Two anonymous parties file motions to block unsealing of 2,000 pages of earlier Epstein-related case

Yesterday I posted about a huge development in the Epstein case:  A 3-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd circuit (that's New York and surroundings) had ruled that 2,000 pages of prior testimony and investigation results in the case--which had mysteriously been sealed--could be un-sealed.

This was huge because it was NOT one of the thousands of articles speculating about the case, but an actual federal court ruling.  That is, it was a matter of factual record.

Unfortunately, this didn't mean the records would actually BE unsealed, cuz anyone who objected had two weeks to file a motion to keep 'em sealed.  But I noted that anyone who filed such a motion would have to identify themselves, and that this would be...informative, to put it mildly.

I didn't imagine that it was legal to file a motion without identifying the "movant."

Well...turns out an attorney named Kerrie Campbell--who bills herself as a "crisis and equity" expert--has done exactly that, filing a request on behalf of a never-named client to have the decision to unseal the 2,000 documents re-heard by all the judges on the 2nd circuit court.

Let's let the Democrat-loving website "Politico" explain:

Mystery parties seek secrecy in Jeffrey Epstein-related suit

Two mystery litigants [i.e. un-named] citing privacy concerns are making a last-ditch bid to keep secret some details in a lawsuit stemming from wealthy financier Jeffrey Epstein’s history of paying underage girls for sex.

Just prior to a court-imposed deadline Tuesday, two anonymous individuals surfaced [Really?  Horse-shit.  The individuals remain unknown.] to object to the unsealing of a key lower-court ruling in the case, as well as various submissions by the parties.

Both people filed their complaints in the New York-based 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which is overseeing the case. The two people said they could face unwarranted speculation and embarrassment if the court makes public records from the suit, in which Virginia Giuffre, an alleged Epstein victim, accused longtime Epstein friend Ghislaine Maxwell of engaging in sex trafficking by facilitating his sexual encounters with teenage girls. Maxwell has denied the charges.

“Wholesale unsealing of the Summary Judgment Materials [see below] will almost certainly disclose unadjudicated allegations against third persons — allegations that may be the product of false statements or, perhaps, simply mistake, confusion, or failing memories of events alleged to have occurred over a decade and half ago,” former federal prosecutor Nick Lewin wrote in an amicus brief filed Tuesday.

Lewin, who’s based in Manhattan, declined to comment. [Gee, I'm...shocked.]

“If the identities of non-parties are not adequately protected, the release of the Summary Judgment Materials in this case would likely cause severe and irreparable harm to a wide variety of non-parties, including those implicated in the conduct and those potentially victimized by it,” according to Lewin's motion.

If you're not in the biz you may not be familiar with the term "summary judgment."  It means that even if ALL the claims made by one side are accepted as fact, the judge nevertheless finds for the other side.  It's the equivalent of a nuclear weapon.  We have no idea what the SJ covered, but it almost certainly ain't good for Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffy Epstein and all his rich, powerful friends.

The other anonymous brief came from Washington DC-based attorney Kerrie Campbell, who handles gender equality cases and is affiliated with the Time’s Up movement to combat sexual harassment.

No she doesn't.  She specializes in crisis-management:  defending rich and powerful clients from damaging charges.  Hell of a fine line of work, eh?  Here's how the bitch describes her specialty on her own g'd website:

Ms. Campbell is a tireless advocate for due process, transparency...

Really?  "Transparency"?  Yeah, that was exactly my first thought when I read that she was trying her damndest to keep the 2,000 pages of records sealed.  Yeah.  "Transparency."  "Fairness."  Uh-huh.

In an amazing display of chutzpah Campbell asked the court to even seal her own motion, submitted on behalf of a “J. Doe.”  She said her client is “objecting to public disclosure of specific content pertaining to Doe to protect compelling personal privacy interests.”

Amazingly (sarc) Campbell didn't respond to a message seeking comment.

Giuffre and Maxwell settled the lawsuit for an undisclosed sum in 2017 after U.S. District Court Judge Robert Sweet turned down Maxwell’s bid to head off a trial. In the lead-up to that ruling, Sweet accepted almost all filings in the case under seal, without specific orders justifying the secrecy.

For a judge to seal all filings in a case without explaining why is extremely unusual.

The Miami Herald sought to open all records in the suit as part of a series on Epstein it ultimately published last year.

Sweet turned down all the requests, prompting an appeal to the 2nd Circuit.  A three-judge panel there heard arguments on the issue earlier this month and indicated last week that it plans to soon release Sweet’s opinion and related filings.

The panel voted to unseal the records.  But as noted above, "crisis-attorney" Kerrie Campbell immediately filed a motion to block that.

Maxwell indicated in papers filed by her lawyers Tuesday that she continues to oppose any unsealing. Her attorneys said that if the appeals court believes some unsealing is required, the matter should be returned to Sweet for action...

Sweet is 96 years old.  But hey, he's still on top of the legal game, eh?  Oh, and "Judge, do you want to overturn your original decision to seal all the records in this case?"  Judge: "Um...lemme think for a second.  No."

Giuffre's attorneys claim critical documents and transcripts proving the truth of Ms. Giuffre's allegations remain sealed in the vault of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, and that it's time for the truth to come out.

Last month a federal judge in Florida ruled that federal prosecutors broke the law a decade ago by making a deal that waived any federal charges in exchange for him pleading guilty to two state felony prostitution charges. He ultimately served 13 months of a 19-month sentence, but one that allowed him to spend 13 hours each day working in his posh Palm Beach office, without supervision.

So...where are we here?  All the records in an explosive case that never went to trial (because the defendant--Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell--settled out of court--were sealed, and now might be unsealed.  Lots of panic by the rich and powerful elites who were part of Epstein's "friends list."

But don't take my word for it.  Click on the links several paragraphs above to see how the Dem-loving website Politico reports it--or click here.