← Back to home

Document A-5813

AI Analysis

Summary: The court questions a witness about their law firm's disclosure practices and their consideration of raising an issue regarding Juror No. 1 during jury deliberations. The witness testifies that they didn't think there was a waiver issue and didn't consider raising the issue during juror replacement. The court and an attorney, MR. OKULA, engage in a discussion about further inquiries.
Significance: This document is potentially important as it reveals the court's inquiry into the law firm's disclosure practices and the handling of a juror replacement during deliberations, potentially impacting the trial's outcome.
Key Topics: disclosure of information by law firm juror replacement during deliberations potential waiver issue
Key People:
  • THE WITNESS - witness being questioned by the court
  • THE COURT - presiding judge
  • MR. OKULA - attorney
  • Ms. Brune - attorney or associate
  • Ms. Trzaskoma - attorney or associate
Document Type
Court Filing
Date
02/24/22
Pages
2
Folder
IMAGES004

Full Text

Case 1:20-cr-00330 Document #: 616 Filed: 02/24/22 Page 128 of 130 A-5813 C2grdau4 Edelstein 356 1 THE COURT: No. My question is not whether it would 2 have come out. If it had not come out, if the Court had not 3 pressed your law firm and the government failed to raise the 4 issue, would your law firm have disclosed the information set 5 forth in the July 21 letter? 6 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 7 THE COURT: Did you ever have any discussion with 8 anyone in the firm about that? 9 THE WITNESS: I think that our, at least my, frame of 10 mind was that we didn't know they were the same person, so I 11 just didn't think that there was a waiver issue. 12 THE COURT: In the middle of jury deliberations, this 13 Court displaced Juror No. 11 because of a health emergency, 14 replaced him with an alternate after much discussion with 15 counsel and over the objection of the government, and directed 16 the jury to restart its jury deliberations. Did you give any 17 consideration at that time to raising the issue that you 18 discussed in the park on May 12 with Ms. Brune and Ms. 19 Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1? 20 THE WITNESS: No. I continued to believe that Juror 21 No. 1 was who she said she was. That didn't occur to me, no. 22 THE COURT: Any further inquiries? 23 MR. OKULA: May I follow up on one or two questions, 24 your Honor? 25 THE COURT: Yes. THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00009417 --- PAGE BREAK --- C2grdau4 Edelstein 356 1 THE COURT: No. My question is not whether it would 2 have come out. If it had not come out, if the Court had not 3 pressed your law firm and the government failed to raise the 4 issue, would your law firm have disclosed the information set 5 forth in the July 21 letter? 6 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 7 THE COURT: Did you ever have any discussion with 8 anyone in the firm about that? 9 THE WITNESS: I think that our, at least my, frame of 10 mind was that we didn't know they were the same person, so I 11 just didn't think that there was a waiver issue. 12 THE COURT: In the middle of jury deliberations, this 13 Court displaced Juror No. 11 because of a health emergency, 14 replaced him with an alternate after much discussion with 15 counsel and over the objection of the government, and directed 16 the jury to restart its jury deliberations. Did you give any 17 consideration at that time to raising the issue that you 18 discussed in the park on May 12 with Ms. Brune and Ms. 19 Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1? 20 THE WITNESS: No. I continued to believe that Juror 21 No. 1 was who she said she was. That didn't occur to me, no. 22 THE COURT: Any further inquiries? 23 MR. OKULA: May I follow up on one or two questions, 24 your Honor? 25 THE COURT: Yes. THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300

Individual Pages

Page 128 - DOJ-OGR-00009417
Case 1:20-cr-00330 Document #: 616 Filed: 02/24/22 Page 128 of 130 A-5813 C2grdau4 Edelstein 356 1 THE COURT: No. My question is not whether it would 2 have come out. If it had not come out, if the Court had not 3 pressed your law firm and the government failed to raise the 4 issue, would your law firm have disclosed the information set 5 forth in the July 21 letter? 6 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 7 THE COURT: Did you ever have any discussion with 8 anyone in the firm about that? 9 THE WITNESS: I think that our, at least my, frame of 10 mind was that we didn't know they were the same person, so I 11 just didn't think that there was a waiver issue. 12 THE COURT: In the middle of jury deliberations, this 13 Court displaced Juror No. 11 because of a health emergency, 14 replaced him with an alternate after much discussion with 15 counsel and over the objection of the government, and directed 16 the jury to restart its jury deliberations. Did you give any 17 consideration at that time to raising the issue that you 18 discussed in the park on May 12 with Ms. Brune and Ms. 19 Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1? 20 THE WITNESS: No. I continued to believe that Juror 21 No. 1 was who she said she was. That didn't occur to me, no. 22 THE COURT: Any further inquiries? 23 MR. OKULA: May I follow up on one or two questions, 24 your Honor? 25 THE COURT: Yes. THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00009417
Page 356 - DOJ-OGR-00010096
C2grdau4 Edelstein 356 1 THE COURT: No. My question is not whether it would 2 have come out. If it had not come out, if the Court had not 3 pressed your law firm and the government failed to raise the 4 issue, would your law firm have disclosed the information set 5 forth in the July 21 letter? 6 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 7 THE COURT: Did you ever have any discussion with 8 anyone in the firm about that? 9 THE WITNESS: I think that our, at least my, frame of 10 mind was that we didn't know they were the same person, so I 11 just didn't think that there was a waiver issue. 12 THE COURT: In the middle of jury deliberations, this 13 Court displaced Juror No. 11 because of a health emergency, 14 replaced him with an alternate after much discussion with 15 counsel and over the objection of the government, and directed 16 the jury to restart its jury deliberations. Did you give any 17 consideration at that time to raising the issue that you 18 discussed in the park on May 12 with Ms. Brune and Ms. 19 Trzaskoma regarding Juror No. 1? 20 THE WITNESS: No. I continued to believe that Juror 21 No. 1 was who she said she was. That didn't occur to me, no. 22 THE COURT: Any further inquiries? 23 MR. OKULA: May I follow up on one or two questions, 24 your Honor? 25 THE COURT: Yes. THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300