5.CDF Trust Evidence — Deposits Allowed, Payment Details Limited
74 lines(Side-bar end.)
(Continued on following page.)
(In open court.)
THE COURT: All right, the objection is overruled.
Government's Exhibit 605 is received in evidence.
(Government's Exhibit 605 received in evidence.)
MR. LESKO: Thank you, Your Honor. Now we are going to move on to another section.
(Jury exits.)
(In open court; outside the presence of the jury.)
THE COURT: The witness may stand down.
Please, do not discuss your testimony with anyone.
ANTHONY VALENZIANO: Of course, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right, we will take 45 minutes for lunch.
(Continued on following page with AFTERNOON SESSION.)
AFTERNOON SESSION:
(In open court - jury not present.)
(Judge NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS enters the courtroom.)
COURT CLERK: All rise.
THE COURT: Please, bring in the witness. Is there a witness?
MR. LESKO: There is a witness, but we would like to discuss one matter, Your Honor, briefly. It's something we talked about earlier.
THE COURT: All right, wait on the witness.
All right, go ahead.
MR. LESKO: Thank you, Your Honor.
We just wanted to get some guidance from the Court regarding the CDF trust documents. This is the Clare Bronfman trust.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. LESKO: Just so the Court is aware, we have the Wells Fargo bank records and we have a schedule that has been prepared that indicates and lists both deposits and disbursements as well as payees. A typical schedule.
THE COURT: There is nothing typical about that schedule.
MR. LESKO: Well, this is true. The format is typical.
And just to sort of go to the bottom line here; we do think the amounts that were deposited into the trust are highly relevant and, I think, consistent with the Court's order.
THE COURT: We are not going to -- just the amounts. Not with regard to the payees or how much was paid to the payees.
MR. LESKO: Correct.
THE COURT: My sense is that would be somewhat prejudicial and I do not think we ought to do that.
MR. AGNIFILO: That's fine.
So, there will be the amount that goes into the trust.
THE COURT: Yes, 14 million. It is a round number, so to speak.
MR. AGNIFILO: Right.
THE COURT: Fourteen million.
How are you going to do it? You can redact all of the rest of it.
MR. LESKO: I think the, what we would like to do is admit the bank statements and then, not publish them to the jury, ask the witness to indicate where deposits were made into the trust.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. LESKO: And then afterwards, we will do a full redaction and then the Exhibit would be ready for the jury.
THE COURT: You are going to have the witness go through every deposit, is that it?
MR. LESKO: There are not that many, Your Honor. I think it's a total of six or seven.
MR. AGNIFILO: And then what are we going to admit in terms of -- forgetting the amounts of the money, which I understand is off-limits, but what are we going to admit into evidence in items of who's getting the money? The whole array of people? I'm just trying to understand.
THE COURT: Who is getting the money?
MR. AGNIFILO: Yes. So...
THE COURT: Lawyers.
MR. AGNIFILO: I mean, but are we going to be able to establish that Lauren Salzman's lawyer was paid from the trust, we were paid from the trust, other people were paid from the trust? I'm just trying to get an idea of what is going to happen.
THE COURT: Who is going to be the witness on this?
MR. LESKO: An IRS investigator.
THE COURT: Let the IRS investigator indicate how many people received some payment from the trust. It is a lot of people, not just five or six counsel for the defendants who were charged. I mean, there were --
MR. AGNIFILO: In excess of 20.
THE COURT: -- a lot of lawyers, including lawyers who never showed up here.
MR. AGNIFILO: That is true.
THE COURT: That is true.
MR. LESKO: Your Honor, it may make sense if Your Honor allows me to lead the witness a little bit just to get through this.
THE COURT: Yes, yes, yes. As long as you do not identify who got how much. Then we are okay.
MR. LESKO: Okay.
THE COURT: Because I think it would be very prejudicial to identify just two sets of lawyers, even though there have been many lawyers who received payment. So, that is it.
Do you plan to call the grantor of the trust?
MR. LESKO: No.
THE COURT: Okay.
Is there anything else?
So, this afternoon. Let's talk about this afternoon. How much more?
MR. LESKO: I'm almost done with this witness, I'd say five, ten minutes.
MR. AGNIFILO: A short cross-examination, ten minutes tops.
THE COURT: Then?
MR. LESKO: So, if we get to Investigator Guerci by say 2:30, I do not think I have until the end of the day. I think we will be done in two hours or less, and that includes cross-examination.
MR. AGNIFILO: I don't know exactly what they're going to go through. I don't see a very long cross, though.
THE COURT: And that is it for today?
MR. LESKO: That's all we have for today, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Well, I cannot say I am disappointed.
MR. AGNIFILO: This means we will get our letter in at 2:00 a.m.
THE COURT: Another letter?
MR. AGNIFILO: No, Judge, I hope there is no more need for a letter.
THE COURT: Okay.
So, let's get the witness in here and then the jury. Thank you for your cooperation.
(Witness resumes stand.)
THE COURT: Do you think we need to meet at 9:15 tomorrow?
MS. PENZA: No, we don't, Your Honor.
(Jury enters.)
THE COURT: Please be seated.
You may continue your examination of the witness.
The witness is reminded he is still under oath.
ANTHONY VALENZIANO: Of course, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay.