Deposition Transcript: 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 61102/20
Summary
The witness is being questioned about their knowledge of certain facts and the drafting of a legal brief. They discuss their understanding of events and the reasoning behind the wording used in the brief. The testimony highlights potential discrepancies in interpretation and the context in which the brief was written.
This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (4)
Related Documents (6)
Deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-03339
The deposition transcript discusses the investigation into Juror No. 1's identity and the use of a Westlaw report. The witness confirms they had resources to investigate further but chose not to, and later called Nardello to assist in gathering information after receiving a juror letter.
deposition transcript: A-5718
The witness discusses their firm's receipt and analysis of juror information and research conducted before voir dire. They confirm having access to a specific 2010 suspension opinion related to Catherine M. Conrad, although there is a dispute about when it was shown to them.
deposition transcript: A-5790
The witness discusses receiving a memo from David Benhamou, which included information about Juror No. 1's voir dire responses and an Appellate Division order. The witness confirms noticing details in the Appellate Division order and a suspension report related to Catherine M. Conrad.
deposition transcript: A-5795
The witness describes their investigation into Catherine Conrad, using Google and the New York State Bar Association registration site to verify information. They recall a conversation about a suspended lawyer with the same name and take steps to confirm details. The witness's testimony provides insight into their thought process and actions during the investigation.
deposition transcript: A-5796
The witness, Edelstein, is being questioned about their investigation and computer research related to Catherine Conrad. The questioning focuses on what information was known on May 12th and whether certain research could have been done at that time. The witness's responses indicate some discrepancies in their previous statements.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-03303
The deposition transcript discusses the authenticity of a juror's identity and the intent behind a court brief's wording. The witness explains that the brief's detail was necessary to establish the juror's identity and denies that the intent was to create a false impression. The questioning highlights a potential misinterpretation of the brief's content.
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.