DOJ-OGR-00015159.jpg
670 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
670 KB
Summary
This legal document, filed on August 11, 2025, is a page from a court filing analyzing whether to unseal grand jury testimony related to an individual named Maxwell. The analysis considers several factors, including the potential harm to Maxwell and her family, the fact that much of the information was already revealed during her trial, and the status of witnesses. The document concludes that some factors are neutral while the factor of prior public disclosure is consistent with unsealing.
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government | Government agency |
Mentioned as proposing to redact victim identities and the names of law enforcement agents who testified.
|
Relationships (1)
The document considers the 'vulnerability' of 'her and her family' and notes that 'no family member of hers has expressed a position on the motion to unseal'.
Key Quotes (2)
"the continued existence and vulnerability"Source
— In re Craig, 131 F.3d at 107
(A legal consideration regarding the potential harm to Maxwell and her family from the disclosure of testimony.)
DOJ-OGR-00015159.jpg
Quote #1
"[T]he extent to which the grand jury material in a particular case has been made public is clearly relevant because even partial previous disclosure often undercuts many of the reasons for secrecy."Source
— In re Craig, 131 F.3d at 107
(Quoted as legal precedent to support the argument for unsealing, as much of the information has already been made public.)
DOJ-OGR-00015159.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,913 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 809 Filed 08/11/25 Page 27 of 31
This factor, on balance, weighs against unsealing.
6. Current Status of the Principals of the Grand Jury and That of Their Families
This factor is aimed primarily at protecting the reputations and interests of unindicted individuals, about whom unsealed grand jury testimony would reveal damaging information not previously disclosed. See In re Craig, 131 F.3d at 107. There is no such person or information here. Insofar as Maxwell was the subject of the grand jury testimony, this factor suggests considering here “the continued existence and vulnerability” of her and her family. Id. Maxwell is alive and so theoretically could be harmed by the disclosure of adverse testimony. But here, the grand jury materials, being cumulative of the public trial evidence, do not add anything to the formidable public record inculpating her. And no family member of hers has expressed a position on the motion to unseal. Gov’t Mem. at 6. This factor is neutral.
7. Extent to Which the Desired Material Has Previously Been Made Public
“[T]he extent to which the grand jury material in a particular case has been made public is clearly relevant because even partial previous disclosure often undercuts many of the reasons for secrecy.” See In re Craig, 131 F.3d at 107. Here, as explained, substantially all the information testified to by the summary witnesses in the grand juries has been revealed at Maxwell’s trial. And the Government proposes to redact victim identities, consistent with the approach that it took at trial. This factor is consistent with unsealing.
8. Whether Witnesses to the Grand Jury Proceedings Who Might be Affected by Disclosure Are Still Alive
Both law enforcement agents who testified are still alive. Gov’t Mem. at 7. The Government, however, proposes to redact their names. This factor is neutral.
27
DOJ-OGR-00015159
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document