Edwards, Bradley vs. Dershowitz

Edwards, Bradley vs. Dershowitz Case No.: CACE 15-000072 Edwards and Cassells Response to Dershowitz's Motion to Determine Confidentiality of Court Records Page 14 of 20 Dershowitz description of what was said is not true.” Statement of Ms. McCawley on Behalf of David Boies (Oct. 15, 2015). More broadly, the Court can readily see from this passage how Dershowitz is willing to inject into the record a part of Ms. Giuffre’s affidavit whenever it serves his purpose — and, indeed, to characterize the part of the affidavit as “preposterous.” But then he asks this Court to place the underlying affidavit under seal, so that the Edwards and Cassell stand accused having filed a “preposterous” affidavit without anyone being able to assess the validity of Dershowitz’s attack. Dershowitz has referred to the court records that he now wishes to have the Court declare confidential not only in his deposition, but also in his widely-broadcast media attacks on Edwards and Cassell. For example, Dershowitz appeared on the British Broadcasting Corporation (the BBC) and was asked about the allegations: Well, first of all they were made in court papers that they don’t even ask for a hearing to try to prove them. They put them in court papers in order to immunize themselves from any consequences from a defamation suit. The story is totally made up, completely out of whole cloth. I don’t know this woman. I was not at the places at the times. It is part of a pattern of made up stories against prominent people and world leaders. And the lawyers in recent statement challenged me to deny the allegations under oath. I am doing that. I am denying them under oath, thus subjecting me to a perjury prosecution were I not telling the truth. 7 am now challenging them to have their client put these charges under oath and for them to put them under oath. I am also challenging them to repeat them outside of the context of court papers so that I can sue them for defamation. .. . And I will prove beyond any doubt not only that the story is totally false, but it was knowingly false: that the lawyers and the client conspired together to create a false story. That is why I am moving for their disbarment in challenges to be provided to the disciplinary committee. BBC Radio 4 - Sarah Montague (Jan. 3, 2015) (http:/Avww.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02g7qbc). HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010770