DOJ-OGR-00009272.jpg
1.01 MB
Extraction Summary
8
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
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, in the case of U.S. v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It captures the cross-examination of a witness, Ms. Conrad, who is questioned about receiving use immunity and the possibility of facing perjury charges. The transcript culminates with the judge directly questioning Ms. Conrad about why she admittedly lied and perjured herself during the jury selection (voir dire) process, to which she responds it was for the 'interesting trial experience'.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| PAUL M. DAUGERDAS | Defendant |
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. Referred to as 'Ms. Conrad' by the Court.
|
| MR. OKULA | Attorney |
An attorney present in the courtroom, making objections on behalf of his client.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
The presiding judge in the hearing, ruling on objections and questioning the witness directly.
|
| MR. SHECHTMAN | Attorney |
An attorney who states he has 'No further questions' on page 236.
|
| Mr. Rotert | Attorney |
An attorney who declines to ask further questions on redirect on page 236.
|
| Ms. McCarthy | Attorney |
An attorney who is asked if she has further questions on redirect and states 'Nothing further' on page 236.
|
| Ms. Guerin |
Mentioned by Mr. Rotert who says he has 'nothing for Ms. Guerin' on page 236.
|
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 proceedings, mentioned at the bottom of page 236.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2012-02-15
Cross-examination of witness Ms. Conrad regarding her testimony, use immunity, and admitted perjury during the voir dire process.
Southern District
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned by the witness, Ms. Conrad, as the location of the court proceedings: 'But we're sitting here in the Southe...
|
Relationships (3)
The document shows the judge directly questioning the witness, Ms. Conrad, about her admitted perjury, indicating a formal, authoritative interaction within a legal proceeding.
The transcript is a cross-examination where the attorney questions Ms. Conrad's credibility, her understanding of immunity, and the potential for perjury charges against her.
The case title 'UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,' establishes them as the plaintiff and defendant in a criminal case.
Key Quotes (4)
"The judge didn't confer immunity until I invoked my Fifth Amendment privilege."Source
— Conrad
(Explaining the timing and circumstances under which she received use immunity.)
DOJ-OGR-00009272.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 her use of the phrase 'our government' in a letter she wrote.)
DOJ-OGR-00009272.jpg
Quote #2
"Ms. Conrad, I would like to ask you, given your acknowledgment here today that you misrepresented any number of material things about yourself during voir dire to make yourself marketable for the jury, and you perjured yourself, why did you do that?"Source
— THE COURT
(The judge directly questioning the witness about her admitted perjury during jury selection.)
DOJ-OGR-00009272.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 her motivation for lying and perjuring herself during the voir dire process.)
DOJ-OGR-00009272.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (4,824 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAEumDocument 616 Filed 02/24/12 Page 50 of 67
A-5668
A-5668
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v.
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,
Page 233
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross
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
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.
Page 234
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross
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
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
Page 235
February 15, 2012
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross
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.
February 15, 2012
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross
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.
Page 236
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross
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 acknowledgment here today that you misrepresented any
18 number of material things about yourself during voir dire
19 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.
C2frdau7 Conrad - cross
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 acknowledgment here today that you misrepresented any
18 number of material things about yourself during voir dire
19 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-00009272
(59) Page 233 - Page 236
DOJ-OGR-00009272
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document