Important and Relevant Documents Provided by Tony Silva from Prison in the United States are reprinted below. This material has been placed on an Australian site to help prevent potential attempts by the US Government to wipe this material from the internet. It has been published here in the public interest by Australians Against Corruption (AAC). AAC have also sought specific documents from the US Government and the Judge who heard the case. As of 9th March 1997, no material had been forthcoming from the Government side, which was several months after the initial request.

The following has been converted from typed documents using OCR technology.

Most typo errors resulting from the OCR process have NOT been corrected due to time constraints. The errors in the transcript material and documents will be fixed up when time permits. However most material in the following material is both legible and understandable to most readers

From: Tony Silva 06402-424
Room 220, Unit 210
FPC-Duluth
Box 1000
Duluth, HN 55814-1000

To: Laeling Jew
NBC Dateline
30 Rockefellor Plaza
New York, New York 10112

20 January 1997

Dear Laeling:

Last week I was called into Mr Pulford's office adn asked about the interview. I agreed and he said he would advice you so. Hopefully he has done so. At the MCC-Chicago, after your contact, I was immediately moved to another floor, where my outgoing mail could ne censored, and given a job that would keep me from having access to a phone for part of the day; almost immediately I was designated -- another inmate that came with me, Angel terrazas, waited almost six months to be designated-- and moved. I felt that there was a certain rush to get me out of Chicago and for the interview not to occur there.

The attached are my notes prepared for trial some time ago and also a page by page response to the government's motion to prevent the judge from allowing me to go to trial. These notes were also prepared some time ago. If you read everything ( I am convinced they will not give you copies of the reports cited, as these clearly indicate that James Mackman and others lied), it will become evident that James Mackman lied repeatedly-- if he was so credible, why didn't they investigate his charges of arms dealings to the Contras and 'other side', murder, child sex, drug smuggling, CITES and TRAFFIC official cover-up of my activities, etc-and that other person's wrong doings were covered up or simply ignored (eg, Dr Thomas Goldsmith threatened to take the fifth if we brought up his drug use and possible involvement; Robbie Harris's smuggling of eggs to New Zealand was completely hushed if she would provide information on the flamingoes (I have a document, never provided at Brady or later-- acquired secretly-- that proves this); the agreement to keep Cornejo's involvement quiet in Argentina, etc). Please read everything carefully. Should you wish to verify what I claim, my attorney has the original reports from the agents. The vast majority of these reports were brushed 'under the carpet' and a condensed, filtered, slanted report used at the evidentiary hearing. Please keep these notes confidential; they will be part of my defense should I win the appeal.

Lastly, I am still insisting that they return my papers, documents, cancelled checks, slides (only some returned-- all filtered to insure that any that could date some of the birds were not present), etc. They claim they returned copies of the documents, but what they brought back was irrelevant and concisted mainly of my stepfather's cancelled checks, countless copies of the manuscripts to my books and articles, appliance operating manuels, etc. Slides, documents and even checks that could have helped have never been returned, nor was I privied to copies.

I look forward to seeing you here at Duluth.

Sincerely Yours - Tony Silva

Page 1: Pat Murray never signed plea offer-- others are signed. He said he'd leave Gila Daoud out and offered a lesser charge.

Page 2: Exhibit B: Dave replies to the Court that 'the government has been very candid with us. We had a meeting yesterday, we, the attorneys, and the government divulged a great deal of their evidence in this case.' At that time, much of the data presented was taken out of context; for example, Acosta said that around the time of the 'smuggling attempt' there were some 20 calls to Ugalde. This is clearly not borne out by evidence. Other things were also taken out of context; perhaps Nancy still has her notes and we can cite other specific points.

Page 2: Exhibit C: Government changed its mind in the plea offer several times. For example see page 4 where Daniel Martin reports to the Court that the 'Government ... tendered a superseding indictment charging her [=Gila Daoudl with a misdemeanor conspiracy and misdemeanor tax count, and that is quite agreeable with her./ attorney and with her. 1 (emphasis added) Later Acosta reported that Kevin Moss would only accept a felony on taxes and the Government a misdemeanor for conspiracy. Later Fish and Wildlife had also changed its mind and wanted a felony.

Page 3: Government's letter dated January 19 mentions that no further plea agreements would be made was NOT approaved by US Attorney. Acosta used tremendous pressure; ask Nancy.

Page 3: Copy of final plea was received on the morning of the plea, where some final changes were made, eg. removing from Gila Daoud's the remark that she distracted US Department of Agriculture employees while the birds were snuck out of quarantine. If we had so much time, why were changes still made at the last minute?

Page 3: Money was NEVER sent to Gisela Caceres for the adquisition and upkeep of the Hyacinth Macaws. Note Giselals remarks. Where is the proof that the government has that it was? They rely far too much on our conversations with James Mackman for their evidence but these are based on fiction. If they are taken seriously, then we should look at the various remarks made by tackman, eq he told Rodd May that Gila wanted to hire him as a body guar ackman- ay tape21-ol, transcript page 29-- no ta Mackman make any reference to this) ; that Kiessling is a 'Hitler' and that Loro Parque could get hit for illegal birds' (Daoud-Mackman tape 22-24, transcript pages 23 and 25, respectively) ; that a lot of people are watching Ide Diosl and that 'I don't think Tony should associate with him, (Daoud-Mackman tape 22-38, transcript page 3); his claims in the various reports to agents about me having someone that was investigating me killed, that Caceres was a US Citizen, about smuggling parameters where even child sex would be used to entrap peocle, and so much more.

Page 4: Plea has a number of major mistakes. It states that 'On or about- July 7 1 9 9 0 defendant knowingly facilitated the transportation after importation of merchandise .... knowing the same to have been imported and brought into the United States contrary to law. 1 This refers to Blue-rhroar-ed Conures which were in my possession before 1989 and which were collected on loan by Mackman. In my version of the crimes, page 6, I state that they were acquired in 1986 or 1987. They are listed on the breeding loan with Doane of August 1989. The government can't prove they were smuggled and as such no laws were violated; Marks himself testified that they could be transported across a state line without violating any law.

On or about August 13, 1990, defendant knowingly caused to be received, possessed, transported, and delivered three Crimsonbellied Conures after importation, knowing the same to have been imported and brought into the United States contrary to law .... 1 These birds also feature in the aforementioned loan agreement with Doane. They government claims that they came from Kawall (which is what I told Mackman) but this is not true; they were acquired at the pet shop prior to 1989 (see my Version of Crime, page 6) . No law was violated giving them to Mackman on loan. My only mistake was purchasing them without verifying their legality but this does not indicate they were smuggled.

'On or about August 20, 1990, defendant knowingly caused to be possessed,delivered and transported, and facilitated the concealment of three Yellow-shouldered Amazons, knowing the same to have been brought into the United States contrary to law.

Specifically, defendant caused these birds to be transferred from the possession of Gila Daoud ... to a cooperating witness who resided in Wisconsin. 1 These birds were acquired on trade with Ugalde in late 1988, early 1989; they were listed on a bill of sale from 1989, made at the time my collection was disbursed; birds were subsequently returned. My mom told Mackman to collect them in tape 22-45, page 1. In tape 22-46, page 2, Mackman asked are these birds that just came into the country?'. Gila says yes; but they were not and note how it was Mackman that makes the remark about their legality. In tape 22-48, page 3, Mackman states (incorrectly, I might add) that Tony 1 . . had a bunch more .... right in August before he left.' Gila was uncertain of what he was talking about. She did remark (tape 22-74, page 21) that she had birds at her house. The Yellow-shouldered were there, after having been returned by the person who bought some of my birds when I left for Spain. Mackman either confused this species with Yellow-faced Amazons or purposel@, said that I had more to cover his report to the agents (report 1-30-1990 to Agents, Mackman claims I had between 120-50 Yellow- faced Amazons 1 ) . Transporting the birds to Wisconsin did not violate any law (testimony Marks on stand).

on or about June 6, 1991, defendant knowingly caused to be possessed and facilitated the transportation and concealment of certain merchandise after importation, that is, two Red-vented Cockatoos, knowing the same to have been imported and brought into the United States contrary to law. Specifically, defendant knowingl,,, received [them] . . from a U.S.D.A. quarantine facility knowing them to have been imported from the Philippines to the United States under fradulently obtained CITES permits. 1 Birds were imported by and consigned to Mackman and they were legal (my version of the crimes, page 6; letters from de Dios) . Mackman started the story that they were illegal with the remark about de Dios (tape Silva-Mackman 22-38, page 3) 'a lot of people are watching him'. In going along, I state that the Red-venteds weren't captive bred but wild caught, yet the birds entered the US 10 months after this conversation and they could have been DNA tested at the time of the search. I had told Mackman (22-40, page 17) that Ide Dios can fingerprint babies if there's any question.' Before the birds entered the US, Gila Daoud had a series of conversations ith Mackman about their legality:TaiDe 22-43, page 11. She instructs fvlackman to apply f or uarantine spaceand on page 30 states that the birds are entirely legal.

Tape 22-49, page 14, she again brings up renting the quarantine space for the birds. Mackman asks are they legal?'. Gila replies on two separate occasions (page 14 and 15) that they are 'legal'.

Tape 22-141, page 6, she says that de Dios, birds legal, and repeats this on page 32 of same transcript. In my own conversation with Mackman (tape 22-60, page 8) I state that the CITES is genuine,. Mackman and I talk after the arrival of the birds (tape 22-149, page 5) and he says I think they're ,wild caught'. I respond with luh hul even though I knew they were legal-- Mackman in Spain and in Canada made it clear that he only wanted illegal birds and hence the stories about all of these birds. Mackman even went as far as asking (tape 22-176, page 14) if CITES permits could be purchased in the Philippines. These birds were legal. Had the government wanted to prove otherwise, they could have requested DNA samples of the parents to compare with the progeny, which they had in their possession. The law states that birds with questionable CITES permits must be held until the matter is cleared; if not satisfactorily cleared, they must be seized. These were not and DNA was not requested, proving that the government wanted them to be illegal.

Page 4: Note how Acosta tries to link my departure for Spain with Lafeber's economic problems. This is a false assumption. Lafeber had problems before I moved to Rockford.

Page 4: Blue-fronted Amazons are legal to export and import. See import data from TRAFFIC (Sud America).

Pages 4, 14, 15: If I was planning to smuggle Hyacinth Macaws and had talked to Ugalde about this, why is it that Mackman never reported this to the agents until AFTER he returned from Spain?

Page 5: The remark about the 'speedy trial, is a joke. This case had been investigated nearly four years before the indictment and more than four years before the plea was signed.

Page 5: Yes, I read the plea, but I had many reservations and these were pointed out in my version of the crimes (date submitted: ask Dave) ; they were also the reason why so many points were contested.

Parole Officer Renee Mulliken even had me meet her with Dave to go over plea, which she felt should have been withdrawn (date of meeting: ask Dave).

Page 6: If the Principal Case Agent was called to testify, why is it that marks said the person that could answer the Questions about Mackman was Heard?

Page 6, ll: Dave had a conversation with Acosta be-fore April 2, 1996, in which he said he had reservations about the case and that he felt I was entrapped. I was present, but can't remember date.

[Court made a remark that I've listened to the tapes, but if you listen to these it becomes clear that nothing was ever going to happen.]

Page 9: Martinezls passport was never provided under Brady, but a.fter the evidentiary hearing had started.

Page 9: I am not trying to delay sentencing. The Government has caused the delays, by not indicting me until almost four years after the search!

Page 9: Government did more to boost my reputation than I could have when they presented their 'witnesses' and 'experts'. See CITES letter regarding Bruning, remarks in On Wings (April 1996) and AFA Fast N?_ws (April 1996). Exhibit K shows a commentary. See On Wings article (March 1996) and note correct title of magazine On Wings and not On Wing; letter from Judy Franklin. This was received on or before February 20.

I have always made it clear that tax payers are paying my lawyer. See On Wings April 1995 where I state: 'He E=Dave Schippers) will be working for me under the federal defender system .... 1

It is the Government that has used the press, giving it inaccurate information. See remarks in The Miami Herald, 27 September 1995, page 12A, where it reads:

'According to the Prosecutor [emphasis added] , Silva, a Cubanamerican that has written a half dozen books about this group of birds and is considered a world authority, imported more than 100 parrots listed as endangered and with a value of $10,000.00 each. Apparently he did this [importation] with the help of a daughter of the ex-president of Paraguay Alfredo Stroessner, in his private plane.'

Stroessner has no daughter and all evidence, clearly thoroughly examined by agents and prosecutor by that time, has shown this to be a false charge.

Why does Acosta not complain that Xx, for example, posted on the internet on June 8, 1995 extracts from the search warrant that is fraught with false data (see posting), eg: -that birds would be placed in PVC pipes inside door panels of automobiles for the trip across the border; -that Dr Goldsmith was present when Trabaue received approximately 35 Hyacinth Macaws from Silva, that all were dead On arrival and tha ' t he helped decapitate them [all disproves in c c u r t -that Cornejo -said wildlife was placed in PVC pipes for shipment; ...and so on.

Page 10: Much of the testimony provided is a sham. Lafeber, for example, could not even identify a bird that was supposedly smuggled, etc. Why did the government nor provide a copy of Lafeber's cross in all of the documents attached to their reply?

Page 10: Nothing illegal was done between July 1988 and May 1990. If it was, why did Mackman not provide specifics with evidence to the agents?

Page 10: It was the agents that interviewed Lafeber-- not US! How then can they discount it, especially in light of it proving that the conspiracy with Lafeber had terminated.

Page ll: I could not have remembered everything at the time of the plea, given that most events cited date back more than 6 years; since the search more than 4 years have passed. Also, Acosta misrepresented the facts to Dave when they met, stating, for example, that there were more than 20 calls to Ugalde.

Page 12: The sworm testimony' cited was not read by me but by Acosta (see Court transcripts). No tape recording were made of proffer session, and the transcript is fraught with mistakes.

Page 13: Ugalde testimony is fraught with mistakes. He claims that I bought a Cuban Amazon from him, then changed his mind:

Page 7 of transcript of his testimony in Court: Question by Acosta: 'And what happened after you bought the bird?'

Answer by Ugalde: 'Well, he called me, and then two or three days later he and someone else came by Miami, and I sell him the bird., (emphasis added)

Q. 'Do you know whether or not Mr Silva or the person who accompanied him was the actual purchaser of the bird?'

A. 'No, I don't recall.'

Under cross examination, Ugalde testified the following on the Cuban Amazon on page 33:

Question by Schippers: 'I think you testified that you procured a Cuban Amazon for Mr Silva. Do you remember that?' Answer by Ugalde: 'Yes.'

When comfronted with a photograph of Mike Liddel-Taylor and that particular bird, Ugalde testified the following (page 35):

Question by Schippers: 'And Mr Santiago may be the one who got the bird, as a matter of fact, isn't that right?'

Answer by Ugalde: 'Could be.'

In his Grand Jury testimony, Ugalde claims I bought the Cuban Amazon (direct, page 37). In Agent's report of 3-15-1993, Ugalde also claims that I purchased the bird; the transaction occurred in 1984/85-- not 1988/89 as he reports. Ugalde here changed his mind from a previous report (11-5-1992, page 2) where he stated bird was acquired by a friend and not me. Letter from Liddel-Taylor will verify that I did not purchase the bird.

In the Grand Jury testimony, Ugalde claims that shortly after purchasing the Cuban Amazon, I called him regarding the smuggling of Hyacinth Macaws (see direct, page 37), but later (direct pages 37,38) admits that is incorrect and gives the year as 1988 (direct, page 38). He can't keep one date straight!

Page 13: Yellj---hnlilrired Amazons @ere acquired in trade in late 1988, early 1989 (see m version of crime page 6). He claimed he had bred them, as he told Mackman (direct, page 47; taped conversation between Mackman-Ugalde number 110-02, page 4 and 5, call on 11-26-1991 (tape and page number?-- verify) and tape 110-10 page 4). In court (page 11) he said he was fairly certain he said they were illegal but later (pages 47, 48) he couldn't remember if he said they were illegal and (page 47) that he didn't make it a point they were illegal.

Page 13: Ugalde varies the dates when the Hyacinthine smuggling came up. In court he said (direct, page 12) he couldn't remember but that it was probably in 1988. He had told agents it was in 1990 (direct, page 39), after saying 'right, (direct, page 39) he said 'no, 19881 (direct, page 40). He summarized everything by saying that efforts were made between 1988 and 1991 (direct, page 17). In Agent's report of 10-5-1992 (page 2), Ugalde says efforts were made in 1990. He didn't know vjho had the Hyacinthine Macaws (direct, page 13) but then says Gisela Caceres Koopmann (direct, page 14).

Page 13: According cc Ugalde Martinez looked into off-loading the birds in late 1988, early 1989 (direct, page 17). Martinez in his Grand Jury testimony (page 22) says it was 1988, 1989 or 1990 and (page 25) 1989, 1990. Acosta, when asked, said martinez went to Mexico in 1990 (Ugalde direct, page 63).

Page 13: Ugalde claims that Martinez tried to get people to offload the birds more than once (direct, pages 18 and 21) but Martinez in his Grand Jury testimony (page 24) says only once. Ugalde later conceded (direct, page 45) that he doesn't know if Martinez tried more than once. Ugalde claimed that he called Gila Daoud wanting to know box sizes, because Martinez needed that information (direct, page 21), but this was not mentioned by Martinez in his Grand Jury testimony and in an interview with SA Prather on 8-23-1993 Martinez knew nothing about box sizes. Ucralde sizes requested in the @al of h our version ttia martinez went Co-Mexico late in 1991; the same for Ugaldels remark to Mackman (110-10, transcript page 5) that he spoke with me around Christmas 1991.

Page 13: Ugalde responds that call about smuggling Hyacinthines was made in 1990 with 'don't recall, (direct, page 40), 'don't remember, (direct, page 41) and could be' (direct, page 46) . He admits that I never pressured him (direct, page 41) and that it was Mackm.an that wanted the birds (direct, page 43).

Page 13: Ugalde concedes he does not know drug smugglers (direct, page 26) but he told Mackman Marr-inez could not arrange unloading because they could get more money for other things like drugs (direct, page 44) . Ugalde admits that was not true (direct, page 44).

Page 13: Ugalde claims that he tried to get Manuel Hernandez to smuggle the birds in the fall of 1991 (direct, page 18) but in same testimony (page 25) he claims he told me about Manuel Hernandez in 1990 'around Christmas'.

Page 13: Ugalde claims he spoke with me 15-20 times in the course of three years, starting in 1988 (direct, pages 14 and 22) . This is not true and is certainly not reflected in first version of Government's Exhibit 170; second Government's Exhibit 170 has the number of calls to Ugalde increased by 10 and the number of calls from Ugalde to us by 36, though in this version calls are spread out much more throughout the years. I firmly believe that the increase is based on the number of times we said we were going to call Ugalde, but calls were not made! He said (direct, page 42) Mackman and him spoke three, four, five' times but there are 18 taped conversations or messages between them! Ugalde asked Mackman about me four times (tapes Mackman-Ugalde 2, 3, 4 and 5).

Page 14: My change in plea comes as a result of new evidence surfacing. Acosta seems to forget that more than 4 years passed from the time of the search to the time of the plea and that even the most brilliant mind can forget.

Pages 14, 15, 18, 19: No money was ever sent to Gisela Caceres to buy or keep birds and she was never instructed to acquire any birds. The government must admit that there is no evidence to this effect.

Page 17: How long a person takes to make up his mind depends on the complexity of the plea. Acosta is an idiot!

Page 18-19: There was never any 'intensive, plea barganing! They had to have certain things and would not budge. I had to stipulate to the Hyacinth Macaws because they would have it no other way. I objected to many points but they nonetheless included them. I wanted no number listed (see footnote at bottom of page 19) because I acquired absolutely no birds! Proffer was not taped-- only a report (never signed by me) was issue and it is fraught with mistakes.

Page 20: Birds have a value and I kept some.

Page 21: Loro Parque has done nothing illegal. Their notarized statements prove that many of Mackman's claims (see various agent's/reports) were false. In my version of the crime (page 5) I state everything was done legally while I was Curator there; also that I acquired NO illegal birds past 1989. I never stated Gisela was a principal supplier of Loro Parque but that her father supplied some of the first birds to the park, all of which were imnorted legally and in compliance with Spanish law. See also notarized statements and statement of Pilar Elorriaga, former telephone girl at park; she handled all outgoing and incoming calls while I was there.

Page 21: ugalde has contradicted himself considerably on all relating to his involvement. See remarks under Page 13.

Page 22: Ugaldels conversation with Mackman of January 16, 1992, proves nothing concrete: he goes back and forth and only creates more confusion. He did mention that 'we didn't pursue it anymore, (page 5) and 'that chances are not that good [to get the birds in] 1 (page 3) . Ugalde, when referring to someone that was going to smuggle the birds (Martinez?, someone else?) for him, he says he 'hasn't returned my calls'. Note how he refers to the present. We can either accept the calls between Ugalde and Mackman or discount them because of the amount of lies in them.

Page 22: Acostals version regarding the conversation of November 18, 1991, between Ugalde and Mackman is totally wrong: Ugalde does not acknowledge his awareness of the plan and difficulty involved in getting the birds'. This is what was said (transcript pages 1213):

Mackman: ... the other thing I've been trying to get is, you know, is some of those macaws and stuff, and, um, manf They're all just full of pap[illomas] and Pachecos. And they just-- you know, all the ones I looked at were bad or-- so, you know, I don't know.

Ugalde:Do you breed any Hyacinths?

Mackman:Um, no. And, in fact, you know, um, I-- and I think, uh, Tony's talked to you some about-- about trying to obtain some, and, um--um, and, you know-- you know, we've talked some about that. And I-- you know, I'm very, very ancious to get some, um--

Ugalde: UNINTELLIGIBLE

Mackman: Uh, well. Y- it's just-- sounds crazy. It sounds crazy. Um, but, you know, that's um-- they're golden right now. I'll tell ya.

Ugalde: I know.

Mackman: Um, and I'm--I'm, um, super, super keen to get some. So, but, I~- but, I think right now it's very difficult.

Ugalde: Yeah.

Mackman: So--

Ugalde: Just a little bit. Well, but you never know. We'll see what happens. Okay, Jim. Let me think about it, and, uh, you know, I'll try to come up with something that, you know, is fair. I don't-- I'll get back to you.

[After 'We'll see what happens' Ugalde starts talking about the Cuban Amazons he has for sale and which Mackman wants to buy.] Ugalde also says possible, about obtaining another female Cuban Amazon, to go with the two males and one female he has offered to Mackman (see 110-03, page 7).

Mackman also brought up Hyacinth Macaws with Ugalde in tape 110-05 and Ugalde says he knows a breeder who produced many young. Perhaps this is where Ugalde was going to try get some to sell Mackman. Why was tape 05 not mentioned?

Page 23, 26: Acost:a himself, when Ugalde was testifying, gives the year of Martinez going to Mexico as 1990 (direcC-, page 63) . In the government's reply, Acosta mentions Martinez going to Mexico in December 1992 bur- this was already after the search (conducted January 17, 1992) ! We claim he went to Mexico right after the call, on January 2, 1992. If the passport is not -a valid in reflecting Martinezls visit, as Acosta now claims, why is it that the first document mentioned by the Mexican Embassy is a passport (and a valid one at that) and why is it thar- Martinez mentioned to agents that held check his passport (report 8-23-1993, page 3)? He made no reference to using any other document.

Page 23, 24: In my version of the crimes, page 7, I mention making a couple of phone calls about the Hyacinth Macaws-- and this is what I state in the affidavit: one call to Ugalde, one call to Gisela. I did talk to Gisela Caceres before that period on many things: when she was shipping birds to Lafeber on that subject, on information for my book and the possible discovery of the Glaucous Macaw (can provide many references from books) and about her birds on loan (mentioned in affidavit and in my version of crime, page 3). In one of the Government's version of exhibit 170, there are no calls in 1990; in another none in 1991. What is going on? Acosta is correct that he has now knowledge of the subject of the calls with Gisela Caceres.

Page 24: Ugalde and I spoke about many things, including trading birds, a Hispaniolan Conure on loan to him, and about birds in general. Ugalde (Ugalde-Mackman tape 110-02, page 7) mentions that when he has questions about identifying birds he calls me. If I spoke so often with Ugalde as he claims, why is it that he asked Mackman (taped conversations) about me?:

Tape 110-02, page 2: 'Have you talked to Tony recently?' 'Was him in the States?' Page 7: 'I haven't been able to talk to him for a few months.'

Tape 110-03, page 10: 'When is Tony coming to--to the States?' Tape 110-04, page 9: 'Is Tony--uh, did you find if Tony's coming down to, uh, States on Christmas or not?' ,

Tape 110-05, page : 'Have you taked with Tony?

'

Page 24: Mackman was the one that wanted to come to Loro Parque. We have only been supplied ,iith select r-ranscrips, which satisfy the government's claims; those which go against their view have not been transcribed. Court has heard only tape 22-03 but this makes no reference to anything illegal and neither do any of the tapes until Mackman returned from Spain; tape 22-24 is the first that mentions the Hyacinth Macaws. In tape 22-03 Gila mentions that Mackman should visit the park, clearly refering to its beauty. This is used by the government to imply that he was asked to visit Spain, but listening to the 24 first tapes shows that it was Mackman that had something illegal in mind and that he was the one that wanted to go to Spain.

Tape 22-01: Mackman wants to talk to Tony about maybe going to Tenerife.

Tape 22-02: Mackman has made up his mind he wants to go to Tenerife:

Tape 22-03, page 7: Mackman needs to talk to me 'about some stuff,, it's really important that I talk with him soon,; page 12 Mackman has 'some really big questions', needs to communicate with Tony ,confidentially'.

Tape 22-05: Mackman needs to talk to me from a safe phone,.

Tape 22-06: Mackman insists he needs to talk to me as soon as possible.

Tape 22-07: Blank? Gila remembers it contained more of above-need to talk with him confidentially, secretly, etc.

Tape 22-08: Conversation underway before recording device activated. Why? To insure that more of the above was not recorded.

Tape 22-09: Mackman needs to communicate with me ,confidentially, and asks Gila i@ I'd mind receiving a personal, confidential letter'.

Tape 22-11, page 6: Mackman 'I really need to talk to Tony.' After being told about taking Bonnie Doane's birds on loan, he says: 'Maybe this is a good time to go to Spain'. Government can't claim that the reason he wanted to talk with me before this time is about Doane's birds, because they were not on the scene.

Tape 22-13: Mackman really needs to talk to Tony'.

Page 25: Mackman's veracity as a witness must be Questioned. See documents from Loro Parque, proving that he lied about: what happened and about the park, Kiessling and my daily activity. I state in my version of the crime that after 1989 I wanted nothing to do with illegal birds (page 5). Both my mother and myself may have said many things, but as I state in my version of the crime (page 7) all was to satisfy Mackman.

Page 25: The gross receipts called into question in plea is from 1988, but Acosta now makes reference to the year 1989. We had questions about this and this is why we had an evidentiary hearing. From the gross receipts attributed to me in 1989, Moss provided evidence (but not until after evidentiary hearing was underway; they still do not want 0 give us our financial records) that clearly proves some of that money was not mine; th@s evidence the government had in its power and Acosta was well aware of it when he wrote that 1 ... his actual gross receipts for the year 1989 alone exceed his reported gross receipts for the year by almost $40,000.1 Of the $17,070.00 dollars attributed to Mike Edwards, $7500.00 was returned (see documents) ; of the $11, 000. 00 attributed to Frank Dombrowski, all of that money and an additional $4,000.00 (from the $6,000.00 attributed to Charles LeMorzellec) was forwarded to Alistair McAlpine, who owned the birds sold (see checks, letter); of the $3,400.00 attributed to Sharon Funkhauser, all of that money was returned (Government has evidence; not yet provided); and that of the $7,000.00 attributed to Rodd May, $2,000.00 was returned (see documents).. The government has never provided copies of all the seized material as that would show that other moneys attributed to me was not mine.

Page 26: Dave: How does 'Ugaldels testimony support my theory of two conspiracies?' Is it because he was unaware of Lafeber, Cornejo?

Page 26: Ugalde leads some credence to my claim that we spoke once about the birds, in 1991 (direct, page 51, where he mentions wanting to know box sizes) . In a body-wire recorded conversation between Silva and Mackman made on 22 December 1991 (tape 22-176), Silva says (page 92, 105) when we get back, I'll call Ugalde; with .@,,@Mackman present I called Ugalde, though ironically Mackman did not record that return trip to Rockford and as a result the phone call. Ugalde did tell Mackman (Ugalde-Mackman 110-10, page 5) that he spoke around Christmas time with me. Ugalde told me when I called him, after laughing, that it would be difficult to arrange the Hyacinth Macaw off-loading but held check and let me know. Mackman was keen to know when Ugalde would respond, so he called. This is why I told Mackman that I called Ugalde (tape 22-178, page 2) but he couldn't talk. My report that Ugalde had two male and one female Cuban Amazon and a couple of Yellow-shouldered Amazons for sale (tape 22-180, page 1) is a repeat of what Mackman had told me several days before (tape 22-176, page 35) . I had not talked to Ugalde again but did say what he had previously said, that it would be difficult to pull off but if an opportunity would arise, he would let me know (tape 22-180, page 1).

Page 27: Acosta cites the remarks in the Grand Jury by Martinez, that he travels a couple of times a year' to Mexico. In the interview with agents (8-23-1993, page 2) he says that he travels every year or two, usually during Christmas. His passport does not reflect that many trips. Martinez told the Grand Jury (page 22) that 'at this time, I am uncertain of the date on which I made this particular trip, to get the birds off-loaded.

Page 27: I have a pamphlet in my house titled 'Entrapme: Federal Court'. If it wst have been planted by t agents. or is this what ind when said that Howa Voren had asked him to_G e information from my files and he proposed to my mom.@at he could get it for him (tape 22-94)?

Page 27: The inducement to get Mackman the birds was that, made very clear in Spain and again in Canada, unless he got t would be unable to care for my birds on loan. I did not w, mother, who has allergies and other health problems, to hi worry about taking care of them; sometimes she would call cry ng after Mackman pressured her on the phone.

Page 27: Mackman did have an inducement: entrapping me! He was paideozakl by the government and not only entrapped me but got in trouble other people as well. There is no compelling evidence, because if you look at the following material it is clear that nothing was going to happen.

Page 27:Tape 22-94, page 1: Gila tells Mackman that 'we will decide to wait all this month and after that we see what we going to do., Clearly she was alluding to the fact that birds were not going to come.

Tape 22-141, page 2: Gila says things are not going to work., Page 3: Gila 'doesn't think it will be possible to bring blues, into the country and she says that Gisela Caceres agrees. Page 9: Gila says she's serious-- does not want any smuggling to occur and (Page 11) that both Mackman and Tony should work on legal things'. Page 14: Gila says forget blues,, do things legal'. He agrees but comes back with (page 26) is it ok to talk to Tony on the phone?,. Gila was aware that his intention was to pressure me and responds (page 29) with 'Jim, I [do] not want you or Tony try to convince each other to do something no right, because I no going to permit that. 1 Mackman (page 31) tries to imply that he is not the problem, but that 'Your son is gonna be difficult to convince. 1 It is at this point that Mackman says this won't affect our friendship, but he continues with the pressure (see further below).

Tape 22-142, page 3: Gila told Tony to forget about the birds and 'he agreed 100%1 that nothing illegal be done and that only legal birds should be acquired. Gila continues (page 14) that she wants things done legally, and that (page 16) she's going to tell Gisela to sell birds or whatever, as she' s not going to send any more money for their upkeep, for 'birds that are never going to come'. Gila (page 19) does say that 'Gisela doesn't deal in birds any more' She does not want to call Gisela any more (page 20) and Tony is aware that blues are not going to come (page 23).

Something very interesting happens after this call: there are two tapes with the same date but one (22-143A) is cut at the and the next tape (22-143B) has the beginning missing and it is clear that it refers to a different conversation, even though the government will try to say they are the continuation of the call. This is a trick to cover that Mackman came back with pressure on not wanting to keep the birds if the blues were not going to come. Tape 22-144: Mackman needs to 'reach Tony to discuss some things' and offers to call in the middle of the night from a pay phone,. Tape 22-146: When Mackman next reaches Gila on the phone, he again says that he needs to talk to Tony' as he 'needs to discuss some things, . Finally he gets me on 28 July 1991 and this is what ensues:

Tape 22-149A-- has KEY AREAS UNINTELLIGIBLE:

Mackman asks me (page 9) if it's lok to talk'. He acknowledged that Gila is against trying to get the blues but that he wanted to talk with me. I was aware that he had pressured my mom and said that I was paying for their upkeep, that the thing is [to] sort of hang tight' and that the birds are there,. Mackman then begins the pressure: page 10 'Everyone's smuggling Amazon [Parrots]' and the border seems clearly open' and put the guilt trip on by saying that both Gila and myself are obviously, not telling him everything. Page ll: Mackman says smuggled Amazons a dime a dozen, millions are coming in'. Page 13: Mackman says 'pet stores full of smuggled birds, and 'I'm interested, even without you, though I need your experience,. I respond (page 15) that I also want the birds and (page 16) that Gisela is still holding on to them. Page 16: Mackman says that rumors are you and [Howard] Voren are smuggling blues and vinaceous Amazons.' The latter specie's name comes up because it was supposedly used in a trial run mentioned by Gila, but that was @never going to occur and never occurred; it ,jas just a stall technique. The birds, Gila claimed, were seized but she gives so many different stories that it is clear nothing ever occurred; @agents also found no evidence that a trial run was ever made.

Mackman was not told who was supposed to do this but suspects Ugalde and says (pages 17, 18) that 'he's screwing you' . He continues with (page 19) Voren has many Vinaceaous', 'Hector shafted us, and (page 21) 'people are saying Voren and you smuggled Vinaceous [Amazons] and blues'. I deny this. Tape 22-157, page 2, I tell Mackman to leave Gila out of this.

Whether the government admits it or not, Mackman used pressure and even tried to get me to give him money to buy a farm and construct a pole barn (government claims I offered him this, but this is not true and can be proven-- see tapes 22-26 and 22-27). Here's some examples of his pressure tactics and how as time passed the pressure increased:

Tape 22-27, page 6: Mackman needs to talk to Tony before he invests money and needs to know birds are coming for certain'. Gila (in many tapes) always tried to get him to rent, not to buy and stated repeatedly that there was never any guarantee that the blues were going to come.

Tape 22-43, page 41: Mackman complaints that he's invested a lot of money'.

Tape 22-49, page 19: Mackman complaints he's invested a lot of money, and (page 22) that he 'needs to talk to Tony for a good hour'.

Tape 22-74, page 22: Mackman needs to talk to Tony.

Tape 22-82, page 7: Mackman says that he needs to know when blues are coming and complaints (page 9) that the birds not coming is ,driving me nuts'.

Tape 22-94, page 36: Mackman frustrated that the birds have not arrived and complaints 'You know, you would think that they would bring things across the border all of the time, and it's just so hard for me to understand [why you can't arrange this].,

Tape 22-96, page 21: Mackman frustrated because things keep changing and birds do not arrive.

Tape 22-133, page 13: Mackman pressuing and makes it clear that he used intensive pressure in Canada, where conversation was not recorded. He made it clear in Canada that unless birds would come, held have to pack everything and drop it all off at Gilals house. Tape 22-141, page 9: Mackman complaints that he's spent over $50,000 and (page 15) is worried about the little contact he's had with Tony; 'I didn't know what was going on, and 'I really don't know what's going on'. This is where the aforementioned smuggling of parrots by others, mention of supposed smuggling with Voren and open border is discussed. Tape 22-157, page 3: Mackman complaints that leverything's taking forever'.

Tape 22-162, page 12: Mackman suggests that Tony should return to the US so that 1 we could work together 1 and then says (page 15) it's so frustrating, that 'I can't ever get' Tony. Tape 22-176, page 91: Mackman mentions that Hyacinth Macaws are very valuable and that that is 'why I'm so keen [on getting them] and whatever it takes-- that's what I want'.

Page 28: There is no connection between the two conspiracies.

Page 29: Buyers and suppliers not the same between 1987 and 1992 as claims Acosta. There were no purchases of Hyacinth Macaws, not anything illegal after 1988; the raid occurred in January 1992, which precludes that year, and Cornejo dropped from the scene by 1987 and Lafeber shortly thereafter.

Page 30: Gisela Caceres supplied Lafeber with birds only for a short period, so how could she be at the core of the conspiracy which the government claims lasted from 1987 to 1992? Even Lafeber admitted that she came on the scene after Cornejo dropped off. If they are claiming that Cornejo told them that Gisela Caceres supplied him with the birds he sent out illegally, this is not true and he's not credible. For example, Cornejo told Picon (report 8-31992) that Gisela owned a plane and then changed his story that she did not (report 4-3-1995) . Even Gila told Mackman (1 July 1991, tape 22-142, page 19) that Gisela no longer dealt in birds.

Page 30: Acosta is trying to confuse the Court by throwing in LAPSA (Paraguayan Airlines) , Afredo Fuentes, wire transfers, etc and saying they all formed part of the conspiracy. These are independent people and events, and there is no evidence for some of their claims or that they are linked.

Page 31: Tapes show he wanted birds. Tape 22-176, page 35, for example he says the market for Hyacinth Macaws is so good that ,that's why I'm so keen to try to get some' and, page 91, 'I'm so keen [to get them] and whatever it takes, that-- that's what I want' . Mackman also mentioned (22-49, 51) that his wife wanted Hyacinths-- note plural not singular.

Page 33: Acosta seems to overlook many things, including all of what I've listed under page 27 (see above) . It was Gila that suggested and insisted we should forget about everything (tapes 22141 and 22-142) but Mackman pressured and in tape 22-133 even refers to intense pressure he used in Canada. This obviously does not include the various unrecorded visits and almost certainly calls. He called once from a public phone and recorded that call, but how many other calls could he have made from a public phone without recording them? He also showed up at the airport when Gila returned from Spain once and did not record that.

Page 34: Plea is not being withdrawn because certain tapes were going to be played. These are selective and are taken out of context, if all are played it becomes evident that every time mackman was told the birds were going to come they would not, that events which never occurred were mentioned, and that much of his claims are repeated after they were heard from his mouth.

Page 34: I am not predisposed to smuggle. As I stated in my version of the crime, page 5, I wanted nothing to do with illegal birds after 1989.

Page 35: We could not, in my affidavit or motion, go into details about the financial part because we have very few records; Acosta keeps coming up with excuses not to hand over the rest. Much more could have been said if we had complete records. Why does he cite year 1988 here and refer to year 1989 on page 25 of his response? Is it to confuse the Court?

Page 36: I did not profit from the sale of birds, but from keeping them; to me having a species is more valuable than the money. Proffer was not recorded and hence does not accurately reflect what was really said.

Page 37: How does my plea change prejudice the government and pose a burden? They don't want the truth-- that their problem! There was no live preview of any evidence; it was all nonsense! We stipulated to many checks and thus 1100 far-flung, witnesses would not be needed. It's his problem not wanting to divert resources from other cases-- not mine!