Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 10)

Transcript

Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 10) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:03
  Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to pick up
• 0:06
  where we left off with the Virginia Roberts deposition against
• 0:10
  Alan Dershowitz. Question, other than meeting that you talked about
• 0:16
  with the FBI in twenty eleven, shortly after the first
• 0:20
  Daily Mail article came out, have you talked to any
• 0:22
  other law enforcement about Jeffrey Epstein. Ms McCauley, I'm going
• 0:26
  to object to the extent that it's an investigational privilege.
• 0:30
  If there's an ongoing investigation, to extent it was the
• 0:33
  FBI or something that happened previously, you can discuss that
• 0:37
  special Master. You can answer answer, Okay, I'm honestly, I'm
• 0:42
  trying to think FBI. I'm trying to remember when I
• 0:45
  talked to Marie Villafauna. I'm just going to say, I'm
• 0:48
  not too sure. I don't want to answer incorrectly. Question.
• 0:52
  Have you ever given an affid David to law enforcement?
• 0:55
  Answer an Affidavid question something that you signed? Answer? Yeah,
• 1:00
  I know what it is. I'm just trying to think.
• 1:02
  I'm not questioning you, but would the FBI have an
• 1:05
  Affidavid I don't know. I would have signed something for them. McCauley.
• 1:09
  Just answer what you know, Borgia. Question when was the
• 1:12
  first time that you told Brad Edwards that you had
• 1:15
  been sexually abused by Professor Dershowitz McCauley, and again, no
• 1:19
  attorney client privileged discussion. You can give the date answer
• 1:24
  I don't know the date, McCauley, or a timeframe answer
• 1:27
  it would have been. I think this is not attorney
• 1:30
  client privilege, special Master. Just the timeframe McCauley, As long
• 1:34
  as you don't describe it, just the timeframe, special Master.
• 1:38
  You can't describe the conversation, but you can describe the timeframe. Answer.
• 1:42
  That's a difficult answer because she gets cut off by McCauley.
• 1:46
  I don't want you to go into considerations. Think about
• 1:49
  it in your mind, so don't talk about what you
• 1:51
  were discussing. But if you can come up with a
• 1:53
  date in your mind or a time period, then you
• 1:56
  can say that answer. Let's just say the first time
• 2:00
  I mentioned Alan Dershowitz I think was in twenty eleven.
• 2:03
  Question did you say when was the first time, not
• 2:07
  that you mentioned Alan Dershowitz, but that you identified them
• 2:10
  as a sexual abuser. Answer the first time I went
• 2:13
  into detail about it would have been I think in
• 2:15
  twenty thirteen, maybe early twenty fourteen. Question were you living
• 2:19
  in the US? Answer? Yes, don't quote me one hundred percent.
• 2:23
  It could have been before that. I'm just trying to
• 2:25
  remember back. Question when was the first time, just the
• 2:30
  date that you ever told Paul Cassel that you were
• 2:32
  sexually abused by Alan Dershowitz special master. Just the date.
• 2:37
  Answer it would have been early twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen,
• 2:41
  same as Brad. Question. Now, in the document that we
• 2:45
  previously marked, the transcript of our conversation with mister Scrolla,
• 2:50
  I'm not going to ask you to read it. I'm
• 2:52
  just asking you generally, you had said that Brad Edwards
• 2:55
  had contacted you because he was being sued. He was
• 2:58
  in a lawsuit with mister Epstein. Do you recall that,
• 3:02
  Miss McCauley, objection you can answer. Sorry, Virginia, you're confusing me, McCauley,
• 3:08
  it's part of it. I'm sorry. Answer yes, I do
• 3:11
  remember that. Question. Do you remember when that was? Answer?
• 3:14
  Possibly April seventh, twenty eleven. I don't know if that's
• 3:18
  the same conversation or if it was before that or
• 3:21
  after that, But I believe the first time me and
• 3:23
  Brad ever talked was around that date. He called you, right,
• 3:28
  you didn't call him out of the blue. He called
• 3:30
  you out of the blue. Answer, No, I might have
• 3:33
  called him. I think I might have. I can't honestly remember,
• 3:37
  but Sharon Churchiller knew how much I wanted to see
• 3:39
  this case open up and get resolved, which is why
• 3:41
  I talked to the FBI. So I can't remember if
• 3:44
  she introduced me to Brad. I think that's how it went.
• 3:47
  Question did Sharon Churcher talk about mister Edwards litigation with
• 3:51
  mister Epstein McCauley objection special Master? You can answer. If
• 3:55
  you know McCauley, you can answer. Answer. I don't know
• 4:00
  what she knew about him, but she told me he
• 4:02
  was a really good lawyer who was doing good pro
• 4:04
  bono work for other victims of Epstein, and that if
• 4:06
  I had wanted to talk to somebody, he would be
• 4:08
  a good person to talk to. Question that was in
• 4:13
  twenty eleven. Answer yes, question okay, so in twenty eleven
• 4:18
  he was going to help you answer. At that stage,
• 4:21
  we hadn't established anything. It was just kind of like, Hi,
• 4:25
  how are you? Who are you? This is me? Who
• 4:27
  are you? And so on and so forth. Question you
• 4:31
  wanted to identify yourself as a victim of Jeffrey Epstein?
• 4:34
  Answer absolutely, McAuley. Do you need a break the witness?
• 4:38
  No Borgia. Question now in your transcript. Towards the end
• 4:43
  of mister Scrola ask you certain names, special master, what
• 4:46
  page are you referring to? Borgia? Question at page twenty
• 4:50
  two of twenty three. Answer yes, question if you go
• 4:54
  down about halfway two thirds of the way down the page.
• 4:57
  It says, so, I'll just name a name, and you
• 4:59
  tell me if they told the truth. I think they
• 5:02
  have relevant information or no, I don't think they would,
• 5:05
  or I don't know whether they would or not. Okay,
• 5:08
  you understand, McCauley. I don't see where you are Scrolla
• 5:13
  just below the middle of the page. McCauley, here we go.
• 5:15
  I see it. I'm sorry, Borgia, you see where I'm reading?
• 5:19
  Answer uh huh question and then you say yes. And
• 5:23
  then mister Scrolla says, okay, redacted, do you see that?
• 5:26
  Answer yes? Question? And you said I think he has
• 5:30
  relevant information, but I don't think he'll tell you the truth.
• 5:33
  Do you see that? Answer? Yes. Question why did you
• 5:36
  think he wouldn't tell the truth? Answer? Because he did
• 5:40
  things that were wrong? Question what do you mean by that? Answer?
• 5:44
  He participated in sex with miners? Question did you tell
• 5:47
  redacted that Redacted had participated in sex with minors? Answer? Yes,
• 5:52
  I did. Question did you talk to or redacted about
• 5:55
  efforts to obtain any sort of remedy or relief or
• 5:58
  damages or other to bring redacted to justice? Answer? I
• 6:03
  did talk to her about the ongoing proceedings that I
• 6:05
  wanted to bring against redacted. Question what did you tell her? Answer?
• 6:11
  I told her the details about what happened between redacted
• 6:14
  and I, And you know, I said, I hope we
• 6:17
  can get them in some way. I mean, I've heard
• 6:19
  statements about the fifty billion or whatever that was completely incorrect,
• 6:23
  and I honestly do not know where she pulled that
• 6:26
  rabbit out of that's absorb I don't know her to
• 6:30
  be an untruthful person, but what her statements were are
• 6:33
  a thousand percent untrue. Borgia. Can you read back the answer?
• 6:37
  I can read your notes, Borgia. Question when you said
• 6:41
  I hope we can get them in some way, what
• 6:42
  did you mean by that answer, I hope that my
• 6:45
  lawyers would prevail in fighting them in court. You know,
• 6:48
  I don't know what I'm allowed to talk about. McCauley.
• 6:51
  You're not allowed to discuss anything that we've talked about
• 6:53
  in a confidential nature. Answer there was never any monetary
• 6:58
  value discussed. Question, So you wanted to go off redacted
• 7:03
  special Master outside of McCauley cuts her off. If you're
• 7:06
  talking about the conversation with redacted Special Master, you're excluding
• 7:10
  discussions with your lawyers. McCauley. If you're talking about conversations
• 7:14
  with redacted that time, but don't talk about anything you
• 7:19
  talked to about with us. Answer No, with redacted there
• 7:23
  was no monetary value ever discussed. Question. But you said
• 7:26
  you wanted to go after him in court. Answer yes.
• 7:29
  Question what did you want to have happened? Answer? I
• 7:33
  wanted to see him come forward. I wanted justice to happen.
• 7:36
  Question what does that mean? Answer? I wanted him to
• 7:39
  own up for his wrongs. Question did you go to
• 7:42
  the government and say prosecute him? McAuley objection to the
• 7:46
  extent that it reveals any current ongoing investigation. You can't
• 7:49
  discuss that special Master anything you had discussions with your lawyers,
• 7:54
  and they provided on your behalf that's not to be discussed.
• 7:57
  Do you understand that? Answer? Did I tell redacted that
• 8:00
  I'm going to the government special master we're talking about redacted? Answer? No,
• 8:06
  I never went or redacted and told her we're going
• 8:08
  to the government. What did the government have to do
• 8:11
  with this anyway? Question? Did you want to have redacted
• 8:14
  or anybody else pay amounts to your charity? Answer? No?
• 8:18
  Question why not you didn't want money for your charity? Answer?
• 8:22
  Of course, I want money for my charity. I'd love
• 8:24
  to see my charity is my vision to be able
• 8:26
  to help other victims out of their suffering through what
• 8:29
  I suffered through. Of course that would be a dream
• 8:32
  come true. But did I say that money is going
• 8:35
  to be put into that by some unimaginable source? No question.
• 8:40
  Has the charity distributed any funds to victims? Answer? Not?
• 8:44
  As yet, we haven't been able to go out and publish,
• 8:47
  not publish what's the word I'm looking for. We haven't
• 8:49
  been able to make it proactive the way I want
• 8:52
  to make it proactive, like go on TV and talk
• 8:54
  about it. You know what I mean? It's there, It's
• 8:57
  set up. It's wonderful. It's got a list of a
• 8:59
  number the names of places you can go to for help.
• 9:03
  Right now, it's just a map of every place in
• 9:05
  the US that I've called personally to be able to
• 9:08
  get out of the situation that you're in. If you're
• 9:10
  a victim of abuse or sexually trafficked, that's no money
• 9:14
  to give victims. Question there's no funds currently in the charity?
• 9:19
  Answer no, besides what keeps it afloat in the bank,
• 9:22
  which is probably one hundred and fifty or something. Question
• 9:25
  are the officers paid? Answer the who answer the officers
• 9:29
  of the charity? Answer no, one's paid. Question Have you
• 9:33
  applied to the charity or funds? Answer no, Like has
• 9:37
  a victim called up and said, can we get some money?
• 9:39
  Is that what you're asking? No question, that's one way
• 9:43
  answer no question. Nobody ever contacted the charity online? Answer No.
• 9:48
  We've had a nice people call up and tell us
• 9:51
  about their story and you know, thank me for coming
• 9:53
  forward and being brave. We've had that, But we have
• 9:56
  had nobody asked for money. We've just had a nice
• 9:58
  fan mail special Master. Now's a good time to take
• 10:02
  a five minute break. McCauley, sure, I was going to
• 10:05
  let you know too. In the effort to conserve time,
• 10:08
  I did get lunch brought in for everybody. I'm not
• 10:10
  sure how many things are open since it's a Saturday.
• 10:13
  I don't know when you're hungry. It's your deposition unless
• 10:16
  you're ready to eat. But whenever that is, I think
• 10:19
  she set it up, maybe in one of the rooms
• 10:22
  so we can sign them out, Special Master. Thank you.
• 10:26
  The witness is excused, Go ahead and step out, McCauley. Meredith,
• 10:30
  why don't you take her special Master housekeeping? You wanted
• 10:34
  to put your objection on the record outside of the witness.
• 10:36
  Go ahead, now would be the appropriate time. Miss Borgia,
• 10:41
  the witness has testified that she's afraid for her life.
• 10:44
  Her counsel has instructed her not to provide names because
• 10:47
  of fears of physical retribution. At the same time, the
• 10:50
  witness is posted on Facebook in a way that's publicly available,
• 10:55
  not only the photo of her house, the exact street address.
• 10:58
  She posted her children up on Facebook. I didn't interject
• 11:02
  those children into this case. I don't plan to, but
• 11:05
  there's no basis. When the witness is made a Facebook
• 11:07
  page profile available to the world to say that I'm
• 11:11
  supposed to collect copies of something that's on the internet
• 11:14
  and seal them. That's not my obligation, and I think
• 11:17
  that's inappropriate, and that's something that the witness has put
• 11:20
  out there that is inconsistent with the testimony McAuley. I
• 11:24
  want to make clear the date on that is November
• 11:27
  of twenty thirteen. She has received threats to her safety
• 11:30
  since that date, so it's inappropriate to put her address
• 11:34
  on the record or anything with respect to her children. Borgia,
• 11:38
  I did not read her address into the record. SCROLLA
• 11:40
  may I make a suggestion. I understand that the point
• 11:44
  is attempted to be made with regard to the relevancy
• 11:46
  of the matter, and the relevancy is the suggestion that
• 11:49
  posting pictures of her children and her address would tend
• 11:53
  to contradict assertions that she's in fearor well to the
• 11:57
  extent that this is relevant. Argument is established by reference
• 12:01
  to the fact that pictures of her children and her
• 12:04
  address were posted on the internet in a specific date.
• 12:07
  There's no reason for either of the pictures themselves or
• 12:10
  the address to be part of the record. So we
• 12:13
  would join in the objection that as a matter of privacy,
• 12:16
  those things be excluded from the public record, although reference
• 12:20
  to the fact of the posting is fairy game from
• 12:23
  our perspective, Miss Borgia. Then I'm going to go in.
• 12:27
  I'm going to need to re examine the witness because
• 12:29
  I avoided any mention of her children based on her
• 12:32
  council's objections, and I will ask her on the record
• 12:36
  that she posted pictures of her own children. I didn't
• 12:39
  ask her that SCROLLA. Will stipulate to the fact that
• 12:42
  I think that she said those are her children. Will
• 12:45
  stipulate to the fact that there are photographs of her children, Borgia,
• 12:50
  that she posted SCROLLA, that she posted McAuley on that
• 12:54
  date SCROLLA on that date in twenty thirteen, and that
• 12:58
  her address appears on the dot document posted in twenty thirteen,
• 13:02
  Special Master, Does that stipulation satisfy you, Mister Scott, will
• 13:06
  consider it over lunch. We'll talk SCROLLA over lunch. When
• 13:10
  we take the break, we'll talk to our client, Special Master.
• 13:13
  I'm not excluding the documents should be aware. What I
• 13:17
  want to do, though, is take extra precaution or protect
• 13:19
  the document from being disclosed in any form, which is
• 13:23
  why we've collected all the copies. I'll put you in
• 13:26
  charge of them, Cigared, and what we'll do with respect
• 13:29
  to your relevancy argument or any other argument that you
• 13:32
  wish to make on what appears it's going to be
• 13:34
  in front of Judge Lynch. That document is going to
• 13:37
  be available to you. If he's going to treat it
• 13:40
  in the manner in which he treats it and gives
• 13:42
  it whatever weight, I'm not excluding that, But what I
• 13:46
  do want to do is take the extra precaution of
• 13:48
  protecting the witness privacy. Borgia, That's fine, but to be clear,
• 13:52
  my objection is not relevance. My basis for arguing this
• 13:56
  is not relevancy. It goes to the credibility of the witness.
• 14:00
  Special Master. I'm aware. I will share this. If you
• 14:03
  need to ask additional questions beyond stipulation, then I think
• 14:06
  we can go down that road and let you ask
• 14:08
  the questions and we'll see if there's an objection with
• 14:11
  respect to those. But I'm going to give you that
• 14:14
  opportunity if you choose to take it. Fair enough, Miss Borgia, Yes,
• 14:18
  Special Master, let's break for five minutes. Let's be back here.
• 14:22
  It is by my watch, it's now twenty to one.
• 14:25
  Let's be back here at a quarter to one. Wellcauley,
• 14:28
  can we have a time check on how much time
• 14:30
  we've spent the videographer two hours, fifty nine minutes, exactly,
• 14:36
  Special Master, it's twenty to one. Let's be ready to
• 14:39
  begin the deposition again at one o'clock. All right, folks,
• 14:42
  we're going to wrap up right here, and in the
• 14:44
  next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up
• 14:47
  where we left off. All of the information that goes
• 14:50
  with this episode can be found in the description box.