Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Transcripts From The Hearing Dealing With Tyler Robinson’s Courtroom Appearance (Part 8) (8/1/26)

Transcript

Transcripts From The Hearing Dealing With Tyler Robinson’s Courtroom Appearance (Part 8) (8/1/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to pick up where he left
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: off with the Tyler Robinson closed hearing discussing his appearance
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: the court. All right, and from defense, mister Grunnander, do
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: you have anything else? I didn't mean to cut you off,
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: mister Grunnander, No, the court, okay, from the defense, any
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: thoughts progress or things that you wish to bring up
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: with the court, mister Novak. Everything that was stated accurately
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: represents the collaboration and it also presents a picture of
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: the amount of material we need to get through so
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: far the court, right right, and my final question, and
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: I appreciate it. I think there's good cooperation between the parties.
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: This is in the interest of justice and it just
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: makes the process so much better, even though it's an
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: adversarial system. Mister Novak, we have no discovery disputes given
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: the way things have gone. There will of course be
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: requests that we may have based on what we see
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: in discovery, but we're not there yet the court, and
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: I'm not holding anyone to this, but I'm trying to
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: earmark a time for a potential prelim hearing and whatever
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: you have to say is not something I'm holding you to.
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: But we do have a very basic idea of how
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: much time the court should be allocating for a potential
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: preliminary hearing. And again I don't mean to put you
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: on the spot. You are not prepared for this. I'm
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: just trying to see how much time theoretically should I
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: be looking at because I want to get that available
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: and have that in mind. Mister Grunnander. Very fair question,
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: your honor, and we're trying to come up with that
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: as well. And as we sit here today, in my experience,
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: I've done prelim hearings that last ten minutes to five days.
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: This will probably be more complex than a typical homicide case,
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: but I would ask the court for at least five
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: days understanding it's a probable cause hearing as well, as
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: much as we want to get into it to litigate
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: every issue, it's a probable cause hearing. So I would
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: say five days as I stand here today, the court, okay,
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: mister Grunander. And then I just add one more issue
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: to bring up the court. Sure, And again I'm not
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: trying to put you in a corner or in a box.
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: Any thoughts and if not, that's okay, mister Novak. I
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: don't think we can really comment on how long the
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: prelim hearing would be at this point. I think the
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: state has a better sense of what kind of case
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: it wants to present. Obviously there's cross examination, you know,
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: the court all right, okay, thank you, mister Grunnander. Mister Grunnander.
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: There's one outstanding issue, and that's the preservation order, and
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: there are some pending filings with respect to that, and
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: I just want I know we're going to talk about
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: an early January date to convene next but there might
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: be a need to meet before then. And the reason
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: I say that if an issue comes up again, we
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: don't want to violate any orders. We want to act appropriately.
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: But there's still additional testing that's being done, forensic testing
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: with respect evidence. So we're going to cooperate with the
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: defense on that, but there may be need of some
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: time to reconvene with respect to the issue. The Court absolutely,
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: mister Grunnander, because again we want to investigate this as
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: expeditiously as possible and move the information to the defense
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: in the same fashion. So the court and I want
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: the parties to know if an issue does come up,
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: the Court will prioritize to make sure that we have
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: the time to act quickly, because it's in the interest
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: of all parties and it's in the interest of justice.
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: So I'll make it a priority. And I realize that
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: things can come up and we don't know about which
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: they will, and that's okay, all right. What potential dates
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: do we have in January and how much time do
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: we need is probably an important question, mister Novak. I
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: think we outlined a number of motions. A different way
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: to do it would be depending upon the court's own calendar.
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: I don't want to say two and a half days
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: because I don't want to say it's you know, eight
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: hours of argument. But there's a few motions there, right,
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: So maybe maybe I don't know how the court's calendar works.
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: I'm just thinking, you know, that's one way to think
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: about it is if there are two days where the
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: court has time, we can knock out some on one
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: day and some on the other. But maybe the court
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: prefers to just use a clearer day and go from
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: start to finish. I have no idea how the court
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: the court interrupts. Assuming the Court has a clearer day,
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: mister Nestor. That's the point, mister Novak. Two partial days
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: back to back eliminates well, at least travel for some
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: of us. The Court, all right, so potentially two four
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: hour blocks, and then we can figure out what we
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: argue on which days, whatever is effective or works for
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: the parties. Mister Nestor, your honor, if I could ask, respectfully,
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: that is the month before I have a fairly large
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: homicide trial starting, and so we have cleared several days
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: for evidentiary hearings on our last round of motions, So
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: that week of January fifth, if we could avoid that
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: week and maybe look at the next week of the twelve,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: just because I've got three days of hearings that week
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: of the fifth in my other case. The court, all right,
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: mister Nestor, thank you, your honor. The court, so give
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: me the good or bad news about dates the clerk
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: your book with jury trials every week the court. Oh, interesting,
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: mister Novak. Jury trials every week, the court, apparently, the
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: clerk except for one week where you're packed from nine
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: to five with other civil matters. Unless a jury trial settles,
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: I can't even begin to guess which one may or
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: may not. The court, Well, let's look at Friday, because
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: if we have a jury trial, usually hopefully they're in deliberation,
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: and I don't need to be in court per se,
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: because we shouldn't be taking evidence on a Friday afternoon
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: if the trial is ended by Friday. So can we
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: look at a Friday, perhaps at one on the weeks
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: in January, excluding the first week of January, just trying
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: to think what's most likely to give us time the clerk,
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: we could look at one on the sixteenth, and then
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: again on the thirtieth, the Court Council. What's your thoughts,
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: Miss Grunader. The state's available, mister Novak, that works for
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: us the afternoon of the sixteenth and the afternoon of
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: the thirtieth. The court all right, and obviously will address
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: who needs to be well, there's issues will address. But
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: these hearings unless there is a mention of it needing
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: to be a closed hearing, the assumption is a will
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: be open hearings unless the parties bring compelling reasons to
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: close them. Mister Novak. There may be aspects of the
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: hearing on the motion to disqualify, which, out of respect
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: for the privacy of the family of a member of
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: the state prosecution team should be sealed because it would
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: necessarily reveal family relationships and names and where somebody goes
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: to school. I mean, I don't want to say too much.
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: Although we're actually in a sealed hearing, we're sensitive to
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: that and we're actually going to file that motion and
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: request that it be filed privately so it's not a
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: public document. But so the court has the specifics, Mister Grunader,
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: I think that's fair, and counsel has given us the
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: heads up with respect to the issue, and we'll see
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: how we respond. There may be interest and a need
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: for the court and for the record to have response
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: as far as the identity or to some degree of
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: the identity, but we'll cross that bridge when we get there.
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: Miss Nestor, I definitely don't want this want his I
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: don't want the family members getting the emails that I'm
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: getting right now. So we're going to try and protect
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: that innocent family member from experiencing that the court, all right,
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: So just for the benefit of that being a potential issue,
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: can we address that on the sixteenth And if there's
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: other potential issues that needs to be sealed, let's kind
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: of group them together so we don't have to seal
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: both of them. That can affect transparency. And so let's
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: say the sixteenth theoretically is sealed, Miss Nestor, Honestly, your honor,
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: we may only have just need like just have everybody
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: leave and seal like a portion of the hearing, just
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: like a few minutes where we enter into the record,
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: the part that we're trying to protect the person we're
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: protecting the court. Okay, I appreciate that, Miss Nestor. So
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: I don't even think we would need to seal the
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: entire hearing, just where if you need to know the
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: details about the individual and if the prosecution would like
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: that to remain private the court. All right, So the
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: sixteenth potentially for a partial seal, Mister Gray, I just
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: want to add, I think we can file these in
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: such a way that we have a public document and
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: protected document. The public one would be redacted, and so,
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: you know, because I think that's what I would prefer
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: to do, so that we can argue these and then
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: we'll just provide the court with both a public and
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: a redacted one. Miss Nestor, will do that the Court,
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: all right, And it sounds like there's good communication between
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: the parties. Unless the parties are requesting filing motion dates,
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: I'm happy to leave it to you. Since it's still
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: kind of up in the air. It sounds like we
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: now know the dates and so we can work towards
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: those dates, allowing the opposing party time to respond. We're
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: all well established in what time that takes, and so
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: I'll leave it to you unless there's a request otherwise, Counsel,
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: anything else that you need to address today, Miss Nestor,
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: perhaps just a docket entry, striking the hearing on the thirtieth,
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: the court all right, we'll go ahead and strike the
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: hearing on the third. The clerk that's already done. The
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: court all right, and counsel and closing. I want to
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: comment on the professionalism and the civility all sides have shown.
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: I recognize that this is a very difficult matter for
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: all parties, and I wish to comment that your professionalism,
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: your civility, and the way that I see that you
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: were working together is very commendable. So thank you, Miss
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: Novak or mister Novak, thank you your honor, Miss Nestor,
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: thank you your honor the court, And with that, I
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: wish you a good weekend, and this court is in recess,
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: all right, folks. That's going to do it for the
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: closed hearing dealing with Tyler Robinson and his appearance inside
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: of the courtroom. All the information that goes with this
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box.