EFTA01137794

Page 582 
1 
question, I would object on the basis of work 
2 
product, attorney-client, common interests, and 
3 
instruct you not to answer to the extent it 
4 
invades any of those privileges. 
5 
A. 
What am I looking at here? 
6 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
7 
Q. 
This is the Palm Beach Police Department 
8 police report. 
9 
A. 
What do you want me to look at? 
10 
Q. 
Sure. It's page 40. 
11 
A. 
I have it, yes. 
12 
Q. 
We're going to go to the paragraph --
13 second paragraph, "Detective Dawson and I met with 
14 
on October 11, 2005." 
15 
A. 
"Detective Dawson and I met with 
and 
16 her friend." 
17 
Q. 
I'm going to tell you that the person 
18 under that redaction is 
19 
A. 
Okay. That doesn't mean anything to me. 
20 
Q. 
Is that somebody that -- whose name that 
21 
you --
22 
A. 
Oh, that person. 
23 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Go ahead and 
24 
make your objection. 
25 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
EFTA01137914

Page 583 
1 
instruction. 
2 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Do you know this 
3 
person? 
4 
A. 
Only through my work with Jeffrey Epstein. 
5 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
6 
Q. 
Wasn't there public documents that you 
7 exchanged with the police department with respect to 
8 that particular victim that pertained to her 
9 allegation that the investigators, Corali (phonetic) 
10 and Riley, had posed as police officers and things 
11 of that nature? Do you remember that? 
12 
A. 
I do recall that, yes, yes. 
13 
Q. 
And so -- and this is also one of the 
14 people whose MySpace page you pulled down? 
15 
A. 
I didn't pull anything down. 
16 
Q. 
That you produced to the State Attorney's 
17 Office? 
18 
A. 
I don't know how to use a computer, so I 
19 couldn't pull down anything. But I was presented 
20 with these within the lawyer-client representation. 
21 And I don't know how much further to go. 
22 
Q 
And didn't you take that information --
23 
MR. INDYKE: Instruct you not to answer. 
24 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
25 
Q. 
Didn't you take that information, whatever 
EFTA01137915

Page 584 
1 
information that you pulled from 
MySpace page 
2 to the State Attorney's Office to convince the State 
3 Attorney's Office that this witness was not 
4 credible? 
5 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Do you have an 
6 
objection, or no? 
7 
MR. INDYKE: No. 
8 
A. 
For 50 years, I've taught my students in 
9 criminal law that their job is to present evidence 
10 that would raise questions about the credibility of 
11 a witness against their criminal defendant. And, of 
12 course, every criminal lawyer does that. And I, 
13 along with my co-defendants [sic], did the very same 
14 thing in this case. 
15 
MR. SIMPSON: I believe you misspoke. You 
16 
said "co-defendants." Co-counsel? 
17 
MR. SCAROLA: Freudian slip. 
18 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
19 
Q. 
When you initially made the allegations 
20 that Mr. Cassell and I had played a role in 
21 fabricating the allegations --
22 
A. 
Right. 
23 
Q. 
-- and also improperly believed in a 
24 serial liar --
25 
A. 
Right. 
EFTA01137916

Page 585 
1 
Q. 
-- instead of just calling you, did you 
2 read our response that was filed January 21, 2015 
3 wherein we put forth much of our investigative 
4 material that led to our --
5 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Guys on the 
6 
phone, we're hearing your discussions and, 
7 
frankly, it's right in the middle of a 
8 
question. I apologize. 
9 
MR. EDWARDS: Want me to start over? 
10 
THE WITNESS: Please. 
11 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
12 
Q. 
After you made the statement that 
13 Mr. Cassell and I had fabricated the allegations 
14 against you and believed in the story of a 
15 incredible, serial liar, and had failed to call you, 
16 did you read our responsive pleading which I believe 
17 was more than 150 pages long outlining some of our 
18 investigation of the surrounding allegations? Just 
19 did you read that response? I believe it was filed 
20 January 21, 2015, in Judge Marra's courtroom. 
21 
A. 
I don't recall reading a 150-page 
22 document. My lawyer Kendall Coffey would have read 
23 it. It's possible I read it. But -- can you show 
24 it to me? 
25 
Q. 
I don't have it here, but I assumed that 
EFTA01137917

Page 586 
1 
you had read it. 
2 
A. 
I would be happy to look at it and see if 
3 it's something I read. I know I'm familiar with 
4 what -- some of the things you said you did, and 
5 they didn't make me change my opinion at all. 
6 
Q. 
Did you read Detective Recarey's 
7 deposition that was taken in the civil cases against 
8 Mr. Epstein? 
9 
MR. INDYKE: Objection. 
10 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: There's no 
11 
grounds for an objection as to whether he read 
12 
a deposition. 
13 
MR. INDYKE: Well, there is when they 
14 
didn't place it within a timeframe. 
15 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Okay. 
16 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
17 
instruction. 
18 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
19 
Q. 
In production we had produced many 
20 depositions not only in this case, but have been 
21 filed in other cases, which is why I asked you about 
22 that January 21st pleading. 
23 
Is one of the documents that you have read 
24 regarding our investigation of the allegations 
25 Detective Recarey's deposition? 
EFTA01137918

Page 587 
1 
A. 
When -- when was Detective Recarey's 
2 deposition? 
3 
Q. 
It was taken sometime in 2010. I don't 
4 have the entire document. 
5 
A. 
I doubt that I read it. I wouldn't have 
6 had any reason to read it back in 2010. 
7 
Q. 
If --
8 
MR. INDYKE: If are you talking about what 
9 
he did in 2010 rather than in response to 
10 
pleadings in this case, then I would object. 
11 
Same objection, same instruction. 
12 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
13 
Q. 
I don't need to ask you if you've read the 
14 deposition. If Detective Recarey has testified that 
15 the State Attorney, very early on in the 
16 investigation, was gung-ho up until the meeting with 
17 Alan Dershowitz, would that be a true statement? 
18 
MR. SCOTT: Objection, form, totally 
19 
irrelevant to anything. 
20 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
21 
instruction. 
22 
A. 
I sure hope so. I mean, if I did a good 
23 job in persuading a very distinguished State 
24 Attorney about being less gung-ho about going after 
25 my client, that's my job, that's what I get paid for 
EFTA01137919

Page 588 
1 
as a criminal defense lawyer. So I'm proud to 
2 have -- if it's true, have had him be less than 
3 gung-ho. 
4 
I have tell you my negotiations with him 
5 were very tough, very arm's length and very 
6 difficult to the point where I was replaced at one 
7 point for not getting a good enough deal. 
8 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
9 
Q. 
If --
10 
MR. INDYKE: Objection. Alan, please do 
11 
not go into the substance of any kind of 
12 
interactions between you and any of on 
13 
Mr. Epstein's counsel in connection with your 
14 
representation. 
15 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
16 
Q. 
At some point in time, were your services 
17 terminated by Mr. Epstein? 
18 
A. 
I was replaced. 
19 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
20 
instruction. 
21 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
22 
Q. 
At what point in time were you terminated? 
23 
MR. SCOTT: He didn't say that. 
24 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
25 
instruction. 
EFTA01137920

Page 589 
1 
A. 
I wasn't terminated. A lawyer was added 
2 to the team. And I think the record will show when 
3 that happened, and negotiations continued with a new 
4 lawyer who was seeking to get a better deal. 
5 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
6 
Q. 
If Detective Recarey testified that the 
7 point of your meeting with the State Attorney's 
8 Office was to show that the character of the girls 
9 was not to be believed, would that be a fair and 
10 accurate description of that? 
11 
A. 
Well, the purpose of the meeting was 
12 multiple. The purpose of the meeting, I remember we 
13 brought forth every single --
14 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
15 
instruction, please. And, Professor Cassell, 
16 
I'm having some difficulty hearing you. 
17 
MR. SCOTT: He's having a hard time 
18 
hearing you. 
19 
MR. INDYKE: Yes. 
20 
A. 
The plain purpose of my meeting and the 
21 work that did I together with my research assistant 
22 was to gather all the cases in Palm Beach County and 
23 maybe some other surrounding counties involving the 
24 allegations, allegations similar to those against my 
25 client, and to show that in none of the cases had 
EFTA01137921

Page 590 
1 
prison time been given for the kinds of activities 
2 that were alleged against my client. So, I 
3 presented him with hundreds of --
4 
MR. INDYKE: I have to interrupt you. If 
5 
you are talking about what you did for 
6 
Mr. Epstein, which it sounds like you are, then 
7 
you are invading the attorney-client privilege 
8 
and work product. 
9 
A. 
I gave it to the prosecutor. 
10 
MR. INDYKE: I object, and I instruct you 
11 
not to answer. 
12 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
13 
Q. 
My question is very narrow. 
14 
Do you remember attending a meeting with 
15 Detective Recarey, yourself and the State Attorney 
16 wherein you made presentations using the website of 
17 some of the victims, including 
18 
A. 
The three people that you mentioned were 
19 not the only people at that meeting. 
20 
Q. 
I'm not insinuating that they are. Do you 
21 remember those people being at the meeting? 
22 
A. 
I remember others as well, including 
23 Mitchell Webber, who had done some of the research 
24 for me on the case. 
25 
Q. 
I'm just asking do you remember this 
EFTA01137922

Page 591 
1 
meeting? 
2 
A. 
I do, yes. 
3 
Q. 
If Detective Recarey says that the point 
4 of your presentation was to attack the credibility 
5 of the witnesses, is that accurate? 
6 
A. 
No. The point of my meeting --
7 
Q. 
I'm only asking for yes or no. 
8 
A. 
I have to do more than yes or no. 
9 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: The initial 
10 
answer was? 
11 
A. 
No. And now explain. The point was to 
12 get a reduction in sentence and to get the best 
13 possible deal I could get for my client. That 
14 included giving comparative sentencing data about 
15 other cases and included raising questions about the 
16 credibility of the witnesses and included showing 
17 documentation that some of the witnesses had 
18 provided false documentation about their age. 
19 
It was a general presentation to a 
20 prosecutor to try to mitigate the allegations 
21 against my client, which is -- I've done that many, 
22 many times, and so has every other criminal lawyer I 
23 know. 
24 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
25 
Q. 
And if Detective Recarey says it was Alan 
EFTA01137923

Page 592 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
Dershowitz that was making the presentation on 
Mr. Epstein's behalf to discredit the victims, that 
would be a true statement in part? 
A. 
Alan Dershowitz made a presentation in 
general that included truthful statements about the 
witnesses, the truth of which tended to discredit 
some of their testimony, yes. 
Q. 
If Detective Recarey was asked, in fact, 
"Was he, Alan, trying to convey to the State 
Attorney's Office that you should not believe these 
girls that they were at his house at all because 
they have credibility problems," and he answered, 
"That was the impression I received, yes" 
A. 
Totally false impression. 
Q. 
This is something that Detective Recarey, 
if he said that, he's lying? 
A. 
No, I didn't say he's lying. You're 
putting words in my mouth. I said it's a false 
impression. He didn't say it definitely happened. 
He said that's the impression he had. 
I didn't ever say that these people were 
not at Jeffrey Epstein's house. That was not part 
of my defense. I never said that to anybody about 
any of the people involved in this case. The 
defense was very different. And Mitch Webber, who 
EFTA01137924

Page 593 
1 
was there, and probably the State Attorney will 
2 confirm that. 
3 
Q. 
Okay. Going to the police report of 
4 on page 40 it begins, is she one of the victims that 
5 you tried to discredit during this meeting we're 
6 discussing? 
7 
A. 
My recollection is that 
was one of 
8 the accusers, and we had --
9 
MR. INDYKE: Objection. I'm sorry, I'm 
10 
trying to give you some leeway, but I object on 
11 
the same basis that I objected previously. And 
12 
I believe this was also treading settlement 
13 
negotiations on behalf of Mr. Epstein with the 
14 
police department. Again, this is -- so I 
15 
instruct you not to answer to the extent it 
16 
invades privilege. 
17 
THE WITNESS: So I just understand, are 
18 
you alleging a negotiation privilege, too? 
19 
MR. INDYKE: Yes. I don't want you 
20 
talking about --
21 
THE WITNESS: Clearly, it's covered by 
22 
negotiation, and it would take incredible --
23 
well, I'm not going to say it. This was 
24 
clearly a negotiation. Are they asserting a 
25 
negotiation privilege? I would like to hear 
EFTA01137925

Page 594 
1 
that. 
2 
MR. INDYKE: Yes. 
3 
MR. SCAROLA: It's being asserted by 
4 
Mr. Epstein's counsel. 
5 
THE WITNESS: Are you challenging the 
6 
negotiation privilege? 
7 
MR. SCAROLA: We're asking the question. 
8 
MR. EDWARDS: Are we challenging it? 
9 
Absolutely. 
10 
THE WITNESS: Good. 
11 
MR. SIMPSON: Just wait for a question. 
12 
MR. EDWARDS: It's not getting us 
13 
anywhere. 
14 
MR. INDYKE: I would instruct you not to 
15 
answer that question to the extent it invades 
16 
that privilege. 
17 
THE WITNESS: I think we need a ruling on 
18 
negotiation privilege. 
19 
MR. SCAROLA: I don't think we get that 
20 
ruling in the context of this deposition. 
21 
THE WITNESS: Well, you're asking me a 
22 
question --
23 
MR. SCOTT: There's no question pending. 
24 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
25 
Q. 
Do you remember 
as being one of the 
EFTA01137926

Page 595 
1 
victims that explained that she was also made to 
2 have sexual relations with 
3 
A. 
No, I have no recollection. 
4 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
5 
instruction. 
6 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
7 
Q. 
Do you remember 
being one of the 
8 victims saying that Epstein bragged that he bought 
9 
from her family in 
to be 
10 his sex slave? 
11 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
12 
instruction. 
13 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
14 
4. 
Do you remember -- do you know how it was 
15 that 
obtained a visa in this 
16 country? 
17 
A. 
No, absolutely not. 
18 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
19 
instruction. 
20 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
21 
Q. 
Were you a part of the negotiation with 
22 the U.S. Attorney's Office to protect 
23 
against immigration charges. 
24 
A. 
I was not aware that there was any 
25 negotiation relating to her. 
EFTA01137927

Page 596 
1 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
2 
instruction. 
3 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
4 
5 
6 
7 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
8 
instruction. 
9 
MR. SCOTT: If that is privileged, then 
10 
don't answer it. 
11 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
12 
Q. 
You're refusing to answer? 
13 
A. 
I'm not refusing to answer anything. I 
14 have not refused to answer a single question today. 
15 I'm instructed, I await the judge's ruling, and 
16 whatever the judge says, I do. 
17 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: There are now, I 
18 
count, four privilege issues that have been 
19 
raised separately. One deals with the 
20 
privilege issue directly and under the 
21 
representation of Mr. Epstein, the work product 
22 
issue that deals with the scope of the 
23 
representation of Mr. Epstein, the joint 
24 
defense agreement and common interest 
25 
privilege, and now as well as a negotiation 
EFTA01137928

Page 597 
1 
privilege. 
2 
And for my purposes, in fairness to all 
3 
the parties, I do think that is something that 
4 
has to be subject to a set of facts on some of 
5 
them and fuller briefing of law, and that 
6 
requires -- I'm happy to hear it, but I think 
7 
it would be even in the purview of a separate 
8 
hearing from today, whether it's in front of me 
9 
or in front of directly Judge Lynch. 
10 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
11 
12 
13 
14 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
15 
instruction. 
16 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
17 
Q. 
I'm going to read this into the record and 
18 then we'll get the objection and then we'll --
19 
MR. INDYKE: I apologize. I'm not there, 
20 
so I'm not clear when you're finished. I just 
21 
want to make sure I make the objection before 
22 
Mr. Dershowitz responds. 
23 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
24 
Q. 
till. then became upset over this. She 
25 said her head was being held against the bed 
EFTA01137929

Page 598 
1 
2 
3 
Epstein 
4 apologized and subsequently paid her a thousand 
5 dollars." 
6 
Does that refresh your recollection as to 
7 
8 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
9 
instruction. 
10 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
11 
Q. 
And if we look back at the public 
12 statement that was available and attributed to you 
13 from the Daily Mail in April of 2007, and 
14 particularly the third statement that was 
15 highlighted where it attributes to you, "He said 
16 that the girl who accused Epstein of forcible sex 
17 had a long record of lying, theft and blaming others 
18 for her crimes." 
19 
Does what I just read you about 
help 
20 to refresh your recollection that she is the victim 
21 
you were talking about in the public statement made 
22 in April of 2007? 
23 
A. 
No. 
24 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
25 
instruction. 
EFTA01137930

Page 599 
1 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
2 
Q. 
Do you believe, then, that it was a 
3 different victim that Jeffrey Epstein forcibly raped 
4 and that had a long history of lying, theft and 
5 blaming others for her crimes other than 
6 
MR. SCOTT: Object to the form. 
7 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
8 
instruction. 
9 
MR. SCOTT: Argumentative and relevancy. 
10 
This whole line. 
11 
A. 
I guess I have to answer? 
12 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: No. 
13 
A. 
I just want to make one point in response, 
14 though, and that is the quotes from the Mail, of the 
15 three paragraphs, the first two are not in quotation 
16 marks, they are not quoting me directly, they're not 
17 in quotation marks, and I do not remember saying 
18 those. 
19 
Only the third one is in quotation marks, 
20 and only had a long record of lying, theft and 
21 blaming others for her crimes, and I think that 
22 comes from a court document. And I think if you 
23 check, you would see that quotation comes from a 
24 court document. So I have not been quoted by the 
25 Daily Mail, and I do not think I ever spoke to 
EFTA01137931

Page 600 
1 
Ms. Churchill. 
2 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
3 
Q. 
You don't deny, though, that in reading 
4 the Daily Mail article in your hand that the Daily 
5 Mail has attributed each of those statements to you, 
6 whether quoted or not? 
7 
MR. SCOTT: Objection, form, totally 
8 
improper examination. 
9 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
10 
Q. 
You can answer. 
11 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: You can answer. 
12 
A. 
Oh, sure. I have no memory of having had 
13 an interview with the Daily Mail. They do attribute 
14 statements to me, but not in quotes, and that's 
15 always a red flag. When you see statements 
16 attributed to somebody in the newspaper and there 
17 are no quotes, any reasonable lawyer or reader would 
18 question whether there, in fact, had been such a 
19 conversation because if there had been such a 
20 conversation, any good journalist would put it in 
21 quotes. And many of the things article are in 
22 quotes, but my statements are not in quotes other 
23 than the last statement, which I think comes from a 
24 legal document. 
25 
And at the time I made any statement about 
EFTA01137932

Page 601 
1 
this 
about a woman with a long record of lying, I 
2 don't think I was making it about somebody who 
3 claimed to have been raped. I have no recollection 
4 as I sit here now that anybody ever claimed to have 
5 been raped by Jeffrey Epstein. I mean forcibly 
6 raped in the way that you described it in that 
7 document. That was not part of my negotiation with 
8 the D.A. The D.A. never accused --
9 
MR. INDYKE: Objection. 
10 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
11 
Q. 
But that document that I was reading from 
12 is the public police report that is available to 
13 everybody. You recognize that, right? 
14 
A. 
But the D.A. obviously didn't put much 
15 credit in that because he never charged him with 
16 that. So that was not one of the things that I was 
17 dealing with. 
18 
What I was dealing with was two charges 
19 
MR. INDYKE: Objection. 
20 
A. 
-- of massages with underage sex. That 
21 was what I was dealing with. That's what any 
22 comments I may have made dealt with. There was 
23 never an allegation of forcible rape made by any 
24 responsible prosecutor in this case. 
25 
EFTA01137933