court transcript: 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 63 of 117
The transcript captures a discussion between the court and lawyer MR. SHECHTMAN regarding the alleged lack of candor by lawyers Brune & Richard and whether their actions were circumstantial evidence of a strategic decision to game the system.
Summary
The transcript captures a discussion between the court and lawyer MR. SHECHTMAN regarding the alleged lack of candor by lawyers Brune & Richard and whether their actions were circumstantial evidence of a strategic decision to game the system.
This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (1)
Related Documents (6)
Index of Examination: A-5838
This document is an index of examinations conducted during a court proceeding, listing witnesses and the attorneys who questioned them. It includes the names of witnesses Susan Brune, Laura Edelstein, Paul Schoeman, and Barry H. Berke, as well as attorneys Ms. Davis, Mr. Shechtman, and Mr. Okula. The document was prepared by Southern District Reporters, P.C.
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 transcript: A-5722
The document is a transcript of a deposition where Ms. Brune is questioned about her understanding of the significance of certain information regarding a potential juror and the steps she took or didn't take to verify this information. The questioning attorney presses Ms. Brune for her understanding and actions, with objections and comments from other attorneys and the court.
transcript of a court hearing or oral argument: A-5914
The document is a transcript of an oral argument where an attorney, Mr. Shechtman, is discussing the ineffective assistance of counsel and prejudice prong in a case involving multiple defendants and allegations of backdating. He argues that the government's case focused on backdating, but the evidence shows a more complex situation. The attorney compares his client's situation to that of another defendant, Mr. Brubaker.
deposition transcript: A-5773
The document is a transcript of a deposition where Ms. Brune is questioned about her evaluation of a document and her decision not to investigate further. She testifies that the document would not have changed her understanding of the case, and that she wouldn't have chosen to investigate despite her training and experience.
court transcript: A-5918
The document is a court transcript where MS. DAVIS argues that Mr. Parse's attorney made strategic choices that benefited him, and that MR. SHECHTMAN has not met the Strickland standard for ineffective assistance of counsel. The court had previously ruled on a motion for a new trial related to Catherine Conrad, a juror who was known to the defendant's law firm, Brune & Richard.
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.