DOJ-OGR-00018359.jpg
603 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
603 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a discussion between the Judge, Ms. Menninger, and Ms. Moe regarding the sealing and redaction of exhibits marked J8 and J9. Ms. Menninger argues for specific redactions to protect plaintiffs' identities while keeping the bulk of the document public, citing 'Lugash' precedent. The Court orders the exhibits temporarily sealed while the parties confer on the specific redactions.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, making rulings on sealing exhibits J8 and J9.
|
| Ms. Menninger | Attorney |
Arguing for narrow redactions rather than full sealing of documents to allow public access while protecting PII.
|
| Ms. Moe | Attorney |
Agreeing to confer on redactions but noting that the documents are already public elsewhere.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| DOJ |
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
Court hearing regarding the sealing and redaction of exhibits J8 and J9.
Courtroom (Southern District)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied jurisdiction (SDNY) based on court reporter stamp.
|
Relationships (1)
Ms. Menninger states 'I'm happy to speak with Ms. Moe' regarding redactions.
Key Quotes (3)
"I think to narrowly tailor redactions so that it can't be matched up, it may include the case number, for example, certainly the plaintiffs' names"Source
DOJ-OGR-00018359.jpg
Quote #1
"J8 and J9 are temporarily sealed and you'll confer on redactions."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018359.jpg
Quote #2
"I do want to flag, because these documents are entirely public in full, it is very easy for a member of the public to compare"Source
DOJ-OGR-00018359.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,540 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 751 Filed 08/10/22 Page 22 of 261 1162
LC6Cmax1
LC6Cmax1
1 exhibits should be under seal.
2 THE COURT: I thought I did admit that under seal, but
3 maybe I misremembered.
4 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, we ended up admitting the
5 one complete document. It is now marked J8 and 9 because it's
6 the one that contains the seal. I think to narrowly tailor
7 redactions so that it can't be matched up, it may include the
8 case number, for example, certainly the plaintiffs' names, but
9 otherwise I think there is a way to redact this so that the
10 public has access to the bulk of the exhibit, but just not the
11 personally identifying information.
12 Again, I'm happy to speak with Ms. Moe about what she
13 believes are the things that would lead to be a personally
14 identifying piece of information, but portions of it, including
15 the defendants' names and other pieces were testified about
16 publicly on the record, not under seal.
17 So, I think to keep the entire exhibit under seal does
18 not comport with Lugash and the other precedent that requires
19 us to sort of take a pen to the parts that are concerning.
20 THE COURT: So let's do this, same process. If I
21 didn't already, J8 and J9 are temporarily sealed and you'll
22 confer on redactions.
23 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. We'd be happy to confer.
24 I do want to flag, because these documents are entirely public
25 in full, it is very easy for a member of the public to compare
2 THE COURT: I thought I did admit that under seal, but
3 maybe I misremembered.
4 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, we ended up admitting the
5 one complete document. It is now marked J8 and 9 because it's
6 the one that contains the seal. I think to narrowly tailor
7 redactions so that it can't be matched up, it may include the
8 case number, for example, certainly the plaintiffs' names, but
9 otherwise I think there is a way to redact this so that the
10 public has access to the bulk of the exhibit, but just not the
11 personally identifying information.
12 Again, I'm happy to speak with Ms. Moe about what she
13 believes are the things that would lead to be a personally
14 identifying piece of information, but portions of it, including
15 the defendants' names and other pieces were testified about
16 publicly on the record, not under seal.
17 So, I think to keep the entire exhibit under seal does
18 not comport with Lugash and the other precedent that requires
19 us to sort of take a pen to the parts that are concerning.
20 THE COURT: So let's do this, same process. If I
21 didn't already, J8 and J9 are temporarily sealed and you'll
22 confer on redactions.
23 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. We'd be happy to confer.
24 I do want to flag, because these documents are entirely public
25 in full, it is very easy for a member of the public to compare
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00018359
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document