Does that letter put Mr. Dershowitz on fair

02:42:20 02:42:23 02:42:26 02:42:27 02:42:28 02:42:32 02:42:35 92:42:37 OOnN OA BW HD a 02:42:38 ezazze 10 ozazae 11 o24z40 12 0242-40 13 o2aaat 14 eaaoaa 15 o2a2a8 16 ozazea 17 o2azss 18 ozazss 19 o2a2ss 20 erase 21 or4rse 22 o2raesa 23 0243.02 24. o24a03 25 02:43:09 62:43:18 02:43:23 02:43:27 02:43:29 02:43:33 02:43:34 ON Oa Rh WN = 02:43:37 © 02:43:40 02:43:42 10 02:43:44 11 2437 12 02:43:50 13 o2a3s0 14 cass: 15 024352 16 ooaass 17 o2asse 18 oraanr 19 o24a02 20 coaaos 24 e2aaos 22 02:44:06 23 02:44:09 24 02:44:12 25 10/20/2015 01:08:15 PM 276 Does that letter put Mr. Dershowitz on fair notice that he's accused of being a sex offender himself? MR. SCAROLA: Objection. Repetitious. To the extent that you can improve upon the answer, you can improve upon the answer. If you can't, all you need to do is say that. THE WITNESS: I -- and I'll try to -- obviously, I want to be responsive -- BY MR. SIMPSON: Q. Let -- let me ask -- A. ++ to your question. Q. I'll ask you a different question. A. I don't think that's a yes or no question because of ~~ of you're including vague terms like fair notice and -- and those sorts of things. So -- but go ahead and ask your questions and I'll -- I mean, go ahead. . You're a former federal judge? Right. A former Supreme Court law -- law clerk? Yes. Professor at a law school? Yes. Reading as -- reading the language of this ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS (954) 331-4400 277 letter, in your opinion, does the language itself put the recipient on notice that the recipient is accused of abusing minors himself? A. It puts him on notice that that is going to be a potential subject of inquiry at the -- at the -- the deposition. Q. So your answer then is, yes, it puts the -- the -- the person on notice; that's your reading? A. You're -- I think you're putting words in my mouth. You're -- you're trying to ask, you know, a question that on the one hand, you're suggesting is narrow, and on the other hand is broad. It -- I mean, this is probably the simplest way to answer that question. If I had gotten that letter, I would have said, schedule the deposition in the next 24 hours, and come on down here now, and I will be available for a week, That's what I would have said if I had gotten that letter. MR. SIMPSON: Move to strike as nonresponsive. BY MR. SIMPSON: Q. Is it your testimony you can't answer yes or no whether that letter, on its face, puts the recipient on notice that the recipient is accused himself of ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS (954) 331-4400 02:44:47 02:44:24 02:44:24 02:44:27 02:44:44 02:44:46 02:45:04 On OA kh © NH = 02:48:09 ozas1 9 024513 10 o2z4s17 11 o2asta 12 o2s21 13 024524 14 024526 15 ozas28 16 ozas30 17 o245:33 18 024533 19 024534 20 024536 21 024537 22 0248:39 23 o2asan 24 02:45:45 25 02:45:47 02:45:51 02:45:55 02:48:57 02:45:58 02:46:01 02:46:04 ONO Oh WH = 02:46:08 © 02:46:08 o2as:09 10 ozae10 11 o24612 12 024612 13 o24613 14 orders 15 02:46:17 16 o2aeta 17 ozas19 18 02:46:21 19 o24621 20 evaear 21 o246:31 22 o246:22 23 024635 24 02:46:37 25 278 having abused minors? Can you answer that: Yes or no? A. No. I think a yes-or-no answer would be misleading, given the context of this case. Q. You referred in your earlier testimony to -- strike that for a moment. You referred in your earlier testimony to an articie that appeared today regarding Professor Dershowitz's deposition testimony, correct? A. Idon't think so. Q. Okay. Are you aware that -- well, perhaps it was Miss McCawley who referred to it. Do you recall there being a reference this morning to an article being published about Professor Dershowitz's testimony? MS. McCAWLEY: Oh, I'm sorry. It was me. I objected to the extent -- only to the extent it revealed something public that had been stated in public. BY MR. SIMPSON: Q. Okay. And I -- you recall that? A. Yeah, I recall the objection. I think there's an article that came out yesterday or a communication. I -- I -- you know, I can't remember the -- exactly where I -- I know that I received a communication, either through publication or in some ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS (954) 331-4400 279 other way from the -- from the -- you know, I became aware that there was a statement that the -- what's the name of the outfit? It's the Business Investor -- MR. SCAROLA: Daily Business Review. THE WITNESS: Daily Business Review that was stating that David Boies was saying that the representations made by Mr. Dershowitz were false. MR. SCAROLA: I did just coach the witness. I apologize. THE WITNESS: Yeah. And, I'msorry, just for the name of that, so... BY MR. SIMPSON: Q. And you -- in your earlier testimony, you referred to it -- you didn't recall the name, but you referred to it as a reputable -- A. That's right. Q. -- publication? A. That's right. That's the one we are talking about, right. Q. Right. And in that article it states: "McCawley," referring to our colleague, "later issued a statement on Boies's behalf saying, because the discussions that Mr. Boies had with Mr. Dershowitz were expressly privileged ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS (954) 331-4400 Page 276 to 279 of 335 32 of 46 sheets HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010872