UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

_________________

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 2:18-cr-00422-DJH

Phoenix, Arizona

September 27, 2023

8:53 a.m.

BEFORE: THE HONORABLE DIANE J. HUMETEWA, JUDGE

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

JURY TRIAL - DAY 13

(A.M. SESSION)

Official Court Reporter:

Cathy J. Taylor, RMR, CRR, CRC

Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 312

401 West Washington Street, Spc 31

Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2151

(602) 322-7249

Proceedings Reported by Stenographic Court Reporter

Transcript Prepared by Computer-Aided Transcription

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 1 of 105
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

2

A P P E A R A N C E S

For the Government:

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

By: Mr. Kevin M. Rapp, Esq.

Mr. Andrew C. Stone, Esq.

Mr. Peter Shawn Kozinets, Esq.

Ms. Margaret Wu Perlmeter, Esq.

Mr. Daniel G. Boyle, Esq.

40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1800

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408

kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov

peter.kozinets@usdoj.gov

andrew.stone@usdoj.gov

margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov

- and -

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

By: Mr. Austin Berry, Esq.

1301 New York Avenue NW, 11th Floor

Washington, DC 20005

austin.berry2@usdoj.gov

For the Defendant Michael Lacey:

LIPTSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA, LLP

By: Mr. Paul J. Cambria, Esq.

42 Delaware Avenue, Suite 120

Buffalo, New York 14202

pcambria@lglaw.com

For the Defendant Scott Spear:

KESSLER LAW OFFICE

By: Mr. Eric Walter Kessler, Esq.

6720 North Scottsdale Road, Suite 210

Scottsdale, Arizona 85253

eric.kesslerlaw@gmail.com

- and -

FEDER LAW OFFICE, PA

By: Mr. Bruce S. Feder, Esq.

2930 East Camelback Road, Suite 160

Phoenix, Arizona 85016

bf@federlawpa.com

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 2 of 105
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

3

A P P E A R A N C E S (Cont'd)

For the Defendant John Brunst:

BIRD MARELLA BOXER WOLPERT NESSIM DROOKS

By: Mr. Gopi K. Panchapakesan, Esq.

Mr. Gary S. Lincenberg, Esq.

Mr. Ariel A. Neuman, Esq.

1875 Century Park E, Suite 2300

Los Angeles, California 90067

gpanchapakesan@birdmarella.com

glincenberg@birdmarella.com

aneuman@birdmarella.com

For the Defendant Andrew Padilla:

DAVID EISENBERG, PLC

By: Mr. David S. Eisenberg, Esq.

3550 North Central Avenue, Suite 1155

Phoenix, Arizona 85012

david@deisenbergplc.com

For the Defendant Joye Vaught:

JOY BERTRAND, ESQ, LLC

By: Ms. Joy Malby Bertrand, Esq

P.O. Box 2734

Scottsdale, Arizona 85252-2734

Joy@joybertrandlaw.com

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 3 of 105
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

WITNESSES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: PAGE

Carl Ferrer

Cross-Examination (Cont'd) by Mr. Cambria 9

Cross-Examination by Mr. Lincenberg 86

EXHIBITS

NO. DESCRIPTION REC'D

662 Email from Ferrer to Larkin and Lacey,

"Sgt Byron Fassett", 07/06/2011,

DOJ-BP-0002114645 - DOJ-BP-0002114646

20

668 Email from Ferrer to Lacey, "RE: Age

verification ID", 07/15/2011,

DOJ-BP-0001127479 - DOJ-BP-0001127481

35

669 Emails between Spear, Larkin, Ferrer, and

Lacey, "stats...more info", 07/15/2011,

DOJ-BP-0001127482 - DOJ-BP-0001127483

44

6243 Jan. 2006 VVM Corporate Structure

DOJ-BP-0004602110-017

73

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 4 of 105
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

08:53:35

08:54:08

08:54:37

08:55:02

08:55:30

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

P R O C E E D I N G S

(Defendants are present and out of custody.)

(Court was called to order by the courtroom deputy.)

(Proceedings reconvene at 8:53 a.m.)

(Jury not present at 8:53 a.m.)

THE COURT: All right. Please be seated.

Good morning, everyone. We have a juror who is under

the weather somewhat. She's explained a particular health

issue that she does not feel safe in driving in. She's got

a -- quite a long commute. We've conveyed to her a couple

options, including the -- being reimbursed for ride share. And

she lives quite a distance away that she didn't think that that

would be feasible she would be able to get a Uber or a Lyft

from the distance that she drives.

The Alternative B is we're checking with our

technological department to see, and she's willing and capable,

of viewing the proceedings through a video. And we're looking

into that in terms of how long it will take us to set that up

and to test it.

And so while that is being done, I ask you to meet and

confer with your respective clients and determine whether or

not that is something you wish to do. And if that is not

something that you think that you are going to be agreeable to,

we can make a record on that. And then you have, I think, a

decision to make, which would be to postpone for today or to

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 5 of 105
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

08:55:54

08:56:11

09:17:36

09:17:55

09:18:09

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

release the juror.

And so while Liliana checks with our IT folks on how

to establish that link and bring in the equipment to do that,

I'll leave you to meet and confer, and then I'll check back in.

MR. RAPP: Your Honor?

MR. CAMBRIA: Can we know who it is?

THE COURT: It's Juror Number 9.

MR. FEDER: Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: All rise.

(Recess from 8:56 a.m. to 9:17 a.m.)

THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: All rise.

THE COURT: All right. Please be seated.

And so has there been any agreement with regard to

Juror Number 9 from the government's perspective?

What is your position?

MS. PERLMETER: Good morning. The government has no

objection to Juror Number 9 appearing telephonically or through

videoconferencing, as the Court suggested. We think that this

would be a good alternative to her being live in court given

that she is healthy enough and able to participate in the

continued proceedings.

We very much do not want to delay this trial any

further, so we ask that the Court allow her to do that.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cambria?

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, our position is that she

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 6 of 105
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

09:18:29

09:18:38

09:18:49

09:19:06

09:19:23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

should be excused. There's just too much, let's say, lack of

any kind of control, and so on, with somebody being remote.

That's just not acceptable to us. We think that she should be

excused.

THE COURT: Ms. Bertrand?

MS. BERTRAND: I join in my colleague's

recommendation. I would ask that this juror be excused.

THE COURT: Mr. Lincenberg?

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes, Your Honor. We join.

THE COURT: Mr. Feder?

MR. FEDER: We do not agree to having her remotely.

We do agree to her being removed or excused.

THE COURT: Mr. Eisenberg?

MR. EISENBERG: The same, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

Well, that poses a different question, then, to the

government with regard to excusing the jury -- juror from

service.

THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. I can't hear you.

MS. PERLMETER: While we do prefer that she continue

participation in this trial, if the Court decides that it is in

the interest of keeping the trial moving, we have no objection

to letting her go.

THE COURT: All right. Well, I think because there is

no agreement with regard to her appearing remotely for the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 7 of 105
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

09:19:49

09:20:08

09:21:53

09:22:22

09:22:34

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

purposes of keeping us on track, then I believe it is in the

interest of the parties to release Juror Number 9.

And so all of our jurors are present. And so we will

proceed without Juror Number 9. Liliana and our juror

administrate -- okay -- our jury administrative office will

inform her that she's excused from further duty.

And so with that, let's go ahead and check on the jury

and have them in.

Mr. Cambria, are you prepared to proceed?

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Let's have our witness in.

All rise for the jury.

(Jury present at 9:21 a.m.)

THE COURT: All right. Please be seated.

Members of the jury, not quite the early start that I

had anticipated. The best laid plans apparently do not work

well for me. So, in any event, due to circumstances, and you

need not concern yourself with the details, we have determined

that it best to proceed without Juror Number 9. And so Juror

Number 9 has been excused from service -- further service. So

I just wanted to update you on all on that.

And so we are ready to proceed. The witness is

present.

And, Mr. Cambria, you may continue.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you, Your Honor.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 8 of 105
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

09:22:42

09:22:59

09:23:22

09:23:38

09:23:51

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Good morning, Mr. Ferrer.

A. Good morning.

Q. In your various interviews with people from the government,

you were asked some questions, and you made some statements

with regard to Mr. Lacey.

Do you recall that?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. And, for example, you characterized Mr. Lacey

as a journalist. Is that fair?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. And, as a matter of fact, there were -- at one

time was it 19 or so various newspapers?

A. With this number, it was 11. Then it went up to 16, so --

Q. 16's the highest number you recall?

A. That's the highest number that I recall.

Q. Okay. And Lacey was the overall editor of those papers.

Is that fair to say?

A. Yes.

Q. And -- but the individual papers had editors as well, did

they not?

A. Yes, they did.

Q. Yeah. And then he would supervise those individuals?

A. That was my understanding.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 9 of 105
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

09:24:10

09:24:26

09:24:33

09:24:45

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

Q. Okay. And that's all we can ask you for.

That some of the things that he did was -- or he wrote

editorials; true?

A. Yes. I think so.

Q. Okay. And wrote articles. Not necessarily editorials, but

articles?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Foundation.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Well --

THE COURT: Well --

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. -- if you know.

THE COURT: -- just -- just lay a little foundation

for the question, Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: Ooh. Let me put this on.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Well, you -- you were familiar with the newspapers, were

you not?

A. Yes, I was.

Q. All right. And so I said, he also wrote articles, did he

not?

MR. RAPP: Again, objection. Foundation. When?

Where?

THE COURT: Yes. I guess --

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 10 of 105
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

09:24:51

09:25:06

09:25:21

09:25:45

09:26:00

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

THE COURT: -- if you could be a little bit more

precise and --

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All the time that you were associated with Village Voice

Media, Backpage, et cetera, were you able to observe whether or

not Mr. Lacey worked with the newspapers in writing articles?

A. Yes, he did.

Q. Okay.

MR. CAMBRIA: Is that good?

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Next. You described Mr. Lacey as being a layer away from

Backpage?

Do you recall that?

A. I did say that, yes.

Q. Okay. And you also said, did you not, that you did not

act -- interact very much with Mr. Lacey; true?

A. Yes, but it was different at different times.

Q. Okay. And in addition to that, you also stated that Lacey

was more or less in the background; true?

A. It depends on the time. There's some times that he was

very much in the forefront.

Q. Okay. With regard --

A. Not so much.

Q. We were -- you at some time had mentioned so-called

quarterly meetings or banking meetings.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 11 of 105
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

09:26:21

09:26:39

09:26:58

09:27:20

09:27:36

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

You indicated Lacey did not attend those; correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. Now, I wanted to talk about the operation of Backpage. I

mean, you were the -- basically the CEO there of Backpage, were

you not?

A. I -- I don't understand by that term, because I always

think of a CEO as somebody who has some ownership stake or owns

a percentage of the company.

Q. All right. How about operating Backpage? You were the

chief operator, were you not?

A. I would use the term a director, yes.

Q. Director/operator. What I'm talking about is the

day-to-day business of Backpage.

You were the person in charge of that, were you not?

A. I was the overall supervisor that reported to Scott Spear.

Q. Okay. And, now, with regard to -- there were a number of

terms that the moderators would look for and take out of ads;

is that correct?

A. Correct.

Q. And that was at -- that was their job, one of their jobs,

was it not?

A. It was.

Q. All right. And we see, for example, other platforms.

Let's talk about, like, Facebook.

MR. RAPP: Objection.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 12 of 105
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

09:27:40

09:27:58

09:28:07

09:28:28

09:28:44

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. There are times --

MR. RAPP: Objection. Relevance.

THE COURT: Overruled.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. There are times when the people who run Facebook take

certain things out or prohibit certain things; correct?

MR. RAPP: Same objection. And foundation.

THE COURT: Well, it -- if he knows based on his own

knowledge, he can answer.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. You're familiar with that, aren't you?

A. Yeah, but I have a different impression.

Q. Well, my question is, are you familiar with that and do

they do that?

A. I believe they do something different.

Q. All right. Well -- all right. How about this: You talked

about -- you used a few terms, BBJ. You talked about Greek and

all these other things.

Do you recall that?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. Now, in a situation where somebody launches an

ad, the idea is that some other person will respond to that ad;

correct?

A. Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 13 of 105
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

09:28:59

09:29:17

09:29:42

09:29:59

09:30:20

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

Q. All right. The ad is sort of an offer, and they're looking

for a customer?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. So, now, if I am somebody -- you talked about

the term "Greek." All right. And you said -- I think you said

Greek was -- that some people interpreted that word to mean

anal sex; true?

A. It's -- Greek is a common term for anal sex --

Q. Okay.

A. -- in the adult industry.

Q. All right. So if I were someone who was perusing ads and I

was interested in engaging in that kind of conduct, I would

look for that word, would I not?

A. That could happen, yes.

Q. Well, it makes sense, doesn't it?

A. Well, I suppose if you're looking for anal sex in the

female escorts category that you could search for that term,

Greek --

Q. Well --

A. -- and then those ads would come up.

Q. Okay. But wasn't -- wasn't that the point you were trying

to make, that maybe there are people that associate that term

with that kind of conduct; right?

A. Some, it's not a really accurate term if you're browsing

the female escorts category. It would be many or most.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 14 of 105
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

09:30:33

09:30:42

09:30:49

09:30:53

09:31:12

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

Q. Well, you can't speak for people you never met before, can

you?

A. Well, I -- I can tell you that we --

Q. No. That wasn't my question.

Can you speak for people you never met before?

MR. RAPP: Objection as to vague.

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, Your Honor --

MR. RAPP: And speculation.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- that wasn't my question.

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Okay. Can you speak for people who you have never met

before?

MR. RAPP: Same.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you understand?

MR. RAPP: Objection.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. In any event, if that word would indicate to someone who

was looking for that kind of conduct that perhaps it was

available in that ad, you would need to have that word in the

ad, would you not?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Speculation. Foundation.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 15 of 105
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

09:31:24

09:31:42

09:31:58

09:32:10

09:32:33

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

THE COURT: Well, overruled.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you understand my question?

A. No.

Q. Okay. Let's assume that --

MR. CAMBRIA: Sorry.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Let's assume that I'm someone looking for that kind of

activity and that I would associate that word with that

activity.

If I reviewed an ad that had that word in it, then

perhaps I would respond to it for that activity; correct?

A. Correct.

Q. All right. Now the word's gone. It's not in the ad

anymore.

Why would I respond to the ad --

A. Because.

Q. -- if I was looking for that conduct and that word was

gone?

A. Because you would look for the misspelling. You would look

for Greek spelled with -- instead of two Es, two 3s.

Q. Okay. Now, let's assume that wasn't there either. There

was no Greek, no 3s, no 6s, no 12s. No Greek.

That's not an ad that would catch my attention, don't

you agree, if I was looking for that conduct and looking for

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 16 of 105
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

09:32:52

09:33:05

09:33:19

09:33:33

09:34:18

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

those words if they were gone?

A. You're -- you're really speaking about a hypothetical here,

because you could just call her and ask.

Q. You could. And then you would have a conversation.

Somebody would make an offer. You would have an acceptance;

correct?

A. Correct.

Q. All right. I'm talking about just reading an ad. Reading

an ad doesn't have that connection with the individual, does

it?

A. It's not as transparent, if that's what you mean.

Q. What I mean is --

A. Not as convenient.

Q. -- if you read an ad and the word's not there and you

haven't talked to the individual, then you're going to have no

connection with that person for that activity, are you?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Asked and answered.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. I guess they agree with me

then.

MR. RAPP: Objection. Move to strike that and

admonish counsel not to editorialize.

THE COURT: Sustained, Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Could we show the witness

Exhibit 662, which I believe is in evidence.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 17 of 105
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

09:34:42

09:35:14

09:35:27

09:35:44

09:35:59

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you see that, Mr. Ferrer?

A. I do.

Q. All right. And I think that you had identified that

earlier as a -- an email from you to Mr. Larkin, Mr. Lacey, and

it's with regard to a meeting you had with a Byron Fassett.

Who's Byron Fassett?

A. So he's a police officer for prostitution investigations

involving juveniles in Dallas, Texas.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. And before we go on, could we

just publish this, please.

MR. BERRY: It's not in evidence.

MR. CAMBRIA: It's in evidence.

MR. RAPP: It's not in evidence. It's not in

evidence. 662b is in evidence.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Mr. Ferrer, I call your attention to 662.

Is that something that you wrote?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. And you send it to Jim Larkin, Mike Lacey, and it was with

regard to Byron Fassett; is that correct?

A. I sent it to them because they requested that.

Q. I didn't ask you that. I asked you if you sent it to them.

A. I did.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 18 of 105
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

09:36:11

09:36:18

09:36:29

09:36:41

09:37:10

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

Q. All right.

MR. CAMBRIA: And I offer it in evidence.

THE WITNESS: I'm sorry? I did not -- I didn't hear

that. Oh.

THE COURT: I'm sorry?

MR. CAMBRIA: I offer it into evidence.

THE COURT: You're moving to admit?

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry.

THE COURT: Are you moving to admit?

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes.

THE COURT: Oh, okay.

Is there an objection?

MR. RAPP: Judge, I need a second because this is not

the version of the exhibit that -- so I need to see the second

page.

THE COURT: Oh, are there multiple pages, Mr. Cambria?

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, I thought this one was in

evidence. He says there's a 662a apparently.

MR. RAPP: B.

THE COURT: B.

MR. CAMBRIA: B.

MR. RAPP: If -- if counsel wants this in, it can be

published and admitted.

THE COURT: This is Government's 662, is that correct,

Mr. Cambria?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 19 of 105
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

09:37:17

09:37:23

09:37:36

09:37:49

09:38:03

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

20

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: It may be admitted, and it may be

published.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you.

(Exhibit 662 admitted into evidence.)

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Mr. Ferrer, would you read this, please.

MR. RAPP: Well, the --

THE WITNESS: The entire --

MR. RAPP: Hold it.

It's a lengthy -- it's a lengthy email here. The

entirety of it?

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, sections at a time here.

Could we have him read it, please.

THE COURT: Well, how are you going to have him read

it? From the top up or from the top down?

MR. CAMBRIA: From the top down.

THE COURT: Okay. And I'm assuming that you don't

need him to read the email addresses.

MR. CAMBRIA: No.

THE COURT: Okay.

You may -- you may read the email, Mr. Ferrer.

THE WITNESS: "I had a meeting with Sergeant Byron

Fassett. He heads up the High Risk Victims and Trafficking

Unit. My thought is to get to know the guy who is very well

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 20 of 105
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

09:38:17

09:38:37

09:39:03

09:39:22

09:39:47

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

known and liked at the Crimes Against Children Conference in

Dallas.

"He had been quoted in several articles by our papers

in the past. Including the Super Bowl article" -- and then I

have a link to the Super Bowl article with the title Super Bowl

Prostitution, 100,000 Hookers Didn't Show but America's Latest

Political Scam did.

"I expect a low key meeting with Byron. I ended up in

a meeting with 8 well-prepared people. Sergeant Fassett and

Sergeant Nunez (head of vice), a Lieutenant on the vice squad,

an ICAC member, Joe Ullman of the FBI, Sally Lannon Lieutenant

PD, Lisa Miller AUSA, Brooke Grona-Robb, ADA, and another

sergeant who pulled records but did not have a card.

"I told them I was not a reporter. I run the web site

and want to work with them. Our priorities are deter, remove,

and report bad postings and help prosecute any child

exploitation or human trafficking cases.

"Sergeant Fassett recalled speaking with the Village

Voice reporter last week. He indicated the arrest records are

problematic way to qualify the prostitution" -- "child

prostitution issue. However, he felt to exaggerate statistics

were not helpful. If we say there are around a thousand child

prostitute victims, he says it means there are 10,000. This is

because so many cases involving child exploitation may get

charged for a different crime.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 21 of 105
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

09:40:05

09:40:22

09:40:38

09:40:54

09:41:19

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

22

"They only use 1 percent of the NCMEC reports we send

them. There are several reasons for this: Backpage needs to

do a better job. We are reporting pics where the user is

clearly not underaged. Even if the pic looks under aged, they

still have to set up a meeting with the user and often they do

not get a call back when they leave a voicemail," [as read].

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Let me stop you there for a second.

So he at this meeting said that even if the pic looks

under aged, they still have to set up a meeting with the user;

is that correct?

A. That's what it says.

Q. Under- -- do you understand that to mean at the time by him

that simply looking at the picture itself, or the ad, was not

sufficient? You had to actually meet?

A. That's how I understood it.

Q. Okay. Continue, please.

A. "Most of their successful cases are achieved through other

means than our" -- "than one of our NCMEC reports. Even

reports from other users often turn out to be competitors just

trying to get someone's ad taken down."

Q. Let me stop you there.

That last statement that sometimes reports turn out to

be competitors, are you familiar with that generally aside from

what he said?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 22 of 105
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

09:41:41

09:42:02

09:42:10

09:42:18

09:42:40

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

23

A. Yes, I am.

Q. All right. And that from time to time people will call in

and report a particular ad and say that it -- you know, it's

inappropriate, or what have you, and they're really trying to

get that ad taken down because that's one of their competitors;

true?

A. We did see that happen on occasion.

Q. Okay. And so sometimes a statement, whether it be a report

or a claim or so on, isn't reliable?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Foundation.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. From your experience?

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Based on your observations and your experience?

MR. RAPP: Same. Same objection. When? Where?

What?

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. Does it matter when, where, or what as a -- as

to whether that occurs?

Would it matter if it happened in March versus

December?

A. It -- it -- no. It matters more on the IP tracking and the

tools that we put in place to ignore those type of reports.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 23 of 105
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

09:43:04

09:43:24

09:43:37

09:43:53

09:44:12

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

24

Q. Let me give you another example. If you, for example, had

a complaint about a particular ad, let's say, and then it turns

out that you had complaints about a number of ads but they all

came from the same place, that would be something you'd look

at; correct?

A. Correct. That's how you could identify somebody who -- who

may be -- the report is not genuine.

Q. Yeah. So, in other words, one IP address is reporting 50

other ads as being inappropriate. That usually is somebody

who's a competitor trying to get somebody else taken down;

right?

A. Sometimes. Sometimes it's a NGO or an anti-human

trafficking group that's just flagging every ad in the

category.

Q. And there would be no way for you to tell just by looking

at it?

A. Well, there is a way. I mean, we -- you'd look at the

number of reports by IP and if it's all in one particular city,

then we question the -- whether that report is genuine and

whether we should send a report to NCMEC or not.

Q. Right. And so you'd find, however, in situations like that

that frequently the reports are not genuine?

A. No. It's more like the minority of the reports. I mean,

frequently they're -- the reports are -- appear to be genuine.

Q. Okay. And so the problem is, however, that you don't know

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 24 of 105
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

09:44:33

09:44:42

09:44:53

09:45:00

09:45:09

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

25

the genuine from the not accurate?

A. I think that's why we enjoyed sending those reports to

NCMEC and let them send it to the police department to let them

investigate.

Q. So is your answer to my question yes?

A. Well, could you -- can I -- could you say that question

again?

Q. Oh.

A. I'm sorry.

Q. Yeah. No. What I said was, you can't tell the difference

between a genuine and a non-genuine?

And did you not say, we just send them on to NCMEC and

let them figure it out?

A. Well --

MR. RAPP: Objection. Objection. Confusing and vague

and --

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Are you confused by that?

THE COURT: Well, no. Let -- let me -- Mr. Cambria,

when there's an objection, let me make a ruling.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry. Sure, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. So I will sustain the objection.

And you can rephrase or --

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

THE COURT: -- ask a new question.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 25 of 105
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

09:45:18

09:45:37

09:45:59

09:46:16

09:46:30

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

26

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. In any event, you told us, didn't you, that in

situations like that you'd send those to NCMEC and let them

figure it out?

A. In situations where we felt that the report was genuine, we

would send them to NCMEC.

Q. All right. Well, if -- if you felt that it wasn't genuine,

would you still send them to NCMEC so that they could figure

out for sure if it was genuine?

A. We would err on the side of sending the report to NCMEC.

Q. So -- so you would send it? Either way, you would send it

to be safe?

A. If you had asked me earlier about the reports being

genuine, some reports appeared to be very genuine if they

involved a family member.

So there's just degrees of authenticity of these

reports. You know, I can't paint the -- a broad brush on every

report that we have from the user.

Q. Okay. Back to where we were reading. Do you recall where

we were here?

A. I don't.

Q. All right. Let's start with the part where it says,

"Dallas focuses on run aways."

A. I got it.

"Dallas focuses on run aways and this they feel is

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 26 of 105
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

09:46:55

09:47:18

09:47:47

09:48:07

09:48:24

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

27

much more successful. They have 9,000 run aways per year. Any

child who runs aways 4 times or more they believe is at risk of

child exploitation. They end up creating a list of 207 high

risk children. These high risk children profiles are shared

with law enforcement. About 94 high risk children end up

involved in prostitution.

"They would like backpage to do the following: Build

a tool where law enforcement can access and do a search by

phone number all cities; build an image hash so we can find and

remove images where a child is exploited and/or assist law

enforcement; include the backpage user name that made the NCMEC

report; ask the backpage person to provide more detail on why

they think someone is under age; include a PSA on the site

explaining the consequences of statutory rape (run this in the

listing or at the bottom of every ad); include a time date and

time zone info with the IP address; as was the case in Chicago,

they also think they should be able to get info without a

subpoena if we added this to our disclaimer or Terms of use.

(I said my attorneys continue to review this request but it's

problematic).

"Sergeant Nunez asked if I would remove ads from known

prostitutes. I said, email me the posting and I would be happy

to do so.

"We also talked about user reporting. Do we continue

to assume anonymous reports or do get their email address and

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 27 of 105
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

09:48:43

09:49:01

09:49:18

09:49:32

09:49:49

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

28

share it with law enforcement?

"I said user reporting was under review, that I will

share any info they need with a subpoena (or the promise of a

subpoena) for exigent circumstance. Carl," [as read].

Q. So the last part of that, there were a number of things

that they asked Backpage to do to assist them; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. So they were asking to continue to work with

Backpage, were they not?

A. I don't know if they'd describe it work with us. That's

implying some kind of partnership. But they do have a to-do

list they'd like us to consider.

Q. Well, if they ask you to do something and then you do that

for them, you're working with them, aren't you?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Asked and answered.

THE COURT: Overruled.

You can answer, if you can.

THE WITNESS: We're following through on some of their

suggestions but some we did not do.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. So the ones you're following through on, then,

you're working with them because you are accepting their

request; true?

A. Part of my reason to visit them was to create the

impression that we're working with them.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 28 of 105
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

09:50:03

09:50:17

09:50:34

09:50:47

///

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

29

Q. Do you remember my question?

A. I just did.

Q. I said, if they asked you to do something, you agreed to do

it, you were working with them, were you not?

That's a yes or a no.

A. Well, what if they asked me not to --

Q. That's a yes or no.

A. There's things that I'm not doing, so I'm not working with

them on those things.

Q. So it's no?

A. No. I just wouldn't characterize it as working with them.

I just think that that implies a partnership. As I said

earlier, I was there for a PR --

Q. If the police asked you to do something and you agreed to

do it, you consider that working with them?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Asked and answered.

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, he hasn't answered it. I've asked

for a yes or no.

MR. RAPP: He's answered it.

MR. CAMBRIA: No, he's not.

THE COURT: All right. There's an objection, and I'm

going to sustain it.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

THE COURT: Let's move on, Mr. Cambria.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 29 of 105
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

09:51:44

09:52:21

09:52:41

09:52:54

09:53:12

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

30

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Are you familiar with the USC Annenberg study?

A. I am.

MR. CAMBRIA: And could we pull up PCCF 20, please.

THE COURT: What did you say?

MR. CAMBRIA: PCCF 20.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Mr. Ferrer, do you recall writing this email?

A. I do.

Q. Okay. And did you send this particular email to Mr. Larkin

with a copy to a Don Bennett Moon, Michael Lacey --

A. I did.

Q. -- and --

MR. CAMBRIA: I'd offer this in evidence.

MR. RAPP: Objection. Hearsay. And, in particular,

the lower email.

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Well, my question is, did you report this information to

the individuals you sent it to?

A. Are you referring to the Annenberg study?

Q. I'm referring to this email that you sent to these

individuals.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm offering it, Your Honor, not for the

truth but for the fact that it was reported.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 30 of 105
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

09:53:23

09:53:41

09:54:02

09:54:11

09:54:23

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

31

THE COURT: You can ask him about that.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. This email you wrote; correct?

A. I wrote it.

Q. And you sent it to these individuals; true?

A. I did, but I would like a moment to read it --

Q. Certainly.

A. -- just to confirm that, because this is the first time I'm

seeing this email, and it's 2011, 12 years ago.

THE COURT: Is the -- is that the full exhibit?

MR. CAMBRIA: It's all I have, Your Honor.

MR. RAPP: Do you have a hard copy available of this?

THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Counsel should have it.

MR. RAPP: Do you have a hard copy available?

MR. CAMBRIA: Mine.

THE COURT: Did you provide copies to the Court,

Mr. Cambria?

MR. CAMBRIA: Pardon me, Your Honor?

THE COURT: Did you provide copies of that exhibit to

the Court?

MR. CAMBRIA: All of the exhibits that we've referred

to we've provided. I'm told. I didn't physically do it

myself.

(The Court and the courtroom deputy confer.)

THE COURT: They're not here. Your exhibits are

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 31 of 105
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

09:54:43

09:54:49

09:54:58

09:55:10

09:55:21

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

32

not -- that exhibit in particular's not here, and we don't

have -- I don't have a copy of it.

MR. CAMBRIA: It was filed by the paralegals, Your

Honor. I didn't file the exhibits.

MS. BERTRAND: Your Honor, may I step out and get the

paralegals?

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. BERTRAND: They're in the workroom. I'll be right

back.

MR. CAMBRIA: Pardon me?

THE COURT: Well, we don't have your exhibit, but,

nevertheless, it's on the screen in front of the witness, so

you can move forward.

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh, thank you.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. I was asking you, did you send this on

December 8th, 2011, to the individuals I've indicated; Larkin,

Lacey, Moon?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. All right.

MR. CAMBRIA: And I'd offer this in evidence, Your

Honor.

MR. RAPP: Right. Same objection. It's hearsay.

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, it's being offered for conveying

this information to those individuals, as the government has

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 32 of 105
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

09:55:35

09:56:37

09:56:49

09:57:21

09:57:38

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

33

done with a number of exhibits.

MR. RAPP: No. The door doesn't swing both ways.

MR. CAMBRIA: It should.

MR. RAPP: This is -- it doesn't. This is hearsay.

THE COURT: Okay. Sustained as to hearsay.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Could I have Exhibit 668, please?

THE COURT: Just confirming. You said 668?

MR. CAMBRIA: I did.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. 668.

Do you see that, sir?

A. I do.

Q. And do you recall that is an email that you wrote to

Mr. Lacey July 15th, 2011?

A. Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: Offer that in evidence, Your Honor:

MR. RAPP: Objection. Hearsay.

MR. CAMBRIA: This is what he's telling Mr. Lacey.

He's available here to cross-examine.

MR. RAPP: You can ask him about that, but it contains

other emails. It's an email thread.

THE COURT: Does it? I -- is this the only page? Oh,

okay. All right.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm offering it up to where it says

"Carl." That's the first email.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 33 of 105
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

09:58:02

09:58:19

09:58:25

09:58:39

09:58:50

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

34

THE COURT: Well, the problem, though, is that it's

not been redacted to that point, Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: Well, we can supply that, Your Honor.

At this point I would only ask him about the part that goes up

to the end that he wrote.

THE COURT: Yet -- well --

MR. CAMBRIA: Pardon?

THE COURT: Okay. All right. It has been redacted,

and so --

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh, good. Thank you. I appreciate

that.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right.

A. Is it --

THE COURT: Well, hold on.

Did the government have an objection with regard to

the redacted version?

MR. RAPP: So the -- I -- now that it's redacted,

it's -- it's -- the other part is still hearsay. He's still

offering it for the truth.

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, I'm --

THE COURT: Well --

MR. CAMBRIA: Speaker is --

THE COURT: Well, let me make a ruling.

MR. CAMBRIA: Yeah.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 34 of 105
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

09:59:02

09:59:07

09:59:22

09:59:28

09:59:43

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

35

THE COURT: I'm going to overrule the objection with

regard to the redacted version. And so this redacted version

that is on your screen is admitted.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you.

(Exhibit 668 admitted into evidence.)

MR. CAMBRIA: May I publish it, please.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: May I have the witness read it?

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Would you read it, please, up to where it says "Carl."

THE COURT: Oh, I'm sorry. Are you asking the

witness?

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm asking the witness to read it, yes.

THE WITNESS: Oh --

THE COURT: Yeah.

THE WITNESS: -- I'm sorry.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. I'm sorry, sir. Go ahead.

A. From the top?

Q. Yes, please.

A. "I just want to make sure you have thoughts on this photo

ID. Regarding age" --

MR. RAPP: I'm sorry. That was -- you -- you

misstated that. Objection.

THE COURT: I can't hear you, Mr. Rapp.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 35 of 105
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

09:59:55

10:00:22

10:00:43

10:01:05

10:01:27

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

36

MR. RAPP: My apologies. He misstated that sentence.

He just missed a word. If he could read it again.

MR. CAMBRIA: I think he left out "my thoughts."

THE WITNESS: Oh, I apologize.

Starting again. "I just want to make sure you have my

thoughts on this photo ID. Regarding Age verification ID.

Response: There's always an adult involved in child

exploitation. According to Sergeant Byron Fassett, Dallas

Police Department's Crimes Against Children unit, the adult

places the ad, the adult rents the motel room, and the adult

provides the transportation. The majority of the cases

involved" -- "involve a homeless run away with limited

resources. Our own experience at backpage.com has been that in

virtually every case of posting involving a child exploitation,

the post was from someone over the age of 18 and using a valid

credit card.

"Credit cards: We capture full credit card numbers,

the users name and address with every transaction. We also use

AVS (address verification system) to further authenticate the

user. We do not take cash or money orders. We provide the

full credit card number with a subpoena and it has aided law

enforcement in their prosecution. Retaining this personally

identifiable data and credit card number requires a great deal

of expense in terms of security. Many sites simply choose to

not retain this information and avoid the expense.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 36 of 105
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

10:01:50

10:02:09

10:02:27

10:02:47

10:03:12

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

37

"Some clients do not use" -- or, excuse me. "Some

clients do use prepaid debit cards, someone else's credit card

with or without the card holder permission. Our experience has

been the vast majority of users eventually post with their

credit card and provide valuable personally identifiable

information.

"Photo IDs are impractical for e-Commerce sites.

Other sites like Match.Com, AdultFriendFinder, Plenty of Fish

and Craigslist do not require a photo ID to post. Requiring a

credit card is the most widely acceptable method of user

verification. Very few people have the capability to scan

their ID or fax.

"Images on dating and classified sites are often not

valid. It is widely known among law enforcement that the image

used on Internet postings will not off" -- "will often not be

real. Images are often borrowed from other ads or other

websites.

"Regarding Eros.com. They have a policy that if you

look under the age" -- "that if you look under the age of 25

they may request a fax of their ID. Their ID requirement is

enforced selectively. Many vice detectives consider Eros's ID

requirement as a way to make it impossible for their vice

department to post a sting ad.

"User education and age verification. We have notices

throughout the site to not post in adult or personals if you

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 37 of 105
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

10:03:34

10:03:54

10:04:16

10:04:36

10:04:56

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

38

are under 18. The posting form requires you to enter an age.

You are told you cannot post in this site if you enter any age

under 18. Our moderators aggressively report to law

enforcement postings that may have a pic or language in the ad

suggestive of someone who appears to be under the age of 18.

In addition, users browsing the site also send us reports of

any ads in violation of our terms.

"Law enforcement has not complained about the quality

or quantity of the information we provide. They are more

focused on getting the information quickly. For example, they

sometimes need information at 3 am where a subpoena will be

forthcoming. Backpage staff has been focused on turning around

requests for information expeditiously as possible often within

the hour or same day. I have been told we respond

significantly faster than the cell phone carriers, internet

service providers and email service providers which can take a

week or longer. Carl," [as read].

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. And, as I say, you sent this email to Mr. Lacey in July of

2011; correct?

A. I did.

Q. All right. And one of the things that you said in there

and that you had learned is that photographs that appear in ads

are all -- not always genuinely the person posting the ad;

correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 38 of 105
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

10:05:10

10:05:37

10:05:58

10:06:22

10:06:42

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

39

A. Correct.

Q. Sometimes people will use photographs of younger-looking

people; true?

A. Yes, that could be true.

Q. And, in addition, they may use just stock photographs that

they find on the Internet?

A. That also could be true.

Q. So a picture isn't necessarily a depiction of the person

who is posting the ad.

Is that fair to say? You knew that?

A. That could be true.

Q. All right. And, also, the information that's in the ad,

the platform, if you will, like Backpage or Facebook or

whatever, the -- it isn't the practice to verify all of those

statements that people put into ads?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Relevance and foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Well, with regard to a -- with regard to a particular ad,

there isn't -- there isn't anything -- in other words, when

somebody places an ad, they don't come down personally -- or

they don't have to come down personally and verify their age

and their identity and their picture and so on; is that

correct?

A. That's correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 39 of 105
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

10:06:57

10:07:08

10:07:19

10:07:42

10:07:58

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

40

Q. And that's how it goes for most things, that, for example,

your background of newspapers, when people posted ads in

newspapers?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Relevance. Foundation.

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, it is relevant.

THE COURT: Well --

MR. CAMBRIA: It is the practice.

THE COURT: Well, he can answer the question. I'll

overrule the objection.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Thank you.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. So, in other words, when you were in the newspaper

business, you didn't verify the information that somebody

called in on an ad, did you?

A. It was pretty rare, but sometimes.

Q. That's a yes or no.

A. Well, I can't answer a yes or no because --

Q. All right. I'll withdraw the question.

At its peak, how many ads a week would be posted on

Backpage?

MR. RAPP: Objection as to foundation. When? Where?

MR. CAMBRIA: At its peak.

THE COURT: Well, I think it's confusing. Maybe you

can ask him what he considers to be the peak.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. I adopt that question.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 40 of 105
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

10:08:16

10:08:35

10:08:46

10:09:00

10:09:19

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

41

MR. RAPP: Well, I still have an objection as to the

market. And Backpage was many places.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Let's say all the markets. How many ads -- because, for

example, the moderators would review the words for all the

markets, didn't they, except -- all the United States markets;

correct?

A. You're speaking of just the U.S. markets?

Q. That's the United States.

A. What was the question?

Q. The question was, the moderators would review all of the

ads for the United States, would they not?

A. No.

Q. No? Okay.

Was there a particular state left out?

A. No. There's categories --

Q. Oh, okay.

A. -- with --

Q. Let's take the adult category. Okay?

How many at its peak, meaning the most, adult ads were

published in a week?

Best estimate. Thousands? Hundreds? Millions?

MR. RAPP: I still have a foundational question.

THE COURT: Yeah.

MR. RAPP: Can we establish what the peak is and in --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 41 of 105
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

10:09:30

10:09:44

10:10:00

10:10:09

10:10:25

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

42

in all cities?

MR. CAMBRIA: All cities.

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Yeah, the peak -- do you understand peak to mean the

highest number?

A. I do.

Q. Okay. And so I'm asking you, in any given week, what was

the highest number of ads that were submitted to Backpage in

the United States?

A. So this is a more complicated answer than you think.

Q. Okay.

A. Okay? And I -- I want a chance to explain.

Q. All I'm asking you is for numbers. Is it --

A. Well --

Q. -- hundreds -- hang on one second.

Is it thousands? Is it millions? How many?

A. I've got to qualify my answer.

Q. Go ahead.

A. So are we talking about new ads that are posted? Are we

talking about ads that had been moved to the top?

Q. All right. Let's --

A. Do you want to count an ad that's moved to the top as a new

ad that -- are we talking ads that day that are new?

Q. Let's start with new ads in a week.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 42 of 105
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

10:10:49

10:11:08

10:11:21

10:11:33

10:11:43

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

43

A. I'm going to say maybe 5- to 10,000.

Q. 5- to 10,000 ads in a week?

A. The majority of the ads, once posted, users would move to

the top. And so a significantly greater number.

Q. Okay. Well, whether or not hundreds of thousands of ads

posted on Backpage, let's say, in a month --

A. Are -- are we talking adult again?

Q. Well, let's start with all ads first, and then we'll break

it down.

A. Once again, I've got to qualify my answer.

Q. I'm not surprised.

Go ahead.

A. Okay. Are we talking about just user-generated content?

Q. Yes.

A. Are we talking about feeds coming in from, you know,

websites?

Q. We're --

A. Take XML feeds.

Q. We're talking about all ads that the moderators would

review.

A. Okay. So that would be user-generated content across all

categories.

Q. Yes.

A. Hundreds of thousands.

Q. A week?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 43 of 105
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

10:12:05

10:12:25

10:12:45

10:13:08

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

44

A. No. I -- I was thinking of a month.

Q. A month. Hundreds of thousands?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay.

A. And I want to qualify that by just saying it's an estimate.

There's reports that can give you an exact number.

Q. All right.

MR. CAMBRIA: Could we pull up 669, please.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. On the screen you see Exhibit 669.

Is -- do you recognize this as an email from you to

Michael Lacey, Jim Larkin in 2011?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. All right. And do you recall this?

A. I do.

Q. All right.

MR. CAMBRIA: Offer this in evidence.

MR. RAPP: No objection.

THE COURT: It may be admitted.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you.

(Exhibit 669 admitted into evidence.)

THE COURT: And published.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Could you read this, please.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 44 of 105
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

10:13:32

10:13:53

10:14:22

10:14:40

10:14:55

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

45

A. "We sent 19 NCMEC reports to date in 2011 for Seattle

specific postings. This does not include Tacoma, etc.

"You probably remember these stats: Approximately

21,143 banned terms (terms added on a daily basis); 96,350

banned users; 4,323 banned IPs; 493,516 ghosted postings all

sections (although most people would not know what ghosting

means)."

Q. All right. Let's hold one moment there.

What is a ghosting posting?

A. So this is an automated process that when people are

posting spam ads and jobs it appears that their ad is live, but

it's actually not going to appear in the listings. So it won't

interfere with the user experience.

Q. And were -- did you do any ghosting -- ghosted postings in

connection with law enforcement?

A. Did we ghost any postings in connection with law

enforcement? Why?

Q. I'm just asking you if you did.

A. Yeah. I can't think of any reason why --

Q. Now --

A. -- we'd do that.

Q. -- there came a time, did there not, when law enforcement

would put up a sting ad; is that true?

A. Yes.

Q. And what is a sting ad?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 45 of 105
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

10:15:24

10:15:38

10:15:44

10:15:57

10:16:14

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

46

A. So a sting ad is when law enforcement posts an ad in order

to get Johns to respond and then they are arrested.

Q. So, in other words, the law enforcement officers would make

an arrangement with Backpage that they would post an ad where

they were trying to catch people who were trying to break the

law?

A. There was no arrangement.

Q. Well --

A. We did it -- we didn't even want to tell them.

Q. Well, you said there was no arrangement. You answered my

question.

Next question.

A. That's -- there's no arrangement.

Q. Okay.

A. They do it anonymously.

Q. Next --

A. We don't know.

Q. Next question. Did you not have cases where they posted a

sting ad and your moderators took it down?

MR. RAPP: Objection as to foundation. When? Where?

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Anytime during the operation of Backpage when you worked

there, whether situations where they posted a sting ad and your

moderators took it down because it had a word in it that on

your list of words wasn't prohibited.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 46 of 105
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

10:16:26

10:16:35

10:16:51

10:17:07

10:17:12

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

47

THE COURT: All right.

MR. CAMBRIA: Was prohibited.

THE COURT: Mr. Cambria, I will overrule the objection

given that you've clarified the question.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you. I'm sorry, Your Honor.

Thank you.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you -- do you follow me?

A. Yes. Moderators did remove ads, but they wouldn't know

that they were sting ads.

Q. Okay. But here's my question: The police put up a sting

ad, which basically is a fake ad, and they're trying to get

somebody to respond to it so that they can arrest them.

Isn't that a fact? Isn't that true?

A. That's -- that's what I understand.

Q. Okay. And at some time what happened is they put up one of

these sting ads, and your moderators took it down because it

had a term in it that was not permitted --

MR. RAPP: Objection.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. -- correct?

MR. RAPP: Asked and answered.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Well, is that true?

THE COURT: Overruled.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 47 of 105
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

10:17:21

10:17:41

10:17:59

10:18:10

10:18:29

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

48

THE WITNESS: It did happen.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. And then the police would call you and say,

hey, don't take my ad down, it's a sting ad; correct?

A. Yes. They wouldn't use the word "sting," though. They'd

say prostitution investigation.

Q. Okay. You understood it to be a sting ad; correct?

A. I did.

Q. All right. And prostitution investigation was simply a way

of trapping people to -- who were looking to break the law;

correct?

A. That's my understanding.

Q. All right. But what my point is, that the -- they would

post this. Your moderators wouldn't know it was a police ad,

but because it had prohibited terms in it, they'd take it down.

And then the police would call you and say, hey, put that back

up, it's a sting ad; correct?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Asked and answered.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. And so in that circumstance, where you put the ad back up,

you were facilitating the police, were you not?

A. Our policy was not --

Q. That's not the question.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 48 of 105
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

10:18:41

10:18:51

10:19:06

10:19:22

10:19:37

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

49

Were you facilitating the police? Were you helping

them?

A. You asked --

Q. The last question is, were you facilitating the police?

MR. RAPP: Objection. It's confusing.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. I withdraw the question.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Were you helping the police by putting their sting ad back

up?

A. That statement is completely false --

Q. False?

A. -- because we did not put the sting ads up -- back up, to

my recollection. We told them: Post again. Follow the

posting rules.

Q. Okay. You didn't put the same ad back up?

A. It's a big difference.

Q. You let them post the same ad again. Is that fair?

A. We don't want to know it's a sting ad.

Q. Okay. Here's the question: You let them post the sting ad

again.

Is that how you did it?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. So what happens is they post a sting ad, your

moderators took it down, they contacted you, and you had them

repost a sting ad; correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 49 of 105
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

10:19:53

10:20:12

10:20:28

10:20:37

10:21:25

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

50

A. We didn't have -- we -- we didn't let them. They would

post again.

Q. You didn't let them?

A. Do you understand? Your statement was just not accurate.

Q. Okay. Let's see if we can make it accurate.

They'd post a sting ad. Your moderators take it down.

Are we okay so far?

A. We are.

Q. All right. They then repost another ad that is a sting ad;

correct?

A. We don't know.

Q. Well, if they contact you and say, hey, you took my sting

ad down, you know, don't you?

A. Yes. Then for that ad we do know.

Q. All right. And that happened, didn't it?

A. It did.

Q. That was easy, wasn't it?

THE COURT: Mr. Cambria.

MR. RAPP: Judge, I'm going to object.

THE COURT: Yes. Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: Could we have 669 up? 669. Oh, here we

go.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. Do you see 669 on your screen? It's a -- a --

it appears to be an email from you to Mr. Lacey, Mr. Larkin?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 50 of 105
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

10:21:44

10:22:12

10:22:49

10:23:08

10:23:16

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

51

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And do you recall this?

A. It looks like I sent it, and I would just need some time to

read it to fully understand this email.

Q. Would you -- would you do that, please.

A. Isn't this the same email?

Q. Yeah, I -- I've lost track now whether I had you read this

or not to publish it to the jurors.

THE COURT: It was admitted, and it was previously

published, Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh, all right. Thank you.

Would you put up 637, please.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. I'm showing you what's been marked as 637.

Do you recognize this as an email from you to Mike

Lacey, Bill Jensen, Scott Spear?

A. Yes, I do.

MR. CAMBRIA: And I'd offer this in evidence.

MR. RAPP: I believe it's in, and no objection to it

being published.

THE COURT: It is. It's already been admitted a

couple of weeks back, Mr. Cambria, and it can be published.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Would you read this, sir.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 51 of 105
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

10:23:28

10:23:46

10:24:10

10:24:30

10:24:58

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

52

MR. RAPP: Could I ask that he -- if he's going to

read it, he reads the entire one. And it starts on the second

page.

THE WITNESS: Start from where?

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. It starts where it says, "We would not have reported

Amber's ads to NCMEC."

A. "We would not have reported Amber's ads to NCMEC. We had

made reports when the following happens: A user reports it,

i.e., 'I saw this girl and she is not 18' or 'I see this pic

and I think she is too young'. We aggressively ask users to

report child exploitation. We get several reports a day.

"Our moderators will see pics where the pic might be

too young or the text is suggestive of child exploitation.

"Once a report goes to NCMEC, they vet it and send it

to local law enforcement. I think they look to make sure it is

a possible exploitation: Pic too young, text saying things

like 'first time to the rodeo', 'fresh', '1st timer',

et cetera.

"The NCMEC people have been quite helpful," [as read].

Then below, "Carl, why would we isolate this ad? What

would NCMEC do with this ad? What do they look for? What is

being guarded against? Lacey."

Then I write, "A senior VP staff member can click a

link while in admin view called 'Report this ad to the NCMEC'.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 52 of 105
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

10:25:19

10:25:43

10:25:59

10:26:30

10:26:43

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

53

A 4-color pdf is automatically emailed of the posting to NCMEC

and includes an IP email address, comments from our staff, and

FAQ explaining data and how to contact us.

"NCMEC then emails us acknowledging receipt of the

report," [as read].

Then Scott Spear writes, "Carl, you are better

equipped than I to explain the nuances of the NCMEC reporting

than I. Please shoot them the basics without a lot of tech

talk. Thanks, Scott Spear, Executive Vice President, Village

Voice Media Holdings, LLC," then his phone number.

And you really want me to read the disclaimer that he

has at the bottom?

Q. No. You don't have to read that.

A. Then I'll just finish with from Michael Lacey to Scott

Spear, "Will you send to Jensen Andy and me a few sentences to

describe how we forward to Ernie Allen questionable ads for his

review, Lacey."

q. Did there come a time when you developed a response manual,

if you will, for the law enforcement individuals?

A. Yes.

Q. And it was a law enforcement guide.

Is that what it was?

A. It was.

Q. And what -- who developed it?

A. I believe I contributed the most to that guide.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 53 of 105
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

10:27:13

10:27:38

10:28:04

10:28:26

10:28:44

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

54

Q. Okay. And what did the guide do?

A. Well, it answered questions so that law enforcement

wouldn't have to ask us in support. We wanted to reduce the

amount of communication between support and law enforcement

because we had so many subpoenas.

Q. So this was designed to assist law enforcement individuals

in pursuing cases against people who violated the law?

A. But it -- once again, it was designed for two reasons.

Q. First question. Can you answer my question?

A. That's one of the reasons.

Q. Okay. And these -- this law enforcement guide was

distributed to members of law enforcement, was it?

A. With a valid subpoena.

Q. And basically what it would do is it would help them obtain

the information they were looking for; correct?

A. No. They already have the information.

Q. Well, they were asking you for information, were they not?

A. Yeah, but you said obtain. What they needed that guide for

was really to kind of understand the information so that they

wouldn't have to email us in support.

Q. Right. And wasn't my question so that that guide would

help them obtain the information they were looking for?

A. Well, I wouldn't say it that way, but we sent the guide

with the information to help them understand it.

Q. Okay. And facilitate their getting the information that

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 54 of 105
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

10:28:59

10:29:10

10:29:30

10:29:42

10:29:59

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

55

they were trying to get?

A. Yeah, I don't really understand that word "facilitate." It

sounds like a legal term, but, yes.

Q. You think facilitate's a legal term?

A. Well, I don't use it very much. I help --

Q. Do you understand --

A. We wanted to help them.

Q. Do you understand what it means? What's it mean to you?

A. I think it means to assist.

Q. Okay. You got it. So let's use it the way you understand

it.

That law enforcement guide assisted the police in

gathering the information they were looking for; correct?

A. Once again, it did help law enforcement understand the

information.

Q. And that would be assistance, wouldn't it?

A. It is.

Q. Okay. Now, you had --

MR. CAMBRIA: I'll stay over here.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. You had -- a number of subpoenas would come in, and law

enforcement individuals would ask you for certain types of

information to help them build cases.

Is that fair to say?

A. That's correct.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 55 of 105
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

10:30:17

10:30:28

10:30:43

10:30:58

10:31:04

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

56

Q. All right. And by supplying that information, you were

assisting the law enforcement people, were you not?

A. Yes.

Q. And you were not in any way assisting or facilitating the

potential law violators, were you?

A. We weren't, but we had no choice with the subpoena.

Q. Answer --

A. You have to send the information.

Q. That wasn't my question.

My question was, by giving that information to the

police, you were assisting the police; correct?

A. We are assisting, but, once again, we have no choice. We

have to give them this information.

Q. Whether you have a choice or not, that's what you were

doing, assisting them, weren't you?

A. I do think it's assistance providing the records.

Q. Okay. And by assisting the police, you weren't helping the

people they were trying to arrest, were you?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Asked and answered.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: No.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right.

A. We would not do that.

Q. All right. So -- and we've mentioned a -- a number of

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 56 of 105
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

10:31:24

10:31:40

10:31:56

10:32:14

10:32:29

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

57

times that there were -- well, strike that.

How many different law enforcement agencies do you

believe you supplied records to? Can you give us a -- an

estimate? Is it hundreds?

A. I can tell you that we had 20,000 subpoenas from 2004 to

2018, and there were many different law enforcement

departments.

Q. Over 50?

A. Yes.

Q. Over a hundred?

A. Yes.

Q. Both state and federal?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And you -- there was an expense involved, wasn't

there, in maintaining the records that you knew the law

enforcement wanted to have access to?

A. The main expense is providing --

Q. That's a yes or no.

There's an expense involved, was there not?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And Backpage paid that expense to maintain those

records, did it not?

A. We did.

Q. Okay. And -- and that expense was because you were trying

to be in a position to respond to these subpoenas; true?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 57 of 105
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

10:32:57

10:33:24

10:33:47

10:34:14

10:34:35

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

58

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. That included computer storage, did it not?

A. Data storage, yes.

Q. And it -- and it included people, employees; correct?

A. Yes, it did.

Q. All right. And so at Backpage's expense you had the people

and the equipment necessary to store information that you knew

law enforcement individuals were going to access?

A. The information's already on our servers. There's really

no additional expense in storing it. The expense is in pulling

the records, responding to law enforcement.

Q. Okay. Did you have additional storage so that you could

maintain records that eventually went to the police?

A. The records are on the servers. The -- the data is already

there. So we didn't really have any significant storage

expense other than people needed computers.

Q. Okay. So when the police would send you a subpoena and

let's say it asked -- it mentioned a specific web address,

would you have your individuals search your database to see if

that web address turned up anyplace else?

A. You're talking about web address?

Q. Well, and I --

A. I'm confused.

Q. Computer ID. Your address. A computer address. IP

address.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 58 of 105
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

10:34:50

10:35:15

10:35:27

10:35:48

10:36:06

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

59

A. I'm sorry. I still don't follow the question.

Q. All right. Every computer has a -- an address, if you

will; correct?

A. There's an IP address when they access the Internet.

Q. And so that means that it can be traced back to the unit

that sent the message; correct?

A. Only if you subpoena the ISP.

Q. I'm talking about, technically speaking, you can -- you can

go back and find out which computer sent an address -- sent a

message on a certain day; correct?

A. I'm just telling you that we don't have that information.

We have the IP address. They would need to go through an

Internet service provider to find the location of that IP

address.

Q. Well, did you have situations where law enforcement would

ask you about a particular individual and you would determine

that that individual was not only where they were looking, but

identified in other sites as well?

A. Correct. We did do that.

Q. And you volunteered that information to law enforcement,

didn't you?

A. They re- -- they demand all ads posted by a particular

user, which means email address. And if they're posting in

five different cities, they get all of the ads.

Q. I'm talking about posting on other -- other platforms

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 59 of 105
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

10:36:19

10:36:38

10:36:51

10:37:00

10:37:03

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

60

besides Backpage.

If you knew -- did you not give them, the law

enforcement people --

A. So --

Q. -- information that not only did they post on us, but they

posted on others, and you told them which ones they were?

A. So this is a significantly different area that you're going

into. This is a public relations area that the subpoena

compliance department handled.

Q. All I'm asking you is, did you do that?

I didn't ask your motivation or what you today are

going to say the motivation was. I asked you whether you did

it.

MR. RAPP: I'm going to object to that question. It's

argumentative.

MR. CAMBRIA: Wait. There's nothing argumentative

about my question.

THE COURT: Well, let -- I've, frankly, lost track of

the question.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Here's the question --

THE COURT: I'm going to --

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh.

THE COURT: -- sustain the objection.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 60 of 105
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

10:37:14

10:37:38

10:37:46

10:38:02

10:38:20

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

61

So you can rephrase or ask a new question.

MR. CAMBRIA: I will. Thank you.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. So if they -- if law enforcement asks you for particular

information about a particular individual or computer and you

found out that that computer or individual was used on other

sites and you had that information, would you not supply that

to law enforcement even though they didn't ask for it?

A. I don't know why you're referencing computers. That just

doesn't make any sense.

Q. Okay.

A. You want to say that if we saw an ad with a phone number

running on other sites?

Q. Yes. There you go.

A. Okay. Good.

Q. I adopt your question.

A. Okay. So that we would compile a list of sites that had

scraped Backpage ads and put them on different web addresses,

and we would provide that list.

Q. So that was actually bonus. They'd ask for one thing.

You'd give them what they asked for, and then you'd give them

other information that was helpful?

A. It's not a bonus. It's more of a misdirection.

Q. Well, whatever your motive is, you gave them additional

information where that other person had posted an ad --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 61 of 105
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

10:38:30

10:38:48

10:38:59

10:39:41

10:40:03

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

62

A. No.

Q. -- correct?

No?

A. No. This is information where that ad had reappeared. And

like we had discussed earlier in my testimony about scraping,

many sites would scrape ads from Backpage and then repurpose

them on different domains. So a good portion of that list of

links and other ads was ads Backpage ads repurposes on domains

not owned by Backpage --

Q. Okay.

A. -- with the exception there were a couple of legitimate

sites that would be included in that list.

Q. And you gave that information to law enforcement?

A. We did.

Q. Okay. Did Backpage from time to time post public service

announcements?

A. We did.

Q. And what were they?

A. There was a PSA, I believe, in Denver that we posted in the

Denver Backpage site at the request of law enforcement.

Q. No. I'm asking, what was the public service announcement?

A. Time? When? What PSA are you talking about?

Q. I'm asking you which ones were posted whenever on the site.

Public service announcement.

Call this number if you're in trouble, whatever.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 62 of 105
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

10:40:22

10:40:37

10:40:55

10:41:16

10:41:28

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

63

Things like that.

A. Oh. So we did have user safety guide information where you

post on some other sites or some NGO's contact information.

Q. Well, let's -- let's -- let's get down to what they were.

In other words, what public service announcement did you have

on the website that somebody could report something that was

wrong?

How about that?

A. Yeah. It's just an unusual way to describe it, as a public

service announcement.

You mean did -- we had ways that users could report

problematic ads.

Q. Yes. Well, not only that, but, for example, didn't you

have a public service announcement that said that it would say

to youths, if you're in an issue or you have a problem, you

could call this number? That sort of thing.

A. We donated an ad to an organization who ran.

Q. What was it?

A. The add text or the name --

Q. Both.

A. -- of the organization?

Q. Both.

A. The name of the organization is Children of the Night, and

the ad text is: Tired of turning tricks. Your pimp doesn't

care. Call this number.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 63 of 105
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

10:41:40

10:42:03

10:42:31

10:42:45

10:43:16

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

64

Q. And you posted that on the Backpage website?

A. We donated that ad. Yes.

Q. At your -- at the expense of Backpage?

A. Yes.

Q. And so basically that ad was telling people who may have

been victimized by others where they could get help; right?

A. Correct.

Q. And any other ads like that?

A. During the history of Backpage?

Q. Yes.

A. As I said earlier, there was some crime in Denver, and so

we posted an ad in Denver to see --

Q. How about this? Did you post something where you basically

said XYZ is against the law and will be reported?

A. Yes.

Q. And what was that?

A. We could -- wouldn't call it a PSA. It's a --

Q. Whatever. What was the --

A. The posting rules of the site. When you -- when you go to

look at a category, you'll see the rules. When you go to post

in a category, you'll get some rules.

Q. Okay. Do you recall that you made a presentation at Crimes

Against Children Conference?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And that presentation was basically what law enforcement

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 64 of 105
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

10:43:43

10:43:52

10:44:00

10:44:18

10:44:30

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

65

needed to do to get information from Backpage about ads?

A. That's correct.

Q. And were there not occasions when you were called by

prosecutors to come and actually testify at trials to help law

enforcement convict individuals who violated the law?

A. Yes, that happened.

Q. And --

THE COURT: Mr. Cambria, can I ask you to move closer

to a microphone.

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh, I'm very sorry --

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- Your Honor. I apologize. I'm a

wanderer.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. There were situations where you would be called by the

prosecution, both state and federal; correct?

A. Are you talking about me personally or the company?

Q. Yeah, you personally to be a witness.

A. None -- no state. All federal.

Q. All federal. Okay.

But, in any event, you were called as a prosecution

witness; correct?

A. I was called as a custodian of record to authenticate the

records.

Q. By the prosecution; correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 65 of 105
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

10:44:40

10:44:58

10:45:09

10:45:26

10:45:45

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

66

A. Yes.

Q. To help their case; true?

A. I presume so.

Q. To convict somebody else; right?

A. I presume so.

Q. And some people were convicted; true?

A. True.

Q. And you were a witness for the prosecution in those cases?

A. I was a witness providing custodian of record

authentication.

Q. For the prosecution?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And you provided records and identified records in

those proceedings, too, did you not?

A. I did.

Q. Okay.

THE COURT: Mr. Cambria, I think at this point we

should take our morning break.

And so, members of the jury, just remember the

admonition. We'll be on our usual 20-minute break. So that

puts us at about five minutes after the hour. We'll go short

this morning because I know you've been here early. And so

we'll aim to break right at the noon hour for our 45-minute

lunch because I think you've been here for a while. And so

just remember the admonition.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 66 of 105
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

10:46:17

11:08:04

11:08:13

11:08:33

11:09:00

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

67

And please all rise for the jury.

(Jury not present at 10:45 a.m.)

THE COURT: All right. We will stand at recess.

And can you make sure that we have defense exhibits

here and ready for Liliana.

(Recess from 10:46 a.m. to 11:06 a.m.)

THE COURT: All right. Let's bring the jury in.

All rise for the jury.

(Jury present at 11:07 a.m.)

THE COURT: All right. The record will reflect the

presence of our jury.

Mr. Cambria, you may proceed.

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you, Your Honor.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Mr. Ferrer, do you recall in one of your interviews with

various agents or attorneys for the government that you

indicated that Dollar Bill's ads did not contain offers of sex

for money?

Do you remember making that statement?

A. I believe I -- I do recall making that statement.

Q. Okay. You bought Backpage what, in 2015?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay.

MR. CAMBRIA: Could we pull up 19 --

THE COURT REPORTER: 19 what? I'm sorry.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 67 of 105
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

11:09:17

11:09:34

11:09:53

11:10:17

11:10:36

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

68

MR. CAMBRIA: 1928.

MR. FEDER: 1928?

MR. CAMBRIA: 1928.

THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: That's been admitted.

MR. CAMBRIA: There we go.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you see that on the screen?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Okay. And is this a -- an email from Mr. Padilla to you?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. And does it -- does it deal with the term GFE/PSE?

A. Yes, it does.

Q. Now, before you told us GFE meant girlfriend experience?

A. Yes.

Q. Must have some different girlfriends.

So -- and the other was porn star experience?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. And basically what's happening here is that --

well, you tell me. What's happening here? What -- what's

happening in this email to you?

A. Well, can I start from the bottom working up?

Q. Well, all right. Let's make it easier.

Is this a situation where Padilla's talking about

pulling the terms GFE and PSE?

A. Yes, it is.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 68 of 105
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

11:10:54

11:11:07

11:11:26

11:11:41

11:11:48

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

69

Q. And you say that those terms will be stripped out but, to

you, begrudgingly?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. So those terms were stripped out then.

Is that fair to say?

A. Yes.

Q. And this is in 2010?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Now, you took over in 2015? You bought Backpage; correct?

A. I became the nominal owner in April of 2015.

Q. All right. You say "nominal owner." Aren't you the one

who told us as part of your plea bargain that you gave Backpage

to the prosecution to shut down?

Is that what you did?

A. I wanted to shut down the site.

Q. No. That's not the question.

Did you give Backpage to the prosecution to shut down

as part of your plea agreement -- plea agreement?

A. I wouldn't use the word "give," but --

Q. Well --

A. Okay.

Q. -- turned it over to them?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. So you must have had control over it to be able to

turn it over to them, didn't you?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 69 of 105
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

11:12:05

11:12:16

11:12:30

11:12:44

11:12:56

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

70

A. I knew all the developers.

Q. That's a yes or no.

A. I had the access to do it.

Q. Okay. So now when 2015 came around and you had this

access, didn't you reinstate the term GFE?

A. There was a time --

Q. Yes or no?

A. Yeah, there was a time GFE was added to the site.

Q. While you owned it?

A. During the period of time, yes.

Q. Okay. So you put it back in?

A. I don't recall the why it came back in.

Q. I didn't ask you that. I asked you whether you're the one

that put it back in.

A. I don't know that.

Q. I'm sorry?

A. I don't know that.

Q. You don't know whether you put the term back in?

A. I don't know whether I did it or whether it was just Andrew

and I deciding together that let's take it out -- let's stop

banning it, because we really need to focus on other things --

Q. Well, you can't --

A. -- with --

Q. You can't say that he did it.

You're the one that had control over it then; correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 70 of 105
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

11:13:03

11:13:09

11:13:25

11:13:31

11:13:40

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

71

A. Yes, I had --

Q. Right.

A. -- control --

Q. That would be --

A. -- but what I'm saying --

Q. That would be -- I'm sorry.

A. What I --

Q. That would be your decision; correct?

A. What I'm saying is it would be helpful if you had an email,

because we're talking about 2000 -- sometime after 2015 to

today.

Q. Have you recalled a number of things about 2015 for the

government?

A. If there's an email or an --

MR. RAPP: Objection.

THE WITNESS: -- exhibit, I find --

MR. RAPP: Objection. Vague. Confusing.

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Well, here.

THE COURT: Sustained as to that last question.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Let's -- let's do it this way: In 2015, as you indicated,

you had the access to control the website; correct?

A. Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 71 of 105
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

11:13:53

11:14:21

11:14:27

11:14:37

///

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

72

Q. All right. And it turns out that that term got back in in

2015, didn't it?

A. It did.

Q. All right. Now, how about porn star experience? Did that

get back in, too?

A. I don't know.

Q. Okay. By the way, have you ever typed in the letters GFE

into Backpage to see what you get?

I'm sorry. Not Backpage. Facebook --

MR. RAPP: Objection. Relevance.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. -- to see what you get?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Relevance. Foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: Just asked if he's done it.

MR. RAPP: Same objection.

MR. CAMBRIA: I didn't hear you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained, Mr. Cambria.

MR. CAMBRIA: Hang on.

MR. FEDER: Is this --

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. FEDER: -- exhibit in?

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: Oh, thank you. Okay.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 72 of 105
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

11:15:01

11:15:15

11:15:32

11:15:44

11:15:53

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

73

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Did you ever type in GFE into TikTok?

MR. RAPP: Same objection. Foundation and relevance.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Could we pull up Defense 6243,

please.

THE COURT: This is --

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. All right. Do you see this on your screen?

A. I do.

Q. Do you recall what this is?

A. This is the corporate structure for Village Voice Media.

Q. Okay.

MR. CAMBRIA: I offer this in evidence.

MR. RAPP: No objection.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

THE COURT: Wait. Is the -- I'm sorry. What exhibit

number is it again, Mr. Cambria?

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, it is 6243.

THE COURT: Yes, it may be admitted --

MR. CAMBRIA: Thank you.

THE COURT: -- and published.

(Exhibit 6243 admitted into evidence.)

MR. CAMBRIA: Could we have Exhibit 23 on the screen,

please. Page 8.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 73 of 105
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

11:16:13

11:16:29

11:16:39

11:16:51

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

74

THE COURT: Oh, we're talking about a different

exhibit now?

MR. CAMBRIA: Now we are, yeah.

THE COURT: 20 -- 23?

MR. CAMBRIA: 23.

THE COURT: Government's 23?

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes. Page 8.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you see this on your screen?

A. I do see it.

Q. Okay. The last paragraph, there's a reference there --

MR. CAMBRIA: This is in evidence, I believe.

MR. RAPP: Yes.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. -- which says, "Larkin and Lacey arrested by Arpaio."

Do you recall that?

A. I'm sorry. I don't recall this exhibit. Could I see the

other pages?

Q. Well, no. What I'm asking you is, do you recall when Lacey

and Larkin got arrested by Arpaio?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Relevance. Move to strike.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor, I believe that it is

relevant as to motivation.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 74 of 105
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

11:17:20

11:17:43

11:18:03

11:18:08

11:18:25

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

75

THE COURT: Well, with regard to the question, it's

sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right.

(Microphone noise.)

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm sorry about that.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Now, do you recall in the past indicating that the reason

that there's a charge for adult ads is to help ensure that the

content is legal?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Foundation.

MR. CAMBRIA: Did he say it?

THE COURT: Well, let me -- let me review the question

once more, Mr. Cambria.

Overruled.

You can answer.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you recall the question?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Okay. And the answer?

A. Yes, that was the company narrative.

Q. All right. Well, that's what you said the reason for

charging for ads was; correct?

A. That's what I said --

Q. Yeah.

A. -- but you need to --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 75 of 105
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

11:18:39

11:18:47

11:18:58

11:19:08

11:19:14

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

76

Q. You said that, didn't you?

MR. RAPP: Well, I'm going to -- I'm going to object

as the foundation for the -- the answer. Where?

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you remember --

MR. RAPP: And --

MR. CAMBRIA: I'll handle it.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you remember testifying in a case called United

States vs. Fuentes?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you recall in that case you said, "We do charge for

adult ads to help ensure that the content is legal"?

Did you make that statement under oath in that case?

A. I did.

Q. Okay. Was it a lie?

A. It turned out that --

Q. No, no. Was it a lie?

A. I later learned --

Q. Was it a lie?

A. Well, I later learned different information --

Q. No.

A. -- that it --

Q. At the time you stated it, was it -- was it -- did you

believe it was true?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 76 of 105
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

11:19:34

11:20:19

11:20:35

11:20:49

11:21:04

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

77

A. At the time I stated it, I did believe it to be true.

Q. All right. Now, did you also state that you forbid any

posting that is a sex act for money exchange or any explicit

pictures of genitalia?

A. Yes.

Q. And did you also testify on a case called United States vs.

Chappell?

A. I did.

Q. By the way, in the first case, Fuentes, you were testifying

for the prosecution, were you not?

A. Once again, custodian of record.

Q. You were testifying for the prosecution, were you not?

A. And, yes, I was called by the prosecution.

Q. I didn't ask you that. I just asked you if you were

testifying for the prosecution? Yes?

A. I just said yes.

Q. No?

Okay. And the same thing in U.S. v. Chappell. You

were testifying for the prosecution; correct?

A. Yes, but I think it's important to clarify that I'm

testifying specifically about the records. I don't know the

defendant.

Q. Mr. Ferrer, it's a simple question.

You were called by the prosecution to testify, were

you not?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 77 of 105
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

11:21:25

11:21:40

11:21:48

11:21:56

11:22:03

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

78

A. I was.

Q. All right. And do you recall testifying in that case that

Backpage does not intentionally post illegal activity?

A. What does it say exactly?

Q. The question was, "Backpage does not intentionally post

illegal activity; true?"

And your answer was, "Correct."

Do you recall that question and that answer?

A. I do recall the question and the answer.

Q. Was it true?

A. Other users --

Q. Was it a true statement?

A. Because they're saying --

Q. Was it a true statement?

A. I've got to give you some context because you --

Q. How about first answering my question?

A. Well --

Q. Was it a true statement?

A. Backpage doesn't post --

MR. CAMBRIA: Your Honor --

THE WITNESS: -- ads.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- would you indicate to the witness to

answer my question, please, "Was it a true statement?"

Simple.

THE COURT: If you can answer yes or no, please do so.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 78 of 105
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

11:22:18

11:22:39

11:23:00

11:23:21

11:23:41

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

79

I'm certain Mr. Rapp will permit you to clarify any issues, but

don't get into a debate or argument. Just if you can answer,

answer yes or no.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Was it a true statement?

A. It's a true statement.

Q. Okay. Did you also testify that Backpage doesn't encourage

illegal activity?

A. I did.

Q. Okay. Do you recall testifying in a case called United

States vs. Townsend?

A. Yes.

Q. And, again, in that case you were called by the prosecution

as their witness; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. And you said -- do you recall saying that Backpage

had about a hundred employees?

A. Could you say that again?

Q. That Backpage had about a hundred employees?

A. Don't have it in front of me but --

Q. Well, I'm -- does that -- do you recall making that

statement?

A. Well, I -- that sounds about right.

Q. Okay. And that there was an -- an adult jobs section,

strip clubs, porn jobs, drivers, things like that?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 79 of 105
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

11:24:02

11:24:30

11:24:54

11:25:00

11:25:55

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

80

A. That sounds right.

Q. Okay. That in April of 2012, Backpage website users posted

3.3 million ads?

Did you make that statement?

A. I did make that statement.

Q. Okay. And that charging for ads and requiring payment by

credit cards discourages abusive posting and helps identify and

track users who misuse the site.

Do you recall saying that?

A. Yes.

Q. And that Backpage.com prohibits illegal content and

activity on its service, and especially condemns all forms of

human trafficking and child exploitation.

"We take many steps to prevent such abuse and misuse

on the site."

Did you say that?

A. Yes. Once -- once again, though, is this --

Q. The question is, did you say that?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. Next. Let's see here.

Do you recall making a statement that it's impossible

to determine what is an implicit offer for commercial sex?

A. Can you -- can I see the document?

Q. Yeah. I have -- let's see. Exhibit 6180. Exhibit 6180,

page 9. It should be paragraph 19.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 80 of 105
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

11:26:16

11:26:34

11:27:13

11:27:32

11:27:40

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

81

MR. RAPP: Right. I'd move to object, Judge. This is

based on the Court's previous order.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm just asking if he made this

statement.

THE COURT: 6180, dash, what?

MR. CAMBRIA: 6180, page 9. Oh, yeah, page 9,

paragraph 19.

I'm simply asking about a statement not a case.

MR. RAPP: It's within the context of a case.

MR. CAMBRIA: It's not relevant. It's a free-standing

statement.

THE COURT: Wait. There's a pending objection. Let

me look at the exhibit.

I'm -- I must state that I'm confused, because I

thought the prior line of questions was related to his

testimony in Townsend, Fuentes, and so forth --

MR. CAMBRIA: And it was.

THE COURT: -- and you were posing his testimony with

regard to that. This doesn't look like testimony in a case.

So I think you --

MR. CAMBRIA: This -- this --

THE COURT: I somehow have overlooked where your

transition occurred.

So with regard to this exhibit --

MR. CAMBRIA: This is a declaration.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 81 of 105
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

11:27:54

11:28:08

11:28:24

11:28:36

11:28:50

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

82

THE COURT: -- what was the -- well, you phrased it as

testimony. So I think you need to --

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

THE COURT: -- rephrase the question and the -- the --

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

THE COURT: -- that the witness may look at the

exhibit. But you need to rephrase the question first.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you recall making a declaration under oath where you

said "because it is impossible to determine" -- "to determine

what is an 'implicit' offer for commercial sex"?

MR. RAPP: Objection.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Do you recall making that statement in a declaration under

oath?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Court's previous order. It's

within the context of a different case.

MR. CAMBRIA: I'm not referring to the case at all,

just the statement.

THE COURT: Well, I -- I'm going to sustain the

objection because it's not the -- it's not the full statement.

You only read a part of it.

And he can say whether or not he remembers making that

statement.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 82 of 105
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

11:29:07

11:29:18

11:29:23

11:29:35

11:29:44

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

83

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay. Can we have the -- can we put the

full affidavit on the screen, please, starting at the first

paragraph. And it's -- the statement I'm talking about's in

the 19th paragraph.

He can read it all, Your Honor, and see.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. Does it start off, "I, Carl Ferrer, declare and state" --

THE COURT: No.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- "as" --

THE COURT: No.

MR. CAMBRIA: -- "follows"?

THE COURT: No, no, no. The paragraph 19 is what you

were focused on.

MR. CAMBRIA: Yes.

THE COURT: There was a sentence, but you only read

half of it. That's -- that is the difficulty with the way that

you presented it.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

THE COURT: So --

MR. CAMBRIA: Would you show him paragraph 19, please.

THE COURT: You can read the full sentence and ask him

if he recalls making that statement.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. "Alternatively" -- "Alternatively, because it is impossible

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 83 of 105
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

11:30:04

11:30:19

11:30:40

11:30:59

11:31:06

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

84

to determine what is an 'implicit'" -- in quotes -- "offer for

commercial sex, online service providers could require

identification from all users who submit postings containing a

person's photograph (and retain copies of the identification

apparently indefinitely). I expect that most online users

would be unwilling to comply with such requirement because of

the burden and/or because of privacy concerns."

So my question is, did you --

MR. CAMBRIA: The first part of that, which is a

declaration, "because it is impossible to determine what is an

'implicit' offer for commercial sex," I'm asking him if he made

that statement in this declaration under oath.

MR. RAPP: Objection. It goes to a Court's private --

previous order. Move to strike the question.

THE COURT: Well, again, that's a different question

that you asked than previously. The prior question, as I

recall it, was, "Do you recall making that statement?"

And he can testify as to whether or not he recalls

making the statement.

THE WITNESS: I don't recall this specific paragraph,

because I didn't --

BY MR. CAMBRIA.

Q. No.

A. -- write these.

MR. CAMBRIA: Please, Your Honor. Can you --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 84 of 105
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

11:31:13

11:31:33

11:31:52

11:32:03

11:32:36

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION (Cont'd)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

85

THE COURT: He said he did not recall.

MR. CAMBRIA: All right. Thank you.

THE COURT: So ask your next question.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. So now when you look at this, do you recall that you

submitted a sworn declaration which you have in front of you?

A. I was asked to sign a declaration by my supervisors.

Q. And you signed it under oath; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. And it included this paragraph 19; correct?

A. It appears to be it's included.

Q. Okay. And paragraph 19 starts off with the words

"alternatively, because it is impossible to" --

MR. RAPP: Objection. Asked and answered.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. CAMBRIA: Okay.

BY MR. CAMBRIA:

Q. And it -- all right. So you did submit this declaration

under oath containing those words; correct?

A. It appears so.

Q. All right. Is it true that on the website there are --

website, the Backpage website, there are messages about

exploitation and how to report it throughout the website?

A. It's in a couple different locations.

Q. All right. So it's there; correct?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 85 of 105
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

11:33:51

11:34:16

11:34:53

11:36:03

11:36:14

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

86

A. It is there.

Q. All right. When -- all right. Bear with me a second here.

6243.

And did you also in your interviews with the various

government officials say that cooperating with law enforcement

was one of your favorite parts of employment at Backpage?

A. I did say that.

MR. CAMBRIA: That's all I have, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Who is coming forward?

MR. EISENBERG: May we split -- switch places with

counsel so that they --

THE COURT: Your seating? Yes. Yes.

MR. EISENBERG: Thank you.

MR. LINCENBERG: Liliana, can I get that microphone?

How's that?

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Mr. Ferrer, my name's Gary Lincenberg. I represent

Mr. Brunst.

THE COURT: You're going to have to speak up.

MR. LINCENBERG: Can everybody hear me? Is it loud

enough?

Let me try putting it on my tie. Is that better?

THE COURT: Better.

MR. RAPP: Yes.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 86 of 105
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

11:36:24

11:36:42

11:37:04

11:37:21

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

87

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Mr. Brunst, before we talk about -- is that too loud?

THE COURT: Well, Mr. Ferrer.

THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: I'll bring it down.

THE COURT: You called him Mr. Brunst.

MR. LINCENBERG: Is that too loud?

THE COURT: No. That's fine.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Mr. Ferrer --

THE COURT: Thank you.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. -- before we discuss a lot of the testimony you had about

credit card processing and banking relationships with regard to

Mr. Brunst, I'd like to go over some of the other areas just to

see if there's anything that we need to pursue in those areas?

So, first, you had testified about conversations with

Mr. Larkin back in 2003-2004 about the founding of Backpage.

Do you recall that topic?

A. Yeah, 2003.

Q. Okay. Was Mr. Brunst involved in those conversations that

you were referring to back in 2003? Do you recall?

A. He was not.

Q. Okay. And you had a lot of testimony about the marketing

of the adult section.

Was Mr. Brunst ever a part of the marketing department

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 87 of 105
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

11:37:37

11:37:47

11:37:57

11:38:18

11:38:29

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

88

at Backpage?

A. Was he ever a part of the marketing department?

Q. Yes. Was he in the marketing department of Backpage?

A. No. He's part of the budget process.

Q. Okay. So my -- we're going to discuss the budget process.

If you can try --

A. Yeah.

Q. -- to answer my question. I promise that whatever else --

A. Okay.

Q. -- you want to say Mr. Rapp will ask you or I'll follow up

later. We'll do it one point at a time.

Was he a part of the marketing department?

A. He was not --

Q. Okay.

A. -- a part of the marketing department.

Q. And in the marketing department, I believe your testimony

was that there was money spent on marketing, non-adult

advertisements, but money wasn't spent in marketing adult

advertisements; is that correct?

A. Could you say that one more time --

Q. Sure.

A. -- please?

Q. Let me break it down.

Is it your testimony that with regard to marketing

expenses that money was spent to help market some of the

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 88 of 105
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

11:38:51

11:39:10

11:39:26

11:39:50

11:40:13

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

89

non-adult sections?

A. A nominal amount, yes.

Q. Okay. And money was not spent -- perhaps it wasn't needed,

but money was not spent marketing the adult section. Is that

accurate?

A. No, that's not accurate.

Q. Okay. And you testified about The Erotic Review at length

and your dealings with people at The Erotic Review, including

Mr. Elms.

To your recollection, was Mr. Brunst ever a part of

your conversations with Mr. Elms?

A. Was he ever a part of my conversation with Mr. Elms?

Q. Yes.

A. He was not.

Q. Okay. Do you know whether Mr. Brunst ever had any

conversations with Mr. Elms?

A. I thought that was the question. He did not.

Q. Okay. And with regard to ad moderation, was Mr. Brunst a

part of the compliance department that dealt with ad

moderation?

A. He wasn't -- he wasn't affiliated or a part of the

moderation department.

Q. Okay. With regard to aggregation, do you have any

knowledge of Mr. Brunst ever communicating with any

aggregators?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 89 of 105
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

11:40:27

11:40:49

11:41:12

11:41:36

11:41:56

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

90

A. I'm sorry?

Q. Yes. Do you have any knowledge of Mr. Brunst having ever

communicated with any aggregators?

A. With any advertisers?

Q. Aggregators.

A. Ag- --

Q. Aggregators.

A. Aggregators. Oh, okay. I don't, other than hiring them.

But, no, I don't believe he ever communicated directly with

them.

Q. Okay. With regard to advertisers, people who advertised on

Backpage, do you have any knowledge of Mr. Brunst ever having

any communication with anybody who advertised on Backpage?

A. I don't believe he did.

Q. Okay. With regard to reviewing ads -- you testified about

numerous ads. A number of ads were introduced as exhibits

during your direct examination.

Do you have any knowledge of whether Mr. Brunst ever

reviewed any of the ads that you testified about during your

direct examination?

A. I don't know.

Q. Okay. With regard to super posters -- I believe Mr. Mersey

was somebody you identified as a super poster; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Do you have any knowledge of Mr. Brunst ever having

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 90 of 105
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

11:42:21

11:42:30

11:42:49

11:43:08

11:43:20

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

91

any conversation with Mr. Mersey?

A. I don't believe he did.

Q. Okay. Did you ever include Mr. Brunst on any email that

you had with Mr. Mersey, to your recollection?

A. No.

Q. One of the topics that you testified to was dealings you

had with NCMEC.

Do you recall that?

A. Yes.

Q. And was Mr. Brunst, to your memory, ever a part of any

meetings you had with anybody from NCMEC?

A. No, he was not.

Q. Okay. To your memory, was Mr. Brunst ever a part of any

phone calls or emails that you had with people from NCMEC?

A. I don't recall any.

Q. Okay. With regard to your testimony about going to

Washington involving the Senate proceedings, was Mr. Brunst

with -- present in Washington, D.C.?

A. He was not.

Q. Okay. You had testified, I believe, that -- I think you

said Mr. Lacey and Mr. Larkin and others were there; is that

right?

A. Correct.

Q. Who were the others who were there?

A. PR firms.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 91 of 105
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

11:43:36

11:43:59

11:44:14

11:44:25

11:44:46

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

92

Q. Okay. Was Mr. Moon there?

Mr. Moon, was he there?

A. I don't know.

Q. All right. But when you say "others," just so the record's

clear, you're not referring to Mr. Brunst; correct?

A. Correct.

Q. All right. With regard to responding to subpoenas, from

your recollection, was Mr. Brunst ever a part of the effort to

respond to law enforcement subpoenas or subpoenas in any piece

of litigation or investigation?

A. Generally funding the people in subpoena compliance, but I

don't believe he ever had any individual interactions --

Q. Okay.

A. -- fulfilling the subpoena.

Q. Just so we're clear, when you say "generally funding,"

you're saying -- and you testified that at times there'd be a

budget that would be presented to him and ownership for

approval.

Is that what you're referring to?

A. Correct.

Q. Okay. There was testimony about correspondence from

Attorneys Generals, different State Attorneys Generals.

Do you recall testifying -- several different

interactions that you had with Attorneys Generals?

Do you recall that?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 92 of 105
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

11:45:02

11:45:24

11:45:43

11:46:05

11:46:21

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

93

A. Yes.

Q. With regard to any of the back and forth with any of those

Attorneys Generals, did you ever, to your memory, consult with

Mr. Brunst about how you should respond?

A. No.

Q. All right. There was a little bit of testimony about press

and press inquiries.

Did you ever consult with Mr. Brunst about how to

respond to press inquiries?

A. I don't recall any.

Q. Okay. There was some testimony about dealing with

legislative bodies or mayors in the case of the State of

Washington.

Do you ever recall speaking with Mr. Brunst about how

to respond to any political officials?

A. No.

Q. Okay. With regard to dealing with outside lawyers

regarding non-transactional matters -- do you know what I mean

by non-transactional matters?

A. I think. Can you give me an example?

Q. Sure. So let's put aside, for example, if there were

lawyers involved in buying or selling a business, helping

execute a transaction.

And just talking about lawyers who may have been

advising in connection with compliance or litigation --

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 93 of 105
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

11:46:28

11:46:41

11:46:46

11:47:08

11:47:22

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

94

MR. RAPP: Objection.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. -- was --

MR. RAPP: It was --

MR. LINCENBERG: I haven't finish the question.

MR. RAPP: Objection. Move to strike the question.

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Were -- did you ever discuss with Mr. Brunst or was he a

part of any of your conversations with non-transactional

attorneys?

MR. RAPP: Same objection.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Do you recall?

MR. RAPP: Move to strike and admonish counsel.

THE COURT: Sustained.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Now, one part of your testimony was that the moderation

department, I think at one point you said some of their work

was just a veneer.

Do you recall that testimony?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever have any emails where you said, Jed, I'd like

you to know that the work we're doing in the moderation

department is a veneer?

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 94 of 105
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

11:47:44

11:48:04

11:48:25

11:48:45

11:48:57

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

95

A. It's in the budgets, which were emailed.

Q. So in the budgets -- which we're going to look at some of

those exhibits -- were -- are you saying we're going to find in

those budget proposals your statement that the ad moderation

efforts are a veneer?

A. It's not going to use the word veneer.

Q. Okay. And I believe you said that in your testimony. I

believe you -- you testified that you were facilitating

prostitution.

Is that the gist of your testimony? Some of your

testimony?

A. Promoting.

Q. Okay. Did you ever send any emails or presentations for

budget review or anything to Mr. Brunst where you indicated

that you were promoting prostitution?

A. I -- I wouldn't do that.

Q. Okay. So the answer is you never did that; correct?

A. No, I didn't. I wouldn't want to be fired.

Q. Okay.

MR. LINCENBERG: I move to strike the last part after

the word "No."

THE COURT: Okay. The jury will disregard after, "No,

I didn't."

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. I know you want to make certain points, and you'll have an

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 95 of 105
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

11:49:25

11:49:43

11:50:05

11:50:14

11:50:36

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

96

opportunity on redirect. Just try to answer my questions.

Now, prior to your purchase of Backpage in 2015 --

well, let's go even further back.

Did you understand that at one point in time

Mr. Brunst was the chief financial officer of a company called

New Times?

A. Yes.

Q. And is it your understanding that he was the CFO of a

company called New Times until there were certain corporate

purchases and sales and then the holding company became Village

Voice Media Holdings?

A. That's correct.

Q. All right. And when -- was that around 2012?

A. When it became Village Voice --

Q. Yeah.

A. -- Media?

No. I think 2006.

Q. 2006? Okay.

A. It was with the acquisition of the Village Voice.

Q. Okay. And was it your understanding that at one point

the -- the holding company -- I'm going to refer to it as the

holding company since at times it's New Times and at times

Village Voice Media Holding Company.

Do you understand that at some point the holding

company held approximately 18 different business units,

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 96 of 105
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

11:50:56

11:51:31

11:51:52

11:52:07

11:52:19

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

97

different companies?

A. Approximately.

Q. Okay. And so, for example, let's focus, and just to pick a

time period for the moment, 2006 to 2012.

Did you understand that the -- that Mr. Brunst was

listed as the CFO for all of those holding companies for

purposes of corporate documentation?

A. I understood he was the corporate CFO.

Q. And during that time period -- in fact, at any time period,

was Mr. Brunst on Backpage's payroll?

A. During what time period?

Q. Any time period. Was Mr. Brunst ever on Backpage's

payroll?

A. After the transaction I had to pay a loan origination fee

that I thought was covering Jed Brunst's expenses to maintain

the loan, to collect on the loan.

MR. LINCENBERG: Your Honor, I move to strike the

answer as nonresponsive. My question is not about loan

payments to a -- to a company. It's about whether or not

Mr. Ferrer ever understood that Mr. Brunst was on Backpage's

payroll.

MR. RAPP: Objection as to foundation. When? Where?

THE COURT: Well --

MR. LINCENBERG: Ever.

THE COURT: -- I think the question was ever, so

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 97 of 105
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

11:52:37

11:52:49

11:53:11

11:53:28

11:53:36

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

98

overruled as to that.

He can answer it if he -- if he can, if he knows.

THE WITNESS: So Backpage made payments that I

understood was going to Brunst, some part of it. Not the loan

payment. It was like a loan maintenance fee.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Sir, do you understand what the word payroll means?

A. I do.

Q. And what does the word payroll mean to you?

A. Payroll means that you are getting a paycheck.

Q. Okay. And when somebody got a paycheck from Backpage, for

example, was it a normal -- in the normal course of business

activity?

Did Backpage issue a W-2 for its employee?

A. Yes.

Q. And as the senior officer of Backpage, however you want to

describe yourself, do you know whether or not a W-2 was ever

issued to Mr. Brunst --

A. We didn't --

Q. -- at Backpage ever?

A. No.

Q. Yes or no?

No.

And so then in response to the question of whether he

was ever on Backpage's payroll, using your understanding of

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 98 of 105
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

11:53:47

11:54:11

11:54:39

11:54:58

11:55:12

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

99

payroll, is the answer, likewise, no, he was never on

Backpage's payroll?

A. He wasn't on his payroll --

Q. Thank you.

A. -- to receive a W-4. Or was it W-2?

Q. If you want to discuss W-4s and what that means, feel free

to do it on redirect. For right now, please answer my question

about payroll. Okay?

Now, was -- to your knowledge, did Mr. Brunst ever

hold an operational position at Backpage?

You know that he was listed on documents as a CFO.

Did he ever act as an operating CFO at Backpage?

A. Can I have a time frame, because his role changed?

Q. Well, my question is ever, and my question is about

operational. We're going to look at documents where he was

listed as an ultimate business owner. And when he signed, it

was CFO of Backpage or other newspapers.

My question, if you can focus on it, is, did he ever

hold an operational position at Backpage?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Foundation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: Yes, he did.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Okay. We'll explore that later. We'll explore that answer

later.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 99 of 105
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

11:55:36

11:55:58

11:56:19

11:56:23

11:56:29

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

100

Did Backpage -- let's just for foundation pick a time

frame. Let's talk about prior to 2013.

Did Backpage have an in-house controller?

A. What date again was that?

Q. Prior to 2013.

A. We had an accountant.

Q. Okay. Who was that accountant?

A. Their time -- which time frame? They were --

Q. Prior to 2013. If it'll help you, prior to Nathan Kopecky

being hired in 2013, my question is, who was in -- who was in

charge of accounting, controller actions at Backpage?

MR. RAPP: I'm going to object as to foundation.

Prior to 2013 when?

THE COURT: Yeah. Perhaps just confine that --

MR. LINCENBERG: Let's just use the --

THE COURT: Okay. Can I finish --

MR. LINCENBERG: Yeah.

THE COURT: -- what I'm saying?

MR. LINCENBERG: Yeah.

THE COURT: Can you just confine whatever the time

period is --

MR. LINCENBERG: Sure.

THE COURT: -- in your question, please.

MR. LINCENBERG: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 100 of 105
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

11:56:43

11:57:00

11:57:13

11:57:35

11:57:49

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

101

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Let's take 2011. In 2011, who was the person who was doing

the accounting at Backpage?

A. I can't be sure. There were at least three separate

accountants that I could recall.

Q. Okay. What names do you recall?

A. Jess Adams. There was an Adrianna. And then there was

another individual. I just can't -- his name doesn't come to

mind right now.

Q. Okay. Jess Adams was a name we heard before. I think you

identified him as a person who reported to Mr. Spear; is that

right?

A. It was my understanding that he reported to Mr. Spear and

Mr. Brunst.

Q. Okay. And when you were interviewed by the government

multiple times, did you ever review an interview report in

which you stated that Mr. Adams reported to Mr. Brunst?

A. Did I --

Q. Let me rephrase it.

A. Yes.

Q. Let me rephrase it.

Prior to your testimony in this trial, did you ever

tell these prosecutors in your 30-plus interviews that

Mr. Adams reported to Mr. Brunst?

A. I'm not sure. I would have said that he -- the primary

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 101 of 105
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

11:58:04

11:58:12

11:58:21

11:58:38

11:59:04

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

102

report would be Scott Spear.

Q. Okay. As to anything else, you're just not sure.

Is that your testimony?

A. No the -- my experience was in talking to Jess Adams.

Q. Wait, wait, wait. My question is, and you're not sure

whether you said anything else in your prior reports, in your

prior interviews?

A. Are we talking about the prior reports?

Q. Yeah.

A. Yes. I --

Q. Okay.

A. I don't have that in front of me.

Q. Fair enough.

Do you know of -- let's just focus on --

MR. LINCENBERG: Well, let's -- let's put up

Exhibit 6243, which is in evidence.

I ask for permission to publish. This was a -- I

think an organizational chart that Mr. Cambria used.

THE COURT: Yes. And once you're done with this, we

can take our lunch recess.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. It's kind of difficult to

read. Let's, if we can, first, maybe blow up the middle of

this organizational chart. A little more so it includes

everything under Mr. Larkin. Oh, it does include everything.

Okay. I'm sorry. Go ahead and -- there we go.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 102 of 105
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

11:59:25

11:59:43

11:59:47

11:59:53

12:00:03

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

103

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. All right. I believe that Mr. Cambria showed you this

organizational chart. And this organizational chart notes

Mr. Larkin is the CFO -- CEO; Mr. Spear is the -- a vice

president; Scott Tobias, Ruxton Group and Backpage.

And was it your understanding that in this time period

Backpage reported up through Mr. Spear ultimately to the CE- --

CEO, Jim Larkin?

MR. RAPP: Objection. Foundation as to which time

period this is.

MR. LINCENBERG: I believe I --

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Do you recognize this as an organization --

THE COURT: Well, let me -- let me rule on the

objection.

MR. LINCENBERG: I'm sorry, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay. I'm sorry.

THE COURT: One more question, and then we'll take our

lunch break.

MR. LINCENBERG: Okay.

BY MR. LINCENBERG:

Q. Do you -- do you recognize this as the organizational chart

in the 2011 time period?

A. It looks like an organization chart. I just don't think

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 103 of 105
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

12:00:12

12:00:51

12:01:17

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

104

I've seen it before.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. LINCENBERG: Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Members of the jury, we will take our

45-minute lunch break at this time. Again, just remember the

admonition. And be prepared to come back into court at quarter

till the hour.

So with that, please all rise for the jury.

(Jury not present at 12:00 p.m.) can.

THE COURT: All right. Please be seated.

And let me just make one inquiry with counsel. Last

evening I received a -- by email an exhibit -- Defense

Exhibit 6250 and a redacted version, 6013.

Did the government receive those exhibits?

MR. RAPP: We did, Your Honor? Yes.

THE COURT: Okay. I just wanted to make sure.

All right. We'll stand in recess.

THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: All rise.

(Proceedings recessed at 12:01 p.m.)

---oOo---

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 104 of 105
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

CARL FERRER - CROSS-EXAMINATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

105

C E R T I F I C A T E

I, CATHY J. TAYLOR, 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 27th day of

September, 2023.

/s/Cathy J. Taylor

Cathy J. Taylor, RMR, CRR, CRC

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1832 Filed 09/27/23 Page 105 of 105