1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATE OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MCKENZIE J. CARSON,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 11 CR 00918

Chicago, Illinois

October 15, 2015

10:40 AM

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS - Sentencing

BEFORE THE HONORABLE ELAINE E. BUCKLO

APPEARANCES:

For the Plaintiff: HON. ZACHARY T. FARDON

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

BY: MS. JENNIFER H. LEVIN

219 South Dearborn Street, Suite 500

Chicago, Illinois 60604

For the Defendant: LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM D. SHAVER

BY: MR. WILLIAM D. SHAVER

150 North Michigan Avenue,

Suite 2800

Chicago, Illinois 60601

ALSO PRESENT: MR. TROY GROOMS, Probation Officer.

Court Reporter: SANDRA M. TENNIS, CSR, RMR, FCRR

Official Court Reporter

219 S. Dearborn Street, Room 2260

Chicago, Illinois 60604

(312) 554-8244

sandra_tennis@ilnd.uscourts.gov
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

2

THE CLERK: 11 CR 918, Defendant one, USA versus

Carson, for sentencing.

THE COURT: Good morning.

MR. SHAVER: Good morning, Judge. William Shaver

on behalf of McKenzie Carson.

MS. LEVIN: Good morning, Judge. Jennie Levin on

behalf of the United States.

THE COURT: Good morning. Okay. Mr. Carson can

come down. There are numerous objections that we need to

deal with.

MR. SHAVER: I believe Mr. Carson wants to address

the Court.

THE COURT: Well, usually that's the last thing

before sentencing. Is there something -- some reason why

there should be an exception?

MR. SHAVER: He is claiming he has fired me and --

THE COURT: Well, I already ruled on that.

THE DEFENDANT: I have an attorney that's supposed

to be meeting with me here today. Heather Winslow is

supposed to be meeting with me here today to do the

sentencing. It has been nothing but conflict after conflict

with -- with him. And he is trying to sabotage my sentence.

I don't agree with his sentence memorandum. She is claiming

in our sentence that -- objection that I'm stalling, your

Honor. I want to get this over with just like -- just like
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

3

you guys. I'm the one going through the torture every day in

fear for her trying to give me life in prison, you know,

and -- and --

THE COURT: Well, technically that's not what she

is asking. Although, I'm not quite sure what the sentence

recommendation from the government means, but we'll get to

that. We'll get to that. Have you hired Ms. Winslow?

THE DEFENDANT: That's what -- we are in the midst.

She is going to be here today to meet with my family and me.

She spoke with my aunt yesterday and --

THE COURT: Call her up, Jackie.

THE DEFENDANT: And I'm -- you denied paying for a

lawyer so my family -- we're going to get the money together

to pay for it.

THE COURT: I didn't hear what you just said. I

did not what?

THE DEFENDANT: You denied giving me a lawyer last

time I was here.

THE COURT: Wait a minute. Let's at least make

sure that the record is very straight. In the first place,

you were appointed a lawyer. I don't remember who -- I just

noticed that the other day.

MR. SHAVER: Chuck Aron?

THE COURT: No, before him.

MR. SHAVER: Jack Rimland?
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

4

THE COURT: Yes. I don't know -- I can't tell -- I

don't have from -- what happened there. He quit, you fired

him, or what happened.

THE DEFENDANT: The first lawyer, I don't believe

you were on the stand. It was a different judge on the

stand.

THE COURT: There have been --

THE DEFENDANT: And I was appointed Jack Rimland.

THE COURT: Yes.

THE DEFENDANT: And Jack Rimland, I had him for six

months that he never came to see me or accept my calls. And

after six months, he withdrew from the case.

THE COURT: All right. Well, anyway, is he a

Defender?

MS. LEVIN: He is.

THE COURT: He must be.

MS. LEVIN: He was appointed, Judge. And he

withdrew because he was fired by the defendant. The

defendant wanted a new attorney.

THE DEFENDANT: No, he was not fired by the

defendant.

THE COURT: All right. Well, we won't go into

whatever the cause of it was, but I saw that. And then, you

know, the Federal Defender was again appointed. The

government -- you know, again, you were having a paid
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

5

attorney. It was Mr. Aron, who is a very experienced

attorney around here. I know you had some disagreements with

him. I saw one letter in the -- on the docket. But then, in

the end, he asked to have a second attorney. And so it's

highly unusual in a case like this, but I appointed an

additional attorney. When I say a case like this, it's

highly unusual in any Federal case to have two appointed

attorneys. But, in this case, I did appoint a second

attorney. And so you had two attorneys to represent you at

trial. And then, on the eve of trial, he suddenly decided he

needed somebody who -- an additional attorney. And while she

was supposed to just be helping prepare, technically, at

trial, you had three attorneys, two of whom were highly

experienced Federal Panel attorneys. Then after -- frankly,

you know, they --

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor?

THE COURT: They were -- they certainly were

zealous. They were extremely zealous. At times I thought

perhaps their zealousness exceeded civility. But, at any

rate, the jury did convict you and the jury convicted you

because the evidence was simply overwhelming, despite the

fact that you had two --

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor?

THE COURT: -- attorneys who did their best. And

you fired them.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

6

THE DEFENDANT: You're absolutely right. I had

Chuck Aron. Chuck Aron was a great attorney. I'm not

arguing what -- what he is capable of doing. But what he is

capable of doing and what he do is two different things. And

I let you know this way before trial that he refused to file

motions, refused to get the evidentiary hearing, refused to

explore special investigators to go outside and do research

of my -- on my defense. I wrote a letter to your clerk's

office, to you, to Chuck Aron's office, you know. And I went

to trial with a lawyer that said, if it was up to him, I

would get the rest of my life in prison.

THE COURT: Wait a minute. Ellen Domph is

considered one of the most highly respected lawyers I know.

THE DEFENDANT: Yeah, I know he is a great lawyer,

but --

THE COURT: But she was, too.

(Discussion off the record.)

THE COURT: I'm not sure what your aunt said to

her. She didn't know that there was any reason why she

needed to be here today.

THE DEFENDANT: I haven't spoken to Heather

firsthand. You know, my aunt spoken with Heather. And, from

my understanding, Heather was going to be in the court

building today, you know. And I was going to be able to

speak to her today to employ her for my sentencing, you know.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

7

And -- and, right now, I don't have an attorney. This is not

my attorney.

THE COURT: All right. Well, let's continue.

THE DEFENDANT: And any other thing would be --

THE COURT: I don't want to say that she should

come or not come. She hasn't been hired, apparently. Okay.

Anyway, let me continue this. I want to finish at

least what I have to say on this because I don't -- I don't

know if you will think about it; but, anyway, so then you had

three attorneys, you fired them all. Mr. Shaver was

appointed. He has certainly, I think, been diligent in

representing you in all of this time. So the thing is, it

has been two years since the trial, or almost two years.

THE DEFENDANT: You say --

THE COURT: It's a very long time. And this case

is -- began in 2011. We need to have it done. So --

THE DEFENDANT: I was arrested in 2012.

THE COURT: You came in last time and you

disagreed -- well, it has an 11 CR.

THE DEFENDANT: Yeah, I was arrested in 2012, your

Honor.

MS. LEVIN: He was arrested, your Honor, I believe

it was January 2nd of 2012. It was indicted in late.

THE COURT: I see.

THE DEFENDANT: I was arrested in 2012.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

8

THE COURT: Okay. At any rate, the reason I denied

it last time is that it sounded like the same thing; that,

when an attorney disagrees with you, then you decide that you

want them fired. I have no reason to think some other

attorney is going to agree with you. And, at this point, we

are at sentencing.

THE DEFENDANT: It's so much information that's

being left out of my sentence memorandum. It's like, it's

surface stuff that is being -- you need to get a real clear

picture of me and a real clear understanding of what type of

person and individual I am --

THE COURT: I agree with that.

THE DEFENDANT: -- you know, and -- and to just,

you know, I'm not saying he didn't discuss me, but it's not

detailed. There is a lot of stuff missing that I think you

really should know, you know, um. This is my life, your

Honor.

THE COURT: I understand.

THE DEFENDANT: You know, and, you know, this

isn't -- my life is in your hands. And I believe I -- I

deserve a fair shot for you to be able to make the ruling of

what type of future I'm going to have, if any, you know.

Because it's like -- it's like the world is against me in a

sort-of-speak manner. And I'm not getting a chance at a -- a

fair chance to show that I can be a productive member of
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

9

society, you know. My life can go to a way better direction

if you know the type of individual I truly am, you know. You

have been misled about many things that I can't sit here and

go into. But a memorandum, everything isn't always what it

appears to be, you know. But, you know, it's like, you know,

I'm already, before birth, you know, coming in fighting.

One-in-a-billion chance to even make -- to survive to the

womb to come into this world. Then you come into this world

and it's like everybody is closing in on you. You know, I

mean, you know, I mean, I got certain circumstances that

happened in my life that you need to know that led up into

the points of things. Do you understand what I'm trying to

say here? And just surfacing and missing out -- missing out

complete stuff. And, you know, I think Heather can prepare

my memorandum much better, you know. And I --

THE COURT: Well, I'm not going to appoint another

attorney for you.

THE DEFENDANT: I'm saying, I'm going to pay for

the attorney. If I have to do the memorandum myself, you

deny me -- if I got to do my sentence myself, you deny me

assistance of a counsel. But I cannot go on with someone I

feel is trying to sabotage --

THE COURT: I don't think anybody can say that I

have denied you the assistance of counsel.

THE DEFENDANT: And he is trying to -- that
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

10

somebody -- how can I move forward with somebody that I feel

that's trying to sabotage my sentencing. You know, everybody

in this world have personal interests in things. And some

things it's very personal to -- to people and -- and certain

matters, people can't even make a complete, unbiased decision

on things. You know, we all have special interests that we

take up on things, you know. And, you know, I'm not saying

what anybody ain't educated. I'm not educated. I got a

sixth grade education, special ed education. But I can't say

this man ain't educated for something he went to school for.

I'm not arguing that. But I'm arguing, you know, it's a

conflict of interest here. He even told you several --

several times that he came to see me and has been -- we've

been fueling at each other. It's already bad vibes between

us. To have somebody with bad vibes between them and doing

my sentence, doing my sentence, he controls what he put in

there and what he not. You know, and -- and last time I was

here, I was trying to speak, and you had them remove me from

the court. You said you heard enough. And somebody gave me

this, Faretta vs. California. Faretta, F-a-r-e-t-t-a, versus

California says I have the right to speak and be heard and

participate in my defense, you know, to participate in my

sentencing and all stages of my -- you know, then I get the

objection to the sentence memorandum a day before sentence.

I got the -- that objection yesterday. It was mailed out on
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

11

the 13th. He got it on the 13th, from my understanding. I

get the sentence memorandum, what, a week ago, a couple days

after the court. So it was that Thursday. I got the

sentence memorandum, his sentence memorandum, Thursday. So I

had no knowledge that this is just surface -- stuff is

missing, a lot of important stuff in this sentence

memorandum. You know, if I had -- if I had knowledge of

this, we could have addressed this. This is something --

this is something that should have been brought way ahead of

time. You know, just like everything else, like you said, it

has been two years. Yeah, two years. A long two years. I

don't want to live in fear every day wondering what my future

hold. I want to get it over with myself. But, on the same

token, at the same token, I want to be able to do everything

to bring about, you know, how you say that? I want to,

like -- say, for instance, I didn't -- I didn't hold -- like

if I'm holding up the court because I asked for my discovery.

No, I -- I -- you know, part of the time was -- we didn't

wait too long when I waited a year and a half to get my

discovery. You know, but now -- now, as soon as they ready,

Lindberg kept telling them to give me my discovery. The next

thing I know, he is gone. And, finally, when I get my

discovery, it was on a CD that I couldn't even access it. I

kept on bringing it to you-all's attention. And about time I

get the paper print of some of the stuff, I'm being moved
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

12

four days -- I got the stuff 30 days before trial; and four

days before trial, I was moved to the MCC.

THE COURT: Well, your attorneys had it. But,

meanwhile, I guess I would like both of you to respond to

what he has said.

MR. SHAVER: Judge, you know that the relationship

between Mr. Carson and I has been difficult. I have met with

him on numerous occasions, both in Kankakee and at the MCC.

Without going into the specifics, because I want to maintain

the attorney-client privilege, he has not been forthcoming in

assisting me in putting together his sentencing memorandum.

He says that it doesn't include -- it's just surface. It

just doesn't include the things he wants to say. But,

frankly, he has never told me what those things are when I've

asked. I've done the best that I can based on what I have

had. I think it's a pretty good effort.

You know, I'm uncomfortable about representing him.

He doesn't want me. He thinks I'm part of some grand

conspiracy. I know I'm not -- I'm going to hear all about

this later on at some point because he is going to complain

about me, as he is going to complain about the other

attorneys he has had. But, you know, I've done it to the

best of my ability. I filed a motion to withdraw. You

denied. I still persevered. I attempted to go over and see

him the other day. I wanted to discuss the government's
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

13

filings with him. We had a major blowup. And I just

couldn't continue because nothing was being accomplished.

But that's par for the course. I feel very uncomfortable

representing Mr. Carson right now. I don't think I should.

THE COURT: Did you -- when did he get the

memorandum that you filed?

MR. SHAVER: The memorandum I filed?

THE COURT: Or you were going to file. I assume

you gave it to him before you filed it.

MR. SHAVER: I gave him the draft copy the day I

filed it. He has had it a long time. I met with him --

THE COURT: Not just since last week?

MR. SHAVER: I've met with him on numerous

occasions and asking him if he has read it. The last time,

when he actually talked to me, he said he hadn't even read

it.

MS. LEVIN: It was filed on September 25th, your

Honor.

MR. SHAVER: September 25th. He has had a draft

copy since September 25th.

THE DEFENDANT: I was given -- yeah, I was given a

draft copy at the end of September. He said he wasn't going

to file that one, that he wanted to take some stuff out. And

I got the memorandum -- I got the memorandum last week. You

gave me the memorandum last week. And it came in the mail.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

14

I signed for it. All right? So what he is saying, I can

easily prove. I didn't get the memorandum until last week.

And I didn't -- I signed for the objection to the memorandum

yesterday. I got the objection to the memorandum yesterday.

MR. SHAVER: I don't care about the attorney-client

privilege. I told him that that was what I was going to

file, that it was a draft, but I was going to file it. So he

had what I was going to file on the date that I filed it. He

has had it. He hasn't even read it.

THE DEFENDANT: I've read the memorandum. I read

the draft to the -- to the memorandum. You know, he -- he is

saying I ain't read it. You know, I told him I read it. He

wants to say I ain't read it. If I ain't read it, I wouldn't

have knowledge of it. I wouldn't have knowledge that --

that -- that he is asking for 15 years and that he is -- I

wouldn't have knowledge that he is using -- that he is

missing stuff, you know.

THE COURT: What is he missing?

THE DEFENDANT: He is missing a lot of detailed

stuff. And it's a lot of abuse that I went through as a

child that he don't have. He don't have it all in there.

There are some things in there I pointed out that, wait,

you-all got this -- this wrong. And he goes, oh, don't worry

about it, it sounds better that way anyway.

MR. SHAVER: That's not true. That is,
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15

categorically, not true.

THE COURT: You can say whatever you want to say.

I guess the issue is whether -- I don't want this back.

THE DEFENDANT: And it was so bad the other day he

went to court that -- the other day, he came to the MCC, the

officers at MCC had to intervene. He was --

MR. SHAVER: I asked them to intervene because of

the violence of the confrontation. It was -- I was getting

no where and it was getting heated. So I knocked on the door

and asked them to come in and get me out.

THE DEFENDANT: He is supposed to be a

professional. He was yelling at me at the top of his lungs.

And at that time I -- you know, I wasn't --

THE COURT: He probably was trying to get you to

listen.

THE DEFENDANT: No, no. They -- they brought me

into the meeting area, and I told them I need my legal

documents. He got upset because I wanted my legal documents.

Why do you always need your legal documents, and this, and

that, and got to yelling to the top of his lungs at me. I

said: Look, please don't yell at me. I respect you. I

don't yell at you. He kept yelling at me. Then I ended up

yelling back. It got -- it got really bad. And, you know, I

got my own problems, you know, and he is supposed to be

professional. You know, and I ended up, you know, and -- and
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

16

my medication ain't been right for over two -- I wasn't

taking my medication. And they -- they -- I ended up in the

segregation. I've been off medication for, like, two,

three weeks. And they had to give me -- I've been back on my

medication for, like, two days now because they said they

wasn't going to let me out of the Seg unless I start taking

my medication. So they let me out yesterday and put me on

the floor where I could be with the doctor that helps me a

lot, you know.

THE COURT: By the way, I didn't notice, and I

guess I want the record -- because I saw that in your

memorandum, you are referring a lot to mental issues. I went

back to look. Now, I can't say for sure that something --

without getting transcripts of every hearing; but, as far as

I know, despite having very experienced attorneys who are

strong advocates for any -- whatever they can do within the

bounds, there was never an issue raised about mental capacity

until after the jury verdict and until after you had come in.

I'm not saying that it isn't there. I realize you decided

there was an issue.

MR. SHAVER: Chuck Aaron filed a motion.

THE COURT: But in terms of --

MR. SHAVER: Chuck Aaron filed the first motion

because he thought he was incapable of going to trial.

That's the first time Dr. Dinwiddie --
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

17

THE COURT: I missed that going through it

yesterday.

MR. SHAVER: That's the first time Dr. Dinwiddie

approached him. I followed up and hired Dr. Dinwiddie

because I thought he had a history with Mr. Carson and it

would aid in his evaluation of him and submitting a memo that

might be --

THE COURT: All right. Well, at this rate, there

hasn't been any issue other than when he stops taking his

medication of his capabilities. And so it's a question of

exactly as you arguing it I think in your memorandum; that

whether I should take some history into account in terms of

his sentence.

MS. LEVIN: And, Judge, I can speak to the

appellate issue, not wanting the case to come back to you in

terms of the procedural posture and where we are.

THE COURT: Yeah, I mean, the alternative is that

I -- well, there are three alternatives. I put it off a

month and I appoint -- I don't know if they would even let me

just appoint somebody that was handpicked. Usually they

don't. Or I give him a chance to hire her and give her one

month and continue this one month and have the sentencing or

go ahead today.

MS. LEVIN: Right. So I think -- and obviously

your Honor read our objection to continuing the sentencing.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

18

And, in there, we cite numerous cases by the Seventh Circuit

which say that, if somebody has had numerous attorneys and,

like the defendant, is going to be on their fifth or is on

their fourth, it is not an abuse of discretion to deny a

continuance for a trial when they come the day of trial and

then they have to represent themselves. So there is -- I

think that your Honor has made a strong record in terms of

constantly giving the defendant an attorney every time he has

had a problem with one; appointing multiple attorneys for his

trial. This Court has bent over backwards to accommodate the

defendant with respect to the medical examinations; making

sure he is on his medicine, his thyroid medicine. It has

been, if you look back at the docket, one thing after another

after another that has delayed this for over -- for almost

two years, Judge. And the truth of the matter is, these

additional details he didn't -- the defendant didn't tell

these additional details to probation when he was interviewed

for the PSR. The defendant has never mentioned these

additional details prior to coming today. He had every

opportunity to do so. And it's -- it's on the -- when you

deny the motion for continuance, now the defendant is coming

in when we have our victims here who are, as the Court said

last time, entitled to have justice and to move forward with

this sentencing and entitled to have closure in this case.

It's the same story every time, Judge. And the
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

19

defendant will have an opportunity to address the Court. And

the defendant can communicate those details to the Court here

today. And it's the government's position that we should

move forward with this.

MR. SHAVER: Judge, my --

MS. LEVIN: He can go -- sorry. Either the

defendant can proceed pro se, or with Mr. Shaver.

THE DEFENDANT: First off, your Honor, I'd like to

say she is speculating what I didn't tell the probation

officer. That's pure speculation. She wasn't there. That's

not personal knowledge. I told the probation -- there is a

lot of things I told the probation officer. The probation

officer did not put it in -- there is a lot of things I told

the probation officer. He did not put it in his report. And

Shaver said that's what the memorandum is for. We'll, I'll

put it in your sentence memorandum. It's a lot of things to

probation. I even got it highlighted, wrote it on the side.

It's even things that the probation wrote down wrong or mixed

up, like -- like -- like that my father and mom separated

when my father was 60 something years old and my father went

to a nursing home. That's not what I told the probation

officer. It's an art to listening. And everybody is not

good at listening to me because of my speech impediment.

Some get annoyed, as you seen through trial how -- how the

FBI agent mocked my speech impediment. And Elaine (sic.)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

20

Domph had to ask him, was he mocking me, you know. Some

people get annoyed and intolerant of my speech impediment, my

stuttering, and so forth, and stop listening. When you're

not listening, you miss a lot of information. That probation

officer mixed up information, got -- wrote things down wrong

and left out a lot of things.

I have been, since my arrest, I've been begging for

my right medication from McHenry County to Kankakee to MCC,

back to Kankakee. Even at one time Charles Aron said that

the government came down to Kankakee and Kankakee told them

that my medical condition is fine, that I don't suppose to be

on mental health medication. I was forced to go to trial

without even being on -- on -- on my medication. When

Dr. Dinwiddie clearly put in his report that we recommend

before trial that he be medicated on his proper medication or

he might not be able to participate in his own defense

properly.

THE COURT: Stop. Is any of that true?

MS. LEVIN: No.

THE COURT: Correct it. I need to know that the

record is correct and make sure there is no issue.

MS. LEVIN: Yes. So, for the record, Judge, AUSA

Bhachu stood in for me one day. And the defendant was making

complaints about his medical treatment he was receiving from

Kankakee. He said that he wasn't being given his medicine,
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

21

he wasn't being visited. There was a follow-up; and the

government obtained the medical records, submitted a letter

to this Court, attaching the medical records, showing that he

was receiving his medication and that he was being seen,

contrary to the defendant's claims. Dr. Dinwiddie's report

was attached to I believe the defendant's sentencing

memorandum.

THE COURT: This -- I mean, this happened -- but

right now he is saying before trial, that's my concern. This

was after trial.

MS. LEVIN: There was --

THE DEFENDANT: I have the documents to back it up,

your Honor. If you want to pass it for a day, I could bring

the documents tomorrow and back up what I'm saying is true,

your Honor.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, this did happen before trial.

There was an evaluation done of the defendant before trial.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. LEVIN: In that evaluation, Dr. Dinwiddie found

him competent to stand trial. He found, unequivocally, that

he was competent to stand trial. He had depressive disorder.

THE COURT: Was this after this case was

transferred to me?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

MS. LEVIN: Give me one moment, Judge.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

22

THE DEFENDANT: Yes. Yes, your Honor, it was after

the case was transferred to you. I was competent to stand --

THE COURT: All right. Just a minute. I mean, I

know we had the issue in the last few months.

THE DEFENDANT: I was competent to stand trial. I

had thyroid issues going on that's been going on for years

that affects my whole chemical balance and my way of thinking

and -- and it controls everything that people don't even

realize control that -- I didn't have surgery until the two

months before trial and I didn't get on my medication after

trial, which, in that evaluation, they stated that both of

these needed to be taken care of before trial.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, the prior -- this case was

before your Honor. The evaluation was done per

Dr. Dinwiddie's report on September 24, 2012. That was

approximately three months before this case went to trial.

THE COURT: Okay. You're right. I granted a

motion for a psychiatric evaluation and it came back that he

was -- he was competent.

MS. LEVIN: Correct.

THE COURT: And was there any issue raised about --

THE DEFENDANT: It's two parts of the competency.

THE COURT: I at some point had him transferred;

right?

MS. LEVIN: Yes, Judge, and that was later on. So
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

23

the case proceeded to trial, he was convicted, and he

remained at Kankakee County Jail. After -- and I -- I

hesitate to say the exact amount of time, but I believe it

was about a year after he was convicted the defendant was

making additional claims that he was not receiving his

medication and was not being seen by the doctors. Mr. Shaver

filed a motion to continue the sentencing, an emergency

motion saying that he needed to get this medical treatment.

The government and defense counsel worked out an agreement

and presented it to the Court that --

THE COURT: I remember granting that.

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor?

THE COURT: And I certainly wouldn't have gone

ahead with the trial if there had been any issue whatsoever.

MS. LEVIN: There was no issue, Judge.

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor, inside that evaluation,

if you'll allow me to bring it tomorrow, if you want to pass

this until tomorrow, it shows two parts of -- of the

competency. One part that you understand the role of the

court and -- and the proceedings. The other part is your

mental health competency. And they stated in there, due to

my hyper -- hyperthyroid and my psychotropic meds, not being

on it, that they feel if I'm not medicated and I don't have

my thyroid dealt with before trial, I will not be able to

stand -- participate in my own defense properly. To --
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

24

and -- and some -- in that way. You know, not quote, but

that's what it summed up to. And I had the documents to

prove it. And this wasn't something that I created to --

to -- as a stall tactic, as she keeps on arguing. This is

something that has been a life-long situation for me, a

life-long situation, you know, where, you know, times I'm not

on my medication, right, dealing with drug issues, and stuff.

I mean, I started at Kankakee where I got burn marks all over

my back from being taised and tortured by the police where

I'm cutting and bleeding myself, right there to die, than go

through -- who does that? Who cuts on themself and just

fills up juice cups of blood trying to, okay, how long is it

going to take to get to 15 pints so I can die? Who does

that?

MS. LEVIN: Judge, I have a copy of the report, if

your Honor --

THE DEFENDANT: I wasn't on my proper medication.

And still to this day, I'm not on my proper medication. I'm

on medication, but it's not the medication, even in

Dr. Dinwiddie's own report. And not being proper medication,

medicated, it plays a part, too, in -- in relationships with

other people as far as me and my -- me and Shaver fueling, me

and Chuck Aron, the domestic violence in my life with women

that I was in relationships with. My wife, I got domestic --

you look at my criminal history, you see domestic violence,
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

25

domestic violence. I grew up to domestic violence. I grew

up in a house full of violence and -- and things I said I

don't want to live through when I grew up, I carried on

through relationships hurting people that I loved that I did

not want to hurt, but I got issues is what -- what I'm saying

that needs to be addressed. And -- and if -- you know, how

do you solve something by keep on putting a Band-Aid on it

instead of fixing the problem?

I don't got no education, but it don't take an

educated person to understand that much that, if you can't

fix -- if you can't solve it, you can't cover up something,

you've got to fix it. Do you understand what I'm trying to

say, your Honor?

THE COURT: I do understand it.

MR. SHAVER: Judge, if I may?

THE COURT: It does seem to me that you are able to

tell me in detail and articulately what -- your evaluation of

that evaluation, which, frankly, is only telling me that

there isn't any reason why we can't go ahead today. I do

want to know, Mr. Grooms?

PROBATION OFFICER: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Is there anything that he told you that

you didn't put into this PSR that --

PROBATION OFFICER: I don't believe so, your Honor.

I was looking at my Form 1, the interview form we used when
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

we interview every defendant, and it pairs right up with what

the language that's in the pre-sentence report.

MR. SHAVER: Judge, I believe, right now, I think

my representation is untenable. He is -- the relationship is

totally fractured. We have no attorney-client relationship.

He has called into question the accuracy of what I've done,

the competency of what I've performed.

THE COURT: Well, and that will calm down. I mean,

I -- it seems to me that he can supplement it by saying, as

he now has, actually, for the last 40 minutes, but,

50 minutes, what he wants to add. I haven't heard anything

to think that he -- why I should -- what difference it would

make if I continued this, frankly.

MR. SHAVER: He has got a name of an attorney that

he thinks is going to represent him in a much better fashion

than I do.

MS. LEVIN: The defendant has felt that about every

attorney and every subsequent attorney, Judge. You're

absolutely right, nothing is going to change. This Court, as

I had mentioned, has given him opportunity after opportunity.

If Mr. Shaver -- if the Court does not want to have

Mr. Shaver represent the defendant, then the defendant can

represent himself.

THE DEFENDANT: As she said herself, that she has

cited cases in the Seventh Circuit why change in defendant --
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

27

change in attorneys at sentence, at sentence, those case laws

refer to at sentence. This issue arised way before sentence,

way before. This isn't the first time we spoke on issues

between us. This is not the first time. So that doesn't

even apply.

THE COURT: He wasn't appointed until after trial.

I mean, there are two issues. The trial is --

THE DEFENDANT: Yeah, but what I'm saying, the case

law she wanted to throw in there doesn't even apply to this,

you know. Because this came up before the sentence date.

This came up before the sentence date. She is talking about

people that all of a sudden, on sentence date, you know, all

of a sudden, on sentence date, I don't want this attorney.

No, this issue has been an ongoing issue, and it has been

brought up in this court that -- that -- that it has been an

issue.

And, like I said, there is a lot of things he

didn't put in. The probation officer didn't put a lot of

things in. He didn't say -- he is not -- he is not even

denying that he didn't. He said he doesn't believe so, your

Honor. He doesn't believe so implies doubt, that there is a

possibility. And I'm telling you, it's a lot of stuff he

left out.

THE COURT: Well, I'm going to give you the

opportunity to tell me what all he left out, and you can tell
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

28

me in mitigation. You clearly are capable --

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor?

THE COURT: -- of doing this. I have no reason to

think that another attorney -- if another attorney was hired

or appointed is going to be able to do any more than has been

done.

THE DEFENDANT: Well, surely an attorney is going

to be able to do it better than me. I don't -- I don't know

the law.

THE COURT: No, but that's not what you think. You

say -- you have thought that every single attorney was not

doing their job.

THE DEFENDANT: I don't -- I don't know the law.

THE COURT: I know you don't. But you actually do

a good job of understanding --

THE DEFENDANT: But I understand that there is

steps that are -- are -- I understand, if somebody tell me

this paper is yours, but it's always in their possession, do

you understand what I'm saying? So if -- or you can have

water at these certain times, but at those certain times, I'm

being denied the water.

THE COURT: What have you been denied?

THE DEFENDANT: It's a list of things I've been

denied. That's all in the letter I wrote to the courts

before --
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

29

THE COURT: I told you the last time --

THE DEFENDANT: Before trial.

THE COURT: -- when I said I was not going to give

you another --

THE DEFENDANT: You know --

THE COURT: -- attorney that if you didn't want to

cooperate with him, that then you needed to be prepared.

THE DEFENDANT: And -- and then you -- you allowed

Chuck Aron to put on two more lawyers, which was just a way

he wanted to boost his expenses up.

THE COURT: Wait a minute, are you saying that I

should not have allowed the second and third lawyers?

THE DEFENDANT: You shouldn't have allowed Chuck

Aron to stay on, as far as I'm concerned.

THE COURT: Well, as I remember -- never mind. I'm

not going to get into that. Okay. Let's go ahead. Please

be seated.

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor, I -- I have a right to

finish talking before --

THE COURT: You have a right to talk. You have

been talking out of order for the last 50 minutes.

THE DEFENDANT: Can you please give me two minutes,

please? Can you please give me two minutes? Please, your

Honor?

THE COURT: Yes, two more minutes, and then you
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

30

will get to talk again before I sentence and to say

everything that you want to say.

THE DEFENDANT: You said for mitigation. I

can't -- I can't do this sentence by myself. I can't -- if I

don't have an attorney, you are forcing me -- you are forcing

me to do my sentence thing without the due process of

attorney. You asked me what I'm being denied. That's what

I'm being denied, due -- due process says --

THE COURT: No, I'm expecting Mr. Shaver to make

whatever arguments that he can make as an officer of the

court and as the person who has been representing you for a

long time now; and then you can tell me where he is wrong.

THE DEFENDANT: He is telling you this relationship

is savage (sic), or whatever the word is. He is telling you

this is -- there is nothing he can do for --

THE COURT: Actually --

THE DEFENDANT: I'm telling you that he is -- I

feel he is trying to sabotage. We're both telling you the

same thing, and you are sending me to sentence with him or do

it yourself, do it without a lawyer. That's what you're

telling me.

THE COURT: Take a seat. Let's take two minutes.

MR. SHAVER: Okay. Thank you, Judge.

THE CLERK: All rise.

(Recess taken.)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

31

THE CLERK: Sentencing continues, 11 CR 918, US

versus Carson.

THE COURT: All right. We're going to let the

government go ahead. We're going to deal with these

objections, and we'll let the -- those are legal issues.

Well, there is factual issues, too, but they're not -- and

then I will let the government, as standard here, go ahead

and present anything. I will tell you that we are going to

have to stop for approximately an hour anyway, if we're not

done -- it sounds like we won't be done -- at 12:15. I have

to go to a meeting. And we will see where we are and we'll

decide later whether we can finish this today or not.

So, okay. Let's deal with -- the government had

two objections, I believe?

MS. LEVIN: Yes, Judge. There were two objections

to the criminal history. There were two additional

objections. However, they don't affect the guidelines.

THE COURT: Right.

MS. LEVIN: They were just for --

THE COURT: On your objections, I think I agree

with one and don't agree with the other one. I mean, I don't

know if that makes a difference on the criminal history. The

first one, I don't know that -- I mean, I've read the case

she cited that seemed to overrule -- wait a minute, no, no.

The first one was actually just a factual thing.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

32

MS. LEVIN: Yes, Judge. So our first objection was

to PSR Paragraph 104.

THE COURT: Right.

MS. LEVIN: It was for a May 14, 2008 conviction

for possession of drug paraphernalia. The actual sentence,

as reflected by the attached exhibits, was 62 days as opposed

to 31. So there should be two criminal history points for

that conviction.

THE COURT: Does anybody disagree?

MR. SHAVER: I don't disagree, Judge.

THE DEFENDANT: Excuse me, your Honor. How is this

supposed to work? Because he is not my attorney.

THE COURT: He is your attorney. At this point,

I'm actually asking probation -- I need to ask Mr. Grooms who

is behind you.

PROBATION OFFICER: Your Honor, I agree with the

government's objection.

THE COURT: Okay. So --

THE DEFENDANT: I have an objection to government's

objection.

THE COURT: Are you disagreeing that you were

sentenced to a term of 62 days?

THE DEFENDANT: I was sentenced to -- no, it was

62 days and I served 31 days, yes. I have no objection. I'm

sorry.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

33

THE COURT: Okay. The next one had to do with

solicitation of a sexual act, which I actually think is

different than what he has been convicted of. So I'm

actually not going to give him the point for that. So I

don't know if that makes a difference in the criminal history

or not.

MS. LEVIN: I believe that, Judge, defense counsel

had an objection to the criminal history that will also

affect the points.

THE COURT: Okay. So if it -- on yours, he would

get to two points but no more --

MS. LEVIN: Correct.

THE COURT: -- in addition to what -- okay. Then

let's turn to the defendants. You definitely have some

objections. Let me find it.

MR. SHAVER: First was on the issue of the computer

enhancement, under the guidelines, the use of the computer.

THE COURT: Oh, that's what I was starting to refer

to.

MR. SHAVER: Yes.

THE COURT: It was actually on your objection.

And --

MR. SHAVER: I think you were referring to the

McMillan case?

THE COURT: Yeah.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

34

MR. SHAVER: You know, I think that Patterson is

still good law. McMillan suggests that it's just dictum

because, in Patterson, one, the government agreed that the

enhancement didn't apply in that case. But, two, that the

actors were not the same. They say that the actors were not

the individuals who were participating in the offense itself.

THE COURT: Let me make sure we're talking about

the same one. You know, I'm missing something.

MR. SHAVER: Patterson is the case that says that

you cannot use the enhancement.

THE COURT: I know what Patterson does and I

know --

MR. SHAVER: McMillan is a 2015 case.

THE COURT: Right. That's the one in which Judge

Posner said --

MR. SHAVER: In Patterson, they suggested the facts

do not establish that there is -- that three-prong persons

acting.

THE COURT: I agree. But in the most recent case,

Judge Posner said that, what do you call it, the statement.

MS. LEVIN: The application note for --

THE COURT: That the note simply contradicted by

the language of the guideline. And the language of the

guideline clearly would apply here. Even if I disagreed with

Judge Posner, it wouldn't be up to me. But I actually think
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

35

he is right.

MR. SHAVER: Well, it is the -- it's the holding in

most circuits. And there is a difference between the

guidelines and the advisory note. Supreme Court says the

guideline applies, but --

THE COURT: Right.

MR. SHAVER: I don't think that Patterson is just

dictum, as Judge Posner said in that -- in that opinion.

THE COURT: But that isn't the issue, whether it is

dictum or not. The question is whether I need to go by the

most recent case and what he says, and I think I do. So --

and I think -- we can go back and look at the guideline. It

was --

MS. LEVIN: Judge, it was Guideline Section

2G1.3(b)(3). And, your Honor, there are two subsections.

THE COURT: Right.

MS. LEVIN: This is in reference to Subsection B,

as in boy.

THE COURT: 2G1.2?

MS. LEVIN: 2G1.3.

MR. SHAVER: Judge, the guideline section reads

that -- it provides if the offense involved the use of a

computer or interactive computer device to entice, encourage

or offer or solicit a person to engage in a prohibited sexual

conduct with a minor, increase it by two levels.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

36

MS. LEVIN: Judge, I just want to make sure that

we're all on the same page. It's guideline Section

2G1.3(b)3(b).

THE COURT: If the offense involved a use of a

computer or an interactive computer service to either

persuade, induce, entice, coerce or facilitate the travel of

the minor to engage in a prohibited sexual -- in prohibited

sexual conduct or entice, encourage, offer or solicit a

person to engage in prohibited sexual conduct with a minor,

increase by two levels.

There is -- there is not really any question, I

don't think here, that the facts really support both parts.

MR. SHAVER: Yeah, it's --

THE COURT: The only thing was that odd note.

MR. SHAVER: Well, and then --

THE COURT: It doesn't really seem to have anything

to do with it. I actually think --

MR. SHAVER: And then Patterson suggested that it

applied to both. The Courts have taken issue with that.

McMillan suggested that it was wrong. And I think the only

thing I have to hang my hat on is the Patterson case.

THE COURT: Okay. Well, I think that I am

obligated to do what Seventh Circuit said, and I do think

that's what the guideline says.

MR. SHAVER: Okay.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

37

THE COURT: Okay. Any other objections?

MR. SHAVER: Next is the objection -- the two-point

increase for an offense involve the commission of a sex act

or sexual conduct. I've briefed the issue. It comes down to

whether or not it should -- it's referring to a commercial

sex act versus a sexual conduct or sex act. My position is

that Carson did have sex with Victim 1, but it was not part

of the offense itself. The other offenses are not -- are

commercial sex acts which are covered in the other section

but not in the section that is appropriate in this case.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, under Guideline Section

2G1.3(b)(4)(a), if the offense involved the commission of a

sex act or sexual contact, then two points are added. There

is no requirement written into the guideline language, no

guideline application note that says that the act at issue

has to be a commercial sex act. It's the government's

position that it does not have to be a commercial sex act.

However, Judge, even accepting defense counsel's argument

that a commercial sex act is required here, as the defendant

admits, he raped Victim 1. That is a non-commercial sex act.

As your Honor heard through the evidence at trial, it was

part and parcel of the instant offense; and, therefore, it's

the government's position that two points are applied under

this guideline.

THE COURT: How do you respond to the latter part?
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

38

MR. SHAVER: The commercial sex act, it's subsumed

in the -- on the offense that he has been convicted of, 1591

makes it part that used to cause a person to engage in a

commercial sex act. That is the offense in this case, a

violation of 1591. The -- I won't say rape, but, say, having

sex with the minor who was in the case but was not a

commercial sex act, then, is a separate act in itself and it

is not part of the offense of conduct. The offense of

conduct is encouraging her to engage in commercial sex acts.

THE COURT: Well, the rape was part and parcel of

it because it was part of the coercion to engage in

commercial sex acts. So just on that ground alone, I think

that the two levels apply. I know you -- you have some

arguments about double counting, but those have been rejected

at this point by the courts.

MR. SHAVER: They have, Judge.

THE DEFENDANT: I'm sorry, your Honor, could you

repeat what you said again, before you said, so you agree?

Could you -- I didn't catch what you said. You said

something coercion, but you said something before coercion.

THE COURT: Raping Victim A was, as the testimony

at trial showed, part of the coercion to make her engage in

prostitution. Okay. Go on.

MR. SHAVER: Next objection. We are objecting to

the two-point increase to Carson's offense level in Counts 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

39

and 4 because the victims were, in those counts, were found

to be vulnerable victims. We've briefed the issue. The PSR

says, because of the physical and mental conditions of the

victims, Nahrin Lassar, Jessica Sicora and Veronica Del

Valle, that they were particularly susceptible to Carson's

criminal conduct. You know, they have to be an atypical

victim. And our argument is that they are, regrettably, it's

very sad, but they're typical victims of the type of crime

that's involved here, which is prostitution. They are not --

there is no question about their intelligence. There is no

question about their physical meekness. No question about

their mental condition. All the condition was suggesting

that because they were using drugs, which they had always

used in the past, that they were particularly susceptible to

his criminal conduct. We don't think, although they are

victims in this case, they are atypical victims such that

there should be a two-point increase in the offense level.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, it's the government's position

that these three victims did have vulnerabilities that

warrant this enhancement. They were, as the evidence was

presented at trial, they were severely addicted to heroin.

They had no job. They had no home. They had no families

that were looking after them and caring about them. They

were in desperate need of money. They were in desperate need

of shelter. They were in desperate need of love and
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

40

affection. And it wasn't just the fact that they were

vulnerable victims, it was these precise vulnerabilities that

made the defendant choose these victims and choose to target

them. This is the precise type of victim that the guideline

is trying to protect here. These are not savvy women who

were taken advantage of here. These were women who were

crying out for help. And it was those specific

vulnerabilities that caused the defendant to prey on them.

THE COURT: I agree. All right. There is an

objection to the five-point increase.

MR. SHAVER: Pattern of sexual --

THE COURT: The pattern of sexual conduct. As I

understand it, the pattern of sexual conduct to which

probation and the government are saying five points should

apply to is because really we had -- well, I mean, at trial

we had five, actually, I think, people testify about the same

kind of conduct. It seems to me, if that's the legal

definition of a pattern, which I would assume it was, that it

clearly applies here.

MR. SHAVER: The definition is two or more

instances. It establishes a pattern.

THE COURT: Are you saying it has to be two --

well, it doesn't make any difference whether it's two or more

involving the same person or two or more people.

MR. SHAVER: Well, no, it's not two or more people,
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

41

it's just those are sexual -- separate instances of sexual

conduct. But I think we lose sight of the fact of what this

statute was designed to combat. And it's to combat

recidivist offenders. People who have in the past have done

things that hurt people and they are doing it again. And

maybe again. In this case, it's all the conduct and all of

the pattern conduct is encompassed in this case. This case

has been prosecuted. He has been convicted of those crimes.

The guideline levels are affixed by what he was convicted of.

And we think this is not applicable to him because there

are -- there are no prior cases that they can point to that

say that that is a pattern that he has built on in the

present conduct.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, may I respond?

THE COURT: Yes, please.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, this guideline punishes activity

when there is a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct where a

defendant, on at least two separate occasions, engaged in

prohibited sexual conduct, here, sex trafficking with a

minor. Now, Victim 1 was a minor in this case. We know from

the testimony from Victim 1 and from Chris Richardson that

the defendant repeatedly trafficked her, sent her on more

than one prostitution date. There were more -- there was

more than one instance of prohibited conduct here. That

alone is sufficient to satisfy the guideline.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

42

To the extent that defense counsel is, and I would

just want to address this because it's in his memorandum,

attempting to make a double counting argument here, the

defendant was convicted of his conduct with Victim 1, now

that conduct is being used for the five-point enhancement,

that -- that argument is foreclosed by United States versus

Von Loh 417 F 3d 710. The government cited that in its

response.

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. LEVIN: So it's our position, Judge, this is

very clearcut. The guideline is applicable based on the

evidence that was presented, and we believe that it should be

applied.

THE COURT: All right. I was forgetting that this

one was just applicable to the minor, but.

MR. SHAVER: It is.

THE COURT: But there was no question that she was

sent on multiple dates for prostitution by your client.

MR. SHAVER: And he was convicted of that and his

guideline level was set at that. Now we're going to increase

it some more based on the offense of conduct in this case.

THE COURT: Well, but it's not uncommon that you

start with a base guideline, and then it goes up, depending

upon what the circumstances are or what the particular

activity, sometimes what it involved. I mean, I don't find
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

43

that -- I don't find that to be contradicted by the

guidelines or the way that they generally are put together.

I find that it applies.

MR. SHAVER: The last Ms. Levin alluded to is our

miscounting of criminal history points. They assessed two

criminal history points based on a conviction for pandering

in 2008. McKenzie was discharged on October 2nd, 2009, in

that case. The offense of conduct in this case by the dates

of the indictment is November 2009, the earliest,

November 2009 to March 2010, which is after the point of

conviction on that prior case. This case shouldn't apply

because it wasn't within the --

THE COURT: Oh, I missed that.

MS. LEVIN: I can short-circuit this, Judge. The

government is not going to oppose that objection.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. So that reduces the

two points that I had added. So we'll get in the same place;

right?

MS. LEVIN: Yes, Judge, we are going to end up

being exactly the same place. It is going to be -- I will

tell you in one moment.

THE COURT: It's a 43, three?

MS. LEVIN: Yes, Judge.

THE COURT: Or it's still a three?

MS. LEVIN: So the revised criminal history points,
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

44

given your Honor's ruling, are six. And that puts the

defendant at a Criminal History Category III, which is what

the PSR calculated him at. And the guideline range is 49. I

mean, excuse me, the guideline Offense Level is 49, but it's

capped at 43. So, therefore, we do have exactly what we have

in the PSR, which is a total Offense Level of 43, a Criminal

History Category of III, which results in the same guideline

range, which is natural life in prison.

THE COURT: Did I miss something?

PROBATION OFFICER: Well, your Honor, everything is

the same except, instead of six points, it's five points, is

what my math is coming to.

THE COURT: I'm sorry, I'm having trouble hearing

you.

PROBATION OFFICER: The total criminal history

points is five and not six, so the prosecutor just said. But

the category is the same. So five points total, not six.

MS. LEVIN: Can you just give me one moment to --

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. LEVIN: That's right, Judge. That's fine.

Thank you.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. I'll let the

government argue.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, we have two victims here that

would like to address the Court. I know that your Honor
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

45

wants to take a break in 15 minutes. Would you like to hear

from the victims before we --

THE COURT: Let's try to.

MS. LEVIN: Okay. So, Judge, if I may ask Jessica

to come address the Court first.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. SICORA: Good afternoon. I was approximately

21 years old when I first met Casino. I was going through a

divorce and was addicted to heroin and crack. At that time,

my addiction was stronger than my will to stop using drugs.

I wanted to stop, but my mind would not allow me. Casino

promised to keep me safe. He promised that he would not rape

me or beat me, and he promised that he would provide me food,

clothes, drugs and a safe place to stay. When you are an

addict, all you care about is getting high. To be able to

wake up with food, clothes, and the drugs sounded like

someone actually cared about me. So Casino and I made a

deal. I would try it out for three days. And at the end of

three days I would be able to leave if I wanted.

The first two-and-a-half days, Casino kept his

word. On the third day, things took a turn for the worse. I

just returned from a four-hour date and was tired and Casino

wanted me to go out again. When I told him I had enough and

wanted to go home, he punched me in the face. He hit me so

hard that it permanently scarred my left eye. My eye
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

46

immediately began to swell and bruise. I had never been hit

before and the pain was unbearable. He took me back to the

hotel and calmed me down by giving me more drugs. Still to

this day, the scar is visible for anyone to see. I am

constantly getting asked what happened to my eye --

THE DEFENDANT: Objection, your Honor. They're

saying that I permanently bruised her face and speaking on

medical stuff that no medical evidence has supported any of

these allegations.

THE COURT: Well, at this stage, she gets -- a

victim gets to make a statement. That's under the law. And

you will have the opportunity to contradict it.

And if you're saying that it's visible, I suppose I

can come down and see it. I can't see that far.

MS. LEVIN: And if you recall, Judge, at trial --

THE COURT: I do think that was the case, but that

was two years ago.

MS. LEVIN: It's a permanent blood vessel that's

broken in her eye that she can certainly show.

THE COURT: Is it visible?

MS. SICORA. Yes.

THE COURT: Okay.

THE DEFENDANT: So is there medical documents to

show the date of this injury?

THE COURT: This isn't your time to talk right now.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

47

MS. SICORA: I am constantly getting asked what

happened in my eye and my mind races back to that day. But

the story I tell is not the truth, and I am constantly

ashamed that I have to lie. Three days turned to three

months of continual hell. The only thing that Casino kept

true was his promise to provide drugs. But Casino's gift of

drugs came at a high price. Casino was able to control my

every move by providing or withholding drugs at a moment's

notice. At the time, drugs were the only thing I cared about

and Casino knew this about me. Casino gave me drugs to work

and would deny me drugs if he thought I was bad or

disrespectful. Casino would control me by taking me to

hotels in areas that I had never been before. I felt

completely isolated. Casino would take sex from me and rape

me violently. I would cry and plead for him to stop, but he

would just beat me for being too loud. This happened often.

The fear of him beating me and raping me kept me paralyzed;

and I was unable to leave. I had no where to go. And every

time I thought of escaping, the fear of Casino killing me

would overcome my will to leave. I often fantasized about

escaping, but my fantasy always ended with Casino killing me.

I was a victim to much of Casino's abuse, but I

also -- but I was also made to witness the abuse that he did

to the other girls. I watched you violently beat and anally

rape other women. I will never be able to get these images
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

48

or their cries for you to stop out of my head. Casino, you

are a monster and these girls did not deserve to be treated

this way. I am a very forgiving person and never once did

you say you were sorry for all the horrible things that you

did to me. At the time, I'm sorry would have gone a long

way; but now I know you're only sorry for getting caught. I

don't think you are capable of truly being sorry for the harm

that you caused me or the other woman. I often wonder how

you could ignore their screams of pain or their tears and

pleads to stop. The only person you ever cared about was

yourself.

Now, today is your day to plead for mercy.

Although I am still haunted by your violence, I have done

many things to improve my life. I am making an honest and

good living, I am going to school, and I no longer do drugs;

but socially I still struggle. I do not trust people. I am

especially untrusting of males; and I fear their potential

abuse.

I still have flashbacks of some of the unsettling

events that took place while I was with you. Sometimes I

wake up in a panic, fearing that I am trapped in a hotel. I

often wonder when these nightmares will end. I am very happy

to close this chapter of my life. And seeing you get

sentenced will be a big part of my recovery. Thank you.

THE COURT: Thank you.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

49

MS. LEVIN: Now, if we could have Veronica address

the Court.

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. DEL VALLE: Well, the day has finally come

where justice is being served for me and a whole lot of other

victims. I can bet my bottom dollar you think that you have

done nothing wrong. You have damaged and affected people's

lives you don't even know. Like my husband, for example.

Thanks to you and all of the torture you put me through, I

have night terrors when I sleep where I scream, I cry, I

fight, I whimper, et cetera, et cetera. I have had such

horrible episodes when I sleep, I've woken up to my own

husband in tears. The man was in straight tears because of

me crying and fighting and the disturbing things that I cry

out because of you. The man still fights my demons for me

still every single night. He doesn't complain, not one bit,

he just loathes you for scarring me the way you did.

I ask myself why you felt the need to hurt me so

badly. And that will probably be an answer I'll never know.

What you did to me was inhumane and what you did to everybody

else was inhumane. You are a very sick man and you're

twisted and you are a monster. Seriously, you are getting

off easily with prison. You really are. The only thing and

the only hope for you is God, and lots of him. I will one

day forgive you, but I haven't quite gotten there yet. I'll
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

50

tell you what, I'll pray for you. Someone needs to. Thank

you.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, may I have one moment?

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. LEVIN: The government doesn't have any other

additional victims that are going to address the Court. My

presentation will likely take more than 15 minutes. Would

you like to break and have us come back and begin again when

the Court is --

THE COURT: Okay. If you want to do that, we'll

come back at 1:15.

THE CLERK: All rise.

MS. LEVIN: Thank you, Judge.

THE CLERK: This court is in recess.

(Recess taken at 12:03 PM. Resumed at 1:22 PM.)

THE CLERK: 11 CR 918, USA versus Carson,

sentencing hearing continued.

MS. LEVIN: I apologize I was late, Judge. Jennie

Levin on behalf of the United States.

MR. SHAVER: William Shaver on behalf of McKenzie

Carson.

THE COURT: Good afternoon. All right, everybody,

let's go ahead.

MS. LEVIN: Yes, Judge. As your Honor has already
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

51

found, the guideline range here is natural life in prison.

This type of case is not the type of case that is often or

normally seen in federal court. Similarly, a guideline range

of natural life in prison is not the typical guideline range

that is seen in Federal court. One of the difficult things

about this case, and just one, is the fact that the numbers

are so high. The government's position after evaluating the

factors in 3553(a) and the goals of sentencing is that a

sentence of 55 years in prison is sufficient but not greater

than necessary.

THE COURT: How does that differ from natural life?

He'd have to be 90 something.

MS. LEVIN: That's an excellent question, Judge.

55 years in prison is essentially a life sentence for the

defendant, who is 42 years old. And the government strongly

believes that the defendant should remain in prison for

55 years. It's specifically asking for a sentence and it is

putting a number on a sentence with the knowledge, full well,

that asking and receiving that sentence will put the

defendant in prison for the rest of his life. As for the

recommendation of 55 years versus life, all I can tell your

Honor is that there are a lot of people who weighed in on

this decision from my office. And the office's position is

that we are asking for 55 years. I can certainly tell the

Court that the Court is well within its -- its rights to
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

52

impose whatever sentence it believes is appropriate, if that

is natural life. I know that the victims in this case would

like to see the defendant imprisoned for natural life. And,

as probation recommended, excuse me, that is which is also

consistent with probation's recommendation, which is a

recommendation of --

THE COURT: I'm just wondering how your

recommendation was any different.

MS. LEVIN: And practically speaking, Judge, I

don't think that it is. It is just putting a number on it as

opposed to asking for a natural life in prison. But the

practical realities and the practical consequences of

obtaining a 55-year sentence from this Court is that the

defendant would spend the rest of his life in prison. And I

can stand here before you and tell you that for the reasons

I'm about to discuss with you, a sentence of 55 years in

prison is -- is warranted here based on all of the factors,

including the nature and circumstances of the offense and the

history and characteristics of the defendant; the incredibly

strong need for deterrence, specific and general. The need

to protect the public. All of these reasons, as I'm going to

lay out for you, support giving such a significant sentence.

And, again, Judge, the government doesn't recommend 55 years

or life, or what have you, lightly.

THE COURT: Don't spend any more time on that, on
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

53

the difference, because I don't see any difference, so.

MS. LEVIN: Right. And -- but my point is,

whatever you want to call it, we don't ask you for the

sentence lightly. We recognize the magnitude of it. We just

feel that this is a case, if there was a case, that deserves

it.

So turning to the nature and circumstances of the

offense. Obviously, as your Honor is aware, you sat through

the trial so you're very familiar with the facts and

circumstances of the case. Unfortunately the trial was

almost two years ago. So I'm just going to take a few

moments and refresh the Court with the evidence that we

heard.

The defendant, as you know, ran a sex trafficking

business for approximately four years, 2008 to the end of

2011, and targeted vulnerable women, including the victims

that testified at trial: Kaitlin, Veronica, Jessica, Nahrin.

In addition to these four named victims, you also heard from

Margaret. And she talked about being trafficked by the

defendant.

What you didn't hear about is that, in addition to

these five women that you heard from, there were

approximately 30 other girls that were trafficked during that

four-year time period; 30 other women that the defendant

specifically targeted because of their vulnerabilities. The
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

54

vulnerabilities that we've talked about at length. The fact

that these girls were addicted to heroin. The fact that they

were out on the street with no support system. They were

homeless. They were runaways. And what's so sick about the

defendant's behavior is that he would actually go to rehab

centers, drug rehab centers, homeless shelters to scout out

and find his victims. He would lurk there waiting for them,

preying on them.

After the defendant recruited his victims, you

heard a lot of evidence about how he treated them. And quite

frankly, Judge, he treated them like cattle, like they were

his property. And he was -- there really are no words. I

thought and thought about what I could say to you to describe

adequately and do justice to what he did to these girls. And

every time I thought of something, I thought that's not good

enough. Luckily you were able to hear it from the girls

themselves during their trial testimony.

But, you know, the defendant had a rigid set of

rules that he enforced. The victims couldn't talk to other

men. They couldn't talk back or otherwise disrespect him; if

they did, they would face the consequences. They couldn't

refuse to go on a date. They couldn't keep the money that

they made. They couldn't hold money on their person. They

couldn't keep their own cell phones. The cell phones that

they did have were for work. They weren't allowed to use
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

55

them to make personal phone calls. They weren't allowed to

keep their personal contacts in them. And the defendant

routinely checked the phones to ensure that they were

complying.

But most importantly, Judge, and what the defendant

made perfectly clear to all of these girls is that they were

not allowed to leave. They were never allowed to leave. And

if you broke one of the defendant's rules, then there were

consequences. And the consequences here were extreme. He

enforced his rules with psychological torture and

manipulation and physical torture. He would beat these girls

on a daily basis. He used cords, he used belts, he used his

fist. We saw evidence of this at trial. Jessica today

showed you the broken blood vessel in her eye as a result of

the defendant hitting her so hard because she was tired after

going on so many prostitution dates and didn't want to go on

another one. And he would rape these girls vaginally,

anally. The night that Jessica was beaten so badly that her

blood vessel broke, after that, when they went back to the

hotel, the defendant raped her; forced her to perform oral

sex on him and then vaginally raped her, as Veronica slept in

the next bed. And as she was crying while she was performing

oral sex and she was whimpering because she was being forced

to do this, the defendant's response was: You should be

quiet. I don't want to wake Veronica up. This is the type
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

56

of person who is before you. And it's so important for the

Court to be able to consider the type of person that is

before you when you impose a sentence.

The defendant's beatings and rapes were not,

though, just to enforce the rules. The defendant took a sick

pleasure in hurting these girls. It was a power thing for

him. So he did it to make them feel this big. To make them

feel worthless. And he did it to make them feel helpless and

like they could never leave. And it wasn't just through his

physical beatings and the fact that he took sex from them

whenever he wanted to. It was also through his verbal abuse.

I mean, he told them on a daily basis that they were

worthless, that they were nothing, that their lives didn't

mean anything. Nobody cared about them. Nobody is coming

looking for you. You know, as human beings, we can only

endure so much. And to be beaten and raped and also hear

that you're nothing repeatedly day after day, you can only

take so much of that. And for a young woman, for a girl who

is so impressionable and who has no one there looking out for

them, they can take probably a lot less before they break.

And the defendant broke these girls. And he set out to break

them. And he did it with pleasure. And he did it with joy.

And he did it without remorse. And I will touch back on this

in a minute, but he sits here today without remorse. He

tortured these girls.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

57

We've talked a lot about and we've heard a lot

about the drug use. I just want to bring your Honor back to

a piece of evidence that we introduced at trial. Your Honor

saw that horrific video where Veronica was giving Jessica an

injection of heroin and the defendant was filming it. And

you could hear him in the background encouraging it, telling

her what to do. He gave these girls heroin because he wanted

them to be compliant. He wanted them to go on dates. He

wanted them to make money. And he withheld drugs from them

to punish them, knowing that agony, I mean, sheer agony that

these girls would have to go through during the withdraw.

Jessica stood here today and told you how terrible the

withdraw was and that she would do anything for drugs. It is

a powerful, powerful addiction. The defendant knew that, and

he made a choice to exploit it. And he -- he literally

preyed on every vulnerability that these girls had. You

know, sometimes we see things in life and they are so

horrible that we have to turn away and we can't even think

about it because we ask ourselves, how could someone do this.

You know, beating a child, beating an elderly person. It's

just unfathomable. And I have thought long and hard, how

could somebody do this to these girls because, at their core,

these girls were just like an elderly person or just like a

young person in the fact that they were helpless and

vulnerable. And they needed someone there to help them and
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

58

pick them up. And, instead, the defendant saw that and he

beat them down. There is something different about a person

who is able to do that.

During the testimony at trial, I'm going to go back

to Jessica's testimony again. We also heard about a

horrific, horrific rape. And we introduced a photograph of

the defendant raping Jessica. And you could see her in the

photograph. And she is screaming. And, if you recall, the

testimony was that the defendant raped her while there was a

baby in the room, another woman's baby. And the woman took a

photograph of this rape with her cell phone. And Jessica

testified that, as she was being raped and she was crying and

in pain and humiliated, the defendant, again, told her to

shut up because he didn't want her to wake the baby.

I bring up all these examples, Judge, because they

are so telling of the defendant's attitude towards women,

towards other human beings; and really express and shed light

on the type of person that he is, which I am going to come

back to and tie into the need to protect society and protect

the public from him.

Veronica, Kaitlin and Nahrin all testified about

the abuse they suffered and the beatings that they suffered

and the rapes. Kaitlin was on the stand, and she told you

she was only 17 years old. And she had moved out of her

house for the first time and was in need of money and got
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

59

introduced to the defendant. And the first time he met her

he brought her into a bathroom at a Motel 6 and raped her and

then told her he would kill her if she told anybody; and then

forced her to work for him. And, Veronica, she told you that

there was one time that she tried to get away from the

defendant. And the defendant was so determined not to let

her go that he used the GPS in her phone to find her because

he won't let them go. Another time, Veronica wanted to leave

and the defendant put a knife to her throat, threatened her,

threatened to kill her grandmother, threatened to kill her

child.

So there are no limits for the defendant. He will

go to any extreme. He will go to the darkest, ugliest place

to control these girls. And nothing has stopped him, until

he was arrested in this case. Because these girls couldn't

get up the courage, understandably, to be able to walk away.

And if they did, he came and found them and brought them

back; or, in Jessica's case, as she testified, used drugs as

a way to get her back. Jessica was in a bad place after her

father passed away. Carson picked her up, and he got her

heroin. It's constant. And it's a sick need to fulfill this

dominance and this power over these helpless girls.

One of the other things that I think is so telling

is the testimony about the climate of fear that the defendant

created. So, for the defendant, it was complete and total
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

60

control and dominance. That was his goal. That was what he

was trying to achieve here. And he did that not only by

torturing each individual girl, but he did it by making each

individual girl know that he was torturing the others. Look

what will happen to you if you get out of line. Look what

I'm doing to her. Jessica talked to you today about having

to be there while Nahrin was being anally raped. And Jessica

is a kind, wonderful girl and has such a big heart. And such

a big heart that she felt so guilty about going and talking

to Nahrin and bringing her into this -- although it was not

Jessica's fault -- that she switched places with Nahrin. And

the defendant started anally raping Jessica because Jessica

was trying to do the right thing and help because she

couldn't bear to watch Nahrin screaming and crying.

We also introduced at trial photographs of beaten

victims. There was one photograph of a rear end that had

been badly beaten. And the defendant showed that photograph

to the victims and said: This is what's going to happen to

you if you withhold information from me, if you hide money

from me. Again, it was a fear tactic, a tactic of

intimidation, one that worked for the defendant. While these

seem like -- and I don't want to use the word minor; but

while these pale in comparison to the types of abuse we're

just talking about, I mention them, and I'm going to mention

them, because, again, they just show the lengths the
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

61

defendant will go to to control his victims.

The defendant would only let them wear lingerie

while they were in the hotel rooms. And he took their shoes

so they couldn't leave. Again, he took their phones and

checked their phones. Remember Jessica testified that there

was one day that she wanted to leave so badly that she was

willing to leave naked. Literally, she started walking

towards the door naked. She would have rather gone outside

and faced people with no clothes on, strangers who she had

never met, which anybody would think would be just

unbearable; and she was willing to do that over stay with the

defendant. But, of course, again, just a game to him, makes

her take off her clothes if she wants to leave. But when she

actually starts to walk towards the door, he brings her back

inside, and he beats her.

You know, looking at the defendant's conduct is

only one part of considering the seriousness of the offense

here. I think talking about the harm that he has done to

these girls is the other part of it. And the psychological

and the physical harm he has caused them is going to -- and

I -- it saddens me to have to stand here and say this to you,

but it's going to last a lifetime for them.

And today you got to talk -- excuse me, hear from

Jessica and Veronica. And they both told you that they're

afraid. They can't sleep. They have night terrors. They
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

62

want the images out of their head. They won't go away. They

can't stop seeing what he did to them and what he did to the

other girls. They can't stop hearing the screams. Jessica

testified she can't stop hearing the screams of other girls

being raped. They're not as trusting. It's affecting their

interpersonal relationships, especially with men. The

physical scars, those are easy to see. But the emotional

ones, those are even more damaging than the physical ones

because those can change you. And the defendant did

everything he could to change these girls to make them feel

absolutely worthless. You know, they are going to have to

spend forever trying to repair and rebuild who they are. And

I know that they are putting a lot of hard work into it. And

I know that they are going to continue to put a lot of hard

work into it. But they're going to have to suffer for the

rest of their lives with the consequences of the defendant's

actions. And a sentence that the defendant receives from

this Court should similarly force the defendant to spend his

life also suffering from the consequences of his actions.

And while that will not take away the life sentence that he

gave to these girls, what it will do is show them that,

contrary to what the defendant told them day after day, their

lives do mean something. They are worth something. And the

defendant is not going to be able to get away with what he

did to them; and that he is going to be punished to the full
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

63

extent of the law. And he is not going to regain his freedom

to be able to do this to anybody else. It's going to show

them that they matter and that justice has been done here.

So unless the Court has any questions about the

nature and circumstances, I'm going to move onto the history

and characteristics.

THE COURT: Go ahead.

MS. LEVIN: There are a couple of characteristics

about the defendant that I want to highlight because I think

that they are important about evaluating his risk of

recidivism and the need to protect the public and the need

for deterrence here. First of all, the defendant, his

behavior has demonstrated that he has a real belief that

women are to be controlled and that they are worthless. It's

an ingrained belief, and he has acted consistently with that

belief, not only in the fact that he literally sold these

victims like they were merchandise and made money off of

them. You know, he took sex from them whenever he wanted to,

like they didn't have a say, like they weren't even human

beings. When we searched the defendant's computer and we

introduced these photos at trial, there were two particularly

disturbing photographs. We attached them to our sentencing

memo. One was of a woman who had a piece of tape over her

mouth and it said: Tape. Shutting bitches up since 1926.

And the second one was of a girl who was badly beaten. And
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

64

you could see the bruise on her eye. And it said: This

bitch didn't know when to shut up to you. Again, telling of

the defendant's attitude. And that attitude makes him a

threat to our girls and our young women and our society.

The defendant's behavior has also demonstrated a

lack of respect for the law. He has repeatedly lied to law

enforcement about his sex trafficking activities. And you

heard testimony from the victims as well, that he instructed

them to lie. If they were arrested or if they were stopped,

they were not supposed to say they had a pimp. They were not

supposed to tell them what was going on, that they were being

abused, they were being beaten. The defendant's criminal

history shows that he has 14 previous convictions and 21

previous arrests. And as we pointed out in our sentencing

memorandum, this Court has seen far worse criminal histories,

including much more serious offenses. That being said,

Judge, taken as a whole and viewing all of these facts

together, his constant refusal to obey the law demonstrates

his lack of respect and his attitude towards the fact that

there are laws, there are rules that he has to obey and he

has to follow. And, further, it's the government's position

that the criminal history really doesn't reflect his violent,

criminal behavior. Because, again, it doesn't document the

fact that he was trafficking all these girls for four years.

And it also doesn't document the fact that he is a rapist.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

65

The defendant's behavior has also shown that he is

smart and he is manipulative. The defendant talks a lot

about his sixth grade education. And that may be. But his

behavior both out on the street as part of this case and in

this courtroom has shown that he is anything but stupid. He

has a keen understanding for the legal proceedings that are

going on. He understands his rights. He has articulated

them to the Court. His words have shown that he is skilled

at playing a part. He knows when to act like he doesn't

understand what's going on, and then he can turn it off and

he can show the Court that he is fully aware of everything

and can, you know, cite case law and talk about -- today he

knew, oh, I served 31 days, but, yes, I was sentenced to

62 days. He knows this stuff inside and out. And he

understands it. And he -- in his method of recruitment, we

can also see how manipulative and smart and savvy he was

because, each girl, he would recruit them differently.

So, Kaitlin, she talked about how he promised her,

you could be a model and the fame and the money. And that's

how he lured her in. And then it turned to violence, of

course, and went down the same path. And with Jessica,

Veronica and Nahrin, it was controlling them with the drugs

and the physical abuse and the beatings. The defendant is a

chameleon. And he knows how to get what he wants. And he

knows his audience. And he knows how to temper his behavior
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

66

and his personality to that audience. And that makes him

very dangerous.

I think one of the most telling things about the

defendant is the fact that he has no remorse for what he has

done. And I touched on this earlier. The defendant has an

excuse for everything. Nothing is his fault, ever his fault.

His post-arrest interview, we attached this to our sentencing

memorandum. There were numerous examples that we cited in

the sentencing memorandum from that post-arrest interview

where the defendant was confronted with prostituting these

girls, taking their money. His point of view: I was helping

them. They had trouble holding onto their money, so I was

helping them. I'm just addicted to heroin-using girls. Poor

me. And, even today, while the defendant was talking to your

Honor, he continuously expressed that, you know, he hasn't

done anything wrong. He is the victim. He said: I'm the

one who is suffering every day. It's like the world is

against me. I don't want to have to live in fear every day

that I might get a life sentence. It's always about him.

And his refusal to accept responsibility for what he has done

wrong makes him very dangerous if he gets out because he

either doesn't -- he really doesn't see that what he has done

is horrific and in violation of the law, and that makes him a

danger; or he just refuses to accept it. And that makes him

a danger, a danger of not stopping.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

67

Which brings me to the deterrence. Specific

deterrence is really important here, Judge, as is general

deterrence. Specific deterrence and the need to protect the

public, we've talked about how the law is not a barrier to

this defendant. He was convicted in 2008 of pandering,

continued to engage in sex trafficking. Again, in 2011,

convicted of pandering, continued to engage in sex

trafficking. Numerous, numerous interactions with law

enforcement. None of that stopped him. Human intervention

has not been a barrier. Kaitlin's mother filed a missing

person report, tried to get law enforcement involved. That

didn't stop him from trafficking Kaitlin. Veronica runs

away, tries to hide her phone when she realizes that he is

using the GPS to track her; and he still doesn't give up.

And what's particularly frightening here, Judge, is

that the defendant's role as a sex trafficker does not

require heavy lifting. It requires a skill set. And he has

it, in spades. It requires being able to be smart and

manipulative. So if he gets out when he is 70, 75, he can go

right back into this life. This is something that he, by his

own admission, has admitted he is addicted to. He is

addicted to these girls. He is addicted to, you know,

spending time with them and helping them, in his own words.

His age is not going to slow him down.

As far as general deterrence, Judge, as I'm sure
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

68

this Court is aware, there is a culture of sex trafficking

out there. And it is -- you know, this -- these cases don't

come around that often. And when they do, they do receive

public attention. And I'm sure as the Court was aware when

this case was going to trial and when there was a verdict on

this case, it received public attention. And this Court's

sentence is going to receive public attention. And a message

needs to be sent to people who do this type of activity that

it will not be tolerated; that, if you do this in the

Northern District of Illinois, you are going to prison for

decades. And a message also needs to be sent because these

cases are so hard to prosecute, Judge. And one of the

reasons they're so hard to prosecute is because it is very

hard to find victims who have the -- who are willing and have

the courage and the strength to be able to come forward and

testify against the person who is trafficking them. Both

because the trafficker tells them not to and has so much

control over them; and also because I think the victims feel

like people don't view them as victims. You know, looking at

them, people think, oh, they used drugs, they were out there

prostituting themselves. But that is not the picture at all.

And I think your Honor has been able to see firsthand by

presiding over this trial that that is not the picture. And

when they're met with that type of reception or, you know,

response, it's very hard to come forward when people don't
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

69

support you and don't view you as the victim that you are.

But a sentence of 55 years in prison here will make a loud

statement that these are victims and they can come forward;

and they can trust in the legal process; and they can trust

in the system; and they will get the justice that they

deserve.

And finally, Judge, I will touch briefly on

sentencing disparity. We talked about this in our sentencing

memo. The Court is obviously free to impose whatever

sentence it feels is appropriate after it starts by looking

at the guideline range, which is life here. The penalties

for these cases, 15 year mandatory minimum, life sentence for

advisory guidelines, are very severe, but they reflect

Congress' intent and the sentencing commission's intent to

punish these crimes harshly. And we cited numerous cases in

our sentencing memorandum in this district where other

defendants similarly situated who have gone to trial and have

used violence and rape and drugs and verbal and psychological

abuse have received the type of sentence that we are asking

for here. It is not out of line with previous cases.

So based on all of these factors, Judge, the

government respectfully requests that a sentence of 55 years

in prison will serve the goals of sentencing, punish the

defendant for his behavior and send a message that this crime

is taken seriously and it won't be tolerated. Thank you.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

70

THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Shaver?

MR. SHAVER: 55 years in prison. 55 years. And

the government says they want him to suffer for those

55 years. That's what the government is asking for. Your

Honor says that's a life sentence, and it basically is. If

he serves 85 percent of the sentence, that's eight years off.

It will be 47 years. Four years already served is down to

43 years. That's 86-years-old when he walks out of prison.

Is that a just sentence in this case? Is it sufficient but

no greater than necessary to serve the interest of justice?

I think that it's much greater than necessary.

We've heard from the government about the heinous

nature of the crimes committed by Mr. Carson. The government

alluded to 30 women who he has prostituted over the years.

We're dealing with five women here, the four women charged

and with the one other woman, as relevant conduct. That is

in no way to suggest that crime isn't serious. They've

labeled Mr. Carson a predator, prone to violence, a

chameleon, a cold and calculating liar who has

psychologically and physical hurt his victims in this case.

They say he should never get out of prison, it's a sure thing

he will begin sex trafficking again. We've got to protect

the community. Send a message. I used to be a prosecutor in

this building. I sent a message all the time.

Let's talk about the case and what happened in this
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

71

case. One, and I'll explain this later on, that, you know,

McKenzie Carson is a troubled soul. He suffers from mental

illness. And to say that he took pleasure, joy, in

administering pain, I think that's beyond the realm. He

committed serious crimes and he should pay for those crimes.

But sentencing him to 50 years in prison is just too much.

Counsel alluded to sentencing disparities, similarly situated

defendants. And one of the cases they cited themselves,

United States vs. Sawyer, which Judge Kocoras handled, he

gave Dequan Sawyer a 50-year sentence. But that was a

different case entirely. That 50-year sentence was for a

much longer period. He was charged with trafficking over ten

minor victims. One of them was only ten years old. That is

a much different case than this case. Not to denigrate the

seriousness of this case, but a much different case. And

Judge Kocoras gave 50 years in that case.

We cited the Misher case, which Judge Leinenweber

had. Only two victims, and he pled guilty. But he was

facing life in jail by the guidelines, the advisory

guidelines. And Judge Leinenweber gave him ten years. There

is a disparity that exists, even in this district. It

shouldn't, but it does.

So what are we going to do about that? How long

should his sentence actually be? What is different about

this case, different than what was happening in the Sawyer
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

72

case? Well, we look to the defendant and the personal

characteristics of the defendant, which nobody has talked to

to this point. The things that differentiate him from the

average defendant in this type of case. The things we must

consider in sentencing him.

What's different about this case? Well, I alluded

to it. Mental illness. McKenzie Carson's life has been

indelibly marked by mental illness, Bipolar I disorder. He

has suffered from this debilitating disease continually for

his entire life and it has left him psychologically in an

almost constant state of confusion, despair and impaired

judgment, leaving him feeling hopeless and frequently

contemplating suicide.

Before I discuss the mental illness he is suffering

from, suffered from then, suffered from now, we should look

at his life. He has had a horrible life. His home life,

broken from the start. Carson's father was a chronic

alcoholic. McKenzie remembered a memory he had with his

father was sharing a beer with him when he was only 12 years

old. When he left, he was replaced by a stepfather and that

stepfather mercilessly beat McKenzie and his siblings with a

two-by-four. During the course of those beatings, his mother

became involved; and she became physically abusive as well.

He didn't have a proper education. He had learning

difficulties. He had some learning disabilities since
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

73

kindergarten. Serious speech impediments, writing

difficulties. His teachers knew about it, but, you know, he

was never formally diagnosed and never received care. He

didn't last long in jail or in prison. Got in a fight in

high school. And when they kicked him out, he never went

back.

Over the years, he has worked numerous jobs, but he

never could hold a job. He was constantly depressed,

constantly using drugs, liquor. Would get fired or walk away

from the job. He did everything he could to make ends meet.

And McKenzie was a heavy substance abuser, basically from the

time he was 12 years old. First liquor. Then he used

marijuana from the early teen years through his adult life.

Then smoking cocaine, snorting cocaine, snorting heroin,

sometimes using the substances almost daily. He sought

substance abuse programs, many of them: Branden House,

Haymarket House, South Suburban, Weiss Hospital, Linden Oaks

Hospital, trying to get a handle on his problem. But

nothing. Nothing stuck. He had a couple brief periods of

sobriety, but he was feeling this constant anger, confusion,

depression, and he slipped back into the use of drugs again.

The personal background of McKenzie Carson was

harrowing enough. We've heard it many times in this

courthouse, but it was harrowing enough. But add to this his

bipolar disease. We now know that McKenzie Carson suffers
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

74

from Bipolar I disorder, which he has suffered from most

likely since his adolescence. He was always depressed, the

records show. During his pre-teen years, he began having

thoughts of suicide. And at 14, he tried to kill himself,

swallowing a bunch of pills. In the following years, there

were constant thoughts of suicide and multiple suicide

attempts, often followed by short periods of hospitalization.

But the hospitalization wasn't continuous. He didn't

follow-up on his treatment and he would fall into line again

of depression, growing disgruntlement, confusion. And the

cycle continued. Even during this period he was using

cocaine, heroin on a daily basis. And that only exacerbated

the way he was feeling. Over the years, when the depression

overwhelmed, he sought help for that. He sought mental

health at Evanston Hospital, at Reed Mental Health, at Elgin,

at Good Sam, at Linden Oaks Hospital. And we have the Linden

Oaks hospital records. In fact, he was first diagnosed as

bipolar at Linden Oaks in 2008. He got -- he got treatment

during that period. The records show he was feeling better.

But when he left outpatient, he didn't follow up on that.

Dr. Stephen Dinwiddie examined McKenzie. He said,

definitely, he has got Bipolar I disorder. And he

recommended a treatment: Stabilizing agent, like lithium

carbonate, combined with an anti-psychotic agent. To this

day, he is not receiving that medication. The MCC thinks
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

75

that he just has depression. So they gave him

antidepressants, which exacerbate his condition. And

Bipolar I disorder is a serious mental condition. Less than

one percent of the population has it. We hear about it all

the time on the news, on television shows. But only a small

percent, one percent of the people, have it. But of those

people, they are 15 more times more likely to commit suicide

than the general population. And estimates by experts

suggest that a quarter of all suicides are bipolar related.

The disease generally arises in a patient's early teens and

20s and is characterized by manic episodes and then followed

by major deep depressive periods. When the bipolar episode

hits, the patient becomes extremely aggravated, more given to

mood swings, more impulsive, maybe more violent. They

exhibit poor judgment and lack of insight and their behavior

becomes antisocial. Their mood disturbances are sufficiently

severe to cause a marked impairment in social and general

occupational functioning. And, finally, from a suffering

standpoint, there is a circularity in the condition. You

know, once a manic episode starts, it's going to happen

again. And to end the manic episode, they go into deep

depression. They're in depression, and then the manic

episode hits. And it's a cycle. And it's over and over

again. A high, aggravated, confused, followed by deep

depression and thoughts of suicide. It must be a horrible
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

76

situation.

McKenzie Carson wasn't just sad or depressed over

the years; wasn't just sad or depressed over the fact that he

is facing now, in this criminal case, a long period of

incarceration. He suffers from a serious and debilitating

mental illness. And the manic episodes probably occurred

when he was 13 years old, that first one, when he tried to

commit suicide, followed by deep depression. And the cycle

continued ever since. He was certainly suffering from

Bipolar I disorder at the time he committed the offenses in

this case. He certainly had periods of high manic state. He

certainly had periods of deep, deep depression.

The Bipolar I disorder, the severe mental illness,

was a contributing fact for the offense of conviction. I'm

not saying it caused it. Even Dr. Dinwiddie didn't say it

caused it. But did it contribute to what McKenzie -- the

facts indicate what McKenzie did in this case? I don't think

there is any question of it. And his diminished mental

capacity due to that ongoing illness warrants a significant

departure under the guidelines. The case law says that a

severe mental illness is recognized as a ground for departing

from the advisory guideline range, so long as that mental

illness is a contributing factor of the offenses charged.

McKenzie Carson is not the mainstream of sex

trafficking offenders. And, again, I'm not going to suggest
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

77

and lessen in any way the severity of what he is -- what he

has done in this case. The government says that he is a

liar, that he lied. He lied during his post-arrest

statement. I think if we read that post-arrest statement, he

admitted to what was done in this case during that long,

rambling interview. It was used during his trial. He didn't

admit a lot of things. He didn't admit violence. But he

admitted that he was prostituting those girls and had them

out there trafficking for him. So is he a -- a cold,

calculating liar, a manipulator? You could say that, if you

didn't know more; if you didn't know that he was bipolar. I

doubt that he can be so calculating, as the government

suggests, knowing that he suffers from this illness. We've

seen him on performance in this case, in this courtroom.

That is a smidgen of what it is. He doesn't seem to control

himself. He goes off on tangents. I don't think he is the

cold, calculating criminal that the government is suggesting.

He suffers from a relatively rare mental illness that leaves

him in a constant state of confusion and deep depression; and

is likely suffering regularly occurring manic episodes that

are severely impairing his judgment and functioning to this

day.

Due to his mental illness, even given the facts of

this case, it would simply be unfair to punish him with

basically a life prison term for criminal activity that was
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

78

caused in part by his mental illness. I think a fair and

just sentence in this case is a mandatory minimum. A

serious, serious sentence, 15 years in jail. McKenzie Carson

is 43 years old. He'll just be under 60 when he gets out.

For recidivism sake, even Dr. Dinwiddie's report says, as he

gets older, he is less apt to recidivate. He will be old

when he gets out of prison in 15 years.

I'd ask the judge to sentence him to 15 years. I

would also ask you to suggest to the Bureau of Prisons that

he is in need of psychological help. That the Bureau of

Prisons is not right now providing him with the psychological

help he needs. Certainly the medication is wrong, and he is

acting out because of that. I'd like to see McKenzie Carson

on an even keel. I would like to see the McKenzie Carson who

is receiving the proper medication to see what he can do. He

suggested to you, Judge, that he can be a valued member of

the community. Maybe that's the case. It hasn't been the

case in the past. But then we now know he suffered from this

mental disease. Please sentence McKenzie Carson to 15 years

in prison.

THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Carson, it's your

opportunity to speak.

MR. SHAVER: Judge, his aunt would like to say a

few words.

THE COURT: All right.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

79

MR. SHAVER: One moment, Judge. Judge, I would ask

Emma Chin to come up now. She is McKenzie Carson's aunt and

she would like to say a few words. I have attached her

letter on behalf of McKenzie to the sentencing memorandum in

this case.

MS. CHIN: Thank you, your Honor, for giving me a

minute of your time. My name is Emma Chin. I'm McKenzie

Carson's deceased mother's sister. And you heard a lot of

negative things about him, but I want to tell you, I'm not

here to say if he is right or wrong. I just want to let you

know the McKenzie Carson that I know. And I'm trying to undo

some unjust that was done to my nephew the whole time he was

growing up. I tried to intervene when my sister, his father,

his stepfather, but nobody would hear me. The courts, the

school, when I went to them and pleaded for him, nobody would

hear me. And I witnessed him being abused, suffered. I

couldn't even begin to tell you the suffering he went through

with his family. And in school he was picked on. He was

beat up every day. He was in special ed.

And the McKenzie Carson that I know, I'm not saying

what's in the street, that I know, I have a mentally retarded

brother. He took care of my brother. He bathed him. He did

everything he could do to help the family. He even took care

of his abusive father when he couldn't move anymore. He even

took care of my sister who wasn't there to defend him as a
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

80

little boy as he was being beaten. And I had my own family.

And maybe I could have did more. I tried to do as much as I

can as an aunt, but they wouldn't let me. I was bound by the

court because now they take child abuse a little serious than

back in the day, in the '80s, when he was growing up. And

they take bullying at school a little serious now than they

did when McKenzie was growing up.

But McKenzie is a good person. He has always been

there for the family. And, you know, he got addicted to

drugs and the streets caught him up. And, you know, but

there is nothing I can say but good things about my nephew.

And I ask your Honor, can you please take that under

consideration when you sentence him because he has been

through a lot. And I'm trying to undo what happened to him

as a child. So if you would take that under consideration, I

would really appreciate it.

THE COURT: Thank you very much.

MS. CHIN: Thank you.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Carson?

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor, there is a lot of

things I want to say. And I want to say first, I bounce

sometimes. It's something I can't control. If you notice

throughout, I bounce on one thing, then to here. I don't

know how to put things, stay in order. If you can please try

to bear with me as I try to say some things.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

81

First, I want to address the last things that was

addressed and try to stick there first to some things I'd

like to say, like Ms. Levin and here today and throughout the

trial, the word that's been pounding in my head that she

said. If you can allow the pictures in, it goes towards

my -- she basically said some word that was saying it goes

towards the way I feel or think towards women. That --

that -- what's the -- um, I can't think of his name right

now, Carrie's partner. Can you help me, please?

MR. SHAVER: Was it the FBI agent?

THE DEFENDANT: Yeah, him. Let's see. The FBI

agent testified that those were pictures that were downloaded

to my phone. And you allowed it in as it goes towards my

thought of mind. That's what you said. And the pictures

were the pictures she spoke of today that -- with a woman

duct taped and a woman with black eye and a black -- bruises

over her body, or whatever. And those pictures if -- if --

if I had knowledge of those pictures before trial, that they

were even part of discovery, or anything, I would have been

able to explain what I would like to do today about those

pictures. Those aren't pictures that I downloaded all -- he

was able to testify they were downloaded to my phone. Yes,

they were downloaded to my phone, not the computer, as it was

changed -- as the story was changed today. But they were

downloaded because the first thing you do when you get a
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

82

smartphone, you've got to decide do you want sites to visit

to your phone or -- or to your phone card or to the little

small memory that comes with the phone. And the normal

average person choose the bigger memory place, which is your

memory card holder, whatever. So you got people -- you go

through Facebook pages and people put all types of -- some

people put stupid images, stuff that doesn't express any of

your opinions or views, or so forth. These images, if a

computer expert was on the stand, that the person that

actually went through the phone would have been able to

testify, those was cookie images. Those are what those

images is. It's not -- it's not my state of mind towards

women.

You know, yes, I've made mistakes and I've never

denied making mistakes. And I am truly, despite on what

Ms. Levin might feel, I'm truly sorry for all mistakes I've

made in life, even mistakes that ties into this case, you

know, and -- and not saying that because I'm here and I'm

arrested, and so forth. My actions show when I learned to --

when I came to the knowledge of Kaitlin's true age and when I

found out her true age, it messed me up so bad that it scared

me clean. And I have not put a drug in my body since June

16th -- June 14th, excuse me, 2010. That's -- you know,

maybe it took several months for me to get clean, but it --

do you understand what I'm saying? You do something that,
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

83

you know, but what I'm saying is, you know, that right there

shows, you know, a person trying to turn their life around.

I wasn't arrested, you know, turning my life around. You

know, when I got arrested, I was taking care of my elderly

father that couldn't feed himself, couldn't cook for himself

and dealing with trying to deal with my mental illness at the

same time on the phone with the crisis line crying and

dealing with my stuff. And they -- I couldn't -- it's hard

for me to -- it was hard for me to take care of my dad. So

they had to give me the -- they gave me a number where people

came in and started giving me a break because, you know, I

already got my own problems. And they had to see if -- give

me a relief a couple hours a week because I had a breakdown

over the 1-800 crisis line phone number, whatever, but. And

I'm running to the hospital to see my mom that was fighting

for her life at the time, you know.

It's a lot that -- I never say I'm stupid. Yeah,

I'm smart. I got a learning disability. I'm not good with

remembering words, and stuff, but, for some reason, I've been

good with numbers all my life. And that's how I was able to

be a cab driver because I'm good with numbers. I'm not good

with -- you know, it's documented throughout school history

of my disability. You know, I -- I can read a book and

couldn't even explain the book to you. But, yeah, four years

locked up, yeah, I'm starting to -- three -- three of those
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

84

four years I was quiet in the courtroom. I had nothing to

say because I didn't even understand what was going on, you

know, except for asking for the discovery, you know. I mean,

today, or last week, probably, the most conversation, but.

I don't know, what I'm trying to say is, no, nobody

in this world deserve a lot of things that they've been

through. Veronica, Jessica, Nahrin, Kaitlin and many other

people in this world. Nobody deserves it. Nobody deserves

to feel less than. And I never intended to do anything to

make them feel less than, you know, or, you know,

sometimes -- sometimes in life you look back and your actions

didn't level out with your intent. You know, like, when --

when I was a kid growing up watching my dad beat my mom all

the time when she was in so much fear that she went to my

aunt's house and got my uncle's gun and would hide it behind

the chest for maybe if she get fed up with it one day. Or

watching my other uncle beat his wife, you know. And I grew

up saying, I never want to be that person. I was a mama's

boy. I loved my mom. I loved -- you know? I cried when she

cried. You know, I hurted when she hurted, and that's it. I

made a promise to myself I would never put my hands on a

woman. And I remember the first time I did something against

my word, my belief, and everything, how it affected me and it

affected my life many times. And, at one point, I went to

South Suburban domestic violence class voluntarily. It
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

85

wasn't nothing to do with no court system. Parenting class.

It was parenting and domestic tied in together. I just

had -- told my sponsor it ain't helping me -- you know, it

had a bonus thing, too, even help me to try to parent better

because I was a single father raising my son by myself after

me and my wife separated due to her drug addiction. I was

trying to continue to raise a son that I didn't -- I wasn't

even the biological father. But Derek is always going to be

my son, you know. And I was trying to raise him. And Derek

is ADHD and I got my problems, too.

And, you know, what I'm trying to say is, you know,

no matter what the government may say or anyone else, you

know, the calling me a monster and predator, I know what type

of person I am. I'm a good individual that made some bad

mistakes in my life. And some of the mistakes I made were

very bad. But I know that I'm a good individual and they

can't define who I am, you know. And no matter what happens

today, I can continue to strive to show people that I am a

good individual. That I made bad mistakes, but to let my

further actions show that I'm a good individual.

I got clean -- my first time getting clean was in

'95. '95 to 2006. When you look at my criminal history,

from '95 to 2006, you don't see no arrests. I was clean. I

was on my medication. I was going to my group meetings, the

Bradberry (phonetic) service. And I was going to my drug
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

86

meetings. And then my wife started using drugs. And I had a

mental breakdown and isolated in the house for two years.

And then when I came out of that isolation, I relapsed

because the thing that was helping me and keeping me on

track, I isolated myself away from it. My medication was

keeping me on track. The meetings, the groups, all that

helped. All that together change the type of person I was,

changed the type of person that I was. That our spare

bedroom was open to the newcomer that didn't have a place to

lay for the night that people would -- at the groups are,

like, are you crazy, you don't know what he might have in his

pocket. I said: That's what Dr. Bob did. They opened a

door to a stranger, you know. And I had no problem opening

the door to strangers for a couple nights, let them get a

couple days clean and try to find them a -- the house, the

halfway house, and go to because people helped me like that.

When I got out of treatment, I went to halfway house and

to -- they at the halfway house taught me how to live better.

I know that I could be a productive member of

society through the right resources. I know it because I

have achieved it. I'm not pointing a finger saying this

person, that person, just because I say that I had some

things happen that I'm not -- no, I'm not pointing the blame

finger. I'm not here to point the blame finger. Yeah, I'm

saying, I'm just here saying, under certain circumstances, I
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

87

know I can do better.

I had a mental health probation officer. If he

could have wrote a letter like he wanted to, but he said he

is not allowed to without a court order. And it would have,

you know, because he -- he worked for Cook County. But he

was my probation officer. He know what type -- nobody knows

me as far as public people like him, you know. Or the

shelter. I used to go volunteer at First Baptist Church

shelter on holidays and feed -- and feed the homeless on

holidays at Thanksgiving. When I got clean, that's how I

spent my holidays. You know, a lot of times I wouldn't spend

it with my family. I told them, I said, I got to serve them

because, when I was out there homeless, somebody served me.

And the program teaches you to give back that was so freely

given to you, you know.

So I know what to do under -- I learn what to do

under the right circumstances, and stuff. And if I didn't

have my mental breakdown, you know, I -- I had to put my wife

out. They took my son because my wife was on drugs. And

they told me if I wanted my son to come back to the house, I

had to put a restraining order on her. You know how hard it

is for a non-biological father to get a restraining order on

a biological mother? That right there speaks for itself what

type of person I am and can be. If the courts granted a

non-biological father a restraining order on a biological
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

88

mother and allowed a non-biological father to -- to provide

and take care of a child that he did not give birth to or,

you know, I'm not -- or you know what I mean, a father

biologically. But I always said Derek was always my son

before I even met him. I felt like God made me to be his

father, you know? He was -- he was my everything, you know?

He was my little man. I would go work on the car. He is

right there with me changing the oil, you know. You know,

um, I watched him from his different stages. Like he was

only in second grade when I met him. And, you know, that was

the curious grades stage where he asks you a million

questions, you know. And the different stages, you know, and

what separated us is the time it took for me to get Derek

back at home. They put Derek in a group home until I get the

restraining order. And -- and DCFS had to -- they had to do

it by the papers, or DCFS had to take custody of Derek and

then give me guardianship. So that took time. So I had to

go to Irving Park every weekend to pick him up for the

weekend visits. And I was without him throughout the week.

But then he was in an environment where it changed, you know,

his behavior. You know, you put a child that has ADHD around

kids that come from all different background and -- and he

was in homes where these kids talked to the adults all

different type of ways and try to fight him. So after the

time it took, he come back home, try to fight me. And I
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

89

tried and tried. I couldn't -- I didn't know what to do. So

I made what I feel was the worse mistake of my life. I told

DCFS I couldn't take care of him. And that, too. It

spiraled from, first, I had to get the restraining order on

my wife. Now I lost my son. Then my mom came and said I got

to come get the dog and take the dog to the shelter because I

didn't have the energy to get up out of bed and walk the dog.

I didn't have the energy to eat. I was too depressed. So my

mom had to remove my dog and give it to Naperville shelter.

And all these things I'm losing just kept on contributing

more to my depression, you know. And all this on top of no

meetings, no -- no, no group meetings, only meetings in -- no

counseling meetings. I stopped taking my medication, stopped

showering. You know, waking up every day staring at an

orange electricity cord, just listening to Alicia Keys torn

between the two because I was torn whether to live or die. I

wanted to take that cord and wrap it around my neck and wrap

it around a balcony at the same time and jump. And maybe

that would have been better. Maybe, you know, we wouldn't be

here if that would have happened then, you know.

I don't try to hurt people. I don't want to hurt

nobody. I love people. I love the people I love best. I'm

a counselor. And a counselor, we like to help people, not

hurt people. I didn't intentionally of my own -- you know,

the government may disagree. I'm not here to argue any
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

90

agreement, but I'm just saying Veronica, you know, she was

somebody I was in love with, you know. That was my

girlfriend. We were a couple. We'd go spend time with her

kids, go to the ice cream thing, take them out for ice cream.

You know, I would tell her, come on, get some games for them.

We'd get some games for them ordered, you know. If

Veronica's mom was here to testify, she would say that, you

know, I encouraged Veronica to spend time with her kids.

Before Veronica met me, she hadn't spent time with her kids

in three months, you know, or longer. You know, she started

spending time with her kids on a regular because I encouraged

that, you know. Because I grew up looking out the window

waiting for my dad to come with broken promise, over broken

promises, you know. But, no, he ain't coming, he coming.

And the hours would turn to days or week because he was

someplace stuck in a bar somewhere or a gambling house

somewhere. You know, and it's a lot of abuse that I grew up

to that I didn't even get into, but. And I'm not going to

get into because it has been touched on. But, I mean, I've

been through abuse, been beat with two-by-fours, living in

the country, and the green part of the corn stalk. Wet it

and whip it and see what that do, you know? And I tried

killing myself swallowing a bottle of pills. They put me in

a guardianship of the state. And what the state do? They

put me right back in the house of abuse. But on paperwork
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

91

we're going to say you living with your older brother. All

that DCFS case worker cared about probably the money he was

getting because he so didn't care about my well-being.

So after being in a mental hospital for some time

where I stayed at Evanston Hospital until the insurance ran

up where I was transferred to a state hospital, Reed Henry

Warner for kids mental hospital where I was abused, where I

was restrained. I was raped by own male staff, shot up with

Thorazine and restrained. The story is because you got

caught smoking a cigarette because the people that came on

visits would sneak us cigarettes, give us cigarettes. But

John liked to have his way with you when you was drugged and

cloudy off these psych meds that you didn't even need, like

Thorazine and Haldol. So when I get out -- how do I get out,

first of all? A kid that lived in so much fear that pulled

the fire alarm and climbed over a wire fence and ran down

Irving Park Road with his bloody hands and feet to get away.

And I make it from Chicago back to Evanston Hospital. And

the person that I trusted, Nurse Kathy, I trusted her so

much, I told her. She calls security behind my back and they

take me right back to Henry Horner. Then three days, maybe a

week later, Henry Horner released me. Now all of a sudden

nothing wrong with me when I'm trying to put the truth out

what's going on in there to me.

But my time at being at Henry Horner, after
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

92

fighting the hallucid drugs that they give you, that John

would give you so he could have his way, you start enjoying

the effect of it. I grew up vowing that I would never, ever,

use drugs. But 13, 14, after getting used to fighting the

drugs that they shot me with and ended up drinking where I

developed an ulcer, I went to St. Francis Hospital. About

16, I had a peptid ulcer, a baby ulcer. A 16-year old that

drunk so much that they had a baby ulcer. My uncle said,

don't worry, you don't need to drink, just smoke weed. I

started smoking weed with him and his wife that led to other

drugs. And I enjoyed the effect of those drugs. That led --

weed is nothing but the gateway to all drugs and all. So

when I finally led to heroin, I found a similar effect of the

same effect that I felt from the hallucid -- the Haldol and

the Thorazine type of drugs that I got drugs. Haldol, you

were only supposed to get if you were harmful to yourself or

other. I got it for smoking a cigarette. That was the

paperwork statement. But the truth of the matter, John

wanted his way again. It was always about John.

It's a lot, you know, that I wish I can -- if I can

go back and change the hands of times, you know, I think that

it's a song that says that. And I relate sometimes my

feelings with music. And it goes with -- I just wish I could

change it. I wish I could change everything. But the only

way you can change things is by doing better in the future.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

93

And I know I could do better. I know I can.

I'm asking you to have mercy on me, as God has

mercy on all of us. I'm begging for my life. I'm begging

for my life. I ain't never -- I -- I never -- this is -- I

never been faced with -- -- I never been faced with such a

serious crime in my life, you know. Most of my crimes, if

you look at my history, were self-inflicted crimes, as we

call it in the program. Self-inflicted because I'm chasing

after one more, one more high so I don't got to feel or think

of the pain and the things that went through me as a child,

you know. So let me get one more bag, one more bottle, one

more line, one more whatever because, for some reason, I

thought the drugs would fix me. They didn't fix me, they

just hallucinated me. I was accustomed to it from those

drugs that I first learned took away everything. You know,

the Thorazine. So chasing after that escape, the great

escape that never happens. Because when the high gone,

you're right back, messed up in the head, wishing it would go

away; but it never goes away. So why would I intentionally

inflict the same pain on anyone that I deal with every day of

my life.

You know, I talked about probation officer, you

know, left out some things and -- and that's some of the

things even I don't remember seeing in the probation thing,

even him speaking about the times that I prostituted myself
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

94

for one more escape, you know. You know, sometimes that, you

know, even my ex-girlfriend, you know, prostituted ourself

with this teacher that wanted me to dress up like a woman,

you know, and dress him up and put lipstick on us and all

that crazy stuff that makes me feel like I'm going to throw

up. But if it was the key to making the pain escape out of

my mind, I did it, you know. I did a lot of things that I

didn't want to do, voluntary and involuntary. And the

Narcotics Anonymous books say, drugs change you into a person

you don't want to be. And I surely was the little boy

playing with fire hydrants, saying I want to grow up to be a

drug addict. I wasn't thinking I wanted to grow up to be a

drug addict, I wanted to grow up to be mostly unbalanced.

Most of my life I've been homeless, homeless because I

preferred to be homeless. Started out being placed back into

the indirect custody of my mom, you know. So that's when the

running away started, you know. And -- and then I left home

at an early age and I came back at a wrong age, you know,

after a few setbacks and relapsing. Because, throughout my

addiction, you know, it was a lot of bridges burnt with

conflicts between me and my mom, you know. And my mom passed

away since I been here. I don't know how much you're aware.

That fact is I love my mom. She had a very, very bad

marriage that put her through a lot of things. And she

always tried to do the best that she can do, but she was a
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

95

mother at a young age that -- very, very young age that made

bad decisions, you know. And we all make -- we all capable

of making bad decisions at times. The question is, do we

learn from them. And, you know, our relationship wasn't

mended because, throughout my addiction, you know every time

I got high, you know, the hurt and anger, every bag or bottle

I put in to me, the anger just -- just increased because it

fueled, it fueled the fire, so to speak, of things I went

through growing up. But it took a while for me. So,

throughout my addiction, I said some things to my mom that

I -- I didn't mean at times, you know. My mom gave me the

gift of life. Through God, my mom gave me the gift of life.

I can never take that away from her. She was a great mother.

She worked three jobs, you know, trying to take care of four

kids. Despite whatever mistakes she made, she was a great

mother because she was the greatest mother she knew how to

be. And she tried to do the best she could do for all her

kids. But I had completely stopped talking to my mom one

time in life. And at one point I lived with my aunt right

there, 811 Callan. That was years ago. And I can always

remember addresses, numbers, for some reason. 802 Dobson,

311 Custard, 302 Callan. It just -- numbers stick with me.

But a lot of stuff, I can go on all day with numbers. I can

go on with numbers to customers that -- that I get an order

to go take to the airport here or there forever, you know.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

96

But I'm not good with -- but before I get too bouncy, what

I'm trying to say -- let me try to re-focus.

What I'm trying to say is those bridges were mended

through medication, program, sponsor. You know, all the

group therapy meetings. But then, you know, sponsor had to

teach me that I had to let go. Let go and let God, you know.

That was in the past because I -- I couldn't blame my mom. I

can't go through the rest of my life blaming my mom, my dad

or anyone else for things they done at me. I got to look at

the part I played in it, you know. And, you know, I got

to -- I learned to pray for people that I were mad at because

that's where you find forgiveness and peace and through

prayer. Prayer and understanding.

You know, before I got arrested, I was searching.

I was searching, I was lost and searching for a better

relationship with God. I just felt so lost and confused.

You know, and it's funny how things turn out sometimes

because I used to pray, God, if I get arrested, God, let me

find you. Let me find you. Although, God been right there

all the time. God is everywhere. We just don't grasp what

he is giving us at times. But it took me to be incarcerated

and out of my mind, like the whole world is going down. And

I feel like I'm gasping for breath, can't breathe. I'm

breathing, but the air is not coming. Where is it? I get a

phone call. They tell me to come to the attendant office and
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

97

it's my aunt on the phone saying my mom is gone, you know.

And this was very, very -- a month after I was arrested, you

know, I took my mom to the hospital, May 6th. I never forget

the date, May 6, 2011. Two days before Mother's Day. Took

her for some simple pain. And nobody couldn't tell me in a

million years my mom would never walk out of that hospital

alive. And I wasn't able to be there, comfort her or tell

her I love her one last time. And when you wake up and

realize you don't -- you can't even pick up the phone,

everyday life. My mom died at a very young age, 60 years

old. I could never hear her voice anymore. I could never

say, mom, I love you. I miss you. I'm sorry. I can't hear

her say: McKenzie, it's going to be okay. You got your

whole life ahead of you. You'll be okay.

My dad, I grew up watching my dad beat my brother

with a horse whip. One day I told my brother about it, and

he was shocked. He was shocked because he thought I was too

young to even remember. I cried with my brother. My brother

had whips on his body the size of one of those big patch of

band aids. One day, when I got clean, I called my brother, I

said: I'm sorry how dad treated you different. To this day,

my brother still called my dad, dad; and that wasn't his

biological father. His father died when he was a baby. And

it's things like that that motivated me to give Derek all the

love I can and treat Derek the best I could treat him as a
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

98

father, a kid and a human being.

My dad was abusive. He was -- belittle me. The

favorite word he had for me is: Boy, you ass backwards. You

can't do nothing right. I remember going -- it was our

weekend to spend with my dad, and he finally came. We going

to the theater. And somebody bumped him. And then somebody

else got to shaking his pants, they dropped their contacts,

the whole time they picking his pocket. And I'm trying to

tell him: Daddy, daddy. Leave me alone. I'm trying to help

them get the -- get their contact. Dad? Leave me. So I

left him alone. They picking his pockets. When he got done

looking for something that wasn't there, I said: Daddy, they

just took your wallet. Boy, you ass backwards. I tried to,

you know. I wasn't McKenzie or Kenzie to my dad. 95 percent

of the time I was, "Boy." I can't ever remember my dad

telling me he loved me. Never, ever. That's why I always,

even when I get done, you know, telling Derek you can come

out of the corner, I give him a hug and embrace him. I love

you, son.

But at times my dad did show me he loved me. He

got me on one arm and my sister on another, he would be

swinging us at the park. It meaned so much if I could ever

hear the word, and I never in my life could remember ever

hear the word. But I learned to accept that maybe he grew up

in a different time. Maybe, you know, you weren't supposed
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

99

to tell a man or a boy you loved him, maybe, you know. Just

like you weren't supposed to cry. If my dad see me cry, he

will push me around and smack me and tell me to stop crying.

A man ain't supposed to cry. If somebody chased me home

because I was in special ed and beat my ass and I come

running home, excuse me, he told me to get out there and

fight or he going to beat me. Not the best of alternative.

Lose-lose situation.

In school, I feared on a daily basis where I

started stealing out of people's lockers from the older guys,

stealing out of their lockers. So I used the money I'm

stealing to buy everybody ice cream so I wouldn't be getting

beat up. The principal called and said, your son is stealing

money to buy stuff for everybody. He didn't understand why.

And I never told him. It's because I was tired of getting

beat around for being special ed.

I had teachers that didn't even have basis to try

to teach us. It wasn't just me, we were in special ed. But

all they cared about is whether -- whether they going to --

they got to get us graduated. So it's some test to graduate

by 8th grade. I failed it two times. They just gave me the

answers. And you call that teaching? I was told that by a

teacher that I can never get better in reading, that my

reading would never change. Today, I know that to be a lie,

just like the Devil is. In four years, I learned how to read
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

100

words. I ain't never learned how to read. I never had an

interest in opening a book to try to read because the teacher

told me life early on that I would never be able to read

right. I might read slower than other people. It might take

me a week to read a 400 page book, but I can read it. I've

been learning words I didn't -- never knew I could learn.

Friends sent me a Webster and Thesaurus. But I used to keep

going on and just skip a word when I didn't try to pronounce

it. Then I'm learning how the P-h really say F. I didn't

know that. I'm 42 years old. It took me 43 years to really

know how to use a pencil. I cried when I learned how to use

a pencil. I got a callus right here because I held a pencil

right here because I couldn't get how to hold it. The

teacher said, just lay it right here. Big old callus I had

because I spent my life not holding the pencil right here

because the teacher didn't have the patience to teach me.

They had those cursive cards to learn how to -- teachers lost

interest in teaching me that. They even lost interest in

even trying to help me with reading where they will just put

me in a booth and get me a head phone with tapes that read to

me.

I never forget, I think it was around 2000, when No

Child Left Behind came out. And I cried. I was so happy to

hear that because my son was 7th grade. And I said, with

that, Derek can get a proper education because it always
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

101

played on my self-esteem, and stuff, of what I can say or

what I understand, you know, that some people could talk at a

higher level, you know. I was told that if a person is

teachable, they are reachable. That's a slogan, one of many,

we got in the program. And I tried to keep an open mind

where I can be teachable and I -- and in four years I've been

learning how to read.

I know -- I know I can move forward. And, you

know, if given the opportunity, have a career and contribute

to not just the community, but my country. I -- '95, I was

charged with possession of drugs, delivery of controlled

substance and possession of drugs, I believe it is. Another

self-inflicted crime to support my habit. I was -- the crime

was -- the crime was -- the drugs were self-inflicting, you

know, to inflict more pain on myself, that's -- by using

drugs, I was in possession or seller of the drugs, or both, I

don't remember exactly. But, with that probation, I got TASC

probation. And that's when TASC probation first started. It

was a strict two-and-a-half year TASC probation. Not once

did I drop dirty with going to my meetings, seeing my

probation officer, you know.

I know I'm changeable because God is the one that

changes people. As long as you have God in your life and --

and you following steps, you know, and with the support. You

know, my aunt and my cousin, they're not the only support I
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

102

got. I got loving family that live in the south. They're

not able to be here. I got -- I got family in Arkansas and

in Georgia, Little Rock, Arkansas; Pratville, Alabama,

Conyers, Georgia. I got a sister in Naperville that is going

through some things herself right now; and she is unable to

be here, you know. But they love me. My family love me, and

I love them. And I got support. And as long as you got

support, you can -- as long as you got your support, like we

call it in the program, networking support group, support

team, you know. But the truth of the matter, the long --

longer someone was locked up, the less support they're going

to have. Just in four years I lost three people: My father,

my mother and a cousin. Two of them at a very young age.

The cousin, to Stage 4 cancer that he made headlines because

the cancer never existed. A new type of cancer. My mother

to the -- my mother dealt with a long, long illness of kidney

disease that brought on many other problems, starting with

the problems that changed her to the person she wasn't. My

mother went to see a doctor because she was overweight. And

instead of the doctor running medical tests and doing what he

was supposed to do, he told her, oh, you need to back away

from the table, that's all that's wrong with you. Here, take

these water pills. Drink water, eat less. The water pills

was -- I'm sorry, not water pills, but some type of steroid.

Take these, drink water, eat less. The steroids was
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

103

something that made her change to a very angry person. My

mother never abused me before she got on that medication.

And not to mention the other decisions she made because she

was on that medication, like meeting somebody in a pen pal

newspaper one week and two months later moving us about 400,

500 miles from Chicago to Vandalia, or actually a small town

called Brownstown. It was so small it wasn't even on a map

back then. Moving us there overnight in a couple month

period and marrying a total stranger, where I dealt with more

abuse. I swear I got beat with two-by-fours and wet corn

stalks. And, you know, if you just happened to be walking

while Bob was mad, he had the big, long country boots to give

you a nice kick right in your anal, you know. So it was

better to just try to stay out of his way because he don't

got to be mad at you to catch one of those kicks. He could

be mad because his check didn't come, nobody bought enough

wood; or the tree he chopped down fell in the wrong

direction. Or maybe you were expected to have those trees he

left cut up. You got to chop them in one -- one, and you got

four pieces, and you got to have them stacked up. If you

didn't have enough stacked up for him to keep the firewood

burning because that's what we stayed warm on.

We moved a nice -- a nice, beautiful house from

1932 Gray in Evanston to a shack in the middle of a cornfield

where we had to a burn wood stove all around the clock in the
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

104

morning time not to freeze. And that was only due to the

doctor putting my mom on that medication that damaged the

heart, messing with her mind, think she really had an

illness, a kidney disease, that needed to be dealt with. And

after years, then they -- when they finally found out she had

a kidney disease, she went through numerous transplants.

That failed six months later. Two transplants she went

through. Two heart surgeries. Brain aneurysm, you know.

Water on her brain. And when you got -- have surgery and you

have to have emergency surgery and you're on blood thinners,

you're on blood thinners so -- so you can have dialysis, they

don't have that much time to try to get your blood thick.

They got to plug an IV and give you the plasma, the stuff

that's in the bananas and starch that she normally don't --

she can't eat because it thins her blood. But they got to

give it to her through blood now to thicken her blood. And

after the surgery, because of the stuff she was missing, you

know, you don't even recognize the person. She came out like

a human balloon. After surgery, she was like 300 was blown

into her, 300 pounds of air, you know. But that's all the

water that build in her, I think, I don't know. But it's a

scary thing to go through, you know, being told that your mom

is not even going to make it. But she was the miracle

patient, you know. She made it a couple times that they said

she wouldn't. And the times you least suspected, she didn't
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

105

make it.

Bottom line is, it's not -- it's not about being --

it's not about being sorry I got caught, as Ms. Levin wants

to say. No. I am truly and sincere sorry for pain, hurt,

misguidance, suffering, anything I've done to anyone, you

know. And the only thing, there is only a few things I can

do, you know. And that's, one, never, never do the things

I've done to anyone else, you know. Get, as Mr. Shaver been

telling me, you know, and it's get on the proper medication,

as he been telling you I need as well, you know, and if --

if -- allow the opportunity to get back in my therapeutic

groups. And the number one rule in Narcotics Anonymous,

never use again, you know. And the book of Narcotics

Anonymous talks about, which is very true, some people don't

understand, they misunderstood it, but recovery -- I mean,

I'm sorry, relapse is not part of the program. No, relapse

is not part of the program. It never will be part of the

program. You know, like some people might say, have you had

a relapse yet? No, relapse ain't a part of the program.

Everybody don't have relapse, but it does happen. Relapse

does happen, you know. Relapse in anything happen. You

know, even after a surgery, somebody might relapse and report

back because they went not following the procedures of you

weren't supposed to lift more than 30 pounds for -- you know.

You know, regular meetings is the procedure of Narcotics
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

106

Anonymous through my depression and other -- the mental

health issues and -- and family issues in isolating, I

relapsed, you know. As the book says, you know, sometimes we

can back ourself into a corner that we might not come out

clean. And that was the corner I backed myself into when I

stopped doing everything that was helping me. Ten years,

nine months. Ten years, nine months. November.

November '95 to June 2006. When I relapsed and after the

fact of relapse, it felt like I woke up in a nightmare. It

was like another person did that drug, not me. How did I do

that? But I stopped doing everything that helped, that's

how. But if I could do that, ten years and nine months from

the age of 23 when I got clean, when I was in the program, it

wasn't too many people my age when I was 23 that was staying

clean. I stayed clean for ten years and nine months. If I

did it at 23, I know when I finally, finally get clean again

at 38, I can -- I could continue and continue and do it much

longer.

My biggest stumbling block getting back to the

program and getting medicated was the shame of I threw all

that, as they call it, good time away. I pissed it down the

drain, you know. You know, and sometimes shame stop us from

doing things that we need to do. As the book of Narcotics

Anonymous say, there is nothing shameful about a relapse.

The shameful part is staying out there in the relapse, you
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

107

know. I stayed out and the shame got worse and worse

because, with the shame, came more and more bad decisions.

Right now, today, I stand here clean since 2011.

I'm sorry, 2010. And some people may argue, oh, he is in

jail, he don't got a choice. That's a lie. People over

there getting high every day, every day. Whether it's weed,

heroin, coke, or the stuff that don't show up in the system,

they call it tunechi. I don't want no part of it. They

played a part at ruining my life. I don't want no part of

nothing that played a part in why I'm here today. No part of

drugs. No part of prostitution. No part of soliciting. No

part of drinking because I got to be sure about -- be sure

and never forget one thing. For me, alcohol is a drug. One

is wet, the other one is dry. Bottom line, they both get me

high. If I pick up a bottle, sooner or later, I'm going to

end up maybe with a needle in my arm. People over there

cooking up their own wine. I don't want no part of it. I

want a part in changing, a part in putting back to the

community, you know, helping rebuild the community. This

either going to do negative or positive. I learned, if you

don't get involved in something positive, you going to do

something negative. Like, when I got clean, when I got out

of treatment and went to the halfway house, I didn't know

what to do. They said, well, do some service work. I said,

I just read something that you got to be six months clean to
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

108

do service work. He said, the guy that ended up becoming my

sponsor, he said, no, you got to be six months clean to chair

the table, run a meeting. No, no, the meeting is -- running

a meeting is a year clean. But the other stuff like,

secretary, GSR, and stuff, six months, you know, he said.

But all you need is one day and the willingness to go around

and push the chairs in. You know, this is before they passed

the new bylaws to make the meeting rooms non-smoking or empty

the ashtrays or, you know. And then about after -- I want to

say when he gave me my three-month -- no, when he gave me my

nine-month medallion, he told me -- you know, I was trying to

get a service position and I didn't get voted in. He said --

he said, don't be discourage. Really, to tell you the truth,

some of the most humbling service, you don't have to get

voted in, you know. Pick up a newcomer, take him to a

meeting, you know. Give the new person that's walking in the

door a hug. The one that, you know, that looks dirty and

grimy person that you want to walk away from. Give them a

hug. You know, make somebody feel like they belong. Give

back what is so freely given to you. And those are the

things that help me stay clean. And that guy became my

sponsor and helped me stay clean; had me sign up with Grand

Prairie Service, help me, you know, to get -- get in the

right meetings because I had came from three -- three-month

program to the Branden house. I'm seeing TASC probation and
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

109

my regular probation officer. And my regular probation

officer, he said, okay, you got to get in, you know. That's

part of my mental health probation, I have to get in. And if

you talk to Dave Bishop today, he'll tell you that I'm one --

I was one of his success stories. Before I got locked up, I

called Dave Bishop. You know, when I relapsed, when I

relapsed, I called Dave Bishop and broke down and cried, left

a message, told him I messed up. And before I got locked up,

about a month or so before I got locked up, I called Dave

Bishop and told him, you know, I wanted to let you know that

I'm clean. At that time I had I think about 18 months clean,

you know. I said, I'm clean. I know I left a message on

your recording one day and I was messed up. And I said --

then it turned out he had never got the message. So I might

have deleted it because it gives you the option to send or

delete. But it was good to let him know I was clean. And I

reached out to him, you know. And, you know, and I know

how -- when I'm on the right track and I'm medicated, I know

how to reach out, you know. You know, I have my network. I

have 800 numbers.

You know, Ms. Levin is talking about life in

prison, you know, and to protect society, and I -- and I

understand it's important to protect society. But I truly,

honest to God, do not believe that society need to be

protected from me. You know, I understand I made some real
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

110

bad mistakes in -- in life. However, the thing about -- I

don't even think she is even qualified to determine what type

of person I can be moving forward. But I think my past

speaks for itself of what type of person I can be, you know.

From 10 years and nine months that I was clean and on

medication, what do you see in my background? Nothing.

THE COURT: There were numerous arrests for assault

during that time.

THE DEFENDANT: I forgot about that. I was

arrested for -- it was assault. Someone claiming they was

battered. It was a guy from one of the meetings, and he

claimed I battered him.

THE COURT: I think one of them was your stepson.

THE DEFENDANT: Pardon? No, I never been arrested

for assault on my stepson.

THE COURT: Well, you weren't convicted.

THE DEFENDANT: And that was something that was

claimed throughout bond and throughout trial. I never

been -- Oh, I'm sorry, I did have that, too. But, and that

was thrown out, too. That was in --

THE COURT: I agree, there were no convictions.

Okay. I think --

THE DEFENDANT: But for the gist of it, what I'm

saying is, if you look at my background, you see, when I used

drugs, I had patterns. Patterns maybe that lasted every
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

111

three months. I'm arrested for something, whatever it is.

Domestic. A domestic, disorderly conduct, you know,

possession, you know. From 2000 -- or from '95 to 2006, you

don't see that pattern. Something changed. So when you --

when you ask yourself, the pattern was broken, what changed,

I'm letting you know what changed in my life. I had help. I

had help. I was properly medicated, you know. Maybe --

maybe not even properly, but I was -- I had a doctor that

didn't really want to mess with my psych meds because I had

thyroid issues. I been going back and forth to the hospital

for thyroid issues since 2000. Since 2000 and -- and they

don't -- when you going through thyroid issues, they don't

want to mess with your psych meds because your thyroid glands

control every single thing in your body, you know, from

mental health issues to even nerve issues. And it's -- you

know, it gets real deep how much the thyroid control, you

know. And it took years to get this thyroid dealt with. One

minute I'm on medication, one minute the doctor calling me,

don't take no more, you're too high, you're too low. I'm

being sent from one specialist to another, you know. And

then there was times where I just stopped taking the meds

and, you know, I -- I was using. You know, I was battling

back and forth with the demons that -- of the drugs, you

know. From 2006 to '10 was a real battle back and forth, you

know. I think I went -- went to three -- I went to the
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

112

hospital three, four times from 2006 to '10, and two of them

being a drug rehab. And -- and then I left Linden Oaks at

one time and was sent to a nursing home for mental illness

because I wasn't discharged stable. I wasn't stable. They

just -- my insurance ran up and they sent me to a nursing

home, Sunset. It was called Sunset on Sheridan, on the north

side of Chicago. And I was eventually discharged from the

nursing home at a hospital. When they took me to the

hospital from Sunset, I had a bipolar episode, and they sent

me to the hospital and they refused to take me back at --

Summerset, not Sunset. It was called Summerset. They

refused to take me back at Summerset because of my bipolar

episode. You know, I had put a couple cigarettes out on

myself where, in order for me to go have a cigarette, I had

to be on one on one. You know, I had to have counselor with

me anytime I wanted a cigarette, you know, because I kept

putting out cigarette out on myself. And then -- then a

couple bipolar episodes where they had to restrain me and

medicate me, you know. And -- and they discharged me from

that hospital. They had taken me to the hospital. They sent

me back, you know, and I got discharged from there, didn't

know where to go. North side of Chicago, you know. It only

take a second to get further south or west, you know. And

I'm over somebody's house getting high, you know. You know,

many times feeling rejected, I don't want it, you know.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

113

And I felt all my life I felt rejected by my dad,

waiting at the window, rejected by my mom when it seemed that

she chose a pen pal stranger over her kids. Rejected by the

hospital when they say they can't help me. When I got

expelled out of school and my mom took me to therapist. A

rejection that the therapist said there is no help for him.

When you go to see a medical doctor and they lie and say

there is no help, you know how belittling that is?

But these are things I just added to my

self-medicating list. I'll get high and forget about it.

But the truth of the matter, high don't get -- getting high

don't take no pain away. It gives you an illusion that it's

gone for a minute. As soon as the high goes away, the pain

comes tumbling down ten times worse. And I've learned over

the years the only thing that ease the pain, because pain is

never going to go away, that eases the pain is to confront

the pain. Deal with it, you know. So working the steps in

the Narcotics Anonymous meeting, you got your anger category,

you got your rejection category, you got your -- you got your

abuse category, you got your resentment. I resent this, I

resent that. And sometimes you look up. And when you keep

on riding over the years, you look up and you -- then you

resent things that, like, where did this come from? Even the

perfect stranger. But when you get deep down from under the

surface stuff, you resent the perfect stranger because he
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

114

reminded you of Bob that did this to you or dad that did this

to your mother; or the list go on. But then, when you get to

the nitty-gritty, you got to get to the forgiveness category,

including forgiving yourself, you know. And sometimes, I'm

not going to say sometimes, a lot of times, it seems easier

to forgive somebody else than yourself, you know. I'm mad at

myself the most. But you learn forgiveness. True

forgiveness start with self. You got to truly forgive

yourself before you can forgive others. Then you can get

closure and move forward, you know. And these are the tools

that I have instilled in me that, with the chance, I can -- I

regain these tools. I can use them. I can use them. And I

can help someone else use them where they don't have to go

down some path. I can stop somebody else from falling in the

pothole I fell in. There is another me sitting in the

meeting right now that needs somebody to reach out to him and

tell me he is not that bad person, he made bad decisions, and

we're going to love you until you learn how to love yourself;

and then you can give it back to somebody else and we're

going to do this together. Everything you've been through or

going through, I've been through it. That is okay. That it

might get worse before it gets better, but it's going to get

better, you know. There is somebody else that needs tools

that's instilled in me that I can put in to them that they

don't end up in front of you or no other judge under any
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

115

other circumstances.

One thing I've learned in this four years, besides

learning that the jails are so overcrowded, it's overcrowded

with people with mental illness. This guy, Angel Ramos, rest

his soul, guy just died a couple days, right there, in the

cell across from me. Mental illness. And people with mental

illness end up in the SHU or Seg and neglected and left

behind. You know, a lot of times, you know, oh, he just got

mental illness. That's why he is not getting up. Don't

worry. He don't want the breakfast? He don't want the

lunch? He don't want the dinner? Until the right CO that's

caring and loving come by. Oh, no, why he is not getting up.

THE COURT: All right. I don't think we need to

talk anymore about him.

THE DEFENDANT: Okay. I'm sorry.

THE COURT: I need you to finish a point or -- it

has been a long time.

THE DEFENDANT: I'm sorry. I'm just trying to

express my feelings and views. But, again, I stand before

you and I'm begging for mercy. And I think Count 1 doesn't

limit how much probation you can give me. If you give me a

chance, I can be the miracle defendant that stood in front of

you and turned things around and helped to contribute to

society. I stand before you today begging for mercy.

THE COURT: Thank you. All right. Let's turn to
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

116

3553. Starting with an Offense Level of 43 because I guess

is the highest level it can go, and a Criminal History

Category of III. The guideline provision is life

imprisonment, but it is not a requirement.

Well, we start with looking at the nature and

circumstances of the offense. And it's hard to really talk

about or really to describe, I mean, as the government was

saying, that the seriousness of the offense in terms of the

viciousness of it and the harm that it did. I mean, this was

several years of trafficking. This was involving the four

victims that testified before me, as well as the -- I mean,

the five before involving counts and the additional one in

terms of relevant conduct. They were kidnaped in the sense

that they were not allowed to leave. They were tortured.

They were coerced. They were forced to engage in

prostitution. They were humiliated. They were repeatedly

raped.

The other part of 3553(a)(1) is the history and

characteristics of the defendant. In some ways, certainly

this criminal history category does not overstate his

offenses. I have listened, I've read your very good

memorandum, listened to your argument, Mr. Shaver; and I have

listened as well, I have for a very long time now, to

Mr. Carson. And, of course, I have watched him both in trial

and in court over a period of several years and many times.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

117

You are smart and manipulative and incredibly self-centered.

I just listened to you for an hour and a half, or however

long it was, and I never heard any remorse, any

understanding, any -- -- anything whatsoever that said, I

know I really hurt these people, and I am sorry for that.

What I heard was: Poor me. I was victimized by my mother, I

was victimized by my father, I was victimized by every

medical person who has had any contact with me. I was

victimized by teachers; everyone, apparently, who has come

into your life. And I also heard you say that, okay, you

acted better during the years when you weren't drugging. If

so, you had an option. You had the option not to go back to

it. I do notice that, when you say you quit your drugs again

in early 2010, that the conduct in this case went on after

that. And, oh, your wife's fault. I left that one out.

I do see that there is a history of mental health

issues. I think we've been very careful in this case to make

sure -- to try and separate and make sure what was going on.

Sometimes it was, I think you decided not, just as you

decided to stop taking your medication back at times when you

were out, you stopped taking your medication when you were

incarcerated. Undoubtedly -- there is nobody -- I don't

think anybody grows up to be an abuser in the way that you

were an abuser without probably being abused at some level

himself; or I suppose it could be herself. But that doesn't
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

118

excuse what you did. And it doesn't excuse you from at some

point taking responsibility, real responsibility, and saying:

Gee, I really, really hurt these people. But I will take it

into consideration in a sentence.

The sentence is supposed to reflect the seriousness

of the offense, promote respect for the law and provide just

punishment, as well as adequate deterrence; and to protect

the public from further crimes of the defendant. I

usually -- in most cases, I'm actually not that worried about

further crimes. I am in this case. I see no sense

whatsoever that whatever has fueled this is not still there,

will not be there. I also see somebody who can talk well,

who may not have had a lot of education. Although, it does

say you went to high school part of the time. But is quite

smart and quite capable of discerning a whole bunch through

lots and lots of facts. And I can see at talking vulnerable

people into going with them.

So taking all of that into consideration, as well

as the need for just punishment, the need to really punish

just really severe crimes and the other factors, but also

hoping that if any help is given in prison that there might

be a chance some day that you could be released and not cause

harm, I'm committing you to the custody of the Bureau of

Prisons for a term of 47 months -- 47 years on Counts 1, 2, 3

and 4, to be served concurrently. 47 years. There will be a
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

119

fine. There is a special assessment of $400 payable

forthwith.

Upon your release from prison you will be on

supervised release for a term of five years on Counts 1, 2,

3, and 4, to be served concurrently. Within 72 hours of your

release from the custody of the Bureau of Prisons, you shall

report in person to the probation office in the district to

which you are released. On supervised release, you shall not

commit another Federal, state or local crime. You shall

comply with the standard conditions adopted by the Court.

You shall refrain from any unlawful use of a controlled

substance. You shall submit to one drug test within 15 days

of release from prison and random drug tests thereafter, not

to exceed 104 tests per year. You shall cooperate with the

collection of the DNA sample at the direction of the

probation officer. You shall participate in a mental health

treatment program at the direction of the probation officer.

You shall comply with all recommended treatment. That may

include psychological and physiological testing. You shall

maintain use of all prescribed medication. You shall

registered with the state sex offender registration agency in

any state where you reside, employed, are employed, carry on

a vocation or are a student. You shall not have contact with

any person under the age of 18 except in the presence of a

responsible adult who is aware of the nature of your
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

120

background and current offense and who has been approved by

the probation officer and treatment provider.

I think that's all. I don't actually have one of

those little up-to-date -- this was done so long ago. I

think that ought to cover -- you have one? I don't think one

was done in this case.

MS. LEVIN: Oh, then I don't.

THE COURT: Did you do one?

PROBATION OFFICER: No, your Honor, I did not. I

have --

THE COURT: Well, I think I've covered the ones

that would seem to me to be important, considering his age,

by the time he will be released.

PROBATION OFFICER: Very well, your Honor. I mean,

we typically recommend, one of them statutory, it's No. 8,

under the special conditions, I think. Refrain from

possessing a firearm or destructive device.

THE COURT: Yes, we should do that.

PROBATION OFFICER: Then there is a cluster of them

routinely asked for every case. Remain in this jurisdiction

where he is released and being supervised.

THE COURT: Yes.

PROBATION OFFICER: Don't leave without permission

of the Court or probation officer. Report to the probation

officer or Court as directed. Permit the probation officer
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

121

to visit the defendant at his home, work or any other

reasonable location; and permit the confiscation of any

contraband observed. Notify the probation officer promptly

of any change in residence. Notify the probation officer

promptly within 72 hours if arrested or questioned by law

enforcement. So those are the standard.

THE COURT: Do you have any objection to any of

those?

MR. SHAVER: I do not, Judge.

THE COURT: They all sound appropriate. Okay. We

will include -- we will include those.

You have 14 days to file a notice of appeal. Is

there any place you want me to recommend where he serves his

sentence?

MR. SHAVER: The medical facility in Minnesota I

think would be the best place for him. We haven't talked

about it, and I don't know if he wishes a place that's closer

to home, but he needs psychological counseling. He needs

medical help -- a mental health treatment.

THE DEFENDANT: Excuse me, your Honor. There is no

medical center down south where the majority of my family is.

My sisters will have to relocate down there as well. My

brother is in --

THE COURT: I'll tell you what, it will take her a

little while to get this prepared. You people -- well, I
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

122

don't know, do you want to talk about it a little bit? Do

you want the list?

MR. SHAVER: There is a medical facility in

St. Louis, Missouri, but that is as close as it is farther

south, but --

THE COURT: Do you want me to just recommend that

he be sent to an appropriate facility in Georgia? Is that

what you're saying?

THE DEFENDANT: In Georgia, Arkansas, in that area.

If you got a medical center, if you got one.

THE COURT: There is one in -- I mean, I'm not --

you know, they will have to decide whether --

MR. SHAVER: Yes.

THE COURT: -- what kind of treatment is

appropriate. But I will recommend that he go to an

appropriate -- whatever is the appropriate facility in

Georgia, Arkansas or Missouri. Is that what you said? You

didn't --

THE DEFENDANT: No. Alabama, Arkansas.

Prattville, Alabama; Conyers, Georgia; and in Arkansas;

right? Yeah, Little Rock. Arkansas.

THE COURT: Where is your sister moving?

THE DEFENDANT: My sister, she is moving that way,

too, where my brother is, towards my brother. She don't know

exactly where, so.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

123

THE COURT: Where does he live?

THE DEFENDANT: He lives in Georgia. He lives in

Conyers, Georgia.

THE COURT: All right. We'll say Georgia,

Arkansas, Alabama. Anything else?

MS. LEVIN: Just one issue from the government,

Judge. The government is seeking restitution for the victims

that were charged in the indictment in this case. It's based

on their trial testimony. I have a chart that I can provide

to your courtroom deputy. It's based upon the number of days

that they worked and an average amount that they made each

day.

MR. SHAVER: I would object, Judge.

THE COURT: I'm not going to do that.

MS. LEVIN: Under the statute, Judge, they're

entitled to -- I mean, restitution is mandatory.

THE COURT: But it's restitution of funds. They

actually were engaged in illegal conduct; right?

MS. LEVIN: Yes. And the courts have held that

it's appropriate to order restitution in cases like these

where they were entitled to the funds and the funds went to

the person who was trafficking.

THE COURT: Have you given them this chart? I

haven't seen this.

MS. LEVIN: I haven't -- we just put it together.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

124

It was -- I wrote about restitution in the government

sentencing memo, though, Judge, and said that I would be

providing a copy at sentencing.

MR. SHAVER: Judge, I have seen some restitution

orders that are tied directly to treatment, counseling,

medical treatment, but there are bills. And there should be

an accountability of what was spent and what supposedly is

owed. But I think it's too speculative and is inappropriate

in this case.

THE COURT: Well, right now you're asking me to

look at something I haven't even -- do something based on

something I haven't even seen.

MS. LEVIN: Yes. Judge, as I said, it's based on

the trial testimony. And if your Honor would, like while

your courtroom deputy is putting together the judgment of

commitment order, I can certainly --

THE COURT: Well, she is probably not going to get

that done today.

MS. LEVIN: So I can certainly submit something

more in writing and submit the attached chart and your Honor

can rule.

THE COURT: Do you have the chart now?

MS. LEVIN: And, Judge, I'm passing up one more

that actually is more detailed that I just received.

THE COURT: You know --
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

125

MR. SHAVER: I note that Judge Leinenweber did not

order restitution in the case.

THE COURT: You've also had a lot of time to have

done this so that we could deal with it today. I don't want

to deal with this after today. I'm not going to do it then.

I have no idea what this is based on. Ordinarily, if we had

a restitution issue, we would have dealt with it before the

day of sentencing, not at the very -- not at 4:00 o'clock on

this afternoon, after an entire day, or almost an entire day.

And I have no idea what these numbers mean.

MS. LEVIN: Judge --

THE COURT: Have you given this to Mr. Shaver

before then?

MS. LEVIN: It was just prepared today, Judge, and

it has been -- but it's information that has been available

because it's in the trial transcripts that I received from

Mr. Shaver. I mean, none of this is new. It's based on the

time period that they testified that the defendant trafficked

them. And it's based on the average amount of money that was

also in the record that they would make each day. So, I

mean, all of this information is available. And of course --

MR. SHAVER: We're paying them for the trial

testimony?

MS. LEVIN: I'm sorry.

MR. SHAVER: I'm sorry.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

126

MS. LEVIN: And as far as putting defense counsel

on notice, we mentioned this in our government's version. We

also put it in our sentencing memorandum. So it shouldn't be

a shock to anybody that the government is seeking this

restitution. And we cited cases that support providing

restitution to victims of sex trafficking in similar

circumstances where it has been awarded, based upon the

services that the victims provided when the money went to the

trafficker.

MR. SHAVER: They have not provided in paper the

specifics of what was done in this case that deserves

restitution. They simply haven't. If the only restitution

is based on the funds that were paid for the sex acts in the

case, how many sex acts were there? Estimates? Is that an

appropriate estimate for a restitution? I don't think so.

MS. LEVIN: Based on the testimony that was given

under oath and the jury found them credible and there is no

evidence to the contrary, yes, it actually is, Judge, because

it's confined to the period that they testified they were

trafficked, based upon working every single day. And it is a

very moderate estimate of $500 a day. And there was

testimony regarding the prices that were charged for each of

the sex acts. I have a copy, Judge. Would you like --

THE COURT: Yeah, I would like to see it.

THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor, while you're waiting on
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

127

that, two quick things, please. We never dealt with the

forfeiture thing. I'm willing to waive the forfeiture thing,

but the Federal agents took a computer of my mom's that was

not used in trial, has no -- was no part of the case

whatsoever, got all our family pictures on that my aunt would

like back. And it's a whole bunch of family irreplaceable

pictures that --

THE COURT: Did you hear him?

THE DEFENDANT: That even affected them having the

proper pictures for my mom's obituary, you know, that we've

been trying to get back for years.

MS. LEVIN: Judge, it has previously been returned

to the defendant's sister.

THE DEFENDANT: No, it hasn't, your Honor. We've

been asking about this for long. Is there a receipt that

you -- that it has been returned to my sister?

MS. LEVIN: Yes, Judge. And we can certainly

provide it to defense counsel.

THE COURT: All right.

THE DEFENDANT: Okay.

THE COURT: Well, it did say you would submit a

victim information sheet for restitution in advance of

sentencing. And you don't cite any Seventh Circuit cases.

MS. LEVIN: That is true, there is no Seventh

Circuit case cited there.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

128

THE COURT: I guess, without anything being

submitted, I didn't have any reason to really look into it.

Okay. I don't think there is going to be any money, so I

think we're spending additional time in a too warm courtroom

for something that isn't going to be very useful. But I'm

not going to order restitution based on something that I was

just given now. And this is the end of this case. You

wanted to go to sentencing today, we did. All right. Thank

you.

MR. SHAVER: Thank you, Judge.

THE CLERK: All rise.

(Which were all the proceedings heard.)

CERTIFICATE

I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript

from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter.

/s/Sandra M. Tennis January 4, 2016

 

Sandra M. Tennis Date

Official Court Reporter