1.Michael Weniger — Direct (Part 2)
644 lines(In open court - jury not present.)
(Judge NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS entered the courtroom.)
THE COURT: Good morning.
MS. PENZA: Good morning, Your Honor.
(Defendant entered the courtroom.)
THE COURT: Appearances.
MS. PENZA: Moira Penza, Tanya Hajjar, and Mark Lesko for the United States. Special Agent Michael Lever and Paralegal Specialist Teri Carby are also at counsel table.
Good morning.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MR. AGNIFILO: Good morning, Your Honor. Marc Agnifilo, Teny Geragos, Paul der Ohannesian, and Danielle Smith for Keith Raniere, who is with us here this morning in court.
Good morning.
THE COURT: Good morning, everyone.
MR. DEROHANNESIAN: Good morning, Judge.
THE COURT: All right, please be seated.
I am going to start by discussing some scheduling issues.
As I noted earlier, we have three jurors who have travel commitments, I would say, beginning with Juror 11 on 6/23, Juror 5 on 6/25, and Juror 6 on 6/27.
And the schedule that we outlined on Friday makes it likely that the jury would not receive the case until sometime late on Wednesday and that would only give the jury either two days, Thursday and Friday; or three days, if they were willing to sit on Saturday, to resolve the case.
And it would appear to me that with the -- I am looking at the list of evidence in the case, I have not counted, but it is a lot. And the fact that there are going to be extensive instructions of over a hundred pages, and that this is a racketeering indictment, that it is going to take a good deal of time for them to sort through everything.
So accordingly, I am going to push the whole thing forward, closer. I need to have a charge conference tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. And let's make sure that the defendant is produced for that.
Monday morning we will have closing arguments, we will start closing arguments. And I am going to ask everyone to tighten up their closing arguments, not to leave anything out, but to make their closing arguments focused and robust, but not expansive, if at all possible.
I am not telling you how much time. I am not limiting you. You can speak as long as you need to. But just remember, the sooner we get this case to the jury, the more likely it is that we won't need to replace a juror and then start from scratch.
And I am going to tell the jury that what we are trying to do is to give this case to them as early in the week as possible. And also tell them that if they are unable -- if they haven't reached a verdict by Friday, and they are willing to sit on Saturday, that we can accommodate that as well.
But they need to know that we are trying to get this to them as quickly as possible.
Any comments?
MR. AGNIFILO: Nothing from us.
MS. PENZA: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right, 11:00 a.m. tomorrow for a charge conference.
Has everyone received the first draft of the charge?
MR. AGNIFILO: We have.
MS. HAJJAR: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right, and we have received the Government's language.
Now, I also have two letters from the Government. I think there's the -- is there -- the forfeiture letter. Do we need to talk -- oh, hi. Ms. Orenstein, come on up.
What is the Government's position on the jury dealing with -- potentially dealing with forfeiture?
MS. ORENSTEIN: Your Honor, our position is that because we are not seeking any specific assets, but only a forfeiture money judgment, that there is no right to retain the jury to determine that.
We could do it all on papers, or if we need a hearing we can do that later on, but not with the jury.
THE COURT: All right, thank you.
And I would like to hear from the defense on that, whether orally now or at a later date.
MR. AGNIFILO: Well, I think Ms. Orenstein is correct, but I do want to just check a couple of things on --
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. AGNIFILO: -- and if that's right, then we'll agree.
THE COURT: All right, just let me know.
Okay. Thank you, Ms. Orenstein. Have a nice day.
MS. ORENSTEIN: Thank you.
THE COURT: Okay. Anything else before we start?
About how much more do you have?
MS. PENZA: I really believe 45 minutes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. And then the defense?
MR. AGNIFILO: We are definitely going to finish before lunch.
THE COURT: Okay. At the break, we will have a break, I need to take a short matter. So I just wanted to let you know about that. Okay.
MS. PENZA: I'm sorry, Your Honor, just very briefly.
Government Exhibits 505 and 505-A were discussed at sidebar yesterday, and were offered by the Government.
I believe Your Honor overruled the objection as to them, but we wanted to formally admit them, because I don't think they have been admitted yet.
THE COURT: Do you want to just do it in front of the jury? Is it all right if we do it right here?
MR. AGNIFILO: You can do it here, Judge.
THE COURT: All right, 505 and 505-A are objected to, correct?
MR. AGNIFILO: I'm --
MS. PENZA: There was -- they were -- that was in relation to Ms. Hajjar's witness, Brian Booth, so...
MR. DEROHANNESIAN: I think we -- our objections were on the record and you overruled them.
THE COURT: And you are renewing the objection?
MR. DEROHANNESIAN: Yes.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. DEROHANNESIAN: Yes.
THE COURT: The objections are overruled. 505 and 505-A are received in evidence.
(Government's Exhibits 505 and 505-A were received in evidence.)
THE COURT: Let's bring in the witness.
(Witness enters the courtroom and resumes the stand.)
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, if I may, before the jury -- or even as they come in, but 619 is another exhibit that was admitted, but I think the transcript is in error and has the wrong number. So we just wanted to confirm that 619 is in evidence.
MR. AGNIFILO: That's fine.
THE COURT: All right, 619 is in evidence. Thank you.
(Jury enters.)
THE COURT: Please be seated, everyone.
Members of the jury, good morning.
JURORS: Good morning.
THE COURT: Before we continue with the testimony of the witness, I'd like to go over the schedule with you again.
After reviewing the vacation commitments of three of the jurors, and consulting with the attorneys for both sides, I am revising the schedule.
Tomorrow we will have the conference on the jury charge. Of course, you won't be here, but we will be able to resolve any issues having to do with the jury charge, and prepare a final jury charge for you tomorrow.
On Monday we were not going to sit, we were going to have the jury charge discussion, but we are going to sit. And we are going to start closing arguments on Monday morning at 9:30.
So that gives us an extra day next week. All right? So that Monday and part of Tuesday, at least, we will have the oral argument of the parties, and then I will give you the charge as to the law. And then you will begin your deliberations probably, hopefully, early on Wednesday.
And that gives you Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. And if you have not reached a verdict, and it is possible for you to sit on Saturday, I am more than willing to have you sit on Saturday if you are able to resolve any open issues.
If the jury has not reached a verdict by Saturday the law is as follows, and I just want to share it with you, without making any comment on any meaning that it would have for you:
That if a juror who is deliberating is no longer able to deliberate, the first alternate would take over for that juror, and the deliberations would have to start from the beginning. So to make it less likely that that becomes necessary, we are trying to provide more days next week for you to deliberate.
So this is all in an effort to move the case along and to give you the time next week to carefully consider all of this substantial evidence in the case, and the law as I am going to give it to you in the charge. So I just wanted to advise you about that.
If we get to the point late next week during deliberations where there's a question of whether to sit on Saturday, I will be back with you about that.
So, at this point, we will continue with the direct examination of the witness.
The witness is advised that he is still under oath.
Ms. Penza.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
Your Honor, may I -- oh.
(Continued on the following page.)
MICHAEL WENIGER, called as a witness by the Government, having been previously duly sworn/affirmed by the Courtroom Deputy, was examined and testified further under oath as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: This is -- I am showing what's already in evidence as Government Exhibit 669.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, good morning.
MICHAEL WENIGER: Good morning.
MS. PENZA: Yesterday when we looked at this was the website from the NXIVM, this was the NXIVM website regarding Keith Raniere?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And it had his biography --
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: -- what purported to be his biography?
And it talked about him taking PhD-level mathematics and science classes?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And then we looked very briefly at Government Exhibit 670, which was the defendant's transcript, is that right?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And so I just want to go through some of the classes that he took.
So starting -- I mean, if we just -- and we won't go through all of his entire transcript, but looking at fall 1978, there is a number of C's in various classes, organic chemistry, intermediate mechanics, is that right?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: And then -- and there are some higher level courses on the next page, is that right?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It appears so, yes.
MS. PENZA: And as of -- as of spring 1979, the defendant was placed on probation?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: At that time, his GPA was a 2.26 -- a 2.49, rather?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And then if we look fall 1980, there is an F in general physiology, an F in advanced ordinary differential equations, an F in theoretical physics, and an F in quantum mechanics?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And it says he was placed on probation, and that there was actually academic dismissal on 12/31/80?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And then go down further, there is a D in experimental physics?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then that leads to the final GPA of 2.26?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: I am going to be jumping around topics a little bit this morning, Special Agent.
In the course of your investigation, did you review any e-mails and other documents related to the -- to various financial arrangements?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: So we are just going to look at a couple of those.
Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1383.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Are you -- are you familiar with this -- are you familiar with this document?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I am, yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And do you know what this was in relation to?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I believe this was in relation to exo/eso, a company that was -- that was operated by Danielle.
I should explain. Exo/eso is one of the umbrella companies under NXIVM.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And I know the screen is going in and out, but I can -- why don't --
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, may I just approach the witness and ask him while we're waiting?
THE COURT: Yes, you may.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, I am just going to ask you some questions about this document.
Government Exhibit 1383, who is this document to and from?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The document is to Danielle, and it is sent from Clare Bronfman.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And that's the Danielle who -- is that -- is that the Danielle who did the branding in this case?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then who is copied on this e-mail?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Adrienne Styles, Sahajo, Rebecca Davis, Bonnie Piese, and the defendant.
MS. PENZA: And do you know a number of those people to be involved in exo/eso?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, I do.
MS. PENZA: And does this document discuss payments to various individuals?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, it does -- or at least percentages.
MS. PENZA: And so can you just read the percentages that are listed here?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Well, I should mention that the -- the portion that's drafted here is in red, which according to the -- or excuse me, magenta, appears to be -- oh, I'm sorry.
It says -- it states 70 percent to the mentor, 10 percent to the place owner, 10 percent to corporate, and 10 percent to Keith.
MS. PENZA: And is that consistent with other documents that you've reviewed, this idea of 10 percent of proceeds going to the defendant?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, it is.
THE COURT: You can go back to the lectern. And the ELMO is working.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You're welcome.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1827.
Are you familiar with this document?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, I am.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And --
JUROR: Excuse me.
MS. PENZA: -- at the bottom of the e-mail --
JUROR: Excuse me.
MS. PENZA: Yes.
JUROR: It wasn't working. Now it is.
THE COURT: Okay. Please let me know any time that something like that happens.
Go ahead.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: At the bottom there is a forwarded message from someone named Matt Burbach to John Sandweg.
Do you know who John Sandweg is?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I do.
MS. PENZA: Who is he?
MICHAEL WENIGER: John Sandweg is the former acting director of Immigration and Customs, and has since gone out on his own to start a immigration consulting firm.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And do they do other types of consulting as well?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's my understanding, yes.
MS. PENZA: And what was their involvement, just very generally, in this case?
MICHAEL WENIGER: My understanding is that Clare Bronfman was in regular contact and had hired Mr. -- Mr. Sandweg.
MS. PENZA: And is this e-mail in reference to Marianna's visa?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And so I just want to read -- so here it says -- it's talking about a notice of a gift from Keith Raniere to Marianna?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Is that right?
Do you have a -- from review of other documents, and documents that we are going to look at in a second, do you have an understanding of what's happening here?
MICHAEL WENIGER: My understanding is that, and I am not an immigration specialist, but my understanding is that a gift is being made, and then -- with the prospect of investment in order to obtain a visa. There is a particular type of visa that is available and -- in the event that a certain -- a certain amount of -- is invested in -- in the U.S.
MS. PENZA: Okay.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: And the defendant responds to Clare Bronfman or forward -- here and says: I don't have the money yet to make this gift. I won't even be able to assess that for a while, but Pam had a desire to make this gift, which can be done from her estate or something like that.
And this is on December 21st, 2016?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And so at -- December 21st, 2016, the defendant says: I don't have the money yet to make this gift?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: And then do you know whether there was -- there were funds transmitted to Marianna?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And who ended up transmitting those funds?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I believe Clare Bronfman's assistant transferred those funds, and they're -- Clare Bronfman's funds were transferred, ultimately.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And I am showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1829.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with this?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And where did we -- do you know where we obtained this, this document and the page behind it?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I am not certain. Maybe from the estate, but I'm not certain.
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with something called Steiner Redevelopment?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, it's in the Brooklyn Navy Yard.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And was this -- was that part of this investment visa, there was going to be an investment in this -- the Brooklyn Navy Yard?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right, yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And do you know whether we received documents from Steiner Redevelopment?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I assume that's where this comes from.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And this is a check that was -- that is dated February 3rd, 2017?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: And the remitter is Michele Tarzia?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And who is Michele Tarzia in relation to Clare Bronfman?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Michele Tarzia is a bookkeeper for a number of Clare Bronfman's companies.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And it's a check for $525,000?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: And then this is a Notice of Gift?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And it is dated January 30th, 2017?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And it's from Clare Bronfman?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: Again, jumping topics.
THE COURT: What exhibit was that, again?
MS. PENZA: That was Exhibit 1829, Your Honor.
THE COURT: 1829, okay. Thank you.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, are you familiar with something called a sheriff's ID?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I am.
MS. PENZA: Can you just explain what a sheriff's ID is?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Sure. Certain counties within the State of New York, their sheriff's offices will -- will -- assuming that you provide the appropriate documents, will create an identification card. It's similar to, like, a New York City identification card that one can get.
And it's just for purposes of -- of -- of utilizing as an identification card. It's not specific to, I think -- you know, it's -- it's for any citizen that resides within that county.
MS. PENZA: Now, showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1819.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Is this something that you're familiar with?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And is this a -- this is a subset of a larger attachment that was attached to this e-mail?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: Okay. So can you just -- can you just explain the "To"/"From" and the attachments?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Certainly. So the "To" is from a Proton e-mail that we have associated with the defendant. The "From" is also, obviously, from the defendant. It was sent on November 25th of 2017, and it is a forward of a super backup to an SM -- to SMS messages.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And the -- the full document that was actually attached, is that approximately 2,000 pages?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: Have you reviewed every page of that?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I have not.
MS. PENZA: In general, can you explain -- were -- did you -- did you review it enough to have a sense of what the document was?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It appeared to be SMS messages.
MS. PENZA: Whose SMS messages?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The defendant's.
MS. PENZA: I am just going to point you to -- in this specific portion, were there specific messages that you are going to highlight for us?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And so who are those messages between?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Those messages are between the defendant and Kristin Keeffe.
MS. PENZA: And what is the -- the -- is the -- when is the timing of these messages?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The timing is during Daniela's transport back to Mexico after she was in the room.
MS. PENZA: And so, obviously, the type is a little difficult to see here. Were you able to make some sense out of it?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And was there something in particular that was -- that was helpful?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The -- the types, the -- if it -- the reference to Type 1 and Type 2 was -- I was able to determine which -- which individual was the sender and the recipient.
MS. PENZA: And did the type actually refer to the direction that the --
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: -- that the message was going?
And was Type 1 incoming and Type 2 outgoing?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: So Type 2 messages are being sent from the defendant?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: And we won't go through all of these, but starting here (indicating), this is a Type 1 message?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: And who is it from?
MICHAEL WENIGER: (No response.)
MS. PENZA: Sorry. Can you see?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Kristin Keeffe.
MS. PENZA: Sorry. This one (indicating)?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Oh, excuse me. Lauren Salzman.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And this message is being sent on February 10th, 2012?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And can you just try to read it, without reading -- it appears that where there's an apostrophe or something like that, there is a little abbreviation for that.
But if you could just read, generally, what it says.
MICHAEL WENIGER: Sure.
I'd like to go to sleep in the next half hour. I will set my alarm for 7:00 a.m. You can wake me any time between now and then. I plan to go to Wilton at 8:00.
MS. PENZA: And then does that message actually continue?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It appears so, yes.
MS. PENZA: And how does it continue?
MICHAEL WENIGER: 8:15 a.m. with Kristin. XO.
MS. PENZA: And from Lauren Salzman?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: And Wilton, can you just remind us what Wilton is?
MICHAEL WENIGER: 12 Wilton Court was the residence where Daniela was -- that the -- that her entire family lived.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And just here (indicating), was this the -- was this the phone number you were able to associate with Kristin Keeffe?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: And how were you able to associate that with Kristin Keeffe?
MICHAEL WENIGER: From the contacts within Lauren Salzman's telephone.
MS. PENZA: And if we just start here (indicating), can you read -- and this is Type 1, so this is an incoming message?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And so can you read the incoming message?
MICHAEL WENIGER: My biggest concern is her lack of aspiration in light of her shortcomings. She seems aware that she is a certain way, but doesn't care. I hope to talk.
MS. PENZA: And then does it -- does the -- does the message continue?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Can you read --
MICHAEL WENIGER: Tonight about the reality of what her life will be like versus what it could have been and how drastic this is.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then here (indicating), Type 2, what does that indicate?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It's a response.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And this is also -- so this is a response from the defendant, and then to the same number?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: So to Kristin Keeffe?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: And so what does the defendant say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Be careful she does not catch on, think it is a game...
MS. PENZA: And then if you -- if you can -- and then does Kristin Keeffe respond?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And how does she respond?
MICHAEL WENIGER: What do you mean, catch on to what?
MS. PENZA: And then what does the defendant say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That she thinks you are trying to sell her --
MS. PENZA: Does it look like "sell" is in quotation marks?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
-- sell her instead of presenting reality...
MS. PENZA: And Kristin responds: Got it, no selling?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: And these messages, they are being sent on February 11th, 2012?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: Then -- okay. So starting here (indicating), do you see where my finger is pointing?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. This is a message -- this is a Type 2 message, so a message from the defendant?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: And this is on February 13th, 2012?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And the defendant -- what does the defendant say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Anything more? Are you okay?
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then is this where Kristin responds?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And what does she say? And there's --
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, I am --
MS. PENZA: And there's three responses in a row?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: Can you just read the whole thing?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Sure.
Yes, I am fine, thank you for asking.
She behaves in a way that is very unnatural. It's creepy in a way, although I am unafraid. I think her joy comes from boundary pushing and boundary destruction.
I do not think she minds going to Mexico, nor is she worried about money. She must have come up with a plan in her head. The short period where she exhibited fear ended at lunch.
MS. PENZA: And then does the defendant -- does the defendant respond?
MICHAEL WENIGER: He does.
MS. PENZA: And what does he say to Kristin?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It may be she thought you were trying to scare her. The natural game playing reaction to that is confidence. If she were scared, she could not give up the control by letting you know.
MS. PENZA: And then does the defendant continue on?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Can --
MICHAEL WENIGER: Remember, for her it is only about control.
MS. PENZA: And then he continues on again?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Likewise, the visible overeating.
MS. PENZA: And then does Kristin respond?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And what does she say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Hmmm, need to process that. What do you advise?
MS. PENZA: And then does the defendant respond?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And what does he say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Even if left on a dirt road going nowhere, she will justify and play a game.
MS. PENZA: And then does he continue?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: What does he say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I believe currently she is incapable of remorse or truly admitting she is wrong.
MS. PENZA: And then Kristin responds: Agreed, with a sad face?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then does the defendant say something else?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And what does he say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Before Bobo leaves, she should understand she was tested several times, like your comment to her about her father supporting her. Each time she answers predictably and behaves predictably, with pride and as a game, with no acting conscience.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And then showing you the next page. And does the defendant continue on again?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And what does he say?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Even if she found herself alone on a dirt road in Mexico without money, she would either still play the game or justify her situation with self-pity. She would never have the true recognition she made a bad mistake.
MS. PENZA: And then it -- and then there is another one?
MICHAEL WENIGER: She is incapable of truly and deeply admitting she is wrong.
MS. PENZA: And do you have a -- were you able to tell from these messages when the defendant and Kristin Keeffe were exchanging these messages?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes. As I said earlier, this appears to be during the trip from Clifton Park to the border.
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, I am going to switch topics again.
During the course of your investigation, you, obviously, investigated DOS, is that correct?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: And in your investigation of DOS, did you come -- were -- did part of your investigation involve reviewing nude images?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It did.
(Continued on the following page.)
BY MS. PENZA: (Continuing.)
MS. PENZA: And just in general, was there a commonality to these nude images?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes. The majority were -- were close-up, inner-labia shots and there were also photographs that would include vaginal shots, but also include the woman's face.
MS. PENZA: In general did there also seem to be a significant amount of pubic hair in the photos?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Were -- do you know whether some of these photographs were collateral that you reviewed?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Some were, yes.
MS. PENZA: Now, since -- since your investigation, are you aware of any collateral being released?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. Can you explain?
MICHAEL WENIGER: During the course of this trial, I viewed a video that was on Mexico television of the branding ceremony of Sarah, Sarah being the individual that originally went to The New York Times in November of 2017 and discussed her experience with DOS.
MS. PENZA: And was anybody else in the video?
MICHAEL WENIGER: There were other people. However, the other people's faces were blurred.
MS. PENZA: Was Sarah's face blurred?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It was not.
MS. PENZA: And what state of -- were you able to tell from the video clip what state of undress the people were in?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The majority of the people within the video, I would say within the --
MR. AGNIFILO: Your Honor, could we have a quick sidebar?
THE COURT: Yes.
(Sidebar held outside of the hearing of the jury.)
(Continued on next page.)
(Continued on next page.)
(Continuing.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 550. Are you familiar with this document?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And is this a file structure from a hard drive that you're familiar with?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, of the hard drive that was discussed yesterday.
MS. PENZA: And this was the file structure from the various folders of photographs that were reviewed?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: Are you personally familiar with these -- with these files and the photos within them?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I am, yes.
MS. PENZA: You've reviewed them yourself?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I have.
MS. PENZA: Okay. Can you -- was there anything in common about the way that the Studies folders were labeled that you were able to -- or was there -- was there a particular pattern to the way the folders were structured or were labeled, rather?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes. The folders began with either initials or the first letter of a nickname for the individuals that were depicted in the images inside that particular photo. Obviously what follows appears to be a date.
MS. PENZA: And from your work -- did you actually discover these files yourself personally?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, I did.
MS. PENZA: And when you reviewed them, were the individuals recognizable to you, within the folders?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The vast majority of them were and ultimately I was able to ascertain -- not necessarily immediately with all of them, but ultimately, yes.
MS. PENZA: And how do you go about doing that?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Just comparing images of -- of other available images of individuals that I was aware of from the course of the investigation.
MS. PENZA: Fair to say in this case there were a lot of photos and videos in order -- that that could be compared to?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Absolutely.
MS. PENZA: So, I just want to go through each of the folders and have you explain.
So, the first one starts 4L. Who is the individual depicted in those folders?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Lauren Saltzman.
MS. PENZA: And does the 4L -- how does the 4L relate to Lauren Saltzman?
MICHAEL WENIGER: My understanding was that the 4L was a nickname for Forlorn, that the defendant would occasionally call Lauren Saltzman, Forlorn and would use that abbreviation, 4L.
MS. PENZA: And who was in the folder that begins with the letter A?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Angel Smith.
MS. PENZA: That's just A for Angel?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes. That's my understanding, yes.
MS. PENZA: And then BJ?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Barbara Jeske.
MS. PENZA: And were those photographs of Barbara Jeske inside the folder?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And whose photographs were in the folder labeled D?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Dawn Morrison.
MS. PENZA: And I won't say out loud the second initial, but there's a first initial and a second initial, whose photographs do those relate to?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Daniella and the second letter is consistent with her last name.
MS. PENZA: And the next folder beginning with J?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I believe that that particular folder had pictures that depicted Barbara Bouchey and indicating a nickname that was used -- during the course of the investigation, it was determined that the nickname that was used was JA.
MS. PENZA: Did that JA come out frequently during the course of the investigation?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It was regularly used between the defendant and Barbara Bouchey.
MS. PENZA: And folder beginning with L?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That folder depicted Loretta Garza.
MS. PENZA: Is that the same Loretta Garza that was in DOS?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, the DOS first line.
MS. PENZA: And then the folder that begins MNP?
MICHAEL WENIGER: These images were of Mariana as well as Pam Cafritz.
MS. PENZA: And M -- cap M with a little O?
MICHAEL WENIGER: This folder contained images of Monica Duran.
MS. PENZA: Also a DOS slave?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct; also first line.
MS. PENZA: And then this one, MSK?
MICHAEL WENIGER: This folder contained images of Kathy Russell and during our investigation we determined a nickname commonly within the community for Kathy Russell was Ms. K.
MS. PENZA: And then the folder that starts V?
MICHAEL WENIGER: These images are the images that were shown yesterday and they depict Camila and a nickname utilized for Camila -- there were several, but Virgin Cami or VC.
MS. PENZA: And you reviewed all of the photos in here; correct?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And can you describe generally, were the photos similar in each of the folders?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And can you just describe that?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The majority of the images are photographs of -- vaginas and inner labia of women. Also there tended to be, and that's how we identified them, by virtue of at least one facial shot that also included a nude image.
MS. PENZA: And, in addition to the dates, were there other things that indicated the age of the photographs when you were looking at them?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The photographs did appear to be dated and so one of the things that we did was we tried to look at other items that were within the photographs to see if we could determine, you know, what point in time they were taken.
MS. PENZA: Just one second, please.
(Pause in proceedings.)
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: I'm just going to show you -- I'm showing you -- I folded it in half, but I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 509-D from the folder that begins with the letter A which I think you said was Angel Smith. And was there something about this photo that indicated the age of these?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The telephone. This other telephone that appears to be by her left arm appears to be an older model Nokia.
MS. PENZA: Is that a phone you actually had at one point in time?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It is, actually. In approximately 2002, I had that phone or a similar one.
MS. PENZA: Did you keep it for a while?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I did, yes.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Again I'm going to fold it over, but I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 516-A and this is from the folder that was labeled with the M-o. I think you testified that was Monica Duran?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: It's a little hard to see in here, but you see the VCR?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's what it appeared to be, an older-model VCR.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: And now the folders that you reviewed from the Studies folder, how did they compare to the images that you reviewed in the DOS context?
MICHAEL WENIGER: They were consistent. The images in 2005 -- the images we believe were taken in 2005 were consistent with the images that were obtained either via collateral or otherwise by the defendant.
MS. PENZA: Did you find images in the defendant's e-mail account?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor may I just approach the witness, please?
THE COURT: Yes, you may.
(Counsel approaches.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, I'm showing you what's already in evidence as Government Exhibits 1806, 1807, 1809, 1810, 1811, 1812 and 1814. Are you familiar with those?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, I reviewed these this morning.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And were these -- I'll just go back to the podium now because I have some questions.
Just looking at the dates of these, this is an example of 1, this is Government Exhibit 1806.
(Exhibit published.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: And it's -- the forward was "Legal Citations"; is that right?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: Are these in evidence?
MS. PENZA: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Was there anything to do with legal citations in the attachments?
MS. PENZA: They're all nude pictures?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's right.
MS. PENZA: And it's an forward from Keith Raniere@ -- the original e-mail is February 15 2016?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And it's keithraniere@yahoo.com?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And then that's forwarded on November 25, 2017 to this karateairlinehen@protonmail.com?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And were all of the documents we looked at, were they from similar time periods?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: So, the original message would have been sent 2015, 2016 and then forwarded to the Protonmail account in November 2017?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, that's right.
MS. PENZA: These images from this 2015/2016 timeframe, are these similarly consistent with the same types of images that you've described?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, they are.
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, you said you also reviewed the photographs that were in the folder marked V?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And those were photographs that you identified as being of Camila?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Did you take any addition -- in addition to the steps that we talked about yesterday in terms of the forensics, were there any other steps taken to identify her age in those photos?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Can you explain?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes. Late in the investigation but before trial began, we had a conversation with a witness who indicated that Camila had surgery when she was a teenager on her appendix. At that time we did two things; one, we verified that information. We looked back and re-reviewed the medical records that we were already in possession of, obtained from McGinnis Medical Clinic, which I think is already in evidence, and which did, in fact, reflect an appendectomy when Camila was at the age of 16.
We also contacted the attorney for Camilla's -- a sibling of Camila, and asked and requested a review for any potential medical records that this individual was in possession of. In fact, we got back -- we learned that the individual was in possession of X-rays related to this particular surgery. And, so, we reviewed those X-rays. We reached out to the radiology clinic in regards to the X-rays and they referred us then to the hospital in which the physician that saw Camila at the time and performed the appendectomy and we were able to obtain the medical records from that appendectomy.
MS. PENZA: Okay. So I'm showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 548. Are these some of the records that you obtained?
(Exhibit published.)
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And just -- we've looked at these before, but Camila had appendix surgery on January 9, 2007?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: And have you reviewed photographs of Camila from after January 2007?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I have.
MS. PENZA: And you've reviewed photographs up until how recently?
MICHAEL WENIGER: As recently -- of Camila?
MS. PENZA: Yes.
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, as recently as 2007 -- excuse me 2017, 2018.
MS. PENZA: And in those photographs is there any scar visible from this appendix surgery?
MICHAEL WENIGER: In those photographs, there are. The scars are reflected in those photographs.
MS. PENZA: After January 9, 2007, the scars were reflected?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And did you review those photographs and compare them with the photographs that were within the Studies folder under V?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, I did.
MS. PENZA: And what did you determine?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I determined that in the Studies folder those images do not reflect a scar where the appendectomy occurred.
MS. PENZA: And so what did that tell you?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That told me that the scar -- that those photographs were taken before the appendectomy surgery in 2007. I should add that the appendectomy surgery occurred when Camila was 16 years old.
MS. PENZA: One second, Special Agent.
(Pause in proceedings.)
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, may I approach Special Agent Weniger?
THE COURT: Yes, you may.
(Counsel approaches.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, I'm showing you what are already in evidence as Government Exhibits 530 and 518-F. Are you familiar with these photographs?
MICHAEL WENIGER: I am, yes.
MS. PENZA: And can you -- can you explain them and compare them, please?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Certainly, the photograph on the left is a nude image of Camila and it does reflect -- when I say the photograph on the left, it's Government Exhibit 530 and it reflects a scar on her and on the lower right-hand side.
MS. PENZA: And are you able to tell the date of that photograph?
MICHAEL WENIGER: We do have it. I don't know it off the top of my head, but I can tell you that it's a relatively recent photograph. I believe 2017, 2018.
MS. PENZA: She's branded in that photograph; is that right?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: And then can you compare it with the other photograph?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The photograph on the right which is Government Exhibit 518-F is the image -- one of the images that was shown to the jury yesterday and it does not reflect a scar on her lower abdominal region.
MS. PENZA: Your Honor, these photographs have been redacted. May I ask permission to pass them around to the jury?
THE COURT: And they're Exhibit Number?
MS. PENZA: 518-F and 530 with redaction tape.
THE COURT: Step up here.
(Counsel approaches.)
THE COURT: All right, you may show them to the jury.
MS. PENZA: Thank you.
(Exhibits shown to jury.)
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, I'm turning to the last topic now. Showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1469.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with this?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Okay. And can you just read the From and To in the attachment?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The From is Michele Saltzman. The To is Nancy Saltzman and the subject is Jness KR Form 102412 for 10/24/12, part two.
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, do you know what a Jness form is?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Can you explain briefly?
MICHAEL WENIGER: It's a form typically where the defendant would come and speak to a large group and questions would be asked to him and of him and he would respond and answer.
MS. PENZA: And have you actually reviewed a video forum that corresponds to this document?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: A video forum from October 24, 2012?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: So this is what appears to be a transcript of sorts.
MICHAEL WENIGER: From that forum, correct.
MS. PENZA: I just want to read this portion. And this is -- when it said K, based on your review of the video, would K correspond to the defendant?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: I'm just going to read a portion here. "Now, understand, women. Here's an interesting tidbit for you. Do you know that that -- there is a certain percentage of women that when they get raped they have orgasm even if they don't want it. There are even some women, a few that I've spoken to, counseled, that they never had an orgasm in their life until they were raped."
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And at the bottom on the same topic, "Don't you feel like you should throw her out? Some guy who didn't even give any damn about her came in did what you couldn't do, not even caring about her? Maybe you even work hard to do that. You feel totally insufficient, I think. I mean, one of the things about men, that's our whole thing. We earn. We want to be worthy, we want to be given the laurels. We want to be told we are the champions. How do you do that? You have sex with us.
"We beg, we beg all of our lives as little kids. We're the ones who had to ask the women out on the date we are the ones who get refused over and over again."
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And I'm going to put up a portion that -- this is Government Exhibit 1469.
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: If you could read the highlighted portion.
MICHAEL WENIGER: Sure. "I will tell you I've had in my past various sexual experiences. I've had sexual experiences with women that have had other partners. I have had other partners myself and things like that and these things. When you really love someone, if you really love a woman and she wants to be with another man, it may sadden you and you may feel deeply insecure, but you are going to say Let it be. If you care for her and that is what she wants, do you really want to say, No, you can't; I'm going to put you in your room? That's not love. That's not love for her person. You have to let it go. It is a moral imperative to let her go."
(Exhibit published.)
MS. PENZA: I'm now showing you what's in evidence as Government Exhibit 1071.
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with this?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, I am.
MS. PENZA: And this is -- what is the title of this?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The Human Experiment.
MS. PENZA: And what does this say here?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Level II-C.
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with the different levels of curriculum within NXIVM?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And can you just describe as an overview kind of the progression?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Certainly. So, the kind of the Level I are the intensives, the five-day and the 16-day. And as you move up into Level II and beyond, the -- kind of the rhetoric and the curriculum appears to become more misogynistic as well as there seems to be a great deal of sexual overtones.
MS. PENZA: So just what was the name of this module within the human experiment?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Sex, Rape and Orgasm.
MS. PENZA: And can I just have you -- this says, "Rape as a metaphor for orgasm"?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: I'll actually have you read this portion. Can you read this portion, please?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes. "In the case of rape, it's the same thing. There is the tension ultimately of being overcome, but release and it is a sexual experience. In a sense, it's the very act of sex. Most people feel inhibited during sex because they believe it's bad and, therefore, do not reach orgasm during the act of sex. Often, women who have that report an unexpected experience of freedom which occurs during rape. Women actually become hypersensitive to the sensation of sex because the issue of it being bad or inappropriate does not exist during rape; freeing them to achieve orgasm. It's almost as though they don't experience their normal fears regarding sex which frees them to feel this sensation. This is often a very confusing experience for them because they don't want to like what is happening to them yet they have orgasm.
(Continued on the following page.)
BY MS. PENZA (Continuing):
MS. PENZA: This is Module 9 from the Human Experiment.
Can you just read the top?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The Human Experiment: Module 9. Abuse, rights, and injury.
MS. PENZA: And can you -- it says here: Expert groups. Discuss the following in three rounds: What is abuse? What does it mean to abuse someone? Are all abuses against right? Why would someone want to abuse babies? If someone comes from a country where adults orally stimulate children and they find out according to American culture they have been abused, have they? Who did the abusing? Who is the injured party? Who injured them?
Can you read this one?
MICHAEL WENIGER: A person at age six had a sexual experience with three adults, two male and one female, one of which was a priest another was their parent, and the third was a neighbor. This experience involved almost every time of sex and violence. The person is now 50 years old with no physical effects.
MS. PENZA: Can you read what follows that?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Number seven, how were they injured? Were they abused? What if they enjoyed it, were they abused? What if they later find out it was only a dream, were they still abused? When does a hypothesis of past become abuse? What present data, if any, is needed to support this?
MS. PENZA: I'm just going to have you read starting with the top of the highlighted portion.
MICHAEL WENIGER: If someone comes from a country where adults orally stimulate children and they find out according to American culture they have been abused, have they?
Answer, Yes.
Who did the abusing?
The abuser is our culture, our society.
Who is the injured party?
The person who suffered the abuse is the injured party.
Where is the injury if an adult parent has sex with a child and the child enjoys it?
The person who suffered the abuse is injured. Parents are not supposed to have sex with children in our society. If a parent does have sex with a child, it undermines the societal definition of the parent. The child will go forth and either never disclose it or live with the fact that the parent is not a standard parent.
MS. PENZA: And then it says: Is this a problem? You have to think this through.
MICHAEL WENIGER: That's correct.
MS. PENZA: And then I'll go down to this portion.
Can you read starting here?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Sure: Sex. An adult and a child are having sex. What's the difference between the child feeling good about being tickled and being stimulated?
Answer, One may say nothing, but there's a possibility of disease transfer and pregnancy. This makes it a slightly different act. In the case of pregnancy, it is a profound act.
MS. PENZA: Can you continue?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Is there anything wrong with feeling good through sex?
There is sex that involves disease transfer and no procreation. There is also sex that minimally involves disease transfer and no procreation. For example, an adult manually stimulates the child. Should the child be allowed to masturbate the adult? Should the adult be allowed to masturbate the child?
Answer, These are things students have to think out for themselves. We are raising the issues on how to think about the issue and generate an opinion. Be careful as head trainer not to give an opinion.
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, the last thing I'm going to show you is two videos.
MS. PENZA: Mrs. Carby, can you please cue up Government Exhibit 1005?
And Special Agent Weniger, are you familiar with this video?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
THE COURT: It's in evidence?
MS. PENZA: It is in evidence, your Honor.
MS. PENZA: Can you just describe -- the jury has seen this video before, correct?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: It was played during Sylvie's testimony?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Correct.
MS. PENZA: Can you just explain briefly what the setting is?
MICHAEL WENIGER: This is a Jness meeting, and it involves women of all ages, to include what appear to be teenagers.
MS. PENZA: And there are also women who are DOS slaves in this video?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, that's correct.
MS. PENZA: Mrs. Carby can you please play starting at 29:22 -- sorry 12:58.
(Video plays; video stops.)
THE COURT: If you want, I can have the midmorning break and then you can come back and play that.
MS. PENZA: I only have two videos and that's it for testimony.
THE COURT: The audio can't be heard.
MS. PENZA: Understood, of course. I'm just letting your Honor know this will be it for my testimony.
THE COURT: We'll take our mid-morning break. All rise for the jury.
(Jury exits.)
THE COURT: You may stand down.
(Witness leaves the stand.)
THE COURT: I have a premotion conference to do right now and we'll resume in ten minutes. We're bringing in someone from IT to go over the availability of the audio.
MS. PENZA: Thank you, your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you.
(Recess taken.)
THE COURT: Let's bring in the witness, let's bring in the jury, let's go.
(Witness resumes the stand.)
THE COURT: About how long do you think the cross will be?
MR. AGNIFILO: Less than an hour.
THE COURT: After that, I have another matter. First, we have other things to do.
(Jury enters.)
THE COURT: Please be seated, everyone.
Ms. Penza, you may continue your examination.
MS. PENZA: Thank you your Honor.
Mrs. Carby, can we please play Government Exhibit 1,005 already in evidence starting at 12:58.
(Video plays; video stops.)
MS. PENZA: Thank you, Mrs. Carby.
BY MS. PENZA:
MS. PENZA: Special agent Weniger, this is Nancy Salzman speaking here?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, it is.
MS. PENZA: She's reading from a piece of paper?
MICHAEL WENIGER: She is.
MS. PENZA: Are you familiar with the process of how Nancy Salzman would get the material for these Jness trainings?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Can you explain?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The curriculum -- our understanding is the curriculum was generated by virtue of what they would term "downloads" by the Defendant. So, the Defendant would sit with Nancy Salzman and sometimes others and essentially provide his thoughts on a particular subject matter, and that information would be either recorded and later -- would typically be recorded and transcribed by Nancy Salzman or others and then placed into the curriculum such as you have here.
MS. PENZA: It's the Defendant who is creating the curriculum originally?
MICHAEL WENIGER: That is correct.
MS. PENZA: For this specific video, were you able to determine -- were you able to actually review a different video that showed this process?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: Mrs. Carby, may we show what's already in evidence as Government Exhibit 1003, beginning at 29:22.
MS. PENZA: Sorry, before I start the video, do you know who was in this video?
MICHAEL WENIGER: The Defendant's depicted as well as I believe Nancy Salzman, as well as I think Allison Mack is on Skype or something similar to Skype, and Marianna.
MS. PENZA: Is that Allison Mack's voice we just heard at the very beginning?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes.
MS. PENZA: And Mrs. Carby, can we start at 29:22, please?
(Video plays; video stops.)
MS. PENZA: Special Agent Weniger, is that consistent with the Jness training that we just watched?
MICHAEL WENIGER: Yes, it is.
MS. PENZA: No further questions.
THE COURT: Cross-examination.