EFTA00607219

r:1 
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 
A. 
Yes. 
Q. 
Okay. Because of the privilege instruction, 
I'm going to ask it this way: As of December 30th, 
2014, when you put your -- allowed your name to be put 
on this pleading as --
A. 
I didn't allow it. I was proud to sign this 
pleading. 
Q. 
Okay. As of December 30th, 2014, when you 
were proud to sign this pleading, was there any witness, 
whether a victim or anyone else, who could be -- person, 
whether a victim or anyone else, who could be called as 
a witness who would say, I have knowledge that Alan 
Dershowitz abused a minor, other than 
MM? 
A. 
I believe with further discovery we could 
have identified witnesses, yes. 
Q. 
So is the answer to my question, no, when I 
ask: As of December 30th, 2014, when you signed this, 
were you aware of a single witness who would testify, I 
have knowledge that Alan Dershowitz abused a minor, 
other than 
IIIIIIIr 
MS. McCAWLEY: Objection. I just want to be 
clear. Outside the context of 
what he learned through the common interest 
privilege. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607259

42 
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 
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 
EFTA00607260

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 
confidential common interest privilege 
communications is privileged. Yes, that's my 
position. 
MR. SIMPSON: Okay. That, we will have to go 
to the judge on. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
Let me ask you this way: As of December --
A. 
I'm going to write down your question because 
this one sounds like it's going to be complicated. 
Q. 
I'm going to ask it again. It's not 
complicated. It's very simple. This one is going to be 
very simple. 
A. 
Okay. 
Q. 
As of December 30th, 2014, had you spoken 
personally with anyone who said, I have knowledge that 
Alan Dershowitz 
I have personal knowledge that Alan 
Dershowitz abused other minors? 
MR. SCAROLA: To the extent that that 
question calls for information conveyed within 
the scope of either the attorney/client or common 
interest privilege, I instruct you not to answer. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
Put aside for the moment 
I'll ask the question: Did 
tell you 
that Alan Dershowitz abused anyone other than her? 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607261

44 
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 
MR. SCAROLA: I instruct you not to answer. 
MS. McCAWLEY: And I object to that. 
MR. SIMPSON: Okay. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
So will you not answer that question? 
MR. SCAROLA: On the basis of attorney/client 
privilege, I instruct him not to answer. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
And you will follow the instruction? 
A. 
I'm being instructed not to waive 
attorney/client privileges of 
and I'm 
going to follow that instruction, yes. 
Q. 
To shorten the deposition --
MR. SCAROLA: I might be able to help you a 
little bit. You can assume that Professor 
Cassell will follow my instructions. You 
don't need to ask for --
MR. SIMPSON: We are at the same place. I 
was just going to say, we have an agreement that 
if --
THE WITNESS: Yeah, yeah. 
MR. SIMPSON: Let me just finish. If 
Mr. Scarola on Ms. McCawley instructs you not to 
answer, you're going to follow it? 
A. 
That's fine. I don't want to try to run out 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607262

45 
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 
the clock or anything, but let's get this moving along 
so we can get your questions answered. 
Q. 
I just need to make my record on that. 
So we are going to put aside 
A. 
Okay. 
Q. 
And I'm not talking about attorneys here 
talking about -- what I'm talking about is people who 
could be witnesses, people who saw things, people did 
things, heard things, people who have evidence that 
would be admissible in court. Do you have that in mind? 
A. 
Okay. 
Q. 
As of December 30th, 2014, putting aside 
Miss 
, as to whom you've refused to answer, had 
anyone who fits that category of a person with personal 
knowledge of admissible evidence told you that Alan 
Dershowitz had abused any other minors? 
MR. SCAROLA: I'm going to instruct you not 
to answer that question on the basis of the 
attorney/client and work product privileges. 
MR. SIMPSON: The knowledge -- let me ask 
this way. 
MR. SCAROLA: Let me explain. It might be 
helpful to you if I were to explain the basis of 
my objection. 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607263

46 
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 
MR. SIMPSON: Let me --
MR. SCAROLA: You are not permitted to get 
indirectly what you cannot get directly, and by 
phrasing the questions as you have phrased them, 
you are attempting to narrow down the source of 
information to an attorney/client privileged 
communication. 
I can't allow the witness to respond to that 
question and thus disclose information that may 
fall within the scope of the attorney/client 
privilege or common interest privilege. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
Let me ask it -- try asking it this way: You 
filed this pleading in the CVRA case; is that correct? 
A. 
Yes. 
Q. 
And if I understand correctly, you have 
argued and the court has agreed that this is a civil 
proceeding; is that right? 
A. 
That's a very complicated question that would 
require a longer answer, so I'm just tipping you off, if 
you want a long answer, we can talk about that. 
Q. 
Give me a fair answer to the question. 
What's been your position and have there been rulings on 
the nature of the proceeding? 
A. 
So this requires some context here. This 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607264

47 
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 
action was filed back in 2007 at a time when 
Mr. Edwards, and a couple days later, I did not know 
that there was a nonprosecution agreement that had been 
entered into between the U.S. Government and Jeffrey 
Epstein giving immunity to Epstein, four named women, 
and any other potential co-conspirators for sexually 
abusing minors over an extended period of time. 
And Mr. Edwards and a couple days later I, we 
filed -- it was a petition seeking to get access to the 
nonprosecution agreement and also seeking to invalidate 
that agreement, which essentially, gave immunity to at 
least five and potentially, you know, many more persons 
from federal prosecution for federal sex crimes. 
When the pleading was filed in the District 
Court, what happened I believe was that the -- you know, 
it was styled as a petition and the clerk refused to set 
set an emergency hearing so I think there's a 
hand-scrawled notation that it's an emergency hearing. 
And at that point it went into the court and 
I believe the court gave it a civil caption. The 
caption that we see reflected here, it's 9:08-CV-80736, 
and it's a civil case. However the ultimate aim of the 
action is to try to invalidate a nonprosecution 
agreement and allow criminal prosecution. 
Now, our position, as I understand it, and as 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607265

48 
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 
we tried to articulate it over seven years is that this 
action is an action that is ancillary to a contemplated 
criminal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, four women who 
were assisting him in international sex trafficking and 
the other co-conspirators that would be involved. 
Judge Marra, I think it's fair to say, there 
are a whole series of ruling over seven years so I 
wouldn't want to try to encapsulate them in just a short 
statement here and I'll just take another minute or so I 
think we will have this finished. 
But I think he's essentially ruled that 
procedural purposes, he's going to treat this case as a 
civil case and has not yet had to decide whether or not 
the case is actually a civil action or a criminal 
action. And that has had some consequences along the 
way, but we have been, I think generally, proceeding 
something under the civil rules, you know, for example, 
on interrogatory -- or with regard to different 
procedural issues. 
So to that extent, the procedural rules 
covering civil actions have been what have been in play. 
Q. 
All right. I'm going to go back to this 
allegation about other minors. 
A. 
Yes. 
Q. 
Putting aside your communications that you 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607266

99 
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 
are claiming privilege as -- as to, are you aware of any 
person who, as of December 30th, 2014, had said, I have 
knowledge that Professor Dershowitz abused other minors? 
MR. SCAROLA: I'm sorry. I need to have that 
question repeated. 
(Thereupon, a portion of the record was read 
by the reporter.) 
MR. SCAROLA: That's fine. You can answer 
that. Were there any nonprivileged 
communications of that? 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
My question is -- for purposes of this 
question, I'm putting aside what you're claiming is 
scope of privilege. Were you aware of anyone who made 
the assertion that Alan Dershowitz had abused other 
minors? 
A. 
I didn't have a named person, but I had a 
pool of persons that I understood would be potentially 
available to provide that kind of information. 
Q. 
So the answer to the question is, no, you did 
not have a person who had said to you that Alan 
Dershowitz abused other minors? 
A. 
I think that is slightly different than what 
I just said. I didn't have a named person. I had a 
pool of people in mind, the names of whom I didn't, you 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607267

50 
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 
know, know every single one of them, but I had a pool of 
persons in mind that I thought could provide that 
information. 
Q. 
So at the time you filed the pleading, you 
didn't have the name of any other minor in mind; is that 
right? 
A. 
No -- well, I had, you know, I had for 
example 23 names, 24 names in the West Palm Beach Police 
Department report as potential persons that could 
provide that information. I also had in mind a broader 
pool of people, again, some of whom had been identified 
by FBI, some of whom had not been identified as 
potentially providing that information. 
Q. 
When you say these people have been 
identified as potentially providing this information, 
what do you mean? 
A. 
What I mean is that, as indicated in the 
pleading, it was my understanding on December 30th, that 
Mr. Dershowitz had not only abused 
, but 
had abused other underage minors and that if we could 
figure out the names of those girls, we could bring them 
in and have them testify and explain exactly what he had 
done to them, explain the crimes he had committed to 
them 
And I was hopeful that this was going to be 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607268

51 
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 
the first step in discovering the names of those girls, 
not just for purposes of moving this prosecution along, 
but if we could identify the names of some of these 
other girls who had been abused we could provide help to 
them, services to them. 
So this was a first step in those kinds of 
developments or what I hoped to be those kinds of 
developments. 
Q. 
So is it fair to say that as of December 
30th, 2014, you hoped you would be able to develop 
evidence showing that Alan Dershowitz had abused other 
minors? 
A. 
No. What I had hoped to find was the name of 
the girl or the girl who would be willing come forward 
and testify so that we could put them into the case. I 
mean, let's be clear. This -- we are talking about 
sexual abuse and it's not just a matter of knocking on 
somebody's door and saying, hey, would you tell me how 
you were sexually abused by this very powerful person 
who was working with an international sex trafficking 
ring to do this, just -- just right out of the blue or 
call somebody up on the phone. 
This is difficult and tricky business. The 
Federal Government had been trying to do this for years, 
and Mr. Edwards and I had been trying to do it too, so 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607269

52 
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 
it's not a simple task. 
But I very much recall that there were going 
to be other girls who would come forward and swear under 
oath that Alan Dershowitz had sexually abused them in 
exactly the same way as he had sexually abused 
. And that was the basis on which I filed this 
pleading, along with my colleague Mr. Edwards. 
MR. SIMPSON: Move to strike nonresponsive 
portion of the answer. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
Let me ask you this: In your pleading, in 
your motion to join, you allege that Professor 
Dershowitz abused 
, correct? 
A. 
Correct. 
Q. 
How did adding "and other minors" enhance 
your legal position in this case? 
A. 
So that's -- let me just be clear before I 
dive into that. It enhanced the legal position in 
multiple ways, so I am going to end up giving a long 
answer, I just want to tip you off, if that's what you 
want, I would be happy to give the extended answer. 
Q. 
I would like to know why you alleged "and 
other minors" given what you have said about your 
knowledge of the factual basis, so to speak, for that 
allegation. 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607270

53 
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 
A. 
Okay. There are going to be -- I'm going to 
end up giving you nine reasons, each of which is 
complicated, so I just want to -- I don't want to be 
accused of filibustering or anything. I just want you 
to know that you have asked a broad question that's 
going to require a broad and extended answer. 
Q. 
Answer the question. 
A. 
Okay. Then I'm going to refer to a -- I have 
a -- well, actually, I don't. 
Q. 
Let me ask you this: Before you refer to 
something --
A. 
Yeah. 
Q. 
-- please give me your best recollection of 
what the basis was, the factual basis that you had in 
mind, if the court said to you -- let me put it this 
way. 
If you went to court and Judge Marra said, 
Professor Cassell, what's your factual basis for this 
allegation? Tell me. What would you say? 
A. 
Right. 
MS. McCAWLEY: Wait. Outside the context of 
of anything that's been communicated to you. 
MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me. You have asked two 
different questions now and I need to understand 
which question you are asking. 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607271

54 
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 
The question that you posed before just now 
was: What was the reason for your including 
those allegations in this pleading? Now you have 
asked: What is the factual basis? And that's 
going back to questions that we have already 
covered and we have, I think, exhausted the 
ability to respond to that question outside of 
privileged information. 
Do you want to go back to the question about 
what was your reason for including those 
allegations? 
MR. SIMPSON: I'll ask the question a 
different way. 
MR. SCAROLA: Thank you. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
Mr. Cassell , I'm going to ask you if you're 
in court and Judge Marra said to you, counsel , what is 
the factual basis for your allegation that Professor 
Dershowitz abused other minors, what would you say? And 
if you wouldn't say something because it's privileged, 
then don't include it. What would you tell the judge 
was your basis for this? 
A. 
All right. So the initial basis for it 
was --
MR. SCAROLA: First of all , let me object 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607272

55 
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 
because Professor Cassell is not here as an 
expert witness and hypotheticals are 
inappropriate. You're calling for speculation on 
his part and I'm not going to instruct him not to 
answer, but it is an improper question. 
MR. SIMPSON: I disagree, but you can answer 
the question. 
THE WITNESS: Right. So the factual basis 
would -- we are setting aside attorney/client 
communications, right? 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
I'm asking: What would you tell the judge? 
A. 
Right. So that -- that's speculative. I 
don't think I can give a fair answer at this point 
because that would have involved going back to my client 
and carving out what kinds of things we were going to 
present to Judge Marra in light of the posture of the 
case at that point. 
So it's a speculative question. I would 
have -- let me just, without going into any 
attorney/client privileged communications, I would have 
provided an ample factual basis for those allegations. 
MR. SIMPSON: Move to strike as 
nonresponsive. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607273

56 
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 
Q. 
Let me ask this way: We have talked somewhat 
about the basis for this allegation about other minors. 
Putting aside information as to what you're claiming 
privilege, tell me what you knew as of December 30th, 
2014, that formed the factual basis for your -- for that 
allegation about other minors? 
MR. SCAROLA: And I'll instruct you not to 
answer that question for the same reason that 
when the same question was asked earlier, I 
instructed you not to answer. 
MR. SIMPSON: I'm -- maybe we are not being 
clear, Jack. I'm asking him to put aside -- I 
mean, certainly, he filed a pleading. You've 
asserted privilege as to certain aspects. I'm 
simply asking him, putting aside whatever you're 
claiming privilege for, right, so I'm not asking 
you right now to tell me anything you're claiming 
as privilege. 
BY MR. SIMPSON: 
Q. 
Tell me whatever is not privileged that 
supports that allegation. 
A. 
Okay. The privileged information obviously 
you're asking me not to reveal at this point. 
Q. 
I'm asking you to tell me the nonprivileged 
information -- and I'm not agreeing with your privilege 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607274

57 
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 
assertion 
A. 
Sure. 
Q. 
-- but purpose of this question 
A. 
For purposes of this question. 
Q. 
-- I'm accepting it. 
Putting aside what you claim is privileged, I 
want to know everything that's the factual basis for 
including the allegation about other minors. 
A. 
Okay. The privileged information which I'm 
not disclosing in any way would have interacted with a 
vast body of other information. The vast body of other 
information would have started with an 89-page police 
report from the Palm Beach Police Department that showed 
for about a six-month period in 2005, there was sexual 
abuse of minor girls going on on a daily basis, in --
whenever Jeffrey Epstein was in his Palm Beach mansion. 
And on some cases, it was going on, not once, 
not twice, but three times during the day. That -- let 
me just be clear. I mean, I referred to the 89-page 
police report. I have offered to put it into the record 
if it would speed things up. 
Let's just talk about some of the things that 
are in that 89-page police report. This was a very 
intensive investigation that the Palm Beach Police 
Department put together. They did, for example, what 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607275

58 
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 
are called trash covers; that is when trash came out of 
the mansion of Epstein, the police would intercept the 
trash and then they would go through the trash and look 
for incriminating information. 
And what they began to discover was memo 
pads -- and I say memo pads, let's be clear. Pad after 
pad after pad or I guess I should say, sheet after sheet 
after sheet, that had the name of a girl . And then 
there was the notation of something to the effect of a 
massage. And so the Palm Beach Police Department began 
tracking down -- wait a minute, these are girls giving 
massages and they don't seem to have any specialized 
training in massages; they don't seem to be masseuses in 
any sense of the term; what's going on here? 
And so the Palm Beach Police Department 
began, you know, I guess what we would call 
knock-and-talks, knocking on doors to try to get to some 
of these girls, and they would get to the girls and many 
of them initially were -- were afraid to explain what 
had happened. 
But as they as they continued talking to 
them, the girls began to explain that what was happening 
was, they were going over to Epstein's house under the 
guise of giving a massage, and when they got there, the 
massage was, in fact, sexual activity. And for many of 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607276

59 
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 
the girls, as I said around 23, 24 something along those 
lines, they were underage; they were under the age of 
consent in Florida. 
And so each and every one of those events was 
a crime being perpetrated -- and let's be clear, not 
just being perpetrated by Epstein, but by other people 
who were involved there at the mansion. 
And so what the Palm Beach Police Department 
was putting together was that this mansion in Florida 
was the next of sexual abuse of young girls here in 
Florida that involved literally, in this period of time, 
more than a hundred events that they were able to 
document of sexual abuse. When you put that together 
with the pattern or practice that was being revealed 
there, there were hundreds of acts of sexual abuse going 
on in the mansion. 
But then what becomes -- and in this is where 
I indicated the answer would continue on -- the problem 
was that the evidence was starting to show that this was 
a much broader series of events. For example, there 
were flight logs showing that Mr. Epstein was then 
flying with underaged girls and those flight logs, you 
know, as the flight logs began to develop, for example, 
we have seen -- I know in the last day or two here, one 
underage girl was 
who is on the flight, 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607277

60 
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 
you know, with Epstein, and with Maxwell , and those 
sorts of things. 
So you start to look at the flight logs and 
you see what's going on is not just events that are 
occurring in Florida, but it's occurring on a multi 
state basis which now starts to make it a federal crime. 
For example, we are seeing evidence that -- let's just 
talk about 
since she's central to this 
case. 
We are seeing 
being flown 
from Florida to New York where she's in the clutches of 
Jeffrey Epstein who is sexually abusing her, you know, 
many times a week. And not just Jeffrey Epstein, but 
other powerful persons, for example, Ghislane Maxwell is 
there with him on all of these flights and apparently 
being involved in the abuse. 
Indeed -- and so you have you have -- you 
have -- you have that. You also start to see on the 
flight logs, what to my mind are some very sinister 
things, suggesting that the pattern is not just confined 
to sort of, you know, the girls that are there in 
Florida, but it is extending more broadly. 
Like one to my mind sinister and scary things 
on the flight logs is we see, you know, 
who we know has been sexually abused and we see Jeffrey 
ROUGH DRAFT ONLY 
EFTA00607278