This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca argues regarding the admissibility of communications between witnesses' lawyers (specifically mentioning Mr. Scarola) and the government, citing an email where Scarola suggested ten interview topics for a witness named Carolyn. The discussion centers on whether these communications and proffers are privileged or if they can be used as evidence regarding the 'cultivating of stories'.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Sternheim | Attorney |
Mentioned in the header 'Opening - Ms. Sternheim'
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, questioning Mr. Pagliuca
|
| Mr. Pagliuca | Attorney |
Speaking to the court regarding witness testimony, proffers, and emails
|
| Mr. Scarola | Attorney |
Sent an email to the government suggesting ten topics for an interview with Carolyn
|
| Carolyn | Witness/Subject |
Subject of an interview for which Mr. Scarola suggested topics
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Government |
Prosecution/Department of Justice, recipient of emails and participant in proffers
|
|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Court reporting agency listed in footer
|
|
| DOJ-OGR |
Department of Justice - Office of Government Relations (indicated by footer stamp)
|
"There's an email from Mr. Scarola to the government in which Mr. Scarola suggests ten topics for the interview with Carolyn."Source
"The lawyers are in proffers, your Honor, and the witness is in the proffer."Source
"Those are not privileged conversations."Source
"Not unless we brief it and you give us permission to do that."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,405 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document