DOJ-OGR-00015093.jpg

708 KB

Extraction Summary

4
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 708 KB
Summary

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.

People (4)

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.

Organizations (3)

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.

Timeline (3 events)

1940s and 1950s
The Hiss case, involving alleged Soviet espionage against the United States, which was a controversial and historically significant issue.
United States
1973
The 'In re Biaggi' case, which involved the unsealing of grand jury testimony of U.S. Congressman Mario Biaggi.
Ongoing criminal cases involving Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, which are generating immense public interest and a request for disclosure of grand jury materials.

Locations (1)

Location Context
Mentioned in the context of alleged Soviet espionage against it.

Relationships (1)

Jeffrey Epstein Co-defendants / Associates Ghislaine Maxwell
Their cases are mentioned together as the source of 'immense public interest' and the document discusses the potential release of 'Maxwell grand jury materials' in this context.

Key Quotes (2)

"historical"
Source
— The government (The government frames the public interest in the Epstein/Maxwell cases as 'historical' in an attempt to justify disclosure, an argument the author refutes.)
DOJ-OGR-00015093.jpg
Quote #1
"seeking complete disclosure in the form of a motion requesting disclosure of his own testimony for its own sake."
Source
— Mario Biaggi (action described in court filing) (Describing how Mario Biaggi waived secrecy protections for his grand jury testimony in the 'In re Biaggi' case.)
DOJ-OGR-00015093.jpg
Quote #2

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,823 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 803 Filed 08/05/25 Page 7 of 9
of time along with the fact that most of the relevant witnesses, including Hiss, had died. Id. at 293. The court ultimately ruled that the great historical importance of the Hiss case outweighed the minimal interest in preserving secrecy. Id. at 293 (noting that alleged Soviet espionage against the United States was a controversial and historically significant issue in domestic politics during the 1940s and 1950s, and to the present day).
Disclosure is being sought in this case due to immense public interest in Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s cases, along with public interest in the government’s handling of those investigations and prosecutions. The public interest identified by the government—while understandable—is insufficient to warrant disclosure of grand jury materials at this time. The government frames this interest as “historical,” yet it is nothing more than widespread and intense public curiosity about an ongoing criminal case. Neither In re Petition of National Security Archive, nor In re Petition of American Historical Association, support the conclusion that the Maxwell grand jury materials should be released. Each of those cases involved testimony dating back at least five decades, along with grand jury testimony relating to defendants and witnesses who were deceased.
In re Biaggi is equally unavailing. In re Biaggi, 478 F.2d 489 (2d Cir. 1973). That case involved the unsealing of grand jury testimony of a U.S. Congressman, Mario Biaggi, who had not been indicted, and who waived any protection to secrecy by “seeking complete disclosure in the form of a motion requesting disclosure of his own testimony for its own sake.” In re Biaggi, 478 F.2d 489, 493 (2d Cir. 1973). The
MARKUS/MOSS
7
DOJ-OGR-00015093

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document