We, the undersigned, petition you to allow Sholom M. Rubashkin to be allowed to come home. 

1. He has proven himself to not be a flight risk in the past. He has behaved in an exemplary fashion in the past as far as conforming to any restrictions placed on him by his parole officer.  When under house confinement previously, he went above and beyond what is expected by temporarily repairing his ankle bracelet until it could be exchanged. He was in proximity to many airports, etc. and did not attempt to flee at that time.  All of this speaks to his reliability and disputes the premise of requesting that he be denied bail by the prosecution and, moreover, being denied bail by Judge Reade.
2. It is not practical for him to flee.  While this appears to be a major concern, the communal pressure on Mr. Rubashkin not to flee is overwhelming and the personal and spiritual repercussions of violating that trust would be unacceptable to a man of Mr. Rubashkin's faith.  In addition, he has offered to have additional conditions such as curfew, home detention, home incarceration and 24-hour armed surveillance, to ensure that he does not flee.
3. There is precedent for non-violent, first time offenders to receive bail after conviction prior to sentencing.
• In United States v. Majors, 932 F.Supp. 853, Mr. Majors was convicted on charges of drug distribution. While pending sentencing he was granted bail - even though he had prior arrests and was an admitted drug user %u2013 primarily due to family and community ties, collateral to be made available, his cooperation during the proceedings, and family assurances of assistance.
• The case of United States v. Sabhnani, 529 F.Supp.2d 377, presents an example of when granting bail pending sentencing is appropriate.  In Sabhnani, a husband and wife were convicted on numerous accounts relating to committing forced labor and harboring illegal aliens. That court determined that the wife was a violent offender while the husband was a passive offender. As such, the court held that the wife should not be granted bail pending sentencing due to the nature of her crimes. Conversely, the husband should be granted bail pending sentencing as he is held to the less stringent bail standard as set forth in 18 U.S.C. %uFFFD 3143(a)(1).
4. There is exceptional need for his presence at home.  He has many children, one of whom has special needs.  His autistic son is heavily dependant on the support that his father provides and asks for him daily.

For these reasons, we, the undersigned, feel that Mr. Rubashkin should be allowed to come home.  Please give the matter the consideration it is due and grant him bail as soon as possible.