This document is a page from a rough draft deposition transcript, likely from the House Oversight Committee investigation (indicated by Bates stamp). A witness, who is a law professor at the University of Utah, explains a clerical error regarding a missing footnote in a legal filing ('Exhibit 2'). The witness clarifies that the Dean of the law school did not order a correction after the fact, but rather had previously suggested using such footnotes, and the omission was a simple word processing or copy-paste error that the witness voluntarily corrected upon discovery.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Witness | Deponent / Law Professor |
Testifying about legal filings and pro bono work; employed at the University of Utah.
|
| The Dean | Dean of the Law School |
Suggested including a footnote in legal filings; supportive of the witness's pro bono work.
|
| Questioner | Interviewer |
Asking questions about the timeline of filing Exhibit 2 and the dean's involvement.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| University of Utah |
Employer of the witness; institution supportive of the witness's pro bono work.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned as the reason the witness is employed there.
|
"I do a lot pro bono litigation for crime victims all over the country"Source
"The star footnote had dropped off."Source
"They have been very supportive of my pro bono work in this case as well as in other cases"Source
"The signature block possibly was a cut-and-paste from an earlier pleading"Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,368 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document