The latest reply by Pagliano’s attorneys was filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. What is most interesting about the newly filed document is the reasoning that Pagliano gives for not wanting a video made public in which he asserts his Fifth Amendment rights.
Pagliano’s attorneys stated:
The very existence of an audiovisual recording presents a risk that the video will eventually be exploited to create a widely broadcast public inference of guilt…..
However, the danger from a constitutional perspective is not the effect of the video on the trier of fact in this civil case, but the potential tainting effect on the jury pool in a potential government enforcement action.
As we reported earlier, Judicial Watch contends a videotaped deposition of Pagliano asserting his Fifth Amendment rights will help the judge in making an assessment of Pagliano’s demeanor.
Pagliano has asserted his Fifth Amendment rights before. He twice refused to testify before congressional committees. He also reportedly received an immunity deal from the Department of Justice as part of the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s private email server.
LawNewz.com is closely following the case and will provide updates when the judge makes a decision.
Read Pagliano’s reply:
Judicial Watch vs. U.S. Department of State