Exhibit A

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 1 of 252
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

_________________

United States of America, )

) No. CR-18-0422-PHX-SMB

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Phoenix, Arizona

) September 1, 2021

Michael Lacey, ) 9:03 a.m.

James Larkin, )

Scott Spear, )

John Brunst, )

Andrew Padilla, )

Joye Vaught, )

)

Defendants. )

_____________________________ )

BEFORE: THE HONORABLE SUSAN M. BRNOVICH, JUDGE

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

TRIAL - DAY 1

Official Court Reporter:

Christine M. Coaly, RMR, CRR

Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 312

401 West Washington Street, Spc 37

Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2151

(602) 322-7248

Proceedings Reported by Stenographic Court Reporter

Transcript Prepared by Computer-Aided Transcription

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 2 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

A P P E A R A N C E S

For the Government:

U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

By: Mr. Peter S. Kozinets

Mr. Kevin M. Rapp

Ms. Margaret Wu Perlmeter

Mr. Andrew C. Stone

40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200

Phoenix, Arizona 85004

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

By: Mr. Reginald E. Jones

1400 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 600

Washington, DC 20530

For the Defendant Lacey:

LIPSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA

By: Mr. Paul J. Cambria, Jr.

Ms. Erin E. McCampbell-Paris

42 Delaware Avenue, Suite 120

Buffalo, NY 14202

For the Defendant Larkin:

BIENERT KATZMAN

By: Mr. Thomas H. Bienert, Jr.

Ms. Whitney Z. Bernstein

903 Calle Amanecer, Suite 350

San Clemente, CA 92673

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 3 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

For the Defendant Spear:

FEDER LAW OFFICE

By: Mr. Bruce S. Feder

2930 East Camelback Road, Suite 160

Phoenix, AZ 85016

For the Defendant Brunst:

BIRD MARELLA BOXER WOLPERT NESSIM DROOKS

LINCENBERG & RHOW

By: Mr. Gopi K. Panchapakesan

Mr. Gary S. Lincenberg

1875 Century Park E, Suite 2300

Los Angeles, CA 90067

For the Defendant Padilla:

DAVID EISENBERG, PLC

By: Mr. David S. Eisenberg

3550 North Central Avenue, Suite 1155

Phoenix, AZ 85012

For the Defendant Vaught:

JOY BERTRAND, LLC

By: Ms. Joy M. Bertrand

P.O. Box 2734

Scottsdale, AZ 85252

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 4 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

I N D E X

PAGE

JURY VOIR DIRE 11

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 5 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

P R O C E E D I N G S

COURTROOM DEPUTY: We are on the record in CR 18-422,

United States of America versus Michael Lacey and others,

before the Court for a jury trial.

MS. PERLMETER: Good morning, Your Honor. Peggy

Perlmeter and Kevin Rapp on the first level, Reginald Jones,

Special Agent Tolhurst, on behalf of the United States.

On the upper level, Your Honor, Richard Robinson with

the IRS, Peter Kozinets, Andrew Stone, Daniel Boyle, and Lindon

Versoza.

MR. CAMBRIA: Good morning, Your Honor. Paul Cambria

and Michael Lacey present.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Good morning, Your Honor. Whitney

Bernstein with James Larkin at counsel table.

Upstairs is Toni Thomas and Tom Bienert.

MR. FEDER: Good morning, Your Honor. Bruce Feder

with Scott Spear.

MR. LINCENBERG: Good morning, Your Honor. Gary

Lincenberg with John Brunst.

And I wanted to raise an issue with regard to our jury

consultant.

MS. BERTRAND: Good morning. Joy Bertrand appears

with Joye Vaught.

MR. EISENBERG: And good morning, Your Honor. David

Eisenberg and Andrew Padilla, who is present.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 6 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

Upstairs is Andy Murphy, an investigator with the

case.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. LINCENBERG: May I raise this issue, Your Honor?

THE COURT: You may.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you, Your Honor.

Your Honor, we were advised that the Court had

indicated that we would not be permitted to have our jury

consultant -- her name is Lee Meihls, she's in the courtroom

with us right now -- present here. And we feel that -- we'd

ask the Court to reconsider, for a couple reasons.

First, this is obviously a very important part of the

trial. Ms. Meihls is a specialist in assisting. I've done

numerous trials with her. I've never seen a trial where a jury

consultant wasn't permitted on the floor. My guess is in

non-COVID times, the Court probably permits it, and the Court

is dealing with this difficult situation of how to keep people

spaced and so forth.

You know, we feel that there could be a spot up here

if Ms. Meihls could sit down, and would be distanced, and be

able to assist us. We're going to be very restricted if she's

not able to be here. Part of her job is also, as with the

attorneys, to be able to look at the jurors and see their

reactions and the like.

Ms. Meihls also has a medical condition. If the Court

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 7 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

needs, she could explain it further, but she had brain surgery

not too long ago. She does have some -- she can climb stairs,

but has difficulty with the stairs, and certainly would have a

great amount of difficulty standing in order to try to be able

to look down. And, of course, wherever she might be able to

stand, she wouldn't be able to see all the jurors like counsel

would.

So we would really ask if the Court would allow us to

have a seat, you know, perhaps here, so that Ms. Meihls could

be down here and we could be able to consult with her.

THE COURT: Mr. Lincenberg, you -- well, not you,

because you weren't here, but on August 20th your co-counsel

raised this issue. Do you remember that?

MR. LINCENBERG: I don't recall it because I was cross

examining a witness in a trial that literally ended yesterday.

THE COURT: And he didn't advise you of the issue?

MR. LINCENBERG: I don't recall. I know we made an

appeal to the Court before, and I know the Court has indicated,

I'm aware of that, Your Honor, that's why I'm asking for

reconsideration. I understand what the Court has indicated. I

just would ask the Court's indulgence to reconsider.

I know the Court is trying to manage this in very

difficult circumstances. And I appreciate everything the

Court's doing to try to keep everybody safe and moving it

forward, but I think we could have a socially distanced space

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 8 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

over here that Ms. Meihls could sit and I don't think it would

impact anything.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. EISENBERG: Your Honor, I have a suggestion.

THE COURT: Okay. The problem is, is we discussed

this on August 20th. Nobody advised me of any special

circumstances, so we haven't had an opportunity to make any

adjustments, and our jury is sitting downstairs.

MR. LINCENBERG: In terms of the special circumstances

with regard to Ms. Meihls's health issues, Ms. Meihls just

advised me of that. And if the Court orders Ms. Meihls to have

to stand up there, she'll do the best she can. It's -- it just

-- it's a difficulty for her and it's a disadvantage for us in

terms of being able to effectively employ her services. I

apologize.

THE COURT: We talked about the fact that your jury

consultant could consult with you in between panels, and,

obviously, at the time that comes for making strikes.

The issue was that I made it very clear that there was

only room for attorneys and parties for jury selection. These

seats here.

MR. LINCENBERG: I'm aware of that.

THE COURT: Mr. Eisenberg.

MR. EISENBERG: Yes, Your Honor.

My suggestion is given, Ms. Meihls's health issue and

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 9 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

her importance to this proceeding, I can move over there with

my client. Those seats over there --

THE COURT: No, those are jury seats.

MR. EISENBERG: All around us.

THE COURT: Every seat in here is taken.

MR. EISENBERG: And would that include the back -- the

first back bench, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Those are not -- yes, those have blue dots

for jurors.

MR. EISENBERG: This bench here does not appear --

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes, it does. It does.

MR. EISENBERG: It does. All right.

MR. LINCENBERG: I was just thinking a seat here

distanced from everybody in front of the counsel table here, if

we could put a seat.

I understand that the upstairs is not ADA compliant.

THE COURT: Elaine.

(An off-the-record discussion was held between the

Court and the courtroom deputy.)

THE COURT: All right. We found one chair. It's in

the back, though.

MR. LINCENBERG: Appreciate it.

THE COURT: Elaine will show her.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you, Your Honor.

Your Honor, could I just ask a logistical question?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 10 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

With regard to these screens, which I believe we don't need

here, can we put them on the floor to make room?

THE COURT: I'm sorry, with respect to what?

MR. LINCENBERG: The screens that are on counsel

table, I see -- I see here you must have -- I'm wondering, can

we put it on the floor for right now? No?

THE COURT: The cords are all -- I mean, I guess,

technically, you could try, but if you mess up the cords,

you're going to lose your screen.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay.

THE COURT: All right. And so I think --

MS. BERNSTEIN: This is Whitney Bernstein.

And, Ms. Garcia, as you're printing extras, we want to

provide some to the rest of our team upstairs. If we can get

two or three extra ones. Thank you.

(Court stands in recess, 9:14 a.m. - 9:23 a.m.)

THE COURT: So, counsel, just -- I don't know if it

copied onto your sheet, Juror 29 was a no show.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And, Your Honor, that's -- so when you

say 29, that's going down the random number 29?

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay.

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, if I may? This is Peggy

Perlmeter.

The government has gone over the list of jurors that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 11 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

was just provided, and we cross referenced it to the Excel

spreadsheet that the Court provided, and the number of people

on both lists do not match. So if, at some point, when the

Court has time, if we could discuss that.

THE COURT: Don't match at all?

MS. PERLMETER: The number of people don't match.

THE COURT: Like they're missing or they don't match?

MS. PERLMETER: It looks like they're missing. We

have five extra people on the --

THE COURT: There were five excused. They sent

excuses in. I think you got them. I can tell you which ones

they were.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay.

THE COURT: Juror 258, Juror 77, Juror 436, 248, and

1871.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you.

(9:33 a.m., the first group of prospective jurors

entered the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Good morning, everybody. Thank you for

your patience this morning.

The logistics of doing trial during COVID are a little

bit more difficult, so sometimes it takes a little longer to

get everybody in here.

This is the time set for trial in criminal case number

18-CR-422, United States of America versus Michael Lacey, James

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 12 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

Larkin, Scott Spear, John Brunst, Andrew Padilla, and Joye

Vaught.

Would all prospective jurors please stand and raise

your right hand to be sworn.

(The prospective jurors were duly sworn.)

THE COURT: All right. Please be seated.

And if at any time during this process you can't hear

me or one of the attorneys, please raise your hand and let us

know and we'll get closer to the microphone.

You have all started this jury selection process case

-- of this case when you filled out the jury questionnaires,

and I want to thank you for the time that you took to do that.

That process will enable us to do this much quicker.

We've asked most of the questions we wanted to ask in

that jury questionnaire with the purpose of trying to minimize

the amount of time we're all sitting here together.

The questions that we have already asked, or that we

might ask today, are not intended to pry unnecessarily into

your private lives and affairs, however, we do need to ask some

questions to find out if you have any knowledge about this

particular case or about any of the persons who might be

involved in it, to find out if you have any preconceived

opinions about the case which you might find difficult to lay

aside, and to find out if you've had any personal or family

experiences that might cause you to identify yourselves with

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 13 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

any of the parties.

In other words, we ask these questions to assure all

the parties in this case that the jurors selected to try this

case can be fair and impartial.

During this in-person process -- well, actually, I

don't have any -- well, I think I have one general question for

you, so when I ask that, if you have a yes answer, just raise

your hand. If there is only one or two of you, that's easy.

If a lot of you raise your hand, what I'll do is I'll just go

around and write down everybody's number so you can put your

hand down, and then I'll follow up as necessary.

When I call on you, or if one of the attorneys has a

question for you, please stand up, it helps us all to hear, and

state your number before you answer.

And, on a side note, I will refer to you by your juror

number. I'm instructing the attorneys to refer to you by your

juror number. And that's because everything said here in open

court is taken down word-for-word by the court reporter. So we

don't want your name in the record.

Obviously, there is a record of who you are, but we

don't want it here in the open record. So that's why

everybody's using a number. I know it's kind of impersonal,

but it's not meant to be, it's just to keep your privacy

secure.

If I ask you a question or one of the attorneys asks

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 14 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

you a question that, for whatever reason, you prefer to answer

privately, please raise your hand and tell us that you do have

an answer but you prefer to answer privately. I'll make a note

of that, and at an appropriate time, we'll discuss it outside

the presence of the other jurors.

All right. With all that being said, after you

submitted your questionnaire, is there anything that's changed

in the last few weeks that would affect your ability to sit as

a juror in this case?

Let me just write down the numbers. Juror 5, 9, 13,

17, 8, 24, 26, 28, and 31.

Okay. Juror 5.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 5. I am a college

professor --

THE COURT: Okay. One second.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 5. I'm a college professor

here in Arizona, and since the --

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: How about now?

THE COURT: That's better.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm a college professor in

Arizona. And since the trial was postponed two weeks, my

semester has already started. I teach eight-week classes.

75 percent of my students are 40 percent in grade-wise. And I

am the only, now after retirement, full-time faculty member, so

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 15 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

I -- my semester is in process here. I don't know what else to

tell you. I'm the only one. I am on our honor's committee.

I've run our online program, and also an instructional council

member and the only one from my campus.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror Number 8.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror Number 8. I guess since

that time I finished the questionnaire, I have become very

concerned with the Delta variant of the coronavirus, and I'm

just very preoccupied with it. And I don't really -- I can't

really honestly say that my mind is a hundred percent on things

when I feel like I'm being exposed.

THE COURT: So you feel that that would overwhelm your

ability to concentrate?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think I could be -- yeah,

basically. It's on the top of my mind. Just being, you know,

in the courtroom with a lot of people, you know, I just feel it

occupies my mind quite a bit.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. On a side note, at

least for this process, I don't know if it makes anybody feel

better, all of those -- the attorneys and parties and myself

have all tested negative within the last 48 hours, at least for

what it's worth.

Okay. Juror 9.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 9. Since the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 16 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

questionnaire -- during the questionnaire I was unemployed, on

unemployment. That has since ended.

I've gotten a job last week. And this is -- these are

the first weeks, you know, of training this new job, so that

would affect, you know, my employment status, possibly. I

don't know the hours of the trial, things like that to work

around, it's a possibility depending on the hours, but those

are my concerns.

That's what's changed since the questionnaire for me.

THE COURT: Okay. Well, congratulations. Where did

you get a job?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: With Solar Nation is the name of

the company.

THE COURT: And is that -- do you know how big of a

company that is?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: From my understanding, they're

kind of a small company right now, in the process of expanding.

THE COURT: All right. And are you being paid a

salary? Is it hourly? Is it commissioned?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm commissioned based.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror 13.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: As you can see, I've had surgery

on my shoulder. They rebuilt my rotator cuff. I have no

problem with anything except the 21st of September when I go

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 17 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

back to see the doctor again.

THE COURT: And do you know what time your appointment

is?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 10:00 a.m.

THE COURT: And so if we could work around that, there

is no other conflict?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror 17.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 17. My grandfather passed

away this morning and I'll have a funeral next week, so I don't

know when the trial starts, but that would be my only conflict.

It's out of state.

THE COURT: Okay. I'm sorry. Thank you for coming in

today. What -- do you know when it's going to be?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: He just passed away today, so

I'm --

THE COURT: And you said it's out of state?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's in Wisconsin, yes.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you.

Juror 24.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hello. So I submitted -- with the

questionnaire, I submitted a document from my work saying that,

basically, I'm -- so I'm a Ph.D. chemist. I work at a company

that makes equipment for circuit boards. And, basically, I am

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 18 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

the only chemist at my company that can keep this project

going, where, basically, I have to travel for work.

So I submitted -- I submitted last night an additional

document from my work saying that there is a very strong chance

that I will need to travel for work in the next three months.

And, basically, there is no one else in my company that can

travel in my stead because of my expertise so...

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror 26.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 26.

THE COURT: I'm going to ask you to grab the

microphone.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Juror Number 26. After I

filled out the questionnaire, my company told me they would

only pay for ten days of jury duty. It would be a financial

hardship for me to go beyond that.

THE COURT: Okay. You faded out there at the end.

You said it would be a financial hardship for you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

THE COURT: And where do you work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I work for Viasat, V-I-A-S-A-T. I

am a salaried employee.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror 28.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 28. I just realized that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 19 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

after I submitted my questionnaire, I had made an omission with

my personal associations. I do have a friend who is training

to be a DEA agent. I don't know if that has any bearing on --

I think federal employees was a question on that survey.

THE COURT: So you just forgot to include that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct. I just wanted to

make sure that that was --

THE COURT: And is that friend currently training or

had trained?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. She's currently in Quantico.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

THE COURT: Juror 31.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good morning. I'm Number 31.

Sorry. My grandpa came home out of hospice on Monday and he is

no longer responsive. And his oxygen this morning dropped, and

he's currently in the Cheyne-Stokes, and so we're expecting him

to pass this week and then we will have a funeral out of state.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Okay. So that is -- because we asked all the general

questions in the questionnaire, that's all I have. So the

attorneys are allowed to ask you some follow up if they want to

clarify anything in the questionnaire, so I am going to hand it

over to the government first.

Ms. Perlmeter. And if you come to the podium, you can

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 20 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

20

take off your mask, otherwise you have to keep it on.

MS. PERLMETER: If it's okay with everyone, I'll try

this with the mask on. And if you all have -- if anyone has

trouble hearing me, please raise your hand and I'll move myself

over to the podium.

Thank you. My name is Peggy Perlmeter. I'm one of

the prosecutors and I'll be handling this case on behalf of the

government. Thank you all for being here today.

A few follow-up questions here.

THE COURT: Ms. Perlmeter, we're going to have you put

on this microphone. I want to make sure the court reporter can

hear you. If you're not facing her, it becomes difficult.

Okay. Go ahead.

MS. PERLMETER: All right. Juror Number 3. Good

morning, sir. In your questionnaire you had written that in

2017 you were a victim of a car theft; is that right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: (No audible response.)

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. I just want to make sure that I

have the right name to the right juror.

Did you indicate on your questionnaire that you were

the victim of a car theft in 2017?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 3. Not to my recollection.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you.

May I have a minute, Your Honor?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Property was stolen from a car,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 21 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

not the car itself stolen.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you for the

clarification. So I just want to make sure that I'm

associating the right questionnaire to the right person.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. And then did you also further

indicate that you felt that the police investigation was

lackluster?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. What agency investigated that

case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The Phoenix Police Department.

MS. PERLMETER: Phoenix Police Department. And then

you indicated that you felt like you may not be able to be fair

and impartial in this case based on your experience with law

enforcement in that matter?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I did probably indicate that, yes.

MS. PERLMETER: So my question for you is, if you are

selected as a member of the jury in this case, there will be

members of law enforcement coming in to testify to present

evidence and information.

Would your experience back in 2007 impact your ability

to fairly and impartially consider the testimony of the law

enforcement officers that may come to testify in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Quick correction, 2017, right?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 22 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

22

MS. PERLMETER: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, that shouldn't be a problem.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. If the witness was a member of

the Phoenix Police Department, do you feel that you would have

difficulty being fair and impartial because of your experience

with the Phoenix Police Department?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, probably not.

MS. PERLMETER: All right. Juror Number 24. Sir, you

had indicated on your questionnaire that you had a trip to New

York City planned from October 29th until November 2nd. Is

that trip still planned?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you have tickets purchased for

airline and lodging?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, airline, no lodging, but I

also have tickets for other attractions in New York already

bought.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you very much, sir.

Juror Number 8. Yes, sir. We got your request for

needing to use the restroom. If the Court was able to give you

accommodations to use the restroom, would that impact your

ability to sit and listen to the evidence in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, as long as I could -- you

know, as long as that could be accommodated.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you. Also, if you're selected

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 23 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

23

as a member of this jury, you will hear some evidence of a

sexual nature. It was mentioned in the jury questionnaire,

there will be discussion about sexual acts, body parts,

genitalia, things like breast, sexual intercourse, oral sexual

contact, phrases like those may come up. And then if you're

selected as a juror, you will have to use -- to deliberate on

the evidence and use those words when discussing the facts with

your fellow jurors.

So you had expressed some discomfort in having to do

that, and I just wanted to clarify with you today. A lot of us

have some discomfort discussing those private topics with

people that we don't know, but when brought together for a

purpose such as court, would you be able to set aside that

discomfort and discuss the evidence with members of your --

with fellow members of the jury?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You know, I think I would still be

very uncomfortable doing that.

MS. PERLMETER: I understand that you would be

uncomfortable and it's not something that you would want to do,

but if required to do it, would you be able to?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I would.

MS. PERLMETER: All right. Thank you.

Juror Number 6. Thank you. Sir, you had indicated in

your questionnaire that you work at a place called Senior Time.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 24 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

24

MS. PERLMETER: No. Okay. Sorry. Do you live in a

house with several roommates?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 6, yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. What is your occupation?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm a time and expense associate.

MS. PERLMETER: And what does that mean?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do payroll, basically.

MS. PERLMETER: Did you indicate on your questionnaire

that you had a roommate that was an attorney?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. PERLMETER: And what is that person's name?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Tyler Schwenke.

MS. PERLMETER: And what type of law does Tyler

practice?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: He practices defense for the State

of Arizona.

MS. PERLMETER: Is it criminal defense?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, criminal defense. Sorry.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you talk with Tyler about his

cases?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. Obviously, he can't share

everything, but we do ask him about cases and just like general

law stuff.

MS. PERLMETER: Is there anything about what you and

he have discussed that would make you unable to sit as a fair

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 25 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

25

and impartial juror in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't -- like, in regards to,

like, this case happening, or just, like, in just, like,

general law procedure?

MS. PERLMETER: In general.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I don't think so.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. PERLMETER: Juror Number 18.

Juror Number 18, I had the similar question that I

posed to Juror Number 8 for you, based on the answer that you

gave in the questionnaire that you might have trouble

deliberating in this case.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If I'm required, I'll -- if I'm

required, I'll do what's necessary.

MS. PERLMETER: I understand. Thank you.

Juror Number 20. Juror Number 20, thank you. What

year did you serve as a juror in Missouri in the land real

estate case? Do you recall?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It had to be in -- during the

1980s, as close as I can get it.

MS. PERLMETER: All right. Thank you very much.

Juror Number 27. Sir, you indicated that you have a

friend who is a member of the FBI.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 26 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

26

MS. PERLMETER: Is that a friend here locally?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. PERLMETER: In what state?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Alaska.

MS. PERLMETER: And is he or she a special agent?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, she is.

MS. PERLMETER: Does she investigate cases involving

financial crimes or sexually related offenses?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I know she does some with

financial crimes. She doesn't give me all the details on the

stuff that she investigates.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you and her discuss the nature of

her work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: We have some, and that's the

financial. I'm not aware of any investigations into sexual

crimes.

MS. PERLMETER: Is there anything about your

relationship with her that would impact your ability to sit

here, receive information, and then treat -- and then serve as

a fair and impartial juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you.

Juror Number 30. Juror Number 30, thank you. You had

indicated on your questionnaire that some members of your

family may have been part of the criminal justice system

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 27 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

27

themselves. Did you indicate it was your son and your

granddaughter? I just want to make sure I have it correct.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Brother-in-law.

MS. PERLMETER: Brother-in-law. Okay. Was your

brother-in-law arrested or charged with some sort of criminal

offense?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: State the question again. I'm

sorry.

MS. PERLMETER: Was your brother-in-law arrested or

charged with some type of criminal offense?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, the question before that.

MS. PERLMETER: I think on your questionnaire you had

indicated that some members of your family had been involved

with the criminal justice system, either arrested, charged

with, or convicted of a crime.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. That was my son-in-law.

MS. PERLMETER: Your son-in-law. Okay. And what was

that for?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Armed robbery.

MS. PERLMETER: When was that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 2001.

MS. PERLMETER: Was that here locally or out of state?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Local.

MS. PERLMETER: Was he prosecuted and convicted of the

offense?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 28 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

28

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, yeah. He got 187 years.

MS. PERLMETER: And then how do you feel, do you have

any thoughts or opinions on his journey through the criminal

justice system? Do you feel he was treated fairly, unfairly,

or something else?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 187 years, we don't even live that

long, so he was definitely treated unfairly.

MS. PERLMETER: So is there anything from that case

that you bring with you to this court that would make you

unable to sit fairly, impartially -- fairly and impartially and

judge these particular defendants on the evidence that you will

hear in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Can you --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Can you explain in a little bit

more detail?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just unfairness. That's all.

MS. PERLMETER: You had also indicated -- so there

were a series of questions on -- on different aspects of the

law as it applies in a criminal case. And the Court will tell

you, if you're selected, that a criminal defendant has the

right to remain silent, and that you may not use that person's

silence against him in court when evaluating the evidence.

So would you be willing to follow that law if selected

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 29 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

29

as a juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure. Certainly.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you believe -- because I think on

your questionnaire there was like a yes or a no about whether

or not you think a criminal defendant should be required to

prove his or her own innocence. So do you believe that or do

you -- what do you think about that now?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do believe that.

MS. PERLMETER: You do think that a criminal defendant

should have to do something to prove their innocence?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you.

Juror Number 34.

COURTROOM DEPUTY: We don't have a 34 in here yet.

MS. PERLMETER: No 34.

I have no more questions, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. And for the defense.

Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you. Good morning. My name is

Paul Cambria and I represent Mr. Lacey.

Juror Number 6, you indicated that you Googled

Mr. Lacey. Is that true?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: (No audible response.)

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. We'll get you some sound

here.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 30 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

30

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 6. There we go. I

did Google him.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. As a result of that, have you

formed any preconceived notions or theories about him?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. Honestly, it was one of those

things where I thought it was, like, a name that just, like,

wasn't going to show anything up. And then, of course, like,

Wikipedia shows, like, what the trial is kind of going to be

about. So other than that, no, I didn't do any other research,

have no other idea about any other people in the case or any

other details.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And is it fair to say that

whatever you read in Google or Wikipedia, wherever, you can put

that aside and be fair to my client?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. It wasn't -- it wasn't

determinative or anything like that. It was straight up, like,

just, like, what is happening, so the fact that, like, trial is

going to happen, but nothing determinative or anything like

that.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you, sir.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You're welcome.

THE COURT: Ms. Bernstein.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I can come grab the microphone, Your

Honor.

COURTROOM DEPUTY: I'll give you a different one.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 31 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

31

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you. Can everyone hear me? Is

that on?

Okay. Thank you. My name is Whitney Bernstein, and

with some of my co-counsel who are not seated at the table,

it's my honor to represent James Larkin.

So we know that you've all filled out various

questionnaires. They were extensive. They have a lot of

specific questions in them. And we're not here to change your

mind or change your beliefs about anything. We are just here

to have a candid conversation, to talk about what those beliefs

are and what your feelings are, so that we have the ability to

impanel an impartial jury for our client.

So I want to just follow up with a couple of you on

those questions.

I think, Juror Number 14 -- and I want to make sure I

have the right person -- did you indicate that you are a beauty

advisor?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay. Thank you. And I think you

also indicated that your sister is having a baby?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: When is her baby due?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: October.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Are you planning on assisting with the

baby?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 32 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

32

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay. I think you also indicated that

you had very strong feelings about pornography?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And that was a pretty specific

question. That's something you've given a lot of thought to

before?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: (No audible response.)

MS. BERNSTEIN: And you had that belief when you

answered the questionnaire well before you came in here today?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And it sounds like it could be hard

for you to put that aside?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: As far as, like, making a decision

in terms of something that happened, I don't think that would

affect the way I would decide, necessarily. I think that's

more of a personal belief on my part.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Right, but so -- and, again, when

people walk through the courtroom, you don't lose your personal

beliefs. We all retain them. So, for example, if this was a

case about, you know, where someone had -- if this was a case

where someone had a gun, and you don't like guns, even though

people have the right to carry a gun, this probably wouldn't be

the trial for you, because I'm not here to change your beliefs

about guns, but it probably wouldn't make sense for you to sit

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 33 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

33

on a trial like that.

Does that make sense?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I guess so.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Well, I just want to find out just if

this is the case for you, if you're able to be impartial for

this case. And so it sounded like you had very strong beliefs

about pornography. And I think you said that, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: It sounds like it might be hard for

you to put those aside. You said you could try to leave that

in the back of your mind, but it's in your mind. You would

agree?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I wouldn't say that I would be,

like, pro pornography all the sudden, but I wouldn't say

immediately I would think somebody is a horrible person for

whatever dealings that they had with it. I mean, if it's

something consensual, or, you know, whatever it is, I don't

necessarily know what it's all about, but for me, personally, I

don't agree with pornography. I don't think it's, you know, a

positive industry that affects people positively, so that's

pretty much just how I feel about that.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And that is a belief that you hold

pretty strongly?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay. Thank you. So even if you're

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 34 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

34

told to disregard that belief, that's a belief you've had for a

while?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I would say that's probably

a belief I've had my whole life.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you.

And, Juror 30, when Ms. Perlmeter was questioning you,

you indicated that you think a criminal defendant would have to

prove their innocence at a criminal trial; is that right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, that's what I said.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Do you understand the constitutional

presumption of innocence, that everyone is presumed innocent

unless the government proves with competent evidence beyond a

reasonable doubt that they are no longer innocent?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I understand.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And if the judge instructed you to

follow that principle, you, nonetheless, believe that a

defendant should have to prove their innocence?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe that's -- I believe

that.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay. Thank you.

I apologize that it's taking so long. The numbers

were all randomized, so that's why we're all trying to figure

this out today.

Just a moment, please.

Thank you, jurors, and thank you, Your Honor. That's

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 35 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

35

all I have for now.

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Feder.

MR. FEDER: Juror Number 30, can I pick on you again?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Certainly.

MR. FEDER: As you might imagine, a belief that a

defendant is not presumed innocent and that they have to prove

something is a little upsetting to criminal defense lawyers.

Do you understand that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do now.

MR. FEDER: Because our constitution talks about the

presumption of innocence, and that the government has this

heavy burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do you understand that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: If the judge -- and let me ask you a

question. Who is the person that you trust the most in the

world?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Who is the person I trust, the

person?

MR. FEDER: Yes, brother, sister, father.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I trust my wife.

MR. FEDER: Good answer. If your wife was charged

with some type of crime, and you think that she is the most

trusted person in the world, what would it take for you to

believe that the government has proven her case against her?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 36 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

36

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: What would it take?

MR. FEDER: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not sure if I understand the

question.

MR. FEDER: In other words, if she's the most trusted

person in your world, you would never suspect her of committing

a crime, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MR. FEDER: That would be completely foreign to you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would not believe that she did

it.

MR. FEDER: And in order for you to be -- to have your

opinion about your wife's honesty and law-abiding nature

changed, how much evidence would it take to change your mind,

or would you still adhere to what you're saying, which is that

she would have to prove her innocence?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It would -- I would absolutely

have to really see that she did that crime.

MR. FEDER: That's what we call the presumption of

innocence and reasonable doubt. Do you get kind of a flavor

for that as we talk about it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MR. FEDER: And if you were chosen for this jury,

could you see each of these accused people at these tables as,

essentially, in the position of your wife, and that you would

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 37 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

37

not let -- you would not vote for guilt unless, one, the

government were able to get past the presumption of innocence;

and, two, to prove every element of every crime beyond what's

called a reasonable doubt?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Is there anybody else in the panel -- I'm

sorry, but the numbers are a little screwed up -- that answered

in their questionnaire that they believe -- it was question 43

-- that they believe that a defendant should have to prove

their innocence, number one; that they should have to testify,

number two; and/or that the prosecution has too heavy a burden

of proving somebody guilty? Could you please raise your hand.

I know there is some of you because I read it in your

questionnaires.

Number 8.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 8. You know, I may have

said that, I'm not sure. I'm not sure. But when I think about

it, I understand the concept, but at the same time, I would

think that if someone was completely innocent, that they would

actively advocate their innocence, and that if they didn't do

that, that would be an indicator that, perhaps, they were not.

MR. FEDER: Well, wouldn't that be the job of the

criminal defense lawyers who represent them, in order to do

what you're asking to be done?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think both have to do the job

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 38 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

38

right.

MR. FEDER: But let's talk about this concept that,

again, is engrained in our criminal justice system for hundreds

of years.

Who is your most trusted person?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I guess I'll go with wife too.

MR. FEDER: That's a great answer. And if your wife

was accused by people like these folks to my right for some

kind of crime, wouldn't it -- how much evidence would it take

for you to be convinced that she is -- that she committed some

kind of crime?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, so in that specific case, I

know for a fact that my wife would be able to prove her

innocence and advocate for that in a positive way, right. And

so, at that point, it would be her word versus what the

government's word was and then the jury would decide. But she

would -- I know for a fact that if my wife was ever accused of

anything, that she would be able to give a positive defense on

her own behalf.

MR. FEDER: But we're talking about, number one, what

the law is, and, number two, what is fair. Do you think it's

fair that if your wife, your most trusted person in the world,

is accused, rightly or wrongly, that she should have to prove

her innocence versus the government of our country having to

prove that she is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 39 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

39

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: There is two different parts. I

think the government definitely has to do that, but I think, at

the same time, an innocent person has a responsibility to

advocate on their behalf.

MR. FEDER: Which is what her lawyers, hopefully,

would do, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Again, at the end of the day, I

hope she would do that, and I know that she would do that.

MR. FEDER: But let's say, again, that you are picked

as a juror, and the order of the trial is that the government

has to go first because they carry the, what's called the heavy

burden of getting past this presumption of innocence, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. FEDER: Do you think your wife would have to do

anything at all if the government could not get past that

presumption of innocence?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If it was any serious nature at

all, I would hope that she would.

MR. FEDER: But she -- do you understand that, under

our system, she wouldn't have any responsibility to do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I certainly understand that.

MR. FEDER: And then it is only upon the defense to

think about whether or not they want to put on evidence or not

after, and only after, the prosecutors have been able to

present the amount of evidence it takes to get past, one, the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 40 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

40

presumption of innocence, and then, second, to prove their case

and each element in it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do you understand that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: Do you have any quarrel with that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. But if you're asking me as a

juror if I would sit -- in my mind, if I would ask myself, wow,

why didn't he testify on his own behalf, I would probably ask

myself that question.

MR. FEDER: Even though --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: In all honesty.

MR. FEDER: Even though the law doesn't require it?

Even though the law indicates that you cannot do that because

there is a presumption of innocence?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: But if you're asking me what I

think in my head, you know, I can't say that I wouldn't be able

to just turn that off.

MR. FEDER: Let me try to summarize it here. It

sounds like you would not be able to apply a presumption of

innocence and that the government has to prove guilt beyond a

reasonable doubt, because you would expect these folks to do

something on their own behalf, whether or not the government

had proven their case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If those are the -- those are two

different choices, right? I think my first choice was the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 41 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

41

government does have to prove something, right? But I would

also hope that the other side, the defendant I guess would be

the right word, would also, you know, advocate on their own

behalf.

MR. FEDER: What if the prosecutors didn't put on much

of a case? Do you think the person that is accused, fairly or

unfairly, still has to defend himself?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I guess if the prosecution didn't

put on, like, any case at all, then I guess, yeah, it would be

true.

So, I mean, if the prosecution came up and didn't

prove anything at all, then, you know, the choice would be

nothing at all and nothing on this side, then there is nothing

there, I would think. But if the prosecution came out and

proved, okay, this is what happened, and the other side didn't

even counter that at all, I would have to wonder, well, maybe

that it's true.

MR. FEDER: As you stand here right now, and you -- if

you were asked to vote guilty or not guilty, how would you

vote?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: On what?

MR. FEDER: Based on what the case is about.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I have no idea.

MR. FEDER: Under our system of laws, you have to --

you would have to vote not guilty, because the presumption of

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 42 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

42

innocence and the burden of proof on the government is beyond a

reasonable doubt, so you have to vote not guilty right now

because there is no evidence.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I guess I'm kind of lost on where

we are right now, so...

MR. FEDER: Juror Number 8, you've indicated -- well,

let's finish this up. Can you apply the presumption of

innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt or not, without

requiring or thinking in the back of your head that these folks

have to put on some kind of evidence to prove that they're not

guilty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know.

MR. FEDER: You've indicated that you are concerned

about the Delta -- you've indicated that you're concerned about

the Delta virus, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm --

MR. FEDER: Like everybody.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm very preoccupied with, for

instance, you know, being in a courthouse for an extended

period of time, you know, with a lot of people in and out. I

think that increases --

MR. FEDER: Is that going to keep you from being able

to be a good juror, an attentive juror and focused juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I cannot guarantee that I would be

able to put a hundred percent of my attention on the trial.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 43 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

43

MR. FEDER: Thank you.

Is there anybody else who would like to have me pick

on them and wants to raise their hand about these issues about

presumption of innocence, reasonable doubt, and the burden of

proof of the government? Come on, somebody.

Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I sure don't want to after

watching that.

MR. FEDER: Well, I'll try to be a lot gentler than I

was with Number 8.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: All I will say is that I have

similar feelings, in that anytime I watch something and someone

doesn't stand up to -- to speak on their own behalf, I wonder

why.

THE COURT: And could you state your number for the

record?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, sorry, 16.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. FEDER: If the judge were to instruct you, if you

were a juror, that you are not to put any importance whatsoever

on an accused person if they don't testify, is that going to

affect your ability to be a juror and fairly judge this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think so. It's very

difficult to -- to make that statement and to answer questions

that are what ifs when you haven't heard any of the case at all

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 44 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

44

yet, but I don't think that it would affect my ability to -- to

be a fair juror.

MR. FEDER: If you had to vote right now, knowing what

you know about this case, which is that little blurb in the

questionnaire, what would your vote be?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, you've told me I would have

to vote not guilty.

MR. FEDER: Don't listen to me. I'm just a criminal

defense lawyer.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I know.

MR. FEDER: Do you understand that that's the --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: -- that's our legal system?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do understand that.

MR. FEDER: And that our constitution has been around

a long time, and those are the types of rules that are

required --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MR. FEDER: -- in these types of cases?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And I understand human nature as

well, and that it's really difficult to not draw conclusions in

your own head about things based on the things that you've

heard if left with no trial, no arguments, nothing, and just

having to say what -- so I think being instructed based on the

law and based on what our country says is the case, I -- I

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 45 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

45

would be able to do that.

MR. FEDER: Thank you very much.

Anybody else want to be victimized?

I can see you're smiling, Number 23.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sorry. Number 23. No, I don't

have an opinion on it. I believe in our justice system. I

believe that the rules are set in place for both sides to

follow and adhere to and that's the way it goes, and that our

job is to be -- to make sure that those rules are followed.

So, no, it's -- I don't have any problem with your -- your line

of thinking.

MR. FEDER: Thank you.

Is there anybody else in this room that does not agree

with Juror Number 23? Please raise your hand or forever hold

your peace.

(No audible response.)

MR. FEDER: Thank you.

THE COURT: Mr. Lincenberg.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Mr. Lincenberg, do you have any questions

for Juror Number 4? I'm going to let her leave to take a

restroom break, or you can ask them when she gets back.

MR. LINCENBERG: Let me just take a look.

THE COURT: Sure.

MR. LINCENBERG: I can certainly -- I think Juror

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 46 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

46

Number 4 should take a restroom break, and if the Court wants

to proceed, we can proceed.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. LINCENBERG: So I -- can everybody hear me if I

speak loudly and don't use the microphone here? Thank you.

I'd like to follow up on Mr. Feder's questions with

regard to presumption of innocence.

My name is Gary Lincenberg. I represent Mr. John

Brunst in this case.

And there were a couple of responses of people who

weren't sure whether or not a defendant should be required to

testify in their minds and the like. And, honestly, I greatly

appreciate your honesty in responding of things that go through

your mind.

You know, what we really want as jurors is for you to

be brutally honest with us. If you have opinions, we all have

opinions, we come into here -- into the courtroom with our

opinions. We're not expected to wipe our mind clean and our

history of our lives clean with regard to our opinions. The

idea of being brutally honest is so that we, as lawyers, can

help evaluate whether or not you, as jurors, can fairly

evaluate the evidence in this case.

And this question is particularly important to me,

because you'll see that when the trial starts -- and the first

thing that happens in a trial, the government is going to give

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 47 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

47

opening statements and some of the defense lawyers are going to

give opening statements. I plan to do what's called reserve my

opening statement, meaning not give an opening statement before

the government presents its case, because I want to see what

the evidence is going to be. They indicate some people may

testify, and then sometimes they change who is going to testify

and the like.

Now, what that means is that you're going to hear the

prosecutors lay out a whole story of what they believe the

evidence will show. And it may be weeks, if not months, before

you actually hear from me in my opening statement. So you can

imagine that my concern is do we have people on the jury who

will follow the judge's instructions that my client is presumed

innocent and that I'm not to form an opinion until we get to

the defense case.

That's a very difficult thing to do. We're human

beings. We react. We're in this artificial environment of a

courtroom where we can only consider what is stated in the

courtroom when it comes in as evidence. And I will, of course,

be getting up to question witnesses. You won't hear from me

for a long time.

And so what I'm really looking for, first of all, is a

general show of hands, is there anybody who just believes they

would have difficulty reserving your views, reserving judgment

until all of the evidence is in in the case and the judge has

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 48 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

48

fully instructed you on the evidence? And there may be some

who the answer is yes, they -- they might have that type of

concern, that you might hear what the government has to say and

say that I would expect -- that you might be of the view that I

would expect I will form opinions. They're going to call lots

of witnesses, people who were prostitutes, people who were

advertising on Backpage's websites.

THE COURT: Counsel, what is your question?

MR. LINCENBERG: The question is whether or not you

will be able to fairly reserve judgment or you think that

you'll start to form an opinion or hold it against Mr. Brunst

because I'm reserving my opening? Please raise your hands if

you think you might fall into that category.

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. Let me go back to Juror

16, if I may. Because you had indicated in your jury

questionnaire, and you were honest enough to also raise your

hand in court to indicate that you expect that a defendant

should have to testify. So, as you sit here today -- and

that's your opinion, you're entitled to hold it -- do you

believe that if somebody did not testify, that that will send a

signal to you that they're therefore guilty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I don't think it would send a

signal that they are therefore guilty. Again, he was talking

about what kind of plays in your head. As I watch TV, as I

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 49 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

49

watch those shows, if someone doesn't testify, I wonder why.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And if the judge were to

instruct you that the prosecution has the burden to prove the

case beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defense doesn't have

to put on any evidence whatsoever, would you be able to fairly

and fully follow that instruction, or would it leave questions

in your mind? That's my question. Would it leave questions in

your mind?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think it would leave questions

in my mind.

MR. LINCENBERG: I appreciate -- I appreciate your

honesty.

Anybody else that would say, you know what, I have

questions in my mind if the defendant didn't put on certain

evidence or did not testify in the case, and it might impact my

ability to be a fair and impartial juror? Please be brutally

honest with me. There is no right or wrong answer.

Yes. Sir, we heard you. Anything -- unless there is

something further to add, you were honest and --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I think -- Number 8. I think

16 basically stated it the same way that I probably wish I had

said.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you very much.

Juror Number 9, I believe, sir, that you indicated

that you have a new job. When did you start?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 50 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

50

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 9. I started officially

Monday last week.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And are you working from home

or the office?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's door-to-door.

MR. LINCENBERG: Door-to-door?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And did you indicate that

you -- did you indicate that you were paid commission?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Commission, yes, sir.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And how long had you been

unemployed before going to that job?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Since, I believe, May of last

year.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. May of 2020?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: May of -- I'm sorry, May of --

when the pandemic started.

MR. LINCENBERG: May of 2019?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. So would serving on -- this

jury is going to be four or five days a week at times. Would

it bother you that that would be interfering with your ability

to earn a living?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, depending on the hours of

trial compared to -- so the -- the hours that I go knocking

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 51 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

51

door-to-door, typically, are three to eight in the evening. So

if it's a morning thing for the courts, I might be able to make

that work.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And as the days shorten,

as we have shorter days, is that still going to -- you still go

door-to-door during the dark or do you try to do it before it

gets dark?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Personally, I try to do it before

dark. It's more of a rule -- it's not a necessity to go those

hours. It's more of a rule of thumb to have the most chances

of success.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right. So would it -- do you think

it might be a burden to you, that you might be concerned about

not performing enough to keep your job or earn a sufficient

income if we were in trial from 9:00 to 4:00 or so?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's a possibility, yes, that

would be a concern.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And do you believe that that

also might cause you some anxiety about the length of the

trial, given that this may be lasting for several months and

might implicate your employment over a lengthy period of time?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'd say there would be some level,

yes. I would have some concern if it, indeed, you know,

started to affect the hours that I was able to go out and try

and earn a living.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 52 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

52

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Now, you also asked an --

answered a question in the questionnaire -- it was question

68 -- you said -- on the question of whether you believe

prostitution should be legalized, you said, yes, legalizing

prostitution but -- would help curve a lot of the stigma around

it, but the issue is with human trafficking.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Do you recall that? Okay.

Now, this is a case which involves statutes involving

prostitution not human trafficking. If the prosecution puts on

evidence, however, that somebody says they were trafficked,

would that be something that would be of a particular concern

to you in being able to fairly look at this -- this case

otherwise?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't believe I would be -- be

able to be unbiased in that situation.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Let me ask, by a show of

hands, if there is anybody else in connection with the question

-- because there were a few people who had various questions,

either you believed prostitution should be legal or not, but

your real concern was where there were children involved or

child trafficking. This case involves people advertising on a

Backpage site, and some of those people are going to come into

the courtroom. I anticipate they'll say, I was trafficked, or

something to that effect.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 53 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

53

With a show of hands, would that indication be

something that you think might make it more difficult for you

to be fair and impartial in a case in which our clients are

charged with promoting prostitution? Please give me a show of

hands. Please be brutally honest with me. There is no right

or wrong answer.

THE COURT: Juror 9, you can sit down. Thank you.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you, Juror 9.

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Juror 10. Juror 10, good morning.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good morning.

MR. LINCENBERG: In the questionnaire relate --

somewhat related to this topic, the question was asked: Should

the government investigate or prosecute purchasers of sex? And

you said yes, and you had in there, was it consensual?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. LINCENBERG: Can you explain what you mean by

that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think that one of the questions

in there was if prostitution should be legal, and I think under

certain guidelines, yes. And the same way how, like, alcohol,

or, like, now weed is being used as, like, a form of tax, to

like -- the same way, like, how the college is with schools and

everything, I think prostitution could be used in the same

sense, but as of right now it's still illegal. And that's

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 54 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

54

where my thought process is on it.

MR. LINCENBERG: I'm trying to understand. When you

say, you know, was it consensual, was that getting at, well, if

there was somebody who wanted to sell their body to somebody

through prostitution, somebody wanted to buy it, it was

consensual, then you have no problem, but otherwise you would?

Is that what you're getting at?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. Force is never okay.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's -- yeah.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And when asked a question

about your feelings regarding laws affecting the internet,

publishing content, you indicated -- you said something to the

effect, don't incriminate yourself on social media. What did

you mean by that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Don't post that you're selling

shit or -- sorry -- or that you're, like, doing something that

you're not supposed to. Like, if you're selling yourself

online, don't -- don't promote it on your Instagram or

whatever.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you very much for

your -- your candid answers.

Juror Number 15. Okay. Hello, sir. There was one

question dealing with crypto currency in which you indicated

that you and your brother did some small crypto trading. You

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 55 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

55

may hear some evidence in this case that at a time payment was

permitted for ads on Backpage using crypto currency. Do you

have any problem with that idea that the business would accept

crypto currency as a form of payment?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. LINCENBERG: Does anybody in the courtroom have

any concerns, negative feelings about bitcoin or Dogecoin, or

whatever the different crypto currencies, being used as a

source of payment? Does anybody think that that suggests that

there must have been something, perhaps, underhanded about the

business? Raise your hands, please, if you have any of those

negative feelings.

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you, sir.

Juror Number 20. Good morning. You indicated that

your -- that you were -- you had a BS in accounting and you

were a retired CPA, CFO, and controller. My client,

Mr. Brunst, was a chief financial officer on a holding company

that had a loan with Backpage and has an accounting degree.

And I was wondering if, because of that, I wanted to ask if you

could just expound a little bit on your background work, your

experience.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 20. I first was in

the military and then got my CPA degree, accounting degree and

my CPA certificate, and practiced for about five years, and

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 56 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

56

then went into the private industry as a CFO, several different

companies. I changed companies about every three or four

years. And then I retired.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Now, you indicated in the questionnaire -- there was a question

that dealt with adult escort services. And you'll hear

evidence that adult escort services are lawful, sometimes

regulated, and that this case deals with prostitution separate

from that.

When the question was asked are you bothered that

adult escort services are legal and/or can legally advertise

their services, you said, yes, I believe this is directly

contradictory to what God has intended for our world. And when

I saw your answer, it raised a question that I had for you as

to whether you thought you could be fair and impartial in this

case since you gave us your honest view that even lawful

activity like that should not be permitted.

Is this a case you believe you could be fair and

impartial to these defendants who are charged in this criminal

case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I believe that I can.

MR. LINCENBERG: You believe you could be?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: That your religious views on these

issues would not interfere, would not cause you to be at all

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 57 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

57

biased against them in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, they would not.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And when asked a question

whether you had strong feelings about prostitution or

commercial sex, you gave the same answer.

There is going to be evidence in this case of

prostitution, and the question will be whether our clients are

liable by running their site and promoting them. Would you be

at all more inclined towards the prosecution side because

prostitution is at issue here?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't believe that I would be.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you. And you were asked

a question whether the government should investigate or

prosecute providers of platforms that promote or facilitate

prostitution, and you said yes. Apologize for that.

And you said yes, and let me ask you why.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Can you rewind and --

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes. Let me start over. We were

interrupted.

The question had been asked about whether the

government should investigate platforms that the government

contends are promoting prostitution, whether -- and this could

apply, in this case it's Backpage, you know, we all have --

there is a lot of platforms out there. Twitter in which -- you

know, we see in the paper that the Taliban are using Twitter,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 58 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

58

for example, or Facebook, or Google, different platforms

sometimes are criticized.

Is it your view that when something that is illegal,

whether it's terrorism or unlawful sales of products or

prostitution, makes its way onto those platforms, is it your

view that those who -- who own those platforms should be

prosecuted for that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would say yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And, given that view,

regardless of whether Twitter was intending to promote the

Taliban, or Backpage folks were intending to promote

prostitution, fair to say that you'd have a bias against them

because their platform was being used for that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would have to agree with that,

yeah.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And I greatly appreciate your

honesty. Thank you very much.

Juror Number 26.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 26.

MR. LINCENBERG: Sir, you indicated this morning that

you were concerned that your employer would only pay you for

ten days of leave. Do I -- I think you were the gentleman.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Can you expand on that, what

do you do, how important your job is to you, and the like?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 59 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

59

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm a production planner for a

satellite company.

MR. LINCENBERG: We can't hear you very well.

There we go.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Is that better?

MR. LINCENBERG: Yeah. What does a production planner

do?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I plan the materials that are

needed to build the actual satellite.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And how long have you been in

that position?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Three years. I've been doing that

work for more than that.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And what would happen if you

were to serve -- if you were forced to serve, you would just go

without pay?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: After the ten days I either have

to use my paid time off or leave without pay.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And if this case went several

months, and then at the end of the several months, would you be

kind of in a hurry to get back as you're in deliberations?

Might it impact how much time you would want to spend in

deliberations, for example?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Obviously, yeah -- yes, because I

would be curious of what's going on at work and --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 60 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

60

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

THE COURT: Can you just repeat your last answer and

we'll see if we can hear better.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. I would be concerned with

what's going back on at work.

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Better? Okay.

Yes. I would be concerned with what's going on at

work, because I have somebody covering for me for all my work.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Now, let me ask you about some

of your earlier work. You, I believe, indicated that earlier

in your career you were a cost accountant and a general ledger

accountant for tech firms. I'm following up on this because

Mr. Brunst is an accountant. Can you explain for me a little

bit about what the nature of the work was that you did there.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I was responsible on the general

ledger side, when I was doing that, for posting the debits and

credits and the monthly cycle.

MR. LINCENBERG: Now, let me ask you on that, if I can

interrupt. On the general ledger side, when you're looking at

debits and credits, did you get documentation and then just

sort of put them in the proper place in the ledgers and prepare

the accounting forms that needed to be done?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It was all electronic.

MR. LINCENBERG: Electronic. Okay. Did you do any

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 61 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

61

particular due diligence into what those underlying debits and

credits were, as to, for example, whether they were for lawful

or unlawful activity, or whether customers had complaints or

anything like that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Only when we were out of balance,

we'd have to go and investigate why we were out of balance or

what particular transaction that was.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And then you would investigate

why you were out of balance. When you investigated why you

were out of balance, would that get into an investigation as to

whether, for example, a particular customer was doing something

wrong?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not at my level.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right. Okay. All right.

And you indicated in your questionnaire that websites

-- platforms should be responsible when the content leads to

criminal activity.

Can you expand on your answer there?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, if the website is, in my

opinion, doing something illegal, I believe that they would be

responsible for those actions that they're taking.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. So if somebody posted

something that was illegal on the website, in your view, the

website should also have responsibility?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. As the content provider,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 62 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

62

yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. I appreciate your answers.

Thank you.

Juror Number 29.

No, there is no 29. I'm sorry. Okay.

Then maybe if we could go to Juror Number 31.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 31.

MR. LINCENBERG: Hi. Good morning. My heart goes out

to you for your losses, and I know it's difficult to share that

in a public place, so forgive me for following up on it.

It sounds like, first of all, your mind is elsewhere

right now. Is that fair? And you're going to need to take

some time off. It sounds like you were close to your

grandmother.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's my grandfather. I'm very

close with him, I would say just about as close as I am with my

own parents.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And so how much -- how much

time do you -- there is going to -- how much time do you think

you would need off for that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Honestly, it's hard to say. When

I lost my dad two-and-a-half years ago, I'm still grieving over

that. So to lose his dad this soon, I, honestly, I can't give

a time frame.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And would your grief

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 63 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

63

also, even if you were in the courtroom as you are today, is

your mind a little bit elsewhere?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Would that make it a little

more difficult to stay focused on the witnesses and the

testimony?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you very much. And, again, my

sympathies.

Nothing further. Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. There might be a few more

questions. How many people need a break? It's been

90 minutes. Okay.

So we're going to take a break, I say ten minutes, but

there are a lot of you. So just come back outside the

courtroom as soon as you're ready, but don't come back into the

courtroom. We'll bring everybody in at the same time.

Try to remember where you're seated because we'll seat

you in the same place.

And we're at recess.

(Recess taken, 11:07 a.m. - 11:28 a.m.)

THE COURT: Thank you. Please be seated.

We are back on the record with the jury present. You

were all so very efficient getting back in here. Thank you.

All right. Mr. Eisenberg.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 64 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

64

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you, Your Honor.

Well, we're decreasing in height, we went from my

colleague Mr. Lincenberg to me. I hope you all can see me. I

can see you. Okay.

Question for Juror Number 13. Where are you, Number

13?

Yes, sir. I noticed from -- are you from Iowa?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. EISENBERG: Got the Hawkeyes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I'm from Texas but I went

to Iowa to play football.

MR. EISENBERG: Good. I noticed in your answers to

the juror questionnaire that you have a connection to law

enforcement.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not that I can think of.

MR. EISENBERG: St. Paul Minnesota Police Department.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, I applied for there, yes.

MR. EISENBERG: You did. Okay. Is there anyone in

your family who has a connection to law enforcement?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. EISENBERG: And so you also stated that -- okay.

Website responsibility was part of the questionnaire

that we had here. And when you answered that question, what

did you think it was getting at?

Let me give you a --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 65 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

65

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Actually, it was a long time ago.

I don't remember.

MR. EISENBERG: I'll try to refresh your recollection.

That's a lawyer's term.

Feelings about website responsibility for content

posted by users. That was the question. And then the answer

was: User platforms should be responsible to keep their sites,

and so forth.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Any -- any web-based communication

device should be policed by whoever owns the device.

MR. EISENBERG: So that can take -- well, we're

talking in the abstract here, and I know we're going to have to

wait until the trial unfolds -- but that can include many

different efforts on behalf of the website.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: As long as the website is -- is

going in good faith --

MR. EISENBERG: In good faith.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: -- there shouldn't be a problem.

MR. EISENBERG: Right.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The thing is right now there has

been no litigation nor any action by Congress or anyone else

that makes the platforms responsible. They can -- they can

tell you that, yeah, we -- we did something here or did

something there, but it's -- there has been no concrete law.

MR. EISENBERG: So it's a pretty undefined area?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 66 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

66

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. EISENBERG: Right. And so it's left to the

platform provider to do the best they can. Would you agree

with that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I would.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. Thank you, sir.

Juror Number 20. Ma'am, I noticed from the responses

on your juror questionnaire you had strong feelings about a lot

of things, and I won't go into them specifically, but -- well,

one of those was about escort services and legal adult

entertainment. And you were pretty clear that you just weren't

in favor of those; am I correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 20. Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Yes, ma'am.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. EISENBERG: So is it going to be difficult for you

to sit in this case and hear testimony that's going to relate

to, for example, escort services?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't believe it will be.

MR. EISENBERG: And would it be difficult for you to

talk about or hear evidence that has to do with massages?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, it won't.

MR. EISENBERG: In spite of the fact that in your --

it seems to me like you have a pretty strong reaction to those

activities, and, in fact, it may come from your own moral

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 67 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

67

situation, your own moral position.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I feel I can be objective.

MR. EISENBERG: You can?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. So, well, that's -- so what

that's going to entail in this case is you'll have to sit and

hear things that you may not like, and they may have issues

with respect to things that you just simply don't agree with,

but you would have to set that aside and try to relate it to

the people who are actually here as defendants.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You're right.

MR. EISENBERG: So, in other words, if somebody comes

in and says that they were a -- I'll just make it up, I don't

want to get too far away from this -- a victim of someone who

was a pimp, but it has nothing to do with these gentlemen and

lady here, would you be able to set aside the fact that they're

talking about the -- the testimony is about something that

happened to them in that situation but it doesn't relate to any

of the defendants here? Would you hold that against the

defendants?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I would not.

MR. EISENBERG: All right. I appreciate that, ma'am.

Your Honor, that's all I have. Thank you.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 68 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

68

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Bertrand.

MS. BERTRAND: Good morning. We're still in the

morning. My name is Joy Bertrand. And it's really easy to

keep track of who my client is because her name is Joye Vaught.

I don't know how that happened, but that's who I am and who my

client is.

And before we talk about specific issues today, and we

are going to focus on issues, I want to -- I think sometimes we

start jury selection and it feels like we've been shot out of a

cannon and we don't -- we don't have clear indications about

what happens in jury selection.

And there is a perception, I think, from television,

that the lawyers are here trying to figure out who to get rid

of, who to strike, and who to keep. And I want to suggest to

you that the other thing we're doing today is finding out who

wants to be here and who does not.

And Ms. Vaught and I are only one-seventh of what's

going on here today, but I encourage you to be honest, and I

encourage you to be straightforward with us and the Court if

you do not want to be in this case. It's too important to say,

well, I guess, if I must, if you make me. So please be candid

with us. And if you don't want to be here, I'll do everything

in my power, it's a little limited, it to make sure you're not

here when we're done. Okay.

So, with that, can we agree that we're going to be

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 69 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

69

straight with each other?

(No audible responses.)

MS. BERTRAND: And my colleagues have talked a little

bit about reasonable doubt.

And, Juror 16, I am not going to pick on you or ask

you to give a right answer, but would you mind talking with me

for a moment?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hi.

MS. BERTRAND: Hi. Reasonable doubt is thrown around

a lot, lawyers, and judges, and jurors. What does reasonable

doubt mean to you? When you hear the government, the

prosecution has to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt, how

would you define that personally?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I think it just means that I

still don't -- haven't heard enough to be fully convinced that

that is correct, that there is still a part of me that thinks

that they might be wrong.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Can I just -- I want to go back to

the question that I answered last time. He asked me if there

would still be a question, if all I heard was the government's

case --

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: -- then would you still -- I have

a hard time imagining that if all you hear is everything that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 70 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

70

has been -- that they have to prove that this is -- person is

guilty, and that's all you hear, that anybody would not still

have questions. There is two sides here, there is two parts of

it, and you always want to hear both.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So that was my response was, of

course, if all I heard was one side of the case, I would be

left wanting in that situation.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you. I think that's -- I think

that's a natural feeling to have. And what gets hard, in a

complex case like this where there is so many counts and so

many moving pieces, is staying on task and keeping the

prosecution on task. They meet reasonable doubt or they don't.

And reasonable doubt can be, and should be, I can't rule out

other reasonable options. Using reason, or using logic, I

can't rule out other things may have happened. There are --

there are alternative concepts that do not lead to guilt.

Does that make sense?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, it does. It's a much better

answer than I gave.

MS. BERTRAND: I try. Thank you, Juror 16.

Who agrees with Juror 16 about that comfort level with

reasonable doubt, or who disagrees?

How about Juror 5, in listening to this?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 5. Yeah, I think

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 71 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

71

reasonable --

MS. BERTRAND: You just have to project through your

mask.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Reasonable doubt, yeah, I believe

that there is reasonable doubt. I would think I have to give

-- everything that's been asked here, I have to hear the

evidence. You can't make me tell you what I'm going to do in a

situation until I hear that.

MS. BERTRAND: Oh, yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: But you also asked -- and I do

want to respond to this -- who doesn't want to be here? To be

honest with you, I don't want to be. The whole time I've been

here --

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm sorry. You know, I'm very

interested in what this case is because of what I do for a

living, but I have a hundred students right now. As I'm

sitting here and go outside, I have got 15 calls right now from

students that have papers due tomorrow, that have exams on

Friday. I just -- I don't know what to tell you, they're

40 percent through with their grade.

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 40 percent of my students have --

or 75 percent of my students have 40 percent of their grades

calculated. We know the effects of COVID-19 educationally.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 72 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

72

Students are being left behind. I've been a college professor

for 23 years and it's killing me not to take their phone calls

for the paper that's due tomorrow.

I take pride in what I do. Just like you care about

your clients, I care about my students. I don't know. I think

it's asking a lot for me to do that. You know, my college --

what are my students going to do, ask for a tuition refund?

We're already down, you know, ten percent enrollment. That's

just my personal feelings. I answered, yes, I don't want to be

here.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you.

Anyone have feelings like Juror 5 that they would like

to get out of themselves, not get out? Any other strong

feelings that they want to share?

(No response.)

MS. BERTRAND: If you change your mind, let us know.

It's important that you let us know.

Juror 2, hi. I noticed in your written responses you

were quite candid with us about your discomfort in serving.

And I think lawyers sometimes forget that not everybody is

comfortable with public speaking.

THE COURT: Ms. Bertrand, can you move closer to the

microphone?

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm extremely uncomfortable

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 73 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

73

speaking.

MS. BERTRAND: I'm sorry. We can't hear you. Talk

like you're at a football game into the microphone and then

we'll hear you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I never speak loud. I'm extremely

uncomfortable speaking.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Being here is, like, one of my

nightmares that I've had my entire adult life. I don't drive,

so my husband brings me and drops me off and then he goes home.

And that -- leaving me in a public place alone is terrifying.

MS. BERTRAND: A place you've never been?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. I will get better as time --

right now I am a wreck.

MS. BERTRAND: I hear you. I'm so glad you were

candid with us, because one aspect of jury service is the

listening and processing of the information you receive. But,

as jurors, the other job is to speak your voice when it comes

time to deliberate. And by just their nature, some people are

-- want -- seek compromise and want to make things nice, make

people comfortable. And some people say, no, I stick to my

guns. I don't care who I make uncomfortable.

Where would you put yourself in that spectrum?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I tend to make people comfortable.

I don't always speak my own mind. I kind of let other people

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 74 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

74

have their way.

MS. BERTRAND: Make people comfortable?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Another thing, and I won't go into

detail, is that you noted that some of the sexual content in

this evidence would make -- would be really uncomfortable to

take in?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Do you think it's something that would

be -- distract you from paying attention?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Probably. I have trouble paying

attention anyway.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: My mind wanders sometimes, yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: Some people -- and this information

that you'll -- some of the stuff you'll see is graphic. It's

not -- what is that?

It's graphic. It's people doing things I didn't know

they did until I joined this case, and it includes photos of

people doing the things I didn't know happened until I took

this case.

How do you feel you would be able to process that, or

would you be able to process that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I am not certain. I haven't

really been exposed to this sort of thing. I don't even know a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 75 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

75

lot about the internet at all. I don't use a computer. So all

the stuff about bitcoin, I have no idea what that is.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I'm a little sheltered. I

don't leave my house much, so that's why.

MS. BERTRAND: That's okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It is for me.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah, and I'm sure it's for your family

too. Do you have a concern that this imagery and descriptions

might be overwhelming?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you. Thank you so much for

sharing with us.

Who, in listening to Juror 2, has similar concerns

about, let's start with, being able to speak their voice?

So, Juror 4, where would you put yourself on that

spectrum from, I'm here to make things nice, I'm here to make

people comfortable, to I'm going to stick to my guns?

THE COURT: Ms. Bertrand, you need to stay close to

the microphone.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: My husband would say I always

speak my voice, so I don't really have a problem doing that. I

try to do it respectfully and kindly and listen to other

people, but I usually pretty much stick to my guns. And I will

-- I don't want to use the word fight, I know that's not the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 76 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

76

right word -- but I will get my point across and be probably

too -- trying too hard to make myself understood until I think

that everybody understands my point of view and then I'll stop.

MS. BERTRAND: So you'll speak until you're heard?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Pardon me?

MS. BERTRAND: You'll speak until you feel heard?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MS. BERTRAND: What about the issue of the graphic

content of this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: While I'm not a person who enjoys

that type of thing or I participate in that, I think that I

could -- it would be -- I could watch it. I could do what I

needed to do. I'm a person who does what's required of me even

if it's difficult.

So it would be -- you know, I would -- yeah, I

would -- it's not something that is a part of my life, so I

wouldn't particularly -- you know, I could do -- I could look

at the evidence and determine the evidence to the best of my

abilities. I can't say that I wouldn't be, like, shocked

maybe, because it's not something I normally -- I don't even

know what it is, but, you know, it's not something I would

normally do, so I might be shocked, but I think I could

deliberate. Is that the right word?

MS. BERTRAND: It is if it's the right word for you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 77 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

77

MS. BERTRAND: I noticed in your response -- your

written responses that you have a -- one of your children is a

child trauma therapist. Is that accurate?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, my daughter. She's 42. But

she -- she has, in her education -- in her education, in her

internships she worked as a high-needs case manager for

children as a social worker, then she also worked in the

domestic violence area -- it keeps going out -- as an intern.

And then now she's a professional therapist and she does have

some children as clients.

MS. BERTRAND: Does she have adult clients too?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, whole -- the whole, what do

you call?

MS. BERTRAND: Trauma clients?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: She has trauma, but she's also

doing marital and family therapy. She does all kinds.

MS. BERTRAND: I'm so sorry about that microphone.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The battery is probably going

dead.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah, good guess.

You mentioned in your written answers a distinction

about being trafficked or being forced into this work, what --

what does that -- versus just prostitution. What's that

distinction to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I'm not an expert in the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 78 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

78

field.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So I would say someone who has

been vulnerable in some way, maybe they're very young, maybe

they're, you know, a young woman, or I suppose a boy too, it

could be a boy who is vulnerable, and somebody befriends them

and does things for them that benefits them, and then they end

up in a lifestyle that may not be beneficial to them. And, you

know, and then they're stuck in that lifestyle and maybe abused

in that lifestyle to have to be continuing it to make money for

that person.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Versus someone who chooses to do

that, as maybe an older person, you know, that decides that

that's a good way to make money because -- for whatever reason.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you, Juror 4. I appreciate it.

Who has feelings like Juror 4, that there are

distinctions between prostitution and someone choosing that

versus trafficking and being taken for granted, trapped?

Juror -- where is Juror 10?

What's your feelings about that distinction?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Being trafficked versus willingly

being --

MS. BERTRAND: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't really have a clear point

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 79 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

79

on one or the other. I think one of them is you're mature and

make the choice to do it, as opposed to other which is, I

guess, for popularity of the word, being groomed at an early

age.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's pretty much it. To where

you don't know any better.

MS. BERTRAND: That's the distinction to you, being

able to make a real knowing choice versus being kind of pulled

and manipulated into it. Is that fair?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: I noticed in your discussions with my

colleagues and in your written responses you said, you know,

don't -- don't go posting your business on, you said Instagram.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: But we could use any social media

platforms, OnlyFans, Pinterest, you would be surprised to

learn. In your mind, coming into this case, what's your

feeling about the responsibility of those -- those platforms,

those providers?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think that they should try their

hardest to not have illegal things happen.

MS. BERTRAND: Uh-huh.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't really have any concrete

idea of what should -- if it is on their hands or if it's on

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 80 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

80

the people -- the people posting its hands. Yeah, I don't -- I

never really put thought into it, to be honest.

MS. BERTRAND: I don't think most people have.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: But there might be a distinction.

Thank you. Thank you, Juror 10.

Juror 27. Hello. You had to know one of us was going

to talk to you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I might be able to speak loud

enough.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Counsel, what areas do you

practice in?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Bankruptcy, creditor's rights,

commercial litigation, business litigation.

MS. BERTRAND: You try cases?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I've tried a few cases.

MS. BERTRAND: To juries?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Never to a jury.

MS. BERTRAND: Bankruptcy doesn't have juries.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, not typically. I mean, it

could, arguably, have one in an adversary proceeding, but not

general bankruptcy.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure. Especially with litigators, and

I've been on panels too, and I sit there, like, on my hands

trying not to talk.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 81 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

81

What's your expectation of the lawyers in this room,

as a litigator?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: What's my?

MS. BERTRAND: Expectation of the lawyers.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, expectation. I don't know if

I have any specific expectation. I mean, I've sat in on voir

dire before. And I've never tried to jury, but in my early

practice I did insurance defense litigation and participated

in, as an associate, through the voir dire process. I know

there is a lot that you all are doing and things that, through

this process, trying to get information from jurors to make

decisions on who is to sit on the jury and who to potentially

strike.

MS. BERTRAND: What else?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, I understand each side has

a position. The state's looking for who might be more

receptive to their position, and possibly the same on the

defense. I'm not sure what else you're looking for at this

stage.

MS. BERTRAND: That might be all you have.

All right. Do you have any -- because litigators tend

to be kind of black and white, because they're forced to take

positions on things, any firm positions you've developed in

listening to this case and answering the questionnaire so far?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I -- I do have positions on

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 82 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

82

Backpage, just on my personal background and thoughts on it

that -- my understanding of it.

MS. BERTRAND: What are those?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I -- I -- typically, are -- my

understanding was it's used for improper and nefarious

purposes. I'm not aware of what all it's used for, but my

general understanding is that it's typically a site that, if

you're looking for something illegal, that's where people go

to.

MS. BERTRAND: Any other thoughts about Backpage?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, other than that. I do

remember seeing, I feel like back when -- I think it was in the

news. I remember reading articles about when the arrests, or

whatever, were made in regards -- I assume it was this case

but --

MS. BERTRAND: Let me ask you this, and you're going

to know the law school answer, but your friends here won't.

You knew about the arrest. You knew people had been indicted,

right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: The human nature is to say, well, they

must have done something or they wouldn't be here. The

government wouldn't have gone to all of this trouble if they

didn't have a case. How do you feel about that? Was that your

first opinion?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 83 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

83

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I mean, I understand the

presumption of innocence and that -- look, there is likely and

clearly some evidence that led to the arrests, and there is

something that was put out there that, obviously, there is a

case to be made, but I certainly understand the concept of the

presumption of innocence, and that just because you're arrested

does not mean that you're guilty.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Thank

you, Juror 27. Thank you.

Who disagrees with Juror 27? Well, they must have

done something or we wouldn't all be here. It's okay. It's

human nature to say it.

There is a string of bank robberies and they finally

make an arrest, and I'll tell you the first thing, if criminal

defense lawyers have been following it, is they're like, oh,

good, they caught them.

So Juror 18. Hello. You're going to have to talk

through the mask.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hi. Hello.

MS. BERTRAND: What's your feelings about, well, they

must have done something? Do you agree with that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not necessarily. I think people

sometimes do get in a position that they --

THE COURT: I need you to speak up a little.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think sometimes people end up in

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 84 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

84

a position that didn't warrant them to be there.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: There could be a mistaken

identity. There could be a situation where a friend of a

friend or something, not every person is -- that is arrested

should be arrested.

MS. BERTRAND: You, in talking with one of my

colleagues, and I -- and I notice that you are very poised and

very soft spoken. You were, I believe, one of the folks that

said, well, I'll deliberate if I have to.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I've been a juror before on a

trial.

MS. BERTRAND: What kind of trial was that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It was a gang trial.

MS. BERTRAND: A gang trial?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, ma'am.

MS. BERTRAND: And without going into the details of

the deliberations, did you feel like you could speak your

voice?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MS. BERTRAND: Do you feel like you're the kind of

person who would be seeking compromise?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would seek to try to get the

truth and make the right decision based on the evidence.

MS. BERTRAND: What if people disagree with you? How

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 85 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

85

do you handle that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would continue to try to push my

point and also hear others as well.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you, Juror 18.

Just a moment, please.

Juror 18, I'm going to ask one other series of

questions to you. I apologize. It's hard to cross back and

forth with the different lists here.

You noted, and much like Juror 2, that talking about

sexual things makes you uncomfortable.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, very much.

MS. BERTRAND: We have weeks of evidence coming in

that involve graphic sexual content. Some people might say

that it would flood me, it would be too much for me to process,

and some say, bring it on. What is your feeling, knowing that

we're going to have to sit here with images projected on these

big screens and go through this evidence, how do you think you

would handle that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would be uncomfortable. As I

said before, if I'm required to do something, I am able to set

aside the uncomfortableness of it and handle it appropriately.

MS. BERTRAND: Can you say more about handling it

appropriately?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just listen to the evidence and

view the evidence and do what's needed to make a final

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 86 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

86

decision.

MS. BERTRAND: All right. Thank you. Thank you,

Juror 18.

Just a moment, please, Judge.

Juror 22. Hi.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 22.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes, sir. Hello. Nice to meet you.

You listed yourself as a consultant. What kind of

consulting do you do? And I apologize if I didn't hear it when

I was writing.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, you're fine. I do branding

and marketing. So I do a lot of logos and renames and social

media newsletters, things like that.

MS. BERTRAND: Social media branding?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: All types of -- all types of

branding.

MS. BERTRAND: For companies?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, companies and nonprofits, a

couple of political campaigns.

MS. BERTRAND: Did you say political campaigns?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Mainly nonprofits.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Can you give an example? I

don't know if you're bound to some confidentiality agreement.

I understand that. What are an example of some of the

nonprofits that you've helped?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 87 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

87

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right now one is called -- sorry,

so a big one for me is called New Pathways for Youths. They do

mentorship for kids that live in poverty in Garfield, so that's

a big one I spend a lot of time on. I'm doing a youth

engagement nonprofit in Colorado right now. So all types of

stuff really. There is not a specific issue area that I focus

on.

MS. BERTRAND: You noted that your, was it your dad --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: -- volunteered or volunteers for,

sounds like a safe house?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, volunteered, I think

probably five-ish years ago.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't remember where, when. I

think what he did was he, like, walked around and played faux

security guard, but I don't know any details beyond that.

MS. BERTRAND: Did his work with the safe house,

halfway house kind of place --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: -- impact how you see prostitution?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. He didn't talk about it very

much. He would just kind of go away on Saturday mornings, come

back aground noon, and that was it. There wasn't a lot of

conversation about it.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 88 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

88

MS. BERTRAND: In your questionnaire answers, you talk

about your position about the legalization of prostitution and

concern that sex workers themselves -- and I thought this was a

great distinction -- don't punish the people in the industry,

publish -- or punish whom? Who do you think would be

responsible or should be pursued?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I think -- I mean,

obviously, we're in a legal system, so whoever is, I guess,

breaking laws. But, you know, I think -- someone at some point

was talking about violent actors and coercion and things like

that, and I think that probably makes sense to be a priority

for any kind of prosecution.

At the same time, it's complicated, there is a lot of

different factors, so it's hard to say any specific wide range

in judgment, because every case, I assume, is different.

MS. BERTRAND: Well, you have experience with social

media platforms?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: And they run the gamut from OnlyFans to

-- I really thought Pinterest was the most, like, low key of

them but --

THE COURT: Ms. Bertrand, you need to move back.

MS. BERTRAND: -- but, apparently, not. It's for more

than recipes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 89 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

89

MS. BERTRAND: Instagram. Since you work with these

platforms and you have some technical expertise with them,

what's your feeling about what burdens these platforms have?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I mean, I think -- someone

made the point there is not currently a legal obligation, and I

don't know the facts on that. But, as far as I know, there is

no legal obligation to, like, seek out, hunt down illegal

content.

You know, I think something a lot of folks have said

is that the platforms should do their best, you know, and

that's hard to define, but I think that's a pretty fair

guideline. Again, though, I think it's case by case and --

yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: All right. Did you have any

familiarity, given the industry you work in, about this

prosecution of these Backpage employees and owners?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, not this specifically. I know

there was a controversy, but my preexisting knowledge was,

like, I think Backpage was like Craigslist. That was about the

extent of what I know.

MS. BERTRAND: All right. Thank you.

With what we discussed so far, and I told you at the

beginning of this, tell me, tell us, if you have anything else

to share with us from what you've heard so far that we need to

know.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 90 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

90

Juror 11, you've been quiet. We'd love to hear from

you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 11.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes.

THE COURT: What is your question?

MS. BERTRAND: Do you want to be here?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I do.

MS. BERTRAND: Why?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe it's a civic duty.

MS. BERTRAND: It's going to be -- it's going to be a

big ask for the people that serve on this jury. We're talking

about months.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I work as a postman, and I

walk about 12 or 13 miles every day, so it doesn't seem that

big of an ask to me really.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you. And your employer is

okay with you -- with a long jury service?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: USPS, yep.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you.

Anyone else have anything to share before I sit down?

Anything else?

Yes. Juror 19.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'll just share that -- I mean,

just putting it out there -- my employer has no problem with me

doing a long jury. I am not uncomfortable speaking my mind.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 91 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

91

Sometimes my husband would say I should shut up. But -- I'm

sure most husbands would say that about their wives -- but I

also too am not uncomfortable with seeing images, photographs,

videos. I'm able to disconnect with that. So, as far as, I

know it's -- I know it's real, but I'm also able to -- I don't

think that it would affect, like, my mental health or capacity.

I also -- like, things don't -- obviously, I get

bothered by things, but I wouldn't -- it wouldn't be disruptive

to myself to share or talk or use language with others that I

just met, you know.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So I just wanted to put that out

there, because I know many of these people do feel

uncomfortable, so I just wanted to let you know I don't.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else?

See, now look what you've done. You've empowered

others.

Juror 7.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I share Juror 11's feeling about

it being a civic duty, but I actually don't want to be here.

And the reason is -- and I didn't speak up earlier because it's

happening in realtime -- my son has a panic disorder. And he's

a sophomore in college. He's had it since he was in seventh

grade. It's triggered at the onset of each school year. And

he's struggling a lot. I was just down in Tucson, he's at

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 92 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

92

University of Arizona, so I was down there this morning, got up

early to drive up here. Got a call from him during our --

during our break, sobbing. I'm sort of his -- he's -- he's

seeing a psychiatrist there and a counselor, but I'm kind of

his go-to person when he's upset. And so not being available

to him, you know, is -- is problematic for me and for him.

And, for that reason, I don't want to be here.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you. Thank you. It sounds like

you would not be able to be fully present.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's right.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you.

Juror 6.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know if, like, we're

supposed to -- like, because I know it was in the questionnaire

to talk about financial hardships and everything. I don't know

if we can now but --

MS. BERTRAND: Go ahead.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: My work does offer jury duty pay,

but they only offer up to ten days' worth. And so just, like,

financially, I support myself. I'm on my own and everything.

I just, like, would absolutely not be -- the case is

interesting and I, like, absolutely agree with the civic duty

and everything like that, so it's not that it's not important

to me on that scale. It's just, like, not being able to pay

rent is, obviously, a little bit more important than, you know,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 93 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

93

being able to serve so -- but that -- that's really my only

issue with being here.

Other than that, obviously, I have a friend that's a

lawyer, and I love hearing about law, I love this, like, kind

of environment and all of that kind of stuff, it's more of

just, like, financially it's not going to be possible, for me,

at least.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Your Honor, I'm just going to check my notes one last

time.

Juror 25. You've been quiet.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: You're going to have to push through

the mask to talk.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I know I've been quiet.

MS. BERTRAND: What's your take on what you've heard

so far?

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, we object. We ask that

the --

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: -- specific --

THE COURT: Hold on. Hold on. I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

MS. PERLMETER: We just ask that counsel pose a

specific follow-up question for each juror.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 94 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

94

THE COURT: Yes.

Counsel, you need to ask a specific question and it's

supposed to be followup.

MS. BERTRAND: Juror 25, you noted you're a server?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: What was that? I'm sorry.

MS. BERTRAND: In your questionnaire you said you were

a server?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Like, at a restaurant?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: What would you do if you had to sit on

a 12-week jury trial?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's not that big of a deal to me

financially. I'm okay stable -- stable financially, so I'm not

worried about that. My work, as long as I let them know when

the jury service is, then they don't mind.

MS. BERTRAND: Just a moment, Your Honor.

You said in your questionnaire that you don't believe

prostitution should be legal. Yes? Can you elaborate on that,

please?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, it's already illegal, so I

kind of believe that it should be illegal, but, I don't know, I

think that a lot of the times what is involved with

prostitution is also negative and illegal, so -- I mean, I

think the two kind of go hand-in-hand. And I haven't really

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 95 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

95

done much research behind it, but it's already illegal, so I

would follow the law on that.

MS. BERTRAND: What other things? Can you elaborate

on that? Say more about what other things go hand-in-hand with

prostitution to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Typically, sex trafficking, or

drugs, or anything of that nature. Yeah, other things that are

negative in the world that contribute to that.

MS. BERTRAND: And you believe that prostitution is

something the police should do their best to stop?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Have you heard of Backpage

before being brought into this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you.

Unless anyone else has anything else, I have nothing

further. Thank you.

THE COURT: Okay. Elaine, are the jurors downstairs

listening still? I know they were.

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Yeah, they should be.

THE COURT: Okay. The jurors are going to be excused

for an hour.

For this group, if you can just wait outside for a few

minutes, I'm going to release a couple of you, I anticipate,

and I'd like to do that before you go to lunch, but I need to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 96 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

96

discuss it with the attorneys before I do that.

So if you all could just wait outside until Elaine

comes out to tell you to go to lunch, I'd appreciate that, and

then we'll need you back in an hour.

(12:20 p.m., the prospective jury panel left the

courtroom, save Juror Number 16.)

THE COURT: Counsel, you can have a seat.

We're on the record. And, Juror 16, if you could just

come forward.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I will. I'm sorry. I just -- I

felt like I should have said at the very beginning, I am

concerned about being here because my -- I work at an

elementary school office. And COVID has just kind of made a

mess of things down there. And for me to be gone for the

length of time that I would be gone, I'm concerned about that.

My mother is also unhealthy, and I'm also the medical

power of attorney for another elderly woman who has taken two

falls. I got another call while I was out there after the

first meeting, she fell again today after yesterday. And I'm

just concerned about not being available for them. That juror

reminded me when he talked about his son, so I just felt like I

should have mentioned that when you asked us to stand up in the

beginning and I was too nervous to stand up.

THE COURT: What's the school you work for?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's called Sunburst Elementary

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 97 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

97

School in the Washington Elementary School District.

THE COURT: It's a public school?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

THE COURT: Okay. And does your mother live with you

or --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, she lives in Tucson, actually.

And the other elderly woman lives in -- and she lives in

Phoenix, but in an independent living place.

THE COURT: Okay. And does your mother live on her

own or with someone?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: She lives with her husband.

THE COURT: Okay. Does the government have any

follow-up questions before I let Juror 16 go?

MS. PERLMETER: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Any defense counsel?

MS. BERNSTEIN: No, Your Honor.

MR. CAMBRIA: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

(Prospective Juror 16 left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Counsel, before you go, is there any

objection to excusing for hardship Juror 5?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: Can I have just a moment?

THE COURT: It's the college professor.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 98 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

98

MR. LINCENBERG: I'm sorry, Your Honor, we just

haven't had a chance to talk and --

THE COURT: Okay. These are hardship questions, but

you can bring her up.

MR. LINCENBERG: I know.

Your Honor, did the Court just excuse Juror 16?

THE COURT: No.

MR. LINCENBERG: No?

MR. CAMBRIA: 16.

THE COURT: No, 16 is not excused. I just asked her

to step out.

MR. LINCENBERG: Oh, I'm sorry. So I'm just -- I'm

just trying to -- 5 and 16 seem to be in the same boat,

generally, different reasons.

THE COURT: Okay. I will get to 16.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay.

THE COURT: But do you have any objection to Juror 5?

MR. LINCENBERG: Not if 16 is also going to be

excused. I think they're in the same boat. So if the Court --

we have an objection -- I'll rephrase it.

We have an objection unless -- I just don't get a

sense yet of, you know, what the Court's view is on folks who

it's difficult because of work-related items to --

THE COURT: Well, because it's different, each person

individually.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 99 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

99

So, over objection, Juror 5 will be struck.

Juror 8. Is there an objection to excusing Juror 8

for his concerns about the coronavirus, as well as his -- well,

that's the hardship.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No, Your Honor. I share his concerns.

THE COURT: Anybody -- Mr. Lincenberg?

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

MR. FEDER: No objection.

THE COURT: Eight will be struck.

Juror 9 for financial hardship. He's the one that

just got a job after being unemployed for a year.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No objection, Your Honor.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

THE COURT: Juror 17 whose grandfather just passed

away this morning. Any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Juror 26 said it's a financial hardship

because after filling out the questionnaire he found out his

company will only pay ten days. Any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

MR. EISENBERG: None.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 100 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

100

THE COURT: Juror 31, whose grandpa is in hospice and

is expected to pass soon.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Juror Number -- I'm sorry, my notes aren't

exactly in order. Juror Number 6 is the one who spoke up at

the very end who said it would be a financial hardship because

his employer will only pay ten days.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: If I could just have a moment.

MR. FEDER: Is that Juror Number 6, Judge?

THE COURT: Six.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And, Your Honor, we do object to

dismissing Juror Number 6 on a hardship.

THE COURT: Okay. Over objection, Juror 6 will be

struck. He clearly indicated he was concerned about paying his

rent.

Let's see, those are the ones I've considered for

hardship.

Juror 16, her job is not the same situation. She

works in the office. She's not a teacher. It's a public

school. So I am not going to excuse her for that reason.

I'm going to ask that you guys come back at 1:15. I

will ask you to be prepared to ask me for any other strikes for

cause on this panel.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 101 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

101

When we come back for -- when we continue, a couple of

thoughts about jury selection so far.

Ms. Perlmeter, I expect you to be a little more

efficient with your time.

For the defense, there was a lot of repeat. Some of

you asked the same question of three people. I'm probably

going to speak up more. I don't like to interrupt attorneys,

but that's my concern is that there is a lot of repetition.

And be careful on getting too close to making an

opening statement, Mr. Lincenberg, and anybody else.

All right. We'll see you at 1:15.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Your Honor, will the courtroom be

locked? Can we leave things in here?

COURTROOM DEPUTY: I am locking and everyone will have

to leave.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you.

(Lunch recess, 12:29 p.m. - 1:19 p.m.)

THE COURT: We're on the record outside the presence

of the jury panel. The sound is not on downstairs. We have

counsel and defendants present.

In the first 31, does the government have any motions

for cause?

MS. PERLMETER: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. PERLMETER: The first we'll start with Juror

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 102 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

102

Number 2.

THE COURT: We can't hear you. Maybe just sit so

you're closer to the microphone.

MS. PERLMETER: We would move to excuse Juror Number 2

based on cause. She indicated that she has trouble paying

attention and her mind wanders.

MS. BERTRAND: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And that was Ms. Vaught that said it the

first time, right?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Ms. Bertrand who said it first,

Ms. Bernstein saying it second.

MS. BERTRAND: No objection.

THE COURT: Thank you. All right. I don't hear any

other objection. I do have a note about that.

Juror 2 will be struck.

MS. PERLMETER: Next we would move to strike Juror

Number 30. He stated that he feels that defendants need to

prove their innocence.

THE COURT: Any objection?

MS. BERNSTEIN: No, Your Honor.

MR. FEDER: We object. I think he was rehabilitated

to being able to say he would follow the law.

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Feder, I'm sorry, when you

respond, can you just remain seated so you're close to the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 103 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

103

microphone. So you object.

Anybody else?

MR. LINCENBERG: We would join in Mr. Feder's

objection.

MR. CAMBRIA: We would also, Your Honor, Mr. Lacey.

THE COURT: And that was Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes. I'm sorry, Your Honor.

MR. EISENBERG: As well as Mr. Padilla.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Your Honor, I misspoke. I didn't

understand we were doing for cause challenges, so we do also

object to Number 30.

MS. BERTRAND: As does Ms. Vaught.

THE COURT: Mr. Feder, can you explain how you think

he was rehabilitated? Because after you questioned him,

someone else did, and he repeated endlessly that he believes a

criminal defendant should prove innocence.

MR. FEDER: I don't recall that happening, Judge. I

think after I talked to him he maintained that he would be able

to -- he said he would be able to treat all the defendants as

though it was his wife, and he trusted her the most, and would

therefore apply the presumption.

THE COURT: Okay. Anything further from the

government?

MS. PERLMETER: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I will look at the transcript at the next

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 104 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

104

break before I make my decision, because I don't remember it

that same way. My notes don't reflect that. I remember that

conversation, but I don't remember him ever backing off from

the general belief, strongly held belief that a criminal

defendant should prove innocence.

So are there any other motions from the government?

MS. PERLMETER: Yes. But as to Number 30, he also

stated that he felt that he couldn't be fair based on his

son-in-law's conviction for the 187 years.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Your Honor, that's not my memory of

what that juror had said. He had said that he thought that was

an unfair sentence, as that's longer than anyone's natural

life. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. I don't

recall him saying that he would, therefore, not be able to be

fair for this trial.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

MR. FEDER: In addition, Judge, in his questionnaire I

believe he said that the conviction was fair, if I recall

correctly.

THE COURT: Okay. So no other motions from the

government?

MS. PERLMETER: I have more.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. PERLMETER: Juror Number 24. This juror indicated

that he has preplanned travel from October 29th where he's

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 105 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

105

already purchased plane tickets and tickets for attractions in

New York City. He also has work-related travel requirements

that he's expecting this quarter. And he indicated that he's

the only chemist for his company, and that without him they

would not -- he would not -- they would not be able to move

forward with their projects.

THE COURT: What's the defense position?

Ms. Bernstein.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Your Honor, there was numerous

opportunities to sort of speak up. There were some times where

jurors were asked if there were any other concerns, there were

times where they were asked about financial burden, financial

hardship, and a number of people did stand up at that point who

hadn't previously spoken. We even had a juror who remained

after everyone was dismissed to share her hardships with us.

This individual did not emphasize his hardships. He

didn't volunteer his New York City trip, it was only when

Ms. Perlmeter asked him. And I don't think he emphasized at

all that he had -- that he won't be able to go on that trip.

That was all. He has no lodging. It doesn't seem very planned

either. So we would object.

THE COURT: Did you get his additional excuse that he

e-mailed in?

MS. BERNSTEIN: We did not.

THE COURT: Okay. Let me see if I can find it.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 106 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

106

Anybody else from the defense want to make a statement

about that?

MR. LINCENBERG: Nothing further. We agree. I did

want to just note he did disclose in his questionnaire that he

had a paid vacation from 10-29 through November 2nd, just to

correct that point. But I think that, given the length of the

trial, I don't think that that amounts to cause.

THE COURT: Okay. I don't have it here, but it was a

list of dates. I'm assuming it related to his business travel.

So the motion -- hold on.

MR. FEDER: Judge, my client points out that if he

left on the 29th, depending on what time his flight was, we're

off for the next two weeks.

THE COURT: Yes, I know.

MR. FEDER: Okay.

THE COURT: Thank you.

The motion is denied. If I can find -- maybe I have

the wrong number of the person that sent in the late excuse.

If we find it, I'll let you know what it says and we can

re-discuss. So let me put that on my --

Okay. Next.

MS. PERLMETER: Juror Number 7, Your Honor. This is

the one that --

THE COURT: Juror 7.

MS. PERLMETER: Juror Number 7. This is the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 107 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

107

individual this morning that disclosed that his son has panic

attacks and that he wants to spend time with him is how I took

it.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, I'll speak up. We would

oppose that one. I think that it's a sad situation, but if

this gentleman is at work, he's also distant from his son at

school, he'll just be in jury duty. The idea that he has to be

on call during the day any differently than if he was at work,

I don't think makes a lot of sense. So while it's a

sympathetic situation, I don't believe it comes close to cause

or hardship.

THE COURT: Ms. Bernstein, did you have something to

add?

MS. BERNSTEIN: No, I don't have anything to add. We

would join the objection.

THE COURT: Okay. Does everybody join the objection?

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: We do.

THE COURT: Okay. Over objection, Juror 7 will be

excused. He drove all the way to Tucson this morning before

coming in to service today, which indicates to me that this is

more than just comforting his child who is seeing a

psychiatrist, and he brought it up. It was significant enough

to him to bring it up, so Juror 7 will be struck.

Anything else?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 108 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

108

MS. PERLMETER: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And from the defense. Let's start with

Mr. Cambria.

Do you have any motions for cause?

MR. CAMBRIA: I do, Your Honor, 18. The problem with

that particular potential juror is that she has a problem with

the materials. And this is a case where we already know, from

looking at the government's exhibit list and the history of

this case, that there are going to be a number of graphic ads,

if you will. There are 50 charged in the indictment. And it's

going to be important for her to observe those. Especially the

nuances of the ads, I think that's very important. And here we

have a person who was pretty strong in her distaste, if you

will.

And so the threat there is that she's not going to

give them the consideration that they deserve, and if that

happens, that's really unfair to the defense, may be unfair to

the prosecution, but it certainly is to the defense.

THE COURT: What's the government's position?

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, this juror maintained that

she will deliberate if she has to. While she did indicate that

this would not be her topic of choice, because she has been a

prior juror before, she did indicate that she understands her

responsibilities and her duties as a juror and that she would

perform them.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 109 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

109

She also indicated that, while she is soft spoken, she

felt that her voice -- her views were heard and considered in

her past jury case. And she also indicated that -- to address

defendants' concerns, she also stated that she is aware that

not every person who is arrested should be. So we think she

can be fair, we think she can deliberate and be fair and

impartial with this jury.

THE COURT: And does anybody else from the defense

want to be heard?

MR. FEDER: Do we need to join?

MR. LINCENBERG: I think we all join. We discussed

these at lunch, Your Honor, so we're all joining in -- we're

going to be proposing four, and we all join in them.

THE COURT: Okay. So the motion to strike Juror 18 is

denied. Although questioned about it, she adamantly stuck to

the fact that she would seek the truth, that it wouldn't affect

her ability to deliberate, so that motion is denied.

Mr. Cambria, your next one.

MR. CAMBRIA: That's the only one I have. We split

these up, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Who is next?

Ms. Bernstein.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Sure, Your Honor.

We would move for cause on Juror Number 14. And Juror

Number 14, when I questioned her extensively, shared candidly

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 110 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

110

that she has very strong beliefs about pornography and related

topics, that's also what she put into her questionnaire.

She explained that she has had these beliefs her

entire life, and that she will bring them into the courtroom,

so we move for cause on her. I think it will be difficult for

her to deliberate about the images in this case, which are

pornographic at best.

THE COURT: And the government's position?

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, Juror Number 14 in

response to that stated, and made very clear, that it was a

personal belief and that she would not immediately find or say

that someone was a bad person just because they were involved

in it. She is able to separate her personal beliefs to serve

as a juror in this case.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And she did say that, that's right,

and that's an admirable statement. But when asked if she would

bring this into the courtroom and how long she's had this

belief, she indicated that it was a lifelong belief, and that

she couldn't put it out of her mind, that she would bring it

into the courtroom. And we move for cause on that because we

deserve a juror who can be impartial and put that out of their

mind.

THE COURT: Well, she also said that it wouldn't

affect her ability to be fair and impartial. And we all come

into -- the jurors all come in with beliefs, the question is

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 111 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

111

whether they can still be fair and impartial.

MS. BERNSTEIN: But, Your Honor, when asked if she

would bring these beliefs into the courtroom with her, she did

say yes. Asked if she could put them out of her mind and do

this, she did say they'd be in her mind.

So I think when a question is posed that says, can you

be fair and impartial, we'd all like to think that we're fair.

And I think everyone understands that they need to be impartial

to sit on the jury. When asked if she could put this out of

her mind or if she would bring it with her, she indicated that

she would. And that would prejudice us to have a juror on the

jury in this case who has very strong beliefs about

pornographic images, has had them her entire life, and has

admitted she can't put them out of her head.

THE COURT: Well, they're not required to -- to

suddenly like pornography.

MS. BERNSTEIN: There are many jurors, Your Honor, who

did not indicate that they have that leaning, that they have

that mindset, that they have those beliefs. And so for this

juror to say that this will be in her mind, that she will not

-- that she will bring these beliefs with her into the

courtroom, you know, it just -- this is not the case for her.

Given the nature of this case and the charges of this

case and the, you know, infinite boxes of government exhibits

that I see right here, most of which I think are all like the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 112 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

112

most pornographic images they could possibly find on the

internet, this is not the case for that juror. If she's going

to be sitting there with this in her mind, it would prejudice

us from having a fair and impartial jury.

THE COURT: Okay. I'll take it under advisement,

because if I decide right now, it would be to deny it, but I'm

going to look at her answers.

Do you have another one or someone else?

MR. FEDER: Number 16.

THE COURT: Mr. Feder.

MR. FEDER: We also move to strike her for cause.

She, in addition to her hardship questions, she's the one that

has a mother and a friend down in Tucson that are in difficult

medical situations. She really, I mean, notwithstanding the

number of questions I asked her, she couldn't get around that

she expects defendants to testify. She agreed with, I think

it's Juror Number 8, that any innocent person would put on --

essentially, present a defense, and thought that they have to

testify in order to, essentially, prove innocence.

So if you look at her questionnaire, it's kind of full

of sort of moralistic -- I have a moral problem with

prostitution. It's harmed one of her friend's -- best friend's

marriage. It caused STDs to be introduced into the -- to the

family relationship, affected pregnancies. I mean, she's very

prejudiced against, essentially, the mention of prostitution,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 113 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

113

but she's going to make the defendants improperly not -- not

have the presumption of innocence in their favor, number one,

and be required to testify in their own defense, number two, in

order for her to think about them.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. PERLMETER: Juror 16 was pushed by many of defense

counsel, and she maintained steadfast throughout that, while

she does have her beliefs, that she understands the law and

that she could fairly and impartially do her duty as a juror.

She maintained that over and over again.

As to her mother's condition, she did indicate that

she resides with her husband, so -- which I understood as the

mother's husband.

THE COURT: Okay. Over the government's objection,

Juror 16 will be struck.

And the last one.

MR. LINCENBERG: Mr. Lincenberg. Your Honor, the last

one is Juror Number 20. And I think this one is pretty

straightforward.

So in the questionnaire Juror Number 20 on question

64, strong feelings affected by escort services or legal adult

entertainment industry. Yes, I believe this type of lifestyle

entertainment is not in alignment with the type of world or

humans that God made us to be.

65. Bothered -- are you bothered that adult escort

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 114 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

114

services are legal and/or can legally advertise services? Yes.

Again, I believe that this is directly contrary to what God has

intended for our world.

66. Do you have strong feelings, have you been

affected by prostitution or commercial sex, quote/unquote?

Yes. Again, I believe that this is directly contradictory to

what God has intended for our world.

So I questioned Juror Number 20 in that arena. And

Juror Number 20, I believe, was fairly candid, particularly as

we went along, in saying I could not leave these biases aside,

and that this is -- this is not a case where she would able to

-- would be able to be fair and impartial to defendants in this

type of prosecution.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. PERLMETER: Juror Number 20 was also questioned by

multiple counsel on behalf of the defendants, and I agree she

was very candid, she was very vocal where she did confidently

state her answers, including her answer that she could be fair

and impartial despite her views. She did maintain that.

MR. LINCENBERG: The interesting thing was she had

answered that -- it was really before I got up and questioned

her -- and I followed up on that and explored it, and that's

when she was candid that she could not be fair and impartial in

a case like this. Her words were that I would be biased in a

case like this.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 115 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

115

THE COURT: I do have a note that she indicated -- I

agree that she tried to resist a little bit the pressure -- but

I do have a note that she indicated she had a bias against

platforms that allow this type of material, and I think that

was at the point where I felt she would properly be struck for

cause, so the motion is granted.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you.

THE COURT: Is that it from the defense?

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes, it is, Your Honor. Thank you.

THE COURT: Okay. So just so we're all on the same

page, 30 and 14 are taken under advisement.

And we'll bring in the next panel.

MS. PERLMETER: Will this be Jurors 34 through 70?

COURTROOM DEPUTY: No, 32 through 62. Page 2 of your

printouts that I gave you of the seating chart.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay.

(1:47 p.m., the next panel of prospective jurors were

brought into the courtroom.)

THE COURT: And thank you, everybody, for your

patience.

Due to the restrictions and the changes we've made

because of COVID, we have to bring you up in smaller groups

than we normally would. Normally we would cram you all in

here. So thank you for that.

While you were down there, I gave some introductory

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 116 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

116

remarks and explanation about the jury selection process. I'm

not sure if the audio was working at that point or not.

Juror Number 32, do you know? Were you able to hear?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I think at the beginning it

wasn't too loud.

THE COURT: Okay. So let me just say a couple things

about the jury selection process.

We have utilized a questionnaire in this case, which

thank you for taking the time to do that. We did that so that

we could try to minimize the amount of time we had to spend in

court with everybody questioning them. So that should make

this process a little less painful.

So today what I need you to do is, if I ask you a

question or if one of the attorneys asks you a follow-up

question, if you could please stand -- we're going to hand you

a microphone to make sure that the court reporter can hear

everything -- and state your number.

Throughout this process, I will refer to you by your

juror number, the attorneys will refer to you by your juror

number. And that is just so that we keep your name out of the

record, because everything said here in court is taken down

word-for-word by the court reporter. So it is not meant to be

impersonal. I just wanted to let you know why we're utilizing

your juror number instead of your name.

So if you could please stand, state your name, and

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 117 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

117

then answer the question. We need the court reporter to hear

the number of the person answering.

Also, if you're asked a question, but for whatever

reason you prefer not to answer in front of the entire panel,

just tell us that you have an answer but you prefer to answer

privately, and I'll make a note of that and at a later time

we'll discuss it outside the presence of the jury panel. The

attorneys will be present but not the entire jury panel.

And, by way of explanation, we've asked you a lot of

questions, some people might have felt that they were

intrusive, and it's not meant to be intrusive. The reason we

ask these questions is to find out if there is any reason you

should not be a juror on this particular case. Sometimes there

is one case that's not good for some jurors and may be better

suited for another juror.

So we ask questions to see if you know any of the

parties, if you know anything about the subject matter of the

trial, to find out if you have any preconceived opinions about

the case that you might find difficult to lay aside. So our

goal is to find jurors that can be fair and impartial and give

both parties a fair trial. So that's why we ask these

questions. They are not intended to be intrusive.

With that being said, I only have one question before

I turn you over to the attorneys, and that is that after you --

Before I ask you any questions, we need to have you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 118 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

118

sworn in. So if you could all stand and raise your right hand

to be sworn.

(The prospective jury panel was duly sworn.)

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. You can have a seat.

So you filled out these questions -- the

questionnaires a number of weeks ago. So my question is is

there anything that's changed in the last few weeks that you

think would affect your ability to sit as a juror in this case?

Okay. Since there is a number of you, I'm going to

just list everybody's number, you can put your hand down after

that.

Juror 36, Juror 42, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 56, and 59,

60, 61.

COURTROOM DEPUTY: And 49.

THE COURT: And 49. Okay.

Juror 36, what's changed?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 36. I started a new job

at Carvana on the 30th, on Monday, so it's the third day today.

And I just don't think I could financially sustain on 200 bucks

a week for a couple of months, to be honest with you.

THE COURT: And have you checked, since it's a new job

-- well, my first question would be are you on like a

probationary status or anything?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I'm not even a hundred

percent sure how it works, to be honest with you, but I know I

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 119 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

119

don't have any benefits or PTO for like the first 30 days at

least, so I would assume this -- I mean, I told them I'm coming

here and they said it's covered, but it's not like I'm getting

paid.

THE COURT: Okay. So they do not have paid jury duty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not for me at least, a new hire.

THE COURT: Okay. And were you unemployed for some

period of time before starting your new job?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. Yeah.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you.

Juror 42.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hi, I'm Juror 42. My health has

declined quite a bit since filling out the survey. I'm under

the care of a pain specialist and she wrote me a letter for an

excuse.

THE COURT: Okay. Did you submit that earlier or did

you --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I did, but they said it was too

late, that I needed to come in still.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. I'll pull up that

letter while we --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Thank you.

THE COURT: -- continue. Thank you.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 120 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

120

Juror 47.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 47. Since I filled out the

questionnaire, I have since become a single mother. I have a

child that has no adequate child care for the time of me being

down here, and I live up in Payson, Arizona. So for me to come

down for the next two-and-a-half, almost three months, and

leave my child with absolutely nobody is not feasible for me.

THE COURT: And how old is your child?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: My child is going to be 16 in a

week.

THE COURT: And I think I -- because you sent in after

you finished the questionnaire, and I think I had a question

about that, because in your questionnaire you were not single.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct, yes. No. I'm -- I'm

actually in the middle of a separation so --

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: -- within the last three weeks to

a month that's occurred as well.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

THE COURT: Juror 48.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hello. I am Juror Number 48.

What changed since the questionnaire, when I brought it up to

my boss that I had jury duty, he did let me know that it is ten

paid days. After that I have to try to figure out how to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 121 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

121

remain financial stability.

I am at an at-will position. I'm a manager for AT&T.

And we are salaried, so I'm not, like, under any union contract

or anything like that. I could be let go at any time so.

THE COURT: All right. Two questions with that.

One -- well, maybe three. How long have you worked there?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I have been at AT&T since 2017.

THE COURT: Okay. And based on how long you've worked

there, do you have a real concern that if you served as a

juror, you would be penalized?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do.

THE COURT: And after the ten paid days, is it a

financial hardship for you to serve as a juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It is. My job actually moved me

here in 2019, so all of my family is in Chicago. I have no

family in Arizona, just me and my boys.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror 49.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good afternoon. Recently we just

lost a few employees in our department so we have to take on a

bit more responsibility. It would be unclear whether or not I

would be able to do the entire 10 to 12 weeks if that did

happen. And if it's something more than two weeks, it's

unclear whether or not -- whether the policy would be able to

take care of anymore payment after that.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 122 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

122

THE COURT: Whore do you work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Banner Health.

THE COURT: Banner Health?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

THE COURT: And what do you do there?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm a research analyst. We deal

with compliance for clinical trials.

THE COURT: And other than the, I guess, strain it

puts on your department, based on your description, you're not

clear on their policy regarding jury duty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: As far as the exact days, no, so

I'd have to go and find out how many days they'd be willing to

cover.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

THE COURT: Juror 50.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 50. Since the

questionnaire, I asked my employer, and my employer says that

we have a difficulty for hire the engineers for my department.

My department is responsible to develop new technology to

launch the products. And I have three projects that in my

hands now that responsible to finish the project by the end of

this year.

THE COURT: I'm sorry. Can you repeat that last part?

You're responsible for three projects.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 123 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

123

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Three projects, three new

technology that is supposed to help develop before the end of

this year to meet the company revenue goal, otherwise there

will be a big impact with the company.

THE COURT: Who do you work for?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Footprint.

THE COURT: Footprint?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Footprint.

THE COURT: Okay. And so is your concern that it

would be a hardship on your employer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

THE COURT: Juror 51.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hi, Juror Number 51. I recently

got my daughter tested for a psyche eval, and we have a meeting

tomorrow to follow up on the report that they did. And she's

going to need testing and additional meetings to go through to

get resources to help her.

And then I have two younger daughters that have --

that go to in-home daycare, and I know of at least two days

that she's going to be closed, so I'm going to have to be home

to take care of them.

THE COURT: Okay. And do you have any other adults

living with you?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 124 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

124

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: My husband does, but he is the

only person in his position at work, so he's not able to take

time off.

THE COURT: And how old is your daughter, the one that

you're looking at treatment for?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Nine.

THE COURT: Nine?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

THE COURT: Okay. And you said the other two are

younger?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

THE COURT: Juror 52.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hi, Juror 52. Can you hear me?

THE COURT: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. So I have a real problem

with highway driving. I actually have a real fear of it. And

I thought -- because normally I don't do so much -- come this

far. And doing that this morning caused me a lot of anxiety

and I kind of had a small panic attack over it. And so I don't

know how I'm going to do that every day, because it really does

give me a lot of fear. And it's a long ways to drive.

So that's really my only thing right now is that it's

going to be difficult going -- coming here and back every day,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 125 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

125

all the way down to Riggs and 10, because the 10 is just -- you

know, there is a lot of construction and things going on right

now. So it just gave me a lot of anxiety this morning. I

thought I would be fine with it, and then, you know, by the

time I got to my exit, I was a complete disaster.

THE COURT: That's what I was going to ask you. So

you live around Riggs and the I-10. That's, like, in Chandler?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. Sun Lakes is actually where

I'm at.

THE COURT: And how long did it take you to get here?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'd say probably about 45,

50 minutes.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Maybe closer to an hour, I'm not

exactly sure, but somewhere around an hour.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror 56.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 56. I am on the board of a

small manufacturing company in California. I presumed I could

-- I should add, we're in a very contentious situation with our

largest shareholder. I presumed that I could simply give my

proxy to another board member that's of like mind and solve the

problem that way, but company counsel informs me that because

we're a California corporation, that is prohibited for me to

do. It's actually a breach of my fiduciary responsibility to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 126 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

126

do so. It's going to make it very difficult for me.

THE COURT: And I think I remember reading about this

a little bit. When is the vote?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: There'll be a whole series of

board meetings. They'll be at kind of odd intervals because

we're trying to arrange an emergency financing. There is also

the possibility of an acquisition underway, so it's difficult

to predict the exact time it will happen.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

Juror 59.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 59. And I have a heart

condition. And I was -- I had a-fib and I was -- we were

controlling it with medication. And on Friday my cardiologist

called and said -- I also have a pacemaker that monitors my

heart -- that they had gotten an alert that I had gone back

into a-fib, and he wants to do an ablation as soon as possible.

And, you know, if the three months is realistic, it would be

putting it off until next year maybe.

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Another thing that I'd like to

clarify. On my questionnaire where it asked if I had children,

I believe I put no, because it was right after a question if

there was anybody at home that needed your care, so I was

thinking the question was in regard to children at home. I

actually have four children, three daughters and a son, that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 127 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

127

are on their own. So I just wanted to clarify that for you.

THE COURT: Okay. I think you're moving the

microphone a little bit far away, but I did hear you have four

kids.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, three girls and a boy.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you.

Juror 60.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 60. Is that coming through?

Juror 60. Luckily I am not that bashful, but I have

ulcerative colitis, so if I could be accommodated when it gets

bad -- it doesn't always happen -- I'm fine.

My second problem is January of 2020 I had a stroke.

Physically I look good, but sometimes I don't retain and

remember stuff. How much that is, I don't know, I just keep

getting told. And I haven't had it with that yet, but that's

where I can go from there.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. If at any time during

this process you need a break, raise your hand and let me know.

Okay. Let's see, Juror 61.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Judge, so there are two things.

First and foremost, on the questionnaire it said if I had any

upcoming travel that had been planned, purchased, et cetera.

At the time I had been planning but had not yet purchased

tickets and whatnot for a trip to New York from November 9th

through the 14th. I had scheduled that per using the calendar

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 128 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

128

that was given to me with the questionnaire. My concern with

that would be if the dates were to change, then that could

cause issues with those travels.

And the second thing is I suffer from anxiety,

depression, PTSD, and whatnot, and I see a therapist biweekly

for that. And my therapist and I have agreed that it would not

be in the best -- in my best interest for my mental health to

be without her services for that long of a period of time. As

it is, like right now, I'm already, like, kind of having

anxiety, as you can hear.

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I thought that I would -- that I

was strong enough to be able to -- to deal with it, but I'm not

sure at this point if I am so.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you for telling

us.

Is there anyone else that I missed?

(No response.)

THE COURT: Okay. I don't see any hands.

Okay. So that is the only general question I had for

the whole panel. Counsel may have some follow-up questions

based on your questionnaires.

So, Ms. Perlmeter.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you. All right. Good

afternoon, everyone. Thank you for being here this afternoon.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 129 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

129

My name is Peggy Perlmeter. I am one of the assistant

United States attorneys that will be working on this case if

you are chosen to be with us over the next few months.

We have a few follow-up questions for some of you this

afternoon, as the judge said, based on some of the answers you

gave in the questionnaire.

Juror Number 47, in your questionnaire there was a

series of questions about general principles of law, such as a

criminal defendant has a right to remain silent and does not

need to testify on his behalf. Do you remember seeing those

questions?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, ma'am. Juror Number 47.

Yes, ma'am.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. One of them was also that, in a

criminal trial, the burden of proof resides on the government.

It's up to the government to present evidence to prove the

charges for which it has alleged.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MS. PERLMETER: A defendant need not prove innocence,

need not produce any evidence.

In your questionnaire, I think you checked the box, or

marked that you think a defendant should prove that he's

innocent, so I just wanted to make sure that I had the right

answer from you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not so much the defendant, but the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 130 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

130

defendant's lawyers. And, you know, I think beyond a

reasonable doubt, you know, they have to prove, you know,

either way, you know, the defendant, you know, as far as his

lawyers and his counsel, have to provide some kind of evidence,

I would think, as to why they are not guilty, not necessarily

the defendant themselves.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. So if you're chosen to sit as a

member of this jury, you will be instructed that the burden of

proof lies on the government, and that in a criminal case it's

a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. So that's the

burden on the government. And you'll be told that a defendant

need not prove innocence.

Will you be able to follow that concept of law if

you're chosen as a member?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, ma'am.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you.

Also, if you're chosen, or selected to be a member of

this jury, you will hear some evidence about sexually explicit

topics. People will be discussing private sexual matters, such

as, you know, sexual intercourse, oral sexual conduct. You

will hear words in testimony like penis, vagina, breasts, so

they will be present in the courtroom throughout trial. And

then one of your duties as jurors is at the end of the case to

go back in the jury room and deliberate on the evidence. So if

you are a juror in this case, you will have to be able to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 131 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

131

deliberate on the evidence, which will also require that you be

able to discuss these topics with each other.

So, Juror -- and I know it is a topic that is not one

that is -- that you normally discuss with strangers, but for

the purposes of this court case, I'd like to talk about how

some of you may feel about potentially having to be -- having

-- potentially being required to do that.

So let's start with Juror Number 52. Okay. So you

had indicated that you don't like this at all in your

questionnaire. So my question to you this afternoon is if you

are selected, I understand you don't like it, you would prefer

to do other things, perhaps, but would you be able to

deliberate?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think so, yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you very much, ma'am.

Also in the questionnaire there were questions about

having to decide whether or not a witness is credible. Who do

you want to believe? Do you want to believe their testimony in

part, in all, or perhaps not at all?

One of the questions was would you find someone to

be -- well, first of all, you'll be instructed that you should

treat witnesses on an even slate, take their testimony as it

is, and then consider it, you know, in whole and in

consideration with all the other evidence at trial when you go

and decide what you want to believe and what you don't want to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 132 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

132

believe.

So there was a question about whether or not a person

with a substance abuse problem, or a person who suffers from

issues like homelessness, does that substance abuse problem or

does that homelessness make them less credible or more credible

as a witness simply because they happen to have that particular

status.

So, Juror Number 50, sir, you had indicated in your

questionnaire that drug users tend to be less credible. If you

hear -- if you're selected and you're sitting listening to the

evidence and you hear some evidence or some testimony about

drug usage, would you automatically find that witness to be

less credible or more credible simply because they have used

drugs in the past?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe they would be less

credible.

MS. PERLMETER: Why do you think that, sir?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Because, well, based on the movies

or news, people with drug abuse or drug influence, they tend to

-- their integrity has been compromised, so their credibility

has been -- will be reduced.

MS. PERLMETER: What if the drug use or the substance

abuse or the alcohol abuse was something that happened in the

past and the witness was discussing it as a part of their past,

would that have an impact on your opinion?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 133 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

133

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It will be.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you think you would be able to

fairly and impartially evaluate a witness that has had

substance abuse in their history --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: -- or would you automatically place

them below the credibility line simply because they have that

issue in their history?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, if -- if the -- the people

who I'm talking with have evidence that they've rebuilt their

credibility, then I might reconsider their status.

MS. PERLMETER: I'm sorry, could you repeat yourself?

I didn't quite hear you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If they tell me what have been

done, so in the past that rebuilt their drug abuse or drug

problems, then I might be -- change my opinions.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. All right. Thank you.

Juror Number 60.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 60.

MS. PERLMETER: Hi, Juror Number 60. Thank you. My

question for you is similar to the other juror. Are you able

to deliberate knowing that this case will involve evidence of a

sexual nature?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I believe so.

MS. PERLMETER: I'm sorry. I didn't hear you.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 134 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

134

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Of a sexual nature, yes, I believe

so.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you.

Juror Number 51.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 51.

MS. PERLMETER: Hi, Juror Number 51. I had a few

questions for you. The first one is similar to what I just

asked Juror Number 50 about the drug use.

I think you had indicated that drug addicts tend to

lie, so my question to you is the same as I posed to Juror

Number 50. Would you be -- fairly and impartially be able to

-- or would you be able to evaluate a witness's testimony on a

clean slate and consider all of it, knowing that they have

substance abuse history in the past, or would having that

history automatically place them either higher or lower on the

credibility scale?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I think if the drug abuse is

in the past and they're sober now, that they could be just as

credible as anybody else.

MS. PERLMETER: And why do you think that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Because they've already taken the

steps to get over that problem and get their lives back on

track, basically.

MS. PERLMETER: All right. Thank you.

And then my other question for you was that I think

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 135 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

135

you indicated you had a couple of people in your life that had

been involved in or had been arrested or convicted of a sex

crime.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. So I think one person was your

stepsister's stepfather.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. And then the second person was?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: A friend.

MS. PERLMETER: A friend's husband?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Were those -- well, let's go

step-by-step.

With your stepsister's stepfather, was that -- where

in -- where in the country was it, about what time frame did it

happen?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It was in Arizona and it was, I

believe it was about 20 years ago, but it had been happening

since she was a little girl.

MS. PERLMETER: So was your stepsister the victim?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Did you -- did she share much

of her experiences with you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, because she had to keep them

secret at the time.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 136 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

136

MS. PERLMETER: Have you since -- has she since shared

them with you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. PERLMETER: No. Okay. So where -- where do you

gather your information from?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I was around when he was caught

and during the trial.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Do you feel like your

stepsister's stepfather -- do you have any opinion or do you

have any knowledge whatsoever about whether he was treated

fairly or unfairly as he progressed through the criminal

justice process?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe he was treated fairly

and got what he deserved.

MS. PERLMETER: And what do you base that opinion on?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just the way he treated her.

There was pictures involved. As I said, it was a secret. She

was -- feared for her life. She had to do whatever he said,

basically, until he was caught.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Would that -- would your

knowledge of that event have any impact on your ability to sit

in this trial, to receive all the evidence, and to remain fair

and impartial?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I don't think so, because

every situation has its own differences.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 137 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

137

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Now, how about the other one,

your friend's husband? Can you similarly tell me where that

happened and the time frame.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It was in Arizona again, and it

was within the last, like, five years.

MS. PERLMETER: And within the last?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Five years.

MS. PERLMETER: Five years. Did that also resolve in

a trial or --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It did resolve in a trial. And

that trial I just know of from hearsay, which from what I

heard, it was unfairly done.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Is that your opinion after

hearing the information or is that the opinion expressed to you

by your friend or other people?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Expressed to me by friends and

other people.

MS. PERLMETER: Unfair on behalf -- so was your friend

the victim?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. My friend's husband was the

defendant.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. But your friend was not

involved, was not a victim or --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. What was the -- do you know

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 138 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

138

what the charge was?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe it was molestation of a

minor and I don't remember what else.

MS. PERLMETER: As far as you're aware, was the minor

a child that your friend and her husband had in common?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. She was over at their house

for a party.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. So is there anything about that

event that would lead you to be unable to sit and give this

case a fair review?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, because, once again, I think

each scenario has its own differences.

MS. PERLMETER: All right. Thank you so much.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

MS. PERLMETER: Juror Number 45.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 45.

MS. PERLMETER: Hello. Repeat question here. Also in

your questionnaire you had indicated that you may have some

difficulty deliberating, or that you weren't sure. Now that

you have sat in the courtroom for a little bit and heard some

of the information and some of the responses, knowing that it's

going to be a sexually related trial with some kind of sex

information coming through, do you think you'll be able to

deliberate?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hard question to answer. It

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 139 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

139

really is.

MS. PERLMETER: I'm sorry. I'm having trouble

hearing.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: In my questionnaire it also said

that we had done work for the county sheriff's department back

in South Carolina in reviewing the case files, and those case

files, attached case files, obviously. And there were child

pornography files, people, you know, I'm sure you've seen all

the case files with photos, and it's really hard, really hard.

If that answers your question.

MS. PERLMETER: Yes, it does. I understand. And I

agree that it's hard, but is it something that you will be able

to do? It may be something that you don't want to do, and

there are some things that people just can't do, but if you

look at yourself and you think about it, is it something that

you would be able to do?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'd have to say no.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you.

Juror Number 44.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 44.

MS. PERLMETER: Hello, Juror Number 44. I think you

indicated in your questionnaire that your son and your

ex-husband have been convicted of crimes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Can you tell me what they are, when

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 140 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

140

they happened, and where they happened.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Husband was 2006 for theft,

theft of means of transportation, and he spent three years in

prison, from 2006 to 2009.

Son --

MS. PERLMETER: Was that here in Arizona?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: In Arizona, yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Son was also in Arizona. His --

he had various charges. I think they were some drug charges,

some fraud, maybe like use of credit cards. And he spent 2006

until 2010 in prison in Arizona.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. So they were separate offenses?

They did not commit a crime together?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you. Is there -- do you

have an opinion on whether your son and your ex-husband were

treated fairly or unfairly as they moved through the criminal

justice process?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe they were treated

fairly.

MS. PERLMETER: Is there anything about your son and

your ex-husband's experience that would make you unable to sit

as a fair and impartial juror in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 141 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

141

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thanks. And then I think you

had also mentioned in your questionnaire that it might be

difficult to deliberate on some of the topics that are

anticipated to be presented.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, the questions basically

were -- you know, I put some of them are a sin, but I wouldn't

really be judging as a sin. I would be deliberating on, you

know, testimony, so I -- I would be able to do that.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. And -- thank you. Thank you.

Can I have one moment, Your Honor?

So next is Juror Number 43. Hi, Juror Number 43. So,

Juror Number 43, I received the -- I didn't receive answers on

all the questions in the questionnaire for you. Did you fill

it out in part, because I didn't get responses to the back end

of it, so I thought I would just ask you a few of those now.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I -- I filled all the questions.

MS. PERLMETER: You did answer all the questions?

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

THE COURT: Can you just start your answer over. We

couldn't hear you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I had problems submitting the

answers. I think the system stopped in the middle. I

resubmitted and they went through the whole thing.

MS. PERLMETER: So you had some difficulty submitting,

and then you tried again and it did go through?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 142 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

142

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: My version has a few holes, so do you

mind if I ask you the questions?

So, sir, do you have strong feelings about pornography

on the internet or have you or someone close to you ever been

affected by pornography?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, very strong feelings.

MS. PERLMETER: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, very strong feelings.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. What are your feelings?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The environment that sometimes

take advantage of people that don't have -- they are in need

and they need support, and they take advantage of that,

especially children, I mean, teenagers. That was the only

problem.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you have strong feelings about

escort services or people working in the legal adult

entertainment industry, or have you or someone close to you

ever been affected by this type of service?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not -- not really, no. No strong

feelings. But as long as it's legal, it's fine, especially if

they are adults and they -- they agreed to work in that

environment.

MS. PERLMETER: Does it bother you that adult escort

services are legal and/or that people working in this industry

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 143 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

143

can legally advertise their services?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. No.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you have strong feelings about

prostitution or have you or someone close to you ever been

affected by prostitution or the purchase or sale of a sex act

for money, also referred to as commercial sex?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, no. No knowledge and no -- no

close ties, no.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you think law enforcement, either

local, state, or federal, and the government, either local,

state, or federal, should expend resources investigating and

prosecuting individuals who are purchasers of commercial sex?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If they're violating the law,

absolutely.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you think that prostitution should

be legalized?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. For the same reasons I

mentioned, that the environment has propensity to take

advantage of certain people.

MS. PERLMETER: Have you, any members of your family

or close friends, ever engaged in, been accused of engaging in,

or been convicted of prostitution, soliciting prostitution, or

any act related to the purchase of commercial sex?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. PERLMETER: If you're selected to sit as a member

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 144 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

144

of this jury, would -- you're going to hear testimony about

prostitution. Would that -- would you be able to receive that

information and fairly and impartially go through it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MS. PERLMETER: Prior to coming to court today, or

prior to filling out this questionnaire at home, had you ever

heard of the website www.Backpage.com?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Barely. There was some

connections. I use Craigslist so was some connections to that,

but that's the only thing I know about it.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Do you know if any members of

your family or close friends, have they ever used the website?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not aware.

MS. PERLMETER: How about other online classified

websites like Craigslist, eBay, Google, or other online

classified websites?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The only one I'm familiar with is

Craigslist.

MS. PERLMETER: In general, what are your feelings

about the laws and regulations affecting the internet,

including the publishing of content posted by users of the

websites?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's a very difficult question

because the environment we are with the social media and all

that, and with no -- lack of regulations, it's very difficult.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 145 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

145

But I still believe if you are the owner of one of those

websites, I think you need to do your best to protect society.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. What are your feelings about

whether websites such as You Tube, Facebook, Twitter, Google,

and Instagram, among others, should be responsible for the

content posted by users of the website?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Again, the same answer before.

The -- I think they should try to do the best to regulate

themselves, but eventually I think they need to be accountable

for some of the impact they do to society.

MS. PERLMETER: Some questions about the different

victims and witnesses that you may hear from if you're selected

to sit as a juror, and whether or not -- and how you may or may

not evaluate their credibility as a witness.

Would you find a witness's testimony to be more or

less credible simply based on race, nationality, ethnicity, or

religion?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think it's the same for

everyone.

MS. PERLMETER: The same for everyone?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Some of the witnesses in this

case are ethnic minorities and of a low socioeconomic status.

Would you find a witness's testimony to be more or less

credible simply based on their socioeconomic status?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 146 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

146

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. PERLMETER: Some of the witnesses in this case

have experienced challenges with substance abuse and

homelessness. Would you find a witness's testimony to be less

credible simply based on their experiences with substance

abuse, either drug or alcohol abuse, and homelessness?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Again, if it is in the past,

that's a different situation and the impact should be as a

normal person.

MS. PERLMETER: Do you have any religious, moral,

spiritual, or philosophical beliefs that would make it

difficult for you to sit in judgment of another person?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you very much, Juror Number 43.

That was a lot.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you. I don't have anymore

questions, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: My name is Paul Cambria and I have the

pleasure of representing Michael Lacey. And I'm going to ask

you a few questions. And I appreciate your candid answers.

As you probably heard, if you were listening

downstairs, you know, there are no right or wrong answers,

they're just your answers. And you're not going to be graded

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 147 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

147

on this or anything like that, we're just going to go through

and try to get some information.

Juror Number 43, you indicated --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 43.

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes, sir. You indicated that you felt

that there should be some responsibility on the part of a

website or something like Craigslist. Is that true?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And would you mind speaking right into

the --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you. She has to take it down over

there.

And you said that you used Craigslist at certain

times; is that correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: When you were using Craigslist, did you

notice any adult advertisements on Craigslist?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I was very specific. I was in and

out. I was just selling something, so I put it in, do the

transaction and remove. So, again, didn't spend time searching

the -- the website.

MR. CAMBRIA: You didn't just kind of come across

something as you were searching?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 148 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

148

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. If -- and so you feel that

there should be -- if a third-party places something on

Craigslist and what they place on the list is all their words,

words they compose, and if for some reason it turns out that

their conduct is not appropriate, you feel the website should

have some responsibility for that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Like I said before, it's a very

difficult question. And with no regulation and with no laws to

try to enforce the content of the website to be managed, it's

very difficult to do that work. But I still believe that the

owner of the website needs to do the best they can to clean up.

And it's obvious sometimes when just scan things, you can see

something is not right.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You need to take action.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. So you feel they should do

the best they can.

Is it fair to say that people use telephones to commit

crimes?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And you feel that the phone

company should in some way be responsible if somebody uses

their phone to commit a crime?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think the comparison is not

right.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 149 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

149

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think the comparison is

correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: One is private and another one is

open to everybody.

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, you say the phone company is --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, no. I'm saying, I'm making

the phone call and I'm committing a crime, so I am -- I am the

only one that knows, and the other person, but nobody is -- you

know that.

MR. CAMBRIA: I see. Okay. And, however, if the

phone company finds out that somebody committed a crime using

their phone, should they shut their phone service off?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: They need to follow the law. If

the law says they need to do that, they should do that.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. So you think they should shut

their phone off so they couldn't do it again?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Is that what the -- you're the

expert. I'm not an expert on the law. Is that what the law

says?

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, I think that's another, as you

pose it, a difficult, complicated question.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MR. CAMBRIA: And it's just a matter of me asking if

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 150 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

150

you think that somebody has a service that's used by millions

and millions of people, and generally people know that people

use the mail and phones and things like that to commit crimes,

how much responsibility should be on the platform, in other

words, the phone company or the U.S. mail or FedEx or one of

those? That was the question.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's a difficult question.

MR. CAMBRIA: It's an open question.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, it is. But I think at the

end, society has to be protected in one way or another.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Thank you, sir.

Juror Number 50.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 50.

MR. CAMBRIA: Get you a microphone.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 50.

MR. CAMBRIA: You -- I'm reading your questionnaire

here. You indicated -- there were talked -- we had a COVID

question. Obviously, all of us are here, Her Honor has allowed

me to take this off while I talk, otherwise we all have to wear

these things, be distanced and so on.

Now, you indicated you have a daughter who,

apparently, works, what, in an emergency room?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. She's a scribe.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And you put this down. Is

there some feeling that maybe she would be exposed and you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 151 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

151

might get exposed?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: Is that a fear on your part that would

cause you to think maybe you shouldn't be here?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't have fear for that. I

just want to put an announcement. That's it.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. So you're just putting us on

notice actually?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. You said -- they were asking

you questions about people taking drugs and whether or not you

would believe them or not believe them because they had a drug

history. Would it be relevant to know if during the event

they're talking about they were in some way influenced by

drugs?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, that could change the

answer, yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: That would be relevant, wouldn't it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: And it would be okay, as far as you're

concerned, to consider that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Let's see. You indicated that you

got -- your job situation is such that you have some three

projects that you're responsible for?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 152 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

152

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: Will they be compromised in some way if

you're here for the next three or four months?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: They'll be compromised for sure.

MR. CAMBRIA: And are these -- will that have an

affect, in other words, will you be thinking about them or

trying to deal with them maybe late at night or something like

that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That will be the plan, yeah. I

will have to stay late night and try to finish the job.

MR. CAMBRIA: Do you think there is any chance that,

as a result of that, we may lose some of your attention or

maybe you'll be up late and not be rested, or any of those

things?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Potentially.

MR. CAMBRIA: That's a potential?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. All right. Thank you, sir.

I appreciate it.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

MR. CAMBRIA: Number 51.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 51.

MR. CAMBRIA: I think they asked you the same

questions about drugs.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 153 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

153

MR. CAMBRIA: And if they were taking drugs at a time

they're talking about something, that would be relevant,

wouldn't it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It would be relevant.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. So you indicate you have a

connection to law enforcement. What's that connection?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Did I say that I have a connection

to law enforcement? I don't have a connection to law

enforcement right now.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. I just had -- the answer was yes,

self. Explain. I worked as a contract for USCIS.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, yes. That is correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: Do you have any other connection to law

enforcement?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, that would be it.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Have you used online classified

websites like Craigslist?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Some of those? And fair to say that

there are literally millions of ads on these?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And during the course of

skimming through any of that on Craigslist, have you seen

anything that appeared to be adult in some nature?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 154 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

154

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And you, obviously,

exercised your right to skip over it and go on to something

else?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Did you feel at that time

that you had to report it to somebody or something like that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. CAMBRIA: No. Okay. Do you have any problem with

the proposition that the -- this is America, and we have a

judicial system and we all love it and we're proud of it, true?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: (No audible response.)

MR. CAMBRIA: And the system says that if a citizen is

accused of a crime by the government, the government has to

prove that crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The ordinary

citizen doesn't have to go against the government and prove

their innocence. Is that fair to say?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: And you're okay with that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And if they -- and the law also says

that -- it doesn't mean it happens in every case -- but the law

says that a citizen can simply remain silent, not testify,

nobody can draw any negative inference from that. Are you okay

with that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 155 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

155

MR. CAMBRIA: And if, for example, the government may

go through, call 100 witnesses, and at the end the jurors say,

you know what, they didn't prove the crime that was charged and

-- would you have any problem with that situation?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. CAMBRIA: So you don't have an uneasy feeling if

somebody doesn't get up and testify, if their lawyers attempt

to succeed by questioning witnesses and so on and presenting

witnesses?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

MR. CAMBRIA: Juror 52.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 52.

MR. CAMBRIA: Good afternoon.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good afternoon.

MR. CAMBRIA: And you answered the question which I

had just asked her, about do you feel that a defendant should

prove their innocence, and you said you agreed with that. Is

that fair to say?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I -- I feel differently about that

now.

MR. CAMBRIA: And what changed your mind?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Rethinking and listening to some

of the other earlier opinions on that, and realizing that that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 156 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

156

doesn't really make sense, because they need to be proven

guilty and not prove themselves innocent, because the burden is

on proving their guilt.

MR. CAMBRIA: Our system is set up so that, you know,

the government, big powerful thing, that the citizen has the

right to protections of the law --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. Right.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- that we all enjoy.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And that makes sense to me.

MR. CAMBRIA: So even though you answered this

question, defendants should prove innocence, agree, now you're

saying that you would not hold that -- should any of these

people decide not to testify, you would not hold that against

them?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. I believe I

misunderstood the question when I read it --

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe I misunderstood the

question reading it the first time.

MR. CAMBRIA: That's fine. See, that's why we ask

questions, so we get the truth. Thank you so much.

Now, you also indicated that the government should

prosecute platforms to root out and rescue trafficked

individuals.

Do you recall that?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 157 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

157

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Nobody here is charged with trafficking.

Did you think they were?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I didn't really know what to

expect.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And so, obviously, you have

a strong feeling if somebody is forced, in other words,

trafficked, they're forced by somebody to do something?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: Here -- here we have a bunch of people

who placed ads on this platform. That's what happened. Okay.

The other thing is that you said that -- you were

asked about whether you would be able to discuss sexual topics.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MR. CAMBRIA: There'll be a number of ads here that

people will have to review, some deal with sexual topics.

Would that be an issue with you? Could you do that or not?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I could, yeah, I -- I think that I

could do that. Is it something that I would want to do, of

course not. It's not in my nature to sit and talk about that

type of thing, which it wouldn't be for most people here. But,

yeah, I definitely could. I think I would probably end up,

like, do more listening than --

MR. CAMBRIA: What we're interested in, at least I am,

is if you could have open and frank conversations with your

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 158 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

158

fellow jurors about ads and --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: About ads?

MR. CAMBRIA: About ads that may include some form of

sexual topic. Could you do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure. Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: See, because if there is any reluctance

to do that, you don't participate in that, we've lost a juror,

because we need all 12 jurors to be part of this.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MR. CAMBRIA: You think you could do it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe so, yes. I would have

to be in the situation.

MR. CAMBRIA: Now, there was another answer you gave

here: Do you think you could determine if a person is credible

or not? Is there some problem with that? Do you think that

people could fool you or mislead you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: What is the question?

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: What is the question?

MR. CAMBRIA: Yeah. The question in this was do you

believe you could determine whether a person is credible? And

you said, no. I don't know how I would assume to know this.

There isn't any magic formula. I'm just asking you do you

think you could do that sort of thing?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: With enough information, I think I

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 159 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

159

probably could, to the best of my knowledge, to -- to determine

if I thought that they were credible or not. Whether they are

or not, I can't say that I would know that for sure.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Very good. Fair enough. That's

all I have. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

MR. CAMBRIA: Number 53.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 53.

MR. CAMBRIA: Good afternoon, sir. Get by the

microphone here.

You indicated earlier you had a medical condition

that, obviously, was an issue for you. Do you think that will

prevent you from being an attentive juror, or will there be a

need for a number of interruptions?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not aware of a medical

condition.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not aware of a medical

condition.

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm reading this.

You're 53. Mixed my numbers up. I'm sorry. I need Juror --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 60.

MR. CAMBRIA: 60. All right. Well, they've got you

here as 53. Sorry, sir.

You heard my question?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 160 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

160

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I did.

MR. CAMBRIA: And what's the answer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 60.

MR. CAMBRIA: 60, yes, sir.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Like I said earlier to the judge,

I had a stroke, a brain bleed, actually. And I feel pretty

good, but I don't always remember everything in great content,

at least I'm getting told that a lot by my wife. But I appear

to be able to answer questions at the moment. Now, how long I

can retain things or -- I'm not going to tell you, because I've

never gone in and had the doctor do this yet.

MR. CAMBRIA: Just a little closer. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: There we go. So where did I stop?

So I have not been evaluated by anybody credible, but

I -- some of these questions you're asking about the form I

actually filled out, some of them I don't quite remember now,

but I'm sure I did that.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry. I didn't catch the last

part.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm sure I did that. I mean, some

of those questions I don't remember. You're asking questions

around what's coming off the sheets.

MR. CAMBRIA: Uh-huh.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, I understand what they

are, but I'm not remembering the answers that I gave to them.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 161 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

161

MR. CAMBRIA: That's okay. You can answer just the

questions I ask you here today. How's that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. Thank you.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. So -- so do you feel that

your medical situation would interrupt your ability to give us

your undivided attention, would require a number of

interruptions, anything like that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm feeling unsure. How is that?

I mean, I can't tell you exactly. I'm just feeling unsure that

I could keep all of it in a reasonable line of thought long

enough. I mean, I -- I don't know how to answer that question.

I think I can do it, but I'm not sure I can do it.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Let me try to put it this way.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I'm trying to answer it

honestly.

MR. CAMBRIA: You're unsure as to whether or not you

could give us your undivided attention in order to be a juror.

Is that fair?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think I can do that.

MR. CAMBRIA: You think you can do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think I can do that.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Any reluctance at all on

that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: On a day-by-day basis for the long

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 162 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

162

term, I can't -- I can't answer that one fairly. On a

day-to-day, what we're doing here, I can -- I can do this. I'm

not sure that in 10 weeks or 12 weeks, or whatever you guys are

talking about, I can keep all of that together without having a

way to -- I'm assuming that we can't write things down and we

can't control that stuff. I'm not sure I can do that. But I'm

also telling you I have not been evaluated, you just have to

take me by my word on how I'm feeling about that.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Well, that's an honest answer.

We appreciate that. Thank you, sir.

Number 54.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 54.

MR. CAMBRIA: Good afternoon.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good afternoon.

MR. CAMBRIA: You heard my questions up here about --

and I notice you answered the same way about credibility and

drug abuse. Can you explain to us -- well, no, strike that.

My question is if it -- if there is an event that

someone is talking about and they may have been influenced by

drugs during that event, would you agree that would be a

relevant issue for you to consider?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And, indeed, it may very

well be that -- that you may disregard what that person has to

say because of their situation, drug situation?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 163 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

163

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Possibly, if they're under the

influence.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. You also answered a question you

were asked about escorts, and you said you're bothered that

escorts are legal. And what's the issue with that? The

question is -- it's number 65 -- question says, bothered that

escorts are legal? Yes. Explain. And you said, I'm opposed

to any advertisement of these services that children or

teenagers may see. Is that -- is that the limit? In other

words, if adults see it, it's okay?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If it's a legal escort --

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: -- situation, yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: So you appreciate the fact that there

are legal licensed escorts?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. So that -- so that was the

concern there.

Now, there is another question here about pornography.

And pornography can be any -- you know, any explicit picture,

whatever, a loose definition of it, if you will. You said I'm

opposed to any form of it on the internet or in a publication.

Will that -- because there will be some pictures here

that may have some semi-nudity or what have you -- will that

prejudice your opinion in the sense of being fair and impartial

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 164 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

164

just because of that, of something you feel strongly about?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I was on a jury in 2017 for

Maricopa County.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry. Go ahead.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And it was a sex abuse against

minors, and that same incident came up, and I was able to

fairly judge that.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. There are no charges here about

minors. Do you understand that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: But you indicated you were bothered by

the fact that escorts are legal. What's that -- what are you

bothered by that? If they're legal, they're licensed by the

city and things like that --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Honestly, I don't remember that

with the legal. I -- unless I was thinking it said illegal.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Let's see here.

What about this idea that a -- there is no burden of

proof on the defense, that the prosecution has to establish

their charges? Do you believe that? You could apply that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And with regard to the pornography kind

of thing, could you discuss those sort of subjects with other

jurors?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 165 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

165

MR. CAMBRIA: You could. Okay.

Have you looked at websites like Facebook, or Twitter,

Craigslist, things like that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And have you noticed on any of those

websites adult subjects, if you will? Let's take Facebook, for

example.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, not on Facebook.

MR. CAMBRIA: Not on Facebook. Okay. How about

Craigslist?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Craigslist. I've never looked at

it. When I was looking for something else on Craigslist, I

noticed that was listed.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. All right. Thank you.

55.

There is an initial COVID situation here. Is there

any -- do you have any issues about being exposed to a lot of

people for a long time?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I don't.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. And any issues as far as the

burden being on the government and --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- defense not have to prove innocence,

that kind of thing?

And because -- are you familiar with websites,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 166 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

166

Craigslist --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- Facebook, all that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And have you seen adult subjects on

those --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- in the past? Pardon?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Frequently?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not frequently, but yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And Facebook, for example?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Twitter.

MR. CAMBRIA: Twitter. Uh-huh. And was there any

indication in any of these ads that people were trying to meet

other people?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, not really.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Were there any other websites

that you reviewed where it appeared people were trying to meet

other people, maybe for sexual activity?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And like Tinder.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know what Tinder is.

MR. CAMBRIA: What website?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Something called Adam.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 167 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

167

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Adam, for Adam.

MR. CAMBRIA: Adam. Okay. And people were there,

apparently, trying to meet other people for sexual activity?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That was their goal.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. So would it be fair to say it's

not unusual to find this stuff on the internet?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's not unusual.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Can you -- if -- if a police

officer testified in this case, would you automatically give

the police officer more credibility because they're police

officers?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, not necessarily.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. And I ask that to anybody here, a

show of hands, anybody here feels that a police officer would

be entitled to greater credibility as a witness than someone

who is not a police officer? Anybody?

Yes, sir. I mean, would you stand, please. What's

your number?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 34.

MR. CAMBRIA: 34, yes, sir.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 34. You asked if I would

give them more credibility, and my answer is yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Just simply because they're police

officers?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 168 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

168

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, as a retired police officer,

I know what goes into that. It's a very big question in my

mind, or issue.

MR. CAMBRIA: So, basically, you're telling us because

you're a retired police officer and so on, that if a police

officer is a witness, they're going to start off a little bit

ahead of somebody who is not a police officer, as far as truth

goes?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, sir.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you.

Number 36.

Yes, sir. You indicated earlier that you had a

financial hardship if you were to be in this trial, something

about you couldn't live on 200 a week.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct. Correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. And are you the sole -- sole

supporter?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I am.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Thank you, sir. That's all

I have.

Number 52. I missed the part about I -- only because

I have these two little batteries behind my ears here, meaning

I wear hearing aids. I did not hear -- you said something

about driving was an issue with big trucks and things like

that. Is that what it was?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 169 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

169

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Highway driving.

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh, I see.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I have -- I'm fearful on the

highway. So I typically avoid highways, but I can't do that in

this situation, so I just -- I don't normally drive this far

along the highway. And so I was on the 10 for an hour this

morning and it -- yeah, I was very shook up by the time I got

to my exit.

And then I got into downtown and I didn't know where I

was going, and I had to pull over and ask a security guard and

I -- tears started falling. So I just -- I just lost control.

I -- I -- and I just thought if I have to do this every day,

that it's going to be really difficult for me, because I don't

want to have an accident. I don't want to cause an accident.

I was going 60 miles an hour with people just zooming all

around me, so it was very -- I was sweating and very nervous.

MR. CAMBRIA: So you're afraid for your safety?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Mine and anyone else's that is

around me.

MR. CAMBRIA: And also you indicated you became very

anxious. Would that -- would that anxiety, if you will, make

it difficult for you to concentrate on what's happening here?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I think that once I was here,

that I would be just fine. It's just a matter of getting here.

And even if I had somebody that I could carpool with or

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 170 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

170

something, then maybe that would work better for me.

MR. CAMBRIA: Until later in the afternoon when you

thought about having to drive home?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Then I have to drive home.

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, that's the thing. We have to be

careful that there is nothing that's going to interfere with

clearheaded thinking.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I'm actually -- I've been

kind of shook up today, and I know it's because I -- because of

the way the day started for me. Because I honestly thought

that I would be able to just -- you know, because I don't

typically drive that far along the highway. And I don't know

if things have changed lately, but everybody is going very,

very fast, in my opinion, so it was -- it's -- and there is a

lot of construction along the 10, and just everybody is just --

so, yeah, it was -- it was a little bit stressful for me.

MR. CAMBRIA: So it could get -- could get worse,

could get better?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You're welcome.

THE COURT: Before you continue, Mr. Cambria, we're

going to take a short break.

So if I could have everybody go out. If you need to

use the restroom, please do. And be back outside ready to come

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 171 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

171

in in 15 minutes.

And, counsel, I need you back in ten.

(Recess taken, 3:06 p.m. - 3:17 p.m.)

THE COURT: We're on the record but outside the

presence of the jury panel.

I wanted to release some people for hardship, so

that's why I took the break.

The first one is Juror 36 who is the one who said he

started his new job and claimed it will be a financial

hardship.

Is there any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Does anybody have an objection they want

to put on the record?

(No response.)

THE COURT: Okay. I don't hear any.

Juror 36 will be struck.

Juror 42 has the health -- her health is a problem.

And she had a letter sent in from her doctor, from her pain

specialist.

Is there any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: No, Your Honor.

MR. LINCENBERG: Is that the driving?

THE COURT: No. 42 is over here in the front row in

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 172 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

172

the corner. She said it at the very beginning, that her health

is declining and she is under treatment.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

THE COURT: Juror 47 is the one who lives in Payson,

is separated now since after she filled out her questionnaire,

and can't leave her 15-year-old alone.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Any objection?

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

THE COURT: Juror -- oh, Juror 48 also said since he

or she filled out the questionnaire, they talked to their

employer about jury pay, and it would be a financial hardship

because they only pay 10 days. She's also worried about

getting fired.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, no objection, but I do have

a concern with her saying that she fears being fired. That's

illegal if her company were to do that. And if we do let her

go, I would just ask the Court maybe to advise the jurors that

employers cannot fire people for serving on a jury. That --

that really wrangled me to hear her say that. That's all.

THE COURT: Yeah. Okay. Juror 48 will be struck.

Juror 50, so when I asked him about his employer, or

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 173 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

173

about changes, he indicated it was a hardship on his employer.

When Mr. Cambria followed up, he indicated that it would be

distracting and he would be working on off hours. So, at that

point, I think it rose to the level where Juror 50 should be

struck, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, I suppose.

MS. PERLMETER: We have no objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No objection, Your Honor.

MR. FEDER: We have no objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Juror 51 has the nine-year-old who

recently had a psyche eval and she has a bunch of followups.

Any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

MR. EISENBERG: Please note it for me too.

THE COURT: I'm sorry, what did you want noted,

Mr. Eisenberg?

MR. EISENBERG: That I have joined in all of the

objections that have been made so far by the defense, each one

of the last five, I think.

THE COURT: Well, there haven't been any objections.

MR. EISENBERG: Well, they say no objection, so I'm

joining in. It's a double negative. Double negative.

THE COURT: I just want to make sure I'm on the same

page, so that the record is clear. All right.

Juror 52, Mr. Lincenberg, is the next one, and she's

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 174 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

174

the one that has anxiety, which I do think clearly would impact

her ability to focus during trial.

Is there any objection from the government?

MS. PERLMETER: No.

MR. LINCENBERG: No, Your Honor.

MR. EISENBERG: No, Your Honor.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No.

MR. FEDER: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. And this is just so that it's

easier for Christine. Mr. Lincenberg seems to be responding

mostly, so I'm going to ask you to respond first, and then if

nobody says anything else, I'm assuming you're all joining, and

if you disagree, speak up. Okay.

MR. FEDER: Judge, did you pass by 49?

THE COURT: I did. Yeah.

Juror -- oh, no, no, no. Juror 59, he's the one with

the heart condition and needs an ablation procedure.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

THE COURT: Juror 59 will be struck.

Juror 60. He's the one that had a stroke last year,

believes it affects his memory.

Any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 175 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

175

THE COURT: Okay. Juror 60 will be struck.

Juror 61 has anxiety, depression, PTSD, and was having

trouble just answering that one question.

Is there any objection from the government?

MS. PERLMETER: I remember, but what number was she

again?

THE COURT: 61.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

THE COURT: Okay. Hearing no other objections, Juror

61 is struck.

So I skipped over 49 and 56. Mr. Feder, did you want

to ask me about 49? I did specifically.

MR. FEDER: No. 56, I mean, he has some concerns.

THE COURT: Well, and you can ask him about that. He

may get struck, I suppose, but I just didn't feel it rose to

the level of hardship. I don't know.

MR. FEDER: Okay.

THE COURT: Some of these are judgment calls.

Okay. So we'll bring the jury back in. I'm going to

excuse those jurors and then --

Mr. Cambria, were you done or no?

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes, I -- yes, I am, Your Honor.

I was wondering about cause on the ex-police officer.

He made it pretty clear that he would be giving the police a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 176 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

176

leg up, and that's usually a fairly obvious disqualification.

MR. LINCENBERG: And, Your Honor, his -- his

questionnaire says he, basically, at some point, I think, was a

sex crimes police officer and so forth.

THE COURT: All right. So I will take that as a

defense motion to strike Juror --

MR. LINCENBERG: 34.

THE COURT: No -- oh, 34. Sorry. I thought you said

44.

What's the government's position?

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, I would ask for the

opportunity to attempt to rehabilitate Juror Number 34, because

he was just given a, you know, would you tend to side with

people of the same group that you have associated with. If you

were instructed that -- he would be told you need to consider

everybody equally, then, I mean, that would be the law, and

he's expected to follow the law, then he could be

rehabilitated.

THE COURT: Okay. I'll allow the --

MR. EISENBERG: Your Honor, my impression of what he

was saying was stronger than that.

THE COURT: I'm not saying he won't be struck, but I'm

going to give them an opportunity to question him, as well as

anybody else that wants to, because we're a little early. I

wouldn't usually do for cause, Mr. Cambria just brought it up,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 177 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

177

so we'll finish up with that juror later.

Okay. So, Elaine, you can bring the jurors in.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, how long are we going

today?

THE COURT: I don't know. We're going to finish this

group.

MS. BERTRAND: Judge, when the jurors are excused, do

their chairs stay --

THE COURT: Empty.

MS. BERTRAND: -- open?

THE COURT: I'm not going to bring people in to fill

them at this point, yes.

(3:29 p.m., the prospective jurors entered the

courtroom.)

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Please be seated.

And we're back on the record with the jury present.

Before we finish with some questions, I'm going to

release some jurors. So if your number is called, you're

excused and you're free to go.

Juror 36, Juror 42, Juror 47, Juror 48, Juror 50,

Juror 51, Juror 52, Juror 59, Juror 60, and 61.

Mr. Cambria, did you have anymore questions?

MR. CAMBRIA: No, I did not. Thank you.

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Bernstein.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Your Honor, I believe Mr. Feder is

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 178 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

178

going to go first.

THE COURT: Oh, Mr. Feder.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you.

MR. FEDER: Good afternoon. My name is Bruce Feder.

I represent Scott Spear on the far end down there. I'm going

to ask a couple questions.

First off, can I talk to Juror 37?

Juror 37, you indicated that you are bothered by

escorts being legal. Do you remember that answer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. Correct.

MR. FEDER: Could you tell us a little bit about -- I

mean, your answer, if I have it right, you said, I don't

believe it's healthy for people to work in this field mentally

and sometimes physically. Can you --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. FEDER: -- elaborate anymore on that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not really. I don't think it's

healthy mentally or physically a lot of the time.

MR. FEDER: But the fact that you don't think it's

mentally or physically good for people to do that, is that

going to affect your ability to recognize that it is legal to

be an escort?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, I don't know the

definition of what legal escort is.

MR. FEDER: Well, for instance, there will probably be

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 179 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

179

evidence in this case where there are Scottsdale, and some of

the various cities in the Phoenix metro area, give out licenses

for escorts. Do you understand that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I understand that.

MR. FEDER: So the fact that they -- it is legal to be

an escort, that one can get a license to be an escort, is that

going to -- are you still going to have a problem with the fact

that people are escorts, number one, and that they may want to

advertise it in a periodical or a website?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: And is that going to keep you from being

able to be a fair and impartial juror if that kind of evidence

comes up, which I think it will?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would hope not.

MR. FEDER: You would hope that it will not?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would hope that it would not

affect me to be impartial.

MR. FEDER: But you have doubt?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: And you have doubt because of the belief

that you've expressed in your questionnaire and what you're now

doing, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. FEDER: So the people that are over to my --

behind me are -- they are not going to have your ability to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 180 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

180

presume them innocent and to make the government prove their

guilt beyond a reasonable doubt because they're going to be a

little -- you're going to have a little bit of a problem with

the subject?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's a moral question for me.

MR. FEDER: And, you know, let's be brutally honest,

as I think we have discussed being. Morals sometimes take over

logic and legalities and things like that, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. FEDER: And your morality, you believe, would --

would keep you from being a fair and impartial juror based on

that subject?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sacrificing what I believe morally

for monetary gain would be a problem.

MR. FEDER: You also indicated that you could -- there

was a question that said, would you have an ability to discuss

or deliberate regarding topics of a sexual nature? And your

answer, I think, was you're not sure. And then you went off

and started talking about that you don't like pornography.

You understand that this case is not about

pornography, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't even know what the case is

about. It was very brief what was told to us.

MR. FEDER: All right. That's all I have. Thanks.

And, Number 38, can we talk a little bit?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 181 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

181

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 38.

MR. FEDER: Thanks. I'm not going to repeat what

you've said in your questionnaire, but it sounds like you've

had some traumatic things happen to your children; is that

right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct.

MR. FEDER: And what happened to your children, of

course, had a deep effect on you and continues to this day,

right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct.

MR. FEDER: And you indicated that, in the

questionnaire, that you were not sure if you could be fair and

impartial, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That was correct, yes.

MR. FEDER: Trials are places where it's sort of the

right place and the right time for somebody, and sometimes it's

not the right place and the right time for certain jurors.

Me, I would have trouble in an environmental crime,

and crimes against children, and crimes against pets, and

things like that. I just wouldn't be the right person, no

matter how logical I might be, no matter how much I might try,

it just wouldn't be fair to either side to have me. That's why

nobody ever picks me as a juror.

And using that as an analogy, do you think that you

could be a fair and impartial juror, given the circumstances?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 182 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

182

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would like to say yes, because

I've heard already that this isn't about children, that this

trial -- there is no children involved, so I --

MR. FEDER: Well, there could be assertions that there

are children involved.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Pardon?

MR. FEDER: There may be assertions like that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Then if there are no

children involved, then, yes, if not, no.

MR. FEDER: That you could not be fair and impartial

if the -- if there is an allegation by the government, the

prosecutors, that children advertised on Backpage?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Possibly, yes.

MR. FEDER: That would be a, basically --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. FEDER: -- be an, I can't do it, situation?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure. Yes.

MR. FEDER: Okay. Thank you.

Next in line, 39.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 39.

MR. FEDER: Juror 39, you answered one of the

questions: Will you be able to deliberate or discuss topics of

a sexual nature? And you said that you were not sure, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: You understand that there is going to be a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 183 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

183

fair amount of discussion about things of a sexual nature in

this trial, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: And given that alone, is that going to

adversely affect your ability to be a fair and impartial juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know.

MR. FEDER: Well, again, if you put yourself in my

shoes, defending somebody like my client --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MR. FEDER: -- would you want somebody like you to be

on that jury who is not sure?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Probably not.

MR. FEDER: You've also indicated -- were you able to

hear the first group's questioning from downstairs?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: So you probably heard some of this, but

I'll repeat it anyhow.

You also answered some questions about whether or not

you believe people that are accused of crimes should have to

prove their innocence, and whether or not they should have to

testify, and whether or not it's too hard for prosecutors to

convict citizens of this country.

Do you recall those questions and answers?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Is that still your belief?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 184 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

184

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, yeah. I feel someone, if

they're going to be -- say that they're innocent, they should

probably have a reason to believe they're innocent. And you're

going to go with who do I trust most. It would be my mom. And

if my mom told me that she didn't commit a crime, but all of

the evidence pointed to that she committed a crime, I'd

probably believe the fact that she committed the crime, and

would like to hear her side of the story to prove that she's

innocent.

MR. FEDER: You, obviously, did hear our discussion.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: If your mother is your most trusted person

in your life --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MR. FEDER: -- and some prosecutors came along and

charged her with a crime, you understand that -- that she is

presumed innocent, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MR. FEDER: And do you have a problem with that

presumption of innocence?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, I'd like to -- I'd like to

hear her story as to why she's innocent, yeah.

MR. FEDER: So you would, basically, put my client and

everybody else over here that's charged in the position that,

as opposed to the burden being on the government, that they

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 185 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

185

have -- that they would have to prove something to you in order

for you to prove them -- to acquit them, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, because otherwise it seems a

little sus, like.

MR. FEDER: So is it fair to say that you don't think,

given your beliefs, that you could be a fair and impartial

juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, I could try, but I don't

think it would be, like, what you want.

MR. FEDER: You have got to be, not only verbally

honest with us --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Then no.

MR. FEDER: -- but brutally -- thanks a lot.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

MR. FEDER: Number 40. You knew I was going to call

on you, didn't you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 40.

MR. FEDER: Thank you. First let's talk about the

hardship that you put in your -- in your questionnaire. I'm

not exactly sure if I understand it, so why don't you give it

your best shot as to why this is -- I mean, not that a

three-month trial is not going to be a hardship on almost

anybody, but why is it specifically a hardship for you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Similar to the gentleman that's an

engineer, I'm a project lead for -- our company does software

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 186 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

186

conversions. It's a bigger company. So I've got three of

those currently going on. They would come to a halt if I was

on this jury.

MR. FEDER: You are --

MR. LINCENBERG: I'm sorry, I wasn't able to hear you,

sir. If you could just pull the mic closer.

Thank you very much.

MR. FEDER: Why don't you repeat your answer, if you

could.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: My work -- my job is a software

consultant converting company ERP systems, basically,

accounting, manufacturing. And I'm the project lead, the sole

lead on three of those projects currently.

MR. FEDER: Three of those projects that are currently

ongoing?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. FEDER: And you're the only person in that job?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I usually manage that on my own,

my own clients.

MR. FEDER: All right. I mean, if you're not there

for three months, tell us some of the consequences.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Projects would be pushed back

until next year, so implication would be on those clients.

MR. FEDER: How would that affect your --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know my company's policy

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 187 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

187

on payment, so I don't -- I'm not worried about my job being

gone. I don't know what they would pay me during that time.

The projects themselves would be delayed until next year.

MR. FEDER: There is a good possibility you could lose

the job because of the delay?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not likely.

MR. FEDER: In your questionnaire answers you said

that the -- you're bothered by the fact that escorts are legal,

that you're against that kind of service. Realizing the

questions and answers that we've already had, the fact that one

can get a license in some of these cities around the Phoenix

metro area for escorting, does that change your opinion at all?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It doesn't change my opinion that

I don't like them. I understand that they're legal and that

wouldn't affect my ability --

MR. FEDER: Well, again, using the same questions that

I've been asking others. If you were in my shoes, or, more

importantly, my client, Mr. Spear's, shoes, would you want

somebody with your mindset and your thought processes to judge

you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not knowing anything about the

court, I mean, I assume the case isn't whether or not being an

escort is good or bad, it's did they break the law, is it legal

or not? So, yeah, I would be okay with having somebody like me

on the jury.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 188 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

188

MR. FEDER: So you think, notwithstanding what you've

said in this questionnaire, you could be a fair and impartial

juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Would the fact that there are alleged --

that -- that escorts, persons considering themselves escorts,

advertised in Backpage, would that be a strike against the

defendants?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, not if escorts is legal. I

don't see that as an issue.

MR. FEDER: If it were suggested that that escort ad

isn't an escort ad, but a prostitution ad, would that be a

strike against the defendants?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would assume, like we've talked

about earlier, that websites should do what they can to limit

that illegal behavior.

MR. FEDER: So do you have any thoughts on how

websites can do something like that, that it's possible?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I know that every time somebody

posts about the virus, I see a flag on it, so obviously there

is ways to do something, but I'm sure you could tag buzzwords

and flag different ads.

MR. FEDER: But if something got through, would that

still be a strike against the defendants?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm sure people would try to find

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 189 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

189

ways to get around that, so I don't know how they could be a

hundred percent accountable, but they should do something.

MR. FEDER: And if things got through, are you going

to blame the people that -- that owned and operated Backpage or

are you going to blame the people that did things to get

through?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Obviously, the people that did

things to get through.

MR. FEDER: Excuse my ignorance, but what is Operation

Underground Railroad?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's a -- I don't know much about

it other than my wife. I think it's an organization that tries

to rescue trafficked children, is my understanding.

MR. FEDER: Is it something that you think if you went

home and said, hey, I'm going to be on the Backpage jury, that

that's going to cause some problems at home?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. My wife or I don't know

anything about Backpage, so, no, I do not think that's a

problem.

MR. FEDER: Are you going to be able to not talk to

your wife about what's going on if you were a juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I will be able to not talk to

my wife.

MR. FEDER: Your questionnaire also indicates that

you're -- you have two brothers that are in -- on the police

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 190 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

190

force in Canada. You're Canadian?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Two brother-in-laws. My wife is

Canadian, was Canadian.

MR. FEDER: Do you ever talk to them about their work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not very often. Occasionally.

MR. FEDER: Are they in good graces with you or bad

graces with you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good.

MR. FEDER: Given the fact that there is going to be

some law enforcement people in this case, are you going to give

them, a law enforcement person, more credence than regular

people?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think so. I mean, I

think -- that's hard to say. I mean, I don't -- I'm accustomed

to respecting law enforcement, but I understand the question.

MR. FEDER: It may be a matter of -- a manner of

speak, people do it all the time, I think and I may, but it's

really important in this setting that you think really hard

about whether or not you think it might affect you or whether

it will affect you or whether it won't affect you. Better if

you can be as black and white as you can.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I understand. You know,

it's not really related to having family members in law

enforcement, as much as I just naturally respect those that are

in law enforcement, but I'll do my best to not give any

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 191 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

191

credence to that.

MR. FEDER: Again, asking you the same question I hope

I'm not repeating too often, and that is, is your belief in law

enforcement people going to be a problem for defendants who are

depending on jurors to be neutral, to obey the presumption of

innocence, to obey requiring the prosecutors to prove guilt

beyond a reasonable doubt, to give all witnesses the same

credence, depending on what they say and how they say it, are

those all things that you believe, given your beliefs, and

given the fact that doesn't matter if you're on this trial or

not, are you -- do you believe you can do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: And you're not -- it's not I think, you're

now more sure?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: In answer to a question that says, the

government should investigate and prosecute a provider of a

platform that promotes and facilitates prostitution, you said

yes, you believe minimizing these individuals in organizations

would have the best effect on reducing prostitution. What does

minimizing mean or what did you mean by minimizing?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't remember. It's been a

long time since I filled that out.

MR. FEDER: Am I allowed to go show him the

questionnaire?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 192 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

192

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm just trying to remember what

my thinking would have been.

MR. FEDER: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think what I was trying to say

would be, making it as difficult as possible for individuals to

illegally use those websites would be a good thing.

MR. FEDER: What does that mean?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Like, maybe one thing would be

putting flags on suspect postings.

MR. FEDER: Okay. Would it mean trying to get rid of

words, trying to get rid of --

THE COURT: Mr. Feder. Mr. Feder.

MR. FEDER: Yes.

THE COURT: You're becoming really quiet, so can you

repeat that last question and speak up.

MR. FEDER: I thought this thing magnified me, but I

guess not.

What would that mean, flagging?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I haven't thought about it. My

only experience really is, you know, with what you see with

COVID. Anybody that posts anything about the virus or vaccine,

you'll see a flag on that posting. And so there is ways to do

it, technology, so they could be notified if there were words

used or things that were questionable, and then those could be

reviewed.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 193 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

193

MR. FEDER: Well, I mean, you understand -- given what

you're saying, it sounds like you've read articles about some

of the websites, Facebook, and Google, and those people

flagging false information about COVID, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I haven't read articles, I've just

seen -- seen it.

MR. FEDER: But you also know that there is a lot of

controversy and articles saying that they're not stopping it,

that they should stop it, but they're not able to or they're

not willing to, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I assume that's correct.

MR. FEDER: So you understand that it's not easy?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right. I agree with that.

MR. FEDER: Thank you very much.

THE COURT: Mr. Lincenberg.

MR. LINCENBERG: Juror Number 40, I just wanted to

follow up on one or two more questions.

It sounded like you were trying to reason through, and

understanding the question I think you were asked, you were

saying it would depend on whether things were illegal that were

being posted or something. I wanted to follow up on that.

One of the things you are going to hear in this case

is that attorneys had advised the defendants that their ads

that were being run were lawful. Is that something that you

would consider in evaluating the evidence?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 194 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

194

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

THE COURT: Counsel, can I see you at side bar.

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Is that the Court's noise or --

that's not from me, is it?

THE COURT: No, no. We turned that on on purpose so

they couldn't hear.

MR. LINCENBERG: Good.

THE COURT: And anything else you want to say about

your objection? I know what you're --

MS. PERLMETER: It just seems like Mr. Lincenberg is

pre-trying his case. He's posing hypotheticals when there has

been no evidence set forth in the record so far. We have no

objection to specific follow-up questions to statements he has

made in his questionnaire, or specific follow-up based on

statements that he has made today, but we object to the defense

pre-trying their case and basically making opening statements.

MR. LINCENBERG: Well, I'm not pre-trying the case. I

was following up on the question. The Court's familiar with

Mr. Ferrer's testimony and the like about attorneys advising.

The Court ruled that that's not privileged and it is coming in.

And I was -- all I asked is if the -- if the juror -- potential

juror would even consider that. I didn't ask him how he would

look at it. Because he was answering Mr. Feder's question that

it -- it depends whether it's legal or illegal, and so I want

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 195 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

195

to get a sense of whether he's just going to be open to that

evidence. That's all.

THE COURT: Okay. But you're asking them to prejudge.

MR. LINCENBERG: My question was just would you

consider that testimony.

THE COURT: Okay. You can ask that question, but you

are coming really close to the line.

MR. LINCENBERG: I know. I won't go beyond that.

THE COURT: Okay.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

THE COURT: You can ask the question.

MR. LINCENBERG: Did you remember the question?

The question was there is going to be evidence about

attorneys advising the defendants that the ads and the policies

were lawful. And my question is not to judge that evidence,

but would you consider that in terms of evaluating the

defendants' state of mind?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I -- yeah, I would guess I would

have to hear it. An attorney could give wrong advice, but

would that make it legal? If an attorney gives me bad advice,

I'm still breaking the law, I guess that's my question, but --

MR. LINCENBERG: Well, let me ask. If the attorney

gave you bad advice -- let's -- I'm not -- I think the advice

was good, but let's say the advice was bad, and you followed

that advice in good faith, would you just consider that in

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 196 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

196

terms of evaluating whether our clients acted lawfully? I'm

not asking you to make a decision.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would say yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you, sir.

Ladies and gentlemen, you may have heard this morning

that I'm going to be reserving my opening statement. I asked

the jury panel this morning if anybody would hold that against

us? I'm looking to make sure that, since the government's

going to put on their case first and I am not going to give an

opening until afterwards, that even though it may be a long

time, that you'll keep an open mind. Some of us make snap

judgments, we go along and we -- we dig in, that's where we

are. That's the way some human beings behave.

Is there anybody here who sort of fits in that

category that, you hear it at the beginning, you kind of come

to a judgment and you usually stick to it after that? Just

raise your hand if you think that fits you.

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Can everybody -- is there anybody who

would not keep an open and impartial mind as the evidence comes

in until the end of it, knowing that there is going to be weeks

full of witnesses called by the government first, that's just

the way cases are presented? Would anybody have a problem with

that, holding it against my client?

(No response.)

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 197 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

197

MR. LINCENBERG: I'd like to ask a question of Juror

Number 33, if I might.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 33.

MR. LINCENBERG: Ma'am, in your questionnaire you

indicated you were the sole provider of income for your

household. Can you please just review what you do for a living

and, you know, what impact the case might have on you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm a scheduler at Mayo Clinic,

22 years.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. So I assume that the Mayo

Clinic would pay you for your -- during your jury service.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: To be honest, I have no idea.

MR. LINCENBERG: You're not sure. Okay. Do you know

if there is somebody there who you could check with?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I could call our human resources.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, I don't want to overstep

my bounds, but would it be appropriate for me to ask if that's

something that could be done by tomorrow?

THE COURT: Yes, and -- yes. And there is another

juror that I'm going to ask to do the same thing.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Would that be -- would that be

okay, ma'am?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 198 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

198

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. Thank you very much.

Juror Number 34, first of all, let me thank you for

your service, and thank you for your honesty in noting that, as

a police officer, you tend to lend greater credibility to the

testimony of police officers. And I just wanted to follow up a

little bit with -- with that.

I believe that as part of your views, looking at your

questionnaire, you also expect a defendant to testify?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't recall writing that. I

understand that for many reasons they have a right to not

testify and it's not held against them. I'm not sure how that

question was worded.

MR. LINCENBERG: I think the question was -- it was 43

C, I think -- let me just grab your questionnaire real quickly.

Let's make sure I get it right.

43. I would expect a person charged with a crime to

testify in their own defense. You indicated that you agree,

that if somebody is looking to be acquitted in a case, it's

your expectation in that situation that they would testify.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Let me fine tune that for a moment

and say that in my experience as a criminal investigator, I was

always expected, and expected of myself, to get some kind of

statement from a person who had become a defendant, because

there are often cross-accusations, there are many reasons to

that. And then in taking a case forward, if that person would

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 199 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

199

not talk or provide information, then that became, okay, they

had their chance.

In a trial setting, I wouldn't consider it in the same

way, because I know that there are reasons that people might

choose not to testify.

MR. LINCENBERG: So when you interviewed people, they

had their chance, and you did not view it favorably if they

chose not to answer your questions. Is that fair?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would state it as they left me

with no other recourse if the evidence built probable cause in

a case to file charges.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And I believe you also

indicated that during the course of your work, your work also

involved issues involving prostitution; is that correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. All right. And fair to say

that there is going to be police officers who come into court,

their credibility may be challenged on cross-examination, and

if you were in the defense seat looking for a juror who was

going to treat that witness no different from any other

witness, that you would put yourself in the category of not

necessarily being a juror who could satisfy that from the

defense point of view?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It became a somewhat complicated

question. Let me answer the question: If I were a defendant,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 200 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

200

would I want Juror 34 on the panel? I would say no.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. All right. Okay.

Juror 35 -- thank you very much.

Juror 35.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 35.

MR. LINCENBERG: Good afternoon, sir. Just a couple

of questions for you. You -- I have a note that either -- I

think it was somebody in your family was involved in banking;

is that right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Um --

MR. LINCENBERG: I don't think it was you, but

somebody else.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Loan officer.

MR. LINCENBERG: Loan officer. Who was that? What

kind of relative?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's my wife.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your wife.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And -- and her -- her sister was

in escrow.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And as a loan officer at a

bank, is part of your wife's job to do due diligence on the

borrower to determine whether or not this is a person who is

fit to provide a loan to then?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, but the information goes out

to the lender that then has the underwriters that determines

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 201 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

201

what the person's information that she receives is qualifying

for the loan.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And is it your experience

through the years of, perhaps, discussing things with your

wife, that banks tend to do due diligence before extending

money? They want to sort of know their customer before they're

going to lend them money.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's their money, so they're

going to do what they have to to protect their behalf, yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you, sir. That's really

all I have of you. I appreciate it. Thanks.

I'm sorry. There was another question.

No, nothing further. Thank you.

Juror Number 56.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 56.

MR. LINCENBERG: Sir, I believe that one of the other

attorneys is going to ask you a few questions, but there were

one or two things I wanted to touch upon, if I may.

Your job involves selling technology to banks; is that

correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I retired from that. I'm doing

some consulting now, but yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Can you describe the nature of your

work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. I worked for two companies

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 202 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

202

that built internet banking and mobile banking products. And

so, in effect, we built the internet banking or mobile banking

that you saw branded to your bank is running on our servers,

millions of people, large scale businesses.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And -- and what do you do now

as a consultant?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do some consulting for

technology companies, generally around sales and marketing

partnerships.

MR. LINCENBERG: In the work that you did over the

years with banks, did you or your company ever have disputes

with the banks?

Let me -- let me make it a little more clear. First,

did you ever have legal disputes, contract disputes?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Typically, the disputes would be

over functionality. If something wasn't working the way they

thought it should, they might have withheld payment, things of

that nature.

MR. LINCENBERG: Did you ever have to testify?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I did not.

MR. LINCENBERG: Deposition or anything like that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. Never reached that stage.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And I had just asked Juror

Number 35 this question, I'm going to ask you as well. Was it

your sense that the banks -- I know you were only dealing with

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 203 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

203

people who were dealing with purchase of technology -- but that

they tried to do their due diligence before deciding to enter

into a contract?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: There was actually a legal

requirement for them to do that.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. Thank you very much.

Your Honor, that's all I have.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Can you hear me? Is the mic on?

Hi. Thank you for being here today and for sticking

with us in the afternoon. My name is Whitney Bernstein, and it

is my pleasure to represent James Larkin.

I just want to go over some of the follow-up questions

that some of my colleagues and the government have covered with

you as well.

I'm going to start with Juror Number 49.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good afternoon.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Hi. On the questionnaire there was a

question asking about your feelings about website

responsibility for content posted by users.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And you answered, I think it is their

responsibility to provide a platform but not interfere, as long

as it is not putting people in danger.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 204 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

204

MS. BERNSTEIN: What do you mean by that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So if you have a social media

website, I think it's -- it's up to you how you want to police

that. You should have a way of dealing with complaints and a

way of maybe flagging for things that could put people in

danger. But you're probably not going to be able to get to all

that because there is just so much content, depending on what

website and how much traffic you have.

So when it comes to policing yourself, those are

mostly going to be by your guidelines and any applicable

regulatory that goes along with it.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And, Juror 56, some additional

questions for you, please.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 56.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I know particularly, if you were all

listening to us while you were sitting downstairs, that we've

gone over the legal principles of the presumption of innocence,

that our clients are presumed innocent unless the government

proves with confident evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that

they are no longer innocent.

On your questionnaire, you were asked if you

understood and agreed with these principles of law and you

answered no. Can you explain that?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 205 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

205

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I should not have answered no.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Was it just a typo? Okay.

Well, another question said that -- it was something

along the lines of, we make it too hard -- the criminal justice

system makes it too difficult for the government to convict,

and you answered that you agree with that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think there are times when that

is true, when you will find a situation where the guilt is

intuitively obvious but can't be legally demonstrated, and --

and my -- actually, if I may, use an illustrative point.

There were several comments that the site, apparently,

was carrying ads for legal escorts, and it -- for me, it

beggar's belief that you could advertise escorts and not

understand that you were facilitating prostitution.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I'm sorry, I didn't hear that part.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Beggar's belief that you could run

escort ads and not understand that you were facilitating

prostitution.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Those are synonymous in your mind?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: You do understand that there is a

factual, and legal, and moral, and ethical, and religious

distinction between the two?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I understand that.

MS. BERNSTEIN: But, in your mind, you wouldn't be

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 206 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

206

able to distinguish?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I find it very difficult to

believe that there are legal prostitute -- or, excuse me, I

made a Freudian slip -- legal escorts that do not engage in

sexual services.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you for your honesty with that.

Are you familiar with -- how do you feel about strip

joints?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't personally enjoy them but

I --

MS. BERNSTEIN: Do you think that a striptease is

necessarily leading to sexual activity?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not as certainly as an escort

service.

MS. BERNSTEIN: What about bondage?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't have any knowledge -- I

know it exists, but I don't have any knowledge.

MS. BERNSTEIN: BDSM?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's the same thing, is it not?

MS. BERNSTEIN: I'm not entirely sure. I'm just going

to give you some terms.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would presume if you were paying

someone to entertain you in that manner, highly likely it would

lead to a sexual encounter.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And that's very -- I appreciate your

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 207 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

207

honesty, and that's very important for this case, because I

think we've discussed in some -- there has been some emphasis

about the fact that we're going to look at really graphic

pictures, there is going to be a lot of conversation about sex

and sexual activities, and there will also be a lot of

conversation about legal adult entertainment activities. And

it's really important to be able to distinguish between the

two.

So it sounds to me like you are very firm in your

belief that they're sort of synonymous?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: In the area of escorts

specifically, yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you.

Does anyone else agree with Juror Number 56? This is

a really crucial point for this case, so if you can please let

us know.

Thank you. I'll talk to 34 first and then 37.

Is there anyone else?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 34.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you. So you agree with what

Juror 56 was saying?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, to the extent that I see

escorts as synonymous with prostitution.

MS. BERNSTEIN: You see escorts as synonymous with

prostitution?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 208 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

208

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: You do understand there is a factual,

legal, et cetera, difference?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would call that a theoretical

difference.

MS. BERNSTEIN: It's theoretical to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The city I worked in did not issue

those licenses. I didn't delve into the criteria that they

based on that on, but in my work life and experience they were

synonymous.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And what city was that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Tempe.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Tempe. Thank you. We appreciate your

candor.

And for everyone, there are certain juries you should

sit on and certain juries you shouldn't. And so if you hold

the beliefs like Juror Number 34, it's important for our system

to work and for our clients to have a fair chance, that you let

us know that. So I really appreciate it.

Juror Number 37.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Question.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Do you share the belief that escort

services and prostitution are synonymous, or do you understand

that there is a legal, factual, ethical, moral, religious

difference between the two?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 209 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

209

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I consider them synonymous.

MS. BERNSTEIN: You do as well?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And that's a firmly held belief that

you have?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's always been my belief, yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And you held that belief far before

coming into this courtroom today?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Ever since escorts have been in

movies, yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And even if you were instructed that

legally there is a distinction, that's not going to override

your firmly held belief?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, because you can call it

whatever you want to call it, but then -- that's all I can say.

I consider them synonymous.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you. I appreciate that.

Does anyone else have anything to share along those

same lines, or agree or disagree with what they've said?

Please don't be shy, because this is very important for our

clients to get a fair trial.

(No response.)

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay. Juror Number 43.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 43.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I apologize, we didn't have your

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 210 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

210

answers, which is why the prosecutor asked you those questions,

so I just want to follow up. I think you had said that -- that

websites should be held accountable for the content that's

posted by their users.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MS. BERNSTEIN: So --

THE COURT: I'm sorry. Wait, wait, wait. We didn't

hear your answer.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I'm not trying to put words in your

mouth.

Do you believe that websites should be held

responsible for content posted by users?

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

Go ahead.

MS. BERNSTEIN: The question was if you believe that

websites should be held accountable for content posted by

users?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: They should have some

responsibility. It's very difficult to do. I think we

discussed that before. There is no regulations in place, so

they have to find the guidelines by themselves to execute in

trying to prevent doing damage to society.

MS. BERNSTEIN: They need to implement guidelines to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 211 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

211

prevent damage to society, is that what you had said? The mic

was cutting out.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you. And lately I think we're

all familiar with what's going on in Afghanistan and the

troops' withdrawal. Are you familiar with the Taliban using

Twitter?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And it's your -- it's your view that

Twitter should be held accountable for those acts of terrorism?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Some accountability, yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay. And even if that wasn't the

law, that's the belief that you hold, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Responsibilities, not violating

the law, then it's a moral -- it's something personal,

something that has to be good for the society, so it's

something that has to be good.

THE COURT: I'm sorry. Can you repeat your answer?

We're really having a little -- sometimes the masks make it

more difficult.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Start the question, please.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I think you had said -- I -- I had

asked you even if the law doesn't require, for example, Twitter

to be criminally liable for acts of terrorism that the Taliban

has committed using that platform, I believe your answer was --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 212 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

212

THE COURT: Okay. I'm going to interrupt, because the

question might be a problem, so let me rephrase it.

If you're selected to try this case, the Court will

instruct the jury on the law that applies to figure out whether

somebody's guilty or not guilty. If you disagreed with that

law, would you still follow it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Actually, I would follow it.

That's a very good way to put in the question. Actually, I

like that. Yes, absolutely.

THE COURT: And if you felt someone should be

responsible but the law says they're not, would you acquit

them, find them not guilty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If you give instructions, and the

instructions has to be followed the way you state it and it's

according to the law, then I will follow it. It should not be

a problem.

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Bernstein.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

I want to go back to Juror 39 for a moment.

Hi. I appreciated your candor and honesty earlier

that you would not be able to deliberate and discuss topics of

a graphic sexual nature. That's correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And can you explain that for a moment?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 213 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

213

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm 19. I'm basically a child.

So all of this is just like -- I'm still in the -- like, I get

that I am an adult, but it's, like, hard to talk about adult

things because of my brain, like, I'm still just a kid. Like,

I live at home with my parents and it just -- it just makes me

uncomfortable, because I'm literally a child.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I appreciate that. We're not here to

change anyone's beliefs, just to understand. And it's not only

that it's difficult for you to talk about these things

yourself, but it would be very difficult to deliberate with

strangers about this as well?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, because I'm 19, so I just

feel like that doesn't really mean anything, because my opinion

doesn't matter. I can't be here responsible for people's

beliefs when they've had more of a life to live than me, so I

would literally let everyone else decide before I would put my

opinion in.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Thank you.

And does anyone agree with Juror 39 that it would be

difficult for them to deliberate with other strangers if the

topics are about, as the prosecutor said, anal sex, or

stripping, or bondage, very graphic sexual activity, would that

be difficult for anyone else?

Juror Number 54, can you please explain?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 54.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 214 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

214

MS. BERNSTEIN: Can you please -- you raised your hand

that it would be difficult for you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think it would be. For me it

would be more of the photographs. I think once I see a

photograph, in my memory, it stays there forever. And as I

mentioned, I have been on a sexual abuse case before, and I

still remember those pictures very graphically. And I'm a very

sympathetic, compassionate person, and if I see any kind of

abuse of a person, then that mentally, for me, is very

difficult to --

MS. BERNSTEIN: I understand that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: -- accept and to understand, you

know, how this can happen.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And I think what's going on here is

actually two issues. It's, one, what you're touching on, the

ability --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time

hearing you.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I think there is two issues going on.

It's, one, what you're touching on, the ability for you

personally to remain impartial when you look at images that

inflame your passions, that inflame deeply held passions that

you've had. I think you indicated your prior trial was in

2017?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 215 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

215

MS. BERNSTEIN: So you've held onto that for many

years. You firmly believe this.

I think the second issue is whether you're able to

speak with strangers, with whomever is chosen to be on the

jury, to discuss and dissect graphic sexual pictures with

people you don't know. Would that be hard for you as well?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would be very uncomfortable with

that.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And that's fine, that's just an

important thing for this case, so I appreciate you explaining

that.

And is there anyone else that feels the same way, that

this would be difficult for them?

(No response.)

MS. BERNSTEIN: Please let us know if there is. If it

comes up later, please let us know, because we're just here to

have the system work and to give our clients a fair chance.

And if it's difficult for you to touch on the subject matter,

there are many other trials that you would be a better juror

for.

Thank you.

MR. EISENBERG: I'll go next, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. EISENBERG: Number 43, I see that --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 43.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 216 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

216

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you, sir. And I don't mean to

impinge on you the way you may feel we're doing, but it is

important. And I want to go back to something Her Honor said

to you, which has to do with the legal principle of the law

comes from the judge in our system. So if the law is as Her

Honor says it is, you said you would abide by the law as a

juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. And that's the way it should

be. But earlier in your responses to Ms. Bernstein you were

talking about moral principles, which I think are things you

feel morally inside, so -- am I right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. And if -- if the Court says,

this is the law and you must abide by it, but your moral

compass says, I don't think so, or I don't like it, or I don't

like what's going on here, are you still going to be able to --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's a tough life, isn't it?

MR. EISENBERG: Yes, it is. Yeah, I know. And

everybody has these issues in their lives, but what we're

dealing with in here is an organized system of trying to bring

the law and justice to every person who comes before the court.

So it's asking people to say, deep down inside I may not like

this charge -- we call them charge, the legal principle -- but

some would say, I'm sorry, I just can't follow it. In my heart

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 217 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

217

of hearts, I'm not going to do it.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You have to be pragmatic in every

decision you make, and then you have to follow the rules,

otherwise then you get in trouble.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's what we're trying to

prevent here, right?

MR. EISENBERG: Well, I'm trying to get at the idea

will your moral feelings about something overcome the Court's

rule on this is what the law is?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think the question was more to

make somebody accountable when their actions or no actions have

an impact to -- to society or to the way we live. I think that

was the context I put more in that, nothing more than that.

MR. EISENBERG: Then I'll turn it around. You would

disregard any moral concern that you have and you would follow

the law. Is that what you're saying?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would follow the law always.

MR. EISENBERG: Regardless of what your internal

feelings were about something?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: First, the law.

MR. EISENBERG: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: First, the law.

MR. EISENBERG: First, the law, but then something

else, or always the law?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 218 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

218

THE COURT: Counsel.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: In this situation here that we're

discussing, the law is the one that has the priority.

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you, sir.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, about ten minutes have

passed since Ms. Bernstein asked this question, but I really do

want to make sure that we are all on the same page with the

question.

And the question is: Are escort services in you all's

minds synonymous with prostitution? And at one point a few of

you did answer that question, and now some time has gone by,

and I know it's getting late, but I think this is something we

don't really want to let pass until everybody has had the

opportunity to respond.

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

THE COURT: Counsel, can I see you at side bar?

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

THE COURT: Okay. You guys keep repeating the same

things. I'm not going to let it go anymore.

MR. EISENBERG: Your Honor, it's just that this is

probably one of the most important --

THE COURT: Well, you're lecturing. You guys are

lecturing the jury on it. If you want to ask the question, ask

the question and then move on, but I'm not going to let you

keep going: Are you sure? Are you sure? Are you sure?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 219 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

219

MR. EISENBERG: May I ask the question this last time?

THE COURT: Since you've already asked it, yes.

MR. EISENBERG: All right.

THE COURT: But if no one raises their hand, you need

to move on.

MR. EISENBERG: I will.

THE COURT: And nobody else needs to ask it again,

because you're the last one.

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, I'd like to ask for

permission to follow up with Juror Number 40 based on some of

the questions Mr. Lincenberg asked subject to what we talked

about at the last bench conference.

THE COURT: Okay. I'll look at my notes.

MR. FEDER: Judge, do you think it's going to be this

hot tomorrow?

THE COURT: I'll check after. We just need to get

through.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

MR. EISENBERG: So I don't see any hands to my

question.

Gentleman.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So just so that we're all on the

same page, what is the legal definition of an escort versus a

prostitute?

MR. EISENBERG: I don't think I should be giving that.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 220 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

220

I can just tell you that it's legal in many jurisdictions,

including this. Okay?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay.

Juror 44.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 44.

MR. EISENBERG: Ma'am, good afternoon. Ma'am, there

was a question about discussion among fellow jurors about

sexually explicit topics. I don't think you've been asked this

before, have you, not by us?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just sort of by the --

MR. EISENBERG: Ma'am?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: -- prosecution, not by you, not by

defense.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. And I think your answer to it,

as I have it here in writing, is, no, it would be difficult for

you to discuss sexually explicit topics with fellow jurors; is

that correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It is a little difficult, but I

think I could do it, like they're saying, set aside your morals

and go by the law. I would agree with that.

MR. EISENBERG: This is a little different, though.

Would you be able to discuss the topic?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, yeah. Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: You think you would or you couldn't?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 221 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

221

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I was exposed to pornography for

about 40 years, so I do believe that I could discuss it.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. That would impact your ability

to be a fair juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think so. I think we're

looking at the law and whether somebody has committed a crime

or not, and not, you know, my experience.

MR. EISENBERG: Well, you were talking about you had

been exposed to pornography for some 40 years. And I got the

impression from that that what you're saying is, having had

that around you for so long, you wouldn't be able to discuss

the topic of a sexually explicit topic?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm saying I have been around it,

so I wouldn't feel uncomfortable talking about it. I wouldn't

be shocked or surprised.

MR. EISENBERG: Would it affect your ability to sit in

judgment of somebody else?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't believe that -- how do I

say that? I think that, you know, the same discussion about

the law, that I would be looking at the law not looking at the

person or the -- you know, not my opinion, but the law.

MR. EISENBERG: So you're saying you would be able to

set it aside, your experience with pornography?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. EISENBERG: The fact that I believe there was a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 222 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

222

conviction in your family involving pornography, that wouldn't

affect your ability to sit in judgment of somebody else?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I just had exposure to it, so it

wouldn't shock me.

MR. EISENBERG: Well, that's a little bit different

than whether you could be fair when you're sitting in judgment

of somebody else, not whether seeing explicit photographs or

non explicit photographs, for that matter, it's really a

question of whether your prior experience says, I just can't be

fair here.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I wouldn't say that.

MR. EISENBERG: You don't think it would impact you at

all?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. EISENBERG: You also said that you were bothered

that escorts are legal. You were bothered by the fact that

they were legal. Now, this is specific --

THE COURT: Mr. Eisenberg, can you please move the

microphone closer.

MR. EISENBERG: Yes.

You said you were bothered by the fact that escorts

are legal. That was in your response to the questionnaire. So

does that persist even now, even today it bothers you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think it would bother me

to --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 223 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

223

THE COURT: I need you to speak up, please.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think I put on there that it was

a sin, but I do not think that -- I think that I could, you

know, listen to a case and not judge -- judge morally but judge

by the law.

MR. EISENBERG: Well, if, in your mind, it is a sin,

and I'm not -- certainly not arguing that one way or another,

doesn't that already foreclose the -- the issue as to whether

the person is guilty or not?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think so.

MR. EISENBERG: Even though you see it as a sin, it's

okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I'm going to be looking at

testimony and figuring out testimony and witnesses. It's not

my place to -- everybody sins. It's not my place to call it

sin really.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's, you know --

MR. EISENBERG: So you're saying you would set aside

the actual act that you see as a sin and be guided by the

evidence and the law --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. EISENBERG: -- as applied to the evidence or vice

versa?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 224 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

224

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. Thank you, ma'am. I appreciate

it.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You're welcome.

MR. EISENBERG: And, Juror 45.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 45.

MR. EISENBERG: Let's see. Is it on?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Can you hear me?

MR. EISENBERG: Yes, I can hear you.

All right. Now, sir, you responded in your

questionnaire that you heard about the defendants through the

media and --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. EISENBERG: All right. Now, there have been

recent publications which were in the media, including some

even today --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: This morning on the news.

MR. EISENBERG: -- about this case. Yes. And you saw

it in the paper?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't get the paper.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. See it on TV or see it on the

internet?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: (No audible response.)

MR. EISENBERG: And I don't want you to go into it,

but there was an article or a publication with respect to what

this case is about; is that correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 225 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

225

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If there was, it was years ago,

because this was on --

MR. EISENBERG: Then let's talk about publications

years ago and publications right now, as of today, yesterday.

Have you seen anything today about this case or yesterday about

this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just on the news this morning.

MR. EISENBERG: And on the news, on the radio, I take

it, is what you're saying?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: TV.

MR. EISENBERG: TV. Okay. Now, there is a -- has

that affected you in any way in terms of coming in here and

determining what's going on with this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Watching the news this morning?

MR. EISENBERG: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. EISENBERG: And are you saying that you disregard

what the news says?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. EISENBERG: You're kind of laughing. Why is that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just these days and times, I

pretty much just disregard all the news.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. So is that the same way as

saying, and I think it is, that you wouldn't be guided by

whatever you read or heard or saw with respect to the news

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 226 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

226

concerning this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. EISENBERG: If you're selected as a juror, the

Court tells the jurors, do not read anything about the case, do

not talk to anybody about the case, that sort of thing, because

the idea is what you get in the courtroom, that's where the

evidence is.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And that's where it says too.

MR. EISENBERG: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And that's where it says.

MR. EISENBERG: Yes. So anything that is written --

go ahead.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So what are you saying, if I am

selected for the jury, that you don't watch the news, you don't

watch TV, you don't watch --

MR. EISENBERG: You can do that, but you can't with

respect to this case. Is that hard to do?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You have to ask the media that

one.

MR. EISENBERG: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You'd have to ask the media.

MR. EISENBERG: Well, certainly the media can publish

what it wants to publish. The point is is whether you and any

other juror are going to be watching it or listening to it.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Would that influence my call on

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 227 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

227

this?

MR. EISENBERG: Well, that's one question. The first

is more fundamental. If you're told not to do that by the

Court, would you follow that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I wouldn't talk with anybody about

it, but am I going to watch the news? Yes.

THE COURT: So let me just interrupt.

Juror 45, it doesn't mean you can't watch TV, you

can't read, you can't listen to the radio. The instruction is

if you come across something, turn it off, don't watch that

particular segment. If you hear something, turn it off. If

you see something in the newspaper, don't read it. And then

you have to inform the Court and then we deal with it, whatever

it is. Could you do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, because, first of all, I

don't read the newspaper. I don't get it. And, to be honest,

if I turn the news on, it's pretty much to get the weather and

that's it. I go out to the other TV. I just can't watch news

anymore. But if it is, would I turn it, yeah, sure, if I was

sitting on the jury.

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Does that answer that question?

MR. EISENBERG: I'm going to go one step further. If

you're sitting on the jury and that happens, would you turn it

off?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 228 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

228

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think I just answered it, didn't

I?

MR. EISENBERG: Did you say that? Then I missed it.

Okay.

I guess the same is true for everybody else here, with

respect to the news and publications, have people seen or heard

recently, with respect to this case, anything about it?

(No response.)

MR. EISENBERG: All right. And I'm sure the

admonition from Her Honor would be the same, if you're a member

of the jury, you would be told to disregard anything that you

hear or see.

You also said, sir, that the defendant should prove

his innocence. That's in response to question 43 in your

questionnaire.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. So what you're saying is it's

the obligation of the defendant to prove that he is not guilty;

is that correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know how to describe this.

I think it's both sides that need -- I mean, obviously, the

prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

MR. EISENBERG: Right.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And do I think -- do I think that

the defendant or defendants should --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 229 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

229

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And I think the attorneys for the

defendant have to prove innocence.

THE COURT: Defendants have to prove they're innocent.

Is that what you said?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. EISENBERG: So it's an obligation on the part of

the defendant to prove that he or she is not guilty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. And my last question for you,

sir, is -- actually, no. I'm sorry. I think you've answered

it. I think you have answered it satisfactory.

I don't have anymore questions for this jury, Your

Honor, and I'm done.

THE COURT: Okay.

Counsel.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Can you hear me?

That's good. This will be easier because it's hard to

talk to everybody when you're spread out.

Understanding that you heard the discussion with the

first group that we had about reasonable doubt and about what

it means to be a juror on this case, and I'm going to tell you

as well, we're not going to belabor the point, but that this is

really important. And if there is some reason -- and I can

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 230 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

230

think of several -- that you don't want to be on this jury or

you can't serve on this jury, tell us. And I only represent

Joye Vaught, that's one-seventh of this whole production, but

I'll do what I can. I'll do everything I can to make sure that

you don't serve. Because what we don't want is people here

that, A, don't want to be here, can't pay attention, and can't

fulfill this when it gets long and it gets hard. So please

don't worry about telling us that. It's okay.

Juror 55, hi. I can't see with these and I can't see

without them. It's the most frustrating thing.

You mentioned in your questionnaire answers that

websites like You Tube, Facebook, and the like should be

responsible for the content posted by users on their websites

up to a limit, and harmful posts and totally fake news should

be scrutinized on a daily basis.

First, what's your definition of what that

responsibility looks like?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, that's a good question.

Maybe not -- how do I say this? Those platforms have a debt to

society to do things as decently as they can. It's hard to do

things right all the time, but -- and it might be hard to do

it, but you've got to start somewhere. They should look at

people who are trying to purposely put disingenuous content

into the population. I think a lot of people do that. They

don't know why they do it, but they do it anyway.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 231 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

231

And platforms can't really be held -- well, they can

be held -- not responsible -- but it's hard for them as well

because they can't go through each -- each content and say,

okay, this is good, this is bad. They don't know why people

are saying these things, but they have to start somewhere. I

think if they start small and work up.

MS. BERTRAND: Start small and work up.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, you know, get rid of all the

crazies, and there is a lot of them online, but then, you know,

work their way to the really hard stuff, which is -- is part of

a mishmash of the government regulations, and people looking at

things and saying, this is not right. That's the -- it's up to

the -- to the content displayers as well. I mean, platforms

can't do everything. They don't even know half the problems

that exist or they're not paying attention to it. So if they

start paying attention, they might get somewhere.

MS. BERTRAND: So what do we do with sex work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Can it be regulated, yes and no.

MS. BERTRAND: What do we do with it on these

platforms?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Monitor, I don't know -- it's like

an apartment complex, you have one person that goes around and

looks at all the patios and says, okay, this patio is decent,

this patio is bad. So what do you do? You go back to the --

to the office and you say, this place is a mess. Can you do

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 232 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

232

something about that? Okay. We'll do something about it.

They won't say what, but they'll do something about it.

And that's like Facebook. Facebook is totally

different from when it started. 2008 it was child's play

almost. Now it's not -- it's not like that anymore. It's a

bunch of people that all push their own ideas and values on

other people, and people suck it up and love it.

MS. BERTRAND: Not a lot of policing.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: There is some but it's not enough.

It's -- it's weird.

MS. BERTRAND: It is weird.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I remember when it was -- when it

was first started, it was nothing like it is now. It was -- it

was crazy but it was just people trying to work their way

through the minutia.

MS. BERTRAND: It's kind of taken a life of its own.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you. Thank you, Juror 55.

Who agrees with Juror 55 that social media and these

platforms have taken on a life of their own?

Juror 62. Yes, you. I'll get you a microphone.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 62.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes.

THE COURT: What is the question?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Do you have a question?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 233 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

233

MS. BERTRAND: What do you -- in response to what

Juror 55 said, that these platforms have taken on a life of

their own and it's hard to regulate them, what is your take on

that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Life is hard. Find a way.

MS. BERTRAND: Can you say more about that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You don't like the way something

operates, there is processes to go through to fix that and

change it. If you don't change it, then you have to abide by

the way it exists.

MS. BERTRAND: Now, I believe in your questionnaire

you said that you refer -- the answer to 69, the question was

government should investigate or prosecute the provider of a

platform that promotes or facilitates prostitution. And there

was no response. But then in the explanation, if the perp is

violating an existing statute, law enforcement should pursue.

Who is the perp that you're referring to in that

response, the poster, the platform?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It goes back to what I just said.

If it violates the law, then it should be pursued. If it

doesn't violate a law, then why are we following it?

MS. BERTRAND: And you noted in response to question

76 that there is a responsibility to these platforms to protect

the innocent.

Who is the innocent in your eyes in that answer?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 234 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

234

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, in the case that I've been

listening today, it appears that the innocent may be the

underage child.

MS. BERTRAND: Can you say more about that? It

appears it's the underage child. So what should the platform

do to protect underage children?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It goes back to working with law

enforcement, providing the information, giving them the

necessary tools they have to pursue that if it violates the

law. If it doesn't violate the law, then I'm not sure what

we're after.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you.

Juror 39, I'm not going to necessarily -- you're

welcome to say something, but I was really touched by what you

said when you said I don't -- in essence, I'm going to

paraphrase you -- I don't have a voice. I'm only 19. And what

touches me is everyone has an equal voice on a jury.

Do you think that you would be uncomfortable asserting

-- taking your stand, placing yourself in a position because of

your age or any other reason?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I don't know. I just -- I

don't have very strong opinions on the world yet. I haven't

even lived on my own in the world yet. So I don't -- I don't

-- my social media is like Snapchat where I have streaks with

my high school friends, like -- like, I don't -- I don't know,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 235 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

235

basically, anything we're talking about, every time you guys

ask a question, I have no clue what you're saying because you

guys use such big words. So, like, I wouldn't be very helpful

as a juror.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. I'm hearing you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MS. BERTRAND: And I will try not to use big words.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

MS. BERTRAND: Who feels like Juror 39, like, look,

man, this is a big deal and no one wants to hear from me, for

whatever reason, I don't -- I'm not qualified to talk about

this stuff and judge this stuff?

How about Juror 46? We haven't heard from you that

much.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I don't think I'm -- I don't

feel that way.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I am fine to give my opinion and

listen objectively and do what I have to do.

MS. BERTRAND: All right. This morning we talked with

the first batch of jurors who were in here about some people

are just, by their nature, that they're about finding common

ground and conciliation and agreement, and there are some who

say, no, I stand my ground and I hold my ground and I will

throw down.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 236 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

236

Where would you put yourself in that spectrum?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Probably a little in the middle.

I mean, I definitely make a judgment early on, but then I'm

open to hear facts and sway my decision if it -- you know, if

the information goes that way so...

MS. BERTRAND: And do you feel comfortable holding

your ground if you feel strongly about something?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Definitely.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you.

Juror 56, hi. And there might be a couple people who

agree with you on this one. I'll just put that out there. I

believe one of your answers was that -- and it's late and it's

hot in here, so if I missed it, you can just say, Joy, I

already said that -- that the system makes it too hard to

convict people. Do you remember talking about that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I do.

MS. BERTRAND: Can you say more about that, that the

system makes it too hard to convict folks.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think there are times, from

things that I've read in the paper, that people who are

obviously guilty get off on a technicality. And so the law was

interpreted correctly, and yet the criminal as was allowed to

go free based on what I would regard as a technicality as

opposed to facts.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure. And sometimes -- sometimes that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 237 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

237

technicality is a constitutional rule, but what I hear maybe --

and please correct me if I'm wrong -- is that it's frustrating?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's exactly right, it is.

MS. BERTRAND: Disappointing?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It is frustrating and it is a

difficult thing, because I do believe in the constitution and

you have to uphold it, but I think sometimes it leads to

injustice.

MS. BERTRAND: So what do we do when there is a

tension between the two, between justice and the constitution?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm sorry. What was the question?

MS. BERTRAND: What do we do when there is tension

between the two?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You follow the law.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Juror 56.

Who agrees with Juror 56, that even when it's hard, we

have to follow the constitution?

Juror 49, yes. Who else? Did I see a -- 38, 34, 44,

41.

41, you wanted to say something when you raised your

hand. What did you want to say about that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm just going to say that even

with -- when there is tensions, you know, just the supreme law

of the land is the Constitution of the United States, so for me

it would be the constitution.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 238 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

238

THE COURT: Wait. Can you -- I'm sorry. You need to

speak up a little.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, I said for me that the supreme

law of the land is the Constitution of the United States. So

if there is tension, I would definitely go with the

constitution.

MS. BERTRAND: All right. Thank you.

Juror 34, I won't -- I won't keep you on your feet

long, because you've talked quite a bit, but you said you would

follow the constitution, but you've also said this is not the

case you want me on, folks, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, yes. And I don't think it's

for reasons of not following the constitution, but, obviously,

a court proceeding is very complicated, involves the jury

determining the credibility of witnesses, and that is where

that original question, I think, came from as to how much

credibility I would give upfront to various types of witnesses.

MS. BERTRAND: I gotcha. Thank you.

Number 40, you were talking about your wife's

involvement in, was it Operation Underground Railroad?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: And that's an organization that assists

people who have been trafficked and are trying to leave that

world, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's my understanding, yeah.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 239 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

239

MS. BERTRAND: And he's not here so I'll tell you. My

beloved would not come home and tell me he did something that

would upset me. So my question for you is, if we're in a case

like this where it's going to be obvious, even if you don't

talk about the case, what case you're going to be on a jury

for, what kind of pressure are you going to have at home? On

one hand you've got your -- your wife, your beloved, very

involved, very concerned, according to your answers, about

human trafficking and sex trafficking, and your own community

involvement involving people who have been involved in the sex

industry, how are you going to square that with a not guilty

verdict, or could you?

MS. PERLMETER: Objection. Juror Number 40 already

stated that, if selected, he would abide by the Court's orders

and not discuss the matters discussed at trial with his wife at

home.

THE COURT: Okay. The objection is noted, but this

question is a little different.

So to simplify the question. If you were selected as

a juror in this case, you get to the end of trial, you're in

jury deliberations and the jury decides to return a not guilty

verdict because the government didn't meet their burden of

proof, would you have any difficulty voting that way because

you would have to go back and tell your wife that you voted not

guilty?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 240 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

240

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

THE COURT: Any other questions?

MS. BERTRAND: Not for Juror 40.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. BERTRAND: Juror 58, hi. We haven't talked a lot.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 58.

MS. BERTRAND: Hi. In your questionnaire answers you

mention that you follow the Me Too, prostitution, and sex and

human trafficking reports. Do you remember?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Could you repeat that?

MS. BERTRAND: Sure. It was in answer to -- and I

hope I -- I think so. You reside in Gilbert?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Excuse me?

MS. BERTRAND: You reside in Gilbert? I'm trying to

make sure I have the right questionnaire for you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. You noted, in terms of keeping

up with current events, that you follow the Me Too movement,

and sex trafficking, human trafficking reports. Do you

remember talking about that in your questionnaire?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: And you also stated that our laws --

and you said this a couple times -- our laws need to be updated

to deal with changes in our society.

Do you recall talking about that?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 241 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

241

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: First of all, in terms of what you

followed in the Me Too and the sex trafficking documentaries

and news reports, how does that affect your feelings about

sitting on a jury about this case and the issues in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I have to listen to the

facts on this case, right? I mean, we might be -- I mean, I'm

not going to be expressing an opinion on a case that I had read

or I had once seen, it's about the specifics on this case.

MS. BERTRAND: Got it. And there might be some of my

colleagues who want to say something about this, so what -- how

do you define trafficking in your mind, because you

specifically used that word in your responses? What is

trafficking to you, whether it's sex trafficking or human

trafficking?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, there is a financial gain

for some -- I mean, using a person or persons that might be

underage or might be under duress, that's only for financial

gain, but somebody that is -- it's a -- is breaking the law.

MS. BERTRAND: So, in your mind, I just want to make

sure everyone is clear, if someone is engaged in, for example,

sex work for financial gain, that, to you, is trafficking. Am

I understanding you correctly?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: They're closely related, I mean.

MS. BERTRAND: Closely related?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 242 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

242

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: How so? Can you say more about that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I mean -- I mean, I used to

live in California, right. And -- and there was very obvious

areas of the city, especially in Los Angeles, where there were

that kind of transactions.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. So it was always very

obvious that somebody was waiting for the ladies or the

youngsters, and it was directing them -- I mean, I used to do

construction, so I was building right along some of those

streets, so it was something that I was watching there every

day, so that's what it -- it really made my mind that it's

closely related.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure. Sure. And do you think that

your mind, with that experience, seeing it day-to-day, and I'm

imagining some pretty sad, some pretty pathetic things you saw

with people who are pretty desperate, would that impact your

ability to be clearheaded in this case when we're talking about

sex work and prostitution and all kinds of stuff?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I mean, like I say before, I

have to know the specifics. I have to know what the evidence

is on this case. Because, I mean, you have -- I mean, we are

-- we have -- right now we have our own mind, say it, what we

think they did. Also we're open to hear an evidence from a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 243 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

243

case, and based on that, reach to a verdict.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you, Juror 58.

Who else finds prostitution and trafficking very

closely related?

Juror 33.

Juror 40, I saw you raise your hand. Let me just see

what Juror 33 wants to say.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 33.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Can you repeat that question?

MS. BERTRAND: Sure. Do you believe that, in

listening to Juror 58, are trafficking, sex trafficking, human

trafficking, and prostitution interrelated, in your mind?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm pretty naive to all this.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I really don't -- I mean, I pretty

much would have to -- someone would have to tell me the

definitions of each one of these because I'm pretty sheltered

when it comes to all this stuff.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I know I'm a lot older than her

and I'm uncomfortable with it, so I can imagine how she feels.

MS. BERTRAND: Do you feel comfortable participating

in a discussion in terms of having your own voice?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, yeah.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 244 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

244

MS. BERTRAND: All right. Thank you.

Juror 40, what did you want to say? You did raise

your hand.

Thank you, Juror 33.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 40. I just -- in my mind,

they're related. Seems like the purpose of trafficking in

general is to get more prostitutes.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. You're soft spoken, so I just

want to make sure we heard. Trafficking means to get more

prostitutes. So what is the difference --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would say, typically, the

purpose of trafficking, in my mind, is to get more individuals

to serve as prostitutes or to work as prostitutes. I'd say

they're related, not necessarily the same, but related.

MS. BERTRAND: Are all prostitutes, in your mind,

trafficked?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you. Let me just check my

notes, Judge. I'm finishing up.

Nothing further, ma'am. Thank you.

THE COURT: Okay. And, counsel, you can have about

two minutes for 34 and 40.

Just use the microphone.

MS. PERLMETER: Hi, Juror Number 40. So you've been

asked a lot of questions today by pretty much everybody. One

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 245 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

245

follow-up question for you. This is related to the question,

or the hypothetical that you were posed, where one of the

defense attorneys asked you, well, if a person relied on advice

from their attorney and then behaved in accordance with it.

Okay.

So I will take it one step further. If your attorney

gives you advice based on information that you share with your

attorney so that they can give you advice, do you think it

would be problematic if you fail to provide your attorney with

all of the relevant information?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: All right. So we've had a lot of

discussion today, and it's good because we need to be able to

find jurors who will be fair for the defense, and we also need

to find jurors that will be fair for the government.

And we've had some discussion about different types of

witnesses --

Oh, I'm sorry, Juror 40, please sit down. I

apologize. I just had that one question for you.

We've had discussions about whether or not certain

life experiences can make you biased towards one group of

people or another. If you are selected to serve as a member of

this jury, you will be given an instruction about how you are

to evaluate the credibility of a witness. And, basically, it

tells you that it is up to you to decide what you want to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 246 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

246

believe and what you don't want to believe, and that you can

accept a witness's testimony in whole or in part or not at all.

And the factors that you may take into account are

things such as the witness's ability to hear --

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, is this the follow up

that the Court was anticipating?

THE COURT: No. Do you have a question for Juror 34?

MS. PERLMETER: Yes.

Juror 34, you are a retired law enforcement officer,

and you told us that if you were a defendant, you would

probably not want someone like yourself on the jury.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: And you also said that you tend to

believe law enforcement witnesses.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Now, as a law enforcement officer, are

you also -- do you also understand that you are required to

follow the law as the judge instructs it of you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Do you agree to follow the law

even if you disagree with it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, but I've never said I

disagreed with any of the laws that were discussed today.

MS. PERLMETER: If you are instructed to treat all

witnesses equally, meaning not to elevate someone based on

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 247 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

247

status, or diminish someone based on status, would you be

willing to do that -- not willing, are you able to do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think so, no.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. So based on your work as a law

enforcement officer, you're just unable to set aside that

feeling of favoring law enforcement witnesses?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct, I cannot.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. Thank you. That's -- I'm

sorry. What did you say?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sometimes the questions become

should you say yes to the no or no to the yes. So I'm trying

to say, correct, I cannot take that out of my mind.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. And that's what we're trying to

figure out, just like the questions we started off earlier

today about people who may have had substance abuse issues or

homelessness in their life, so it's law enforcement in family,

friends, self, is another category. Okay?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you very much for your time.

THE COURT: Okay. So that finishes the questions of

this group. We still have some more jurors that we have to

finish, which we're going to have to do tomorrow.

So that means if you have not been excused, I need you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 248 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

248

to come back tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. and we'll finish up

tomorrow. All right.

And for everybody downstairs --

Are they still listening?

Everyone downstairs is excused to come back tomorrow

at 9:00 a.m.

All right. We're at recess.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, one of the jurors has a

question for you.

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Do we keep numbers?

THE COURT: Yes, that would be helpful, but if you

lose it tonight, just let us know in the morning and we'll get

you a new one, because you will keep the same number, but I

realize they're just stickers.

(The prospective jurors left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Counsel, I wanted to go over hardship, but

I accept that you may want to discuss -- or not hardship,

sorry -- for cause, so I'm not going to make you do it right

now, but I want you back at 8:30 so we can do it before the

next panel.

Also tomorrow I think a couple attorneys were straying

from this area and getting too close to the jurors. You can't

do that. I'll take away the microphone and make you stand at

the podium. All right. Let me see if there is anything else.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 249 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

249

Nope, that's it. We'll see you tomorrow at 8:30.

Thank you.

MR. JONES: Your Honor, just briefly. The government

-- Reggie Jones on behalf of the United States. We just wanted

to make you aware that we did comply with your court order from

record 12-11 and gave each defense counsel a copy of our

PowerPoint that we plan to use for opening statement. Defense

counsel for defendant Larkin has also reciprocated and given us

his anticipated opening statement exhibits.

The other four defense counsels who are giving opening

statements indicated to the government that they were not

intending to use exhibits or PowerPoints, so we just wanted to

make you aware of that.

MS. BERTRAND: Judge, I did e-mail them the one

exhibit I might be using.

MR. FEDER: I actually told Mr. Jones I would send it

to him tonight.

MR. EISENBERG: And, Your Honor, excuse me, I'll give

Mr. Jones -- I'll give Mr. Jones the exhibit that I intend to

use as soon as we're done.

THE COURT: Okay. Did I not say 48 hours in advance

for everybody? Was there an issue with sending an e-mail in

time?

MR. JONES: You indicated 24 hours in advance, Your

Honor, of opening statements, which the government did -- did

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 250 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

250

comply with.

MR. EISENBERG: Well, I got this today, Your Honor, at

the first break. And I'm prepared to tell counsel right now

what I'm going to use.

THE COURT: I can't hear you. I'm sorry.

Mr. Jones, I thought you gave it to them yesterday?

MR. JONES: No, we gave it to them this afternoon,

Your Honor, at the break. We did it when we were anticipating

the 24-hour period to start, when opening statements were to

begin, so we gave it to them after the lunch break.

THE COURT: Okay. So send them your --

MR. EISENBERG: I will, Your Honor. Thank you.

(Proceedings concluded at 5:16 p.m.)

* * *

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 251 of 252
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

251

C E R T I F I C A T E

I, CHRISTINE M. COALY, do hereby certify that I am

duly appointed and qualified to act as Official Court Reporter

for the United States District Court for the District of

Arizona.

I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing pages constitute

a full, true, and accurate transcript of all of that portion of

the proceedings contained herein, had in the above-entitled

cause on the date specified therein, and that said transcript

was prepared under my direction and control.

DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, this 25th day of

September, 2021.

/s/ Christine M. Coaly_______

Christine M. Coaly, RMR, CRR

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-2 Filed 11/01/21 Page 252 of 252