Keyboard shortcuts

/
Search the files
j k
Move through a list of results
[ ]
Previous or next document
g g · G
Top or bottom of the page
Esc
Leave a search field or close this box
?
Show this box

Go to a page: g then

h
Index
t
Timeline
p
People
r
Redactions
x
Explore
w
News
l
Legislation
a
About

Correspondence · April 19, 2021

An attorney letter to Judge Alison Nathan on redactions in Maxwell case, April 2021

Maxwell defense counsel asks Judge Nathan to redact two references to a third-party witness facing charges in France in Rule 17 subpoena pleadings.Machine-written summary

Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. Laura A. Menninger

H A D D O N

M O R G A N

F O R E M A N

150 East 10th Avenue

Denver, Colorado 80203

PH 303.831.7364 FX 303.832.2628

www.hmflaw.com

LMenninger@hmflaw.com

April 19, 2021

The Hon. Alison J. Nathan

United States District Court Judge

Southern District of New York

500 Pearl Street

New York, NY 10007

Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)

Redactions to Pleadings Re: Rule 17 Subpoenas

Dear Judge Nathan:

Counsel for Ms. Maxwell has conferred with Boies Schiller & Flexner (BSF) concerning any proposed redactions to the pleadings addressing the Rule 17(c) subpoena subjudice, specifically Defendant’s Response of April 2 and BSF’s Reply of April 5, both of which were submitted to the Court via email in order to allow an opportunity to address any necessary redactions.

Ms. Maxwell is mindful of the Court’s previous directive that any proposed redactions must be specifically justified and tailored yet is obligated by the Protective Order at ¶ 6 to seek to redact two references to an individual’s name and description of that witness that were contained in the Response and Reply. Those two references are highlighted on the attached exhibits.

Those two references were derived from a document that the government marked “Confidential.” The Court previously upheld the government’s requested redaction of that individual’s name from its Omnibus Response to Ms. Maxwell’s Pretrial Motions and its accompanying Exhibit 7 (Dkt. No. 204-7), an email between the government and, inter alia,

EFTA00092881

The Hon. Alison J. Nathan April 19, 2021 Page 2

Ms. McCawley of BSF. It is the privacy rights of this third-party witness (who is separately facing criminal charges in France on related matters) that would be implicated by any public release.

Because BSF does not know what materials have been exchanged in this criminal action or what has been designated confidential, BSF takes no position on whether the Defendant’s proposed redactions are necessary.

Respectfully submitted,

Laura A. Menninger

EFTA00092882

An attorney letter to Judge Alison Nathan on redactions in Maxwell case, April 2021

Emails and letters

Maxwell defense counsel asks Judge Nathan to redact two references to a third-party witness facing charges in France in Rule 17 subpoena pleadings.

DOJ Epstein Files, Data Set 9 · April 19, 2021

Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. Laura A. Menninger H A D D O N M O R G A N F O R E M A N 150 East 10th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80203 PH 303.831.7364 FX 303.832.2628 www.hmflaw.com LMenninger@hmflaw.com April 19, 2021 The Hon. Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Judge Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Redactions to Pleadings Re: Rule 17 Subpoenas Dear Judge Nathan: Counsel for Ms. Maxwell has conferred with Boies Schiller & Flexner (BSF) concerning any proposed redactions to the pleadings address…