Stinkiest Trials In America
The Illicit Smashing of Who's Who Worldwide Excecutive Club

            See amd Believe     Trial Transcript     Poof - Gone!     Managing Directors!     Best & Brightest   
    Politics     WHAT??!!!       Dirty Jury?        Masters and Millionaires      

2500

(516) 292-6963
22

23 Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography, transcript
produced by computer-assisted transcription.
24
25

OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2502

1 (Case called.)

2 THE COURT: All right. Bring in the jury.

3 (Jury enters.)

4 THE COURT: Good morning, members of the jury.
5 Please be seated.
6 It is indeed gratifying that in one of the
7 largest jury selection districts in the United States, the
8 Eastern District of New York which as I told you several
9 times stretches from the New Jersey border of Staten
10 Island to Montauk Point, everybody is here earlier than on
11 time. Congratulations to you.
12 You may proceed.
13 MS. SCOTT: The government calls Wendi Springer.
14 W E N D I S P R I N G E R , having been first duly
15 sworn by the Clerk of the Court, was examined and
16 testified as follows:
17 THE WITNESS: Wendi Springer, S-P-R-I-N-G-E-R
18 DIRECT EXAMINATION
19 BY MS. SCOTT:
20 Q Could you tell us where you live, Ms. Springer?
21 A I live in Bohemia.
22 Q And how old are you?
23 A 30.
24 Q What do you do for a living now?
25 A I work for a large media company.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2503
Springer-direct/Scott

1 Q How long have you been doing that?
2 A A year and four months.
3 Q Was there a time when you worked at a company called
4 Who's Who Worldwide Registry, Incorporated?
5 A Yes.
6 Q When did you begin working there?
7 A I believe it was the first week in January of '91.
8 Q And how long did you work there?
9 A Up until the day that the company was closed down.
10 Q When was that?
11 A Which was March 30th or 31st of '95.
12 Q So you worked there approximately four years?
13 A A little over four.
14 Q Now, what was your position when you started there in
15 1991?
16 A Receptionist and data entry.
17 Q And where was your office located at that time?
18 Where was the Who's Who Worldwide office located?
19 A 99 Seaview Boulevard.
20 Q Which town?
21 A In Port Washington.
22 Q Did your position change over the four years you were
23 there?
24 A Yes.
25 Q When did it change first?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2504
Springer-direct/Scott

1 A Uhm, I would say a little after maybe seven months or
2 so.
3 Q And how did your job change at that time?
4 A When the company expanded my title of
5 receptionist/data entry was to be editorial assistant.
6 Q Where was the office located at the time when your
7 job changed?
8 A I believe we were in the process of moving and like I
9 said seven or eight months later it was at the Lake
10 Success office.
11 Q What were your responsibilities as an editorial
12 assistant?
13 A I was proofing the applicants, their information they
14 had sent in by mail or fax.
15 Q When you refer to "applicant," who do you mean?
16 A Potential customers.
17 Q Do you mean people who had applied for membership?
18 A Yes.
19 Q When memberships were sold to these companies.
20 MR. GEDULDIG: Objection to the form of the
21 question, Judge.
22 THE COURT: I didn't hear the question yet.
23 BY MS. SCOTT:
24 Q When memberships were sold to customers, how was the
25 contact initially made?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2505
Springer-direct/Scott

1 MR. GEDULDIG: Now I object, Judge.
2 THE COURT: Are you objecting to the form? Why?
3 MR. GEDULDIG: It contains a fact not in
4 evidence. She said something was sold. No evidence has
5 there been that was sold, so she is testifying for the
6 witness.
7 MR. SCHOER: I join in the objection, Your Honor.
8 THE COURT: Did people become members of Who's
9 Who?
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 THE COURT: How did they become members?
12 THE WITNESS: Through a sale.
13 THE COURT: Did they have to pay for it?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes.
15 THE COURT: Overruled. You may proceed.
16 BY MS. SCOTT:
17 Q How did these people who applied for membership first
18 contact through the company?
1 9 A Through phone -- through a mailing house they would,
20 I would assume, get a list.
21 MR. GEDULDIG: Objection to what she assumes.
22 THE COURT: When you assume --
23 THE WITNESS: Let me rephrase that. When a
24 mailing list was from a place called, I believe Antun's,
25 that is a company that provided a mailing list.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2506
Springer-direct/Scott

1 THE COURT: Antun's?
2 THE WITNESS: Antun's.
3 THE COURT: How do you spell that? A-N-T-O-N or
4 U-N?
5 THE WITNESS: U-N, I believe. I'm not --
6 BY MS. SCOTT:
7 Q So in other words, letters were sent to these
8 companies?
9 A Letters were sent to the customers.
10 MR. JENKS: Objection.
11 THE COURT: Please rise, Mr. Jenks.
12 MR. JENKS: I'm sorry, objection.
13 THE COURT: Sustained as to form. Please strike

14 out the answer.
15 BY MS. SCOTT:
16 Q How did the company contact the people they were
17 attempting to sell these memberships to?
18 A By phone. From a lead card that was submitted
19 through the mail or by fax.
20 Q Now, what is a lead card?
21 A It's a card approximately (indicating) -- I don't
22 know the dimensions. It would have the potential
23 customer's name, occupation, company name, city, state,
24 address, industry, organization, expertise.
25 Q Who had filled out the information on the lead card?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2507
Springer-direct/Scott

1 A The potential customer.
2 Q I'm showing you Government's Exhibit 9-D for
3 Identification.
4 What is that document?
5 A This is a lead card.
6 Q And how was it that the potential customers obtained
7 those lead cards and filled them out?
8 A It was through a mailing house.
9 Q How did each customer obtain each particular lead
10 card?
11 THE COURT: You have to go a little slower. I'm
12 having trouble keeping up.
13 Now, what number is this for Identification?
14 MS. SCOTT: 9-D for Identification.
15 THE COURT: Okay.
16 BY MS. SCOTT:
17 Q How did each customer obtain each of those lead
18 cards?
19 A It was sent with a letter, a nomination letter and
20 this card was included in the information that was sent to
21 -- or I could say solicitation mail that was sent to
22 them.
23 Q Did you see these solicitation letters sent out to
24 potential customers?
25 A Yes.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2508
Springer-direct/Scott

1 Q Under what circumstances did you see these letters?
2 A When they came back as, you know, deceased, you know,
3 certain things like that. People would say the person has
4 been dead for 20 years, please do not, you know, send any
5 more correspondence, take us off your mailing list,
6 etcetera, etcetera.
7 Q What would you do with these letters that you would
8 see?
9 A They would be tossed outside the facility.
10 Q What were you --
11 THE COURT: Apparently it is getting
12 contentious. It's reaching epidemic proportions. I
13 cannot keep up with you. You will have to slow down, Ms.
14 Scott. BY MS. SCOTT:
15 Q Under what circumstances would you see these letters
16 that came into the company?
17 A If I was asked to sort the mail, if an overabundance
18 of it came in, I was asked at certain times to separate
19 the cards, separate, you know, separate what they called
20 NG, which were the nixies.
21 THE COURT: N-I-X-I-E-S?
22 THE WITNESS: I believe so. That's what
23 terminology was used. They were called nixies.
24 BY MS. SCOTT:
25 Q Now, I'm showing you Government's Exhibit 60-H for
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2509
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Identification.
2 Can you tell us what that document is?
3 A This is the solicitation letter that was sent.
4 Q How do you recognize that?
5 A I saw it three, four times a week.
6 MS. SCOTT: I offer Government's Exhibit 60-H.
7 THE COURT: Any objection?
8 MR. JENKS: I would like a voir dire, Your Honor.
9 THE COURT: Go ahead.
10 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
11 BY MR. JENKS:
12 Q Ms. Springer, I would ask you to take a look at
13 60-H.
14 Did you specifically see this letter?
15 A This one? Kathy Nielsen.
16 Q Yes.
17 A I saw -- I saw --
18 Q No, I'm asking you --
19 A Did I particularly see the one addressed to?
20 Q Did you see the one addressed to who?
21 A Reid Rotatori.
22 THE COURT: You see, we don't know these names
23 and the reporter has to get down accurately every name
24 spelled correctly.
25 THE WITNESS: Okay.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2510
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 THE COURT: Okay.
2 BY MR. JENKS:
3 Q The question was -- withdrawn.
4 Take a look at 60-H, Government's Exhibit 60-H.
5 Do you see the date on that letter?
6 A Yes.
7 Q It's dated June 17, 1993?
8 A Umm-hmm.
9 THE COURT: Yes?
10 THE WITNESS: Umm-hmm.
11 BY MR. JENKS:
12 Q Is that yes?
13 A Yes, it is.
14 Q It's addressed to a Reid Rotatori; am I correct?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Do you know a Reid Rotatori?
17 A No, I do not.
18 Q Did you see this letter back in June of 1993 prior to
19 it being addressed to Reid Rotatori?
20 A No, because it was not mailed --
21 Q Your answer is no, ma'am?
22 A No.
23 Q Did you mail this letter out?
24 A No, I did not.
25 Q Did you prepare this letter?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2511
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 A No, I did not.
2 Q Do you know whether Reid Rotatori actually received
3 this letter?
4 A I wouldn't be able to tell you, no.
5 Q Did you at any time speak with Reid Rotatori?
6 A I spoke with thousands of customers. I wouldn't be
7 able to tell you if I spoke with him.
8 Q So you have no independent recollection?
9 A No, absolutely not.
10 Q Did you draft the contents of this letter?
11 A No, I did not.
12 Q Have you seen the content of this letter?
13 A I've seen the format of these letters, yes.
14 Q Would it be fair to say that Who's Who Worldwide
15 Registry sent out numerous letters with content other than
16 what is contained in here?
17 A There was different formats. There was different
18 signatures. Kathy Nielsen was one of the people at that
19 time where they were using that name. There was also a
20 Nancy Moore who they used, that they used who did not
21 exist.
22 MR. TRABULUS: I move to strike.
23 THE COURT: Read it back, please.
24 (Record read.)
25 THE COURT: Is the answer yes to that?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2512
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 THE COURT: The entire answer previously is
3 stricken. The jury is instructed to disregard it.
4 BY MR. JENKS:
5 Q You didn't sign this letter; am I correct?

6 A No, I did not. I believe Liz Sautter signed these.
7 Q Do you know who signed the letter for sure?
8 A I believe Liz Sautter did. I'm not saying -- I'm not
9 sure she signed this particular letter, but there were
10 letters signed with her signature under a person's name,
11 whether it be Kathy Nielsen, whether it be Nancy Moore or
12 whatever names were used.
13 Q You didn't sign this letter, did you?
14 A Absolutely not.
15 Q You didn't prepare the letter, correct?
16 A No, I did not.
17 Q You didn't mail the letter, correct?
18 A I didn't mail it.
19 Q When was the first time you saw this letter prior to
20 your testifying here today?
21 A I haven't seen this particular letter.
22 Q All right.
23 A As I explained before.
24 MR. JENKS: I have no further questions. I
25 object to the introduction of this letter with respect to


OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2513
Springer-direct/Scott

1 this witness' testimony.
2 THE COURT: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.
3 MR. JENKS: Based on this witness' testimony, I
4 object to the introduction of this letter.
5 THE COURT: Are you attempting to offer this as a
6 business record?
7 MS. SCOTT: Your Honor, we'll withdraw it and
8 attempt to enter it later.
9 THE COURT: I'll attempt you to lay a foundation
10 if you want to do that. It's up to you.
11 MS. SCOTT: May I confer for a moment, Your
12 Honor?
13 THE COURT: Sure.
14 (Counsel confer.)
15 MS. SCOTT: Your Honor, we'll withdraw the
16 exhibit and attempt to put it in later in the case with
17 another custodian.
18 THE COURT: Very well.
19 MS. SCOTT: Thank you.
20 DIRECT EXAMINATION
21 BY MS. SCOTT: (Continued.)
22 Q Now, Ms. Springer, going back to the lead card. When
23 a person has filled out the lead card and mailed it into
24 the company, what happened to it at that point?
25 A At that point they were sorted by on the right -- on
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2514
Springer-direct/Scott

1 this corner over here there is a code, this one in
2 particular is ML-F. I don't know what the particular
3 coding means. This coding could have been sent to people
4 in the health care industry. A code NN could be in the
5 engineering field. There were certain codes that indicate
6 industry that the letters were addressed to.
7 THE COURT: Excuse me for one minute. I do not
8 understand. Who makes these lead cards? How do they
9 start out these lead cards? Where are they, in your
10 office?
11 THE WITNESS: What happens is --
12 THE COURT: No, listen to me, will you? These
13 lead cards that you have, are they forms that are in your
14 office in blank?
15 THE WITNESS: We had some blank ones, but no,
16 they were done, as I explained before, from a mailing
17 house.
18 THE COURT: Some other company produced them?
19 THE WITNESS: Produced them.
20 THE COURT: And sends them to you?
21 THE WITNESS: Sent them to the customers, the
22 potential customers.
23 THE COURT: How does the mailing company know who
24 to send it to?
25 THE WITNESS: They have lists. Mailing lists.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2515
Springer-direct/Scott

1 Have you ever received anything in the mail where
2 people --
3 MR. TRABULUS: Objection.
4 MR. JENKS: Objection.
5 THE COURT: Listen to me. I'm trying to find out
6 and maybe clear it up for the jury also. These lead cards
7 are -- start off in the mailing list company's
8 headquarters, correct?
9 THE WITNESS: Yes.
10 THE COURT: And according to a list they are
11 mailed to potential customers. Are they mailed with the
12 solicitation letter?
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 THE COURT: And then who fills out these lead
15 cards?
16 THE WITNESS: Excuse me, potential customers.
17 THE COURT: And then the potential customer does
18 what with the lead card?
19 THE WITNESS: Either she would fax them back or
20 send them back to the mail.
21 THE COURT: Back where?
22 THE WITNESS: Whatever address we were at.
23 THE COURT: Not back to the printing companies?
24 THE WITNESS: No.
25 THE COURT: Back to your company?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2516
Springer-direct/Scott

1 THE WITNESS: The back of the card over here has
2 the address of Who's Who Worldwide.
3 THE COURT: But what is written on the card is
4 done by the customer?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes.
6 THE COURT: Okay.
7 BY MS. SCOTT:
8 Q And Ms. Springer, we'll come back to the codes later
9 on in the testimony.
10 Now, you mentioned that when the lead cards came
11 back into the company they were sorted?
12 A Yes.
13 Q After they were sorted, what happened to them?
14 A They were rubber banded and put in a locked drawer.
15 Q What happened after that?
16 A They were distributed.
17 Q Who were they distributed to?
18 A The group leaders to pass out.
19 Q Who were they passed out to?
20 A The telemarketers, salespeople.
21 Q What did the salespeople do with them when they
22 received these lead cards?
23 A They would make phone calls.
24 Q Who would they call?
25 A They would call the customer's name, whatever phone
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2517
Springer-direct/Scott

1 number was on here and asked for the individual who filled
2 out the card.
3 Q Once they got in touch with that individual by
4 telephone, what did they do?
5 A They would read from a pitch trying to sell them a
6 membership.
7 MR. JENKS: Judge, I would object to this
8 testimony unless it is specific to an individual
9 defendant. I would ask that the testimony be stricken as
10 to what the general operation of the salesperson was.
11 There's been no testimony that this woman has worked in
12 the sales department or made any sales.
13 MR. NEVILLE: Your Honor, I don't object to the
14 word "sales" being used.
15 THE COURT: First of all, I've told you, Counsel,
16 not to make these speeches. If you have an objection just
17 make the objection and if I want to know why, I'll ask you
18 why. I'm not bashful, Mr. Jenks.
19 MR. JENKS: I understand, Your Honor.
20 THE COURT: Overruled.
21 Was there an answer to the question?
22 MS. SCOTT: Can you please read back the
23 question.
24 THE COURT: Please don't.
25 (Record read.)
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2518
Springer-direct/Scott

1 A They would read from a pitch which was in their
2 cubicles and they would jot down information that the
3 person was telling them.
4 MR. LEE: I object, Your Honor.
5 THE COURT: On what grounds?
6 MR. LEE: I think there's testimony about a
7 nonverbal assertion which does not pass the hearsay rule.
8 THE COURT: Overruled.
9 Ms. Springer, when you are testifying, what is
10 the basis for the information as to what these salespeople
11 do?
12 THE WITNESS: What knowledge do I have on what
13 the salespeople did?
14 THE COURT: Yes. How do you know what they do?
15 THE WITNESS: I was in that office for years. I
16 saw it. I heard it with my ears.
17 THE COURT: Overruled.
18 MR. DUNN: I would object because on how much she
19 could hear. We're talking about an entire pitch. I would
20 ask you to pursue that, if you would.
21 THE COURT: Your objection is overruled.
22 Go ahead.
23 MS. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honor.
24 I believe Ms. Springer did answer the question I
25 asked, so I'll move on to the next question.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2519
Springer-direct/Scott

1 THE COURT: Good. We are making progress
2 rapidly. At this rate we'll be here all winter.
3 I'm only kidding. Go ahead.

4 BY MS. SCOTT:
5 Q Ms. Springer, after a telemarketer made a sale to a
6 customer, what did the salesperson do to record the sale?
7 A They had a sales sheet where they would write the
8 customer's name, the membership, the price and at that
9 time they would have to have it signed by one of the group
10 leaders to validate that there was a sale since they were
11 basically on quotas. They had to meet a certain quota.
12 So the group leader would have to decide --
13 MR. SCHOER: Objection, Judge. This is
14 unresponsive.
15 THE COURT: Read it back.
16 (Record read.)
17 THE COURT: What did the salesperson do to record
18 the sale?
19 THE WITNESS: They wrote it on a sales sheet, had
20 a sales sheet which would have the day on it and they
21 would write like I was explaining before, they would write
22 the customer's name, they would write the sale amount and
23 what the membership duration was, if it was a lifetime
24 membership, if it was a five-year membership, three-year
25 membership. An associate membership or if they just
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2520
Springer-direct/Scott

1 wanted a wall plaque and that's what would happen.
2 BY MS. SCOTT:
3 Q Now, Ms. Springer, you mentioned a sales sheet.
4 MR. NELSON: Your Honor, I would ask the Court
5 rule on the application, that the Court strike the answer
6 to the prior question.
7 THE COURT: That answer that goes into what a
8 group leader does, that part is stricken.
9 MR. NELSON: Thank you, Your Honor.
10 BY MS. SCOTT:
11 Q Ms. Springer, I'm showing you Government's Exhibit
12 9-C for Identification.
13 What is that document?
14 A This is an order form.
15 Q Now, what is an order form?
16 A The order form is written up while the person is on
17 the phone with a customer. Usually it wasn't only because
18 the customers were talking quick so they would write it on
19 scrap paper and then they would write their sales out. A
20 lot of them would do it while they were in the smoke room
21 and they would have time to do it. Their job was to be on
22 the phone at all times, that was their instructions and
23 they would write the orders up, some of them would write
24 them two minutes after they wrote it, or write on the
25 phone with the customers who they knew weren't going to be
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2521
Springer-direct/Scott

1 sold. This is the order form.
2 Q So did this order form represent a particular sale?
3 A Yes, it does.
4 Q And the information, who writes the information on
5 that order form?
6 A The salesperson.
7 Q Now, what information is recorded on the order form?
8 A Company name, the person's name, how they want their
9 wall plaque to appear. They have a current organization
10 which would be the company, they have street address,
11 city, state, zip, phone number, they have a ship to, a
12 bill and a ship to area, and then they have the business,
13 they have the product that they provide or sell. They
14 have the type of organization, the area of distribution,
15 expertise, the parent organization, favorite book and
16 author or favorite book author.
17 Q And this is information about the customer that was
18 recorded on the order form?
19 A Yes, umm-hmm.
20 Q And what other information about the sales are
21 recorded on the form?
22 A What is checked off. There's a section, a time year
23 membership, five-year, three-year, one-year associate,
24 wall plaque and there is the registry.
25 Q So the salesperson would check off the length of the
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2522
Springer-direct/Scott

1 membership that had been purchased?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Would the salesperson also report the method of
4 purchase, method of payment rather?
5 A Yes, credit card.
6 Q After this information was placed on these order
7 forms, what happened to the order forms?
8 A The order forms were picked up. They were put in a
9 bin, each salesperson had their own bin, and they would be
10 picked up within 15 minutes to a half-hour. It could be
11 when somebody was available, usually within a half-hour,
12 somebody would be told to go around in charge of picking
13 up the order forms.
14 Q What would happen after the order forms were picked
15 up?

16 A Go in my room.
17 Q What would you do with them?
18 A Put in a file cabinet. When I was able to look them
19 over, proof them, edit them, I would do them.
20 Q What was your responsibility with respect to these
21 order forms?
22 A To make sure of the qualifications. To make sure the
23 spelling was accurate. To make sure that the person was,
24 you know, reputable, I would say, that they were a
25 business leader.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2523
Springer-direct/Scott

1 Q Reputable enough to become a member of Who's Who
2 Worldwide; is that correct?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Now, once you had checked the information on the
5 order form, what did you do with the order form?
6 A They would be distributed to the girls for data entry
7 and I would also do the data entry as well.
8 Q So after you had signed off on the order forms, you
9 sent them to the data entry people?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Now, what was the purpose of sending them to data
12 entry?
13 A They would put the information in the database and at
14 the end of the day we would run the invoices and they
15 would be mailed out.
16 Q The data entry people issued the invoices; is that
17 correct?
18 A They were printed out and then whoever was available
19 to, would put the mail together. Sometimes it was three
20 or four girls. Sometimes, you know, it was two.
21 Depending on how many invoices were generated.
22 Q (Handing.) I'm showing you Government's Exhibit 9-B
23 for Identification.
24 Can you tell us what that is?
25 A This is one of the invoices that would be attached to
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2524
Springer-direct/Scott

1 this order form. Actually the same individual.
2 Q And is that invoice, was that invoice issued after
3 the information in the order form had been given to the
4 data entry people?
5 A Yes.
6 Q What happened to the invoices after they were
7 generated?
8 A They were, like I explained, there was girls that
9 would -- I didn't explain this part. What they would do
10 most predominantly, all of the orders that came in were by
11 credit card. So there would be a stamp as per your
12 instructions, I forget what the exact terminology is, it
13 would say it had been changed to your credit card. At the
14 bottom it would say "please --" this is split billed, this
15 says "please correct any errors in the text or gold
16 remittance company." That would be provided for by check,
17 as I explained most of these orders that came in were by
18 credit card.
19 Q We'll go through that in just a minute,
20 Ms. Springer. But once these invoices had been generated
21 by the company, what happened to the invoice?
22 A They were put in the envelope, they were -- you are
23 talking about the order form with this copy? That's what
24 you are asking?
25 Q I'm talking about two separate things. First were
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2525
Springer-direct/Scott

1 they sent to somebody?
2 A Yes, to the people who signed up, the members.
3 Q They were sent to the customer?
4 A Yes.
5 Q How did the company maintain their records of the
6 sale?
7 A This was their document and it would be bundled up,
8 alphabetized by the filing person and they would be put in
9 the appropriate files alphabetically.
10 Q And were other supporting documents attached to each
11 invoice and order form?
1 2 A Yes. Usually, you know, the card would be attached
13 on the back like this -- I forgot one thing, sorry. When
14 -- at the end of the day or whoever, the next morning or
15 a lot of times I would bring them home with me, I didn't
16 have a lot of time sometimes to do it during work, the
17 orders would be checked for spelling, especially the
18 person's name, you know, for accuracy, for the wall
19 plaque, and all the people, I mean people are human, they
20 make errors while doing data entry, and we had to watch
21 for errors. So somebody -- it was usually me who had to
22 proof it again to make sure that the data entry person,
23 you know, was accurate, and if not it was given back to
24 the appropriate person who put in the information
25 incorrectly so they could learn from their mistakes, and
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2526
Springer-direct/Scott

1 the information was changed and they went back to be
2 filed.
3 Q Once you had proofread that invoice, how did the
4 company then record the sale? What documents were stored
5 with the company to record the sale?
6 A There was a credit card transmittal slip that usually
7 would be attached to the front (indicating) and the card
8 would be on the back, if there was a card, and that would
9 be it. Just the pink form and the order form.
10 Q Pink form, order form, credit card slip and lead
11 card?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And any other documentation that related to the
14 transaction?
15 A There would be a code. This code where it says,
16 okay, 91-157, is the approval that they got from the bank
17 or American Express or Visa, whatever, whatever credit
18 card they paid by.
19 Q I'm sorry.
20 I'm showing you Government's Exh ibit 9-A.
21 THE COURT: 9 what?
22 MS. SCOTT: 9-A for Identification.
23 BY MS. SCOTT:
24 Q Tell us what that is?
25 A The credit card transmittal and this one actually
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2527
Springer-direct/Scott

1 belongs to this one because I matched up the number,
2 authorization number and the transaction number.
3 MS. SCOTT: Your Honor, I'm going to show
4 Ms. Springer a number of exhibits and I will have to read
5 off their numbers into the record.
6 I will be showing Ms. Springer Government's
7 Exhibits 3-A, 3-B, 3-C, 3-D and 3-E.
8 Government's Exhibits 4-A, 4-C, 4-D and 4-E.
9 Government's Exhibits 5 --
10 THE COURT: You have to go slower.
11 MS. SCOTT: Government's Exhibits 5-A, 5-B, 5-C,
12 5-D.
13 6-A, 6-B, 6-C, 6-D, 6-E, 6-F, 6-G and 6-H.
14 7-A, 7-B, 7-C, and 7-D.
15 8-A, 8-B, 8-C, 8-D, 8-E, 8-F.
16 9-A, 9-B, 9-C, 9-D, 9-E, 9-F, 9-G, 9-H.
17 10-A, 10-B, 10-C.
18 11-A, 11-B, 11-C, 11-D, 11-E.
19 12-A, 12-B, 12-C, 12-D, 12-E, 12-F, 12-G, 12-H.
20 13-A, 13-B, 13-C, 13-D, 13-E, 13-F, 13-G.
21 14-A, 14-B, 14-C, 14-D.
22 15-A, 15-B, 15-C, 15-D.
23 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, may I list the numbers as
24 A through D.
25 THE COURT: Yes.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2528
Springer-direct/Scott

1 MS. SCOTT: Okay. 16-A through 16-D.
2 17-A through 17-G.
3 18-A through 18-H.
4 19-A through 19-D.
5 20-A through 20-H.
6 21-A through 21-D.
7 22-A through 22-D.
8 23-A through 23-D.
9 24-A through 24-F.
10 25-A through 25-D.
11 26-A through 26-D.
12 27-A through 27-D.
13 28-A through 28-E.
14 29-A through 29-D.

15 30-A through 30-D.
16 31-A through 31-D.
17 33-A through 33-E.
18 34-A through 34-D.
19 35-A through 35-D.
20 36-A through 36-D.
21 37-A through 37-D.
22 38-A through 38 E.
23 Skipping down to 39-D.
24 40-A through 40-D.
25 41-A through 41-E.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2529
Springer-direct/Scott

1 42-A to 42-D.
2 And 42-G, 42-H, and 42-I.
3 43-A through 43-D.
4 44-A through 44-G, 44-H also.
5 45-A through 45-E.
6 46-A through 46-D.
7 47-A through 47-D.
8 48-A through 48-D.
9 49-A through 49-G.
10 50-A through 50-F.
11 51-A through 51-E.
12 52-A through 52-F.
13 53-A through 53-D.
14 54-A through 54-D.
15 And skipping down to 54-I.
16 55-A through 55-C.
17 56-A.
18 57-A through 57-D.
19 58-A through 59-D.
20 60-A through 60 G.
21 61-A.
22 62-A through 62-D.
23 63-A through 63-D.
24 MR. JENKS: Your Honor, I'm sorry, I'm lost.
25 Your Honor, if she could slow down.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2530
Springer-direct/Scott

1 THE COURT: Well, I'm trying hard but I can't
2 succeed. You have to slow down.
3 MR. JENKS: If she could just pick up from 60-A.
4 MR. TRABULUS: Actually 59.
5 MS. SCOTT: 59A through 59-D.
6 60-A through 60 G.
7 61-A.
8 62-A through 62-D.
9 63-A through 63-D.
10 65-B, C and-D.
11 And 66 C.
12 67-A through 67-D. And that's it.
13 BY MS. SCOTT:
14 Q Now, Ms. Springer, I'm showing you the documents
15 I've just read into the record for Identification.
16 Have you had a chance to look at those documents
17 before testifying tod ay?
18 A Yes.
19 Q What are they?
20 A These are order forms, credit card numbers,
21 authorizations. Same as this (indicating.)
22 Q Are there packages of several pieces of paper?
23 A Yep.
24 Q And what does each package represent?
25 A (Perusing.) This is one member, this is another
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2531
Springer-direct/Scott

1 member.
2 THE COURT: No, you have to identify what each
3 package is.
4 THE WITNESS: Okay.
5 THE COURT: You have to name what it is.
6 THE WITNESS: Okay.
7 The order form. You need the names also?
8 THE COURT: No, on each package are there certain
9 forms?
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 THE COURT: What forms are in each package?
12 THE WITNESS: The lead card, the order form and
13 this is an invoice with a credit card approval on it and

14 the information that is sent out to the customer.
15 MR. LEE: Judge, could we have her read the
16 exhibit number and letter while she is identifying
17 something. I don't know what exhibit she is talking
18 about.
19 THE COURT: No, it's not necessary. I'm not
20 going to go through all of these numbers.
21 MR. LEE: Just what she says.
22 THE COURT: No.
23 Does every package you've named include a lead
24 card, order form, invoice with credit card approval and
25 what else? What did you say?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2532
Springer-direct/Scott

1 THE WITNESS: Credit card authorization.
2 THE COURT: Credit card authorization.
3 So every one of those packages has a lead card,
4 order form, invoice?
5 MS. SCOTT: Generally, Your Honor, every package
6 includes an invoice, order form, lead card and credit card
7 receipt. Some of the packages do not, but each -- I was
8 going to ask Ms. Springer, does each of these packets
9 represent a sale?
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 BY MS. SCOTT:
12 Q Do each of these packets represent a sale of a
13 membership to a company?
14 A Yes.
15 Q By the company Who's Who Worldwide; is that correct?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Now, are all the supporting documentation that Who's
18 Who Worldwide had in connection with each of these sales,
19 attached to each of the documents that you have up there
20 in front of you?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Now, were these documents kept in the course of the
23 regularly conducted business activity of Who's Who
24 Worldwide?
25 A Yes, they were.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2533
Springer-direct/Scott

1 THE COURT: You have to slow down, Ms. Scott.
2 MS. SCOTT: Would you like me to repeat the
3 question, Your Honor?
4 THE COURT: Yes, I would. I'm requesting you,
5 especially for you, to slow down. I'm not making an
6 impression.
7 MS. SCOTT: Okay.
8 BY MS. SCOTT:
9 Q Were these documents kept in the course of the
10 regularly conducted business activity of Who's Who
11 Worldwide?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Was it the regular business practice of Who's Who
14 Worldwide to keep and make these records?
15 A Yes.
16 MS. SCOTT: I offer the exhibits that we just
17 read into the record, Your Honor.
18 THE COURT: Any objection?
19 MR. JENKS: I object and I would like a voir
20 dire.
21 THE COURT: Go ahead.
22 MR. JENKS: I would like the Exhibits 9-A through
23 9-D, I believe. I would use them for the purposes of this
24 voir dire.
25 THE COURT: Good thinking. You are not going to
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2534
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 go through each one of them, will you, Mr. Jenks?
2 MR. JENKS: No, I don't want to be here until
3 June, Your Honor.
4 THE COURT: Good thinking. Very good.
5 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
6 BY MR. JENKS:
7 Q Let's talk, Ms. Springer, about 9-D for
8 Identification.
9 MR. JENKS: Do you have that, Ms. Scott?
10 MS. SCOTT: It's up there.
11 MR. JENKS: It's up there.
12 Let me make sure that I'm with the right
13 exhibit. Let's take a look at 9-D.
14 Do you have it in there?
15 THE WITNESS: That's 9-D?
16 MR. JENKS: Is that it?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 MR. JENKS: This is 9. They are out of the book.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes.
20 BY MR. JENKS:
21 Q Now, 9-D for Identification is a so-called "lead

22 card;" am I correct?
23 A It's not a so-called, it's a lead card.
24 Q It's called a lead card?
25 A This is called a lead card, yes.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2535
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q Let's first go over your testimony with respect to
2 that lead card.
3 The lead card was prepared by a publishing house?
4 A I don't know what the terminology is. I believe it
5 is called a mail house.
6 Q A mail house?
7 A Umm-hmm.
8 Q You didn't prepare the lead card, did you?
9 A No, I did not personally.
10 Q Somebody else did, correct?
11 A Umm-hmm.
12 Q Who's Who Worldwide did not prepare the lead card at
13 1983 Marcus Avenue, did they?
14 A I believe what they did they did a draft of it and
15 got a mail house to produce the letter and the card.
16 Q But none of those exhibits there are a draft of the
17 lead card, right?
18 A These cards and these letters are not manufactured at
19 1983 Marcus Avenue, if that is what you are trying to get
20 at.
21 Q So let me make sure I understand. First the lead
22 card. It's made someplace else, the lead card?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And then it's sent to a customer; am I right?
25 A Yes.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2536
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q You're in the office of public administration?
2 A I'm in the office of administration.
3 Q Not of public administration?
4 A Their terminology, Mr. Gordon's terminology, was,
5 right, what you said, public.
6 Q You testified at a deposition back in 1993; am I
7 correct?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Did you testify that you were a member of the office
10 of public administration?
11 A Yes.

12 Q Now, the lead card is prepared by an outside agency,
13 right?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And you didn't prepare it, correct?
16 A No.
17 Q You didn't draft the card; am I right?
18 A No, I did not draft it.
19 Q When it is prepared it is then sent by mail to a
20 proposed customer, I take it?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And that customer fills the information in on the
23 card, right?
24 A Yes.
25 Q You didn't fill the information in on the card?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2537
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 A No, I did not. No.
2 Q And that card comes back.
3 A Umm-hmm.
4 Q Right, to Who's Who Worldwide?
5 A Yes, it does.
6 Q And when that card comes back it is given to a
7 salesperson, right?
8 A They are sorted first and then they are bundled up
9 and then given, distributed to the salespeople, yes.
10 Q Do you sort them?
11 A On many occasions I sorted them.
12 Q You sorted them?
13 A Umm-hmm.
14 Q Do you give them to the salesperson?
15 A If I was asked to I would, but usually that would be
16 asked by Liz. Mr. Gordon would ask Liz to do that or if
17 Liz wasn't there I would pass them on to, let's say, Tara,
18 whoever it maybe, whoever the group leader was. But he
19 was there usually to give the cards out.
20 Q Did you have anything to do with the filling in the
21 information on the lead card?
22 A No.
23 Q Did you have anything to do with the preparing of the
24 lead card that goes to the customer?
25 A No.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2538
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q So when you get back this lead card, this is after it
2 has gone to a salesperson and it is brought back to you,
3 correct?
4 A I saw the cards before. If I was asked to sort the
5 mail -- I seen a lot of them, yes.
6 Q Do you know whether any of the information on those
7 lead cards that Ms. Scott has shown you, all the exhibits
8 there, whether or not any of the information on those
9 cards is true and accurate or correct?
10 A On the cards?
11 Q Yes.
12 A I don't know these individuals to know if they are or
13 they are not.
14 Q And you never spoke to any of those individuals?
15 A I spoke to a lot of people. I never sold them a
16 membership, I never wrote up an order form.
17 Q Did you ever speak to any of those individuals on
18 those exhibits?
19 A In these?
20 Q Yes.
21 A I don't believe I spoke to a Rita Rieger or a Wilma
22 Pincham or Reid Rotatori.
23 THE COURT: Excuse me, what are those names you

24 just mentioned?
25 THE WITNESS: These names on the exhibits --
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2539
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 THE COURT: How do you spell them?
2 THE WITNESS: Rita R-i-e-g-e-r, W-i-l-m-a
3 P-i-n-c-h-a-m, R-e-i-d R-o-t-a-t-o-r-i.
4 And if I did speak with them I would have to be a
5 genus to remember these peoples' names. I speak to a lot
6 of people and did at Who's Who.
7 Q So it would be fair to say you never spoke to any of
8 them or you don't know whether you spoke to any of those
9 people in any of those exhibits?
10 A There is a possibility, but maybe I didn't.
11 Q And maybe not?
12 A Maybe not.
13 Q You don't know as you sit here whether the
14 information contained in those exhibits are, in fact, true
15 or accurate; am I correct?
16 A Right.
17 Q Because you don't know firsthand, right?
18 A I don't know the people individually, so I wouldn't
19 know if the information they wrote down is true.
20 Q And the lead card that we've been talking about which
21 is 9-D, in front of you, you didn't prepare and you didn't
22 fill the information out on that car card, correct?
23 A No, you asked me that already, I said no.
24 Q I asked you again, your answer is no?
25 A Correct.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2540
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q Let's look at 9-C, okay.
2 A 9-C.
3 Q 9-C you testified was an order form; am I right?
4 A Yes (perusing.)
5 Q Do you know whose handwriting 9-C is in?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And how do you know that handwriting?
8 A Because first it says name, second, I know the
9 individual, and third, if any of those salespeople were to
10 write up an order form, they wouldn't even have to sign
11 their name because I knew their handwriting.
12 MR. JENKS: I will move to strike the answer as
13 unresponsive, Your Honor.
14 THE COURT: Your motion is denied.
15 BY MR. JENKS:
16 Q Well, then I'll ask you this, Ms. Springer. Please
17 listen to the question and if it calls for a yes or no
18 answer, can you answer the question yes or no?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Do you know whose handwriting is in that form?
21 A Yes, I do.
22 Q Is it your handwriting; yes or no?
23 A Part is my handwriting, yes.
24 Q Is it your handwriting, yes or no, on the card?
25 A On the card, no.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2541
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q On the order form?
2 A Like I explained to you, yes. Some of the
3 information is in my handwriting. I said it to you.
4 Q Which information is in your handwriting?
5 A Major product, acute care. This is my handwriting.
6 The red is in my handwriting.
7 Q The red writing on these things is in your
8 handwriting?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Is your handwriting on all of those exhibits you
11 examined, the orders forms?
12 A A lot of them, yes.
13 Q A lot of them.
14 A Most of them, yes. If it didn't have anything to
15 have altered on it, I wouldn't change it.
16 Q All right.
17 Let me ask you this, did you prepare the order
18 form itself?
19 A No.
20 Q The order form was sent to a potential customer; am I
21 correct?
22 A The order form was sent to a potential? No, the
23 order form was not sent to a potential customer.
24 Q The order form was prepared in Who's Who Worldwide?
25 A Yes, it was, umm-hmm.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT R EPORTER
2542
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q You didn't prepare them though, generally, a
2 salesperson prepared them?
3 A No, I did not prepare them.
4 Q Would it be fair to say that salespeople generally
5 prepared the order forms?
6 A Yes.
7 Q All right.
8 And the order forms were prepared on information
9 that they obtained through speaking with the customer on
10 the telephone, correct, generally?
11 A Umm-hmm.
12 Q You generally didn't speak with the customer on the
13 telephone to prepare the information in the order form,
14 correct?
15 A Right, but there were a lot of occasions where I did
16 speak with a customer because they didn't care for the way
17 that the salesperson had wrote up the information.
18 Q You spoke to them later, correct?
19 A Yes, later.
20 Q Did you draft and prepare this order form?

21 A No, I did not.
22 Q Were you in charge of keeping the order forms, you
23 specifically, or was it Liz Sautter?
24 Let me withdraw the question.
25 Did Liz Sautter head the Office of Public
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2543
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Affairs?
2 A Yes, she did.
3 Q She was your boss, correct?
4 A Supervisor. I wouldn't say boss. Mr. Gordon was the
5 boss.
6 Q But she was your supervisor, right?
7 A Yes.
8 Q You reported directly to her?
9 A Umm-hmm.
10 THE COURT: Excuse me, you can't say umm-hmm.
11 A Yes.
12 THE COURT: Because we don't know what that
13 means. You have to say yes, no, maybe, I don't know, I
14 don't remember, but not that sound.
15 THE WITNESS: Got it?
16 A Yes. I reported to Liz.
17 Q So it was Liz Sautter who kept these order forms at
18 Who's Who Worldwide.
19 Was she in charge of maintaining and keeping
20 them?
21 A No, I maintained them.
22 Q How about Liz Sautter?
23 A Occasionally if I was busy, she would count them to
24 make sure that the sales matched up with the sales sheet
25 and the actual orders written for that day were physically
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2544
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 counted. There were times she did. There were days also
2 that people get sick and have to take off a day and I'm
3 sure she did maintain it at some point, yes.
4 Q Let's talk about 9-B which is one of the invoices
5 that is in the package.
6 A Yes.
7 Q Four documents in the package, right? There are four
8 documents you've testified to generally or generally are
9 in each package. There's a lead card and an order form.

10 Those are the first two, we've discussed them?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And then there's an invoice which I ask you to take a
13 look at in 9-B. This is an invoice to a person by the
14 name of Rita Rieger, correct?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And did you prepare this invoice, Ms. Springer?
17 A Did I prepare it?
18 Q Yes.
19 A Did I actually print them out of a computer and have
20 them generated?
21 Q Right.
22 A Good possibility.
23 Q Did you do this one?
24 A I couldn't tell you. I did thousands of them a week,
25 how could you --
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2545
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q I'm asking you. Did you prepare this one?
2 A This one? I wouldn't be able to tell you if I
3 prepared this one or if I didn't prepare this one. This
4 is in 1993. Do you remember on this date what you were

5 wearing? I don't mean to seem nasty or anything, but this
6 is the kind of question you are asking me.
7 MR. JENKS: I'm going to ask that that be
8 stricken, Your Honor, and will you instruct the witness,
9 sir, to answer the questions as they are posed.
10 THE COURT: Motion granted. Ms. Springer --
11 THE WITNESS: Let me say, he's asking me a
12 question --
13 THE COURT: Ms. Springer, cease, stop. Listen to
14 me. You will listen to the questions and answer
15 responsively. Just what you are asked. That's all.
16 Do you understand that, Ms. Springer?
17 THE WITNESS: I understand.
18 THE COURT: Okay.
19 BY MR. JENKS:
20 Q Did you prepare this invoice, 9-B?
21 A I wouldn't be able to tell you if I prepared this
22 one.
23 Q Did you prepare any of them that are in that book?
24 A Yes -- well, you are saying in this book. I'm not

25 sure. I should have let you finish.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2546
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q In all the exhibits that Ms. Scott had shown you, did
2 you personally prepare any of those invoices?
3 A Yes.
4 Q You personally prepared them and sent them out?
5 A I wouldn't say -- if my handwriting is on these
6 forms, some of these forms. I wouldn't be able to tell
7 you if I did actually, you know, fold them, stuff them
8 with the literature and send them. I wouldn't be able to
9 tell you.
10 Q Is there any way of looking at this form 9-B which is
11 the invoice form to determine who prepared it, which
12 person prepared it and who sent it? Is there any code or
13 anything on it?
14 A (Perusing.) No. There's coding but that's just for
15 the purpose of who actually put the credit card number
16 through the terminal. That's the only coding that would
17 be on here.
18 Q So there's no way in looking at this invoice form to
19 determine who in the company actually prepared it and sent
20 it, correct?
21 A This form in particular?
22 Q Yes. That form in particular.
23 A Right, no.
24 Q Let's take a look at 9-A. That's a credit card
25 printout; am I correct?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2547
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 A Right, umm-hmm.
2 THE COURT: Yes? Excuse me.
3 THE WITNESS: Yes, sorry.
4 BY MR. JENKS:
5 Q Is that a credit card printout of a customer's credit
6 card?
7 A Yes, it is.
8 Q And there's an authorization number on that credit
9 card, correct?
10 A Yes.
11 Q And did you actually run the customer's credit card
12 and obtain the authorizations, or did someone else do
13 that?
14 A This one in particular?
15 Q First, 9-A.
16 A Yes. I put it through.
17 Q And how do you know you put it through?
18 A This is my handwriting (indicating) right here.
19 Q Right?
20 MR. SCHOER: What exhibit is she talking about?
21 THE COURT: Did somebody say something?
22 MR. SCHOER: I apologize.
23 What exhibit is she referring to when she says
24 "this is my handwriting"?
25 THE WITNESS: This is the invoice.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2548
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 MR. SCHOER: What exhibit is it?
2 THE WITNESS: 9-B.
3 MR. SCHOER: And when you say "this is my
4 handwriting," what are you pointing to?
5 THE WITNESS: The green, okay, this one. This
6 one is okay. 91-157.
7 BY MR. JENKS:
8 Q Would I be correct in saying that the only thing you

9 would write on one of these invoices would be an "okay"
10 with a docket number or a file number?
11 A There would be this and there would also be changes
12 to -- let's say the person who had entered this into the
13 computer had incorrectly spelled the name, I would make
14 the adjustment on there.
15 Q Okay. Take a look at the top.
16 When you say you would make the adjustment, would
17 you make it by hand or would you make it by computer
18 entry?
19 A I would make it by hand and I would distribute it to
20 the person who put the data incorrectly into the computer
21 system.
22 Q Whose initials are on 9-B at top, "CRH." Do you see
23 that?
24 A Yes.
25 Q Who is that?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2549
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 A This would have to be -- CRH? Oh, Rachel Hance.
2 Q And the "C" stands for?
3 A I don't know, but her name was Rachel Hance.
4 Q What is the significance of Rachel Hance's initials
5 appearing on this invoice? Why would her initials be
6 there?
7 A I wouldn't be able to tell you.
8 Oh, wait, actually -- hold on one second.
9 Oh, I know why. It's right here (indicating.)
10 Q Okay.
11 A What this is, her signature is, she was in charge of
12 entering what we called the cash receipts. So once this
13 credit card was processed in the terminal, it had to be
14 marked "paid" and the credit card number was automatically
15 put in there by the person who was entering the order, in
16 this particular case, a Lenny Campbell, C-A-M-P-B-E-L-L,
17 was the individual who was the data entry person.
18 Q I'm not asking you 9-C, I'm asking you 9-B.
19 A Okay.
20 Q You know, you are saying your writing is on there,
2 1 but someone else's is too?
22 A She was the one who entered the cash receipt. She
23 was the one who marked it paid in the computer.
24 Q So she actually did then the credit card
25 authorization?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2550
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 A No, this is my handwriting. This is my check, my
2 check mark.
3 Q Let's take a look at Government's Exhibit 5-B.
4 All of the B's that we have here in this book.
5 These are the invoices; am I right?
6 A Umm-hmm. Yes.
7 Q The pink ones?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Pink means invoice?
10 A Yes.
11 Q So when they think of pink, we think of the Who's Who
12 invoice?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Whose initials are these here on the top?
15 A Jennifer, I don't remember her name.
16 Q Is this your handwriting on 5-B?
17 A Yes.
18 Q So your handwriting just says "okay" with some kind
19 of a docket number on them?
20 A That's the trend.
21 Q Most of them, correct?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Up on the top on each one of these there is someone
24 else's initials; am I right?
25 A Yes, that's correct.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2551
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q And the significance of all of these other peoples'
2 initials up on the top of these invoices is what again?
3 A Entering of the cash receipts.
4 Q So they actually entered it into the computer?
5 A They'll enter in that this is paid by credit card,
6 yes.
7 Q Let's look at the last exhibit there in that
8 collection which is 9-A.
9 That's the credit card receipt of the customer,
10 correct?
11 A Yep. Yes, it is.
12 Q None of those credit card receipts in those books are

13 actually signed by the customer; am I correct?
14 A Yes, they are not signed by the customer.
15 Q None of them are, right?
16 A None.
17 Q And there's no individuals' handwriting from Who's
18 Who Worldwide on any of those credit card receipts, is
19 there?
20 A No, there's not.
21 Q Your handwriting doesn't appear on any of those
22 credit card receipts, correct?
23 A Not on the receipt, no.
24 Q Those credit card receipts are not records which were
25 generated by Who's Who Worldwide, would that be correct?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2552
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 A They are generated through the Banco terminal that
2 was in Who's Who Worldwide.
3 Q But they are not Who's Who Worldwide documents; is
4 that correct?
5 In other words, they are not documents that were
6 produced by Who's Who Worldwide, is that so?
7 A They were produced by NABANCO. This is a receipt.
8 Q By a machine?
9 A By a machine located in Who's Who.
10 Q When you say NABANCO, I don't understand?
11 A N-A-B-A-N-C-O. When you go in and make a purchase
12 with the credit card, the credit card would be swiped
13 through it, we would punch in the credit card number,
14 expiration date and press the enter and in return it would
15 give us either a decline, invalid number or an
16 authorization. And the authorization which is over here
17 would then be put on the order form with the "okay." Now,
18 if it was not okayed, if it was declined, it would have
19 "declined" on it or it would have "invalid credit card
20 number."
21 Q But those documents, the A documents in that series
22 that Ms. Scott had shown you --
23 A Umm-hmm.
24 Q -- Are all of these credit card rece ipts, right?
25 A Yes.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2553
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 Q And those are not Who's Who Worldwide documents.
2 They come out of this that NABANCO machine; am I right?
3 A Which is -- right --
4 Q Which was at Who's Who Worldwide, you said that?
5 A Right.
6 Q Right?
7 A Umm-hmm.
8 Q But they are not Who's Who Worldwide documents that
9 Who's Who Worldwide had generated; is that right?
10 A They were not generated by World Wide Who's Who but
11 by the employees of Who's Who, whoever was up there
12 processing the orders.
13 Q Did you ever work at Sterling Who's Who?
14 A No, I did not.
15 Q So you don't know anything about the operation of
16 Sterling Who's Who, do you?
17 A I saw the orders forms that came over. I knew some
18 of the people that worked there, but I never went there.
19 Q So you had nothing to do with any of the documents
20 concerning Sterling Who's Who to customers; am I right?
21 A Yes, I did.
22 Q You did?
23 A Yes, I did.
24 Q And how was it that you had something to do with
25 those documents?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2554
Springer-voir dire/Jenks

1 A I did the same process as I did with the 1983 Marcus
2 Avenue. I did the same -- the process we did with the
3 orders, editing them, putting them through the terminal,
4 cash receipts, this was all done at 1983 Marcus Avenue and
5 I was in charge of counting the orders, making sure that
6 they matched up to the sales forms, making sure that the
7 information matched.
8 Q Did you ever work at Sterling Who's Who?
9 A No, I did not.
10 Q All right.
11 MR. JENKS: Your Honor, I have no further voir
12 dire of these documents.
13 MR. LEE: I have a couple questions.
14 THE COURT: Go ahead.
15 MR. LEE: Thank you, Judge.
16 (Continued.)
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2555
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
2 BY MR. LEE:
3 Q Ms. Springer.
4 A Yes.
5 Q I would like you to look at Government's Exhibit 9-C
6 for Identification, please.
7 A Okay.
8 Q And that is something that you identify by calling it
9 an order form, correct?
10 A Yes.
11 Q And that document contains information that a
12 salesperson, as far as you can tell, wrote down in that
13 document, correct?
14 A Yes.
15 Q However, am I correct that you stated that the
16 salesperson would not necessarily make out this document
17 at or near the time of this interview?
18 A There was times, yes, correct.
19 Q And there is no way that you can tell by looking at
20 any particular document that it was made anywhere near the
21 time of the interview by the salesperson, correct, you
22 can't tell?
23 A Unless --
24 Q Is that true, yes or no?
25 In other words, you look at this document --
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2556
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 well, let me back up a second.
2 Am I correct that a salesperson doesn't
3 necessarily make notations in this document at or near the
4 time that this interview was occurring?
5 A They do take notes. They did take notes.
6 Q But I'm talking about document 9-C in front of you.
7 A I'm not sure. Let me say I'm not sure --
8 Q I just want you to answer the question. If you don't
9 understand, let me know.
10 A I do understand.
11 Q Let me ask it again, ma'am.
12 A Okay.
13 Q Just listen.
14 A Umm-hmm.
15 Q Look at document 9-C.
16 A Okay.
17 Q That's, as far as you can tell, contains notations
18 made by a salesperson about this qualifying interview they
19 do over the phone. Yes or no?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Is that true?
22 A Yes.
23 Q But you also state based on your experience sometimes
24 the entries made by the salesperson, they don't do it
25 right at the time that they are doing the interview or
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2557
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 right afterwards; is that correct?
2 Just yes or no?
3 A That is true.
4 Q And looking at any particular document, just looking
5 at 9-C for example -- I'll back up.
6 That's true of all these order forms. There are
7 times that a salesperson may make it right or at the time
8 they do the interview but there are times they do it
9 afterwards and we don't know how long afterwards; is that
10 true?
11 A Yes.
12 MR. LEE: I have no further questions.
13 MR. TRABULUS: Your Honor, would it be possible
14 to take a brief break now?
15 THE COURT: Yes. Well, I was going to do that
16 anyway.
17 Members of the jury, we'll take a ten-minute
18 recess because I have to discuss some questions of law
19 with counsel.
20 Please don't discuss the case. Keep an open
21 mind. Please recess yourselves. It may be longer than
22 ten minutes.
23 (Jury exits.)
24 THE WITNESS: Am I permitted to leave?
25 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, do you want the witness
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2558
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 to leave yet?
2 THE COURT: All right. You may step out of the
3 courtroom.
4 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
5 MR. TRABULUS: Your Honor, Mr. Gordon has to go
6 to the wash room very badly. Could we do that right now?
7 THE COURT: All right. We'll have to take a
8 five-minute recess.
9 MR. TRABULUS: It will just be a moment.
10 (Recess taken.)
11 THE COURT: Is everybody in now? Is anybody
12 missing?
13 MR. NELSON: Mr. Dunn is not here, Your Honor.
14 He's coming in.
15 THE COURT: All right.
16 Are there any objections to the introduction of
17 these records?
18 Have a seat, please.
19 MR. JENKS: Your Honor, I would object to the
20 introduction of the lead cards and the computer-generated
21 credit card invoices. I have no objection to the order
22 forms or to the invoices through this particular witness.
23 With respect to the lead cards themselves, the
24 testimony was that the lead cards were prepared by a
25 third-party, an outside publishing company. They were
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2559
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 mailed to the customers, and the customer in fact filled
2 out the information that is contained on the lead card.
3 So what is contained on the lead card is in fact hearsay.
4 I would submit that it is a business record which
5 incorporates a statement by a person who is not part of
6 the regular organized activity and has no business duty to
7 make that report.
8 If the record is offered to prove the truth of
9 what is in that lead card, such as "I'm a pharmacist, I'm
10 a doctor or I'm a lawyer" or what have you, it should be
11 treated as hearsay. I would respectfully submit to you
12 that the appropriate person to introduce a lead card
13 through that lead card that is in every packet there is
14 the actual individual who filled out the information
15 contained on the lead card. I don't think you can offer
16 the contents of the document, whether it be a business
17 record or not, to prove the truth of what is contained in
18 the document. I mean, there are two separate ways. You
19 get the document in as a business record but in order to
20 prove the truth of the contents of the document that has
21 to be proved independently otherwise it is hearsay. You
22 can't circumvent the hearsay rule by a business record
23 exception allowing the document in. I would object to the
24 introduction of the lead card.
25 I would object to all of the lead cards that
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2560
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 Ms. Scott had marked for Identification and had shown to
2 the witness.
3 I would also object to the introduction of -- I
4 think she said that NABANCO, NABANCO credit card receipts
5 that were generated from the terminal in Who's Who
6 Worldwide since they were not regularly kept business
7 records of the corporation. And I would make those two
8 objections.
9 With respect to the order form and the invoice, I
10 have no objection.
11 MR. SCHOER: Judge, with respect to, I hate to do
12 this, but with respect to some of these documents, there
13 are handwritten notes. For example, Exhibit 3-E -- I'm
14 sorry, Judge.
15 THE COURT: No, you go ahead.
16 MR. SCHOER: Exhibit 3-E has a note written
17 apparently by the customer on top of an invoice. I would
18 object to the introduction of those kinds of notes at this
19 point.
20 In addition, I know Ms. Scott went very quickly,
21 but it seems to me that -- I know she went very quickly
22 but it seems to me some of the things she offered in
23 evidence were more than the order form, the lead card and
24 the invoice and that slip. Some of the letters --
25 THE COURT: What is the slip?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2561
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 MR. SCHOER: The credit card slip. Some of the
2 letters, I believe, were solicitation letters. Some
3 apparently -- I believe some were solicitation letters.
4 THE COURT: Are you objecting to solicitation
5 letters?
6 MR. SCHOER: At this point, yes.
7 MR. WHITE: Which exhibit is the solicitation
8 letter?
9 MR. SCHOER: I'm saying, she went fast. 19-E.
10 MR. WHITE: That was the solicitation letter.
11 MR. SCHOER: And 44-F.
12 THE COURT: Why is the solicitation letter not a
13 business record, Mr. Schoer?
14 MR. SCHOER: Your Honor, there has been no
15 testimony about solicitation letters by this witness.
16 THE COURT: Assuming it was made in the regular
17 course of business.
18 MR. SCHOER: She didn't say that.
19 THE COURT: Assuming it is, assuming that she
20 says this. I will not go through this four times. I
21 don't know that she didn't say it, but assuming you are
22 right, assuming that this is the solicitation letter and I
23 have every reason she will say that, don't you,
24 Mr. Jenks?
25 MR. JENKS: I don't know. She said she would
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2562
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 introduce the solicitation letter through a different
2 custodian, so I don't know.
3 THE COURT: So you are not offering this
4 solicitation letter, Ms. Scott?
5 MS. SCOTT: That's correct, Your Honor.
6 THE COURT: I thought she was.
7 MS. SCOTT: Your Honor, we intend to offer it
8 later in the case, just to clarify.
9 THE COURT: I understand.
10 What is objected to, as I understand it, is the
11 lead card because there are comments made by the
12 customers. Two, the credit card slips or receipts, and
13 three, handwritten notes on some of the documents. Is
14 that what is objected to?
15 MR. SCHOER: I think there are other documents.
16 Again, my note-keeping -- did you offer 54-I?
17 MR. TRABULUS: She offered that and also 54-E
18 which is a letter apparently from a customer.
19 MR. WHITE: 54-E is not offered.
20 MR. TRABULUS: Oh, it isn't.
21 MR. SCHOER: 54-I, I believe it was, and that is
22 a letter from Bank America.
23 THE COURT: What I suggest we do, I'll make
24 rulings in a generalized fashion and you can specifically
25 go through any of the items that you say are handwritten
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2563
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 notes or something. It will be a long process. I don't
2 want to keep the jury waiting forever. So let's talk
3 about generically the law on these things. What is the
4 law on the admissibility of a lead card?
5 You are getting up. You are poised to say
6 something. Who will handle this, you or Ms. Scott, not
7 both?
8 MR. WHITE: I will handle the argument.
9 THE COURT: Why is it admissible the lead card
10 that is made up by the customer?
11 MR. WHITE: Because the Second Circuit law is
12 crystal clear that a document that is not produced by the
13 business but is incorporated into that business' records
14 and relied upon is therefore a business record of the
15 corporation.
16 THE COURT: Are you talking about the Jacobetz
17 case?
18 MR. WHITE: Yes, Your Honor, among others.
19 THE COURT: That was an opinion written by that
20 distinguished jurist whose portrait is on the wall here.
21 Did you know that, Mr. White?
22 MR. WHITE: In fact, I do, Your Honor, and as you
23 know that case involved a corporate custodian who
24 testified as part of a reimbursement voucher that was
25 submitted to his corporation by an executive, that
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2564
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 executive included a receipt from the Triboro Bridge and
2 Tunnel Authority which was introduced as a business record
3 of that corporation.
4 THE COURT: You have to slow down, Mr. White.
5 You are going so fast that you are almost reaching
6 Ms. Scott's speed and she is stratosphere. She has gone
7 beyond speed records. I can't keep up with it. I know
8 that my colleagues here, the defense lawyers are all right
9 with it, but I can't. I mean, I'm sure the jurors are
10 with you all the way.
11 MR. WHITE: I'll slow down. In the Jacobetz case
12 it was admitted as a business record although the
13 receipt had been prepared by the Triboro Bridge and Tunnel
14 Authority and submitted by an executive and submitted as
15 his reimbursement voucher to the corporation because the
16 company incorporated into its records and relied upon it,
17 in fact, they paid out money to the executives based upon
18 the genuineness of that document.
19 THE COURT: Mr. White, are you equating Triboro
20 Bridge toll receipts with lead cards made by customers?
21 MR. WHITE: I am, because this is a business
22 record that is relied upon by Who's Who. They sent out
23 the card to a customer, the customer returns it to them
24 with their return address on it.
25 THE COURT: No, you missed my point. We're
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2565
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 talking about reliability, authenticity, trustworthiness,
2 that's what we are talking about, correct?
3 MR. WHITE: Correct.
4 THE COURT: The rule is the business rule record
5 should be admitted if it is trustworthy and it follows the
6 rule --
7 MR. WHITE: That's correct.
8 THE COURT: That's the basic foundation for this
9 rule, that something is done on a regular basis by a
10 company is authentic, is trustworthy. But you are not
11 equating a Triboro Bridge automated toll receipt which is
12 very instrumental in that case because it had the time
13 that this person went to the tolls. You are not equating
14 that document with something written out by a customer in
15 Sioux City, Iowa.
16 MR. WHITE: Actually I am. Let me explain why.
17 The Second Circuit case law isn't limited just to the
18 situation of Jacobetz of an automated toll receipt.
19 THE COURT: Show me.
20 MR. WHITE: There's the Saks case, 817 F.2d 1011.
21 THE COURT: I just got Saks.
22 MR. WHITE: Saks.
23 THE COURT: What is the citation which you went
24 through like lightening.
25 MR. WHITE: 817 F.2d 1011.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2566
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 THE COURT: What does that say?
2 MR. WHITE: The relevance of that, it's a civil
3 case, it's a dispute over some shipping and cargo. A ship
4 loads up cargo in Africa, I believe, sales to the United
5 States. At a subsequent trial the chief.
6 Chief mate of the ship identifies as b usiness
7 records the handwritten tallies made by the African dock
8 workers of what cargo they loaded onto a ship. And he
9 testified that his business, that was the custom and
10 practice in that industry to rely upon the dock workers
11 who were loading the cargo onto the dock although they
12 didn't work for him, but he relied upon it in his
13 business. So, yeah, I'm equating the lead cards with
14 that.
15 THE COURT: Good case for you, Mr. White. I
16 didn't know that case.
17 MR. WHITE: I was up late finding it.
18 THE COURT: That's a very good case. What else
19 do you have? You must have stayed up very late to find
20 that one.
21 MR. WHITE: There is another case that follows
22 the same principle. I can't off the top of my head tell
23 you what the precise record involved was.
24 THE COURT: How about cases that were decided
25 after Jacobetz?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2567
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 MR. WHITE: I don't remember off the top of my
2 head what year that was decided.
3 THE COURT: 1992.
4 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, the ones I have --
5 THE COURT: That is the key case, there's no
6 question about it.
7 MR. WHITE: Right. There is an additional one as
8 I said, Your Honor, and I'm not sure, I would have to
9 review it again to figure out precisely what it is.
10 THE COURT: Do you have a copy of Saks?
11 MR. WHITE: Yes.
12 THE COURT: May I see it?
13 MR. WHITE: (Handing.)
14 THE COURT: Looks good.
15 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, may I make one other
16 point?
17 THE COURT: I mean, for you.
18 MR. WHITE: I know. It does look good.
19 THE COURT: It doesn't look good for Mr. Jenks at
20 all.
21 MR. WHITE: You asked me if I was equating the
22 toll receipt with the lead card. I am in this case. Just
23 as the toll receipt was entered for the time that that
24 person crossed the bridge, the primary reason the
25 government is offering the lead card, is the mailing, the
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2568
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 time stamp, the date postal mark on each of those cards,
2 and I think it is certainly clear from all we know of the
3 mailing process that that's just as reliable as a time
4 stamp from a toll receipt from the Triboro Bridge.
5 THE COURT: I agree. So you don't want the
6 written part to go in?
7 MR. WHITE: I want the whole thing to go in.
8 THE COURT: I thought you said it is so
9 reliable. The written part isn't as reliable, right?
10 MR. WHITE: I agree, but I don't think it is any
11 less reliable than the African dock workers cargo tally.
12 THE COURT: Well, we'll have to go through all of
13 these records. How do you propose that?
14 Well, first of all, the objection is to the lead
15 card, the credit card slips. What about these credit card
16 slips?
17 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, I think the credit card
18 slips fall into the same category. If I understood
19 Ms. Springer's testimony, the Who's Who Worldwide, the
20 credit card merchant runs the card through the credit card
21 machine, it gives them the authorization and this is the
22 receipt that is provided to the merchant, that they keep
23 for their records. Again, it is something that the
24 business incorporates into its records and relies upon.
25 THE COURT: Okay. This is the ruling of the
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2569
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 court on this interesting evidentiary issue and I'm not
2 going through the various handwritten notes. We'll deal
3 with that or you'll have to deal with that on an
4 individual basis, but generally speaking with regard to
5 the lead cards and the credit card receipts. There being
6 no objection to the order cards --
7 MR. LEE: Just -- I do have an objection. I
8 apologize, I didn't have the opportunity to stand up to
9 catch your attention.
10 THE COURT: You object to what?
11 MR. LEE: I do have an objection. Other counsel,
12 I think Mr. Jenks, specifically stated he did not object
13 to what is called by Ms. Springer, the order forms, but I
14 have a very specific objection to that and I would like to
15 be heard on that.
16 THE COURT: Go ahead.
17 MR. LEE: I refer Your Honor's attention to
18 further Exhibit 9-C which is what I specifically asked
19 Ms. Springer about. She identified that as an order
20 form. She testified both on direct and on cross that
21 these order forms are not necessarily created by the maker
22 at -- the salesperson at or near the time of what they
23 reflect which is this interview. She said she couldn't
24 tell how long afterwards they may have prepared it. I
25 think that's a fatal depiction that doesn't allow it to
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2570
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 come in.
2 THE COURT: No, it's not because you didn't ask
3 her how long afterwards is the outside time they would
4 prepare it. I know you carefully avoided that which is
5 nice but I will get to that when she comes back.
6 MR. LEE: Well, Judge, okay. At that point I
7 thought at least it was comfortable that it could call for
8 conjecture and guesswork but it is also trustworthiness.
9 And Mr. White finally was pushed, he tried to offer to the
10 Court the reason for his offering the lead card. I think
11 it need be asked or should be asked what he's offering
12 that order form for. Because if you look at it
13 specifically, Your Honor, I don't know what they are
14 offering it to prove but it has names of people,
15 salespeople on the upper right-hand corner. I don't know
16 what he's offering it for but it should be asked by the
17 Court, it should be his burden what he's offering it for
18 because it may compel Your Honor to give a limiting
19 instruction to the jury for what purpose it is being
20 offered for because it may contain something in there that
21 is inadmissible or at least prejudicial and may require
22 Your Honor either to redact it or to give a limiting
23 instruction as to what it is being offered for because it
24 can be offered for many reasons and he's not being
25 specific.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2571
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 He just wants Your Honor to let it fly in, the
2 complete document. And on these order forms, Your Honor,
3 there is another element about it that I think undercuts
4 his trustworthiness.
5 Ms. Springer is testifying that notations are
6 made on these very documents subsequent to notations made
7 by the maker, the salesperson and there are changes, there
8 is editing occurring. We don't know the motivation for
9 the editing, it goes to the trustworthiness it has and it
10 is all coming in with handwritten changes. We don't know
11 exactly who is making it, when they are making it and why
12 they are making it.
13 I submit this document is unreliable and we need
14 at least some specific offer of proof from Mr. White what
15 he thinks this proves.
16 THE COURT: Mr. Lee, I don't know how to answer
17 each one of your contentions because you've made a number
18 of them. I assume a document offered as an exception to
19 the hearsay rule is offered for the truth. That's what it
20 is offered for. And let's not dodge it. It is offered
21 for the truth. That's what it means. It's an exception
22 to the hearsay rule and as far as changes or notations or
23 alterations, that will have to be handled on a
24 document-by-document basis. If the changes and notations
25 are made in the regular course of business, they are going
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2572
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 to go in evidence for the truth.
2 That's what they are offered for; is that
3 correct, Mr. White?
4 MR. WHITE: Yes, Your Honor. And if Mr. Lee
5 wants further detail, he can cross-examine the witness
6 about certain events.
7 THE COURT: Well, before the documents go in, if
8 there are alterations and handwritten statements on them,
9 I will go over them if they can't be any agreement on a
10 document-by-document basis. I'm going over generically
11 the law with regard to the admissibility of these types of
12 documents. Now, each one may have problems that I'll have
13 to address but as far as whether it is at or about the
14 time of the transaction, Mr. Lee, I don't know because you
15 didn't question the witness sufficiently, or for your
16 purposes it was sufficient, but not for mine. We'll get
17 to that in due course lease.
18 MR. LEE: Just one further thing briefly.
19 Perhaps I used the wrong word or I should have
20 made it more clear. When I speak about what specific
21 purpose he's offering it for, I'm speaking to relevance.
22 I'm not speaking to that it survives as far as the hearsay
23 rule is concerned. There has to be an offer of proof as
24 to its relevance.
25 THE COURT: Relevance of these cards?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2573
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 MR. LEE: No, specifically of this order form I'm
2 talking about. He has to make an offer of proof of
3 relevance, he can't say it is a business record and it
4 comes in. The Court has to inquire what he's offering it
5 to prove, what its relevance is and that may give rise to
6 other evidentiary objections.
7 If he's offering it specifically, for example,
8 for an admission or deletion as a salesperson, there may
9 be a problem with that and that may require some sort of
10 limiting instruction from Your Honor. My point is
11 relevance has to be stated to Your Honor about what these
12 documents are offered to prove.
13 THE COURT: Reading the indictment I think it
14 would be relevant, but when you say it may be an
15 admission, I didn't even get into that yet.
16 There's another, as you say, there's another very
17 important reason why some of this will go in and they are
18 admissions by the defendants. However, I'm going to do it
19 one step at a time.
20 At this point we have an objection to the
21 business record rule because the lead cards and the credit
22 card receipts are hearsay, according to Mr. Jenks,
23 Mr. Schoer and I guess all the rest of the defendants'
24 lawyers.
25 MR. NELSON: Your Honor, if I might be heard for
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2574
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 a moment. I have a specific objection on a generic basis
2 to the order forms, to a specific portion of the order
3 forms. It relates to the portion of the order forms which
4 flow from ship to, which in the middle of the document
5 until the portion which is, which starts with lifetime
6 membership and lists what the actual amount and cost is.
7 It appears, Your Honor, that the information
8 contained here on the testimony of Ms. Springer is
9 information which is acquired from the applicant during
10 the course of an interview. This is hearsay. This is
11 specific intimation that is being imparted to the person
12 preparing the document by a third-party.
13 I would submit, Your Honor, it is analogous, for
14 example, in a robbery case where there is a complaint that
15 is prepared by the police department, the narrative
16 portion of that is hearsay and not admissible, while the
17 document itself is prepared in the recourse of business.
18 The portions that are provided by the victim of the
19 offense itself are hearsay on top of hearsay and there
20 would have to be a separate exception to the hearsay rule
21 to allow that portion of document to be admitted.
22 So my objection specifically is to that
23 biographical portion of the generic document itself, that
24 that portion should not be admissible. It doesn't pass
25 the reliable prong of the business record exception
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2575
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 because it is provided by an outside person to the maker
2 of the document.
3 MR. JENKS: Your Honor, that's the same objection
4 I made to the content of what is contained in the lead
5 card and why if they are offering the lead card for the
6 truth, why I would object. That's basically the same
7 identical reason.
8 THE COURT: It's good you reinforced it. I
9 thought that was so, Mr. Jenks. Thanks for corroborating
10 that. It is the same objection and it was met by
11 Mr. White with the Saks case, 817 F.2d 1011. It was met
12 with --
13 MR. NELSON: That would be Jacobetz, Your Honor,
14 I believe.
15 THE COURT: I'm trying to see what I did with it,
16 which is interesting.
17 MR. NELSON: Your Honor, while I have the Court's
18 attention --
19 THE COURT: Well, you didn't let me finish the
20 Jakobetz case, 955 F.2d, 786 (2d Cir. 1992.)
21 Yes.
22 MR. NELSON: Thank you, Your Honor. While I've
23 not had the opportunity to read Saks and I've read
24 Jakobetz in the past, I would submit to the Court both of
25 those cases are clearly distinguishable and they are
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2576
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 clearly distinguishable because the Court of Appeals in
2 both of those cases looked to the independent reliability
3 of the information that was being relied upon by the
4 person who was the maker of the document or who was
5 utilizing the document.
6 While I've only heard the factual recitation
7 provided by the government with respect to Saks, in
8 essence what the government is saying is that they were
9 relying upon a business record prepared by dock workers in
10 Africa at that time which would have some independent
11 reliability in and of itself. This is a form being
12 prepared by people who are in essence preparing packing
13 slips that are being loaded onto a ship. Those documents
14 have independent reliability. There's a reason why the
15 person who is the porter or the dock worker or his foreman
16 is supervising what is taking place and there is an
17 independent basis for reliability for the preparation of
18 the document upon which it is later relied upon by third
19 parties.
20 I would submit to the Court that is the
21 distinguishing feature in each of these cases, that there
22 is some form of independent reliability that the Court of
23 Appeals looked to in the document that was relied upon. I
24 would submit here as it relates to the lead card there is
25 no independent reliability other than the fact that some
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2577
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 individual sent a lead card in. We don't know who the
2 person is, what the person is, what the person had to send
3 in, what basis the person had to send it in.
4 Thank you, Your Honor.
5 THE COURT: It's an interesting question and it
6 is not open and should I dare say and it would be very
7 interesting to see how it comes out. I like these
8 evidentiary problems. I'll make a ruling but first I want
9 to go into the jury and apologize to them for keeping them
10 waiting, tell them there will be another 15 or 20
11 minutes.
12 Any objection?
13 MR. WHITE: No, Your Honor.
14 (Recess taken.)
15 (In the jury room.)
16 THE COURT: I want to apologize to all of you for
17 keeping you waiting, especially since you got here three
18 minutes before 9:30 in the morning, but I have to go over
19 some issues of law and it will be another 15 or 20
20 minutes. So I'm sorry. I know you are in close quarters
21 here and it could be a larger room and you are very
22 patient or impatient, I don't know what to say, but I'm
23 sorry about that.
24 We'll get to you as soon as we can.
25 (In open court.)
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2578
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 THE COURT: All right. Let's take a look at the
2 first evidentiary rule, 803(6), which says the following
3 are not excluded by the hearsay rule although the
4 declarant is available as a witness. Subdivision (6),
5 records of regularly conducted activity. A memorandum,
6 report, record or data compilation, in any form of acts,
7 events, conditions, opinions or diagnoses, made at or near
8 the time by or from information transmitted by a person
9 with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly
10 conducted business activity and if it was the regular
11 practice of that business activity to make the memorandum,
12 report, record, etcetera, all as shown by the testimony of
13 the custodian or other qualified witness, unless the
14 source of information or the method or circumstances of
15 preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness."

16 In United States v. Strother, which I have the
17 slip opinion, I don't have the citation, but under your
18 modern method you can get that in about eight seconds, I
19 suppose, it was decided by the Second Circuit on March 1,
20 1995 and it says this. Talking about the business record
21 rule.
22 "This Court has adopted a generous view of the
23 business records exception construing it to favor the
24 admission of evidence if it has any probative value at
25 all."
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2579
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 United States v. Froiden, 849 F.2d, 716 at 722,
2 (2d Cir. 1988), citations omitted.
3 Although the principle precondition to
4 admissibility is the sufficient trustworthiness of the
5 record -- and here they give your case, Saks v. MV Export
6 Champion 817 F.2d 1011, (2d Cir. 1987). The proffered
7 record must meet all the requirements of the exception.
8 The determination of whether a record is
9 sufficiently reliable to warrant its admission is within
10 the sound discretion of the district court, citations
11 omitted.
12 In a New York case which is not really binding
13 but is interesting, People v. Guidice, 83 N.Y.2d 630, a
14 line sheet, a record made by a person monitoring an
15 electronic transmission, in this case a telephone
16 conversation, it includes an identification of the tape on
17 which the recording is made, the date of each call,
18 etcetera.
19 The Court of Appeals holds, this is New York
20 Court of Appeals, holds that such line sheets maintained
21 in this instance may be admitted in evidence as business
22 records. Interesting.
23 We know also that invoices received and held by
24 one company and prepared and sent by another company are
25 admissible as business records.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2580
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 United States v. Ullrich, 580 F.2d 765, (5th Cir.
2 1978), where a car dealer made a manufacturer's statement
3 part of the dealer's records. So in this case the fact
4 that someone else sent out some material would not prevent
5 it from being a business record of Who's Who Worldwide.
6 Also, it has been held that invoices that a
7 construction company received from businesses that
8 supplied materials and services for work performed are
9 admissible as business records of the company that
10 received the invoices. United States v. Fleniod, 780 F.2d
11 867, (8th Cir. 1983). And of course a custodian or
12 qualified witness to identify the records need not be the
13 person who made the records, need not be the person

14 whoever saw the records, need not be the person in the
15 same company as made the records, as long as that person
16 says "I recognize that these are records made in the
17 regular course of business," that's sufficient.
18 In addition, I don't know -- are these records --
19 where did you get these records from, Mr. White?
20 MR. WHITE: These were records that were turned
21 over to the U.S. Attorney's Office by the trustee, the
22 bankruptcy trustee that was appointed to run or to
23 liquidate Who's Who Worldwide.
24 THE COURT: An interesting evidentiary point
25 because one who produces voluntarily documents and
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2581
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 implicitly represents them to be business records cannot
2 be heard to contend that they are not business records.
3 That I don't think is very determinat ive in this
4 case but that is another interesting rule of law which is
5 set forth in United States v. Lawrence, 934 F.2d 868, (7th
6 Cir. 1991). And as I stated before the custodian or the
7 other qualified witness who testifies about the business
8 record need not personally participate in the creation or
9 maintenance of the document nor even know who recorded the
10 information. That's United States v. Muhammad, 928 F.2d
11 1461, (7th Cir. 1951).
12 Again, the Second Circuit on July 12, 1995, and I
13 haven't got the citation, in the case of Phoenix
14 Associates v. Stone said, Rule 803(6) favors the admission
15 of evidence rather than its exclusion if it has any
16 probative value at all, and the principle precondition to
17 admissibility is that the record has sufficient indicia of
18 trustworthiness to be considered reliable. And this
19 indicia of reliability or trustworthiness is done when
20 there is repeated events, repeated regular, similar,
21 daily, weekly, monthly events rather than unusual or
22 isolated events which would take away from the
23 reliability. "We further reject --" this is from the same
24 case, Phoenix Associates, "we further reject Stone's
25 argument that -- let's use the name, Ambrosini's failure
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2582
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 to identify the specific employee responsible for filling
2 out the record proved fatal to its foundation." They
3 reject that. The custodian need not have personal
4 knowledge of the actual creation of the document, nor is
5 there any requirement under Rule 803(6) that the records
6 be prepared by the party who has custody of the documents
7 and seeks to introduce them into evidence, rather all that
8 is required is proof that it was the business entities
9 regular practice to get information from the person who
10 created the document, citing Saks again, Mr. White. How
11 did I miss that case?
12 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, I have the cite for
13 Phoenix Associates, if you want it.
14 THE COURT: And in Raphavely International v.
15 Waterman Steamship Corp., decided by the Second Circuit
16 August 14, 1992. They say likewise it is irrelevant that
17 the foundation for this evidence was laid by an employee
18 of SGS rather than an employee of Gezira.
19 In an excellent article on evidence by a
20 distinguished professor, Michavel Martin, who I think is at
21 Fordham Law School, I'm not sure, he commented on this
22 practice of allowing into evidence business records, parts
23 of which were supplied by other entities and other persons
24 which we have here.
25 "Although each of the foundation requirements in
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2583
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 the Federal Rules provides circumstantial assurances of
2 reliability, the courts have not always insisted that
3 every requirement be satisfied, rather if the records seem
4 to be trustworthy, it has sometimes been admitted even if
5 it was not made by the business whose record it was, or if
6 it was not kept by the business. And sometimes the Courts
7 focus on a record's apparent trustworthiness has lead to
8 sliding over double hearsay problems resulting from the
9 observer with personal knowledge, not being a regular
10 participant in the business-making and keeping of the
11 records. And they cited certain cases in which this was
12 done.
13 I don't believe in sliding over double hearsay,
14 however. I don't agree with that, but we come down to the
15 case that surprised me when it came down and that's the
16 seminal case of United States v. Jakobetz, 955 F.2d 786.
17 In Jakobetz, the district court allowed the
18 government to admit into evidence a toll receipt for the
19 Throgs Neck Bridge stamped June 14, 1989, 3:20 p.m., $10.
20 The receipt was part of a trip cost report that the
21 defendant submitted to his employer to obtain
22 reimbursement for his expenses. The government submitted
23 the toll receipt as part of the employer's business
24 records. However, the receipt was a record made by the
25 Throgs Neck Bridge system and not by the employer, a firm
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2584
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 named Wildcat.
2 For some reason the government never put on the
3 stand anybody from the Triboro Bridge Authority, which I
4 imagine they could easily have done, however, it was not
5 done. And on appeal the defendant contended that this
6 toll receipt had to be authenticated by a person with
7 knowledge of the Throgs Neck Bridge records system.
8 He argued that since Wildcat, his employer,
9 simply had possession of but did not prepare the record.
10 Testimony by the custodian of Wildcat's records was
11 insufficient. Stated simply, Wildcat didn't make or
12 prepare the record. This argument was rejected by the
13 circuit court. Inside quote, 'we do not read into the
14 business record exception so narrowly --' withdrawn. "We
15 do not read the business record exception so narrowly.
16 Rule 803(6) allows business records to be admitted 'if
17 witnesses testify that the records are integrated into a
18 company's records and relied upon in its day-to-day
19 operations.'" Matter of Ollag, 665 F.2d 43, (2d Cir.
20 1981). Even if the document is originally created by
21 another entity, in our case the customer, it's creator,
22 the customer, need not testify when the document has been
23 incorporated into the business records of the testifying
24 entity. See United States v. Carranco, 551 F.2d 1197,
25 (10th Cir. 1997).
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2585
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 In this case Wildcat incorporated the toll
2 receipts into its business records to a sufficient degree
3 to permit an inference as to the receipt's authenticity.
4 The Wildcat witness testified that toll receipts were
5 regularly submitted by drivers as part of their trip
6 reports and regularly incorporated into the business
7 records for general accounting purposes.
8 Here's where the government's real problem comes
9 into the case and the Court, Judge Pratt (indicating)
10 continued by saying "in addition, a toll receipt is not
11 the type of evidence that is so susceptible to fabrication
12 that authentication by a representative of the Throgs Neck
13 Bridge should be required. Jakobetz himself relied on its
14 authenticity when he submitted the receipt for
15 reimbursement of his expenses. He must have believed that
16 the date, time and amount stamped on the receipt fairly
17 represented a part of his trip for which he sought to be
18 reimbursed. Thus, the trial court did not abuse its
19 discretion by allowing the receipt into evidence."
20 I might say here while we don't have a toll
21 receipt which is much more authentic on its face than
22 these notes, we have a whole plan, system of operation.
23 As a result of these notes many things occurred. People
24 acted on these notes. They are not notes in an
25 isolation. The notes triggered a whole process by which
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2586
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 this customer became a member of the organization and
2 other reports followed, other records were sent. So there
3 is some authentication for the fact that this customer
4 wrote out what the customer wrote on the card.
5 Moreover, this case demonstrates the tendency to
6 favor admissibility in the federal court, if relevant and
7 probative and reliable.
8 Accordingly, it is the opinion of the Court that
9 the order card is admissible, and I'm not going into the
10 particular details of each card if there may be problems
11 with each particular exhibit, the invoices are admissible,
12 the lead cards are admissible, the credit card receipts
13 are admissible.
14 Now, we didn't get to the solicitation letters.
15 The only -- which was the one, Mr. Lee, that you said
16 wasn't done at the time?
17 MR. LEE: Well, I asked -- Exhibit 9-C.
18 THE COURT: What kind of records?
19 MR. LEE: What she called an order form.
20 THE COURT: Before we let those in, I want to
21 find out when they were made out. If they were made out
22 within a reasonable time that would be enough in my view,
23 Mr. Lee. They don't have to be made on the minute, but we
24 can find that out. So that's my ruling generically on
25 these exhibits.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2587
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 How you will work it out on an individual basis,
2 I think we'll have to do it after court or something.
3 You'll have to do it with the defendants' lawyers.
4 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, I'm sure we can work that
5 out. It sounds like Your Honor's ruling is resolving the

6 issue with respect to probably 90 percent of them.
7 Maybe we can do that at lunchtime.
8 THE COURT: Don't you people eat lunch at all?
9 MR. WHITE: Well, yes, but we'll try to do it.
10 THE COURT: You don't have to reveal it. That's
11 a confidential communication which you don't have to
12 reveal.
13 MR. WHITE: I just want to make sure this is how
14 I would propose to continue. We would continue with
15 Ms. Springer's direct testimony because she is testifying
16 about other matters in addition to this, to lay the
17 foundation for these bids records.
18 She will be here until lunchtime, until 12:30. A
19 member of her family, though, has had surgery this morning
20 and she needed this afternoon to go pick them up. So I
21 guess what we propose with the Court's permission if we
22 can excuse her again and we have other witnesses to put
23 on, she will be back this afternoon and insert her back
24 and continue with her testimony and hopefully in the
25 meantime we can resolve a few outstanding business records
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2588
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 issues.
2 THE COURT: We have great flexibility in the
3 federal court. Did you know that? That's what they told
4 me when I got here, as opposed to the state court. I
5 really haven't seen much difference, but that's what they
6 told me.
7 MR. SCHOER: Judge, my question is, is Your
8 Honor's ruling that these documents are admissible based
9 -- are they admissible against all the defendants? Has
10 Your Honor made a determination that the government has
11 established a conspiracy and that these are -- these
12 documents are in furtherance of the conspiracy, or are you
13 admitting these documents as ad missions of certain
14 defendants or as admissions of the corporation, and are
15 you excluding the documents that weren't prepared by any
16 of the defendants?
17 THE COURT: Which question would you like me to
18 answer first?
19 MR. SCHOER: Maybe the first one.
20 THE COURT: I forget about the first two, maybe
21 the third.
22 MR. SCHOER: As to whether or not Your Honor has
23 found that Your Honor has established a conspiracy.
24 THE COURT: I haven't found that.
25 MR. SCHOER: So therefore --
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2589
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 THE COURT: There's been no testimony that I
2 could find or make such a finding.
3 MR. SCHOER: And I agree with Your Honor. So
4 therefore these documents, particularly the order forms
5 I'm talking about now, are they being offered against all
6 of the defendants or are they being offered only against
7 the defendants whose names appear on them?
8 THE COURT: At this point they will be offered
9 against the corporation and the defendant whose name is on
10 them. At this point that is. If you want me to explain
11 that to the jury, I will.
12 MR. SCHOER: May we confer about that, Judge?
13 THE COURT: Sure.
14 (Counsel confer.).
15 MR. NEVILLE: Your Honor --
16 THE COURT: Just one minute.
17 (Pause in proceedings.)
18 THE COURT: Yes, who wanted to the speak to me?
19 Mr. Neville?
20 MR. NEVILLE: Yes, Your Honor. May we continue
21 to voir dire this witness outside the presence of the jury
22 in terms of the reliability? We'd like to get into some
23 of the names and things.
24 THE COURT: Outside the presence of the jury?
25 MR. NEVILLE: Yes.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICI AL COURT REPORTER
2590
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 THE COURT: Why outside the presence?
2 MR. NEVILLE: Because it could be potentially
3 prejudicial to my client, Scott Michavelson and other
4 people at trial if we were to go through some of the line
5 of questioning with the witness in the presence of the
6 jury. We're merely trying to establish or determine an
7 evidentiary question that the Court or the Judge will rule
8 on and then the jury can hear the testimony.
9 THE COURT: Are you putting in these documents
10 that Mr. Neville is talking about at this point? I don't
11 know what he's talking about.
12 MR. NEVILLE: The order form. The documents
13 we've been talking about all morning.
14 MR. WHITE: Yes, then we are putting them in.
15 MR. NEVILLE: For goodness sake.
16 THE COURT: You are making an objection to the
17 order form.

18 MR. NEVILLE: Not other than the objections
19 already made. Respectfully if we could question the
20 witness outside the presence of the jury in terms of these
21 evidentiary questions.
22 MR. GEDULDIG: One of your rulings, Judge,
23 pertains most specifically to salespeople. I think the
24 documents would be coming in against the corporations and
25 the individual defendants named on the forms or the
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2591
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 package of paper.
2 On the order forms generally or very often appear
3 the names of a salesperson and I believe what the
4 government is going to argue and I believe what
5 Ms. Springer might say is that taking the name off that
6 order form is the way the company knew who made the sale
7 and gave credit for commissions for that person. So if
8 the document now is coming in in part to attribute what
9 the government would characterize as a misrepresentation
10 in a sale to one of these defendants, what we're saying --
11 THE COURT: Sale to one of these defendants?
12 MR. GEDULDIG: I'm sorry, a sale by one of these
13 defendants, we really didn't have an opportunity to
14 question Ms. Springer regarding the names of the
15 salespeople that appears on these order forms. And I
16 think, I'm not trying to speak for Mr. Neville --
17 MR. NEVILLE: You are doing it much better than I
18 am.
19 MR. GEDULDIG: What he was alluding to,
20 Mr. Neville, Mr. Lee, myself and Mr. White, we're the
21 defendants, we represent the defendants whose names will
22 most likely appear on the order forms. I don't think it
23 will be an extensive continuing voir dire but we are
24 asking to ask Ms. Springer some questions regarding the
25 names of the salespeople that are here on the order form.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2592
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 MR. LEE: If I may add. In other words, there's
2 a name identifying the name of the maker on these order
3 forms. That may not necessarily be the name of the person
4 who made out the documents because we understand we have a
5 good-faith basis to believe different names were injected
6 in that identification spot for different reasons, so
7 therefore if we can question this witness and it reveals
8 to Your Honor that there's total unreliability as to that
9 notation, identifying the maker, then Your Honor may not
10 admit it at all because it is total unreliable. It may
11 not be the true maker, someone just injected that name in
12 and I think Ms. Springer should shed some light on that.
13 THE COURT: The only issue I'm raising is should
14 it be in the absence of the jury?
15 MR. NELSON: While my client is not named on any
16 of these documents, Your Honor, I believe the separate
17 issue which might well need to be resolved outside the
18 presence of the jury and is one which will come up during
19 the course of the testimony of the various customers from
20 which the government is trying to lay a foundation by
21 using the order form, is going to be an issue pursuant to
22 801(d)(2)(e) and that will be whether or not the
23 government has proven by a preponderance of the evidence,
24 one, the existence of a conspiracy, and two, more
25 significantly as it relates to these documents, whether
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2593
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 the person against whom the document or statement that the
2 customer might make is introduced, was a member of the
3 conspiracy at the time that that statement was made.
4 Pursuant to Bourgaily v. The United States and
5 pursuant to 801(d)(2)(e), the Court must make a
6 preliminary determination by a preponderance of the
7 evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 104(a) to
8 determine one, whether or not a conspiracy existed, and,
9 two, whether or not the person against whom the statement
10 was made was a member of the conspiracy at the time.
11 I believe what the government is attempting to do
12 at this point without putting words in their mouth is to
13 utilize the order forms which identify the names of
14 individuals as a predicate for the purpose of when the
15 individual customer testifies to elicit the conversation
16 that took place between that customer and the salesperson
17 as was taking place yesterday when the objection was
18 raised at an appropriate point in time by Mr. Lee. And
19 that would be the reason why the hearing would have to be
20 conducted outside the presence of the jury so the Court
21 can make that preliminary determination under 104.
22 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, at this point I thought
23 we decided we are not offering them as co-conspirator
24 statements. They are either corporate -- they are at a
25 minimum corporate admissions. I think Your Honor could
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2594
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 admit them subject to connection as co-conspirator
2 statements, but at this point since there is another basis
3 there is no reason to do that.
4 MR. NELSON: Your Honor, if I might. It's not
5 the question of the admissibility of these documents, it's
6 the question of what will occur next when these various
7 witnesses testify or attempt to testify with respect to
8 conversations between various defendants. And I believe
9 that it would be the appropriate time now since this is
10 the witness who the government is proffering as the
11 records custodian who has knowledge of the manner in which
12 the documents were prepared for the Court to be able to
13 make a factual determination as to whether or not the
14 individual named on the document was in fact the person
15 who participated in that conversation.
16 It goes to the question of reliability and I
17 believe co-counsel are going to question the witness
18 concerning her knowledge of procedures that were followed
19 concerning the preparation of this document and whose name
20 might be included on it.
21 MR. WHITE: Your Honor, if I could just address
22 this. What Mr. Nelson is talking about is the same issue
23 we addressed yesterday morning, namely after Ms. Springer
24 is finished and these documents are in, can we have a
25 customer come in and say, as Ms. Rieger started to
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2595
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 yesterday "I don't know the name of the person I spoke to
2 but they called me up, identified themselves as from Who's
3 Who Worldwide, sold me a membership. I gave them my
4 credit card, I got a plaque in the name and I got an
5 invoice confirming the sale." I also researched that
6 overnight. That at a minimum is a corporate admission,
7 even if these documents were not put in by Ms. Springer.
8 The corporate employee doesn't have to be identified I
9 said at the bench.
10 I found another Second Circuit case directly on
11 point. An employee, a statement of an employee is
12 admitted although they can't -- the plaintiff in the
13 case can't even identify who it is. It is Pappas v.
14 Middle Earth Condominium, 963 F.2d 534 (2d Cir. 1990).
15 Your Honor, it's a very simple case, it's a slip
16 and fall case. The plaintiff sues the Vermont condominium
17 where he's staying because he slipped on the ice. Someone
18 from his family or his party picks up the phone, calls the
19 number for the owner of the condominium and says there is
20 an icy sidewalk. Shortly therefore some guy completely
21 unidentified shows up with a shovel and a bucket of salt
22 and he makes damaging admissions against the condominium,
23 namely something to the effect of, yeah, we've had a
24 problem with the area icing up before, thus putting the
25 condominium on notice.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2596
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 The plaintiffs wanted to offer that and they
2 weren't permitted to, but the Second Circuit said they
3 should and it says specifically that the manufacture, the
4 proponent of the corporate admission didn't have to
5 identify the employee by name. And it said that liberal
6 treatment should be accorded, offers of proof as corporate
7 admissions, and it specifically says that all the facts
8 and circumstances should be taken into account in
9 determining whether or not that is a corporate admission,
10 whether or not you could presume the agency relationship.
11 And just like that, after the call to the condominium
12 owner, a guy shows up with a bucket of salt and a shovel
13 to clear up the icy patch, it's the same thing here. That
14 Who's Who confirms the sale when each of these employees
15 -- I'm sorry, when each of these customers gives them
16 their credit card number they get a plaque in the mail and
17 get an invoice. If that salesperson -- I'm sorry, the
18 Who's Who employee was not authorized to do that
19 presumably, Who's Who wouldn't be sending the customer an
20 invoice confirming the sale.
21 MR. GEDULDIG: The one big difference there the
22 person who comes in with the bucket of sand and a shovel,
23 nothing happened with him, he wasn't charged with
24 anything, he's not a named defendant. We're the bucket of
25 sand and the shovel, we are named defendant. When we are
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2597
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 saying oh, yeah, this icy patch is being here a while.
2 They are charging us with being responsible for the
3 information. So the case he cites is different from the
4 situation that our defendants as salespeople face.
5 THE COURT: Well, this is all well and good. The
6 point I'm trying to make is why this has to be done. I'm
7 certainly going to allow a voir dire, all the voir dire
8 you want. The question is should it be done in the
9 absence of the jury or with the jury present, that's the
10 point.
11 MR. NEVILLE: I can address that, Your Honor, the
12 government is clearly, and if I were in Mr. White's shoes
13 I would do the same thing, he's clearly offering this
14 order form in our case. The first one that was being
15 shown to the witness happens to have Scott Michavelson's
16 name on it. Thus, my avid interest in this issue. The
17 government is clearly looking to admit this in evidence as
18 a business record and also attribute to Scott Michavelson
19 misrepresentations to Rita Rieger who will testify a
20 little bit later today.
21 I take Mr. Nelson's points well on the
22 conspiracy, but we also have substantive counts here on
23 the case. There is a substantive count as to Scott
24 Michavelson making misrepresentations, mail fraud, wire
25 fraud, and we have good faith belief that these order
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2598
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 forms at times were filled out by a person who did not
2 necessarily speak to the perspective customer. There were
3 quotas. Mr. Gordon was very exacting on his quotas. Come
4 the end of the week if you didn't have quotas you would
5 swap with people sometimes and the fact that Scott
6 Michavelson is on the top of this order form of Exhibit 9
7 or whatever, does not necessarily mean that Scott
8 Michavelson spoke to Rita Rieger that she spoke to somebody
9 named Michavel. There is some similarity between
10 Michavelson and Michavel. As far as I know there were three
11 first name Michavels working as salespeople at Who's Who.
12 So if it should turn out that Your Honor does believe this
13 is unreliable to the point of attributing a criminal act
14 on Scott Michavelson based on the fact that his name is on
15 the top of the order form, I don't want the jury to hear
16 that because I think we might have to consider hearing a
17 mistrial.
18 THE COURT: All right. I'm going to allow the
19 voir dire in the absence of the jury.
20 Are you prepared to do it now?
21 MR. GEDULDIG: Yes, Judge.
22 THE COURT: All right. Bring in the jury. I'm
23 going to excuse them for lunch then.
24 MR. WALLENSTEIN: My client wishes to absent
25 himself this afternoon in view of the fact that this
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2599
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 testimony has nothing to do with Mr. Reffsin.
2 THE COURT: Does your client understand that he
3 has a right to be present at all phases of this trial?
4 MR. WALLENSTEIN: Yes.
5 THE COURT: A constitutional right to be present.
6 MR. WALLENSTEIN: Yes.
7 THE COURT: That it is his benefit for him to be
8 here at all times.
9 MR. WALLENSTEIN: Yes.
10 THE COURT: If the jury sees that he's not here,
11 does he understand that they may not like that for some
12 reason?
13 MR. WALLENSTEIN: Yes, Your Honor.
14 THE COURT: He does understand it?
15 MR. WALLENSTEIN: Yes.
16 THE COURT: Do you?
17 DEFENDANT REFFSIN: I'm only asking for a
18 half-hour, Your Honor.
19 THE COURT: You can take more than that, but as
20 long as you understand that you have a right to be here
21 and it's in your best interest to be here.
22 DEFENDANT REFFSIN: Yes.
23 THE COURT: Then you may be excused.
24 MR. DUNN: While we are waiting for the witness
25 to come in, as Your Honor knows my client has some back
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2600
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 and spinal problems. He has an electronic stimulator
2 device called a TENS unit.
3 THE COURT: I can't hear you, Mr. Dunn.
4 MR. DUNN: He has an electronic stimulator device
5 and a massage unit and he's wondering if he can bring that
6 into the building and at the break time to plug it into
7 the witness room so he can have a massage or up in 307
8 when that room is available. The reason I ask is anytime
9 things are brought into the building the marshals have to
10 get approval from the Court.
11 THE COURT: Well, at the lunch hour I'll have to
12 speak to them. You remind me and I'll talk to the
13 marshals about it.
14 MR. DUNN: Thank you, Your Honor.
15 THE COURT: The security of the building is up to
16 them, not me.
17 MR. DUNN: I understand.
18 THE COURT: I do not intrude upon their
19 decisions.
20 MR. DUNN: Thank you, Your Honor.
21 (Jury enters.)
22 THE COURT: Please be seated, members of the
23 jury.
24 As I explained to you when I went into the jury
25 room, we are discussing some legal problems that have
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2601
Springer-voir dire/Lee

1 nothing to do with you and have been rather extensive as
2 far as time is concerned. We appreciate your patience but
3 we'll have to continue to discuss some things, so I do not
4 think it is necessary to keep you confined any further in
5 the jury room.
6 We'll recess for lunch as far as you're concerned
7 until 1:30. Hopefully we'll get what we have to do out of
8 the way.
9 So please don't discuss the case. Keep an open
10 mind. Thank you very much for y our patience and we'll see
11 you at 1:30.
12 Have a nice lunch. You don't have to eat from
13 now until 1:30.
14 (Jury exits.)
15 THE COURT: Do you want to bring the witness in,
16 Mr. White?
17 MR. WHITE: Yes.
18 Your Honor, should we first clarify with the
19 witness the point made when the order forms were made and
20 then the defense can ask questions?
21 THE COURT: Yes.
22 (Witness reenters.)
23 (Out of the presence of the jury.)
24 BY MR. WHITE:
25 Q Turning your attention back to the order forms,
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2602
Springer-direct/White

1 Ms. Springer, do you remember being asked questions about
2 when those order forms were prepared in relation to when
3 the sale occurred?
4 A I'm sorry, say that again?
5 Q Do you remember being asked questions about when

6 those order forms were prepared in relation to when the
7 sale occurred?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Now, typically, to your knowledge, when was the order
10 form prepared in relation to the sale?
11 A As I was explaining before, it depended. Some people
12 wanted to immediately get back, some people meaning
13 telemarketers or salespeople, would want to make a lot of
14 sales, get their quota, so they would save it, let's say,
15 for the end of the day to write all of them up or during
16 lunch they would write them up. I can't say that everyone
17 did it that way but there were people that did and there
18 were ones immediately they got off the phone that would
19 write the orders. But they were instructed by the group
20 leaders, and I would remember --
21 MR. LEE: I would object as not being responsive.
22 THE COURT: Overruled.
23 BY MR. WHITE:
24 Q You may continue with that.
25 A I remember on thousands of times hearing, get back on
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2603
Springer-direct/White

1 the phone, get back on the phone, get back on the phone,
2 get back on the phone and it was constant and it would be
3 not so much Mr. Gordon, although he walked around but not
4 as much as the group leaders would and that is what they
5 were instructed by Mr. Gordon to make sure they were on
6 the phone all the time.
7 THE COURT: No. The question is, with reasonable
8 certainty, how long would you say it took for the order
9 form to be filled out at the longest?
10 THE WITNESS: There were people who wrote them up
11 the next morning. They would write the name on the sales
12 sheet and the order form would be written up the next
13 morning, but it wasn't all the time.
14 THE COURT: But you said that they sometimes did
15 it at the end of the day or during lunch.
16 THE WITNESS: Right.
17 THE COURT: Or immediately.
18 THE WITNESS: Right. I'm sorry.
19 THE COURT: You say the furthest, the longest
20 period after the transaction would be the next day?
21 THE WITNESS: Would be the next morning and those
22 people would come in early.
23 THE COURT: All right.
24 THE WITNESS: But that would be very rare. That
25 would be if they had a phone call, let's say, at, you
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2604
Springer-direct/White

1 know, 10 to 5 in the afternoon and, you know, they were
2 leaving to go home, the order would be written up.
3 THE COURT: All right.
4 BY MR. WHITE:
5 Q So is it fair to say that typically the order forms
6 were filled out on the same day AS the sale?
7 A Yes.

8 MR. WHITE: Thank you. I have no further
9 questions.
10 THE COURT: All right. Anybody want to voir
11 dire?
12 Let's take it in order whoever wants it.
13 (Continued.)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2605
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
2 BY MR. NEVILLE:
3 Q Hello, Ms. Springer.
4 A Hello.
5 Q You worked at Who's Who Worldwide for a number of
6 years?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And you understood the inner workings of the
9 business?
10 A Yes, I did.
11 Q And today you are testifying that you were familiar
12 with the different documents and how they were managed in
13 the business?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And you spoke about the proce dures by which a sale
16 would be made and the documents would go through the
17 system in the company?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And that a prospective customer would send back a
20 lead card with information, right?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And then those lead cards would be distributed to
23 salespeople, telemarketers to him make calls?
24 A Yes.
25 THE COURT: You have to wait until the question
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2606
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 is over, Ms. Springer.
2 THE WITNESS: Sorry.
3 THE COURT: Just relax. Wait until the question
4 is over and then answer because if you talk at the same
5 time as the lawyer, the reporter will not be able to get
6 it down.
7 THE WITNESS: I've never done this before, so
8 excuse me.
9 THE COURT: I understand. It's perfectly
10 understandable, but I'm giving you advice to let there be
11 a slight pause before you answer.
12 THE WITNESS: Right.
13 THE COURT: Good. Okay?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, absolutely.
15 BY MR. NEVILLE:
16 Q Besides, do you know if any prospective customer or
17 if a person who had received a solicitation letter never
18 sends back a lead card, that person would not get a cold
19 call as it is called from a telemarketer, would they?
20 A No.
21 Q Only those people who return the lead cards to Who's
22 Who would get the call from the telemarketer?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And when the salesperson calls, the individual who
25 had already shown interest by sending in the lead card,
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2607
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 the salesperson would read from a pitch, as you said,
2 right?
3 A Yes.
4 Q A script.
5 A Yes.
6 Q Now, speaking hypothetically, if you know, and if you
7 don't know fine, but let's say that one day a person who
8 is a telemarketer, they get a pile of lead cards and that
9 salesperson calls the first name on the lead card and that
10 person isn't home or that person says "call me back when
11 my husband is here" or something like that, isn't it true
12 that on a later day that same, very same lead card could
13 be redistributed to another salesperson?
14 A Uhm, I -- I don't know if it's a couple days later,
15 I'm sorry, I think what they would do is make a couple of
16 calls and they would indicate on the back of the card
17 "left message, date, time" and I would say after the
18 third call, maybe second or third call, then it would be
19 who they called "recycled." But the salespeople would
20 keep those cards.
21 Q Because they would want to try to make a sale?
22 A Yes.
23 Q But it did happen, whether it was after one or two or
24 three calls, that lead cards would get recycled or
25 redistributed to other salespeople or other telemarketers
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2608
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 to yet try again?
2 A Yes.
3 MR. NEVILLE: Okay.
4 Q Now, when the telemarketer who was speaking to the
5 prospective customer makes the sale, in other words, the
6 person who actually gets the sale and has the person agree
7 to purchase a membership, it is normally that person, that
8 telemarketer to whom the customer has agreed to commit
9 money to buying a membership, that gets credit for that
10 sale, gets the commission?
11 A Not necessarily.
12 Q Could you explain.
13 A When the cards are recycled, they will have the
14 handwriting or initials of the person who attempted or
15 left messages with potential customers. So at that point
16 the person would call up on the phone and asked for John
17 Smith and they would say "well, I'm sorry but John Smith
18 is at a meeting right now, can I help you?" And that's
19 where a split commission would come into effect. The
20 person who was the person who sold them would be on the
21 top. They would get seven and-a-half percent commission.
22 The other person on the bottom would get the five percent,
23 depending sometimes if there was contests going where they
24 would get 20 percent commission or there was --
25 Q Incentives?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2609
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 A Yes, exactly, incentives.
2 Q At Who's Who Worldwide the salespeople, the
3 telemarketers had quotas to meet?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And that was pretty strict, the quota, right?
6 A Sure.
7 Q Mr. Gordon was very, very strict with people making
8 quota, right?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And you probably witnessed or heard about people
11 being fired for not having made quota?
12 A I would say in the four and somewhat years I was
13 there, there had been a lot of people who left the company
14 and I'm not going to say they were all fired. There was a
15 very, very, very big turn around. And when I say big turn
16 around, I mean I probably had seen at least 400 people in
17 and out.
18 Q One of the reasons for the big turn around would be
19 the high pressure to make quota?
20 A Yes.
21 Q If a telemarketer is getting to the end of his or her
22 week and sees that he or she is short quota, did it ever
23 happen, as far as you know, that another salesperson who
24 had made quota or even had better quota that particular
25 week, would let that first salesperson, telemarketers who
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2610
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 had not made quota have a sale or two or three or however
2 many it would take for that person on his or her own who
3 didn't make quota, make quota and avoid getting fired?
4 A I would say for the people that were the long time
5 people that were there with the company for two, three,
6 four, even with them from the beginning, and I don't know
7 if I should mention names or whatever it should be.
8 Q Well, go ahead, mention names.
9 A We had an Alan Saffer there.
10 THE COURT: Alan?
11 THE WITNESS: Alan S-A-F-F-E-R, and Maxes,
12 M-A-X-E-S. They were with the company a long time.
13 BY MR. NEVILLE:
14 Q What significance was that?
15 A When I first got there they were there. There was
16 Martine (ph).
17 THE COURT: The question is, would some people
18 transfer sales? That's all. That was the question.
19 THE WITNESS: I would say yes, there was. I
20 can't tell you names of people but What I was trying to
21 get at or explain was that the people who had worked with
22 each other for a long period of time were close.
23 THE COURT: And they would be more likely --
24 THE WITNESS: They would be more apt to transfer.
25 THE COURT: To transfer sales?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2611
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 THE WITNESS: Exactly.
2 THE COURT: Do you know of any actual transfer of
3 sales?
4 THE WITNESS: I couldn't say. I wouldn't know.
5 I wouldn't remember.
6 THE COURT: Would there be any indication on the
7 papers where there was a transferred sale?
8 THE WITNESS: I wouldn't recognize it. It could
9 be a code that the two salespeople had between each
10 other. I wouldn't know. I wouldn't know.
11 MR. NEVILLE: May I, Your Honor?
12 THE COURT: Yes.
13 BY MR. NEVILLE:
14 Q Let me ask you this. On the order form, I'm sorry, I
15 don't remember the number, 9 dash something, the exhibit
16 that you have there, the order form.
17 A I don't have it.
18 Q You don't have it.
19 MR. NEVILLE: Which one is it?
20 MR. WHITE: 9-C.
21 MR. NEVILLE: May I approach, Your Honor?
22 THE COURT: Sure.
23 BY MR. NEVILLE:
24 Q This is Government's Exhibit 9-C for Identification.
25 That's one of those order forms, right?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2612
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 A Yes.
2 Q And at the top right corner there is a line there

3 indicating the sales executive or salesperson who filled
4 out the order form, right?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And in this particular case that name is Scott
7 Michavelson, right?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And so based on the fact -- withdrawn.
10 This order form would be the internal official
11 internal document of Who's Who to designate to where or to
12 whom the credit for the sale would go, right?
13 A Yes.
14 Q So in other words, on this particular one that we are
15 referring to, Scott Michavelson would have gotten credit
16 for?
17 A Would have gotten the full commission.
18 Q My question is this. Based upon what you said about
19 people helping one another to make quota, to avoid the
20 wrath of Mr. Gordon, the fact that Scott Michavelson's name
21 is at the top of that order form doesn't necessarily mean,
22 does it, that he was the only person to have ever spoken
23 to the individual who signed up for the membership?
24 A In this particular circumstance you are referring
25 to? The only way I would be able to determine that is by
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2613
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 looking at the back of the card. It wouldn't determine it
2 because if the card was recycled three or four times,
3 there is no way you can possibly tell except through the
4 date. I don't know that aspect. I didn't get into the
5 technicalities of the group leaders' responsibility, to be
6 honest with you.
7 THE COURT: Excuse me. May I see one of these
8 order forms. In fact, a copy of each of these forms,
9 please.
10 Do I have them here?
11 MR. WHITE: Yes, Your Honor. Your Honor, it
12 should be in Exhibit 9-C. It should be in the first book.
13 THE COURT: Okay, I have it.
14 When it says on the top right-hand corner of the
15 Government's Exhibit 9-C "Scott Michavelson" it says
16 "account executive, number one, Scott Michavelson," what
17 does that mean?
18 THE WITNESS: You are asking me?
19 THE COURT: Yes.
20 THE WITNESS: Excuse me. That means that he sold
21 this individual.
22 THE COURT: Would anybody else have participated
23 in this sale? By looking at this record, could you tell?
24 THE WITNESS: By looking at this form, no.
25 THE COURT: By looking at this form could you say
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2614
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 based upon the custom and practice of the company that
2 Scott Michavelson had something to do with the sale?
3 THE WITNESS: Yes.
4 BY MR. NEVILLE:
5 Q But you would also say, wouldn't you, by looking at
6 that paper you can't tell whether or not some other
7 salesperson also spoke to that prospective customer?
8 A Somebody else could have called and made the initial
9 call.
10 Q Could have made the initial pitch?
11 A I don't -- it could be some people, they would have
12 to be pitched if they put it three or four times before.
13 Q Right. So in other words, there could be as a
14 hypothetical, a salesperson could make a pitch to someone,
15 that person says "call me tomorrow." That same salesperson
16 calls tomorrow, that person says "I'm sorry, I'm still
17 indisposed, call next week." The card gets recycled and
18 goes to salesperson two. They make the pitch again. In
19 my hypothetical we are talking about three different
20 pitches or three different conversations, two different
21 salespeople, and in my hypothetical the perspective
22 customer says "that sounds pretty good, sounds expensive,
23 I like it. Let me think about it. Could you give me a
24 call back tomorrow, I want to discuss it with my wife."
25 Then that salesperson calls again and they say "yes, we're
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2615
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 going to buy it" and they commit to buying. The order
2 form is filled out by whatever telemarketer happens to be
3 the one that the person commits to buy the membership
4 from. Is that right?
5 A It is right, but like I was saying, I don't even know
6 if I did say it, but in a lot -- and this may be going
7 off, you know, into a tangent of some sort, but there were
8 circumstances where there would be arguments between two
9 of the salespeople because they would call the person
10 let's say two weeks down or whatever when they have the
11 card and it was recycled again and say "gee, I called this
12 person two weeks ago, why didn't I get commissions on
13 this?" There were adjustments constantly and research
14 like why didn't I get involved in that.
15 Q There was a lot of desire to make money and get a
16 commission. That's what they were doing?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And this was their livelihood?
19 A It was their bread and butter.
20 MR. NEVILLE: May I approach, Your Honor?
21 THE COURT: At any time. You don't have to ask.
22 BY MR. NEVILLE:
23 Q I will ask you to look at Government's Exhibit 9-H
24 (handing.)
25 If you could tell us what that is?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2616
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 A This is a B-balance.
2 Q What does that mean, B-balance?
3 A The memberships are split bills, so let's say if it
4 is $490 for a lifetime membership -- well, in this

5 circumstance it was $137 that would be due before the
6 release of the registry. They would have to pay the $137
7 for the registry to be sent out to them.
8 So, letters with statements would be generated
9 and it would be going to the B-balance, which is what it
10 was, split billing balance.
11 Q Ms. Springer, at the top right-hand corner of this
12 exhibit, 9-H, is that what I said?
13 A This is 9-H.
14 Q Thank you.
15 There's a name of an account executive as there
16 was in the other order form that we have discussed where
17 in that other order form the name had been Scott
18 Michavelson. Here, however --
19 A Yes.
20 Q Here, however, there is a different name?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Do you recognize the name there?
23 A I recognize what this guy even looked like, I
24 remember.
25 Q What was it?
OWEN M. WIC KER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2617
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 A Kenneth McCarthy.
2 Q This is a second order form related to the first
3 order form that we've been discussing, the first order
4 form having a name of Scott Michavelson as the account
5 executive, right?
6 A Yes.
7 Q This one is the same customer, the same member, this
8 Rita Rieger person, right?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And this second order form has the name Kenneth
11 McCarthy up on the account executive's slot where Scott
12 Michavelson's name had been on the other order form we've
13 discussed?
14 A Yes.
15 Q So Kenneth McCarthy presumably, based on what you
16 said, would receive some of the commission for this
17 B-balance sale, right?
18 A He would be the one who would be listed on the
19 bottom. Yeah.
20 Q If Scott Michavelson found out that Kenneth McCarthy
21 gets the commission on this 100 some-odd dollars for the
22 registry, maybe Scott Michavelson would be upset about it
23 because make it was Scott's good salesmanship that got
24 Rita Rieger to buy this and not McCarthy, so it could
25 cause friction?
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2618
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 A Absolutely.
2 Q So in any event, looking at 9-H, looking at the name
3 Kenneth McCarthy at the top right-hand corner, there's no
4 way without looking at the other order form in the other
5 records, there's no way that you would ever know that
6 Scott Michavelson even spoke to this person Rita Rieger.
7 You would first assume it was Kenneth McCarthy, right?
8 A Kenneth McCarthy spoke with Rita Rieger to get the
9 B-balance. She -- what this is, by looking at it, is this
10 woman had called up and said I received your letter, would
11 you please take the credit card number down and process so
12 I can get my registry. That's what this is.
13 Q Okay.
14 So in other words, this document shows that Rita
15 Rieger herself called Who's Who Worldwide to say that she
16 wanted the registry, is that what it says?
17 A That's what this form would be. It would be a
18 call-in.
19 Q The customer calling the business?
20 A Yes.
21 Q This wouldn't be a telemarketer chasing after a
22 customer?
23 A It could be. I mean, there was lists distributed
24 called dunning calls dunning letters. Mr. Michavelson
25 could have said I want to release your registry, with all
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2619
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 the intentions known, he will still get the commission on
2 it. Could you please call me back with a credit card
3 number and send in a check, whatever method you would like
4 to pay, and he could have left this message and he could
5 have been on the phone when Mr. McCarthy got a phone call
6 from the operator of the companies which we are saying,
7 you know, I have Scott Michavelson's call, B-balance, will
8 you take it. That's how things worked.
9 Q If Scott Michavelson is on the phone and otherwise
10 indisposed, he can't take this call from Rita Rieger. The
11 call gets transferred to another available telemarketer,
12 is that what you said?
13 A Yes.
14 Q And in this case we can say it possibly happened here
15 where McCarthy, Mr. McCarthy was available when Rita
16 Rieger called or maybe Kenneth McCarthy called Rita
17 Rieger, could that be?
18 A I wouldn't know. I wouldn't know. There's a
19 possibility. I don't know if there was a list distributed
20 with people that owed the amounts, please, you know, call
21 these people. I done know. I was involved in that
22 department but not really. I didn't get myself involved
23 with their sales. I would ask them questions about their
24 order forms. I would ask them, you know, to verify credit
25 card numbers if we couldn't meet their handwriting. I
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2620
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 would even pass on if phones were ringing off the hook. I
2 would even pick up and say here, Mike is on the phone
3 right now, can you take this call, John, whoever.
4 I know for a fact that's the way it was because
5 -- in fact, one more thing is that they were not -- the
6 receptionists were instructed not to take messages for --
7 like if Scott Michavelson went up to the receptionist
8 Nadine at the time and said, Nadine, can you do me a favor
9 and take all my messages, she would have gotten fired if
10 she did and he would have got everyone reamed for even
11 asking because they wanted -- think about how many calls
12 come in back and forward, not to get off the subject.
13 Q Very much on the subject.
14 Mr. Gordon would want a salesperson, whoever that
15 was, to speak to the individual who has called in because
16 there was a potential sale to be made?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And if you just left a message you might loose a
19 potential sale?
20 A Yes.
21 THE COURT: Excuse me one minute. Now, looking
22 at Government's Exhibit 9-C, is it the same kind of form
23 as Government's Exhibit 9-H?
24 THE WITNESS: Yes.
25 THE COURT: It doesn't look the same.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2621
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 THE WITNESS: This form? The information isn't
2 filled out.
3 THE COURT: No, no, forget the information. Is
4 it intended to be the same kind of form? For example, the
5 words "bill to" are on top of the form 9-C and the words
6 "bill to" are on the side of the form 9-H. That's on the
7 form itself but it is meant to be the form.
8 THE WITNESS: This original form that was written
9 up, they were instructed for the purposes of sending out
10 -- if they wanted their registry or their wall plaques to
11 go to a different address that was listed on the registry
12 --
13 THE COURT: No, you are missing my point.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes.
15 THE COURT: Looking at 9-C and 9-H, there are
16 slight differences on the type of form. Did I point out
17 to you where it says "bill to" is on the side of one,
18 "bill to" is on the top of another.
19 Do you see that?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do.
21 THE COURT: Is it, in your opinion, based upon
22 your knowledge of the records, are they still intended to
23 be the same type of record?
24 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes.
25 THE COURT: Looking at 9-C and 9-H, with two
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2622
Springer-voir dire/Neville

1 different names on the top upper right, who would be
2 entitled to the commission?
3 THE WITNESS: In this case -- there was changes
4 constantly being, you know, with commissions. I can't
5 tell you at this time in 1993 if Scott Michavelson would
6 get, you know, the total commission or if it would be
7 split with Kenneth McCarthy, because at one time this one
8 individual was entitled to that amount.
9 THE COURT: Do you have an opinion, in your
10 opinion, based upon your knowledge of the records and
11 procedures at Who's Who, at Who's Who Worldwide, would
12 Scott Michavelson be entitled to some part of the
13 commission?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes.
15 THE COURT: Okay.
16 We are going to have to recess now.
17 What in this voir dire -- you may be excused
18 until 1:30. You will have to leave, right?
19 THE WITNESS: I have to pick my boyfriend up from
20 the hospital.
21 THE COURT: Okay. So you are coming back later?
22 THE WITNESS: Well, by 2 o'clock.
23 THE COURT: Okay. Then you take your time.
24 Don't get into any accidents or anything.
25 THE WITNESS: All right.
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2623
1 THE COURT: You can be excused.
2 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
3 THE COURT: Now, Counsel for the defendants, what
4 else do you intend to bring out in this voir dire? Do you
5 intend to bring anything else out in the voir dire?
6 MR. NEVILLE: From my perspective, no, Your
7 Honor, I can't think of any.
8 THE COURT: What does anyone else wish to bring
9 out?
10 MR. DUNN: Your Honor, may I have a moment?
11 THE COURT: Sure.
12 (Counsel confer.)
13 MR. LEE: Judge, in response to your question, I
14 may ask her as far as other than perhaps sometimes
15 recognizing handwriting on the particular order form, does
16 she know who actually wrote the document? Is it just
17 based on the name that appears on the right-hand corner?
18 And I'm asking that in light of the fact that there was
19 this transferring of the sales to meet the quota that
20 someone else may have written somebody else's name in the
21 process of the secret quotas that were going on, I mean
22 transfers.
23 THE COURT: Mr. White, who will explain these
24 documents better than this witness? Anybody?
25 MR. WHITE: Yes, Your Honor. There are going to
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2624
1 be salespeople who worked at the company who will be able
2 to explain them.
3 THE COURT: Okay.
4 MR. WHITE: I just have one other point.
5 I think we are kind of wasting some time because
6 I believe Ms. Springer will be able to identify the
7 handwriting of all the defendants. In other words, for
8 this one we're talking about, 9-C, that is Scott
9 Michavelson's handwriting and the following ones I see are
10 all Scott Michavelson's handwriting, all the following for
11 each of the defendants.
12 If that is the case, they are admissions, they
13 come in as admissions. And the defense attorneys can
14 argue to the jury their clients knowingly put false
15 information for whatever reason, because they were
16 swapping sales or whatever. If they are talking about
17 admissibility, if they wrote it, put their name on it.
18 MR. DUNN: Your Honor, to elaborate what Mr. Lee
19 said in a response to what Mr. White said, this swapping
20 went the other way. For example, if the person had been
21 given a couple sales to make the quota for the week, had a
22 good week down the line, he would pay that person back.
23 THE COURT: Yes, I don't want to interrupt you,
24 Mr. Dunn, this is all very good on cross-examination and
25 cross-examination will reveal all of this. I'm interested
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2625
1 right now on admissibility. These documents, in my
2 opinion, are admissible as business records. Whether they
3 are -- whether they show participation in a conspiracy,
4 whether they show representation or misrepresentations
5 made to customers, whatever the result of that is another
6 matter. But I'm not going to go through voir dires
7 anymore, except as to admissibility. What they mean is
8 another matter.
9 MR. DUNN: I know.
10 THE COURT: There is enough facial evidence to
11 allow that in.
12 MR. DUNN: I know, Your Honor, but one of the
13 distinctions will be made whether it was against the
14 corporation or against the particular defendant.
15 THE COURT: Against the corporation and the
16 person who is named in this document, that's who it will
17 go in against for whatever purpose.
18 MR. SCHOER: To get back to the question Your
19 Honor asked, I would like Your Honor to charge that to the
20 jury.
21 THE COURT: I will. I will.
22 All right. Do you have another witness?
23 MR. WHITE: We do.
24 MS. SCOTT: Yes.
25 THE COURT: You are having problems with this
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
2626
1 particular part of the case, Mr. White. It's like a
2 minefield here.
3 MR. LEE: I hate to bring this up, but in these
4 order forms, Your Honor, I don't know if Your Honor is
5 aware of it, but there are order forms that have names of
6 people who are unindicted co-conspirators.
7 THE COURT: Sure.
8 MR. LEE: I just want Your Honor to understand.
9 THE COURT: Okay. Will you put somebody else on
10 at 1:30?
11 MR. WHITE: Ms. Rieger who was put on yesterday
12 will come back.
13 THE COURT: Does anyone want to eat lunch here?
14 I know Mr. Geduldig wouldn't miss it no matter what.
15 MR. GEDULDIG: You know me well, Judge.
16 THE COURT: We'll recess until 1:30.
17 (Luncheon recess taken.)
18 (Continued.)
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
OWEN M. WICKER, RPR OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER -  CONTINUED - PM Session - 0203gordon PM Session

Corporate sponsors buy over a cup of food for your clicks.                                 Nice... saving a life with clicks!         MisterShortcut Approach Help TheHungerSite Button
     
  Remember 911day.     Keep our heroes alive by  LIVING,   DOING  more!   
  Keep our heroes alive by  LIVING,   DOING  more!    Remember 911day.  

This site is concerned with The Illicit Smashing of Who's Who Worldwide Excecutive Club, and the double scandal of government and judical corruption in one of the Unholy Federal Trials and the concomitant news media blackout regarding this incredible story.

Sixteen weeks of oft-explosive testimony, yet not a word in any of 1200 news archives. This alone supports the claim that this was a genuinely dirty trial; in fact, one of the dirtiest federal trials of the 20th century.

Show your support for justice, for exoneration of the innocent, and perhaps most importantly, government accountability, by urgently contacting your Senator, the White House, and the U.S. Department of Justice.



Unholy Federal Trials  - The Illicit Smashing of Who's Who Worldwide Excecutive Club


Unholy Federal Trials- Perversions of Justice

How rare it is to find a case that offers literally dozens of serious justifications for reversal of conviction.
The Who's Who case was studied by a respected federal judge for many months,
who found that no crime had been committed, and dismissed the case.

Reed Elsevier, Ltd, as the richest and most powerful publisher in over a hundred countries around the world,
accurately described as one of the most corrupt corporations operating operating on the planet today,
undermined the foundations of American justice in the Who's Who Worldwide case with cash and more.

Examine a trial where less than twenty percent of the proceedings had ANY connection to defendants
That alone has required a separation of trials. In this case, NT EVEN ONE PERCENT of the proceedings,
accusations, presented evidence, or accepted facts, had anything to do with the "sales" defendants.

The Who's Who Worldwide case was all about Bruce Gordon, his machinations and his accountant,
and the many companies operated in secrecy by Gordon and Liz Sauter, his true "henchman."

For hundreds of the most boring hours, all discussion was about Gordon and his actions.
Prosecution witness after prosecution witness exculpated the sales defendants, but,
this same judge who had previously dismissed the case after months of study,
who may have been constitutionally unable to resist pressure from above,
was in fact pressured, and demonstrated a caving in to that pressure.
This pressure came from federal court of appeals above him,
Remember that Reed Elsevier is the most powerful force
in the American arena of jurisprudence today.

 This miscarriage of justice can be fixed by granting a new trial
or a Presidential Pardon. Please call 202-456-1414 to lift your voice.