DOJ-OGR-00009331.jpg

Case ee OO NEN DOC At eT NCP ORIBEIZB ag Payal a2 of 130 maaan & Whe 270 C2GFDAUL Brune — direct A. That's correct, it's Judge Pauley's courtroom. Q. And other than the peremptory challenges it was not your decision whether or not to seat any particular juror, correct? A. He was the arbiter of the challenges for cause. O. And you and your team in fact raised questions and concerns with the Court during the voir dire? A. Yes, we did. QO. That includes Ms, Trzaskoma raising a concern about a, or an issue about a potential juror who worked at Goldman Sachs, correct? A. I'm sure it's so. I can't remember this as I sit here, but she certainly raised questions about prospective jurors. Q. And prior to the -- well, you recall, do you not, that the voir dire extended over several days? A. I do. Q. And prior te the start of the second day of voir dire, dudge Pauley solicited of counsel whether or not they had any additional questions to pose to the jury pool? A. I'm sure he did. I can't remember it, but he certainly was open to questions proposed by defense counsel and government counsel. Q. And do you recall that at that point Ms, Trzaskoma specifically asked the Court to ask another question of the jurors, that was, did they have any negative experiences with lawyers orf accountants or financial advisers? SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR- 00009331