DOJ-OGR-00009266.jpg

Case ceeteciieee tials (a7 amaamnniaae al of 67 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL., February 15, 2012 C2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 209 | C2FFDAUG Conrad - direct Page 211 1 Q. So those words are not an omission and they're nota lic, | 1 THE COURT: Any inquiry, Ms. McCarthy? 2 they're true? 2 MS. McCARTHY: Your Honor, just a housekeeping matier. 3 A. Correct. 3 I'm not sure if this is admitted. PMD 23. Has that been 4 Q. And that is to say that you thought that if these lawyers | 4 offered in evidence yet? Mr. Gair offered some at the end. 5 knew who you actually were, and maybe if that judge knew who | 5 I'm not sure. 6 you actually were, you wouldn't have been a juror in this case. | 6 THE COURT: No. You're offering PMD 237 7 A. [knew I could be unbiased and fair. 7 MS. McCARTHY: I am your Honor. 8 Q. No, no. Let's try to answer some questions. You knew if | 8 THE COURT: Any objection? 9 people knew who you actually were, if these lawyers knew who | 9 MR, OKULA: None, your Honor. 10 you actually were, perhaps if that judge knew who you actually |10 THE COURT; Atl right, PMD 23 is received in evidence. 11. were, you wouldn't have been a juror in this case? You knew |11 (Exhibit PMD 23 received in evidence) 12 that. 12 THE COURT: Mr. Okula, you may inquire. 13 A. Probably not, right. 13 MR. OKULA: Thank you, your Honor. 14 Q. Let's not say probably. Let's see if we can get youtobe [14 CROSS-EXAMINATION 15 accurate, 15 BY MR.OKULA: 16 THE COURT: Just stay back by the podium, |16 Q. Ms. Conrad, let me pick up where Mr. Schectman left off 17. Mr. Schectman. 17 where he asked you a question and you answered something about 18 Q. Let's try to be accurate. 18 connecting the dots about determining whether the defendants 19 MR, OKULA: Judge, could we stop the speeching, have 19 were crooks, Do you remember that question? 20 him ask a question? 20 A. Yes. 21 THE COURT: If you have an objection as to form, you 22 Q. Did you make up your mind about those defendants that you 22 can state it, And Mr. Schectman is going to stay behind the |22 found guilty prior to hearing all of the evidence and prior to (23 podium. 23 hearing the judge's instructions in this case? 24 MR. SCHECTMAN: He is indeed. 24 A, Absolutely not. 25 Q. You knew that if these lawyers knew who you really were, | 25 Q. Ms. Conrad, you didn't attempt to try to get on this jury C2FFDAU6 Conrad - direct Page 210 | C2FFDAU6 Conrad - cross Page 212 | 1 there was no chance of your being on this jury? 1 in order to carry out some personal vendetta or agenda with 2 A. Ican't read people's minds, sir. 2 respect to the defendants, did you? 3 Q. Well, you read their minds well enough to keep an enormous | 3 A. No, sir. 4 amount of information from them, didn't you? 4 Q. And you didn't have any vendetta against the government, 5 A. Ican't qualify enormous. 5 correct? 6 Q. Ms. Conrad, I don't want to go through it -- 6 A, Correct. 7 A. More likely than not [ wouldn't have been picked, yes. | 7 Q. And similarly, you didn't think that you would cast 8 Q. Try ahigher standard. Beyond a reasonable doubt you 8 yourself in a good light with the government if you voted in 9 wouldn't have been picked, 9 favor of the government, notwithstanding what the evidence was, 10 A, [can't put words into your mouth, I'm sorry. 10 is that correct? 11 Q. If they knew you were a suspended lawyer with ahistory of |11 A. I believe so. 12 alcoholism with three misdemeanor convictions, with a husband | 12 Q. So when you failed to tell the truth about your education 13 who had seven felony convictions, who had involvement with |13 and failed to reveal your criminal record and your status as a 14 licensing authorities, who had an outstanding warrant from |14 suspended attorney, it was not because you were biased against 15 Arizona, is it your view that these lawyers would have seen you |15 one party or another, is that correct? 16 as adifferent person, a far different person than the one you |16 A. Correct. 17 portrayed yourself to be? 17 Q, Did you have any personal bias or animus against Paul 18 A. I would think the defense counsel would be wild to have me. |18 Daugerdas at the beginning of the case? wo Q. Why is that, Ms. Conrad? ig A. No, not at all. 7 didn't know anybody. 20 A. Well, my husband seems to be a professional defendant. soI 20 Q. So you didn't know any of the defendants, is it fair to say 21. probably would have in their mind been a keeper for their side. 21 that you had no personal bias or animus or feelings one way or 22 Q. Because your view is they wanted people wha were crooks |22 another with respect to them, is that fair? 23 because they were crooks. 23 A. That's absolutely correct. 24 A. If that's connecting the dots logically. 24 Q. And it's true, isn't it, Ms. Conrad, that you hadn't made |25 MR. SCHECTMAN: I'll stop there. 25 up your mind once you were selected to be a juror in this case | vin SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS (53) Page 209 - Page 212 DOJ-OGR- 00009266