DOJ-OGR-00010180.jpg
461 KB
Extraction Summary
8
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
461 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript where an attorney, Ms. Davis, argues against a motion for a new trial. She references a letter from Catherine Conrad about jury deliberations concerning David Parse, noting the jury struggled with the legal definitions of 'wilfully' and 'knowingly' but ultimately made a deliberate and informed decision, as evidenced by their verdict on conspiracy and tax evasion counts. The discussion highlights the legal nuances that influenced the jury's split verdict.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Parse |
Mentioned in the context of a split verdict, which is argued as evidence of a lack of prejudice.
|
|
| your Honor | Judge |
Addressed by a speaker, presumably an attorney, in court.
|
| Catherine Conrad |
Wrote a letter to the government about discussions and deliberations regarding David Parse.
|
|
| David Parse |
The subject of discussions and deliberations mentioned in Catherine Conrad's letter.
|
|
| Mr. Shechtman |
An attorney who apparently omitted information from his brief regarding the jury's struggle with legal definitions.
|
|
| MR. SNECHTMAN | Attorney |
A speaker in the transcript, likely the same person as Mr. Shechtman, who apologizes to the Court.
|
| MS. DAVIS | Attorney |
A speaker in the transcript, arguing that the jury made a deliberate and informed decision.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
A speaker in the transcript, presiding over the proceedings.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| government | government agency |
Recipient of a letter from Catherine Conrad.
|
| Court | government agency |
The judicial body being addressed and which was asked to reread definitions to the jury.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings.
|
Timeline (3 events)
An attorney, Ms. Davis, is addressing the court regarding a prior verdict and a motion for a new trial.
Court
A jury had discussions and deliberations regarding David Parse, and struggled with the definitions of 'wilfully' and 'knowingly' for different counts, including conspiracy and tax evasion.
Catherine Conrad
David Parse (as subject)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the name of the court reporting agency, "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
|
Relationships (2)
Both are speakers in a court transcript, addressing the court and each other, indicating they are likely opposing counsel in a legal case.
Catherine Conrad wrote a letter about discussions and deliberations she was involved in regarding David Parse, suggesting they were both involved in the same legal proceeding, possibly as jurors or co-defendants.
Key Quotes (2)
"Well, I'll wait. I apologize to the Court."Source
— MR. SNECHTMAN
(Said after being interrupted or corrected by Ms. Davis during her address to the court.)
DOJ-OGR-00010180.jpg
Quote #1
"Thank you, Ms. Davis."Source
— THE COURT
(Said at the conclusion of Ms. Davis's argument.)
DOJ-OGR-00010180.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,617 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00033-GBD Document 646-32 Filed 02/22/22 Page 28 of 1717
A-5925
A-5925
23
1 CAC3PARC
2 has stated that you can find that where there has been a split
3 verdict, as is the case with Mr. Parse, that is evidence of a
4 lack of prejudice. We had argued in the original motion for
5 new trial and we renew that as well.
6 Finally, your Honor, with regard to the letter of
7 Catherine Conrad to the government which was referenced in the
8 defendant's briefing, she talked about their discussions and
9 deliberations with regard to David Parse. And interestingly
10 what she also said, which was not mentioned by Mr. Shechtman in
11 his brief, was that that struggle ended when they asked the
12 Court to reread the definitions of wilfully and knowingly.
13 Different states for different counts.
14 MR. SNECHTMAN: Well, I'll wait. I apologize to the
15 Court.
16 MS. DAVIS: And interestingly, their verdict exactly
17 tracked that difference between wilfully, this was required in
18 the conspiracy count and for the tax evasion counts, and
19 knowingly which was really the mens rea relating to other ones.
20 So you might say that they had a struggle.
21 To the extent we can even be considering that letter
22 at all because of Rule 606(b), but I think it's quite clear
23 that they made a deliberate and informed decision about making
24 a distinction drawn on the evidence as apply to the law. Thank
25 you.
THE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Davis.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
2 has stated that you can find that where there has been a split
3 verdict, as is the case with Mr. Parse, that is evidence of a
4 lack of prejudice. We had argued in the original motion for
5 new trial and we renew that as well.
6 Finally, your Honor, with regard to the letter of
7 Catherine Conrad to the government which was referenced in the
8 defendant's briefing, she talked about their discussions and
9 deliberations with regard to David Parse. And interestingly
10 what she also said, which was not mentioned by Mr. Shechtman in
11 his brief, was that that struggle ended when they asked the
12 Court to reread the definitions of wilfully and knowingly.
13 Different states for different counts.
14 MR. SNECHTMAN: Well, I'll wait. I apologize to the
15 Court.
16 MS. DAVIS: And interestingly, their verdict exactly
17 tracked that difference between wilfully, this was required in
18 the conspiracy count and for the tax evasion counts, and
19 knowingly which was really the mens rea relating to other ones.
20 So you might say that they had a struggle.
21 To the extent we can even be considering that letter
22 at all because of Rule 606(b), but I think it's quite clear
23 that they made a deliberate and informed decision about making
24 a distinction drawn on the evidence as apply to the law. Thank
25 you.
THE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Davis.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00010180
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document