deposition transcript: 16166201
The deposition transcript details Brune's testimony about their firm's handling of jury selection, their team's responsibilities, and observations of juror behavior during the trial, particularly noting juror Conrad's attentiveness and note-taking.
Summary
The deposition transcript details Brune's testimony about their firm's handling of jury selection, their team's responsibilities, and observations of juror behavior during the trial, particularly noting juror Conrad's attentiveness and note-taking.
This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (2)
Related Documents (6)
court filing or legal memorandum: 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 522
The document discusses the lawyers' statements about their reaction to a juror's letter and their investigation into the juror's background, concluding that the statements were true as reasonably read and did not constitute a knowing misrepresentation under Rule 3.3.
deposition transcript: A-5810
The transcript captures the cross-examination of Ms. Edelstein by Mr. Schectman, focusing on a conversation about a suspended lawyer with the same name as Juror No. 1 and the decision not to raise a juror misconduct issue in a post-trial motion.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-00330-PAE Document 61102/20
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer with the same name as Juror No. 1. She explains that they didn't bring it to the court's attention because they deemed it inconceivable that Juror No. 1 was the suspended lawyer. There was no discussion about raising a juror misconduct issue in a post-trial motion until after receiving a letter from Ms. Conrad.
deposition: 1:20-cv-00330-PAE
Ms. Brune testifies about a brief she wrote, admitting it missed an important issue and did not accurately represent the timeline of an investigation. She also acknowledges that her colleague, Ms. Trzaskoma, was aware of the investigation but it was not accurately reflected in the brief.
Court Transcript: 1:20-cv-03038-PAE
The document contains excerpts from a court transcript in the case United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas et al., dated February 15, 2012. It includes testimony from witnesses Conrad and Trzaskoma. The case was heard in the Southern District of New York.
deposition: A-5755
The deponent is being questioned about a letter submitted to the Court and the representation of when they became aware of a certain fact or opinion. The deponent clarifies their understanding of the events and the intentions behind the statements made in the letter and the brief.
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.