Hey Jonathan Kanarek @Inigo-montoya was your trip to the VIP tent at Global last night another attempt to try to talk Mr. Tarshis into your theory on things or were you there to discuss your case with someone else?
SGF/Silver are the ones requesting this deposition. So, his questions will come first. And I would bet he is very well prepared for whatever shenanigans may happen.
They can ask the court to force the release of her mental health and school records, including her substance abuse treatment and the results of drug tests. Whether or not they get released is another matter, as that’s up to the Judge and you can bet that the Kanarek’s will protest any release of any records relating to Lauren and her antics over the years. Given her age and personal history, it would be in their interest to get records going back as far as the 90’s and include all records of her time at Hollins University, which is when she testified that she got hooked on painkillers, due to “sports injuries”.
No, we who have looked at what’s in the public records and discussed it here believe that’s when she actually got exposed to and addicted to pain killers, but she did not acknowledge the car crash and simply said that she went off to college and got hooked due to use for “sports injuries”, at least that’s what I remember hearing on her first bit of testimony, when they made her acknowledge her drug addiction, which included heroin use. I haven’t seen her later testimony, so she may have contradicted herself, if she said anything more.
She actually can’t claim much of anything at a deposition. She can’t confer with her attorney except about matters of privilege and he will advise her on the spot as to whether that item is privileged or not. The counsel’s job is to object, the deponent can do it but it will be summarily ignored on most subjects.
I did look it up and in NJ counsel is specifically barred from advising a client to not answer a deposition question unless it is about something covered by privilege or something covered by a court order.
Even so this is easy to work around. You don’t ask what was discussed specifically with her attorney or what her attorney advised her.
Rather keep the questions about what she did do or aware of others doing. The advice doesn’t matter.
Similarly RG’s recording of the Ed meeting doesn’t matter, the privilege was waived merely by the fact a third party was present.
Yes, many thanks to @ekat and @FitzE and @lazaret and @Knights_Mom and any other Legal Eagles I have forgotten to mention. Your expertise and endless patience are so appreciated!