The government's answer brief ('Ans.Br.') is cited as offering a 'halfhearted defense' and 'no explanation' for its inconsistent legal positions.
This legal document argues that the government has taken contradictory positions by intervening in one case (Doe v. Indyke) but not another (Giuffre v. Maxwell). The author contends the government's justification is weak and ignores its own arguments for strict confidentiality in a related criminal case involving Ms. Maxwell, suggesting the government should logically oppose unsealing filings in the Giuffre case but has failed to do so without explanation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein communication