DOJ-OGR-00010084.jpg
434 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript (testimony)
File Size:
434 KB
Summary
A page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cv-00083-AJN) filed on Feb 24, 2022. Ms. Edelstein is being questioned about whether a legal brief she was involved with misleadingly suggested that her team only learned of an Appellate Division suspension report regarding Catherine Conrad (Juror 50 in the Maxwell trial) after receiving a letter or juror note. Edelstein admits the brief might convey that impression but denies any intent to mislead.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Edelstein | Witness/Attorney |
Being questioned under oath regarding the drafting of a legal brief and the timeline of discovering information.
|
| Catherine Conrad | Juror/Subject |
Mentioned in relation to a letter received and a suspension report.
|
| Dr. DeRosa | Previous Witness |
Mentioned as someone Edelstein previously questioned aggressively ('raised your voice') at the podium.
|
| Unidentified Questioner (Q) | Attorney |
Conducting the examination of Ms. Edelstein.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Appellate Division |
Referenced in relation to a 'suspension report'.
|
|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Transcription service provider.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Unknown (Prior to testimony)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied jurisdiction (SDNY) based on reporter name and area code.
|
Relationships (2)
Questioner notes Edelstein 'raised your voice' with DeRosa previously.
Discussion of when Edelstein learned of Conrad's suspension report relative to receiving a letter from her.
Key Quotes (3)
"I can see now that that might be the impression."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010084.jpg
Quote #1
"That certainly was not our intention at the time. I certainly did not, we did not intend to create a misleading impression."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010084.jpg
Quote #2
"Weren't you the one who stood at this podium and raised your voice with Dr. DeRosa about him not answering your questions?"Source
DOJ-OGR-00010084.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,406 characters)
Case 1:20-cv-00083-AJN Document 646-2 Filed 02/24/22 Page 161 of 308
A-5801
A-5801
C2GFDAU3 Edelstein 344
1 Q. In the brief, is it fair to say that the facts section
2 conveys the notion that you discovered or you commenced your
3 discovery and attained your knowledge of the Appellate Division
4 suspension report only after you received the letter of
5 Catherine Conrad? Yes or no?
6 A. I can see now that that might be the impression.
7 Q. Ms. Edelstein, I asked you a simple question. Weren't you
8 the one who stood at this podium and raised your voice with Dr.
9 DeRosa about him not answering your questions? Do you remember
10 that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Okay, can you answer my questions the way I asked them or
13 in response to my question? Would you do that, please?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Wouldn't you agree with me that the facts as laid out in
16 your brief convey the notion that you learned of the Appellate
17 Division report only after you received the juror note; true or
18 false?
19 A. I find that a difficult answer, question to answer true or
20 false. I can see now how that might be the impression that is
21 conveyed by the brief.
22 Q. And that --
23 A. That certainly was not our intention at the time. I
24 certainly did not, we did not intend to create a misleading
25 impression. Our focus at the time was trying to show that
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00010084
1 Q. In the brief, is it fair to say that the facts section
2 conveys the notion that you discovered or you commenced your
3 discovery and attained your knowledge of the Appellate Division
4 suspension report only after you received the letter of
5 Catherine Conrad? Yes or no?
6 A. I can see now that that might be the impression.
7 Q. Ms. Edelstein, I asked you a simple question. Weren't you
8 the one who stood at this podium and raised your voice with Dr.
9 DeRosa about him not answering your questions? Do you remember
10 that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Okay, can you answer my questions the way I asked them or
13 in response to my question? Would you do that, please?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Wouldn't you agree with me that the facts as laid out in
16 your brief convey the notion that you learned of the Appellate
17 Division report only after you received the juror note; true or
18 false?
19 A. I find that a difficult answer, question to answer true or
20 false. I can see now how that might be the impression that is
21 conveyed by the brief.
22 Q. And that --
23 A. That certainly was not our intention at the time. I
24 certainly did not, we did not intend to create a misleading
25 impression. Our focus at the time was trying to show that
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00010084
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document