DOJ-OGR-00009397.jpg
460 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal deposition transcript
File Size:
460 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a deposition transcript (Edelstein) filed on February 24, 2022. The witness discusses receiving a disturbing letter on June 20th from Catherine Conrad, a suspended lawyer, which contained insights into jury deliberations after a three-month trial. The witness describes discussing the letter and an Appellate Division order with Susan Brune.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Edelstein | Deponent/Witness |
Answering questions regarding the receipt of a letter and discussions with colleagues.
|
| Susan Brune | Associate/Attorney |
Person with whom Edelstein discussed the letter from Catherine Conrad.
|
| Catherine Conrad | Letter Author/Lawyer |
Described as a 'suspended lawyer' who sent a letter regarding jury deliberations.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Westlaw |
Legal research service mentioned in relation to a report.
|
|
| Appellate Division |
Court body mentioned in relation to a suspension order.
|
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. |
Court reporting agency.
|
Timeline (1 events)
June 20th
Receipt of a letter from Catherine Conrad regarding jury deliberations.
Courtroom context implied
Relationships (2)
Discussed the receipt of the Conrad letter and Appellate Division order together.
Conrad sent a letter to Edelstein's team that caused shock.
Key Quotes (3)
"I was very disturbed by the letter. This has nothing to do with Catherine Conrad being the suspended lawyer because at that point I didn't know."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009397.jpg
Quote #1
"We had spent three months in the courtroom where everyone wants to know what the jury is thinking about various subjects."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009397.jpg
Quote #2
"We then receive a letter that gives us some insight into the jury deliberations and I was very taken aback by some of the things that she said."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009397.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,563 characters)
Case 1:20-cv-03308-PAE Document 616-2 Filed 02/24/22 Page 108 of 130
A-5793
A-5793
336
C2GFDAU3 Edelstein
1 memo that had been put together and the link to the Westlaw
2 report after we received the letter from Catherine Conrad.
3 Q. And did you discuss it with Susan Brune?
4 A. Discuss what?
5 Q. The Westlaw report and your examination of it as well as
6 your examination of the suspension report.
7 A. I believe I -- well, the suspension report, if you mean the
8 Appellate Division order?
9 Q. Yes.
10 A. I believe I discussed the Appellate Division order. I did
11 not discuss the Westlaw report with her.
12 Q. What was the nature of your discussion with her?
13 A. Well, I believe that after we received the June 20th
14 letter, I first had a conversation with Susan just upon receipt
15 of the letter and reading it and the substance of it, you know,
16 I was very disturbed by the letter. This has nothing to do
17 with Catherine Conrad being the suspended lawyer because at
18 that point I didn't know. When I first received the letter I
19 was sort of, I was disturbed and shocked by it. We had spent
20 three months in the courtroom where everyone wants to know what
21 the jury is thinking about various subjects. We then receive a
22 letter that gives us some insight into the jury deliberations
23 and I was very taken aback by some of the things that she said.
24 I felt that we had sat here trying to read the tea leaves with
25 various juror notes on the one hand and it was just very
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00009397
C2GFDAU3 Edelstein
1 memo that had been put together and the link to the Westlaw
2 report after we received the letter from Catherine Conrad.
3 Q. And did you discuss it with Susan Brune?
4 A. Discuss what?
5 Q. The Westlaw report and your examination of it as well as
6 your examination of the suspension report.
7 A. I believe I -- well, the suspension report, if you mean the
8 Appellate Division order?
9 Q. Yes.
10 A. I believe I discussed the Appellate Division order. I did
11 not discuss the Westlaw report with her.
12 Q. What was the nature of your discussion with her?
13 A. Well, I believe that after we received the June 20th
14 letter, I first had a conversation with Susan just upon receipt
15 of the letter and reading it and the substance of it, you know,
16 I was very disturbed by the letter. This has nothing to do
17 with Catherine Conrad being the suspended lawyer because at
18 that point I didn't know. When I first received the letter I
19 was sort of, I was disturbed and shocked by it. We had spent
20 three months in the courtroom where everyone wants to know what
21 the jury is thinking about various subjects. We then receive a
22 letter that gives us some insight into the jury deliberations
23 and I was very taken aback by some of the things that she said.
24 I felt that we had sat here trying to read the tea leaves with
25 various juror notes on the one hand and it was just very
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00009397
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document