deposition transcript: A-5797
The witness, Edelstein, discusses a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma about a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad and how they decided not to pursue further research after reviewing Juror No. 1's voir dire responses.
Summary
The witness, Edelstein, discusses a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma about a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad and how they decided not to pursue further research after reviewing Juror No. 1's voir dire responses.
This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (3)
Related Documents (6)
deposition: Case 1:20-cr-00336-PAE Document 616-2 Filed 08/24/22 Page 79 of 130
The witness, Brune, testifies about their involvement in preparing a letter dated July 21st and their recollection of events related to the waiver issue. Brune clarifies that they did not meet with Trzaskoma and Edelstein to prepare for the hearing, but had discussed the issues with them previously. The testimony highlights the witness's understanding of the significance of certain documents and emails.
deposition transcript: A-5796
The witness, Edelstein, is being questioned about their investigation and computer research related to Catherine Conrad. The questioning focuses on what information was known on May 12th and whether certain research could have been done at that time. The witness's responses indicate some discrepancies in their previous statements.
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: A-5728
The transcript shows a witness, Brune, being questioned about the defense team's knowledge of a potentially suspended attorney serving on the jury and their decision not to bring it to the court's attention immediately. The team had information that could have clarified the issue but chose not to act on it at the time. The questioning suggests that this decision may have been significant to the case's outcome.
Deposition Transcript: A-5804
The deposition of Ms. Edelstein discusses the accuracy of statements in a court brief, specifically regarding the defendants' investigation into Catherine Conrad and their awareness of an Appellate Division suspension report. Edelstein confirms the accuracy of a statement in the brief but is questioned about the timing and extent of the investigation. The transcript highlights potential inconsistencies in the defendants' claims.
deposition: A-5738
Ms. Brune testifies about a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1's identity, stating that Ms. Trzaskoma expressed doubts but did not mention a Westlaw report. Ms. Brune concludes that Juror No. 1 is who she claimed to be.
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.