the plaza
LocationRelationship Network
EFTA00017022.pdf
A handwritten diary entry describing social outings, including seeing 'Phantom of the Opera' and a ski trip to a cabin with a female friend, her boyfriend, and his 25-year-old brother. The author expresses romantic interest in the brother. The entry concludes with a night out where the female friend announces she is staying at 'Jeffreys' (likely Epstein), leaving the author alone with the brother.
DOJ-OGR-00015726.jpg
A handwritten diary entry recounting a trip to New York City to see 'Phantom of the Opera' and visit The Plaza, followed by a trip to a cabin with a group of four. The author describes meeting Jeffrey Mendelson (boyfriend of a redacted individual) and his 25-year-old brother Eric, noting they went cross-country skiing and watched the movie 'Sleuth'. The document contains significant redactions hiding other events or individuals.
DOJ-OGR-00015724.jpg
This is a personal journal entry from an unnamed author describing an evening out. The author was taken by an unnamed man's driver to see the play "Phantom," which they found extremely moving. After the show, they walked around "the Plaza" and had a very enjoyable time.
DOJ-OGR-00013628.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, showing the direct examination of a witness named Annie Farmer. The questioning focuses on a journal entry, presented as Government Exhibit 604, in which Farmer describes a trip to New York with her friend Maria. The entry details a positive experience, including visiting Jeff Epstein's house for champagne and finding him 'down-to-earth' before seeing the play 'Phantom of the Opera'.
DOJ-OGR-00010181.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated February 22, 2022. An attorney, Mr. Shechtman, is arguing before a judge, refuting the government's claim that his client, Mr. Parse, benefited from a particular juror. Shechtman contends that the acquittal was the result of a split verdict caused by a single 'partisan' juror who was unable to convince the rest of the jury to convict, and that this outcome was not a benefit derived from her presence.
DOJ-OGR-00010162.jpg
This document is a court transcript where a speaker criticizes the past actions of an unnamed woman and her two senior colleagues. The speaker argues they failed to properly investigate or report information to the court, possibly due to exhaustion or intimidation, which the judge later termed a 'tragic misjudgment'. This failure to act ultimately led to the substitution of a juror several days later.
DOJ-OGR-00010093.jpg
This document is a court transcript of the cross-examination of a witness, Ms. Edelstein, by an attorney, Mr. Schectman. The questioning focuses on why Ms. Edelstein and her colleagues, Ms. Brune and Ms. Trzaskoma, did not inform the court after discovering that a juror, Juror No. 1, shared the same name as a suspended lawyer, Catherine Conrad. Ms. Edelstein testifies that they concluded it was 'inconceivable' they were the same person and therefore saw no reason to bring it to the court's attention.
DOJ-OGR-00010064.jpg
This document is a transcript of legal testimony where a witness, Edelstein, is questioned about a conversation with Theresa Trzaskoma and Susan Brune. Edelstein recounts that Trzaskoma, after receiving a note from Juror No. 1, recalled that there was a suspended New York lawyer with the same name as someone relevant to their case. The witness denies prior knowledge of this information from their firm and clarifies their understanding of the situation at the time.
DOJ-OGR-00009414.jpg
This document is a court transcript of a cross-examination where Mr. Schectman is questioned by Ms. Edelstein. The questioning centers on why Schectman and his colleagues, Ms. Brune and Ms. Trzaskoma, failed to inform the court after discovering on May 12th that a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad shared the same name as Juror No. 1. Schectman defends their decision, stating they concluded it was 'inconceivable' that the juror was the same person, and denies any attempt to 'sandbag the Court'.
DOJ-OGR-00009344.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Ms. Brune. The testimony covers the credibility of government witnesses (lawyers who pleaded guilty to false statements to the IRS), the division of labor regarding jury selection between Brune and Theresa Trzaskoma, and a specific conversation they had at 'the plaza' regarding potential information.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity