← Back to home

Document A-5728

AI Analysis

Summary: The transcript shows a witness, Brune, being questioned about the defense team's knowledge of a potentially suspended attorney serving on the jury and their decision not to bring it to the court's attention immediately. The team had information that could have clarified the issue but chose not to act on it at the time. The questioning suggests that this decision may have been significant to the case's outcome.
Significance: This document is potentially important as it reveals discussions around a potentially significant issue with a juror and the decisions made by the defense team regarding how to handle the information.
Key Topics: Juror investigation Potential juror misconduct Defense strategy during trial
Key People:
  • Brune - witness being questioned
  • Trzaskoma - person who conducted a Google search relevant to the case
  • Judge Pauley - presiding judge in the case
  • Catherine Conrad - juror in question
Document Type
Court Filing
Date
02/24/22
Pages
2
Folder
IMAGES004

Full Text

Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 43 of 130 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-00009332 --- PAGE BREAK --- C2GFDAU1 Brune - direct 271 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

Individual Pages

Page 43 - DOJ-OGR-00009332
Case 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 161 Filed 02/24/22 Page 43 of 130 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-00009332
Page 271 - DOJ-OGR-00010011
C2GFDAU1 Brune - direct 271 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