deposition: A-5754
The witness, Ms. Brune, is questioned about a letter submitted to the court in response to new facts coming to light, and whether one of those facts was a suspension opinion she had previously found. The attorney conducting the deposition refers to a specific exhibit and asks Ms. Brune to confirm details about Ms. Trzaskoma's statement to the court.
Summary
The witness, Ms. Brune, is questioned about a letter submitted to the court in response to new facts coming to light, and whether one of those facts was a suspension opinion she had previously found. The attorney conducting the deposition refers to a specific exhibit and asks Ms. Brune to confirm details about Ms. Trzaskoma's statement to the court.
This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (2)
Related Documents (6)
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: A-5729
The transcript records the testimony of Ms. Brune, discussing the jury selection process, access to documents and printers, and concerns raised about Juror No. 20's potential bias due to her mother's employment at the FBI and her attire.
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.
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: 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 1616220 Filed 02/24/22 Page 613 of 130
The document is a transcript of the direct examination of Ms. Brune, where she is questioned about her knowledge of Ms. Trzaskoma's potential attorney suspension and the actions taken by her team during the eight-day jury deliberation period.
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.
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.