DOJ-OGR-00019568.jpg
606 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
606 KB
Summary
This legal document, dated August 17, 2020, is a filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The author argues for modifying a Protective Order, claiming that the 'partial secrecy' surrounding materials from a grand jury subpoena has undermined the fairness of the legal process. The document states that this secrecy unfairly disadvantages Ms. Maxwell and leaves critical questions about government communications unanswered.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Alison J. Nathan | The Honorable |
The document is addressed to The Honorable Alison J. Nathan.
|
| Ms. Maxwell |
Mentioned as being 'unfairly disadvantaged' by the limited fashion in which material is proposed to be handled.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| government | government agency |
Mentioned in relation to a 'government investigation' and communications.
|
| Advisory Committee | committee |
Cited in 'Advisory Committee Note to Subdivision 6(e)2' regarding Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
|
Timeline (2 events)
A grand jury subpoena was issued.
A government investigation was conducted.
Relationships (1)
The document argues that Ms. Maxwell is 'unfairly disadvantaged' by the actions and proposals of the government regarding a grand jury subpoena and investigation.
Key Quotes (1)
"The rule does not impose any obligation of secrecy on witnesses."Source
— Fed. R. Crim. P. 6, Advisory Committee Note to Subdivision 6(e)2.
(Quoted to support the argument against the secrecy surrounding the material in the case.)
DOJ-OGR-00019568.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (987 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 25-2 Filed 08/17/20 Page 6 of 18
The Honorable Alison J. Nathan
August 17, 2020
Page 6
August 17, 2020
Page 6
There are at least three compelling reasons to modify the Protective Order. First, [REDACTED]
The partial secrecy surrounding the Material has also fundamentally undermined the fairness of the adversarial process. Although the grand jury subpoena and government investigation were known to [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] “The rule does not impose any obligation of secrecy on witnesses.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 6, Advisory Committee Note to Subdivision 6(e)2. [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] Too many questions remain unanswered including exactly what was said between the government and [REDACTED], when was it said, and precisely what was turned over. [REDACTED]
Material in the very limited fashion proposed Ms. Maxwell she is unfairly disadvantaged [REDACTED]. Moreover, instead of candidly revealing the fact of the subpoena, [REDACTED]
Second, [REDACTED]
App.109
DOJ-OGR-00019568
DOJ-OGR-00019568
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document