Legal Document - DOJ-OGR-00019434 | Trove Document Archive

Processing Document...

0%

Initializing...

Extraction Summary

8

People

3

Organizations

1

Locations

2

Events

1

Relationships

1

Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document

File Size: 558 KB

Summary

This legal document, dated September 24, 2020, argues that the government strategically chose not to intervene to prevent the unsealing of Ms. Maxwell's depositions. The filing suggests this inaction allows the government to later claim any violation of a prior ruling was harmless. It supports its argument by citing legal precedents, such as 'Louis Vuitton' and 'SEC v. Boock', which warn of the dangers for defendants who waive their Fifth Amendment rights during civil discovery.

People (8)

Name	Role	Context
Judge Preska	Judge	Mentioned as the judge before whom the government should have moved to intervene to oppose the unsealing of depositio...
Ms. Maxwell	Subject of depositions	Her depositions are the subject of the legal argument regarding their potential release to the public.
Judge Nathan	Judge	The judge to whom the government will argue if Ms. Maxwell's depositions are released.
Martindell	Party in a legal case	Mentioned in the context of a potential violation of a ruling in the 'Martindell' case.
Doe	Party in a legal case	A party in the case 'Doe v. Indyke'.
Indyke	Party in a legal case	A party in the case 'Doe v. Indyke'.
Giuffre	Party in a legal case	A party in the case 'Giuffre v. Maxwell'.
Boock	Party in a legal case	A party in the case 'SEC v. Boock'.

Organizations (3)

Name	Type	Context
government	government agency	Discussed in terms of its legal strategy and decision not to intervene in the unsealing of Ms. Maxwell's depositions.
Louis Vuitton	company	Mentioned as a party in a legal case that set a precedent regarding Fifth Amendment privilege in civil discovery.
SEC	government agency	The plaintiff in the cited case 'SEC v. Boock'.

Timeline (2 events)

2010-06-15

A ruling was issued in the case SEC v. Boock in the Southern District of New York.

S.D.N.Y.

SEC Boock

View

2017

Discovery in the case Giuffre v. Maxwell finished.

Giuffre Maxwell

View

Locations (1)

Location	Context
S.D.N.Y.	The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, where the 'SEC v. Boock' case was decided.

Relationships (1)

government → adversarial / legal → Ms. Maxwell

The document describes the government's legal strategy concerning Ms. Maxwell's depositions, suggesting it is positioning itself to argue against her in a future proceeding.

Key Quotes (1)

"if civil defendants do not elect to assert their Fifth Amendment privilege, and instead fully cooperate with discovery, their ‘testimony . . . in their defense in the civil action is likely to constitute admissions of criminal conduct in their criminal prosecution.’"

Source

— The Court in Louis Vuitton (Quoted as a legal precedent recognized by the Court concerning the consequences for civil defendants who cooperate with discovery rather than invoking their Fifth Amendment rights.)

DOJ-OGR-00019434.jpg

Quote #1