THE COURT: Uh, let's see, Mr. Rivello.
MS. HEATH: Yes.
THE COURT: All right.
MS. HEATH: Candy Heath for the government.
MR. HENNESSY: And Matt Hennessy for the defendant, your Honor.
MR. ALFORD: Also appearing for the defendant, Matt Alford, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
And is the government ready to proceed?
MS. HEATH: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
You may call your first witness.
MS. HEATH: The government calls Nathan Hopp.
THE COURT: And before I swear you in, I need to ask a question here.
I've got a financial affidavit here, but I've also got appearances from Mr. Alford and Mr.
Hennessy.
So, let's just get it on the record.
Sir, do you need the appointment of an attorney?
DEFENDANT RIVELLO: Uh, No, ma'am.
THE COURT: All right, so you're able to afford your own attorney, and you have hired your
own attorneys, is that correct?
DEFENDANT RIVELLO: Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT: All right.
Thank you, you may have a seat.
Come on forward.
And please raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give in the matter before
the court will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
MR. HOPP: I swear.
THE COURT: All right, please be seated, and please speak up into
the microphone.
Q. Please state your name and how you're employed.
A. Nathan Hopp, I'm a special agent with the FBI.
Q. Are you one of the case agents on the case of John Rayne Rivello?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Were you the affiant on the criminal complaint that was executed -- or issued by the judge,
on March 10th, 2017?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Does that criminal complaint provide for the offense of cyberstalking, which is a violation
of Title 18, United States Code, section 2261A?
In this case it would be the 2(A) and (B)?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Approximately when did FBI get involved in the matter?
A. Is approximately, uh, two-- two weeks before, uh, March 10th.
So, have been the end of February, approximately.
Q. Did you receive information from Dallas Police Department with regard to the fact
that this offense had been committed?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Were you able to review any evidence during that two week period prior to drafting this
criminal complaint affidavit?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And what type of evidence, in general, were you able to review?
A. I was able to review search warrant returns from DPD that it-- were obtained from both
Twitter and Apple, as well as information obtained from AT&T, and information provided
by the victims themselves.
Q. Was an individual identified in this matter, as the defendant?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Could you please describe the offense as you saw it from, or wh-- uh, saw it from the
evidence that you obtained.
A. Yes, ma'am.
On December 15th, 2016, John Rivello sent a tweet, from a Twitter account that he owned,
@jew_goldstein, to the victim.
This tweet contained a message that said I hope you have a seizure for your posts, and
then contained a strobing image known as a GIF, or GIF.
Upon viewing this GIF, or this tweet, the victim immediately suffered a seizure, an
epileptic seizure.
Um, the victim's wife is a medical professional.
Walked in, saw him having in-- the, the seizure.
And then took a picture of the tweet, still on his computer, still flashing.
And then called 911, and reported the incident as a complaint.
DPD started investigating the inci-- the, the incident, and sent the search warrant
to Twitter, for the account Ari, underscore-- um, it's-- pardon me, jew, underscore, goldstein.
Uh, from--from the information that Twitter provided, among other things, was a telephone
number associated with the account.
From that telephone number they sent AT&T a subpoena requesting information related
to the telephone number.
AT&T responded with a, um, with information showing that the telephone number is associated
with the Apple Iphone account.
DPD then took that information and sent Apple a search warrant for information related to
the telephone number and the Apple Iphone.
Apple then responded with information saying that the account was owned by John Rivello.
And further information in there indicated it was owned by Mr. Rivello, to include pictures
of him holding his driver's license up to his face.
Other things included in the Icloud account were a screenshot of the tweet that was sent
to the victim, with the victim's Twitter account on there, the actual strobing image or GIF
that was sent, as long as a-- as well as a fake obituary, um, concerning the victim and
the incident, and then several antisemitic rhetoric, for lack of a better term.
Q. From the investigation, was it determined whether or not Mr. Rivello knew that the victim
had epilepsy prior to sending this strobe GIF?
A. Yes, ma'am.
In reviewing the information provided by Twitter, he had several direct message conversations
with other individuals.
In some of those direct message conversations, he stated that he knew the victim had epilepsy
before.
He also stated that he had been sending him tweets every day, for months, and it wasn't
until he sent this GIF that he got a response from the victim.
Q. Were the tweets that were being sent to the victim, were they, um, harassing the victim
in any way?
A. Um, I'm not sure.
Q. Have you talked to the victim about the nature of some of the tweets that he received
from Mr. Rivello?
A. I cannot recall.
Q. Did the direct messages that he reviewed for Mis-- [feedback]
MS. HEATH: I don't know if it's this microphone, or--
CLERK: I think it is.
Q. In any of the direct messages that you reviewed for, uh, in Mr. Rivello's account,
did it show that he had talked to other individuals about having harassed Mr.-- uh, or having
harassed the victim in the past?
A. Yes, ma'am.
In several of his inst-- direct messaging conversations he had made mentions to the
fact that he disliked the victim, and said a lot of antisemitic things about the victim.
Q. Was there any indication as to what religion he believed the victim to be?
A. He believed the victim was Jewish.
Q. And in fact is the victim Jewish?
A. No, the victim is not.
Q. But the defendant believed the victim to be Jewish?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Were there other, uh, individuals with whom the defendant communicated on direct
messages, that also believed the victim to be Jewish?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Everybody in his direct message conversations believed that he was Jewish.
Q. This strobe GIF that caused the victim to have a seizure was sent to the victim on December
15th, 2016, correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. The account @jew_goldstein that was set up by the defendant, was that setup just a
week before that GIF was sent to the victim?
A. It was set up days before.
I don't even think it was a full week.
Q. Was the GIF that was sent to the victim something that the defendant had downloaded
from the internet?
A. It appeared it had been downloaded from the internet, yes.
Q. Now, have you had an opportunity to review an email that was sent to the victim that
purported to be from the defendant?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And is this what has been referred to as the apology email?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. In this email did the defendant admit to sending the-- the tweet.
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. You-- you recently arrested the defendant, is that correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And when was that?
A. It was last Friday, March 17th.
Q. Did you have an opportunity to talk to the defendant during the time that you arrested
him?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Was that talk brief, or-- A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. During that period of time did the defendant make any statements to you at all with regard
to this incident?
A. Yes, ma'am.
The defendant, Mr. Rivello, stated he did send the GIF to the victim, and, um, he actually
sent it to him, he stated, multiple times around the same time.
As lau-- as well as other tweets around the same time he sent the GIF.
Q. The-- uh, describe the seizure that the victim had, and what repercussions occurred
after that.
A. The victim had an epileptic seizure, and due to the seizure, he experienced follow-on--
another follow-on seizure, and, uh, lost-- during the seizure he lost all cognitive control
of his body, and memory.
For day or two afterwards he suffered, um, a loss of, uh, mental ability, for lack of
a better term.
Q. And did the Dallas Police Department actually talk to the victim's neurologist to determine
that the strobe GIF in fact was a factor in the seizure that the defendant ha-- that the
victim had.
A. Yes, ma'am.
The neurologist stated that it was the GIF that induced the seizure, and because of that
that he was-- the victim was likely to have follow-on seizures.
Q. And are you aware that the victim has had additional seizures since that time?
A. Yes, ma'am.
According to the victim's wife, he woke up in a state that could only be caused by having
another seizure, within a few days of having the first seizure.
Q. Now the victim had filed a civil suit in order to try to determine the identity of the individual
that sent the tweet, is that correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. And in that lawsuit, did the defendant actually file something anonymously discussing
his sending of the tweet.
A. That's correct.
Q. In that affidavit, did the defendant identify himself.
A. No, defendant did not.
Q. Did he just identify himself as a John Doe and reference the tweet, or, uh, the Twitter
account, Ari Goldstein?
A. That is correct.
Q. And in that affidavit, did the-- did the defendant, um, basic d-- basically deny all
intent to harm the defendant-- arr, I'm sorry, harm the victim?
A. That is correct.
Q. Did he spend some time in that affidavit explaining that he didn't create the GIF,
that he actually just downloaded it from the internet?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Now, upon the arrest of the defendant, he appeared in court in Maryland, is that correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And the government did not move to detain him, but terms of his release were agreed
upon, is that correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. So there is no issue before this court about detention at this time?
A. No, ma'am.
Q. And just for the purposes of the record, is the individual that you arrested and that
admitted to sending the GIF to the victim here in the courtroom?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And where is he in the courtroom?
A. He is seated over there, to your right, ma'am.
Q. Okay, well there's several people over to my right.
Which one would he be?
A. He is the third one to your right.
The dark hair.
MS. HEATH: Your honor, may the record reflect that the witness has identified the defendant
in open court.
And we-- THE COURT: The record will so reflect.
MS. HEATH: And we would pass the witness.
THE COURT: Cross-examination?
MR. HENNESSY: Thank you, your Honor.
Q. S-- Agent Hopp?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Hi, my name's Matt Hennessy.
A. Sir.
Q. Nice to meet you.
So, um, I don't want to identify the victim by name, but perhaps just to set a little
context for things, the victim is a-- a public figure, um, perhaps known for taking public
positions on TV shows and the like, uh, political positions--
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Um, and his politics, let's say, are, are-- he's not in favor of our current president.
Is that fair?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he's a frequent-- he makes frequent appearances on television?
A. Yes, sir.
Several times.
Q. All right.
Are you aware that-- that Mr. Rivello is a former Marine?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you aware that he retired as a sergeant?
A. I was not aware of that.
Q. And that his duty while in service in Iraq and Afghanistan was as a mortuary affairs
specialist.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know what-- Were you ever in the military?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know what a mortuary affairs specialist does?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Tell us.
A. They dispose, or they-- what's a better word to say, uh--
Q. Preserve-- A. --they--
Q. --preserve.
A. --preserve, or prep, deceased bodies, oftentimes our own soldiers, to be transported home.
Q. He collects his comrades, his fallen comrades to bring home so that his fam-- their families
can honor them.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you aware that he has been diagnosed as having some mental disabilities on account
of his service in Iraq and Afghanistan?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And just prior to this-- you know, to center this, just prior-- prior to the tweet that
was sent by Mr. Rivello on December 15th, 2016, just prior to that, um, you're aware
aren't you that this public figure, this victim, uh, had been on TV criticizing the, the coming
administration?
Uh, by then, he was-- we did not have President Trump, it was still President Obama, but he
was on television criticizing the coming administration?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Ms. Heath also mentioned that Mr. Rivello was released on bond.
You're aware aren't you that he was released into the custody of his father?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And his father is a retired DEA agent, twenty-eight year veteran of the DEA?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, as to, the meat of the complaint.
Have you interviewed the victim?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On how many occasions?
A. Just one, sir.
Q. When was that?
A. I can't recall the exact date.
Q. Well, the complaint was filed March 10th.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You said you were involved some time two weeks before that.
So it-- then it-- within that two weeks prior to March 10th?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And did you prepare a report?
From that interview, to be specific.
A. Uh, no, sir.
Q. Any notes?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you have those with you?
A. No, sir.
Q. Where are those?
A. Those are at my field office.
MR. HENNESSY: All right.
Um, Judge I'd ask those to be produced at some point.
THE COURT: At some point before we finish this hearing?
Or at some point--
MR. HENNESSY: I'll-- I'll-- I'll-- I'll-- I'll withdraw that, your Honor.
Q. So when you interviewed, um, when you interviewed the victim, did you discuss how he received
this tweet?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And, um, let me understand.
So I heard-- what I heard you say, and I want to make sure I'm clear here, is that-- What
I heard you testify to is that Mr. Rivello had been sending this same GIF on multiple
occasions in the past, and he finally got a response?
A. According to Mr. Rivello, what he said was that around the same time he sent the
GIF that caused the seizure, he sent the same GIF several times, in several tweets.
Q. Did he tell you in what period of time that those several tweets were sent?
A. No, sir.
Q. All right.
How did you-- was-- How did you interpret it, then?
Within a series of minutes, or a series of days, a series of weeks?
What did that mean to you when he said what he said?
A. To me?
Q. Yes.
A. Uh, I took it to mean within, um, a few days.
Q. But at-- from speaking with the victim-- what I've heard from you there were several sent--
were you able to figure out which one the victim opened?
One first sent, one last sent, some one in the middle?
Were you able to determine that?
A. I don't know, sir.
Q. Were you able to determine whether, if there were multiple tweets sent with the same
GIF, whether more than one was opened?
A. I-- I have not been able to determine that yet.
Q. Did you discuss with the victim-- Do you know what autoplay is?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is it?
A. It's, um, when you receive something, it just automatically starts playing.
You don't have to interact with it.
Q. And do you know that there is a way to turn that off, to disable autoplay?
A. Through the course of the investigation I have found that out.
Q. Did you speak with the victim about whether autoplay was enabled or disabled when this--
this-- when he observed this GIF?
A. The victim stated that the autoplay at that time was on.
Q. Was on?
A. Was on.
He didn't-- he was not aware that, uh, there was such a feature until after the incident.
Q. Okay, so the autoplay was not disabled?
A. Correct.
Q. Which means, just for the record, so, as soon as the tweet would open, in theory, the
GIF should automatically play.
A. Correct.
Q. And it's autoplay.
A. Correct.
Q. The victim told you that, that a-- or did he, let me ask you that way.
Did-- did the victim tell you that he immediately had a seizure upon opening, or seeing that
open GIF?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You said his wife witnessed it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did she witness?
A. She saw him [feedback]-- oh, excuse me, saw him laying on-- laying on the ground,
having a seizure, and when she looked up, she saw the actual GIF still strobing on the
screen.
Q. Did anyone else, besides his wife, witness the seizure?
A. Not that I know of, sir.
Q. Did I hear you say 911 was called?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And have you listened to the 911 tape?
A. No, sir.
Q. Have you interviewed any of the EMTs who showed up-- well first, did any EMT show up?
A. No E-- no MTs.
Q. Why?
A. Um, from my understanding, the wife, uh, did not request an ambulance.
Q. That the wife did not request an ambulance?
A. That's right, yes, sir.
Q. All right.
Your complaint, or the government's complaint, I should more properly say, talks about, and
it's one of the elements, is serious bodily injury.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. All right.
So, um, the victim's wife waived off the ambulance from coming to the house that night, correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know when the victim went to the doctor next?
A. I can't recall when he, immediately went, or--
Q. Now, it's a serious bodily injury.
What, in the course of your investigation, what have you found as to serious bodily injury
with respect to this victim?
A. The, the seizure itself, I-- is the-- the-- the loss of memory, the [indistinct] control
of your body, uh, those would be the serious bodily injuries.
Q. So, that's what you say serious bodily injury is, is loss of memory, and-- and the seizure
itself?
A. I can look up the definition in the note, probably let me speak to it a little bit better.
I have it in front of me.
Q. Oh, okay.
Pardon me, I didn't know that.
Please go ahead.
A. So, it says here, serious bodily injury is defined as, um, any bodily injury which
involves a substantial risk of death, extreme physical pain, protracted and obvious disfigurement,
or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental facility.
Q. So, in what part of that list does loss of memory fall?
A. Mental faculty.
Q. And what about, uh, what about the seizure itself, what does that fall under?
A. I would say-- I'm not a medical professional, but I would say protracted loss or impairment
of bodily function.
Q. Well, you said that-- that he-- he lost memory of the event itself, correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he had some difficulties in the following days, and even a follow-on seizure?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. So, for how long did he suffer this protracted loss?
A. I'm not sure, sir.
Q. Were you aware that he was on television the following week giving interviews?
A. I was aware that he was publicly making-- publicly talking about the incident, yes.
Q. All right.
Have you personally talked with any his doc-- any of his doctors.
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you have permission to talk to any of his doctors?
A. I'm not sure if I've even asked yet, sir.
Q. Do you have any of his medical records?
A. No, sir.
Q. Have you consulted an expert as to what the effects of the effects of a seizure are?
A. We have a sworn affidavit from his doctor.
Q. You have a sworn affidavit from his doctor?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you have that before you prepared your complaint?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you have that sworn affidavit with you?
A. I do not, sir.
Q. Where is that?
A. That would be at my field office, as well.
That was obtained from DPD.
Q. From Dallas Police Department?
A. Dallas Police, sir.
Q. Do you know when that affidavit was prepared?
A. I can't recall, sir.
Q. Did you happen to investigate whether there were any risk factors in play when, um, the
event occurred.
Risk factors for seizure.
Do you even know what I'm talking about?
A. Uh, could you explain that a little more?
Q. Sure, sure.
So a risk factor for s-- for seizure could be a lack of sleep, going too long without
a good night's sleep.
Or perhaps even the-- the overuse of-- recent overuse of alcohol.
Did you-- Or even stress.
Do-- did you investigate whether any of those known risk factors for seizure were present
on December 15th at the time that this-- this GIF opened?
A. I did not.
Q. Is there anything about that-- about risk factors, in the affidavit that you read from
the doctor, the neurologist?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Are you aware that particular-- are you aware the name, do you know what the-- have
you heard of photosensitive epilepsy?
Let me just-- A. No, sir, but I can infer what it means.
Q. Sure, it-- it's-- it's-- it's what we're talking about here, that-- that, uh, a person
in whom seizures can be brought on by observing certain patterns of flashing lights.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you do any investigation, did you ever try to discover how rare that is?
A. Did I ever try to discover how rare it is?
Q. Yes.
A. No, sir.
Q. Now, this particular GIF that was sent, um, it came out on direct, um, I think what you
said was that Mr. Rivello said that he didn't create this GIF, he found it on the internet,
right?
A. Yes.
Q. And you found that to be true?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Not only did your find that to be true, in your research you probably found other
GIFs just like this floating around out in the ether, didn't you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. This particular GIF, do you know when it-- when it was created?
A. The particular GIF that, uh-- Q. Was sent to the victim.
A. Um.
Q. Does 2012, or even 2008 sound right?
A. That-- I have seen those dates, or the 2012 date at least.
Q. 2012 I've seen, too.
Thank you.
Um, and so-- again, no evidence whatsoever Mr. Rivello created it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is, there is no evidence, corre--?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Thanks, I see.
A. Sir.
Q. You mentioned, um, these screenshots that you-- so-- in getting your, um, orders, warrants,
you got ahold of information from Mr. Rivello's Icloud, right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And on that Icloud you found screenshots of various things that are mentioned la--
sort of at the end of your affidavit for complaint, correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you investigate whether Mr. Rivello actually created the content of those screenshots?
A. It-- with the information I had, there was no way to tell, sir.
Q. Okay, so, said differently, there's no evidence whatsoever that he created the content
of the screenshots that you found on Icloud-- A. That's correct.
Q. --weeks and months after the event?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. HENNESSY: Just one moment, your Honor.
Q. Did you, uh, make a report, uh-- How many people have you interviewed in connection
with your investigation in this case?
A. Um, I believe just two, sir.
Q. And who are they?
A. The victim and Mr. Rivello.
Q. So it sounds like, what your complaint is based on-- Is it just based on what Dallas
Police Department handed you?
A. A good portion of it, yes, sir.
Q. Well, everything except what the victim told you.
A. Yes, sir.
MR. HENNESSY: Pass the witness, your Honor.
THE COURT: Any redirect?
MS. HEATH: Yes, your honor Q. Agent Hopp, the elements necessary for
a 2261A case, provides that the defendant, with intent to kill, injure, harass or intimidate,
used a communication system of interstate commerce.
Is Twitter a communication system of interstate commerce?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And did you find any chats, or any direct messages, indicating what the intent of the
defendant was in sending these-- in sending that GIF?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And what did you find?
A. The-- I found the intent was to injure the victim, based on his outlook, on his--
his outlook on, um-- his political stance, and also his supposed, um, Jewish faith.
Q. The GIF that was sent, did that, uh, from your discussion with Mis-- with, with the
victim, did it place him in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And in fact, did he suffer serious bodily injury as a result of the GIF?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. When you're saying serious bodily injury, it, uh, caused him to have serious impact
on his ability to even move his body during the seizure, is that correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. He lost all control of his bodily functions.
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And he lost all control of his mental faculty.
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Was he basically out of it, and not coherent, during the period of time of the seizure?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Was it determined that he actually suffered a second seizure that night while he was sleeping?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And that's according to his wife, is that correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Did the seizure cause he, his wife, or his sons any emotional distress?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Can you explain a little bit about what they have gone through since that period of
time, since receiving the GIF and-- that caused the seizure?
A. The family has continued to [indistinct] follow-on, um, tweets with strobing images
in them.
They've been harassed because of this incident.
Um, it's caused them a lot of distress.
You know, the victim stated during the holidays, I mean he-- he really-- he wasn't really there
even.
He was, uh, his need to be fed, he couldn't raise his arm.
Uh, it was pretty awful for their family.
Q. Have there been adjustments since December, on a fairly regular basis, to his medication
for trying to prevent seizures?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And was there some indication that based on the seizure that he had from the stroke
GIF that those medications are reduced in their efficacy, their ability to actually
help him?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. And has that caused emotional distress for Mis-- for the victim and his wife and
family?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. You were asked about the risk factors, for somebody with epilepsy, to reacting to
a strobe light, correct?
A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Did you find those risk factors actually on a screenshot on the defendant's Icloud
account?
A. Yes, ma'am.
MS. HEATH: Your honor, we pass the witness.
MR. HENNESSY: Just very briefly, your Honor.
Thank you.
Q. You mention that, that-- Agent, you mentioned that, after this event, he started to get
other tweets sent to him of a similar nature.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. But it's also true, isn't it, that within the week after this event, he went on TV and
told the world that someone sent him this flashing GIF, right?
A. I'm not aware if he actually went on television, but I know, yes, he--
Q. He put it out there-- A. --through social media at least, he, he
blasted that out there, yes, sir.
Q. He put it out publicly, one way or another.
A. Yes.
Q. And, you talked about looking at Mr. Rivello's tweets and communications that were obtained
via warrant or court order.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And, we're not here to make excuses for everyone of them, but is it fair to say, looking
at them as a whole, much of it is evidence of the course political discourse that we
see all too much of today?
A. Uh, what do you mean by that?
Q. Angry people angry about politics.
MS. HEATH: Your Honor, we object to speculation on the part of this witness.
There's no basis for asking that particular question.
THE COURT: Well, I'm not sure how it goes to probable cause.
MR. HENNESSY: Very well, your Honor.
That's all, your Honor.
Thank you.
THE COURT: You may step down.
Thank you very much.
Anything else from the government?
MS. HEATH: The government rests, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
Anything from the defense?
MR. HENNESSY: No, your Honor.
Thank you.
THE COURT: Do the parties wish to present argument?
MR. HENNESSY: None from-- none from the defense, argu-- None from the defense, your Honor.
MS. HEATH: Your Honor, I believe the criminal complaint speaks for itself in this case,
and we rely on the criminal complaint as our final argument.
THE COURT: All right
Based on the testimony before me, I do find probable cause in this case, so Mr. Rivello,
you will have to face further proceedings in this case.
THE COURT: Um, we are adjourned as to this matter.
Counsel are excused if they have no further matters before the court.
For more infomation >> Щенячий патруль новые серии СУПЕРГЕРОИ НА ЗАДАНИИ Мультики про игрушки Герои в масках для детей - Duration: 6:52. 
For more infomation >> Pixel Wizard: 2D platform RPG обзор - Аркады - Duration: 2:28. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét