All data sourced from public U.S. government records. Appearance of any name does NOT imply guilt or wrongdoing. Full disclaimer →
The document is a letter from the US Attorney's Office to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding proposed redactions to certain reply briefs and exhibits in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The government requests that certain information be redacted or sealed to protect the privacy interests of third parties and victims. The defense has indicated its position on the proposed redactions, and the government respectfully requests that the Court adopt the proposed redactions.
Source
DOJ
Release Date
—
Pages
4
Jurisdiction
—
Case
222
5 individuals identified
Ghislaine Maxwell (Defendant): This document is significant because it reveals the government's efforts to balance the need for transparency in court proceedings with the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties and victims in a high-profile case.
Alison Moe (Assistant United States Attorney): This document is significant because it reveals the government's efforts to balance the need for transparency in court proceedings with the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties and victims in a high-profile case.
Full-Text Search — Phase 2
In-document keyword search is coming when OCR/text ingestion is complete.
Maurene Comey (Assistant United States Attorney): This document is significant because it reveals the government's efforts to balance the need for transparency in court proceedings with the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties and victims in a high-profile case.
Andrew Rohrbach (Assistant United States Attorney): This document is significant because it reveals the government's efforts to balance the need for transparency in court proceedings with the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties and victims in a high-profile case.
Audrey Strauss (United States Attorney): This document is significant because it reveals the government's efforts to balance the need for transparency in court proceedings with the need to protect the privacy interests of third parties and victims in a high-profile case.