Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-6636Court UnsealedDeposition

Deposition Transcript: 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 61102/20

The witness is being questioned about their knowledge of certain facts and the drafting of a legal brief. They discuss their understanding of events and the reasoning behind the wording used in the brief. The testimony highlights potential discrepancies in interpretation and the context in which the brief was written.

Date
Unknown
Source
Court Unsealed
Reference
File: 1:20-cr-00330-pae document 61102/20
Pages
2
Persons
3
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The witness is being questioned about their knowledge of certain facts and the drafting of a legal brief. They discuss their understanding of events and the reasoning behind the wording used in the brief. The testimony highlights potential discrepancies in interpretation and the context in which the brief was written.

This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.

View Source Collection
Browse epstein-docs ArchiveFile: 1:20-cr-00330-pae document 61102/20
0Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedDepositionUnknown

deposition transcript: A-5790

The witness discusses receiving a memo from David Benhamou, which included information about Juror No. 1's voir dire responses and an Appellate Division order. The witness confirms noticing details in the Appellate Division order and a suspension report related to Catherine M. Conrad.

1p
Court UnsealedDepositionUnknown

deposition: A-5784

The deponent is questioned about their actions and knowledge regarding the identification of a juror named Catherine Conrad, and whether they took steps to verify if two similarly named individuals were the same person.

1p
Court UnsealedDepositionUnknown

deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-03363-PAE

The deposition transcript shows Ms. Brune being questioned about her team's research on a potential juror, Catherine M. Conrad, and whether she had her team conduct additional research before voir dire. Ms. Brune admits that she did not ask her team to do so, relying instead on the voir dire process to determine if Catherine M. Conrad was the same person mentioned in a New York court opinion.

1p
Court UnsealedDepositionUnknown

deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-03303

The deposition transcript discusses the authenticity of a juror's identity and the intent behind a court brief's wording. The witness explains that the brief's detail was necessary to establish the juror's identity and denies that the intent was to create a false impression. The questioning highlights a potential misinterpretation of the brief's content.

1p
Court UnsealedDepositionUnknown

deposition transcript: A-5740

The deposition of Ms. Brune discusses the credibility of government witnesses who pleaded guilty to making false statements, and the jury selection process in which Theresa Trzaskoma was involved. Brune testifies that she didn't believe certain information at the time, but acknowledges that she didn't know its veracity. The conversation with Trzaskoma is also explored.

1p
Court UnsealedDepositionUnknown

deposition: A-5802

The deponent discusses the process of verifying a juror's identity and the intent behind the wording of a legal brief. They acknowledge that the brief may be read in different ways, potentially conveying a false impression. The questioning focuses on whether the brief accurately represents when they learned of the juror's suspension.

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.