1 1 2 3 4 5 6 ROUGH DRAFT PURPOSES ONLY. NOT TO BE USED AS THE 7 OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT AS IT MAY CONTAIN UNTRANSLATES 8 AND MISTRANSLATES WHICH WILL BE CORRECTED IN THE 9 FINAL VERSION. 10 11 12 13 March 31, 2010 14 15 16 SUSAN BYSIEWICZ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Bethany A. Carrier, LSR. 24 Brandon Smith Reporting Service 25 (860) 549-1850 Brandon Smith Reporting 2 1 (Defendant's Exhibit 1: Marked for 2 identification.) notice of deposition. 3 4 (The deposition commenced at 10:06 am.) 5 6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The date today is 7 March 31st, 2010. We're going on the record at 10:06 8 a.m. The case is Bysiewicz versus DiNardo, the 9 Connecticut Democratic Party, and the Connecticut 10 Office of the Secretary of State, filed in the 11 Superior Court of Hartford. The name of the witness 12 is Susan Bysiewicz. This deposition is being held at 13 Gersten, Clifford & Rome, 214 Main Street, Hartford 14 Connecticut. My name is Jacob Brandon from Brandon 15 Smith Reporting & Video. The court reporter is 16 Bethany Carrier from Brandon Smith Reporting & Video. 17 Counsel will now state their appearances for the 18 record please after which the court reporter will 19 swear in the witness. 20 MR. GERSTEN: Thank you, Jake. My name 21 is Eliot Gersten I'm here with my client Chris Healy 22 and we have counsel for the party Jennifer O'Neill. 23 That's my side of the table. 24 MR. HORTON: Would you indicate also 25 the name of your client? Brandon Smith Reporting 3 1 MR. GERSTEN: I did. 2 MR. GERSTEN: Republican party, I'm 3 sorry, Chris Healy -- thanks, Wes -- Chris Healy here 4 is the representative of the republican party. 5 MR. HORTON: Wesley Horton representing 6 the plaintiff, Susan Bysiewicz. 7 MR. REYNOLDS: Kevin Reynolds 8 representing the Connecticut Democratic Party. And 9 representing the party is Allison Dodge, our executive 10 director over in the corner. 11 MR. ZINN-ROWTHORN: Perry Zinn-Rowthorn 12 from the Office of Attorney General on behalf of the 13 Office of the Secretary of State. 14 MR. CLARK: And Assistant Attorney 15 General Robert Clark also on behalf of the Office of 16 the Secretary of State. 17 MR. HORTON: Before the deposition 18 starts, I would like to state for the record that we 19 accept the usual stipulations, except that my client 20 wants to read and sign the deposition. 21 And in addition, we have our own 22 videographer here today. Attorney Gersten, Attorney 23 Krisch and I a conference call with Judge Sheldon 24 yesterday afternoon. The court permitted the plaintiff 25 to bring her own stenographer, but said that Attorney Brandon Smith Reporting 4 1 Gersten was the official one -- Gersten's was the 2 official one and that ours should be careful not to 3 interfere with his. I don't believe that will happen. 4 The Court also inquired of both parties 5 whether they would be using the videotapes for any 6 purpose other than the court proceedings, and both 7 Attorney Horton and Attorney Gersten said no. That's 8 all I want to state for the record. I don't know if 9 you want to add anything to the conversation yesterday 10 so it's on the record. 11 MR. GERSTEN: I'm not adding anything 12 because it's not necessary for any reason. Okay. Are 13 we all set? 14 15 ( Witness sworn.) 16 17 BY MR. GERSTEN: 18 Q Is it okay if I call you Madam Secretary? I 19 don't really know the right title. 20 A Go right ahead. That's fine. 21 Q Okay. Great. Madam Secretary, my name is 22 Eliot Gersten. I represent the intervening defendant 23 in this case. I'm going to ask you a series of 24 questions. I'm hoping you can give me the answers. 25 Any time you have a problem with any of my questions, Brandon Smith Reporting 5 1 feel free to speak up and say, I don't understand, 2 otherwise I'm going to assume that you do, in fact, 3 understand. Is that instruction understood by you 4 now? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Great. Thanks. The next instruction I'm 7 going to let you know about is any time you want to 8 take a break, either indicate I've got to take a short 9 break, go ahead, this is not an endurance contest. Ask 10 for a cup of water, coffee, I'm not here to try to see 11 how long one of us can last until we have to breakdown. 12 Okay? 13 A Great. 14 Q Great. You're the plaintiff in this action. 15 A Yes. 16 Q Great. And you -- did you review any 17 documents in preparation for your deposition today? 18 A I did. 19 Q Okay. Would you identify the documents you 20 reviewed in preparation of your deposition today? 21 A They would be documents in a notebook given 22 to me by my attorney. 23 Q Okay. And what was the contents of the 24 documents that you looked at in preparation for your 25 deposition today? Brandon Smith Reporting 6 1 A They would be documents that were given by 2 the attorney general's office to my attorney. They are 3 documents that I worked on or my office produced. 4 Also, they were copies of my occupational tax forms, 5 client security fund forms, my good standing 6 certificate from the state of Connecticut and I think 7 that's about it. 8 Q Okay. When did you review these documents in 9 preparation for your deposition? 10 A Over the course of the last several days. 11 Q Okay. And last several days is somewhat 12 subjective. How many days are you talking about? 13 A Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and 14 Tuesday. 15 Q Great. And do you recall how much time you 16 spent reviewing those documents? 17 A I couldn't tell you precisely. 18 Q Okay. How about estimating? 19 A Several hours. 20 Q Okay. Again, several is somewhat subjective. 21 Is that more than three? 22 A Probably. 23 Q More than ten? How many hours would it be 24 then? 25 MR. HORTON: Did you say less than Brandon Smith Reporting 7 1 ten. 2 MR. GERSTEN: I'm trying to understand 3 the definition of subjective. 4 A Probably more than three, possibly more than 5 ten. But I'm not certain. 6 BY MR. GERSTEN: 7 Q Okay. 8 A I didn't keep track. 9 Q Okay. Now, is this something that exists -- 10 that you looked at in the context of one notebook, that 11 is -- I'm trying to get a handle on what we looked 12 at -- excuse me, what you looked at. 13 A Yes, I looked at the trial preparation 14 materials prepared by my attorney. 15 Q Okay. When you call them trial preparation 16 materials, could you tell me what you're referring 17 to? 18 A Documents that the attorney general's office 19 got from our office. My occupational tax forms, my 20 attorney registration forms, and my client security 21 fund forms, my good standing certificate from the state 22 of Connecticut. 23 Q Okay. That sounds like all the same 24 materials that you just recited to me that you looked 25 at in preparation? Brandon Smith Reporting 8 1 A That's right. 2 Q And then you called it trial preparation 3 materials. Is there something else besides what you 4 just described? 5 A Not that I can think of. 6 Q Okay. And that is a neat book that was 7 actually handed to you? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Okay. And where is that notebook as we sit 10 right now? 11 A It's at my office. 12 Q Okay. And when you say it's at your office, 13 what's the location of that office? 14 A That office would be at the State Capitol. 15 Q Okay. So if I said to you Madam Secretary, 16 would you be able to produce the documents that you 17 looked at in preparation for today's deposition, you 18 could in fact go over to your office which is about 19 four minutes away and pull out that materials and bring 20 it back relatively quickly, am I correct? 21 A Yes. Absolutely. 22 Q Great. 23 MR. GERSTEN: Wes I'm going to make a 24 request at the break that that be done. 25 MR. HORTON: Yes, Eliot, I have that Brandon Smith Reporting 9 1 file. And it's all -- it contains the documents that 2 you've been given. I have it here and if you want it, 3 I'll give it to you. 4 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. If it's a 5 representation that everything that Madam Secretary 6 looked at in preparation for today, I'll take that 7 representation. I just want to get it marked as an 8 exhibit so we kind of know what we're doing. 9 MR. HORTON: Yes. That's right. It's 10 the documents that were turned over to you. The only 11 other document we showed her was our -- 12 MR. GERSTEN: Hang on a minute, Wes. 13 BY MR. GERSTEN: 14 Q Were there other documents that you looked at 15 besides the documents that are in this notebook that 16 attorney Horton has indicated he has with him today as 17 a copy? 18 A For preparation today? 19 Q Yes, ma'am. 20 A And what are you -- what specific documents 21 would you be talking about? 22 Q That's a fair comment. Attorney Horton 23 indicated just a moment ago, and again, I appreciate 24 him trying to help but he's not the witness here -- 25 that there was other documents besides those in his Brandon Smith Reporting 10 1 notebook that he -- 2 MR. HORTON: I didn't say plural. 3 BY MR. GERSTEN: 4 Q Other document, okay. I'm just trying to 5 find out what that other document is, ma'am. I can't 6 identify it because I don't know what it is. But I'm 7 presuming, if he handed it to you to look at you know 8 what that document is. 9 A I'm not sure what he's referring to. I know 10 that I received a black binder, he has a copy of the 11 same materials. 12 Q Okay? 13 A And that's what I looked at. 14 Q Okay. So that's -- can we produce the 15 notebook so we just get it marked as an exhibit? 16 MR. HORTON: Absolutely. 17 MR. GERSTEN: And then I'll ask the 18 question. Please. Watch the microphone, Wes. 19 Believe me I stepped on many of them doing the same 20 thing. 21 MR. HORTON: I'll go out and get a 22 little room here. 23 MR. GERSTEN: Take your time. 24 MR. HORTON: I want to make sure there 25 is nothing privileged in here. Here it is. Brandon Smith Reporting 11 1 MR. GERSTEN: Great. Thanks, Wes. 2 Okay. 3 MR. HORTON: Hold on a second. 4 MR. HORTON: Eliot I'll be happy to 5 clear up the miss store of the other document. 6 A I know now I'm realizing what you were 7 referring to. 8 BY MR. GERSTEN: 9 Q Okay. Could you go ahead? 10 A I looked at a draft of a brief prepared by my 11 attorneys. 12 Q I think that's a -- did you bring that 13 document with you today? 14 A No. 15 Q Okay. Where is that document? 16 A It's in my briefcase. 17 Q And where is your briefcase? 18 A It's at the State Capitol. 19 Q And is it the same place as this notebook is 20 located at? 21 A It is. 22 Q Okay. And that's another document that at 23 the break I could say, you could get relatively 24 quickly, am I correct? 25 A I could, but that would be privileged. Brandon Smith Reporting 12 1 Q It might be. We can argue about that but 2 we're going to have to get it properly identified 3 before we can do that. 4 How many pages long is that, ma'am? 5 A Perhaps 20. 6 Q Okay. Did you read it? 7 A I did. 8 Q And when did you read it? 9 A Over the course of the past several days. 10 Q Okay. 11 MR. GERSTEN: Can I get this marked for 12 the moment, please, madam court reporter and then we 13 will proceed to the next one. So I'm going to call 14 this exhibit -- you know I apologize I should have 15 made sure I get number one marked first, right? Okay. 16 BY MR. GERSTEN: 17 Q Madam Secretary, I'm going to show you -- 18 just so we can keep some order, a copy of the notice of 19 deposition that was issued in this case so you have it. 20 You've seen this before, correct? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Great. And we're marking that just so the 23 record's clear has number 1. And now for Exhibit 24 Number 2, if I can get Bethany to mark this notebook, 25 we'll mark this as Exhibit Number 2. Brandon Smith Reporting 13 1 2 (Defendant's Exhibit 2: Marked for 3 identification.) Bysiewicz deposition prep 4 folder. 5 BY MR. GERSTEN: 6 Q And ma'am, Exhibit Number 2 has been 7 represented to be an exact duplicate of the notebook 8 that was delivered to you to prepare for this 9 deposition. Do you agree with that? Would you like to 10 take a look at it first? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Great. And would you agree that this is a 13 copy of what you looked at? 14 A Yes. Appears to be the same thing. 15 Q In preparation for today? Good. 16 MR. GERSTEN: Anybody want to share it. 17 BY MR. GERSTEN: 18 Q And the 20 page document that you reviewed in 19 preparation for your deposition today was what, a draft 20 of a brief? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Okay. And do you recall anything that it 23 said? 24 A I do. 25 Q Okay. In a general way, would you describe Brandon Smith Reporting 14 1 what it said? 2 MR. HORTON: I object to that don't 3 answer the question that's clearly privileged 4 information. 5 MR. GERSTEN: Well, Wes, if she looked 6 at it in preparation for the deposition today, if it 7 was privileged, which I don't know that we can argue 8 about, I'm just making sure we have a proper factual 9 background. 10 BY MR. GERSTEN: 11 Q So ma'am, in a general way I'm going to ask 12 you again to identify what its contents were that you 13 read in preparation for deposition today? 14 MR. HORTON: I object and I direct you 15 not to answer and Eliot my suggestion is since we know 16 we have a judge available this morning, why don't we 17 go often, see if there are other things and then give 18 him a call later on. 19 MR. GERSTEN: No problem. That's a 20 wonderful suggestion. I'm just trying to make sure I 21 got a proper predicate for it. 22 MR. HORTON: Right. 23 BY MR. GERSTEN: 24 Q Now, ma'am, how much time did you actually 25 spend preparing for your deposition? Brandon Smith Reporting 15 1 A Several hours. 2 Q Okay. And again, several isn't very 3 quantitative. How much are you referring to? 4 A I spent some time with my attorney and some 5 time -- 6 Q Okay. 7 A -- Reading documents and I would say hours is 8 a good way. I can't tell you how many. 9 Q Now, how much time did you spend with your 10 attorney? 11 A Probably a couple of hours. 12 Q Okay. And again, that can be somewhat 13 subjective. Are we talking somewhere between two and 14 three or more than that? 15 A I guess I'll find out when I get my bill. 16 Q Okay. But as you sit here today, you don't 17 know? 18 A I couldn't say specifically, but I would say 19 several hours. 20 Q Okay. And how much time did you spend 21 reviewing the documents that you've made reference 22 to? 23 MR. HORTON: Objection. That's already 24 been asked. Wasn't that asked earlier? 25 MR. GERSTEN: Even if it were, Wes you Brandon Smith Reporting 16 1 know that's not a proper objection. 2 MR. HORTON: Well, at some point if it 3 continues being asked it's arrest harassment. 4 MR. GERSTEN: At some point you're 5 right. 6 MR. HORTON: Ask the question. 7 MR. GERSTEN: At this point all it does 8 is interrupt my flow. I'm getting there. 9 MR. HORTON: Go ahead. 10 MR. GERSTEN: With all due respect. 11 BY MR. GERSTEN: 12 Q So and how much time did you say you spent 13 reviewing the documents in preparation for the 14 deposition? 15 A I believe I said somewhere between three and 16 ten hours. 17 Q Okay. And I'm just trying to get a handle on 18 this -- 19 A But again, I didn't keep track. 20 Q Okay. Well, when you say you don't keep 21 track, do you have any kind of calendars that you keep 22 in terms of knowing where you're supposed to be at any 23 particular time? 24 A I have my appointment schedule and you have 25 copies of all of that. Brandon Smith Reporting 17 1 Q Okay. And is there an appointment schedule 2 when you met with your attorneys? 3 A No. 4 Q So meeting with your attorneys then would not 5 be included on that appointment schedule? 6 A No. 7 Q Okay. Is there a reason for that? 8 A My appointment schedule has my public 9 appointments on it and you can see that. And then I 10 have a personal schedule. 11 Q Okay. So when you call it a personal 12 schedule, do you keep track of the personal schedule 13 differently than you do your appointments in your 14 capacity as the secretary of state? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Okay. And are there documents reflecting 17 that personal schedule? 18 A No. 19 Q How do you go about keeping track of your 20 personal schedule then when you referred to I have a 21 personal schedule as contrasted to your calendar that 22 you referred to earlier? 23 A Because my appointments with Wes are right 24 here. 25 Q Okay. Are there other kinds of appointments Brandon Smith Reporting 18 1 that are -- I'm going to point to your head but I'm 2 presuming that you kept these things mentally as 3 opposed to keeping track of them on a day-to-day basis 4 that are personal in nature that are not reflected in 5 your office calendar? 6 A I have doctors appointments and other 7 personal appointments that I would keep privately. 8 Q Okay. Any other kinds of appointments that 9 you wouldn't record in your secretary of state out look 10 calendar? 11 A Yes. Those would be my campaign events. 12 Q Okay. What's a campaign event? 13 A It might be a democratic town committee event 14 to campaign for attorney general and those are kept at 15 my campaign office. 16 Q Okay. And when you say those are kept at 17 your campaign office, is there a separate calendar for 18 that? 19 A There is. 20 Q Okay. What is that calendar called? 21 A My campaign calendar. 22 Q Okay. Who's the custodian of your campaign 23 calendar? 24 A One of my campaign staff. 25 Q Okay. And when did you start keeping a Brandon Smith Reporting 19 1 campaign calendar? 2 A In January of this year. 3 Q Okay. And when you say your campaign staff 4 is there a particular person who's the custodian of 5 that record? 6 A It would be Zack Van Lulling. 7 Q I'm sorry. The court reporter is going to 8 need the spelling of that, I assure you. 9 A Let's say V-A-N L-U-L-L-I-N-G. 10 Q Thank you very kindly. And what is Zack's 11 position? 12 A He is a campaign assistant. 13 Q Okay. And so if we asked Zack to produce 14 your calendar, we would simply describe it as a 15 campaign calendar and that would sufficiently identify 16 it so he would know what we were talking about? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Great. And you know what I'm talking about 19 when I ask that question, correct? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And that's not where you keep your -- that's 22 where you keep your appointments for the purposes of 23 your political engagements? 24 A Correct. 25 Q Okay. And I forgot to ask, where is Zack Brandon Smith Reporting 20 1 located? 2 A He is in our campaign office in Rocky Hill. 3 Q And does the campaign office in Rocky Hill 4 have an address? 5 A I believe it's 2263 Silas Deane Highway. I 6 may be wrong about the street address, but it's on the 7 Silas Deane Highway. 8 Q You mean the number address? 9 A Correct. 10 Q Okay. Great. And prior to coming here today 11 for the purposes of your preparation he -- well let me 12 ask my question differently I'm sorry about that. You 13 met with your lawyers to prepare for your deposition? 14 A Uh-huh. 15 Q Did you have discussions with anyone else in 16 connection with this deposition? 17 A My husband. 18 Q Okay. And his name? 19 A David Donaldson. 20 Q And when did you and your husband discuss the 21 deposition? 22 A Over the course of the past several days. 23 Q Okay. What did you discuss? 24 MR. HORTON: I object to that question. 25 Don't answer it. That's privileged. Brandon Smith Reporting 21 1 MR. GERSTEN: The privilege of that is 2 what, Wes. 3 MR. HORTON: Husband wife privilege. 4 MR. GERSTEN: You're claiming the 5 spousal privilege pertains to all discussions between 6 husband and wife about this deposition I just want to 7 make sure I got that. 8 MR. HORTON: Yes. 9 MR. GERSTEN: Great. So any questions 10 that I ask about what her discussions were with her 11 husband you're claiming are privileged. 12 MR. HORTON: Well, it's her privilege. 13 Tell you what could we take a break. 14 MR. GERSTEN: Of course. 15 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 16 10:28. 17 18 (Recess: 10:28 am to 10:36 am.) 19 20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 21 10:36. 22 MR. HORTON: All right. I have spoken 23 to my client about the attorney-client privilege and 24 she wishes to claim it. Therefore, I direct her not 25 to answer the question. Brandon Smith Reporting 22 1 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 2 MR. HORTON: And we can obviously bring 3 this -- be put in our bag to discuss with the judge. 4 MR. GERSTEN: No problem at all I just 5 want to make sure we're clear you're claiming any and 6 all conversations with your husband, ma'am are subject 7 to a privilege claim you're making here today. 8 A Yes, sir. 9 Q Right. Okay. I forgot to give you one more 10 instruction I apologize for that. I've got to be able 11 to finish my question, even if you know what you think 12 the question is, let me finish it because otherwise 13 this poor lady's trying to take down my question and 14 your answer and we'll screw up the record. Okay. I 15 forgot to tell you that. And you're supposed to be 16 audible with answers, not nodding your head. Okay? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Thank you. I just want to go back for a 19 minute. On this appointment book that you said you 20 maintain at your campaign headquarters, it covers the 21 time period from January 2010 until today? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Okay. Now, which appointment book would you 24 place your coming to a deposition on? 25 A Neither. Brandon Smith Reporting 23 1 Q Okay. That's all just kept in your head 2 again? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Okay. And this appointment book is 5 something, if you called up your assistant at the 6 campaign headquarters and said, can you bring over my 7 appointment book, is that something you're able to do? 8 Would that -- let me restate my question, terrible 9 question. If you called up your assistant and said, I 10 need a copy of my appointment book, would your 11 assistant follow your directions and get that over to 12 you? 13 A He could if I were to instruct him to do 14 that. 15 Q Okay. So you're in control of that 16 appointment book, aren't you? 17 A It is on a computer. 18 Q Okay. Other than it being on a computer, if 19 someone wanted to get a copy of it and you said, give 20 me a copy of my appointment book, that's something you 21 would expect people who worked for your campaign would 22 follow your direction; is that correct? 23 A If I asked them to do that, yes. 24 Q Okay. Great. And is there a particular 25 reason why you did not produce the -- strike that. Is Brandon Smith Reporting 24 1 there a particular reason why you did not identify that 2 appointment book in your answers to interrogatories in 3 this case? 4 A Because -- well, I'd have to look at what the 5 interrogatory said. 6 MR. HORTON: Yes, which interrogatory 7 are you talking about, counsel? 8 MR. GERSTEN: I'll get there. 9 BY MR. GERSTEN: 10 Q If you're saying you don't think it was asked 11 for is that -- you just don't remember? I'll restate 12 it it's a terrible question. My question is: Is there 13 a particular reason why you did not identify the 14 existence of that appointment book in answers to 15 interrogatories? 16 MR. HORTON: I object as to form. I 17 think you should identify an interrogatory that you 18 think she didn't answer properly. 19 MR. GERSTEN: I haven't accused her of 20 anything. I'm asking questions and all objections 21 except as to form and you're saying that's a form 22 question? 23 MR. HORTON: Yes. I'm not directing 24 her not to answer. 25 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. Fair enough. Brandon Smith Reporting 25 1 BY MR. GERSTEN: 2 Q Ma'am, there is a particular reason why you 3 didn't identify the existence of this appointment book 4 in any responses to interrogatories? 5 A There was an interrogatory I took it to mean 6 my state calendar because obviously that would be a 7 public document. My campaign calendar is not a public 8 document. 9 Q So you made a distinction between public 10 documents and private documents in responding to the 11 interrogatories in this case? 12 A I just answered the interrogatories 13 truthfully. 14 Q Okay. I didn't ask you that. I'm sure you 15 tried. My question to you is: Would it be correct to 16 say that you do in fact maintain an appointment book at 17 your campaign headquarters regarding your time spent on 18 the campaign as you've just testified? 19 A I maintain a campaign schedule at my campaign 20 headquarters. 21 Q Is that campaign schedule the appointment 22 book that you referred to earlier in your testimony? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Okay. So you do, in fact, maintain an 25 appointment book separate and apart from the Brandon Smith Reporting 26 1 appointment book that was produced in this case from 2 the secretary of state's office? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Great. 5 MR. GERSTEN: Wes, I'm going to claim 6 that in response to question number 43, that document 7 should have been produced. 8 MR. HORTON: Well, we can discuss 9 that -- 10 MR. GERSTEN: First of all it should 11 have been identified and then secondly it should have 12 been produced. 13 MR. HORTON: What number? 14 MR. GERSTEN: 43. 15 MR. HORTON: I suggest we put that on 16 our list of things to discuss with the judge at the 17 break. 18 MR. GERSTEN: Yes, I don't think it's 19 discussing with the judge. It's a simple do you 20 maintain an appointment book and if so, what time 21 period does it cover? Clearly she's identified both 22 things now as things she didn't identify earlier. I'm 23 not accusing anybody of being a bad person. 24 MR. HORTON: No. 25 MR. GERSTEN: I'm just saying it should Brandon Smith Reporting 27 1 have been identified and we're claiming it now and I'd 2 like to get a copy of it. 3 MR. HORTON: Okay. Well, it's one 4 thing to identify it, but if you're claiming a copy of 5 it, I'm going to direct her not to produce it because 6 I consider this harassment because it has absolutely 7 nothing to do with this case and I think this is -- 8 this is something that, you know, the republican party 9 wants just for their own political purposes. It has 10 nothing to do with this lawsuit. And that's why I 11 said earlier, so that we don't have to argue about 12 it. 13 MR. GERSTEN: I'm not arguing about 14 it. 15 MR. HORTON: Let's discuss with it the 16 judge. We have two other things to discuss with the 17 judge let's put this on the list. That's all. We 18 know what it is. 19 MR. GERSTEN: Your speech is done. 20 MR. HORTON: Yes. 21 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. All I did was make 22 the request. I didn't make a speech. 23 MR. HORTON: Okay. And the request is 24 denied. Unless the judge orders me to do it. 25 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. Brandon Smith Reporting 28 1 BY MR. GERSTEN: 2 Q Now, ma'am -- 3 MR. HORTON: Before we go on, I want to 4 make sure I'm keeping a proper list for the judge. I 5 know the second thing. 6 MR. GERSTEN: This is taking up 7 transcript time I don't mean to be disrespectful we 8 can always deal with it later. 9 MR. HORTON: Okay. 10 MR. GERSTEN: Thank you. 11 BY MR. GERSTEN: 12 Q Okay. Now, other than having discussions 13 with your husband regarding your deposition, did you 14 have any discussions with anyone else besides counsel 15 regarding coming today for your deposition? 16 A No. 17 Q So no one in the press, no one talked to you 18 from the press about your deposition? 19 A No. 20 Q Being scheduled today? And no one from your 21 campaign staff discussed your deposition being taken 22 today? 23 A No. 24 Q Okay. Have you had discussions with anyone 25 regarding your deposition, not just the deposition Brandon Smith Reporting 29 1 today, but the prospects of deposition? 2 A What does that mean, prospects of deposition? 3 Q I'll restate my question, because it was 4 probably terribly phrased. And I appreciate you 5 clarifying it for me. 6 Besides your husband and your counsel, does 7 anyone else know that you're coming to a deposition 8 today because you told them? 9 A Tammy Marzik, who is an executive assistant 10 in my office dropped me off here. 11 Q Okay. Anyone else? 12 A Well, my chief of staff, Michelle Gilman 13 knows, because press were calling her today. 14 Q Okay. Anyone else? 15 A Outside of the media, I can't think of any. 16 Q Okay. And did you and Michelle discuss the 17 deposition at all? 18 A No. 19 Q Okay. And you and Tammy didn't discuss the 20 deposition at all? 21 A No. Just the fact that it was here. 22 Q Okay. Fair enough. Now, I'm hoping we can 23 agree on some things here in terms of some facts. On 24 January 4th there was a press conference you attended 25 regarding the Court's ruling on campaign financing. Do Brandon Smith Reporting 30 1 you recall that? 2 A A press conference? January 4th. Where was 3 it? 4 Q I don't know. 5 A I'm not -- 6 Q Then I'll restate my question? 7 A I go to a lot of press conferences. 8 Q Do you recall a press conference in which you 9 attended regarding a court ruling on the campaign 10 finance laws in January of this year? 11 MR. HORTON: Objection. Are you 12 referring to the U.S. supreme court decision is that 13 what you're referring to? 14 MR. GERSTEN: I'm asking the witness. 15 I don't know. I'm trying to find out what she did, 16 not what I know. 17 A I recall going to a press conference 18 regarding campaign finance reform. I cannot recall the 19 date, but it was with the -- someone from common cause, 20 and it was at the legislative office building and it 21 was regarding the clean election program. That's the 22 only campaign finance related press conference that I 23 recall going to. But I couldn't tell you the date. 24 Q Okay. Was -- do you recall if that took 25 place before or after you announced that you were going Brandon Smith Reporting 31 1 to make a run for the candidacy for attorney general? 2 A It was clearly before, because I had pledged 3 to participate it was before. 4 Q Good. And am I correct when I say before, it 5 was after the Christmas holidays, would that be 6 correct? 7 A What was after? 8 Q This press conference? 9 A I can't remember when it was. 10 Q Fair enough. 11 A And again, I don't know that we're talking 12 about the same one. 13 Q Okay. No problem. On January 13th of 2010, 14 that is the date that you announced your candidacy to 15 become attorney general? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Okay. And at that time, did you make that 18 announcement -- strike that. 19 At that time, you had indicated you had been 20 formally running for governor; is that correct? 21 A I did not. I was never formally running for 22 governor. I was exploring the run for governor. 23 Q Okay. 24 A Prior to that. 25 Q Was there a particular reason why you made a Brandon Smith Reporting 32 1 decision to change from exploring to run for governor 2 and instead determine that you wanted to run for 3 attorney general? 4 A There was. 5 Q And could you explain what that reasoning 6 was? 7 A Chris Dodd decided not to run for reelection 8 to the United States Senate, Richard Blumenthal decided 9 to run for the United States Senate, and there was then 10 an opening after they both made their announcements for 11 attorney general. 12 Q Is there any other reason? 13 A I always thought that the attorney general's 14 job was the best in state government. 15 Q Okay. Any other reason? 16 A That would be the main one. 17 Q Okay. And what makes the attorney general's 18 job the best in the state government? 19 A Have the opportunity to fight for people 20 every day. 21 Q Now, on January 13th there was a posting on a 22 website that questioned your qualifications for 23 governor -- or for attorney general. Do you recall 24 that? 25 A Which posting are you referring to? Brandon Smith Reporting 33 1 Q I'm referring to one from a fellow named 2 Ryan? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Okay. And you drafted a response to Ryan? 5 A I would assume we're talking about Ryan 6 McKeen. 7 Q Okay. Don't ever have to assume anything. 8 If you don't know who I'm talking about feel free to 9 let me know? 10 A Would you be talking about Ryan McKeen. 11 Q I believe that's his name. Okay. And you in 12 fact drafted a response to Mr. McKeen? 13 A I did. 14 Q And you were assisted in that response by two 15 attorneys? 16 A I believe so. 17 Q Okay. And do you recall the names of those 18 two attorneys? 19 A May I have a moment with my counsel, please? 20 Q Of course. Going off the record. 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 22 10:50. 23 24 (Recess: 10:50 am to 10:56 am.) 25 Brandon Smith Reporting 34 1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record 2 10:56. 3 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 4 MR. HORTON: I would just like to -- 5 it's my understanding that this line of questions, 6 Eliot, has to do with a confidential investigation 7 where the documents are sealed at this point and that 8 they're not -- and there's been no resolution and 9 until that time that these are not supposed to be on 10 the public record. Now, I'm hearing this for the 11 first time from these questions from you, Eliot, and I 12 think before we mark things for identification or do 13 anything. 14 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 15 MR. HORTON: More in this line we 16 should talk to the judge. 17 MR. GERSTEN: All right. I'm going to 18 continue down this line and you can tell me when I 19 need to have a record and I want to make sure I get it 20 so that when we have a talk with the judge I have a 21 proper record, you being the most imminent -- 22 preeminent appellate attorney in the world. 23 MR. HORTON: The point is. 24 MR. GERSTEN: Don't interrupt me I 25 didn't interrupt you. Brandon Smith Reporting 35 1 MR. HORTON: True. 2 MR. GERSTEN: Please I want to make 3 sure I have a proper record so that when you go to the 4 judge and say something I know what I'm talking about 5 and I can say -- I want point to things. So with that 6 in mind now that you've had a chance to confer with 7 your client I'm going to ask some questions and see 8 where we go. 9 MR. HORTON: Okay. I would prefer that 10 you not mark documents for identification at this 11 point. 12 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 13 MR. HORTON: However, can you obviously 14 identify the subject Martha you're talking about, so 15 that we do have a record to discuss with the judge, 16 whether these things should be on the record. 17 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 18 BY MR. GERSTEN: 19 Q All right. Ma'am, our deposition was 20 interrupted for a few moments while you had a chance to 21 confer with counsel. I'm going to ask you some 22 questions and see if you can answer me. 23 In a general way, ma'am, would you describe 24 the documents that Mr. Horton is referring to? 25 MR. HORTON: The subject matter of the Brandon Smith Reporting 36 1 documents. Without describing the documents 2 themselves, describe what the subject matter is, just 3 so we can tell the judge -- have a basis for 4 discussing the issue with the judge. 5 A I would be referring to a complaint that has 6 been made against me, which is confidential in nature. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q And are you aware of the name of the author 9 of the complaint that's been filed against you? 10 A Yes. It would be a Ms. Ruhe, who is a 11 republican state central committee member from 12 Wethersfield. 13 Q Does she have a first name? 14 A I believe it's Barbara. 15 Q And in a general way, are you familiar with 16 the contents of her complaint? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Okay. You read it? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Okay. And are you familiar with the date of 21 the complaint? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Okay? 24 A In a general way. 25 Q Okay. In a general way, then, what is your Brandon Smith Reporting 37 1 best recollection as to the date of the complaint? 2 A I believe it was January 29th. 3 Q Okay. And do you know where the complaint 4 was filed? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Could you identify where the complaint was 7 filed? 8 A The office of state ethics. 9 Q Okay. And could you identify when you 10 received notice of the complaint being filed? 11 A I believe it was shortly thereafter. I 12 couldn't tell you the day. 13 Q Okay. Have you filed a response to the 14 complaint? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Okay. Do you recall approximately when you 17 filed a response to the complaint? 18 A I don't recall the date, but after -- clearly 19 after the complaint was filed. 20 Q Okay. Was it sometime in the past week that 21 you filed a response? 22 A Without looking at my file, I could not tell 23 you the date. 24 Q Okay. And when you say looking at my file, 25 what is the file you're referring to? Brandon Smith Reporting 38 1 A It would be my personal file with respect to 2 that complaint. 3 Q And where is that -- where is that file that 4 you maintain relative to that complaint maintained? 5 A At my home. 6 Q Okay. And do you keep that in a locked 7 filing cabinet? 8 A No. 9 Q Okay. Were you assisted by counsel in 10 drafting a response to that complaint? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Can you identify the name of any lawyer who 13 gave you advice in responding to that complaint? 14 A Jim Connor. 15 Q And do you know the address of Mr. Connor? 16 A One State Street, Hartford. 17 Q Is he with a law firm? 18 A Updike, Kelly & Spellacy. 19 Q Now, you indicated that you thought this 20 complaint was confidential? 21 A Yes. 22 Q What is the basis for your claim that the 23 complaint is confidential? 24 A It says that on the top of the document. 25 Q Okay. Now, do you recall the nature of the Brandon Smith Reporting 39 1 complaint that was filed? 2 MR. HORTON: I object to the question. 3 What do you mean by nature. 4 BY MR. GERSTEN: 5 Q Okay. In a general way, what was Ms. Ruhe's 6 complaint against you concerning you? 7 MR. HORTON: I object to that question. 8 Don't answer that question. That's the issue that we 9 have to discuss with the judge whether it should be on 10 the public record what the complaint is about. 11 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. Well, 12 Ms. Bysiewicz, it was complaint about you running for 13 a position that you weren't qualified for. 14 A Yes, actually. 15 Q Okay. Did your response to that complaint 16 address the issue whether you were qualified to run for 17 a position? 18 A Would you ask that question again. 19 Q Of course. You drafted a response with the 20 assistance of counsel to the complaint? 21 A Correct. 22 Q Did you address the allegations in the 23 complaint in your response? 24 MR. HORTON: That's just a yes or no 25 question. Brandon Smith Reporting 40 1 A Yes. 2 BY MR. GERSTEN: 3 Q Did you address the allegations in the 4 complaint in a statement that was sworn under oath? 5 A I don't believe so but I would have to 6 refresh my memory by looking at my response. I do not 7 believe that it was notarized. 8 Q Does it say at the bottom of the document, my 9 signature here verifies that the information I'm 10 providing to you is true and accurate? 11 A I would have to look at the document to be 12 sure. 13 Q Okay. When's the last time you looked at the 14 document? 15 A Just prior to the time I filed it. 16 Q Okay. And did you draft the document or did 17 your attorney draft it? Let me -- that's a terrible 18 question. I apologize. Did you draft the response to 19 that document or did your attorney draft the response 20 to the document? 21 A We worked on it together. 22 Q Okay. Who did the first draft? 23 A He did. 24 Q Okay. Do you know how many drafts it went 25 through? Brandon Smith Reporting 41 1 A Several. 2 Q Okay. Do you recall the period of time that 3 you engaged in this draftsman ship? 4 A Over a period of time. Over a period of 5 time. Several days. 6 Q And is it your testimony today that the 7 complaint and your response related to your candidacy 8 to run for attorney general of the state of 9 Connecticut? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And did it relate to your qualifications in 12 satisfying any requirements to run for attorney 13 general? 14 A I believe so. 15 Q Okay. And I'm claiming it should be 16 produced. Would you be able to get a copy of that for 17 us? 18 MR. HORTON: Would you be able to. 19 A No. 20 MR. HORTON: No. Would you be able 21 to. 22 BY MR. GERSTEN: 23 Q You have physical possession of a file, 24 ma'am, correct, that relates? 25 A Yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 42 1 Q Both to the complaint as well as to the 2 response, correct? 3 A Yes. 4 Q And if I ask you to produce that complaint 5 and its response, would you be willing to do that? 6 MR. HORTON: I object. I direct her 7 not to answer that question. 8 MR. GERSTEN: I first have to have her 9 give a position then I can argue on it. 10 MR. HORTON: Fair enough. That's true. 11 BY MR. GERSTEN: 12 Q If I asked you to produce a copy of the 13 complaint and a copy of your response and any drafts 14 that went into the response, would you be going to 15 produce that? 16 A No. 17 Q And would you indicate why you're not willing 18 to produce that? 19 A That is a confidential proceeding. 20 Q Okay. So you've made a statement in a 21 confidential proceeding relating to your qualifications 22 to run for the position of attorney general and you're 23 not in a position to be willing to produce it, am I 24 correct? 25 MR. HORTON: It's not -- I object to Brandon Smith Reporting 43 1 the form of the question. 2 MR. GERSTEN: I'll restate my 3 question. 4 BY MR. GERSTEN: 5 Q Am I correct, ma'am, that you have both a 6 complaint and your response to the complaint relating 7 to your qualifications to run for attorney general and 8 you're not willing to produce it? 9 MR. HORTON: I object to the form of 10 the question. The point is I am -- 11 MR. GERSTEN: Wow. You can direct her 12 not to answer but I have a right to get the question 13 asked and I got a right to get an answer to it and if 14 you don't like the form, correct the form or you could 15 tell me what's wrong with the form and I will do my 16 best to address that issue with you and try to fix the 17 form. But if you're claiming -- we don't need 18 speeches other than that. This is my transcript I'm 19 paying for it. If you make speeches, you're going to 20 pay for it with all due respect. 21 MR. HORTON: My position, I have 22 directed her not to answer. You have made a 23 sufficient record for us to -- my position is that 24 these are documents that should not be produced, 25 they're privileged documents because they're Brandon Smith Reporting 44 1 confidential documents in an ongoing proceeding. You 2 wanted to make a record so that it would be clear to 3 the judge what's going on, you've made the record, I 4 don't think it's necessary to do more. 5 BY MR. GERSTEN: 6 Q Ma'am, what is it that you consider to be 7 confidential about your -- the complaint that was made 8 and your response to the complaint dealing with your 9 qualifications to become attorney general? 10 A The entire complaint and my response to it is 11 what I consider to be confidential. 12 Q And why do you consider it to be 13 confidential? 14 A Because that's what the State Ethics 15 Commission considers it to be. 16 Q And where did you get the source of your 17 information that the State Ethics Commission considers 18 it to be confidential? 19 A From an Attorney Wasielewski, Mark 20 Wasielewski, at the State Ethics Commission. 21 Q Okay. Did he tell you that? 22 A Yes. 23 Q He told you that personally? 24 A He did. 25 Q When did he tell you that? Brandon Smith Reporting 45 1 A Shortly after I received a copy of the 2 complaint and spoke with him. 3 Q And as I understand it, ma'am, you filed this 4 lawsuit because you're looking for a clarification to 5 determine if you, in fact, meet the statutory 6 requirements to be eligible to run for attorney 7 general; isn't that correct? 8 A Yes. 9 Q And the response you gave to me earlier with 10 regard to this state ethics complaint relates to the 11 same topic, doesn't it? 12 A It does. 13 Q And as you sit here today, are you willing 14 to -- are you going to tell us anything further about 15 your response to the state ethics committee on this 16 topic? 17 A No. 18 Q All right. Now, Mr. Horton, I think we have 19 an adequate record. Thank you. 20 MR. HORTON: I agree. 21 BY MR. GERSTEN: 22 Q Ma'am, I asked you before if you were aided 23 in a response to Ryan McKeen that you indicated you 24 drafted -- that you drafted with the assistance of 25 counsel. Do you recall that? Brandon Smith Reporting 46 1 A Yes. 2 Q Was Ryan McKeen's -- do you recall what Ryan 3 McKeen's question to you was? 4 A He didn't ask me a question. 5 Q Okay. Good point. Thank you. 6 What was it that Ryan McKeen posted relating 7 to your qualifications to serve as attorney general, as 8 you recall it? 9 A As I recall it, Ryan McKeen had a blog 10 question as to whether I met the ten year requirement. 11 Q And, in fact, on January 15th you posted a 12 response to Ryan McKeen, correct? 13 A I did. 14 Q And were you assisted by counsel in posting a 15 response to Ryan McKeen on that topic? 16 A I talked to my volunteer lawyers about it, 17 yes. 18 Q Okay. And who were your volunteer lawyers? 19 A Bob Martino is the one that comes immediately 20 to mind. 21 Q Anyone else? 22 A That's the one that comes immediately to 23 mind. 24 Q Fair enough. Now, Mr. Martino, he's with 25 Updike, Kelly & Spellacy? Brandon Smith Reporting 47 1 A He is. 2 Q And you're calling him a volunteer lawyer? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Okay. Great. Was Mr. Connor, who assisted 5 you with the drafting of the response to the ethics 6 question, he's -- I think you indicated he's with up 7 dike Kelly? 8 A He is. 9 Q Is he a volunteer lawyer when he was 10 rendering you the services of responding to the ethics 11 complaint you just mentioned? 12 A Yes. 13 Q When you call these people volunteer lawyers, 14 is there some kind of written -- well, let me ask my 15 question differently. You and Mr. Horton entered into 16 a written retainer agreement for the purposes of 17 prosecuting this action, correct? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Okay. And in that Mr. Horton outlined the 20 terms and conditions that he would work for you, 21 correct? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Hourly rates, correct? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Gave you some idea what he thought he could Brandon Smith Reporting 48 1 do for you? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Okay. Now, did you enter into a similar 4 arrangement with Mr. Martino or Mr. Connor in the 5 course of their voluntary tearing as lawyers? 6 A No. 7 Q And when you called them your volunteer 8 lawyers, to whom are they volunteering? 9 A They are volunteering on my campaign. 10 Q So Mr. Connor is providing you services in 11 responding to this ethics complaint as part of his 12 volunteering of legal services to your campaign to 13 become attorney general? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Okay. Now, is there a written letter between 16 you and your volunteer lawyers similar to the one that 17 you and Mr. Horton entered into for purposes of you 18 prosecuting this case? 19 A No. 20 Q So are there any terms and conditions about 21 the amount of time that will be spent by these 22 volunteer lawyers assisting you in this campaign? 23 A No. 24 Q I'm going to show you now a copy of a -- call 25 it Exhibit 3, please? Brandon Smith Reporting 49 1 MR. GERSTEN: See if we can get the 2 witness to identify it and after you do that because I 3 forgot to make copies I'm going to take a one minute 4 break and have copies made so we can distribute it. I 5 apologize for that. If you can do that for me I'll 6 take literally a one minute break. 7 8 (Defendant's Exhibit 3: Marked for 9 identification.) 10 11 MR. GERSTEN: Don't even bother turning 12 off the camera because it will be that quick if I can 13 get this microphone off me. 14 BY MR. GERSTEN: 15 Q Madam Secretary, I'm going to show you what 16 we had marked here as Exhibit 2. Distribute that. I'm 17 sorry about the ministerial issue there. Can you 18 identify this document, ma'am? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Okay. And is this the document you wrote 21 posting a response to Ryan's blowing? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Great. And in it, it appears as though you 24 are addressing the topic of whether you are qualified 25 to run for attorney general; is that correct? Brandon Smith Reporting 50 1 A Yes. 2 Q And that's the same topic that you indicated 3 you responded to in the ethics complaint, correct? 4 A In a general way. 5 Q Okay. And again, in a general way, it's the 6 same topic as the topic of this lawsuit, isn't it? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Okay. Did you simply use this response and 9 copy it and put it into your response -- strike that. 10 Did you take what Exhibit 3 and simply submit this to 11 the ethics people as your response to the ethics 12 complaint? 13 A No. 14 Q You wrote a different one? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Okay. And in this T course of writing a 17 different one, how long was your response to the ethics 18 complaint? 19 A Several pages. 20 Q Okay. Looking at this particular Exhibit 3, 21 ma'am, did you write the first draft of this 22 document? 23 A Yes. Tanya Meck and I wrote it. 24 Q Did the attorneys contribute to any portions 25 of this document? Brandon Smith Reporting 51 1 A Not in the drafting. 2 Q Okay. I'm not sure I understand what you 3 mean. 4 A Tanya Meck and I drafted this. Our volunteer 5 lawyers, or Bob Martino, my volunteer lawyer, made a 6 suggestion, made suggestions, but Tanya Meck and I 7 wrote it. 8 Q Okay. Now, as we look through the first 9 paragraph of this document, could you tell me if the 10 first paragraph is one in which you and Tanya wrote? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Okay. Did Mr. Martino or any other lawyer 13 provide you with any edits to the first paragraph? 14 A I don't recall any edits. We just had a 15 general discussion about the topic. 16 Q Okay. And I forgot to ask you and I 17 apologize, Tanya Meck is whom? 18 A Tanya Meck is my former chief of staff and 19 was a consultant on my campaign. 20 Q Okay. And when you say she's chief of staff, 21 you're referring to her position at the secretary of 22 state's office? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Okay. And she's no longer chief of staff? 25 A No. Brandon Smith Reporting 52 1 Q And did she go from being chief of staff to 2 going to your campaign office? 3 A No. 4 Q Okay. Could you just articulate for us what 5 the chronology is that she became both? 6 A She left the secretary of the state's office 7 years ago. She started her own consulting business. 8 And I hired her as a consultant on my campaign. 9 Q Okay. And do you recall when you hired her 10 as a consultant on your campaign? 11 A Sometime toward the end of last year. 12 Q Okay. And that would be when you were -- had 13 this exploratory thing that you referred to? 14 A Correct. 15 Q All right. 16 A I'm -- exploratory thing would be referring 17 to my exploratory committee? 18 Q Correct. Correct. 19 A Yes. 20 Q Thank you for the clarification. 21 Now, you said Mr. Martino didn't contribute 22 to the first paragraph, except in a general way? 23 A I am saying that Mr. Martino and I discussed 24 this topic in a general way. 25 Q Okay. How about the second paragraph? Brandon Smith Reporting 53 1 A It would be the same with all paragraphs. 2 Q Okay. Did Mr. Martino supply you with any 3 editing in particular as you look at this? 4 A No. 5 Q Okay. So would it be fair to say that you 6 drafted this, you ran it by your volunteer lawyer, he 7 took a look at it and said, great job, I don't have 8 anything to add, or did he provide a -- 9 A Tanya and I drafted it after having general 10 discussions with our campaign staff. That included Mr. 11 Martino. 12 Q Okay. Were there other people besides Mr. 13 Martino involved in this discussion about responding to 14 Mr. McKeen? 15 A I don't believe so. 16 Q Okay. Now, looking at this letter, if you 17 can go down to the one, two, three, fourth paragraph 18 where it starts with over the years. 19 A Yes. 20 Q Okay. You wrote that? 21 A With Tanya Meck. 22 Q Okay. It says here, over the years I have 23 made all filings and paid fees consistent with filing 24 and fees paid by other practicing attorneys in the 25 state. Do you see that? Brandon Smith Reporting 54 1 A Yes. 2 Q Okay. Did you write that or did Tanya Meck 3 write that? 4 A We both wrote it. 5 Q Okay. And it says here, including the client 6 security fund payment and the attorney occupational tax 7 return. 8 A Yes. 9 Q Again, you take ownership of that paragraph 10 in its entirety, right? 11 A Yes. 12 Q That's yours. Now, ma'am, isn't it a fact 13 that the secretary of state's office has made the 14 payments into the client security fund as contrasted 15 with you doing it personally on your behalf? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Did you tell Mr. McKeen in this paragraph 18 that, fees were paid on my behalf by the state of 19 Connecticut secretary of state's office? 20 A No. 21 Q Do you think that it would be accurate to 22 inform Mr. McKeen that secretary of -- that the state 23 of Connecticut paid fees pursuant to the requirements 24 into the client security fund payment -- fund? That's 25 a terribly phrased question. I apologize for that. Brandon Smith Reporting 55 1 Do you think it would be accurate to advise 2 Mr. McKeen that payments to the client security fund 3 were made on your behalf by the state of Connecticut? 4 MR. HORTON: Objection as to form. You 5 mean now? Could you read the question back? 6 MR. GERSTEN: I'll restate my question. 7 I'll go back if it was confusing. Any time I'm 8 confusing, you let me know, ma'am. Okay? 9 BY MR. GERSTEN: 10 Q As of the date you wrote this letter, which I 11 think is January 15th, I think we confirmed that 12 earlier, would you agree? 13 A I don't see a date on this. 14 Q Do you have any recollection as to when you 15 wrote this? 16 A Probably was about that time. 17 Q Ma'am, would it have been more accurate as of 18 the time you wrote this letter to advise Mr. McKeen 19 that rather than to say, I paid fees, that fees were 20 actually paid on your behalf by the state of 21 Connecticut? 22 A That's more specific. 23 Q Okay. My question is whether it would be 24 more accurate. 25 A This sentence is very general. If you'd like Brandon Smith Reporting 56 1 to get specific, that's more specific. 2 Q Okay. When I read this sentence, it appears 3 to be pretty specific. Tell me where I'm missing 4 something. I have paid -- if I take the operative 5 words, over the years I have paid fees consistent with 6 the filings and fees paid by other practicing 7 attorneys, including the security -- client security 8 fund. Do you see that? 9 A I see it. 10 Q Okay. That's not accurate, is it? Those 11 fees were paid on your behalf by the state of 12 Connecticut; isn't that correct? 13 MR. HORTON: I object as to form. I 14 think you're badgering the witness. She's told you 15 that she thinks this is a good general answer as 16 opposed to a more specific answer. I think that's her 17 answer. 18 MR. GERSTEN: I'm prepared to take that 19 one right now to this judge and ask him if he thinks 20 I'm badgering the secretary of state. 21 MR. HORTON: I didn't direct her not to 22 answer. 23 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. Then don't 24 interpose objections that have no purpose for them. 25 BY MR. GERSTEN: Brandon Smith Reporting 57 1 Q Ma'am, would it be more accurate if you had 2 said, all fees had been paid on my behalf by the state 3 of Connecticut, instead of saying, I paid fees, 4 including fees to the security -- client security fund? 5 Let me state my question a better way. Maybe it's 6 confusing. 7 Which is more accurate as you sit here today 8 under oath, for you to say, I paid fees that were 9 required of me to the client security fund, or, fees 10 were paid on my behalf by the state of Connecticut to 11 the client security fund? 12 A It would be more accurate to say that the 13 state of Connecticut has paid fees on my behalf to the 14 client security fund. 15 Q And you chose not to use those words in this 16 letter, correct? 17 A I did. 18 Q Okay. Now, -- 19 A However, this sentence refers to the whole 20 period that I have been an attorney. 21 Q Okay. So that if I read this sentence, 22 you're indicating that what you were referring to as 23 over the years, and your entire career that these fees 24 were paid, correct? 25 A Correct. Brandon Smith Reporting 58 1 Q And ma'am, when you worked at Robinson & 2 Cole, who paid the fees to the client security fund 3 while you were employed at Robinson & Cole? 4 A I believe that it existed then. 5 Q Okay. So we -- when you say you're talking 6 about over the years, we can't be referring to that 7 time period? 8 A I don't believe so. I'd have to check to see 9 when the client security fund was established. 10 Q Okay. Well, you recall in discovery in this 11 case you produced all sorts of records to us, you 12 remember that? 13 A I did. 14 Q And you produced all the records and proof of 15 payment that you could find to show that I made 16 payments, correct? 17 A Correct. 18 Q And you've -- in fact in that big old 19 notebook we have marked as Exhibit 2, you included all 20 the stuff that you provided to us in terms of the 21 payments you made to the client security fund, 22 correct? 23 A Correct. 24 Q And there was nothing there from you? 25 A Yes, there was. There was a $55 check. Brandon Smith Reporting 59 1 Q There was a $55 check that you made out in 2 2010 correct? 3 A Correct. 4 Q Other than that check for $55 that you issued 5 in 2010, there were no other checks that you provided 6 to us that reflected payments to the client security 7 fund from your personal checkbook, correct? 8 A No. 9 Q The answer is no? 10 A The answer is no. 11 Q And over the years that you have been 12 enjoying your status as a member of the -- of strike 13 that. 14 Over the years as you've been a public 15 servant, you haven't made any payment to the Department 16 of Revenue Services from your own checkbook, correct? 17 A I pay my taxes to the Department of Revenue 18 Services, sir. 19 Q Okay. Well, let's just talk about what 20 you're referring to in this letter, the occupation -- 21 the attorney occupational tax return. Do you see 22 that? 23 A I see it. 24 Q You've made no payments to the attorney 25 occupational tax return from your own checkbook, Brandon Smith Reporting 60 1 correct? 2 A No. Could you repeat that question, please? 3 Q I'll try or I could have the court reporter 4 redo it because I'm already moving on I've already 5 forgot I have a short memory span. Would you rather 6 have her reread it to you? 7 A Yep. 8 MR. GERSTEN: Great? 9 10 (The testimony was read.) 11 12 BY MR. GERSTEN: 13 Q While you were employed as a public 14 servant? 15 A I just would like to take a look, because I 16 might have made them when I was a legislator. So I 17 just -- because -- so could I check the -- 18 Q Of course. Go right ahead. Could you give 19 her that exhibit? Where that is exhibit book? 20 Somebody. Please. Go right ahead, ma'am. Take a 21 look. 22 MR. GERSTEN: How's my tie coming 23 across? 24 A I just want to be sure because I know I paid 25 it when I was at Aetna. And so -- because public Brandon Smith Reporting 61 1 service counts -- it covers the -- 2 MR. HORTON: There's one. 3 A Yes. I am looking at two of my checks that I 4 personally wrote to the commissioner of revenue 5 services. One dated December 17th, 1993 for $450, and 6 one dated January 12th, 1995 for $450. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q All right. And are you indicating, ma'am, 9 that you wrote those checks when you were a public 10 servant? 11 A Yes, because I was a state legislator at the 12 time. 13 Q All right. Well, in 1993, weren't you 14 employed by Aetna? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And didn't you indicate that you were not 17 exempt from making those payments because you weren't a 18 public servant because Aetna was, in fact your employer 19 and you were practicing law? 20 A Yes. But I was also a public servant as a 21 state legislator. 22 Q Okay. We'll get to that. But as of that 23 year when you made that payment when you filed your 24 occupational tax return, you did not indicate that you 25 were a public servant, you indicated you had a full Brandon Smith Reporting 62 1 time employer Aetna and you were in the practice of 2 law. And that's why you didn't claim an exemption, 3 correct? 4 A Correct. 5 Q Good. Now, -- and you indicated that you 6 made a check in would it be January of 1995? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Okay. And again, that would be covering the 9 time period that you owed because in the previous year 10 Aetna was your employer and you were in the practice of 11 law during the year 1994, correct? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Right. So there's nothing that indicates 14 that you thought you were exempt from making payments 15 during that time period because you were a public 16 servant, correct? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Now, in going back to the paragraph of the 19 letter you wrote back here to Mr. McKeen. Anything 20 else you need to check in methods records, ma'am, that 21 you just had? Are you done with those? 22 A At the moment I'm fine. 23 Q Now, ma'am, would it be more accurate or less 24 accurate for you to say to Mr. McKeen that over the 25 years I paid fees to the occupational tax return, but I Brandon Smith Reporting 63 1 didn't pay those fees when I considered myself to be a 2 public servant? 3 MR. HORTON: Was that question clear? 4 A I think -- I think that this is accurate. 5 BY MR. GERSTEN: 6 Q Okay. Well, when you say it's accurate, in 7 fact, what we can conclude here is that you didn't pay 8 any fees to the client security fund at all, all the 9 fees were paid on your behalf, correct, except for the 10 this $55 check? 11 A No. 12 Q That you wrote in June of 2010? 13 A I just paid fees and we just talked about 14 those two checks in those two years and then I wrote 15 that $ -- I wrote two $450 checks for which there are 16 copies and I wrote the $55 check. 17 Q I want to apologize I was obviously unclear 18 in my question so I want to come back and be clear. 19 Those two checks you're talking about were only checks 20 written to the Department of Revenue Services, 21 correct? 22 A Yes. Those two for $450. 23 Q Right. And those two checks were relating to 24 the occupational tax return that you're required to 25 file as an attorney if you're not what you call a Brandon Smith Reporting 64 1 public servant, correct? 2 A At that time, my full-time employment was 3 with Aetna. I was also serving in the state 4 legislature. 5 Q But you didn't claim an exemption? 6 A No. 7 Q I'm sorry, you didn't claim an exemption on 8 the basis that you were employed by the state of 9 Connecticut at that time? 10 A No. 11 Q All right. So when you say over the years, 12 are you talking about the two years that you paid the 13 occupational tax return that you're just talking about 14 right now? 15 A That was a general statement. 16 Q Okay. All right. Other than those two 17 years, am I correct, ma'am, that you have not paid fees 18 and filings strike that. 19 Over the years you have not paid fees 20 consistent with fees paid by other practicing attorneys 21 in the state, including the occupational tax return, 22 other than those two checks we have here today; is that 23 correct? Just for the tax return. 24 A Can you repeat that again? That was a long 25 question. Brandon Smith Reporting 65 1 Q Sure. It was. Any time you let me know. 2 Would it be correct, ma'am, that over the 3 years you did not pay fees consistent with fees paid by 4 other practicing attorneys in the state to the 5 occupational tax return department, other than the two 6 checks that you just referred us to today? 7 A I'm not sure I understand the question. And 8 let me explain why. There are many other attorneys who 9 practice law as public servants and they do not pay 10 fees to the Department of Revenue Services. 11 Q Okay. I'm just talking about your sentence 12 here and whether we are now clear that over the years 13 you paid only two checks consisting of $450 a piece to 14 the occupational tax return department at the 15 Department of Revenue Services; is that correct, 16 ma'am? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And, in fact, you've paid no fees to the 19 client security payment fund, other than the one check 20 that you made reference to in January of 2010? 21 A . 22 MR. HORTON: I object. I'm sorry, go 23 ahead. I was going to object as to the form. You 24 mean out of her own checkbook? 25 MR. GERSTEN: Correct. Of course. Brandon Smith Reporting 66 1 A Yes, because -- 2 Q The state of Connecticut has paid that, 3 correct? 4 A Correct. 5 Q Now, it also says here that I'm also 6 registered on the state of Connecticut judicial website 7 as an active attorney in the state. Did you see 8 that? 9 A I see it. 10 Q Do you have an office registered within the 11 state of Connecticut judicial website demonstrating -- 12 that shows where you're actively practicing law? 13 A That would be room 104 at the State 14 Capitol. 15 Q Okay. Does your -- does the state of 16 Connecticut judicial website indicate that it's at the 17 State Capitol? 18 A I'm not sure. 19 Q Wouldn't it be pair to say, ma'am, that you 20 registered no office on the state of Connecticut 21 judicial website where you actively practice law? 22 A They may have. The Connecticut judicial 23 department may have my home address. 24 Q Okay. And your testimony is that your home 25 address is where you would list your office where you Brandon Smith Reporting 67 1 actively practice law on the judicial website, is that 2 your testimony? I'm trying to understand what you're 3 saying? 4 A I'm trying to understand what you're 5 saying. 6 Q Okay. I'll restate my question. Is it your 7 testimony that you provided information to be posted on 8 the state of Connecticut judicial website where you 9 actively practice law and you've listed an office? 10 A My home is at 125 Clover Street and I receive 11 mail there with respect to some attorney registrations 12 for the state of New York, for the state of 13 Connecticut. My office is at the Capitol. 14 Q I understand that. On your -- where you 15 refer the reader here to the registration on the state 16 of Connecticut judicial website, do you list an 17 office? 18 A I'm not certain what address appears on the 19 judicial website. 20 Q Okay. 21 MR. GERSTEN: Would it be good now to 22 take the break to make you change? Okay. The court 23 reporter has indicated we have one minute for the tape 24 so it's just as good to take a five minute break and 25 let him do his thing that is okay Madam Secretary. Brandon Smith Reporting 68 1 A Fine. 2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record 3 11:43. 4 5 (Recess: 11:43 AM to 11:57 AM.) 6 7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The beginning of 8 tape number 2, on the record 11:57. 9 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 10 Q Now, ma'am I just want to go back to this 11 letter you wrote to attorney McKeen. It -- if you go 12 back up to the paragraph above it -- oh, I'm sorry I 13 have one other question. You've mentioned that you -- 14 we have our -- you have the lawsuit in which you're 15 litigating over the issue about your qualifications. 16 You have this Connecticut ethics document that you 17 indicate has something to do with your qualifications, 18 we have Mr. McKeen's letter which deals with your 19 qualifications. Have you written any other documents 20 relating to the topic of your qualifications to serve 21 as attorney general? 22 A Not that I'm aware. 23 Q Okay. So there is no other written documents 24 than the three we've just identified? 25 A Not that I'm aware. Brandon Smith Reporting 69 1 Q Okay. And when you say not that I'm aware, 2 I'm a little concerned because this is an issue that's 3 only arisen since January. And I want to make sure 4 there's nothing else floating out there that we might 5 discover later that you said I don't remember. There's 6 nothing else in writing that you can recall that you've 7 drafted relating to the topic of your qualifications to 8 serve? 9 A No. 10 Q Okay. Great. Now, other than documents that 11 have been in writing, have you made any verbal 12 statements regarding the topic of your qualifications 13 to serve as attorney general? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Okay. Could you -- I'm not interested in the 16 topic yet, except could you tell me -- could you 17 identify those occasions? 18 A When I campaign for attorney general, I 19 certainly discuss my legal background. 20 Q Okay. Great. Now, going to this document 21 here, I just want to make sure we use your -- 22 understand your words. The next paragraph down says 23 something, this makes me eligible for the office. Do 24 you see that? 25 A Yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 70 1 Q Okay. What is the this that you are 2 referring to? 3 A This would be my service as secretary of the 4 state, my years in private practice, and certainly my 5 work as a legislator. 6 Q Now, I'm looking in here, in your document 7 you wrote, and that's why I asked you what you were 8 referring to -- where is your reference here as the 9 legislative service that qualifies you as an attorney? 10 That is up in that prior paragraph again? Is that what 11 you're referring -- 12 A I'm looking in the third. 13 Q Great? 14 A Paragraph there is a reference to my years in 15 the legislature. 16 Q Okay. So you're indicating now that you 17 consider your service as a state legislator to be part 18 of your qualifications to make you eligible for the 19 Office of Attorney General, am I correct? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And if we go to the eight years in private 22 practice in that same paragraph you just referred us 23 to. You're talking about your two years at White & 24 Case? 25 A Yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 71 1 Q And are you talking about a full four year 2 term at Robinson & Cole? 3 A Yes. 4 MR. HORTON: I'm sorry what do you 5 mean? 6 MR. GERSTEN: I just. 7 MR. HORTON: I don't understand what 8 that means. 9 BY MR. GERSTEN: 10 Q Are you indicating under oath that you spent 11 a full four years at Robinson & Cole? 12 A I spent two -- approximately two years at 13 White & Case, approximately four years at Robinson & 14 Cole and approximately two years at the Aetna law 15 department. 16 Q Okay. Approximate makes me think are you 17 rounding off? 18 A I just don't have the exact dates at my 19 fingertips. 20 Q I understand that. Would it be correct, 21 ma'am, that you did not serve -- you did not work as an 22 associate at Robinson & Cole for a full four years and 23 you are rounding up? 24 A All I know are the years at the moment 25 because I don't have anything in my possession that Brandon Smith Reporting 72 1 shows me the exact dates. 2 Q I understand you don't have the exact dates 3 but my question is: Isn't it correct you spent less 4 than four years at Robinson & Cole but you've rounded 5 it up because you spent three years and seven months 6 there and you consider that to be -- 7 A I don't have the exact dates so I couldn't 8 say with certainty. 9 Q Okay. Would it surprise you to learn, ma'am, 10 that the employment records at Robinson & Cole do not 11 reflect that you worked there for four years? 12 A They would have the exact dates. 13 Q I understand. Am my question is: Would it 14 surprise you that those records do not reflect that you 15 worked there for four years? 16 A I'm certain that their records are 17 accurate. 18 Q Okay. That's not my question. Would you be 19 surprised to learn that their records that you say are 20 accurate reflect that you did not work there for four 21 years? 22 MR. HORTON: It's a yes or no question 23 would you be surprised. 24 A I guess I can't say. 25 BY MR. GERSTEN: Brandon Smith Reporting 73 1 Q You can't answer the question? It would be 2 news to you to learn that the employment records at 3 Robinson & Cole do not reflect that you worked at 4 Robinson & Cole for a full four years, but, in fact, 5 you worked there less than four years? That would be 6 news to you? 7 A No. 8 Q Okay. And when you talk about your strong 9 and diverse qualifications, which include eight years 10 in private practice, are you referring to your strong 11 and diverse legal qualifications there as satisfying 12 the definition for eligibility as defined in the 13 Connecticut statute that reflects that you have to have 14 ten years of active practice at the bar of the state? 15 A I am simply describing my legal background 16 and the qualifications issue and what is meant by 3-124 17 is the subject of this lawsuit. 18 Q I'm afraid maybe my question wasn't clear. 19 Where you refer Mr. McKeen to your eight years in 20 private practice, are you referring him to your eight 21 years in private practice as a means to demonstrate 22 that you satisfy the terms of the Connecticut General 23 Statute that require you to have ten years of active 24 practice at the bar of the state? 25 A No. Brandon Smith Reporting 74 1 Q Okay. And where you refer him to the 16 2 years of public service, do you see that section 3 here? 4 A I do. 5 Q Okay. Great. Are you referring to the 16 6 years as satisfying the statutory requirement that you 7 have ten years of active practice at the bar of this 8 state? 9 A I am simply saying that I was in the 10 legislature for a period of time and as secretary of 11 the state for a period of time, that would be 16 years 12 in public service or perhaps a little more. 13 Q Okay? 14 MR. GERSTEN: Could I have my question 15 read back to the witness because I'm afraid she didn't 16 understand it. 17 A Yes. I'm not understanding your question. 18 19 (The testimony was read.) 20 21 A Yes. 22 BY MR. GERSTEN: 23 Q Okay. Now, you indicated in one of your 24 answers earlier today that you worked at the Aetna and 25 you were a state legislator, do you recall that? Brandon Smith Reporting 75 1 A Yes. 2 Q Are you including that time period in this 3 eight years and 16 years? 4 A Can you rephrase that question? 5 Q Of course I can? 6 A Go ahead. 7 Q Any time you don't understand, you let me 8 know. 9 You indicated you spent time at the Aetna 10 working as an attorney. 11 A Yes. 12 Q And you indicated that during that time 13 period, you also served as a legislator? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Okay. Now, were you including your years at 16 the Aetna when you indicated eight years in private 17 practice? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Were you including your years that you 20 simultaneously served as a legislator at the same time 21 that you worked as an attorney at the Aetna in your 16 22 years of public service? 23 A Yes. 24 Q So ma'am, I'm just trying to understand 25 something here. Are you double counting there in some Brandon Smith Reporting 76 1 way? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Okay? 4 A Because I did private practice and public 5 service at the same time. 6 Q Okay. You didn't indicate that to Mr. 7 McKeen, did you, that you were double counting? 8 A This -- what I wrote to Mr. McKeen is a 9 description of my background in the law and public 10 service. 11 Q Okay. I'm afraid my question wasn't clear. 12 Could you read back my question? 13 14 (The testimony was read.) 15 16 A No. 17 BY MR. GERSTEN: 18 Q Thank you. Now, it also indicates here that 19 you have given Mr. McKeen a claim that says that active 20 practice would mean only private practice. Do you see 21 that? 22 A Where is that? 23 Q Okay. I'll read it to you and you can tell 24 me if I've read it correctly. There is no legal basis 25 to conclude that active practice at the bar of this Brandon Smith Reporting 77 1 state excludes those attorneys who are practicing in 2 the public or corporate arenas. To interpret active 3 practice to mean only private practice would be a 4 mistake. Do you see that? 5 A Show me where we're talking about. Right 6 here? 7 Q I'm talking right after your use of the word 8 secretary of state right where your fingers are in that 9 same paragraph? 10 A I see. Correct. 11 Q And by the way, did you make a similar 12 response like this to the state ethics committee? 13 A I don't believe so. 14 Q Now, looking at your choice of words here 15 where you say there is no legal basis to conclude, 16 you're referring to some legal research you did to come 17 to this conclusion? 18 A Yes. 19 Q What was the legal research you performed to 20 come to the conclusion that you draw in this sentence? 21 A Which sentence? 22 Q The one that starts with there and ends with 23 a term corporate arenas? 24 A There are cases which absolutely count 25 lawyering done in public service to be active practice Brandon Smith Reporting 78 1 of the law. 2 Q Maybe my question wasn't clear. 3 MR. GERSTEN: Could I have you repeat 4 it to the witness, please? 5 6 (The testimony was read.) 7 8 A I looked at cases that consider what the 9 definition of active practice means. 10 BY MR. GERSTEN: 11 Q Okay. And when did you look at those 12 cases? 13 A In January. 14 Q Okay. So you learned about Ryan's letter on 15 January 13th, and you responded to Ryan on January 16 15th? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Correct? And now your testimony under oath 19 is I looked at some cases in that time period that 20 would lead me to have the conclusion that I'm drawing 21 in this letter, correct? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Can you identify any case as you sit here two 24 months later that you looked at during that time 25 period? Brandon Smith Reporting 79 1 MR. HORTON: I'm going to object. I 2 think this is getting to the boarder of harassment of 3 the witness. We're talking about a document that you 4 have been examining her on for well -- at least an 5 hour and I mean the way this is going, the 6 deposition's going to take two or three days and I 7 think that this is improper examination. You're not 8 examining her. 9 MR. GERSTEN: You call the judge then. 10 I'm not taking this. You've said this now three 11 times. You want to call the judge and you tell him 12 that I'm harassing this witness. I've got witnesses 13 here, I got a record and I'm telling you, stop it. Or 14 call the judge and you you tell him that I'm engaging 15 in that kind of behavior because I think you're 16 harassing me and interrupting me with all respect so 17 stop it or tell me I'm stopping this deposition and 18 judge she would done actually has to sit in here and 19 watch the questioning take place. These are her words 20 in a topic on this lawsuit. It's fair game. It's 21 relevant and it's going to lead to even more 22 admissible evidence. So bottom line either take a 23 position and I'm sorry I'm getting upset, but this 24 deposition is taking some time and it's not my fault. 25 And I apologize forth to the witness for losing my Brandon Smith Reporting 80 1 cool. 2 MR. HORTON: Proceed. 3 MR. GERSTEN: Thank you. And now I 4 lost my place. Could I have my last question read 5 back? 6 7 (The testimony was read.) 8 9 BY MR. GERSTEN: 10 Q Please, ma'am. 11 MR. HORTON: Yes or no. 12 A Yes. 13 BY MR. GERSTEN: 14 Q Okay. What case did you look at between 15 January 13th and January 15th that provided you with a 16 basis to come to this conclusion? 17 MR. HORTON: May I have a minute with 18 my client. 19 MR. GERSTEN: There is a question 20 pending. You can, as soon as she answers the 21 question. 22 A The Perez case. 23 Q I'm sorry. I can't hear you. 24 A The Perez case. 25 Q P-e-r-e-z? Brandon Smith Reporting 81 1 A I believe. 2 Q Okay. Do you recall the full name of the 3 case? 4 A No. 5 MR. GERSTEN: Do you want to take a 6 moment with your client? 7 MR. HORTON: I would. Thank you. 8 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record. 9 12:16. 10 11 (Recess: 12:16 pm to 12:18 pm.) 12 13 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record 14 12:19. 15 MR. GERSTEN: Thank you so much. 16 MR. HORTON: I have nothing further. 17 BY MR. GERSTEN: 18 Q Madam Secretary, I should have double 19 checked, after your break with your lawyer here, do you 20 have any parts of your testimony you want to correct 21 your change or anything else like that before we move 22 on? 23 A No. 24 Q Okay. Good. Ma'am, do you recall what state 25 decided this Perez case? Brandon Smith Reporting 82 1 A Maryland. 2 Q Okay. And do you have any other recollection 3 about the name of the case besides calling it the Perez 4 case from Maryland? 5 A No. 6 Q Now, other than the Perez case from Maryland, 7 are you aware of any other legal research you looked at 8 in terms of forming a basis for your conclusion that 9 you wrote to Mr. McKeen? 10 A No. 11 Q So when you responded to Mr. McKeen, the only 12 legal research you had performed was a review of this 13 Perez case? 14 A That's the one that comes immediately to 15 mind. 16 Q Well, now we're here to try to find out is 17 there any others when you wrote -- when you wrote this 18 letter on January 15th, what was the legal research you 19 performed to come to the conclusion that you did? 20 A Reading the Perez case. 21 Q Okay. And nothing else? 22 A That's all that I can recall. 23 Q Okay. Did you keep a file? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Okay. And the file was maintained -- he? Brandon Smith Reporting 83 1 A Actually, may I ask, keep a file on what in 2 particular? 3 Q Fair enough. Did you keep a file on the 4 legal research you performed between January 13th and 5 January 15th in drafting your response to Ryan 6 McKeen? 7 A I have a file of legal research with respect 8 to this issue. 9 Q Okay. I'm sorry, maybe my question wasn't 10 clear. Could you read it back to the witness so she 11 could try to answer what I think my question was? 12 13 (The testimony was read.) 14 15 A I can't remember about this particular -- 16 responding to this. I do have a rather voluminous file 17 of legal research on this issue. 18 BY MR. GERSTEN: 19 Q Okay. And when you say this issue, the issue 20 you're referring to is what? 21 A The ten year active practice requirement. 22 Q Okay. And when did you compile this file 23 relating to this topic? 24 A After this ten year requirement became an 25 issue. Brandon Smith Reporting 84 1 Q And could you tell me what date this ten year 2 issue became a topic for you to keep legal research 3 on? 4 A After it became an issue in the media. 5 Q Okay. Would that be at the time Mr. McKeen 6 wrote his post or before? 7 A Around the same time. 8 Q Okay. So is it your testimony under oath now 9 that you've maintained a file that includes the work 10 you did in responding to Mr. McKeen? 11 A This is something that Tanya Meck and I wrote 12 together. I don't recall if I have a particular file 13 on this subject, but generally, I have a file on the 14 qualifications issue. 15 Q Okay. Let's try it more generally again. 16 What is the file that you maintain strike that. 17 There is a title to the file you maintain? 18 A I have a file of materials given to me by my 19 lawyer and by volunteer lawyers. 20 Q Okay. Outside of the materials given to 21 you -- when you say my lawyer, you're talking about 22 Horton? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Okay. Now, do you maintain a file on the 25 topic that you use to write your letter to Mr. Brandon Smith Reporting 85 1 McKeen? 2 A No. 3 Q Did you actually perform the research 4 yourself to pull and locate this Perez case that you 5 used to form your conclusion that you drew in your 6 letter to Mr. McKeen? 7 A Can you ask that question again? 8 Q Of course. Did you personally conduct the 9 research to find this Perez case you're referring to 10 from Maryland as the basis for you to form your opinion 11 that you concluded in this paragraph? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Okay. And do you recall how you went about 14 locating that when you performed this legal research? 15 A I read the case. 16 Q Okay. Do you recall how you found the 17 case? 18 A It was mentioned by one of my consultants. 19 Q Who mentioned it to you? 20 A Anna Bennett. She worked on an attorney 21 general case in Maryland and I believe it was Mr. 22 Perez's case. 23 Q So is it your testimony she gave you the name 24 of the case or she actually supplied you with the 25 case? Brandon Smith Reporting 86 1 A Well, she made me aware of it and I found 2 it. 3 Q Okay. And what I'd like to know is when you 4 say I found it, what did you go do too find it? 5 A I asked one of my friends to get it for me 6 and then I read it. 7 Q Okay. So you didn't do the research 8 yourself, you told somebody, I heard about this case, 9 can you locate it for me and get it back to me? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Okay. Fair enough. That's all I was trying 12 to get at. 13 A Yes. 14 Q Okay. And do you recall who that person was 15 who got you the case? 16 A Yes, Dave Killain. 17 Q Is Dave Killain a lawyer? 18 A No. 19 Q Do you know how Mr. Killain went about 20 locating this case? 21 A I believe on the Internet. 22 Q Fair enough. Now, as you sit here today 23 recalling that Perez case, what did it stand for that 24 you used it as the basis to claim that it would be a 25 mistake to -- it would be -- that active practice at Brandon Smith Reporting 87 1 the bar does not exclude those practicing the public or 2 corporate arenas? 3 A That Mr. Perez was employed by the federal 4 government. 5 Q Okay. And so you're indicating here that 6 because he was employed by the federal government under 7 the Maryland statute, that did not exclude him from 8 qualifying under that state's statutory terms, 9 correct? 10 A Can you repeat that? 11 MR. GERSTEN: Sure. I'll have the 12 court reporter do it for me. 13 14 (The testimony was read.) 15 16 A I'm not making any legal conclusions about 17 Maryland law. It's just something that I looked at. 18 BY MR. GERSTEN: 19 Q Well, did you look to determine when you 20 wrote Mr. McKeen whether the terms of the Maryland 21 statute were the same as the Connecticut statute that 22 you're trying to become qualified under? 23 A I believe they have a similar statute. 24 Q Did you look at the terms of the 25 Connecticut -- strike that. Did you look at the terms Brandon Smith Reporting 88 1 and wording of the Maryland statute and compare it to 2 the terms and wording of the Connecticut statute? 3 A I looked at it. 4 Q And is it your testimony today as an attorney 5 that the words of the Maryland statute are identical to 6 the words of the Connecticut statute? 7 A I'd have to look at them again. 8 Q Okay. Why do you have to look at them 9 again? 10 A It's been a while since I looked at the 11 Maryland statute. 12 Q And when you wrote this letter, did you 13 compare the wording of the Connecticut statute to the 14 wording of the Maryland statute? 15 A I read about the Maryland statute. I've read 16 the Connecticut statute. 17 Q I appreciate that, ma'am. What I'm asking 18 you is at the time that you wrote this letter to Mr. 19 McKeen, did you conduct a comparison of the Maryland 20 statute to the wording of the Connecticut statute? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Okay. And at the time you wrote this letter 23 to Mr. McKeen, did you form a conclusion that the 24 wording of the Maryland statute was identical to the 25 wording of the Connecticut statute? Brandon Smith Reporting 89 1 A I can't remember. 2 Q Okay. So is it your testimony today that if 3 you looked at the wording of the Maryland statute today 4 you'd be able to do a comparison yourself and maybe 5 recall it? 6 A Maybe. 7 Q Okay. Is it your testimony today that if the 8 wording of the Maryland statute is different than the 9 wording of the Connecticut statute, you would still 10 rely on the Maryland statute to support your 11 statement? 12 A Can you repeat that? 13 MR. GERSTEN: Go ahead Ms. Court 14 reporter, Beth? 15 16 (The testimony was read.) 17 18 A I am now aware of very good authority for the 19 position in this letter. 20 MR. GERSTEN: I'm sorry could I have my 21 question read back. I don't think she understood it. 22 23 (The testimony was read.) 24 25 A The wording is different? I'm just unsure of Brandon Smith Reporting 90 1 what you're getting at. 2 BY MR. GERSTEN: 3 Q Okay. Do you not understand my question, the 4 words of my question? 5 A I don't. 6 Q Okay. Ma'am, I guess I'm sorry I'm so obtuse 7 and I'm not being clear. 8 Would you state that if the wording of the 9 Maryland statute in which Mr. Perez qualified, 10 apparently, to run, were different than the wording of 11 the Connecticut statute, you would still rely on the 12 wording of the Maryland statute to make your 13 conclusions? 14 A No. 15 Q Okay. Now, you mentioned in response to my 16 question before you didn't understand it that you're 17 now aware of very good authority to support the 18 position that you took in this letter. Do you know 19 what I'm referring to a moment ago? 20 A Yes. 21 Q What's the authority you're now aware of? 22 MR. HORTON: I object to that question. 23 That -- well, say the beginning for me. 24 A It would be in the draft brief. 25 BY MR. GERSTEN: Brandon Smith Reporting 91 1 Q And this is a draft brief that you reviewed 2 for preparation of this deposition, correct? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Did reading this draft brief help you in your 5 preparation for today? That's a terrible question that 6 was really stupid. Sorry. 7 Did you have a reason at the time you wrote 8 Mr. McKeen for letting him know that your 9 interpretation here was relying on Maryland law. 10 A No. 11 Q Okay. Was there a reason why you did not 12 tell Mr. McKeen that you were relying on Maryland law 13 to support this position you were taking? 14 A No. 15 Q In your response to the ethics complaint, did 16 you mention this Maryland case that touches on the 17 topic? 18 A . 19 MR. HORTON: Well -- 20 A We already have an objection about the 21 discussion of that. 22 MR. HORTON: Yes, could you repeat that 23 question, please. I obviously didn't hear it 24 properly. 25 Brandon Smith Reporting 92 1 (The testimony was read.) 2 3 MR. HORTON: You're right I missed 4 that. No, I object. Don't answer that. That's part 5 of the issue we have right now. Sorry. 6 BY MR. GERSTEN: 7 Q Okay I'll state my question differently. In 8 your answer to the ethics complaint, did you give them 9 any cases or legal analysis in support of your 10 position? 11 MR. HORTON: I object to that. 12 Let's -- 13 MR. GERSTEN: I'm making a claim -- I 14 want to make sure that I have everything I have to 15 show to demonstrate that this claim that you're making 16 now has no grounds. I'm entitled to the answer to the 17 question. I'm not asking her for the details I just 18 want to make sure that we have it there. 19 MR. HORTON: This is a yes or no 20 question. 21 MR. GERSTEN: Yes or no question. 22 A And what was the question. 23 BY MR. GERSTEN: 24 Q Did you provide the ethics commission with 25 any legal authority relating to the topic of your Brandon Smith Reporting 93 1 qualifications to run for attorney general? 2 MR. HORTON: You may answer because 3 that's yes or no. 4 A No. 5 BY MR. GERSTEN: 6 Q Now, if I go onto another portion of the your 7 response to Mr. McKeen. You refer Mr. McKeen to a 8 section of the practice book. Are you familiar with 9 our practice book? 10 A Yes. 11 Q How often have you used the practice book in 12 your daily practice of law? 13 A I don't use it. I'm not a litigator. 14 Q When you say you're not a litigator, you've 15 never been in a deposition before, ma'am, right? 16 A Correct. 17 Q This is your first time as a witness? 18 A Yes. 19 Q And have you ever been a participant in a 20 deposition like some of these other people are here, 21 just watching one? 22 A No. 23 Q Okay. Never signed any pleadings in court? 24 A No. 25 Q Did you file a brief in some elections case Brandon Smith Reporting 94 1 in the Second Circuit? 2 A Oh, yes. 3 Q And, in fact, that brief wasn't accepted by 4 the Second Circuit, was it? 5 A No. 6 Q Your brief that you filed was filed in an 7 untimely fashion, wasn't it? 8 A No. 9 Q Okay. Well the Second Circuit refused to 10 accept the pleading you filed, signature they? 11 A They are not required to accept amicus 12 briefs. 13 MR. GERSTEN: Could I have my question 14 read back, because I'm not sure she answered it? 15 16 (The testimony was read.) 17 18 A They did. 19 BY MR. GERSTEN: 20 Q And other than that pleading, ma'am, in your 21 whether it's 23 or 24 years of being a lawyer, have you 22 filed any other pleadings in court or maybe that's 23 poorly phrased. I'm sorry. Have you ever attempted to 24 file any other pleadings with the Court in that 24-year 25 period? Brandon Smith Reporting 95 1 A No. 2 Q So the only time that you attempted to file a 3 pleading was, in fact, rejected by the Second Circuit 4 court of appeals; is that correct? 5 MR. HORTON: You're considering an 6 amicus curiae brief to be a pleading? 7 MR. GERSTEN: Yes. 8 A Yes. 9 BY MR. GERSTEN: 10 Q Let's call it a nonpleading. Let's just call 11 it a submission to the court. You wrote that 12 document -- or you signed that document, correct? 13 A I did. 14 Q We'll call it a brief as opposed to a 15 pleading so Mr. Horton isn't concerned about form. Are 16 we clear that that's what we're referring to, that it's 17 a brief? 18 A What are we referring to? 19 Q Did you submit a brief that was rejected by 20 the Second Circuit court of appeals? 21 A It was submitted on my behalf. 22 Q Did you sign it? 23 A I don't -- it was written by David Makerwicz 24 of Updike, Kelly & Spellacy. 25 Q Did you sign it? Brandon Smith Reporting 96 1 A I don't believe so. I don't recall. 2 Q Okay. Was it signed on your behalf as 3 secretary of state or as an individual? 4 A As an individual. 5 Q Okay. So are you indicating now that you 6 don't recall signing it as an attorney? 7 A I don't remember. I would have to look at 8 it. 9 Q Okay. Do you recall when your brief was 10 submitted and rejected by Second Circuit court of 11 appeals? 12 A End of December, beginning of January. 13 Q Okay. So just three or four months ago, 14 right? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Was it submitted before or after you 17 announced your candidacy for attorney general? 18 A Before. 19 Q And was it rejected by the Second Circuit 20 court of appeals before or after you announced your 21 candidacy for attorney general? 22 A Before. 23 Q So other than that brief, ma'am, that you 24 said was written by what's this fellow's name, 25 David -- Brandon Smith Reporting 97 1 A David Makerwicz. 2 Q Okay. And he's at Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, 3 too? 4 A Yes. 5 Q He's with the same law firm that Martino is 6 doing all this volunteer work? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Okay. When he submitted that brief on your 9 behalf he submitted that as an individual you said -- 10 you were an individual? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Okay. Did you pay him to submit that brief 13 on your behalf? 14 A No. 15 Q So he was volunteering to write a brief that 16 wasn't rejected -- that was rejected by the Second 17 Circuit court of appeals? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Do you recall as you sit here today whether 20 that brief had any indication on it that this lawyer 21 from up dike Kelly and Spellacy wrote it? 22 A I don't have it in front of me. 23 Q Okay. Other than that brief that was 24 rejected by the Second Circuit court of appeals in 25 January of 2010, are you familiar with any other Brandon Smith Reporting 98 1 document -- I'll restate that. 2 Although you said Mr. Whatever his name. 3 A Makerwicz. 4 Q I'll butcher that several times. Mr. 5 Makerwicz wrote on your behalf, have you had any other 6 briefs written on your behalf and submitted to any 7 court as an individual? 8 A As an individual? I don't believe so. 9 Q Okay. 10 A Aside from this case. 11 Q Okay. Fair enough. Now, that brief that Mr. 12 Makerwicz wrote, did you participate in writing it, 13 too? 14 A I reviewed it. 15 Q Okay. When you say you reviewed it, did you 16 make any edits or contributions to it? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Okay. How many drafts did it go through, if 19 you recall? 20 A Several, as I recall. 21 Q Okay. So we can call you a collaborator, if 22 you will, in that document? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Other than that document that you 25 collaborated in and was rejected by the Second Circuit, Brandon Smith Reporting 99 1 were there any other attempts you've made in the past 2 24 years to participate in a brief that was submitted 3 to any court? 4 A I worked on pro bono cases as a lawyer at 5 White & Case. 6 Q Okay. White & Case, that's a big New York 7 law firm, isn't it? 8 A It is. 9 Q Like 500 lawyers? 10 A Perhaps more. 11 Q Outside of that work when you worked at that 12 big time New York law firm, working on briefs, have you 13 collaborated on any other briefs besides the one that 14 was rejected recently at the Second Circuit? 15 A As an individual? 16 Q As an individual. 17 A No. 18 Q So no depositions, no pleadings, and two 19 briefs in 24 years, correct? 20 A As an individual. 21 Q As an individual. Am I correct? Have I 22 summarized it properly? 23 A Yes, except that my attorney general lawyers 24 represent the office of the secretary of the state on a 25 variety of litigation matters that have involved our Brandon Smith Reporting 100 1 office as a defendant. 2 Q Okay. We're going to come back to that. I 3 just want to make sure my summary was correct. Other 4 than the brief that was rejected and this pro bono work 5 you did at this New York law firm, you don't recall any 6 other briefs you collaborated on that were submitted to 7 the court over 24 years? 8 A Correct. I'm a corporate lawyer, not a 9 litigator. 10 Q Okay. I'm going to come back to that, too. 11 A Yep. 12 Q Have you actually ever been in court 13 yourself? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Okay. And when you're at court, did you 16 stand at the counsel table? 17 A I've been to court to be sworn in to the New 18 York bar and the Connecticut bar and to observe 19 proceedings. 20 Q Okay? 21 Q Okay. 22 A And I've been to small claims court. 23 Q How did you enjoy that experience? 24 A Lovely. 25 Q Did you represent yourself in small claims? Brandon Smith Reporting 101 1 A Yes. 2 Q How many times have you been to small claims 3 court? 4 A Once. 5 Q Okay. 6 A And I did win. 7 Q And when you observed proceedings in court, 8 as you've just mentioned, were you the one who stood up 9 in court and addressed the judge or the jury? 10 A No. 11 Q Were you sitting at the counsel table and 12 introduced to anyone as the lawyer for the case? 13 A No. 14 Q Did you sit in back of the bar of the court 15 or did you sit in front of the bar at counsel table? 16 A In the public portion of the courtroom. 17 Q And that would be the part that's not at 18 counsel table, correct? 19 A Correct. 20 Q That would be the part in back of the bar, 21 correct? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And how many times did you come to court to 24 observe the proceedings in court and you sat in the 25 public section? Brandon Smith Reporting 102 1 A Just a few. 2 Q Can you name the most recent? 3 A I believe in law school I went to an argument 4 at the Connecticut Supreme Court. 5 Q Okay. Any other occasions? And I don't mean 6 to sound flippant, but I don't think -- that's the most 7 recent one you can recall? That would be what, 8 somewhere 25 years ago, if my math is right? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Was that in your first year of law school? 11 A I can't remember. Probably. 12 Q Well, it was in law school, right? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And you went to UConn law school? 15 A I did. 16 Q Right? 17 A For my first year. 18 Q So you don't recall going to watch the 19 proceedings at the Connecticut Supreme Court while you 20 were at your Duke Law School, correct? 21 A It probably was when I was a first year. 22 Q So other than that occasion to watch what 23 takes place in court you have no more recent 24 recollection about what takes place in court, by 25 personal observation and being in the public section? Brandon Smith Reporting 103 1 A Yes. 2 Q So you've never actually been introduced to a 3 judge or jury as the attorney -- as an attorney at all, 4 have you? 5 A Can you repeat that question? 6 Q Sure. Have you ever been inside a courthouse 7 at all? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Okay. And have you ever been inside a 10 courthouse at any time and been introduced as an 11 attorney in the case? 12 A In a case pending before that court? 13 Q Yes, ma'am. 14 A No. 15 Q Have you ever been inside of a courthouse and 16 been introduced as an attorney outside of your 17 admittance to the bar? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Okay. And when was that? 20 A When I visit district courts to do 21 naturalization ceremonies. 22 Q Okay. And when's the last time that you 23 visited -- that would be the district court of 24 Connecticut? 25 A Yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 104 1 Q And that would be the federal district 2 court? 3 A Yes. 4 Q And in the federal district court, when was 5 the last time you participated in naturalization 6 ceremony where you were introduced as an attorney? 7 A Well, I was introduced as the secretary of 8 the state and I am an attorney, sir. 9 Q Okay. But when you were introduced as 10 secretary of state, does your introduction as secretary 11 of state include a title that says attorney? 12 A No. 13 Q So outside of the naturalizations, have you 14 been introduced as an attorney while you were standing 15 in a courthouse at any time in the past 26 years? 16 A With respect to a pending case in court, no. 17 Q Okay. And when you say with respect to a 18 pending case in court, how about with any case? 19 A I was just -- I visit courthouses as a public 20 official and therefore I'm sure along the way someone 21 has said, this is attorney Bysiewicz. 22 Q Can you recall the most recent time that took 23 place? 24 A Not a specific recollection. 25 Q Did it take place in any time you can recall Brandon Smith Reporting 105 1 in the past six months? 2 A No. 3 Q In the past five years? 4 A I can't remember. 5 Q Okay. And by the way, ma'am, is this the 6 first time -- this is the first time you've been 7 deposed I think we said. Have you ever been a witness 8 in a case before? 9 A No. 10 Q Okay. Have you ever participated in a 11 preparation for a deposition before? 12 A No. 13 Q Have you ever participated in preparing 14 discovery or anything else like that before? 15 A No. 16 Q Okay. Have you ever even in your capacity as 17 secretary of state and your work with the attorney 18 generals as you mentioned have you ever been in a room 19 and you talk about here are things like the occupying 20 statement should sound like, have you ever been a prep 21 session for trial? 22 A No. 23 Q Have you ever been in a prep session about a 24 closing argument in a case when the attorney generals 25 are in the room? Brandon Smith Reporting 106 1 A No. 2 Q Have you participated in any work with the 3 attorney generals in representing the secretary of 4 state's office where you sat down and said, hey, we 5 have some witnesses we got to prepare and work towards 6 preparation of -- trial preparation, have you done 7 that, too? 8 A Preparation of witnesses? 9 Q Right. Have you ever sat in a room with the 10 attorney generals office and sat down and said, we've 11 got to -- 12 A No. 13 Q Okay. Have you ever sat down with the 14 lawyers while they were representing the secretary of 15 state and said, here's some ideas I have for a 16 pleading, can you put this into the brief or the 17 pleading or the motion or anything, have you done 18 that? 19 A No. 20 Q And am I correct, ma'am, the secretary of 21 state doesn't file appearances on behalf of the state 22 of Connecticut in any way, does it, in any court? 23 A No. 24 Q And am I correct all litigation is directed 25 to the attorney general's office to represent the Brandon Smith Reporting 107 1 interests of the state of Connecticut, correct? 2 A Yes. 3 Q In fact, when you refer to earlier litigation 4 that the attorney generals were involved with, they 5 were your lawyers, weren't they? 6 A Yes. 7 Q You were the client, weren't you? 8 A Yes. 9 Q You're not counting work you did as a client 10 towards practicing law, are you? 11 A No. 12 Q Okay. Now, just as an aside because I saw it 13 in here, do you know a fellow named Elliott Prescott? 14 A Yes. 15 Q And how do you know Eliot? 16 A He was, I believe at the attorney general's 17 office, he is a friend of my sister and 18 brother-in-law. 19 Q Okay. And was there a particular -- you had 20 a meeting with Eliot press cot in November of 2009, do 21 you recall that? 22 A No. 23 Q Do you know why your appointment book 24 reflects having a meeting with Eliot process in 25 November of 2009? Brandon Smith Reporting 108 1 A I don't remember. 2 Q Okay. And he's a friend of whom? 3 A My sister Gail and -- Gail Bysiewicz and Ross 4 Garber. 5 Q I get it. Ross Garber the lawyer? 6 A Yes, that one. 7 Q Okay. Got it. 8 MR. HORTON: Presumably your client has 9 heard of him. 10 MR. GERSTEN: I never presume anything 11 on my clients. 12 BY MR. GERSTEN: 13 Q Okay. Now, what did you do when you wrote 14 this letter to Mr. McKeen in terms of finding the 15 portion of the practice book that you referred to in 16 here? 17 A I had volunteer lawyers who were working with 18 me on my campaign who had pointed out this particular 19 portion of the practice book. 20 Q So you didn't go look at the practice book 21 yourself? 22 A No. I relied on research they did. 23 Q Okay. Now, where it talks here in the 24 relevant section of this paragraph you wrote here, did 25 you actually go and read the practice book yourself Brandon Smith Reporting 109 1 before you inserted it in here, this paragraph in 2 here? 3 A I read this section from the book. 4 Q You went and got a copy of the practice 5 book? 6 A I had a copy of the page. 7 Q Okay. So somebody supplied you with a copy 8 of the page? 9 A Correct. 10 Q Said take a look at this? 11 A Yes. 12 Q I think it fits and you kind of -- 13 A Yes. 14 Q Cut and pasted it and put knit there? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Okay. And which volunteer lawyers of yours 17 did that one for you? 18 A Bob Martino. 19 Q And when you say I read the page, did you 20 take a look at the entire section or did you just take 21 a look at Section (a)(2) that you quote in here? 22 A I believe that section. 23 Q Now, when you engaged -- when you were 24 referring to this section in which you state in my 25 service as secretary of state you're practicing law, Brandon Smith Reporting 110 1 can you identify who the client is that you are 2 practicing law strike that. In the course of 3 practicing law just like you were the client for the 4 attorney general, did you have a client while you've 5 been practicing law as a secretary of state? 6 A I have many clients. 7 Q Okay. Do you enter into retainer agreements 8 with those clients? 9 A No. 10 Q Okay. Do you have any terms of engagement 11 with those clients? 12 A No. I have constituents. 13 Q You have constituents. Are constituents 14 different than clients? 15 A I guess they are. 16 Q When you -- you guess they are, can you 17 articulate the basis for your guess? 18 A I am a public servant and I give legal advice 19 on a regular basis to election officials, to members of 20 the public and others. 21 Q Okay. Are they constituents or are they 22 clients? 23 A They're constituents. 24 Q Okay. So have you provided any legal advice 25 to clients while you have been occupying the Office of Brandon Smith Reporting 111 1 the Secretary of State? 2 A To private clients? 3 Q I'm going to start with the word client 4 because you said I guess there's a distinction between 5 constituents and clients. I'm just trying to 6 understand the distinction you're guessing at here? 7 A I provided advice to constituents. 8 Q Okay. Have you provided any advice to any 9 clients while you've been occupying the Office of the 10 Secretary of State? 11 A What do you mean by clients? 12 Q Do you understand the term client? 13 A I want to make sure we're on the same page. 14 Q Okay. Do you understand the term client? 15 A I do. 16 Q Okay. What is your understanding of the word 17 client when used in the context of providing legal 18 services? 19 A If it's in a private sector setting, that 20 would be the person or the entity that is requesting 21 advice or counsel or legal services. 22 Q Okay. Is there any other context to use it 23 in? Let me restate -- I'm certainly sorry I'm going to 24 interrupt you. Could you read back her answer because 25 I'm not sure I understood it and I apologize for that. Brandon Smith Reporting 112 1 I'm just a little slow today? 2 3 (The testimony was read.) 4 5 BY MR. GERSTEN: 6 Q What if it's not in the public service -- 7 strike that -- private, what is the term private when 8 you're providing legal services? 9 A In the public sector or the private sector? 10 Q Any sector. 11 A I'm sorry, repeat the question, please. 12 Q Okay. Maybe I'll try this a different way. 13 When the attorney generals are involved in 14 representing you as the secretary of state, I think 15 you've already said you're the client in that 16 context? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Okay. Is that public or is that private? 19 A Public. 20 Q Okay. Now, how would you go about defining 21 the term client in the public sector, then? 22 A I provide advice with respect to elections 23 with constituents who are election officials as an 24 example, and they are, in essence, clients of our 25 office. The registrar of the voters, the town clerks. Brandon Smith Reporting 113 1 They rely on us for advice about compliance with state 2 and federal election law. 3 Q Okay. And how would you define the word 4 client in that context, please. 5 A Those would be, as an example, election 6 officials who come to our office seeking advice about 7 how to comply with election law. 8 Q Okay. Any other -- that's an example. I'm 9 still trying to get to the definition. What is a 10 client to whom you provide legal advice in the public 11 sector, as you understand it, just like -- let me try 12 it again differently. When the attorney general here 13 comes to you or you go to the attorney general and you 14 say, I have a question. Is the advice that the 15 attorney general gives you confidential? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Okay. Is the advice that you said you 18 provide to these constituents confidential? 19 A I'm not sure. 20 Q Okay. Since you've been an attorney -- since 21 you've been the secretary of state, how many times do 22 you recall providing advice in a confidential setting 23 to any of your constituents in a way that's comparable 24 to the way that you said I receive advice 25 confidentially from the attorney general's office when Brandon Smith Reporting 114 1 you're the client? 2 A Our advice isn't confidential in the sense 3 that when we are asked to provide written legal 4 opinions, we provide those and those are public and you 5 have examples of some of them. 6 Q Right. And what I'm asking for is name the 7 last time -- name any time you've provided confidential 8 advice strike that advice that was confidential to a 9 client of your office in a way that was similar or 10 comparable to the way that you receive advice from the 11 attorney general's office when you're the client? 12 A I guess it's different. It's not 13 confidential, it's there he is no secret as to how to 14 comply with election law; however, it can be 15 complicated to comply with state and federal election 16 law and that is the service that I provide as do my 17 attorneys to our election officials. 18 Q Okay. And -- okay. So it's fair to say, 19 then, ma'am, you're drawing a distinction between the 20 way that the attorney general provides his advice to 21 your office when you're the client and the way that you 22 provide advice to people when you think you're serving 23 their legal needs, correct? That's one distinction? 24 A That is one distinction, because you asked 25 about a litigation setting. Brandon Smith Reporting 115 1 Q Okay. 2 A And the examples that I have been talking 3 about are to avoid litigation. 4 Q Okay. Do you ever receive advice from the -- 5 as the secretary of state as the client from the 6 attorney general's office on how to avoid litigation? 7 A I suppose we have. 8 Q Sure. So one difference is the 9 confidentiality. Do you have any kind of retainer 10 letters with any of these people that you provide your 11 legal services to? 12 A No. 13 Q It's all a function of your performance as 14 secretary of state, isn't it? 15 A Yes. It's a requirement in state statute. 16 Q Now, in any of the documents that you 17 reviewed in preparation for your deposition today in 18 which -- I'll restate that. 19 Did you see any of these documents that you 20 provide legal services to people in any of the 21 documents that you reviewed in preparation for your 22 deposition today? 23 A . 24 MR. HORTON: I'm sorry. 25 A I'm sorry, I don't understand that. Brandon Smith Reporting 116 1 MR. HORTON: Yes I didn't either. 2 MR. GERSTEN: Fair enough. 3 BY MR. GERSTEN: 4 Q You've just described some performances of 5 legal services that you claim you do from your office 6 and you're providing of advice to people on how to 7 comply with elections law. Do you recall that? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Have you looked at any documents in 10 preparation for your deposition today that would 11 reflect your providing of legal services to the people 12 that you just described a moment ago? 13 A Certainly. 14 Q Okay. In Exhibit 2, for example there is a 15 bunch of these documents that come out of the secretary 16 of state's office, right? 17 A Uh-huh. 18 Q Correct? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Now, -- and you looked at these just over 21 the past few days I think you said? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Can you name any one of these documents that 24 identify Susan Bysiewicz as an attorney in any of these 25 documents? Brandon Smith Reporting 117 1 MR. HORTON: I'm sorry you mean the 2 word attorney. 3 MR. GERSTEN: Word -- 4 BY MR. GERSTEN: 5 Q I'll use the word attorney, attorney at law, 6 how about attorney at law esquire, I don't even know 7 what do they call female attorneys esquirees, I forgot, 8 any identification of you as an attorney? 9 A No. 10 MR. HORTON: You got a glower from your 11 client. 12 MS. O'NEILL: Esquirette. 13 MR. GERSTEN: Esquirette. 14 BY MR. GERSTEN: 15 Q Would it be fair to say, ma'am, over the 16 documents you looked at over the past few days if one 17 were to go through them there is no way to know Susan 18 Bysiewicz is an -- 19 MR. HORTON: Sorry. 20 BY MR. GERSTEN: 21 Q I would be correct, ma'am, that there is 22 nothing in any of those documents that you produced in 23 discovery that identify you as rendering opinions to 24 your constituents because you're an attorney? 25 Brandon Smith Reporting 118 1 (Off-the-record discussion.) 2 3 MR. GERSTEN: Can I have the last 4 question and answer read back? 5 6 (The testimony was read.) 7 8 MR. GERSTEN: I'll restate my question 9 because of all the noise. 10 BY MR. GERSTEN: 11 Q Ma'am there is nothing in any of the 12 documents that come from your office that you produced 13 today or that you produced over the past couple of days 14 or that you read over the past few days that identify 15 you as an attorney to someone reading that letter, do 16 they? 17 A No. 18 Q Is there a particular reason why none of the 19 documents have identified you as an attorney? 20 A I'm not aware of one. 21 Q Okay. And you'll agree with me, ma'am, that 22 you had -- you're not the first secretary of state of 23 this grand state, right? 24 A Right. 25 Q And you're familiar with Ella Grasso being Brandon Smith Reporting 119 1 secretary of state, right? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And she never identified herself as an 4 attorney? 5 A She wasn't an attorney. 6 Q Right. And she issued opinions to 7 constituents? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Regarding compliance and litigation 10 avoidance, et cetera, correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And Miles Rappaport was a predecessor of 13 yours too, right? 14 A Yes. 15 Q And there was nothing in his correspondence 16 strike that. And he would let people know how to 17 comply with election laws and do litigation avoidance, 18 right? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And do you know of any instance where he 21 indicated he was acting as an attorney? 22 A No. 23 Q Okay. So what you each have in common there, 24 all three of you, Barbara Kennelly she was there too 25 right? Brandon Smith Reporting 120 1 A Yes. 2 Q She wasn't a lawyer? 3 A No. 4 Q And she was telling her constituents that 5 they could rely on the advice that she gave them on how 6 to avoid litigation and how to comply with election 7 laws, right? 8 A Yes. 9 Q So I think that's four. I don't know if 10 there are more, but that's the ones I -- Pauline 11 Kezer? 12 A Yes. 13 Q She was a secretary of state, too? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Okay. And she would advise clients on how to 16 avoid litigation and how to comply with election 17 laws? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Okay. Now, that means that all five of you 20 demonstrated services that constituents could rely on 21 on how to avoid litigation and how to comply with 22 election laws, correct? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And not one of you -- what you all have in 25 common is that not one of you told somebody receiving Brandon Smith Reporting 121 1 that advice that they were a lawyer, correct? 2 A Yes. 3 MR. GERSTEN: It's just coming to me 4 that it's 1:11. It's probably a good time to take 5 some kind of a lunch break. 6 MR. HORTON: Yes. Could we give 7 somebody in your office some money and bring some ham 8 sandwiches in so we could -- 9 MR. GERSTEN: Well, it's Passover. I'm 10 certainly not going to eat ham sandwiches on Passover. 11 Let's go off the record. 12 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record at 13 1:11. 14 15 (Recess: 1:12 pm to 2:07 pm.) 16 17 (Defendant's Exhibit 4: Marked for 18 identification.) case Abrams versus 19 Lamone. 20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Beginning of tape 21 number 3. On the record, 2:07. 22 BY MR. GERSTEN: 23 Q Ms. Bysiewicz, you had an opportunity to take 24 a break during the lunch break, correct? 25 A Yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 122 1 Q Had a chance to talk to your attorney at 2 all? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Any portions of your testimony from this 5 morning session that you'd like to have the opportunity 6 to correct or modify or alter or change? 7 A No. 8 Q Good. Okay. Now, during the break I went 9 out and I grabbed this thing and I'm going to show you 10 Exhibit 4. And I'm going to ask you if this is a copy 11 of the Perez case that you made reference to earlier. 12 And I'll represent to you that it's not a complete set 13 but it's the head notes. 14 A I believe so. There were several I owe yes, 15 I believe this is it. 16 Q That's great. Now if you could turn to page 17 4, please. And do you see the portion where they quote 18 the statute? 19 A This. 20 Q Right? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Okay. Now, in looking at that statute, and I 23 know you said to me you'd rather compare it before you 24 made a comment, we can agree that's not the same 25 language that's used in the Connecticut statute, can't Brandon Smith Reporting 123 1 we? 2 A Yes. 3 Q So you're not indicating that when you told 4 Mr. Ryan -- whatever his name is -- McKeen that there's 5 press sent that covers me here, that this statute is 6 the same as the Connecticut statute now that you've had 7 a chance to refresh your recollection, right? 8 A It's different. 9 Q Okay. Thank you for that concession. 10 Now, what was it you said to me you had this 11 guy, what was the name, Dave Killain? 12 A Yup. 13 Q You had him go out and pull this case for 14 you? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Okay. And Dave Killain is a lawyer? 17 A No. 18 Q Okay. What does he do? 19 A He works in our office. 20 Q Oh, at the secretary of state? 21 A Uh-huh. 22 Q He's the Dave Killain I see in your calendars 23 who picks you up and drives you places? 24 A Correct. 25 Q So you had a state employee go and find you Brandon Smith Reporting 124 1 legal research so you could respond to Mr. McKeen; is 2 that correct? 3 A He did this on his own time. 4 Q Okay. When you say he did this on his own 5 time, where was he sitting when he did this? 6 A In his home. 7 Q Okay. And where were you? 8 A I don't know. I wasn't certainly in his 9 home. 10 Q Okay. Well, where were you when you asked 11 him to get you this? 12 A In the car. 13 Q Okay. And so you recall the conversation, if 14 you were in the car? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Were you in the car with him? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Okay. So he was driving you someplace? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Okay. So if we look at your calendars, your 21 calendars would reflect Dave driving that day and we 22 could actually probably pinpoint that January 14th date 23 is Dave as driving? 24 A I don't know what date it was. 25 Q Okay. Well, let me show you a copy of what Brandon Smith Reporting 125 1 the Defendant secretary of state -- and we'll produce 2 this as 5. And let me just show you 5 and I'm using 3 Bates stamp number secretary of state 00059. 4 5 (Defendant's Exhibit 5: Marked for 6 identification.) January calendar. 7 8 BY MR. GERSTEN: 9 Q Ms. Bysiewicz, I'll represent to you this -- 10 and I'll have more copies? 11 MR. HORTON: Do you have an extra 12 copy. 13 MR. GERSTEN: Either I can make it. I 14 didn't know where I was going. I apologize. 15 BY MR. GERSTEN: 16 Q Madam Secretary, this is a copy of what we 17 were told is your calendar for that week. And I think 18 we can agree that Ryan did his posting on January 19 13th? 20 A Uh-huh. 21 Q You did your response on January 15th. 22 A Right. 23 Q Okay. Now, on that calendar there doesn't 24 appear to be any reflection of you spending any time on 25 this particular topic? Brandon Smith Reporting 126 1 A On what particular topic? 2 Q Responding to Ryan. 3 A Right. 4 Q And there doesn't appear to be any meeting 5 with Tanya to discuss how to respond to Ryan, 6 correct? 7 A Right. 8 Q And there's no evidence in that document that 9 reflects your conversations with these volunteer 10 lawyers who helped you respond to Ryan? 11 A Right. Because this would be my state's 12 schedule. 13 Q Okay. So in other words, the information I'm 14 talking about now would be reflected on some other 15 calendar? 16 A No. 17 Q Okay. Is the time you spent on this topic 18 responding to Ryan reflected on any kind of day book, 19 appointment book, anything? 20 A I don't believe so. 21 Q Okay. And where -- now that you have your 22 calendar, where were you and Dave driving to or from 23 that you discussed this Perez case? 24 A It would have probably have been in the 25 evening because he, on occasion, brings me to campaign Brandon Smith Reporting 127 1 events in the evening. 2 Q Okay. So he picks you up in the morning and 3 then takes you -- picks you up at the Capitol to take 4 to you campaign events, is that how this works? 5 A He, on occasion, will drive me to the capital 6 and if we are going to a campaign event, it would be 7 in -- he would pick me up wherever I am. 8 Q Okay. And then he drives you to a campaign 9 event? 10 A Yes, on his own time. 11 Q When you say it's on his own time, how do you 12 distinguish that? 13 A Because he fills out the time sheet. 14 Q Okay. 15 A With the state. 16 Q All right. So he has time sheets that he 17 fills out every day? 18 A Yes. 19 Q And you're indicating that when he -- when he 20 picks you up in the morning and takes you to your 21 office at the Capitol, that's included in his time 22 sheet? 23 A I don't know if his day starts when he gets 24 to the capital or if it starts when he gets to my home. 25 I'm not certain about that. Brandon Smith Reporting 128 1 Q Okay. 2 A But he keeps a time sheet for state 3 purposes. 4 Q Okay. And then he keeps a time sheet when 5 he's ending the day for state purposes? 6 A Correct. 7 Q Have you seen his time sheets? 8 A He keeps them and gives them to our deputy. 9 Q And when you say gives them to our deputy, 10 who are you referring to? 11 A Leslie Mara. 12 Q So is it your testimony that the best that 13 you can recall in looking at your calendar that day, 14 that Mr. Killain and you discussed the need to get the 15 Perez case sometime outside of normal office hours? 16 A Oh, yes, absolutely. 17 Q Okay. And as you sit here today, you don't 18 know exactly when that was? 19 A No. And I'm -- I believe it was in this time 20 period but I can't be certain. 21 Q Well, what other time period could it be in 22 because the Ryan letter is the 13th and your response 23 is the 15th. And you testified previously that oh, 24 yes, I got the Perez -- 25 A I believe so. Brandon Smith Reporting 129 1 Q Okay. 2 A I believe so. It could have happened after. 3 I'm not certain. 4 Q Okay. 5 A Now that I'm looking, I don't know. I think 6 it was in this period but I'm not certain. 7 Q Okay. What would you have to look to in 8 order to be certain? 9 A I don't know. 10 Q So there's no document that you could look to 11 that would refresh your recollection better than the 12 calendar you're looking at right now? 13 A Right. I mean, I -- I don't know. 14 Q Okay. So you recognize that other than the 15 documents we have to rely on your testimony to know 16 whether or not you're being accurate, correct? You 17 understand that? You do understand that absent you're 18 being able to rely on a document, we have to rely on 19 your best recollection of events? 20 A I think so, but again, I'm not -- I'm not 21 certain when I looked at the case, as I look at this. 22 I think it was in preparation for this. Could have 23 been after. I looked at a lot of cases during the 24 month of January. 25 Q I understand that but I was asking you -- Brandon Smith Reporting 130 1 remember earlier this morning I asked you what were you 2 talking about when you wrote to Mr. McKeen, and you 3 said oh, the Perez case? 4 A That was the thing that came to mind. 5 Q As you sit here now and you're looking at 6 your calendar and you're looking at the Perez case is 7 there a reason for you to be less certain? 8 A I'm just less certain as I consider this. 9 Q And what is it as you consider this are you 10 becoming less certain -- what causes you to be less 11 certain? 12 A I'm just not certain about the date that I 13 read the Perez case. That was the thing when I was 14 looking at the concept, that was the thing that came 15 immediately to mind. It is possible that I read the 16 Perez case after this. 17 Q After you wrote your response? 18 A Correct. 19 Q Okay. 20 A It is possible. 21 Q Okay. 22 A Now that I'm -- 23 Q That's why we do this, ma'am. 24 A Yep. 25 Q So if it were not the Perez case, would the Brandon Smith Reporting 131 1 different wording of the statute that you looked to 2 when you wrote your response to Mr. McKeen, what else 3 were you relying on when you wrote your response to Mr. 4 McKeen? What case? 5 A Just the general idea that public service 6 lawyering would count. 7 Q Okay. When you say just the idea, that's 8 your idea? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Okay. Outside of your idea, was there any 11 authority that you relied on at the time that you 12 wrote -- let me restate that. 13 When you wrote Mr. McKeen, did you say, I 14 have this idea or did you make it look like there's 15 plenty of case law to support my position? 16 A There is the practice book citation. 17 Q Again we're talking about a prior paragraph. 18 And when you point me to the Perez case, not the 19 practice book section, up above it where you talked 20 about there's -- where you told us there's case law 21 that supports me. 22 A Uh-huh. 23 Q Do you recall that? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Okay. And I'm just trying to learn from you Brandon Smith Reporting 132 1 if you had any authority to support your idea when you 2 represented certain things to Mr. McKeen? 3 A I'm sorry and you're asking which authority? 4 Q Correct. 5 A As I said. 6 Q You've done a very good job of letting us 7 know now that it may not have been the Perez case. And 8 that you may have been -- you may have misspoken. So 9 if it wasn't the Perez case that you were referring to 10 earlier, what else is there? 11 A The practice book section that we talked 12 about. 13 Q Okay. So I guess I'm being confusing and I 14 apologize. Where you said there is no legal basis to 15 conclude that active practice at the bar of the state 16 excludes those attorneys who are practicing in public 17 or corporate arenas and you earlier referred us to the 18 Perez case, are you saying now you were mistaken? Is 19 there anything else besides Perez? You weren't 20 relying -- you didn't tell us I was relying on the 21 practice book for that, you were pretty specific the 22 Perez case? 23 A And that was the case that comes immediately 24 to mind as I mentioned over the course of the month of 25 January, and February, I've been looking at a lot of Brandon Smith Reporting 133 1 cases on this subject. 2 Q You have. Okay. Name another case? 3 A There are cases mentioned in the attorney 4 general's opinion, for instance. 5 Q Okay. So you read those cases? 6 A I read about those cases. I've also had 7 lawyers who have provided me with particular cases as 8 well. 9 Q Okay. So outside of what you've learned from 10 lawyers and Mr. Blumenthal's opinion, Madam Secretary, 11 as you sit here today you can't recall a single 12 authority you relied onto support your idea as set 13 forth in your attorney McKeen letter, am I correct? 14 A Can you ask that again. 15 MR. GERSTEN: Can you go ahead? 16 17 (The testimony was read.) 18 19 A Can't recall a single. 20 BY MR. GERSTEN: 21 Q Case. Authority. 22 A At the time I wrote this? 23 Q Yes, ma'am. 24 A No. 25 Q Now, you'll agree that the Maryland statute Brandon Smith Reporting 134 1 does not talk about active practice at the bar of this 2 state, correct? 3 A Right. 4 Q Now, you've indicated that you're focusing on 5 the words active practice in your letter to Mr. McKeen 6 here, correct? 7 A Right. 8 Q What do the words at the bar of this state 9 mean to you? 10 A Admitted to the bar of the state of 11 Connecticut. 12 Q And do you have any authority to support that 13 position? That's a terrible question. I'm sorry. 14 You'll agree that it doesn't say active 15 practice to the bar of this state, correct? 16 A Well, no, I'm looking it says active practice 17 at the bar. 18 Q All right. And your statement is at the bar 19 means admitted to practice? 20 A Well, isn't that the subject of this lawsuit? 21 Q Is that your position, ma'am, that at the bar 22 means admitted to practice? 23 A It could mean that. 24 Q Is that your position, ma'am, that at the bar 25 means admitted to practice as used in this Connecticut Brandon Smith Reporting 135 1 statute? 2 A It could be. 3 Q Okay. Maybe my question wasn't clear and I'm 4 going to ask you to repeat it to the witness because I 5 think she's misunderstood it and thought I was asking 6 her to speculate. 7 THE COURT REPORTER: Is this the 8 question I read earlier? 9 MR. GERSTEN: You know, maybe I can 10 rephrase. 11 BY MR. GERSTEN: 12 Q Ma'am, is it your position that the meaning 13 of the words at the bar of this state as used in the 14 Connecticut statute means admitted to practice? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Does it mean anything else as far as you 17 know? 18 A You mean at the bar of this state? 19 Q Yes, ma'am, as used in this statute. And if 20 I'm not being clear I'm talking about the Connecticut 21 General Statute which defines how a person is eligible 22 to run for the office you seek. And in the context of 23 that statute, what I'm asking you is the meaning of the 24 words at the bar of this state and you've indicated, 25 that just means admitted to practice? Brandon Smith Reporting 136 1 MR. HORTON: I object. Excuse me. I 2 object to that remark. That was uncalled for. This 3 is a legal question and she is taking a legitimate 4 legal position. 5 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 6 MR. HORTON: You sort of, you know, 7 brushed her off. 8 MR. GERSTEN: I'm not brushing her off. 9 It's very serious. 10 MR. HORTON: Right. 11 MR. GERSTEN: This is her career there 12 is nothing to brush off. 13 MR. HORTON: Thank you. 14 BY MR. GERSTEN: 15 Q As used in the Connecticut General Statute, 16 ma'am, are you indicating that the words, at the bar of 17 this state, mean admitted to practice and that's what 18 it means? 19 A It could mean that because in 18 97 when the 20 legislature passed the requirements, the ten year 21 requirement to be attorney general at the bar of this 22 state, active practice at the bar of this state meant 23 simply that you are not retired from the practice of 24 law. 25 Q Okay. Now, you indicated that it could be. Brandon Smith Reporting 137 1 What I'm asking now is, is that your position as 2 opposed to using the words could be? I'll restate my 3 question. 4 Could you agree with me, ma'am, that could be 5 has some speculation to it? 6 A Yes. 7 Q My question is absent your speculation, is 8 that your position of the meaning of the words at the 9 bar of this state? 10 A That is one meaning. 11 Q Okay. Is there another meaning? 12 A It could mean that an attorney who is a 13 litigator practices before courts. I'm not sure what 14 you're getting at with your question. 15 Q Okay. Are there any other meanings of the 16 word at the bar of this state as used by the 17 Connecticut General Statute? 18 A I'm not sure. 19 Q Okay. Now, would you agree with me, ma'am, 20 that if your interpretation of a possible way to read 21 this would mean that you have to be a litigator 22 that's -- 23 A I'm not saying that is my position, sir. 24 Q I understand. I understand that. In fact 25 you disagree with that, don't you? Brandon Smith Reporting 138 1 A I do. 2 Q But you have indicated that one way to read 3 this is to indicate that at the bar of this state would 4 mean that you would have to be a litigator, correct? 5 A One way, yes. Again, I disagree. 6 Q I understand you disagree. And if it were to 7 be interpreted that you would have to be a litigator in 8 order to qualify as active practice of the bar of this 9 state, that would disqualify you wouldn't it? 10 MR. HORTON: No we have a 11 constitutional argument here. 12 BY MR. GERSTEN: 13 Q Aside from the constitutional argument, just 14 reading the statute, ma'am, would you qualify as a 15 litigator? Terrible question let me ask it this way. 16 You've never been to court, correct? 17 A No. 18 Q Never asked questions of a witness in a 19 deposition, correct? 20 A I've never asked questions of a witness. 21 Q Never asked questions as you told us 22 before -- 23 A Except in small claims court. 24 Q Okay. Excepting your experience in small 25 claims court you've never asked questions of a witness Brandon Smith Reporting 139 1 in a courtroom? 2 A No. 3 Q Never did any pleadings except for the one 4 that got bounced recently, right? 5 A No. 6 Q Would you say that against that background, 7 if the meaning of the word at the bar of this state 8 means that you have to be a litigator, that you qualify 9 as a litigator? 10 A That is not my interpretation. 11 Q I understand that. My question is, if that 12 is the meaning of the words that you have to be a 13 litigator just as you contemplate it could be, would 14 you qualify as a litigator? 15 A That's a hypothetical question. 16 Q Well, let's apply the definition that you say 17 could be adopted. Do you qualify as a litigator? 18 A I am not a litigator. 19 Q Do you qualify as a litigator? 20 A I am not a litigator. 21 Q Maybe there's a problem with my -- I thought 22 it called for a yes or no answer. Would I be correct, 23 ma'am, you would not qualify with the experience as a 24 litigator if that is the meaning of the word that's 25 adopted by the Court? Brandon Smith Reporting 140 1 A Only a court can say. You and I are 2 speculating. 3 Q Well, we're not really speculating are we you 4 have all this experience as a lawyer, right? 5 A Yes. 6 Q You have 25 years of lawyering? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And that requires some use of some -- your 9 Duke law degree, right? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Your White & Case experience, correct? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Your Robinson & Cole experience? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Your Aetna experience, correct? 16 A Yes. 17 Q That's a lot of lawyer work, isn't it? 18 That's a lot of use of legal training and analysis, 19 isn't it? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Okay. Using that legal analysis and 22 training, you could easily opine that you don't qualify 23 as a litigator and it's not necessarily speculating is 24 it? 25 MR. HORTON: Could I object to the form Brandon Smith Reporting 141 1 of the question. I think you two are using qualify in 2 different words. I mean, she is qualified in the 3 sense she can go into court tomorrow morning. I 4 think -- I don't know I think maybe she's using 5 qualified in a different sense from you Eliot. 6 MR. GERSTEN: Fair enough. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q You know the word eligible? 9 A Yes. 10 Q What's the word eligible mean to you? 11 A That if we're talking about eligible as it is 12 involved in this lawsuit, it means whether I may run 13 for attorney general. 14 Q Okay? 15 A And serve in that position. 16 Q All right. And could we agree, ma'am, that 17 if someone with some really good credentials from Duke 18 and working at White & Case and Robinson & Cole and the 19 Aetna would have legal training to draw a conclusion on 20 the meaning of some particular words, correct? 21 A Yes. 22 Q And you'll agree that one reasonable way to 23 interpret the words at the bar of this state is as 24 you've already said, it could be to mean that you had 25 to be a litigator, correct? Brandon Smith Reporting 142 1 A Yes. 2 Q And if the words at the bar of this state 3 were what makes you eligible to become a candidate or I 4 guess an election as attorney general, you would not be 5 eligible, correct, if that meaning is adopted? 6 A If that meaning is adopted. 7 MR. HORTON: Putting aside the 8 constitutional argument, please. 9 MR. GERSTEN: I'm putting aside the 10 constitutional -- I'm not smart enough for the 11 constitutional argument I'm just dealing with little 12 things I'm a little guy. 13 BY MR. GERSTEN: 14 Q So the answer to the question is yes, you 15 would not be eligible? 16 A If that were the case. 17 Q Okay. Now, did we get all that without 18 the -- with the objection? Court reporter court 19 reporter yes? 20 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. Thank you. 21 BY MR. GERSTEN: 22 Q So if that were the case, when you wrote to 23 Mr. McKeen, what you came to be your daily and active 24 role in counseling businesses, voters, candidates, 25 election officials on their rights and duties would not Brandon Smith Reporting 143 1 qualify you to use your word, to be eligible as 2 attorney general, would it? 3 A Could you repeat that again? 4 Q Certainly. In using your words, when you 5 told Mr. McKeen that you're active and daily role in 6 counseling businesses, voters, candidates and election 7 officials on their rights and duties, easily qualifies 8 me to be eligible as attorney general, that would not 9 be correct, would it? 10 MR. HORTON: 11 A I disagree. 12 MR. HORTON: Excuse me, so I don't keep 13 objecting I assume all these questions assume the 14 qualification of the constitutional argument. 15 MR. GERSTEN: I told you Wes, it's four 16 syllables, it's more than I can deal with. 17 MR. HORTON: Fine. 18 BY MR. GERSTEN: 19 Q So outside of this constitutional argument, 20 your activities that you claim you engage in as 21 secretary of state do not make you eligible to satisfy 22 the requirements of the statute if it's interpreted to 23 mean that you're supposed to be a litigator; is that 24 correct, ma'am? 25 A If a court were to interpret it in that way, Brandon Smith Reporting 144 1 that could be the case. 2 Q When you say that could be the case, you 3 would not be found eligible, correct? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Thank you. 6 MR. HORTON: It's true. If you have to 7 be a litigator, you're not a litigator. 8 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. We're done with 9 this, I think. 10 BY MR. GERSTEN: 11 Q Now, as you sit here today, ma'am, after you 12 wrote this letter on January 15th, has anyone told you 13 from the attorney general's office or his client -- I 14 forgot that's your office, has anyone from your office 15 told you, we will not accept your name to be a 16 candidate for attorney general? 17 A No. 18 Q Has anyone from your office indicated that 19 your name would not be accepted as a nominee for 20 attorney general? 21 A My secretary of state office. 22 Q Yes, ma'am. 23 A Notice. 24 Q Has anyone indicated to you that if you were 25 to be nominated by the -- by the way you're not the Brandon Smith Reporting 145 1 nominee by the democratic party are you? 2 A I'm not. 3 Q If anyone were to tell you that you were to 4 be the nominee for the democratic party, your name will 5 not be accepted by your office, Madam Secretary? 6 A No. 7 Q Is it your position that the secretary of 8 state has the authority to reject your name as a 9 candidate if you were nominated by the democratic 10 party? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And what's the basis for that? 13 A The precedent in the Searle Field case, where 14 Mr. Field wanted to run for attorney general and there 15 was an issue with respect to his qualifications because 16 he practiced only for six years in Connecticut. 17 Q And you're saying that your office would 18 reject your name as the nominee from the democratic 19 party in the event you obtain that nomination? 20 MR. HORTON: You said what. 21 A I don't know that. 22 BY MR. GERSTEN: 23 Q Oh, you don't know that? 24 A I don't know that. 25 Q Okay. That's what I thought I asked you. I Brandon Smith Reporting 146 1 didn't know what you were talking about. 2 A No. 3 Q I apologize if I either misunderstood your 4 answer or I didn't get your question. 5 A I have no idea. 6 Q Okay. So as you sit here today, we have no 7 idea if the secretary of state would reject your name 8 if you were lucky enough to get the nomination from the 9 democratic party to run for attorney general, 10 correct? 11 A Right. 12 Q Okay. Now, has anyone from the democratic 13 party rejected your name as a nominee to run for 14 attorney general? 15 A No. 16 Q Okay? 17 A It would not come up until the state 18 convention on May 22nd. 19 Q Right. In fact there are no delegates 20 finally selected are they? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Or are they just about selected now we have 23 all the delegates selected? 24 A Well not all I think the deadline might be 25 March 31st. It's in process. Brandon Smith Reporting 147 1 Q Okay. And have any of these candidates or 2 excuse me have any of these delegates said -- strike 3 that. There's no process for any of these delegates to 4 say, I am rejecting Susan Bysiewicz as a potential 5 candidate, they may not vote for you about there's 6 notice -- you're allow to run in that convention, 7 aren't you? 8 A Yes. 9 Q So there is no legal impediment to you right 10 now that allows you -- that does not allow you to place 11 your name in nomination at the convention, correct? 12 A There are just -- there are substantial 13 questions, which we are attempting to resolve in this 14 lawsuit. 15 Q Okay. But my point to you is there is no 16 legal impediment to anyone at the convention allowing 17 you to strike that. That's a terrible question. 18 There is nothing barring you from having your 19 name put into nomination at the democratic convention; 20 is that correct? 21 A I have announced my candidacy and -- 22 Q Can you interrupt you for a second? I'm 23 sorry. Nothing barred you from announcing your 24 candidacy, correct? 25 A Correct. Brandon Smith Reporting 148 1 Q After you announced your candidacy has 2 anything barred you from implementing your announcement 3 and running for this office? 4 A No. However, there is a substantial question 5 which we are seeking to get an answer to. 6 Q Okay. But no one is stopping you and saying 7 from the democratic party, Madam Secretary, we can't 8 accept your name as a nominee, correct? 9 A No one said that. However, the democratic 10 party, chair lady Nancy DiNardo has publicly expressed 11 her concern about this question and that is why we are 12 here today. 13 Q But in expressing her concern about this 14 question, she expresses her opinion on a bunch of 15 things, doesn't she? 16 A She does. 17 Q Okay. And some of them are of more 18 importance to the secretary of state Bysiewicz than 19 others, right? 20 A Depends. 21 Q For example -- right. It depends on the 22 circumstances. This one effects you, right? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And that's why we're here because you want 25 the answer to this question, right? Brandon Smith Reporting 149 1 A Yes. 2 Q And that's what counts, right? 3 A I'm here with this lawsuit because I would 4 like the answer to the question, yes. 5 Q Right. Now, no one in this -- have you read 6 all the pleadings in this lawsuit? 7 A Yes. 8 Q No one in this lawsuit has said there's a 9 substantial question and agreed with you on the 10 pleadings of this case, correct? 11 A I'm not sure the question. 12 Q All right. You read your complaint? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And you said, there's a substantial 15 uncertainty or substantial question about my ability 16 here right? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Did you read any of the answers that were 19 filed in this case? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Did the Office of the Secretary of State 22 represented by the attorney general file an answer and 23 say, we admit there's a big question here? 24 A I haven't seen their answer if they did. 25 Q Okay. Do you know if the democratic party Brandon Smith Reporting 150 1 filed an answer in this case and said, we agree with 2 the secretary of state -- sorry, we agree with Susan 3 Bysiewicz, there's a big uncertainty here? 4 A When we filed our lawsuit, Nancy DiNardo was 5 present at the press conference and she made a 6 statement that there was uncertainty that she would 7 like to resolve. 8 Q Right? 9 A And she wouldn't have been at the press 10 conference had she not felt there was a substantial 11 uncertainty. 12 Q You are aware she's not a defendant in this 13 case anymore, is she? 14 A Correct. 15 Q And the answer that was filed by the 16 democratic party did not agree with your position where 17 you claim there's a substantial uncertainty, a very 18 serious question, right? 19 MR. HORTON: I object. They didn't 20 disagree with it. I don't think that's -- 21 MR. GERSTEN: That's not the issue. 22 BY MR. GERSTEN: 23 Q Did they admit -- 24 MR. HORTON: That's different. Okay. 25 BY MR. GERSTEN: Brandon Smith Reporting 151 1 Q Did you see anyone who is on the defendant's 2 side of the table admit that you are correct that 3 there's a substantial uncertainty and a serious 4 question about your eligibility to become a 5 candidate? 6 A I haven't seen it. 7 Q Okay. Now, when the secretary of state 8 receives nominations from the parties for offices, 9 what's the process by which you go through to -- what's 10 the next step? 11 A There are endorsement certificates that are 12 filed with our office after the parties hold their 13 conventions or people petition and gather signatures 14 and bring them to our office. 15 Q Okay. Has anyone indicated to you from the 16 secretary of state's office that they won't accept an 17 endorsement coming from the democratic party with your 18 name on it? 19 A No. 20 Q By the way, ma'am, if you didn't get the 21 nomination you could then go for this what did you say 22 the primary what did you call it? 23 A Wells, if I were to get 15 percent of the 24 delegates at the convention I could primary and I 25 could -- or I could also collect petition signatures. Brandon Smith Reporting 152 1 Q Okay. And has anyone from the secretary of 2 state's office indicated to you that your name would 3 not be accepted for the purposes of a primary? 4 A No we wouldn't know that yet, but no. 5 Q And how about for this petition thing, would 6 your name be -- do you have any basis to believe that 7 the Office of the Secretary of State would reject your 8 name under the circumstances in the event you wanted to 9 go for a petition? 10 A No. 11 Q And in fact, am I correct, ma'am, there's 12 nothing preventing you if you went through the 13 convention and you didn't get the nomination and you 14 went through the primary, you didn't within the 15 primary, you could still run as an independent? 16 A You mean as a petitioning candidate. 17 Q Petitioning candidate, right? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Like what's his name Joe Lieberman did, 20 right? 21 A Yes. 22 Q And no one has said to you that you will 23 not -- secretary of state's name won't accept your name 24 if you decide to run as a petitioning candidate, 25 correct? Brandon Smith Reporting 153 1 A Correct. 2 Q Okay. Have you heard from my client that 3 they won't accept your name as a petitioning 4 candidate? 5 A No. 6 Q Okay. So -- 7 A Your client being the republican party. 8 Q Republican party? 9 A No. 10 Q So as we sit here today at about 2:00ish, we 11 know that there's one person claiming that there is a 12 substantial uncertainty in this lawsuit anyway about 13 your serious question that you need a court to 14 determine, correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And that's you? 17 A Yes. 18 Q So far nobody else in this lawsuit's agreed 19 with you, have they? 20 MR. HORTON: I object to that. 21 MR. GERSTEN: Strike that. 22 MR. HORTON: You mean disagree. 23 BY MR. GERSTEN: 24 Q According to the pleadings in this case, no 25 one's agreed with you, have they? Brandon Smith Reporting 154 1 A No. 2 Q And there is no impediment to you running for 3 this candidacy at all, is there? 4 A There could be one in the future. 5 Q Okay. That's pretty speculative, isn't it? 6 A It is speculative. 7 Q Now, after you wrote to Ryan McKeen, you then 8 sat down and you wrote a letter to the attorney general 9 of the state of Connecticut Mr. Blumenthal, correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And am I correct did you draft that letter 12 all by yourself? 13 A I drafted it with Leslie Mara, my deputy. 14 Q Is Leslie a lawyer? 15 A She is. 16 Q And did anyone help you or Leslie in drafting 17 that letter? 18 A We wrote it together. 19 Q Okay. Did anyone review the letter after you 20 wrote it together? 21 A We discussed it with Richard Orr. 22 Q And who is Richard Orr? 23 A He's an attorney. 24 Q And where does Richard Orr work? 25 A He works at a private company in Meriden. Brandon Smith Reporting 155 1 Q Okay. Is he another volunteer lawyer? 2 A He is. 3 Q Okay. Did you discuss it with Richard Orr 4 before or after you and Leslie discussed this? 5 A After. 6 Q Okay. And what did you and Richard Orr talk 7 about? 8 A We -- 9 MR. HORTON: You mean the subject 10 matter? The subject matter. 11 A Yes, the subject matter was the eligibility 12 issue. 13 BY MR. GERSTEN: 14 Q Okay. And -- 15 A And the constitutionality of active -- the 16 meaning of active practice and the constitutionality of 17 the ten year requirement, generally. 18 Q Okay. Now, when you wrote this letter, you 19 wrote this letter with Leslie in your office? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Did you send a copy of it to Mr. Orr? 22 A We wrote it in our office and we ran by the 23 text with him or by him, if I got the right 24 preposition. 25 Q I don't know either, but I'm not a Brandon Smith Reporting 156 1 grammatikarian either. 2 Did you send him an e-mail version of this 3 letter? 4 A I don't -- I don't remember. 5 Q Okay. How long did you and he spend talking 6 about this letter? 7 A Not very long. The bulk of the time was 8 Leslie and I discussing it in our office and drafting 9 it. 10 Q And so Mr. Orr is a lawyer who works for a 11 private company? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Okay. As I recall the letter you wrote to 14 the attorney general you wrote it on secretary of state 15 letterhead, correct? 16 A Absolutely. 17 Q And in that letter, did you indicate that you 18 were sending -- that you had Mr. Orr involved in any 19 way? 20 A No. Because let's Lee and I drafted it and 21 we did discuss it briefly with Mr. Orr. 22 Q Okay. Well, how many lawyers work for the 23 secretary of state's office in the elections 24 division? 25 A I believe three. Brandon Smith Reporting 157 1 Q Okay. And what are their names? 2 A Their names are Ted Bromley, Bernie Liu and 3 Lou Button. 4 Q Okay. And they're election law people, 5 right? 6 A They are. 7 Q And when they sign letters by the way they 8 always say staff attorney, right? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Now, in this letter that you wrote to the 11 attorney general Mr. Blumenthal, is there a reason why 12 you didn't use the -- any one of the three lawyers who 13 work for you in the elections division to confer with 14 them about the letter? 15 A Leslie Mara did confer with Ted Bromley about 16 the letter and he made some additional changes. I did 17 not speak with him, Leslie did. 18 Q Good. I'm glad we're getting that filled in. 19 When did Leslie speak to Ted? 20 A After we had done our initial draft. 21 Q Okay. Did she send a draft of the letter to 22 Ted Bromley to look at? 23 A She did. 24 Q And did she get responses back and 25 comments? Brandon Smith Reporting 158 1 A She did. 2 Q Did you incorporate Ted Bromley's comments 3 into your letter? 4 A His comment had to do, I recall, and this is 5 from her, not from him directly, but his comment had to 6 do with adding language about certificates of 7 endorsement that are filed with our office. 8 Q Okay. Anything else that you recall? 9 A That was, I believe, his comment. 10 Q Okay. So what was the reason that you were 11 consulting with Mr. Orr if you had already received 12 input from one of your staff attorneys who's an 13 election law lawyer? 14 A We consulted -- I believe the chronology was 15 that Leslie Mara and I drafted the letter together and 16 we ran it by -- I ran it by Richard Orr who is just 17 someone that I know to be a very smart lawyer who has 18 volunteered on my campaigns. 19 Q And what was the reason for using a lawyer 20 who -- strike that. 21 What was the reason for using a very smart 22 lawyer who's worked on your campaigns to have him 23 review a letter that's coming out of the secretary of 24 state's office addressed to the attorney general? 25 A I trust his judgment and I just wanted to run Brandon Smith Reporting 159 1 it by him. 2 Q Okay. What did he tell you? 3 A That he thought that it got to the issues we 4 were hoping to get to. 5 Q What else did he tell you? 6 A That was about it. 7 Q Did you call him up and say hey, rich I've 8 been writing a letter to the attorney general seeking 9 his advice, in my position as secretary of state and I 10 need you as someone who's worked on my political 11 campaigns to give me some insight into what should be 12 put into this letter? 13 A No, I just wanted to run by the language of 14 the letter by him. 15 Q But he's not a state employee, is he? 16 A He's not. 17 Q And do you often go to people who are not 18 state employees to ask them how to write a letter 19 that's coming out of the secretary of state's office or 20 do you rely on people who work within the secretary of 21 state's office? 22 A Usually within the secretary of the state's 23 office. 24 Q Okay. Now when you say usually are there a 25 lot of occasions where you go outside the secretary of Brandon Smith Reporting 160 1 state's office to get input on how to write a letter 2 that's coming out of the secretary of state's official 3 letterhead? 4 A This would be -- the only case that I'm aware 5 of. 6 Q There's been no other occasion in which you 7 wrote a letter on behalf of the secretary of state on 8 your letterhead that you went to someone outside the 9 state for advice on what should go into that letter? 10 A It's the only occasion I can remember. 11 Q Okay. So -- and you've been serving as 12 secretary of state for 11 years? 13 A Yes. 14 Q What would ever possess you to go see a very 15 smart lawyer outside of the state government and to get 16 his comments on a letter you're writing to your lawyer, 17 the attorney general on secretary of state's 18 letterhead? What made that mom meant us the? 19 A I just sought his judgment. 20 Q Because? 21 A Because I respect his judgment. 22 Q And is there any particular reason why you 23 needed his judgment on this letter that you're writing 24 on secretary of state letterhead to your lawyer, the 25 attorney general? What influence did -- the first time Brandon Smith Reporting 161 1 in 11 years it seems like there must be something that 2 influenced it? 3 A I believe I've answered that question. 4 Q There was nothing that influenced you to do 5 that for the first -- nothing moment us the, just 6 sought his judgment? 7 A Correct. 8 Q We'll come back to it. 9 Am I correct, ma'am, you spent two hours on 10 this letter? 11 A I couldn't say exactly how long. 12 Q Okay. Did you call the attorney general 13 before you sent it? 14 A I believe I did. 15 Q And did you tell him that you had talked to 16 Mr. Orr and you were sending this letter along after 17 talking to Mr. Orr? 18 A We talked about the -- we talked about the 19 letter prior to my requesting it, as I recall, and then 20 I called him shortly before we sent it to his office to 21 let him know that it was coming. 22 Q Did he have a reaction? 23 A That it was coming? I believe I had left a 24 message. 25 Q How about when you said -- I thought you said Brandon Smith Reporting 162 1 you had actually talked to him about it? 2 A Yes. Because we talked about whether we 3 could -- whether I could, as the head of an agency 4 request an answer to the question about meaning of 5 active practice and the constitutionality of the 6 statute. 7 Q You didn't care about the words at the bar? 8 A I was just generally mentioning the issues. 9 Q I'm aware that you were just generally 10 mentioning the issues. But I noticed in your letter 11 that you wrote with Mr. Orr's review that you didn't 12 ask the attorney general about what the meaning of the 13 words at the bar were, did you? 14 A The focus, I believe, I haven't looked at the 15 letter recently, was -- 16 Q Let's pull it out. I didn't mean to cut you 17 off and I apologize for that. 18 Sorry, Madam Secretary. Every time I think 19 I'm organized, it turns out that I'm not as well as I 20 had hoped. 21 Okay. I've got it here somewhere. I'm going 22 to show you what we've marked as Bysiewicz 209 and 210 23 and I'll give you a copy after the court reporter marks 24 it and I do have copies for everybody. 25 Brandon Smith Reporting 163 1 (Defendant's Exhibit 6: Marked for 2 identification.) letter January 20, 2010? 3 4 BY MR. GERSTEN: 5 Q Is this the letter that you recall writing, 6 Exhibit 6? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And this is a letter that you sent to Mr. 9 Orr, right? 10 A I don't know if we sent him this exact thing. 11 We discussed it with him. 12 Q Now, you noticed in Exhibit 6 that there is 13 no reference to at the bar. 14 A Oh, there is. It's the words of the 15 statute. 16 Q Right. But in your request to the attorney 17 general, do you recall asking him to tell you what do 18 the words at the bar mean? 19 A Yes. We ask, is that portion of Section 20 3-124 that requires at least ten years active practice 21 at the bar of this state constitutional? 22 Q I am sorry. I must have been not very clear. 23 You ask him what the meaning of active practice of the 24 bar was, correct, excuse me, you asked him to give you 25 an opinion as to what the meaning of the words active Brandon Smith Reporting 164 1 practice was, correct? 2 A We ask him what or whether 3-124 requires, we 3 ask -- well the question is right there. That's what 4 we asked. 5 Q And did you ask him to tell you what the 6 meaning was of at the bar? 7 A No. We asked him about the meaning of active 8 practice. 9 Q Right. And you got a response with regard to 10 the meaning of the words active meaning -- active 11 practice, correct? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Was there a particular reason why you and 14 Leslie and Ted and Richard Orr did not seek the 15 attorney general's opinion on the meaning of the words 16 at the bar? 17 A We were focused on the active practice 18 portion. 19 Q Okay. 20 MR. GERSTEN: Could I have my question 21 read back to her because I think she didn't understand 22 it? 23 24 (The testimony was read.) 25 Brandon Smith Reporting 165 1 A No. 2 BY MR. GERSTEN: 3 Q Thank you. And you got a response back from 4 the attorney general? 5 A I did. 6 Q Okay. And by the way, Mr. Orr, when he 7 reviewed this, was he reviewing this from the 8 perspective of a political advisor to you? 9 A Just as a lawyer. 10 Q Has he been a participant in your campaigns 11 in the past? 12 A In past campaigns, yes. 13 Q Contributed money? 14 A In the past, yes, not for this particular 15 campaign. 16 Q Has he provided services to you in the past 17 in connection with your campaigns? 18 A In the past he was a campaign treasurer. 19 Q Oh, he was. And when was that? 20 A In a past secretary of the state campaign, 21 and I can't recall which, because I've had several 22 different treasurers. 23 Q Okay. And in the current process of becoming 24 the -- or trying to become the nominee, has Mr. Orr 25 played any kind of role in advising you on your Brandon Smith Reporting 166 1 campaign, your current campaign? 2 A Just as a volunteer counsel. 3 Q How often does he provide volunteer 4 counseling? 5 A He did on this, just we ran this letter by 6 him. That's all. 7 Q Okay. Any other occasions in which you 8 talked to him about the campaign? 9 A I may have spoken to him in January. I can't 10 recall when, other -- prior to the drafting of this 11 letter. I can't -- I don't have any specific 12 recollection. 13 Q Of course. But you have had discussions with 14 Ritchie or about this particular issue in his capacity 15 as a political advisor to the secretary of state, 16 correct? 17 A He -- I have spoken to him personally, yes. 18 Q Okay. So -- and you've spoken to him 19 personally on more than one occasion on this particular 20 issue, correct? 21 A On which particular issue? 22 Q The issue relating to the application of the 23 Connecticut General Statute 3-124 to your candidacy? 24 A On the occasion of just running by the 25 language in this letter, yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 167 1 Q Okay. Other than this letter, are you 2 testifying that you've had no other occasion to talk to 3 Mr. Orr between January 15th and today regarding the 4 application of 3124 to your candidacy? 5 A I spoke to him prior to the drafting of this 6 letter. 7 Q Correct? 8 A On how many occasions and for how long, I 9 couldn't say. 10 Q Okay. How about since this letter? 11 A Maybe on one or two occasions. 12 Q Did you talk to Mr. Orr about this topic 13 after you received a response from the attorney 14 general's office in which you sought advice? 15 A I didn't seek advice from him after I 16 received the attorney general's opinion. 17 Q Okay. After you received the attorney 18 general's opinion, did you talk to Ritchie or? 19 A Yes. 20 Q What did you and Mr. Orr talk about then? 21 MR. HORTON: Well, just the subject 22 matter? 23 MR. GERSTEN: Yes. 24 A The subject matter was related to 3-124, but 25 I wouldn't go any farther because of lawyer client Brandon Smith Reporting 168 1 privilege and a subject that you have listed on this. 2 Q You got me completely confused here. You're 3 telling me that Mr. Orr is providing you with legal 4 advice with respect to Mr. Blumenthal's letter? 5 A No. 6 Q Okay. What are you talking about? Wait 7 there is a question pending. After the question is 8 answered you can talk to your lawyer? 9 MR. HORTON: Well, what's the question 10 again. 11 A We are talking about -- 12 MR. HORTON: Could I have the question 13 read back, please? 14 15 (The testimony was read.) 16 17 MR. GERSTEN: There is no question -- 18 don't do a speech. This is my transcript. Are you 19 saying there's -- 20 MR. HORTON: What is -- are you asking 21 what is the subject matter that's being discussed? 22 Because if you're going beyond the subject matter, the 23 content of a discussions I object and direct her not 24 to answer because the attorney-client privilege. But 25 if you're just saying what's the topic, that's Brandon Smith Reporting 169 1 something else. 2 BY MR. GERSTEN: 3 Q Are you indicating that Mr. Orr is providing 4 you with legal advice regarding Mr. Blumenthal's 5 response to you? 6 A No. 7 Q Okay. Then what did you and Mr. Orr talk -- 8 A Pardon me. Can we have a break. 9 MR. HORTON: Yes because there is no 10 question pending now. 11 MR. GERSTEN: Sure. 12 A I answered the question I would like to have 13 a break now, please. 14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 15 3:10. 16 17 (Recess: 3:10 pm to 3:27 pm.) 18 19 (The testimony was read.) 20 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 22 beginning of tape 4. On the record, 3:28. 23 MR. HORTON: Eliot, to the extent that 24 I was claiming the attorney-client privilege for Mr. 25 Orr's advice to my client concerning the letter she Brandon Smith Reporting 170 1 wrote to Richard Blumenthal, that claim is withdrawn. 2 I am not claiming attorney-client privilege for his 3 relationship with my client concerning the letter to 4 Richard Blumenthal. 5 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. How about -- okay. 6 I'll move on then. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q Did Mr. Orr and you discuss Mr. Blumenthal's 9 response to you? 10 A I don't believe so. 11 Q Has Mr. Orr provided you with other legal 12 advice in the past three months? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And what were those topics? 15 A . 16 MR. HORTON: Topics. Just the topics. 17 A Generally with respect to the attorney 18 general campaign. 19 BY MR. GERSTEN: 20 Q Okay. And did any of the topics he's 21 provided you in connection with advice with respect to 22 the attorney general campaign, is that advice 23 discussing your concerns about being eligible to run 24 for office under 3-124? 25 A Yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 171 1 MR. HORTON: That's the topic. 2 BY MR. GERSTEN: 3 Q And when has he given you that advice? 4 A Some prior to the writing of this letter and 5 some after. 6 THE WITNESS: I don't like Pepsi. It's 7 okay. Sorry. 8 BY MR. GERSTEN: 9 Q I'm sorry, what was your answer, ma'am? 10 MR. HORTON: Maybe we can have it read 11 back? 12 13 (The testimony was read.) 14 15 BY MR. GERSTEN: 16 Q What I'd like to focus now on, you've givens 17 us all the times beforehand now, correct? We've 18 discussed all those? Or were there others? 19 A I think we've discussed them. 20 Q Okay. After this letter, then, when have you 21 and Mr. Orr discussed the topic of 3-124? 22 A Probably later in January or February. I 23 don't know when Richard wrote his opinion, but some 24 point after that. 25 Q Okay. Well, let's -- as Warner Wolf would Brandon Smith Reporting 172 1 say, go to his opinion. 2 My understanding is that Mr. Blumenthal wrote 3 his response on February 2nd. Does that sound about 4 right? 5 A I'd have to look at it, but probably. 6 Q Okay. 7 MR. GERSTEN: Let's get this marked as 8 an exhibit, please. Bysiewicz 214 through Bysiewicz 9 227. 10 MR. HORTON: Exhibit 7. 11 12 (Defendant's Exhibit 7: Marked for 13 identification.) letter February 2, 14 2010. 15 BY MR. GERSTEN: 16 Q See the letter? 17 A Yes. 18 Q That's the letter you were just making 19 reference to? 20 A Great. 21 Q Now, have you and Mr. Orr discussed -- had 22 your discussions after you received the Blumenthal 23 letter, which is now marked as Exhibit 7? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Okay. And where were you when you had your Brandon Smith Reporting 173 1 discussions. Terrible question. How many times have 2 you and he had your discussions? 3 A Perhaps once or twice. 4 Q Okay. When was the first time? 5 A I don't have a specific recollection about 6 the date. 7 Q Okay. Would it be before you actually 8 received the letter or afterwards? 9 A Probably after. 10 Q Okay. Good. Was it before or after you had 11 filed the lawsuit in this case? 12 A Would be after, because we filed on the 13 29th. 14 Q Okay. So your discussions with Mr. Orr have 15 taken place only after the 29th? 16 A Which discussions? 17 Q Okay. 18 A After the discussion on this letter I had 19 another one or two discussions, probably after the date 20 of Mr. Blumenthal's letter. 21 Q Okay. And my question now to you is: After 22 the -- I'm trying to pinpoint the time. Did you have 23 your discussions that you just made reference to with 24 Mr. Orr before or after you filed your lawsuit in this 25 lawsuit -- in this case? Brandon Smith Reporting 174 1 A After. 2 Q Okay. Do you recall your discussions? 3 A I do. 4 Q Okay. And do you recall how long they 5 took? 6 A I don't remember if it was one or two, but it 7 was brief. 8 Q Okay. Do you recall where you were? 9 A I don't. 10 Q Was it in person? 11 A No. It was -- I believe it was a telephone 12 conversation. 13 Q Okay. And do you recall if you were in the 14 car or if you were in your office? 15 A I'm not sure. 16 Q Was it in the morning, noon or night? 17 A I don't know. 18 Q And are you indicating -- and what did you 19 and Mr. Orr talk about on this conversation? 20 MR. HORTON: Hold on. Object. Are we 21 talking about the response to Blumenthal's letter, if 22 that's so, I object as to form. If we're talking 23 about Blumenthal's letter it's a proper question, if 24 we're talking about something else that may be 25 privileged legal advice. Brandon Smith Reporting 175 1 A We were talking about something than is 2 different than Mr. Blumenthal's letter and I would say 3 it's privileged. 4 MR. HORTON: Hold on he's got to 5 clarify his question because if you're talking about 6 this letter we'll get one answer. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q Let's try this. We know there is this ethics 9 complaint pending? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Correct. Were you and Mr. Orr discussing the 12 ethics complaint? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Did you and Mr. Orr discuss Mr. 15 Blumenthal's -- the content of Mr. Blumenthal's 16 letter? 17 MR. HORTON: Hold on. I object. 18 Within the context of advising on the ethics 19 complaint. 20 MR. GERSTEN: I don't have any clue, 21 Wes. I'm trying to just lay the foundation. 22 MR. HORTON: That's why I'm saying, I'm 23 objecting as to form if you're asking if the question 24 was asked in -- because of his attorney-client 25 relationship, then I object. If you're asking simply Brandon Smith Reporting 176 1 in the context of what he was saying concerning the 2 Blumenthal letter, then I don't object. Depends if it 3 has to do with advice concerning this confidential 4 proceeding, then I object on the attorney-client 5 privilege. So all I'm asking you to do is make your 6 question clear. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q Madam Secretary, I was wondering if you could 9 tell me if you and Mr. Orr had discussed the ethics 10 complaint, correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Okay. I'm not asking you to divulge the 13 contents of your discussions with Mr. Orr regarding the 14 ethics complaint yet. Is that clear? 15 A What do you mean yet? 16 Q When I said yet that's not the content of my 17 question. 18 A Okay. 19 Q Now, did you and Mr. Orr discuss the content 20 of Mr. Blumenthal's letter after Mr. Blumenthal issued 21 his letter? 22 A I don't believe so. 23 Q So it's been limited -- your discussions with 24 Mr. Orr were limited to this ethics issue? 25 A Yes, after we're -- we finished talking about Brandon Smith Reporting 177 1 this? 2 Q This being? 3 A This being our opinion letter request. 4 Q Right. Okay. Thank you? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Now, did you read Mr. Blumenthal's letter? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Did you read all of it? 9 A Yes. All 14 pages. 10 Q Okay. In conducting your review of his 11 letter, did you come to an understanding -- did you 12 understand it? 13 A What do you mean by that. 14 Q Just what I said, did you understand his 15 letter? 16 A I read his letter. I'm not sure what 17 understand means. 18 Q Okay. Do you understand the term 19 understand? 20 A I do. 21 Q Okay. What's your understanding of the 22 term? 23 A What's the question? 24 Q Okay. The question is: I asked you if you 25 understood the term understand and you indicated yes? Brandon Smith Reporting 178 1 A Yes. 2 Q What is your understanding of the word 3 understand? 4 A Do I know what it means. 5 Q Okay. Taking your understanding of the term, 6 after you read Mr. Blumenthal's letter, did you 7 understand it? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Okay. Were there any portions of the letter 10 that you understood and came to a disagreement on? 11 A Oh, yes. 12 Q I'm looking at page 1. Is there any portion 13 of page 1 that you came to a disagreement about? 14 A He is just restating the questions, 15 essentially. 16 Q Okay. Did you agree with the way he restated 17 it? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Okay. Now, one question I had when I read 20 this, moving on to page 2, is that you indicated that 21 you would be called upon to accept certificates of 22 endorsement. Do you see that? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Was there a reason why you thought, as 25 secretary of state, that the issues you raised in your Brandon Smith Reporting 179 1 letter or in Mr. Blumenthal's response had anything to 2 do with your accepting certificates of endorsement? 3 A Had to do with our offices accepting 4 certificates of endorsement because this is an office 5 that will be on the ballot in November of 2010 and I do 6 anticipate that there could be primaries on either side 7 of the aisles, since there are multiple candidates for 8 that office. 9 Q The reason I'm asking you that, ma'am, is has 10 anybody indicated that your name will not be accepted 11 if it is placed on a certificate of endorsement? 12 A No. 13 Q Now, you've indicated that your office will 14 issue notices of primary? 15 A Yes. 16 Q When you asked Mr. Blumenthal to give you a 17 response here. Let me interrupt you for a second. 18 You had a discussion with Mr. Blumenthal 19 before you received his letter, didn't you? 20 A A short one. 21 Q Okay. And what did you and Mr. Blumenthal 22 discuss in that short conversation? 23 A We had heard through a media source that he 24 might be issuing an opinion and I just wanted to know 25 whether he ought to anticipate that being sooner rather Brandon Smith Reporting 180 1 than later. We did not discuss the contents of his 2 opinion. 3 Q Going back to my question it says here you 4 needed this opinion because your office issues notices 5 of primary. See that? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Now, has your office indicated anything to 8 you that if you have a primary going on, your name will 9 not be accepted? 10 A No. 11 Q Okay. And it indicates here that your office 12 will be placing candidates on the ballot for the 2010 13 election. Do you see that? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Okay. And aim correct, ma'am, your office 16 has not indicated that your name will not be accepted 17 as a candidate for ballot for the 2010 election, 18 correct. 19 A No. 20 Q That's not correct? 21 A You said my office has not indicated. 22 Q Right. I'm sorry if the question was 23 confusing you tell me that. I'm sorry. Am I correct, 24 ma'am, that your office has not indicated to you that 25 your name will not be accepted as a candidate for the Brandon Smith Reporting 181 1 ballot for the 2010 election? 2 A They have not. 3 Q And where it says here that Mr. Blumenthal 4 said there's a need to resolve these general legal 5 questions, you see that? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Okay. We've established it pretty far right 8 now that you haven't been given any notice from your 9 office that your name won't be accepted for a 10 certificate of endorsement, there won't be any problem 11 with you running in a primary, there will be no 12 rejection of your name as a candidate, so what was the 13 need, other than a personal one that you wanted to have 14 this resolved as an individual as contrasted to the 15 secretary of state? 16 A There was an interest in resolving this, 17 given the controversy around the meaning of the ten 18 year requirement and the meaning of active practice and 19 the contents of 3-124. 20 Q Okay. Well, what was it about the 21 performance of the official duties of the Office of the 22 Secretary of State that you needed guidance on in this 23 regard if your office has already indicated to you, 24 personally, that your name will be accepted under any 25 condition or are you just looking for free legal advice Brandon Smith Reporting 182 1 from the chief state's lawyer? 2 MR. HORTON: Okay. 3 A I think those are several questions in there. 4 Can we do that again. 5 MR. HORTON: Yes, I object to the form 6 of the question. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q Sure. Were you just looking for some free 9 legal advice in light of the fact that your office had 10 already indicated to you that you would not have your 11 name rejected under any condition set for the N this 12 letter? 13 A My office has not indicated anything about my 14 candidacy. 15 Q That's not what you told the attorney 16 general, is it? 17 MR. HORTON: Are you referring to her 18 letter? Is that what you're -- 19 A I'm sorry, I'm lost. 20 BY MR. GERSTEN: 21 Q Okay. Madam Secretary, what you told the 22 chief lawyer for the state of Connecticut is that my 23 office needs this information, correct? 24 A We need guidance about this issue because our 25 office will be responsible for placing names on the Brandon Smith Reporting 183 1 ballot for the Office of Attorney General. 2 Q But you've indicated that your office hasn't 3 done anything about this controversy. 4 A We've written this letter and we've received 5 this response. 6 Q I understand that. When you say we, it's 7 really you, isn't it? Correct? 8 A Yes. 9 Q And it was you acting in your dual capacity 10 as an elected official seeking free legal advice from 11 the chief lawyer for the state of Connecticut, 12 correct? 13 A It is unusual -- it's an unusual situation to 14 have the chief elections official who happens also to 15 be a candidate for attorney general, but we were quite 16 clear in the letter that we wrote to the attorney 17 general asking him for his advice, we were quite clear 18 about that particular fact. But it is a question 19 outside in the public realm and I am the chief 20 elections official and the attorney general is the 21 chief legal officer for the state. If he saw a problem 22 with our opinion request letter, he could have chosen 23 not to respond and said that it was inappropriate. 24 Q But Madam Secretary, you indicated to him 25 wearing your hat as the chief elections official that Brandon Smith Reporting 184 1 you had a need to get resolution of this, but you're 2 indicating right now that your office hasn't taken a 3 position on any of these issues, correct? 4 A That's correct because there have been no 5 certificates of endorsement, issues of primary notice 6 or petitions submitted to our office for this 7 particular office. 8 Q Now, what basis would your office have to 9 reject any certificate of endorsement which would have 10 your name on it if you were so nominated? 11 A I would not be the person placing the names 12 of candidates on the ballot for attorney general 13 because I have recused myself. My office, however, 14 will need guidance because this is an open seat and 15 there are many individuals who would like the position 16 and they will need guidance on what active practice 17 means. 18 Q Let's take you or your role here in a 19 conflict and put it to the side for a moment. Let's 20 take your expertise as the secretary of state who's 21 performed that function for 11 years and let's have you 22 explain from that level of expertise what the secretary 23 of state's office would have as a basis to reject your 24 name if it were placed on a certificate of endorsement 25 under the circumstances? Brandon Smith Reporting 185 1 A I don't personally believe that they would 2 have a basis; others may disagree. 3 Q So would you agree with me that again, using 4 your expertise in the 11 years, et cetera, that there 5 would be no basis to reject your name if it was placed 6 on a notice of primary either, correct? 7 A Right. 8 Q Okay. And the same thing is if your name 9 came in as a candidate on the ballot for the 2010 10 election, based upon your expertise, there is no basis 11 for the Office of the Secretary of State to reject your 12 name as a candidate, correct? 13 MR. HORTON: I object as to form. 14 That's not what she said. She said she didn't think 15 that. 16 MR. GERSTEN: I understand. 17 MR. HORTON: Personally but otherwise 18 might disagree. 19 MR. GERSTEN: I'm aware of that I don't 20 care about others I'm talking about the chief 21 elections officer in her experience over the past 11 22 years. 23 MR. HORTON: Okay fine. 24 MR. GERSTEN: Giving us her opinion as 25 to whether anybody in a similar position would have a Brandon Smith Reporting 186 1 basis to reject her name as an individual. 2 BY MR. GERSTEN: 3 Q And there would be none, would there? 4 A No. 5 Q Now, you raised another point. You've 6 recused yourself in connection with this particular -- 7 this question now, correct? 8 A I've recused myself in connection with the 9 placement of candidates on the attorney general ballot, 10 yes. 11 Q Okay. And what goes into the decision making 12 of the placement of candidates for the attorney general 13 position. 14 A Whether the person is qualified under our 15 statutes, whether they have submitted the appropriate 16 endorsement certificate, whether they have met the 17 primary requirements, the petition requirements to be 18 on the ballot. 19 Q And when you use the word qualify, you're not 20 saying that it's the job of the secretary of state's 21 office based upon your many years of experience to take 22 a look and determine whether a candidate satisfies the 23 eligibility requirements of this particular statute, is 24 it? 25 A Well, actually in the Searle case, Mr. Searle Brandon Smith Reporting 187 1 went to the secretary of the state, I believe it was 2 Gloria Schaffer at the time, and I believe she asked 3 the attorney general for an opinion about whether he 4 would qualify because he, as I recall, had six years of 5 practice in Connecticut, and she wanted to know whether 6 that was sufficient to place him on the ballot. 7 Q Okay. So is -- in answering my question, are 8 you indicating that the offers of the secretary of 9 state is authorized to examine whether a candidate has 10 satisfied the requirements set forth in 3-124 before 11 allowing that candidate to be placed on the ballot? 12 A Yes. 13 Q And your authority for that is what Gloria 14 Schaffer did in the Searle Field case; is that 15 correct? 16 A That is a precedent for asking the attorney 17 general for his opinion and it is the role of the 18 secretary of the state to determine who is placed on 19 the ballot and whether they meet the requirements of 20 our state statutes. That is what the chief election 21 officer does. 22 Q Okay. Now, if it's not you making the 23 determination in your elected capacity as the 24 commissioner of elections, who is making that 25 determination at the secretary of state's office? Brandon Smith Reporting 188 1 A For the attorney general position? 2 Q Okay. Try that. 3 A Could you please be specific about the 4 question so I know what I'm answering? 5 Q Sure. You've indicated you've recused 6 yourself? 7 A With respect to the attorney general 8 position. 9 Q Okay. So who is making the determination if 10 it's not the chief elected officer? 11 A It will be Ted Bromley, our elections 12 attorney, I believe. 13 Q When you say it will be and I believe, what's 14 the basis for your belief? 15 A Because I believe that my deputy, Leslie 16 Mara, who is appointed by me, has also recused herself 17 and so I believe that responsibility now is with Ted 18 Bromley. 19 Q Okay. And when did Leslie recuse herself? 20 A I'm not certain as to the date. 21 Q Okay. And where is there any authority for 22 the -- you as the chief elected officer to delegate 23 this to someone named Ted Bromley? 24 MR. HORTON: I object to form. That 25 assumes that she did it: I mean you're assuming Brandon Smith Reporting 189 1 what -- that she did. 2 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. I'll try it 3 another way. 4 BY MR. GERSTEN: 5 Q What is the authority for Ted Bromley, who's 6 he? I'll restate my question? 7 A Ted. 8 Q Yes. Who's Ted? 9 A Ted Bromley is our elections lawyer. Is one 10 of our elections attorneys. 11 Q Okay. And is he elected? 12 A No. 13 Q Okay. You're elected? 14 A Yes. 15 Q And you were elected as the commissioner of 16 elections? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Now, what is the authority for Ted Bromley, 19 who's not an elected official, to assume the position 20 of the secretary of state in determining whose name 21 should be put on the ballot if his capacity of 22 commissioner of elections? 23 A That would be a question better directed to 24 our attorney and that would be the attorney general. 25 Q You don't know? Brandon Smith Reporting 190 1 A I know that I recused myself. I believe my 2 deputy has and I believe that Ted Bromley will make 3 that determination. 4 Q Madam Secretary, you haven't taken any steps 5 to find out what basis there is to have Ted Bromley, a 6 staff attorney, take over your function as an elected 7 official; is that correct? 8 A My deputy has taken care of that with Mr. 9 Bromley. 10 Q Your deputy is not the one who is elected as 11 the secretary of the state by the voters of this 12 state? 13 A Correct. 14 Q Correct. That's just a political appointee, 15 correct? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Did you delegate that to this political 18 appointee? 19 A I was advised by my attorney to recuse myself 20 and so I have done that to avoid any appearance of any 21 conflict. 22 Q What attorney gave you that advice? 23 A Dan Krisch. 24 Q Okay. Now, in your capacity as the elected 25 official, who you're generally concerned about the way Brandon Smith Reporting 191 1 that the way the commissioner of elections conducts the 2 job, aren't you? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Have you -- have you not tried to ascertain 5 what basis there is to have someone take your place? 6 A I believe there is precedent in our office 7 for recuse Al and I followed it. 8 Q What precedent? 9 A I can't give you anything specific at the 10 moment. 11 Q Okay. Now, Madam Secretary, what I'm trying 12 to understand is given the importance of this, you've 13 basically delegated this function to a nonelected staff 14 attorney, correct? 15 MR. HORTON: I object. That's not what 16 she said. 17 A I did not delegate it to Mr. Bromley. I 18 delegated it to my deputy. 19 BY MR. GERSTEN: 20 Q Okay. So you delegated it to a political 21 appointee -- let me restate my question. 22 You will admit that you were elected to serve 23 in the capacity as the chief elections official, 24 correct? 25 A Yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 192 1 Q Pretty important part of the description of 2 your job, correct, commissioner of elections? 3 A Yes. 4 Q And when people go to the vote owe to vote 5 they know that's who they're voting for, correct? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And you're now indicating that because you 8 made a decision to delegate that function, you 9 delegated it to some political appointee, am I 10 correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And your understanding now is that political 13 appointee has in turn delegated that job to some staff 14 attorney, correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And you have no idea if there is any 17 authority to allow that to take place, for that staff 18 attorney to act as commissioner of elections, 19 correct? 20 A I'm sure there is authority. 21 Q What is it? 22 A I can't provide it with you right now. 23 Q But you've abdicated that position, haven't 24 you, as it relates to this attorney general job? 25 MR. HORTON: I object to that word Brandon Smith Reporting 193 1 abdicate. She's disqualified herself, Eliot. She's 2 disqualified herself. 3 MR. GERSTEN: Fine. She can -- 4 MR. HORTON: She hasn't abdicated 5 anything. 6 A I recused myself. 7 BY MR. GERSTEN: 8 Q Well, you'll agree that in recusing yourself, 9 you play no role in this decision making of an elected 10 official, that normally an elected official is supposed 11 to do, correct? 12 A Play no role in what? 13 Q As the secretary of state, you're the one 14 who's been elected to perform the function as 15 commissioner of elections as it applies to attorney 16 general raises in general, correct? 17 A And other raises, yes. 18 Q And as applied to the attorney general's 19 office, you've basically said, I'm not going to have a 20 role in this and I'm going to let some staff attorney 21 take that job, correct? 22 A I haven't said that. I have delegated it to 23 my deputy and she delegated it further, I believe. 24 Q Okay. And as you sit here today you don't 25 know of any authority to allow you to do that, do you, Brandon Smith Reporting 194 1 this delegating to a political appointee? 2 A I believe there is authority. I just can't 3 give it to you at the moment. 4 Q And all of this takes place because you made 5 a decision to run for this office, correct? 6 A All of what takes place? 7 Q All of this delegating of the authority to 8 act as commissioner of elections takes place solely as 9 a result of your decision to run for this particular 10 office, correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Now, Mr. Blumenthal gave you an opinion that 13 says that -- on page 2, that the requirement of 14 being -- of active practice at the bar means more than 15 being a Connecticut -- a member of the Connecticut bar 16 in active status, do you see that? 17 A Where are you looking? 18 Q Second paragraph. 19 A Yes. 20 Q Okay. Did you agree with that? 21 A Not necessarily. 22 Q Okay. What don't you agree with? 23 A That in 18 97, active practice may have meant 24 simply being an active member of the bar. 25 Q So you're disagreeing with the attorney Brandon Smith Reporting 195 1 general's opinion because you think that merely being a 2 member of the Connecticut bar in if I have status in 18 3 97 was sufficient? 4 MR. HORTON: For ten years, right? 5 A Could be. 6 BY MR. GERSTEN: 7 Q When you say could be, is that your position 8 in this case? 9 A That is one of my positions. 10 Q That's why I'm asking. 11 A Yes. 12 Q Because you are the plaintiff and you're now 13 saying that in 18 97 -- your position in this case that 14 is Mr. Blumenthal was wrong because the requirement of 15 being an active -- of active practice meant being an 16 active member of the bar for ten years in 18 97. Do I 17 understand your position correctly? 18 A I'm saying that the legislature may have had 19 a -- it may have meant when it sedative practice in 18 20 97, it may have been meant active practice to mean 21 being an attorney that was not retired or suspended 22 from the bar. 23 Q And that's the position you're asserting in 24 this lawsuit as the plaintiff in this lawsuit, 25 correct? Brandon Smith Reporting 196 1 A One of them. 2 Q Okay. What's another one then as it relates 3 to this clause? Strike that. Is there another position 4 that you're taking as it relates to this clause? 5 A Yes. 6 Q What's that, ma'am? 7 A That active practice can encompass the giving 8 of legal advice, the drafting of documents, and the 9 advocacy of reform to laws at the state level or the 10 federal level. 11 Q Okay. Is there any other position you're 12 taking with respect to that phrase in this lawsuit? 13 A Generally speaking, those would -- I would 14 have covered all of the positions that we're taking. 15 Q And I you on that but I want to make sure we 16 get all specifics. You said generally. Is there any 17 other position you're taking that you haven't mentioned 18 besides those two? 19 A Yes. That 3-124 is unconstitutional in light 20 of the amendments to the later -- the later amendments 21 to our state constitution. 22 Q Okay. Is there any other basis you're taking 23 to disagree with Mr. Blumenthal's opinion? 24 A Those would be the major ones. 25 Q Okay. I'm interested in getting them all. Brandon Smith Reporting 197 1 You use the word major. Are there any minor ones? 2 A No. Those are the two points. 3 Q Okay. Well, you've mentioned -- 4 A Actually there is more than two. 5 Q Right. There's three points aren't there? 6 A Uh-huh. 7 Q And I want to make sure we've exhausted them 8 all Madam Secretary. There are any others as you sit 9 here today that you're asserting as the plaintiff in 10 this case? 11 A Yes. That the work that I am required to do 12 under 9 dash 3 and 9 dash 4 of the Connecticut General 13 Statutes constitutes legal work and the practice of law 14 when done by a lawyer. 15 Q So now we have four. Are there any others? 16 A That lawyering and public service counts 17 toward the active practice of law of the ten year 18 requirement. 19 Q Remember when I said to you I don't want to 20 cover just major ones I want to make sure we've 21 exhausted all of the positions in this case? 22 A Yes. 23 Q So now we have five. Are there any others, 24 ma'am? 25 A Those are the ones that I can think of at the Brandon Smith Reporting 198 1 moment. 2 Q Okay. Unfortunately we're not going to get a 3 lot of opportunity to ask you questions like this again 4 so I'm really going to ask you to stretch your mind for 5 a moment and make sure that if there are any others you 6 can do it because now is the time to speak up. So if 7 you have any others besides these five, this is your 8 opportunity to tell us. This is your case. We can't 9 guess. We're trying to understand it. 10 A That's my case. 11 Q No others? 12 A That's it. 13 Q Correct? Great. 14 Now -- 15 MR. HORTON: You want me to mention one 16 thing, Eliot, that she did not mention? Or I'll do it 17 later if you want. 18 MR. GERSTEN: Why don't you whisper it 19 in her ear and you can tell her so it can come from 20 her lips under oath. 21 MR. HORTON: All right. 22 23 (Witness and counsel conferred.) 24 25 A That's fine. I'm disagreeing with my lawyer, Brandon Smith Reporting 199 1 too. I disagree with Mr. Blumenthal, I'm disagreeing 2 with Wes Horton. 3 BY MR. GERSTEN: 4 Q Okay. So there are no other basis that the 5 defendants in this case have to try to figure out in 6 terms of your position in this case? 7 A Those would be the points. 8 Q ? 9 MR. HORTON: I'm satisfied. 10 MR. GERSTEN: Do you want me to go 11 anymore in this? Sorry about that. 12 BY MR. GERSTEN: 13 Q Madam Secretary, are you aware of anyone 14 besides yourself who have sought the advice of the 15 Office of the Secretary of State to determine whether 16 these requirements set forth in the statute are going 17 to make them qualified or unqualified? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Who's that? 20 A The Searle Field. 21 Q Anyone else? 22 23 (Witness and counsel conferred.) 24 25 A Which statute are we talking about? Are we Brandon Smith Reporting 200 1 just talking about 3-124 or are we talking about 2 election. 3 Q Right. We're talking about the one that 4 you're concerned with. Besides you, in 2009 and 2010, 5 are you aware of anyone else who has approached the 6 secretary of state, you, and said, I have a question as 7 to whether I may be eligible under the confines of this 8 statute, Madam Secretary? 9 A No. Others may have approached my elections 10 division and I may not be aware of that, but I am 11 not -- I was not asked that question. 12 Q Okay. Maybe it's a good time to go there. 13 Explain, if you will, how do you operate your Office of 14 the Secretary of State? Who's in charge? I'll strike 15 that. You have this chief of staff lady that you 16 talked about, correct? 17 A Yes. 18 Q You have these attorneys that you talked 19 about? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Okay. Do you meet with these attorneys 22 yourself? 23 A Yes. 24 Q And do you meet with these attorneys yourself 25 every day? Brandon Smith Reporting 201 1 A It depends. I speak to them on the phone 2 frequently. 3 Q How often do you have a face-to-face meeting 4 with Ted Bromley? 5 A We see each other at the legislature when I 6 testify, he accompanies me. I speak to him on the 7 telephone frequently because my office is at the 8 Capitol and his office is at 30 trinity street, so we 9 speak on the phone frequently. 10 Q By the way you just testified in front of the 11 judiciary committee this week or was it last week? 12 A Yes. 13 Q And didn't you refer questions about legal 14 issues to your attorney accompanying you that day? 15 A Seth Klaskin is the head of my commercial 16 recording division and he is an attorney and he was 17 with me and yes. 18 Q And you referred questions to him and you 19 said I'm really not sure how to answer those questions 20 you got to talk to the lawyer, correct? 21 A There was one question that -- and it had to 22 do with electronic signatures and how our division 23 handles that and he answered that question, yes. 24 Q All right. Now, by the way when you received 25 in front of the legislature, did you say, I am the Brandon Smith Reporting 202 1 secretary of state and I am a lawyer? 2 A I say I am the secretary of the state and my 3 name is Susan Bysiewicz. 4 Q Okay. In fact, have you ever, in any of the 5 documents you provided to us which represented your 6 written testimony, it does not appear that you've 7 introduced yourself to the legislature and said you are 8 a lawyer, does it? 9 A No. Most of my colleagues know that. 10 Q Okay. And in your testimony you provided 11 last week, you did not represent yourself as being a 12 lawyer, did you? 13 A No. However -- 14 Q Nor to my of your so-called constituents that 15 you give this advice to from your office, the people 16 from your office identify themselves strike that. When 17 people give -- when Ted Bromley signs a letter he says 18 staff attorney, right? Wouldn't that be correct ma'am 19 if someone got a letter from Ted Bromley they would 20 know he's writing them as a lawyer? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Now, on documents you've signed written to 23 some people, is there anything on those documents that 24 would represent that you are a lawyer? 25 A No. My documents are signed as you see Susan Brandon Smith Reporting 203 1 Bysiewicz, secretary of the state. 2 Q So would you agree with me, ma'am that there 3 is nothing in the documents that you signed that 4 differentiate you from Miles Rappaport signing his name 5 the same way, correct? 6 A Not in the title, no. We both sign the same 7 way, however, I'm a lawyer, Mr. Rappaport is not. 8 Q Okay. So if I receive one of those letters, 9 is there anything in that letter that would lead me to 10 believe as a constituent that I am getting advice from 11 a lawyer? 12 A If you didn't know me or my background, you 13 wouldn't know. 14 Q Okay. You're not going to represent that all 15 the people who you've responded to that you gave us all 16 these documents from know your a lawyer strike that. 17 Are you making the claim that all of the people you 18 write to know that you're a lawyer? 19 A I am not. 20 Q And are you making the claim that these 21 documents that you provided in discovery are to people 22 who know that you're a lawyer? 23 A I am not. 24 Q Okay. 25 MR. HORTON: Eliot, excuse me, that Brandon Smith Reporting 204 1 reminds me of an issue that I may -- she may not have 2 properly disclosed to you earlier in saying what all 3 the issues are. 4 MR. GERSTEN: You want to confer with 5 your client find out if there is another issue. 6 MR. HORTON: This is not going to be 7 something we disagree on. 8 9 (Witness and counsel conferred.) 10 11 MR. HORTON: All right. I'm sorry. I 12 forgot. 13 A My -- 14 BY MR. GERSTEN: 15 Q After confirming with counsel do you have 16 something to add? 17 A Yes. I believe I've already raised the 18 issue, but to clarify even further, 9 dash 3 and 9 dash 19 4 empower nonlawyers to do legal work. And what -- and 20 if a lawyer does those activities that are mentioned in 21 9-3 and 9-4, those constitute the practice of law 22 giving legal opinions, and giving legal advice. 23 Q Okay. 24 MR. HORTON: If you see my draft brief, 25 it will explain it. Brandon Smith Reporting 205 1 BY MR. GERSTEN: 2 Q So there is a sixth claim you're making 3 then? 4 A Well, I -- I think it relates to the 5 statutory argument that I've already made under 9 dash 6 3 and 9 dash 4. He thinks it's a -- my attorney thinks 7 it's a subargument. I thought I had already raised it. 8 BY MR. GERSTEN: 9 Q I'm not even sure I understand it, that's why 10 I'm going to ask you to try to explain it to me again. 11 You're indicating that if a nonlawyer performs the 12 functions that are empowered by the secretary of 13 state -- strike that -- that are empowered by statute 14 to be performed by the secretary of state, that 15 nonlawyer would, in fact, be engaged in providing legal 16 services -- 17 A Yes. 18 Q -- to the constituency, correct? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Let me ask -- we're getting late in the day 21 and I know we're going to end up having to come back. 22 Let me ask you, you're aware Mr. Blumenthal -- you've 23 compared yourself in the public to the experiences of 24 Mr. Blumenthal prior to the time he became attorney 25 general, haven't you? Brandon Smith Reporting 206 1 A We have some similar legal experience in 2 common. 3 Q And you've actually said you're every bit as 4 qualified as Dick Blumenthal was when he took this 5 position based upon your legal experience, correct? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And you're aware, aren't you, that prior to 8 the time Mr. Blumenthal became attorney general, he 9 actually in contrast to you, appeared in court, 10 correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q In fact, he tried a bunch of cases, didn't 13 he? 14 A Yes. 15 Q You never tried any cases? 16 A No. 17 Q So in your comparison to Mr. Blumenthal, 18 that's something that you would agree he appears to 19 have fulfilled the requirements of the statute in a way 20 that you cannot if the statute is valid, correct? 21 A No. 22 Q Okay. What am I not correct about? 23 A That I believe my experience in private 24 practice and in the public sector more than qualifies 25 me to serve as attorney general because it more than Brandon Smith Reporting 207 1 meets the ten year requirement. 2 Q Okay. Maybe my question wasn't clear and I'm 3 wondering if I could have the court reporter reread it 4 so that if it wasn't clear I'll redo it but I think it 5 called for a different answer, ma'am? 6 7 (The testimony was read.) 8 9 BY MR. GERSTEN: 10 Q Okay I'll restate my question. Mr. 11 Blumenthal appeared at the bar, didn't he? 12 A He did. 13 MR. HORTON: He appeared in court. 14 A He appeared in court, yes. 15 BY MR. GERSTEN: 16 Q If the interpretation of the word at the bar 17 means a litigator, as you said it might? 18 A I didn't say I agreed. 19 Q I understand that. But you've conceded that 20 it's a plausible argument that you disagree with, 21 correct? 22 A Correct. 23 Q And will you concede that Mr. Blumenthal 24 satisfied that requirement of being a litigator before 25 he became attorney general? Brandon Smith Reporting 208 1 A Yes. 2 Q Okay. And that's not something you can 3 satisfy in a way that he satisfied, correct? 4 A Our experiences different. 5 Q Right. You're not a litigator? 6 A No. 7 Q He was? 8 A Correct. 9 Q So that's one difference when you've 10 indicated to people my experience is the same as Dick 11 Blumenthal's, I'm just as qualified, that's one 12 distinction between the two, correct? 13 A We do have similar experiences. We both were 14 in private practice. We both served in the 15 legislature. And I run a large constitutional office. 16 I supervise lawyers. I give legal advice. Mr. 17 Blumenthal runs a large constitutional office, he 18 supervises lawyers, he gives legal advice. Therefore, 19 our experience is similar. 20 Q And you'll agree that your experiences are 21 also different because he was a litigator before he got 22 this position and you were not? 23 A Correct. That's one difference. 24 Q And in fact he spent a larger amount of time 25 in private practice than you did, isn't that also Brandon Smith Reporting 209 1 correct? 2 A I'm not certain. I'd have to look at his 3 resume and count that up. I know he served as United 4 States attorney and I know that he worked for several 5 private law firms. I don't know how long he worked at 6 private law firms. 7 Q Okay. Now, gist going back to the operations 8 of the office again. Did you -- you indicated you have 9 some face-to-face time with Mr. Bromley when you go to 10 the legislature? 11 A Yes, and Mr. Button and Mr. Klaskin and Mr. 12 Liu. 13 Q Okay. How often do you meet with Mr. Bromley 14 on an annual basis, face-to-face? 15 A I couldn't tell you. 16 Q Once a week? 17 A We have, as I said we have phone 18 conversations. We have meetings in my office. We have 19 meetings in the elections division. We see each other 20 at town clerk conferences, registrar of voters 21 conferences, and press conferences. Other office 22 events. 23 Q All right. Maybe I can ask the question and 24 it can be answered. How often do you and Mr. Bromley 25 meet in the secretary of state's offices Brandon Smith Reporting 210 1 face-to-face? 2 A Hard to say. Depends on the particular time 3 of year. Depends on the month. Depends on whether the 4 legislature is in session. 5 Q Do you meet 12 times a year? 6 A I'm sure more than that. And we speak on the 7 phone frequently. 8 Q I'm just talking about the face-to-face at 9 the moment so I get a handle on this. You keep ongoing 10 to talking on the phone? 11 A Uh-huh. 12 Q How -- you're unable to state under oath here 13 today how often you and Mr. Bromley meet face-to-face 14 at the secretary of state's offices; is that correct? 15 A I would say frequently, because, for 16 instance, he has come with me on three or four 17 occasions as we've testified in the legislature, so we 18 meet at our office. Also, we have -- we just had an 19 office press conference on audits, choosing precincts 20 for hand count audits. You know, I'm on the phone with 21 him frequently. 22 Q Okay. You keep on talking about the phone. 23 We don't have records of any phone calls, do we? 24 A I'm sure we do, because we have phone calls 25 with election officials, or mayors who are seeking Brandon Smith Reporting 211 1 answers to election questions and he will make notes 2 about those because we keep phone logs. 3 Q Okay? 4 A In our elections division. 5 Q Okay. So if we ask the attorney general in 6 our discovery here to have his client, the Office of 7 the Secretary of State produce records of phone calls 8 that people have with you from the attorneys, you're 9 indicating there are records relating to your phone 10 calls and discussions with the attorneys at the office, 11 am I understanding that correctly? 12 A I'm saying, if I -- for conversations with 13 our client -- with our constituents, a registrar, a 14 mayor, about a candidate, about an elections issue, 15 that may be noted in our attorney's phone logs. I 16 don't know if there are telephone records in my 17 telephone extension to Ted Bromley's or to Leslie Mara 18 or to Lou Button. 19 Q That's why I'm asking the question. I'm 20 trying to figure out because you keep talking about 21 having phone calls, are your phone calls with Mr. 22 Bromley only when these other people are on the 23 phone? 24 A No. 25 Q Okay. So are there records of phone calls Brandon Smith Reporting 212 1 between you and Mr. Bromley that you're aware of as the 2 chief executive officer of the secretary of state? 3 A Well, I'll give you an example of one 4 yesterday. I spoke to Ted about a town clerk issue 5 brought to my attention by the mayor of Plymouth and we 6 talked about a statute 7 dash 22 and its application to 7 this town clerk. That's one example. 8 Q Okay. That's one. Good. My question is: 9 Are there any records of any conversations that you're 10 aware of as the chief executive officer of this office 11 relating to your conversations with Ted Bromley, for 12 example? 13 A And I said to you that we have -- that we 14 have phone logs in our elections division and so when 15 I'm on the telephone with a constituent and Ted might 16 be on the phone, Leslie Mara might be on the phone or 17 some other election attorney, they might note that in 18 the phone log. 19 Q Okay. I apologize if I wasn't clear. You're 20 the boss over there, correct? 21 A Yes. 22 Q You're the head dog, right? 23 MR. HORTON: I object to that 24 characterization. 25 A I'm the chief elections official. Brandon Smith Reporting 213 1 MR. HORTON: Let's go back to 2 esquire. 3 BY MR. GERSTEN: 4 Q You're the CEO, right? 5 A Yes. 6 Q And as the CEO, are you aware of any records 7 relating to phone conversations between you and Mr. 8 Bromley where no one else is on the phone? 9 A Yes. I made a note on my schedule 10 yesterday. 11 Q Okay. Is the note on your schedule that you 12 made of this phone call yesterday are there other 13 records besides a note on your schedule of your 14 telephone call with Ted Bromley that we could look to 15 determine how often there are -- that there's 16 documented evidence to support how many times you and 17 Ted talk on the phone one on one? 18 A I'm not aware of them. You could certainly 19 ask Mr. Bromley. 20 Q I could ask Mr. Bromley, but as I asked you, 21 you're the boss, aren't you? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And as you sit here today as the boss, is it 24 your testimony you don't know? Is that correct? 25 A I don't know what? Brandon Smith Reporting 214 1 Q You don't know if there are any records? 2 A I don't know of any telephone records outside 3 of the log books that -- 4 Q Okay. Now, how about with Mr. Button, that's 5 one of the other guys? 6 MR. GERSTEN: Can I just have my 7 notebook that you're in the way of there. Sorry, 8 Jake. 9 A Mr. Button is frequently in our office, 10 because he brings writs for me to sign and he also is 11 our legislative liaison to the general assembly. So we 12 will meet to go over testimony and he will accompany me 13 to the legislature and he will bring various bills to 14 my attention and we discuss them. 15 BY MR. GERSTEN: 16 Q Okay. And it's all in the function of you 17 performing your job as secretary of state, correct? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Now, are there any records of phone calls 20 between you and Mr. Button? 21 A I don't know that our office keeps track of 22 internal telephone calls. 23 Q Okay. Now, there is a log kept by the 24 election law division of the offices of the secretary 25 of state reflecting responses to official election law Brandon Smith Reporting 215 1 inquiries during the year 1999 to 2010? 2 A There are log books kept by our attorneys and 3 election officers to document conversations that they 4 have with election officials because we have found that 5 people who call our office will shop around for 6 opinions, so we have log books so we can keep an 7 accurate record of the questions that are asked and 8 make sure that people get consistent advice. 9 Q What do you mean they shop around? 10 A Well, they don't like the answer they get 11 from one particular election officer, so they try 12 another attorney, they try another election officer. 13 Q So in other words, somebody will call and 14 talk to Ted Bromley? 15 A Uh-huh. 16 Q And then they'll turn and talk to this guy 17 Lou Button? 18 A Yes, or Art Champagne or Mike Kozik when he 19 was there. 20 Q Now, when those conversations take place, are 21 you involved? 22 A Sometimes. 23 Q How often? 24 A You know, a lot around election time because 25 we get more questions when an election is occurring. Brandon Smith Reporting 216 1 Q Okay. But I'm wondering about your 2 participation now, Madam Secretary. How often do you 3 get involved with responding to inquiries such as the 4 ones that you just described get shopped around? 5 A Frequently. 6 Q How much is frequently? What does that mean, 7 once a week? 8 A I guess -- I have discussions with town 9 clerks and registrar on a daily basis or have mayors 10 call frequently for -- 11 Q Is that what you're talking about people 12 shopping around? 13 A No, I was talking about -- 14 Q Right? 15 A -- Either -- could be an election official 16 like a registrar or could be a constituent of our 17 office. 18 Q Right. So often do you get involved 19 personally responding to these discussions that you 20 said people are shopping around? 21 A Oh, I just was talking about why the log book 22 is kept. 23 Q Okay. Well, how often do you get involved 24 with responding to people who call in shopping around 25 for answers to election law questions? Brandon Smith Reporting 217 1 A I frequently answer election law questions. 2 Q Okay. Maybe my question wasn't clear. When 3 people call in with an election law question and 4 they're referred to -- do they get referred to Mr. 5 Bromley? 6 A Our registrar have the various attorneys and 7 election officer phone numbers. So they decide who 8 they would like to speak to or they could call our 9 elections division and they might be referred to 10 whoever is free. 11 Q Okay. Try this a different way. Madam 12 Secretary, I'm wondering if you could push your memory 13 back to last Friday. Okay? 14 A Uh-huh. 15 Q How did you begin your day? 16 A I don't know. I have to look at my 17 schedule. 18 Q Okay. So unless you have your scheduler, you 19 can't tell us how you spent your day last Friday? 20 A I don't know. I have to look at my 21 schedule. 22 Q Okay. 23 A I do a lot of things during a particular 24 day. 25 Q So as recently as last Friday, without having Brandon Smith Reporting 218 1 your schedule in front of you, you're unable to tell us 2 what did you for the day? I just want to make sure 3 we're clear on this? 4 A Yep. 5 Q Okay. So if we look at your schedule from 6 the year 2001 and I ask you is this what you did during 7 the day, that's the only evidence that would be in 8 existence about what you did, correct? 9 A Yes. 10 Q You can't recall anything about what you did 11 in 2001 without looking at that schedule? 12 A Well that would certainly help me remember. 13 Q Okay. Same for 2002? 14 A Yep. 15 Q Same for 2003? 16 A Yep. 17 Q Throughout this, correct? 18 A (Nodding in the affirmative.) 19 Q And if we don't see -- if we see a lot of 20 entries about press conferences, you're not considering 21 press conferences the practice of law, are you? 22 A It depends, because sometimes in press 23 conferences we -- I might be advocating for a change in 24 the law. 25 Q In your position is it when you as the Brandon Smith Reporting 219 1 secretary of state advocates for a change in the law, 2 you're practicing law? 3 A Sure. And advocating for reform of the law 4 or change of the law. 5 Q Okay. Are you the only person in the state 6 of Connecticut who's elected who does press conferences 7 advocating for changes in the law? 8 A Certainly not. 9 Q And is it your position that anyone who 10 advocates for a change in the law is engaged in the 11 practice of law? 12 A No. 13 Q Okay. Is it your position if that person is 14 a lawyer and they are doing a press conference 15 advocating for a change in the law that's practicing 16 law? 17 A Well, it would be part of legislative 18 advocacy, because if you look at the canons, you will 19 see that one part of lawyering is suggesting reforms 20 and improvements to the law. And I believe that 21 advocating for law changes before the legislature and 22 in public is part of that process. 23 Q So if you're performing that as a lawyer, 24 that's performing law, correct? 25 A That is part of the practice of law, yes. Brandon Smith Reporting 220 1 Q And if you're not a lawyer, that's not 2 practicing law? 3 A Yes. 4 Q So it's the qualification of a law degree -- 5 do you have to be admitted to the bar to be able to be 6 engaged in that distinction? Let me ask it this way. 7 That's a terrible question. If you're a law school 8 graduate and you never took a bar exam, never passed 9 the bar, never was admitted to the bar, but you 10 participate in the kinds of advocacy that you're 11 talking about, that is practicing law? 12 A There are activities that nonlawyers do that 13 could constitute the practice of law. 14 Q Of course? 15 A And that would be for a judge to say. 16 Q Okay. I'm asking you to understand your 17 position here. If I graduated Duke law and never 18 sought admittance to a bar of any state and I engage in 19 the kind of advocacy that you're referring to, is that 20 engaged in the practice of law? 21 A If you're not admitted to the bar of a state, 22 I couldn't tell you the answer to that. 23 Q So you don't have a position on that topic? 24 A No. Not on -- because I don't -- I'm not 25 certain of the status of someone who went to law Brandon Smith Reporting 221 1 school, graduated but then never passed the bar. 2 Q Well, would you agree that that person is 3 using whatever legal skills they learned out of Duke 4 law school to do the advocacy you're suggesting? 5 A Yes. 6 Q But you're having difficulty calling that the 7 practice of law because that person hasn't been 8 admitted to the bar; is that correct? 9 A Correct. 10 Q Okay. So am I correctly understanding your 11 position that it's the admittance to the bar that 12 allows you to claim that when you engage in this kind 13 of activity, you're actively engaged in the practice of 14 law? 15 A For the purposes of this lawsuit, yes. 16 Q Okay. For any other purposes? 17 A Such as? 18 Q I'll restate my question. 19 What if I'm not an elected official and I 20 engage in the kinds of activities you're talking about. 21 Is that the practice of law? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Okay. Now, if you're an elected official, 24 such as you are, do you consider these advocacy things 25 you're talking about to be part of your job as the Brandon Smith Reporting 222 1 secretary of state? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And would you agree that when Miles Rappaport 4 was secretary of state, he performed similar functions 5 in the advocacy of positions? 6 A Yes. 7 Q But the difference between you and he is that 8 you've been admitted to the bar and he was not? 9 A Yes. 10 Q And that's why he was not practicing law when 11 he did it, correct? 12 A Correct. 13 Q But that's why you are practicing law because 14 you are doing it while you have a law degree and 15 admitted to the bar? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Okay. And when you do your advocacy you're 18 talking about, do you describe yourself having -- do 19 you tell people, I'm a lawyer? 20 A No. 21 Q Okay. Now -- 22 MR. HORTON: You have to wrap up, soon. 23 It's quarter of 5:00. 24 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. 25 MR. HORTON: Whenever it's Brandon Smith Reporting 223 1 appropriate. 2 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. Be right there. 3 BY MR. GERSTEN: 4 Q So if I understand that last line, ma'am, 5 correctly, that means when you advocate that it's time 6 to help small businesses in Connecticut, you're 7 engaging in the practice of law? 8 A When I advocate for abolishing the business 9 entity tax, which would help small businesses, yes. 10 Q You're engaged in the practice of law when 11 you do that? 12 A When I bring forth a bill that is drafted to 13 remove the business entity tax from the statutes and 14 advocate before that legislation, before the general 15 assembly, yes. 16 Q And just to distinguish again, when Miles 17 Rappaport or Gloria Schaffer or Ms. Kennelly engaged in 18 similar activities, that would not be the paragraph law 19 because they don't -- they weren't admitted to the 20 bar? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Now, I know we've got these here somewhere so 23 where is the official one? Bysiewicz -- there we go. 24 MR. GERSTEN: Yes, I'm wrapping up. 25 I understand. Thank you, Jake. Brandon Smith Reporting 224 1 BY MR. GERSTEN: 2 Q Ms. Bysiewicz, you are going back to the 3 occupational tax returns for a moment. You've 4 indicated you file these every year when you wrote to 5 young Ryan there, Ryan McKeen, do you remember that? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Did you actually sign all those yourself? 8 A Yes. 9 Q And did you actually sign all of the 10 documents that you submitted to the clients funds 11 people yourself? 12 A Did I I'm sorry. 13 Q Did you actually do the signature of these 14 forms when they're submitted? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Is that your signature on all these? 17 A Yes. 18 Q So when there are mistakes made on those 19 documents, that's a mistake that you made? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And you'll agree that there's been a number 22 of changes that you've made to both the occupational 23 tax return and to the client's fund account form that 24 were -- you're claiming now were errors when you filed 25 them, correct? Brandon Smith Reporting 225 1 A Yes. 2 Q And you knew that when you signed these 3 forms, that you were doing it under penalty of perjury, 4 weren't you? 5 A Yes. 6 Q It's an oath just like the one you took 7 today? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Okay. Now, what was the reason in -- for 10 example, the year 2000, that you indicated that you did 11 not work or were employed as an attorney at the time 12 you signed the forms? 13 MR. HORTON: Which one are you talking 14 about? 15 MR. GERSTEN: 2000. 16 BY MR. GERSTEN: 17 Q Ma'am? 18 A Well, I am employed as the secretary of the 19 state, and I realized in reviewing these forms in 20 January that I had made a mistake and decided to 21 correct it. And filed an amendment. 22 Q Okay. 23 A To that one, I believe. 24 Q You did a lot of amending sometime in January 25 of 2010 after you declared your candidacy for attorney Brandon Smith Reporting 226 1 general, correct? 2 A I amended several occupational tax returns 3 and client security fund, and made an additional client 4 security fund payment, yes. 5 Q But in fact it was your first client security 6 fund payment you've ever made out of your own pocket; 7 isn't that correct? 8 A Yes. Because our office had made the policy 9 decision to pay for all of our attorneys. 10 Q Well, when you say our office, that's you, 11 isn't it? 12 A Yes. 13 Q You made that decision? 14 A Yes. 15 Q You didn't delegate that to Ted Bromley, did 16 you? 17 A No. 18 Q You're the CEO? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Okay. Now, as of 12/1/2000, what was the 21 reason why, when you indicated your employer was the 22 state of Connecticut, that you indicated at that time 23 that you were not working or employed as an attorney? 24 A That was a mistake and I was getting 25 frustrated with these forms, they're ambiguous and Brandon Smith Reporting 227 1 there are several boxes that could apply to my 2 situation. 3 Q Well, you've indicated that the only way you 4 can tell what you were doing back in 2000 is if you 5 took a look at your schedule and you -- that would help 6 you maybe understand what you were doing back then, 7 correct? 8 A Yes. 9 Q And would I be correct, ma'am, that when you 10 signed this as of 12/1/2000, you knew what you were 11 doing when you signed it as of that period of time, 12 correct? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And you went through it very carefully 15 because you knew you were signing this under penalty of 16 false statement, correct? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And you took your time to sign it, right? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And you said you thought it was pretty 21 confusing, if I understand your testimony, correct? 22 A My testimony is that these forms are 23 ambiguous and there is -- there are multiple boxes that 24 could apply to my situation, not exactly, certainly, 25 but I had decided that there was a better box to -- Brandon Smith Reporting 228 1 that would apply to my situation in other years and 2 reasonable people can differ about which boxes apply. 3 Q And you only made that decision that you 4 should make some changes to the boxes that you did in 5 2000 after you decided to run for attorney general and 6 found out about this eligibility issue; isn't that 7 correct, ma'am? 8 A No. Well -- 9 Q Okay. You didn't make the decision to go 10 back and review things beforehand, did you? 11 MR. HORTON: Hold on. I think you 12 interrupted. 13 MR. GERSTEN: I didn't interrupt. 14 BY MR. GERSTEN: 15 Q You didn't make the decision to go back and 16 look and see if you committed some kind of error on any 17 of these occupational tax returns before you declared 18 your candidacy, did you? 19 A No, it was after. 20 MR. GERSTEN: We're out of time. 21 Thanks. 22 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 23 4:51. 24 25 (The deposition adjourned at 4:51 pm.) Brandon Smith Reporting