This legal document, page 7 of a court filing, argues against the disclosure of Ghislaine Maxwell's grand jury materials. The author contends that the current 'immense public interest' in the Epstein and Maxwell cases is mere public curiosity about an ongoing case and does not meet the standard of historical importance that justified disclosure in past cases like the Hiss espionage case or the 'In re Biaggi' case. The document distinguishes the current request from precedents where materials were released decades later, after witnesses had died, or when the subject of the testimony themselves requested the release.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Hiss |
Mentioned as a deceased witness in the historical 'Hiss case' concerning Soviet espionage.
|
|
| Jeffrey Epstein |
His case is cited as a source of immense public interest driving the request for disclosure of grand jury materials.
|
|
| Ghislaine Maxwell |
Her case, along with Epstein's, is cited as a source of immense public interest. The document argues against the rele...
|
|
| Mario Biaggi | U.S. Congressman |
The subject of the 'In re Biaggi' case, where his own grand jury testimony was unsealed after he requested it.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| National Security Archive | Archive/Organization |
Mentioned in the case name 'In re Petition of National Security Archive'.
|
| American Historical Association | Association |
Mentioned in the case name 'In re Petition of American Historical Association'.
|
| MARKUS/MOSS | Law firm |
Appears in the footer of the document.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in the context of alleged Soviet espionage against it.
|
"historical"Source
"seeking complete disclosure in the form of a motion requesting disclosure of his own testimony for its own sake."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,823 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document