DOJ-OGR-00000750.jpg
691 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
8
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
691 KB
Summary
This legal document, part of a court filing from July 29, 2025, argues for the disclosure of grand jury materials. It analyzes legal precedents, noting that while the Government may oppose disclosure, factors like public interest can be overriding. The document states that Defendant Epstein is deceased and cannot assert a position, while Defendant Maxwell intends to respond, and argues that the significant public interest in the crimes of Epstein and Maxwell justifies disclosure.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | Defendant |
Mentioned as 'Defendant Epstein' who has passed away and therefore cannot assert a position on the disclosure of gran...
|
| Maxwell | Defendant |
Mentioned as 'Defendant Maxwell' who has indicated she expects to respond to the Court regarding the disclosure.
|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Mentioned in the context of public interest in her and Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Defendant |
Mentioned in the context of public interest in his and Ghislaine Maxwell's crimes.
|
| Garland |
Mentioned in the case citation 'Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry Inc. v. Garland'.
|
|
| Craig |
Mentioned in the case citation 'In re Craig'.
|
Organizations (8)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Court | government agency |
Referenced throughout the document as the judicial body hearing the case.
|
| Government | government agency |
Mentioned as a party that may oppose the disclosure of grand jury materials.
|
| Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry Inc. | non-profit organization |
Mentioned as a party in the case citation 'Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry Inc. v. Garland'.
|
| Second Circuit | court |
Mentioned as the court that held a specific position in the 'In re Craig' case.
|
| 4th Cir. | court |
Mentioned in the case citation 'In re Grand Jury Proceedings GJ-76-4 & GJ-75-3, 800 F.2d 1293, 1305 (4th Cir. 1986)'.
|
| 2d Cir. | court |
Mentioned in the case citation 'Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry Inc. v. Garland, 43 F.4th 276, 285–86 (2d Cir. 20...
|
| Department of Justice | government agency |
Mentioned as having conducted investigative work into the crimes discussed.
|
| Federal Bureau of Investigation | government agency |
Mentioned as having conducted investigative work into the crimes discussed.
|
Timeline (2 events)
A Grand Jury Proceeding, the disclosure of materials from which is being debated based on several legal factors.
Defendant
Government
Investigative work conducted by the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation into the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
Relationships (1)
The document refers to 'Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s crimes' and the public interest in them.
Key Quotes (3)
"to craft a response and set out [her] position to the Court."Source
— Defendant Maxwell
(Quoted from a docket entry (Maxwell Dkt. 793) indicating her intention to respond to the motion.)
DOJ-OGR-00000750.jpg
Quote #1
"why disclosure is being sought in the particular case."Source
— Court (from In re Craig)
(Describes the third factor considered by courts when deciding whether to disclose grand jury materials.)
DOJ-OGR-00000750.jpg
Quote #2
"It is . . . entirely conceivable that in some situations historical or public interest alone could justify the release of grand jury information."Source
— Second Circuit
(A holding from the case 'In re Craig' cited to support the argument for disclosure based on public interest.)
DOJ-OGR-00000750.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,999 characters)
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 66 Filed 07/29/25 Page 5 of 10
nature of the instant request, it is also (like the Court) faced with a broad public interest in the underlying proceedings.
2. Whether the Defendant to the Grand Jury Proceeding or the Government Opposes the Disclosure
The second factor asks whether the defendant or the Government opposes public disclosure of grand jury materials. See In re Craig, 131 F.3d at 106; see also Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry Inc. v. Garland, 43 F.4th 276, 285–86 (2d Cir. 2022) (affirming denial of motion to disclose grand jury materials where the Government opposed release). A defendant’s opposition to public disclosure is not dispositive. See In re Grand Jury Proceedings GJ-76-4 & GJ-75-3, 800 F.2d 1293, 1305 (4th Cir. 1986) (affirming district court’s decision to disclose grand jury transcript and exhibits over defendant corporation’s objection).
Defendant Epstein has passed and therefore cannot assert a position.³ Defendant Maxwell has indicated that she expects “to craft a response and set out [her] position to the Court.” (Maxwell Dkt. 793).
3. Why Disclosure Is Being Sought in the Particular Case
The third factor considers “why disclosure is being sought in the particular case.” In re Craig, 131 F.3d at 106. The Second Circuit in In re Craig held: “It is . . . entirely conceivable that in some situations historical or public interest alone could justify the release of grand jury information.” Id. As described above and in the underlying motions, there is undoubtedly a clearly expressed interest from the public in Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s crimes. Beyond that, there is abundant public interest in the investigative work conducted by the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation into those crimes. See In re Am. Hist. Ass’n, 49 F.
³ As noted below, the Government has not received any outreach from Epstein’s surviving family concerning the instant motion.
4
DOJ-OGR-00000750
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document