this is a motion to reverse the district court's terminations of bail in this case to start with this year your honor as mr lim rado's is not a risk of flight is a wealth of information provided in case law reflecting what flight is absolutely rado's never made false representations to the court he never disregarded court orders never written misrepresented his birthplace or citizenship he never used aliases he has strong ties family ties to the united states specifically in new york area including his minor children siblings nieces nephews home and businesses mr lim rattles contrary to what the government attempted to represent in its papers did not travel abroad frequently specifically travelled to greece travel seven times in the forty four years that he's been in this country that contradicts the wealth of cases showing that frequent travel outside of the united states frequent international travel is significantly more than seven times in forty four years even if mr lim rollo's is considered a risk of flight there are set of conditions that could assure his return to court st let's take a look at the conditions that the court already set they're listed in my papers and i'd note that voce conditions  the court failed to seek alternate conditions including exploring additional sure there's alternate properties exploring the adding of a waiver of extradition and i think most egregiously the district court used his family ties against him in this case the district court stated in part his length of residence and strong family ties to the united states notwithstanding these are strong incentives to flee to circumvent the proceedings in his court especially since he has numerous other family members here who could provide support network for his immediate family your honour's the district court literally use a factor that's supposed to go in favor intent just two of the things i'd like to mention to the court the government's papers refer to substantial resources and again the frequent travel substantial in the cases in many of the cases that the government cited in its papers to this court is papers before the district court those defendants had millions of dollars used to liberals at sixty thousand dollars which he honestly report d to pretrial services in an account to sixty thousand dollars that sixty thousand dollars has been depleted since his arrest in this case sixty thousand dollars does not represent substantial amount of resources this is exaggeration on the part of the government and it should not be taken it natch not be used as a factor in this case your honor unless the unless the court is saying that the minimal amount of money that mr or resources that mr nimrod owes has shows that he does not have enough resources to flee as the government states are not that this court in friedman acknowledged that the government used the strength of the case the nature of the charge public school or in the possible penalties but also noted that a lack of criminal history no passport no no no ability to evade surveillance and the fact that if the defendant in friedman worked in the united states specifically the new york area for twenty five years and had three children in the new york area were factors that went against a risk of flight in that case your honour's thank you may please the court my name is sam rothschild i'm an assistant united states attorney in the southern district of new york and i represent the united states in his appeal in the court below the court should affirm judge swain's detention order because she did not one that's that's correct your honor i would note that all the evidence that judge swain had before her when she made her ruling was not in front of magistrate judge weighing including the returns from the search warrant that was executed at the defendant's residence on the day of arrest believe the detention order should be affirmed here judge swindon not clearly error by concluding that the government showed by a preponderance of the evidence both that the defendant presents a serious risk of flight and that no combination of conditions could reasonably assure his appearance this court reviews detention decisions for clear error because those decisions depend largely on the district court's pending findings and because determining the weight to be accorded each factor under eighteen u s c thirty one forty two dollars is the special province of the trier of fact as the court knows is a deferential standard the court reverses only if it has a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made here judge swain made no mistake she properly considered the relevant statutory factors  argued that was in violation of the congressional purpose your honor just when did not use the defendant's community ties as a factor in favor of release rather and in fact know that judge understood perfectly well that community ties counsel against detention because as as defense counsel quoted in the passage you read he said his ties to new york or his family ties notwithstanding he has strong incentive to physics she understood which side of the balance those those fall on she she pointed to the extended family in the area simply to turn back the defendant's argument that she had miscalculated his incentives one of defendant arguments was that i actually don't have a strong incentive to flee because i need to care for my children who are here in new york and it was posing supposing that we were to reasons posing that in a case of this nature a court w to reason or read this variable were to reason that the presence in the united states of family ties could be relied on by the defendant to go to greece  that the court should consider and the court should consider those factors in total in assessing a particular dissent a defendant's incentives to to flee so in many cases it might well be that the presence of extended family discovery in this case the next date in front of judge swain is late april and it's difficult for me to say at this time when so he will have been detained for about six months possibly longer that's a form of punishment r your honor i'd note that the defendant faces aggravated identity theft charges which as your honor no carry a two year mandatory consecutive sentence to anything that he would receive on the other charges and the government is very confident that the defendant will be convicted in this case there's overwhelming evidence against him including wiretap record and recording surveillance footage and fruits and instrumentalities of a t m skimming which were recovered at his home and i guess i'll end on that point your honor the essence of this case is a t m skimming which is fundamentally a crime that involves identity theft the defense counsel noted that this particular defendant has not used aliases but he's been a leading figure in a in an a t m skimming conspiracy ring that has no compunction about stealing victim's personal identifying information which makes him a serious risk of flight for which no conditions of release are sufficient accordingly we think judge swain acted well within her discretion in ordering the defendant detained here and unless the court has questions will rest on our submission and respectfully request he's not he's not a citizen of greece where he is a citizen he's a citizen yes  did anything happen during those two weeks which would which would have given anyone who is for concern not that i'm aware of your honor i would note that i think the government mentioned in some of its papers below the typically when defendants do flee it's not right away and it tends to happen as something of consequence like a plea or a sentence of approaches so give us the timeline just a moment so on a certain date he's detained and he is granted bail by a judge when he's not right he's arrested on october th and granted that that day by judge way so he's in route and then when they do the side that he would appeal this decision to the district judge we submitted our appeal on october th so five days later we appealed to the bell not only of of this defendant but to other defendants as well so it wasn't based on something that ha noble action of misconduct it was that you had intended you had been unhappy with the original decision to begin with and in the normal course that's exactly right your honor that when the presentment in front of judge weighing was under way that the search of the defendant's house had not yet concluded correct your honor it correct we went by the time we put in our papers in front of judge swain on the th we included photographs of additional items that had been seized from the defendant's home including what's called a deep insert a t m scam or device that actually goes all the way inside of the a t m and is capable of damaging the victim's cards thank you very much ana just home allegedly and the government stated that if legit lee found implements of the crime that was stated before judge weighing the government produced pictures of what they believe were items connected to the crime i believe there were a few repeat issues they produced before judge weighing in total i want to say of five pictures before judge before judge swain so it's not accurate that judge when was not on where of the search that was conducted and that there were items that were legibly taken that were supposed to be in connection with the with the the crime the when the government states that people tend to flee after pleas there's no stay or no statistics that back that up your honor your honors and i the cases that the government sided with respect to that before judge swing in october th at the bill hearing