The judge refers to Mr. Pagliuca as one of the counsels involved in a dispute over the scope of questioning.
DOJ-OGR-00017942.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a judge's remarks during a hearing. The judge explains the reasoning for sustaining an objection related to a prior "Daubert" ruling on the scope of testimony about child grooming. The judge highlights a significant misunderstanding between opposing counsel, Mr. Pagliuca and another unnamed lawyer, but concludes that the violation of the ruling was not intentional.
Entities connected to both Unnamed Judge and MR. PAGLIUCA
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein relationship