Pseudonym and Privilege-Briefing Matters
33 linesMS. COMEY: I apologize, your Honor. We do have an issue. We will need to take it up at sidebar because it relates to a pseudonym issue.
JUDGE NATHAN: Okay. Sidebar pseudonym issue.
MS. COMEY: It will be brief, your Honor.
(Pages 672 SEALED)
(Continued on next page)
(At sidebar - not sealed)
JUDGE NATHAN: Okay. See you 8:45. The only thing I wanted to -- this isn't sealed. But timing, if you're going to brief piercing the privilege.
MR. PAGLIUCA: When would you like it, your Honor?
JUDGE NATHAN: A month ago.
MS. STERNHEIM: We can turn back the hands of time.
JUDGE NATHAN: I wish we could.
MS. STERNHEIM: I don't think you would. We might, but not you.
MR. PAGLIUCA: I think it's a little more complicated than -- I think there are different issues related to different potential witnesses, I guess is the issue. I'm happy to have it briefed as best we can under the facts that we know right now, assuming that the Court wants briefed is the issue we discussed today. Okay. Because then we may have issues related to lawyer witnesses that are under subpoena, but will not be called under any circumstances unless it's briefed and the Court gives permission for the calling of those witnesses.
JUDGE NATHAN: Let's start with the limited issue that was raised today, which is that you would call -- you're seeking to call Glassman.
MR. PAGLIUCA: Glassman.
JUDGE NATHAN: You're seeking to call Glassman on the narrow question of whether under theory of waiver he told Jane that it would -- testifying would help her in her case. When would you like to do that?
MR. PAGLIUCA: How about Friday, your Honor?
JUDGE NATHAN: This would be a witness you would call in your case-in-chief?
MR. PAGLIUCA: Exactly. So it's at least a week from now, I would imagine. I'm assuming the government has about a week more of testimony, by my review of the witness list.
MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I think that's right. We're unlikely to rest in less than a week from now.
JUDGE NATHAN: So is Friday okay?
MR. ROHRBACH: We can respond on Monday, if that's all right.
JUDGE NATHAN: Sure. Great. It will provide some general background on piercing privilege and waiver to the extent that will inform issues beyond the specific.
MR. PAGLIUCA: To the extent we can preview the additional issues, we'll get that underway as well so that you have a sense of what may or may not be coming down the road here.
JUDGE NATHAN: Okay. Can I ask, thinking about timing, now that we're where we are, what is your estimate for the trial?
MS. COMEY: Your Honor, I think it depends on the length of cross-examination for some of the more substantial witnesses. If we can expect about the same length as we have with Jane today, I expect we'll be able to rest the third week of trial. So not next week, but the week after, early that week is my best estimate.
JUDGE NATHAN: And what's the defense's best estimate?
MS. STERNHEIM: We'll let you know.
MR. PAGLIUCA: I'm going to suspect the length of cross-examination will be less for the remaining witnesses.
JUDGE NATHAN: We worked out some --
MR. PAGLIUCA: Kinks, yes. But I just think substantively it's likely to be less, and there's likely -- well, with the exception of one, there's less 3500 impeachment material that needs to be gone through potentially, so I think that will shorten the length of cross-examination. And we will have whatever we need to have ready to go, understanding the format we're doing this in now.
JUDGE NATHAN: All right. See you in the morning.
(Adjourned to December 2, 2021 at 8:45 a.m.)