EXHIBIT A

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 1 of 11
3891321.1 1

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

Q. And were you involved in responding in any way to 

the subpoena request?

A. Yes, I was. I even had to testify at times as a 

custodian

of records.

Q. Okay. So can you explain to the jury what a subpoena 

is?

A. A subpoena is a request from law enforcement to 

provide records on a particular posting or user.

Q. All right. And as time went on between 2004 and 

2018, did subpoena requests increase or decrease?

A. Subpoena requests continually increased. We ended 

up having a total of 20,000 subpoenas involving 

prostitution investigations in that time frame.

[09/13/23 AM Tr. at 63:4-15]

Q. Did you -- when you were asked to testify in these 

cases, did you ever disclose to anybody these marketing 

strategies that you’ve testified to the last couple of days, 

the aggregation, the super poster and the relationship 

with The Erotic Review?

A. I did not disclose that, nor was I asked.

[09/13/23 AM Tr. at 65:10-15]

Q. All right. So when you -- just so the jury is clear, 

when you receive these subpoenas, did you have any 

choice not to comply?

• All responses from law enforcement concerning Backpage’s 

assistance.

• The testimony Mr. Ferrer provided in the cases in which he was 

called to admit records from Backpage.

• All responses from law enforcement that show that Backpage not 

only provided the requested information but also provided 

information outside the scope of the subpoena.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 2 of 11
3891321.1 2

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

A. There was no realistic choice. I mean, you could you 

try to quash it and go to court. We just did not do that. 

We just had to comply, and we complied.

[9/13/23 AM at 68:14-19]

Q. And then what does Mr. Lacey say in response to 

these e-mails?

A. "We do how many million ads and he picks out one, 

tells us at the end of the day and wants our total response 

by a.m.? Of course there are kids who get through 

system. As there are in bars. This makes pursuit of 

solution, ie USC study, more critical rather than scoring 

political points."

Q. This reference to, "As there are in bars," what did you

take that to mean from Mr. Lacey?

A. In bars you would have an I.D. to get into the bar to 

drink alcohol.

[9/19/23 PM Tr. at 44:8-18]

Q. Why didn’t you implement age verification?

A. Well, we did the slow dance with [Seattle] Mayor 

McGinn to add age verification and it was kind of clunky 

and it was decided later by -- by the owners to no longer 

pursue the age verification.

[9/19/23 AM Tr. at 77:22-25] (emphasis added).

• Following the discussions with Seattle Mayor McGinn and the 

Washington Attorney General’s Office, Washington passed a statute 

(SB 6251) criminalizing the dissemination of content that included 

“depiction of a minor” and any “explicit or implicit offer” of sex. 

Backpage.com, LLC v. McKenna, 881 F. Supp. 2d 1262, 1268 

(W.D. Wash. 2012). A defense to the statute was “that a defendant 

obtained and retained government or school identification for the 

person depicted,” i.e., age verification. Id. at 1268. The statute was 

set to go into effect on June 7, 2012. Id. at 1269.

• Backpage then sued McKenna. The Western District of Washington 

enjoined the enforcement of the statute as violative of the First 

Amendment, as well as the CDA. Id. at 1275.

• Specifically, with respect to Mr. Ferrer’s testimony regarding the 

purported reasons Backpage did not implement age verification in 

response to the state of Washington’s efforts, the Western District of 

Washington held: “At first blush, requiring publishers to check 

identification before publishing an escort ad seems as 

commonsensical as requiring bar owners to check identification 

before allowing patrons to enter the door. There is, however, a key 

difference between these two scenarios. The latter is an 

identification requirement related to conduct—drinking alcohol in a 

bar. The former is an identification requirement—imposed by the 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 3 of 11
3891321.1 3

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

Q. All right. Was there -- do you know if there was any 

effort in Seattle by either the mayor or law enforcement 

that was asking for age verification by backpage.com?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection, leading.

THE COURT: Well, he can say “yes” or “no” if he 

knows.

BY MR. RAPP: Q. Do you know?

17 A. Yes, I know.

18 Q. Okay. And was there some effort?

19 A. Yes, Mayor McGinn.

[9/14/23 PM Tr. at 94:9-19] (emphasis added).

Q. And the Mayors surrounding Seattle, what do they 

tell Mr. Larkin in this letter that was ultimately 

forwarded to Mr. Lacey? Can you read it?

A. “We the undersigned mayors of the cities in 

Washington State, write to urge you to take steps to 

prevent the use of Backpage.com for underage sex 

trafficking by requiring in-person verification of any 

prospective escort advertiser’s ID, as well as proof of 

identity and age for anyone pictured in an escort ad. 

There is an urgent need to act quickly, as our cities have 

continued to find advertisements on your site that

reflect underage sex trafficking in recent weeks . . . . 

Backpage.com does not employ adequate safeguards to

prevent underage sex trafficking. To place an ad on

Backpage.com, all one has to do is check a box saying 

that the person featured in the ad is over 18. Other 

government and punishable by imprisonment—related to speech. 

Since there is no constitutional right to drink alcohol, courts tasked 

with upholding the Constitution care little if a bar’s identification 

verification process results in a line forming outside the door, or 

causes some restaurants to stop serving liquor. However, because 

there is a constitutional right to free speech, the Constitution cannot 

permit similar collateral consequences in the First Amendment 

context. See United States of America v. United States District 

Court for the Central District of California, 858 F.2d 534, 539 (9th 

Cir.1988) (“[A] speaker may not be put at complete peril in 

distinguishing between protected and unprotected speech. 

Otherwise, he could only be certain of avoiding liability by holding 

his tongue, causing him ‘to make only statements which ‘steer far 

wide [ ] of the unlawful zone.’”)). Id. at 1277. 

• The Court also held that “it unlikely that Defendants would be able 

to prove that all online advertisements for escort services are ads for 

prostitution. Thus, a website that contains a section for postings

for escort services that chooses to either shut down that section or

require age verification will likely chill protected speech in the

course of doing so.” Id. at 1282 (emphasis added).

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 4 of 11
3891321.1 4

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

advertising services require a photo ID to be brought to 

an office, in person, to verify age . . . .”

Q. Let me just stop you there. Was there at any point in 

the history of Backpage from 2004 to 2018 that you 

required in-person proof of who you were and what 

age you were?

MS. BERTRAND: Objection. Argumentative. Leading.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: No.

BY MR. RAPP:

Q. All right. And if you would go on starting with “We

believe.”

A. “We believe this practice is substantially more 

effective at rooting out under[age] sex tracking. In the 

last 18 months the City of Seattle has not found any 

evidence of underage sex trafficking on sites requiring 

photo ID. Since the beginning of 2010, 22 children 

advertised on Backpage.com were recovered by the 

Seattle Police Department. The Tacoma Police 

Department reports that they are currently working on 16 

cases of juvenile prostitution involving 14 persons who 

had Backpage.com ads. “We urge to you take quick 

action and help us address underage sex trafficking 

by requiring photo ID. Sincerely.”

Q. Now, did you continue to receive letters from the 

National Association of Attorney Generals?

A. Yes.

[09/19/23 AM Tr. at 80:3-81:17] (emphasis added).

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 5 of 11
3891321.1 5

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

A. The second bullet point is that AG McKenna has been 

attacking Backpage in Washington state, and so we just 

are going to try to attack him, attack him from getting 

campaign donations from Bing, and then Bing is a search 

engine that strikes content.

[09/19/23 PM Tr. at 41:25-42:4]

Q. And in 2012, if you know, were you experiencing any 

pressure regarding the website?

A. Yes, there was another prostitution investigation of 

the site.

[09/13/23 AM Tr. at 80:5-7]

Q. All right. And then No. 2, what is -- what is the 

second agenda item?

A. The second agenda item is, “fallback business plan 

scenarios in 2013 if business interrupted.”

Q. What did you take that to mean?

A. We’re under a lot of pressure from different groups 

and the media. We’re under investigation, that we’re 

wondering what is our business plan in the event that we 

have to turn off the adult section.

[09/20/23 AM Tr. at 47:2-10] (emphasis added).

• Defendants should be permitted to cross-examine Mr. Ferrer 

regarding what investigation he was referring to and the result of 

that investigation.

• If Defendants are not permitted to do so, then the jury will be left 

with the misimpression that a “prostitution investigation” in 2012 

produced an adverse result for Backpage and the Defendants.

References to attorneys, including Samuel Fifer, Steve 

Suskin, and Edward McNally.

• To the extent there are communications in admitted exhibits 

involving these attorneys, Defendants should be permitted to 

question Mr. Ferrer about those communications, as doing so does 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 6 of 11
3891321.1 6

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

Q. Okay. Steve Suskin, who is that?

A. Steve Suskin is in-house counsel, Village Voice 

Media. 

[9/15/23 Tr. at 41:4-5]

Q. How is it, sir, that you received this document?

A. It was a document that went to Sam Fifer that was

eventually sent to us indicating problems that Backpage 

had that they wanted to address.

Q. Okay. When you say us,” who are you referring to?

A. Myself, Scott Spear, the owners, Jed Brunst.

Q. All right. And this letter is -- how many pages is this

letter?

A. Three pages.

Q. All right. And you identify the individual went to -- I

believe you said his name was Sam Fifer. Who is Sam 

Fifer?

A. Sam Fifer was a lawyer that Scott Spear engaged. 

[09/13/23 PM Tr. at 76:14-25]

Q. And who are the signatories of this letter? 

A. These are Attorneys Generals from most of the U.S. 

states.

Q. All right. And who is this letter addressed to?

A. It’s addressed to Mr. Sam Fifer, counsel for 

Backpage.com,

not require the waiver of any privilege or assertion of a formal 

advice of counsel defense.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 7 of 11
3891321.1 7

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

LLC.

[09/19/23 AM Tr. at 81:23-82:2]

Q. So when we broke, I believe you were testifying that 

the portion that starts with Dear Councilman Burgess you 

didn’t write?

A. Correct. I did not write it.

Q. Who do you believe wrote this?

A. Edward McNally who was hired by Jim Larkin.

[09/19/23 AM Tr. at 57:24-58:4]

See, e.g., Exhs. 52, 804, 902, 938, 1185a (as revised per 

the Court’s order to show Mr. Suskin’s statements to 

CNN).

Government admitted Exhibit 23 through Ferrer. 

[09/12/23 AM Tr. at 70-71].

Page 8 of Exhibit 23 states that: “Larkin and Lacey 

[were] arrested by Arpaio.”

• Lacey must have the opportunity to show that this arrest – for his 

anticipation in protected expression by publishing – was not 

warranted and, in fact, violated the Constitution, as recognized by 

the Ninth Circuit in an en banc opinion. This decision then resulted 

in Maricopa County paying a settlement, which Larkin and Lacey 

stated that they would donate to, among other things, organizations 

dedicated to protecting free speech on the internet.

Q. Do you know if Craigslist is receiving any pressure?

MS. BERTRAND: Seek speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled, “yes” or “no.”

THE WITNESS: Yes.

BY MR. RAPP: Q. How do you know that?

• Defendants must have the opportunity to put before the jury 

everything that they “follow[ed]” about Craigslist including 

Craigslist’s announcement with the National Association of 

Attorney’s General, litigation involving Craigslist, information on 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 8 of 11
3891321.1 8

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

A. We follow Craigslist and the news closely, and he’s 

under frequent attacks from the Attorneys General.

[9/13/23 PM Tr. at 71:3-21]

Q. So starting down here, does this give you any type of 

notice, this Google alert?

A. Yes, it does and. . .

Q. What does it tell you?

A. It states, So. Carolina eyes ‘criminal investigation’ of 

Craigslist

[09/13/23 PM Tr. at 73:20-25]

Q. All right. And what changes did you understand

Craigslist was making with its adult section?

A. Well, he had two sets of changes. One was erotic

services cancelled, and then it all moved to adult 

services; and then later he terminated adult services.

Q. All right. And did you -- did it come to your attention

that Craigslist -- did Craigslist have a blog?

A. Yes, he had a blog.

Q. When you keep saying “he,” who are you --

A. Craigslist, Craig Newmark and Jim Buckmaster often 

posted in the blog, the Craigslist blog.

[09/13/23 Tr. PM at 112:8-18]

Craigslist’s blog, and Congressional testimony concerning 

Craigslist.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 9 of 11
3891321.1 9

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

Q. And was there some type of a testimony that you were 

– of Mr. Allen that you were made aware of?

A. Yes.

Q. And does Mr. Spear alert you to that testimony?

A. Yes. He gives me a summary of the testimony.

Q. Okay.

MR. RAPP: Move to admit 925.

MR. FEDER: Same.

THE COURT: Yes, it may be admitted.

(Exhibit 925 admitted into evidence.)

THE COURT: And it may be published.

BY MR. RAPP:

Q. All right. And so what does Mr. Spear tell you in this

email below here?

A. Scott Spear writes, “Just finished. We got called out 

once with CL. Lots of history of the CL saga over the 

last two years. He strayed from script at times.”

Q. And what does Mr. Larkin say to Mr. Spear in 

response?

A. Jim Larkin writes, “I’ve got the hearing up. Do we 

know anything about the underage example Ernie Allen 

cited from Backpage? Did they ever notify us of this?"”

[9/14/23 AM Tr. at 51:25-52:18]

Ferrer testified today that: (1) he came to learn during the 

first week of July 2015 that Visa and MasterCard 

terminated their relationships with Backpage and (2) the 

credit card companies did so in the face of “pressure put 

• The “pressure” Mr. Ferrer testified to was in fact exerted by Sheriff 

Dart. As contemporaneous emails and Mr. Ferrer’s statements to 

the government (as documented in FBI 302s) will show, Ferrer 

understood that (1) Dart was exerting pressure on Visa and 

Mastercard and (2) Backpage sued Dart in response, and ultimately 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 10 of 11
3891321.1 10

Ferrer Testimony “Opens Door” to:

on them.” He also referred to this as the “credit card 

apocalypse.” 

prevailed, which put Ferrer and Defendants on notice that the 

terminations were due to illegal coercion by a government official.

Today, the Government showed Mr. Ferrer the Senate 

PSI Report and elicited testimony that Ferrer read it, the 

report was publicly available, as well as testimony 

regarding Ferrer’s reaction to the report.

• The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations is a quasijudicial body. As the government was permitted to ask Mr. Ferrer 

about that committee’s investigation of Backpage and its final 

report/findings of fact (a quasi-judicial opinion), Defendants should 

be permitted to do the same as to court opinions that Ferrer was 

aware of and relied on, as those opinions counter the government’s 

“notice” evidence.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1803-1 Filed 09/21/23 Page 11 of 11