Relationship Details

This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case of United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It details the examination of a juror, Ms. Conrad, regarding her failure to disclose her background, which includes being a suspended lawyer and having a husband with a significant criminal record. The attorneys question whether she intentionally concealed this information to get on the jury and whether she holds any bias towards the defendants or the government, which she denies.

This document is a court transcript from the trial *United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas* (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN / Document 616-1), dated February 15, 2012. It features the cross-examination of a witness named Conrad (likely a former juror, Catherine Conrad), who is being questioned about discrepancies in her stated residence (Bronx vs. Bronxville) and potential bias. This document was filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330), likely by the defense to establish legal precedent regarding juror misconduct and false statements during voir dire.

This document is a transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case United States v. Daugerdas, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Conrad. The witness, a suspended lawyer, is being aggressively questioned about her defiant behavior toward Judge Pauley during a previous hearing regarding her role as a juror, as well as inquiries into her mental health, specifically bipolar disorder. The witness is evasive, frequently claiming she is not a psychologist and giving sarcastic answers, such as stating she takes 'Water' when asked about medications.

This document is a transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case of USA v. Daugerdas, filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It features the cross-examination of Ms. Conrad (a former juror who is a suspended lawyer) regarding her financial status, specifically establishing she had approximately $14,000 in assets versus her claim of indigence for legal counsel. The questioning highlights discrepancies between her court testimony and a sworn affidavit submitted to the Bar disciplinary committee regarding her tax returns and income.