Ms. Edelstein
witness
Mentioned in 17 documents. Roles: witness, co-counsel or associate of Ms. Brune, A thorough person who wants to see documents and cases, witness being cross-examined, Witness
Ms. Edelstein is mentioned in documents or reporting related to the Epstein case. Being mentioned does not imply any wrongdoing, criminal conduct, or inappropriate behavior.
At a Glance
Click values for sourcesSources
5 sources for document mentions
The transcript shows the redirect examination of witness Ms. Edelstein, with the court asking questi...
“The transcript shows the redirect examination of witness Ms. Edelstein, with the court asking questi”
The witness clarifies the timeline of events related to a court case, initially making an error but ...
“The witness clarifies the timeline of events related to a court case, initially making an error but ”
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer wi...
“Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer wi”
The deposition transcript shows Ms. Edelstein being questioned about statements made in a court brie...
“The deposition transcript shows Ms. Edelstein being questioned about statements made in a court brie”
The transcript is of a court proceeding where Ms. Edelstein is being questioned about her law firm's...
“The transcript is of a court proceeding where Ms. Edelstein is being questioned about her law firm's”
Sources
1 source for known connections
Co-Document Mentions
“Named alongside other network members in 89 documents”
Known Connections (20)
Document Mentions (24)
The transcript shows the redirect examination of witness Ms. Edelstein, with the court asking questi...
The transcript shows the redirect examination of witness Ms. Edelstein, with the court asking questions about the disclosure of information regarding Juror No. 1 and whether the law firm would have disclosed it without the court's inquiry or the government's action. The witness responds that they thought it would come out at some point during the proceedings.
The witness clarifies the timeline of events related to a court case, initially making an error but ...
The witness clarifies the timeline of events related to a court case, initially making an error but later correcting it to July 18th. The discussion involves the witness's knowledge of a Westlaw report and the characteristics of Ms. Edelstein. The transcript appears to be part of a larger legal proceeding.
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer wi...
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer with the same name as Juror No. 1. She explains that they didn't bring it to the court's attention because they deemed it inconceivable that Juror No. 1 was the suspended lawyer. There was no discussion about raising a juror misconduct issue in a post-trial motion until after receiving a letter from Ms. Conrad.
The deposition transcript shows Ms. Edelstein being questioned about statements made in a court brie...
The deposition transcript shows Ms. Edelstein being questioned about statements made in a court brief, specifically regarding the defendants' knowledge and investigation into Catherine Conrad. Edelstein confirms the accuracy of certain statements while also revealing her awareness of Theresa Trzaskoma's discovery of the Appellate Division suspension report.
The transcript is of a court proceeding where Ms. Edelstein is being questioned about her law firm's...
The transcript is of a court proceeding where Ms. Edelstein is being questioned about her law firm's handling of information regarding Juror No. 1, including whether they would have disclosed it to the Court if not prompted. The discussion also touches on whether they considered raising it as an appellate issue.
court transcript: 1:20-cr-00303-PAE Document 611 Filed 02/24/22
The transcript shows the redirect examination of witness Ms. Edelstein, with the court asking questions about the disclosure of information regarding Juror No. 1 and whether the law firm would have disclosed it without the court's inquiry or the government's action. The witness responds that they thought it would come out at some point during the proceedings.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 1616-20 Filed 02/24/22 Page 623 of 130
The document is a transcript of the direct examination of Ms. Brune, where she discusses her conversations with defense counsel and the receipt of a jury note. She testifies that she had conversations with co-counsel after receiving a copy of a letter and that the communications were joint defense communications. The witness also mentions being upset upon reading the jury note and verifying information on the Bar website.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cr-00338-PAE Document 1616220 Filed 02/24/22 Page 58 of 130
The witness clarifies the timeline of events related to a court case, initially making an error but later correcting it to July 18th. The discussion involves the witness's knowledge of a Westlaw report and the characteristics of Ms. Edelstein. The transcript appears to be part of a larger legal proceeding.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-00330-PAE Document 61102/20
Ms. Edelstein is cross-examined about a conversation with colleagues regarding a suspended lawyer with the same name as Juror No. 1. She explains that they didn't bring it to the court's attention because they deemed it inconceivable that Juror No. 1 was the suspended lawyer. There was no discussion about raising a juror misconduct issue in a post-trial motion until after receiving a letter from Ms. Conrad.
deposition transcript: 1:20-cv-03308-PAE Document 61602 Filed 02/24/22 Page 119 of 130
The deposition transcript shows Ms. Edelstein being questioned about statements made in a court brief, specifically regarding the defendants' knowledge and investigation into Catherine Conrad. Edelstein confirms the accuracy of certain statements while also revealing her awareness of Theresa Trzaskoma's discovery of the Appellate Division suspension report.
Court Transcript: 64432
The transcript is of a court proceeding where Ms. Edelstein is being questioned about her law firm's handling of information regarding Juror No. 1, including whether they would have disclosed it to the Court if not prompted. The discussion also touches on whether they considered raising it as an appellate issue.
deposition transcript: A-5736
The witness, Brune, testifies about a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma and Ms. Edelstein on May 12th, and when they became aware of Ms. Trzaskoma's research. Brune clarifies their understanding of Ms. Trzaskoma's actions on May 12th and when they learned more about the investigation.
Deposition transcript: A-5737
The witness recounts a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma and Ms. Edelstein about Juror No. 1, speculating that she might be a suspended lawyer due to similarities between her voir dire responses and the juror note. They discussed the juror's background, including a personal injury suit, and initially downplayed the significance of the juror note.
deposition transcript: A-5744
The witness clarifies the timeline of events, initially making an error about the date they learned about a voir dire, later correcting it to July 18th. They discuss Ms. Edelstein's thorough nature and her potential request to see a suspension opinion.
court transcript: A-5745
The document is a transcript of a court proceeding where a witness, Brune, is being questioned about a conversation regarding a suspension opinion and whether certain individuals were informed about it. The witness is unsure if Ms. Edelstein asked to see the suspension opinion, but confirms that Ms. Trzaskoma informed Mr. Schoeman and Mr. Berke about the issue on May 12th.
Showing 15 of 24 documents. View all →
This dossier on Ms. Edelstein was compiled from court records, flight logs, and public documents. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.