the appearance of the person as required and the safety of any other person and the community: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged (including whether it is a crime of violence), (2) the weight of the evidence against the person, (3) the history and characteristics of the person, and (4) the nature and seriousness of danger to any person or community that would be posed by the person’s release. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g). The Court notes that only a few courts have considered these factors under the Act in making flight risk determinations in international extradition cases. See, e.g., Ramnath, 533 F.Supp.2d at 667-71 (stating that the Act “provides a helpful framework of reference” and specifically applying each of the four factors); Nacif-Borge, 829 F.Supp. at 1221-22 (<HOLDING>); Santos, 473 F.Supp.2d at 1040-41 (looking to
holding that arrests under  1357a2 require an individualized determination of flight risk recognizing that the act provides a detailed outline of traditional factors used to assess risk of flight holding that the statute was ambiguous because it provides no definition of the term violation and provides no specific direction as to the proper unit of prosecution holding that an alien must be released unless the government demonstrates at a bond hearing that the alien poses a risk of flight or a risk of danger to the community holding that because the crime of rape involved a nonconsensual act there was a substantial risk that physical force may be used in committing the offense