maximum sentence of up to 35 years (later increased to 65 years with the superseding indictment). The severity of potential punishment provided a powerful incentive to flee.
Evidence of obstruction: The government presented evidence that Maxwell had made false statements and had engaged in efforts to conceal evidence and obstruct the investigation.
SUBSEQUENT BAIL APPLICATIONS:
Maxwell's defense team made multiple additional bail applications over the following months, each proposing enhanced conditions and additional financial guarantees. All were denied. In one proposal, Maxwell's husband, Scott Borgerson, offered to post $22.5 million in assets and agreed to serve as a personal surety. Judge Nathan again denied bail, finding that no conditions would adequately address the flight risk.
CONDITIONS OF DETENTION:
Maxwell was initially held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, where her defense attorneys raised concerns about conditions of confinement, including allegations that she was subjected to excessive monitoring, sleep deprivation from frequent cell checks, and inadequate nutrition. The Bureau of Prisons stated that enhanced monitoring was implemented for Maxwell's safety, citing the circumstances of Epstein's death in federal custody.
LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE:
The Maxwell detention order was closely watched by legal practitioners as a case study in bail determination for high-profile, wealthy defendants with international ties. The court's analysis of flight risk factors — particularly its focus on the defendant's demonstrated efforts to conceal her whereabouts and the significance of multiple foreign citizenships — provided guidance for subsequent cases involving similar circumstances.