HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592.jpg
1.61 MB
Extraction Summary
5
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing / court motion page
File Size:
1.61 MB
Summary
This document is page 3 of a legal motion filed by Alan Dershowitz requesting a modification to a Confidentiality Order. Dershowitz argues he must be allowed to contact witnesses to verify or disprove allegations made by Virginia Roberts (Giuffre), asserting that the Plaintiffs (represented by Edwards and Cassell) may not have conducted a reasonable investigation before filing suit. The text references a previous filing from November 23, 2015, and cites case law regarding the benefits of openness in court proceedings.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Alan Dershowitz | Defendant/Movant |
Requesting the court to modify a Confidentiality Order to allow him to contact witnesses to verify allegations agains...
|
| Virginia Roberts | Accuser/Witness |
Also referred to as Ms. Virginia Giuffre; her allegations and credibility are the subject of the investigation mentio...
|
| Edwards | Plaintiff Attorney |
Partnered with Cassell; filed sexual abuse allegations on behalf of Giuffre.
|
| Cassell | Plaintiff Attorney |
Partnered with Edwards; filed sexual abuse allegations on behalf of Giuffre.
|
| Virginia Giuffre | Plaintiff/Client |
Client of Edwards and Cassell; made sexual abuse allegations inherent to the lawsuit.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Museum of Sci. & History of Jacksonville, Inc. |
Cited in a legal precedent regarding openness in courts.
|
|
| Florida Circuit Court |
Court that issued the precedent cited (Fla. Cir. Ct.).
|
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of the cited case law.
|
|
|
Location mentioned in the cited case name.
|
Relationships (3)
sexual abuse allegations filed by Edwards and Cassell for their client Ms. Virginia Giuffre
sexual abuse allegations filed by Edwards and Cassell for their client Ms. Virginia Giuffre
Dershowitz seeking to verify or disprove Roberts's allegations.
Key Quotes (5)
"Dershowitz now requests that the Court modify the Confidentiality Order to allow Dershowitz to use the transcript for those limited purposes as deemed necessary"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592.jpg
Quote #1
"DERSHOWITZ MUST BE ALLOWED TO CONTACT WITNESSES AND ADVISE THEM OF WHAT ROBERTS ALLEGES IN ORDER TO VERIFY OR DISPROVE HER ALLEGATIONS"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592.jpg
Quote #2
"sexual abuse allegations filed by Edwards and Cassell for their client Ms. Virginia Giuffre are not peripheral to this lawsuit – they are inherent to it."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592.jpg
Quote #3
"Dershowitz argues that Plaintiffs did not perform a reasonable investigation before making the allegations in the Federal Action."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592.jpg
Quote #4
"[o]penness in courts has a salutary effect on the propensity of witnesses to tell the truth"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,152 characters)
Dershowitz now requests that the Court modify the Confidentiality Order to allow Dershowitz to use the transcript for those limited purposes as deemed necessary in the professional judgment of his counsel to ensure Dershowitz is afforded his right to build and present his defense.
I. DERSHOWITZ MUST BE ALLOWED TO CONTACT WITNESSES AND ADVISE THEM OF WHAT ROBERTS ALLEGES IN ORDER TO VERIFY OR DISPROVE HER ALLEGATIONS AND CREDIBILITY AND DETERMINE WHETHER PLAINTIFFS EVER MADE EFFORT TO CONTACT THESE INDIVIDUALS TO VERIFY ROBERTS’S ALLEGATIONS AND CREDIBILITY.
As explained by Plaintiffs Edwards and Cassell in their Response to Dershowitz’s Motion to Determine Confidentiality, the “sexual abuse allegations filed by Edwards and Cassell for their client Ms. Virginia Giuffre are not peripheral to this lawsuit – they are inherent to it.” Plaintiffs’ Response to Dershowitz’s Motion to Determine Confidentiality, November 23, 2015, attached hereto as Exhibit E at 4 (emphasis added). Those “sexual abuse allegations filed by Edwards and Cassell for their client” go beyond Dershowitz. Another inherent part of this lawsuit is what investigation, if any, Plaintiffs undertook with respect to the scope of Roberts’s allegations, all of which bear upon her credibility. Dershowitz argues that Plaintiffs did not perform a reasonable investigation before making the allegations in the Federal Action. Plaintiffs argue that they did. Dershowitz must be allowed to contact witnesses and advise them of what Roberts alleges so that Dershowitz can not only verify or disprove her allegations and credibility, but also determine whether Plaintiffs ever made efforts to contact key witnesses to verify Roberts’s allegations and credibility. As explained by one Florida court, “[o]penness in courts has a salutary effect on the propensity of witnesses to tell the truth” as it “informs persons affected by litigation of its effect upon them . . . .” John Doe-1 Through John Doe-4 v. Museum of Sci. & History of Jacksonville, Inc., No. 92-32567-CI-CI, 1994 WL 741009, at *1 (Fla. Cir. Ct. June 8, 1994) (internal citations omitted).
3
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document