Stein cleverly weaved in every fact he intended to produce, and the jury, rather than being bored, was absolutely fixated on his version of the story.

"Ladies and Gentlemen, finally I would like to remind you that it is the Plaintiff who must bear the burden of bringing forth evidence to support each of her claims. Think of it as a puzzle. We all know what a puzzle looks like if it's only missing a few pieces here and there. We can still tell what the picture is. But if the puzzle is missing too many pieces, it's impossible to recognize the picture without looking at the box. What does not fit in this puzzle is the act of murder. And, like that unfinished and undiscernible puzzle, even though I believe that the evidence the Plaintiff produces will not be enough to make a case of RICO, we will present evidence that negates the bank of any responsibility."

When Stein had finished, Brent realized that Stein had planted seeds in the minds of each of the jurors that he would cultivate and water during the trial. The jurors had now been briefed. All of their biases and prejudices, their first impressions of April, Brent, Stein, and Black and Bernstein, had all been fixed in stone. Whether the evidence that was presented could change any of those pre-formulated opinions would not be known until the end of the trial.

37.

"Mr. Marks, you may call your first witness, said Judge Masters.

"The Plaintiff calls Tanya Barton."

Barton was a custodian of records for Prudent Bank. She was short, timid, and was dressed in a 90's style business suit, as if she had recently purchased her wardrobe at the Goodwill or had just forgotten to take it there. Her testimony, although dry, was essential to establishing the elements of the case.

Barton testified that in 2006, Tentane Mutual had loaned $750,000 to the Marshes, and identified their loan application, the subprime promissory note and deed of trust. She also verified that the note contained an adjustable rate rider allowing the interest rate to adjust, or increase, on the first day of June 2006 and on that day every month thereafter for the entire life of the loan. With Barton's testimony, Brent had established that the Marshes had taken out a subprime, toxic loan with Tentane that had provisions for "death spiral" interest rate increases that would make it impossible for them to pay their payments later on. Later, Brent would call Bernstein to testify that he prequalified the Marshes for this loan, even though they had no income at the time.

Barton further identified the Pooling and Service Agreement (PSA) that Tentane had entered into with Deutschland Bank, which was governed by New York law, and the trust it created that was called "Tentane Mutual Pass- Through Certificates, Mortgage Series 2006-TT53 Trust." The intention of Tentane was to transfer the Marsh loan into the trust along with hundreds of millions of dollars in other mortgages, take the money, and then forget about them.

Altogether, the trust would hold over $2 billion in mortgages, which would be sold off to investors as mortgage backed securities in a virtual free for all. Barton read into the record that portion of the Pooling and Service Agreement that required any transfer of any mortgage or deed of trust to be before the closing date of the trust.

"Ms. Barton, can you please tell the Court when the closing date of the trust was?"

"August 20, 2006."

"And when was the Marsh loan transferred to the trust?"

"It was transferred by assignment on September 26, 2008."

"Objection and move to strike," barked Stein. "Ms. Marsh has no standing to raise any issue with regard to the assignment."

"Counsel, please approach the bench with the Court reporter," said Judge Masters. All the lawyers and the reporter came to the bench, outside the earshot of the jury.

"Your Honor," said Stein. "The Marshes were not privy to the Pooling Service Agreement, and it is not relevant to the issues of this case. Ms. Marsh has no standing to enforce the terms of the Agreement. "

"Mr. Marks, how does your client have standing to raise the issue of the assignment to the trust?"

"Your Honor, if the assignment was made after the closing date of the trust, then Prudent Bank lacks the legal right to enforce the note. I cite Glaski v. Bank of America, 218 Cal. App. 4th 1079."

"Your Honor," said Stein, "Neither the Plaintiff nor her parents were primary parties nor were they third party beneficiaries with respect to the pooling service agreement, and have no standing to enforce the terms of the PSA."

"What about that Mr. Marks?"

"Your Honor, this is a declaratory relief action. If the transfer to the PSA was void because it was made after the closing, then nobody seeking to enforce that deed of trust who claims ownership or servicing rights pursuant to the PSA has the right to foreclose."

"Good point, Mr. Marks. Consistent with the Glaski case, I will allow it in, and leave it for the jury to decide its weight."

All counsel took their places in the courtroom.

"You may proceed, Mr. Marks."

"The assignment occurred over two years after the closing date of the trust, correct?"

"It appears so, yes."

"Calling your attention to Exhibit 5, can you identify this document?"

"Yes, that is the assignment of the Marsh deed of trust to the Tentane Mutual Pass-Through Certificates, Mortgage Series 2006-TT53 Trust."

"Thank you. Your Honor. I move that Exhibit 5 be admitted into evidence."

"Exhibit 5 is received."

Brent next had Barton identify the Notice of Default on the Marshes' deed of trust, which began a 90 day default period, and the Notice of Trustee's Sale, which began a 21 day period, the last day of which would be the foreclosure sale.

"Your Honor, I move Exhibits 6 and 7 into evidence."

"Any objection? Exhibits 6 and 7 are admitted."

Brent had already established that the Marshes' loan had been transferred to the trust by Tentane Mutual after the closing of the trust. He went on to have Barton identify all of the filings of the trust with the S.E.C., which showed that Tentane Mutual had sold all of the deeds of trust in the trust to various investors as mortgage backed securities.

"Now, Ms. Barton, I am showing you what has been marked collectively as Exhibit 9. Can you identify these documents?"

"It looks like the payment and collection records on the Marsh loan from Tentane Mutual."

"And Exhibit 10?"

"Exhibit 10 appears to be the payment and collection records on the Marsh loan from Prudent Bank."

"And from these records, can you determine who now services and collects payments under the Marsh loan?"

"Prudent Bank services the loan and collects any payments made on it."

"Thank you Ms. Barton. Your Honor, I move Exhibits 9 and 10 into evidence."

"No objection? They are received."

"Finally, Ms. Barton, can you please identify Exhibit 11?"

Barton flipped through Exhibit 11, which was voluminous.

"Exhibit 11 appears to be the Agreement with the FDIC for the purchase of the assets of Tentane Mutual by Prudent Bank."

"And is this your certification on Exhibit 12 that Exhibit 11 is a true copy of that agreement?"

"It is."

"Your Honor, I move that Exhibits 11 and 12 be admitted into evidence."

"Any objection, Mr. Stein? 11 and 12 are admitted."

"Ms. Barton, can you please identify Exhibit 13?"

"Yes. Exhibit 13 is a letter from Adelay Gioriano, the collection manager of Prudent Bank."

"And what do your records show was the purpose of this letter?"

"To tell Mr. and Mrs. Marsh that Prudent had taken over their loan and to send further payments to Prudent Bank."

Brent moved the exhibit into evidence and it was admitted.

"Thank you, Ms. Barton. No further questions, Your Honor," said Brent.

Brent knew that Stein would not benefit from asking any questions on cross-examination about most of the paperwork that was in evidence, and he couldn't risk boring the jury any further, or emphasizing anything that was potentially damaging. However, since the judge had allowed the pooling and service agreement and the late assignment of the Marsh loan into evidence, he had to exercise some damage control.

"Mr. Stein, your witness."

"Thank you, Your Honor. Ms. Barton, I call your attention to Exhibit 3, the pooling and service agreement. That agreement was made in August 2006, is that correct?"

"Objection," said Brent. "The Exhibit speaks for itself."

"It does," said the judge, but this is cross examination. I will allow it."

"Yes, the agreement was made in August 2006," said Barton.

"And the Marsh loan closed in April 2006, isn't that correct?"

"Yes, it did."

"And neither Mr. Marsh nor Mrs. Marsh were parties to the pooling servicing agreement, isn't that correct?"

"Yes."

"So then, since their escrow had already closed, Mr. and Mrs. Marsh were not contemplated by the parties to the pooling service agreement to have any benefits flowing from that agreement, isn't that correct?"

"Objection! Lack of foundation, argumentative and calls for a legal conclusion," said Brent.

"Yes," Barton blurted out.

"Move to strike the answer," said Brent.

"Sustained. The jury will disregard the question and the answer. Ms. Barton, remember what I told you. Wait for the objection to be ruled on before you answer."

Too late, they already heard it. That was Stein's plan. He had taken advantage of the fact that Barton would follow her pattern and jump to the answer before a ruling on the objection.

Confucius said, Study the past if you would define the future. Brent should have been prepared to jump in with his objection before the ink had dried on Stein's question. But Barton knew which side she was on. She knew she had to downplay what would be damaging to her employer. Thus, the seed for the defense was planted in each of the 12 brains in the jury box. Brent's job would be to make sure that seed would never grow.

38.

"The Plaintiff calls Ms. Adelay Gioriano."

Adelay Gioriano was a low level executive at Prudent Bank, charged with mortgage loan collections. She reluctantly took the witness stand in a floral print skirt with white blouse, and nervously avoided looking at the jury. Brent questioned her on her position with the bank and went over all the documents, then zeroed in for the kill.

"Ms. Gioriano, in September 2008, when Prudent Bank took over the assets of Tentane Mutual, your department performed an inventory of all the mortgage loans that Prudent was taking over, isn't that correct?"

"Yes we did."

"And as part of that inventory, your department performed due diligence on the papers and records of every mortgage loan, isn't that correct?"

"Yes. It was a very big job."

"I'm certain that it was. Now, Ms. Gioriano, you are familiar with Exhibit 3, The Pooling Service Agreement for the Tentane Mutual Pass- Through Certificates, Mortgage Series 2006-TT53 Trust, are you not?"

"I am."

"And, calling your attention to Exhibit 2, this is the assignment of the Marsh mortgage loan to this trust, isn't it?"

"Yes, it appears to be."

"What is the date of the assignment?"

"September 26, 2008."

"And that was by Tentane Mutual to the trust, correct?"

"Yes."

"What was the date of the agreement with the FDIC to take over Tentane's assets?"

"September 25, 2008."

"So Tentane Mutual assigned the Marsh loan to the trust the day after Prudent Bank took over Tentane's assets?"

"Objection argumentative," said Stein.

"Overruled," said Judge Masters.

"I'm not sure," said Gioriano.