mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00009261.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": null,
    "document_number": "120-ec1-00330-PAE",
    "date": "February 15, 2012",
    "document_type": "Court Transcript",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 120-ec1-00330-PAE Document 16161201 Filed 02/24/22 Page 239 of 67 A-5657\n\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,\n\nFebruary 15, 2012\n\nC2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 189\n1 A. I understood that, sir.\n2 Q. And did you know in March of 2011 that your husband had\n3 been in fact arrested and convicted a number of times?\n4 A. Yes, sir.\n5 Q. And did you know that he had been sentenced to prison in\n6 1980 for receiving stolen property?\n7 A. No, not 1980.\n8 Q. Did you know that in 1981 he had been convicted of\n9 possession of a controlled substance?\n10 A. Sir, I don't know the dates. I thought it was in the '70s.\n11 I'm not sure.\n12 Q. Did you know that he had been convicted of a probation\n13 violation and of making terroristic threats?\n14 A. That might have been '93. Vaguely I remember.\n15 Q. Did you know that he'd been indicted for check fraud and\n16 unlawful possession of weapons?\n17 A. That was in Manhattanville, Kentucky in like 1976 when he\n18 tried to board an airplane with a gun.\n19 Q. So that's not the incident in August of 1985 in New Jersey?\n20 A. Sir, I was ten years old probably then. I don't know. I\n21 can't tell you.\n22 Q. Was he indicted a second time for receiving stolen property\n23 and burglary?\n24 A. Sir, I don't know.\n25 Q. Did he get 18 months in prison in 1993 for harassment,\n\nC2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 190\n1 burglary and terroristic threats?\n2 A. I don't know.\n3 Q. Did you know that he was convicted for auto theft and\n4 served, got a ten-year prison sentence for that?\n5 A. No. Seven years, seven months.\n6 Q. Served seven years and seven months.\n7 A. Paroled out, yes.\n8 Q. Did you know him while he was in prison?\n9 A. No.\n10 Q. You met him afterwards?\n11 A. Yes, sir.\n12 Q. And he disclosed his criminal history to you?\n13 A. Yes.\n14 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor, to marital\n15 communications.\n16 THE COURT: I'll sustain any further inquiry along\n17 that line.\n18 Q. And you concealed your knowledge about your husband's\n19 criminal career in order to make sure that you would get a seat\n20 on this jury, is that correct?\n21 A. Yes, I concealed his career.\n22 Q. Does your father work for the Justice Department right now?\n23 A. Yes, sir.\n24 Q. How old is he?\n25 A. On March 1 he'll be 80. And I remember specifically that\n\nC2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 191\n1 voir dire commenced a year ago on March 1, because that was his\n2 birthday.\n3 Q. Now, another question that was asked of the whole panel was\n4 whether you or a close relative had ever been involved in or\n5 appeared as a witness in a variety of types of investigations\n6 including investigations by licensing authorities.\n7 A. Yes, sir. And in retrospect, I should have mentioned the\n8 disciplinary committee proceeding. I didn't just connect the\n9 two at that time. And that was obviously a pertinent issue\n10 that should have been raised.\n11 Q. I see. So on March 1st or 2nd, you didn't think about the\n12 fact that you'd participated in a disciplinary proceeding?\n13 A. Please say it again.\n14 Q. When you were testifying as a juror, potential juror here\n15 on March 1 and 2nd, you weren't thinking about the fact that\n16 you had participated in disciplinary proceedings?\n17 A. No. I thought about testifying in my mind about my\n18 personal injury case and more along those lines. No, it didn't\n19 occur to me.\n20 Q. Even though you had filed your petition for reinstatement a\n21 day or two before that?\n22 A. I just didn't look at it that way.\n23 Q. You believed that by serving on this jury you could get\n24 some measure of vindication for yourself, didn't you?\n25 A. Not at all. Vindication for what?\n\nC2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 192\n1 Q. You believed that you could somehow vindicate yourself as\n2 having done something worthwhile after a career that was in\n3 disgrace at that point?\n4 A. Are you trying to say that serving three months on a jury\n5 is akin to some sort of penance? I don't understand really\n6 what you're trying to tell me. It was my civic duty, which I\n7 performed to the best of my capability and ability and I\n8 believe I did it fairly, justly and unbiased.\n9 Q. Was it your civic duty to perjure yourself in this court?\n10 A. It's nobody's.\n11 Q. So you didn't really do your civic duty, did you?\n12 A. Of course. Rendering the just verdict in an unbiased\n13 fashion, I certainly did.\n14 Q. If you were on trial for a crime, would you want to know\n15 that one of the jurors who was judging the credibility of\n16 witnesses and had your fate in his or her hands had perjured\n17 themselves repeatedly at voir dire? Would you want to know\n18 that?\n19 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor.\n20 THE COURT: Overruled.\n21 A. Probably not, if I was a good criminal.\n22 MR. GAIR: Your Honor, this would be a good place to\n23 break.\n24 THE COURT: All right. We're going to take a\n25 ten-minute recess and then we'll reconvene and endeavor to\n\nPage 189 - Page 192 (48) SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS DOJ-OGR-00009261",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 120-ec1-00330-PAE Document 16161201 Filed 02/24/22 Page 239 of 67 A-5657",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "February 15, 2012",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 189",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 A. I understood that, sir.\n2 Q. And did you know in March of 2011 that your husband had\n3 been in fact arrested and convicted a number of times?\n4 A. Yes, sir.\n5 Q. And did you know that he had been sentenced to prison in\n6 1980 for receiving stolen property?\n7 A. No, not 1980.\n8 Q. Did you know that in 1981 he had been convicted of\n9 possession of a controlled substance?\n10 A. Sir, I don't know the dates. I thought it was in the '70s.\n11 I'm not sure.\n12 Q. Did you know that he had been convicted of a probation\n13 violation and of making terroristic threats?\n14 A. That might have been '93. Vaguely I remember.\n15 Q. Did you know that he'd been indicted for check fraud and\n16 unlawful possession of weapons?\n17 A. That was in Manhattanville, Kentucky in like 1976 when he\n18 tried to board an airplane with a gun.\n19 Q. So that's not the incident in August of 1985 in New Jersey?\n20 A. Sir, I was ten years old probably then. I don't know. I\n21 can't tell you.\n22 Q. Was he indicted a second time for receiving stolen property\n23 and burglary?\n24 A. Sir, I don't know.\n25 Q. Did he get 18 months in prison in 1993 for harassment,",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 190",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 burglary and terroristic threats?\n2 A. I don't know.\n3 Q. Did you know that he was convicted for auto theft and\n4 served, got a ten-year prison sentence for that?\n5 A. No. Seven years, seven months.\n6 Q. Served seven years and seven months.\n7 A. Paroled out, yes.\n8 Q. Did you know him while he was in prison?\n9 A. No.\n10 Q. You met him afterwards?\n11 A. Yes, sir.\n12 Q. And he disclosed his criminal history to you?\n13 A. Yes.\n14 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor, to marital\n15 communications.\n16 THE COURT: I'll sustain any further inquiry along\n17 that line.\n18 Q. And you concealed your knowledge about your husband's\n19 criminal career in order to make sure that you would get a seat\n20 on this jury, is that correct?\n21 A. Yes, I concealed his career.\n22 Q. Does your father work for the Justice Department right now?\n23 A. Yes, sir.\n24 Q. How old is he?\n25 A. On March 1 he'll be 80. And I remember specifically that",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 191",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 voir dire commenced a year ago on March 1, because that was his\n2 birthday.\n3 Q. Now, another question that was asked of the whole panel was\n4 whether you or a close relative had ever been involved in or\n5 appeared as a witness in a variety of types of investigations\n6 including investigations by licensing authorities.\n7 A. Yes, sir. And in retrospect, I should have mentioned the\n8 disciplinary committee proceeding. I didn't just connect the\n9 two at that time. And that was obviously a pertinent issue\n10 that should have been raised.\n11 Q. I see. So on March 1st or 2nd, you didn't think about the\n12 fact that you'd participated in a disciplinary proceeding?\n13 A. Please say it again.\n14 Q. When you were testifying as a juror, potential juror here\n15 on March 1 and 2nd, you weren't thinking about the fact that\n16 you had participated in disciplinary proceedings?\n17 A. No. I thought about testifying in my mind about my\n18 personal injury case and more along those lines. No, it didn't\n19 occur to me.\n20 Q. Even though you had filed your petition for reinstatement a\n21 day or two before that?\n22 A. I just didn't look at it that way.\n23 Q. You believed that by serving on this jury you could get\n24 some measure of vindication for yourself, didn't you?\n25 A. Not at all. Vindication for what?",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "C2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 192",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 Q. You believed that you could somehow vindicate yourself as\n2 having done something worthwhile after a career that was in\n3 disgrace at that point?\n4 A. Are you trying to say that serving three months on a jury\n5 is akin to some sort of penance? I don't understand really\n6 what you're trying to tell me. It was my civic duty, which I\n7 performed to the best of my capability and ability and I\n8 believe I did it fairly, justly and unbiased.\n9 Q. Was it your civic duty to perjure yourself in this court?\n10 A. It's nobody's.\n11 Q. So you didn't really do your civic duty, did you?\n12 A. Of course. Rendering the just verdict in an unbiased\n13 fashion, I certainly did.\n14 Q. If you were on trial for a crime, would you want to know\n15 that one of the jurors who was judging the credibility of\n16 witnesses and had your fate in his or her hands had perjured\n17 themselves repeatedly at voir dire? Would you want to know\n18 that?\n19 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor.\n20 THE COURT: Overruled.\n21 A. Probably not, if I was a good criminal.\n22 MR. GAIR: Your Honor, this would be a good place to\n23 break.\n24 THE COURT: All right. We're going to take a\n25 ten-minute recess and then we'll reconvene and endeavor to",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Page 189 - Page 192 (48) SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009261",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Conrad",
      "Paul M. Daugerdas"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA",
      "Justice Department",
      "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Manhattanville",
      "Kentucky",
      "New Jersey"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "February 15, 2012",
      "March 1, 2011",
      "1980",
      "1981",
      "1976",
      "August 1985",
      "1993",
      "March 1"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "120-ec1-00330-PAE",
      "16161201",
      "A-5657",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009261"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript from a trial involving Paul M. Daugerdas. The transcript includes testimony from a witness named Conrad, who is being questioned about her husband's criminal history and her own involvement in a disciplinary proceeding. The document is well-formatted and easy to read, with clear headings and line numbers."
}