Epstein Secrets

Southern District of New York The Silvio J. Mollo Building One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York. New York 10007 April 5, 2021 BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Judge Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United Stases v. Chislaine Maxwell, S2

e Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United Stases v. Chislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Judge Nathan: The Government respectfully submits this letter in connection with the Court's Order of March 24, 2021, regarding the defendant's application for

the Government has various disclosure obligations. United States v. Cole, No. 19 Cr. 869 (ER), 2021 WL 912425, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2021); see Bergstein, 2017 WL 6887596, at *3. Finally, the Government has standing to challenge subpoenas that call for its own communications. See United States v. Cart

Southern District of New York The SilWoJ. Mollo Building One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York. New York 10007 April 5, 2021 BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Judge Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2

ge Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (MN) Dear Judge Nathan: The Government respectfully submits this letter in connection with the Court's Order of March 24, 2021, regarding the defendant's application for

) (alterations omitted) (quoting United States v. Giampa, No. 92 Cr. 437 (PKL), 1992 WL 296440, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 7, 1992)); see United States v. Bergstein, No. 16 EFTA00022030 --- PAGE BREAK --- Page 5 Cr. 746 (PKC), 2017 WL 6887596, at *2-*3 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2017) ("Preventing the undue harassm

tates of America, —v— Ghislaine Maxwell, Defendant. USDC SONY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC 0: DATE FILED: 4/27/21 20-CR-330 (MN) ORDER ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell seeks an order authorizing a subpoena pursuant to Rule 17(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Proce

e Government's briefing regardless of standing as part of its duty to ensure that the subpoena meets the requirements of Nixon. See United States v. Bergstein, No. I6-CR-746 (PKC), 2017 WL 6887596, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2017). But ex parte Rule 17(c) subpoenas are possible in some circumstances if just