DOJ-OGR-00009332.jpg
451 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
451 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript of the direct examination of a witness named Brune. The questioning focuses on why Brune and their team did not inform the court about information suggesting a juror was a suspended attorney. Brune explains that the information, found via a Google search by a colleague, Ms. Trzaskoma, was initially dismissed as pertaining to a different person and that they did not have a physical printout of the document in court.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Brune | Witness |
The individual being questioned during a direct examination.
|
| Judge Pauley | Judge |
Mentioned as the judge who could have been asked to inquire about Juror No. 1.
|
| Juror No. 1 | Juror |
The subject of the questioning, specifically regarding the possibility of her being a suspended attorney.
|
| Catherine Conrad |
Mentioned in a question, possibly as an alternative name or identifier for Juror No. 1, in the context of juror numbe...
|
|
| Ms. Trzaskoma |
Mentioned as the person who performed a Google search that uncovered a document about the juror.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceeding, listed at the bottom of the page.
|
| Court | Government Agency |
Mentioned as the entity that was asking questions of the jurors and to whom information should have been provided.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Ms. Trzaskoma performed a Google search which resulted in finding a document.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the name of the court reporting agency, "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
|
Relationships (2)
Brune describes having a discussion with Ms. Trzaskoma about a Google search she conducted, indicating they were working together on the case.
Brune is a witness in a proceeding where Judge Pauley is the presiding judge. The questioner suggests Brune could have addressed the judge directly.
Key Quotes (3)
"You had this potentially highly pertinent piece of information in your hands at that point and you did nothing with it with regard to what the Court was asking of the jurors."Source
— Unnamed Questioner
(Questioning Brune about the failure to act on information that a juror might be a suspended attorney.)
DOJ-OGR-00009332.jpg
Quote #1
"When you say "in your hand" I think what you mean is that we knew it. We did not have in our hands a printout. But certainly we had the discussion that I've described and Ms. Trzaskoma had done the Google search that we've talked about."Source
— Brune
(Responding to the questioner's assertion that they had information "in their hand," clarifying the nature of the information they possessed.)
DOJ-OGR-00009332.jpg
Quote #2
"As I think you know, we concluded it was a different person and therefore did not view it as the highly significant information that, unfortunately, it turned out to be."Source
— Brune
(Explaining why they did not act on the information found about the juror.)
DOJ-OGR-00009332.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,564 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 1616-2 Filed 02/24/22 Page 43 of 130
A-5728
A-5728
C2GFDAU1
Brune - direct
271
Brune - direct
271
1 A. I do remember that.
2 Q. And at that point you could have asked Judge Pauley to
3 inquire specifically of Juror No. 1, if I could call her Juror
4 No. 1, I know the juror numbers changed, but Catherine Conrad?
5 A. I know who you mean.
6 Q. About the potentiality that she was a suspended attorney,
7 correct?
8 A. Certainly could have asked him to do that.
9 Q. You had this potentially highly pertinent piece of
10 information in your hands at that point and you did nothing
11 with it with regard to what the Court was asking of the jurors.
12 A. As I think you know, we concluded it was a different person
13 and therefore did not view it as the highly significant
14 information that, unfortunately, it turned out to be.
15 Q. Well, you had a way, you had information in your hand that
16 could have further illuminated this issue, correct?
17 A. When you say "in your hand" I think what you mean is that
18 we knew it. We did not have in our hands a printout. But
19 certainly we had the discussion that I've described and Ms.
20 Trzaskoma had done the Google search that we've talked about.
21 Q. And that Google search resulted in her finding a document,
22 correct?
23 A. That's my understanding, yes.
24 Q. And even if she didn't have a printout of it in court, she
25 had it on the computer that she had sitting in front of her,
2 Q. And at that point you could have asked Judge Pauley to
3 inquire specifically of Juror No. 1, if I could call her Juror
4 No. 1, I know the juror numbers changed, but Catherine Conrad?
5 A. I know who you mean.
6 Q. About the potentiality that she was a suspended attorney,
7 correct?
8 A. Certainly could have asked him to do that.
9 Q. You had this potentially highly pertinent piece of
10 information in your hands at that point and you did nothing
11 with it with regard to what the Court was asking of the jurors.
12 A. As I think you know, we concluded it was a different person
13 and therefore did not view it as the highly significant
14 information that, unfortunately, it turned out to be.
15 Q. Well, you had a way, you had information in your hand that
16 could have further illuminated this issue, correct?
17 A. When you say "in your hand" I think what you mean is that
18 we knew it. We did not have in our hands a printout. But
19 certainly we had the discussion that I've described and Ms.
20 Trzaskoma had done the Google search that we've talked about.
21 Q. And that Google search resulted in her finding a document,
22 correct?
23 A. That's my understanding, yes.
24 Q. And even if she didn't have a printout of it in court, she
25 had it on the computer that she had sitting in front of her,
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00009332
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document