Jury Voir Dire (Continued) — Qualifications and Hardship Review
1,018 linesSAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA SEPTEMBER 1, 2021 P R O C E E D I N G S
(COURT CONVENED AT 9:05 A.M.)
(PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL OUT AT 9:05 A.M.)
JUDGE DAVILA: LET'S GO ON THE RECORD IN THIS MATTER THIS MORNING. THIS IS 18-258, UNITED STATES VERSUS ELIZABETH HOLMES. LET ME GET APPEARANCES OF THE PARTIES, PLEASE. MR. SCHENK.
MR. SCHENK: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. JEFF SCHENK ON BEHALF UNITED STATES. I'M APPEARING THIS MORNING ALONG WITH MY COLLEAGUES ROBERT LEACH AND JOHN BOSTIC, AND ALSO SPECIAL AGENT ADDY HERNANDEZ FROM THE FBI, KELLY VOLKAR FROM THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND MADDI WACHS FROM THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MR. DOWNEY.
MR. DOWNEY: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. KEVIN DOWNEY FOR MS. HOLMES. I'M HERE WITH MY COLLEAGUES LANCE WADE AND KATIE TREFZ AND OUR COCOUNSEL JOHN CLINE IS WITH US. MS. HOLMES IS PRESENT IN COURT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. THIS IS OUR SECOND DAY OF JURY SELECTION, AND WE HAVE NOT BROUGHT OUR JURY UP, OUR PROSPECTIVE PANEL UP YET. AS WE EXPERIENCED YESTERDAY, THERE'S -- WITH THE SIZE OF THE PANELS BEING SUCH AND BROKEN INTO THREE SEPARATE TRANCHES, WE'VE HAD SOME DIFFICULTY WITH FOLKS OR FOLKS HAVE HAD DIFFICULTY ARRIVING ON TIME AND ON THEIR CURRENT DAYS. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, SOME JURORS WHO WERE SUPPOSED TO BE HERE YESTERDAY SHOWED UP TODAY, I BELIEVE, AND SOME JURORS WHO WERE SUPPOSED TO BE HERE TOMORROW SHOWED UP TODAY. SO I THOUGHT WE WOULD TALK ABOUT THOSE INDIVIDUALS. ALSO, I DID WANT TO TALK ABOUT A JUROR WE TALKED ABOUT YESTERDAY, MR. SINGH. I THINK IF YOU RECALL MR. SINGH, HE TALKED WITH US ABOUT HIS FINANCIAL HARDSHIP WITH HIS BUSINESS. I THINK BOTH COUNSEL AGREED TO THAT. I TOLD MR. SINGH THAT WE WOULD LET HIM KNOW, AND MY SENSE IS THAT I SHOULD HAVE YESTERDAY DONE THIS, BUT LET ME EXCUSE HIM FOR FINANCIAL REASONS TODAY. ANY OBJECTION TO THAT, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. DOWNEY?
MR. DOWNEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND WHAT NUMBER WAS MR. SINGH?
MR. DOWNEY: I BELIEVE HE WAS 48, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: LET ME EXCUSE HIM NOW. LET ME ASK, COUNSEL, DID YOU RECEIVE A JURY SELECTION LIST THAT MS. KRATZMANN PREPARED THAT ARE THE ORDER OF JURORS, DID YOU RECEIVE THAT?
COURT CLERK: NOT YET, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OH.
COURT CLERK: (HANDING.)
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU, MS. KRATZMANN. THIS IS THE FORM YOU'LL USE WHEN YOU ENGAGE YOUR SELECTIONS, AND MS. KRATZMANN HAS PUT DOWN, AT LEAST AS FAR AS WE CAN TELL, THE ORDER OF REMAINING JURORS, PROSPECTIVE JURORS JUST FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE IN COLLATING THOSE INDIVIDUALS. I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT SOME OTHER JURORS. AND THERE WERE TWO JURORS THAT I BELIEVE MS. KRATZMANN SENT AN EMAIL TO YOU ABOUT THIS MORNING, AND THEY WERE INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY HAVE READ SOME LITERATURE, AND I WANTED TO ASK WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THOSE TWO PROSPECTIVE JURORS REMAINING.
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, THE DEFENSE CONSENTS TO THE EXCUSAL OF THOSE TWO JURORS.
JUDGE DAVILA: LET'S SEE. THOSE NUMBERS AGAIN WERE -- MS. KRATZMANN, DO YOU HAVE THOSE NUMBERS?
COURT CLERK: I'M SORRY, JUST ONE MOMENT.
MR. SCHENK: THE FIRST ONE WAS 135, AND THE GOVERNMENT CONSENTS TO EXCUSE JUROR 135. I BELIEVE THE SECOND ONE WAS 171.
JUDGE DAVILA: I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.
MR. SCHENK: AND FROM THE QUESTIONNAIRE THERE WAS A LACK OF CLARITY AT LEAST FROM THE GOVERNMENT'S PERSPECTIVE, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE NOT EXCUSING THAT JUROR YET, THOUGH WE MIGHT VERY WELL BE HEADED IN THE DIRECTION OF EXCUSING THAT JUROR.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. DOWNEY?
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD CONSENT TO EXCUSAL TO BOTH AT THIS TIME, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THE GOVERNMENT WANTS TO VOIR DIRE THAT JUROR.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD YESTERDAY AT SIDE-BAR REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT'S POSITION ABOUT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY HAVE READ CERTAIN LITERATURE. I THINK THE GOVERNMENT MAY HAVE AGREED THAT THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD DONE SO WOULD BE STRICKEN. SO WE'LL STRIKE AT THIS TIME JUROR NUMBER 135, AND THAT WOULD BE A CAUSE STRIKE BECAUSE OF EXPOSURE TO INFORMATION. WE'LL BRING UP 171 WITH THE REST OF THE PANEL, AND WE'LL EXAMINE JUROR 171 FOR FURTHER CLARITY. I ALSO NOTE THAT JUROR NUMBER 28 WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HERE YESTERDAY. SHE IS HERE TODAY. I WANT TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THAT. IF YOU HAVE THE QUESTIONNAIRE IN HAND, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO LOOK AT THAT MATERIAL. IT APPEARS THAT, AND MY NOTES REFLECT, THAT IN HER QUESTIONNAIRE SHE INDICATED THAT SHE HAD CHILDCARE ISSUES, AND SHE RESIDES IN SALINAS, I BELIEVE. I WANTED TO ASK YOU WHETHER YOU HAD ANY THOUGHTS ON THIS PROSPECTIVE JUROR? OF COURSE TAKE TIME TO DISCUSS WITH YOUR TEAMS AND REVIEW HER QUESTIONNAIRE. WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT I'LL TELL YOUR TEAMS BEHIND YOU JUROR NUMBER 62 WAS TO COME YESTERDAY, AND JUROR NUMBER 62 IS HERE TODAY AND WOULD OTHERWISE BE ADDED TO OUR COMPLEMENT FOR TODAY.
(PAUSE IN PROCEEDINGS.)
MR. SCHENK: YOUR HONOR, AS TO JUROR NUMBER 28, NO OBJECTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT FOR HARDSHIP EXCUSAL.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION FROM THE DEFENSE.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUROR NUMBER 28 WILL BE EXCUSED FOR HARDSHIP. AS I SAID, SHE LIVES IN SALINAS, AND SHE HAS YOUNG CHILDREN. SALINAS IS PROBABLY A 90 MINUTE DRIVE ON A GOOD DAY FROM THIS COURTHOUSE. SO I WILL EXCUSE JUROR NUMBER 28. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MS. KRATZMANN, IF YOU COULD NOTIFY OUR JURY COMMISSIONER THAT JUROR NUMBER 28 HAS BEEN EXCUSED AND NEED NOT COME UP TO THE COURTROOM, AS WELL AS JUROR NUMBER 135. I'M ALSO INFORMED THAT --
COURT CLERK: YES, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: -- THAT JUROR NUMBER 62 IS HERE TODAY AND WOULD BE ADDED TO OUR PANEL THIS MORNING. THAT WOULD BE MY INTENT. AND JUROR NUMBER 205, I THINK, IS ALSO HERE, AND 211? MS. KRATZMANN, IS THAT CORRECT?
COURT CLERK: YES, YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE 205, 211, AND 220.
JUDGE DAVILA: IF WE CAN ADD THEM TO OUR PANEL, THAT GIVES US -- HAVE YOU DONE THE MATH, MS. KRATZMANN?
COURT CLERK: IF YOU CAN GIVE ME JUST ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: I'M SORRY TO GIVE YOU THAT TEST ON THE FLY.
COURT CLERK: SO, YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 47 TODAY. THE THREE THAT YOU JUST EXCUSED, JURORS 48, 135 AND 28, THAT TAKES US TO 44. SO IF WE HAVE 205, 211, AND 220, AND THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 3, SO THAT WOULD LEAVE YOU WITH 41 TODAY, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, I SET TODAY STARTING AT 9:00 O'CLOCK, AND WHAT WE'RE REALIZING IS LOGISTICS BEING WHAT THEY ARE JURORS SHOWING UP LATE AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, AND THEN OUR JUROR COORDINATOR TRYING TO COORDINATE ALL OF THE NUMBERS, IT'S REALISTICALLY -- I THINK YOU RECEIVED SOME INFORMATION FROM MS. KRATZMANN THAT REALISTICALLY WE'LL START ABOUT 9:30. HOPEFULLY WE CAN ARRANGE ALL OF THOSE JURORS DOWNSTAIRS, BRING THEM UP. OF COURSE IT TAKES SOME TIME TO GET 41 PEOPLE SEATED IN OUR JURY BOX HERE, SO IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME ADDITIONAL TIME. I KNOW OUR WONDERFUL STAFF IS WORKING AS HARD AS THEY CAN TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN SO.
COURT CLERK: YOUR HONOR, COULD I JUST GET CLARIFICATION? SO ARE YOU EXCUSING JUROR 62, 211, 205, AND 220? THEN THAT WOULD DROP YOU TO 40 JURORS.
JUDGE DAVILA: MS. KRATZMANN, I THOUGHT THEY WERE HERE TODAY TO JOIN THE PANEL.
COURT CLERK: THEY ARE HERE TODAY. SO YOU WANT TO ADD THEM TO THE POOL?
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. YES.
COURT CLERK: OKAY. I'M SORRY.
JUDGE DAVILA: ANY OBJECTION TO ADDING THESE JURORS TO OUR POOL TODAY?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: WITH RESPECT TO JUROR 62, I NOTE THAT THERE'S A MATTER THAT HE WANTS TO DISCUSS --
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
MR. DOWNEY: -- AT SOME POINT AT SIDE-BAR --
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
MR. DOWNEY: -- WHICH WAS A MATTER THAT WE WOULD LIKE ADDRESSED. SO I JUST NOTE THAT SO THE COURT CAN CONSIDER WHEN DURING THE DAY WE WOULD DO THAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. I NOTED THAT, AND I THINK THE QUESTIONNAIRE SUGGESTS THAT IF IT COMES UP, THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT PRIVATELY.
MR. DOWNEY: RIGHT.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. AND WE'LL CERTAINLY DO THAT FOR HIM.
COURT CLERK: SO LET ME MAKE A CORRECTION, YOUR HONOR. THE 47 INCLUDED ALL OF THESE JURORS. SO YOU EXCUSED THREE. SO WE HAVE 44 JURORS TO WORK WITH TODAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I'LL STEP DOWN NOW, AND WE'LL LET THE COMMISSIONER DO HER GOOD WORK AND BRING FOLKS UP. SO IT'S NOW 20 PAST THE HOUR, AND MY SENSE IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER 20 MINUTES OR SO. SO I JUST TELL YOU THAT FOR YOUR INFORMATION.
MR. DOWNEY: THANK YOU.
MR. SCHENK: THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
COURT CLERK: COURT IS IN RECESS.
(RECESS FROM 9:16 A.M. UNTIL 9:53 A.M.)
(PROSPECTIVE JUROR BROWN PRESENT.)
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. WE'RE BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE HOLMES MATTER. ALL PARTIES PREVIOUSLY PRESENT ARE PRESENT ONCE AGAIN. I BELIEVE WE ALSO HAVE JUROR NUMBER 171. IS THAT MR. BROWN?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, SIR. WE BROUGHT YOU UP BECAUSE YOU WERE SUMMONED HERE FOR JURY SERVICE IN A CASE ENTITLED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VERSUS ELIZABETH HOLMES. THERE WAS AN ANSWER ON YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE THAT I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT. BUT, YOU KNOW, FIRST WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IN A MOMENT IS BRING ALL OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURORS UP, AND WE'LL SWEAR THEM IN TO BEGIN ANSWERING QUESTIONS. YOU'RE HERE, SO PERHAPS WE SHOULD SWEAR YOU RIGHT NOW. SO IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, OUR COURTROOM DEPUTY HAS A QUESTION FOR YOU.
(PROSPECTIVE JUROR WAS GIVEN THE OATH.)
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. BROWN. I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION THAT WE SAW ON YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE, AND AS YOU KNOW FROM FILLING OUT THAT QUESTIONNAIRE LAST WEEK, WE ASKED JURORS TO FILL THAT QUESTIONNAIRE OUT SO WE COULD SEE AND THESE LAWYERS COULD SEE AND THE COURT COULD HAVE SOME ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS THAT WOULD HELP IN THIS SELECTION PROCESS. I WANTED TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO ONE QUESTION IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE, AND THAT WAS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD READ, HEARD ABOUT, SEEN, LISTENED TO, OR DISCUSSED ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE. I THINK THEY'RE QUESTIONS 40, 41 IN THAT AREA. I THINK YOU RESPONDED IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE THAT YOU HAD READ A BOOK CALLED "BAD BLOOD." I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU HAD SAID.
JUROR: NO. I HAD SEEN -- I HAD SEEN, I GUESS, A DOCUMENTARY.
JUDGE DAVILA: CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MIKE?
JUROR: I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S QUITE ALL RIGHT.
JUROR: I HAD SEEN A DOCUMENTARY.
JUDGE DAVILA: IT'S QUESTION 37, HAVE YOU WATCHED, READ, LISTENED TO OR BEEN TOLD OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING, PLEASE CIRCLE. AND "BAD BLOOD" WAS CIRCLED BY YOU ON YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE, AND THAT CAUSED ME TO WONDER WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD READ THE BOOK OR SOMEHOW BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THAT MATERIAL.
JUROR: YEAH, I HADN'T READ THE BOOK. I SAW A DOCUMENTARY REGARDING IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. AND WAS THAT THE -- I THINK YOU CIRCLED -- YOU DID CIRCLE, PARDON ME, "20/20" AND "60 MINUTES"?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: CAN YOU SHARE WITH ME HOW LONG AGO YOU SAW THOSE SHOWS AND WHETHER THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU -- ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU RECEIVED ABOUT THIS CASE.
JUROR: MY BEST RECOLLECTION OF SEEING ANY OF THOSE WAS WELL OVER A YEAR, MAYBE A YEAR AND A HALF AGO.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. AND IS THERE ANY OTHER MATERIAL THAT YOU CAN RECALL --
JUROR: I MEAN --
JUDGE DAVILA: -- ABOUT THIS CASE?
JUROR: BASIC INTERNET INFORMATION.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT, SIR?
JUROR: SORT OF NEWS FEEDS THAT POP UP ON THE BROWSER.
JUDGE DAVILA: LET ME ASK YOU, WHAT IS THE MOST RECENT INFORMATION THAT YOU RECEIVED, READ, HEARD, LISTENED TO OR SAW REGARDING THIS CASE?
(PAUSE IN PROCEEDINGS.)
JUROR: HOW LONG AGO, OR INFORMATION?
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: PROBABLY, PROBABLY -- POSSIBLY A YEAR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND BY THAT HAVE YOU SEEN ANY -- LET ME JUST ASK YOU, OVER THE WEEKEND DID YOU READ ANY NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ABOUT THIS CASE?
JUROR: NO. NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: DID YOU, OVER THE WEEKEND, DID YOU SEE ANYTHING ON THE INTERNET OR RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION ON A DEVICE, NEWS INFORMATION ABOUT THIS CASE?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO THE LAST TIME THAT YOU RECALL SEEING SOMETHING, INFORMATION ABOUT THIS CASE WAS ABOUT A YEAR AGO?
JUROR: YEAH, IN TERMS OF -- I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THE TELEVISION IS ON, BUT AS SOON AS ANYTHING CAME UP, THE TELEVISION WAS TURNED OFF.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND WHEN WAS THAT?
JUROR: THAT WAS PROBABLY WITHIN A COUPLE WEEKS.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN -- AND I'M SORRY TO DRILL DOWN ON THIS.
JUROR: THAT'S OKAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: I'M JUST TRYING TO MEASURE YOUR EXPOSURE AND WHEN THAT WAS. SO DID YOU SEE OR HEAR ANY INFORMATION AFTER YOU HAD COME TO COURT AND FILLED OUT YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE?
JUROR: NO. NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US THAT YOU SAW, THE TELEVISION AND THOSE THINGS, WAS BEFORE YOU FILLED OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND YOU SAID YOU TURNED IT OFF. WHY DID YOU TURN IT OFF?
JUROR: JUST NOT REALLY INTERESTED.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING -- MR. BROWN, IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN RELATION TO THIS CASE OR INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED ABOUT THIS CASE THAT YOU THINK WOULD AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL TO THE GOVERNMENT AND TO MS. HOLMES?
JUROR: NO. NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. I'M GOING TO ASK THESE LAWYERS IF THEY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU NOW.
JUROR: SURE.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND I MAY HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR YOU. MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NOTHING FROM THE GOVERNMENT. THANK YOU.
MR. DOWNEY: GOOD MORNING, MR. BROWN. MY NAME IS KEVIN DOWNEY. I REPRESENT MS. HOLMES.
JUROR: GOOD MORNING.
MR. DOWNEY: I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. YOU SAID YOU WATCHED A DOCUMENTARY. HOW LONG APPROXIMATELY DO YOU THINK THAT DOCUMENTARY WAS?
JUROR: I'M GOING TO SAY AN HOUR OR 60 MINUTES.
MR. DOWNEY: SO YOU WATCHED "60 MINUTES" ALSO?
JUROR: A VARIETY, "60 MINUTES," "20/20." BUT SPECIFIC TO THE "BAD BLOOD," THAT WAS ABOUT A 60 MINUTE PROGRAM, I BELIEVE.
MR. DOWNEY: AND WHAT DO YOU REMEMBER LEARNING FROM THAT PROGRAM ABOUT MS. HOLMES?
JUROR: SHE'S PRETTY SMART. IN TERMS OF THE CASE? JUST HOW THE COMPANY STARTED, WHAT THEIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE WAS, AND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT THEY WERE USING TO SORT OF ADVANCE THAT WHOLE PROCESS OF BLOOD TESTING.
MR. DOWNEY: WHAT DO YOU REMEMBER ABOUT THE TECHNOLOGY, IF ANYTHING?
JUROR: THAT IT USED MUCH LESS BLOOD THAN CONVENTIONAL TESTING AND IN A SHORTER TIMEFRAME.
MR. DOWNEY: DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING DISCUSSIONS DURING THE DOCUMENTARY BY ANY INDIVIDUALS WHO KNEW MS. HOLMES?
JUROR: OH, UM, THE SHULTZ, SHULTZ.
MR. DOWNEY: IS THAT GEORGE SHULTZ?
JUROR: THE -- WAS IT THE GRANDSON?
MR. DOWNEY: IS IT TYLER SHULTZ? IS THAT WHO YOU REMEMBER SEEING?
JUROR: I THINK THAT'S HIS NAME. IT WAS THE GRANDSON.
MR. DOWNEY: OKAY. SO YOU REMEMBER HEARING FROM GEORGE SHULTZ'S GRANDSON DURING THAT PROGRAM?
JUROR: I BELIEVE SO.
MR. DOWNEY: WHAT DO YOU REMEMBER HIM SAYING DURING THAT PROGRAM?
JUROR: THAT HE HAD QUESTIONS REGARDING THE VALIDITY OF THE TESTING.
MR. DOWNEY: ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT MS. HOLMES THAT YOU REMEMBER LEARNING FROM THAT DOCUMENTARY?
JUROR: SHE WORE BLACK SUITS.
MR. DOWNEY: ANYTHING ELSE?
JUROR: NOTHING I COULD PUT MY FINGER ON OTHER THAN THE CREATION OF THE COMPANY AND JUST OVERALL RUNNING THE COMPANY.
MR. DOWNEY: FAIR ENOUGH. I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF YOU, MR. BROWN. THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO, MR. BROWN, THANK YOU FOR SHARING THIS INFORMATION WITH US. I GET BACK TO MY QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS INFORMATION WILL CAUSE YOU TO BE LESS THAN FAIR TO BOTH SIDES. THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOLKS ABOUT. AND I, I RECOGNIZE WE'RE HUMANS AND WHEN WE'RE ASKED A QUESTION, WE STOP AND WE REFLECT BECAUSE WE WANT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT THE QUESTION AND TRY TO RECALL. YOU DID THAT. I'M NOT BEING CRITICAL OF YOU. I'M JUST SAYING AND MAKING THE OBSERVATION. YOU WERE VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT YOUR ANSWERS HERE.
JUROR: UH-HUH.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND IT SEEMED LIKE YOU WERE PROCESSING, TRYING TO USE YOUR MEMORY TO RECALL WHAT YOU SAW IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONS POSED TO YOU. I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT -- THIS CASE WILL BE ABOUT THERANOS. IT WILL BE ABOUT THOSE SHOWS THAT YOU SAW -- OR THOSE SHOWS ARE ACTUALLY ABOUT THIS CASE. A JUROR -- IF A JUROR IS SEATED TO HEAR THE CASE, THEY MUST MAKE THEIR DECISION ONLY ON THE EVIDENCE THAT IS IN THE COURTROOM.
JUROR: OKAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S IT. THEY CAN'T USE ANYTHING THAT THEY'VE RECEIVED OUTSIDE, ANYTHING THEY'VE READ, LISTENED TO, WATCHED, OR HEARD FROM A FRIEND OR A RELATIVE ABOUT THE CASE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?
JUROR: YES, SIR.
JUDGE DAVILA: HAVE YOU EVER SAT ON A JURY PREVIOUSLY?
JUROR: NO, SIR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING THESE QUESTIONS. THERE'S BEEN PUBLICITY ABOUT THIS CASE. THERE'S BEEN PUBLICITY ABOUT INDIVIDUALS WHO MIGHT BE INVOLVED WITH THIS CASE. THE REASON I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS AND THE LAWYERS ASK THESE QUESTIONS IS THAT WE WANT TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER OR NOT A JUROR WHO MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO INFORMATION, AND MANY HAVE LIKE YOU, WHETHER OR NOT THEY THINK THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO, IF THEY'RE SEATED AS A JUROR, TO NOT ALLOW THAT OUTSIDE INFORMATION THAT THEY HAVE BEEN PRIVY TO, TO NOT ALLOW THAT TO INFECT THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS AND THEIR DECISION ON THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT CONCEPT?
JUROR: YES, I DO.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. SO TELL ME WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE ABOUT THAT, HAVING SEEN THESE SHOWS AND TALKED ABOUT THEM THIS MORNING.
JUROR: I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IT WAS NEWS. BUT IN TERMS OF INFORMATION BASED ON A CASE AND WHAT IS HEARD OR TALKED ABOUT OR PRESENTED AS EVIDENCE, I FEEL LIKE I CAN BE IMPARTIAL SEPARATING, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST TO FACTUAL INFORMATION TODAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. IT'S A DIFFICULT THING WE DO. I RECOGNIZE THAT. YESTERDAY I WAS TALKING TO SOME OTHER JURORS AND I SAID, HOW DO YOU UNREAD SOMETHING? HOW DO YOU UNLISTEN TO SOMETHING? HOW DO YOU UNRING THAT BELL?
JUROR: RIGHT, RIGHT.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND WE ALL KNOW THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE. SO WHAT WE TRY TO DO IS WE ASK JURORS, WHAT METHODS WILL YOU USE? HOW WILL YOU SEPARATE THAT? HOW WILL YOU COMPARTMENTALIZE WHAT YOU'VE SEEN, HEARD, OR BEEN EXPOSED TO IN THE PAST AND SEPARATE THAT JUST SO YOU'RE FOCUSSED ON THE EVIDENCE IN THIS COURTROOM AND NOT ANYTHING ELSE AS YOU MAKE A DECISION? THAT'S A CHALLENGE. I RECOGNIZE THAT. THAT'S DIFFICULT.
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK YOU CAN DO?
JUROR: I BELIEVE I CAN.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ANY IDEA ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD -- WHAT YOUR PROCESS WOULD BE? FOR EXAMPLE, LET ME SAY, IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR IN THIS CASE, YOU MIGHT HEAR EVIDENCE, OR YOU WILL HEAR EVIDENCE ABOUT THIS COMPANY AND THE ACTIVITY IN THIS COMPANY. THE GOVERNMENT GOES FIRST AND THEY PUT THE EVIDENCE ON AND THEN THE DEFENSE, IF THEY WISH, THEY CAN PUT EVIDENCE ON AS WELL. AND YOU MIGHT HEAR SOMETHING DURING THAT PRESENTATION THAT CAUSED YOU TO PERHAPS REMEMBER SOMETHING THAT YOU SAW IN ONE OF THESE PROGRAMS. AND THEN IT BECOMES, WELL, WHAT I'M HEARING IN THE COURTROOM IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I SAW IN THE PROGRAM, OR MAYBE IT'S THE SAME. AND THAT MIGHT CAUSE SOMEONE TO THINK, WELL, THAT SUPPORTS WHAT I'M HEARING IN THE COURTROOM, OR IT'S DIFFERENT, SO THAT MIGHT CAUSE SOMEONE TO QUESTION WHAT YOU HEAR IN THE COURTROOM. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. SO HOW DO YOU THINK YOU WOULD SEPARATE THOSE?
JUROR: I MEAN, I RECOGNIZE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU DO HEAR THINGS AND YOU ONLY HAVE TO GO BY WHAT IS PRESENTED, WHAT IS HERE, WHAT IS NOW, TODAY, NOT BASED ON ANYTHING ELSE THAT HAS TRANSPIRED IN THE PAST. I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH, DIFFICULT, BUT I THINK -- I FEEL LIKE I'M UP FOR THE TASK.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YOU'LL BE INSTRUCTED -- IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR, I'LL GIVE YOU AN INSTRUCTION THAT YOU'RE OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW.
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: IT SAYS JUST THAT. IT SAYS YOU'RE GOING TO FOCUS YOUR DECISION AS A JUROR SOLELY ON THE EVIDENCE THAT IS RECEIVED HERE IN THIS COURTROOM. CAN YOU FOLLOW THAT INSTRUCTION?
JUROR: YES, SIR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. I WANTED TO -- ANY QUESTIONS?
MR. DOWNEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. SCHENK: NO. THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: I WANTED TO TOUCH ON SOMETHING ELSE THAT I THINK YOU MENTIONED. DID YOU TALK ABOUT SOME OTHER TOPIC THAT YOU WANTED TO DISCUSS IN PRIVATE? DID I GET THAT INCORRECT? LET ME SEE. WELL, LET ME ASK YOU, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS WITH US NOW?
JUROR: NO, SIR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ANYTHING THAT COMES TO MIND ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE?
JUROR: NO, SIR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. COUNSEL, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR MR. BROWN?
MR. DOWNEY: NOTHING FROM THE DEFENSE, YOUR HONOR.
MR. SCHENK: NO, THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. BROWN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING UP IN ADVANCE. NOW WE'RE GOING TO -- CAN MR. BROWN JUST STAY SEATED HERE?
COURT CLERK: I'LL PUT HIM IN HIS ASSIGNED SEAT, YOUR HONOR, SURE.
JUDGE DAVILA: WE'RE GOING TO ASK YOU TO STAY AND THEN WE'LL CALL YOUR COLLEAGUES UP FROM DOWNSTAIRS AND THEN WE'LL START THE PROCESS AGAIN.
JUROR: SHALL I TAKE THIS WITH ME?
JUDGE DAVILA: IF THAT'S -- YES.
COURT CLERK: YOU'LL HAVE ONE ON THE SEAT. THANK YOU, SIR.
JUDGE DAVILA: LET ME ASK, COUNSEL, DO YOU WANT TO DISCUSS ANYTHING? SHOULD WE HAVE MR. BROWN WAIT OUTSIDE FOR A MOMENT?
MR. DOWNEY: I JUST WANTED TO MENTION ONE THING QUICKLY, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: WITH MR. BROWN HERE?
MR. DOWNEY: ACTUALLY, IT'S JUST A PROCEDURAL ISSUE, YOUR HONOR. I THINK IT'S FINE TO DISCUSS IT WITH MR. BROWN HERE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
MR. DOWNEY: JUST --
JUDGE DAVILA: MS. KRATZMANN IS GOING TO SHOW YOU WHERE TO SIT, MR. BROWN.
MR. DOWNEY: JUST TWO ISSUES, YOUR HONOR. ONE IS THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO DEFER ON JUROR 62 WHO HAD THE PRIVATE MATTER. I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S FIRST IN THE ORDER OR WHETHER HE'S MOVED TO THE BACK.
JUDGE DAVILA: HE'LL BE FIRST, YES.
MR. DOWNEY: YES. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR HONOR WANTS TO DO THAT NOW. I ONLY HAVE A QUESTION OF HIM ON THAT ONE TOPIC, SO I'LL LEAVE IT TO YOU. SECONDLY, I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT I KNOW THE DAY IS A BIT BROKEN UP AND SO FORTH, BUT WE DISCUSSED WITH MS. KRATZMANN THAT WE NEEDED TO TAKE A BREAK AROUND THE 11:00 O'CLOCK HOUR.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT MY PLAN IS, TO TAKE A BREAK ABOUT 11:00 O'CLOCK, AND IT WILL BE ABOUT 20 MINUTES, DO YOU THINK?
MR. DOWNEY: I THINK THAT'S ABOUT RIGHT, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU JUST LET ME KNOW. SO WE'RE GETTING A LATE START, JUST THE LOGISTICS OF THIS. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH WHAT WE NEED TO TODAY BEFORE WE GO DEEP INTO THE AFTERNOON. LET ME PUT IT THAT WAY. AS TO JUROR NUMBER 62, I THINK WE'LL -- I DON'T WANT TO BRING HIM UP NOW. I THINK, SHOULD THAT TOPIC COME UP, WE'LL -- WE CERTAINLY HAVE A MECHANISM TO DISCUSS THAT.
MR. DOWNEY: UNDERSTOOD, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING FURTHER?
MR. SCHENK: NO. THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. MR. BROWN, WE'RE GOING TO BRING YOUR COLLEAGUES UP NOW, SO WE'LL BE IN RECESS FOR A MOMENT. THANK YOU.
COURT CLERK: COURT IS IN RECESS.
(RECESS FROM 10:11 A.M. UNTIL 10:24 A.M.)
(PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL IN AT 10:24 A.M.)
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. LET ME THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE THIS MORNING. THE FIRST THING I'D LIKE TO DO IS ASK MS. KRATZMANN TO ADMINISTER THE OATH TO ALL OF OUR PROSPECTIVE JURORS HERE. LET ME DO THAT. IF ALL OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURORS WOULD PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. MR. BROWN, YOU'RE EXCLUDED FROM THAT. YOU'VE TAKEN AN OATH.
(PROSPECTIVE JURORS WERE GIVEN THE OATH.)
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE SEATED. AGAIN, LET ME THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR PATIENCE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU HAVE BEEN SUMMONED TODAY IN A CRIMINAL CASE ENTITLED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VERSUS ELIZABETH HOLMES. IN THIS CASE THE DEFENDANT, ELIZABETH HOLMES, IS CHARGED WITH WIRE FRAUD AND CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT WIRE FRAUD. THE INDICTMENT ALLEGES THAT MS. HOLMES WAS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THERANOS INCORPORATED, WHICH WAS IN THE BLOOD TESTING BUSINESS. THE INDICTMENT ALLEGES THAT MS. HOLMES AND RAMESH "SUNNY" BALWANI, THERANOS'S CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AND PRESIDENT, KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY DEVISED A SCHEME OR PLAN TO DEFRAUD INVESTORS AND PAYING CUSTOMERS. THE CHARGES ARE ONLY ALLEGATIONS AND ARE NOT EVIDENCE. THE DEFENDANT HAS ENTERED A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY TO ALL OF THE CHARGES IN THIS CASE AND IS PRESUMED TO BE INNOCENT. IT WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GOVERNMENT, THROUGH THE TRIAL, TO PROVE THOSE CHARGES BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
THE INDICTMENT ALLEGES IN COUNTS ONE AND TWO THAT MS. HOLMES VIOLATED 18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1349, CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT WIRE FRAUD, AND IN COUNTS THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, TEN, ELEVEN, AND TWELVE WITH WIRE FRAUD IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1343. THE INDICTMENT IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ANY KIND. IT IS THE CHARGING DOCUMENT THAT IS FILED IN THIS CASE. TO THESE CHARGES MS. HOLMES HAS PLEADED NOT GUILTY, AND THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE DENIAL OF THE CHARGES. IT WILL BE THE PURPOSE OF THIS TRIAL FOR YOU TO DETERMINE IF THE GOVERNMENT HAS MET THEIR BURDEN IN PRESENTING THEIR CASE TO YOU. NOW, JURY SERVICE IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND, AGAIN, I WANT TO WELCOME YOU AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. BUT BEFORE WE BEGIN, I WANT TO DESCRIBE FOR YOU HOW THE TRIAL WILL BE CONDUCTED AND EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT YOU AND THE LAWYERS AND I WILL BE DOING. NOW, FIRST OF ALL, WHEN I REFER TO THE GOVERNMENT, I MEAN MR. ROBERT LEACH, MS. KELLY VOLKAR, MR. JOHN BOSTIC, AND MR. JEFF SCHENK, WHO ARE THE ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS WHO ARE PROSECUTING THIS CASE. MR. LEACH, WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOUR TEAM, PLEASE, TO THE JURY PANEL.
MR. LEACH: YES, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS ROBERT LEACH. TO MY LEFT IS JOHN BOSTIC, TO HIS LEFT IS JEFF SCHENK, SEATED RIGHT HERE IS KELLY VOLKAR WITH MY OFFICE, AND TO MY RIGHT IS ADDY HERNANDEZ, WHO IS A SPECIAL AGENT WITH THE FBI. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. WHEN I REFER TO DEFENSE COUNSEL, I MEAN MR. KEVIN DOWNEY, MR. LANCE WADE, MS. KATHERINE TREFZ, AND I SEE MR. CLINE HERE AS WELL. THANK YOU. WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOUR TEAM, PLEASE.
MR. DOWNEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS KEVIN DOWNEY, AND I REPRESENT MS. HOLMES IN THIS MATTER. THIS IS ELIZABETH HOLMES, WHO IS THE DEFENDANT IN THIS CASE. WITH ME ON BEHALF OF MS. HOLMES ARE MY COLLEAGUE LANCE WADE, MY COLLEAGUE KATHERINE TREFZ, AND OUR COCOUNSEL, JOHN CLINE.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS CASE IS EXPECTED TO TAKE APPROXIMATELY 13 WEEKS HERE IN COURT, AND IT COULD BE A LITTLE LONGER. THIS MORNING WE WILL BEGIN SELECTING JURORS WHO WILL SIT TO HEAR THIS CASE. THIS PROCESS INVOLVES INTERVIEWING SEPARATE PANELS OF POTENTIAL JURORS. AND I SHOULD TELL YOU WE ENGAGED THIS PROCESS YESTERDAY WITH A SIMILAR PANEL AS YOURS. AFTER OUR SESSION TODAY, YOU WILL BE PERMITTED TO LEAVE THE COURTHOUSE AND YOU WILL BE NOTIFIED BY THE COURT WHETHER AND WHEN YOU SHOULD RETURN FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. WE'LL RETURN AND THEN WE'LL BEGIN THE TRIAL. NOW, YOU SEE THE SCHEDULE. I THINK YOU HAVE A SCHEDULE IN YOUR SEATS. THAT HAS THE POTENTIAL SCHEDULE FOR OUR TRIAL NOW. THAT COULD CHANGE, OF COURSE. AS YOU SEE, THE JURY DELIBERATIONS SHOULD BEGIN THE FIRST OR SECOND WEEK OF DECEMBER. IT COULD BE SOONER THAN THAT DEPENDING ON THE EVIDENCE. I WILL KEEP YOU INFORMED AS TO OUR SCHEDULE AS WE GO FORWARD.
AS YOU ALSO SAW IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE, OUR PROPOSED DAYS IN COURT WILL BE TUESDAYS, WEDNESDAYS, AND FRIDAYS, POTENTIALLY FROM 9:00 A.M. TO APPROXIMATELY 2:00 P.M. IT MAY BE THAT THIS SCHEDULE WILL CHANGE TO ADD SOME TIME OR CHANGE DAYS, AND I WILL, OF COURSE, KEEP YOU APPRISED IN ADVANCE OF ANY CHANGE IN THE SCHEDULE. I ANTICIPATE, ACCORDING TO THIS SCHEDULE, I ANTICIPATE THAT WE WOULD THEN TAKE ONE BREAK DURING THE COURT DAY OF PERHAPS 30, 45 MINUTES, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF THE TRIAL, MY HOPE WAS THAT THIS SCHEDULE WOULD ACCOMPLISH THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE IN THE TRIAL AND AVOID THE STRESS AND FATIGUE THAT MIGHT ALSO ARISE FROM AN ALL-DAY EVERY DAY SCHEDULE THAT IS THE NORM FOR SHORTER TRIALS. NOW, I ALSO REALIZE THERE ARE OCCASIONS WHEN SOMEONE MAY NEED TO TAKE AN UNSCHEDULED BREAK FOR ANY REASON, AND IF ANYBODY NEEDS TO TAKE A BREAK FOR ANY REASON, YOU JUST NEED TO ALERT ME AND WE WILL CERTAINLY BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
NOW, THE FIRST STEP IN THE TRIAL FOLLOWING THE SELECTION OF THE JURY IS THE GOVERNMENT'S OPENING STATEMENT. THE DEFENSE MAY CHOOSE TO GIVE AN OPENING STATEMENT FOLLOWING THE GOVERNMENT'S STATEMENT, OR THEY CAN WAIT UNTIL THE BEGINNING OF THE DEFENSE CASE. THE PURPOSE OF AN OPENING STATEMENT IS TO PROVIDE YOU, THE JURORS, AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE ATTORNEYS BELIEVE THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE WILL SHOW. NEXT THE GOVERNMENT WILL OFFER THEIR EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE USUALLY CONSISTS OF TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS. AFTER THE GOVERNMENT PRESENTS THEIR EVIDENCE, THE DEFENSE MAY ALSO PRESENT EVIDENCE, BUT IS NOT REQUIRED TO DO SO. BECAUSE MS. HOLMES IS PRESUMED INNOCENT, SHE DOES NOT HAVE TO PROVE THAT SHE IS NOT GUILTY. NOW, YOU HAVE ALSO ATTACHED TO YOUR INFORMATION AT YOUR SEATS, AND YOU'VE ALSO SEEN WHEN YOU CAME IN LAST WEEK TO FILL OUT YOUR QUESTIONNAIRES, A WITNESS LIST, AND I'M GOING TO ASK YOU -- YOU REVIEWED THAT WHEN YOU FILLED YOUR QUESTIONNAIRES OUT, I KNOW, AND I'LL ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN THIS MORNING. COUNSEL, CAN I GET A STIPULATION THAT THE COURT NEED NOT READ THE ENTIRETY OF THE WITNESS LIST ON THE RECORD?
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, MS. HOLMES AGREES.
MR. SCHENK: SO STIPULATED.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IT'S NOT UNUSUAL FOR JUDGES TO READ ON THE RECORD THE ENTIRETY OF THE WITNESSES KNOWN AT LEAST AT THIS TIME, BUT YOU SEE THE LENGTH OF THAT POTENTIAL WITNESS LIST, AND I'M NOT GOING TO READ IT TO YOU. BUT I DO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO IT AGAIN THIS MORNING, AS WELL AS LAST WEEK WHEN YOU FILLED OUT -- YOU REVIEWED THAT WHEN YOU FILLED OUT YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE. YOU SHOULD NOTE THAT THE PARTIES MAY NOT WISH TO CALL ALL WITNESSES AND THEY MAY LATER FIND IT NECESSARY TO CALL OTHER WITNESSES. IT MAY OCCUR THAT THE PARTIES STIPULATE TO A WITNESS'S TESTIMONY OR AN EXHIBIT. THIS MEANS THAT THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT THE STATEMENT, THE TESTIMONY, OR THE EXHIBIT CAN BE RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE. AFTER YOU HAVE HEARD ALL OF THE EVIDENCE, AND AFTER THE ATTORNEYS HAVE GIVEN THEIR FINAL ARGUMENTS, I WILL THEN INSTRUCT YOU ON THE LAW THAT APPLIES TO THE CASE.
AFTER YOU HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS AND THE LAW AS GIVEN BY THE COURT, YOU WILL THEN RETIRE TO THE JURY ROOM TO DELIBERATE THE MERITS OF THE CASE AND THEN TO RETURN WITH YOUR FINDINGS. NOW, LET ME TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR SERVICE. IT IS AN OBLIGATION. JURY SERVICE IS AN OBLIGATION, AND WE RECOGNIZE IT'S INCONVENIENT TO YOU. BUT I HOPE, AND MY COLLEAGUES HOPE, THAT YOU ALSO VIEW JURY SERVICE AS A PRIVILEGE, A PRIVILEGE TO SERVE YOUR COMMUNITY AND TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR SYSTEM OF JUSTICE. AND WE ALL RECOGNIZE AND WE'RE SENSITIVE TO THE FACT THAT IT'S HIGHLY LIKELY THAT NONE OF YOU ARE HERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO, OR THAT YOU VOLUNTEERED OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF YOUR HEARTS TO JOIN US HERE. WE RECOGNIZE THAT JURY SERVICE IS AN IMPOSITION ON YOU. IT IMPOSES ON YOU. IT TAKES YOU FROM THOSE WHO NEED AND RELY ON YOU AT YOUR WORKPLACES AND AT YOUR HOMES.
FOR THOSE OF US WORKING IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM AND TRYING TO IMPROVE ON THE QUALITY OF JUSTICE, IT IS A CHALLENGE TO PROVIDE A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURY FOR ALL OF OUR TRIALS. IT'S A CHALLENGE TO DELIVER ON THE PROMISE OF A JURY OF ONE'S PEERS, A TRUE CROSS-SECTION OF OUR COMMUNITY TO EVERYONE ENTERING OUR COURTS. IT'S A PROMISE THAT WE ENDEAVOR TO FULFILL AS WE RECOGNIZE WE WOULD RELY ON THAT PROMISE SHOULD ANY OF US COME INTO THE JUSTICE SYSTEM AS A PARTY. OUR CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES THE RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL, AND THAT IS THE BASIS FOR ALL OF OUR OBLIGATIONS, YOURS AND MINE. I SHOULD TELL YOU THAT I GET SUMMONED FOR JURY SERVICE. IT'S HAPPENED TO ME ONCE -- THREE TIMES IN THE LAST THREE YEARS. I SHOULD TELL YOU, WITH GREAT REGRET, I HAVE NOT BEEN SELECTED. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS ABOUT.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: BUT HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL. WE'LL SEE. I SUPPOSE I SHOULD MENTION TO YOU THAT I THINK IT'S SIGNIFICANT NOW TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR JURY SERVICE, PERHAPS NOW MORE THAN EVER. WE KNOW WE'RE IN A PANDEMIC SITUATION NOW, AND OUR LIVES HAVE CHANGED DRAMATICALLY, BOTH IN OUR PROFESSIONAL LIVES AND OUR PERSONAL LIVES AS TO ACTIVITIES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY THE NORM AND PREVIOUSLY WE HAD THE LUXURY OF ENGAGING IN. AND WE SEE REGRETTABLY IN OUR COMMUNITIES THE LOSS OF LIFE AND INDIVIDUALS AFFECTED WITH THIS PANDEMIC. I SUGGEST TO YOU THAT SERVING AS A JUROR NOW IS AS IMPORTANT AS EVER. YOU SEE THAT, THAT THEN REFLECTS TO OUR COMMUNITIES, TO OUR COUNTRY, AND TO THE WORLD THAT DURING THE CHALLENGE OF A PANDEMIC, OUR COURTS ARE OPEN AND OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM ENDURES. AND YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THAT SHOULD, I HOPE, GIVE YOU SOME PRIDE IN YOUR COUNTRY AND PRIDE IN YOUR JUSTICE SYSTEM AS WELL. NOW, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO TALK ABOUT COVID AND THE COVID PROTOCOLS THAT WE HAVE ENGAGED.
THIS IS OF GREAT CONCERN TO EVERYONE. FIRST OF ALL, LET ME TELL YOU THAT I HAVE THE PERMISSION OF THESE LAWYERS AND OUR STAFF TO TELL YOU THAT EVERYONE ON MY STAFF AND THE LAWYERS AND THEIR STAFF HAVE BEEN VACCINATED. I SHOULD ALSO TELL YOU THAT THE INFORMATION I HAVE IS THAT ALL OF OUR PROSPECTIVE PANEL MEMBERS, ALL OF YOU, THE INFORMATION WE HAVE IS THAT ALL OF YOU ARE ALSO VACCINATED. WE WILL CONTINUE TO STRIVE TO CONTINUE FOR YOUR PROTECTION, SAFETY, AND GOOD HEALTH. AS YOU SEE, WE'LL ENGAGE IN SOCIAL DISTANCING. WE'LL HAVE MASKS AVAILABLE. PARTIES IN COURT WILL WEAR MASKS. WITNESSES, DEPENDING ON THEIR HEALTH AND VACCINATION STATUS, MAY BE ABLE TO REMOVE THEIR MASK OR WEAR A CLEAR FACE SHIELD WHILE TESTIFYING. I SHOULD TELL YOU THAT I HAVE ALSO TOLD THE LAWYERS THAT IF THEY WISH TO CALL A WITNESS IN THE CASE, TO INQUIRE AS TO THAT WITNESS'S VACCINATION STATUS IN ADVANCE SO WE CAN TAKE PRECAUTIONS IF WE NEED TO, AND THEY'VE AGREED TO DO THAT.
WE'LL HAVE AIR PURIFIERS AT THE WITNESS STAND. THERE IS ONE HERE UNDERNEATH THE WITNESS STAND THAT IS ACTIVE, AND I BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE ONE OTHER PURIFIER AT EACH COUNSEL TABLE AND WE CAN, SHOULD A SITTING JUROR HAVE A REQUEST FOR ANOTHER OR FEEL IT'S APPROPRIATE, I CAN SECURE ANOTHER AIR FILTER FOR THESE AREAS AS NEEDED. NOW, LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR BUILDING. OUR COURTHOUSE, IT'S QUITE OLD. IT'S OVER 25, 30 YEARS OLD. BUT I SHOULD TELL YOU THAT WE RECENTLY HAD AN UPGRADE IN OUR HVAC SYSTEM. I THINK THAT OCCURRED ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO. WE'VE UPGRADED OUR SYSTEM TO SOMETHING CALLED MERV 14. THIS IS THE MERV FILTRATION SYSTEM, AND THE CURRENT GUIDANCE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS TO INSTALL A MERV 13. SO WE'RE ABOVE THE MINIMUM STANDARD IN THAT REGARD. THIS HELPS US, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE AIR QUALITY OUTSIDE IS POOR BECAUSE OF THE FIRES THAT ARE IN CALIFORNIA RIGHT NOW, BUT OUR SYSTEM IS EXCELLENT AT FILTERING THAT AIR AS WELL.
I ASKED OUR BUILDING MANAGEMENT ABOUT THE AIR CIRCULATION IN THIS COURTROOM, AND I'M INFORMED THAT THE AIR IN THIS COURTROOM CIRCULATES, IT ENTIRELY CIRCULATES AT -- IT'S CALLED A RATE OF AIR CHANGE PER HOUR RATE, ACH IS WHAT THE ENGINEERS CALL IT, OF 6.3. AND WHAT THAT MEANS TO ME AND TO YOU IS THAT THE AIR IN THIS COURTROOM CIRCULATES COMPLETELY ABOUT EVERY TEN MINUTES. SO OUR FILTRATION SYSTEM, OUR HVAC SYSTEM, IS WORKING ADMIRABLY. IT'S DOING ITS JOB. I HOPE THAT BRINGS YOU SOME COMFORT. WE RUN THIS SYSTEM TWO HOURS IN ADVANCE OF OPENING. THAT MEANS IT STARTS ABOUT 5:00 A.M. SO IT COULD GENERATE AS MUCH CIRCULATION AS POSSIBLE. IT RUNS ABOUT TWO HOURS AFTER THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS. AS TO OUR BUILDING ITSELF, THE GSA, THE GENERAL SERVICE ADMINISTRATION WHICH SUPERVISES THE BUILDINGS HERE, HAS IMPLEMENTED GUIDELINES FROM THE CDC REGARDING ROUTINE CLEANING, DISINFECTION OF HIGH TOUCH SURFACE AREAS AND HIGH TRAFFIC AREAS.
WE HAVE FACE MASKS AND SANITIZER TO PROVIDE YOU SHOULD YOU NEED THOSE THINGS, AND IF YOU HAVE A REQUEST FOR THAT, WE CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE THAT FOR YOU. NOW, THE SCHEDULE I TALKED ABOUT SEEKS TO KEEP TIME IN OUR COURTROOM, NOTWITHSTANDING THE EXCELLENT SYSTEM WE HAVE HERE, I DO WANT TO KEEP TIME IN THE COURTROOM SPACED, SO AS OUR JURORS AND PARTICIPANTS AREN'T SEATED FOR IN EXCESS OF TWO HOURS AT A TIME. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. WE'LL SPACE BREAKS ALSO AS NECESSARY AND AS I FEEL APPROPRIATE. THIS HOPEFULLY WILL ALLOW FOR BREAKS, BUT ALSO WILL ALLOW FOR THE EFFICIENT AND ORDERLY TRIAL PROCESS TO CONTINUE.
JUDGE DAVILA: NOW, WE HAVE A COURTROOM JUST NEXT DOOR, AND I WANT TO TELL YOU IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR, THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR DELIBERATION ROOM. YOU WILL HAVE THE WHOLE COURTROOM TO USE FOR DELIBERATION AND DISCUSSIONS. AND BY THAT, YOU CAN THEN SOCIALLY DISTANCE YOURSELVES IN THAT COURTROOM. I SHOULD TELL YOU THAT I'VE HAD TWO TRIALS THIS YEAR IN OUR COURTHOUSE, AND THAT'S WHAT OUR JURORS DID. WE DEDICATED A COURTROOM SO THE JURORS CAN SPACE THEMSELVES OUT. SOME WILL SIT IN THE JURY BOX. SOME WITNESS SIT AT THE TABLES AROUND, AND THAT AFFORDS SEPARATION FOR YOU AND HOPEFULLY PROVIDES SOME SAFETY AND COMFORT TO YOU. SO YOU'LL HAVE THE ENTIRE COURTROOM NEXT DOOR TO SERVE AS YOUR DELIBERATION ROOM. WE ALSO WILL BE PROVIDING DURING THESE THREE DAYS A WEEK, AT LEAST TO START, WE WILL BE PROVIDING, I'M TOLD, SOME BREAKFAST ITEMS. AND WE'LL HAVE THAT FOR YOU HERE.
WE'LL PROBABLY SPACE THAT OUT BECAUSE I'M TOLD THAT THE SERVICE THAT WE USE IS EXCELLENT, THEY HAVE EXCELLENT BAGELS AND FRESH FRUIT AND THEY BRING A LOT OF IT, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE IT CAN BE SPACED OUT OVER THE COURSE OF THESE THREE DAYS. SO YOU WILL HAVE BENEFIT OF THAT. NOW, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ISSUE REGARDING YOUR SAFETY OR THE COURT CONDITIONS DURING YOUR TIME HERE, YOU SHOULD REACH OUT TO OUR COURT STAFF WITH ANY OF THOSE, AND WE'LL BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE YOU INFORMATION AS NEEDED. NOW, LET ME ASK THIS: IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PANEL WHO HAS ANY SPECIAL DISABILITY PROBLEM OR ISSUE THAT WOULD MAKE SERVING AS A JUROR DIFFICULT? I'M CALLING OUT THIS SPECIFICALLY FOR, FIRST OF ALL, ANY HEARING ISSUES? DOES ANYONE ON THE PANEL HERE HAVE ANY HEARING ISSUE, OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE AN ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICE PROVIDED FOR YOU TODAY TO ASSIST IN THAT REGARD? WE HAVE SOME HEADPHONES THAT WE CAN USE IF ANYONE WOULD BENEFIT FROM THAT. IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR HAND, WE'LL GET THAT TO YOU. I SEE NO HANDS. ANY OTHER ISSUE, MEDICAL ISSUE OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT SOMEONE WANTS TO RAISE? I SEE A COUPLE OF HANDS. LET ME TRY TO FIND THOSE JURORS. WE'RE GOING TO ALSO PROVIDE A MICROPHONE FOR YOU, AND WE'LL SEND THE MICROPHONE WITH WIPES, SO IF YOU WOULD WIPE THE MICROPHONE SURFACE AND PERHAPS THE MICROPHONE SCREEN AS WELL, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. SO LET ME SEE THE HANDS AGAIN, PLEASE. OKAY. THAT LOOKS -- IS THAT MR. PACK? YOU'RE JUROR NUMBER 137, SIR?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO KNOW?
JUROR: I HAVE A SURGERY SCHEDULED FOR THE 8TH. IT'S POSSIBLE TO RESCHEDULE IT, BUT IT PROBABLY IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT GIVEN IT PROBABLY TAKES ONE OR MAYBE TWO DAYS RECUPERATION.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. AND THAT IS SCHEDULED NEXT WEEK IT SOUNDS LIKE.
JUROR: YES, I APOLOGIZE. I DIDN'T EXPECT THE TRIAL TO START SO SOON.
JUDGE DAVILA: WELL, WE'RE VERY EFFICIENT, MR. PACK.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: I APPRECIATE THAT. RESCHEDULING -- I WANT TO BE DELICATE HERE AND I DON'T WANT YOU TO REVEAL ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION -- BUT RESCHEDULING, YOU HEARD ME TALK ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE TRIAL. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT RESCHEDULING THE SURGERY? DON'T TELL ME WHAT IT IS, BUT --
JUROR: YEAH. SO THERE'S AN OUTSIDE POSSIBILITY THAT I COULD PUSH IT INTO THIS FRIDAY, BUT THAT IS PROBABLY DIFFICULT. IT'S NOT A LIFE THREATENING THING. IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS A SEVERE INCONVENIENCE, SO I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT DONE.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. OF COURSE. THE RECOVERY TIME WOULD BE HOW LONG? OR WHAT IS THE INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE?
JUROR: IT'S BASICALLY A SINUS SURGERY, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S PROBABLY -- SO I PROBABLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM THE NEXT DAY. BUT THERE'S A POSSIBILITY, AND LOOKING REALLY WEIRD.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S WHAT THE MASKS ARE FOR.
JUROR: YES, THAT'S RIGHT. I'LL USE A BIG MASK.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: WELL, MY CONCERN IS YOUR HEALTH AND YOUR CONDITION, AND IN OUR CURRENT CLIMATE WITH THE PANDEMIC AND THIS VARIANT THAT IS ABOUT, LET ME JUST EXPRESS A CONCERN, MY SENSE IS THAT YOU PROBABLY WOULD BE TAKING SOME ANTIBIOTICS OR SOME OTHER TYPE OF FOLLOW-UP MEDICATION FOLLOWING THE SURGERY. MY CONCERN IS THAT YOU MIGHT OTHERWISE BE AT A HIGHER RISK OF INFECTION, SHALL WE SAY, THAT CREATES SOME CONCERNS. HAVE YOU TALKED TO YOUR DOCTOR ABOUT THAT, AND WHAT HAS SHE TOLD YOU? IF YOU WANT TO SHARE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
JUROR: ACTUALLY, THE INFECTION THING IS NOT A CONCERN --
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
JUROR: -- TO ME. I JUST DO NOT WANT TO HAVE YOU DEPEND UPON ME AND HAVE ME NOT SHOW UP AS A GOOD -- OPERATING IN GOOD CAPACITY.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. MR. SCHENK, ANY QUESTIONS?
MR. SCHENK: NO OBJECTION TO HARDSHIP, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MR. PACK, THE LAWYERS HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD AGREE AND STIPULATE TO THE EXCUSAL FOR THE MEDICAL REASONS AND STIPULATION. I EXCUSE YOU NOW. BEST WISHES ON YOUR SURGERY. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THIS MORNING. IT WAS A PLEASURE MEETING YOU.
JUROR: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: CAN MR. PACK JUST LEAVE, OR DOES HE HAVE TO GO DOWNSTAIRS?
COURT CLERK: NO, YOUR HONOR. HE CAN JUST LEAVE THE COURTHOUSE.
JUDGE DAVILA: WE'LL COLLECT THE MICROPHONE. IF YOU COULD LEAVE THE PAPERWORK, THOUGH, ON YOUR SEAT THERE.
COURT CLERK: I BELIEVE THE JUROR NEXT DOOR CAN TAKE IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. PACK. I SAW ANOTHER HAND. IS THAT MR. TAUSWORTHE? IS THAT RIGHT? JUROR NUMBER 141?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU CAN WIPE THE MICROPHONE THERE AND USE THAT IF YOU WISH, PLEASE.
JUROR: I HAVE RELAPSING REMEDIAL SCLEROSIS WHICH CAN AFFECT MY ABILITY TO WALK AND MY LINE OF SIGHT. I HAVEN'T HAD ANY FLARE UPS IN A FEW YEARS SINCE I CHANGED MEDICATION. I JUST WANTED TO ESTABLISH THAT SO IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN, ALTHOUGH IT'S UNLIKELY, IT WOULDN'T BE A SURPRISE TO THE COURT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU, SIR. I READ THAT IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE. YOU INFORMED US OF THAT. I THINK YOU INDICATED AS MUCH IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE. IT WAS INFORMATION THAT YOU WANTED US TO KNOW. BUT YOU HAD A THOUGHT, AS YOU JUST EXPRESSED, THAT IT WOULD NOT CAUSE YOU ANY ISSUE TO SIT AS A JUROR HERE. IS THAT ACCURATE?
JUROR: YEAH, I DO NOT EXPECT ANY ISSUE.
JUDGE DAVILA: WOULD IT -- LET ME JUST TALK ABOUT SEATING. YOU SEE THE JURY BOX HERE. THAT'S NORMALLY WHERE JURORS WOULD SIT. THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THE JURORS WHO ARE SELECTED IN THIS CASE WILL SIT. WE MAY HAVE TO USE ANOTHER ROW TO KEEP SOCIAL DISTANCING PROTOCOLS. WOULD SEATING YOU IN A CERTAIN WAY BE OF ASSISTANCE?
JUROR: IT COULD BE. AGAIN, AT THE MOMENT I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARY, BUT IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN, THAT WOULD PROBABLY WORK OUT GREAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DO YOU -- AND I'M SORRY TO INQUIRE, AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK PRIVATELY ABOUT THIS, I'M HAPPY TO ARRANGE THAT. ARE THERE MEDICATIONS THAT YOU TAKE THAT CAUSE YOU TO BE -- TO INTERRUPT YOUR -- LET ME JUST CALL IT YOUR COGNITIVE ABILITIES, YOUR ABILITY TO FOCUS, TO LISTEN, TO HEAR?
JUROR: NO, WE HAVE NOT OBSERVED ANYTHING LIKE THAT WITH MY MEDICATIONS.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR TELLING US THAT, SIR. I APPRECIATE THAT.
JUROR: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU'RE WELCOME. I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER HAND BEHIND YOU. IS THAT MR. TONG? YOU'RE JUROR NUMBER 147, I BELIEVE. WE'LL HAND YOU THE MICROPHONE AND YOU CAN WIPE IT IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
JUROR: IS THIS MEDICAL OR WITH REGARD TO ANY HARDSHIP THAT WE HAVE?
JUDGE DAVILA: THIS IS MEDICAL.
JUROR: I'LL WAIT FOR LATER.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. DO YOU FEEL YOU HAVE A HARDSHIP THAT YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT?
JUROR: IT'S NOT MEDICAL RELATED.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. WAS THERE ANOTHER HAND FOR MEDICAL OR ANY OTHER ISSUE? ANY BACK THERE? NO. I DON'T SEE ANY IN THE AUDIENCE. SO WE'LL REACH OUT. IS IT MS. ZHAO? MS. ZHAO, JUST A SECOND AND WE ARE GOING TO GET A MICROPHONE FOR YOU.
JUROR: HI, YOUR HONOR. I AM XIAOYAN ZHAO. I HAVE TWO PROCEDURES SCHEDULED, KIND OF RADIOLOGY, AN X-RAY, AND IT'S A FOLLOW-UP EXAM, BUT BASICALLY PREVIOUSLY IT WAS DEFERRED KIND OF THEY HAVE SUSPICION OF THEY WANT TO GET A BIOPSY. SO THE RESULT, IT WAS DEFERRED BECAUSE AT THE TIME I DON'T HAVE ANYONE TO TAKE CARE OF THE KIDS SO WE DEFER IT TO OCTOBER. AND BASED ON THE RESULT, SO MY MENTAL AND EVERYTHING ELSE MAY CHANGE. SO THAT'S A POTENTIAL EFFECT TO THE CASE TO MY AVAILABILITY, AND ALSO EVERYTHING FOLLOWS.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S IN OCTOBER?
JUROR: YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: OCTOBER? IS IT MID-OCTOBER? LATE OCTOBER?
JUROR: IT'S EARLY OCTOBER.
JUDGE DAVILA: EARLY OCTOBER. OKAY. AND THEN -- THERE'S A RADIOLOGY APPOINTMENT. AND THEN DID YOU SAY THERE WOULD BE A SUBSEQUENT BIOPSY AFTER THAT?
JUROR: THE PREVIOUS RADIOLOGY HAVE A BIOPSY FOLLOWED, AND I POSTPONED THE BIOPSY TO OCTOBER. BUT IN SEPTEMBER I WILL HAVE ANOTHER RADIOLOGY TO FOLLOW UP.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. AND THEN YOU'LL CONSULT WITH YOUR PHYSICIANS ABOUT THE RESULTS OF THAT?
JUROR: YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. DO YOU THINK THAT THAT -- IS THAT GOING TO AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO CONCENTRATE ON THIS CASE DO YOU THINK?
JUROR: YEAH, I THINK --
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE.
JUROR: -- BASED ON THE RESULTS IT WILL GIVE ME CONCERN.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR TELLING US ABOUT THAT, MS. ZHAO. I APPRECIATE IT. I WILL EXCUSE YOU AT THIS TIME. SO JUROR NUMBER 120, MRS. ZHAO, IS EXCUSED FOR HARDSHIP, AND BEST WISHES TO YOU.
JUROR: THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER HANDS FOR THAT QUESTION. ONE JUST POPPED UP. MR. NGO, WE'LL GET THE MICROPHONE TO YOU.
JUROR: MY NAME IS ANTONION NGO. CAN I BE EXCUSED BECAUSE I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MY HEARING AND I HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF MY KID? MY WIFE I TAKE TO WORK EVERY DAY AND I'M THE ONLY ONE WHO IS DRIVING.
JUDGE DAVILA: WELL, SIR, AS TO YOUR HEARING, WE HAVE ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES, AND I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT TO YOU IF YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO YOU.
JUROR: ALSO, I HAVE TO DROP OFF MY WIFE TO WORK EVERY DAY, AND MY MOTHER-IN-LAW, I NEED TO TAKE HER BLOOD SUGAR EVERY DAY, TOO. THEY'RE 82 YEARS OLD.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT, SIR. WHAT TIME DO YOU DROP OFF YOUR CHILDREN?
JUROR: PARDON ME?
JUDGE DAVILA: WHAT TIME DO YOU DROP YOUR CHILDREN OFF?
JUROR: 8:00 IN THE MORNING, AND MY WIFE MAYBE 12:00 O'CLOCK.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NOTHING.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. MR. NGO, THANK YOU. I'M NOT GOING TO EXCUSE YOU JUST AT THE MOMENT, BUT IF YOU WOULD JUST TAKE A SEAT. LET ME ASK YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE ONE OF THESE ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES? WHY DON'T WE PROVIDE SOMETHING TO MR. NGO JUST FOR THE MOMENT.
COURT CLERK: (HANDING.)
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER RESPONSE TO THAT QUESTION? I SEE NO HANDS. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE NOW COME TO THAT PORTION OF THE TRIAL WHERE I WILL ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING YOUR QUALIFICATIONS TO SIT AS JURORS IN THE CASE. COUNSEL WILL ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS. THIS PROCESS IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE PARTIES AND THE COURT WANT FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURORS, JURORS WHO ARE FREE OF ANY PRECONCEIVED IDEA, BELIEF, ATTITUDE, BIAS, OR PREJUDICE ABOUT THE OFFENSES CHARGED OR THE ACCUSED, AND JURORS WHO WILL DECIDE THIS CASE ONLY AFTER HEARING ALL OF THE EVIDENCE IN THIS COURTROOM, THE ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL, THE LAW AS GIVEN TO YOU BY THE COURT, AND THEN ONLY AFTER DELIBERATING WITH YOUR FELLOW JURORS. BY THE OATH THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN, YOU'RE OBLIGATED TO ANSWER ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS TRUTHFULLY AND COMPLETELY.
YOU'LL HELP THE PROCESS BY VOLUNTEERING INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR EXPERIENCES, FEELINGS, BIASES, IF ANY, EVEN THOUGH YOU FEEL YOU CAN PUT ASIDE THOSE FEELINGS, EXPERIENCES, AND BIASES TO SERVE AS A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JUROR. IF YOU ARE SENSITIVE ABOUT ANSWERING ANY QUESTION OF ANY TYPE, YOU SHOULD PLEASE LET ME KNOW AND WE CAN DISCUSS WHATEVER THAT MATTER IS PRIVATELY WITH COUNSEL. LET ME SAY, YOU SHOULD -- IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS SOMETHING PRIVATELY, PLEASE DON'T BE SHY ABOUT LETTING ME KNOW THAT. THAT'S VERY COMMON IN OUR COURTS, AND WE DO THAT WITH GREAT FREQUENCY. SO DON'T BE SHY ABOUT LETTING ME KNOW THAT, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY ENGAGE THAT. THIS PROCESS SEEKS TO IDENTIFY ANY MATTER, INCLUDING THOSE THAT MIGHT BE CONTROVERSIAL THAT RAISE AN ISSUE OF BIAS OR AN INABILITY TO BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL.
NOW, IF ANY JUROR FEELS LIKE AN ISSUE HAS ARISEN THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO, OR YOU THINK IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO SPEAK IN PRIVATE WITH THE COURT AND COUNSEL, AS I'VE SAID, PLEASE LET ME KNOW AND WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. YOU SEE, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU EXPRESS THESE ISSUES WITH THE PARTIES. WE CAN MEET PRIVATELY AND ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT. AND I WANT YOU TO BE FRANK AND OPEN, BUT I ALSO WANT TO NOT ALLOW ANYTHING THAT IS SAID TO NEGATIVELY INFLUENCE OR AFFECT ANY OTHER JUROR. THIS IS IMPORTANT. WHILE WE ALL WANT TO HEAR YOUR CANDID THOUGHTS ON TOPICS, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT EXPRESSIONS, WHILE HEARTFELT, DO NOT TAINT OR NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE FAIRNESS OF THE PANEL. SO IF YOU FEEL, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THAT YOU MIGHT, FOR WHATEVER REASON, HAVE AN ISSUE THAT IS CONTROVERSIAL OR SOMETHING -- A STRONG BELIEF ABOUT SOMETHING, LET ME KNOW, PLEASE, AND WE'LL HAVE A PRIVATE CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT.
NOW, IN SELECTING A JUROR, EACH SIDE IS PERMITTED A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES TO PROSPECTIVE JURORS AND AN ATTORNEY MAY EXCUSE A JUROR JUST BECAUSE THEY FEEL THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT CASE FOR THEM. THERE ARE CHALLENGES FOR CAUSE, AND THOSE ARISE WHERE A PARTY OR THE COURT FEELS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL CANNOT SIT ON THE CASE BECAUSE OF A BIAS, INTEREST, OR OTHER INABILITY TO BE FAIR. I'LL DETERMINE IF A JUROR SHOULD BE EXCUSED FOR CAUSE. THE QUESTIONS OF THE COURT AND COUNSEL AND THE ANSWERS OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURORS ASSIST THE ATTORNEYS IN THIS PROCESS. NOW, FOLLOWING MY QUESTIONS AND THE QUESTIONS -- MY QUESTIONS, THE LAWYERS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS ABOUT THE JURORS THAT THEY WISH. WE'LL TAKE THESE UP AFTER WE HAVE MET ALL OF THE PANELS, AND YOU'LL THEN BE NOTIFIED BY THE COURT WHETHER AND WHEN YOU SHOULD RETURN TO THE COURT FOR FURTHER SERVICE. WE WILL ALSO BE SELECTING FIVE ALTERNATE JURORS IN THIS CASE.
THEY WILL SIT DURING THE TRIAL AND, SHOULD A MEMBER OF THE SEATED 12 JURORS BE UNABLE TO CONTINUE TO SIT AS A JUROR, THE ALTERNATE JUROR WOULD REPLACE THAT SITTING JUROR AND WOULD JOIN THE OTHER JURORS IN DELIBERATION AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE CASE. IF THERE IS NO NEED FOR THE SUBSTITUTION OF A SITTING JUROR, THE ALTERNATE JURORS WOULD BE PERMITTED TO GO HOME. YOU WOULD STILL BE UNDER THE COURT ORDER NOT TO DISCUSS THE CASE OR NOT TO READ, LISTEN TO, OR SEE ANY MATERIAL ATTACHED TO IT, BUT YOU WOULD AND COULD BE SUBJECT TO BEING RECALLED TO REPLACE A SITTING DELIBERATING JUROR. IF THAT HAPPENS, THE JURY DELIBERATIONS WOULD START ANEW, ALL OVER AGAIN WITH THE NEW SEATED AND SUBSTITUTED JUROR. NOW, YOU'VE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRES LAST WEEK. I'M GRATEFUL FOR THAT. WE'RE ALL GRATEFUL FOR THAT. YOUR ANSWERS IN RESPONSE TO THOSE QUESTIONNAIRES HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL IN PREPARATION FOR THIS PROCESS.
JUDGE DAVILA: NOW, MY QUESTIONS MAY BE REPETITIVE AS TO SOME OF THOSE ITEMS ASKED, AND I'LL HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO ASK AS WELL. SO THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR PATIENCE. PLEASE DO LISTEN CAREFULLY TO ALL OF THE QUESTIONS ASKED AND THE ANSWERS OF PROSPECTIVE JURORS. DOING SO MAY ASSIST YOU IN THINKING ABOUT WHAT YOUR RESPONSE MIGHT BE TO A QUESTION. NOW, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ASK THE PANEL AS A WHOLE HERE, DO ANY OF YOU KNOW THE ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS OR DEFENSE COUNSEL OR ANY MEMBERS OF THEIR TEAMS? ANYONE HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH ANY OF THESE PARTIES HERE? RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU DO. I SEE NO HANDS. HAVE ANY OF YOU HAD ANY BUSINESS DEALINGS WITH THE ATTORNEYS OR BEEN REPRESENTED BY THEM OR MEMBERS OF THEIR FIRMS? AGAIN, I SEE NO HANDS. DO ANY OF YOU KNOW THE DEFENDANT, MS. HOLMES? ANY OF YOU KNOW MS. HOLMES? I SEE NO HANDS. DO ANY OF YOU KNOW ANY OF THE WITNESSES THAT WERE ON THE WITNESS LIST? I SEE A HAND HERE IN THE JURY BOX.
JUROR: I KNOW TWO.
JUDGE DAVILA: HANG ON, MR. WAXMAN, AND WE'LL GET YOU A MICROPHONE. THIS IS MR. WAXMAN, JUROR NUMBER 220.
JUROR: NO, MR. GOLDBERG.
JUDGE DAVILA: GOLDBERG, I BEG YOUR PARDON. I'M LOOKING AT THE WRONG CHART. MR. GOLDBERG, YOU ARE JUROR NUMBER 102. I BEG YOUR PARDON. YES, SIR?
JUROR: I SEE A NAME ON THE WITNESS LIST WITH WHOM I HAVE A PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
JUROR: I DID NOT NOTICE THAT NAME WHEN WE FILLED OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. WELL, THERE'S A LOT OF THEM. I RESPECT THAT. WHO IS IT, SIR.
JUROR: HIS NAME IS SETH MICHELSON. HE'S A RETIRED MEDICAL RESEARCHER.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND TELL ME THE NATURE OF YOUR CONNECTION WITH HIM.
JUROR: I'M A CUSTOM PICTURE FRAMER IN THE COMMUNITY NEAR DOWNTOWN, AND HE'S ONE OF MY LONG-TIME CUSTOMERS, AND WE HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT PERSONAL MEDICAL ISSUES HAVING TO DO WITH THE ILLNESS OF MY FATHER.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. MR. GOLDBERG, HAVE YOU TALKED TO HIM AT ALL ABOUT ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE?
JUROR: NOTHING HAVING TO DO WITH THIS CASE.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. OKAY. TELL ME, WHAT EFFECT DO YOU THINK YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH MR. MICHELSON WILL BE SHOULD HE TESTIFY IN THIS CASE?
JUROR: GIVEN MY EXPERIENCE WITH HIM, I WOULD GIVE GREAT WEIGHT TO HIS TESTIMONY BEING ACCURATE.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. DO YOU THINK IF HE IS CALLED AS A WITNESS, IF HE TESTIFIES, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO WEIGH HIS TESTIMONY AND CREDIBILITY? THAT'S WHAT JURORS DO, THEY DETERMINE CREDIBILITY OF TESTIMONY. DO YOU THINK YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO WEIGH HIS TESTIMONY THE WAY YOU WOULD ANY OTHER WITNESS?
JUROR: I WOULD APPLY THE RULES OF EVIDENCE AND -- OF THE LAW. HOWEVER, KNOWING THE MAN IN A CASE WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL DISAGREED WITH HIM, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO BELIEVE MR. MICHELSON.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING NEXT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. IT MAY BE THAT -- IT'S NOT UNUSUAL FOR A WITNESS TO TESTIFY AND THEN OTHER EVIDENCE THAT MAY COME IN THAT MIGHT REBUT OR BE CONTRARY TO A WITNESS'S TESTIMONY. AND IN REGARDS TO MR. MICHELSON, I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S GOING TO TESTIFY OR NOT, BUT IF HE DID AND IF EVIDENCE WERE TO COME IN THAT WAS CONTRARY, OR THE OTHER SIDE OF HIS TESTIMONY, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU THINK YOU COULD KEEP A --
JUROR: I DON'T BELIEVE I COULD --
JUDGE DAVILA: I'M SORRY. LET ME FINISH. IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU THINK YOU COULD JUDGE FAIRLY MR. MICHELSON'S TESTIMONY, NOTWITHSTANDING YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM?
JUROR: YES, I BELIEVE I COULD WEIGH IT OBJECTIVELY.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND I'M SORRY, MR. GOLDBERG, THESE LAWYERS ARE GOING TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, TOO.
JUROR: SURE.
JUDGE DAVILA: BUT I THINK YOUR FIRST ANSWER WAS, I DON'T THINK I COULD DO THAT.
JUROR: UM --
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. GOLDBERG, I'M SORRY, WE JUST HAVE TO TALK ONE AT A TIME, AND I APOLOGIZE. YOU TOLD ME FIRST, I'M GOING TO GIVE HIS TESTIMONY MORE WEIGHT, AND THAT'S VERY NATURAL. I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT. AGAIN, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE, THERE'S NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER HERE. YOU'RE NOT BEING PENALIZED FOR TELLING US HOW YOU FEEL. WE JUST WANT YOU TO BE HONEST ABOUT THIS. SO -- AND THEN YOU SAID, WELL, I THINK I CAN BE FAIR. I CAN BE OBJECTIVE. SO WHAT DO YOU THINK?
JUROR: I THINK THAT MY FIRST RESPONSE IS PROBABLY TRUER, THAT IN THE CASE OF WEIGHING THAT WITNESS'S TESTIMONY AGAINST CONFLICTING TESTIMONY, GIVEN THAT I HAVE A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP AND HE'S ESTABLISHED CREDIBILITY, I WOULD BE MORE SWAYED BY HIS TESTIMONY THAN CONTRADICTORY TESTIMONY.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND IT'S NOT --
JUROR: I WOULD BE OPEN TO CHANGING MY MIND, BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT I WOULD BE -- MAYBE "OBJECTIVE" IS THE WRONG WORD. I WOULD BE COMING AT IT WITH SOME PREEXISTING IDEA.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE.
JUROR: I WOULD FEEL LIKE I COULD PUT THAT ASIDE, BUT A PERSON'S LIBERTY IS ON THE LINE, AND I THINK THAT REQUIRES A REAL HIGH STANDARD OF FAIRNESS.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU FOR CALLING THAT OUT. I APPRECIATE THAT. HE'S A CUSTOMER OF YOURS? YOU'RE A CUSTOM FRAMER AND YOU HAVE DONE CUSTOM FRAMING FOR HIS ARTWORK?
JUROR: HE'S A PAINTER AND HE BRINGS ME A PAINTING ABOUT EVERY SIX WEEKS.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. AND HE TRUSTS YOU WITH FRAMING HIS WORK?
JUROR: HE GIVES ME MATERIAL AND SAYS, DO WHAT YOU THINK IS BEST AND CHARGE ME WHAT YOU THINK IS FAIR.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND YOU DO BOTH OF THOSE THINGS?
JUROR: HE'S ALWAYS BEEN HAPPY WITH THE RESULT.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. HOW LONG HAS HE BEEN A CUSTOMER/CLIENT OF YOURS?
JUROR: MORE THAN FIVE YEARS.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. MR. SCHENK, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
MR. SCHENK: NO QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO KNOW ABOUT, MR. GOLDBERG, IN THIS REGARD?
JUROR: NOT WITH RESPECT TO THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR, NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. ANYONE ELSE WHO KNOWS ANYONE ON THE WITNESS LIST? I SEE NO HANDS. AS I INDICATED, THIS CASE RELATES TO MS. HOLMES'S ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF WIRE FRAUD OR CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT WIRE FRAUD AS INDICATED IN THE INDICTMENT. LET ME ASK, HAS ANYONE READ OR HEARD ANY NEWS COVERAGE OF THIS CASE? OKAY. WE'LL START IN THE JURY BOX THERE. MR. WAXMAN, YOU HAVE THE MICROPHONE. WHY DON'T YOU TELL US --
JUROR: GOLDBERG.
JUDGE DAVILA: GOLDBERG, I BEG YOUR PARDON.
JUROR: I'VE BEEN FAMILIAR WITH THE DETAILS OF THE CASE PRETTY MUCH IN REALTIME. WHEN I WAS ASKED TEN DAYS AGO TO REFRAIN FROM READING OR LISTENING TO ANYTHING ABOUT THE CASE, I CLOSED NEWSPAPERS AND WEBSITES AND SHUT OFF NEWS PROGRAMS WHEN THE STORY CAME UP.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WHAT IS THE MOST RECENT PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT YOU RECEIVED SUBSEQUENT TO YOUR FILLING OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE?
JUROR: SUBSEQUENT TO MY FILLING OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE? I HAVE RECEIVED NO NEW INFORMATION SUBSEQUENT TO MY FILLING OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE. I'VE STUDIOUSLY AVOIDED THAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. SO TELL US ABOUT THE INFORMATION. YOU SAID YOU KNOW DETAILS ABOUT THE CASE.
JUROR: WELL, PRIOR TO BEING CALLED FOR JURY SERVICE, I HAD HEARD NEWS ARTICLES ABOUT THE DEFENDANT'S PREGNANCY. AND IN YEARS PRIOR I HAD HEARD NEWS ARTICLES ABOUT INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD INVESTED IN THE COMPANY, AND EARLY ON I WAS ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE POSSIBILITIES OF A MEDICAL DEVICE AND WAS DISAPPOINTED AS NEWS REPORTS SUGGESTED THAT EARLY PROMISES WERE NOT COMING TO FRUITION.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. SO YOU FOLLOWED THE MEDIA STORIES ABOUT THIS, RIGHT? I THINK YOU ALSO TELL US, OR TOLD US -- DO YOU GO TO L.A., LOS ANGELES, EVERY SUNDAY?
JUROR: I TRAVEL EVERY SUNDAY TO SPEND THE DAY WITH MY 90-YEAR-OLD FATHER WHO IS IN THE MIDDLE STAGES OF ALZHEIMER'S. HE WAS A BRILLIANT ATTORNEY, AND IT'S AN INTERESTING PROCESS TO HELP A PERSON TRANSITION, AND I WANT TO SPEND TIME WITH HIM.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: ADDITIONALLY, YOUR HONOR, I LOST A BROTHER IN DECEMBER TO AN ACCIDENTAL OPIATE OVERDOSE, AND I'VE BEEN COMFORTING MY FATHER AND STEPMOTHER, AS WELL AS HANDLING THE PROBATE, HELPING WITH THE PROBATION OF MY BROTHER'S ESTATE. HE DIED INTESTATE WITH NO HEIRS.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SAW THAT AND THAT DREW MY ATTENTION, AND THAT'S WHY I'M SOMEHOW CHANGING CONVERSATIONS HERE. YOU GO EVERY SUNDAY TO SEE YOUR FATHER?
JUROR: THIS SUNDAY I'M GOING TO REFRAIN. LAST SUNDAY I TRAVELLED DOWN. NEXT SATURDAY IS MY FATHER'S 91ST BIRTHDAY. MY PLAN HAD BEEN TO RENT A MOTOR HOME AND TAKE MY PET ANIMALS DOWN TO VISIT HIM. I SEE NOW THAT COURT IS SCHEDULED FOR FRIDAY OF NEXT WEEK. I WAS HOPING THAT IF COURT WAS MONDAY, TUESDAY, AND THURSDAY, OR TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY I COULD TRAVEL FOR FRIDAY. I NOW SEE THAT THAT COULD BE INTERRUPTED. I FELT THAT I COULD MAKE IT IF I COULD LEAVE ON A SATURDAY AND RETURN FOR COURT ON A TUESDAY, BUT I'M AFRAID IF COURT IS MEETING ON FRIDAY, IT'S STARTING TO -- AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, MY PRESENCE THERE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO MY STEPMOTHER AND MY SURVIVING FAMILY MEMBERS BECAUSE I'M THE ONLY SON THAT HAS THE TIME --
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE.
JUROR: -- AND WHEREWITHAL TO FLY THERE AND SUPPORT HIM AND GIVE MY STEPMOTHER A BREAK FROM CARE FOR A PERSON WHO IS SUFFERING FROM DEMENTIA.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. ARE THERE OCCASIONS WHEN YOU ARE CALLED DURING THE WEEK?
JUROR: THERE ARE OCCASIONS. THEY ARE NOT COMMON. BUT BECAUSE OF THE FAST MOVING NATURE OF THE ILLNESS, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE MIGHT BE IN THREE OR TEN WEEKS.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. THANK YOU. AS TO THIS, ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. LET ME SEE, WERE THERE OTHER HANDS IN THE JURY BOX? YES? IS THAT MS. LOCKWOOD?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: NUMBER 99. YES, MS. LOCKWOOD? WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE US TO KNOW?
JUROR: I'VE ONLY SEEN A COUPLE OF ONLINE MEMES, OR FUNNY IMAGES RELATING TO THIS, NOT REALLY ANY REAL INFORMATION. BUT I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I HAVE SEEN SOME THINGS. BUT SINCE THE QUESTIONNAIRE, I HAVE DEFINITELY STOPPED MYSELF FROM LOOKING ON YOUTUBE AND ALL OF THAT FUN STUFF BECAUSE IT CAN BE A VERY QUICK RABBIT HOLE OF MISINFORMATION, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. LET ME ASK YOU THE SAME QUESTION -- AND THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE RAISED YOUR HANDS, PLEASE KNOW I'M GOING TO ASK YOU THIS SAME QUESTION -- WHAT IS THE MOST RECENT INFORMATION THAT YOU RECEIVED POST, AFTER YOU FILLED OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE?
JUROR: NONE.
JUDGE DAVILA: NONE. OKAY. LET'S START THERE AND GO BACKWARDS. AND THEN PRIOR TO FILLING OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE, WHAT IS THE MOST RECENT THING THAT YOU SAW?
JUROR: MAYBE A COUPLE MONTHS AGO THERE WAS A FUNNY IMAGE OR A MEME IN, LIKE, A GROUP THAT I'M IN RELATING TO A VOICE THING, NOT REALLY ANYTHING ABOUT THE ACTUAL CASE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT DISTINCTION. HAVE YOU SEEN ANYTHING THAT REFLECTS ON THE FACTS OR ANTICIPATED FACTS OR ANYTHING ABOUT THE CASE IN ANY OF THE MATERIAL THAT YOU'VE LOOKED AT?
JUROR: NOT THAT I KNOW OF. BUT I DON'T CONSIDER MYSELF VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ON MEDICAL DEVICES, SO I CAN'T BE A GOOD JUDGE OF THAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU CAME IN A WEEK AGO TO FILL OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND YOU SAW THE NAME OF THE CASE, YOU SAW WHAT CASE IT WAS. DID THAT CAUSE YOU, JUST THAT READING WHAT THE CASE WAS ABOUT, DID THAT CAUSE YOU TO REFLECT ANYTHING ABOUT, OH, I KNOW ABOUT THIS, OR, OH, I SAW A MOVIE ABOUT THIS, I READ A BOOK, ANYTHING LIKE THAT?
JUROR: I ONLY RECOGNIZED THE NAME THERANOS. THAT WAS IT, AND ONLY FROM THE MEME.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE.
JUROR: BUT I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHO ANYBODY WAS. MAYBE IT'S JUST A LITTLE OUT OF MY CIRCLES OF SOCIAL CIRCLES, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY KNOW MUCH ABOUT IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: BASED ON WHAT YOU HAVE SEEN, YOU DID SEE, IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THAT EXPOSURE THAT YOU THINK WILL AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE FAIR TO BOTH SIDES IN THIS CASE?
JUROR: NOT THAT I KNOW OF.
JUDGE DAVILA: CAN YOU THINK OF -- AND YOU WILL PARDON ME, BUT YOU KNOW YOURSELF BETTER THAN ANYBODY. CAN YOU THINK OF A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE YOU MIGHT -- WHERE THAT INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE BEEN EXPOSED TO MIGHT CREEP INTO YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS AS A JUROR IN THIS CASE AS YOU JUDGE THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE? ANYTHING?
JUROR: NO. BECAUSE IT WAS LITERALLY AN IMAGE MAKING FUN OF HOW SOMEONE WAS TALKING IN VIDEOS. I DON'T REALLY -- I DON'T BELIEVE THAT PERSONALLY BECAUSE PEOPLE SPEAK DIFFERENTLY TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. SO I DON'T REALLY FIND THAT AS ANYTHING TO SWAY MY BIAS IN ANY DIRECTION.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WHAT YOU SAW WAS AN OPINION POSTED BY SOME OTHER INDIVIDUAL, I TAKE IT? IS THAT A FAIR CHARACTERIZATION OF THAT?
JUROR: YEAH, I THINK SO.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU HEARD ME TALK EARLIER, AND I THINK -- WELL, MAYBE NOT. I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE JUROR'S OBLIGATION, IF THEY'RE SEATED AS A JUROR, YOU WILL DECIDE THIS CASE ONLY ON THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HEAR IN THIS COURTROOM, NOT ON ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THIS COURTROOM, JUST HERE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK YOU CAN DO?
JUROR: ABSOLUTELY.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. YOU ANSWERED THAT RIGHT AWAY AND WITH A VERY FIRM VOICE, AND SO I TAKE IT YOU HAVE NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
JUROR: UH-HUH, NO QUESTIONS.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. LET'S SEE. WAS THERE ANOTHER HAND? YES? IS THAT MR. MASON-BURCHELL?
JUROR: MS.
JUDGE DAVILA: MS. PARDON ME.
JUROR: YES. GOOD MORNING. THE ONLY THING I HEARD WAS ABOUT A WEEK PRIOR TO GETTING THE NOTIFICATION TO SHOW UP FOR JURY DUTY, SOMETHING ON THE NEWS BLURB BECAUSE I WAS WALKING BY, BECAUSE I NORMALLY DON'T WATCH THE NEWS, THAT IT WAS GOING TO TRIAL. SO IT WAS JUST A REAL QUICK THING. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING.
JUDGE DAVILA: WAS THAT A HEADLINE OR SOMETHING YOU SAW?
JUROR: YEAH, LIKE RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NEWS THEY TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH, AND IT WAS REAL QUICK AND THAT WAS IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND YOU DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION TO IT OTHER THAN THAT?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND HAVE YOU SEEN ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THIS CASE OR ANYTHING RELATED TO IT PRIOR?
JUROR: NO, I HAVE NOT.
JUDGE DAVILA: CAN YOU BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL TO BOTH SIDES HERE BASED ON THAT LIMITED EXPOSURE?
JUROR: YES, ABSOLUTELY.
JUDGE DAVILA: DO YOU THINK THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL TO BOTH SIDES HERE?
JUROR: NO, IT'S NOT.
JUDGE DAVILA: IN ANY WAY?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. AND WAS THERE ANOTHER HAND? LET'S JUST GO RIGHT ACROSS THERE. IS THAT MR. CHATHAM?
JUROR: CHATHAM, YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: GOOD MORNING.
JUDGE DAVILA: WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION?
JUROR: THE STORY OF THERANOS HAS BEEN IN THE NEWS, OR IN THE PAST IT WAS IN THE NEWS, AND I WAS AWARE OF IT. I READ A FAIR AMOUNT OF NEWS ONLINE. BUT I HAVE NOT REALLY FOLLOWED IT SUPER CLOSELY IN THE PAST YEAR. I WAS AWARE IT WAS GOING TO TRIAL. I THINK THAT WAS ABOUT IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. TELL ME AGAIN ABOUT THE MOST RECENT PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE READ. THIS IS POST THE QUESTIONNAIRE.
JUROR: AS THE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID, I'VE BEEN DELIBERATE ABOUT ANYTHING ABOUT THERANOS OR ELIZABETH HOLMES OR ANY SORT OF THING ON A HEADLINE, I IMMEDIATELY DIDN'T READ ANYTHING FURTHER THAN THAT. SO I'VE AVOIDED ANY EXPOSURE SINCE COMING OVER TO THE -- YOU KNOW, LAST WEEK.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. YOU'VE SEEN HEADLINES. DO YOU HAVE A RECOLLECTION OF WHAT HEADLINES YOU'VE OBSERVED?
JUROR: WELL, LIKE ELIZABETH HOLMES'S NAME, AND I WOULDN'T READ ANYTHING FURTHER, OR THERANOS I WOULD STOP.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. OKAY. WERE THOSE IN ELECTRONIC FORM OR WAS IT HARD COPY NEWSPAPER?
JUROR: ELECTRONIC FORM. I DON'T TYPICALLY WATCH NEWS, SO, YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. DO YOU READ NEWSPAPERS?
JUROR: ONLINE, "THE WASHINGTON POST" AND "NEW YORK TIMES."
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. I SEE. DO YOU GET HARD COPY NEWSPAPERS?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: WHEN IS THE LAST TIME THAT YOU READ A HARD COPY NEWSPAPER?
JUROR: WE WERE TAKING "THE SANTA CRUZ SENTINEL" UP UNTIL MAYBE FEBRUARY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. OKAY. I ASK THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I HAVE A PENCHANT FOR HOLDING THE NEWSPAPER IN MY HAND AND I HAVE MY TEA IN THE OTHER HAND, AND THAT'S A DYING ART, I THINK, OR A DYING PRACTICE.
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO LET ME GET BACK TO YOUR OBSERVATIONS, SIR. WHAT ABOUT -- YOU FOLLOWED THE CASE, I THINK YOU TOLD US, YOU FOLLOWED IT FOR SOME TIME; IS THAT RIGHT?
JUROR: I WOULDN'T SAY FOLLOW IT. THERE WAS OCCASIONALLY A NEWS ARTICLE THAT WOULD POP UP AND IT WOULD CATCH MY ATTENTION AND I WOULD PROBABLY READ IT. I THINK THE LAST ONE I KIND OF LOOKED AT WAS JUST SOMETHING ABOUT IT COMING TO TRIAL. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WAS, IN THE SPRING MAYBE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR -- AND I'LL CALL IT EXPOSURE -- BUT ANYTHING THAT YOU'VE READ, SEEN, LISTENED TO THAT YOU THINK WILL AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL TO BOTH SIDES HERE?
JUROR: I DON'T THINK SO. I'LL WEIGH THE EVIDENCE BASED ON WHAT IS PRESENTED IN TRIAL.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LET'S JUST GO DOWN IN THE FRONT ROW. IS THIS MS. GONZALEZ?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: JUROR NUMBER 108.
JUROR: SO I JUST HEARD A NEWS STORY ON IT ON NPR WHEN IT FIRST HAPPENED, AND SO I DON'T KNOW, WAS THAT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO MAYBE? AND SINCE THEN NOTHING, EXCEPT THAT I HEARD THAT SHE HAD A BABY MAYBE.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THE STORY ON NPR, THAT WAS A COUPLE YEARS AGO. AND WAS IT -- CAN YOU TELL US, WAS IT A NEWS STORY OR WAS IT A DOCUMENTARY OR A LENGTHY STORY?
JUROR: IT WASN'T LENGTHY. IT WAS JUST KIND OF, HERE'S WHAT IS HAPPENING, MAYBE A COUPLE MINUTES, AND I DON'T REALLY REMEMBER ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR THE NAME OF THE COMPANY AND THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. OKAY. AND SINCE FILLING OUT YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE, YOU'VE HAD NO EXPOSURE?
JUROR: NO, NONE.
JUDGE DAVILA: HAVE YOU TALKED TO FRIENDS OR HAVE ANY FRIENDS TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THIS CASE TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, TO YOUR RECOLLECTION?
JUROR: A COWORKER MENTIONED IT. MY BOSS, BECAUSE I HAD TO SAY THAT I WAS COMING TO JURY DUTY, AND SHE SAID, OH, IS IT THIS? AND I SAID HMM -- NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU DIDN'T TELL HER WHAT THE CASE WAS?
JUROR: I DIDN'T. SHE SAID SHE HAD HEARD ABOUT A CASE, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: AND YOU'RE SOMEBODY WHO KEEPS CONFIDENCE. OKAY.
JUROR: ESPECIALLY AT WORK.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WE PROBABLY SHOULD LEAVE THAT THERE. BUT LET ME ASK YOU, SO THERE WAS INQUIRY FROM YOUR BOSS AND OTHERS AT WORK ABOUT WHAT CASE ARE YOU GOING ON, AND YOU DIDN'T REVEAL TO THEM THE CASE.
JUROR: RIGHT.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU KNEW WHAT IT WAS, OF COURSE, HAVING BEEN SUMMONED AND FILLED OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE.
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. I THINK THE QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTED THAT.
JUROR: RIGHT.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO LET ME THANK YOU FOR FOLLOWING THOSE INSTRUCTIONS.
JUROR: YOU'RE WELCOME.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATION SINCE WITH ANYBODY ABOUT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS CASE?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THE EXPOSURE THAT YOU'VE TOLD US ABOUT -- I USE THAT WORD AND I DON'T MEAN IT PEJORATIVELY, BUT IT'S WHAT I'M CALLING IT -- BUT IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THAT THAT YOU THINK, AGAIN, WILL IMPAIR YOUR ABILITY TO BE FAIR TO THE GOVERNMENT, TO BE FAIR TO MS. HOLMES?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
JUROR: THANKS.
JUDGE DAVILA: IS THAT MS. DENT?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: JUROR NUMBER 112.
JUROR: IN FULL DISCLOSURE AND HONESTY, I READ THE NEWSPAPER ALSO AND I THOUGHT IT WAS MORE THAN A COUPLE YEARS AGO I HAD WATCHED AND BEEN VERY INVOLVED WITH THIS WHOLE THING AS FAR AS WATCHING WHAT WAS GOING ON. I'M A RETIRED REGISTERED NURSE. MY HUSBAND IS A RETIRED LAB TECHNICIAN. SO WE ACTUALLY HAD QUITE A BIT OF INFORMATION. WE WATCHED THE DOCUMENTARIES. WE ALSO WATCHED I THINK IT WAS LIKE A MOVIE KIND OF THING THAT CAME OUT ABOUT IT. SO WE HAD A LOT OF EXPOSURE I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY. AND THEN WHEN I CAME DOWN FOR JURY DUTY, I WAS VERY SURPRISED. I DID WRITE DOWN ON MY QUESTIONNAIRE THE FACT THAT I HAD BEEN VERY AWARE OF IT. I DID NOT KNOW THAT IT WAS COMING TO TRIAL. I WASN'T AWARE OF THAT UNTIL I ACTUALLY CAME TO JURY DUTY. AS FAR AS -- I REALLY WANT TO SAY THAT I'M COMPLETELY UNBIASSED AND IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT ME. I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN HONESTLY 100 PERCENT SAY THAT. I'VE NEVER BEEN ON A JURY. I'VE NEVER BEEN INVOLVED IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS. SO TO BE VERY HONEST WITH YOU, I DON'T KNOW. I'M MORE THAN WILLING TO TRY AND TO, YOU KNOW, SAY AND TO LISTEN AND ALL OF THAT KIND OF THING. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE -- I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU, YOU KNOW, PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE I DON'T KNOW. SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: HOW TO PUT THAT ASIDE?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. THANK YOU.
JUROR: I'M TRYING TO BE REAL HONEST. I MEAN, I WANT TO SAY THAT I CAN DO THAT, BUT I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE I'VE NEVER BEEN IN THAT SITUATION. SO I DON'T KNOW.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE HAD BENEFIT OF YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE AND I THINK IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE YOU TOLD US, YOU SAID, I'M NOT SURE I CAN BE FAIR. I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID.
JUROR: UH-HUH.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CANDOR. LET ME AGAIN SAY, MS. DENT, THERE'S NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER HERE. THERE ISN'T. YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO PENALTY FOR BEING HONEST. QUITE THE CONTRARY. WE WANT YOU TO BE HONEST AND CANDID. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE REST OF THE MORNING, I EXPECT, AND PERHAPS THIS AFTERNOON. EVERYBODY IS DIFFERENT. YOU AND I READ HARD COPY NEWSPAPERS. A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE DON'T. THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. BUT WE PROCESS THINGS DIFFERENTLY. AS YOU SAID, YOU'VE HEARD A COUPLE OF OTHER PEOPLE SAY, I THINK I SAW SOMETHING. MS. GONZALEZ SAID, I THINK I HEARD THIS. MS. LOCKWOOD TALKED ABOUT SEEING THIS MEME, OR WHATEVER IT WAS. AND EACH OF THEM HAVE TOLD US IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT BECAUSE OF THIS REASON, I THINK I CAN PROCESS THAT AWAY. YOU'RE A LITTLE DIFFERENT. YOU FOLLOWED THIS STORY. YOU'RE IN THE INDUSTRY, SHALL WE SAY, AND YOUR HUSBAND WAS, AND THAT PUTS YOU IN A DIFFERENT POSITION, I SUPPOSE, JUST INSIDE INFORMATION, I'LL CALL IT THAT. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO PROBE HERE. THESE LAWYERS WANT TO KNOW THAT, TOO, WHETHER OR NOT -- CANDIDLY, THE QUESTION REALLY IS, IS THIS THE RIGHT CASE FOR A JUROR? THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE QUESTION IS. IS THIS A CASE WHERE A JUROR CAN SIT AND BE FAIR TO BOTH SIDES? THAT'S THE JOB DESCRIPTION FOR A JUROR. YOU HAVE TO BE FAIR TO BOTH SIDES IN THIS CASE. IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK WILL IMPAIR, AFFECT THAT ABILITY TO BE FAIR TO BOTH SIDES, WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THAT. THESE LAWYERS NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THAT. I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THAT. SO I APPRECIATE THIS CONVERSATION. I'M GOING TO ASK THE LAWYERS IF THEY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS OF YOU ABOUT THIS RIGHT NOW AS WELL. MR. SCHENK, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
MR. SCHENK: NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
MR. DOWNEY: NO QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. DENT. I APPRECIATE YOUR CANDOR HERE, AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU READ A HARD COPY NEWSPAPER.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE BOX HERE? YES, LET'S GO DOWN TO MS. NELSON, 116.
JUROR: YES, YOUR HONOR. SO I FOLLOWED THE NEWS COVERAGE PRETTY EXTENSIVELY WHEN THE STORY BROKE OUT. I DISCLOSED IN MY QUESTIONNAIRE THAT I LISTENED TO A PODCAST ON A ROAD TRIP WITH MY HUSBAND. MY HUSBAND IS A SCIENTIST FOR A BIOTECH COMPANY. AS A GRADUATE STUDENT, HE DID MALARIA RESEARCH AND DID BLOOD TESTS AND IS REALLY FAMILIAR WITH THAT FIELD, AND SO WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT WHEN THE STORY BROKE OUT. SINCE COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE, I TRIED NOT TO, YOU KNOW, SEEK OUT MEDIA ON THE STORY. I WAS EXPOSED A COUPLE DAYS AGO TO A HEADLINE ON TWITTER, AND I THINK THAT I SHOULD DISCLOSE THAT JUST BECAUSE OF MY -- THE PRACTICE AREA THAT I PRACTICE IN. I THINK IT MIGHT AFFECT MY GOING INTO THE CASE. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE DEFENSE STRATEGY, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT PRIVATELY.
JUDGE DAVILA: WELL, YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BUT JUST A -- AND THAT'S FINE, THAT TOPIC, THE TITLE RATHER, PARDON ME. BUT WHAT YOU READ ON THAT TWITTER, DO YOU THINK THAT WILL AFFECT YOU AS A JUROR IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR IN THIS CASE? OR DO YOU THINK IT WILL HAVE SOME IMPACT?
JUROR: I THINK THAT I CAN BE OBJECTIVE AND FAIR, BUT I THINK, IN FULL DISCLOSURE, THAT COUNSEL SHOULD KNOW WHAT I HEARD AND MAYBE LET THEM DECIDE WHETHER THEY THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD CASE FOR ME GIVEN MY BACKGROUND.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WELL, TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR BACKGROUND.
JUROR: SO I'M AN ATTORNEY FOR LEGAL AID. I REPRESENT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS AND SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN FAMILY COURT, AND SO, YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SAW THAT IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE. AND HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN DOING THAT?
JUROR: ELEVEN YEARS.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND DO YOU ASSIST IN -- DO YOU SOMETIMES ASSIST THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN THE PROSECUTION OF CASES BY PROVIDING INFORMATION TO THEM?
JUROR: SO I WILL SAY THAT WE HAVE -- I HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH A LOT OF THE D.A.'S. A LOT OF MY CLIENTS ALSO HAVE CASES WHERE THEIR ABUSER IS BEING PROSECUTED, AND SOMETIMES OUR CLIENT WHO WE IDENTIFY AS D.V. SURVIVORS ARE PROSECUTED THEMSELVES. ACTUALLY, THAT HAPPENS QUITE OFTEN, AND SO I'M PROVIDING INFORMATION TO THE D.A. TO GET THOSE CHARGES DROPPED. AND THEN I ALSO DO A LITTLE BIT OF IMMIGRATION. SO WE COOPERATE WITH THE D.A. TO GET CERTIFICATION FOR U-VISA APPLICATIONS.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND DO YOU PROSECUTE -- I CAN'T REMEMBER IF BAY AREA LEGAL AID ACTUALLY ASSISTS IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THOSE TYPES OF VISAS.
JUROR: WE DO.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU DO.
JUROR: AND I'VE DONE THEM PERSONALLY MYSELF.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THOSE ARE VISAS THAT ARE UNIQUE AND SPECIAL TO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE PRESENTED EVIDENCE OF BEING --
JUROR: VICTIM OF A QUALIFYING CRIME.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES, EXACTLY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THAT WORK, BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE READ, THAT YOU THINK -- YOU READ ABOUT THIS CASE, THAT YOU THINK WOULD IMPAIR OR AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL AS A JUROR IN THIS CASE?
JUROR: I DO NOT THINK SO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. TELL ME ABOUT THE OTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH YOUR HUSBAND ABOUT THIS CASE. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE SEEN SOME -- I THINK YOU TOLD US YOU SAW AN ABC AND HBO, YOU SAW PODCASTS AND THINGS.
JUROR: SO I'VE READ ARTICLES, AND THEN WE LISTENED TO A PODCAST.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. AND HOW LONG AGO WAS THAT? I'M SORRY.
JUROR: PROBABLY TWO YEARS AGO WAS THE PODCAST I WANT TO SAY, YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND YOU'VE DISCUSSED THIS WITH YOUR HUSBAND?
JUROR: YES. PRIOR TO BEING SUMMONED, YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE DISCUSSIONS, I'M SURE -- WELL, I'M NOT SURE. IT MAY BE THAT YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT THE SCIENCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND HE SHARED WITH YOU HIS OPINION. I'M NOT GOING TO ASK YOU WHAT HIS OPINION IS OR WAS.
JUROR: RIGHT.
JUDGE DAVILA: BUT IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU THINK WILL CARRY FORWARD WITH YOU AS YOU SIT AS A DELIBERATING JUROR IN THIS CASE?
JUROR: I THINK THAT MY HUSBAND'S OPINION -- YOU KNOW, I TRUST HIM ON THE SCIENCE AND I THINK THAT WOULD CARRY OVER AS I'M WEIGHING THE TESTIMONY THAT I HEAR IN THIS CASE.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MR. SCHENK, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS?
MR. SCHENK: NO. THANK YOU.
MR. DOWNEY: NOT FROM THE DEFENSE, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. NELSON. THANK YOU FOR WORKING FOR BAY AREA LEGAL AID. THAT'S A WONDERFUL ORGANIZATION. I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE EVENTS ANNUALLY TO RECOGNIZE THE LAWYERS IN THAT GROUP, BUT YOU HAVEN'T HAD ONE BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC.
JUROR: THAT'S RIGHT, YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: I KNOW. AND I SAY THIS, AND THIS IS JUST RECOGNITION, MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES AND OUR COLLEAGUES IN SISTER STATE COURTS ATTEND THOSE EVENTS TO SUPPORT THE GOOD WORK OF YOUR ORGANIZATION.
JUROR: I APPRECIATE THAT, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU'RE WELCOME. ANYONE ELSE? OH, LET'S GO TO MR., IS IT PARODI, 123? MS. PARODI. I THINK I HAVE THAT RIGHT. 122, I BEG YOUR PARDON. THANK YOU, MS. PARODI.
JUROR: I ALSO GET THE HARD COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER, "SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS."
JUDGE DAVILA: WE'RE ON A ROLL HERE.
JUROR: SO WE'RE OUT HERE. AND I HAVE SEEN GENERAL NEWS ARTICLES IN THE PAST. SINCE WE'VE BEEN CALLED IN, I HAVE SEEN JUST KIND OF HEADLINES ON THE TOP OF THE FRONT PAGE, BUT I JUST PUSH IT AWAY. AS SOON AS I RECOGNIZE IT'S RELATED, I DON'T READ IT. I'VE ALSO SEEN JUST ON MY FACEBOOK FEED NATIONAL NEWS STORIES, LIKE "U.S.A. TODAY," "NEW YORK TIMES," AND AGAIN, I JUST SCROLL PAST AND DON'T READ THOSE. THE MOST RECENT THING I'VE SEEN WAS ACTUALLY LAST NIGHT MY SON TURNED ON THE LOCAL NEWS AND THEY TALKED ABOUT JURY SELECTION HERE TODAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOUR 5-YEAR OLD SON?
JUROR: NO, THAT'S MY 16-YEAR OLD.
JUDGE DAVILA: OH, OKAY. THANK YOU.
JUROR: HE'S A BIG NEWS JUNKIE, SO HE'S ALWAYS ON CNN. JUST, THE NEWS IS ON A LOT IN OUR HOUSE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
JUROR: BUT SINCE THEN I'VE TRIED TO AVOID EVERYTHING.
JUDGE DAVILA: WELL, WHAT ABOUT -- HOW MUCH DID YOU SEE LAST NIGHT?
JUROR: JUST -- I JUST SAW, LIKE, A PHOTO OF THE COURTROOM COME ON AND THEN I -- I WAS IN THE KITCHEN AND I WASN'T REALLY WATCHING IT WITH HIM, BUT I HEARD IT AND I ASKED HIM TO CHANGE THE CHANNEL AND HE DID.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. OKAY.
JUROR: SO JUST A SNIPPET.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THE QUESTION THAT I'VE ASKED YOUR COLLEAGUE AND JURORS, WHAT ABOUT WHAT YOU'VE SEEN, WHAT YOU'VE READ, WHAT YOU'VE HEARD, AND HOW DO YOU THINK THAT WILL AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO BE FAIR AND IMPARTIAL TO BOTH SIDES IN THIS CASE?
JUROR: I DON'T THINK IT WOULD.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND ABOUT THAT?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOUR 16-YEAR OLD, HE SOUNDS LIKE HE'S VERY BRIGHT AND PRECOCIOUS, AND HE MIGHT SAY, IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR, MOM, TELL ME WHAT HAPPENED? WHAT IS GOING ON?
JUROR: YEAH, 100 PERCENT. BUT I WON'T.
JUDGE DAVILA: HE'S GOING TO PUSH AND HE'S GOING TO PROD, MOM.
JUROR: YEAH, I KNOW, I KNOW.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: AND YOU'VE GOT CONTROL OF THAT?
JUROR: YEAH, I CAN DEFEND.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE US TO KNOW ABOUT THIS? LET ME ASK ONE THING. I THINK YOU HAVE A VACATION PLANNED FOR THE FIRST WEEK IN OCTOBER.
JUROR: WELL, THAT'S KIND OF UP IN THE AIR BECAUSE THAT WAS TO HAWAII, AND WE'VE RECONSIDERED THAT, BUT MY CHILDREN WILL BE OUT THAT ENTIRE WEEK FROM SCHOOL BECAUSE IT'S A PLANNED NORMAL SCHOOL BREAK, SO I DO HAVE A LOT OF CHILDCARE ISSUES WITH SHOWING UP BECAUSE I'M THE PRIMARY CARE GIVER FOR MY THREE KIDS AND THERE'S NO ONE ELSE WHO CAN PICK THEM UP FROM SCHOOL AND TAKE THEM TO ORTHODONTIST APPOINTMENTS AND BE THERE WHEN THEY'RE ON THEIR BREAK. AND ALSO, MY YOUNGEST IS UNVACCINATED, AND THEY'RE ASKING, IF HE SHOWS ANY SYMPTOMS WHATSOEVER OF COVID, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO KEEP HIM HOME. IF THEY'RE EXPOSED IN SCHOOL AND CONSIDERED A CLOSE CONTACT, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO KEEP THEM HOME AND GET TESTED. SO THAT'S KIND OF ALWAYS UP IN THE AIR OF WHAT I WOULD BE NEEDED FOR AT HOME, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. PARODI. I APPRECIATE IT. I THINK THAT EXHAUSTS EVERYONE IN THE BOX. LET'S GO BACK TO OUR AUDIENCE HERE AND WE'LL PASS THE MICROPHONE DOWN.
JUROR: YOUR HONOR, I'M 130, MR. MURPHY.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. MURPHY.
JUROR: SO I'VE ACTIVELY AVOIDED ANY EXPOSURE SINCE THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND THAT'S MOVING KIND OF PAST ONLINE. I DON'T READ A HARD COPY NEWSPAPER THOUGH, MY FATHER DID.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR DATING ME. I APPRECIATE THE RECOGNITION.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUROR: I DO FOLLOW THE LOCAL NEWS, BUT I DO THAT RECORDED AND I'LL AVOID ANYTHING RELATED TO THIS CASE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
JUROR: THE TESTIMONY SO FAR REMINDED ME, I THINK I DID LISTEN TO A PODCAST A COUPLE YEARS AGO. AND I'M ABSOLUTELY CONFIDENT THAT I COULD FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AND BE A JUROR OBJECTIVELY BASED ON MY EXPOSURE.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. DO YOU RECALL THE NAME OF THE PODCAST?
JUROR: I DON'T. I'M SORRY. AND PROBABLY RADIO STORIES ALONG THE WAY, BUT IT WAS QUITE SOME TIME AGO.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT WHAT YOU'VE LISTENED TO AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU'VE LISTENED TO, I'LL JUST PUT IT IN THE VERNACULAR, NOTHING STUCK?
JUROR: NO. I'M GOOD.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND NOTHING STICKS WITH YOU THAT YOU WOULD CALL UPON IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR IN THE CASE?
JUROR: MAYBE JUST THE BASIC, VERY BASIC SKELETAL SERIES OF EVENTS, OR STORY. BUT AS I SAID, I'M CONFIDENT THAT I COULD LOOK AT WHAT IS PRESENTED.
JUDGE DAVILA: OF COURSE. AND NOW I HAVE TO PROBE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "THE SKELETAL?" ARE YOU SAYING THAT, WELL, I KNOW IT'S THERANOS AND THAT WAS A COMPANY, AND I KNOW THAT IT IS MS. HOLMES AND THAT'S IT?
JUROR: YEAH. YEAH, PRETTY MUCH.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND ANYTHING DEEPER THAN THAT?
JUROR: JUST THAT IT WAS ABOUT TESTING.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
JUROR: LAB TESTING.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. OKAY. IS THERE -- AND I'M SORRY, YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT HBO. DID YOU SEE AN HBO SHOW OR LISTEN TO AN HBO SHOW?
JUROR: I MEAN, MAYBE. I WATCH A LOT OF HBO. SO I DON'T BELIEVE IT SAID IT WHEN I JUST SPOKE. I MAY HAVE PUT IT ON MY QUESTIONNAIRE.
JUDGE DAVILA: I THINK THAT'S WHERE I GOT IT.
JUROR: I REMEMBER SEEING SOME MEDIA ABOUT IT A COUPLE YEARS AGO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. BUT, AGAIN, NOTHING STICKS TODAY?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: CAN YOU BE FAIR TO THE GOVERNMENT IN THIS CASE?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND CAN YOU BE FAIR TO MS. HOLMES IN THIS CASE?
JUROR: YES, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: DO YOU HAVE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND ABOUT THOSE THINGS?
JUROR: I HAVE NO DOUBT.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MURPHY. ANYONE ELSE? LET'S PASS IT BEHIND, MR. MURPHY. IS THIS MR. TONG?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: THIS IS JUROR NUMBER --
JUROR: -- 147.
JUDGE DAVILA: -- 147. THANK YOU, SIR. YES?
JUROR: SO EXPOSURE TO THE CASE PRIOR TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE, MAYBE, LIKE, YEARS AGO JUST HEARING ON THE NEWS. AND THEN ALSO I HAD A COWORKER WHO HAD A DAUGHTER WHO WORKED AT THERANOS AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE NEWS AND STUFF. AND MAYBE A FEW MONTHS AGO I SAW IN, LIKE, ABC NEWS THERE WAS, LIKE, A TRIAL WAS COMING. AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION JUST WITHIN THE FAMILY AND WHAT WERE THE ALLEGATIONS AND SUCH. SO THAT'S TO THE EXTENT WHERE I HAD KNOWLEDGE PRIOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
JUROR: AND AFTER THE QUESTIONNAIRE I SAW THAT THE TRIAL WAS COMING ON THE NEWS, BUT I DIDN'T CLICK ON IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THAT WAS ON A NEWS FEED ON YOUR DEVICE?
JUROR: YEAH, YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO I THINK YOU SAID IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE THAT YOU HEARD ABOUT HER AND YOU MIGHT BE BIASSED. I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU WROTE.
JUROR: YEAH. YOU HEAR ON THE NEWS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY SUBCONSCIOUS BIAS, BUT I THINK I CAN TRY TO BE OBJECTIVE AND NOT LET IT AFFECT ME. BUT IT'S JUST BASED ON THE NEWS WHAT I HAVE HEARD.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. SO YOU'VE HEARD ME TALK TO THE OTHER JURORS AND YOU'VE HEARD THEIR ANSWERS ABOUT HOW IT WILL AFFECT THEM AND BASED ON THEIR EXPOSURES. WHAT ABOUT YOU? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK YOU HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT YOU CAN PUT ASIDE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU'VE HEARD, READ?
JUROR: BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD AND READ, I THINK I CAN NOT LET IT AFFECT ME.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. HAVE YOU -- HAVE YOU WATCHED ANY SHOW OR DOCUMENTARY OR ANYTHING ON THIS, ON THIS CASE OR THE ITEMS SURROUNDING THIS CASE?
JUROR: NOT ANY SHOWS OR DOCUMENTARY. JUST, LIKE, THE NEWS CHANNEL, LIKE ABC OR SOMETHING WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THE CASE. BUT I DIDN'T WATCH IT IN DEPTH.
JUDGE DAVILA: HAVE YOU LISTENED TO THE ENTIRETY OF THAT NEWS?
JUROR: NOT PARTICULARLY.
JUDGE DAVILA: I'M SORRY, I INTERRUPTED YOU. GO AHEAD.
JUROR: JUST, LIKE, WHEN IT'S ON THE NEWS AND IN THE BACKGROUND IN PASSING I JUST HEAR, AND MAYBE SOME DISCUSSION WITH FAMILY ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK HAS HAPPENED. BUT NOTHING IN DETAIL.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND HAVE YOU SHARED IN THAT CONVERSATION WITH YOUR FAMILY? AND I'M NOT GOING TO ASK YOU WHAT WAS SAID, BUT DID YOU SHARE YOUR OPINION ABOUT THE CASE AT THAT TIME? OR NOT THE CASE, BUT ABOUT THE NEWS STORY?
JUROR: NO, NOT -- NOT TOO MUCH DISCUSSION. MAINLY THEY WERE ASKING, WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENED? BUT NOT TOO MUCH ON MY SIDE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. YOU'VE TOLD US THAT YOU'RE A BUSY ENGINEER.
JUROR: YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: TELL US ABOUT THAT.
JUROR: OH, MY WORK RIGHT NOW, IT'S PRETTY STRESSFUL. I'M WORKING MAYBE 60 TO 80 HOURS A WEEK AND I'M BARELY KEEPING UP. WHAT I MENTIONED WAS THAT I WAS CONCERNED THAT THE WORKLOAD IS PRETTY HIGH AND I'LL HAVE TROUBLE KIND OF FOCUSSING ON WORK AND WITH FOCUSSING MENTALLY ON THE CASE IS WHAT WAS MY CONCERN.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE A CHALLENGE FOR YOU?
JUROR: YEAH, I THINK SO, BECAUSE SINCE THE CASE IS SO LONG AND THE WORK, I MEAN, IT'S PRETTY HEAVY IN TERMS OF THE HOURS THAT I HAVE TO PUT IN. I DON'T KNOW HOW I WILL BE ABLE TO MANAGE BOTH.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. I THINK YOU NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOUR EMPLOYER AND TELL HIM TO HIRE SOME MORE PEOPLE, DO YOU THINK?
(LAUGHTER.)
JUROR: YEAH, WE'RE PRETTY SHORT STAFFED.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT MIGHT BE A FAST SOLUTION TO THIS. BUT I KNOW YOU TOLD US ABOUT THAT IN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE, THAT YOU HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO. ARE THE PROJECTS THAT YOU ARE WORKING ON NOW THAT HAVE A COMPLETION DATE SOON?
JUROR: NO. IT'S KIND OF JUST STARTING, SO IT WILL GO ON FOR A WHILE. AND I'M ONE OF THE MAIN ONES KIND OF STARTING ON IT, AND THE OPPORTUNITY IS, LIKE, A PRETTY HIGH VISIBLE PROJECT, AND SO IT'S LIKE PRETTY IMPORTANT TO MY WORK AND CAREER IN TERMS OF PROVING MYSELF. SO, YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MR. SCHENK, ANY QUESTIONS?
MR. SCHENK: NO.
MR. DOWNEY: I WANTED TO INQUIRE OF MR. TONG OF THE COWORKER WHO WORKED AT THERANOS, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO --
JUDGE DAVILA: NO, I THINK YOU MENTIONED THAT, MR. TONG. MR. DOWNEY, YOU HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THAT?
MR. DOWNEY: I DO. WHO WAS THE FRIEND WHO HAD A CHILD THAT WORKED AT THERANOS?
JUROR: SO IT WAS A COUPLE COMPANIES AGO THAT I WORKED AT, AND I JUST KNOW THAT THE DAUGHTER WORKED AT THE COMPANY, AND I MIGHT HAVE MET ONCE AT A COMPANY PARTY, BUT I DON'T KNOW HER PERSONALLY WELL.
MR. DOWNEY: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW THE LAST NAME OF YOUR COWORKER?
JUROR: IT'S BEEN, LIKE, A FEW YEARS AGO, SO I DON'T KNOW THE LAST NAME, BUT I HAVE THE FIRST NAME.
MR. DOWNEY: YOU DO RECALL THE FIRST NAME?
JUROR: YEAH.
MR. DOWNEY: AND WHAT WAS THE FIRST NAME?
JUROR: THE FIRST NAME OF THE COWORKER OR THE DAUGHTER?
MR. DOWNEY: THE DAUGHTER.
JUROR: OH, THE DAUGHTER. I DON'T REMEMBER HER NAME.
MR. DOWNEY: HOW ABOUT THE COWORKER?
JUROR: IT'S PHI, P-H-I.
MR. DOWNEY: AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR COWORKER'S DAUGHTER DID AT THERANOS?
JUROR: NO. I JUST KNOW THAT SHE WAS WORKING THERE AT THE TIME.
MR. DOWNEY: OKAY. DID YOU EVER TALK TO YOUR COWORKER ABOUT THERANOS?
JUROR: NO, NOT THAT COWORKER. MAYBE SOME OTHER COWORKER THAT KNEW HER JUST MENTIONED WHEN THIS HAPPENED THAT SHE HAD A DAUGHTER THAT WORKED THERE.
MR. DOWNEY: I THINK YOU SAID YOU MAY HAVE MET YOUR COWORKER'S DAUGHTER ONCE AT A PARTY.
JUROR: A COMPANY EVENT.
MR. DOWNEY: WHEN YOU WERE AT THE PARTY, DID YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THERANOS WITH HER?
JUROR: NO. THIS IS BEFORE EVERYTHING HAPPENED, SO WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING THIS.
MR. DOWNEY: OKAY. WHAT ABOUT ANY WORK AT THERANOS THAT SHE WAS DOING?
JUROR: THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
MR. DOWNEY: THANK YOU, MR. TONG.
JUDGE DAVILA: ANYTHING FURTHER, MR. DOWNEY?
MR. DOWNEY: NO, NOTHING, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU, MR. TONG. THANK YOU. LET'S PASS THE MICROPHONE DOWN THE ROW BEHIND YOU, I THINK. IS THAT MS. GLIK? WHERE DID THE MICROPHONE GO?
JUROR: VANDEKAMP IS MY LAST NAME, 160.
JUDGE DAVILA: I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. YES?
JUROR: ARE WE DISCLOSING THINGS OUTSIDE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE OR JUST THE QUESTIONNAIRE STILL?
JUDGE DAVILA: WELL, MY QUESTION WAS REGARDING EXPOSURE, ANYTHING THAT YOU MAY HAVE SEEN, READ, HEARD.
JUROR: YEAH, FOR SURE.
JUDGE DAVILA: BOTH BEFORE THE QUESTIONNAIRE AND AFTER THE QUESTIONNAIRE.
JUROR: OKAY. COOL. SO BEFORE THE QUESTIONNAIRE, I CONSUMED A LOT OF MEDIA AND I'M PRETTY SURE I HAVE HEARD THE PODCAST ABOUT IT. BUT NOW THAT I SEE THE DEFENDANT, I THINK I HAVE SEEN A MOVIE OR DOCUMENTARY BECAUSE SHE LOOKS FAMILIAR.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WHEN WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN THAT YOU SAW THIS?
JUROR: A WHILE AGO. MAYBE A YEAR AGO, TWO YEARS AGO. I'M NOT SURE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. OKAY. IS THERE -- DO YOU REMEMBER ANY OF THE CONTENT THAT YOU SAW?
JUROR: SOMEWHAT, LIKE, ABOUT THE TESTING AND SUCH. BUT THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THE GENERAL STORY?
JUROR: YEAH, THE GENERAL STORY. I WASN'T THAT INVESTED IN IT, TO BE HONEST.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WAS IT A CABLE NEWS SHOW OR A TELEVISION SHOW? DO YOU RECALL?
JUROR: IT WAS PROBABLY EITHER SOMETHING LIKE ON A STREAMING SERVICE.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE.
JUROR: YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND WHAT ABOUT SUBSEQUENT TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE?
JUROR: I SAW A HEADLINE ON "THE NEW YORK TIMES" THE OTHER DAY ABOUT FEMALE FUNDING IN THE TECH SPACE, BUT I DIDN'T READ IT. I DIDN'T READ THE WHOLE THING.
JUDGE DAVILA: THERE'S A BOOK I THINK CALLED "BAD BLOOD." ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT?
JUROR: WITH THE BOOK?
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: NO, I DIDN'T READ THE BOOK.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU DID NOT READ THE BOOK?
JUROR: HUH-UH.
JUDGE DAVILA: DID YOU SEE A MOVIE OR DOCUMENTARY ABOUT THE BOOK?
JUROR: I THINK IT WAS A PODCAST.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. OKAY. I THINK YOU TOLD US ALSO THAT THE MEDIA THAT YOU CONSUMED ABOUT THIS, AND IT MAY BE THIS, DID YOU SAY THAT IT DID NOT SHOW BOTH SIDES?
JUROR: I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS A TWO-SIDED THING. I FEEL LIKE IT WAS FROM -- IT WAS REALLY JUST COVERAGE ABOUT WHAT WAS HAPPENING. IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE IT HAD ANY OTHER -- LIKE, IT WASN'T LIKE A GOVERNMENT TYPE THING OR FROM THE INVESTOR SIDE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT I DON'T THINK. I DON'T REALLY RECALL TO BE HONEST.
JUDGE DAVILA: I JUST ASKED THAT AND I SAW YOU -- I THINK YOU SAID IT DID NOT, "IT" MEANING THE DOCUMENTARY, THE PODCAST, WHATEVER IT WAS --
JUROR: YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: -- IT DID NOT SHOW BOTH SIDES, AND I WAS CURIOUS WHAT YOU MEANT BY THAT.
JUROR: YEAH, I WAS TRYING TO THINK ABOUT IT AS THE PROSECUTOR AND THE DEFENDANT, AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS A TWO-SIDED THING. IT WAS JUST, LIKE, INFORMATIONAL.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. OKAY. I ALSO WANT TO ASK YOU, I THINK YOU TOLD US THAT YOU HAVE SOME TRAVEL PLANNED?
JUROR: I DO, YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND TELL US ABOUT THAT.
JUROR: I HAVE A WORK TRIP FROM SEPTEMBER 20TH TO THE 28TH.
JUDGE DAVILA: 28TH. OH, OKAY. AND IS THAT INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL?
JUROR: NO. IT'S TO CHICAGO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COULD BE EITHER RESCHEDULED OR THAT YOUR EMPLOYER MIGHT SEND SOMEONE ELSE? I KNOW THERE'S NO ONE ELSE THAT WOULD DO AS GOOD OF A JOB AS YOU --
JUROR: THAT'S RIGHT.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUROR: I'M ACTUALLY THE PERSON IN CHARGE OF THE ENTIRE EVENT.
JUDGE DAVILA: I BEG YOUR PARDON?
JUROR: I'M IN CHARGE OF THE EVENT FOR THE ENTIRE TEAM.
JUDGE DAVILA: OH, YOU'RE RUNNING THE EVENT?
JUROR: YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO YOU WOULD BE CONSPICUOUS IN YOUR ABSENCE?
JUROR: I THINK SO. PARTICULARLY BECAUSE I'M REALLY GOOD AT WHAT I DO.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: DO YOU HAVE ANY DOUBT ABOUT THAT MS. VANDEKAMP?
JUROR: NO DOUBTS.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. VANDEKAMP. I APPRECIATE IT. IS THIS MS. GLIK?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT.
JUROR: SO WHEN I FILLED OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE I WASN'T FAMILIAR WITH ANYTHING, NOT THE TOPIC OR THE NAME. BUT WHEN I CAME BACK HOME I COMPLETED THE QUESTIONS, AND THEN I REMEMBER MY HUSBAND'S MOVIE WAS IN THE MIDDLE ABOUT THE BLOOD TESTS WHICH I MADE THE CONNECTION. I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT IT, JUST PART OF THE MOVIE. I KNOW IT'S ABOUT BLOOD TESTING, LIKE A SMALL BLOOD TESTING, BUT NOTHING ELSE.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU. SO YOU SAW PART OF THE MOVIE?
JUROR: YEAH. MY HUSBAND, BUT NOTHING MUCH I REMEMBER.
JUDGE DAVILA: DO YOU REMEMBER THE TITLE OF THE MOVIE?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND HOW LONG AGO WAS THIS?
JUROR: I DON'T REMEMBER MUCH, SO I GUESS IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO.
JUDGE DAVILA: MORE THAN A YEAR AGO?
JUROR: PERHAPS, YEAH. I JUST --
JUDGE DAVILA: AND DO YOU REMEMBER HOW LONG THE MOVIE WAS OR HOW LONG YOU WATCHED THE MOVIE?
JUROR: NO. I WATCHED JUST A FEW MINUTES. MY HUSBAND GAVE ME SOME MORE DETAILS ABOUT IT, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER THE DETAILS, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. DO YOU REMEMBER OR DO YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE TODAY ABOUT ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE?
JUROR: NO. NOT EXCEPT THAT IT'S ABOUT VERY SMALL BLOOD TEST.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. HAVE YOU TALKED TO ANYBODY ABOUT ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OR HAS ANYBODY TALKED TO YOU?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: HAVE YOU READ ANYTHING ABOUT THIS CASE?
JUROR: NO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MR. SCHENK, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. GLIK?
MR. SCHENK: NO. THANK YOU.
MR. DOWNEY: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MS. GLIK.
JUROR: THANK YOU.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU'RE WELCOME. IS THAT MR. FORSBERG?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: 169.
JUROR: SO SINCE FILLING OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE, THE ONLY EXPOSURE I'VE HAD WAS LAST NIGHT MY HUSBAND HAD THE T.V. ON AND THERE WAS A SHOT OF THE COURT REPORTER, OR THE REPORTER OUTSIDE THE COURT. WE IMMEDIATELY TURNED OFF THE T.V., SO IT JUST FLASHED BY.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. DID YOU SEE ANY -- OR EXCUSE ME. DID YOU HEAR ANY CONTENT?
JUROR: JUST THAT THEY WERE DOING JURY SELECTION TODAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WHAT ABOUT PRE-QUESTIONNAIRE?
JUROR: SO PRE-QUESTIONNAIRE I HAD SEEN THE "60 MINUTES" PIECE, AND ANOTHER PIECE ABOUT THE TESTING THAT WAS POSSIBLE.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND DID YOU SEE THOSE IN THE ENTIRETY?
JUROR: YES, I DID.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND DO YOU RETAIN SOME OF WHAT YOU SAW TODAY?
JUROR: YES, I DID.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE. YOU HAVE THAT IN YOUR MIND TODAY, WHAT YOU SAW?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND YOU'VE HEARD ME TALK, OF COURSE, ALL MORNING HERE ABOUT SEPARATING THINGS IF YOU'RE A JUROR IN THIS CASE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK YOU COULD DO?
JUROR: I BELIEVE, YES, I COULD DO IT. I THINK THAT I'M NOT UNBIASSED, BUT I THINK I'M AWARE OF MY BIASES.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. AND HOW DO YOU -- MAY I ASK YOU, MR. FORSBERG, HOW DO YOU RECONCILE THOSE TWO THINGS, RECOGNIZING YOUR BIASES AND THEN MOVING TO PUT ASIDE THOSE BIASES? HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU -- WHAT TOOLS DO YOU USE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT?
JUROR: I THINK IN THIS APPLICATION IT WOULD BE BASICALLY LISTENING TO THE COURT AND THE DIRECTION THAT THEY HAVE. SO YOU MAY HEAR THINGS OR HAVE TO NOT APPLY THEM, IF YOU WILL.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND YOU KNOW THIS AND I'VE TOLD THIS AND I'VE SAID THIS, THAT THERE WILL BE A COURT ORDER THAT JURORS, JURORS ARE NOT, NOT TO CONSULT ANYTHING OUTSIDE THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE. YOU HAVE HEARD ME TALK ABOUT THE UNIVERSE OF EVIDENCE IN THIS COURTROOM AND THAT FORMS THE BASIS OF A JUROR'S INFORMATION. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DO?
JUROR: ABSOLUTELY, YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND CAN YOU PARSE OUT THE PROGRAMS THAT YOU'VE SEEN AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE SEEN AND NOT ALLOW THAT TO INFECT YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS AS YOU DELIBERATE AS A JUROR AND YOU SEE AND HEAR THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE? CAN YOU DO THAT?
JUROR: I BELIEVE I CAN.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND ANY DOUBT ABOUT THAT?
JUROR: THERE'S A LITTLE DOUBT, YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT. TELL ME ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CANDOR, MR. FORSBERG, I REALLY DO.
JUROR: I THINK JUST -- I THINK THERE WAS SO MUCH POSSIBILITY ATTACHED TO THE PRODUCT THAT WOULD BE DELIVERED, THAT THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO DETACH AND GO BACK TO, THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE COURTROOM AND THIS IS WHAT IS BEING GUIDED, AND TO PUT THE OTHER PERCEPTIONS ASIDE.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. AND THAT'S -- I RECOGNIZE -- YESTERDAY I SAID IT WAS A HERCULEAN TASK TO ACCOMPLISH THAT FOR FOLKS, TO SEPARATE THAT, TO UNRING A BELL, TO UNREAD A BOOK, WHATEVER THAT IS. HOW WOULD YOU ACCOMPLISH THAT OR GO ABOUT DOING THAT?
JUROR: I'M NOT SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. IT WOULD JUST BE TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY TO REALLY JUST FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AND THE GUIDANCE, LIKE WE HAD ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE WHERE IT WAS DON'T GOOGLE IT, DON'T LOOK IT UP, DON'T TALK ABOUT IT. YOU KNOW, SO WHEN IT CAME ON T.V. LAST NIGHT, WE IMMEDIATELY TURNED THE T.V. OFF. SO I THINK JUST FOLLOWING THE GUIDANCE OF THE COURT IS PROBABLY THE BEST ANSWER I HAVE AT THIS TIME.
JUDGE DAVILA: I APPRECIATE THAT. THAT WAS A TOUGH QUESTION. SOMETIMES IN A CASE LIKE THIS, PERHAPS, A JUROR MIGHT SIT HERE AND WILL INFORM US ALL THAT, YOU KNOW, I CAN KEEP THAT OUT OF MY MIND. AND THEN SOMETHING MIGHT COME UP IN THE TRIAL ITSELF, A PIECE OF EVIDENCE, A WITNESS, AND SOMEONE MIGHT SAY, OH, I REMEMBER HEARING ABOUT THAT IN THIS PODCAST, IN THIS MOVIE, AND THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I HEARD, HOW CAN THAT BE? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT SCENARIO?
JUROR: ABSOLUTELY, YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THAT'S OUR CONCERN HERE IS HOW CAN A JUROR, HOW CAN WE ASK A JUROR TO KEEP THAT SEPARATE?
JUROR: I ALSO THINK TIME HAS A BIT OF AN ADVANTAGE. MOST OF THE THINGS THAT I PREVIOUSLY SAW WERE, YOU KNOW, WELL OVER A YEAR AND A HALF AGO.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. OKAY. I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOU HAVE SOME TRAVEL.
JUROR: I DO.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THAT'S FROM THE END OF OCTOBER THROUGH THE SECOND WEEK OF NOVEMBER I BELIEVE.
JUROR: SO THE OCTOBER TRIP CAN BE CANCELLED AND RESCHEDULED, BUT I SENT AN EMAIL ON MONDAY AND I DO HAVE A TRIP SCHEDULED FROM DECEMBER 3RD THROUGH THE 13TH.
JUDGE DAVILA: OH, OKAY.
JUROR: AND WHEN I COUNTED 13 WEEKS, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WAS RIGHT AT THE END OF THE TRIAL SCHEDULE.
JUDGE DAVILA: SO, I'M SORRY. THE OCTOBER TRAVEL?
JUROR: COULD BE RESCHEDULED.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. SCHENK, ANY QUESTIONS?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET'S SEE. WERE THERE OTHER HANDS? OKAY. I SEE.
JUROR: I'M JUROR 165.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: I HAVE A 5-YEAR OLD SON I NEED TO PICK UP FROM SCHOOL AT 12:30, AND THERE'S NO ONE ELSE THAT CAN GO GET HIM. I CAN ONLY GET HIM.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE IT'S NOON NOW. WILL YOU BE ABLE TO RETURN?
JUROR: NO, BECAUSE NO ONE IS ABLE TO PICK HIM UP. I'M THE ONLY ONE THAT CARES FOR HIM.
JUDGE DAVILA: IS THAT EVERY DAY, SIR?
JUROR: YEAH.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THIS IS MR. RAZO; IS THAT RIGHT?
COURT CLERK: YES, JUROR 165.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. WHY DON'T YOU HAND THAT BACK TO YOUR COLLEAGUE. THANK YOU, MR. RAZO. HAVE A SEAT. WHERE DO YOU PICK UP YOUR CHILD?
JUROR: MORGAN HILL.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S A BIT OF A DISTANCE FROM HERE. MR. SCHENK, ANY OBJECTION?
MR. SCHENK: NO OBJECTION.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. RAZO, YOU'RE EXCUSED. DRIVE SAFELY.
JUROR: THANK YOU.
JUROR: MY NAME IS DANIEL HALL, JUROR 167. PRIOR TO FILLING OUT THIS QUESTIONNAIRE, I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THIS CASE WHATSOEVER, NOT THE NAMES OR NOTHING INVOLVED. UP UNTIL THIS LAST WEEKEND, AND EVEN THIS MORNING, I SAW SOME NEWS ARTICLES COMING THROUGH, JUST THE TITLES ON THE FEED AND GOING TO COURT AND THAT KIND OF THING. I DIDN'T CLICK ON THEM. I DIDN'T GO TO THE STORY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO I DON'T HAVE ANY DETAILS ON THE CASE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT IT WAS JUST THEY STARTED COMING THROUGH THE NEWS, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. YOU KNOW, IT MAY BE THAT I CAN'T ORDER PEOPLE TO -- WELL, I CAN ORDER PEOPLE NOT TO READ AND PAY ATTENTION TO THOSE THINGS. I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW TO DO THAT. BUT I'M TOLD THAT YOU CAN TURN THESE NEWS FEEDS OFF. JUST LIKE THAT PHONE THAT IS RINGING, YOU CAN TURN THAT OFF. I'M TOLD THAT THEY CAN TURN PHONES OFF LIKE THAT, SO -- BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE JURORS MIGHT ENGAGE IN, THAT IS, TO TURN OFF THOSE NEWS FEEDS, AND THAT MIGHT BE OF ASSISTANCE. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANYONE ELSE IN THE BACK? WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR NOON RECESS NOW, BUT I'D LIKE TO FINISH THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOU IF I CAN.
JUROR: GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: HI. I'M JUROR 161, RONNIE JACOBSON.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU.
JUROR: AS I PUT IN MY QUESTIONNAIRE, I DIDN'T --
(CELL PHONE RINGING.)
JUROR: THAT WAS NOT MY PHONE.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUROR: I DID NOT KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE CASE. I HEARD NAMES AND THINGS, BUT I DIDN'T REALLY PURSUE READING ANYTHING. SINCE I FILLED OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE, MY COLLEAGUES AT WORK DID KNOW THAT I WAS AT JURY DUTY, SO THEY'VE BEEN TRYING TO GUESS. FORTUNATELY, I'VE BEEN ON ZOOM SO I DIDN'T HAVE TO -- IT WAS EASY TO KIND OF CONCEAL THAT. BUT YESTERDAY WHEN MY FRIEND KNEW I HAD TO COME TODAY, SHE STARTED TEXTING ME LINKS TO THINGS, AND SO I JUST SAW A COUPLE OF HEADLINES ABOUT THE JURY SELECTION THAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO I DIDN'T READ IT AND THAT WAS THE END OF IT.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I WONDER, IS IT ALSO POSSIBLE TO BLOCK PEOPLE FROM TEXTS?
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT MIGHT BE A SOLUTION. THANKS. WELL, YOU SAW THE HEADLINES?
JUROR: IT SAID JURY SELECTION STARTED YESTERDAY WAS THE HEADLINE THAT I SAW, AND THEN I SAW THE CAMERAS DOWNSTAIRS WHEN I GOT HERE TODAY, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THAT'S THE EXTENT OF IT?
JUROR: YES. THE COURT. OKAY. SO IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR, I'LL INSTRUCT YOU THAT YOU'RE NOT TO DISCUSS THE CASE WITH ANYONE. YOU MAY TELL THEM THAT YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR IN A CASE, BUT YOU'RE NOT TO TALK ABOUT THE CASE AT ALL. ARMED WITH THAT, WE CAN GIVE YOU A WRITTEN ORDER IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT IN FRONT OF YOUR FRIEND.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL. BUT THAT MIGHT ASSIST YOU ALSO AS TO ANY COLLEAGUES WHO WANT TO ENGAGE YOU. BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR -- YOU KNOW, YOU AND MS. GONZALEZ ARE TERRIFIC IN DOING THAT AND AVOIDING THAT CONVERSATION. THANK YOU.
JUROR: IS IT POSSIBLE, MAY I ASK A QUESTION, PLEASE?
JUDGE DAVILA: ABSOLUTELY, PLEASE.
JUROR: I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THAT YOU LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT EVERYONE IN HERE IS VACCINATED, BUT IF YOU SAW MY QUESTIONNAIRE, I WROTE SEVERAL TIMES HOW CONCERNED I AM ABOUT BEING IN AN ENCLOSED ROOM. THIS IS THE MOST PEOPLE THAT I'VE BEEN WITH IN A YEAR AND A HALF, AND THE FACT THAT IT HAS HAPPENED TWICE NOW IN TWO WEEKS HAS ME VERY, VERY ANXIOUS, AND SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: -- SO I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE LENGTHS THAT YOU DESCRIBED IN TERMS OF TRYING TO KEEP US SAFE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN BE COMFORTABLE AT ALL. I MEAN, I'VE BEEN IN MY HOUSE AND WORKING FROM HOME. I HAVE A SON WHO IS IN HIGH SCHOOL, AND THANKFULLY HE WAS ABLE TO GO BACK, AND I'M WORRIED AND I JUST --
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. IS YOUR SON VACCINATED?
JUROR: HE IS, YES. WE'RE ALL VACCINATED. AND A COLLEAGUE AT WORK WAS VACCINATED AND SHE AND HER PARENTS BOTH GOT SICK, AND SHE WAS SICK LAST WEEK, AND SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT.
JUROR: SO THREE MONTHS AGO MAYBE I WOULD HAVE FELT A LITTLE BIT BETTER AFTER THE INITIAL WE ALL GOT VACCINATED AND WE SORT OF HAD HOPE. BUT THE LAST, YOU KNOW, SIX WEEKS ARE -- I'M KIND OF SHAKEN, AND I'VE NEVER TRIED TO GET OUT OF JURY DUTY BEFORE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN IT. BUT I'VE NEVER BEEN IN A PANDEMIC BEFORE, AND THE THOUGHT OF HAVING TO BE IN A ROOM LIKE THIS WITH THIS MANY PEOPLE THREE DAYS A WEEK FOR 13 WEEKS, QUITE HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN DO THAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. I EXPECT THAT ONCE WE GET OUR JURY SEATED, CERTAINLY THE NUMBERS ON YOUR SIDE OF THE ROOM I THINK WILL DIMINISH GREATLY. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. BUT THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT WITH ME. ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. WAS THERE ONE MORE INDIVIDUAL? YES, LET'S -- IS THIS MS. CHEN?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES?
JUROR: I PREVIOUSLY WATCHED SOME YOUTUBE VIDEOS ABOUT THIS CASE ABOUT I'D SAY, LIKE, SIX MONTHS AGO, AND I SORT OF FELL DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE BACK THEN. I HAVE A HABIT OF WATCHING A LOT OF DOCUMENTARIES, AND I BELIEVE THAT I WATCHED EITHER THE "20/20" OR THE "60 MINUTES" DOCUMENTARY ON IT, AND SO I'M SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR WITH THE CASE. I DO HAPPEN TO REMEMBER THE DETAILS ABOUT SORT OF WHAT HAPPENED, AND ALSO THE FIRST VIDEO THAT I WATCHED, SPECIFICALLY THE PERSON WAS A BIT MORE OPINIONATED AND NOT LINKED TO ANY JOURNAL NATIONALISM, AND SO THEY WERE PURELY STATING OPINIONS EXPLICITLY STATING THAT --
JUDGE DAVILA: PARDON ME FOR INTERRUPTING YOU, FIRST OF ALL. SO WAS IT A "20/20" THAT YOU SAW, I THINK? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID?
JUROR: I'M NOT TOO SURE. I TEND TO WATCH THINGS, EVERYTHING ON TIMES 2. SO I WATCH A LOT OF VIDEOS. IT WAS EITHER A "20/20" DOCUMENTARY OR "60 MINUTES." I DON'T REALLY LOOK AT THE TITLES OF VIDEOS SOMETIMES.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. LET ME ASK YOU TO PASS THE MICROPHONE TO I THINK IT'S THE LAST PERSON THERE. IT'S JUST BEHIND YOU THERE. OH, THERE'S MORE THAN --
JUROR: I'M JUROR 164.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES, MS. QUINTANILLA?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. THANK YOU.
JUROR: AFTER THE QUESTIONNAIRE, I TRY NOT TO TALK TO ANYBODY, INCLUDING MY FAMILY. BUT LAST NIGHT MY HUSBAND WAS WATCHING THE EVENING NEWS AND THE JURY SELECTION COMMENT CAME ACROSS. AND MY SON DID ASK ME, MOM, BY ANY CHANCE IS THIS CASE THE ONE THAT YOU'RE POTENTIALLY IN THE JURY? AND I SAID I COULD NOT DISCLOSE THAT, AND I KNOW IT WOULD BE VERY DISRESPECTFUL IF I WERE TO TELL THEM THAT I'M PART OF THIS CASE. PRIOR TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE I DID WATCH -- I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS A T.V. SHOW OR A DOCUMENTARY, BUT IT WAS YEARS AGO AND IT WAS REGARDING THE CASE. AND I DIDN'T REALIZE UNTIL I WAS ANSWERING THE QUESTIONNAIRE THAT I ALREADY HAD, LIKE, A LITTLE BIT OF A -- NOT A LITTLE BIT, BUT I ALREADY HAD BEEN TO AN EXTENT EXPOSED, BUT I DIDN'T REMEMBER THE NAMES OR THE COMPANY, BUT I REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS ABOUT AND IT WAS ABOUT TESTING.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
JUROR: I THINK I CAN FOLLOW DIRECTIONS AND BE FAIR AND BE OBJECTIVE FOR THE ENTIRE PROCESS.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MS. QUINTANILLA, I ALSO SEE THAT YOU'RE TRAVELLING --
JUROR: I'M TRAVELLING --
JUDGE DAVILA: -- THIS WEEKEND.
JUROR: -- TOMORROW AND COMING BACK THIS WEEKEND, AND THAT'S THE ONLY TRAVELLING I WILL BE DOING PLANNED AS OF NOW.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AND THERE WAS ONE OTHER PERSON I THINK. IS THAT MS. DOMINGUEZ?
JUROR: YES, IT IS, 211.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. THANK YOU.
JUROR: SAME AS HER. CAN YOU HEAR ME?
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: PRIOR TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE I DID KNOW ABOUT THE CASE, BUT I DIDN'T REMEMBER WHEN I WAS FILLING OUT THE QUESTIONNAIRE, BUT I DID SEE IT AGAIN LAST NIGHT ON THE NEWS.
JUDGE DAVILA: WHAT DID YOU SEE ON THE NEWS?
JUROR: JURY SELECTION STARTED YESTERDAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE?
JUROR: I'M GOING ON VACATION TOMORROW AND COMING BACK THE 10TH, AND I DON'T THINK I STATED THAT ON THERE.
JUDGE DAVILA: NO, I DON'T THINK YOU DID. AND IS THIS -- IS THIS TRAVEL OF A GREAT DISTANCE?
JUROR: NOT A GREAT DISTANCE.
JUDGE DAVILA: IS THIS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RESCHEDULED?
JUROR: NO. I WORK FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR 21 YEARS AND I --
JUDGE DAVILA: SANTA CLARA SUPERIOR COURT?
JUROR: SANTA CLARA.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: AND EVERY YEAR WE HAVE TO PUT IN OUR BIDS AND SO I PUT IT IN LAST YEAR.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU KNOW, I HAVE SOME FAMILIARITY WITH THAT, I THINK.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: I RECALL THAT THE CLERKS OF THE COURT, YOU DO HAVE A BIDDING PROCESS THAT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH.
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND THEN WHOEVER IT IS APPROVES IT AND THAT'S WHAT YOU GET.
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND IF YOU DON'T USE IT, YOU LOSE IT, I GUESS, IF YOU'LL PARDON ME FOR PUTTING IT THAT WAY. IS THAT RIGHT?
JUROR: WE DON'T LOSE THE HOURS. WE DON'T LOSE THE HOURS.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. BUT YOU HAVE TO TRADE WITH SOMEONE IF YOU MISS THAT DAY? IS THAT HOW IT WORKS?
JUROR: YES.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT.
JUROR: AND IT IS ALREADY TOMORROW.
JUDGE DAVILA: IT IS TOMORROW. OKAY. THANK YOU.
(LAUGHTER.)
JUDGE DAVILA: ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. DOMINGUEZ?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU, MS. DOMINGUEZ: LET ME --
JUROR: HI, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: I'M SORRY.
JUROR: I'M IN THE BACK CORNER. 220.
JUDGE DAVILA: OH, THAT'S MR. WAXMAN. THERE WE ARE.
JUROR: HERE I AM.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES.
JUROR: SO BY NATURE OF MY PROFESSION AND MY EDUCATION, MEDIA IS SOMETHING THAT I CONSUME VORACIOUSLY, SO I'VE BEEN READING, WATCHING PARTICULARLY BUSINESS NEWS AND PARTICULARLY SILICON VALLEY NEWS FOR MOST OF MY CAREER, AND I'VE READ ARTICLES MOSTLY CONTEMPORANEOUSLY AS THE COMPANY WAS ANNOUNCED AND SUCCESSFUL. AND THEN AFTER THAT I'M NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE DOCUMENTARY KINDS OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED AFTERWARDS. BUT I WAS VERY FAMILIAR DURING THE TIME. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ARTICLES THAT I READ, INCLUDING BECAUSE I HAVE -- I ALSO ADVISE A LOT OF EARLY START-UP COMPANIES AND WORK WITH INVESTORS AND V.C.'S. IT WAS KIND OF A CONVERSATIONAL, I DON'T KNOW, CONTACT PARTY CONVERSATION, IF YOU WILL, FOR QUITE SOME TIME DURING THE TIME THAT IT ACTUALLY REALLY HAPPENED, NOT RECENTLY. YEAH, SO I HAVE A CONSIDERABLE BOTH AMOUNT OF INFORMATION AND PRECONCEIVED OPINION ON THE SUBJECT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. NOW, TELL US WHAT YOU CAN DO TO PUT ALL OF THAT ASIDE IF YOU'RE SEATED AS A JUROR IN THIS CASE AND TO DECIDE THE CASE ONLY ON THE EVIDENCE IN THIS COURTROOM? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DO, MR. WAXMAN?
JUROR: AND THAT'S A REALLY HARD QUESTION AND I THOUGHT ABOUT THAT AND THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT I FIND CONFLICTING FOR ME. ONE IS THAT I DO THINK I'M A VERY OBJECTIVE PERSON. I DO THINK THAT I CAN LOOK AT INFORMATION OBJECTIVELY AND MAKE THAT KIND OF A DECISION. BUT I'LL ALSO SAY THAT HAD SOMEONE IN THIS COURTROOM WALKED UP TO ME A WEEK AGO AND, KNOWING WHAT THIS WAS ABOUT, AND ASKED, HEY, DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS, I WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY UNAMBIGUOUS ON MY OPINION ON THE SUBJECT BECAUSE IT'S STRONG. SO I'M A HUMAN BEING. I CAN DO MY BEST TO BE OBJECTIVE, BUT I HAVE A STRONG OPINION.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. LET'S PASS THE MICROPHONE UP. I THINK MS. COMILANG WANTS TO BE HEARD, SO LET'S GET THAT TO HER, AND THEN WE'LL END WITH MR. CHATHAM, YES. THIS IS JUROR NUMBER 124, MS. COMILANG.
JUROR: IT'S NOT RELATED TO THE IMMEDIATE, BUT I HAVE TO PICK UP MY TWO DAUGHTERS TODAY AT 1:00 AND 1:30. IF I COULD BE EXCUSED?
JUDGE DAVILA: AND IS THIS EVERY DAY YOU PICK THEM UP?
JUROR: YEAH, EVERY WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO ARRANGE FOR OTHER TRANSPORTATION FOR THEM SINCE YOU WERE SUMMONED FOR JURY SERVICE?
JUROR: THERE'S NOBODY WHO CAN PICK UP MY KIDS, BECAUSE MY HUSBAND HAS TO GO TO WORK UNTIL 3:00 O'CLOCK OR 2:30, 2:30, 3:00, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: AND WHERE DO YOU PICK THEM UP?
JUROR: I PICK THEM UP AT PIEDMONT HIGH SCHOOL AND MIDDLE SCHOOL.
JUDGE DAVILA: PIEDMONT. AND DO YOU PICK THEM UP OR TAKE THEM HOME?
JUROR: YEAH, I HAVE TO PICK THEM UP AND TAKE THEM HOME.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND HOW OLD ARE YOUR CHILDREN? WHAT ARE THEIR AGES?
JUROR: THEY ARE 11 AND 15, AND I HAVE ONE UNVACCINATED, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT. ANY QUESTIONS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. PLEASE HAND THAT TO MR. CHATHAM.
JUROR: I NEGLECTED TO PUT IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT SOME PLANNED TRIPS, AND SINCE YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT THAT, I THOUGHT I WOULD BRING IT UP.
JUDGE DAVILA: WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO KNOW?
JUROR: WE HAVE THE FIRST VACATION PLANNED IN TWO YEARS TO GO TO EUROPE TO SEE MY DAUGHTER FOR, LIKE, EIGHT DAYS AT THE END OF -- OR AT THE BEGINNING OF -- END OF OCTOBER, BEGINNING OF NOVEMBER, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY PAID FOR THE HOTEL AND THE FLIGHT, SO --
JUDGE DAVILA: TELL ME THOSE DATES AGAIN.
JUROR: THAT WOULD BE -- WE'RE LEAVING SUNDAY, THE 24TH OF OCTOBER, AND WE'RE RETURNING ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2ND.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE?
JUROR: THERE IS A SHORTER TRIP COMING UP. MY MOTHER-IN-LAW'S 90TH BIRTHDAY IS COMING UP AND WE ARE GOING DOWN TO SAN DIEGO, JUST DRIVING. I CAN MAKE SOME ARRANGEMENTS FOR THAT, BUT THAT'S THE 1ST THROUGH THE 5TH OF OCTOBER.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME KNOW THAT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'VE KEPT YOU PAST THE NOON HOUR, SO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR LUNCH BREAK NOW, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. I REALIZE I TOOK A LOT OF TIME. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO KNOW AND THESE LAWYERS TO KNOW THIS INFORMATION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, SPECIFICALLY INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE HAD ABOUT THE ISSUES IN THIS CASE AND WHAT TO DO WITH THEM. LET'S -- CAN WE HAVE -- I'D LIKE TO GET STARTED -- IF WE CAN -- MS. KRATZMANN, DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE OUR JURORS UP HERE BY 1:40? IS THAT POSSIBLE?
COURT CLERK: YES, YOUR HONOR. IF THEY COULD COLLECT AND RETURN FROM LUNCH NO LATER THAN 1:15.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. SO WE HOPE WE CAN SEAT EVERYONE AND START BY A QUARTER TO THE HOUR. SO LET'S TRY, AND LET'S SHOOT FOR THAT, FOLKS. AND LET ME TELL YOU, DURING YOUR BREAK YOU'RE NOT TO DISCUSS THE CASE WITH ANYONE. YOU'RE NOT TO READ, LISTEN TO, OBSERVE ANY NEWS STORIES, RADIO PROGRAMS ABOUT THIS CASE. YOU'RE NOT TO DISCUSS IT AMONGST YOURSELVES IN ANY WAY AT ALL. AND THAT WILL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL YOU'RE RELEASED OR OTHERWISE EXCUSED. ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTION ABOUT THAT? I SEE NO HANDS.
JUROR: DO WE COME TO THE DOOR?
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU'LL COLLECT YOURSELVES DOWNSTAIRS ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN THE JURY ASSEMBLY ROOM IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
JUROR: TIME?
COURT CLERK: IF YOU COULD RETURN TO THE JURY ROOM NO LATER THAN 1:20, AND THEN YOU WILL GET WORD TO COME UP. DO NOT COME UP DIRECTLY HERE. HOPEFULLY -- IT TAKES TIME TO GET THROUGH THE ELEVATORS, AND WE CAN SEAT YOU BY 1:40.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU, FOLKS. HAVE A GOOD LUNCH. COUNSEL, IF YOU COULD REMAIN, PLEASE.
(PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL OUT AT 12:17 P.M.)
JUDGE DAVILA: PLEASE BE SEATED. I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT OUR JURY -- OUR PROSPECTIVE PANEL HAS LEFT THE ROOM. ALL COUNSEL ARE PRESENT. MS. HOLMES IS PRESENT. I WANTED TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE JURORS HERE AND GO OVER WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE. JUROR NUMBER 32, MR. NGO, AND JUROR NUMBER 102, MR. GOLDBERG, COME TO MIND FIRST.
MR. SCHENK: YOUR HONOR, MR. NGO IS 172.
JUDGE DAVILA: YOU'RE RIGHT. THANK YOU. IT'S 172. ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THIS JUROR? HE INDICATED HE DROPS OFF HIS KIDS AND WIFE DAILY. HE TAKES HIS WIFE I THINK AT 8:00 A.M. AND HIS CHILDREN AT NOON.
MR. SCHENK: NO OBJECTION.
MR. DOWNEY: AND NO OBJECTION AS TO THIS JUROR. AND AS TO MR. GOLDBERG, LET US TALK AT LUNCH AND I CAN LET YOUR HONOR KNOW BEFORE THE JURY RETURNS.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY.
COURT CLERK: OKAY. I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. CAN I GET CLARIFICATION OF THE JUROR THAT WAS JUST EXCUSED?
JUDGE DAVILA: 172, MR. NGO, AND HE'S EXCUSED FOR HARDSHIP. AND THEN 102 IS MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. SCHENK: WE BELIEVE HE SHOULD BE EXCUSED FOR CAUSE.
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, LET US TALK. HE DOES SEEM TO HAVE A DIFFICULT SITUATION, SO WE'LL --
JUDGE DAVILA: IT DOES TO ME, TOO. I'M INCLINED TO DO THAT. I DON'T WANT TO DISCOURAGE YOUR CONVERSATION, BUT HE TRAVELS FOR HIS FATHER. HE TOLD US ABOUT READING SOME ARTICLES AND KNOWING A WITNESS, THAT TYPE OF THING. BUT I'M INCLINED TO EXCUSE HIM FOR CAUSE JUST BASED ON THE HEALTH ISSUE OF HIS FATHER.
MR. DOWNEY: I UNDERSTAND, YOUR HONOR. IF YOU DO SO, THAT'S FINE.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. LET'S EXCUSE JUROR NUMBER 102, MR. GOLDBERG, FOR HARDSHIP. LET ME DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO JUROR 116. THAT'S MS. NELSON. MY QUESTION ABOUT MS. NELSON WAS HER COMMENTS ABOUT HER HUSBAND BEING A SCIENTIST AND IN THE FIELD AND HER COMMENTS ABOUT THAT. WE KNOW SHE'S AN ATTORNEY. SHE DEALS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ISSUES. BUT WHAT I'M MORE INTERESTED IN AND CONCERNED ABOUT IS HER CONTACT WITH HER HUSBAND. MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: YOUR HONOR, I WROTE DOWN THAT SHE SAID THAT HER HUSBAND'S OPINIONS ON THE SCIENCE WOULD WEIGH ON HER, AND I THINK THAT EXCUSING HER FOR CAUSE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
MR. DOWNEY: WE AGREE, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. WE'LL EXCUSE JUROR NUMBER 116 FOR CAUSE. THE COURT FINDS THAT SHE WAS VERY CANDID ABOUT THE INFLUENCE THAT HER HUSBAND'S OPINIONS WOULD HAVE ON HER. JUROR NUMBER 13 -- EXCUSE ME -- 122, MS. PARODI, I THINK SHE EXPRESSED CHILDCARE ISSUES. I WROTE IN MY NOTES FINANCIAL. MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: I HAVE THE SAME THING IN MY NOTES ALSO, COVID AND CHILDCARE CONCERNS, AND THEN AGAIN CHILDCARE CONCERNS BECAUSE SHE WAS THE PRIMARY CAREGIVER. NO OBJECTION TO HARDSHIP.
MR. DOWNEY: SHE APPEARED TO HAVE NO SUBSTITUTE TO TAKE CARE OF THE CHILDREN, SO WE AGREE THAT'S A HARDSHIP. I THINK SHE ALSO INDICATED THAT SHE HAD A TRIP.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. MORE IMPORTANTLY, SHE HAS A PRECOCIOUS 16-YEAR-OLD SON THAT REQUIRES SOME ATTENTION, SO WE'LL EXCUSE MS. PARODI FOR HARDSHIP. THAT BRINGS ME TO 160, MS. VANDEKAMP. SHE SAW THE DOCUMENTARY. SHE SHARED WITH US HER VIEWS ON THAT. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, SHE'S TRAVELLING TO CHICAGO, AND SHE TOLD US THAT HER PRESENCE IS REQUIRED THERE FROM SEPTEMBER 20TH TO THE 28TH I THINK SHE TOLD US.
MR. SCHENK: NO OBJECTION TO HARDSHIP.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE'LL EXCUSE JUROR NUMBER 160, MS. VANDEKAMP. MS. COMILANG, JUROR NUMBER 124, DID WE EXCUSE HER?
COURT CLERK: NOT YET, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: SHE HAS CHILDCARE ISSUES THAT SHE TOLD US ABOUT FROM PIEDMONT HIGH SCHOOL, I THINK. MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO OBJECTION TO HARDSHIP, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. I'LL EXCUSE MS. COMILANG. I WANT TO ASK YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT REMAINING JURORS. AND 159, CHAN. MS. CHAN TALKED ABOUT GOING DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE, I THINK SHE PHRASED IT, OF INTERNET SEARCHES. I CANDIDLY CUT HER OFF BEFORE SHE BEGAN I THINK ELABORATING ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SHE HAD SEEN. I'M HAPPY TO RECEIVE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT HER NOW IF YOU HAVE ANY, WHETHER OR NOT THIS MIGHT BE SOMEONE THAT WE CAN CALL UP IN ADVANCE OF THE OTHER JURORS AND HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH.
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, I DIDN'T REQUEST THAT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. I ACTUALLY THOUGHT HER STATEMENTS WERE SUFFICIENT AS TO WHERE WE WERE TO DISMISS HER ON THE GROUNDS OF BIAS, BUT IF THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T OPPOSE WE MAY NOT NEED TO HAVE HER BACK.
JUDGE DAVILA: WELL, BASED ON MY OBSERVATIONS AND ALSO ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE THAT SHE FILED. MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: WE WOULD AGREE TO DISMISS HER NOW FOR BIAS. FOR QUESTION 39 ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE, SHE PUT YES, AND I THINK HER STATEMENT IN COURT CONFIRMED HER ANSWERS IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE.
JUDGE DAVILA: THAT'S WHAT I WAS FOCUSSED ON, MR. SCHENK. WE'LL EXCUSE JUROR 159 FOR CAUSE. JUROR 164 IS MS. QUINTANILLA. I MADE A NOTE TO MYSELF WITH A QUESTION MARK FOR PRIVATE. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S NECESSARY, THOUGH. SHE SEEMED TO -- SHE TOLD US THAT SHE COULD FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS AND BE FAIR AND OBJECTIVE.
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, MY QUESTION ABOUT THIS WITNESS WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING IN HER QUESTIONNAIRE, WHICH THIS JUROR, SHE WAS NOT ASKED ABOUT AND DIDN'T SEEM TO BE AN ISSUE, BUT SHE HAD CITED A HARDSHIP SITUATION IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE AS TO A POTENTIAL LOSS OF INCOME. I GATHER EITHER THAT'S BEEN RESOLVED OR SHE'S WAITING TO SHARE THAT WITH US, BUT I THINK THERE'S A HARDSHIP ISSUE WITH RESPECT TO HER. I DON'T THINK, WITH REGARD TO THE BIAS INQUIRY, FRANKLY, THAT IT WAS A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR DISMISSAL.
MR. SCHENK: AGREED. NO BASIS TO DISMISS HER YET.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. THANK YOU. JUROR 211, MS. DOMINGUEZ. WAS IT MS. DOMINGUEZ WHO TOLD US ABOUT HER VACATION SITUATION?
MR. SCHENK: YES.
MR. DOWNEY: YES, SHE'S LEAVING TOMORROW.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SHE'LL WELCOME THAT NEWS. SO WE'LL EXCUSE MS. DOMINGUEZ FOR HARDSHIP. 220 IS MR. WAXMAN, AND I DID -- OWING TO THE HOUR, I DID SOMEWHAT STOP OUR CONVERSATION.
MR. SCHENK: THE GOVERNMENT AGREES TO EXCUSE HIM FOR CAUSE FOR BIAS.
MR. DOWNEY: AGREED, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. 220, MR. WAXMAN, WILL BE EXCUSED. THAT BRINGS ME TO MR. CHATHAM WHO HAS THESE TRAVEL PLANS. ANY COMMENT ABOUT MR. CHATHAM?
MR. SCHENK: I BELIEVE THE TRAVEL WAS OCTOBER 3RD THROUGH THE 12TH, AND THERE WAS ALSO SOME OTHER TRAVEL. WE AGREE TO EXCUSE HIM FOR HARDSHIP.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION TO THAT.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE'LL EXCUSE JUROR -- MR. CHATHAM. HE'S JUROR NUMBER -- NO, I DON'T HAVE HIS NUMBER.
COURT CLERK: HE'S 62, YOUR HONOR, SEATED IN A.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. HE'S EXCUSED. THE ONLY JUROR NUMBER I HAVE LEFT IS 169, MR. FORSBERG. ANY COMMENT ON MR. FORSBERG?
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, MR. FORSBERG INDICATED THAT HE WOULD TRY TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY, BUT THAT HE HAS DOUBT ABOUT SEPARATING OUT HIS PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND FORMING HIS JUDGMENT IN THE CASE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S A STATEMENT OF SUFFICIENT IMPARTIALITY TO QUALIFY AS A JUROR, SO I THINK HE SHOULD BE DISMISSED FOR BIAS.
MR. SCHENK: YOUR HONOR, HE ALSO WROTE THAT HE HOPES NOT FOR QUESTION 39. HE DIDN'T WRITE JUST NO. HE WROTE, HOPES NOT. SO I AGREE WITH COUNSEL THAT HIS STATEMENT WASN'T CERTAIN ENOUGH.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. I NOTED THAT AS WELL, AND WE'LL EXCUSE MR. FORSBERG, JUROR NUMBER 169, FOR CAUSE. I SAID THAT WAS THE LAST ONE. I HAD FOR SOME REASON CIRCLED JUROR NUMBER 112, MR. DENT.
MR. SCHENK: YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD NOT OBJECT TO DISMISSING MR. DENT ALSO FOR BIAS. HE SAID HE DID NOT KNOW IF HE COULD HONESTLY SAY THAT HE COULD BE UNBIASSED.
MR. DOWNEY: I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE RETIRED NURSE, AND SHE DID MAKE THAT ADMISSION.
JUDGE DAVILA: MS. DENT.
MR. SCHENK: MS. DENT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. AND SHE WAS VERY CANDID WITH US ABOUT THAT AND I APPRECIATE HER CANDOR. THOSE ARE ALL OF THE JURORS THAT I --
COURT CLERK: SO 112 WILL BE?
JUDGE DAVILA: SHE'S EXCUSED FOR CAUSE. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE TAKE OUR LUNCH BREAK NOW?
MR. DOWNEY: NO. IF YOUR HONOR PREFERS AT SOME POINT BEFORE THE BREAK, WE CAN LET YOUR HONOR KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY CAUSE CHALLENGES THAT WE SEE FROM WHAT WE'VE HEARD. BUT IF YOUR HONOR WOULD JUST PREFER TO DO THAT AT THE END, THAT'S FINE WITH US, TOO.
JUDGE DAVILA: OKAY. WELL, LET'S DO THAT. I'D LIKE TO -- AS YOU CAN SEE, I'D LIKE TO GET -- I'D LIKE TO HAVE YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK WITH THE PANEL AS WELL, AND THEN HOPEFULLY WE CAN -- AS I SAID YESTERDAY, I THINK WE MAY HAVE, WE MAY HAVE A COLLECTIVE NUMBER SUFFICIENT SUCH THAT YOU CAN BEGIN ANY PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES, STRIKES THAT YOU HAVE, AND WE CAN START THAT PROCESS TODAY. I HOPE WE CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT. IF WE DO, THEN THE NEXT QUESTION -- IF WE DO SELECT A JURY AND ALTERNATES TODAY -- AND I DON'T MEAN TO GET AHEAD OF MYSELF -- SHOULD WE INVITE THOSE FOLKS IN, IF POSSIBLE, TOMORROW TO SWEAR THEM IN? SHOULD WE WAIT UNTIL NEXT WEEK AFTER THE HOLIDAY TO SWEAR THEM IN? AND THAT'S THE NEXT QUESTION THAT WE'LL ADVANCE, AND I JUST WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT THAT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. HAVE A GOOD LUNCH.
MR. SCHENK: THANK YOU.
MR. LEACH: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: WE'LL SEE YOU BACK SOON. THANK YOU.
(LUNCH RECESS TAKEN AT 12:33 P.M.) AFTERNOON SESSION
(PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL OUT AT 1:42 P.M.)
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. WE'RE BACK ON THE RECORD. ALL PARTIES PREVIOUSLY PRESENT ARE PRESENT ONCE AGAIN. OUR JURORS ARE NOT PRESENT. I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT -- AND I APOLOGIZE I FORGOT TO RAISE TWO JURORS. NUMBER 161, MS. JACOBSON, SHE EXPRESSED AT THE BREAK SOME COVID CONCERNS, I'LL CALL THEM; AND JUROR NUMBER 147, MR. TONG, WHO TALKED TO US ABOUT HIS WORK SCHEDULE. ANYTHING ABOUT -- LET'S START WITH MS. JACOBSON. MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: NO OBJECTION TO DISMISSING MS. JACOBSON.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. WE'LL EXCUSE JUROR 161, MS. JACOBSON, FOR HARDSHIP. AND THEN MR. TONG, 147?
MR. SCHENK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK HE'S A HARDER CALL. ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE HE WROTE THAT HE WASN'T SURE. FOR QUESTION 39 HE EXPRESSED SOME BIAS. IN COURT HE DESCRIBED A SUBCONSCIOUS BIAS, I THINK HE CALLED IT, AND A CONCERN WHETHER HE COULD PUT THAT ASIDE, AND THEN EXPRESSED -- SO I'M NOT SURE THAT HE NEEDS TO BE EXCUSED FOR CAUSE AT THIS POINT. HE ALSO TALKED ABOUT AN IMPORTANT PROJECT AT WORK. I THINK HE WORKS AT APPLE IF MY NOTES ARE CORRECT ON THAT. APPLE TAKES ADVANTAGE OF THE COURT, LIKE EVERY OTHER COMPANY HERE, AND I'M RETICENT TO EXCUSE A JUROR BECAUSE OF WORK DEMANDS WHEN WE KNOW THE WORK WILL PAY FOR THEIR TIME AS JURY SERVICE. I DON'T KNOW THAT HIS WORK DEMANDS ARE ENOUGH OF AN EXCUSE FOR HIM TO NOT APPEAR FOR SERVICE AT THIS TIME.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU.
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, I THINK AS TO THE HARDSHIP INQUIRY, I THINK THE CONCERN HE RAISED WAS HIS ABILITY TO FOCUS HERE AS A RESULT OF THE WORK DEMANDS. I DON'T THINK HE WAS RAISING AN INCOME ISSUE. I THINK HE INDICATED HE WOULD BE UNABLE TO FOCUS AND CONCENTRATE ON THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS COMING IN. WITH REGARD TO BIAS, I'M NOT SURE HE HAD A SUFFICIENT REHABILITATION TO SIT ON THE JURY. HE BEGAN TO SAY HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT BIAS IN RESPONSE TO QUESTION 39. HE AGAIN STATED TODAY THE PROBABILITY OF BIAS. I DON'T THINK HE DEFINITIVELY SAID HE COULD PUT BIAS ASIDE. SO I THINK THIS JUROR SHOULD BE EXCUSED FOR BOTH REASONS, BUT IF THERE'S A DISPUTE ABOUT HARDSHIP, I THINK HE CERTAINLY SHOULD BE DISMISSED ON CAUSE GROUNDS.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT HIS -- AND MR. SCHENK, MAYBE YOU CAN HELP ME -- HIS LAST COMMENT WAS THE FOCUSSED ONE ABOUT WORK, I'M NOT SURE I COULD FOCUS, THAT TYPE OF THING. THAT'S WHY I CALLED HIM TO OUR ATTENTION.
MR. SCHENK: YES. I ALSO HAVE HIM IN MY NOTES THAT HE DESCRIBED THIS PROJECT AS BEING IMPORTANT TO HIS CAREER. I RESPECT THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT HE'S GOING TO BE THINKING ABOUT HIS WORK DEMANDS WHEN HE'S IN COURT. IT'S NOT A SHORT TRIAL, SO IT'S REASONABLE TO THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME MEASURE OF A TRADEOFF FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS AT WORK DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME. THE GOVERNMENT DEFERS TO THE COURT. I THINK THE RECORD IS THIN, BUT SUFFICIENT.
JUDGE DAVILA: THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT APPLE IS A HEAVY COURT USER. THEY'RE IN OUR COURTS WITH GREAT FREQUENCY. WE RESPECT THE FACT THAT THEY DO PAY, UNLIKE MANY OTHER LARGE COMPANIES WHO ARE FREQUENT COURT USERS THAT DO NOT PAY THEIR EMPLOYEES FOR JURY SERVICE. I BELIVE APPLE IS ONE THAT DOES, AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT. MY CONCERN WAS HIS LACK OF FOCUS AND WHETHER OR NOT HIS LOYALTIES WOULD BE TORN FROM HIS CAREER TO HIS OBLIGATIONS AS A JUROR. I'M GOING TO -- THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP ON THIS, BOTH SIDES. I'M GOING TO EXCUSE JUROR NUMBER 147, MR. TONG, FOR CAUSE. I THINK THAT'S ALL I NEED TO DO. WE CAN CALL UP OUR JURORS NOW. ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE DO THAT?
MR. DOWNEY: YOUR HONOR, ONLY THAT THERE WERE FIVE OTHER JURORS WHO, IN THEIR QUESTIONNAIRES, IDENTIFIED HARDSHIP ISSUES OR EXPLICITLY ASKED TO BE EXCUSED IN RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1. I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR HONOR WANTS TO INQUIRE. I THINK I LIKELY WILL IF YOUR HONOR DOESN'T.
JUDGE DAVILA: WHAT NUMBERS ARE YOU REFERRING TO?
MR. DOWNEY: I HAVE THAT AS 117, 121, 142, 143, AND 145. AND THERE'S A VARIETY OF ISSUES WITHIN THOSE.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. SCHENK, GO AHEAD AND FINISH YOUR CONVERSATION IF YOU'D LIKE.
(DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD.)
MR. SCHENK: I THINK ALSO MAYBE 127 IF MY NOTES ARE CORRECT.
MR. DOWNEY: I THINK THAT'S RIGHT, YOUR HONOR, NOW THAT I ACTUALLY LOOK AT MY NOTES. I THINK HE ASKED TO BE EXCUSED ON THE BASIS OF INCOME, LOSS OF INCOME.
MR. SCHENK: I DON'T HAVE AN OPINION ON WHETHER MR. DOWNEY DOES IT OR THE COURT DOES IT, OR IF THE COURT, INSTEAD OF INDIVIDUALLY ASKING, AS ONE OF ITS QUESTIONS ASKED IF THERE ARE JURORS WHO HAVE OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT THE IMPLICATION THAT JURY SERVICE WOULD HAVE ON THEIR LIFE, NOW IS THE TIME TO RAISE THAT. I THINK THAT ALSO WOULD BE SUFFICIENT.
JUDGE DAVILA: I SEE -- THANK YOU. I SEE 127 WAS ACTUALLY SOMEBODY WHO WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY, OR AT LEAST I THINK HE WAS FORWARDED BY THE COURT. HE'S A GENTLEMAN WHO I THINK HE'S 63 YEARS YOUNG AND DRIVES A DELIVERY TRUCK IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. HE EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS ABOUT FINANCES IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE, AND THAT'S WHY I FORWARDED HIM FOR OUR ATTENTION. I AM GOING TO STRIKE HIM FOR HARDSHIP NOW, 127. 127. IT'S MR. BREKKE.
COURT CLERK: HE IS IN SEAT N, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: I'M SORRY?
COURT CLERK: HE'S IN SEAT N.
JUDGE DAVILA: YES. SO HE NEED NOT COME UP. 142 I NOTED AS A FULL-TIME STUDENT, KINESIOLOGY, I THINK.
MR. SCHENK: YOUR HONOR, THIS INDIVIDUAL ALSO WORKS AT SAFEWAY, AND SAFEWAY IS A VICTIM IN THE CASE AND WE WERE GOING TO RAISE IT FOR THAT REASON AS WELL.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT. MR. DOWNEY?
MR. DOWNEY: WE AGREE, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE'LL EXCUSE JUROR NUMBER 142, 142. IS THAT SEAT U, I BELIEVE?
COURT CLERK: YES, YOUR HONOR, SEAT U.
JUDGE DAVILA: JUROR NUMBER 143 EXPRESSED, IN ANSWER TO QUESTION 1, THERE WAS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR HER. I BELIEVE SHE'S A TEACHER, PART-TIME TEACHER. SHE SAYS THERE'S NO SUBSTITUTE FOR HER. SHE INDICATES THAT SHE DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE CASE AS MY NOTES REFLECT, BUT SHE HAS A HEALTH CONDITION ALSO THAT SHE SUGGESTS MIGHT REQUIRE SOME ATTENTION. I THINK IN ANSWER TO QUESTION 1, SHE DID TALK ABOUT THERE BEING NO SUBSTITUTE FOR HER.
MR. SCHENK: IT WOULD BE THE GOVERNMENT'S PREFERENCE TO WAIT FOR THE RECORD TO BE MORE FULLY DEVELOPED ON THAT ONE.
JUDGE DAVILA: SURE. OKAY. LET'S DO THAT. 145 IS AN INTENSIVE CARE NURSE, I BELIEVE, AT VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER.
MR. DOWNEY: THAT'S RIGHT, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: AND EXPRESSES POTENTIAL HARDSHIP TO THAT HOSPITAL. I KNOW THAT THAT IS THE COUNTY HOSPITAL, AND I KNOW THE RATES -- EXCUSE ME -- THE RATE OF ENTRY INTO THE HOSPITAL, HOSPITALIZATIONS ARE QUITE HIGH IN THIS COUNTY NOW. I'D BE INCLINED TO STRIKE HER SO SHE CAN CONTINUE, OR HE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK HE DOES.
MR. SCHENK: NO OBJECTION.
MR. DOWNEY: NO OBJECTION.
JUDGE DAVILA: 145 IS EXCUSED FOR HARDSHIP. 121 IS -- I THINK THAT'S MR. LEPE, AND HE INFORMS THAT HE HAS TO PICK UP HIS KIDS AT 2:30. I EXPECT WE'RE GOING TO GO BEYOND 2:30 TODAY, DESPITE OUR BEST EFFORTS, BUT THAT MIGHT CREATE A PROBLEM HERE. I WAS GOING TO QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT, IF WE FINISH OUR COURT DAYS AT 2:00 O'CLOCK, WHETHER THAT AFFORDED HIM SOME RELIEF. BUT YOU MIGHT HAVE HIS QUESTIONNAIRE AT YOUR FINGERTIPS. I CAN'T RECALL IF HE SAID HE HAD ALTERNATIVE PLANS FOR HIS CHILDREN.
MR. DOWNEY: I DON'T THINK HE TALKS ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN, YOUR HONOR. SO I CAN'T SAY THAT HE MAKES CLEAR THAT THERE WON'T BE SOME SUBSTITUTION.
JUDGE DAVILA: ANY THOUGHTS, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: HE SAYS THAT HIS WIFE IS OFF OF WORK AT 5:00.
JUDGE DAVILA: RIGHT.
MR. SCHENK: GIVEN THE HOUR, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HIM MAKING IT TODAY AND, THEREFORE, I WOULD CONSENT TO DISMISSAL.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. LET'S STRIKE MR. LEPE, EXCUSE HIM I SHOULD SAY, 121, SEAT K, FOR HARDSHIP. 117 IS TRUONG. I JUST REVIEWED THE QUESTIONNAIRE. I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A SINGLE SOURCE OF INCOME AND THERE'S A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP THERE.
MR. DOWNEY: THAT'S RIGHT, YOUR HONOR.
MR. SCHENK: I'M DOING THIS FROM MEMORY. I THINK HE WORKS FOR VMWARE. I DON'T THINK HE KNEW WHETHER HIS WORK PAID FOR JURY SERVICE. MAYBE HE HAS THE ANSWER NOW.
JUDGE DAVILA: IN RESPONSE TO QUESTION 1, HE SAYS, I AM ONLY INCOME IN FAMILY. I CAN'T COMMIT TO 13 WEEKS. IT CAN COST MY JOB. WE COULD BRING HIM UP AND MAKE FURTHER INQUIRIES IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
MR. SCHENK: QUESTION 16, HE SAYS HE'S EMPLOYED BY VMWARE, BUT I DON'T THINK HE -- HE CHECKED HE DID NOT KNOW IF HIS EMPLOYER WOULD CONTINUE TO PAY HIS SALARY. THE GOVERNMENT WOULD DEFER TO THE COURT. WE WOULD NOT OBJECT TO DISMISSING HIM, BUT WE THINK THERE MIGHT BE A SOLUTION THAT THE JUROR MIGHT ALREADY HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT.
JUDGE DAVILA: MR. DOWNEY?
MR. DOWNEY: I THINK THE QUESTIONNAIRE INDICATES PROBABLY AS MUCH AS WE'RE GOING TO KNOW. I THINK HE IS ADMITTEDLY UNCERTAIN ABOUT INCOME, BUT I THINK HE'S CONCERNED ABOUT CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT IF HE'S UNAVAILABLE FOR THAT PERIOD, SO I'D BE INCLINED TO DISMISS HIM.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. HE DOES INDICATE THAT HE DOES HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE TRIAL. HE ANSWERED THAT IN QUESTION 1, THE FIRST QUESTION WHICH ASKS THAT. I'LL EXCUSE HIM FOR HARDSHIP. THAT'S JUROR NUMBER 117. HE'S IN SEAT I. I THINK WE CAN BRING THE PANEL UP NOW, COUNSEL? SHOULD WE CALL UP OUR PANEL NOW, MR. SCHENK?
MR. SCHENK: YES. SORRY, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DOWNEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.
JUDGE DAVILA: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL DO THAT NOW. WE'LL BRING UP OUR PANEL NOW TO BEGIN THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONING. LET ME TURN TO EITHER PARTY AT BOTH TABLES, IF YOU NEED A BREAK AT ANY TIME, YOU SHOULD LET ME KNOW. AS I SAID IN MY EARLIER COMMENTS, IF ANYONE NEEDS AN UNSCHEDULED BREAK, JUST LET ME KNOW, AND I'M HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. SO JUST LET ME KNOW, PLEASE. WE'LL CALL UP OUR PANEL NOW. THANK YOU.
(RECESS FROM 1:56 P.M. UNTIL 2:04 P.M.)