DOJ-OGR-00009921.jpg

Casasé 2k Oreo aiites PAE cman yet a FRED ORS ZED 22 Peake aye Of 676 7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL., February 15, 2012 C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 113 | C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 115 1 Q. It was irrational, was it not? 1 filed in the court, sir. Everyone can look it up. It's a 2 MR. OKULA: Objection, your Honor, 2 matter of public record. 3 THE COURT: Overruled. 3 Q. And in your judgment the motion was ridiculous, is that 4 A. Idon't know what "irrational" means. I'm not a 4 what you meant to convey? 5 psychologist. 5 A. Idon'trecall, no, I don't recall. 6 Q. And would you agree with me that at least there was no | 6 Q, Well, when you said it was ridiculous, what did you mean? 7 logical connection between Judge Pauley having attended Duke 7 A. I don't recall. 8 University 30 years or more ago and the hearing that you were 8 Q. Well, did you mean that you thought there was no merit to 9 present for and the instructions you were receiving on | 9 it? 10 December 20th. 10 A. [don't recall. 11 A. You went there too, but I really don't know what your (11 Q. I mean, you know there's merit to it, right? 12 question means. iz A. I don't recall. 13 Q. When you say you went there too, you mean I went there too? |13 Q. Do you know -- I'm not asking about your recall right now, 14 A. Yes, I Googled you, 14 ITmasking you whether or not there is merit to a motion thal is Q. And you know that I attended that as an undergraduate? 15 said you came into court and lied and lied and lied on March 1, 16 A. I believe so. is 2011, |17 Q. Is that responsive to the question I just asked you? | 17 MR. OKULA: Objection to the form, your Honor. ‘18 A. I told you, I can't answer your question, sir, 18 THE COURT: Sustained as to form. 19 Q. Ihave now posed a different question, I am now asking you 19 Q, So you don't know why you said it was ridiculous? /20 to explain for us whether there's a logical connection between 20 A. You're correct. I'm not a psychologist. |21 Judge Pauley's attendance at Duke University and your statement 21 Q. Now, when you went on to tell Judge Pauley “If you want 22 to the Court in the proceedings on December 20th? (22 another Clinton appointment, it's not going to happen" -- do 23 A. Ican't parse it down. I'm not a psychologist, sir. 23 you remember saying that? |24 Q, Now, then you went on to say, “Come on, this is anything in |24 A. I don't recall. '25 favor of the defendants and they brought the motion against the 25 Q. So you do not remember saying that? C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 1i4 | C2FFDAU4 Conrad - direct Page 116 1 prosecution. It's ridiculous." Now, what were you trying to | 1 A. If it's in the record, [ probably did say that, sir. 2 get at when you said "this is anything in favor of the | 2 Q. Okay, so it's in the record. So why did you say it? 3 defendants"? 3 A. Probably just being smart, 4 A, Idon't recall. 4 Q. Just being smart. 5 Q. Well, what you were trying to get at is -- 5 A. Smart a-s-s. 6 A, Are you testifying for me, sir? 6 Q. So you were being a smart ass to a federal judge, is that 7 Q. What you were trying to get at, ma'am, you thought that | 7 what you call it? 8 anything that might be in favor of the defendants would be | 8 A. If you need to say it that way, that’s your words, not 9 ridiculous, is that correct? 9 mine. 10 A. Absolutely not. 10 Q. Okay, well, let me ask you this: Are you under the 11 Q. Because you had decided that they were fricken crooks, 11 impression that the President of the United States is named 12 isn't that correct? 12 Clinton? 13 A. Absolutely not. 13 A. [Googled -- no. Please, stop. No. 14 Q. You haven't decided that? /14 Q. Why did you refer to another Clinton appointment? 15 A. Absolutely not. /15 A. Because I Googled the judge after the trial was over and I 16 Q. Did you think -- and when you said and they brought the 16 saw he was a Clinton appointee. End of story. Why don't we 17 motion against the prosecution did you think that Judge Pauley |17 get on to the meat of this? 18 was unaware of who filed the motion and who was responding to 18 Q. Ms. Conrad, can you explain for us the connection between 19 the motion concerning the request fora new trial? $19 Judge Pauley ordering you to appear for a hearing on 20 A. You have to break that question down for me, because Pacer (20 February 15th and the prospect that Judge Pauley would receive |21 isa public record, sir. |21 another appointment to the bench from somebody -- 22 Q. Can you explain to me what the fact that Pacer isa public 22 A. No. {23 record has to do with the question of whether Judge Pauley (23 Q. -- who is not President? 24 would know who filed the motion? |24 A. No. 25 A. Of course. It's a matter of public record and it's what's | 25 Q. Would you agree with me that in the common parlance that | Vite LlScviprt SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS (29) Page 113 - Page 116 DOJ-OGR- 00009921