Politics
Ghislaine Maxwell judge rules some details in child sex trafficking case are ‘too sensational and IMPURE’ to be revealed
A MANHATTAN federal judge okayed a number of redactions proposed by both lawyers representing Ghislaine Maxwell and district attorneys prosecuting her for being too “sensational and impure” to be made public.
US District Judge Alison J. Nathan reviewed arguments from both sides and ruled on Thursday there would be some parts of transcript interviews with Maxwell that needed redaction for being too severe.
A court ruled some parts of Maxwell’s case were too “sensational” to be made public[/caption]
The judge approved redactions of the transcript for satisfying a “craving for that which is sensational and impure”[/caption]
“In addition, the Court adopts the Defendant’s proposed additional redactions,” the judge said according to the ruling.
“Those portions of the transcript, which were redacted in the civil matter, concern privacy interests and their disclosure would merely serve to cater to a ‘craving for that which is sensational and impure,’” Nathan ruled.
“The Court thus concludes that such redactions are justified.”
She kept most redactions asked for by both sides in place and even added some from the court.
Maxwell is still awaiting a trial for her alleged recruitment of underage girls for sex offender Jeffrey Epstein[/caption]
A judge rejected her pleas to dismiss all charges in January[/caption]
Maxwell’s team filed 12 motions in January requesting the court dismiss all charges related to her alleged role in recruiting young girls for the notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The government rejected Maxwell’s motions, all of which are sealed until the ruling of the redactions.
The government argued that the redactions were required to “protect the integrity” of its ongoing criminal investigation into Maxwell.
Nathan granted the government’s requests, saying there were legitimate interests needed to be kept from public access.
“Exhibit 1 contains a single redaction—the name of a third party—and the Court concludes that that individual’s personal privacy interests outweigh the presumption of access that exists as to that limited portion of the exhibit,” Nathan wrote.
Most read in News
“The proposed redactions to Exhibit 7 are similar in that they seek to protect from public access only the names and contact information of third parties,” she continued. “Here, too, the interest in protecting the safety and privacy of those individuals outweighs the presumption of access that attaches to those documents.”
The judge did reject Maxwell’s objection to redactions that had information Nathan deemed “has been made public by other means.”
As the ruling came to a close, Nathan deemed the redactions appropriate, and the transcripts will be made public once all three parties have submitted their final edits.
