DOJ-OGR-00010036.jpg
416 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
416 KB
Summary
This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding where a witness, Brune, is being questioned about their knowledge of statements made by a Ms. Trzaskoma during a July 15th conference call. The questioning focuses on the timeline of when Brune read the call transcript in relation to filing a letter on July 21st, implying that Brune may have known Ms. Trzaskoma's statements were incorrect. Brune denies this assertion.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Brune | Witness |
The person being questioned in a direct examination, referred to as 'Ms. Brune' in line 21.
|
| Ms. Trzaskoma |
Mentioned as someone who participated in a July 15th conference call and whose statements are being questioned.
|
|
| Judge Pauley | Judge |
Mentioned as the judge who was directing a response, prompting the witness to read a transcript.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| the Court | government agency |
The legal body with which a conference call was held and to whom statements were made.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceeding, listed at the bottom of the page.
|
Timeline (3 events)
July 15th
A conference call was held with the Court. Ms. Trzaskoma participated and made statements. The witness, Brune, was not on the call.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied location of the court, as indicated by 'SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.'
|
Relationships (2)
Ms. Trzaskoma informed Brune about the conference call 'immediately after that,' suggesting they are colleagues working on the same matter.
Brune read a transcript to understand what 'Judge Pauley was directing us to do,' indicating a relationship between a judge and a party/attorney in a case.
Key Quotes (3)
"We had to respond, so I read the transcript to make sure that I knew what Judge Pauley was directing us to do."Source
— Brune
(Explaining why they read the transcript of the conference call so quickly.)
DOJ-OGR-00010036.jpg
Quote #1
"At the point at which you saw those emails, Ms. Brune, at the very least you knew that Ms. Trzaskoma's statements to the Court in that conference call were not correct?"Source
— Questioner
(Questioning Ms. Brune's knowledge of the veracity of Ms. Trzaskoma's statements.)
DOJ-OGR-00010036.jpg
Quote #2
"I disagree."Source
— Brune
(Responding to the accusation that she knew Ms. Trzaskoma's statements were incorrect.)
DOJ-OGR-00010036.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,316 characters)
Case 2:20-cv-00838-PAE-N Document 164-20 Filed 03/24/22 Page 686 of 1300
A-5753
A-5753
C2grdau2
Brune - direct 296
1 the Court.
2 Q. Do you think it was before the July 15th conference call
3 with the Court?
4 A. I did not see it before the July 15th conference call with
5 the Court.
6 Q. Do you think it was before you filed your July 21st letter?
7 A. Yes, it was.
8 Q. You were not on the July 15th conference call, correct?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. You saw a transcript of the conference call?
11 A. Ms. Trzaskoma let me know about it immediately after that,
12 and I also read the transcript when it became available.
13 Q. Approximately when was that? Was that before you filed
14 your July 21st letter?
15 A. Oh, yes, within a day.
16 Q. You're accustomed to get daily or -- in other words, this
17 was not an instance where you ordered like a 30-day-out
18 transcript?
19 A. Oh, no. We had to respond, so I read the transcript to
20 make sure that I knew what Judge Pauley was directing us to do.
21 Q. At the point at which you saw those emails, Ms. Brune, at
22 the very least you knew that Ms. Trzaskoma's statements to the
23 Court in that conference call were not correct?
24 A. I disagree.
25 Q. Did she reveal to the Court what she knew?
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
Brune - direct 296
1 the Court.
2 Q. Do you think it was before the July 15th conference call
3 with the Court?
4 A. I did not see it before the July 15th conference call with
5 the Court.
6 Q. Do you think it was before you filed your July 21st letter?
7 A. Yes, it was.
8 Q. You were not on the July 15th conference call, correct?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. You saw a transcript of the conference call?
11 A. Ms. Trzaskoma let me know about it immediately after that,
12 and I also read the transcript when it became available.
13 Q. Approximately when was that? Was that before you filed
14 your July 21st letter?
15 A. Oh, yes, within a day.
16 Q. You're accustomed to get daily or -- in other words, this
17 was not an instance where you ordered like a 30-day-out
18 transcript?
19 A. Oh, no. We had to respond, so I read the transcript to
20 make sure that I knew what Judge Pauley was directing us to do.
21 Q. At the point at which you saw those emails, Ms. Brune, at
22 the very least you knew that Ms. Trzaskoma's statements to the
23 Court in that conference call were not correct?
24 A. I disagree.
25 Q. Did she reveal to the Court what she knew?
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00010036
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document