MR. SCAROLA
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Professor Cassell
|
Client |
9
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Mr. Simpson
|
Opposing counsel |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Client |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
the witness
|
Client |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Mr. Edwards
|
Professional collaborative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
witness
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
THE WITNESS (Deponent)
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Mike Danchuck
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Unspecified |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Informational |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Client
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the witness
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Dershowitz
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Scott
|
Opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Prince Andrew, the Duke of York
|
Correspondents |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Richard
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Edwards
|
Co witnesses |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Simpson
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
THE WITNESS
|
Examiner and deponent |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
BRAD EDWARDS
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alan Dershowitz
|
Opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
THE WITNESS
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
THE WITNESS (Deponent)
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Legal deposition/testimony | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of an unnamed witness by Mr. Scarola. | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of an unidentified witness regarding a lawsuit referred to as 'Epstein versus RRA'. Th... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | A deposition where an unnamed witness is questioned by Mr. Scarola, with Mr. Pike present as coun... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition/Testimony of Professor Cassell | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition Interruption | Deposition Room | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Professor Cassell regarding knowledge of allegations against Alan Dershowitz. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Disruption during deposition | Deposition Room | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Mr. Rothstein | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | End of deposition session / Break | Unknown | View |
| N/A | Disclosure | Mr. Scarola made statements to the government about Carolyn. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Professor Cassell | Deposition Room | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Mr. Cassell | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition/Hearing interruption where phone participants are identified. | Deposition Room | View |
| N/A | N/A | Marking of Cassell Exhibit 3 | Deposition setting | View |
| N/A | N/A | Recess in deposition proceedings | Deposition room (unspecifie... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal proceeding involving testimony where Alan Dershowitz is present and accused of disrupting t... | Unspecified legal venue | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal Deposition/Hearing | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of an unnamed witness regarding an investigation. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition/Hearing Testimony | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal deposition or hearing where a witness is questioned about evidence concerning Professor Der... | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | A request was made for a copy of an entry from Professor Dershowitz's book. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Video Record Recess | Deposition Room (Time: 4:01... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of an unnamed witness | Not specified on this page | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The witness, Carolyn, was shown answers to interrogatories and was directed by Mr. Scarola. | N/A | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021909.jpg
This document is page 86 of a legal deposition transcript (rough draft). The witness testifies that flight logs demonstrate a close association and travel history between Alan Dershowitz and Jeffrey Epstein. The witness then mentions becoming aware on December 30th that attorney David Boies had agreed to represent Virginia Roberts. At this point, attorney Mr. Simpson interrupts the testimony to raise an objection regarding a potential waiver of attorney-client privilege.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021907.jpg
This is a page from a rough draft deposition transcript (Bates HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021907). A witness testifies that flight logs produced by Mr. Dershowitz to Detective Riccari of the Palm Beach Police Department were 'incomplete and inaccurate,' raising concerns that Dershowitz had 'sanitized' the logs. The witness further mentions receiving additional flight logs from an individual named Dave Rogers for comparison.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021906.jpg
This document is page 83 of a rough draft deposition transcript. A witness testifies that pilot Dave Rogers produced flight logs during sex abuse litigation against Epstein. The witness notes that when these logs were compared to logs provided by Mr. Dershowitz to the Palm Beach Police Department, inconsistencies were found, arousing suspicion. The testimony is briefly interrupted by Mr. Scott, who reports receiving a call from Epstein's lawyer, Darrin Indyke, regarding technical phone issues.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021894.jpg
This page is a rough draft transcript from the deposition of Professor Cassell. Attorney Mr. Scarola places an objection on the record regarding Alan Dershowitz's behavior, specifically accusing him of distracting the room by jumping up and excitedly whispering in Mr. Simpson's ear during testimony. Mr. Simpson disagrees with the characterization but agrees to pass notes moving forward.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021893.jpg
This document is a page from a rough draft legal transcript (page 70) marked with a House Oversight Bates stamp. It records a contentious exchange between attorneys Mr. Scarola and Mr. Simpson regarding the conduct of Alan Dershowitz. Scarola complains that Dershowitz has been repeatedly 'jumping up' during testimony over the last two days, while Simpson attempts to downplay the disruptions, stating he only saw Dershowitz approach him once.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021892.jpg
This document is a page from a rough draft of a legal transcript (Bates stamped House Oversight) where a witness discusses Jeffrey Epstein taking the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination, specifically regarding his connection to Alan Dershowitz. The testimony is interrupted by a heated exchange between attorneys Mr. Scarola and Ms. McCawley regarding the disruptive behavior of McCawley's client, who was allegedly jumping up and down and using profanity in the room.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021887.jpg
This document is page 64 of a rough draft legal transcript, likely from a House Oversight Committee investigation given the Bates stamp. It features an exchange between attorneys Mr. Simpson and Mr. Scarola, and an unnamed witness. The witness denies that Professor Dershowitz abused other minors, and the ensuing dialogue concerns the procedural rules for the witness referring to notes and documents to refresh their recollection versus testifying from memory.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021879.jpg
This document is a page from a rough draft deposition transcript involving an interrogation by Mr. Simpson. The questioning focuses on establishing the factual basis for allegations concerning 'other minors' known by the witness as of December 30, 2014. Attorney Mr. Scarola interrupts to instruct the witness not to answer based on privilege, leading to a debate about separating privileged legal strategy from non-privileged factual information.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021872.jpg
This document is page 49 of a rough draft deposition transcript marked with a House Oversight Bates stamp. Attorney Mr. Simpson questions a witness about whether, as of December 30, 2014, they were aware of any specific person alleging that Alan Dershowitz abused other minors. The witness responds that while they did not have a specific named person at that time, they had a 'pool of persons' they understood would be potentially available to provide such information.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021868.jpg
This document is page 45 of a rough draft deposition transcript bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp. Attorney Mr. Simpson asks a witness if, as of December 30, 2014, anyone (other than Virginia Roberts) had told them that Alan Dershowitz abused minors. Attorney Mr. Scarola objects and instructs the witness not to answer, citing attorney-client and work product privileges.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021867.jpg
Page 44 of a rough draft deposition transcript involving a witness identified as Professor Cassell. Attorney Mr. Scarola instructs Cassell not to answer questions to preserve the attorney/client privilege of Virginia Roberts. Mr. Simpson questions whether the witness will consistently follow these instructions, to which the witness agrees.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021865.jpg
This document is page 42 of a rough draft deposition transcript, likely from a House Oversight investigation. Attorney Mr. Simpson asks a witness if they knew of anyone (as of Dec 30, 2014) who could testify that Alan Dershowitz abused a minor. Attorney Mr. Scarola objects and instructs the witness not to answer, asserting that even the names of potential witnesses are protected under attorney-client and common interest privilege if that information was communicated confidentially.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021862.jpg
This document is page 39 of a rough draft deposition transcript marked with a House Oversight Bates stamp. Attorney Mr. Simpson questions a witness regarding the existence of a written 'common interest agreement' as of December 30, 2014. The witness confirms a written agreement exists and states that the parties involved include Virginia Roberts and her attorneys.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021860.jpg
This document is page 37 of a rough draft deposition transcript stamped by House Oversight. The witness is being questioned by Mr. Simpson regarding which attorneys they held a 'common interest privilege' with as of December 30, 2014. The witness identifies Brad Edwards, attorneys from Boies Schiller (representing Virginia Roberts), and Mr. Scarola (representing Brad Edwards).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021859.jpg
This is a page from a rough draft deposition transcript involving an inquiry related to Virginia Roberts. The witness (likely an attorney for Roberts) requests a break to consult with counsel to avoid inadvertently waiving attorney/client privilege. After a 12-minute recess (2:13 p.m. to 2:25 p.m.), attorney Mr. Scarola places on the record that they are asserting both attorney/client and common interest privilege regarding the source of information in question.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021858.jpg
This document is a page from a rough draft deposition transcript (Bates stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021858). Attorney Mr. Simpson is questioning a witness about legal agreements existing as of December 30, 2014, specifically regarding a 'common interest privilege' with other attorneys in the 'CVRA case' (Crime Victims' Rights Act). Attorneys Mr. Scarola and Ms. McCawley interject to clarify the scope of the question and assert privilege, with McCawley specifically objecting to revealing information about an agreement (transcribed as 'accountant interest agreement', likely a typo for 'common interest agreement').
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021857.jpg
This document is a page from a rough draft deposition transcript marked 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT'. The witness (identified as Professor Cassell) is asked if anyone other than Virginia Roberts had told him, as of December 30, 2014, that Alan Dershowitz abused a minor. The witness denies this. Attorney Mr. Scarola interrupts to clarify the question, asserting that he will not allow the witness to answer regarding information obtained through 'joint representation or common interest privilege' (likely referring to legal team communications), but allows answers regarding outside sources.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021856.jpg
This document page is a rough draft of a deposition transcript. A witness is questioned by Mr. Simpson about whether anyone had told them that Professor Dershowitz abused minors. Ms. McCawley objects based on attorney/client privilege regarding Virginia Roberts, and Mr. Scarola instructs the witness not to answer, to which the witness agrees.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021852.jpg
This document is page 29 of a rough draft legal transcript (Bates stamped House Oversight). A witness discusses the difficulty of investigating Jeffrey Epstein's crimes due to a lack of cooperation and the inability to identify the names of the girls he trafficked. Attorneys Mr. Simpson and Mr. Scarola discuss procedural objections regarding the witness's answer.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021837.jpg
This document is page 14 of a rough draft deposition transcript from a House Oversight investigation. Mr. Simpson is questioning a witness, initially instructing them to look at the camera for the benefit of a future jury, a point clarified by the witness's counsel, Mr. Scarola. The questioning then pivots to the 'scope of investigation,' specifically asking if serious misconduct allegations require more investigation than lesser allegations, to which the witness agrees.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021832.jpg
Page 9 of a rough draft transcript from a House Oversight investigation. Mr. Scarola and the Witness request access to communications involving 'Rebecca' and Professor Dershowitz before proceeding. Mr. Simpson argues the documents are unnecessary as he intends to avoid questions specifically about those communications, noting the Witness was present for Dershowitz's prior testimony.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021831.jpg
This is page 8 of a rough draft deposition transcript. The text begins with a procedural discussion between a questioner and a witness regarding how questions should be answered. Mr. Scarola interrupts to ask about a document placed before him, which Mr. Scott confirms is a copy of an entry from Professor Dershowitz's book, provided in response to a request made during a previous deposition.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014309.jpg
This document is page 90 of a deposition transcript related to a lawsuit identified as 'Epstein versus RRA'. An unidentified witness, questioned by attorney Mr. Scarola, asserts their 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendment rights when asked about socializing with Alan Dershowitz in the presence of females under 18. The witness objects to a subsequent question about Tommy Mottola, accusing a 'Mr. Edwards' of introducing irrelevant names to damage the witness's personal relationships.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014308.jpg
This document is page 89 of a deposition transcript where an unnamed witness is questioned by Mr. Scarola. The witness invokes their Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights when asked about the contents of private jet flight logs and about socializing with Donald Trump in the presence of females under 18. The witness confirms having socialized with both Donald Trump and Alan Dershowitz, identifying Dershowitz as his attorney.
No Subject
Mr. Scarola wrote answers to interrogatories which were signed by his client. The speaker argues these answers are not privileged.
N/A
Referenced as an attachment in the email.
Unknown
Mr. Scarola suggests ten topics for the interview with Carolyn
Interview Topics
Mr. Scarola suggests ten topics for the interview with Carolyn.
Courtroom Conduct
Discussion regarding Alan Dershowitz interrupting proceedings by standing up.
Document Handover
Mr. Scott provided a copy of an entry from Professor Dershowitz's book to Mr. Scarola, fulfilling a request made in a previous deposition.
Questioning regarding flight logs and relationships with ...
A transcript of a deposition where MR. SCAROLA questions an unnamed witness. The witness invokes constitutional rights for questions about flight logs and socializing with Donald Trump in the presence of minors, but confirms socializing with both Trump and Alan Dershowitz.
Questioning about flight logs, and relationships with Don...
A deposition Q&A where the witness is questioned about flight logs for a private jet and social interactions with Donald Trump and Alan Dershowitz. The witness invokes their constitutional rights to avoid answering questions about the flight logs and about socializing with Trump in the presence of underage females.
Questioning regarding flight logs and relationships with ...
A transcript of a deposition where MR. SCAROLA questions an unnamed witness. The witness invokes constitutional rights for questions about flight logs and socializing with Donald Trump in the presence of minors, but confirms socializing with both Trump and Alan Dershowitz.
Questioning about socializing with Alan Dershowitz and To...
Mr. Scarola questions the witness about socializing with Alan Dershowitz in the presence of minors, to which the witness pleads the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. Scarola then asks about socializing with Tommy Mottola, which the witness calls an irrelevant question brought by Mr. Edwards to harm his relationships.
Questioning about associations with Alan Dershowitz and T...
Mr. Scarola questions an unnamed witness about socializing with Alan Dershowitz in the presence of minors and with Tommy Mottola. The witness refuses to answer, citing constitutional rights, and complains the questions are irrelevant and intended to harm their personal relationships.
Questioning about socializing with Alan Dershowitz and To...
Mr. Scarola questions the witness about socializing with Alan Dershowitz in the presence of minors, to which the witness pleads the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. Scarola then asks about socializing with Tommy Mottola, which the witness calls an irrelevant question brought by Mr. Edwards to harm his relationships.
Waiver of statute of limitations
Described by the witness as a 'nasty letter' containing a waiver of the statute of limitations.
Difficulty contacting Carolyn
The government informed Mr. Scarola it was having difficulty contacting Carolyn.
Response to government's message
Mr. Scarola replied that he had forwarded the government's message to Carolyn.
Information about Carolyn
Mr. Scarola made statements to the government about Carolyn, which the document argues constitutes a waiver of attorney-client privilege.
Discussion about Carolyn
Mr. Scarola spoke with the government for approximately ten minutes about Carolyn.
Follow-up to interviews
An email sent by Mr. Scarola on behalf of the witness as her agent, which was followed up by interviews with the government.
Interview preparation
Email containing bullet points for the government to interview about.
Interview topics
Email with bullet points for the government to interview about
Unsuccessful contact attempts
Mr. Scarola replied that his attempts to contact Carolyn were unsuccessful and provided her phone number.
Legal consultation
Witness confirms speaking with Mr. Scarola in 2020.
Contacting the government
Mr. Scarola left multiple voice messages for the witness (Carolyn) in 2020 regarding the government.
Contact information for Carolyn
Mr. Scarola spoke with the government, which provided Special Agent Young's contact information for him to pass to Carolyn.
Request to meet with Carolyn
The government informed Mr. Scarola that it wanted to meet with Carolyn.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity