Prior to 02/24/22
Discussion regarding Juror vetting
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Edelstein | person | 115 | View Entity |
| Ms. Trzaskoma | person | 103 | View Entity |
DOJ-OGR-00009401.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on February 24, 2022. It features testimony from a witness named Edelstein regarding a discussion with Ms. Trzaskoma about Juror No. 1. They debated whether the juror was a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad but concluded at the time that it was 'inconceivable' based on voir dire responses, specifically regarding education.
Events with shared participants
Investigation requested by Ms. Trzaskoma.
0012-05-01 • Unknown
A witness named Edelstein is questioned about a decision made with Susan Brune to omit information from a legal brief.
Date unknown
Edelstein and Susan Brune decided to omit information about a juror note and a suspended lawyer from a legal brief they were preparing.
Date unknown
A discussion was held regarding Catherine Conrad's potential status as a suspended lawyer, prompted by Ms. Trzaskoma. The group reviewed voir dire responses and decided against further research.
Date unknown
The writing of a legal brief by Edelstein and Ms. Brune.
Date unknown
A discussion between Edelstein and Ms. Brune about what information to include or omit in a legal brief concerning Catherine Conrad.
Date unknown
A witness, Edelstein, is questioned by an attorney about their knowledge of Catherine Conrad's professional status.
Date unknown
A discussion about whether computer research on Ms. Conrad could have been performed on May 12th.
0012-05-01
Theresa Trzaskoma told the witness (Edelstein) that there was a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad.
Date unknown
A question-and-answer session where a witness named Edelstein is being questioned about the intent and content of a legal brief.
Date unknown
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event