Southern District
LocationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Eastern District
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Main Justice
|
Co negotiators |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Investigation | A criminal investigation into Epstein's co-conspirators by the Southern District. | Southern District | View |
| N/A | N/A | Negotiations with Main Justice and Southern District | Unknown | View |
DOJ-OGR-00010045.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (page 305) filed on May 24, 2022. A witness named Brune is being questioned about the disclosure of a private investigation firm, Nardello, in a legal brief and during a conference call with Judge Pauley. The testimony confirms that the Nardello firm performed jury research and investigative work pertaining to 'Juror No. 1' after a specific letter was received.
DOJ-OGR-00010036.jpg
This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding where a witness, Brune, is being questioned about their knowledge of statements made by a Ms. Trzaskoma during a July 15th conference call. The questioning focuses on the timeline of when Brune read the call transcript in relation to filing a letter on July 21st, implying that Brune may have known Ms. Trzaskoma's statements were incorrect. Brune denies this assertion.
DOJ-OGR-00010035.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (filed March 24, 2022) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Ms. Brune. The questioning focuses on the ethical obligations of a female partner at Brune's law firm, establishing that she has independent obligations to the Court despite Brune's supervisory role. The testimony also references the review of email traffic leading up to the submission of a letter on July 21st.
DOJ-OGR-00010029.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Brune. The testimony covers procedural timeline issues, specifically regarding jury deliberations that lasted eight days and whether the legal team could have raised issues regarding a 'suspended attorney' with the Court prior to the verdict. It references a conversation between Ms. Trzaskoma, Barry Berke, and Paul Schoeman.
DOJ-OGR-00010026.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on March 24, 2022. It features the direct examination of Ms. Brune (a former AUSA), questioning her decision not to alert the Court about Google search results regarding a juror found around March 12th. Brune testifies that she did not report it because she relied on the juror's sworn statements claiming to be a 'stay at home wife,' leading Brune to believe the search results referred to a different person.
DOJ-OGR-00010025.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a legal proceeding, likely a deposition or court transcript, featuring a direct examination by 'Brune' of a speaker identified as 'C2GFDAU1'. The discussion revolves around a past court event where a judge had to restart jury deliberations due to a juror's illness, which coincided with Mr. Rosenbaum having to leave. The witness explains why they did not raise a particular issue with the Court at an earlier time.
DOJ-OGR-00010014.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cv-03388-LAK) featuring the direct examination of an individual named Brune. The testimony focuses on the jury selection process (voir dire), specifically discussing a joint defense agreement and the reliance on 'gut feelings' rather than perfect knowledge when challenging potential jurors. The witness is also asked if they recall a 'Mr. Aponte' and a juror with a criminal background.
DOJ-OGR-00010008.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Page 268, Exhibit A-5725) filed on August 24, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Brune regarding strategies used during jury selection (voir dire). Brune confirms utilizing Google, a database, the Nardello firm, and Dennis Donahue to research potential jurors to find those sympathetic to defense themes.
DOJ-OGR-00010007.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (filed August 24, 2022) featuring the direct testimony of a witness named Brune. The testimony concerns the due diligence performed during jury selection (voir dire), specifically admitting that the witness did not launch a full-scale private investigation into every juror and confirming that the investigative entity 'Nardello' did not search for juror Catherine M. Conrad of Bronxville. The witness also discusses the timing of when the government disclosed a letter sent by the juror.
DOJ-OGR-00009986.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (page 246), filed as part of Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (USA v. Maxwell) on August 24, 2022. It depicts the swearing-in and initial direct examination of witness Susan Elizabeth Brune by Ms. Davis on behalf of the Government. Brune establishes her credentials, noting she graduated from Harvard Law in 1988, has been practicing for nearly 25 years (placing the actual testimony date circa 2013), and is a former Assistant United States Attorney.
DOJ-OGR-00009984.jpg
This document is a page from a legal hearing transcript dated February 22, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00038-AEN. It lists the attorneys appearing on behalf of various parties: Caroline Rule and Sharon McCarthy for Defendant Field, Paul Shechtman and Adam Murphy for Defendant Parse, and Bobbi C. Sternheim for Ms. Conrad. The document also notes the presence of IRS Special Agent Christine Mazzella.
DOJ-OGR-00009983.jpg
This document is a cover or separator page from a legal hearing transcript, identified by case number 1:20-cv-00883-PAE-SN. The document was filed on March 23, 2022, and indicates it is page 515 of a larger set. It identifies the court reporting service as 'SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.' and bears the Bates number DOJ-OGR-00009983.
DOJ-OGR-00009978.jpg
This document is a page from a 'Min-U-Script' word index (concordance) for a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, in the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. The index lists words starting with 'S' through 'T', including names such as Sternheim (who testified), Stetler, Susan, Swan, Swann, and Sweeney, along with their frequency and line references in the transcript. The document bears a DOJ-OGR stamp, indicating it was processed as part of a Department of Justice release, potentially related to the Epstein/Maxwell document productions where this case may have been cited or included.
DOJ-OGR-00009977.jpg
This document is a page from an index for a legal transcript in the case of United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., dated February 15, 2012. The page covers keywords alphabetically from 'set' to 'step', providing the page and line numbers where each term appears in the full transcript. The document was prepared by Southern District Reporters and is marked with the identifier DOJ-OGR-00009977.
DOJ-OGR-00009976.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript index (concordance) dated February 15, 2012, for the case 'United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.'. It lists words alphabetically (from 'revisit' to 'sessions') alongside their frequency counts and specific page:line citations within the transcript. While the content pertains to the Daugerdas tax fraud case, the header indicates this document was filed on March 10, 2022, as Document 646-2 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, which is the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell, suggesting it was used as a legal exhibit or precedent in her trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009975.jpg
This document is Page 7 of 30 from a court transcript index (concordance) filed on February 24, 2022, for the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. Checks against the index indicate the transcript is from proceedings on February 15, 2012. The page lists the frequency and page:line citations for words beginning with 'recross-examination' through 'revised'.
DOJ-OGR-00009974.jpg
This document is a page from an alphabetical index for a court transcript dated February 15, 2012. It pertains to the legal case of United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. The index on this page covers words from 'production' to 'recovery', listing the page and line numbers where each word appears in the full transcript.
DOJ-OGR-00009973.jpg
This document is an index (concordance) page from a court transcript in the case 'United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.', dated February 15, 2012. It lists words alphabetically from 'petition' to 'product' alongside their frequency and specific page/line citations within the full transcript. The document includes references to legal terms (plaintiff, plead, probation), generic terms, and the acronym 'PMD' (likely referring to the defendant, Paul M. Daugerdas).
DOJ-OGR-00009972.jpg
This document is a word index (concordance) page from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the case 'United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.' It tracks the frequency and location (page:line) of words alphabetically from 'otherwise' to 'petit'. Although the content concerns the Daugerdas tax fraud case, the header 'Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN' indicates this document was filed on February 14, 2022, as Exhibit A-5689 in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00009970.jpg
This document is a page from an index for a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, from the case of United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. The page indexes words from 'measure' to 'next', providing the page and line number for each occurrence in the transcript. The document was produced by Southern District Reporters and is marked with the identifier DOJ-OGR-00009970.
DOJ-OGR-00009966.jpg
This document is a page from an index for a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, from the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. The page covers keywords from 'hardcopies' to 'information' and lists the corresponding page and line numbers where they appear in the full transcript. The document was prepared by Southern District Reporters and includes case and document identification numbers.
DOJ-OGR-00009964.jpg
This document is a single page from a transcript index (concordance) for the case 'United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.', dated February 15, 2012. It was filed as Exhibit A-5681 in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) on March 21, 2022. The page lists keywords alphabetically from 'experienced' to 'following' (including 'FBI', 'federal', 'felony', 'financial', 'firm') alongside the page and line numbers where they appear in the original transcript. While filed in the Maxwell/Epstein docket, the content originates from the Daugerdas tax fraud case.
DOJ-OGR-00009960.jpg
This document is a concordance (word index) page from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, in the case of USA v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It lists words alphabetically from 'communication' to 'counseled' along with line and page numbers where they appear in the full transcript. Notably, the name 'Conrad' appears 192 times, indicating this individual was a primary subject of the testimony recorded on that date.
DOJ-OGR-00009956.jpg
This document is an alphabetical index from a legal transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. It lists keywords and their corresponding page and line numbers from the transcript, which was prepared by Southern District Reporters. The document was filed on March 22, 2012, as part of the court record.
DOJ-OGR-00009955.jpg
This document is a keyword index (concordance) page from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the case 'United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.' It lists occurrences of specific numbers (including dollar amounts like $12,000 and $14,000) and their corresponding page and line numbers in the transcript. While the document header (Case 1:20-cr-00330) indicates it was filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial on February 21, 2022, the content pertains to the Daugerdas tax fraud case, likely serving as a reference or sample in the Maxwell proceedings.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity