mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES001/DOJ-OGR-00001664.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "1",
    "document_number": "33",
    "date": "07/28/20",
    "document_type": "Letter",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": true
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-000330-AJN Document 33 Filed 07/28/20 Page 1 of 7\nU.S. Department of Justice\nUnited States Attorney\nSouthern District of New York\nThe Silvio J. Mollo Building\nOne Saint Andrew's Plaza\nNew York, New York 10007\nJuly 28, 2020\nVIA ECF\nThe Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nUnited States District Court\nSouthern District of New York\nUnited States Courthouse\n40 Foley Square\nNew York, New York 10007\nRe: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)\nDear Judge Nathan:\nThe Government respectfully submits this letter with respect to the protective order to be entered in the above-captioned case, and to respond to the defendant's letter and submission of July 27, 2020 (the \"Defendant Letter\" or \"Def. Ltr.\") (Dkt. 29). The Government and defense counsel have conferred regarding a protective order several times via telephone and email between July 9, 2020, and today, including as recently as this morning. The Government and defense counsel have come to an agreement on much of the proposed protective order. However, the parties disagree as to two inclusions sought by the defendant which the Government objects to and for which, as detailed herein, the Government submits there is no legal basis. Accordingly, the Government respectfully requests that the Court enter its proposed protective order (the \"Government Proposed Order\"), which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and which differs from the defendant's proposed order in those two respects, as further described below.\nA. The Defendant's Request to be Permitted to Publicly Name and Identify Victims\nAs detailed herein, the Government seeks to protect the identities of victims, consistent with their significant privacy interests and the well-established law in this Circuit, and proposes a protective order consistent with those very significant interests. In contrast, the defendant insists that the protective order be modified such that she and her counsel would be permitted to \"publicly reference[e]\" individuals, by name, 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.\"1\n1 Specifically, the defendant's proposed protective order differs from the Government's in that it adds a sentence, in its paragraph 6 (which is paragraph 5 of the Government Proposed Order), stating the following: \"Nor does this Order prohibit Defense Counsel from publicly referencing individuals who have spoken on the record to the media or in public fora, or in litigation - criminal or otherwise - relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.\" The defendant also either adds or otherwise - relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.\"\nDOJ-OGR-00001664",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-000330-AJN Document 33 Filed 07/28/20 Page 1 of 7",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "U.S. Department of Justice\nUnited States Attorney\nSouthern District of New York",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Silvio J. Mollo Building\nOne Saint Andrew's Plaza\nNew York, New York 10007",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "July 28, 2020",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "VIA ECF",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Honorable Alison J. Nathan\nUnited States District Court\nSouthern District of New York\nUnited States Courthouse\n40 Foley Square\nNew York, New York 10007",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Dear Judge Nathan:",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The Government respectfully submits this letter with respect to the protective order to be entered in the above-captioned case, and to respond to the defendant's letter and submission of July 27, 2020 (the \"Defendant Letter\" or \"Def. Ltr.\") (Dkt. 29). The Government and defense counsel have conferred regarding a protective order several times via telephone and email between July 9, 2020, and today, including as recently as this morning. The Government and defense counsel have come to an agreement on much of the proposed protective order. However, the parties disagree as to two inclusions sought by the defendant which the Government objects to and for which, as detailed herein, the Government submits there is no legal basis. Accordingly, the Government respectfully requests that the Court enter its proposed protective order (the \"Government Proposed Order\"), which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and which differs from the defendant's proposed order in those two respects, as further described below.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A. The Defendant's Request to be Permitted to Publicly Name and Identify Victims",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "As detailed herein, the Government seeks to protect the identities of victims, consistent with their significant privacy interests and the well-established law in this Circuit, and proposes a protective order consistent with those very significant interests. In contrast, the defendant insists that the protective order be modified such that she and her counsel would be permitted to \"publicly reference[e]\" individuals, by name, 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.\"1",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 Specifically, the defendant's proposed protective order differs from the Government's in that it adds a sentence, in its paragraph 6 (which is paragraph 5 of the Government Proposed Order), stating the following: \"Nor does this Order prohibit Defense Counsel from publicly referencing individuals who have spoken on the record to the media or in public fora, or in litigation - criminal or otherwise - relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.\" The defendant also either adds or otherwise - relating to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.\"",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00001664",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Alison J. Nathan",
      "Ghislaine Maxwell",
      "Jeffrey Epstein"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "U.S. Department of Justice",
      "United States District Court",
      "United States Attorney"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "New York"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "July 28, 2020",
      "July 27, 2020",
      "July 9, 2020"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-000330-AJN",
      "Document 33",
      "Dkt. 29",
      "20 Cr. 330 (AJN)",
      "DOJ-OGR-00001664"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a formal letter from the U.S. Department of Justice to the Honorable Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter discusses the proposed protective order and the disagreements between the Government and the defendant's counsel. The document is typed and contains a stamp from the U.S. Department of Justice."
}