DOJ-OGR-00009927.jpg
1010 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
6
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
1010 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, detailing the direct examination of Ms. Conrad, a former juror in the case against Paul M. Daugerdas. The questioning focuses on her financial situation, her memory of prior court proceedings, and her past confrontational statements to the court, such as calling her husband a "convicted felon" whom she might retain as a lawyer and telling the court that her finances were "none of your business." Ms. Conrad's testimony is evasive and hostile, suggesting a contentious relationship with the court and the defendant's counsel.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Paul M. Daugerdas | Defendant |
Mentioned in the case title, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL. The witness, Ms. Conrad, refers to...
|
| Ms. Conrad | Witness / Juror |
The individual being questioned in the transcript. She was one of the jurors who rendered a verdict against Paul M. D...
|
| Judge Pauley | Judge |
Mentioned as the judge who instructed Ms. Conrad to take an oath, advised her to get a lawyer, and explained the purp...
|
| Ms. Sternheim |
Mentioned in the context of a financial affidavit Ms. Conrad filled out, which was to determine if Ms. Conrad had the...
|
|
| Ms. Conrad's husband | Spouse of witness |
Referred to by Ms. Conrad as "my husband, the convicted felon." She is questioned about a statement where she said sh...
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | Government agency |
The plaintiff in the case against Paul M. Daugerdas.
|
| The Court / federal court | Government agency |
The judicial body hearing the case, which Ms. Conrad provided testimony to and which was to determine her financial n...
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS | Company |
The court reporting service that transcribed the proceedings, mentioned in the footer.
|
Timeline (6 events)
2011-03-01
A date mentioned in a question to Ms. Conrad, possibly related to the trial or a related proceeding.
Federal Court
2011-03-02
A date mentioned in a question to Ms. Conrad, possibly related to the trial or a related proceeding.
Federal Court
2012-02-15
Direct examination of witness Ms. Conrad.
Federal Court, Southern District
Ms. Conrad
Unidentified attorney
Unknown (December 20th of a prior year)
Ms. Conrad was asked by the Court if she owned any stocks or bonds, to which she replied "none of your business."
Federal Court
Ms. Conrad
The Court
Unknown (prior to 2012-02-15)
A trial where Ms. Conrad and eleven other jurors rendered a verdict against Paul M. Daugerdas.
Federal Court
Unknown (start of the Daugerdas case)
Judge Pauley explained the purpose of voir dire to the jury pool (venire), including Ms. Conrad.
Federal Court
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the name of the court reporters, "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS", indicating the jurisdiction of the court.
|
Relationships (3)
Ms. Conrad states she was one of the "jurors rendered against your client," referring to Daugerdas. Her testimony shows clear animosity towards him.
She refers to him as "my husband" and confirms he is a "convicted felon."
The transcript details interactions where Judge Pauley gave instructions to Ms. Conrad regarding taking an oath, retaining a lawyer, and the purpose of voir dire.
Key Quotes (3)
"Sure, ripping off the government."Source
— Ms. Conrad
(Her response when asked if she considered Mr. Daugerdas to be a financially successful lawyer.)
DOJ-OGR-00009927.jpg
Quote #1
"I'll retain myself or my husband, the convicted felon,"Source
— Ms. Conrad
(A statement she allegedly made to Judge Pauley after being advised to get a lawyer.)
DOJ-OGR-00009927.jpg
Quote #2
"none of your business."Source
— Ms. Conrad
(Her response to the Court on December 20th when asked if she owned any stocks or bonds.)
DOJ-OGR-00009927.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (4,784 characters)
Case 6:10-cr-00888-WHP Document 646-10 Filed 08/22/12 Page 26 of 767
A-5644
A-5644
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.
C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 137 C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 139 February 15, 2012
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. I don't live an extravagant lifestyle like Mr. Daugerdas.
3 Q. Would you consider that Mr. Daugerdas was a financially
4 successful lawyer?
5 A. Sure, ripping off the government.
6 Q. And would you consider that --
7 A. And this was only after the trial, might I add.
8 Q. Would you consider --
9 A. In keeping with the verdict that myself and eleven other
10 jurors rendered against your client.
11 Q. Would you agree with me that you have not been very
12 financially successful as a lawyer?
13 A. I am fine, thank you.
14 Q. Okay. How is it that you're able to pay your $800 a month
15 in rent?
16 A. You got that from the financial affidavit as well this
17 morning. Yes. From savings.
18 Q. And is that how you pay all your expenses, from savings?
19 A. I don't have a lot of expenses, so, yes. I'm going to need
20 a job soon. I'm sure your office is not going to hire me,
21 but --
22 Q. Now, Ms. Conrad, when you filled out this affidavit today,
23 did you understand that the purpose of this affidavit was to
24 allow the Court to determine whether or not you had the
25 financial need for Ms. Sternheim to be appointed and funded by
2 A. I don't live an extravagant lifestyle like Mr. Daugerdas.
3 Q. Would you consider that Mr. Daugerdas was a financially
4 successful lawyer?
5 A. Sure, ripping off the government.
6 Q. And would you consider that --
7 A. And this was only after the trial, might I add.
8 Q. Would you consider --
9 A. In keeping with the verdict that myself and eleven other
10 jurors rendered against your client.
11 Q. Would you agree with me that you have not been very
12 financially successful as a lawyer?
13 A. I am fine, thank you.
14 Q. Okay. How is it that you're able to pay your $800 a month
15 in rent?
16 A. You got that from the financial affidavit as well this
17 morning. Yes. From savings.
18 Q. And is that how you pay all your expenses, from savings?
19 A. I don't have a lot of expenses, so, yes. I'm going to need
20 a job soon. I'm sure your office is not going to hire me,
21 but --
22 Q. Now, Ms. Conrad, when you filled out this affidavit today,
23 did you understand that the purpose of this affidavit was to
24 allow the Court to determine whether or not you had the
25 financial need for Ms. Sternheim to be appointed and funded by
C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 138 C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 140
1 the federal court?
2 A. However that's relevant, but yes.
3 Q. Now, when you were asked back on December 20th if you owned
4 any stocks or bonds, you replied to the Court "none of your
5 business." Is that correct?
6 A. If it's in the transcript, I probably said it, sir. I
7 don't specifically recall.
8 Q. First I'm just asking if you remember it.
9 A. No, not offhand.
10 Q. So let's look at the transcript on page 12. You are asked
11 on line 13, "Do you own any stocks or bonds?"
12 And you said to the Court on line 14, "None of your
13 business."
14 Does that refresh your memory that when the Court
15 asked a question about your ownership of stocks and bonds you
16 said "none of your business"?
17 A. Not specifically, but I see it written in front of me, so I
18 must have said it.
19 Q. But it was the Court's business, was it not?
20 A. That I -- I don't know.
21 Q. Why did you say "none of your business"?
22 A. It's probably what I felt at the time.
23 Q. Now, when Judge Pauley asked you or instructed you to take
24 the oath so that he could ask you questions about your
25 financial situation, you refused to take the oath, is that
2 A. However that's relevant, but yes.
3 Q. Now, when you were asked back on December 20th if you owned
4 any stocks or bonds, you replied to the Court "none of your
5 business." Is that correct?
6 A. If it's in the transcript, I probably said it, sir. I
7 don't specifically recall.
8 Q. First I'm just asking if you remember it.
9 A. No, not offhand.
10 Q. So let's look at the transcript on page 12. You are asked
11 on line 13, "Do you own any stocks or bonds?"
12 And you said to the Court on line 14, "None of your
13 business."
14 Does that refresh your memory that when the Court
15 asked a question about your ownership of stocks and bonds you
16 said "none of your business"?
17 A. Not specifically, but I see it written in front of me, so I
18 must have said it.
19 Q. But it was the Court's business, was it not?
20 A. That I -- I don't know.
21 Q. Why did you say "none of your business"?
22 A. It's probably what I felt at the time.
23 Q. Now, when Judge Pauley asked you or instructed you to take
24 the oath so that he could ask you questions about your
25 financial situation, you refused to take the oath, is that
1 correct?
2 A. I don't recall.
3 Q. And when Judge Pauley advised you that you should get a
4 lawyer, retain a lawyer, you told him, "I'll retain myself or
5 my husband, the convicted felon," is that correct?
6 A. If it's written somewhere I probably said it. I don't
7 specifically recall, sorry.
8 Q. So you don't remember telling the Court that you would
9 either retain yourself or your husband the convicted felon?
10 A. Where are you directing me to look at?
11 Q. I'm asking you if you remember it, ma'am?
12 A. Not specifically.
13 Q. Do you have memory problems?
14 A. Certainly not.
15 Q. Certainly not. Never had blackouts, I take it?
16 A. I remember every day of this trial.
17 Q. Have you ever had a blackout?
18 A. No.
19 Q. And you have no memory problems?
20 A. No, sir.
21 Q. And yet you don't remember telling the Court, "I'll retain
22 myself or my husband the convicted felon"?
23 A. Not specifically.
24 Q. Is your husband a convicted felon?
25 A. Yes, sir.
2 A. I don't recall.
3 Q. And when Judge Pauley advised you that you should get a
4 lawyer, retain a lawyer, you told him, "I'll retain myself or
5 my husband, the convicted felon," is that correct?
6 A. If it's written somewhere I probably said it. I don't
7 specifically recall, sorry.
8 Q. So you don't remember telling the Court that you would
9 either retain yourself or your husband the convicted felon?
10 A. Where are you directing me to look at?
11 Q. I'm asking you if you remember it, ma'am?
12 A. Not specifically.
13 Q. Do you have memory problems?
14 A. Certainly not.
15 Q. Certainly not. Never had blackouts, I take it?
16 A. I remember every day of this trial.
17 Q. Have you ever had a blackout?
18 A. No.
19 Q. And you have no memory problems?
20 A. No, sir.
21 Q. And yet you don't remember telling the Court, "I'll retain
22 myself or my husband the convicted felon"?
23 A. Not specifically.
24 Q. Is your husband a convicted felon?
25 A. Yes, sir.
1 Q. Did you remember that on March 1 and 2nd of 2011 or did you
2 forget?
3 A. Sir, I did not reveal that to the Court.
4 Q. Did you remember it was my question.
5 A. Well, I'm answering part two of your question that's not
6 asked yet, but yes.
7 Q. So you did remember that, right?
8 A. To repeat a third time, yes.
9 Q. Now, Ms. Conrad, do you remember that at the start of the
10 voir dire in this case Judge Pauley explained the purpose of
11 voir dire?
12 A. I believe so, yes.
13 Q. Do you remember that he explained that voir dire means to
14 speak the truth. Do you remember that?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. And do you remember that Judge Pauley explained to you and
17 everybody else on the venire that that's precisely what you had
18 just been sworn to do, to speak the truth.
19 A. Veneer, yes.
20 Q. Do you remember that he explained to you that the purpose
21 of purpose of voir dire was to make sure that we have a jury
22 of citizens who will decide the issues in this case fairly and
23 impartially and without any bias or prejudice in favor of
24 either side or against either side. Do you remember saying
25 that?
2 forget?
3 A. Sir, I did not reveal that to the Court.
4 Q. Did you remember it was my question.
5 A. Well, I'm answering part two of your question that's not
6 asked yet, but yes.
7 Q. So you did remember that, right?
8 A. To repeat a third time, yes.
9 Q. Now, Ms. Conrad, do you remember that at the start of the
10 voir dire in this case Judge Pauley explained the purpose of
11 voir dire?
12 A. I believe so, yes.
13 Q. Do you remember that he explained that voir dire means to
14 speak the truth. Do you remember that?
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. And do you remember that Judge Pauley explained to you and
17 everybody else on the venire that that's precisely what you had
18 just been sworn to do, to speak the truth.
19 A. Veneer, yes.
20 Q. Do you remember that he explained to you that the purpose
21 of purpose of voir dire was to make sure that we have a jury
22 of citizens who will decide the issues in this case fairly and
23 impartially and without any bias or prejudice in favor of
24 either side or against either side. Do you remember saying
25 that?
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS (35) Page 137 - Page 140
DOJ-OGR-00009927
DOJ-OGR-00009927
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document