1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

KESSLER LAW GROUP

Eric W. Kessler, SBN 009158

9237 E. Via de Ventura, Ste. 230

Scottsdale, AZ 85258

(480) 644-0093 phone

(480) 644-0095 fax

Eric.KesslerLaw@gmail.com

FEDER LAW OFFICE PA

Bruce S. Feder, 004832

2930 E. Camelback Rod., Ste. 160

Phoenix, Arizona 85016

(602) 257-0135 phone

bf@federlawpa.com

Knapp Counsel

Attorneys for Defendant Scott Spear

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, ) No. 2:18-cr-00422-DJH

)

 Plaintiff, ) DEFENDANT SPEAR’S JOINDER

v. ) IN DEFENDANT BRUNST’S 

) BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF

) OBJECTIONS TO COURT

) RULINGS DURRING FERRER

) TESTIMONY - INCLUDING

) ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT

Michael Lacey, et al., )

) (The Hon. Diane J. Humetewa)

Defendant. )

Defendant Scott Spear, through his attorneys, joins in all respects in Defendant John 

Brunst’s Brief In Support Of Objections To Court Rulings During Ferrer Testimony and 

additionally requests that the Court clarify what questions and evidence can be used 

regarding §230 of the Communications Decency Act. 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1841 Filed 10/06/23 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Specifically, this Court has ordered as follows:

• “Testimony that Section 230 was meant to incentivize internet providers to 

engage in moderation practices will be allowed.” (DOC 1081, pg. 20);

• “Defendants may not argue that Section 230 of the CDA immunizes 

Defendants from Counts 2-51 of the SI for violating the Travel Act.” (DOC 

1642, pg. 10);

However, far beyond the language of these orders, this Court is precluding the mere 

mention of CDA §230 in either cross examination or defense exhibits. For example, during 

the cross examination of Mr. Ferrer by Mr. Feder on September 26, 2023, in the morning

session (Transcript 9/26/23, AM session, pg. 65), the mere mention of CDA §230 - before 

there was even a completed question - caused this Court to sustain the government’s 

objection and later warn all defense counsel that an OSC might issue if CDA §230 was 

further mentioned. (Transcript 9/26/23, AM session, pg. 107) This warning to defense 

counsel contravenes the Court’s Order described above in DOC 1081. Defense counsel 

cannot present evidence to show §230 was meant to incentivize internet providers to engage 

in moderation practices (which is expressly allowed per the Order in DOC 1081) if the Court 

threatens contempt proceedings for doing so:

“Now, let me say this: I'm going to give you a warning regarding any mention 

of the CDA or 230, and if any counsel asks a question about definitions or 

the meaning of CDA or 230 of this witness, I may begin to issue an Order to 

Show Cause. 

“There have been two opinions issued by the Court regarding the relevance 

of Section 230 to this case. I have admonished counsel numerous times, and 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1841 Filed 10/06/23 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

I'm beyond the point now of doing so, and so if any counsel blatantly violates 

the Court's order, brings out the CDA, I may start issuing those

orders to show cause.” (Trans. AM, 9/26/23 at 107)

This response by the Court substantially and prejudicially modifies this Court’s own 

previous orders in the middle of trial and interferes with defense counsels’ ability to properly

present their defenses and represent their clients consistent with the effectiveness 

guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. 

CDA §230 is prominently mentioned in many of the exhibits admitted into evidence

at the government’s offering and over Defendants’ objections. Precluding defense counsel 

from probing these same references within the Court’s previous rulings substantially 

interferes with the truth-seeking process and impedes a fair trial.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this October 6, 2023.

s/ Bruce Feder

Bruce Feder, Esq.

Eric W. Kessler, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendant Spear

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1841 Filed 10/06/23 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 6, 2023, I electronically transmitted the attached 

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

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

as counsel of record.

 s/ Eric W. Kessler 

Eric W. Kessler, Esq.

Attorney for Defendant Spear

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1841 Filed 10/06/23 Page 4 of 4