Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings USA v. McCabe United States v. Dustin Sean McCabe — S.D. Fla., No. 9:24-cr-80103-AMC Transcript of Jury Trial - Day 4 as to Dustin Sean McCabe — USA v. McCabe (Dkt. 111, S.D. Fla.)

Court filing

Transcript of Jury Trial - Day 4 as to Dustin Sean McCabe — USA v. McCabe (Dkt. 111, S.D. Fla.)

Filed May 9, 2025 in USA v. McCabe; one of 219 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Filed2025-05-09

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida · No. 9:24-cr-80103-AMC · Doc. 111 · 2025-05-09 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION
CASE NO. 24-cr-80103-AMC-1 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Fort Pierce, Florida 
Plaintiff,
February 27, 2025
vs.
9:32 a.m. - 4:26 p.m.
DUSTIN SEAN MCCABE,
Volume 4
Defendant. 
Pages 1 to 207
______________________________________________________________
TRANSCRIPT OF JURY TRIAL - DAY 4
BEFORE THE HONORABLE AILEEN M. CANNON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE GOVERNMENT: 
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 
ZACH KELLER, ESQ. 
TANNER STIEHL, ESQ.
JACOB KOFFSKY, ESQ.
99 NE 4th Street 
Miami, Florida 33132 
FOR THE DEFENDANT: 
TERRENCE O'SULLIVAN LAW, P.A. 
TERRENCE J. O'SULLIVAN, ESQ. 
3810 Murrell Road 
Suite 340 
Rockledge, Florida 32955 
LAW OFFICE OF CALISHA A. FRANCIS 
CALISHA A. FRANCIS, ESQ. 
7481 NW 37th Court 
Lauderhill, Florida 33319 
STENOGRAPHICALLY REPORTED BY:
LAURA E. MELTON, RMR, CRR, FPR
Official Court Reporter to the 
Honorable Aileen M. Cannon
United States District Court
Fort Pierce, Florida
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 1 of 207

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
2
E X A M I N A T I O N S
Witness/Proceedings
Page
ANDREA WALKER
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. STIEHL
9
CHRIS CEDERHOLM
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. STIEHL
22
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O'SULLIVAN
30
JOSHUA STEIB
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. STIEHL
32
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O'SULLIVAN
43
ADAM POLLACK
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KOFFSKY
44
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. FRANCIS
76
JUSTIN MASTERMAN
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KOFFSKY
79
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O'SULLIVAN
98
SANDRA BRAMMEIER
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KELLER
107
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O'SULLIVAN
120
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KELLER
129
SPECIAL AGENT CALEB KING
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KELLER
131
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. O'SULLIVAN
159
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KELLER
172
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 2 of 207

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
3
E X H I B I T S
GOVERNMENT FOR IDENTIFICATION
Exhibit
Page
NONE
 
DEFENDANT FOR IDENTIFICATION
Exhibit
Page
NONE
 
GOVERNMENT ADMITTED EXHIBITS 
Exhibit
Page
NONE 
DEFENDANT ADMITTED EXHIBITS
Exhibit
Page
NONE
JOINT EXHIBITS
Exhibit
Page
NONE 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 3 of 207

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
4
(Call to the Order of the Court.)  
THE COURT:  Good morning.  Let's call the case. 
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Calling United States v. Dustin Sean 
McCabe, Case Number 24-cr-80103.  
Counsel, please make your appearance. 
MR. KELLER:  Good morning, Your Honor.  Zachary Keller, 
Tanner Stiehl, and Jacob Koffsky on behalf of the 
United States, joined by Special Agent Caleb King of the 
Coast Guard Investigative Service. 
THE COURT:  Good morning.  You may all be seated, 
unless you are addressing the Court. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Good morning, Your Honor.  
Terrence O'Sullivan, Calisha Francis, and Dustin Sean McCabe, 
two defense counsel and defendant. 
THE COURT:  All right.  Good morning to you as well.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Good morning, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  We will proceed with trial today.
Mr. Creary, do we have our jurors?  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  We're missing, I think, three.  
THE COURT:  Three.  Okay.  
All right.  Any issues to address while we wait for the 
jurors?  Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No, ma'am.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 4 of 207

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
5
THE COURT:  Okay.  
MR. KELLER:  And yes, Your Honor, let me just 
apologize.  We thought we were supposed to be here at 9:30, and 
I think that we all were just on the wrong page about that.  So 
I understand we might have -- supposed to be here at 9:15. 
THE COURT:  That's okay. 
MR. KELLER:  I just wanted to apologize. 
THE COURT:  Thank you.  
Mr. Keller, in terms of the schedule for tomorrow, you 
have two witnesses; is that correct?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  How long do you think the total time will 
take?  
MR. KELLER:  The first witness is very short.  It's the 
Internal Revenue Service employee who is just testifying to 
what -- the documents not having been filed, the IRS documents.
The second witness is going to be Special Agent King.  
His will be lengthier.  I believe it will probably be 
45 minutes on direct, and then, you know, whatever the cross 
consists of.  So, I guess, in total between those two, I would 
guess an hour and 15 minutes to an hour and 30 minutes, 
perhaps.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.  That's helpful.  
Remember that we won't be -- we won't be beginning 
trial on Monday until 1:00 p.m., or perhaps 12:45, due to other 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 5 of 207

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
6
court hearings.  
Are the exhibits that have been admitted organized and 
ready to provide to the jury?  
MR. KELLER:  I do have them both in physical and in 
electronic.  One thing that -- in speaking with the IT people 
in our U.S. Attorney's Office here in Fort Pierce, our 
understanding is that the Court has a trial tablet that goes 
with the jury.  
THE COURT:  I'm not sure about that.  I think we have a 
laptop, perhaps, but typically the government has provided a 
clean laptop.  It seems like maybe they're shifting over to 
tablets.  I'm not exactly sure what the latest format is, but 
you should look into that. 
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  I will make inquiries to 
our office and tell them that we have been informed that there 
is no court laptop or tablet.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  We're still missing our 
three -- three jurors.  So we will wait a few more minutes.  
MR. KELLER:  Your Honor, if we could just mention for 
today, we are going to publish the trial stipulation with our 
first bank witness who we anticipate will be Justin Masterman.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  That's right, Your Honor. 
MR. KELLER:  Or if it's Pollack, if we can't get 
Masterman here first, then that will be when we will do the 
stipulation. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 6 of 207

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
7
THE COURT:  Is that a numbered exhibit?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  It's Government's 
Exhibit 14, although they -- I believe it's in the binder, just 
in unsigned form.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.  
Mr. O'Sullivan, where is Rockledge, Florida?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  It is in Brevard County, just -- it's 
a suburb of Melbourne.  It's a northern suburb of Melbourne. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  It's fairly close to Cocoa Beach.  
It's just Cocoa Beach is on the beachside, and I'm across the 
bridge on the land side.  
THE COURT:  Nice.  
Mr. Creary, any updates?  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Yes.  Two of them are just walking 
in, and I will go find out where the last one is.  
(Pause in proceedings.)  
THE COURT:  Mr. Creary, can you call him or her.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Yes. 
THE COURT:  Thank you.  We are still waiting on one 
juror who will be contacted now. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  I want to make sure that Mr. McCabe's 
monitor is charged.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  It is fully charged, Your Honor. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 7 of 207

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
8
THE COURT:  Okay.  So the beeping I just heard -- 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I think he was removing the extra 
battery pack.  Just we were charging it to the last second, so 
there would be no issues again today, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, ma'am.  
(Pause in proceedings.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  Let's call in the jury, please.  
(The jury entered the courtroom at 9:47 a.m.) 
THE COURT:  Please be seated.  
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.  We will resume 
trial this morning.  
Mr. Keller or Mr. Stiehl or Mr. Koffsky, please call 
your next witness. 
MR. STIEHL:  Thank you, Your Honor.  The United States 
would like to call Andrea Walker.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Good morning, Ms. Walker.  
Mr. Creary will swear you in once you get over here.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please raise your right hand.  
Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are 
about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
the truth, so help you God? 
THE WITNESS:  I do.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please be seated.  State and spell 
your first and last name for the record.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 8 of 207

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
9
THE WITNESS:  Andrea Walker.  A-N-D-R-E-A, W-A-L-K-E-R. 
ANDREA WALKER,
having been sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION 
BY MR. STIEHL:
Q.
Good morning, Ms. Walker, and thank you for being here with 
us today. 
Can you just start out with a little bit of background 
about yourself.  Can you please tell the jury where you live.  
A.
I live in Martinsburg, West Virginia.  I started with the 
Coast Guard 29 years ago, so I'm in my 30th year.  I actually 
started in the mail room and have worked my way up to my 
position right now.  I am the chief of the commercial vessel 
division.  
Q.
Okay.  And let's break that down a little bit.  So you said 
you work for the Coast Guard.  Specifically, what Coast Guard 
office do you work in? 
A.
I work for the National Vessel Documentation Center.  We 
are the unit that is responsible for the documentation of 
vessels and maintaining those records. 
Q.
And you said you were in the commercial vessel section -- 
or the commercial vessel supervisor.  Can you tell me what, 
particularly, that means.  
A.
That -- I'm the head of the division for all of the 
officers that issue certificates of documentation for the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 9 of 207

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
10
commercial vessels.  I primarily answer -- if there is any 
inquiries, I answer questions regarding commercial vessels, but 
I also can oversee recreational transactions as well. 
Q.
And what do your typical duties look like, as far as day to 
day? 
A.
Day to day, I facilitate transactions that are more complex 
in nature.  I deal with a lot of external agencies, answering 
questions, responding to inquiries regarding coastwise laws. 
Q.
Okay.  And do you know the defendant in this case? 
A.
I do not. 
Q.
Okay.  Let's talk more specifically about the National 
Vessel Documentation Center.  Can you tell me broadly what the 
National Vessel Documentation Center is.  
A.
We are a unit of the Coast Guard that's responsible for 
documenting vessels, particularly those that are in the 
coast-wide trade because they are required to being documented.  
But recreational vessels, it's a choice if the owner chooses to 
document.  
We are responsible for maintaining that -- those vessels, a 
list of those vessels, that are available in case of wartime, 
and we also issue the certificates of documentation.  We are 
kind of equivalent to the DMV for the State.  
Q.
You're the DMV of commercial vessels? 
A.
We're the DMV of all vessels that want to be documented.  
Commercial vessels are required; recreational, it's optional.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 10 of 207

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
11
Q.
So does that require paperwork for a lot of vessels? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And you mentioned commercial vessels.  What specifically do 
you mean by that?  
A.
Commercial vessels are those that are engaged in coastwise 
trade or fisheries.  So coastwise trade would be your tugboats, 
your barges, your charter fishing, passenger vessels.  And 
fisheries would be those that harvest, catch, sell, and 
prep -- process fish.  
Q.
So does NVDC maintain files for all commercial U.S. 
vessels? 
A.
All commercial vessels that are documented, yes, we do. 
Q.
Okay.  
A.
They're all supposed to be documented, but we have the 
files for those.  
Q.
Okay.  Let's talk about the documents related to the vessel 
with the official number 930158.  Have you reviewed the file on 
this vessel? 
A.
Yes, I have. 
Q.
And is this the file maintained by your office? 
A.
Yes, it is. 
Q.
Specifically, have you viewed the vessel's files from a 
period of March to December of 2020? 
A.
Yes, I have. 
Q.
And do you recall the name of the vessel at that time?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 11 of 207

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
12
A.
Southern Comfort was on the paperwork.  
Q.
Okay.  I want to go through some of these documents from 
your file.  I want to show the witness and the jury what has 
already been admitted as Government's Exhibit Number 77.  
And, Ms. Walker, can you tell me what type of document this 
is.  
A.
This is the CG-1258.  This is the application for 
documentation.  
Q.
And are you familiar with this form through your normal 
duties and responsibilities? 
A.
Yes, I am. 
Q.
And zooming in on blocks -- block A, can you tell me the 
name of the vessel listed in block A.  
A.
Southern Comfort.  
Q.
And can you tell me the name of the person listed in 
block F.  
A.
Dustin S. McCabe.
Q.
Okay.  Moving down to block J, a little bit further down 
the page, I will wait until we get the zoom for that one. 
Can you tell me what endorsement is indicated in block J.  
A.
"Recreational."  
Q.
And can you tell me the difference between these types of 
endorsements that are shown in block J.  
A.
Recreational would, of course, be just for a vessel that's 
only going to be used for pleasure use.  "Fishery," again, is 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 12 of 207

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
13
considered a commercial endorsement, and that would be used for 
any vessel that would be catching, harvesting, processing fish.  
"Coastwise" would be another commercial endorsement, and that's 
your tugboat, your barges, your passenger vessel, your freight 
barge.  And "registry" is any vessel that would be used in 
foreign trade, and that's also a commercial endorsement.
Coastwise, boat waters, oil spill, and under charter, those 
are exemptions.  Those are special coastwise endorsements; so 
they're exemptions and they normally involve an exemption to 
the citizenship laws. 
Q.
So if you were operating a small passenger vessel, which 
block would you mark in this section?  
A.
From my experience, we would see the coastwise endorsement 
marked.  
Q.
And what does the recreational block imply?  
A.
That the vessel is only being used recreationally for 
pleasure use.  
Q.
And what block is checked here? 
A.
In J?  Section J is recreational only.  
Q.
And what box would be required if the vessel was engaged in 
commercial fishing?  
A.
In section J, it would be fishery.  
Q.
And can a vessel have multiple boxes checked in this 
category? 
A.
Yes.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 13 of 207

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
14
It can have all of the recreational, fishery, coastwise, 
and registry endorsements checked. 
Q.
And is there any additional costs associated with having 
extra blocks checked? 
A.
The coastwise endorsement has a fee of $29, and the fishery 
endorsement has a fee of 12, but if you request both, you only 
pay the higher fee for the endorsement.  So...  
Q.
Okay.  Let's move to block K.  Can you tell me what primary 
service is when it comes to this application.  
A.
The primary service selected is "recreational."  
Q.
And can you tell me what that means in this context.  
A.
Primary services is something we use to issue the 
certificate of documentation.  It's information that we gather 
for other units in the Coast Guard.  I would say "recreational" 
selected there tells me that the vessel is going to be 
primarily used for recreational purposes only.  
Q.
And what box would be checked here if the vessel was 
primarily engaged in commercial fishing? 
A.
Commercial fishing.  We would expect to see "commercial 
fishing boat" or a "fish processing vessel."  
Q.
And what box would be required if the vessel was operating 
as an uninspected passenger vessel?  
A.
We would expect to see "passenger, 6 or fewer" selected.  
Q.
So how does your office, the National Vessel Documentation 
Center, verify that the information in these boxes is true? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 14 of 207

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
15
A.
Well, it -- in a situation as the one shown in front of us, 
there is no -- there is nothing abnormal or a red flag, but if 
an owner would select "recreational," and then they would 
select "passenger, 6 or fewer," we would then inquire and seek 
clarification.  
Q.
So do you or does your office rely on the attestations made 
in this form by the person who filled the form out? 
A.
Yes.  It's a self-certifying form, and we assume the form 
is filled out truthfully.  
Q.
Okay.  Let's move down to block L on the next page.  What 
is this block for?  
A.
Section L is citizenship of the owner, and the selection 
made here is "one or more individuals."  And that indicates 
that the owner listed on the front is a U.S. citizen.  
Q.
Okay.  Let's move down to block M at the bottom of this 
page or on the next page, I believe.  
A.
Next page.  Uh-huh. 
Q.
Okay.  Block M.  First, I want to read you the section 
that's right above the signature line.  So right above -- yeah, 
right above the signature line.  
A.
You want me to read it?  
Q.
Yes.  
A.
"Potential penalties for false statements or 
representations by owner or representative:  Civil, monetary, 
vessel forfeiture (46 USC 12151), fine and/or imprisonment 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 15 of 207

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
16
(18 USC 1001)."  
Q.
And can you read to me the printed name, signature, and 
date on this document.  
A.
The printed name is "Dustin S. McCabe."  The date is 
"March 5, 2020."  
Q.
And can you read to me the capacity.  
A.
"Sole owner."  
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  Let's move on to the next form.  I 
want to show the witness and the jury what has already been 
admitted as Government's Exhibit Number 78.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Are you familiar with this form?  
A.
Uh-huh.  This is the Coast Guard's Bill of Sale form.  It 
is used to transfer ownership of a vessel.  
Q.
And can you tell me what block 4 says.  
A.
Block 4 has the name and address of the buyers, and it has 
"Dustin S. McCabe" and an address.  
Q.
And can you tell me what that means specifically.  
A.
It means that 100 percent of the vessel was transferred to 
Dustin S. McCabe from Leaf Properties Inc.  
Q.
And can you tell me the date on this form.  
A.
The date it was signed by the seller was March 10th of 
2020, and the date it was acknowledged was also 
March 10th, 2020.  
Q.
Thank you.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 16 of 207

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
17
MR. STIEHL:  I want to show the witness and the jury 
what has already been admitted as Government's Exhibit 74.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Can you tell me what this document is?  
A.
It's a First Preferred Ship's Mortgage.  
Q.
And what does that mean?  
A.
It means that a lender, a bank listed here as a mortgagee, 
has loaned money to the mortgagor or the vessel owner, and they 
are filing this mortgage with our office to secure their debt.  
Q.
And can you tell me the value of the mortgage.  
A.
$60,000.  
Q.
And can you tell me who the mortgagor is.  
A.
The mortgagor is Dustin S. McCabe.  
Q.
And what does it mean to be a mortgagor?  
A.
The mortgagor is the owner of the vessel, and the mortgagor 
is also the individual to whom the bank or the mortgagee loaned 
the money.  
Q.
Okay.  Moving to the next page.  At the very top, you see a 
number 7.  Can you read to me what number 7 says.  
A.
"Federal documentation and right to own and operate.  You 
are and shall continue to be entitled to own and operate this 
vessel under her United States Coast Guard certificate of 
documentation in accordance with the endorsements thereon.  You 
will continue to keep the vessel's certificate of documentation 
in full force and effect."  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 17 of 207

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
Q.
And can you tell me what that means.  
A.
I mean, they have to operate the vessel as it is documented 
on the certificate of documentation with -- and how it is 
endorsed.  And they need to keep the certificate of 
documentation valid.  
Q.
And why would this type of language be included?  
A.
I know I see on occasions, just experience, where 
individuals obtain a loan with the vessel for purposes of using 
it recreational, and then they attempt to then change, and the 
bank refuses to agree to that.  We call it an exchange of a 
certificate of documentation.  And that -- if there is an 
outstanding mortgage, we require the bank to approve of that 
exchange.  
And I have seen on occasions where the individuals have 
taken upon themselves to change the endorsements, and the bank 
does not consent or the mortgagee does not consent to that 
change or that exchange of certificate.  It also happens if 
they try to change ownership as well.  
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  I want to show the witness and the 
jury what's already been admitted as Government's Exhibit 73.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Can you tell me what this document is?  
A.
This is the general index or abstract of title.  This is 
the history of the vessel while it's been documented.  We 
record build information, title changes, preferred mortgages, 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 18 of 207

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
19
encumbrances, and liens, as well as name changes on the 
abstract. 
Q.
And is this a standard form you use in your day-to-day job? 
A.
Yes, it is. 
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  Can we move to page 5 of this 
document.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
And can you tell me who is listed on the section marked 
"bill of sale"?  
A.
The bill of sale, just filed December the 4th, 2020, shows 
the seller as Dustin McCabe to Steven Poznak. 
Q.
Okay.  And I want to show the witness and the jury what's 
already been admitted as Government's Exhibit 72.  Can you tell 
me what this document is.  
A.
This is the actual certificate -- a copy of the actual 
Certificate of Documentation that our office, the National 
Vessel Documentation Center, would issue upon review of the 
documents, the application for documentation, the bill of sale, 
and the preferred mortgage.  
Q.
And just for the jury's awareness, why does it say 
"deleted" in large letters on the page? 
A.
It says "deleted" because after the vessel was documented, 
we received notification that it was sold and a bill of sale 
was filed.  And, therefore, the vessel was deleted and removed 
from documentation.  And a "deleted" stamp is placed on the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 19 of 207

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
20
certificate of documentation once the vessel is deleted. 
Q.
And can you tell me who is listed as the owner on this 
form.  
A.
Dustin S. McCabe.  
MR. STIEHL:  And can we scroll down and look at the 
bottom of the page.  We might have to scoot back up in a 
second.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Can you tell me the date that this was issued?  
A.
May 19, 2020.  
Q.
And do you know if this vessel had a valid certificate of 
documentation prior to this date?  
A.
It did not.  
Q.
Is the vessel allowed to operate without a valid 
certificate of documentation? 
A.
It is not, no.  
Q.
And moving back up to the middle of the page, could you 
tell me what operational endorsements are listed?  
A.
Only one.  "Recreational."  
Q.
And, again, what does that mean from your perspective?  
A.
That this vessel is only to be operating for recreational 
purposes only.  
Q.
And this endorsement is made based on the application that 
we just looked at from your office? 
A.
That is correct.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 20 of 207

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
21
Q.
And would a vessel with this endorsement be permitted to 
operate as a small passenger vessel? 
A.
No. 
MR. STIEHL:  Thank you, Ms. Walker.  No further 
questions.  
THE COURT:  Cross-examination?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Your Honor, we have no further questions 
for this witness.  Thank you.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you very much, ma'am.  
You may be excused.  
Please call your next witness. 
MR. STIEHL:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
The United States would like to call Captain Chris 
Cederholm of the United States Coast Guard.  
THE COURT:  Good morning, sir.  Please walk over here.  
Good morning, Captain.  Mr. Creary will swear you in.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please raise your right hand.  
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you 
are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 
THE WITNESS:  I do.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please be seated.  State and spell 
your first and last name for the record.  
THE WITNESS:  My name is Captain Chris Cederholm.  
C-H-R-I-S, last name, C-E-D-E-R-H-O-L-M.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 21 of 207

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
22
THE COURT:  You may begin.
CHRIS CEDERHOLM,
having been sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION 
BY MR. STIEHL:
Q.
Good morning, Captain.  And thank you for being here today. 
Can you please first tell us who you work for.  
A.
The U.S. Coast Guard.  
Q.
And what is your rank in the United States Coast Guard? 
A.
I'm a Captain.  
Q.
And what is your current role with the Coast Guard?  
A.
I'm the Commander and Captain of the Port for Sector Miami.  
Q.
And how long have you been the Captain of the Port of 
Miami?  
A.
Three years, come April. 
Q.
And can you explain what you mean by "Sector Miami."  
A.
So Sector Miami is one of the 36 regional sectors that the 
Coast Guard has.  We're essentially the field elements for all 
missions of the Coast Guard.  And my area runs from, 
essentially, the beginning of the Keys to about an hour and a 
half north of here towards the middle of the state, and then to 
the territorial boundaries of the U.S. and the Bahamas or 
200 nautical miles offshore. 
Q.
And we have had some previous witness from Marine Safety 
Detachment, Lake Worth.  Does that office also fall under your 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 22 of 207

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
23
purview? 
A.
They work for me, yes.  
Q.
And, to be clear, does the coverage include the North Palm 
Beach area? 
A.
It does.  
Q.
And can you tell the jury what your responsibilities are in 
your role as the Captain of the Port.  
A.
So I have -- internally, I'm the commanding officer for all 
my units, subordinate units that work for me.  I also have five 
externally facing authorities, Captain of the Port, officer -- 
officer in charge of marine inspections, SAR mission 
coordinator, federal coordinating officer, and federal on-scene 
coordinator. 
Q.
And what types of measures are you empowered to do with 
your authority as Captain of the Port?  
A.
Issue Captain of the Port orders and, essentially, 
anything -- control maritime trade and traffic inside any port 
subject to U.S. jurisdiction.  
Q.
Okay.  I want to talk to you about those orders.  When you 
issue an order, what effect does that have on a vessel? 
A.
Essentially, they have to comply or they face penalties; it 
can be civil or criminal, depending on what the event is. 
Q.
And can those orders apply to just vessels or people or 
both? 
A.
It's people, vessels, or some facilities shoreside.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 23 of 207

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
24
Q.
And why would you, as the Captain of the Port, issue an 
order on a vessel or a person?  
A.
It's all based off of the Magnuson Act and the Safety Act.  
So, essentially, it's to protect the safety, security, and 
environment of a port area.  
Q.
And once an incident happens, what is the process that 
leads you to actually issuing a Captain of the Port order? 
A.
So if it's a threat to the safety, security, or the 
environment within that port area, my team will review the Code 
of Federal Regulations for the appropriate issue or concern, 
draft up a Captain of the Port order, bring it to me, brief 
the -- whatever the case is, the event.  And then I will sign 
it out, and it will get sent to the individual, the facility, 
or the -- whoever owns the vessel. 
Q.
And is this something that you're authorized to do by law? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And are these orders enforceable if someone does not comply 
with them? 
A.
They are. 
Q.
What steps can you take or can your staff take to enforce 
these orders?  
A.
It would start with warnings, but essentially, it runs 
into -- you move from warnings to, essentially, they get fined 
on the civil side.  And if it -- it elevates eventually to 
criminal.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 24 of 207

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
25
Q.
And do you know when it would elevate to a criminal 
violation? 
A.
Essentially, willfully, depending on what the event is, if 
it goes to a certain level, something very bad happens, or if 
it -- it's willfully broken.  
Q.
And when you issue an order, does it have a specific 
expiration date? 
A.
It does not.  
Q.
So when is it effective until?  
A.
Until we issue a rescission order to that -- the original 
order.  
Q.
And how would you go about issuing a rescission order? 
A.
There would be a -- essentially, a write-up, say, "this 
Captain of the Port order is hereby rescinded on such and such 
date." 
Q.
So when you became Captain of the Port in April of 2022, 
did the orders issued before you were in that position remain 
in effect? 
A.
They do.  
Q.
And can you describe the procedure for the previous Captain 
of the Port transferring to you as the Captain of the Port.  
A.
So during the change of command -- which, our supervisor, 
who is the district commander, the admiral, we actually salute, 
and all authority, responsibilities, and orders remain intact.  
And actually, at the end of my speech during that event in 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 25 of 207

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
26
front of my entire crew and any witnesses who wish to attend, 
there is actually a section where I say to the assembled of 
"all policy regulations and orders remain in effect."  
Q.
And are you aware of a Captain of the Port issued on 
April 9th of 2020 affecting the defendant, Dustin McCabe? 
A.
I am. 
Q.
And is this order still in effect? 
A.
It is. 
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  Your Honor, I would like to 
introduce what is -- or show you and the jury what has been 
previously admitted as Government's Exhibit Number 12.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Please proceed.  
MR. STIEHL:  And, Your Honor, this is another document 
with redactions. 
THE COURT:  Same instruction applies, ladies and 
gentlemen.  
BY MR. STIEHL:
Q.
And, Captain, looking at the top of the page here, who is 
this order issued to?  
A.
Dustin S. McCabe. 
Q.
And what date was the order issued?  
A.
9 April 2020.  
Q.
Now, does this look like a typical Captain of the Port 
order from your perspective? 
A.
It does. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 26 of 207

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
27
Q.
Okay.  And to start on the second page, before we talk 
about what's in it, I wanted to direct your attention to the 
signature block.  Who is J.F. Burdian who has signed this 
document? 
A.
So that was my predecessor, Captain Burdian. 
Q.
And, just to be clear, as you described earlier this 
authority has passed to you? 
A.
It has.  
Q.
And was this order signed by the defendant?  
A.
Yes, it was.  
Q.
And can you show where.  You can, like, circle it or 
underline it.  
A.
(Indicating). 
Q.
And was he served by a Coast Guard representative?  
A.
He was. 
Q.
And do you know who that was?  
A.
It -- yes.  Christopher, I think that's Mosquera.  
Q.
And can you circle where Mr. Mosquera signed the form.  
A.
(Indicating). 
Q.
And what date is this signed?  
A.
10 April 2020.  
Q.
Okay.  Let's go back to the first page of this order.  
Directing your attention to the first paragraph.  
Can you explain what the order means when it says "the 
Coast Guard conducted a casualty investigation"?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 27 of 207

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
28
A.
So, my investigators go out -- and for this vessel, the 
motor vessel "Persistence," and at that location -- essentially 
after the investigation, they were deemed to be operating in a 
legal passenger-for-hire vessel. 
Q.
And can you explain what it means when the vessel was 
deemed to be operating as a passenger-for-hire vessel?  
A.
So, essentially, they were working as a -- people would 
rent out a vessel.  Renting it out on its own is not -- they 
aren't following the appropriate regulations and rules for 
safety and security.  
Q.
And just to be clear, the name "Persistence" -- are you 
aware if the name of this vessel later changed? 
A.
I believe it has.  
Q.
And, just for the record, can you read what the official 
number is associated with the vessel? 
A.
930158.  
Q.
And would that official number stay with the vessel if the 
name was to change? 
A.
It would.  
Q.
Okay.  Let's move down to the third paragraph of 
Government's Exhibit 12.  What does that order the defendant to 
stop doing?  
A.
You know, "I hereby order you to cease any operations, 
whether as an inspected or uninspected vessel, until such time 
as it can be shown to the satisfaction of the Coast Guard that 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 28 of 207

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
29
your vessel is being operated in compliance with all applicable 
federal laws and regulations."  
Q.
And, just to be clear, if the defendant was to buy or to 
have bought another vessel after this order was issued, would 
he be allowed to operate for hire? 
A.
No.  
Q.
And what does the next paragraph do?  
A.
So it essentially outlines my authorities and then goes 
through the various civil penalties and/or felony issues if he 
was to violate those Captain of the Port orders or this Captain 
of the Port order.  
Q.
And, finally, what does the final paragraph do here? 
A.
Essentially, it allows them to -- if they don't believe 
that this order was issued appropriately, that they can appeal 
the decision up the chain of command, which would be to 
Admiral Schofield at District 7. 
Q.
And are you aware of any appeals related to this order?  
A.
I am not.  
Q.
And from your awareness, is this order still in effect --
A.
It is. 
Q.
-- today?  
And so one last question I have.  I should have mentioned 
it at the top.  But what types of waterways do your authorities 
extend over?  
A.
Essentially, any navigable waterway that is deemed 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 29 of 207

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
30
accessible.  All federal waterways, essentially. 
Q.
And would that include the Atlantic Ocean? 
A.
It would.  
Q.
And would that include the Intracoastal Waterway in Palm 
Beach, Florida? 
A.
It would.  
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  Thank you, Captain.  No further 
questions.  
THE COURT:  Any cross-examination?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. O'SULLIVAN: 
Q.
Good morning, Captain.  
A.
Good morning. 
Q.
I just have a couple of questions just to clarify.  So on 
April 9th of 2020, an order was issued against Mr. McCabe; 
correct? 
A.
That's correct. 
Q.
And that order prohibited him from operating that vessel 
which has now become the Southern Comfort; correct? 
A.
That is correct. 
Q.
Okay.  And you testified on direct examination that not 
following these orders could lead to civil or criminal 
penalties; correct? 
A.
That's correct. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 30 of 207

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
31
Q.
And it's your understanding that Mr. McCabe has followed 
that order to the T; correct?  
A.
I'm not aware of that, one way or the other, sir.  
Q.
Have you ever pursued any civil penalties against 
Mr. McCabe? 
A.
I don't know off the top of my head, sir. 
Q.
Have you ever pursued any criminal penalties against 
Mr. McCabe? 
A.
I'm not aware of that, sir. 
Q.
Are you able to offer any evidence to this jury today that 
Mr. McCabe did not follow this order?  
A.
I'm not aware of that, sir. 
Q.
Okay.  So it's fair to say that he did follow this order 
and continues to follow this order?  
A.
I'm not aware of that, sir.  
Q.
But you're not aware of anything that says he did not 
follow this order, correct, Captain? 
A.
I am not. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Okay.  Thank you for your time, sir.  
I appreciate it.  
THE COURT:  Mr. Stiehl. 
MR. STIEHL:  Thank you, Captain.  No further questions 
from the United States. 
THE COURT:  Thank you very much, sir.  You may be 
excused.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 31 of 207

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
32
THE WITNESS:  Thank you.  
THE COURT:  We will proceed to your next witness. 
MR. STIEHL:  Thank you, Your Honor.  The United States 
would like to call Joshua Steib.  
THE COURT:  Good morning, sir.  Please walk over here, 
and then stay standing for a moment so you can be sworn in.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Do you solemnly swear or affirm that 
the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 
THE WITNESS:  I do.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please be seated.  State and spell 
your first and last name, for the record.  
THE WITNESS:  Name is Joshua Steib.  J-O-S-H-U-A, 
Steib, S-T-E-I-B, as in boy. 
JOSHUA STEIB, 
having been sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION 
BY MR. STIEHL:
Q.
Good morning, Mr. Steib, and thank you for being here with 
us today. 
We're going to start out with a little bit of background 
about you, and then we're going to get into some specifics.  So 
can you just start out and tell the jury where you live.  
A.
Yes.  So I live in Jupiter, Florida.  
Q.
And what do you do for a living? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 32 of 207

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
33
A.
So I'm a general manager of the Safe Harbor North Palm 
Beach. 
Q.
And can you tell me what Safe Harbor North Palm Beach is.  
A.
So, it's a marina.  We hold about 120 slips, fuel dock, 
boat lifts, a little mixture of a food truck on-site.  And so, 
just a, kind of, basic marina. 
Q.
And again, I know one of our other witnesses mentioned 
this, but can you just clarify what a marina is.  
A.
Yeah.  So a marina is a spot where you can bring boats in, 
store boats, moor boats, repair services, and things like that.  
It's kind of your general spot where you can store a vessel if 
you can't keep it on land somewheres.  So it's just a mooring 
spot for vessels.  
Q.
And how long have you been working at this marina? 
A.
I have been at North Palm now for almost 14 years now, 
almost -- yeah, coming up on 15, actually. 
Q.
So were you working there in March of 2020? 
A.
I was. 
Q.
And can you describe your role at North Palm Marina.  
A.
So as a general manager, you oversee the whole aspect of 
the marina operations, from business side of it to, you know, 
finances, to the employees, the staffings, the members that 
come in and out.  So, yeah, a general manager does a little bit 
of everything. 
Q.
And how long have you been in that position as a general 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 33 of 207

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
34
manager? 
A.
I have been in that position for about five years now.  
Q.
Okay.  And, again, you were in that position in March of 
2020? 
A.
I was. 
Q.
Okay.  Let's talk about the defendant, Mr. McCabe.  Do you 
know Mr. McCabe? 
A.
Yes, I know of Mr. McCabe.  He was a member of ours back 
in the -- in time.  
Q.
Do you recall when he was a member or -- 
A.
I don't recall.  
Q.
So do you know how long ago you first met him? 
A.
Got to be, I would say, about four years, maybe, give or 
take.  Around there. 
Q.
And how did you first get to know him? 
A.
He just came as a member.  He had a dive boat.  And my 
previous manager before me signed him up as a member.  And, 
yeah, he was just a member into the marina.  
Q.
And what was your relationship with him at that time?  
A.
Just normal conversations with -- as normal members.  Brief 
conversations throughout the day, coming through.  You know, 
slips, storage license and things like that, insurance, those 
kinds of conversations, just normal conversations with -- as 
members that we ask for documents and things. 
Q.
And what type of documents would you and the defendant, I 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 34 of 207

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
35
guess, work with? 
A.
So you have slip license agreements and things like that.  
You have payments, you know, and how to, you know, pay the 
bills and stuff, the insurance, those -- those kind of things.  
Q.
And would you ever help him print or scan documents? 
A.
Yeah.  I mean, most members, you know, don't have printers 
and scanners on their boats, so, yes, we would. 
Q.
So do you know what kind of things you would print? 
A.
No.  I mean, members send us stuff all the time.  We just 
print it out.  Since we have a printer at the office, we 
just -- they send it to our emails and we print it. 
Q.
And can you tell me how that works with your printers and 
scanners.  
A.
Yeah, so a member would send us an email or -- 
(Court Reporter requested clarification.) 
THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.  
A member would send us an email or a document and send 
it to our email personally, and then we would just print it on 
our printer at the office.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Okay.  Let's move to the events just before March 2020.  
Prior to March of 2020, what kind of vessel did Mr. McCabe 
have? 
A.
I think it was a 30-foot vessel.  I can't remember the 
make, but it was called Sea Scout. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 35 of 207

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
36
Q.
And what type of vessel was this? 
A.
A normal kind of dive boat.  
Q.
Were there a lot of dive vessels at your marina? 
A.
No.  
Q.
Why not?  Is there any particular reason? 
A.
No.  We just -- it wasn't the kind of community (phonetic)  
that we had at the marina.  It was more of your mom-and-pop, 
you know, like, local patrons, you know, going out on their 
boats.  We didn't have many commercial vessels at the marina; 
so I think he was actually the only one. 
Q.
And in the months prior to March of 2020, had Mr. McCabe 
ever mentioned to you purchasing a new vessel? 
A.
Yes, he talked about, you know, purchasing something new.  
I just -- didn't really pan out at the time.  He was looking at 
something, just didn't have anything on -- at the mind.  
Q.
And do you know why he wanted to purchase a new vessel?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Calls for speculation.  
THE COURT:  Overruled.  
THE WITNESS:  I don't recall.  
BY MR. STIEHL:
Q.
Okay.  So what happened in early March of 2020?  
A.
What -- what are you referring to?  
Q.
Well, did Mr. McCabe get a new vessel? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And was the new vessel the same size as the old one? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 36 of 207

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
37
A.
I think it was a little bit bigger.  
Q.
And did Mr. McCabe tell you when he was getting that new 
vessel? 
A.
There might have been a brief conversation that he was 
looking at a new vessel, just not a direct conversation to say, 
hey, I bought this vessel.  
Q.
And was it typical for a member to get a new vessel without 
giving you advanced notice? 
A.
It's not typical, but members do that on a whim.  They buy 
vessels, you know, and they get a good price.  And then they 
buy a vessel, and then we get word of it. 
Q.
And what do you do when a member gets a new vessel? 
A.
Usually, we have to redo the contract because the contract 
is stated to that vessel.  And then we have to get the updated 
insurance. 
Q.
And were you aware of the events that occurred with 
Mr. McCabe in -- on March 28th and 29th of 2020? 
A.
What are you referring to?  
Q.
An incident that occurred on his vessel on the, I guess, it 
was on the weekend of March 28th and 29th.  
A.
Yes, I was aware of it, yes. 
Q.
Were you working on those days? 
A.
I was not. 
Q.
And do you know why Mr. McCabe got this new vessel? 
A.
I don't. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 37 of 207

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
38
Q.
Okay.  Let's move to the events just after those late 
March 2020 dates.  Did you see Mr. McCabe again after the 
events of March 28th and 29th, 2020? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
In what context did you see him? 
A.
Printing and scanning some items.  
Q.
Would you recognize these documents if I showed them to 
you? 
A.
I -- maybe.  
MR. STIEHL:  Your Honor, I want to show the witness and 
the jury what has already been admitted as Government's 
Exhibit 79.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Is that your email address on the "to" line? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And who is the email from?  
A.
Florida Scuba Charters.  
Q.
And do you know what this document is? 
A.
I don't.  
Q.
And do you know who would send you emails from the Florida 
Scuba Charters account?  
A.
Usually, it would be Dustin.  
Q.
Do you know why this document was sent to you?  
A.
I don't.  
Q.
And can you tell me what the date and timestamp is here.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 38 of 207

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
39
A.
Date says, Friday, April 3, 2020, at 2:53 p.m.  
Q.
And do you know if this is a document that you printed for 
Mr. McCabe? 
A.
It is.  
Q.
And can you tell me what the attachment says.  
A.
Attachment says "Borrower Paycheck Protection" -- 
pro-something.  It just went away.  
"Borrower Paycheck Protection Program Application V1033120, 
SBA Loan CARES Act Calculation Sheet."  
Q.
And then what does the last line say? 
A.
"PPP borrower information fact sheet 033120.pdf." 
Q.
And so, do you known what this document is? 
A.
I did not.   
Q.
Were you able to print this document for Mr. McCabe? 
A.
I'm sure I was. 
Q.
Okay.  Let's move to the next document.  Or I guess we can 
show the -- show the full document to the jury here.  So now 
that you have seen this, do you know what the document is? 
A.
No.  It's just a document that I printed.
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  I want to show the witness and the 
jury what has already been admitted as a Government's 
Exhibit 80.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Is that your email address on the "from" line? 
A.
Yes.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 39 of 207

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
40
Q.
And can you tell me what the attachment says.  
A.
"Dustin1.pdf."  
Q.
And do you know what this document is? 
A.
No.  
Q.
Can you tell me the date and timestamp on this document.  
A.
Friday, April 3, 2020, 3:07 p.m.  
Q.
Do you know why you would have the email for this document?  
A.
So when we have to print things and scan things back to 
members, we would have to send it through our email and then 
send it back to that member's email.  So that's why.  
Q.
So is this -- are you saying -- is this a document that you 
scanned? 
A.
This is a scanned document that I must have sent back to 
Dustin. 
Q.
Okay.  Let's move on to the next page of the document. 
Can you tell me what is listed as the average monthly 
payroll.  
A.
7,300.  
Q.
And then what does it say in the next box of the 2.5 
equals -- 
A.
18,250. 
Q.
And can you now tell me the name of the business.  
A.
Florida Scuba Charters Inc.  
Q.
And the name of the individual listed?  
A.
Dustin McCabe.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 40 of 207

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
41
Q.
Okay.  Let's go through the rest of this document for the 
jury.  Can you tell me whose initials those are on the bottom.  
A.
I believe that's Dustin McCabe's.  
Q.
Okay.  And can you tell me whose signature, and the date on 
the bottom.  
A.
Dustin McCabe.  Looks like April 3, 2020.  
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  I want to show the witness and the 
jury what's already been admitted as Government's Exhibit 81.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Is that your email address on the "from" line? 
A.
Correct.  
Q.
Can you tell me what the attachment says.  
A.
Dustin.pdf. 
Q.
And do you know what this document is? 
A.
I don't.  
Q.
Is this also a document that would have been scanned? 
A.
Correct, yeah. 
MR. STIEHL:  And can we show the jury and the witness 
what the document is here.  
BY MR. STIEHL:  
Q.
Can you read what this document is?  
A.
Report of Marine Casualty, Commercial Diving Casualty or 
OCS-related Casualty.  
Q.
Okay.  We will just -- we can go through the rest of this 
document for the jury, but...  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 41 of 207

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
///
///
42
Okay.  Now, after you printed and scanned these documents 
for Mr. McCabe, did you ever see him again? 
A.
Once.  
Q.
And do you recall that interaction?  
A.
Yeah.  It was just a brief interaction with him coming 
up -- he asked me and another officer to block his vehicle, 
just because a bunch of media was there at the time.  
Q.
So you mentioned earlier that a new contract was required 
for his new boat.  Did he ever renew that contract? 
A.
No.  
Q.
And did he ever make payments to your marina after those 
dates at the end of March 2020? 
A.
No.  
Q.
And did he continue to operate a scuba charter out of your 
marina after those dates? 
A.
He did not.  
Q.
And are you aware if he was operating a scuba charter or a 
scuba business anywhere else in the area? 
A.
I was not.  
MR. STIEHL:  Okay.  Thank you, Mr. Steib.  No further 
questions.  
THE COURT:  Cross-examination?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 42 of 207

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
43
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. O'SULLIVAN: 
Q.
Good morning, Mr. Steib.  
A.
Good morning.  
Q.
At the time that Mr. McCabe was at the marina, do you 
recall approximately what his slip rent would be monthly?  
A.
Around that time, maybe between 17- and $1,800. 
Q.
Okay.  And how many years was he at your marina?  
A.
I think around three or four --
Q.
Okay.  
A.
-- give or take. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Those are the only questions I have, 
Your Honor.
Thank you, sir.
THE WITNESS:  Of course. 
THE COURT:  Redirect?  
MR. STIEHL:  No further questions, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Thank you, Mr. Steib.  You may be excused. 
THE WITNESS:  You are welcome. 
THE COURT:  Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take 
a 15-minute break.  
All rise for the jury.  
(The jury exited the courtroom at 10:33 a.m.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  Please return to the courtroom 
at 10:45.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 43 of 207

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
44
(A recess was taken from 10:34 a.m. to 10:47 a.m.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  Let's call in the jury, please.  
(The jury entered the courtroom at 10:47 a.m.) 
THE COURT:  Please be seated.  
All right.  Mr. Koffsky, let's hear from your next 
witness. 
MR. KOFFSKY:  The United States calls Adam Pollack to 
the stand.  
THE COURT:  Good morning, sir.  If you can walk over 
here to be sworn in, please.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Right up here, sir, (indicating).  
Please raise your right hand. 
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you 
are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 
THE WITNESS:  I do.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please be seated.  State and spell 
your first and last name, for the record.  
THE WITNESS:  My first name is Adam.  My last name is 
Pollack.  A-D-A-M, P-O-L-L-A-C-K. 
THE COURT:  Thank you.  You may begin. 
MR. KOFFSKY:  Thank you, Your Honor. 
ADAM POLLACK,
having been sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 44 of 207

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
45
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Mr. Pollack, good morning.
A.
Good morning.
Q.
Thank you for being here.  I know you have had to make 
arrangements to get here today.  I appreciate it.  
I want to start with some questions about your background.  
Where do you work, sir? 
A.
I work for Cross River Bank. 
Q.
And where is Cross Bank -- Cross River Bank, excuse me, 
located? 
A.
It's located in Fort Lee, New Jersey. 
Q.
Where are you based? 
A.
I am based in Fort Lee, New Jersey. 
Q.
I see.  What type of bank is Cross River Bank?  Does it 
have a specialty of any sort? 
A.
It has a couple cross specialties.  Commercial loan 
lending; fintech; and they specialized, during the pandemic, in 
PPP loans.  
Q.
Okay.  How long have you worked there for? 
A.
I have worked at the bank for four years, with a short 
stint a few months ago where I was on furlough and then came 
back.  
Q.
What roles have you had since you've been at Cross River 
Bank?  
A.
I was the head of recruiting for technology for IT; and 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 45 of 207

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
46
that was my role.  I was the IT recruiter.  And now I am the 
PPP manager.  
Q.
PPP manager?  
A.
Yeah. 
Q.
And if you could -- 
A.
The program manager for PPP. 
Q.
If you could just state, what does PPP stand for? 
A.
The -- I forget the -- but it was the pandemic relief 
program for -- during the -- during COVID pandemic to assist 
the local businesses and the businesses in New York and -- not 
in New York, sorry -- in the U.S. to be able to pay their 
payroll.  So it was a payroll protection program. 
Q.
Did Cross River participate in that program? 
A.
Yes, they did. 
Q.
Is the program still active? 
A.
Define "active." 
Q.
When was the program established?  Let's start there, from 
Cross River's perspective.  
A.
The program was established in 2020.  And I would say it's 
still active in the fact that we are still in the midst of 
servicing the loans to people, recovering the loans.  
Q.
And what was Cross River's role with respect to the PPP 
program? 
A.
We were both an -- we were an originator.
Q.
What does "originator" mean? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 46 of 207

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
47
A.
We would originate the loans.  So we would get the 
documents.  The borrowers would apply to us through our portal.  
There were two ways.  There was direct through 
third parties, which we had contracts with, which would bring 
in the loans, or they would apply direct to us through our 
portal.  
And through our portal, they were able to put their 
information in, apply, upload their documents.  And then we 
were able to fund the loans to -- and approve the loans with 
the approval of the SBA, and then fund them, make the payments 
to the borrowers.  
Q.
Is "lender" another term for originator? 
A.
I would say, yes, we were a lender.
Q.
Okay.  And just for context, how many loans -- if you 
know -- and just an estimate -- how many loans did Cross River 
Bank make throughout the PPP program? 
A.
On our portfolio, we have, if I'm not mistaken, a little 
over 500,000 loans.  
Q.
In your role as the PPP manager for Cross River Bank, are 
you familiar with how the program works? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And are you familiar with Cross River Bank's policies for 
evaluating and approving loans -- applications for loans, I 
should say? 
A.
Yes, I'm familiar with how the PPP process ran in order to 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 47 of 207

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
48
approve the loans for that and what went through with that.  
Q.
Okay.  So let's talk about that process.  You have already 
testified a little bit about it.  I think you mentioned one of 
the ways a borrower could apply is directly to Cross River 
Bank?  
A.
Yes, through our portal. 
Q.
And you also mentioned third parties.  Please explain to 
the jury what you meant by that.  
A.
So there were other companies.  One of them was Kabbage, 
which was case servicing.  They -- they did loans on our behalf 
and then gave us the information and then we funded loans.  
Some of those loans that they did we also purchased on their 
half.  So some of them were originating loans and some of them 
were purchase loans that they were doing on our behalf.  
Intuit also did loans on our behalf.  And then the rest of 
the loans were done through us.  And then there were people, 
third-party people, who would bring in potential borrowers and 
they would get -- go through us.  But it all went through our 
portal. 
Q.
And by "portal," did someone have to walk into a Cross 
River Bank to actually apply? 
A.
No, they did not. 
Q.
What was the way in which it was done?  
A.
They were able to do it online. 
Q.
Online.  I see.  Okay.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 48 of 207

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
49
And you mentioned the total number of loans that Cross 
River Bank has given out.  At the time the program was in 
effect, how many loans a month on average, if you would 
estimate, was Cross River Bank analyzing?  
A.
I would say in the tens of thousands, if not more.  
Q.
How did Cross River Bank review the information in a loan 
application to determine whether it was true and correct?  
A.
We relied on the -- well, for documents, the government 
allowed us to rely -- or requested, I would say, to rely on the 
attestation of the borrower that the documents that they, in 
fact, supplied were accurate and were not -- were not 
fraudulent documents.  So we -- we relied on the attestation 
from the borrower that these were legitimate documents.  
Q.
Did Cross River Bank ever communicate with borrowers as 
they were applying for a PPP loan? 
A.
There were comms back and forth.  Borrowers would reach 
out, you know, "What is the status of my loan application?"  
"When am I getting my DocuSign?"  "Did you receive my 
DocuSign?"  "When am I getting my funds?"  So there was, 
you know, communication back and forth with that.  
Q.
In what manner would those communications be exchanged?  
Phone?  Email?  
A.
All of the above. 
Q.
Email.  Oh, all of the above, you said? 
A.
Yeah.  There were -- some borrowers would call.  Obviously, 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 49 of 207

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
50
email is an easier way to communicate and faster when you are 
doing that volume of loans. 
Q.
And let's say a loan is actually approved.  How does the 
money go from Cross River Bank to a borrower?  What's the 
mechanism for actually transferring the funds?
A.
When the borrower puts -- fills out his application for the 
loan, his or her application for loan through the portal, part 
of the thing is they put in their bank account, their routing 
number for the bank accounts and that, and then the money is 
done through, I believe, an ACH process -- pathway straight to 
their bank account.  
Q.
And just for the jury's knowledge, what is an ACH? 
A.
It's an electronic fund transfer standard in the banking 
industry.  There is multiple ways of transferring money; ACH is 
one of them.  
Q.
Okay.  
A.
It's a wire, basically, almost.  
Q.
And in your role, do you know where the bank infrastructure 
for Cross River Bank is located?  
A.
The infrastructure for Cross River?  
Q.
Yeah, as far as the account and where the money comes out 
from.  Do you happen to know where that is?  
A.
I mean, our -- our physical location is on -- in Fort Lee, 
New Jersey, in the building that I work in.  And we have one 
branch now in -- also in New Jersey, but all of the technology 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 50 of 207

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
///
51
is done through the building -- through our -- you know, office 
buildings. 
Q.
Understood.  
Okay.  I want to shift -- thank you for that information 
about your background and your company.  I want to shift focus 
to this case.  
Let me start here.  Do you know the defendant in this case, 
Mr. Dustin McCabe, at all on a personal level? 
A.
No, I do not. 
Q.
Do you know anything about businesses that he operated? 
A.
I do not.  
Q.
Are you here because you have been subpoenaed to testify 
today? 
A.
Yes, I am. 
Q.
Did Cross River Bank receive a subpoena in the course of 
this case to produce documents? 
A.
Yes, we did. 
Q.
Did you review those documents prior to your testimony here 
today? 
A.
I have reviewed those documents several times.  
Q.
Okay.  And let's go to some of these documents.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  I want to show the witness and the jury 
what's already been admitted into evidence as Government's 
Exhibit 92.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 51 of 207

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
52
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And before we begin, Mr. Pollack, are you able to see the 
document on the screen? 
A.
Yes, I am. 
Q.
And just to let you know, as we talk through these 
documents, you're able to use your finger to mark on the 
screen.  We also can zoom in on the text.  And so, as we go 
through each document, we will zoom in and you can mark as 
well.  
Let's -- let me start off with a general question.  What is 
this document?  
A.
It is the electronic record of the loan application.  So 
this is the -- I guess we will call it the cover page for it.  
And it says the -- it was the loan application submitted and 
accepted by Dustin McCabe, signed by him with his email, 
virtually, on January 21, 2021, at 1:12 in the afternoon.
Q.
Thank you.
A.
And it shows his IP address that he used to submit it.  
Q.
Thank you.  
I want to go to page 2 of Government's Exhibit 92.  And 
what information does page 2 of Government's Exhibit 92 
contain? 
A.
So it contains the name of the legal company that the -- I 
guess the defendant put down.  It shows where it's located; the 
address; his email address; the type of entity it was, which 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 52 of 207

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
53
was a C-Corp; the state that it was incorporated in; the year 
the company started.  It shows the number of employees he's 
saying -- stating he has, which was one on there; his 
pre-adjusted payroll monthly, which was 8,154, which, 
coincidentally, is his average monthly payroll; and his total 
loan request, which was a calculation -- a standard 
calculation -- I believe it's a multiplication of 2.5.  
Q.
And let me jump in there.  Just for the record, can you 
read the business that this application is associated with.  
A.
Yes.  The legal name on there is Florida Scuba Charters 
Inc., and it had a DBA of Florida Scuba Charters. 
Q.
Okay.  And then I want to move to -- and we will talk more 
about the payroll calculation in a moment.  I want to turn to 
page 3 of Government's Exhibit 92.  And, generally speaking, 
what is this section of Government's Exhibit 92 talking about? 
A.
These are the check boxes that he is attesting for several 
terms and conditions of the loan that were a requirement for 
the PPP program.  
Q.
And I just want to underline a particular part of the 
document that I will ask you to read into the record 
(indicating).  Can you read what that first bullet point says.  
A.
Yes.  It says, "To the best of my knowledge, the business 
information I provided in this application is accurate and 
complete.  And..."  
Q.
And if you go to the bottom of that section of text, what 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 53 of 207

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
///
54
is the last -- and I will mark it for you.  I just would like 
you to read this into the record as well (indicating).  
A.
"I am electronically signing the authorization above that I 
give permission to Cross River Bank to obtain my personal 
credit report." 
Q.
Thank you.  And then one last portion I will ask you to 
read from this document.  
THE COURT:  When you read, sir, if you could do so 
slowly so our court reporter can hear you.  
THE WITNESS:  I'm sorry.  No problem. 
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
(Indicating).  
A.
"I confirm that I have not applied for a PPP loan with 
another lender."  
Q.
And why is that significant?  
A.
That's significant because you are only allowed to have one 
loan at a time.  And sometimes borrowers would apply for a loan 
with one vendor, and then while it was getting approved, they 
would apply for another loan with another vendor and, 
therefore, they would end up with two loans which they were not 
allowed to have. 
Q.
I see.  Okay.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  And I will have Government's Exhibit 92 
taken off the screen. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 54 of 207

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
55
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Mr. Pollack, would borrowers have to submit supporting 
documentation with an application for a loan? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
What types of documentation generally would be included?  
A.
Depending on the type of business, it would be tax reports.  
So, like, if it was a personal loan for like an LLC, it would 
be, like, a 1040.  For a Schedule C, it would be a Schedule C 
report, an 1140, and those type of documents.  They would also 
supply -- for bank proof, they would supply, you know, voided 
checks, bank records, and the like.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  I now would like to show the witness and 
the jury what's already been admitted as Government's 
Exhibit 93.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Can you tell what Government's Exhibit 93 is?  
A.
Yes.  It's the 1120, which is the corporate -- the U.S. 
Corporation Income Tax Return for 2020. 
Q.
Would this be a document that might be submitted in support 
of a loan application? 
A.
This would very much be.  
Q.
What is the business that's referenced in this document? 
A.
Florida Scuba Charters Inc.  
Q.
Do you have any personal knowledge of the figures that are 
included in this document? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 55 of 207

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
56
A.
The only personal knowledge is what I can see on the paper, 
so, yes. 
Q.
Do you happen know if the numbers in there are true and 
correct? 
A.
I can only base it on the attestation of the borrower that 
it was correct.  
Q.
And would Cross River Bank have relied on the numbers in 
this document as being correct? 
A.
For the PPP program, yes. 
MR. KOFFSKY:  Okay.  And now I want to show the witness 
and the jury Government's Exhibit 94 already in evidence.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And what is Government's Exhibit 94? 
A.
It's a voided check for the Florida Scuba Charters Inc.  
Q.
And is this a document that a borrower might have to submit 
in support of a loan application? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Why is that?  
A.
Well, it shows that they have a bank account that's valid, 
so that they're in business.  It also is -- helps with the ACH 
processing and the account of which it would be used for 
to -- to fund the money.  
Q.
And if you could just read for the record, the bank that is 
referenced in this voided check.  
A.
Knoxville TVA Employees Credit Union.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 56 of 207

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
57
Q.
Thank you.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  I now want to show the witness and the 
jury Government's Exhibit 96.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And just briefly, what is this document?  
A.
This is a Florida State driver's license for the -- for 
Dustin Sean McCabe. 
Q.
And same question.  Would -- would a borrower have to 
submit something like this in support of an application? 
A.
Yes, for ID purposes.  
Q.
I'm sorry.  Let me repeat the question.  Is this a document 
that a borrower would have to submit in connection with the PPP 
loan application? 
A.
Yes.  These are one of the ways we would identify that the 
borrower was, in fact, who they claim to be. 
Q.
And just to clarify, Government's Exhibits 93, 94, and 96 
that I just showed you, are those all documents that Mr. McCabe 
submitted in connection with the application he submitted to 
Cross River Bank?  
A.
Yes.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  Okay.  I will now ask for Government's 
Exhibit 91 to be shown to the witness and the jury, also in 
evidence.
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Mr. Pollack, what is Government's Exhibit 91? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 57 of 207

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
58
A.
This is the cover page or -- for the overall loan package 
that was sent to the borrower for review.  
Q.
And if I can have you read the first sentence of that 
paragraph that I just marked on the screen.  
A.
"Cross River Bank is happy to let you know that your loan 
request has been approved by the SBA.  The enclosed DocuSign 
includes several important documents that need to be executed 
for your loan to fund."  
Q.
And just down the first page here, what documents are 
included in this -- in this package?  
A.
So the documents included are:  The 2483, which is the 
completed application; the settlement sheets, which is the SBA 
Form 1050 which will show everything that's the responsibility 
of the borrower going forward; the borrower resolution, which 
allows them to understand any and all references for the loan; 
the privacy notice, the GLBA privacy notice which is the 
standard privacy notice that banks have to provide to 
borrowers; the promissory note, which is the bank note that is 
DocuSigned which shows what the terms are; all third-party 
disclosure forms for anybody else who would have accessed any 
of the files; the 4506-T form, which is another form that shows 
information; and then the applicant certification which is 
where the applicant signs.  
Q.
And we will go through some of those documents in a moment.
If you see the text on the bottom of the first page of 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 58 of 207

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
59
Government's Exhibit 91, what does that first sentence say?  If 
you could read that into the record.  
A.
"After your documents are fully executed, it can take 7 to 
10 business days for the funds to post to your bank account."
Do you want me to continue?  
Q.
That's okay.  And let me just ask a question about that.  
Was that timing standard for, on the one end, a loan being 
approved, on the other, someone actually receiving the loan? 
A.
On average, it took about 10 days.  There were exceptions 
to that.  There was a lot of money going out and a lot of 
funding and a lot of paperwork.  So sometimes, it was a little 
bit longer than that.  And Cross River did its best to honor 
the government's commitment and get the funds out as quickly as 
possible. 
Q.
Understood.  I'm going to go through a couple of pages in 
Government's Exhibit 91.  I would like to turn to page 2 of the 
exhibit.  
If you can tell the jury -- bless you -- if you can tell 
the jury what's included on this page.  
A.
This is the numbers that we saw earlier, the qualifying 
payroll amount.  That's where they're putting down the average 
monthly payroll.  That he had any existing EIDL, which is a 
different type of loan; he did not.  The approved amount which 
was $20,385.  The payments that would be monthly if the loan 
was not forgiven.  The SBA loan number which is the number 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 59 of 207

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
60
provided by the SBA once the loan is approved.  The interest 
rate which is 1 percent.  And the term of the loan, which was 
60 months.  
Q.
And just for clarity for the record, if I can ask you to 
read what the loan number is into the record.  
A.
Yes.  The loan number is 4387648301.  
Q.
Thank you. 
And I will now move to page 3 of the document of 
Government's Exhibit 91.  And before we kind of dive into this 
document, generally speaking, what is this document?  
A.
This is the actual application form.  This is like the 
2483.  This is what is taken from the portal from what the 
borrower entered, and then transcribed into this form.  
Q.
Was this a standard form that was used throughout the PPP 
program? 
A.
This form was for the second-round loans.  There was a 
similar form for the first-round loans.  
Q.
How many rounds of the program were there? 
A.
There were two. 
Q.
Two rounds.
If I can zoom into the top third of the document.  And this 
will be page 3 of Government's Exhibit 91.  
We will move through this part of it somewhat quickly.  
What is the business that's referenced in the 2483 form? 
A.
The Florida Scuba Charters. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 60 of 207

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
61
Q.
And who is listed towards the right of the screen as the 
primary contact?  
A.
Dustin McCabe. 
Q.
And if can you read into the record his email address.  
A.
Dmccabe, C-A-B-E, 10 -- 1075@gmail.com. 
Q.
And I will now move to the calculations just below where 
you were reading.  You briefly spoke about this earlier.  Just 
starting on the left side, the average monthly payroll.  Who 
put in that amount?  
A.
He did it based on -- the borrower would have done it based 
on the tax forms that they provided.  
Q.
Was that information that was provided to Cross River Bank?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Did Cross River Bank rely on that information being 
accurate? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Moving to the right where you have this calculation -- was 
that calculation standard for every loan?  
A.
The total value, the 20,000?  
Q.
I'm sorry.  In between the payroll figure and the 20,000, 
if you could explain to the jury how that calculation worked.  
A.
Yes.  So that calculation was the calculation that was 
allowed for the loan.  So it was multiplied by 2.5, or there 
was higher for certain category of applicants.  Multiplied that 
by 2.5 is what gave you the loan amount.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 61 of 207

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
62
Q.
Okay.  And moving to the right even further.  "Number of 
employees," what's included in that -- in that column? 
A.
That is what the borrower would have attested to having as 
the amount of current employees the borrower had at the time of 
the loan. 
Q.
How many employees are referenced here? 
A.
One.  
Q.
Okay.  And is that number supposed to be at the 
time -- does that number reference at the time the loan is 
being made how many employees exist? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Okay.  And just briefly, what are the purposes of the loan?  
What's included there?  
A.
The purposes of the loan are to pay payroll for those 
employees, to cover operating expenses for those employees.  
That is the purpose of the loan as selected.  
Q.
Could loan proceeds be used for other purposes that are not 
listed here?  
A.
They were not allowed to be used for other purposes. 
Q.
I will now scroll down to the second half of the page.  
And if I can zoom in on the question chart.  Generally 
speaking, what are these questions designed to -- what are 
these questions geared at getting, what type of information?  
A.
These -- there are certain exclusions that would make 
someone ineligible for a loan based on the criteria that the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 62 of 207

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
63
government set.  So these were the questions that were selected 
to verify that the person was -- the borrower was, in fact, 
eligible for the loan.  
Q.
And you've talked about attestations.  Does a borrower have 
to make those same attestations in answering these questions? 
A.
Yeah.  
Q.
How does a borrower actually do that in completing this 
form?  
A.
By initialling next to -- on line 4 and on line 5.  
Q.
And -- 
A.
Yeah. 
Q.
Excuse me.  I didn't mean to cut you off.  
Do you see initials on the document? 
A.
I do.  
Q.
What initials do you see?  
A.
DM.  
Q.
I will now ask to go -- let's see, I will now ask to go to 
page 9.  I'm sorry.  Let me scroll back up to page 4, please.
So this is page 4 of Government's Exhibit 91.  If you could 
please describe generally, what's on this document?  
A.
Again, this was a borrower making representation, 
authorization, and certifications towards the loan and then 
initialling on those lines to verify that it was correct.  And 
they agreed.  
Q.
And if I can just mark a couple of things for you to read 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 63 of 207

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
64
into the record.  I will start with this one.  
A.
Sorry.  How do I zoom that in?  
Q.
If we could zoom in on that.  
A.
There we go. 
Q.
Let me clear the screen for you.  
A.
"I have read the statements included in this form, 
including the statements required by law and executive orders, 
and I understand them."  
Q.
And how about that second bullet point?  
A.
"The applicant is eligible to receive a loan under the 
rules in effect at the time this application is submitted that 
have been issued by the Small Business Administration (SBA) and 
the Department of Treasury (Treasury), implementing second draw 
Paycheck Protection Program loans under Division A, Title I of 
the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Acts" -- 
which was known as the CARES Act -- "and the Economic Aid to 
Hard-Hit Small Businesses, Nonprofits, and Venues Act, the 
Paycheck Protection Program rules."  
Q.
And if you had to boil that down, what does that mean?  
A.
That means these are the rules that the Treasury 
Department, that the government, that everybody put together, 
and the applicant understands the rules that are in effect and 
is agreeing to them. 
Q.
And when it says, "The applicant is eligible," the 
beginning of that bullet point, what does that mean?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 64 of 207

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
65
A.
That means that all those things before that he checked 
off, that he checked "no" to, that he didn't -- they weren't 
ineligible for the loan.  
Q.
Okay.  And I'm going to ask you to read just a little more.  
(Indicating).  
A.
"All loan proceeds will be used only for business-related 
purposes as specified in the loan application and consistent 
with the Paycheck Protection Program rules, including the 
prohibition on using loan proceeds for lobbying activities and 
expenditures.  If applicant is a news organization that became 
eligible for a loan under Section 317 of the Economic Aid to 
Hard-Hit Small Businesses, Nonprofits, and Venues Act, proceeds 
of the loan will be used to support expenses at the component 
of the business concern that produces or distributes 
locally-focused or emergency information."  
Q.
And if I -- if you focus on that, the first part of that 
bullet point, what is that getting at?  
A.
That the proceeds can only be used for the business-related 
purposes that were specified on that previous page -- document 
we saw.  
Q.
And if I can zoom out on page 4 of Government's Exhibit 91.
And down at the second half of that page, what do you see 
on that part of the page?  
A.
I see the initials "DM" down by all the rules and 
signatures and statements for the loan.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 65 of 207

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
66
Q.
Thank you.  If I can flip to the next page of Government's 
Exhibit 91. 
And what do you see at the bottom of page 5 of Government's 
Exhibit 91?  
A.
I see the borrower's signature.  
Q.
And what name is listed there?  
A.
Dustin McCabe. 
Q.
What's the date?  
A.
2/2/2021.  
Q.
Thank you.  
If I can jump to page 9 of Government's Exhibit 91.  
The text is cut off at the top of the screen here.  Just, 
generally speaking, what is this document?  
A.
This is the Resolution to Borrow.  It's basically that he 
certifies that he is -- that -- his existence, the name of his 
company, that -- that he is a duly formed company, and that -- 
all the resolutions adopted to it, and the office, and that 
he's the officer of the company, his title, and signature.  
Q.
Is the document signed? 
A.
Yes, it is. 
Q.
And who signed it? 
A.
It's signed by D. McCabe. 
Q.
I will jump to page 16 of Government's Exhibit 91.  
And what is page 16 of Government's Exhibit 91?  
A.
This is the bank note, the standard loan bank note for the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 66 of 207

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
67
loan.  
Q.
And if you could just explain, what is a bank note?  
A.
Basically, a promissory note to -- this is what you're 
signing; this is what you will pay back. 
Q.
And does this document -- does it come with the loan?  Is 
it part of the loan package? 
A.
It is part of the loan, every loan package. 
Q.
Okay.  And if a loan was forgiven, what happens to this 
note?  
A.
Disappears.  
Q.
Okay.  What's the loan date on this, just for the record? 
A.
The loan date on this was January 23, 2021. 
Q.
And what's the business that's referenced in there? 
A.
Florida Scuba Charters Inc.  
Q.
Okay.  And then last, but not least, for Government's 
Exhibit 91, if I can go to page 21.  
And, just briefly, if you could describe what this document 
is.  
A.
This is basically the -- saying that the applicant's aware 
of the rules, a full set of the guidelines, that the signature 
of the applicant is a qualified representative of the 
applicant -- of the application, actually, but, yes, the 
applicant.  What -- what they were applying for, the type of 
loan, that information.  
Q.
And if I can direct your attention to number 4.  What does 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 67 of 207

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
///
68
number 4 say? 
A.
Number 4 says, "The average monthly payroll that applicant 
reported in the application was calculated in accordance with 
instructions for the Paycheck Protection Program application 
form, SBA Form 2483, or the Paycheck Protection Program second 
draw borrower application form, which is SBA Form 2483-SD, as 
applicable." 
Q.
Were there, to your knowledge, specific instructions on how 
payroll was to be calculated?  
A.
Yes.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  Okay.  And if I can just flip to the next 
page of Government's Exhibit 91.  And one more.  And just one 
more.  There should be a signature page, is what I'm looking 
for.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And just for the record, what business is listed on this 
page? 
A.
Florida Scubas Charters Inc. -- sorry, Florida Scuba 
Charters Inc.  
Q.
And who is it signed by? 
A.
D. McCabe.  
Q.
Thank you.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  And I will take Government's Exhibit 91 
off the screen.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 68 of 207

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
69
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Earlier you testified that -- one more question for the 
record.  What's the date of this document?  
A.
The date of this document is the 2nd day of February, 2021.  
Q.
Okay.  Thank you so much.  
And I want to shift gears.  Earlier you talked about that 
Cross River Bank would sometimes communicate with borrowers 
during a pending application; is that correct? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
Do you know if communications were exchanged with 
Mr. McCabe during this application? 
A.
There were some comms that were communicated back and forth 
to the borrower regarding this loan. 
MR. KOFFSKY:  Okay.  I will now show the witness and 
the jury what's already been admitted as Government's 
Exhibit 97B.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And we can just look at particular parts of this document.  
I will direct you first (indicating) to that section.  What's 
the date -- well, let me ask first, what type of communication 
are we looking at here?  
A.
This was an email request from the borrower regarding the 
status of the loan.  
Q.
Okay.  And what's the business?  If you look right at the 
top of the document, what business is being discussed?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 69 of 207

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
70
A.
Florida Scuba Charters. 
Q.
And where I directed your attention, who does it appear is 
sending this email?  
A.
Dustin McCabe. 
Q.
Okay.  And generally, what is he asking? 
A.
He is asking, "When am I getting the DocuSign so I can sign 
it and get the money?"  
Q.
And if Cross River gets an inquiry like this, how does it 
respond? 
A.
As best as we can.  And usually, in a case like that, we 
advise them of any potential delays that are going on or advise 
them that it will be out there shortly; you know, there is a 
process of steps to get the loan information and the DocuSign 
created and then out to the borrower. 
Q.
Based on your review of the records in connection with this 
case, did Mr. McCabe eventually receive the funds with this 
loan? 
A.
He did. 
Q.
Okay.  And I now want to shift gears again, and I will have 
Government's Exhibit 97B taken off the screen.  
We briefly touched earlier on forgiveness.  Can you explain 
to the jury what forgiveness is.  
A.
The government -- the purpose of the PPP program was to 
help out small businesses in the U.S.  It was not to burden 
them.  It was not to punish them.  It was to help them.  And 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 70 of 207

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
71
one of the ways the government did that, that if the borrower 
used the money in the appropriate manner that it was given, it 
allowed the borrower to submit an application to be forgiven 
for the loan.  And in that case, the borrower would not have to 
pay back the money. 
Q.
Was an application for forgiveness a separate application 
all together? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And would it come after the application for the original 
loan? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Okay.  And as far as information, like, generally, what 
information needed to be included in a forgiveness application?  
A.
It was similar information to what was in the application.  
It would ask for things like, you know, the money, what you 
spent it on, what your payroll was, how many employees you had 
then, how many employees you now have, because it was at a 
later time, and the hope was that this was -- businesses were 
able to grow or at least continue at that point.  
Q.
Uh-huh.  
A.
That sort of information. 
Q.
And if you think back to the application that we just 
looked at, how many employees were -- were in existence for 
Florida Scuba Charters? 
A.
On the 2483, they put down -- the borrower put down, there 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 71 of 207

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
72
was one employee. 
Q.
How did you -- with -- regarding forgiveness, how did you 
know that the information in the forgiveness application was 
true and correct?  
A.
Documents that they would have to provide.  
Q.
And would -- in the same way for an application, would a 
borrower need to certify representations made in a forgiveness 
application? 
A.
They would. 
MR. KOFFSKY:  Okay.  I now want to show the witness and 
the jury what's already been admitted into evidence as 
Government's Exhibit 98.  
And let's work our way down on this document.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
First, just generally, what is this document? 
A.
This is a 3508, which is the forgiveness application. 
Q.
Was this a standard form used for forgiveness applications? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
What's the business that's referenced at the top of the 
screen? 
A.
Florida Scuba Charters Inc. 
Q.
And who is listed as the primary contact?  
A.
Primary contact is Dustin McCabe.  
Q.
And I will work down to the loan number.  If you could 
read, for the record, what the loan number is.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 72 of 207

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
73
A.
The loan number is 4387648301.  
Q.
Is that the same loan that we were just looking at the 
application for? 
A.
I believe so. 
Q.
What's the loan amount?  
A.
The loan amount is $20,385. 
Q.
And just below the loan amount, it seems there is employees 
at the time of loan application.  What number is included in 
this forgiveness application?  
A.
In this application, there is -- it's listed as five 
employees at the time -- at the time of the original 
application.  
Q.
Is that question asking the same question that's being 
asked in the original loan application? 
A.
It is asking for that exact data. 
Q.
Is the information in this forgiveness application the 
same? 
A.
No, it is not. 
Q.
If it's -- in your experience, is that supposed to be the 
same if it's asking the same question? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Okay.  Moving to the right, how many employees are listed 
at the time of this forgiveness application?  
A.
At the time of the forgiveness application, it's now 
listing as five employees. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 73 of 207

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
74
Q.
Okay.  And now moving down to the center of the page, what 
does it say there? 
A.
It says the amount of the loan that was spent on payroll 
costs. 
Q.
And what amount is included there? 
A.
$20,385. 
Q.
And what does that -- what does that mean?  
A.
That means the PPP loan that was funded was for $20,385, 
the borrower was supposed to use that for payroll costs, and 
according to this form, the borrower spent that exact amount on 
payroll costs. 
Q.
And how do you know -- as Cross River Bank, when you're 
evaluating this application, how do you know that's true? 
A.
Because the borrower signs that that's what they spent.  
Q.
Okay.  We will move down to the second half of the page, 
and if I can zoom in on that second half.  
And if I can ask you to read -- let me clear the screen.  
If I can ask you to read that sentence into the record 
(indicating).  
A.
"The borrower has complied with all requirements in the 
Paycheck Protection Program rules, Section 7(a)(36), 7(a)(37), 
and 7(a) of the Small Business Act.  The PPP interim final 
rules and guidance issued by the SBA through the date of this 
application, including the rules related to eligible uses of 
PPP loan proceeds, the amount of PPP loan proceeds that must be 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 74 of 207

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
75
used for payroll costs, the calculation and documentation of 
the borrower's revenue reduction, if applicable, and the 
calculation of the borrower's requested loan forgiveness 
amount."  
Q.
And I will ask you to boil that down.  What is that saying?  
A.
That's saying that the borrower followed all the rules, 
used the money for payroll costs, and all the proceeds that 
must be used, payroll cost, the calculations, and documentation 
of how it was calculated, and the calculation of -- how he 
calculated the borrower's requested loan amount.  
Q.
Is this -- is this certification initialed in any way? 
A.
Yes.  "DSM" on the left.  
Q.
Okay.  And I will move to the second certification, and I 
will ask you to just summarize that as opposed to read it.  
What is the second certification getting at?  
A.
This is the borrower saying that all of the material that 
was submitted is true and correct, that they understand that 
making false statements is a -- is punishable by law, and the 
effective punishments that can happen from fraudulently doing 
it. 
Q.
And is this certification initialed as well? 
A.
Yes, it is. 
Q.
By who? 
A.
By DSM. 
Q.
Is this forgiveness application signed? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 75 of 207

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
76
A.
Yes, it is. 
Q.
What is the signature included below? 
A.
Dustin Sean McCabe.  
Q.
And what is the date of the forgiveness application?  
A.
August 9, 2021. 
Q.
Do you know if it was granted? 
A.
It was.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  I have no further questions, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Cross-examination.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor. 
I'm sorry, Your Honor.  I seem to have lost power.  May 
I collect my charger?  
THE COURT:  Yes.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Thank you.  Your Honor, I will proceed. 
CROSS-EXAMINATION 
BY MS. FRANCIS:
Q.
I only have a few questions for you.  Good morning again, 
Mr. Pollack.  
A.
Good morning. 
Q.
Are there any red flags or indicators that would indicate 
to the bank that an application possibly contained fraud?  
A.
If we were to -- if the loan -- if the loans were, 
you know, had -- the name on the -- on the ID didn't match up 
to the tax documents, that would be an obvious fraud.  Those 
dates -- we were relying on the documents as being accurate 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 76 of 207

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
77
and, you know... 
Q.
Okay.  Is there a process?  For bank employees that do find 
fraud, is there a process as far as to discover it, report it?  
What happens when a bank employee does uncover fraud?  
A.
We have a fraud department that reviews all of those, and 
they go through the entire fraud review of the loan and go from 
there. 
Q.
Okay.  Thank you, sir. 
As far as your review of Mr. McCabe's application, did your 
bank uncover any indication of fraud? 
A.
I believe there was a fraud flag on this -- 
Q.
And -- 
A.
-- post the loan being given.  
Q.
And what was that flag fraud you said?  That flag? 
A.
Just a tag that it was suspected of being fraud.  
Q.
Did it give any indication of what the suspected fraud 
would be?  
A.
I don't have that information.  
Q.
Okay.  Are you aware -- you mentioned earlier that 
sometimes customers would call in to receive assistance with 
their application.  You said that you did receive comms from 
Mr. McCabe.  That was post-application; correct?  
A.
Post application submission, yes. 
Q.
Okay.  Are you aware of any telephone calls that Mr. McCabe 
had with any of your bank employees? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 77 of 207

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
78
A.
I believe I did see one phone call that was made.  
Q.
Okay.  Is it customary for banking employees to assist 
customers in filling out their PPP loan applications?  
A.
It is customary to guide them to the regulations and the 
rules that are in the program.  
Q.
Okay.  And are you aware of whether or not Mr. McCabe 
received help and assistance from a banking employee in filling 
out his application?  
A.
I am not.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Okay.  No further questions, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Any redirect?  
MR. KOFFSKY:  No redirect, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Thank you very much, sir.  You may be 
excused. 
THE WITNESS:  Thank you.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Please call your next witness.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  Your Honor, the United States calls 
Justin Masterman to the stand.  
THE COURT:  Good morning, sir.  Once you get here, 
Mr. Creary will swear you in.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please raise your right hand.  
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you 
are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God? 
THE WITNESS:  I do.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 78 of 207

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
79
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please be seated.  State and spell 
your first and last name for the record.  
THE WITNESS:  Justin Masterman.  J-U-S-T-I-N, 
M-A-S-T-E-R-M-A-N. 
MR. KOFFSKY:  Thank you, Your Honor. 
JUSTIN MASTERMAN,
having been sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Mr. Masterman, good morning.  
A.
Good morning.  
Q.
Thank you for being here today.  
I want to start with some questions about your background.  
Where do you work?  
A.
Celtic Bank. 
Q.
Where is Celtic Bank based? 
A.
Salt Lake City, Utah. 
Q.
Is that where you are based as well? 
A.
Correct. 
Q.
Okay.  What type of specialty, if any, does Celtic Bank 
have?  
A.
We're a industrial bank, specializing in commercial 
lending. 
Q.
How long have you been with Celtic Bank?  
A.
Seven years.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 79 of 207

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
80
Q.
And what roles have you had since you have been there?  
A.
I was a BSA compliance manager, and now I am the Bank 
Secrecy Act officer. 
Q.
And what type of responsibilities have you had in 
performing that work?  
A.
I protect the bank from fraud and anti-money laundering. 
Q.
And please tell the jury what that entails.  
A.
Investigating potential criminals that are trying to 
launder money through the bank or use our institution to 
facilitate illegal activity through money.  
Q.
Okay.  And did Celtic Bank participate in the PPP program? 
A.
We did. 
Q.
And just for the record, that's the Paycheck Protection 
Program.
And please describe what Celtic Bank's role was.  
A.
We were a lender. 
Q.
When did Celtic Bank participate in the program? 
A.
Since the inception.  So it was April 2020.  
Q.
In your roles at Celtic Bank, did you become familiar with 
the Paycheck Protection Program? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And were you involved in Celtic Bank's participation in 
that program? 
A.
I was. 
Q.
Okay.  And let's talk about that.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 80 of 207

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
81
How would a borrower apply to Celtic Bank for a PPP loan? 
A.
Online.  
Q.
And would it be directly to Celtic Bank or were there other 
ways? 
A.
You could apply directly with Celtic, or you could apply 
through one of our agents that would offer loans on our behalf. 
Q.
And when you say "agents," how did that process work?  
A.
So in order to get money out to businesses quickly, the 
Small Business Administration said that lenders could utilize 
technology companies or financial technology companies to issue 
loans faster.  So Celtic partnered with several of these 
different technology companies to accept applications from 
across the country on our behalf. 
Q.
And when you say, on your behalf, like, how did that 
relationship work?  
A.
So an applicant would go to one of our agent's website.  
They would fill out their information.  They would have the 
authority to approve or decline a loan on behalf of Celtic, but 
ultimately, Celtic was the one that was issuing the funds. 
Q.
Got it.  And just for context, while the program was going 
on, if you had to estimate, how many applications was Celtic 
Bank getting on a monthly basis? 
A.
Thousands.  
Q.
And how was Celtic Bank reviewing the information in those 
applications?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 81 of 207

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
82
A.
Quickly.  It was all based on attestations from the 
borrower.  
Q.
Were additional documents required to be submitted from a 
borrower? 
A.
They were.  
Q.
What types of documents would those have been?  
A.
Payroll information, justification that the business was 
legitimate, and that they had employees, and that they were 
paying them. 
Q.
Were employees like yourself reviewing these applications 
by hand? 
A.
Not all the time.  
Q.
What were the other mechanisms for review?  
A.
We utilized third-party vendors to kind of read the 
documentation that was uploaded online to pick out the pieces 
of information of importance that would look at payroll, 
employee count, who the information was for.  But internally, 
at Celtic, we also looked at that information manually with our 
own eyes. 
Q.
Okay.  So let's -- thank you for that information about the 
process.  Let's actually talk about this case. 
Let me start here.  Do you know the defendant in this case, 
Mr. Dustin McCabe, personally? 
A.
I do not. 
Q.
Do you know anything about businesses that he operated?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 82 of 207

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
83
A.
I do not.  
Q.
Were you subpoenaed for your testimony here today?  
A.
I was. 
Q.
Was your organization subpoenaed to produce documents in 
connection with this case? 
A.
They were. 
Q.
Did Celtic Bank produce those documents? 
A.
We did. 
Q.
And have you reviewed those before your testimony here 
today? 
A.
I have.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  I now want to show the witness and the 
jury what's already been admitted into evidence as Government's 
Exhibit 86.  And just generally, I want to -- I want to start 
at the top of the document.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And I noticed there is a term in there, Bluevine.  What is 
Bluevine? 
A.
Bluevine is one of the agents that I talked about earlier 
that accepted PPP loans on behalf of Celtic. 
Q.
And based on your review of the documents in this case, 
what role did Bluevine play with regard to this application?  
A.
Borrowers could apply through Bluevine for a PPP loan from 
Celtic. 
Q.
Okay.  And I'm going to mark on the screen, and you can 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 83 of 207

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
84
mark as well, a couple of things I would like for you to read, 
for the record (indicating).  What's the business listed in 
Government's Exhibit 86?  
A.
Florida Scuba Charters Inc. 
Q.
And who is just below that, the authorized person, and 
what's -- what's the full name there? 
A.
Dustin McCabe.  
Q.
Okay.  And I now want to go -- do you know if Mr. McCabe 
was required to submit any additional documents in connection 
with this application?  
A.
They did.  
Q.
Do you know which documents were submitted?  
A.
A bank statement and a 2019 Schedule C form.  
Q.
Okay.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  I now want to show the witness and the 
jury what's already been admitted as Government's Exhibit 121.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And what is this document?  
A.
It's a profit and loss form, a Schedule C or Form 1040 from 
2019.  
Q.
And if I can direct your attention to block -- well, just 
above block A.  Who is the person listed in this document?  
A.
Dustin McCabe.  
Q.
And in block C, what's the business?  
A.
Florida Scuba Charters.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 84 of 207

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
85
Q.
And let me just clear the screen here.  
Is this a document that was submitted in connection with 
Mr. McCabe's loan application?  
A.
It was.  
Q.
And for a document like this, how do you -- how does Celtic 
Bank determine that this is an accurate, legitimate document?  
A.
We're relying on the borrower's attestation that this is a 
legitimate document for the business.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  I now want to show the witness and the 
jury what's already been admitted as Government's Exhibit 90.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And what is Government's Exhibit 90? 
A.
It's a Florida driver's license. 
Q.
Was this something that Mr. McCabe submitted to Celtic 
Bank? 
A.
It was.  
Q.
Were driver's license -- driver's licenses, were they 
always submitted by a borrower? 
A.
Not necessarily, no.  
Q.
Why, in this case, did Mr. McCabe submit a driver's 
license?  
A.
I can't speak to the exact reason, but we have third-party 
vendors that verify identity through third-party sources.  So 
when somebody applies for a loan, the company would take the 
name, social, date of birth, and address, and match that with 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 85 of 207

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
86
third-party sources to determine the legitimacy of the 
identity.  
If the logic was less than perfect, there could be a reason 
for additional documentation to be provided.  So it's likely 
that Bluevine may have requested the applicant to provide a 
driver's license to verify their identity.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  And I will now show the witness and the 
jury Government's Exhibit 85 which is in evidence.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Generally, what is Government's Exhibit 85?  
A.
It's a Paycheck Protection Borrower Application Form.  
Q.
And was this -- is this a standard form that you've seen in 
connection with the PPP program? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Starting at the top of the document, what business is 
included in this form?  
A.
Florida Scuba Charters Inc. 
Q.
And who is the primary contact?  
A.
Dustin McCabe.  
Q.
And let's go down to the next section.  The jury has heard 
a little bit about these forms.  But what is -- what is the 
average monthly payroll?  
A.
$7,500. 
Q.
And were there specific instructions on, like, how to 
calculate payroll for this program, do you know?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 86 of 207

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
87
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And do you know what type of instructions were provided to 
borrowers for that?  
A.
Yeah.  They were supposed to take, essentially, their 
average monthly payroll, times it by 2 1/2 -- or times it by 
2 1/2, and that would get your loan amount. 
Q.
And if you move to the right from the average monthly 
payroll, what is the total loan amount for this loan? 
A.
$18,750. 
Q.
What's the number of employees that are referenced for this 
business?  
A.
Zero.  
Q.
In your experience, could there be -- can you have payroll 
with zero employees? 
A.
You could. 
Q.
How would that work?  
A.
You're paying yourself.  I mean, if you're self-employed, 
you are eligible for payroll.  
It also covers things like mortgage, interest, rental, 
utility payments, other business expenditures such as 
utilities, et cetera. 
Q.
Okay.  And then for the average monthly payroll amount, how 
do you -- how do you know, as Celtic Bank, that there are 
$7,500 worth of payroll expenses for this business? 
A.
We're relying on what the borrower provided us.  But you 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 87 of 207

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
88
could get there from the Schedule C form that you showed 
previously.  You take the tentative profit that was listed 
there, you divide that by 12, because the business was in 
operation for a year, you get $7,500, and then you times that 
by 2 1/2, which gets you your -- your loan amount.  
Q.
Okay.  But -- but to a certain extent, is it fair to say 
you're relying on the representation from Mr. McCabe? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Okay.  And then you talked briefly about the purpose of the 
loan.  Could proceeds from a loan be used for any other reason 
at all?  
A.
It has to be for the business for payroll, whether that be 
for insurance, benefits, sick time, leave, any of that.  But it 
has to be designated for the business.  
Q.
Okay.  And now getting towards the bottom half of the 
document.  Generally speaking, based on your experience with 
handling the Paycheck Protection Program, what are these 
questions at the bottom half of the document designed to do? 
A.
They're eligibility questions.  
Q.
And what do you mean by that? 
A.
So if somebody has a prior record, they're a felon, they 
have defaulted on a government-guaranteed loan before, those 
would disqualify them from eligibility from the PPP program.
There is also questions about do they have other businesses 
that have received PPP loans?  The government wanted to know 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 88 of 207

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
89
about that.  That's not necessarily something that would make 
them ineligible, but we needed to be aware of other businesses 
that were owned by the applicant and that -- if they were the 
owner and operator of the business, and was the business in the 
United States?  Was it for representatives of the 
United States, not for international operations?  And then, was 
it a franchise?  
Q.
And how does a borrower answer these questions using this 
form?  
A.
They're just checkmarks on the online application, followed 
by initialling.  
Q.
And what initials do you see for some of these questions on 
this document?  
A.
A "D" and an "M." 
Q.
Okay.  And you mentioned the word "eligibility."  When you 
say that these questions are designed to determine eligibility, 
what does a -- what does that mean?  What does -- what is 
eligibility in this context?  
A.
So PPP money was finite; it wasn't out there for just 
everybody.  You had to prove that this was -- there was a need 
for it, so you weren't taking away from a business that 
actually needed it.  
So the way they did that was create questions to determine 
if you could qualify for a loan.  Because you're not 
underwriting it as a normal credit perspective.  But if you had 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 89 of 207

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
90
a former record, if you are a felon, or if you have defaulted 
on a government loan before, they weren't going to give you 
one. 
Q.
And is eligibility for a borrower determined on how that 
borrower answers these questions? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
I'll flip to the second page of Government's Exhibit 85.  
And what is this second page?  What information does this 
have?  
A.
There are certifications just stating that everything is 
true and accurate, that everything is going to be used for the 
business, the applicant is going to comply with the letter of 
the law, and that they're essentially attesting that everything 
is true and accurate.  
Q.
And I will scroll to the bottom of the page.  This is 
page 2 of Government's Exhibit 85.  
And do you see initials on this document?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And what are those initials?  
A.
DM.  
Q.
Do you see a signature on the document? 
A.
I do. 
Q.
Whose signature do you see?  
A.
Dustin McCabe.  
Q.
And what's the date on this document?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 90 of 207

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
91
A.
May 11, 2020.  
Q.
Do you know if this application was approved?  
A.
It was.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  Okay.  I now want to show the witness and 
the jury Government's Exhibit 88, which is in evidence.  And if 
I can zoom into the bottom, bottom third of the document.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And I just want to ask a couple of questions about the 
movement of the funds after a loan is approved.  
How would that work, generally speaking?  How are the funds 
moved from Celtic Bank to a borrower? 
A.
It's through ACH.  So the borrower getting approval through 
Bluevine, Bluevine would then send us the approval file, a 
bunch of 1s and 0s, basically computer code.  Our accounting 
department would look at the bank information that's on the 
screen here, and we would initiate the transfer from our 
accounts in Salt Lake City. 
Q.
And would the funds be directed to -- where would they be 
directed to? 
A.
Wherever the borrower told us. 
Q.
Okay.  And do you see bank information on Government's 
Exhibit 88?  
A.
I do.  
Q.
Can you read, for the record, the bank name.  
A.
TVA Credit Union.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 91 of 207

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
92
Q.
And as to Celtic Bank, do you know where Celtic Bank's 
infrastructure is located?  
A.
Salt Lake City, Utah. 
Q.
Is that where the funds were transferred from? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Okay.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  Your Honor, at this time, I would like to 
publish to the witness and the jury Government's Exhibit 14, 
which is in evidence.  These are the trial stipulations I would 
like to read into the record.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  One moment.  
Ladies and gentlemen, sometimes parties agree that 
certain facts are true.  This agreement is called a 
stipulation, and you must treat these facts as proved for this 
case.  So Mr. Koffsky now will read out loud a stipulation that 
has been agreed to by the parties.  
Please proceed.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  Thank you, Your Honor.  If I can ask to 
use the ELMO for this.  
I will read -- I will read into the record:  "The 
United States of America, by and through the undersigned 
Assistant United States Attorney and the defendant, Dustin Sean 
McCabe, personally and through his attorney, stipulate and 
agree to the following facts which the jury must accept as 
having been proved beyond a reasonable doubt:  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 92 of 207

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
93
"1, the defendant, Dustin Sean McCabe, was the owner 
and captain of the M/V Southern Comfort on March 28 and 29, 
2020.  
"2, the disbursement of Paycheck Protection Program 
loan number 5224667409 from Celtic Bank, identified in the 
indictment as Bank Processor 1, in the approximate amount of 
$18,750, by Automated Clearing House, ACH, transferred to 
Knoxville TVA Employees Credit Union, identified in the 
indictment as Credit Union 1, as well as the attending loan 
forgiveness application were wire communications transmitted in 
interstate commerce.  Among other things, Celtic Bank is 
headquartered in Utah, and Knoxville TVA Employees Credit Union 
is headquartered in Tennessee.  
"3, the disbursement of Paycheck Protection Program 
loan number 4387648301 from Cross River Bank identified in the 
indictment as Bank Processor 2, in the approximate amount of 
$20,385, by ACH transfer to Knoxville TVA Employees Credit 
Union, identified in the indictment as Credit Union 1, as well 
as the attending loan forgiveness application were wire 
communications transmitted in interstate commerce.  
"Among other things, Cross River Bank is headquartered 
in New Jersey, and Knoxville TVA Employees Credit Union is 
headquartered in Tennessee."  
And I will just note, for the record, that the 
stipulations are signed by an attorney for the United States, 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 93 of 207

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
94
an attorney for the defendant, and by the defendant himself.
Thank you, Your Honor.  And I will ask for the HDMI to 
be reconnected.  
And I will ask for Government's Exhibit 88 to be 
removed.
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
Mr. Masterman, I want to shift gears.  We talked about a 
PPP loan application from the defendant.  I want to talk about 
forgiveness.  Can you explain to the jury what forgiveness is.  
A.
Yeah.  So these PPP loans were 100 percent forgiven; that 
was what kind of allowed for or incentivized borrowers to get 
them, knowing that they -- if they used the loan for the 
purposes in which they attested to, that they wouldn't have to 
pay it back, that the government would forgive the loan 
100 percent.  And all PPP loans were eligible for 100 percent 
forgiveness.  
Q.
Do you know, based on your review of the documents in this 
case, whether Mr. McCabe applied for forgiveness with respect 
to the loan we just talked about? 
A.
He did. 
MR. KOFFSKY:  I now want to show the witness and the 
jury what's already been admitted into evidence as Government's 
Exhibit 87.  
BY MR. KOFFSKY:  
Q.
And what is Government's Exhibit 87?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 94 of 207

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
95
A.
It's a Paycheck Protection loan forgiveness application 
form for $150,000 or less.  
Q.
Why is the -- what is that dollar threshold?  Is that 
significant at all? 
A.
Yes.  The SBA, the Small Business Administration, said that 
all loans that were under $150,000 were eligible for 
auto-forgiveness, meaning that they did not have to provide any 
supporting documentation to evidence that they actually used 
the money for payroll.  They were eligible to just get away 
with attestations stating they used the money for the business.  
Q.
Would a borrower still have to fill out the form on the 
screen, Government's Exhibit 87, truly and correctly? 
A.
They would. 
Q.
Okay.  What's the business that's referenced in 
Government's Exhibit 87? 
A.
Florida Scuba Charters Inc.  
Q.
And who is the primary contact? 
A.
Dustin McCabe.  
Q.
And what loan is referenced here in this document?  
A.
It's a first draw PPP loan. 
Q.
Was this the loan that we just talked about that was 
applied for by Mr. McCabe? 
A.
For Celtic, yes. 
Q.
What's the loan amount?  
A.
$18,750. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 95 of 207

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
96
Q.
And when was it disbursed?  
A.
May 12, 2020.  
Q.
If you think back to the loan application we just talked 
about -- and I can pull it up -- how many employees were listed 
as part of Florida Scuba Charters at the time of the 
application?  
A.
Zero.  
Q.
How many employees are listed at the time of the loan 
application here?  
A.
Five.  
Q.
Are those two questions asking for the same information? 
A.
They are. 
Q.
In your experience, are they -- is the answer supposed to 
be the same? 
A.
It is. 
Q.
How many employees are listed at the time of the 
forgiveness application?  
A.
Five.  
Q.
And so, if -- if the number at the time of forgiveness 
application is five, and the number at the time of the loan 
application was zero, what would that mean with respect to 
Florida Scuba Charters?  
A.
There is some sort of misrepresentation, whether it was on 
the initial application or the forgiveness application.  
Q.
And going to the second half of the document, what is 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 96 of 207

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
97
the -- the bottom portion of the document?  What information is 
contained there?  
A.
It's more certifications stating that the information that 
has been applied for is true and accurate, and that the loan 
was used for the intended purposes from the Paycheck Protection 
Program. 
Q.
Could loan proceeds be used on anything other than what is 
permitted, based on these applications? 
A.
No.  
Q.
Is the representation -- or the certifications, are they 
signed in this document?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And are they initialled?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
What are the initials that you see? 
A.
DM.  
Q.
And what is the signature that you see?  
A.
Dustin McCabe.  
Q.
What's the date of the document?  
A.
May 14, 2021.  
Q.
Do you know if this forgiveness application was approved?  
A.
It was.  
MR. KOFFSKY:  Just a moment, Your Honor.  
Mr. Masterman, thank you.  I have no further questions.  
THE COURT:  Cross-examination?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 97 of 207

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
98
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. O'SULLIVAN: 
Q.
Good afternoon, Mr. Masterman.  You testified a few times 
that the PPP loan is for payroll; correct? 
A.
Correct. 
Q.
And it's also -- in addition to payroll, it's also for 
covered operational expenses; correct? 
A.
Correct. 
Q.
And that includes rent, utilities, mortgage, as well as 
some other operational expenditures? 
A.
Correct.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Okay.  Thank you. 
I have no further questions, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Any redirect?  
MR. KOFFSKY:  No redirect, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Thank you, sir.  You may be excused.  Safe 
travels.  
I will see the attorneys at sidebar. 
(Conference at bench.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  Who is your next witness?  
MR. KELLER:  Our final witness for the day is 
Sandra Brammeier.  
THE COURT:  And who is she?  
MR. KELLER:  She's a boat captain who was in the Palm 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 98 of 207

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
99
Beach area at the time of the incident.  And -- 
THE COURT:  Which incident?  
MR. KELLER:  Oh, the March 29th incident.  But she knew 
Mr. McCabe before and after the incident.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  How long do you anticipate her 
testimony?  
MR. KELLER:  20 to 30 minutes. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So we cannot end this early.  You 
have an agent that can you call.  Why can't he be called today?  
MR. KELLER:  We can call him today. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So my proposal would be to have an 
extended lunch so you can do any preps, since I don't think you 
were planning on calling him today, but I can't -- I can't 
consume an entire trial day with no witness in the afternoon.
Is Ms. Brammeier here already?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  All right.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Judge, I don't mean to butt in.  I 
wasn't planning on crossing Agent King until tomorrow. 
THE COURT:  I understand that, but your crosses are 
very short, if they're at all, and we have a trial that we're 
here to conduct.  I have a jury, so we're not going to just 
basically do nothing for the afternoon other than the charge 
conference.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I understand that.
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 99 of 207

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
100
THE COURT:  So we're going to proceed.  I'll do an 
extended lunch so you can prepare.  
Has any Jencks or any other documentation been 
provided?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor, for this witness -- for 
all our witnesses, we have already produced our Jencks. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  Then we are going to 
break now for an hour-and-forty-minute lunch.  That should give 
you a little bit more time, and then we will proceed.  
Thank you.  
MR. KELLER:  Judge, the only thing I will just flag, 
just because of your concern about the jury.  I just want to 
note that Ms. Seward, tomorrow, will be very short, probably 
25 minutes.  
THE COURT:  She's the IRS?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor, and we just couldn't get 
her here today. 
THE COURT:  What's the point of her testimony?  
MR. KELLER:  So with respect to the IRS documents that 
we have shown, she's going to be testifying that those 
documents were never filed.  In other words, they were not 
actual IRS documents that were real filings for the -- so she's 
a very important witness.  We just couldn't get her here today. 
THE COURT:  Is there a stipulation on this subject, 
potentially, that these tax returns were never filed?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 100 of
207

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
101
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  We can certainly discuss it. 
MR. KELLER:  If they want to stipulate to that, then we 
can cut the witness. 
THE COURT:  All right.  Well, why don't the parties 
confer over lunch on this issue --
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT:  -- because it may be unnecessary to call 
her.  But otherwise, we will permit her, of course, to be 
called as your final witness then.
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.
MR. KELLER:  Thank you.  
(Conference at bench concluded.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  Ladies and gentlemen, we are 
going to take our lunch break now.  But it is going to be a 
little bit longer today because I have some additional matters 
to discuss with the attorneys.  So we are going to be in recess 
until 1:40.  
Please continue to follow all of my instructions with 
respect to no discussion, no research, no investigation, no 
contact with anybody in the case.  And continue, of course, to 
keep an open mind.  
All rise for the jury.  
(The jury exited the courtroom at 12:04 p.m.) 
THE COURT:  All right then.  We will be in recess until 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 101 of
207

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
102
1:35.  So please return to the courtroom at that time.  Please 
confer over the break regarding the IRS witness, and please be 
prepared to call your next witness -- which is Ms. Brammeier; 
is that correct?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then thank you.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Your Honor, may I address one 
scheduling concern before lunch?
THE COURT:  You may. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  If, over lunch -- if the defense and 
the government agree to stipulate to that IRS testimony, that 
would leave no witnesses for tomorrow.  We had been -- the 
defense had been under the impression that my client has not 
made a decision whether or not to testify yet.  That meeting 
was going to happen in my office on Saturday, and I would need 
some time to prepare him.  
Would the Court be pushing his testimony tomorrow if he 
chose to testify?  Because that would kind of eliminate, 
essentially, all of Friday if we stipulate.  
THE COURT:  Is there a way that you can meet with your 
client this evening and decide what you wish to do, and conduct 
any preparation prior to tomorrow?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Judge, that would -- that would not be 
enough time.  I mean, for the last week and a half, we have 
dedicated Saturday to a, you know, full-day meeting.  There is 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 102 of
207

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
103
a lot of testimony, obviously, to go over.  There is 20-plus 
witnesses that I would have to discuss with my client, and I 
don't think we would be able to do it tonight, especially since 
we live in different counties and different cities. 
THE COURT:  At this point, do you know whether 
Mr. McCabe wants to testify?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I would say it's very likely that he 
does, in all candor, but there is just a lot that we still have 
to go over; and we have dedicated all of Saturday in my office 
in Rockledge to do that. 
THE COURT:  Okay, well, then I have considered your 
arguments.  I will give it some thought. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, ma'am. 
THE COURT:  And I will address it upon returning from 
lunch.  Thank you.
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Your Honor.
MR. KELLER:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
(A recess was taken from 12:07 p.m. to 1:37 p.m.). 
THE COURT:  Please be seated, unless you're addressing 
the Court.  
Any updates, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  We do have a stipulation.  It's marked, 
now, as Government's Exhibit 122.  So I will add that to the 
witness exhibit list and file and update it. 
THE COURT:  What did it say?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 103 of
207

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
104
MR. KELLER:  I'm sorry?  
THE COURT:  What does the stipulation say?  
MR. KELLER:  So the stipulation consists of two 
paragraphs.  The first relates to the Form Schedule C relating 
to the first PPP loan; the second stipulation relates to the 
Form 1120.  
And what both say is that the IRS form, which 
Mr. McCabe submitted to the bank -- you know, we have the bank 
in connection with the PPP application, in month and year, 
which is marked and admitted as Government's Exhibit "blank," 
was never filed with the IRS. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  And has Mr. McCabe executed this?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  This is an executed copy 
that can be entered into evidence. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Mr. O'Sullivan, is all of that 
correct?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, Judge, it's 100 percent correct.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  So obviously, the government is 
going to call off its witness, and that means that the 
stipulation will hold.  I don't want any surprises because I'm 
directing the government to move things along.  Understood?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, ma'am.  Understood, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay, then, the witness is ready, I 
presume?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Judge. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 104 of
207

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
105
THE COURT:  Mr. Creary, do we have our jurors?  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  We're waiting on one more to come 
back, I believe.  
Yes, the last ones are coming up the elevators now. 
MR. KELLER:  Your Honor, while we're waiting, may I 
ask, if we rest today, are we going to do Rule 29 arguments at 
the end of court today?  Mr. Stiehl is going to do it for us, 
but he has never done one before, so he is kind of preparing.  
So I just wanted to let him know whether he is going to do it 
or not. 
THE COURT:  It depends what time it is.  Priority for 
today is the charge conference.  So I'm willing to hold off on 
the Rule 29, but if there is time, then, yes, I would like to 
do that.  So we will see how the timing plays out. 
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  
All right.  Let's call in the jury.  
(The jury entered the courtroom at 1:40 p.m.) 
THE COURT:  I think we're waiting on one additional 
juror.  Do any of the jurors need any of their belongings?  Is 
there anything you are missing?  
A JUROR:  I don't have my (indicating).  Do I have time 
to get my pad?  
THE COURT:  Yes, sir.  
While we're waiting for the other juror, let's call in 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 105 of
207

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
106
the next witness. 
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  The United States 
calls -- 
THE COURT:  Well, before you call the witness, I just 
want him or her to come into the courtroom.  
MR. KELLER:  Oh, I see.  I'm sorry.  Okay. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  We are all here.  Please call your 
next witness. 
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  The United States calls 
Sandra Brammeier.  
THE COURT:  Good afternoon, ma'am.  If you could walk 
over to where I am here, and then just stand right there next 
to the officer.  Now stay standing for just one moment so you 
can be sworn in.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please raise your right hand.  
Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are 
about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
the truth, so help you God? 
THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please be seated, state and spell 
your first and last name, for the record.  
THE WITNESS:  My name is Sandra Brammeier.  First name 
is S-A-N-D-R-A, last name is B, as in boy, R-A-M-M-E-I-E-R. 
SANDRA BRAMMEIER,
having been sworn, testified as follows:
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 106 of
207

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
107
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Good afternoon, Ms. Brammeier.  
A.
Good afternoon. 
Q.
Can you just introduce yourself to the jury real quick.  
Just tell them who you are.  
A.
Sure.  I'm -- I basically was a dive boat owner and 
operator in West Palm Beach for the last 25 years.  And I 
recently sold that business, so now I'm going back and forth a 
little bit between my home in Colorado and here. 
Q.
And, Ms. Brammeier, what was the name of the business that 
you operated here in West Palm?  
A.
I owned Ocean Quest Scuba Charters. 
Q.
What was Ocean Quest Scuba Charters in the business of? 
A.
Primarily, we offered daily dive trips to the reefs and 
wrecks offshore, and then we did a lot of teaching.  
Q.
And did y'all mostly operate in West Palm? 
A.
Yes.  Strictly in West Palm. 
Q.
And how many years did you say that you operated that 
business?  
A.
Well, I had my own business for 21 years, and I owned my 
boat for 20.  
Q.
And when did you stop owning the business?  
A.
July 1st of 2024.  
Q.
And is that when you stopped operating charters in that 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 107 of
207

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
108
area? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And how long have you been working on boats?  
A.
Well, I was with the United States Coast Guard for a few 
years, and I have owned some ski boats and bass boats, that 
kind of thing.  And then prior to buying my own boat, I was an 
operations manager for Jim Abernethy Scuba Adventures.  So I 
worked around his boats for three years, and then I bought my 
own. 
Q.
And what years were you in the Coast Guard? 
A.
'86 to '90, actively. 
Q.
And after that, you were working on boats professionally? 
A.
Not immediately, no.  I went to Arizona where I worked in a 
research laboratory and I did law enforcement, and then I 
decided I wanted to go back to Florida and be close to the 
ocean.  
Q.
And are you licensed as a boat captain? 
A.
Yes, sir.  I'm a -- I hold a 100-Tons Master's license. 
Q.
Do you have a Merchant Mariner license? 
A.
Yes, I do. 
Q.
And can you describe what you had to do to get a Merchant 
Mariner license.  
A.
So for the ratings, they're different -- anywhere from, 
like, 25-ton to a 500-ton license.  In my case, mine is 
100-ton, which allows me to operate vessels that weigh less 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 108 of
207

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
109
than 100 ton.  And pretty much, it could be any kind of 
different type of deal.  
But to qualify for that, I had to have a minimum of 
720 days of sea time working as a crew member of some sort on a 
boat.  And then there is a course that you take that is pretty 
intense, and then there is a two-day test following that.  And 
I did all of that in addition to the prior Coast Guard training 
that I had received. 
Q.
Yes, ma'am.  And, Ms. Brammeier, do you know the defendant, 
Dustin Sean McCabe? 
A.
Yes, I do. 
Q.
And how did you get to know Mr. McCabe?  
A.
When he first bought his first boat, coincidentally, they 
put his boat next to mine in the same marina.  So that's how we 
met there.  
Q.
And what boat do you mean? 
A.
His first boat was called Sea Pup. 
Q.
And did he get another boat after that? 
A.
Yes, his second boat was called Sea Scout.  
Q.
And were you familiar with the Sea Scout as well? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And about how long ago did Mr. McCabe get the Sea Scout? 
A.
Let's see.  I can't give you an exact, but it's been quite 
a few years.  
Q.
And were you familiar with Mr. McCabe's scuba charter 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 109 of
207

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
110
business? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And what was his scuba charter business called?  
A.
Florida Scuba Charters. 
Q.
And so I want to talk a little bit about Florida Scuba as a 
business.  So, Ms. Brammeier, were you familiar with the 
defendant's vessels before 2020?  Was it just the Sea Scout and 
the Sea Pup? 
A.
I know he -- he's had three total.  
Q.
But -- 
A.
Oh, before then, yes, it was just the two that I'm aware 
of, yes. 
Q.
And what type of vessels were the Sea Pup and Sea Scout?  
A.
So, again, coincidentally, his boat is the same make and 
model as mine, a 30-foot Island Hopper.  
Q.
Is that like a typical dive boat? 
A.
It's very common, yes. 
Q.
And are you familiar with the defendant's purchase of a 
vessel in 2020 for his scuba business?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Had you discussed that purchase with the defendant before 
he made it? 
A.
Yeah.  He had been talking about get a new boat and running 
a different type of charters, like a concierge, kind of a 
little more upscale type of charter.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 110 of
207

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
111
Q.
And what month and year, about, did you talk with the 
defendant about this purchase?  
A.
I would say it was towards the end of 2019, early 2020, 
somewhere in there.  
Q.
And what type of vessel did the defendant ultimately 
purchase?  
A.
I'm not sure of the actual make and brand, but the model 
is -- it would be a sport fisherman.  
Q.
And what was the vessel called?  
A.
Southern Comfort.  
Q.
And is a sport fish like that typical for scuba diving? 
A.
Not generally, no.  
Q.
And did Mr. McCabe and you discuss modifications to that 
sport fish that he was going to make to help with scuba? 
A.
I did see the vessel out of the water.  By coincidence, I 
was in the marina working on -- in the yard working on mine.  
And they pulled that boat and had it up.  So I walked over and 
visited with him a little bit, and I asked him what he was 
going to do as far as getting his divers back on the board, as 
far as like a ladder or a platform, something like that.  
Q.
Did it not have a ladder when you saw the boat? 
A.
No. 
Q.
Did it not have a typical scuba platform? 
A.
No, but he told me he was having one made.  
Q.
And did the defendant also discuss the throttles of the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 111 of
207

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
112
vessel? 
A.
He had just mentioned it had the two-system throttle like 
my boat did.  And that was the difference between his Island 
Hoppers and mine.  I had a dual station on mine, one from -- on 
the main deck, and then one on the bridge.  So he said he was 
going to be, you know, changing his around.  He would be 
driving from up on top.  
Q.
And did he say he was going to remove one of them? 
A.
I don't know if he specifically told me he was going to 
remove one of them, just that he was going to alter it and run 
it from the top. 
Q.
And can altering those engine controls cause problems with 
the engine? 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Lack of foundation.  Lack 
of predicate. 
THE COURT:  Sustained.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
As you have worked on boats as you were in the Coast Guard, 
did you -- are you familiar with boats and how their engines 
operate as -- terms of the throttle controls? 
A.
Yes, absolutely.  
Q.
And what type of experience do you have with that?  
A.
So, as far as, like, my engine goes and my little business, 
I couldn't afford to pay $130 hour for a mechanic; I just 
couldn't.  So I utilized all the knowledge I had, and I did 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 112 of
207

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
113
most of the work by myself with a little bit of help once in a 
while.  And so I changed the throttle cables twice over the 
20 years of owning my vessel.  And the first time I did it, I 
discovered that they're pretty -- it's not just unplug one and 
then plug another one back on.  There is quite a bit of 
adjusting to do to make sure that they're in the proper 
position.  
Q.
And as you talked with the defendant about this purchase of 
this vessel, did the defendant talk about being in need of 
money?  
A.
Well, at the time, we were all discussing that because we 
were in the process of being really concerned about what COVID 
was going to do for all of us.  And I had just did extensive 
amount of money into my repairs on my boat.  So we -- on more 
than one occasion, we all talked about it.  I'm sure Dustin and 
I visited about -- I knew I needed to make money, and at the 
same time, he had just purchased a new boat, and he was needing 
to make money as well.  
Q.
And moving forward from where we were just talking about -- 
you know, when you were talking about the -- with him about the 
boat, when you saw it out, did you see the vessel in late March 
of 2020? 
A.
Yes, I did.  
Q.
And what day did you see it?  
A.
So it was March 29th.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 113 of
207

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
114
Q.
And do you know what happened on that boat, March 29th, in 
general?  
A.
Yes, I do. 
Q.
Okay.  So I want to talk about March 29th.  And let me 
begin here.  Do you know the victim who was ultimately killed 
that day? 
A.
Yes, I do.  She dove on my boat as well. 
Q.
And did she, in your experience, have the habits of a safe 
scuba diver? 
A.
Yeah, I would think so.  Mollie and Sean were good divers 
in my professional scuba instructor opinion.  
Q.
And on the 29th, when did you first see the defendant?  
A.
So we were going out the inlet.  So I had divers on my 
boat, and we were going out that day as well.  And I actually 
had two guys on my boat that were -- they're like, "Oh, there's 
Dustin's new boat."  
So we seen them.  They were coming out behind me.  We 
visited a little bit about the boat, and then I turned and went 
north, and Southern Comfort turned and went south.  So we were 
diving opposite directions of the inlet.  
Q.
And did you see the defendant later that day? 
A.
I did see him later that day.  
Q.
And what led you to seeing the defendant later that day? 
A.
I was picking up divers, and we were getting ready to head 
in, and I received a call from Kristy McCabe.  And we were all 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 114 of
207

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
115
friends, and so she had called me and told me that there had 
been an accident -- 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Hearsay.  
THE COURT:  Sustained.  
THE WITNESS:  Okay.  I received a call from Kristy, and 
she told me that there -- 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Hearsay.
MR. KELLER:  I'm sorry.  Sorry, Ms. Brammeier -- 
THE WITNESS:  Oh, I'm sorry. 
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
We can move ahead, because, really, we're not trying to get 
into what someone told you for the truth of it -- 
A.
Oh, okay. 
Q.
-- we're just trying to explain how you ended up at the 
scene.  
A.
Oh.
Q.
So let me just ask this:  Did you end up near Mr. McCabe 
after this incident happened? 
A.
Yes, I did. 
Q.
And where were -- did you come up to them, this group of 
people?  
A.
Yeah.  
Q.
Okay.  And once you got to them, what happened?  What did 
you do?  
A.
I saw Dustin was sitting on a dock box on the dock, and I 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 115 of
207

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
116
walked over.  And he was obviously shooken.  And we visited for 
a minute, and I was just basically trying to be there as 
support for a friend.  
Q.
And did you tell him anything at that point?  
A.
I suggested to him that -- because nobody seemed to know 
what really had happened, so I suggested to him that he went 
over to the Coast Guard crew and ask which one of them was the 
engineer, because all Coast Guard crews have engineers.  And 
then ask the engineer maybe to go with him, if they would allow 
it, and check out the boat and see if maybe something was wrong 
with the boat.  
Q.
And did he do what you suggested?  
A.
Not that I'm aware of.  I don't believe so.  
Q.
Did he respond in a way that suggested that he was going to 
do it?  
A.
No.  
Q.
Now, have you yourself ever reported incidents on your 
vessels to the Coast Guard?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And is it hard to do?  
A.
No.  Generally, you make a phone call to the nearest unit, 
which, in our case would be Station Lake Worth Inlet.  And then 
it's followed up by -- you fill out -- there is a standard form 
that we're required to fill out.  And then they will generally 
tell you to bring it immediately or to drop it by, depends on 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 116 of
207

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
117
what the incident is.  
Q.
And what types of things do you have to report?  
A.
So, there's three categories.  One is if there is 
a -- something happens to the vessel, that you lose power or 
you lose steerage, or there is an electrical failure, something 
that could interrupt your activities that could endanger anyone 
who is on board, so, like, losing your power, losing steerage.  
And then the second category is if there is someone who is 
injured, if there is an injury of some sort.  And then the 
third category is, like, if there is a major catastrophe like a 
death.  
Q.
And do you learn about these types of reportable incidents 
while you're getting your Merchant Mariner license? 
A.
Yeah.  Oh, yeah. 
Q.
And can you explain how.  Do you take a class in it?  How 
do you do it?  
A.
Yeah.  Like you say, it goes back to the captain's courses 
and stuff.  
Q.
And if a vessel runs aground, is that something you would 
have to report? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
What about if something with a propeller causes an injury?  
Is that something you need to report if it's a malfunction? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And moving past March 29th of 2020, after what happened 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 117 of
207

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
118
that day happened, did you see Mr. McCabe again after that? 
A.
Yes, I did. 
Q.
And after the incident, the tragic death of Ms. Flynn -- 
Ghiz-Flynn, did you discuss a way to get money from the federal 
government with Mr. McCabe? 
A.
Yeah.  We had conversations about what programs were 
starting to come out and what was going to be offered to 
business owners and stuff that were forced to shut down due to 
the COVID restrictions. 
Q.
And did the topic of Paycheck Protection Program loans ever 
come up? 
A.
Yes, it did. 
Q.
And I want to be clear about this.  Did you discuss 
Paycheck Protection Program loans before or after 
Ms. Ghiz-Flynn was killed?  
A.
I would believe that it would have been after.  
Q.
And had you tried yourself to apply for a PPP loan at some 
point?  Did you investigate it? 
A.
I did after I got a phone call from Dustin.  He shared some 
information with me.  
Q.
And once you investigated, were you able to apply for a PPP 
loan? 
A.
No, I wasn't.  
Q.
And why not?  
A.
Because my --
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 118 of
207

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
119
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Relevance.  
THE COURT:  Overruled.  
THE WITNESS:  My operation is very similar, in that 
it's owner-operated, meaning that I didn't have any W-2 
employees.  I didn't have any employees on payroll.  It was 
myself and my business partner and a few volunteers.  And then 
we had, like, contract labor that could come in.  Like I would 
pay a dive instructor maybe to come teach a class or something 
for me.  We didn't have any official qualifying employees that 
would enable me to qualify for that loan.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
And did Mr. McCabe, in speaking with you about this, talk 
about having himself gotten a PPP loan? 
A.
Yes, he did. 
Q.
And how much did he tell you that he was getting?  
A.
Well, I don't know the total amount that he got, but I 
believe that -- when he first contacted me and I said, "Are you 
sure?" -- because I was excited because I thought maybe 
possibly I could then.  And he said, yes, that they had already 
sent him, like, a partial payment.  
Q.
And how much in total did he expect to be getting? 
A.
I think somewhere around 20,000 is what he received.  
Q.
And did the defendant claiming 20,000 in proceeds from a 
PPP loan seem unusual to you once you had investigated?  
A.
Well, if anything, I felt a little, you know, more sad for 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 119 of
207

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
120
myself that I didn't qualify.  
Q.
And how much longer after 2020 did you continue operating 
in this Riviera area?  
A.
Until July 1st of 2024.  
Q.
And did you ever see Mr. McCabe operating a scuba charter 
vessel after Ms. Ghiz-Flynn's death? 
A.
No. 
MR. KELLER:  Nothing further, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Cross-examination. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. O'SULLIVAN: 
Q.
Good afternoon, ma'am.  
A.
Good afternoon.  
Q.
So you operated a dive charter business as well; correct? 
A.
Yes, sir, I did. 
Q.
And was that in the same marina or a different marina than 
Mr. McCabe? 
A.
Originally, we were in the same marina side by side. 
Q.
And what years was that?  
A.
Honestly, I cannot tell you exactly the dates.  I did move 
my boat to Newport Cove Marina due to some parking issues at 
Riviera. 
Q.
Do you recall about what year you moved marinas? 
A.
It was definitely more than 10 years ago.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 120 of
207

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
121
Q.
Okay.  So you were never in a marina next to Mr. McCabe 
when he bought the new boat, the Southern Comfort? 
A.
Absolutely, no.  No, I was not. 
Q.
Have you ever been on the Southern Comfort?  
A.
I have been under it.  
Q.
Have you ever been on it or, like, out for a ride or a sea 
trial or anything? 
A.
No, none of that. 
Q.
Okay.  So you said you had a 30-foot Island Hopper? 
A.
Yeah, I have a 30-foot Island Hopper.
Q.
Did you have to make payments on that Island Hopper 
monthly? 
A.
Yeah, I did. 
Q.
What were your monthly payments?  
A.
My monthly payment was approximately -- they were 694, I 
believe. 
Q.
And then what does it cost to dock your -- at the marinas, 
either Riviera or the other marina, like, the slip fee a month? 
A.
Right.  So the marina that I'm in when I sold my boat, it 
cost me $853 a month. 
Q.
So 853 month for a 30-foot boat; correct? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And how many gallons of gas does that boat hold? 
A.
My boat held 200 gallons. 
Q.
Okay.  And what was gas, marine gas back in 2020?  About 4 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 121 of
207

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
122
or $5 a gallon?  
A.
I believe it had come down.  A little less than that. 
Q.
So would it be fair to say it was about 8- or $900 for a 
fill-up, somewhere in that neighborhood? 
A.
I would say it was probably between 6- and $700.  
Q.
Okay.  And then what -- what would your average 
maintenance, monthly, cost to run a 30-foot Island Hopper? 
A.
So my Island Hopper, because I did all the work myself, 
would have been just random parts and things.  So, unless I was 
doing a major, major overhaul, I probably spent less than 250, 
300 a month on filters and random bilge pump or an electric 
switch or something. 
Q.
So that's just, kind of, monthly stuff that you just have 
to pay, absent, like, a major breakdown or something like that? 
A.
Right.  It's hard to say.  Like, you wouldn't buy a battery 
for your car every month, but you might need one once a year, 
or something like that. 
Q.
So there are obviously just some big, unexpected expenses, 
but then there is going to be some expenses that you just know 
that they're going to hit you every month on a boat? 
A.
Indefinitely, because saltwater and electronics don't go 
together.
Q.
Yeah.  
A.
So we replace radios more often than you might think and 
that kind of stuff. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 122 of
207

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
123
Q.
Okay.  So you're not, like, personally aware of 
Mr. McCabe's expenses; correct? 
A.
No.  
Q.
Okay.  Like, you guys -- you guys visited, as you said, and 
talked and maybe compared, you know, notes and stories, but you 
weren't involved in his business as far as how it was set up or 
his personal expenses? 
A.
No.  I -- I knew what he charged his divers.  We -- we 
comparatively charged about the same rates.  
Q.
Okay.  Was your business set up as an LLC?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And you're aware that my client's business was set up as a 
corporation? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
Okay.  So those are different -- different business 
structures; correct? 
A.
Right.  Yes, sir, they are. 
Q.
Okay.  I know that you said that you were in the 
Coast Guard actively for, I think, at least four years; right? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
Okay.  As part of your training in the Coast Guard, did you 
get, like, a mechanic's license or a mechanic's certification?  
A.
No, I did not. 
Q.
Okay.  Subsequent to that, have you ever been certified as 
a mechanic? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 123 of
207

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
124
A.
No.  
Q.
Okay.  I know that you testified on direct that marine 
mechanics are charging, like, around $130 an hour? 
A.
Currently, now, the couple that I know, yeah. 
Q.
So it makes sense to do as many repairs as possible 
yourself; right? 
A.
If you can, yeah. 
Q.
Okay.  And you said that you changed the throttles on your 
boat; correct? 
A.
Yes.
Q.
Did anyone supervise you, or was that just something you 
did on your own? 
A.
I did that on my own. 
Q.
And after you changed those throttles, did you have anyone 
inspect the boat or approve it to make sure that they were done 
correctly? 
A.
I had a Coast Guard inspection.  
Q.
Okay.  Was that immediately after the throttles?  
A.
It was.  Because I replaced them prior to my inspection 
because I knew that one of them was starting to look pretty 
stiff and a little corroded, so I went ahead and did the 
repairs so that my boat would be ready. 
Q.
How did you know how to replace throttles if you've never 
had any formal training in marine mechanics? 
A.
Well, you don't -- I mean, I'm mechanically inclined.  I 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 124 of
207

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
125
know that when you push the throttle cable forward, the engine 
goes forward, and when you pull it back, it goes back.  And I 
know that that throttle moves a little lever on the 
transmission, and the two are connected together.  
I mean, there is YouTube.  There is all kinds of ways to 
research and learn how to do things. 
Q.
So it doesn't seem like it's that complex.  If you're an 
avid boater, it's -- by your testimony, it seems a rather 
simple thing to change yourself; correct? 
A.
It's simple to get it all changed, but you have to make 
sure that the settings and everything are correct.  
Q.
Okay.  
A.
You have to test it. 
Q.
And you don't need formal training to do that; correct? 
A.
No.  I mean, I -- I double-tied my boat to the dock.  And 
at idle speed, I would put it in forward and count how many 
seconds it took the transmission to engage; then I would count 
how many seconds it took to disengage.  And I did that both 
in -- in forward and reverse many times.  
And then sometimes you would do it, and it would take -- 
there would be too long of a delay.  So you'd have to go and 
you have to take it, and you have to move something forward and 
move something back, and then you go try again.  
So there is -- there is quite a bit of time invested.  It's 
not necessarily a hard process, but it does take some -- some 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 125 of
207

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
126
effort and some time to make sure that it's exact.  
Q.
But you don't need formal training?  If you kind of know 
what you're doing and you take the time, you can do it yourself 
and -- 
A.
Exactly.  If you know what you doing. 
Q.
And you never had problems with your throttles after you 
did those self-repairs; correct? 
A.
No, not after I correct -- I made sure they were correctly 
adjusted; no, I never had any problems. 
Q.
But you never had any accidents that needed to be reported 
to the Coast Guard or anything like that? 
A.
Not related to throttle cables, no. 
Q.
You were able to repair your throttles and then 
successfully go about your business, and no issues with the 
throttles? 
A.
Yes, after I --
Q.
Okay.
A.
-- made sure that they were adjusted correctly, and tested 
them time and time again.  
Q.
Did Mr. McCabe ever do any, like, general maintenance or 
work on your boat? 
A.
Yeah, sure, he helped me quite a bit.  
Q.
Did he -- him and his mechanic, John Miller, did they 
change the turbos in your engines? 
A.
Yeah, he did.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 126 of
207

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
127
Q.
Okay.  Is that -- that's more complex than a throttle 
cable; correct? 
A.
No, it's not more complex.  But if -- I could explain if 
you don't mind.  
Q.
Sure.  
A.
I could simply show you my arms (indicating).  You can 
visually see that my right arm is very swollen; right?  So I'm 
a survivor of stage IV breast cancer, and one of the things 
that -- a residual effect of that is they removed all of the 
lymph nodes from underneath my collar bone and my right armpit 
and stuff.  So my arm swells, and I don't have as much strength 
in my right arm anymore as I would.  
So there was often time that, yes, I would call on my male 
friends that had big muscles to come and help me lift things 
like turbos, but it didn't have anything to do that I 
didn't -- anything to do with me not knowing how to do it 
myself.  It's just with my arm, I was slightly handicapped in 
doing so.  
Q.
Thank you for sharing that.  
When you called Mr. McCabe, he would come and he would help 
you? 
A.
He would, yeah.  He is a good guy. 
Q.
Did he ever charge money for this, or was he just there to 
help out a fellow business owner? 
A.
Yeah, just there to help out.  We helped out each other.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 127 of
207

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
128
Sometimes his divers would come on my boat; sometimes my divers 
would go on his; sometimes I would take my students and dive 
off his boat.  We helped each other back and forth, the same as 
all of us do. 
Q.
You said he was a good guy.  Was he also a good captain? 
A.
I -- I wouldn't say that he was not a good captain. 
Q.
You brought your paying customers on his boat, and he 
brought them on your boat, and you were kind of in a community 
together? 
A.
Sure.  All of us. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Okay.  I have no further questions.  I 
thank you for your time, ma'am. 
THE WITNESS:  Thank you very much.  
THE COURT:  Redirect?  
MR. KELLER:  Thank you, Your Honor.  Just a few 
questions.  
THE COURT:  Actually, I will see the parties briefly at 
sidebar before you begin.  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan, sidebar, please.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I'm sorry, Your Honor. 
(Conference at bench.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  During direct, there was a 
question about whether manipulating cables could have an impact 
on the vehicle.  Defense objected for lack of foundation.  I 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 128 of
207

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
129
sustained that.  A foundation was later built, but no 
subsequent question related to the original question.  
Then on cross, there was substantial questioning of the 
witness related to her repairs of cables, et cetera.  So I just 
want to make clear that if there is an interest in the line of 
inquiry with respect to the cables, that, at this point, seems 
to me, is fair game.  Any questions?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Nothing from the defense, ma'am.  
Thank you. 
THE COURT:  Thank you. 
(Conference at bench concluded.) 
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. KELLER: 
Q.
Hi, Ms. Brammeier.  
A.
Hello. 
Q.
I just have a few questions for you.  
A.
Okay. 
Q.
Just to start kind of broad, who is responsible for keeping 
your boat in proper working order?  
A.
Me.  
Q.
And when Mr. McCabe would come help you work on your boat, 
or someone else -- a friend would come help you work on your 
boat, who was responsible for the boat being in working order 
at the end of that? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 129 of
207

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
130
A.
Me.  
Q.
And when you fixed your throttle controls on that -- on the 
vessel you were talking about, who was responsible for it being 
fixed properly? 
A.
Me.  
Q.
And after you fixed those throttle controls, who was 
responsible for the safety of the passengers on your boat next 
time that you took it out with paying passengers? 
A.
Myself.  
MR. KELLER:  Nothing further, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Thank you very much, ma'am.  You are all 
done.  Thank you.  You may be excused. 
THE WITNESS:  Thank you, ma'am.  
THE COURT:  Please call your next witness, Mr. Keller. 
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  The United States calls 
Special Agent Caleb King.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Do you swear or affirm that the 
testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 
THE WITNESS:  I do.  
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Please be seated.  State and spell 
your first and last name for the record.  
THE WITNESS:  Caleb King.  C-A-L-E-B, K-I-N-G. 
MR. KELLER:  I'm going to connect to the HDMI. 
SPECIAL AGENT CALEB KING,
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 130 of
207

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
131
having been sworn, testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. KELLER:
Q.
Good afternoon, Special Agent King.  
A.
Good afternoon. 
Q.
And just to start, where do you work?  
A.
I am a supervisory special agent with the U.S. Coast Guard 
Investigative Service in Miami, Florida.  
Q.
And what is a supervisory special agent? 
A.
So, I'm the first-line supervisor for an office with 
Coast Guard special agents who are federal criminal 
investigators. 
Q.
And how long have you been a special agent, more generally? 
A.
I first became a special agent in 2010, and I worked for 
another agency.  And I came to the Coast Guard Investigative 
Service in 2020.  
Q.
And were you a special agent before you were a supervisor? 
A.
Correct.  
Q.
And what does a special agent do? 
A.
So you can think of it like a federal detective, so to 
speak, a little bit different than a local police detective, 
but that's basically -- a detective in federal law enforcement 
is usually called a special agent.  
Q.
And what did you do before being a special agent?  
A.
So I was a police officer in Volusia County, Florida, for 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 131 of
207

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
132
three years.  And I served on active duty in the U.S. Marine 
Corps for eight years, and then became a special agent in 2010.  
Q.
And can you describe the training you did to become a 
special agent.  
A.
Sure.  
In addition to the training I had prior to becoming a 
special agent -- which, a lot of it was law enforcement 
related -- I attended the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation 
Division Academy in 2010.  Then I worked for the Defense 
Criminal Investigative Service, and I attended the Defense 
Criminal Investigative Service special agent basic training at 
the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.  And I have been 
to a variety of courses related to financial crime, death 
investigation.  And I'm a graduate of the FBI National Academy, 
and I'm also a licensed attorney in Florida and 
Washington, D.C.  
Q.
And with the Coast Guard, what types of crimes do you 
investigate?  
A.
So I like to say that the Coast Guard Investigative 
Service, which we call CGIS, is kind of like NCIS but just for 
the Coast Guard, and we don't have a TV show.  
So our primary mission is to investigate violations of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice committed by active duty 
members of the Coast Guard.  And then after that, it's all 
manner of crimes within the maritime jurisdiction of the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 132 of
207

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
133
Coast Guard, which range from pollution, frauds against the 
Coast Guard, crimes related to Coast Guard vessels, Coast Guard 
licenses, drug-trafficking, human-trafficking, and certain 
violent crimes or deaths that may occur within jurisdictions 
that are subject to federal law.  
Q.
And the jury has seen you sitting at counsel table the last 
couple days with us.  So what part of the investigation team 
are you?  What is your role in it? 
A.
So I'm the -- what we call the case agent.  The case agent 
is sort of the main detective.  In some investigations, you may 
have multiple agencies involved.  In this case, as far as the 
federal criminal investigation, I have been the only case 
agent.  
Q.
And do you coordinate with other law enforcement agencies, 
like the Florida Fish and Wildlife, like we saw before? 
A.
Yes.  So the case agent will coordinate and sort of serve, 
sort of, like the quarterback for the investigative process, if 
there was a related regulatory or state investigation or if you 
have a joint investigation with another federal agency.  And 
then, we're doing that in hopes to bring a sound investigative 
product to the U.S. Department of Justice to evaluate if 
something needs to be charged. 
Q.
And do you also participate in securing records relating to 
the investigation, and reviewing those records? 
A.
Yes.  This investigation, we picked it up after there had 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 133 of
207

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
134
already been sort of a regulatory and investigation by the 
State.  So when I picked this up, one of the things we did was 
to look at what other information we did not have, and part of 
that was to secure records from various business entities 
through the use of subpoenas. 
Q.
And we will talk about the investigation in just a minute.  
But just to start with talking about how the investigation got 
to you at the Coast Guard, does the Coast Guard Investigative 
Service or CGIS automatically get involved in incidents 
involving recreational vessels? 
A.
No, we don't automatically.  The Coast Guard has the 
authority to investigate any recreational boating accident in 
federal waters, but typically, we don't.  And the Coast Guard 
initial process from a marine safety standpoint, the 
investigation is just to sort of determine what happened, make 
recommendations.  And if that regulatory investigation 
identifies indications that there was an actual crime -- so a 
violation of federal law, not just regulation -- then that 
crime is referred to the Coast Guard Investigative Service 
because we are the criminal investigators for the Coast Guard.  
Q.
And is it different for commercial vessels? 
A.
So commercial vessels are very regulated by the 
Coast Guard.  So if there is a certain crime or a serious 
casualty or a death involving a commercial vessel, the 
Coast Guard is going to be more involved in that than we would 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 134 of
207

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
135
with the recreational vessel accident in most cases. 
Q.
Okay.  So now I want to move to the investigation you did 
conduct, and I want to talk about the business entity, Florida 
Scuba Charters.  
Did the records that you secured and reviewed include 
records from the Maritime Consortium Incorporated? 
A.
Yes.  That is a consortium that manages drug and alcohol 
testing for covered -- a covered entity -- which, people in 
safety-sensitive positions on boats, commercial boats, have to 
be enrolled in that program.  
Q.
And did the defendant submit names of deckhands as people 
who needed to be tested? 
A.
Yes, the Maritime Consortium gave us a list of what -- what 
we would call his covered employees.  And these are people 
operating as -- as crew, whether they're paid or not, just 
functioning as crew in a safety-sensitive position that would 
be required to be covered by that chemical-testing program. 
MR. KELLER:  And I'm going to publish to the witness 
and to the jury what has been admitted as Government's 
Exhibit 114.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 114?  
A.
So this is a list of the terminated employees of Florida 
Scuba Charters that was provided by the Maritime Consortium.  
Q.
And are there any employees, aside from the defendant, 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 135 of
207

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
136
listed after March 31st of 2020? 
A.
No.  You can see here that there is not.  
Q.
And now moving to -- and to shift to what we're looking at 
just a little bit.  Publishing what's been admitted as 
Government's Exhibit 87.  What is this document, Special Agent 
King? 
A.
So this is the Paycheck Protection Program, also known as 
PPP, a loan forgiveness application form for one of the two 
loans that Florida Scuba Charters Incorporated obtained. 
Q.
And how many employees did the defendant list as being in 
the company at the time of the application at the time of 
forgiveness?  
A.
On this form it's five employees at the time of 
application, as well as five employees at the time of 
forgiveness application.  
Q.
Thank you.  And then moving to Government's Exhibit -- 
what's been admitted as Government's Exhibit 98, which I'm 
publishing to the witness and the jury, is it the same for this 
other PPP loan application as to the number of employees? 
A.
Yes.  You can see in the same space that I circled before, 
five and five.  
Q.
Thank you. 
Now, as you subpoenaed records, as you secured evidence, 
did you also secure records from banks? 
A.
I did. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 136 of
207

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
137
Q.
And you saw Cross River Bank and Celtic Bank testify 
earlier.  Did you secure records from them? 
A.
I did.  
Q.
And is there another bank you subpoenaed where the 
defendant held a business account? 
A.
Yes.  That was at the Knoxville TVA Employees Credit Union.  
Q.
And publishing to the witness what's been admitted -- and 
to the jury what's been admitted as Government's Exhibit 100.  
And the jury saw this document yesterday.  
Special Agent King, what is this? 
A.
So this is the signature card for the Knoxville TVA 
Employees Credit Union business account for Florida Scuba 
Charters' account number ending in 3600.  
Q.
And who are the authorized signers at this time? 
A.
At this time, it was the defendant, Mr. McCabe, and his 
wife at the time, Ms. Kristy McCabe.  
Q.
And what is the date that this account was opened?  
A.
The opening document -- 
Q.
And I will zoom in to make it easier for the jury to see.  
A.
Sorry about that.  It's November 21, 2019.  
MR. KELLER:  And moving to Government's Exhibit 113 
which has been admitted into evidence.  Publishing it to the 
witness and to the jury.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
What is Government's Exhibit 113, Special Agent King? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 137 of
207

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
138
A.
So this is a notice to terminate a joint owner, also an 
authorized signatory, for the same business account. 
Q.
Is this the document we looked at with Ms. Kelly yesterday? 
A.
Yes.  She saw the same document. 
Q.
And what again is the date that Ms. Kelly was removed from 
the account? 
A.
She removed herself from the account on March 25, 2020.  
Q.
And Special Agent King, we have a variety of documents 
listed as Government's Exhibits 100A through 100V.  What are 
those records?  
A.
Those are the monthly statements for the business account 
from Knoxville TVA Employees Credit Union for Florida Scuba 
Charters.  
Q.
And are you familiar with those records? 
A.
I am familiar.  
Q.
And are you going to summarize what you saw in those 
records with the exhibits being available to the jury? 
A.
Yes, as best I can.  
Q.
So I want to talk about the records from Government's 
Exhibit 100A through V.  And to start and to situate us, when 
did the defendant receive his first Paycheck Protection Program 
loan proceeds? 
A.
Based on the date I know the loan proceeds were transferred 
to the account, it was in May of 2020.  
Q.
And what bank account were those proceeds deposited into? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 138 of
207

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
139
A.
So the -- as many credit unions are set up, you will have 
sort of a checking and a savings side to the same account.  You 
can think of one as a sub-account.  So the funds were deposited 
to one of the two business accounts for Florida Scuba Charters 
at Knoxville TVA.  
Q.
And publishing to the witness and to the jury what has been 
admitted as Government's Exhibit 100G, what is Government's 
Exhibit 100G?  
A.
So this is the monthly statement for the period of May 2020 
for the Florida Scuba Charters Incorporated business account at 
the Knoxville TVA Credit Union.  
Q.
And directing your attention to the second page of this 
account, Special Agent King, do you see the PPP deposit in May 
of 2020? 
A.
I do.  
Q.
And can you circle it.  
A.
(Complies.)  
MR. KELLER:  And let the record reflect that the 
witness is circling right around the center of the screen.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
And how much is the deposit into this account for, Special 
Agent King? 
A.
So it was $18,750 and no cents. 
Q.
And what was the balance in this account immediately before 
the deposit?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 139 of
207

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
140
A.
So just before you look up here, right above it, and you 
will see it was $1,157.29 the day prior.  
Q.
And do you see four deposits right above the first 
PPP -- this first PPP loan deposit? 
A.
I do.  
Q.
And were those deposits significant to your investigation?  
A.
They were.  
Q.
And what are these deposits? 
A.
So I recognize these deposits from other investigations I 
have conducted.  FLDO is the Florida Department of Economic 
Opportunity.  And "UI Benefit" is typically how I see Florida 
Unemployment Insurance benefits payments made.  So these are 
unemployment payments that were made into the business account 
from the State of Florida.  
Q.
And was the defendant receiving unemployment insurance from 
the State while receiving PPP loans from the federal government 
significant to your investigation?  
A.
It was.  
Q.
And why is that?  
A.
Typically, you wouldn't see both.  It could be a scenario 
where you might be able to receive both.  But for someone that 
was only operating one business to receive a paycheck 
protection loan, to keep the business operating while you're 
also receiving unemployment benefits from the State of Florida, 
you know, you shouldn't have both of those together.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 140 of
207

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
141
Q.
And do the records from Knoxville TVA also include a 
personal bank account for the defendant? 
A.
Yes.  The defendant had a personal bank account at 
Knoxville TVA that we also obtained records for.  
MR. KELLER:  And publishing to the witness and to the 
jury what's been admitted as Government's Exhibit 115.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 115?  
A.
So this is the monthly statement for May of 2020 for the 
defendant's personal bank account at Knoxville TVA Credit 
Union.  
Q.
And directing your attention to page 2, what was the 
balance on this account at the beginning of the month?  
A.
So the balance, you can see right here, at the beginning of 
the month was $88.52 as of May 1, 2020.  
Q.
And directing your attention to the $900 deposit that 
occurs on May 15th, where does that deposit come from?  
A.
This was a counter deposit.  So that's -- typically, a 
counter deposit is something that you may make at a bank 
teller.  Some banks, this will show up as an ATM deposit.  You 
could also mail it in, but when you see a deposit that doesn't 
reflect a wire or ACH transfer or a check, that's typically 
what that indicates on a bank statement.  
Q.
And so I'm going to move us back to -- and, oh, just ask 
one more question. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 141 of
207

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
142
Did this deposit which happened on May 15th happen before 
or after that first PPP loan was deposited?  
A.
I was just after. 
Q.
I'm going to clear the screen and bring us back to 
Government's Exhibit 100G, what's already been admitted as 
Government's Exhibit 100G.  And Special Agent King, I'm going 
to bring us back to page 2 of Government's Exhibit 100G.  
So we talked about the PPP loan and what's above it.  Now I 
want to talk about what is below the PPP loan.  So what date 
does the PPP loan get deposited into this account?  
A.
May 13, 2020.  
Q.
And what happens the following day?  
A.
So the following day, we -- we see a series of transfers to 
the other side of the business account in the amount of $1,875.  
It goes on to the second page as a series of quite a few of 
them. 
Q.
And how many in total? 
A.
I forget the exact number in total, but if we go to the 
second page, we will see it.  But it was basically almost the 
entire loan amount divided among ten. 
Q.
And I will ask it this way.  How many loan transfer or 
deposit transfers are on page 2 of Government's Exhibit 100G?  
A.
Six, if I'm counting properly.  
Q.
And then moving to the second page.  How many more? 
A.
Two more.  So a total of eight.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 142 of
207

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
143
Q.
And how does the number 1,875, the amount of the transfers, 
relate to the total amount of the loan? 
A.
Well, that's 10 percent of the loan.  So 1,875 is 
10 percent of one thousand eight hundred and seven fifty 
dollars [sic]. 
Q.
And based on your training and experience, when people 
transfer funds like this, who writes the memos on the transfer 
line like you see here?  
A.
So it will be done one of two ways.  If an authorized 
signatory on the account is logging into -- if you have, like, 
a mobile app on your phone or you're on a website, when you put 
in the transfer, the bank will sometimes require some -- 
sometimes they will require to put a memo what it is.  
You can make a transfer like this on the phone or in person 
at a bank.  And in that case, it would be the bank employee 
inputting the information based on what the customer told you. 
Q.
And at this point in May 2020, who was the only authorized 
signatory on this account? 
A.
So this was in May.  So this was after March when we saw 
Ms. McCabe removed herself as a signatory from the account, I 
believe, based on their pending divorce.  So in May, Mr. McCabe 
was the only signatory on this account. 
Q.
And here is where I'm going to be summarizing earlier 
exhibits.  So based on your review of the defendant's activity 
from November 2019, and Government's Exhibit 100A, up to 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 143 of
207

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
144
Government's Exhibit 100G, May of 2020, had the defendant ever 
transferred money like this that he designated as payroll? 
A.
No, I had not seen anything that looked like a consistent 
regular payroll payment or anything was labeled as one. 
Q.
Thank you, Special Agent.  
And now turning our attention to page 5 of Government's 
Exhibit 100G, and directing your attention specifically to the 
middle of the page, can you explain what these payroll entries 
are?  
A.
So this is the -- what I said before, the business account 
had two sides to it.  This is the other side of the business 
account.  This was -- one was like his savings, this was like 
the checking.  And you can see here, this is the money 
(indicating) coming in.  You see on the deposits, most bank 
ledgers will have deposits, withdrawals, and then a running 
balance.  So this is just seeing from the other side where we 
saw the money leaving the account, going to this account.  This 
is the money coming in, showing up in it.  
Q.
And what was the balance of this checking before the 
defendant transferred these PPP funds into it? 
A.
So if you look on May 14th, the balance just before the 
first transfer of 1,875 came in, it was $2,019.51.  
MR. KELLER:  And now I want to turn to what's been 
admitted, and I'm going to publish this to the witness and the 
jury as Government's Exhibit 100H.  And I will clear the screen 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 144 of
207

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
145
as well.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 100H? 
A.
So this is a monthly statement for the same business 
account we've been looking at for Florida Scuba Charters, at 
the Knoxville TVA Employee Credit Union for the month of June 
of 2020.  
Q.
And turning to page 2 of Government's Exhibit 100H, what 
does this information contain?  
A.
It shows you the beginning balance, and it also shows some 
checks that were written, and we also see another payment from 
the Small Business Administration.  
Q.
And how much is the payment from the Small Business 
Administration? 
A.
You can see it here on June 23rd (indicating).  We can see 
$4,500 comes into the account.  
Q.
And are the deposits above it transfers from the checking 
account? 
A.
Correct.  
Q.
So how many actual deposits that are not from the SBA or 
from the checking account are there this month? 
A.
Looks like we've got one on June 1st for 230; then we have 
one on the 17th for 1,775; and then on the 29th, you see that 
last one for $1,100.  
Q.
And is the $1,100 the only actual -- only actual cash 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 145 of
207

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
146
deposit in the -- into the account this month? 
A.
Yeah.  The other ones were internal bank transfers. 
Q.
And I will ask this question again to not painstakingly go 
through every single month of these bank statements.  What do 
the rest of the Government's Exhibit 100 series contain, from 
100H that we're looking at here, to 100V? 
A.
These are the rest of the monthly statements for 
these -- for this account for the relevant time period.  So you 
will see a monthly statement for each month that looks like 
this, just different transactions, different dates. 
Q.
And do these accounts reflect deposits made into the 
account, including cash deposits? 
A.
They do.  
Q.
And do they also include records relating to checks 
written? 
A.
They do. 
Q.
And is there a TVA bank record that contains all deposits 
made into this account?  
A.
Yes.  So, earlier, when I was talking about counter 
deposits, some banks will give you sort of a separate sort of 
record.  And so, within the monthly statements, you will see 
just blank deposit.  This other document from the bank has a 
record of what those counter deposits were, which are usually 
going to be cash because it's not associated with a check or 
anything like that.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 146 of
207

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
147
MR. KELLER:  And publishing to the witness and to the 
jury what has been admitted as Government's Exhibit 116, and I 
will clear the screen as well.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
What is Government's Exhibit 116, Special Agent?  
A.
So this is an example from that sort of counter deposit 
ledger showing, you know, a cash -- a counter transaction.  
Q.
And directing your attention to page 10 of Government's 
Exhibit 116, what is reflected on page 10 here?  
A.
So this is the bank's sort of record of a receipt for a 
cash deposit that was made into the account on May 26 of 2020 
for $300.  
Q.
And then turning to page 11, and clearing the screen, what 
is on page 11? 
A.
So here we see the same thing.  It's just on June 29th for 
$1,100. 
Q.
And is this the $1,100 deposit that we just looked at?  
A.
Yeah, you can see the date matches up.  This is just the 
bank saying that this was cash and not a check or a wire 
transfer.  So this was basically what you would call money 
coming across the counter.  
Q.
And at this time, I'm going to cycle from page 11 to 
page 23, and I'm going to do it relatively quickly, just 
because I'm going to have you summarize -- 
THE COURT:  Ladies and gentlemen, all of the exhibits 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 147 of
207

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
148
that have been admitted during this trial will be in your 
possession during deliberations.  So you will have hard copies 
of these items to review if you wish to.
MR. KELLER:  And just two more.  And, yes, I'm doing 
this in an effort not to put anyone to sleep.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
So, Special Agent King, what do these records reflect?  
A.
So these are just all of the counter deposits.  A couple of 
them, the way they're done by the bank, I believe probably 
could have been ATM transactions.  But those are just summaries 
of cash deposits made into the account that are not a check, 
not a wire transfer, things like that. 
Q.
And do those deposits reflect less than $5,000 deposited 
during this period?  
A.
Correct.  
Q.
And after the defendant's first PPP loan in May of 2020, 
but before the second one, did the defendant write checks to 
himself from the Florida Scuba bank account? 
A.
Yes, he wrote a series of checks to himself from that 
account.  
MR. KELLER:  And I'm going to begin by publishing 
Government's -- what's been admitted as Government's 
Exhibit 117 to the witness and the jury.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
So, Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 117? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 148 of
207

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
149
A.
This is a check drawn from that same 3600 account, from 
the -- the Florida Scuba Charters business account that was 
made payable to himself.  
Q.
And when you look at the endorsement on the back, which 
account is this being deposited into? 
A.
This went over to the personal account that he had at 
Knoxville TVA.  
Q.
And now moving to Government's Exhibit 118 -- and actually, 
let me just also ask -- so I'm not sure that we said it.  What 
is the date of this check? 
A.
This was May 15th, 2020.  You can see the check was for 
$900. 
MR. KELLER:  And now publishing to the witness and to 
the jury what's been admitted as Government's Exhibit 118.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 118? 
A.
Another check that was the same, from the business account, 
payable to himself.  This one is just for 4,000 on 
July 7th, 2020.  
Q.
Thank you.  
MR. KELLER:  And now moving to publishing Government's 
Exhibit -- what's been admitted as Government's Exhibit 119.
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 119?  
A.
Another one of the same.  This one was just 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 149 of
207

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
150
September 4, 2020, for $2,700, made payable to himself.  
MR. KELLER:  And then moving to publishing what's been 
admitted as Government's Exhibit 120.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Can you tell us what Government's Exhibit 120 is?  
A.
Yeah.  Same thing.  This one is $700, October 6, 2020.  
Basically wrote a check to himself.  So more of the same. 
Q.
And does the total of this amount well exceed the amount 
that there were cash deposits of into that account during this 
same period? 
A.
Yeah, if you add it all up.  I don't have the number 
memorized anymore, but that is correct.  
Q.
And based on your review of the records, before the 
defendant received his first PPP loan, had he ever written a 
check to himself for a dollar amount similar to what we've seen 
here? 
A.
No.  Nothing -- nothing close to these amounts we saw.  
Q.
And when did the defendant receive his second PPP loan 
proceeds into this TVA bank account?  
A.
So he received the proceeds for what they call the draw 2 
loan.  That was -- there was two draw periods -- and he 
received that in February of 2021.  
Q.
And directing the witness's attention to Government's 
Exhibit 100P, what is Government's Exhibit 100P?  
A.
So this is the same business account we have been looking 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 150 of
207

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
151
at for Florida Scuba Charters at Knoxville TVA, and this is 
just for the -- this is the monthly statement for February of 
2021.  
Q.
And moving to page 2 of Government's Exhibit 100P, what was 
the beginning balance?  And directing your attention to the top 
of the page, the top quarter.  What was the beginning balance 
of the account this month? 
A.
$48.87 was the balance of this account as of 
February 1, 2021.  
Q.
And before, when we looked at the earlier records from 
2020, and we saw a business savings account and then a checking 
account.  What happened to the savings -- the savings account?  
Is there any money left in that? 
A.
No.  
Q.
So there is just this checking account? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And based on the fact that there is just this checking 
account, what, if anything, does that lead you to conclude 
about the PPP funds from the first loan at this point? 
A.
That all of the proceeds of that loan were either spent or 
moved to other bank accounts. 
Q.
And do you see the PPP loan deposit for the second PPP loan 
in this bank statement?  
A.
Yes.  We see this on February 9th.  Easy to identify 
because it says "SBA loan," and the amount was $20,385. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 151 of
207

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
152
Q.
And how much of this PPP loan had the defendant withdrawn 
by the end of the month? 
A.
Almost all of it, about $18,000.  You can see there was two 
checks written that was almost all of the loan.  
Q.
And how many -- how many checks was it?  
A.
You can see a Check 1011 and then Check 1012.  And so, 
basically, all but 26- -- $2,500 and change was drawn on those 
checks.  
MR. KELLER:  And let the record reflect that the 
witness has circled all over Government's Exhibit 100P on 
page 2.  
And I'm going to shift our focus to these checks, and 
I'm going to start with the first of those checks by publishing 
to the witness and to the jury what's been admitted into 
evidence as Government's Exhibit 101.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
And, Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 101? 
A.
This is a check from the business account, payable to 
Mr. McCabe on February 22, 2021.  
Q.
And how much is it for?  
A.
$9,500.  
Q.
And what did the defendant write in the memo line? 
A.
So on this check, we see on the memo line a notation that 
it says "payroll." 
Q.
So the defendant didn't bother to do the structured 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 152 of
207

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
153
transfers this time?  
A.
It would appear not, no. 
Q.
And moving from the first check to the second -- and I'm 
going to clear the screen by going from Government's 
Exhibit 101 to publishing what's been admitted into evidence as 
Government's Exhibit 99.
Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 99? 
A.
So this is another check from the Florida Scuba Charters 
business account.  This one is dated May 19, 2021.  I think 
this is the day after the loan hit the account.  
Q.
And I'm sorry.  You said May 19th? 
A.
I'm sorry.  February.  Thank you.  
Q.
How much is this check for?  
A.
$8,774.00. 
Q.
And who is this check written to? 
A.
So this one is different than the previous ones we saw in 
that this one is paid to the order of the PGA National Members 
Club.  
Q.
And during the course of your investigation, did you learn 
what the PGA National Members Club is? 
A.
I did.  And I already knew what it was.  I'm actually from 
Daytona Beach which is the headquarters for the LPGA, so I knew 
that the PGA is headquartered in Palm Beach Gardens, just 
because the LPGA is in my hometown.  So I already knew what 
this was. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 153 of
207

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
154
Q.
Okay.  And can you just explain to the jury what PGA 
National Members Club is.  
A.
So this is a very nice country club, basically, a golf -- 
golf club/resort type of place. 
Q.
And what does the memo line say for this check? 
A.
So just a number that says 40624. 
Q.
And I'm going to clear the screen.  
And, Special Agent King, did you secure records from PGA 
National Members Club? 
A.
We did.  
MR. KELLER:  And publishing to the witness and the jury 
what has been admitted into evidence as Government's 
Exhibit 111.  
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 111?  
A.
So this is a hand-filled-out application, a membership 
application for the PGA National Members Club.  
Q.
And is this record we're going to be looking at only 
records that the PGA had as to Mr. McCabe?  
A.
There is a series of pages, but, yes, this was the 
responsive record they had. 
Q.
And I want to ask a couple of things about this first page.  
The first thing I want to ask is, what is the number in the top 
right?  
A.
So it's the same number we saw on that check, 40624, which 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 154 of
207

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
155
is like a membership -- I've come to learn it was like a 
membership number. 
Q.
And just to illustrate that -- so I'm going to go from 
the -- I'm going to go from publishing Government's Exhibit 111 
where you see the 40624, back briefly to Government's 
Exhibit 99, and just to illustrate the 40624.  
And then, bringing us back to Government's Exhibit 111, and 
directing your attention to the middle of the page, 
Special Agent, what is the business name that Mr. McCabe, the 
defendant, listed for his business? 
A.
So you can see there, it's FSC, which, I believe is an 
abbreviation for Florida Scuba Charters.  
Q.
And what type of business does he say that he operates? 
A.
It says "charter."  
Q.
Does he say anything about being a dive instructor or 
anything like that? 
A.
No.  
Q.
And turning your attention back to the top of the page, 
what was the date you said this was filled out? 
A.
So on the top right, you will see there, it's 
January 12, 2020.  
Q.
Now, is that before or after the PPP loans? 
A.
So this -- if you remember, this was when the pandemic was 
barely even discussed.  This is well before the PPP loans, I 
think, even had been thought of.  This was January.  PPP wasn't 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 155 of
207

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
156
a thing until, like, March or April.  
Q.
And clearing the screen and directing your attention to the 
bottom of Government's Exhibit 111, what is the defendant 
applying in January 2020 for access to at this country club?  
A.
So you can see interest, checks all that apply:  The Men's 
Golf Association and the fitness center is what's checked here.  
Q.
And now moving to the second page of Government's 
Exhibit 111, and directing your attention to the second line in 
this.  As to the total joining cost to join this country club, 
what is the amount of money that the defendant was going to 
have to pay in order to join the country club? 
A.
So you can see after these other amounts were crossed out, 
but the amount that's left that's not crossed out is $8,774.  
Q.
And turning to page 3 of this country club application, did 
the defendant sign the country club application?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And when did he sign it?  
A.
January 12, 2020.  
Q.
And turning to page 4, what is page 4 laying out, 
Special Agent? 
A.
This talks about the rules about the country club attire.  
You know, you've got to dress nice going to the golf course.  
Talks about unacceptable attire and different rules of conduct 
for going to the country club.  
Q.
And does the defendant sign the bottom of this page as 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 156 of
207

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
157
well? 
A.
He does, also, on January 12th of 2020.  
Q.
And turning to page 5 of this country club application, 
what does page 5 contain? 
A.
This is a copy of Mr. McCabe's Florida driver's license.  
Q.
Now, this application portion was filled out in 
January 2020.  Does -- do the records reflect that Mr. McCabe 
bought the membership in January 2020?  
A.
No.  
Q.
And looking at the final page of Government's Exhibit 111, 
what is this final page? 
A.
So this is the -- you can see there it says "membership 
sales office to billing," and we see the same 40624 number, and 
this shows that there was a payment made.  
Q.
And directing your attention to the bottom of the page.  
What is the amount that Mr. McCabe had to pay?  
A.
It's that $8,774 that we saw as the -- what the cost was in 
the January 2020 application fee.  
Q.
And focusing here on what's listed above that 8,774 number, 
what are initiation fees?  
A.
I have never been a member of a country club, but --
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Outside of this witness's 
scope of knowledge.  
MR. KELLER:  Your Honor, we would be -- ask that he 
just be able to complete laying the foundation, because I think 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 157 of
207

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
158
he was about to do that. 
THE COURT:  All right.  I will overrule the objection.
Answer the question, sir.  
Madam reporter, please read it back. 
(The last question and/or answer was read back.)  
THE COURT:  All right.  Now answer, sir.  
THE WITNESS:  Initiation fee is the fee to be initiated 
into something like a membership of an organization or a club.  
BY MR. KELLER:
Q.
Is it a one-time expense? 
A.
In my experience, initiation fee is the thing you pay at 
initiation, and then you may have a renewal after that. 
Q.
And what is indicated about whether the total was paid at 
the time of enrollment in this document?  
A.
There is a checkmark.  
Q.
And what is the notation made at the bottom of this page? 
A.
At the bottom right you see 2/19, which, I believe, is 
February 19th.  
Q.
And turning your attention -- and then publishing to the 
witness and the jury what's already been admitted as 
Government's Exhibit 99 -- how does the 2/19 on the date of the 
billing or on the billing form, rather, compare to the date 
that Mr. McCabe actually paid for the golf club membership? 
A.
It's the same date; and the amount of the check is the same 
that was listed on that billing document.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 158 of
207

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
159
Q.
So while the defendant applied initially before the PPP 
loans, did he pay for it before or after the PPP loans?  
A.
Based on the records from the country club, he paid for it 
after.  
MR. KELLER:  Nothing further, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Cross?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. O'SULLIVAN: 
Q.
Good afternoon, Agent King.  
A.
Good afternoon, sir.  
Q.
When did you first get involved in this investigating 
Mr. McCabe?  
A.
It -- it would have been sometime in 2022.  I can't -- I 
can't point you to an exact month or date right now, but it was 
in 2022.  
Q.
Do you recall, was it towards the beginning of the year, 
middle, or end?  If you could just give your best guess.  
A.
I'm going to -- so I know that this matter was formally 
referred to the United States Attorney's Office by Coast Guard 
District 7 in the late summer of 2021.  I know that because I 
was mobilized by the U.S. Army.  I'm an Army reservist.  I was 
mobilized when it was referred.  And when I came back from 
mobilization, I knew that this referral had been sort of 
sitting, you know, there.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 159 of
207

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
160
So, late 2021.  So that would probably be early 2022.  
Q.
Okay.  So the referral from the Coast Guard came, at a 
minimum, 18 months after the incident? 
A.
I think it -- I think the referral came under 18 months.  I 
think it was between 12 and 18.  But if you say 18, you're 
pretty close. 
Q.
Okay.  So at that point, of course, you never had access -- 
well, let me just back up a little bit.  As case agent, you're 
the lead; correct?
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And you have been here for the last week, obviously; right? 
A.
I have. 
Q.
You have interviewed pretty much all of the witnesses that 
we have seen; correct?  Almost all of them? 
A.
There may be one or two that I didn't interview, but, yeah, 
pretty much everyone I have interviewed at least once. 
Q.
Okay.  So you're, kind of, the quarterback.  You're in 
charge of this investigation? 
A.
I don't know if I'm in charge, but I'm the main criminal 
investigator. 
Q.
You're the main investigator; correct? 
A.
Yes.
Q.
Okay.  And since you didn't come on until either late '21 
or early '22, you never had access to the Southern Comfort 
itself; correct? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 160 of
207

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
161
A.
No.  I wouldn't -- I wouldn't agree with -- you mean access 
at the time of the fatality?  
Q.
Just access to the boat itself.  
A.
No.  I have access to the boat today.  
Q.
I mean -- well, let me rephrase that.  
Once you came on as the investigator, the boat had 
transferred title from Mr. McCabe to Steve Poznak; correct? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
And a lot of time had gone by? 
A.
Correct. 
Q.
And you were here.  Mr. Poznak said that the boat had, 
you know, suffered some decay, for lack of a better word, the 
engine rooms were full of water and it was in rough shape?  
A.
Right. 
Q.
So, I guess, what I'm getting at is that there was never an 
investigation done the day of the incident of that boat; 
correct? 
A.
Just the investigation done the day of, that you 
have -- that you heard about, that was what was done. 
Q.
So, basically, we hit -- saw four photographs.  That was 
the extent of that investigation, was four photographs of the 
exterior of the boat that we saw every day this week? 
A.
I didn't even work for the Coast Guard in March of 2020.  
So I only know what the documents show that was done.  But, 
yeah, if -- if we saw four photographs, that was -- those are 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 161 of
207

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
162
the four photographs that were shown from that.  But I didn't 
even work for the Coast Guard in March of 2020.  
Q.
So from the information you received from the Coast Guard 
and from Mr. Fowler from Fish and Wildlife, from 
Officer Abramowitz from North Palm Beach, just everyone that we 
heard about and everyone that you interviewed, no one inspected 
the boat on March 29, 2020; correct?  The date of the incident? 
A.
Inspection means, you know, something very specific to the 
Coast Guard -- 
Q.
I can be more clear.  
A.
Sure. 
Q.
I know people got on the boat and they looked around.  I'm 
talking about, did anyone look at the throttles or the engines 
or the transmission? 
A.
Other than the pictures we saw of the controls that were 
moved.  And I do know that FWC did look at the engines; I know 
that. 
Q.
Who testified to that?  Because I don't recall that.  
A.
Well, you just asked me if I knew.  
Q.
Okay.  Did anyone testify about looking at a transmission 
this week? 
A.
I -- I think Mr. Fowler said they looked -- they would have 
looked at the engines.  I know that they did, but --
Q.
Okay.  Was a mechanical survey ever done on this boat? 
A.
A mechanical survey?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 162 of
207

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
163
Q.
Any type of survey? 
A.
Yeah, there was a survey done. 
Q.
Okay.  Who testified to that this week, if anyone?  
A.
I don't remember if anyone testified to it, but I know 
there was a survey that was done.  
Q.
So if there was a survey of the boat done, and one of the 
issues of this case is, was there negligence in the maintenance 
of the boat, why wasn't that mechanical survey brought to the 
jury's attention?  
A.
Well, because this was a -- it wasn't a mechanical survey.  
It was a survey done of the vessel that is typically done when 
you are going to sell a vessel, kind of like a real estate 
appraisal.  And that survey was done prior to the sale when we 
have already heard testimony about modifications that were made 
to the boat.  So that survey is prior to the modifications.  
Q.
So I'm not talking about a real estate survey where, 
you know, we can put this in the boattrader.com.  I'm talking 
about, there is a criminal investigation.  
A.
Uh-huh. 
Q.
A young lady died.  How come no one inspected this boat to 
find out exactly what happened so that five years later a jury 
would know for sure and not have to rely on 15 different 
witnesses?  
A.
You're asking me -- I'm sorry.  Could you ask the question 
again, sir. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 163 of
207

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
164
Q.
Why did no investigative official really look at this boat 
on the day after the incident?  It was there and available.  
Mr. McCabe had it in the slip.  Why did no one look at the 
boat? 
A.
I can -- I can tell you what Mr. Fowler said on the stand 
as to that, and I can also speculate as to why I think no one 
did the day of, if you would like. 
Q.
I don't want you to speculate.  And I think the jury will 
rely on their own recollection of what Mr. Fowler said.  
But from your point of view as -- as, you know, one of the 
leads, a young lady died on this boat, the boat's available, 
how come no one looked at the boat on March 29th of 2020? 
A.
They did look at the boat.  
Q.
Okay.  But no one testified to anything other than that "we 
walked around and took four pictures of the back." 
A.
You heard testimony from the FWC diver that took extensive 
video underneath the boat.  So it was more than just look at 
the boat.  They dove the boat, looked at the propeller. 
Q.
They didn't drive the boat, did they? 
A.
No, they did not drive the boat. 
Q.
They didn't turn the boat on, did they? 
A.
I don't believe they turned the boat on, no.
Q.
They didn't put the boat in forward, did they? 
A.
No.  
Q.
They didn't put the boat in reverse, did they? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 164 of
207

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
165
A.
No. 
Q.
They took some pictures of the boat and threw a diver and 
took some pictures of the prop.  That's the extent of the 
investigation of this manslaughter case; correct? 
A.
No, I don't -- as someone that's been doing this for 
several years, this case -- that's not the extent of it, no. 
Q.
Well, okay.  We will leave it at that.
At the beginning of your testimony today, you started your 
testimony discussing a Maritime Consortium.  
A.
Yes. 
Q.
Could you just expand a little bit so the jury knows what a 
Maritime Consortium is.  
A.
So the commercial vessels regulated by the Coast Guard, one 
of the things that is required is the -- anyone in a 
safety-sensitive position on the boat -- that's basically 
anyone that could handle a line, a life jacket, operate 
controls -- so, basically, if you had, like, a bartender and 
they were only a bartender and served no safety function, they 
don't have to be enrolled in the program.  But anybody that 
serves a sensitive safety position has to be enrolled in a 
random -- you have a preemployment chemical-testing program and 
also a random.  And there is a couple of organizations that 
will manage this, and the Maritime Consortium is one of them.  
And they basically just have the list of folks that are subject 
to this, and they will maintain the randomized testing.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 165 of
207

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
166
Q.
Okay.  I just want to be very clear that you have been a 
part of this investigation and trial now for about three years, 
give or take?  Several years?  
A.
Yeah, pretty close to three, yes, sir. 
Q.
Okay.  Drugs and alcohol were never a part, at all, of this 
investigation; correct? 
MR. KELLER:  Objection, Your Honor.  Pretrial rulings. 
THE COURT:  All right.  I will see the parties at the 
sidebar. 
(Conference at bench.) 
THE COURT:  I thought we weren't going to talk about 
drugs in this case. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I didn't either.  I was kind of 
surprised that Mr. Keller started his direct talking about the 
Maritime Drug Consortium.  I was -- kind of blew me way that he 
talked about that.  It was a pretrial ruling.  That was 
literally one of the first questions, and that kind of leaves 
an inference to the judge -- or the jury that maybe there are 
drugs involved in this case.
MR. KELLER:  It was -- 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I have to -- sorry.  
That door was wide open.  You cannot leave that hanging 
in front of a jury, that -- and then he even showed exhibits 
talking about, you know, exempt and not exempt.  He -- 
basically making an inference to the jury that, hey, there 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 166 of
207

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
167
could be chemicals involved in this.  
I never would have mentioned that but for the 
government's opening that door, first thing out of their mouth.  
MR. KELLER:  Those records -- that record was clearly 
just about who was listed employees.  That was the purpose of 
the record.  That was what was introduced as a record about his 
listed employees -- 
THE COURT:  But wasn't there at least one question 
related to the Consortium and this notion of a drug-testing 
program?  I think that did get referenced somehow.  
MR. KELLER:  He just explained what the business is, 
but then I asked him just "What employees are listed after 
March 31st of 2020?"  And he said, "There are no employees."  
And then we moved on -- "except for Mr. McCabe."  And then we 
moved on.  Because that was the purpose of that record, was 
just to show that Mr. McCabe had no employees, because that's 
why I then showed the forgiveness applications that showed five 
employees. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  But you don't disagree that there 
was a reference to a drug-testing program by the witness; 
correct?  
MR. KELLER:  There was the -- yes, there was the 
existence of a drug-testing program.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, then given that, wouldn't it 
be fair for the defense to ask the question that was just 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 167 of
207

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
168
asked, which is that there was no connection to drugs in this 
case?  
MR. KELLER:  Well, again, the issue is that we don't 
know that because these -- these people who were his deckhands 
never got tested.  
So when you asked me at the motion in limine hearing if 
there was any evidence, it's true that there is no evidence of 
drugs being involved because of the fact that there never will 
be because there was no testing done on those people.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  My client was tested that night and he 
passed, and the government knows that. 
THE COURT:  I recall that.  Okay.  
Because there was some degree of testimony on direct 
related to the existence of the drug program, I'm going to 
overrule the government's objection to the question and permit 
you to ask it.  I don't believe the witness yet answered, but I 
will check the transcript.  And then after that, I want this 
topic over with. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Absolutely.  Just one question.  
That's it. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Thank you.  
(Conference at bench concluded.) 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  May I proceed, Your Honor?  
THE COURT:  One moment.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, ma'am.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 168 of
207

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
169
THE COURT:  All right.  The question, sir, was:  "Drugs 
and alcohol were never a part at all of this investigation; 
correct?"  
The objection has been overruled.  
Answer that question.  
THE WITNESS:  So drugs and alcohol, I'm not aware of 
them being a factor in any way in the circumstances of this 
case, if that's what you're asking. 
BY MR. O'SULLIVAN:
Q.
Yes.  Let's move on. 
Okay.  We looked -- during your direct, we looked at some 
records from, I think, the TVA bank.  Is that the Knoxville 
bank?
A.
Yeah, the Knoxville TVA Employees Credit Union. 
Q.
Correct.  And we looked at exhibits going from the year 
2020, going forward.  
A.
Yes. 
Q.
We never looked at anything from 2019, 2018, 2017; correct?  
A.
We looked at some of them from 2019.  
Q.
But we looked at a very short snapshot picture in time of 
his financial history; correct? 
A.
We looked at -- yes.  We -- we looked at the -- a relevant 
period, but it was -- 
Q.
Relatively short? 
A.
I would agree with that, yeah.
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 169 of
207

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
170
Q.
You know, given that this business that been around for 
lots of years, and we only saw a little snapshot of just, kind 
of, maybe a month before the PPP loan, and then a couple of 
months after? 
A.
Yes, I would agree with that. 
Q.
And that's not really giving the jury a full financial 
picture of the business.  It's just if we had the business 
timeline like this, we're just kind of looking like this, just 
at a real short timeline; correct? 
A.
I think Mr. Keller said we were summarizing the records.  
So that's what a summary is. 
Q.
Mr. McCabe, he sold his boat, the Sea Scout, in 2020, 
March 9th of 2020? 
A.
It sounds right.  I think -- 
Q.
And that boat was owned for -- free and clear.  Did you 
learn that as part of your investigation? 
A.
I'm sorry.  Could you repeat?  
Q.
I'm sorry.  My voice is a little hoarse.  
He owned that boat free and clear.  Did you learn that as 
part of your investigation? 
A.
No.  We didn't -- didn't look into the ownership or 
financing of that vessel because it wasn't -- I don't know.  
Q.
Okay.  But you agree with me, he did sell it in March of 
2020, March 9th?  
A.
Yes. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 170 of
207

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
171
Q.
And he sold it for $67,500? 
A.
I had looked at the bill of sale documents for that.  
I -- I have no reason to dispute that -- if you say it's 67, 
I -- I don't -- I don't doubt that, no. 
Q.
Okay.  And he has more than one bank account; correct?  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
He has personal bank accounts, plural, and a business 
account at several different banks? 
A.
At least, yes. 
Q.
Okay.  As part of your investigation, do you also learn 
that he received insurance settlement checks for, like, a 
motorcycle accident for a substantial sum?  
A.
I don't remember that, but I don't -- I don't remember 
that, no. 
Q.
Okay.  I just want to just talk a little bit about the PGA.  
You're aware that he's a golf teacher, correct, a certified 
golf teacher? 
A.
You mean, like, a golf pro?  
Q.
Yes.  
A.
Yes.  
Q.
So on direct, it kind of sounded like he was spending the 
company money to belong to a rich, fancy country club, is what 
it was portrayed as.  PGA --  
THE COURT:  Is there a question?  
BY MR. O'SULLIVAN:
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 171 of
207

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
172
Q.
You testified that he was -- paid membership fees to PGA 
National; correct? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
In the amount of 8,774? 
A.
Yes. 
Q.
Okay.  And you're aware that he is a golf pro? 
A.
Yes.  
Q.
And you're aware that he taught golf at that -- at that 
country club in order to provide an income for himself?  
A.
I know he is a golf pro.  I know he had worked at other 
country clubs.  I -- I don't know for certain that he was a 
golf pro there, but I -- I would not -- it wouldn't surprise 
me.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Okay.  I don't have any other 
questions, Agent King.  I appreciate your time, sir.  
THE WITNESS:  Yes, sir. 
THE COURT:  Redirect?  
MR. KELLER:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. KELLER: 
Q.
Good afternoon again, Special Agent.  
A.
Yes, sir.  
Q.
Special Agent, were you at the scene of Ms. Ghiz-Flynn's 
death on March 29th? 
A.
No, I was working at the Pentagon on March 29th of 2020.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 172 of
207

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
173
Q.
So do you know exactly what the officers who arrived did to 
the boat or didn't do to the boat?  
A.
Only that I can learn from their reports and from speaking 
to them.  I wasn't there.  I didn't even work for the 
Coast Guard in March of 2020.  
Q.
And in terms of the records that you did receive from them, 
and because there was a little talk on cross about four 
photographs, which, I guess, is a reference to some of the 
photos we've seen in trial, did FWC take many more photographs 
than this?  
A.
FWC, as well as the Palm Beach medical examiner, took a 
significant -- a lot of photographs, yes. 
Q.
And are the 25 or so photographs in this case as exhibits, 
just a subset of the photographs that were taken during this 
investigation?  
A.
Yeah.  At some point, when you have crime scenes and 
autopsy and photography -- at some point, the photographs just 
sort of become repetitive.  So, you know, I have seen all of 
it, but 25, I think, tells the story.  
Q.
And in terms of the level of investigation that 
Investigator Fowler did and such, you were not part of those 
conversations or anything like that? 
A.
No.  
Q.
And as far as the marine survey, I want to just be clear 
because there was kind of a little confusion in the back and 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 173 of
207

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
174
forth.  When was the marine survey that you have access to 
completed?  
A.
It was done prior to the purchase of the vessel by 
Mr. McCabe.  So this was -- it is like a real estate appraisal.  
It is -- you know, buyer of a vessel is doing the survey to 
kind of see the condition of the boat, the engines, structural 
issues, engine hours.  That's -- that's the one I looked at. 
Q.
And shifting gears to Florida Scuba Charters and its 
finances, you testified that the records that you have only go 
back to 2019?  
A.
We looked at records in 2019, but I think we have -- I 
think we have records that go a little bit farther back than 
that, but we did look at records, say, from 2019. 
Q.
Well, for the business accounts specifically, when did 
those records begin?  
A.
The TVA account was opened in 2019.  
Q.
And when in 2019?  
A.
Was that October?  
Q.
And I can direct the witness's attention.  I will publish 
to the witness and to the jury -- 
A.
I think it was October 16th. 
Q.
-- what's been admitted as Government's Exhibit 100.  
A.
I'm sorry.  November 21st, 2019.  
Q.
So this is the very beginning of records existing for this 
business account? 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 174 of
207

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
175
A.
Correct.  
Q.
And are you aware of any other business accounts that came 
before this?  
A.
I'm not aware.  There is personal accounts, but this is the 
first time we saw business account. 
Q.
And when did Florida Scuba Charters officially go -- or 
officially unincorporate itself?  
A.
I think they failed to file their annual report in 2021, 
maybe.  
MR. KELLER:  And the government will publish to the 
witness and to the jury what's been admitted as Government's 
Exhibit 103.  
THE WITNESS:  Yeah, they -- it wasn't -- sorry. 
BY MR. KELLER:  
Q.
Yeah.  Let me ask a question.  
So, Special Agent King, what is Government's Exhibit 103? 
A.
So these are the articles of the dissolution.  I was 
incorrect when I said they failed to file the annual report.  
They actually dissolved the company.  
Q.
And what are articles of dissolution, just to be clear? 
A.
So when you have a corporation and you dissolve it, you're 
filing articles of dissolution.  These are filed on May 13th, 
with the Secretary of State of Florida, 2021.  
Q.
And as far as Mr. McCabe being a, quote/unquote, "golf 
pro," and speaking to what you actually know about, your 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 175 of
207

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
176
knowledge, was Mr. McCabe a golf pro after this -- these PPP 
loans or before?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Asked and answered.  
THE COURT:  Overruled.  
THE WITNESS:  So I know he was a golf pro off and on, 
before and after.  I do know that.  
BY MR. KELLER:
Q.
And do you have any personal knowledge of Mr. McCabe being 
a golf pro at the PGA club that we have here?  
A.
I -- I don't specifically know that he was working as a 
golf pro there.  I do know other golf courses that I can 
recall, but I don't specifically know at the PGA National 
Master's Club, no. 
Q.
And publishing to the witness and to the jury what's been 
admitted as Government's Exhibit 111, and focusing on the 
bottom of the page, what is Mr. McCabe looking for a membership 
into?  
A.
So there is two things -- 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection.  Calls for speculation.  
Outside the scope.  Relevance.  
THE COURT:  I will sustain the objection, but you 
can -- may rephrase your question, Counselor, on the basis of 
the information in the exhibit. 
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  
BY MR. KELLER:
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 176 of
207

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
177
Q.
So, Special Agent King, what interests does the defendant 
indicate in this golf application?  
A.
So there is two things checked here:  Men's Golf 
Association and the fitness center.  
Q.
Is there anything in this application relating to the 
defendant providing paid golfing services? 
A.
I don't know unless a fitness center or Men's Golf 
Association -- 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Judge, I'm going to object to outside 
the scope of this witness's knowledge.  
THE COURT:  Overruled.  
Please answer.  
THE WITNESS:  Unless it's one of these two things that 
pertains to being golf pro, I don't know.  
BY MR. KELLER:
Q.
But is there anything specifically in these document -- in 
this document saying "terms for providing services," anything 
like that? 
A.
We saw terms on the rules about clothing and conducting 
business, but I didn't see anything that jumped out at me that 
said this was to be a golf pro.  I -- I just -- I don't know.  
MR. KELLER:  Nothing further, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you, Agent.  You may 
return to counsel table.  
Any additional exhibits to present?  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 177 of
207

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
178
MR. KELLER:  Your Honor, at this time, if we could have 
access to the ELMO, we would want to publish what's 
been -- what we will move into evidence as Government's 
Exhibit 122 which is a trial stipulation.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Ladies and gentlemen, as we did 
before, I instructed you that a stipulation is an agreement 
between the parties.  You must accept it as true and proven in 
this case.  
So Mr. Keller will now read into the record a 
stipulation agreed to by the parties, which is marked as 
Government's Exhibit 122, and which has been admitted.  
MR. KELLER:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
So this has the same preamble as the last stipulation, 
so I will spare you reading it again.  So there are two 
stipulations here:  Number 1, that the Internal Revenue Service 
form Schedule C, quote, "Statement of Profit or Loss from 
Business Tax Document -- for the year -- for tax year 2019, 
which the defendant submitted to Celtic Bank in connection with 
Paycheck -- with the Paycheck Protection Program application in 
May of 2020, and which is marked and admitted as the 
United States' Exhibit GX121, was never filed with the IRS.  
"And Number 2, that the IRS Form 1120, U.S. Corporation 
Income Tax Return Tax Document for the tax year 2020, which the 
defendant submitted to Cross River Bank in connection with a 
PPP application in February 2021, and which is marked and 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 178 of
207

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
179
admitted as the United States' Exhibit GX93, was similarly 
never filed with the IRS."  
And, as you see, this, like the other stipulation, is 
signed by the parties.  
THE COURT:  All right.  I will let you, Mr. Keller, 
arrange yourself back at counsel table.  
Anything further for today?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor.  The government rests.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Ladies and gentlemen, it is 
3:20, and we are done early again for the day.  We have also 
been moving a bit more quickly than initially anticipated.  And 
so while I was going to have you all come tomorrow morning for 
trial, it appears that the schedule of witnesses won't 
accommodate that.  And so, tomorrow, you will be off and you 
will not be expected to come, but the trial will resume on 
time, promptly on Monday.  Except there is additional change 
for the Monday schedule, and that is that we are going to start 
at 11:30 on Monday rather than the standard 9:00 a.m.  
So just to recap so there is no confusion, you aren't 
expected to be here tomorrow.  That will permit the parties and 
the Court to tend to additional matters.  But we will expect 
your appearance on time at 11:30 a.m. on Monday.  
So I'm going to instruct you again, as I normally do, 
that you shall not discuss this case with anyone or permit 
anyone to discuss it with you.  Until you retire to the jury 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 179 of
207

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
180
room at the end of the case, you are prohibited from talking 
about this case in any way.  Also, remember not to read or 
listen to anything touching on this case in any way.  If 
anybody should try to talk to you about it, please bring it to 
my attention promptly.  Do not conduct any research or make any 
investigation about the case on your own.  It's imperative that 
you understand that the only evidence in this case is the 
testimony of the witnesses that you hear in court and the 
evidence that is introduced during the official proceedings in 
the courtroom.  
Remember not to have any contact with the attorneys, 
witnesses, or parties.  And finally, do not form any opinion 
about this case until all of the evidence has been presented.  
You must keep an open mind until you start your deliberations 
at the end of the case.  
So happy Friday and have a great weekend.  We will see 
you at 11:30 on Monday.  
All rise for the jury.  
(The jury exited the courtroom at 3:20 p.m.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  Please be seated.  I'm going to 
step off the bench for 15 minutes.  So we will have a break.  
Following that, I would like to segue directly into the charge 
conference unless there's a preference to do the Rule 29 first.  
I will hear from the parties on the sequence. 
MR. KELLER:  No preference, Your Honor. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 180 of
207

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
181
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Judge, I would prefer to do the charge 
conference.  I was anticipating to do the Rule 29 on Monday, so 
I would love to do the jury instruction -- or the jury charge 
conference first, if that's acceptable to the Court. 
THE COURT:  Yes.  Okay.  Then we will proceed as 
scheduled with the charge conference in 15 minutes.  Thank you.  
(A recess was taken from 3:22 p.m. to 3:46 p.m.) 
THE COURT:  All right.  Please be seated.  
I have the parties' joint proposed jury instructions 
and verdict form.  This is docket entry 54.  So we will be 
working off of that.  I reviewed that.  And I have some 
questions and comments to address.  But for now, let's start at 
the end, which I think should be an easy topic, and that's the 
verdict form.  Any objection -- it doesn't appear -- to the 
verdict form submitted?  This is pages 42 and 43 of the 
proposal.  Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No objections, Judge. 
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, then let's get back to the 
beginning.  
All right.  So the first page is introductory; no 
disagreements there.  Let's shift to the 
duty-to-follow-instructions instruction.  The one that was 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 181 of
207

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
182
submitted is B2.1, and there are no changes there.  We should 
be using B2.1 in this case, correct, assuming Mr. McCabe 
chooses to testify, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor, if he does testify. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I agree, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So for now, given what I have heard 
is a high likelihood we'll presume to be using the B2.1 
instruction, but we will adjust as necessary. 
Okay.  Anything to discuss so far, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then let's inquire.  Any objection 
to the pattern definition of reasonable doubt, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Judge. 
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection.  
THE COURT:  Any objection to the B4 pattern, 
Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  
Okay.  Any objection to the standard credibility of 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 182 of
207

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
183
witnesses instruction, Mr. Keller?  This is B5.  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Now, we're at the identification 
testimony.  Is this a necessary instruction in this case, 
Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  I don't think it is.  We had some people 
identify Mr. McCabe, but it was never really an issue of 
evidence.  So I think we can go without it.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Mr. O'Sullivan, what's your 
position?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I'm fine taking it out in an interest 
of economy and less instructions to the jury.  That's not an 
issue of the trial.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  So are the parties in agreement that 
we no longer need this identification testimony instruction?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  It hasn't been a subject 
of the trial. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, then this one will be removed 
then.  Mr. O'Sullivan, do you agree?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I agree, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  We next had a proposal for something 
called "equally available witness" instruction, then later we 
discussed a separate joint proposal related to Mr. Miller, and 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 183 of
207

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
184
that one was called "unavailable witness."  
So my question is whether we still need the equally 
available witness instruction, Mr. Keller.  
MR. KELLER:  And so, Judge, I conferred with the 
defense prior to this charge conference about this instruction, 
and I will just join it with the next one, Persons not on 
trial, that the defense and the government agree that equally 
available witness -- that there has been no argument in this 
case about someone should have been here.  So -- and the 
defense has represented that they're not going to be making 
that type of argument in closing.  So we don't think that 
instruction is necessary. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So, "Equally available," 
Mr. O'Sullivan, you agree should be removed?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I agree, Judge, after conferring with 
Mr. Keller.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  And there is a commitment not to 
raise this sort of argument in closing?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Absolutely, Judge. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So then let's shift to the next one, 
Persons not on trial.  Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  So, my understanding, in conferring with 
the defense, is they do not object to this instruction.  And 
when it comes to the Mr. Miller supplemental, our suggestion 
would be that it be added at the end of this, since they're 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 184 of
207

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
185
kind of, related concepts.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, I had already done that.  So I 
guess we're on the same page.  One instruction will be a 
hybrid, Persons not on trial, plus the John Miller joint 
instruction.  
Do you agree to that, Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. KELLER:  I do agree, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  We have, then, next, two 
pattern instructions:  B6.1 for Impeachment of witnesses 
because of inconsistent statements; and then a B6.3 for 
Impeachment of witnesses because of inconsistent statements.  
And so, let me just hear from Mr. Keller on which of 
these we should use. 
MR. KELLER:  Well, kind of using the same approach that 
you were using earlier with respect to, I believe, it was 2 -- 
or B2.1 and B2.2, then, assuming that Mr. McCabe testifies, 
then it would be B6.3.  So I guess we would have that one right 
now as the standard, and then if he chooses not to, then we 
would revert to B6.1.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Agreed, Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, Your Honor, that makes sense. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then let's shift to the -- this T2.  
Is that submitted by both parties, Witness's prior statement or 
testimony explanatory instruction?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Judge, and it's because there has 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 185 of
207

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
186
been some cross about prior statements, which is why we thought 
it was appropriate.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Mr. O'Sullivan, do you agree to have 
T2?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Judge, I really take no position on 
T2.  There wasn't a whole lot about it, but I'm fine either 
way.  I have no position on this one.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, in light of the absence of any 
objection, this is a pattern instruction, so I will include it.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then, next is the transcript of 
tape-recorded conversation.  I don't think we've had any 
transcripts, at least not yet.  So is there a need for this 
one, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor, there is not.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Mr. O'Sullivan, do you anticipate a 
need for this?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I do not anticipate a need now or 
potentially in the future. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So T3 will be removed.  
Expert witness is a pattern.  I see no objection.  Is 
that correct, Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Correct.  No objection, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then let's now get to the 
introduction to offense instructions.  I see no disagreements 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 186 of
207

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
187
there.  So, Mr. Keller, any challenge to that intro language?  
MR. KELLER:  The only thing I would raise, Your Honor, 
just in light of the way that you instructed the jury at the 
beginning, I know that you're using the more precise term of 
"negligence" on a -- aboard a ship.  So I think we would 
suggest, just to be consistent with that, that we replace the 
use of the common term "seaman's manslaughter" with the 
description that you used before of -- 
THE COURT:  From the statutory title?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Any objection to that, 
Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  What's the exact language that we're 
talking about?  
THE COURT:  The statutory title is -- it says -- one 
moment. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I'm trying to look it up in the 
indictment as well.  
THE COURT:  It's titled "Misconduct or neglect of ship 
officers."  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  And just to refresh my recollection, 
was that read to the jury at the beginning of the case?  
THE COURT:  Well, in the description of the charges, I 
did use the statutory language because it comes from the 
statute.  But the proposal by the parties does contain 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 187 of
207

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
188
"seaman's manslaughter," and the indictment as a descriptor 
does use the word "seaman's manslaughter."  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Judge, generally, I would prefer to 
track the language of the indictment since that's the actual 
charging document.  While the statute, of course, is the law, 
the indictment is what the jury is going to see, and that's 
what Mr. McCabe is charged with.  So I always prefer that the 
jury instructions track the exact language or as close as 
possible to what's in the charging document.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  So "seaman's manslaughter" is, I 
think, the appropriate language for that. 
THE COURT:  Mr. Keller. 
MR. KELLER:  Judge, we really don't have a strong view 
on this.  I think it can go either way.  If the defense feels 
strongly about that, then we're fine with using the term we 
used in the indictment. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then we will stick with that, 
although I don't think that descriptor in the indictment 
changes the statutory language or the charge itself.  I will 
agree with that shorthand and keep things as is.  So B8 will be 
used in the form submitted on page 17 of docket entry 54.  
Let's turn now to the -- to the pattern instruction for 
Knowingly and willfully.  Any challenge to that, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 188 of
207

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
189
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No challenge.  No objection.   
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then we have B10.2, which is a 
"Caution:  Punishment."  That's a pattern too.  
Any objection, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No objection, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection, ma'am.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then now, let's get to the more 
difficult subject which is the substantive instruction for 
1115; that's the seaman's manslaughter.  So we will call it 
seaman's manslaughter.  I will put, probably, Count 1, maybe at 
the top there, but the title will be the same.  I have seen the 
government's proposal and I also see the defense proposal.  
I will hear argument first on the question of the 
mens rea that applies.  I see the defense has opted for a 
"gross negligence" terminology along with the use of the words 
"wanton or reckless disregard for human life."  I don't see 
that anywhere in the text of the statute, but I do want to give 
you a chance to raise your argument and preserve it.
Ms. Francis?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes.  Thank you, Your Honor.  
We did confer with the government's attorneys, and we 
have decided that we will go ahead and go with their proposed 
jury instruction that tracks the language from the Eleventh 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 189 of
207

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
190
Circuit.  So we have reached an agreement on that instruction, 
Your Honor.  There is no objection from the defense.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  So that's out of the 
way.  I do, though, want to then just better understand the 
government's proposal which is unobjected to, and in 
particular, Element 3, which seems to have two options.  It 
seems to me like that's potentially confusing.  And although 
you are correct that the brute facts don't need to be 
unanimous, the element does, and I'm a little concerned that 
having these options will create an issue there.  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  And I think that what 
our -- I mean, one of the ways that we could, perhaps, make 
this simpler would be to consolidate into a listing of 
owner/captain.  And, really -- and I believe in the indictment 
we only describe him as a few of those things.  I believe it's 
only describing him as the owner or captain, which is always 
stipulated to in the stipulation.  So we could simplify, that 
way, number 1, by cutting some language.  
And then number 2, really, this all comes back to the 
standard of negligence.  So maybe one way we could deal with, 
kind of, the verbiage here is to simplify that by just going 
with "engaged in negligent conduct," and have the definition of 
negligence reflect inattention to duties, et cetera. 
THE COURT:  From the statute?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 190 of
207

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
191
THE COURT:  Okay.  I think that makes more sense.  The 
way I see things is:  Element 1 is he's an owner or captain and 
that's stipulated.  Element 2 is somebody died.  Element 3 is 
the defendant was negligent -- using the statutory terms.  And 
then Element 4, his negligence, misconduct or inattention to 
his duties upon the vessel proximately caused the person's 
death.  
But that's just me.  I see this as a four-element case 
to make it more simple.  But why don't the parties confer for a 
few moments off the record on some potential language to 
simplify at least Element 3, and I will just wait here.  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Mr. Creary, can you put the white noise on 
for me. 
COURTROOM DEPUTY:  Yes, Your Honor. 
(Inaudible discussion amongst counsel.) 
MR. KELLER:  And, Your Honor, we are prepared to -- 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Let me hear from Mr. Keller. 
MR. KELLER:  And this is kind of working within the 
four -- four-element structure that you were proposing or 
saying we were going to do. 
THE COURT:  You don't have to do that.  I'm just -- to 
me, conceptually, it made more sense, but I am open to what the 
parties recommend first, and then I will consider whether it 
makes sense. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 191 of
207

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
192
MR. KELLER:  So, well, I guess -- okay.  So we will do 
this then for the -- in the three-element scheme.  So we would 
have the first two elements as they are.  The third element 
would be, the loss of life was proximately caused by the 
defendant's negligence.  
And then what we had proposed is that, at the end of 
the definition of negligence, there be a sentence added that 
says, "Negligence also includes misconduct, inattention to 
duties upon a vessel, fraud, connivance, or violation of law," 
which are the -- are the aspects of -- that are listed in the 
statute that are not already contained within negligence.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  What's the defense view?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Your Honor -- 
MR. KELLER:  Did I not say "misconduct"?  Sorry.  
THE COURT:  I believe you did, yes.  
Ms. Francis?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor.  Our only thought 
process here is that the indictment alleged acts that the 
defendant committed in his capacity as a sea captain.  There 
was nothing alleged that would implement him in his capacity as 
a ship owner.  Again, it would all have to lead to a loss of 
life.  Fraud, neglect, conveyance, misconduct, violation of 
law, none of those apply and nothing was alleged in the 
complaint that would say that he was acting in his capacity as 
a ship owner.  
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 192 of
207

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
193
Violation of law.  Judge, he was not charged, nor was 
he convicted of violating any of the ordinances that they are 
trying to add onto the -- that they did add onto the evidence.  
So the violation of law was not proven.  The misconduct -- 
THE COURT:  Hold on.  Hold on.  I'm sure the government 
would disagree with that.  But the indictment does say "owner 
and charter of a vessel by his fraud, neglect, connivance, 
misconduct, and violation of law on said vessel, caused the 
life of victim to be destroyed."  So it's very clearly there.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor.  I would say that it's 
there, but it also says "or."  Count 1 charges the defendant 
with seaman's manslaughter in his capacity as a captain "or" in 
his capacity as an owner.  All of the allegations alleged 
negligence or inattention to duties while he was on the ship in 
his capacity as a captain.  None of the neglect, fraud, 
conveyance, misconduct or violation of law that they allege 
they put in their indictment as the owner.  
THE COURT:  I'm confused.  The allegations are what's 
in the indictment.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  And I'm looking at the indictment, and it 
says "owner and charter," everything I just said a moment ago.  
So it's there.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor.  I would agree that it 
is there.  So they did list the statute.  They tracked the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 193 of
207

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
194
language of the statute.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  So then we should just formulate the 
elements based off the statutory language in conjunction with 
what was charged. 
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor, I agree. 
THE COURT:  So then what is your specific proposal?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Your Honor, I did agree with the one that 
you advised that we should have; I did like that idea.  I 
believe that would be sufficient.  I believe that wouldn't 
confuse the jury.  But -- 
THE COURT:  Well, I didn't really come up with any 
final language.  It was just a concept that it could be broken 
down into four elements.  I think the trickier question is what 
to put into the elements themselves, specifically, the one that 
has all of these various words from the statute.  
Let me do this.  One thing I want to clarify, there is 
no dispute from the defense that gross negligence and 
recklessness, as you had in your proposal, does not apply to 
this statute; correct?  
MS. FRANCIS:  That's correct, Your Honor, we have 
conceded that. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, then I'm going to direct the 
parties to confer on specific language with respect to 
Element 3, and then come prepared to discuss that.  As far as 
when, specifically, we will have that discussion, that's 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 194 of
207

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
195
something I will decide before the close of today.  But I don't 
want to just be on the record floating different options and 
then confusing the transcript.  So confer on this substantive 
instruction, most especially that third element, and we will 
take it from there. 
Any objection to the remainder of the government's 
proposal, Ms. Francis?  
MS. FRANCIS:  No, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  So the definition of negligence and 
the proximate causation is also all there and correct.  
Anything further to discuss about this proposal at this 
time, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Judge.  I apologize.  I thought we 
were agreed when I ended that conferral, but I guess we 
weren't.  So we will just have to talk more about it.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  Then let's -- let's move 
past the defense proposal on Count 1, which is no longer being 
offered, and let's address the CFR regulations.  
Mr. Keller, I see you put these in here.  What's your 
thought process for including them as separate instructions?  
MR. KELLER:  So, Judge, the idea here is that because 
these are laws, because these are statutes that are codified, 
that they, just like any other law that is at issue here -- 
regulations -- just like any other law regulation at issue here 
should be memorialized officially by the Court to say that this 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 195 of
207

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
196
is what the law is, these were the obligations of the 
defendant, and -- and we, you know, acknowledge that the 
drug-testing requirements are not coming in and that the 
chemical testing are not coming in.  But with respect to the 
4.05 CFRs, they were a major feature of trial.  The fact that 
he violated them is a huge aspect of this case in proving his 
negligence.  
So our position is that this Court should be endorsing 
or should be speaking to what the actual law is so that the 
jury has that available to them to make a decision about 
whether he violated them.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Ms. Francis or Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor.  
We would say that it would be inappropriate to read the 
Coast Guard regulations as part of the jury instructions.  
Mr. McCabe was not charged with violating those regulations.  
Those regulations were already introduced as evidence in this 
case.  So there is no reason to repeat this particular evidence 
to the jury.  It's like that of all the other evidence that was 
presented to the jury.  So we believe that doing so would 
unduly prejudice and undermine the limiting instructions that 
you will already be providing.  So we -- as far as the 
regulations being provided, they are evidence, they were 
already presented to the jury.  We feel that adding those back 
in and putting it a part of the jury instructions would 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 196 of
207

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
197
definitely prejudice the jury.  
THE COURT:  All right.  You mentioned that it would 
undermine the limiting instructions that I will be providing.  
What are you referring to?  
MS. FRANCIS:  The instructions for the seaman's 
manslaughter, Judge.  Like they just said and what we will be 
speaking about, in his capacity as an owner, there are 
instructions that say "if he violated any law."  I believe that 
adding these in, which would be -- everything but the drug 
testing.  So that would be the notice of marine casualty, of 
the regulations concerning vessel operations.  
Adding those in with what we already have, which is a 
seaman's manslaughter limiting instruction, we feel that not 
only will it be overkill, it would pretty much be saying that, 
yes, he did violate these laws.  There is no indication of 
that.  They did not prove that he violated, was charged, or 
convicted of any of those offenses that they're trying to add 
in.  So as of this point, what is the purpose -- 
THE COURT:  Hold on.  Hold on.  Let's say they did 
prove that he violated -- or they at least presented evidence 
that he violated this particular CFR provision requiring 
notice.  Then what is your argument?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Well, at that point, I would have no 
argument.  But at this time, Judge, they have not proved or 
even shown any evidence that he, in fact, did violate those 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 197 of
207

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
198
ordinance.  He wasn't charged -- 
THE COURT:  Okay, okay.  But you're blending things.
There were multiple witnesses who testified that he 
would have been required to advise the Coast Guard of the 
events for March 28th and that he did not.  I know you have a 
different view about whether he was required to, but there is 
certainly evidence in the record that he was required to notify 
and he did not notify.  
So in light of the evidence in the record, then what's 
your argument for why this should be removed?  
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Judge.  
There are many witnesses that did testify of what he 
should or should not have done.  That's contested.  However, 
there is no witness that presented any evidence that the 
government actually charged him with violating these 
ordinances.  Which they could have done.  They could have given 
him a civil ticket.  He could have gotten a fine.  That did not 
happen here.  There is no ticket.  There is no fine.  There is 
no penalty.  No one charged him with violating these 
ordinances. 
THE COURT:  Everything you just said you could argue, 
but what's offered here in the language just says persons 
employed on a vessel are required to comply with the law.  
And then it goes on to say that the jury can consider 
the law as one of the circumstances in evidence in the case 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 198 of
207

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
199
surrounding the conduct of the defendant.  And then it goes on 
to describe what the law is.  
So it's not -- it's not referencing being charged with 
a violation of that law in particular.  
Let me just hear from Mr. Keller on this.  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  
And I will start by responding to Ms. Francis referring 
to this instruction as evidence.  It's not evidence of 
anything.  
The discussion during closings is going to be exactly 
what Ms. Francis is doing right now, which is trying to 
persuade you that there was no violation here; whereas, we say 
there was a violation here.  And that's because this issue lies 
at the center of this case.  And when it comes to what it is 
the Court is presenting here, it's not saying the things are 
necessarily relevant or not.  It's just telling the jury what 
the law is.  
THE COURT:  Let me ask you something.  Let's say there 
was a violation of this CFR, and that's all you had, would that 
be enough to convict on Count 1?  
MR. KELLER:  Yes, because in this specific context, 
because of the fact that what -- the testimony that we've 
had -- this is what we would argue:  The testimony that we've 
had is that, if this reporting had been made for this type of 
issue, so a grounding or a loss of steerage or propulsion, then 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 199 of
207

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
200
there would have been an intervention.  And our argument would 
be in that case that the intervention that the -- or the lack 
of an intervention, the lack of the ability for the Coast Guard 
to do something proximately caused the vessel being unsafe when 
it was brought out the next morning.  
THE COURT:  Are you concerned at all that that theory 
makes it so that a single civil violation turns into a criminal 
violation?  
MR. KELLER:  Judge, it all depends on the context.  So 
there can be civil violations that caused huge, awful issues 
like we have here; there can be ones that don't.  It's really a 
matter of how dangerous the situation we're talking about is.
One of the key aspects of this case -- one of the 
almost unique aspects of this case, compared to other types of 
boating incidents, is that we're talking about scuba diving 
here.  We're talking about an activity that inherently involves 
going near the propellers, and all of that context plays into 
what we're talking about when we talk about a civil violation.  
But because it's scuba instead of fishing -- if it were 
fishing, then the propeller issue would not be nearly the kind 
of big deal that it is in this specific context.  
THE COURT:  Why do you need to have this written out?  
I mean, there are multiple exhibits in the record that I 
believe went through these requirements, and you went over 
those with some of the witnesses.  Couldn't you just use those 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 200 of
207

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
201
documents in closing to describe to the jury what the law is, 
and then refer them back to the witness testimony about what he 
was supposed to report and under what circumstances?  
MR. KELLER:  Judge, the issue with that is just the 
fact that when it comes to the law, what the law is, the jurors 
are supposed to rely on the Court and what the Court says the 
law is.  
So our position would be that when it comes to being 
clear about what the law is, that this Court should be who 
tells them what the law is, instead of expecting them to look 
at a Coast Guard form and rely on that.  So it's really the 
fact that this is a legal question; that's why we suggest that 
the Court give an instruction about it.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Your Honor, if I may respond?  
THE COURT:  One moment.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Thank you.  
THE COURT:  Okay, Ms. Francis. 
MS. FRANCIS:  Yes, Your Honor, thank you.  
We feel that the regulations should be treated as any 
other piece of evidence that has been treated for the jury to 
evaluate.  They should not be presented to the jury as part of 
the Court's instruction on the law of the case.  That's not the 
charge he's facing.  And especially just after they hear the 
elements of the crime.  That kind of instruction would elevate 
the regulations above the remainder of all of the 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 201 of
207

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
202
evidence -- other evidence that has been introduced at trial.  
It could give a misleading impression this those regulations 
are a part of the crime that's been charged.  So we don't 
believe that they should be able to add those regulations in.  
Treat it as evidence as it has been presented.  
Thank you, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  All right.  Thank you.  
I will take this issue under advisement.  I think I'm 
inclined to agree with Ms. Francis that highlighting this 
instruction without any additional language would be 
problematic, and that there is sufficient evidence in the 
record from which the government can reference the notice 
requirements.  But I will give it some additional thought.  
What we do know without a doubt is that the drug 
testing items will be removed per the Court's order on the 
motion in limine, as will the chemical-testing portion.  So we 
will leave that somewhat unresolved for now, and then shift to 
the 1001 charge.  
Any objection to that pattern, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Judge. 
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan or Ms. Francis?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then let's look at the substantive 
wire fraud count.  I see the defense wishes to add some 
language that's not part of the pattern.  Please explain to me 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 202 of
207

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
203
what your authority is and why you think this is a correct 
statement of the law.  
MS. FRANCIS:  Thank you, Your Honor.  
We have conferred with the government's attorneys, and 
we have conceded and we would like to go with their 
instructions for wire fraud. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then we will do that and use the 
pattern.  And that will be -- the defense proposal will be 
removed.  
Okay.  All right.  Let's look now at page 39 of docket 
entry 54, which is entitled, "No defense, blaming victim."  
I see no objection.  Is this agreed to by the parties, 
Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  That's my understanding, Judge.  When we 
conferred, there was no objection.  
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I agree.  Are we on page 39?  I just 
want to make sure that I'm following along accurately. 
THE COURT:  Yes, 39.  I'm using the blue banner on the 
top.  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I must have a different page 39. 
MR. KELLER:  You can't see the blue banner. 
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Oh, that's why.  I heard it orally 
and, yes, I agree we have talked about this. 
THE COURT:  This is the "No defense, blaming victim." 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 203 of
207

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
204
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Absolutely.  I agree with that. 
THE COURT:  You agree to it.  Okay.  Then it will be 
included.  
Duty to deliberate and verdict.  Anything to comment on 
those pattern instructions, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor. 
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  No objection, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  And we already talked about the verdict 
form.  
All right.  Okay.  Then anything else to discuss 
regarding the instructions, Mr. Keller?  
MR. KELLER:  No, Your Honor.  
THE COURT:  Mr. O'Sullivan?  
MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Not insofar as the instructions, no, 
ma'am. 
MR. KELLER:  Actually, Judge, when it comes to 
the -- us conferring, do you want us to do like we did with the 
supplemental jury instruction and file something, or do you 
want us to just be prepared to discuss?  
THE COURT:  Yes, I think there should be a joint filing 
noting any disagreement, and that should be done -- can that be 
done this evening?  
MR. KELLER:  If that's what Your Honor wants, that's 
what we will do. 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 204 of
207

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
205
THE COURT:  Yeah, okay.  Okay.  Then that will be due 
by 9:00 p.m. this evening.  
MR. KELLER:  Your Honor -- 
THE COURT:  We are talking about the substantive 
offense instruction for Count 1. 
MR. KELLER:  Yes, Your Honor.  Could we have until 
midnight?  
THE COURT:  Sure.  
MR. KELLER:  Thank you.  Because we're going to drive 
back to Miami.  
THE COURT:  Okay.  Then midnight today or tomorrow I 
will receive the proposal following conferral on that one 
issue.  
I heard you say you're driving, but I never released 
trial for tomorrow, only the jury so far.  Were you all 
planning on not being here tomorrow?  
MR. KELLER:  We will be here tomorrow if there is court 
tomorrow, Your Honor.
THE COURT:  Okay.  Well, I do want to do the Rule 29 
argument, and I want to finalize the instructions.  So there is 
still work to do tomorrow morning, which is why I am asking for 
this joint proposal.  
We will, therefore, be in session tomorrow from 
approximately 10:00 to noon.  And so please prepare for your 
Rule 29 argument, along with finalization of the jury 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 205 of
207

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
206
instructions.  I want to have everything squared away for 
Monday morning. 
All right.  Mr. McCabe, over the weekend, you should 
consider your decision whether to plead guilty.  I will put you 
under oath and inquire about your decision because it's 
important that you personally make that decision after 
consulting with counsel.  But, ultimately, it is your decision 
to make.  So you can anticipate me asking you some questions 
under oath regarding that decision.  Do you understand?  
THE DEFENDANT:  Yes, ma'am. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  All right.  
Anything further before we close for the day?  
MR. KELLER:  Judge, I'm sorry.  Did you say "plead 
guilty" or "testify"?  
THE COURT:  I'm sorry.  If I said "plead guilty," I 
meant to say "testify."  And it must be a long day.  I retract 
that statement.  I just mean "testify."  
Do you understand, sir?  
THE DEFENDANT:  Yes, ma'am. 
THE COURT:  Okay.  I did not mean to imply that.  
Okay.  That's all I have for now.  I will see you all 
tomorrow at 10:00 a.m.  
(These proceedings concluded at 4:26 p.m.) 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 206 of
207

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
207
C E R T I F I C A T E
I hereby certify that the foregoing is an accurate 
transcription of the proceedings in the above-entitled matter.
DATE:  05-05-2025
/s/Laura Melton 
LAURA E. MELTON, RMR, CRR, FPR
Official Court Reporter 
United States District Court
Southern District of Florida 
Fort Pierce, Florida 
Case 9:24-cr-80103-AMC   Document 111   Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2025   Page 207 of
207

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.flsd.673624.111.0.pdf
Size
634,470 bytes
SHA-256
6cb9a64bbab9bc60a2b44393db7036cfcd6435b9fce4767cfaef2e01ad879f67
Our copy
gov.uscourts.flsd.673624.111.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top