Event Details
May 24, 2022
Description
The juror's verdict was delivered.
Participants (1)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Juror No. 1 | person | 133 | View Entity |
Source Documents (2)
DOJ-OGR-00010093.jpg
This document is a court transcript of the cross-examination of a witness, Ms. Edelstein, by an attorney, Mr. Schectman. The questioning focuses on why Ms. Edelstein and her colleagues, Ms. Brune and Ms. Trzaskoma, did not inform the court after discovering that a juror, Juror No. 1, shared the same name as a suspended lawyer, Catherine Conrad. Ms. Edelstein testifies that they concluded it was 'inconceivable' they were the same person and therefore saw no reason to bring it to the court's attention.
DOJ-OGR-00009414.jpg
This document is a court transcript of a cross-examination where Mr. Schectman is questioned by Ms. Edelstein. The questioning centers on why Schectman and his colleagues, Ms. Brune and Ms. Trzaskoma, failed to inform the court after discovering on May 12th that a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad shared the same name as Juror No. 1. Schectman defends their decision, stating they concluded it was 'inconceivable' that the juror was the same person, and denies any attempt to 'sandbag the Court'.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
A jury asked for a judge's clarification on legal terms ("willfully" and "knowingly") during deliberations regarding David Parse.
2011-05-24
David Parse was convicted on charges related to backdating, though the jury did not convict on the conspiracy charge.
2011-05-24
A question-and-answer session (likely a deposition or court testimony) where Edelstein questions a witness about the identity of 'Catherine Conrad,' specifically whether two individuals with that name, one being 'Juror No. 1,' are the same person. The discussion includes the role of Theresa Trzaskoma and the firm's awareness of information regarding Juror No. 1's identity and responses to voir dire.
2022-02-24 • Implied to be within the Southern District, possibly New York
The government conducted a Google search on Juror No. 1 after she received a letter.
Date unknown
An investigation into Juror No. 1, referenced in a July 21 letter.
Date unknown
On the third day of jury deliberations, Juror No. 11 needed an emergency medical procedure and was excused, replaced by an alternate, and the jury was instructed to restart deliberations.
2012-05-16
Juror No. 11 was displaced during jury deliberations due to a health emergency and replaced with an alternate.
Date unknown • Court
A subsequent investigation regarding Juror No. 1 was conducted by Theresa Trzskoma.
Date unknown
A trial proceeding where a witness (Brune) is being questioned about a juror's behavior and a note sent by the juror.
Date unknown • Court
Juror No. 1 sent a note to the court.
0010-05-01 • Court
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event