Parse
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Shareholders
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Kasperzak
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Mr. Shechtman
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
location
court
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul Daugerdas
|
Co conspirators |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Shechtman
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS
|
Co defendants inferred |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Peter Barnhart
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Kasperzak family
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul Daugerdas
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
BARRY H. BERKE
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Donna Guerin
|
Co defendant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
DENIS FIELD
|
Co defendant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Craig Brubaker
|
Co defendant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul Daugerdas
|
Co defendant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Shechtman
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Brune
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Internal Revenue Service
|
Adversarial fraud |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Donna Guerin
|
Co conspirators |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Denis Field
|
Co conspirators |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Craig Brubaker
|
Co conspirators |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Trip | Parse's participation in advising shareholders of the Calphalon cookware company in a fraudulent ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | A trial that demonstrated Parse's role as a key actor in the largest criminal tax fraud in history. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Telephone call | Ms. Brune, her firm, or defendant Parse acknowledged being differently situated than other defend... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Defendant Parse waived his new trial motion in a district court proceeding. | district court | View |
| N/A | Meeting | Paul Daugerdas pitched a confidential tax shelter to Calphalon shareholders, urging them to make ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Barry H. Berke by Mr. Shechtman. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A trial that demonstrated Parse's role as a key actor in the tax fraud scheme. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Crime | A wide-ranging corrupt endeavor and mail fraud scheme to defraud the IRS through the design, mark... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Crime | Parse participated in the Fraudulent Kasperzak/Calphalon Tax Shelter by advising shareholders on ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Financial crime | Parse's Participation in the Fraudulent Kasperzak/Calphalon Tax Shelter. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Financial crime | Parse's Personal Tax Evasion. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Criminal conspiracy | A wide-ranging corrupt endeavor to obstruct and impede the IRS and defraud the IRS through the de... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Financial crime | Parse's Participation in the Fraudulent Backdating of Transactions. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Meeting | Parse introduced Peter Barnhart to Paul Daugerdas to pitch a tax shelter. | Parse’s office | View |
| 2015-01-01 | Legal proceeding | The 2d Circuit court reversed the district court's conclusion that defendant Parse had waived his... | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2015-01-01 | Legal case | United States v. Parse, 789 F.3d 83 | U.S. Court of Appeals for t... | View |
| 2013-03-18 | N/A | Filing of Document 605 in Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP | Court | View |
| 2013-03-18 | N/A | Original filing of the document in Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP | N/A | View |
| 2012-02-15 | N/A | Court proceeding or deposition for United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas | Southern District (New York) | View |
| 2011-05-24 | N/A | Jury found Parse guilty on Counts Twenty and Twenty-Five. | Court | View |
| 2011-02-28 | N/A | Trial commenced against Parse and co-defendants. | Court | View |
| 2010-03-04 | N/A | Grand jury returned a third superseding Indictment charging Parse and others. | Court | View |
| 2006-01-01 | Employment | Parse became self-employed at his company Union Capital LLC. | N/A | View |
| 1998-01-01 | Introduction | Parse was introduced to Peter Barnhart, Sara Jane Kasperzak, Dean Kasperzak, and other members of... | N/A | View |
| 1995-01-01 | Employment | Parse was employed as an investment representative at Deutsche Bank Alex Brown in its Chicago off... | Chicago | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021746.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing (Document 87, Case 22-1426) dated July 27, 2023. It contains a Table of Authorities listing various legal precedents (cases) and the page numbers on which they appear in the full brief. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp (DOJ-OGR-00021746).
DOJ-OGR-00009147.jpg
This legal document argues against the automatic presumption of juror bias when a juror has engaged in conduct similar to the defendant's. It cites multiple court cases from various circuits (First, Second, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth) to support the position that juror removal is reserved for "extreme situations" and that a finding of bias often depends on a combination of factors, not just a similarity of experience. The document distinguishes cases cited by the defendant, arguing they are either inapposite or involve unique, egregious facts not present in the current matter.
DOJ-OGR-00009030.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing that argues for a defendant's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury under the Sixth Amendment. It cites multiple legal precedents to underscore the critical importance of the voir dire process, which must provide defendants with a full and fair opportunity to uncover potential juror bias. The text establishes that ensuring an impartial jury is a fundamental principle of constitutional law and due process.
DOJ-OGR-00009007.jpg
This document is page vi of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, Document 613), filed on February 24, 2022. It is a table of authorities, listing numerous legal cases with their citations and the page numbers where they are referenced in the main document. The cases cited span from 1936 to 2018 and involve various parties in different U.S. federal and state courts.
DOJ-OGR-00008987.jpg
This document is page 8 of a court filing (Document 609) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated February 24, 2022. It presents legal arguments citing various precedents to establish that jurors retain privacy interests after a trial concludes and that jurors face criminal exposure for perjury on questionnaires. It also argues that third parties may intervene in criminal trials to protect their constitutional rights.
DOJ-OGR-00008982.jpg
This document is page 3 of 13 from a legal filing (Document 609) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on February 24, 2022. It is a Table of Authorities listing various legal precedents (case law). The cases cited largely pertain to press access, public trials, and the sealing of judicial documents (e.g., Associated Press, Press-Enterprise Co.), suggesting the filing relates to transparency issues or the unsealing of evidence in the Maxwell trial.
DOJ-OGR-00010353.jpg
This legal document is a court opinion from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 1, 2022. The court analyzes and rejects the Defendant's (Maxwell's) argument that Juror 50 was biased due to dishonest answers on a jury questionnaire. The court distinguishes this case from precedents involving deliberate deception, crediting Juror 50's explanation that his nondisclosure was an 'inadvertent mistake' resulting from personal distractions and 'skimming' the form.
DOJ-OGR-00010214.jpg
This document is a page from a court filing (likely a sentencing memorandum) regarding a defendant named Parse. It details the calculation of sentencing guidelines, noting a base offense level of 36 with enhancements for 'sophisticated means' and 'special skill' (as a broker and CPA), resulting in a guideline range of 292-365 months, capped at 276 months. The document also outlines Parse's objections to the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR), specifically regarding loss calculations and culpability for the broader tax fraud scheme.
DOJ-OGR-00010208.jpg
This legal document, filed on March 18, 2013, outlines the background and alleged criminal conduct of a defendant named Parse. It details his educational history at the University of Michigan and his extensive work experience as an investment adviser at firms including Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank Alex Brown, and his own company, Union Capital LLC. The document introduces Parse's alleged involvement in a fraudulent tax shelter scheme, where he advised shareholders of the Calphalon cookware company on the disposition of stock acquired from a sale.
DOJ-OGR-00010207.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing from March 18, 2013, argues for a significant prison sentence for an individual named Parse. It details his central role as a Deutsche Bank representative in a massive criminal tax fraud scheme involving multiple co-conspirators and fraudulent tax shelters, which generated over $7 billion in fraudulent deductions and caused over $230 million in actual losses to the U.S. Treasury. The document highlights that Parse earned over $3 million in commissions for his indispensable role in the scheme.
DOJ-OGR-00010205.jpg
This document is the table of contents for a legal filing, specifically Document 605 in case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP, filed on March 18, 2013. It outlines the structure of a memorandum concerning a defendant named Parse, detailing the offense conduct which includes participation in a fraudulent tax shelter with Kasperzak and Calphalon, personal tax evasion, and backdating transactions. The document also covers sentencing guidelines, restitution, and other legal analyses pertinent to the case.
DOJ-OGR-00010127.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 6, 2012, presents an opinion on the ethical obligations of Brune & Richard lawyers concerning disclosures related to a new trial motion involving juror Conrad. It concludes that the lawyers did not violate their ethical obligations in their research, motions, or communications with the Court. The opinion is based on a review of various legal documents and transcripts, and references the New York Rules of Professional Conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00010118.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding, filed on March 22, 2022. In it, the judge ('The Court') asks counsel, Mr. Shechtman, for briefing on a hypothetical scenario regarding the appellate rights of both the defendant, Parse, and the government if a new trial were to be granted. Mr. Shechtman clarifies that the key issue is whether the defendant could file an interlocutory appeal before sentencing, which the Court confirms.
DOJ-OGR-00010117.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (likely from the Daugerdas case, referenced in Epstein/Maxwell filings regarding juror misconduct precedents). The defense (Parse, Field) and the government rest their cases in an evidentiary hearing. The Judge requests post-hearing briefs specifically addressing whether attorneys for the firm Brune & Richard satisfied ethical obligations regarding the disclosure of a 'July 21 letter' and an investigation into 'Juror No. 1'.
DOJ-OGR-00010116.jpg
This document is a court transcript from March 22, 2022, detailing the redirect examination of a witness named Berke by attorney Mr. Shechtman. The questioning centers on why Berke did not further investigate a potential name match between Juror No. 1 and a suspended lawyer, Catherine Conrad, with Berke stating it was concluded they were different people based on the voir dire. After the examination, the witness is excused, and the court asks if the defense, representing a defendant named Parse, has any more witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00010040.jpg
This document is a transcript of a direct examination of a lawyer, Ms. Brune, regarding her firm's knowledge of potential juror misconduct. Ms. Brune asserts that the legal standard requires 'actual knowledge' of misconduct, which she claims her firm did not possess, though she admits they erroneously believed no misconduct occurred. The questioning also references a July 22nd telephone call where Ms. Brune apparently acknowledged her client, defendant Parse, was in a different situation compared to other defendants.
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-00009890.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that a new trial is necessary due to the implied and inferable bias of Juror No. 50. The author contends that if the juror had answered voir dire questions truthfully, it would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. The document refutes the government's legal arguments by citing precedents like United States v. Daugerdas and United States v. Torres, and suggests a hearing is needed to evaluate the juror's actual partiality.
DOJ-OGR-00009826.jpg
This legal document argues against the defendant's assertion that a juror's similar life experiences should automatically presume bias, requiring their removal. It cites multiple legal precedents (from the Second, First, Seventh, and other circuits) to support the position that only "extreme situations" warrant such a presumption. The document contends that similarity of experience is just one of many factors to be considered and is often insufficient on its own to justify a juror's dismissal for cause.
DOJ-OGR-00009530.jpg
This legal document describes how an individual named Parse, while assisting Calphalon stockholders with their shares from the company's sale to Newell, introduced them to Paul Daugerdas, a partner at Altheimer & Gray. Daugerdas pitched a confidential tax shelter designed to eliminate their taxable gains, instructing them to misrepresent their investment intent if questioned. Parse witnessed this event, which is described as being inconsistent with good faith.
DOJ-OGR-00009529.jpg
This legal document, filed on March 18, 2013, details the background and alleged criminal conduct of a defendant named Parse. It outlines his education at the University of Michigan and his extensive career as an investment adviser at firms including Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank Alex Brown, and his own company, Union Capital LLC. The document introduces Parse's participation in a fraudulent tax shelter scheme where he advised shareholders of the Calphalon cookware company, including the Kasperzak family, on the disposition of stock from a sale.
DOJ-OGR-00009528.jpg
This legal document, filed on March 18, 2013, outlines the case against an individual named Parse, an investment representative at Deutsche Bank. It details his central role in a massive criminal tax fraud scheme involving fraudulent tax shelters, which resulted in over $7 billion in fraudulent deductions and over $230 million in actual losses to the U.S. Treasury. The document argues that Parse's conduct, for which he earned over $3 million in commissions, warrants a significant prison sentence.
DOJ-OGR-00009526.jpg
This document is a Table of Contents for a legal filing (likely a sentencing memorandum) regarding a defendant named 'Parse' (David Parse), originally filed in 2013. It outlines sections regarding tax shelter fraud, personal tax evasion, and sentencing guidelines. The document was later filed as Exhibit A-6075 in February 2022, within the docket of Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), likely submitted as legal precedent regarding sentencing.
DOJ-OGR-00009448.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal opinion or declaration filed in April 2012 (and re-filed in 2022) regarding the ethical conduct of lawyers from the firm Brune & Richard. The text argues that the lawyers had no obligation to disclose certain research regarding juror Catherine Conrad at specific times. It lists various documents reviewed, including briefs, letters, and hearing transcripts from 2011 and 2012, and cites New York Rules of Professional Conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00009438.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 24, 2022, capturing the conclusion of an evidentiary hearing. Both the defense attorneys for defendants Parse and Field, as well as the government attorney, rest their cases. The judge then instructs the parties to submit post-hearing briefs, specifically requesting they address the strongest evidence from the hearing and a key ethical question regarding the potential failure of attorneys for 'Brune & Richard' to disclose a July 21 letter and an investigation concerning Juror No. 1.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Paid | Parse | N/A | $0.00 | Personal Tax Evasion | View |
| N/A | Paid | Parse | N/A | $0.00 | Restitution (Section E) | View |
Introduction for tax shelter pitch
In a meeting at Parse’s office, Parse introduced Peter Barnhart to Paul Daugerdas for the purpose of having Daugerdas pitch a J&G tax shelter.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity