The man: I don't give orders.
The wife's counsel: Did you write this request to Phoebe?
The man: I don't know, again, you're trying to mislead me, it's very hard for me to deal with it. Did you give an order? No, I didn't give an order. Now you're asking me if I asked for something or if I was a parent.
The wife's counsel: Look, I don't want to go into the definitions of semantics. I ask you if you have ever written to Phoebe... This matter?
The man: In my opinion, definitions are important. I didn't give orders to Phoebe.
...
The wife's counsel: Did you write to Phoebe?
The man: If there is a document that you would like to refer me.
The wife's counsel: No, I want to ask you a question... Did you contact Phoebe and ask that if legal proceedings are conducted between you and [The woman] Will she be removed as a beneficiary of the fiduciary?
The man: I'm again, can you refer me to a period of time, something?
The Court: I think that's an answer. We can go on.
The wife's counsel: Okay. Now look, you're talking about Nevada and Arizona, You claim that there too [The woman] She knew and agreed that if there were divorce proceedings, she would cease to be faithful. Now.
The man: Wait, can I take a second? I don't think I said it or meant it or wrote it, that's what you're saying" (See the minutes of the hearing of November 18, 2020, pp. 669, 11-26 and 670, 1-14, emphases not original).
- But what? The woman cited as evidence a 2012 correspondence between the man and Mr. Glenn Kelly of the Texas Trust Management Company, in which the man unequivocally requested that the woman be removed as a beneficiary of the Nevada trust, just as was done in the Arizona trust, in the event of a divorce dispute. Thus in his own words (see Appendix 62 to the woman's summaries, emphases not in the original):
"I would like the class of beneficiaries for Nevada trust to be the same as Arizona. That is, ((the wife is added as a beneficiary so long as divorce proceedings (from either side) has not been initiated. In the event of divorce, she is removed as a beneficiary."
- Finally, the man was forced to admit, after many maneuvers and evasion attempts, that he had indeed sought to remove the woman as a beneficiary of the various loyalties:
"The Woman's Counsel: Have you ever approached Amos and asked him to contact the trustees and ask if, wait, [The woman] And you will conduct legal proceedings, she will be removed as a beneficiary? Yes or no?