Press-Enter. Co.
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1984-01-01 | Legal case | The Supreme Court case Press-Enter. Co. v Superior Ct. of California, Riverside County, 464 US 50... | United States | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001521.jpg
This legal document, filed on July 6, 2020, is a court order concerning the initial appearance and removal hearing for defendant Ghislaine Maxwell. The court justifies holding the hearing via video, citing COVID-19 related standing orders, and finds that this method constitutes a partial, rather than total, closure of proceedings. The court concludes that public and press access is maintained, satisfying the constitutional rights of the defendant and the public.
DOJ-OGR-00020971.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 1, 2022, discusses the jury selection process in a criminal case. It details how the Defendant chose not to challenge for cause two prospective jurors, Juror A and Juror B, despite their disclosures of personal experiences related to sexual abuse. The document contrasts their situations with that of another juror, Juror 50, and notes that all affirmed their ability to remain fair and impartial.
DOJ-OGR-00020718.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet for Case 22-1426, detailing filings and orders related to defendant Ghislaine Maxwell between March 9 and March 15, 2022. The entries primarily concern post-trial matters, including orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan on document redactions and juror anonymity, as well as a motion for a new trial filed by Maxwell's team and the subsequent opposition memoranda filed by the USA.
DOJ-OGR-00020713.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings between February 11 and February 24, 2022. It details motions for a new trial filed by the defense, communications regarding redactions to protect juror anonymity (specifically Juror 50), and the granting of an amicus curiae brief. The document lists correspondence between the prosecution (USA), the defense team (Sternheim, Everdell), and Judge Alison J. Nathan.
DOJ-OGR-00020572.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket sheet (Case 22-1426) covering proceedings related to United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell between March 10, 2022, and April 1, 2022. It details various motions including a Motion for New Trial filed by the defense, the government's opposition, and orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding redactions to protect juror anonymity. The document also lists legal team members for both sides and references transcripts and sealed documents.
DOJ-OGR-00020568.jpg
This legal document is a court docket summary from July 2022, detailing filings and orders from February 2022 in the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. The entries, primarily orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan, concern procedural matters like redactions and amicus briefs. The most significant action is the Court's order for an evidentiary hearing to investigate whether 'Juror 50' failed to truthfully disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection, a matter which could impact the validity of the trial's verdict.
DOJ-OGR-00020467.jpg
This document is a court docket summary from February 2022 for the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan. It details several procedural orders regarding motions for a new trial, redactions to protect juror privacy, and the filing of an amicus brief. The most significant entry is an order granting an evidentiary hearing to investigate whether Juror 50 failed to truthfully disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection, while denying a broader hearing involving other jurors.
DOJ-OGR-00019224.jpg
This legal document, filed on July 2, 2020, is a court order concerning the initial appearance and removal hearing for defendant Ghislaine Maxwell. The court details its decision to hold the hearing via video, justifying it as a partial, rather than total, closure of proceedings. It references its own Standing Orders related to the COVID-19 outbreak and cites legal precedents to affirm that it has considered the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights and the public's First Amendment rights to access.
DOJ-OGR-00019194.jpg
This document is a court order from July 2, 2020, concerning the initial appearance and removal hearing for defendant Ghislaine Maxwell. The court justifies its decision to hold the hearing via video, considering the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights and the public's First Amendment rights to access. It concludes that a video hearing constitutes a partial, rather than total, closure of proceedings, ensuring public access is maintained.
DOJ-OGR-00009164.jpg
This legal document, filed on February 24, 2022, discusses a motion by Juror 50 to obtain his own jury questionnaire and voir dire testimony transcript. The defendant opposes the request, framing it as a 'discovery request' that would prejudice an 'investigation' into the juror's conduct. The Government argues that Juror 50 is not a defendant seeking discovery and that the privacy concerns for sealing such documents do not apply to the juror himself.
DOJ-OGR-00008986.jpg
This legal document argues in favor of allowing 'Juror 50' to intervene in a case to protect his privacy rights concerning a past sexual assault. It cites legal precedents, including the Supreme Court case *Press-Enter. Co.* and the Second Circuit case *United States v. King*, to establish that jurors have compelling privacy interests that justify sealing records on sensitive personal matters. The filing asserts that intervention will also allow Juror 50 to assert his fifth amendment rights before any inquiry is held.
DOJ-OGR-00008982.jpg
This document is page 3 of 13 from a legal filing (Document 609) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on February 24, 2022. It is a Table of Authorities listing various legal precedents (case law). The cases cited largely pertain to press access, public trials, and the sealing of judicial documents (e.g., Associated Press, Press-Enterprise Co.), suggesting the filing relates to transparency issues or the unsealing of evidence in the Maxwell trial.
DOJ-OGR-00008976.jpg
This is a court order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on February 24, 2022. The order approves the defendant's proposed redactions to court documents, finding they are necessary to protect juror anonymity and privacy. The court orders the parties to file the redacted briefs and other materials by February 25, 2022, and also states it will docket a motion from 'Juror 50'.
DOJ-OGR-00010757.jpg
This legal document, filed on June 29, 2022, argues for the immediate unsealing of a defendant's motion for a new trial and related documents, such as juror questionnaires. The argument is based on the First Amendment right of public access to court proceedings, which is asserted to be particularly strong when allegations of juror misconduct are involved. The document contends that the public interest in transparency is significant, especially in a high-profile case, and that no sufficient justification for sealing the documents has been provided.
DOJ-OGR-00009538.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing (Document 617) in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues against the defendant's claim that 'Juror 50's' motion to intervene constitutes a discovery request, clarifying that the juror is seeking access to his own questionnaire which he swore under penalty of perjury. The filing argues that the motion is a judicial document that should not remain sealed, noting the defendant's arguments regarding privacy and potential prejudice lack merit.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity