Gonna try this thread again; my first one was a mess.
The district court issued two orders today swatting away Ghislaine Maxwell's efforts to keep portions of her deposition testimony under seal:
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
The district court issued two orders today swatting away Ghislaine Maxwell's efforts to keep portions of her deposition testimony under seal:
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
The first order says that the court took into account Maxwell's and others' reliance on the protective order in the case when it ordered those materials unsealed.
The first order notes that the court of appeals distinguished btw testimony about 'consensual sexual activity with adults" (kept sealed) and about "purportedly non-sexual massages" (ordered disclosed); the judge says she's following that rubric for the depo. 
The second order then denies Maxwell's motion for reconsideration. Maxwell had argued in the alternative that the portion of the testimony at issue was "adult, consensual activity" that should be sealed and, if not sexual, was outside the proper scope of the deposition.
The court responds that this too relates to not private sexual activity, but only massages, as to which "Maxwell's privacy interest... is minimal." It doesn't further address the argument that the subject was outside the proper scope of the depo.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
