← Back to home

Document A-5818

AI Analysis

Summary: 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. The conversation occurred after the reading of a note from Juror No. 1. The witness and Ms. Trzaskoma concluded it was not the same person based on the voir dire questioning.
Significance: This deposition testimony reveals a conversation about Juror No. 1 that may be relevant to the case, potentially raising questions about juror identity or impartiality.
Key Topics: Conversation between the witness and Ms. Trzaskoma about Juror No. 1 Discussion about a person with the same name as Juror No. 1 who was a disbarred lawyer Voir dire questioning and its relevance to identifying Juror No. 1
Key People:
  • Schoeman - witness being deposed
  • Ms. Trzaskoma - person conversed with the witness about Juror No. 1
  • Juror No. 1 (Ms. Conrad) - juror being discussed
  • Someone at the Brune firm - potential discussant about Juror No. 1

Full Text

C2grdau4 Schoeman - direct 361 1 Q. Sometime after the reading of the note from Juror No. 1, 2 did you speak to Ms. Trzaskoma about Ms. Conrad, Juror No. 1? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Would you tell the Court what was said between you and Ms. 5 Trzaskoma at that time. 6 A. Yes. I recall that we had a conversation. I believe it 7 was as we were walking across Foley Square towards Duane 8 Street. She told me that there was a person with the same name 9 as -- I don't recall whether she said Juror No. 1 or Ms. 10 Conrad, but a person with the same name who was a disbarred 11 lawyer but that it was not the same person as Juror No. 1. 12 I began formulating a question to say, how do you 13 know? She anticipated that question and said, because of the 14 voir dire. I began formulating the question of, what question 15 during the voir dire would have disclosed that? She 16 anticipated that question as I was speaking it and said 17 something to the effect that her educational background did not 18 include law school. I said, then it's not the same person? 19 And she said right. By that time we had finished crossing the 20 street. 21 Q. Any further discussion about Juror No. 1? 22 A. Not with Ms. Trzaskoma during that time period. 23 Q. Any further discussion with anyone at the Brune firm 24 regarding Juror No. 1 during that time period? 25 A. No. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00010101