Skip to main content
Skip to content

Duplicate Document

This document appears to be a copy. The original version is:

Congressional hearing excerpt probing potential witness testimony on alleged Alan Dershowitz minor abuse
Case File
kaggle-ho-021865House Oversight

Congressional hearing excerpt probing potential witness testimony on alleged Alan Dershowitz minor abuse

Congressional hearing excerpt probing potential witness testimony on alleged Alan Dershowitz minor abuse The passage references a request for a witness who could testify to alleged abuse by Alan Dershowitz, a high‑profile attorney. While it does not provide concrete evidence or names beyond Dershowitz, it hints at possible undisclosed testimony and raises privilege objections, offering a moderate investigative lead. The claim is sensitive and could provoke public outcry if substantiated, but the excerpt lacks specifics such as dates, documents, or additional actors, limiting its immediate actionable value. Key insights: Question asked about a witness who could testify to alleged minor abuse by Alan Dershowitz as of Dec 30 2014; Attorney‑client privilege invoked to block the line of questioning; No other individuals or transactions are named

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
kaggle-ho-021865
Pages
1
Persons
3
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Congressional hearing excerpt probing potential witness testimony on alleged Alan Dershowitz minor abuse The passage references a request for a witness who could testify to alleged abuse by Alan Dershowitz, a high‑profile attorney. While it does not provide concrete evidence or names beyond Dershowitz, it hints at possible undisclosed testimony and raises privilege objections, offering a moderate investigative lead. The claim is sensitive and could provoke public outcry if substantiated, but the excerpt lacks specifics such as dates, documents, or additional actors, limiting its immediate actionable value. Key insights: Question asked about a witness who could testify to alleged minor abuse by Alan Dershowitz as of Dec 30 2014; Attorney‑client privilege invoked to block the line of questioning; No other individuals or transactions are named

Tags

kagglehouse-oversightmedium-importancelegalsexual-misconductprivilegewitness-testimonyhigh‑profile-individual

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Oo O DN OO FF WwW NY =| NO RO PO PNP NM NO | S| S| HS SF S| S| S| S| S| non BP WO NO -|- ODO OO WDN OO OT BP WO NYO — 42 Q. I'm asking whether he was aware of I'm not asking about -- well, let me back up. Are you aware of any witness who could be called who, as of December 30th, 2014, any person who could be called as a witness who would testify, I have knowledge that Alan Dershowitz abused a minor to support the allegation that Alan Dershowitz abused other minors? MR. SCAROLA: Outside of information gathered through attorney/client or common interest privileged communications; is that correct? MR. SIMPSON: No. It's not correct. MR. SCAROLA: Okay. Then, I'm not going to permit him to answer the question to the extent that it includes a request for information within the attorney/client and common interest privilege. MR. SIMPSON: Is it your position that the name of a person who could be called as a witness is somehow privileged? MR. SCAROLA: It is my position that any information communicated within the scope of the confidential attorney/client communication is privileged information. It is my position that any information including names communicated in the scope of ROUGH DRAFT ONLY

Related Documents (6)

House OversightUnknown

Sealed Declaration in Giuffre v. Epstein Motion to Compel Production of Epstein’s Phone Records, Contact List, and Message Pads

Sealed Declaration in Giuffre v. Epstein Motion to Compel Production of Epstein’s Phone Records, Contact List, and Message Pads The filing reveals a court‑ordered request for Epstein’s sealed phone records, contact list, and message pad excerpts, which could contain undisclosed connections to powerful individuals. While the case is already public, the specific documents sought are not, offering a concrete investigative avenue. The lead is moderately controversial and potentially high‑impact if the records expose further elite networks, but it does not yet name top‑level officials directly. Key insights: Plaintiff [REDACTED - Survivor] seeks a court order compelling Jeffrey Epstein to produce phone records, a contact list, and message pad excerpts.; The documents are filed as sealed exhibits, indicating they may contain undisclosed information.; Exhibit 4 references Ghislaine (likely Ghislaine Maxwell), suggesting her involvement in the communications.

1p
House OversightDepositionNov 11, 2025

Deposition excerpt mentioning [REDACTED - Survivor], sex‑trafficking allegations and Alan Dershowitz

The text is a largely unintelligible deposition transcript with vague references to a sex‑trafficking case involving a minor named [REDACTED - Survivor] and mentions of Alan Dershowitz. It provides no conc Witness references a December 30th source about a sex‑trafficking organization. [REDACTED - Survivor] is named as a victim/minor in the alleged trafficking network. Alan Dershowitz is mentioned in the con

2p
House OversightUnknown

BuzzFeed Review Finds Little Hard Evidence Linking Bill Clinton to Jeffrey Epstein Crimes, but Flight Logs and Lawyer Claims Provide Leads

BuzzFeed Review Finds Little Hard Evidence Linking Bill Clinton to Jeffrey Epstein Crimes, but Flight Logs and Lawyer Claims Provide Leads The passage summarizes a detailed review of over 2,000 pages of court filings that confirm Bill Clinton flew on Epstein's jet multiple times and that attorneys have attempted to use Clinton's connection in lawsuits. While it concludes there is no concrete proof of sexual misconduct, it identifies specific leads – flight logs, attorney Jack Scarola’s threats, alleged settlement negotiations involving Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr, and pending lawsuits by [REDACTED - Survivor] – that merit further investigative follow‑up. Key insights: Clinton appears on 13 flight logs for Epstein's private 727 between 2002‑2003, often with Epstein aide Sarah Kellen and Clinton aide Doug Band.; Attorney Jack Scarola warned of "extortionate threats, power, wealth or political pressure" when asked for proof linking Clinton.; [REDACTED - Survivor]' lawsuit alleges Epstein forced her sexual exploitation by "adult male peers" including high‑level figures; she claims Clinton was present on Little St. James Island but later recanted sexual claims against him.

1p
House OversightDepositionNov 11, 2025

Deposition excerpt reveals Alan Dershowitz on call‑in line during testimony about Epstein‑related abuse allegations

The passage documents a live deposition where Alan Dershowitz was identified on a call‑in line, discussing a comment about moving on and denying knowledge of abuse allegations involving Jeffrey Epstei Alan Dershowitz was the only identified participant on a call‑in line during a deposition on 10/20/2 Witness questioned the presence of an unidentified party and the possibility of a muted participan

2p
Court UnsealedSep 9, 2019

Epstein Depositions

10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 16. 17. l8. 19. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards, et Case No.: 50 2009 CA Attachments to Statement of Undisputed Facts Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein taken March 17, 2010 Deposition of Jane Doe taken March 11, 2010 (Pages 379, 380, 527, 564?67, 568) Deposition of LM. taken September 24, 2009 (Pages 73, 74, 164, 141, 605, 416) Deposition ofE.W. taken May 6, 2010 (1 15, 1.16, 255, 205, 215?216) Deposition of Jane Doe #4 (32-34, 136) Deposition of Jeffrey Eps

839p
House OversightNov 4, 2011

Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse

Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse The passage merely references a prior deposition where Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment, offering no new names, transactions, or actionable details beyond what is already public. It confirms existing allegations but provides no novel leads for investigation. Key insights: Cites Epstein's deposition on March 17, 2010; Notes Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked about sexual preferences; Mentions adverse inference doctrine in civil procedure

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.