Exhibit C

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 1 of 148
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 2, 2021

Michael Lacey, ) 1:05 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 2 - 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 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 2 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 3 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 4 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

I N D E X

PAGE

JURY VOIR DIRE 5

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 5 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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: All right. Thank you. Have a seat.

And before the next counsel starts, Juror 63, I had a

follow-up question with you about your grand baby.

So there was some dispute about whether you said you

planned to go in October when your daughter has the baby or for

the month of October. Did you have a plan?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: We -- the plan is that I will be

there for the whole month of October.

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: She wants me there before and then

after.

THE COURT: And this is your daughter's first child?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right, first child.

THE COURT: All right. You don't need to ask any

followup.

Who is next over here?

Okay.

MR. FEDER: Good afternoon. My name is Bruce Feder.

It's my honor to represent this young man in front of me, Scott

Spear. Let me do some follow-up questions, if I can.

First of all, I know you all sat downstairs and

listened to these questions yesterday, but I want to -- it's an

important concept in our law, and I want to make sure that

we're all on the same page, and so I want to talk to Numbers --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 6 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

Juror Numbers 64, 73, 79, 80, and 91.

Start with 64.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 64.

MR. FEDER: There were three questions, I think they

were questions 43 A, B, and C, about jurors' attitudes toward

the presumption of innocence, whether or not a defendant would

be expected to testify, and whether or not the burden of proof

on the government is too hard.

Do you recall those questions?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do.

MR. FEDER: And I think today your answer is, even

though you had checkmarked one of those questions as being the

defendant should have to testify or the burden is too hard,

that you said you no longer believe that. Is that true?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. That's correct.

MR. FEDER: When you say you no longer believe that,

does that mean that if you are selected as a juror, that

basically the slate will be clean and you will require -- that

you believe in the presumption of innocence and will enforce

it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: That you do not believe that the burden of

proof, the high burden of proof put on prosecutors to prove

their case, that that's what -- what it ought to be?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I believe the prosecution has

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 7 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

the burden of proof.

MR. FEDER: And you're good with that, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: You believe in that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: And, similarly, that you -- you have no

expectation and will not hold it against an accused person in

any way if they don't testify?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. FEDER: Thank you very much.

Number 73.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 73.

MR. FEDER: Do you want me to ask the questions again

or do you want to just answer them?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, you don't have to ask the

question again.

Yeah, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. I

believe that, absolutely.

MR. FEDER: And you're -- you're going to apply that

if you are a juror, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely.

MR. FEDER: You have no question in your mind?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No question.

MR. FEDER: Same question with the presumption of

innocence. Are you going to apply that presumption that all of

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 8 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

these folks here are innocent unless the prosecutors can prove

guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Similarly, are you -- are you going to

expect in any fashion or hold it against them in any way if

they don't testify?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. FEDER: That's all I have. Thanks.

79.

THE COURT: 79 is not here.

MR. FEDER: 80.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 80. Yes, I do understand

that the emphasis is put on the prosecution to establish their

case beyond a reasonable doubt. I'd like to think that I would

not have any sort of preconceived notions about why a defendant

was not testifying on their behalf. I think there is a variety

of reasons as to why defendants would not do that, so I'd like

to think that I'd be, you know, fair and impartial if the

defendants were to not testify on their own behalf.

MR. FEDER: Maybe this is just a figure of speech, and

I apologize for asking you about it, but a lot of us use: I

think, I might, or sort of. Sometimes I use -- they're wiggle

words. When you say, I think, what does that mean?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would certainly do my best. I

mean, I've never been in this situation before and it's hard to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 9 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

say how you would think or how you would act, you know, in an

unfamiliar situation.

MR. FEDER: You don't know me, I don't know you, none

of us know you, so you have to give us your -- I think the

phrase has been -- your brutal honesty about whether or not,

deep inside, it's not I think, but I will.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I think I will. I will be

impartial and fair to both sides.

MR. FEDER: Okay. Thank you.

And 91.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 91. Same questions?

MR. FEDER: Same questions.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think I might have clicked the

box incorrectly, but I believe I can be impartial and fair to

both sides.

MR. FEDER: When you say fair and impartial to both

sides, let's say that today Judge Brnovich said, Juror

Number 91, I want you to vote, guilty or not guilty? What's

your vote?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Based on zero evidence, I couldn't

give you a vote right now.

MR. FEDER: Do you understand that because of the

presumption of innocence, where they are presumed innocent,

that means that there has to be evidence to get beyond that

presumption? Do you understand that?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 10 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I understand that.

MR. FEDER: Similarly, there has to be proof beyond a

reasonable doubt to get anywhere close to a guilty verdict,

right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I understand that.

MR. FEDER: So given the fact that you have not heard

any kind of information on this case, what's your verdict if

called upon to give it today?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: This very second I would have to

-- well, I think the case would be dismissed at that point in

time if we were asked. We wouldn't be asked to vote.

MR. FEDER: Wouldn't it have to be not guilty right

now?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You're putting words in my mouth,

sir.

MR. FEDER: Well, I don't want to do that. I want you

to give me your words.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: My word is I would have to hear

the data and understand it and analyze it and make my decision

based on the data provided. Right now, I have no data.

MR. FEDER: But if there is a presumption of

innocence, isn't that where you would have to start?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If there is -- if -- if I was --

if Her Honor was to say right now what are we going to do, I'd

say I would have to abstain because I have no evidence, no

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 11 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

information whatsoever to base my opinion on.

MR. FEDER: So it's going to be hard for you to say

right now, if there is a presumption of innocence, I have to

say they're innocent?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's a very, very large

hypothetical I'm not prepared to answer at this time.

MR. FEDER: Okay. Thank you.

Number 88.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 88.

MR. FEDER: Thank you. Juror Number 88, have we --

has anybody asked you about the hardship that you indicated?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. FEDER: Is there a hardship?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. FEDER: Are you a CFO of a company that you're

retiring from?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I am.

MR. FEDER: Tell me if I'm reading from the wrong

questionnaire. It says, I am retiring from the company at the

end of the year and will be training my replacement --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: -- during the last quarter, which means, I

assume, now, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MR. FEDER: Is this trial, if you were selected, going

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 12 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

to interfere with your ability to serve out your term as the

CFO of your company and train your replacement?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I thought about that. I've

actually been training her for a whole year for it. We just

need to get to one last little piece which is critical to the

company, but I don't see any problem.

MR. FEDER: Is that maybe what you referred to

initially where you said the problem has been solved?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Okay. Great. Thank you.

You indicated in your questionnaire that you had heard

of Backpage. Is that anymore than I've heard of a lot of

things or something specific?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I -- I mean, I've heard of it and

that's all.

MR. FEDER: Okay. You indicated that you're -- I

think the question is something to the effect of feelings

regarding a website's responsibility for content posted by

users.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MR. FEDER: And your answer was: I think they should

be responsible for the content. I don't know how to do that,

but I think they should.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, since I've been in here for

two days almost, I -- it's sort of like telephone deal versus a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 13 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

website, you know. Like, I hate robo calls, but I can't do

anything about it, in terms of shutting down, you know, the --

the phone system. So I think the way you're --

Are you asking me what I think we should do?

MR. FEDER: Well, I guess I'm asking you a question of

are you going to impose a burden on these folks that's --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. FEDER: -- an impossible one?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I got it.

MR. FEDER: And then there is the question, of course,

of whether or not that should be some kind of civil case or an

injunction case, as opposed to bringing the heaviest load, and

that is a criminal case.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I understand.

MR. FEDER: I think that's all. Thanks.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thanks.

MR. FEDER: Number 90, I think behind you -- oh, there

she is.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 90.

MR. FEDER: Perfect. You follow up the exact question

I just asked this gentleman. They should be held

accountable -- I'm sorry, a website -- your feeling is that a

website has responsibility for content posted by users, and

your answer was they should be held accountable if they know

illegal activity is occurring, right?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 14 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Do you have any feelings as to what it is

they have to do in order to know?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, just due diligence. I'm

sure there is plenty of software out there to catch keywords,

things like that -- I mean, obviously, things are going to get

through. It's not possible to catch everybody doing

everything, but there are certain things you can do as far as

software, I'm sure.

MR. FEDER: Does that make you think that the

Facebooks and the Googles and the big players in the internet

are not doing everything they should be doing?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I honestly don't know. Couldn't

tell you. I don't do a lot of social media. I mean, I have,

like, LinkedIn, that's it, so I don't really play around too

much in social media.

MR. FEDER: So you're not going to get called as an

expert on social media, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Definitely not.

MR. FEDER: Okay. Thanks.

Do you think if you were selected as a juror, because

of your feelings of whether a website should be responsible,

that you're going to hold -- even though you don't know the

answers -- you're going to hold these people to an unreasonable

standard?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 15 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I'm into laws and facts. I

watch a lot of Dateline.

MR. FEDER: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I said I watch a lot of Dateline.

All I use is facts and laws, so I would be just fine.

MR. FEDER: You're confident inside yourself?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely, yes.

MR. FEDER: Great. Thank you very much.

Number 91. Again, sir, you gave a reason why you have

concerns about serving. I want to make sure that you've at

least been asked about it.

Did you say I have a concern that missing ten weeks of

work and the need for me to pick up missed duties upon return?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. That's correct.

MR. FEDER: Could you be a little bit more specific?

I mean, are you going to get paid if you miss ten weeks of

work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe I will be paid, yes.

MR. FEDER: Is there somebody that can step in and

help to do the things that you would ordinarily be doing?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: At this time, there is nobody else

doing the work that I do.

MR. FEDER: How big a company is this?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's General Dynamics. It's an

electrical company.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 16 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. FEDER: I mean, have you discussed this at all

with your supervisors and about the problem that this would --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I have discussed it with

them, but they basically said let's wait and see what happens.

MR. FEDER: Would that -- if you were chosen, would

that be on your mind to a point where it would interfere with

your ability to be a juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. It would just mean I would

have to do some things in the evenings and weekends.

MR. FEDER: I think I forgot which juror it was was

talking about -- I think the lawyer was talking about having

worked last night until 12:30 and he was exhausted just from

one day of doing that, much less some months of doing that. Is

that a concern for you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's not. I don't think it would

be that many hours, just be some elective after the trial dates

and on the weekend.

MR. FEDER: You understand there is some days a week

we go five days a week, four days a week, three days a week, et

cetera?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I understand that.

MR. FEDER: Here was the question: Government should

investigate or prosecute provider of platform that promotes or

facilitates prostitution? And your answer was: Yes, until it

is a controlled environment -- that's in quotes -- some

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 17 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

protection needs to be provided to those forced into the

business.

What does that mean to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm sorry, I couldn't quite hear

you.

MR. FEDER: The answer that I have on your

questionnaire is you said, yes. And then it said, until it is

a controlled environment, some protection needs to be provided

to those forced into the business.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And what was the question that I

was asked?

MR. FEDER: The question was should the government

investigate and prosecute providers of platforms that promote

or facilitate prostitution?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe that answer feeds back

to an earlier one with questions of legality and whether it

should be legal or not, so controlled environment meaning

something more of an environment that allows people to do what

they want, not the platform provider, but the business being

provided.

MR. FEDER: I'm still not quite understanding what

you're saying.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: One of the earlier questions was

what was my opinion on prostitution, right?

MR. FEDER: Yeah. Your answer to that one was that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 18 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

you believed prostitution ought to be legalized because it's

the world's oldest profession, so to speak. No amount of

effort will ever completely stop it. Legalize it and provide

safety to all.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. So my answer below feeds

back into that answer. So if it's -- if it's everybody has a

safe environment, then there is an obligation to be able to

provide protection to anybody who is forced into the business.

MR. FEDER: Into what business?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Into the prostitution business.

That's what -- that was the feedback.

I misunderstood the question.

MR. FEDER: Okay. Well, as you stand here today, do

you think the internet sites have a responsibility to keep

anything illegal off of their site?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe they have an amount of

responsibility to ensure information provided on their site,

whoever provides it is providing protection to people that are

involved in the business, in the business being advertised.

MR. FEDER: Does that mean absolute? Try your best?

What is it to you that you believe is the -- your -- at least

is the basis of your answer to this question?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So, as I said earlier, I think --

I believe I misunderstood the question, or provided a different

answer than the question asked.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 19 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

As a platform provider, as an advertising platform

provider, is that what we're talking about?

MR. FEDER: Well, there is a difference between a

user, somebody that sends an ad --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. FEDER: -- versus the site where the ad is sent.

Those are two distinct things.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. So the platform provider

of the ad has some amount of culpability and understanding, in

that if there is one IP or one service address that's putting

in a thousand ads, there should be some sort of investigation

of what's going on there.

MR. FEDER: Okay. I got it. Thank you. Thank you.

Are you versed in social media and internet sites?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I've created an internet site for

a volleyball club I used to be a part of.

MR. FEDER: Were you able to implement any kinds of

ways of keeping off bad content or undesirable content?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I was the sole poster, so

everything that got posted had to go through me.

MR. FEDER: I got it. I understand.

All right. Thank you.

92. I know. I know. It's okay. I'll be gentle.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 92.

MR. FEDER: I must have missed you on my first

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 20 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

question, and that is you answered: Too hard to convict the

accused, I agree.

Do you remember?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think sometimes that happens.

MR. FEDER: Well, we have actually pretty standard --

a standard constitution that hasn't changed in many years, and

some standard laws that talk about this idea of a presumption

of innocence; that the government has a heavy burden of getting

past that presumption, and then another heavy burden of proving

the guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and that defendants don't

have any obligation whatsoever to put on any evidence, but

merely to test what the government asserts.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: Right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: And then if a defendant chooses to

testify, they can, if they don't, they don't have to, and you

are not to take anything about that to heart. You're not to

use it in any way against them.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. Oh, I understand that, but,

I mean, when the question was asked, it's like that's just how

I felt at the time.

MR. FEDER: But these are -- these are our laws.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: And you say it's too hard to convict. Are

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 21 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

you able to completely put that aside, don't even consider that

feeling, and apply the laws of our country?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I was a juror before, so

I've done that.

MR. FEDER: Do you enjoy being a juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Did I enjoy it? It was a murder

trial. It was interesting.

MR. FEDER: You also indicated that, in regard to

whether or not you have strong feelings about escorts -- I know

you've heard a lot of information about that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: So I'm not going to keep on pounding it

in -- but your answer was, it may be legal, but I think it's

wrong and breaks up marriages, but you said that you've not

been personally affected, thank goodness.

Understanding that theory being an escort can be

legal --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MR. FEDER: -- an escort can get a license from some

of the cities in this town, are you going to be able to apply

that and only that and not your personal beliefs against

escorts?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, because not everybody has got

the same moral code that I do, so I'm not going to push my

moral code on somebody else.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 22 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. FEDER: In other words, you will follow the law,

be a fair and impartial juror, and try to leave your morality

out of your decision making?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Thanks. Don't sit down.

I know you were probably just playing around, but in

answer to the question of: Do you believe prostitution should

be legalized? You said, hell, no. It's just wrong. Is that

just --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I -- I think it's wrong,

but, again, I know other people have different beliefs on it

than I do.

MR. FEDER: Going back to what you've already talked

about, you're going to apply the law, you're not going to let

your judgments about any of this stuff have an effect on your

ability to be a fair and impartial juror?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Your feelings about response -- website

responsibility for content posted by users. Your answer was,

I'm again conflicted. These entities allow some horrible

things to be posted which restricts religious views.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I thought -- the Facebook

police got me one time for posting something about -- the

Facebook police got me one time for posting something about

Jesus, so I think if they have the time to do that, they've got

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 23 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

the time to find and get rid of some of this other stuff that's

out there.

MR. FEDER: So you, in your opinion, in that

situation, they went overboard?

THE COURT: Mr. Feder, you need to move back a little.

Thank you.

MR. FEDER: I keep hitting this thing.

In that case, you think that the social media site

went overboard and was too strict, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I mean, it wasn't illegal or

anything, so why punish me when there is people posting illegal

things out there. Go after them. Leave me alone.

MR. FEDER: But you understand the predicament that a

social media site is in, where some people are unhappy about

them being too restrictive, and other people are unhappy about

them being not restrictive enough?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, that comes to whether it's

illegal or not. That's the key. I mean, if something is

illegal, then I believe they've got the responsibility to pull

it, but, I mean, if it's not, there is -- as far as I know, we

still have freedom of speech.

MR. FEDER: And you, again, will bring your best juror

to the jury box with you and be fair and impartial, and leave

these moral feelings, or ethical feelings, or just personal

feelings outside, as far as being -- being able to follow the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 24 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

law?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. I totally believe in the

constitution.

MR. FEDER: Great. Thank you very much.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Is that it?

MR. FEDER: Yes, that's all I have. Thanks.

MR. LINCENBERG: While we're on Juror Number 92, just

ask one quick followup, it's just a quick followup. You

indicated that your son is an Arizona state trooper?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Congratulations. And we're going to

have some law enforcement officials testifying in this case.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Do you believe that you will give any

additional deference to their credibility because they work as

law enforcement officials?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: They're people like we are, so you

have to take what they say and, you know, what anybody else

says. They're all going to be on the same playing field.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. So the fact that your son is a

state trooper won't even give you a little more of an edge

towards believing their testimony?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you very much.

Number 91, I also had just one or two follow-up

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 25 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

questions. I found a lot of your answers thoughtful about the

responsibility of platform providers, and I wanted to ask if at

all, going into your thinking, if you're familiar at all with

the protections for platform providers provided by Section 230

of the Communications Decency Act?

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

THE COURT: Yeah. You can ask about his general

opinions, but not about some specific.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. Well, are your opinions

informed at all by any -- any understanding of protections

under the law?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not aware of the exact -- I'm

not aware of the exact wording of those laws.

MR. LINCENBERG: Does anybody in the room have any,

what you might believe is, greater understanding than the

average about the laws that govern content that is posted on

platforms? Just raise your hand.

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, I think this is a

perfectly legitimate area of inquiry.

THE COURT: Yes, but it -- side bar.

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

THE COURT: Okay. So my objection is that this is a

general question into a new area that was not in the

questionnaire, and this is only for follow up.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 26 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: Right. So this deals with feelings

regarding website responsibility or content posted by users.

Number 91, obviously, has a lot of thought. He's a bright guy.

He has a lot of thought that goes into that area. He's created

platforms and the like and --

THE COURT: Created one website.

MR. LINCENBERG: Created one website, sure, and has a

lot of thoughtful responses. And I'm trying to get a sense of

whether any of the jurors have any greater expertise in this

area than the average person. I don't know what could be more

pertinent.

THE COURT: Well, that's not the question you asked.

You started asking about Section 230.

MR. LINCENBERG: That was with him, right.

THE COURT: And, well, then you turned to the jury and

asked them.

MR. LINCENBERG: So, first of all, I think the 230

question was appropriate, but the Court wanted me to change it

to understanding of the laws, so I did so. And then when I

turned to the jurors, I asked about understanding -- any

greater understanding of the laws in the area. I didn't even

talk specifically about 230 in that question. And I can

rephrase it again to keep it more general, more general nature.

THE COURT: Except that we have already covered

people's thoughts about websites in the questionnaires. This

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 27 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

is opening up a whole new area.

MR. LINCENBERG: It's dealing with question 76. We

had a discussion, and I want to see if anybody else has an

answer that would be different.

THE COURT: Different than what?

MR. LINCENBERG: Different than his answer. Where he

said he doesn't have any particularized knowledge in that area,

I want to see if anybody has any particularized knowledge in

that area.

There is going to be a lot of testimony about Section

230 and the First Amendment and the like, and I want to see if

anybody is going to have or has any particularized knowledge in

the law.

THE COURT: Okay.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

MR. LINCENBERG: So, ladies and gentlemen, my question

again, that was followup on my question to Juror 91, was if

anybody in the room has any particularized knowledge about the

laws that govern content or protections for content platforms

on the internet? If you do, please raise your hand.

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And, Juror Number 88, while

I'm on this side of the room, I wanted to also follow up with

you.

You indicated that, in your questionnaire, you advised

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 28 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

us that you're one of the owners of your company and currently

serving as the CFO. I represent Mr. Brunst who was the CFO of

a company that at one point owned Backpage, later sold it, and

so I'm very interested in hearing a little bit more about your

background and your work history in that regard.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Can you hear me now?

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. My early career was in the

real estate development business in Boulder, Colorado. And I

got my undergraduate degree at the University of Colorado and

went to work for a home builder for about ten years, probably

more like 15, actually, but then got a headhunter job here in

Phoenix and went to work for a REIT, real estate investment

trust. And that real estate investment trust --

MS. PERLMETER: I'm sorry. I don't mean to interrupt

the juror. I'm having difficulty hearing. If he could hold

the mic closer.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, no problem. My apologies.

When I transitioned down here, I went to work for

REIT, Real Estate Investment Trust. My job there was to -- I

was the valuation team captain, if you will. I was a vice

president of a group of people that valued the real estate that

we bought across the United States. And we ultimately set the

final purchase price on all of -- all the properties that we

acquired.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 29 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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. LINCENBERG: Was that a large REIT?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: What was the name of the REIT?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It was called Franchise Finance

Corporation of America.

MR. LINCENBERG: Can you give me a very general sense

of perhaps either the valuation of the REIT or the size of the

holdings, just to get a sense?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It was sold for five billion.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And in your role, you were

serving as the CFO of that REIT?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, no.

MR. LINCENBERG: What was your role at that time?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I was vice president in charge of

real estate valuation.

MR. LINCENBERG: You said that with a company -- a

large company, I would assume you would have quarterly meetings

or yearly meetings, something of the sort?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MR. LINCENBERG: And at those meetings, I assume that

there would be a number of different executives --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MR. LINCENBERG: -- who would come and they would

address things in their area of the company?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: For sure.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 30 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And you had your role in

that company and dealt with property valuations, as I

understand it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. LINCENBERG: And I assume that you viewed your

responsibility at that time as being focused on doing your job

as well as you could with regard to the valuations?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure.

MR. LINCENBERG: And did you assume that the other

folks in management would have had primary role for their

various responsibilities?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Of course.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And so I take it when you

would do due diligence in preparation for a meeting, it was

generally in your area and not in everybody else's area?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Now, I assume a company of

that size also employed outside counsel?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And was outside counsel

at that company in part involved in providing compliance

recommendations, for example?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Of course.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And did you generally

defer to the advice of outside counsel in terms of being a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 31 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

greater expert in what the law was than yourself, for example?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Many times.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. Okay. Now, I believe

that when we started, there was a -- you were, I think, one of

the gentlemen who raised your hand that said that there was

some information in addition to advising the Court -- correct

me if I'm wrong -- I wrote down a note that you said some

circumstances changed and that you have more availability now

than you thought. Is that what that was referring to?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, because -- yes. I had

requested a postponement of my service and I revoked that

request. And the circumstances changed in the last couple of

days where I felt more comfortable with my staff and with the

person in particular who is replacing me at the end of the

year.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you very much.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You're welcome.

MR. LINCENBERG: I'd like to ask some questions of

Juror Number 67. And let me -- let me, before I ask this, just

ask again. You may have heard me ask this of the earlier

sessions where I mention that on behalf of Mr. Brunst, I'm

going to be reserving my opening statement. I'll be giving my

opening statement after the close of the government's case and

before the defense case.

And I asked the question of the jurors earlier, first

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 32 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

of all, I have a concern if there is anybody who sort of comes

to quick decisions on things and then tends to stay with that

as opposed to keeping an open mind. And we've had some jurors

who have said I have sort of formed an opinion of this case

based upon just what I've heard during voir dire. And so

that's my question for those of you who are in the room right

now.

Is there anybody who believes that you either have

formed an opinion of the case or would likely form an opinion

early in the case, and that you would probably stick with that

opinion? If so, please raise your hands.

MS. PERLMETER: Objection. This is a new question.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

MR. LINCENBERG: Raise your hand if that applies to

anybody.

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. I want to make sure that

everybody --

Yes, Juror -- what's your number?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 87.

MR. LINCENBERG: Go ahead, 87. I think you need the

microphone.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 87. I just heard there is some

comments that there might be some things involving children.

And, with that being the case, I know that, you know, anybody

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 33 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

that's participated in crime that hurts children, I don't think

I'll be able to overcome my -- my bias towards that.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. I appreciate that. I

appreciate that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm a mom.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right. I understand. Anybody else?

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Now, if we could maybe give it

back to 67.

And, Juror 67, I want to pick up and I'm going to

start with you, although my question is really going to be

applying to everybody, if you can keep this question in mind.

The prosecutor in her voir dire questions used the

term victim. And my question, and I'll first ask you since I

know you were a victim of an offense, whether when the

prosecutor uses the term victim, that causes any of you to

infer that a particular witness, such as a prostitute, that the

troubles of that particular witness were caused by the internet

platform owners where that person advertised? Does anybody

infer that from when the prosecutor uses the term victim to

describe a prostitute who may be testifying as a witness?

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

Mr. Lincenberg, you can follow up with Juror 67.

MR. LINCENBERG: Well, Juror 67, let me ask that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 34 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

question more directed towards you. I know that you were

forthright about a difficult thing in your life of having been

a victim of an offense when you were -- when you were younger.

And if in the course of this trial the prosecutor describes

somebody who is testifying as a victim, will that lead you to

infer that the place where that person advertised her services

should be responsible?

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

THE COURT: The objection is overruled.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 67. So, yes, I was a

victim, but I also don't view it as that any longer. I

overcame the situation. I am a grown woman now. I'm

accomplished. And hearing anything, it's not going to change,

you know, my thought process. I'm a very fair person. I

manage a lot of employees. And when situations come up, I

analyze, take in the information and go from there.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So previously -- no. Is my

experience going to change the way I view things, no.

MR. LINCENBERG: I appreciate that. So the fact that

they may use the term victim, and we're the ones sitting at the

defense table, is not going to immediately cause you to assume

that whatever led this person into prostitution, that my client

is responsible for it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 35 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Anybody have a different view

of that? Please let me know.

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

THE COURT: Objection is overruled.

(No response.)

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And, Juror 67, let me follow

up. You had, in response to the questionnaire, you indicated

that you did not believe prostitution should be legalized

because it could potentially divert from individuals pursuing

other career goals if it was legalized. Can you explain what

you mean by that, what your feelings were?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I guess when it comes to,

obviously, we've all heard the difference between the

prostitution and the escort legalization and whatnot, so my

perspective is, you know, I think that everybody does have a

choice in what they do, but there are other avenues that they

can pursue to earn money.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And in question 69 you were

asked about whether the government should investigate or

prosecute providers of platforms that promote or facilitate

prostitution. And the answer -- the note I have down is you

said, yes, more resources should be utilized as long as

prostitution is illegal. And I wanted to ask for you to

explain what you meant by that as well, since this question

focuses on platforms, whether it's newspapers or internet

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 36 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

platforms where prostitutes had, apparently, advertised.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, again, I think, you know,

you're specifically asking about prostitution, so I would think

that -- I'm sorry. Can you repeat the question? I apologize.

MR. LINCENBERG: Sure. I'm really just trying to get

a little more of your thought about why, if this -- if my notes

are correct, you felt that more resources should be used to

investigate or prosecute platforms where prostitutes have,

apparently, advertised?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I guess if it's like

factual, right, that the -- that it is -- there are prostitutes

being advertised specifically, but if it's not proven, you

know, there is nothing, you know, to put the resources to. I

guess in my mind when I answered that question, as other people

have said, there are things where you are like -- when you do

post something online that -- or if you upload a video, it is

automatically reviewed for, I don't know what type of content,

I'm not an expert in that, but it will tell you, hey, your

video will be uploaded in a -- in a few minutes, so I'm

assuming they're doing a check.

So I guess that's where I say, like, resources. You

know, if it's something in that nature where, if there is the

keywords, if there is specific things that maybe the platform

does not want to use, but then they, on the other side of that,

I can't -- or I guess no one really can control what somebody

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 37 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

would like to say, freedom of speech so...

MR. LINCENBERG: So you're saying, if I understand you

right, the business that runs the platform should have

compliance steps to try to take out words that might constitute

sex for money?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, it just depends on, I

guess I would say what they were looking to have on the

website.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. All right. Thank you for your

explanations. That's helpful.

Juror 68. Sir, thank you for coming in with an

explanation of various things, it was very helpful to hear, and

it led me to have a few follow-up questions.

Let me -- let me start with bitcoin. So as I

understand it, you had, at one point, bought some bitcoin.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good afternoon.

MR. LINCENBERG: Good afternoon.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 68. Yes, I made a

number of purchases until I had a little over two bitcoin.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And you then indicated that

you sold them and at some point developed some ethical concerns

with the technology?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I transferred the two bitcoins to

my son-in-law, future son-in-law, as a wedding gift, and then I

retained a fraction of a bitcoin, then I sold those.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 38 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. So my question is this: Do

you believe that there is anything wrong with a company

accepting payment through bitcoin?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And let me ask, have you ever

paid for anything with your bitcoin or was your purchase just

an investment?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just an investment.

MR. LINCENBERG: Do you ever know of any friends or

family members who have used bitcoin in transactions?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Of course, my son-in-law after he

lost his password but then recovered it, obviously, used the

two bitcoins that I -- that I had given him.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. If you heard evidence in this

case that one of the forms of payment that was accepted by

Backpage was bitcoin, would that raise any ethical concerns in

your mind that would cause you to have any bias?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: As I mentioned in my answer, I

think there is a record or correlation of bitcoin being used by

actors who have an interest in anonymity, and that's why, for

example, bitcoin was a method of payment on -- so just a, for

instance, that's why it's also used when people produce ransom

money.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Can it be used by legitimate

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 39 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

business or legitimate transactions, absolutely, there is not

fundamental there.

MR. LINCENBERG: And you understand there is thousands

of legitimate businesses that accept bitcoin as payment?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely. I wouldn't have,

obviously, myself, owned bitcoin if I felt that it was

fundamentally always a matter of illegal use or supporting

crime.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. Let me ask you about --

you indicated that, I believe, you work for AETNA?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, CVS Health Net.

MR. LINCENBERG: CVS. Do you have any concerns, work

wise or otherwise, with being able to serve on the jury? My

note may be wrong. I had written down that you either were

going to or had asked your manager.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm so glad you asked. So during

the break I received a message from a manager salaried

employees can serve on a jury as long as you like, as long as

needed, without a reduction in their salary. So on that score,

no hardship concern.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you, sir.

Juror 69.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 69.

MR. LINCENBERG: Good afternoon. I understand from

your answers to the questionnaire that you had some concerns

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 40 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

about serving. Rather than going through your answers when you

gave them, if you could just help us and lay those out for us.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So I'm a high school math teacher,

and my concern was, with serving, was just what my students

would be doing while I'm gone. And I did not know that there

would be some weeks that there would be three or four-day

trials where we'd be asked to report. I don't know if I would

have to -- like, let's say I had to report Monday through

Wednesday and not a Thursday/Friday, do I have to go into my

classroom that Thursday because I didn't report here? Do I

have to, like, plan for that?

So I just have some concerns, like, as far as, like,

picking up where I left off in the interim, or when it comes to

an end, that's only -- that's my only concern.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. So if you had to serve four

days a week, five days a week, you would be able to do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. If I had to serve four days

a week, and let's say Friday I didn't, like, I don't know if I

would be obligated to go into work that Friday, if I would

receive payment that Friday. If I had to serve Monday through

Thursday, and since I didn't have jury duty on Friday, if I

would have to go into work. I would have to prepare something.

And, as a teacher, it is difficult to go in and out of working,

just, like, coordinating. That's an unknown for me. I have no

idea what that would be like.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 41 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: And so since the time of the

questionnaire, did you find out any answers to that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, as a Mesa Public Schools

employee, I do get jury duty salary, but as far as the

logistics of, like, am I just not working until the trial is

over, or if I have to go in throughout the week, I didn't find

that out until yesterday. And I haven't been able to ask, I

don't know who knows, like, if that's even what the protocol is

for that, or even, like, the two-week break that they mentioned

in November, I don't know if I would be required to go and

teach. Because even that is, like, the week preceding that I

would have to prepare what I'm doing with my students for those

times where I'm there, and then preparing them for when I

leave. Again, that's just the unknowns that I have.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. There was a question asked of

you about whether you agreed to, and are comfortable with,

wearing a mask. And you said no, of course, none of us enjoy

this, but I want to explore it a little bit with you.

Certainly, there is some who have a harder time with

it. If you can just give us your thoughts on that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I can wear a mask. Like, I've

taught through this all last year. Is it my preference, no. I

do find myself, like, if I'm in the classroom and I have to

talk through this, like, at length, I find myself maybe talking

less than I would before. Like, I don't want to be speaking --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 42 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

like, in my experience, talking for -- in my experience,

talking for, like, multiple hours at a time. I like the breaks

of not talking. So am I comfortable wearing one, no. I

would -- I will. During lengthy conversations, though, I don't

want to talk at length through one. I just find myself not

talking as much.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I like to talk but --

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Now, with regard to the

question about your feelings regarding website responsibility

for content posted by users, my notes indicate that you said

that you think that some of the websites have gotten so large

it's borderline impossible for them to know anything that's on

their site. Can you expound on that a bit?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. If you have ten people

posting on your website, you could check what they're saying.

If you have, like, six million videos uploaded every day, like

you people will get through that, like, there is -- I don't

think that there is a possible way.

Like, even my wife, when she posts a TikTok, as a

therapist, she can't put the word suicide anywhere, because

then it will tag it. So if she types sewer slide, like, then

it doesn't, so there are ways around it. And there is no way

that you could ever police all of it. So, yeah, it just

depends on the size and the ability.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 43 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

43

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And what are your thoughts

about the responsibilities of the website platforms --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well --

MR. LINCENBERG: -- to prevent things from being

posted?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not sure on, like, the legal

responsibilities, as far as, like, yesterday, and, like --

like, the bare minimum that I know, I don't think they have a

legal responsibility to do that. Like, if I was running a

website, or one of my friends was running a website, I think it

would be something that I would want to do just on my site,

but, like, do I think that they should be doing something,

maybe, but is it, like, do they have to, no. I don't know.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. You heard my colleague,

Mr. Feder, asking a number of jurors about whether you would be

able to, when you come into this trial, and would presume our

clients innocent unless and until you heard evidence beyond a

reasonable doubt to the contrary. Do you believe in that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. LINCENBERG: And so, as we're sitting here today,

if the judge were to instruct the jury that a defendant is

presumed innocent unless and until proven otherwise, at this

time, would you vote not guilty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'd have no reason not to.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And is there anything else

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 44 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

that we should know in connection with the issues that we've

discussed with a number of the different jurors that would be

helpful in just understanding if you have any biases or

concerns that we should be aware of?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think anything has came up

for me, other than the -- the question of, like, being

mindfully present as a juror, that's the only one really. Just

with what I said about, you know, I've known my students for a

couple weeks now, and, like, what's going on there and what

would happen when I come back to pick up the pieces months

later.

Because there is a teacher shortage, and even the last

two days, like yesterday and today, my students didn't have a

set substitute. So, like, even if I were to go back tomorrow,

it feels like I'm picking up the pieces. And if I don't go

back tomorrow, when I go home tonight, I have to try to find

another sub, make lesson plans, get them ready, so that -- that

juggle is the only questions that I have.

MR. LINCENBERG: So I -- I truly understand and

sympathize with that concern. If you were on the jury, would

those concerns, do you think, in any way inhibit you from

giving your full attention to what's going on in the courtroom,

the testimony?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It depends. If I was, like, you

started the trial and then you don't have to work until it's

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 45 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

totally over, there is a piece of me that thinks maybe at the

end when I'm coming back, my mind would start thinking about,

like, well, what are you going to do December 17th or

January 14th when you come back? Like, what is your plan

moving forward? And my brain might shift to that, I don't

know. I've never been in that position. I'm just going off

of, like, when I've taken vacations before, the last day or two

of the vacation I might start being, like, well, what am I

doing when I get back Monday? That's just part of who I am

and, like, that's, like, who I am as a person with my career

so...

MR. LINCENBERG: Well, I mean, given your important

responsibilities, every week is going to be a little different

in the courtroom, depending on holidays and this and that. But

if most weeks are four or five days a week, I think you've

heard there is a couple weeks off in November, it's going to be

that type of schedule. As best you can tell us under that type

of schedule, will you be able to -- I know you don't know for

sure, but as best you can tell us, will you be able, you know,

will you -- do you think you'll be able to fully focus on the

testimony or not?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I can't be certain that if on a

Friday we were finishing and I knew I was going to be in my

classroom Monday, if towards the end of the day, like, I would

start thinking about my lesson for Friday, because if I --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 46 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

like, I would need to spend time on Saturday or Sunday to get

ready for that Monday, that's -- I can't say that my mind

wouldn't do that.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. I appreciate you trying to

work through these uncertain questions.

Juror 71. Good afternoon. Juror 71, you were a

person who in the questionnaire had indicated that a defendant

should have to prove his innocence. Do you recall that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Can you explain what you mean?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's -- I raised my children and I

was raised that way too as a child. If -- so if a student came

up to you and accused you of saying something or doing

something and you did not do that, you speak up. You don't

stay quiet. The others around watching think, oh, they must be

guilty because they're not defending themselves. So I just

believe that -- I know if it was me, I would not sit quietly

and not stand up and say something.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If it's a lie and I know it's not

true, it's in me to speak up and defend myself. And I've

taught my kids to be that way. Don't be shy. Don't -- if it's

not true, speak up, speak out. Don't sit down and let somebody

else control that, because they may take it in an area where

you -- you're not happy with, that it is not true, so I would

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 47 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

like to see defendants stand up and say something.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right. And I appreciate -- this is

what I want. There is no right or wrong answer, just looking

for your honest opinion.

So as you come into this case, given all that you've

heard, that defendant doesn't need to present any evidence or

testify or anything, if a defendant did not do so, it sounds

like you would view that negatively?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Could you say that again?

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes. It sounds like -- suppose I --

I'm a lawyer. I'm in this case.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: You're on the jury, and you've,

basically, indicated that if somebody is innocent, they should

stand up and talk and so forth?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Uh-huh.

MR. LINCENBERG: If my client did not do so, it sounds

like you'd have a little bias against him, assume there must be

some --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would wonder why, because, to

me, it's human nature to stand up and say, no, I didn't do

this, and try to explain how did this come about, you know.

It's -- to me, it's just human nature. And when they don't,

there is a little bit of a, hmm.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. So even though the judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 48 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

might instruct you that a defendant doesn't need to testify and

so forth, that would just run counter to your intuitions, fair?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And so --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: And -- and as -- at the time, I

may have that little prejudice towards them, but when you start

seeing the evidence, it could really turn the other direction.

And it's like, yeah, a person is innocent until proven guilty,

but the fact that they are not free to wander the city, they're

being held somewhere and there is evidence, I can't really say,

no, he's absolutely innocent until proven guilty, but he is not

guilty either. It's kind of like they're floating in this

limbo. And I just want to see that there is -- if there is no

evidence, then turn the guy loose. Why are you holding him?

But there is -- they claim that there is evidence, I'd like to

see it.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right, sure. So if you were in my

shoes, would it be reasonable for me to infer that if I -- if I

-- let's say I didn't even give an open -- I mentioned I was

going to give an opening statement. Let's say I didn't give an

opening statement or a closing statement or anything, just left

it to the jury to decide if there was sufficient guilt, it

sounds like that would not be a strategy that would win you

over?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I'd like to hear your opening

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 49 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

statement, or if you save it until the end, I'd like to hear

from you. I want to hear everything.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right, right. And if you don't hear

everything from both sides, it sounds like you're likely to go

with the side that you heard more from?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, then why are we all here if

both sides had nothing to say and there is no evidence then?

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Okay. In -- in the jury

questionnaire, question number 76 was asking about feelings

regarding website responsibility for content posted by users,

and you said there was a lot of hypocrisy with those websites.

Can you explain what you meant by that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, they lay down the rules but

they don't make it for everybody. They pick and choose. Okay.

You broke the rule, so we're kicking you off, or we're kicking

off your -- what you posted, but then you turn and you see

other stuff that is offensive, hateful, and that's okay. So,

to me, rules shouldn't just -- you pick and choose who has to

follow the rules. That's what I don't like.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right. Okay. Thank you for your

honesty.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MR. LINCENBERG: Appreciate it.

And the last person I wanted to ask some questions of

was Juror Number 80.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 50 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

THE COURT: I think 80 is --

MR. LINCENBERG: No, 80 is --

THE COURT: Oh, 80 is still here. Sorry.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 80.

MR. LINCENBERG: Hi, Juror 80.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hello.

MR. LINCENBERG: I don't want to retread some of the

areas, but I just want to make sure I understand the hardship

position of you. I believe that you had some child care

issues, did not believe that your husband could cover for you

and that this would really create a problem. Is that fair?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, that is fair. I would say

both my husband and I have pretty demanding jobs. We both work

50 to 60 hours as it is. We flexed our schedule since COVID

started so that he goes in early and I do drop off and take

care of the kids in the morning, he does pick up while I stay

later in the evenings. And that's been working well enough.

So I think it would be extremely challenging for him to still

meet his work commitments if I asked him to do both of those

things.

And then I further confirmed with my employer that

they do not offer payment during jury service, so if it was a

long-term jury service, I'd be, you know, a little more

concerned about monetary concerns, as I do, you know,

contribute more than half of the household income.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 51 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Thank you.

Your Honor, nothing further.

MR. EISENBERG: May I proceed, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, I represent Mr. Padilla, that's

the gentleman third from my right. And I apologize to him, I

forgot to introduce myself to your prior two panels.

Juror 82.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 82.

MR. EISENBERG: Yes, sir. Good afternoon, sir. On

your juror questionnaire you listed some answers, so I'm going

to go through them and I'll ask you some questions about them.

Okay?

First one is, with the length of the trial, would the

length of the trial create an undue hardship? Now, I'm not

sure if you've been asked these questions before, but I don't

have an answer for that. So could you explain what that would

be?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So I messaged my employer on

break, and my employer can only find that I would be covered

for ten days. I'm the sole provider. And my apartment complex

just became under new management, and they are looking at

anyone that misses two months' rent will be evicted. So a

lengthy trial would mean I can't afford rent and I'd be at risk

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 52 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

of losing my house.

MR. EISENBERG: Do you have roommates or people that

you live with?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do not. I'm going through a

nasty divorce right now that my spouse just took one of the

cats and left.

MR. EISENBERG: And you're also going through a

bankruptcy, as I understand it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: How far have you come in the

bankruptcy situation?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It should be going through in

front of the judge either this month or next month. We've

already done the 60 days after the meeting of the creditors.

MR. EISENBERG: And, in terms of your employment,

what's the situation right now?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right now I actually took a leave

of absence for seven days the first of this month so that I can

de-stress after having worked through this COVID as a pharmacy

tech and --

MR. EISENBERG: So you're under a good deal of stress,

to say the least?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Right. As a pharmacy technician, I

see that you wrote down here that you have close contact with

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 53 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

COVID-19.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right now we're averaging 1 to 10

patients every day coming in saying that they're confirmed

positive.

MR. EISENBERG: Though these are people who have --

they actually have evidence that they --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That they are saying they are

laboratory confirmed COVID.

MR. EISENBERG: And that's per day?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's about per day.

MR. EISENBERG: Is that typical? Let's see, is it

CVS?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I work for Walgreens.

MR. EISENBERG: Walgreens. If you know, is that

typical for all the Walgreens in the area?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I do not know. I work at a

24-hour store, the only one in Mesa, so we see a lot more

volume than other stores.

MR. EISENBERG: All right, sir. I'm going to shift a

little bit to your academic background. I see that you have

put down that you have some law and legal training and that you

studied administration of justice in community college; is that

correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. I am two classes away from

getting associate's, but switched focus over to nursing because

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 54 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

I am not very fond of public speaking.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. And so you're not pursuing your

law training?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I have switched focus to go

towards nursing.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. Did you, at one time, want to

be a law enforcement officer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I actually applied for Mesa police

in either '19 or '20, and actually was injured on my job and

was unable to go to the physical test.

MR. EISENBERG: All right. So you don't have any

future plans of joining the force?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. My last question for you

concerns something that I think you were asked about at length,

and I'm not going to repeat it, but I want to go one step

further with it. It has to do with your answers about

expecting a defendant to testify. In your form that you filled

out, you said that you would agree with that.

However, during the voir dire, you were asked

questions about the defendant's right not to have to testify.

Do you remember that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: And that the defendant is presumed

innocent and so forth.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 55 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. The one question that I want to

take a little bit further is if the defendant doesn't testify,

and it comes to the end of the case and you feel that the

government -- and I know it's a hypothetical -- the government

hasn't proven to your satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt,

which is the standard, that the crime -- that the defendant is

guilty, would you return a verdict of not guilty?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: If they have not met the burden of

proof without a reasonable doubt, then I would vote not guilty.

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

And the only question I have -- the only other

question I have is for Number 80.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 80.

MR. EISENBERG: Actually, ma'am, I think you did

answer the series of questions that this gentleman asked --

that I just asked this gentleman about Fifth Amendment

privilege, that sort of thing.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. I'm going to ask you the same

question I asked him. Although I think you did -- oh, yes,

here it is.

In response to your -- the question that presented to

you about the perspective that you give a defendant during a

criminal case -- I think I have this right -- the last question

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 56 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

had an answer that I can be fair in this -- and I think you

were referring to a trial -- but you said, I believe so.

Now, you're shaking your head yes?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. Do you have any kind of -- want

to change that, do you, because when you say I believe so,

that's sort of -- is it just an intellectual thing or do you

really mean it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I really mean it. I would hear

all the facts and circumstances -- I'm not an analyzer by

trade, so very logical, and just like to think through

everything. So I would, you know, consider all the facts and

circumstances presented and the information provided by the

judge, and make the best decision that I could with the

information presented and follow the, you know, law that all

the defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty

beyond a reasonable doubt.

MR. EISENBERG: Suppose the defendants didn't testify

and felt the government hadn't produced the case beyond a

reasonable doubt, is he guilty or innocent?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Innocent.

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you. I have no further

questions.

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Bertrand.

MS. BERTRAND: Good afternoon. I'm Joy Bertrand. I

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 57 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

represent Joye Vaught.

And you heard me yesterday talk to the two other

groups of folks about the importance of being more than honest,

but being totally straightforward with us about, not only your

thoughts about these questions -- and I know that it's a grind

to sit here and listen and answer -- but also your feelings

about being here. And like I told the other two groups, I'm

only one-seventh of all of this -- that's Ms. Vaught -- but if

you don't want to be here, tell us and I'll do what I can to

see that you don't have to be here.

Let's start with Juror 76.

Hi. Juror 76, excuse me if you already answered this

and I just didn't hear it. How big is your nonprofit that you

work for?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: We're about 76 employees.

MS. BERTRAND: 76.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: But my team is two people.

MS. BERTRAND: You and another person?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: And it sounds like with these events

coming up that, if you're serving jury duty here, you would

have to work nights and weekends to get your other job

responsibilities done. Is that accurate?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Correct. And the end of the year

is really a big time for us with our annual report that we have

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 58 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

to do, and I'm the one who creates all the content for that,

and I would still need to do that.

MS. BERTRAND: So in addition to the events coming up,

you also participate in putting together an annual report?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: That's for a 501c3 nonprofit. That's a

big undertaking.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Donors, yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: Do you think that that needs -- those

are real work demands. Do you think that those will create a

distraction from your ability to participate here?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: A hundred percent I'll be focused

on what I need to work on that night.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure. I -- I can imagine. And I bet

if you had to work on it that night, it would also keep you

from getting rested?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: In straightforward terms, do you think

it would be an undue hardship, given your specific work

considerations, to sit on this jury?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I think I would be extremely

stressed. And I think it would put an undue hardship on my

organization that gave me this opportunity less than a month

ago and to leave them for three months.

MS. BERTRAND: So on top of these things, you just

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 59 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

started here?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you.

Juror 77, in the back.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm Juror 77.

MS. BERTRAND: Hi. Nice to meet you. Make sure -- I

get a sense you're probably soft spoken, so make sure you

really talk through that mask.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MS. BERTRAND: I have your answers to the

questionnaire in front of me. And I thought it was a fair

comment one of the other -- one of your colleagues said, look,

I don't remember what I put on there. I can kind of tell you,

so I'll give you back some of the language if you need it.

One of the things I thought was interesting, and it's

something that I think a lot of folks struggle with is, you

were asked: Do you believe that you can determine whether

someone is credible? And your response was, no, not certain I

know how to tell if someone is lying. It seems that lying

could be part of this world.

Does that sound correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't recall exactly those

words, but I understand what it is. I mean, I've been lied to

directly to my face before, and I can usually find a factual

way to prove that it's a lie or not, but I can't tell they're

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 60 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

lying. I mean, I'm not a very good liar. My wife tells me

that all the time. But other people can lie to me and I don't

know the difference.

MS. BERTRAND: Well, that's not necessarily a bad

trait that you're trusting. And I bet there is other folks

here in this room who can say, yes, I've had people smoke me

too.

You are a supervisor at Honeywell?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: So what do you do in your work

environment to ferret out if someone is telling the truth?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, usually in the work

environment it's about the work that's done and it's pretty

easy to tell. I'm technically -- I'm a trained engineer, and

they're all engineers that work for me, so I can tell if

someone is giving me smoke and mirrors or the facts.

MS. BERTRAND: Because whatever you're working on

doesn't work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, right.

MS. BERTRAND: Or they don't show up with their part

of the work product?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MS. BERTRAND: Then you noted in your answers that you

have followed the Me Too -- news about Me Too, about

prostitution, sex, and human trafficking reports, and then

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 61 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

said, especially with the border crises in Arizona and the sex

traffic associated with large events, parenthetically, like the

Super Bowl in the Phoenix area. Do you recall?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I've heard about the Super Bowl

stuff on the news quite a bit and the Super Bowl time of year.

And then, yeah, there is a lot of border traffic which is

constantly in the news, talks about trafficking minors and

things over the border, and trafficking even non minors, but

into the sex trade so -- but from what I learned yesterday,

that's not what this case is really about.

MS. BERTRAND: Right. Correct. I was curious -- it

struck me, because I was curious to know, I hate to say it,

we've got so many problems on the border, which border crises

you were referencing? Was it the onslaught of immigrants

waiting to be let in? Was it the violence on the border? How

do you define that border crisis?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, that's all crises, I think,

but the part that I was referring to when I was answering the

questions was, you know, the drop houses where they find, you

know, 45 people stuffed in a garage somewhere.

MS. BERTRAND: So in terms of human trafficking, it

was about, criminal immigration terms, the pollos and the

coyotes being trafficked?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MS. BERTRAND: And that includes some children.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 62 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

What about the Me Too movement have you followed?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's interesting that I would have

written that down, because I don't really mean -- there is not

a lot of depth in that, in my thing of it, except I've just

heard about it a lot. I've heard about it a lot on the news.

I've got two grown daughters and a wife, so I -- I just hear

about it quite a bit. I don't have a lot of specific details,

but it seems like people come out of the woodwork, you know,

the -- the expectations have changed over time, and that's --

that's just the world. The expectations have changed over time

and -- and we're now getting worried about things that have

happened 20 years ago.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah. I follow.

Especially since there are three women that you love,

your two daughters and your mom -- your wife, excuse me -- in

the context of Me Too. What has changed since -- you know, Me

Too has been around, what, about three years now, four years --

what's changed for you since the Me Too movement has taken on a

life of its own?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Personally, nothing for me really.

I just have watched, you know, kind of from the outside, but

nothing personally has happened in my life about it.

MS. BERTRAND: Has it changed how you see the lives

that your wife and your daughters live?

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

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 63 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MS. BERTRAND: Then you also noted that you have seen

reports about prostitution and sex or human trafficking. Can

you say a little bit more about that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, just like I say, just the

news. The one that really comes to mind is the Super Bowl,

and, like, during Barrett-Jackson and all those times when

there is big fancy events going on in Arizona, how much -- how

prevalent it is just kind of -- I've never been exposed to it.

I had no idea it was so prevalent, but it just shocks me that

it is.

MS. BERTRAND: I think it shocks a lot of people.

There is a -- there is a saying in that world of, if a woman

comes up to you at a hotel bar and says, are you here for the

convention, that's a clue.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I've seen that on a TV show

or something before, but I've never experienced anything like

that actually so...

MS. BERTRAND: It is, I think for a lot of people, a

totally different world. Have you formed opinions about that

world just from what you know about it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not really, just my eyes are a

little bit more open, more nervous about it, I guess.

MS. BERTRAND: More nervous. Can you say more about

that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I -- I go to events like

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 64 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

Barrett-Jackson and stuff and I -- I just worry if someone were

to approach me like that, I would almost instantly feel nervous

about it now instead of just feeling that it was just a

friendly person, and I used to be more naive about it I guess.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah. Your eyes are a little bit more

opened, like you said.

You noted in a couple of your responses that -- I'm

going to just kind of make it in a general sense -- sex work

and the sex industry is illegal and a bit sick.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MS. BERTRAND: I noticed you kind of shrugged your

shoulders like you're a little nervous about saying that. I

think there is a lot of people that would agree with you.

There is parts of it that are really not wholesome.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MS. BERTRAND: And you've heard the lawyers talking

with people over the past two days about this. This is more

than simply using medical terms for body parts and technical

terms for different types of sex acts. This stuff is gross.

MS. PERLMETER: Objection. Could counsel please ask a

question.

THE COURT: Ms. Bertrand.

MS. BERTRAND: So since you've noted it's a little bit

sick to think about, what is your take on -- what's your

feeling about serving on this jury where we're going to be

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 65 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

talking about this type of content for 10 to 12 weeks?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: As far as I understand what the

trial is about, and it's only just from the last couple days of

listening, it's more about sort of the responsibility of an

internet provider or a Facebook type provider on the internet

and not about the acts that might be associated with it.

So the first thing I think of is why do we have to

talk about all that icky stuff, why do we have to see all these

pictures, and is someone trying to get everybody's emotions

riled up instead of sticking to the facts? That's really --

that's been going through my mind quite a bit the last few

days.

MS. BERTRAND: Understanding I don't have a lot of

control over what other people do here. What if this is --

what if that content is part of this case and is the reality of

this case, how would that affect your ability to be fair and

impartial?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. So, yeah, I would be

uncomfortable, but as people have said, uncomfortable around

strangers, I'm more comfortable around people I don't know

talking about stuff like that than people I do know, so I would

be okay with it.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Your Honor, let me just check

real quick. I may be done.

Juror 64, hi. It's hard for me to -- for me to see

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 66 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

some of you guys.

And I think Juror 74 also had a similar conversation.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 64.

MS. BERTRAND: 64, yes, you're 64. Hello. Regarding

the defendant's right to stay silent, that continues through a

criminal prosecution. You noted that the -- while everyone

understands that is their right, they can do that, there is a

lot of rights we have that don't necessarily mean we agree with

people exercising them. I believe your words were that it

creates an environment, or it creates an atmosphere and a

perception that this person's giving up and not defending

themselves. And I think Juror 64 said something similar.

Having listened to our conversation today, let's talk

about that. And it may be that intellectually you understand

that, but in your heart it still bothers you. What's your take

on that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It doesn't necessarily bother me,

it's just that if a person is accused of something and doesn't

react, does not defend themselves, then that creates a

perception that they've given up and they're guilty or whatever

the -- that they -- they've given up and that they're not

defending themselves so that they are -- they're agreeing with

whatever the accusation might be.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: But in a courtroom situation, by

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 67 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

just the mere fact that they've brought legal counsel, that's a

defense. They're defending themselves. They don't necessarily

have to testify, they are defending themselves. There is a

difference.

MS. BERTRAND: I follow you. I got it.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's the thought I had on that.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. Juror 74, having heard this, I

think you said something similar. And I loved your answer. I

teach --

THE COURT: Juror 74 is gone.

MS. BERTRAND: Oh, I'm sorry. 71. I thought that was

a 4. Excuse me. Sorry. It was folded. I apologize.

I loved your response, you know, I tell my kids to

stand up for yourself.

MS. PERLMETER: Objection. I'd ask counsel to please

ask a question of the juror.

THE COURT: Ms. Bertrand, what's your question?

MS. BERTRAND: I'm about to ask a question.

What's your take on what Juror 64 said? There is a

difference between what you intellectually understand and in

your heart.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I agree with him. I agree with

him. To me it's just -- it's something that you have learned

when you were little. I know your mothers probably taught all

of you, stand up for yourself, don't just back off and let

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 68 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

people attack you verbally -- well, little kids -- not that

they're going to hurt you, but you're being insulted and you

need to speak up for yourself. If no one is going to, it falls

on you to do it as a child. And as you grow up, it's -- I've

always followed that. If someone really, truly believes that I

said something bad, like in the workplace, I will approach them

and then let's talk it out because I don't feel I said

anything, and then it usually gets resolved.

So when someone just sits there and won't say

anything, I just -- it's just a little bit -- something clicks,

like, why not that, oh, you know, it's that you're not

innocent. It's just something as a mother, why don't you? And

then I want to see -- then I want to continue and see what they

bring forward to show that this person is innocent or guilty.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure. I hear what you're saying. And

I think one thing you said just now is that, you know, that

they need to bring forth something to show that they're --

they're innocent. And, again, sometimes this is what the brain

hears, and the heart.

MS. PERLMETER: Objection. There is no question.

THE COURT: She's getting to it.

Ms. Bertrand. Go ahead.

MS. BERTRAND: So we were saying defendants do not

have to prove their innocence. They don't have to show their

innocence. The job in this room remains with the prosecution

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 69 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

to rule out doubt, that is it, and either they are successful

at it or they're not. That's the juror's decision. That's

different from someone proving their innocence. What's your

feeling about that distinction?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I -- I just feel that everyone

wants to hear from this person, everyone's in the courtroom

because of this person, so they want to watch their demeanor

when they stand up and/or when they speak. A lot of times what

they say can turn people's opinion in their favor, sometimes

right away.

Women are really good at reading facial expressions

and tones of voices, whether the tears are real or not, and

it's -- you can see if it's phony. I mean, it can happen, or

it cannot, it just -- as a woman, I want to see that, because

we've been trained to -- to know when a child is telling the

truth or sick or happy or sad, and you can just see the facial

expressions. And I want to see this defendant speak. That's

all.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you. Before I wrap up, we've all

been listening to these conversations this afternoon. Having

heard everything this afternoon, is there anything any one of

you want to follow up about or share with us before we are

done?

(No response.)

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you, Your Honor.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 70 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

THE COURT: Okay. So we have about six more people

downstairs to talk to, so I'm going to ask you to go downstairs

and we'll let you know as soon as we can. Thank you.

(The prospective jurors left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Okay. Counsel, you can take a ten-minute

break and then we'll come back and do strikes before we bring

up the last six.

(Recess taken, 2:41 p.m. - 2:56 p.m.)

THE COURT: We are back on the record outside the

presence of the jury.

Before I get to cause, for hardship I would excuse

Juror 63.

Is there any objection?

MR. LINCENBERG: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And Ms. --

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

THE COURT: Okay. And then the other one for hardship

was 80.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

MS. PERLMETER: We had posed questions this morning.

I know she said it was difficult, it doesn't -- it's not going

to be ideal, but she does have both of her in-laws here, and we

had asked if she could inquire about whether or not they would

be able to pitch in.

THE COURT: But then she added this afternoon that her

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 71 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

employer won't pay, which created a financial hardship, so over

your objection --

MS. PERLMETER: That's right.

THE COURT: -- I'm going to strike Juror 80.

Okay. Let me just check -- oh, there was one more. I

had 82 said he verified with his employer that they would only

pay ten days and it would be a financial hardship and he talked

about losing his apartment.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: No objection.

THE COURT: Okay. Juror 82 will be struck.

Okay. I have one more, 87 because of her health

concerns. She's immunocompromised.

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

MS. BERNSTEIN: No objection, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you. Juror 87 will be struck.

Okay. That was all of them. Any motions for cause

from the government?

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, we would move to strike

Juror Number 75. Juror Number 75's wife works with Michael

Lacey's brother at Village -- at WMG is what the questionnaire

says. She has worked there for 13 years. Her job is accounts

receivables and payables, something to do with ads.

Based on his answers, we think there is too close a

relationship between this juror and the defendants and we ask

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 72 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

that he be excused. And he -- and he could -- he doesn't know

who the witnesses are, but based on what his wife's job is,

there is a chance that he could know or know of some of the

witnesses that the government plans to call.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Your Honor, this is the juror who when

asked if he would not speak to his wife about this case for

many months, said that it would be a blessing. He expressed

that it would cause -- he has no opinions. He has no preformed

opinions. He has no trouble not talking to his wife about it.

He would welcome that opportunity. And so I don't think there

is any cause justification to excuse this juror at this point.

MS. PERLMETER: And he may not talk to his wife about

the trial going forward, but he may have knowledge

institutionally that he can't erase.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Also, just as a factual point of

clarification, Mr. Lacey's brother has nothing to do with his

company, so that's not even accurate.

THE COURT: Nothing to do with WGN?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

THE COURT: Well, he obviously thinks there is some

relationship. I mean, he might be wrong about that, but he

thinks there is a relationship and I -- that's the important

part, and that she thinks -- or he thinks his wife's boss is

his brother, which I suppose we could clarify, but, okay, let

me think about that one. Because he didn't say anything

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 73 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

directly but --

MS. PERLMETER: Just because there is going to be some

evidence about the New Times and, you know, the evolution of,

you know, the case from -- through time, and it could --

potentially, it could be a problem that we could --

MS. BERNSTEIN: Well, Your Honor, I don't think we're

striking every law enforcement officer because there is going

to be law enforcement witnesses. I mean, this juror said that

he would welcome not speaking to his wife about it.

THE COURT: I said I was going to think about it.

Any other motions?

MS. PERLMETER: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: From the defense.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, the defense moves to strike

Juror 76. This is our juror who just got the job with the

nonprofit and was explicit she won't be able to do this and

maintain her new job responsibilities.

THE COURT: Is there any objection from the

government?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

THE COURT: Juror 76 will be struck.

MR. LINCENBERG: And we would ask that Juror 71 be

stricken. Juror 71 indicated that she expects the defendant to

prove his innocence. She stated that she has been taught,

she's taught her children that if they're accused of something,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 74 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

they have to stand up and defend themselves. If it was me, I

would speak up. If the defendants don't speak up, I would,

essentially, hold it against them. We spent a fair amount of

time on that.

I think she was pretty forthright in her views and

there is cause to strike her.

THE COURT: Any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, so she talked about --

what she talked about is pretty much what many people teach

their kids, you stand up for yourself, you speak up, just,

basically, don't be bullied.

And she did talk about how she expects defendants to

testify, but then she also at the end agreed with juror -- the

juror who spoke before her, which I think was Juror Number 64,

when he said, you know, the fact that they brought in counsel

is a voice that they're showing that they're defending

themselves.

And then she went on to talk about a lot of other

things, but she also did reiterate that she understands that a

defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Both sides have a

job to do. She -- she did not say anything that would put her

-- she did not say that she could not be fair and impartial,

and she did not say she would hold it against the defendant if

he did not testify.

She said a lot of other things, but just

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 75 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

institutionally growing up, you know, what she has learned and

what she has thought, how she has felt, but she did not say she

would not follow the law as instructed by the Court.

THE COURT: Over objection, Juror 71 is going to be

struck.

Was there anymore from the defense?

MR. LINCENBERG: Juror 69. Your Honor, Juror 69 is

the gentleman who is the high school math teacher. And I will

admit it was kind of hard to figure out where -- where he was

going. He had a lot of uncertainty. And this was a close call

as to whether we, frankly, believe there was cause. And at the

end of the day, we -- I do believe there is cause, because he

really couldn't even commit to that he would have his attention

focused on this case and that his concerns were going to be

elsewhere. And it sounds like he sort of hasn't planned this

out with his teaching, and he's likely to be thinking about his

lesson plans and finding substitutes and the like throughout

the day. So we do think that there is cause to strike Juror

69.

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, we would object to that.

Juror Number 69 right now has an issue with his employer that

he needs to work out. He needs to figure out if he's going to

be required to report to work on the days that the Court

doesn't have trial, the two weeks that the Court is not having

trial.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 76 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

To expect a juror to come into this courtroom every

day and think only about the trial and to have no other outside

thoughts is a little bit unreasonable. I think it is

reasonable for a person, as he described, you know, if the two

days -- the last two days of your vacation, you kind of think

about, you know, what you might be doing come the following

work week. He did not say that he would not pay attention. He

did not say he would not be distracted. He did not say he

would be unable to consider the evidence.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. FEDER: Judge, one other thing. This is the

fellow I believe that was talking about even after a couple of

days he's already exhausted from having to do stuff at night

because of his service here. If he's going to be exhausted,

he's going to have a difficult time being an attentive juror.

THE COURT: Was that him?

MS. PERLMETER: I don't remember him saying that. I

remember the attorney, Juror Number 27, saying that he was

tired.

THE COURT: Yeah.

MR. LINCENBERG: That was a different juror. I don't

recall him saying that, but I do part ways with government

counsel. This isn't somebody that we all expect that

somebody's mind may drift at times. This is somebody who was

pretty forthright in saying, you know, with all of his math

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 77 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

teaching responsibilities and the like, and that he -- that he

had serious concerns about whether he would be focusing on this

case. And it's important for us -- to him -- for him to focus

on the case.

THE COURT: Okay. That motion to strike Juror 69 is

denied. I agree that it was a close call, but ultimately I

guess I came out the other way. He did not seem to indicate

that it was as severe as you described it, and that's just

based on my observations. So it's a judgment call and that's

the way that I'm calling it.

Any other?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Yes, Your Honor. Juror Number 83 was

the gentleman with 30 years of law enforcement who teaches a

criminal justice class whose class meets for eight weeks. He

teaches them the rules of evidence and on criminal justice

policy. He has experience with prostitution stings which will

-- we spoke pretty extensively about.

When Your Honor directed me to stop questioning him, I

asked him if he thought he would be a good juror for this case,

he said he's surprised that I'm even talking to him. He would

try his best, but, no, so I think there is cause for that

juror.

MS. PERLMETER: I don't -- disagree with that recount.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Is it possible to get a transcript? I

was taking contemporaneous notes while he was speaking.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 78 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

THE COURT: I assume the government objects because

you stood up.

MS. PERLMETER: We object. He stated on his own that

-- several times that he understood his rights, that he spent

-- it's basically been his lifelong duty to protect the rights

and the constitution to everyone that he comes into contact

with. He has no hardship because he can do his class over Zoom

on Wednesdays. When he was asked --

MR. LINCENBERG: And our notes --

THE COURT: Can you please let her finish.

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes. I'm sorry.

MS. PERLMETER: He said I don't see it as any

different. I see both sides. I can step up and do my job. I

have experience. It would be difficult for me to get rid of my

life experience. And then the Court instructed that we don't

leave our common sense and our experience at the door. He said

he would do his best. He says, I know I can always be fair. I

stand up for the protection of everyone's rights. I will be as

fair as I possibly can.

And then as to: Are you right for this case? He

said, I have concerns, considering my history in law

enforcement. However, that would apply to any case that he was

called to serve on because of his history of law enforcement.

So if he is struck because he is a law enforcement, then we are

basically suggesting that somebody with a history with law

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 79 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

enforcement can't ever serve, but my notes do not reflect that

he said no, I would not be a good fit for this jury.

MS. BERNSTEIN: And, Your Honor, that's not at all

what we're suggesting, that anyone who is law enforcement can

never be on a jury. And as Your Honor knows, there are plenty

of jurors that don't involve law enforcement. There is still

potential former law enforcement in our panel as well. This

was a person who was very candid and forthright.

He did explain many times he has spent a long career

trying to be a fair officer of the law and a fair police

officer, but he did say that it is definitely concerning to him

to sit on this jury. And when we had our side bar and we came

back and I asked him the final question, he said he is

surprised that I'm even talking to him. He would try to do his

best, but, no, he did not think he should be on this jury.

THE COURT: Mr. Lincenberg, did you want to say

something?

MR. LINCENBERG: No. I think that Ms. Bernstein

covered it. My notes were definitely concerning.

THE COURT: Okay. Well, I don't remember him saying

no. What I thought he said was, no, you might not want me to

be on it, but I -- the definitely concerning part is -- I

actually think he'd be a great juror, but given his answer to

that one question, the motion is granted and 83 will be struck.

Any others from the defense?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 80 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, I think that's it. Can I

mention two things? One is -- well, two questions before you

bring in the next panel.

THE COURT: Yeah, one second.

With respect to Juror 75, over objection, I'm going to

strike Juror 75.

And what was your question?

MR. LINCENBERG: So my first question was does Juror

Number 78 who came late --

THE COURT: Is not coming.

MR. LINCENBERG: He is not coming. Okay. That

answers that.

And the second one was there is a juror in the next

panel, Juror 94, that I raised with government counsel as to

whether government counsel would stipulate to 94. Government

counsel said that she would not. And I would encourage the

Court to look at the questionnaire before we get into

questioning.

This person is basically saying, I am the most biased

person in the world, in short. And I'm concerned, frankly,

about having to get all of his answers into the record. I can

go through the questionnaire briefly with the Court, but the

answers: Very strong. This material is a trigger for me

because of my past experiences, as my father investigated those

activities and I was exposed to the terrible negative things

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 81 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

that occurred with sex trafficking and prostitution.

Will you be able to deliberate? Not sure. I don't

get involved in that world because of what I saw when I was

young when my father was investigating --

THE COURT: Mr. Lincenberg, can I stop you for just a

second, because I am going to do some math here. I'm not sure

we even need the last six. I think we barely made it to the

number we need, but so just give me a second.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay.

THE COURT: Okay. Elaine and I are getting different

numbers, so I'm going to go over with you the ones that I

believe are remaining and see if you guys have any difference

to make sure we didn't make a mistake, because I think the

number remaining are less than if I went through the ones we

struck.

Is that going to work? Do you have --

MR. LINCENBERG: That would be helpful.

THE COURT: Okay. Juror 1, Juror 3, Juror 4, and

that's it on the first page.

Well, do they have the same pages?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Yes, Your Honor. And that's

consistent with what we have.

THE COURT: On the second page, Juror 10, 11, 12, 13,

15, and 18, correct?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 82 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

THE COURT: On the next page, Juror 19, 21, 22, 23,

and 25.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

MS. PERLMETER: Could you please say that again?

THE COURT: On the third page?

MS. PERLMETER: Yes.

THE COURT: Juror 19, 21, 22, 23, and 25.

MS. BERNSTEIN: That's what we have, Your Honor.

MS. BERTRAND: Judge, is Juror 20 struck?

THE COURT: What did she ask?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Ms. Bertrand asked if Juror 20 was

struck, and Juror 20 has been excused.

MS. BERTRAND: Got it. Thank you.

THE COURT: On page 4, Juror 28, 32, 33, and 35.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

THE COURT: On page 5, Juror 41, and 43.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

THE COURT: On page 6, Juror 49, 53, and 54.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

THE COURT: Page 7, Juror 55, 57, 58, and 62.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct. That's what we have, Your

Honor.

THE COURT: On page 8, Juror 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, and

69.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 83 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

THE COURT: Page 9, Juror 73, 77.

MR. LINCENBERG: Wait. That is correct.

MS. BERNSTEIN: That's correct.

THE COURT: And that's all, right?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

THE COURT: And page 10 is Juror 84, 85, 88, and 90.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Correct.

THE COURT: And then 91 and 92.

Okay. Then --

MS. BERNSTEIN: Your Honor, I don't believe we've

called 92 yet. 92 is the beginning of the next -- oh, I'm

sorry. I'm sorry. Yes, that's correct.

MR. LINCENBERG: 84, 85 -- what were the others from

that page?

THE COURT: 88 and 90. I did actually say 91 and 92,

but was --

MS. BERNSTEIN: I don't think 93 was a part of this

panel. That is correct, Judge.

THE COURT: Elaine, can I use your pencil?

MS. PERLMETER: I'm checking my chart, Your Honor. If

I could please have a minute.

THE COURT: We have to bring the last six up. We're

only at 42.

Okay. We do need to bring the last six up, so,

Mr. Lincenberg, you can finish.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 84 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

MR. LINCENBERG: I wanted to go through 94, because if

we need to question 94, I'd like to do it at side bar so he's

not -- so as not to pollute the panel.

So I was saying that with regards to Juror Number 94,

in response to question 87, in addition to saying he's on an

emergency team with the bankruptcy court and so forth, under 1

F for hardships, with 87 he says this material is very much a

trigger for me based on my past experiences, as my father

investigated these activities and I was exposed to the terrible

negative things that occurred with sex trafficking and

prostitution.

He said, with regards to deliberations, I don't -- I'm

not sure because I don't get involved in that world because of

what I saw when I was young when my father was investigating

this.

Question number 80 he says, my father investigating --

yes. Is there anything about facilitating prostitution or

money laundering that would make it difficult to be fair or

impartial? Yes. My father investigating all this filth and I

have already seen what it can do to people.

Do you have any beliefs affecting your ability to sit

in judgment? Yes. He did not give his explanation.

Question 89, I am way too biased in this type of

criminal activity.

Question 48, my father was a police officer. Do you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 85 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

think this experience would prevent you from being fair and

impartial? Yes. I have a deep concern and bias against any

type of sex trafficking and prostitution as I have seen dirt

had in these case files, how terrible and sick this is.

Question 41 --

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lincenberg, I'm going to allow

the questioning to occur separate from the others unless the

state agrees to strike the juror now.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you.

THE COURT: Government, sorry.

MS. PERLMETER: We would like an opportunity to

question the juror.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. PERLMETER: A lot of people have --

THE COURT: Okay. That's fine. We're going to do it

outside the presence of the other jurors.

Ms. Bernstein, did you have something else?

MS. BERNSTEIN: I'm a little concerned if we're going

to run past 4:00 o'clock, I'd like to swap out with other

counsel.

THE COURT: You want to swap out?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Yeah. I'm going to need to leave no

later than 4:00 o'clock for a break. So if we can break then,

I'm happy to sit here. If you plan to keep going past 4:00

o'clock, I'm going to swap out with counsel.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 86 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

THE COURT: I mean, it's six people. I don't -- it

could take to past 4:00, so if you want to, that's fine. There

he is.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Okay. We'll be switching. Thank you.

(Next panel of prospective jurors entering the

courtroom.)

THE COURT: Okay. Welcome to the courtroom. I know

you've been waiting a long time. I'm sorry you guys randomly

got put at the end of the list, so thank you for your patience,

and we'll try to move quickly.

I know I've given the instruction to the other jurors

before, and hopefully you've heard them, but just a couple

things I want to touch on. Just so you understand that we're

not trying to be impersonal, we're using your numbers to

identify you so that your name is not in the record, because

everything said here in court is taken down by the court

reporter, so don't be offended when we refer to you by number.

Also, when you answer, I need you to state your number

so that we know who is talking for the record.

We ask that you be honest and candid in your answers.

We're just trying to find a jury that can be fair and impartial

in this case. Not everybody is suited for a case involving

drugs because of their experiences, or a civil medical

malpractice case, because they've had a similar experience, so

that's why we ask all these questions. It's not intended to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 87 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

pry unnecessarily into your private lives and affairs.

Let's see. My question before I let the attorneys

follow up with you on your questionnaire is since you filled

out the questionnaire, has anything changed that would impact

your ability to sit as a juror on this case?

Just get to a clean piece of paper.

Juror 98, did you raise your hand?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I did.

THE COURT: Okay. 98, 99, and 96.

Okay. Juror 96, what's changed?

Oh, forgot we're using the microphones so we can all

hear you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Like this. Okay.

THE COURT: Perfect.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: When I filled out the

questionnaire, I believe I represented myself as the owner of a

software company. As of about ten days ago, I sold that on to

a bigger software company, so we're in the middle of the

integration of two companies right now. So that's what's

changed also. I am an employee now.

THE COURT: Okay. And in this transition, is that

going to affect your ability to be available for trial?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I imagine every day will

look a lot like last night, which was up until about ten, you

know, sending spreadsheets and PowerPoint text to my new

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 88 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

corporate overlords so...

THE COURT: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: After a month of that, I'll be

tired, I guess is my point.

THE COURT: And are you going to get paid?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Oh, yeah.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you.

Juror 98.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 98. I am a City of Phoenix

employee, and due to COVID, there has been some classes that

have had to be canceled and rescheduled.

Anyhow, I have two classes I need to take by the end

of the year in order to maintain my ADEQ certifications. One

is a three-day and one is a one-day. One is scheduled for this

month, later on this month, the other is scheduled for sometime

in November.

THE COURT: Do you want -- which one is first, the

three-day or the one-day?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe the three-day is later

on this month.

THE COURT: Do you know the dates?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The one on November is the 8th,

the one in September, that's the 24th, but the other one in

November is 8, 9, and 10.

THE COURT: So September 24th, November 8, 9, 10?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 89 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

THE COURT: Okay. Well, those are all days we are not

going to be in trial, miraculously, so all right. Thank you.

Juror 99.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 99. Since the

questionnaire, I have been asked to chair an upcoming expo for

the Surprise Regional Chamber of Commerce. And I have also

been elected to a community coalition that works with the

elementary schools in El Mirage, and the school year is just

starting. And the expo is due to occur on November 7th.

Additionally, there are added work stresses. We've

since launched a project at work. We have a team of about nine

people, six of which are technically proficient. And I'm on a

team of three that handle the primary workload when it comes to

troubleshooting and facilitating reporting back to our

engineering team, and that team of nine is responsible for 8 to

9,000 machines within our work environment.

We're also trying to upscale so that we have some

scaleability and flexibility and it's not all reliant within

our team and trying to get some certifications done by the end

of the year.

THE COURT: Who do you work for?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: American Express.

THE COURT: Is there a -- I mean, American Express is

a big company. So is there a specific office here in Phoenix?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 90 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So we're primarily working from

home, but there are efforts to try to work to return to office.

And because we handle machines and we're globally present,

there are some times when our schedule has to shift. For

instance, we just shifted from having to do two to three weeks

of alternating overnight to support UK and India and other

regions. And that's between the three of us that are on

operations.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

From the government.

MS. PERLMETER: Hi. Juror Number 97, please.

I guess it's the end of the day, so let me introduce

myself again because you guys have not met me. My name is

Peggy Perlmeter. I am one of the assistant United States

attorneys that will be working this case representing the

interests of the United States. So thank you for sticking with

us the past few days.

And, Juror Number 97, please.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror Number 97.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you. So in our quest to find

the best fit jurors for this case, we have -- I'm not sure if

you, perhaps, may have heard, but we have asked some people

about some general concept about what a criminal defendant is

allowed to do or is required to do, and, more importantly, what

he's not required to do.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 91 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

And one of those things -- one of the things that a

criminal defendant does not have to do is testify on his own

behalf, or her behalf, at trial. A defendant has a right to

remain silent and his or her choice to exercise that right

cannot be used against him or her.

In your questionnaire, sir, you appear to have checked

the box that says that you would expect a criminal defendant to

testify. And so now I'm just asking what your thoughts are

about that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So, I mean, just because of the

fact that I wasn't sure, I mean, to me it's not a yes or no

question. It's more of an, it depends on the circumstances.

So if you were to tell me, hey, this person committed X crime

or violated such law and that's all you have, no, I don't -- I

would not -- not a -- not a, what you call it, not guilty.

If you provided substantial evidence to where, like,

okay, you have provided enough to, okay, yeah, I believe you

100 percent that that person has indeed committed X crime or

broken such law, then, yes, I would plead guilty, so, to me,

it's not a yes or no question, to be honest.

MS. PERLMETER: If a defendant chooses to exercise his

or her right to remain silent and did not testify on his or her

own behalf at trial, would you hold it against him or her?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I wouldn't, because, I mean, I

believe the fact that if the person doesn't have anything

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 92 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

against you, there is really no need for you to say anything at

all. If you can remain silent on your side and just let them

go, and if they can't prove anything against you, I have no

reason to say anything really.

MS. PERLMETER: And while a defendant may personally

stay silent and, you know, sit in their chair and not, you

know, make a peep, there will be lawyers in court that will be

questioning witnesses and handling exhibits and introducing

evidence, and sometimes their voices can be heard that way.

Would you hold it against a defendant if they

presented no evidence at trial, because one of the concepts

here is that the burden of proof in a criminal case is that the

proof -- the burden of proof resides on the United States.

It's up to the United States to prove that defendants have

committed crimes that the United States levies on them.

Do you understand that concept?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I do.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. So would you be okay rendering

a verdict in a case when a criminal defendant decides not to

present any evidence?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I would be able to provide a

verdict. It's their choice to provide any evidence against --

to prove their innocence or whatever they choose. It's up to

them if they choose to.

MS. PERLMETER: And if they choose to do nothing,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 93 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

would you hold that against them?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's perfectly fine. That's

their option.

MS. PERLMETER: Thank you very much, Juror Number 97.

Juror Number 99. Hello. I have --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Number 99.

MS. PERLMETER: I have the same question for you. In

your questionnaire, you kind of check that box where you

indicated you expected a criminal defendant to testify. So

we've been in court for a couple of days now, do you still have

that belief, and please talk to us about that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think, when answering the

questionnaire, it was coming more from -- of an opinion not

necessarily a recognition of the law and how you would -- how

you would determine innocence or guilt according to that,

especially in light of the past two days.

MS. PERLMETER: Okay. So if a criminal defendant

decided to remain silent and not testify and not present any

evidence, would you hold it against him or her?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

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

And Juror Number 98.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 98.

MS. PERLMETER: I have the same questions for you. In

your questionnaire you had indicated or made the checkmarks

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 94 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

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

that you would expect the defendant to testify. What do you

think about that concept now?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe it's the defendant's

right to testify or not to testify.

MS. PERLMETER: So if a defendant elected to not

testify, would you hold that against him or her?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I wouldn't.

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

Number 98.

Nothing further, Your Honor.

THE COURT: From the defense. Ms. Bernstein, are you

starting?

MS. BERNSTEIN: Yes, Your Honor, I'm going to start.

I just have a question for Juror Number 97.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 97.

MS. BERNSTEIN: Sorry, more than one question. The

prosecutor who just spoke to you explained that, and I think

you agreed, that if the defendants themselves don't testify,

they will -- and I'm paraphrasing here -- but they will,

nonetheless, be speaking through their attorneys. Do you

remember that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I also want to be clear and kind of

educate everyone here that there is no obligation for anyone on

this side of the room to do anything. We could all sleep

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 95 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

95

through the whole trial and the presumption rests very squarely

on this table and it never ever crosses the line over to us.

Do you understand that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. That's basically what I

meant by saying -- I mean, you guys can -- I mean, you can say

something or say nothing when the trial happens, that's

perfectly fine with me. You know, it's up to them to provide

the evidence to make us believe 100 percent that you guys did

commit whatever they're accusing you of.

MS. BERNSTEIN: It can be a confusing concept in the

law. I just want to be clear.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I understand.

MS. BERNSTEIN: It doesn't always track what we do in

our outside world, but the legal system is different. That's

what I wanted to clarify. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: You said you had two questions.

MS. BERNSTEIN: I dropped the second one. Thank you

though.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

THE COURT: Okay. Who is next? Anyone?

Okay. Does anybody else have any other questions?

MR. FEDER: Number 98.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 98.

MR. FEDER: Juror 98, according to the questionnaire I

have for you, you indicate that the length of the trial could

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 96 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

96

cause undue hardship.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't recall, no.

MR. FEDER: All right. You indicated that you work

for the City of Phoenix, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: And --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Single dad, you know, teenager at

home, don't want to leave him unattended.

MR. FEDER: Is your son -- is it your son? Yes, your

son lives with you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, he does.

MR. FEDER: Goes to school, I assume?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not right now.

MR. FEDER: You're the sole provider of income for

your household, according to this questionnaire?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Are you going to get paid if you're in a

three or four-month trial?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not sure. I haven't checked

into the whole policy on that. I'm not sure. I'd have to ask

my supervisor. He's looking into that.

MR. FEDER: I assume if you were not going to get paid

for the entirety for being here for however long this trial

lasts, that that would be a big impediment for you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, three or four months

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 97 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

97

wouldn't work for me.

MR. FEDER: Well, I mean, even if you are paid, is

there another hardship that you would have in regard to your

son or your household?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, not that I can think of right

now.

MR. FEDER: Okay. You also indicated that you have

got a concern about the delta virus and the close proximity to

jurors.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I don't recall that. I mean,

I got a hard time being here right now as it is but --

MR. FEDER: You have some kind of respiratory problem?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, no, just the masks. I usually

use a paper mask.

MR. FEDER: The masks are trouble.

You indicate that you're -- that you -- another reason

for not serving is, again, your financial obligations, number

one, and that your teenage son requires adult supervision?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, you know, like everybody

else who has teenage kids, you don't want to leave them

unattended too long. With the other job, if anything happens,

it's easier for me to take time off. If I were to be locked in

a courthouse --

MR. FEDER: Does he -- I mean, you know, you said he

lives at home and he's not going to school. Is he home during

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 98 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

98

the day?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, he's -- I think he's working

part time.

MR. FEDER: Okay. I mean, does he need more

supervision than most other 18-year-olds do?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know anymore than that,

just him being a teenager, you know, I just like to keep an eye

on him.

MR. FEDER: Okay. I think you had gone through that

you don't -- you now understand that you -- an accused does not

have to testify, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I understand that.

MR. FEDER: And that he or she does not have to prove

his or her innocence, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. FEDER: That the burden of proof is always on

these folks and not anywhere behind me, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. FEDER: And that you no longer think that an

accused has to testify, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Here's the question for you, though. When

you went through this questionnaire, I assume you read the

questions, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, I tried to.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 99 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

99

MR. FEDER: And until you came in and listened to

what's been being talked about the last couple of days, you did

believe all that, that defendants have to prove their innocence

and that they should be required to testify, true?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. FEDER: Is just because you heard what you've

heard over the last couple of days, is that going to overcome

what you thought initially when you filled out this

questionnaire?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. Well, it's been a little

bit more of an education just being in here listening to all

the different views and opinions. Like I said, the defendant,

I believe it's his right whether he wishes to testify or not.

MR. FEDER: Well, it's always a choice what we do in

the world, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: Here's the real issue, though, and that

is, is it going to have the slightest effect on your ability to

be fair and impartial and to apply the law when you believe, or

at least have believed that a defendant has to prove their

innocence, number one, and that they have to testify, number

two?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. You just have to go with what

the law states.

MR. FEDER: Is it going to put them back a couple of

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 100 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

100

steps or are you going to feel like they have to prove

something to you?

MS. PERLMETER: Objection. He's asking the same

question multiple times.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I'm -- no, I'm fine.

MR. FEDER: Question 69 you said -- the question was,

government should prosecute businesses that provide a platform

to facilitate prostitution. Sounds like they used to -- you

used to read New Times, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. Honestly, there is an

online Backpage. I don't know anything about it. The only one

I know about is the one that was physically on the back page of

the New Times magazine.

MR. FEDER: The newspapers that used to be in the red

stands and pick them up --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right, every Wednesday.

MR. FEDER: -- get Best of Phoenix.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right. Right.

MR. FEDER: But you said in here -- so you're saying

that the only Backpage that you knew of was the actual Backpage

of the print newspaper?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. FEDER: But then you went on to say, I'm quoting

here, but you tell me if this is wrong, that Backpage has

always been a little shady, end quote.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 101 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

101

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, just from reading it. I

mean, you know, anybody reading it could guess what it -- what

it was, just -- that's what it looked like to me. It just

seemed kind of shady and sketchy.

MR. FEDER: Well, shady and sketchy, what does that

mean to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just like some of the personal

ads.

MR. FEDER: Well, they have lawyer -- lawyer

advertising, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: They have all kinds of stuff.

MR. FEDER: Abortion clinics, things like that, true?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure, sure. Clean fill, if you

wanted.

MR. FEDER: So I'm trying to figure out what it is,

when you refer to shady, what does that mean? What kinds of

ads?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm saying personal ads, so far

as, you know, women advertising themselves, people advertising

themselves.

MR. FEDER: People wanting to go meet other people,

people wanting to --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Ads for prostitution. That's what

it looked like for me. That's what it sounded like to me.

MR. FEDER: What made it sound like that to you?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 102 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

102

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hey, my name is Candy. I'm blah,

blah, blah for this and that, it's $25 an hour or whatever,

something like that. It's kind of sketchy.

MR. FEDER: Did you see any overt sex-for-money ads on

there or just something that suggested to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Really suggest, recommend hard,

really hard, yeah. Like I said, I looked through it. It's

kind of entertaining, sometimes went through it. That was it.

MR. FEDER: But you have never seen the digital

Backpage, correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Digital website, no, never seen

it.

MR. FEDER: Does shady mean dishonest to you or what

does it -- give me another word that's the equivalent of that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Shady might be, like I say, maybe

unlawful or --

MR. FEDER: And, again, unless it says sex for money,

it's not illegal, it's just a suggested ad, right?

MS. PERLMETER: Objection.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MS. PERLMETER: Multiple questions.

THE COURT: The objection is sustained.

Do you want a side bar?

MR. FEDER: Sure.

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 103 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

103

THE COURT: So that question was overtly defining for

this juror what a prostitution ad is, which is part of the

question for the trial, so that's why I think the question is

improper.

MR. FEDER: I have to discover whether they can make

the distinction between something that's merely suggestive and

something that's actually illegal.

THE COURT: Well, you can ask that without giving him

your opinion about what is a prostitution ad.

MR. FEDER: I'll ask it that way. Thanks.

THE COURT: Okay.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

MR. FEDER: Let me ask it to you this way.

What's the distinction to you between an ad that you

think is illegal and one that's legal on the back page that

we're talking about of the newspaper?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just, it's my opinion. It just

seemed it had to do with, let's say, prostitution, and other

stuff didn't. That's just what it looked like to me.

MR. FEDER: But what is it about the ad that makes it

look like that to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Just all the wording in it. I

mean, you get a high school kid to read it, they probably know

what it's all about.

MR. FEDER: If you're instructed, Number 98, that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 104 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

104

merely suggestive ads are not illegal, are you going to be able

to follow that or are you going to be able to -- or is that

going to be something that's going to -- your idea --

MS. PERLMETER: Objection. The Court instructs on the

law not counsel.

THE COURT: Okay. So let me just ask it this way.

If you're instructed on -- if you're given an

instruction defining what is legal, what is not, and you

disagree with it, will you follow the instruction as it is even

if you disagree with it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Given by the Court?

THE COURT: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, it's something I have to go

with?

THE COURT: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Yeah.

THE COURT: Mr. Feder.

MR. FEDER: I'm sorry, what was --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. FEDER: And you will have no problems doing that

or hold that against the accused?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No.

MR. FEDER: There was a question about what are your

feelings regarding the internet publishing content, and your

answer was something to the effect of, very loose, you say, and

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 105 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

105

show just about anything. Do you know what that means or what

you meant there?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, yeah, you can see your --

find anything, just about anything on the internet.

MR. FEDER: I assume by your answer that you -- that

you've gone on the internet and looked around?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. FEDER: And when you say very loose, just that,

just you mean can find anything -- anything on the internet?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Pretty much, yeah.

MR. FEDER: To you, what did you mean when you said

very loose?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's like there is no -- there is

no controls, no -- no limits.

MR. FEDER: Is that concerning to you or just an

observation?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I would think most platforms

would want to, you know, keep an eye on what's being put on

their platform.

MR. FEDER: Who? Who would want to keep an eye on it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The owners of the platform.

MR. FEDER: Okay. That's all I have. Thanks.

MR. EISENBERG: May I proceed, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 106 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

106

I am Dave Eisenberg. I represent Andrew Padilla. He

is the gentleman -- the third gentleman down to my right.

Good afternoon, folks. I want to ask some questions

of Juror 96.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 96.

MR. EISENBERG: Yes, sir. You had -- or I think the

company that you are involved with that's being sold or

transferred is called Justice Tracks?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Now you're laughing. I'm sure there

is a reason why.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, I can just take my number

off right now, can't I?

MR. EISENBERG: Well, maybe you -- it might be headed

in that direction. What did Justice Tracks do?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Justice Tracks is a software

company. We make software that runs, essentially, all of the

operations of a forensic lab.

MR. EISENBERG: So, by that, would that be testing?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, it's, essentially, three

major areas. It's evidence control, so chain of custody

tracking, workload management, and test -- test support, so all

of the supporting documentation. Part of that is testing, and

then we also have another product called -- that deal with DNA,

a sample tracking system.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 107 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

107

MR. EISENBERG: And reporting, was that also one of

the --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: What's involved with reporting?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Essentially, it's a generate --

report generator that takes the information that has been

entered into the database and then produces a piece of paper or

an electronic document that formats that in an easy-to-read.

MR. EISENBERG: So some of the subject matter of what

you would be looking at would be, like, DNA?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Sure.

MR. EISENBERG: Blood?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. EISENBERG: Anything that it would be related to

such crimes as murder?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. EISENBERG: Are there others?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Essentially, any crime that was

processed through a forensic lab.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. And I see in relationship to

that question 89, your answer was, well -- the question was:

Any reason why you don't want to serve? And the answer was:

Yes. I wish to clearly disclose that I have a long association

with law enforcement through my work with forensic

laboratories --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 108 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

108

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yep.

MR. EISENBERG: -- and their stakeholders. And I am

assuming that that answer is no different today than it was

when you wrote it out?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, that's correct. As is, you

know, forensic labs are concerned with sources of bias, and I

wanted to be very clear and forthcoming that that is a

potential source of bias for me.

MR. EISENBERG: In essence, is what you're saying, you

would be biased in favor of the people who are related to law

enforcement because that's what forensic labs are involved

with?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I am saying I have -- yes,

overall, a favorable body of experience with people involved in

law enforcement and forensics.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. And then you say that you have

spent your career in, and made your living by providing

services to them. So I think what you're saying is you have

worked with them so long that if somebody from law enforcement

comes in to testify, you would tend to believe that person?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I am saying that, yes, they are

credible to me, based on everything that I know about how they

operate and how they work.

MR. EISENBERG: So, in other words, they have built-in

credibility?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 109 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

109

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. EISENBERG: Okay. 26 years of providing software

to law enforcement, that's a long time, isn't it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's a very long time.

MR. EISENBERG: What are you going to be doing in your

retirement?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I'm not retiring just yet.

MR. EISENBERG: That's right, you sold the company.

What are your plans, sir?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: To keep doing what I'm doing.

MR. EISENBERG: Which is related to forensics and --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, developing forensic software.

MR. EISENBERG: All right. Thank you, sir.

Appreciate it.

Number 99, you told us --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 99.

MR. EISENBERG: Yes, sir. I'm sorry. You told us

about how the trial might impact you in terms of hardship, that

is your work with American Express.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. And both my wife and I also

work full time. We have a four-year-old and we kind of

alternate taking care of him. He's not in school. We've been

reluctant with coronavirus to start him in preschool or

anything. She works for a university and she, at random times,

will have to go into the university, and then I just take over

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 110 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

110

on making sure that he's taken care of since we're primarily

working from home.

MR. EISENBERG: So is that an actual hardship or are

you just saying that there is some times when she needs to

cover for the child, and then you need to cover for the child,

or does it really impact both of you all's work?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think it's something that really

impacts both of our work. I have been fortunate where I

haven't really had to go into the office more than two or three

times during the pandemic, and it's been to try to address some

things with how we're able to deploy machines, and she's been

able to watch over our son because it was after she was out of

work. She's been called to go to campus far more often and

there is not necessarily a set schedule to when she's called.

MR. EISENBERG: So she's now back working?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: She's never stopped working, she's

just been primarily working from home, but she is the -- with

what the role that she does there, she gets called in to campus

and has had to, essentially, go back to office frequently.

MR. EISENBERG: Who does she work for, sir?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: She works for Ottawa University.

MR. EISENBERG: And how far is that from your house?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's not far from our house, but,

again, just with our four-year-old there and I've been assuming

controls and duties of watching him so...

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 111 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

111

MR. EISENBERG: Do you work for American Express --

does your work for American Express impact the credit card

company, the credit card function of American Express?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't work directly with

personal information. I'm more just making sure people can do

their job on their devices.

MR. EISENBERG: So do you service the devices

themselves?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. So I assist in making sure

that software works on people's devices, or if people are

having problems, help to troubleshoot.

MR. EISENBERG: Do you do any management with respect

to American Express, working in the corporate area?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not directly managing myself, but

I work with various levels, as far as throughout the

management.

MR. EISENBERG: I'm going to switch a little bit now

to something that has to do with your answer to paragraph 63.

Your Honor, may I approach the Court?

THE COURT: Yeah.

MR. EISENBERG: Excuse me, sir, I'll be right back.

(The following proceedings were held at side bar.)

THE COURT: Because he wrote private?

MR. EISENBERG: Yeah. He hasn't said -- hasn't said

anything, but he hasn't had a chance to say anything. And I

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 112 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

112

think this is the type of subject matter that ought to be

pursued outside of everybody else. It has to do with

pornography. And this part here, question 63, 68, 69, they're

all related.

THE COURT: That's fine. We'll do it separately.

MR. EISENBERG: I am not going to ask him anymore

questions then, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. EISENBERG: Just have him sit down.

THE COURT: Yeah. And then I'll have -- I'll just

separate them. I'll ask 94 and 99 to stay and have one of them

go out.

MR. EISENBERG: Sure.

MS. BERTRAND: We may have the same issue with 95.

She reports being a sex assault victim. I'd rather not put her

on the spot in front of a group of people about that so...

THE COURT: We've done it with other jurors, so if she

expresses some hesitancy, you can ask her but --

MS. BERTRAND: All right.

THE COURT: It's getting late.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

THE COURT: This takes a long time.

(The following proceedings were held in open court.)

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you, Juror 99. I'm going to

hold off at this point, so I'm done questioning you. Thank

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 113 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

113

you, sir.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you, Your Honor.

Juror 98.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 98.

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes, sir. Good afternoon, by the way.

You indicated that you saw the print -- a print, small

newspaper, and you looked at the back page of that where the

want ads are; is that correct?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah.

MR. CAMBRIA: Yeah. And you were telling us that you

thought that some of these ads were shady. If the ad did not

specifically offer a sex act for money, would it be fair to say

that the only way you would know if, in fact, that was a sex or

prostitution ad is if you answered it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I suppose what I'm saying is some

of those they just --

MR. CAMBRIA: I just asked that question, and if -- if

-- how else would you know unless you answered it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I didn't answer any of them.

MR. CAMBRIA: Pardon?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I didn't answer any of them.

MR. CAMBRIA: No, no, no. I didn't say you did. What

I'm saying is if you saw an ad and it didn't specifically say

on its face, sex for money, okay, I offer this sex act for this

amount of money, the only way you would know whether it was an

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 114 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

114

actual prostitution ad is to answer the ad, would you not?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. And that would be reasonable

to say that, wouldn't it?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Right.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. You did indicate here that if

somebody was -- had abused drugs, that you would find that

person less credible. Do you recall giving that answer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, no. If they're clean and

sober, I would not have a problem with their credibility.

MR. CAMBRIA: But my question is, though, if you found

out that whatever they were testifying about, they had been

taking drugs during that time, wouldn't that be a fair thing to

think about as far as whether they're being accurate and so on?

Do you follow what I'm saying?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: And would that be fair to assess that if

you -- in other words, okay, a person is saying X, however, we

now find out that during that time they were using drugs, maybe

they're not accurate. That make sense?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. And that's all I have. Thank

you.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 115 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

115

Juror Number 97.

Good afternoon.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good afternoon.

MR. CAMBRIA: If someone went on Facebook and they put

an ad or, you know, I don't know if it's necessarily an ad, but

they posted something on Facebook that ultimately led to an act

of prostitution, would you consider Mr. Zuckerberg, for

example, who owns Facebook, liable for that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No, I wouldn't.

Juror 97, by the way.

MR. CAMBRIA: Would it be fair to say that the people

who actually posted that are the ones who should be responsible

for that criminal act?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, so the person who posted,

yeah, would be the ones -- they're the one that is actually

putting it up, so yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. That's all I have for you.

Thank you, sir.

And 99.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 99.

MR. CAMBRIA: Good afternoon.

I wanted to go back. I'm reading your answer here,

and basically what you're saying is you and your wife have a

toddler and you split your time watching the toddler while the

other works?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 116 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

116

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct.

MR. CAMBRIA: So, obviously, you are here for several

months. How would you accommodate that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's what I'm saying, it would

be a hardship to try to accommodate that.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. And because you both work and you

have a toddler?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes. In response to what the

judge was saying earlier, we have family in town, but my father

was just recently released from the hospital, and other than

that, it's my wife's grandmother who is 80 and she gets

assisted care. Her mother is in Tucson and her uncle is in

Tucson so...

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Thank you.

MS. BERTRAND: Hello. I'm Joy Bertrand. I represent

Joye Vaught.

And I'd like to start with Juror 95.

Hi.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Hello. Juror 95.

MS. BERTRAND: 95?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: It's nice to meet you. I'm going to

start out by saying you answered in response to question 89 in

your questionnaire, a reason to serve, that you do not want to

serve on this jury. All the lawyers have that answer in front

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 117 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

117

of them. I don't want to put you in an uncomfortable spot, and

certainly we can talk to the Court if we need to.

Has that answer changed in terms of your discomfort in

serving on this panel in this case?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I don't think that would be

-- I guess I misunderstood the question when I answered it. I

don't feel like --

MS. BERTRAND: Can you talk up just a little bit?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I'm sorry.

MS. BERTRAND: Good.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think there is any reason

why I wouldn't be able to serve on this jury.

MS. BERTRAND: So after listening for the past couple

days, you feel like you would have more comfort with it than,

perhaps, you initially thought?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think I understood the

question at first.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: But I am completely comfortable

with serving on the jury.

MS. BERTRAND: All right. You mentioned here in

response to question 76, the question was, feelings regarding

website responsibility for content posted by users. I think

these websites have a responsibility to maintain certain

guidelines and they also should be responsible for maintaining

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 118 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

118

whatever guidelines or rules they established.

Do you remember answering --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: -- that way? Can you say a little bit

more about what those guidelines would look like?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I feel like whatever rules that

the website has established, they should follow their rules.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. The user should or the website

should or both?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The website.

MS. BERTRAND: And what happens if the website does

follow its rules?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: They're doing what they said they

were doing.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. It's not a trick question.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: No. I -- no. Well, no. I wasn't

-- sorry. If the website has rules, they should follow them.

If the website follows their rules, then I feel that the

website has integrity because they did what they said that they

were -- they were doing.

MS. BERTRAND: Who should set the rules?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: The website -- I mean, the

website, because it's like going into a restaurant. Like, a

restaurant has rules, like, no shirt, no shoes, no service. So

if I go into that restaurant without a shirt on and no one does

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 119 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

119

anything, then I can't question the restaurant, if that makes

sense.

MS. BERTRAND: I follow you. That's a good -- that's

a good analogy.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

MS. BERTRAND: You heard the other lawyers say that

the material that might be presented to jurors on these big

screens and in front of you on the screens in the jury box is

going to be -- could be quite graphic. And I think someone

used the word gross. Knowing that, and appreciating what you

have previously shared with the Court, how do you feel that

would affect you to see that kind of graphic content?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't think it would affect me.

It's part of the evidence, so it's part of what I need to see

to make a decision as a juror, if that makes sense.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah, it makes sense.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, if I saw it, like, on the

street, it would just be something I saw, I guess.

MS. BERTRAND: I follow you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I wouldn't be in shock.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah, after what we've been talking

about for two days so...

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Well, that plus, like, no matter

what I've been through in my life, it's still something that

wouldn't shock. I mean, I would just, like, okay, that's that.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 120 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

120

If that makes sense.

MS. BERTRAND: Sure.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's like when you see a car

accident, you're looking, oh, look, a car accident. Like that

affects some people, to me, it would just be like, okay, this

is something that happened. Like, if I want to stare at it, I

will, if I don't -- if that makes sense.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah. Do you feel like, given your

world experience, that you can hold your ground in a discussion

with other jurors?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I feel that I can do that.

MS. BERTRAND: You noted a couple times a concern --

this is in question 67 and 69 -- about protecting minors,

regarding should the government investigate or prosecute

purchasers of sex, and investigating and prosecuting providers

of platforms that promote or facilitate prostitution.

What is your distinction there? Is there a

distinction between regular prostitution and protecting minors,

because you said it twice, so it seems important.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I feel -- well, so when it comes

to minors, then definitely I think children need to be

protected. They don't have their own voice in a lot of ways,

so society needs to protect them, whether it's their parents,

or sometimes the parents can't do that, so, you know, it's,

like, CPS is there for a reason, type of thing. You know, we

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 121 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

121

need the people out there protecting children.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, it's two separate issues,

I guess.

MS. BERTRAND: Prostitution itself and --

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Prostitution itself is

prostitution. When it -- I mean, minors is children that have

no voice, because, you know, you -- when you're a minor, you

have limited resources, you have limited -- like, you can't

just, like, go and hire a lawyer as a child and have a child --

you know, there has to be organizations someplace to protect

children.

MS. BERTRAND: Agreed. Okay.

So to you, is it fair to say -- because you've heard

the discussions over the past few days, this is an important

distinction that there is a difference between prostitution,

just plain old regular prostitution, and trafficking. Is that

a difference to you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. I mean, I don't -- I mean,

trafficking can mean a lot of different things. It can involve

adults and minors, from my understanding. I mean, prostitution

is -- I mean, I'm not educated enough to know the difference,

but minor -- I mean, I guess I'm kind of confused with your

question.

MS. BERTRAND: I might have asked a bad question.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 122 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

122

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It's okay.

MS. BERTRAND: What's the difference to you between

prostitution and trafficking? You said there is a lot of

definitions for trafficking.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't know the difference to me.

From what I've heard -- or, you know, trafficking is something

where there is people, like minors that are put into positions

where they're doing things against, obviously, their ability to

make that decision to do it.

MS. BERTRAND: They're not able to consent?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah. Whereas prostitution is,

from my understanding, I mean, Pretty Woman, I guess, like, you

know, that person that's an adult individual who makes their

own decisions. And if they want to -- you know, if that's --

if that's what they decide based on, like, whatever, you know,

they are mature and they have that right to make those

decisions and those choices. If that makes sense.

MS. BERTRAND: Yeah, makes sense.

I don't think I have any other questions for you,

Juror 95. Thank you.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay. Thank you.

MS. BERTRAND: Does anyone, with this discussion with

Juror 95, agree with her about the distinction between

prostitution and trafficking, or disagree?

So, 97, agree, disagree?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 123 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

123

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: 97. I mean, I really didn't

understand her point and stance on it, so I can't really agree

or disagree with her, because I don't -- I'm not sure where she

stands on it, based on her answer.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay. What's your -- is there a

distinction to you between prostitution and trafficking?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, two separate things to me.

MS. BERTRAND: What is it in your eyes?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: So, I mean, trafficking, being

from Latino Mexican descent, trafficking can be -- I come to

know it as coyotes and stuff, transporting people across the

border, whether they pay for it or it's against their will, or

anything like that. They're just moving one place to another.

That's what I consider trafficking.

Prostitution is someone out there, basically, trying

to sell their body for money.

MS. BERTRAND: Okay.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I mean, that's how I see them.

MS. BERTRAND: Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else have any feelings about that distinction

that you want to share?

(No response.)

MS. BERTRAND: Juror 99, I would like to talk to you

about your answer to question 76 regarding website

responsibility for content posted by users. And you said, I

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 124 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

124

think there is a responsibility those websites it is -- I think

it was supposed to be if -- but it is promoting hate, violence,

harm to other individuals.

What would that responsibility look like in your eyes?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Juror 99.

MS. BERTRAND: Yes.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I think that the responsibility

varies depending on the site and what's being offered and who

has access to it. I mean, you have private sites, you have

sites that are invites, you have sites that you pay to be a

part of the public. So depending on some of those

circumstances is how you would have to adjust guidelines and

parameters that they have in place to -- to secure it.

MS. BERTRAND: You mentioned here, especially

regarding issues of hate, violence, and harm to others. What

do you think -- and it's a big conversation we're having

culturally -- what should platforms do to prevent violence,

hate, and harm to others?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Not being a platform owner, I

can't say exactly what platforms should do. I think, to your

point, that it's a discussion that's going on right now, that

you're seeing some platforms starting to take that more

seriously, starting to form boards or starting to form groups

that help them regulate that internally and externally. I

think it just -- it just depends.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 125 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

125

MS. BERTRAND: All right. I don't think I have

anything else. Let me just check with my colleagues.

Thank you.

THE COURT: All right. We're going to finish, for the

most part, so I'm going to ask you to go outside, except Jurors

99 and 94, if you could wait outside the door, we may have some

follow up for you without the others present.

(The prospective jury panel left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Okay. We are outside the --

MR. LINCENBERG: Are we still outside the presence of

all the jurors?

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Hold on a second. Let me --

THE COURT: Now we are muted.

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Yep.

THE COURT: Okay. I'm inclined to excuse Juror 99 for

hardship, so that would mean we didn't have to follow up with

him on the other issue.

Does the government have any objection?

MS. PERLMETER: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Does the defense?

MR. LINCENBERG: No, we don't, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Juror 99 will be struck, so you can tell

Juror 99 --

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Okay.

THE COURT: -- that he's excused and bring 94 in.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 126 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

126

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Okay.

THE COURT: Please. Thank you.

And, Mr. Lincenberg, I'm going to have them go first,

because if they can't rehabilitate him, it's going to

necessitate --

(Prospective Juror 94 entered the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Juror 94, you can come have a seat in

whatever seat you want that has a blue dot. We're very

specific about the blue dots.

Can you give him the microphone?

MS. PERLMETER: Hi, Juror Number 94. Good afternoon.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Good afternoon. Number 94.

MS. PERLMETER: So in your questionnaire, Mr. 94, you

had indicated that your father was a police officer for

30 years, he investigated sex trafficking, and he investigated

sex trafficking and sexually related offenses. And you had

indicated that you have some biases towards that crime based on

what you know of what -- your father's work.

Do you still have those same beliefs? Can you please

tell us whether or not you can sit and give these defendants

over here a fair shake at trial given your background.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would say, yes, that I could

give the defendants a fair shake, considering the background.

It was many years ago. My father was a senior special

investigator for the Department of Social Services for

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 127 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

127

California. He investigated those crimes but that was many

years ago.

MS. PERLMETER: Because you indicated in several

places on your questionnaire that you had this concern, which

is why we decided to bring you in and ask you about them.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Okay.

MS. PERLMETER: So you made some comments about how

you think that sex trafficking -- you have seen the dirt in his

case files and how horrible and sick this is. So after making

those statements, clearly, the defense has some concerns. The

government, the United States just wants to make sure that you

have said that you can separate your past and be able to sit

fairly and impartially and consider the evidence as it is

brought in when making a decision about whether or not the

defendants have committed the crimes that the United States

accuses.

MR. LINCENBERG: I do object to government counsel

saying --

Are all the jurors in the --

THE COURT: It should be muted.

MR. LINCENBERG: -- saying, clearly, the defense has

concerns about you. I object to that. We're going to raise

our questions, but that's just an inappropriate statement for

one side to be raising with a juror.

THE COURT: Well --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 128 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

128

MS. PERLMETER: And to put --

THE COURT: Just to clarify, it wasn't that she said

the defense has concerns about you, but, Ms. Perlmeter, please

rephrase your question.

MS. PERLMETER: Sure.

We want to make sure that the jurors that we have as a

group are able to sit and consider the evidence fairly and give

both sides a fair trial, both the United States, as well as

each and every single defendant in the courtroom today. We

just want to make sure that everyone that we bring into the

courtroom is able to do that.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I understand.

MS. PERLMETER: So you have your beliefs about

prostitution and you feel that it is immoral. Would you be

able to listen to a case where prostitution will be discussed,

it will be part of the evidence, and consider it in -- consider

it in the context of whether or not the defendants violated

laws, which the Court will instruct you what the laws are?

We're not saying that the defendants engaged in

prostitution themselves, but the behavior and the context of

the crimes with which they have been charged with involve

prostitution.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I understand that, and I can

separate that.

MS. PERLMETER: There was a question about whether you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 129 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

129

would be able to deliberate on the evidence, because there is

information of a sexual nature that is going to be needed to be

discussed between the jurors. You had indicated, not sure.

Do you think after being in the other courtroom and

listening in on the proceedings the past two days, that you

will be able to sit and deliberate on the evidence and discuss

it with other jurors?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I can.

MS. PERLMETER: And what makes you have that

confidence today?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would say the confidence is that

the proceedings are not specifically about some of my biases

that are particular to what I put on the survey. It is not

dealing with trafficking, it is not dealing with underage. And

my opinions about prostitution and otherwise are merely moral

suggestions, and I know I have an ethical duty to perform as

the Court would order.

MS. PERLMETER: So you also say that you're open to

serve on other cases but except this one. I am way too biased

in this type of criminal activity.

Having written that statement, having participated in

the court proceedings the past two days, do you still feel

that? Do you still feel that you have this bias, or can you

set it aside to be able to make -- to be able to give the

defendants a fair trial, as well as the United States?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 130 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

130

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I can set aside the bias.

MS. PERLMETER: And how do you think you're going to

be able to do that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Because I would follow the rule of

law in court. I take an oath as a deputy clerk to follow the

oath of the court, and I would be obligated to do that. I'm

very a hundred percent behind due process and that isn't

something that would be an issue.

MS. PERLMETER: No more questions, Your Honor.

Sorry. I have one more.

No more questions, Your Honor.

MR. LINCENBERG: Hello, Juror Number 94. Can you hear

me okay?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I can. Number 94.

MR. LINCENBERG: First, Juror Number 94, have I spoke

-- have you spoken during the past couple of days with anybody,

either in the government or the jury room, about your views on

anything?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Absolutely not.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. In your questionnaire --

first, let's talk about the question of hardship. First, when

asked whether the length of the trial would create an undue

hardship, you said yes, that you're the IT director for the

bankruptcy court, part of an emergency team, and you're under

certain orders for reopening and it would put an additional

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 131 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

131

burden on your team. Can you expand on that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I can expand on -- what I said

there was very accurate, to the point. I am on an emergency

team. I am the IT director for the United States Bankruptcy

Court for the District of Arizona. We are currently in a

lockdown status, and as part of that emergency team, I need to

be in the office five days a week and being able to facilitate

access to justice for the courtrooms and for the clerk staff.

MR. LINCENBERG: And so if you were to serve on this

jury, what -- how would that impact your team?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It would have a great impact on

the team, because I am the team leader and I am the one that

facilitates scheduling. I facilitate time-off requests. And

currently right now I only have two people that are scheduled

to come in, per judge's order, so that only leaves, like, three

of us that can actually be on staff to support the judges for

keeping the courts open.

MR. LINCENBERG: And in this, what you refer to as

phase two reopening, during this trial period, is it -- given

the -- sort of the post-COVID reopening, is it even more

stressful on your team right now?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It would be even more stressful on

my team right now. It's still up for deliberation with the

judges.

MR. LINCENBERG: When asked whether there were any

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 132 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

132

reasons you would prefer not to serve on the jury in this case

in the questionnaire -- the questionnaire, you recall, gave a

general description of the case? Do you recall that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I do.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And you said this material,

referring to the material involved in this case, is, quote,

very much a trigger for me based on my past experience.

Were you being truthful when you indicated that the

material in this case was very much a trigger for you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I would, because I've had

experience with that in the past.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And you refer to it as a

trigger in connection with being exposed to the, quote,

terrible negative things that occurred with sex trafficking and

prostitution.

Is that still an accurate answer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, that would be an accurate

answer. And more of it was the toll that it had on my father.

MR. LINCENBERG: Right. Okay. And it had a large

toll on your father?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, it did.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And then on the question of

whether you would be able to deliberate or discuss topics of a

sexual nature, your answer was you were not sure. You don't

get involved in that world because of what you saw when you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 133 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

133

were young and your father was investigating this.

So is being a trigger area, is that something that you

particularly try to avoid this area?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct, yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And when asked about

being -- was there anything about facilitating prostitution or

money laundering that would make it difficult to be fair and

impartial, was your answer yes?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I believe so, yes.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And did you then explain

further by saying that your father investigating all of this

filth and I've already seen what it can do to people? Is that

still your explanation for that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, it is. And the reason why I

-- I probably was so succinct in the words that I used is

because it did lead to my father's eventual suicide.

MR. LINCENBERG: Oh, I'm sorry.

And then you were asked if there were any beliefs

affecting your ability to sit in judgment, and, again, you were

forthright and answered yes.

Is that still your answer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct.

MR. LINCENBERG: And, in that regard, if you were on

the defense side of this case, knowing what you've gone through

in your life, do you think that a defendant could see you as

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 134 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

134

being fair and impartial in light of your forthright answers to

these questions?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Honestly, I would not.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And to go further on question

number 89, when the question was: Is there other information

the judges or attorneys should know? You answered: Yes, I

would be open to serve on any other case except this one. I am

way too biased in this type of criminal activity.

Is that still an honest answer to that question?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: It is an honest answer, however, I

can put that bias aside should the Court need my services.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. You would do your best to put

it aside?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, I would.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And then when asked the

question: Do you think that the experience with your father

would prevent you -- prevent you from being fair and impartial?

You answered: Yes. I have a deep concern and bias against any

of this type of sex trafficking and prostitution.

Is that still an honest answer?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That is an honest answer, however,

I have had more information to understand that that isn't what

this case is about.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. This case is going to involve

witnesses who are prostitutes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 135 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

135

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I understand that.

MR. LINCENBERG: And you understand that the

prosecution is going to take the position that they are victims

of the platform on which those prostitutes advertise?

Do you understand that?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I understand, but I would not have

a judgment on that at this time.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. And when you were asked the

question of whether you follow criminal cases and trials in the

news, part of your answer was: Just what is on the news, and,

yes, being in a law enforcement family and working in the

judiciary has a tendency for me to be a bit biased in my

opinions.

That answer wasn't even particular to this Backpage

matter, right?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And when asked questions

about a defendant's burden in a trial when you were filling out

the questionnaire, you said the defendant should prove his

innocence, and it's too hard to convict the accused and you

would expect a defendant to testify.

Do you recall? Am I accurately reflecting what you

answered in this question?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: I don't specifically recall saying

that. And I would say I would amend that and say that was a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 136 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

136

typo on my part. I'm very well aware of due process and whole

heartily accept that.

MR. LINCENBERG: So I'm looking at the questionnaire,

43 A, it says, do you agree or disagree with the following

statements:

And it says, A, a defendant in a criminal trial should

be required to prove his or her innocence. You answered:

Agree.

And it's your testimony -- it's your statement today

that that was a typo?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yeah, that's correct. That's not

correct.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And 43 B, again, do you

agree or disagree with the statement: The criminal justice

system makes it too hard for the prosecution to convict people

accused of crimes? You said you agree.

And is it your statement today that's a typo?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct. That is

absolutely incorrect.

MR. LINCENBERG: All right. And 43 C: A defendant in

a criminal trial should be required to -- do you agree or

disagree with the following statement:

I would expect a person charged with a crime to

testify in his own defense -- or his or her own defense. You

said agree.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 137 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

137

Was that also a typo?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: That's correct. I do not believe

that they have to testify on their own behalf.

MR. LINCENBERG: And then with regards to question

number 50, 50 asked about: Do you, any members of your family

or close friends, support, volunteer, donate to, or work for

any groups or organizations that advocate for human trafficking

awareness, sex trafficking awareness, or the prevention of the

sexual exploitation of women? You said, yes.

And then it said: If yes, please explain. And your

answer was: Myself and my wife's family support an

organization in Vietnam that helps women and girls who are

trafficked.

Is -- is it -- and I appreciate your answer and I

appreciate your support for that organization. Is that a

suggestion that this particular area is a particular area of

grave concern for you?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, it is.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. Your Honor, I have nothing

further.

Thank you, sir.

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Thank you.

THE COURT: Did anybody else?

(No response.)

THE COURT: All right. If you can, you can just set

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 138 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

138

that down there and go back downstairs and we'll be with you

shortly. Thank you.

(Prospective Juror 94 left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Motions for cause from the government.

MR. LINCENBERG: Is Your Honor asking the government

about all of the last panel?

THE COURT: Yes, the last six.

MS. PERLMETER: The last --

THE COURT: Yes, which there is only five left now so.

MS. PERLMETER: No.

MR. EISENBERG: Your Honor, excuse me, yes. I think I

thought I heard the government say they didn't have any

motions, they did not -- oh, I'm sorry.

THE COURT: Do you have any motions for cause?

MS. PERLMETER: No, Your Honor, we don't.

THE COURT: Okay. You were right.

MR. EISENBERG: Well, we have one, at least one, Your

Honor, and that's Number 96.

This is the gentleman who told his business is Justice

Tracks. He has a relationship with law enforcement over, I

think it was 26, perhaps more, years. And it would appear to

me, Your Honor, that he has a bias. I think he grudgingly

admitted that he has a bias with respect to law enforcement,

and that he would take the testimony of law enforcement into

greater proportion than he would any other witness.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 139 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

139

I think his experience may have, as a profession, been

limited to forensic laboratories, but his association with law

enforcement is far more encompassing than that, so I think that

he has a bias. His answers weren't any different than when he

was questioned.

Any other reason why you don't want to serve?

Yes. I wish to clearly disclose that I have a long

association with law enforcement through my work. And then --

that's question 89.

I think it was question 38: Yes. I have a connection

to law enforcement, have a number of business acquaintances who

have become friends over the years.

So based upon his business and his associations and

his answers to the questions, I think he is biased and we move

that he be stricken -- excused.

THE COURT: Government's position.

MS. PERLMETER: So the government's position is that

this should be denied, because this juror's experience with law

enforcement is on a business level. You know, there has been

some mutual -- like, they've been mutually beneficial to each

other over the years. The law enforcement has given his

company business, in exchange, his company provides data.

This is different from someone who has a day-to-day

relationship or a tie to a detective or a patrol officer or

someone that would testify about events. So this juror

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 140 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

140

indicated that he could follow the law when the Court instructs

about the credibility of witnesses and how it's to be

determined. The government feels that he has made no

indication that he would be unable to follow the instructions.

And given that his relationship with law enforcement is, like,

on a business-type level, involving data, involving forensics,

the government feels that this motion should be denied and that

he can serve fairly and impartially.

THE COURT: Okay. Over objection, Juror 96 will be

struck.

Any others?

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, with regards to Juror 94,

we would ask that he be struck. And if -- I can go through the

argument. The Court just kind of heard it from the

questionnaire.

THE COURT: You don't need to repeat it.

What's the government's position?

MS. PERLMETER: No objection.

THE COURT: 94 will be struck.

MR. FEDER: 98, although he's changed his tune in

regard to requiring defendants to testify and prove their

innocence, he was not unequivocal in that regard, number one.

Number two, his comments about the paper version of

Backpage being shady, and I think there was another adjective

that he used that was derogatory, he indicates he is not a

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 141 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

141

neutral juror. Especially because he didn't seem to understand

the difference between what was illegal and making assumptions

about suggestive ads being illegal.

THE COURT: Well, he agreed with Mr. Cambria that he

wouldn't know unless he followed through with it.

Ms. Perlmeter.

MS. PERLMETER: Your Honor, we object. This witness

unequivocally stated -- I don't know where he wavered -- but he

clearly and firmly stated that a defendant did not have to

testify, that he understands the burden of proof.

With regards to the definition, the legal definition

between an escorting ad and a prostitution ad, he doesn't know

these things yet because the Court has yet to instruct.

He was asked his opinions on certain things and he

gave them, because he was required to answer questions, he gave

answers both ways. He didn't say -- he said he could be fair.

He has never seen the website itself. He was talking about the

actual print ad, the last page of the print ad many years ago.

THE COURT: Okay. That motion is denied.

Any others?

(No response.)

THE COURT: Okay. There is two people left -- no,

three. So that gets us to exactly 45, right?

Okay. So from the last six, we have Juror 95, 97, and

98 left.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 142 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

142

Everybody agrees, right?

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: We just did it, so I hope so.

That should get us exactly to 45, which would allow 18

strikes for the defense and 10 for the government, which I'm

not sure whether I actually expressed that, that I was going to

grant your request for additional strikes.

MR. LINCENBERG: I think you did.

THE COURT: Okay. Because the government mentioned it

in response to your request to do alternating strikes, but --

MR. LINCENBERG: I didn't remember if it was 9 or 10

for the government, but others may have a better memory.

THE COURT: Okay. Well, I had planned on 10 and 18.

And because I have granted your request for these additional,

so you now have 18 and we're only choosing 17, I'm denying the

request to do alternating strikes. The extra strikes sort of

mitigate the concerns that were in that motion, so that motion

is denied and you'll do simultaneous strikes.

I'm going to have Elaine go downstairs and poll the 45

and make sure they know to come back tomorrow at 9:00 a.m., the

rest can go.

Do you have any questions about that?

COURTROOM DEPUTY: No.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, I'd like to be heard,

please, about the strikes method.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 143 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

143

THE COURT: Okay. I already read your motion and the

government's response. I did my own research.

Do you have something to add to it? I don't want you

just to repeat what you wrote in your motion.

MS. BERTRAND: I won't.

THE COURT: Okay.

MS. BERTRAND: I think that the alternative that is

important to consider is where they do them in batches, the

government can do half and then we do something like that, it

won't take a lot of time. I don't know that it would make any

difference in time. And yet it would allow -- especially what

I'll call the smaller defendants in this case, like

Mr. Eisenberg's client, my client, to have a better ability to

exercise the strikes. Otherwise, you see it even with the

cause strikes here, several of them are cause strikes that both

sides would have had, and I don't want to see either side lose

their ability to fully exercise their ability to strike. We

have enough people on the panel to do it.

THE COURT: Okay. I did also consider that, because

it was in your motion, and that request is denied.

So we're going to send the jurors home, but I'm going

to have you stay until we get this done. And -- yep.

And since the government is a smaller party, can you

guys use the room back there to do your strikes?

MS. PERLMETER: Yes, we will.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 144 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

144

THE COURT: And if you guys want to split up, you can

use the courtroom or you can stay at your tables.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, that would be great. Can

we just get the government to commit that they're not going to

be in the balcony or --

THE COURT: Yeah. I'll clear everybody from the

balcony so you can talk amongst yourself.

So everybody up there needs to go outside, unless

you're part of the team. If you're part of the team, you can

come in.

(Court stands in recess, 4:51 p.m. - 5:02 p.m.)

MR. LINCENBERG: My client is not here. I can waive

his --

THE COURT: So my --

MR. LINCENBERG: He's just in the hall.

THE COURT: What my plan is, is to call them back in,

swear them in, and ask them to affirm everything they told us

is truthful.

MR. LINCENBERG: That's fine. We can stipulate to

that.

No? Okay.

THE COURT: Well, they're right outside, so I'll just

do it so --

MR. LINCENBERG: Let me see if my client's here.

THE COURT: Okay.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 145 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

145

(5:04 p.m., prospective jurors entered the courtroom.)

THE COURT: Okay. We are back on the record with

Jurors 94 through 98.

Counsel, you can have a seat.

So, I apologize, when you came in, I didn't have you

sworn in, so I'm going to have you sworn in and then ask you a

yes or no question.

If you'd all stand up and raise your right hand.

(The prospective jurors were duly sworn.)

THE COURT: Okay. And, Juror 94, now that you've been

sworn in, were all of the answers that you gave earlier today

to the Court and counsel truthful?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you.

Juror 95, were all of the answers you gave earlier

truthful?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Juror 96, were all the answers you gave to

Court and counsel earlier today truthful?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Juror 97, were all the answers you gave in

response to questions by Court and counsel truthful?

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And, Juror 98, were all the answers you

gave here today truthful?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 146 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

146

PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, ma'am.

THE COURT: Anything else?

(No response.)

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. You can step outside.

And why don't you just wait outside and Elaine will tell you

what to do.

(5:06 p.m., prospective jurors left the courtroom.)

THE COURT: So now that I have eaten up 20 minutes of

your time, I am willing to consider having you come back at

8:30 tomorrow morning if there is a request to do so.

MR. LINCENBERG: We would make such a request. Thank

you.

THE COURT: And does the government want to say

anything about that?

MS. PERLMETER: Sounds good.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. So 8:30 tomorrow

morning to do your strikes. I'll just have Elaine here so that

she can let you in and you can do your thing, and she'll just

let me know when you're ready and I'll come down. Okay.

(Proceedings concluded at 5:07 p.m.)

* * *

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 147 of 148
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

147

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 28th day of

September, 2021.

/s/ Christine M. Coaly_______

Christine M. Coaly, RMR, CRR

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1355-4 Filed 11/01/21 Page 148 of 148