DOJ-OGR-00009372.jpg

404 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

9
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
4
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 404 KB
Summary

This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding filed on February 24, 2022. It details the cross-examination of a witness named Brune, who is questioned about their firm's decision not to investigate potential juror misconduct by Juror No. 1, Ms. Conrad, following a verdict on May 24th. Brune states that the firm did not believe there was an issue to investigate at the time.

People (9)

Name Role Context
Brune Witness
Subject of a cross-examination, answering questions about why their firm did not investigate a juror.
Ms. Conrad Juror No. 1
The subject of a potential investigation regarding juror misconduct.
MR. SHECHTMAN Counsel
An attorney who concludes his questioning of the witness.
Judge Judge
Presiding over the court proceedings, referred to as 'THE COURT' and 'your Honor'.
Ms. Davis Counsel
An attorney who is prompted by the judge for a redirect examination.
MR. DAVIS Counsel
An attorney who speaks on behalf of the defense counsel and addresses the court.
MR. GAIR Defense Counsel
An attorney who declines to inquire further.
MR. ROBERT Defense Counsel
An attorney who declines to inquire further.
MS. MCCARTHY Defense Counsel
An attorney who declines to inquire further.

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
Nardello firm company
A firm that was considered for conducting an investigation into Ms. Conrad.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. company
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceeding.

Timeline (2 events)

A verdict in a case was reached on May 24th.
Cross-examination of witness Brune regarding the decision not to investigate Juror No. 1, Ms. Conrad, for misconduct.
Courtroom

Relationships (4)

Questioning Attorney professional Brune
The document is a transcript of a cross-examination, a formal legal interaction.
MR. SHECHTMAN professional Judge
Mr. Shechtman addresses the Judge directly during the court proceeding.
Ms. Davis professional Judge
The Judge addresses Ms. Davis to ask if she has a redirect examination.
MR. DAVIS professional MR. GAIR
Both are identified as defense counsel participating in the same proceeding.

Key Quotes (2)

"We spent a lot of time thinking about appellate issues, but we didn't think that there had been juror misconduct and therefore didn't think that there was an appellate issue."
Source
— Brune (Explaining why their firm did not investigate potential juror misconduct after the verdict.)
DOJ-OGR-00009372.jpg
Quote #1
"I didn't think there was anything to investigate."
Source
— Brune (Answering why their firm did not contact the Nardello firm to investigate Ms. Conrad.)
DOJ-OGR-00009372.jpg
Quote #2

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document