You are on page 1of 85

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5

Cecillia D. Wang (Pro Hac Vice)


cwang@aclu.org
ACLU Foundation
Immigrants Rights Project
39 Drumm Street
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 343-0775
Facsimile: (415) 395-0950

6
7
8
9
10

Daniel J. Pochoda
dpochoda@acluaz.org
ACLU Foundation of Arizona
3707 N. 7th St., Ste. 235
Phoenix, AZ 85014
Telephone: (602) 650-1854
Facsimile: (602) 650-1376

11
12

Attorneys for Plaintiffs (Additional attorneys


for Plaintiffs listed on next page)

13
14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

15
16
17

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres,


et al.,
Plaintiff(s),

18
19
20

v.
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al.,

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Defendants(s).

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CV-07-2513-PHX-GMS

PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF
SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365 Filed 09/18/15 Page 2 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Additional Attorneys for Plaintiffs:


Andre I. Segura (Pro Hac Vice)
asegura@aclu.org
ACLU Foundation
Immigrants Rights Project
125 Broad Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 549-2676
Facsimile: (212) 549-2654

Priscilla G. Dodson (Pro Hac Vice)


pdodson@cov.com
Covington & Burling LLP
One CityCenter
850 Tenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001-4956
Telephone: (202) 662-5996
Facsimile: (202) 778-5996

Anne Lai (Pro Hac Vice)


alai@law.uci.edu
401 E. Peltason, Suite 3500
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
Telephone: (949) 824-9894
Facsimile: (949) 824-0066

Jorge M. Castillo (Pro Hac Vice)


jcastillo@maldef.org
Mexican American Legal Defense and
Educational Fund
634 South Spring Street, 11th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90014
Telephone: (213) 629-2512

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Facsimile: (213) 629-0266

Stanley Young (Pro Hac Vice)


syoung@cov.com
Michelle L. Morin (Pro Hac Vice)
mmorin@cov.com
Hyun S. Byun (Pro Hac Vice)
hbyun@cov.com
Covington & Burling LLP
333 Twin Dolphin Drive
Suite 700
Redwood Shores, CA 94065-1418
Telephone: (650) 632-4700
Facsimile: (650) 632-4800

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Tammy Albarran (Pro Hac Vice)


talbarran@cov.com
Lauren E. Pedley (Pro Hac Vice)
lpedley@cov.com
Covington & Burling LLP
One Front Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 591-7066
Facsimile: (415) 955-6566

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365 Filed 09/18/15 Page 3 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiffs submit the following supplemental


authorities pursuant to the Courts request of September 16, 2015:
1. Excerpts from transcript of Sept. 9, 2015 deposition of Sergeant Travis
Anglin, attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. Excerpts from transcript of Sept. 8, 2015 deposition of Captain Steve
Bailey, attached hereto as Exhibit B.
3. Excerpts from transcript of Sept. 16, 2015 deposition of Tim Casey,
attached hereto as Exhibit C.
4. Excerpts from transcript of Sept. 9, 2015 deposition of Chief Deputy
Gerard Sheridan, attached hereto as Exhibit D.

11
12

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 18th day of September, 2015.

13

By: /s/ Michelle L. Morin

14

Cecillia D. Wang (Pro Hac Vice)


Andre I. Segura (Pro Hac Vice)
ACLU Foundation
Immigrants Rights Project

15
16
17
18

Daniel Pochoda
ACLU Foundation of Arizona

19

Anne Lai (Pro Hac Vice)

20

Stanley Young (Pro Hac Vice)


Tammy Albarran (Pro Hac Vice)
Michelle L. Morin (Pro Hac Vice)
Lauren E. Pedley (Pro Hac Vice)
Hyun S. Byun (Pro Hac Vice)
Priscilla G. Dodson (Pro Hac Vice)
Covington & Burling, LLP

21
22
23
24
25

Jorge M. Castillo (Pro Hac Vice)


Mexican American Legal Defense and
Educational Fund
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

26
27
28
1

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365 Filed 09/18/15 Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 18, 2015 I electronically transmitted the

attached document to the Clerks office using the CM/ECF System for filing and

caused the attached document to be served via the CM/ECF System on all counsel of

record.

6
7

/s/ Michelle L. Morin

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 23

EXHIBIT A

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 2 of 23

In The Matter Of:


Melendres v
Arpaio

Sergeant Travis Anglin


September 9, 2015

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


2398 E. Camelback Road, Suite 260 Phoenix, AZ 85016
www.arizonacourtreporters.com
602.264.2230

Original File ta090915.txt

Min-U-Script

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 3 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

34
1

A.

Yes, ma'am.

Q.

And if we could go to the flowchart-looking

pages starting at MELC199933, there are three of those.

They also have revision footers at the bottom.

receive these three revisions as well in your e-mail

exchanges with Mike Zullo --

Did you

A.

I did.

Q.

-- in December 2013?

A.

Yes, ma'am.

10

Q.

So you referred to a meeting and that's the

11

January 2nd, 2014, meeting?

12

A.

Yes, ma'am.

13

Q.

Who was at that meeting?

14

A.

Sheriff Arpaio, Mike Zullo, myself,

15

Captain Bailey, Mr. Masterson, Mr. Popolizio, Mr. Liddy,

16

and Mr. Casey, and Dennis Montgomery was on

17

speakerphone.

18

MR. WOODS:

19

THE WITNESS:

20
21
22

Q.

When was this meeting?


January 2nd, 2014.

BY MS. MORIN:

So did you bring these documents

with you to the meeting?


A.

I brought one of these flowcharts, probably the

23

most recent revision, and I also brought information

24

that I had received or discovered through Open Source

25

about Dennis Montgomery.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 4 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

35
1
2

Q.

Did you circulate these documents prior to the

meeting to anyone?

A.

The sheriff had it.

Q.

And by "these documents," I mean all of these

5
6
7

timeline revisions and the matrix revisions.


A.

No, ma'am.

I believe I just brought one

version of this -- the flowchart.

Q.

Mm-hm.

A.

And I know the sheriff had that.

10
11
12

believe that I brought the spreadsheets to that meeting.


Q.

And when we say "spreadsheets," we are looking

at the documents with the Bates number MELC199917?

13

A.

I am.

14

Q.

Okay, just to be clear.

15
16

So did the sheriff already have the timeline


spreadsheets prior to the meeting?

17

MR. MASTERSON:

18

THE WITNESS:

19

MR. WALKER:

20
21

I don't

Q.

Foundation.

I don't know.

BY MS. MORIN:

Join.
Okay.

Did you ever circulate

those to him after?

22

A.

I don't believe that I did.

23

Q.

Okay.

24

A.

I don't know the answer.

25

Q.

So if we look at the last page of the

Do you believe that someone did?

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 5 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

36
1

flowchart, I'll call it, it says Revision 2.0 at the

bottom, Bates number 935.

Do you see that?

A.

Yes, ma'am.

Q.

Is that the document that you brought to the

meeting?

A.

I believe so.

Q.

Okay.

And that's the document that you asked

Dennis Montgomery about on the phone?

A.

Correct.

10

Q.

And I see the top box in the middle says,

11

"G. Murray Snow, Federal Judge, Arpaio Case 07/22/2009."

12

Do you see that?

13

A.

I do.

14

Q.

Did you ask him about that box?

15

A.

No.

16

Q.

And below that there is the Covington Burling

17

Law Firm 05/06/2010 box.

18

Sheriff Arpaio," and it has a case number in it.

19

It also says "Melendres versus

Do you see that?

20

A.

I do.

21

Q.

Did you ask him about that box?

22

A.

No, ma'am.

23

Q.

So did you wonder why and how these boxes are

24
25

on this document?
A.

I did.
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 6 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

37
1

Q.

And how did that come up in the meeting?

A.

I asked in a general sense what information he

used to complete this form.

Q.

Okay.

And what did he say?

A.

He didn't give me an answer.

He would talk

around the answer.

an explanation as to how he could come up with this

information.

9
10

Q.

To my knowledge, he's never produced

Did anyone else at that meeting ask questions

about this document?

11

A.

Not that I recall.

12

Q.

Nobody wondered at that meeting how he got a

13

document with -- or how he created a document with these

14

names and these other references on it?

15

MR. WALKER:

16

MR. WOODS:

17

MR. MASTERSON:

18

THE WITNESS:

19

Q.

20

right.

21

Object to the form.


Foundation.

BY MS. MORIN:

Join.

I don't know.
Let me rephrase that.

You're

That was a bad question.


Nobody expressed during the meeting any

22

questions to Mr. Montgomery, "How did you get this

23

information," except you?

24
25

A.

Well, I know I asked the question, so I don't

know whether it was repeated by anybody else or not.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 7 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

38
1

Q.

Do you recall it being repeated by anyone?

A.

I don't.

Q.

Or did you -- do you recall other similar

inquiries, even if it wasn't a repetition of this

specific question, but inquiries about how did this

information come to be in Dennis Montgomery's

possession?

8
9

A.

What I can tell you that I remember Dennis

Montgomery saying in that meeting was repeating the --

10

basically the entire story about how he had been a

11

subcontractor for the CIA and going into details about

12

this computer that they would use to harvest

13

information.

14

CIA harvested information.

15
16

That was the general answer is that the

And we would say, well, how -- you know, how


did you get this?

17

Well, it was part of the information that was

18

harvested.

19

and that -- that's the only answer we ever got about it.

20

Q.

So he would always throw out that broad net

So is this -- just to make sure I'm clear, is

21

this flowchart thing the document that you have referred

22

to as the "matrix"?

23

A.

Probably, yes.

24

Q.

Okay.

25

Did Mike Zullo tell you anything about

these documents when he conveyed them to you or at any


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 8 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

56
1

"Joe Arpaio Brief"?

A.

It likely is.

Q.

So do you see where it says, "Covington now

included" in the e-mail from David Webb to

Detective Mackiewicz and Mike Zullo?

A.

I do.

Q.

And it also says, "Seems ... the only people

not talking to the Judge G. Murray Snow was Sheriff

Arpaio and his attorney's"?

10

A.

I do.

11

Q.

Did you have an understanding of what that

12

meant?

13

MR. MASTERSON:

14

THE WITNESS:

15

MR. WALKER:

16

Q.

Form; foundation.

No.
Join.

BY MS. MORIN:

And Mike Zullo forwarded that to

17

you with the e-mail of -- with the text in his e-mail

18

saying "Update," right?

19

A.

Yes, ma'am.

20

Q.

What was your understanding of why he was --

21

what he was updating you about?

22

MR. MASTERSON:

23

MR. WALKER:

24

THE WITNESS:

25

Foundation.

Join.
I received several of these

e-mails, it appears, on New Year's Day.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Don't tell the

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 9 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

57
1

sheriff, but I wasn't spending a lot of my New Year's

holiday reviewing these documents.

that I had any question or, you know, curiosity about

these at the time I received them.

So I don't think

I'm -- I'm going to go off just a little bit,

if you don't mind, and tell you that on January 2nd,

after the meeting that we discussed earlier, was the

first opportunity I had to have a meeting with

Chief Sheridan, and it was then that I had the

10

opportunity to ask some questions about why I was being

11

given this information.

12

Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

Okay.

Maybe we should turn back

13

to the text messages, if you could, that's Exhibit 2079,

14

and I want to look at the fourth page, which is Bates

15

number 199516.

16

A.

Yes, ma'am.

17

Q.

And do you see where Mike Zullo writes, "Hell,

18

I would wear a dress and ruby red slippers all year if

19

we can prove this"?

20

A.

I do.

21

Q.

Do you have an understanding of what he was

22

talking about proving in that text?

23

MR. MASTERSON:

24

MR. WALKER:

25

THE WITNESS:

Foundation.

Join.
It is my belief that Mike Zullo

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 10 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

that.
Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

When is the last time you were

aware of a payment going to Dennis Montgomery?


A.

Probably the week that I was there, so May 10th

to the 14th, thereabouts.


Q.

So at least through that time he was on the

payroll?

A.

Yes, ma'am.

Q.

Okay.

So getting back to the meetings with

10

Sheriff Arpaio, in May 2014, you told the sheriff to

11

distance himself from Mike Zullo and Dennis Montgomery?

12

A.

I did.

13

Q.

And subsequently you were taken off the case?

14

A.

Yes.

15

Q.

I want to go back to the January 2nd, 2014,

16

meeting.

Are you with me?

17

A.

Yes, ma'am.

18

Q.

So if you could, walk me through the start of

19

that meeting.

Like, you walk in the door.

20

that you mentioned are at the meeting.

21

there, if you could tell me what happened.

22

MR. WALKER:

23

THE WITNESS:

24
25

The people

Just starting

Form.
I'm afraid I can't really.

don't mind just telling you what I do remember.


Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

Sure.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 11 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

75
1

A.

I do remember introductions being made to some

parties because there were some people there that I had

not met.

Zullo giving some type of overview to the room about

Dennis Montgomery, that is, who he was and the general

briefing about the case and then he was called and put

on speakerphone.

8
9
10

Q.

I didn't know who they were.

I remember Mike

And he told his story, as you've described it,

to the monitor, and, to some extent today, on the


speakerphone, correct?

11

A.

Yes, ma'am.

12

Q.

And what was -- so if we're walking through the

13

meeting, what was the response to him telling his story?

14

Was it interjected throughout or did people sort of

15

listen to him finish and then start in with their

16

questions?

17

MR. MASTERSON:

18

MR. WALKER:

19

MR. MASTERSON:

20

THE WITNESS:

Form --

Join.
-- foundation.

Mike Zullo spoke to Dennis

21

Montgomery on speakerphone.

I know I asked at least a

22

question or two and the sheriff spoke to him.

23

recall any of the other members -- of counsel or any of

24

the other members of the office having direct contact

25

with Montgomery over the phone.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

I don't

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 12 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

76
1

Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

What did the sheriff say?

A.

The only thing I specifically remember him

asking Montgomery was if all of this information is true

and that he had in fact taken items from the CIA that

proved that they were harvesting information illegally

from the U.S. public, why he hadn't been assassinated.

7
8

Q.

That's the only thing the sheriff said to him

during the whole --

A.

That's the only thing I remember him saying.

10

Q.

That you remember?

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q.

And this was with the matrix flowchart --

13

A.

Correct.

14

Q.

-- present in the room at the meeting?

15

A.

Yes, ma'am.

16

Q.

Okay.

17

You said you don't recall if the

timeline spreadsheet was in the room as well?

18

A.

I don't believe it was.

19

Q.

Okay.

So what happened -- what else was said

20

to Dennis Montgomery?

21

You mentioned the sheriff's questions.

22

said to him?

23

A.

You've mentioned your questions.


What else was

I don't specifically recall anything else said

24

to him.

He just told us the story, and it's the same

25

story that if he were here today, he could tell in the


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 13 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

77
1

same cadence, in the same tone, in the exact almost

word-for-word because he's told it so many times.

by that time, it's probably the third time I had heard

it, so I just remember going through that and having to

endure that story again.

Q.

And

So I want to ask you to look at your interview

transcript, and specifically I think you describe some

of what you said on pages 85, 86, 87, around that point

in the transcript?

10

A.

That's 3835, is that what that's going to be?

11

Q.

No, just page 85 of the transcript.

12

A.

Okay, I see it.

13

Q.

It has a monitor's Bates number at the bottom.

14

A.

Okay.

15

Q.

Yeah, just to give you some context, if you

16

Starting on page 85, ma'am?

want to look at page 85.

17

A.

Okay.

18

Q.

But I think your response about Mr. Montgomery

19

on the speakerphone is on page 86 --

20

A.

Okay.

21

Q.

-- which is WAI 18309.

22
23

MR. MASTERSON:

Are you going to ask questions

about what's contained in the interview transcript?

24

MS. MORIN:

Yes.

25

MR. MASTERSON:

Okay.

I had an objection

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 14 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

78
1

yesterday concerning use of the interview transcripts,

and I'll incorporate that objection here.

to state it all, but in essence, these interviews were

taken without regard for my client's due process rights.

The interviews, to an extent, were compelled, although

the Court said they had to show up but they didn't have

to answer questions.

by the monitors in that the monitors made threats to the

interviewees about if they did not answer questions,

10

MS. MORIN:

15

With all due respect,

Mr. Masterson, if you made an objection --

13
14

But in reality, they were coerced

that would be reported to the judge in fact --

11
12

I'm not going

MR. MASTERSON:

I'm going to let him answer the

question.
MS. MORIN:

I haven't asked a question.

If you

16

made an objection on the record, I'm happy for you to

17

incorporate your objection on the record.

18

MR. MASTERSON:

19

MS. MORIN:

20
21

I just want to --

You're testifying here and arguing,

and this isn't really the place for that.


MR. MASTERSON:

I'm not arguing.

I'm just

22

putting an objection on the record.

23

free to ask all the questions you want about the

24

interview.

25

And then you're

The interviews were coerced to the extent the


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 15 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

79
1

monitors threatened the interviewees.

They threatened

to go to the Court and discuss questions that were not

asked.

status conference and the judge raised issues concerning

questions that at least for a short time were not asked

by an interviewee.

In fact, we did go to court one time for a

So the interviews were compelled.

They were

coerced.

ignored, and I do not think they should be utilized in

10
11
12

The due process rights of my clients were

this proceeding or at the evidentiary hearing.


Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

Were you coerced?

Thanks.

Or sorry.

Were you threatened by the monitor at your interview?

13

MR. WOODS:

Object to the form.

14

MR. WALKER:

15

MR. MASTERSON:

16

THE WITNESS:

Join.
Foundation.

I felt that I was compelled to be

17

there, and if I did not participate that that could be

18

problematic for me.

19

Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

20

A.

Well, both by the sheriff's office, as well as

21

Compelled by whom?

the monitors.

22

Q.

As a condition of your employment?

23

A.

That's the way I felt, ma'am.

24

Q.

So at the interview you described what

25

Mr. Montgomery said on speakerphone, I think starting on


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 16 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

80
1

page 86.

A.

Yes, ma'am.

Q.

And you said that it was the first time you

4
5

heard his voice at that point?


A.

I had heard his voice on video, I believe, but

actually speaking to him, that would be the first time I

heard his voice.

8
9

Q.

Okay.

And then Chief Anders asked you about

two documents at the top of page 87.

Do you see that?

10

And if you want to look at the page first, then I'll ask

11

you about this.

12

A.

Yes, ma'am.

13

Q.

And I believe you told the monitor that the

14

sheriff had copies of both of those documents on

15

page 88.

16

page 88, and then my question is, is that what you told

17

the monitor and do you have different -- a different

18

recollection now?

19
20

A.

So if you want to read through to the top of

And you're referring to what we're calling the

matrix as well as the spreadsheet?

21

Q.

Correct.

22

A.

I see what I told the monitors, and I can tell

23

you that I know that the sheriff had the matrix.

24

there was a subsequent sheet stapled to it or -- it

25

appears that I told the monitors that I thought he had


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

If

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 17 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

81
1

that, so I --

Q.

You're not changing that --

A.

I'm not changing that.

Q.

-- testimony today?

A.

No.

I -- I have the picture in my mind's eye

of the matrix, so I know -- or excuse -- yes, of the

matrix, so I know he had that.

had that other spreadsheet.

ma'am.

10

He very well may have

I honestly don't remember,

It seems that I told the monitors that he did,

and I'm not recanting that statement.

11

Q.

12

questions.

13

mentioned the question that Sheriff Arpaio asked.

14
15
16

Okay.

All right.

And then you asked your

The attorneys didn't ask questions.

You've

Did anyone else at that meeting ask -- ask


questions of Dennis Montgomery?
A.

If the attorneys asked any questions

17

specifically, I don't remember it.

18

that were in the room that weren't attorneys were the

19

sheriff, Mike Zullo, Captain Bailey, and myself.

20

don't think Captain Bailey said anything.

21

had some conversations because he was the conduit

22

between Montgomery and everybody else, and, you know, I

23

think I tried to -- to get this information about these

24

documents that we've been discussing to no avail.

25

Q.

And the only people

Mike Zullo

So this was on the morning of January 2nd?


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 18 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

82
1

A.

I believe so.

Q.

Do you remember about how long the meeting

3
4

lasted?
A.

I don't.

meeting.

would say.

Q.

I don't recall it being a very long

Maybe a half an hour, less than an hour, I

Did the meeting continue after you left the

meeting or did it end and everybody left?

A.

No, everybody left.

10

Q.

What happened in relation to this Seattle

11
12

investigation immediately after that meeting?


A.

Because the chief deputy wasn't in this

13

meeting, Captain Bailey and I waited for the chief

14

deputy at his office.

15

very specifically -- because I had gotten text messages

16

that had the name Judge Snow in it, and now there was

17

this matrix and these spreadsheets that say things like

18

Judge Snow.

19

of the other law firms or the people mentioned, I didn't

20

know who they were.

21
22
23

And when he arrived, I asked him

And obviously I knew who Holder was.

Any

So I asked the chief deputy specifically, are


you asking me to investigate a federal judge?
And he said in no uncertain terms am I to

24

investigate a federal judge or anything to do with the

25

birth certificate.

I was just investigating the


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 19 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

83
1
2
3

allegations of the illegal harvesting.


Q.

So did he tell you to stop Dennis Montgomery

from investigating the federal judge?

A.

No.

Q.

But he knew that that information was on the

matrix when you spoke with him?

MR. MASTERSON:

MR. WALKER:

THE WITNESS:

Foundation.

Form; foundation.
I provided the chief

10

deputy with -- I don't know what I gave him, but I at

11

least showed him the matrix, and I also provided him the

12

"Playboy" article and the "New York Times" article and

13

the Wikipedia page of Dennis Montgomery.

14

my concern is if the idea of investigating a federal

15

judge wasn't concerning enough to me, doing it based on

16

somebody who the media titles the man who duped the

17

government for millions of dollars just made it even

18

more ludicrous.

19

information to him.

20

Q.

And that was

So I know I provided all that

BY MS. MORIN:

So you provided that to the

21

chief deputy during this meeting that you had with him

22

on January 2nd?

23

A.

Yes, ma'am.

24

Q.

And he told you, you, Travis Anglin, are not to

25

investigate a federal judge or the DOJ -- did you say


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 20 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

127
1

returned back to Arizona a few times during the -- his

entire stay on that case.

Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

So starting when?

A.

He got there either in late October or

beginning of November of '13, and I don't believe he

returned until the beginning of January.

went on January 10th, I flew up there with Mackiewicz

and Zullo.

think that Brian returned more than twice from then

10

Because when I

They stayed when I returned, and I don't

until May when I came home with him.

11

Q.

And that was authorized by whom?

12

A.

That was ordered by Sheriff Arpaio.

13

Q.

Ordered by Sheriff Arpaio?

14

A.

Yes.

15

Q.

And so he went up in, you said, October or

16

November 2013?

17

A.

Yes, ma'am.

18

Q.

And then do you know when he came back before

19
20

again departing in January 2014?


A.

He wasn't back at our January 2nd meeting, but

21

he departed with me on January 10th, so within that time

22

frame.

23

Q.

24
25

So sometime between January 2nd and

January 10th he returns to Arizona?


A.

Yes.
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 21 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

154
1

incorrectly.

I don't want to --

A.

No, you're correct.

Q.

-- misrepresent.

A.

It was also in addition to the text messages

that I had received from Mike Zullo where he had

mentioned the judge.

7
8

Q.

Right.

So you showed those to Chief Sheridan

also?

A.

Yes.

10

Q.

But not in the call with -- the conference call

11

with Montgomery?

12

A.

Correct.

13

Q.

So my question, after recapping all that, is

14

why did you not bring up the Judge Snow allegation in

15

the matrix specifically during the January 2nd

16

conference call meeting?

17

to Chief Deputy Sheridan afterwards to raise that?

18

MR. MASTERSON:

19

THE WITNESS:

Why did you wait until talking

Form.

There were four attorneys in the

20

room and an elected official, and I didn't want to bring

21

up the conversation of investigating a federal judge in

22

that context, because if it progressed somewhere else, I

23

didn't want to hear the answer.

24
25

So I waited until I had a -- a private audience


with the chief deputy where I asked him in that tone,
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 22 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

155
1

you're not asking me to investigate a federal judge, are

you?

would have been "yes" to ask to recuse myself from that

investigation.

guess, like I said, private audience than to bring it up

in front of everybody else.

Because that gave me an opportunity if the answer

Q.

So I waited until I had just a more, I

BY MS. MORIN:

Do you think that sharing

information about Sheriff Arpaio's investigation of --

hypothetically, of a federal judge, if that existed,

10

would affect your career at the sheriff's office?

11

MR. MASTERSON:

12

MR. WALKER:

13

THE WITNESS:

14
15

Form; foundation.

Join.
You threw me off with the

hypothetical question there.


Q.

BY MS. MORIN:

Well, I don't want to force you

16

to assume based on my question that -- that I'm telling

17

you what you testified to says anything.

18

that there is information in your possession,

19

hypothetically, that Sheriff Arpaio is investigating

20

Judge Snow or any other federal judge.

21

that sharing that information outside of the sheriff's

22

office would affect your career at the sheriff's office?

23

MR. MASTERSON:

24

MR. WALKER:

25

THE WITNESS:

But let's say

Do you think

Form; foundation.

Join.
If I were, hypothetically or not,

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-1 Filed 09/18/15 Page 23 of 23


Sergeant Travis Anglin - September 9, 2015

164
1

STATE OF ARIZONA

COUNTY OF MARICOPA

BE IT KNOWN that the foregoing proceedings


were taken before me; that the witness before testifying
was duly sworn by me to testify to the whole truth; that
the foregoing pages are a full, true, and accurate
record of the proceedings, all done to the best of my
skill and ability; that the proceedings were taken down
by me in shorthand and thereafter reduced to print under
my direction.

4
5
6

)
) ss.
)

7
8

I CERTIFY that I am in no way related to any


of the parties hereto, nor am I in any way interested in
the outcome hereof.

9
10
11

[X]
[ ]
[ ]

Review and signature was requested.


Review and signature was waived.
Review and signature not required.

12
13
14

I CERTIFY that I have complied with the


ethical obligations set forth in ACJA 7-206(F)(3) and
ACJA 7-206 J(1)(g)(1) and (2).
Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 13th day of
September, 2015.

15
16
17
18

___________________________________
KELLIE L. KONICKE, RPR
Certified Reporter
Arizona CR No. 50223

19
*

20
21
22

I CERTIFY that GRIFFIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC, has


complied with the ethical obligations set forth in ACJA
7-206 (J)(1)(g)(1) through (6).

23
24
25

_____________________________________
GRIFFIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC
Registered Reporting Firm
Arizona RRF No. R1005
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-2 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 7

EXHIBIT B

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-2 Filed 09/18/15 Page 2 of 7

In The Matter Of:


Melendres v
Arpaio

Steve Bailey
September 8, 2015

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


2398 E. Camelback Road, Suite 260 Phoenix, AZ 85016
www.arizonacourtreporters.com
602.264.2230

Original File SB090815.txt

Min-U-Script

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-2 Filed 09/18/15 Page 3 of 7


Steve Bailey - September 8, 2015

336
1

BY MS. WANG:

Q.

Can you tell me how Sheriff Arpaio expressed that.

A.

It was in the same meeting when I observed this.

It was slid to me.

And I said, that's nothing.

And the sheriff responded, you don't know.

And I said, I do know.

And, obviously, the case kept going, so that

was -- it was a very short exchange, but...

Q.

Okay.

When was that meeting?

10

A.

It -- it -- I believe it was after I was the PSB

11

commander.

12

Q.

Do you recall when it was?

13

A.

No.

14

Q.

Could it have been January 2nd of 2014?

15

MR. MASTERSON:

16

THE WITNESS:

17
18
19
20
21

What month?

Foundation.
I -- I don't know.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

Okay.

Where was the office -- the meeting that

included you and the sheriff?


A.

This particular meeting was in the executive

conference room of the fifth floor.

22

Q.

That's where the sheriff's office is?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q.

Who else was present at the meeting?

25

A.

Sheriff.

Chief deputy.

I think -- there was a

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-2 Filed 09/18/15 Page 4 of 7


Steve Bailey - September 8, 2015

337
1

meeting with Mike Zullo in it and a couple of the -- of our

attorneys, but I don't remember which group it was.

3
4

Q.

Did Dennis Montgomery join that meeting at any

point in time?

A.

No.

Q.

Okay.

with this meeting.

8
9
10

Were you ever a part -- well, let's stick

Was this the first time you met with


Sheriff Arpaio concerning the Dennis Montgomery
investigation?

11

A.

12

little bit.

13

stay for the whole thing.

14

then -- and then left.

15
16

Q.

It wasn't really a meeting.

He walked in for a

In terms of his part, what I remember, he didn't


He walked in briefly with this and

After you expressed your concerns that Dennis

Montgomery was not reliable, did the investigation continue?

17

A.

Yes.

18

Q.

After you -- at the point that you had the

19

conversation with Chief Deputy Sheridan saying that you could

20

not in good conscience approve payments to Dennis Montgomery,

21

did payments to him continue?

22

A.

I believe so.

23

Q.

Did you continue to sign those approvals?

24

A.

I did not.

25

Q.

Do you know who did?


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-2 Filed 09/18/15 Page 5 of 7


Steve Bailey - September 8, 2015

344
1

Seattle investigation?

MR. MASTERSON:

THE WITNESS:

4
5

Q.

MR. MITCHELL:

THE WITNESS:

11

No.

You thought it was not an appropriate use of funds?


MR. MASTERSON:

10

Foundation.

BY MS. WANG:

Form.

Form.

Foundation.

Asked and answered.


That's accurate.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

Okay.

Did you continue to sign those travel

expense approvals after reaching that conclusion?

12

A.

I don't believe I did.

13

Q.

Do you know what -- who started to approve them

14

after -- well, first let me ask you.

Did the travel continue

15

after you declined to sign those approvals?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q.

Do you know who did do those approvals?

18

A.

I don't.

19

Q.

Do you recall a meeting on January 2nd, 2014,

20

about the Seattle investigation that included you,

21

Sheriff Arpaio, Mike Zullo, Mr. Masterson, Mr. Popolizio, Tim

22

Casey, Tom Liddy, Travis -- and Travis Anglin where Dennis

23

Montgomery was participating by telephone?

24
25

A.

I don't remember Montgomery being on the phone.

remember a meeting with some of those -- I think this is the


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-2 Filed 09/18/15 Page 6 of 7


Steve Bailey - September 8, 2015

345
1

meeting I was describing earlier potentially.

Did you say Mike Zullo?

Q.

Yes.

A.

Yeah, I believe I do remember that one.

Q.

Okay.

And you don't remember Dennis Montgomery

participating in that meeting by telephone?

A.

I'm not saying he didn't.

I don't remember that.

Q.

Were you there for the entire meeting?

A.

As far as I know.

10

Q.

What was the purpose of that meeting?

11

A.

To -- I -- the -- that I remember, to evaluate how

12

credible this person was.

And I know Mike Zullo did a lot of

13

the talking in that -- in that meeting.

14

Q.

Did Judge Snow come up during that meeting?

15

A.

Not that I remember.

16

Q.

I'm going to show you a document that we will mark

17

Exhibit?

18

THE COURT REPORTER:

19

MS. WANG:

20

THE COURT REPORTER:

21

MS. WANG:

22

(Exhibit 2073 marked for identification.)

23
24
25

2073.

2073?
Yes.

Thank you.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

And I will tell you that Exhibit 2073 is a

collection of documents that the court-appointed monitor -Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-2 Filed 09/18/15 Page 7 of 7


Steve Bailey - September 8, 2015

394
1

STATE OF ARIZONA

)
)
)

ss.

COUNTY OF MARICOPA

BE IT KNOWN that the foregoing proceedings were


taken before me; that the witness before testifying was duly
sworn by me to testify to the whole truth; that the foregoing
pages are a full, true, and accurate record of the
proceedings, all done to the best of my skill and ability;
that the proceedings were taken down by me in shorthand and
thereafter reduced to print under my direction.
I CERTIFY that I am in no way related to any of the
parties hereto, nor am I in any way interested in the outcome
hereof.

4
5
6
7
8
9

[X] Review and signature was requested.

10

[ ] Review and signature was waived.

11

[ ] Review and signature not required.

12
13
14
15

I CERTIFY that I have complied with the ethical


obligations set forth in ACJA 7-206(F)(3) and ACJA 7-206
J(1)(g)(1) and (2).
Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 10th day of
September, 2015.

16

____________________________

17

CATHY J. TAYLOR, RPR


Certified Reporter
Certificate No. 50111

18
19

20

I CERTIFY that GRIFFIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC, has

21

complied with the ethical obligations set forth in ACJA

22

7-206(J)(1)(g)(1) through (6).

23
24
25

_____________________________
GRIFFIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC
Registered Reporting Firm
Arizona RRF No. R1005
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 47

EXHIBIT C

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 2 of 47

In The Matter Of:


Melendres v
Arpaio

Timothy J. Casey
September 16, 2015

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


2398 E. Camelback Road, Suite 260 Phoenix, AZ 85016
www.arizonacourtreporters.com
602.264.2230

Original File TC091615.txt

Min-U-Script

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 3 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

245
1

THE COURT:

I'm going to overrule the

objection and direct the witness to answer.

THE WITNESS:

I could have, but that's not a

solid -- that's not -- in my judgment, that's not a practice

to make, rewriting an opposing party's discovery request,

because that's the -- that's the problem with that.

BY MS. WANG:

8
9

Q.

So, in your view, it's -- setting aside not getting

into any communications with the client in this case, your

10

general practice as an attorney is to convey the other

11

party's document requests without elaboration?

12

A.

Generally that -- that is true.

I will -- I will

13

provide -- as a practical matter, I will provide follow-up

14

clarification if needed, but it's -- how I learned, it's very

15

dangerous for one advocate to summarize another advocate's

16

discovery.

17

the appropriate grounds.

18

Q.

If it's not clear, it ought to be objected to on


Otherwise, that's a problem.

And you don't know whether you followed your

19

general practice of not providing further instruction during

20

a pretrial discovery period in this case?

21

A.

I don't -- I don't remember that.

22

Q.

All right.

23
24
25

I'm going to change gears entirely.

This will be very brief.


Were you present at a meeting on
January 2nd, 2014, with John Masterson, Joe Popolizio,
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 4 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

246
1

Sergeant Travis Anglin, Sheriff Arpaio, a posse member named

Mike Zullo, and Tom Liddy concerning a -- an MCSO

investigation involving a confidential informant in Seattle?

4
5
6
7

A.

I know I was -- I don't know the date, but I know I

attended one.
Q.

And do you recall whether the confidential

informant was on the telephone during that meeting?

8
9

MS. CLARK:

Objection.

Calls for

attorney-client privileged, confidential, and work product.

10

MS. WANG:

Well, if the confidential informant

11

were on the phone, it would affect the analysis of whether,

12

in fact, that conversation was privileged.

13

entitled to an answer on that.

14
15

So I think I'm

(An off-the-record conversation was held


between the witness and his counsel.)

16

THE WITNESS:

17

attended was there was no CI on the phone.

18

by whoever it was in the MCSO that was telling -- that was

19

telling everyone in the room what their process was, or

20

analysis or whatever.

21

BY MS. WANG:

22
23
24
25

Q.

My memory of the meeting I


It was a briefing

Were you there for the purpose of giving legal

advice?
A.

I -- don't know.

My -- my impression is what I can

just tell you.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 5 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

247
1
2
3

Q.

What was your impression as to whether you were

there to give legal advice?


A.

My impression was is that the sheriff wanted to

know from the lawyers in the room what we thought about the

information that was being provided by MCSO personnel about

this confidential informant.

Q.

Was he seeking legal advice as to the

investigation, or was he trying to get a sense of whether you

believed the informant was reliable?

10

A.

I don't know, because it was never really

11

explained.

12
13

MR. MASTERSON:

Foundation.

BY MS. WANG:

14

Q.

15

you this:

16

the MCSO?

17

A.

All right.

During that meeting -- well, let me ask

Do you know whether Mike Zullo is an employee of

I -- I mean, I heard the name.

I've read about

18

him, but I'm not sure I could spot him in a lineup.

19

don't know what his role is.

20
21

Q.

All right.

So I

Do you recall seeing any documents

during that meeting that mentioned Judge Snow's name?

22

A.

I do.

23

Q.

What do you recall about that?

24

A.

I remember seeing some sort of graphic.

25

Q.

Okay.

I'm going to hand you an exhibit that was


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 6 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

248
1

already marked 2524.

2
3

MS. WANG:
yesterday, because --

4
5
6

I hope you still have this from

MR. MASTERSON:

I don't, but that's okay.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

Mr. Casey, can you -- this is a declaration that I

filed with the Court in response to the opposition to

Sheriff Arpaio and Chief Deputy Sheridan's motion to

disqualify the Court.

10

that it is under seal.

11

under seal.

12

court order either unsealing or denying the motion to seal.

13
14

The document indicates on its face


I will tell you that it is no longer

The motion to seal was -- well, there was a

Take a look at Exhibit F.


documents there.

There are two

One is in landscape --

15

A.

This thing.

16

Q.

-- orientation.

17

Correct.

18

So there's a document that contains a -- a

19
20
21

sort of a graphical -MS. CLARK:

Mine looks like it's different.

My F starts with --

22

MS. WANG:

23

MS. CLARK:

24

MS. WANG:

25

MS. CLARK:

Keep -- keep turning.


Keep going?
Keep going.
Okay.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 7 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

249
1

THE WITNESS:

MS. WANG:

MS. CLARK:

This is all part of F; right?

Yes.
Okay.

BY MS. WANG:

Q.

So keep flipping.

A.

Yeah.

Q.

I think you're flipping the wrong direction.

A.

No, but I'm -- I'm looking at this.

Q.

Okay.

10
11

14

I'm sorry.

Okay.

(An off-the-record conversation was held


between the witness and his counsel.)

12
13

Excuse me.

THE WITNESS:

Okay.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

Does -- do the materials that -- Exhibit F on my

15

declaration look like the documents you saw during that

16

January 2nd, 2014, meeting?

17

A.

This thing identified as timeline looks familiar.

18

And I remember a color-coded chart of some sort that looked

19

like what you see here, that I'm pointing to at Bates label

20

MELC199934.

21

Q.

22

Was there a discussion of these documents during

that meeting?

23
24
25

MS. CLARK:
privilege.

Work product.
MS. WANG:

Objection.

Attorney-client

Confidentiality.
Your Honor, we discussed this

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 8 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

250
1

Exhibit F to my declaration during the deposition of

Captain Bailey last week.

recollection is that there was not an objection to my

questions concerning what was said during that meeting on

January 2nd, 2014.

THE COURT:

Mr. Masterson was present.

My

I'll say, Ms. Clark, that I

haven't heard an objection from Mr. Masterson.

is proponing

has to establish that the privilege exists.

But whoever

-- whoever is the proponent of the privilege


I have not yet

10

heard anything from Mr. Casey which would implicate the

11

attorney-client privilege.

12

I'm saying what I understood his testimony to be -- that

13

Sheriff Arpaio had the attorneys there to ask them about what

14

they thought about the reliability of the informant.

15

does not strike me as solicitation of or the receipt of legal

16

advice.

17

To the extent that he said -- and

That

So you're the proponent of the privilege.

18

Unless you can tell me that it -- convince me that it does,

19

I'm going to overrule your objection and instruct the witness

20

to answer.

21

MS. CLARK:

Judge, the holder of the privilege

22

is the client represented by Mr. Masterson here today.

23

as I told you in the prefatory statement, if he doesn't

24

object, I'm assuming there's a waiver.

25

this is covered by client confidentiality under 1.6.

And

However, I do believe

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

It's in

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 9 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

251
1

the course of representing the client that he's attending

these meetings.

an order, I'm instructing the witness not to answer.

4
5

It's confidential under ER 1.6.

THE COURT:
answer.

I'm directing the witness to

I'm overruling the client confidentiality objection.

THE WITNESS:

Again, I -- can you read --

reread that question for me?

BY MS. WANG:

Q.

And without

I think it was just was there discussion of these

10

documents at Exhibit F of my declaration during that

11

January 2nd, 2014, meeting?

12

A.

I believe so.

13

Q.

Can you describe what you recall of that

14

discussion.

15

MS. CLARK:

Continuing objection.

16

MR. MASTERSON:

Well, you -- has the witness

17

been asked the question to whether he was providing his legal

18

advice, mental impressions, or legal analysis to his client?

19

In other words, if -- if the response to this

20

question is the witness says legal advice, mental

21

impressions, or legal analysis to his clients, if that is the

22

answer to this particular question, I'm going to object based

23

on privilege.

24

this witness yet.

25

I'm not sure that question's been asked of

MS. WANG:

Well, I did ask Mr. Casey whether

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 10 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

252
1

he was there at the meeting to provide legal advice.

it was not clear.

Let me ask -- let me withdraw the pending

question and ask another question first.

BY MS. WANG:

He said

Q.

During the conversation about these documents at

Exhibit F of my declaration dated July 10th, 2015, did you

provide any legal advice?

A.

I, like the other lawyers in the room, including

10

some that are here today, offered our assessments of what we

11

heard.

12

I'm a lawyer.

13

about admissibility or anything.

14

talked about what we thought about what we heard.

15

Q.

Whether it's legal advice, I don't know to this day.


I don't remember being asked for any issue
I just remember that we all

Was there any discussion about whether any

16

particular action taken in the course of the investigation

17

was legal or not?

18

A.

What -- what was legal?

19

Q.

Whether any -- well, you understood that the

20

dis- -- there was discussion during the January 2nd, 2015,

21

meeting about -- sorry -- January 2nd, 2014, meeting, there

22

was discussion about an investigation by MCSO involving a

23

confidential informant; correct?

24

A.

Yes.

Generally, yeah.

25

Q.

During the discussion of that investigation, was


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 11 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

253
1

your advice sought on whether any actions taken during that

investigation were lawful --

A.

I don't --

Q.

-- or not lawful?

A.

I don't believe that was ever asked.

Q.

Were you asked for your assessments about whether

the -- the informant was reliable?

A.

I believe we were asked that.

Q.

Did it involve any legal analysis or application of

10
11

your knowledge of the law?


A.

My experience as an attorney that tries cases and

12

deals with people, like -- kind of like what you are, but I'm

13

not sure about legal analysis applying law to facts.

14

sure about that.

15
16
17

Q.

I'm not

I don't think so.

You were being asked to assess his believability,

in other words?
A.

I will state for clarification, I don't believe the

18

time I was present that there was the CI on the telephone.

19

believe it was just a report by whoever it was, detectives or

20

whoever.

21

share our thoughts about the information being relayed.

22

Q.

But we were -- I think we were being offered to

And were you -- was your legal advice being sought?

23

I guess I'm just trying to get at whether --

24

A.

I --

25

Q.

-- you were bringing to bear any legal analysis to


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 12 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

254
1

that situation or whether your opinion was being sought as an

observer of --

(An off-the-record conversation was held

between the witness and his counsel.)

BY MS. WANG:

Q.

-- human behavior, whatever.

You mentioned yourself assessing witnesses on

the stand.

A.

I -- I cannot tell you.

You would have to ask the

10

client what their expectation were for having the lawyers

11

present.

12

exactly why.

13

Q.

I don't -- I -- it's -- to this day, I don't know

Captain Bailey testified in his deposition that he

14

believed that at least Mr. Popolizio was present, because

15

there was a claim made by the confidential informant that

16

Mr. Popolizio's law firm's e-mails had been hacked.

17

Do you recall that?

18

A.

I do.

19

Q.

All right.

That did not involve -- Mr. Popolizio

20

was not being asked for his legal opinion about anything, was

21

he?

22

A.

I -- I don't know what Joe was asked.

23

Joe was present.

24

Mr. Liddy.

25

Q.

I believe John was present.

I know that

And myself.

I don't know if James in my office was present.

All right.

So, Mr. Casey, I'll ask you again at


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 13 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

255
1

this point.

Exhibit F of my declaration?

What was the discussion about the documents at

MS. CLARK:

I'm going to object based on

confidentiality and attorney-client privilege and work

product.

client asks you to attend a meeting as a lawyer, it is to

provide your legal analysis.

8
9

It's, I -- I think, fair to presume that if a

And I understand Mr. Masterson is not


objecting, but Mr. Liddy -- excuse me -- Mr. Casey has

10

obligations to his former clients, and I'm going to make that

11

objection and instruct him not to answer absent a Court

12

order.

13

MR. MASTERSON:

Well, actually, I am -- I am

14

objecting, because I think the testimony I just heard from

15

the witness is he's giving his impressions.

16

understand you tried to finagle it a little bit and ask him,

17

well, are you giving legal advice?

18

I'm giving an analysis possibly of a witness, although he's

19

telling us he doesn't recall the witness being on the phone.

20

And I -- and I

And his answer was, well,

But, in any event, he's there in connection

21

with litigation.

He's looking at documents.

And if he's

22

being asked for comments on documents, that's part of his

23

position as a representative, a legal representative of the

24

client.

25

being work product, at least, and probably attorney-client

And his statements, I think, are then privileged as

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 14 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

256
1

privilege.

Possibly his legal analysis of what he has seen.

They're his impressions of what he has seen.

MS. WANG:

Mr. Casey testified that it was not

clear to him that he was being -- he was there for the

purpose of providing legal advice or analysis, and I don't

believe that on the testimony that we've heard the

conversation is privileged.

8
9

MS. CLARK:

I believe that's a legal

conclusion and for the judge to make.

10

MS. WANG:

I'm making my argument and --

11

MS. CLARK:

12

MS. WANG:

13

MS. CLARK:

I'm making mine.

14

THE COURT:

All right.

I'm making --- now seeking a ruling.

Here's how we're going

15

to proceed:

We're going to proceed on a

16

statement-by-statement basis, a question-by-question basis,

17

that -- to the extent that the witness is capable of

18

reconstructing the conversation.

19

that -- that the witness is entitled to a general presumption

20

that if he's asked to be there as an attorney, there is a --

21

there is some presumption that there is -- at least you have

22

to be careful about an attorney-client relationship.

23

law, as I understand it, and I believe it exists and the

24

Ninth Circuit is quite clear, that does not necessarily mean

25

that the attorney-client privilege exists.

I believe it is true

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

But the

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 15 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

257
1

With respect to a conversation, the

attorney-client only exists -- the attorney-client privilege

only exists where legal advice of any kind is sought from a

professional legal advisor in his capacity as such.

communications relating to that purpose made in confidence by

a client are at the client's instance permanently protected

from disclosure.

8
9

And

So we are going to go forward to the extent


it's possible on a very specific basis.

I have not heard --

10

I will say, Mr. Masterson, Ms. Clark, I haven't heard

11

anything yet that necessarily implicates the attorney-client

12

privilege to cover the whole conversation.

13

reason to proceed with caution.

14

I have heard

And for that reason, I am going to require

15

you, Ms. Wang, to ask more specific questions about that

16

January 2nd meeting.

17

MS. WANG:

18

THE COURT:

19

Yes, Your Honor.


See if we can get to it any

better.

20

MS. WANG:

21

MS. CLARK:

Yes, Your Honor.


Judge, I'm continuing the

22

objection on confidentiality under ER 1.6.

23

can't --

24
25

THE COURT:

Mr. Casey

I'm overruling the objection on

confidentiality pursuant to ER 1.6.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 16 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

258
1
2
3

MS. CLARK:

Thank you, Judge.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

Mr. Casey, at any point during the January 2nd,

2014, meeting, did you learn that the confidential informant

was offering information or making a claim or allegation that

there was a conspiracy between Judge Snow, the Attorney

General of the United States, or the Department of Justice

generally and the law firm of Covington & Burling that would

affect the sheriff?

10

MR. MASTERSON:

11

THE WITNESS:

12

THE COURT:

14

THE WITNESS:

16
17
18

Am I instructed to answer, Your

Honor?

13

15

Form.

You are.
Yes.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

Who provided that information during the

January 2nd, 2014, meeting?


A.

Well, first of all, I have to -- I don't know the

19

date.

20

like November of '13.

21

For some reason, I thought it was earlier than that,

Whoever was doing the speaking on the

22

telephone were relaying information -- was relaying

23

information about what the CI, the confidential informant,

24

claimed to have put together.

25

Q.

So your impression was that somebody was on the


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 17 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

259
1

telephone conveying information on behalf of the confidential

informant but that it was not the confidential informant --

3
4
5

MR. MASTERSON:
BY MS. WANG:
Q.

-- himself?

MR. MASTERSON:

THE WITNESS:

remember.

Seattle calling in.

10
11
12

Form.

Form.
That's -- that's what I

I thought there were two MCSO employees up in

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

All right.

Do you know who the person on the phone

was?

13

A.

The names that you mentioned.

One of them, the --

14

with the Z.

15

Q.

Mike Zullo?

16

A.

Yeah.

17

Q.

All right.

18

A.

-- but --

19

Q.

What about Brian Mackiewicz?

20

A.

There were --

21

Q.

-- someone who was participating by telephone?

22

A.

I couldn't tell you, but I know there were two.

23

Q.

All right.

24

A.

Two employees.

25

Q.

What did the person on the telephone convey as far

That sounds familiar --

Is that possibly --

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 18 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

260
1

as you remember about an alleged conspiracy between

Judge Snow, the Attorney General of the United States, the

Department of Justice, and the law firm of Covington &

Burling?

A.

Would you -- are you asking me for my impression --

Q.

No.

A.

-- or are you asking me --

Q.

I'm asking you --

A.

-- specifically --

10

Q.

-- for fuller information about what was conveyed

11

about that.

12

MR. MASTERSON:

13

THE WITNESS:

Form.
I will tell you in all sincerity

14

that the details are not clear.

15

clear.

16

BY MS. WANG:

17

Q.

What was the conclusion?

18
19

MS. CLARK:

Again, just the continuing

objection, Judge, and the work product as well.

20

THE COURT:

21

THE WITNESS:

22

The conclusion is abundantly

Overruled.
Hogwash.

BY MS. WANG:

23

Q.

Who said it was hogwash?

24

A.

That was my conclusion.

25

And if I'm not mistaken,

every lawyer in the room reached that conclusion.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 19 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

261
1

Q.

Did anyone in the room not reach that conclusion?

MR. WALKER:

MR. MASTERSON:

THE WITNESS:

5
6
7

10
11
12

Q.

I don't know.

or not the information about that conspiracy was reliable?


(An off-the-record conversation was held
between the witness and his counsel.)
BY MS. WANG:
Q.

You've mentioned already every lawyer in the room.

Every lawyer in the room said that it was hogwash.


(An off-the-record conversation was held
between the witness and his counsel.)

15
16

I don't know.

Who in the room ventured an opinion as to whether

13
14

Join.

BY MS. WANG:

8
9

Foundation.

MS. CLARK:

Judge, we're renewing the

objection on all three bases.

17

THE COURT:

I'm not sure I understand the

18

question, and I want to be able to be very clear that I

19

understand the question and give everybody a chance to

20

object.

I don't understand the question.

21

MS. WANG:

22

pending question.

23

BY MS. WANG:

24
25

Q.

Sure.

I'm not sure there was a

I apologize.

My question was, you mentioned that the -- every

lawyer in the room expressed the view that the allegation of


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 20 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

262
1
2

the conspiracy was hogwash; is that right?


A.

That -- that was my description for my conclusion,

and I believe that was shared by the other lawyers in the

room.

Q.

All right.

So my question is, did any nonlawyer in

the room express a view as to whether the alleged

information -- the information about the alleged conspiracy

was accurate?

A.

Yes or no?

10

Q.

Yes, yes or no.

11

A.

Yes.

12

Q.

Who was that?

13

A.

My client.

14

Q.

And what was the view that he expressed?

15
16

Joe Arpaio.

MS. CLARK:
privilege.

THE COURT:

18

confidentiality objection.

19

Mr. Masterson.

20

to answer.

21

23
24
25

Well, I'm going to overrule the


The privilege belongs to

I don't hear an objection, so I'll direct him

MR. MASTERSON:
here.

Attorney-client

Confidentiality as well.

17

22

Objection, Judge.

Can we just wait a second

Can -(Stenographic record reviewed by

Mr. Masterson.)
MR. MASTERSON:

I'm going -- I'm going to

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 21 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

263
1

raise the objection.

statement made by my clients, two lawyers, and I think the

assumption is that he is making this statement in order to

seek his attorney's counsel or advice regarding how to

proceed in a legal matter.

I think the question calls for a

THE COURT:

Do you know, I think that this

is -- I think this requires some careful consideration on my

part and a little bit more research than I've done.

is what I would propose.

So this

And it's going to dislocate,

10

perhaps, Mr. Casey and everybody else, but I think it's an

11

important enough question that I may not want to just fire

12

from the hip here.

13

It seems to me that there are several

14

different reasons why this conversation may not be privileged

15

at all.

16

thing is, I'm not sure that a statement made by

17

Sheriff Arpaio is privileged, but I think that Mr. Masterson

18

raises a good point.

19

expresses an opinion.

It depends on who was on the phone.

And the second

There are attorneys in a meeting.

He

20

I would like to look into that and in terms of

21

whether or not it's covered by the attorney-client privilege.

22

So what I intend to do, and what I'll invite the parties to

23

do, we're meeting Friday morning.

24

submissions or legal authority you want to put forward on

25

that question, I'll take a look at it and make the ruling.

If you have any

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 22 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

264
1

But for now, I think in order to protect the privilege, I'm

going to tentatively sustain the objection, direct the

witness -- or sustain the objection.

won't answer it, but that he is going to be determinative on

who else -- I mean, if we can make a determination as to who

else was on the call.

present physically, if there's anybody there that might

destroy the privilege and/or I want to look into just

statements made by counsel -- or I'm sorry -- statements made

And so the witness

And I'm not sure who else was actually

10

by a client and whether or not it's up to the Court to

11

determine whether or not in the context that is seeking legal

12

advice.

13

MS. WANG:

14

May I ask the witness just -- I now realize I

15

told the witness who I understood to be at the meeting based

16

on prior deposition testimony by other witnesses.

17

to ask him what his recollection is as to who was present.

18
19

THE COURT:

All right, Your Honor.

I'd like

You may do so.

BY MS. WANG:

20

Q.

Who else was present, Mr. Casey, that you recall?

21

A.

I'm going to start off with the lawyers.

22

Popolizio and John Masterson from Jones Skelton.

23

Tom Liddy.

24

was present or not.

25

Chris -- I -- Christine Stutz was there.

Joe
Myself.

I don't remember if James Williams in my office


As to the lawyers, I don't know if

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

I don't remember

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 23 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

265
1

that.

Jerry Sheridan was there.

Sheriff Arpaio was

there.

I believe Jack Mac- -- Jack MacIntyre was there.

There were other people that were there.

can't say with certainty, like Mr. Bailey, Steve Bailey.

don't know if the PIO person, Lisa Allen, was there.

Perhaps -- but I

But, I mean, it seemed to me that it was a

very full conference room.

about occurred in a conference room in his old building.

And I -- the meeting I'm thinking

10

Q.

At the Wells Fargo building?

11

A.

Yes.

12
13
14

It was a long conference room at one end of a

hallway.
Q.

Did you know everyone present?

THE COURT:

16

THE WITNESS:

17

been.

18

BY MS. WANG:

20

Were there people

unfamiliar to you there?

15

19

Q.

Well -There may -- there may have

Can you give me an estimate of the number of people

that you believe were present?

21

A.

As many as that are in this room.

22

Q.

And can you tell me how many people do you think

23
24
25

are in the room currently?


A.

Oh, 16.
MS. WANG:

All right.

Yes, Mr. Masterson's

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 24 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

266
1

requesting we take a break as Mr. Popolizio's come to fill

in.

3
4

THE COURT:

We can, and we're off the record

for the deposition.

(Discussion off the record.)

THE COURT:

I would appreciate counsel doing

an evaluation of their own ethical obligations under the

Title 3s to make sure that they are not going to end up

either as witnesses or that they don't have duties relating

10

to candor to the tribunal on my previous testimony or other

11

matters that they need to investigate and consider, because

12

I -- I do not want to go down the road and be in the middle

13

of this hearing and have you tell me for some reason -- and

14

I'm not trying to suggest that I think there's any

15

determination here.

16

want you to have to tell me for some reason that you believe

17

that your ethical obligations require you to withdraw.

I'm just raising this issue.

18

And is that clear?

19

MR. STEIN:

Your Honor, I'm sorry.

I don't

It's not

20

clear to me.

And I don't mean to be difficult, but -- I

21

understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure what you mean

22

by it.

23

greatly appreciate it.

And so if -- if you could be more specific, I would

24

THE COURT:

I'm not going to be more specific.

25

MR. STEIN:

Okay.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 25 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

267
1

THE COURT:

I think that -- well, I guess I

don't mind being more specific.

going to be more specific is because I don't want to suggest

that I made any determination, but as I'm sitting here -- let

me see if I've got -- I don't have the rules.

6
7

MS. CLARK:

Got 'em.

THE COURT:

Oh, you

Nah.

I have the federal rules.

don't have the state rules.

11
12

Oh, I have them, Judge.

have -- okay.

10

The reason I say I'm not

MS. CLARK:

Oh, I got them right here, Judge.

They're open to the 3s.

13

THE COURT:

We have candor toward the

14

tribunal.

15

the lawyer knows to be false.

16

client or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material

17

evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the

18

lawyer shall take reasonable remedial" -- "remedial measures

19

including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal."

20
21

"A lawyer shall not knowingly offer evidence that


If a lawyer" -- "the lawyer's

There's a number of state ethical opinions


that'll give guidance on that.

22

"A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other

23

than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that

24

the lawyer reasonably believes is false."

25

That's one that seems to me -- I don't


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 26 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

268
1

remember exactly what previous testimony was, but I do

remember previous testimony regarding aspects of whether or

not this Court was ever the subject of an investigation by

the MCSO or if the MCSO ever knew of an investigation of

which this Court was the subject.

think, from Sheriff Arpaio, from Chief Deputy Sheridan, and

then there was a statement made under penalty of perjury by

Chief Arpaio.

And I received answers, I

It seems to me that counsel need to evaluate

10

that testimony in light of their own participation or what

11

they may have subsequently come to know to determine whether

12

or not they have a duty of candor toward the tribunal that

13

they have to fulfill.

14

to make that determination.

15

because I don't want you to be wrong.

16
17

MR. STEIN:

20

It's up to you

But I'm just raising it now,

May I respond to that, or would

you rather me not?

18
19

I'm not saying you do.

THE COURT:
if you wish.

I'm just -- you can respond to it

I'm just asking you to take it into account.


MR. STEIN:

Right.

I guess what my concern

21

is, we're sitting in a deposition, and that -- and, you know,

22

deputy -- and information gets presented through the course

23

of a deposition, but the Court hasn't sat through all the

24

depositions and --

25

THE COURT:

No, that's true.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 27 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

269
1

MR. STEIN:

-- this is the first witness, for

example, who has said that Chief Deputy Sheridan was at that

January 2nd meeting.

No other witness has said so.

THE COURT:

That's true.

MR. STEIN:

And so --

THE COURT:

That's why I raise that now,

because the hearing is going to start next week.

8
9

MR. STEIN:

Right.

So the basis for the

Court's concern about revising previous testimony is based in

10

part on the testimony that he was at that -- that -- I'm

11

concerned that the Court is forming impressions --

12

THE COURT:

Well --

13

MR. STEIN:

-- based upon hearing deposition.

14

THE COURT:

I'm not forming impressions, and

15

I'm perfectly capable of listening and will listen to all the

16

witnesses.

17

if, in fact, you feel like you have an obligation to

18

withdraw, because I want to know that now.

I'm raising things that I want you to consider

19

So I didn't know -- for example, I have no

20

basis to know or any basis to believe, Mr. Stein, that you

21

knew about this prior to my finding out about it.

22

I've raised it.

23

That's why

There's also -- and it has to do with -- with

24

lawyers as witnesses.

25

3 point area.

There's several others that are in the

Maybe that's not applicable either, and I'm


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 28 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

270
1

not saying it is.

it is.

don't have any basis to believe that.

you.

was in the meeting, that Mr. Masterson was in the meeting,

that Mr. -- did you say Casey?

or Mr. Liddy was in the meeting.

But I think that you need to make such -- well, I


That was my reply to

But we've just had the witness say that Mr. Popolizio

8
9

I'm not saying I made a determination that

I think he said Mr. Casey --

So we've got some -- I guess Liddy was wrong.


We've got some lawyers here in the present action, and

10

there's now been a suggestion that they may be a witness to

11

something.

12

to call them.

13

got this hearing scheduled to start next week, I'm just

14

asking you, as lawyers, to consider that and to consider if

15

you feel like you have any obligation.

And they may not be a witness.


I'm not saying that's true.

16

No party may want


But because we've

If you do, I want to know about it so that we

17

can take appropriate steps and see if we have to postpone

18

this thing.

19

want to oblige any of you to violate what you think may be

20

your ethical obligations.

I don't want to postpone it, but I also don't

21
22

Since this is the first time I've heard this,


I thought I would raise it.

23
24
25

That's all, Mr. Stein.

MR. STEIN:

Fair enough.

THE COURT:

Mr. Woods?

I appreciate the

clarification.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 29 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

271
1

MR. WOODS:

Thank you, Your Honor.

On a

different topic, it's occurred to me today that Friday's

deposition of Christine Stutz and Monday's deposition of Tom

Liddy are going to be missing you.

to be missing you, when they believe that they have an

obligation to keep information confidential under 1.6, there

won't be a judge there to tell them that they have to abandon

that obligation.

that, I think they're under the obligation to keep

10

And because they're going

And until there's a judge here to tell them

information confidential under 1.6.

11

And I hate to think that we have to have

12

supervised depositions, but I note in the Liddy deposition it

13

will come up often, and the Stutz probably less often.

14

in the Liddy deposition, it's going to come up as many times

15

as it did today with Mr. Casey.

16

put it out there so we can decide how we're going to deal

17

with it.

18

THE COURT:

But

And I -- I just needed to

Well, when is -- Friday we have a

19

status conference.

20

would appreciate it if I wouldn't have to -- have to have it

21

here or if you could call me on the phone.

22

issues.

23

I'm available for part of Friday, but I

I'm aware of the

Monday I'm completely unavailable.

Depending

24

upon how I rule on the pending motion that relates to whether

25

or not privileges have been waived regarding advice or


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 30 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

272
1

directions given concerning not disclosing the 1459 IDs,

there may be more depositions we have to notice up for

Tuesday.

going to be ruling on this.

So maybe we can take it up in that light.

But I am

And I -- and I haven't changed my direction,

Mr. Stein, to you or to anybody else that if you want to

provide me authority that would be of assistance to me in

deciding this question, then tell me.

ruling Friday morning.

But I will make a

And we may have to have Mr. Casey

10

back to answer these questions related to this meeting.

11

it is now, I've directed him not to answer, although I'm

12

still going to allow you to follow up when you come.

13

As

I may determine that based on who was at the

14

meeting there is no attorney-client privilege anyway.

15

Mr. Masterson may withdraw his -- his feeling about that.

16

don't know.

17

assuming I'm still going to hold that the meeting -- that I

18

still want to consider the question.

19

anybody else to put forward whatever information you can for

20

me by Friday morning, and I'll take a look at it.

21

But we're just going to go step by step,

I'm inviting you or

I'm really not available much of tomorrow.

22

you can get it to me by tomorrow night, I will read it

23

overnight and try and have some -- some ruling on it by the

24

morning.

If

25

Any other question, Mr. Stein?


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 31 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

273
1

MR. STEIN:

MS. WANG:

No, thank you.


Your Honor, we -- we all have a lot

on our plates between now and Friday morning.

a list of authorities?

5
6

THE COURT:

Just -- and I would

prefer that.

MS. WANG:

THE COURT:

Yes, you may.

May we submit

authorities.

Thank you.
I will read the list of

And, you know, develop whatever you want now

10

that you think might throw light on the privilege without me

11

requiring Mr. Casey to ask -- answer that last question.

12
13
14

MS. WANG:

Thank you, Your Honor.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

Mr. Casey --

15
16

All right.

MR. MASTERSON:

Wait.

We were going to take a

little short break.

17

MS. WANG:

18

(Recess from 4:31 p.m. to 4:47 p.m.)

19
20

Oh, I'm sorry.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

All right.

Mr. Casey, let me continue asking you

21

some questions.

22

this and tee it up for the judge's ruling.

23

Okay.

We'll see if we can get anywhere further on

The documents that we just looked at,

24

Exhibit F of my declaration, were those -- were copies of

25

those handed around at this meeting?


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 32 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

274
1

A.

I don't remember that, if there was one copy

circulated or if there were multiple copies.

remember.

Q.

Did you leave that meeting with a copy?

A.

I did not.

Q.

You've already testified that Sheriff Arpaio did

I don't

speak during that meeting; is that correct?

A.

Yes.

Q.

Without telling me what he said, was it your

10

understanding that he was seeking the legal advice of any of

11

the attorneys in the room when he spoke on the subject of the

12

confidential informant's allegation about a conspiracy?

13

MR. POPOLIZIO:

14

THE WITNESS:

Foundation.
I don't know.

15

spoke towards the end, but I don't know.

16

BY MS. WANG:

17
18

Q.

And I believe he

Did he speak after the attorneys in the room had

spoken?

19

A.

I don't remember that.

20

Q.

Did anyone other than Sheriff Arpaio and the

21

attorneys in the room speak on the subject of the allegation

22

concerning this conspiracy?

23

MR. POPOLIZIO:

24

MS. CLARK:

25

Form.

Continuing objection on

confidentiality under ER 1.6.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 33 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

275
1
2

THE COURT:
overridden.

THE WITNESS:

remember.

BY MS. WANG:

6
7
8
9

Confidentiality obligation is

Q.

I don't -- I'm sorry.

I don't

You mentioned that there was one person on the

telephone; is that right?


A.

No.

I had the -- my memory of the meeting -- and I

thought it was earlier than January 14th, but my memory is

10

there were two people.

And my impression was they were

11

calling from out of state, and they were --

12

Q.

Okay.

13

A.

-- employees of MCSO.

14

Q.

Were they on a speakerphone in the room?

15

A.

They were.

16

Q.

And your impression was they were both employees of

17

MCSO?

18

A.

Yes.

19

Q.

Was your impression that those two people were

20

together in the same place or calling in from different

21

locations?

22

A.

My impression was they were in the same place.

23

Q.

Was that in Seattle?

24

A.

That's my impression, yeah.

25

Q.

All right.
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 34 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

276
1

A.

I believe that's where they were calling from.

Q.

Okay.

3
4

Do you recall whether Sergeant Travis Anglin

was present?
A.

You know, the name -- I -- I'm familiar with the

name, but I don't -- I'm -- I'm sure I've met that person,

but I'm embarrassed to say if that person walked in, I

probably -- I might recognize the person but not match the

name.

9
10
11
12
13

Q.

All right.

You mentioned that you believe

Captain Bailey was present; is that right?


A.

I'm going off of my best memory, even though it was

what, a little over a year ago?


Q.

He -- I believe he was.

Do you recall whether Captain Bailey spoke on the

14

subject of an alleged conspiracy involving the Court and the

15

Department of Justice?

16

A.

I don't remember that.

17

Q.

Okay.

18

You mentioned that your recollection is that

Lisa Allen may have been there; is that right?

19

A.

She may have been there.

20

Q.

You testified earlier today that Lisa Allen is the

21

Yes.

head of MCSO's Public Information Office; is that right?

22

A.

That's my understanding, yes.

23

Q.

Is her job essentially to -- to do publicity for

24
25

the sheriff's office?


A.

Yes.
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 35 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

277
1

Q.

Do you recall whether she spoke on the subject of

an alleged conspiracy involving the Court, the Department of

Justice, and the Covington & Burling law firm?

A.

I do not remember that.

I -- I have a general

memory that most of the MCSO people were quiet except for the

people talking on the phone.

7
8

Q.

Did you do anything in relation to the Seattle

investigation?

Do you understand what I mean when I say --

10

A.

No.

11

Q.

Okay.

Let me -- let me withdraw that.

12

Did you do anything relating to the alleged

13

conspiracy involving the Court, the Department of Justice,

14

and Covington & Burling after this meeting?

15

MS. CLARK:

16

privilege.

17

BY MS. WANG:

18
19

Q.

Confidential.

MS. CLARK:

I still have the objection based

on confidentiality and work product.


THE COURT:

23

THE WITNESS:

25

Work product.

revealing any attorney-client communications.

22

24

Attorney-client

Tell me to the extent you can answer that without

20
21

Objection.

Those are overruled.


Yes.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

To the extent you can tell me without revealing


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 36 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

278
1

attorney-client communications, what did you do to follow up?

MS. CLARK:

Just a continuing objection,

THE COURT:

On what basis?

MS. CLARK:

All three bases.

THE COURT:

They're all overruled.

THE WITNESS:

Judge.

I remember lawyers talking

amongst ourselves.

I can remember talking to, you know -- I

thought Jack MacIntyre was there.

I thought Jerry Sheridan

10

was there, but my memory is not perfect.

This thing was --

11

this thing was so ridiculous on its face in everything that I

12

heard, and I remember sharing with whoever I talked to that

13

the timeline, I could hire my son, that that information was

14

publicly available -- I believe was publicly available

15

information, and it had some sex appeal because supposedly

16

someone was monitoring Jones, Skelton & Hochuli's -- I think

17

Joe's telephone line.

18

But it -- it had nothing to it.

19

was out -- it was whacked is the best way I could describe it

20

to you to use kids' terms.

21

remember sharing.

22

BY MS. WANG:

23
24
25

Q.

It was -- but that's what I

At the time of this meeting, were you -- you were

co-counsel with Tom Liddy; correct?


A.

It was -- it

I was.
Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 37 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

279
1
2
3
4

Q.

Were you co-counsel with Mr. Masterson and

Mr. Popolizio?
A.

No, but they had the DOJ case that had very

overlapping.

Q.

Did you have a joint defense agreement?

A.

In principle, we certainly did.

Q.

It was the same client?

A.

Same client; same interests.

Q.

Well, did they -- in that case, at that time, the

10

defendants in this case were the sheriff -- well, withdrawn.

11

Did you receive any information during the

12

meeting -- let's call it the January 2nd meeting, even if

13

it -- you -- you don't recall the exact date.

14

convenience, will you agree that we're talking about this

15

meeting?

16
17
18
19

A.

But just for

I know I went to some meeting in which this

material was discussed.


Q.

Okay.

I just -- want -- I just want to shorthand

it as the January 2nd meeting.

20

During the January 2nd meeting, did you see

21

any information suggesting that the confidential informant

22

had accessed telephone records of -- telephone records or any

23

electronic communications of the Jones Hochuli -- Jones

24

Skelton Hochuli firm?

25

MR. POPOLIZIO:

Form.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 38 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

280
1

THE WITNESS:

I didn't see anything.

I heard

that there was representations that there was a duplication

of some sort of NSA/CIA data dump that this person had access

to, and that's where supposedly he got this information.

That's my memory.

BY MS. WANG:

Q.

Did you see any information or hear any information

during this meeting suggesting that telephone records or

other electronic communications of anyone at the law firm of

10

Covington & Burling had been accessed?

11

And feel free to refer to the document if that

12

helps you.

13

A.

I do remember there was something about the effect

14

of phone calls between -- you know, it wasn't Stan Young.

15

wasn't any of the lawyers that I had met, but, like, people

16

out of your DC office supposedly talking with Eric Holder or

17

Lanny Breuer.

18

worked for or used to work for Judge Snow supposedly

19

communicating with somebody.

20

details, but that's -- that's what I remember.

21

Q.

It

There was something about a clerk that either

And I don't remember the

Did you see any information that electronic

22

communications of any of those people you just described had

23

been somehow accessed, although they were private?

24

A.

I didn't see anything.

25

Q.

Did you hear that?


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 39 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

281
1

A.

It -- I was left with the impression that somehow,

somewhere there was some data that connected phone calls

between people that supposedly did this.

Exhibit 2524 at Exhibit F, this -- this chart, this flowchart

that emanates from the DOJ.

was some telephonic connection, but we didn't see that.

we -- that's what was represented as supposedly -- supposedly

potentially available.

Q.

I'm looking at your

That somehow there was -- there


But

Did you hear any represent -- representation that

10

the confidential informant had access to the content of

11

electronic communications between any of the people you just

12

mentioned:

13

Burling's DC office?

14

A.

Judge Snow's law clerk; somebody at Covington &

I don't --

15

MR. POPOLIZIO:

16

THE WITNESS:

Form.
I don't remember that, and I

17

don't believe that got down to that nitty-gritty.

18

mostly that -- just to confirm that a call was placed from

19

this number and went to this number and lasted whatever

20

period of time.

21

BY MS. WANG:

22

Q.

It was

And just to be clear, your understanding, based on

23

what you heard at that meeting, was that the information had

24

been obtained somehow from the CIA or the NSA?

25

A.

That was my -- that's my memory, which raised


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 40 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

282
1

questions about how did this CI obtain this information from

what I understood was a former employer?

3
4

Q.

Did you raise any concerns about that during this

meeting?

A.

I don't know if I did at the meeting.

Q.

Did there come a time when you did?

7
8

MS. CLARK:
Attorney-client privilege.

9
10
11

THE COURT:

Continuing objection, Judge.


Confidentiality.
Sustained.

Work product.

At least for now.

BY MS. WANG:
Q.

I just want to circle back and make sure that I got

12

a full answer to my question whether -- to the extent you can

13

answer this question without revealing attorney-client

14

communications, what did you do after this meeting that

15

related to the alleged conspiracy?

16

MS. CLARK:

17

Confidentiality.

18

to raise privilege.

19
20

Objection on work product.

And I believe it would be for Mr. Popolizio

MR. POPOLIZIO:

Can I hear the question again,

Ms. Court Reporter.

21

(The requested record was read.)

22

MR. POPOLIZIO:

Well, the question

23

specifically is whether he can answer, so it would be yes or

24

no that -- without revealing any privileged communications.

25

So I'm going to wait, Your Honor.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 41 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

283
1

MS. CLARK:

I'm objecting --

THE COURT:

Okay.

MS. CLARK:

-- on work product.

THE COURT:

I'm going to overrule the

objection.

It doesn't deal with his impressions.

with what he did.

allow him to answer the specific question asked.

It deals

So I'm going to overrule the objection and

THE WITNESS:

What was the question again?

(The requested record was read.)

10

THE WITNESS:

That's more than a yes or no.

11

MR. POPOLIZIO:

12

MS. WANG:

13

THE COURT:

14

THE WITNESS:

15

MR. POPOLIZIO:

Yeah.

It is.
It is.
And am I -Therefore, on that basis, Your

16

Honor, I'll assert the -- I will assert -- I will object and

17

assert the attorney-client privilege work product and to the

18

extent that it asks for any mental impressions or legal

19

analysis.

20

THE COURT:

I will overrule the objection to

21

the extent it is based on the work product privilege, 1.6,

22

and anything Mr. Casey did that did not involve

23

communications with his client.

24

involve client communications, you should not answer the

25

question, Mr. Casey.

To the extent it would

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 42 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

284
1

THE WITNESS:

I'm unable then to answer the

question, because my communications were to my client.

BY MS. WANG:

Q.

Did you do anything other than communicate with

your client after the meeting in relation to this alleged

conspiracy?

MR. POPOLIZIO:

THE WITNESS:

Form.
Yeah.

I remember the lawyers

talking, and I remember talking to my co-counsel.

10

a dead issue in my book.

It was worthless.

11

vindictive, and we would have no part of it.

12

BY MS. WANG:

And it was

It was

13

Q.

When you say "we," who do you mean?

14

A.

I said for the defense team, but I was talking

15

about myself and my law firm.

And my memory is, is that I

16

was joined in that by my co-counsel.

17

no use of this in any circumstances under any way.

18

it is, we want nothing to do with it.

There were going to be

19

Q.

How did you find out about the meeting?

20

A.

I -- I don't remember.

21

remember.

22

all gathered into a big room.

23
24
25

Q.

It was called.

Whatever

We probably -- I don't

It was summoned.

We showed up and

Did you -- were there -- did you attend any other

meetings at which this alleged conspiracy was discussed?


A.

I only remember one.

And nothing -- that one

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 43 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

285
1

meeting was the first, and that was the last.

2
3

MS. WANG:
have for you.

All right.

I think that is all I

Thank you.

THE WITNESS:

THE COURT:

Who wants to question the witness?

MR. WALKER:

I have -- I have a few questions.

6
7
8

Thank you.

Mr. Walker?

Thank you, Your Honor.

MS. WANG:

10

THE COURT:

Let me move.
You know, before you start,

11

Mr. Walker, I just guess -- I think I need to give a little

12

more guidance on the Friday morning thing.

13

Although I will be interested if you have

14

authority that suggests that statements made by clients

15

during a meeting are possibly not subject to the privilege, I

16

think I'm inclined to give Sheriff Arpaio the benefit of the

17

doubt since he has so many attorneys here.

18

then is going to be given -- is going to be whether given the

19

identity and the number of persons that were present at the

20

meeting, whether the attorney-client privilege applies.

21

Everybody understand that?

22

MR. YOUNG:

The real issue

Okay.

Your Honor, if I can interpose a

23

question or an issue.

24

memories of various witnesses about who was at the meeting --

25

There may be differences in the

THE COURT:

Uh-huh.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 44 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

286
1

MR. YOUNG:

-- and those differences may,

depending on how we -- those differences may point to

different results on the issue --

THE COURT:

I see what you're saying.

MR. YOUNG:

-- whether the meeting is

THE COURT:

I see what you're saying.

privileged.

Maybe

we'll have to -- maybe I can't make the decision Friday

morning.

Maybe we'll just have to apply all of the testimony

10

that we have, and I'll consider it in its totality prior to

11

the beginning of the hearing.

12

we're obviously going to have to do some scheduling on

13

Friday.

14

which witnesses that you may be calling that were in that

15

meeting.

16

mean --

17

And if we need to do that,

I will try to make it -- if you will let me know

And I don't know whether waiver's an issue.

MR. YOUNG:

Well, it's not just witnesses, but

18

actually counsel for the sheriff have taken different

19

positions in different depositions with respect to that

20

meeting, or at least parts of that meeting, which is why we

21

have testimony about the content of the meeting from some

22

witnesses but not from Mr. Casey so far.

23

THE COURT:

24
25

We already have testimony about

this meeting from other witnesses?


MS. WANG:

Yes, Your Honor.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 45 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

287
1

THE COURT:

MS. WANG:

Who has testified?


As far as I recall, Chief Deputy

Sheridan had some testimony on it.

meeting.

He did not recall the

Did not recall being at any such meeting.

And Sergeant Anglin also testified.

And Mr. Young is right.

I think -- I was not

present at the Anglin deposition, but I do believe there have

been different positions taken by defense counsel as to the

privilege issues.

10

MR. YOUNG:

Well, and then specifically

11

whether Mr. Montgomery was part of the conversation or not.

12

And I think for those witnesses who have -- or recall that

13

Mr. Montgomery was part of the conversation, there's been no

14

assertion of privilege to bar testimony about what was said

15

while he was in the conversation.

16
17
18

THE COURT:
waiver?

Well, then does that amount to

I guess I'd invite that question.


MS. WANG:

I think there may be waiver issues

19

as well, yes, but we would need to take a look at the

20

deposition transcripts.

21

THE COURT:

Well, it sounds to me like maybe I

22

better look at the totality of the circumstances before I

23

make any rulings.

24
25

MR. YOUNG:

Yeah.

The issue with Mr. Casey

may be because Mr. Montgomery was on the phone and -- and


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 46 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

288
1

Mr. Casey had never met or --

THE COURT:

Well, I mean, I don't -- you

MR. YOUNG:

Yeah.

THE COURT:

-- I understand, but we're not

know --

going to characterize that now.

Let me see what the sworn testimony is, and

then you can try and characterize the sworn testimony.

we'll realize really what the whole totality of the issue is,

10

or if I can get actual descriptions of what the various

11

witnesses have said about it.

12

MR. POPOLIZIO:

But

Your Honor, in terms of -- of

13

defining who the various witnesses who have testified on this

14

issue in deposition, I heard Chief Sheridan and Travis

15

Anglin.

Were there any others?

16

THE COURT:

17

MS. WANG:

Those are the two I heard.


I think Captain Bailey also may

18

have testified on this.

I took that deposition and confess

19

that I do not have a clear memory, but I -- I do believe I

20

asked him about the meeting.

21

THE COURT:

All right.

22

MR. POPOLIZIO:

23

THE COURT:

Any -- any further issues on that?

24

All right.

Mr. Walker.

25

MR. WALKER:

Thank you.

Thank you, Your Honor.

Griffin & Associates Court Reporters


602.264.2230

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-3 Filed 09/18/15 Page 47 of 47


Timothy J. Casey - September 16, 2015

289
1
2
3

E X A M I N A T I O N
BY MR. WALKER:
Q.

Mr. Casey, you were lead counsel for the defense in

this case in the fall of 2009; correct?

MS. CLARK:

Again, I'm going to just go back

and refer to my prefatory statement, and the final portion of

which stated that if counsel for any of the defendants

questioned Mr. Casey, that I'm -- he -- I've instructed him

to presume that that counsel has conferred with their

10

respective client and that they are waiving the

11

attorney-client privilege that might be invoked otherwise for

12

the information that responds to that question which

13

Mr. Casey's being asked.

14

I hope that was clear as mud.

I'm sorry.

15

It's getting late, and I'm getting tired.

16

statement was he's going to presume there's been a waiver of

17

the privilege if he's questioned by defense counsel.

18

THE WITNESS:

19

MR. WALKER:

But my prefatory

Yes.
In response to Ms. Clark's

20

comments, that -- I will represent to you that in this

21

proceeding, I represent Maricopa County.

22

the sheriff.

23

BY MR. WALKER:

24

Q.

Do you understand that?

25

A.

I hear what you're saying.


Griffin & Associates Court Reporters
602.264.2230

I do not represent

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-4 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 4

EXHIBIT D

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-4 Filed 09/18/15 Page 2 of 4

Sheridan, Gerard - Vol. 4 9/15/2015 9:16:00 AM

IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA


MANUEL DE JESUS ORTEGA
MELENDRES, et al.,

)
Plaintiffs, )
)
vs.

)No. CV-07-2513-PHX-GMS
)

JOSEPH M. ARPAIO, et al.,

)
Defendants. )
)
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF GERARD SHERIDAN
VOLUME IV
(Pages 355 to 685, inclusive)
Phoenix, Arizona
September 15, 2015
9:16 a.m.
REPORTED BY:
PAMELA A. GRIFFIN, RPR, CRR
Certified Reporter
Certificate No. 50010
PREPARED FOR:
CONDENSED/ASCII
(Certified Copy)
Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres

Unsigned

Page -

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-4 Filed 09/18/15 Page 3 of 4

Sheridan, Gerard - Vol. 4 9/15/2015 9:16:00 AM

and lack of performance flies in the face of his numerous

promises pledging to complete the work," et cetera.

Seems to me based on this e-mail that

Mike Zullo was still demanding work product from

Dennis Montgomery as of April 20th, 2015.

Did you know that that was happening?

MR. MASTERSON: Foundation.

THE WITNESS: I know that we had paid

Dennis Montgomery an awful lot of money, and he had

10

nothing to show for it, and that on occasion Mike would

11

contact him. Yes, I was aware of that.

12

BY MS. WANG:

13
14

Q. And you're aware that Mike Zullo was doing that


up till April 20th of 2015?

15

MR. MASTERSON: Form. Foundation.

16

MR. WALKER: Join.

17

THE WITNESS: I don't recall when, but

18

obviously this e-mail gives me that date.

19

BY MS. WANG:

20
21

Q. And -- okay.
Do you recall a meeting about the Seattle

22

investigation on or about January 2nd, 2014? And this

23

would have been with Travis Anglin, Tim Casey, Tom Liddy,

24

John Masterson, Joe Popolizio.

25

A. No.

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres

Unsigned

Page 614

Case 2:07-cv-02513-GMS Document 1365-4 Filed 09/18/15 Page 4 of 4

Sheridan, Gerard - Vol. 4 9/15/2015 9:16:00 AM

1
2
3
4
5
6

STATE OF ARIZONA
)
) ss.
COUNTY OF MARICOPA )
BE IT KNOWN that the foregoing proceedings were
taken before me; that the witness before testifying was
duly sworn by me to testify to the whole truth; that the
foregoing pages are a full, true, and accurate record of
the proceedings, all done to the best of my skill and
ability; that the proceedings were taken down by me in
shorthand and thereafter reduced to print under my
direction.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

I CERTIFY that I am in no way related to any of


the parties hereto, nor am I in any way interested in the
outcome hereof.
[X] Review and signature was requested.
[ ] Review and signature was waived.
[ ] Review and signature not required.
I CERTIFY that I have complied with the ethical
obligations set forth in ACJA 7-206(F)(3) and ACJA 7-206
J(1)(g)(1) and (2).
Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this [!DATE] day of
[!MONTH], 2015.

15
16
17
18
19

_____________________________ ______
PAMELA A. GRIFFIN, RPR, CRR
Certified Reporter
Arizona CR No. 50010
*

20
21
22
23
24
25

I CERTIFY that GRIFFIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC, has


complied with the ethical obligations set forth in ACJA
7-206 (J)(1)(g)(1) through (6).
_____________________________________
GRIFFIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC
Registered Reporting Firm
Arizona RRF No. R1005

Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres

Unsigned

Page 685