k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

20

being paid, and in particular omitted documentation relating to
purported loans associated with Robert Kowalski,
Mr. Kasprowicz, Mr. Krejza, Mr. Matczuk, and others.

Finally, our evidence would show that in
December 2017, the bank failed, and that there was
approximately $66 million in non-performing loans.

And in addition to examination of the bank's assets,
that the loan -- there was also liability, and there were at
least ten account holders, primary CD holders, who had deposits
at Washington Federal and suffered losses that were not -- over
the insurance limit at the FDIC.

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. -- is that it, Mr. Netols?

MR. NETOLS: It is, your Honor, yes.

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Corvite, did you hear
everything that Mr. Netols just said?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Anything that he said that you
disagree with?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Then how do you plead to Count 1 of
the fourth superseding indictment?

THE DEFENDANT: Guilty, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. I'11 accept your plea of
guilty. I will hold off on starting the probation officer's

report since you have agreed to postpone your sentencing until



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

14

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor. Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, as far as the appellate rights
are concerned, you're waiving all appellate issues that might
have been available if you had exercised your right to trial,
and also acknowledging that you have the right to appeal your
conviction. If the government makes that motion for downward
departure pursuant to 5K1.1, then you're also waiving your
right to appeal your conviction and any pretrial rulings by the
Court and any part of the sentence, and that even includes the
order of restitution, and that's because of the concessions
that the government would make in that 5K1 departure.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Now, if the government makes the motion
for downward departure, you're also waiving your right to
challenge your conviction and sentence in any future, what we
call collateral attack or future challenge. That's a motion
that we call a habeas petition, maybe you've heard the term, or
one pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, 2255. Now, that
waiver doesn't apply to a claim of involuntariness or
ineffective assistance of counsel. And it also won't prohibit
you from seeking a reduction of your sentence if there's a
change in the law that is directly applicable to you and it has
been made retroactive by Congress or the Supreme Court or the

Sentencing Commission.



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

THE DEFENDANT: Yes. Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Do you want any more time to review it?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Are you satisfied with
Mr. Whitney's representation?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Whitney, any reason to question
her competence, sir?

MR. WHITNEY: No, Judge.

THE COURT: Okay. Any reason, Mr. Netols?

MR. NETOLS: No, your Honor. I've had the opportunity
to speak with Ms. Corvite extensively on a number of occasions.
I have no reason to believe she's not competent.

THE COURT: Okay. All right. I'm going to accept
your plea of guilt -- I'm sorry. Why did I even say that? I'm
going to find that you are competent to enter into this plea
agreement -- must be a Monday morning, right -- I'm going to
find you are competent to enter into this plea.

And now let's return to the document.

So you've been charged in the fourth superseding
indictment in this case, in Counts 1 and 2, with conspiracy to
commit offenses against the United States.

And you've also been charged with making false entries
in the books of a financial institution. That's Counts 5 and

6.



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

21

after the co-defendants. And it's going to be a little while
before they are going to be sentenced, so I'll hold off on
that.

One last thing that I wanted to go over with you.
We're here today by WebEx. We're doing all of this by
computer. That's because we still have this pandemic occurring
and people still getting sick, and we're trying hard to prevent
everyone from getting sick.

Have you agreed today to do this change of plea by
video?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. And did you talk with your attorney
about that before you agreed?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. All right then. We will not give
you a sentencing date. What I'll do, I think, is just --
Mr. Netols will keep me apprised of when to bring you back in.
In the meantime, whatever conditions of pretrial release that
you're on will be the same conditions until we see each other
again. Okay?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor, okay.

THE COURT: Okay. Stay well.

THE DEFENDANT: Thank you.

THE COURT: Anything else, Mr. Whitney, that I can

help you with?



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

18

that over a long period of time, Ms. Corvite was basically
being instructed by Mr. Gembara to falsify records, and that,
while initially the changes could have been interpreted as
basically corrections of records, it became clear over the time
because the corrections were always consistent with the written
records of the bank and always to the benefit of the bank that
Mr. Gembara was instructing her to falsify records.

In particular, the evidence would show, with respect
to the records that were being provided by consultants, that
one of the consultants, Consultant A, would need -- would be
reviewing records showing the maturity dates of loans, and
because, of course, what the evidence would show is that these
loans were essentially not really loans, they were
documentations to basically conceal embezzlements. These loans
were never maturing. And so the maturing dates would always
have to be altered to conceal the embezzlements, in particular
the embezzlements to Mr. Kowalski. And that with respect to
one of the overt acts that's charged, we would prove that on
May 30, 2013, defendant sent consultant an email that falsely
represented the maturity dates of a number of loans related to
Robert Kowalski.

The evidence would also show that there was -- the
defendant was involved in providing false information to the
FDIC, and that would be in the part of call reports. And,

again, the evidence would show, based on defendant's admissions



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

10

the applicable guideline sentence in an amount to be determined
at the time of sentencing. Mr. Whitney can recommend any
sentence he thinks is appropriate, but the decision to depart
from the guidelines rests solely with me.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: So if the government doesn't move the
Court for this cooperation departure under the guideline 5K1.1,
then both parties will be free to recommend any sentence. And
I will sentence you under those factors that I mentioned a
little while ago under 3553 as well as the sentencing
guidelines without any downward departure. But that does not
allow you to withdraw your guilty plea.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. So I'm not a party to this
agreement. This is between you and the government.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes. Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, regarding restitution, you are
going to be obligated to pay restitution. That amount will be
determined by me at the time of sentencing, and it will be a
part of the judgment and conviction order. It will be together
jointly held with your co-defendants in this case.

Is that your understanding?



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

those factors will include the seriousness of the offense; the
need to promote respect for the rule of law; the need to avoid
sentencing disparities that are unwarranted; the need to take
into account your history and characteristics about you that
would include any criminal history and whether you might commit
a crime again; also your health, well-being, and other concerns
individually about you. And then I fashion a sentence that
takes into account all of those factors, and I impose a
sentence at that point.

Is that your understanding as to how the sentencing
hearing will work?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. So let's take a look at those
sentencing guideline calculations.

The parties used the 2021 manual, which is the most
recent manual. And the base offense level pursuant to the
theft guideline and the conspiracy guideline is a base offense
level of 7.

And then it is increased 24 levels because the loss
amount is between 65 million and $150 million.

It's increased another two levels because ten or more
victims were involved.

And another two levels because the offense involved
sophisticated means, and you engaged in conduct involving

sophisticated means.



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

And this plea agreement has you pleading guilty to
Count 1. That is one of those conspiracy charges.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, that conspiracy charge has a
maximum penalty of five years in prison.

It carries a maximum fine under the law of $250,000 or
twice the gross gain or the gross loss, whichever one is
greater.

And also a term of supervised release of not more than
three years.

There's also restitution that is ordered by the Court.

And a $100 special assessment.

Now, under the law, that's the highest penalty that
you can receive by pleading guilty today.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. But, here, we also do something --
we make a calculation under what we call the sentencing
guidelines. Those are not mandatory, but they must be taken
into account prior to sentencing you.

So the way the sentencing hearing will work is that we
will calculate a sentencing guideline calculation. That will
give me an advisory range of a sentence for your conduct. And

then I'11 turn to the 3553 factors under the statute. And



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

19

and the testimony of other -- of the cooperating employees in
this case, that Mr. Gembara would instruct the defendant to
falsify the call reports. And these call reports were
falsified in a way to conceal the level of delinquencies to
make it appear that, to the extent that loans were delinquent,
there was only a couple hundred thousand dollars of delinquent
loans, and they were all in the 30- to 90-day range. In
reality, the records show that there were many loans that were
more than 90 days delinquent, and particularly there were
millions of loans -- millions of dollars in loans that were
more than 90 days delinquent.

Finally, the evidence would show that defendant was
involved in providing false information to the OCC, and that
was in the form of falsifying a trial balance. And in
particular, along with Ms. Mandujano, Ms. Iriondo, and
Ms. Torres, she was involved in the creation of false trial
loan balances. In particular, the final loan balance that was
the trial loan balance that was provided to the OCC in October
of 2017, and that those -- that trial loan balance was
falsified to basically remove loans that would have more
documents -- embezzlement that was being booked by his loans
that would reveal the criminal activity at the bank, and that
was in particular to change and revise certain loans, change
records which would conceal the identities of borrowers, loan

balances, payment histories, making it appear that loans were



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

be a probation officer who will draft a report. Your attorney
and the government attorney can challenge those. What you need
to understand is that this is a preliminary calculation.

Is that your understanding?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. But by pleading guilty to the one
count, which is capped at five years, that's the maximum
penalty that you could receive.

Is that your understanding?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, you're also agreeing to fully
and truthfully cooperate in any manner in which you're called
on to testify for the Northern District of Illinois U.S.
Attorney's Office. So it requires that you provide complete
and truthful information to any investigation -- criminal,
civil, or administrative proceeding -- and it also requires
that you postpone your sentencing until all of the other
defendants in this case are sentenced.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, at the time of sentencing, the
government intends to make known to me the extent of your
cooperation. And if they believe that you have continued to
provide full and truthful cooperation, then they're going to

move the Court to depart downward and impose a sentence below



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

Vv.

ROSALLIE C. CORVITE,

Defendant.

EASTERN DIVISION

Docket No. 19 CR 00226-3

Chicago, Illinois
May 23, 2022
9:44 a.m.

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS - Change of Plea
BEFORE THE HONORABLE VIRGINIA M. KENDALL

APPEARANCES : (Via WebEx Videoconference)

For the Government:

For the Defendant:

Court Reporter:

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE by
MR. BRIAN P. NETOLS

Assistant United States Attorney

219 South Dearborn Street, 5th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60604

DOUGLAS WHITNEY LAW OFFICES by

MR. DOUGLAS E. WHITNEY

120 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2000
Chicago, IL 60601

GAYLE A. McGUIGAN, CSR, RMR, CRR
Official Court Reporter

219 S. Dearborn Street, Room 2504
Chicago, IL 60604

312.435.6047
gayle_mcguigan@ilnd.uscourts.gov



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

12

Now, today, if we were to begin a trial, the way that
jt would work is that I would call in random individuals to sit
as prospective jurors on your case, and I would ask those
jurors whether they could be fair and impartial. That's what I
would want to know, and I would ask them different questions to
find that out.

If their answers to my questions showed that they
could not be fair or they could not be impartial, then I would
strike them for cause. Also during this process, both your
attorney and the prosecuting attorney would have what we call
peremptory challenges. Those are a handful of strikes that
they can use strategically to strike prospective jurors, and
they can do that so long as they don't do so ina
discriminatory way. So only after we all agreed on the 12
individuals who would sit as the jury on your case would I
swear them in, I would tell them that you're innocent until
proven guilty, and that it remains the government's burden to
prove you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

So the government would start its case-in-chief, and
they would call witnesses and they would put on evidence in
order to meet that burden. And during this process,

Mr. Whitney could cross-examine those witnesses because you
have a constitutional right to confront the accusers against
you. Also he might challenge the evidence by using the Federal

Rules of Evidence. He might say, for example, something is not



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

11

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Now, your attorney is going to reserve the
right to argue that restitution should be apportioned, meaning
that you should only get a portion of that restitution amount.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, as far as the sentence that
you're going to plead guilty to, this Count 1, at the time of
sentencing, the government intends to move to dismiss the
remaining counts against you in the fourth superseding
indictment and also move to get rid of the forfeiture
allegation.

Is that your understanding?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. They get rid of all of the other
superseding indictments also.

All right. Let's talk about your trial rights because
that's the most important thing that you need to understand
today as far as your trial rights that you would be waiving.

You do have a right to have a trial by a jury of your
peers. You have a right to be represented at trial by an
attorney. And you have a right to have a speedy trial. And if
you wanted to do so, we could set that trial. In fact, we have
a trial date coming up that we could set a trial for you if you

wanted.



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

It's then increased another four levels because it
jeopardized the safety and the soundness of a financial
institution.

Another two levels because you abused a position of
trust with Washington Federal.

Now, you would receive three levels off for pleading
guilty and doing so in a timely fashion.

And that means that, when you total all of that up,
you get a total offense level of 38.

Now, you have no criminal history, so you have a
criminal history category of I.

And the advisory guideline range is 235 to 293 months
in prison, plus that supervised release, any fine and
restitution that I might impose, and that $100 special
assessment.

Now, the statutory maximum, however, is what you are
going to plead to, which is the maximum for a conspiracy. So
even though the advisory guideline range has you up at 235
months to 293 months in prison, you're pleading only to one
count of a conspiracy, which is capped under the law at 60
months.

Is that your understanding?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, these guidelines are only

advisory in nature. And so what will happen is that there will



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

22

MR. WHITNEY: No, your Honor. Thank you.
THE COURT: Mr. Netols?
MR. NETOLS: No, your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay, everyone, have a good day.
MR. WHITNEY: You, too.
THE DEFENDANT: Thank you. You, too.
THE CLERK: Court is in recess until 11:30. You can
please log off.
(Proceedings concluded at 10:12 a.m.)
CERTIFICATE
I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript, to
the extent possible, of the record of proceedings in the
above-entitled matter, given the limitations of conducting

proceedings via videoconference.

/s/ GAYLE A. McGUIGAN March 14, 2023
Gayle A. McGuigan, CSR, RMR, CRR Date
Official Court Reporter



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Have you had any drugs in the last 24
hours?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Corvite, I have in front of me
a 23-page document. And it's entitled "Plea Agreement" in
United States versus America -- excuse me, United States of
America versus Ms. Corvite.

Have you reviewed this document with your attorney?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: When you were reviewing it with him, did
you ask him questions about it?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: And when you were talking with him, did he
explain things to you such as the difference between the
sentencing guidelines versus the maximum penalties under the
law?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. And he answered those questions
when you had them, right?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Do you think you had enough time to
review this document?

THE DEFENDANT: If I had enough time?

THE COURT: Yes, did you have enough time?



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

15

Is that your understanding?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Now, this is a public document. It
will be filed in the public record.

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Is anyone forcing you today to do this,
Ms. Corvite?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Are you making this decision to plead
after talking with your attorney, judging all of the facts and
circumstances, and you reached this decision voluntarily?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. I'm going to turn then to
Mr. Netols and have him tell me the evidence that he believes
will show that you're guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

MR. NETOLS: Yes, your Honor.

If this case were to proceed to trial, the
government's evidence would be in the form of the records of
Washington Federal, including the (indecipherable) records and
in particular also the email records of Washington Federal, the
testimony of the other employees of Washington Federal
(indecipherable) and the admissions of Ms. Corvite.

What the evidence would show is that she became

employed by the bank in approximately 2003. And by 2011, she



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

17

insurance, there was some oversight, and the FDIC relied on
things, including the call reports, to assess the bank's
performance.

We'd also prove that in approximately 2011, Washington
Federal was being supervised by The Office of the Comptroller
of the Currency. And that was in the form of basically
examinations in which the OCC would rely on and review
documents, including the call reports, trial loan balances,
which are supposed to disclose the actual condition of the
bank, including delinquencies, and complying with lending
limitations and the actual loan histories, and that the OCC
would also look at the documents generated by third parties,
including consultants.

The evidence would show that by about 2011 through
when the bank closed, Ms. Corvite was involved in a conspiracy
to essentially embezzle money from the bank and then conceal
those embezzlements with false documentations.

Her role was primarily just falsifying documents and
records that would conceal that money was being embezzled from
the bank.

And to be clear, Ms. Corvite didn't receive any of the
money that was embezzled from the bank. Her only compensation
was her salary.

Essentially, what the evidence would show -- and,

again, through her admissions and the testimony of others -- is



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help
you God?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

(Defendant sworn.)

THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Corvite, how old are you?

THE DEFENDANT: Forty-six.

THE COURT: What's your highest level of education?

THE DEFENDANT: Bachelor's degree in (indecipherable) .

THE COURT: In what?

THE DEFENDANT: Bachelor's degree in accounting.

THE COURT: Oh, in accounting. Okay. All right.

Have you ever suffered from any serious medical
conditions?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Do you take any medicines on a regular
basis?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Have you ever suffered from a mental
health condition?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Have you ever taken medication for mental
health?

THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Have you had any alcohol in the

last 24 hours?



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

(Proceedings had via videoconference. )

THE CLERK: Good morning. Court resumes session.

Case number 19 CR 226, Defendant 3, U.S. versus
Rosallie Corvite.

Please introduce yourself, starting with the
United States.

MR. NETOLS: Good morning. Brian Netols on behalf of
the United States.

THE COURT: Good morning.

MR. WHITNEY: Good morning, your Honor. Doug Whitney
for Ms. Corvite, who is present on the WebEx.

THE COURT: Good morning, Ms. Corvite.

Can you turn on your video?

THE DEFENDANT: Good morning, your Honor.

THE COURT: Good morning.

Okay. It's my understanding, Ms. Corvite, that you
intend to plead guilty today. And I have a plea agreement in
front of me that has been signed, I believe, by you and your
attorney.

In order for me to accept a plea of guilty, I need to
ask you some questions about your health, your well-being, and
your education so that I can determine if you are competent to
enter the plea. So I'm going to place you under oath, so
please raise your right hand.

Do you swear that the answers to my questions will be



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

13

relevant or that something is overly prejudicial, and I would
make those evidentiary calls using the Federal Rules of
Evidence.

Now, once the government completed its case-in-chief,
I would turn to you and I would say, "Do you want to put ona
case?" And, of course, you wouldn't have to because the
government would still have the burden to prove you guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt, so you could do nothing if you
wanted to. However, if you wanted to put on a case, you could.
You could call witnesses. You could testify. You could bring
in evidence. And if Mr. Whitney needed help getting that
evidence or those people here into the courtroom, I would issue
trial subpoenas to help him get those people and that evidence
here to court.

Also if you chose in this process not to testify, I
would tell the jury that they could make no inference of guilt
based upon you not testifying because you also have an absolute
right not to incriminate yourself.

Now, only after the entire trial process was completed
and the jury went into the jury room and deliberated and
reached the conclusion that you're guilty of Count 1 of the
fourth superseding indictment would I enter a judgment of
guilt. But today if you plead to this plea agreement, you're
waiving all of those trial rights.

Do you understand that?



k WO DN

olCOmUlUODWULUNCUCUCUCOUCUCUM

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

16

was the Chief Financial Officer who was responsible for
maintaining the bank's ledger and for any financial reports
including the --

THE COURT: Hold on, Mr. Netols. I think Gayle had
some trouble just then.

COURT REPORTER: You're breaking up just a little bit,
Mr. Netols.

The last thing I heard was: "She was the Chief
Financial Officer who was responsible for maintaining the
bank's ledger and for any financial reports, including the."

MR. NETOLS: I'm going to go closer. Is it better if
I'm closer? Because before I think it was problematic. Is it
better now?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. NETOLS: Okay. All right. She was responsible
for preparing these financial reports, including call reports
and reports -- information to auditors and consultants and
regulators.

And our evidence would show that Ms. Corvite was
actually -- she was trained by John Gembara. Her primary
experience was based on Mr. Gembara's instruction.

We would also show, based on the records of the
Federal -- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation that the FDIC
had insured Washington Federal at least as far back as 1989,

and that had basically oversight, in addition to providing the