DOJ-OGR-00010105.jpg

450 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

5
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court transcript
File Size: 450 KB
Summary

This document is page 365 of a court transcript (filed Aug 22, 2022) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Schoeman by an attorney named Mr. Okula. The questioning focuses on Schoeman's failure to seek more information to verify if 'Juror No. 1' was a suspended attorney, specifically discussing a 'Catherine Conrad' as an example of identity verification using names and middle initials. Okula concludes his questioning at the bottom of the page.

People (5)

Name Role Context
Schoeman Witness
Under cross-examination regarding his analysis of Juror No. 1.
Mr. Okula Attorney
Questioning the witness (Schoeman) and concluding his examination.
Juror No. 1 Subject of Inquiry
Discussed as potentially being a 'suspended attorney' who claimed not to have gone to law school during voir dire.
Catherine Conrad Subject of Hypothetical/Example
Name used by the attorney to illustrate a point about identifying people with the same name and middle initial.
Judge Judge
Addressed by Mr. Okula at the conclusion of questioning.

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
Southern District Reporters, P.C.
Court reporting firm listed in the footer.
DOJ
Department of Justice (inferred from footer stamp DOJ-OGR).

Timeline (2 events)

2022-08-22
Filing date of the document containing this transcript page.
Court
Unknown
Cross-examination of witness Schoeman regarding juror vetting.
Courtroom

Locations (1)

Location Context
Likely Southern District of New York (SDNY) based on reporter name and 212 area code.

Relationships (2)

Mr. Okula Legal Adversary/Examiner Schoeman
Okula is cross-examining Schoeman in court.
Schoeman Analyst/Subject Juror No. 1
Schoeman performed an analysis regarding the identity and background of Juror No. 1.

Key Quotes (3)

"Would you have liked to receive that information in order to make a better assessment of your own about whether Juror No. 1 was the suspended attorney?"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010105.jpg
Quote #1
"I concluded from the fact that she was telling me that the voir dire answer had said that this person had not gone to law school, that this was not an issue."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010105.jpg
Quote #2
"Would you agree with me that if you have two people, one named Catherine Conrad, another named Catherine Conrad... that it made it statistically more likely that was the same person?"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010105.jpg
Quote #3

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document