Mr. Shechtman
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Judge
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Mr. Parse
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
MR. DAVIS
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MR. OKULA
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Trzaskoma
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Parse
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Berke
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Susan Brune
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Laurie Edelstein
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
PAUL SCHOEMAN
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Berke
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Conrad
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Theresa Marie Trzaskoma
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Benhamou
|
Counsel witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Parse
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Susan Brune
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
PAUL SCHOEMAN
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
BARRY H. BERKE
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Parse
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge Easterbrook
|
Citation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Defendant Parse
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MS. DAVIS
|
Opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Parse
|
Client |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness Brune regarding the decision not to investigate Juror No. 1, Ms. Con... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing discussing attorney misconduct and potential retrial. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Direct examination | Direct examination of Mr. Schoeman by Mr. Shechtman. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | Redirect examination of Ms. Brune by Mr. Davis, during which Government Exhibit 28 (a letter from... | The Court | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | A cross-examination of witness Ms. Brune by attorney Mr. Shechtman regarding the jury selection p... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A conversation between THE COURT and MR. SHECHTMAN regarding disclosure of documents and misleadi... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Redirect examination of a witness regarding juror Catherine M. Conrad's background check. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | A discussion between the Court and counsel regarding a procedural hypothetical about a motion for... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | The Court questioned Mr. Shechtman. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Paul Schoeman is sworn in as a witness for Defendant Parse. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | A hearing was held to discuss and set deadlines for legal briefs before being adjourned. | Southern District (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Redirect examination of Ms. Brune regarding Government Exhibit 28. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Barry H. Berke | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Legal examination/testimony | Examination of witness Susan Brune, including direct, cross, redirect, and recross examinations. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal examination/testimony | Examination of witness Laura Edelstein, including direct, cross, and redirect examinations. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal examination/testimony | Examination of witness Paul Schoeman, including direct, cross, and redirect examinations. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal examination/testimony | Examination of witness Barry H. Berke, including direct, cross, and redirect examinations. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Barry H. Berke by Mr. Shechtman. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Paul Schoeman | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Susan Brune | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding jury deliberations and verdict validity (likely the Parse case being cite... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Cross-examination of witness Schoeman by attorney Mr. Okula regarding the timing of a conversatio... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court testimony (Direct and Cross-examination) of Mr. Berke. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-24 | N/A | Court proceedings regarding Case 1:20-cr-00339-AJN | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| 2022-06-24 | N/A | Court testimony in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). | Courtroom | View |
DOJ-OGR-00009428.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on February 24, 2012, detailing the direct examination of witness Barry H. Berke. Mr. Berke, a partner at the law firm Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel, outlines his legal career, including his time as a judicial clerk, a lawyer with the Federal Defenders, and a professor at NYU. He also confirms his prior involvement as a lawyer in a trial concerning the defendant, David Parse.
DOJ-OGR-00009427.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated February 24, 2012, detailing the redirect examination of a witness, Mr. Schoeman. An attorney, Mr. Shechtman, questions Mr. Schoeman about a conversation on or after May 13th, in which Ms. Trzaskoma told him she had rejected the conclusion that Juror No. 1 was a suspended attorney. The witness confirms the conversation but states he had no specific understanding of her reasoning, attributing the information sharing to their established pattern during the lengthy trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009423.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding, filed on February 24, 2012. It captures the cross-examination of a witness named Schoeman by an attorney, Mr. Okula, regarding the timing of a conversation Schoeman had with a Ms. Trzaskoma. The questioning aims to establish whether this conversation occurred on the same day or several days after a juror's note was received in court during deliberations.
DOJ-OGR-00009420.jpg
This page is a transcript from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330) featuring the direct examination of attorney Mr. Schoeman. The testimony focuses on establishing Schoeman's background and his involvement in a previous trial (United States v. Parse et al.) regarding a specific incident on May 11, 2011, involving a note from a juror named Catherine Conrad. This testimony is likely being used to establish legal precedent regarding juror misconduct.
DOJ-OGR-00009419.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on February 24, 2022. In the proceeding, the Government (represented by Mr. Okula) rests its case after admitting Exhibit 10 into evidence. Subsequently, defense attorney Mr. Shechtman begins the defense case for 'Defendant Parse' by calling Paul Schoeman as a witness.
DOJ-OGR-00009374.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) featuring a redirect examination by an attorney named Brune. The questioning focuses on a Westlaw report concerning a person named Catherine M. Conrad, verifying her name, birth year (1969), and age (41) against a jury list provided before voir dire. Attorneys Gair and Shechtman raise objections during the questioning.
DOJ-OGR-00009373.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Page 312, Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) documenting the redirect examination of a witness named Ms. Brune by Mr. Davis. The proceedings involve the identification and admission of 'Government Exhibit 28,' which is described as a July 21st letter written by Ms. Brune to the Court. Following the admission of the letter into evidence without objection from Mr. Shechtman, the questioning turns to a Westlaw report attached as an exhibit.
DOJ-OGR-00009372.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding filed on February 24, 2022. It details the cross-examination of a witness named Brune, who is questioned about their firm's decision not to investigate potential juror misconduct by Juror No. 1, Ms. Conrad, following a verdict on May 24th. Brune states that the firm did not believe there was an issue to investigate at the time.
DOJ-OGR-00009369.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (page 308) filed on February 24, 2022. A witness, Ms. Brune, is being questioned by Mr. Davis about a mistake in a legal brief regarding the timing of a Google search relative to receiving a letter. The testimony also confirms that David Parse was convicted of two charges and acquitted of four, and that the witness believed the jury rendered a fair verdict.
DOJ-OGR-00009354.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) featuring the direct examination of Ms. Brune. The questioning focuses on a legal brief drafted by Ms. Trzaskoma and signed/approved by Brune, which allegedly omitted the fact that the defense had accessed a 'suspension opinion' during the trial. Brune admits to regretting the oversight but argues the investigation mentioned in the brief was genuinely prompted by a letter from Ms. Conrad, disclosed by the government.
Approval of transactions by Deutsche Bank
A brief submitted by Mr. Shechtman suggested that the transactions in question were approved by Deutsche Bank, a point the speaker is refuting.
Redirect Examination regarding Juror No. 1
Mr. Shechtman questions the witness, Berke, about why no further investigation was conducted into a potential name match between Juror No. 1 and a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad. The witness confirms it was because they agreed, based on the voir dire, that it couldn't be the same person.
Approval of transactions by Deutsche Bank
A brief submitted by Mr. Shechtman suggested that the transactions in question were approved by Deutsche Bank, a point the speaker is refuting.
Direct examination of Barry H. Berke's employment history
Mr. Shechtman questions witness Barry H. Berke about his legal career, including his partnership at Kramer Levin, his time at the Federal Defenders office, and his role as a lawyer in a prior trial involving defendant David Parse.
Legal arguments in the case
Mr. Shechtman's brief is mentioned as having omitted the fact that the jury's struggle with legal definitions ended after they asked the Court to reread them.
Brief regarding transaction approval
Suggestion that transactions were approved by Deutsche Bank.
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding Berke's employment history and presence at the David Parse trial.
Argument on prejudice and backdating allegations
Mr. Shechtman argues that the key issue distinguishing his clients is the allegation of 'backdating,' which he claims is a mischaracterization by the government of how Deutsche Bank records were prepared and labeled 'as of'.
Legal Argument
Oral argument regarding prejudice, harmless error, and juror bias.
Argument regarding a split jury verdict for Mr. Parse
Mr. Shechtman argues against the government's assertion that his client, Mr. Parse, benefited from a particular juror. He contends that the juror was a partisan who couldn't follow instructions, and the resulting split verdict was due to her inability to persuade other jurors, not a benefit to his client.
Argument regarding a split jury verdict for Mr. Parse
Mr. Shechtman argues against the government's assertion that his client, Mr. Parse, benefited from a particular juror. He contends that the juror was a partisan who couldn't follow instructions, and the resulting split verdict was due to her inability to persuade other jurors, not a benefit to his client.
Post-verdict legal argument
Mr. Shechtman argues against the government's position that his client, Mr. Parse, benefited from a strategic choice regarding a juror. He contends the acquittal was due to a split verdict caused by a partisan juror who failed to persuade others, not because Mr. Parse benefited from her presence.
Cross-examination regarding voir dire omissions
Mr. Shechtman questions Ms. Conrad about her failure to disclose her husband's criminal history and other details during jury selection. The questioning probes her motives, including the $40/day stipend, her curiosity about the case, and her distinction between an "omission" and a "lie".
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity