HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021944.jpg

Oo O DN OO FF WwW NY = NO RO PRP LP PNMO NO | S| S| |S FS FS S| S| | | no Bb WO NO F- ODO OO WDNnN DO OT BP WO NYO — 121 Mr. Dershowitz was apparently, based on the transcripts I was seeing, to take the Fifth even with regard to any knowledge of Mr. Dershowitz. So in those circumstances I did think it was highly fair to draw an inference from Mr. Epstein, particularly where, you know, like some of the sexual abuse involved Virginia, Epstein, and Dershowitz was the allegations, you know, the trafficking and so forth. So you know, if Virginia is making an allegation, Mr. Epstein is invoking the Fifth and Mr. Dershowitz is, you know, declining to answer questions, it seemed to me in those circumstances an adverse inference would be fair. Q. Isn't it routine practice for a witness who is the target or faces -- I'm going to start over. Isn't it routine practice for a witness who faces potential criminal liability to take the Fifth as to all substantive questions? A. That's not -- no. I would say absolutely not. And again, I'm drawing -- I was a federal prosecutor for four years. I was a federal district court judge for about five-and-a-half years. I would say, that is not the practice and, indeed, that would be inconsistent with Fifth Amendment case law as I understand it. ROUGH DRAFT ONLY HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021944