DOJ-OGR-00009386.jpg

Case Fee ee eee OTR) CO ORRAIZRag Rabel ok 130 o~Anw fw NF NNMNNNMNP RPP Pee Pe eB MobWN Pow OI H Of NP Ow 325 C2GFDAU3 Edelstein attorney? A. I don't believe she had formed a belief about the New York attorney. She mentioned that there was an attorney, a suspended attorney with the same name, and that after having received the note from Juror No. 1 that mentioned several legal concepts, she had thought that could it possibly be they were the same person. 0. And at what point did you ask Ms. Trzaskoma for the evidence, the underlying documents or information that led her to believe that there was a4 possible connection between Juror No. 1 and the suspended New York attorney? A. I didn't realize that there was a document that she was basing any belief on. It was the fact that there was a suspended lawyer with the same name. Q. Well, didn't you ask how did you form this belief or what did you look at to see that there was a suspended New York attorney? Did you ask that question? MR. GAIR: Objection. Three questions. Compound. THE COURT: Overruled. A. No, I did not. Q. So do you mean to tell us that you at no point asked Theresa Trzaskoma for what underlying information she saw that led her to believe that there was a possible connection between Juror No. 1 and the suspended New York attorney? Yes or no. A, I'm not sure that was a yes or no question, but she SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, F.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR- 00009386