Mr. Daugerdas
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Sandra Burnside
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. GAIR
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed questioning attorney (Q)
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sandra Burnside
|
Professional secretary boss |
5
|
1 |
DOJ-OGR-00010178.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript, filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), though the content appears to stem from a separate tax fraud case involving Deutsche Bank (likely U.S. v. Daugerdas/Parse). The text details a closing argument or legal submission regarding 'tax shelter transactions' designed to defraud the IRS, specifically highlighting the roles of Deutsche Bank employees Mr. Parse and Carrie Yackee, and referencing testimony from Paul Daugerdas' secretary. The argument asserts that Parse and Yackee were the only ones at Deutsche Bank who knew the 'full picture' of the fraud.
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-00009499.jpg
This document appears to be a transcript of a legal argument asserting that a jury had sufficient evidence to infer an individual's knowledge of a scheme to defraud the IRS. The argument cites testimony from multiple individuals, including Sandra Burnside and Carrie Yackee, describing an 'avalanche of work' in December to finalize tax shelter transactions, implicating Mr. Parse and Ms. Yackee at Deutsche Bank. The speaker refutes a suggestion from Mr. Shechtman's brief that Deutsche Bank's approval of the transactions meant that only a few people knew the full extent of the scheme.
DOJ-OGR-00009351.jpg
This document is a court transcript of testimony from a witness named Ms. Brune. She is being questioned about communications she had with defense counsel after receiving a copy of a letter from Ms. Conrad. Ms. Brune states these were 'joint defense communications' and recounts becoming upset by a jury note, after which her colleague, Ms. Edelstein, verified a phone number from the letter on the Bar website.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity