Epstein Secrets

998) 8 FDIC v. Ernst & Ernst, 677 F.2d 230 (2d Cir. 1982) 8 Gambale v. Deutsche Bank, 377 F.3d 133 (2d Cir. 2004) 15 Globe Newspapers, Co. v. Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596 (1982) 10 Hardy v. Kaszycki & Sons, No. 83-CV-6346 (LAP), 2017 WL 6805707 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 21, 2017) 9, 14 Havens v. Metropolitan L

HISLAINE MAXWELL 2 II. THE OVERBROAD SEALING ORDER AND PRIOR ATTEMPTS TO UNSEAL 3 III. THE ORDER DENYING THE MOTIONS TO UNSEAL 6 ARGUMENT 6 I. MIAMI HERALD MEDIA HAS THE RIGHT TO INTERVENE AS A NEWS ORGANIZATION 7 II. THE PRESUMPTION OF OPENNESS UNDER THE COMMON LAW AND FIRST AMENDMENT APPLY TO THE

and unseal all of the documents in the above-captioned action that have been filed under seal or redacted. These judicial documents are germane to the Miami Herald's ongoing coverage of dozens of underage minors who were victims of Jeffrey Epstein, the South Florida financier who pleaded guilty in 2008 to solicit

t 2015) 10 Danco Labs., Ltd v. Chem. Works of Gideon Richter, Ltd, 274 A.D.2d 1, 711 N.Y.S.2d 419 (1st Dep't 2000) 11, 13 Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596 (1982) 11, 13 In re Application of National Broad Co., 635 F.2d 945 (2d Cir. 1980) 11, 13 In re Associated Press v. Bell, 70 N.Y

aled — including a detailed criminal complaint — so that "no one ... could know the full scope of Epstein's crimes and who else was involved." Id. The Miami Herald's reporting has also had serious political ramifications. As the Miami Herald has reported, "[t]he U.S. attorney in Miami, Alexander Acosta, was perso

ray of mandatory closure rules ... proves too much, and runs contrary to the very foundation of the right of access...." Globe Newspa- per Company" Superior Court, 102 S.Ct. 2613, 2622 (1982). Accordingly, having considered the briefs and argu- ments of counsel for the reasons set forth in this opinion, it i

2d DCA 1979) (Error to exclude press from courtroom while juvenile witness in sex crime testi- fies and error to seal record from press). Compare Miami Herald Pub. Co. I. Morphonios, 467 So.2d 1026 (Fla.1985) (Error to gag press from publishing testi- mony of minor witness via prerecorded video) and Thornton

ray of mandatory closure rules ... proves too much, and runs contrary to the very foundation of the right of access...." Globe Newspa- per Company Superior Court, 102 S.Ct. 2613, 2622 (1982). Accordingly, having considered the briefs and argu- ments of counsel for the reasons set forth in this opinion, it i

t.)) "the public and the press have a fundamental right of access to all judicial proceedings," however, this right is not absolute. State ex rel. Miami Herald Pub. Co. McIntosh, 340 So.2d at 908-9. In Bar- ron, the court took the occasion to establish the standards upon which the presumption of openness may

s of Gideon Richter, Ltd., 274 A.D.2d 1, 711 N.Y.S.2d 419 (1st Dep't 2000) oo. eeeeseseeseeseeeeeseeeteeseeeseeseeeees 13, 15 Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596 (1982)... eeeceesescesseseeseeseeseescscesceseescesceesseeseecseeseseeseeseeaeaseeaeeacseeseesseateaseeeases 13, 14 In re Application

aled — including a detailed criminal complaint — so that “no one . . . could know the full scope of Epstein’s crimes and who else was involved.” Jd. The Miami Herald’s reporting has also had serious political ramifications. As the Miami Herald has reported, “[t]he U.S. attorney in Miami, Alexander Acosta, was person