This document is a page from the court docket for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering entries from January 26, 2022, to February 4, 2022. It details procedural motions regarding the sealing of documents for a new trial motion, media requests for access (Daily News, ABC, NBC, NYT), and redactions of witness names. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued orders balancing public access with the integrity of potential inquiries and granted a defense request for an extension of time for post-verdict motions.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the court orders and letters; filed motion for new trial
|
| Alison J. Nathan | Judge |
Signed orders and addressed in letters
|
| Matthew A. Leish | Attorney |
Wrote letter on behalf of Daily News, L.P.
|
| Nathan Siegel | Attorney |
Wrote letter on behalf of ABC and NBC Universal
|
| Maurene Comey | AUSA (Assistant US Attorney) |
Prosecutor listed on letter re: Redaction of Witness Name
|
| Alison Moe | AUSA (Assistant US Attorney) |
Prosecutor listed on letter re: Redaction of Witness Name
|
| Lara Pomerantz | AUSA (Assistant US Attorney) |
Prosecutor listed on letter re: Redaction of Witness Name
|
| Andrew Rohrbach | AUSA (Assistant US Attorney) |
Prosecutor listed on letter re: Redaction of Witness Name
|
| Christian R. Everdell | Defense Attorney |
Wrote multiple letters on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell regarding redaction, sealing motions, and extensions
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Daily News, L.P. |
Represented by Matthew A. Leish
|
|
| American Broadcasting Companies, Inc |
Represented by Nathan Siegel; filed letter
|
|
| NBC Universal News Group |
Represented by Nathan Siegel; filed letter
|
|
| USA |
Government/Prosecution
|
|
| New York Times Company |
Filed motion to unseal juror questionnaires
|
|
| Pyramid Co. of Onondaga |
Cited in case law (Lugosch v. Pyramid Co.) regarding sealing tests
|
"The Court is aware there is substantial public interest in this matter and will ensure that the First Amendment right to public access is fully safeguarded."Source
"Arguments in favor of sealing can be made in such a way so as not to undermine the grounds for seeking sealing or redaction in the first instance."Source
"The parties are FURTHER ORDERED to address the New York Times Company's motion to unseal the filled-out questionnaires for the twelve seated jurors."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (4,726 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document