DOJ-OGR-00010011.jpg
454 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript / deposition
File Size:
454 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript (testimony of 'Brune') filed on March 24, 2022. The testimony concerns a failure by the witness's legal team to alert Judge Pauley that a juror, Catherine Conrad (referred to as Juror No. 1), was potentially a suspended attorney. The witness admits that Ms. Trzaskoma had performed a Google search revealing this information, but the team concluded at the time it was a 'different person' and did not act on it.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Brune | Witness/Deponent |
Answering questions under direct examination regarding legal team decisions.
|
| Judge Pauley | Judge |
The judge presiding over the matter being discussed (likely a previous trial).
|
| Catherine Conrad | Juror (Juror No. 1) |
A juror suspected of being a suspended attorney; the subject of the Google search.
|
| Ms. Trzaskoma | Attorney/Legal Team Member |
Performed a Google search on Catherine Conrad and found a document.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Court reporting firm listed in footer.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated by footer Bates stamp DOJ-OGR).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Prior to deposition
Ms. Trzaskoma performed a Google search on Juror Catherine Conrad and found a document indicating she might be a suspended attorney.
Court / Legal Office
Prior to deposition
Legal team discussion regarding whether to inform Judge Pauley about the juror's potential status.
Unknown
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by 'Southern District Reporters' and case header.
|
|
|
Location where Ms. Trzaskoma had a computer with information.
|
Relationships (1)
Brune refers to 'we concluded', 'we knew it', and discusses Trzaskoma's actions in the context of their shared legal strategy.
Key Quotes (3)
"As I think you know, we concluded it was a different person and therefore did not view it as the highly significant information that, unfortunately, it turned out to be."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010011.jpg
Quote #1
"Trzaskoma had done the Google search that we've talked about."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010011.jpg
Quote #2
"You had this potentially highly pertinent piece of information in your hands at that point and you did nothing with it"Source
DOJ-OGR-00010011.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,515 characters)
Case 1:20-cv-00813-PAE Document 616-20 Filed 03/24/22 Page 48 of 300
A-5728
A-5728
271
C2GFDAU1 Brune - direct
1 A. I do remember that.
2 Q. And at that point you could have asked Judge Pauley to
3 inquire specifically of Juror No. 1, if I could call her Juror
4 No. 1, I know the juror numbers changed, but Catherine Conrad?
5 A. I know who you mean.
6 Q. About the potentiality that she was a suspended attorney,
7 correct?
8 A. Certainly could have asked him to do that.
9 Q. You had this potentially highly pertinent piece of
10 information in your hands at that point and you did nothing
11 with it with regard to what the Court was asking of the jurors.
12 A. As I think you know, we concluded it was a different person
13 and therefore did not view it as the highly significant
14 information that, unfortunately, it turned out to be.
15 Q. Well, you had a way, you had information in your hand that
16 could have further illuminated this issue, correct?
17 A. When you say "in your hand" I think what you mean is that
18 we knew it. We did not have in our hands a printout. But
19 certainly we had the discussion that I've described and Ms.
20 Trzaskoma had done the Google search that we've talked about.
21 Q. And that Google search resulted in her finding a document,
22 correct?
23 A. That's my understanding, yes.
24 Q. And even if she didn't have a printout of it in court, she
25 had it on the computer that she had sitting in front of her,
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00010011
C2GFDAU1 Brune - direct
1 A. I do remember that.
2 Q. And at that point you could have asked Judge Pauley to
3 inquire specifically of Juror No. 1, if I could call her Juror
4 No. 1, I know the juror numbers changed, but Catherine Conrad?
5 A. I know who you mean.
6 Q. About the potentiality that she was a suspended attorney,
7 correct?
8 A. Certainly could have asked him to do that.
9 Q. You had this potentially highly pertinent piece of
10 information in your hands at that point and you did nothing
11 with it with regard to what the Court was asking of the jurors.
12 A. As I think you know, we concluded it was a different person
13 and therefore did not view it as the highly significant
14 information that, unfortunately, it turned out to be.
15 Q. Well, you had a way, you had information in your hand that
16 could have further illuminated this issue, correct?
17 A. When you say "in your hand" I think what you mean is that
18 we knew it. We did not have in our hands a printout. But
19 certainly we had the discussion that I've described and Ms.
20 Trzaskoma had done the Google search that we've talked about.
21 Q. And that Google search resulted in her finding a document,
22 correct?
23 A. That's my understanding, yes.
24 Q. And even if she didn't have a printout of it in court, she
25 had it on the computer that she had sitting in front of her,
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00010011
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document