Full Text
appeared in the High Court, House of Lords and Supreme Court in leading extradition cases; and has acted as an expert consultant to the Commonwealth Secretariat on international cooperation. (Id.). In 2011 and 2012, Mr. Perry was part of a select team appointed by the U.K. government to conduct a review of the United Kingdom's extradition arrangements, a review that formed the basis of changes to the 2003 Extradition Act. (Id. Annex B ¶ 3.1). In Mr. Perry's opinion, it is “highly unlikely that Ghislaine Maxwell would be able successfully to resist extradition to the United States” in connection with this case. (Perry Rep. ¶ 2(e)). After concluding that none of the potentially applicable bars to extradition or human rights objections would prevent Ms. Maxwell's extradition, Mr. Perry explains that Ms. Maxwell's waiver of her extradition rights “would be admissible in any extradition proceedings and, in cases, such as this one, where the requested person consents to their extradition, the extradition process is likely to take between one and three months to complete.” (Id. ¶¶ 24-39). Mr. Perry's report also undercuts the government's representation at the initial hearing regarding likelihood of bail (see Tr. 27), opining that “a person who absconded from [a] US criminal proceeding in breach of bail . . . is extremely unlikely to be granted bail” in a subsequent U.K. extradition proceeding. (Perry Rep. ¶ 23). France. The accompanying report of William Julié (“Julié Rep.”) reviews the French extradition process as it would likely be applied to Ms. Maxwell. Mr. Julié is an expert on French extradition law who has handled extradition cases both within and outside the European Union and regularly appears as an extradition expert in French courts. (Julié Rep.) (attached as Exhibit V). Mr. Julié explains that, contrary to the government's representation, “the extradition of a French national to the USA is legally permissible under French law.” (Id. at 1).