DOJ-OGR-00009372.jpg
404 KB
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)
The document is a transcript of a cross-examination, a formal legal interaction.
Mr. Shechtman addresses the Judge directly during the court proceeding.
The Judge addresses Ms. Davis to ask if she has a redirect examination.
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
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,408 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 616-2 Filed 02/24/22 Page 83 of 130
A-5768
A-5768
C2grdau2
311
Brune - cross
311
Brune - cross
1 Q. I ask you the same question. Why not?
2 A. We spent a lot of time thinking about appellate issues, but
3 we didn't think that there had been juror misconduct and
4 therefore didn't think that there was an appellate issue.
5 Q. At any time between the verdict on May 24th and the receipt
6 of the letter on June 20th, did your firm contact the Nardello
7 firm to do additional investigation about Ms. Conrad?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Why not?
10 A. I didn't think there was anything to investigate.
11 Q. At any time during these proceedings, "these proceedings"
12 meaning between the initial voir dire and today, have you tried
13 to sandbag this Court or plant error in the record as to Juror
14 No. 1, Ms. Conrad?
15 A. No.
16 MR. SHECHTMAN: No further questions, Judge.
17 THE COURT: Redirect, Ms. Davis?
18 MR. DAVIS: I assume there is no other defense counsel
19 who wishes to inquire?
20 THE COURT: Does any defense counsel wish to inquire?
21 MR. GAIR: No, thank you, your Honor.
22 MR. ROBERT: No, thank you, Judge.
23 MS. MCCARTHY: No, your Honor.
24 MR. DAVIS: Just briefly, your Honor.
25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
2 A. We spent a lot of time thinking about appellate issues, but
3 we didn't think that there had been juror misconduct and
4 therefore didn't think that there was an appellate issue.
5 Q. At any time between the verdict on May 24th and the receipt
6 of the letter on June 20th, did your firm contact the Nardello
7 firm to do additional investigation about Ms. Conrad?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Why not?
10 A. I didn't think there was anything to investigate.
11 Q. At any time during these proceedings, "these proceedings"
12 meaning between the initial voir dire and today, have you tried
13 to sandbag this Court or plant error in the record as to Juror
14 No. 1, Ms. Conrad?
15 A. No.
16 MR. SHECHTMAN: No further questions, Judge.
17 THE COURT: Redirect, Ms. Davis?
18 MR. DAVIS: I assume there is no other defense counsel
19 who wishes to inquire?
20 THE COURT: Does any defense counsel wish to inquire?
21 MR. GAIR: No, thank you, your Honor.
22 MR. ROBERT: No, thank you, Judge.
23 MS. MCCARTHY: No, your Honor.
24 MR. DAVIS: Just briefly, your Honor.
25 SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00009372
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document