002.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: house-oversight-doj
Pages: 7
Text status: Searchable text available
OCR confidence: 0.908999019054287
Extracted text

Case 1:20-mj-00132-AJ Document2 Filed 07/02/20 Page1of7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE United States of America Vv. Case No. 20-mj-132-AJ-1 Ghislaine Maxwell   Public Access Findings Ls Background This hearing is taking place during the public health emergency caused by the COVID-19 outbreak. All parties to this proceeding, including the court, are appearing remotely via video. In light of the anticipated volume of public and media interest and the operational/capacity limitations of videoconference technology, public and media access to the proceeding will be via telephonic conference. The court’s protocols for this hearing are laid out in Standing Order 20-7 (Mar. 23, 2020).! The court finds that conducting this hearing     via video under the unique circumstances presented by the   COVID-19 pandemic — is the best way to ensure the safety of the litigants, court personnel, and the public at large. All   findings made in the court’s prior standing orders are | Standing Order 20-7 was extended to August 1, 2020 by Standing Order 20-21 (June 17, 2020). 1 DOJ-OGR-00019193 

Case 1:20-mj-00132-AJ Document2 Filed 07/02/20 Page2of7 incorporated herein. See Standing Orders 20-5 (Mar. 20, 2020) and 20-21 (June 17, 2020) .? The hearing held today will be an initial appearance and   removal hearing for defendant Ghislaine Maxwell. Today’s     hearing has been noticed as a video hearing. In the event defendant consents to proceed, the court makes the findings   below.   Before convening this video/telephone hearing, the court   carefully considered the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to public court proceedings and the public’s and press’s First Amendment rights to in-person access to such proceedings. See Bucci v. United States, 662 F.3d 18, 22 (1st Cir. 2011) (citing Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39, 48 (1984)); Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Court of California, Riverside Cty., 464 U.S. 501, 509- 10 (1984). This Order details my findings. II. …
Open in the interactive archive →