This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Berke. The questioning focuses on legal ethics, specifically asking Berke if an attorney is obligated to report juror misconduct to the Court. Berke attempts to qualify his answer rather than giving a simple 'yes' or 'no,' stating he relies on ethical rules and commentary when such issues arise.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Berke | Witness/Attorney |
Undergoing cross-examination regarding legal ethics and attorney obligations.
|
| Unidentified Questioner (Q) | Attorney |
Conducting the cross-examination of Berke.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Footer information.
|
|
| The Court |
Referenced in the context of reporting juror misconduct.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Implied by the Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the court reporter's name (likely SDNY).
|
"If an attorney forms a belief that a juror has engaged in misconduct, do you believe that the attorney has an obligation to bring it to the attention of the court?"Source
"I will tell you that I have never confronted that issue at trial in any trial I have done"Source
"I'm very familiar with the ethical rules. I'm familiar with my obligations to my client, to the court"Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,439 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document