DOJ-OGR-00009339.jpg

412 KB

Extraction Summary

6
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court transcript
File Size: 412 KB
Summary

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on Feb 24, 2022. Witness 'Brune' is being questioned about when they became aware of research conducted by their colleague Ms. Trzaskoma regarding Catherine Conrad (Juror 50). The testimony focuses on whether Brune was included in email traffic regarding this research prior to jury deliberations. Attorneys Schectman and Davis argue over the timestamp (West Coast vs East Coast) of a specific note.

People (6)

Name Role Context
Brune Witness
Under direct examination; testifying about knowledge of research into Catherine Conrad.
Ms. Trzaskoma Attorney/Colleague
Sent an email regarding research on Catherine Conrad; works at the same firm as the witness.
Catherine Conrad Subject of Research
Person being investigated by Ms. Trzaskoma and the firm (Context: Known as 'Juror 50' in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial).
Mr. Schectman Attorney
Interjects to clarify a time zone issue regarding a note.
Ms. Davis Attorney
Refuses to stipulate to Mr. Schectman's clarification about the time.
The Court Judge
Instructs the questioning attorney to ask a new question.

Organizations (1)

Name Type Context
Southern District Reporters, P.C.
Transcription service listed in footer.

Timeline (2 events)

Unknown
Beginning of jury deliberations
Court
Unknown (Prior to testimony)
Research on Catherine Conrad
Law Firm
Ms. Trzaskoma Firm employees

Locations (1)

Location Context
Mentioned by Mr. Schectman in reference to the time zone of a note.

Relationships (1)

Brune Colleagues Ms. Trzaskoma
Reference to 'others in your firm'

Key Quotes (3)

"I certainly was not included on any e-mail traffic."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009339.jpg
Quote #1
"I'm not willing to stipulate to that, your Honor, and I'll move on, but I'm not willing to stipulate to that."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009339.jpg
Quote #2
"that note prompted Ms. Trzaskoma and others in your firm to do additional research on Catherine Conrad"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009339.jpg
Quote #3

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,312 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAC Document 1616-20 Filed 02/24/22 Page 50 of 130
A-5735
C2GFDAU1 Brune - direct 278
1 counsel, correct?
2 A. I was.
3 Q. And that prompted, that note prompted Ms. Trzaskoma and
4 others in your firm to do additional research on Catherine
5 Conrad, correct?
6 A. That's now my understanding, yes.
7 Q. Did you know that at the time?
8 A. No, I don't think so. But I'm not, I really don't think
9 so.
10 Q. So is it your testimony here today that from 7:30 in the
11 morning when Ms. Trzaskoma sends out the first e-mail --
12 MR. SCHECTMAN: Judge, just for the record, that 7:30
13 is the west coast time on the note, I'm almost certain it's
14 10:30 and I think we can probably stipulate to that.
15 MS. DAVIS: I'm not willing to stipulate to that, your
16 Honor, and I'll move on, but I'm not willing to stipulate to
17 that.
18 A. I'm sorry --
19 THE COURT: Why don't you put a new question to the
20 witness?
21 Q. So is it your testimony here today that you were neither
22 included on the e-mail traffic nor made aware of the e-mail
23 traffic up through the beginning of jury deliberations?
24 A. I certainly was not included on any e-mail traffic. What
25 I'm saying is I don't have a recollection of being made aware
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00009339

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document