Exhibit L

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 1 of 95
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 13, 2021

Michael Lacey, ) 1:35 p.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 7 - P.M. SESSION

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 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 2 of 95
1

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 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 3 of 95
1

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 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 4 of 95
1

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

WITNESS PAGE

DR. SHARON COOPER

Direct Examination by Mr. Jones 5

Cross-Examination by Ms. Bertrand 53

E X H I B I T S

Number Description Admitted

6148 Screen Shot 489a at 20 Seconds 66

6149 Screen Shot 489a at 33 Seconds 66

6150 Screen Shot 489a at 37 Seconds 66

6151 Screen Shot 489a at 1 Minute

14 Seconds Gorgeous Nubian 66

6152 Screen Shot 489a at 1 Minute

29 Seconds Hot Friday 66

6153 Screen Shot 489a at 2 Minutes

1 Second Hot Latina 66

6154 Screen Shot 489a at 2 Minutes

10 Seconds Bootylicious 66

6155 Screen Shot 489a at 2 Minutes

37 Seconds Running Special 66

6156 Screen Shot 489a at 33 Seconds

Want Out 66

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 5 of 95
1

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

THE COURT: We are back on the record with the jury

present.

The government's next witness.

MR. JONES: The United States calls Dr. Sharon Cooper,

Your Honor.

MR. BIENERT: This is Mr. Bienert. While we're

waiting, your madam clerk was nice enough to square away those

exhibits with me.

Do you want me to recite the list now or do it later?

THE COURT: We'll do it on a break.

MR. BIENERT: Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you.

DR. SHARON COOPER,

called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was

examined and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Good afternoon, Dr. Cooper.

A. Good afternoon.

Q. Please introduce yourself to the jury.

A. My name is Sharon W. Cooper and I'm a developmental and

forensic pediatrician.

Q. Dr. Cooper, where do you live?

A. I live in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 6 of 95
1

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

Q. Is that where you serve as -- currently serve as a

developmental and forensic pediatrician?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And how long have you held that position?

A. I started my own corporation, Developmental and Forensic

Pediatrics, in 1997.

Q. Dr. Cooper, could you just briefly describe for the jury,

just walk them through some of your formal education.

A. I received my bachelor's of science degree from Fisk

University in Nashville, Tennessee, and then went on to medical

school at Meharry Medical College.

After I graduated from medical school, I volunteered

and joined the United States Army and did an internship and

residency at Tripler Army Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.

I then spent the next total of 20 years -- 21 years

serving in the armed forces at various installations where I

was both a forensic pediatrician responsible for child abuse

cases of all different types, and involved in family violence

cases, as well as completing a fellowship in developmental at

Behavioral Pediatrics in El Paso, Texas.

My last assignment was at Fort Bragg in North

Carolina, which has the largest pediatric population in the

Army, more than 45,000 children under the age of 18. And as

the chief of pediatrics there, I was responsible for

supervising other pediatricians who cared for inpatient

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 7 of 95
1

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

children, outpatient, and nursery and special care nursery

patients.

I retired from the Army in 1996 and started my own

corporation, Developmental and Forensic Pediatrics, and became

an adjunct professor of pediatrics at the University of North

Carolina at Chapel Hill, which is an appointment I continue to

have to the present date.

I also, at that point, became a forensic pediatrician

at the Southern Regional Area Health Education Center in

Fayetteville, which is one of ten counties in the 100-county

state of North Carolina that sees -- that has special clinics

to see child abuse cases. And I continue to see patients

within that -- within those confines as well.

Q. And, Dr. Cooper, what -- in or around what year did you

retire from the military?

A. I retired in 1996.

Q. And what was your rank upon retirement?

A. I retired as a full colonel.

Q. Did you receive any awards upon your retirement from the

military?

A. I was very honored to be a recipient of the Legion of Merit

Award, which is an award that has to be approved by Congress in

order for you to receive that award as a military personnel.

Q. Dr. Cooper, could you walk the jury through any of your

academic and community affiliations and appointments as they

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 8 of 95
1

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

relate to sex trafficking and how it occurs online.

A. I had began working in the area of sexual exploitation and

sex trafficking around 1996 to 1997 after I retired from the

military.

I was asked initially to become a trainer for the

United States Postal Inspection Service, because in the late

1990s, just as we were coming to the change of the century, we

were beginning to see internet crimes against children, and we

were beginning to see digital crimes against children. And the

U.S. Postal Inspection Service, which is the law enforcement

part of the post office, was finding themselves in a state of

delivering what turned out to be contraband in the mail, and so

they needed to be able to better assess the content of illegal

videotapes and things of that nature. That started to become

more common.

Shortly after 2000 to 2001 when we started seeing

sexual exploitation exploding, both from the perspective of

online, what we called child pornography at that time, we now

call that child sexual abuse material --

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Move for side bar, please.

THE COURT: All right.

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

MS. BERTRAND: This is Joy Bertrand, attorney for Joye

Vaught.

The defense objects to this line of prove up of this

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 9 of 95
1

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

witness for the following reasons:

First, this is not a pornography case; second, it's

not a child exploitation case. We just talked about this

witness's limited scope of testimony at 8:30 this morning, and

they're already going beyond that in the prove up, talking

about child exploitation, talking about child pornography,

videos, and the explosion of all of this. None of that has to

do with what this Court told the government it is allowed to do

with this witness.

I would ask, Judge, first of all, that this be

sustained, but also that I be allowed to voir dire this witness

before we get into substantive testimony, because I don't think

they're going to be able to prove up that she's linked to the

ability to talk about vernacular language, and that was what

the Court told the government this morning it could do, and

that's it.

THE COURT: No, I thought there was a second area.

MS. BERTRAND: Secondary area --

MR. JONES: -- occurs online --

THE COURT: Online.

MR. JONES: -- which is what she --

THE COURT: So, first of all, this is just foundation.

This is what she does. She hasn't been asked anything

substantive, so the objection is overruled.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, can I just --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 10 of 95
1

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

THE COURT: State your name.

MR. LINCENBERG: Gary Lincenberg.

I thought the Court ruled that this witness can go

into one area -- vernacular and that was it. And what the

government --

(Court reporter interrupts for clarification.)

THE COURT: She can't hear you.

MR. LINCENBERG: This is Gary Lincenberg.

And what the government is doing with this going into

the background is just all of the child and sex stuff that the

Court had permitted them to do and just kind of try to talk

about it by way of background.

I heard the Court rule -- there were two issues this

morning. And the Court ruled that this witness can go into

vernacular, but then told the government if you do it with this

witness, you can't do it with Decoufle, and that the other area

they can't go into.

THE COURT: Right. No, no. What I said is they can't

go into the relationship between traffickers and pimps and that

whole psychology, but I did not preclude how sex trafficking

occurs on the internet.

MR. LINCENBERG: I heard it differently, but okay.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, I heard it differently too.

THE COURT: Okay.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 11 of 95
1

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

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Apologize, Dr. Cooper. You can continue.

A. So, therefore, right around 2000 we began, in the United

States and around the world, to recognize a new type of crime

against children, and that had to do with technology.

Around 2001, or thereabouts, I was asked to begin as a

trainer for the National Center for Missing and Exploited

Children, which is our national hotline, for individuals who

want to report a concern of either internet crimes against

children or sex trafficking of children. That is our national

hotline.

Around 2002, I began to recognize that the field of

child maltreatment did not recognize child sexual exploitation

as a form of child abuse. It just wasn't in our textbooks at

all. So I began working, at that particular point, on writing

a textbook focused in this particular area.

At which time, I met Dr. Richard Estes, who became

very internationally renowned at recognizing sex trafficking in

children. Dr. Estes is from the University of Pennsylvania,

and ultimately became one of the coauthors of the textbook that

we completed in 2005 focused on all aspects of child sexual

exploitation. And it is Dr. Estes's term, the commercial

sexual exploitation of children, which is still used

internationally and nationally to reflect the issue of sex

trafficking involving minors, not just young children, but

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 12 of 95
1

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

adolescents as well.

I was continuing to provide training at the National

Center for Missing and Exploited Children for a specific course

entitled initially, Prostitution of Children, initially. And

that name changed as our country changed in recognizing that

children were not prostitutes, children were being prostituted.

They were not prostitutes.

And it was in 2004 ECPAT International and ECPAT USA,

which is a nonprofit international organization that focuses on

sexual exploitation of children, wrote a document that caused

our Congress and state laws to change from any longer referring

to children as prostitutes. They began to recognize that

children were, in fact, being prostituted. They were not

prostituting themselves.

So in our earlier funds of knowledge, we always had

children who were sex trafficking victims as juvenile

delinquents. And it was in the early 2000 part of this century

that we began to recognize that we had mis -- mislabeled, if

you will, a form of very serious victimization. And we had

just assumed that children were selling themselves on street

corners, which was very, very erroneous in our thought process,

both from a criminal justice perspective, from a psychological

perspective, and from a medical perspective.

So in 2005 we wrote a textbook focused on all aspects

of child sexual exploitation. I was the lead editor.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 13 of 95
1

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

Dr. Estes was one of the editors, Dr. Angelo Giardino,

Dr. Nancy Kellogg, and attorney Victor Vieth were the five

editors of this particular two volume set of books that are

still seen in the United States, and in some foreign countries,

as the most comprehensive text on child sexual exploitation.

Because of our beginning to recognize, therefore, the

issue of the trafficking of children, we became much more

knowledgeable in our country, which already had passed the

Child Victim's Protection Act in 2000, that act already existed

as a federal law, but now we were beginning to look at the role

of subjugation and victimization of children as equally, if not

more so, problematic.

In 2004 --

MR. FEDER: Judge, I'm going to object to this as

relevance. It's a narrative of not her credentials, but her --

a speech.

THE COURT: The objection is noted.

You need to ask a question.

MR. FEDER: And move to strike and for a continuing

objection.

THE COURT: The motion to strike is denied.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, could you talk with the jury a little bit about

any of your recent or past trainings as it pertains to adult

and child sex trafficking, and along with that, have you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 14 of 95
1

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

reviewed any medical literature on -- on prostitution and child

sex trafficking as well, to talk with them briefly about that.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, have you testified as an expert in the area of

sex trafficking as pertains to adult and children and

prostitution in federal and state courts?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. Okay. Just, approximately, the number of times your

testimony you have been qualified as an expert in this area?

A. At least 25 times.

Q. Okay. As part of your medical practice, have you

interviewed victims who have been trafficked, both -- online,

both as adults and children?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. Okay. Just, approximately, how many victims have you

interviewed?

A. Well over a hundred.

Q. Okay. Could you briefly just describe, I guess, to the

jury, the nature of your -- of your work with victims and

interviewing them.

A. Usually I have been called by law enforcement to evaluate

victims who have been rescued within the context of an

investigation involving a sex trafficker.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 15 of 95
1

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

And so, generally speaking, I would be flown to

whatever part of the United States this would have occurred,

and I would stay and interview each one of the victims, and

write reports for the court regarding what had happened to them

in their life, how did they come to be exploited in the manner

that they were, what kinds of mental health problems were they

experiencing, were they also --

MS. BERTRAND: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance and

narrative.

THE COURT: The objection to narrative is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. And as part of your expert testimony in those more than 25

occasions, has that testimony included how victims, both adults

and children, were trafficked through online platforms?

A. Yes, it has.

Q. Okay. Dr. Cooper, through your more than 40 years of

medical practice specialization in sex trafficking, have you

become familiar with terminology, in other words, the

vernacular used in the prostitution and sex trafficking

industry?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. Have you written books, read articles in any publications

regarding the vernacular involved in the prostitution and sex

trafficking industry?

A. Yes, I have.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 16 of 95
1

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

Q. Briefly just talk --

A. Yes. The most recent chapter that I wrote was for the

third edition of child sexual abuse, it was on child sexual

exploitation, and in particular was focused on terminology that

is used with respect to children and adolescents who are being

sold in the online world.

Q. Have you trained law enforcement on terminology used in the

prostitution and sex trafficking industry during your more than

40 years of experience?

A. Yes. I have not only trained law enforcement, I have also

trained medical providers, legal investigators, and I've spoken

at the National Judicial College.

Q. Also through your work, have you, through your interviews

with victims, have you discussed the vernacular and terms used

in the prostitution and sex trafficking industry with them as

well?

A. Yes, I have. Specifically, within the context of

understanding if a victim has had quite a bit of trauma, it is

difficult for the victim to chronologically describe what has

happened to them, and so it really requires careful victim

interviews and repetitive interviews in order to get as many

details as possible.

Q. Dr. Cooper, during your more than 100 occasions to have

testified in court throughout the country, has any of your

expert testimony involved or described the vernacular and

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 17 of 95
1

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

terminology used in the prostitution and sex trafficking

industry?

A. Yes, it has.

Q. Okay.

MR. JONES: Your Honor, at this point the government

requests that Dr. Cooper be qualified as an expert in the area

of how trafficking occurs through online media platforms, and

also terminology and vernacular used in sex trafficking and

prostitution industry, her proposed expert testimony on these

topics deemed reliable and relevant to this case.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, I would ask to be able to

voir dire the witness before the Court makes that conclusion.

THE COURT: That request is denied.

The government may proceed.

MR. JONES: Thank you, Your Honor.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, could you just start off by explaining to the

jury, talking to them about, you know, what is sex trafficking

and what is prostitution, and really distinguishing the two for

them.

A. Yes, I can do that. The -- the difference between sex

trafficking and prostitution entails two components.

Prostitution can only occur with individuals who can give

consent. Minors cannot give consent for any type of sexual

encounter, and so therefore prostitution is defined as the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 18 of 95
1

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

exchange of sex for money, drugs, influence, et cetera, between

two consenting adults. If these two individuals are exchanging

sex without consent, that is not considered prostitution,

that's considered sex trafficking between two adults.

If you, on the other hand, have third-party control,

that is, there is an exchange of sex between two adults or

between an adult and a child, and there is a third party that

is maintaining the power, control, and money that occurs for

that transaction, that is referred to as sex trafficking,

third-party control.

Q. I want to talk -- ask you to explain just some of the

terminology just briefly. We'll go into detail later. But

just explain what a pimp and a trafficker is to the jury, and

also a John and trick, and also a madam and bottom. Could you

just explain those terminologies to the jury so they have a

good understanding of what those terms mean?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: A pimp or a trafficker is that

third-party control of which I just spoke. That's the

individual who is responsible for control, who has been the

individual to recruit, to entice, to harbor, or obtain, to

provide and/or transport a victim for the purpose of sexual

acts, typically commercial sex acts.

If a victim is a minor, no force, fraud, or coercion

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 19 of 95
1

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

is necessary for this to be a pimp or trafficker/victim

relationship. If, on the other hand, the victim is an adult,

force, fraud, or coercion are necessary if, in fact, this is

going to be therefore considered a trafficking scenario, as

compared to a pimp.

A pimp individual often controls one or more

individuals --

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, objection. Relevance.

Move to strike.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: A pimp or trafficker uses, typically,

their power, control over one or more victims for the purpose

of sex trafficking, and makes those victims available for

individuals to purchase. That dynamic, the making them

available for purchase, is the component that causes there to

be money, usually, made available.

What is also relevant is that typically in the

organization of a trafficker --

THE COURT: Counsel, you asked for a definition.

MR. JONES: Right. Okay.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Could we move on to a John and a trick? Could you give the

jury a definition of what a John and a trick means?

A. Yes, I can.

Q. And --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 20 of 95
1

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

A. Yes, I can. I was going to explain a bottom. I'll explain

a John.

Q. Or you can go whatever order, madam and bottom as well.

A. If that's okay? Yeah.

As I was saying, the -- the trafficker usually chooses

a person among the women and/or men that they are controlling

to be in charge of everyone, and that person's referred to as a

bottom. That was one of the questions that was posed.

A bottom is often a person who was controlled by the

trafficker initially and who has worked their way up in the

organization to be in charge of everybody else. And so they're

referred to as the bottom, but they actually are the victim who

is in charge of all the other victims in the organization.

Q. What about a John?

A. A John is a term often used for a buyer. We try not to use

that terminology too much anymore. We prefer the term buyer so

it's clear as to who is the trafficker and who is the market,

or who is the buyer. And a John is an individual who usually

goes online in order to find any kind of evidence that would

allow him or her to be able to buy a person for sex.

Q. What about the terminology hobby boards, review boards in

prostitution?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: Counsel, just yes or no, does this relate

to ads?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 21 of 95
1

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

MR. JONES: It does, Your Honor.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: Hobby boards, or review boards, are

often written information, typically in the online world, that

will score or gauge how successful a victim is likely to be

when an individual is considering buying that victim for sex.

MS. BERTRAND: Same objection, relevance. Move to

strike.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled. The motion is

denied.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Now, Dr. Cooper, I want to talk now about how sex

trafficking occurs on online platforms. Before the advent of

the internet, you know, where did sex trafficking and

prostitution mostly occur?

A. Most of the time, prior to the internet, sex trafficking

occurred on street corners or it occurred in brothels, in

hotels, or locations where individuals could go in and have sex

with men or women and then leave. But the most common urban

form of sex trafficking was on street corners, with victims

walking up and down the street, often referred to as the track,

and with individuals who would drive by and decide which one

they wanted to buy for sex at that time.

Q. You've interviewed approximately how many victims involved

in sex trafficking and prostitution over the past 15 or

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 22 of 95
1

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

20 years since the advent of the internet?

A. How many have I seen? I'm sorry.

Q. Yes, just approximately.

MS. BERTRAND: Wait. Can we have the question again,

please?

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Approximately, how many victims that have been trafficked

through online platforms have you seen or worked with in the

past 15 to 20 years?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance. Conflates

victims with prostitution.

THE COURT: Okay. The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question? I

apologize.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. That's okay. Approximately, how many victims, over the

past 15 or 20 years, have you worked with that have been

involved in the online sex trafficking or prostitution

industry?

A. I have seen well over 200 victims, in part because some are

sold by traffickers who are not related to them. Many have

been sold by traffickers who are family members.

Q. Have those victims been both adult and children -- adults

and children?

A. Yes, they have.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 23 of 95
1

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

Q. Okay. And how many of those victims have been trafficked

online?

A. The overwhelming majority.

Q. Okay. What about specific platforms over the past 15 or

20 years, the victims you have seen that have been trafficked

online?

A. Initially, when we looked at online trafficking, Craigslist

was the first online site that we were aware of. When I say we

are aware, this was within my relationship with the National

Center for Missing and Exploited Children as they were

monitoring where were children being found that were being

bought.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Move to strike. Hearsay.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: I was working directly with the National

Center at that time. In fact, I was an instructor for the

National Center for 16 years, and I taught specifically, with

respect to sex trafficking victimization, a 4-hour window, a

4-hour course of a 40-hour course, 10 percent of the course, on

victimization of children and adolescents in sex trafficking,

which is how I came to understand where and how it was that

victims were more commonly sold.

With respect to online marketing, Craigslist was our

first site that we began to see. Then we began to see and

worry about social networks, because individuals were

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 24 of 95
1

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

interacting on MySpace at first, and then in Facebook and other

social networks, using that as a means. And then we began to

hear about a different platform, and that was Backpage, which

became the most common, for at least ten years, site that we

saw victims sold for sex by sex traffickers.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Based on your experiences in this arena as well, did

Backpage itself and the online platforms, you know, have they

served as a means to also recruit victims into trafficking as

well?

MR. FEDER: Objection. Leading.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance. Leading.

THE COURT: The objection to leading is overruled.

The other objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Could you talk to the jury briefly about how individuals,

basically, in your experience with law enforcement, experience

interviewing victims that have been trafficked, based on your

education and background as well, you know, how do you -- I

mean, how do traffickers come to know, you know, that online

platforms, in particular Backpage, was a site to go to?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Calls for hearsay.

Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection to relevance is overruled,

but the objection to hearsay is sustained unless you have some

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 25 of 95
1

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

other foundation.

MR. JONES: Okay.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. You mentioned that Backpage was the platform, for at least

over ten years, where the majority of your victims are

trafficked, correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. How did you learn that to be the case?

A. I usually -- usually glean that information from law

enforcement investigations.

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, I object. It's hearsay.

That's not appropriate foundation.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: I would typically be working with law

enforcement when they were investigating a trafficking case,

and they would brief me with respect to the number of victims,

their ages, as best they could tell, and how did the case first

become known. And there --

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, hearsay. Objection.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: And as I was briefed prior to evaluating

these victims by law enforcement, which is a standard

procedure, typically, when medical care providers are going to

interact with victims, usually we are briefed by law

enforcement and/or child protective services regarding the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 26 of 95
1

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

specifics of the case, that this is how I discovered that these

victims were most commonly being sold from Backpage.

In keeping with that intel, when I would evaluate

victims, I would ask them did they have any idea of how it was

they were being sold and bought, and they told me directly that

how they had --

MS. BERTRAND: Judge, hearsay. Objection.

THE COURT: Okay. Counsel, side bar.

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

THE COURT: Who is -- who am I talking to? You made

the objection. So Rule 702 gives the expert some leeway, so

you can have a continuing objection, but as long as it's

something she used in her experience, it's coming in under 702.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, there is also an objection

to relevance and 403, and that she keeps going back to child

trafficking, child trafficking, child abuse, medical

evaluations of children, and not talking in general terms about

sex trafficking. That is improper. It goes against prior

orders of this Court and we'd object. It's going outside the

bounds of the limits this Court has placed on this prosecution.

MR. CAMBRIA: Paul Cambria.

THE COURT: Okay. That limit was placed when we

talked about a different witness.

MR. CAMBRIA: Paul Cambria on behalf of Mr. Lacey.

Your Honor, the entire direct was geared toward saying

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 27 of 95
1

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

children, children, children, children, children. That's all

we heard about. I did this with children, I did that, I this,

they can't consent, they can't this, that. I move for a

mistrial. I think that we are absolutely prejudiced at this

point.

These people think that this is a children case, and

in -- at the very minimum, this Court should instruct the jury

that there is no children charged in this case. There is no

charge of trafficking children. There is no charge of children

prostitution. There are none of those crimes, if you will.

And these jurors are being led to believe that this is all

about children. And that's all she is talking about.

And you can tell she's a professional witness. She's

got all the, you know, the long narratives. Any kind of

question she just goes on, and on, and on, and on, and I just

think you have to stop it, Your Honor, and I think we're

prejudiced irretrievably.

MR. FEDER: Bruce Feder on behalf of Mr. Spear.

You mentioned to the opening statement, which was also

-- there was also a mistrial asked for, this is -- this is --

this appears to be the theme of the government is that they

open with child exploitation when this isn't about child

exploitation, and they have brought up -- they tried to gauge

it in.

THE COURT: Mr. Jones.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 28 of 95
1

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

MR. JONES: As Your Honor has indicated in her order

to our motion in limine, criminal record 1156, the government

charged the defendants with intending to facilitate

prostitution through running Backpage for more than 14 years.

Sex trafficking is a subset of prostitution and

requires individuals to engage in sexual services in exchange

for money. And so, you know, while the government does not

feel that Dr. Cooper's testimony has been overly focused on

children, but the fact of the matter is, you know, children are

trafficked through Backpage, and sex trafficking is a -- is a

subset of prostitution.

THE COURT: Go ahead.

MR. JONES: Moreover, Your Honor, we'd just like to

make the government aware, as Your Honor indicated, that the

fact that sex trafficking occurs on -- was facilitated through

Backpage and defendant knew it is highly relevant and highly

probative to defendants' intent to -- and their knowledge that

illegal activity was taking place on their website.

THE COURT: Okay. So you need to move on, because you

haven't even talked about how it's actually done, you've just

sort of --

MR. JONES: And that's where we're leading up --

that's where we're headed to next.

THE COURT: Well, you need to be careful, because

you're getting close to a 403 violation.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 29 of 95
1

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

MR. JONES: Okay.

THE COURT: And I did, when discussing a different

expert, Ms. Perlmeter indicated she would phrase it in terms of

sex trafficking, stay away from the child sex trafficking.

MR. JONES: All right. Okay.

THE COURT: You have not done the same, so you need to

be careful.

MR. JONES: Will do. Will do, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And you need to direct your witness a

little bit, because she could very well go off on a tangent

into something.

MR. JONES: Okay. Will do.

THE COURT: Which I had to stop her one time.

MR. EISENBERG: I'm sorry. May I be heard? This is

Dave Eisenberg.

The real problem, as I see it, is that there is no

link between sex trafficking and anybody at Backpage who was

aware of it at all, child sex trafficking, I should say. And I

think the jury is getting the impression that that's what this

case is really about. I don't think the government can make

that link at all. In fact, it's just the opposite, that's why

they were reporting what they thought were minors, not people

who were sex trafficked as minors, just minors, to NCMEC and

others.

MR. BIENERT: For the record, I assume the motion --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 30 of 95
1

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

all of us are deemed to have joined in the motion for mistrial.

THE COURT: I will do that, although I think most of

you have spoken, but yes.

MR. BIENERT: Well, Mr. Bienert joins.

THE COURT: Okay.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Apologies, Dr. Cooper.

I want to ask you, talk briefly now about your

knowledge of the Backpage.com website.

Have you had the occasion to -- have you seen ads that

have been posted in the adult services section of Backpage?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. Okay. Have you had the occasion to notice certain

disclaimers within those advertisements?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Are there any disclaimers as it pertains to

companionship? Could you explain, talk with the jury about why

those disclaimers would be in a Backpage ad.

A. My understanding of online marketing is to try to make it

as clear to the viewer that everything that is being marketed

online is legally marketed online.

Q. Okay. What about any disclaimers regarding law

enforcement?

A. The goal is to make individuals who might be choosing to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 31 of 95
1

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

make purchases online feel comfortable that they would not be

at risk for any type of law enforcement action.

Q. Are you also familiar with how the Backpage website

operated, just generally?

A. My knowledge of the operation of the Backpage process is

strictly through the -- my reading about Backpage, but also

from --

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, objection. Hearsay.

MR. FEDER: It's a yes or no question.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled because I'm

trying to figure out what her knowledge is.

Without telling us what you read, you can continue.

THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am.

My reading, in general, because I stay abreast of

victimization and the victimization literature, and also from

interviewing, doing medical interviews of patients whose images

were on Backpage.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Are you aware that there are posting rules that an

individual must agree to before posting in the adult service

section of Backpage?

A. Yes, I am aware of that.

Q. Okay. Is it your -- based on your education and

experience, is it your expert opinion that those posting rules

are effective in preventing sex trafficking?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 32 of 95
1

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

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Based on your education and experience, what have you

learned about the posting rules that individuals must agree to

before posting in the adult services section of Backpage?

A. My understanding of the posting rules are that they must be

voluntary and that no laws are going to be broken by their very

nature of having been posted.

Q. Okay. And based on your interviewing of victims, has this

been the case?

A. No, it has not.

Q. Okay. Once an individual is recruited into trafficking,

you know, are there reasons why the victims are sold online, a

vast majority, versus elsewhere?

MR. CAMBRIA: Object to the relevance, Your Honor.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: I apologize. Could you repeat the

question?

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Are there reasons why a victim may be trafficked online,

through online platforms like Backpage, versus elsewhere, like

on the street?

MS. BERTRAND: Same objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 33 of 95
1

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

THE WITNESS: Yes. The main reason that victims are

posted on online classifieds is because they will bring more

money because they are more readily available. They can be

booked, if you will, very predictably ahead of time so that a

victim will know exactly how many sexual contacts they're going

to have in a given period of time because they've already been

booked.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, move to strike. This calls

for speculation as to what the booker on the platform intends

and wants.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: Because the victims are told by the

trafficker exactly how many dates -- is what they're usually

referred to as -- they are going to have at a given time, it is

much more efficient than a victim standing on a street corner

waiting for a car to stop.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What about the -- the crafting of advertisements that are

posted online? Do traffickers, are they able to control the

method by which the ads are posted with this process as well?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Foundation.

MR. FEDER: Objection. Beyond the scope of expertise,

and relevance.

Bruce Feder.

MS. BERTRAND: Joy Bertrand. Objection. Lack of

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 34 of 95
1

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

foundation, and outside scope of expertise.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained as to

foundation.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Are you familiar, Dr. Cooper, with how ads are posted to be

-- are posted on Backpage.com?

A. I am.

Q. Okay. And what's involved in the posting of

advertisements?

A. Yes. A picture has to be made of a given victim, and then

the victim's image is going to be uploaded so that there will

be a description. And specific words will be used for the

buyer to be able to ascertain how much money it's going to cost

in order to have a date with this particular victim.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Move to strike. Conflating

all prostitution with traffickers.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What about the payment for advertisements? Are you

familiar with how advertisements are paid to be posted on

websites like Backpage?

A. Yes, I am familiar.

Q. Okay. Are there either benefits to a trafficker as it

pertains to the payments that -- or being able to pay for ads

on websites like Backpage?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 35 of 95
1

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

A. Yes, there are benefits. Victims are usually sold by the

hour, and, generally speaking, they are -- generally speaking,

the amount of money that is going to be necessary for the hour

of a sexual encounter with a victim will be communicated in the

ad itself.

Q. Based on your knowledge and experience of working with

hundreds of victims that have been trafficked online, do

websites like Backpage -- were you aware of any age

verification as it pertains to the posting of ads on Backpage?

MR. FEDER: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: Based upon my experience from seeing

victims and evaluating victims, there has been no age

verification for minor victims who have been sold online.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Can you briefly describe for the jury the role -- you

explained what a buyer was, or what you -- of sex for money.

Just briefly describe the role a buyer plays in the online sex

trafficking industry.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. You talk about -- you talked about review sites and these

hobby boards. Have you found, based on your education and

experience in your more than 40 years of experience, have you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 36 of 95
1

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

found that online sex trafficking occurs through these review

sites as well?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, have you found, with your expert experience,

that online platforms like Backpage have been helpful in

preventing sex trafficking --

MS. BERTRAND: Objection.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. -- online sex trafficking?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Leading. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: I have found just the opposite. I have

found that the presence of online classified ads as are seen in

Backpage promote increased victimization, both in numbers and

in severity.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What about -- could you talk about other online platforms,

whether it be Google, Twitter, Facebook, is there a difference,

based on your expert opinion, in those online platforms versus

the online platform like Backpage?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Foundation. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained as to

foundation.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 37 of 95
1

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

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Are you aware of other online -- online platforms?

A. Yes, I am.

Q. Okay. That may host -- that may have adult content on

them?

A. Yes, I am.

Q. Okay. Are you -- also you said you're familiar with

Backpage, correct?

A. Yes, I am.

Q. Have you found, based on your experience, a difference

between how the websites maintain the market as it pertains to

prostitution?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. I'm sorry, as it pertains to adult advertisements?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: That objection is overruled.

MR. FEDER: Foundation too.

THE COURT: That objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. You are aware of other online platforms that may host adult

content, correct?

A. Yes, I am.

Q. You are also aware that Backpage also hosted adult content

as well?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 38 of 95
1

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

A. Yes, it does.

Q. Have you found, based on your experience in both of those

areas, have there been a difference in how adult ads were --

were -- were on -- were on Backpage versus other platforms that

may host adult content?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection.

MR. FEDER: Foundation.

MS. BERTRAND: Relevance. Beyond scope ordered by the

Court.

THE COURT: That objection is overruled.

But can you rephrase the question? I don't understand

the question.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Could you -- is there a difference between --

MR. JONES: She's familiar with both adult content

that may be hosted on other platforms, whether it be Facebook,

Twitter, Google versus Backpage.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Have you found, based on your expert experience and

interviews of victims, have there been -- is there a difference

of how adult content is marketed on Backpage versus these other

platforms?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Foundation. Relevance.

Beyond scope.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 39 of 95
1

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

THE WITNESS: Yes, I have found a difference. There

are several differences.

The first difference is that the overwhelming majority

of victims that I have evaluated over the last 15 years, but

especially over the last 10 years, who have been sold online,

have been sold on Backpage, that's -- absolutely the lion's

share have been sold on Backpage.

The second point is that the majority of victims that

I have evaluated who have been sold on Backpage were underage

minors, so that is a second component.

And the third component is that reviewing the actual

Backpage postings, as I have as I prepared to testify in court

in many of these kinds of cases, the victims are promoted

within that particular venue as if they are selling themselves

not as if they are being sold.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, have you also found that recidivism, as it

relates to victims being trafficked on online platforms, in

particular Backpage, have you found that recidivism to be an

issue?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Vague as to recidivism and

relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, are you familiar with recidivism as it relates

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 40 of 95
1

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

to online sex -- in the online sex trafficking industry?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Relevance.

MR. LINCENBERG: And 403.

MS. BERTRAND: 403.

MR. JONES: I'm laying the foundation, Your Honor, for

her to explain.

THE COURT: Well, that topic is not relevant.

MR. JONES: Okay.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, based on your education and experience, you

said interviewing hundreds of victims who were trafficked via

online platforms, mostly Backpage, what percentage of them

have, to your knowledge, you know, actually engaged in sex for

money through those online platforms?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Foundation. Relevance.

403.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. You've interviewed victims -- trafficking victims --

victims who have been trafficked from Back -- on Backpage,

correct?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. I'll come back to that, Dr. Cooper.

I want to ask you now about -- I want to focus on some

of the terminology that's often used. We've talked about

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 41 of 95
1

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

pimps, traffickers, you know, buyers, and the like. You know,

why -- why is there a different vernacular used in the

prostitution and human trafficking industry?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Foundation. Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: There is --

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, objection. Calls for

speculation as to what's in someone else's mind.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: There is a specific language involved in

sex trafficking victimization, and, generally speaking, the

general public is not really familiar to -- with that language.

For those of us who work in this particular field and

in this area, it's much easier for us to understand exactly

what's being communicated, and when we see it in writing, for

example, on an online classified ad, we know right away that

this is going to be the selling of a person for sex.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection, Your Honor. Comes to --

calls for ultimate conclusion.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled for this

question.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Let's talk about, Dr. Cooper, you know, the -- some of the

terms used in the prostitution sex trafficking industry.

Could you explain to the jury the term -- terminology

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 42 of 95
1

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

in call and out call?

A. Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Foundation.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

You can answer.

THE WITNESS: Yes, ma'am.

My knowledge with respect to a lot of the language

associated with sex trafficking victimization has come from my

study of the literature, but also my having worked with

seasoned investigators at both the federal and state level for

many years.

In calls and out calls are particular terms used to

describe whether or not a victim is going to remain in one

location and a buyer is going to come to the victim. This

would be referred to as an in call. Typically, you would see

that in a motel type of setting where --

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Lack of foundation. Move

to strike.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: -- where the victim may, in fact, be

standing outside a door, and the buyer comes and sees the

victim and knows what room to come to in order to buy them and

have sex with them.

An out call, on the other hand, is when there is on

the -- on the platform that is marketing the victim, a request

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 43 of 95
1

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

for the victim to be brought to them. Very often this means

that a trafficker will either personally drive a victim to a

hotel, for example, and take them specifically to a room where

the sexual acts are going to occur and where monies will be

exchanged, or if the trafficker has a more complete enterprise,

there will be other pieces to that transporting for an out

call. There will be taxi cab drivers that are already paid.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, objection. Goes beyond

scope. 403. Relevance.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: In that manner, the trafficker will

already have had working for him individuals who will transport

the victim from where the victim is staying, which is usually

with the trafficker, to the location of where the buyer is

going to be. They will then wait. They will often pay

individuals in a given hotel to allow that victim to just go

right past the front desk to the right room in order to have

sex with that particular buyer --

MS. BERTRAND: Objection.

THE WITNESS: -- and then leave the hotel.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, 403. Beyond the scope.

Relevance.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What about the term 100 percent independent, or

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 44 of 95
1

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

independent, have you come across that term in ads on Backpage?

A. Yes, I have. When the term 100 percent independent is

cited on a classified ad, it is for the purpose of promoting

the buyer to believe that this is prostitution, that this is an

individual who is selling herself or himself hundred percent.

They're the person in charge of themselves.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, objection. Testifying as

to the mindset of someone else. Goes beyond the scope. 403.

THE COURT: Counsel, the objection is overruled. Rule

702 allows it.

Go ahead.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What about the term roses?

A. Roses was a term that was first promoted in Craigslist and

usually would be the term to tell you how much money was going

to be necessary for the sex act.

An example -- I will give an example of what we would

see often in Craigslist, and subsequently have seen in other

online classified services, including Backpage. A number of

roses, such as 100 or 150 roses, is the desired gift, if you

will, that is -- that is written, actually, in the online

classified. That means that the sexual act is going to be 100

or $150.

In Backpage and some other sites, dollar signs are not

necessarily evident. You may just see a symbol of a flower

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 45 of 95
1

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

that would be called a rose, but that really means how much

money the sexual act is going to cost.

Q. What about the phrase GFE? Are you familiar with that

term?

A. Yes, I am. The abbreviation GFE stands for girlfriend

experience, which means that the buyer wants to have a female

who will act like a girlfriend not like a stranger who is

coming in who is going to perform a sexual act and who is going

to leave, but who is going to be more personable and be more

like a girlfriend.

So GFE means that the victim is going to have to

behave in a certain manner, because they usually are not coming

to see someone they've ever met before, but they have to come

in and perform the sexual acts in a manner as if they were the

girlfriend of the individual who is buying them.

Q. What about the terminology quick -- quickie, and also,

along with those, could you talk about, you know, pricing

increments in ads, generally?

A. Yes, I can. The -- often the sexual acts are sold in

increments of 15 to 30 minutes, and the more time, obviously,

the more expensive the date, as it is often referred to as on

classifieds, and also in terminology from the trafficker to the

victim. The -- the amount of time will, of course, go up and

-- and more money will be necessary.

So a quickie is a very short sexual encounter, one of

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 46 of 95
1

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

the shortest sexual encounters. And a quickie may very well

not entail a complete sexual act in the manner that we would

think, such as intercourse. It may, in fact, entail a very

limited amount of contact, such as something referred to as a

blow job, which is oral sex, or a hand job, which is

masturbation of a penis to ejaculation.

Q. What about the term Greek?

A. The term Greek is another common term that you can see in

online classified ads. It is another description of a

different type of sexual act. It infers anal sex from the

Grecian times.

Q. What about PIT? Are you familiar with that term?

A. I'm not so familiar.

Q. PIT, or pimp in training?

A. Yes, I am familiar with PIT.

PIT means that there are those younger pimps who are

learning how to be pimps. And, in fact, I have evaluated

victims who spoke to me about PITs, which is how I first

learned about PITs. A younger pimp is going to not protect a

victim as well as they might, or a younger pimp --

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, objection. Goes beyond the

scope. 403. We --

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

MS. BERTRAND: Move to strike.

THE COURT: That last answer will be stricken.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 47 of 95
1

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

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What about DATY, D-A-T-Y, are you familiar with that term?

MS. BERTRAND: D-A-T-Y?

MR. JONES: Correct.

THE WITNESS: Yes. D-A-T-Y refers to oral sex, where

the Y is -- it's like dining at a meal, so to speak -- and the

Y is the Y of the vagina. And so when the term D-A-T-Y is

present, it infers that the individual wants to have oral sex

with a female, and the female -- the Y is -- is the vaginal

area of the female.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What about bareback?

A. Bareback is a very common term and it refers to having sex

without a condom. It is the most dangerous type of sex, and

often is associated with transmission of sexually transmitted

infections.

Q. What about donations? Have you heard of the term donations

used?

A. I can't recall donations.

Q. Okay. And I also wanted to ask you also about the -- what

about BBBJ, bareback blow job?

A. That is -- what that means is that a blow job --

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, beyond scope. 403.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: A blow job is oral sex. And bareback

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 48 of 95
1

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

oral sex means that there is not going to be, again, use of a

condom, so it's not protected sex. It, therefore, makes the

victim at higher risk for pharyngeal sexually transmitted

infection such as gonorrhea.

MS. BERTRAND: Objection, Your Honor. Beyond scope.

403. Move to strike.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled, but the motion

to strike is granted after everything after the definition.

MR. JONES: Thank you, Your Honor.

One second, Your Honor.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, what about the term the wifey or a stable,

could you explain those terms to the jury?

A. Yes, I can, very common terms in sex trafficking. A wifey

is a female, usually many females, who are under the control of

a male trafficker, typically, who see themselves as all being

married to that one trafficker. They're often referred to

as --

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, objection. 403. Goes

beyond scope.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

MR. JONES: Your Honor, this concludes the

government's expert -- expert witness portion of Dr. Cooper's

testimony. We have a few we'd like to -- wanted to ask her a

few particular questions regarding the facts of this case as a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 49 of 95
1

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

fact witness now, so we'd like to -- to move to that area of

her testimony, if the Court likes.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. BERTRAND: We'd object and ask for a side bar.

THE COURT: All right.

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

MS. BERTRAND: Good afternoon. This is Joy Bertrand.

Given the sweeping efforts the government has made to

bring in more in this case than the Court has deemed relevant,

I would ask that the government proffer as to what this witness

is going to testify to as now a fact witness so that we can

have the discussion outside the presence of the jury and

determine whether or not it is even relevant to any of the

elements the government must prove in this matter.

THE COURT: Hold on. Let me hear what the government

has to say.

MR. JONES: Your Honor, the defense has been given

portions of the interview as it pertains to Dr. Cooper more

than a year-and-a-half ago, as it pertains to she was contacted

by a Backpage representative in around 2014 and was asked to --

I'm summarizing her testimony now -- if she would do consulting

work for Backpage in order to look at images and determine if

they were minors or children, and she declined to do so. And

so that's the nature of her testimony and it's relevant in this

case.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 50 of 95
1

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

MR. CAMBRIA: Who asked her?

MR. JONES: A Backpage representative, their then

general counsel.

MS. BERTRAND: Well, we don't know that. And, in

fact, the 302 says she doesn't know who called. It was someone

from Backpage named Liz. She did not know who it was.

MR. CAMBRIA: And there is no foundation to show that

the person had the authority to make that request. She can't

identify who it is.

MS. BERTRAND: For all we know, it was a crank call.

THE COURT: Can you stop?

Do you know who it is she spoke to?

MR. JONES: Yes. She -- based on -- she is aware that

it was Elizabeth McDougall that she spoke with, then general

counsel. And she's aware that when -- the year she called and

what she -- the nature of the conversation, and that what she

-- that's simply all she'll testify to, Your Honor.

THE COURT: But the conversation is that they asked

her to be an advisor --

MR. JONES: Right.

THE COURT: -- and she declined?

MR. JONES: She told them that it was impossible,

without having the birth certificate, to determine whether an

individual depicted in a Backpage ad was a minor or over the

age of 18.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 51 of 95
1

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

THE COURT: Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, she rendered an opinion

on --

(Reporter interrupts for clarification.)

THE COURT: Do you have anything else to say on the

issue of whether or not she can testify as to factual?

MR. CAMBRIA: Not in that issue, no.

THE COURT: Any other motions we can talk about at the

break.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

THE COURT: Okay. The objection is overruled. I kind

of have an idea what she's going to say, so you can make any

other objections.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Dr. Cooper, during the years that Backpage was in

operation, were you at one point contacted by a Backpage

representative?

A. Yes, I was.

Q. In or about when were you contacted?

A. This was around 2013, 2014.

Q. What was the nature of that contact?

A. It was a brief telephone call to my office, basically

asking me would I consider working for Backpage.

Q. And how did you respond?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 52 of 95
1

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

A. I declined.

Q. What was the nature of why you were -- were asked to work

with --

MR. BIENERT: Objection. Speculative. No foundation.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. Who contacted you at Backpage, Dr. Cooper?

A. I was contacted by an attorney at Backpage, Liz McDougall.

Q. Okay. And what was the reason Ms. McDougall contacted you?

A. What she communicated to me was the desire --

MR. FEDER: Objection. Hearsay.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

THE WITNESS: What she communicated to me was the

desire to try to make sure that there were not underage minors

whose images might be on Backpage, and that's why she was

contacting me, because this is an area that I've worked in for

several years.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. And what was your response in regards to her contact --

reaching out to you regarding this issue?

A. I explained to her that I could not work for Backpage,

predominantly because you can --

MR. BIENERT: Objection, Your Honor, as to whether

this is her behind-the-scenes reasons for not doing it, which I

would say is irrelevant and should not be stated, or whether

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 53 of 95
1

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

she's saying she told this to the Backpage representative.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

BY MR. JONES:

Q. What did you tell the Backpage representative?

A. What I told Ms. McDougall was that I could not work for

Backpage, primarily because some children will be sexually

mature long before they are 18 years of age, in fact, most

children in the United States have reached sexual maturity

before they're 18 years of age.

MR. JONES: Thank you, Your Honor. No further

questions from the government.

THE COURT: Okay.

Who is starting cross?

Ms. Bertrand.

MS. BERTRAND: I am, Your Honor. Thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MS. BERTRAND:

Q. Good afternoon, Doctor.

Doctor, you mentioned -- did I write this down --

you've testified in a federal trial as an expert 25 times?

And I'll take my mask off so you can --

A. I have worked in federal trials. Some went to a plea and

so they didn't actually go to a total -- in fact, several have

gone to a plea.

Q. Sure. How many times do you believe you have testified as

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 54 of 95
1

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

an expert in a federal trial?

A. I would have to go back to my office and look at all of our

files. I have been -- I've testified in federal trials every

year, usually on average of two to three or four per year, and

that's been going on since about 2000, but I'm not positive

exactly how many cases I have testified in federal trials.

Q. Do you think it would be a fair estimate to say then in the

past 10 years you have testified in 20 to 40 federal trials?

A. No. I wouldn't say I have testified in 40 trials in the

last 10 years, no.

Q. Okay.

A. I testify in state courts, federal courts, court-martial

proceedings, family courts, many different types of courts. So

I would have to defer to my office to give you the exact

number.

Q. Would you say you testify in federal trials like this one

once or twice a year?

A. Sometimes more often than that.

Q. All right. And you've been testifying in federal trials

since when?

A. Probably since the 19 -- since the 1980s, because any case

that entails a civilian crime on a military installation will

be tried in federal court.

Q. Gotcha. So when you were with the Army, you also were

serving as an expert, but some of those cases, some of those

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 55 of 95
1

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

were court-martials and some of them were federal. Is that

fair?

A. That is correct.

Q. And how many times have you been qualified in a federal

trial as an expert on the operations of Backpage?

A. I've never been qualified as an expert on the operation of

Backpage.

Q. How many times have you been qualified as an expert in

terminology used in advertising for sex work?

A. I have testified on numerous occasions on terminology used

in sexual exploitation. I don't refer to it as sex work. I

refer to it as sexual exploitation.

Q. All right. Well, let's break that down.

So early in your testimony here you did make a

distinction between being trafficked, right, and being a free

agent, choosing to go out and do sex work by your own -- this

is what you decide you want to do for your job as an adult,

correct?

A. What I testified to was the difference between sex

trafficking and prostitution.

Q. And prostitution can involve adults who choose to make

money in that way, correct, having sex with others, correct?

A. As long as the money remains with the person who is having

the sex.

Q. Right.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 56 of 95
1

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

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Right. So -- right. So as long as we're not talking about

anyone else managing it, that's why I said a free agent, that

also is considered sex work, correct?

A. I don't use the term sex work. I use the term

prostitution.

Q. All right. What's the difference to you between sex work

and prostitution?

A. It's my choice.

Q. Well, what's the -- what's that choice driven by for you?

A. Because in the United States the term prostitution is more

commonly used when we speak of the exchange of sex between two

consenting adults.

Sex work is a term that I'm more familiar with in

European countries, as you see in the Netherlands and in

Amsterdam, where you have women or men who are in visible

single rooms and individuals will come in and have sometimes

visual sex so that others can watch. That's what's referred to

as sex work, so this is why --

Q. In your mind, right?

A. I did say it was my choice, yes.

Q. Okay. So is it fair to say that there are people who

engage in erotic conduct that does not -- here in the United

States who are adults -- that does not entail having actual

penis to vagina sex, correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 57 of 95
1

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

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. That does not entail having the touching of anybody's

genitals by anybody else's anything, correct?

A. I would have to say that there, in fact, is a form of

sexual exploitation where there is no contact.

Q. Okay. I'm not talking about exploitation. I'm talking

about adults who choose to do this without anyone controlling

them.

A. Oh, if you're talking about adults who choose to do -- I

heard you say erotic.

Q. Right. That can involve striptease, correct?

A. Yes, it can.

Q. It can involve talking dirty to someone, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. I'm thinking of the -- the sex lines in the '80s and '90s?

A. Right, cyber sexing.

Q. Uh-huh. It can involve any element of nudity, as long as

somebody is not touching the other's genitals, correct?

A. As long as these are adults.

Q. Right, as long as these are adults?

A. Correct.

Q. It can involve kissing, no matter the state of undress,

mouth-to-mouth kissing, correct?

A. Yes, it can.

Q. It can involve fantasies that do not involve getting

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 58 of 95
1

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

undressed, correct?

A. Well, I don't know how one observes a fantasy. I can just

imagine a person speaking of a fantasy.

Q. Or acting one out, right?

A. I've not seen that, but I would imagine that if a person --

I'm sorry. I have just not seen a person acting out a fantasy

without communicating what that fantasy is.

Q. Oh, yeah, well, we'd all -- there would have to be an

agreement as to what the fantasy is that's going to be acted

out, but among consenting adults, that's a possibility,

correct?

Here's a common example, totally pedestrian example.

Dirty librarian, right? You don't have to take off any clothes

to have someone work out that type of fantasy, correct?

A. A dirty librarian?

Q. Naughty librarian. Maybe not? Okay.

So let's go back to the number of times you've

testified in federal trials, testified. How many times have

you been qualified as an expert under Rule 16 regarding

terminology used in ads for commercial sex?

A. Not specifically regarding terminology only.

Q. All right. You mentioned that you teach, or you did teach

at the National Advocacy Center?

A. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Q. Oh, I thought you also said -- did you also not teach at

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 59 of 95
1

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

the NAC?

A. I have spoken at -- yes, I have taught at the NAC in South

Carolina, yes, I have, but I didn't mention that in my

qualifications.

Q. Maybe I saw it in your CV. So National Advocacy Center is

prosecutor training, big facility in Columbia, South Carolina,

correct?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. And usually -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- the people

instructing at the NAC use PowerPoints or outlines as part of

their instruction, correct?

A. As far as I know. I know about me. I wasn't there for all

of the other instructors, but as far as I did, I did.

Q. You used a PowerPoint when you taught at the NAC?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And the NAC is run by the United States Department of

Justice, correct?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Did you share with the prosecutors in this case those

PowerPoints that you used at the NAC to teach?

A. I haven't shared any PowerPoints with any prosecutors in

any case that I've ever testified in.

Q. You have given the list to the prosecutors of the federal

trials that you have previously testified in, correct?

A. I believe my office did if it was requested.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 60 of 95
1

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

Q. So if you testified in trials, much like this trial, is it

your recollection that there was a court reporter in the

courtroom taking down what you said?

A. Yes, I'm sure there was a court reporter.

Q. And you were sworn?

A. I'm sure that that would be the case.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, I don't know what the Court

wants to do in terms of this afternoon's schedule, so I'll

pause here and say I'm about to change topics, or I can go

forward.

THE COURT: Okay. We'll take our afternoon recess.

So please remember the admonition. We'll come get you

in about 20 minutes.

(The jury left the courtroom, 2:58 p.m.)

THE COURT: We are outside the presence of the jury.

Ms. Bertrand.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, at this point -- I'm sure

some of my colleagues are going to join me in this -- I think

we have a Jencks Act issue here that is substantial.

We've been talking about Jencks Act violations in this

case for months. I believe we've received from the government

in this case maybe one trial transcript of this witness's

testimony. We have received none of her PowerPoint

presentations. We have received no other recorded statements

of this witness. The government can't say they weren't ones

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 61 of 95
1

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

she adopted, because they would have occurred in the context of

federal jury trials like this.

So, at this point, I'm going to move for a mistrial.

That is one of the sanctions under Jencks that is appropriate.

I welcome my colleagues jump in on this, but I don't see how

the government fixes this very serious discovery problem.

THE COURT: You're done?

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah.

THE COURT: Mr. Cambria, anything to add?

MR. CAMBRIA: Nothing to add, Your Honor, but I,

obviously, join in that.

THE COURT: Mr. Bienert?

MR. BIENERT: I join.

MR. EISENBERG: And I, as well, Your Honor.

MR. FEDER: Join.

MR. LINCENBERG: Join.

THE COURT: Okay. From the government, Mr. Jones.

MR. JONES: Judge, Your Honor, the government has

given defense a list of trials Dr. Cooper has participated in

and any transcripts that were in the custody and control of the

government, so we are not in violation of the Jencks Act in any

respect. You know, anything that we have in our custody and

control, which is what the rule requires, we have turned over

to the defendants in this case, as it pertains to Dr. Cooper

and her transcripts.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 62 of 95
1

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

MS. BERTRAND: Custody and control, as the Ninth

Circuit addressed in the Bundy matter, goes well beyond this

prosecution team sitting here in Phoenix, Arizona. This

witness has testified repeatedly for the United States

Department of Justice in criminal --

MR. JONES: These are public -- oh, sorry. Sorry,

Your Honor. I apologize.

MS. BERTRAND: That is not the point.

Much like the government this morning dodging the lack

of notice it gave under -- there is no notice under 16.1 or

Rule 16 that this witness would ever testify as to terminology.

When invited to amend their notice, they declined. So we now

have a violation of Rule 16.

We also have a violation of Jencks, in that, as the

Ninth Circuit has been explicitly clear, material under Brady,

material under Jencks, goes well beyond what they have in their

file cabinets at the U.S. Attorney's Office. And saying, it's

public record, is wholly unacceptable.

THE COURT: Do you acknowledge that they gave you a

list of the trials?

MS. BERTRAND: We do have a list of trials. I do not

know if it is a comprehensive list. We also did not get any of

her presentations at the National Advocacy Center for which she

has now stated she prepared PowerPoint presentations. That

also would constitute Jencks material.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 63 of 95
1

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

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Jones, before we break, what

about the PowerPoint? What's your position on the PowerPoint?

MR. JONES: Like I said, we've given them everything

we have custody and control over. And as Dr. Cooper stated in

her 30 trials that she has testified to, she has never turned

over -- has given any PowerPoint presentation that she ever

presented to any -- to any, I believe she said to any

prosecutor.

You know, we have given defense counsel everything

that is in the government's control as it pertains to

Dr. Cooper, given them the list of the trials, given any

transcripts that may be in our possession as well, Your Honor,

exclusive control.

THE COURT: So, Ms. Bertrand, with respect to the

PowerPoint, if that is in the witness's control, do they have

an obligation to get it from her?

MS. BERTRAND: Yes. She's a paid witness for them.

She's working for them. She's not a percipient witness who

just got roped into this. She's working for them. She's an

arm of their investigation. And she is regularly an arm of

their investigation. She trains them. She trains law

enforcement and she testifies for the prosecution, for the

United States government, U.S. Department of Justice,

repeatedly.

They cannot say that it wasn't in their -- and the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 64 of 95
1

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

exclusive control would have been something that, at least, the

government should have put the defense on notice it existed so

we could get it by other means.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. JONES: Your Honor, just to be clear, Dr. Cooper

is not being paid by the government. She's, in fact, an expert

and a fact witness, so she is not being paid for her testimony

here today. So we just wanted to make that clear.

THE COURT: All right. We're at recess. I'm going to

use the break to consider the motion.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Thank you.

MR. BIENERT: You know, I'm chomping at the bit about

my exhibits, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Yes, thank you.

So can you just read them off for me.

MR. BIENERT: I assume you want me to do it, or madam

clerk? I've got my sheet.

THE COURT: Why don't you do it.

MR. BIENERT: All right. Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Since you're moving to have them admitted.

MR. BIENERT: Yes, I am. And I have reviewed these

with Mr. Kozinets who is in the back here.

So at this time the government is moving into evidence

the following exhibits identified for us, which were then given

the exhibit numbers by madam clerk. And it would be

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 65 of 95
1

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

defense's --

MR. KOZINETS: You said the government is moving into

evidence.

MR. BIENERT: Oh, sorry, the defense is moving into

evidence. I spent too many years over there, do that

sometimes.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. BIENERT: Exhibit IM 17, which is now

Exhibit 6148.

Exhibit IM 19, which is now Exhibit 6149.

Exhibit IM 20, which is actually now Exhibit 6150.

Exhibit IM 22, which is now Exhibit 6151.

Defense's IM 23, which is now Exhibit 6152.

Defense's IM 24, which is now Exhibit 6153.

Exhibit IM 25, which is now Exhibit 6154.

Exhibit IM 26, which is now Exhibit 6155.

And, finally, what was Exhibit IM 18, is now

Exhibit 6166, so I would ask to move into evidence Exhibit 6148

through 6166.

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Correction, it would be 6156.

MR. BIENERT: Yes, thank you so much. I thought the

math didn't add up, so thank you.

So with that correction, it's actually 6148 through

6156.

THE COURT: Mr. Kozinets, is there any objection?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 66 of 95
1

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

MR. KOZINETS: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Those exhibits will be

admitted.

Okay. We're at recess.

(Recess taken, 3:07 p.m. - 3:47 p.m.)

THE COURT: With respect to the defense motion,

pursuant to the Ninth Circuit, prior testimony at a public

proceeding is public records not subject to the Jencks Act, so

that's not a Jencks Act violation.

With respect to the PowerPoint, I don't know what she,

this expert taught about, so I wouldn't be able to evaluate

whether her PowerPoint relates to any subject matter of her

testimony here. And, secondly, I am not even sure that it

would be subject to disclosure if it did relate, so the motion

is denied.

One thing I did want to ask is, Mr. Cambria, you

started to make a motion at the bench conference but we were

talking about something else so I said you could make it later.

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Do you want to make that now?

MR. CAMBRIA: I can make it now or after the witness

has testified.

THE COURT: Why don't you do it now.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Your Honor, you know, we

have made a number of complaints about the fact that this

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 67 of 95
1

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

witness was, obviously, prepared so -- whatever happened here

-- obviously, prepared so that she would inject the word

children, minors, and whatever into every sentence she should

possibly do it in. And she did that in a case where there is

no charge of trafficking children. There is no charge of child

prostitution. And, in addition, she was allowed to give an

ultimate conclusion that Backpage was promoting.

And so, Your Honor, we renew our motion for a

mistrial.

THE COURT: Does anybody else want to add anything

before I ask the prosecution?

Mr. Bienert?

MR. BIENERT: Well, I -- I just second it. And I saw

Your Honor react when he said the word promoting as though --

and I may have misread it -- but that you weren't sure of that.

I specifically remember it when he said that word as well. I

want to look for it in my notes. But she definitely used the

word promoting prostitution, which, of course, is what the

charge is here, so I think that is error.

And I agree with the sentiment that -- I think it was

Mr. Feder said at side bar -- the problem we're having here is,

obviously, we believe that just what was said in opening is

sufficient, but we understand your ruling, but these things are

snowballing.

Every single time the government continues to beat the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 68 of 95
1

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

drum of child trafficking, the prejudicial effect and the

difficulty that -- that jurors would have to objectively

evaluate the evidence gets tougher and tougher.

And what I am just, frankly, amazed at, and just think

this case has gotten dramatically off the rails, is here we are

and we still have heard no connection of anything to any

defendant or any ad in the indictment that is somehow tying the

knowledge of any defendant to the ad, the knowledge of any

defendant to any child who was peddled in an ad before the ad

was done, or even connecting any of the victims that -- we've

only had the one and her mom -- but now we've got people just

broadly saying -- the guy earlier today gave an improper

opinion -- Mr. Fichtner, Agent Fichtner -- that Backpage is

misleading, because almost all of this, or most of this is

prostitution, and they're misleading law enforcement when they

report a few things. That was just a pure out opinion of

something that has never been proven, both on the prostitution

or trafficking front.

So we're in this mode where we've got all these

broad-based statements about prostitution and trafficking. The

trafficking is, of course, inflammatory as all get-out. And

none of it is ever being tied in to anything that shows

percipient knowledge of a defendant at the time that matters,

namely, when they're posting an ad and it's going to go public.

And I just don't understand how this jury is ever

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 69 of 95
1

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

going to evaluate whether these guys had specific intent on any

of the counts or things charged in the indictment, when they're

day, after day, after day just hearing Backpage had

prostitution, Backpage had child trafficking, from people who

don't identify the particulars and/or tie it to any defendant.

THE COURT: Well, it's way too early to make that

argument, because I can envision from the evidence that I've

already seen where they're going to get to that. It's way too

early. We're barely, I don't know, ten percent in, so --

MR. BIENERT: May I just --

THE COURT: -- my -- the only real -- real argument

that I am considering is the argument about the prejudicial

value of the testimony that's been given so far, so you've

joined that.

MR. BIENERT: And the only thing I would just add, I

just want to say on the record -- and, look, Your Honor runs

your court as you see fit -- but I think that's part of the

problem, that it is way too early. In other words, in my

experience, and I do think that what the case law would back

up, while it is discretionary, this is, you know, ruling your

court, normally the courts require that they start proving that

defendants had particular knowledge of things that tie into the

actual counts before they start making the broad-based, this is

all prostitution, this is all children being trafficked.

And the problem is each time these jurors hear,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 70 of 95
1

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

Backpage is the place where all children are trafficked,

Backpage is the place where it's just nothing but prostitution,

that's being cemented in their brains. And we're on probably

four or five days of that, and yet they still haven't shown

them anything. And that, in and of itself, is prejudicial.

The proof of the tie in to the defendants should be at

the beginning of the case, and then Your Honor can decide how

far they're able to go based on actual evidence. But here it's

just a bunch of wave of the hand that it's all bad and none of

it is tying it to us, so I think that exacerbates things.

MR. LINCENBERG: I wanted to just make one

supplemental point on that, Your Honor.

I thought it was a bit outrageous what happened in the

redirect of Agent Fichtner when he was asked questions and gave

testimony that all of these commendation letters are garbage

and that Backpage is really using all of that as a gloss over.

That was new on redirect.

Under the Court's rules, we didn't have an

opportunity, because the Court doesn't allow re-cross. There

were strenuous objections by the defense that it was beyond the

scope and offering new opinions, and now on redirect we have

this broad-based wild opinion with no foundation and we didn't

even get to cross him on it.

THE COURT: Anybody else?

MR. FEDER: I don't know if it connects to this,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 71 of 95
1

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

Judge. It's Bruce Feder.

When we make motions to strike and the Court

occasionally grants the motion to strike, I would ask that the

Court instruct the jury about what that means and what they're

not to -- they're no longer to consider.

THE COURT: I've already instructed them on that and I

will instruct them again.

Ms. Bertrand.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, the only thing I would add

to what Mr. Lincenberg and Mr. Bienert have noted is echoing

the Court's comment. After the government's opening statement

and we were discussing a mistrial then, and the Court at that

time -- and I'm paraphrasing here -- said, I'd rather do a

mistrial now than weeks in. And so I don't know that the --

that it is a wise or proper consideration to say, well, let's

see how this all plays out.

The government's conduct is the government's conduct.

It's not a one-off. It's repeated. It's repeated after this

Court admonishes the government not to do it and it still does

it. And the impact of saying, let's just see how this plays

out, lets see how the rest of the evidence comes in, really

works against the whole purpose of denying mistrials early when

misconduct occurs.

And this -- this theme that the government has

embarked on in its opening, in its testimony through Dr. Cooper

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 72 of 95
1

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

today, through the testimony of the Svendgards last week, it is

clear they are going to run up to the line and step over that

line every time they can to get in children, children,

children. This is not simply a, well, it's a subsection and we

might, like, you know, get into it and get out of it, this is

their focus. They can't un-focus it now. And they've been

told repeatedly by this Court to knock it off and they just

keep doing it. Thank you.

THE COURT: Mr. Eisenberg.

MR. EISENBERG: Your Honor, I need not repeat

everybody else's statements to you. I just think that what we

discussed at the side bar with respect to child endangerment

has now come in and this jury has heard it, even though there

is no way they could relate child endangerment to any single

defendant, much less a policy of Backpage. Backpage was not in

the business of endangering children.

What is the relevance of that whole line of

questioning of Dr. Cooper? I don't understand it, Your Honor,

and I think it's irretrievably caused a 403 issue with respect

to the defendants. Thank you.

THE COURT: And from the government. Who wants to

respond?

MR. JONES: Reggie Jones, Your Honor.

I guess to defendants' point regarding the ultimate

issue in the case, Dr. Cooper never commented on the six

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 73 of 95
1

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

defendants' mental state. This is a specific-intent crime, and

so she -- she's never commented on the ultimate issue in the

case. She gave her opinion, based on her expertise and her

qualifications, education, and experience, as it pertains to

prostitution and her belief that prostitution was facilitated

via Backpage, but that's not -- doesn't go to the ultimate

issue of these six defendants' mental state.

As it pertains to the sex trafficking, Your Honor,

this is an issue we addressed this morning, we've addressed it

in detail before trial started, and now during trial on several

occasions. And as the Court has issued in 1156, you know, sex

trafficking is a subset of prostitution. And the fact that

individuals were trafficked on Backpage is -- is highly

probative in this case. As the Court did say, there are many

subparts to this, but that does not outweigh the high probative

value of evidence as it pertains to trafficking that took place

on Backpage.

And we are not -- the government does not believe that

it keeps beating a dead horse. We are simply bringing in

relevant evidence, and that evidence pertains to categories the

Court in this case has deemed relevant under Dr. Cooper's

testimony, how sex trafficking occurred online, as well as the

terminology and the vernacular used in sex trafficking and the

prostitution industry. And so we do not believe the 403 with

the defendants have been prejudiced in that regard, Your Honor.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 74 of 95
1

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

THE COURT: All right. Well, I have concerns that the

government has crossed that line several times even after at

side bar I warned you not to do it.

I do want to take a look at the transcript to make

sure that my memory is what I think it is, and I do think there

is some validity to the argument of the cumulative effect. I

had some concerns that the testimony elicited from the victim

went beyond what it should have, and that, coupled with the

testimony of Dr. Cooper, which went well beyond what we had

talked about prior to her testifying.

So why don't we bring her back. We will continue with

cross until the end of the day. I will talk to the court

reporter, both from this morning and this afternoon, about

getting a draft transcript to me, and I'll let you know in the

morning.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, with regard to

transcripts, I'd like to make a plea that the Court permit the

entire defense team CJA funds for transcripts. You know, every

one of us who are paid counsel are under water in this case, in

part, because of COVID and all of the additional time that

passed and expenses. And I know the government's been getting

daily transcripts. These issues are coming up daily. We

haven't ordered transcripts because there are cost issues, and

we would make that request.

THE COURT: So I don't want to cross the CJA lines,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 75 of 95
1

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

the rules for that. As far as getting a transcript from today,

if one of the CJA attorneys wants to order it, I'll approve it.

I think it has --

Does it have to come through me directly?

MR. EISENBERG: I think it does, Your Honor.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes, ma'am.

THE COURT: I'll approve it. Although, I don't know

that that will get done fast enough.

MR. LINCENBERG: We do appreciate that.

If the Court can consider the broader topic, I have

had this come up before, I had it come up two years ago in a

trial before Judge Cooper -- not Judge Cooper -- Judge

Phillips --

THE COURT: Well, I'll talk to the Ninth Circuit

person I've been working with on budgeting issues and I'll let

you know tomorrow.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, the CJA component of

transcripts does allow for daily or expedited transcripts, we

just have to be explicit about that. I'll coordinate with

Mr. Eisenberg. Particularly as to urgent matters like this, I

think we can quickly get something turned in to the Court.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. I think someone started

to bring the witness in, but then took her out because we were

still talking.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 76 of 95
1

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

Can you have her brought in.

And, Elaine, you can get the jury.

(4:06 p.m., the jury entered the courtroom.)

THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Please be seated.

And we are back on the record with the jury present.

Ms. Bertrand.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you, Your Honor.

BY MS. BERTRAND:

Q. Doctor, can you estimate for us, in the times you have

testified in a federal trial, how many times you have been

qualified as an expert in sex trafficking?

A. Every time that I've been -- every time that I've testified

in a sex trafficking case, I've been qualified as an expert in

sex trafficking.

Q. And that's in addition to being qualified as an expert on

any medical issues that you might be testifying in?

A. I'm usually qual -- yes, that's correct.

Q. And have you been qualified in any federal case as an

expert in online sex trafficking?

A. I have been qualified as an expert in online victimization.

It was --

Q. Ma'am, that is a different question than what I asked.

Have you been qualified as an expert in online sex

trafficking?

A. I have been qualified as an expert in sex trafficking,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 77 of 95
1

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

including online victimization.

Q. So is the answer to my question a yes or a no?

A. It would be yes.

Q. What case was that in which you were qualified?

A. In every case that I have testified in, and I'd have to go

back and give you specific names. I would have to go and give

you. There are several that I've testified in.

Q. Is it fair to say that, sitting here today, you cannot --

and understanding your notes are someplace else -- sitting here

today, talking with us, you cannot think of a case where you

have been found to be an expert in online sex trafficking?

A. I would like to explain.

Q. All right. Well, I'm going to look at -- check in with the

judge about that. Mr. Jones will have an opportunity to follow

up with you as well, and that would be probably a more

appropriate time to talk about any elaboration.

You spoke before we broke, I believe in your direct

examination, about a conversation you may have had with someone

named Liz from Backpage, correct?

A. After she identified that she was with Backpage, yes. I

didn't know when I first started speaking with her that she was

with Backpage.

Q. And that conversation occurred in 2011 or 2012?

A. I think it was closer to 2014.

Q. Would it surprise you to know that an FBI 302 said 2011,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 78 of 95
1

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

2012?

A. It could be, but I think that it was 2014 --

Q. All right.

A. -- from looking at my calendar. I'll have to look again.

Q. How long was that conversation, would you estimate?

A. Probably about ten minutes.

Q. Did you know, when you had that conversation, that you were

talking to Elizabeth McDougall?

A. I thought I was talking to Liz, Liz Yore.

Q. Okay. Is that a different person?

A. She is. She's also an attorney.

Q. So do you know if you spoke to Liz McDougall or Liz Yore?

A. I now know that I spoke to Liz McDougall. What I mean is

that when I first said, hello, how are you doing, I thought I

was speaking to Liz Yore, but it turned out that it was a

different attorney who referred to herself as Liz and her last

name.

Q. McDougall. All right. And she asked you to help Backpage,

correct?

A. She said -- I'm paraphrasing because I didn't record our

conversation or anything of that nature, and this is several

years later. She said, we'd be interested if you would want to

provide some training for our staff regarding sexual

maturation, is what I recall she said.

Q. Understanding that this now is --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 79 of 95
1

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

A. Several years ago.

Q. -- somewhere between 7 and 10 years ago, and you don't have

any contemporary notes of that conversation.

A. I wasn't -- no, I wasn't taking any notes at that time.

Q. But Backpage reached out to you for help in identifying

underaged people in ads. Is that -- is that a fair summary?

A. I would say that Liz McDougall reached out to me. It was

towards the middle of our conversation that she let me know she

was working with Backpage. I don't know if you could say

Backpage reached out to me. I would say that Liz McDougall

reached out to me.

Q. Okay. What distinction is -- is that, in your mind?

A. I don't know that an employee of a large organization such

as Backpage can speak for the entire organization.

Q. Did she indicate in that phone call, though, that she was

an attorney with Backpage, or for Backpage?

A. I don't recall.

Q. And you told them no? You told this Liz no?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And you told her no, because, as I understand it, so

correct me if I'm wrong, it is once -- once people reach

puberty and sexual maturation, it's difficult, if impossible,

to determine the exact age; is that correct?

A. What I said was that the majority of children are sexually

mature before they reach 18 years of age.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 80 of 95
1

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

Q. And so because they are sexually mature, particularly

American children, and by -- well, let's back up. And I hate

to be granular about it, but let's be real clear that we're all

using the same terminology.

A. Right.

Q. Okay. So when I hear you say sexually mature, what I'm

hearing is that you're talking about physiologically mature,

correct?

A. Correct. Physically mature, right.

Q. So young women have breasts --

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. -- that have filled out?

A. Right, that is correct.

Q. Pubic hair, all the indications that you've gone from being

a child to early adulthood, correct?

A. To sexual maturation, right.

Q. And it's also fair to say, so we're clear, that simply

because your body has gotten rolling, it doesn't mean you're

capable of consent, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. And this -- this type of sexual maturation we're talking

about is different from the emotional maturation that can come

much later than 18, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. So when you spoke with Ms. Liz -- we believe McDougall --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 81 of 95
1

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

A. Yes.

Q. -- what you related to Ms. McDougall is that the job

Ms. McDougall was asking you to do was not possible, is that --

it would not be practical or it would not be doable?

A. I couldn't say that no one could do that. I would just say

that I was not going to do that.

Q. Because you didn't want to or because you didn't think it

was a doable thing?

A. No, it wasn't because I didn't think it was a doable thing.

I chose not to do that because I had more work than I could do.

Q. Did you suggest anyone to Ms. Liz of Backpage who could

help them?

A. I did not. She didn't ask me if I knew of anyone else who

would be willing to provide training, et cetera, for the staff.

Q. And the idea was, when you talk about training for the

staff, did she say, or did you have an understanding of whom,

at a big organization like Backpage, she meant by the staff?

A. I considered it to be similar to training at any

organization that is monitoring online content. For example,

the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, I

provided training for their staff and other hotlines around the

world, and they have different size staff, for the purpose of

trying to determine if images are consistent with those

children who are minors.

Q. So it would have been, in your understanding, helping the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 82 of 95
1

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

people trying to watch -- the people at Backpage trying to

watch out for children ending up on the site, correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. You're on the board of the National Center for Missing and

Exploited Children, correct?

A. I have been for several years, but I just recently stepped

down from the board.

Q. Okay. And were you a member of the -- this is the board of

directors, right?

A. That's correct.

Q. Sometimes organizations have, like, fundraising boards, but

this is the board board, right?

A. That is correct.

Q. What years were you on the board of the National Center for

Missing and Exploited Children?

A. I believe I was elected to the board in 2005, and -- yeah,

in 2005, to my recollection.

Q. And you stepped down this year?

A. 2021, yes.

Q. So you were on the board for 16 years?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Were you aware, in your time at the board for NCMEC, as we

call it, about Backpage having a reporting system to NCMEC?

A. I was aware of almost all social networking sites having a

mandated reporting to the National Center for Missing and

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 83 of 95
1

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

Exploited Children of potential illegal content.

Q. Were you aware of Backpage's reporting system?

A. Not specifically, aside from Facebook and other sites.

Q. So is it your testimony today that you do not have

familiarity with how Backpage reported potential underage

people to NCMEC?

A. I am aware of the requirement. And I am aware that often

the reports -- it's not -- are, actually, the download content

that they feel is illegal. And this content is then analyzed

digitally by the National Center to discern whether or not

they're consistent with children and are these children known

victims --

Q. Right.

A. -- already in the database.

Q. So, basically, in general terms, this is what social

networking sites, whether Facebook, Instagram --

A. Correct.

Q. -- TikTok, have some system in place where if people, kind

of the backrooms of these social media platforms, observe

someone who looks like they may be under age, they can refer

that image, that post, to NCMEC, correct?

A. Yes, they can. That's one of the ways in which they can

refer images, right.

Q. Right. And then NCMEC can take the images and kind of

cross reference the missing and exploited children database.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 84 of 95
1

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

Is that fair?

A. Correct.

Q. Are you familiar with the volume of reports that Backpage

sent to NCMEC, let's say, like, per year?

A. I'm not specifically familiar with Backpage, but I do know

that the National Center receives millions of reports,

sometimes per week.

Q. Right. Did NCMEC, in your time on the board, publish any

studies or reports regarding the number of referrals -- I'll

call them referrals, if you have a better name, I welcome a

correction -- of these images on social media platforms sent to

NCMEC?

A. NCMEC does -- does document the number of reports that --

that they receive from all of the different social networking

sites. They are not necessarily available to the public, but

they do keep that data, yes.

Q. And they break that down by the platform that sends it?

A. That's correct.

Q. So somewhere at NCMEC, or somewhere where NCMEC's servers

are is a statistical database, or some sort of storage of how

many referrals Facebook sends, correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. And how many TikTok sends?

A. That's correct.

Q. And how many Instagram sends?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 85 of 95
1

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

A. That's correct.

Q. And when Backpage was in business, NCMEC maintained

statistics on how many referrals Backpage sent, correct?

A. I would assume that. I can't tell you that for sure, but I

would assume that.

Q. Do you know when NCMEC began keeping those statistics?

A. I do not know exactly the year that that began, but I do

know that it coincided with the ability to not have to look at

each image with the naked eye, but to look at hashtag values on

the images in order to have a better idea about whether or not

they were consistent with underage minors.

Q. Do you know whether or not Backpage was, when it was in

business, responsible for the most referrals to NCMEC?

A. I don't know the answer to that.

Q. Do you know who was responsible at Backpage for making the

referrals to NCMEC?

A. No, I don't know the name of the person, nor the department

of Backpage that was responsible for that.

Q. You talked in your -- let's change topics here.

You talked in your direct examination about some

statistical conclusions you drew. And other than your

one-on-one experience working with individual people, have you

participated in any statistical studies regarding online sex

trafficking?

A. I have participated and was on the international working

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 86 of 95
1

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

group of the survivor survey, which was a study done by the

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and the

Canadian Center for Child Protection. I remain on that

international working group.

Q. You do not have a background in statistics, correct?

A. No. My background is in medicine.

Q. And I am in no way saying that you don't have to have a

strong proficiency in math to have a medical degree, but

statistics is different, would you say?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Do you have any special training in statistics?

A. No, I do not.

Q. Do you have any special training in evaluating statistical

data?

A. No, I do not.

Q. Do you have, sitting here today, statistical data or

studies you can cite regarding some of your conclusions about

the volume of sex trafficking that you say occurred on

Backpage?

MR. JONES: Your Honor, objection to vague. Could she

ask a specific question?

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

MS. BERTRAND: What? I don't know what the objection

is.

MR. JONES: Vague.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 87 of 95
1

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

THE COURT: His objection was vague.

The objection is overruled.

MS. BERTRAND: Vague. Okay.

Madam, please, go ahead.

THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Can you repeat the question?

BY MS. BERTRAND:

Q. No. It's hot in here and we're tired.

MS. BERTRAND: Madam court reporter, could you please

repeat the question for us.

(Requested portion of the record was read by the

reporter.)

THE WITNESS: Today I have spoken of my own experience

in the cases that I have worked in where victims have been

victims of sex trafficking and the most common platform for

which they were exploited. And the information that I gave to

the Court today reflects the fact that Backpage was the most

significant platform that we would see for the majority of the

patients that I've seen.

BY MS. BERTRAND:

Q. That's your anecdotal experience. Is that a fair

statement? That's your experience in terms of who you spoke

to, correct?

A. That's my experience in the histories that I have taken

from the victims, that's correct. I wouldn't call it

anecdotal, but it's the history that the victims have shared

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 88 of 95
1

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

with me.

Q. All right. Is it also fair to say that before Backpage was

shut down in, I believe 2018, Backpage was the most responsive

to law enforcement subpoenas of the social media platforms that

we're referring to, in general terms?

A. I don't have information to support that. That may be

true, but I don't have that information to affirm that.

Q. So it's possible?

A. I just don't -- I wouldn't want to speculate on that.

Q. Changing topics.

MS. BERTRAND: And I'm -- Your Honor, I'm sensitive to

time, I don't have a clock up here, so I just --

THE COURT: We have about ten more minutes.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

BY MS. BERTRAND:

Q. Change topics now to some of the terms we talked about in

your direct examination.

For example, let's -- let's talk about girlfriend

experience, GFE.

A. Yes.

Q. What we're calling consenting sex workers, people doing

this by choice, not manipulated by anybody --

A. Yes.

Q. -- also use the term GFE; isn't that true?

A. I'm sure that that could be true.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 89 of 95
1

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

Q. And the same would be true that consenting sex workers also

use the term, I believe it was -- these aren't words we use in

my home so -- bareback blow job?

A. Right, that would be true. I would think that would be

true.

Q. And with -- same with Greek?

A. Yes, that would be true.

Q. What that implies?

A. Yes.

Q. And what was DATY, D-A-T-Y? I had a question mark next to

that.

A. Dine at the Y.

Q. Oh, got it. Also something that consenting sex workers

would use, correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. And you made a distinction before our afternoon break, it

was an interesting one, about in Europe how there is places, I

think you said the Netherlands as an example, where there is

red light districts, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. And people in windows putting on a show, correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Or you can go into, like, an arcade, I don't mean like game

arcade, but like a -- more of an inside, same idea, correct?

A. Yes. The red light district has buildings along the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 90 of 95
1

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

street, and each street -- each building has a glass in the

front like you would for a store. And women or men will be

standing there inviting potential clients to come in to have

sex.

Q. And here in the United States we don't have, necessarily,

sanctioned red light districts, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. But we do have areas where, again, consenting adults can

engage in sexually explicit conduct, correct?

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. So that could include topless dancing, correct?

A. Yes, also known as strip clubs.

Q. Right, strip clubs. And there can be a difference between

the topless ones and then the full nude ones, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. And Mr. Bienert mentioned earlier today, you know what, my

son had a bachelor party, and I thought about -- and it's kind

of dated now -- but like the lady jumping out of the cake at

the bachelor party?

A. Yes.

Q. Maybe in various states of undress?

A. Yes, you can see that, and that is also a well reported

form of exploitation.

Q. Okay. But it may be -- it may also be people choosing to

do this for a living, correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 91 of 95
1

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

A. Yes, it could be.

Q. It could include bondage and BDSM, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Those are actually a little different?

A. Yes.

Q. But some of that involves being fully clothed, right?

A. That's correct.

Q. Do you think it's fair to say that the world of what sex

work is, as we're using it now, is actually pretty broad?

A. The world of prostitution, which is illegal in the United

States in every state except for, I think, three counties in

Nevada, can have many different types of sexual proclivities

acted out.

Q. And prostitution is one area of that kind of work, right,

selling actual --

A. Yes. Prostitution is illegal --

Q. Illegal, correct.

A. -- in the United States.

Q. Are you familiar with what prostitution is defined as in

California?

A. My definition, and the definition from research, helps us

to understand that prostitution is the exchange of sex for

money, drugs, influence, or some other desired outcome between

two consenting adults.

Q. And how do you -- how are we defining sex in that context?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 92 of 95
1

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

A. Any type of sexual act. It doesn't have to be penetration,

vaginal, anal, oral, or otherwise.

Q. So you define prostitution as any sexual act even if the

parties -- the consenting parties involved do not touch each

other. Am I understanding you correctly?

A. It depends upon -- well, if we're talking about adults.

Q. Yes, just talking about adults here.

A. Right.

Q. Are you defining prostitution as broader than the two or

more people involved touching each other?

A. No, I'm not.

Q. Okay. So we can agree that prostitution is, with some

different definitions in the different jurisdictions, having

actual sexual contact, correct?

A. Correct, that's the difference between prostitution and

stripping.

Q. Yes. Thank you.

A. Stripping is different.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, this might be a good time

to pause, or I can change topics.

THE COURT: All right. We'll break.

So we'll recess for the evening. Please remember the

admonition and we'll see you tomorrow morning.

(The jury left the courtroom, 4:34 p.m.)

THE COURT: Is there something else?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 93 of 95
1

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

MR. JONES: Your Honor, I think it's too late now, but

Dr. Cooper is a medical physician, and she flew from the east

coast and she had patients to see tomorrow. We were trying to

get her off today. I know the jury has gone back now. I

should have brought this up right before they left, but she'll

finish tomorrow morning, so that's fine.

THE COURT: Okay. You can step off, Doctor. Thank

you.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, we might be able to answer

the government's conundrum here, if I may just confer with my

colleagues for a minute.

THE COURT: Okay.

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

counsel.)

MS. BERTRAND: We are not done. I tried.

THE COURT: All right.

(Proceedings concluded at 4:37 p.m.)

* * *

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 94 of 95
1

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

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 24th day of

September, 2021.

/s/ Christine M. Coaly_______

Christine M. Coaly, RMR, CRR

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-13 Filed 11/01/21 Page 95 of 95