726.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: house-oversight-doj
Pages: 3
Text status: Searchable text available
OCR confidence: 0.9094841794127011

Extracted text

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 726 Filed 07/13/22 Pagelof3 USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #; DATE FILED: United States of America, _y_ 20-CR-330 (AJN) Ghislaine Maxwell, ORDER Defendant. ALISON J. NATHAN, Circuit Judge, sitting by designation: The Court is in receipt of the parties’ proposed redactions to motions that were not previously docketed. See Dkt. No. 698. With one exception, the Court concludes that the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to protect information subject to Fed. R. Evid. 412 and the privacy interests of witnesses, including individuals subject to the Court’s pseudonym order, and individuals who were anticipated to be called as witnesses at trial, but were not ultimately called. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). The Court will file unredacted copies of all items under seal. The Court concludes, however, that the proposed redactions to Dkt. No. 725 are not narrowly tailored. The private information of victim-witnesses who are discussed in the letter may be protected by narrow redactions. However, there is no basis to redact the letter’s general request to identify the proper scope of cross-examination. Accordingly, the Defendant is ORDERED to confer with the Government and docket proposed revised redactions on or before 12:00 p.m. on Friday, July 15, 2022. The letter at Dkt. No. 725 was filed under temporary seal at Dkt. No. 712. Because the Court concludes that sealing in not justified, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to strike the entry at Dkt. No. 712 from the docket. DOJ-OGR-00011381

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 726 Filed 07/13/22 Page2of3 The Court’s Chambers also received an email from Defense counsel inquiring whether to docket three joint letters regarding jury strikes that were previously filed with the Court, but not docketed. Because docketing the letters would not undermine the important interest …

Open in the interactive archive →