Judge again declines to put Madoff behind bars
NEW YORK -- A federal judge Wednesday denied prosecutors' second bid to revoke Bernard Madoff's bail and make him trade house arrest in a $7 million apartment for a jail cell pending a potential trial for allegedly running a $50 billion Ponzi scheme.
Upholding a lower court's Monday decision, U.S. District Judge Lawrence McKenna said federal prosecutors had failed to prove that Madoff, 70, posed a flight risk or a danger to the community. Those are the two main requirements in bail decisions.
But McKenna ruled that Madoff, previously ordered to provide an inventory of valuables in his Manhattan apartment, must provide similar itemization from homes in Montauk, N.Y.; Florida; and France. The provision was aimed at addressing prosecution arguments that Madoff might transfer assets that could help repay scam victims.
Free on $10 million bail, he is required to stay in the apartment around the clock, monitored by an electronic ankle bracelet and cameras focused on the doors and building entrance, as well as by an armed guard stationed outside. His outgoing mail is also being monitored.
During Wednesday's hearing, the prosecution and defense clashed over whether those restrictions satisfied the federal Bail Reform Act, which requires the release of most defendants on the least restrictive conditions that reasonably assure appearance for court hearings and community safety.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Marc Litt argued that Madoff posed an economic threat to the community in part based on the December mailing of about $1 million worth of watches, jewelry and other gifts to relatives. Madoff and his wife sent the gifts despite a court order that barred any transfers.
Litt also stressed that a search of Madoff's desk found about 100 signed checks totaling more than $173 million "ready to be sent out."
"There is no set of conditions short of detention where the government can trust the defendant not to do serious harm to the community," Litt argued.
But Ira Lee Sorkin, Madoff's lead defense attorney, argued that the gift mailings were an innocent yet "stupid" mistake and said the items have since been returned. He said the strict bail conditions all but ruled out any unauthorized transfers.
