Ghislaine Maxwell's child sex trafficking case is too 'sensational and impure' for public, says judge
A federal judge has ruled that some of the details of Ghislaine Maxwell’s case cannot be made public since they are “sensational and impure”. On Thursday, March 18, US District Judge Alison J Nathan in Manhattan gave her verdict on a number of redactions proposed by the alleged pimp of Jeffrey Epstein and prosecutors regarding a compilation of transcripts submitted under seal by the government in February. Though the judge agreed with most of the redactions by the government, she also ruled to add some made by Maxwell and her legal team.
This comes after 12 motions were filed by Maxwell’s attorneys in January. The legal team had requested the court, among other things, to drop charges relating to her alleged role as a recruiter of young girls for the disgraced financier, who died in jail in August 2019 while awaiting trial. But the motions, filed under seal pending rulings on the redactions, received opposition from the government last month that responded with an “omnibus memorandum of law”. The government said that modifications in the compilation of transcripts were needed to “protect the integrity” of the probe that is underway. It also argued that to protect the privacy interests of third parties redactions are a must.
READ MORE
Ghislaine Maxwell ‘gagged and raped’ student with Epstein, forced her to recruit girls: 'She was the monster'
Judge Nathan ruled in favor of most of the government’s requests as she noted, “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. 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. Here, too, the interest in protecting the safety and privacy of those individuals outweighs the presumption of access that attaches to those documents.”
Continuing further, the judge wrote, “At least some of the redactions to which the Defendant objects relate to private ‘family affairs’ of a third party, a factor that ‘weigh[s] more heavily against access than conduct affecting a substantial portion of the public’. And though the Defendant contends that some of the information contained in the redactions is public, she furnishes no evidence to that effect. As a result, the Court concludes that the significant privacy interests at stake justify the limited and narrowly tailored redactions contained in Exhibit 5.”
However, referring to the privacy interests, Judge Nathan did not completely oversee Maxwell’s request and agreed with her on several additional redactions proposed to transcripts submitted as part of the government’s filing. She added, “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.’ The Court thus concludes that such redactions are justified.”
The 59-year-old socialite is in jail for the past eight months after being accused of pimping girls as young as 14 to Epstein. She was arrested on July 2, 2020, in New Hampshire. Her lawyers have tried hard to get her bail in the past, but the requests were denied twice after deeming her a flight risk. In October last year, a close friend of Maxwell even launched a campaign to get her out of the jail, claiming she nearly starved since she has not been provided with the vegan diet she follows. He also alleged that his friend has only been forced to wear paper clothes with no bra since she is considered a suicide risk.