DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
1.01 MB
Extraction Summary
8
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
1.01 MB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, for the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It details the cross-examination of a witness, Ms. Conrad, who admits to perjuring herself during the jury selection (voir dire) process. The questioning focuses on her awareness of potential perjury charges, her receipt of use immunity, and her motivations for wanting to be on the jury, which she explains was for the 'interesting trial experience' and to get 'back in the swing of things' after a suspension.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| PAUL M. DAUGERDAS | Defendant/Party in case |
Named in the case title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.
|
| Conrad | Witness |
The person being cross-examined throughout the transcript. Addressed as 'Ms. Conrad' by the Court.
|
| MR. OKULA | Attorney |
Makes objections on behalf of his client during the cross-examination.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, ruling on objections and questioning the witness.
|
| MR. SHECHTMAN | Attorney |
States he has 'No further questions' on page 236.
|
| Mr. Rotert | Attorney |
Addressed by the Court regarding redirect examination on page 236.
|
| Ms. McCarthy | Attorney |
Addressed by the Court regarding redirect examination on page 236. States 'Nothing further'.
|
| Ms. Guerin | null |
Mentioned by Mr. Rotert on page 236: 'no, nothing for Ms. Guerin.'
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | government agency |
The plaintiff in the case, also referred to as 'the government'.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS | company |
The court reporting service that transcribed the document, mentioned in the footer.
|
Timeline (3 events)
2012-02-15
Cross-examination of witness Ms. Conrad regarding potential perjury during voir dire and her understanding of use immunity.
courtroom in the Southern District
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The legal jurisdiction where the hearing is taking place, mentioned by the witness on page 235.
|
|
|
The physical location of the legal proceedings, mentioned multiple times.
|
Relationships (3)
The judge (THE COURT) presides over the hearing and directly questions the witness (Conrad) about her conduct.
Mr. Okula appears to be an attorney representing a party, possibly the witness, as he makes objections during her cross-examination.
The case is titled 'UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.', indicating the government is the plaintiff and Daugerdas is the defendant.
Key Quotes (4)
"The judge didn't confer immunity until I invoked my Fifth Amendment privilege."Source
— Conrad
(Explaining the sequence of events regarding her receiving use immunity on the day of her testimony.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #1
"You're quoting from my letter. I don't know who else's government it would be. But we're sitting here in the Southern District, so kudos, I guess you're correct."Source
— Conrad
(Responding to a question about whether the decision on criminal charges would be made by 'our government'.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #2
"Ms. Conrad, I would like to ask you, given your acknowledgement here today that you misrepresented any number of material things about yourself during voir dire because you wanted to make yourself marketable for the jury, and you perjured yourself, why did you do that?"Source
— THE COURT
(Directly questioning the witness about her motivations for lying during jury selection.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #3
"As I had mentioned, I knew I could be a fair, unbiased juror, and substantivelywise it seemed as if it would be an interesting trial experience. And having been suspended for so long, I guess mentally I would think maybe I'm back in the swing of things now."Source
— THE WITNESS (Conrad)
(Explaining to the judge why she misrepresented herself during voir dire.)
DOJ-OGR-00009951.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (4,769 characters)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross Page 233
1 sir.
2 Q. You know as you sit here today that the government is
3 considering bringing perjury charges against you?
4 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor.
5 A. No, I'm not.
6 MR. OKULA: Unfair characterization.
7 THE COURT: Sustained.
8 Q. Have you thought that there is a possibility that since you
9 lied repeatedly in this courtroom, the government might bring
10 criminal charges against you?
11 A. Sir, that's why I have use immunity at the moment we speak.
12 Q. But you didn't know you had use immunity when you came here
13 today, did you?
14 A. I knew it was a large probability that I would.
15 Q. Can I ask you a question?
16 A. Sure.
17 Q. If that testimony is completely the opposite of the
18 testimony you gave this morning, what conclusions should we
19 draw from that?
20 A. I don't know what your question means, sir.
21 Q. This morning you told us you had no idea you were going to
22 get use immunity, and this afternoon you told us, just now, it
23 was a large possibility. Which of those is true?
24 A. I guess both. The judge didn't confer immunity until I
25 invoked my Fifth Amendment privilege.
1 sir.
2 Q. You know as you sit here today that the government is
3 considering bringing perjury charges against you?
4 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor.
5 A. No, I'm not.
6 MR. OKULA: Unfair characterization.
7 THE COURT: Sustained.
8 Q. Have you thought that there is a possibility that since you
9 lied repeatedly in this courtroom, the government might bring
10 criminal charges against you?
11 A. Sir, that's why I have use immunity at the moment we speak.
12 Q. But you didn't know you had use immunity when you came here
13 today, did you?
14 A. I knew it was a large probability that I would.
15 Q. Can I ask you a question?
16 A. Sure.
17 Q. If that testimony is completely the opposite of the
18 testimony you gave this morning, what conclusions should we
19 draw from that?
20 A. I don't know what your question means, sir.
21 Q. This morning you told us you had no idea you were going to
22 get use immunity, and this afternoon you told us, just now, it
23 was a large possibility. Which of those is true?
24 A. I guess both. The judge didn't confer immunity until I
25 invoked my Fifth Amendment privilege.
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross Page 234
1 Q. When you came here today, did you know that there was use
2 immunity or not, a distinct possibility that you would be
3 charged with perjury?
4 A. No.
5 Q. You have convinced yourself there is no chance of such a
6 charge?
7 A. I don't really think it matters what I convince myself of,
8 sir.
9 Q. It matters enormously.
10 MR. OKULA: Objection.
11 THE COURT: Sustained.
12 Q. When you entered this courtroom today, did you believe
13 there was a possibility that charges would be brought against
14 you for perjury during the voir dire process of this trial?
15 A. Not really.
16 Q. That's because you think the government doesn't care that
17 jurors lie during voir dire?
18 A. I'm not in their heads. I can't answer that.
19 Q. As you sit here today, you think you have lied during voir
20 dire repeatedly, caused this entire process, and that there
21 will be no consequences for it?
22 MR. OKULA: To the form, your Honor.
23 THE COURT: Sustained as to form.
24 Q. As you sit here today --
25 A. Sure there are consequences. The sentencing date was moved
1 Q. When you came here today, did you know that there was use
2 immunity or not, a distinct possibility that you would be
3 charged with perjury?
4 A. No.
5 Q. You have convinced yourself there is no chance of such a
6 charge?
7 A. I don't really think it matters what I convince myself of,
8 sir.
9 Q. It matters enormously.
10 MR. OKULA: Objection.
11 THE COURT: Sustained.
12 Q. When you entered this courtroom today, did you believe
13 there was a possibility that charges would be brought against
14 you for perjury during the voir dire process of this trial?
15 A. Not really.
16 Q. That's because you think the government doesn't care that
17 jurors lie during voir dire?
18 A. I'm not in their heads. I can't answer that.
19 Q. As you sit here today, you think you have lied during voir
20 dire repeatedly, caused this entire process, and that there
21 will be no consequences for it?
22 MR. OKULA: To the form, your Honor.
23 THE COURT: Sustained as to form.
24 Q. As you sit here today --
25 A. Sure there are consequences. The sentencing date was moved
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross February 15, 2012 Page 235
1 up.
2 Q. That must disappoint you, that the sentencing date has been
3 put off?
4 A. I have no opinion as to that, sir.
5 Q. But it's a fact you know, right?
6 A. It's pretty self-evident, sir.
7 Q. Is it your view as you sit here today that there are no
8 likely consequences to you other than this unpleasant hearing
9 for having perjured yourself in this courtroom?
10 A. I don't know what the government is going to do, sir.
11 Q. You know the government could bring perjury charges against
12 you?
13 A. Maybe. I don't know.
14 Q. You know that whether criminal charges are brought against
15 you will be determined by what you refer to as "our
16 government," is that correct?
17 MR. OKULA: Objection.
18 THE COURT: Overruled.
19 A. Can you rephrase that, please?
20 Q. You know that the decision as to whether criminal charges
21 will be brought against you will be made by what you call "our
22 government"?
23 A. You're quoting from my letter. I don't know who else's
24 government it would be. But we're sitting here in the Southern
25 District, so kudos, I guess you're correct.
1 up.
2 Q. That must disappoint you, that the sentencing date has been
3 put off?
4 A. I have no opinion as to that, sir.
5 Q. But it's a fact you know, right?
6 A. It's pretty self-evident, sir.
7 Q. Is it your view as you sit here today that there are no
8 likely consequences to you other than this unpleasant hearing
9 for having perjured yourself in this courtroom?
10 A. I don't know what the government is going to do, sir.
11 Q. You know the government could bring perjury charges against
12 you?
13 A. Maybe. I don't know.
14 Q. You know that whether criminal charges are brought against
15 you will be determined by what you refer to as "our
16 government," is that correct?
17 MR. OKULA: Objection.
18 THE COURT: Overruled.
19 A. Can you rephrase that, please?
20 Q. You know that the decision as to whether criminal charges
21 will be brought against you will be made by what you call "our
22 government"?
23 A. You're quoting from my letter. I don't know who else's
24 government it would be. But we're sitting here in the Southern
25 District, so kudos, I guess you're correct.
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross Page 236
1 Q. Which is to say you also know that if your answers today
2 displease the government, there is no likelihood of those
3 criminal charges being brought?
4 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor.
5 THE COURT: Sustained.
6 Q. Have you thought about that possibility, Ms. Conrad?
7 A. Not really until your questions brought it up.
8 MR. SHECHTMAN: No further questions.
9 THE COURT: Anything further on redirect, Mr. Rotert
10 or Ms. McCarthy?
11 MR. ROTERT: Thank you, your Honor, no, nothing for
12 Ms. Guerin.
13 MS. McCARTHY: Nothing further.
14 THE COURT: Anything further, Mr. Okula?
15 MR. OKULA: Nothing. Thank you, your Honor.
16 THE COURT: Ms. Conrad, I would like to ask you, given
17 your acknowledgement here today that you misrepresented any
18 number of material things about yourself during voir dire
19 because you wanted to make yourself marketable for the jury,
20 and you perjured yourself, why did you do that?
21 THE WITNESS: As I had mentioned, I knew I could be a
22 fair, unbiased juror, and substantivelywise it seemed as if it
23 would be an interesting trial experience. And having been
24 suspended for so long, I guess mentally I would think maybe I'm
25 back in the swing of things now.
1 Q. Which is to say you also know that if your answers today
2 displease the government, there is no likelihood of those
3 criminal charges being brought?
4 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor.
5 THE COURT: Sustained.
6 Q. Have you thought about that possibility, Ms. Conrad?
7 A. Not really until your questions brought it up.
8 MR. SHECHTMAN: No further questions.
9 THE COURT: Anything further on redirect, Mr. Rotert
10 or Ms. McCarthy?
11 MR. ROTERT: Thank you, your Honor, no, nothing for
12 Ms. Guerin.
13 MS. McCARTHY: Nothing further.
14 THE COURT: Anything further, Mr. Okula?
15 MR. OKULA: Nothing. Thank you, your Honor.
16 THE COURT: Ms. Conrad, I would like to ask you, given
17 your acknowledgement here today that you misrepresented any
18 number of material things about yourself during voir dire
19 because you wanted to make yourself marketable for the jury,
20 and you perjured yourself, why did you do that?
21 THE WITNESS: As I had mentioned, I knew I could be a
22 fair, unbiased juror, and substantivelywise it seemed as if it
23 would be an interesting trial experience. And having been
24 suspended for so long, I guess mentally I would think maybe I'm
25 back in the swing of things now.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS (59) Page 233 - Page 236
DOJ-OGR-00009951
DOJ-OGR-00009951
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document