Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 281-3 Filed 09/20/21 PageID.3179 Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 281-3 Filed 09/20/21 PageID.3180 Page 2 of 5
` 1
`18-cr-4683-GPC
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
` v.
`
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, .
` .
`Plaintiff, . No. 18-cr-4683-GPC
`.
`. August 20, 2021
`. 1:00 p.m.
` .
`JACOB BYCHAK,
` .
`MARK MANOOGIAN,
` .
`MOHAMMED ABDUL QAYYUM,
` .
`PETR PACAS,
` .
`Defendants.
`. San Diego, California
`. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
`
`
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF TELEPHONIC MOTION HEARING
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE GONZALO P. CURIEL
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`13
`
`
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`For the Plaintiff:
`
`For the Defendant
`JACOB BYCHAK:
`
`For the Defendant
`MARK MANOOGIAN:
`
`24
`
`///
`
`25
`
`United States Attorney's Office
`By: SABRINA L. FEVE, ESQ.
` MELANIE K. PIERSON, ESQ.
`880 Front Street, Room 6293
`San Diego, California 92101
`
`Wiechert, Munk & Goldstein, PC
`By: JESSICA C. MUNK, ESQ.
`27136 Paseo Espada, Suite B1123
`San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
`
`Mintz Levin
`By: RANDY K. JONES, ESQ.
` RYAN T. DOUGHERTY, ESQ.
`3580 Carmel Mountain Road, Suite 300
`San Diego, California 92130
`
`
`
`Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 281-3 Filed 09/20/21 PageID.3181 Page 3 of 5
` 2
`18-cr-4683-GPC
`
` 1
`
`APPEARANCES (CONTINUED):
`
` 2
`
`
`
`For the Defendant
`MOHAMMED ABDUL
`QAYYUM:
`
`
`
`For the Defendant
`PETR PACAS:
`
`Bienert, Miller & Katzman, P.L.C.
`By: CARLOS A. NEVAREZ, ESQ.
`903 Calle Amanecer, Suite 350
`San Clemente, California 92673
`
`Bird Marella
`By: DARREN L. PATRICK, ESQ.
`1875 Century Park East
`Suite 2300
`Los Angeles, California 90067
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`Court Reporter:
`
`22
`
`23
`
`Chari L. Bowery, RPR, CRR
`USDC Clerk's Office
`333 West Broadway, Suite 420
`San Diego, California 92101
`chari_bowery@casd.uscourts.gov
`
`24
`
`Reported by Stenotype, Transcribed by Computer
`
`25
`
`
`
`Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 281-3 Filed 09/20/21 PageID.3182 Page 4 of 5
` 8
`18-cr-4683-GPC
`
` 1
`
`emails and basically all the communications that would have
`
` 2
`
`been exchanged between the FBI and the Spamhaus informant.
`
` 3
`
`You are more concerned and/or exclusively concerned about
`
` 4
`
`this Anon-1; is that right?
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
`MS. MUNK: Not exclusively, Your Honor.
`
`When I did at first have Ms. Pierson's declaration -- you
`
` 7
`
`kind of infer that -- I think it's paragraph -- is it paragraph
`
` 8
`
`nine or ten? I think it's paragraph ten. It sounds like they
`
` 9
`
`provided all the documents, but they don't -- from the Spamhaus
`
`10
`
`informant, but they don't use the word "all."
`
`11
`
`And so we actually asked the government to clarify, have
`
`12
`
`they provided us with all of the documents from the Spamhaus
`
`13
`
`informant? And they specifically said, "No" -- or I don't know
`
`14
`
`if she used the exact words "no," but the government said, "We
`
`15
`
`provided you the relevant documents."
`
`16
`
`THE COURT: Let me do this. Since we have
`
`17
`
`Ms. Pierson here, let me ask her, in response to that question,
`
`18
`
`have you provided all of the reports and otherwise, email
`
`19
`
`contacts, between the Spamhaus informant and the -- first, the
`
`20
`
`reports? Have you provided all the reports?
`
`21
`
`MS. PIERSON: We have provided them with all of the
`
`22
`
`reports that are relevant to this case.
`
`23
`
`And why I limit it like that -- and they can tell this
`
`24
`
`from the discovery -- the Spamhaus informant is not just
`
`25
`
`corresponding with the FBI agent here, but also with FBI agents
`
`
`
`Case 3:18-cr-04683-GPC Document 281-3 Filed 09/20/21 PageID.3183 Page 5 of 5
` 9
`18-cr-4683-GPC
`
` 1
`
`in other offices.
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
`THE COURT: As to other charges?
`
`MS. PIERSON: Yes.
`
`THE COURT: So that's why you would not be able to
`
` 5
`
`say unequivocally that, "We have provided you with every report
`
` 6
`
`that relates to the Spamhaus informant"?
`
` 7
`
`MS. PIERSON: Yes. But we have given them everything
`
` 8
`
`that relates to this indictment.
`
` 9
`
`THE COURT: All right. And so, given that clear
`
`10
`
`response, Ms. Munk, do you have reason to contest that?
`
`11
`
`12
`
`MS. MUNK: Yes, Your Honor.
`
`And this is -- I don't want to go through a timeline, but
`
`13
`
`just so you know, since the government filed their opposition,
`
`14
`
`they produced a bunch of stuff that I would actually like to
`
`15
`
`inform the Court about this stuff. But they also, last week,
`
`16
`
`produced, in production 40 -- it came last week -- a 302 that
`
`17
`
`was written the day before by one of the FBI agents that
`
`18
`
`appears they are trying to rewrite history on the Spamhaus
`
`19
`
`informant.
`
`20
`
`So, all the evidence we have shows that the Spamhaus
`
`21
`
`informant was clearly an informant since 2013. He had a DHS
`
`22
`
`number. He was mapping out this case for the government. He
`
`23
`
`gave them a dossier on everybody related to this case, that we
`
`24
`
`actually did not receive until this August 5th production. And
`
`25
`
`I consider it Brady because Mr. Bychak, my client, is nowhere
`
`
