Thread by @LuciaOC_

#BREAKING: Judge Nathan has DENIED the defence’s request to keep their motion for a new trial for #GhislaineMaxwell secret. She will allow them to make narrowly-tailored redactions to protect privacy but said there is no legal reason to keep the entire motion sealed.

Firstly, and importantly, Judge Nathan confirms in her order that “much of the information relied upon in the Defendant’s motion and the Government’s response is publicly available.”

Secondly, she agreed with the prosecution’s argument that “Court is the relevant fact-finder with respect to any potential hearing and it is obviously privy to the information whether filed under seal or filed publicly.”

Judge Nathan said that she will allow narrow redactions to the motion only to protect the privacy of jurors, and she will allow redactions if the parties do, in the future, uncover any information relevant to the potential inquiry that has not yet been reported in the press.

Also, Judge Nathan writes: “Importantly, following the Court’s resolution of the Defendant’s motion or a hearing, if one is ordered, all redactions will be promptly unsealed except those necessary to protect any continuing interest in juror anonymity and privacy.”

This makes clear that as soon as the the motion for a new trial has been resolved, *everything* will be made public apart from anything that threatens juror privacy.

Also, Judge Nathan makes clear in this order that she *has not even decided yet if a hearing on this question is warranted.* She continually refers to the possibility that this will just be decided based on the briefs submitted by the parties with no further hearing necessary.

“Restricting public access to judicial documents… must be “narrowly tailored to serve that interest.” Wholesale sealing of the motion papers, even on a temporary basis, is not narrowly tailored to serve the interest in ensuring the integrity of any potential inquiry.”

Judge Nathan has also DENIED Juror 50’s motion to intervene in the case, saying that there is no legal precedent to allow a juror to intervene when there is a chance he may be subject to a post-trial inquiry.

But she also DENIED the defence’s request to keep Juror 50’s motion to intervene under seal, saying again that the court needs to protect the right of public access to court documents.

“The Defendant fails to articulate how docketing Juror 50’s own motion could affect the testimony of any potential witness and ultimately affect the integrity of any inquiry into Juror 50’s conduct. The possibility of media attention does not outweigh the presumption of access.”

One more important thing: The order makes clear that once we’ve established that everything in the defence’s motion for a new trial is already public knowledge, it seems that the defence just wants to keep their *legal argument* for a new trial secret. #GhislaineMaxwell

And, as Judge Nathan says, there’s no reason to allow that. This question can be argued in open court like everything else. #GhislaineMaxwellTrial