← Back to home

Document 80

AI Analysis

Summary: The government responds to Ghislaine Maxwell's requests for sealing and an in camera hearing regarding her bail application, agreeing to some redactions but objecting to a fully sealed hearing, citing the rights of crime victims to be present and heard.
Significance: This document reveals the government's position on the defendant's bail application and sealing requests, highlighting the balance between protecting third-party privacy and the public's right to observe court proceedings.
Key Topics: Ghislaine Maxwell's bail application Sealing requests and redactions In camera hearing request
Key People:
  • Ghislaine Maxwell - Defendant
  • Alison J. Nathan - United States District Judge
  • Audrey Strauss - Acting United States Attorney
  • Maurene Comey - Assistant United States Attorney
  • Alison Moe - Assistant United States Attorney
  • Lara Pomerantz - Assistant United States Attorney
Document Type
Letter
Date
12/02/20
Pages
2
Folder
IMAGES001, IMAGES008

Full Text

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 80 Filed 12/02/20 Page 1 of 1 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 December 2, 2020 BY 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 in response to the defense requests for sealing and for an in camera hearing in connection with the defendant's anticipated renewed application for bail. The Government has reviewed the proposed redactions to the defense letters dated November 25, 2020 and November 30, 2020. Because those proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to protect the privacy interests of third parties, the Government has no objection to the defense's proposed redactions. The Government objects, however, to the defense request for a sealed in camera hearing to discuss further sealing requests from the defense. As demonstrated by the defense's recent letters, any request for sealing of third party information can be made in writing with narrowly tailored redactions. Based on defense counsel's proffers regarding the potential harms that may come from publicly identifying proposed cosigners, the Government has no objection to the redaction and sealed filing of any identifying information for those individuals. Given the availability of redacted filings, the Government sees no reason for an entire hearing to be conducted without the opportunity for the public or the victims in this case to observe. Indeed, given that crime victims have a statutory right to be present and heard at any proceeding regarding the defendant's "release," 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(4), the Government would object to any proceeding addressing aspects of a renewed bail application that was conducted entirely in camera. Respectfully submitted, AUDREY STRAUSS Acting United States Attorney By: s/ Maurene Comey / Alison Moe / Lara Pomerantz Assistant United States Attorneys Southern District of New York Tel: (212) 637-2324 Cc: All Counsel of Record (By ECF) DOJ-OGR-00001846 --- PAGE BREAK --- Case 22-1426, Document 80, 06/30/2023, 3536537, Page1 of 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ORAL ARGUMENT STATEMENT (Local Rule 34.1(a)) TO REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT, FILL OUT THIS FORM AND FILE IT WITH THE CLERK WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER THE FILING OF THE LAST APPELLEE BRIEF. IF THIS FORM IS NOT TIMELY FILED, YOU WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO ARGUE IN PERSON. Short Title of Case: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell Docket No.: 22-1426 Name of Party: United States of America Status of Party (e.g., appellant, cross-appellee, etc.): Appellee Check one of the three options below: I want oral argument. I want oral argument only if at least one other party does. I do not want oral argument. An attorney whose preference depends on whether other attorneys will argue should consider conferring before requesting argument. After the appeal has been scheduled for oral argument, a motion by counsel to forgo oral argument, even on consent, may be denied. If no party wants oral argument, the case will be decided on the basis of the written briefs. If you want oral argument, you must appear in Court on the date set by the Court for oral argument. The Court may determine to decide a case without oral argument even if the parties request it. If you want oral argument, state the name of the person who will argue: Name: Maurene Comey (An attorney must be admitted to practice before the Court in accordance with Local Rule 46.1.) If you want oral argument, list any dates (including religious holidays), that fall in the interval from 6 to 20 weeks after the due date of this form, that the person who will argue is not available to appear in Court: September 1, 2023; September 5, 2023; September 8, 2023; September 26, 2023; October 3, 2023; October 31, 2023; November 7, 2023 ANYONE WHO WANTS TO ARGUE MUST UPDATE THE COURT IN WRITING OF ANY CHANGE IN AVAILABILITY. THE COURT MAY CONSIDER A FAILURE TO UPDATE ABOUT AVAILABILITY WHEN DECIDING A MOTION TO POSTPONE A SET ARGUMENT DATE. Filed by: Print Name: Maurene Comey Date: June 30, 2023 Signature: /s/Maurene Comey (Revised December 2011) DOJ-OGR-00021741

Individual Pages

Page 1 - DOJ-OGR-00001846
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 80 Filed 12/02/20 Page 1 of 1 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 December 2, 2020 BY 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 in response to the defense requests for sealing and for an in camera hearing in connection with the defendant's anticipated renewed application for bail. The Government has reviewed the proposed redactions to the defense letters dated November 25, 2020 and November 30, 2020. Because those proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to protect the privacy interests of third parties, the Government has no objection to the defense's proposed redactions. The Government objects, however, to the defense request for a sealed in camera hearing to discuss further sealing requests from the defense. As demonstrated by the defense's recent letters, any request for sealing of third party information can be made in writing with narrowly tailored redactions. Based on defense counsel's proffers regarding the potential harms that may come from publicly identifying proposed cosigners, the Government has no objection to the redaction and sealed filing of any identifying information for those individuals. Given the availability of redacted filings, the Government sees no reason for an entire hearing to be conducted without the opportunity for the public or the victims in this case to observe. Indeed, given that crime victims have a statutory right to be present and heard at any proceeding regarding the defendant's "release," 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(4), the Government would object to any proceeding addressing aspects of a renewed bail application that was conducted entirely in camera. Respectfully submitted, AUDREY STRAUSS Acting United States Attorney By: s/ Maurene Comey / Alison Moe / Lara Pomerantz Assistant United States Attorneys Southern District of New York Tel: (212) 637-2324 Cc: All Counsel of Record (By ECF) DOJ-OGR-00001846
Page 1 - DOJ-OGR-00021741
Case 22-1426, Document 80, 06/30/2023, 3536537, Page1 of 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ORAL ARGUMENT STATEMENT (Local Rule 34.1(a)) TO REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT, FILL OUT THIS FORM AND FILE IT WITH THE CLERK WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER THE FILING OF THE LAST APPELLEE BRIEF. IF THIS FORM IS NOT TIMELY FILED, YOU WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO ARGUE IN PERSON. Short Title of Case: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell Docket No.: 22-1426 Name of Party: United States of America Status of Party (e.g., appellant, cross-appellee, etc.): Appellee Check one of the three options below: I want oral argument. I want oral argument only if at least one other party does. I do not want oral argument. An attorney whose preference depends on whether other attorneys will argue should consider conferring before requesting argument. After the appeal has been scheduled for oral argument, a motion by counsel to forgo oral argument, even on consent, may be denied. If no party wants oral argument, the case will be decided on the basis of the written briefs. If you want oral argument, you must appear in Court on the date set by the Court for oral argument. The Court may determine to decide a case without oral argument even if the parties request it. If you want oral argument, state the name of the person who will argue: Name: Maurene Comey (An attorney must be admitted to practice before the Court in accordance with Local Rule 46.1.) If you want oral argument, list any dates (including religious holidays), that fall in the interval from 6 to 20 weeks after the due date of this form, that the person who will argue is not available to appear in Court: September 1, 2023; September 5, 2023; September 8, 2023; September 26, 2023; October 3, 2023; October 31, 2023; November 7, 2023 ANYONE WHO WANTS TO ARGUE MUST UPDATE THE COURT IN WRITING OF ANY CHANGE IN AVAILABILITY. THE COURT MAY CONSIDER A FAILURE TO UPDATE ABOUT AVAILABILITY WHEN DECIDING A MOTION TO POSTPONE A SET ARGUMENT DATE. Filed by: Print Name: Maurene Comey Date: June 30, 2023 Signature: /s/Maurene Comey (Revised December 2011) DOJ-OGR-00021741