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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1140

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF OREGON

THE HON. MICHAEL J. McSHANE, JUDGE PRESIDING

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Government,

vs.

DANIEL STEPHEN JOHNSON,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

No. 6:14-cr-00482-MC-1

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

EUGENE, OREGON

Tuesday, May 15, 2018

Day 10, Morning and Afternoon

Volume 9 - PAGES 1140 - 1308

DEBORAH COOK, RPR, CSR

OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

405 East 8th Avenue

Suite 2130

Eugene, Oregon 97401

(541) 431-4162

Deborah_Cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 1 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1141

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:

FOR THE GOVERNMENT:

Jeffrey S. Sweet

United States Attorney's Office

405 E. Eighth Avenue, Suite 2400

Eugene, OR 97401

541-465-6771

Fax: 541-465-6917

Email: Jeff.sweet@usdoj.gov

Lauren E. Britsch

U.S. Department of Justice

Criminal Division

1400 New York Ave NW, 6th Floor

Washington, DC 20530

202-514-2220

Fax: 202-514-1793

Email: Lauren.britsch@usdoj.gov

Ravi Sinha

United States Attorney's Office

1000 SW Third Ave, Suite 600

Portland, OR 97204

503-727-1014

Fax: 503-727-1117

Email: Ravi.sinha@usdoj.gov

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

Craig E. Weinerman

Office of the Federal Public Defender

859 Willamette Street, Suite 200

Eugene, OR 97401

541-465-6937

Fax: 541-465-6975

Email: Craig_weinerman@fd.org

Lisa A. Maxfield

Pacific Northwest Law LLP

1255 NW Ninth Avenue, No. 11

Portland, OR 97209

(503) 222-2661

Fax: (503) 222-2864

Email: Lamaxfield@pacificnwlaw.com

*****

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 2 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1142

WITNESS INDEX

Page/Line

FOR THE DEFENSE:

TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD 1152 1

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. WEINERMAN

1152 10

Defense Rests 1178 16

JURY INSTRUCTIONS 1185 18

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT 1209 9

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT 1239 19

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT 1285 16

EXHIBIT OFFERED INDEX

EXHIBIT RECEIVED INDEX

EXHIBIT 277 RECEIVED 1182 3

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 3 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1143

PROCEEDINGS

Tuesday, May 15, 2018, at 9:14 a.m.

THE COURT: Ready for the jury?

MR. WEINERMAN: Judge, there's one thing to bring up

and that would be the jury instruction on page 27, which is

the elements of counts 1-6, and I think we worked it out.

THE COURT: Go ahead. I am sorry.

MR. WEINERMAN: The column on nickname, we're asking

that that be removed. I think the government is willing to

do that, and I've agreed just to put those names under name.

As the Court knows, the indictment does not name -- put the

real names of any of the alleged victims. They identify them

by number.

So of course, we have no objection to their real

name being disclosed to the jury. But since there's really

not been any evidence of nicknames, we feel there shouldn't

be a nickname column, but the name in the current nickname

column be put in the name column so there's no confusion.

THE COURT: So more -- that's called an Anglicized

version of their names instead of their actual native name.

MR. WEINERMAN: For example, for BT XXXXXXXXX it

would just say under that, BT XX or BT XXXXXXX. So ES XXXXX

XXX it would shift from the nickname column, ES XXX or

"ES XXX," because I think along the way witnesses have

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 4 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1144

referred to the alleged victims by the nickname, but not as a

nickname, necessarily. And just the whole term "nickname"

has not come up, to my knowledge, during the trial.

THE COURT: It's come up a number of times. What is

the government's thought?

MR. SINHA: Your Honor, my understanding of

Mr. Weinerman's proposal is basically to strike the word

"nickname" from the instruction and combine those two

columns, and we're fine with that. We're just trying to make

sure the jury knows who each count is referring to.

THE COURT: I don't think it's necessary. We can --

I know the witnesses have actually used the word "nickname"

in describing their own various names. I don't know how that

actually translates, but the fact is, every alleged victim in

the case is operating under at least two names, at various

times.

I think we have generally known them by their

shortened easier names, which are either nicknames or some of

them are Anglicized names, so -- I think we have both names

available to the jury so they can clarify. Some may be

taking notes under the name they spelled out to the jury as

their formal names. Others may have taken notes using the

more general nickname, for want of a better word. I don't

know how else to call it.

MR. WEINERMAN: Judge, the last thing I will say

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 5 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1145

about this is I realize the Court is not sending the

indictment back to the jury. The indictment does not refer

to the term "nickname". The indictment has the name by

number of each victim. So again, I am not asking the Court

to send the indictment back, because that doesn't help the

jury very much because it just has numbers, rather than

names.

But it just seems to me that additional information

that is not in the indictment, we should keep to a minimum

because the Grand Jury has returned an indictment, not based

on these names, but on numbers.

So it just seems to me we should limit the amount of

extraneous information. Nickname is not a concept that has

been put into the indictment. So I -- again, I don't oppose

the jury knowing which number refers to which alleged victim,

but I think we should be careful about labeling these names

as nicknames when that's not in the indictment.

As the Court knows, the government can allege in the

indictment aka's. We know why they didn't do it in this

case, we understand that. But we think the whole concept of

nickname since it's not in the indictment should not be sent

back to the jury in this instruction.

THE COURT: Okay. Well, I want both names on the

this chart to go to the jury so there's no confusion, because

multiple names have been used. We can strike "nickname" and

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 6 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1146

put "also known as". I don't know if that is helping you

anymore than nickname.

MR. WEINERMAN: No, I don't think we should do that.

But again, the substance, the names that may have been

referred to, we have no objection to that. I really -- I can

boil the argument down, and ask that the word "nickname" be

stricken from this instruction.

THE COURT: And keep both columns.

MR. WEINERMAN: Sure, we can keep both columns. I

don't mind that.

THE COURT: We will strike nickname. I think it's

clear that there are two names for each minor victim. I

assume you will clarify that a little bit in your closing

arguments.

MR. SINHA: We will. And as I told Mr. Weinerman,

we have slides that say "nickname" so he's agreed we don't

have to change them.

We have one other thing we would like to raise with

the Court. But the first one is with regards to the

alternate jurors. I don't know what the Court's plan is in

terms of dismissing the alternate jurors. We would ask the

Court to consider perhaps keeping them under -- I don't know

if it's sequestration, or the Court's instruction so we can

use them in case we lose somebody during deliberations.

THE COURT: We will keep them through closing

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 7 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1147

argument, and I instruct them not to deliberate with their

fellow jurors but to say their goodbyes and then also not to

discuss the case with anybody in the event that we have --

something remarkable were to happen, we would have to call

one of them in to begin deliberations all over. And then we

will call them as soon as a verdict comes in to let them

know.

MR. SINHA: Thank you, Your Honor.

MS. BRITSCH: Sorry. Two more brief issues. First,

for the record, we would like to note the two interpreters

used for the government, Pauline Laurent and Rithy Lim are

both certified by the State of California as Court certified

interpreters in Khmer, and they were used for witnesses that

primarily speak Khmer, rather than English. So we wanted to

note that for the record.

And secondly, I believe there may be one area of

dispute with respect to the defense's expert witness who is

about to testify. Mr. Weinerman has indicated he may still

seek to have her testify about police tactics regarding

interviewing children. We still maintain an objection to

that. That's outside of her area of expertise.

So I just wanted to note that for the Court in case

the Court would like to address that before she gets on the

stand.

MR. WEINERMAN: And, Judge, and I am going to try to

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 8 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1148

lay a foundation. I will just tell the Court I learned this

morning that she did some work for the UN in Cambodia. I am

trying to read my writing -- UN Transitional Authority in

which she was involved with studying the interviewing

techniques of witnesses and child witnesses so she is

familiar. And I think she can testify about the lack of

training in that area, that they are not trained in the

techniques and the concepts of interviewing child witnesses.

So I think she does qualify in that very limited

area. It's not going to be a major part of our presentation,

but I think it is relevant and she should be allowed to

testify about it.

THE COURT: I think you need a child forensics

psychologist who specializes in this area; otherwise, you can

call anybody who can Google the issue on the Internet and say

what they found out. That's not her expertise. There really

hasn't been evidence in this case presented by the defense

that the interviews themselves in this case were defective.

Certainly you can put on a forensic child

psychologist and say, I reviewed the interviews and they were

inappropriate. They led the witness, they suggested answers,

they forced the witness to answer when the witness didn't

want to. Some of the general things we often hear in these

kinds of cases. They were interviewed around too many

people.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 9 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1149

The list goes on for the kinds of issues that a

forensic psychologist would raise in really any sex abuse

interview. But putting a history professor on to talk about

it seems to go too far, so I would sustain the objection.

MS. BRITSCH: Thank you, Your Honor. I don't think

we have anything else before the jury comes in.

MR. WEINERMAN: One minute, Judge.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. WEINERMAN: Judge, I am informed we have an

unresolved objection to Exhibit 277 which is in front of me.

So there are three areas. The first one -- and just for

context, this is a chat between BT XXXXXXX and Knot Mariah.

I am not going to try to pronounce the last name. Who, at

one time, was in a relationship with Daniel Johnson, for some

context.

And this takes place on the day Mr. Johnson was

arrested, December 9, 2013. So unlike other texts that the

Court has permitted with BT XXXXXXX complaining about things

before Mr. Johnson was arrested, this text occurred after he

was arrested. So the first one we're objecting to is

Mr. BT X saying, "I will tell you because you are my dear

sis," and then a minute later texting, "he committed sexual."

We're also objecting to two lines down. "I don't

know for sure, but I just know he had sex with one of the boy

in the center." And we feel that that is not relevant, or

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 10 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1150

the Court should exercise its discretion under 403 in that

he's not identifying a particular person, unlike some of the

other instances where he does. And then finally, he also

texts to Knot Mariah that "When I talked with him about this

he cried a lot, and he wanted to commit suicide." And we

think the part about committing suicide should go out under

relevancy on 403 grounds.

THE COURT: How many pages is the exhibit, because I

am only seeing one page?

MR. WEINERMAN: The actual exhibit looks like it's

five pages.

THE COURT: I am going to need a copy, because I am

not able to scroll on the screen. I am only seeing one page.

MR. SWEET: I can give the Court a copy of 277,

which I just marked on and highlighted. And I have a

slightly longer version of the chat, which has some of the

parts that we removed and I can provide both of those to the

Court.

And I will say this, Your Honor, the conversation

appears to potentially split between a discussion that

Mr. BT X had regarding a boy who may have disclosed during

the arrest, and then also discussions prior to the arrest,

because it indicates that he confronted Mr. Johnson. So I

think there's a little bit of a split with pre-arrest and

post-arrest conduct.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 11 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1151

MR. WEINERMAN: And, Judge, to add to the context,

Mr. BT X is in the United States when this conversation, this

chat is being held, and Knot Mariah, we believe Knot Mariah

was in Korea at the time. So neither of them are in

Cambodia. Doesn't mean they can't have information about

what is going on there, but it seems to me that it's somewhat

speculative. Two people in two different countries talking

about something that occurred in Cambodia, and it just

doesn't seem that it should go to the jury. It's confusing,

and it's irrelevant.

THE COURT: All right. How about I take a look at

it while our first witness this morning is testifying, and

then we can break and I will rule a little bit more. Let's

bring in the jury.

(JURY IN.)

THE COURT: Please be seated. Welcome back. Thank

you. We're now going to hear from the final witness for the

defense.

Mr. Weinerman, your next witness.

MR. WEINERMAN: Yes, Judge. The defense would call

Dr. Trudy Jacobsen.

THE COURT: Go ahead and step up to the witness

stand, and remain standing and you will be sworn in.

//

//

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 12 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1152

TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD,

produced as a witness, having been first duly sworn, was

examined and testified as follows:

THE WITNESS: I do.

COURT CLERK: Please be seated. State your name for

the record, spelling your first and last.

THE WITNESS: Trudy Anne Jacobsen, T-R-U-D-Y,

A-N-N-E, J-A-C-O-B-S-E-N.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. WEINERMAN:

Q Can I call you Dr. Jacobsen?

A Yes.

Q Because you have a PhD?

A Correct.

Q Can you please tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury

how you are employed.

A I am tenured at the rank of full professor at Northern

Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois.

Q Can you tell us the areas of the subjects, the topics

that you teach and you write about at that university, and

other areas?

A I teach at the undergraduate and graduate level, courses

in anthropology, political culture, ethnography, gender and

sexuality studies, and history, specifically in Southeast

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 13 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1153

Asia. And my country of research, primarily, is Cambodia.

Q And you mentioned Cambodian culture?

A Yes.

Q And could you give us a general idea of some of the

classes you teach in these subjects?

A Certainly. Gender and sexuality in Southeast Asia,

Buddhist Southeast Asia, history of genocide, history of

Cambodia, ethnographic methods, doing research in developing

countries.

Q Could you give us a brief background on your educational

background?

A Certainly, I hold undergraduate degrees in history and

anthropology, double major. First class honors from the

Columbia University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, and

a PhD in history.

Q From what university?

A From the university of Queensland.

Q And just give us a little background about where you

grew up?

A Certainly.

Q Where you lived up until now?

A Both of my parents worked in development. My father was

a soil scientist, my mother is an epidemiologist. I grew up

in Algeria, Indonesia, and Cambodia. And my mother first

went to Cambodia when I was 13 years old. She was one of the

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 14 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1154

first 50 nonSoviet technical experts allowed into Cambodia to

assist with the reconstruction of the country after the Khmer

register in 1988.

Q And I judge from your accent you were born in --

A I am Australian.

Q And you lived the first how many years of your life

there?

A Four and a half, Algeria for three, Indonesia for five

and a half, Cambodia since I was 13.

Q Tell us about living in Cambodia from the age of 13 on?

A The country was still very much under the control of the

Vietnamese, who assisted with the liberation of Cambodia from

the Khmer Rouge in 1979. They had a shadow presence as a

government for ten years until 1989.

Foreigners were not permitted to live in houses. We

were expected to live in three different hotels. The United

Nations and other aid agencies had to run their offices out

of one particular hotel. Western technical experts and

program officers were not allowed to interact with the Soviet

technical experts.

There was a nightly curfew of 8:00 p.m. Schools

were few and far between. I, myself, carried out

correspondence studies until my senior year of high school in

1991 when I returned to Australia to take my baccalaureate

there.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 15 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1155

Q Did you attend school when you were a teenager in

Cambodia?

A I was carrying out correspondence classes. I also had

Saturday jobs typing reports for many of the nongovernmental

organizations, since I was foreign.

I learned Khmer when I was living in Cambodia with

my mother. But I was unable to read or write it until I

started doing my PhD thesis on Cambodia in the year 2000.

Q Let's talk about your language proficiency in Khmer.

Would you tell us about that, please?

A I did not have formal classes. I learned Khmer from

interacting with friends and people in Cambodia. Therefore,

I was in an unusual position in 1992 when the United Nations

transitional authority in Cambodia came in to begin to

prepare for the elections in Cambodia in 1993, in that I

spoke a more accurate version of Khmer from the 1980s and

1990s than many experts that had learned Khmer in the 1960s.

THE COURT: You are going to have to slow down a

little bit. We have a court reporter who has to take

everything down.

THE WITNESS: I am sorry, ma'am.

Q BY MR. WEINERMAN: What is your reading and writing

proficiency?

A When I began taking my PhD, I carried out formal

instruction in Cambodia in reading and writing, so I am able

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 16 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1156

to read and write proficiently.

Q Do you have experience observing Cambodian culture?

A I do, both formally and informally. My mother

established the cold chain in Cambodia, which is the system

for keeping vaccines safe as they are carried to rural places

in order to carry out mass vaccinations. So I was,

therefore, able to see a great deal of Cambodia in the late

1980s and early 1990s. I also maintained a residence in

Cambodia from 1999 until after my son was born in the year

2010.

Q Tell us about, I think you mentioned work with the

United Nations. Tell us about your work with that, and what

you did?

A When I finished secondary school I returned to Cambodia.

I believe I took what was one of the earliest gap years. It

was the late -- no, early 1990s, and I wanted to work in

Cambodia before I went to university to take a degree. And

it so happened that the Paris Peace Accord had been signed in

1989.

Q We ought to back up. And one or two sentences on what

that was?

A The UN came in to educate people on how to have an

election and how to vote. I was in the fortunate position of

speaking English, French, and Khmer. I was hired by the

human rights component, particularly the investigation and

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 17 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1157

monitoring team. Our responsibility was to carry out

investigations into politically motivated intimidation,

harassment, assault and death. And also to train local law

enforcement agents on how to carry out similar

investigations.

Q So how long did that go on, your work with the UN?

A I worked for the UN from March of 1992 until September

of 1993.

Q And have you published numerous articles and

peer-reviewed monographs on aspects of Cambodian society,

religion, and politics?

A Yes. I have two single monographs specifically on

Cambodia, published in 2008 and 2017, and I believe 40 peer

reviewed book chapters or general articles.

MR. WEINERMAN: We would ask the Court to allow her

to testify as an expert on Cambodian history and culture.

MS. BRITSCH: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I will. Thank you.

Q BY MR. WEINERMAN: Dr. Jacobsen, let me start with a

real basic question. Is Cambodia a poor country?

A It is among the poorest in Southeast Asia.

Q And could you explain why it is one of the poorest

countries in Southeast Asia?

A Certainly. From the 1960s on, Cambodia began

experiencing a civil insurgency, which affected the ability

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 18 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1158

of rural communities to produce regular crops of rice. The

Vietnam conflict, which was happening at the same time, drove

many people from farming into the cities seeking refuge.

Infrastructure, which was never particularly good in

Cambodia since the French colonial period, began to falter.

Unemployment rose, even though young people had been promised

that education would lead to good government jobs, they did

not eventuate. Many people were disillusioned and went to

join the socialists, who they believed would provide them

with a more equitable future in Cambodia as opposed to the

capitalism and corruption they saw from the existing regime.

In 1970 the leader of the government, Sihanouk,

S-I-H-A-N-O-U-K, was deposed in a coup. He sought exile in

China, and soon joined the Khmer Rouge who promised to

reinstate him if --

Q Tell us briefly who the Khmer Rouge was?

A The Khmer Rouge -- there were two groups of the Khmer

Rouge. One is lasting from the 1930s with Ho Chi Min

IndoChinese Communist Party. Cambodians who were

disillusioned with the idea of colonialism and capitalism

joined in a vision of social utopia in mainland Southeast

Asia.

Another group, people who were educated in France

during the colonial period, and they came into contact with

French communists and socialists in the 1940s and '50s began

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 19 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1159

to spread ideas of a socialist government. During the 1950s

and '60s, when political parties were allowed to form, these

people tried to participate in usual political activities and

were repressed by the Sihanouk's government. They went and

joined the former communists --

Q Let's move a little more into more modern times, and

again, the context of the question is why is Cambodia a poor

country, whether we get into employment, lack of education,

things like that. So we can -- so we have information about

the current situation in Cambodia in terms of poverty.

A Definitely. In 1979 when the Khmer Rouge were deposed,

a quarter of the population had either died of malnutrition,

torture, purges by the Khmer Rouge, or had fled the country

to neighboring Thailand and Vietnam.

Q So you are saying it lost a quarter of its population

either to immigration or death?

A Fleeing rather than immigration. And even before the

Khmer Rouge took power, the educated elite had managed to get

out of the country fleeing to France or the United States,

where they remained during the Khmer Rouge period.

In 1979 the Vietnamese assisted the remaining

Cambodians, many of whom did not have the necessary skills to

rehabilitate their own country in beginning to get the

country back together. This was hampered by the fact the

Khmer Rouge continued a civil war against the Cambodians

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 20 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1160

until 1997. Apart from a brief period during the UN, when

they agreed to participate in the elections and then reneged.

With all of the civil war, it was very difficult for

Cambodia to continue to grow their own food, to reconstruct

what little infrastructure had been in place previously, and

the government was dealing with a civil insurgency as opposed

to trying to rehabilitate the country.

There was very little investment in education, very

little investment in social programs that we would expect in

a country of Cambodia's size.

Q So fast forward to more recent times, like today, if you

know, what the average per capita gross income is, of the

average Cambodian --

A GDP is $3,700 on paper, but this is skewed because there

are a group of very, very rich Cambodians, and there are a

large number of Cambodians who are extremely poor, so the

average is misleading.

The majority of Cambodians living in a rural

situation would be largely subsistence farmers, small

livestock holders, and existing on remittances from family

members working in the cities, and whatever cottage

industries they are able to produce.

Q So let's talk about what is going on right now. Tell us

about the urban population, the capital is Phnom Penh,

correct?

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 21 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1161

A Correct.

Q What percentage of Cambodians live in the urban area of

Phnom Pehn?

A The official statistics state that 90 percent of

Cambodians are rural dwellers. This is also misleading

because when people are not required to perform agricultural

tasks, so for example, when you are not planting rice or

harvesting rice, it has been traditional for people to go to

the cities to seek other forms of temporary labor.

It's very common for men, particularly, to come to

the cities to provide public transport on their motorbikes or

tuk tuk, et cetera. And then once they are needed back in

the countryside, they will return then. So the population is

fluctuating.

Q So let's talk about, if this is the right term, the

migration of people, particularly young people, from the

rural areas, agricultural areas, into the cities.

A Sociologists and demographers have noted that

particularly in the last ten years, with foreign investment

increasing in Cambodia, in the form of establishing many

factories, such as the Gap factory, Banana Republic, who have

factories in the north of Phnom Penh, increasingly South

Korea and Chinese businesses are choosing to manufacture in

Cambodia as well, because labor is cheaper than in their own

countries, a large number of young people, particularly,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 22 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1162

don't want to stay and grow rice. They want to come to the

cities and take what they perceive as more lucrative jobs in

these factories, believing that they will then be able to

enjoy consumer goods such as cell phones, TVs, and remit

money back to their families living in the rural countryside.

Q So there's a shift in population from the rural areas to

the urban areas, but we don't know in terms of numbers?

A No. I mean there are some studies, but they are on one

province at a time, so we don't have a good idea.

Q Do they have a census in Cambodia?

A They do. I believe the next one is due to be carried

out in 2019.

Q So tell us about the educational opportunities in the

rural areas versus the urban areas. And again, what parents

of young kids in the rural areas do in terms of educating

their kids.

A At the village level, which may be ten houses with rice

paddies in common that they farm, children will often walk an

hour to the nearest school, as a matter of course. If

children want to go to the high school -- there's only a

primary school and high school. There's no middle school in

Cambodia -- they will often have to use some other form of

transport to get to a high school in a larger town. Or,

which is more common, they will have to go live with a

relative in that larger town.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 23 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1163

If people wish to go to university or vocational

training, they have to go and live in the capital city of

Phnom Penh. It is not a common cultural practice for people

to go and live alone in Cambodia, rent an apartment. There's

no dormitory attached to the university. Therefore, the

expectation is you will go and live with family.

Q So what about elementary school? Kids who are

elementary school, middle school age who live in the rural

areas, agricultural areas? Has there been a shift of

population of those kids leaving their parents, if they

exist, and leaving the agricultural areas and moving to

cities, like Phnom Penh, for education?

A Since the UN election, parents have realized

increasingly that for their families to get ahead, English

language is important. There is no English language

instruction in the elementary school system in Cambodia. So

most parents will send their children to the local school,

and then send them to an international school where they will

learn English or Chinese or Korean, is becoming increasingly

common. But those private schools for language instruction

don't exist in the countryside. They exist in the larger

cities. Battambang, B-A-T-T-A-M-B-A-N-G, and the capital,

Phnom Penh.

Q So if -- the kids who wind up in Phnom Penh for

educational purposes, what has your observation been as far

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 24 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1164

as their parental situation, whether they have parents to

send them, whether they are orphans, explain that to us.

A There is no data listing the numbers of children who

have been sent from the countryside. It is, however, an

extremely common practice. Almost -- I would imagine, most

children who are in Phnom Penh attending an international

school are not originally from the city center itself.

Q In Cambodia does the state provide educational services,

or are there other organizations that fill that void?

A The state provides schools, and a teacher in the school.

The teacher is usually poorly paid in comparison to what we

would see in the United States, and often has a second job

tutoring or teaching in a private school.

Parents are expected to provide school uniforms, buy

text books, and exercise books, pencils, et cetera. Into the

void for language instruction have stepped a number of

organizations. For example, the Australian Center for

English has a variety of scholarships funded by private

donors for Cambodians who wish to learn English to attend.

And there are similar schools that have private donor schemes

to provide instruction for students.

Q Are there private organizations, of NGOs, religious

organizations, that provide services, education, shelter,

food for young people who live in the city Phnom Penh?

A Certainly. In fact, in the absence of government

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 25 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1165

services, particularly -- and this is my area -- people who

are survivors of trafficking or domestic violence, rape,

there are no government services for them. Therefore, the

only recourse people in this situation have is to go to

either nonprofit organizations funded by foreign governments,

or faith-based organizations, not necessarily Christian.

There is an organization called CAMAN, which is funded,

C-A-M-A-N -- which is funded from Malaysia, and donations

from the Middle East, for example.

There are organizations that have been set up to

provide a place for children to live while they attend high

school and university that is privately funded from Belgium.

And Somaly Mam Foundation for victims of trafficking and

child sex abuse, et cetera, which is probably one of the more

famous ones.

Q Some of the organizations that provide these services

are faith based?

A Yes.

Q And different religious denominations?

A Absolutely.

Q Including Christian organizations --

A Including different denominations of Christian --

there's a Morman one, Presbyterian one. There's a Scottish

Methodist one. I believe every denomination would be

represented if we did a survey.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 26 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1166

Q So would it be fair to say that if someone wants to be

upwardly mobile, if a parent wants their child to be upwardly

mobile, their best bet is to get out of the rural areas to

get into the urban areas for education support?

A Absolutely. There are very few resources available for

rural parents who wish their children to get what would be

considered a comprehensive education and be able to enter

into a job in a lucrative sector, such as tourism, where

either English, Korean, or Chinese is necessary.

Q During this trial we have heard the term "orphanage."

We have heard the term "center." Could you tell us your

observations about orphanages in terms of the parents, are

there parents, are the parents alive, are the parents

deceased? What are the criteria?

Let me ask it this way: What is the criteria and

the ability to verify the criteria for a child, let's say

from a rural area being able to live in an orphanage or

center in Cambodia, in Phnom Penh, in order to access the

services that are available there?

A Being an orphan in Cambodia is simply somebody who

either does not know where their parents are, or has not seen

them for an extended period of time, or is not living with

them. And there is a cultural tradition in Cambodia of

parents sending their children to live with more affluent

relatives in order to access educational services or to pay a

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 27 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1167

debt. And the child would receive education in return for

doing chores around the house.

Living apart from your parents in Cambodia was never

something that was odd or uncommon. The existence of

orphanages really began in Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge

period when so many children had lost parents, and they did

not know where they were.

Q In the West, our conception of orphanages is your

parents are deceased. Is that the same thing in Cambodia?

A It is not.

Q So I want to ask you a few questions about the system of

documenting births in Cambodia. Do they have a similar

system like we have here in the West?

A Well, no. To begin with, most births would be carried

out in the home. Nobody comes by with paperwork when a baby

is born. The onus is on the parents to go and register a

birth.

But this might not take place until there is some

need for the child's existence to be documented, so for

example, to go to a school. Most children don't get issued a

birth certificate. A parent will go to the village chief and

state this child has been born on this date, this is their

name, and the village chief should keep a record in the

village. Many do not.

In some villages the system is you go to the nearest

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 28 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1168

district capital and register there. This, again, might be a

long way away, and somebody may not have a reason to go to

the district capital for months or years. And, therefore,

also the ability of a central authority in Phnom Penh, for

example, to issue a driver's license or a passport might not

have any way of getting to the person responsible for record

keeping at the district level.

Q Is registration contemporaneous with the birth, or not

necessarily?

A Not necessarily.

Q We talked a little bit about the civil servant system in

Cambodia. Government jobs, village jobs, how are they paid?

A The government does have a budget for civil servants,

and included in that categorization are teachers, police

officer, magistrates, village chiefs, et cetera. They are

very poorly paid. For example, a mid-level police officer in

Phnom Penh makes $240 a month, which is not enough, even in a

country like Cambodia that is less expensive in terms of

paying rent and food, it is not enough to support a family.

Therefore, almost everybody there has another job and a

family business, probably.

Q Are there other ways to supplement one's income, other

than a second job?

A Certainly. There's a concept in Cambodia called Ahasai.

Q You have to spell that one.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 29 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1169

A I am about to. A-H-A-S-A-I. It literally means cords,

and it's a system wherein everybody is in some form of

reciprocal relationship. So if your uncle lives in the

district capital, you are a farmer, you will make sure you

send mangoes to that uncle, so if it happens that you get

into some legal trouble, he will be able to pull strings for

you so that nothing too bad happens to you. If you are a

student, you should bring a present of some kind to your

teacher. And the teacher then will emit goodwill towards

you.

This sometimes can be corrupted. There have been

some very famous cases of teachers at the law school not

allowing students to sit for the law exam, because they

hadn't received a nice enough present. But everyone is in

some kind of obligation to each other.

Q So this is part of the culture?

A Yes, it's not perceived as corruption.

Q So I have some questions about some of the cultural

practices in Cambodia that may be different than ours. First

of all, could you talk a bit about -- not immigration

policies of the United States -- but the movement of

population out of Cambodia due to poverty and other reasons?

A Certainly. I mainly work with women who are trying to

obtain a marriage partner in the West, particularly, but

increasingly in China, South Korea, as these places become

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 30 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1170

more affluent.

And the reason for this is the majority of people

who had some form of dual citizenship, whether the United

States or France, before the Khmer Rouge were able to escape

and be safe, and then be able to return to Cambodia. During

the Khmer Rouge period, obviously people are aware of the

genocide, the suffering, family members dying, horrible

malnutrition, tortures and death, and for this reason people

in Cambodia never feel quite secure about not being able to

get out of the country.

And increasingly, anyone with any financial assets

don't want to keep them in Cambodia. They want to keep them

in another country where they know what happened under the

Khmer Rouge was the obliteration of money, bank accounts,

deeds of property were completely obliterated never to be

recovered. So it's seen as insurance, having a passport to

another country.

Q And in general, how do people go about leaving Cambodia

if they can, and where do they want to go?

A Those with enough money are able to send their

university age children to other countries to go to school.

So New Zealand, Australia, the United States, France, Western

countries, and Japan to some extent.

Once people have a visa to study in a country, it's

relatively easy to convert it to permanent residency and then

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 31 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1171

citizenship. That's one avenue, but that's only available to

very wealthy people.

Women often try to form relationships leading to

marriage with men who do visit Cambodia quite often. And

often older men come to Cambodia looking for a younger woman

who might like to come back and live with them in their home

country. This is another avenue. It's becoming more and

more difficult, however, for these visas to be issued by a

country such as United Kingdom and Germany have been cracking

down on this for some time. This did not begin in Cambodia,

but in other countries there has been -- there are often

visas --

MS. BRITSCH: Objection, Your Honor. I am going to

object to the relevance of immigration visas in other

countries.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Q BY MR. WEINERMAN: So how -- you talked about what

wealthy people try to do to leave Cambodia. What about poor

people? What are the options available to them if they want

to leave the poverty of Cambodia, to leave and go to a

Western country?

A Sometimes they will sign on to work units, for example,

working in construction in Vietnam or Thailand. And once

there, try and remain in those countries, and from there

springboard to others in the West. Some people use work

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 32 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1172

visas to come to a country, such as the United States, on a

six-month work visa, and then stay. Others use other means,

such as special visa categories, where they can go to, for

example, give -- to go to a wedding, and then they will stay

and overstay their visa, and not have a legal reason to be in

that country anymore.

There are other options however, people can

convert --

THE COURT: You need to slow way, way down, or we're

not going to get all of this on the record.

Q BY MR. WEINERMAN: Again, getting back to a poorer

person, is there an option available to at least try to come

to a Western country to study?

A Yes.

Q And how would someone who is poor, who doesn't have the

financial means, how would they go about doing that?

A Usually they would have to come to the attention of a

private donor or organization that would fund such an

activity for someone. Particularly in the Cham community in

Cambodia who are Muslims, wealthy Malaysians are funding Cham

Muslim kids to come study in Malaysia, for example.

Q So you would need a benefactor?

A You would. You would not be able to do it yourself.

Q You may have touched upon this, but in general, do

people in Cambodia, are they still concerned about their

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 33 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1173

safety in remaining in Cambodia?

A Yes. Even though things have been very calm, as the

civil war has been ended now for some time, over 20 years,

there is still a fear in Cambodia that these things could

happen again, the genocide could happen again. There is also

a fear from current -- the current government, which has

recently taken a turn towards being very oppressive with the

elimination of all other political parties recently, the

closing of newspapers that are anti-government in their

rhetoric.

But also people are sort of victims of the state as

the state sells off land, and they evict people without

providing an alternative accommodation. And when people

protest, even peacefully, the government responds very

violently. So state agents are not seen in Cambodia as

people to trust. They are seen as people of whom you should

be scared.

Q What is the Prime Minister's name?

A Hun Sen, H-U-N, S-E-N.

Q And how long has he been the Prime Minister?

A He has held high government office since 1984. He was

elected Prime Minister in 1993 in the UN election, and has

remained there.

Q In your opinion, are there free and fair elections in

Cambodia?

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 34 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1174

A I believe the 1993 election was free and fair. The

others, which have occurred every five years, have become

increasingly beset with electoral irregularities.

Q The second-to-last area, talk about some of the domestic

culture. First, sleeping arrangements in a family. Could

you touch upon that a little bit? What might be a little

different than what we're accustomed to in the West?

A First of all, the concept of family, it's not a nuclear

family. Many extended family members will live together in

one household, especially in rural areas. A household might

be one room. It's simply one room. Everybody sleeps in the

same room under different mosquito nets.

But people share sleeping mats. People share beds.

I have seen as many as six children in a double bed together.

This is a normal practice. There's only one bed. If it's

very hot, people might sleep under the house, as well as in

it. But everyone is sleeping together. The concept of

privacy is not really that common.

Q How about adults sharing the same bed with children?

A Yes, that's very common. There is usually only one bed

elevated off the floor.

Q Might there be other reasons for adults and children to

share beds, other than the lack of space?

A Well, malaria and dengue fever are very serious problems

in Cambodia, and the acquisition of a Deet net are very

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 35 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1175

effective against eliminating those diseases, might mean only

one exists per family, so everybody will get underneath it.

Q When you are talking about adults sleeping in the same

bed with children, are they part of the nuclear family, or

are there other adults who could be in that arrangement?

A Other adults, depending on the particular family

dynamic. It's not considered to be a sexual thing.

Q Let's talk a little bit, we have heard a lot of

testimony in this case about massage, massaging. Could you

tell us about the custom of massaging in Cambodia?

A Again, it's not considered to be a prelude to sexual

behavior, as I believe it is in the West. It's considered to

be medicinal. And there are other -- apart from massage,

there's things such as cupping or coining, which is when you

take a coin and run it down various parts of the body,

depending on what is afflicting you at the particular time.

And it's common for household members to perform

these tasks, and others that, I guess, we would consider

grooming, such as searching the hair for lice, to be a

function of existing in the same household.

Q And the attire that is worn, there's been some testimony

about people getting massages without a shirt on. Is that

common, or is the custom that the person receiving the

massage is fully clothed?

A I have never seen anyone in Cambodia getting a massage

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 36 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1176

being fully clothed.

Q Partially clothed?

A It is -- if someone is going to a doctor or a

practitioner of massage or coining in order to receive

treatment for some ailment, you are not wearing your clothes.

You will be asked to remove them to receive this treatment.

If it is being carried out in the household, people wouldn't

be fully clothed anyway, because most people have only one

set of good clothes that they wear to work or university or

to school. So as soon as you come home, Cambodia is very hot

and your clothes soil easily. So people will remove them and

put on something comfortable.

For women, it might be loose pajamas. For men, it

might be baggy pajama pants, or a sarong, or something like

that until everyone has a shower before they leave the house

again, putting their good clothes on again.

Q So using -- not wearing good clothes inside the house?

A Right.

Q You mentioned wearing a sarong, a short --

A Like a length of cotton cloth that you just tie around

your waist. Women would tie it around up here (indicating),

or wearing sort of pajama shorts or shorts. Something like

that, just something loose and comfortable.

Q What about men wearing a very short attire around their

waste covering their private parts, not having a shirt on,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 37 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1177

have you observed that in Cambodia?

A As long as your genitals are covered, and breasts for

women, you are not considered to be risque or obscene. It

would be normal.

Q Is there any cultural connotation to someone,

particularly a male, just wearing a short covering over the

lower part of their body?

A No.

Q Perhaps what I was getting at, and I hope I can spell

this right, the concept of O-M-N-A-I-C-H, "Omnaich," tell us

about that.

A Omnaich, so in Cambodia there are different forms of

power you can have in society. One of them is sel, which is

a kind of Buddhist, you are a good Buddhist. You perform

good work. Omnaich is political power, so you have the

ability to make other people do what you want to be done,

like charisma, I think we would call it in the West.

Omnaich, you have Omnaich if you are the quietest

one at a business meeting. Everybody else is talking and

arguing. The person who has Omnaich at the table is the

person who doesn't say a word, they don't need to. But when

they do speak, everyone else is quiet.

Q Who normally occupies those types of positions?

A In society, it's people who have the ability to make

your life miserable. So people like the police, for example,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 38 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DIRECT EXAMINATION - TRUDY JACOBSEN, PhD

Page 1178

the tax collectors. In relation to students, teachers have

more Omnaich than the students do. In the household, it's

the head of the household, which may not necessarily be the

father, sometimes it's the mother, or sometimes it's an uncle

whose house it is, but he's allowing his relatives to live

there. It depends on the circumstances.

MR. WEINERMAN: Let me just check my notes. I have

no further questions.

THE COURT: Cross-examination.

MS. BRITSCH: Thank you. We have no questions, Your

Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you, Dr. Jacobsen. You are free

to go.

Any further witnesses from the defense?

MR. WEINERMAN: No, Your Honor.

(Defense Rests.)

THE COURT: Any rebuttal?

MR. SINHA: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Reserving issues around exhibits, both

sides have closed their cases, folks. We're going to take a

morning break. When you come out, we'll read the legal

instructions that apply to the case, and then we will begin

our closing arguments.

(Jury Out.)

THE COURT: With regard to Government Exhibit 277, I

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 39 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1179

have read the proposed exhibit. A lot of it is not relevant.

There's a lot of talk of God, repentance, sin, morality. I

think the relevant statements, if they are to be considered,

consistent -- prior consistent statements of the witness are

that he committed sexual, but then BT XXXXXXXXXX says, "I

don't know the story for sure, but I know he had sex with the

boy in the center. When I talked with him about this, he

cried a lot, and he wanted to commit suicide."

I guess my issue with that is within the context of

the statement he says, I don't know for sure. I just know

but it doesn't tell you the context, really, of his

testimony, which was that he had -- at least one boy had come

forward to him to talk about it.

So at this point it seems mostly irrelevant,

somewhat confusing with the hearsay nature of the actual

statement. And also I would think somewhat cumulative at

this point, so I will sustain the objection to 277.

MR. SWEET: Your Honor, just to clarify, if I may, I

believe the defense was objecting to just three parts of 277,

three small subsections of it. That may change after what

the Court just said --

MR. WEINERMAN: It just changed.

THE COURT: I mean, they are objecting to the

salient part, which is the actual statements, which I think I

have addressed. The rest of it, in my mind, seems

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 40 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1180

irrelevant.

MR. WEINERMAN: Judge, if this jury reads every page

of every exhibit, we will be here until next May, so it's

cumulative.

MR. SWEET: To clarify, Your Honor, did the Court

mention a part of 277 that the Court was not troubled by?

And I would say when Mr. BT X is talking about, "I want to

see him repent for his sins and then he can go to haven," is

what he wrote. The government did discuss that with BT XXX

XXXX, and some of his other things that he wrote.

And the relevance is that Mr. BT X has been accused

of doing this to come get a visa, and here he is expressing

his love, his concern, his concern for Mr. Johnson's

salvation. He expressed a concern for his soul on the stand.

And he talks about having confronted Mr. Johnson before.

He talks about I did -- on the very first page, "I

did go talk with him" -- well, six lines down, "I have been

praying for him for six year and I did go talk with him, but

he's still the same. I knew one day this going to happen for

him and I did tell him."

So that's going to a prior discussion with -- with

Daniel. And it's clear that it's regarding sex, because he

discusses -- it's about immoral, God is punishing him. I

understand what the Court is saying regarding the uncertainty

about the sex with the boy, the suicide, but all this talk

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 41 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1181

about, "He told me he wants to change but he can't." "Did

you have sex with him?" "He try to, but I didn't allow,"

that's clearly, the last part about having sex with him, is

consistent. That's the top of page 3.

And perhaps counsel and I could take one more crack

at this, and come down to a stripped-down version that we

could try and see if we can reach.

THE COURT: No, I think that's helpful, Mr. Sweet.

I was looking at this just in the context of prior consistent

statements, and not -- I didn't have a complete understanding

of the context of relevancy that you have just laid out.

So that does make sense to me that the statements

that talk about why, his concern for Mr. Johnson, as opposed

to his desire to come to the United States would come in.

I still share a concern, and I think these really

were the concerns that the defense had about the somewhat

vague nature of his knowledge in what other boys may have

said.

MR. SWEET: The government is happy to strike that,

Your Honor, and I believe that would be December 9, 2013 at

12:07. There are three sections for that.

THE COURT: If you strike those, I will allow 277.

Sorry, Mr. Weinerman, I didn't understand the

relevance of the document until Mr. Sweet put it into some

context for me.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 42 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1182

COURT CLERK: That will be admitted as redacted?

THE COURT: Yes.

(EXHIBIT 277 RECEIVED.)

THE COURT: So in terms of how we want to proceed,

it's 10:19, and 10:30 when we bring the jury back out. We

can go forward this morning, probably about 15 minutes of

instructions. I think the government said they were about

45 minutes.

I guess the question is, do we want to break for an

early lunch and do closings completely, following an early

lunch, or do we want to get some of it in this morning?

MR. SINHA: The government may be closer to an hour

once we put it together.

THE COURT: Still shorter than I thought you would

be.

MR. SINHA: Our preference would be to break for

lunch, because we're going to try to move the television over

so our PowerPoint can be viewed by the jury. So that would

be our preference, to do an early lunch.

MR. WEINERMAN: I'm not giving the closing,

Ms. Maxfield is, but it seems it's fairer for there not to be

a break. We should go all the way through, whether we do it

all in the morning or all in the afternoon. That would be

our preference.

THE COURT: So we will instruct them this morning,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 43 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1183

and then we will break for an early lunch, and what if we

start back up at 12:30?

MR. WEINERMAN: You are just going to instruct.

THE COURT: We're going to instruct. But let's take

a short break, and then I will hopefully give the

instructions in a clear voice, and we will break when that is

done until 12:30.

(Brief recess taken from 10:20 a.m.

to 10:42 a.m.)

MR. WEINERMAN: First thing, I would like to renew

the Rule 29 motion, which we have to do after we rest our

case.

THE COURT: All right. Consistent with my earlier

ruling, I will deny the motion.

MR. WEINERMAN: And then I would like to read into

the record -- the government has no objections to any of

them, but to make sure they get to the jury. Exhibit 600,

Exhibit 602 through 618, so all of those numbers, rather than

read each one individually. Exhibits 624, 625, 700, 701-A,

701-B, 709, 710, 711, 713, 716, 717, 720 through 723, and 726

through 729.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you.

MR. WEINERMAN: And the last matter, Judge, I was

looking at Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 30(d), which

deals with objections to instructions and having to do it out

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 44 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1184

of the presence of the jury, and out of the jury's hearing.

And requiring us to make specific objections, and the grounds

before the jury retires to deliberate.

If it's acceptable to the Court, I would like the

record to reflect that the Court has considered our

objections previously made, including the ones in the

pretrial conference, and that we satisfied the requirement of

Rule 30. I have seen some judges, before the jury -- after

they are instructed and they hear argument, and before they

retire, call us up and ask if there's any exceptions other

than previously made. So I want to make sure we had complied

with the rule, and are not stuck with plain, narrow review if

there's an appeal in the case.

THE COURT: Yes, you complied with the rule, and I

think I will tell the jury not to begin deliberations until

they are instructed by Ms. Pew to do so, because you are

going to have to -- the alternate jurors are going to have to

gather up their things and leave while that is happening.

We can put on the record whether there's any

additional exceptions, and then Ms. Pew can instruct them to

begin their deliberations.

Mr. Sweet.

MR. SWEET: The government's exhibits -- and the

government has no objection to the exhibits that the defense

read. We went over these last night. I don't recall each

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 45 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1185

and every number, but we went over them together so we're

fine with that. And likewise, the government has filed a

third exhibit list which ends with 312, so rather than read

those into the record, the government would move to admit --

and I believe there may be a few that Ms. Pew notes that

weren't actually admitted, 1 through 312, except the ones

that are noted as withdrawn.

We did go over these with the defense yesterday

afternoon. We made a few redactions and withdrawals since

then, which are reflected in this list. And 312 is the board

in the back, which we're going to ask that that go to the

jury, as well. So there -- I believe there are no objections

to 1 through 312, except the ones that were withdrawn.

THE COURT: We will bring the jury in for

instructions.

(JURY IN.)

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

THE COURT: All right. You have heard all the

evidence in the case. Thank you, again, on behalf of all the

parties, and myself and my staff for all the work you've put

into this case. My plan is to give you the instructions this

morning. It's going to take some setting up for closing

argument, so we're going to break early for lunch and have

you back here at 12:30, in which case we will start our

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 46 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1186

closing arguments. When those are complete, we will then

begin the deliberations.

You will have a copy of these instructions with you

in the jury room. We will make one for each of you, so do

not feel like you have to write down everything I am saying.

It is your duty to weigh and evaluate the evidence

received in the case, and in that process, decide the facts.

It is also your duty to apply the law as I give it to you, to

the facts as you find them, whether or not you agree with the

law or not. You must decide the case solely on the evidence

and the law. Do not allow personal likes or dislikes,

sympathy, prejudice, fear, or public opinion to influence

you. You should also not be influenced by any person's race,

color, religion, national ancestry or gender, sexual

orientation, profession, occupation, celebrity, economic

circumstances, or position in life or in the community. You

will recall that you took an oath promising to do so at the

beginning of the case.

You must follow all of these instructions and not

single out some and ignore others. They are all important.

Please do not read into these instructions, or into anything

I may have said or done, any suggestion as to what verdict

you should return -- the matter is entirely up to you.

Because you must base your verdict only on the

evidence received in the case and on these instructions, I

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 47 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1187

remind you that you must not be exposed to any other

information about the case or to the issue it involves,

except for discussing the case with your fellow jurors during

deliberations.

I have given you throughout the trial and in the

beginning of the trial, several warnings about not listening

to the media, not discussing the matter outside of court,

being in a position where you are not overhearing others talk

about the case. So I am not going to read to you those

instructions again. But I will read -- some of these are

repetitious from earlier, but I think they are worth

repeating.

The first is, what is evidence? The evidence you

are to consider in this case in deciding the facts consists

of the sworn testimony of any witness, and exhibits that are

received into evidence, any facts to which the parties have

agreed, called stipulations, and any facts that the Court has

instructed you to accept as true.

So what is not evidence? Reaching your verdict you

may consider only those things that are previously listed.

The following things are not evidence, and you may not

consider them in deciding what the facts are. One,

questions, statements, objections and arguments by the

lawyers are not evidence. The lawyers are not witnesses.

Although you must consider a lawyer's question to understand

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 48 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1188

the answer of a witness, the lawyer's questions are not

evidence.

Similarly, what the lawyers have said or will say in

their opening statements -- or said in their opening

statements and will say in their closing arguments, and at

other times is intended to help you interpret the evidence,

but it is not evidence. If the facts, as you remember them,

differ from the way the lawyers state them in their

arguments, your memory of them controls.

Two, any testimony that I have excluded, stricken or

instructed you to disregard is not evidence. Three, anything

that you may have seen or heard when court was not in session

is not evidence. You are to decide this case solely on the

evidence received at the trial.

Direct and circumstantial evidence, there are two

types of evidence, direct and circumstantial. Evidence may

be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof

of a fact, such as the testimony of an eyewitness about what

that witness personally saw or heard or did. Circumstantial

evidence is indirect evidence, that is it's a proof of one or

more facts from which you can find another fact. The proof,

sometimes, we would describe it as proof of a chain of facts

pointing to the existence or nonexistence of another fact.

You are to consider both direct and circumstantial

evidence. Either can be used to prove any fact. The law

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 49 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1189

makes no distinction between the weight to be given to either

direct or circumstantial evidence. It is for you to decide

how much weight to give the evidence.

You have watched transcripts and recording -- you

have watched recordings that have been received into

evidence. Each of you was given a transcript of the

recording to help you identify speakers and help you listen

to the recording. However, bear in mind that the recording

is the evidence, not the transcript. If you heard something

different from what appeared in the transcript, what you

heard is controlling.

For recordings that involve the translation of a

foreign language, such as Khmer, you must accept the English

translation as evidence.

Foreign language testimony. You have heard

testimony of a witness who testified in the Khmer language.

Witnesses who do not speak English, or are more proficient in

another language testify through an official interpreter. It

says here, although some of you may know the Khmer

language -- I don't think we've asked you this. Do any -- is

there anybody who actually knows some Khmer language, that

you understand some words?

(No Response.)

THE COURT: Well, if you did, it is important that

jurors consider the same evidence; therefore, you must accept

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 50 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1190

the interpreter's translation of the witness' testimony. You

must disregard any different meaning.

You must not make assumptions about a witness or a

party based solely on the fact that an interpreter was used.

Credibility of witnesses, in deciding this case you

may have to decide which testimony to believe and which

testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a

witness says, part of it, or none of it.

In considering the testimony of any witness, you may

take into account, one, the witness' opportunity and ability

to see or hear or know the things testified to; two, the

witness' memory; three, the witness's manner while

testifying; four, the witness's interest in the outcome of

the case, if any; five, the witness' bias or prejudice, if

any; six, whether other evidence contradicted the witness'

testimony; seven, the reasonableness of the witness'

testimony in light of all the evidence; eight, the prior

statements of the witness; and nine, any other factors that

bear on believability.

Sometimes a witness may say something that is not

consistent with something else he or she said. Sometimes

different witnesses will give different versions of what

happened. People often forget things or make mistakes in

what they remember. Also, two people may see the same event,

but remember it differently. You may consider these

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 51 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1191

differences, but do not decide the testimony is untrue just

because it differs from other testimony.

However, if you decide that a witness has

deliberately testified untruthfully about something

important, you may choose not to believe everything that

witness testified. However, on the other hand, if you think

the witness testified untruthfully about some things, but

told the truth about others, you may accept the part you

think is true, and ignore the rest.

The weight of the evidence as to a fact does not

necessarily depend on the number of witnesses who testify.

What is important is how believable the witnesses are, and

how much weight you think their testimony deserves.

Prior statements of a witness, some witnesses who

testified in Court also made statements to others in the

past. You may consider the consistency or the

inconsistencies of these statements in deciding whether or

not to believe a witness, and how much weight to give to the

testimony of a witness.

Testimony of witnesses, compensation and benefits.

You have heard testimony from some witnesses who received

benefits or compensation from the government in connection

with this case. For this reason, in evaluating the testimony

of these witnesses, you should consider the extent to which

or whether their testimony may have been influenced by the

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 52 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1192

compensation or benefits. You should examine the testimony

of these witnesses with greater caution than that of other

witnesses. It is for you to determine the weight to give

such evidence.

Opinion evidence, expert witness, you have heard

testimony from certain witnesses who testified to opinions

and reasons for their opinions. The opinion testimony is

allowed because of their education or experience of this

witness. Such opinion testimony should be judged like any

other testimony. You may accept it or reject it, and give it

as much weight as you think it deserves, considering the

witness' education and experience, the reasons given for the

opinion, and all the other evidence in the case.

Statements made by a defendant, you have heard

testimony that Mr. Johnson made certain statements to others.

It is for you to decide, one, whether Mr. Johnson made the

statement, and two, if so, how much weight to give to it. In

making those decisions you should consider all of the

evidence about the statement, including the circumstances

under which Mr. Johnson may have made it.

Prior proceedings. You have heard testimony that

Mr. Johnson was arrested in Cambodia and spent time in jail

in Cambodia. You have also heard testimony about a court

proceeding in Cambodia. You should not speculate as to the

nature or outcome of the proceeding in Cambodia. What a

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 53 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1193

Cambodian Court did or did not do is not relevant to your

deliberations. You should base your verdict only on the

evidence you heard in this case.

Charts and summaries and transcripts not admitted

into evidence, during the trial certain charts and summaries

and transcripts were shown to you in order to help explain

the evidence in the case. Some of these charts and summaries

and transcripts were not admitted into evidence, and will not

go into the jury room with you. They are not themselves

evidence or proof of any facts.

If they do not correctly reflect the facts or

figures shown by the evidence in the case, you should

disregard these charts and summaries and determine the facts

from the underlying evidence.

Use of notes, some of you have taken notes during

the trial. Whether or not you took notes, you should rely on

your own memory of what was said. Notes are only to assist

your memory. You should not be overly influenced by your

notes, or by the notes of your fellow jurors.

Consideration of punishment, the punishment provided

by law for this crime is for the Court to decide. You may

not consider punishment in deciding whether the government

has proved its case against Mr. Johnson beyond a reasonable

doubt.

Stipulations of fact, the parties have agreed to

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 54 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1194

certain facts that have been stated to you. Those facts are

now conclusively established. The Court is instructing you

that the following facts are true, and you will have these

with you as part of the instructions.

Stipulation No. 1, on January 10, 2014, an APLE,

A-P-L-E social worker and an APLE lawyer met with ES XXXXXXXX

and SO XXXXXXX at a shelter in Cambodia. The boys said that

Sambo Heng, former staff member from Hope Transition Cambodia

met them at their high school a week ago. Sambo said that he

visited Daniel Johnson, who was in custody in Cambodia.

Sambo said that Daniel was very thin and having a very

difficult time, and Sambo felt pity for him.

Both ES XXXX and SO XXX said to the APLE

members that their statements about the abuse, by Daniel

Johnson, were not true. They did not want to lie to

everybody and they did not want someone to be prosecuted

because of a lie, and that they would change their

statements.

APLE wrote a report regarding their statements on

January 11, 2014, and provided the FBI with the report.

On January 6, 20 -- excuse me, on January 6, 2013,

FBI Special Agent Jeff Yesensky spoke with the APLE employees

regarding Daniel Johnson. The APLE employee did not have

copies of the Cambodian National Police interview reports

with LS XXXXX, VS XXXXXXXXXXXXX, CC XXXXXX, SO XXXXXXX and

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 55 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1195

ES XXXXXXXX, but had been briefed on the case. To the APLE

employee's knowledge, none of the victims had disclosed that

Daniel Johnson had taken explicit images of them.

MR. WEINERMAN: Judge, I think there's an error. I

think both parties agree. The date should read on January 6,

2014 when the --

THE COURT: All right. We will fix that.

MR. WEINERMAN: Same date. January 6, 2014, not

2013.

MR. SWEET: That's correct, Your Honor.

THE COURT: We will make that correction.

Stipulation two, at all relevant times, including

between November 1st, 2005, and December 9, 2013, Daniel

Johnson's last known domestic residence was in the District

of Oregon.

Stipulation No. 3. 1, Mr. Johnson's TECS records,

airline records, passport, and US and Cambodian immigration

records, including records regarding immigration status,

travel, and entry and exit data, and the information

contained in those records are true and accurate.

2, Mr. Johnson became a United States citizen at

birth, and he has remained a United States citizen,

continuously and without interruption from the time of his

birth to present.

3, Mr. Johnson traveled in interstate and foreign

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 56 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1196

commerce between the United States and Cambodia, between, on,

or about the following dates: November 28, 2005, departing

the US, to December 6, 2005, arriving in Cambodia;

January 11, 2007, departing the US, January 12th, 2007

arriving in Cambodia; October 10, 2008, departing the US,

October 11, 2008, arriving in Cambodia; October 22nd, 2009,

departing the US, October 23rd, 2009, arriving in Cambodia;

June 8, 2010, departing US, June 10, 2010, arriving in

Cambodia; January 18, 2011, departing the US, January 19,

2011, arriving in Cambodia.

4, Mr. Johnson was present within the District of

Oregon and then traveled in interstate and foreign commerce

between the United States and Cambodia on or about the

following dates: June 21st, 2011, in Oregon, July 5, 2011,

departed the US, July 7, 2011, arrived in Cambodia;

December 1st, 2011, in Oregon, December 20th, 2011 departed

the US, December 22nd, 2011, arrived in Cambodia; July 24,

2012, in Oregon, August 24, 2012, departed the US, August 27,

2012, arrived in Cambodia; November 19, 2012, in Oregon,

December 5, 2012, departed the US, December 7, 2012, arrived

in Cambodia; May 28, 2013, in Oregon, May 29, 2013, departed

the US, May 30, 2013, arrived in Cambodia.

Stipulation No. 4, in accordance with Title 28,

Section 1821 of the United States Code, any fact witnesses

for either party must be paid a $40 witness fee for each day

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 57 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1197

they attend the trial, and for each day necessarily occupied

in going to and returning from the place of attendance. That

same Federal law requires that, in addition to travel-related

expenses, fact witnesses must be paid a subsistence

allowance. The subsistence allowance paid to any fact

witness in the case will be the current Federal per diem rate

for Eugene, Oregon of $59 per day.

Defendant's decision not to testify, a defendant in

a criminal case has a Constitutional right not to testify.

In arriving at your verdict, the law prohibits you from

considering in any manner that Mr. Johnson did not testify.

Presumption of innocence, burden of proof. The

indictment is not evidence. Mr. Johnson has pleaded not

guilty to the charges. He's presumed to be innocent unless

and until the government proves his guilt beyond a reasonable

doubt. Mr. Johnson does not have to testify or present any

evidence. He does not have to prove innocence. The

government has the burden of proving every element of the

charge beyond a reasonable doubt.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, proof beyond a reasonable

doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced that

Mr. Johnson is guilty. It is not required that the

government prove guilt beyond all possible doubt.

A reasonable doubt is based on reason and

commonsense, and is not based purely on speculation. It may

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 58 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1198

arise from a careful and impartial consideration of all the

evidence, or from a lack of evidence.

If, after careful and impartial consideration of all

the evidence, you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt

that Mr. Johnson is guilty, it is your duty to find him not

guilty.

On the other hand, if, after careful and impartial

consideration of all the evidence in the case, you are

convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Johnson is

guilty, it is your duty to find him guilty.

Activities not charged, you are here only to

determine whether Mr. Johnson is guilty or not guilty of the

charges in the indictment. He is not on trial for conduct or

offenses not charged in the indictment.

Separate consideration of multiple counts, single

defendant. A separate crime is charged against Mr. Johnson

in each count. You must decide each count separately. Your

verdict on one count should not control your verdict on any

other count.

I am now going to go through the different counts of

the indictment, and the elements that are required legally to

be proven by the government beyond a reasonable doubt.

First, Counts 1 through 6. Mr. Johnson is charged

in Counts 1 through 6 of the indictment with traveling in

foreign commerce and engaging in illicit sexual conduct in a

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 59 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1199

foreign place in violation of Section 2423(c) of Title 18 of

the United States Code. In order for him to be found guilty

of these charges the government must prove each of the

following elements beyond a reasonable doubt.

One, that Mr. Johnson is a United States citizen;

two, that Mr. Johnson traveled in foreign commerce from the

United States to Cambodia; and three, Mr. Johnson engaged in

illicit sexual conduct with the victims referenced in that

count of the indictment, and it will say, "please see the

chart below."

And to clarify, Mr. Johnson engaged in illicit

sexual conduct with the victim referenced in that count in

the indictment, in Cambodia.

Now, in the instructions you will see Count 1

through 6, the same criminal charge, but it involves six

different minor alleged victims. So this chart puts the

names and the dates for each of the counts of the indictment.

So you will see Count 1 says Minor Victim No. 1,

name BT XXXXXXXXX. Next you will see BT XXXXXXX, so that you

know specifically which of the alleged victims we're talking

about.

A person born in the United States is a United

States citizen at birth. A United States passport issued by

the Secretary of State to a citizen of the United States is

proof of United States citizenship for the period during

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 60 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1200

which the passport is valid.

Lack of consent is not an element of the offense.

The government does not have to prove that the victim did not

consent to the illicit sexual conduct, nor is the government

required to show that the victim resisted.

The government does not have to prove that the

illicit sexual conduct violated the laws of the foreign

country where it occurred.

For this offense, the government does not have to

prove that Mr. Johnson intended to engage in illicit sexual

conduct at the time he departed the United States.

Count 7 of the indictment, Mr. Johnson is charged in

Count 7 of the indictment with traveling in foreign commerce

for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct

with a person under 18 years of age in violation of Section

2423(b) of Title 18 of the United States Code. In order for

Mr. Johnson to be found guilty of this charge the government

most prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable

doubt.

One, that Mr. Johnson is a United States citizen;

two, that Mr. Johnson traveled in foreign commerce from the

United States on or about June 23rd, 2011, and May 29th,

2013; three, Mr. Johnson traveled for the purpose of engaging

in illicit sexual conduct.

Again, a person born in the United States is a

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 61 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1201

United States citizen at birth. A United States passport

issued by the Secretary of State to a citizen of the United

States is proof of a United States citizenship for the period

during which the passport is valid.

For this offense, the government does not have to

prove that Mr. Johnson actually engaged in illicit sexual

conduct, but must prove that he travelled for the purpose of

engaging in such conduct. In doing so, the government need

not prove that Mr. Johnson traveled in foreign commerce for

the sole and exclusive purpose of engaging in illicit sexual

conduct. A person may have different purposes or motives for

travel, and each may prompt in varying degrees the act of

making the journey.

For this count, the government must prove beyond a

reasonable doubt that a dominant, significant, or motivating

purpose of Mr. Johnson's travel in foreign commerce was to

engage in illicit sexual conduct. In other words, the

government must prove the sexual act was not merely

incidental to travel. The government does not have to prove

the illicit sexual conduct is illegal in the country to which

Mr. Johnson traveled.

Count 8 of the indictment. Mr. Johnson is charged

in Count 8 of traveling across a state line with the intent

to engage in a sexual act with a person who was less than

12 years old.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 62 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1202

In order for you to find him guilty of this charge

the government must prove each of the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt: One, Mr. Johnson traveled across

a state line between on or about June 23rd, 2011, and May 29,

2013; and two, Mr. Johnson traveled with the intent to engage

in a sexual act with a person who is less than 12 years old.

Again, the government does not have to prove that

Mr. Johnson actually engaged in a sexual act with a person

under 12, but must prove that he traveled with the intent to

engage in such conduct.

In doing so, the government need not prove that

Mr. Johnson traveled across a state line for the sole and

exclusive purpose of engaging in a sexual act with a person

under 12. A person may have different purposes or motives

for travel, and each may prompt in varying degrees the act of

making the journey.

For this Count, the government must prove beyond a

reasonable doubt that a dominant, significant, or motivating

purpose of Mr. Johnson's travel across a state line was to

engage in a sexual act with a person under 12. In other

words, the government must prove the sexual act was not

merely incidental to the travel.

Some definitions. The term "illicit sexual conduct"

means knowingly engaging in a commercial sex act with a

person, the victim, who is under 18 years of age; the

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 63 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1203

government does not have to prove the defendant knew the

victim was under the age of 18.

Or illicit sexual conduct means knowingly causing a

person who is under 18 years of age to engage in a sexual

act, one, by using force against that person, or two, by

threatening or placing that person in fear.

Or the term illicit sexual conduct means knowingly

engaging in a sexual act with a person, the victim, who has

attained the age of 12 years, but has not attained the age of

16 years, and is at least four years younger than the

defendant; the government does not have to prove that the

defendant knew the age of the victim, nor does it have to

prove the defendant knew the requisite age difference

existed.

Illicit sexual conduct also means knowingly engaging

in a sexual act with a person, the victim, who is under

12 years of age; the government does not have to prove the

defendant knew the victim was under the age of 12.

The term "sexual act" means contact between the

penis and the anus, involving penetration, however slight, or

contact between the mouth and the penis, or the mouth and the

anus, or penetration, however slight, of the anal opening by

a hand, finger, or any object, with the attempt to abuse,

humiliate, harass, or degrade the person, or to arouse or

gratify the sexual desire of the defendant or any other

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 64 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1204

person.

Or an intentional touching, not through the

clothing, of the genitalia of the person younger than

16 years old, with the intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, or

degrade the person, or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire

of the defendant, or any other person.

The term "commercial sex act" means any sex act, on

account of which anything of value is given or received by

any person.

The term "travel in foreign commerce" means travel

between any part of the United States and a foreign country.

On or about, the indictment charges the offenses

alleged occurred on or about a certain date. Although it is

necessary for the government to prove beyond a reasonable

doubt that the offense was committed on a date reasonably

near the date alleged in the indictment, it is not necessary

for the government to prove that the offense was committed

precisely on the date charged.

Venue, Counts 1 through 6, for the offenses charged

in Counts 1 through 6, the government must prove it is more

likely true than not that Mr. Johnson was first brought to or

arrested in the District of Oregon, or that his last known

residence was in the District of Oregon. You decide these

facts by considering all the evidence and deciding what

evidence is more believable. This is a lower standard of

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 65 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1205

proof than beyond a reasonable doubt. The requirement of

proof beyond a reasonable doubt applies to all other issues

in this case.

Counts 7 and 8, for the offenses charged in Counts 7

and 8, the government must prove it is more likely true than

not true that the offense was begun, continued, or completed

in the District of Oregon. You decide these facts by

considering all the evidence and deciding what evidence is

more believable. This is a lower standard of proof than

proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The requirement of proof

beyond a reasonable doubt applies to all other issues in this

case.

The word "knowingly," an act is done knowingly if

the defendant is aware of the act and does not act through

ignorance, mistake, or accident. The government is not

required to prove the defendant knew that his acts or

omissions were unlawful. You may consider evidence of the

defendant's words, acts, or omissions, along with all other

evidence, in deciding whether the defendant acted knowingly.

Unanimous agreement, with regard to Count 7 the

parties have stipulated that during the time frame set forth

in Count 7, Mr. Johnson took five trips from the United

States to Cambodia. While you may consider all of these

trips in your deliberations, you may only find Mr. Johnson

guilty of Count 7 if you all unanimously agree beyond a

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 66 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1206

reasonable doubt, one, that Mr. Johnson possessed the

requisite intent for a specified United States to Cambodia

trip, and two, that Mr. Johnson was a US citizen at the time

of the trip. You must unanimously agree on at least one

trip.

In other words, six of you can't agree that

something occurred during trip two, and 6 of you say, no, but

we think it occurred during trip three. 12 of you have to

agree on a single trip.

Count 8, the parties have stipulated that during the

time frame set forth in Count 8, Mr. Johnson took five trips

from the United States, to Cambodia. While you may consider

all of these trips in your deliberations, you may only find

Mr. Johnson guilty of Count 8 if you all unanimously agree

beyond a reasonable doubt as to a specific trip in which he

crossed a state line with the requisite intent. You must

unanimously agree on at least one trip.

You have a verdict form that has been prepared for

you. After you reach a unanimous agreement on a verdict,

your presiding juror, foreperson, should complete the form

according to deliberations and sign it and date it, and

advise the clerk that you are ready to return to the

courtroom.

I will give you further instructions about

deliberations, brief instructions, after the closing

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 67 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Page 1207

statements. Because the attorneys will likely reference the

verdict form, I think what we will do is give you a copy of

the verdict form to have with you to reference during the

closing statements, so that the attorneys can express to you

their arguments about how you should go about filling out the

verdict form. So you will have a copy during closing

statements, and then of course you will take a copy back with

you.

So our plan now is to break for lunch until 12:30.

At 12:30 the government will begin their closing statement.

Remember, the government has the complete burden of proof

here. So they will go first, followed by the defense, and

because the government has the burden of proof, they will

have an opportunity to provide rebuttal argument.

We will then say goodbye to our alternate jurors,

and the 12 jurors will be able to begin their deliberations.

So with that, we will break for lunch and see you back here

at 12:30.

(JURY OUT.)

THE COURT: Please be seated. Mr. Weinerman, since

I just gave the instructions and we don't have the jury

deliberating until later this afternoon, now is as good a

time as any to make any exceptions to the record.

MR. WEINERMAN: Yes, Judge, and I am going to

mention a few. That doesn't mean we don't continue our

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 68 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1208

exception to the remainder.

We still believe the Court should identify an

alleged victim in Count 7 and 8. The Court has done so in

Counts 1 through 6, but not 7 and 8. And here I know the

Court has redenied that, but we wanted to renew that request.

And we previously submitted our instruction on

Counts 1 through 6, the elements of the offense. I think we

did at the pretrial conference. I don't have the document in

front of me, and the Court denied. But we're renewing that

request to renew the instruction on Counts 1 through 6.

THE COURT: Thank you.

For the record, any exceptions from the government?

MR. SWEET: No exceptions. Just one error that I

believe we made on page 27. There's, for Count 1 there's an

extra zero in November 12, 2008. It's 20,008 right now.

That's the only thing. Thank you.

THE COURT: We will fix that. There are a couple of

other minor typos that we will go through.

See everybody back at 12:30, and if you need to stay

and set up for your closing statements, please do so.

(Lunch recess taken from 11:25 a.m.

to 12:39 p.m.)

THE COURT: All right. Ready to go? Bring the jury

in. This would be a good time to remind people to turn their

phones down or off. I am usually the worst when it comes to

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 69 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1209

that.

(JURY IN.)

THE COURT: Please be seated. Mr. Allnatt is

handing out a copy of the verdict form so you have some sense

of the questions you are going to be asked to answer. With

that, we will hear closing summation from the government.

Mr. Sinha.

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

MR. SINHA: Control and abuse. At the beginning of

this trial, the United States, Ms. Britsch, stood up here and

told you that this is a case about control and abuse. And

over the last two-and-a-half weeks of testimony, what seemed

like a lifetime, you have heard testimony from 13 Cambodian

witnesses and 10 Americans. And together, they have painted

a portrait of control and abuse.

They have painted a harrowing and horrifying

portrait of what life was like for the boys who lived at the

Hope Transition Center under the control of Daniel Johnson.

That portrait has included being in fear, being threatened,

being hit. That portrait has included being systematically

and repeatedly sexually abused by Daniel Johnson whenever he

wanted.

Now, you have heard extensive testimony from boy

after boy after boy after boy after boy about the things that

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 70 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1210

Daniel Johnson did to them, and the things that Daniel

Johnson attempted to do to them. But I want to focus your

attention on six of them today. These are the six children

whose abuse underlies Count 1 through 6 of the indictment.

These are the six children who are going to ask you to

consider the evidence about their abuse.

The first, underlying Count 1 is BT XX. Two, Count

2 is ES XXX, or sometimes called "ES XXX." 3, Count 3 is

LS XXXXX. 4, Count 4 is SO XXX. 5, Count 5 is VS XXXX, or

VS XXXX. And 6, Count 6 is CC X, or CC XXXXXX.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, you sat through this

trial and you have watched these kids testify. And though

they spoke through interpreters, you don't have to speak a

foreign language to understand what they were telling you.

You don't have to speak Khmer to hear the pain in their

voice, to see the shame on their faces, to see the scars that

they still bear from the things that Daniel Johnson did to

them.

Ladies and gentlemen, you don't have to speak Khmer

to see the tears that some of them had. And when you saw

that, you can make a determination that when they told you

about the ways in which Daniel Johnson repeatedly and

systematically sexually abused them, they were speaking from

the heart.

Now, you also heard from several other boys who

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 71 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1211

lived at Hope Transition Center, boys who Daniel Johnson also

controlled, and either attempted or succeeded in sexually

abusing. Now, those are boys who told you about their

experiences themselves, but they also told you what they saw.

And they provided you with important context and

corroboration of the things that Mr. Johnson did to those six

victims.

Some of the details that those boys told you are

difficult to forget. You may recall SESX talking to you

about how Mr. Johnson attempted to touch his genitals

whenever he gave him a massage. And SESX expressed his love

for Mr. Johnson, saying if he keeps continuing to do that to

me, I am going to stop giving him a massage.

You heard RT XX talk about Mr. Johnson trying to

grab his penis, and from LT XXXXXXX who actually left the

orphanage and had to leave his little brother behind, because

Mr. Johnson repeatedly grabbed his penis.

You may also remember LT XXXXXXX telling you what

LS X told him about Mr. Johnson. In strikingly similar

language to what LS X told you from the stand, LS X told

LT XXXXXXX quote, "He sucked my dick."

You heard from SS XX, and at first how SS XX -- how

Mr. Johnson tried to grab SS XX's genitals, and second, how

SO XXX disclosed the abuse that Mr. Johnson had put upon him,

and the sexual abuse that Mr. Johnson had committed against

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 72 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1212

SO XXX, disclosed it to SS XX. But perhaps most strikingly

from SS XX, you heard his testimony that was corroborated by

SESX.

That at night Mr. Johnson would come into the room

where the boys were sleeping with a flashlight, and he would

walk around and choose which of the boys he was going to pick

up and carry into his bedroom, and that he often chose

SO XXX, LT XXXXXXX, and ES XXX. As SS XX put it, at times

they were asleep and he came and just took them.

In addition to the boys at Hope Transition Center,

you also heard from a number of volunteers. First, you heard

from Celena Ocen who told a story of volunteering and being

there on the morning of Mr. Johnson's arrest.

She told you that she went to worship services at

5:00 a.m., and after she got done and took a shower, she was

outside Mr. Johnson's bedroom for about four hours. No one

came in, and no one went out. And in spite of her repeated

knocking at the door, Mr. Johnson didn't answer.

Celena then told you she saw a boy emerge from that

room looking disheveled, I believe she said looking

intoxicated. And that Mr. Johnson came out later tucking in

his shirt.

You also heard from Kelby and Lindsay Alderson.

Kelby and Lindsay told you about the times that SO XXX and

CC X had told them about Mr. Johnson's sexual abuse of them.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 73 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1213

But Lindsay sat up here, and with tears welling in her eyes,

recounted to you how SO XXX told her that one time he

pretended to be asleep while another boy was being abused so

that Mr. Johnson wouldn't abuse him.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a difficult case to

serve on. I have little doubt that you have heard things you

never wanted to hear, and we have asked you to consider in

depth things that I suspect you never want to think about.

And frankly, I have no illusion about the cost of your

service on this jury to you. The sleepless nights it may

have caused, the sleepless nights it may cause you.

But the United States can't apologize for the

evidence you have heard. The United States didn't create

this evidence. Mr. Johnson created the evidence you heard,

and it's evidence of his control and abuse of these children.

So let's talk about that evidence, and let's talk

about how it fits into the charges against Mr. Johnson.

While I talk I want to remind you of three things: First and

foremost, what I tell you, what Ms. Maxfield tells you, or

what Mr. Sweet tells you is not evidence.

The evidence is the testimony you heard, what you

saw with your eyes, the exhibits that have been admitted, and

the agreed-upon facts. I also want to tell you that while

we're going to talk about the law, and I am going to try to

give you an insight into how the government views the case,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 74 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1214

what I tell you is not the law. If there's any conflict,

refer to the jury instructions.

And finally, I want to remind you that at all points

the United States bears the burden of proving each element of

these crimes. With those three things in mind, let's talk

about the evidence. The evidence has shown that Mr. Johnson

repeatedly and systematically sexually abused multiple boys

under the age of 16, and in one case, under the age of 12,

who lived at Hope Transition Center. These boys, who were as

young as seven years old when Mr. Johnson started molesting

them, have told you of the fear they lived in.

Not only has VS XXXX said, the fear that he would

continue to violate them, but also the fear that the

orphanage would close if they said anything, that they

wouldn't be able to seek their education, that their source

of food and shelter would go away, that Mr. Johnson would hit

them.

And they told you, as ES XXX said, that it really

made little difference if they tried to resist, he would do

it anyway. They also told you about the commercial nature of

Mr. Johnson's sexual abuse. They told you that after the

abuse, in many instances, Mr. Johnson gave them money, or

gave them cookies. They knew that they were living in the

orphanage and receiving the food and shelter and schooling

that they were receiving was a condition upon them not

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 75 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1215

speaking out to the police. They told you how reliant they

were on Mr. Johnson. And how sometimes they would get gifts

if they submitted to the abuse.

Now, for all of this, Daniel Johnson stands accused

of eight Federal crimes. So let's talk about them in order.

The first six crimes are all charged under the same statute,

so they all have the same elements. So I am going to talk

about them together, and then we will break them up.

Counts 1 through 6 of the indictment charge

Mr. Johnson with traveling in foreign commerce and engaging

in illicit sexual conduct. So the first things to consider

in Counts 1 through 6 is whether there is venue for these

charges, and I think this is an easy question for you. There

are two situations in which each of those counts can be

venued in the District of Oregon.

One is that Mr. Johnson was first brought or

arrested into the District of Oregon, and two, is that his

last known residence was in the District of Oregon. So in

terms of him first being brought, you have Exhibit 221 and

you have testimony from Special Agent Forrest Schoening who

told you that Mr. Johnson was first brought and touched down

in America in Portland, Oregon.

That's borne out by 221, which shows his itinerary

going from Phnom Penh to Seoul, Seoul to Vancouver, Canada,

and then into Portland. So that aspect of the venue would be

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 76 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1216

sufficient.

But even if you didn't find that aspect of venue,

you have the second option, which is that Mr. Johnson's last

known residence was in the district of Oregon. The

stipulation states that at all relevant times, Mr. Johnson's

last known residence was in the District of Oregon.

So let's go to the next element. Once you have

established venue, you have to find three elements in order

to find Mr. Johnson guilty of any of these charges. First

element is that Mr. Johnson was a United States citizen.

This also is an easy lift. Mr. Johnson and the United States

have agreed that Mr. Johnson has, his entire life,

continuously been a United States citizen. Those are

stipulated facts.

You could also, if you wanted to, rely on

Mr. Johnson's passports, which are admitted into evidence,

Mr. Johnson's passport application and other evidence. But

you don't need to.

The second element is that Mr. Johnson traveled in

foreign commerce from the United States to Cambodia. Now you

have an instruction on what that means, but this also is a

pretty easy lift for you, because the parties have stipulated

that Mr. Johnson traveled in interstate and foreign commerce

between the United States and Cambodia, and then it gives you

the dates on which he traveled. This is in part three, and I

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 77 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1217

believe there's a second part, as well.

But in total, you are going to be looking at ten

trips in which the parties have agreed that Mr. Johnson

traveled between the United States and Cambodia.

Turning to the third element, the third element is

that Mr. Johnson engaged in illicit sexual conduct with the

victim referenced in the count of the indictment. And like I

say, we will go through each of these counts individually.

So what does illicit sexual conduct mean? Well, it's got a

few definitions. You could find any of these in finding that

there's illicit sexual conduct.

So the first one is that Mr. Johnson knowingly

engaged in a commercial sex act with someone under the age of

18 years. So I will note for you that a commercial sex act

means any act on account of which anything of value is given,

or received by the person. So that doesn't mean that is

confined to instances in which Mr. Johnson gave someone

money. It could be he gave them, for instance, food or gifts

or he provided something to them, such as shelter or housing

or schooling.

Alternatively, you could find that Mr. Johnson

engaged in illicit sexual conduct by finding he knowingly

caused a person who is under the age of 18 to engage in a sex

act by either using force against that person, or by

threatening or placing that person in fear. Here again,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 78 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1218

either one works, and there's been testimony, I believe, with

regards to both.

There are two other ways to find illicit sexual

conduct. One is when there is a gap in age between the

person who is perpetrating the crime and the victim.

Actually, that one involves a victim who is under the age of

16 years old, but is over the age of 12, where the

defendant -- excuse me, where the perpetrator is over four

years older. So here, you have victims who are under the age

of 16, but over the age of 12, and as has been testified to,

Mr. Johnson is, as we sit here, 40 years old.

So you can look at the dates on which the kids were

born, and look at the dates in the indictment, and you can

determine that Mr. Johnson was never within four years of

these kids.

Finally, for victims who were under 12 years old,

you can simply find, regardless of what the gap in age

between the victim and the perpetrator is, that the victim

was under 12 years old, and that Mr. Johnson knowingly

engaged in a sex act with this person.

So let's talk about what constitutes a sex act.

There are several things that constitute a sex act. First,

contact between the penis and anus, involving penetration,

however slight. You have heard testimony about anal

penetration by Mr. Johnson of his victims. And several of

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 79 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1219

them talked to you about how it was painful. A couple of

them talked about how he used lubricant.

Contact between the mouth and the penis, or the

mouth and the anus. Here again, you have heard testimony

over and over and over again about Mr. Johnson either

performing oral sex on these children, making the children

perform oral sex on him, attempting to make them perform oral

sex on him, or some variation of those three things.

Next, penetration, however slight, of another

person's anal opening by hand, finger, or any object with an

intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade the person. Or

an intent -- and this is the one that seems applicable here,

to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of the defendant, or

of any person. So if you find there is penetration, however

slight, of the anus, and you find that Mr. Johnson was doing

so to fulfill his own sexual desire or to gratify or arouse

his own sexual desire, that's illicit sexual conduct.

Finally, the intentional touching, not through the

clothing, of the genitalia of a person younger than 16 years

old. Again, with the same intent. And the one I want to

draw your attention to is at the end, with the intent to

arouse or gratify the sexual desire of the defendant, or any

other person.

Now, here in this case you have heard testimony over

and over and over again about Mr. Johnson touching these

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 80 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1220

boys' penises, and about Mr. Johnson making them touch his

penis. And what you have heard asked almost always after

that testimony was, was that skin on skin contact. Was that

over your clothes or under the clothes? And the boys in the

charged counts have testified to you that that was skin on

skin contact. That was not through the clothing. So finding

that, you can find illicit sexual conduct, sexual contact,

and you can find a sex act.

So let's break up the counts and talk about them

individually. Count 1 involves BT XXXXXXXXX, who you have

heard referred to throughout sometimes as BT XX. BT XX was

born in 1991. As he testified, Mr. Johnson began abusing him

when BT XX was 14 or 15 years old. And that abuse continued

at Hope Transition Center at three different locations until

BT XX was almost 18 years old.

BT XX told you that Mr. Johnson sexually abused him

in a variety of ways 19 to 22 times. He told you that Daniel

Johnson provided him with money for BT XX's sick dad, and for

BT XX's schooling. BT XX told you that he was afraid during

the abuse, and that Daniel Johnson would later apologize to

him, cite scripture seeking forgiveness, and said he was

abusing BT XX because he had been abused. Daniel Johnson

reminded BT XX that Daniel Johnson knew people in high

places.

Now, the illicit sexual conduct that Daniel Johnson

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 81 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1221

engaged in with BT XX included skin on skin contact, between

Mr. Johnson and BT XX's penises. Oral sex, BT XX told you

that Daniel Johnson performed oral sex on him many times,

attempted to make BT XX perform oral sex on Mr. Johnson, and

attempted anal sex where Daniel Johnson put lubricant on

BT XX's anus and attempted to have anal sex with him. He

eventually gave up, and as BT XX told you, he then tried to

put his penis in BT XX's mouth.

BT XX told you in describing this event, "So he

sucked me in that house, and then after he tried to -- and

then after that, he tried to put his penis in my butt. But I

tried to avoid. I tried to stop him from doing that. Then

after that, he also tried to put it in my mouth again."

Count 2, Count 2 involves ES XXXXXXXX, who you have

heard referred to as both ES XXX and "ES XXX." ES XXX was

born in 1997, and he was 13 years old when he moved to Hope

Transition Center. He lived there from 2009 until the date

of Daniel's arrest on May 9, 2013.

Though ES XXX told you that he was abused less than

three times per week during this period, he told you that the

abuse happened pretty much the entire time he lived there.

It started almost immediately after he got there, and it only

ended a couple of weeks before Daniel was arrested after he

told Pastor Sopheak. ES XXX talked to you about how he tried

to resist and how he couldn't try to resist more.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 82 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1222

And he told you a couple things. He said, "I mean,

we had done this since we were young, so even when you

refused it didn't do you any good. Why continue to refuse?"

And then the question was asked, "What happened when you

refused?" And ES XXX's answer was, "He continued to do it.

Like yanking on your arms or shoulders."

Now, ES XXX talked to you about a variety of abuse.

He talked to you about Daniel Johnson touching his penis,

skin on skin. He talked to you about Daniel Johnson making

him touch Daniel Johnson's penis. He talked to you about

Daniel Johnson performing oral sex on him, and he talked to

you about Daniel Johnson touching his penis to ES XXX's

mouth.

ES XXX also talked to you about Daniel Johnson's

attempted anal sex with him. And he said, as others said,

that it was, quote, painful. And in explaining why it wasn't

possible for Daniel Johnson to have anal sex with him, he

said it was impossible because he was an adult and I was a

child.

Count 3, Count 3 involves LS XXXXX. He's largely

been referred to as LS X, but occasionally LS X. LS X lived

at Hope Transition Center from 2009 until the date of

Daniel's arrest in 2013. LS X told you he was born in 2002.

So he was seven years old when he moved to Hope Transition

Center. And he lived there from the time he was seven until

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 83 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1223

11, when Daniel was arrested.

LS X told you that Daniel abused him three or four

times a week, the entire time he was at Hope Transition

Center, with the exception of about two weeks from his

arrival date, and two to three weeks before Daniel's arrest

on December 9th.

So the entire time that LS X was there, Daniel

Johnson was sexually abusing him. And LS X's age during that

time was age 7 to 11 years old. LS X told you that among the

things that Daniel Johnson did to him was Daniel touched and

masturbated LS X's penis. Daniel made LS X touch and

masturbate Daniel's penis. Daniel performed oral sex on

LS X, and tried to make LS X perform oral sex on him.

LS X told you about the, quote, countless times that

Daniel's penis came in contact with LS X's buttocks. And he

told you about one instance in which Daniel Johnson tried to

anally penetrate him, but ultimately gave up. LS X told you

about that time, and he told you how painful it was for him.

LS X also told you that during this period, Daniel

Johnson, while touching him, would also touch himself. And

LS X gave you a series of details that someone that age

usually wouldn't give about Daniel Johnson ejaculating on

him, ejaculating on a mattress, ejaculating on Daniel

Johnson's own stomach while these things were happening.

Count 4, Count 4 involves SO XXXXXXX. You have

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 84 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1224

heard him referred to as SO XXX. SO XXX was between the ages

of 12 and 16 years old during the time he lived at Hope

Transition Center and was being abused by Daniel Johnson. He

told you that Daniel Johnson sexually abused him two to three

times per month. That the abuse lasted for a span of two to

three years, and that he was abused by Daniel Johnson at all

three Hope Transition Center locations. SO XXX told you that

right after the abuse, Daniel gave SO XXX money. He gave him

ice cream, gave him candy, he gave him cookies while SO XXX

was still in Daniel's bedroom.

SO XXX told you that Daniel Johnson slapped him and

hit him with a belt, and that Daniel Johnson threatened to

call the police on him. Daniel Johnson abused SO XXX in a

variety of ways similar to the other boys.

Daniel Johnson touched SO XXX's penis. SO XXX told

you he ejaculated. Daniel Johnson performed oral sex on

SO XXX, and he attempted, like others, to have anal sex with

SO XXX. SO XXX told you that he avoided it, that he tried to

avoid it by twisting his body away from Daniel, but that it

was ultimately painful.

SO XXX also told you why he didn't come forward with

the disclosure of the abuse. He said of Daniel Johnson, "I

also feel sorry for him and I wanted him to come out and I

wanted him -- and he wanted to. Well, he helped a lot of

other children, and I want him to continue to help children.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 85 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1225

And that's why I couldn't tell the truth."

SO XXX and others talked about the very mixed

feelings they had about Daniel. On the one hand, he provided

them with their sole source of food and shelter and

schooling. And on the other hand, as they told you, time and

time again, he used that power to control them and sexually

abuse them.

That was equally true for VS XXXX, who underlies

Count 5. VS XXXX lived at Hope Transition Center for two

years before Daniel was arrested. During that period VS XXXX

was ages 11 to 13 years old. VS XXXX told you for that whole

period, so from before he was 12, Daniel Johnson was, in

VS XXXX's words, violating him at Hope Transition Center. He

was sexually abusing him.

And as VS XXXX told you very much like LS X told

you, Daniel Johnson would give him money or cookies after the

abuse, and VS XXXX and LS X understood it to be payment for

the abuse. They understood it to be as a result of the

abuse. When asked whether VS XXXX was scared of Daniel,

VS XXXX told you, I was afraid he would continue to violate

me.

Now, VS XXXX detailed the abuse that he endured. He

told you about the first time that Daniel Johnson abused him.

He and LS X were in Daniel Johnson's bedroom watching TV.

LS X fell asleep, and afterwards, Daniel Johnson made VS XXXX

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 86 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1226

perform oral sex on him. He did that many, many times.

VS XXXX told you how Daniel Johnson pushed his head down when

making him perform oral sex, and told you how Daniel Johnson

came.

VS XXXX also told you about the two or three times

that Daniel Johnson anally penetrated him. He told you that

it was painful. He told you that Daniel Johnson used

lubricant, and he told you that he couldn't stop Daniel

Johnson because Daniel Johnson was much bigger than VS XXXX.

Count 6, Count 6 involves CC XXXXXX, who is often

referred to as CC X. CC X was between the ages of 12 and

15 years old while he lived at Hope Transition Center. He

was 15 when Daniel was arrested. As CC X told you, Daniel

Johnson sexually abused CC X in very familiar ways. And

afterwards he gave CC X money and gifts right after it

happened.

CC X told you that he was ashamed. In fact, when

asked, "Before Daniel Johnson was arrested, did you ever tell

anyone what Daniel was doing to you?" And CC X said, "No."

When asked, "Why not?" He said a single word: "Ashamed."

Daniel Johnson's sexual abuse of CC X included skin

on skin touching where Daniel Johnson made CC X touch Daniel

Johnson's penis. It included oral sex where Daniel Johnson

put his penis in CC X's mouth, and when Daniel Johnson

ejaculated. And it included anal sex where, as CC X told

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 87 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1227

you, Daniel Johnson put lotion on his penis first, and then

painfully penetrated CC X.

Count 7 and 8 have different charges. They involve

traveling, either across a country line or across a state

line with an intent. So let's talk about them each in order.

With Counts 7 and 8 you have a different venue

requirement, so let's talk about that first. For Counts 7

and 8 the government has to prove that it is more likely than

not that the offense was begun, continued, or completed in

the District of Oregon. There's a couple of things you can

look for in finding this venue requirement is satisfied.

First, you can look to the parties' stipulation, and

the stipulated fact that everyone has agreed on. These facts

show you the date on which Daniel Johnson was in Oregon, then

departed the United States and traveled to Cambodia.

And if you look at these dates and overlay them with

the dates of the abuse, you will see that during this period

Mr. Johnson was doing exactly what it seems like he was

doing. He was abusing these kids in Cambodia, systematically

and repeatedly, several children. He was coming back to the

United States, and as Lindsay Alderson told you, raising

money to fund the orphanage and then he was turning around

and going back to Cambodia.

And on each of those trips to the United States

Mr. Johnson hit destinations all around the country, but each

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 88 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1228

one he came to Oregon. So the venue statute requires that

the offense was begun, completed, or continued in or through

Oregon. And that's the basis for you finding venue.

In addition to the travel stipulation, you also have

in Exhibits 307 through 311, Mr. Johnson's IP and message

records from his Facebook. So you can go through these

carefully if you would like. What they will show is

Mr. Johnson did exactly what I just described to you. He was

in Cambodia abusing these kids. He came back to the United

States to raise money. He hit a bunch of churches around the

country, one of the places he stopped was in Oregon, and then

he turned around and went back to Cambodia. He always

intended to go back, and he always did factually go back to

Cambodia.

Once you find venue, that it was more likely than

not that there was venue, you can turn to Count 7 and we can

look at the elements of that charge. Count 7 charges

Mr. Johnson with traveling in foreign commerce with the

intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct.

So there's three elements here, and we will talk

about each in turn. First is that Mr. Johnson is an American

citizen. So we have talked about this. You have a passport

and a stipulation that says he has always been an American

citizen. Second, is that Mr. Johnson traveled in foreign

commerce from the United States to Cambodia.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 89 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1229

Now, there's ample evidence of the time that

Mr. Johnson was in Cambodia, but we also have a stipulation.

And the stipulation tells you that on these dates, dates

within the period indicted in Count 7, Mr. Johnson traveled

from the United States to Cambodia, back and forth, back and

forth, raising money here, and sexually abusing kids there.

Finally, the third element requires for you to find

that Mr. Johnson traveled to Cambodia for the purpose of

engaging in illicit sexual conduct. So let's talk about

that. As the Court instructed you, there's law on how you

figure out whether there was a purpose for which Mr. Johnson

was traveling. So let's talk about what that law is.

In order to find that Mr. Johnson is guilty of Count

7, you have to find that a dominant, significant, or

motivating purpose of his travel back to the orphanage in

Cambodia to run it and to sexually abuse these children was

to engage in illicit sexual conduct. You have to find, in

other words, that his travel from the United States was

not -- excuse me, that his intent or desire to sexually abuse

these kids was not just incidental to his travel.

Now, in finding that it's a dominant, significant,

or motivating purpose, you don't have to find that it was the

only purpose. A person can have a variety of purposes while

they are traveling. It just has to have been a significant

one.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 90 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1230

So you have to think about the evidence and use your

commonsense and ask yourself, how big of a role do you think

it played for Mr. Johnson, that waiting for him in Cambodia

he had a stable of children who he could sexually abuse

whenever he wanted, however he wanted, for as long as he

wanted? How big of a role do you think it played for

Mr. Johnson when he was deciding whether to stay in America

or go back to that orphanage in Cambodia, do you think it

played that those kids were scared of him, and they were

scared of losing their home, and they were scared of

resisting him. And they were scared of getting in trouble,

so he could do whatever he wanted with them.

Do you think that that was incidental to

Mr. Johnson's travel to go back to Cambodia and run an

orphanage that was predominantly boys, and included several

boys who he was sexually abusing on a regular basis?

Count 8, Count 8 is in many ways very similar to

Count 7. There's a couple of differences. Count 8 has two

elements. The first of which is that Mr. Johnson traveled

across a state line -- didn't travel internationally, just

traveled across a state line, between the dates in the

indictment.

Here again, this is pretty easy, because you have

to -- the parties have agreed that Mr. Johnson was in Oregon

on these days, which are included in the indicted period, and

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 91 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1231

that he left, not only Oregon, he left the United States and

traveled to Cambodia. So in order to leave the United States

you have to cross the Oregon state line. You don't have to

spend a ton of time on that one.

The second element is similar to what we just talked

about. You need to look at what Mr. Johnson's intent was

when he crossed that state line. And again, you need to find

that it was a dominant, significant, or motivating purpose;

that it wasn't merely incidental that he engaged in a sex act

with a child under the age of 12.

Now, you can match up the dates, but I will tell you

what two children you should focus on. LS XXXXX was abused

during the entire period that he was at Hope Transition

Center up to Mr. Johnson's arrest. And at no point during

that period was he ever over the age of 12. You have heard

testimony and you have seen evidence, including LS X's

passport, that tells you that on the day of Mr. Johnson's

arrest, he was 11 years old.

The other kid you can look at in considering this

charge -- well, you can just look at LS X. That's all for

now.

Now, you have heard a lot of testimony from these

boys, and you have heard a lot of testimony from other boys

who were abused, or who Mr. Johnson intended to abuse. And

it seems that over the course of this trial you have heard

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 92 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1232

day after day after day after day of people corroborating the

boys' testimony, of the boys corroborating one another's

testimony, of evidence that corroborates the boys' testimony.

So while I will not go over all of the pieces of

corroboration that you have heard, I will remind you of 30 of

them, so let's go through those. For Count 1 involving BT XX

XXXX, you heard testimony that right after the arrest BT XXX

XXXX told a woman, Knot, that Daniel had abused him, and he

tried to have sex with him. You also heard in early 2014

BT XX confided in Kelby Alderson, telling Kelby that it was

true Daniel had sexually abused him.

You also heard testimony from Lindsay Alderson,

telling you that in early 2014 BT XX told her that the

accusations of sexual molestation against Daniel were true.

And finally, you heard about the 2014 child forensic

interview conducted by Martha Finnegan, who is a forensic

interviewer for the FBI, in which BT XX talked to her about

the abuse.

For Count 2, ES XXX, you heard testimony from Tola

telling you that he saw ES XXX sleeping in Daniel Johnson's

room at the third house in Hope Transition Center. You heard

testimony from Pastor Sopheak saying approximately two or

three weeks, ES XXX and LS X came to him and told him that

Daniel was sexually abusing them.

You heard testimony from SESX, who told you that at

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 93 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1233

the first or second house for Hope Transition Center, ES XXX

had told him that Daniel had played with his penis and sucked

his penis. You heard testimony from BT XX who told you that

before he moved to the United States, he had spoken to ES XXX

and ES XXX had told him what Daniel had did to him, quote,

just like husband and wife. And finally, you heard part of

ES XXX's forensic interview with the FBI from 2017.

Count 3, LS X, for LS X, you also heard testimony

from Tola who told you that at the third house he overheard

LS X tell his friends that Daniel had touched his penis. You

heard from Pastor Sopheak who, like ES XXX, told you about

two to three weeks before Daniel's arrest LS X and ES XXX had

told him that Daniel was abusing them.

You heard testimony from ES XXX who told you that

his younger brother had told him that Daniel was abusing him.

You heard testimony from LT XXXXXXX, who told you that LS X

had told him that Daniel had touched his penis, and also had

told him that Daniel had sucked his penis.

You heard testimony regarding LS X's disclosure on

the date of arrest by the Cambodian National Police, and what

he told them. And that he told you that he had, quote,

sparingly told them, end quote, what Daniel had been doing,

he told you that he had disclosed the abuse that was taking

place.

LS X also told you that when it came time for

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 94 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1234

Daniel's trial in Cambodia, he stood up and he told them

about Daniel abusing him. Finally, you heard part of LS X's

forensic interview with FBI forensic interviewer Martha

Finnegan that took place in 2014.

For SO XXX you heard BT XX testify that SO XXX had

told him that Daniel was abusing him before BT XX moved to

the United States. You heard Pastor Sopheak tell you that

SO XXX had told him that Daniel was sexually abusing him, and

told him that Daniel had played with his penis and that

Daniel had had sex with SO XXX, but that Daniel pulled his

penis out of SO XXX's anus because it was hurting SO XXX.

You heard from SESX who told you that at the second

or third house, SO XXX told him that Daniel had been with him

in a sexual way. You heard from SS XX who told you that

the -- who told you that before the arrest, LS X had told him

that he and Daniel had slept together and done sexual things.

You heard from Lindsay Alderson who told you about

SO XXX telling her that the sexual allegations against Daniel

were true, and that Daniel had done those things to SO XXX.

You heard from Kelby Alderson who told you basically the same

thing. And you heard about the 2016 forensics interview in

which SO XXX disclosed abuse to the FBI.

For VS XXXX, you heard that VS XXXX testified and

talked about the abuse at the Cambodian trial. And you heard

that VS XXXX had talked to FBI interviewer Martha and told

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 95 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1235

her about the uncomfortable things that Daniel had done to

him.

Finally for Count 6, you heard from Lindsay Alderson

that CC X, who is the subject of Count 6, told her that

Daniel would call him into his room, touch him in an area,

and at that point he pointed to his genitals. You heard from

Kelby Alderson who told him the same thing.

You heard that CC X told the Cambodian National

Police that Daniel had touched his sex organ, and you heard

about CC X's interviews in 2014 and 2017 with the FBI

forensic interviewers in which he told them that Daniel had

touched his penis, and told the second one about all the

things that Daniel had done to him.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, in addition to all of

this corroboration, I want to highlight two more things.

First, you heard testimony from three witnesses, Pastor

Sopheak, ES XXX and LS X about ES XXX and LS X telling Pastor

Sopheak, before Daniel's arrest, before the involvement of

any law enforcement, before any interviews, telling Pastor

Sopheak that Daniel was abusing them.

And you heard testimony from ES XXX and Pastor

Sopheak about Pastor Sopheak confronting Daniel about two or

three weeks before Daniel's arrest. You also heard testimony

from ES XXX and LS X that after Pastor Sopheak confronted

him, the abuse stopped up until the time of Daniel's arrest.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 96 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1236

And you have heard testimony regarding Facebook

messages that Pastor Sopheak sent and received prior to the

confrontation with Daniel, and after that confrontation.

You have also heard testimony and seen evidence of

another confrontation in which BT XX spoke to Daniel, and

Daniel explained that "I have done nothing in the United

States and I have done nothing in Vietnam." But notably

absent from Daniel Johnson's denials to BT XX was "I have

done nothing in Cambodia."

In addition to the evidence of Daniel Johnson's

repeated abuse of all these boys, you have also learned of

the years that Daniel Johnson spent frightening,

intimidating, and most of all controlling them. You have

heard about his efforts to control them before he was

arrested, but you have also heard about how those efforts

continued after the arrest.

And they give you some insight into why the boys

haven't always disclosed abuse to everyone they spoke to.

You heard testimony from SO XXX and ES XXX regarding their

recantation, and from ES XXX about Daniel telling him to tell

his younger brother LS X to lie.

You heard testimony from LT XXXXXXX about him

visiting Daniel in jail. Daniel apologizing to him, and

telling him, Don't say anything to the FBI. You have seen

Facebook messages between Daniel's brother Gary and Pastor

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 97 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1237

Sinai talking about perhaps giving 10K to BT XX to change his

story.

And you have also seen Facebook messages between

Daniel's brother, Gary, and SO XXX talking to SO XXX about

talking BT XX into recanting, and how if they do that,

Daniel's lawsuit against the FBI will be successful, and they

can share in the profits.

Ladies and gentlemen, at the end of the day, this is

not a difficult case to understand. You have heard boy after

boy after boy after boy after boy after boy after boy after

boy disclose Daniel Johnson's sexual abuse of them, or his

attempts to sexually abuse them. One by one they got on the

stand and testified to you about Daniel Johnson grabbing

their penises, making them grab his penis, performing oral

sex on them, making them perform oral sex on him. And Daniel

Johnson's sometimes successful, sometimes unsuccessful,

efforts to anally penetrate them.

Now, you saw and you listened to these witnesses.

Does it sound like they were making it up for a witness fee?

Did it look like they were fabricating their stories to get

immigration benefits? Do you think that 11-year-old LS XX

XXX, raised in the rural provinces of Cambodia, coming to

Phnom Penh just for the opportunity to go to school and

living in this orphanage, do you think that LS XXXXX was

coming up with a way in which to make up allegations so he

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 98 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

GOVERNMENT'S CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1238

could game the American immigration system and eventually get

a T visa at 11 years old? Does that make sense to anyone?

Taken together, these boys have painted a stark and

horrifying picture of their lives at Hope Transition Center,

where they were subjected to repeated sexual abuse by Daniel

Johnson, where they were afraid of him, where he gave them

money and food and gifts and provided shelter and schooling

to them, and where what he got out of it was control and

sexual abuse of them.

They told you that they knew they couldn't have

resisted, that it wouldn't have made any difference. And

that disclosing the abuse to anyone might have caused the

orphanage to shut down, and for them to lose the food,

shelter, and schooling they depended on.

The evidence has shown you that during the period

where Daniel Johnson was abusing all of these kids, he

traveled back and forth between the United States and to

Cambodia. And each time he did so, he came and went from

Oregon. As we told you, a person can have multiple purposes

when they travel and you have to ask yourself whether a

significant purpose of Daniel Johnson's travel was his

ability to go back to Cambodia and abuse BT XX, ES XXX, LS X,

SO XXX, VS XXXX, and CC X.

We believe that when you consider the evidence, the

testimony, and the exhibits, the stipulated facts, and you

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 99 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1239

follow the Court's instructions and use your commonsense, you

will find that Daniel Johnson molested every one of these

boys, and that he traveled across state lines and to Cambodia

to continue doing so.

And given that recognition and the other evidence

before you, we believe that you will return a verdict of

guilty on all counts. Thank you.

THE COURT: Let's take a brief break while the

defendant sets up to give its closing argument. We will be

in recess for five minutes.

(JURY OUT.)

(Brief recess taken from 1:33 p.m.

to 1:44 p.m.)

THE COURT: All right. Bring the jury in.

(JURY IN.)

THE COURT: Please be seated, everybody. We will

now hear from Ms. Maxfield for the defense.

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

MS. MAXFIELD: Good afternoon, may it please the

Court, Counsel, Mr. Johnson, ladies and gentlemen of the

jury, I want to begin by thanking each of you. I know that

these long trials, especially taking two weeks out of a

spring period, can be burdensome and can be disruptive, both

professionally and personally. And I want to thank you for

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 100 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1240

taking the time to do this.

Each of us has noticed how attentive all of you have

been from the beginning to the end, and I want to thank you

for that, too. I want to thank you, especially on behalf of

my client, who appreciates the fact that as his fate is in

your hands, you have taken the time to really pay attention

to the evidence.

The American system of justice is unlike any other

system of justice, we don't try the accused based on

suspicion. We do not convict him based on conjecture, and in

this case we certainly don't convict a person based on

unreliable proof. In the American Court system a prosecution

must prove a man's guilty beyond all reasonable doubt with

descent, reliable, believable evidence.

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't mean

that maybe he's guilty. It doesn't mean that probably he's

guilty. It certainly doesn't mean that it's highly likely

that he's guilty. To convict in American Court, you have to

be sure, based on the evidence that you have actually heard

in the case.

Maybe the best way to understand proved beyond a

reasonable doubt is to look at the various levels of proof

that we use in American Courts.

I see how you're doing that. She's way ahead of me.

Probable cause. What does probable cause mean? It

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 101 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1241

means that there's a quantum of evidence that would actually

let you search a car, a person's car. It means there's

probably something going on there.

Preponderance of the evidence. That means we get to

a 51 percent chance, it's more likely that this occurred than

that it didn't occur.

The next area is clear and convincing. Clear and

convincing is a very, very high level of proof. The Supreme

Court has said that it's one of those that leaves you without

any significant doubt, but it's the level of proof that we

actually are willing to take a person's child away.

In other words, you could lose your children if they

can prove by clear and convincing evidence that you have done

something that is harmful to them, or they are not safe with

you. It's a very high burden of proof.

But higher than that still is proof beyond a

reasonable doubt. And that means as you sort through the

evidence, if there's any remaining reasonable doubt you have

an obligation to acquit.

The Court is going to tell you that a reasonable

doubt isn't one based on something that is imaginary or

something that you have made up. A reasonable doubt is based

on a lack of evidence, or something that is missing in the

case, or something that gnaws you about what you heard.

What is an imaginary doubt? I don't know how many

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 102 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1242

of you scuba dive. I used to, and then ended up in the

chambers and stopped that. But one of the things you do

before you go down in the water is you want to check your

regulator to make sure it's clear. And you might have

checked your regulator before you got on the boat, you might

have checked the regulator when you left the house. You

might have checked your regulator five times in the car, but

just before you step off the boat, you check your regulator

again to make sure that it's clear.

Is that an unreasonable doubt? No. That regulator

could have been clear 99 times out of 100, but it's not an

unreasonable doubt to check the regulator before you jump.

Same thing with a parachute. Nothing crazy about checking

the chute to make sure it's folded exactly as it should be

before you jump out of the plane.

Even though everything would suggest that everything

is probably fine, there's nothing unreasonable about looking

again to make sure that you are safe.

An imaginary doubt would be something crazy. I had

a trial a little while ago, and the prosecutor had talked to

the jury about circumstantial evidence. And she tells a

story that prosecutors often do about the mom who bakes

cookies and tells the boy, don't eat the cookies. And the

mom leaves, and the little boy eats all the cookies. And the

mom comes home, and she sees crumbs all over the cookies

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 103 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1243

(sic), she says, I think you ate the cookies. And the boy

says, no.

And then the prosecutor says that's proof beyond a

reasonable doubt. You can see it from circumstantial

evidence. So my client was so upset about this that he came

up to me afterwards and he said, well, that's not at all --

like what could have happened is like a guy could have been

walking down the street. He could have walked in the house.

He could have found those cookies, he could have eaten all

but one. He could have forced the little boy to eat a

cookie, and then he would have crumbs on him.

So that would be an imaginary doubt. That would be

cobbling a bunch of crazy things together to call into

question the level of proof. But in this case, a reasonable

doubt just requires you to sift through the evidence

carefully.

Where to begin in this case, because I think it's

where the government has really failed to prove a material

element, and it's an important material element. And that's

in Counts 7 and 8. 7 and 8, each of these charges are

different than Counts 1 through 6. Counts 1 through 6

actually talk about engaging in a sex act. That's kind of

the core of the offense, to engage in a sex act.

But Counts 7 and 8 are thought crimes. It has to do

with what is in the defendant's head. This defendant's head

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 104 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1244

at the time that he travels.

You were there, and then you weren't.

And the question really for all you is, why did

Daniel Johnson get on a plane and fly to Cambodia? That's

the question you have to answer, and you have to look at the

evidence to see whether the government has proven that the

reason he got on an airplane and flew to Cambodia is to have

sex with kids.

7 and 8 both turn on his purpose and intent, and the

Court has instructed you that the purpose and intent has to

do with the dominant, significant, or motivating purpose. In

Count 7, is the dominant, significant, or motivating purpose

to engage -- to travel in foreign commerce to engage in

illicit sexual conduct. And Count 8, the government has to

prove the same thing, a dominant, significant, or motivating

purpose of Mr. Johnson to travel across the state line to

engage in sex with someone under the age of 12.

So the key question and the key period is, what is

in his head when he gets on the plane. And the way we

examine that is to look at the phrases, dominant,

significant, and motivating purpose.

Dominant, an ordinary definition, is commanding or

controlling or prevailing over all others. Significant,

important, great, especially in leading to a particular

result. Motivating, the reason one has for acting in a

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 105 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1245

particular way. And then contrary to that is incidental,

accompanying, but not a major part of something.

So what was Daniel Johnson's purpose in traveling?

I think if you actually look at the evidence, that the

evidence would point you to a single purpose for travel. The

best way to understand why Daniel Johnson traveled, is to

think about what he was focused on, and what he was doing in

Cambodia, and why he would have left the country at the time.

Pretty soon you are going to see a slide that says

reasonable doubt. Mr. Johnson traveled to fund and

facilitate the Hope Ministries, good works in Cambodia. Look

at the evidence and ask yourself, what did the evidence show

that Mr. Johnson was doing during the relevant period in

these counts. During the time he had been in Cambodia -- I

think Karla Comstock begins in 2011, 2012 is when she comes

to visit. And that gives a good sense of what he's up to.

Pastor Sopheak is also there during that period of

time. And what Pastor Sopheak says is that during this

period of time that he had met Daniel Johnson, and then he

met a fellow by the name of Pastor Pilot are doing just

ordinary good works in Cambodia.

And Daniel Johnson has managed to find a bunch of

computers, and he set up this Coffee House where people can

come and take Bible classes, learn English and work on a

computer. At this time he has no intention or desire to run

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 106 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1246

any kind of Cambodian orphanage.

But Pastor Pilot at one point moves in, and Pastor

Pilot brings with him several children. One day, and Pastor

Sopheak talked to you about this, Pastor Sopheak is out in

Prey Veng and he's looking for some land or property for them

to build a Prey Veng compound on.

And while he's away, out of nowhere, Pastor Pilot

and his wife leave, they leave the premises, and they leave

the children behind. So at this point, things kind of shift,

but not too much. Karla Comstock tells you by the time she

gets there and she's meeting the children, that she has a

sense that Daniel Johnson really -- that's not where his

focus is.

You may recall she testified that she's going to go

talk to him about the fact that he's being short or abrupt

with the children, and she says, Before I began to even

explain what I was upset with, he jumped into it just saying,

I never knew I was going to be a single man working in this

country with all these kids. It's really hard. She says he

buried his head and threw his notebook down, and she doesn't

remember if he started to cry or if he sobbed, but she does

remember that he was very very upset.

She also remembers his energy in that time period,

what he was focused on just personally. She said it was

amazingly chaotic. Daniel Johnson was very busy, hectic,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 107 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1247

kind of coming and going a lot. He just seemed overwhelmed,

always giving people instructions for people to come and go

and do this and do that. And making arrangements for the

church teams to come to the center, to go out and do the good

works. It was the good works. It was the good works that

had Mr. Johnson's heart, and it was the good works that held

his time, and it was the good works that held his attention.

The very, very best evidence, and frankly, the only

evidence that you have about why Daniel Johnson traveled back

to Cambodia is to look at the evidence about why he left

Cambodia in the first place. And he left Cambodia to find a

way to fund the good works projects that they were doing at

Hope Transition. He would go to the United States, because

it was the only way to fund the projects that they had going.

He would come to the United States and spend

anywhere between five and eight weeks, and he would go around

to these various churches, and he would have these fund

raising events. And he would raise enough money over the

period of time to fund the things that he was thinking about,

or were in the planning stages back in Cambodia.

One of the very best pieces that gives you a clue

about what Mr. Johnson was thinking while he was in the

United States is to look at Government's Exhibit 311. In

Government's Exhibit 311 -- and that's really tiny. What you

see is they have pulled out of a Facebook page Mr. Johnson's

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 108 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1248

itinerary. This is what I am going to do while I'm in the

United States.

And if you look at that itinerary, it's just chock

full of fund raising, and visiting the various churches, to

get the money together, and to get the support and try to

find church teams that will come back to Cambodia to assist

in the projects that they were doing.

So for example, in this one from April 26 to May

31st, from a solid month he's moving from church to church to

church to church to raise money, to do fund raisers, and talk

about the good works that they are doing, and try to keep the

energy behind the forces of good works that Hope is engaged

in in Cambodia. And then finally on May 31st he flies back

to Cambodia.

Having spent four to eight weeks in the United

States in Christian churches, raising money, why did he

decide to go back to Cambodia? He decided to go back to

Cambodia to spend the money. That's why he's going back to

Cambodia. He's going back to Cambodia with the money that

he's made, with the time investment, the teams that are now

going to come, and he's going to engage in the good works

that have been planned. That's his goal. That is his

dominant purpose, that is his purpose and intent.

Anything else is peripheral. He has more wells he

wants to dig. He has more eyeglass clinics that he wants to

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 109 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1249

put on. He wants to go back and fix the church in Kampot.

He had money to do that.

In fact, in 2013, just as everything has exploded in

his last trip to the United States, what's he focused on?

He's focused on the medical clinic in the Prey Veng compound,

the medical clinic that is partially finished. He's gone to

raise money in the United States to finish that clinic. He's

gone to get the medical supplies to actually supply that

clinic, and that's the next phase of what he's going to do.

Everything, everything, all of his focus, 100 percent of his

focus when he leaves Cambodia and comes back from Cambodia is

to make these projects work. And there's no other evidence

in the record. That's the only evidence in the record.

The government's suggestion that there's some

peripheral purpose in him leaving the United States and then

coming back really doesn't make any sense if you think about

what he's doing, where his focus is on. If the government is

correct and his sole focus is on molesting children, or even

primary focus is on molesting children, why leave Cambodia in

the first place?

He leaves Cambodia to fund the projects and in these

two elements, 7 and 8, the government has failed to prove

this -- these two charges beyond a reasonable doubt, because

they have failed to establish he has an ulterior purpose, his

motivating purpose, his significant purpose in traveling.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 110 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1250

You are going to have in the jury room exhibits --I

have shown you a few, but you are going to have a gazillion.

You have seen us go through this, because we wanted to give

you a sense of what our client was doing in this country.

But you are going have a gazillion photographs, itineraries,

you are going to have conversations all focused on what

Mr. Johnson was focused on, and that's the good works in

Cambodia.

Now I want to talk about the other charges more

generally. A different measure. We're dealing with a

different culture. We're dealing with people who come from a

very different place, who have very, very different lives

than any of us.

In trying to measure the motives of people and

trying to measure whether something is a benefit, trying to

measure whether someone would make an accusation or not make

an accusation, it would be a terrible mistake to use an

American ruler. Because the government stressed, and we all

stressed in this case that the Cambodian witnesses are very,

very poor. They are very deprived. They are looking for

ways to survive.

And it's all very true. That's exactly who these

people are. That's exactly where they have come from. The

Cambodian witnesses have lived in a very poor, undeveloped

country. And they testified their parents have died, or

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 111 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1251

abandoned them, or simply were unable to provide them with

even the basics of food and shelter. That's who these

witnesses are.

Karla Comstock describes the country as being --

she's overwhelmed by how extremely impoverished it is, how

it's run down, and the people need so much. They don't have

a foot to stand on. She talks about the fact that there

aren't very many educated people in the country to build it

back up, and people are needy, hungry, wonderful people to

work with. But it's that level of need and deprivation you

need to keep in mind as you measure motive.

SO XXX describes why he lives with his uncle. As

you recall, his parents disowned him, and abandoned him, and

just kind of given up on him. And he talks about going to

live with his uncle, and he says that he's up very, very

early in the morning and constantly working until midnight.

And that's what is expected of him. That's how his day goes.

Again, we're talking about people with a level of

deprivation and desperation that is probably unlike the

people that any of us know in this country.

As a result of that, you have witnesses who have

been conditioned to focus first on what it's going to take to

survive. Survival is and always will be the bottom line. It

just will be. As you recall, there was some testimony about

it's a common problem in Hope Transition with the folks that

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 112 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1252

lived there with stealing and lying, and just had these kids

coming in. BT XXXXXXX, I think, he was questioned about the

little boy who kept stealing, and a description of what to

do -- check his pack, send an older boy to school with him,

do all of these things because this was part of how the kid

interacted, trying to take what he needed.

If you recall LS X's final punishment that he and I

talked about on cross-examination, perhaps the most serious

punishment he had was for stealing some money. Even ES XXX

talks about this. There's a story he tells about getting in

trouble for the new shirt, the new shirt that he brings back,

claiming that a neighbor has just given him the new shirt.

He ended up getting punished on that occasion, presumably

because Mr. Johnson believed it wasn't a gift, and in fact,

it was a shirt that had been stolen.

I only tell you these stories, because it gives you

a sense of what these kids are up against, and what it is

that motivates them, and how it is that they get through

life. And it's important to keep in mind as you sit through

the evidence in this case. From birth these are young men

who have learned they won't survive, let alone succeed,

unless they are willing to scrape, and sometimes steal,

manipulate, and yes, in this case, sometimes lie. They have

been conditioned to keep a sharp eye out for the next

opportunity.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 113 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1253

Reasonable doubt. Hopes and promises. The young

Cambodian witnesses are deprived, but they are not

unmotivated. These are not just -- they haven't given up.

These are kids that are as induced by a prayer and induced by

a hope as they are by a promise. They know any opportunity

shouldn't be squandered, that you need to grasp the next

opportunity because it might be your last one. They have an

eye out for it, and they will invest energy in obtaining it.

The government made the witnesses a few really

significant promises in this case in exchange for

cooperation. Motivators by themselves, but they also left a

huge amount of room with these witnesses for hopes and

prayers. Things that you might get, things that you probably

could get. And it's kind of in this area of hopes, prayers,

and promises that we find the chief motivators in this case.

Judge McShane has instructed you, it's in the

instruction on testimony of witnesses, compensation and

benefits. That you should examine the testimony of these

witnesses who receive benefits from the government with

greater caution than with other witnesses.

This is -- I mean, this isn't minor. It's something

you should consider seriously as you sift through the

evidence and think about why people said the things they

said, and why people did the things they did.

Now, all of the government witnesses are going to

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 114 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1254

make about $2,800 just in witness fees. A lot of that, I

hope, will go home with them, although LS X says he ate all

of his. Maybe he discovered room service or something else

about our country. But hopefully, some of this goes home,

because one of the things you learned from the expert witness

today is that a police officer in Cambodia makes $240 a

month.

So $2800 gives you, what, about 10 months, 11 months

of salary. That's -- that is -- that's a motivating amount

of money in the place where these folks live.

But I submit to you that really that's not all

that's in play here. There are other potential benefits,

other potential parting gifts that are much, much more

significant than the cash that might go home. And I want to

look at what has happened to BT XXXXXXX, to discuss that.

BT XXXXXXX agreed to cooperate, and as a result, he

was promised, first of all, an extended visa that allows him

to stay for a period of time. But with that comes much, much

more. What is the value -- think about the value you put on

the path to US citizenship. We know many, many people who

would give an arm and leg for such a path to US citizenship.

It can't be ignored as a powerful, powerful motivator.

The government is going to say it was just BT XXX

XXXX. None of the other people got that. And I want to look

again at BT XXXXXXX's cross examination, and talk to you

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 115 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1255

about how all of that played out. And then we're going to

come back and ask whether that claim really makes any sense

at all.

Mr. Weinerman talked to Mr. BT X and he asked, "At

some point you decided that you wanted to stay here, right?"

Remember, this was at a time when Mr. BT X's -- he has this

one-year visa, and it's about to expire and now he's deciding

whether he's going to go talk with the FBI.

So Mr. Weinerman says, "You wanted to stay here,

right?

"Mr. BT X, Yes.

"And at some point you decided to talk to the FBI,

right?

"Yes.

"And that was in February of 2014?

"Yes.

"And that's the first time you told them or anyone

in the United States about alleged sexual abuse by Daniel

Johnson?

"Yes.

"And you discovered at some point in 2014 before

your visa expired that if you cooperated in the investigation

of Daniel Johnson that you could be eligible to get a visa

that would allow you to stay in the United States?

"Yes.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 116 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1256

"And you have been here since August of 2013, right?

"Yes.

"And you have not been back to Cambodia in four and

a half years, almost five?

"Correct.

"And the FBI helped you get that extension of your

Visa; is that correct?

"Yes.

"And the FBI helped you find an attorney to do that

correct?

"Yes.

"And your visa was extended before it expired?

"Yes.

"And it allows you to work?

"Yes.

"And you have been working here since you got this

new visa?

"Yes, I have been working at a grocery store in

Beaverton.

"And does this visa also allow you to go to school?

"Yes.

"And to get financial aid?

"Yes.

"And you have been able to do both, go to school and

get financial aid, correct?

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 117 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1257

"Yes.

"And so you obtained another visa in 2016 which

allows you to stay here until 2020, and you are allowed to

apply for a green card within three years, correct?

"Yes.

"And it also allows you, within five years after

obtaining the green card, to become a United States citizen?

"Yes.

"And it's your understanding, Mr. BT X, that to

obtain this visa and to be able to remain in the United

States, that you have to cooperate with the FBI in the

investigation and prosecution of Daniel Johnson?

"Yes."

Now, that's the trade that was made. What did we

learn from the testimony of BT XXXXXXX? I want to look at

these component parts. First of all, BT XXXXXXX is in the

United States, which creates the availability of this visa.

So we learn that a person who is a victim of crimes like

those charged in this case are eligible for an extended --

Mr. BT X called it a T visa if they cooperate with the FBI.

The FBI can and will help a cooperating witness to

get an extended T visa, or if he or she keeps cooperating,

the FBI will even pay for the help of an immigration lawyer.

The FBI -- if the FBI asks the Department of Human Services

to grant an extended visa, it's very likely to be granted.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 118 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1258

That extended visa will allow someone to work in the

United States. It will allow someone to go to school and get

financial aid. Three years after that visa is extended you

are eligible for a green card, and five years after that

green card you are eligible for US citizenship.

Now, Mr. BT X's clock ran out, and he was in an

unusual position. His clock ran out, he was literally in the

country. And so the FBI had to provide this assistance maybe

a little sooner than it wanted to provide. You listened to

some of these kids talk about when they made the inquiry,

kind of this, We will talk about that when the case is over.

But in any event, I think it's very, very likely

that the other witnesses in this case would ask for the same

sort of benefit, or the same sort of treatment that BT XXX

XXXX has been given. In fact, they have said as much when

they testified in this case.

SO XXX said -- we asked, "Did you talk to an

attorney about how you could stay here after you are done in

Court?" And he said, "I was just asking about going to

school here, and they said that we could talk. We could talk

after this, or later."

So in other words, this is a benefit we can talk

about once this trial is done. But to suggest that it's not

a benefit that is in the wings, I think really is

disingenuous.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 119 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1259

LS XXXXX says the same thing. I said, "When you

talked to FBI Martha, do you remember telling her that you

wanted to come to the United States to go to school, and to

be a doctor?" And he said, "Yes, I did tell her that."

"Is that still your hope?

"Yes.

"And when you talked to that lawyer, did you talk to

him about maybe moving to the United States?

"Yes, I did.

"And have you talked with that lawyer since you have

been here, or another lawyer since have you been here, in the

United States about staying here?

"I did.

"Do you think there's some chance that you will be

able to stay?

"I hope.

CC XXXXXX, also one of the kids who met with the

lawyer, says the same thing. Mr. Weinerman asked, "In the

beginning of the interview with the FBI on March 21st, 2017,

about ten minutes into that interview did you ask the FBI

when you will be going to the United States?

"Yes.

"And after you told the FBI on March 21st that

Daniel had sexually abused him, did you ask them whether you

can go to the United States?

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 120 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1260

"Yes.

"Lindsay Alderson encouraged you to change your

story again, and tell the FBI that Daniel had sexually abused

you.

"Yes, she encouraged me to tell the truth.

"And you want to live with her in the United States;

is that correct?

"Yes.

"And after that you told the FBI on March 21st that

Daniel hat sexually touched you, and you asked them if you

could go to the United States?

"Yes.

"Did you talk to the attorney about trying to stay

here after testifying in this case?

"I asked. I only asked.

"You asked if you could?

"Yes.

VS XXXXXXXXXXXXX also testified that he was someone

with a lawyer. And kind of as an aside here, VS XXXX also

had some pretty significant benefits that go a little bit

above and beyond witness fees. He tells you that after he

finally gets through and back home with his parents, the

authorities bring him a new bike. He doesn't know who the

authorities are, but those same authorities apparently paid

for some repairs on his parents' home. And then it's

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 121 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1261

clarified later that actually, they gave him a new house and

put a new roof on it. So VS XXXX's benefits were

significant. In these kids' minds though, it's all just

coming from the authorities.

ES XXXXXXX, what does he get? I would imagine

ES XXX gets whatever his brother LS X gets. That seems fair.

Almost certainly he would also talk to the FBI about filing

some kind of lawsuit. But ES XXX Soy gets LS X back. ES XXX

XXX doesn't tell the FBI that he's been abused until there's

this period where all of a sudden there's a chance for him

and LS X to be reunited. And another thing that ES XXXXXXX

gets is the promise that the questioning, all the authority's

questioning will finally, finally come to an end.

You recall on cross-examination that we talked to

him about how often he had been questioned. "When you met

with the FBI the second time, you told them you were meeting

because you wanted it to finally be over?

"Yes.

"And you believed it wouldn't be finally over until

you told them that you had been sexually abused?

"Yes.

"And then you were asked to come to this country?

"Yes.

"And to talk about it yet once again.

"Yes.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 122 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1262

"And you came with the final hope that this would

finally be over.

"Yes.

"And you have said what you need to say for it to be

over?

"Yes."

ES XXX's motivation lies in having it be done, but

he's probably in the same position that his brother is in if

there's more to be hoped for.

Pastor Sopheak gets control of Prey Veng and Kampot.

Let me take you back --

THE COURT: Excuse me. It's the second time.

MS. MAXFIELD: These kids have cooperated with the

FBI. They testified they were sexually abused in Cambodia.

They come to this country and cooperated in every single way.

How are they materially different from BT XXXXXXX? They are

not. They are in exactly the same position that he is, and

their hopes that access to this country, just to even come

here to work here, to go to school here, and even to be a

citizen here, the road should be no different. All that is

different, I would submit, is the timing of when that hope

becomes a reality.

A reasonable doubt. Tell a lie once, and all your

truths become questionable. Every one of these young

Cambodian witnesses believes that telling a pragmatic lie is

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 123 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1263

okay. And they make that very clear in their testimony to

you. Instead of it being wrong, a pragmatic lie is viewed as

a necessary survival tool, and a tool to success.

For these kids truth has more to do with whatever I

am saying to you right now, and it has much to do with who is

asking the questions. And you can tell that that is true by

what they say to you. Every kid said, I lied, I lied.

SO XXXXXXX, now when -- "SO XXX, when you were first asked

about sexual abuse by Daniel Johnson you said -- did you tell

the truth?

"At first in Cambodia I didn't tell the truth. The

first time with the FBI, I did not tell the truth.

"But you told APLE that Daniel didn't do anything to

you sexually?

"Yes, at that time I didn't tell the truth.

"And about nine months later the FBI came to

Cambodia, correct?

"The first FBI I did not tell the truth, either.

"So do you think it was wrong to lie about that?"

This is when he's talking about whether his parents

are dead, and that was kind of interesting. He's telling the

story about how he's been abandoned, that he can choose to

stay with his uncle and live that life that has him up at

5:00 in the morning and working until midnight.

And what does he say? "I feel it was severely wrong

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 124 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1264

to do that, but my cousin said I had to do that. And if I

didn't do that, I wouldn't be able to live there." He was

willing to tell a lie to live in a better place.

The other kids also said that they had lied during

the investigation, and this is like a five-year

investigation, so these things go back and forth and

boomerang through. LS XXXXX says that he lied, as well.

Talking about the interview with the FBI, "I told her, but I

just told her so many times because I lied to her. There

were times that I told a lie, but there were times that I

told the truth."

ES XXXXXXX, he lied, as well. "So when you spoke to

APLE and said that Daniel had not abused you, was that the

truth or a lie?

"It was a lie.

"And that same year, did you meet with a woman named

Martha from the FBI?

"Yes.

"Did you lie to her, also?

"Yes. Everything I said was a lie. It was a lie,

and it was not because I was scared and it was not because I

was nervous, or anything like that.

"So then pretty much everything you said to Martha

was untrue?

"Correct. It was a lie."

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 125 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1265

We're going to come back to this interview in a

minute, because it's a significant interview in this case.

But it's just a matter of fact, that was a lie. CC XXXXXX

said he lied. "Did you later say that Daniel Johnson had

never touched you?

"Yes.

"Was that the truth or a lie?

"A lie.

"And why did you tell that lie at the time?

"Because I don't want them to ask me too many

questions.

"Okay. I understand that you are saying you lied to

Martine?

"Answer, Yes.

"And you thought it was to okay to lie to Martine?

"Yes.

"And you told them that Daniel Johnson touched you?

"Yes.

"And you believed that is what they wanted you to

say?

"Yes. But --

"But, go ahead.

"Yes. I was scared so I said I told a lie, because

I don't want to have problems, you know, messy problems."

These kids are making decisions on what to say in

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 126 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1266

any given circumstance based on what tomorrow is going to

look like, how messy their lives are going to be.

VS XXXXXXXXXXXXX also lied. This is a conversation

he and I had about when Martine goes to visit VS XXXX after

he's finally gone home. He's been isolated from his parents

for a couple of years. "So about two years after Daniel

Johnson was arrested, do you remember a man named Martine

coming to your home village?

"Yes.

"And did Martine ask your parents if he could talk

with you?

"Yes.

"And you and Martine went inside a church to talk?

"Yes.

"Was it a Christian church?

"Yes.

"And you didn't want to tell a lie inside the

church?

"Yes.

"And you told Martine that you had exaggerated and

told lies when you talked with the FBI?

"Yes."

Are you getting there?

Calling ten witness who have admitted to lying,

depending on who is asking the questions -- and again, that's

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 127 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1267

how the government has couched it, and that's because now

we're in trial and now they are the dominant force asking the

questions.

Calling ten witnesses who have lied during a

five-year investigation, admitted that they have lied is an

evidentiary ploy to paper over the fact that the government

is relying on unreliable witnesses. It's built its case on

unreliable witnesses.

Rather than meet its burden with reliable evidence

to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, the guilt of Daniel

Johnson, the government calls ten witnesses, each of whom

admitted to lying about the case, and then tells you, because

there are ten of them, if you add them all together, that's

proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

No. No. Together they add up to ten individuals

who have told serious untruths in the course of a five-year

investigation. Ten admitted nontruth-tellers don't add up to

proof beyond a reasonable doubt, nor 20, nor would 50.

The fact that they have all come through this

gauntlet and told things that are untrue doesn't make the

whole more believable than the parts.

Reasonable doubt. The contaminating influences and

coercive pressures in this case are mind blowing. The

Cambodian police, or as I call them, the Canadian police

which makes them seem so much nicer on horses and funny

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 128 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1268

hats -- but the Cambodian police are scary folks. And they

aren't scary in the abstract. Every Cambodian kid knows that

it's smart to be afraid of the Cambodian police.

The Cambodian police and the Cambodian authorities

are corrupt. And they are corrupt on a scale that we can't

really imagine in this country, and every Cambodian kid has

adjusted life according to that truth. Karla Comstock talks

about it, and Trudy Jacobsen talked about that earlier. It's

a fact of life in Cambodia. It's a system built on

corruption, and if you are a kid who wants to survive, if you

are a deprived kid who doesn't have a lot of tools to get

from point A to point B, appreciating the corruption of a

Cambodian police officer is a wise thing to do.

There are other influences in this case, and we have

got church members talking to these kids about what to tell

or not to tell. When you combine God, and -- God and the

sponsorship, the money, not only is it God is telling you to

do this, but you might recall SO XXX who had denied, denied,

denied, is now being questioned by CC XXXXXX's sponsor,

Ms. Alderson. And all of a sudden has his own account of

abuse. And what follows that? What follows that is a new

sponsor. And maybe a new place to live.

So this potent combination of God and money is

something you have to think about as you sift through the

evidence. And we all know basically about peer pressure, and

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 129 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1269

that peer pressure plays it own part in a case like this when

all these kids are talking. But no influence, none at all

are as coercive and as corrosive as what the Cambodian

National Police brought to this table.

The Cambodian National Police believed in an

investigation by intimidation and isolation of these boys,

and it had an impact. Every one of these kids talked to you

about the fact that they were afraid. LS X says, "Many

people came and we were afraid. It wasn't just a few." CCXX

XXXX, he gives a pretty good description. "Are you scared of

the Cambodian police?

"Scared.

"They have a bad reputation, don't they?

"Yeah, they have bad attitude in general. No good.

"Aggressive?

"Yes.

"Mean?

"Yes.

"Dishonest?

"Not honest. Not honest. Yes.

"You can get in trouble if you don't do what they

want you to do, correct?

"Correct.

"And you can also get in trouble if you don't say

what they want you to say?

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 130 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1270

"Yes.

"So you also said later that when you were talking

to the FBI about a year later, that you were in a panic

because of the police being there?

"Fear."

VS XXXX had the same sort of fear. "Do you remember

how many police came?

"I don't remember. There were many.

"There were many?

"Yes.

"Were the children at the center, the kids at the

center frightened when the police came?

"Yes.

"And you were frightened, too; is that right?

"Yes.

"The Cambodian police, they are scary.

"Yes.

Celena Ocen, the US missionary who had come, she

tells this interesting story. She's there at the compound

and she's there at the Hope Transition Center on the day the

police swooped in. And it's a very small part of her

testimony, but it gives you a picture for how frightening the

Cambodian police are.

She says at the very end, it's late at night, and

all of these kids have been questioned, and it's been a long

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 131 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1271

day. And the Cambodian Police are kind of swooping these

kids into vans. And then there's a commotion, because the

people in the village come and try to grab the children away

from the Cambodian police.

She said, "I observed that the kids were being

escorted to the van. And that there were other individuals

who were trying to take the kids. And the people who might

have been resisting, they were the friends, relatives of the

kids, who maybe wanted them to prevent them from being taken

to another location. They were just the Cambodian people."

So imagine this scene as the Cambodian police are

collecting these kids into the vans, and people in the

village -- or people in the village come to do what they can

to separate the children from the Cambodian police. It tells

you a lot about the impact and the influence of the Cambodian

police, and the fears that the people in the community had

when they find themselves interacting with these folks.

The prosecution witnesses also described the

pressures that were put on them during this process. You

have these police officers who are kind of watching -- first

of all, they take over the compound. They are watching all

over these kids. They take the kids and literally collect

them on benches, or in corners, and tell them they are not

allowed to move around, that they are basically prisoners.

So these kids sit there. They are coerced into

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 132 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1272

silence, and then they are taken off to be questioned. This

is CC XXXXXX, CC XXXXXX being questioned. Look at what is

surrounding CC XXXXXX. He's asked about this picture and who

are these people, perhaps, it's a police agent.

But in any event, what does he say? They keep

questioning him, there were many. The words, the question

words is the same words over and over and over and over

again. That's what is happening to CC XXXXXX as those grown

men stand around him, asking him questions. And apparently

we need to ask them over and over, because we don't get the

answer we want the first time the question is asked.

Same thing happened with CC XXXXXX. "Was it a

friendly atmosphere?

"Yes.

"And you weren't scared" -- I know, when Martine

comes. Martine comes, and he's going to talk to him about

what is going on.

"And was it a friendly atmosphere?

"Yes.

"And you weren't scared like you were when you

talked to the Cambodian police?

"Yes.

"And he asked you about what happened when you

talked to the Cambodian police on the day that Daniel was

arrested?

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 133 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1273

"Yes.

"And you told Martine that you felt pressured to

talk to the Cambodian police?

"Yes. And you felt like you had no choice, you had

to talk to them?

"Yes.

"And you told Martine that you didn't tell the

truth?

"Yes.

"And you just told them what you believed they

wanted to hear?

"Yes."

LS XXXXX was questioned, as you remember. He talked

about four or five policemen. Only one is asking questions,

but he talks about how they are kind of circling or swarming

around him as the one person is asking questions. He's very,

very aware of multiple police presences as he's asking

questions.

But even more key to what is going on with LS X this

day is that he has been physically separated from his

brother, ES XXX, on purpose, I would submit, because it's a

two-year separation, as it turns out. But ES XXX and LS X

are separated, and that's the environment, and that's the

context in which LS X is questioned. And the questioning

didn't end until the police heard what they wanted to hear.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 134 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1274

"Let's talk about while you were still being

questioned by the police. You said that they asked you

questions again and again and again. Did that happen at the

Hope Transition Center?

"Yes.

"So they asked you, they would not stop questioning

you until you told them that you had been touched?

"Yes.

"That was the only way to make the questioning stop?

"Yes."

It's kind of interesting if we look at what happened

with ES XXX that day. The Government Exhibit 105, there he

is on the day that the police arrive, and he's looking away.

And you recall him being asked by counsel about that look on

his face, and he just didn't want to say anything to them.

He's obviously not pleased to be in that environment. He's

not pleased to be questioned. It's written all over his

body, and it's written all over his face.

But the next exhibit is pretty interesting. Look

how he's dressed. The very next day, 12/9 he's looking way

and looking aside. By 12/10 they are back again, and he's

dressed in exactly the same shirt. And now he's being

questioned anew. Apparently the things that were said on

12/9 weren't satisfactory to the police, so they show up

again on 12/10.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 135 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1275

VS XXXXXXXXXXXXX talks about how frightened he was

by the police, but the other thing that happens to him is he

is literally swept away in one of these vans that the people

in the community are trying to save him from. And what

happens to him over the next two years is he's literally kept

away from his parents for two years. He's held in one of

the -- these, I guess, orphanages, but with a connection

somehow, or at least of the choosing of the government. He's

not allowed any contact with his parents.

His parents, his mom is actually petitioning the

Cambodian Courts to try to have her son back, so to have

access to her son and it doesn't happen. It doesn't happen

for two years, over two years before he actually gets to go

home. These are the pressures that these kids found

themselves in.

RT XX tells the story, although he tells it on

cross-examination because he told it earlier, when he was

first talking to FBI. When he was first talking to the FBI

he said this: "When we had the problem, the police came down

to interview each of us. There were a few police officers

who were not convinced in what I was saying. They tried to

give me the answers they wanted to hear."

And the FBI said, "What did they want to hear?" And

RT XX said, "I think what they want to hear from us is

something bad or allegation." And he describes the exact

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 136 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1276

same situation that you are seeing in these photos, although

now he finds himself as a government witness.

The other key to all of this is that the authorities

are the authorities are the authorities are the authorities.

These kids find themselves, in the first instance,

intimidated and questioned by the Cambodian National Police,

but there is no daylight between the Cambodian National

Police and the FBI.

Now, we all know that our FBI are not the Cambodian

police. But they are not viewed this way. Each of these

kids knows when they go in for their FBI interview, which

takes place at the Cambodian National Police office, that in

the room next to them is a bunch of Cambodian National Police

officers who are watching what they say in these videotaped

interviews.

I am sure that there's a not-scary reason for why

that is occurring, but for these kids who are already

intimidated, now they go in to be interviewed by the FBI, the

people who had interviewed them at the center are now in the

room next-door, watching what they say on videotape. And

these kids know it.

CC X: "And there were some people there listening

or watching from the Cambodian National Police?

"Yes, perhaps watching the video.

"And you were concerned that if you told FBI Martha

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 137 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1277

different than what you told the Cambodian police, that you

could get into trouble?

"Yes.

CC X, and there were people there listening or

watching from the Cambodian police -- I think it was VS XXXX

who also talked about it.

Anyway, there were several of these kids who knew

that while this is going on, they are being interviewed by

the FBI, supposedly a professional forensics interviewer, but

in the shadows, in the back room, are the people that had

intimidated them before.

Repeated interviews, repeated coaching. You have

listened to a number of witnesses come into this courtroom

and tell a story, and it's been a story that has been put

together professionally. It's been a story that has, as

counsel showed you, the corroborating witnesses, and all of

the connections.

But what has come before you five years after the

fact has layers and layers and layers of things that happened

before. What you saw has been built over several years, and

it's been built as a result of repeated interviews. And what

really is repeated coaching.

There are nearly 30 -- we're going to move down to

30 inconsistent statements. There are nearly 30 prior

inconsistent statements that this case has been built on.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 138 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1278

These kids have been interviewed multiple times. LS X was

four. Somebody was up to five, seven, six.

And that doesn't include when the defense

investigator went to talk to a kid, or when someone less

formal, like a church person, talked to the kids. These kids

have been interviewed and asked questions about the events

that you heard about for a long, long time.

Let's look at the inconsistent things, the things

different than what you heard in this courtroom. ES XXX is

questioned first on the day that they come to the center.

And here he is, again, in Exhibit 105, when apparently that

was not a satisfactory interview, he's interviewed again the

very next day.

In January of 2014 you heard testimony that he and

SO XXX talked to the people at APLE and NGO, and told them

no, we were not sexually abused. Then on November 14th --

and this was the long FBI interview that the government

didn't show you. But ES XXX and I talked about it. It's an

interview that lasted an hour -- he recalled somewhere an

hour and a half, but it really is an hour and 24 minutes.

And he was asked for an hour and 24 minutes again

and again and again whether anyone sexually abused him. And

in the course of that interview, 20 denials. That's what

this case is built on. That's what ES XXX said to the FBI on

November 14th in 2014, when it was the answer that he thought

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 139 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1279

was going to put him in the best place for tomorrow.

In June of 2015 he's questioned again by the defense

investigator and he adamantly denies to Martine that he was

sexually abused. The defense investigator comes back a year

later. He still adamantly denies that he had been sexually

abused.

Finally in March 2017 ES XXX tells the FBI what they

want to hear. And he explains why he does that, that if he

kept telling it like he had been telling it, that this still

is not going to finish. It's not going to be over.

LS XXXXX. LS X's story isn't like a back and forth

and back and forth. LS X's story is one that grows bigger

and bigger and bigger as a result of repeated interviews. It

starts small with playing with my penis, I think is what

Pastor Sopheak said.

But he talks again about how the questioning doesn't

stop. "So they asked you -- they would not stop questioning

you until you told them that you had been touched?

"Yes.

"And that was the only way to make the questioning

stop?

"Yes."

So with each story he adds more to the story and

more to the story, but like his brother, he's a young guy who

wants the questioning to end. And he believed it never would

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 140 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1280

unless he provided the account that the authorities were

looking for, or maybe even insisting upon.

CC XXXXXX, again, is interviewed on December 9th.

Again, they come back to him like ES XXX on December 10th for

a follow-up interview. In June of 2015 he's interviewed by

Martine, and we have already talked about this, but he tells

Martine that he was intimidated by the Cambodian National

Police, and that he simply told them what they wanted to hear

and that he had not been sexually abused, and he only said

that because that's what they were insisting upon. In this

June 2016 when Martine comes back, he confirms that same

account.

VS XXXXXXXXXXXXX is a kid who goes back and forth

and back and forth, too. He went -- but I think the two that

you should pay attention to, once he's finally allowed to go

home and be with his parents, he talks to his father. And

his father asked him whether he's been sexually abused, and

he tells him that nothing had happened with Daniel Johnson,

and D had done nothing wrong.

And then he has this interview with Martine that

takes place in the church. And I think that for VS XXXX an

interview that takes place in a church actually had some

meaning. And he tells Martine that he had exaggerated and

told lies to the FBI when they had questioned him.

BT XXXXXXX, BT XXXXXXX started out telling people in

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 141 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1281

the church that he hadn't been sexually abused. And, in

fact, no one had been sexually abused, and that's basically

the account that he provides in the month of December.

So he began by denying any sexual abuse had

occurred, and then a few months before his visa had expired

he kind of changed course. It was then that he was

interviewed by the FBI, maybe five, six more times, and with

each FBI interview his story also grew. But the growth in

his story is a growth that matches the promise of a visa.

If you -- if what the government had presented were

a number of witnesses, and what you heard from these

witnesses is not, they talked about a visa, and maybe I can

get a visa. If what you heard from that witness was, the

government gave me a million dollars to cooperate in this

investigation, that would cause you some pause. And you

would have to think very, very seriously about what -- the

reliability of what you are hearing from the witness stand.

Well, what the government gave Mr. BT X is worth at

least a million dollars to many, many people. You might

compare it to like these E-5 investment visas that people pay

a million dollars to get. Wealthy Chinese people agree to

put a million dollars within the US economy to get access to

our country, and to our citizenship exactly like Mr. BT X

finds himself with today.

That's what it is worth to people to live in this

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 142 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1282

country. It's worth a lot. And as you are measuring motives

and incentives you can't lose sight of the value.

Now, SO XXX had denied and denied and denied. He

told APLE, along with ES XXX, that there had been no sexual

abuse. And then in November, just like ES XXX, he sits in

for a two-hour interview. Two hours with the FBI, and for

two hours denies again and again and again and again and

again that he had been sexually abused. Then boom. His best

friend, BT XXXXXXX, gets a visa. And in 2016 SO XXX tells

the FBI for the very first time that he had been sexually

abused, too.

The evidence in this case leaves reasonable doubt

around every single corner. In Count 7 and 8 the government

has completely failed to prove a material element of the

crime. Mr. Johnson's intent and purpose for traveling to

Cambodia was to bring back the charitable donations to fund

the good works.

And all of the evidence, all of the documentary

evidence, the witness evidence, everything supports that that

is why he left Cambodia, and that's why he came back.

As to the other Counts 1 to 6, those allegations are

built upon witnesses who, first of all, told you about a

willingness to lie, depending on who is asking the questions.

It's built upon inducements and benefits that are more

valuable than almost any I've seen in any case. And it's

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 143 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1283

built upon inconsistencies that have papered over

governmental witness coaching, and the fact that these kids

really have been whipped back and forth. It happened, it

didn't happen, it happened, it didn't happen, depending on

which authority is asking the question.

In the end there's nothing but reasonable doubt if

you think through the motives, and think through the history.

There's only one person in this case that is entitled to

reasonable doubt. When we come into these cases we think

about all the witnesses, and what a struggle it is to get

them on the witness stand, and go through this, and have 12

grownups in a box and staring them down.

But the truth is in a criminal trial, there's only

one person entitled to the benefit of your reasonable doubt,

and that person is Daniel Johnson. In the American Courts,

he's the only person who is entitled. The Constitution gives

him and him alone the benefit of proof beyond a reasonable

doubt.

BT XX, ES XXX, CC X, VS XXXX, SO XXX, none of them

is entitled to proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There's only

one person who is entitled to the benefit of those doubts,

and that's Daniel Johnson.

If the witnesses give radically inconsistent

accounts in this courtroom than they have given on other

days, it's Daniel Johnson who is entitled to your reasonable

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 144 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

DEFENSE CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1284

doubt. If the rewards for cooperating are so valuable that

it causes pause and might tempt some people to lie, it's

Daniel Johnson who is entitled to the benefit of your

reasonable doubt.

Weaknesses in the case should never benefit the

government, ever. This makes sense because there's only one

person whose fate is in the balance. Every single witness

here will go home to a life when this case is over, no matter

the result. It is Daniel Johnson who faces the loss of

liberty, and that's the reason our Constitution provides him

with the protective cloak that it does.

Pretty soon, very soon, Daniel Johnson's fate will

be yours and yours alone. When this happens, the whole

dynamics in this courtroom is going to change. You will

become the most powerful people in the courtroom. You will

be certainly more powerful than me, more powerful than any of

these folks sitting at counsel table. And in that jury room,

even more powerful than Judge McShane.

Because your job is different than our jobs. Our

job is to do the law. We are here to handle all of the legal

issues. If I make a mistake on the law, if counsel makes a

mistake, or even if the judge makes a mistake on the law, the

Appellate Courts are there to fix our mistakes.

But you and only you are the finders of the facts.

That is your job, your job alone. No lawyers and no Courts.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 145 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1285

And sadly, your mistakes are yours alone.

I ask you to talk amongst yourselves as much as you

can to sift through the evidence as carefully as you can, to

think about the issues that have been raised and the concerns

about how this case came before you, and all that lies under,

historically, the testimony that you heard. And for all of

those reasons, I will ask you to find my client not guilty.

Thank you.

THE COURT: Thank you, Ms. Maxfield.

Do we need a break between rebuttal?

MR. SWEET: I would refer to the jury, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Do we need a short break?

A JUROR: We're good.

THE COURT: Mr. Sweet, go for it. Thank you.

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

MR. SWEET: I think Ms. Maxfield saw a different

trial than what I saw. I think she observed the witnesses in

a completely different light, and I think her recollection,

though, perhaps well-intended and sincere, is different in

many ways. And I would like to talk about that.

Ms. Maxfield categorized the boys as conniving,

scheming, looking for an edge in any way. But did you see

boys that were open and wounded and sincere? Did you see

boys who talked to you, and explained the suffering that they

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 146 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1286

had been through? Did you see the raw emotion in them?

And as far as a visa, they were open about that,

too. I don't know. I talked to somebody. I don't remember

their name. I thought about it. Some said yes, some said

no. Where is the conniving, scheming, manipulative boys that

she depicted?

And the other thing that Ms. Maxfield -- she ignored

huge parts of this case. What happened to the disclosures

that the boys made prior to the arrest of Daniel Johnson?

Where did those go? How much discussion did you hear about

those? I didn't hear any. How much discussion did you hear

about SO XXX going to Pastor Sopheak at the second house, and

talking about Daniel Johnson trying to put his penis in

SO XXX? Where was that?

How about LS X and ES XXX going to Pastor Sopheak,

LS X crying, Pastor Sopheak talking to them? Pastor Sopheak

sending a message about it to BT XXXXXXX. This is before

Daniel Johnson's arrest. Did Ms. Maxfield talk about that?

And BT XXXXXXX remembered getting that message that

discussed this. And then Pastor Sopheak confronted Daniel

Johnson about it, and he messaged BT XXXXXXX about that, too.

Where was that?

And then BT XXXXXXX, BT XXXXXXX on December 8th in

America, he wrote, "Daniel tried to have sex with me but I

didn't let him." So as of the day of Daniel Johnson's

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 147 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1287

arrest, BT XXXXXXX is already talking about attempted sexual

abuse, from BT XXXXXXX.

And counsel labeled all the boys liars. Well, I

think I missed that, too. Where did SESX, and SS XX and

LT XXXXXXX -- where did they lie? Those are the ones who

came in March of 2017. You may remember SESX. SESX is the

one who said, "I will always love him forever," when talking

about Daniel Johnson. He was one who it pained him to say

anything remotely negative about Daniel Johnson. How is he

lying? Because he disclosed that Daniel Johnson had tried to

touch his genitals on several occasions, and he also

disclosed that ES XXX and SO XXX had told him about abuse

prior to Mr. Johnson's arrest. Where was that?

What about SS XX? SS XX, who said that Daniel

Johnson tried to touch his buttocks. He also said SO XXX

disclosed prior to arrest. Where are the lies for that? She

labeled everyone a liar, but they are not.

SESX, SS XX, LT XXXXXXX, BT XXXXXXX started early.

And LS X, LS X disclosed abuse from the beginning. He

disclosed more, but he disclosed abuse from the beginning.

And this was painted as some professional, coached,

manipulated series of events.

Well, that's funny because a couple of boys recanted

right away. You have got the stipulation about SO XXX and

ES XXX recanting to APLE. So a couple of questions about

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 148 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1288

that. What were they recanting? They are recanting their

accusations. They are recanting something. And if the

Cambodian National Police and APLE are all so corrupt, why

are they reporting this recantation to the FBI?

This isn't some polished, professional, rehearsed

presentation. Let's think about it. When did the FBI first

contact SESX, SS XX, and LT XXXXXXX? March 2018, less than

two months before trial. If these boys were waiting to come

to the US for money, what were they going to do, wait until

late March of 2018?

No. The FBI reached out to them. The FBI reached

out to those boys, and they came here, and they spoke. And

they gave really limited disclosures. All of them were

attempted touching of either the genitals or the buttocks.

They didn't have the same level of abuse that you heard from

others.

But how can they all be called liars? Just because

Ms. Maxfield, with all due respect, says something, it

doesn't make it true. Just because I say something, it

doesn't make it true. You all are the deciders of fact. You

all listen and hear and judge the evidence that comes in from

the witness stand.

I think many things that Ms. Maxfield said, she

talked about her opinion: I think or it's really very

likely. Well, that's her opinion, and she's entitled to it,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 149 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1289

but just because he says it 50 times doesn't make it true.

Evidence, opinion, and arguments. So what basis

does she have for calling all these boys liars? She just

gave a blanket label, and it's not true. Like Hagar, she

talked about VS XXXX, VS XXXX getting a bike. I believe

VS XXXX testified the bike came from Hagar, which was the

center that helped boys.

And here's the thing that we all have to remember.

These boys are dealing with a difficult, traumatic, emotional

circumstance. If this were a polished presentation from the

beginning, if this were coached and orchestrated, do you

think it would have looked like this? Do you think you would

have had recantations? Do you think you would have had these

different stories?

No, it would have been put together from the start.

But it's not. It's real. It's these boys dealing and coping

with what happened to them. Boys in difficult, difficult

circumstances. And here's the other thing, behind all of

this --

Well, another thing I have to say that Ms. Maxfield

didn't talk about that we're going to talk about. She didn't

discuss at all the prior statements of the boys before Daniel

Johnson's arrest. The other thing she didn't talk about, she

didn't talk about BT XXXXXXX's chats with Daniel Johnson.

Where Daniel Johnson said, "I am not saying anyone is wrong."

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 150 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1290

That's after being accused already of -- "I knew long time

already that you had sexual abuse to the kids." "I am not

saying anyone is wrong, really."

Is that how people respond to that? We're going to

talk about that. But that was something that you haven't

heard of.

I need to discuss Daniel Johnson for a minute,

because Daniel Johnson was the puppet master in this case.

He manipulated the boys, he controlled the boys, and there's

a message that we haven't discussed yet. I believe it's

Exhibit 170, if that's the one I just handed over. And I

want to talk to you about it for a minute.

So this is a message that helps to explain the

influence that is put on these boys, not by the Cambodian

National Police, not by the FBI, but by Daniel Stephen

Johnson. So I am going to walk you through this. It's from

the Gary Donna Johnson account, which the FBI discussed with

you was used by Daniel Johnson's brother.

And in there it talks about, "I went to jail and I

may need him to come to the US to testify." So I think you

will be able to see that this was passed on by someone else

and written by Daniel Johnson. So you are going to recognize

a lot of the names in here.

Let's start the second line at the top. So first

line starts about talking about Daniel, but then it moves

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 151 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1291

into -- it talks about Gary talking about Daniel, and then it

goes into what I am going to call the marching orders that

are being issued. "LS X still needs to be removed from

Hagar." We all know who LS X is, and we all know he was

staying at Hagar. "His family needs to talk to him. APLE

and Hagar are trying to get him to USA for trail."

And this is full of misspellings but try. It talks

about blank documents. But how about this: "Get him out no

matter what it takes." Get LS X away from Hagar. Get him

away from a neutral party. Get him back under Mr. Johnson's

control.

And then we go to VS XXXX, and you heard about

VS XXXX talking to Martine, the defense investigator.

VS XXXX in Prey Veng keeps changing his story. Why would

that concern Mr. Johnson, if he's changing his story? He

told Mr. Martine something negative. Negative in

Mr. Johnson's world means implicating him.

"I think he is still afraid of police. His parents

need to talk to him. They think he is speaking positive but

he is not."

So we have talked about LS X, charged victim,

VS XXXX, charged victim. ES XXX, LS X's older brother, was

interviewed. During the interview with Martine, he got up

and walked out. Why? Because he was pro Daniel Johnson? Is

that why he got up and walked out from meeting with their

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 152 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1292

investigator?

"ES XXX, please encourage him and let him know I

need him, and may need him to come to the US and to testify.

He needs to be strong about the police scaring him in a

closed room, and trying to get him to lie."

This one is Tola, you will see it's Tola. Asked by

David Roth if Daniel did it, and Tola said, he did. "Tola

needs to clarify this." Which way do you think Tola needs to

clarify this? What does Mr. Johnson want him to do? He

wants him to recant that. Tola was saying that based on

what, and then he gives an explanation. That's what APLE and

the Cambodian police were telling him and that's firsthand

knowledge.

Sorry, speaking too fast.

David Roth, FBI, Tola misconstrued.

Let's go on to somebody you are going to recognize.

"RT XX needs to tell the investigator when he is asked that

APLE and police forced his fingerprint, but the document was

fortunately not negative." So truth has nothing to do with

anything. Mr. Johnson just issues his marching orders as to

what he needs these boys to say for his benefit, because he's

trying to control everything.

When we talk about BT XX, BT XX says he has a plan

to stay in the USA. Let's go on to CC X. It's about three

lines below -- about five lines below Tola. Far right.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 153 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1293

"CC X needs to speak strongly that he was told he had to

continue following the police with a lie, or he would go to

jail. APLE would help his family." Now CC X is another

charge victim. Let's go to another charge victim.

"SO XXX said I gave him money after I went to jail.

He needs to clarify." A lot of boys need to do a lot of

clarifying in Mr. Johnson's world. "He needs to clarify that

the money came from Bill and Lonna to help him with school,

not from me."

I am going to skip down. "Warn all of them to be

careful with Peter and Kelby and Lindsay" -- probably Kelby

and Lindsay Alderson, we heard testimony -- "BT XX," probably

BT XXXXXXX, "Chuck and Janice." More people -- "Phillip and

Sue." And you wonder why some of the boys struggle in

getting a consistent story. Because Daniel Johnson is behind

the scenes being the puppet master.

So now I have to tell you, when you look at this

case from the beginning, this is not about digging wells,

this is not about building churches, and feeding the hungry.

Those are all good things, and I hope that some part of

Mr. Johnson found that to be valuable.

But this case is about his systemic and repeated

sexual abuse of these boys, boy after boy, time after time,

year after year. That's what this case is about.

Mr. Johnson, I don't think this was just a small purpose for

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 154 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1294

him. I think he was consumed with sexual abuse. He ran Hope

Transition Center as his practical personal sexual

playground.

And that's what he did to these boys there. He

would go in at night, and choose which boy he wanted. And

yes, did they need funds to keep it running? Sure he did.

He would go back to America and get funds. Did he do some

good things with those funds? Yes, he did, and that's a good

thing. We're not saying every waking moment of Mr. Johnson's

life was filled by nothing but abuse.

I am sure if he saw one of his children fall and

scrape their knee he would pick them up, dust them off, and

put a bandage on. But then he was abusing too many of them

at night in his room.

And this case is not about money, or about visas.

Do you really think -- again, the defense is viewing these

boys through a scheming, grasping, they are from a poor

country, therefore, they are all just coming to say anything

for money.

Do you think they got on a plane and flew over here

and sat in the same room with the man who molested them, and

took the stand and disclosed the most personal, graphic

details they will hopefully ever have to say in their entire

life? Do you think they did that for a per diem? You all

presumably get a juror fee. I hope you get money for gas,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 155 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1295

and a per diem for your hotel.

Do you feel compromised or bought? Is it worth more

to them than it is to you? Sure. But is that why they are

here? You heard them say, We didn't even know how much we

were getting. Do you think when the Cambodian police came to

Hope Transition Center on December 9, 2013, do you think

those boys knew, well, Daniel Johnson's sexual abuse of me

can be prosecuted in the United States of America?

How many of you, how many people do you think know

that this crime, a crime committed in Cambodia, can be

prosecuted here? How many teenagers do you think know that?

How many 11-year-olds know that? And how many 11-year-olds

in Cambodia at an orphanage know that?

They came here. They weren't bought. They are not

here for a visa. There's no orchestrated scheming plan. You

have all those boys saying -- and you have BT XXXXXXX saying,

halfway across the world at the same time.

Exhibit 277, please. This is going to take a second

because I didn't tell them this one was coming.

This is BT XXXXXXX and Knot. Second page, please

very bottom, Knot, December 9th. "Did you have sex with

him?" "No." It's on the next page. "He tried to but I

didn't allow." Let's go back to the very first page, please.

BT XXXXXXX, December 8th, "I know Daniel is a good man but

he's kind of demon spirit stay inside him. I have been

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 156 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1296

praying for him for six years and I did go talk with him, but

he's still the same."

How is this a last-minute fabrication? That's

December 8th of 2013, and he's talking about -- he's talking

about not just what Daniel Johnson tried to do to him, but

what he's been thinking about this whole time. And this

isn't to the FBI. This is to Daniel Johnson's girlfriend

that he's having the conversation with.

See, I talked to you about SESX. SESX who said, "I

will always love him forever." And SO XXX said something

like, "I loved him like my father." BT XXXXXXX, he was

worried about Mr. Johnson going to heaven, and he was

concerned about his soul.

Are these young men with an axe to grind? Are these

young men here who are vindictive, or they are trying to get

something? It's not because of any benefit that they are

here. It is in spite of Daniel Stephen Johnson's efforts to

keep them from being here. It is in spite of the shame and

the embarrassment. It is in spite of his efforts to silence

them that they are here.

They endured. They sacrificed to be at that

orphanage. There was a price to be paid for being at that

orphanage, and that price for too many was sexual abuse. Why

did they pay that price? BT XXXXXXX told you. "Daniel gave

money for my sick dad, and money for university." And BT XX

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 157 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1297

was going to be the first person to graduate university.

And LS X, what did LS X say when the police first

came? This was LS X talking on the stand. When the police

came he said, "I was afraid that we were not going to have a

place to stay and we couldn't go to school anymore."

They are not going to jeopardize their situation.

They are an impoverished country in a vulnerable situation.

Mr. Johnson is the food on the table, the roof over their

head, and the money for the school. And they are going to

make something up and throw it all away for an uncertain

future? For why? They cared about him.

Again, they are here in spite of Daniel Johnson's

efforts to silence them. What did he say? He wrote to Becka

Norris, "Silence is golden." He wrote to Lindsay Alderson,

"Silence is all that we can do now." To BT XXXXXXX, "Peace

upon you and your tongue and wisdom in your thoughts, words,

actions. Healing does not begin until we stop picking at the

scab."

In other words, stop talking BT XX. Stop talking.

"Healing doesn't begin until we stop picking at the scab,

peace on your tongue." He's trying to get them to be quiet.

And I have to talk about Pastor Sopheak for a minute

more. You see, I talked about these boys enduring the abuse,

and endure they did, but there was a limit. Because SO XXX

went to Pastor Sopheak, and Pastor Sopheak can tell you what

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 158 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1298

house it was, second house, what room it was. What that

meeting followed. It followed a sermon about sin.

And SO XXX came and talked to him, and told Pastor

Sopheak about what he did. And Pastor Sopheak didn't do

anything with that information. And that's to his regret,

because Pastor Sopheak -- you may recall he had kind of a

nervous laugh. He smiled at times when it didn't make sense

to smile, but then at the end I asked him, "Do you regret not

telling anyone about SO XXX?" And he said, essentially,

"It's really hard for me to think about that. I don't feel

good inside. It's a burden that I carry, and I want to take

a burden and release it. I feel like it's something I have

to carry with me all the time and I want to be free."

Do you remember Pastor Sopheak on that stand? Do

you remember him, how upset he was? Well, the good thing

that came of that, is it stiffened his spine, because the

next time those boys came to him he did something about it.

Because LS X and ES XXX, they came to Pastor

Sopheak. Now we're at the third house. And it was kind of

a -- I think it started with ES XXX, and ES XXX went and

spoke to Pastor Sopheak. And LS X was there, and LS X was

just crying. And Pastor Sopheak, he sent a message to BT XXX

XXXX about this, and he gave you the date of the message,

November 24th, 2014. And then he went and confronted Daniel

Johnson.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 159 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1299

And Daniel Johnson said something like, "Well, they

wanted something from me, and I didn't give it to them and

they made this up." And remember ES XXX telling this from

the other end, and he could hear the raised voices from in

there. And then Pastor Sopheak sent another message

afterwards to -- sent another message to BT XXXXXXX. BT XXX

XXXX remembered that, too.

And so you now have SO XXX disclosing beforehand.

You have LS X and ES XXX disclosing beforehand. You have

someone else who didn't endure in silence, and that's LT XXX

XXXX. He just got up and left. He got up and left. I think

it was three times that he said Daniel Johnson tried to touch

his penis. He left, and he left his little brother there.

He walked away from the orphanage, and you have heard about

the hardship these boys suffer.

I think somewhere in one of the defense exhibits is

a summary of LT XXXXXXX and his life, and what he came from.

And what he would be going back to. I don't think everything

on that summary is correct, because I think -- but it

describes what they were risking and losing by walking away.

And then we talked about BT XXXXXXX, December 8th.

And I am going to talk about BT XXXXXXX, and I am not going

to keep you much longer. But BT XXXXXXX, he confronted

Daniel Johnson. And this is Exhibit 163. And if you want to

see anything that is full of information about this case,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 160 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1300

it's Exhibit 163.

And on page 2414 BT XX says, as clearly as you could

say, "I knew long time already that you had sexual abuse to

kids but I didn't want to defile you." He goes on. Daniel

Johnson in responding, he doesn't deny it. He doesn't admit

it. The conversation continues. Later BT XX says, "Then you

did appropriate to LS X and ES XXX." And again you are not

going to see denials when you go through, but what you will

see is sort of a back and forth. And finally BT XX, BT XX

writes, "What did I do wrong? Just say the truth about what

I had seen and experience with you in Cambodia."

Page 2421, and what is the response from

Mr. Johnson? "I am not saying anyone is wrong. I am just

saying that might be the wrong spirit in a situation based on

scripture. I tell you I did nothing in the USA." And then,

"I assure you there is nothing in Vietnam." But what about

Cambodia? What about Cambodia? And it goes on.

And BT XX says later, "I really don't want to say

anything" -- anything negative -- "but when people ask me

what is the truth I can't lie." And Mr. Johnson gives some

helpful answers for BT XX, "Brother, sometimes saying I am

sorry, I don't want to talk about it or I don't want to speak

anything negative or I don't know for sure. Right now the

best thing you can do is pray, or I would like to think not."

We would all like to think not. But that's not the

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 161 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

REBUTTAL CLOSING ARGUMENT

Page 1301

case. Mr. Johnson didn't say, BT XX, you are lying. BT XX,

this isn't true. BT XX, I didn't do anything. He didn't

even ask who, who did I supposedly molest. That's not asked

in here. He does say, "Peace upon you and your tongue." He

does say, "Stand with me and stand close."

You see, at the end of the day, these boys, what

they needed was they needed love from a parent. They needed

that affection, and what Mr. Johnson wanted was sex. He took

the love and the need and the affection in these boys, and

twisted it into his personal sexual gratification.

SESX, SESX described Daniel Johnson coming in with a

flashlight at night and taking a boy, his brother, SS XX. He

described seeing Mr. Johnson come in and carry boys out of

the rooms. We all know who his favorites are, you heard

them. They are the boys who spent all the time in his room.

A lot of those boys, the same ones who were abused.

See this case is not about wearing a towel that is

too short. It's not about sending really weird romantic text

messages or texts to the boys. It's not about getting a lot

of massages. It's not even about having boys in your room.

It's what he did to those boys' bodies once they were in his

room. That's what this case is about.

Daniel Johnson needed to silence the boys, and you

heard why. He violated their trust. He violated their

bodies. And he violated the law. And you should find him

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 162 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

FURTHER JURY INSTRUCTION

Page 1302

guilty of each and every crime that he committed. I thank

you for your attention.

THE COURT: Folks, I have a short instruction to

give you. I will come down here, because we have a screen.

When you begin your deliberations, select one member

of the jury to act as the presiding juror or foreperson who

will preside over your deliberations and speak for you in

Court.

The presiding juror doesn't have any greater voting

weight than any other juror, but is to be the spokesperson

for the jury. You will then discuss the case with your

fellow jurors to reach agreement, if you can do so. Your

verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous. As

well as with the individual questions you are being asked to

answer, those must be unanimous.

Each of you must decide this case for yourself, but

you should do so only after you have considered all of the

evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors, and

listened to the views of your fellow jurors.

Do not be afraid to change your opinion if the

discussion persuades you that you should, but do not come to

a decision simply because other jurors think it is right.

It is important that you attempt to reach a

unanimous verdict but, of course, only if each of you can do

so after having made your own conscientious decision. Do not

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 163 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

FURTHER JURY INSTRUCTION

Page 1303

change an honest belief about the weight and effect of the

evidence simply to reach a verdict.

Perform these duties fairly and impartially. Do not

allow personal likes or dislikes, sympathy, prejudice, fear

or public opinion to influence you. You should also not be

influenced by any person's race, color, religion, national

ancestry, gender, sexual orientation, profession, occupation,

celebrity, economic circumstances, or position in life or in

the community.

It is your duty as jurors to consult with each other

and deliberate with one another with a view towards reaching

an agreement if you can do so. During your deliberations,

you should not hesitate to reexamine your own views and

change your opinion if you are persuaded that it is wrong.

If it does become necessary to communicate during

deliberations with me, you may send a note through Ms. Pew,

signed by one or more of you. No member of the jury should

ever attempt to communicate with me except by signed writing,

and I will respond to the jury concerning the case only in

writing or here in open court. If you send out a question I

will consult with the lawyers before answering it, which may

take some time. You may continue your deliberations while

you wait for an answer to any question.

Remember that you are not to tell anybody, including

me and Ms. Pew, how the jury stands, numerically or

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 164 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

FURTHER JURY INSTRUCTION

Page 1304

otherwise, on any question submitted to you, including the

question of the guilt of Mr. Johnson, until after you have

reached a unanimous verdict or have been discharged.

You have seen the verdict form. The parties have

gone over it with you. When you have answered all of the

questions on the verdict form, the presiding juror will sign

the form, date it, and then notify the bailiff and we will

reassemble to take your verdict.

It's up to you to decide what you want your schedule

to look like. We want you to have as much time as you need.

You are certainly welcome to go later today, if you wish. At

some point, Ms. Pew might ask you, because we need to make

sure some of the staff is still here to let people in and out

of the building, if we need to. And then you can certainly

set a time if you wish to return tomorrow.

So that is completely up to you how you want to

schedule your time. There are two of you that are alternate

jurors, and I know this doesn't -- seems unfair, I know.

So we have Mr. Watt and Nicki Taylor, so you are our

two alternates. And you, at this time, are excused. You can

go back and gather your things.

Couple of things, No. 1, I know it seems unfair that

you want to say something to these 12, but it's these 12 who

deliberate. You don't get to deliberate with them. Here's

the other thing. We have to have 12 at the end of the case.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 165 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

FURTHER JURY INSTRUCTION

Page 1305

If an emergency occurs we have to call one of you back. So

as a result, I am going to still admonish you don't look up

information about the case. Don't talk to anybody about the

case until we inform you that this jury has reached a verdict

or it's been discharged.

It has happened before where somebody, one juror

during deliberations gets so sick that we have to call back

one of the alternates and ask you all to begin your

deliberations all over again. That's why we hold you here

until the very end to hear all of these instructions.

So this is how we do reach a resolution to conflict

in our community. You know, it's not judges who make these

decisions. It's not angry moms. It's not soldiers or

religious leaders. We bring in people from the community.

12 of you have stepped up and taken that vow to be jurors,

and resolve this for us.

And I want to thank all of you for the time you put

into this case. I will now have you return to the jury room.

The verdicts will -- excuse me, the instructions will be

brought back for you to have. I think each of you will have

a copy, as well as all of the exhibits that have been

received into evidence for you to look at.

You can begin your deliberations immediately

following picking your presiding juror. But with that, I

would like to thank all of you.

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 166 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1306

We can stay standing for my oath to the bailiff.

THE COURT: Do you solemnly swear to keep this jury

together in some private and convenient place; that you will

not permit any person to speak or communicate with them, nor

do so yourself, unless by order of the Court; or to ask them

whether they have agreed upon a verdict; that you will return

them into court when they have agreed, or ordered by the

Court?

COURT CLERK: I will.

THE COURT: Ms. Pew will have you back to the jury

room. Thank you very much.

(Jury Out.)

THE COURT: People can be seated. I assume Ms. Pew

knows how to get ahold of everybody, but make sure she has

your cell phone and e-mails. Around 4:30 I will have her

check with the jury and see if they are going to go past

5:00, if we need to let our security folks know if that's the

case, or whether they are going to break at a particular

time. So she will get ahold of you if there's any questions

or anything else occurs.

Anything else we need to discuss?

MR. SWEET: Nothing from the government, Your Honor.

MR. WEINERMAN: Nothing from the defense.

THE COURT: All right. Again, I have already told

you this, but both sides did an incredibly professional job,

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 167 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1307

and both sides, obviously, put an incredible amount of work

into this case. And it clearly showed by the preparation and

professionalism of the attorneys. I really appreciate it.

We will hear from people soon.

(Proceedings concluded at 3:27 p.m.)

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 168 of 169
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

DEBORAH COOK, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

deborah_cook@ord.uscourts.gov

Page 1308

STATE OF OREGON )

)ss

COUNTY OF YAMHILL)

I, Deborah L. Cook, RPR, Certified Shorthand

Reporter in and for the State of Oregon, hereby certify that

at said time and place I reported in stenotype all testimony

adduced and other oral proceedings had in the foregoing

hearing; that thereafter my notes were transcribed by

computer-aided transcription by me personally; and that the

foregoing transcript contains a full, true and correct record

of such testimony adduced and other oral proceedings had, and

of the whole thereof.

Witness my hand and seal at Dundee, Oregon, this

1st day of June, 2018.

/s/ Deborah L. Cook, RPR, CSR

__________________________

DEBORAH L. COOK, RPR

Certified Shorthand Reporter

OREGON CSR #04-0389

CALIFORNIA CSR #12886

WASHINGTON CSR #2992

Case 6:14-cr-00482-MC Document 289 Filed 11/02/18 Page 169 of 169