Trove
Sign In Sign Up

["Berke"]

Person
Mentions
0
Relationships
0
Events
0
Documents
0
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
No relationships found for this entity.
No events found for this entity.
No documents found for this entity.
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
0
As Recipient
6
Total
6

Hypothetical situation involving a suspended attorney ser...

From: MR. OKULA
To: ["Berke"]

Mr. Okula questions the witness, Berke, about what actions he would take if he discovered that Juror No. 1 was a suspended attorney named Catherine Conrad. Berke refuses to answer the question, deeming it speculative.

Court testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Redirect Examination regarding Juror No. 1

From: Mr. Shechtman
To: ["Berke"]

Mr. Shechtman questions the witness, Berke, about why no further investigation was conducted into a potential name match between Juror No. 1 and a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad. The witness confirms it was because they agreed, based on the voir dire, that it couldn't be the same person.

Court testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Attorney's obligations regarding potential juror misconduct

From: Unnamed Questioner
To: ["Berke"]

An unnamed questioner cross-examines a witness named Berke about his professional duties as an attorney, specifically in a hypothetical scenario where he believes a juror has engaged in misconduct. Berke states he would research the rules and law before reporting it to the court.

Cross-examination
N/A
Communication Source

Knowledge of Juror No. 1's background and potential conne...

From: Unnamed Questioner
To: ["Berke"]

An unnamed questioner is cross-examining a witness named Berke about what Berke knew regarding a potential connection between Juror No. 1 and a suspended New York attorney. The questioning also covers Berke's awareness that Juror No. 1 had previously been a plaintiff in a personal injury case.

Court testimony / cross-examination
2022-03-22
Communication Source

Cross-examination regarding a suspended attorney serving ...

From: MR. OKULA
To: ["Berke"]

Mr. Okula questions the witness, Berke, about what actions he would take upon learning that a suspended attorney, Catherine Conrad, was serving as Juror No. 1. Berke refuses to answer the hypothetical question, calling the premise 'far-fetched'.

Court testimony
2022-02-24
Communication Source

Cross-examination regarding a suspended attorney serving ...

From: MR. OKULA
To: ["Berke"]

Mr. Okula questions the witness, Berke, about what actions he would take upon learning that a suspended attorney, Catherine Conrad, was serving as Juror No. 1. Berke refuses to answer the hypothetical question, calling the premise 'far-fetched'.

Court testimony
2022-02-24
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search