EFTA00601154

1 
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL 
CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA 
CASE NO.: CACE 15-000072 
BRADLEY J. EDWARDS and PAUL G. 
CASSELL„ 
Plaintiffs, 
vs. 
ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, 
Defendant. 
 
/ 
VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION OF 
ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ 
VOLUME 1 
Pages 1 through 179 
Thursday, October 15, 2015 
9:31 a.m. - 4:13 p.m. 
Cole Scott & Kissane 
110 Southeast 6th Street 
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 
Stenographically Reported By: 
Kimberly Fontalvo, RPR, CLR 
Realtime Systems Administrator 
EFTA00601154

2 
1 
APPEARANCES: 
2 
On behalf of Plaintiffs: 
3 
SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA 
4 
BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A. 
2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard 
5 
West Palm Beach, Florida 33402-3626 
BY: JACK SCAROLA, ESQ. 
6 
jsx@searcylaw.com 
7 
8 
On behalf of Defendant: 
9 
COLE, SCOTT & KISSANE, P.A. 
Dadeland Centre II - Suite 1400 
10 
9150 South Dadeland Boulevard 
Miami, Florida 33156 
11 
BY: THOMAS EMERSON SCOTT, JR., ESQ. 
thomas.scott@csklegal.com 
12 
BY: STEVEN SAFRA, ESQ. 
(Via phone) 
steven.safra@csklegal.com 
13 
--and--
14 
SWEDER & ROSS, LLP 
131 Oliver Street 
15 
Boston, MA 02110 
BY: KENNETH A. SWEDER, ESQ. 
16 
ksweder@sweder-ross.com 
17 
--and--
18 
WILEY, REIN 
17769 K Street NW 
19 
Washington, DC 20006 
BY: RICHARD A. SIMPSON, ESQ. 
20 
RSimpson@wileyrein.com 
BY: NICOLE A. RICHARDSON, ESQ. 
21 
nrichardson@wileyrein.com 
22 
23 
24 
25 
EFTA00601155

3 
1 
APPEARANCES (Continued): 
2 
3 
On behalf of Jeffrey Epstein: 
4 
MARTIN G. WEINBERG, PC 
20 Park Plaza, Suite 1000 
5 
Boston, MA 02116 
BY: MARTIN G. WEINBERG. ESQ. (Via phone) 
6 
marty@martinweinberglaw.com 
7 
--and--
8 
DARREN K. INDYKE, PLLC 
575 Lexington Ave., 4th Fl. 
9 
New York, New York 
BY: DARREN K. INDYKE, ESQ. (Via phone) 
10 
11 
On behalf of 
12 
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 
401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Ste. 1200 
13 
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 
BY: SIGRID STONE MCCAWLEY, ESQ. 
14 
smccawley@bsfllp.com 
15 
16 
ALSO PRESENT: 
17 
Joni Jones, Utah Attorney General Office 
18 
Travis Gallagher, Videographer 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
EFTA00601156

4 
1 
INDEX 
2 
3 
4 
Examination 
Page 
5 
6 
VOLUME 1 (Pages 1 - 179) 
7 
Direct 
By Mr. Scarola 
6 
8 
Certificate of Oath 
176 
Certificate of Reporter 
177 
9 
Read and Sign Letter to Witness 
178 
Errata Sheet (forwarded upon execution) 
179 
10 
11 
No exhibits marked to Volume 1. 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
EFTA00601157

5 
1 
Thereupon, 
2 
the following proceedings began at 9:31 a.m.: 
3 
VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 15th day of 
09:31:40 
4 
October, 2015. The time is approximately 9:31 
5 
a.m. This is the videotaped deposition of Alan 
6 
M. Dershowitz in the matter of Bradley J. 
7 
Edwards and Paul Cassell versus Alan M. 
8 
Dershowitz. This deposition is being held at 
9 
110 Southeast 6th Street, Suite 1850, Fort 
10 
Lauderdale, Florida, 33301. 
11 
My name is Travis Gallagher. I'm the 
09:31:40 
12 
videographer representing Above & Beyond 
13 
Reprographics. 
14 
Will the attorneys please announce their 
09:31:46 
15 
appearances for the record. 
16 
MR. SCAROLA: My name is Jack Scarola. 
09:31:48 
17 
I'm counsel on behalf of Bradley Edwards and 
18 
Professor Paul Cassell. Mr. Edwards and 
19 
Mr. Cassell are also present. 
20 
Also with us from the Utah Attorney 
09:31:58 
21 
General's office is Joni Jones. 
22 
MS. McCAWLEY: Sigrid McCawley. I'm with 
09:32:06 
23 
the law firm of Boies Schiller & Flexner on 
24 
behalf of
25 
MR. SCOTT: Good morning. Tom Scott on 
09:32:12 
EFTA00601158

6 
1 
behalf of the Defendant Professor Dershowitz. 
2 
MR. SIMPSON: Richard Simpson on behalf of 
09:32:18 
3 
Professor Dershowitz. 
4 
MR. SWEDER: Ken Sweder on behalf of 
09:32:22 
5 
Defendant and Counterclaimant Alan M. 
6 
Dershowitz. 
7 
MR. WEINBERG: This is Martin Weinberg 
09:32:29 
8 
appearing by telephone. Thank you for allowing 
9 
that on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. 
10 
MR. SAFRA: This is Steven Safra also on 
09:32:37 
11 
behalf of Professor Dershowitz. 
12 
MR. INDYKE: This is Darren Indyke on 
09:32:43 
13 
behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. 
14 
MS. RICHARDSON: Nicole Richardson on 
09:32:46 
15 
behalf of Professor Dershowitz. 
16 
Thereupon: 
09:32:47 
17 
ALAN DERSHOWITZ 
09:32:47 
18 
having been first duly sworn, was examined and 
09:32:47 
19 
testified as follows: 
20 
DIRECT EXAMINATION 
09:32:47 
21 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:32:54 
22 
Q. 
Would you please state your full name, 
09:32:55 
23 
sir? 
24 
A. 
Alan Morton Dershowitz. 
09:32:57 
25 
Q. 
And where did you live? 
09:32:59 
EFTA00601159

7 
1 
A. 
Well, I live in three places. We have a 
09:33:00 
2 
home in Miami Beach, a small condo apartment where 
3 
we spend the winters. We live in the fall and part 
4 
of the spring in an apartment in New York, and then 
5 
we have a summer place on Martha's Vineyard. 
6 
Q. 
Within the last ten years, have you had 
09:33:21 
7 
other residence besides those that you've described? 
8 
A. 
Yes. 
09:33:27 
9 
Q. 
And where are they? 
09:33:27 
10 
A. 
We owned a home in Cambridge, 
09:33:30 
11 
Massachusetts about a mile away from the Harvard Law 
12 
School. 
13 
Q. 
And at what point in time did you no 
09:33:39 
14 
longer have the Cambridge home? 
15 
A. 
Well, we moved out of it a couple of years 
09:33:45 
16 
ago and then it was on the market for a while. And 
17 
then it was sold. I don't have exact dates in my 
18 
mind. 
19 
Q. 
Sometime within the last three years 
09:33:57 
20 
approximately? 
21 
A. 
Certainly was sold within the last three 
09:34:02 
22 
years, yes. 
23 
Q. 
And you moved out when? 
09:34:04 
24 
A. 
Moved out earlier than that. Moved out 
09:34:06 
25 
when we put it on the market. And when I came back 
EFTA00601160

8 
1 
to teach at Harvard for my last semester, we stayed 
2 
in the Charles Hotel. 
3 
Q. 
How long have you had the apartment in 
09:34:20 
4 
New York? 
5 
A. 
This apartment, it's been a couple of 
09:34:23 
6 
years. 
7 
Q. 
And prior to that, was there a period of 
09:34:26 
8 
time when you maintained another residence in 
9 
New York? 
10 
A. 
Yes. 
09:34:31 
11 
Q. 
And what period of time was that? 
09:34:32 
12 
A. 
Probably 30 years, around 30 years. 
09:34:37 
13 
Q. 
Beginning approximately 30 years ago? 
09:34:42 
14 
A. 
Yes, beginning approximately 30 years ago, 
09:34:46 
15 
yes. 
16 
Q. 
So, have you maintained a residence in 
09:34:49 
17 
New York continuously for approximately the last 
18 
30 years? 
19 
A. 
We have not maintained a residence as that 
09:34:56 
20 
term's legally applied. We have had a pied-a-terre 
21 
in New York that we occasionally visited over the 
22 
past 30 years, yes. 
23 
Q. 
You had property where you could stay 
09:35:07 
24 
overnight, you had access to that property in 
25 
New York continuously for the past 30 years? 
EFTA00601161

9 
1 
A. 
That's correct. 
09:35:20 
2 
Q. 
Is that accurate? 
09:35:21 
3 
A. 
That's correct, yes. 
09:35:22 
4 
Q. 
All right. Can you tell me, please, 
09:35:23 
5 
whether you agree or disagree with the following 
6 
statement: "According to our philosophical and 
7 
ethical traditions, reputation is sacrosanct"? 
8 
MR. SCOTT: Can I ask what you're 
09:35:39 
9 
publishing from? 
10 
MR. SCAROLA: I'm just asking a question. 
09:35:41 
11 
A. 
I believe reputation is sacrosanct and I 
09:35:43 
12 
believe that an effort has been made to destroy mine 
13 
by false and malicious charges, yes. 
14 
MR. SCAROLA: I would move to strike the 
09:35:53 
15 
unresponsive portion of the answer. 
16 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:35:56 
17 
Q. 
Do you agree or disagree with the 
09:35:56 
18 
following: "A good name is more desirable than 
19 
great riches"? 
20 
A. 
I certainly agree with that. And there's 
09:36:02 
21 
been an effort to destroy my good name by false and 
22 
mendacious charges. 
23 
MR. SCAROLA: I move to strike the 
09:36:09 
24 
unresponsive portion of the answer. 
25 
EFTA00601162

10 
1 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:36:12 
2 
Q. 
Do you agree or disagree with the 
09:36:13 
3 
following statement: "While throughout history 
4 
reputation has been recognized as a priceless 
5 
treasure, it is fragile"? 
6 
A. 
I think that the longer one maintains a 
09:36:28 
7 
good reputation, as I have for over 50 years, the 
8 
less fragile it is; but, yes, it is fragile and one 
9 
false allegation maliciously made by a serial liar 
10 
with the help of her unethical lawyers could destroy 
11 
a fragile or hurt a fragile reputation. 
12 
MR. SCAROLA: Move to strike the 
09:36:59 
13 
unresponsive portion of the answer. 
14 
MR. SCOTT: Obviously we take a different 
09:37:01 
15 
position. But go ahead, Jack. 
16 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:37:04 
17 
Q. 
Do you agree or disagree with the 
09:37:05 
18 
following statement: "Sensational accusations, even 
19 
when baseless, often cause damage that is 
20 
irreversible"? 
21 
A. 
That is a perfect description of exactly 
09:37:15 
22 
what happened to me, yes, at the hands of your 
23 
clients. 
24 
MR. SCAROLA: Move to strike the 
09:37:24 
25 
unresponsive portion of the answer. 
EFTA00601163

11 
1 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:37:26 
2 
Q. 
Do you degree or disagree with the 
09:37:27 
3 
following statement: "There is no presumption of 
4 
innocence in the court of public opinion"? 
5 
A. 
I think there's some truth to that. But 
09:37:35 
6 
when you have a good reputation, there are some who 
7 
do presume innocence, particularly when the charges 
8 
made against you are so clearly filled with the lies 
9 
and financial motivation as were in the instance 
10 
when your clients directed false accusations against 
11 
me. 
12 
MR. SCAROLA: Move to strike the 
09:38:06 
13 
unresponsive portion of the answer. 
14 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:38:08 
15 
Q. 
Do you agree or disagree with the 
09:38:09 
16 
following statement: "The usual reaction to ugly 
17 
accusations assumes that fire lies beneath the 
18 
smoke, rather than that the smoke lies"? 
19 
MR. SCOTT: You want that read back? You 
09:38:25 
20 
got it all? 
21 
A. 
Can you -- can you show me where that 
09:38:31 
22 
comes from? 
23 
09:38:34 
24 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:38:34 
25 
Q. 
I'm only asking ultimately whether you 
09:38:35 
EFTA00601164

12 
1 
agree or disagree with the statement. 
2 
MR. SCOTT: It's our position that you're 
09:38:38 
3 
reading from something that -- especially if 
4 
you're reading something that he's published, 
5 
he has the option to see it in order to -- if 
6 
you're quoting from it, we would like to ask 
7 
you to produce it so he can read it. 
8 
A. 
It's -- it's a metaphorical statement 
09:38:53 
9 
whose general thrust I agree with, yes. 
10 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:38:58 
11 
Q. 
Thank you. 
09:38:59 
12 
A. 
Thank you very much for reading from my -- 
09:39:01 
13 
from my book. Appreciate it. 
14 
Q. 
In light of your agreement with the 
09:39:10 
15 
principles that I have just read, can we also agree 
16 
that a serious injury to a reputation requires 
17 
serious monetary compensation if the injury is 
18 
unjustified? 
19 
MR. SCOTT: Objection, form, conclusion, 
09:39:28 
20 
speculation. 
21 
A. 
I don't think that there is any possible 
09:39:32 
22 
monetary compensation for the attempt to damage my 
23 
reputation which your clients have maliciously and 
24 
deliberately set out to do for their own financial 
25 
reasons. 
EFTA00601165

13 
1 
2 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
3 
Q. 
That, however, is not a response to the 
4 
question that I asked. So let me try again. 
5 
MR. SCAROLA: And I move to strike that. 
6 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
7 
Q. 
Can we agree that in light of the 
8 
9 
10 
unjustified injury to reputation is a serious injury 
11 
that requires serious compensation? 
12 
MR. SCOTT: Same objection. 
13 
A. 
I don't think that question can be 
14 
answered in a yes or no way. I will just reiterate 
15 
that I think the damage to my reputation exceeds any 
16 
possible amount of money. If I had been offered 
17 
$10 million in exchange for somebody making the 
18 
kinds of baseless accusations that your clients made 
19 
against me, I would have turned down that 
20 
21 
possible other than a complete apology and 
22 
withdrawal of the false accusations, especially 
23 
since your clients know that the accusations made 
24 
against me are baseless and false. 
25 
statements that you have recognized to be accurate 
regarding the priceless value of reputation, that an 
$10 million. I think that there is no compensation 
09:39:47 
09:39:47 
09:39:47 
09:39:50 
09:39:52 
09:39:53 
09:40:17 
09:40:18 
EFTA00601166

14 
1 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:41:02 
2 
Q. 
Do you agree that if an injury to 
09:41:03 
3 
reputation is done purposefully and with malice, it 
4 
is deserving of punishment? 
5 
MR. SCOTT: Objection, legal conclusion, 
09:41:13 
6 
form, speculation. 
7 
A. 
I believe that the accusations leveled 
09:41:18 
8 
against me were made with malice and with deliberate 
9 
intention, which is why I am going to be seeking 
10 
disciplinary action, including disbarment, against 
11 
your unethical and mendacious clients. 
12 
MR. SCAROLA: Move to strike as 
09:41:36 
13 
unresponsive to my question. 
14 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:41:38 
15 
Q. 
The question I'm posing to you, sir, is: 
09:41:39 
16 
Do you agree that if an injury to reputation is done 
17 
without factual basis and intentionally, it is 
18 
deserving of punishment? 
19 
A. 
What you have done is to describe with 
09:41:58 
20 
great precision what your clients did to me. And so 
21 
the answer to my question is -- the answer to your 
22 
question is yes, I think your -- I think your 
23 
clients are deserving of punishment, yes. 
24 
Q. 
Do you believe that you are a special 
09:42:09 
25 
case; that is, that intentional injury to your 
EFTA00601167

15 
1 
reputation is deserving of punishment but 
2 
intentional injury to the reputation of others is 
3 
not deserving of punishment? 
4 
MR. SCOTT: Objection, form, 
09:42:24 
5 
argumentative, compound. 
6 
A. 
I certainly don't think I'm a special 
09:42:26 
7 
case. I think that I have been defamed and 
8 
deliberately by your clients and I don't think 
9 
lawyers who engage in such deliberate conduct should 
10 
be allowed to practice law, which is why I am going 
11 
to seek their 
their 
their disbarment and 
12 
other -- other sanctions. 
13 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:42:49 
14 
Q. 
In fact, you have been making public 
09:42:50 
15 
statements of your intention to seek the disbarment 
16 
of Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell for 
17 
approximately ten months, correct? 
18 
A. 
That's right. That's correct. 
09:43:03 
19 
Q. 
You are aware of the ethical obligation 
09:43:05 
20 
that a lawyer has when that lawyer has direct 
21 
knowledge of unethical conduct on the part of 
22 
another member of the Bar --
23 
A. 
That's right. 
09:43:16 
24 
Q. 
-- to report that unethical conduct, 
09:43:16 
25 
correct? 
EFTA00601168

16 
1 
A. 
Yes. 
09:43:19 
2 
Q. 
Have you done that? 
09:43:20 
3 
A. 
I have conferred with three leading ethics 
09:43:21 
4 
experts and I have been advised that to file a 
5 
report while there is ongoing litigation is not the 
6 
proper approach. But rather to gather the evidence 
7 
and the information and to make sure that all of the 
8 
allegations I make are well founded, unlike what 
9 
your clients did, and then at the appropriate time, 
10 
when the litigation is concluded, seek the 
11 
disbarment of Bar associations. I am advised by my 
12 
ethics experts do not look kindly on attempts to 
13 
disbar lawyers that can be perceived as part of an 
14 
ongoing litigation strategy. 
15 
I fully intend to seek disbarment, as I 
09:44:10 
16 
said, of your clients because I believe they engaged 
17 
in unprofessional, unethical and disbarrable 
18 
conduct. And I've continued to do so until as 
19 
recently as last week. 
20 
MR. SCAROLA: Move to strike the 
09:44:28 
21 
unresponsive portion of that answer. 
22 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:44:32 
23 
Q. 
Who are the three leading experts with 
09:44:33 
24 
whom you've conferred? 
25 
A. 
The expert I conferred with initially was 
09:44:37 
EFTA00601169

17 
1 
Dean Monroe Freedman of the Hofstra law school who 
2 
had been my kind of ethical guru for my entire 
3 
career. I spent an extensive amount of time with 
4 
him conferring about all aspects of this case. 
5 
I then conferred with Professor Stephen 
09:44:59 
6 
Gillers, who is wildly regarded as the leading 
7 
current ethics expert in the United States who is a 
8 
professor at NYU law school. 
9 
I also conferred with Professor Ronald 
09:45:12 
10 
Rotunda, and in the process of also received advice, 
11 
some unsolicited 
some solicited from a variety of 
12 
lawyers and other experts. I'll give you an 
13 
example. 
14 
For example, when I was speaking at an 
09:45:33 
15 
event in Florida, a man came over to me who I -- I 
16 
don't recall his name, but he worked for a big firm 
17 
and was on the -- on some ethics committee of a 
18 
Florida Bar Association. And he advised me to bring 
19 
ethics charges saying that from what he had seen, 
20 
the conduct of the lawyers were unethical and 
21 
unprofessional and deserved disbarment. But also 
22 
advised me not to do it until litigation was 
23 
concluded. 
24 
MR. SCAROLA: Move to strike the 
09:46:07 
25 
unresponsive portions of that answer. 
EFTA00601170

18 
1 
And I would ask, Mr. Scott, that you 
09:46:10 
2 
counsel your client to be responsive to the 
3 
questions in order that we have some reasonable 
4 
expectation of being able to finish this 
5 
deposition within my lifetime. 
6 
MR. SCOTT: I'm not here to exchange 
09:46:26 
7 
sarcastic comments, Jack, with you. I believe 
8 
my client is trying to answer your questions. 
9 
MR. SCAROLA: The question asked for names 
09:46:32 
10 
of three individuals. What I got was a speech. 
11 
What I have gotten repeatedly in response to 
12 
direct questions are speeches. I would ask 
13 
that you counsel your client to please respond 
14 
to the questions. 
15 
MR. SCOTT: When we take a break, I'll 
09:46:45 
16 
speak to my client in general based upon what I 
17 
think is appropriate. Let's proceed. 
18 
MR. SCAROLA: Thank you. 
09:46:54 
19 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:46:54 
20 
Q. 
In an interview with Hala Gorani on 
09:46:55 
21 
January 5 of this year, broadcast on CNN Live, you 
22 
said, "I have a superb memory." 
23 
Do you acknowledge having made that 
09:47:08 
24 
statement? 
25 
A. 
I have a superb memory, so I must have 
09:47:10 
EFTA00601171

19 
1 
made that statement. My mother had an extraordinary 
2 
memory and when I was in college and I was on the 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
take 
9 
10 
11 
12 
MR. SCAROLA: Move to strike the 
13 
unresponsive portions of the answer. 
14 
Would you like to take a break now, 
15 
Mr. Scott, so that --
16 
MR. SCOTT: No, I'd like to proceed. 
17 
MR. SCAROLA: Okay. 
18 
A. 
Me too. 
19 
20 
Q. 
21 
have a superb memory? 
22 
A. 
No. My contention is that I have a very 
23 
24 
25 
now remembering names of people I've just met, but I 
debate team, my mother allowed me to debate on the 
Sabbath, which was Jewish rest day, only on the 
condition that I not take notes or write. And at 
that point I discovered that I have a very good 
memory and don't have to -- generally didn't have to 
notes. 
My memory, obviously, at the age of 77 has 
slipped a bit; but do I have a very good memory, 
yes. 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
So it is your contention that you still 
good memory and that at the age of 77, occasionally 
my memory slips. I particularly have difficult time 
09:47:41 
09:47:48 
09:47:51 
09:47:55 
09:47:56 
09:47:57 
09:47:58 
09:47:58 
09:48:00 
EFTA00601172

20 
1 
remember events very well. And when I argue cases 
2 
in front of courts, I generally don't need to have 
3 
notes in front of me because I remember the cases 
4 
very well. And I remember the transcript very well, 
5 
and so I have always relied on my good memory in my 
6 
professional life. 
7 
Q. 
So, on January 5, when you were 
09:48:29 
8 
interviewed on CNN Live, your memory at that time 
9 
was superb but in the ensuing ten months, it has 
10 
become less than superb? 
11 
A. 
No -- 
09:48:41 
12 
MR. SCOTT: Objection, form. 
09:48:41 
13 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:48:42 
14 
Q. 
Is that correct? 
09:48:42 
15 
A. 
No, that's not correct. 
09:48:42 
16 
MR. SCOTT: Let me -- objection, form, 
09:48:44 
17 
conclusion, not what he said. 
18 
A. 
Memory is a matter of degree and memories 
09:48:48 
19 
don't -- unless there's an illness or trauma, 
20 
don't -- don't suddenly change. I've had no --
21 
nothing in my life to dramatically change. But as I 
22 
said, as a 77-year-old, my memory is not what it was 
23 
when I was a 25-year-old. 
24 
BY MR. SCAROLA: 
09:49:11 
25 
Q. 
Are you under the influence today of any 
09:49:11 
EFTA00601173