1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MICHAEL BAILEY

United States Attorney

District of Arizona

KEVIN M. RAPP (Ariz. Bar No. 014249, kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov)

MARGARET PERLMETER (Ariz. Bar No. 024805, margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov)

PETER S. KOZINETS (Ariz. Bar No. 019856, peter.kozinets@usdoj.gov) 

ANDREW C. STONE (Ariz. Bar No. 026543, andrew.stone@usdoj.gov)

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1800

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408

Telephone (602) 514-7500

DAN G. BOYLE (N.Y. Bar No. 5216825, daniel.boyle2@usdoj.gov) 

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

312 N. Spring Street, Suite 1400

Los Angeles, CA 90012

Telephone (213) 894-2426

BRIAN C. RABBITT 

Assistant Attorney General 

Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice

REGINALD E. JONES (Miss. Bar No. 102806, reginald.jones4@usdoj.gov) 

Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice

Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section 

950 Pennsylvania Ave N.W., Room 2116

Washington, D.C. 20530

Telephone (202) 616-2807 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CR-18-422-PHX-SMB 

UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE TO 

JAMES LARKIN’S MOTION TO 

CONTINUE TRIAL

(CR 1058) 

Defendant Larkin has filed, and all Defendants have joined, a Motion to Continue 

the trial for the fifth time. Defendants cite two reasons for this request: (1) Attorney 

Bernstein’s pregnancy and upcoming maternity leave and (2) the COVID-19 health 

pandemic. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the uncertainty it brings to whether the 

trial can currently be conducted in a manner that ensures the health and safety of all trial 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1062 Filed 10/05/20 Page 1 of 4
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

participants, and the specific circumstances cited by Ms. Bernstein, the government does 

not oppose Defendants’ request. But although there is no opposition, certain portions of 

the motion warrant discussion. 

VICTIMS’ RIGHTS

As the Court recognized in its Order granting Defendants’ third request for a 

continuance, both victims and the public have a right to proceedings free from 

unreasonable delay under the Crime Victims’ Right Act. (CR 893 at 5.) When contacted 

for its position on this motion, the government indicated it would not oppose the request, 

but needed to seek input from the victims. Exhibit A. Defense counsel agreed to represent 

the government’s position in its motion to the Court. Id. Rather than doing so, Defendants’

motion instead states the government “seek[s] input from its witnesses prior to providing 

its position.” (CR 1058 at 1) (emphasis added.) Defendants’ inability to recognize the 

victims as victims or even alleged victims and incorrectly stating the government’s 

position, impinges upon a victim’s right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the 

victim’s dignity. 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(8).1

After conferring with the victims and the next of kin of the deceased victims, the 

overall consensus is that this process is taking entirely too long. Preparing for trial is an 

emotional and painful process for the victims and it is traumatizing each time there is a 

delay. One victim representative expressed a belief that this is a “manipulative ploy to

drag this out thinking we’re gonna lose interest and go away.” Another victim believes 

this is just “yet another tactic to keep their freedom longer.” 

The Court takes the rights of victims seriously. (CR 893 at 5.) It previously 

acknowledged, “[a] continuance may represent far more than mere inconvenience” to 

victims—particularly the victims who have already waited nearly two and a half years for 

 1 As this Court is aware from previous pleadings and the Superseding Indictment, the victims fall into several categories. Certain victims were underage (14 and 15 years 

old) at the time they were trafficked on Backpage. Other victims were being abused by pimps who also were posting them on Backpage. Lastly, several of the victims are family member representatives of victims who were murdered as a result of being posted on Backpage. (See CR 920).

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1062 Filed 10/05/20 Page 2 of 4
- 3 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

their day in court. Id. As such, it is not surprising that the victims’ desire for certainty and 

closure is increasing with the passage of time. While the COVID-19 health pandemic has 

created its own challenges regarding moving this case forward to trial, the victims seek 

closure and would like to proceed to trial as soon as possible as they are looking forward 

to moving on with their lives. 

TRIAL DEADLINES

If the Court is inclined to continue the trial date, Defendants seek a concomitant 

extensions of related deadlines. (CR 1058 at 1.) As the Court has noted, the motions in 

limine deadline has passed and will not be reset. (CR 1031.) The substantive motions 

deadline has also long since passed.2

 (CR 664.) The government has no objection to an 

extension of the pending deadlines described below if the trial date is continued and 

respectfully requests that no further substantive motions be permitted. 

Document Current Deadline

Government’s Disclosure of Final Exhibit and Witness List December 14, 2020

Defendants’ Disclosure of Final Exhibit and Witness List December 21, 2020

Parties Joint Submission of Proposed Jury Instructions, Verdict 

Form, Voir Dire, and Statement of the Case December 21, 2020 

(CR 1031.)

CONCLUSION

Once again, the government does not oppose Defendants’ request, given the specific 

circumstances, but notes that if granted, this case will proceed to trial more than three years 

after the indictment was filed. This will be the fifth continuance. Absent the public health 

emergency and Ms. Bernstein’s maternity leave, the parties were preparing for trial in 

January 2021. The government has expended significant time and resources preparing for 

 2 Despite the substantive motion deadline passing, Defendants continue to file 

motions based on information they had prior to the deadline. (See CR 940 and 1059.)

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1062 Filed 10/05/20 Page 3 of 4
- 4 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

trial and the victims are hopeful the trial can proceed as soon as possible without 

unreasonable delay. 

Respectfully submitted this 5th day of October, 2020.

MICHAEL BAILEY

United States Attorney

District of Arizona

s/ Margaret Perlmeter KEVIN M. RAPP

MARGARET PERLMETER

PETER S. KOZINETS

ANDREW C. STONE

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

DAN G. BOYLE

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

BRIAN C. RABBITT

Assistant Attorney General 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice

REGINALD E. JONES

Senior Trial Attorney

U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division

Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this same date, I electronically transmitted the attached 

document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a 

Notice of Electronic Filing to the CM/ECF registrants who have entered their appearance 

as counsel of record.

s/ Marjorie Dieckman Marjorie Dieckman

U.S. Attorney’s Office

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1062 Filed 10/05/20 Page 4 of 4