DOJ-OGR-00001664.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 33 Filed 07/28/20 Page 1 of 7

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

July 28, 2020

VIA 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 with respect to the protective order to be
entered in the above-captioned case, and to respond to the defendant’s letter and submission of
July 27, 2020 (the “Defendant Letter” or “Def. Ltr.”) (Dkt. 29). The Government and defense
counsel have conferred regarding a protective order several times via telephone and email between
July 9, 2020, and today, including as recently as this morning. The Government and defense
counsel have come to an agreement on much of the proposed protective order. However, the
parties disagree as to two inclusions sought by the defendant which the Government objects to and
for which, as detailed herein, the Government submits there is no legal basis. Accordingly, the
Government respectfully requests that the Court enter its proposed protective order (the
“Government Proposed Order”), which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and which differs from the
defendant’s proposed order in those two respects, as further described below.

A. The Defendant’s Request to be Permitted to Publicly Name and Identify Victims

As detailed herein, the Government seeks to protect the identities of victims, consistent
with their significant privacy interests and the well-established law in this Circuit, and proposes a
protective order consistent with those very significant interests. In contrast, the defendant insists
that the protective order be modified such that she and her counsel would be permitted to “publicly
referenc[e]” individuals, by name, who have “spoken on the public record to the media or in public
fora, or in litigation – criminal or otherwise – relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.” 1

1 Specifically, the defendant’s proposed protective order differs from the Government’s in that
it adds a sentence, in its paragraph 6 (which is paragraph 5 of the Government Proposed Order),
stating the following: “Nor does this Order prohibit Defense Counsel from publicly referencing
individuals who have spoken on the record to the media or in public fora, or in litigation – criminal
or otherwise – relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.” The defendant also either adds

DOJ-OGR-00001664