DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
1.02 MB
Extraction Summary
8
People
4
Organizations
2
Locations
5
Events
4
Relationships
8
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
1.02 MB
Summary
This legal document argues for the release of grand jury transcripts with narrowly tailored redactions to protect the identities of victims like Ms. Farmer, citing their strong privacy interests as established in previous cases. However, it argues against redacting the names of third parties who have not been charged or alleged to be involved in the crimes of Epstein and Maxwell, suggesting such an effort "smacks of a cover up" and requires independent court scrutiny.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | Accused criminal |
Mentioned in relation to crimes he was charged with, along with Maxwell, and as the perpetrator of sexual abuse.
|
| Maxwell | Accused criminal |
Mentioned in relation to crimes she was charged with, along with Epstein, and as a defendant in legal cases.
|
| Ms. Farmer | Victim |
Mentioned as a victim of sex abuse and human trafficking with strong privacy interests.
|
| Judge Preska | Judge |
Cited as the judge in Giuffre v. Maxwell who recognized the privacy interests of Epstein's victims.
|
| Giuffre | Litigant |
Mentioned as the plaintiff in cases against Maxwell and Dershowitz.
|
| Dershowitz | Litigant |
Mentioned as the defendant in a case brought by Giuffre.
|
| Judge Rakoff | Judge |
Cited as the judge in Doe I v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. who found that protecting a victim's identity is justificat...
|
| Doe I | Litigant |
Mentioned as the plaintiff in a case against JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| BSF | Law firm |
Appears as a logo at the top of the document.
|
| The Government | Government agency |
Referenced as a party in the legal proceedings that intends to redact victim information and seeks to redact third-pa...
|
| The Court | Judicial body |
Referenced throughout as the entity that should assess redactions and make rulings.
|
| JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. | Company |
Mentioned as the defendant in the case Doe I v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
|
Timeline (5 events)
2020-09-09
A ruling in the case Giuffre v. Dershowitz, 2020 WL 5439623, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2020) is cited.
S.D.N.Y.
2020-11-25
A ruling in the case Giuffre v. Maxwell, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221599, at *16 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 25, 2020) is cited.
S.D.N.Y.
Relationships (4)
The document refers to "crimes with which Epstein and Maxwell were charged" and "Epstein and Maxwell affiliates."
The document cites the case "Giuffre v. Dershowitz."
The document identifies Ms. Farmer as a victim of sex abuse and human trafficking, and cites cases recognizing the privacy interests of "victims of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse."
Key Quotes (8)
"allay any remaining privacy concerns"Source
— In re Kutler
(Describing procedures for reviewing transcripts to protect named individuals.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #1
"information related to third parties who neither have been charged or alleged to be involved in the crimes with which Epstein and Maxwell were charged"Source
— Epstein Dkt. No. 66 at 7
(Arguing against rubber-stamping redactions of third-party information.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #2
"neither have been charged or alleged to be involved"Source
— The Government (paraphrased)
(The basis on which the Government seeks to redact the names of Epstein and Maxwell affiliates.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #3
"a court must still articulate specific and substantial reasons for sealing such material"Source
— Brown v. Maxwell
(Stating the requirement for sealing documents, even if they are not considered judicial documents with a presumption of public access.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #4
"gravity of the privacy interests"Source
— Judge Preska
(Recognizing the privacy interests of victims of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse in the Giuffre v. Maxwell case.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #5
"[t]hose interests are particularly acute given that the psychological and emotional wellbeing of survivors of alleged sexual assaults may be implicated by such a broad disclosure."Source
— The Court (in Giuffre v. Dershowitz)
(Explaining the heightened privacy interests of sexual assault survivors.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #6
"[t]hose interests weigh no less heavily"Source
— The Court (in Giuffre v. Maxwell)
(Stating that victims' privacy interests are strong even when law enforcement, not a private litigant, seeks to modify a protective order.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #7
"[p]rotecting the identity of sexual assault survivors and the details of their assaults is traditionally considered private and has been widely recognized as a compelling reason to limit public access to [even] judicial documents."Source
— Judge Rakoff
(In the case of Doe I v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., justifying the sealing of documents to protect a victim's privacy.)
DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg
Quote #8
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document