Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
2
3
4
Plaintiff,
vs.
JAY MICHAUD,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
9
10
11
12
APPEARANCES:
13
For the Plaintiff:
14
15
MATTHEW HAMPTON
Assistant United States Attorney
1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700
Tacoma, Washington 98402
KEITH BECKER
U.S. Department of Justice
1400 New York Avenue NW, 6th Floor
Washington, DC 20530
16
17
18
For the Defendant:
COLIN FIEMAN
LINDA SULLIVAN
Office of the Public Defender
1331 Broadway, Suite 400
Tacoma, Washington 98402
Court Reporter:
Teri Hendrix
Union Station Courthouse, Rm 3130
1717 Pacific Avenue
Tacoma, Washington 98402
(253) 882-3831
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(Defendant present.)
THE CLERK:
All rise.
presiding.
6
7
THE COURT:
Please be seated.
Good morning.
motion to compel.
10
11
12
13
14
defense objected.
15
MR. FIEMAN:
The government
I gather the
16
17
18
THE COURT:
19
20
So I
21
22
file.
23
24
at that time.
25
It
that the government was in fact willing to turn over the NIT
code.
MR. FIEMAN:
Is that
10
11
minds.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
THE COURT:
So I was surprised by
Yes, okay.
24
I would like to just start with the basic premise here and
25
classified document.
information.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I understand
18
19
20
21
22
23
One is that
24
25
1
2
talking about.
For example, the data stream, which is a copy of the data
10
11
government.
I would also note that Agent Aflin is not a code expert.
12
13
14
15
16
declaration.
17
18
19
clearance.
20
21
22
23
And I
This
24
25
on them.
8
9
10
what their point is, that the images that are alleged, in
11
12
13
14
15
16
The only
17
18
19
20
store information.
21
22
23
24
government's assurances.
25
independently.
So they
And so I am
10
11
12
13
14
15
an independent order.
16
17
of relevance.
18
19
possible defense.
20
21
22
23
24
25
adequate?
But
10
11
We
12
testimony about how NITs works, and we get the objection, well
13
14
I respectfully
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
provisions.
23
24
25
And unless
THE COURT:
Okay.
MR. HAMPTON:
Mr. Hampton.
I think it
obviously relevant.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
is accurate.
17
18
19
unique.
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
defense and its expert can evaluate whether in fact that code
that data.
10
11
12
13
14
accurate, the defense has the tools that they need to do that.
15
The third question that the defense asks is, well, what if
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The
But even if there is some other data that were seized, the
government isn't relying on that.
11
We are
question:
What if someone
10
11
12
there?
13
14
15
16
17
computer.
18
And if
19
20
isn't saying, well, I've looked and I can't tell and here's
21
why.
22
23
So the defense
24
25
12
haven't done.
the defense has made some showing, the government does have
requested.
10
But we do
11
believe that the defense has made a showing, nor does the
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
government's proof.
23
24
25
And so the
13
1
2
matter.
Here, we have a very different case.
The information
pornography.
It is relevant.
It is
It
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
as to the possession.
18
It is how it
But in terms of a
And it
19
lot of bearing on this case and how the Court should resolve
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
with that.
disclosing.
10
And
11
12
13
14
with the FBI and the government would propose filing that
15
16
17
18
19
propose to proceed.
20
The
21
22
23
affidavit.
24
25
But
15
THE COURT:
MR. FIEMAN:
THE COURT:
MR. FIEMAN:
10
11
THE COURT:
12
13
MR. HAMPTON:
This is not
14
15
16
17
stakes.
18
19
20
management within the FBI and the law enforcement agencies who
21
22
23
MR. FIEMAN:
24
THE COURT:
25
MR. FIEMAN:
16
THE COURT:
All right.
(Pause.)
THE COURT:
MR. HAMPTON:
THE COURT:
MR. FIEMAN:
10
11
Okay.
Unless the Court has any further
Mr. Fieman.
Thank you, Your Honor.
I withdrew my
12
in open court.
13
14
is extraordinarily restrictive.
15
16
17
of the relevance.
18
19
We
20
government's assurances.
21
personal integrity.
22
23
24
25
We
17
So we have some
overrides.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
THE COURT:
20
21
22
23
but we won't know until the defense can look at the details of
24
25
I think
18
same thing that the government said in their brief on page 13,
consequences.
8
9
10
11
12
order in place.
13
14
made to the protective order, you can discuss that and submit
15
16
The government
17
18
19
20
21
22
simple thing.
23
24
question.
25
A fair
19
1
2
6
7
10
11
8
9
I respect the
moment?
(Pause.)
MR. HAMPTON:
12
ruling, both Mr. Becker and I will need to consult with our
13
supervision.
14
15
of this material.
16
17
18
19
THE COURT:
20
or move to dismiss.
21
the other 130 cases, whatever you have, based on the same
22
information.
23
24
25
couple of weeks.
20
MR. FIEMAN:
Without
frankly they are trying to run out the clock on some of our
options.
And
10
11
would revisit.
12
THE COURT:
We'll
13
negotiations.
14
15
16
MR. FIEMAN:
17
THE COURT:
18
19
20
21
think is right.
22
MR. HAMPTON:
23
24
25
THE COURT:
21
MR. HAMPTON:
consult with our supervision and the FBI and make a decision
THE COURT:
Yes.
10
11
resolved.
12
MR. FIEMAN:
13
MS. SULLIVAN:
14
THE COURT:
15
16
order.
17
MR. FIEMAN:
18
MR. HAMPTON:
19
20
(Proceedings concluded.)
*
*
*
*
*
C E R T I F I C A T E
21
22
23
24
25