DOJ-OGR-00009343.jpg

432 KB

Extraction Summary

2
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court transcript / deposition testimony
File Size: 432 KB
Summary

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) involving the direct examination of a witness named Ms. Brune. The testimony centers on Ms. Brune's reasoning for not further investigating an individual (referred to as 'she') who might have been a suspended lawyer, citing reliance on sworn voir dire responses. The questioning attorney challenges this by pointing out that the indictment itself focused on the misconduct of lawyers and that several codefendants were lawyers.

People (2)

Name Role Context
Ms. Brune Witness
Being questioned on direct examination regarding vetting of a juror or individual, possibly regarding a 'suspended la...
Q Interviewer/Attorney
Questioning Ms. Brune about her team's investigation and knowledge of the indictment.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
Google
Source of information mentioned by the witness.
Southern District Reporters, P.C.
Court reporting service listed in the footer.
DOJ
Department of Justice (referenced in document ID DOJ-OGR-00009343).

Timeline (2 events)

2022-02-24
Filing date of the court document.
Court
Unknown
Voir Dire process
Court
Ms. Brune Potential Juror/Subject

Relationships (1)

Ms. Brune Professional Her team
Questioner asks: 'occurred to you that you could have your team look into this'

Key Quotes (4)

"I didn't think there was anything to the idea that she was a suspended lawyer."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009343.jpg
Quote #1
"I credited her sworn voir dire responses."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009343.jpg
Quote #2
"it made no sense that a lawyer would sit in a voir dire and lie that way."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009343.jpg
Quote #3
"And you understood that much of the indictment focused around the misconduct of lawyers, correct?"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009343.jpg
Quote #4

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,411 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 166-2 Filed 02/24/22 Page 54 of 130
A-5739
282
C2GFDAU1 Brune - direct
1 occurred to you that you could have your team look into this,
2 correct?
3 A. I certainly thought, well, here's this information on
4 Google. Here's the sworn statement. We could have certainly
5 done more. I didn't think it was proper in light of the fact
6 that I didn't think there was anything to the idea that she was
7 a suspended lawyer.
8 Q. Based on what information, actual information?
9 A. I credited her sworn voir dire responses. I went through
10 the reasoning that I described that the note in a way ruled out
11 the idea that she was a lawyer, and matched up with the idea
12 that she was a litigant in the personal injury suit, and it
13 made no sense that a lawyer would sit in a voir dire and lie
14 that way.
15 Q. Did you read the indictment in this case, Ms. Brune?
16 A. I read the indictment in this case.
17 Q. And you understood that much of the indictment focused
18 around the misconduct of lawyers, correct?
19 A. That is certainly what the indictment alleged.
20 Q. And a number of the defendants were lawyers, correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And a number of the cooperators and codefendants who
23 pleaded guilty were lawyers, correct?
24 A. If what you're asking me is --
25 Q. It's a simple question, Ms. Brune.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00009343

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document