DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
1.01 MB
Extraction Summary
8
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
1.01 MB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, for the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It details the cross-examination of a witness, Ms. Conrad, who admits to perjuring herself during the jury selection (voir dire) process. The questioning focuses on her awareness of potential perjury charges, her receipt of use immunity, and her motivations for wanting to be on the jury, which she explains was for the 'interesting trial experience' and to get 'back in the swing of things' after a suspension.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| PAUL M. DAUGERDAS | Defendant/Party in case |
Named in the case title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.
|
| Conrad | Witness |
The person being cross-examined throughout the transcript. Addressed as 'Ms. Conrad' by the Court.
|
| MR. OKULA | Attorney |
Makes objections on behalf of his client during the cross-examination.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, ruling on objections and questioning the witness.
|
| MR. SHECHTMAN | Attorney |
States he has 'No further questions' on page 236.
|
| Mr. Rotert | Attorney |
Addressed by the Court regarding redirect examination on page 236.
|
| Ms. McCarthy | Attorney |
Addressed by the Court regarding redirect examination on page 236. States 'Nothing further'.
|
| Ms. Guerin | null |
Mentioned by Mr. Rotert on page 236: 'no, nothing for Ms. Guerin.'
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | government agency |
The plaintiff in the case, also referred to as 'the government'.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS | company |
The court reporting service that transcribed the document, mentioned in the footer.
|
Timeline (3 events)
2012-02-15
Cross-examination of witness Ms. Conrad regarding potential perjury during voir dire and her understanding of use immunity.
courtroom in the Southern District
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The legal jurisdiction where the hearing is taking place, mentioned by the witness on page 235.
|
|
|
The physical location of the legal proceedings, mentioned multiple times.
|
Relationships (3)
The judge (THE COURT) presides over the hearing and directly questions the witness (Conrad) about her conduct.
Mr. Okula appears to be an attorney representing a party, possibly the witness, as he makes objections during her cross-examination.
The case is titled 'UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.', indicating the government is the plaintiff and Daugerdas is the defendant.
Key Quotes (4)
"The judge didn't confer immunity until I invoked my Fifth Amendment privilege."Source
— Conrad
(Explaining the sequence of events regarding her receiving use immunity on the day of her testimony.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #1
"You're quoting from my letter. I don't know who else's government it would be. But we're sitting here in the Southern District, so kudos, I guess you're correct."Source
— Conrad
(Responding to a question about whether the decision on criminal charges would be made by 'our government'.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #2
"Ms. Conrad, I would like to ask you, given your acknowledgement here today that you misrepresented any number of material things about yourself during voir dire because you wanted to make yourself marketable for the jury, and you perjured yourself, why did you do that?"Source
— THE COURT
(Directly questioning the witness about her motivations for lying during jury selection.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #3
"As I had mentioned, I knew I could be a fair, unbiased juror, and substantivelywise it seemed as if it would be an interesting trial experience. And having been suspended for so long, I guess mentally I would think maybe I'm back in the swing of things now."Source
— THE WITNESS (Conrad)
(Explaining to the judge why she misrepresented herself during voir dire.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #4
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document