{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "4",
    "document_number": "717",
    "date": "07/12/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 717 Filed 07/12/22 Page 4 of 10\nThe Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nDecember 12, 2021\nPage 4\n\n        Ms. Maxwell expects her to testify on Monday, December\n20. This Court should permit to testify using a pseudonym.\nFirst, has a substantial professional interest in testifying using a pseudonym.\nPut simply,\n\nis justifiably worried that she will be denounced and ostracized by her colleagues should it become a mater of public record that she testified at the request of Ms. Maxwell's defense team. See, e.g., United States v. Marti, 421 F.2d 1263, 1266 (2d Cir. 1970) (proper for court to preclude defense from revealing witness's address when that information \"may subject the witness to reprisals\"). Her testimony in this case, if revealed, presents a real threat to her employment. See United States v. Marcus, No. 05 CR 457 (ARR), 2007 WL 330388, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2007) (pseudonymity may be appropriate \"to avert loss of employment potentially resulting from trial publicity\").\n\ncf. TR 11/1/2021, p 8:1-3\nDOJ-OGR-00011323",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 717 Filed 07/12/22 Page 4 of 10",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nDecember 12, 2021\nPage 4",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Ms. Maxwell expects her to testify on Monday, December",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "20. This Court should permit to testify using a pseudonym.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "First, has a substantial professional interest in testifying using a pseudonym.",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Put simply,",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "is justifiably worried that she will be denounced and ostracized by her colleagues should it become a mater of public record that she testified at the request of Ms. Maxwell's defense team. See, e.g., United States v. Marti, 421 F.2d 1263, 1266 (2d Cir. 1970) (proper for court to preclude defense from revealing witness's address when that information \"may subject the witness to reprisals\"). Her testimony in this case, if revealed, presents a real threat to her employment. See United States v. Marcus, No. 05 CR 457 (ARR), 2007 WL 330388, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2007) (pseudonymity may be appropriate \"to avert loss of employment potentially resulting from trial publicity\").",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "cf. TR 11/1/2021, p 8:1-3",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00011323",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "E.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "December 12, 2021",
      "07/12/22",
      "Jan. 31, 2007",
      "11/1/2021"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 717",
      "05 CR 457",
      "DOJ-OGR-00011323"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document contains redactions, likely to protect sensitive information such as witness identities."
}