DOJ-OGR-00009945.jpg
1.02 MB
Extraction Summary
7
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
1.02 MB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It details the examination of a juror, Ms. Conrad, regarding her failure to disclose her background, which includes being a suspended lawyer and having a husband with a significant criminal record. The attorneys question whether she intentionally concealed this information to get on the jury and whether she holds any bias towards the defendants or the government, which she denies.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Paul M. Daugerdas | Defendant |
Named in the case title, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL. Also mentioned in questioning regardin...
|
| Conrad | Witness / Juror |
The individual being questioned (testifying) throughout the document, referred to as Ms. Conrad. The questioning conc...
|
| Schectman | Attorney |
Referred to as Mr. Schectman. He is questioning the witness, Ms. Conrad, on pages 209 and 210.
|
| Okula | Attorney |
Referred to as Mr. Okula. He begins his cross-examination of Ms. Conrad on page 211.
|
| McCarthy | Attorney |
Referred to as Ms. McCarthy. She addresses the court regarding the admission of an exhibit (PMD 23).
|
| Gair | Attorney |
Referred to as Mr. Gair. Mentioned as having previously offered some evidence.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Presiding over the proceedings, ruling on objections and evidence, and directing the attorneys.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | government agency |
The plaintiff in the case, as seen in the document title.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS | company |
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings, listed at the bottom of the document.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2012-02-15
Court testimony of a juror, Ms. Conrad, being questioned about her background and potential biases. The questioning covers her status as a suspended lawyer, her husband's criminal record, and whether she concealed this information to be selected for the jury.
Courtroom
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in a question to Ms. Conrad regarding an outstanding warrant.
|
Relationships (3)
Ms. Conrad is a juror in the case against Paul M. Daugerdas and is being questioned about any potential bias she may have against him.
Mr. Schectman conducts a direct examination of Ms. Conrad.
Mr. Okula conducts a cross-examination of Ms. Conrad.
Key Quotes (3)
"If they knew you were a suspended lawyer with a history of alcoholism with three misdemeanor convictions, with a husband who had seven felony convictions, who had involvement with licensing authorities, who had an outstanding warrant from Arizona, is it your view that these lawyers would have seen you as a different person, a far different person than the one you portrayed yourself to be?"Source
— Mr. Schectman
(A question posed to juror Ms. Conrad summarizing allegations about her concealed background during jury selection.)
DOJ-OGR-00009945.jpg
Quote #1
"Well, my husband seems to be a professional defendant, so I probably would have in their mind been a keeper for their side."Source
— Ms. Conrad
(Her response when asked why she thought the defense counsel would be 'wild to have' her on the jury.)
DOJ-OGR-00009945.jpg
Quote #2
"Because your view is they wanted people who were crooks because they were crooks."Source
— Mr. Schectman
(A follow-up question to Ms. Conrad, interpreting her previous statement about why the defense would want her on the jury.)
DOJ-OGR-00009945.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document