Free Transcript - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1

1 2 3 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA __________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

5 vs. 6 GLEN BECK, 7 Defendant. 8 9

CR 03-00890-PHX-JAT Phoenix, Arizona January 16, 2008 9:32 a.m.

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 10 (Evidentiary Hearing re: Petition on Probation) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Official U.S. Court Reporter: David C. German, RMR, CRR Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 312 401 West Washington Street, SPC-39 Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2151 (602) 322-7251 PROCEEDINGS TAKEN BY STENOGRAPHIC COURT REPORTER TRANSCRIPT PREPARED BY COMPUTER-AIDED TRANSCRIPTION For the Defendant: Lawrence A. Hammond Attorney at Law Osborn Maledon, P.A. 2929 North Central Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2794 (602) 640-9000 BEFORE: APPEARANCES: For the Plaintiff: Darcy Cerow Assistant U.S. Attorney Two Renaissance Square 40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408 (602) 514-7500 THE HONORABLE JAMES A. TEILBORG, JUDGE

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 1 of 82

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 GLEN BECK By Mr. Hammond By Ms. Cerow By Mr. Hammond 36 WITNESS: RHONDA By Ms. By Mr. By Ms. SPENCER Cerow Hammond Cerow DIRECT

I N D E X

CROSS

REDIRECT

RECROSS

VD

7,69 22,72 37

53 67

E X H I B I T S 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NO. 1 2 DESCRIPTION Letter from Aliante Apartments Aliante Apartments Lease EVD 9 17

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 2 of 82

3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Phoenix, Arizona January 16, 2008 (Proceedings convened at 9:32 a.m.) THE COURT: Thank you. Please be seated.
09:33:29

I'll ask the clerk to call the next matter, please. THE CLERK: Criminal Case 03-890, United States versus

Glen A. Beck, set for evidentiary hearing regarding petition to revoke probation. Please announce your presence for the record. MS. CEROW: Good morning, Your Honor. Darcy Cerow
09:33:40

appearing on behalf of the United States. THE COURT: Good morning, Miss Cerow. Larry Hammond on behalf of Mr. Beck, who

MR. HAMMOND:

is here with me, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Good morning. This is the time set for the evidentiary
09:33:50

hearing on allegations D and E. You may proceed. MS. CEROW: Thank you, Your Honor. The United States
09:34:04

calls Rhonda Spencer to the stand. MR. HAMMOND: Your Honor, before we begin, can I take

a moment and just make sure that the record is clear with respect to what we're doing today and what we're going to do at the next hearing? THE COURT: You may.
09:34:18

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 3 of 82

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 along.

MR. HAMMOND:

I think it will help us move the matters

It's my understanding from an e-mail that I received from Miss Cerow last night that she intends to put the probation officer on with respect to one half of what was allegation D. second half. They are dismissing, as I understand it, the There are two sentences. The second half of
09:34:31

allegation D they are dismissing.

The first half that deals

with providing a copy of the lease on the San Francisco unit is what they intend to not dismiss today. And then they -- I believe they also intend to put on evidence with respect to allegation E. As the Court knows, at one point we had advised the Court that we thought we had an agreement among counsel. not going to hold them to that agreement. I'm
09:35:21 09:34:59

If they want to put

on information with respect to D, that's fine with me, and if they don't want us to admit E, that's fine with me, too, although as the Court knows and as I've said in a written memorandum we were prepared to admit E as we understood it from the written document. those two. But a couple of important things, Your Honor. It is my understanding, based upon our last session here in court, that there will be a separate evidentiary hearing at a later time on the disposition of this matter and
09:35:55

But we are now prepared to go forward on

09:35:39

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 4 of 82

5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that at that time it is contemplated by the Court, and I think now by the parties, that you might also consider the amount of restitution paid on a monthly basis. My thought on that is that as long as I understand that, as long as I understand that today is just related to these two items, I think it will be pretty short. But I also want to suggest that the parties ought to have some opportunity to try to resolve not your ultimate disposition on these issues but the question of the restitution. It seems to me that it would be silly for us to
09:36:42 09:36:20

have an evidentiary hearing if, in fact, Miss Cerow and the Probation Office and I can resolve the amount. I still haven't I

received anything from what's called the FLU unit in Tucson. have no idea what they've done. But one last thing that I think might be helpful.

09:36:59

Miss Cerow has, I think, confirmed what I thought was the case with respect to matters that the Court may consider in connection with the ultimate disposition, and I think it would help me if Miss Cerow would advise the Court of what her position is with respect to the Court's consideration of matters that have been dismissed. As you know, it was our position that if a matter was dismissed the facts with respect to that are not pertinent to whatever sentencing disposition you ultimately would make, and I think she agrees with that, but I would prefer to have her
09:37:39 09:37:22

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 5 of 82

6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

say that so that we don't have to deal with it any further. THE COURT: Miss Cerow? MS. CEROW: Do you want to proceed with the
09:37:50

Thank you, Mr. Hammond.

evidentiary hearing or go into these other matters first, Your Honor? THE COURT: Well, the two items on my agenda or the

item on my agenda today is the evidentiary hearing on allegations D and E, which I guess the first question is whether you're in agreement with Mr. Hammond that the second prong to D is being dismissed. MS. CEROW: THE COURT: Yes. I was going to dismiss it.
09:38:10

And then I guess it's up -- obviously,

depending on the outcome of today's hearing, if there is found to be a violation the matter will be set for evidentiary hearing, and I suppose it's more appropriate to deal with the scope of that once we determine if indeed there's been a violation. So I guess in answer to your question I think we should proceed with the evidentiary hearing. MS. CEROW: Thank you.
09:38:58 09:38:37

Call Miss Rhonda Spencer to the stand. THE DEPUTY CLERK: THE WITNESS: Your name is Rhonda Spencer?

That's correct. Please raise your right hand.
09:39:12

THE DEPUTY CLERK:

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 6 of 82

7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? THE WITNESS: I do. Please be seated.
09:39:15

THE DEPUTY CLERK:

RHONDA SPENCER, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CEROW: Q. Good morning. Could you please state your name and spell your last name for the record? A. Q. A. Q. A. Rhonda Spencer, S-P-E-N-C-E-R. Where are you employed? U.S. Probation, District of Arizona. What are your responsibilities? I am a supervision officer and have a supervision caseload
09:39:45 09:39:32

of offenders. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Do you supervise Mr. Beck? I do. Do you see him in the courtroom today? I do. Could you point him out and describe what he's wearing?

09:39:52

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 7 of 82

8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

He's wearing a gray suit and red tie. MS. CEROW: Your Honor, may the record reflect the

identification of the defendant? THE COURT: BY MS. CEROW: Q. Now, back in February of last year, 2007, did you have a It does.

discussion with Mr. Beck about any leases he may be involved in? A. Q. A. Yes. And just advise the Court the substance of that discussion. It came to light that he -- there was an apartment in
09:40:07

Sunnyvale, California that I was not aware of and I asked him to provide me a copy of the lease on that apartment and any other offices that he might have that I was not aware of the leases on those as well. Q. A. Q. A. What about the lease in Scottsdale? I already had the information on the lease in Scottsdale. Did you have a copy of the lease? Yes. Well, not the actual lease; a letter from the
09:40:51 09:40:27

apartment complex extending the lease. Q. A. In February? 2007. I believe so. May the witness be shown Exhibit Number 1,

MS. CEROW: please? A.

In February of 2007 I believe I did have his lease.

09:41:26

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 8 of 82

9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A. Q. A.

Okay.

And when did you receive that?

September 6th of 2006. What is Exhibit Number 1? It is a letter from Aliante Apartments telling me that he
09:41:41

has extended his lease that he had prior. Q. Okay. Now, is that a document you received? A. Q. A. From Mr. Beck, yes. And has it changed in any way since you received it? No. MS. CEROW: Your Honor, at this time we would offer

09:41:56

Exhibit 1 into evidence. MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT: BY MS. CEROW: Q. A. How did it come about that you received Exhibit 1? I directed Mr. Beck to get me a copy of his lease that he No objection. Exhibit 1 is received.

All right.

had signed. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Okay. You need to tell us what lease you're talking about.
09:42:23

In Scottsdale, on his residence in Scottsdale. He had an apartment in Scottsdale? That's correct. And this was back the end of '06 or sometime in '06? Yes. Back in May of '06 did you have a discussion with him about

09:42:33

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 9 of 82

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

any leases he was involved in in Scottsdale? A. Q. A. Yes. And what was the substance of that discussion? I'm sorry. In May of '06. Yes. I told him to get me his
09:42:56

lease. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Is that Exhibit 1 you're talking about? Yes. So you requested that in May of '06? Yes. Is he required to get your permission as a condition of

09:43:03

supervision to enter into a lease agreement? A. Q. A. Q. Yes, he is. Did you discuss that with him? At the outset of supervision, yes. And when you met with him in May did he tell you what kind
09:43:11

of apartment he was living in? A. Q. A. Q. A. No. And did he tell you whether or not he had signed a lease? No. When you first started supervising him where was he living? He was living at the same apartment complex in a studio
09:43:25

apartment. Q. A. Q. Okay. And did you talk to him about the studio apartment?

Yes, I did. What did you tell him?
09:43:39

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 10 of 82

11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

I had told him that the price he was paying for the studio I knew of other apartment complexes

I found to be quite high.

in the immediate area that were substantially lower and I felt that he could live in one of those complexes and that more money could be paid toward restitution. Q. And did you advise him then that if he entered into any new
09:43:55

leases you need to authorize them? A. Q. Yes. And after you had the discussion about the studio
09:44:08

apartment, did there come a time when he entered into a new lease? A. Q. A. Yes. And when was that? My understanding was the end of that year. I think it was

2005 I first met with him regarding that and the end of that year, December of 2005, it ended and he signed the new lease in the beginning of 2006. Q. A. Q. A. And did you learn about that in about May of 2006? Correct. And how is it he told you about that? He told me that he had moved into a two-bedroom, two-bath

09:44:18

09:44:33

apartment at the complex. Q. A. Q. And was the rent higher or lower than -Higher. And did he explain to you why he didn't seek your
09:44:46

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 11 of 82

12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

permission? A. Q. No. He did not explain why he did not seek my permission.

And what did you tell him when he entered into the new

lease? A. I told him it was technically a violation to not have
09:44:58

sought my permission. Q. A. Q. A. Did you discuss with him the cost of the apartment? Yes. What did he say? He told me that his daughter had moved in. Originally
09:45:07

when he lived in the studio apartment his son was living with him and paying part of the rent but that when he moved into the two-bedroom/two-bath his son had moved out and his daughter had moved in and she could pay a larger portion toward the rent and that he felt he needed a two-bedroom if she was living with him. Q. And so did you authorize him to say stay in that apartment
09:45:24

at that time? A. Q. Yes. Did you talk to him about any other apartments that might
09:45:35

be available less expensive in the neighborhood? A. Yes. I had -- originally when I first told him about the

studio being too expensive I had suggested a place next door that I had another offender at that I knew was substantially cheaper. We came to find out that one had gone condo and they
09:45:50

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 12 of 82

13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

were not rentals.

But I had explained to him that there were

several other apartment complexes in the area that I had actually called to determine what their rents for two-bedroom/two-baths were and that they were substantially less than the apartment complex he was at. Q. A. Q. And you sent him a list? I did. Okay. And why were you interested in keeping him at a less expensive apartment? A. Q. A. Q. Because I felt he should make payments towards restitution. Okay. And do you remember how much the restitution is?
09:46:16 09:46:06

I faxed him a list of those.

It's over $1.8 million. Okay. So did you request a copy of the lease for that period
09:46:28

of time? A. Q. A. Yes, I did. And did you receive it? I believe a while later. About three months later, I
09:46:40

think. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Is that what you're referring to in Exhibit 1? Yes. Okay. Yes. And he brought this in to you? I believe he brought it in to the office.

Now, when the lease became due, which would be the end of

09:46:55

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 13 of 82

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

2006, beginning of 2007, did he discuss with you whether or not he had permission to enter into a new lease at the apartment? A. Q. A. Q. A. No, he did not. And did he enter into a lease? Yes, he did. How did you learn about that? I asked him at one time on the phone, "Has your lease come I think I asked him
09:47:14

due recently and did you re-sign a lease?"

a couple months after he had actually already done it. Q. A. Q. A. And what did he say? He said yes. He said he re-signed the lease.
09:47:30

Did you ask him why he didn't obtain your permission? Yes. I told him again that's technically a violation to

not seek my permission. Q. A. What did he say? He just said he needs to stay in that apartment, that's
09:47:42

where his daughter wants to live with him. Q. Okay. Now, you indicated that his daughter contributes $500 a month. A. Q. That's what he says, yes. Now, you also talked about restitution. Did there come a
09:47:52

period of time when you learned the defendant was behind on his restitution payments? A. Yes.
09:48:04

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 14 of 82

15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A.

When was that?

Do you recall?

I learned in December of '0 6 that he had not made payments

for approximately three months. Q. A. Did you talk to him about it? Yes. I called him and told him if it became a fourth month
09:48:17

I was -- it was our policy that I would have to inform the Court that he had missed payments and that he needed to make those payments up. Q. A. Q. And how much was he paying in restitution? $100 a month. Now, did he explain to you why he was behind on restitution
09:48:29

payments? A. Yes. He told me his daughter couldn't make rent one month,

could not pay her $500, and that's why he was behind. Q. A. Has he since made up those restitution payments? In reviewing the payment record, it looks like he may be -He's made up two of those three
09:48:44

I believe he's $100 short. payments. Q. A.

And how did you get that information? It's through our payment record that the Clerk of the Court
09:48:58

provides us. Q. Okay. So did he make -- he start making extra payments after you talked to him? A. He did.
09:49:08

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 15 of 82

16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Okay. Now, do you have Exhibit 2 in front of you?

A. Q. A. Q. A.

Yes. Do you recognize Exhibit 2? Yes. What is Exhibit 2? This is when he re-signed the lease on the So the second lease on the
09:49:24

two-bedroom/two-bath.

two-bedroom/two-bath apartment in Scottsdale. Q. A. Q. A. Q. For what time frame? The beginning of 2007, I believe. There's no date on it. Yeah. It says here for the beginning of 2007. The lease term. Okay.
09:49:56 09:49:36

Let me see.

Oh, I see.

And how is it you got this document? A. Q. A. He provided it to me after I directed him to. And this was after he had already entered into the lease? That's correct. MS. CEROW: BY MS. CEROW: Q. Has this document changed in any way since you originally Your Honor, at this time we --.

09:50:06

received it? A. No. MS. CEROW: Your Honor, at this time we would offer
09:50:12

Exhibit 2 into evidence.

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 16 of 82

17

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT: BY MS. CEROW: Q.

No objection. Exhibit 2 is received.

All right.

For the time period of 2008, did the defendant renew the
09:50:29

lease again? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Yes, just recently. For the same apartment? Yes. Do you recall what the rent is? It's 1,200 -- $1,290.96, I believe. So it went up in 2007 from the original amount. From the original amount. Okay. And when did you learn he had recently signed a lease for the 2008 time period? A. Q. A. I was informed of it December 19th. He left me a message. It had gone up $30.

09:50:35

09:50:53

And what did he tell you on the message? He told me he had re-signed a lease and questioned whether

I needed him to get that faxed over to me. Q. A. Did he seek permission to sign it? Not before -MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance.
09:51:08

The relevance? Relevance to -I'm asking Miss Cerow.
09:51:21

MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT:

I heard you.

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 17 of 82

18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

MR. HAMMOND: MS. CEROW:

Oh.

I'm sorry.

Your Honor, I guess it goes to -- if the

Court finds he's violated, then I'm just saving the Court time, in essence, of I would present it at the disposition hearing. It's the continuing conduct of not obtaining her permission to enter into a lease. MR. HAMMOND: Your Honor, if that is her basis for One is, we ought to do it at
09:51:35

doing it, let me say two things.

the disposition hearing, but I should also advise the Court that if this is the position they take I am now a witness and I would want to testify and I'd want to have somebody from my office examine me. And I -THE COURT: Why does that make you a witness? Because I was the one who confirmed that
09:52:03 09:51:51

MR. HAMMOND:

he could renew the lease in a conversation both with Miss Cerow and with the probation officer standing within or sitting within feet of us prior to the hearing on December the 10th. THE COURT: Well, I will sustain the objection without
09:52:25

prejudice to raising this at the time of a disposition hearing if that does materialize. MS. CEROW: THE COURT: Thank you. I have no further questions.

Cross-examination? Your Honor, there having been no
09:53:02

MR. HAMMOND:

testimony adduced with respect to allegation D having to do

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 18 of 82

19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

with the apartment in Sunnyvale, I ask that that allegation be dismissed. THE COURT: MS. CEROW: office. lease. Miss Cerow? Your Honor, it doesn't say the Sunnyvale It doesn't specify which
09:53:34

It just says all leases.

Her testimony is just regarding the Scottsdale lease. THE COURT: MS. CEROW: Right. As I advised the Court at one of our

hearings, the question regarding the California office, I had talked to Mr. Hammond about that and we were dismissing all the allegations regarding the California office. testimony's limited to Scottsdale. THE COURT: I don't see what there is -- I mean, So that's why her
09:53:48

the -- the particular allegation is that he violated Special Condition Number 2 by virtue of having been directed on February 6, '07 to provide the lease-related contracts for any and all office space in all districts. This needs to be And I
09:54:14

provided to the probation officer by March 5, 2007. guess the proof is what the proof is. there's anything to dismiss. MR. HAMMOND:

I don't know that
09:54:43

Your Honor, the reason I said that is

that throughout these proceedings the allegation with respect to his Scottsdale apartment has been covered by allegation E. The allegation with respect to D dealt with the office apartment in California, and we indeed responded to it that way
09:55:07

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 19 of 82

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

throughout the -THE COURT: Well, you know, you keep raising all this

stuff that occurs, and I'm looking at -- I'm looking at the formal charge here. I've heard the evidence. There's nothing
09:55:25

here that specifies a particular charge with respect to California. Obviously, if there's no evidence adduced that he

failed to provide something with respect to California, how could I find that he violated it in that respect? only evidence I've heard. dismiss. MR. HAMMOND: Well, if -- if -- I'm sorry if I'm This is the

I don't know what there is to
09:55:50

irritating you, Your Honor, but -THE COURT: Well --- it is important to us that there not
09:56:02

MR. HAMMOND:

be an allegation here before you with respect to -THE COURT: Well --- the California --

MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT: Show me.

Point out the allegation, Mr. Hammond.

I'm dealing with issues that have been framed by the
09:56:15

papers in front of the Court. MR. HAMMOND: Your Honor, and maybe I just don't read

this correctly, but the way I read this it says, "Provide the lease rental contract for any and all office spaces in all districts." There has been not a word of testimony about office
09:56:29

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 20 of 82

21

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

space.

The only office space lease is in California.

If we

agree that there's been no testimony about the office space, then -- then we can -- we can simply assume and I would ask the Court to assume that there having been no evidence on that it ought to be dismissed. THE COURT: apologize. All right. And I now see your point. I
09:56:52

I'm reading this as including both office -- I was

reading this more broadly to be leases, including office space. So I apologize for my apparent irritation. irritation. Miss Cerow, it does seem his point is well taken. This particular allegation only seems to address office space and not -- and it does seem like the only evidence adduced would fall under allegation E. MS. CEROW: Well, that's true. And there is no
09:57:38

Perceived
09:57:20

evidence that the Scottsdale apartment is an office, but we've provided the information to the Court so the Court would have it. THE COURT: All right.
09:57:49

Well, then wouldn't that logically leave us only with -- wouldn't that logically then compel the Court to dismiss allegation D for failure of proof and leave only -well, I gather, a violation of E in the form of incurring new financial obligations. MS. CEROW: I would -- yes. I wouldn't object to

09:58:18

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 21 of 82

22

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that. THE COURT: dismissed. MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT: cross-examine. MR. HAMMOND: And I will. Thank you.
09:58:28

All right.

Then allegation D is ordered

But you still have the right to

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. HAMMOND: Q. Miss Spencer, let's now focus on your communications with
09:58:32

Mr. Beck with respect to his Scottsdale apartment. A. Q. Okay. Am I correct, then, in concluding that when he became your
09:58:57

probationer you learned very quickly that he was living in a studio apartment in Scottsdale? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. That's correct. You knew the location of the apartment? Yes. And you knew the amount of rent he was paying? That's correct. You knew that from several different sources. You knew it

09:59:10

first because you met with him when he became a probationer and you spoke to him about a number of things, but including his living arrangements.
09:59:23

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 22 of 82

23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q.

That's correct. You also received on a monthly basis a report from him? That's correct. And in that report he put his address? Right. He put the amount of rent he was paying? Correct. There's a little financial thing in every monthly statement
09:59:32

that he filed? A. Q. A. Q. Uh-huh. And that was in there from the very beginning. Correct. And early on after he became your probationer you went out
09:59:42

to his apartment house to the place where he was living in the studio and you met with him there. A. Q. I did. So sometime early on -- and I'll ask you if you know the
09:59:57

precise date -A. I don't but I know it was in -- within just two to three
10:00:09

weeks of him getting on supervision. Q. And you know that because that's sort of your practice

generally? A. Yes. I need to go out and see them pretty quickly once

they get on supervision. Q. And when you met with him there you saw the studio
10:00:20

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 23 of 82

24

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

apartment? A. Q. I did. You learned at that time that his son, one of his sons, was

living there. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Yes. And was paying $250 a month. That's what he told me, yes. Did you have any reason to doubt that that was correct? No. You also learned that he was -- his son was moving out. I don't know that I learned it at that time. Sometime in the -- either then or sometime shortly
10:00:44 10:00:35

thereafter you learned that the son was moving out. A. Q. I did. And you also had a conversation with Mr. Beck about the
10:01:02

possibility that his daughter, who is a college-age student, might move in and live with him. A. Q. I did. You also had a conversation with him, and I suggest it was
10:01:20

evident to you, that she couldn't live with him in the studio apartment. A. Q. I did not have that conversation with him. Did you conclude independently that it was unlikely that he

would be able to live with his college-age daughter in the studio apartment that you had seen?
10:01:37

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 24 of 82

25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

No, I didn't make that conclusion.

I actually considered

the apartment, even though it may formally be called a studio, to be more like a one-bedroom because it appeared that it had a bedroom but it's one of those that had like double doors to the bedroom so it's kind of open to the living room. If I remember
10:01:55

correctly, his son was sleeping in the living room. So to be honest with you, I don't think I thought about the fact of the girl's moving in they need a bigger apartment. I don't think I thought about that fact when he
10:02:12

discussed it with me. Q. You don't have a recollection of having any conversation

about that? A. Q. No. Okay. You did talk to him at some point, though, about the
10:02:20

amount that his daughter was willing to pay toward rent. A. Q. Yes. And you knew that she -- she was willing to pay 500 a

month. A. Q. Right. And that you also learned that he was contemplating moving
10:02:30

into a two-bedroom apartment. A. Q. I did not know that. Do you recall talking to him about his desire to stay in

the same apartment complex? A. I -- I did not -- I, for one thing, did not realize the
10:02:52

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 25 of 82

26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

leases was coming due.

We did not discuss that.

At the time that he was telling he me about his daughter moving in, we did not discuss that the lease was coming due, that I recall. He basically was saying to me, "My My son may be moving out.
10:03:12

daughter can pay more toward rent. My daughter may be moving in."

In my opinion, it was -- he was insinuating to me and it was even said to me that he could then, therefore, afford to pay more toward restitution. Q. Well, isn't it indeed a fact that what you talked about was
10:03:27

that with his daughter paying $500 there would be less money going toward rent? A. Q. A. Yes. You knew that sometime very early on. Well, that's what he told me was his plan. He didn't -- he
10:03:45

at the time was not positive his son was going to move out and his daughter was going to move in; he just told me that was likely what was going to be happening. Q. But in March of 2006 you learned that, if you didn't know
10:04:03

it beforehand, and I'm listening to you say that you might not have, you did learn that he had moved into a two-bedroom apartment with his daughter. A. Q. A. That's correct. And you learned that she was paying $500 a month. That's correct.

10:04:16

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 26 of 82

27

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

And if from any other source, you also learned that from

the monthly statements he files with you. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. It does show that he gets $500 from her. And it shows what the rent is. Correct. So you can get both the total rent and the net rent. Right. And it shows his address and the apartment number. Correct. All of those things were fully disclosed. It's not your
10:04:37 10:04:29

accusation or your contention that he withheld that information from you. A. no. Q. A. Q. Or that he tried to keep it a secret from you. No. Okay. You then had some further conversations with him after March of '06. A. Q. That's correct. I think you said on direct examination that you sent him a
10:05:02 10:04:48

No.

That he lied about where he was living or anything,

fax with some locations of other two-bedroom apartments. A. Q. That's correct. Did you have a conversation with him about moving to one of
10:05:18

those other apartments?

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 27 of 82

28

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q. A.

Yes. And what did he tell you? He told me -- well, he at first questioned the safety of

those complexes, and I said that I wasn't going to get into determining how many police reports were filed at each apartment complex and that the area we were discussing was Frank Lloyd Wright and Shea in Scottsdale and that I think most everyone would agree that is quite a safe area and that I would think all of those apartment complexes in that area would be equally safe. Q. A. Q. And did you tell him that at the time? Yes. And did you talk to him about his daughter's attitude about
10:05:49 10:05:33

this? A. I -- he said, "My daughter may not want to move to one of And I said, "That's not anything that I could
10:05:58

those places."

help, that's not -- I can't tell her where the live." Q. But you know that the places you identified, if he had

moved to any of those places without his daughter it would have cost more. A. I don't know that. I didn't check on what a one-bedroom at
10:06:19

those places would be, or a studio. Q. A. Or studio? A one-bedroom or a studio. I had only gotten information
10:06:37

about two-bedroom/two-bath apartments in those areas.

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 28 of 82

29

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

But you also provided what you thought were the apartment

price ranges. A. Q. For the two-bedroom, two-bath, yes. And you know that all of those would have been -- if he had
10:06:52

moved there without his daughter, they would have been more expensive? A. For a two-bedroom/two-bath. Without his daughter paying as

she was at the other, yes. Q. That's right. And you certainly knew that at the time you sent him the fax, that, in fact, it would -- if he were to move into any of the two-bedroom places, it would cost more and not less. A. Without his daughter. But it would not be my intention if
10:07:03

he were moving without his daughter for him to need a two-bedroom/two-bath apartment. Q. Did you identify any places that you thought were suitable
10:07:21

studio apartments? A. Q. Not at that time. Did you even have a conversation with him at that time
10:07:33

about moving into a studio apartment? A. Q. No. I thought I heard you say on direct examination that from

some review of the records you found that he had been three months in arrears at some point? A. Yes.
10:08:06

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 29 of 82

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A. Q.

When did you find that out? In December of 2006. I take it that you have never considered this an allegation

that ought to be made as part of his probation violation. A. Q. No, I have not. Indeed, have you ever told Mr. Beck or us that he was three
10:08:22

months in arrears? A. Q. Yes; when I spoke to him on the phone about it. And it's your memory that you told him he was three months
10:08:38

in arrears? A. Q. A. Q. I told him he was nearly four. And you told him that he needed to make those up? That's correct. And then you said that it's your information today that he Is that what I heard you say on

didn't make them all up? direct examination? A. Yes.

10:08:52

When reviewing -- I had -- to be honest with you, my

impression was prior to reexamining this document I had believed he made them all up. Now going back and looking at But
10:09:11

this document, it does appear he may be one payment short. I'm not alleging that. Q. A. Q. A. I'm not making an allegation.

You aren't making that allegation. No. You're not suggesting that he remains in arrears. Without clarifying what with the Clerk of Court, I don't
10:09:24

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 30 of 82

31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

want to make that allegation. Q. And, in fact, isn't it true and fair for us to say that as

far as Mr. Beck has known he has been current for at least the last year and eight months? A. No, I wouldn't say that because he wasn't current in I believe that's just
10:09:43

September, October or November of 2006. over a year ago. Q.

So a year and a couple of months.

It's your memory that it's those three months and not three

earlier months? A. Yes, it's my -- I can see here on paper those are the
10:10:00

months. Q. And so your position would be he's -- except for the $100

which you're not disputing, he's been current since at least sometime in the fall of '06. A. Q. That's correct. And you remember that there was a question that came up
10:10:13

some months ago about -- and indeed I believe you raised it about whether he had failed to make two payments. remember that? A. Q. A. Yes, I do recall. And it turns out that you were incorrect. It was -- our agency's payment record with Clerk of Court
10:10:27

Do you

had different records than what Probation -- and it was the entire Probation Department was couple of months behind. Actually, Mr. Beck helped us figure that out and it was
10:10:46

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 31 of 82

32

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

corrected after that. Q. So that it became clear through -- probably through

inadvertence here that your office was calculating the payments incorrectly and that Mr. Beck had calculated -A. Yeah. The most recent information from the Clerk of Court
10:11:00

was not reaching the Probation Department is what it was. Q. Let me just make sure that we are in agreement on a couple

of things. You have received from Mr. Beck a monthly report every month since he's been a probationer. A. Q. A. Q. That's correct. That probation report has identified his housing location? Correct. The amount of rent he was paying, both the gross and the
10:11:34 10:11:22

net? A. When you say that you mean including his daughter's payment

or -Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Yes. Yes. Because you could see -- he showed his income. Yes. The $500 he got from his daughter. Right. So those are things you knew throughout the process. Is
10:11:47 10:11:38

that correct?

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 32 of 82

33

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

That's correct. And it's also true that over the last year and a half

you've had -- a little longer you've had a good number of conversations with Mr. Beck about this housing issue. A. Q. Yes. Both conversations that occurred at your office and
10:12:00

conversations that occurred out at the apartment. A. Q. That's correct. Okay. MR. HAMMOND: please. BY MR. HAMMOND: Q. One last question. It is the case, is it not, that there is a specific condition of his probation that relates to his living arrangements? A. Q. I'm sorry. Sure. Isn't Condition Number 7, Standard Condition Number 7, one that requires a probationer to advise the Probation Office within ten days of any change of residence? A. Q. A. Q. That's correct. You aren't alleging that he ever violated that provision. I'm not. Indeed, you would have to concede that he has complied with
10:13:18 10:13:07 10:12:54

Your Honor, give me just a moment,

10:12:11

Can you clarify?

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 33 of 82

34

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that provision. A. Q. I would. Okay. MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT: Redirect? MS. CEROW: Thank you, Your Honor. Your Honor, I have no further questions. Thank you.
10:13:26

All right.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CEROW: Q. I want to go back to the arrears that you testified about.
10:13:33

The defendant was in arrears September, October, November, 2006, correct? A. Q. That's correct. Then there was testimony about confusion with the Clerk's
10:13:47

Office records and the PO records? A. Q. That's correct. According to the Clerk's Office records, did the defendant

make a restitution payment in September of 2000? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. No. Did he make a restitution payment in October of 2006? No. And did he make a restitution payment in November of 2006? No. And you verified that with the Clerk's Office?
10:14:06 10:13:59

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 34 of 82

35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

Yes. When was the last time you verified the Clerk's Office

records? A. Q. Yesterday. Now, just briefly, the defendant, you said, entered into a
10:14:14

lease in March of 2006, correct? A. Q. That's correct. Did he get permission to enter into that lease agreement

from you? A. Q. No. And you again testified that on January 1st of 2007 he
10:14:31

entered into another lease which required a higher monthly payment. A. Q. That's correct. Did he get permission to enter into that lease prior to
10:14:41

signing the lease? A. No. MS. CEROW: THE COURT: I have no further questions. All right. Thank you.

You may step down.
10:14:52

Any additional witnesses? MS. CEROW: THE COURT: No, Your Honor. All right. Your Honor, I call Mr. Beck. Thank you.

MR. HAMMOND: THE COURT:

Very well. Did you leave the exhibits up
10:15:13

THE DEPUTY CLERK:

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 35 of 82

36

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

there? THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Your name is Glen Beck?

THE DEPUTY CLERK: THE DEFENDANT:

Yes. Please raise your right hand.
10:15:20

THE DEPUTY CLERK:

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? THE COURT: Why don't you just hand them to her,
10:15:23

because she needs to mark them. Let me see those after you've marked them, Ms. Bengtson, please. You may proceed, Mr. Hammond. MR. HAMMOND: Thank you, Your Honor.

GLEN BECK, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HAMMOND: Q. A. Q. A. Q. Would you please state your name, sir? Glen Beck. Where do you reside? In Scottsdale Apartments al Aliante, Apartment Number 2017. You are, in fact, on probation, is that correct?
10:16:02 10:15:48

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 36 of 82

37

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

Yes. I want to focus narrowly today on the issue that you've And I want to go back to the

heard us talk about this morning. beginning.

When was your first communication with the Probation Office with respect to your Scottsdale residence? A. Q. In our first meeting. Okay. I don't know the exact date.

10:16:22

The records show that you were sentenced, I believe, Could we safely assume it was sometime
10:16:46

in the summer of 2006. shortly thereafter? A. Q. A. Very soon.

Maybe I was a year off. That's okay.

I think I should have said '05.

It was immediately after sentencing and prior So somewhere within that time frame.
10:17:01

to her three-week visit. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Yes.

You met with Miss Spencer?

You met with her at her office? I did. Was there conversation at that time about your living
10:17:15

arrangements in Scottsdale? A. The fact that I lived with my son and what he pays for

rent, yes. Q. A. What did you say to Miss Spencer with respect to that? That very thing; essentially, that I live in a studio
10:17:33

apartment at Aliante and that my son lives with me and

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 37 of 82

38

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

contributes $250 a month in rent in an attempt to reduce the expense as much as possible. Q. Okay. Did you then have an occasion to meet with Miss Spencer out at your studio apartment? A. Q. A. I did. And approximately when was that? I think -- I think it was within the time frame that she I think it was within a three-week time
10:18:06 10:17:50

had mentioned earlier. period. Q.

So we're still very early on in your period as a person

serving probation. A. Q. Correct. Tell us what you can recall happening at that meeting at
10:18:17

your apartment. A. She appeared with one other individual -- the name escapes

me -- and then took a tour of the studio apartment and we sat down at the table and again reviewed the fact that my son was living with me and that he was paying $250 a month in rent. Q. A. Did you tell her how much the total rent was? I don't recall at that time whether we had that specific
10:18:44

conversation then but we had had it prior to that. Q. A. Q. So she already knew what you were paying? Yes. Both the gross and the net resulting from your son paying
10:19:01

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 38 of 82

39

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

250? A. Correct. It's stated on the monthly report and also on the

bank statements that are supplied every month. Q. And you had by that time already filed your first monthly
10:19:17

statement, do you believe? A. Q. Yes. Okay. Did you have any conversation with Miss Spencer at

that time about relocating from that studio apartment? A. Not that I recall. I don't think my son had indicated at
10:19:32

that period yet that he was going to move. Q. Did there come a later time at which you did have a

conversation with her about your son moving out and the possibility of your daughter moving in? A. Q. At least once, if not twice. Let's take the first one you can recall, and if it prompts But let's
10:19:46

a memory as to a second one I'll ask you that, too.

talk about the first conversation you can remember with Miss Spencer about this topic. A. I was at her office shortly thereafter. The exact date I
10:20:10

don't know.

It would have been the next meeting after she had

been out and reviewed the apartment. Q. Tell us what you can recall occurring with respect to this

topic in that conversation. A. Well, at that point we had discussed again the living
10:20:32

arrangements and I notified her at that point that it appeared

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 39 of 82

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

more than likely, almost inevitable that my son was going to move out and that I was going to have to try to seek another means for trying to keep the rent down as low as possible. I don't recall at that point whether I had mentioned to her yet or even knew, quite frankly, that my daughter had offered to move in if we went into a two-bedroom and she was willing to pay the 500, but she did make the stipulation it had to be a gated community, it had to be in that area or she would -- she would seek a roommate at ASU. Q. Let me unpack that a little bit. At the first conversation that you're talking about here, you can't tell us today whether you even knew that there was a possibility of your daughter moving in with you? A. Q. No, I can't recall. Okay. The part of the conversation you can remember where you told her that your son was moving out, I'd like you to give us a sense of that conversation. with the Probation Office? A. Q. A. No. Was it confrontational? Not that I recall. It was simply -- simply a discussion of
10:22:07 10:21:50 10:21:36 10:21:09

Was it a hostile conversation

the facts as I saw them at that point in time, and my entire intention was to try to decrease the rent as much as possible and stay in that immediate vicinity.
10:22:38

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 40 of 82

41

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Did you have a conversation with Miss Spencer at some later

time at which the discussion with respect to your daughter being a possible alternative, somebody who might move in? A. The conversation I'm referring to we -- I did have that Very -- if not
10:23:03

conversation with her at that point, I believe. that one, it was the next meeting with her. Q.

Tell us what you can recall about the conversation insofar

as it involved the alternative of your daughter moving in. A. That the stipulation from my daughter, who is a student at
10:23:23

ASU, was that rather than seek residence down at ASU she would move in with me as a mutual understanding if she paid $500 in rent and that it was a gated community and that it was safe that she would -- she would live with me, and obviously under the condition that I had a two-bedroom apartment, that we weren't living in the same room, and she said that she would use at that point her National Guard money to do that. Q. A. Q. "She" being your daughter? Yes. And is this all information that you provided to

10:23:53

Miss Spencer? A. Q. Yes. Did you also at sometime provide her a copy of the price

10:24:14

terms of the lease agreement? A. Q. Yes. We saw Exhibit 1 this morning.
10:24:30

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 41 of 82

42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

MR. HAMMOND:

Your Honor, I think you have the

official exhibit, but I'll be happy to show him my copy. THE COURT: BY MR. HAMMOND: Q. Let me ask you to look at what's been marked as Exhibit 1. It appears to have been signed by the
10:24:49

All right.

It has a cover sheet.

manager that specifies what the terms are and what the start date is of the lease? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Correct. And then there's a second sheet to it? Uh-huh. Are you familiar with these documents? I am. Did you provide them to the Probation Office? I did. There's a date on here that says September of '06. Does
10:25:20 10:25:14

that look like September of '06? read the stamp. A. Q. Yes.

It's a little difficult to

I don't know if you can recall the exact date upon which

10:25:35

you provided but would that be a reasonably good guess when you provided? A. I would have -- yes, I would have -- I don't recall the

exact date but I would have provided this as quickly as I possibly could have upon request.
10:25:49

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 42 of 82

43

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Did the Probation Office advise you at the time that you

were talking to them about moving into this apartment and providing them with this lease information that you were not permitted to do that? A. Q. No. Did someone say that if you did this it would be a
10:26:08

violation of your probation? A. No. I have never been told that I cannot do this, I could I was never told that.
10:26:28

not sign the lease. Q.

Did you at some point talk to Miss Spencer about the cost

differential that would arise from entering into this lease and having your daughter live with you in a two-bedroom apartment? A. Q. At least on one occasion, yes, possibly two. Tell the Court about the one occasion that you can remember
10:26:51

clearly. A. I just remember clearly indicating, having gone through the

math before in order to initiate this, that there was a decrease in rent by having my daughter move in with me and paying $500 in the two-bedroom versus the 250 that my son was paying in the studio. Now, the reality is that it's not a fair comparison because that rent from my son was no longer going to be available, the 250. To compare the studio with the 250 versus
10:27:22

the two-bedroom and the 500 is not a fair comparison, again, because the 250 was just not going to be there.
10:27:42

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 43 of 82

44

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A. Q. A. Q.

Your son was moving out. He was moving out. You are divorced, correct? Correct. Your son is of an age that he's able to make independent
10:27:51

decisions about his living arrangements? A. Q. He was at least 21, yes. At the time. He's 23 now.

What we heard on direct examination is Miss Spencer say

something about assuming or believing that your daughter might move in with you into the studio apartment. A. Q. Yes. Did you ever talk to Miss Spencer about your daughter
10:28:19

moving into the studio apartment? A. Q. A. Never. Not even a possibility.
10:28:36

Why is it not a possibility? It was very clearly a stipulation with my daughter that if

she were to move in with me that we would have a two-bedroom place where she would have her own bedroom, and I always, and I still think, rightfully so, assumed that to be a fair stipulation for a college student in the National Guard to live with her dad. Q. In your first monthly report after you entered into this
10:29:09

lease with your daughter living with you, did you disclose on the monthly report that goes to Probation and to Miss Spencer? A. Absolutely. Not only the monthly report, but also the bank
10:29:28

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 44 of 82

45

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

statements, personal bank statements, clearly indicate the amount that I get each month from when Marshal was giving me the 250, my oldest son was giving me the 250, versus when my daughter started paying me the 500, and that monthly report -or the bank statement is attached to that monthly report. Q. And at any point in your conversations in 2006 with the
10:29:53

Probation Office, did Miss Spencer tell you that by executing that lease and moving into a two-bedroom apartment with your daughter that you were violating some provision of Probation? A. Q. No. There did come a time later in 2006, though, in which you
10:30:16

and Miss Spencer had some further conversation about other apartment alternatives. A. Q. Correct. Do you know approximately when these conversations
10:30:29

Is that correct?

occurred? A. Q. A. I don't. Would -I know the scene in which they occurred, which would have
10:30:46

been at her office, and there's a sign-in sheet so it would not be that difficult to ascertain the exact date that I was there. But this became a conversation that -- or a topic that we had virtually every time that we met. Q. A. And how often did you meet with the probation officer? I can't recall.

10:31:13

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 45 of 82

46

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A.

Are we talking about meeting three or four times a year? Yes. Something in that area. In other words, not once a

week and not once a month, but probably once a quarter might be accurate. Q. Was there ever a time when you failed to make an
10:31:30

appointment that you were asked to make with the probation officer? A. No. And, also, in regard to your previous question on the monthly reports and the statements, in every single case those have been on time and in her office when they were to be there. Q. The document here Exhibit 1 that's been entered into
10:31:41

evidence indicates that your lease that we've just been talking about for the two-bedroom would expire at the end of November of '06. A. Q. Correct. In terms of placing in context your conversations with the
10:32:08

probation officer about other living arrangements that might be possible, did those conversations occur before the expiration of this lease? A. Q. Absolutely. Okay. Understanding, then, that at sometime between the commencement of the lease, which was March of '06, and the end of the term, which was apparently the end of November of '06,
10:32:34 10:32:24

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 46 of 82

47

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

in that time frame would you summarize for the Court the conversations that you had with Miss Spencer about the possibility of moving to another location? A. Q. A. In regard to moving outside of Aliante? Yes. Yes. We -- she had said that she had had -- she had some
10:32:55

other options for me to explore, and I indicated to her then that safety was a main concern and that the only way that I could economically afford to do that would be if my daughter would move with me. She then indicated that there was a place
10:33:18

next door and, as she correctly stated earlier, it was an apartment and it was turning condo. and was told it was condo. So I did check into that

That gave me a real strong sense of

hesitancy in terms of really pursuing anything else. She does indicate that she had faxed me a sheet of apartments. To my recollection, I never received that sheet.
10:33:48

And it just quickly became apparent to me that there was no way I could economically reduce the rent by moving out, even if I went into a one-bedroom or studio apartment, without the $500-a-month subsidy that I was receiving from my daughter. Q. Just so we have those numbers correct, the rental for the
10:34:15

two-bedroom with your daughter in it was $1,260 a month correct? A. Correct.

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 47 of 82

48

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

$500 a month, if my arithmetic is correct, would take it

down to 760? A. Q. Correct. Were there any alternatives presented to you or available
10:34:43

to you that would have allowed you to spend less than $760 a month? A. Q. A. Not even close. Did you -Within -- meaning that we were talking at least a hundred,

if not more, maybe upwards of 200, 250 after tax, which is -when she gave the rent and she quotes these rent figures she doesn't include the tax, and that's an additional expense as well. Q. A. Q. A. Did you also take into account the cost of moving? Absolutely. What -And I did communicate that to Rhonda as well, at least on

10:34:57

10:35:16

one occasion, that there would be a cost of moving, not only from producing revenue, because I couldn't be at my business, but also purely from an expense standpoint of what it would cost to do that. Q. In these months where you had conversations with the
10:35:32

probation officer, was there ever a time that she said here, here is a place that will be cheaper than $760 taking into account all of the other factors that would save money so that
10:35:55

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 48 of 82

49

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

more could be paid to restitution? A. Q. A. Q. No. That never happened? Never. Was there ever a time that she told you that if you stayed
10:36:02

in that apartment where you already were that you would be in some way in violation of a term of probation? A. Q. No. Take a look at Exhibit 2, please. Have it there in front of you? A. Q. A. Q. A. I do. Are you familiar with this document? I am. What is it? It's the lease agreement for Aliante Apartments. It's
10:36:50 10:36:44

the -- I believe it's the first page of the lease. Q. And this is a lease that shows what the amount of the

payment was on a monthly basis? A. Correct. It shows the address, the monthly amount and also
10:37:11

the duration of the lease. Q. A. Q. And who is Kelly Ann who's referred to here in the -Kelly Ann is my daughter. She's the person we've been talking about that's going to

pay the $500 a month? A. That's correct.
10:37:25

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 49 of 82

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A. Q. A.

Did you provide this lease to the Probation Office? If it was requested I did. You just don't remember whether you did or not? I don't remember whether I did or not but I can assure you
10:37:35

if it was requested I would have provided it immediately. Q. In your dealings with the Probation Office on this

apartment in Scottsdale, has there ever been a time when Miss Spencer asked you for lease information that you didn't give her? A. Q. No. Absolutely not. Was
10:37:53

Was there ever any time -- and we're now into 2007.

there ever a time during 2007 prior to the initiation of these proceedings that Miss Spencer told you that by entering into the lease or staying in those premises you were in violation of a term of your probation? A. Q. Absolutely not. Miss Spencer says that -- I think you heard her say this
10:38:14

morning that she told you that by not obtaining her approval in advance you might be technically violating a term of probation. Do you ever recall her saying that to you? Do you remember her saying -A. Q. I honestly do not recall having heard that. Okay. Certainly were never told that it was something that might be a sufficiently substantial violation that it would -10:38:54 10:38:34

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 50 of 82

51

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that it would call for the possibility of the revocation of your probation? A. Q. That I can tell you with absolute certainty no. Let's be clear about this. Was there ever any conversation
10:39:11

between you and Miss Spencer suggesting in any way that the living arrangements you were making first with your son and then with your daughter were in any way a violation of probation sufficient that your probation could, in fact, be revoked or that you could be in some way punished? A. Q. Absolutely not. Is there anything else you recall with respect to the

10:39:28

communications with the Probation Office on the terms of the lease itself or the communications about them that I haven't asked you about? A. In regard to the -- in regard to the Scottsdale personal
10:39:52

apartment? Q. A. Q. Yes. No. The last thing I want to ask you about is the statements
10:40:04

here this morning that you might still be a hundred dollars in arrears. First of all, had you ever been told that you might still be a hundred dollars in arrears? A. Q. No. Are you in arrears?

10:40:15

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 51 of 82

52

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

I keep the cashier's check receipts filed on a monthly

basis and I can say with almost a hundred percent certainty that I have to be current and that I have every single monthly cashier's check and can provide that to the Court, as I had to do before for the other period when I was told that I was behind. Q. And you do recall that a few months ago there was a
10:40:43

suggestion that in some way you were behind, that there had been two payments that might have been missed? A. That's the incident I'm referring to where I do have the
10:41:00

cashier's check receipts and keep them filed chronologically so that if Probation needs that I can certainly provide proof that I did, in fact, make that hundred dollar payment that they're saying I didn't make. Q. And indeed, on the occasion that we were just talking about
10:41:17

you did exactly that, didn't you, provided the cashier's check -A. Q. A. Correct. -- copy? Correct. MR. HAMMOND: on this topic. Your Honor, I have no further questions
10:41:25

Thank you. Miss Cerow? Yes. Thank you.

THE COURT: MS. CEROW:

UNITED STATES Case 2:03-cr-00890-JAT Document 74 DISTRICT COURT Filed 01/23/2008

Page 52 of 82

53

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BY MS. CEROW: Q. A. Q. Good morning. Morning.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

It's your testimony that Miss Spencer never ever told you

10:41:41

that you needed to get her approval before you entered into a lease? A. Q. No, I don't recall. You testified earlier you were emphatic that she never told
10:42:02

you that. A. Q. That she never insisted that I get her approval? The question is, is it your testimony that Miss Spencer

never told you you needed prior approval from her to enter into this lease agreement with the Scottsdale apartment? A. Q. A. I honestly don't recall. You don't recall what? I don't recall having a conve