Event Details
July 01, 0021
Description
Submission of a letter to the court.
Participants (1)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ms. Brune | person | 82 | View Entity |
Source Documents (2)
DOJ-OGR-00010035.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (filed March 24, 2022) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Ms. Brune. The questioning focuses on the ethical obligations of a female partner at Brune's law firm, establishing that she has independent obligations to the Court despite Brune's supervisory role. The testimony also references the review of email traffic leading up to the submission of a letter on July 21st.
DOJ-OGR-00009356.jpg
This is page 295 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The witness, Ms. Brune (likely Susan Brune, a defense attorney), is being questioned about a female partner in her law firm regarding ethical obligations and the review of a final brief. Brune confirms reviewing 'email traffic' leading up to the submission of a 'July 21st letter' to ensure material information was conveyed to the Court.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
Direct examination of Ms. Brune regarding her knowledge and actions during the voir dire process.
Date unknown • Court (implied)
Voir dire, the process of jury selection, is discussed.
Date unknown • Court (implied)
The writing of a legal brief by Edelstein and Ms. Brune.
Date unknown
Redirect examination of Ms. Brune by Mr. Davis, during which Government Exhibit 28 (a letter from Ms. Brune) is admitted into evidence.
Date unknown • The Court
A discussion between Edelstein and Ms. Brune about what information to include or omit in a legal brief concerning Catherine Conrad.
Date unknown
Edelstein and Ms. Brune specifically decided what information to include or exclude from a legal brief.
Date unknown
Ms. Brune, her firm, or defendant Parse acknowledged being differently situated than other defendants during a telephone call on July 22nd.
Date unknown
Discussion between the speaker, Ms. Edelstein, and Ms. Brune regarding Catherine Conrad and a Westlaw report.
Date unknown
The jury selection process for a trial that was expected to be very long. A key issue was the availability of jurors. A potential juror with a criminal record (turnstile jumping, lookout for burglary) was considered but not challenged.
Date unknown
A three-month long trial for which the jury selection discussed in the document was conducted.
Date unknown
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event