deposition transcript: A-5735
Summary
The witness, Brune, testifies that they were not included in email traffic related to Catherine Conrad and does not recall being made aware of it. The discussion involves a note that prompted additional research and a dispute about the timing of an email sent by Ms. Trzaskoma.
This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (6)
Related Documents (6)
deposition transcript: A-5724
The witness, Brune, testifies about the methods used to investigate potential jurors, stating that they relied on sworn testimony during voir dire and did not conduct a full-scale private investigation. Brune also discusses the handling of juror information, including the use of middle initials to identify jurors.
deposition transcript: A-5797
The witness, Edelstein, discusses a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma about a suspended lawyer named Catherine Conrad and how they decided not to pursue further research after reviewing Juror No. 1's voir dire responses.
deposition: Case 1:20-cr-00336-PAE Document 616-2 Filed 08/24/22 Page 34 of 130
The witness, Brune, discusses a conversation about Catherine Conrad, a potential juror, and how the jury consultant advised striking her due to her background as a recovering alcoholic. The conversation highlights the jury selection process and the factors considered when evaluating potential jurors. The document is part of a larger court filing in a criminal case.
Court Transcript: 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 1616220 Filed 02/24/22 Page 85 of 130
The document is a transcript of a court proceeding where a witness, Brune, is being questioned about a Westlaw report concerning a juror, Catherine M. Conrad. The witness confirms that the report matches the juror's information provided to the firm before voir dire.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-03363-PAE
The deposition transcript shows Ms. Brune being questioned about her team's research on a potential juror, Catherine M. Conrad, and whether she had her team conduct additional research before voir dire. Ms. Brune admits that she did not ask her team to do so, relying instead on the voir dire process to determine if Catherine M. Conrad was the same person mentioned in a New York court opinion.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-13038
The witness, Schoeman, testifies about a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1, discussing a person with the same name who was a disbarred lawyer. Trzaskoma assured Schoeman it was not the same person based on the voir dire process. No further discussion about Juror No. 1 occurred with Trzaskoma or anyone at the Brune firm during that time.
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.