Streeter: Okay.
And did you ever have an intimate relationship with her? Cohen:
Yes, I had a brief intimate relationship with her. RT 49 - 50
. PD: Okay.
Now, you also mentioned earlier that there was a brief intimate relationship between you and Ms. Lynch, correct? Cohen:
That’s correct. PD: You
wouldn’t say that that was probably the best idea, to have a romantic
relationship with your business partner, correct? Streeter:
Objection; relevance. Court: Overruled.
Cohen: I don’t think it goes to the description of romantic. PD: But it was a sexual relationship,
correct? Cohen: It was an intimate
relationship, yes. PD: Was it a
sexual relationship? Cohen: It
involved a sexual -- yes. PD: Now, it was - It was actually
spanning years, correct? Cohen:
I’m sorry? PD: It actually
spanned years, correct? Cohen: I don’t
know how long it spanned, Sir. PD:
Okay. But you would agree with me
that it was on and off for a period of time?
Cohen: Yes, Sir. PD: Now why did that – that part of
the relationship, what you called the intimate part of the relationship, why
did that end or when did it end?
Court: Those are two different
questions. PD: I’ll go with the latter. PD:
When did it end? Cohen: I
don’t remember exactly when it ended. Like many relationships, it -- it
just dissolved. PD: But it’s fair
to say that it ended before your business relationship ended, correct? Cohen:
That’s correct. PD: Okay.
And do you know why it ended?
Cohen: I would say that part of
the relationship exhausted itself and dissolved naturally. RT 276 PD: Okay. Do you remember testifying on March 23rd at
another hearing? Cohen: March
23rd, yes. PD: Of this year.
You were in this courthouse testifying, correct? Cohen: That is correct. PD: Now, you were asked if this was --
if your relationship with Ms. Lynch was purely a business relationship.
Do you remember that? Cohen:
I did. PD: And you actually
said that it was, yes, purely a business relationship. Cohen: I
have said repeatedly that there was an intimate relationship, but the lady
denies it. So I did not want to insist.
PD: I’m not asking you about what Ms. Lynch said. I’m asking
about what you said. You said that yes, that it was purely a business
relationship, correct? Cohen: May
I explain. PD: I’m just asking for
if that’s what you said on March 23rd. Cohen:
Yes. PD: In fact, you were
asked a follow up question that -- asking you if that was the extent of it, and
again you said yes, that was the extent of it, correct? Cohen: Correct. RT 273-277
Streeter: Finally, there was a question about a previous
testimony you’ve given, the description of your relationship with Ms.
Lynch. Why at that hearing did you say
that you only had a business relationship with Ms. Lynch? And now just once or twice. Why did you say that? Cohen : Because, as it turns out, the
friendship that Ms. Lynch displayed was false and deceptive, so it was not
really a friendship … The intimate relationship we had, she denies. So I’m not going to insist. So, therefore, it was not – from that point
of view, there was not an intimate relationship and there was not a friendship;
it was all business. It was all business
from the point of view of Ms. Lynch.
Streeter: And in your mind –
PD: Objection; speculation as to what
Ms. Lynch thought. Streeter: In your mind, if a woman says that you don’t
have an intimate relationship with her but you do, why does that matter? Cohen:
I’m sorry, Ma’am? Streeter; Why does it matter if – if you’ve had an
intimate relationship like Ms. Lynch, she said you don’t – didn’t have one, why
does it matter? Why does that impact
that answer to the question, that particular question a couple of weeks
ago? PD:
Objection; vague. Court: Sustained.
I think we’ve adequately covered this subject. RT 321
