Epstein Secrets

itical to the grand jury process," including "protect[ion of] the reputation of a person under investigation who is not indicted." United States v. Eisenberg, 711 F.2d 959, 961 (11th Cir. 1983). See, e.g., Application of Dow Jones & Co., Inc., 842 F.2d 603, 611 (2d Cir. 1988)("Not the least important cons

g that the existing parties cannot adequately represent its interests, but this burden is treated as minimal"); Federal Say. and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Falls Chase Special Taxing District, 983 F.2d 211, 216 (11th Cir. 1993)("The proposed intervenor's burden to show that their interests may be inadequately repre

ritical to the grand jury process," including "protect[ion ofj the reputation of a person under investigation who is not indicted."United States v. Eisenberg, 711 F.2d 959, 961 (11th Cir. 1983). So important are the private interests at stake in grand jury secrecy that private parties may bring civil acti

ng that the existing parties cannot adequately represent its interests, but this burden is treated as minimal"); Federal Say. and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Falls Chase Special Taxing District, 983 F.3d 211, 216 (11th Cir. 1993)("The proposed intervenor's burden to show that their interests may be inadequately repr

itical to the grand jury process," including "protect[ion ofj the reputation of a person under investigation who is not indicted." United States v. Eisenberg, 711 F.2d 959, 961 (11th Cir. 1983). So important are the private interests at stake in grand jury secrecy that private parties may bring civil acti

g that the existing parties cannot adequately represent its interests, but this burden is treated as minimal"); Federal Say. and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Falls Chase Special Taxing District, 983 F.3d 211, 216 (11th Cir. 1993)("The proposed intervenor's burden to show that their interests may be inadequately repre