David Parse
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Conrad
|
Juror defendant |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Client |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Matt Coleman
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
William B Kavanagh
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
location
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Craig Brubaker
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
PAUL SHECHTMAN
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Daniel Aronoff
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Edelstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Theresa Trzaskoma
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Brune
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
LLP
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Preet Bharara
|
Prosecutor vs defendant |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Paul Daugerdas
|
Co defendants |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Catherine Conrad
|
Juror defendant |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Carrie Yackee
|
Professional supervisor subordinate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Aronoff family members
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Kevin Blair
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Shechtman
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
J&G Attorneys
|
Co conspirators professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Carrie Yackee
|
Professional superior subordinate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Kyle Coleman
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Theresa Parse
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jenkins
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Trial related to the defense of David Parse, where Edelstein was involved in various parts, focus... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | A previous trial involving David Parse and other defendants. | this courtroom | View |
| N/A | Financial transaction | Complex and varied transactions were effectuated to change the results of three sets of transacti... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Sentencing of David Parse for his role in tax shelter-related transactions. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Prosecution | Prosecution of brokers who performed functions for Jenkins and other law firms. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Financial fraud | Fraudulent backdating of transactions was committed to achieve impermissible tax results, in viol... | Deutsche Bank (implied) | View |
| N/A | Trial | The David Parse trial, in which Theresa Trzaskoma served as a lawyer. | this courtroom | View |
| N/A | Trial | A trial in which Conrad served as a juror and David Parse was a defendant. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial verdict | David Parse was convicted of two charges and acquitted of four charges by a jury. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Jury selection for the case United States of America v. Paul M. Daugerdas, et al. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Meeting | David Parse met with the Brune lawyers to discuss possible post-trial motions and appellate issues. | N/A | 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 | Conviction | A jury convicted David Parse for his involvement in three backdating transactions. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Conviction and Acquittal of David Parse | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Oral argument on defendant Parse's motion for a new trial. | Open Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial of David Parse | Unknown (Court) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Representation of David Parse by Brune. | Unknown | View |
| 2022-02-24 | Legal filing | Filing of Document 646-10, an appendix (Volume XVI of XVII), in case 13-1388-cr in the United Sta... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2014-02-24 | Legal filing | Filing of an appendix (Volume XVI of XVII) in the case of United States of America v. Paul M. Dau... | United States Court of Appe... | View |
| 2013-03-22 | N/A | Scheduled sentencing of David Parse | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2013-03-22 | N/A | Sentencing of David Parse | Court | View |
| 2013-03-22 | N/A | Transcript—Sentencing of David Parse | Court | View |
| 2013-03-20 | N/A | Reply Of The United States Regarding Defendant David Parse | Court | View |
| 2013-03-18 | N/A | Filing of Amended Sentencing Memorandum regarding David Parse | SDNY | View |
| 2013-03-18 | N/A | Amended Sentencing Memorandum of the United States Regarding Defendant David Parse | Court | View |
DOJ-OGR-00009267.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, detailing the cross-examination of a juror named Conrad regarding their service in a trial involving defendant David Parse. The questioning probes Conrad's impartiality, focusing on a post-verdict letter, their initial belief in the defendant's guilt, and whether their own past criminal history (including arrests for DUI and shoplifting) biased their judgment. Conrad consistently affirms that their final decision was based solely on the evidence and Judge Pauley's legal instructions, and that their personal history did not affect their ability to be fair and impartial.
DOJ-OGR-00009263.jpg
This document is a four-page transcript excerpt (pages 197-200) from the case United States v. Daugerdas (February 15, 2012), filed as Exhibit A-5659 in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The transcript features the examination of a witness named Ms. Conrad regarding a letter she sent to a Mr. Okula (likely a fellow juror), in which she included her phone number and discussed her reasoning for convicting defendant David Parse. The questioning highlights contradictions between what Conrad wrote to Okula on May 25th (claiming she wanted to convict Parse 100%) and what she told Judge Pauley on December 20th (claiming Parse shouldn't have been convicted on count 1). This document was likely used in the Maxwell trial to argue legal precedents regarding juror misconduct.
DOJ-OGR-00009236.jpg
This document is page 'xii' of a legal index or table of contents, filed on February 24, 2022. It lists documents ranging from 2012 to 2013 concerning the case of United States v. David Parse, specifically referencing sentencing memoranda, restitution calculations regarding 'Jenkens and Gilchrist Clients,' and correspondence between attorney Paul Shechtman and Judge Pauley. The document outlines the procedural history of Parse's sentencing, appeal, and judgment.
DOJ-OGR-00009230.jpg
This document is page 'vi' of an index of exhibits from a legal case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It lists various documents by exhibit number, including emails, faxes, letters, Deutsche Bank client statements, and an IRS certificate, with dates ranging from 1999 to 2009. The index provides a brief description, date, and the corresponding page number in the case file for each item, detailing communications between multiple individuals.
DOJ-OGR-00009224.jpg
This document is the cover page for Volume XVI of a legal appendix filed on February 24, 2014, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The case, docket number 13-1388-cr, is an appeal by Defendant-Appellant David Parse and others against the United States of America, originating from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The page identifies the parties involved, their legal roles (Appellee, Defendants, Defendant-Appellant), and their respective legal counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00010212.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a sentencing memorandum in the case United States v. Parse (Case 1:09-cr-00581), filed in 2013 and later referenced in a 2022 filing. It discusses the fraudulent backdating of transactions at Deutsche Bank to achieve tax shelters, specifically refuting David Parse's attempt to blame his subordinate, Carrie Yackee, for the misconduct. The text includes transcript excerpts where Yackee testifies she simply followed her boss's orders, assuming they complied with bank policy.
DOJ-OGR-00010211.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP) filed on March 18, 2013, concerning the sentencing of David Parse. The text argues that Parse was instrumental in backdating financial transactions for clients (Aronoff, Toporek, Blair, Coleman) in 2000 and 2001 to facilitate tax shelters involving J&G attorneys. It strongly criticizes Parse for attempting to blame his sales assistant, Carrie Yackee, for executing these trades.
DOJ-OGR-00010204.jpg
This document is the cover page for an Amended Sentencing Memorandum filed on March 18, 2013, by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York (Preet Bharara) regarding defendant David Parse. The case (S3 09 Cr. 581) involves multiple defendants including Paul Daugerdas, Donna Guerin, and Denis Field. The document also bears markings indicating it was later filed as Exhibit A-6074 in a 2020 civil case (1:20-cv-00338-AJN) on August 24, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010197.jpg
This document is a legal brief or letter to The Honorable William H. Pauley, III, discussing the case of a man named David, who was convicted of backdating transactions. It references the impact of the conviction on David's family and cites legal precedent from the United States Supreme Court and United States v. Adelson.
DOJ-OGR-00010196.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing submitted by Zuckerman Spaeder LLP to Judge William H. Pauley, III on March 7, 2013, regarding the sentencing of David Parse. It argues for leniency, distinguishing Parse's role as a broker executing trades from those who designed the illegal tax shelters (referencing Donna Guerin and the Jenkins law firm). The document appears to be an exhibit (A-5941) filed in the later Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-AJN) in 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010194.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing by Zuckerman Spaeder LLP addressed to Judge William H. Pauley, III, regarding the sentencing of David Parse. It disputes the Probation Office's sentencing guidelines which calculated a tax loss of $1.5 billion and a prison range of 292-365 months. The document includes a significant footnote quoting a letter from Juror No. 1 (Catherine Conrad) to AUSA Okula, detailing her hesitation in convicting Parse on conspiracy charges.
DOJ-OGR-00010180.jpg
This document is a court transcript where an attorney, Ms. Davis, argues against a motion for a new trial. She references a letter from Catherine Conrad about jury deliberations concerning David Parse, noting the jury struggled with the legal definitions of 'wilfully' and 'knowingly' but ultimately made a deliberate and informed decision, as evidenced by their verdict on conspiracy and tax evasion counts. The discussion highlights the legal nuances that influenced the jury's split verdict.
DOJ-OGR-00010177.jpg
This document appears to be a transcript of a legal argument asserting that David Parse was fully aware that a series of complex financial transactions were being executed for tax loss purposes. The speaker argues that Parse's sales assistant, Carrie Yackee, acted explicitly on his instructions to carry out these transactions for two taxpayers, Coleman and Blair. The argument also highlights communication between Parse's office, the firm Jenkins & Gilchrist, and Deutsche Bank, suggesting a coordinated effort.
DOJ-OGR-00010159.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript in the case 'United States of America v. David Parse.' It records the opening of oral arguments regarding Parse's motion for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Defense attorney Paul Shechtman and prosecutors Nanette Davis and Stanley J. Okula, Jr. are present. While part of a larger batch of documents (indicated by the DOJ-OGR Bates stamp) often associated with Epstein-related releases, the text specifically concerns the trial of David Parse.
DOJ-OGR-00010156.jpg
This document is the signature page of a legal affidavit signed by David Parse on August 3, 2012. The text discusses a conclusion reached by 'Brune lawyers' regarding an individual named Conrad, determining that Conrad was not a suspended attorney and that the Court did not need to be informed. The document bears a DOJ Bates stamp and appears to be an exhibit in a later case.
DOJ-OGR-00010155.jpg
This document is an affidavit filed by David Parse on August 7, 2012, in the criminal case *USA v. Daugerdas et al.* (Case 1:09-cr-00581). In the affidavit, Parse attests that during jury selection, he heard attorney Theresa Trzaskoma mention a juror had the same name as a suspended attorney but dismissed it as a coincidence. Parse states he only learned later (after a motion for a new trial was filed) that the issue of the juror ('Conrad') actually being the suspended lawyer had surfaced prior to deliberations. Note: While this document bears a DOJ-OGR stamp often associated with Epstein-related releases, the text strictly concerns the Daugerdas tax fraud case and juror misconduct.
DOJ-OGR-00010108.jpg
This document is a court transcript of a direct examination of an individual named Berke. Berke testifies about events on May 11, 2011, when the court read a note from Juror Catherine Conrad regarding jury instructions. Berke also discusses his professional relationship with another lawyer, Susan Brune, who represented David Parse in the same case, and recalls speaking with her about the juror.
DOJ-OGR-00010107.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on March 21, 2022, featuring the direct examination of attorney Barry H. Berke by Mr. Shechtman. Berke testifies about his employment history at the law firm Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel and the Federal Defenders office, and confirms he was a lawyer present in the courtroom during the trial of David Parse. The document bears a DOJ-OGR bates stamp, suggesting it was released as part of a Department of Justice records request.
DOJ-OGR-00010075.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a legal proceeding, likely a deposition or testimony, involving a person named Edelstein. The questions revolve around Edelstein's involvement in the trial for the defense of David Parse, email exchanges mentioning Robert Conrad, Theresa Trzaskoma, and David Benhamou, and the receipt of a 'dossier' or a link to one, possibly related to a Catherine Conrad letter.
DOJ-OGR-00010048.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 22, 2022, detailing the testimony of Ms. Brune. She explains that a legal brief her firm wrote "missed the issue" because they were focused on other aspects of the case and lacked certain information, which she regrets. Ms. Brune also confirms that she believed the jury's verdict to acquit David Parse on four of six charges was fair and impartial.
DOJ-OGR-00009991.jpg
This page contains court testimony from a witness named Brune regarding the ethics of legal defense. Brune discusses the concept of 'forceful advocacy' and denies raising issues with the Court without believing they had merit. The examination concludes with a transition to questions regarding a former client named David Parse.
DOJ-OGR-00009946.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, containing the cross-examination of a juror named Conrad regarding her service in the trial of U.S. v. Daugerdas, et al. The questioning attorney probes Conrad's impartiality by referencing her past criminal record, her status as a suspended attorney, and a letter she wrote after the verdict. Conrad affirms that while she initially believed defendant David Parse was guilty, her final decision was based solely on Judge Pauley's legal instructions and was free from any bias.
DOJ-OGR-00009942.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Conrad, who was a juror in a previous trial. The questioning focuses on a letter Conrad wrote to another individual, Mr. Okula, in which she claimed she held out for two days to convict a defendant, David Parse. This is contrasted with a later statement she made to Judge Pauley, where she stated that Parse should not have been convicted on a particular charge, highlighting a significant contradiction in her accounts of the jury deliberations.
DOJ-OGR-00009915.jpg
This document is a table of contents (Page xii) from a court filing filed on August 11, 2022. It lists historical legal documents from 2012 and 2013 related to the case of United States v. David Parse, including affidavits, sentencing memoranda, restitution calculations for Jenkens and Gilchrist clients, and correspondence between attorney Paul Shechtman and Judge Pauley. The document appears to be part of a larger appendix or record on appeal released via FOIA (DOJ-OGR).
DOJ-OGR-00009909.jpg
This document is a table of contents or an index of exhibits from a legal case (Case 3:20-cr-00338-PA-1). It lists various documents, identified by 'GX' numbers, including emails, faxes, letters, client statements from Deutsche Bank Alex. Brown, and an IRS record. The documents are dated from 1999 to 2009 and detail communications between several individuals.
No Subject
A letter from Matt Coleman to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-44.
Sentencing arguments
Parse claimed he gave no investment advice and trades were executed by his assistant.
No Subject
A letter from Matt Coleman to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-44.
Sentencing Memorandum
Parse claimed 'He gave no investment advice, and the trades were executed by his assistant.'
Tax Transactions
Conversations regarding the necessity to complete transaction steps by year-end to achieve tax benefits.
Conference Call
A conference call after which Parse learned about the juror issue dates.
No Subject
A letter sent from Matt Coleman to David Parse, listed as exhibit GX24-23.
No Subject
Letter listed as exhibit GX201-3a.
No Subject
Letter listed as exhibit GX201-39a.
No Subject
A letter sent from Matt Coleman to David Parse, listed as exhibit GX24-22.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-47a.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-98.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-100.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-99.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-100.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-99.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-98.
No Subject
A letter from Daniel Aronoff to David Parse, identified as exhibit GX401-47a.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity