SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
                    COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
 
     WILLIAM JAMES MITCHELL,
                     Plaintiff,
           vs.                         CASE NO. 19STCV12592
     TWIN GALAXIES, LLC; and Does 1-10,
                     Defendants.
     __________________________________
 
     AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS.
     __________________________________
 
 
 
           VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF ROBERT MRUCZEK
                     APPEARING REMOTELY
                        July 21, 2023
                          10:12 a.m.
 
 
 
 
     REPORTED STENOGRAPHICALLY BY:
     Deborah L. Heskett
     CSR No. 11797
     APPEARING FROM SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
 1   REMOTE APPEARANCES:
 2
 3        For Plaintiff:
 4             MANNING & KASS, ELLROD, RAMIREZ,
               TRESTER LLP
 5             KRISTINA ROSS
               ANTHONY J. ELLROD
 6             801 South Figueroa Street, 15th Floor
               Los Angeles, California 90017
 7             213.624.6900
               kristina.ross@manningkass.com
 8
 9        For Defendant and Cross-Complainant Twin
          Galaxies, LLC:
10
               TASHROUDIAN LAW GROUP, APC
11             DAVID A. TASHROUDIAN
               12400 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 300
12             Studio City, California 91604
               818.561.7381
13             david@tashlawgroup.com
14
          Also Present:
15
               ROB DENOS, VIDEOGRAPHER
16
               BILLY MITCHELL
17
               BILL MITCHELL
18
               JACE HALL
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
 1                   INDEX TO EXAMINATION
 2            WITNESS: ROBERT MRUCZEK
 3   EXAMINATION                                     PAGE
 4   By Mr. Tashroudian                            7, 195
 5   By Ms. Ross                                  92, 203
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
 1                    INDEX TO EXHIBITS
 2      (Exhibits provided electronically to reporter)
 3                      ROBERT MRUCZEK
 4                Mitchell vs. Twin Galaxies
 5                  Friday, July 21, 2023
 6            Deborah L. Heskett, CSR No. 11797
 7
 8   IDENTIFIED          DESCRIPTION                 PAGE
 9   EXHIBIT A      Document Bates Stamp Number        16
                    007224
10
     EXHIBIT B      Document Bates Stamp Number        38
11                  007223
12   EXHIBIT C      Document Bates Stamp Number        41
                    007236
13
     EXHIBIT D      Document Bates Stamp Number        66
14                  007227
15   EXHIBIT E      Confidentiality Agreement          79
16   EXHIBIT F      Declaration                       140
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
 1                 REPORTED REMOTELY FROM
 2           SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
 3            FRIDAY, JULY 21, 2023, 10:12 a.m.
 4                        -- o0o --
 5
 6            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  We are on the record at
 7   10:12 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time on July 21st, 2023.
 8            Audio and video recording will continue to
 9   take place until all parties agree to go off the
10   record.
11            Please note that microphones are sensitive
12   and may pick up whispering and private
13   conversations, therefore, private conversations
14   and/or attorney-client interactions should be held
15   outside the presence of the remote interface.
16            For the purpose of creating a witness-only
17   video recording, the witness is being spotlighted or
18   locked on all video screens while in speaker view.
19            We ask that the witness not remove the
20   spotlight setting during the deposition as it may
21   cause other participants to appear on the final
22   video rather than just the witness.
23            This is the remote video-recorded
24   proceeding of Robert Mruczek, being taken by counsel
25   for Defendant and Cross-Complainant in the matter of
 1   William James Mitchell versus Twin Galaxies, LLC,
 2   and all related cross-actions filed in Superior
 3   Court of the State of California, County of
 4   Los Angeles.
 5            This proceeding is being held via U.S.
 6   Legal Support remote depo videoconference platform.
 7            My name is Rob Denos.  I am the remote
 8   videographer on behalf of U.S. Legal Support,
 9   located at 16825 Northchase Drive, Suite 900,
10   Houston, Texas 77060.  I am not related to any party
11   in this action nor am I financially interested in
12   the outcome.
13            The court reporter today is Debbie Heskett
14   on behalf of U.S. Legal Support.
15            At this time will counsel please state
16   their appearances for the record, after which the
17   court reporter will swear in the witness.
18            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Yes.  David Tashroudian
19   for Twin Galaxies.
20            MS. ROSS:  Kristina Ross for Plaintiff.
21            MR. ELLROD:  Anthony Ellrod also for
22   Plaintiff.
23   ///
24   ///
25   ///
 1                     ROBERT MRUCZEK,
 2   having been first duly sworn, was examined and
 3   testified as follows:
 4
 5                       EXAMINATION
 6   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 7       Q    Good morning, Mr. Mruczek.  Thank you for
 8   being here today.
 9            Can you state --
10       A    Good morning.
11       Q    Can you state and spell your name for the
12   record?
13       A    First name Robert, middle initial T., last
14   name M-r-u-c-z-e-k, pronounced Mruczek.
15       Q    All right, Mr. Mruczek.
16            Where do you live currently?
17       A    My current address effective Friday,
18   July 14th, 2023, is ###########################,
19   Brooklyn, New York ###########################
20   ##################################.
21       Q    All right, Mr. Mruczek.  Do you have any
22   plans to move from New York in the next six months?
23       A    Not at all.
24       Q    What about in the next year?  Do you have
25   any plans to move from New York in the next year?
 1       A    Not at all.
 2       Q    All right.  Mr. Mruczek, do you know who --
 3   do you know who Billy Mitchell is?
 4       A    Billy Mitchell the gamer, yes.
 5       Q    How long have you known Billy Mitchell?
 6       A    Personally, the first time I met him was
 7   1999 at the first Fun Spot tournament.
 8            Prior to that I've only been aware of him
 9   through anecdotes in the Twin Galaxies Book of
10   Records and on the gaming forums.
11       Q    Do you know -- well, start this way --
12       A    Who?
13       Q    Let's strike the question.  Okay?  Here's
14   the question:  When did you first become affiliated
15   with Twin Galaxies?
16       A    As a gamer I submitted a score to Twin
17   Galaxies, a single score, in January of 1984.
18            I spoke with Walter Day and Steve Harris
19   approximately seven months later via landline phone
20   call when they called me at home to ask questions
21   about my score.
22            I joined the TG forum when it was
23   resurrected in approximately 1997, 1998 range.
24            I became a Twin Galaxies -- I don't want to
25   say employee, but a contributor as far as
 1   contributing editor/referee April 1st, 2001.
 2            I became Twin Galaxies' chief referee
 3   July 1st, 2001.
 4       Q    How long were you Twin Galaxies' chief
 5   referee?
 6       A    From July 1st, 2001, until August 31st of
 7   2005, when I resigned.
 8            Several weeks later I returned as senior
 9   referee, and that lasted until I resigned a second
10   and final time on December 19th of 2006.
11       Q    Did you adjudicate any of Billy Mitchell's
12   Donkey Kong scores?
13       A    One and one only.  It was the million and
14   47 score, which was originally shown publicly at the
15   May 2005 Fun Spot/ACAM event.
16            That score was subsequently sent to me by a
17   videotape to my home residence where I was operating
18   still as a Twin Galaxies referee, and that score was
19   adjudicated by me in late 2005 and then reentered
20   into the TG database.
21            It was originally entered into the TG
22   database during the competition.  I removed it from
23   the database the Monday immediately thereafter the
24   competition, because it did not have board of
25   referees approval to be adjudicated because of
 1   glitches that were present in the tape.
 2            Once the tape was subsequently received by
 3   me and reviewed, it was reentered into the TG
 4   database in late 2005.
 5       Q    So when you talk about late 2005, is this
 6   when you were the chief referee or the senior
 7   referee?
 8       A    Senior referee.  It was a senior referee.
 9   I was in charge of the arcade platform at the time.
10   So I would still be the referee that would have
11   adjudicated this score.
12       Q    Is this the same score performance that was
13   shown in "The King of Kong" movie?
14       A    Yes.  The score's identifiable via three
15   key elements.  There was a major glitch that took
16   place in the mid-600,000 range.  There was the
17   998,500 point rollover to all zeros with the 1500
18   point bonus in Level 20.  Then there was the ending
19   score of a million 47,200, followed by the USA
20   initials.  Those are the three key elements of the
21   game.
22            It was the same score that was shown in
23   "The King of Kong" tape.  But the tape itself in
24   "King of Kong," that was the tape that was
25   originally sent to that event that had the major
 1   glitch.
 2            A master copy was subsequently sent to me
 3   later in the year, which would not have as prevalent
 4   of a glitch.  That was the copy that final
 5   adjudication was based on.
 6       Q    Who sent you the master copy of the tape?
 7       A    Well, according to Walter Day, Billy would
 8   be sending me the master copy of the tape at some
 9   subsequent point, and when it arrived in the mail,
10   that was the tape that came from Billy.
11       Q    And you adjudicated that tape that came
12   from Billy and entered the 1,047,200 into the Twin
13   Galaxies score database; correct?
14       A    Correct.  Once that score was reviewed and
15   it met all of the primary key elements from the
16   original performance shown at ACAM, once that was
17   reverified, then it was reentered into the database
18   by me.
19       Q    And so you would be able to identify that
20   score performance by these three elements or three
21   markers that you --
22       A    Yes.
23       Q    -- identified?
24       A    Yes.  They were the standout elements of
25   the performance.  There was -- throughout the tape
 1   it was basically regular game play, but the three
 2   standout elements were the major glitch in the
 3   mid-600,000 range, the 998,500 point rollover to all
 4   zeros courtesy of a 1500 point bonus climbing up a
 5   ladder, and then after that, the million and 47,200
 6   followed by the entry of the USA initials.  Those
 7   are the three key elements.
 8       Q    Prior to this deposition I sent you the
 9   document that's been previously marked with Bates
10   stamp number 7224.
11            Do you recall receiving that document?
12       A    Yeah.  I recently received documents, which
13   I took a look at.  The documents contained the key
14   elements.  One of them was an abbreviated portion of
15   the performance that ended in the high 800,000
16   range, but it did include the glitch in the
17   mid-600,000 range.
18            The other document that I received was the
19   full performance and it contained all the three key
20   elements.
21       Q    The full performance that you reviewed, is
22   that the one that bears Bates stamp -- rather, is
23   that the one that bears number 7224 in the file
24   name?
25       A    Hold on.  I'm checking the email that I
 1   received.  The exact file name I don't remember off
 2   the top of my head.  It was just received recently.
 3   Bear with me, please.
 4            All right.  The 07899 was, I believe, the
 5   partial, and the 07224 was the full performance of
 6   million 47.
 7       Q    All right.  Now, I want to focus only on
 8   the 007224 document, the full performance.  Okay?
 9       A    Yes.  Yes.  Yes.
10       Q    Is this document and score performance the
11   score performance of Billy Mitchell's, the 1047200
12   score that you adjudicated and placed into the Twin
13   Galaxies record books?
14       A    Yeah.  The final score of a million 47 was
15   the score that was entered into the TG database.
16            Keep in mind that the document I
17   reviewed -- well, the videotape that I reviewed was
18   the master copy, because the one that was shown at
19   the ACAM event had a more prevalent glitch than what
20   I subsequently seen.
21       Q    My question is a little bit different.
22            The document and the videotape that I sent
23   you with the numbers 007224 in the file name, is
24   that the score performance of Billy Mitchell's that
25   you adjudicated and entered into the Twin Galaxies
 1   database?
 2            MS. ROSS:  Objection.
 3            THE WITNESS:  Yes.
 4            MS. ROSS:  Calls for speculation.  Asked
 5   and answered.
 6            THE WITNESS:  Yes.
 7   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 8       Q    So is that a yes, sir?
 9       A    Yes, sir.
10       Q    And that's the -- I just want to be clear.
11   That's the document and that's the video that you
12   reviewed and entered into the score database; right?
13            MS. ROSS:  Same objections.
14            THE WITNESS:  Yes.
15   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
16       Q    And how do you know that that document,
17   007224, is the same one that you entered into the
18   Twin Galaxies database in 2005?
19       A    It met the three primary criteria of what
20   was the key elements of the performance.
21            And on top of that, the glitch that I had
22   witnessed with the doc -- in the tape that was
23   received subsequently to the ACAM event was less
24   prevalent than the glitch that was observed with the
25   tape that was shown at the ACAM event.
 1            So effectively the ACAM event was the --
 2   I'd say the copy of the performance, and what I
 3   subsequently received was the master tape.
 4       Q    And you received that master tape from
 5   Billy Mitchell; is that correct?
 6       A    Yeah.  A tape arrived in the mail, as it
 7   was promised to be arriving from Walter Day.
 8            The tape arrived in the mail.  It was the
 9   exact same performance in terms of outcome from the
10   ACAM event, and the glitch in the mid-600,000 range
11   was less prevalent; therefore, it met the
12   acceptability criteria for Twin Galaxies to accept
13   it as a performance.  And it was the master copy of
14   the previously publicly shown 10 million -- sorry,
15   1,047,200.
16       Q    Do you have a copy of that tape today?
17       A    No.  I -- when I resigned from Twin
18   Galaxies, I had returned, over a period of time, all
19   of my documentation to either a TG representative or
20   sent the digital stuff that I had to existing TG
21   referees.
22            So right now in my possession, I have
23   nothing from Twin Galaxies during my tenure as an
24   employee/referee.
25       Q    All right.  I'm going to mark now as
 1   Exhibit A, document that's been previously produced
 2   in this matter bearing Bates stamp number 007224.
 3   I'm going to play this for you, sir.  Bear with me.
 4            (Exhibit A identified)
 5            THE WITNESS:  Go ahead.
 6   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 7       Q    Hold on here.  I need to share my screen.
 8            All right.  Do you see my screen?
 9       A    Yeah.  I see something on my screen right
10   now.  It says 1047200.mp4.
11       Q    And do you see here where it says 007224 in
12   the file name?
13       A    Yes, I do.
14       Q    Is this a document that you reviewed prior
15   to today's deposition?
16       A    Yes.
17       Q    And, again, this is the -- go ahead.
18       A    Yeah.  I specifically looked for the three
19   key elements.  I didn't watch the entirety of the
20   two-and-a-half hour performance.  I looked right for
21   the three key elements.
22       Q    And you determined from your analysis of
23   this exhibit that this is a score performance that
24   you adjudicated and entered into the Twin Galaxies
25   database in 2005; is that right?
 1       A    Yes.  At approximately the 1 minute -- 1
 2   hour 35 minute and 35 second mark is approximately
 3   when that glitch appears.  If you zoom forward to
 4   1:35:35.
 5            (Unreportable simultaneous speaking)
 6   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 7       Q    We will play Exhibit A starting at 1:34 --
 8   you know, let me do this:  Robert, I didn't go
 9   through any of the admonitions before the
10   deposition, but one of the most important things is
11   that the court reporter is taking down our
12   testimony.  So it's very important --
13       A    Oh, I have to speak in such a way that she
14   could type it.
15       Q    Yes.  So it's very important --
16       A    (Unintelligible.)
17       Q    -- that you allow me to finish my question
18   before you answer --
19       A    Okay.
20       Q    -- crosstalk.
21       A    Okay.
22       Q    All right.
23            So I've scrubbed this videotape all the way
24   into one minute and 35 seconds here, and we'll play
25   it.  Actually, one minute 34 and 55 seconds.  I'm
 1   sorry, one hour 34 minutes and 55 seconds here.  And
 2   we'll play it for you through 1 hour and 36 minutes
 3   and you can tell me where the glitch occurs.
 4            Let me know when to stop.
 5       A    There was a glitch around 1:35:35.
 6       Q    Back up to that for you.
 7            We will go frame by frame.
 8       A    I don't know what the frame by frame.  The
 9   glitch occurred as I was watching it.  I did not
10   have frame-by-frame analysis capacity back in that
11   year when I adjudicated.
12       Q    Did the glitch occur prior to -- to the
13   frame that we are looking at now?
14       A    It was at the 1:35:35 in the document that
15   I reviewed yesterday.
16       Q    So tell me when you see -- and what does
17   the glitch look like?
18       A    It is along the left side of the screen.
19   It was vertical.  And it is a distortion of graphics
20   from the top -- from what we are seeing here, from
21   the bottom left all the way to the bottom right.
22   That's what I saw.
23       Q    Did we miss the glitch?
24       A    It's possible we missed it.
25       Q    Let's go back a little bit here.  Let's go
 1   back to 1:35.
 2       A    I think that -- I think that was it.
 3       Q    Let's play that again for you, 1:35.
 4            Tell me when to stop.  All right?
 5       A    Sure.
 6            Right there.  What was the -- okay.  Yeah,
 7   1:35:15 then.
 8       Q    1:35 --
 9       A    That's the mid-600,000 glitch, in that
10   range.  And then the other key -- there.
11       Q    So we just saw it there.  It's really
12   1:35:12; is that correct?
13       A    Yeah, about.  Maybe that's it then.  It's
14   around this range.
15            And then the next key element was --
16       Q    Is that it right here --
17       A    There you go.
18       Q    Is this the glitch?
19       A    Yeah, that's the distortion of the
20   graphics.
21       Q    Okay.  I see.  So that's right at 13:12.
22            And this is the same glitch that you
23   observed when you originally adjudicated the score
24   in 2005; is that correct?
25       A    Yes.  Remember, it was first broadcast
 1   publicly at the ACAM event and then later the tape
 2   arrived to my home in which case I watched the three
 3   key elements again.
 4       Q    So this glitch that appears here at 1:35:12
 5   in this document 007224 is --
 6       A    Yeah.  This is --
 7       Q    -- is a --
 8       A    This is the tape.  Go ahead.
 9       Q    Yeah, you got to let me finish.
10            So this glitch that occurs here at 1 minute
11   35 -- I'm sorry, 1 hour -- let's try the question
12   again.
13            This glitch that occurs here at 1 hour 35
14   minutes and 12 seconds is the same glitch that you
15   observed when you adjudicated this score originally
16   in 2005; correct?
17       A    Yes.  But keep in mind the tape that I
18   adjudicated was the master copy of it.
19            The tape that was used at the ACAM 2005
20   event was a more prevalently visible glitch, because
21   that was a copy of the master copy.
22       Q    And so you can tell from this glitch that
23   appears in this document, 007224, that this document
24   is the same exact score performance that you
25   adjudicated in 2005; is that right?
 1       A    Correct.
 2       Q    Now, can you tell me then where the second
 3   indication is that you know that we are looking at
 4   the same --
 5       A    Yeah.
 6       Q    -- tape?
 7       A    This one -- I don't know the time element,
 8   but the score is where it's key.
 9            You have to fast-forward to where the
10   score -- it's a barrel stage where he's at 998,500,
11   about to roll over to a million.  He will be -- a
12   little before that.  Right -- start from here.  He's
13   going to climb up to the top ladder and wait there a
14   little bit for the timer to get to 1500, and then
15   he's going to go up to the top and the score is
16   going to become all zeros.  That's the second major
17   element.
18       Q    Okay.  So now we are playing from -- let me
19   stop this.  We are playing the tape from 2 hours 21
20   minutes and 31 seconds to find the second indicator
21   of yours.  So tell me when we found it.
22       A    It's coming up very soon.  He's going to go
23   up the ladder shortly, this ladder.  Very soon he's
24   going up the ladder.  And now he's going to go up to
25   the other ladder, the final one, and he's going to
 1   wait there until the timer is at 1500 and then go to
 2   the top and the score is all zero.  That's the
 3   second major indicator.
 4       Q    And you recognized that play style back in
 5   2005; correct?
 6       A    Yes.  That's exactly what was shown at the
 7   ACAM event.  That is exactly what was on the tape
 8   that I received subsequent to the event, the exact
 9   same conclusion to the score rolling over to all
10   zeros.
11       Q    So from that play style and that clip at 2
12   hours 21 minutes and right around 50 seconds, you
13   can tell that this document, 7224, is the same score
14   performance that you adjudicated in 2005; is that
15   correct?
16       A    Yes.  That's the second major indicator,
17   and there's one more to come at the end of the
18   performance.
19       Q    And where is that third indicator?
20       A    It would be the very final stage coming up
21   next right here.  1,047,200, he's going to end the
22   score without getting any additional points that he
23   could, and then he's going to put up his USA
24   initials, and that's the third and final indicator.
25       Q    All right.  So here we'll start the tape,
 1   document number 7224, at 2 hours 28 minutes and 21
 2   seconds.
 3            Let me know when you observe the third
 4   indicator.
 5       A    Okay.  It's coming up any second.
 6            As you can see, the score is now 1,047,200.
 7   He is not going to get any additional points at this
 8   stage.  He's going to forego the possibility of
 9   additional points and let his character and game
10   come to an end.
11            He has one extra life, which he is going to
12   similarly exhaust in identical fashion and then he
13   is going to enter the initials USA.
14            And that's the conclusion of the
15   performance and the score.  That's the third major
16   indicator, identical to what was shown at ACAM 2005.
17       Q    And this third major indicator that appears
18   here in document number 7224 is the same indicator
19   that you observed when you adjudicated this tape in
20   2005; is that right?
21       A    Yes.  This was the same ending performance.
22   He exhausted all remaining men in the final barrel
23   stage and then entered his trademark initials of
24   USA.
25       Q    So is it accurate to say that this document
 1   bearing Bates number 007224 is the exact same score
 2   performance that you adjudicated and entered into
 3   the score database for Twin Galaxies in 2005?
 4            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Calls for
 5   speculation.
 6            THE WITNESS:  Yes.
 7   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 8       Q    Is that a yes?
 9       A    Yes.  But keep in mind I'm looking for the
10   three key elements.  Every single other stage,
11   'cause it's 117 stages to Donkey Kong, the exact
12   same ending and playback of every single stage along
13   the way, that, I can't tell you after 17 years that
14   each and every one of them played out the same, but
15   the three key elements as they occurred are all
16   prevalent.  They are all present, including where he
17   did his rollover to all zeros, how he concluded the
18   game with a million 47200.  Based on that, it's the
19   same performance.
20       Q    And this document, number 007224, the score
21   performance, rather, is this the same score
22   performance that was played at the 2005 ACAM Fun
23   Spot event by Brian Kuh?
24       A    The performance, yes, but the recording,
25   no.
 1            As I stated previously, what was shown at
 2   the ACAM 2005 event was a copy of a master tape.
 3   And the tape that was subsequently sent to my home
 4   in my capacity as a Twin Galaxies referee, was a
 5   better quality copy which Walter Day said would be
 6   the master tape.
 7       Q    But aside from the difference in the actual
 8   physical tapes, the performance is the same.  In
 9   other words, this 007224 is the same performance --
10       A    Same performance, same outcome, yes.
11       Q    It was the same --
12       A    Same performance, same outcome.
13       Q    It's the same performance and the same
14   outcome as the one that was shown in 2005 at the
15   ACAM Fun Spot event; right?
16       A    Yes.
17       Q    And is this the same score performance that
18   appears in "The King of Kong" movie?
19       A    Yes.  Because "The King of Kong" movie, the
20   film footage of the score took place at the 2005
21   ACAM event.  So "The King of Kong" footage is based
22   on the same performance, but the videotape that
23   Brian Kuh is showing, which is the original lesser
24   quality copy that Billy had originally sent for the
25   purposes of showing it publicly at the event.
 1            So it was the same performance, but "The
 2   King of Kong" movie features the earlier lower
 3   quality incarnation of the tape.
 4            The higher quality master tape, that's what
 5   I adjudicated at home later subsequent to the event
 6   and which I entered the score into the TG database
 7   based on.
 8       Q    Did you see Billy's 1,047,200 point score
 9   performance displayed at Fun Spot in 2005?
10       A    No.  And can I explain why?
11       Q    Yes.
12       A    When Billy's performance was shown --
13   sorry, I'm leaning.
14            When Billy's performance was shown at the
15   2005 event, it ended on a Saturday evening.  I had
16   retired to my personal cabin subsequent to that.
17            Unbeknownst to me, on Saturday night Walter
18   Day had entered Billy's score into the TG database,
19   and further he allowed "The King of Kong" camera
20   crew to film him doing so.
21            I returned to Fun Spot Sunday morning to
22   say my goodbyes, drove home, and it was on Monday
23   morning while I was at my place of employment, I
24   took a look at the TG front page -- and in that year
25   of TG, the most recently entered scores appeared on
 1   the front page -- and I saw the million 47 there,
 2   even though there was no authorization given by the
 3   attending referees for the score to enter because of
 4   that glitch.
 5            I consulted my fellow board of directors
 6   member and senior referee, Brien King, our CTO at
 7   the time.  We agreed to take the score immediately
 8   down.  Listen to "The King of Kong" DVD's director's
 9   commentary.  You will hear that I took the score
10   down personally on the Monday after the event.
11            The score was not reentered into the
12   database until it was agreed that Billy would be
13   sending me the master copy of the tape subsequent to
14   the event, which several months later I received.
15       Q    You know, they are doing some construction
16   here on my building.  Bear with me for a second
17   here.
18       A    I know what that's like.  They are doing
19   construction next to mine as well.
20       Q    Hold on.
21       A    Uh-huh.
22       Q    So I want to get this clear.
23            So I'd like to get this clear.  The score
24   1047200 was entered into the database after the ACAM
25   event; is that correct?
 1       A    During the ACAM event.  Walter Day entered
 2   it on the Saturday evening of the ACAM event.
 3            I personally removed it from the TG
 4   database Monday morning subsequent to the event.
 5            And then I personally adjudicated the score
 6   after receiving the higher quality master copy of
 7   the tape several months later.  I reentered it into
 8   the TG database.
 9       Q    If you had to adjudicate --
10       A    Yes?
11       Q    Let's try the question again.
12            If you had to adjudicate this score
13   performance again -- sorry.  Let's try the question
14   over.
15            If you had to adjudicate the score
16   performance again, the one appearing here in
17   document number 007224, would you adjudicate it and
18   enter it into the database as valid?
19            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Calls for
20   speculation.  Improper hypothetical.
21            You can answer.
22            THE WITNESS:  Based on my current knowledge
23   of technical discoveries that have occurred since
24   the original submission of the tape, or is it based
25   on my -- my personal knowledge as a Twin Galaxies
 1   referee leading up to my point of resignation?
 2   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 3       Q    Now.  According to all of the knowledge
 4   that you have now, would you have still accepted
 5   this score performance appearing here in document
 6   number 007224 as valid?
 7            MS. ROSS:  Same objections.
 8            THE WITNESS:  No, I would not, for one very
 9   important reason.  Technical discoveries have been
10   made subsequent to the original submission of the
11   tape which shows a disparity in the frame-by-frame
12   transition, as I understand it, involving switching
13   from certain stage types to others, which indicate
14   that the performance may not have been done on
15   original hardware.
16            The technical capacity to do this did not
17   exist back in 2005 to Twin Galaxies staff members,
18   therefore, in 2005 the performance would have been
19   accepted.  But in the here and now, had there still
20   been Twin Galaxies referees, including myself, the
21   performance would have been rejected.
22   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
23       Q    And the performance would be rejected
24   because of the frame-by-frame analysis between --
25       A    Yes.
 1       Q    -- levels; correct?
 2            (Stenographer clarification)
 3            THE WITNESS:  Barrel stage, elevator stage,
 4   conveyor belt and rivet.
 5            Recent discoveries that have come out over
 6   the last few years suggest that involving the barrel
 7   stage as a transition to subsequent stages, there is
 8   a certain indicator that would show you that the
 9   transition is not aligned with what happens when an
10   arcade performance on arcade hardware transitions
11   from screen to screen.
12            That technical knowledge did not exist to
13   Twin Galaxies staff members back in 2005 when the
14   performance was originally adjudicated.
15            And the precise means of seeing that, I'm
16   note sure on this playback, which has a
17   second-by-second counter, you can physically see it.
18            This would be a frame-by-frame playback,
19   which, again, we did not have the technical
20   knowledge that such a transition issue existed in
21   2005, nor did we have the technical capacity to
22   check it on a frame-by-frame basis back in 2005.
23            So the criteria by which it was adjudicated
24   in 2005, that criteria was missing this key element
25   of adjudication, which now exists in the here and
 1   now.
 2   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 3       Q    Now, I'm going to show you a couple of
 4   these transition levels, and you tell me if you see
 5   anything that indicates that the document number
 6   007224 did not come from an original arcade machine.
 7       A    Unfortunately, I can't, because the people
 8   that discovered this were technically savvy on
 9   arcade versus nonarcade transitions, and I am not.
10            I see this tiny little blip at the end of
11   the girder over here, which I have read, but do not
12   fully understand, indicates that that is a so-called
13   finger.  And the presence of it indicates -- or
14   gives indication as to whether this is a arcade
15   original hardware transition at that specific point
16   in the frame transition or if it's not.
17            I myself am not a technical expert.  I have
18   simply read these recently discoveries.  I don't
19   fully understand them, but they seem to suggest that
20   there is a difference in terms of how this
21   performance transitioned from this particular screen
22   type to the next as opposed to how it should have
23   transitioned had it been played under original
24   arcade hardware.
25            I am only reiterating what I read, not what
 1   I understand, because, again, this knowledge did not
 2   exist to Twin Galaxies staff members, including
 3   myself, back in 2005 when the performance was
 4   originally adjudicated, nor did the technical
 5   capacity to search and evaluate this exist to Twin
 6   Galaxies staffers, including myself, back in 2005.
 7       Q    All right.  I've -- I've paused.  I've
 8   paused --
 9       A    Yes.
10       Q    -- the document 7224 at 28 minutes and 43
11   seconds.
12            Is this the transition that you are talking
13   about?
14            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Calls for
15   speculation.
16            (Unreportable simultaneous speaking)
17            MS. ROSS:  Hold on, Robert.  Hold on.  You
18   need to also pause for me to be able to object,
19   please.  I know it wasn't given in your admonitions
20   earlier.  But, again --
21            THE WITNESS:  Apologies.
22            MS. ROSS:  -- the reporter --
23            THE WITNESS:  Apologies.  Apologies.
24            MS. ROSS:  -- can only take down one at a
25   time.
 1            Objection.  Calls for speculation.
 2   Improper hypothetical.  Calls for expert testimony.
 3   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 4       Q    Okay.  Do you remember the question?
 5       A    Yes.
 6            From what I have read on recent forum
 7   discussions regarding this frame-by-frame
 8   transition, what I'm seeing here at the point to
 9   which you have paused appears to be what has been
10   called a girder finger, which is an element that
11   technical experts on the title, of which I am not,
12   have found is an indicator as to whether the
13   subsequent frame-to-frame transition of the next
14   screen type was accomplished on original DK hardware
15   versus nonoriginal DK hardware.
16            I am only repeating what I read, not what I
17   am an expert at.
18            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  All right.  Let me do
19   this:  Why don't we take a five-minute break, return
20   at 11:00.  Let me see if I can get to somewhere a
21   little bit more quiet.
22            THE WITNESS:  Okay.
23            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Let's go off the record.
24            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  Time now is 10:55 a.m.
25   We are off the record.
 1            (Recess taken)
 2            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  We are back on the
 3   record, the time now is 11:06 a.m.
 4   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 5       Q    All right, Mr. Mruczek.  We were talking
 6   before we left about the transition screens that
 7   appear here in 007224.
 8            Do you recall that?
 9       A    Yes.
10       Q    And I freeze-framed on that document, which
11   is Exhibit A, at 28 minutes and 43 seconds.  Let me
12   share my screen so you can see that again.
13            Do you see that?
14       A    It says, "David Tashroudian has started
15   screen sharing," but I'm not seeing that screen
16   appearing again.  It keeps coming back to myself
17   seeing my own image.
18       Q    Okay.  Do you see --
19       A    There it goes.  Now I see it.
20       Q    All right.  I'm going to fast-forward now
21   to 36 minutes and 29 seconds.  Bear with me.
22            Do you see this transition screen here at
23   36 minutes and 29 seconds in this Exhibit A,
24   document number --
25       A    Yes.
 1       Q    -- 7224?
 2            Is this the --
 3       A    Yes.
 4       Q    Is this the transition screen that you
 5   understand as not being able to come from an
 6   original arcade machine?
 7            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Calls for
 8   speculation.  Improper hypothetical.  Calls for
 9   expert testimony.
10   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
11       Q    Is that right, Robert?
12       A    Based on what I have read on the forums as
13   written by technical experts on the title, this is
14   an indicator as to whether this is or is not
15   original arcade hardware transition graphics as it
16   transitions from this screen type to the next.
17       Q    All right.  Let's go now to 52 minutes 48
18   seconds.
19            Now, this transition screen that we've
20   paused on here, 52 minutes and 48 seconds, is this
21   similarly a transition screen that cannot be
22   produced from an original arcade machine?
23            MS. ROSS:  Same objections.  Misstates
24   testimony.
25   ///
 1   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 2       Q    You can answer.
 3       A    Based on what I read from the technical
 4   experts on the title, this is, again, indication as
 5   to whether it is or is not an arcade original
 6   hardware transition from the barrel screen type to
 7   the subsequent screen type.
 8       Q    All right.  Now, let's go to 1 hour and 11
 9   seconds.
10            Now, this transition screen that appears
11   here at 1 hour and 11 seconds, is this similarly a
12   transition screen that cannot come from an original
13   Donkey Kong arcade machine?
14            MS. ROSS:  Same objection.
15            You can answer.
16            THE WITNESS:  Again, this is an example,
17   another similar example, of what I have read as
18   written by the technical experts on the title that
19   is an indicator as to whether this is performed on
20   original Donkey Kong arcade hardware versus
21   nonoriginal hardware as it transitions from the
22   barrel screen type to the next subsequent screen
23   type.
24            Apparently this is a consistent indicator
25   with every transition from a barrel screen type to
 1   the subsequent screen type, as I understand it.
 2   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 3       Q    Now, sitting here today and knowing what
 4   you know about these transition screens and me
 5   having showed you those four transition screens
 6   appearing at 28 minutes 43 seconds, at 36 minutes 29
 7   seconds, at 52 minutes 48 seconds, and at 1 hour and
 8   11 seconds, would you still adjudicate this score as
 9   valid?
10            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Improper
11   hypothetical.
12   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
13       Q    You can answer.
14       A    Based on this knowledge, knowledge that was
15   not known to me nor made known to me in 2005, in the
16   here and now, if I was a Twin Galaxies referee or
17   gamer simply logging my opinion on what I'm seeing,
18   I would state, based on knowledge as it is available
19   to us today, that this common occurrence is not
20   indicative of an arcade original hardware
21   performance, again, based on what I have read that
22   technical experts on the title in the here and now
23   have shown as an indicator to this effect.
24       Q    So if you were adjudicating this score
25   performance now that appears in this document number
 1   7224, is it true that you would not accept it as
 2   valid?
 3            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Improper --
 4            THE WITNESS:  True.
 5            MS. ROSS:  -- hypothetical.  Asked and
 6   answered.
 7            THE WITNESS:  True.  In the here and now,
 8   that is the outcome of my rendition, would be that
 9   this was not to be accepted as an arcade submission.
10   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
11       Q    Very good.  Let me ask you this:  At some
12   point MTV asked you to do an interview for them;
13   correct?
14       A    Correct.  Steven Totilo, T-o-t-i-l-l-o
15   [sic], I believe is how his name is spelled.
16       Q    Let's mark now as Exhibit B document that's
17   been previously marked and produced as Bates stamp
18   number 007223.
19            (Exhibit B identified)
20   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
21       Q    We will play now as Exhibit B for you.
22            This is a 2-minute-and-14-second video. I
23   will play it all the way through and then ask you
24   questions about it.  All right?
25       A    Yes.  Hello?
 1            MS. ROSS:  You're muted.  David, you're
 2   muted.  You're still muted.
 3   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 4       Q    Let me try that again.  I don't think I
 5   sent audio with my share screen.  Bear with me.
 6            MS. ROSS:  Yeah, it had no audio.
 7            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Share sound.  There we
 8   are.  That's why.
 9            Let's start this Exhibit B playback again.
10   Let me share this.  Bear with me.
11   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
12       Q    It looks like -- let's see if this works.
13   Hold on.
14            Can you guys hear the audio on that?
15       A    I heard an explosion.
16       Q    Okay.  Let's start it over.
17            Now, Mr. Mruczek, I'm going to play for you
18   document number 007233.  We will watch it, and then
19   I'll ask you questions about it afterward.
20       A    Yes.
21       Q    All right.  Mr. Mruczek, can you tell me
22   what that document is that we just took a look at,
23   that video?
24       A    That was a video interview that I did with
25   Steven Totilo from MTV.  I was filmed in my home.
 1   And additionally I sent to Steven a select number of
 2   performances, including Joust 2 by Dwayne Richard
 3   and a Donkey Kong performance, which was the last
 4   one that I received from Billy, which was the
 5   million 47, and they put together what they filmed
 6   of me in my home plus clips from the various videos
 7   received.  And as you could also see, there was
 8   certain other gamers involved in the video
 9   production of this clip, and that's what we saw.
10            We saw something that MTV released as a
11   two-minute clip featuring me as a referee but
12   including some other people as well.
13       Q    All right.  Those -- there were clips of
14   Donkey Kong -- let's start it this way:  There were
15   clips of a Donkey Kong performance showed in this
16   document.
17            Do you -- did you see that?
18       A    Yes.
19       Q    Whose Donkey Kong performance was that?
20       A    That would have been the Billy Mitchell
21   performance, which was the highest performance that
22   I had on tape at the time, which was the million
23   47200, which I had recently adjudicated at that
24   point in time and entered into the TG database.
25       Q    All right.  So did -- did you play, then,
 1   in that video clip the 1047200 performance that was
 2   provided to you by Billy Mitchell?
 3       A    Yes.
 4       Q    I'm sorry.  I'm sorry.  Was that a yes?
 5       A    Yes, that was a yes.
 6       Q    And what year was that filmed?
 7       A    Late 2005 to as late as January 2006. I
 8   don't remember the precise date that they came to my
 9   home, but the perform -- the video clip itself was
10   released at some point around February 2006.  So
11   they were in my home late 2005 to January '06.
12            The precise dates, I am apologizing, it's
13   17 years, I don't remember.  It's been too long.
14   But it's within that range, late 2005 to
15   January 2006.
16       Q    All right.  Now I'm going to play now for
17   you the video that's been previously produced in
18   this matter bearing Bates stamp number 007236, and
19   this will be Exhibit C.
20            So let's take a look at this tape -- or
21   this video, rather, and then I'll ask you questions
22   about it afterward.
23            (Exhibit C identified)
24   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
25       Q    Now, Mr. Mruczek, when was this footage
 1   filmed?
 2       A    After I had already adjudicated in my home
 3   the received master copy of the million 47200 tape
 4   and prior to the February 2006 production release on
 5   the MTV site of the video clip that we watched.
 6       Q    So sometime --
 7       A    He came to my home in late 2005 to
 8   January 2006.  Again, the precise date I can't
 9   remember, but I had already adjudicated and entered
10   into the TG database the 1047200 score prior to
11   their arrival.
12       Q    So just to be certain, the footage that
13   appears here, this Exhibit C, on the document Bates
14   marked number 007236 was shot sometime between late
15   2005 and early 2006; correct?
16       A    Yeah, between late 2005 and January 2006.
17       Q    All right.  Thank you.
18       A    In my home.
19       Q    Now, what is the source of the video, the
20   Donkey Kong video, being played on that screen?
21       A    That's the videotape that I received to my
22   then home address after the 2005 ACAM event, which I
23   used to adjudicate the million 47200 performance on
24   the master quality tape and then entered into the TG
25   database.  That was the tape that was used for the
 1   MTV interview.
 2       Q    So is the tape that -- rather, is the
 3   Donkey Kong score performance that appears in this
 4   exhibit Billy Mitchell's 1,047,200 Donkey Kong score
 5   performance?
 6       A    Yes.  It is the exact same performance.
 7       Q    I'm going to share the screen again.
 8            We are going to go over here to time stamp
 9   27 seconds.
10            All right.  Do you see this transition that
11   appears here on 27 seconds?
12       A    Yes, I do, being that you are freezing the
13   screen.  As I'm watching it of course normally back
14   in late 2005, I wouldn't have seen that myself.  It
15   would have passed by too quickly for me to have
16   picked it up on my own with my own naked eye.
17       Q    And what is this transition screen showing?
18       A    This is an indication, based on my current
19   knowledge from TG technical experts and Donkey Kong
20   technical experts writing in the TG forum, that this
21   is an indicator that this may not necessarily be --
22   may not be arcade original Donkey Kong hardware as
23   it transitions from the barrel stage to the
24   subsequent stage.
25       Q    Are you aware of a rivalry between Billy
 1   Mitchell and Steve Wiebe with respect to Donkey Kong
 2   scores?
 3       A    Of course.  The minute Steve Wiebe came on
 4   the scene way, way, way back in 2003 or 2002, the
 5   two of them of course were rivals.
 6            Billy was the -- on the TG scoreboard, the
 7   recognized champion, and then Steve Wiebe came out
 8   of the blue from Washington and he posted a score
 9   eventually of 947,200 points, which, back in that
10   era, was accepted.  And ever since then the two
11   Donkey Kong rivals were Billy Mitchell and Steve
12   Wiebe from the minute that 947,000 score was
13   accepted by TG all the way into the 2005 ACAM event.
14            Because at that point in time, there were
15   no other Donkey Kong players that were at million
16   point mark except for Steve and Billy.
17            Steve had a, as of that point in time, a
18   score submission to TG of 1.006 million, which TG
19   did not accept, and Billy had a submission prior to
20   the 1047 of 1.014 million.
21            They were the only people TG was aware of
22   worldwide that were at the 1 million point threshold
23   in Donkey Kong.  So the rivalry was known to pretty
24   much everyone at Twin Galaxies, not just myself.
25       Q    Now, did Steve Wiebe submit a Donkey Kong
 1   score of 1,006,000 in July of 2004?
 2       A    Yes.  The sequence of events was as
 3   follows:  May 29th of 2004, Steve was already the
 4   recognized holder of 947200, but that score was
 5   later found out to be done on a Double Donkey Kong
 6   board, so it was rejected.
 7            He then submitted a 985,000 point score on
 8   video on May 29th of 2004.
 9            Then shortly before July 1st of 2004, he
10   submitted on video 999.5K, and then several days
11   later 1.006 million.
12            That was the first videotape that TG had
13   ever received from any gamer in excess of 1 million
14   points on Donkey Kong.
15       Q    Was Steve Wiebe's 1,006,000 score accepted
16   by Twin Galaxies?
17       A    It was slated to be accepted; however,
18   there was an occurrence that took place in
19   Washington where two gamers, Brian Kuh and Perry
20   Rogers, they paid a visit to Steve Wiebe's place of
21   residence and they discovered while there in Steve
22   Wiebe's garage, the presence of Donkey Kong board
23   sets coming from one Roy Shildt who was a very
24   pulverizing individual known to Twin Galaxies dating
25   back, as I know, until 1985.
 1            Based on the report that came from Brian
 2   Kuh as to the presence of those board sets provided
 3   by Roy Shildt, and also based on information
 4   provided by Brian and Billy and confirmed by TG
 5   technical expert Chris Ayra, as far as Donkey Kong
 6   goes, the only substance that was on the board set,
 7   they said that the board sets were tainted and,
 8   therefore, Steve's 1.006 million performance could
 9   not be accepted.
10            Now, at that point in time, I had already
11   written an article adjudicate -- not only
12   adjudicating Steve's 1.06 million, but Billy also
13   sent in a performance subsequent to that of
14   1.014 million, and I wrote a collaborative article
15   celebrating the first two Donkey Kong scores in
16   excess of a million.  It was a rather elaborate
17   36-page article that never got published because of
18   the taint of these board sets that were in Steve's
19   possession.
20            So TG did not honor the 1.006 million, and
21   it also at that point in time prompted Billy to
22   rescind his 1.014 million, thus the announcement of
23   the 2 million point achievements on Donkey Kong was
24   never formally made by Twin Galaxies as of that
25   point in time.
 1       Q    What was Billy's involvement in rejecting
 2   Steve Wiebe's 1.006 score?
 3            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Calls for
 4   speculation.
 5            THE WITNESS:  Billy was attempting --
 6            MS. ROSS:  Misstates testimony.
 7   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 8       Q    You can answer.
 9       A    Billy was attempting to use his board of
10   directors influence to get Walter Day, who was the
11   founder and chief scorekeeper of Twin Galaxies, and
12   myself, who as of that point in time was still chief
13   referee, he was trying to get us not to recognize
14   Steve's performance as the first million point
15   performance achieved on Donkey Kong.
16            Billy had said that he called Steve to tell
17   Steve that he had done the million .014 a year
18   earlier.  Problem is, Billy never sent in that tape
19   before Steve did.
20            So, in my eyes and Walter Day's eyes, Steve
21   was the first million point scorer that would be
22   recognized by TG, and it would have been, had it not
23   been for that discovery of the Roy Shildt-supplied
24   board sets and that so-called gummy substance at the
25   home Steve Wiebe.
 1       Q    What exactly did Billy say to dissuade you
 2   from accepting Steve Wiebe's 1.006 score?
 3       A    There was a three-way or four-way
 4   conference call.  That was Billy -- Billy, Chris
 5   Ayra, Brian Kuh and myself, and they were describing
 6   to me that this gummy substance, which they sent me
 7   a copy of via email, would have the potential to
 8   impact the game play on the board set where this was
 9   present.
10            They speculated that it could potentially
11   change the clock speed of the game, thus slowing
12   things down, allowing for additional points to be
13   made.
14            I was never a technical expert at all on
15   this title or any title, and I had to rely on the
16   technical experts at my disposal for such
17   information, such as Chris Ayra, who had previously
18   contributed as a technical expert when Steve Wiebe's
19   submission of 985K on tape came in.
20            That particular tape was also rejected
21   because he had started the game with extra credits
22   on the game, which prevented the splash screen from
23   appearing, which could show you whether it was on
24   the Nintendo of America version of the board set or
25   the Japanese version, which allows you to keep your
 1   hands on top of the ladders and have barrels roll
 2   over.  That's, again, a technical element I didn't
 3   know at the time.  So Chris was my go-to person as a
 4   technical expert on Donkey Kong.
 5            So when this revelation came about, this
 6   so-called gummy substance, as they called it, and
 7   how it could impact the game play, plus the presence
 8   of the Roy Shildt-supplied board sets, it was Billy
 9   that said TG could not afford another egg on its
10   face.  And with that in mind, the 36-page article or
11   so that I wrote never unfortunately got published to
12   the TG website announcing and heralding these two
13   million point scorers on the title.
14            So Billy used his influence as board of
15   directors member, for the second time actually --
16   that was the first time -- to squash a score that
17   potentially would trump his.
18       Q    I want to go back to this Exhibit C that we
19   watched where you played Billy Mitchell's 1047 tape.
20   I just want to be clear here.
21            The tape that appears in this Exhibit C
22   Bates marked 007236, that's the master tape that was
23   sent to you by Billy Mitchell of his 1047200 score;
24   is that correct?
25       A    Yes.
 1       Q    All right.
 2       A    I would like to qualify.  That was the only
 3   tape copy of the million 47 in my possession, ever,
 4   was the master tape that I received to my home
 5   address that I adjudicated and entered the TG
 6   database and which I shared as part of MTV video
 7   process.
 8       Q    Did Mr. -- did Billy Mitchell ever have a
 9   conversation with you about having more tapes to
10   beat whatever Steve --
11       A    Yes.
12       Q    -- Wiebe may subsequently submit?
13       A    Yes.  At one point when Steve Wiebe turned
14   a million six and Billy turned out the million 14 --
15   again, this was a conversation -- Billy basically
16   said that if Steve ever comes out with a higher
17   score, he will just pull out another tape.
18            Now, at the time my interpretation of that
19   was simple:  Billy probably possibly had a library
20   of tapes.  He possibly had a million and 30,000, a
21   million 40,000, a million 50.  This way any time
22   Steve pulled out one performance, Billy would just
23   pull out another.  I had no reason to disbelieve at
24   the time that that would be true.
25       Q    When did Billy Mitchell tell you that?
 1       A    After the million and 6 performance was
 2   received by Steve Wiebe.
 3       Q    What year was that?
 4       A    2004.
 5       Q    Do you recall --
 6       A    July 2004.
 7            This would have been a phone call.  This
 8   wouldn't have been in person.  I met Billy very few
 9   times in person.  This would have been a phone call.
10       Q    Do you recall that phone call?
11       A    The details, as I just described to them,
12   regarding Billy saying that if Steve ever was to
13   send in higher performances, he would just pull out
14   another tape.  Those elements of the phone call,
15   yes.  The rest of the contents of the phone call,
16   I'm not sure.
17       Q    Did Mr. Mitchell make an announcement at
18   the Lincoln Center in August of 2004 --
19       A    Yes.
20       Q    -- that he had achieved the first 1 million
21   score in Donkey Kong?
22       A    Yes, he did.  Can I go into the details of
23   that, please?
24       Q    Yes.
25       A    There was an event that took place at
 1   Lincoln Center.  Graham Leggat was the director of
 2   the event.  I think the individual has since passed
 3   away.  You can look it at up as Graham Leggat.  And
 4   Walter Day was present, Billy Mitchell was present,
 5   and I believe Zack Hample, the Arkanoid champion,
 6   was present.  I don't remember if anyone else was.
 7            There was the performance itself of the
 8   million and 14,000.  It wasn't the 1047.  It was the
 9   million and 14,000 that was shown in the lobby
10   leading to where the event was taking place.  It was
11   on a TV set that was turned on its side.
12            And when it came to the event itself, we
13   removed the tape from the machine, brought it in to
14   where all the speaking was taking place.  And Billy
15   basically said, when it was his turn to speak, he
16   said they said it couldn't be done, and he held up a
17   tape, and he says, Here it is, the world's first
18   million point score in Donkey Kong.
19            Now, that performance, again, TG ultimately
20   did not honor the performance by Steve Wiebe and
21   Billy rescinded the million 14,000, being that if
22   Steve Wiebe's performance wasn't going to be
23   honored, there was no reason for Billy to announce a
24   million 14,000 to TG.  Here he did it in front of,
25   I'm guessing, 12 to 1500 people.  And that's when he
 1   announced, with no permission from me as chief
 2   referee.  Walter was there present, didn't say a
 3   word about it.  Billy made the announcement, I was
 4   the first million point score.
 5       Q    And that million 14 score was never
 6   adjudicated by Twin Galaxies; is that correct?
 7       A    I adjudicated -- I watched it and I was
 8   fully prepared to announce it concurrent with
 9   Steve's 1.006 million.  But once the word got out
10   about the tainted board sets from Roy Shildt or,
11   rather, the taint of the board sets supplied to
12   Steve by Roy Shildt and the presence of that gummy
13   substance, the article that I had written that
14   heralded million point scores of both Billy and
15   Steve was never released.
16       Q    Are there any grounds upon which the
17   million 47 performance should never have been
18   accepted back by TG in 2004-2005?
19            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Improper
20   hypothetical.  Calls for speculation.  Calls for
21   expert testimony.
22   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
23       Q    You can answer.
24       A    There are -- in 2004, the only two grounds
25   that could have blocked the score from being
 1   accepted, there were only two.  Number one would be
 2   at the very beginning of the performance,
 3   traditionally an arcade performance that's done is
 4   typically you boot the game up.  You simply do not
 5   start recording with the game already on.  You have
 6   to let -- show the CMOS and the BIOS loading up.
 7   You put the credit in the machine, and then you
 8   start.
 9            At the tail end of the performance, you pan
10   the camera in one continuous motion to the back of
11   machine.  You open it up, and you show the DIP
12   switch settings on the board set.  That was not
13   done.
14            The second grounds by which it could have
15   been disqualified back in 2004 and 2005 has nothing
16   to do with a technical element.  It was the presence
17   of a player submission agreement form.  There was a
18   traditional form that any gamer would have to sign,
19   acknowledging, yes, I did the performance, and this
20   performance becomes TG property.
21            Neither the submission agreement form was
22   present, nor were the before and after filming
23   elements of the performance present.
24            Billy, being that he was Billy, was
25   typically given an affording of the benefit of the
 1   doubt when it came to the few preponderances that he
 2   would submit.
 3            Prior to the million 47,200 score, prior to
 4   the million 14,000 score, I never had to approve any
 5   of Billy's performances.  They were approved by
 6   somebody else at TG, likely Walter Day.  I wasn't
 7   present for any of the previous adjudications of
 8   Billy's scores.
 9            These particular scores came from Billy.
10   Billy was an established gaming personality.  He was
11   a TG board of directors member.  And in 2004, with
12   all due respect, Billy's reputation was impeccable
13   when it came to gaming.  Nobody had any doubt that
14   this was Billy that was submitting the Donkey Kong
15   scores, because the only other person in existence
16   to TG's knowledge in 2004 that could even get close
17   to a million would be Steve Wiebe, and these were
18   certainly not Steve Wiebe's performances.
19            So as far as the guarantee that these
20   performances were Billy's, I had no doubt in my mind
21   that they were from Billy.  So, therefore, he's a
22   known individual, he's part of Twin Galaxies, he had
23   at that point in time a 25-year history at TG, I
24   accepted the scores based on Billy's notoriety, his
25   credibility, his respectability in the community,
 1   and his talent, because at the time, again, only
 2   other gamer that can get a million Donkey Kong known
 3   to TG was Steve Wiebe.
 4       Q    Now, you identified two defects with the
 5   million 47 submission by Billy Mitchell, one being
 6   the failure to show the startup, the entry of the
 7   credit, and the back of the machine for the DIP
 8   switches, and two, the failure to submit a player
 9   submission form; is that correct?
10       A    Correct.  Correct.
11       Q    Did you --
12       A    Again, Billy was -- go ahead.
13       Q    Did you bring those defects up to anybody
14   at Twin Galaxies?
15       A    No.  It wasn't a defect so much as an
16   omission.  The player submission agreement form,
17   when it comes to Billy, again, it was kind of a
18   formality.  Billy was so well known, he pretty much
19   almost also never submitted scores to TG.
20            So the fact that it was coming from the
21   only other person that I knew that can get a million
22   in Donkey Kong, I had no doubt that it was Billy.
23            So as far as the player agreement form,
24   both saying, yes, this is my performance, I let that
25   one go.  I was chief referee.  It was within my
 1   purview to do so.
 2            As far as the front and the back not being
 3   filmed, generally because he was Billy, TG gave him
 4   a special accord that other gamers generally did not
 5   get.  He didn't submit much, but the very, very few
 6   times that he submitted, Billy was given the benefit
 7   of the doubt with respect to several matters,
 8   including the filming of the front of the game, with
 9   the credits not yet in, with the game not turned on,
10   and then the filming of the back of the game as far
11   as if the -- the DIP switches were not filmed.  He
12   was given the benefit of the doubt.
13       Q    Now, in 2004 and 2005, was it permissible
14   for a gamer to submit a direct feed recording of
15   their score performance?
16       A    Generally, no, but in the past TG had
17   accepted direct feeds.  I was not present for any
18   submissions prior to 2001, but I do know that in the
19   past TG had accepted direct feeds.
20            At a certain point, because I was just one
21   referee and not the referee, board of referees
22   decided that things have got to be buttoned up,
23   tightened up, you know, right the ship, however you
24   want to phrase it, and no exceptions can be made.
25            So at some point in the history of TG,
 1   there would be no more exceptions allowed, but up to
 2   a certain point, TG did accept the few submissions
 3   that we had via direct feed.  They were far and few
 4   in between.  And the Donkey Kong performance
 5   apparently was a direct feed submission.
 6            So it was that, plus it came from Billy, it
 7   was a different era in terms of TG's -- how do you
 8   want to put it? -- how tightly run TG was in terms
 9   of rules, it was accepted back in 2004-2005.
10       Q    Back in 2004 and 2005, when this million 47
11   score performance was accepted, what were the rules
12   for a videotape submission of a score performance?
13       A    The rules changed after 2005 when Donkey
14   Kong scores became hot as far as the TG database
15   goes.  They were tightened up.
16            But as of 2005, basically you had to, a
17   normal gamer had to, record the game, the game
18   starting with the game turned off, then you put the
19   one credit in.  You weren't supposed to have
20   multiple credits in because it blocked the splash
21   screen from appearing.  You played the game out
22   continuously until the very end of the performance,
23   and then in one continuous motion the camera had to
24   go from the front of the game to the back of the
25   game where you could see the cabinet, back of the
 1   cabinet opened up, so you could see the DIP switch
 2   settings.
 3            Now, that methodology was applied in full
 4   when I was told to adjudicate the Steve Wiebe
 5   1.049 million performance.
 6            But, again, back in 2005 when it came to
 7   Billy Mitchell's submission of the million 47200
 8   and, prior to that, the million and 14,000, Billy
 9   was given a special accord or an affordment that
10   other gamers, other normal gamers, were not.
11       Q    And, again, Billy's 1047 score was
12   adjudicated by you in --
13       A    Yes.
14       Q    -- 2004 -- 2005; correct?
15       A    2005.
16            (Stenographer lost internet)
17            (Discussion off the record)
18                          * * *
19                    (LUNCHEON RECESS)
20                          * * *
21            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  We are back on the
22   record.  The time now is 12:32 p.m.
23   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
24       Q    All right.  Thank you, Mr. Mruczek, for
25   returning.
 1            You understand you're still under oath;
 2   correct?
 3       A    Yes, I am.
 4       Q    All right.  You know, before we broke we
 5   were talking about the arcade submission rules in
 6   2005.
 7            Do you remember that?
 8       A    Yes.
 9       Q    Okay.  Can you tell me -- can you tell me,
10   again, 'cause I'm not sure the court reporter caught
11   all of that, what were the rules in 2005 for an
12   arcade submission?
13       A    Rules were markedly different from what
14   they subsequently were.
15            Prior to 2006, basically a standard
16   submission was that you had to start the submission
17   recording with the game turned off.  You would start
18   the recording at that point.  You would turn the
19   game on so it loads up the screen CMOS, BIOS,
20   whatever it does from the technical perspective to
21   the point that it reaches where you put a credit in
22   the machine.  You're still filming it.  At that
23   point once the credit's in the machine, you start
24   your performance.  You continue recording until the
25   end of the performance, after which you take the
 1   camera and in one continuous motion you pan to the
 2   back of the machine where you show the back of the
 3   machine's board set and what the DIP switch settings
 4   are.
 5            Those were the standard recording rules for
 6   all arcade submissions at live events back in
 7   2004-2005.
 8       Q    All right.  Now, did Billy Mitchell's
 9   million 47200 score comply with those rules?
10       A    No, it did not.
11            The score appeared to be direct feed, which
12   at the point in time was previously allowed by Twin
13   Galaxies.  It did not comply with the beginning of
14   the recording where it should start with the game
15   booting up from the beginning, the credit put in the
16   machine, et cetera, nor did it have at the end of
17   the performance where it sweeps to the back of the
18   machine to show you the DIP switch settings.
19       Q    Is there any reason that Billy's -- rather,
20   is there any reason that Mr. Mitchell's 1047200
21   score was accepted even though it did not comply
22   with the rules in place at the time?
23       A    Yes.  Billy was a well-known, established
24   celebrity figure within the TG community.  He rarely
25   submitted scores.  So the few times that he did,
 1   generally, because of his notoriety and his position
 2   within TG, Billy was given a little bit of an extra
 3   affording to bypass those elements of the standard
 4   recording rules, so -- additionally, at a point in
 5   time, there were only two gamers known to Twin
 6   Galaxies all over the world who were capable of
 7   million point scores on Donkey Kong, and one of
 8   which is Steve Wiebe.  This was definitely not a
 9   submission from Steve Wiebe.  It was generally
10   practically assumed that that was coming from Billy
11   and, as such, Billy was given the extra affording
12   for review process that traditional gamers were not.
13       Q    Who gave Billy this extra affording?
14       A    Well, prior to myself doing it through
15   Donkey Kong performances, Billy's earlier
16   submissions were adjudicated by Walter Day or
17   someone representative of TG at the time.  I wasn't
18   there for those.
19            But when Billy's performance was received
20   coming from Billy, basically Walter said, for
21   instance, for the 1047, Billy would be sending me
22   the master tape.
23            The master tape came in the mail.  It was
24   the same 1047 score that I had seen at the Fun Spot
25   event, so it was from Billy.
 1            As far as the bypassing of the original
 2   pre-inserting of the coin, the machine being turned
 3   on and showing the back of the machine, Walter had
 4   already ratified the score based on what he had
 5   seen, the totality of the performance at the Fun
 6   Spot 2005 event.  That was the score that I
 7   subsequently removed.
 8            So following suit with exactly what Walter
 9   did, I adjudicated the score based on the
10   performance.  And I knew it was Billy's score, had
11   his name of USA on the end, so basically Billy's
12   score was given the thumbs up at that point, no pun
13   intended.
14       Q    Can you tell me more about Walter's --
15   Walter Day's involvement with Billy Mitchell's 1047
16   score performance and subsequent adjudication?
17       A    Yes.  At the Fun Spot 2005 event,
18   specifically the day of Saturday when the
19   performance was shown on videotape in the Fun Spot
20   ACAM arcade about 20 feet away from where Steve
21   Wiebe was playing the actual Donkey Kong game,
22   Walter Day was present as were 30-plus gamers,
23   myself and film crews.  The performance ran to
24   completion.
25            After that -- it was late in the evening --
 1   I retired to my cabin.  And as I subsequently found
 2   out, Walter had not only entered the score into the
 3   TG database, but he also allowed himself to be
 4   filmed doing so.
 5            I found out on Monday morning that the
 6   score was entered into the database when I returned
 7   to New York City where I worked.  And I contacted my
 8   fellow board of directors member, the TG chief
 9   technical officer, Brien King.  We had a brief
10   conversation as board members, and we came to the
11   conclusion that the score needs to be immediately
12   taken down because it never had board of referees
13   approval to be accepted in the first place.
14       Q    At the time that Billy's 1047 score was
15   accepted, was he a member of the Twin Galaxies board
16   of directors?
17       A    Yes.  Billy was a board of directors member
18   before I was.
19       Q    And he served on the board of directors at
20   the same time that you did; is that correct?
21       A    Yes.  The board of directors were Walter
22   Day, Billy Mitchell, myself, Ron Corcoran, and then
23   there after, Brien King.  Ron Corcoran was ousted
24   from TG under unfortunate circumstances, leaving
25   Walter, Billy, myself and Brien King as the four
 1   remaining board of directors members.
 2       Q    How long were you a board of director
 3   member with Billy Mitchell and Walter Day?
 4       A    I was a board of directors member starting
 5   with my appointment to the chief referee position in
 6   July 1st of 2001.  And as a board of directors
 7   member, the appointment was never formally rescinded
 8   until I resigned from Twin Galaxies December 19th of
 9   2006.
10       Q    So is it fair to say that from July 1,
11   2001, through December 19, 2006, you were a board of
12   directors member with Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Day for
13   Twin Galaxies?
14       A    Yes.  Yes.
15       Q    All right.  You saw Billy Mitchell's
16   1047200 score performance displayed at the ACAM
17   event at Fun Spot; correct?
18            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Misstates --
19            THE WITNESS:  Correct.
20            MS. ROSS:  -- prior testimony.
21   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
22       Q    Is that a yes?
23       A    Yes.
24       Q    And that was filmed and subsequent --
25   subsequently shown in the movie "King of Kong";
 1   correct?
 2       A    Yes.
 3       Q    Have you seen the movie "King of Kong"?
 4       A    Yes, I own it on DVD.
 5       Q    All right.  Have you seen those portions of
 6   "The King of Kong" where Billy Mitchell's 1047200
 7   score performance is displayed?
 8       A    Yes, I have.
 9       Q    All right.  And is that the same score
10   performance that you adjudicated later in 2005?
11       A    Yes.  And I can tell you that for an
12   absolute fact, because if you carefully watch "The
13   King of Kong" sequence where Billy's performance is
14   on tape, you will see me standing right next to Ed
15   Cunningham, who is one of the filmmakers.
16       Q    Why don't we -- why don't we pull that up.
17   I think I've got that tape.  Hold on.
18       A    I am clearly visible seen watching it with
19   the people that crafted "King of Kong."
20       Q    Let's mark now as Exhibit D document that's
21   previously been produced as Bates stamp number
22   007227.  Let's pull this up.  Bear with me while I
23   scroll over to that portion.
24            (Exhibit D identified)
25   ///
 1   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 2       Q    All right.  Share the screen.  All right.
 3       A    That's Steve Wiebe in front of ACAM's
 4   Donkey Kong machine.
 5       Q    All right.  So I've got now as --
 6       A    Back end of the arcade.
 7       Q    I've got now Exhibit D, Bates stamp number
 8   007227 up.  I am showing the witness the video
 9   starting at time stamp 48 minutes and 9 seconds.
10   Let's start this.
11       A    Hold on.  Hold on.  Hold on.
12       Q    I've paused the tape now.
13            (Unreportable simultaneous speaking)
14            THE WITNESS:  Recognize the names, but you
15   see me right there with my eyeglasses and my ID tag.
16   I'm between Shawn Cram with the mustache on the left
17   and Donald Hayes in the yellow shirt.  I'm right
18   behind that, and right behind me is Ed Cunningham
19   from "The King of Kong" crew.
20   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
21       Q    Okay.  So now I've stopped the tape here --
22   or this Exhibit D, 007227, at 48 minutes and 30
23   seconds.
24            And you're indicating, Mr. Mruczek, that
25   you appear here right next to the gentleman in the
 1   yellow shirt, correct --
 2       A    Behind.  Behind him.
 3       Q    And behind you is Ed Cunningham, one of the
 4   producers of the --
 5            (Unreportable simultaneous speaking)
 6            (Stenographer clarification)
 7   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 8       Q    Let's try that again.
 9            So I've now stopped this Exhibit D
10   Bates-marked number 007227 at 48 minutes and 30
11   seconds.
12            And, Mr. Mruczek, is that you behind the
13   gentleman in the yellow shirt?
14       A    Yes.
15       Q    And the gentleman behind you, that's Ed
16   Cunningham, one of the producers of "The King of
17   Kong"; correct?
18       A    Yes.
19       Q    And this television set that's rotated what
20   appears to be onto its left-hand side with a
21   video -- with a VCR on top, is that the television,
22   the VCR combo, where the 1047200 tape performance by
23   Billy Mitchell is being shown?
24       A    Yes.
25       Q    Let's play this some more.  I'm sorry, it
 1   looks like it's -- the television is turned to the
 2   right, not to the left, I'm sorry.  Turned to the
 3   right.
 4            I'm going to stop now at 48 minutes and 32
 5   seconds.  You can see here the Sony television is
 6   turned to the right.
 7            Is this Billy Mitchell's 1047200 score
 8   performance that was displayed at the ACAM event in
 9   2005?
10       A    Yes.  That was the tape that we were
11   watching at this time.  It was the only tape that we
12   were watching at this time.
13       Q    And you had previously viewed portions of
14   this tape the evening before in the cabin in
15   New Hampshire; correct?
16       A    Correct.  Correct.
17       Q    But you didn't -- but you didn't finish
18   watching the tape the evening before; is that
19   correct?
20       A    Yes, we did.
21       Q    Okay.
22       A    May I explain.
23       Q    Yes.
24       A    Originally Billy had a tape sent and a
25   group of us proceeded to watch his performance, but,
 1   as it turns out, he sent the wrong tape.  He sent a
 2   wrestling videotape.
 3            Another tape subsequently arrived and we
 4   watched part one of it.  And in "King of Kong" is
 5   annotated as being Brian Kuh's cabin.  It's not.  It
 6   was the Crams cabin.  Basically it's a place called
 7   The Lodge as part of the Sun Valley Hotel and
 8   Cottages in the back area.  We watched the first
 9   third of the performance under the supervision of
10   Brian Kuh, who stopped the performance intentionally
11   at a certain point.  And the second day we were not
12   welcome back into the Cram cabin because people left
13   too late, so we started to watch the second portion
14   of it in my cabin, which at the time was Cottage 5,
15   also part of Sun Valley.
16            And we watched the second third of the
17   performance.  Some people left, and then, with
18   Brian's approval, we watched the final portion of
19   the tape all through the 1047200.
20            Subsequent night we showed, Brian showed,
21   1047200 in its entirety at ACAM, and that's when
22   effectively -- I already knew what the outcome was.
23   I just didn't spill the beans to Ed Cunningham who
24   was sitting next to me, but this is actually at
25   ACAM, the second time I'm seeing the performance
 1   itself.
 2       Q    And, again, this is the same score
 3   performance that you adjudicated and entered into
 4   Twin Galaxies' database; is that correct?
 5       A    The latter portion of 2005, yes.
 6       Q    Do you notice anything odd about the
 7   orientation of this performance as it appears here
 8   in the movie?
 9       A    Well, of course it's shown vertical, but
10   the TV itself is tilted on the side.  And my
11   knowledge, up to that point in time, was that direct
12   feeds were typically shown with the TVs tilted to
13   the side because of the nature of how direct feeds
14   were captured on video.
15            Never understood the technical whys behind
16   it, only that this was the byproduct of direct feed
17   being recorded.
18            So I naturally assumed that this was a
19   direct feed performance back in that point in time.
20       Q    Do you know whether or not this television
21   is tilted the wrong way?
22       A    I would honestly have no way to know one
23   way or another which way it's supposed to be tilted.
24       Q    So let's play this through.  I'm going to
25   pause here at 48 minutes and 48 seconds.
 1            Is that Walter Day sitting here in the
 2   referee shirt?
 3       A    Yes, it is.
 4       Q    Is that Morningdove Mahoney behind him?
 5       A    Yes, it is.
 6       Q    And is that Todd Rogers behind her?
 7       A    Yes, it is.
 8       Q    Let's continue on.
 9            This image of the Donkey Kong performance
10   appearing at 48 minutes and 52 seconds, is this also
11   Billy Mitchell's Donkey Kong taped performance that
12   you adjudicated?
13       A    Yes, it is.  Yes.
14       Q    Again, you talked about this screen that
15   appears at 59:04 earlier today; correct?
16       A    Correct.
17       Q    And this is one of the two markers that
18   indicate to you that, in fact, the tape performances
19   that we previously showed as Bates stamp number 7224
20   is, in fact, the Billy Mitchell tape performance
21   that you adjudicated/entered into the Twin Galaxies
22   database; correct?
23       A    Yes.  It was at the end of the screen where
24   he reached the top of the final ladder, score was
25   998.5, and he had a 1500 bonus points, which made it
 1   go to all zeros.
 2       Q    And that, again, shows here on the time
 3   stamp 49 minutes and 4 seconds in this Exhibit D
 4   Bates-marked number 007227; correct?
 5       A    Yes.  It's about to go to all zeros a few
 6   seconds from now.
 7            MR. ELLROD:  I think 49, minutes not 59.
 8            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Sorry.  49 minutes and 5
 9   seconds.
10   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
11       Q    Let me stop it there.
12            Have you ever heard from Billy Mitchell
13   that he has never watched "The King of Kong"?
14       A    Multiple times, more than I can count.
15            Hello?
16       Q    Yeah, I'm here.
17            When did you first hear about any questions
18   regarding any of Billy Mitchell's Donkey Kong
19   scores?
20       A    Not until several years ago.
21            After I left Twin Galaxies in December 19th
22   of 2006, I know that Billy achieved other scores,
23   but I was not part of the adjudication team as I was
24   no longer a TG official.  I could only read about
25   any scores he might have achieved in the forums.
 1            As far as people questioning Billy's
 2   scores, really the only time I first heard questions
 3   come up as to the authenticity of the scores or any
 4   discrepancies of the scores was not until several
 5   years ago --
 6       Q    When was that?
 7       A    -- on the TG forum.
 8            There was a forum started or a discussion
 9   started by someone by the name of a Jeremy Young who
10   did some personal research into the Donkey Kong
11   performances in question, and that was the first
12   time I recall any of Billy's Donkey Kong scores ever
13   coming under some form of question.
14       Q    Do you know if Roy Shildt had ever
15   questioned the legitimacy of any of Billy Mitchell's
16   Donkey Kong score performances?
17       A    Roy Shildt questioned every single one of
18   Billy Mitchell's performances.  It was his very
19   nature to debunk Billy Mitchell.
20            So, to be honest with you, I regarded Roy
21   as just a major annoyance.  Roy never pointed out
22   anything of substance relating to Billy's Donkey
23   Kong scores.  It was just wanton -- not even
24   speculation, just wanton accusations.  I dismissed
25   any musings coming from Roy Shildt, to be perfectly
 1   honest.
 2       Q    Were you ever a shareholder of Twin
 3   Galaxies?
 4       A    Officially Walter Day told me as a board of
 5   directors member and as Twin Galaxies' chief referee
 6   what my share in Twin Galaxies was, as well as what
 7   the remaining shares of Twin Galaxies were held by.
 8   He gave me a very specific breakdown.
 9       Q    And when did you -- when did he give you
10   this breakdown?
11       A    After Brien King was brought on board to
12   Twin Galaxies, there was a lawsuit that Walter had
13   won in the early part of my tenure with Twin
14   Galaxies where he rested control of Twin Galaxies
15   back from some other third-party investor.  He
16   commissioned fellow board of directors member Ron
17   Corcoran and a third party, Brien King, of Dark
18   Horse Productions to build the new Twin Galaxies
19   server and to redesign the Twin Galaxies website
20   using some of the money from the lawsuit.
21            Brien King was subsequently brought on
22   board as a board of directors member.  And at that
23   point in time, Walter told Ron Corcoran, Brien King
24   and myself what our board of directors members
25   shares were as well as what the totality,
 1   100 percent of shares breakdown was.
 2       Q    And what did he tell you with respect to
 3   your personal shares and the other shares in Twin
 4   Galaxies?
 5       A    The breakdown, as per Walter Day, was as
 6   follows:  Walter Day, 51 percent; Billy Mitchell,
 7   12 percent; Robert Mruczek, Ron Corcoran, Brien
 8   King, 10 percent each; Douglas McGregor was a
 9   programmer before Brien King's arrival was
10   5 percent, and the remaining 2 percent was Mark
11   Longridge, Canadian-based former Twin Galaxies
12   senior referee and keeper of the rules, his working
13   title, in addition to the former arcade and named
14   worldwide referee.  That was the 100 percent
15   breakdown.
16       Q    Do you recall what year it was that Walter
17   Day told you what the breakdown in ownership was?
18       A    It would have been -- it would have been
19   after Brien King was brought on board, which I
20   believe was after Walter's lawsuit was concluded and
21   the new TG website was programmed and up and
22   running.  So it would have been either late 2002 or
23   early part of 2003.  The precise day and month, it's
24   lost in time.  It's over 20 years now.
25       Q    Did Walter ever tell you that your
 1   ownership interest in Twin Galaxies had changed?
 2       A    Yes.  In August of 2005, Brien King and I,
 3   who were two of the four remaining board members,
 4   with Corcoran no longer being part of the group --
 5   he was ousted at that point -- called for a board of
 6   directors conference call between Walter, Billy,
 7   myself and Brien.  Billy never showed up.  Walter
 8   showed up about 40 minutes or so late.
 9            During that call Walter gave us, Brien and
10   I, different information as far as our shares.
11   Because we asked him what now happens now that
12   Corcoran is no longer part of the mix.
13            Walter goes, Well, I reabsorb Corcoran's
14   shares.  That's fine.
15            So we went down the line and we said, Okay,
16   that means you have 61 percent, Billy has 12, Brien
17   and I have 10 each, Doug McGregor, 5, Mark
18   Longridge, 2.
19            And then Walter goes, No.  You don't have
20   10 percent.
21            And we said, This is what you told us
22   beforehand.
23            Walter goes, No.  That's not what I meant.
24   In my heart I meant that you have 10 percent of the
25   shares that I don't have, meaning shares that Walter
 1   doesn't.
 2            And Walter was referring to 10 percent of
 3   the 49 percent that he doesn't have.  That's what
 4   Walter said.
 5            And Brien and I said, That's impossible,
 6   because if we get 10 percent of 49 percent, that's
 7   4.9 percent each.  What happens to the other
 8   5.1 percent each.
 9            And Walter goes, Oh, I guess I have that,
10   and that's when Walter lied to us.
11            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  Counsel, you're on mute.
12   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
13       Q    Do you understand that at some point Walter
14   Day sold Twin Galaxies or its assets to Jace Hall?
15       A    My understanding that a transition occurred
16   first between Walter Day and someone named Pete
17   Bouvier, and then after that it's a little murky to
18   me as far as what happened next.
19            People by the names of Jourdan Adler and
20   Richie Knucklez come into mind.  And then after
21   that, there's a purchase of -- by Walt -- by Jace
22   Hall of Twin Galaxies.  That's my understanding of
23   the transition, that Jace was not sold -- while I
24   was there, he was not sold Twin Galaxies by Walter
25   but at some point subsequent to that, and only after
 1   Walter had previously sold it to someone named Pete
 2   Bouvier and then whoever got involved thereafter.
 3       Q    Now -- now, were you offered any money by
 4   Walter Day after he had sold Twin Galaxies to Jace
 5   Hall?
 6       A    Not a penny.
 7       Q    Let me mark now as Exhibit 3 -- I'm sorry,
 8   as Exhibit E a confidentiality agreement.
 9            (Exhibit E identified)
10   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
11       Q    Do you see this Exhibit E, confidentiality
12   agreement, on my screen, sir?
13       A    Yes, I do.
14       Q    On your screen, rather.
15            What is this document?
16       A    There was a document that I believe --
17   okay.  It was in late 2013, I believe, that I
18   received from somebody named -- what the hell is
19   that guy's name?
20       Q    Joel West?
21       A    It was the Berzerk player, the one that
22   died.  His name is escaping me.
23       Q    Is it Joel West?
24       A    Joel West.  He's a paralegal.
25            Joel was representing Walter Day and he
 1   sent myself, and as I subsequently found out a
 2   number of other people, he sent us an email saying
 3   that Walter wanted to make due to people that should
 4   have been compensated but weren't.  The email
 5   basically said that a payment of an undisclosed
 6   amount would be made now, providing we signed this
 7   document, an enclosed confidentiality agreement, and
 8   there may or may not be subsequent payments of
 9   amounts to be determined down the line.  And in
10   exchange for this document, you are not allowed to
11   basically speak ill-will of certain individuals for
12   a period of about ten years.
13            I never signed this document because I
14   never got my full answers to my questions from Joel
15   West and it just reeked of being a hush money
16   request.  But I do recall receiving this from Joel
17   West as a representative of Walter Day.  And Billy
18   Mitchell's name is mentioned at some point within
19   these documents.
20       Q    Do you agree with Twin Galaxies' removal of
21   Billy Mitchell's 1047200 score performance from the
22   score database?
23       A    Once the revelations of the recent years
24   came into light with respect to the technical
25   findings that conclude -- that led to the apparent
 1   conclusion that original hardware was not used, yes,
 2   I did agree with the removal of the score, yes.
 3       Q    All right.  Did you perceive any malice
 4   from Twin Galaxies toward Billy Mitchell during the
 5   dispute process?
 6            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Calls for a legal
 7   conclusion.  Calls for speculation.
 8   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 9       Q    You can answer.
10       A    The only -- there was no malice that I had
11   towards Billy.  In all honesty, the only thing that
12   Billy has ever done that has annoyed me on a
13   professional level is he dumped scores in process
14   that were potential world record performances.
15            As a former Twin Galaxies referee, it
16   just -- nothing is as appalling to me as when
17   someone aborts a world record score in progress.  On
18   a personal level, after "King of Kong" came out,
19   Billy kind of used me as a tool on social media to
20   make posts on his behalf.  That became self-apparent
21   after time.
22            But there was no malice that I ever had
23   towards Billy as a gamer.  Up until the discovery of
24   the finger girder, et cetera, that came out in
25   recent years, I always had thought that Billy's
 1   Donkey Kong scores were fully legitimate.
 2       Q    You mentioned that Billy used you as a pawn
 3   to make social media posts.
 4            Can you tell me about that?
 5       A    Yes.  After "The King of Kong" came out --
 6   and you would need to go to archive.org to see
 7   evidence of this -- the old Picturehouse forum,
 8   which was the forum run by the company that produced
 9   "King of Kong," it got out of control on the
10   sub-forum related to "King of Kong" because of all
11   the animosity that some people had against Billy
12   Mitchell and the people trying to defend Billy
13   Mitchell, myself and another gamer Dwayne Richards
14   often made posts on Billy's behalf saying such
15   things as, not limited to, such as, There's Billy
16   the gamer and there's Billy the person.  Billy the
17   gamer might come off as arrogant on film.  You may
18   not like him, but Billy the person is a nicer
19   individual.  He just doesn't show that as often to
20   the media.
21            So we would defend him, Billy's scores,
22   performances, actions on the forum, defending it for
23   someone who claimed at the time never to have seen
24   "King of Kong," the film.
25            But after a while it became quite apparent
 1   that we were not simply defending Billy, but we were
 2   his social media lackeys in that respect.  And I
 3   got, honestly, tired of doing that.
 4       Q    Did Billy Mitchell ever ask you to make any
 5   social media posts that were favorable to him?
 6       A    On one occasion I had to make a post
 7   relating to Billy where he told me specifically to
 8   say something, and it had something to do with the
 9   effect that please do not call me, et cetera. I
10   don't remember if it was related to Roy Shildt or
11   not.  I can't remember.
12            But, in general, we tried to stave off any
13   accusations from gamers that were anti Billy or that
14   questioned the authenticity of Billy's performance
15   or the integrity of his actions.  Basically we would
16   discuss with Billy what we saw.  Billy would, you
17   know, give us a potential course of action to take
18   to post on his behalf, and we would gladly do it
19   because we were friends with Billy Mitchell at the
20   time.
21       Q    About how often would Billy Mitchell ask
22   you to make posts on social media on his behalf?
23            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Misstates testimony.
24   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
25       Q    You can answer.
 1       A    Prior to the release of "King of Kong," not
 2   often.  Maybe once, once and once only.  After "The
 3   King of Kong," that's when it started.
 4       Q    So I want to be certain here.  Billy
 5   Mitchell would ask you to make posts that were
 6   favorable to him; is that correct?
 7       A    Yes.  But we were a hundred percent on
 8   board with Billy because we knew that the film
 9   portrayed him in a negative light.  So we were only
10   too happy to help out our friend and colleague in
11   gaming by posting what we knew to be the truth about
12   Billy the person and Billy the gamer.
13            So it was not a matter of Billy dictating,
14   saying, Type this word by word.  We would have a
15   brief discussion and we knew exactly what needed to
16   be done based on the negative comments that we saw
17   in the forums, and based on our own personal
18   knowledge of Billy and our own personal expertise in
19   the niche world of arcade gaming, made appropriate
20   posts that were, quote/unquote, pro Billy, in favor
21   of Billy, because we knew that the forums had a very
22   negative portrayal of him.  And it was, in my
23   opinion, unfair because people have only seen a film
24   that's 90 minutes long and they are being judgmental
25   on someone that we knew for several years, in
 1   Dwayne's case, for 20 years before me.
 2       Q    Do you know whether or not Carlos Pineiro
 3   was working on Billy Mitchell's behalf to prove the
 4   legitimacy of the score performances?
 5            MS. ROSS:  Speculation.
 6            THE WITNESS:  I never --
 7            MS. ROSS:  Vague and ambiguous.
 8            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  We lost your objection.
 9            MS. ROSS:  Calls for speculation.  Vague
10   and ambiguous.
11   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
12       Q    You can answer.
13       A    I never personally knew Carlos Pineiro up
14   to the point in time when he started to have any
15   involvement with Billy.
16            He was an individual I never -- I had no
17   prior knowledge of.  What his role was with Billy, I
18   personally didn't really care about.  His name
19   became more prominent in the TG forums concurrent
20   with the Jeremy Young thread challenging Billy's
21   score, but I've never knew Carlos Pineiro
22   personally.  I've never met him face-to-face.  I've
23   only read about him, and that's pretty much it.
24       Q    Did Walter Day ever pay you any sort of
25   salary for your work for TG?
 1       A    Walter Day compensated me once and once
 2   only as a TG employee.  For the Mall of America
 3   event, I was paid a stipend of $300.  The -- that
 4   covered transportation and food.  The event budget
 5   covered airfare and hotel.
 6            Beyond that I was never paid a dime by
 7   Walter Day for all of the time that I worked as a TG
 8   employee.
 9       Q    And you certainly were never paid any money
10   with respect to the liquidation of Twin Galaxies and
11   your ownership interest in the company; correct?
12       A    Correct.  Not one penny.
13       Q    All right.  Do you know if Billy Mitchell
14   has ever posted -- strike it.
15            Do you know if Billy Mitchell has ever made
16   any defamatory statements about you?
17       A    Someone on social media made a post and it
18   said it was Billy Mitchell, but whether it's Billy
19   or Billy, Jr., I have no way of knowing.  I don't
20   have a social media account on Twitter on Instagram.
21   All I have is Facebook.  Someone showed me a
22   screenshot of a post made by a Billy Mitchell and
23   they made comments that I get kicked out of every TG
24   event that I attend to, made a comment about my art
25   collection.  I don't remember what every defamatory
 1   comment was made, but there was one social media
 2   comment that was clearly made by someone within an
 3   account name of Billy Mitchell.
 4       Q    You said earlier that -- you said earlier
 5   that Billy Mitchell received preferential treatment
 6   from Twin Galaxies.
 7            Do you recall that testimony?
 8       A    Yes, he did.
 9       Q    Can you identify for me all of those
10   instances of preferential treatment?
11       A    Well, for starters, Billy's submissions, as
12   I previously testified, I passed the needs to go
13   through the arcade boot-up process at the beginning
14   and to have that as part of the film prior to
15   starting the game, as well as showing the back of
16   the performance, bypass the need for filling out the
17   player submission agreement form, which, barring a
18   live performance, was part of every videotape
19   submission that I received as a referee from all
20   other gamers.
21            Additionally, on two separate occasions,
22   one of which I already testified on, he used his
23   position as a board of directors member to try to
24   get two score submissions squashed.  The first one
25   was the Steve Wiebe -- or one of them, was the first
 1   one, was the Steve Wiebe 1.006 million score in
 2   Donkey Kong.  He tried to get that squashed as being
 3   recognized by TG as the first million point score in
 4   Donkey Kong.
 5            And the second time he tried to use board
 6   of directors influence was in the latter portion of
 7   2005 when a gamer by the name of Abdner Ashman broke
 8   the world's record on arcade Ms. Pac-Man, beating
 9   out the previous record held by Chris Ayra, Billy's
10   childhood friend.
11            Billy tried to get that score not
12   recognized by Twin Galaxies on the grounds that
13   Abdner managed to get three kill screens in a row
14   that were eight kill screens in length, and for
15   Ms. Pac-Man, that's maximum possible.  Billy and
16   Chris Ayra said that in all of their collective 20
17   years of playing the game, including Rick Fothergill
18   from Canada, they only had eight kill screens -- an
19   eight kill screen game maybe seven times between the
20   three of them over 20-year period, and yet here
21   comes Abdner who got three in a row.  So they said
22   that the score should not be recognized.
23            Walter Day, Brien King and myself, three
24   board of directors members, met with Abdner Ashman
25   and Darren Harris, a friend of Abdner.  We met them
 1   at the Sun Valley Cottages -- I believe it was
 2   Cottage 13 -- during my November 2005 trip to ACAM,
 3   and it was agreed that at Twin Galaxies' expense,
 4   which, as it turns out, was my expense, I would have
 5   Abdner Ashman's board set sent to a recognized
 6   industry technical expert, Spike from Lupine
 7   Systems.  I do not know his last name.  I got
 8   Abdner's board set.
 9            At my own expense I sent both that board
10   set and also Darren Harris's to Spike from Lupine
11   systems.  I got the results back.  It said that
12   there was no problem whatsoever with the board set.
13   And as a result of that, there was no possible
14   grounds for TG to disregard Abdner's world record
15   score, despite the protest coming from both Billy
16   Mitchell and Chris Ayra to the contrary.
17            Those were the two grounds where Billy used
18   his board of directors influence to try to squash
19   two submissions.
20       Q    Do you know whether or not Billy Mitchell
21   in 1999, at the ACAM event, convinced Walter Day to
22   change the rules for PAC-MAN so that he would be
23   recognized as the first perfect PAC-MAN player?
24            MS. ROSS:  Objection.  Calls for
25   speculation.  Vague and ambiguous.  Assumes facts
 1   not in evidence.
 2   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 3       Q    You can go ahead.
 4            MS. ROSS:  You can answer.
 5            THE WITNESS:  I was not physically present
 6   during the discussion that took place between
 7   Walter, Billy, Chris Ayra and a third individual,
 8   who was either Fothergill or Neil Chapman, both of
 9   which were from Canada.
10            But, anecdotally, as I understand it, the
11   previous Twin Galaxy settings for PAC-MAN were three
12   lives to start plus one extra.
13            What they convinced Walter of, because they
14   were planning on getting a perfect score at some
15   point, they wanted to have the settings changed to
16   five plus one settings so that should any of them
17   ever get 3,333,180 at a subsequent date, third party
18   to not get 3,333,360 and say, Look, my score is
19   higher, so they consequenced Walter to change the
20   rules.
21            Further, at that point in time, the rules
22   were changed, not just to five plus one settings to
23   start, but only if you got a perfect score in the
24   game, meaning that if you did not get 3,333,360
25   points on the five plus one settings, your score
 1   would not be accepted under five plus one settings.
 2            If you got 3,200,000 on five plus one
 3   settings, it would be rejected.  You would have had
 4   to have been played at three plus one settings.
 5            At some point subsequent to that, Twin
 6   Galaxies made the two rules identical, meaning it
 7   was five plus one settings regardless of what the
 8   score was.  But initially it was changed so that,
 9   and for no other reason than that, that if anyone
10   was to ever beat the 3,333,180 on the three plus one
11   settings, that they could not claim, for sake of
12   prominence, a higher score beyond that that they
13   played at five plus one settings.
14            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Okay.  Thank you, Robert.
15   I think I'm done.  I'll pass to Kristina.  Thank you
16   again, Robert, for telling the truth.  I appreciate
17   your time.
18            THE WITNESS:  You're welcome.
19            MS. ROSS:  Go off the record for five
20   minutes.  I want to get some more water real quick.
21            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Sure thing.  Let's take a
22   five-minute break.
23            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  Time now is 1:20 p.m.
24   We are off the record.
25            (Recess taken)
 1            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  We are back on the
 2   record.  The time now is 1:25 p.m.
 3   ///
 4   ///
 5                       EXAMINATION
 6   BY MS. ROSS:
 7       Q    All right, Robert.  I will try to keep it
 8   as succinct as possible.  It might be a little bit
 9   running from one subject to another, just what
10   happens when you're second.  If at any time you have
11   any confusion or don't hear me or understand me, let
12   me know.
13            (Interruption in proceedings)
14   BY MS. ROSS:
15       Q    Sorry about that.
16            Can you hear me okay?
17       A    I can hear you.
18       Q    Okay.  We were just talking about the
19   perfect PAC-MAN score.
20            What is the perfect PAC-MAN score?
21       A    It's currently -- it was defined in 1999 as
22   being a score of 3,333,360, which is achievable
23   using five plus one settings, meaning starting with
24   five lives with an opportunity to earn an extra life
25   at 10,000 points.
 1       Q    Okay.  And this was in 1999 when you were
 2   not a referee; is that correct?
 3       A    Correct.  I was a gamer and a TG
 4   participant at the time.
 5       Q    Okay.  Did you follow this perfect PAC-MAN
 6   score closely at all?
 7       A    Did I follow it -- what's the word you said
 8   after that?
 9       Q    Closely.
10       A    Yes.  I read about it on the Twin Galaxies
11   website.  That was my primary source of information
12   on arcade gaming occurrences at that point in time.
13       Q    Okay.  Are you aware that Rick Fothergill
14   achieved a near perfect score on PAC-MAN in May of
15   1999?
16       A    Yes.  I was present at this first ACAM Fun
17   Spot -- first Fun Spot event.  It wasn't yet called
18   ACAM.  I was present during the event, and I was
19   witness to the ending portions of his performance of
20   333,333,270.
21       Q    Okay.  And was that recognized as a world
22   score -- world record score on Twin Galaxies?
23       A    At the time it was.  I was not an
24   adjudicator, of course, not a referee, but the
25   people that were entered it into the TG database at
 1   that point in time.
 2       Q    And do you know if that score occurred on
 3   five plus one settings?
 4       A    Yes.  In fact, that's the only possibility
 5   that it could have occurred.
 6       Q    Okay.  Were you present for Billy
 7   Mitchell's perfect PAC-MAN score?
 8       A    No.  I was only present during the first
 9   Fun Spot event in May of '99.  Billy's subsequent
10   performance took in place I believe in July.  I was
11   not at Fun Spot in July.
12       Q    Okay.  Have you watched the perfect PAC-MAN
13   tapes from Billy Mitchell?
14       A    At some point after I became a Twin
15   Galaxies referee, Walter Day sent me several boxes
16   of TG documentation, record performances on tape,
17   and other paraphernalia, and within that parcel --
18   this would have been 2001 or 2002 I would have
19   received it -- there was a three-tape set that said
20   perfect PAC-MAN.
21            I watched the tapes, first tape one of
22   three, all the way through where the ninth key
23   pattern starts.  I skipped the middle tape entirely,
24   and then I went on the second tape, I fast-forwarded
25   up to 3,200,000 and I watched it to the end.
 1            And for years I believed that that was
 2   Billy Mitchell performance.  And the reason why I
 3   believe that is because at the beginning of every
 4   board, I heard Billy saying the word "focus" in
 5   Billy's voice, and that's why I believe I was
 6   watching Billy's performance all this time.
 7            At some point at the end of the
 8   performance, he was on the phone with some
 9   individuals, which I can't remember if it was Chris
10   Ayra or Walter Day or someone else, and then the
11   performance eventually reached the maximum score and
12   it was over.
13            And I watched it as a matter of curiosity,
14   having never seen a kill screen on the beginning or
15   a ninth key being completed or all the blue time
16   ghosts being completed before.  I wasn't watching it
17   as a referee because the score was already in the TG
18   database, so I watched it as a point of curiosity,
19   and I had believed it was Billy's perfect score.
20       Q    Okay.  And why did Walter Day send you
21   these all these tapes?
22       A    Walter was cleaning out his repository of
23   tapes, gave me one entire box filled with Tony
24   Hawk's Pro Skater 1 + 2 tapes from some event that
25   he ran, gave me another box filled with various TG
 1   performances over the years, which had already been
 2   adjudicated, but he wanted them housed under one
 3   repository.  And since I was the primary person to
 4   receive tapes at that point in my tenure with TG, I
 5   was the logical person to send it to.
 6            He also sent me his then gray bound rule
 7   book with the various rules for arcade titles and
 8   some other TG documentation that he had.  Walter was
 9   simply cleaning house.
10       Q    Okay.  And did you ever provide the three
11   perfect PAC-MAN tapes or any of the perfect PAC-MAN
12   tapes to anybody else?
13       A    I can't remember.  It's been now 20 -- 19,
14   20 years.  I can't remember.  Possible I did. I
15   don't know for sure.  I just honestly don't
16   remember.
17            I know some tapes were lent out to Steven
18   Totilo for the production piece from MTV, others
19   were sent out to Graham Leggat for the Lincoln
20   Center production review, others were sent out to
21   other referees for call review.  So, honestly, I
22   don't remember.  It's close to 20 years now.
23       Q    When you say the tapes were sent out for
24   the MTV, did you get the tapes back at some point?
25       A    Oh, yes.  Oh, yes.  Got them back, yes.
 1       Q    So all tapes that you sent out to people
 2   you got returned?
 3       A    Yeah, with two exceptions.  I sent Mark
 4   Longridge the world's record on Tempest by Laszlo
 5   Takacs.  He still has that.  He never sent it back.
 6   And I believe I also sent him the world's record on
 7   Carnival by Fred Pastore.  Mark's in Canada.  He
 8   left TG.  He never got around to sending those two
 9   tapes back.  Those are the two exceptions that come
10   to mind.  Otherwise, all the other tapes that were
11   lent out that were for special-event purposes, they
12   all came back.
13       Q    And you were not ever making copies of
14   tapes; correct?  You were just sending out the ones
15   that you had?
16       A    Yeah.  I had no reason to make copies of
17   the TG performance.
18       Q    Did you ever send Dwayne Richard any tapes?
19       A    I might have over the years.  He might have
20   gotten the Steve Wiebe performance because Dwayne
21   had problems with Steve.  He was claiming that Steve
22   might have been using an eight-way joystick, so he
23   wanted to see that performance.  But, beyond that, I
24   don't remember if there was any other performances
25   sent to Dwayne.
 1            He was a fellow TG referee.  He was a TG
 2   technical expert, so from time to time if I had to
 3   consult with Dwayne on something, I would.  But as
 4   far as sending him tapes, I know I sent him tapes.
 5   I don't remember how many or which specific ones.
 6   Again, it's too, too many years.
 7       Q    Okay.  Do you know if you ever sent him any
 8   of Billy's tapes?
 9       A    No.  I only ever had two tapes of Billy.
10   That would be the million and 14,000 and the million
11   47.  Those are the only two tapes of Billy's that I
12   was sent by Billy.
13            I also had what I believe was the perfect
14   PAC-MAN performance.
15            Did I send them to Dwayne?  In all honesty,
16   I can't remember.  I might have.  I just don't
17   remember.  Being honest with you.
18       Q    Okay.  And you said Dwayne Richard was a
19   referee for Twin Galaxies.
20            When was he a referee?
21       A    He was what you would call a referee at
22   large, where if he was there and was able to view a
23   score, he would, but he really wasn't for what you
24   would call an extended period of time.  We only had
25   a couple referees at large.  He was mostly a
 1   technical expert because of his extensive knowledge
 2   of the arcade niche hobby.
 3            Like, if he had to at an event help out
 4   Walter, like at Mall of America 2001, take a score
 5   down, he would because he is a trusted individual
 6   for Twin Galaxies.
 7       Q    Do you know during what years Dwayne
 8   Richard was a ref at large?
 9       A    Well, he was at the Mall of America 2001
10   event.  I know that for a fact.
11            Did he help out Walter in a pinch at other
12   events?  Well, for the 1999 and 2000, I wouldn't
13   know.  I wasn't a referee during those events.
14            Did he help out at any other events that he
15   attended outside of Fun Spot?  I wouldn't be aware
16   of that.
17            Did he function as a referee in attendance
18   at an event in Canada that Walter authorized?  It's
19   entirely possibly because TG didn't really have a
20   Canadian presence like that.
21            So as far as what Dwayne Richards might
22   have done on behalf of TG over a span of years, I
23   don't fully know.
24            I know that he helped out from time to
25   time.  He didn't have a formal title as a referee,
 1   but in a pinch he would help out.
 2       Q    As the chief referee did you oversee all
 3   the other referees for Twin Galaxies?
 4       A    In scope, yes.
 5            TG became larger over time, and there were
 6   certain referees of a more specific nature, a
 7   specific title referees and smaller consult platform
 8   referees, and I couldn't oversee them with the same
 9   degree of completeness that I was able to when TG
10   was a smaller entity.
11            So as time, we had chief referee -- head
12   referee, Walter; chief referee, me, then we had
13   senior referees below that, and then we had platform
14   referees, referees at large, and we had specialist
15   referees assigned to one title.
16            So was I in direct communications with
17   every single one of them every single week, the
18   answer would be no.  Was I there if they had
19   questions at any given time, yes.  But was I
20   directly seeing them?  We were all working from
21   different states, so it was impossible for me to
22   directly meet with them on a regular basis.
23            Was I in direct communications with all of
24   them 24 hours a day?  No, I wasn't.
25            Walter wasn't in communications with all
 1   the referees either.  I know I wasn't.  And I had my
 2   hands full between dedicating half my free time to
 3   Twin Galaxies and the other half of my free time to
 4   my job, my real job.  I was only sleeping for about
 5   two hours a day for almost five years.
 6       Q    Okay.  How long have you known Dwayne
 7   Richard?
 8       A    Personally, I first met Dwayne Richards at
 9   Fun Spot during the Fun Spot 1999 or 2000 event.  It
10   was one of two.  I can't remember which.
11            Prior to that, I only read about Dwayne's
12   gaming exploits on the TG forums and in Walter's
13   first book of records.  I never met Dwayne prior to
14   1999 or 2000, but I've known him ever since.
15       Q    Okay.  Has Dwayne ever sent you tapes of
16   other person's games play that were not his?
17       A    Well, I don't believe so.
18            Dwayne really doesn't submit that many
19   scores, but I did receive his own submission on
20   Nibbler.  That was almost 40, 45 hours or so.
21            Beyond that, he wouldn't really submit any
22   other gamer's scores.  He didn't have to.  Just his
23   Nibbler score I think was one of the only
24   performances I ever received from Dwayne.
25       Q    But that would be his own.  I asked if he
 1   ever sent any other players.
 2       A    No.  He wouldn't have any reason to or
 3   wasn't an intermediary between Gamer A wanting to
 4   send a score to Robert at Twin Galaxies.  They would
 5   just send it directly themselves.  He was never an
 6   in between in that respect.
 7       Q    When you lent out tapes to people, is it
 8   possible that you were returned copies?
 9       A    Well, if someone was to have received Tape
10   A, made a copy of it and returned Tape B, even if
11   they returned the original, I wouldn't put it in the
12   VCR just to watch a two- to six-hour tape to see
13   that it's the exact same performance.  It just
14   wasn't enough time in the day.
15            The number of people that were lent tapes,
16   all of which were trustworthy, I never really tested
17   to make sure that the tape that came back was a
18   secondary copy of it.  To be all honest, I never
19   tested that.  It just never occurred to me to do
20   that.
21       Q    But it's possible that they could have sent
22   you back copies; correct?
23       A    Of course it's possible.
24       Q    Okay.
25       A    You know, you lend out anything, regardless
 1   of what it is, it can come back as a copy.  Nobody
 2   really has a chance to rewatch the entirety of a
 3   two-hour performance just to see that end to end
 4   it's the exact same thing.
 5            And the other thing is, how would you
 6   recognize it unless it was substantially different.
 7   If it was pretty much the same thing, you'd never
 8   know.
 9       Q    Are you familiar with Bill Bastable?
10       A    The name, yes.  I've never met him in
11   person, but I am familiar with him as an individual
12   which achieved some high scores on PAC-MAN back in
13   the '80s, not including some hidden dots that were
14   not discovered until later.
15            So my knowledge of Bill Bastable is that
16   he's the first person to have news footage in print
17   of getting the highest known perfect score in
18   PAC-MAN at that point in time.
19            Now, that would have been at three plus one
20   settings, and that would have been excluding the
21   hidden dots, which I don't think Bill knew about
22   until much later.  That's my --
23       Q    Do you know if --
24       A    -- knowledge of Bill Bastable.
25       Q    Do you know if this score that you're
 1   referring to was ever submitted to Twin Galaxies?
 2       A    If it was, it was before my tenure with
 3   Twin Galaxies.
 4            I know that Bill Bastable's achievements
 5   purportedly happened in the early 1980s when I was
 6   not a member of Twin Galaxies.  In fact, I didn't
 7   even submit a score until January '84, but as a
 8   gamer in the resurrected TG forums, that was late
 9   '90s.  So if anything happened with Bill Bastable
10   submitting to TG in the '80s, I wouldn't even be
11   aware of it.
12       Q    Okay.  Going back to the issue of ownership
13   of Twin Galaxies, did you ever see any paperwork
14   from Walter or anybody else that proved you had any
15   ownership of Twin Galaxies?
16       A    No.  TG was very grassroots.  There was
17   never any documents, for instance, that I signed to
18   become chief referee.  It was an appointment by
19   Walter and with the approval of Ron Corcoran.  There
20   was never any document that said you're board of
21   directors member or you're a referee or anything of
22   that nature.  It was always Walter said, Okay,
23   you're chief referee, you're senior referee, you're
24   a board of directors member, you got 10 percent
25   shares.
 1            Everything was verbal.  It was grassroots.
 2   It was the way TG started and it was the way TG
 3   operated.  Nothing was ever formally on paper.
 4            And, in fact, when I started TG, some of
 5   the very rules governing score adjudication were not
 6   on paper.  It was word of mouth.  And one of my
 7   first goals as chief referee was to put in writing
 8   on the forums, here's the rules for submitting
 9   scores, score challenges, anti-leaching and so
10   forth.  I tried to formalize TG.
11            With respect to stock ownership or anything
12   of that nature, no, nothing was ever in writing.
13   Nothing.  Not even via email.  It was all word of
14   mouth from Walter.
15       Q    Okay.  Have you ever said that Billy
16   Mitchell was a part owner of Twin Galaxies?
17       A    Yes, on several occasions.
18            For starters, in January of 2005 -- this
19   was short a couple months before that board meeting
20   that I called for with Walter, Billy and Brien King.
21   My company that I currently still work for allowed
22   me to run a hoovers.com check on Twin Galaxies
23   because I wanted to see for myself am I a TG board
24   member.
25            So I ran a hoovers.com report on TG in
 1   early 2005.  I found out that I wasn't on paper on
 2   Hoovers, which is a repository where you can get
 3   infrastructure on corporate entities, such as who
 4   the board members are, et cetera.  I saw that there
 5   were several entities called Twin Galaxies.
 6            There was a Twin Galaxies playing card
 7   company, there was a Twin Galaxies, LLC, and were
 8   others.  And the names I saw there were not Robert
 9   Mruczek and not Brien King 'cause Corcoran was
10   ousted at that time.  I saw Walter Day, I saw Billy
11   Mitchell, I saw a name of John Bloch that I remember
12   from Walter's first book of records, was one of his
13   old oil sector buddies, and other names I didn't
14   recognize.  My name wasn't there.
15            During that board of directors call in
16   August of 2005, Walter said he never got around to
17   updating those records.  And it's ridiculous
18   considering he had to file taxes for Twin Galaxies.
19   So that is when I realized that was all a lie.
20       Q    And this was in 2005 you did this search?
21       A    Yes, January of --
22       Q    Did you send --
23       A    -- 2005.
24       Q    Did you send any --
25       A    I gave copies of it to Brien King.  I gave
 1   copies of the search to Brien King, who was my then
 2   fellow CTO board member and chief technical officer.
 3   I shared with him the copies of the search.  I do
 4   not have the copies of that.  This is now 18 years
 5   ago.  I did not retain them going back that far.
 6            But hoovers.com may have a retroactive way
 7   of showing corporate ownership going back a few
 8   years, if you were so inclined to check for
 9   yourself.  But bottom line is that's what was there
10   as of January 2005 with hoovers.com.
11       Q    Okay.  When you say you gave copies to
12   Brien King, did you do this in person?  By email?
13       A    Digital.  Digital copies.  Brien King lives
14   in Arizona.  I don't see him face-to-face.  The only
15   time I ever mit him face-to-face was at the Fun Spot
16   events, specifically the 2005 Fun Spot events.
17       Q    So how do you send him these copies?
18       A    Digitally by a PDF file.
19       Q    Via email?
20       A    Email.  Of course.
21       Q    Would you still have that email?
22       A    Not from -- not from 17 years ago, no. I
23   have no Twin Galaxies correspondence as a Twin
24   Galaxies staffer at all.  That's all gone.
25       Q    Aside from the board meeting that you
 1   called for in August of 2005, did you have regular
 2   board meetings for Twin Galaxies?
 3       A    No.  That was the first one that we had
 4   called for because Twin Galaxies was in transition.
 5   We lost Ron Corcoran as a board of directors member
 6   under unsavory circumstances.  There was no
 7   replacement that had been appointed.  And Walter had
 8   discussed stepping down from Twin Galaxies at some
 9   point.
10            So Brien and I as board members were
11   concerned with continuity of business.  Walter was
12   the voice and face of Twin Galaxies.  Nobody really
13   knew who we were from a media perspective, so we
14   needed to have a plan in action, what happens if
15   anything happens to Walter.  We had no idea of Twin
16   Galaxies' balance sheet at the time, no idea of TG's
17   liabilities, we had no idea of what infrastructure
18   TG had other than the server costs which Brien was
19   maintaining.
20            So we wanted to formally have all of this
21   on the table with Walter.  That was one of the
22   primary reasons for the board meeting.
23            And concurrent with that, we wanted to
24   solidify what is our stock ownership positions,
25   because here's what we are told, and yet here's what
 1   we are seeing as evidenced by what was collected by
 2   online from a site that collects corporate
 3   infrastructure hierarchy.  It was different.  That
 4   was the purpose of the board meeting call.
 5       Q    Okay.
 6       A    Plus we had some revenue generating ideas
 7   which Walter shot down.
 8       Q    Earlier you testified you left Twin
 9   Galaxies for several weeks and then came back;
10   correct?
11       A    Correct.  I resigned as chief referee
12   shortly after that board meeting in August of '05.
13   We then met, Walter and I, and several other TG
14   members, we met in New Hampshire for the filming of
15   "Chasing Ghosts" in either late August or early
16   September of 2005.  And at that point I agreed to
17   come back in a different capacity, as a senior
18   referee, not as chief referee.  This way I wouldn't
19   be responsible for every single platform under the
20   sun.  I could just focus on arcade and MAME.
21       Q    And when you left in December of 2006, why
22   did you leave?
23       A    I left for several reasons.
24            For starters, Roy Shildt, one of the
25   pulverizing individuals that I testified about
 1   earlier from the '80s, Roy Shildt's scores were
 2   taken down from the website after discussion with my
 3   fellow referees.  Walter demanded to have the scores
 4   put back, which I refused.  That was the first
 5   reason.
 6            The second reason is Steve Wiebe's
 7   performance of 1.049 million, which I was sent to
 8   adjudicate, Steve did not follow the submission
 9   rules from technical standpoints.  He started to
10   record his game as it was standing there not turned
11   on, and the next thing you know the game is turned
12   on, skipped that part about turning the game on.  He
13   pops the credit in, plays the game out.
14            I thought that the performance was good,
15   but then he does not cleanly go from the front of
16   the game to the back.  So I had no way of knowing
17   that the back panel that he was showing was from the
18   same exact performance.  I refused to authenticate
19   the performance under rules that Walter had set in
20   place.
21            Walter wanted me to authenticate it based
22   on the totality of the performance and I refused.
23            And the third reason is under much protest
24   in 2005, I told Walter I did not want to split the
25   Atari 2600 platform into three.  Walter wanted it
 1   split into NTSC panel original and emulator.  I did
 2   that largely on my own with some help from Todd
 3   Rogers, created great animosity on the forums. I
 4   was getting no support whatsoever from Walter.
 5            So between all three of those things
 6   collectively, I just had it with TG.  So I resigned
 7   on December 19th of '06.  I emailed Kelly Flewin and
 8   Brien King all of my digital files and I had asked
 9   Walter at the time what he wanted me to do about the
10   stockpile of videotapes that I had.  And I started
11   communications with him to try to get these returned
12   to TG.  Walter never got back to me.
13            And several months later in November of
14   2007, the tapes were carried by Brian Kuh, gave them
15   to TG referee at large, Shawn Cram in New Hampshire.
16   That was my last possession of any hard copy TG
17   materials at that point in time.  That's also why I
18   left TG.  I already told you.
19       Q    Okay.  And when you left, did you have any
20   discussions with Walter about your alleged ownership
21   and shares?
22       A    Not at that point in time, because I was no
23   longer a part of TG.  I resigned.  So I am assuming
24   that at that point in time, Walter was free to do
25   whatever it is he did at that point in time.
 1            No communications were ever issued to me
 2   one way or another saying, Robert, this is just to
 3   formalize you are no longer a board member, you are
 4   no longer a shareholder.  I never received any
 5   communications as to that effect, none.
 6       Q    Okay.  In your tenure as senior -- senior
 7   referee and chief referee, approximately how many
 8   scores did you adjudicate?
 9       A    Between 20 and 30,000.
10            Some of these scores you have to understand
11   are less than ten seconds in duration.  The great
12   majority of them were under 15 minutes.  I also have
13   to adjudicate scores that are subsequently beaten,
14   which means I can have a performance by a gamer and
15   they submit over time ten more performances, each
16   one subsequently higher or faster.
17            So, you know, overall, I've -- I've
18   estimated 20 to 30,000 scores is not outside the
19   realm of possibilities.  I know I've watched 15 to
20   1600 videotapes, average length four to six hours.
21   So I went through an awful lot of performances on
22   tape, in person, digital such as MAME.  And, again,
23   this is why I only slept for two hours a day for
24   five and a half years.
25       Q    Okay.
 1       A    I was watching --
 2       Q    So --
 3       A    -- tapes when I wasn't working.
 4       Q    So 20 to 30,000 total.  And of those 1500
 5   to 1600 were via videotape adjudication; is that
 6   correct?
 7       A    No.  1500 to 600 videotapes, each of which
 8   contained one or more scores.
 9       Q    Got it.  Approximately how many scores --
10   approximately how many scores did you adjudicate
11   live?
12       A    Well, that's tough to say.  I never kept
13   count of it.  Live would imply Fun Spot and both Fun
14   Spot in May, the event, and Fun Spot in November, my
15   vacation.  It would include the Philly Classic 2004
16   event, which I also adjudicated in person, anything
17   from the Mall of America 2001 event, and then the
18   one time I had to travel to Philadelphia to watch
19   something play Dance Dance Revolution.
20            Typically at a Fun Spot event, including
21   the scores adjudicated by Fun Spot staff, I probably
22   in a May event at Fun Spot -- that would be from
23   2001 through 2006 at a May event -- I probably took
24   down during a typical May event outside of what Fun
25   Spot did, anywhere from 25 to 50 scores.
 1            During the November trip where I was by
 2   myself and gamers would also join me in November,
 3   easily 100 to 200 scores during each of those trips.
 4            Classic '04 was probably around 50 to 100
 5   scores.
 6            My trip to Philadelphia, one score.
 7            So all in all, if you do the math over
 8   here, talking about maybe 5 percent of all the
 9   scores were live scores.  The rest of it was all on
10   tape.
11       Q    Okay.  And when you're adjudicating scores
12   on tape -- let's just stick with Donkey Kong to make
13   it easy -- what exactly are you looking for?
14       A    Well, specific to Donkey Kong, keep in mind
15   I've only adjudicated a few Donkey Kong arcade
16   scores.  Adjudicated Steve Wiebe's 985, which was
17   not the one from ACAM.  This is what he sent on
18   tape.  I adjudicated his 947200, his 999.5, and his
19   1.06 million.  And then later I rejected his 1.049
20   million.  So five scores from Steve Wiebe.
21            Billy Mitchell was the 1.014 million and
22   the 1.047 million.  So it was a few scores from
23   them.  And I might have also reviewed over time a
24   few submissions of other gamers, maybe five or six
25   over the years, smaller scores.
 1            What I was looking for initially when I
 2   started as a referee to view Donkey Kong is making
 3   sure that they're playing Donkey Kong.  What I did
 4   not know when I first watched my first Donkey Kong
 5   adjudication, Steve Wiebe, is that he was playing
 6   Double Donkey Kong.
 7            And the reason I didn't know that is I was
 8   watching it with the sound turned down so I didn't
 9   disrupt my landlord upstairs at the time who was in
10   the '80s.  It was three o'clock or three o'clock in
11   the morning.  So because the sound was turned down,
12   I did not hear the sound disparity with Donkey Kong
13   Jr. sounds.
14            So what I could have heard, I didn't.  What
15   I'm supposing to be looking for is to make sure that
16   the game boots up at the beginning, score
17   performances except for Billy is what happened.  You
18   put the credit in, play the game out to the end. I
19   look for any indications of cheating, which in
20   Donkey Kong is hard to catch, but there are ways to
21   cheat such as changing programs if you know how to
22   do it, but they there easy to spot.  And you look at
23   the end to make sure that they show the back of
24   their screen, which, again, I did for every gamer
25   except for Billy.  And that's pretty much it for a
 1   Donkey Kong performance.
 2            That was while I was adjudicating based on
 3   the TG rules at the time.
 4       Q    Okay.  And earlier you testified that there
 5   was no technical ability to see these artifacts that
 6   Twin Galaxies is now claiming are in the 1047 score;
 7   correct?
 8       A    We -- correct.  Billy had -- after that era
 9   typical referee had a video recorder, a TV screen.
10   They could press pause.  They didn't watch the games
11   frame by frame, because a two-and-a-half-hour game
12   watching it frame by frame, you'd be there all day.
13            They looked at the game.  It was a game
14   that we all recognized.  We all thought we knew
15   well.  We didn't know about that in between frame
16   transition element.  So it happens when you watch
17   it, it's too fast for you to catch it with the naked
18   eye.  So we bypassed it.  We didn't even know it
19   existed back then.  And even if we did, none of us
20   had the technical expertise or the machinery to
21   watch it properly on a frame-by-frame basis to catch
22   it.
23            Keep in mind, this was now almost 20 years
24   ago.  Video recorders were vastly different back
25   then than the digital recording playbacks now.  You
 1   could press pause and it would be in between frames
 2   and you would see half of one frame and half of
 3   another, and we just couldn't really do that
 4   effectively back in the day.  Plus, we didn't know
 5   it existed.
 6       Q    Did MAME exist back in 2005?
 7       A    MAME existed.  We were familiar with the
 8   MAME submission process.  It started with an earlier
 9   version of MAME and it progressed to WolfMAME where
10   you record the game, you provide a WLF file.  We had
11   people that were able to look at the MAME file from
12   the technical point of view to make sure that it's
13   within a certain frame rate to make sure that
14   it's -- it's of a certain percentage, like close to
15   a hundred percent playback where it's not jumping.
16            Basically they were able to make sure that
17   nobody was using -- let's just call it save state
18   software on MAME where you would save a performance
19   at Point A, concatenate it with another performance,
20   B, and so forth, string together a great
21   performance.  We had technical experts on MAME that
22   if someone made a digital submission, they were able
23   to check for these things.  So MAME itself was never
24   really a problem, never.
25       Q    Were you one of these experts in the MAME
 1   video games that were being submitted as well?
 2       A    I was able to watch MAME files, but I
 3   wasn't an expert that would be able to look at it on
 4   a frame-by-frame basis or to check the frame rate or
 5   the frame skip.
 6            We had other people at TG that did, and
 7   they frequently contributed their additional insight
 8   on submissions.  So we always had it covered.
 9       Q    Okay.  So for Donkey Kong specifically, did
10   MAME exist in 2004?
11       A    Of course it did.
12       Q    Okay.  And in 2005?
13       A    It's been in existence since the 1998
14   range, as far as I understand it.  Might be even
15   prior.
16       Q    Okay.
17       A    MAME has been around for a long time.  At
18   least 20 years, if not 25.
19       Q    On a Donkey Kong machine, do you know if
20   you can use an eight-way joystick?
21       A    This came up in discussion around
22   2004-2005, because we were wondering what would
23   happen if an eight-way joystick were in a four-way
24   harness.  We didn't know how to test this from a
25   technical point of view.
 1            The reason it came up is we were watching
 2   one of Steve Wiebe's performances, and while he was
 3   on a ladder -- we were watching it at ACAM cabin --
 4   we heard what sounded like clicking noises while he
 5   was on a ladder, and there's no possible clicking
 6   noise to make because you either go up or down.  So
 7   we speculated could an eight-way joystick in a
 8   four-way harness be used to a player's advantage.
 9   And long and short is we didn't know.  We didn't
10   know how to test it.  It was just speculation back
11   then.
12       Q    Have you ever tried to put an eight-way
13   joystick into the Donkey Kong machine and use it?
14       A    I don't even know how to do that.  I don't
15   have any hardware of my own, nor have I known anyone
16   that's tested it myself.  I don't have access to
17   arcade hardware.
18            I have access to MAME and that's about it
19   and a keyboard, which is a PC keyboard.  So
20   personally I can't test it.  I never have been able
21   to.
22            But I don't know if anyone else ever
23   able -- was ever adequately able to test it.  I'm
24   sure by now it's been done as part of some ongoing
25   thread on the issue, but as far as the specific
 1   outcome, what it would do, what it can do, I don't
 2   know.  I --
 3       Q    Okay.
 4       A    -- just know that it was of issue back in
 5   2004-2005.
 6       Q    When it was an issue for Steve Wiebe's
 7   tapes, did you see Mario moving diagonally at all?
 8       A    Well, you can't move diagonally.  The only
 9   possible thing that you can do in Donkey Kong where
10   it'd cause an impact -- and you would have to know
11   the game well to understand what I'm about to say --
12   in Donkey Kong, when you're on a ladder, there is a
13   way to redirect the -- on the incoming barrels from
14   the upper levels, cause them to suddenly drop down a
15   ladder before they get to you.  It's a strategic
16   defensive tactic.
17            So when you're climbing up a ladder, you
18   can't do that.  You need to basically make a sudden
19   right or left movement.  But if you're on a ladder
20   and you have a way to press the joystick on an
21   angle, then maybe you can affect barrels that you
22   otherwise couldn't.  That was speculation of mine
23   back in the 2004-2005 era.
24       Q    Okay.  And if you were watching a tape,
25   though, would you be able to see that movement?
 1       A    Not -- not see it.  You're only watching a
 2   visual representation of what the Mario character is
 3   doing.
 4            What you could potentially do is hear a
 5   click when a character is otherwise not moving.
 6   And, even then, it's very difficult to discern
 7   whether that click is related to a player hitting a
 8   button or tapping a joystick, because they would be
 9   potentially on a ladder climbing up or down, and all
10   of a sudden a click is occurring that otherwise
11   shouldn't.  So you wouldn't see it.  You would only
12   hear it.
13       Q    Okay.  Did you ever hear it in the tapes of
14   Bill Mitchell that you watched?
15       A    No, not of Bill's.
16            We thought we heard it on one of Steve's
17   performances.  We were never a hundred percent sure.
18   We weren't able to prove it at the time.
19       Q    Okay.  Earlier you testified at the very
20   beginning of your deposition, might be hard for you
21   to remember, that the only tape you had adjudicated
22   of Billy Mitchell for Donkey Kong was the million 47
23   tape.
24       A    No, I adjudicated two.
25            I also adjudicated the million and 14 score
 1   that was received subsequent to Steve Wiebe's
 2   million .06 score.
 3       Q    And who did you receive the million 14 tape
 4   from?
 5       A    From Bill.
 6       Q    How do you know it was from him?
 7       A    Who else would send it?  It's a score
 8   that's beating Steve Wiebe.  There was nobody else
 9   in the world that TG knew that can get a million
10   points.  Billy told me he had a higher score than he
11   told Steve Wiebe indeed a year earlier of a million
12   14.  So when a tape comes in that says a million 14
13   and the gamer initial is USA, I know it's Billy.
14       Q    Do you know for certain, though, or you're
15   just assuming that it was because it was his tape?
16       A    Billy told me he was sending me the tape,
17   so when the tape came in, that was a million 14,
18   that's Billy's tape.
19       Q    Did it have a return address that said Bill
20   Mitchell?
21       A    Well, you are talking now 2004.  You are
22   talking 19 years ago.  I'm not going to remember the
23   return address on the envelope.  I didn't save the
24   return envelope.  I didn't take a digital photograph
25   of it.  But it is expected to come from Billy of a
 1   million 14.  A tape arrived that was a million 14.
 2   That's Billy's tape.
 3       Q    Okay.  And --
 4       A    There was no doubt in my mind.
 5       Q    Was --
 6       A    Plus, it was the tape that he held up
 7   himself at the Lincoln Center event acknowledging
 8   that it was his tape.  So it was, yes, Billy's tape.
 9       Q    That's different from my question though.
10   I wasn't asking if it's Billy's tape.  I'm asking
11   who sent it to you.
12       A    Well, who else would send it to me before
13   besides Billy.  Nobody else alerted me that a tape
14   was coming on its way other than Billy.
15       Q    Okay.  And for this million 14 score, did
16   you watch it to adjudicate it?
17       A    Oh, yes.  I maintained an Excel file that
18   has every single jump, barrel jump, bonus timer,
19   end-of-score bonus.  I have all this stuff in Excel
20   file, and it's part of my 36-page article
21   celebrating Billy and Steve as the first two million
22   point scorers on Donkey Kong.  So, yes, I
23   adjudicated it in extreme detail.
24       Q    Do you still have that file?
25       A    Yes, I do.
 1       Q    Would you be willing to produce that to us?
 2       A    At this very second, no, but I know for a
 3   fact I sent it to Billy himself.  I sent it to
 4   Steve.  I sent it to Walter.  I sent it to Jace. I
 5   sent it to David.  They all have it.  But I cannot
 6   produce it at this exact moment because I only have
 7   two HDMI connections, one of which is my headset and
 8   one of which is for my video camera.  I have
 9   literally no other way to access it because it is on
10   this very hard dock over here, which I cannot at the
11   moment plug in, but I can email you subsequent date
12   if you'd like.
13       Q    Okay.  Perfect.  Thank you.
14            THE STENOGRAPHER:  Can we take a break,
15   Counsel?
16            MS. ROSS:  Yeah.
17            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  Time now is 2:10 p.m.
18   We are off the record.
19            (Recess taken)
20            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  We are back on the
21   record.  The time now is 2:18 p.m.
22   BY MS. ROSS:
23       Q    You testified that it was the million 14
24   tape was the same tape that Billy showed at the
25   Lincoln Center.
 1            Did you send that tape back to him?
 2       A    That tape was received by me, reviewed by
 3   me, and then after that, I don't remember the chain
 4   of custody of how it got to Lincoln Center.  Most
 5   likely I brought it because I was the one in custody
 6   of it, unless Billy had a second copy.  But I can't
 7   remember.  This is '23.  This is 18 years ago.
 8            I do remember being the initial recipient
 9   of it.  I remember seeing the million 14 at the
10   Lincoln Center event both in the lobby and then
11   Billy pulled the tape out of the machine and showed
12   it before the congregants that were there for the
13   symposium.
14            So is it the tape that I brought versus a
15   secondary copy that he brought?  Can't remember.
16   But my gut tells me it's the tape that I brought
17   since I had primary custody of it at that time.
18       Q    Okay.  For Billy's Twin Galaxies scores
19   that have been recognized, were most of these done
20   at live events verse tape submissions?
21       A    Well, as far as I know, his 874,000, his
22   original score -- I think that's the right score --
23   that was a live event.  Billy hadn't done anything
24   for years until Steve Wiebe came around, and Billy's
25   first submission after that was a million 14.
 1            That was not done in a live event, as far
 2   as I know, 'cause no one ever heard of the million
 3   14 score before.  The million 47 was not done at a
 4   live event.
 5            What was done at a live event was he had
 6   a -- I think it was a 933,000 score.  I never
 7   witnessed this, nor did I see a tape of it.  That's
 8   the Midwest event.  And then he had a million and
 9   50,000 score that he might have done from the
10   mortgage brokers event, and then after that, I don't
11   know if he had any scores.
12            So it's fair to say the 874, his 933, I
13   think it was, and his million 50 was done at live
14   events, and his million 14 and his million 47 were
15   not.
16       Q    Okay.  What does a ref do at the live
17   event?
18       A    Well, it depends on what year you are
19   talking about.  In my era I can speak of
20   specifically.
21            At a live event for the score to be
22   recognized, it has to be a senior referee that could
23   witness it by themselves.  Any other referee also
24   needs -- a lesser referee needs a witness.
25            Prior to my being part of TG, this was
 1   whoever Walter appointed to witness scores, so I
 2   can't speak to that.
 3            After I left TG, the rules were a little
 4   more ratified.  You had to be senior referee to take
 5   down scores.
 6            So generally at an event, what a referee is
 7   responsible for is to make sure that the game is at
 8   the right settings, just to make sure that the
 9   player is not cheating, and to watch the performance
10   from the very beginning to the very end.
11            At a live event you do not have to show the
12   boot up at a live event from the beginning of the
13   game to the end -- to the point where you start to
14   play.  The reason being, it's a live event.  You
15   can't keep turning a machine off and on and off and
16   on every time somebody wants to record a score,
17   because at a live event, it's open to the public.
18   You can't turn the game off every single time
19   someone wants to play.
20            So at a live event, there are slight
21   allowances made.  You don't, for instance, at a live
22   event have to turn the machine off and on before you
23   play.  The referee only has to be responsible that
24   the DIP switch settings are correct, which can be
25   done at any point before or after the game play
 1   starts.  They just have to make sure they fully
 2   watch it from the beginning to the end.
 3       Q    Okay.
 4       A    Just to make sure the players aren't using
 5   illegal maneuvers.  Some games have illegal
 6   maneuvers.
 7            They also have to check things such as if
 8   you're playing on the right hardware.  For instance,
 9   if you're playing a game that norm -- normally would
10   use buttons and yet the game has a track ball in
11   front of it, such as is the case with Track & Field.
12            TG accepts Track & Field submissions with
13   buttons but not with the track ball.  The referee
14   has to make sure they are using the right joystick
15   type, for example.  That's what the referee does.
16       Q    Okay.  Is there any reason to second guess
17   a score that has been adjudicated by a live-event
18   referee?
19       A    Well, I can only speak for under my tenure.
20   If a referee witnessed the score, the settings were
21   correct, that everything was according to TG rules
22   at the time, there's no reason to second guess the
23   referee.  They are responsible for making sure that
24   this is all said and done, but a referee never signs
25   a document saying, yes, I witnessed this, check,
 1   check, check, this was done, this was done, this was
 2   done.  It's kind of like an honor system in that
 3   respect.
 4            We never had a formal check list where a
 5   referee had to sign off, I checked all of these
 6   elements; I'm signing off on it.  TG never had that
 7   in place, ever, neither before I was part of TG, nor
 8   during my tenure with TG.  I don't even recall it
 9   being mentioned after, because the referee was
10   wholly responsible for representing TG in that
11   matter.
12       Q    So it would be the senior referee who's
13   adjudicating it that would then just go and enter it
14   on the leaderboard if the top score is achieved?
15       A    Yeah.  The onus of responsibility is on
16   that referee for making sure everything is done
17   correctly and that any questions that needed to be
18   asked were asked and answered.  Because Walter, as
19   chief referee, could not possibly be at every single
20   event and watching every single performance.  The
21   current head custodian of TG can't, so -- and there
22   are no referees right now.
23            But in the old days, Walter couldn't be
24   everywhere.  The gaming events taking place all over
25   the globe.  So the referees in charge were the TG
 1   affiliate that was empowered to take down scores
 2   during the event, they were responsible for doing
 3   so.
 4       Q    Okay.  Have you seen Billy Mitchell play
 5   live?
 6       A    Yes.  I saw him play on a couple of
 7   occasions.  I saw him attempt Donkey Kong at Fun
 8   Spot during the 1989 and 2000 event.  I saw him play
 9   live there.
10            I saw him play to some extent at the Mall
11   of America event.  I don't remember if it was Donkey
12   Kong or Dig Dug.  I can't remember.  It's been too
13   many years.
14            But watching Billy play live, not really.
15   I wasn't there for any of his Donkey Kong
16   performances when I think back.
17            I saw him play a Donkey Kong performance to
18   meet 300,000 range at Fun Spot.  He missed an
19   elevator jump and just killed the game in progress.
20   I never saw him play kill screen game live because I
21   only met Billy on a couple of occasions.
22       Q    Okay.  And a little bit ago you mentioned
23   the mortgage brokers score, which was the million
24   50.  Were you --
25       A    I wasn't --
 1       Q    -- present for that?
 2       A    -- present for that.  I wasn't present for
 3   that.
 4            Billy told me -- and this is my repeating
 5   what he told me -- that he had a special arrangement
 6   for that particular score.  He told me two things.
 7   First that the score was being recorded two
 8   different ways.  One was a camera on the floor
 9   focused at the game.  The other one was a camera at
10   some higher upper deck balcony pointed down towards
11   the game.  He said that the game was being
12   authenticated in a way that was never done before.
13            He was going to have it authenticated both
14   prior to the performance and then insert it into the
15   game, take it out of the game, shipped off to have
16   that authenticated somewhere else.  That's what he
17   told me.  I wasn't physically present for it, but
18   supposedly that's what he was having done.
19       Q    Okay.  Do you know what year that score
20   was?
21       A    Not off the top of my head.  It did not --
22   I don't believe the mortgage brokers score occurred
23   while I was TG referee.  I know it occurred while
24   Todd Rogers was still a referee, but I don't
25   remember if it occurred in 2006 or thereafter.
 1            I don't believe it was 2006.  I would have
 2   to Google search it, but I wasn't physically present
 3   for it, no.
 4       Q    No worries.
 5            And you believe that Todd Rogers was the
 6   referee for this score?
 7       A    I was told that Todd Rogers was at the
 8   event, as well as Morningdove Mahoney who
 9   surprisingly, to me, was given some form of referee
10   status.  Todd was the senior referee at the event,
11   as I understand it, and she was also there in a
12   supportive role.  That's what I've read about and
13   that's what I was told.
14       Q    Okay.
15       A    I was not part of TG at the time.
16       Q    And you said that Bill told you he was
17   verifying it a different way and it was going to be
18   sent in.
19            Are you referring to the board being sent
20   from Nintendo and then after the play sent back to
21   Nintendo for verification?
22       A    Yes.  Yeah.  Billy gave me some story on
23   how he was going to have it super authenticated,
24   both before he played and after he played, to make
25   sure that everything was on the up-and-up, and
 1   that's the anecdote that I remember best, Billy
 2   telling me about all these extra precautions he was
 3   trying to take at the time.
 4       Q    Okay.  Have you heard of Billy Mitchell's
 5   Boomers score?
 6       A    No.  I know of some Midwest gaming
 7   convention score where he got around 933,000.  I've
 8   heard the word "Boomers," but I don't remember if he
 9   had a score set there or not.
10            The only scores I remembered were the five
11   or so that I mentioned earlier.  If he had a Boomers
12   score, I don't remember it, or I just simply forgot
13   about it because I, quite honestly, don't remember
14   scores that I didn't personally see that well.
15            Still here?
16       Q    Yeah.  I'm just looking at my outline.
17   Just give me one second.
18       A    Uh-huh.
19       Q    Going back to the million 47 score, you
20   testified earlier that Walter told you Billy would
21   be sending you his tape; correct?
22       A    Correct.
23       Q    And do you remember seeing a return address
24   or any other notice that was actually from Billy
25   Mitchell when you received the tape?
 1       A    Well, again, Walter told me the score would
 2   be sent to me by Billy.  The score -- the tape
 3   eventually arrived in the mail.  It was the same
 4   million 47.  I don't have a photographic
 5   recollection of what was on the mailing label at the
 6   time, but it, you know, didn't come from a foreign
 7   country.  Came from the United States.  And, you
 8   know, did I specifically remember it saying from
 9   Billy Mitchell?  I honest to God can't tell you
10   that.  I can tell you it came to my address at the
11   time, which is different than the address I have
12   now.  Otherwise, I wouldn't have received the tape.
13   But it was Billy's name.  Did it say Billy Mitchell,
14   B. Mitchell, BM?  I can't remember.  It's now 17 --
15   almost 18 years ago.  I don't remember.
16       Q    No worries.  We are just here for your
17   best --
18       A    (Unintelligible.)
19       Q    -- recollection.
20       A    It's the same tape, same performance, same
21   key elements.  It was a tape that was expected to be
22   received, as per Walter.  I had no reason to think
23   it came from anyone other than Billy.
24       Q    Okay.  Just remember for the court
25   reporter's sake, please let me finish my question
 1   even if you know what it's going to be.
 2            Also, I get you're trying to --
 3       A    I didn't --
 4       Q    -- explain yourself.
 5       A    -- realize you were still talking. I
 6   didn't realize you were still talking.
 7       Q    That's okay.  I get you're trying to
 8   explain yourself, but I'm not asking for drawn-out
 9   explanation for some of the questions, so just
10   listen to the question carefully, pause for a
11   second, and then answer.  Okay?
12       A    Okay.
13       Q    Do you remember if there was any
14   documentation that came with the tape, or was it
15   just a tape in an envelope?
16       A    Just a tape in an envelope.  No other
17   documentation was included.
18       Q    How do you have specific memory that it
19   wasn't from a foreign country then?
20       A    Well, if it was from a foreign country, I
21   would see a whole bunch of foreign stamps on it. I
22   mean, that would pretty much be a red flag that I
23   would remember.  Even anecdotally I would remember
24   that.
25            It did not come from a foreign country.  It
 1   did not come via, you know, Royal Airmail or
 2   anything like that, did not come from Abu Dhabi.  It
 3   came from the United States.
 4       Q    The AMCAM event where the million 47 tape
 5   was showed in "The King of Kong," that was May at
 6   Fun Spot; correct?
 7       A    May 2005 at Fun Spot, correct.
 8       Q    And then did you go to the Fun Spot event
 9   in November of 2005 that year?
10       A    There is no event in November, simply my
11   vacation.  And, yes, I was on vacation at Sun Valley
12   Cottages in November of 2005 again.
13       Q    Was Dwayne Richard there as well?
14       A    It's possible.  There were a large number
15   of people there, largely because there was also
16   filming taking place.  I know that I was there.
17   Walter was there.  Brien King, my fellow CTO, Abdner
18   Ashman, Darren Harris was there.  Whether Dwayne was
19   there, I don't remember.  It's possible.  I used to
20   do, after every November trip, I used to do a
21   write-up on the TG site of my entire week.  Possible
22   I mentioned Dwayne's name within the trip.  I don't
23   remember.
24            But as far as Dwayne being there for the
25   November 2005 trip, I don't remember.  I'm sorry.
 1       Q    Okay.  Do you remember if Brian Kuh was
 2   there?
 3       A    Brian Kuh would most likely have been
 4   there.  He was a staple of these November trips for
 5   a great many years.  So in high degree of
 6   probability, Brian was at that event.  And not
 7   event, my vacation.
 8       Q    Did you ever talk to Brian Kuh about Billy
 9   Mitchell's 1047 tape?
10       A    Yes.  Brian originally showed his tape in
11   the cabins during the ACAM 2005 event prior to it
12   being shown publicly at ACAM.
13            So, of course, we were discussing some of
14   what we saw, discussing Billy's performance, his
15   tactics used.  So from a tactical perspective, of
16   course we discussed Billy's tape or oohing and
17   aahing over what we saw.  But as far as discussing,
18   you know, did he really do that in the original
19   hardware or anything of that nature, we never
20   discussed the "is it real" aspect of it.
21            We only discussed, if anything, how good a
22   performance it was and things of that nature,
23   nothing more, nothing less.
24       Q    Did you ever ask Brian to have the tape or
25   borrow the tape?
 1       A    No.  Brian was in full possession of the
 2   tape throughout the entire event.
 3            Affirm the performance was shown in the
 4   cabins, he left with the tape.  First he left on
 5   Thursday with it after the first portion was shown.
 6   He left again on Friday after we watched it to its
 7   conclusion in my cabin.  Brought it back to ACAM on
 8   Saturday where he propped up the TV set originally
 9   on top of the Donkey Kong machine, which -- tried to
10   and Fun Spot management shot that down.  And then he
11   gave him an opportunity to put it on a table in the
12   back.  And then when enough people gathered in the
13   evening Brian popped the tape into the cassette and
14   was present during the entire performance.
15            What happened after the performance ended,
16   I went back to the cabin shortly thereafter.  What
17   Brian did with the tape at that point, you'd have to
18   ask Brian, but I never saw that particular tape
19   again.
20            My next exposure to that performance was
21   when the master tape was sent to me several months
22   later and it arrived to my home via US mail.
23       Q    So in November of 2005 at Fun Spot, you
24   never asked Brian to see the million 47 tape of
25   Billy's game play?
 1       A    I would have no reason to because I had
 2   already received it myself to my home address.
 3       Q    So you think you --
 4       A    So there was no --
 5       Q    You think you received it prior to November
 6   of 2005?
 7       A    The tape was sent to me by Billy after the
 8   ACAM 2005 event.  And I received it in the latter
 9   portion of 2005 prior to February of 2006, because
10   at that point I had already watched it and
11   adjudicated it.  So the exact month it was received,
12   was it August, September, October, November,
13   December, January?  I don't remember.  But the
14   million 47, the entry date into the Twin Galaxies,
15   that's a matter of the digital time stamp of when it
16   was entered, archived would certainly show you that
17   because I myself entered the score into the TG
18   database immediately upon receipt.
19            That's how you would tell when I received
20   it and when I entered it.  Just go to the
21   archive.org, find the date that the million 47 was
22   part of Donkey Kong as a matter of record and that
23   would be it.
24       Q    Are you aware that there are accusations by
25   Brian Kuh that you or Dwayne Richard stole the
 1   million 47 tape from his possession at Fun Spot in
 2   2005?
 3       A    Yes, I am.  I'm aware that in Billy
 4   Mitchell's original evidence package, there was some
 5   statements to the effect that I made off with that
 6   tape, which is a flat-out lie.
 7            As far as what Dwayne might have done, I
 8   can't speak to that.  I wasn't present for what
 9   Dwayne did or did not do, but as far as myself, I
10   certainly did not make off with that tape.  Anyone
11   that would say otherwise is a liar.
12            MS. ROSS:  Madam Court Reporter, what
13   exhibit are we on?  Or, David, if you know?
14            THE STENOGRAPHER:  I think the next one is
15   F.
16            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  We are on -- there you
17   go.
18            MS. ROSS:  Thank you.  I'm going to mark
19   this as Exhibit F and share my screen.
20            (Exhibit F identified)
21   BY MS. ROSS:
22       Q    Can you see this document?
23       A    Yes, I can.  It says Superior Court of the
24   State of California.
25       Q    Yes.  This says Declaration of Robert
 1   Mruczek --
 2       A    Yes, I do.
 3       Q    -- correct?
 4       A    I see that, uh-huh.
 5       Q    Is this your signature?
 6       A    Yes, that is, under penalty of State of
 7   California, blah, blah, blah, June 20th.  Hold on.
 8   That looks like my signature.  I recognize the T. I
 9   recognize the M.  Yep, that would be my signature
10   all right.
11       Q    Okay.  Do you remember signing this
12   declaration?
13       A    To be honest with you, no.  But it looks
14   like it's my signature for sure.  And I am looking
15   at the words over here.  Words, I agree with the
16   words.  I am sure I have seen this one, it's been a
17   while, but I'm sure I've seen this one.
18       Q    Okay.  And in 2020, were you asked to sign
19   a declaration by Twin Galaxies?
20       A    To be honest with you, I -- if I signed it
21   here, I'm sure I was at some point.  I willfully
22   signed it, but do I remember the exact date?  No, I
23   don't remember the exact date.
24       Q    I wasn't asking if you remember the exact
25   date.  I was asking if in 2020, at some point Twin
 1   Galaxies asked you to sign a declaration; yes or no?
 2       A    Yes, I do.  I just don't remember the exact
 3   date.
 4       Q    Okay.  Do you remember reading over
 5   declaration before you signed it?
 6       A    Yes.
 7       Q    Okay.  Looking at paragraph 3 --
 8       A    Uh-huh.
 9       Q    -- this says that you adjudicated the
10   million 47 score in January of 2006; correct?
11       A    Correct.
12       Q    Does that mean in January of 2006 is when
13   you watched the tape that was sent to you for the
14   first time?
15       A    Yes.  As I stated earlier, the tape was
16   sent to me in late 2005.  It was late as
17   pre-February 2006, so that would be consistent with
18   that, yes.
19       Q    Did you write this declaration?
20       A    No, I'm not a lawyer.
21       Q    Do you know who wrote this?
22       A    No.
23       Q    Who sent it to you?
24       A    The only person I would have been dealing
25   with is either TG or TG's lawyer.  I deal with no
 1   one else.
 2       Q    And when you say "TG," do you mean Jace
 3   Hall?
 4       A    Yes.  'Cause that's my only contact at TG
 5   is Jace Hall or Jace Hall's lawyer.
 6       Q    And that's Mr. Tashroudian who's on the
 7   deposition today is who you are referring to as Jace
 8   Hall's lawyer?
 9       A    Yeah, yeah, yeah.
10       Q    Okay.  When you were sent it, did you ask
11   who wrote it?
12       A    Why would I?
13       Q    Because it's a --
14       A    No, I did not.
15       Q    -- declaration -- because it's a
16   declaration under penalty of perjury.
17       A    It's words that I agree with because
18   everything over here is exactly what I had discussed
19   with Twin Galaxies as my firsthand recollection and
20   my firsthand experience of the events of what
21   happened.
22            So as I'm reading it over here, as I read
23   it before, it's exactly as per my recollection.
24   That's all I needed to know.  I didn't need to know
25   if Jane Doe wrote it or John Doe wrote it.  It
 1   exactly mirrors what the key points were that I
 2   needed to sign, and that's it.  That's all that
 3   mattered to me.  And I agree with everything that is
 4   stated over here.
 5       Q    So you were interviewed by Jace Hall or
 6   Mr. Tashroudian or both prior to signing this
 7   declaration; is that correct?
 8       A    I spoke with them.  I don't know if you
 9   would call it a formal interview or not.  These are
10   the key points that needed to be addressed, but was
11   it a formal interview?  I can't say if it was a
12   formal interview or not.  It was discussions.
13   That's all I can say.
14       Q    About how many discussions did you have
15   with them prior to receiving this declaration?
16       A    To be honest with you, I can't tell you.
17            I don't keep track of these things.  I have
18   no reason to.  Did I speak with them once?
19   Obviously.  Did I speak with them more than once?
20   Sure.  Did I speak with them 137 times?  Probably
21   not.  So how many times exactly did I speak with
22   them, I don't know.
23       Q    Do you remember the first time you spoke
24   with Mr. Tashroudian?
25       A    No, I do not know.  No, I do not.
 1       Q    Can you tell me --
 2       A    Not the specific date or the specific year.
 3       Q    Can you give me an estimate of what year if
 4   this was signed in --
 5       A    Well --
 6       Q    -- June of --
 7       A    -- if this was signed in 2000 --
 8       Q    Robert, wait for the question, please.
 9            If this was signed in June of 2020, did you
10   talk to him for the first time a month before?  Six
11   months before?  A year before?  What do you think?
12       A    There's no way for me to remember that.  It
13   could have been a week before, a month, three
14   months.  I just simply don't know.  It's too long
15   ago.  I just don't remember the specifics. I
16   remember speaking with him obviously before this,
17   but how long exactly, I don't know.
18       Q    So you remember stuff from 17 years ago
19   about who sent you tapes and exact game play, but
20   you don't remember from three years ago when you
21   signed a declaration?
22            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Objection.
23   Argumentative.
24            I don't have to -- you don't have to answer
25   that.  You don't have to.
 1            MS. ROSS:  You are not his attorney.  He
 2   has to answer that.
 3            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  No, I'm instructing him
 4   not to answer.  That's fine.
 5            MS. ROSS:  You are going to instruct
 6   somebody that's not your client not to answer?
 7            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I'm telling him he
 8   doesn't have to answer that argumentative question.
 9   So, yeah, he doesn't have to answer.
10            MR. ELLROD:  I just want the record to be
11   straight.  You're instructing this witness not to
12   answer a question.
13            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Yeah.  I'm telling him he
14   doesn't have to answer this question.
15            MS. ROSS:  On what authority though?
16            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  He can take my
17   instruction as he wants, but it's an argumentative
18   question.  The form the improper.
19            Robert, you don't have to answer this
20   question if you don't want to.
21            THE WITNESS:  I'd like to answer some form
22   of context, if I -- if I can.
23   BY MS. ROSS:
24       Q    No, it's okay.  You can answer the question
25   I asked, if you would like, which is:  Why don't you
 1   remember three years ago, but you remember 17 years
 2   ago?
 3       A    It's impossible for me to tell you why.
 4            There are dates in my tenure with TG and my
 5   exposure to TG that I remember well.  There are
 6   dates where I don't.
 7            For example, Ron Corcoran was a board of
 8   directors member that was ousted.  I remember the
 9   year that he was ousted.  I don't remember the
10   month.  And that's a very pivotal moment in Twin
11   Galaxies that I lived through.
12            So I can tell you for a fact the score
13   adjudication I will more likely remember details of
14   that.  This is not a score adjudication.  This was a
15   simple conversation and a document signed as a
16   result.  I'm not going to remember the details of
17   this as well as a score adjudication.
18       Q    Do you remember --
19       A    It's --
20       Q    -- when -- do you remember when the dispute
21   thread post by Jeremy Young was posted?
22       A    Approximately 2017 to 2019 range.  It's
23   been a couple of years.  It started on the TG forums
24   and it gathered steam rather quickly.
25            I do remember it's been a couple of years
 1   and it obviously occurred after I left TG.  It's
 2   between 2017 and 2019 range.
 3       Q    If I told you it was early 2018, would that
 4   sound correct?
 5       A    Could be.  It's within that range, so, yes.
 6       Q    And did you -- do you think that you saw
 7   the dispute thread right when it was posted or was
 8   it a year later?
 9       A    I fairly religiously check TG on a daily
10   basis for new threads, so I'm sure that I saw it the
11   day it was posted or if not within a day of that.
12   Probably did not respond to it immediately, but I
13   did see it within the first day or two because I
14   religiously used to check TG's forums every single
15   day as an interested gamer.
16       Q    Do you remember the first time you
17   commented on the thread?
18       A    No.  But the comments -- the comments
19   themselves are forever preserved within the body of
20   the thread.  I know I've commented several times
21   within the thread.  But the first day I commented
22   and the full extent of how many times I commented, I
23   know it was frequent, but I can't tell you the first
24   day I commented, but it's within the body of the
25   thread.  It's preserved and it's there for all to
 1   see.
 2       Q    Prior to the dispute thread in 2018, had
 3   you spoken to Jace Hall?
 4       A    Yes, on non-Donkey Kong matters.
 5       Q    Okay.  Do you remember when you first spoke
 6   to Jace Hall about Billy Mitchell's score dispute?
 7       A    After Jeremy's thread -- Jeremy Young
 8   dispute was launched, I had no reason prior to that
 9   to discuss Billy Mitchell's Donkey Kong scores with
10   Jace Hall because there was no reason for me to.
11            I saw the million 14.  I saw the million
12   47.  I never saw any of his other performances, so I
13   couldn't comment on those.  I had no reason to
14   discuss Donkey Kong with Jace Hall at that point in
15   time.
16       Q    Okay.  And do you remember if you spoke to
17   him just through comments on the dispute thread or
18   personal message, email, phone for that first time?
19       A    Probably I spoke to Jace initially through
20   an email or a direct conversation, because any
21   comments that I would have made on the forum would
22   not have been addressed directly to Jace.
23            So any conversation I would have had with
24   Jace would have been a private conversation, either
25   through an email to Jace's email address or a phone
 1   call.  That would be the only way I would have
 2   conversed with Jace about Donkey Kong.
 3            The thread itself was open to the public.
 4   I was not a technical expert, so I did not
 5   ingratiate myself into the girder finger theory or
 6   anything like that because I was out of my league.
 7            The only thing I could comment on is here's
 8   what I saw and when.
 9       Q    Okay.  And do you believe that you reached
10   out to Jace for this first discussion, or did he
11   reach out to you?
12       A    Don't remember.
13       Q    Okay.
14       A    It could be either one, either way.
15   There's no way for me to be a hundred percent
16   certain.
17       Q    Would you have the emails back and forth
18   with Jace still?
19       A    No, not -- not relating to this.  There
20   were a lot of emails that went back and forth.
21   There were mostly conversations, but I don't record
22   conversations.  I don't save, for the most part, any
23   emails with few exceptions, and I certainly don't
24   have any Donkey Kong emails relating to did Billy do
25   it, did Billy not do it, because it wasn't even on
 1   my radar until the Jeremy Young dispute came up as
 2   far as whether Billy's performance was in question
 3   or not.
 4       Q    I'm asking about this talk that you said
 5   had you with him after --
 6       A    No, I have no --
 7       Q    -- the dispute thread was put -- let me
 8   finish, please.
 9            After the dispute thread was started, you
10   said you had either a call or a direct message or an
11   email with Jace Hall; correct?
12       A    Yeah, correct.
13       Q    Okay.  Would you not have that direct
14   message or email?
15       A    No.  I don't save things like that.
16            I got enough emails that I have to save on
17   personal.  I don't need this other stuff, which is
18   already being rehashed on the forum itself.  The
19   meat and potatoes of discussion were the technical
20   aspects of it, which were already within the body of
21   the dispute thread.
22            So any discussions I had with Jace, whether
23   it was email or voice message, I have no digital or
24   hard copy archives of either.
25       Q    Do you actively delete all of your emails?
 1       A    All but very few.  I save the emails that
 2   are relating to that message that came from Jay --
 3   Joel West.  I saved that one because that one was
 4   very important to save.  Beyond that, I didn't
 5   really save much emails relating to TG.  I didn't
 6   have to.  I'm no longer part of TG.  I am a gamer.
 7   Happy to be a former referee, but I'm just a gamer.
 8       Q    So, as you sit here today, you don't think
 9   you have any emails still between you and Jace
10   related to the dispute thread and Billy's scores?
11       A    No.  Because those -- those emails,
12   whatever they were, relating to the origin of the
13   Jeremy Young thread and the ongoing development,
14   those emails to me are just private conversations.
15   They not something that I need to save.  I just
16   delete them.  I save only the emails that are
17   pertinent to me as a person.
18       Q    Okay.  Have you ever had any text messages
19   with Jace Hall?
20       A    I'm sure I did.  I've had several messages
21   with Jace Hall.
22       Q    Do you also delete your text messages?
23       A    Yes.  They are not directly important to
24   me.  If I don't need to digitally save them for any
25   reason, I delete them.  I don't let my emails clog
 1   up for several years, because I don't have the time
 2   to look at them.  Even it's just -- it's said and
 3   done, done with.
 4       Q    Do you know if you currently have any text
 5   messages between you and Jace Hall?
 6       A    I might.  I might have an email relating to
 7   the upcoming depositions saying, Are you going to be
 8   ready for it, can you connect to it, things like
 9   that, the most current stuff.  The rest of the stuff
10   I junk.  I save the ones from David with the email
11   link to this deposition.  I saved the one saying,
12   Are you going to be ready for it, yes; can we talk,
13   yes.  That's about it maybe.  I have David's phone
14   number in one of the emails I saved, but I don't
15   make cross of saving these messages.
16       Q    Okay.
17       A    It's not that I have to.  No reason for me
18   to.
19       Q    If I asked you to not delete any after
20   today until you've produced them, could you produce
21   them to us, any that you do have still?
22            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I'm going to object.
23            THE WITNESS:  I can --
24            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  No one has subpoenaed you
25   to produce any documents.  You're not under any
 1   obligation to produce any documents, Robert.
 2            MS. ROSS:  I'm not asking if he is -- I'm
 3   not telling him he is under obligation.  I'm asking
 4   if he would.
 5            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Well, you are under no
 6   obligation to produce any documents, Robert, unless
 7   you're subpoenaed.
 8            MR. ELLROD:  I'm going to -- however, that
 9   if you destroy evidence which we believe -- if you
10   destroy or delete any emails or texts from this date
11   forward, which is obviously evidence, there could be
12   repercussions.  You can talk with Mr. Tashroudian as
13   your legal counsel if you choose on that issue.
14            THE WITNESS:  Okay.  I'll talk to
15   Mr. Tashroudian, but at present I'm inclined to
16   follow his advice that I'm under no legal obligation
17   to provide anything, because such as not has been,
18   as he said, subpoenaed.  It's my personal email
19   repository.  It's not intended for any other
20   purpose.
21   BY MS. ROSS:
22       Q    I understand.  My question was just that if
23   I asked you to, could you not destroy any further
24   emails, text messages or any messages with Jace Hall
25   and Tashroudian?  That way if you want us to get a
 1   subpoena for those, we will, and then you can
 2   produce them that way.
 3       A    I have to defer on David on this one
 4   because I don't have -- you know, I'm not a lawyer
 5   myself.
 6       Q    Okay.
 7       A    I have to defer to David.
 8       Q    Do you communicate on Facebook Messenger
 9   with Jace Hall?
10       A    Actually, I am not friends with Jace Hall
11   on Facebook.
12       Q    That wasn't my question.
13            My question is:  Have you communicated with
14   Jace Hall on Facebook Messenger?
15       A    Via Facebook, chat, yes.  But when you
16   delete someone as a friend on Facebook, all the chat
17   goes away.  So whatever I did chat with Jace on
18   Facebook prior to deleting him from my friends list,
19   I don't know if that's recoverable.  You'd have to
20   ask Facebook for that.  But he's not part of my
21   friends roster, so I don't know how to properly
22   answer you.
23       Q    When did you delete him as your friend?
24       A    It was -- it was a range because I didn't
25   like the way he was handling the -- you know, my
 1   situation with the toxic environment at TG with
 2   respect to three individuals.
 3       Q    I asked you when.  When.
 4       A    Three years ago, two and a half years ago.
 5   Been a little while.
 6       Q    Okay.  Do you have any text messages with
 7   Mr. Tashroudian?
 8       A    Relating to the upcoming deposition, sure,
 9   getting the, you know, information saying it's about
10   to happen on this date.  That's the most recent one
11   I received.  And, of course, my messages today
12   regarding my problems initially with connecting with
13   video, but, yeah, I do have messages.
14       Q    Okay.  Have you communicated with
15   Mr. Tashroudian in any other fashion other than text
16   messages, emails or on the telephone?
17       A    Phone call and email are the only options
18   available to me.  I don't have any other means to
19   commute with him.
20       Q    Okay.  Going back to -- you just referred
21   to toxic environment that made you delete Jace as
22   your friend.
23            Can you elaborate on that?
24       A    Yeah.  There was several individuals at TG,
25   William Rosa was one of them.  Another one was --
 1   and I can only tell you based on TG user names in
 2   some cases.  One of them was ssdninja --
 3            (Stenographer clarification)
 4            THE WITNESS:  There were several
 5   individuals that I was having ongoing reoccurring
 6   toxic problems with on the TG forum.  William Rosa
 7   was number one.  Brandon Finton.  I think his TG
 8   handle was ssdninja possibly.  There was another
 9   one, Mark -- marcamy I think was his TG user name.
10   Mark Cohen was his real name.  There was a fourth I
11   can't remember.
12            And they were constantly hammering me on
13   the forums regarding the authenticity of my scores,
14   calling me a corrupt TG official and all TG former
15   officials corrupt.  And no matter what they did, no
16   matter how they said defamatory comments, Jace's
17   position on it was unless I could procure the
18   precise forum threads and forum posts, they couldn't
19   do anything.
20            And I have a real-life job.  I don't have
21   time to scour hundreds of threads to find specific
22   posts.  So nothing, after months, was being done
23   about this.  And I just got so sick and tired of it,
24   I just -- honestly, I just defriended Jace on
25   Facebook at that point, and that's the reason why.
 1   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
 2       Q    Okay.  Prior to 2018, did you have any
 3   problems with Billy Mitchell?
 4       A    Problems?  Not directly.  I stopped talking
 5   to Billy as a friend and colleague shortly after
 6   "The King of Kong" came out.  And I had initially
 7   defended him on social media, meaning the gaming
 8   forums, but when it became apparent that I was being
 9   used on a recurring basis, I stopped talking to
10   Billy on a professional and personal level probably
11   around mid to late 2007, and I really did not engage
12   Billy ever since.  He may have called me on the
13   phone once after that on his own to say hello.  In
14   fact, he did.  And that was a brief conversation.
15   It wasn't regarding any specific matter.  It was
16   just to say hello.  That was about it.
17            Beyond that I haven't spoken to him.  Nor
18   did I engage him by initiating a conversation.
19       Q    Okay.  So then at some point in 2018, you
20   reached out to Jace Hall after the dispute thread by
21   Jeremy Young was posted to discuss Billy's scores;
22   correct?
23       A    I reached out or Jace reached out to me. I
24   don't remember which occurred first.  And I don't
25   remember.  A lot happened.  That thread is hundreds
 1   of posts.  I don't remember which happened first.
 2   It's impossible for me to know for sure.
 3       Q    Okay.  And how long have you been working
 4   with Jace against Billy?
 5            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Objection.  Objection to
 6   the form.  Objection -- objection to the form of the
 7   question.  Assumes facts not in evidence and that
 8   should be it.  Lacks foundation.
 9   BY MS. ROSS:
10       Q    Go ahead.
11       A    You use the words "against Billy."  There's
12   nothing I have against Billy.
13            The only thing I have is personal knowledge
14   of what I personally witnessed or heard anecdotally.
15   There's no -- nothing against Billy that I have.
16            Billy's scores are Billy's scores.  Whether
17   they are real or not, that's a matter for others to
18   decide, not me.  I can only provide Jace with
19   knowledge, knowledge of what I've seen firsthand,
20   anecdotes I may have heard, that's it.  There's no
21   working against Billy.
22            So you used that word, and I can tell you
23   there's nothing to do with being against Billy.
24       Q    Did you ever state that you wish someone
25   would punch Billy in the face?
 1       A    No.  But, to be honest with you, you know,
 2   do I wish someone would?  I wish someone would just
 3   tell him to knock it off already.
 4       Q    Okay.  Is it true that you want to help
 5   Jace and Twin Galaxies and hurt Billy in the
 6   process?
 7       A    I want the matter to be resolved.  I want
 8   the matter to reach a satisfying conclusion.  I want
 9   the truth to come out.  Hurting Billy is not the
10   goal here.  Getting the truth out is the goal.
11            If I have knowledge that can be of
12   assistance in the case that TG has, sure, I will
13   provide TG with knowledge that I have as a former TG
14   referee and based on any anecdotal evidence I may
15   have that they may find is appropriate, but the goal
16   is not to hurt Billy.  Goal is to get the truth out.
17       Q    Aside from the declaration what other
18   information have you provided to Jace, Twin Galaxies
19   or Mr. Tashroudian?
20       A    Well, I provided to them that hush money
21   payout attempt by Joel West from late 2013, because
22   that, to me, was important to provide.  It was
23   representative of an attempt by Walter Day to
24   basically keep my mouth shut for a period of ten
25   years.  And on top of that to basically shove stuff
 1   under the bridge, so to speak, shove stuff under the
 2   rug.  I thought that was important.
 3            Beyond that it's just knowledge, knowledge
 4   of what I witnessed as, you know, the few tapes that
 5   I saw of Billy's, the million 47, the million 14,
 6   anything that I might have seen relating to that,
 7   such as the Steve Wiebe performance in the million
 8   6, and any other anecdotal evidence that I may have.
 9   That's it.
10       Q    Since the dispute thread was posted in
11   2018, how many times can you estimate you spoke on
12   the phone or via Zoom or some other application with
13   Mr. Tashroudian or Jace Hall regarding the Donkey
14   Kong score issue?
15       A    Oh, I can tell you right off the bat with
16   respect to Zoom, the answer is zero.  Today is the
17   first Zoom session I'm having.
18            With respect to post-2018 Jeremy Young
19   thread, speaking to Mr. Tashroudian and Mr. Hall, I
20   have spoken to them on multiple occasions.  I don't
21   keep an aggregate count, but I can safely say that I
22   have spoken to -- spoken to Mr. Tashroudian verbally
23   at least ten times, Mr. Hall probably at least 25
24   times on a number of matters.
25            And then as far as general email
 1   correspondence, mostly I would email Jace and mostly
 2   it was not Billy Mitchell related.  It was more
 3   relating to the ongoing forum toxicity.
 4            As far as David, I would have only spoken
 5   to David related to issues pursuant to the legal
 6   stuff, not the Jeremy Young thread, but the legal
 7   stuff, and that's it, but definitely nothing on
 8   Zoom.
 9       Q    Okay.  When was the last time you spoke
10   with Mr. Tashroudian on the phone?
11       A    Probably last night.  I wanted to make sure
12   my connectivity is good, wanted to make sure, you
13   know, I'm ready for the day, which, of course, here
14   I am.  I'm ready.  Make sure that, you know, I'm
15   prepared, and I feel I'm prepared.
16       Q    And exactly what was that discussion about
17   if you're feeling prepared?
18       A    Well, to make sure that, you know, my -- my
19   head's on straight, as the expression goes.  I am
20   going to say basically what needs to be said.  I'm
21   going to say truth, nothing but the truth, and
22   that's it.
23       Q    How long was this call last night?
24       A    Couple of minutes really.
25       Q    Was it just you and Mr. Tashroudian or also
 1   Jace?
 2       A    No, just me and Dave, David.
 3       Q    And before last night, when was the last
 4   time before that?
 5       A    Oh, speaking with him.  I don't remember
 6   off the top of my head.  Within two weeks, I'm sure,
 7   but the exact date, I don't remember.  Within two
 8   weeks.
 9       Q    And what was the substance of that
10   conversation?
11       A    Don't remember.  I know that it was likely
12   that the deposition is coming up shortly, but beyond
13   that, the core of discussion, I don't remember the
14   exact specific details, no.
15       Q    Earlier you --
16       A    I don't keep a written log.  I don't keep a
17   written log of all my discussions I had with people.
18   I don't really have to.
19       Q    Okay.  Earlier you testified that
20   Mr. Tashroudian had sent you the document video of
21   million 47 play.
22            When was that sent to you?
23       A    Within the last 48 hours.
24       Q    And with that was there any other documents
25   sent to you?
 1       A    There were two enclosures.  One was an
 2   abbreviated enclosure where the performance was
 3   recorded up to approximately the 880,000 range.
 4            The other document was the entirety of the
 5   million 47,200 performance.  Those are the two
 6   enclosures.
 7       Q    Do you still have that email?
 8       A    I'm sure I do.  I -- I looked at it the
 9   other night, yeah.
10       Q    Okay.  Aside from those two documents, has
11   Mr. Tashroudian or Jace Hall sent you any other
12   documents or videos related to this case?
13       A    No.  Just those two.  Those were the two
14   ones that were last received, nothing since.  No
15   documentation, no videos, no Word, no PDF
16   enclosures, nothing of that nature.
17       Q    Okay.  Prior to this conversation two weeks
18   ago, when's the last time before that you had spoken
19   with Mr. Tashroudian on the phone?
20       A    That's like asking me what I had for dinner
21   last Monday.  I don't remember.  I honest to God
22   don't remember.  I don't even remember the last time
23   I spoke to Jace.  I'm sure it was within two weeks,
24   but I don't know the exact date.  I honestly don't
25   remember.
 1       Q    When you spoke two weeks ago, can you say
 2   approximately how long that phone call was?
 3       A    Within a half hour.  I don't think we've
 4   ever really had more than one or two really long
 5   calls.  So it would have been within a half hour or
 6   less.
 7       Q    Okay.  In the last two months, how many
 8   times do you think you talked to Tashroudian on the
 9   phone?
10       A    Best estimate under ten.  More than two,
11   but under ten.  I don't know the exact number. I
12   don't keep track.
13       Q    Do you call him on your cell phone, or does
14   he call you on your cell phone?
15       A    Both.  There were some times when I did
16   call him.  Usually he will call me, but a few
17   occasions I called him direct if I happened to have
18   his number and I called.  Usually, though, David
19   will call me.  He will say, Can we speak.
20       Q    Do you delete your phone log on your cell
21   phone?
22       A    I don't even know how to access it on my
23   cell phone.  I'm a very simple person.  I know how
24   to make a call, I know how to see recent calls, and
25   that's about it.
 1       Q    Okay.  Okay.  On this half-an-hour
 2   discussion that you had about two weeks ago, what
 3   was discussed?
 4       A    Again, it was most likely, with the
 5   deposition approaching, it was most likely -- oh, I
 6   know what it was.  I told him that there were three
 7   points that I did not want to get in discussion on
 8   because they have no probative value.  One was my
 9   living arrangement at home.  One was my art
10   collection.  I didn't feel like that was anyone's
11   business other than my own.  And -- what the hell
12   was the other one?  Oh, my -- my social dating
13   habits.  I didn't feel that was anyone's appropriate
14   business.  Those are the three things that I said I
15   do not want to discuss.
16            I also said there's some points I'd like
17   to, you know, discuss because they need to get said,
18   such as, for instance, the TG stock ownership. I
19   wanted to make sure that I had an opportunity to say
20   what I had been told all these years about what was
21   my stock ownership, so things like that.  The points
22   that I would like to talk about, mostly the three
23   things I do not want to talk about.
24            MS. ROSS:  Okay.  Debbie, do you need a
25   break?
 1            THE STENOGRAPHER:  Yeah, that would be
 2   great.
 3            MS. ROSS:  Let's go off the record.
 4            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  Time now is 3:13 p.m.
 5   We are off the record.
 6            (Recess taken)
 7            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  We are back on the
 8   record.  The time now is 3:27 p.m.
 9   BY MS. ROSS:
10       Q    Right before we went on the break, we were
11   discussing your conversations that you've had with
12   Mr. Tashroudian, and you noticed you -- sorry,
13   testified that you had two conversations that were
14   longer than half an hour; is that correct?
15       A    I said I had at least two conversations and
16   probably less than ten conversations within the last
17   date range that you said, which was probably the
18   last month or two.
19            But as far as how many of them were
20   lengthy, I'm sure I've had at least one long
21   conversation, probably two, that were in excess of a
22   half an hour.  Most conversations I had with David
23   tend to be rather brief and well under a half an
24   hour.
25       Q    And those one or two conversations that
 1   were over a half an hour, can you explain the
 2   substance of those, please?
 3       A    The earlier conversations that -- the
 4   earliest conversations that I would have had with
 5   David had to do with well before the deposition date
 6   was set in stone.  These were preliminary
 7   conversations, kind of an introduction.  So, of
 8   course, there was a brief getting to know you and to
 9   discuss the core matter of the suit that TG has
10   versus Billy and Billy has versus TG so as to get me
11   up to speed.  So a lot of earliest conversations was
12   to make sure that I'm fully aware of everything
13   that's going on, what my involvement is.
14            I know I had some questions to David as far
15   as, well, how am I going to testify logistically, am
16   I going to have to be flown somewhere, taken to New
17   York City, can I do a video session from home,
18   things of that nature.  A lot of it was hashing out
19   the details of what eventually would come to
20   transpire.  Of course, we discussed some of the key
21   issues themselves, but as far as did I maintain a
22   log of what was discussed or anything, of course
23   not.
24       Q    Okay.  Have you ever retained or paid
25   Mr. Tashroudian for legal services?
 1       A    Never.  Never came up in discussion, never
 2   been done by action.
 3       Q    Okay.  Today during your deposition, during
 4   any of the breaks, have you had any conversations
 5   with Mr. Tashroudian or Jace Hall?
 6       A    I recently sent him an email which
 7   basically said regarding my inability to hear.  You
 8   guys wanted the video session.  Jace suggested I
 9   probably have a very high security session on my
10   Google Chrome, and I responded to the effect that
11   I'm such a technical idiot, I have no idea that that
12   was in place.  That was my last email response.  Not
13   being flippant, it's just exactly what I told him.
14       Q    Can you talk a little bit louder, move the
15   phone a little closer to your mouth, please?
16       A    Is it easier to hear me now?
17       Q    A little bit louder maybe.
18       A    Is it easier to hear me now?
19       Q    Okay.  So aside from the email prior to us
20   starting deposition, have you had any communications
21   via phone, text or email with Mr. Tashroudian or
22   Jace Hall?
23       A    No.  Just with respect to right before the
24   session began, I was writing to them, again, from a
25   technical point of view, saying, you know, how do I
 1   test; you know, it's telling me that I did the test
 2   properly as far as audio, you guys are not coming
 3   over properly, please help.  These guys tried to
 4   help as best as they could and thankfully everything
 5   is working now.
 6       Q    Okay.  Earlier you testified that the video
 7   of the million 47 score that was sent to you by
 8   Mr. Tashroudian you skipped through.  You didn't
 9   watch the entirety of that tape; correct?
10       A    Correct.
11       Q    Go back to Exhibit F, your declaration.
12            In paragraph -- oh, I'm not sharing my
13   screen.  Sorry.
14            Can you see this?
15       A    Yeah.  This is from 2020.  What David sent
16   to me as a link was just sent within the last 48
17   hours, so what is your question?
18       Q    Well, you didn't give me a chance to ask my
19   question.  I just asked if you could see the
20   document.
21       A    Yes.
22       Q    Okay.  In paragraph 4 it says that you have
23   viewed Billy Mitchell's million 47 score performance
24   posted on the Mitchell score dispute thread on
25   March 23rd, 2018.
 1            When you reviewed this copy of the game
 2   play, did you also skip through it, or did you watch
 3   the whole thing?
 4       A    I only had to watch the key elements, make
 5   sure it was the same thing.
 6       Q    Okay.  So you only skipped through and
 7   watched the three glitches; is that correct?
 8       A    Correct.
 9       Q    Okay.  When you originally adjudicated the
10   score in January of 2006, you watched the entirety
11   of the tape; correct?
12       A    Yeah.  I rewatched the tape because it was
13   a higher degree of clarity.  I re-went through the
14   glitches, right to the end.  It was the same
15   performance.
16       Q    Okay.  Moving on to paragraph 5 you say: I
17   can say with absolute certainty that the videotape
18   performance that I adjudicated in 2006 is the exact
19   same performance that appears in the Mitchell score
20   dispute claim thread as post number 2188; correct?
21       A    Yes, yes.  Performance.
22       Q    But --
23       A    Performance being Billy's actions.
24       Q    It was just a yes or no.
25            But --
 1       A    Yes.
 2       Q    -- you just testified you only watched
 3   through the glitches.  You didn't watch the entire
 4   tape; correct?
 5       A    Correct.
 6       Q    So how can you say with absolute certainty
 7   it's the exact same performance if you didn't watch
 8   the entirety of it?
 9       A    Because the exact same key moments appeared
10   in both performances, because only two people on the
11   planet in that era were able to get those particular
12   scores.  Because they had the same ending results,
13   same anticipated elements, it was the same
14   performances.  You didn't have to watch every minute
15   of the game.
16            (Unreportable simultaneous speaking)
17   BY MS. ROSS:
18       Q    If you are not watching the entirety of the
19   thing, of the game play, how can you say with
20   absolute certainty, as it states here in your
21   declaration, that it was the exact same performance?
22       A    By the same reason that if I watched a
23   videotape right now of the shot that was heard
24   around the world in the baseball game, I would know
25   it's from the exact same game without having to
 1   watch the first several innings.
 2       Q    Isn't it true that --
 3       A    Logic.
 4       Q    Isn't it true that someone could just piece
 5   together the three glitches that you say you see and
 6   rest of the tape could have other stuff and you have
 7   no idea?
 8       A    Of course that's possible, but --
 9       Q    Okay.  Thank you.
10       A    -- it wasn't done.
11       Q    So this paragraph, with absolute certainty
12   that's the exact same performance, really you mean
13   you're certain that those three glitches that we
14   identified earlier, your three indicators, were the
15   exact same?
16       A    Yes.
17       Q    So this is false; correct?
18       A    No, it's not false.
19            In order for Billy to have achieved exactly
20   what did he with each of those key elements, his
21   character had to perform a certain number of actions
22   to get from point A to point B, to be at point B
23   before it went to point C.  All of these things were
24   done.  In fact, it's the exact same thing that's
25   mirrored in the MTV interview at the end of the
 1   performance when he kills two men intentionally at
 2   the end of the game and puts his score up, all of
 3   this is the exact same performance.
 4            I didn't have to watch all 2 hours and 30
 5   minutes of it.  The key elements alone in context
 6   with what I've known all these years, were the exact
 7   same elements as they played out.
 8            I didn't have to watch 2 hours and 30
 9   minutes from start to end to know that that was the
10   same performance.
11       Q    When you reviewed this declaration, did you
12   tell Mr. Tashroudian or Jace Hall that you did not,
13   in fact, watch the entirety of the game play posted
14   on the dispute thread and only watched the three
15   indicator areas that you discuss before?
16       A    Don't remember.  To be honest with you, I
17   don't remember.
18            I read what this document is.  I agreed
19   with everything that's here.  Everything is exactly
20   as I remember it, therefore, I signed it.
21       Q    It's exactly as you remember it as to the
22   three indicators?
23       A    Yes.
24       Q    Okay.
25       A    Everything leading up to them.  Didn't have
 1   to see it to know that for it to get to those
 2   points, everything else had to be done exactly the
 3   way it was done before.
 4       Q    But you don't know because you didn't catch
 5   it all; correct?
 6       A    That's correct.
 7       Q    Okay.  Earlier you testified that the tape
 8   that was shown at AMCAM from "The King of Kong"
 9   filming had glitches because it was a copy; correct?
10       A    Correct.
11       Q    So when you make a copy of a VHS, does it
12   cause glitches?
13            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I'm going to object.  It
14   calls for an expert conclusion.
15            Objection.  Calls for an expert conclusion.
16            You can answer.
17   BY MS. ROSS:
18       Q    Go ahead.
19       A    As I understand it, a copy to a copy of
20   VHS, being that the nature of a videotape itself has
21   a bunch of oxide particles on it, every copy is
22   going to have a slight degradation from the previous
23   copy.
24            In other words, if you take a copy of a
25   copy of a copy of a copy, eventually it's going to
 1   have very low quality.
 2            As far as the videotape copying what was on
 3   the first tape, you have a first tape, you make a
 4   copy of the second, any glitch that was on the first
 5   tape is, of course, going to be part of what's on
 6   the second tape.  And the second tape has within its
 7   context any additional glitches.
 8            Depends on the quality of the tape that
 9   you're using, the speed of the tape, are you
10   recording at 2-hour speed, 4 hours or 6 hours, it
11   can cause additional degradation.
12            As far as are the glitches that were on
13   tape A present on the copy tape B, of course they
14   have to be.  They can't disappear.
15       Q    And tapes that --
16       A    VHS tapes degrade over time; correct?
17            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I'm going to object that
18   he is not an expert and it calls for expert
19   conclusions.
20   BY MS. ROSS:
21       Q    You can answer.
22       A    I know they degrade over time.  What I
23   don't know is over how much time.  It depends on the
24   quality of the tape.
25            If you buy -- back in the day I remember if
 1   you bought TDK, that was probably one of the highest
 2   quality tapes to buy, but it would degrade over a
 3   lengthy period of time.
 4            But if you bought Magnum quality tapes,
 5   which were basically a bunch of sniplets all sewn
 6   together, which was on a very low quality tape, that
 7   would probably degrade within a year or two -- it
 8   depends on the quality of the tape that you're
 9   using.
10            (Stenographer clarification)
11            THE WITNESS:  Magnum is a brand that took
12   sniplets from the manufacturing process.  When the
13   tape had a few extra feet or inches, it would take
14   all of these and catenate them together to make
15   another tape to sell.
16            So if you bought Magnum-brand videotape, it
17   was poor quality to begin with, so it would degrade
18   that much faster.
19   BY MS. ROSS:
20       Q    Okay.  And do you know if, when you copy
21   tapes from a VHS to another VHS, continue to make
22   copies, can it cause other anomalies?
23       A    I'm not a technical expert in terms of
24   making copies, but I can tell you from my personal
25   knowledge that if you take a tape that's recorded at
 1   2 hours' speed and you record it at 6 hours' speed,
 2   you're not going to get the same quality of the
 3   copy.  But as far as causing anomalies, I am not a
 4   technical expert.  I'm really not.  I'm the wrong
 5   person to ask about that.
 6       Q    Okay.  So earlier you testified that this
 7   girder finger issue you only know about because of
 8   items you have read from experts.
 9            Who are these experts?
10       A    Well, from the Jeremy Young discussions.
11   Jeremy is one expert.  There were others that chimed
12   in.  I don't remember their names because in the TG
13   forums, in some cases you don't have the name.  You
14   just have a user name.
15            So I don't remember their names, but the
16   experts would chime in and contribute -- contribute
17   what they knew about it.  I had to sit on the
18   sidelines because I would look like a fool if I
19   chimed in about the girder finger because, first of
20   all, I didn't know it existed back in 2005, and
21   second, I barely understand it right now other than
22   what I'm reading.
23       Q    So when you refer to experts, you just mean
24   other Donkey Kong forum posters; correct?
25       A    The ones that posted with the technical
 1   knowledge about what causes this effect to happen,
 2   yes.
 3       Q    How do you know that they have technical
 4   knowledge to be experts?
 5       A    To be honest with you, just reading it, it
 6   sounds like they are an expert, that's number one.
 7            When the other people were supporting their
 8   statements that also knew about this, that was
 9   number two.
10            And number three, very few people
11   challenged the findings because of the totality in
12   which they presented their evidence.  So I took them
13   to be experts.  Nobody defines them as being
14   experts.  I took them as being experts, plain and
15   simple.
16       Q    Outside of the dispute thread, did you read
17   any other, quote/unquote, expert's opinions on the
18   girder finger issue?
19       A    YouTube videos.  There was a few YouTube
20   videos I listened to, one of which might have been
21   the one by Karl Jobst, but generally it was what was
22   on the TG thread, because I don't have time to be
23   looking at other gaming forums that discuss the
24   matter, such as Donkey Kong Forum or
25   classicarcadegaming.com.  They are just reiterations
 1   of what was already going on the TG forum, so my
 2   sole form of information was TG forum.
 3       Q    Apologize.  I meant the TG forum, not the
 4   Donkey Kong Forum.
 5       A    Yes.
 6       Q    Okay.
 7       A    Correct.
 8       Q    During this dispute thread, how often would
 9   you say you went on to look at the comments?
10       A    I say every one to two days, depending on
11   what I was doing with my work and personal life.
12   Probably at least once every 48 hours for sure.
13            Eventually it reached a point where the
14   comments were same old, same old and I just stopped
15   listening to it, but initially I was reading it at
16   least once every, you know, day or two just to try
17   to keep pace with everything.
18       Q    There were also posts supporting Billy and
19   saying he didn't cheat; correct?
20       A    Yes.  There was several different camps, if
21   you will.  There was the pro-Billy camp, there was
22   the anti-Billy camp.  The anti-Billy camp being the
23   ones that said he was not playing on original
24   hardware and the pro-Billy camp which said he did.
25            Basically that's it.  It was either you
 1   said he did or you said he didn't do it.  You agreed
 2   with the findings, you didn't agree with the
 3   findings.
 4       Q    So why choose to believe the side that is
 5   agreeing that Billy cheated versus the other side?
 6       A    Well, because I looked at the evidence as
 7   it was presented, and based on my former expertise
 8   as a TG referee and based on my years of gaming
 9   acumen, it seemed to be the version of what happened
10   that had the most plausibility to it.  And,
11   therefore, I accepted the findings as being logical
12   and conclusive, as was my right to do so.
13       Q    Even though you have seen Billy play and
14   adjudicated his tapes yourself before, you chose to
15   side with the people who were explaining the girder
16   finger and other items that you're not even
17   technically savvy enough to understand, per your own
18   testimony?
19       A    Yes.
20            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I'm going to object that
21   misstates his prior testimony.  I'm going to object
22   that it misstates his prior testimony.
23            You can answer.
24   BY MS. ROSS:
25       Q    Go ahead.
 1       A    I would answer that my previous
 2   adjudication of Billy's scores, based on my
 3   knowledge at the time, it was pointed out to me by
 4   several people in the thread that I goofed and I
 5   missed something, which years ago I didn't have the
 6   technical knowledge to catch.  I accept that.  It
 7   happened.  And as a result of that, I accepted a
 8   score years back where almost 15 to 20 years later,
 9   I would not have, based on current technical
10   understanding of the performance in question.
11   BY MS. ROSS:
12       Q    So had nothing to do with the fact that you
13   had a falling out with your friendship with Billy
14   and Twin Galaxies people before Jace owned it and
15   were now friends with Jace?
16       A    No.  Because after I reviewed Billy's
17   performance, which was 2006, I never once questioned
18   Billy's performances until 2018.  So in all that
19   time, I was a hundred percent behind Billy's million
20   47, his million 14.  I had no reason to doubt those
21   scores at all, none.
22            I wasn't personally witness to his million
23   and 50,000 score that he did at the mortgage brokers
24   convention or any other scores he might have done
25   since then, but I never questioned Billy's scores
 1   publicly.  I never had any reason to.
 2            It was the revelation that was pointed out
 3   in Jeremy Young thread that gave me pause for
 4   consideration and the more that people responded
 5   with follow-up comments and insight that I came to
 6   see that there was an element of that performance,
 7   which I did not know enough to check for, and which
 8   showed me that I had validated a performance that
 9   should not have been validated.
10       Q    What if a qualified engineer told you that
11   the game play in the million 47 tape could be done
12   on original hardware?
13       A    Well --
14            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Objection.
15            THE WITNESS:  -- any score --
16            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  Hold on, Robert.
17            Objection.  Incomplete hypothetical.
18            You can answer.
19            THE WITNESS:  I can answer to one extent.
20   People have since gotten almost a million 3,
21   therefore, it is entirely plausible that a score of
22   a million 47 could be done on original hardware or
23   on nonoriginal hardware or on MAME.  The reason
24   being, it's done.
25            By the same reason that if somebody right
 1   now is able to run the mile in under four minutes,
 2   of course the mile could be run in under five
 3   minutes.  It's a given.
 4            So, yes, the score could have been done on
 5   original hardware, because it has been done by other
 6   people on original hardware.  That's a given.
 7   BY MS. ROSS:
 8       Q    Earlier we talked about the live
 9   performance at mortgage brokers which you believe
10   was adjudicated by senior ref Todd Rogers.
11            Do you have any opinion as to that score
12   being done on original hardware or not?
13       A    I wasn't present for it.  I never saw a
14   video of it.  The only knowledge I have is anecdotal
15   based on what Billy told me when we were on speaking
16   terms of how he had recorded it as well as the chain
17   of custody authentication process he set in motion,
18   also recent anecdotal evidence as it appeared on the
19   forums that we have additional information about the
20   event.
21            But, again, I wasn't personally there.  So
22   my opinion of the event is based solely on what I
23   previously heard then and what I'm hearing now.
24            I haven't made a formal opinion of it
25   because I have never physically even seen the score
 1   itself.  I have only heard about what happened
 2   during the event.  So any opinion I have is based on
 3   incomplete facts.  I never saw the performance.
 4       Q    Would you agree that a score that is
 5   adjudicated on a live event by a senior referee is
 6   given deference versus any tape that might have been
 7   taped from that same event?
 8       A    Based on the rules that were in place with
 9   Twin Galaxies at the time of the event, a senior
10   referee had the purview to authenticate a score at a
11   live event without the score even being taped.
12            Those were the rules at one point in time.
13   I think they were still in existence, although
14   somebody after I left TG might have tightened up the
15   rules specific to Donkey Kong.  I didn't really keep
16   track of details of that.  But I know that specific
17   to Donkey Kong at some point, more stringent rules
18   were created.
19            But at that point in time when the mortgage
20   broker event took place, Todd was the representative
21   senior referee and, as long as he did his job
22   properly, should have been responsible for
23   adjudicating the totality of the performance all
24   inclusive.  That includes the game being turned on,
25   the game being properly booted up, coin inserted,
 1   play the game out, all of that he is responsible
 2   for, or rather was responsible for it.
 3       Q    So you agree that the deference should be
 4   given to the senior referee adjudicating the score
 5   verse watching a tape years later that may or may
 6   not be the game play; correct?
 7       A    Incorrect.  If the referee in question made
 8   a mistake in the adjudicating process, misstep,
 9   et cetera, just like my own adjudication that was
10   years later found to have inconsistencies, then the
11   tape should override the referee's decision, just as
12   it is with my decision.
13            I adjudicated a million 47.  I did not know
14   about the screen transitions with the girders.  It
15   is a -- it was pointed out by technical experts that
16   this is a indisputable fact and which I did not know
17   about 17-plus years ago.  So in that case the tape
18   overrides the referee.
19       Q    Okay.  Few more questions for you.
20            You testified earlier that after you quit
21   Twin Galaxies, some months later Brian Kuh picked up
22   the entire library of tapes; correct?
23       A    Correct.  In November of 2007, he drove me
24   back from Fun Spot from my vacation and we loaded up
25   all the tapes into Brian Kuh's car who then drove
 1   him back all the way to New Hampshire where the
 2   intent was to drop it off with Twin Galaxies referee
 3   at large, Shawn Cram, to take custody of it on
 4   behalf of Twin Galaxies.
 5       Q    And Billy Mitchell's million 47 tape was
 6   part of those tapes; correct?
 7       A    As long as it was still in my possession at
 8   that point in time -- it would have been -- because
 9   once Brian Kuh took that carload of tapes, I had no
10   other TG tapes in my possession.
11       Q    When you say as long as it would have been
12   in your possession, why wouldn't it have been in
13   your possession?
14       A    As previously testified, there were a few
15   tapes that may have been given out to other TG
16   referees, which I -- some I remembered, some I may
17   not have remembered.  If those tapes were given out
18   to a previous TG referee for co-validation or
19   questioning or review for whatever reason and I
20   didn't remember it and it wasn't given back to me,
21   it would not have been part of what was given to
22   Brian Kuh to drive back.
23       Q    So after your adjudication in 2006 of the
24   million 47 tape, you have no way to say for certain
25   either way that any tape that's found that is the
 1   1047 -- million 47 tape is the original that you
 2   had; correct?
 3       A    The only thing I can say with a matter of
 4   certainty was after the adjudication of the million
 5   47 tape, the one that was sent to my home address
 6   and the one which subsequently became part of the
 7   MTV interview, that tape's whereabouts after that, I
 8   can't tell you with certainity [sic] that it was
 9   still in my residence after the MTV Steven Totilo
10   returned it to me, because what was given to Brian
11   Kuh in November of '07, there was no manifest tape
12   by tape of what was in what I estimate to be about
13   1600 tapes in a number of boxes.
14            I can only tell you that everything was
15   given to Brian that I had.  There was nothing
16   leftover at that the point.
17       Q    Okay.  So, again, my question was:  You
18   can't say for certain whether any copies of the
19   million 47 game play that are found today or were
20   found since 2006 after you adjudicated it are the
21   original tape that you had; correct?
22       A    No way for me to give thumbs-up certainity
23   for that for sure.
24       Q    Okay.
25       A    The only thing I was ever certain of is the
 1   tape that was in my possession that I received in
 2   the mail which I adjudicated at home which I went to
 3   MTV and which MTV returned.
 4       Q    Okay.  So just for clarity, yes or no, you
 5   can't say for certain that any tape, since you got
 6   it back in 2006, is an original tape that has
 7   surfaced since then; correct?
 8       A    Of course, no.
 9       Q    Thank you.
10            At some point you were banned from Twin
11   Galaxies; correct?
12       A    In February of 2007, after I left Twin
13   Galaxies, a publication called the Guinness book of
14   records issued a video game guide, a video game book
15   of records, and there was an inclusion there which
16   was of Roy Shildt, a Missile Command player, having
17   played at a higher degree of difficulty than world
18   champion Tony Temple.
19            I wrote to Walter Day in protest that he --
20   and publicly in the forums -- that TG should take
21   action to contact Guinness to have them issue a
22   retraction or TG should rescind all involved in the
23   Guinness because they did this without any vetting
24   whatsoever based on the requests of an interested
25   party, Roy Shildt.
 1            Walter Day took great umbrage to what I
 2   wrote publicly and my TG account was summarily
 3   deleted and all my forum posts were reduced guest
 4   status.  That's what happened in 2007 February.
 5            Later when Jace Hall took over, way back in
 6   2013, my TG account was, of course, reinstated, but
 7   in actions that took place approximately 2020 or so
 8   involving toxicity on the forums specific to certain
 9   individuals, Jace Hall effectively banned four
10   individuals all at the same time.  And eventually,
11   as I understand it, including myself were all -- had
12   the ban unbanned, although I have yet to rejoin the
13   TG forums because I just quite honestly don't trust
14   the toxicity on the forums ever again, with all due
15   respect to Jace.
16       Q    All right.  At some point were you caught
17   entering your own scores into the Twin Galaxy
18   database when you were referee?
19       A    You're using an incorrect word.  It's not
20   caught.
21            We were entering our own scores because of
22   necessity.  What happened was as follows:  Twin
23   Galaxies' former worldwide arcade MAME editor Mark
24   Longridge resigned abruptly.  Nobody was handling
25   entry of arcade scores.  Nobody was handing --
 1   handling entry of MAME scores, and we had an
 2   extremely limited number of ancillary referees to
 3   handle score entry.  They were backlogged by the
 4   hundreds.
 5            I had the ability to enter my own scores
 6   out of necessity, because in that incarnation of the
 7   TG database -- and you would have to know this
 8   intimately from 2004 -- the rules associated with TG
 9   games could not physically be visible to anyone
10   outside of Twin Galaxies staff unless at least one
11   score was entered into the database.
12            Mark was not here to enter scores.  I had
13   no other resources.  So inaugural scores on a number
14   of titles were entered.  Most of these scores were
15   immediately beaten over the next 12 months, but
16   scores were entered into the TG database by
17   referees, including myself.
18            Because we were an extremely small
19   grassroots organization, we placed a lot of trust
20   into the hands of the referees that they would not
21   abuse the privilege, although unfortunately some
22   did.  I was one of the few that could say with a
23   matter of certainty that I did not abuse the
24   privilege of entering my own scores.  All of my
25   scores had backup, either on VHS tape or in the case
 1   of MAME, a digital format.
 2       Q    When you say other referees were doing it,
 3   who else?
 4       A    They had a number of referees.  Todd Rogers
 5   eventually joined as a referee.  He was given
 6   permission to enter between 50 and 100 scores. I
 7   gave him personal permission to do that.
 8            Unfortunately he started to enter some
 9   other scores on his own -- of his own.
10            Ron Corcoran through his ouster entered a
11   couple of his scores on his own that he shouldn't
12   have.
13            And, as I found out, over time there were
14   some other referees that would in collusion with
15   each other cross enter their own scores.  Wasn't a
16   perfect system.  There was no secondary review,
17   referee A entered a score, referee B had to click
18   accept.  We entrusted the referees to do what was
19   right, what was accurate, and with integrity, and
20   unfortunately some of them abused the process.
21       Q    Who adjudicated the scores that you entered
22   of your own?
23       A    Most of the scores that I entered of my
24   own, the MAME scores were open ended.  They were
25   posted to TG's website for anyone to see.
 1            The videotape scores were largely from the
 2   summer competitions of 2001.  There was no other
 3   referee to ever watch those scores.  None of those
 4   scores were world records.  They were mostly second,
 5   third, fourth place scores, et cetera.  They all got
 6   entered because there was at least 2 or 300 of them.
 7            Scores that were culled from my November
 8   trips to Fun Spot, I was fully empowered as a live
 9   referee to enter those scores if any scores called
10   from a Fun Spot event.
11            Monthly MAME competition scores, which did
12   happen for several years, on a specific title I
13   handled the monthly MAME competitions up until my
14   resignation.  And any scores submitted, including my
15   own, I was able to enter them up to a point in time.
16            A point was reached as a matter of
17   historical record when Todd Rogers entered a 5
18   million-plus score on Donkey Kong for the NES, which
19   was told to me by gamer Tom Votava as being flat-out
20   impossible.  And at that point CTO Brien King
21   immediately, on his own with everyone's approval,
22   later built in a provision whereby no referee, not
23   even Walter, could enter their own scores into the
24   TG database.
25            At that point in time, I was no longer
 1   entering my scores and no other referee was entering
 2   their scores, and that's the way it remained in
 3   place until my resignation, and I was fine with
 4   that.
 5       Q    Do you know if Billy Mitchell ever entered
 6   his own scores?
 7       A    Billy Mitchell probably didn't even know
 8   how to enter his own scores.  I seriously doubt he
 9   ever entered any of his scores because he wouldn't
10   know how.
11       Q    Other than the communications -- strike
12   that.
13            Earlier you testified that Walter Day told
14   you Billy would be sending you the original million
15   47 tape; correct?
16       A    Yes.
17       Q    Did he tell you this on a phone call?
18       A    Of course.  We were at the tail end of the
19   Fun Spot event.  This was on the Sunday morning
20   after the performance of a million 47 was shown. I
21   did not know yet that Walter had entered Billy's
22   score into the database.  We discussed the events of
23   the night prior.  I went home.  I reversed the score
24   on the TG database, taking it out.
25            Walter was informed.  We had a subsequent
 1   conversation via phone call.  And at some point
 2   Billy told -- Walter told me that Billy would be
 3   sending me the higher degree quality tape, master
 4   tape.
 5       Q    Did he say master tape, or did he just say
 6   a higher degree quality tape?
 7       A    The master tape.  It's not like Billy had
 8   three different degrees of tapes.  He had the
 9   original and he had the copy that was sent to Fun
10   Spot.  Walter said Billy would be sending me the
11   original, the master tape as far as I'm cornered.
12            MS. ROSS:  Okay.  That's all.
13            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  All right.  I have a
14   couple follow-up questions.
15            THE WITNESS:  Go ahead.
16
17                   FURTHER EXAMINATION
18   BY MR. TASHROUDIAN:
19       Q    Did you -- did you lend the 1047 master
20   tape to Dwayne Richard at any time?
21       A    It's entirely possibly.  I don't remember.
22   The score was already adjudicated.  It wasn't going
23   to be removed from the TG database after I entered
24   it.  So if Dwayne wanted to see it, I might have
25   lent it to him.
 1            Hold on one second, please.  My apologies.
 2            I could have lent it to him, yes, and
 3   forgotten about it, so I'm not going to say, no, I
 4   never lent it to him.  It's entirely possibly that I
 5   did.
 6       Q    Would you have lent it to him prior to the
 7   MTV interview?
 8       A    No.  There would have been no time to lend
 9   it to him prior to the MTV interview.  The tape
10   arrived.  It was adjudicated, lent to Steven Totilo,
11   did whatever his production team did, and then it
12   came back.  So, no, there would have been absolutely
13   no time to give Dwayne that tape within that window.
14       Q    The three sort of identifying anomalies
15   that you have, I guess identified in the 1047 tape,
16   did you ever share those anomalies with anybody?
17       A    I'm sure I did in interviews over the
18   years.  I did a number of interviews with Rob
19   Santellan, Rudy Ferretti, ersatz_cats, probably
20   someone else that I've forgotten about.  And if the
21   discussion ever came up regarding ACAM event, I'm
22   sure I went into extreme details of it.  I was very
23   forthright in many of my interviews in terms of the
24   explicit details.
25            My story has remained consistently over the
 1   years, although I one time forgotten, I thought that
 2   Billy's 000 rollover occurred in an elevator screen,
 3   it was really a barrel screen.  Beyond that slip up
 4   of memory, my story has been very consistent.  With
 5   every interview I have ever done, anytime I've
 6   written it in a forum response, and I'm sure it's in
 7   a forum response multiple times over the years,
 8   because I discussed the matter ad nauseam.  So I'm
 9   sure it's out there for everyone to see.
10       Q    Do you know if Todd Rogers ever entered
11   fake -- fake scores of his own into the TG database?
12       A    Yes, he did.  He was the reason why Brien
13   King had to build in a provision that TG staffers
14   could no longer enter their scores.  Todd Rogers was
15   given permission by me to enter approximately 50 to
16   100 scores, reason being is that Ron Corcoran who
17   was the Atari referee was ousted from Twin Galaxies
18   and there was nobody else to enter Todd's scores.
19            So I gave Todd permission because none of
20   the scores were outlandish; however, Todd took
21   advantage of that and entered certain other scores,
22   most notably a 5-plus million score on NES Donkey
23   Kong, which Tom Votava, the former world champion,
24   pointed out to me.
25            And once that happened, all referees,
 1   including myself and Walter, had their ability to
 2   self-enter scores removed programmatically by chief
 3   technical officer and chief programmer for TG, Brien
 4   King.
 5       Q    Do you recall which of Todd Rogers's scores
 6   that he entered into the database were actually
 7   fake?
 8       A    Well, unfortunately there was several, but
 9   the one I remember best was the -- that was the
10   Donkey Kong score in the NES.
11            Todd did enter, again with my permission,
12   50 to 100 other scores, but Todd also had scores
13   already in the database entered by Corcoran,
14   supposedly by Corcoran, which were outrageous and
15   which I had over a period of years asked Todd as a
16   fellow referee, as a fellow senior referee, I gave
17   him the courtesy of sending me sniplets of -- for
18   instance, the last 60 seconds of his Kaboom!
19   Difficulty A, 960,001 score, his claimed Super Man
20   score on game B of 47 seconds and so forth, I asked
21   him to provide me with copies of these of about
22   seven to ten scores that I found to be outrageous.
23            And I told him I will give you the benefit
24   of the doubt of all of your scores if you simply
25   send me these few that I'm asking for, and he never
 1   sent them after requesting for several years, always
 2   coming up with one excuse after another, typically
 3   that they are buried in a pile and can't find it.
 4   And I never was able to do anything about it until
 5   the point that I left as a TG referee.  And at that
 6   point it was -- honestly, it was the other referees
 7   problems to deal with it.
 8            The issue never came up again until Todd's
 9   Dragster score was dragged under the carpet by an
10   Omni gamer and another well-noted TG thread pulling
11   out that score and at that point came into surface.
12   I told Jace that there was all these scores from
13   before that Todd never came forward to and showed me
14   copies of.  That, plus the evidence that Todd was
15   self-entering scores also was another nail in the
16   coffin, if you will, to Todd's scores getting ousted
17   from the TG database.
18            So, yes, Todd did self-enter a number of
19   scores.  Corcoran also potentially entered scores of
20   Todd's that were fraudulent.  And I have no way of
21   knowing which entered which.  There was just no way
22   to tell --
23       Q    How do you know --
24       A    -- that they were fraudulently entered.
25       Q    How do you know that the 5 million point
 1   Donkey Kong NES score was fraudulent by Todd?
 2       A    That was easy.  That's easy.
 3            Tom Votava, who is a well-known worldwide
 4   SNES gamer expert, Tom was the reigning world
 5   champion of the title and those -- how the game
 6   plays out at those levels, but not at that level
 7   because it had never been done before because it had
 8   difficulty, what the difficulty is.
 9            Tom pointed out to me the improbability of
10   that score existing, and based on Tom's expertise
11   and his reputation in gaming is absolutely
12   impeccable.  He has never once been accused of
13   cheating in all these years.  Based on that, I took
14   it as a matter of fact that Todd's score could not
15   possibly have been done.
16       Q    Todd Rogers a cheater?
17       A    I didn't like to think of Todd as a
18   cheater.  I had regarded Todd as, quite honestly,
19   the brother that I never had for a great many years.
20   But over time Todd's claimed scores, his reticence
21   about providing proof, and then the subsequent
22   revelation of the impossibility of his long-claimed
23   Dragster score showed me, unfortunately, that a
24   great gamer that I put a lot of faith in as being
25   one of the greatest console gamers I had ever heard
 1   of had, in fact, cheated on a number of scores, and
 2   not simply cheated, may simply never have done the
 3   scores.
 4       Q    All right.
 5       A    There's a difference, cheating and
 6   fraudulently claiming a score you've never done.
 7       Q    You testified earlier that Mr. Mitchell
 8   told you how he recorded the 2007 mortgage brokers
 9   score.
10            Do you remember that testimony?
11       A    Very well, yes.
12       Q    All right.  How did he tell you that?  Was
13   it by telephone call?  In person?
14       A    Telephone call.  At that point, post-2006,
15   I don't remember how often I saw Billy face-to-face.
16   Only on a -- maybe once after that at most, but what
17   Billy told me was that he would have a camera on the
18   game floor itself next to the game pointing at the
19   machine and a second camera, from what he said, was
20   an upper level deck or balcony pointing downward so
21   you could capture, not just him playing from an
22   overhead view, but also the other camera itself
23   recording that performance.  This is what he told me
24   when we were still on speaking terms.
25       Q    Did he tell you that he recorded that
 1   performance at mortgage brokers by direct feed?
 2       A    Well, the balcony camera of course could
 3   not possibly have been direct feed.  It would have
 4   been too far away.
 5            The other camera, the way he told me, is
 6   that it would be situated next to the game focused
 7   on the game itself, the game screen, which implies
 8   that that would not have been direct feed.
 9            And, again, I have never seen the mortgage
10   broker performance tape itself.  It was never sent
11   to me for adjudication as I was no longer a TG
12   referee when it transpired.
13       Q    My question is -- that's a great answer. I
14   appreciate that.  My question is a little bit
15   different though, and I want to know if he told you
16   this.
17            Did Billy Mitchell tell you that he
18   recorded his mortgage brokers score by direct feed?
19       A    He did not say those exact words, no.
20            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  All right.  Okay.  I'm
21   done as well.
22            MS. ROSS:  I just have one follow-up
23   question.
24
25                   FURTHER EXAMINATION
 1   BY MS. ROSS:
 2       Q    You said you were interviewed with
 3   esrat_cats [sic].
 4            Do you know his real name?
 5       A    Ersatz_cats.  All I know is his first name
 6   is Walter.  He has a -- he is well-known on the TG
 7   forums.  I know he has made multiple posts, but his
 8   first name I only know as Walter.  I don't know his
 9   last name.
10       Q    And how did you do your interview with him?
11       A    They are on YouTube actually.  I have at
12   least a two- to three-hour interview with him on
13   YouTube.  I may, in fact, even have two interviews
14   with him on YouTube.
15            He came to know me because I was a
16   well-known figure at Twin Galaxies and also I had
17   direct involvement with the Donkey Kong proceedings
18   from way back in 2004-2005.  And at some point he
19   requested an interview with me, which I granted.
20   And I believe I gave him a second interview at some
21   point a year or two later.
22            They are on YouTube for you to find and
23   listen to, if you are so inclined.
24       Q    Thank you.  My question is a bit different.
25   I asked how you did the interview.  Was it in
 1   person?  Was it video recording?  Telephone?
 2       A    My apologies.  It was via right now.  I had
 3   a headset on or I was doing phone, one of the two,
 4   but it was not via Zoom session or anything like
 5   that.  It was either headset or phone call.  My gut
 6   tells me it was phone, because I don't believe I
 7   ever did a Zoom session with him, but I definitely
 8   was audio recorded only, not video.
 9            MS. ROSS:  Thank you.  That's all.
10            THE WITNESS:  Phone was most likely it.
11            MS. ROSS:  Thank you.  That's all.
12            THE WITNESS:  Anything else?
13            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I think we are done.
14   That was long.  That was a long day.
15            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  Are we ready to go off
16   record?
17            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I think so.
18            THE WITNESS:  Can I say one more thing for
19   the record, just as a matter of FYI?
20            The scenes that were in "King of Kong" that
21   showed me in my home, that was at a different
22   address than I'm at right now.  Is it a matter of
23   need for me to tell you what that address is or no?
24            MR. TASHROUDIAN:  I don't think so.
25            THE WITNESS:  Okay.
 1            THE VIDEOGRAPHER:  The time now is
 2   4:19 p.m.  We are off the record.
 3            THE STENOGRAPHER:  Ms. Ross, did you need a
 4   copy of the transcript?
 5            MS. ROSS:  Yes, can we get an electronic
 6   copy of the transcript, please.
 7            (Deposition concluded at 4:19 p.m.)
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
 1           DECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY
 2
 3          I, ROBERT MRUCZEK, do hereby certify under
 4   penalty of perjury that I have read the foregoing
 5   transcript of my deposition taken on July 21, 2023;
 6   that I have made such corrections as appear noted on
 7   the Deposition Errata Page, attached hereto, signed
 8   by me; that my testimony as contained herein, as
 9   corrected, is true and correct.
10
11          Dated this _______ day of ___________, 2023,
12   at __________________________, California.
13
14                           __________________________
                             ROBERT MRUCZEK
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25