DOJ-OGR-00001832.jpg

913 KB

Extraction Summary

3
People
4
Organizations
6
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 913 KB
Summary

This legal document is a letter from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated October 6, 2020, regarding the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecution requests permission to delay the disclosure of sensitive evidence, specifically photographs and documents related to victims of Jeffrey Epstein, to the defense until eight weeks before trial. The government argues this delay is necessary to protect an ongoing investigation and prevent the premature release of sensitive victim information, citing Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(d)(1) as legal justification.

People (3)

Name Role Context
Alison J. Nathan Judge, United States District Court
The recipient of the letter, addressed as 'The Honorable Alison J. Nathan' and 'Dear Judge Nathan'.
Ghislaine Maxwell Defendant
The defendant in the case 'United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)'.
Jeffrey Epstein
Mentioned in relation to victims of sexual abuse and as a co-conspirator with Ghislaine Maxwell.

Organizations (4)

Name Type Context
U.S. Department of Justice government agency
The seal of the department appears at the top of the document.
United States Attorney, Southern District of New York government agency
The sender of the letter.
United States District Court, Southern District of New York court
The court where the case is being heard and the recipient of the letter. Also referred to as USDC SDNY.
Cryovac, Inc. company
Mentioned in a case citation: 'Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., 805 F.2d 1, 8 (1st Cir. 1986)'.

Timeline (1 events)

2020-11-18
The document was electronically filed with the USDC SDNY.
United States District Court, Southern District of New York

Locations (6)

Location Context
The jurisdiction of the United States Attorney and the United States District Court mentioned in the document.
Part of the address for the United States Attorney's office.
The address of the United States Attorney's office.
The location of the United States District Court.
The address of the United States Courthouse.
The city where the US Attorney's office and the Courthouse are located.

Relationships (1)

Ghislaine Maxwell co-conspirators Jeffrey Epstein
The document states, 'Count One of the Indictment charges Maxwell with conspiring with Epstein and others to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts...'

Key Quotes (3)

"The Government respectfully submits this letter to request that the Court grant the Government permission to delay disclosure to the defense of certain photographs of and documents regarding victims of sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein."
Source
— United States Attorney, Southern District of New York (The opening sentence of the letter, stating its primary purpose.)
DOJ-OGR-00001832.jpg
Quote #1
"premature disclosure of these materials could jeopardize the Government’s ongoing investigation and would reveal sensitive victim information months in advance of trial."
Source
— United States Attorney, Southern District of New York (The justification provided by the Government for requesting the delay in disclosure.)
DOJ-OGR-00001832.jpg
Quote #2
"A finding of good cause “ʻmust be based on a particular factual demonstration of potential harm, not on conclusory statements.’”"
Source
— United States v. Gangi (quoting Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc.) (A legal standard cited from a previous case to support the argument for delaying discovery.)
DOJ-OGR-00001832.jpg
Quote #3

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,756 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 50 Filed 10/08/20 Page 1 of 3
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
The Silvio J. Mollo Building
One Saint Andrew’s Plaza
New York, New York 10007
October 6, 2020
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 11/18/20
BY ECF
The Honorable Alison J. Nathan
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square
New York, New York 10007
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Dear Judge Nathan:
The Government respectfully submits this letter to request that the Court grant the Government permission to delay disclosure to the defense of certain photographs of and documents regarding victims of sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. These materials relate to abuse that post-dated the time period charged in the Indictment, and the Government does not intend to offer them at trial. Although the Government intends to produce these materials to the defendant in advance of trial, premature disclosure of these materials could jeopardize the Government’s ongoing investigation and would reveal sensitive victim information months in advance of trial. For these reasons and as set forth below, the Government respectfully submits, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(d)(1), that good cause exists to delay disclosure of these items to defense counsel until eight weeks prior to trial.¹ The Government has conferred with defense counsel, who have indicated that they object to this request and intend to submit a letter in opposition.
As the Court is aware, the superseding indictment in this case (the “Indictment”) charges the defendant in six counts. Count One of the Indictment charges Maxwell with conspiring with Epstein and others to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
¹ Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 provides for the production of discovery to a defendant, upon request, of certain materials, such as documents that are material to the preparation of the defense and documents the Government intends to use in its case-in-chief at trial. However, Rule 16(d)(1) also provides that:
At any time the court may, for good cause, deny, restrict, or defer discovery or inspection, or grant other appropriate relief. The court may permit a party to show good cause by a written statement that the court will inspect ex parte.
A finding of good cause “ʻmust be based on a particular factual demonstration of potential harm, not on conclusory statements.’” United States v. Gangi, No. 97 Cr. 1215 (DC), 1998 WL 226196, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 1998) (quoting Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., 805 F.2d 1, 8 (1st Cir. 1986)).
DOJ-OGR-00001832

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document