SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS
OrganizationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00009928.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Conrad. The questioning focuses on allegations that Conrad was dishonest during jury selection (voir dire) by deliberately omitting that she was an attorney and by providing a false address (Bronxville) to Judge Pauley. Conrad admits to the 'omission' of her legal background but distinguishes it from a lie, while the questioner challenges her credibility and the truthfulness of her statements under oath.
DOJ-OGR-00009927.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, detailing the direct examination of Ms. Conrad, a former juror in the case against Paul M. Daugerdas. The questioning focuses on her financial situation, her memory of prior court proceedings, and her past confrontational statements to the court, such as calling her husband a "convicted felon" whom she might retain as a lawyer and telling the court that her finances were "none of your business." Ms. Conrad's testimony is evasive and hostile, suggesting a contentious relationship with the court and the defendant's counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00009926.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Ms. Conrad. The questioning focuses on her financial situation, including her assets of approximately $14,000, her past earnings as a lawyer, and her tax filing history. The attorney attempts to scrutinize her financial success and challenges the truthfulness of a prior affidavit she submitted to a disciplinary committee, while Ms. Conrad is often evasive in her answers.
DOJ-OGR-00009924.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. It was filed as an exhibit (Doc 646-10) in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330). The transcript features the examination of a witness named Ms. Conrad by Mr. Gair regarding her conduct in a previous hearing before Judge Pauley, specifically concerning her financial inability to retain counsel and her remark that a financial affidavit form was 'garbage'.
DOJ-OGR-00009922.jpg
This document is a transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case United States v. Daugerdas, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Conrad. The witness, a suspended lawyer, is being aggressively questioned about her defiant behavior toward Judge Pauley during a previous hearing regarding her role as a juror, as well as inquiries into her mental health, specifically bipolar disorder. The witness is evasive, frequently claiming she is not a psychologist and giving sarcastic answers, such as stating she takes 'Water' when asked about medications.
DOJ-OGR-00009921.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It details the direct examination of an unnamed witness by an attorney named Conrad regarding the witness's prior statements in court, where they called a defense motion 'ridiculous' and made comments to Judge Pauley about his background. The witness is largely uncooperative, frequently claiming a lack of recall, leading to a tense exchange about their motives and credibility.
DOJ-OGR-00009920.jpg
This document is a condensed transcript (pages 109-112) from the case United States v. Daugerdas (2012), ostensibly filed as Exhibit A-5637 in the later Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The transcript features the direct examination of a witness named Ms. Conrad, focusing on her alcohol consumption (specifically 'cheap vodka') and a previous erratic court appearance on December 20th before Judge Pauley. The questioning highlights her bizarre statements to Judge Pauley regarding Duke University football and 'Clinton appointments,' seemingly to attack her credibility or mental state.
DOJ-OGR-00009919.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, detailing the questioning of a witness, likely Ms. Conrad, in the case of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL. The questioning focuses on her understanding of a court order and subpoena issued by Judge Pauley, her legal training, and her prior statements to court staff that she would not appear or testify. The witness also mentions having met Ms. Sternheim six times and having 'Googled' the questioner after a previous trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009918.jpg
This document contains transcript pages 101-104 from the case United States v. Daugerdas, dated February 15, 2012. The witness, Catherine M. Conrad, a former juror in the case, initially asserts her Fifth Amendment privilege regarding her previous voir dire testimony but is subsequently granted immunity by the Court. Under questioning by attorney Mr. Gair, Conrad admits to lies and omissions during her jury service selection in 2011 and confirms she called Judge Pauley's chambers earlier that morning to state she would not attend court.
DOJ-OGR-00009917.jpg
This document is a court transcript from *United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas* dated February 15, 2012. It details a hearing regarding Juror No. 1, Catherine Conrad, who intends to invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Her attorney, Ms. Sternheim, argues for the courtroom to be closed to protect Conrad's privacy regarding alcohol dependence and disciplinary records, but the Court denies this request, citing that the information is already public.
DOJ-OGR-00009916.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case of USA v. Paul M. Daugerdas. The witness, Ms. Trzaskoma, is being questioned regarding her knowledge of misconduct by Juror No. 1 (Catherine Conrad), specifically regarding a Westlaw report identifying Conrad as a suspended lawyer. Trzaskoma testifies that she believed the report was a case of mistaken identity and denies trying to 'sandbag' the court by withholding information about Conrad's criminal history and suspended license during the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009301.jpg
This document is an index page (Page 12 of 130) from a legal transcript dated February 15, 2012, in the case 'United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas.' It was filed as Exhibit A-5697 in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330) on February 24, 2022. The page contains an alphabetical concordance of words used in the transcript (from 'Tylenol' to 'week'), including names like Viviann, Vivien, Walker, and Warren, along with their corresponding page and line numbers.
DOJ-OGR-00009300.jpg
This document is a concordance (word index) page from a legal transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the case 'United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al.' It was filed as Exhibit A-5696 in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) on February 24, 2022. The index lists words starting with 'T' (testify, Texas, Theresa, Trzaskoma, trial, etc.) alongside their corresponding page and line numbers in the original transcript. Notable entries include 'Trzaskoma' (mentioned 41 times) and 'trial' (mentioned 103 times).
DOJ-OGR-00009299.jpg
This document is page A-5695, an index from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the criminal case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The index, prepared by Southern District Reporters, lists keywords starting with 'S' and their corresponding page and line numbers, with numerous references to an individual named Sternheim, who is noted to have testified.
DOJ-OGR-00009298.jpg
This document is an index or concordance from a legal proceeding, dated February 15, 2012, involving the United States of America and Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. It lists various words and names, including several individuals like Shechtman and Sklarshy, along with their corresponding page and line number references within a larger transcript. The document was likely produced by Southern District Reporters.
DOJ-OGR-00009297.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 lists keywords alphabetically from 'revisit' to 'sessions', along with their frequency counts and page/line citations. The document bears a header indicating it was filed on February 24, 2022, as part of Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), suggesting it was submitted as an exhibit in that trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009296.jpg
This document is an index page from a court transcript dated February 15, 2012, for the legal case of United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. It lists various words alphabetically from 'RECROSS-EXAMINATION' to 'revised' and provides the corresponding page and line numbers where they appear in the full transcript. The document was produced by Southern District Reporters and is marked with the identifier DOJ-OGR-00009296.
DOJ-OGR-00009295.jpg
This document is page 86 of a 130-page index for a court transcript from the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., dated February 15, 2012. It alphabetically lists keywords from 'production' to 'recovery' and provides the specific page and line numbers where these terms appear in the full transcript. The document is identified by the Bates number DOJ-OGR-00009295 and was produced by Southern District Reporters.
DOJ-OGR-00009294.jpg
This document is page A-5690 of an index for a court transcript from the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAEum), dated February 15, 2012. The index, prepared by Southern District Reporters, covers terms from 'petition' to 'product' and provides their page and line number locations within the full transcript. The document carries a Department of Justice Bates number DOJ-OGR-00009294.
DOJ-OGR-00009293.jpg
This document is a page from an alphabetical index of a court transcript for the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., dated February 15, 2012. The page lists keywords from 'otherwise' to 'petit' and provides the page and line numbers where each term appears in the full transcript. The document was produced by Southern District Reporters and is marked with the Bates number DOJ-OGR-00009293.
DOJ-OGR-00009291.jpg
This document is page 26 of a 130-page index from a legal transcript dated February 15, 2012. The index is for the case of United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., and was prepared by Southern District Reporters. This specific page lists words alphabetically from 'measure' to 'next' and provides the page and line numbers where each word appears in the full transcript.
DOJ-OGR-00009288.jpg
This document is page 66 of a court transcript index from the case of United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., dated February 15, 2012. It lists keywords alphabetically from 'informed' to 'jurors' and provides the corresponding page and line numbers where these terms appear in the full transcript. The document was produced by Southern District Reporters and is marked with case and document filing numbers.
DOJ-OGR-00009287.jpg
This document is page 65 of a 67-page index from a legal transcript, filed on February 24, 2022, in the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The index, prepared by Southern District Reporters for a transcript dated February 15, 2012, lists terms alphabetically from 'hardcopies' to 'information' with corresponding page and line numbers. The document is marked with the Bates number DOJ-OGR-00009287.
DOJ-OGR-00009286.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript index (concordance) dated February 15, 2012, for the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. It lists keywords alphabetically (from 'follows' to 'hard') alongside their frequency and page:line citations in the transcript. Prominent entries include 'Government' (82 mentions) and 'Gair' (59 mentions), indicating significant participation or discussion of these entities/persons during the proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00009285.jpg
This document is page 63 of a court transcript index from the legal case of United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al., dated February 15, 2012. It provides an alphabetical list of words (from 'experienced' to 'following') and their corresponding page and line numbers within the full transcript. The document was produced by Southern District Reporters and is part of a larger court filing from February 24, 2022.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity