Article

2021-03-21 -Lurid Crime Tales-

Ghislaine Maxwell case details too ‘sensational and impure' for public, judge says

[NYP] A federal judge on Thursday agreed with Ghislaine Maxwell’s request to keep certain details in the criminal case against her secret — finding that information would be too "sensational and impure" to reveal to the public.

US District Judge Alison J. Nathan issued a ruling on redactions that Maxwell had asked for regarding transcripts the government filed under seal last month.

"Those portions of the transcript, which were redacted in the civil matter, concern privacy interests and their disclosure would merely serve to cater to a ’craving for that which is sensational and impure,’" Nathan wrote in the order.

The judge also granted redactions that prosecutors made when filing the transcript. Prosecutors had argued the redactions were necessary to "protect the integrity" of the investigation into Maxwell and to protect the privacy of third parties.

Posted by Besoeker 2021-03-21 07:56|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ] Top

#1 'Too Sensational and impure' for public

Translation: Bi-lateral intelligence activities likely involved.

Posted by Besoeker 2021-03-21 08:09|| 2021-03-21 08:09|| Front Page Top

#2 too ‘sensational and impure' for public

the judge hasn't been on the internet much has she.

Posted by Procopius2k 2021-03-21 08:34|| 2021-03-21 08:34|| Front Page Top

#3 Too 'sensational and impure' means they fear a run on the market for tar and feathers, and rope if the details came out.

Posted by ruprecht 2021-03-21 09:00|| 2021-03-21 09:00|| Front Page Top

#4 It means that they implicate certain people.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2021-03-21 09:28|| 2021-03-21 09:28|| Front Page Top

#5 Ayuh, if the guilty party was Joe Blow (no pun intended) I'm sure the judge would have ruled the same way.

Posted by CrankyOldYankee 2021-03-21 10:14|| 2021-03-21 10:14|| Front Page Top

#6 What phooking bull sh!t.

@ #1 - I think Besoeker nailed it.

Posted by Clem 2021-03-21 10:38|| 2021-03-21 10:38|| Front Page Top

#7 So, you can hear "Wet A$$ P*$$y" on the radio or TV but can't hear about American politicians diddling kids on a private island? Seems sort of arbitrary to me...

Posted by M. Murcek 2021-03-21 10:56|| 2021-03-21 10:56|| Front Page Top

#8 Who's the judge trying to protect? Clinton?

Posted by Ho Chi Hupoluter6839 2021-03-21 10:59|| 2021-03-21 10:59|| Front Page Top

#9 re: #8 above. No, Roberts.

Posted by Canuckistan sniper 2021-03-21 11:11|| 2021-03-21 11:11|| Front Page Top

#10

Only guessing......
But maybe she does not want to HANG HERSELF.

Posted by NN2N1 2021-03-21 11:28|| 2021-03-21 11:28|| Front Page Top

#11 The Five Eyes and the Seth Rich mystery flicker for a moment and are gone from view.

Posted by NoMoreBS 2021-03-21 12:15|| 2021-03-21 12:15|| Front Page Top

#12 'Impure' would mean the Clintons.
I'm surprised she didn't say 'sacrilegious'.

Posted by Dron66046 2021-03-21 23:45|| 2021-03-21 23:45|| Front Page Top

08:33 Gleng Whaick2262
08:32 Gleng Whaick2262
08:31 Gleng Whaick2262
08:28 Gleng Whaick2262
08:24 Matt
08:20 SteveS
07:43 Procopius2k
07:42 BrerRabbit
07:42 Procopius2k
07:39 Procopius2k
07:36 Procopius2k
07:35 Procopius2k
07:34 trailing wife
07:31 Procopius2k
07:30 NN2N1
07:22 NN2N1
07:18 trailing wife
07:14 Richard Aubrey
07:10 NN2N1
07:09 Besoeker
07:03 NN2N1
06:58 NN2N1
06:58 Besoeker
05:28 Whiskey Mike