Mr. Shechtman's brief is mentioned as having omitted the fact that the jury's struggle with legal definitions ended after they asked the Court to reread them.
This document is a court transcript where an attorney, Ms. Davis, argues against a motion for a new trial. She references a letter from Catherine Conrad about jury deliberations concerning David Parse, noting the jury struggled with the legal definitions of 'wilfully' and 'knowingly' but ultimately made a deliberate and informed decision, as evidenced by their verdict on conspiracy and tax evasion counts. The discussion highlights the legal nuances that influenced the jury's split verdict.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein communication