UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON THE HON. ANN L.

AIKEN, JUDGE PRESIDING UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Government, v. No. 06-60080 SUZANNE NICOLE SAVOIE, Defendant REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS EUGENE, OREGON FRIDAY, JULY 31, 2006 PAGES 1 - 40 Kristi L. Anderson Official Federal Reporter United States Courthouse 211 East Seventh Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 465-6503 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: FOR THE GOVERNMENT: UNITED STATES ATTORNEY BY: KIRK ENGDALL, ESQ. 701 High Street Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541)465-6771 kirk.engdall@usdoj.gov FOR THE GOVERNMENT: UNITED STATES ATTORNEY BY: STEPHEN F. PEIFER, ESQ. 1000 SW Third Avenue, Suite 600 Portland, Oregon 97204-2902 503)727-1044 steve.peifer@usdoj.gov FOR THE DEFENDANT: JOHN J. KOLEGO BY: JOHN J. KOLEGO, ESQ. 804 Pearl Street Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541)484-1066 johnkolego@yahoo.com 3 PROCEEDINGS FRIDAY, JULY 21, 2006 THE CLERK: This is the time set for Criminal 06-60080, United States of America versus Suzanne Nicole Savoie, hearing on defendant's oral motion to change plea. MR. ENGDALL: Your Honor, the government has submitted for the court and filed with the court an information in this particular case. It's my understanding the defendant is prepared to enter a waiver of indictment on that information, be prepared to be arraigned on the information, and go forward with the entry of a plea of guilty on that information.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

MR. KOLEGO: That's correct, Your Honor, and to that end, I have tendered to the court a waiver of indictment signed by Ms. Savoie after discussion with me, together with a plea petition, along with an executed plea agreement. THE COURT: Thank you. Ms. Savoie, you have a copy of the information in Case 06-60080; is that true? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: And Mr. Kolego has been your attorney throughout these proceedings? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And did you receive this information 4 and have a chance to read it over and review it with him? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And do you wish me to go through each and every count and read them out loud to you? THE DEFENDANT: I don't think I need that. THE COURT: Do you want me to go over the nature of each count, lesser included offenses, or defenses? THE DEFENDANT: No. THE COURT: So you understand the charges in this case? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And the maximum penalties, Mr. Engdall, can you recite those for the defendant? THE DEFENDANT: Yeah. MR. ENGDALL: Yes, Your Honor. Count 1 of the information which involves conspiracy to commit arson and destruction of an energy facility of the United States, the maximum sentence is five years imprisonment and a fine of $250,000. Counts 2 through 15 involve arson and attempted arson, and the maximum sentence is 20 years imprisonment, mandatory minimum of five years imprisonment, and a fine of $250,000 on each count. THE COURT: Do you waive further advice of rights and wish to proceed at this time? 5 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And you have filed with the court or handed to the court a waiver of indictment, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: And so you understand, after discussions with Mr. Kolego, that you wish to go forward and accept the government's offer today? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And you do not want this case presented to the grand jury to return a true bill? THE DEFENDANT: Correct. THE COURT: You are giving up that right; is that correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

15 THE COURT: You asking the court to sign that? 16 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. 17 THE COURT: Any questions that your lawyer or I 18 may answer for you? 19 THE DEFENDANT: No. 20 THE COURT: And again, you are asking the court to 21 sign that waiver of indictment? 22 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. 23 THE COURT: All right. I will sign it. 24 Go ahead. 25 THE CLERK: Can I ask you to raise your right hand 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 6 to be sworn. (The defendant was sworn.) THE COURT: Please state your full name. THE DEFENDANT: Suzanne Nicole Savoie. THE COURT: How old are you? THE DEFENDANT: 29. THE COURT: How far have you gone through school? THE DEFENDANT: 16 years. THE COURT: Tell me about your schooling. THE DEFENDANT: High school and San Diego State University. THE COURT: And how far? THE DEFENDANT: Four years. THE COURT: Did you get a degree? THE DEFENDANT: Almost. THE COURT: What was your area of study? THE DEFENDANT: English. THE COURT: So you were able to read and understand the petition and the plea agreement attached to that petition? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And Mr. Kolego, again, has been your lawyer throughout these proceedings? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And you have had a chance to discuss 7 with him the nature of these charges, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Lesser included offenses? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And defenses that you could raise to these charges; is that correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, yes. THE COURT: And you have also had a chance with him to review the discovery or the evidence that the government has provided? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And have you talked to him about all aspects of this case, to the best of your knowledge? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And you have had a chance to talk with him about all the choices and options that you have,

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: So after reviewing the government's evidence, understanding the nature of the charges, and all the defenses, looking at all the choices that you have, you concluded today you wish to accept the government's offer to settle this case? THE DEFENDANT: Correct. THE COURT: And you do not wish to go forward to 8 trial? THE DEFENDANT: Correct. THE COURT: And so you understand, then, we are going to go through this change of plea, and you will be pleading guilty to various elements of each of these counts? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And starting with, then, the conspiracy count, Count 1, the elements are as follows: That beginning October 1996 and continuing through October of 2001, you, in the District of Oregon and elsewhere, willfully and knowingly conspired to maliciously damage or destroy, or attempt to damage or destroy, by means of fire, buildings, vehicles, and other personal and real property owned in whole or in part or possessed by or leased to the United States or any department or agency thereof and/or used in interstate commerce or in any activities affecting interstate commerce, and to knowingly and willfully damage and attempt to damage property of an energy facility of the United States involved in the transmission of electricity as set forth in the attachment to the petition. THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: With regard to Count 2, that on or about January 2nd, 2001, that in Glendale, Douglas County, Oregon, the District of Oregon, you unlawfully and willfully 9 caused and aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, and procured the malicious damaging and destruction, by means of fire and explosive, a building and other real or personal property used in interstate commerce and used in activities affecting interstate commerce, namely, a building and its contents located at Superior Lumber Company, 2695 Glendale Valley Road, Glendale, Douglas County, Oregon as set forth in Attachment 1 hereto. THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Count 3, on or about May 21st, 2001, at Clatskanie, Columbia County, in the District of Oregon, you unlawfully and willfully caused and aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, and procured the attempt to damage or destroy, by means of fire and an explosive, a building and other real and personal property used in interstate commerce and used in affecting -- activities affecting interstate commerce, namely, the main office building and its contents located at Jefferson Poplar Farm,

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

79114 Collins Road, Clatskanie, Columbia County. THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Count 4, on or about May 21st, 2001, in Clatskanie, Columbia County, in the District of Oregon, you unlawfully and willfully caused and aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, and procured the malicious damaging and destruction, by means of fire and an explosive, 10 of a building and other real and personal property used interstate commerce and used in activities affecting interstate commerce, namely, a vehicle shop and its contents located at Jefferson Poplar Farm, 79114 Collins Road, Clatskanie, Columbia County, Oregon. THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Any questions? THE DEFENDANT: No. THE COURT: And are you satisfied with your legal representation? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: A moment ago you took an oath to tell the truth, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: You understand I'm going to ask you questions about the offenses and your role in the offenses? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And you understand that if you lie to the court or you deliberately misstate information in answer to questions that I place before you, separate charges of perjury or false statement may be brought against you, and the answers that you give in court today may be used against you in a further court proceeding? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Are you under the influence of drugs 11 or alcohol at this time? THE DEFENDANT: No. THE COURT: Are you suffering from any injury, illness, or disability that would affect your ability to think or reason? THE DEFENDANT: No. THE COURT: Have you taken any medications in the last seven days? THE DEFENDANT: No. THE COURT: Do you understand that conviction of a crime can result in consequences in addition to imprisonment? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Such consequences may include deportation or denial of naturalization if you are not a United States citizen; loss of eligibility to receive federal benefits; loss of certain civil rights, which may be temporary permanent depending on applicable state or federal law, such as the right to vote, to hold public office, and to possess a firearm; and the loss of the privilege to

21 engage in certain occupations licensed by the state or 22 federal government? 23 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. 24 THE COURT: You understand you do not have to 25 plead guilty this afternoon? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 12 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: You can stand on all your constitutional guarantees and set this matter for trial. THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: But in order for the court to accept your plea of guilty this morning, or actually this afternoon, you are going to waive or give up some of those rights. Do you understand? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: More specifically, you are giving up the following: The right to a speedy and public trial by jury, during which you would be presumed to be innocent unless and until proven guilty by the government beyond a reasonable doubt and by a unanimous vote of 12 jurors. You are giving up the right to have the assistance of an attorney at all stages of the proceedings. You are giving up the right to use the power and process of the court to compel the production of evidence, including the attendance of witnesses in your favor. You are giving up the right to see, hear, confront, and cross-examine all witnesses called to testify against you. You are giving up the right to decide for yourself 13 whether to take the witness stand and testify. You are also giving up the right to decide not to take the witness stand and have the court instruct the jury that no inference of guilt may be drawn from that decision. And finally, you are giving up the right not to be compelled to incriminate yourself. Do you understand each and every one of those rights? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Are you prepared to give up each and every one of those rights? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: So you understand if you plead guilty this afternoon, there will be no trial before a judge or a jury, and you will not be able to appeal from a judge's denial of any pretrial motions that may have been filed, save and except issues related to the court's jurisdiction. THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: In looking at the petition, this guilty plea is pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(B), and I'm assuming in this instance it means that there will be joint sentencing recommendations made to the court; is that

23 correct? 24 MR. KOLEGO: That's correct. They are not binding 25 on the court. She may not withdraw her plea if the court 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 14 refuses to accept that. THE COURT: Right. There will be, in the agreement you have reached -- at the time of sentencing joint sentencing recommendations or concessions will be made. The court will listen very carefully to those sentencing recommendations or concessions, but the court is not bound or obligated to follow those sentencing agreements or recommendations or concessions, and if the court sentences you to something different than what you expect to receive pursuant to the agreement, you would not be able to withdraw your plea of guilty. Do you understand? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: With regard to the maximum, you understand on Count 1, the maximum sentence is five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 and a two-year -- two- to three-year period of supervised release and a mandatory $100 fee assessment. Count 2, maximum sentence is 20 years in prison, a mandatory minimum of five years, and a fine of $250,000, two- to three-year period of supervised release, and a mandatory $100 fee assessment. Count 3, the maximum sentence is 20 years in prison, a mandatory minimum of five years, a fine of $250,000, two to three years of supervised release, and a 15 mandatory fee assessment of $100. Count 4, the sentence, the maximum sentence is 20 years in prison, a mandatory minimum of five years, fine of $250,000, and a two- to three-year period of supervised release and a mandatory $100 fee assessment. MR. ENGDALL: Your Honor, excuse me. Before the court continues with Paragraph 11 of the plea petition, I might ask the court for a brief recess. The defendant will be pleading not only to Counts 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the information, but also Counts 5 through 15, and they are not referenced in this petition. I think it was an oversight on the part of the defense counsel. If we could have a moment, we could complete the correction of the plea petition. THE COURT: That's fine. I will just step away from the bench. MR. ENGDALL: Thank you. It will just take a moment, Your Honor. THE COURT: Let me know when you are ready. THE CLERK: Court is in recess. (Recess.) THE COURT: Please be seated. I'm going to go back to the elements of what you will be pleading guilty to, to make sure I covered them all. Now it's 5 and 6 through 15 that were not included earlier.

25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

So you understand on Count 5 that on or about 16 May -- you will be pleading guilty to the following elements: That on or about May 21st, 2001, at Clatskanie Columbia County, Oregon, in the District of Oregon, you unlawfully, willfully aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, and procured the malicious damaging and destruction by means of fire and explosive, a building and other real and personal property used in interstate commerce and used in activities affecting interstate commerce, namely, a shop and office and its contents located at Jefferson Poplar Farm, 79114 Collins Road, Clatskanie, Oregon. Count 6 through 15 with the new attachment, on or about May 21st, 2001, at Clatskanie, Columbia County, Oregon, the District of Oregon, you unlawfully and willfully aided and abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, and procured the malicious damaging and destruction, by means of fire and explosive, of 10 vehicles used in interstate commerce and used in activities affecting interstate commerce located at Jefferson Poplar Farms, 79114 Collins Road, Clatskanie, Columbia County, Oregon. Is that what you understand you are pleading guilty to? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: And the petition has been corrected, and there are initials by both you and your lawyer where the 17 additional language has been written in, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: All right. And with regard to the maximum penalties, which is where we left off, on Counts 5 through 15, the maximum sentence is 20 years in prison on each count, a mandatory minimum of five years on each count, a fine of $250,000, and a two- to three-year period of supervised release and a mandatory fee assessment of $100. Correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Now, in addition, just -- I have gone over them, but on each count there is a mandatory fee assessment of $100, and I think I stated it as I went through because that's the way the petition is crafted, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: You also understand that if you are ordered to pay a fine and you willfully refuse to pay the fine, you can be returned to court where the amount of the unpaid balance owed on the fine could be substantially increased by the court and you could be imprisoned for up to a year? THE DEFENDANT: Correct. THE COURT: Have you and Mr. Kolego had plenty of time to talk about the Federal Sentencing Guidelines system?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

18 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: So you understand under Federal Sentencing Guidelines system there will be a presentence report prepared. That in that presentence report there will be a guidelines calculation and a sentencing recommendation pursuant to the guidelines made to the court. It is not a mandatory guidelines recommendation. It is advisory. And the court will take into account the advisory guidelines range as well as the factors in 18 U.S.C. 3553, including the nature and circumstances of this offense; your own criminal history and characteristics and circumstances; the goals of sentencing, punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, and protection of the community; the guidelines advisory range; and any other factor the court deems appropriate in fashioning a reasonable but not greater than necessary sentence and also that the court may not sentence you, obviously, to a sentence greater than the maximum, which we have reviewed, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Correct. THE COURT: In addition, should you be sent to prison under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines system, you will serve your full sentence except for credit for good behavior that you may earn at the rate of 54 days for each year of imprisonment served beyond a one-year sentence. THE DEFENDANT: Correct. 19 THE COURT: And further, following your prison sentence, you will serve a term of supervised release. During that term of supervised release, you will be supervised by a probation officer according to terms and conditions set by the court. If you violate those terms and conditions, you could be returned to prison. In this particular case, your term of supervised release can be up to three years, and if you violate those terms, you could go back to prison for up to two. THE DEFENDANT: Correct. MR. KOLEGO: Well, Your Honor, I think it may be three years because I think it's two to three. There's some question as to whether or not it's two or three years, so I put up to three years in the plea petition. THE COURT: All right. You understand it's still a debatable point? It could be as much as three years? THE DEFENDANT: (Nodded affirmatively.) THE COURT: Do you understand that in addition to or in lieu of any other penalty, you will be required to pay restitution to any victim of any offense to which you are pleading guilty? That as well, for crimes of violence and crimes involving fraud and deceit, it is mandatory that the court impose restitution in the full amount of any financial loss or harm caused by the offense, and if imposed, the victim can use the order of restitution to obtain a civil

20 1 judgment lien. The restitution order can be enforced by the

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

United States for up to 20 years from the date of your release from prison or, if you are not in prison, 20 years from the date of the entry of judgment, and if you willfully refuse to pay the restitution as ordered, the court may resentence you to any sentence which could have originally been imposed. Do you understand? THE DEFENDANT: I understand. THE COURT: Do you understand on a fine or restitution in an amount greater than $2500, you will be required to pay interest unless the fine or restitution is paid within 15 days of the entry of judgment? THE DEFENDANT: Um-hmm. THE COURT: Do you also understand that if you are on probation, parole, or supervised release in any other state or federal case, that by pleading guilty in this court, your probation, parole, or supervised released could be revoked, and you could receive a consecutive sentence; that is, a sentence in addition to the one imposed in this case by this court? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Do you, finally, understand that if there are any other charges pending in state and federal jurisdictions and they are not specifically talked about now 21 at the time of your change of plea or addressed in the letter attached to the petition, that those cases could be fully prosecuted, and you could receive a consecutive sentence; that is, a sentence in addition to the one imposed in this case by this court? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Earlier you told me you understood the agreement that you reached with the government to settle this case, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Correct. THE COURT: And it's contained in the letter attached to the petition, correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: I'm going to ask you to listen very carefully while Mr. Engdall recites on the record the terms that settle this case. When he finishes reviewing the terms that settle this case, I will come back to you and I will ask you if that's your understanding of the agreement. As a part of his recitation of the agreement, he will read the attachment verbatim which outlines the factual basis of your guilty plea. Please listen carefully. I will ask you if you want me to read it out loud to you again verbatim. If you choose to have me do that, that's fine. If you wish to then acknowledge those facts, we will proceed. All right? Go ahead, Mr. Engdall.

22 1 MR. ENGDALL: Thank you, Your Honor. The 2 agreement between the defendant and the government is as 3 follows:

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5

She will plead guilty to Counts 1 through 15 of the information. Count 1, of course, is the conspiracy to commit arson and destruction of an energy facility. Count 2 is the arson at Superior Lumber Company. Count 3 is an attempted arson at Jefferson Poplar Farm, the main office structure there. And Counts 4 through 15 are the arsons at Jefferson Poplar Farm, which would include a vehicle shop, shop and office, and ten vehicles. The defendant will agree to pay the fee assessment as applicable to each of the counts, and also defendant will pay mandatory restitution as ordered by the court. I am requesting Mr. Peifer to read the actual factual attachment and then proceed with the rest of the plea agreement. MR. PEIFER: Count 1, the conspiracy count, beginning in October 1996 and continuing through October 2001, in the District of Oregon and elsewhere, Josephine Sunshine Overaker, Kevin Tubbs, Stanislas Gregory Meyerhoff, Daniel Gerard McGowan, Joseph Dibee, Rebecca Rubin, Chelsea Dawn Gerlach, Kendall Tankersley, Suzanne Savoie, Jonathan Christopher Mark Paul, Darren Todd 23 Thurston, Nathan Fraser Block, Joyanna L. Zacher, Jacob Jeremiah Ferguson, Jennifer Lynn Kolar, William C. Rodgers, and other persons willfully and knowingly conspired and agreed to maliciously damage or destroy or attempt to damage or destroy, by means of fire, buildings, vehicles, and other personal and real property owned in whole or in part or possessed by or leased to the United States or any department or agency thereof and/or used in interstate commerce or in any activity affecting interstate commerce, and to knowingly and willfully damage and attempt to damage the property of an energy facility of the United States involved in the transmission of electricity. Excuse me. The conspiracy was accomplished by the defendant and the others named above when certain of the defendants and others joined together in a group they called the "family." This family was what is commonly known as a cell of groups and movements publicly named and described by certain of the defendants and others as the Earth Liberation Front, ELF; the Animal Liberation Front, ALF; and other names. The primary purposes of the conspiracy were to influence and affect the conduct of government, commerce, private business, and others in the civilian population by means of force, violence, sabotage, destruction of property, 24 intimidation, and coercion and, by similar means, to retaliate against the conduct of the government, commerce, and private business. To achieve these purposes, some of the conspirators committed and attempted to commit acts

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

potentially dangerous to human life and property that constituted violations of the criminal laws of the United States and of individual states. Some of the defendants and others targeted for arson buildings, vehicles, and other real and personal property owned, possessed, and leased by the United States and its departments and agencies, while others targeted for arson buildings, vehicles, and other real and personal property used in interstate commerce and in activities affecting interstate commerce, and still others targeted energy facilities of the United States for damage and destruction. The defendant and others conducted and participated in meetings to plan arsons of the targeted sites. Several of these meetings were called "book club" meetings by the defendants and others and occurred at distant locations. The book club meetings covered subjects such as lock-picking, computer security, reconnaissance of targets, and manufacture of timing devices to set off improvised incendiary devices. 25 Some of the defendants and others conducted research and surveillance of sites targeted for arson and discussed their actions among themselves by using code words, code names, and nicknames. The phrase "direct action" was used to include arsons and other acts of destruction. In preparation for the action, some of the conspirators designed and constructed destructive devices which functioned as incendiary devices to ignite fires and destroy the targets for arson, and they provided transportation to the locations of the arson targets. During the course of the direct actions, the defendant and others dressed in dark clothing, wore masks and gloves and otherwise disguised their appearance. Some of the conspirators acted as lookouts to ensure secrecy as the crimes were carried out, and some placed destructive devices and accelerants at sites targeted for arson and ignited or attempted to ignite the devices and accelerants. In some of the arsons and attempted arsons, certain of the defendants and others painted messages on walls of the targets, including Earth Liberation Front, ELF, and related names and statements concerning the purposes of the crimes. After the arsons and attempted arsons, the defendants and others destroyed, buried, hid, and otherwise 26 disposed of physical evidence used in the commission of the crimes, and thereafter publicized and promoted the results of the fires by means of written releases and communiques which attributed the arsons to the Earth Liberation Front, the Animal Liberation Front, and related groups, and stated the purpose of the arsons. Before, during, and after the arsons, attempted

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

arsons, and destruction of an energy facility, some of the defendants and others agreed among themselves never to reveal to law enforcement authorities or to anyone else outside family the identity of the conspirators and participants in the arsons and attempted arsons and agreed among themselves to conceal or destroy any evidence connecting them to the arsons and attempted arsons. Some of the defendants and others possessed and/or used false identification documents in order to conceal their true identities, and after the arsons and attempted arsons, some of the defendants and others fled and secreted themselves in foreign countries in order to avoid detection and arrest by law enforcement authorities in the United States. Count 3 regarding the arson at Superior Lumber Company. Prior to January 2, 2001, Suzanne Savoie participated in planning and preparation to commit arson at 27 the Superior Lumber Company at Glendale, Oregon. On or about January 2, 2001, at Glendale, Douglas County, the District of Oregon, defendant Suzanne Savoie, Stanislas Gregory Meyerhoff, Kevin Tubbs, and Daniel Gerard McGowan, and others unlawfully and willfully caused and aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, and procured the malicious damaging and destroying, by means of fire and an explosive, of a building and other real and personal property used in interstate commerce and used in activities affecting interstate commerce, namely, a building and its contents located at Superior Lumber Company, 2695 Glendale Valley Road, Glendale, Oregon. Suzanne Savoie and the others met at a set location in the City of Eugene, Oregon, from which they then traveled in two separate vehicles to a predetermined staging area at a rest area located just north of the town of Glendale, Oregon, on Interstate 5. Upon arrival at the staging area, Suzanne Savoie and the others dressed in dark clothing, gloves, masks, shoes, and hats to avoid being detected while committing the arson at the Superior Lumber Company. Suzanne Savoie and the others put on their radio earpieces, completed a radio check, and traveled in one van to the Superior Lumber Company building. Upon their arrival, Suzanne Savoie was dropped off at a phone booth 28 near the Superior Lumber Company and served as a lookout, while others positioned the pickup vehicle and placed the time delayed incendiary devices. After the incendiary devices were placed, Suzanne Savoie was picked up along with the other coconspirators and traveled back to the staging area at the Interstate 5 northbound rest stop just north of Glendale, Oregon. Suzanne Savoie and the others changed their dark clothing and disposed of clothing as they traveled back to

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Eugene, Oregon. The incendiary devices functioned, and the Superior Lumber Company facility was destroyed by fire. The Superior Lumber Company building and other real and interstate -- excuse me -- other real and personal property were used in interstate commerce or in activities affecting interstate commerce. On January 2nd, 2001, Suzanne Savoie and Daniel McGowan traveled to Portland, Oregon, and prepared a communique claiming responsibility for the Superior Lumber Company arson, attributing the fire to the Earth Liberation Front. The communique was publicized by Craig Rosebraugh of the North American ELF press office. Counts 4 through 16, attempted arson and arson at Jefferson Poplar Farm, the main office, the vehicle shop, the shop and office, and 10 vehicles. 29 Approximately six to eight months prior to May 21st of 2001, Suzanne Savoie, Daniel Gerard McGowan, and others performed research regarding the James River Corporation's involvement in the genetic engineering of trees. At a time prior to May 21st, 2001, defendants Suzanne Savoie, Stanislas Gregory Meyerhoff, and Chelsea Dawn Gerlach performed a reconnaissance for the arson at the Jefferson Poplar Farm, which they believed -- they believed was associated with the James River Corporation. At a time prior to May 21, 2001, Suzanne Savoie traveled from her residence in Southern Oregon to the residence of coconspirator Nathan Fraser Block in Olympia, Washington. Once there, Suzanne Savoie, Nathan Fraser Block, Joyanna L. Zacher, Daniel Gerard McGowan, and Stanislas Gregory Meyerhoff, and others discussed plans for committing the arson at the Jefferson Poplar Farm at Clatskanie, Oregon. On May 20th, 2001, Suzanne Savoie, Nathan Fraser Block, Joyanna L. Zacher, Daniel Gerard McGowan, and Stanislas Gregory Meyerhoff traveled in vehicles to a staging area just north of the Oregon/Washington border. At the staging area, the coconspirators dressed in dark clothing to avoid being detected while committing the arson at the Jefferson Poplar Farm. Once they were ready, 30 they all drove to the Jefferson Poplar Farm. Suzanne Savoie was the driver of the vehicle. Once at Jefferson Poplar Farm, Suzanne Savoie dropped off the coconspirators at different locations at the poplar farm so they could place the incendiary devices in numerous sites in and around the Jefferson Poplar Farm buildings. One of the incendiary devices was placed adjacent to a large propane gas tank. Some of the coconspirators spray-painted graffiti at the site attributing the action to the Earth Liberation Front.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Suzanne Savoie monitored a radio scanner to ensure the security of the other coconspirators while they were placing the incendiary devices. After being informed by two-way radios that all of the incendiary devices had been properly placed by her coconspirators, Suzanne Savoie returned to pick up the others. Suzanne Savoie then drove everyone back to the staging area to undress, dispose of their clothing, and get the second vehicle. Suzanne Savoie then returned to Olympia, Washington. The time-delayed incendiary devices which were placed at the main office building failed to function. The timed-delayed incendiary devices placed at the vehicle shop and the shop and office buildings did function and resulted 31 in a fire which destroyed both buildings as well as ten vehicles sheltered inside those buildings. On or about June 1, 2001, the defendants in the Jefferson Poplar Farm arson issued a communique attributing the fire to the Earth Liberation Front. The communique was published by Craig Rosebraugh of the North American ELF press office. The Superior Lumber Company building at Glendale, Douglas County, District of Oregon, which was destroyed by fire -- excuse me -- which destruction by fire occurred on or about January 2, 2001, and the Jefferson Poplar Farm arson, which occurred on or about May 21, 2001, at Clatskanie, Columbia County, the District of Oregon, were buildings and other real and personal property used in interstate commerce and were used in activities affecting interstate commerce. MR. ENGDALL: Paragraph 4 of the plea agreement discusses dismissal and no prosecution agreements. The United States Attorney's Office will move to dismiss all remaining counts at the time of sentencing. The United States Attorney's Office further agrees not to bring additional charges against the defendant for offenses relating to arson, conspiracy, conspiracy to commit arson, or destruction of an energy facility in which the defendant may have been involved directly or indirectly up to and 32 including December 11th, 2005, which took place in the District of Oregon. With regard to sentencing issues, in addition to waiving the right to a jury trial on the issue of guilt, defendant knowingly and voluntarily agrees that sentencing issues in this case need not be alleged in a grand jury indictment, proven to a trial jury, or proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Defendant also knowingly and voluntarily consents to judicial fact-finding and resolution of any and all sentencing issues. Defendant and government agree that the guidelines calculations should be derived from the United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual with an

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

effective date of November 1, 2000, and further, that the combined offense level for the defendant requires a two-level increase pursuant to Section 3D1.4 of that manual. Defendant and government understand and agree that the court will consider 18 United States Code Section 3553(a) in determining the appropriate sentence in this case. The United States Attorney's Office will recommend a terrorism guideline enhancement found in Guideline Section 3A1.4 because the felony offenses either involved or were intended to promote a federal crime of terrorism. The United States Attorney's Office agrees to recommend a three-level reduction for the acceptance of 33 responsibility if the defendant's offense level is 16 or greater. Otherwise -- it says two. It should be two-level reduction applies pursuant to section 3E1.1. The United States Attorney' Office reserves the right to change or omit this recommendation if the defendant between plea and sentencing commits any new or additional violation of law, obstructs or attempts to obstruct justice, or acts inconsistently with acceptance of responsibility. With regard to a mitigating role recommendation, the United States Attorney's Office will recommend that the defendant receive a two-level decrease for her role as a minor participant in the offense under the provisions of Guidelines Section 3B1.2(b). The sentence will be recommended by the government in this case and be based upon the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant, the need for the sentence to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide a just punishment for the offense, to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct, to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant, and to provide a just and fair sentence for this defendant in relation to and in comparison with all of the defendant's coconspirators. With regard to waiver of appeal and post-conviction relief, the defendant knowingly and 34 voluntarily waives the right to appeal from any aspect of the conviction and sentence on any grounds unless the sentence imposed exceeds the statutory maximum, the court imposes an upward departure pursuant to Part 5K of the Sentencing Guidelines, or the court exercises its discretion under 18 United States Code 3553(a) to impose a sentence which exceeds the advisory guideline range. Should the defendant seek an appeal despite this waiver of that right, the United States Attorney's Office may take any position on any issue on appeal. Defendant also waives the right to file a motion pursuant to 28 United States Code Section 2255 to set aside the conviction and sentence except on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, newly discovered evidence, or retroactive change in the applicable guidelines or statute.

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

The defendant understands that the court is not bound by the recommendations of the parties or of the presentence report writer. Because this agreement is made under Rule 11(c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the defendant may not withdraw any guilty plea or rescind this plea agreement if the court does not follow the agreement or recommendations herein. The United States Attorney's Office will fully inform the presentence report writer and the court of the facts and law related to the defendant's case. Except as 35 set forth in this agreement, the parties reserve all other rights to make sentencing recommendations and to respond to motions and arguments by the opposition. If the defendant breaches the terms of this agreement or commits any new violations of the law between signing the agreement and sentencing, the United States Attorney's Office is relieved of its obligations under this agreement, but defendant may not withdraw any guilty plea. Paragraph 14 discusses cooperation terms. Should the defendant complete all those conditions of cooperation, the government will do the following, as articulated in Paragraph 14H: Assuming defendant complies with the terms of the agreement and assuming the base offense level is 38 as calculated pursuant to the United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual with effective date of the November 1, 2000, the United States Attorney's Office will recommend up to a 16-level downward departure pursuant to Guidelines Section 5K1.1. If the base offense level is determined to be less than 38, and assuming defendant complies with the terms of this agreement, the United States Attorney's Office will recommend a departure level which may be less than 16. In either instance, the United States Attorney's Office will recommend that the sentence be imposed at the low end of the 36 resulting advisory guidelines range and anticipates the sentence to be 63 months imprisonment. The defendant is free to request any other adjustments or departures; however, the United States Attorney's Office will oppose any such request. The defendant agrees that any grounds upon which defendant will seek a sentencing adjustment will be raised sufficiently in advance of the sentencing hearing to permit the government a full opportunity to respond to the court. The defendant agrees to have the sentence hearing postponed in order to continue cooperation efforts if the United States Attorney's Office requests such a continuance. This letter states the full extent of the agreement between the parties. There are no other promises or agreements, express or implied, Your Honor. THE COURT: Ms. Savoie, is this your understanding of the agreement reached with the United States government?

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And this is the only agreement between you and the United States government that settles this case; is that true? THE DEFENDANT: That's true. THE COURT: No other officer or agent of any branch of government, be it federal, state, or local, or anyone else has promised or suggested that you'd receive a 37 lesser term of imprisonment, probation, or any other form leniency except as recited on the record by counsel and contained in the letter attached to your petition; is that true? THE DEFENDANT: No. No one has, no. That's true. THE COURT: And you understand you can't rely on any promises or suggestions made outside the presence of the court? THE DEFENDANT: Correct. THE COURT: Is anybody threatening you, forcing you, intimidating you, twisting your arm, or making you plead guilty this afternoon? THE DEFENDANT: No. THE COURT: Do you make the plea freely and voluntarily? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And did you hear counsel recite on the record the factual basis of your guilty pleas to the Counts 1 through 5 -- 15 as listed? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And are those facts true? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: And are your actions accurately reflected? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. 38 THE COURT: Satisfied, Mr. Engdall? MR. ENGDALL: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: To Counts 1 through 15, how do you wish to plead? Guilty or not guilty? THE DEFENDANT: Guilty. THE COURT: Guilty pleas are received. A sentencing date. THE CLERK: December 14th at 9:00 o'clock. THE COURT: And pursuant to your request, Mr. Kolego, you would like all the documents, including the transcript, sealed; is that correct? MR. KOLEGO: That's correct. THE COURT: I have a report from the pretrial officer who has been supervising this case, Mr. Wodehouse, and he tells me there have been no difficulties. Is there any motion being made by the government to change any of the release conditions? MR. ENGDALL: No, Your Honor. We would urge the court to continue the current conditions on release.

20 THE COURT: Anything else for the court to know, 21 Mr. Kolego? 22 MR. KOLEGO: No, Your Honor. I believe she's 23 scrupulously complied with the release conditions. 24 THE COURT: That's what Mr. Wodehouse's report 25 said. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 39 Please know that this continues to be a very important period for the court to review how and -- how you comport yourself with these conditions. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Wodehouse or your lawyer. But please understand those conditions are to be followed. All right? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Anything else? MR. KOLEGO: No, Your Honor. MR. ENGDALL: No, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. THE CLERK: Court is in recess. (The proceedings were concluded this 21st day of July, 2006.)

40 I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of the oral proceedings had in the above-entitled matter, to the best of my skill and ability, dated this 12th day of September, 2006. _______________________________________________ Kristi L. Anderson, Certified Realtime Reporter

21 22 23 24 25