1

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

Mr. Brunst’s motion also refers to court opinions and cases that guided him in his work 1/

and on oral and written contacts he had with counsel concerning them. Although Mr. Padilla’s

contacts with counsel was far more limited, his joinder encompasses the Brunst motion in its

entirety. 

DAVID EISENBERG

DAVID EISENBERG, P.L.C.

3550 N. Central Avenue, Ste. 1155

Phoenix, Arizona 85012

Arizona State Bar No. 017218

Telephone: 602.237.5076

Email: david@deisenbergplc.com

Attorney for Defendant Andrew Padilla

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v.

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

CR-18-00422-06-PHX-SRB

DEFENDANT PADILLA’S NOTICE

OF JOINDER re: DEFENDANT

BRUNST’S MOTION TO SEEK

ADMISSION OF STATE OF MIND

TESTIMONY (Doc. 1879)

The Defendant Andrew Padilla, by and through counsel, hereby gives notice that he joins

in Defendant Brunst’s Motion to Seek Admission of Brunst’s Testimony re: State of Mind.

(Doc. 1879.) Specifically, Defendant Padilla joins in Mr. Brunst’s motion as it relates to

testimony based on good faith in relying on the presence and participation of lawyers in

Backpage’s operations. (Id., pp. 13-14.) In Mr. Padilla’s case, that guidance impacted his state

of mind as to the criteria for the publication of advertisements during the time he managed the

moderation process at Backpage. As Mr. Brunst has noted and as Mr. Padilla recognizes, such

testimony concerning what he was told by lawyers would violate prior Court Orders. 

1/

The following sets out Mr. Padilla’s contacts with lawyers in his position as operations

manager and how these contacts impacted his actions at Backpage. Mr. Padilla, along with

approximately 40 moderators attended a presentation by Steve Suskin (and others) on

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1887 Filed 10/22/23 Page 1 of 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 2

moderation standards, which he incorporated into the criteria to be followed in reviewing

advertisements. He also talked with and was guided by Mr. Suskin concerning subpoena

compliance and would from time to time consult with Mr. Suskin about moderation criteria. Mr.

Padilla also personally met and talked by telephone with Liz McDougall many times concerning

moderation criteria. For example, when she started with Backpage in 2012, Ms. McDougall

directed him in certain cases to remove entire advertisements rather than merely stripping out

terms, and she encouraged him and Joye Vaught to meet with law enforcement. 

The evidence discloses that it was Carl Ferrer, Mr. Padilla’s superior, who was the

overarching source of moderation standards - - ever changing - - in both words and photos.

Nonetheless, the presence and participation of attorneys in the moderation process is quite

relevant to Mr. Padilla’s state of mind: he relied on and followed their directions. If he takes the

stand, Mr. Padilla should be allowed to testify about how the directions attorneys gave him in

carrying out his duties supported his good faith belief that he was conducting himself properly.

Respectfully submitted this 22 day of October, 2023. nd

s/ David Eisenberg

 

DAVID EISENBERG

Counsel for Defendant Andrew Padilla

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that on October 22, 2023, 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/ David Eisenberg 

 David Eisenberg

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1887 Filed 10/22/23 Page 2 of 2