ÿWPCk  ÷ÅyRðQ—‹,0‹¼‘9šå•öojˆºh mâÎTŽuriÒŠhzȃ‡ß‚Ï<¹IݼöÚ^Úíáï3ÌÌL²©&9ñ~РQ~¡Nü LnóBœŽ»:–(Ž £oµVÄ{w.ØÎÜ7@«Ø œÚ=P¦ì‰‘8Ý;m–‘lAØ[vð°/šâAüJvóE®˜dH8GŒŠ÷ažÃ@GáƒÉàÞ©+ºût;È%…gï‚`šsw{&8õŒÌrmMbÿ¨w›æ­}™¥f “{ãós´NµXj0T™ Ô\ˆáYª/ߤ]›M¸øµ¼úNÕ#þ‚áõ¦•+Ø4ô¢ÄúùrÐàíi¹¡ô¿}p­\€Vië3C vò%ÿöêú:Àîú7èýÄÃÛ.šP 0è%äþ2¥³(½p‚¦ŽÀA „9€!ó‰`_Õ>œ&\SOáNÆ<®x–ÁRÈ(?¯´A¸´K$€ËTƒçQ“ƒOF-Ìo”Ò{$HQ^uÑÅf[¶8Ÿx²Œ„©1" Y¥4¡=aŠä'àÍ¥Ý6)R€0‘køâ3:\ê%^R•ê'ã·Ô^:ç+dƒÕ|zšibrÖä9ÑšÙen»iK"G*Š[vÞêÂ~¦(#!0 %Q 0DW 0(›U:à 0ÆýUNÃUFNWU>Yf—N™b›^ £w@¯4ïE-2:I mKab 1uv 0cëëëëëëëëëëëëëë BN ˜HP LaserJet 4ÈðððÈð0X(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó($¡¡<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT(d:2‡Ø$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÓ=€´XÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóvÖr Z‹6Times New Roman Regular´¾½Q 9Z+‹.Courier New Regular<è\( 9Z+&Courier RegularøÀ- ù-a¦Õ&c `DabDcDdÓ€eDfDgDhiï]‹Ð&6X,‰‚”¥‚ #Ñ#€ u Xÿÿd#Ñ 3|xiÿU‹ÿÀÀÀTABLE A3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑTRXà3Ø'Xà3Ø' Letter3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÑ ? ÑÙ*ƒ !ÙÔ€XMXXXÔÔ€°òG°XXMÔò òÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÑ€|HÑUnited€States€Court€of€AppealsÔ€„½Ô„°°òGÔÐ ° ÐFor€the€First€Circuitó óÔ€„á„„„½ÔÔÔ€XJ¸X„„áÔÐ ˆØ ÐÓ÷ÓÌÌßA€') °°` dE< ` AßÐ  à ÐÌÔ€ X´XXXJ¸ÔNo.€98-1563Ð s à ÐÌà@¤¤#ìàUNITED€STATES,ˆÌÌà@ÐÐ&ìàAppellee,ˆÌÌà@tt)ìàv.ˆÌÌà@,,"ìàÔ_ÔKRISTENÔ_Ô€GILBERT,ˆÌÌà@ ìàDefendant,€Appellant.ˆÌÌÔ‡XJ¸XX X´ÔÌßA€') °°` dE<¦` AßÔ#† X´XXXJ¸A#ÔÐ §÷ ÐÌà@œ œ ìàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€UNITED€STATES€DISTRICT€COURTˆÌÌà@0 0 ìàFOR€THE€DISTRICT€OF€MASSACHUSETTSˆÌÌà@` ` ìà[Hon.€Michael€A.€Ô_ÔPonsorÔ_Ô,€òòU.S.€District€Judgeóó]ˆÐ žî ÐÌÔ‡XJ¸XX X´Ôà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌßA€') °°` dE<` AßÔ#† X´XXXJ¸Î#ÔÐ R ÐÌà@„„'ìàBeforeˆÌÌà@ÄÄìàÔ_ÔBoudinÔ_Ô,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó,ˆÐ i¹  ÐÌà@ ìàÔ_ÔBownesÔ_Ô,€òòSenior€Circuit€Judgeóó,ˆÐ ùI" ÐÌà@ìàand€Ô_ÔStahlÔ_Ô,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó.ˆÐ ‰ Ù$ ÐÌòòóóÔ‡XJ¸XX X´ÔÌßA€') °°` dE<ì"` AßÔ#† X´XXXJ¸ò#ÔòòóóÐ í"=' ÐÌÌà  àòòHarry€L.€Milesóó,€with€whom€òòGreen,€Miles,€Lipton,€White€&Ð Œ$Ü* ÐÔ_ÔFitzÔ_Ô-Gibbonóó,€were€on€brief€for€appellant.Ð T%¤ + ÐÌà  àòòWilliam€M.€Welch,€IIóó,€Assistant€United€States€Attorney,€withÐ ä&4"- Ðwhom€òòDonald€K.€Sternóó,€United€States€Attorney,€were€on€brief€forÐ ¬'ü". Ðappellee.€€€ÌÌÔ*‹ƒ 'ddd Xdd Xdd X°(#°(#‹ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ+  ÔÐ  *T%1 ‹‹ÐñiñÐ SIh*¸%2 `½á@36331„„‰`½á@‰‹‹SÐñiññiñÐ 0&h*¸%2 „„‹‹0ÐñiñÌñhñJune€21,€1999ñhñÌÐ SIDø+H'5" `½á@36331 `½á@ ‹‹SÐÐ(h*¸%6  (Ðâ âÓ  ÓÙ* !ÙÐ ð,@(6?ƒ ÐÑ|HÑâ âÑ8€ ´ XXdÈXXdÈ8Ñâ âÑ  ÑÑ|HÑâ âÑ8€ ´ XXdÈXXdÈ8Ñâ âÑ  ÑÔ_ÔÓ  ÓÑ  ÑñdñÓ=€ ¦ XÐXdÐd=ÓñdñÓÓÑ€ ÑÓ*°,X°` ¨ ƒX°œX*ÓÝ ƒÿÝÝ  Ýà ` àò òBOWNES,€òòSenior€Circuit€Judgeóó.ó ó€€Defendant-appellantÐ ° Ðâ âKristen€Gilbert€was€charged€in€a€single-count€indictment€withÏmaking€a€telephone€bomb€threat€on€September€26,€1996,€to€theÏDepartment€of€Veteran's€Affairs€Medical€Center€(VAMC)€in€Leeds,ÏMassachusetts,€in€violation€of€18€U.S.C.€ðð€844(e).€€Gilbert€wasÏfound€guilty€by€a€jury€and€was€sentenced€to€imprisonment€forÏfifteen€months€and€three€years€of€supervised€release.€€We€affirm.Ìà ` àThere€are€three€issues€for€review:€€(1)€Was€there€subjectÏmatter€jurisdiction€under€the€interstate€commerce€clause;€(2)€DidÏthe€district€court€commit€reversible€error€in€the€exclusion€andÏallowance€of€certain€evidence;€(3)€Was€the€evidence€sufficientÏunder€the€reasonable€doubt€standard€to€sustain€the€jury's€findingÏof€guilt.Ìà@°°*ìàò òIó óˆÐ P  Ðà ` àWe€state€the€facts€as€they€could€have€been€found€by€theÏjury.Ìà ` àGilbert,€a€registered€nurse,€worked€the€3:30€p.m.€toÏmidnight€shift€on€Ward€C,€an€acute€medical€ward€at€the€VAMC.€€JamesÏPerrault€was€a€VAMC€police€officer€who€worked€the€3:00€p.m.€toÏ11:00€p.m.€shift€at€the€medical€center.€€In€the€summer€of€1995ÏGilbert€and€Perrault€became€friendly.€€The€friendship€blossomedÏinto€a€full-blown€affair€in€September€and€October€of€1995.€€At€theÏtime€Gilbert€was€married.€€In€November,€1995,€Gilbert€filed€forÏdivorce€against€her€husband,€Glenn€Gilbert,€and€moved€out€of€theirÏâ âhome.€€Ð Ð* &0 Ðà ` àIn€February,€1996,€an€investigation€was€launched€at€theÏâ âVAMC€because€of€some€suspicious€occurrences€at€the€hospital.€€TheÏinvestigation€became€an€official€criminal€investigation€in€a€fewÏmonths.€€Gilbert€was€one€of€the€targets€of€the€investigation.€€ManyÏemployees€at€the€VAMC€were€interviewed€and€grand€jury€subpoenasÏwere€served€on€some€employees.Ìà ` àGilbert€was€photographed€and€handwriting€samples€wereÏtaken€from€her.€€Gilbert€was€upset€by€the€investigation€and€madeÏher€feelings€known.€€She€told€her€former€husband€(the€divorce€hadÏbecome€final)€that€he€had€the€right€not€to€speak€to€theÏinvestigators.€€After€he€had€spoken€to€them€anyway,€she€becameÏangry€and€upset.€€She€disparaged€him€to€several€people€byÏbelittling€him€and€using€epithets€to€denigrate€him.€€Gilbert€alsoÏexpressed€anger€and€resentment€against€those€of€her€co-workers€whoÏcooperated€with€the€investigation.€€She€told€a€co-worker€thatÏ"maybe€they€ought€to€investigate"€Gilbert's€nursing€supervisor.€ÏGilbert€became€upset€and€angry€with€some€of€her€co-workers€on€theÏevening€shift€because€they€would€not€talk€to€a€private€investigatorÏshe€had€retained.Ìà ` àGilbert€talked€about€the€investigation€with€Perrault.€ÏShe€told€him€that€three€nurses€who€worked€in€Ward€C€wereÏresponsible€for€starting€the€investigation€and€she€"couldn'tÏunderstand€why€they€were€trying€to€do€this€to€me."€€PerraultÏsuggested€leaving€the€area,€but€Gilbert€refused,€saying€she€"wantedÏeverybody€here€to€see€what€they€had€done€to€ruin€her€life."€ÏPerrault€tried€to€end€their€relationship€in€June€of€1996,€but€sheÐ À+'2 Ðbegged€him€not€to€do€so.€€In€late€July,€1996,€Gilbert€told€a€friendÏof€hers€that€if€Perrault€"dumped€her,€she€probably€would€startÏstalking€him."€€Perrault€tried€again€in€late€August€of€1996€toÏbreak€his€relationship€with€Gilbert.€€She€became€upset€and€blamedÏthe€investigation€for€this.Ìà ` àIn€September,€1996,€Perrault€told€Gilbert€of€the€day€and€Ïtime€he€had€agreed€to€be€interviewed€in€Springfield,€Massachusetts,€Ïby€investigators€from€the€United€States€Attorney's€Office.€€Gilbert€Ïbecame€upset€and€begged€Perrault€not€to€attend€the€interview.€€On€Ïthe€day€of€the€interview,€Gilbert€blocked€Perrault's€car€with€her€Ïcar€as€he€attempted€to€drive€out€of€his€driveway.€€She€asked€ÏPerrault€to€talk€to€her€and€not€to€go€to€the€interview.€€When€ÏPerrault€made€it€clear€that€he€would€not€do€as€she€wished,€she€Ïreturned€to€her€car€and€drove€off.€€On€arriving€at€Springfield,€ÏPerrault€used€a€parking€garage€that€he€and€Gilbert€had€used€on€Ïprior€occasions.€€When€Perrault€returned€to€his€car€after€the€Ïinterview€he€found€that€air€had€been€let€out€of€his€right€front€Ïtire.Ìà ` àDuring€the€next€several€days€Perrault's€car€was€stained€Ïby€egg€yolks€from€eggs€that€had€been€thrown€at€it,€the€windshield€Ïwas€spray-painted,€scratches€were€made€on€the€exterior€by€keys,€and€Ïthe€front€license€plate€was€damaged.€€After€the€damage€to€the€Ïlicense€plate,€Perrault€saw€a€car€similar€in€appearance€to€ÏGilbert's€enter€the€parking€lot€that€Perrault€used.€€Ìà ` àGilbert€denied€that€she€was€responsible€for€the€damage€toÏPerrault's€car,€but€admitted€she€had€been€in€the€parking€lot€priorÐ À+'2 Ðto€and€after€the€bomb€threat€to€the€VAMC€on€September€26,€1996.€ÏGilbert€called€a€neighbor€of€hers€on€two€occasions€to€ask€ifÏPerrault€had€been€checking€on€her.€€When€told€that€Perrault€hadÏinquired€about€her,€the€neighbor€testified€that€Gilbert€became€veryÏangry€and€said,€"Twit,€fucking€twit,"€in€what€the€neighborÏdescribed€as€a€deep€controlled€tone€of€voice.Ìà ` àStarting€in€mid-September€Perrault€received€a€number€ofÏphone€calls€at€his€residence.€€There€was€no€voice€communication,Ïonly€heavy€breathing€or€hang-ups.€€Perrault€unsuccessfully€tried€toÏtrace€the€calls.€€He€contacted€NYNEX€which€traced€seven€of€theÏcalls€to€Gilbert's€telephone€number.€€A€pen€register€was€installedÏon€Gilbert's€phone€on€September€26,€after€the€bomb€threat.€€The€penÏregister€showed€that,€between€September€26€and€October€1,€1996,€Ïabout€one€half€of€Gilbert's€phone€calls€to€Perrault€used€a€methodÏ(called€the€"*67€function")€which€prevented€Perrault€from€tracingÏher€calls€from€his€own€telephone.Ìà ` àOn€September€26,€the€day€of€the€bomb€threat€that€was€theÏbasis€of€the€indictment,€Gilbert€purchased€a€"Talkgirl€Jr."€withÏher€VISA€credit€card€at€Toys-R-Us.€€She€also€bought€severalÏpackages€of€Energizer€batteries€from€a€Thrifty€Drug€Store€about€anÏhour€after€the€"Talkgirl€Jr."€purchase.€€The€batteries€could€beÏused€to€activate€the€"Talkgirl€Jr."€€The€toy€is€a€hand-held€voiceÏchanger€that€records€a€statement€which€can€be€played€back€at€aÏhigher€or€lower€speed€than€the€original€recording.€€Words€recordedÏby€a€woman€played€back€at€a€lower€speed€make€them€sound€like€aÏman's€voice.Ð À+'2 Ðà ` àOn€September€26,€the€following€message€was€received€atÏ3:34€p.m.€on€the€telephone€answering€machine€of€Glenn€Gilbert,Ïdivorced€husband€of€defendant-appellant:€€"I€just€wanted€to€sayÏgoodbye€for€the€last€time.€€Goodbye."€€Glenn€Gilbert€described€theÏvoice€as€"an€altered€voice,€an€almost€haunting€voice."Ìà ` àOn€September€26,€Perrault€was€on€patrol€for€two€hours€atÏthe€VAMC€and€then€took€over€the€security€desk€at€5:00€p.m.€ÏGilbert's€neighbor€saw€her€leave€her€apartment€about€5:00€p.m.€ÏGilbert€knew€that€Perrault€would€be€at€the€security€desk€for€twoÏhours€starting€at€5:00€p.m.€€She€also€knew€the€direct€dialÏtelephone€number€for€the€security€desk.Ìà ` àPerrault€answered€a€security€desk€phone€call€at€5:11€p.m.€ÏA€recorded€message€from€an€unidentified€caller€stated:€€"ThisÏmessage€is€for€all€Persian€Gulf€veterans€who€were€exposed€toÏchemical€weapons."€€Perrault€was€a€Persian€Gulf€War€veteran€andÏGilbert€knew€it.€€Perrault€described€the€telephone€voice€asÏ"staticky,€almost€like€there€was€a€mechanical€ring€to€it."€ÏPerrault€dismissed€the€call€as€a€prank.ÌÓ9°,X°` ¨ ƒXL°,X°` ¨ ƒX9Óà ` àFrom€5:22€p.m.€through€7:07€p.m.€during€the€evening€ofÏSeptember€26,€Perrault€received€a€series€of€unidentified€phoneÏcalls€at€the€security€desk.€€He€described€the€voice€as€beingÏexactly€the€same€as€the€one€directed€to€Persian€Gulf€veterans.€€TheÏmessages€received€were€as€follows:Ìà ` àà ¨ àòòContent€of€Messagesóóà L àòòTimeóóÐ  (ð#. ÐÓÓà ` à"There€are€three€explosive€devices€inà L à5:22Ð 0*€%0 Ðà ` àBuilding€One.€€You€have€two€hours."ÌÌà ` à"Nothing€will€compare€as€to€what€isÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ðà ` àgoing€to€happen€tonight."à L à5:30Ð ° Ðà ` àÌà ` à"I€want€those€patients€out€on€time.à L à5:36Ð @ Ðà ` àRemember."ÌÌà ` à"Would€you€like€to€know€where€to€locateà L à5:40Ð ˜è Ðà ` àthe€devices?"ÌÌà ` àUndiscernable.à X àà ° àà L à5:45Ð ð @ ÐÌà ` àUndiscernable€(small€plane€heard)à L à5:50Ð € Ð  ÐÌà ` à"You€sound€dumb€or€you€would€go€.€.€."à L à5:55Ð `  ÐÌà ` à"You€mustn't€think€this€is€veryà L à6:10Ð  ð  Ðà ` àserious,€just€sitting€in€your€officeÌà ` àanswering€the€phone."ÌÌà ` à"You€must€be€pretty€stupid€.€.€."à L à6:18Ð À ÐÌà ` àUndiscernable.à X àà ° àà L à6:25Ð P  ÐÌà ` à"You€find€this€exciting,€don't€you?"à L à6:48Ð à0 ÐÌà ` à"This€is€my€last€call.€€In€twenty-fiveà L à6:51Ð pÀ Ðà ` àminutes,€I'll€see€you€in€hell."ÌÌà ` à"It's€your€job€to€think€about€theà L à7:07Ð È Ðà ` àpatients.€€I€do€care,€but€theÌà ` àGovernment€needs€a€message."ÌÌÓÓà ` àAll€of€the€phone€calls€had€the€same€ring€pattern,Ïindicating€that€they€were€made€from€outside€the€VAMC.€€An€officer,Ïother€than€Perrault,€answered€the€5:30€call.€€He€described€theÏvoice€as€distorted,€not€a€normal€voice€ð!ð€"like€some€kind€of€tapeÐ ˜!è% Ðrecorder."Ìà ` àAs€a€result€of€the€bomb€threat,€fifty€acutely€illÏpatients€were€moved€by€wheelchairs€and€stretchers€from€the€buildingÏcontaining€Ward€C€and€Ward€C€Annex€to€another€building€severalÏhundred€yards€away.€€No€explosive€devices€were€found€in€theÏâ âbuilding.Ð ø*H&1 Ðà ` àOn€the€evening€of€September€27,€Perrault€received€twoÏâ âanonymous€telephone€calls€while€on€duty€at€the€security€desk.€€HeÏdescribed€the€voice€as€exactly€like€that€of€the€caller€onÏSeptember26.€€Gilbert's€telephone€toll€records€did€not€show€anyÏcalls€from€her€home€at€the€time€of€the€September€27th€calls.€Ìà ` àAfter€listening€again€to€the€taped€calls€made€onÏSeptember€26,€Perrault€noticed€that€certain€tones€of€the€callerÏsounded€very€familiar.€€He€described€the€caller€as€sounding€hurt,Ïupset,€taunting,€provocative,€cold,€and€unfeeling.€€He€also€noticedÏthat€the€calls€seemed€directed€at€him€personally.€€He€was€of€theÏopinion€that€the€caller€was€Gilbert.Ìà ` àOn€September€28€and€29€Perrault€was€off€from€work€and€wasÏnot€on€duty€at€the€VAMC.€€No€anonymous€phone€calls€were€received€atÏthe€VAMC€on€either€of€those€days.Ìà ` àOn€September€30,€Gilbert€told€her€neighbor€(O'Donnell)Ïthat€she€had€gone€to€the€Holyoke€Mall€and€visited€an€InternetÏcoffee€shop.€€She€said€that€she€had€logged€onto€the€Internet€andÏobtained€a€bomb€recipe€which€she€said€was€"easy€to€find."Ìà ` àAbout€6:25€p.m.€on€the€30th,€Gilbert€bought€a€"TalkboyÏJr."€and€the€batteries€to€run€it€at€Toys-R-Us€with€a€personalÏcheck.€€Like€the€"Talkgirl"€the€"Talkboy"€is€a€voice€changer€andÏoperates€in€the€same€manner.€€The€cashier€who€sold€the€toy€toÏGilbert€remembered€that€Gilbert€wanted€to€be€sure€that€theÏbatteries€worked€with€it€and€that€Gilbert€told€her€she€wanted€theÏâ âtoy€for€her€nephews.€€Gilbert€does€not€have€any€nephews.Ð 0*€%0 Ðà ` àAt€6:44€p.m.€on€September€30,€Perrault€received€a€phoneÏâ âcall€stating,€"Officer€Perrault,€I've€been€watching€you,€boy."€ÏPerrault€described€the€voice€as€the€same€as€the€one€who€made€theÏcall€on€September€26,€except€that€this€time€the€caller€appeared€toÏbe€"trying€to€put€a€southern€drawl€into€it."€€Perrault€received€twoÏmore€calls€on€September€30.€€The€caller€sounded€the€same€as€the€oneÏwho€had€made€the€first€call€that€evening.Ìà ` àOn€the€same€evening,€September€30,€other€departments€atÏthe€VAMC,€i.e.,€Admissions€and€the€Nurses'€Station€on€Ward€C,€alsoÏreceived€unidentified€phone€calls.€€Those€who€received€the€callsÏdescribed€the€voice€as€sounding€electronically€altered€or€as€aÏmechanical-sounding€voice.Ìà ` àAfter€finishing€his€shift€on€September€30,€Perrault€wentÏto€the€local€Veterans€of€Foreign€Wars€(VFW)€Club€about€midnight.€ÏShortly€after€arriving€he€received€a€phone€call€at€the€bar.€€TheÏcaller€stated:€€"You€think€you€have€a€problem?€€Just€wait€and€seeÏwhat€I€have€planned€for€you."€€Perrault€recognized€the€voice€asÏbeing€the€same€as€the€one€in€the€prior€phone€calls.€€Gilbert€knewÏthat€Perrault€usually€stopped€at€that€VFW€on€the€way€home€fromÏwork.€€In€fact,€she€had€met€him€there€on€several€prior€occasions,Ïwithout€notice€beforehand.€€On€this€same€day,€September€30,ÏPerrault€received€a€letter€from€Gilbert€in€which€she€said€that€asÏshe€drove€by€the€VFW€one€evening€she€saw€his€car€and€stood€outsideÏand€watched€him€through€a€window€playing€darts.Ìà ` àOn€October€1,€1996,€Perrault€met€with€investigators€andÏit€was€agreed€that€he€would€call€Gilbert€when€he€started€his€shiftÐ À+'2 Ðon€the€security€desk€at€5:00€p.m.€€Surveillance€of€a€number€of€payÏtelephone€booths€in€the€vicinity€of€Gilbert's€apartment€wasÏarranged€for€that€evening.€€Perrault€called€Gilbert€at€5:12€p.m.Ïand€left€a€message€on€her€answering€machine€that€he€would€be€at€theÏsecurity€desk€until€7:00€p.m.€€Perrault€received€a€series€ofÏanonymous€phone€calls€at€5:25€p.m.,€5:41€p.m.,€5:44€p.m.,€andÏ6:37p.m.€€The€voice€was€the€same€as€that€of€the€prior€anonymousÏcalls.€€Another€officer€on€duty€received€an€anonymous€call€atÏ7:35p.m.€€He€described€the€voice€as€strange,€male-sounding€andÏdistorted.€€The€5:41€p.m.€and€5:44€p.m.€calls€were€traced€toÏtelephone€pay€stations€at€a€Citgo€gas€station€and€the€DailyÏHampshire€Gazette.€€Gilbert€later€admitted€to€Perrault€that€she€hadÏused€those€pay€phones,€but€denied€making€any€of€the€phone€calls€inÏquestion.Ìà ` àShortly€before€the€6:37€p.m.€pay-booth€phone€call,ÏMassachusetts€State€Trooper€Kevin€Murphy,€who€was€on€surveillance,Ïsaw€Gilbert€arrive€in€her€car€at€the€Tasty€Top,€an€ice€cream€stand,Ïand€use€the€pay€telephone€booth€outside€of€it.€€Trooper€MurphyÏradioed€to€Special€Agent€Plante€(a€member€of€the€surveillanceÏteam).€€Plante€contacted€Perrault€at€the€VAMC€security€desk,€whoÏconfirmed€that€he€had€just€received€a€call€in€which€there€wasÏtraffic€noise€and€heavy€breathing€noise.Ìà ` àA€fingerprint€from€Gilbert's€right€index€finger€wasÏlifted€from€the€telephone€receiver€at€the€Tasty€Top€phone€booth.€Ïâ âGilbert€later€told€Perrault€that€she€had€made€a€phone€call€from€theÐ 0*€%0 ÐTasty€Top€booth€to€check€her€answering€machine€and€that€she€hadÏseen€a€State€Trooper€at€the€Tasty€Top.€€Ìâ âà ` àOn€the€evening€of€October€1,€1996,€a€search€warrant€wasÏexecuted€at€Gilbert's€apartment.€€Trooper€Murphy€seized€from€theÏtrash€three€empty€battery€packages€for€Energizer€batteries,€twoÏbatteries€stamped€LI54€on€the€back,€and€a€Thrifty€Drug€StoreÏreceipt€showing€the€purchase€of€the€Energizer€batteries.€€DetectiveÏLieutenant€Thomas€Soutier€also€seized€a€"Talkboy"€from€a€closet€inÏa€child's€room€which€contained€a€tape€cassette€that€was€blank.€ÏAgent€Plante€seized€operating€instructions€for€the€"Talkboy"€fromÏthe€left€pocket€of€Gilbert's€outdoor€jacket,€which€Agent€PlanteÏfound€lying€on€her€bed.€€Agent€Plante€also€found€a€Daily€HampshireÏGazette,€dated€September€27,€1996,€on€Gilbert's€bed€that€containedÏan€article€about€the€bomb€threat.Ìà ` àWhile€the€police€were€executing€the€search€warrant,ÏGilbert€went€over€to€her€neighbor's€(O'Donnell)€apartment.€€GilbertÏtold€O'Donnell€that€the€police€were€looking€for€a€voice-changingÏdevice,€similar€to€a€toy€that€her€son€owned,€that€"could€changeÏyour€voice€up€high€like€a€chipmunk€or€down€low€like€a€man."€€SheÏalso€told€O'Donnell€that€if€the€police€found€such€a€device€in€herÏhouse,€it€might€be€broken,€the€tape€might€be€erased€or€blank,€orÏthe€batteries€might€be€dead.€€The€investigators€never€told€GilbertÏthat€they€were€looking€for€a€child's€toy€that€could€change€aÏperson's€voice.€€The€VAMC€did€not€receive€any€more€telephone€callsÏâ âfrom€the€anonymous€caller€after€October€1st.Ð 0*€%0 Ðà ` àBruce€Koenig,€a€government€expert,€tested€the€"Talkboy"Ïâ âand€determined€that€the€variance€in€speed€from€low€to€high€speed€onÏthe€"Talkboy"€was€31.1%.€€Koenig€increased€the€playback€speed€forÏexhibit€13,€the€tape€containing€the€September€30th€phone€calls,€byÏ31.1%.€€The€telephone€calls€on€exhibit€13€were€tape-recordedÏmessages;€the€messages€had€been€pre-recorded€on€the€"Talkboy",€andÏthen€played€back€at€a€slower€speed.€€Mr.€Koenig€created€a€speed-Ïcorrected€tape€of€exhibit€13,€which€became€exhibit€44.€Ìà ` àOne€of€Gilbert's€friends,€Ms.€Abderhalden,€who€had€knownÏand€worked€with€Gilbert€for€over€five€years€and€had€talked€toÏGilbert€daily€in€the€fall€of€1996,€identified€the€voice€onÏexhibit44€as€Gilbert's€voice,€as€did€Glenn€Gilbert€her€formerÏhusband.€Ìà@tt)ìàò òIIó óˆÐ P Ðà ` àWe€first€turn€to€the€interstate€commerce-jurisdictionÏissue.€€Gilbert€argues€that€because€there€was€no€evidence€"that€theÏtelephone€system€used€was€more€than€an€intrastate€system,€or€thatÏthe€threat€call€was€routed€through€an€interstate€system,"€there€wasÏno€effect€on€or€nexus€to€interstate€commerce.€€Appellant's€Br.€atÏ19.€€This€claim€is€one€of€the€many€that€have€surfaced€in€the€wakeÏof€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòLopezóó,€514€U.S.€549€(1995).€€And,€as€with€mostÐ @$( Ðof€the€others,€the€claim€fails€to€float.Ìà ` àBefore€starting€our€legal€analysis,€we€address€theÏgovernment's€suggestion€that€Gilbert's€claim€was€procedurallyÏâ âdefaulted€and€is€reviewable€only€for€plain€error.€€We€do€not€haveÐ €*Ð%0 Ðto€resolve€the€issue€because€we€do€not€think€there€was€error,€plainÏor€otherwise.Ìâ âà ` àWe€now€proceed€to€our€analysis€of€the€interstateÏcommerce-jurisdictional€question.€€The€first€paragraph€of€òòLopezóóÐ ` ° Ðsummarizes€the€case:ÌÓÓà8 ` à€€€In€the€Gun-Free€School€Zones€Act€of€1990,ÏCongress€made€it€a€federal€offense€"for€any€Ïindividual€knowingly€to€possess€a€firearm€at€a€Ïplace€that€the€individual€knows,€or€has€Ïreasonable€cause€to€believe,€is€a€school€Ïzone."€€18€U.S.C.€ðð€922(q)(1)(A)(1988€ed.,ÏSupp.€€V).€€The€Act€neither€regulates€aÏcommercial€€activity€nor€contains€aÏrequirement€that€the€€possession€be€connectedÏin€any€way€to€€interstate€commerce.€€We€holdÏthat€the€Act€€exceeds€the€authority€ofÏCongress€"[t]o€€regulate€Commerce€.€.€.€amongÏthe€several€€States€.€.€.€."€U.S.€Const.,€Art.ÏI,€ðð8,€cl.ñeñ€ñeñ€3.Ð ` x` x ÐÌòòLopezóó,€514€U.S.€at€551.Ð 8ˆ ÐÌÓÓà ` àòòLopezóó€does€not€apply€because€a€telephone€is€anÐ È Ðinstrumentality€of€interstate€commerce€and€this€alone€is€aÏsufficient€basis€for€jurisdiction€based€on€interstate€commerce.Ìà ` àIn€òòLopezóó€itself€the€Court€held:Ð xÈ! ÐÓÓà8 ` àFirst,€Congress€may€regulate€the€use€of€the€Ïchannels€of€interstate€commerce€.€.€.€.€ÏòòSecond,€ñfñ€ñfñCongress€is€empowered€to€regulate€andÐ ˜!è% Ðprotect€the€instrumentalities€of€interstateÏcommerce,€or€persons€or€things€in€interstateÏcommerce,€even€though€the€threat€comes€onlyÏfrom€intrastate€activitiesóó€.€.€.€.€€Finally,Ð ¸$ ) ÐCongress'€commerce€authority€includes€theÏpower€to€regulate€those€activities€having€aÏsubstantial€relation€to€interstate€commerceÏ..€.€,€i.e.,€those€activities€thatÏsubstantially€affect€interstate€commerce.€€Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€558€(emphasis€ours,€cites€and€quotes€omitted.)€€The€CourtÐ 0*€%0 Ðheld€that€the€statute€at€issue€in€òòLopezóó€fell€into€the€thirdÐ À+'2 Ðcategory€and€could€only€be€sustained€"as€a€regulation€of€anÏactivity€that€substantially€affects€interstate€commerce,"€òòid.óó€atÐ @ Ð559.€€In€the€present€case,€we€are€dealing€instead€with€the€secondÏcategory.Ìà ` àShortly€after€òòLopezóó€was€decided€the€Court€issued€a€perÐ ð @ Ðcuriam€opinion€in€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòRobertsonóó,€514€U.S.€669€(1995).Ð € Ð  ÐThe€case€was€brought€under€the€Racketeer€Influenced€and€CorruptÏPractices€Act€(RICO)€on€the€basis€that€defendant€had€investedÏproceeds€obtained€from€unlawful€acts€proscribed€by€RICO,€in€theÏpurchase€and€operation€of€a€gold€mine.€€Section€1962(a)€prohibitsÏthe€"acquisition€of€any€interest€in,€or€the€establishment€orÏoperation€of,€any€enterprise€which€is€engaged€in,€or€the€activitiesÏof€which€affect,€interstate€or€foreign€commerce."€€Ìà ` àThe€Ninth€Circuit€reversed€defendant's€conviction€on€theÏground€that€the€government€had€failed€to€prove€that€the€gold€mineÏ"was€engaged€in€or€affect[ed]€interstate€commerce."€€òòId.óó€at€670.€Ð  p ÐThe€Court€did€not€consider€the€"affecting"€commerce€question.€€ItÏpointed€out€that€the€evidence€showed€conclusively€that€the€goldÏmine€itself€was€engaged€in€interstate€commerce€activities.€€TheseÏactivities€"assuredly€brought€the€gold€mine€within€ðð1962(a)'sÏalternative€criterion€of€'any€enterprise€.€.€.€engaged€in€.€.€.Ïinterstate€or€foreign€commerce.'"€€òòId.óó€at€672.€€This€case€is€notÐ €%Ð * Ðprecisely€on€point€but€it€illustrates€that€"affecting€interstateÏcommerce"€is€not€the€sole€test€to€use€in€determining€whether€thereÏâ âis€interstate€commerce€jurisdiction.Ð 0*€%0 Ðà ` àThere€are€cases€directly€on€point:€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð ° Ðâ âòòKunzmanóó,€54€F.3d€1522,€1527€(10th€Cir.€1995),€held:€€"As€long€asÐ @ Ðthe€instrumentality€used€is€itself€an€integral€part€of€anÏinterstate€system,€Congress€may€regulate€intrastate€activitiesÏinvolving€the€use€of€the€instrumentality€under€the€federalÏsecurities€laws."€Ìà ` àThe€intrastate€telephone€call€cases€are€of€long€standingÏbut€like€old€wine€have€a€pertinent€robust€taste.€€òòLoveridgeóó€v.Ð  ð  ÐòòDreagouxóó,€678€F.2d€870,€874€(10th€Cir.€1982),€held:€€"[P]roof€ofÐ 0€  Ðintrastate€telephonic€messages€in€connection€with€the€employment€ofÏdeceptive€devices€or€contrivances€is€sufficient€to€conferÏjurisdiction€in€a€ðð€10(b)€and€Rule€10b-5€action."€€In€òòAlleyóó€v.Ð à0 ÐòòMiramonóó,€614€F.2d€1372,€1379€(5th€Cir.€1980)€the€court€held:€€"ThisÐ pÀ Ðcourt€has€consistently€held€that€the€intrastate€use€of€theÏtelephone€may€confer€jurisdiction€over€a€private€action€underÏSection€10(b)€and€Rule€10b-5."€€In€òòKerbsóó€v.€òòFall€River€Indus.,Ð  p ÐInc.óó,€502€F.2d€731€(10th€Cir.€1974)€the€court€explained€cogentlyÐ °  Ðthe€reason€for€the€telephone-call€rule:€ÌÓÓà8 ` àBoth€intrastate€and€interstate€telephone€Ïcommunications€are€part€of€an€aggregate€Ïtelephonic€system€as€a€whole.€€And€as€long€as€Ïthe€instrumentality€itself€is€an€integral€part€Ïof€an€interstate€system,€Congress€has€power,€Ïwhen€necessary€for€the€protection€of€Ïinterstate€commerce,€to€include€intrastate€Ïactivities€within€its€regulatory€control.Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€738€(citation€omitted).Ð Ø'(#- Ðà ` àThe€use€of€the€telephone€in€this€case€to€make€a€bomb-Ïthreat€was,€without€more,€sufficient€to€sustain€jurisdiction€underÏthe€interstate€commerce€clause.Ð ˆ,Ø'3 Ðà@88)ìàò òIIIó óˆÐ ° Ðà ` àThe€first€evidentiary€issue€is€rather€unique€and€requiresÏexplanation.€€Prior€to€the€bomb€threat,€Gilbert€and€some€othersÏwere€the€subject€of€an€investigation€by€the€VAMC€police€and€otherÏpolice€agencies.€€The€investigation€was€prompted€by€unexpectedÏdeaths€at€the€VA€hospital.€€That€there€was€an€ongoing€investigationÏwas€common€knowledge€at€the€VAMC€and€in€the€outside€community.€Ìà ` àPrior€to€trial,€the€district€court€discussed€with€counselÏhow€to€handle€the€introduction€of€the€fact€that€there€was€anÏinvestigation€going€on€and€that€Gilbert€was€one€of€those€beingÏinvestigated.€€The€court€told€counsel€that€he€would€not€excludeÏentirely€the€fact€that€there€was€an€investigation€in€processÏbecause€the€case€"flowed"€around€the€investigation.€€After€aÏlengthy€pre-trial€conference€on€the€instructions€to€be€given€to€theÏjury,€the€following€instruction€was€given€at€the€outset€of€theÏtrial:ÌÓÓà8 ` à€€€Here€is€my€preliminary€instruction€to€you.€ÏI€want€to€instruct€you€now€on€part€of€the€Ïbackground€of€this€case.€€Beginning€around€ÏFebruary€1996,€seven€months€before€the€bomb€Ïthreat€charged€by€the€Government€in€this€case,€Ïan€independent€investigation€began€about€Ïcertain€possible€wrongdoing€at€the€VA.€Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€That€separate€investigation€had€nothing€to€Ïdo€with€the€charge€in€this€case.€€The€supposed€Ïwrongdoing€involved€something€else€entirely.€€ÏFor€a€time€that€separate€investigation€Ïincluded€within€its€scope,€among€other€people€Ïand€things,€the€defendant€here€Kristen€ÏGilbert.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€I'm€not€going€to€tell€you€about€the€Ïspecifics€of€that€other€separate€suspected€Ïwrongdoing€because€to€do€so€would€give€that€Ð ,`'2 Ðsupposed€misconduct€more€weight€than€it€Ïdeserves.€€I€have€also€instructed€counsel€not€Ïto€refer€to€the€specifics€of€that€Ïinvestigation.€€I€do€want€to€emphasize€a€Ïcouple€points€however.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€Nearly€two€years€after€that€separate€Ïinvestigation€first€began,€there€is€still€no€Ïsufficient€evidence€that€any€wrongful€act€was€Ïever€committed€by€anyone.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€Moreover,€although€at€some€point€the€Ïinvestigation€turned€in€part€towards€this€Ïdefendant,€Ms.€Gilbert€has€never€been€charged€Ïwith€the€wrongdoing€that€was€the€subject€of€Ïthat€separate€investigation.€€So€as€far€as€Ïthis€trial€is€concerned,€even€assuming€that€Ïthe€other€wrongdoing€ever€actually€occurred,€Ïshe€is€not€only€entirely€innocent€of€that€Ïseparate€misconduct,€she€has€not€ever€been€Ïcharged€with€it.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€The€fact€that€there€was€an€investigation,€Ïhowever,€and€that€for€some€time€it€included€Ïthe€defendant,€among€other€persons€and€things€Ïwithin€its€scope,€is€part€of€the€background€of€Ïthis€case.€€You€may€hear€references€to€that€Ïinvestigation,€and€I€am€therefore€permitting€Ïyou€to€know€of€the€fact€of€that€separate€Ïinvestigation.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€Do€not€speculate€about€the€subject€matter€Ïof€that€separate€investigation.€€It€doesn't€Ïmatter.€€Such€speculation€might€distract€you€Ïfrom€your€task€in€this€trial,€which€is€to€Ïdetermine€whether€the€Government€has€proven€Ïbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€defendant€Ïphoned€a€bomb€threat€to€the€VA€onÏSeptember26,€1996.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€Keep€in€mind€as€well€that€the€fact€that€a€Ïperson€is€investigated€for€some€separate€Ïwrongdoing€is€not€evidence€of€any€kind€that€Ïthe€person€is€guilty€of€the€crime€they€have€Ïactually€been€charged€with.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€You€should€not,€as€a€matter€of€law€and€as€a€Ïmatter€of€fundamental€fairness,€assume€in€any€Ïway€that€Ms.€Gilbert€is€or€might€be€guilty€of€Ïphoning€in€a€bomb€threat€simply€because€she€Ïhappened€to€fall€within€the€scope€of€a€Ïseparate€investigation€involving€something€Ð ˆ,Ø'3 Ðentirely€different.€€The€fact€that€she€was€Ïincluded€for€a€time€in€that€separate€Ïinvestigation€is€simply€not€evidence€against€Ïher€in€this€case€in€any€way.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€As€I€have€said,€I€am€permitting€the€Ïevidence€of€the€existence€of€that€separate€Ïinvestigation€to€come€in€this€limited€form€Ïsimply€to€give€you€the€background€and€context€Ïout€of€which€the€evidence€in€this€case€partly€Ïarises.€€Consider€this€evidence€only€in€this€Ïlight.Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓà ` àGilbert€took€the€position€at€trial€that€evidence€of€theÏother€investigation€should€not€have€been€admitted€at€all.€€SheÏargues€before€us€that€its€admission€violated€the€provisions€of€Fed.ÏR.€Evid.€404(b),€was€an€abuse€of€discretion,€and€deprived€her€of€aÏfair€trail.€€The€government€counters€that€the€evidence€was€properlyÏadmissible€under€Fed.€Rules€of€Evidence€401€and€403€and€"in€theÏalternative"€under€Fed.€R.€Evid.€404(b).Ìà ` àPrior€to€giving€the€jury€instruction€the€court€made€theÏfollowing€rulings.€€ñ_ñIt€ñ_ññ`ñ€ñ`ñexpressed€doubt€that€the€investigationÏevidence€ÌÓÓà8 ` àconstitutes€the€sort€of€other-act€evidence€Ïthat€falls€within€the€scope€of€Rule€404(b).€€I€Ïthink€the€fact€is€that€the€evidence€of€the€Ïother€investigation€is€connected€to€this€case€Ïin€a€way€that€really€makes€it€part€of€the€ÏGovernment's€proof€of€the€actual€act€that€has€Ïbeen€charged.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€This€isn't€a€pure€other-act€type€ofÏsituation€where,€for€example,€the€GovernmentÏwould€be€trying€to€prove€that€the€defendantÏengaged€in€some€kind€of€misconduct€two€orÏthree€years€ago€and€therefore€is€likely€to€be€Ïguilty€or€possibly€guilty€of€the€charge€that€Ïshe's€facing€here€at€this€time.Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓà ` àThe€court€then€acknowledged€that€it€might€be€wrong€aboutÌRule€404(b)'s€applicability€and€stated€that€ñañitñaññbñheñbñ€was€"going€to€makeÐ ˆ,Ø'3 Ða€finding€under€Rule€404(b)€to€cover€the€situation:"€ÌÓÓà8 ` à€€€I€want€to€make€it€clear€that€in€permitting€Ïevidence€of€the€other€investigation€to€come€Ïin,€I€do€find€that€it€has€special€relevance€in€Ïthis€case€both€on€the€issues€of€motive€and€Ïidentity,€and€that€special€relevance€is€Ïentirely€separate€from€any€improper€purpose€Ïthat€the€evidence€might€be€offered€for,€Ïmeaning€propensity€evidence.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€I€believe€also€that€the€probative€value€of€Ïthe€evidence€outweighs€any€unfair€prejudice€Ïthat€will€be€done€to€the€defendant€as€a€result€Ïof€my€letting€this€in,€particularly€in€the€Ïcontext€of€the€limiting€instruction€that€I€Ïwill€give.Ð ` x` x ÐÌà8 ` à€€€So€I€want€to€make€sure€that€my€specific€Ïfindings€are€on€the€record€to€the€extent€that€Ïwe€are€in€the€area€of€Rule€404(b).€€I€alsoÏwant€ñgñ€ñgñto€make€it€clear€because€this€is€close€toÏ404(b)€that€I'm€approaching€it€as€if€it€wereÏ404(b)€evidence€in€assessing€the€probativeÏweight€versus€the€unfair€prejudice.Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓà ` àWe€start€our€analysis€with€the€three€evidentiary€rulesÏimplicated.€€Rule€401€defines€relevant€evidence.€€Rule€403€providesÏfor€the€exclusion€of€relevant€evidence€on€the€grounds€of€prejudice,Ïconfusion€or€waste€of€time.€€The€pertinent€part€of€Rule€404(b)Ïstates:ÌÓÓà8 ` à€€€(b)€Other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts.€ÏEvidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs€or€acts€is€Ïnot€admissible€to€prove€the€character€of€a€Ïperson€in€order€to€show€action€in€conformity€Ïtherewith.€€It€may,€however,€be€admissible€for€Ïother€purposes,€such€as€proof€of€motive,€Ïopportunity,€intent,€preparation,€plan,€Ïknowledge,€identity,€or€absence€of€mistake€or€Ïaccident.Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓà ` àOur€standard€of€review€of€a€district€court's€admission€orÏexclusion€of€evidence€is€abuse€of€discretion.ÌÓÓà8 ` àWe€review€a€trial€court's€Rule€403€balancing€Ïtest€for€an€abuse€of€discretion,€and€only€in€Ð ˆ,Ø'3 Ð"extraordinarily€compelling€circumstances"€Ïwill€we€reverse€a€district€court's€"on-the-€Ïspot€judgment"€concerning€the€probative€value€Ïand€unfair€effect€of€the€proffered€evidence.€€Ð ` x` x ÐÌÓÓòòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòSheaóó,€159€F.3d€37€(1st€Cir.€1998);€òòUnited€StatesóóÐ ˜è Ðv.€òòPitroneóó,€115€F.3d€1,€7€(1st€Cir.€1997).Ð ( x Ðà ` àWe€do€not€think€that€the€investigation€evidence€is€barredÏby€either€Rule€403€or€Rule404(b).€€As€the€district€court€pointedÏout,€it€could€be€described€as€part€of€the€proof€that€Gilbert€wasÏthe€one€who€made€the€telephone€bomb€threat.€€The€jury€could€wellÏhave€found€that€her€reaction€to€the€investigation€as€shown€by€whatÏshe€said€and€did€was€the€motive€for€the€bomb€threat.€€And€proof€ofÏmotive€is€one€of€the€purposes€for€admitting€evidence€that€would€beÏotherwise€excludable€under€Rule€404(b).€€Thanks€to€the€admirableÏinstruction€given€the€jury€on€this€matter€and€the€rulings€made€inÏconjunction€with€it€by€the€district€court,€we€need€go€no€further.€ÏWe€hold€that€the€other€investigation€evidence€was€properlyÏadmitted.Ìà ` àThe€next€evidentiary€issue€is€more€troublesome.€€ItÏinvolves€the€admissions€of€expert€testimony€that€resulted€in€theÏpositive€voice€identification€of€Gilbert€as€the€person€who€made€theÏtelephone€calls€on€September€30,€1996€(subsequent€to€the€bombÏthreat€calls€on€September€26).€€Gilbert€argues€that€the€admissionÏwas€erroneous€for€three€reasons:€€(1)€ambush,€abuse€of€discretion,Ïand€deprivation€of€a€fair€trial;€(2)€the€voice€identifications€wereÏunduly€suggestive,€inherently€unreliable,€and€constituted€an€abuseÏof€discretion;€(3)€the€trial€court's€refusal€to€give€an€adverseÏinference€instruction€constituted€reversible€abuse€of€discretion.€Ð ˆ,Ø'3 Ðà ` àThe€procedural€history€of€the€voice€identification€isÏimportant.€€We€first€note€that€there€was€no€mention€of€a€positiveÏidentification€of€Gilbert's€voice€in€the€government's€opening.€€WeÏstart€our€recital€of€the€facts€underlying€this€issue€by€pointingÏout€that€what€took€place€is€based€in€part€on€the€representations€ofÏthe€prosecutor€which€the€court€obviously€accepted.€€We€make€noÏsuggestion€that€the€prosecutor€misrepresented€the€facts€or€theÏcourt€erred€in€accepting€the€prosecutor's€representations.Ìà ` àTrial€started€on€Wednesday,€January€7,€1998.€€On€theÏweekend€prior€to€trial,€the€prosecutor€was€"fooling€around"€withÏexhibit€13€on€a€play€back€tape€recorder.€€Exhibit€13€consisted€ofÏtape€recordings€of€phone€calls€made€on€September€30.€€PerraultÏreceived€three€phone€calls€during€the€evening€of€September€30.€€TheÏvoice€on€all€three€calls€sounded€the€same€to€Perrault.€€On€the€sameÏevening,€there€were€unidentified€phone€calls€made€to€variousÏdepartments€of€the€VAMC.€€The€testimony€of€the€recipients€was€thatÏthe€voice€sounded€as€being€electronically€altered€or€was€aÏmechanical€sounding€voice.Ìà ` àAs€the€prosecutor€"fiddled"€with€the€tape€recorder€thatÏheld€exhibit€13,€he€became€aware€that€when€the€play€back€speed€ofÏthe€recorder€was€increased€that€Gilbert's€natural€voice€was€heard.€ÏThis€discovery€was€confirmed€on€January€6.€€On€January€7,€after€theÏtrial€started,€the€government€sought€to€have€Gilbert's€ex„husbandÏGlenn€Gilbert,€identify€defendant's€voice€by€playing€exhibit€13€onÏa€voice€transmitter€with€a€variable€speed€adjustment.€€The€courtÏsustained€Gilbert's€objection,€subject€to€a€change€of€ruling€if€theÐ À+'2 Ðgovernment€obtained€an€expert€witness.€€The€court€was€of€theÏopinion€that€allowing€the€government€to€vary€the€speed€of€the€playÏback€to€obtain€Gilbert's€natural€voice€would€be€unreliable€and€tooÏhaphazard.Ìà ` àThe€government€promptly€contacted€an€expert,€BruceÏKoenig,€who€was€in€the€business€of€analyzing€audio€and€video€tapes.€ÏPreparatory€to€testifying,€he€speeded€up€the€play€back€so€thatÏGilbert's€natural€voice€was€heard.€€This€was€recorded€on€anotherÏtape,€exhibit€44.€€It€must€be€borne€in€mind€that€part€of€theÏgovernment's€theory€on€the€voice€identification€issue€was€thatÏGilbert€had€made€the€September€30€phone€calls€on€the€"Talkboy"Ïrecorder€that€she€bought€on€September€30€at€6:25€p.m.€at€Toys„R„Us.Ìà ` àKoenig€delivered€the€tape€he€created€(exhibit€44)€to€theÏgovernment€on€Sunday,€January€11,€which€immediately€provided€theÏdefense€with€a€copy€of€it€and€a€statement€of€Koenig's€proposedÏtestimony.Ìà ` àOn€Monday,€July€12,€the€prosecutor€proffered€Koenig€as€aÏwitness.€€Gilbert€objected€on€the€grounds€already€stated.€€She€alsoÏpointed€out€that€she€would€be€severely€prejudiced€because€of€theÏshort€amount€of€time€she€had€to€prepare€for€his€testimony.Ìà ` àThe€court€decided€to€admit€the€evidence€but€gave€GilbertÏseveral€options€among€which€was€a€short€continuance.€€GilbertÏdeclined€the€continuance€but€accepted€the€court's€offer€to€allowÏher€expert€to€testify€out€of€order.€€Gilbert€was€also€given€anÏâ âopportunity€to€voir€dire€Koenig,€which€she€did€for€ninety€minutes.Ð 0*€%0 Ðà ` àOn€January€13,€Gilbert€called€her€expert,€ChristopherÏâ âRyan.€€Ryan€was€a€full„time€musician,€master€engineer,€and€recordÏproducer.€€His€testimony€was€that,€after€listening€to€the€"Talkboy"Ïtape,€he€was€of€the€opinion€that€it€was€incapable€of€producing€theÏconversation€recorded€on€exhibit€44.Ìà ` àKoenig,€the€government's€witness,€testified€as€to€how€heÏhad€tested€the€"Talkboy"€for€variances€in€speed€and€then€created€aÏspeed€corrected€tape€of€exhibit€13€which€became€exhibit€44.Ìà ` àThere€was€testimony€by€two€witnesses,€a€long€time€friendÏof€Gilbert€and€Gilbert's€ex„husband,€that€the€voice€on€exhibit€44Ïwas€that€of€defendant.Ìà ` àWe€do€not€doubt€that€Gilbert€was€surprised€by€theÏpositive€voice€identification€testimony.€€We€do€not€think,€however,Ïthat€she€was€ambushed€by€it,€if€we€define€ambush€as€the€governmentÏdeliberately€laying€a€trap€for€her€to€walk€into.€€If€the€eventsÏleading€to€the€discovery€that€speeding€up€of€the€September€30€tapeÏrecordings€disclosed€Gilbert's€natural€voice€were€as€the€prosecutorÏstated,€there€was€no€ambush,€just€a€fortuitous€discovery€by€theÏprosecutor€the€weekend€prior€to€start€of€the€trial.€€And€even€if€weÏwere€skeptical€about€the€prosecutor's€assertion,€we€would€be€boundÏby€the€district€court's€decision€to€admit€the€evidence.€€"AÏdistrict€court's€denial€of€a€motion€to€suppress€will€be€upheld€ifÏany€reasonable€view€of€the€evidence€supports€the€denial."€€òòUnitedÐ '`", ÐStatesóó€v.€òòWatsonóó,€76€F.3d€4,€6€(1st€Cir.€1996).€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.Ð  (ð#. Ðâ âòòde€Jesus„Riosóó,€990€F.2d€672,€677€(1st€Cir.€1993).€€And€the€standardÐ 0*€%0 Ðof€review€of€discovery€decisions€is€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòUnitedÐ ° ÐStatesóó€v.€òòSamalot„Perezóó,€767€F.2d€1,€4€(1st€Cir.€1985).€Ð @ Ðâ âà ` àWe€think€that€the€district€court's€handling€of€thisÏsurprise€evidence€treated€Gilbert€fairly€under€the€circumstances.€ÏShe€eschewed€the€offer€of€a€short€continuance€and€opted€instead€toÏput€on€her€own€expert€out€of€order.€€The€prosecutor€had€given€her,Ïas€soon€as€it€was€available,€a€statement€of€the€testimony€of€itsÏexpert€that€would€be€proffered€at€trial.€€And€Gilbert€was€accordedÏan€extensive€voir€dire€of€the€government's€expert€before€heÏtestified€before€the€jury.€€Significantly,€Gilbert€does€not€stateÏhow€she€was€prejudiced€by€the€late€disclosure€of€the€voiceÏidentification€testimony€or€how€it€would€have€changed€her€defenseÏstrategy.€€òòUnited€Statesóó€v.€òòMeluccióó,€888€F.2d€200,€203€(1st€Cir.Ð pÀ Ð1989).Ìà ` àMoreover,€Gilbert€had€been€furnished€a€copy€of€exhibit€13Ïover€a€year€prior€to€trial.€€She€certainly€had€an€opportunity€toÏhave€her€expert€perform€as€many€tests€on€it€as€necessary.Ìà ` àGilbert€also€argues€on€appeal€that€the€court€erred€in€notÏexcluding€Koenig's€testimony€on€the€grounds€that€it€was€scientificÏevidence€and€did€not€pass€the€reliability€and€validity€tests€ofÏòòDaubertóó€v.€òòMerrell€Dow€Pharmaceuticals,€Inc.óó,€509€U.S.€579,€590„93Ð ð#@( Ð(1993).€€The€short€answer€to€this€argument€is€that€there€was€noÏobjection€in€the€trial€court€on€this€basis.€€No€suggestion€was€madeÏby€Gilbert€that€the€òòDaubertóó€principles€should€be€applied€toÐ  (ð#. ÐKoenig's€testimony.€€Our€rule€is€that€an€objection€not€made€in€theÏtrial€court€will€not€be€considered€in€the€first€instance€on€appeal.€Ð À+'2 ÐòòCoopermanóó€v.€òòIndividual,€Inc.óó,€171€F.3d€43,€49€(1st€Cir.€1999);Ð ° ÐòòAlbionóó€v.€òòYMCA€Camp€Lettsóó,€171€F.3d€1,€2€(1st€Cir.€1999).Ð @ Ðà ` àGilbert's€second€contention€is€that€the€voiceÏidentifications€were€unduly€suggestive€and€their€admission€an€abuseÏof€discretion€because€the€witnesses€already€knew€Gilbert's€voiceÏbut€were€not€given€comparisons€of€tape€recordings€of€other€voices.€ÏIn€addition,€both€witnesses€had€listened€to€exhibit€44€prior€toÏtestifying€and€identified€the€voice€as€that€of€Gilbert.€€For€theseÏreasons,€Gilbert€says€that€the€trial€judge€should€have€excluded€theÏidentifications€in€this€case.Ìà ` àWhile€there€were€certainly€suggestive€elements€in€thisÏprocedure,€the€Supreme€Court€has€made€clear€that€this€does€notÏviolate€due€process€if€the€identification€remains€sufficientlyÏreliable,€òòseeóó€òòMansonóó€v.€òòBraithwaiteóó,€432€U.S.€98€(1977),€òòcf.óóÐ P ÐòòGovernment€of€Virgin€Islandsóó€v.€òòSanesóó,€57€F.3d€338€(3d€Cir.€1995).€Ð à ÐHere,€the€witnesses€were€both€familiar€with€Gilbert's€voice€andÏtherefore€had€a€solid€basis€for€their€opinion€that€the€taped€voiceÏwas€Gilbert's,€and€the€defense€was€free€to€bring€out€on€cross„¼examination€any€aspects€of€suggestiveness,€including€the€pretrialÏexposure€of€the€witnesses€to€the€tape.€€This€was€a€judgment€call€byÏthe€district€court€under€an€abuse€of€discretion€standard,€and€we€doÏnot€think€that€the€discretion€was€abused.Ìà ` àMoreover,€there€was€sufficient€evidence€for€the€jury€toÏconvict€without€the€voice€identification€of€the€September€30Ï"Talkboy"€telephone€calls.€€We€summarize€the€evidence,€omitting€theÏvoice€identification€testimony.€€Ð À+'2 Ðà ` àGilbert€purchased€a€"Talkgirl€Jr."€about€three€and€oneÏhalf€hours€before€the€bomb€threat€calls€to€the€VAMC€on€the€eveningÏof€September€26,€1996.€€The€"Talkgirl€Jr."€could€make€a€woman'sÏvoice€sound€like€that€of€a€man.€€Gilbert€left€her€apartment€elevenÏminutes€before€the€first€bomb€threat€calls€were€received€at€theÏVAMC.€€She€did€not€return€home€for€about€three€hours.Ìà ` àAfter€listening€to€the€tape€recordings€of€the€ten€phoneÏcalls€made€on€the€evening€of€September€26,€1996,€the€first€of€whichÏwas€the€bomb€threat,€Perrault€believed€that€they€all€were€made€byÏGilbert.€€She€admitted€to€Perrault€that€she€watched€from€across€theÏstreet€as€the€building€which€the€caller€said€"contained€threeÏexplosive€devices"€was€evacuated.€€Ìà ` àPersonnel€at€the€VAMC€and€Perrault€received€a€number€ofÏunidentified€phone€calls€over€the€next€several€days.€€The€callsÏwere€made€by€someone€who€knew€Perrault's€work€schedule,€whichÏGilbert€did.€€Some€of€the€calls€to€Perrault€were€of€a€personalÏnature.€€Perrault€believed€that€the€voice€on€these€calls€was€theÏsame€as€the€one€that€had€made€the€bomb€threat€calls.Ìà ` àOn€September€27th,€Gilbert€purchased€a€"Talkboy€Jr."Ïwhich€like€the€"Talkgirl€Jr."€could€make€a€woman's€voice€sound€likeÏthat€of€a€man.€€She€told€the€clerk€from€whom€she€made€the€purchaseÏthat€it€was€a€gift€for€her€nephews.€€Gilbert€does€not€have€anyÏnephews.€€The€VAMC€received€an€unidentified€phone€call€about€15Ïminutes€after€the€purchase.€€The€caller's€voice€sounded€the€same€asÏâ âthe€other€calls.Ð 0*€%0 Ðà ` àOn€October€first,€it€was€decided€to€conduct€aÏâ âsurveillance€of€a€number€of€pay€phone€booths€in€the€vicinity€ofÏGilbert's€apartment.€€Perrault€agreed€to€call€Gilbert€from€theÏsecurity€desk€ñcñthñcñat€VAMC,€which€he€did€at€5:00€p.m.€€At€6:37€p.m.€theÏVAMC€received€an€unidentified€phone€call€in€the€same€voice€as€theÏothers.€€At€the€same€time€Gilbert€was€observed€by€a€state€trooperÏmaking€a€phone€call€from€a€pay€phone€booth€near€her€apartment.€€AÏfingerprint€from€Gilbert's€right€index€finger€was€lifted€from€theÏreceiver€at€the€phone€booth.Ìà ` àA€warrant„authorized€search€was€made€of€Gilbert'sÏapartment€during€the€evening€of€October€1.€€A€"Talkboy€Jr."€andÏother€incriminating€evidence€was€seized.Ìà ` àThis€evidence€was€sufficient€òòwithoutóó€the€voiceÐ pÀ Ðidentification€evidence€for€a€conviction.€€Because,€however,€theÏadmission€of€the€voice€identification€was€not€error,€we€need€notÏdecide€whether€it€would€have€been€harmless€error.Ìà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€district€court€is€òòò òaffirmed.ó óóó