1.Daniela — Direct (Part 2)
950 lines(In open court; outside the presence of the jury.)
THE COURT: Everyone in the audience may be seated.
All right. Appearances, please.
MS. PENZA: Moira Penza, Tanya Hajjar and Mark Lesko for the United States. Good morning, Your Honor. Also at counsel table is Special Agent Michael Weniger with the FBI and paralegal specialist Teri Carby.
THE COURT: Good morning everyone.
MR. AGNIFILO: Good morning, Your Honor. Marc Agnifilo, Teny Geragos, Paul DerOhannesian, Danielle Smith with Keith Raniere at counsel table.
THE COURT: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Please be seated.
Does anyone have anything before we start?
MS. PENZA: Just briefly, Your Honor, in response to your question on the Daubert hearing?
THE COURT: Yes.
MS. PENZA: We expect on Friday to file a very brief motion for reconsideration. We believe that the need for the Daubert hearing may be obviated by a brief supplemental report that Dr. Hughes is putting together. We'll submit that on Friday, but we would be prepared to go forward with the Daubert hearing next week otherwise.
THE COURT: Well, that would be on Tuesday because we don't have court on Tuesday.
MS. PENZA: Understood, Your Honor.
THE COURT: So what I would like to do is by next Monday at noon, I would like a response from the defense so we can make a decision as to what to do.
MR. AGNIFILO: That's fine, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Is that all right?
MR. AGNIFILO: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much.
All right. Daniela is on direct, correct?
MS. PENZA: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Let's move forward. Let's bring the witness into the courtroom.
MS. PENZA: Thank you.
(Witness resumes the stand.)
THE COURT: Please bring in the jury.
(Jury enters.)
THE COURT: Please be seated.
Good morning, members of the jury.
JURORS: Good morning.
THE COURT: All right. We will continue with the direct examination of Daniela.
You may proceed, Ms. Penza.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
DANIELA , called as a witness, having been previously duly sworn, was further examined and testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Good morning, Daniela.
THE COURT: By the way, you are still under oath. Do you understand?
MS. PENZA: Daniela, last week, we ended by talking about your sister Camila. While your sister Camila was under 18, did she ever have any medical issues?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain?
DANIELA: She had -- she had appendicitis. She was, she had appendicitis and she had to have a surgical, severe surgical procedure when she was -- it was around 2007, early 2007.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember how old Camila was at the time?
MS. PENZA: You said it was appendicitis. Do you remember what actually happened?
DANIELA: Yes, I was with her. We were together in the house and she had pain. She had pain and I, I remember at the time I thought maybe it was because of laxatives or things she was taking at the time because she was taking a lot of things to lose weight and she had been complaining about pain.
I think I remember, like, my, my parents were in town but they were at an intensive. They were away from the house. We were alone all day, and she had been complaining about very severe pain to the point where she could not stand up straight, like she was bent with pain. And I remember talking to my mother and telling my mother and they took her to the hospital.
When they took her to the hospital, as I remember, they realized she had appendicitis but also that she had, she had waited too long. I remember thinking, wow, she went through a lot of pain because there was already -- there was a condition. It's actually not only inflamed but it explodes and it contaminates everything. So she had that already. That's what I remember.
MS. PENZA: And you said she had surgery?
MS. PENZA: What do you remember from the, about the surgery?
DANIELA: I remember, I remember it was very expensive. She didn't have health insurance. I remember it was long. We were worried and there was -- I remember her wound. I remember after the surgery, there was a big, like, a big hole in, in the, and it needed to be, like, drained every certain period of time like throughout the day.
MS. PENZA: Can you explain where on her body the wound was?
THE COURT: Abdomen.
THE COURT: You can stand up and show on your body where it was.
THE COURT: On the right side, correct?
DANIELA: And like a big slit. It was, like, a slit that was wide open. It was wide open. I remember my mom used to take -- may I sit down now?
THE COURT: Yes, you may sit.
DANIELA: It was very hard to see. It used to be, like -- it had white stuff and it was, like, blood-ish stuff and it had to be drained constantly because it had become infected so they would take, like, cotton and substances and, like, put it in and, like, to drain it and take all this stuff out. It was -- I remember Cami was in a lot of pain. She was in a lot of pain and my mom was able to do this. My grandfather had been a doctor and at some point in her life, she wanted to be a nurse but, but I remember thinking it would be hard to help her but it would be hard to be Cami with all that pain all the time because it took weeks and weeks and weeks for that to heal.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember how wide the wound was?
MS. PENZA: And did that create a scar?
MS. PENZA: Had you seen -- have you seen Camila's abdomen recently?
MS. PENZA: And does Camila still have that scar?
MS. PENZA: So if there is an image of Camila and her abdomen and that scar is not visible, how old would Camila have to be?
MR. AGNIFILO: I object to the form of the question.
THE COURT: Could you restate the question?
MS. PENZA: How old would Camila be if there's a picture of her abdomen and there's no scar showing?
MR. AGNIFILO: I object to the form of the question.
THE COURT: You'll have to ask it differently.
MS. PENZA: Daniela, you've seen Camila's abdomen?
MS. PENZA: You saw it before she had the surgery?
MS. PENZA: And you've seen it after the surgery?
MS. PENZA: Do you know -- if you saw an image of Camila where there is no scar on her abdomen, would you know how old she was?
MS. PENZA: How old would she be?
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, I'd like to move into evidence Government's Exhibit 1529 which was on consent of the defense.
MR. AGNIFILO: No objection.
THE COURT: I'm sorry. The number again? 1629?
MS. PENZA: 1529.
THE COURT: Without defense objection, correct?
MR. AGNIFILO: Yes, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Yes. Government Exhibit 1529 is received into evidence. You may publish it to the jury.
(So marked.)
MS. PENZA: Daniela, I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1529. Can you read the "from" and "to" lines on this e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes. This is from thegreathead@gmail.com on behalf of Daniela, Dani, something, at gmail.com, to Flintlock, kunterre@nycap.rr.com.
MS. PENZA: When was this e-mail sent?
MS. PENZA: And we talked about this before, but whose e-mail address is kunterre@nycap.rr.com?
MS. PENZA: And in your e-mails, would that e-mail address sometimes come up as "Flintlock"?
MS. PENZA: Why is that?
MS. PENZA: And the subject line says, "About VC." What is "VC"?
DANIELA: It stands for -- that's what Keith nicknamed my sister, Virgin Camila. Also, at times, he called her VC.
MS. PENZA: Now, this e-mail was sent on June 26, 2007. Last week when you were testifying, you talked about certain milestones in your relationship with the defendant. When was -- where does June 26, 2007 fit in?
MS. PENZA: Can you read this e-mail, please?
DANIELA: Yes.
I cannot tell VC because I technically don't know what is going on but if you could find a way, please tell her having an alarm set on her phone that reads PILL is not a good idea. Sorry to write to you about this, but with my parents here and VC otherwise off meds I think it is an unnecessary risk. D.
MS. PENZA: What did you mean in that e-mail? Can you explain that e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes. So my sister had an alarm on her phone to remind her to take the pill, birth control pill, and I was worrying for protecting Keith, my parents didn't know it was supposed to be a secret. I knew -- Cami didn't know I knew so that's what that e-mail is about.
MS. PENZA: Can you describe -- I'm sorry. One more question, Daniela.
This e-mail address, on June 26, 2007, how old was Camila?
MS. PENZA: Daniela, can you describe -- we've talked a little bit about your legal status in the United States. Can you describe what your siblings' status in the United States was?
DANIELA: Yes. So once they came, once they came in without my parents, their status was that they were on a visitor's visa, much like I had had before, and I believe at least once, they renewed it the way I used to, going back after six months, but after that, they overstayed their, their stay, their allowed stay, and their status expired and there was a time when they were in the country illegally in that way.
MS. PENZA: The decision to stay illegally in the United States, was anyone else in the NXIVM community ever involved in that as to your siblings?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain?
DANIELA: Yes. There were a few people involved but as I recall, the way in which they ended up extending or, rather, their stay expired is because they were offered help to extend, to ask for an extension on their visa, and through Keith and through a lawyer and through I remember at the time Kristin, they said they had hired people who would file an extension and that they were okay to stay. That ended up not being true. Nothing had been filed. So by the time that they realized and we realized, they were already illegally in the country.
MS. PENZA: Was there ever an instance where your brother Adrian planned to leave the United States because otherwise he was going to be overstaying?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain what happened?
MR. AGNIFILO: Your Honor, I'm sorry, I object unless the witness has personal knowledge of these things.
THE COURT: No, don't answer.
MS. PENZA: I can ask another question, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Why don't you ask another question.
MS. PENZA: Daniela, were you personally aware of the circumstance in which your brother was encouraged to stay in the United States once he was illegally here?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain, please?
DANIELA: Yes. My brother wanted to leave so as not to break the rules and he had a conversation with Keith.
MS. PENZA: Were you present for that conversation?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain where this conversation took place?
DANIELA: Yes. It took place at the gym during a volleyball night. He had -- as I remember, he had a plane to catch, he had his plane ticket and he wanted to leave, and Keith talked him out of it. He told him that he should stay, that it would be harder to come back if he left, that they had ways and they had people who could help him, you know, solve it without having to leave. And my, my brother presented quite a bit of resistance but in the end, he listened to Keith.
MS. PENZA: Was any of that night that you're talking about, was anybody else involved in those conversations with your brother?
DANIELA: Yes. Pam was there and she also talked to my brother about it at length. My brother really liked Pam, we all really liked Pam and listened to her.
MS. PENZA: And how about your -- how about your sister Camila, at what point were you aware that she was illegally in the country?
DANIELA: I don't remember the exact timing of that. I remember that there was a lawyer, all of the sudden, there was a lawyer involved and there was a big fuss about who had been at fault. I remember that Loreta had been involved, a lawyer called Jonathan had been involved and my parents got involved because, you know, nobody intended for that situation to happen. Somebody had not done their job. They had been promised that extensions would be filed and they weren't or they weren't done correctly, I don't know what the details were, but they were now illegally in the country and they had to figure that out.
MS. PENZA: Did you -- later, when you were in touch with Camila, when you were in touch with Camila later, did you later understand her to be out of status in the United States?
DANIELA: Yes. Yes. In fact, Cami never did leave the country again after that first overstay. She was too fearful to leave and not be able to come back and many strategies were devised and a lot of help was offered but she never became regular again with her status, legal status.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, may I have the ELMO just for the witness, please?
THE COURT: Go ahead.
MS. PENZA: Daniela, I'm showing you what's been marked for identification as Government Exhibit 1554. I'm going to show you the three pages to this document.
Are you familiar with this document?
MS. PENZA: We can squeeze in the middle little bit?
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, may I approach and show the document?
THE COURT: Yes, you may.
(Pause.)
MS. PENZA: Do you recognize it generally?
MS. PENZA: And can you just explain generally what this document is?
DANIELA: Yes. This is an exchange with lawyers and people from ESP who were supposed to be helping in the status of my siblings culminating with my father being aware that they're out of status.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, the government offers Government Exhibit 1554 into evidence.
MR. AGNIFILO: One second, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Sure.
(Pause.)
MR. AGNIFILO: I have no objection.
THE COURT: All right. Government Exhibit 1554 is received into evidence.
MS. PENZA: Thanks, Your Honor.
(So marked.)
MS. PENZA: Daniela, I'm showing you what is marked in evidence as Government Exhibit 1554. Turning to the -- turning to the third page, the e-mail, the letter of the e-mail, the signature block says Jonathan Ware, Esquire. Do you know who Jonathan Ware, Esquire is?
MS. PENZA: And turning to the second page, to the start of that e-mail that ends with his signature block, can you see the beginning of that e-mail?
MS. PENZA: And that's sent from Jonathan Ware. And who is it sent to?
DANIELA: To NSalzman, which is Nancy Salzman, @NXIVM.com, kristinandkeith@gmail.com, and an e-mail at sagitta.com.
MS. PENZA: What is sagitta.com?
MS. PENZA: And does your father have an e-mail address that ends in that?
MS. PENZA: And the e-mail is addressed to Hector, Nancy and Kristin, correct?
MS. PENZA: Can you read this e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes.
Hector, Nancy and Kristin, I hope you are all well. I'm writing this message at Lisa's request to follow up on the discussions I've had with her regarding the legal strategy for mitigating any potential negative consequences to Adrian and Camila in terms of their ability to return to the United States in valid immigration status. I want to make sure that we are in alignment on our approach.
I see two distinct issues which I feel should be approached separately. The first issue is using NXIVM's connections to people of influence in the government to assist in documenting the fact that Adrian and Camila became out of status because they did not timely receive notices of approval/requests for additional evidence and, therefore, should not be subject to any bar from returning to the U.S. I feel that this is an appropriate strategy.
There is a second issue of how to return Adrian and Camila to valid immigration status. In my professional option, our best bet given the options available to us at this time would be to seek USCIS approval for Adrian and Camila to return to the U.S., with Hector as L-2 dependents provided that we obtain a favorable adjudication of Hector's pending L-1 petition. Once Hector's petition is approved, we will be able to submit dependent petitions on behalf of Adrian, Camila and Adriana. Given our present timeline and the fact that USCIS requested additional evidence in connection with Hector's case, we should expect a decision in Hector's case sometime in early January. If everything runs smoothly, we could have Adrian and Camila back in the U.S. by the end of February, 1st of March.
MS. PENZA: So, at this time, Daniela, although it says "back in the U.S.," are Camila and Adrian actually in the United States?
DANIELA: Yes, I believe they are.
I feel that it would be undesirable from a strategy standpoint at this time for Adrian and Camila to seek readmission to the U.S. in B-1 status and want to make sure we are in alignment on this issue. If they do so, based upon my understanding of the family's immigration history, I felt they will encounter significant difficulty which will be difficult to overcome.
In 2004, Hector and Adriana were stopped at the border, questioned by U.S. Customs and Border Protection extensively and gave sworn statements to border protection officers. Their immigration file contains negative history which indicates the children were enrolled at one time in public school in New York. If this is correct, the children would have been in violation of their B-1 status. As a non-immigrant, one is not permitted to enroll in public school in the U.S.
Given the overstay situation, the government will scrutinize any attempt on their part to reenter the U.S. extremely closely. Both Adrian and Camila will likely be subject to detailed examinations and extensive questioning at the border about their prior activities in the U.S., Example, did they go to public school, did they work, why are they seeking re admission, et cetera.
In determining whether to readmit them to the U.S., USCIS will refuse to do so if it is determined that they violated their prior status. Provided Hector is admitted in L-1 status, we will have additional public policy arguments that the children should be admitted in order to keep the family together. We would not otherwise have these arguments if they seek admission in B-1 status.
MS. PENZA: Okay, Daniela. At this time, had your brother and sister, Adrian and Camila, had they been working for the NXIVM community?
MS. PENZA: Okay. What had Adrian been doing?
DANIELA: I know he had been working for Clare and I think he was at that point already part of the video team maybe.
MS. PENZA: What did that mean, being part of the video team?
MS. PENZA: Do you know how much he was working at that time?
MS. PENZA: How about Camila, what was she doing for work at this time?
MS. PENZA: Did she end up doing other work for the community as well?
DANIELA: At some point, she started working for rainbow. I don't remember the exact transition date for that.
MS. PENZA: Then there's another e-mail in the chain so the last e-mail started there and there's another e-mail. So I'm going to move to the beginning of that e-mail and can you start there.
DANIELA: Yes.
Hector, I hope you are well. I am writing to you to follow up my message of last week, which appears below. When I wrote this message last Friday, I was under the impression that Adrian and Camila had already left the U.S. I had a conversation with Loreta Garza last night, and I learned that they are still physically present in the U.S.
As a follow up to my conversation with Loreta, I want to make sure we are in alignment on our strategy. I also want to make sure that you clearly understand my recommendations and the potential implications for Adrian and Camila if they continue to remain in the U.S. I am significantly concerned that if they do not make plans to leave the U.S. immediately, it may have considerable long-term effects of their ability to return in the future in another valid status.
I want to reiterate this to make sure that you have a full understanding of the situation in case it wasn't clear from my earlier communications. Because we know that Adrian and Camila are now out of status, from a procedural standpoint, the only way for them to return to proper status is to have them leave the country and apply for reentry in another valid status. The longer they remain in the U.S. without being in proper status, the more difficult it will be for them to return. If they accrue more than 180 days in unlawful presence, which USCIS and State Department will most likely assert began as of the expiration date of their last B-1 extensions, they will be subject to a three-year bar from returning to the U.S.
Although I have been in contact with Steve Pigeon's office, who in turn has connections with Hillary Clinton, please do not make the mistake of thinking we can return Adrian and Camila to a valid status by appealing to these political connections.
MS. PENZA: Can I stop you for a second, Daniela.
Do you know who Steve Pigeon is?
MS. PENZA: Do you remember in what context you had heard his name?
DANIELA: Yes. I had heard it from the conversations between Keith and Kristin that were, you know, open cases, legal strategy.
MS. PENZA: And then can you read -- did you have an understanding of connections with the Clintons?
DANIELA: I heard a name mentioned. I did have an understanding of trying to gain, in gaining political connections and political favors through those connections.
MS. PENZA: And can you continue reading, please?
DANIELA: Yes.
In my professional opinion with 12 years of immigration practice, I do not view this as a viable strategy. These political connections can be very helpful to us, however, in liaising with USCIS, where the issue of the three year bar is concerned, if the USCIS asserts that Adrian and Camila are subject to the same when they apply for readmission. I feel this is our best approach in asking for Mr. Pigeon's assistance.
At this time, the best scenario for returning Adrian and Camila to valid status is:
Bullet point: Having them immediately return to Mexico. Another bullet point: Obtaining approval of your primary L-1 intracompany transferrer visa. Another bullet point: Subsequent to obtaining approval of your L-1 visa, filing for L-2 dependent visas on behalf of your children under 21, Adrian and Camila, and Adriana.
As I mentioned in my message below, in determining whether to readmit a non-immigrant to the U.S., a major factor the USCIS relies on is whether the visa holder maintained her/his prior immigration status, which would include departing on time when her/his visa expires or if the visa holder becomes aware that he or she is out of status. In my professional opinion, the best action Adrian and Camila can take at this time is to show good faith in complying with the terms of their earlier admittance in B-1 status by returning to Mexico and seeking reentry in another valid status.
I would much appreciate if -- I would much appreciate it if you could send me a return message just so I know you understand my recommendations. I will also be glad to answer any questions you may have. With warm regard, Jonathan.
MS. PENZA: And then did your father respond to the message?
MS. PENZA: And can you -- before we read the response, it's from your father to Jonathan Ware, is that correct?
MS. PENZA: And can you go through the e-mail addresses of the people who are copied?
DANIELA: Yes. So first one copied is my mother's e-mail address, theinnerwitch@gmail.com, the second is my brother Adrian's, dofito@gmail.com, the third is Camila's address, vcbaby@gmail and the fourth and last is Lisa Derks, lderks@nycap.rr.com.
MS. PENZA: Who is Lisa Derks?
DANIELA: Lisa Derks was a student in NXIVM who also ended up working or at least was working at the time in the so-called legal team with Kristin.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then can you read your father's e-mail address, your father's e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes.
It says: Jonathan, I understood what you wrote. I asked Lisa about the kids' B-1 visa extension expiration and no answer received yet. I am aware of the issue and forwarding this mail to the kids to immediately return to Mexico if no other choice is workable for the time being. I am on the road but tonight I will send you what I have about the USCIS request. So please send me an e-mail tomorrow to review USCIS request of info. Sincerely, Hector.
MS. PENZA: And was this e-mail then forwarded to anyone else?
MS. PENZA: Okay. Who forwarded the e-mail?
MS. PENZA: And it was forwarded on the same day that the original e-mail had been written?
MS. PENZA: And who was it forwarded to?
DANIELA: It's forwarded to me, my personal e-mail address, thegreathead@gmail.com, to my sister's Marianna's e-mail address, themightyrunner@gmail, to Pam Arstakaitis' e-mail address, vivajness@gmail.com, and to Keith's e-mail, keithraniere@yahoo.com.
MS. PENZA: Is that another e-mail address that the defendant used?
MS. PENZA: I'd like to go back to the time after you crossed over illegally into the United States.
At that time, can you describe any changes in your relationship with the defendant?
DANIELA: Yes. I -- our relationship became much closer. I was fully immersed in the community around Keith, the inner circle, and I didn't, I didn't realize fully at the time but I was completely dependent.
MS. PENZA: Can you explain what you mean by that?
DANIELA: Well, at first, it wasn't evident because there was -- it just wasn't evident. It was just, like, normal, it was just spending more time together and while everything was going well, there was no, there were no signs of the clear dependency that I had, but as time progressed, it would be, to put it mildly, brought to my attention, but more accurately held over my head, the fact that they, they had brought me into the country, that I was there illegally, that I was a liability, and so it became a huge thing they held over me.
MS. PENZA: So would the story of having brought you over illegally come up frequently?
MS. PENZA: In what sorts of contexts?
DANIELA: In two different kinds of contexts. One would be the playful triumphant, like, we did this thing and we were victorious context and that was sort of in the setting of playful banter.
MS. PENZA: And who would participate in that?
DANIELA: The people in the inner circle who were aware. So obviously Keith, Kathy Russell, Pam would be there, people who were aware of what had happened and how it had gone down. In stark contrast would be a completely different context in which it would come up. It would come up on, when I wasn't doing my program or I wasn't doing something that I, they thought I should be doing when, you know, really as an act of discipline, in any kind of act of discipline, it would be brought up that I was there thanks to them bringing me into the country.
MS. PENZA: Now, when you first came back, I think you talked a little bit about the fact that you were now spending a lot of time at 3 Flintlock, is that right?
MS. PENZA: And can you describe what the day-to-day conversations are like in 3 Flintlock?
DANIELA: In general, in the house, all right, so at the time in 3 Flintlock, there are several people living there. So in one room, it's Karen Unterreiner, in another room, it's Kristin Keefe, in the third bedroom there, Pam Cafritz lived with my sister Marianna, and Keith sort of lived downstairs in the coach and like migrated around spending time with different women, but that was, like, his control center.
The day-to-day was, so early in the morning, usually, the first conversation as I remember would be Kristin. Kristin would be coming downstairs in her bathrobe, rollers in her head, preparing the coffee, and would sit down to report to Keith all of the things, the legal things that were happening and he would give her instructions. Like, that was one of, like, the main events of the morning, he would be there for that. There were other times maybe throughout the day she would stop by and they would talk about something, but that was the allotted time they had to review this.
In the morning, he also did the stock market. Keith had, like, a lot of phone conversations doing stuff with the stock market. I remember "futures" and "OJ" and words like that that were said over the phone and it sounded like the person he was working with, like, they were very friendly.
MS. PENZA: Were you able to hear from those conversations who he was talking to?
DANIELA: Yes. There was a man named Yuri. He's the one that he, he was talking to a lot and it seemed to be very friendly. He'd ask him about his family and they would have very friendly conversations.
Karen was kind of just like there briefly in the morning and worked outside all day long at the center, came back late at night, watched some TV, went to her room. She was pretty stealthy and didn't have a big presence in the house.
Marianna and Pam were almost always upstairs. He would go up there when he wanted to sleep. That's what I understood.
(Continued on next page.)
BY MS. PENZA: (Continued.)
MS. PENZA: What other types of -- I think you talked a little bit about them last week, but the other types of categories of conversations that would happen in the house.
DANIELA: There would be people that would come. So I would say there were times where there was, like, curriculums discussed or trainings discussed and sometimes people would stop by and talk about that, particularly when there was an intensive going on or there was, like, a new release of, like, new curriculum he would be, like, debriefing after, like, every session.
That would happen -- he was around at the house to receive phone calls from Nancy or from whomever. It was mostly Nancy who was releasing the new material and then at the end of the day she would stop by and they would have a big -- they called it debriefing. These were the things about curriculums. As I said before there was either playful banter or very -- very sexual, like, talk, which, you know, was only when certain people were around that they could have that. What else? There were disciplining talks and arguments with women. I would say that's a whole separate category.
So, most of that happened on the phone. At least that's what I presenced (sic) that's what I could see of it. It would be very long conversations, very rough conversations to discipline someone, you know, what they're doing wrong and you shouldn't say that, think that, just disciplining.
MS. PENZA: So, the conversations are with the defendant and the woman who needs discipline or with someone else who is going to do the disciplining?
DANIELA: Actually, both. So, when a person -- when a woman was going off -- when a woman was having an issue, when something was wrong, there was often, like disciplining one-on-one, so it would be a conversation just with one-on-one, sometimes, and I imagined always that if the issue was large enough or if Keith could not handle it, he would call on other women. So Lauren or Pam or Nancy so that they -- he would have a conversation with them about the issue that the woman was having so that they would go and basically execute the disciplining as opposed to him doing it personally.
MS. PENZA: At this time what are you doing or work in the community?
DANIELA: At that time I was doing odd jobs here and there. As I mentioned before, my mom told me about a few jobs. I found a way to make a little money. There was a point when I did a website for Pam, for Jness, and I got paid a good amount of money for that and it lasted a long time.
MS. PENZA: How much was it?
MS. PENZA: How did she pay it?
DANIELA: Cash. That lasted me for a long time. And somewhere in there there was a transition because I had no way to make money. I had no job and I had no status that that's when the book reports were presented to me as here, you can make money doing this.
MS. PENZA: Were you paid for any of those?
MS. PENZA: Were you doing other work around -- were you doing other types of work?
DANIELA: Yes, I was doing a lot of activities, a lot of not-for-pay work. As I mentioned before, there was not only, like, the executive library, the organizing, there were also passing projects. So, for example, there would be a video that I needed to transcribe or there would be V Week coming up and there was a video that needed to be edited and I would spend days and days and hours and hours editing that. So there was always a project that needed, you know, to be worked on and, so, I was doing all of those odd things.
MS. PENZA: Other than the money for Jness website, were you paid for any of that?
MS. PENZA: And then you mentioned, I think before, you also would do cleaning and organizing?
MS. PENZA: I think you also talked about your recording of the defendant; is that right?
MS. PENZA: How would that actually take place while you were at Flintlock?
DANIELA: Well, when I'm at Flintlock, it would be turning on and off the recorder when things were happening. Many times it would be during walks. It would be he's walking with somebody else and I would go along and record. That would be each recording. And then it became a little more formalized and there was video recording and that was, more scheduled. So if someone was going to have a class or he was going to have a specific interaction. If I wasn't around -- if I was around I would just go and do it. If I wasn't around, they would call me over to go and do that.
MS. PENZA: Were you paid for any of that?
MS. PENZA: At Flintlock would you record the defendant the entire time, like basically all day?
MS. PENZA: Okay. So what were the exceptions?
DANIELA: The exceptions were anything related -- anything related to legal stuff. When there was, for example, the interactions with Kristin. At first, I would outright be instructed to stop recording and eventually I got it. Meaning if she's around, that's the type of conversation that would happen and I would stop recording. Really, that was the one major exception.
MS. PENZA: Would anyone else have been present on these, what you're calling legal conversations other than you with the defendant and Kristin -- and that's Kristin Keefe?
DANIELA: Yes, Kristin Keefe. Yeah, a few people would be around that were allowed listen to that type of stuff or that participated. The only ones that I observed were Nancy Saltzman -- Karen could be there if those conversations happened, but she basically turned out -- but she was okay to hear those things, but that would also participate Nancy.
MS. PENZA: Now, just to go back to the stock market conversations for a second, did you ever observe the defendant's reactions to any of those conversations?
MS. PENZA: And was there a time when he was upset?
MS. PENZA: And so what was he saying?
DANIELA: I remember, and it was not just on one occasion. It was some separate occasions. Like, there would be, like, the sense that what's -- almost like a conspiracy, that there was a conspiracy going on like that something had gone wrong and he was either speaking to Yuri about it or speaking to somebody else about it as to this is strange; this should not have gone wrong, there's something else there. And I don't remember specifically, like, what it was. I wasn't paying very much attention to it, but I did have a distinct understanding of those exchanges.
MS. PENZA: Did you understand anything about how much money the defendant was making or losing?
MS. PENZA: Now, you talked about -- you've been using the word "legal" and, like, these legal conversations. Can you describe in a little more detail what types of conversations you would be there for between the defendant and Kristin Keefe?
DANIELA: Yes. So, when I say "legal," I mean a few different things. So -- and they were mostly with Kristin Keefe so there were quite a few that it was, like, the three of them, Nancy also; not just Nancy and Keith would talk about it. But mostly Kristin because she lived there. So there were different types. One of the types was I knew they had a group of lawyers. So Kristin, as I understood, was in charge of, like, making sure that filings were done for the different cases that they had, different documentation -- just, like, very procedural stuff. And she would be working with Nxivm's lawyers on that and she would report on the results.
And there was, like, an upper level of the lawyers or just political figures, I wasn't sure, that they had. But that was more, like, almost, like -- almost like PR. It was almost like, they were -- as I understood, they were lobbyists. That's how I can describe what I understood at the time; that they were there to gain them political favor. To get them to succeed in the cases they were bringing up or just to lobby for the company.
A separate type of legal matter that they handled was, I would say, quite the opposite from legal. It would be the illegal stuff. And the illegal stuff would be they hired, like, agencies, I don't know -- like agents do, or, like, a PI agency or something like that. And the discussion about that would be what information to get from whom, how much it would cost, if they got it, if she reviewed it, what that meant. And, in that, get access to people's e-mails accounts, get access to people's records. So all of that -- all of that I would clump under the legal part of legal. And I think that's it.
MS. PENZA: Did you ever remember -- were there ever any discussions about obtaining people's bank records?
MS. PENZA: What do you remember about that?
DANIELA: I remember they were going back and forth, Kristin asking him who they should get stuff for -- like, on. I remember -- I don't know why I remember. I remember they were, like, faxing the information back and forth. I remember, like, a fax. And, I remember them discussing -- like, he would ask how much is this, how much is that. It was bank records and it was, like, information, like personal, like, personal records on different people, yes.
MS. PENZA: Who was deciding -- in these conversations who was deciding who there was -- who was going to be investigated?
MR. AGNIFILO: Object to the form of the question.
THE COURT: Well, the answer is out. So, overruled.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: The defendant would?
MS. PENZA: And can you explain a little bit about how that back and forth would work?
DANIELA: Yes. So, the interactions were obviously Kristin, like, was actually out in the field, like, doing the work. Like, she was is the one actually doing the things, but she would also -- she would always be there going back to Keith and reporting on what was happening. So he was fully aware of everything that was happening and he would be the one thinking about the things. And then when they interacted, clearly she presented certain options and this is going on, this is going on with so-and-so. So it would be all of the specifics and Keith would be the one do decide. So he would have the last say.
He would say, okay, I think you're right I think you should do this or he would come up to the idea or he would tell her you should try to do this or you should try to get that. But it was very clear to me that it was Keith that was making all of the decisions.
MR. AGNIFILO: Your Honor, could we have a sidebar for a second?
THE COURT: Sure
(Sidebar held outside of the hearing of the jury.)
(Continued on next page.)
(The following sidebar took place outside the hearing of the jury.)
THE COURT: Okay, go for it.
MR. AGNIFILO: This general conclusion that she's saying, well, Keith would do. If she wants to refer to a specific conversation in a specific point in time when she claims she and Keith were speaking, that's one thing but for her to just editorialize generally about her conclusions about generic conversations without any specificity to time is improper and I object to the entire line.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, I think that we have set the stage of when the time period is. She's discussing the time period when she has come back from -- from crossing the border. She's laid the foundation that she's basically sitting there day in and day out. I don't think it's fair for her to describe a specific conversation. She's described this is literally every day. It's back and forth.
MR. AGNIFILO: Keep it down.
MS. PENZA: He reprimanded me.
MR. AGNIFILO: I did not reprimand it. I suggest that we speak softly.
THE COURT: Okay. Anything else?
MS. PENZA: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have anything more on this line of questioning?
MS. PENZA: There's a little bit more, Your Honor. She's about to talk about her own involvement in these very types of things.
THE COURT: The point being made is that a general discussion -- you've laid a foundation, but try to be as specific as possible as to when certain things happened. You know, we have the general idea that she was taping, audio taping, the discussions with Kristin and the general framework of what they were discussing. But, if you could, be specific as to certain issues. Try to get details as to when they happened. That would be helpful.
MS. PENZA: I will do that, Your Honor.
MR. AGNIFILO: Thank you.
THE COURT: You're welcome. Let's move on.
(Sidebar ends.)
(Continued on next page.)
(Continuing.)
THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: The time frame that we were just talking about when you would hear these back and forth conversations between the defendant and Kristin Keefe, can you try and put a little bit -- can you put bookends on that?
DANIELA: Yes. So that would be when I was clearly still having a talking conversation and relationship with Keith. So that would be before the fall of 2006. That would be the top bookend. And the bottom bookend would be -- I mean, I started hanging out at Flintlock before 2004. But it really -- I became more to be approved for everything after I crossed illegally.
So, firm bookends I would say from late 2004 to late 2006. A little bit -- I was still around before 2004, but I don't have, a firm, like, lapse of time for that.
MS. PENZA: Did you have an understanding of why Kristin was the person who was out in the field?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain?
DANIELA: Well, she was very smart. She was very loyal to Keith and she -- she had conversations with me and Pam about it. It seemed to me at the time she considered herself, like -- like she was fighting for the mission. I remember she once told me she would take a bullet for Keith. Like she was a front line of, like, everything that they were doing that she was -- so I think she prided herself in -- in being able to help and -- but you know she also was very smart and very, very able. That's what I saw.
MS. PENZA: Did the defendant -- where would she go? When you say in "the field." Did you have an understanding of where she was going?
MS. PENZA: What would she say?
MR. AGNIFILO: Your Honor, I'm going to object to this as hearsay. Overruled.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
DANIELA: She -- I mean, she would go out and, like -- as I understood it from the conversations that I heard and what she would talk about it. She would like recounting -- Kristin was a great storyteller and when we were in the close circle and mostly just when it was Pam, like, it was when it was that hermetic, but those stories were obviously very sensitive. She loved telling stories of what she would do and especially when it was, like, borderline -- like getting illegal and something she was trying to achieve and she would recount it.
As I understood, she used to go and see the lawyers and she was present in the court things and all of that, like, legal stuff. There was also, like, as I said this other part that wasn't just, you know, this strict procedural stuff.
So, as I understood it, she, like, went around, you know, like, doing little missions to gather information, to find out things. She seemed to be very good at that and that was part of what she was doing.
MS. PENZA: Did she report on those missions to the defendant?
DANIELA: Yes. He was the first person, like, she always went back and, like, reported to him. Even conversations she had with Nancy she would go and report to him.
MS. PENZA: Did the defendant ever go out into the field?
MS. PENZA: Did you have an understanding of why?
DANIELA: Yes. Yes. And this was with everything. His name was on nothing. He would not ever be the one executing any of his plans but with the legal stuff in particular there was -- like, there was a distinct awareness between everybody involved so there was no mistake that some of what they were doing was illegal. There was the distinct awareness of that. There was full --
MR. AGNIFILO: Your Honor, I object.
THE COURT: Sustained. You will disregard the last answer.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: When you say -- Daniela, how did you come to the understanding that there was an awareness of what was happening was illegal?
MR. AGNIFILO: I object to the whole line, Judge.
THE COURT: Well, you can answer that.
DANIELA: There would be a focus on protecting Keith and him not be the one to -- to be, like, that's where conversations with Kristin about she would take a bullet for Keith. She was the one who would take the fall if something happened, like, and she was willing to do all of that for the mission and Keith. That's how it was so clear that she knew that -- they knew what they were doing -- that some of what they were doing at least was not kosher.
MS. PENZA: Did you, yourself, have conversations with the defendant -- and we'll go into the details in a minute, but did you, yourself, have conversations with the defendant about illegal activities?
MS. PENZA: You mentioned other types of information that the defendant and others were trying to gather on people and you mentioned passwords. Can you explain that a little bit more?
DANIELA: Yes. So there was a time when they were trying to get access to a woman's e-mail address. I remember who this person was and her name was Kristin Snyder and Keith wanted to gain access to her e-mail account because something happened and he had a theory and he was trying to disprove it, like, disprove what had happened.
And, as I remember, Kristin had found a service where they could pay a certain very large amount and they could obtain the password for any e-mail address so I remember that attempt.
MS. PENZA: What do you remember about those discussions specifically?
DANIELA: I remember the -- about those discussions specifically, I remember it was a very large amount of money they were willing pay for a password.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember the amount?
DANIELA: $24,000 was the amount. I remember -- that was the shocking part for me. I remember the situation was that -- and it was going all around, like, ESP the center because this woman had taken some ESP classes and what I remember, what I understood this woman was a student from Alaska or had come from Alaska and she had disappeared and she had left a note attributing, I think, like a suicide or something like that to the company and that was obviously very destructive to the company.
And I think Keith believed this was a plot to create negative publicity for ESP and that she was alive, so they were trying to gain access to her e-mail to prove that she was alive.
MS. PENZA: When you say the defendant believed that, did the defendant actually say that to you?
MS. PENZA: And he would be saying that in these conversations with Kristin as well?
MS. PENZA: How long was -- how long was the time period of this back and forth about Kristin Snyder and her password?
MS. PENZA: Now, do you remember anyone else that the defendant was trying to gather information on?
MS. PENZA: Who stands out?
MS. PENZA: Who was Rick Ross?
DANIELA: Rick Ross was a person who had -- I believe he, like, was the programmer and had zoned in on ESP and had gotten his hands on some of the curriculum and was, like, publishing it and they had a case, like, a big case. I think I remember like on copyright or something against him. There was Toni Natalie who understood had been in business with Keith, had been part of, like, an older CBI and either another business and on that business he had stolen from Keith so I don't know who was suing who, but they had some legal stuff open with her. There was a lawyer who at first was working with them who then became part of the list of enemies, of people they were trying to get information on and his name was Joe O'Hara.
So, Joe O'Hara, like, first was on ESP's side and was working with them and then I don't even remember the transition point, but all of a sudden he had done something bad and he was out to get them so he was also part of that group. Later on there would be other people in that similar situation.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember a specific conversation -- do you remember the specific conversation between the defendant and Kristin Keefe, when there was a discussion about the paying the $24,000?
DANIELA: Yes. I remember -- I remember those conversations. I remember Keith saying it was worth it. You know, like, and that maybe if they could get that and it was good, you know, there was a risk of not being able to -- you send the wire into oblivion and obviously these people are doing illegal things and so maybe you will get it and maybe you won't. I remember him saying it was, like, worth the amount and, like, maybe if it worked it would be a good thing because they could get more and that was a conversation that they had.
MS. PENZA: So, was somebody -- was the defendant -- was there discussion about how the $24,000 would actually be transferred?
MS. PENZA: So after you were present for this conversation about obtaining -- and did they actually obtain that password?
MS. PENZA: After that incident where they obtained this password and you heard these conversations, did you have a conversation with the defendant about it?
MS. PENZA: And can you explain what that conversation was?
DANIELA: That first conversation was firmly centered on the large amount that they were willing to pay for a password and that I thought it was a lot of money.
MS. PENZA: Why were you focused on the amount of money?
DANIELA: Many reasons. I mean, it was -- well, because of my particular position at the time, that was a lot of money, but also how easily they were to willing to spend it versus how easy I think it would be to get somebody to do it for less money. So it was a lot of money for that. And that's what the conversation centered around. And he asked if maybe I could find somebody who could do it and that first conversation went like that and -- and I looked for someone who might do it.
MS. PENZA: How did you -- can you explain the process of you trying to find someone to do it?
DANIELA: Well, yeah, well the reason he thought I may have someone was because I had been in a life where I had a group of friends who were very smart and it's people at that level tend to gravitate towards computers. And so maybe I knew someone who knew someone who could do it. So I contacted two of my friends that I knew who were very proficient in computers that I knew from high school that were, like, the really smart guys. So I contacted two of them. One of them told me, no. I really don't know. I don't know anybody. I can't do it and I don't know anybody. And my other friend, he put me in touch with someone who could do it.
MS. PENZA: Who did he put you in touch with?
DANIELA: The Dark Lord was his nickname. So I contacted The Dark Lord and I sent him the e-mail address that I needed the password for.
MS. PENZA: Who gave you the e-mail address?
DANIELA: The e-mail address, Keith. And then -- I actually got the correct typing of the e-mail address from an e-mail from Kristin, but these were the people that Keith had said he would like the passwords on. I sent one of the addresses to the Dark Lord and he wrote back asking me if that was my -- if that e-mail address belonged to me and I told him very honestly, I said no. And he said, Then I can't help you.
MS. PENZA: Did you report -- did you report this back-and-forth with your other friend who knew the Dark Lord to the defendant?
MS. PENZA: And how did the defendant respond?
DANIELA: It became, like, a main topic of conversation between us, it would become even more. So, after I had no success finding someone who could do it, he floated the idea of, well, do you think you could do it? Well, how hard can it be? And -- and I took it as a challenge.
MS. PENZA: So, what were the next steps that you took?
DANIELA: I started researching and started thinking how I would do it and I started discussing my ideas and I started discussing it with Keith and looking online. Different methods, reading forums, reading threads and I advanced very rapidly. I downloaded a few pieces of software. I played with them and I started testing and pretty quickly I zoned in on a strategy that I thought would be successful and I thought I could, in all likelihood, get a password -- hack a computer and get a password.
MS. PENZA: So once you felt you had reached that stage, did you discuss that with the defendant?
DANIELA: Well, yes. For the period of my research where I was, like, figuring out how do I solve this. If I needed to do this how would I do this. It was very animated. It was a very exciting subject to tackle. It had an end point. Once I knew I could do it I had -- I had a lot of reservations; some of which I had brought up in the past with Keith, but now it was -- I was faced with, okay, I can hack someone and what that meant for me, what that meant for him. What that meant in general.
So I had extreme reservations about it and I talked -- you know, what I'm trying to say is, okay, now I know how to do this and now I have -- I have, you know, specific people that he wants to hack, that they want to hack. Like, that was a big jump for me. The one thing figuring out how to do it and then actually doing it.
So I had a big conversation with him about that and my conversation was very specifically, this is wrong, right. This is what was way, way -- what held more weight at time was this is illegal. This is unethical. I'm like, this is not okay.
MS. PENZA: You're saying this to the defendant?
DANIELA: To him. Right, this is my concerns this is unethical, this is illegal. This is wrong. ESP is supposed to teach ethics and, you know, bring good things in the world and you are the leader of this organization, like, how come? How do we get to do this? Why are we breaking the rules? Like, I didn't understand, you know. It didn't seem, like, okay to me and then I had that conversation with him.
MS. PENZA: And how did the defendant respond?
DANIELA: He gave me a very specific, very convincing response. This is what he told me at the time. He said it's like something out of game theory. So you have ESP, us, the good guys. We are doing good things. We're going to go by the rules. We're going to be good people and there are certain things that we're not willing to do because they're wrong and they're unethical. So we have a certain number of options of choices we can take.
And then you have these bad people, the suppressives; the people who are out to get us and destroy the good things in the world and these people have no ethics and these people don't care. These people are going to do everything we're going to do and then more. They're going to break the rules and do illegal things and destroy. These bad people have all the options in the world and we have only these options.
So the bad people are always going to win so you have to believe that what we're doing here, what we're doing here is trying to build a better world and we're going to do unethical things ethically because we, we're good. We want to do good. Ultimately this is to do good. So we're going to have to break some rules in order to make that happen.
MS. PENZA: So after you had that conversation with the defendant -- did you push back at all?
DANIELA: That made sense to me and I believed, like, he was doing something good and ESP was trying to defend itself from the bad guys. That made sense to me.
MS. PENZA: After that conversation with the defendant, what happened?
DANIELA: After that conversation with the defendant, Keith, I proceeded. I -- I -- I tried first to hack into Joe O'Hara's e-mail address.
MS. PENZA: Who gave you the e-mail address?
DANIELA: There were two e-mail addresses. There were two targets. Keith had told me those targets and -- and I needed to get right. So they were in writing. The actual e-mail with the writing came from Kristin. And the first one that he told me was Joe O'Hara. So it was Joe O'Hara and then there was another one, Kim Snyder, was the second e-mail that I was given. The first target was Joe O'Hara and I started -- you know, I had devised an entire method and I proceeded to attempt.
MS. PENZA: What computer were you using?
DANIELA: So, once it was settled, both the method and my ethical stand with regard to it, then I planned and I was very cautious and so I told Keith I needed a computer, a dark computer, one that was not linking me to anybody. He told me that I could get the money from Pam and she gave me $500 and bought a refurbished computer from an independent story in Troy. It was a Dell laptop computer. So that computer had self-everything, not linked to me and not linked to anybody and in that computer, I installed the software that I needed. From that computer using WiFi that was not my local network or anybody in the company. I set up servers for the purposes of the methods that I had devised.
MS. PENZA: So we're going to go very slowly. So, first with the -- you said you didn't use your local WiFi. What do you mean by that?
DANIELA: So, right. So an internet network, WiFi, either, like, landline or WiFi is identifiable. You know, there's an IP address, a specific number assigned to it so I was very cautious not to use any internet connections that might be traced back to me or back to ESP.
MS. PENZA: And, so, what internet connections would you use?
DANIELA: I would use public ones. At the time, WiFi was not as pervasive as it is now. It would be public libraries, parking lots of hotels. Sometimes I could pick up a connection from the side of the street and see if the connection was open and I would use that.
MS. PENZA: Would you go to these locations yourself?
MS. PENZA: When you say "they," who is they?
DANIELA: Kristin would drive me. I remember Kristin would drive me. At other times I remember other people, but mostly it would be Kristin because I was aware of it.
(Continued on Following page.)
EXAMINATION CONTINUES BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Just as an aside, did the defendant drive?
MS. PENZA: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Now, did you have a car in the Albany area?
MS. PENZA: So when did you -- just, I know we're going off topic for a second, but when did you have a car and when didn't you?
DANIELA: When I first went to Albany, I did not have a car for the first period. I would say loosely, six months. I was -- Loreta was driving me around when I needed to.
Then I believe it was when my sister Marianna moved in with me, I bought a used Ford Explorer and I used that until it broke. It was very, very old, it was $800. And I had to -- couldn't even find a signal of how much gas was in it, and one day it just broke down on the highway.
After that I had a Honda Civic, and that was all of my driving or all of my possession of a car would have been before I crossed over illegally. After I was illegally in the country, I didn't have a car. I didn't drive. Nothing was in my name. I never, ever exposed myself in any way.
MS. PENZA: When you say you never exposed yourself, what do you mean?
DANIELA: I mean I had no bank accounts, no e-mail going to my house in my name. Absolutely nothing with my name on it. I would even be very aware and careful if I was walking, walking alone where I was walking so I wouldn't be, I imagine, stopped, you know, asked -- so I was invisible.
MS. PENZA: What was your fear, what were you worried about?
DANIELA: I was -- I was -- immigration. For -- I mean, even since I was younger, I knew that immigration in the U.S. is very strict. Then I completely confirmed it. I was stopped, you know, at the airport, my visa was drawn. I was -- I was -- I had a very healthy fear for -- for -- for immigration in the law. It was just something I was always very aware. Sometimes it would just be like a police car, like driving past me when I was alone, my heart would jump. It was just something I was very aware that I was illegal in the country.
MS. PENZA: So going back to once you're -- you're making the attempts regarding Joe O'Hara, can you walk us through all of the other steps you took regarding that first e-mail account?
DANIELA: Yes. So I'll just say it generally, and then I'll say the steps.
So the general idea was to send an infected e-mail to the user, to the target, that would be embedded with -- like in a Trojan way, would be embedded with software that would record all the key strokes, sometimes screenshots, and send it to a server that I had access to so that I could gain access to everything being typed and from there retrieve the password, user name and password.
More specifically, I started by first having an application that could mask an e-mail address, so that it would bypass any spam filters and so that it would entice the user to open it, so it didn't look like -- like a bunch of garbage at a bunch of garbage.com. So, first I'd have to mask the e-mail address and I'd have to make sure it bypasses spam folders. And I also, at the time it was possible, I would code it in a way that it would self-destroy if it wasn't opened in a certain amount of time, so that there would be no evidence sitting there in someone's inbox of any attempt to break into their privacy.
So, the second step would be actually grabbing the software that logs the key strokes. It's called a key-logger, and any other surveillance software that I was going to use, and embed it onto a regular-looking file, which would be an Excel spreadsheet. It could be an image. It could be anything. Once it's embedded, then the e-mail is created and then I send it to the targets and --
MS. PENZA: Can I ask -- I just wanted to ask you one question.
So, when you -- the software, itself, where do you get the software?
MS. PENZA: What does that mean?
DANIELA: I changed the code so that it does what I want it to do. So, yeah, I -- I used different software at different times. For the first time, as I remember, I was looking -- I was using both a key-logger and screenshot capture so that I could have two points of information.
MS. PENZA: And so then, once you have the software the way you want it, then you embed it in a normal-looking file?
MS. PENZA: And so what is the point of that?
DANIELA: The point of that is to -- for the target to open it when they receive the e-mail. At the moment one clicks on the infected file in a way that doesn't show, if I did my job correctly, to the user, it installs itself in a stealth way. So that also means that the infected file needs to bypass any anti-virus software, which is also a difficult thing to do and it's a multistep process, but that's the idea. Once the target has clicked on it and it's installed, it doesn't do anything else. On your computer you see nothing else. You click on it, then nothing happens, and it's just like a bad file.
And from that moment, once the computer -- the software has been deployed, the software, what it will do is, it will be recording everything you type on your keyboard, and in some cases it will take a screenshot of the computer every once in a while and save it on the local memory. And the software I had -- I had used and I had coded -- what it did is it was like every hour, for example, it would open that communication to the server and upload all that information to a remote server and delete it from the -- you could delete it from the local computer. What I would be checking would be not the actual computer infected but the server where the information was being uploaded.
MS. PENZA: And are you paying for access to that server?
DANIELA: No. All the services that I decided to use were free, therefore, anonymous. So I created a set of e-mail accounts that are the ones that I opened those services for, so everything I was very cautious.
MS. PENZA: Along the way, as you're developing these steps, are you discussing them with anyone?
MS. PENZA: Did the defendant contribute anything specific to these discussions?
MS. PENZA: And so what is the point of the self-destroy?
DANIELA: It's so evidence doesn't sit on an inbox. So if I send an e-mail and it's infected and either it doesn't work or it's not opened or it goes without notice, then it's just sitting there and it's, you know, it's a risk. So for it to be able to just disappear or destroy itself, it's very convenient so that you don't have that open risk there.
MS. PENZA: Any of the work that you're doing, are you doing any of it at 3 Flintlock?
DANIELA: Yes, the testing. I mean I was spending almost every waking moment I had there. So I would be testing offline, so I would not be connected to wifi. But a lot of the testing, for example, infecting myself with a key-logger and then testing it, see how it worked, see how it looked like, all of that I was doing mostly there.
MS. PENZA: And as you're testing it, are you communicating the results of your testing to the defendant?
MS. PENZA: And what's his reaction?
MS. PENZA: So what were the actual steps you took for this first -- so you described generally the process; are those steps you took for this first e-mail account?
MS. PENZA: And what happened?
MS. PENZA: So what exactly? So what did you -- you end up sending these e-mails?
DANIELA: I end up sending a series of mails with infected files and it never worked. It never works. I don't know why. I can imagine why. Either it went to a spam folder or maybe Mr. O'Hara caught on to it and went, oh, no, this is an infected file. Or maybe he did get it, did click on it and maybe his anti-virus software stopped it. It could be any of those things.
MS. PENZA: Apart from the conversations that you would hear between the defendant and Kristin Keeffe and Nancy Salzman about Joe O'Hara, did you personally have any involvement with Joe O'Hara?
MS. PENZA: Did you ever meet him?
DANIELA: No. I remember having seen him, so I remember he had like white hair and a white beard. He looked like Santa Claus to me. He was like a big guy. I remember having seen him at the center, maybe in a meeting with them when he was like doing work with them, but I never actually was introduced before.
MS. PENZA: So what happened -- when you would have the discussions with the defendant, where were most -- most of these conversations would take place at 3 Flintlock?
MS. PENZA: So what happened after that?
DANIELA: Well, I was clearly unsuccessful and Keith came up with a plan. I don't remember exactly how it came about, but he told me that there was this guy who worked with Joe, or for Joe, who they had access to, I -- I believe he was doing -- he was working for Joe and maybe like was also doing some work in the accounting of ESP. It was something like that. So he says -- so he came up with this plan where Kathy Russell, who was a person who was working with this man whose name was James Loperfido, she -- he talked to Kathy. So Kathy would make an appointment with him at the 455 New Karner Road center, which is where the ESP center was. And for me to take that opportunity to infect his computer, like, live, like right there.
So, yeah.
MS. PENZA: What would be the strategic difference or the -- is the likelihood of success different if you're going to do what the defendant had now planned for Mr. Loperfido?
DANIELA: If one has physical access, it's infallible. Like the success rate is a hundred percent because the main problem in infecting a computer remotely is gaining the access. So, whether it be via e-mail or you're gonna like, you know, through the wifi, it's something very sophisticated. So if I have access to a computer, all I have to do is plug in a USB and deploy it myself. And in the event -- in the event that an anti-virus would try to stop it, I can also disable it right then and there. So there is no failing with that.
MS. PENZA: Before that day had you ever heard of James Loperfido?
MS. PENZA: So what happened after the defendant communicated this plan to you?
MS. PENZA: Go through it slowly.
DANIELA: Yes. So, Kathy made an appointment with Mr. Loperfido at the center. He attended. I remember I drove in with Kathy and I was just in a separate room, a separate person, just hanging out at the center. And they were working and she was communicating with me and she was supposed to tell me when she was gonna take him away and distract him from his laptop. He had a laptop and he was working in one of the rooms with Kathy.
So, she would take him away for what should be a considerable amount of time so I would have enough room to deploy, install and get out of there, and she did exactly so. She gave me a sign, took him out of the room to like a separate wing of the center, and I went to his computer. I had a USB prepared with all the software and I deployed it.
MS. PENZA: When you say you had a USB prepared with all the software, can you describe that?
DANIELA: Yes. So for each different attack that I would do, I had specific software, but also I had a specific server account set up. Again, very cautious, so that this particular computer would upload the information I was gathering to a specific server.
So all of that had to be set up in advance, which I did.
MS. PENZA: And what do you remember about this specific software?
DANIELA: This specific software was log the key strokes and also took a snapshot of the screen every, like, minute or 30 seconds. It would just take a snapshot of the screen and save it.
MS. PENZA: Logging the key strokes, what exactly is the point of that?
DANIELA: The point of logging the key strokes is -- other than, you know, writing whatever you write on your computer, it is necessary to access an e-mail account or any other kind of account for one to type the password.
So, the point of the key log is exactly that, to be able to at some point where the person is going to log into their e-mail address or is going to log into some kind of anything that requires a login, to capture that user name and password so that, for example, if they've got an external account, for example, Gmail, Hotmail, AOL, then a lot of people maybe have Outlook on their computers or some other kind of server where they're used to accessing it, but it can also be accessed directly going to Gmail.com or Hotmail.com or AOL.com.
So gaining simply their user name and password allowed me to then be accessing their e-mail in other forms.
MS. PENZA: So was it successful with James Loperfido?
MS. PENZA: So what happened right afterwards?
DANIELA: Right afterwards, I -- I remember I gave the good news to Keith and then I proceeded to go and check the first uploads to the server just to make sure that it was, indeed, successful. And it was.
MS. PENZA: And how did the defendant react?
MS. PENZA: So you checked the server -- you checked the server that night?
MS. PENZA: And eventually -- eventually, what happened?
DANIELA: So eventually, I started gathering more information and I got e-mail -- user names and passwords to virtually everything he was signing into and including his e-mail address. And so I had access now to his e-mail address.
Eventually, what happened is I -- I killed the entrance to, you know, to the -- from the computer to the server because this attack, in particular, was designed to be getting all the screenshots from his computer and they were accumulating very rapidly and, I believe, making his computer very slow. So it had become a risk, so I just shut that down remotely and just kept the access to his e-mail address, which is what I was checking periodically.
MS. PENZA: When you say it became a risk, what do you mean?
DANIELA: Well, that he might find that he had been hacked. So if your computer is slow, what do you do? You might take it to a technician or you might run, like, another anti-virus because you think there is something going on and you might discover that you have been hacked.
So anything that creates that risk, I eliminated.
MS. PENZA: So, after some period of time, you did get his user name and password?
MS. PENZA: And so what would -- what was the process then?
DANIELA: The process was to access his e-mail address. I -- again, with all the precautions I had spelled out before, which was I would go to -- with my -- the computer that was anonymous, I would go to a wifi network that was public and I would check his e-mail address. I would try to do it at times where I thought people would not check their e-mail address. Because, essentially, what I would do is I would go into the e-mail and I would read -- click on one e-mail, read it, see if it was relevant. If it was relevant, I would copy/paste it into a text file, a separate text file in my computer, and then I would mark it as unread and then I would read the following one. And so on and so on and so on.
So at the end of any time where I went and checked for information into the e-mail address, I would have like a series of text files with different relevant e-mails.
MS. PENZA: What was the point of marking the e-mails as unread?
DANIELA: So that he wouldn't notice that I was -- that somebody else was checking his e-mail.
There is two reasons. The person might be checking their e-mail address directly, in which case they will clearly know that there is an e-mail that they haven't read, which had been read. That's extremely suspicious.
In a different instance, if a person is using an application like Outlook, then those applications tend to have rules. Like, they will check your e-mail server and if any e-mails are new, like marked as unread, then it will download those e-mails and those are the ones you're gonna get. If something is marked as read, then those applications typically will not download it because they think that those have already been downloaded. So then what the user would -- would keep getting is: I'm not getting e-mails, I'm not getting e-mails, and that might be suspicious and, again, might lead to him realizing that he's been hacked.
MS. PENZA: What time of day would you typically go through this process of reading the e-mails?
MS. PENZA: Why is that?
DANIELA: Outside working hours, which is when I think people are checking their e-mails or I thought people were checking their e-mails.
MS. PENZA: So you said you would copy, paste and create text files?
MS. PENZA: What would you do then?
MS. PENZA: How would you bring them to Keith?
MS. PENZA: And did you ever observe the defendant reviewing those?
DANIELA: Yes. He would use the little laptop computer that he had at the coffee table on the stack of books in front of his couch and he would plug it in and he would review the e-mails.
MS. PENZA: Did you ever give -- was it always the same process of putting the e-mails onto a USB?
DANIELA: To a USB, yes, but there were times where I handed them to Kristin and sometimes they would just be handed to Kristin. Sometimes, you know -- yeah, it would actually be that way or for Kristin needs to see it; many times he would see it first and then she would keep it. So -- but it was just a tool though.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember for how long you surveilled James Loperfido?
DANIELA: Not exactly. But it was, I would say, not weeks, not months, I would say a year or years.
MS. PENZA: Did you ever access anyone else's e-mail account?
MS. PENZA: When was that?
MS. PENZA: Was this in relation to the time that you accessed James Loperfido?
MS. PENZA: Whose account was that?
MS. PENZA: Who was Edgar Bronfman?
MS. PENZA: And what did you know about Edgar Bronfman at that point in time?
DANIELA: Hum, I knew -- I knew vaguely who he was. I knew he was a rich, powerful man. I also knew he had taken ESP classes and Nancy was coaching him. So, for a little while there, he was like a star student of sorts, like they were very proud that Edgar was in ESP, was being coached by Nancy. Like it was like a big name, right, and it was a big deal. And then, all of a sudden -- I don't know exactly what happened, but then Edgar Bronfman was not -- no longer on the ESP side, he was in the ESP enemy side.
I remember vague details, but, you know, I wasn't very keyed into that.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember were there any concerns about anything Edgar Bronfman had said?
MS. PENZA: What you do you remember about that?
DANIELA: I remember there was a Forbes article that came out where he said: It's a cult. And I don't remember if that was the breaking point, but certainly that was a big deal also.
MS. PENZA: Does that -- does the -- do you remember what publication that was in?
MS. PENZA: And do you -- does that -- do you actually have a memory of that article coming out?
DANIELA: When that article came out, yes, I remember they bought a lot of those magazines, like boxes. Like there were like -- it was -- it was -- it was weird because it was -- it was -- I wasn't sure if it was a negative or positive article from reading it. It seemed really -- but he was on the front page and everybody was like very enthusiastic about it.
MS. PENZA: Who was on the front page?
MS. PENZA: But that was the article where there was the statement from Edgar Bronfman?
MS. PENZA: And you said, at some point, Edgar shifted to the enemy side; is that what you said?
MS. PENZA: What is this concept of the enemy side, what was your understanding from the defendant?
DANIELA: Yes. There were -- there was this series of people that can be listed, there was a series of people who were out to destroy Keith, out to destroy ESP. And I make that distinction because, to me, it was clear that Sir Rick Ross wanted to destroy ESP, Toni Natale wanted to destroy Keith. You know like -- some of it seemed like, you know, like, that's my -- that's my understanding of it.
And so like Joe O'Hara, I didn't know what had happened, but he wanted to destroy ESP, and I understood it was the same for Edgar Bronfman.
MS. PENZA: And so how were you approached about Edgar Bronfman's e-mail account?
DANIELA: It was Keith who -- I mean, Keith was the one who I was working with. I did not have a relationship with Clare and, in fact, did not have a lot of interaction with her about that. It was Keith who asked me and --
MS. PENZA: What did he say?
DANIELA: That, you know, I don't remember the exact words, but, you know, that it would be good if they, you know, had access to his e-mail address.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, would this be a good time to take a break?
THE COURT: All right, let's take our mid-morning break.
All rise for the jury.
(Jury exits.)
(In open court - jury not present.)
THE COURT: The witness may stand down. Do not discuss your testimony with anyone.
(Witness steps down.)
THE COURT: Everyone else may be seated.
Ms. Penza, about how much more time on direct do you have?
MS. PENZA: I think it's at least through the end of the day, Your Honor.
THE COURT: At least through the end of the day?
MS. PENZA: Yes.
THE COURT: And?
MS. PENZA: I'll be able to judge much better by our mid-afternoon break, but probably no later than the morning tomorrow.
THE COURT: All right, just let me know.
MS. PENZA: Absolutely, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right, we will take our ten-minute break. Thank you, everyone.
MS. PENZA: Thank you.
(Judge NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS exited the courtroom.)
(Recess taken.)
(Judge NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS entered the courtroom.)
(In open court - jury not present.)
THE COURT: All right, let's bring in the defendant, please.
Bring in the witness, please.
(Defendant entered the courtroom.)
THE COURT: Please bring in the jury.
(Witness resumed the stand.)
(Jury enters.)
THE COURT: Please be seated. I remind the witness she is still under oath.
THE COURT: Ms. Penza, you may continue your direct examination.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
EXAMINATION CONTINUING BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Daniela, we were talking about Edgar Bronfman's e-mail account.
What were the next steps you remember after his e-mail account was mentioned to you?
DANIELA: The advantage with that attack was that it was Clare's father, so I did not have to send any e-mails myself or take care of that part myself. I did have contact with Clare because I was gonna set up the file to the server and give her a file for her to send to her father.
MS. PENZA: Can you describe those interactions with Clare Bronfman?
DANIELA: I don't remember them very clearly. I -- I think they were just brief; me handing over a USB with a file in it so she would attach it and send it to her father.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember how you actually -- how you embedded the software?
DANIELA: Yes. I remember this particular instance it was an image, like an image of her choice. Like I said, the advantage was that I didn't have to worry about bypassing spam or masking the e-mail address so it seemed familiar because it was gonna come from his daughter. So, she picked the image. She knew what, you know, he would open, something that was familiar I imagine, and if that e-mail -- in that image she gave me I embedded the software that was gonna be deployed.
MS. PENZA: Did you embed the same software that you had used for James Loperfido's account?
MS. PENZA: Why?
MS. PENZA: So what did you do differently this time?
DANIELA: It wasn't a -- a -- it wasn't gonna generate the very heavy files. It was, I believe, much more stealthy and so it had higher -- you know, it would have higher rate of success.
MS. PENZA: So you give the image to Clare Bronfman?
MS. PENZA: And then what happens?
MS. PENZA: She told you this?
MS. PENZA: Okay.
DANIELA: I don't remember exactly. But that she sent e-mails, I understood several ones, and they were not -- I remember the point was that it wasn't that it hadn't been successful, but rather that he wasn't opening them. So that was an issue and so there was nothing really for me to do. The point there was, you know, to get him to actually open it so that it would infect the computer.
And I believe so what ended up happening is, and again I wasn't there for that, but from the stories afterwards that I heard from -- I believe from Kristin and from talking to Keith, what she did is actually she visited her father and did, essentially, what I had done with the attack on James Loperfido's computer, which is physically go and like plug it in, click on it and infect the computer locally.
MS. PENZA: And so you said you learned that from the defendant or Kristin Keeffe, but did you actually gain access at that point?
MS. PENZA: So what happened?
DANIELA: So what Clare did worked and I started getting the information. I checked it. There was like success reported that she had done it. So I checked the server and, indeed, I am receiving information. So I start monitoring the -- the uploads to the server with the key strokes, everything that's being logged.
And very rapidly, as I remember, I get the user name and password that I'm looking for, which was, as I remember, his AOL account. And -- I mean, this was a high profile person as I understood, so immediately after I had that access I killed the back door. So I just -- I just deleted the rest. I didn't need to have more key logs being uploaded, nothing. Once I had the user name and password, I killed that entrance.
MS. PENZA: Were you able to -- do you remember anything from his user name or password?
MS. PENZA: Did you discuss the fact that you had been able to -- once you got his user name and password, what would you do?
DANIELA: As I did before, I would access in this case his AOL account directly via AOL, and I would read all of his correspondence.
MS. PENZA: And did you discuss the fact that you had accessed his -- had accessed Edgar Bronfman's e-mail account with anyone?
MS. PENZA: And what was his reaction?
MS. PENZA: And so what happened after that, what is the process of you monitoring?
DANIELA: The process of me monitoring is -- it wasn't on a schedule. I would check it regularly, mostly at the request of Keith.
So, all of this, you know, was as I understood and as it was told to me at the time, it was, you know, for -- for the legal battles, for the legal cases. It was to aid them in whatever problems it is they were facing from these people. So there were -- most of the times, I would be asked by Keith: Is there anything new on the -- on the key-loggers? You know, have you found something? Have you checked? When was the last time you checked?
So I would, you know -- it wasn't like -- what I'm trying to say, it wasn't every Friday afternoon or it wasn't no periodic way, but rather it was constantly and often at the request when something important was happening, it's happening and they needed it.
(Continued on the following page.)
BY MS. PENZA: (Continuing)
MS. PENZA: And how -- for how long did you continue this process of monitoring Edgar Bronfman's e-mails?
DANIELA: I don't remember exactly but, again, it wasn't days or weeks or months. It was a really long time.
MS. PENZA: Why did you stop monitoring Edgar Bronfman's e-mail?
DANIELA: I remember suspecting that he had found something was wrong and I got a little bit scared and I stopped, you know, I stopped checking.
MS. PENZA: At any point in time, did anyone ask you about the fact that you had stopped checking?
MS. PENZA: Who?
MS. PENZA: And what did you tell him?
DANIELA: I told him precisely that, that I had stopped checking and that -- I believe I told him I had lost access.
MS. PENZA: What do you remember from reading Edgar Bronfman's e-mails? Would you copy and paste all of them? How would it work?
DANIELA: No, I would check and maybe I also misstated that part before because it was the same for James Loperfido. So I always checked the e-mails coming in but also I want to make clear, I was also checking all the e-mails in the Outlooks, everything in the sent folder which is everything relevant because most, if not all, services log every e-mail going out as well.
So I would be -- I would check, methodically check e-mail by e-mail all of the e-mail coming in and all of the e-mail going out for the last period since I had last checked which I just, you know, kept in memory. And I would not save every e-mail. I mean, a lot of the e-mail is, as I'm sure, as I get, a little bit spam, some of it is, like, news, some of it is newsletters that he signed up for. So those, almost right away I knew what they were, but all the personal or business e-mails, I would go through all of them, and not all of them were relevant.
So there were communications between him and his family. There were a lot of e-mails about scheduling, whether he was going to travel to this place or that place. There was a great deal of, like, political e-mails. I noticed he was a very -- he was a man with very good manners. It seemed he always sent, like, thank you e-mails after, like, meeting someone or, like, having an event and running into someone. Like, he followed up on things like that at a very personal level. I remember that.
And there was, you know, some -- there was, like, some degree of legal strategizing but from reading his e-mails, I became aware he was involved with the WJC, World Jewish Congress. So that, there was a lot of those e-mails going back and forth amongst a group of people. I did not consider those relevant to, you know, the ESP cases, but there was a big volume of communications.
MS. PENZA: And how would you transmit these -- would you transmit, would you transmit the information that you learned from Edgar Bronfman's account to the defendant?
MS. PENZA: And how would you do that?
DANIELA: In the same manner. I would save them in text files which I would then save into USB drive and I would, you know, I would -- at one point, and I would give it to him and he would check it.
The transition of me having a fight with him when we stopped talking to each other happened somewhere in between. And so there was -- as of that cutoff point, there was a time where he was still requesting for me to check on all these accounts and, obviously, since we weren't talking and we weren't seeing each other, I stopped handing the USB drive to him and I would be handing it to Kristin who would hand it to him.
MS. PENZA: And were some of those communications about continuing to check, would those sometimes come through Kristin as well?
MS. PENZA: Did there come a time when you ever accessed, when you ever used the type of software you're describing to gain information on anyone else?
MS. PENZA: When was that?
DANIELA: That was after 2006. It could have been 2007, '8, maybe even '9. I hacked my sister's computer, my sister Marianna.
MS. PENZA: How did that happen?
DANIELA: My sister was having issues, I was told. I believe it was Pam who told me. And she was throwing a big tantrum, like, it had been, I remember it had been days and it was obviously an issue with Keith and he was asking for me. What she told me is they, they, Pam and Keith, suspected that she was, like, rekindling, like, having a relationship with one of her ex-boyfriends and they wanted to monitor her communications and, and they asked me to, to hack into her computers so I could give them access to, I remember, her Facebook account and her e-mail address.
MS. PENZA: And so what were the actual logistics and how was it explained? Who explained it to you?
DANIELA: Pam, Pam explained it to me. I remember talking to her. There was a degree of follow-up with Keith via e-mail at the time. So it was direct communications from both of them and it was quite specific because they needed to give me access to go to Flintlock and infect the computers that she was using and they needed to tell me which computers she was using and the computers that I would infect for her instructions, I would encourage her to use those computers so the key logger -- I was going to use just a simple key logger -- would, you know, capture her user name and password and everything she was doing.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember what the computers were?
DANIELA: I think one of them was a Mac computer and the other one was a big PC computer that was in the house.
MS. PENZA: And do you -- did you actually go over and do this?
MS. PENZA: And were there specific steps taken so that you would be able to go over there?
DANIELA: Yes. Well, as any other times I would visit Flintlock, because I was not talking to Keith, he was not talking to me, then, you know, he needed to make sure he wasn't there. So there was a very logistical aspect of making sure it was okay for me to go to Flintlock and Keith wasn't going to be there. And also they told me which computers it was that they wanted infected that she was going to be using and that all happened.
MS. PENZA: You did that?
MS. PENZA: How did you feel about doing that?
MS. PENZA: Why?
DANIELA: Because I breached my sister's privacy. I mean, back then, I thought, and I really thought, I was helping her. Like, you know, the way I understood it then, it was presented to me was she was having an issue and there was, like, an issue she needed to overcome and, you know, knowing what they were going to know, they were going to be able to help her out of that issue which was destructive. Everything that I heard, that's what it was. And even then, knowing that, I felt bad because, you know, it's a person I love and I never thought I was going to, you know, breach into someone's privacy. Now I feel even worse.
MS. PENZA: Do you remember, were you having any interaction -- you weren't speaking to the defendant in person at the time. Were you having any interactions with Marianna at the time?
DANIELA: Yes, there were some. I mean, I spoke to my sister. I didn't see her very often but there were interactions, yes.
MS. PENZA: Around that time, was there a specific incident that involved you?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain what happened?
DANIELA: I don't remember exactly what the circumstances were but she became really mad at me. I don't remember if it was jealousy or it was something else, but she -- I was, I think, in Flintlock and she called the police on me. Like, it was really -- it was, it was a big deal and I remember not understanding why she was so upset at me and what had happened but it was like big, yeah.
MS. PENZA: Did the defendant ever talk to you about that incident or did anyone else -- did they e-mail you about the incident?
DANIELA: We were having e-mail communications at the time. I, I think I remember mention of it, like that it was really bad and that it was, it was just really bad, but I don't remember exactly the direction where he was guiding it.
MS. PENZA: Did you discuss it with anyone else at the time?
MS. PENZA: Did Pam have any thoughts about it?
DANIELA: The general idea that I had was that my sister was going through, like, a really hard time and that she was having a lot of issues and that we needed to help her.
MS. PENZA: And so did you, did you actually gain access to your sister's computers?
MS. PENZA: And what happened?
MS. PENZA: Did you continue to access her computer once -- did you do the same thing you had done with Edgar Bronfman and James Loperfido where you would monitor and send the information to the defendant?
DANIELA: No, I did not want to surveil her. I did not want to read her personal communications. I -- that's not something I wanted to do. So all I did is I, I sent the, you know, the user names and passwords, what was needed to access to Keith and said I'm not going to read, I'm not going to read what's going on. I don't want to read my sister's private life.
MS. PENZA: Looking back, how do you feel about the other e-mail accounts that you accessed?
DANIELA: I know what I did was wrong. I mean, it's, it's plain and simple illegal. I feel bad for that reason. I am -- I regret that I bought Keith's story about the mission and the good and, you know, means justify the end or whatever excuse he had. About my sister's, however, I felt bad at the time. I could not justify it at the time and now I feel even worse because I know that those issues are not what I thought they were, much like mine, so I feel bad that I contributed to the abuse and manipulation of my own sister.
MS. PENZA: I'm going to switch topics in a second but you mentioned a little bit ago various legal cases that they were involved in, the defendant and others were involved in.
Did you ever hear the name Stephanie Franco?
MS. PENZA: Can you describe what was going on with Stephanie, what you would hear from the defendant and others about Stephanie Franco?
MR. AGNIFILO: Objection as to others, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MS. PENZA: What would you hear from the defendant?
DANIELA: What I heard from Keith was that -- so Stephanie Franco was somehow related to, I think, Michael Sutton. They were both students of ESP and Stephanie Franco had been the one who had leaked or given the information to Rick Ross and that was the core of the lawsuit and legal battle that ensued. I also knew that in, that they couldn't find her signed confidentiality agreement.
MS. PENZA: When you say "they," who do you mean?
DANIELA: They -- I, I -- okay. "They," I would mean Nancy, Keith, Kristin, upper management, I did. I say they because we spent hours on end going through the filing room looking for that confidentiality agreement and to my knowledge, it was never found.
MS. PENZA: What was your understanding of the importance of finding the confidentiality agreement?
DANIELA: What I understood was that, you know, I like, I didn't have then -- I don't have very much now but, you know, that's where the person signed -- we all signed it. I signed one. You signed that you're bound now by confidentiality and that's your actual signature. So this person went through the ESP program, had the materials, they had a case that was open. And they couldn't find this critical piece of paper which is where she had signed the confidentiality of all that material. So it was, like, a key piece that pulled all of it together.
MS. PENZA: How long did you and the people that you named spend looking for this piece of paper?
DANIELA: . I think a few weeks. It was a long period of time. It was several weeks but every -- the filing room was a mess but after that, new procedures were instituted, but at the time -- I mean, I never, I never learned or found out that confidentiality agreement had been found.
MS. PENZA: Okay. During the time period when you, before you had the falling out with the defendant, we talked a little bit about your access to 8 Hale Drive.
MS. PENZA: Can you just describe what you would do at 8 Hale Drive?
DANIELA: Yes. Eight Hale Drive was also interchangeably called the executive library. This is the place where all of Keith's media, books, CD's and videos were stored. They were all arranged and stored there. I was the one who personally brought all of the books from Flintlock that were there at the time to the executive library and once they had all been migrated to the executive library and he kept ordering books online, I would go and grab them from Flintlock and I would bring them to the executive library and I would organize them, books, media, videos.
At the executive library, I did the catalog for the books which in time became a little more sophisticated than the Excel spreadsheet. I had special software and I would grab relevant information and summaries and, like, a cover of the books so one can virtually go through the library. I devised, like, a special system to organize it and with the music and the videos, I would do something different.
So with the music, I was digitizing the music so that it could be played not only on a CD player which was the most popular medium at the time, but, like, on an iPod. And there was a very specific thing that I did because when I discussed it with Keith -- so Keith liked music very much and it was very important to him that it was stored in, like, a high fidelity format. This is something he wanted. So I did some research and I found this, it's call FLAC format. So it's, like, a very high fidelity format and I was going through the process of taking, it was hundreds, maybe a thousand albums and one by one, digitizing them in FLAC format.
MS. PENZA: Other than that, what else would you be doing at 8 Hale?
MS. PENZA: Did you ever have access to 8 Hale for any other reasons?
DANIELA: Yes. When I was with Keith, there were other activities that I was there for. When he had a class, so, like, a piano lesson or a singing lesson, I would be called over to videotape it, like record it. Same if he had a meeting but those were a little rare, like to have a meeting at Hale, but it did happen. And also, a couple of times, we had sexual encounters there.
MS. PENZA: Do you know who decided who would have access to 8 Hale?
MS. PENZA: Who was that?
MS. PENZA: Did you yourself have to ask permission to go to 8 Hale?
MS. PENZA: Did you ever observe anyone else ask permission to go to 8 Hale?
MS. PENZA: Did the defendant have any electronics at 8 Hale?
MS. PENZA: Can you describe what those electronics were?
DANIELA: Yes. There was a PC. So a computer. One of the -- well, back then, there was an older one but it was one where there's like a screen and it's all separated. It was like a tower processor. It was a Dell computer. That was, like, the main computer there. There were a couple of hard drives. Those were the ones I was using for the digitizing and they were connected to the computer.
So there was, like, dark with a blue LED, if I remember correctly, WD, Western Digital dark hard drive, and there was, like, a C drive. They were rare at the time. They were very expensive. Like, over one terabyte was a very expensive storage device and they were needed for the music. There were also a camera. There was a big camera. It was a big professional camera that he had gotten before that was stored at 8 Hale at the time and --
MS. PENZA: Had you ever -- the camera that you're describing, the big professional camera, had you ever seen that camera before?
MS. PENZA: And had you seen the defendant with that camera any other times?
MS. PENZA: What else was there, what other electronics?
DANIELA: Strictly speaking, electronics? There were devices that were placed on the top of the white board that were set up to digitize whatever was written on the white board.
MS. PENZA: And other than the large professional camera, were there any other cameras?
DANIELA: I think there was, like, a smaller, not professional, like, Canon Shot or something like that, camera. I think that was also there.
MS. PENZA: You may have already said this but do you remember the brand of the computer?
MS. PENZA: Do you remember what types of FLAC files, what some of the FLAC files that you actually converted?
MS. PENZA: Uh-huh.
DANIELA: It was a ton of music. Yes. So, I mean, I would guess more than a thousand albums, easy, easy. A lot of classical music, full compositions. All of Beethoven's symphonies, various versions. There was Bach, various versions. There were Mozart for Babies, Chopin for Babies, Debussy for Babies. There was a lot of jazz, Keith Jarrett, A Melody At Night With You, Live at La Scala.
I would indulge in listening to all these albums while I was digitizing them so I would -- when I was working at the executive library, digitizing them takes a long time because it's a very heavy file format. That type of file contains the most data one can get from a CD so it's rather heavy files and it takes a long time for the computer to process it. So, you know, I listened to a lot of these albums and read a lot of books while I was doing that at the executive library. And it was some of his favorite music which was Yes and Genesis, he had several albums of that, and there was some, like, I think a few collections of speeches. So there's what a wide variety of music that I was digitizing and sound.
MS. PENZA: Do you know whether the defendant ever used the computer and hard drives himself?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain?
DANIELA: Well, I, saw him use them, like access the library and the information. But there was also a time where I, like, I went through the computer and I found some of his personal files.
MS. PENZA: Why were you going through his computer?
DANIELA: He had told me that he had noticed, like, something funky. I don't remember exactly but the gist of it is, like, he thought there was something wrong with the computer and maybe it was a virus, maybe it was something because the computer had done something funky. So, I mean, I was the one who took care of the networking computers and that stuff. So I -- he gave me his password. There was a password.
I had to scan the computers and so I went into -- and I never understood this, into anybody's files, into his files but this time, I actually needed to go through all of their computers and I found the set of files in the scan that were -- I don't remember exactly if they were, like, in the trash or they were in a hidden folder, not in the normal structure of my PC, My Documents, like, not visible. Like it was a backup or a trash. It was, like, a separate file structure that it was under and I, and I -- you know, I clicked through it and I quickly realized what it was and this was. I clicked on, I think, a few, like -- I vaguely remember and there was pictures of naked women, women that I knew Keith was with. I, you know -- so that's it. So I didn't use that.
MS. PENZA: Did any of them stand out to you? Did any of the women stand out to you?
DANIELA: There was one that I distinctly remember because I didn't know Keith was having sex with her.
MS. PENZA: And who was that?
MS. PENZA: Now, when you did this scan, this was on the computer itself, not the hard drive?
MS. PENZA: And you mentioned backups. Is that something that you had -- did you set up backups?
DANIELA: I was one, yes. So I was the one in charge of the computers and I, I'm very cautious with backups especially because it housed, you know, so much information, some information easy to -- I mean, hard to replicate. So, yes, there were backups set up. I believe actually one of those hard drives I set up specifically for backups at some point, yes.
MS. PENZA: And you would communicate with the defendant about everything you were doing with his computer?
MS. PENZA: Where was the -- so after you saw those folders, what did you do next?
MS. PENZA: After you saw those folders, what did you do?
MS. PENZA: Why?
DANIELA: I had a couple of concerns. I mean, finding them was alarming and my reasons were, first of all, I, I knew had taken pictures of me so I asked him to delete my pictures. You know, I didn't click through it so I don't remember having seen myself. I remember that -- I mean, I don't want to see pictures of naked women, but I remember going to him and I also remember, my approach when I went and told him was almost like in a I'm-looking-out-for-you kind of way, like, you really shouldn't have that there, you know, you really should be more careful. You know, I found it. Anybody else could find it. You shouldn't have that.
MS. PENZA: Do you know whether the defendant deleted your pictures?
MS. PENZA: Did you ever look on the computer to see if they had been deleted?
You have to --
THE COURT: You have to answer yes or no.
MS. PENZA: I'm going to go back for a second to the topic we were talking about, the various legal matters and the passwords that you had talked about accessing. That category of information -- and we'll look at some e-mails.
MS. PENZA: May I have the ELMO just for the witness, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes, you may. Go ahead:
MS. PENZA: Daniela, are you familiar with this e-mail?
MS. PENZA: Okay. And is this an e-mail from Kristin Keefe to you copying Nancy Salzman on August 29, 2005?
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, the government offers Government Exhibit 1590 into evidence.
MR. AGNIFILO: No objection.
THE COURT: All right. Government Exhibit 1590 is received in evidence.
(Continued on next page.)
BY MS. PENZA: (Continuing.)
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Daniela, can you read this e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes. It says, "Hi Danny. I figure you are the most likely of the gang to check your e-mail first. Can you report to Keith and Nancy on the following for me: Nothing new on our legal fronts. Some suspicious car activity around the house Friday night, but nothing else since. I've conferred with Judd yesterday and today on the missing data on why Joe has done -- why Joe has done what he has done."
MS. PENZA: Sorry, Daniela, do you have an understanding of who Joe is?
MS. PENZA: Do you know who Judd is?
MS. PENZA: You can keep reading.
MS. PENZA: Do you know who Doug is?
DANIELA: I imagine Doug Rudnick. "He thinks Joe is a crook who just could not keep up the facade anymore, and he thought he could bully his way out of what he did to us. Judd is still thinking on it. I made the point that I don't think Joe is that stupid and he is acting like someone who wants to get caught. Judd said he thinks Joe is just crazy. The judge will be setting the hearing date today or (probably) Friday or next Tuesday. (Nancy especially will want to know this.) Judd expects to settle with Joe this week before the hearing. Otherwise there will be no way to avoid Keith being deposed or called as a witness in the Ross case short of settling the case. He thinks trying to fight that is tricky at best, but will think of it some more. I referred him to Nancy to discuss it in more detail. I have spoken to Nardello Schwartz on the newswire data and I'm waiting to hear back on a time to conference with them today. I will be going to the Albany airport at 5 to check on a suspicious flight and I'm following up on some other leads today too. Neither of the suspicious trips have been cancelled yet and communications evidenced. Heidi is returning to AK on September 6th in spite of keeping the flight arrangements to FL on the 10th. On a different note, my mother called yesterday and told me she had a massive heart attack and could go at any time. She wants to see me before she dies. I was planning on coming to Silver Bay for the day yesterday, but was on the phone with -- for two or three hours yesterday and I'm trying to block the conversation and decide what to do. I've decided not to go down immediately and I'm following up on everything we are working on today, but may go tonight after my airport adventure. Depending on what happens, I plan to be at Silver Bay tonight or tomorrow after I come back. Love to all. Hope you are having fun. If I miss the triathlon tomorrow, good luck to you Mariana and Dan. Love, Kristin."
MS. PENZA: August 29, 2005 do you have an understanding of where you are?
DANIELA: Yes. So what I remember is we're all at V Week. We're at V Week and at V Week there used to be really spotty, rare WiFi reception. So one needed to really be connected to the internet to check the e-mail and -- so we were Silver Bay.
MS. PENZA: Do you have an understanding of why this is being sent to you?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain?
DANIELA: So, I am one of the very few people who's aware or approved to, like, be present for all of these types of conversations and communications. Kristin is trying to get a message to Keith and Nancy and it's unlikely that they would check their e-mail as often I would be checking my e-mail so she's reporting through me.
MS. PENZA: Do you understand the details of everything that's being discussed here?
MS. PENZA: So what would your role have been upon reading this?
DANIELA: To print it and hand it to Keith or Nancy or just tell them Kristin wrote something important.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, may I have one moment to confer with defense counsel?
THE COURT: Sure.
(Pause in proceedings.)
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor. On consent of the defense, the Government moves into evidence Government Exhibit 1514, 1514-A, 1515, 1516, 1517, 1518, 1519, 1520, 1521, 1522, 1523, 1525, and 1525-A.
MR. AGNIFILO: We do consent, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Government Exhibits 1514, 1514-A, 1515, 1516, 1517, 1518, 1519, 1520, 1521, 1522, 1523, 1525 and 1525-A are received in evidence.
(Government Exhibits 1514, 1514-A, 1515, 1516, 1517, 1518, 1519, 1520, 1521, 1522, 1523, 1525 and 1525-A received in evidence.)
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Daniela, I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1514. Do you recognize this e-mail?
MS. PENZA: And underneath -- I'm going to put what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1514-A.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Is Government Exhibit 1514-A a translation of Government Exhibit 1514?
MS. PENZA: Can you read Government Exhibit 1514-A?
MS. PENZA: The from and to as well.
DANIELA: This is from Leonardo Icaza. E-mail leomcho@gmail.com to my both of my e-mail addresses. The subject line is, "What e-mail? 1, I did not receive the e-mail. 2, 3, I don't think they apply since I didn't receive the e-mail. Ha ha. P.S., I like your saying on messenger" and a smiley face.
MS. PENZA: Can you explain what's happening in this e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes, so I have contacted this friend to find out if he can or knows someone who can obtain a password for an e-mail account and I contacted him via messenger or via e-mail and he didn't receive my e-mail. That's what I think is happening.
MS. PENZA: Is this one of the people you described earlier as one of your early attempts to find someone else could get passwords for an e-mail account?
MS. PENZA: I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1515.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Do you know what this is?
MS. PENZA: Can you -- can you read it, please?
DANIELA: Yes. This is an e-mail to me from Kristin Keefe that contains the two e-mail addresses that are the targets to obtain the passwords for these accounts.
MS. PENZA: What is the date on this e-mail?
MS. PENZA: And did you have an understanding of who Kim Snyder was?
MS. PENZA: Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1516.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Can you read this?
DANIELA: Yes. This is an e-mail from me to myself with a subject line "Retrieve lost password" and it contains a series of links. This is when I was doing research online to figure out how to hack into those e-mail addresses.
MS. PENZA: And when you -- what are the three different types of e-mails that you have?
DANIELA: So, they're grouped. This is the key logger which is the software that logs the key scripts. And there's one that says "Crack AOL" which seems to be like a specifically -- a specific software to attack AOL accounts through, it says remote password cracker. So maybe it's like a brute force type attack and then there's two -- two links under the headline "Paid services." And if it's self-explanatory, then I would imagine it's paid software."
MS. PENZA: So what is going on here?
DANIELA: So sending e-mails to myself is something I tended to do. This is the product of my research. So what's happening is I'm looking up online all of these different things, looking up different threats and isolating the different methods that I think would work.
MS. PENZA: I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1517. Can you -- and I'm sorry, the e-mail we just looked at, that was on November 4, 2005; correct?
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Looking at the next e-mail can you read the top part?
DANIELA: Yes. This is an e-mail from myself to myself again on November 6, 2005, subject line "Test 2" and there's an image attachment.
MS. PENZA: Why -- what is your understanding of this language "test 2"?
DANIELA: It's -- I'm sending myself a test and that is an image that I recognized. That's an image that I had in my computer so what I'm doing is I'm maybe testing the embedding of the software.
MS. PENZA: The subject is Test 2 and in the body Test 2 and there is there's an attachment that's titled white dress JPEG?
MS. PENZA: And this is the image that you recognize?
MS. PENZA: Would you actually embed software in this image like you were describing before?
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1518, you read this e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes. This is an e-mail from me to Keith at his address kunterre@nycap.rr.com. And, so this has some more about some key log software.
MS. PENZA: And the subject line is Magic Lantern?
MS. PENZA: And was that a type of software?
MS. PENZA: And if we look at the second paragraph it says, "Magic Lantern Keystroke Logging Program is one of the several enhancements to Carnivore discovered by the public in mid-November 2001"?
MS. PENZA: And then it goes on to provide more information about -- about the key logger?
MS. PENZA: And why are you sending this to the defendant?
DANIELA: Because this is what we're discussing at the time, all the time. So, I mean, this is one example of written communication where I'm sending that to him, but really our conversations in the house and on walks it's all surrounding this topic at the moment.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1519. Are you familiar with this e-mail?
MS. PENZA: Okay. Can you explain what's going on in this e-mail?
DANIELA: Yes. It's an e-mail sent to me by some service, it seems to me. I registered for a special service that masks the sender. So it would be to use as a complementary to one of my methods to send an e-mail.
MS. PENZA: And this is on November 7, 2005?
MS. PENZA: Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1520 --
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Did you receive this e-mail?
MS. PENZA: And this is also from November 7, 2005?
MS. PENZA: And can you describe what this e-mail is?
DANIELA: Yes. This is another e-mail from myself to myself with subject line "E-Mail Services." So this looks to be a list of links resulting of my research to complete the part of the attack that is the sending of the e-mail. So this is some -- self-destructing-email. So e-mail -- remailers. That's the one that masks the sender. Fakemail also masks the sender. Trashmail, that deletes it. So this is the product of research on trying to bypass spam, trying to get the target to believe it's a familiar sender and possibly destroy the e-mail once it's not being used.
MS. PENZA: Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1521.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: This is an e-mail from November 20, 2005. Are you familiar with this e-mail?
MS. PENZA: Starting at the bottom, can you explain what's happening?
DANIELA: Yes. So this is an e-mail from a person named Ankit Fadia to Edgar Boone, eboone@nxivm.com. That is his personal e-mail address with the subject line "Hello" and -- I mean, it's just an e-mail to Edgar making contact at the bottom it says, "Hackingmobilephones.com."
MS. PENZA: And the next e-mail?
DANIELA: The next e-mail it's -- it's Edgar Boone writes, "Ankit just a reminder for the software. Thank you, Edgar Boone." So I imagine there's been a request for software from Ankit.
MS. PENZA: And does Ankit respond?
DANIELA: Ankit responds to Edgar Bloom on November 19th, "Go to lostpassword.com and download, yes, like a set of instructions.
MS. PENZA: And does that end up getting forwarded to you?
MS. PENZA: And is Loretta, Loretta Garza?
MS. PENZA: Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1522.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with this e-mail?
MS. PENZA: And what is this?
DANIELA: This is another e-mail from me to myself on November 24, 2005 with another product of my research. It seems another utility to recover a password.
MS. PENZA: Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1523?
(Exhibit published.)
DANIELA: This is an e-mail from myself to myself on December 17th, 2005 with the subject line misspelled "Software" with two links that respond to -- to software and then to hack passwords.
MS. PENZA: I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1525?
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Do you see that?
MS. PENZA: And then 1525-A.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Is 1525-A a translation of 1525?
MS. PENZA: Starting at the bottom can you read this chain?
MS. PENZA: Who is Farouk?
MS. PENZA: And can you read what it says?
DANIELA: Yes. It says -- Farouk wrote, "And why haven't you downloaded the demo? It appears that it doesn't have any use restrictions?"
MS. PENZA: Do you know what he means there?
DANIELA: Yes. As I remember, I was trying to have access to a certain piece of software and I was trying to get his help to obtain, like, a cracked version of it so I wouldn't have to purchase this so that it wouldn't be traceable and when I asked that, it seems he's not understanding why I want it to be untraceable.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then does the e-mail -- do you continue to communicate with him about this?
DANIELA: Yes. It appears that way. So. He writes, "Again it seems --- I'm writing back okay, okay. Now all of that is done. The problem isn't in the restrictions on the program itself, but in fact the legal restrictions in general. In fact, I'm not worried read about the company that created the software wanting to track it. The only risk is if anybody wanted to, the transaction can be traced to the person owning f the credit card. That's all. In fact, even that is quite difficult, but it is a possibility. Understand this. The software would be installed and directed from an anonymous computer but if it was ever detected, the only information they would have would be the product ID number (embedded in the program) and from that, the history of the transaction. I hope this is clear enough. If you have any problem with that or have any kind of difficulty please let me know. I can find otherwise. Danny.
MS. PENZA: So what are you communicating to Farouk?
MS. PENZA: And then there is a continuing communication back and forth?
MS. PENZA: And ultimately you say, "Farouk, I still haven't received anything. Send it to me as soon as you can," and he says, "I had resent it to you. I don't understand why you are not receiving my messages"?
MS. PENZA: Do you know anything else about this interaction?
MS. PENZA: I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1526?
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with this document?
MS. PENZA: Can you explain what this is?
DANIELA: So, this is an e-mail from myself to myself, e-mailing me the results of a successful deployment. So the subject line is "Testing self extract. Current user: Administrator" and there's an attachment key log to ESP. And I believe this must have been a computer I tested and infected successfully and the file that is the outcome of the log.
MS. PENZA: Turning to the second page is this the only information that's on the text file?
DANIELA: Yes. So then this may be an infected file for testing. Like a text file that's infected. That would be all.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, I think Mrs. Carby has informed me that I may have missed two exhibits to move in on consent. I think the one I just showed, 1526, and also Government Exhibit 1527.
THE COURT: Any objection to those two?
MR. AGNIFILO: One second, Judge.
THE COURT: Sure.
(Pause in proceedings.)
MR. AGNIFILO: No objection.
THE COURT: All right. Government Exhibits 1526 and 1527 are received in evidence.
(Government Exhibit 1526 and 1527 received in evidence.)
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Daniela, I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1527.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with this document?
MS. PENZA: And can you -- this is from you to you on January 16, 2006?
MS. PENZA: The subject line is D-1. Do you know what that means?
DANIELA: I -- no. I would suspect it's -- not exactly, but the attachment is called Downloads 1 so maybe it's just shorthand for that.
MS. PENZA: And then these letters that are in the body of the e-mail FSDVSDF, does that mean anything?
DANIELA: That means nothing. That is a habit I have of typing something on the in-line text because I know that if I don't, the computer will prompt me, ask me, are you sure you want to send without anything in the body. But it's more work to not put anything in the in-line text, but it means nothing.
MS. PENZA: Then turning to the second page, can you explain what this attachment is?
DANIELA: Yes. This is a compendium of all the information retrieved from the James Loperfido hack. This is a very clean, cleaned up, file. So I have it here organized by the -- it seems the date and maybe even time of the capture and the -- and then there's information that the key log captures automatically, like the IP address, and the key strokes pertaining to that and what I remember about this file is typically files that is the output of a key logger is a very noisy file. It has all the key strokes including spaces, delete, backwards.
So I had to go and clean it up and retrieve only what's really important. In this case there's different websites that are accessed and different passwords are captured. So, for example, in line two, there is a password captured Cinefile, in line three.
MS. PENZA: Can you circle that for us?
DANIELA: Yes. It's right there. The second line there's another password captured. It's quality and on the different line that's a different capture altogether, cinefile, and so on. So, like, the first part of the line will -- will tell you which application it was captured in so the first few lines are all in Explorer. So these are passwords and user names for specific websites. Further along we can see that there's one for Quickbooks. I can try and -- there. And it has some instant messenger applications. So it seems like some AOL services there and then again in Explorer, there is more passwords captured here. Whoops. Here. And here. And there's the e-mail address and there's user names. So this is what this particular software rendered from what I retrieved from the server.
(Continued on the following page.)
EXAMINATION CONTINUES BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Okay, so here we have you circled another password that was captured, loper?
MS. PENZA: And you captured another one down here, and are these all -- cinefile, is that --
DANIELA: Yes, they are repetitive. A lot of people use the same passwords for many different applications, which is a big mistake. But if one observes carefully you will see that there are many different services accessed with the same password, but they're all different.
MS. PENZA: So just going down further, there is a payroll service and there is a password captured?
MS. PENZA: Another cinefile and another one that plays on loper, right?
MS. PENZA: And the next page, another page the same type of information?
MS. PENZA: And then there is another password; is that right, ecv5180?
MS. PENZA: That appears again here (indicating)?
MS. PENZA: Now, would you always e-mail yourself these types of files?
DANIELA: No. In fact, that was a big mistake. That's not something I ever did. I thought I was very cautious. I was very cautious, like nothing was on my personal e-mail address, nothing was on my personal network. And those types of files would be just handed over in a USB, not e-mailed. I would never e-mail those.