EFTA01138026

748 
1 
exact words were: 
2 
"MR. DERSHOWITZ: So they and the woman 
3 
got together and contrived and made this up." 
4 
Yes. 
5 
Q. 
Right. So, when I asked you what formed 
6 
the basis of your public statement that the lawyers 
7 
were involved in contriving and making this up, you 
8 
gave me a list of things, and one is --
9 
A. 
That's right. 
10 
Q. 
-- Paul Cassell's reputation 
11 
A. 
That's right. 
12 
Q. 
-- that was supported by various people 
13 
telling you various things. 
14 
A. 
That's right. 
15 
Q. 
One of those things being Paul Cassell is 
16 
a zealot. And so that's where we are right now in 
17 
understanding who these people were, when you got 
18 
this information. And that's what you're describing 
19 
for me, right? 
20 
A. 
That's correct. But I'm saying to you 
21 
that it was the totality of circumstances. For 
22 
example, if a very imminent lawyer with a superb 
23 
reputation had made serious allegations, I would 
24 
be -- I mean, I knew in this case they were totally 
25 
false, but if I didn't know, if I didn't have that 
EFTA01138126

749 
1 
personal information, I would be more reluctant to 
2 
express this opinion. 
3 
But knowing everything I knew, that the 
4 
allegations were false, that there had to be 
5 
financial motive, that there was so much 
6 
specificity, that it was written by the lawyers 
7 
themselves, that they didn't put it under seal, that 
8 
they were trying to get the story out and circulated 
9 
as widely as possible, all of that combined with 
10 
their reputation led me to the opinion that this was 
11 
the scenario. 
12 
By the way, I think it was partial 
13 
scenario, I think as I've said before, there were 
14 
dual motivations. One motivation was to profile me 
15 
to try to -- that was a cover, really. 
16 
MR. EDWARDS: Object. Move to strike as 
17 
nonresponsive. 
18 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Yeah, I think 
19 
we've gone far afield. So granted. Move 
20 
forward. 
21 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
22 
Q. 
What did the former President of Ecuador 
23 
tell you about Paul Cassell? 
24 
A. 
Again, all I remember is we had a 
25 
conversation. You asked me who did I have a 
EFTA01138127

750 
1 
conversation with about Paul Cassell. My 
2 
recollection is that he did not use the term 
3 
"zealot" or anything like that. He just gave me 
4 
information. 
5 
Q. 
What information did he give you? 
6 
A. 
That he is stubborn, that he would be 
7 
difficult to get to change his views, that kind of 
8 
thing, in general. But all of it contributed to an 
9 
image. 
10 
I had never met Paul Cassell. I didn't 
11 
know who he was other than having read some of his 
12 
articles. But then I did a lot of research on him 
13 
before I made these statements. 
14 
Q. 
Okay. My question that's pending is, what 
15 
did the former President of Ecuador tell you? 
16 
A. 
That he was stubborn and probably would be 
17 
difficult to get him to change his mind. 
18 
Q. 
Okay. Is there anyone else other than the 
19 
people that you have already either identified --
20 
A. 
Yes. 
21 
Q. 
-- by name or described for me that gave 
22 
you information 
23 
A. 
Yes. 
24 
Q. 
-- about Paul Cassell that contributed to 
25 
your belief about his reputation that gave you a 
EFTA01138128

751 
1 
confidence in the public statement you made about 
2 
him on January 5, 2015? 
3 
A. 
Yes. 
4 
Q. 
Okay. Who are those individuals? 
5 
A. 
But I want to be very clear. I'm talking 
6 
about individuals who I spoke to about Paul Cassell, 
7 
who gave me information that formed part of the 
8 
large picture. 
9 
Q. 
You've been clear on that. I get that. 
10 
A. 
One of them is Akhil Amar, who is a 
11 
professor at Yale Law School. 
12 
Q. 
When did you talk to Akhil Amar? 
13 
A. 
Shortly after this happened. Again, my 
14 
recollection is he called me because he was so 
15 
shocked. 
16 
Q. 
And would that have been some date prior 
17 
to January 5, 2015? 
18 
A. 
I don't remember for sure. But it's -- I 
19 
don't remember for sure. 
20 
Q. 
Can you tell me what the substance of the 
21 
conversation was that you had with Akhil Amar about 
22 
Paul Cassell? 
23 
A. 
Well, how shocked he was that Cassell 
24 
would make a statement like this. And that he would 
25 
try to talk to Cassell and persuade him that it 
EFTA01138129

752 
1 
couldn't be true. And that it would be a difficult 
2 
conversation. That's my basic recollection. 
3 
Q. 
Did Akhil Amar tell you that he thought 
4 
highly of Paul Cassell? 
5 
A. 
No. 
6 
Q. 
Did he give you positive or negative 
7 
information about Paul Cassell or Paul's reputation? 
8 
A. 
I would say it was neutral but consistent. 
9 
You have to know something about Akhil Amar. Akhil 
10 
Amar is the nicest person in the world. I've never 
11 
heard him say anything negative about any human 
12 
being on the face of the earth, and I would never 
13 
expect him to say in specific terms anything 
14 
negative about anybody. But the information he 
15 
provided me helped form the total picture that I had 
16 
of Mr. Cassell. 
17 
Q. 
Other than telling you that Mr. Cassell 
18 
was stubborn, what other information did he provide 
19 
you which helped to form the total picture? 
20 
A. 
I think we discussed his views of 
21 
victimization, his views of false confessions. We 
22 
had a general discussion about his academic 
23 
standing, about his general reputation, about --
24 
Q. 
When you says "his," you're speaking of 
25 
Paul Cassell's or Akhil Amar's? 
EFTA01138130

753 
1 
A. 
No, about Paul Cassell's. This is a 
2 
conversation with Akhil Amar. 
3 
Q. 
Okay. What specifically, then, was the 
4 
substance of that conversation about Paul Cassell's 
5 
reputation that's helped to form the basis of the 
6 
big picture? 
7 
A. 
The conclusion that I drew from it was 
8 
that he with a zealot and he was stubborn and that 
9 
he was an idealogue, and that he was rigid in his 
10 
views. But, again, this is a conclusion that I 
11 
reached on the basis of all the conversations I had. 
12 
I reached out, some people reach out to me, and 
13 
these are the kinds of things that we discussed. 
14 
Q. 
Did Akhil Amar, in speaking about Paul 
15 
Cassell and his character and his reputation, tell 
16 
you that he feels Paul Cassell must genuinely 
17 
believe in the allegations? 
18 
A. 
No. 
19 
Q. 
Did he tell you or convey to you that Paul 
20 
Cassell did not believe in the allegations of this 
21 
claim? 
22 
A. 
No. 
23 
Q. 
Did Akhil Amar convey to you that Paul 
24 
Cassell's character or reputation were such that he 
25 
would place assertions or allegations in pleadings 
EFTA01138131

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
I got from the people around -- the people I spoke 
13 
to. 
14 
MR. EDWARDS: We're getting a little 
15 
feedback on the phone. 
16 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: On the phone, 
17 
there is some background --
18 
VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going off the record. 
19 
The time is 11:21 a.m. 
20 
(Recess was held from 11:21 a.m. until 11:27 a.m.) 
21 
VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the record. 
22 
The time is 11:27 a.m. 
23 
MR. EDWARDS: Can you read back for me the 
24 
last question and the last answer? 
25 
COURT REPORTER: "Did Akhil Amar convey to 
in which Paul Cassell did not believe? 
A. 
My best recollection -- again, this could 
be him, it could be others, but it was partly from 
what I spoke to him about is that Paul Cassell does 
not believe that any woman is capable of lying about 
sexual assault; that when a woman makes a claim of 
sexual assault, it must be believed and it must be 
credited without regard to the evidence. 
That was certainly the impression I came 
away with from my various conversations with a range 
of people. And that was a pretty uniform view that 
EFTA01138132

755 
1 
you that Paul Cassell's character or reputation 
2 
were such that he would place assertions or 
3 
allegations in pleadings in which Paul Cassell 
4 
did not believe? 
5 
"My best recollection -- again, this could 
6 
be him, it could be others, but it was partly 
7 
from what I spoke to him about is that Paul 
8 
Cassell does not believe that any woman is 
9 
capable of lying about sexual assault; that 
10 
when a woman makes a claim of sexual assault, 
11 
it must be believed and it must be credited 
12 
without regard to the evidence. 
13 
"That was certainly the impression I came 
14 
away with from my various conversations with a 
15 
range of people. And that was a pretty uniform 
16 
view that I got from the people around 
the 
17 
people I spoke to." 
18 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
19 
Q. 
Is there anything more about your 
20 
conversation with Akhil Amar that contributed to 
21 
your overall perspective on the reputation of Paul 
22 
Cassell, other than what you've already told me? 
23 
A. 
Not that I can now think of. 
24 
Q. 
How many times did you speak with Akhil 
25 
Amar about Paul Cassell? 
EFTA01138133

756 
1 
A. 
I think twice. 
2 
Q. 
And are you able to say with any certainty 
3 
whether or not it was before or after January 5, 
4 
2015? 
5 
A. 
I can't say. 
6 
Q. 
Did you ask Akhil Amar to reach out to 
7 
Paul Cassell? 
8 
A. 
I did. 
9 
Q. 
Other than Akhil Amar, is there anyone 
10 
else that you haven't already described or named 
11 
that gave you information about Paul Cassell? 
12 
A. 
Okay, let me be very clear, I'm not 
13 
including people with whom I have a privilege, I'm 
14 
not including people that have a privilege with me. 
15 
And I want to be very clear about this, I 
16 
am not now allowed to describe any conversations 
17 
with the person who Sigrid McCawley is now here on 
18 
behalf of. So, I don't want a negative inference to 
19 
be drawn. 
20 
I would like to comment, if I could, about 
21 
a person who I'm not allowed to comment about. But 
22 
I want the record to be -- I don't want 
I have to 
23 
answer your question completely. 
24 
Q. 
Okay. But this is all -- all of these 
25 
questions are about the basis that gave you the 
EFTA01138134

757 
1 
confidence to make the January 5, 2015 statement 
2 
that provided you information on Paul Cassell. 
3 
A. 
I misunderstood. I think your last 
4 
question said the universe of information about Paul 
5 
Cassell. That's why I had to put that on the record 
6 
involving the sealed --
7 
Q. 
Maybe it did, so let me just say 
let me 
8 
break this down. 
9 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: That's how I 
10 
understood it. 
11 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
12 
Q. 
Let's break this down into the people that 
13 
you were describing you spoke to prior to making the 
14 
public statement that we've been talking about, and 
15 
then we'll expand it beyond that time. 
16 
A. 
Okay. 
17 
Q. 
Okay. So, in addition to Akhil Amar, who 
18 
is next on the list? 
19 
A. 
You want me to repeat the names I gave you 
20 
or --
21 
Q. 
No, no, outside of the people we've 
22 
already discussed? 
23 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Who is next on 
24 
the list for what? 
25 
EFTA01138135

758 
1 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
2 
Q. 
Who is next on the list of people that you 
3 
spoke with about Paul Cassell or his reputation that 
4 
gave you the confidence to make the public statement 
5 
that you made about Paul Cassell on January 5, 2015? 
6 
A. 
Outside of people within the various 
7 
privileges we've talked about. 
8 
Q. 
Well, I want to know are there people 
9 
within the privileges that we spoke about --
10 
MR. SCOTT: Objection. 
11 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
12 
Q. 
Are there people within the privilege that 
13 
spoke to you that helped to form your opinions or 
14 
give you confidence to make the public statement 
15 
that you made in January 5, 2015? 
16 
MR. SCOTT: Objection, work product --
17 
MR. INDYKE: Objection --
18 
MR. SCOTT: -- attorney-client. I'm 
19 
instructing him not to answer that question. 
20 
MR. EDWARDS: I'm not even asking for the 
21 
identities first. I'm asking are there people. 
22 
MR. SCOTT: I'm not -- objection. 
23 
MR. INDYKE: Objection. Same objections. 
24 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Because you've 
25 
defined the topic so specifically, it would, in 
EFTA01138136

759 
1 
my view, invade the privilege without 
2 
identifying the people. And so based on the 
3 
objection, I will grant the objection pending a 
4 
reservation to review the entire issue on the 
5 
privilege, as we've done before. 
6 
So move on. I think right now, move on on 
7 
this -- on the question because you specified 
8 
the question. 
9 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
10 
Q. 
Did privileged communications assist in 
11 
forming your opinions about Paul Cassell? 
12 
MR. SCOTT: Same objection, same 
13 
instruction. 
14 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection. 
15 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: And the same 
16 
ruling as the previous question. 
17 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
18 
Q. 
Are we clear that I'm not asking what 
19 
those opinions are or the names of the individuals? 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
Just are there individuals -- is there privileged 
communications that form the basis of your -- that 
help to form the basis of your opinions? Just yes 
or no, is there privileged communication --
MR. SCOTT: Same objection, same 
instruction. 
EFTA01138137

760 
1 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
2 
instruction. 
3 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: Here's -- let me 
4 
just -- so I'm clear, we may -- it may be me or 
5 
it may be Judge Lynch who visits this issue, 
6 
and it may very well be that he will have to --
7 
the witness will have to answer these questions 
8 
after subsequent argument. 
9 
However, because the question defines the 
10 
topic and the matter that you're inquiring so 
11 
specifically without addressing the 
12 
individuals, but seeking the individuals whom 
13 
he shares whatever privilege is being asserted, 
14 
since the topic is so specifically defined in 
15 
your question, I think it would invade the 
16 
privilege, as I understand it. 
17 
And until we reach the overall decision on 
18 
whether privileged information of this type can 
19 
be -- to force the witness to answer it --
20 
require an answer from the witness, then I 
21 
would like to move on. 
22 
MR. SCAROLA: So that our position is 
23 
clear, there is no legal issue to address 
24 
unless there are materials over which a 
25 
privilege is being asserted. 
EFTA01138138

761 
1 
We are entitled to know whether there are 
2 
materials over which a privilege is being 
3 
asserted, and we are entitled to know the 
4 
nature of the privilege that is being asserted 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
SPECIAL MASTER POZZUOLI: I -- well taken. 
16 
But my ruling will stand for now. 
17 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
18 
Q. 
Did you receive any e-mails about Paul 
19 
Cassell or his reputation? 
20 
A. 
Not that I remember, but I can check. 
21 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection. 
22 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
23 
Q. 
Did you receive any e-mails about the 
24 
reputation of Brad Edwards? 
25 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
so that we can make a determination as to 
whether we even want to raise a legal issue. 
There's no legal issue to raise unless 
we've identified whether there is privileged 
material. 
That's what we're attempting to do, to 
establish for the record whether there is 
privileged material and the nature of privilege 
being asserted without getting into the 
substance of any privileged communication. 
EFTA01138139

762 
1 
instruction. 
2 
MR. SCOTT: Again, if they're in the 
3 
context of privileged materials. 
4 
A. 
Outside -- outside all of the privileges, 
5 
I will have to check. I don't recall. 
6 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
7 
Q. 
Did you receive any e-mails about the 
8 
reputation of Jack Scarola? 
9 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
10 
instruction. 
11 
A. 
I don't recall. 
12 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
13 
Q. 
Did you receive any e-mails about the 
14 
reputation of Sigrid McCawley? 
15 
MR. SCOTT: Relevancy. 
16 
MR. INDYKE: Same objection, same 
17 
instruction. 
18 
A. 
No. I've always had a very high regard 
19 
for Sigrid McCawley prior to these allegations, 
20 
which is why I was so shocked that she would lend 
21 
her name to these false allegations. 
22 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
23 
Q. 
I don't believe there's any question 
24 
pending. 
25 
Who are the individuals by name that told 
EFTA01138140

763 
1 
you Paul Cassell, as a professor, used Alan 
2 
Dershowitz as an object of hatred in his class? 
3 
A. 
I heard that from some students. Well, 
4 
no, let me be clear. From a student. And I have no 
5 
recollection of the name. But a student called me 
6 
and told me that a friend of his who was in Paul 
7 
Cassell's class remembered that he went after me on 
8 
the -- two issues; on the death penalty and on the 
9 
exclusionary rule, and used me as a kind of object 
10 
example of, you know, a wrong-headed person. That 
11 
he seemed to -- at least the student got a 
12 
perception that he seemed to have an animus towards 
13 
me. But I have to tell you that did not figure 
14 
into -- that did not contribute to my conclusions 
15 
about that. I'm controversial; I know that. 
16 
Q. 
Didn't we get here by me asking what did 
17 
contribute, and you told me, amongst a laundry list 
18 
of other things, that you were told that Paul 
19 
Cassell used Alan Dershowitz as an object of hatred? 
20 
A. 
I may have thought about that. But as I 
21 
think about it now, I don't think I really factored 
22 
that in in any significant way into my assessment. 
23 
Q. 
So that I understand the source of that 
24 
information, as you sit here today, it is a person 
25 
who you cannot identify told you that a friend of 
EFTA01138141

764 
1 
that person that you cannot identify --
2 
A. 
That's right. 
3 
Q. 
-- told you that --
4 
MR. SCAROLA: Told him. 
5 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
6 
Q. 
-- told him that Paul Cassell used you as 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
That 
14 
call 
15 
in your mind and it becomes a small part. 
16 
As I now think about it, I think too small 
17 
a part to even factor into my decision. I don't 
18 
think I really let that weigh on my decision. It 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
that 
25 
are the other names in addition to those that you 
an example on two issues, the death penalty and 
exclusionary rule, in his class? 
A. 
And more generally about my approach to 
criminal law. That's why I would never make a 
statement like that publicly. 
You're asking me what was in my mind. 
was a factor in my mind. When you get a phone 
about somebody, you don't forget it, it stays 
may have weighed on my attitude toward Paul Cassell, 
but I don't think it would have affected my decision 
as to whether he would do what I said he did -- what 
I believe he did. 
Q. 
What are the names -- other than those 
you have identified or described for us -- what 
EFTA01138142

765 
1 
have described or named for us that gave you 
2 
information about Paul Cassell? 
3 
A. 
As I sit here now, I'm sure there are 
4 
many, but I can't identify any specific names, and 
5 
if I can think of any, I will certainly let you 
6 
know. 
7 
Q. 
Can you tell me the additional names other 
8 
than Akhil Amar that you communicated with and asked 
9 
to communicate with Paul Cassell? 
10 
A. 
Nancy Gertner, former federal judge. 
11 
MR. SCOTT: Again, not privileged. 
12 
A. 
Well, it's complicated. At the time I 
13 
asked her to reach out, I did not regard her as my 
14 
attorney. Since that time, she has offered to help 
15 
represent me. So we're now in a privileged 
16 
relationship. 
17 
But when I called and asked her -- I think 
18 
she called me. I had no idea who knew Paul Cassell, 
19 
but a number of people called and said, what can we 
20 
do? Can we call Paul? How can he be doing this? 
21 
This is -- even Senator Hatch offered to call Paul 
22 
Cassell because he couldn't believe -- he said, I 
23 
cannot believe this allegation against you. I know 
24 
you. I know you to be a very honorable man. I 
25 
cannot believe that allegation against you. And I'm 
EFTA01138143

766 
1 
going to call Paul Cassell. 
2 
BY MR. EDWARDS: 
3 
Q. 
Okay. Going back to Nancy Gertner, when 
4 
did you establish an attorney-client relationship 
5 
with Nancy Gertner? 
6 
A. 
Sometime thereafter. 
7 
Q. 
Sometime? 
8 
A. 
After she called Cassell, and Cassell 
9 
would not do anything to try to resolve the matter. 
10 
Q. 
Okay. Do you know when it was that you 
11 
asked Nancy Gertner to reach out to Paul Cassell? 
12 
A. 
Shortly after the allegations. Again, she 
13 
called me, and she just couldn't believe that 
14 
anybody would be making these allegations. 
15 
Q. 
Was it before or after the statement that 
16 
we have discussed that was made by you on the Don 
17 
Lemon show on January 5, 2015, that you asked Nancy 
18 
Gertner to reach out to Paul Cassell? 
19 
A. 
I don't remember. It could have been 
20 
before. But it might have been after. I just don't 
21 
remember. 
22 
Q. 
And is there a formal memorialization of 
23 
the attorney-client relationship between yourself 
24 
and Nancy Gertner? 
25 
A. 
I don't know the answer to that as we sit 
EFTA01138144

767 
1 
here now, but she's one of my lawyers and she's 
2 
included on my list of lawyers and I regard her as 
3 
one of my attorneys. 
4 
Q. 
Is there anyone else that is on the list 
5 
of people other than those that you've either 
6 
described or named already that provided you 
7 
information about Paul Cassell? 
8 
A. 
I'm sure there are many, but not that I 
9 
can identify now. Well, I can give you one more. 
10 
The BBC reporter who interviewed me showed me an 
11 
e-mail from Paul Cassell in which Paul Cassell gave 
12 
her a list of questions to ask me, while claiming 
13 
that he was not speaking to the media. 
14 
That led me to conclude that he was a 
15 
liar. And that happened very early on. That he was 
16 
absolutely a liar because he categorically stated 
17 
that he had never spoken to the media, never would 
18 
speak to the media. And here I had an e-mail from 
19 
him showed to me by BBC that proved he was 
20 
absolutely lying through his teeth. So I concluded 
21 
that he is a liar who has no concern for the truth. 
22 
Q. 
When did Paul Cassell categorically deny 
23 
ever speaking to the media? 
24 
A. 
In his press releases where he says, we do 
25 
not speak to the media, we've never spoken to the 
EFTA01138145