Opinion
Criminal No. 05-40033-FDS.
July 27, 2007
ORDER OF SUMMARY CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
This is a summary criminal contempt proceeding pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 42(b). According to Rule 42(b), the Court "may summarily punish a person who commits criminal contempt in its presence if the judge saw or heard the contemptuous conduct and so certifies."
On June 4, 2007, the government applied for an order pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 6002, 6003, requiring defendant Thomas Vigliatura to testify in the trial of co-defendant Heriberto Arroyo. The Court granted the application the same day. On June 6, 2007, during the trial, defendant informed the Court that he would not answer questions put to him if called as a witness. See Transcript of hearing held on June 6, 2007, attached as Exhibit A. Defendant stated to the Court that he had safety concerns about the possible repercussions from his testifying, and that he was worried about harassment of his family. The Court informed defendant that he would be found in contempt if he refused to testify, and afforded him time until the next day to reconsider his refusal.
On June 7, 2007, defendant returned and informed the Court that he would not testify. See Transcript of hearing held on June 7, 2007, attached as Exhibit B. Accordingly, the Court held defendant in civil contempt and announced its intention to hold him in summary criminal contempt. The Court set the matter for a show cause hearing on June 18, 2007. After a hearing, the Court ordered the parties to file briefs on July 9 and set a further hearing date. On July 26, 2007, after consideration of the filings made by the parties, the Court found defendant in criminal contempt.
The Court therefore finds, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 42(b), that defendant Thomas Vigliatura has committed criminal contempt for his refusal to testify at the trial of co-defendant Heriberto Arroyo on or about June 7, 2007. This Order shall be filed with the clerk pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 42(b).
So Ordered.
EXHIBIT A
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS United States of America, ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) vs. ) CR No. 05-40033 ) ) Heriberto Arroyo, ) Defendant. ) BEFORE: The Honorable F. Dennis Saylor, IV Hearing United States District Court Courtroom No. 2 595 Main Street Worcester, Massachusetts Wednesday, June 6, 2007 Marianne Kusa-Ryll, RMR, CRR Official Court Reporter United States District Court 595 Main Street, Room 514A Worcester, MA 01608-2093 508-929-3399 Mechanical Steno — Transcript by ComputerAPPEARANCES:
United States Attorney's Office
By George W. Vien, Assistant U.S. Attorney
John Joseph Moakley Federal Courthouse
1 Courthouse Way, Suite 9200
Boston, Massachusetts 02210 for the Plaintiff
U.S. Department of Justice — NDDS by Harry Matz, Senior Trial Lawyer
1400 New York Avenue NW 11th Floor
Washington, DC 20005 for the Plaintiff
Robert L. Sheketoff, Esquire
One McKinley Square
Boston, Massachusetts 02109 for the Defendant
Public Defender's Office
Stellio Sinnis, Assistant Federal Public Defender
408 Atlantic Avenue, 3rd Floor
Boston, Massachusetts 02110 for Thomas Vigliatura
PROCEEDINGS
THE COURT: Do you want to handle the matter of Mr. Vigliatura now? Is that the idea?MR. VIEN: I think it would make sense if you're available, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Why don't we take about a 10-minute recess, and we'll bring him up and do that.
George, can you get Marty, or give him a copy of his immunity order?
MR. VIEN: Yes, your Honor.
(Recess from 12:43 p.m., until 12:56 p.m.)
THE CLERK: All rise.
Court is now open. You may be seated.
THE COURT: All right. Let's take up the matter of Mr. Vigliatura's potential testimony.
Is Mr. Vigliatura present? Yes.
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes.
THE COURT: And you're represented by counsel?
MR. SINNIS: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Sinnis, would you please identify yourself.
MR. SINNIS: Stellio Sinnis for Tom Vigliatura.
THE COURT: All right. And, Mr. Sinnis, it's my understanding that Mr. Vigliatura has been immunized, pursuant to an order that I signed on Monday; that he's aware of the order and that he has indicated he will not answer questions concerning — during the trial; is that correct?
MR. SINNIS: Your Honor, I have met with Mr. Vigliatura on a couple of occasions to discuss the issue of his being compelled to testify in this case by the Government.
He has a copy of the order. We've gone over the contents of the order and the possible repercussions of his making a decision not to testify. He has advised me that he will not testify based upon concerns he has for his safety in Wyatt, and in any other facility that he may be in, and that is the basis for his unwillingness — one of the bases, I would say, the prominent basis for his unwillingness to give testimony in this case.
THE COURT: Is there any other basis, other than a concern for his safety?
MR. SINNIS: His family's safety. His safety once he returns to the Worcester community, after whatever prison sentence your Honor imposes upon him. So, between the concerns for his own personal safety while he's incarcerated, as well as his family's safety, and issues when he gets out of prison.
There have also been some previous incidents while he has been incarcerated on this case, which gave some ground to his concerns, which I'd be happy to share with your Honor either at sidebar or a closed courtroom, and I think all of those things come — put together lead him to this decision, which he does not take lightly.
THE COURT: All right. Let's take that up at the sidebar in just a moment.
Is there something specific about Wyatt, for example, or a specific fellow prisoner that would be obviated by transfer to a different facility, or is it a more generalized concern?
MR. SINNIS: I don't think there's anything specific about Wyatt, your Honor. You know, given the nature of the facilities in which people in Mr. Vigliatura's position are kept, I don't know that going to one of the other facilities here would moot the issue. I also know that Mr. Vigliatura's concern that when and if he is ever sent to a Federal Bureau of Prisons, there's going to be some questioning of him as to what his offenses were, what he did in relation to his offenses, and so it's not just an immediate concern now, it's a future concern if he ever does get to a federal facility, and so I think the option of moving him to another facility does not ease his concerns.
THE COURT: Okay. Before I hear you at sidebar, let me hear Mr. Vien.
MR. VIEN: Your Honor, regarding these concerns that Mr. Sinnis raises, number one, of course, I don't think anyone disputes he could ask to be segregated from the prison population.
He has not been sentenced yet, so we could keep him in a local facility, or make arrangements through the marshals to put him in a different facility, if that's what he needs.
In the near future he will be sentenced and become a Bureau of Prisons' prisoner, and sent to the Bureau of Prisons' system. Once he's in that system, then I, or frankly Mr. Sinnis, anyone at Mr. Sinnis' request, I could ask the Bureau of Prisons to separate him from other inmates within those facilities, or to send him to a particular facility where there's no specific threat.
That is the point of this, your Honor. This is a very generalized fear. There's nothing specific. If there's something specific, we're more than willing to act on it to address those concerns, if they are legitimate. I don't think they're legitimate. I think Mr. Vigliatura's real concern is being viewed as a, quote, stand-up, end quote, guy when he gets out of prison. That's what's going on here, and he's concerned about his reputation in the criminal community, not about his actual safety, and not about his — his family's safety. There's nothing specific in the record to indicate that.
THE COURT: All right. Let me hear you at sidebar.
(Sidebar as follows:
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Sinnis, what did you wish to add?
MR. SINNIS: At some point earlier in this case, prior to my representation of Mr. Vigliatura, one of his codefendants, Mr. McLaughlin, as part of discovery, was given a copy of Mr. Vigliatura's proffer. That proffer got circulated around Wyatt, and Mr. Vigliatura had several run-ins with various inmates regarding him being a rat and regarding his perceived cooperation by giving the proffer, although I'm not sure that the point of his proffer was to become some sort of informant and cooperator, but more rather fully to disclose his own involvement in it.
And based upon the reaction of what happened when he had his proffer passed out in Wyatt, he still has problems there to this day, although many of the inmates who originally confronted him have been — since moved on, but there's still at least one inmate, who he has had some issues with because of it. Him and Mr. McLaughlin have been separated when the plaintiff's proffer got around.
I would also just offer a brief response to what Mr. Vien said. You know, as your Honor is well aware, this case has gotten a lot of press, and so Mr. Vigliatura getting on the stand and testifying is going to be prominent news in the Telegram Gazette, and presumably sent to anybody, and anybody who wants it or is interested in it would know that he testified.
I — I'm not trying to — I don't want — I'm not saying that Mr. Vien was trying to trivialize Mr. Vigliatura's concern, but, you know, Mr. Vigliatura is in a position where he's a very large man, so I think people perceive him as being above being scared or above being afraid, and that's just frankly not the case.
He has legitimate concerns. I'm not sure that there's anything this court can do to — to persuade him that those concerns are not valid or legitimate. He's the one that has to go back to Wyatt tonight and answer questions, and be there, and watch over his shoulder. That is his reality of what he's expressing to me are his concerns, and it's hard pressed for me or with all due respect for your Honor to say that those aren't valid concerns; that there isn't any safety risk, or that we can protect him sufficiently, or he's such a large man that he's not at risk. These are the things that he's worried about, and he's worried about them not only in the facility that he is now, but also in the federal facility where I will tell you, I've had numerous clients tell me when they get to a federal facility, what the first people want to see is their psi, to see if there's any information in there that they cooperated or anything of that nature.
And then also when he gets back out. Worcester is a small community, and Mr. Arroyo is a police officer. Now, I'm not saying that he's concerned directly that Mr. Arroyo would do something to him, but he has concerns about being out back in this community where he spent his entire life and his entire family is for their well-being and for their safety as well as his own.
THE COURT: All right. I assume that arrangements can be made either to segregate him or to transfer him to a different facility to Plymouth or Middleton or something or both.
Mr. Vien?
MR. VIEN: Absolutely.
THE COURT: And mechanically how does that happen? Does it — does the defendant have to request it?
MR. VIEN: Segregation, all he has to do is go to the institution and say I want to be segregated, and he'll be put in solitary confinement until we can get him moved, so he could go back to wherever he is this evening, go into segregation or solitary confinement, and I'm sure the marshals could have him moved to a different facility within a day or two.
THE COURT: Do you want me to make that request to the marshals that he be segregated as of this evening?
MR. SINNIS: I will talk to Mr. Vigliatura, but I don't know that — I mean I have had that conversation with him, not in actual specific do you want to be segregated, but my sense is he will tell you he doesn't want to do that, because that's almost like a red flag that something has occurred, but I'd be happy to talk to him. I'm just not sure that even moving him is going to eliminate the concern that he is feeling; and I'm happy to have your Honor address him personally, and he's willing to address your Honor personally. I would just ask maybe we do that sealing the courtroom so he can speak more freely to your Honor.
THE COURT: Well, I think what makes more sense is — well, let me back up.
I'm not dismissing the concern as trivial, because it's not, but to say it's not trivial or — or even valid is not the same as saying it's a valid reason not to testify; and I am going to require him to testify on pain of contempt under the circumstance with a generalized fear of repercussions; and, therefore, what I intend to do is to put him on the stand and to go through the colloquy about that.
If there are specific issues that he wants to address me about, I'll permit it to occur at sidebar, which raises the question should this sidebar be sealed in some way? I'm not sure that there's —
MR. SINNIS: I don't know that it needs to.
MR. VIEN: I don't have any reason to seal it, your Honor.
THE COURT: I'm not sure I see a need, so —
MR. SINNIS: I don't know.
THE COURT: But I will permit him to address me at sidebar, if there's something that he thinks needs to be addressed in that regard, but I am going to go through the colloquy with him, and I will require him to testify on pain of — if it happens right, civil contempt, while the trial is still going on. The trial's supposed to end tomorrow, but he's subject to criminal contempt if he refuses to testify, if I understand the way this works.
MR. SINNIS: I believe there's civil contempt, summary criminal contempt, and there's also potentially the possibility of an indictment for contempt. I think under summary contempt the most your Honor could penalize him is six months incarceration. I don't believe there's any cap on sum — on contempt —
THE COURT: Right.
MR. SINNIS: — after indictment.
THE COURT: Right. Well, I'm going to read the script from the bench book, and we'll take it from there, if we need to.
MR. VIEN: Your Honor, just for the record, I didn't know if I should have marked this order separately.
THE COURT: Yeah. No, that's fine. What number is it?
MR. VIEN: It's 18.
THE COURT: Fine.
MR. VIEN: I'm going to place it in front of the witness stand — on the witness stand at this point, so you can make reference to it.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. SINNIS: Can I — before you call him, can I just give him a few minutes to give him guidance?
THE COURT: Yes.
(Counsel conferred with Mr. Vigliatura.)
MR. SINNIS: We're ready to proceed, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Please take the stand, Mr. Vigliatura.
MR. SINNIS: Your Honor, may he stand up by the stand?
THE COURT: Yes.
THE CLERK: Please raise your right hand.
THOMAS VIGLIATURA, SWORN
THE CLERK: Please be seated.
Please state your name and spell your last name for the record.
MR. VIGLIATURA: Thomas Vigliatura, V-I-G-L-I-A-T-U-R-A.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Vigliatura, do you understand that I have signed an order that, in effect, requires you to testify in this trial?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, I do, your Honor.
THE COURT: Is that order in front of you marked as Exhibit 18?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes.
THE COURT: And have you seen that order and had an opportunity to go over it with your counsel?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, I have.
THE COURT: All right. And do you understand that by the terms of that order, you can be compelled to give testimony in this case, that is, the case of the United States versus Heriberto Arroyo, and that the information provided by you cannot be used against you, except in a later prosecution for perjury, giving a false statement, or failing to comply with the order?
Do you understand that?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, I do.
THE COURT: All right. And my understanding is that notwithstanding the order that if you're called to testify at the trial of this case tomorrow that you would refuse to answer valid questions; is that correct?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: And what is the reason for your refusal?
MR. VIGLIATURA: All the above reasons that Mr. Sinnis has already said, and he — your Honor, he said that I could speak with you at sidebar on something after, but just what he said, basically my family's safety and my safety.
THE COURT: All right. That is concerns about your safety in jail while you're detained in prison after you're sentenced and afterwards and your family's safety?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. And my understanding is that there has been no specific threat made against you or your family; is that correct?
MR. VIGLIATURA: No. No specific threat, no.
THE COURT: All right. Before I proceed then, why don't I hear you at sidebar, and obviously both counsel can be present.
I'm going to ask the marshals to be present as well.
(Sidebar as follows:
MR. SINNIS: Why don't you stand right there, Tom.
THE COURT: And what else do you wish to put on the record?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Just that I'm just concerned about when I get out eventually that my business, hopefully, will be based in Worcester again, and, um, the Worcester Police, the fire department, a lot of — a lot of those types of people were my clients. They came to my store, and I'm hoping to reopen again some day. That's my ultimate hope, and I just feel that my — my whole future could be affected by this decision today, and I don't know that my family's safety, um, my family's reputation wouldn't be marred in a bad way if I did this today.
I just — I don't know what else I can say. I'm sorry for this, but I'm living in a very hostile environment right now, and I've seen a lot of things happen over the past 22 months since I've been incarcerated, and I don't want to be one of those statistics.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. VIGLIATURA: I'm sorry.
THE COURT: All right. And just so you understand, my understanding is that if you are — have a legitimate concern for your safety that you can request to be segregated or to have the marshals transfer you to another facility, that is that there are procedures in place, but you have to request them. You have to invoke them. They're not going to happen without you requesting them.
All right. Why don't you resume the stand then.
Thank you.
MR. VIGLIATURA: I'm sorry.
. . . end of sidebar.)
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Vigliatura, we're going to resume the trial tomorrow morning. The jury will be present, and you'll be ordered to answer any questions that are put to you.
If you persist in refusing to answer, you will be cited in civil contempt. If you're found guilty, you'll be confined until you answer the question or until the trial ends, and you may also be fined in addition to being confined.
Now, we expect that the trial will end tomorrow, but civil contempt is not your only exposure. If you have not answered the question before the trial ends, you may be cited for criminal contempt; and if you're found guilty of criminal contempt, you may be fined or imprisoned.
If you're found guilty of criminal contempt by me at a bench trial, you may be imprisoned for up to six months. If you are indicted or formally charged with criminal contempt, and a jury finds you guilty of criminal contempt, you may be imprisoned for as long as I, in my discretion, determine.
If you're serving another sentence, you will be confined for civil or criminal contempt — if you're serving another sentence, and you also receive a contempt sentence, either civil or criminal on top of that, the confinement will be in addition to the sentence already being served.
So, for example, if you were to get a six-month contempt sentence, on top of whatever your prison sentence is, they would not be concurrent. One would run after the other.
Do you understand that? Do you have any questions in that regard?
MR. VIGLIATURA: No — no, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. What I'm going to do then — unless there's anything further from counsel — is you will be brought back tomorrow, which will give you the evening to think about this and to consult with Mr. Sinnis, and you'll be put on the stand to testify, and again, if you persist in refusing to answer questions, there will be likely consequences in the form of civil and/or criminal contempt.
Mr. Vien, is there anything you wish to add?
MR. VIEN: No, your Honor.
I assume the marshals are good with the request to bring him back tomorrow and that we won't have to make any additional requests.
U.S. MARSHAL: Yes.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Sinnis, anything further?
MR. SINNIS: No, your Honor.
THE COURT: Is there anything, Mr. Sheketoff, you wish to add?
MR. SHEKETOFF: I'm not sure I have any standing, your Honor; and even if I do, there's nothing I want to add.
THE COURT: All right. All right then. Let's return Mr. Vigliatura to custody, and then I want to see Mr. Vien and Mr. Sheketoff briefly.
All right. Thank you.
MR. SINNIS: Your Honor, from a scheduling standpoint, are you thinking of calling Mr. Vigliatura right at nine or after the next witness?
MR. VIEN: We can do it right at nine, your Honor, for Mr. Sinnis' convenience. We just have one other witness.
MR. SINNIS: My convenience would actually be after the last witness, but I can —
MR. VIEN: We will do it after the last witness.
MR. SINNIS: I can make arrangements if your Honor wants to do it right at nine.
MR. VIEN: It will be nine or ten. The witness will only be an hour.
THE COURT: All right. It took me an hour and a half to get to work this morning from two different accidents, so allow lots of time. All right.
MR. SINNIS: Okay.
THE COURT: All right. Why don't you return Exhibit 18 to Mr. Vien.
MR. SINNIS: Yeah.
(Document handed to Mr. Matz.)
THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
(Mr. Vigliatura left the courtroom.)
THE COURT: Mr. Vien, Mr. Sheketoff, if the jury is going to get the case tomorrow, we have to have the charge conference this afternoon. We also have this issue of the medical records. What I suggest is that we reconvene at 2:30.
The charge doesn't seem particularly complicated to me. This may not take long, but we obviously have to have the conference.
MR. VIEN: I agree with that, your Honor.
THE COURT: 2:30 all right, Mr. Sheketoff?
MR. SHEKETOFF: That's fine.
THE COURT: Okay. Is there anything else we have to take up between now and then?
MR. VIEN: Not from us, your Honor.
MR. SHEKETOFF: Not with me, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. I'll see you at 2:30.
(Recess at 1:19 p.m.)
CERTIFICATE
I, Marianne Kusa-Ryll, Certified Realtime Reporter, do hereby certify that the foregoing transcript, consisting of 19 pages, is a true and accurate transcription of my stenographic notes in Case No. 05-40033-FDS, United States of America versus Heriberto Arroyo, before F. Dennis Saylor, IV, on Wednesday, June 6, 2007, to the best of my skill, knowledge, and ability. ____________________________ Marianne Kusa-Ryll, RMR, CRR Official Court ReporterEXHIBIT B
_______________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS AT WORCESTER CASE NO. 4:05-cr-40033-FDS-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V. HERIBERTO ARROYO, _______________________________________________________________ EXCERPTS FROM JURY TRIAL TAKEN JUNE 7, 2007 AT THE FEDERAL BUILDING AND COURTHOUSE 595 MAIN STREET WORCESTER, MASSACHUSETTS PRESIDING JUDGE: F. DENNIS SAYLOR IVREPORTER: CAROL A. CARPENTIER
APPEARANCES:
APPEARING FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
J.J. MOAKLEY FEDERAL COURTHOUSE
1 COURTHOUSE WAY, SUITE 9200
BOSTON, MA 02210
BY: GEORGE W. VIEN, ESQ.
617.748.3236 FAX 617.748.3954
george.vien@usdoj.gov
APPEARING FOR THE DEFENDANT:
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT L. SHEKETOFF
ONE McKINLEY SQUARE
BOSTON, MA 02109
BY: ROBERT L. SHEKETOFF, ESQ.
617.367.3449 FAX 617.723.1710
sheketoff@aol.com
(Appearing on behalf of potential witness Thomas Vigliatura was Attorney Stellios Sinnis.)
INDEX: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS WITNESS: (None)PROCEEDINGS
(Jury is not present. Time is 9:20 a.m.)(Mr. Vigliatura takes the stand, and he is represented by Stellios Sinnis, who is standing next to him.)
THE COURT: All right.
Mr. Vigliatura, I had you in here yesterday and you indicated that you were going to refuse to answer valid questions at this trial and that your reason for doing so are concerns over your safety — principally the safety of your family and that you understood that you were subject to additional punishment for refusing at the time to testify.
Do you have any — well, let me ask the question, let me ask the questions this way now —
Have you had a chance to reflect upon this issue since we last came into court on that?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And have you had a chance to discuss it with your counsel, Mr. Sinnis?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, I did.
THE COURT: And do you believe that you are fully aware of the consequences of your failure to testify?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, I am.
THE COURT: And the consequences include, among other things, the possibility of additional prison time on or after whatever — the underlying offenses?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And this is your last chance, so to speak. The trial is about to come to a conclusion. You've been called as a witness. As a witness, what do you intend to do?
MR. VIGLIATURA: I'm not testifying, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You're not going to testify?
MR. VIGLIATURA: No.
THE COURT: All right. And you do so with full knowledge of the possible consequences of your failure to do so?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Including the possibility of additional prison time?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
I find that the defendant is in civil contempt.
Because this case presents somewhat of an unusual situation in that the trial is literally about to end momentarily and the defendant is detained, in any event, I don't think additional confinement or fines are likely to compel or persuade the witness to testify.
There is the issue of criminal contempt. As I understand the law, I could find the defendant in criminal contempt and imprison him as much as an additional six months for his failure to testify.
What I am going to do is I am going to set the matter for an additional hearing a couple weeks out, in which the — Mr. Vigliatura shall show cause why he should not be found in summary criminal contempt.
Mr. Vigliatura is going to be sentenced, as I understand it, in September, but I think we ought to have a hearing before that to talk about that and there's additional briefing on other issues that ought to be attended to first.
What does the week of the 18th look like?
18th through the 20th at four o'clock, does that work, Mr. Sinnis?
MR. SINNIS: The 18th works but not the 19th.
MR. VIEN: I believe the 18th is fine, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. And what I envision here is if Mr. Sinnis or the Government indicates that a particular procedure ought to be followed here — in other words, briefing and so forth — I'll set a timetable.
If we need a hearing, I'll set the date of the hearing from one counsel or another, and — we'll see what is the appropriate course of action here.
In the meantime, Mr. Vigliatura is detained in any event — having pleaded guilty — and will be sentenced in September and he will be returned to the marshal service for further detention.
All right. Mr. Vigliatura, I already said this was your last chance. This really is your last chance:
Do you continue to intend to refuse to answer questions?
MR. VIGLIATURA: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Okay. I'll direct that he be returned to the custody of the marshals and we will bring the jury in — timetable for going forward.
MR. SINNIS: Thank you, Your Honor.
(Mr. Vigliatura leaves the stand at 9:27 a.m.)
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
I, CAROL A. CARPENTIER, Notary Public, Court Reporter, do hereby certify that the foregoing testimony is true and accurate, to the best of my knowledge and belief.WITNESS MY HAND JUNE 26, 2007.
___________________ Carol A. Carpentier Notary Public My Commission expires:April 17, 2009