…answers to interrogatories and reasonably inferred, for the purpose of these motions, are as follows: From between about 1999 and 2007, Jeffrey Epstein sexually abused more than 30 minor girls, including Petitioners Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 (hereinafter…
…including information about minor sexual abuse victims, to conclude that privacy interests in this case weighed heavily against the public’s right of access. are not merely unfiled discovery exchanged between the parties, but rather are documents that were filed…
…Government to raise. The Court has previously ruled that the victims’ request for rescission of the NPA “implicates a fact-sensitive equitable defense which must be considered in the historical factual context of the entire interface between Epstein, the relevant…
…more than a prediction of public access absent a countervailing reason.”30 Documents that are never filed with the court, but simply “passed between the parties in discovery, lie entirely beyond the presumption’s reach.”31 The remaining sealed materials…
…issues presented in this case and to determine whether the subjects committedprofessionalmisconduct. As part of its investigation, OPR examined the interactions between state officials and the federal investigators and prosecutors, but because OPR does not have jurisdiction over state officials…
Comments