Skip to content
Case File
d-34364House OversightOther

Judge refuses to view 'Deep Throat' in obscenity case, allows public screening

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #017201
Pages
1
Persons
2

Summary

The passage describes a courtroom dispute over viewing a pornographic film for obscenity purposes. It contains no new allegations, financial flows, or involvement of high‑level officials. The only act Judge Alberti demanded to view the film before ruling on an injunction. Defense counsel refused to watch the film, arguing constitutional grounds. Judge ultimately declined to block the screening, de

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Persons Referenced (2)

Tags

first-amendmentconstitutional-rightsobscenity-lawcensorshiplegal-exposurehouse-oversightcourt-proceedings
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Court hearing on limiting derogatory language in Giuffre defamation case

The passage merely records a procedural objection to calling a plaintiff a prostitute or slut in a defamation trial. It contains no concrete leads, transactions, or new allegations involving powerful Defense counsel objected to any derogatory language toward the plaintiff. The court is considering a motion to exclude terms like "prostitute" or "slut". The case involves defamation claims related t

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Court hearing references alleged trafficking of witness to foreign presidents and world leaders

The excerpt mentions vague claims that a witness was trafficked to foreign presidents and world leaders, but provides no names, dates, transactions, or concrete evidence. It suggests a possible lead a Witness alleges being trafficked to foreign presidents and world leaders. Defense counsel seeks to exclude those statements from evidence. No specific foreign leaders, dates, or financial details are

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Defense team seeks protective sidebar to shield Boies Schiller lawyers from alleged aggressive language in trial

The passage is a routine procedural request in a court case, mentioning only the defense firm and its attorneys. It lacks concrete allegations, financial details, or connections to high‑level official Defense counsel requests a sidebar or in‑camera hearing to prevent certain statements from reaching Mentions alleged aggressive language by the defense team toward the plaintiff’s team. Specifically

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Victim Privacy Concerns in Federal Subpoena Procedures Highlighted by 2007 Case and Advisory Committee Proposal

The passage discusses procedural flaws in how victim-sensitive records can be subpoenaed without notice, citing a specific 2007 federal case and an email from then‑U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein. While Defense counsel used Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c) to obtain a victim's VA medical records ex parte and und Victim and prosecutor were unaware of the subpoena until counsel warned of potential harm. Current

2p
House OversightDepositionNov 11, 2025

Deposition excerpt hints at possible misrepresentation by Dershowitz/Epstein defense regarding flight logs and alleged arrest

The transcript contains vague references to Professor Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein’s defense team, and a disputed arrest of a ‘Miss Roberts’. It raises questions about whether defense counsel prep Witness questioned about an alleged arrest of Miss Roberts that may not be reflected in interrogator Reference to Professor Dershowitz possibly testifying falsely or omitting information. Inquiry whe

2p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Internal memo reveals aggressive defense strategy for Jeffrey Epstein involving high‑profile attorneys and attempts to disqualify prosecutors

The passage details a coordinated defense effort for Epstein that included Alan Dershowitz, Kenneth Starr, and other senior legal figures, and describes attempts to disqualify prosecutors. It suggests Defense team hired Alan Dershowitz, former Dean Kenneth Starr, and other senior lawyers for Epstein. Defense counsel attempted to disqualify at least two prosecutors by investigating their personal l

1p

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