Trooper Yuri Bukenik
speaker
156 appearances
1 recordings
1 series
first heard Nov 2024
last heard Nov 2024
Trooper Yuri Bukenik’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
What did you mean then when you said she's fucked?
What you meant by that comment, Trooper Proctor, was you were going to make sure because 50-51 had said she's going to skate. She's skating. When you said zero chance she skates, she's fucked. What you meant was I am going to make sure Ms. Reed doesn't skate. She's fucked. That's what you meant. And then Bird decides to chime in. Good. No ass bitch. Right?
How did you respond to Bird saying, good, no-ass bitch?
Thought that was funny, did you, Trooper Proctor? Thought that was funny?
Well, I think we all know it was unprofessional. It was a lot of things. I'm asking you, did you think it was funny?
On Monday, you indicated that your conduct in this case, and specifically your conduct as reflected in these messages, how did you put it? It did not affect the integrity of the investigation, of your investigation, correct? Correct. Do you know what the definition of integrity is?
It means the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles, correct? Do you believe that integrity means being honest and having strong moral principles?
Do you stand by that testimony that you were showing strong moral principles in this investigation, sir?
When you say they're juvenile and regrettable, it sounds like you're almost apologizing to the jury for your conduct. Is that what you're doing? Super Proctor, have you ever apologized to Ms. Reed?
As a lead investigator in this case, you were tasked with the responsibility of making sure that the investigation remained free of any conflicts of interest. It's part of your job, correct? Correct. Throughout the pendency of this investigation in this case, you've denied having any conflict of interest in this case. Isn't that right? Correct.
In fact, a couple of months ago in February of 2024, you testified in a different proceeding. Is that right? Yes. You testified under oath in that proceeding on February 1st that you did not know any members of the Albert family or McCabe family, correct?
That wasn't my question. Let's take them one at a time. Did you testify under oath, same oath you took here today, in a formal proceeding in February of 2024, that you did not know and did not have any relationship with members of the Albert and McCabe families?
You can't remember how you testified, whether or not you knew or had relationships with the Alberts in the case? As you sit here right now, you need to refresh your recollection. You can't remember what you said.
Would you refresh your recollection if you took a look at those grand jury minutes? Yes.
You were asked the question, quote, did you communicate with first assistant DA Beeland that you did not know and had no relationship with the Albert and McCabe families? And you answered, quote, I, to the best of my recollection, the same conversation took place with everyone I talked to about this because it's the same answer. It's the facts that I shared with everyone.
Question, meaning you told First Assistant Phelan that you didn't know, didn't have a relationship with members of the Albert and McCabe families. Answer, correct.
Do you recall that? Yes. And that's your testimony that you, in fact, told members of the DA's office that you did not know and did not have a relationship with the Alberts or McCabes. Is that right?
Well, the question wasn't, did you know most of the Alberts? The question was, did you have a relationship with, or did you know the Alberts? And your answer was no.
Or know them.
So you do know the Alberts, correct?
Showing 61–80 of 156 · page 4 of 8
← Previous
Next →