{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "29",
    "date": "July 27, 2020",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 29 Filed 07/27/20 Page 3 of 4\n\nThe Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nJuly 27, 2020\nPage 3\n\nMaxwell with respect to using the criminal discovery material solely for the purpose of this criminal case.\n\n2. Victim/Witness Identities\n\nMs. Maxwell's proposed protective order prohibits Ms. Maxwell, defense counsel, and others on the defense team from disclosing or disseminating the identity of any alleged victim or potential witness referenced in the discovery materials, but does not prohibit defense counsel from publicly referencing individuals \"who have spoken on the public record to the media or in public fora, or in litigation—criminal or otherwise—relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.\" Id. ¶ 6. This language, which is nearly identical in all material respects to the language in the protective order approved in the government's criminal prosecution of Mr. Epstein, see United States v. Epstein, 19-CR-00490-RMB (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2019), ensures appropriate privacy protections for alleged victims and should be approved here.\n\nIn contrast to the more permissive language it agreed to with respect to Mr. Epstein, the government has taken the position that Ms. Maxwell's defense counsel should only be allowed to disclose the identity of alleged victims or potential witnesses who have spoken by name on the public record \"in this case.\" The government's proposal, however, advances no compelling privacy protections, and instead prevents the defense from making reference to individuals who have already voluntarily publicly disclosed their identities by, among other things, pursuing civil suits in their own name against Ms. Maxwell and/or Mr. Epstein; speaking by name in the public record in Mr. Epstein's criminal proceedings; participating in on-the-record media interviews; or posting comments under their own names on social media. The government's proposed restriction is therefore \"broader than necessary\" to protect the privacy interests of these individuals who have already chosen to self-identify, and will hinder the defense's ability to conduct further factual investigation, prepare witnesses for trial, and advocate on Ms. Maxwell's behalf.\n\n*   *   *\n\nDOJ-OGR-00001645",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 29 Filed 07/27/20 Page 3 of 4",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nJuly 27, 2020\nPage 3",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Maxwell with respect to using the criminal discovery material solely for the purpose of this criminal case.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2. Victim/Witness Identities",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ms. Maxwell's proposed protective order prohibits Ms. Maxwell, defense counsel, and others on the defense team from disclosing or disseminating the identity of any alleged victim or potential witness referenced in the discovery materials, but does not prohibit defense counsel from publicly referencing individuals \"who have spoken on the public record to the media or in public fora, or in litigation—criminal or otherwise—relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.\" Id. ¶ 6. This language, which is nearly identical in all material respects to the language in the protective order approved in the government's criminal prosecution of Mr. Epstein, see United States v. Epstein, 19-CR-00490-RMB (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2019), ensures appropriate privacy protections for alleged victims and should be approved here.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "In contrast to the more permissive language it agreed to with respect to Mr. Epstein, the government has taken the position that Ms. Maxwell's defense counsel should only be allowed to disclose the identity of alleged victims or potential witnesses who have spoken by name on the public record \"in this case.\" The government's proposal, however, advances no compelling privacy protections, and instead prevents the defense from making reference to individuals who have already voluntarily publicly disclosed their identities by, among other things, pursuing civil suits in their own name against Ms. Maxwell and/or Mr. Epstein; speaking by name in the public record in Mr. Epstein's criminal proceedings; participating in on-the-record media interviews; or posting comments under their own names on social media. The government's proposed restriction is therefore \"broader than necessary\" to protect the privacy interests of these individuals who have already chosen to self-identify, and will hinder the defense's ability to conduct further factual investigation, prepare witnesses for trial, and advocate on Ms. Maxwell's behalf.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "*   *   *",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00001645",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Jeffrey Epstein",
      "Ghislaine Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [
      "S.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "July 27, 2020",
      "July 25, 2019"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 29",
      "19-CR-00490-RMB",
      "DOJ-OGR-00001645"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, with discussions around protective orders and witness identities. The text is mostly printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The document is well-formatted and legible."
}