returned may direct that the indictment be kept secret until the defendant is in custody or has been released pending trial. The clerk must then seal the indictment, and no person ■may disclose the indictment’s existence except as necessary-to issue or execute a warrant or summons. There are various purposes for sealing an indictment," including, but not'limited to, protection of potential'witnesses or facilitation of an arrést. United States v. Wright, 343 F.3d 849, 858 (6th Cir.2003); United States v. Srulowitz, 819 F.2d 37, 40 (2nd Cir.1987); see also United States v. DiSalvo, 34 F.3d 1204, 1218 (3rd Cir.1994) (“An indictment may be sealed for any legitimate law enforcement reason or where the public interest requires it.”); United States v. Ellis, 622 F.3d 784, 793 (7th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Edwards, 777 F.2d 644,
holding that sealing an indictment for the security of witnesses and to protect against witness tampering was proper recognizing statute prohibiting witness intimidation was designed to protect witnesses in federal courts and to prevent a miscarriage of justice by corrupt methods holding that the defendants due process rights were violated when the trial judge singled out the only defense witness and indicated to that witness that he expected the witness to he and would personally ensure that the witness was prosecuted for perjury and thereby effectively drove that witness off the stand holding that material for witnesses need not be produced to defendant where the witnesses were not called as government witnesses at trial holding a failure to object to a witnesses testimony while the witness was on the stand justified overruling a motion for a mistrial made several witnesses later