DOJ-OGR-00009378.jpg
447 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
447 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript dated February 24, 2022, detailing the recross-examination of a witness named Brune. The Court questions Brune about their firm's ethical obligation to disclose information from a July 21 letter concerning an investigation into Juror No. 1. Brune states that while they have an ethical duty to be accurate and honest, they do not believe they were obligated to proactively disclose the information or anticipate the government's arguments if the court had not inquired.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Brune | Witness |
The person being questioned during a recross-examination.
|
| MR. SCHECTMAN | Attorney |
An attorney questioning the witness, Brune.
|
| Ms. Davis | Attorney |
An attorney addressed by the Court.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
The presiding judicial officer asking questions of the witness and attorneys.
|
| THE WITNESS | Witness |
A speaker role in the transcript, referring to Brune.
|
| Juror No. 1 | Juror |
The subject of an investigation mentioned in a July 21 letter.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2022-02-24
Recross-examination of witness Brune by Mr. Schectman and the Court.
Courtroom
An investigation into Juror No. 1, referenced in a July 21 letter.
Juror No. 1
Brune's firm
Relationships (3)
The Court directly questions Brune, who is testifying as a witness.
Mr. Schectman conducts a recross-examination of the witness, Brune.
Key Quotes (2)
"I don't think we would have, your Honor. And as I think about it, we have an ethical obligation to be accurate and honest, and it's something that we take very seriously."Source
— THE WITNESS
(Responding to the Court's question about whether their firm would have disclosed information about Juror No. 1 if the Court had not inquired.)
DOJ-OGR-00009378.jpg
Quote #1
"But I don't think that we're obliged to identify arguments that the government might make in our opening brief."Source
— THE WITNESS
(Explaining the limits of their ethical obligations regarding disclosure.)
DOJ-OGR-00009378.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,500 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 1616-2 Filed 02/24/22 Page 89 of 130
A-5774
A-5774
C2GFDAU3
Brune - recross
317
1 numbers?
2 A. The thing has something that said fraud alert and it
3 indicates that there were two Social Security numbers, and so,
4 of course I'm just testifying about what I would have thought,
5 but I thought that would be consistent with what I thought I
6 knew, that there were two people floating around with the same
7 name.
8 MR. SCHECTMAN: Thank you.
9 THE COURT: Anything further, Ms. Davis?
10 MS. DAVIS: No, your Honor.
11 THE COURT: Ms. Brune, I have a question for you.
12 Would your firm have disclosed the information in your firm's
13 July 21 letter and the investigation into Juror No. 1 if the
14 Court had not inquired or the government failed to raise the
15 waiver issue?
16 THE WITNESS: I don't think we would have, your Honor.
17 And as I think about it, we have an ethical obligation to be
18 accurate and honest, and it's something that we take very
19 seriously. But I don't think that we're obliged to identify
20 arguments that the government might make in our opening brief.
21 I mean, when we go through the case law, of course, we have to
22 say the authority and then if we think there's contrary
23 authority out there we have to state that, but as I said to the
24 Court on the call, I kind of assumed it was coming and I was
25 going to respond accurately. So I didn't spend a lot of time
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
Brune - recross
317
1 numbers?
2 A. The thing has something that said fraud alert and it
3 indicates that there were two Social Security numbers, and so,
4 of course I'm just testifying about what I would have thought,
5 but I thought that would be consistent with what I thought I
6 knew, that there were two people floating around with the same
7 name.
8 MR. SCHECTMAN: Thank you.
9 THE COURT: Anything further, Ms. Davis?
10 MS. DAVIS: No, your Honor.
11 THE COURT: Ms. Brune, I have a question for you.
12 Would your firm have disclosed the information in your firm's
13 July 21 letter and the investigation into Juror No. 1 if the
14 Court had not inquired or the government failed to raise the
15 waiver issue?
16 THE WITNESS: I don't think we would have, your Honor.
17 And as I think about it, we have an ethical obligation to be
18 accurate and honest, and it's something that we take very
19 seriously. But I don't think that we're obliged to identify
20 arguments that the government might make in our opening brief.
21 I mean, when we go through the case law, of course, we have to
22 say the authority and then if we think there's contrary
23 authority out there we have to state that, but as I said to the
24 Court on the call, I kind of assumed it was coming and I was
25 going to respond accurately. So I didn't spend a lot of time
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00009378
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document