Epstein Secrets

isclosure “will be the product of their own conduct, and not the consequence of an unrestrained body of misguided citizens.” Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Marko, 352 So. 2d 518 (1977) (“The benefits to be derived from this extraordinary exercise in citizen participation [in the grand jury] would be severely l

of his co-conspirators, and the identities of the victims have already been exposed, the need for grand jury secrecy is no more. See United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150, 234 (1940) (“[A]fter the grand jury’s functions are ended, disclosure is wholly proper where the ends ofjustice require it.”). WHEREFO

isclosure] will be the product of their own conduct, and hot the consequence of ah unrestrained body of misguided citizens.” Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Marko, 352 So.2d 518, 523 (Fla. 1977). The decision in Marko emphasized that a grand jury’s important role in “exposing] official misconduct” precludes res

f time that has passed, and the widely reported nature ofthis miscarriage ofjustice, there is no additional need for maintaining secrecy. See U.S. v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150,.234 (1940) (“[A]fter the grand juty’s functions are ended, disclosure is wholly proper where the ends ofjustice require it.”). 112. Co

isclosure “will be the product of their own conduct, and not the consequence of an unrestrained body of misguided citizens.” Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Marko, 352 So. 2d 518 (1977) (“The benefits to be derived from this extraordinary exercise in citizen participation [in the grand jury] would be severely l

of his co-conspirators, and the identities of the victims have already been exposed, the need for grand jury secrecy is no more. See United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150, 234 (1940) (“[A]fter the grand jury’s functions are ended, disclosure is wholly proper where the ends ofjustice require it.”). WHEREFO