Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-30689House OversightDeposition

Opaque deposition excerpt referencing Alan Dershowitz and alleged personal connections

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #011380
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage hints at a possible personal relationship and undisclosed individuals in a deposition, but provides no concrete names, dates, transactions, or verifiable evidence. It is largely speculativ Mentions a conversation with Alan Dershowitz about a defamatory statement. Alleges the deponent claimed ignorance while the text suggests familiarity with a client. References omitted individuals in

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Tags

defamationpotential-witness-influencealan-dershowitzlegal-depositionlegal-exposurehouse-oversightpotential-witness-tampering
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 ee) H3VOGIU1 another document that they gave you, and I think this document is really telling for what it doesn't say, and that's the email tna Fie. Right after -- a few days after she makes th defamatory statement, she's conversing with Alan Dershowitz about this statement. And this is GM0006 through 00015. What's really interesting about this is nowhere in this statement does she say, 'I didn't participate in this abuse. I didn't know this person. I wasn't around. This didn't happen with JE.' Instead, she picks statements and says things like -- which sound like a jealous girlfriend -- she says, "I called Jeffrey and told him I've fallen madly in love, Virginia says. I was hoping he'd be delighted, but he said, "Have a nice life" and hung up on me." And she puts in parens to Mr. Dershowitz, "Did she want Jeffrey to say no, don't do it, I want to marry you?" Clearly, she knows -- while during her deposition she claimed to not recollect my client whatsoever, she clearly knows her and this shows that they were together. It's also interesting, if you look on page 0008, because she's putting in parens individuals, other people that my client was lent out to that they forgot to mention in the list that they give. I mean, what's really telling about this document is what it doesn't say, but it clearly shows she knew my client, she knew what was occurring, and she's simply trying SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300

Related Documents (6)

House OversightUnknown

Opaque deposition excerpt referencing Alan Dershowitz and alleged personal connections

Opaque deposition excerpt referencing Alan Dershowitz and alleged personal connections The passage hints at a possible personal relationship and undisclosed individuals in a deposition, but provides no concrete names, dates, transactions, or verifiable evidence. It is largely speculative and lacks actionable details, limiting its investigative usefulness. Key insights: Mentions a conversation with Alan Dershowitz about a defamatory statement.; Alleges the deponent claimed ignorance while the text suggests familiarity with a client.; References omitted individuals in a list (GM0006‑0015) that may be relevant.

1p
House OversightUnknown

Discovery Dispute Over Alan Dershowitz's Document Control in Defamation Suit

Discovery Dispute Over Alan Dershowitz's Document Control in Defamation Suit The passage outlines a procedural battle over production of documents and metadata in a defamation case involving Alan Dershowitz. While it flags potential evidence that could expose communications or internal materials, it lacks concrete details about the content, dates, or parties beyond the litigants, limiting immediate investigative value. However, the mention of “control” and alleged refusal to produce metadata could merit follow‑up to determine what information is being withheld and whether it relates to broader controversies surrounding Dershowitz. Key insights: Plaintiffs allege Dershowitz is withholding documents and metadata under the claim of ‘control’.; The objection is framed as ‘word play’ and gamesmanship, suggesting possible intentional concealment.; Discovery objections focus on timeframe limits, implying plaintiffs seek records spanning an undefined period.

1p
House OversightUnknown

Dershowitz seeks to seal Giuffre affidavit in Edwards‑Cassell defamation case, claims media attacks are fabricated

Dershowitz seeks to seal Giuffre affidavit in Edwards‑Cassell defamation case, claims media attacks are fabricated The passage hints at a possible concealment of evidence in a high‑profile defamation dispute involving Alan Dershowitz, a prominent attorney, and references the infamous Giuffre allegations. While it names well‑known legal figures, it provides no concrete financial transactions, dates, or new factual revelations beyond already public claims, limiting its investigative utility. However, the suggestion that a court record may be sealed to hide potentially damaging testimony offers a moderate lead for further document‑review and freedom‑of‑information requests. Key insights: Dershowitz requests the court to declare portions of Ms. Giuffre’s affidavit confidential.; He publicly denies the allegations on BBC Radio 4, framing them as a coordinated false‑story campaign.; Dershowitz threatens perjury prosecution against accusers and seeks disbarment of opposing counsel.

1p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01656173

20p
House OversightUnknown

Alleged criminal extortion plot discussed during Alan Dershowitz's 2015 Broward County deposition

Alleged criminal extortion plot discussed during Alan Dershowitz's 2015 Broward County deposition The passage references a claim that Alan Dershowitz disclosed a criminal extortion scheme involving unnamed clients during a deposition, and mentions related defamation lawsuits. While the details are vague and unverified, the involvement of a high‑profile attorney and a federal courtroom provides a concrete lead (date, location, parties) that could be pursued. The claim is moderately controversial and potentially sensitive, but it lacks clear novelty and specific financial details, limiting its score. Key insights: Dershowitz allegedly told lawyers Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell that "your clients were involved" in a criminal extortion plot.; The statement was made on October 15, 2015, during a deposition in Broward County, Florida.; Bradley and Cassell had sued Dershowitz for defamation, and Dershowitz had filed a countersuit.

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Draft transcript excerpt mentions Jeffrey Epstein invoking the Fifth and a reference to Alan Dershowitz

The passage provides a vague, uncited reference to Epstein and Dershowitz refusing to answer questions in a hearing. It lacks concrete details—no dates, transactions, or specific allegations—making it Jeffrey Epstein allegedly took the Fifth Amendment during a court hearing. A question about Alan Dershowitz was raised, and he also invoked the Fifth. The excerpt is labeled as a rough draft and appe

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.