| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Brune
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Conrad
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Edelstein
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Edelstein
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Conrad
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Edelstein
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. OKULA
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MS. DAVIS
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Brune
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Trzaskoma
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Edelstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A witness, Edelstein, is questioned by an attorney about their knowledge of Catherine Conrad's pr... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Cross-examination and redirect examination of a witness named Edelstein regarding knowledge of Ju... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Trial | A trial in which Conrad served as a juror and David Parse was a defendant. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Brune by an unnamed questioner, with objections from Mr. Schectman ... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Redirect and recross-examination of witness Brune. | Implied to be a court in th... | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | Redirect examination of witness Edelstein. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Trip | The underlying trial in the case of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Brune regarding her understanding of 'significant informati... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | Recross-examination of witness Brune regarding a fraud alert, Social Security numbers, and the di... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Laura Edelstein | Courtroom | View |
| 2025-11-05 | Meeting | A conversation took place regarding a suspended lawyer having the same name as a juror. | the plaza | View |
| 2022-03-24 | Court proceeding | A court hearing where one witness (Ms. Brune) is excused and another (Laura Joy Edelstein) is cal... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Brune regarding her understanding of 'significant information' conc... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Court testimony | Redirect and recross examination of witness Brune regarding their interpretation of a document, t... | Southern District | View |
| 2022-02-24 | N/A | Court proceeding where Ms. Brune is excused and Laurie Edelstein is called as a government witness. | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Court testimony | Recross-examination of witness Brune by Mr. Schectman and the Court. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-02-22 | Court proceeding | Testimony of witness Edelstein, being questioned by Mr. Okula in the presence of Mr. Schectman an... | N/A | View |
| 2012-02-15 | N/A | Court proceedings in United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. | Courtroom | View |
| 2012-02-15 | Court hearing | Direct examination of witness Conrad in the case of U.S. v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. The questio... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2012-02-15 | Court testimony | Court testimony of a juror, Ms. Conrad, being questioned about her background and potential biase... | Courtroom | View |
| 2012-02-15 | Court testimony | Court hearing featuring the direct and cross-examination of witness/juror Ms. Conrad regarding he... | Courtroom | View |
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.
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on February 24, 2022. It captures a portion of the direct examination of a witness named Brune, who is being questioned about her assessment of potentially significant information regarding a juror and whether it should have been raised with a Judge Pauley. The transcript includes legal objections and rulings, indicating a contentious line of questioning.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity