Title: Volume FOIA 073

Release Date: 2014-03-20

Text: 23371

Volume 73 of 111
SJAR ROT
FOIA Version

VERBAT IM 1

RECORD OF TRIAL2

(and accompanying papers)

of
(Name: Last, First, Middie initiai) (Sociai Security Number) (Rank)
Headquarters and
Headquarters Company,
United States Army Garrison U-S- Army FCDIJC Ml/er: VA 22211
(Unit/Command Name) (Branch of Service) (Station or Snip)
By
GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL
Convened by Commander

(Titie of Con vening Authority)

UNITED STATES ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
(Unit/Command of Con vening Authority)

Tried at

Fort. Meade, MD on see below

(Piace or Piaces of Triai) (Date or Dates of Triai-9

Date or Dates of Trial:

23 February 2012, 15-16 March 2012, 24-26 April 2012, 6-8 June 2012, 25 June 2012,

16-19 July 2012, 28-30 August 2012, 2 October 2012, 12 October 2012, 17-18 October 2012,
7-8 November 2012, 27 November - 2 December 2012, 5-7 December 2012, 10-11 December 2012,
8-9 January 2013, 16 January 2013, 26 February - 1 March 2013, 8 March 2013,

10 April 2013, 7-8 May 2013, 21 May 2013, 3-5 June 2013, 10-12 June 2013, 17-18 June 2013,
25-28 June 2013, 1-2 July 2013, 8-10 July 2013, 15 July 2013, 18-19 July 2013,

25-26 July 2013, 28 July - 2 August 2013, 5-9 August 2013, 12-14 August 2013,

16 August 2013, and 19-21 August 2013.

1 insert ?verbatirri or ?surrimari'zeo? as appropriate. This form be used by the Army and Navy for verbatim records of triai

2 See inside back co ver for instructions as to preparation and arrangement.

DD FORM 490, MAY 2000 PREWOUS OBSOLETE Front Cover





.

..

mmsagmgmo
_mo_Eo ..
2:0 mm: _m_oEo .5

wmEmz ..
mconmoog

..
.




ManningB_00376862



..










.

2mEo_o__m_ .



.
..

.
mboz .

m_m_oEO ..

m._o..ow._Eoo .
ho .
.

.

830.5




mEm>m_ .



ManningB_00376863

23374

^^^^

^

=3 CO

^

c of
O

43

m o
= m
iS LL

g2


3

2" #
MmM
S^Mm/mmiim

ManningB_00376864

w c
UJ o

ll

23375

3 ^
^

^
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

« o

illlll
Z O < (/) O W||
I

ManningB_00376865

I

I

I

I

ii








:onmE._ouE_ _mo_Eo



..

mcoa_wm>> ..

EmEqS_u.u._

mccm?mw ..





ManningB_00376866

.. .
. ., .




?wwmm 3

mrwxomr

..
.

..

8:80 _moE_on_

.,
.
mm_Em:m ..
..
mEmEEm>oO .




ManningB_00376B67

23378

WMM^^W^

3 fit

CO

ll

^2 ^

O. N C
CO 05 g
$ O) CO

^^^^^^6^^^

iiteiiiiiffliisiisiii

^

ManningB_00376868

CO

^ 0^

05 .5

4 ^

I

I

c

#

•gl
c/5 >

:>:::;:!::|::::>:;:::::::4




.


>..m_oom :30 new mmi
mm_Emcm_ ..
mm: .
..mEmE_ .
.

.
coEmE..ouE_ mc_..mon_ ..
.,
I
co__.mE.6.E_ m.__._mo_om5 .




ManningB_OO376869











23381

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V.

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

Prosecution Motion
for Preliminary Determination
of Admissibility of
MRE 404(b) Evidence
Enclosure 3
3 August 2012

APPELLATE EXHIBIT %5^0
PAGE REFERENCED:
PAGE
OF
PAGES

23382

28
29
30
31
32
33

34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47

^IRI^EA^ 5^^^^^MAN, C i v i l i a n , was c a l l e d as a t e l e ^ ^ o n i c w i t n e s s
f o r t l ^ e ^ o v e r n ^ e n t , was sworn a n d t e s t i f i e d i n substance as
follows^
DIRECTE^^INATI^N

questions by t ^ e assistant

trial

counsels

I am ^ i r l e a h Showman o f Syracuse, ^ew ^ o r k . I l e f t t h e
Army i n t h e rank o f S p e c i a l i s t on ^5 ^une ^011 a f t e r s e r v i n g ^
years and 2 months.
I was i n t h e same u n i t and i n t e l l i g e n c e
shop w i t h PFC Manning. I was a l s o h i s team l e a d e r . I f i r s t met
t h e accused when I a r r i v e d i n t h e u n i t i n March 2009. ^e were
b o t h 35F MOS. I a t t e n d e d AIT a t F o r t 8uachuca, A r i z o n a i n ^ u l y
2007. I was t r a i n e d as an a l l source a n a l y s t on how t o h a n d l e ,
d i s s e m i n a t e and d e s t r o y c l a s s i f i e d i n f o r m a t i o n .
I also received
t r a i n i n g on a l l o f t h e computer systems we use t o g a t h e r
i n t e l l i g e n c e , ^ou need a t l e a s t an i n t e r i m SFC^FT c l e a r a n c e i n
o r d e r t o i n i t i a t e t r a i n i n g . I a t t e n d e d some t r a i n i n g w i t h t h e
accused a t t h e d i v i s i o n h e a d q u a r t e r s p r i o r t o O^^TC. ^e b o t h

^50

23383

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47

a t t e n d e d t h e ^PTC r o t a t i o n f o r I r a q . I d e p l o y e d w i t h t h e
accused t o I r a q i n October 2009 where we b o t h worked i n t h e
b r i g a d e TSCIF on F08 hammer. I worked d i r e c t l y w i t h t h e accused
f o r t h e f i r s t two months as ^COIC o f t h e n i g h t s h i f t . The
accused was a Shia a n a l y s t .
^e would g a t h e r i n t e l l i g e n c e
i n f o r m a t i o n f o r p r o d u c t s and p r o j e c t s t h a t would be p l a c e d on
t h e b r i g a d e shared d r i v e f o r use by t h e b r i g a d e Commander.
^e used OCCS as a t o o l t o do our ^ob b u t we a l s o used CPOF
s t r i c t l y t o communicate w i t h t h e b a t t a l i o n s and t h e Companies.
I don^t know what ^CFT i s . I never used t h a t t o do my ^ob. The
accused always had computer i s s u e s on a weekly o r b i - w e e k l y
b a s i s . The OCCS c o n t r a c t o r would have t o c o r r e c t h i s system
b e f o r e i t crashed.
The accused l e f t t h e b r i g a d e SCIF on 9 May
2011, t h e morning a f t e r he a s s a u l t e d me. ^e was removed f o r
p u n c h i n g me i n t h e f a c e and d i s p l a y e d u n c o n t r o l l a b l e and
untrustworthy behavior.
I worked w i t h t h e accused i n a
s u p e r v i s o r y c a p a c i t y d u r i n g t h e f i r s t few weeks o f t h e
deployment.
The t r i a l c o u n s e l announced t h e defense r e q u e s t e d a c l o s e d
u n c l a s s i f i e d s e s s i o n . The government r e q u e s t e d a c l o s u r e
determination hearing.
The I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r c l o s e d t h e h e a r i n g .
^The A r t i c l e 32 h e a r i n g recessed a t 09^7,
2011.^

20 December

^The A r t i c l e 32 h e a r i n g was c a l l e d t o o r d e r a t 0952, 20
December 2011.^
The I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r announced t h i s was an
u n c l a s s i f i e d c l o s e d sessions and t h e p a r t i e s p r e s e n t were
c o u n s e l f o r b o t h s i d e s , h e a r i n g s e c u r i t y o f f i c e r , t h e accused,
p e r s o n n e l d e t a i l e d t o t h e defense and p r o s e c u t i o n teams,
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f r e l e v a n t government a g e n c i e s , and t h e
I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r ^ s l^egal A d v i s o r and s u p p o r t s t a f f .
The I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r announced t h e defense r e q u e s t e d a
c l o s e d s e s s i o n t o d i s c u s s d i s l o y a l s t a t e m e n t s made by t h e
accused t o t h e w i t n e s s t h a t would be p r e j u d i c i a l i f h e a r d i n an
open forum, which was d e n i e d .
The I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r announced he would r e c o n s i d e r t h e
denial.

^51

23384

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47

8oth p a r t i e s maintained the previous p o s i t i o n s submitted t o
the Investigating Officer f o r consideration.
The I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r p l a c e d h i s f i n d i n g s on t h e r e c o r d
r e v e r s i n g t h e d e n i a l o f t h e defense r e q u e s t t o c l o s e t h e h e a r i n g
c i t i n g t h e accused^s r i g h t t o a f a i r t r i a l was an o v e r r i d i n g
interest.
^IRI^EA^ 5^0^^MAN, C i v i l i a n , was r e c a l l e d as a t e l e ^ ^ o n i c w i t n e s s
f o r t l ^ e ^ o v e r n ^ e n t , was reminded o f ^ e r p r e v i o u s o a t ^ , a n d
t e s t i f i e d i n s u b s t a n c e as f o l l o w s ^
DIRECTE^^INATI^N
^ e s t i o n s b y A s s i s t a n t T r i a l Counsel 2^
I d i s c u s s e d PFC Manning^s o p i n i o n about t h e m i l i t a r y w i t h
h i m . ^e t o l d me he c o i n e d t o earn money f o r c o l l e g e and t o g e t
computer knowledge and t r a i n i n g .
^hen he was asked what t h e
O.S. f l a g meant t o h i m he s a i d i t d i d n o t mean a n y t h i n g t o h i m
and he h e l d no a l l e g i a n c e t o t h i s c o u n t r y o r i t s p e o p l e .
CR052^E^^AMINATICN
questions by t ^ e defense

counsels

That c o n v e r s a t i o n t o o k p l a c e d u r i n g a v e r b a l c o u n s e l i n g
s e s s i o n between me and PFC Manning. I t was d u r i n g a c o u n s e l i n g
sessions h i s b e h a v i o r i n i t i a l l y i n d i c a t e d t h a t he d i d n ' t c a r e
what I was sayings I w o u l d n ' t say t h a t he was happy about b e i n g
counseled.
^e was r a r e l y happy, and I do n o t know i f h i s mood
changed d u r i n g t h e c o u n s e l i n g s e s s i o n .
PFC Manning showed a
l a c k o f r e s p e c t towards a n y t h i n g t h a t o c c u r r e d .
I do agree t h a t
a t t h e t i m e I was c o u n s e l i n g h i m he was n o t happy. I was t r y i n g
t o see where he was coming from, so I asked h i m why he c o i n e d
t h e Army, and t h a t i s when he responded t o t h e f l a g meant
n o t h i n g t o h i m and he no a l l e g i a n c e t o t h e O n i t e d S t a t e s .
I was
upset when he s a i d t h a t , I r a i s e d my v o i c e , b u t I do n o t
remember e x a c t l y what I s a i d . I b e l i e v e I s a i d t h a t he had no
business c o i n i n g the m i l i t a r y .
I don't know PFC Manning's
i n t e n t i o n s f o r a n y t h i n g he s a i d . I am n o t sure i f he was s a y i n g
t o push my b u t t o n s . r e g a r d l e s s i t was something t h a t he knew
n o t t o say. That i s n o t a p o k i n g m a t t e r f o r an I n t e l a n a l y s t .
I t o l d Master Sergeant A d k i n s t h a t I d i d n o t t r u s t PFC Manning
and he s h o u l d n o t d e p l o y w i t h us. I was n o t aware t h a t Master
Sergeant A d k i n s d e n i e d h e a r i n g i t f r o m me. I t does s u r p r i s e me
t h a t he d e n i e d me t e l l i n g h i m t h a t .

15^

23385

1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47

E^^AMINATION

T ^ IN^5TI^TIN^C^^ICER

questions by tbe I n v e s t i g a t i n g

Officers

T h i s c o n v e r s a t i o n t o o k p l a c e f o l l o w i n g t h e ^IPTC r o t a t i o n
w i t h i n months o f us d e p l o y i n g .
^The A r t i c l e 32 h e a r i n g recessed

a t 1004,

20 Oecember

2011.^
^The A r t i c l e 32 h e a r i n g was c a l l e d t o o r d e r a t 1013,
Oecember 2011.^

20

The I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r opened t h e h e a r i n g , and s t a t e d
t h a t t h e c l o s e d s e s s i o n d e t e r m i n a t i o n w i l l be p u t on t h e r e c o r d .
^IRI^EA^ 5^^^^^^MAN, C i v i l i a n , was r e c a l l e d as a w i t n e s s f o r t l ^ e
p r o s e c u t i o n , was r e m i n d e d o f ^ e r p r e v i o u s o a t ^ , a n d t e s t i f i e d i n
s u b s t a n c e as f o l l o w s ^
CRC^^^E^^INATICN
q u e s t i o n s b y tb^e c i v i l i a n d e f e n s e

counsels

I s u p e r v i s e d PFC Manning b e f o r e d e p l o y i n g s I became h i s
s u p e r v i s o r i n March 2009. I had d a i l y c o n t a c t w i t h PFC Manning.
There was an i n c i d e n t i n where he d i d n o t show up f o r PT. I
went t o h i s room t o f i n d o u t where he was.
^hen I g o t t h e r e he
appeared t o have ^ u s t woken up^ he was s t i l l i n c i v i l i a n
clothes.
I t o l d him t o g e t dressed and t o get d o w n s t a i r s r i g h t
away. ^e w a l k e d f r o m h i s b a r r a c k s room t o f o r m a t i o n . PFC
Manning d i d n o t respond t o a n y t h i n g t h a t I was t e l l i n g him.
I
asked him why he was n o t i n f o r m a t i o n . I do n o t remember h i m
r e s p o n d i n g t o a n y t h i n g t h a t I was t e l l i n g him.
I had t o c o u n s e l
him and r e q u i r e h i m t o show up e a r l y t o f o r m a t i o n s f o r
corrective training.
PFC Manning screamed and s t a r t e d dumping
up and down, f l a p p i n g h i s arms. ^e was e x t r e m e l y l o u d , s w i n g i n g
h i s hands around. ^ i s body language was v e r y a g g r e s s i v e .
I
stepped back from him.
^ i s screaming l a s t e d s e v e r a l seconds.
Master Sergeant A d k i n s approached PFC Manning and t h e n he
q u i e t e d down. PFC Manning was f r u s t r a t e d . Master Sergeant
A d k i n s asked PFC Manning what t h e p r o b l e m was, and PFC Manning
responded t h a t he was f r u s t r a t e d . PFC Manning s a i d t h a t he d i d
n o t l i k e t o mess up, I counseled him a f t e r t h a t i n c i d e n t . I
a l s o recommended ^CMO^ a c t i o n , because he d i s r e s p e c t e d Master
Sergeant A d k i n s and me. ^e l o s t h i s m i l i t a r y b e a r i n g .
Master

153

23386

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
4^

Sergeant A d k i n s recommended ^CM^I b u t he d i d n o t f o l l o w up on
those.
F o l l o w i n g t h a t i n c i d e n t , I r e q u i r e d PFC Manning t o go t o
behavioral health.
To my knowledge, no one i n t h e c h a i n o f
command a l e r t e d t h e Commander o f t h e i n c i d e n t .
I recommended t o
Master Sergeant A d k i n s t h a t f u r t h e r a c t i o n was needed and PFC
Manning was a t h r e a t and he s h o u l d n o t be h a n d l i n g c l a s s i f i e d
i n f o r m a t i o n and s h o u l d n o t d e p l o y .
^^^CTICN
The t r i a l c o u n s e l o b j e c t e d t o t h e l i n e o f q u e s t i o n i n g
s t a t i n g lack of foundation.
The c i v i l i a n defense c o u n s e l r e p l i e d t h a t t h e purpose o f an
A r t i c l e 32 h e a r i n g i s d i s c o v e r y f o r t h e defense.
The I n v e s t i g a t i n g O f f i c e r i n f o r m e d t h e c i v i l i a n
counsel t o l i m i t h i s l i n e o f questioning.

defense

Tl^e c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n b y tl^e c i v i l i a n d e f e n s e c o u n s e l c o n t i n u e d
as f o l l o w s ^
I do n o t know i f Master Sergeant A d k i n s i n f o r m e d t h e
Commander. I b e l i e v e PFC Manning was u n s t a b l e as one o f t h e
reasons why he s h o u l d n o t d e p l o y . I saw PFC Manning f r e e z e when
he was asked a q u e s t i o n by t h e I ^ i e u t e n a n t . ^e was
n o n r e s p o n s i v e . I asked him what was wrong and he d i d n ^ t speak.
I f e l t he was n o t p r o c e s s i n g what I had s a i d .
I t o l d Master
Sergeant A d k i n s what happened. ^e b o t h asked PFC Manning what
was g o i n g on. PFC Manning s a i d he f e l t p a r a n o i d and p e o p l e were
l i s t e n i n g t o h i s c o n v e r s a t i o n s . ^e d i d n o t t r u s t anyone i n t h e
u n i t o r around him. ^e s a i d he was n o t s u i c i d a l and d i d n o t
want t o h u r t h i m s e l f .
I asked him i f he h e a r d v o i c e s he s a i d
no. I was t r y i n g t o d e t e r m i n e i f he had. I am n o t a medic, b u t
I was t r y i n g t o see i f he had p s y c h o t i c i s s u e s . ^e had an
elevated l e v e l o f paranoia.
PFC Manning was n o t f u n c t i o n i n g i n t h e o f f i c e .
^e was n o t
a b l e t o do s i m p l e t a s k s .
I c o n f r o n t e d him about n o t g e t t i n g
work done. ^e used t h e excuse f o r b e i n g t a s k e d f o r a c l e a n u p
detail.
^e showed no i n d i c a t i o n o f gender i d e n t i t y d i s o r d e r .
8ased on a l l o f t h i s I recommended t o Master Sergeant A d k i n s
t h a t PFC Manning n o t d e p l o y o r have access t o c l a s s i f i e d
i n f o r m a t i o n . Master Sergeant A d k i n s t o l d me he spoke t o someone
b u t I do n o t know i f i t was t h e commander.
I t o l d Master

154

23387

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46

Sergeant A d k i n s t h a t PFC Manning s h o u l d be command d i r e c t e d t o
b e h a v i o r a l h e a l t h , b u t i t d i d n o t happen. I was n o t happy when
PFC Manning^s name was on t h e l i s t t o d e p l o y . I t a l k e d t o
Master Sergeant A d k i n s a g a i n and was t o l d t h e d e c i s i o n was made
and I had t o d e a l w i t h i t .
^e d e p l o y e d t o I r a q on 11 October 2009. I was t h e n i g h t
s h i f t ^COIC o f t h e T-SCIF. I had PFC Manning and PFC Cooley
under me. Master Sergeant Adkins d e c i d e d who would be on
d a y s h i f t , b u t I c o u l d be wrong.
Master Sergeant A d k i n s was t h e
o v e r a l l ^COIC. ^e d e c i d e d who would be on t h e n i g h t s h i f t . ^e
d i d n o t have much say over t h e S o l d i e r s we were i n charge o f .
F v e r y t h i n g went t h r o u g h Master Sergeant A d k i n s . Master Sergeant
A d k i n s oversaw a l l equipment and S o l d i e r s .
S o l d i e r s were n o t
b e i n g c o u n s e l e d as t h e y s h o u l d have been.
Ma^or Clausen was t h e
b r i g a d e S2. ^e was n o t i n t h e SCIF and was i n h i s o f f i c e .
C^2
^ack d i d n o t have t h e a u t h o r i t y t o c o u n s e l me. I was c o u n s e l e d
by Master Sergeant A d k i n s . I was c o u n s e l e d once d u r i n g t h e
e n t i r e deployment.
I w i t n e s s e d t h e i n c i d e n t between PFC Manning and SPC
P a d g e t t . I t happened towards t h e end o f Oecember. I h e a r d PFC
Manning screaming. I walked t o t h e door t o see what was g o i n g
on. I saw PFC Manning on one s i d e o f t h e t a b l e and SPC P a d g e t t
on t h e o t h e r .
I saw PFC Manning f l i p t h e t a b l e .
The computer
h i t t h e ground. I f o u n d o u t l a t e r t h a t i t was b r o k e n . I saw
PFC Manning approach SPC P a d g e t t , and he was t r y i n g t o t a l k PFC
Manning down. PFC Manning l o o k e d around t h e room, he was about
t o r e a c h f o r an M4 r i f l e .
C^2 5^hresman grabbed PFC Manning f r o m
b e h i n d and l o c k e d h i s arms up.
PFC Manning was i n t h e f u l l
nelson p o s i t i o n .
There was no f o r m a l punishment t o my
knowledges I don^t know why.
I t o l d Master Sergeant A d k i n s
about t h e i n c i d e n t and t o l d Master Sergeant A d k i n s t h a t PFC
Manning had no b u s i n e s s i n t h e SCIF.
I know what t h e OF^OC p r o c e s s i s . ^e have a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
t o r e p o r t OFPOC i n f o r m a t i o n . ^hen PFC Manning^s c l e a r a n c e was
suspended I h e l p e d t h e Commander f i l e t h e paperwork. To
i n i t i a t e a OFPOC t h e Commander w i l l i n d i c a t e what t h e a c t i o n was
t h a t l e a d t o t h e OFPOC, make a recommendation, and check a box
i f t h e i n d i v i d u a l c l e a r a n c e s h o u l d be suspended o r t e r m i n a t e d .
I f e l t t h e y t r i e d t o keep e v e r y t h i n g t h a t happened w i t h i n t h e S2
internal.
The i n c i d e n t between PFC Manning and SPC P a d g e t t
s h o u l d n o t have remained i n house.
The ISC f o u n d o u t about t h e
i n c i d e n t f r o m C^2 ^ack.
PFC Manning and I had t o go see ISC.
A f t e r s e e i n g ISC, a s h o r t t i m e l a t e r i n t h e deployment I saw PFC

155

23388

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47

Manning r o l l e d up i n a b a l l .
I r e p o r t e d i t t o C^2
t o l d him t o be ready f o r something t o happen.

Fhresman. I

I was c a l l e d back
I l e f t t h e TSCIF a t t h e end o f my s h i f t .
t h e r e around m i d n i g h t .
I was a s s a u l t e d by PFC Manning.
I stood
up and p i n n e d him t o t h e ground a f t e r he h i t me.
PFC Manning
t o l d me he was s c a r e d o f what b e h a v i o r a l h e a l t h would f i n d o u t
and t h a t he would be removed f r o m t h e Army.
I f o u n d what l a t e r became known as t h e C^o^^^^era^ ^ ^ r ^ e r
video.
I was g o i n g t h r o u g h some f o l d e r s t h a t b e l o n g e d t o t h e
f i r e s s e c t i o n w o r k i n g f o r C^2 ^ack.
I came a c r o s s t h e v i d e o
w h i l e I was t r a i n i n g t o improve p r o f e s s i o n a l development.
Chief
and I watched t h e v i d e o and he would go over how h i s s e c t i o n
responded.
C h i e f was grooming me t o be a t a r g e t a n a l y s t f o r
f u t u r e deployments. There were o t h e r p e o p l e t h a t watched i t
w i t h us. They were d i s c u s s i n g what we were s e e i n g i n t h e v i d e o .
There was no ^ u l e s o f engagement d i s c u s s i o n t h a t I r e c a l l .
REDIRECTE^^INATION
q u e s t i o n s b y A s s i s t a n t T r i a l Counsel 2^
PFC Manning h e l p e d me p u t MIPC Chat on my computer.
^e had
t h e most knowledge o f computers.
I used i t t o t a l k t o f e l l o w
targeting sections.
PFC Manning never t o l d me he was c h a t t i n g
w i t h J u l i a n Assange. ^e were never a l l o w e d t o t a k e c l a s s i f i e d
i n f o r m a t i o n o u t s i d e o f t h e SCIF. ^e a l l s i g n e d n o n d i s c l o s u r e
Agreements.
RECRC52^E^^AMINATI0N
q u e s t i o n s b y t ^ e c i v i l i a n d e f e n s e counsels
I d o n ^ t remember what r e g u l a t i o n was b e h i n d t h e

^OA.

^The w i t n e s s was p e r m a n e n t l y excused, d u l y warned,
ended t h e phone c a l l . ^

and

^The A r t i c l e
2011.^

32 h e a r i n g was r e c e s s e d a t 1055, 20 Oecember

^The A r t i c l e
Oecember 2011.^

32 h e a r i n g was c a l l e d t o o r d e r a t 1113,

A l l p a r t i e s present p r i o r
present.

20

t o t h e r e c e s s were once a g a i n

155

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.

Manning, Bradley E.

PFC, U.S. Army,

HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211



23389

Prosecution Motion
for Preliminary Determination
of Admissibility of
MRE 404(b) Evidence

Enclosure 4

3 August 2012

APPELLATE
PAGE

PAGE PAGES

23390

SWORN STATEMENT
Foroaa at this torm, sea AR19D-45;the proponent agency is Pm.

PRIVACY ACT STATEIENT

AUTHONTY: Title 10. USC Section 301; Title 5. USC Sadion 2951; E0. 9397 Social Seeurly Number (SSN).

PRIICPAL PURPOSE: To dominant potential criminal activity involving the us. Army. and to allow Army of?ciala to maintain discipline.
In and order through Invumdton otoomptalnts and incidents.

IIQWNE USES: Information provlmd may be hrtha disclosed to Iocleral. state. local. and foreign law enloroament
Itle?dos. Dlbuctitora. courts, child protective services. victims, witnesses. the Department of Veterans Albara. and
the Otlloa at Persomal Management information provided my be used tor detarmindlona rooar-ding ludclal or
nan-judidat ?hat administrative actions. aocurityduranana. retention.
placement. arrdotharparsonnal actions.

DISCLOSURE: Disclosure or your SSH and other intormauon is voluntary.

1. LOCATION 2, oars: 3. mus 4. NUMBER
DlV,Foit Drum, New York 20l l/0|/I9 I300

5. LAST NAME. FIRST NAME. moou-: NAME 6 SSN 7. GRADEISTATUS
showm-whrlahwmnex MD

a. on Aooness

S2, 2nd BCT, 101}! MIN DIV, Fort Drum NY
9.
Jihrleah Wittney Showman waur to MAKE rue FOLLOWING srneueur uuoen oam;

What is your name, rank, SSN, and duty position?

A: lihrleah Wittney Showman, SPC.-. BCT Security Specialist

Q: When did you first come to know PFC Manning?

A: MAR of 09 when he got to the unit. 1 was arriving to the unit and wu told by MSG Adkins that would be the team leader of the
3SFs

Q: Tell me about the incident in the spring when Manning missed PT formation.

A: He missed PT Formation in APR or MAY, there was still snow on the ground. I went to Manning?s room to make sure he was
alive, knocked on the door. and he answered, looking like hejust woke up. ltold him to get his P'l?s on and meet me at the entrance
to the barracks. was not yelling at him, I was telling him what formation, I explained to him in a very calm
voice that he would have to report early to the company for to ensurethat he was on time. I also told him I would have to give
him a counseling for missing fonnation. We were approaching MSG Adkins in the company parking lot. when Manning froze in his
tracks. started jumping up and down and waving his anns, yelling to the point that saliva was coming out of his mouth. MSG Adkins
approached Manning and asked him in a calm voice what his problem was. A?er Manning calmed down, he explained that his
outburst was because he can't handle it when he makes mistakes or messes up. He was counseled later that day and his corrective
training was to report to me at the company 20 minutes early for PT every day for about month. He started showing up on time a?er
that.

Q: Was any thought given to not deploying Manning?

A: Yes, I was asked by MSG Adkins a lot about Manning's mental state. If it dealt with Manning, was asked because I was his lirst
line supervisor. Initially, Manning went to Behavioral Health here at Drum, but since it was sell?-referral we never got any data back
from his appointments and no follow-ups were scheduled. Actually, several incidents occurred that should have led to Manning not
deploying: emotional break downs--he would freeze emotionally; he stated that he felt no loyalty to this nation, that the flag on his
shoulder meant nothing to him; he stated several timesthathe felt paranoid, that he felt people were listening in on him; at one
point he described to me that in the process of joining the Army that he had to scrub the internet of anything with his name on it or
he wouldn?t have gotten a security clearance. He told me that these things were blogs and expressed that if the military had seen his
blogs that he never would have gotten a securityclearance. I ?lled MSG Adkins in on that conversation and I thought that
was extreme for a person with a TS clearance and talked to MSG Adkins about it. He went to our 0lC MAJ Clausen, from my
understanding. there was nothing on paper that could have proved Manning should have stayed behind. That was due to our shop
keeping everything internal and not telling the company commander. We did get Manning to go back to Behavioral Health. We
don't know what was discussed because it wasn't command referred. That by itself, along with Manning not being able to handle a
day at work without an emo aal breakdown should have caused him to stay here. I even used the phrase ?possible spy" to MSG
Adkins during this time &7

10. EXHIBIT 11. lN|Tl 8 OF MAKIIG STATEAENT
I r-?sewer .4. .. mes
ADDITTONN. PAGES BUST CONTAIN THE OF TAKEN AT DATED

THE BOTTOM OF EAOV ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT, AND PAGE NUMBER
MUST BE IIWTCATEO.

DA FORM 2823. Nov 2000 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE more -1 men

ManningB_00013711

23391

USE THIS PAGE IF NEEDED. IF THIS PAGE IS NOT PEEDED. PLEASE PROCEED TO FINAL PAGE OF FORM.

Showman, Jihrleah Wittney

STATEMENT or onrso 203 1/01/59

IAKEN AI

TEMENT {Continued}

9.

don?t know who decided to deploy with Manning?

A: No, it could have stayed at the S2 level or he may have brought it to the BCT Staff. All MSG Adkins told me was that he brought
it to the S2.

IQ: About how o?en did he have these outbursts?

A: At lent once a week. He would have incidents where he couldn't work if he was corrected. He would go completely rigid if he
was corrected on anything. Almoston a daily basis. Even to the point that we had to lay down the foundation for how Soldiers were
to interact with Of?cers because the work environment was getting a little too friendly and the Soldiers were losing their military
bearing. Even a?er that, where I briefed the whole shop on it, Manning got rigid and unresponsive again. It got to the pointwhere LT
Fields had to go over and check if Manning was breathing.

Q: What was that like as his supervisor?

A: It was frustrating, whatever way we could give him a task and he was allowed to do it, he was fine, but any detour from that track
for him mentally would cause him to freeze and he would become emotionally unstable for a short period of time.

Q: What was the effect of Manning's behavior on the rest of the section?

A: Hard to say. It got them in trouble o?en. When one Soldier would mess up, we would bring them all into the conference room to
ddress it with SGT Mitchell. They were constantly being corrected and having to learn the rules again. it made them less
productive.

Q: During deployment. what was your job?

A: was initially the NCOIC of the Fusion Cell and Manning worked nights with me. This was during the RIPITOA. About a month
later, a?er we got Padgett to the shop,l was moved to targeting during the day and SPC Padgett took over on nights. In mid
December, Manning was late to work twice and Padgett counseled him. This was when Manning flipped the table. I witnessed what
appenedj ust alter the table was turned over because it was near shift change and went to see what happened until Manning was
subdued. wasn't surprised. I wasjust counting down the days until he lost it, we all pretty much thought that way. Manning had
physically gone after Padgett, thought about it, and then kind of gone for the M4 in the corner. That's when Chief Ehresman put him
in a full Nelson.

Q: A?er Manning returned from EML, around FEB, he went back to days, what was that like?

A: Manning had no physical incidents because he was watched. He would still freeze up if people tried to get him back on track
during a brief, but overall, he wasn't as bad as before. We tried to lighten things up with a newsletter in the SCIF that told funny
stories because it was getting pretty serious.

IQ: was this about the time of the E0 complaint?

A: I truly don't remember, but he wu on days at the time?this allowed him to hear evetybody?s conversations. The E0 complaint
accused me of being hateful towards homosexuals because used the word ?faggoty? with reference to not being able to do so many
pushups, not in reference to homosexuals. At sometime, CPT Martin and Chief Ehresman and myself were talking about how they
?can't prove that President Obama was born in the United States and we mentioned that if that was true, then Arnold Shwarunegger

should run. What was reported to the E0 office was that we had said the President Obama had an inability to lead this country

because he was a foreigner, which was not the direction of the conversation. We all told the E0 officer what the truth was and
inothing was really done about it that I know of. We were asked to stop talking about anything that could offend people so we just
stopped talking. Shortly before the indent with me, though, Manning started using words like ?faggoty? and ?gay? in a derogatory
fashion, so I sent out a shop email reminding everyone of the E0 complaint.

Q: Describe the incident when Manning attacked you.

A: I was called in to the office from my CHU and someone couldn't find a file on someone we were targeting. I walked into the
SCIF and no one was really working, CPT Martin, SPC Bales, and LT Fields were in there.Manning was playing Zuma, the game on
his computer. I inked if could get a brief on the situation since no one was working on the task I was called in to research and
Bales told me what they needed. I went to my workstation and asked where everyone had looked for the information and started to

ull it up on my computer. At that time, Manning got up from his computer and walked over to me with his Coke can and told me he
had already looked for the information and couldn?t find it, that CPT Martin didn't know what she was talking about. While he paced
back and forth, I fiddled with my computer and asked Manning if he had looked in a particular location on the Division Portal,
Manning said yes they had I said they obviously hadn?t because here it is and pulled it up on my screen. Manning asserted that they
ad done so and that there was no reason to berate the Soldiers in the SCIF. He was probably a good 4 feet away from me. I told

him, ?Manning how about you fix your shit before you tell me how to fix mine". He threw his hands up in the air, yelled ?no? and
rushed me. He punched me in the face and kind of body slammed me. Then pushed my chair back, he rushed me again and I pinned
him to the ground and screamed at him if this is what he wanted. He said a couple of times he was tired of this. Then SGT Taua had?













PAGE 2 or 4 PAGES

xi

OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT

on Pom am, NOV zoos PE

ManningB_00013712

23392

USE THIS PAGE IF NEEDED. IF THIS PAGE IS NOT IEEDED. PLEASE PROCEED TO FINAL PAGE OF THIS FORM.

STATEMENT or TAKEN AT omen 20ll1?Dl/I9



TATEMENT (Continued)

all knew this was going to happen. Nothing happened until the next day when LT Gaab changed the code on the cipher lock to the
door and demanded that his weapon be taken away. The company commander was not informed and she had the MP5 come
over and take my statement. No one had taken my statement until then. I believe this was in an attempt to keep it internal to the S2
shop. but LT Gaab is very bold and I?m thankful for that because she wanted the company commander to know about it. We then
immediately wrote up a derogatory report to have Manning's clearance pulled.

Q: What happened after the MP5 took your statement?

A: The MP5 detained Manning and he was moved out of the S2 shop. Then the Wikileaks investigation happened and we were
interviewed that night.

Q: Who did Manning go to chow with?

A: A lot of the time, SPC Cooley would take him to chow in the rear. He would go to Pizza Hut here and walking to his room. On
deployment, he would typically go with Cooley and then when they were separated and he was on days I would only see him walking
from the Chow Hall back to his CHU.

Q: Did he have any friends??
A: Not that was made known. He typically was referred to as a loner. If he had friends they would be his opinion of friends. kind of
one-sided friends that he talked to in the smoke pit kind of randomly.

10: Did he ever go on pass?

In garrison, yes, he would always go back to DC. he would take a bus if he could afford it at four day weekends. He has an aunt in

the area and his server is in the DC area and he would remote into it from here and Iraq.

Q: What about weekends?

A: He spent them in his room. Once he went to Mexico, NY to hang out with buddies or take a taxi to Watertown to go shopping. At
least that's what he said. He didn't own a car, spent most of his money on computers and investments?he was always bragging
about how much money he made with his investments.

Q: Anything you care to add??

A: in the Intel community there is a large disconnect between Soldier duties and Tech duties. This has caused large difficulties
when leading these soldiers. All Soldiers must know how to ful?ll the basic responsibilities of a Soldier and this has not been a
standard in the tech MOS's, leaders must lead regardless of the MOS. a Soldier first a Tech second, Manning could not grasp how a
true Soldier should be.

Manning had way too many windows open on his computer. No one else in the shop had as many windows open at once; in return no

ne else had their computers crash as many times either. The computer Tech had indicated many times that Manning overloaded his
mputer by opening to many windows and he was downloading to many things at once. He had to have his computer wiped multiple
imes during the deployment.

Command referral to Behavioral Health for flipping the table--l SO told me to talk to Manning about his command referral to
Behavioral Health. This was an interesting he would be chaptered out. This would have ?negative effects on the





world?. He had said that if he is honest with the counselor that they would have to chapter him out and if he gets kicked out that It
would affect the whole world. I informed him that he has no choice but It be honest with them.
That night before shift change Prior to Manning striking me in the face he sat on the floor in the conference room in a fetus
'0?kl"8 back 3'15 f07'lh- >533 1.wJ
'ii?irip.Ls or sou STATEMENT
PAGE 3 or 4 PAGES
DA Movzooe APD PE v1.01E8

ManningB_00013713

23393

NsmEME~me= Wu:-2-:a ms? AT zmunuw

9. STATEMENT {Ccmf?rut9dJ
. - -
#AFFIDAVIT
I. Showman . HAVE READ on HAVE HAD READ 113 ME ms srmremeur

WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE AND ENDS ON PAGE I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE

BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE

CONTAINING THE I HAVE MADE THIS STAT EMENT FREELY WITHOUT DR REWARD. WITHOUT

THREAT or PUNISHMENT. AND wsmaur UNLAWFUL TNFLUENCE, Dam?:

.-

..
of Person Making

wn-N55555: I Subg?bed and swam to before me. a person authorized by law In

adminisler mama. this 39th day of January 20! I
.1. 1,
MAJ 23,231? 5:3. ?yer --
OR ADDRESS I I I {5?'I'Bnatum tn? Adm?nisienng mm}
LTC Juds P. Nelson JR.
(Typed Name of Parson Administenng Oath)
ART I36 (4)
ORGANIIATIOH OR ADDRESS (Aurhonty T6 Administer Oaths}
INITIAL. PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
1 PAGE 4 OF 4 PAGES
on ram 2323, NOV 2005 APDFE

ManningB_00013714

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.

Manning, Bradley E.

PFC, U.S. Army,

I-IHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211



23394

Prosecution Motion
for Preliminary Determination
of Admissibility of
MRE 404(b) Evidence

Enclosure 5

3 August 2012

APPELLATE
PAGE REFER
PAGES



For Official Use Enforcement Sensitive

o1eo-1o.cm399-14453
A 77

Brigade Operational
L21wTeam
A RTIC L15. 15



?1 I
by: mvu.-.w: IL rwmw:

NAME .RAN.K.: MANNING, Br21(liey E.

HHC. Ed

I 3? 20} TO TC:

DATE T0 UNIT:

DATE. READ

TADS TDS

DAT 01:? FINAL ACTION:

TC) LECEAL

. . . . . . . . . . . --.. . . . . . ..

IN NATURE
(57-4.7949



Exhibit



. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ManningB_00O00206

For Official Use Enforcement Sensitive .- 0117


ARTICLE 15 RIGHTS, MAXIMUM PUNISHMENTS, AND FILING

. Article IS. UCMJ. is a federal law that permits commanding officers to conduct non-judicial proceedings for minor offenses. A
Soldier may refuse Article 15 proceedings and demand trial by court-martial. unless attached to or embarked on a vessel. A Commander may
?nd a Soldier guilty of an offense at an Article IS proceeding only after being convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the Soldier is guilty.

SOLDIERS HAVE THE FOLLOWING RIGHTS AT AN ARTICLE I5 PROCEEDING:

a. To refuse Article I5 proceedings and demand trial by court-martial. lfthe Soldier is attached to or embarked on a vessel. he or she is
not permitted to refuse Article I5 proceedings. [fa Soldier demands trial by court-martial, the trial could be a Summary. Special. or
General Court-Martial. A Soldier may object to trial by Summary Court-Martial. At a Special or General Court-Martial. a Soldier is
entitled to be represented by quali?ed military defense counsel, or by civilian counsel at no expense to the government.

To request an open or closed hearing.

c. To request a person to speak on his or her behalf.

d. To invoke his or her rights under Article 3| UCMJ, to remain silent and to not make any statement regarding the offense(s) for
which the Article I5 hearing is held. If the Soldier makes a statement, that statement may be used as evidence in a later trial by court-
martial.

e. To present matters in defense, extenuation, or mitigation.

To discuss the Article IS and its proceedings with an attorney in private before making these elections.

To appeal the ?ndings and punishment to the next superior authority.



MAXIMUM PUNISHMENTS UN DER A FORMAL ARTICLE 15 FOR ENLISTED SOLDIERS IF IMPOSED BY:

A Company Grade Of?cer: An oral or written reprimand, restriction for I4 days, extra duty for I4 days, correctional custody for 7
days (ifthe Soldier is in the grade of E-3 or below and ifa correctional custody facility is available), reduction ofone grade (ifthe Soldier is
in the grade of E-4 or below), and forfeiture of? days? pay. The amount ofthe forfeiture is computed at the reduced grade, even if
suspended. if reduction is part ofthe punishment imposed.

A Field Grade or General Of?cer: An oral or written reprimand, restriction for 60 days. extra duty for 45 days, correctional custody
for 30 days (ifthe Soldier is in the grade of E-3 or below and ifa correctional custody facility is available), reduction of one or more grades
(ifthe Soldier is in the grade of E-4 or below), reduction of one grade ifthe Soldier is in the grade of E-5 or E-6, and forfeiture of of one
month's pay for two months. The amount of the forfeiture is computed at the reduced grade, even if suspended, if reduction is part of the
punishment imposed. When restriction is combined with extra duty, the maximum period of restriction is 45 days.

MAXIMUM PUNISHMENTS UNDER ARTICLE 15 FOR COMMISSIONED 8: WARRANT OFFICERS IF IMPOSED BY:

A Company Grade Officer or Field Grade Of?cer: A written reprimand and restriction for 30 days. Note: The authority of
company and field grade officers to impose Article I 5 punishment on fellow o?icers is typicaily withheid by the Genera! ("ourt-Martial
?om-ening Authority MC A). heck with the command Ir Staff Judge Advocate before attempting to take action.

A General Of?cer or GCMCA: A written reprimand, arrest in quarters for 30 days, restriction for 60 days, and forfeiture of of
one month?s pay for two months.

THE FILING OF ARTICLE I5 FORMS 8: REVIEW BY DA CAREER MANAGERS AND SELECTION BOARDS:

lfa Commander ?nds a Soldier in the rank of Sergeant (E-5) or above guilty of one or more offenses at an Article I5 proceeding

and imposes punishment, the Commander must ?le the Article IS form in either the Soldier?s Of?cial Military Personnel File (OMPF)
performance or restricted ?che. MOS/specialty career managers and DA Selection Boards routinely use the OMPF performance ?che. The
OMPF restricted ?che is not given to MOS/specialty career managers or DA selection boards without the approval ofthe Commander.
or selection board proponent. lfthe soldier is in the grade of E-4 or below at the start of an Article I5 proceeding and punishment is
imposed. the form will be maintained locally and no ?ling in the OMPF. either in the performance or the restricted ?che, is authorized. AR
27-I 0. Chapter 3 provides detailed rules governing requests to transfer an Article I5 from a Soldier's performance ?che to his or her
restricted ?che.

THE NEED TO IMPROVE STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE AND CONDUCT: Soldiers found guilty at an Article IS proceeding
are considered to be on notice that they must improve their conduct and performance. An Article 15 may form the basis. either in whole or in
part, for an administrative separation action that results in a less than honorable discharge. Soldiers are strongly encouraged to exhibit the
behavior necessary to receive an Honorable Discharge. If not. one or more ofthe following situations may occur:
a. The Soldier may be separated with a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions or with an Other Than Honorable
Discharge.
b. A Soldier separated with less than an honorable discharge may be barred from ever enlisting again, may encounter problems
securing civilian employment, and may forfeit the many bene?ts generally associated with an Honorable Discharge.
c. The Soldier should be aware that the likelihood ofupgrading a less than honorable discharge, while possible. is unlikely.

FOUU
For Official Exhibit__

ManningB_00000207



For Official Use Enforcement Sensitivea 01

SWORN STATEMENT
For use or this form, see AR 190-45; the proponent agency ls Plus

17
53

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Title 10 USC Section 301; Title 5 USC Section 2951; O. 9397 dated November 22, 1943 ISSN)
To Drovide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accuratelyidentilied
Your social security number is used as an aoditionallalternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrievah

AUTHORITY:
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE:
ROUTINE USES:

oiscigsugg; Disclosure of your social security number is voluntary.

1 LOCATION 2 DATE 3. TIME 4. FILE NUMBER
Fob Hammer, 2nd BDE SCIF 2010/05/08 030]

5 LAST NAME. FIRST NAME. MIDDLE NAME 6. SSN 7 GRADEISTATUS
Showmaan, Jihrleah E4

8 ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
HHC ZBCT, IOMTN. Fob Hammer Iraq

1

2. Jihrleah Showman . WANT TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT UNDER OATH:

08 May 20l0 between the hours of 000i and 0l00 was called into work While performing my task I was asking many questions of the other
Soldiers in the SCIF SPC Manning began pacing the ?oor next to me drinlting a soda He came over and said that they had already conducted the
searches that I was performing on the computer and that I needed to calm down. I was sitting in my seat focusing on my task; he was to the right til?
me He then said that I lashed out on everyone in the room. I said did not lash out? He said I did At this time I said Manning you should fix your shit
before you tell me how to fix mine. He then yelled (I believe he yelled no). Then in a matter ofseconds he began swinging his arms while screaming.
he then ran towards me (I was sitting) His whole body made contact with me and. his fist struck my right jaw. Once his fist made contact with my
lacel iumped up and grabbed him as he continued to fight me. I brought him to the ground and laid on him holding his hands to the ground in order to
subdue him SSG Taua and CPT Martin came over. and once SPC Manning stopped trying to fight I was told to let him up. I then let him up At no ti
prior to SPC Manning making physical contact with me did I threaten or make any movement towards him that would provoke any such bCh?lVl0

CPT Martin. SSG Taua. SPC Shim and PFC Bales were in the SCIF during this event /1



NOTHING








10. EXHIBIT

1 OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT

PAGE I OF 2 PAGES

ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING TA TEMENT OF TAKEN AT DA TED

THE BOTTOM OF EACH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT, AND PAGE NUMBER

APD PE vl

at


Exhibit

ManningB_00000208

For Official Use .v Enforcement Sensitive 0028-1 0117

STATEMENT OF Jihrlcah Wittney Showman\sU'3 TAKEN AT Fob Hammer DATED 2010/05/08
. STATEMENT (Continued)
2 0"





AFFIDAVIT
I, Jihrleah Wiltn?y Showman HAVE READ on HAVE HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENT
WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1. AND ENDS ON PAGE . I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE
BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE
CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT FREELY WITHOUT HOPE OF BENEFIT OR REWARD. WITHOUT
THREAT OF PUNISHMENT. AND WITHOUT COERCION. UNLAWFUL INFLUENCE. OR UNLAWFUL INDUCEMENT.
("Signature of Person Making Statement)
Subscribed and sworn to before me. a person authorized by law to
administer oaths. [his day of
at
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS (Signature of Person Administering Oath)
Typed Name of Person Administering Oath)
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS (Authority To Administer Oaths)
INITIALS OF PE KING STATEMENT
PAGE 2 OF 2 PAG

PAGE 3. on FORM 2323, DEC 1993 "101


ManningB_0000O209

For Official Use Enforcement Sensitive 0117

sworm 0160-10-cios99-144is3

For use of this form. see AR 190-45.? the proponent agency is PMG

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT

AUTHORITY: Title 10 USC Section 301. Title 5 USC Section 2951; E0. 9397 dated November 22, 1943 (SSN)

punpos?; To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
?ourmg Your social security number is used as an additional/altemate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval
D|scLosuRE: Disclosure of your social security number -s v0Iunta'y.

1 LOCATION 2. one 3. 7117!? 4. FILE NUMBER

Fol: H?mhcl Qoio 0508?

ST NAME. FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME 16. SSN 7 GRADEISTATUS




. - - FOLLOWINGSTATEMENTUNDEROATH
Ma?; /0 aw? amt won?: 1 Ida; Callie! mat t,t)ork_

yvu, uh,? wfayuf qu4.wuai wc.s?iwc, bicoa, I win? c-may IM, 3?

bar . IMctrIr\.pt.)
CF cg
H04 {uwtv (incl 66:34:] q((QaA du?xtoj

?ip I
my /0 w/gain, /y/as

Mrs? [Any L16?/o Satiae
M514 0.1../t4 on

;Maiw\in3 H),
3 a?d lab uJa?
I

0??apn.V' J-ca

Lag? Did: Oi/i I was ?0[loJt.b?
(Info) 57( Hianrlinj (iuwas
(am about 5'
CQULI Hi5

CV) V47 Zfk-l? Jaw?
\,u5 . 3

\0kit.aJ cm? I gumtzuj? M, Jmog

i
. I gc . 0? iV\'7 tc
No? Wu? 0:0 akfiuu

Uklig M49,

10 EXHBIT 11 I OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE 1 OF 2 PAGES

ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING OF TAKEN A DA TED



THE BOTTOM OF EACH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT, AND PAGE NUMBER
MUS BE BE INDICA TED

DA 1998 DA FORM SOLETE APO PE v1 01
For Official Use Only Law Enforcement Exhibit
5 Am 9t=l\IRt I I

Manning

For Official Use Enforcement Sensitive-
EN AT alt)

\/uwk Sc 1uLr!)- I aw
29canal ?79; 611/
5? 4CCu.r*

0315 5,/Sci 14":


STATEMENT OF



(Continued)

9. STATEMENT



0117

3

AFFIDAVIT

125 I- L]g% L3 HAVE READ OR HAVE HAD READ To ME THIS STATEMENT
WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1, AND ENDS 0 PAGE .4 I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE
BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONS AND HAV THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE

CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT FREELY WITHOUT
THREAT OF PUNISHMENT. AND WITHOUT COERCION. UNLAWFUL INFLUENCE. OR UNL






Tgnature of Person Making Statement)

Subscribed and sworn to

administer oaths. this day of

lsgore me. a person authonzed by law to

.9010

3?

OR ADDRESS (Signature of Person Administering Oath)

/1 ?c 5
yped ?31? Parson Administering Oath)

.
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS Auihoriiy 0 dmin Ier aihs

PAGE 3 OF 9 PAGES

ERSON MAKING STATEMENT


APD PE V1.01

mu


PAGE 3. DA FORM 2823. DEC 1998

ensitive

SITIVE

ManningB_0000021 1

Exhibit



For Official Use .y_51w Enforcement Sensitive A 0117

3
SWORN STATEMENT

For use or this form, see AR 190-45; the proponent agency IS PMG

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT

AUTHORITY: Title 10 USC Section 301. Tulle 5 USC Section 2951; E.O 9397 dated November 22, 1943 (SSN)

pnmc|pA|_ puapose; To provide commanders and law entorcement officiats with means by which Intormation may be accurately identitied
aounug Your social security number is used as an additionatlattemate means of Identi?cation to facilitate tiling and retrieval.
D|scLo3uRE; Disclosure of your socual security number is votuntary.

-. LOCATION 2. DATE 3 TIME 4. FILE NUMBER
COS Hammer BDE SCIF 2010/05/08 03:04

5. LAST NAME. FIRST NAME. MIDDLE NAME 6 SSN 7. IATUS
Shim. Paul. Kyu Sik -

8 ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS

2bci l0mtn (Ll) 1-ll-1C. S2
9.

I. Shim. Paul . WANT TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT UNDER OATH.

Between I200 and I230 hours I was working on my computer when I Showman. Jihrleach entered BDF. She arrived and was an bit upset
about being called back into work. She made a few statements asking us if we searched vartous areas on the shared data drive in order to find a

certain file we needed to obtain for Major Ford. I was not tasked to find taht ?le but Manning Bradley was. He seemed a bit angry with her
outbursts and began to pace around the scif. I proceeded to go back to my work on my own computer when I heard Showman say to
Manning "You better check yourself? Manning and said "hey" Then he punched her on the side of her head. She got up and they
proceeded to wrestle She threw him to the ground. Jumped on top of him and pinned him to the ground

She said "calm down" "calm down". And he said am calm". She replied "why did you punch me then" Ht: said don't know why I punched you.
I'm tired nfiill this shit" SSG Tau took charge and grabbed manmng and told him to go outside and cool off He said tired of all this shit" and

walked oft?








/4

/1

10. EXHIBIT 11. INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE 1 or 2 PAGES
ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING TEMENT DP TAKEN A DA TED

THE BOTTOM OF EACH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT, AND PAGE NUMBER

MUSTBE BE INDICA TED. I ..
DA egg" 2323. 05c 1993 DA FORM 282 .JU . LETE APO PE v1.01

For Official Us_q\gQn m??m?i?e Exhibit__

ManningB_00000212

For Official Use 5a_w Enforcement Sensitiven

53
SWORN STATEMENT
For use of this form. see AR 190-45: the proponent agency is PMG.

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT

AUTHORITY: Title 10 USC Section 301: Title 5 USC Section 2951.? E.O. 939? dated November 22. 1943 (SSN) .

PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
uses; Your social security number is used as an additionallalternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval.
mscLo5URE: Disclosure of your social security number is voluntary.

1. LOCATION 2. DATE 3. TIME 4. FILE NUMBER
Brigade SCIF on COS HAMMER, Iraq 2010/05/08 00:01 - 0 I :00hrs

5. LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME 6. SSN 7.
Taua, Julia Marie E-6 I AD

8. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS

HHC 2BCT IOMTN DIV
9

I. Julia M. Taua WANT TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT UNDER OATH:

On 08 May ZOIO between 00 0| and OI .00hrs I broke up a scuflle that broke out in the BDE SCIF between SPC Jirleah Showman and SPC
Bradley Manning

Words were exchanged between the two soldiers. Then I heard the other soldiers in the SCIF react to what sounded like people struggling with one
another I turned to see what was going on and saw both SPC Showman and SPC Manning laid out on the ground.

I walked up to them and saw where SPC Showman had SPC Manning pinned to the ground telling him that he "needed to calm down" before she let
him up SPC Manning was red in the face and struggling to get out from under SPC Showman.

It was at that point that I separated the two soldiers. tapped SPC Showman on the shoulder and said "Let him up" SPC Showman immediately got up
then helped me get SPC Manning to his feet. SPC Manning got up off the ground. walked to the other side ofthe SCIF saying repeatedly "l'm iust tired
ofthis."

I turned to SPC Showman with a "What The Heck jus look on my face. she mouthed back to me and actioned with her hand "He
punched me in the face" I turned to SPC Manning who was standing and shaking his head near the front of the SCIF (still saying to no one in general
but out loud for all to hear "Im_|ust tired of this") and told him that I needed to speak with him outside. I led him out ofthe SCIF and to a separate room
where he was met by MSG Adkins and taken out ofmy custody.

I
10. EXHIBIT 11. INIT PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE 1 OF 2 PAGES
ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING TEM NT TAKENAT DA TED

THE BOTTOM OF EA CH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MA KING THE STA TEMENT, AND PAGE NUMBER
MUST BE BE INDICA TED, --

DA FORM 2323, DEC 1998 DA FORM 28 3.

For Of?cial Exhibit__



OLETE APO PE V1.01

ManningB_00000213

For Official Use 5a_w Enforcement Sensitive?
-I 53


STATEMENT OF TAKEN AT DATED


9 STATEMENT (Continued)

AFFIDAVIT
I. M?t?c. HAVE READ OR HAVE HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENT

WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1, AND ENDS ON PAGE I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE
BY ME. THE STATEMENT Is TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE
CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT FREEL WITHOUT HOPE OF BENEFIT OR REWARD. WITHOUT
THREAT OF PUNISHMENT, AND WITHOUT COERCION. UNLAWFUL INFLU FUL INDUCEMENT.




(Signature of Person Making Statement)

w|TNEssEs; Subscribed and Sworn to before me. a person authorized by law to
admInISter oaths, thIS day of
at

OR ADDRESS (Signature of Person Administering Oath)

(Typed Name of Person Administering Oath)

ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS (Authority To Administer Oaths)

INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
HEB PAGE 2 OF 2 PAGES

PAGE 3, DA FORM 2323, DEC 1998 I PE vI 01



For Official Exhibit

ManningB_00000214


51L AI RCERTIFICA

For :his I see the agency is ODCSOPS '1

NI

DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT

True 10, Ueled States Code. Section 3012(9)

pugposg: To Drovroe commander: and Iaw er?orcement o?rcrels wits meme by when untormaeon may be accureteoy iduttrtoeu

noujmg uses; Your Soul Security Number 5 used as an eddrtionauallernaterreene oI rdenti?catron Iecleate ?ling and relieve!

o|3cLo3u3E; Dradoaure or your Social Security Number I: voluntary.

1 LOCATION 2 DATE 3 TIME 4 FILE NO

F015 2010 05708
5 NAME (Last. MI) 5 ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS

MANN BKADLQI E. no MW

6 7 omoersrarus F03
'29 r?rP0.- #5 30%

PART I - RIIGHTS WAIVERINON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE

Section A.

The -nvestigatorwhose name eppen DeIow to a me not helshe as warm the Unrted Sites Anny
FD and wanted to question me woU?IIhe Iollomng otlenaeu) Mud: lam

Rasuot?

Bdore nelahe asked me any aboutthe oHense(a)_ however helehe made It dear Io me that I have the Iottowung

1 I do not have to anauer any question or say anyttung

2 Anytholaeyoroocanbeused as evidence

3 {For personnel suopct to the UCMJ) I have the to taut prwatety to a lawyer belore uunng. and liner questioning and to have a lawyer present um rne
dunm queslionmg Thus lawyer can be a tewyor I arrange Ior at no expense to the Government or a mitrtary lawyer oetaded for me at no expense to me.
or both

. 9, .
(For cmhans not subject to the I have the right to tour pnvetety to a lawyer beIore. dunng. end e?er quesoomng and to have lawyer present wee-
rne dunno questionrng Iundersleno that the lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own eroense. or I I cannot e?ord a lawyer and want one. a Iewyer
w? be appealed for me belore any questnonng begunouacuaa the ofIense(a) under mvestigd -. or wdhoot I bwyu present. I have a room to stop answenngqueebona at any tame. or
seat: privately with a lawyer before answering Iutlhef. even I sugn the Nerve! bdovl

5 COMMENTS (Continue on reverse srdej

\Iou~ IA 235

Section 8. Waiver

Itmoerstutcl my nghta as stated above. I am now to diacuuthe ol'Ierue(a) under mvenegatron and mile a stat .: without hllung to a Iawyer fat and
wrthout fearing a lawyer present me.

3 SIGNAILRE OF INTERVEME
to NAME (Type or Print)

ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 4 SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

2: (rm, 0, pm? 5 rvpeo NAME or

ORGANIZATION on ADDRESS AND 6. ORGANIZATION OF NVESTIGATOR

section C. Non-waiver

I

I want a lawyer 3 I do not wast to be quenoneo or say anytmo
2 SIGNATU :/L;d7
ATTACH TI-IS CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STAITEMENT (DA FORM 2823) XECUTED BY THE
DA pogu 3331' Nov 13.9 EDITION OF woven APO P6 v? 0165

For Official use; Exhibit_

ManningB_O0000215

For Of?cial Useg L3_w Enforcement Sensitive -to
.. 1M63

REPORT OF UNFAVORABLE INFORMATION FOR SECURITY DETERMINATION
For use of this Iorrn see AR 190-56 the proponent agency Is ODCSOPS

1 REPORTING COMMANDER
Freeburg, Matthew

I-IHC, ZBCT, IOMTN IOMTN (LI)
FOB Hammer 09308 Fort Drum, NY 13601
3 UNIT IDENTIFICATION CODE

4 socvum
j?
Sb ALIASES (Former/Maiden name)

2 SIPPORTING SPECIAL SECURITY OFFICE
(Sensitive Compamnontod Information Only)

53 NAME (Last. Iirst.

Manning, Bradley E.

83. DATE OF BIRTH (voar, month, my) 8b PLACE OF BIRTH (State or Country) Ta. RANK 7b. STATUS (see Item 16)
SPC 5

ea CURRENT CLEARANCE 5b 5c. (check 90., ac. DATE GRANTED ad OF INVESTIGATION
Top Secret '55 N0 20080! I 5 SSBI
9 TYPE OF REPORT (Check appropriate box)

2 INITIAL FOLLOW-UP FINAL

10 UNIT ACTION TAKEN (Check appropriate box)

LI ACCESS COLLATERAL AccEss SUSPENDED Ian Forwarded)
ACCESS NOT SUSPENDED

11 BASIS OF REPORT

3 OFFENSEIALLEGATION
07 MAY I0 -- Soldier accused of assault battery.

Soldier allegedly struck a fellow Soldier in the face with a closed fist after a verbal altercation. Witnesses. including a
commissioned officer, attested to the veracity of the accusation.

ACTION TAKEN
Referred to JAG for legal action and behavioural health for further evaluation.

I A mm
/4

INCLOSURES


13. DATE 14 TYPED NAME. GRADE, TITLE, AND AUTOVON NO 15 SIGNATURE OF SECURITY MANACERIAUTHORIZED
Freeburg. Matthew, W. OFHCN
09 MAY II CPT, Company Commander
16 A -AAFES - DAC AND ACTIVE USAR -ACTIVE USAR
- DA CIVILIAN (DAC) - DAC AND INACTIVE USAR 5 - HIRE
-ACTIVE ENLISTEDIOC5 AND ARNG -CIVILIAN CONTRACTOR
- NAF -DAC AND DOD AFFILIATION W- ACTIVE WARRANT OFFICER
-ACTIVEGENERAL orncen -ARNG caoss
I - INACTIVE USAR -ACTIVE OFFICER - ROTC CADET
OTHER (Explain)
.2 - .1
T7771
DA FORM 5248-R, SEP :1 ?ml 2?

For Official Use gengg?ymg Exhibit__

ManningB_00000216

For Official Use 1 Law Enforcement Sensitive

DEVELOPMENTAL COUNSELING FORL.
For use ot thus lorm_ see FM 22100, the proponent agency us TRADOC

0028-1o-cID2?2l?-at 0117

3

AUTHORITY:
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE:
ROUTINE USES:
DISCLOSURE:

DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974

5 USC 301 Departmental Regulations 10 USC 3013. Secretary of the Army and E0 9397 (SSN)

To leaders in and counselrng data pertannmg to suoordmates

For subordrnate leader development IAW FM 22-100 Leaders should use thus lorm as necessary

as voluntary

PART I - ADMINISTRATIVE DATA

Name (Last, First, MI)

Manning. Bradley

RanluGrade Socral Security No.



Organ-zatnon

HHC ZBCT. I0th MTN (LI)

Date or Counsebng
I7 MAY I0

Name and Two ol Counselor

SGT Mitchell, Lawrence, PSG

PART II - BACKGROUND INFORMATION

(Assault and Battery)

Purpose ot Counsellng: {Leader states the reason for the counsetmg, g. performance/professional growth or event-oriented counselmg,
and Includes the leader's facts and observatrons pnor to the counselmg

PART - SUMMARY OF COUNSELING
complete section during or Immediately subsequent to counsellng.

ENCOUNTER SUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICE IN CIVILIAN LIFF.

Key Polnts ot Discussion:
On 07 MAY I0. SPC Manmng struck SPC Showman a closed Inst

THIS COUNSELING IS AN TO CORRECT THE DISCUSSED AND IS AN ATTEMPT TO REIIABILITATF YOU
AS A SOLDIER YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT If YOU EINUAOI-. IN FURTHER MISCONDUCT OR YOUR DUTY
PERFORMANCIL CONTINUES TO BE YOU MAY BE PROCESSED FOR ELIMINATION FROM I HE ARMY
TIIE PROVISIONS OF AR 635-200. IF SEPARATED FROM THE ARMY. YOU COULD RECEIVE FROM
A (JENERAL DISCHARGE UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS TO DISHONORABLE DISCHARGE. AND YOU SHOIJLD EXPECT TO
IN ADDITION. YOU MAY BE INELIGIBLF. FOR MANY OR ALL

BENEFITS GRANTED UNDER BOTII FEDERAL AND STATE LAW YOU MAY ALSO BF. SUBJECT TO OTHER PUNITIVE
AND MEASURES

DA FORM 4856. JUN 1999

ManningB_O0000217

OTHER INSTRUCTIONS

Thus lorm wull be destroyed upon. reassignment (other than rehabrhtatave sf ._separati_on at ETS. or upon retrrement For separatuon
reourrements and notntacatron or loss or Ildnrectrves and AR 835-200

EDITION OF JUN 85 IS OBSOLETE

For official use

APO PE vl OC

Exhibit



For Official Use Enforcement Sensitive .

07
0028-1 o?ciof2t -1 01 1 7
Plan ot Action: {Outlines actions that the st.? nate do after the counseling session to reach th e-go?. I

must be speci?c enough to modify or maintain the subordinate ?s behavior and include a specified time line for implementation and
assessment (Part IV belowl)



- Soldier will continue to receive BHU counseling and treatment on a weekly basis

- Soldier will move from the SCIF to work as prescribed by the HHC BDE ISG until final adjudication oflegal and medical proceedings IS completed
CDR will make recommendation regarding continued status of Soldier's clearance, and forward his recommendation to (.3251?) for CCF processing

- As investigation is ongoing, Soldier will not contact BDE 52 section personnel until further notice

Session Closing: The leader summarizes the key points of the session and checks if the subordinate understands the plan of action The
subordinate agrees/disagrees and provides remarks if appropriate.)

Individual Counseled I agree disagree with the information above

Individual counseled remarks

2 3
Signature of Individual Counseled - 7 Dale. I7 MAY l0


Loader (Leader's responsibilities in implementing the plan ol?action
Ensure Soldier is kept informed of proceedings and adj udication ofcase as it is made known.

Date: 10
-



Signature of Counselor-

PART iv - ASSESSMENT or THE PLAN or Acrioii

Assessment: (Did the plan of action achieve the desired results? This section is completed by both the leader and the individual counseled
and provides useful information for lollow?up counseling.)

Counselor Individual Date ol Assessment:

Note: Both the counselor and the individual a record of the counseling.

REVERSE, DA FORM 4856, JUN 1999

AFC PE

For Official Exhibii__

ManningB_00000218

3
RECORD EEDINGS UN ER A
For use of lhlt. see AR 27.10. Chapter 3: the proponent age. 3 J. .3- . 5?'1?'c'D399'14453



NAME 3. SSN GRADE UNIT a LOCATION BASE PAY
MANNING. Bradley E. E4 HHC, 2d BCT,
COS Hammer, Iraq APO AE 09308

I. I am considering whether you should be punished under Article IS. UCMJ, for the following misconduct:

In that you. did, at COS Hammer, Iraq on or about 8 May 20l0. unlawfully strike SPC Jihrleah Shoman in the face with a
closed ?st. This is in violation of Anicle I28, UCMJ

(END or CHARGES)

2. Page three ofthis form lists your rights and the maximum punishment that may be imposed. In deciding what to do. you have the rigit to

consult with legal counsel located at USA Trial Defense Service, Camp Liberty. Iraq APO AE 09344 You now have 48 hours to decide
what to do.

DATE NAME. RANK. AND ORGANIZATION OF COMMANDER SIGNATURE

74Slu?l?7?Y> MATTHEW W. FREEBURG. CPT, HHC, 2D BCT

3. Having been afforded the opportunity to consult with counsel and understanding my rights listed on page three ofthis form. my decision is as
follows? trial appropriate blocks. date. and sign)

a. demand trial by court-martial.
b. I do not demand trial by court-manial and in the Article IS proceedin
fl) I request the hearing be I: Open. A Closed.
(2) A person to speak in my behalf I: Is Engls not requested.
(3) Matters in defense. extenuation. and/or mitigation:
5 Are not presented. El Are attached. [3 Will be presented in person.
DATE NAME AND RANK OF SERVICE MEMBER SIGNATURE

to BRADLEY MANNING, SPC 6. 3
4a. In a(n) Open g?osed hearing, having considered all matters presented, I hereby make the fdl?iwing ?ndings:
rt
qeuilly ofAll Guilty ol'Some Speci?cations El Not Guilty ofAl| Speci?cations (line out all

Speci?cations. (line out Not Guilty Speci?cations). Speci?cations and sign below).
Based on my ?ndings. impose the punishments that are of?cially recorded in Item 6 of this form.
4b. I direct that this DA Form 2627 be ?led in the:

Performance ?che I: Restricted ?che onhe OMPF. as Soldier was an (2-4 or below at start of

of the OMPF. proceedings.

4c. You are advised of your right to appeal to the next superior authority: Cdr, 2d BSTB within ?ve (5) calendar days.
An appeal made after that time may be rejected as untimely. Punishment is effective immediately unless otherwise stated in Item 6.

DATE NAME, RANK. AND ORGANIZATION OF COMMANDER SIGNATURE
.
/5 MATTHEW w. FREEBURG, CPT, HHC, 2D BCT
5. (lniricfl appropriate block. dale. and sign)
0 not appeal. Ilnaalgzj but do not subm? addmonal I appeal and submit additional matters.
TE NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER .
)4 ivml to BRADLEY E. MANNING

DA Form 2627 (Test) NOV 04 Page 1 Eu

For Official Exhibit_

ManningB_00000219

For Official Use t_ L33: Enforcement Sensitive ooze-1o-cID2ii4-?P0117


NAME 3. ss~ unit 45. LOCATION I
MANNING. Bradley E. E4 HHC. 2d BCT,
-- cos Hammer, Iraq APO AE 09308

6. The following punishment is imposed: Reduction to the Grade of Forfeiture of $446.00 pay per month for one month.

7. I have considered the appeal and it is my opinion that

DATE NAME. RANK, AND ORGANIZATION OF REVIEWING JUDGE ADVOCATE SIGNATURE

8. After consideration of all matters presented in the appeal. the appeal ts:

Denied. I Grantedasfollowsz

DATE NAME. RANK, AND ORGANIZATION OF COMMANDER SIGNATURE

9. I have seen the action taken on my appeal.

DATE NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER SIGNATURE

I0. ALLIED DOCUMENTS COMMENTS

I. DA Form 4856
2. DA Form 2823 (x 4)
3. DA Form 388I
4. Hag
S. ERB

DA FORM 2627 (Test) NOV 04 Page 2




For Official Use Only Law Enforcement Sensitive Exhibit

ManningB_O00O0220

For Official Use 9 l,a_w Enforcement Sensitive


ARTICLE 15 PUNISHMENT WORKSHEET
Soldier?s Data: SPC MANNING, Bradley E., HHC, 2d BCT, COS Hammer, lraq APO AE09308
Imposing Commander: CPT Matthew W. Freeburg Type of Article 15: Company Grade Article IS
Reduction: Soldier may be reduced to E3.
Forfeiture: Maximum of? days? pay for one month, not to exceed the following:
If no reduction imposed: $486.00
If Soldier reduced to E3 (whether or not suspended): $446.00
Deprivation of Liberty Punishments:

Extra Duty: Maximum of 14 days. May be combined with Restriction.

Restriction: Maximum of 14 days. May be combined with Extra Duty. When combined, the maximum
period cannot exceed the maximum period allowed for Extra Duty.

Reprimand: May be an oral or written reprimand.

Any punishment may be suspended for up to 180 days.

PUNISHMENT IMPOSED:

Reduction to th Grade of: lfsuspended. then(suspended for days) or(reduction below the

Grade of kl?) suspended for lg days).

Forfeiture of$ ofthe forfeiture for the number of months selected for a period of
days).

Extra Duty for LJA days, (suspended for days).

Restriction for QB. days, (suspended for 3 13 days).
(Normal limits are Company area, Dining/Medical Facility, Place of Worship, and Place of Duty)

Reprimand H3 (Oral )(Written _ui4._

(Reprimands for enlisted Soldiers may be oral or written and oral is typically appropriate. Reprimands of
commissioned or warrant officers must be in writing.)

Dale Pzmishmem? Imposed.? jD_ Commander 's InitiaI.s'.' piwf

1.3

-:
For Official Use Only Law Enforcement Sensitive Exhibit

ManningB_00000221

23411

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V.

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

Prosecution Motion
for Preliminary Determination
of Admissibility of
MRE 404(b) Evidence
Enclosure 6
3 August 2012

APPELLATE EXHIBIT
PAGE REFERENCEDPAGES
PAGE _0F

23412

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41

STAFF SERGEANT PETER BIGELOW, U.S. Army, was c a l l e d
t e l e p h o n i c a l l y as a w i t n e s s f o r t h e p r o s e c u t i o n , was sworn, and
t e s t i f i e d i n substance sis f o l l o w s :
DIRECT EXAMINATION
Q u e s t i o n s b y A s s i s t a n t T r i a l Counsel 2:
I am c u r r e n t l y a s s i g n e d t o AFSOUTH B a t t a l i o n Naples I t a l y ,
Army Element o f NATO. I knew t h e PFC Manning i n I r a q . He worked
f o r me a f t e r f i g h t w i t h Showman i n t h e SCIF. I was t h e HHC
B r i g a d e Supply Sergeant.
He worked f o r me u n t i l May and he was
taken i n t o custody.
He came t o work f o r me maybe i n A p r i l .
I
c a n ' t h o n e s t l y t e l l you, b u t I know i t was a f t e r t h e
a l t e r c a t i o n . I had a SIPR and NIPR computer i n t h e s u p p l y room
and my p e r s o n a l l a p t o p so I c o u l d search w e b s i t e s where t h e Army
b l o c k e d . My p e r s o n a l computer was used t o h e l p me do my j o b . I
d i d n o t l o g i n t o PFC Manning's a c c o u n t s , t o i n c l u d e h i s AKO, h i s
g m a i l , and h i s Amazon account.
I d i d n o t know any o f h i s
passwords. I d i d n o t search f o r o r view t h e W i k i L e a k s . o r g
w e b s i t e . I d i d n o t s e a r c h f o r J u l i a n Assange on t h e s u p p l y room
computer. I have n o t googled t h e G l o b a l Address L i s t on t h e
s u p p l y room computer. I never downloaded e m a i l s on t h e
I r a q . c e n t c o m . m i l domain. I o n l y e m a i l e d t h e t h e a t r e PBO on t h e
NIPR computer.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Q u e s t i o n s b y t h e c i v i l i a n defense

counsel:

My p e r s o n a l l a p t o p was n o t password p r o t e c t e d . I gave
i n s t r u c t i o n s t o check p e r s o n a l e m a i l on my l a p t o p , b u t do n o t
download c r a z y o r u n a u t h o r i z e d s i t e s on my l a p t o p t h a t c o u l d g e t
me i n t r o u b l e .
I never gave access t o o t h e r S o l d i e r s . My c l e r k
had access, b u t she had h e r own NIPR access.
She went t o h e r
room and used h e r p e r s o n a l computer. I don't know i f she used
i t when I was n o t t h e r e .
[The w i t n e s s was p e r m a n e n t l y
ended t h e phone c a l l . 1

157

excused, d u l y warned, and

23413

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V.

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

Prosecution Motion
for Preliminary Determination
of Admissibility of
MRE 404(b) Evidence
Enclosure 7
3 August 2012

23414

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Prosecution Notice of Intent
V.

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

to Present Evidence of
Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts
6 April 2012

1. Military Rule ofEvidence (MRE) 404(b) requires the prosecution to provide reasonable
notice ofthe general nature of other crimes, wrongs, or acts that the prosecution may use for a
purpose other than character, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan,
knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, upon the request of defense.
2. The prosecution may present evidence of the following other crimes, wrongs, or acts:
a.

The accused falsifying his SF86 to receive his security clearance;

b. The accused's violations of operations security and information security regulations
before his deployment, such as during AIT which led to his corrective training;
c.

The accused's stabbing of another Soldier with a pencil;

d.

The accused's disloyal statements to SPC Showman;

e. The accused's conduct resulting in and following his counseling sessions prior to
deployment;
f.

The accused's disclosure of classified information to Mr. Adrian Lamo via chat;

g. The accused's compromise of other govemment closely held or classified information as
found in the forensic reports, such as the Rules of Engagement, the C3 document, and the NCIS
document;
h. The accused's disclosure of classified documents from the charged databases that are not
the documents charged in Specifications 5, 7, 9, and 13 of Charge II;
i.
The accused's violations of operations security and information security regulations
during the deployment, including communicating other govemment closely held or classified
information to those without clearances and downloading information from SIPRNET and
removing it from the SCIF for unofficial purposes;
j.
The accused's conduct resulting in and following his counseling sessions during
deployment;
k.

The accused's assault consummated by battery of SPC Showman; and

23415

1^

The accused'sassault consummated bybattery at the .IRCE in Fort I^eavenworth.

3^ The prosecution will notily the de^nseofany additions to this notice and understands that
this isacontinuing obligation.

ANGEL OVERGAARD
CPT, JA
Assistant Trial Counsel
I certify that I served or caused to be served a true copy of the above on Defense Counsel, via
electronic mail, on 6 April 2012.

ANGEL OVERGAARD
CPT, JA
Assistant Trial Counsel



23416

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defense Reply to Prosecution
Motion for Preliminary
Determination of Admissibility
of MRE 404(b) Evidence

V.

MANNING. Bradley E., PFC
U-S- Army. j?
Headquarters and Headquarters Company, US. Army)

Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall)

Fort Myer, Virginia 22211 17 August 2012



RELIEF SOUGHT

The Defense in the above-captioned case respectfully requests that this Court (1) close
the Article 39(a) sessions of court during which evidence is adduced, argument is made, and
the Court's ruling announced on this particular motion and (2) deny all of the prosecution's
requests made in their corresponding 3 August 2012 motion. The Defense does request oral
argument on this motion.

BURDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OF PROOF

The prosecution bears the burden of persuasion as the moving party. The burden of
proof is by a preponderance of the evidence. RCM 905(c).

FACTS

Closure of Court. This court-martial has received constant international media
attention from the Summer of 2010 onward. Almost every Article 39(a) session of this Court has
been well-attended by members of the media and widely reported in the news. (An internet
news search conducted on 14 August 2012 received over 12,000 search results. Many of those
results reported the events happening in this court-martial as they were happening.)

Mr. Brian Madrid. The Defense has no objection to the facts rendered by the
Government with respect to Mr. Madrid and would be willing to stipulate to those facts contained
in the second, third, and fourth paragraphs in the ?facts" section of Government's motion for the
limited purpose of this motion. Likewise, we would be willing to stipulate to Enclosures 1 and 2
of the Government's motion for the same limited purpose.

Ms. Jihrleah Showman. The Defense is unwilling to stipulate to the testimony Ms.
Jihrleah Showman and objects to the Court's considering the testimony of Ms. Showman during
the Article 32 investigation, her sworn statement, or any sworn statements describing the
alleged assault between Ms. Showman and PFC Manning in order to resolve any factual issue
related to this motion. (The Defense also objects to the Court considering Enclosures 3, 4, and
5, of the Government's motion.) The Defense would draw the Court's attention to the entirety of
Ms. Showman?s Article 32 testimony in order to better prepare the Court for her in-person
testimony. Speci?cally, Ms. Showman admits, among other things, that she (1) does not know
what PFC Manning was thinking at the time he made the alleged disloyal statements and (2)
does not know if PFC Manning was only making the alleged disloyal statements in order to
annoy Ms. Showman.

SSG Peter Bigelow. The Defense has no objection to the facts rendered by the
Government with respect to SSG Bigelow and would be willing to stipulate to his testimony from

APPELLATE
PAGE REFERENCED:
PAGE PAGES

Z-j



23417

the Article 32 investigation as well as Enclosure 6 of the Government's motion for the limited
purpose of this motion .

LEGAL AUTHORITY

Court Closure
RCMs 806 and 912
U.S. v. Travers, 25 M.J. 61 (C.M.A. 1987)

Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts

MREs 401, 403, and 404

Huddleston v. U.S., 485 U.S. 681 (1988)
U.S. v. Reynolds, 29 M.J. 105 (C.M.A. 1989)
U.S. v. Castillo, 29 M.J. 145 (C.M.A. 1989)
U.S. v. Sweeny, 48 M.J. 117 (C.A.A.F. 1998)
U.S. v. Wright, 53 M.J. 476 (C.A.A.F. 2000)
U.S. v. McDonald, 56 M.J. 426 (C.A.A.F. 2004)
U.S. v. Berg, 61 M.J. 91 (C.A.A.F. 2005)
U.S. v. Rhodes, 61 M.J. 445 (C.A.A.F. 2005)
U.S. v. Hays, 62 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2005)
U.S. v. Harrow, 65 M.J. 190 (C.A.A.F. 2007)

ARGUMENT COURT CLOSURE

The Defense requests that the Court be closed while it is hearing evidence, considering
argument, and issuing its decision on this motion. Publicly airing the facts that gave rise to this
motion now will impact PFC Manning's ability to receive a fair trial later, and there is no
alternative to closure that will protect against that harm.

The applicable rule provides, in certain terms, that courts-martial ?shall be open to the
RCM 806(b)(2). This rule observes the long?standing principle that
confidence in matters of military justice would quickly erode if courts-martial were arbitrarily
closed to the public.? U.S. v. Travers, 26 M.J. 61, 62 (C.M.A. 1987). This right of the public
may be curtailed by the Court only after ensuring the four-part test in RCM 806(b)(2) is satisfied:
(1) there is a substantial probability that an overriding interest will be prejudiced if the
proceedings remain open; (2) closure is no broader than necessary to protect the overriding
interest; (3) reasonable alternatives to closure were considered and found inadequate; and (4)
the military judge makes case-specific findings on the record justifying closure.

PFC Manning has an overriding interest in a trier-of-fact that is free from bias. gee RCM
912 (allowing for the examination of court members to identify appropriate grounds for
challenge, including bias). The Government uses their motion to accuse PFC Manning of
striking a woman as well as open contempt for the American flag and the people it represents.
There is a substantial probability that, if this hearing is conducted in open court, a potential
member will read the news accounts related to this motion and form an opinion about PFC
Manning, regardless of the Court's ruling on the underlying issues. Those allegations alone are
enough to bias potential members against PFC Manning, and they will certainly be broadcast
thoroughly enough for any member of the public to hear.

The Defense does not seek a blanket closure of all of the proceedings currently
scheduled for 28-30 August 2012. We only seek closure for those proceedings in which this
motion will be contemplated by the Court.



23418

There are no reasonable alternatives that will address PFC Manning?s overriding
interest. The Discussion for RCM 806(b)(2) contemplates alternatives like expanding voir dire,
continuing the proceedings, directing the members to ignore the media, selecting members from
outside the immediate area or new arrivals, changing the place of trial, or sequestering
members. First, the Court should disregard any remedy that contemplates interaction with
members six months prior to trial. It is impractical to suggest to anyone that they ignore the
news for a period of months. Furthermore, the court membership may well change in light of
any number of unforeseen circumstances, and the venire would have to be replaced with
members that may have read accounts or heard rumors of this motion. Second, the media
attention for this case is national, if not international. Selecting new arrivals or moving the
location of the court-martial will not avoid the saturation coverage. Finally, expanding voir dire
will not address the serious harm that this information could cause PFC Manning. Panel
members are all part of an organization dedicated to defending this country. Evidence like this
may deeply influence their views on this case in a way that voir dire will not be able to
adequately address.

Finally, if the Court is inclined to agree with this request for closure, then it must make
case-specific findings on the record justifying closure. Those reasons stated above necessitate
closure in this action.

ARGUMENT 404(b)

The admissibility of other crimes, wrongs, or acts against a military accused for the
purpose of showing some non-character rationale is well?settled. The Government's
explanation of the rule in its motion is certainly serviceable. Prosecution Motion, pages 2-3.
Another description of this body of law can be found in U.S. v. McDonald, 59 M.J. 426, 428?29
(C.A.A.F. 2004).

YouTube Video Postin and Corrective Training. The Government seeks to elicit
testimony of PFC Manning's "wrong" of discussing his duties as an intelligence analyst in a
video he posted to YouTube in order to show his knowledge information posted on the
internet is accessible to and sought out by the enemy." 3 Prosecution Motion, page 4. The
Defense concedes that an adequate factual foundation exists for this evidence.

This evidence fails the second prong of the 404(b) inquiry because it makes no fact of
consequence more or less probable. Reynolds, 29 M.J. at 109. The government's problem
here is one of causation. The fact of consequence (PFC Manning's knowledge) is not
something that PFC Manning carries with him throughout the arc of the other act and is,
therefore, relevant to determine his knowledge at the time of the charged offenses. PFC
Manning?s knowledge is caused by the corrective training administered by Mr. Medina. Contrast
Huddleston v. U.S., 485 U.S. 681 (1988), a case cited by the government, with the facts at bar.
In Huddleston, the government sought to introduce that his guilty knowledge with respect to
stolen televisions was admissible evidence against him in a case involving stolen Memorex
tapes. Huddleston, 485 U.S. at 682-83. In this case, the knowledge the Government wants
PFC Manning to have comes not from PFC Manning, but from an outside source (Mr. Madrid).

Assuming the second prong is satisfied, evidence of the YouTube video ?wrong? fails the
third prong of the 404(b) inquiry because its probative value is substantially outweighed by the
danger of unfair prejudice. Reynolds, 29 M.J. at 109. We agree with the Government that the
factors identified in U.S. v. Berg, 61 M.J. 91, 95 (C.A.A.F. 2005) are helpful to balance the
interests necessary. In this case, the ?wrong" of uploading a video to YouTube with
?buzzwords" has little, if any, probative value. The true probative value lies in the actions taken

3

23419

by PFC Manning after the corrective training was administered by Mr. Madrid preparing a
presentation for his fellow students about information security). Furthermore, the Government is
free to put on evidence of the class given by PFC Manning without reference to the ?wrong.? A
reasonable member is capable of understanding that an NCO, especially an NCO in a training
environment, might task a junior enlisted Soldier to teach a class to his peers on a relevant
subject for a variety of reasons. Finally, the time difference between the YouTube incident and
the beginning of the first charged time period more than a year is great enough to find that
the incidents are not "temporally proximate." Berry, 61 M.J. at 95, citing U.S. v. Wright, 53 M.J.
476 (C.A.A.F. 2000).

Disloyal Statements. The Government seeks to admit evidence from Ms. Showman
that PFC Manning told her that [American] flag meant absolutely nothing to him, and he
had no allegiance to the United States or its people." This evidence is offered as proof of PFC
Manning's ?state of mind? or ?intent." Prosecution Motion at page 4.

Ms. Showman?s testimony with respect to the disloyal statements fails to meet even the
meager standard included in the first prong of the 404(b) analysis. First, there is no record of
Ms. Showman reporting this incident until after (1) PFC Manning allegedly assaulted her and (2)
the allegations against PFC Manning became well known. Second, Ms. Showman herself
cannot say what motivated PFC Manning to make these statements or exclude the possibility
that PFC Manning was making these statements just to annoy her. Ms. Showman?s testimony
alone, with respect to the disloyal statements, would not provide the reasonable support a trier-
of-fact would need to make any determination in this matter.

Procedurally, the Defense would assert that the in?person testimony of Ms. Showman is
vital for the Court to determine the first prong of the 404(b) inquiry. The Court's determination
whether the evidence would support a finding by members should be done considering the
same form of evidence that members will consider with Ms. Showman in-person testimony.

Notwithstanding any conclusion made by the Court with respect to the first prong, Ms.
Showman?s testimony regarding the disloyal statements also fails the second prong of the
404(b) inquiry. Her uncorroborated testimony does not make a fact of consequence more or
less probable. Reynolds, 29 M.J. at 109. There are a substantial number of cases that discuss
the use of "intent? as a non?character theory of relevance under MRE 404(b). U.S. v.
Sweeney, 48 M.J. 117 (C.A.A.F. 1998) (allowing evidence of stalking a previous wife in a trial
for stalking current wife); U.S. v. Hays, 62 M.J. 158 (C.A.A.F. 2005) (allowing evidence of child
pornographic videos and explicit emails about adult-child sexual contact in a trial for soliciting
rape of a minor); and U.S. v. Harrow, 65 M.J. 190 (C.A.A.F. 2007) (allowing evidence of prior
instances of child abuse in a trial for the unpremeditated murder of the same child). In general,
the Court has to conclude that PFC Manning's state of mind was similar to make
the evidence of the prior acts relevant on the intent element of the charged offenses.? U.S. v.
McDonald, 59 M.J. at 430.

In the present case, the Government seeks to admit evidence of a statement that was
made some months before the charged offenses in an environment in which PFC Manning was
compelled to be present (a counseling session). The stated theory offered by the Government
is that, in the moment he made the statement to Ms. Showman, he had a similar mindset to the
times in the future when he committed the acts described in the charges and specifications.
Unfortunately, the Government has proffered no evidence that indicates PFC Manning was
motivated by some animus toward the United States or its people while he was allegedly
committing the crimes charged. So, even if the Court is inclined to agree that these statements



23420

are indicative of PFC Manning?s intent, there is nothing to connect that intent with his intent
during the charged offenses.

Assuming the first two prongs are satisfied, these disloyal statements fail the third prong
of the 404(b) inquiry because the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by the danger
of unfair prejudice. Reynolds, 29 M.J. at 109. First, there is again little temporal proximity
between the uncharged misconduct and the charged offenses. In the least, it occurred months
before PFC Manning deployed to Iraq in October 2009. Therefore, it was months before the
first charged offense. Second, the disloyal statement happened only once under involuntary
circumstances. The Government has not produced evidence of these types of disloyal
statements occurring with any additional frequency as imagined by the Wright/Berg factors.
Finally, the relationship between the parties must be considered because they fundamentally
changed. PFC Manning's remarks to Ms. Showman were made while one junior enlisted
Soldier was counseling another. The charged offenses were not done while PFC Manning was
speaking with Ms. Showman. They are alleged to have occurred while PFC Manning was
sitting alone at government computers.

Assault on Ms. Showman. The Government seeks to admit evidence that PFC
Manning struck her in the face with his fist. This evidence is offered as proof of timeline
of the Accused's removal from the SCIF and placement in the Supply Room to work with SSG
Bigelow where the Accused?s misconduct continued.? Prosecution Motion at page 5.

Assuming the appropriate finding of the Court with respect to the first prong, (the
Defense is only willing to stipulate to SSG Bigelow?s expected testimony and Enclosure 6 of the
Prosecution Motion), the assault on Ms. Showman fails the second prong of the 404(b) inquiry
because it does not make a fact of consequence more or less probable. Reynolds, 29 M.J. at
109. The Government?s timeline is not a fact of consequence contemplated by MRE 404(b).
The Government uses Castillo to assert that sole test under 404(b) is whether the
evidence of the misconduct is offered for some purpose other than to demonstrate the
accused's predisposition to and insist their evidentiary timeline is an appropriate
purpose. U.S. v. Castillo, 29 M.J. 145, 150 (C.M.A. 1989). The Defense contends this is a
drastic misinterpretation of the both 404(b) and Castillo. The rule obviously contemplates the
accused himself, and what his other actions may mean, in its title ?Other Crimes, Wrongs, or
Acts? and the factors listed in the actual text. That language helps the trier?of?fact interpret the
behavior of the accused to resolve factual issues related to the accused, not the exigencies of
proving the Government?s case. The 404(b) evidence in Castillo was the history of sexually
assaultive behavior between the accused and a stepdaughter. Castillo, 29 M.J. at 148-49.
Other, non-listed factors approved by military appellate courts have included consciousness of
guilt (see U.S. v. Rhodes, 61 M.J. 445 (C.A.A.F. 2005)), but none have gone as far as the
Government does in its motion.

The only permissible theory the Defense could imagine for this evidence was
opportunity. Essentially, PFC Manning?s alleged assault on Ms. Showman and subsequent
exile from the S2 Section to the Supply Room show his opportunity to use SSG Bigelow?s
computer. The problem with this strawman imagined by the Defense is again one of causation.
There is no evidence to suggest that the assault on Ms. Showman by PFC Manning was done
with the intention of giving himself the opportunity to use SSG Bigelow?s computer. Contrast the
instant facts with a situation in which an accused lies to gain access to an area and then steals
something from that area. In a subsequent larceny trial, the government is free to discuss the
other wrong of lying because that lie provided the opportunity to commit the larceny. PFC
Manning?s alleged assault is different from the hypothetical above because there is no evidence

23421

to indicate the alleged assault was done with the intent to give him an opportunity to commit the
actual charged offense.

Assuming the Court finds that both the first and second prong are satisfied, the assault
on Ms. Showman fails the third prong of the 404(b) inquiry because the probative value is
substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Reynolds, 29 M.J. at 109. The
Government has indicated that this assault is probative for its ability to establish a timeline that
the trier-of-fact will be able to understand during the presentation of evidence. That is scant
probative value offered by the proponent of this evidence, especially when the danger of unfair
prejudice is this great. The evidence for this uncharged misconduct indicates that PFC
Manning, a man, struck Ms. Showman, a woman, in the face with his closed fist. A plain
reading of MRE 403 would necessitate closely examining this evidence, regardless of the
rationale offered by the Government. It certainly compels excluding this evidence when the
probative value offered is so low.

There are two other factors to consider. First, the Court can avoid this by directing the
Government to elicit testimony from SSG Bigelow that PFC Manning was assigned to work for
him in the Supply Room from April 2010 until he was placed in pretrial detention. The members
will certainly be able to understand that anyone wearing a uniform, especially junior enlisted
Soldiers, may change job locations or duties daily performed for any number of reasons.
Second, the Government knew of this misconduct at the time of its charging decision in this
case and failed to include it as a charged offense. Simply put, the Government should not find
refuge in 404(b) under these circumstances.

Impeachment. The Defense requests you deny the relief sought by the Government on
pages 7 and 8 of its motion because the matter raised is not yet appropriate for a ruling. The
Defense has not been called upon to identify its witnesses. We have not sought a ruling from
the Court about the propriety of any defense or attempted to shield any witness from cross-
examination. We accept that the Government can rebut ?good Soldier? opinion evidence by
asking if the witness ?knew? or ?had heard? about specific instances of conduct. The Defense
likewise accepts that the "good faith? standard for asking "did you know" or ?have you heard"
questions is quite low. However, a ruling by this Court months before such evidence may be
admitted is far too speculative. If the Defense elicits a ?good Soldier? opinion AND if the
Government asks a question that challenges the basis for the opinion AND if the Defense
objects, then the Court will have before it a proper issue upon which to make a ruling. Until
then, the Government's current request for relief should be denied.

CONCLUSION

The Defense respectfully requests that this Court (1) close the Article 39(a) sessions of
court during which evidence is adduced, argument is made, and the Court's ruling announced
on this particular motion and (2) deny all of the prosecution?s requests made in their
corresponding 3 August 2012 motion.

THOMAS F. HURLEY
MAJ, JA
Defense Counsel

23422

Appellate Exhibit 251
Enclosure 1
have been entered into
the record as a CD/DVD
and will be maintained
v^ith the original
Record of Trial

23423

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Prosecution Disclosure
to the Defense

V.

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

3 August 2012

The United States responds to the Court's Order, dated 29 May 2012 as follows:
1. On 3 August 2012, the United States filed an ex parte motion requesting the Court consider
that motion in camera and ex parte under MRE 505(g)(2) and to authorize redactions of portions
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) file under MRE 505(g)(2) that are not relevant and
necessary for production under RCM 703(f). The United States requested the Court authorize
redactions under MRE 505(g)(2)(A). See Enclosure 1. The United States seeks to protect
information relating to national security investigations.
2. On 3 August 2012, the United States filed an ex parte motion requesting the Court consider
that motion in camera and ex parte under MRE 505(g)(2) and to authorize redactions of portions
of the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive (ONCIX) damage assessment under
MRE 505(g)(2) that are neither favorable to the accused and material to guilt or punishment, nor
relevant and necessary for production under RCM 703(f)- The United States requested the Court
authorize redactions under MRE 505(g)(2)(A). See Enclosure 2. The United States seeks to
protect information relating to intelligence activities, intelligence sources or methods, and
foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, all within the national security
interests of the United States.
3. On 3 August 2012, the United States filed a motion requesting the Court consider the
enclosures in camera and ex parte under MRE 505(g)(2) and to authorize redactions of portions
of Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) records under MRE 505(g)(2) that neither involve
investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures, nor are otherwise subject to discovery
or production under Brady. RCM 701(a)(2), RCM 701(a)(6), or RCM 703(f). The United States
requested the Court authorize redactions under MRE 505(g)(2)(A). See Enclosure 3. The
United States seeks to protect information relaUng to intelligence activities and intelligence
sources or methods, all within the national security interests of the United States.
4. On 3 August 2012, the United States filed an ex parte mofion requesfing the Court consider
that motion in camera and ex parte under MRE 505(g)(2) and to authorize a substitution of the
portion of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report referenced in Appellate Exhibit CCVIII
that is favorable to the accused and material to guilt or punishment or relevant and necessary for
production under RCM 703(f). The United States requested the Court authorize a summary
under MRE 505(g)(2)(B). See Enclosure 4. The United States seeks to protect informafion

1

APPELLATE EXHIBIT^^
PAGE REFERENCED:,
PAGE OF PAGES

23424

relating to intelligence acfivifies, intelligence sources or methods, and foreign relations or foreign
activities of the United States, all within the national security interests of the United States.

3 a Q ^ AO^tvth^

^^0DEAN MORROW
CPT, JA
Assistant Trial Counsel

4 Ends
1. Govemment
2. Govemment
3. Govemment
4. Government

ex parte Motion (FBI) [unclassified redacted version]
ex parte Mofion (ONCIX) [unclassified redacted version]
Mofion (DIA)
ex parte Mofion (CIA) [unclassified redacted version]

23425

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Government in camera Motion for



v. Authorization of Redactions
for the FBI File
Manning, Bradley E. under RE 505(g)(2)
PFC, U.S. Army.
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall 3 August 2012


Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

RELIEE SOUQHT

(U) COMES NOW the United States of America, by and through undersigned counsel, and
respectfully requests this Court: I) consider this motion and the enclosures in camera and ex parte
under Military Rule of Evidence (MRE) and (2) authorize redactions of portions of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) ?le (hereina?er that are neither favorable to the accused
and material to guilt or punishment, nor relevant and necessary for production under Rule for Courts-
Martial (RCM) 703(f).

BURDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OE PROOE

(U) As the moving party, the United States has the burden of persuasion on any factual issue
the resolution of which is necessary to decide the motion. RCM 905(c)(2). The burden of proof is
by a preponderance of the evidence. RCM 905(c)(l

FACTS

(U) On I6 March 20l2, the prosecution began producing documents from the FBI
investigative ?le relevant to the accused. On 10 May 201 2, the defense moved the Court to order
production of the entire FBI file under the ?relevant and necessary" standard under RC 703(f).

(U) On 22 June ?.0l 2, the Court found the defense had shown that the FBI ?le (minus grand
jury testimony), to the extent relevant to an investigation of the accused, was material to the
preparation of the defense to the extent that it is relevant and necessary for production under RCM
703(t). The Court ordered the prosecution to notify the Court whether the FBI, as a custodian of
classified information, would seek limited disclosure ofthe ?le IAW MRE S05(g)(2) or claim a
privilege IAW MRE 505(c).

(U) On 25 July the prosecution noti?ed the Court that the FBI would seek limited
disclosure under MRE and would not claim a privilege IAW MRE 50S(c).


(U) The United States does not request any witnesses be produced for this motion. The
prosecution requests that the Court consider the enclosures listed at the end of this motion.

1
l_LA'l Ii



or

23426

LEGAL AUTHORITY AND

(U) If classified information is at issue a corut-martial. then the United States may agree to
disclose the classi?ed irrfonnatiou to the defense uirder a protective order. 1 MRI: 505(g)(l).
Additionally. the United States nray motion the Court to "authorize (A) the deletion ofspecifrc items
ofclassified irrfonrratiorr from to be made available to the [accused]. (B) the sirbstitutioir
of a portion or siurunary of the for classified docruneirts. or (C) the substitution ofa
statement admitting relevant facts that the classified would teird to prove." l~??cE
50S(g)(2). The military judge "shall authorize" these alternative forms. she determines "the
disclostue ofthe classified information itselfis necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial."
lfa motion is filed under MRE 505(g)(2). then irporr request ofthe United States. the motion
"shall" be considered by the military judge in rmilem and "shall not be disclosed to the accused." gr

(U) The procedrues outlined in MRI-L 505(g)(l) and (2) apply when the United States
volturtarily discloses information and does not withhold classified inforrnatioir under MRE 505(c). Lf
the United States intends to withhold information iuidei? 505(c). their the Uirited States iririst
move for an in camera proceeding under 505(i)(2), obtain an affidavit demoristratiirg that
disclosrue ofthe information reasonably corrld be expected to carise damage to the national security
iurder? MRE 505(i)(3). and follow the notice procedures orithned under See MRE
505(i). For the purposes ofthis filing. the FBI. through the prosecution. ls voluntarily disclosing
portions oftlre FBI file to the Corut's Order and is not any classified
information turder MR1-I and MRE 505(i).



(U) The information redacted the FBI file is not material to the preparation oftlie defense
or relevant and necessary for under RCM 703(f?} and is therefore not discoverable.
Additionally. the iirforrnation is irot "necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial" under MRF.
505(g)(2) Tlierefore. the defense is not to discovery ofthe redacted iirfonnation.

(U) Sliortld the Court find the redacted informatioir is discoverable uirder RCM 703(1). or is
"necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial" iurder MRE 505(g)(2). their the United States
requests the opportunity to either: (1) address the Coui1?s findings with the relevant govenrment
agency to whether a drffererrt alterative under MRE 505(g)(2) is appropriate and file that
with the Court, or (2) allow for the relevant govemrireiit agency to claim a privilege under
MRE 505(c) and the Urirted States to move for an in camera proceeding MRE 50S(r)

23427



(L2) The prosecutiun will not use any redacted punions oftlie FBI ?le provided to the (four!
during any portion ofthe trial.



(U) The Lfnited States requests this Court: (1 consider this motion 1'nm/ucm
and purlv under MRE and (2) authorize reductions of portions of the FBI ?le that are
neither favorable to the accused and material to guilt or punishment, nor relevant and for
production under


JA
Asaistaitt Trial (fnitittsel

1 Encls

l. FBI File Produced to l)efense Reductions in Grey [classi?ed

provided

2. FBI Declaration [classified
3. (?im/ermnent?s Due Diligence Statement. 25 July 2012 [classi?ed [not






23428



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Government In camera Motion for
Authorization of Reductions of
the Damage Assessment
under MRE S05(g)(2)

V.

Manning, Bradley E.

PFC, US. Army,

I-IHC, U.S. Army Carrlsoti,
Joint Base Myer?Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 2221]

3 August 2012



RELIEF

(U) COMES NOW the United States of America. by and through undersigned counseL and
respectfully requests this Court (1) consider this motion in camera and at parte under MRE
and (2) authorize redactions of portions of the Office of the National Counterintelligence
Executive (ONCIX) damage assessment (hereinafter "report") under Military Rule of Evidence
(MRE) that are neither favorable to the accused and material to guilt or punishment, not
relevant and necessary for production under Rule for Cotuts-Martial (RCM) 703(f).

0 VD OF PROOF

(U) As the moving party. the United States has the burden of persuasion on any factual issue
the resolution of which is necessary to decide the motion. RC 905(c)(2). The burden of proof is
by a preponderance of the evidence. RCM 905(c)(1).

HE

On 22 June 2012. the Court ordered (hereinafter "Court's Order") the prosecution to

provide oun with the ONCLY damage assessment for in camera review by 3 August 2012. To

date. the report is a draft doctunent that is incomplete and continues to . 2 . as information is
. See Enclosure l. The - it is classified and contains










I -. - nu Headqunnas. O?ice of
the Director of National Intelligence facility available.






(U)

is the of contact within the Of?ce of the General otmsel and

will coordinatet erepott tn av - 'ew the material. .
may be contacted at

(U) The ONCIX. through the prosecution. seeks limited disclosure of the repon under MRE
The proposed redacted repon is classified at the same level as the tmredacted report. The
proposed redactions are highlighted in grey. Enclosure l.

(U) ?re ONCIX will make the redacted report available to the defense counsel and their
security expens to inspect at ODNI turn! the end of the court-martial. The defense counsel are only
authorized access to inspect the redacted report with their sectuity experts present. The defense
counsel and their experts are authorized to take notes. and those notes will be classified at the same
level as the redacted report. All notes be stored pursuant to the Cotut's Protective Order. dated

1

Ij Lo;



M55 or A






23429

l6 March 2012. The defense coiuisel and their experts are mt authorized to share the
contained within the report or their notes with the accused.

The ONCIX acknowledges that the rt ii_i_i_i_sr be made an of the appellate record.
Accordingly. and because the document . the ONCIX requests

the document be permanently stored at ODNI.
WITN

(U) The United States does not request any witnesses be produced for this motion. The
prosecution reqirests that the Court consider the enclosures listed at the end of this motion.

LEGAL AUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT

(U) If classified information is at issue ni a coiut-martial. their the United States may agree to
disclose the classified information to the defense under a protective order. 505(g)(l).
Additionally. the United States may motion the Court to "authorize (A) the deletion of specific items
of classified infoniiatioii from documents to be made available to the [accused]. (B) the substitution
of a portion or suninraiy of the irrfoimatioii for classified dociinierits. or (C) the substitution of a
statement admitting relevant facts that the classified information would tend to prove." MRE
505(g)(2). The military judge "shall authorize" these alternative foruis. tuiless she determines "the
disclostire of the classified itself is necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial."
1; Ifa motion is filed rurder MRE then upon request of the United States. the motion
"shall" be considered by the military judge in camera and "shall not be disclosed to the accused." lg_.

(U) The procedures outlined in MRE 505(g)(l) and (2) apply when the United States
voluntarily discloses and does not withhold classified information under MRE 505(c). If
the United States intends to withhold under MRE 505(c). then the United States
move for air in camera proceeding under MRE 50S(i)(2). obtain an affidavit demonstrating that
disclosure of the reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national seciuity
tuider MRE 505(i)(3). and follow the notice procedures outlined tinder MRE 505(i)(4). MRE
For the piuposes of this filing, the ONCIX. through the prosecution. is voltuitarily disclosing
portions of the report and is not withholding any classified infoimatioii under MRE 505(c) and MRE
50S(i).

On 3 August 2012. the prosecution reviewed the most-criireiit report for uifonnatiori
favomb 0 ie accused and material to guilt or punisliineiit. RC 70l(a)(6): see also BQQ
. 373 US. 83 (1963). The prosecution reviewed the report and determined that it contained
that was favorable to the accused and material to guilt or The appropriate
Original lassification Authori that ONCIX would disclose the re under MRE







. contact itTvoiild"authori2e the
disclose the original classi material to the defense under MRE
50S(g)(1) or obected to a portion of their rnfoiinatioii being disclosed to the
defense. Enclosure 3. requested that certain be redacted and a redacted
version of the report produced rurder MRE

The prosecirtioii reviewed the that! objected to disclose to the
defense. its redacted contained within the report oes not meet the Brady/Giglio.

'7




prosecution to vo tint

23430

RCM 701(a)(6). 01' RCM standards and therefore IS not discoverable or sub to production.
Additionally. that information is not ?necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial" under
MRI-L 50S(g)(2). Therefore. the defense is not entitled to discovery of the redacted information.

(U) Should the Court find the redacted information is discoverable under RCM 70l(a)(6) or
Brady/Giglio. subject to production under RC 703(1). or "necessary to enable the accused to
prepare for trial" under MRE then the United States requests the oppomurity to either (1)
address the Court's ?ndings with the relevant govemnrent agency to determine whether a different
alterative under MR.E 505(g)(2) is appropriate and file that alteniative with the Court, or (2) allow
for the relevant goveinineirt agency to claim a privilege uirder MRE 505(c) and the United States
to move for air in camera proceeding under MRE

(U) The prosecution will not use any redacted portions of the report provided to the Court
during any portion of the trial.



(U) The United States respectfully requests this Court: (l)consider this motion in camera
and at? parfe iuider MRE 505(g)(2). and (2) authorize redactions ofponions of the ONCIX report that
are neither favorable to the accused and material to guilt or piuiishinent. not relevant and necessary
for production under RC 703(0

J. HUNTER
CPT. JA
Assistant Trial Counsel

2 Encls

IX Dra? Damage Assessinent (classified not attached]
2 Menioranduin. dated 2 August 2012 (class



23431

UNITED STATESOF AMERICA
Government Motion for
Authorization ofRedactions
o f D I A Records
under MRE 505(g)(2)

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
^ointBase MyerHenderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

3August2012

RELIEFSOUGHT
COMES NOW the United States ofAmerica, by and through undersigned counsel, and
respectfully requests this Court: (I)consider the enclosures ^^^^^^^^^ and ^^^^^^^^ under Military
Rule ofEvidence (MRE) 505(g)(2); and (2)authorizeredactionsofportions of the Defense
Intelligence Agency (DlA)records (hereinafter "records") under MRE 505(g)(2) that neither involve
investigation,damage assessment, ormitigation measures, nor are otherwise subject to discovery or
production under Brady, Rule forCourtsMartial (RCM) 701(a)(2), RCM 701(a)(6), or RCM 703(f)

BURDEN OFPERSUASION AND BURDEN OFPROOF
As the moving party,the United States has the burden ofpersuasion on any factual issue the
resolution ofwhich is necessary to decide the motion. RCM 905(c)(2). The burden ofproofis bya
preponderance ofthe evidence. RCM 905(c)(1).
FACTS
On 22 June 2012, the Court ordered (hereinafter "Court's Order") the prosecution to seek out
and identity files regarding the accused that involve investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation
measures,and to notify the Court withastatus of whether it anticipates any govemment entity that is
the custodian ofclassified evidence that is the subject ofthe Defense Motion to Compel will seek
limited disclosure lAWMRE505(g)(2)orcIaimapriviIegeIAWMRE505(c)forthe classified
information under that agency^scontrol.
On 25 JuIy20I2, the prosecution notified the Court that the DlAwouId seek limited
disclosure under MRE 505(g)(2) and would not claimaprivilegelAWMRE 505(c).
O n l August 2012, the prosecution disclosed to the defense DIA records that involve
investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures, or are otherwise subject to discovery or
production under B i ^ RCM 701(a)(2), RCM 701(a)(6), or RCM 703(f), and that DIA authorized
the prosecution to voluntarily disclose to the defense under MRE 505(g)(1). Atotal of 4,^7^ DIA
records, consisting of25,772 pages, were disclosed to thedefense.
^ITNESSES/EVIDENCE
The United States does not request any witnesses be produced for this motion. The
prosecution requests that the Court consider the enclosures listed at the end ofthis motion.

Erct j oC
A—

^ ATE EXHIBIT! iNCED:
PAGE
OF
PAGES

23432

LEGALAUTHORITY^ AND ARGUMENT
If classified information is at issue inacourtmartial,then the United States may agree to
disclose the classified information to the defense underaprotective order. SeeMRE 505(g)(1)
Additionally.the United States may motion the Court to "authorize(A)the deletion of specific items
of classified information from documents to be made available to the[accused],(B)the substitution
ofaportion or summary of the information for classified documents, or(C) the substitution ofa
statement admitting relevant facts that the classified information would tend to prove." MRE
505(g)(2). Themilitaryjudge "shall authorize" these altemative forms, unless she determines "the
disclosureof the classified information itselfis necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial."
Id. Ifamotion is filed under MRE 505(g)(2), then upon request of the United States, the motion
"shall" be considered by the militaryjudge ^^^^^^^^^ and "shall not be disclosed to the accused."Id.
The procedures outlined in MRE 505(g)(I)and(2)appIy when the United States voluntarily
discloses information and does not withhold classified information under MRE 505(c). Ifthe United
States intends to withhold information under MRE 505(c), then the United States must move f^r an
^^^^^^^^^proceeding under MRE505(i)(2), obtain an affidavit demonstrating that disclosure of the
information reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security under MRE
505(i)(3), and follow the notice procedures outlined under MRE 505(i)(^). SeeMRE 505(i). Forthe
purposes ofthis filing, the DIA,through the prosecution,is voluntarily disclosing portions ofits
records pursuant to the Court's Order and is not withholding any classified information under MRE
505(c)andMRE 505(i)
Pursuant to the Court^sOrder, the prosecution sought out DIA records regarding the accused
that involve investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures. The prosecution also sought
out DIA records subject to discovery or production under Brady,RCM 701(a)(2), l^CM 701(a)(6), or
RCM 703(f). SeeBradvv.Marvland. 373 U.S.^3^1963). The prosecution identified information
that involved investigation,damage assessment, ormitigation measures,or is otherwise subject to
discovery orproduction under Brady,RCM701(a)(2),RCM 701(a)(6), or RCM 703(f) The DIA
reviewed that information to determine i f i t would authorize the prosecution to voluntarily disclose
the original classified material to the defense under MRE 505(g)(l)or (g)(2). The DIA determined
that the agency would discIoseamajorityofinformationunderMRE 505(g)(I)andalimited amount
ofinformationinaredactedf^rm under MRE 505(g)(2). SeeEnc1osure3
The prosecution reviewed the information that the DIA objected to disclose to the defense.
This redacted information neither involves investigation,damage assessment, ormitigation measures,
nor is otherwise subject to discovery or production under Brady, RCM 701(a)(2), RCM 701(a)(6), or
RCM 703(f). Additiona11y,the information is not "necessary to enable the accused to prepare for
trial" under MRE505(g)(2).Therefore, the defense is not entitled to discovery of the redacted
information.
Should the Court find the redacted information is discoverable, or is "necessary to enable the
accused to prepare for trial" under MRE 505(g)(2), then the United States requests the opportunity to
either:(I)address the Court's findings with the relevant govemment agency to determine whethera
different alterative under MRE 505(g)(2) is appropriate and file that alternative with the Court, or (2)
allow for the relevant govemment agency to claimaprivilege under MRE 505(c)and the United
States to move for an ^^^^^B^^^^^ proceeding underMRE 505(i)
The prosecution will not use any redacted portions ofthe DIA records provided to the Court
during any portion ofthe trial.

23433

CONCLUSION
The United States respectfully requests this Court: (l)consider the enclosures ^^^^^^^^^^^ and
^^^^^^^ under MRE 505(g)(2), and (2) authorize redactions of portionsofthe DIA records that
neither involve investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures, nor are otherwise subject
to discovery or production under Brady, RCM 701(a)(2), RCM 701(a)(6), or RCM 703(f).

JFlUNTERWlf^TE
CPT,JA
AssistantTrial Counsel
3Encls
1. OriginalDlARecords[cIassifiedw/various control measures] [CD provided separately]
2. Redacted DIA Records[cIassifiedw/various control measures] [CD provided separately]
3. DIA Memorandum, dated3August 2012

23434

(b) (1) (B)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Government in camera Motion for
Authorization ofa Substitution of
the CIA Report
under MRE 505(g)(2)

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Ai-ray,
HHC, U.S. Array Gariison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

3 August 2012

RELIEF SOUGHT
(U) COMES NOW the United States of Amenca. by and tluougli undersigned counsel, and
lespectfiilly requests this Coiut: (1) consider this motion /;) camera and ex parte under NfRE
505(g)(2); and (2) authorize a substinition of the portion of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
report (hereinafter "report") imder Militaiy Rule ofEvidence (MRE) 505(g)(2) that is favorable to the
accused and material to guilt or punisluuent, or relevant and necessaiy for production under Rule for
Courts-Martial (RCM) 703(f).
B l RDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OF PROOF
(U) As the moving party, the United States has the biuden ofpersuasion on any facnial issue
the resolution of which is necessaiy to decide the motion. RCM 905(cX2). The bmden of proof is
by a preponderance of the evidence. RCM 905(c)(1).
FACTS
(U) On 12 July 2012, the prosecution notified the Court that the CIA diafted anotlier report
analyzing the impact ofthe WikiLeaks disclosiues on a discrete matter and that the report was a
follow-on report to the original WikiLeaks Task Force Report. The prosecution notified the Court
that it intended to submit any applicable filing to the Coiul no later than 3 August 2012.
(b) (1) (B) The report is classified " (b) (1) (B)
proposed siunniarized report is classifie

. The

(b) (1) (B) Based on the classification and the use o:
(b) (1) (B)
.
in the original
report, the CIA will accommodate the Court in its review ofthe enclosures, to iaclud
(b) (6)
making the CIA Headquarters available or using]
(b) (1) (B)
| is the point of contact within theLitigation Division, Ofiice
r^
the original report and the proposed siumuarized
assessment being available anytime the Coiut would like to review the material at the mutually
aeieeable location.
(b) (1) (B)

may be contacted at I

(b) (1) (B)

(b) (1) (B) ) The CIA acknowledges that the original report and the proposed summarized repor
part of the appellate record. Accordingly, and because the docimients contain J |
(b) (1) (B) the CIA requests the dociunents be pennanently stored at CIA Headquarters.

(b) (1) (B)

W

4 4*

APPELLATE EXHIBIT 2S"2.
PAGE REFERENCED:
PAGE
OF
PAGES

23435

(b) (1) (B)

(U) The CIA gives temporary custody ofthe summarized report to the prosecution. The
prosecution is authorized to make the report available to the defense counsel and their security
experts to inspect until the end of the court martial. The defense counsel are only authorized access
to inspect the summarized report with their security experts present. The defense counsel and their
experts are authorized to take notes, and those notes will be classified at the same level as the report
All notes must be stored pursuant to the Court's Protective Order,dated16March 2012 Thedefense
counsel and their experts are not authorized to share the infomiation contained within the report or
their notes with the accused. At the conclusion of the court martial, the prosecution is required to
retum all the copies ofthe summarized report to the CIA.
^ITNESSES^EVIDENCE
(U) The United States does not request any witnesses be produced for this motion. The
prosecution requests that the Court consider the enclosures listed at the end ofthis motion.
LEGALAUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT
(U) If classified information is at issue inacourtmartial,then the United States may agree to
disclose the classified information to the defense underaprotective order. See MRE 505(g)(1).
AdditionaIIy,the United States may motion the Court to "authorize(A)the deletion of specific items
of classified information from documents to be made available to the[accused],(B)the substitution
ofaportion or summary ofthe information for classified documents, or(C) the substitution ofa
statement admitting relevant facts that the classified information would tend to prove." MRE
505(g)(2). The militaryjudge "shall authorize" these altemative forms, unless she determines "the
disclosure ofthe classified information itselfis necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial."
Id. Ifamotion isfiledunderMRE 505(g)(2), then upon request of the United States, the motion
"shall" be considered by themilitary judge ^^^^^^^^^ and "shall not be disclosed to the accused."ld.
(U) The procedures outlined in MRE 505(g)(I)and(2)apply when the United States
voluntarily discloses information and does not withhold classified information under MRE 505(c). If
the United States intends to withhold information under MRE 505(c), then the United States must
move for an ^^^^^^^^^^^ proceeding under MRE 505(i)(2), obtain an affidavit demonstrating that
disclosure ofthe information reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security
under MRE 505(i)(3),and follow the notice procedures outlined under MRE 505(i)(4). SeeMRE
505(i). For the purposes ofthis filing, the CIA,through the prosecution is voluntarily disclosinga
summary oftheir report, pursuant to the Court's Order and is not withholding any classified
information under MRE 505(c)and MRE 505(i)
( U ) O n l l JuIy20I2, the prosecution learned that theCIAdraftedafollowon report to the
WlkifeaksTask Force Report analyzingthe impact oftheWikiUeaks disclosures onadiscrete
matter. On I3JuIy20I2,the prosecution traveled to CIA headquarters and reviewed the report for
informationfavorable to the accused and material to guihor punishment. See RCM 701(a)(6); see
also Bradvv.Maryland. 373 U.S.^3 t^1963). The prosecution reviewed the report and determined
that it contained information that was favorable to the accused and material to guihor punishment.
The particular sections are highlighted in yellow. See Enclosurel The prosecution identified
discoverable information and the CIA reviewed the infonnation to determine i f i t would authorize the
prosecution to voluntarily disclose the original classified material to the defense under MRE
505(g)(1)or (g)(2). The CIA determined that it would disclose the infonr^ationinasummarized

(b) (1) (B)

23436

(b) (1) (B)

fbnn under MRE 505(g)(2). The prosecution reviewed the smumaiy and detei^ined that it
acciuately summarized the original material, including providing adequate context.
(U) The infomiation contained within the original report, which is not included in the
simmiai^.does not meet the Brady/Giglio. RCM 701^a)^6).or RCM 703^f) standards and therefore is
not discoverable or subject to production. Additioiially.tliat infonnation is not ^necessary to enable
the accused to prepare for triaf imder MRE 505(g)(2) Therefore, the defense is not entitled to
discoveiy ofthe redacted infonnation.
(U) Should theCoiu^ find the deleted, ^bstituted, or simimai^ed infomiation is discoverable
under RCM 701^a)^6) or Brady/Giglio. subject to nrodiictiontmder RCM 703tf^. or "necessary to
enable the accused to prepaiefor trial" imder MRE 505(g)(2)^ then the United States requests the
opportimity to eitlier(I)addresstheCouifsfindingswith the relevant govemment agency to
detenninewhetheradiffereiit alterative under MRE 505(g)(2)is appropriate and file that altemative
with theCoiirt, or (2)allow for the relevant govemment ageiicytoclaimapiivilege under MRE
505(c)and the United States to move for an ^^^^^^^^^^^^ proceeding imder MRE 505(i).
(b) (1) (B)

Ifthe prosecution does oftor
aggravating evidence during the presentencuig portion offlietrial, then it will disclose the evidence
piu^uant to RCM 701(a)(5). subject to any required protections under MRE 505.
CONCLUSION
(U) The United States lespectfrilly requests this Court: (1) consider this motion //; camera
and ex parte luider MRE 505(g)(2). and (2) authorize a substitution ofthe portion of the CLA report
that is favorable to the accused and material to guilt or piuiishiuent. or relevant and necessary for
production imder RCM 703(f).

JODEAN MORROW
CPT. JA
Assistant Trial Coimsel
2 Enclosiues
(b) (1) (B)
1 Original CIA Report (classified
2. Siumuarized CIA Report (classified

(b) (1) (B)

I") [not attached]
) [not attached]



23437

IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY
FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES
DEFENSE RESPONSE TO
GOVERNMENT MOTION FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF
REDACTIONS OR
SUBSTITUTIONS FOR THE FBI
FILE, ONCIX DAMAGE
ASSESSMENT, DIA RECORDS,
AND CIA REPORT

MANNING, Bradley 13.. PFC

US. Army,

Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S.
Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer?Henderson Hall,
Fort Myer, VA 222]

DATED: 21 August 2012



RELIEF REQUESTED

1. The Defense requests that this Court deny any proposed redactions or substitutions from the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) file, the Of?ce of the National Counterintelligence
Executive (ONCIX) Damage Assessment, the identified Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)
records, and the identi?ed Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports where, considering the
mindset of Defense counsel (including the questions referenced herein), the Court concludes that
the classified information itself is necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial. The
Defense further requests that the Court Order the Government to request ONCIX to provide
updated versions of its damage assessment as they become available for the Court?s review until
a ?nal damage assessment is completed.

EVIDENCE

2. The Defense does not request any witnesses for this motion, but does request that the Court
consider Appellate Exhibit IX, CXVI, CXLVI, CXLVII, and for the
purposes of this motion.

FACTS

3. The FBI, ONCIX, DIA, and CIA have not claimed a privilege under MRE 505(0). Therefore,
the documents being considered by the Court are governed by Brady/RCM 70l(a)(2). RCM
70l(a)(6), RCM 703?), and MRE 505(g)(2).

4. The Court has found that the FBI, ONCIX, DIA, and CIA are "closely aligned" with the
Government in this case. Appellate Exhibit p. 1. The Court has also found that the

APPELLATE
PAGE.
PAGES



23438

?Defense has shown that the FBI ?le (minus grand jury testimony) to the extent relevant to an
investigation of PFC Manning, is material to the preparation of the Defense to the extent that it is
relevant and necessary for production under RCM Appellate Exhibit CXLVII, p. 6.

ARGUMENT

5. The Govemment?s non-ex parte ?ling requests the Court to authorize redactions and
substitutions under MRE 505(g)(2). Speci?cally, the Government requests the following:

a) FBI ?le. The Government asserts that the redacted portions ?are not relevant and
necessary for production under RCM See Prosecution Disclosure to the Defense,
dated 3 August 2012.

b) ONCIX damage assessment. The government maintains that the redacted information is
?neither favorable to the accused and material to guilt or punishment, nor relevant and
necessary for production under RCM Id.

c) DIA Records. The Government requests approval of redactions from DIA records that it
maintains ?neither involve investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures nor
are otherwise subject to discovery or production under Brady, RCM 701(a)(2), RCM
701(a)(6), or RCM Id.

d) CIA Report. The Government requests authorization of a substitution for a portion of the
CIA report that is ?favorable to the accused and material to guilt or punishment or
relevant and necessary for production under RCM Id.

6. As part of its request, the Government provided redacted versions of its in camera motions
for authorization of redactions or substitutions. Id. The redacted versions provided the
following detail:

a) FBI ?le. The Government has indicated that it will not use the redacted portions of the
FBI ?le during any portion of the trial. Id.

b) ONCIX damage assessment. The Government informed the Court that the ONCIX
damage assessment is still a draft document. Id. Within the redacted in camera motion,
the Government informs the Court that it reviewed the ?most-current? ONCIX damage
assessment on 3 August 2012. The Government determined that the report ?contained
information that was favorable to the accused and material to guilt or punishment.? Id.
The Government, however, does not provide an estimate of when ONCIX envisions
completing the damage assessment. ONCIX had previously indicated that it believed it
might have a completed copy of its damage assessment by 3 August 2012. See Enclosure
2 to Appellate Exhibit CXIX. Finally, the Government indicates that it will not use
redacted portions of the ONCIX damage assessment during any portion of the trial. See
Prosecution Disclosure to the Defense, dated 3 August 2012.

c) DIA Records. The Government has indicated that it will not use the redacted portions of
the FBI ?le during any portion of the trial. Id.

d) CIA Report. The Government states that it became aware of an additional CIA damage
assessment on 11 July 2012. Id. The Government reviewed the report on 13 July 2012



23439

and determined that it ?contained information that was favorable to the accused and
material to guilt or punishment.? Id.

7. The Government requests this Court to approve of its determination that the Defense is not
entitled to discovery of the redacted or substituted information. In considering whether the
proposed substitutions or redactions are suf?cient, the Court must determine if the disclosure of
the classi?ed information itself is necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial. MRE
505(g)(2). In making this determination, the Defense requests that this Court consider the
analysis proposed by the Defense in Appellate Exhibit and the following factors
adopted by the Court in Appellate Exhibit CXLVI:

a) What is the extent of the redactions/substitutions?

b) Has the Government narrowly tailored the substitutions to protect a Governmental
interest that has been clearly and speci?cally articulated?

c) Does the substitution provide the Defense with the ability to follow-up on leads that the
original document would have provided?

d) Do the substitutions accurately capture the information within the original document?

e) Is the classi?ed evidence necessary to rebut an element of the 22 charged offenses,
bearing in mind the Govemment?s very broad reading of many of these offenses?

f) Does the summary strip away the Defense?s ability to accurately portray the nature of the
charged leaks?

g) Do the substitutions prevent the Defense from fully examining witnesses?

h) Do the substitutions prevent the Defense from exploring all viable avenues for
impeachment?

i) Does the Government intend to use any of the information from the damage assessments?
Is so, is this information limited to the summarized document provided by the
Government? If the information intended to be used by the Government is not limited to
the summarized document, does the Defense in fairness need to receive the classi?ed
portions of the documents to put the Government?s evidence in proper context?

j) Does the original classi?ed evidence present a more compelling sentencing case than the
proposed substitutions by the Government?

k) Do the proposed substitutions prevent the Defense from learning names of potential
witnesses?

1) Do the substitutions make sense, such that the Defense will be able to understand the
context?

m) Is the original classi?ed evidence necessary to help the Defense in formulating defense
strategy and making important litigation decisions in the case?

11) Is it unfair that the Government had access to the unclassi?ed version of the damage
assessment and the Defense did not? Does that provide a tactical advantage to the
Government?

CONCLUSION

8. The Defense requests that this Court deny any proposed redactions or substitutions from the
FBI ?le, the ONCIX Damage Assessment, the identi?ed DIA records, and the identi?ed CIA



23440

reports where, considering the mindset of Defense counsel (including the questions referenced
herein), the Court concludes that the classi?ed information itself is necessary to enable the
accused to prepare for trial. Finally, the Defense requests that the Court Order the Government
to request ONCIX to provide updated versions of its damage assessment as they become
available for the Court?s review until a ?nal damage assessment is completed.

Respectfully submitted,



DAVID E. COOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

23441

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
ORDER: GOVERNMENT
MRE 505(g)(2) REDACTIONS

V.

Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

21 August 2012

On 22 June 2012, this Court ruled granted the Defense Motion to Compel Discovery 2 for the
FBI files (minus grand jury testimony) related to the accused to the extent relevant to an
investigation of PFC Manning. On 3 August 2012, the Government filed an ex pmrte classified
motion for this Court to conduct an in camera review of proposed redactions to the FBI file
pertaining to the accused and to authorize limited disclosure lAW MRE 505(g)(2). The Court
has reviewed the FBI file and the proposed redactions and has determined this Order is necessary
for the Court to conduct the MRE 505(g) review of the FBI file.
ORDER: NET 14 September 2012, the Govemment will;
1. Identify numerically each proposed redaction by Bates number and provide the Court with
justification for each proposed redaction. The same redaction on multiple pages may be
addressed together.
2. Identify whether each proposed redaction has been made available to the Defense in
discovery from another source and identify the source.
SO ORDERED: This 21" Day of August 2012.

DENISE R. LIND
COL, JA
Chief Judge, l " Judicial Circuit

APPELLATE EXHlBIT_2Si
PAGEREFERENCED:
PAGE
OF
PAGES

23442

IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY
FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES
RULING: GOVERNMENT

MOTION FOR MRE 505(g)(2)
REDACTIONS - ONCIX

DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
MANNING, Bradley E., PFC
U.S. Army,

Headquarters and Headquarters Company,
U.S. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-
Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA 22211

DATED: 23 August 2012



On 3 August 2012, the Government ?led a classi?ed motion moving the Court to conduct an ex

parte review of the damage assessment prepared by the Office of National Counterintelligence Executive
(ONCIX) and to au?iorize redactions of classi?ed information from the damage assessment MRE
The Court conducted an in camera review of both the damage assessment and the proposed

redactions. In coming to this ruling, the Court has considered the factors requested by the Defense in its
21 August 2012 submission.

:33 3 ?3 8 S3

What is the extent of the redactions/substitutions?

Has the Government narrowly tailored the substitutions to protect a Governmental interest that
has been clearly and speci?cally articulated?

Does the substitution provide the Defense with the ability to follow-up on leads that the original
document would have provided?

Do the substitutions accurately capture the information within the original document?

Is the classi?ed evidence necessary to rebut an element of the 22 charged offenses, bearing in
mind the Govemment?s very broad reading of many of these offenses?

Does the summary strip away the Defense?s ability to accurately portray the nature of the charged
leaks?

Do the substitutions prevent the Defense from fully examining witnesses?

Do the substitutions prevent the Defense from exploring all viable avenues for impeachment?
Does the Government intend to use any of the infomiation from the damage assessments? If so,
is this information limited to the summarized document provided by the Government? If the
information intended to be used by the Government is not limited to the summarized document,
does the Defense in fairness need to receive the classi?ed portions of the documents to put the
Govemment?s evidence in proper context?

Does the original classi?ed evidence present a more compelling sentencing case than the
proposed substitutions by the Government?

Do the proposed substitutions prevent the Defense from learning names of potential witnesses?
Do the substitutions make sense, such that the Defense will be able to understand the context?
Is the original classi?ed evidence necessary to help the Defense in formulating defense strategy
and making important litigation decisions in the case?

Is it unfair that the Government had access to the unclassi?ed version of the damage assessment
and the Defense did not? Does that provide a tactical advantage to the Govemment?

APPI3-LLAT23

I PAGE REFERIENCED:
PAGE OF PAGES

23443

The ONCIX damage assessment remains in draft, however, no substantive changes are
anticipated. The Government will keep apprised of any changes to the damage assessment and notify both
the Court and the Defense of any substantive change to it.

The Government has advised the Court that nothing redacted will be used by the Government
during any portion of the trial.

The ONCIX Damage Assessment, as redacted, meets the Govemment?s discovery obligations
under Braay and RCM 70l(a)(6) to disclose evidence tending to reasonably negate the guilt of the
accused to an offense charged, reduce the degree of guilt to an offense charged, or reduce the punishment.
The ONCIX Damage Assessment, as redacted, also provides the Defense with evidence that is material to
the preparation of the defense and relevant and necessary for production MRE 703(?.

The redacted ONCIX Damage Assessment is disclosed to the Defense almost in its entirety.

The redacted information not disclosed to the Defense is not favorable, material to the preparation of the
defense, or relevant and necessary for production under RCM 703(f). The Government is ordered that no
portion of the ONCIX Damage Assessment not disclosed to the Defense will be used by the Government
or any Government witness during any portion of the trial. This includes rebuttal and rule of
completeness if Defense introduces or references anything in the substitution.

The substitution is sufficient for the Defense to adequately prepare for trial and represents an
appropriate balance between the right of the Defense to discovery and the protection of speci?cally
identi?ed national security infonnation.

RULING: The Classi?ed motions by the Government to voluntarily provide limited disclosure under
MRE 505(g)(2) for the ONCIX Damage Assessment is GRANTED.

DENISE R.

COL, JA
Chief Judge, 1" Judicial Circuit

ORDERED this 23"? day of August 2012.

Ix)

23444

INTHE UNITED STATES ARMY
FIRST JUDICIALCIRCUIT
UNITEDSTATES
DEFENSE REOUESTED
WITNESSES: SPEEDYTRIAL
MOTION

v.
MANNING,BradleyE,PFC
U.S. Army, (b) (6)
Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S.
Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,
FortMyer,VA 22211

DATED: 24August2012

1. On behalfofPFC Bradley E.Manrttng, his civilian counsel,David E.Coombs, requests the
attettdanceofthe following witnesses for purpose ofhis ArticlelOmotion:
a) COL Carl Coffman, United States Forces-Afghanistan,(b) (6)
. As
the former Special Court Martial Convening Authority (SPCMCA), COL Cofftttan was
the approval authority for numerous Govemment requests for excludable delay under
Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c). COL Coffman will testify conceming his
approvals ofthe Govemment^srequests for excludable delay. For any particular period
for which excludable delay was found, COL Coffman will testify regarding the grounds
which the Govemment provided for its request. COL Coffman will also testify regarding
how the Govemment made its request for excludable delay,and his decision process in
electing to grant the Govemment^sexclustonrequest(of^en over the Defense^s
opposition and demand for speedy trial). COL Coffman will testify that he approved
separaterequestsforexcludabledelaycoveringaperiodfroml2July2010untill6
November 2011(4^3 days of excludable delay).
b) SFC Monica Carlile, United States Army Legal Services Agency (USALSA),
(b) (6)
SFC Carlile will testify regarding the
circumstances ofher signing for COL Coffman on the 22 April 2011Excludable Delay
Memorandum. At the time she signed for COL Coffman, she wasaparalegal for the
Officeofthe Staff Judge Advocate, Military District ofWashington and worked under
the supervision of theTrial Counsel. SFC Carlile will explain the role she played in that
Govemment request for exclusion of36daysof apparent inactivity betweenl^March
2011and 22 April 2011. She will also testify regarding her involvement in the
processing ofprevious and subsequent requests for excludable delays to COL Coffman.
c) LTCPaulAlman^a,(b) (6)
LTC Alman^a was the Article 32 Investigating Officer. He will testify
regarding his decision to exclude two weeks of"federal holidays and weekends" between
23 December 2011and3January2012. During this timeLTCAlman^a chose not to
work on the case. In response toarequest fiom MAJ Fein,LTCAlman^a elected to
exclude these days. LTC Alman^a will testify regarding his believed legal basis for such
adecision.
APPELLATE EXHIBIT
PAGEREFERENCED:
^
PAGE
OF
PB^GES

23445

d) Dr.MichaelSweda, Chief, Forensic Psychology Service, (b) (5)
DrSweda was in chargeofthe RCM 706 DrSweda will testify
regarding the basis or bases for the RCM 706 Board^srequested delay from3March
2011until the date he submitted the Board^sreport on 22 April 2011.
e) Original Classification Authortties(OCAs). The various OCAs conducted reviews ofthe
charged classified information in this case. The SPCMCA approved numerous requests
for excludable delay by the Govemment apparently to provide the Govemment with time
to obtain classification reviews from the various OCAs. Even the Article 32
Investigation was delayed for over eight months in order to obtain the OCA Disclosure
Requests and the OCA Classification Reviews. The various OCAs will testify regarding
the following: i) when the Government first contacted the specific OCA; ii) when the
Govemment first requested the OCA to conductaclassification review; iii) the amount of
times the trial counsel followed up with the OCA to determine the progression ofthe
OCA'sreview; and iv)when the Govemment first requested the OCA to consent to
disclose the classified evidence to the Defense. Each OCAwill also explain the process
of complying with the Govemment^srequest. The OCAwill testify about:!) how long it
took to complete the classification review and why; ii) how many people fiom its
organisation worked on the Govemment^srequest; and iii) the basis for any delay
between completion ofthe classification review and the OCA giving consent to the
Govemment to disclose the information. The Defense requests at least one witness with
knowledgeofthe classification review process in this case from each OCA. The Defense
requests the Govemment produceawitness fiom each of the following OCAs:
LUnited States Central Command(CENTCOM);
2. JointTask Force Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO);
3. Department ofState (DOS)^
4.Office ofthe Director ofNationallntelligence(ODNI);
5. Other Govemment Agency for Specifications3andl5of Charge IL
6. Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA); and
7 United StatesCyberCommand(CYBERCOM)
f) Government^sDue Diligence inRegardsto RCM 701(a)(2)andRCM701(a)(6)^^^^^
The Defense requestsawitness fiom each of the following organi:^ations:
LHeadquarters Department ofthe Army (H(^DA). On 2^ July 2011,theTrial Counsel
sentarequest to Headquarters, Department of the Army to task Principal Officials to
search for, and preserve, any discoverable information. The Defense requestsa
witness with knowledge from H(^DA that can explain why no action was taken by
H(^DAfor nine months afier receiving theTrial CounseFsrequest. The witness will
also testify regarding whether theTrial Counsel attempted to follow up on the 2^ July
2011memorandum at any time during the nine months ofinactivity. Finally,the
witness will testify about the time it took to comply with the 2^ July2011request.

23446

2. Department ofState (DOS) and Diplomatic Security Services (DSS) On 30 May
2012, during an ^02 conference, the Govemment admitted that they had not reviewed
anything at the Department ofState except forthe DOS damage assessment, i^^^
Appellate Exhibit ^^,p.2. At the point of the Govemment^sadmission, the case had
been ongoing for over two years. Despite this passage oftime, the Govemment still
had not conducted any DOS search for RCM 701(a)(6)^^^^^ material. The Defense
requestsawitness with knowledge from the DOS that can explain when the
Govemment first contacted the DOS to conduct anRCM 701(a)(6)^^^^^ search. The
Defense also requests that this witness, or another witness, beaperson with
knowledge regarding the Govemment^sRCM701(a)(2)search ofthe DOS files.
Finally,the Defense requests thatawitness be provided fiom Diplomatic Security
Services (DSS) to testify to when the Govemment first contacted the DSS to conduct
anRCM 701(a)(6)^.^^^^ search and when the Govemment actually conducted this
search.
3. Federal Bureau oflnvestigatton (FBI). The Govemment first revealed on31May
2012that the FBIhad completed an impact statement.
Appellate Exhibitl00,p,4.
The Defense requestsawitness to be produced fiom the FBI that can speak to when
the impact statement was prepared. This witness should also be able to testify about
how the Government was notified of the impact statement and when the Govemment
first chose to view the impact statement. The Defense also requestsawitness who can
testify as to when the Govemment approached the FBI about its general discovery
obligations anda^^^^ search.
4. Department ofHomeland Security (DHS). The Govemment notified the Cottrt and the
Defense on^June2012that the DHS had completedadamage assessment.
Appellate Exhibitl73,p.l6. The Defense requestsawitness to be produced from
DHS that can speak to how and when the Govemment learned ofthe DHS damage
assessment. This witness should also be able to testify about when the Govemment
first chose to view the damage assessment.
5.Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive(ONCIX). The Defense requests
awitness fiom ONCIXwho can testify to: i) the representation made to trial counsel
in February2012regarding the ONCIX damage assessment; ii) the representation
made to trial counsel in March 2012 regarding the ONCIX damage assessments tit)
what ONCIX had by way ofadamage assessment in February and March 2012; iv)the
contents of thel^May meeting with ODNI; v)when the Govemment first contacted
ONCIX and what information the Govemment knew and when.
6 DIA,D1SA, CENTCOM, SOUTHCOM,CYERCOM The Defenserequestsawitness
fiom each ofthese agencies to testify as to when the Govemment first contacted these
organisations and when the Govemment actually conducted anRCM 701(a)(2)and
701(a)(6)^^^^^search

23447

7.D0J. The Defense requestsawitness from the DOJ who can testify as to when the
Govemment first contacted the DOJ and when the Govemment actually conducteda
701(a)(6)^^^^^search
^.Government Agency. The Defense requestsawitness fiom Govemment Agency who
can testify as to when the Govemment first contacted Govemment Agency and when
the Govemment actually conducteda701(a)(6)^^^^^ search. The Defense also
requestsawitness who can testify as to when the Govemment leamed ofthe existence
of the second follow on report by Govemment Agency.
^. 63 Agencies: On23Febmary2012,the Govemment represented at an ^02 session
and later during an Article 3^(a) that it had been conductingaRCM701(a)(6)^^^^^
search for approximatelyayear and that it found no RCM 701(a)(6)^^^^^ material.
Article 3^(a) Audio Recording 23 February2012,(unauthenticated record of trial
at p. 3^). The representation by the Govemment is inconsistent with their its later
admission that it first became aware that ONCIX had received input fiom the 63
various agencies inFebruaryof2012.
Appellate Exhibitl73,p.16-20. The
Govemment stated that it was only afier February of2012that it began reaching out to
the 63 different agencies. Based upon this admission, it appears that the Govemment
did not begin its search for RCM 701(a)(6)^^^^^ material fiom the 63 agencies until
February of2012. Accordingly,the Defense requests at one witness fiom each of
these agencies to testify abouti) when the Govemment first contacted them regarding
this case; ii) when the Govemment first became aware ofexistence of agency files;
and iii) when the Govemment first examined the agency^sfiles.
2. In addition to the above witnesses, the Defense requests that the Court order the Govemment
to provideacopy ofits due diligence filing based upon Appellate Exhibit CLXXVII. Although
the Govemment^sfiling was
based upon the ArticlelOmotion, this filing should no
longer remain
Under (^^^^^^^^^^^^.^v..^^.^.^^^^, 3^ M.J.25^(C.M.A.1^^3)the test for
measuring compliance with ArticlelO,UCMJ,is "reasonable diligence."
at 262 ("The touch
stone...is not constant motion, but reasonable diligence in bringing the charges to trial."). Asa
result of the Defense^sArticlelOmotion, the Govemment is required to provide an account of
its activities. ^^^(^^^^^^^^^^^^.^v.^^^^^^^^,41M.J.51^(C.G.Ct.CrimApp.l^^4)(court
suggests that the best way for the militaryjudge to proceed with an ArticlelOmotion would be
to have the parties enterastipulation of fact as to the undisputed portions of chronology and then
to present evidence on those relevant matters upon which there is disagreement.). Inthis
instance, the current ^^^^^^^ filing by the Government should provideabasis for the required
account. The Govemment will also need to account for its post-arraigttment activity, In(^^^^^^^
^^^^^.^vC^^^^^,5^ML54(CAAF 2003),CAAFstated,"^etherefore hold thatthe
ArticlelOduty imposed on the Govemment immediately to try an accused who is placed in
pretrial confinement does not terminate simply because the accused is arraigned," The court
went on to say that post arraignment, the military judge has much more control of the course of
the trial,but the "affirmative obligation ofreasonable diligence upon the govemment does not
change."

23448

3. If the Goverttment^scurrent^.^^^^^^ filing contains any information which could be
considered work product or revealing part of the Govemment^strialstrategy,the Defense would
not object to this information being redacted with the Court^sapproval. Obtaining the
Govemment^sdue diligence filing in advance of the Article lOmotion will allow the Defense
and the Government to enter intoastipulation of fact as to the undisputed portions of chronology
and then to present evidence on those relevant matters upon which there is disagreement.
Narrowing the scope of the Article lOissues will also likely result in the elimination of one or
more ofthe above requested witnesses, and enable the Goverttment and Defense to focus their
witness lists on only the disputed portions ofthe chronology.
4. The Defense reserves the right to supplement this witness list should it be necessary to do so.
If the Defense submits any additional request for witnesses, it will do so inatimely manner.
Respectfully submitted,

DAVID EDWARDCOOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

23449

UNITED STATESOF AMERICA
Prosecution Disclosure
to the Defense
Manning, Bradley E.
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall
Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

17 August 2012

The United States responds to the Court's Order, dated 29 May 2012 as follows:
On 17 August 2012, the United States filed an ex parte motion requesting the Court consider that
motion in camera and ex parte under MRE 505(g)(2) and to authorize redactions of portions of
the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) records that neither involve investigation, damage
assessment, or mitigation measures, nor are otherwise subject to discovery or production under
Brady. RCM 701(a)(2), RCM 701(a)(6), or RCM 703(f). The United States requested the Court
authorize redactions under MRE 505(g)(2)(A). See Enclosure. The United States seeks to
protect information relating to intelligence activities and intelligence sources and methods, all
within the national security interests of the United States.

ASHDEN FEIN
MAJ, JA
Trial Counsel
Enclosure
Govemment ex parte Motion (DIA) [unclassified redacted version]

/>PKLLLATL 'CX^ilBIT^&^l
PAGS REFERENCED:
PACB
OF
.PAGE^

23450

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Government in camera Motion

v. for Authorization of Reductions of

DIA Records
Manning. Bradley E. under MRE 50S(g)(2)
PFC, U.S. Army,
HHC, US. Army Garrison,
Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall 17 August 2012



Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

REIJEF I

(U) COMES NOW the United States of America. by and through undersigned counsel,
respectfully requests this Court to: (I consider this motion in camera and ex pane under
Military Rule of Evidence (MRE) 505(g)(2); and (2) authorize redactions of portions of the
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) records (hereinafter "records") under MRE 505(g)(2) that
neither involve investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures, nor are otherwise
subject to discovery or production under Brady. Rule for Courts Martial (RCM) 70l(a)(2), RCM
70l(a)(6), or RCM 703(f).

RDFN PE

(U) As the moving party, the United States has the burden of persuasion on any factual
issue the resolution of which is necessary to decide the motion. RC 905(c)(2). The burden of
proof is by a preponderance of the evidence. RCM 905(c)(1).

FACTS

(U) On 22 une 20l 2, the Court ordered (hereinafter "Court Order") the prosecution to
seek out and identify files regarding the accused that involve investigation, damage assessment.
or mitigation measures. and to notify the Court with a status of whether it anticipates any
government entity that is the custodian of classi?ed evidence that is the subject of the Defense
Motion to Compel will seek limited disclosure IAW MRE 505(g)(2) or claim a privilege IAW
MRE 505(c) for the classi?ed information under that agency's control.

(U) On I9 July 2012. the prosecution requested leave of the Court until I7 August 20l2
to notify the Court with a status of whether it anticipates the custodian of classi?ed evidence
will seek limited disclosure IAW MRE 505(g)(2) or claim a privilege IAW MRE 505(c) for the
classi?ed information under that agency's control; (2) to ?le notice IAW MRE 505(i)(2), if
necessary; and (3) if necessary, to disclose such ?les regarding the Accused that involve
investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures to the Defense or, submit them to the
Court for in camera review under RCM 70l(g) or for limited disclosure under MRE 505(g)(2) for
Depanment of Defense information classi?ed collateral to "secret" and classi?ed above



23451

the "secret" level or containing specialized control measures. S_m_ Appellate Exhibit (AE)
CCXX.

(U) On l9 July 20l2, the defense did not object to the prosecution's request for leave and
the Court granted the request on the record at the Article 39(a).



(U) The United States does not request any witnesses be produced for this motion. The
prosecution requests that the Court consider enclosures listed at the end of this motion.

LEGAL AUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT

(U) If classi?ed information is at issue in a court-martial, then the United States may
agree to disclose the classi?ed infonnation to the defense under a protective order. 1; MRE
505(g)( Additionally, the United States may motion the Court to "authorize (A) the deletion
of speci?c items of classi?ed information from documents to be made available to the [accused],
(B) the substitution ofa ponion or summary ofthe infonnation for classi?ed documents. or (C)
the substitution of a statement admitting relevant facts that the classi?ed infonnation would tend
to prove." MRE 505(g)(2). The military judge "shall authorize" these alternative fonns, unless
she determines "the disclosure of the classi?ed infomiation itself is necessary to enable the
accused to prepare for trial." l_d. If a motion is ?led under MRE 505(g)(2). then upon request of



23452

the United States, the motion "shall" be considered by the military judge in camera and "shall
not be disclosed to the accused." Id;



(U) Pursuant to the Court?s Order. the prosecution sought out DIA records regarding the
accused that involve investigation, damage assessment, or mitigation measures. The prosecution
also sought out DIA records subject to discovery or production under RCM 70l(a)(2),
RCM 70l(a)(6). or RCM 703(f) . Se_e Brady v. Magyland. 373 U.S. 83 (1963). The prosecution
identi?ed information that involved investigation, damage assessment. or mitigation measures,
or is otherwise subject to discovery or production under Brady. RCM 70l(a)(2). RCM 70l(a)(6).
or RCM 703(l). The reviewed that information to detennine if it would authorize the
prosecution to voluntarily disclose the original classi?ed rnaten'al to the defense under MRE
505(g)(l or The determined that the agency would disclose a majority of
information under MRE 505(g)( l) and a limited amount of information in a redacted or
summarized form under MRE 505(g)(2). ?_ee Enclosure 3. The prosecution disclosed the
majority ofthe information on 3 August 20l2 and on l7 August 2012.



None of the redacted
infomtation is subject to discovery or production under Bradv or RCM 70l(a)(6). Therefore, the



defense is not entitled to discovery of the redacted infonnation.

(U) Should the Court find the redacted infonnation is discoverable. or is ?necessary to
enable the accused to prepare for trial" under MRE 505(g)(2), then the United States requests the
opportunity to either: (I) address the Coun's findings with the relevant government agency to



3


23453

determine whether a different alterative under MRE 505(g)(2) is appropriate and file that
alternative with the Court, or (2) allow for the relevant government agency to claim a privilege
under MRE 505(c) and the United States to move for an in camera proceeding under MRE
505(

(U) The prosecution will not use any redacted portions of the DIA records provided to the
Court during any portion of the trial, including in aggravation, if applicable.

I. SION

(U) The United States respectfully requests this Court: (I) consider this motion and the
enclosures in camera and ex parte under MRE 505(g)(2). and (2) authorize redactions of
portions of the DIA records that neither involve investigation. damage assessment, or mitigation
measures. nor are otherwise subject to discovery or production under Brady. RCM 70l(a)(2).
RCM 70l(a)(6). or RCM 703(f).

ASHDEN FEIN
MAJ. JA
Trial Counsel

Encl

Original DIA Records

23454

INTHE UNITEDSTATES ARMY
FIRST JUDICIALCIRCUIT

UNITEDSTATES
MOTIONTO DISMISS
FOR UNLAWFUL
PRETRIAL PUNISHMENT
MANNING, BradleyF,PFC
U.S. Army, (b) (6)
Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S.
Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer Henderson Hall,
FortMyer,VA 22211

DATED; 27 July 2012

RELIEF SOUGHT
1. PFC Bradley E. Manning, by and through counsel, pursuant to applicable case law and Rule
for Courts Martial (R.C.M.) 907(a) requests this Court to dismiss all charges with prejudice
owing to the illegal pretrial punishment PFC Manning was subjected to in violation of Article 13,
UCMJ and the Fifth and Eighth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Alternatively,
the Defense requests that this Court grant meaningful relief to include at least 10-for-l
sentencing credit.
BURDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OF PROOF
2. The Defense, as the moving party, bears the burden to present evidence to support PFC
Manning's claim of illegal pretrial punishment. This involves a "relatively low burden of proof"
UnitedStates v. Scalarone, 52 M.J. 539, 544 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 1999). Once the Defense
does this, the burden then shifts to the Government to present evidence to rebut the allegation
beyond the point ofinconclusiveness. See United States v. Cordova, 42 C.M.R. 466, 1970 WL
7132 (A.C.M.R. 1970)("Appellate government counsel apparently contend that because the
evidence is 'inconclusive' the fact of pretrial punishment has not been established. If this be the
Government's intended conclusion, we do not agree. The burden of producing evidence in
support of a motion to dismiss on the basis of illicit punishment while an accused is confined
pending trial, is one for the defense. However, once the issue is raised—in this case by the
aforementioned testimony—the burden shifts to the prosecution to rebut that evidence beyond
the point of equipoise or 'inconclusiveness.'"); United States v. Scalarone, 52 M.J. 539, 543-4
(N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 1999).
AMICUS FILINGS
3. The Defense requests that this Court consider an amicus filing from Psychologists for Social
Responsibility. This has been filed as Attachment 41.

AP??;! LA.TE RXHmTr_222
r'
REFERENCED:
P^GE
^OF rAGES

23455

United StatesvPFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

WITNESSES^EVIDENCE
4. The Defense requests the following witnesses be produced for this motion:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)

Col Robert Oltman;
Capt.William Hocter;
COL Ricky Malone;
Capt. Brian Moore;
LCDR David Moulton;
LTC Dawn Hilton;
Mr.JuanMendez;
PFC Bradley Manning.

This Court has ruled that the testimony ofMr. Juan Mendez is not relevant and necessary for this
motion.
5. The Defense requests the following evidence be produced for this motion;
a) Suicide Smock;
b) Suicide Blanket;
c) Suicide Mattress.
ATTACHMENTS
6. The Defense respectfully requests that this Court consider the following Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
^.
9.
10.
11.
12.

Initial Custody Classification Determination
Psychiatrists'Weekly Recommendations
Secretary ofNavy Instruction (SECNAV1NST)1640.9C
Special Handling Instructions
Observation^Evaluation(O^E) Notes
Classification^Assignment(C^A)Board Reviews
Capt. Hocter Affidavit^l
Capt. Hocter Affidavit^2
COF Malone Affidavit
Memorandum to CW04Averhart About Conditions of Confinement,5January 2011
Request for Release From Confinement,13January 2011
COL Carl R.Coffrnan Jr.,Response to Request for ReliefFromConfinement,21
January 2011
13 PFC ManningArticle 13^ Complaint, 19January 2011
14. PFC Manning Rebuttal to Col.Choike'sResponse to Article 13^ Complaint, lOMarch
2011[hereinafter "Rebuttal to Article 13^ Complaint"]
15. CW04 JamesAverhart Response to Article 13^ Complaint,24 January 2011

23456

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

16 CW04AverhartResponsePFCManningRebuttaltoArticle 13^ Complaint, 16
March2011
17. Col Oltman Response to Article 13^ Complaint,31January 2011
1^. Col Choike Response to Article 13^ Complaint,lMarch 2011
19. Col.ChoikeNotificationofSeparateFilingforNewMattersRaised,6April 2011;
Col.Choike Response to PFC Manning Rebuttal to Article 13^ Complaint,^April
2011;PFC Manning Rebuttal ^2 and Request to Consider New Matter Raised, April
10
20. CW02 Denise Barnes Response to Article 13^ Complaint,7April 2011
21. CW02 Barnes Response to PFC Manning Rebuttal to Article 13^ Complaint, lOMay
2011
22. CW05 Abel Galaviz Investigation in Response to Articlel3^ Complaint and
Appointment Memorandum
23. Juan Garcia Final Action on Articlel3^Complaint,13June 2011
24. Affidavits ofBrigCuards Regarding Incident onl^January 2011
25. Video Recording of Incident at O^^^tico Brig onl^January2011
26. Photo ofSuicide Prevention Smock
27. Affidavit ofBrig Guard Documenting Incident Where PFC Manning wasTrapped in
the Suicide Smock
2^. Amnesty International Letter
29. Law Professors'Letter
30. Psychologists for Social Responsibility Letter
31. Furopean Leaders'Fetter
32. Materials Related to the United Nations Special Rapporteur onTorture,Mr.Juan
Mendez
33. Emails between Mr. Coombs and CPT Fein related to; a) PFC Manning'sPOI status at
Otiantico;andb)arrangingaunmonitored official visit
34. Ot^^^fi^^ Brig Policy onVisitation
35. CW04Averhart Memorandum to the Office of the Regimental Judge Advocate,l
December 2010
36. PFC Manning DD510Crievance Re; Conditions ofConfinement
37. Statement from Professor Haney on Solitary Confinement and Other Documentation
From the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
3^ Work Reports
39. Incident Reports
40. 5-minute Observation Notes(sample)
41. Amicus Filing from Psychologists for Social Responsibility
FACTS
7. PFC Manning is charged with five specifications of violatingalawful general regulation, one
specification of aiding the enemy,one specification of conduct prejudicial to good order and
discipline and service discrediting, eight specifications ofcommunicating classified information,
five specifications of stealing or knowingly converting govemment property,and two

23457

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

specifications ofknowingly exceeding authorized access toagovemment computer, in violation
of Articles 92, 104, andl34. Uniform CodeofMilitaryJustice(LCMJ)10U.S.C.^^ ^92, 904,
934(2010). PFC Manning has been held in pretrial confinement since 29 May 2010,atotal of
791 days. For 265 ofthese days, PFC Manning was held in conditions tantamount to solitary
confinement at the Ot^^^fi^o Brig.
A.

PFC Mannings Confinement in I^uwaitandTransfer to O^^^fico

^. On 27 May 2010, PFC Manning was detained by agents from the Army'sCriminal
Investigation Division(CID). He was subsequently placed into pretrial confinement on 29 May
2010. PFC Manning was held inasecured area on Forward Operating Base Hammer, Iraq until
he could be transported to theTheater Field Confinement Facility (TFCF) at Camp Arifjan,
I^uwait. PFC Manning was transported to theTFCFon31 May 2010.
9. During his time in I^uwait, PFC Manning'smental health deteriorated. PFC Manning was
anxious, confused and disoriented for much ofhis time in l^uwait. Although he was seen by
mental health providers in I^uwait, given the limited resources at theTFCF,the Govemment
decided to transport PFC Manning toafacility with adequate specialized resources to manage
PFCManning'scare.
10. PFC Manning was transported fiom theTFCF to the Marine Corps Base O^^^fi^o(MCBO)
Pretrial Confinement Facility (PCF) on 29 July 2010.The Duty Brig Supervisor(DBS)
reviewed the inmate background summary and completed an initial custody classification
determination (DD Form 2711). ^^^Attachmentl. The DBS determined that PFC Manning's
score wasa"5,"significantly lower than the"12^Points" normally required fbraMAX custody
determination. Despite the low score, the DBS chose to override the custody determination and
assign PFC Manning to MAX custody. The DBS cited PFC Manning'sprevious suicide watch
while in l^uwait as the rationale for this decision.
The PCF Commander, CW04 James
Averhart, approved ofthe MAX custody determination by the DBS and also decided that PFC
Manning should be placed under special handling instructions ofSuicide Risk (SR).
11. On 30 July 2010, Navy Captain(Capt.)William Hocter, the forensic psychiatrist for the
Brig, conducted his first assessment ofPFC Manning. Capt. Hocter has over 20 years of
experience asaforensic psychiatrist. At the time ofhis assessment, he was the Senior Medical
Officer for the Behavioral Health Clinic at O^^titico with the responsibility for providing
psychiatric care to all active duty personnel stationed at O^^^tico. One ofhis collateral duties
was to provide onsite mental health care to the Brig detainees. Capt. Hocter initially
recommended observing PFC Manning on Suicide Risk precautions because ofhis suicide watch
inl^uwait. Within days ofarriving at the Brig, PFC Manning began to respond favorably to
treatment. On6August 2010, Capt. Hocter determined that PFC Manning was no longer
consideredasuiciderisk. He recommended that PFC Manning be moved from Suicide Risk to
Prevention oflnjury (POI) status.
Attachment 2. I^nowing that the Brig was very concemed
about PFC Manning'ssafety,and because there had beenasuicide in the Brig earlier that year,
Capt. Hocterelected to obtain the services ofanother senior forensic psychiatrist, COL Rick

23458

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

Malone, asaconsultant^second opinion. COL Malone evaluated PFC Manning and he concurred
that PFC Manning should be downgraded from Suicide Risk to POI. Despite these
recommendations and contrary to the requirements ofSecretary ofNavy Instruction
(SECNAVINST)1640.9C, the Brig didnotimmediatelyremove PFC Manningfrom Suicide
Risk. ^^^Attachment3,Section 4205.5.d.("When prisoners are no longer considered to be
suicide risks byamedical officer, they shall be retumed to appropriate quarters."). Instead, it
was not until almostaweek later, onllAugust 2010, that CW04Averhart directed PFC
Manning be moved from Suicide Risk to POI. .^^^Attachment5.
12. Over the course ofthe following three weeks, PFC Manning was observed by the Brig staff
and received regular treatment from the Brig psychiatrists. During this time, the Brig staff noted
in PFC Manning'sObservationandFvaluation(O^F) notes that he was adjusting well to
confinement. ^^^^^^^^^^^Attachment5. The Brig staffnoted that PFC Manning "has
presented no problems and has been courteous and respectful to staff." The Brig staff also noted
that PFC Manning'sconduct "has been excellent" and that PFC Manning states he "does not
have any suicidal feelings" and "has not been suicidal since arriving at O^^^tico and mentally
feels good."
Given his exemplary behavior, the Brig staffinformed PFC Manning ofthe
process ofreducing his custody and classification and ofthe possiblejob assignments that PFC
Manning could receive while in confinement. PFC Manning indicated that he would likeajob in
the Brig library.
13. On 27August 2010, Capt. Hocter determined that PFC Manning was no longer considereda
risk ofself-harm and recommended that PFC Manning be taken off ofPOI status, i^^^
Attachment 2. The PCF Commander did not follow Capt. Hocter'srecommendation.
B,

PFCManningisHeldinMAX Custody and Under Prevention ofln^uryStatusfor
the Next Eight Months

14. UnderSFCNAVINST1640.9C, the regulation that details the proper procedures and
safeguards for classification ofinmates, evaluation ofinmates, and the limited use of special
quarters,aMaximum Custody detainee is subject to following mandatory restrictions;
1) Supervision must be immediate and continuous. A D D 509,lnspection
Record ofPrisoner in Segregation, shall be posted by the cell door and
appropriate entries made at least every 15minutes.
2) They shall not be assigned to work details outside the cell.
3) They shall be assigned to the most secure quarters.
4) Two or more stafl^members shall be present when MAX prisoners are out of
their cells.
5) MAX prisoners shall wear restraints at all times when outside the maximumsecurity area and be escorted by at least two escorts(confinement facility staff
or certified escorts, per article7406).

23459

United StatesvPFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

6) Onacase-bycase basis, the CO^OIC^CPOIC may authorize additional
restraint for movement ofspecific MAX prisoners. Amilitaryjudgemay
direct that restraints be removed fromaperson in the courtroom if, in this
judge'sopinion, such restraint is not necessary. In all cases, the limitations of
articlell02 of reference (b)shall be observed.
^^^Attachment3. CW04Averhart adds the following characteristics o f M A X custody;
7) Inmates must be under observation ofasupervisor ofthe same sex.
^) Such prisoners shall be berthed in special quarters and physically checked
every5minutes.
Attachment 15.
15. By contrast,aMedium Custody detainee is subject to the following restrictions:
1) Supervision shall be continuous within the security perimeter and immediate
and continuous when outside the security perimeter.
2) They shall not be assigned to work outside the security perimeter.
3) They shall wear restraints outside the security perimeter unless the
CO^OIC^CPOIC directs otherwise.
4) They shall be escorted by at least two confinement facility staff or certified
escorts, per article7406, unless the CO^OIC^CPOIC directs only one escort is
required.
5) They may be assigned dormitory quarters.
^^^Attachment3.
16. PFC Manning was classified asaMAX detainee for the entirety ofhis time at Oti^tttico.
In addition to his MAX custody classification, PFC Manning was also held under POI status,
which necessitated the use of special quarters. "Special O^^t^^t^^^^^^^^^^^^ii^^^^^^^^ Section
4205 ofSFCNAVINST16409Cas follows:
a. Some prisoners require additional supervision and attention due to personality
disorders, behavior abnormalities, risk ofsuicide or violence, or other character
traits. Ifrequired to preserve order, the BRIO Os or, in their absence, the brig
duty officers^duty brig supervisors may authorize special quarters for such
prisoners for purposes ofcontrol,prevention ofinjury to themselves or others, and
the orderly and safe administration ofthe confinement facility. Ahearingto

23460

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

determine the need for continued administrative segregation ofthe prisoner shall
be conducted. This hearing may be by board action or byamemberofthe
confinement facility appointed in writing by the BRIG 0,andawritten
recommendation to the BRIGOwill be provided within 72 hours ofthe prisoner's
entry into segregation.
b. Special quarters isagroup of cells used to house prisoners who have serious
adjustment problems or certain medical issues, are highlytemperamental or
emotional, anti-social, some medical cases, or who cannot get along with other
prisoners, or are persistent custodial problems. Special quarters are notapunitive
measure and shall not be used as such. Prisoners must be made aware ofthe
reason they are berthed in special quarters. Prisoners are assigned to special
quarters by the BRlCOand shall not have normal privileges restricted unless
privileges must be withheld for reasons of security or prisoner safety(e.g.,suicide
risks or aggressive, assaultive or predatory prisoners). For each period of30 days
aprisoner is retained in special quarters, the C^A board shall review and provide
arecommendation to the BRIO 0,who shall determine and certify the
requirement for continuation in special quarters.
c. Disciplinary segregation is provided for in article5105.3e.
d. Prisoners who have threatened suicide or have madeasuicide gesture but are
found fit for confinement may be placed within special quarters under continuous
observation while in the category ofsuicide risk. CO^OIC^CPOIC may direct
removal of prisoner'sclothing when deemed necessary. Prisoner must be under
observation ofasupervisor ofthe same sex.Closed circuit television may be
installed atalimited number of cells for observation, although cross gender
monitoring is not authorized.
2. Procedures. All prisoners in special quarters shall be under continual
supervision. Special precautions shall be taken in equipping, inspecting, and
supervising their quarters to prevent escapes, self-injury,and other serious
incidents. They shall be sighted at least once everyl5minutesbyastaff member
and shall be visited daily byamemberofthe medical department and the BRIG
O. In addition, it is highly desirable that prisoners in special quarters be visited
daily byachaplain. Each sighting ofand visit to any segregated prisoner shall be
officially recorded and include date, time, nameofvisitor, and any appropriate
remarks. DD509,lnspection Record ofPrisoner in Segregation, shall be used to
record visits.
^^^Attachment3. POI status is assigned to those prisoners who have given an indication that
they intend or are contemplating harming themselves. ^^^Attachmentl5.

23461

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

17. The combination ofPFCManning'sMAX and POI status meant that for approximately9
months while at O^^^fico, PFC Manning was held in his 6x^ cell for 23-24hoursaday. His cell
did not haveawindow or any natural light.
1^. Owing to his classification asaMAX detainee, PFC Manning was subject to the following
restrictions:
a) PFC Manning was placed inacell directly in front of the guard post to facilitate his
constant monitoring.
b) PFC Manning was awoken at 0500 hours and required to remain awake in his cell fiom
0500to 2200 hours
c) PFC Manning was not permitted to lie down on his rack during the duty day. Nor was
PFC Manning permitted to lean his back against the cell wall; he had to sit upright on his
rack without any back support.
d) Whenever PFC Manning was moved outside his cell, the entire facility was locked down.
CW04Averhart describes this as follows,"Whileamaximum custody inmate is outside
ofasecured area, the facility will commencealockdown until the inmate is returned toa
secure area. No other inmates are allowed to move throughout the facility whilea
maximum custody inmate is outside ofasecured area. At no time will maximum custody
inmates be outside ofasecured area at any time." ^^^Attachmentl5.
e) Whenever PFC Manning was moved outside his cell, he was shackled with metal hand
and leg restraints and accompanied by at least two guards.
f) From 29 July 2010tolODecember 2010, PFC Manning was permitted only 20 minutes
of'sunshinecall." Aside froma3-5minute shower, this would be the only time PFC
Manning would regularly spend outside his cell. During this sunshine call, he would be
brought toasmall concrete yard, about half toathird of the size ofabasketball court.
PFC Manning would be permitted to walk around the yard in hand and leg shackles,
while being accompanied byaBrig guard at his immediate side(the guard would have
hishandonPFCManning'sback). Two to three other guards would also be present
observing PFC Manning. PFC Manning would usually walk in figure eights or some
other pattem. He was not permitted to sit down or stay stationary.
g) Initially,Brig guards provided PFC Manning with athletic shoes ^^^^^^^^ laces which
would fall offwhen he attempted to walk. PFC Manning elected to wear boots instead
because at least the boots would stay on when he walked.
h) FromlODecember2010onward, PFC Manning was permittedaone hour recreation call.
At this point, the Brig authorized the removal ofhis hand and leg shackles and PFC
Manning was no longer required to be accompanied byaBrig guard at his immediate

23462

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

side. CW04Averhart describes PFC Manning'srecreation privileges as follows:
"Because the outdoor recreation area is notasecured area, restraints are not normally
removed from maximum custody inmates. All inmates, unless inaSR, POI or
disciplinary status are allowed to exercise while in their cells provided that it does not
disrupt the good order and discipline ofthe facility. Due to the extended period oftime
that PFC Manning has been inaSR or POI status, and not allowed to exercise within his
cell,lauthorized PFC Manning'srestraints to be removed while conducting recreation
call inside although he is not inasecured area." ^^^Attachmentl5. Although PFC
Manning was technically "permitted" to use exercise equipment at the gym,most ofthis
equipment was unplugged or broken down. In addition, depending on the guards, they
would not permit him to use certain types of equipment(e.g. the chin up bar). So as to
avoid any problems with the guards, PFC Manning would usually walk around the room
as he had during his sunshine calls. Three or four guards would be monitoring PFC
Manning during his recreation call.
i)

PFC Manning was only authorized non-contact visits. The non-contact visits were
permitted on Saturdays and Sundays between 1200 andl500 hours by approved visitors.
During these visits, he would have to wear his hand and leg restraints.

j)

PFC Manning was required to meet his visitors inasmall4by6fbot room that was
separated withaglass partition. His visits were monitored by the guards and they were
audio recorded by the Brig. The recording equipment was added byArmy CID after PFC
Manning'stransfcrtotheO^^titicoBrig.

k) PFC Manning was only permitted non contact visits with his attorneys. During these
visits, he was shackled at the hands and feet.
1) PFC Manning was not permitted any work duty. However,"special quarters work and
training reports" were routinely filled out pertaining to PFC Manning (presumably
reports generated from observing PFC Manning cleaning his cell). ^^^^ Attachment 3^.
19. Owing to PFC Manning being placed on continuous POI status, he was subject to the
following further restrictions:
a) PFC Manning was subject to constant monitoring; the Brig guards were required to check
on him every five minutes by asking him some variation of, "are you okay7" PFC
Manning was required to respond in some affirmative manner. Cuards were required to
make notations every five minutes inalogbook.
Attachment 40.

23463

United StatesvPFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

b) At night, if the guards could not see him clearly,because he hadablanket over his head
or he was curled up towards the wall, they would wake PFC Manning in order to ensure
thathewasokay.^
c) At night, only some ofthe lights would be tumed off. Additionally,therewasa
fiorescent light in the hall outside PFC Manning'scell that would stay on at night.
d) PFC Manning was required to receive each ofhis meals alone in his cell. He was only
permitted to eat withaspoon.
e) There were usually no detainees on either side ofPFC Manning. IfPFC Manning
attempted to speak to those detainees that were several cells away from him, the guards
would order him to stop speaking.
f^ PFC Manning originally was provided withastandard mattress and no pillow. PFC
Manning tried to fold the mattress to makeapillow so that he could be more comfortable
when sleeping. Brig officials did not like this, so onl5December2010they provided
him withasuicide mattress withabuilt-in pillow. This builtin pillow was onlyacouple
ofinches high and was not really any better than sleeping onafiat mattress.
g) PFC Manning was not permitted regular sheets or blankets. Instead he was provided with
atear-proof security blanket. This blanket was extremely coarse and irritated PFC
Manning'sskin. At first, PFC Manning would get rashes and carpet burns on his skin
from the blanket. Fventually,his skin became accustomed to the coarseness ofthe
blanket and he got fewer rashes. The blanket did not keep PFC Manning warm because it
did not retain heat and, due to its stiffness, did not contour to his body.
h) PFC Manning was not allowed to have any personal items in his cell.
i)

PFC Manning was only allowed to have one book or one magazines at any given time to
read. Ifhe was not actively reading, the book or magazine would be taken away from
him. Also, the book or magazine would be taken away fiom him at the end ofthe day
before he went to sleep.

j)

For the last month ofhis confinement at O^^^fi^o, PFC Manning was givenapen and
five pieces ofpaper along with his book. However, ifhe was not actively reading his
book and taking notes, these items would be taken away from him.

k) PFC Manning was prevented fiom exercising in his cell. Ifhe attempted to do pushups,
sit ups, or any other form of exercise he would be forced to stop.
' CW04 Averhart writes, "inmates are not authorized to cover their entire face with blankets while sleeping.
Inmates are not to be awakened for the purpose of bed checks, however positive identification must be made if no
part of an inmate is visible. The only way for this to be possible is to ... awaken the inmate ..." See Attachment 15.
He was also "permitted" one copy of the Brig's rules and regulations. See Attachment 15.

10

23464

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

1) When PFC Manning went to sleep, he was required to strip down to his underwear and
surrender his clothing to the guards.
m)PFC Manning was only permitted hygiene items as needed. PFC Manning would have to
request toilet paper every time he wanted to go to the bathroom; at times, he had to wait
for guards to provide him with toilet paper.
n) There was no soap in his cell. PFC Manning requested soap to wash his hands after using
the bathroom; guards would sometimes get the soap, and sometimes not.
o) PFC Manning was not permitted to wear shoes in his cell.
p) PFC Manning was initially only permitted correspondence time for one houraday; after
27 October 2010, this was changed to two hours per day.
Attachment 4.
C.

Multiple Psychiatrists Recommended for ElghtMonthsthatPFCMannlngBe
Downgraded from POI Status

20. Over the course of eight months,with only two exceptions, Capt. Hocter and COL Malone
consistently recommended that PFC Manning be removed from POI status, i^^^ Attachment 2.
21. Capt. Hocter states in his affidavit that the Brig did not follow his repeated recommendations
to downgrade PFC Manning from POI. In his first affidavit, dated7April 2011,Capt. Hocter
states as follows:
I,WilliamJ.Hocter,Jr.,the undersigned, do hereby certify and swear that the
following is true: lam an active duty member of the United States Navy, lhave
overl9years of experience asaforensic psychiatrist. My current position is OIC,
Combat Stress Clinic, Camp Leatherneck, Helmand Province, Afghanistan. My
usual job is as Senior Medical Officer for the Behavioral Health Clinic at MCB
Ouantico. One ofmy collateral duties is to provide onsite medical health care to
all active duty personnel on the base. In my duty position,lam responsible for
providing psychiatric care to all active duty personnel on the base. lalso provide
limited forensic services as time permits.
OuestionA. Do you mal^e recommendations to the O^^^fi^^ Brig concerning
whetheradetainee is placed on either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention o f l n j u r y
Status7
LYes

II

23465

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

Ot^cstionB. In your experience, does the O^^^fi^o Brig follow your
recommendation concerning either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention of Injury
Status7
l . N o . They generally keep patients on precautions longer thanlrecommend.
OuestlonC. Have you made any recommendation concerning PFC Bradley
Manning^s custody and classification status^ If so, what were your
recommendations^
1. Yes. Please note that this is fiom recollection asldo not have access to my
notes, lam currently at Camp Leatherneck in Afghanistan, linitially
recommended observing PFC Manning on suicide precautions for the first couple
ofweeks after his arrival,both because ofhis suicidal behavior in l^uwait and
because his medical record from l^uwaitincludedaquoteoraparaphrase from
PFC Manning to the effect that he could be patient when it comes to suicide.
2. Afteracouple of weeks, it seemed reasonable to downgrade his precaution
level to Prevention oflnjury (POI) status, l^nowing that the Brig was very
concemed about his safety,and because there had beenasuicide in the Brig
earlier that year,lobtained the services of another forensic psychiatrist(Col.Rick
Malone)tobeaconsultant^second opinion. He evaluated the patient and
concurred that POI was appropriate. The Brig, aslbest recall,waitedacouple of
weeks to put this recommendation into effect.
3. Subsequently,Irecommended that he be removed from POI as he continued to
do relatively well in the Brig(occasional mild, odd behaviors such as dancing
around were noted in the log as well as possible sleep walking). Col. Malone
concurred. These recommendations were not followed.
4. In the fall (I am uncertain ofthe date); PFC Manning became agitated after an
odd incident with staff As best aslcould tell from discussing the matter with
Manning and with staff, he had been performing some kind ofyoga move in
which he contorted his limbs in suchaway that staff thought he was trying to hurt
himself They intervened and returned him to his cell. He was very upset about
this(not suicidal) and solbriefiy recommended he be put back on POI status asa
safeguard because he was so upset. Irescinded this recommendation the
following week as he had calmed.
5. Since then,lhave continued to recommend that POI precautions be removed.
As ofthe time ofmy leaving for Camp Lejeune to prepare for deployment, the
recommendations had not been followed. CAPT Moore and Col. Malone can
provide details ofwhat occurred next.

12

23466

United StatesvPFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Article 13Motion

Ot^estlonD. Have your recommendations been followed by the Ottantico
Brlg7 I f not, have you been given any reason for the Ot^^^ficoBrig^s
decision not to follow your recommendations^
1. No. My understanding is that the Brig has not followed my recommendations
because ofgreat concern and worry that Manning will harm himself ItoldthemI
thought the Max status(with every 15minute visual checks ofthe detainee vice
POI with every5minutechecks)was more than sufficient to ensure his safety,
fiomapsychiatric perspective. The every5minute checks done for POI is
extremely rigorous, particularly fdrasecond tier precaution. Every 15minute
checks was common for suicide precautions in otherjails and correctional
facilities wherelhave worked.
2. Iwish to add thatldo not believe the staffhas disregarded my
recommendations out ofmalice toward Manning. The Marine Corps, including
Ouantico, has hadamiserable time with the problem of suicide recently. lam
certain, from their point of view,the best way to avoidatragedy is to watcha
situation very closely and take action quickly, fthas been difficuh to help them
see that good intentions can have unintended consequences(e.g.,making the
detainee more anxious and causing occasional agitation).
Ot^cstionE.Withrespectto PFC Bradley Manning,isbeingheld under
Maximum Custody and eitherSuicideRisl^ or I^reventionofln^uryStatus
since31 July 2010detrimentalto his mentalorphysicalhealth7 Why orwhy
not7
1. Ibelievethat(at the timellast saw him)Suicide precautions and POI were
excessive and were making Manning unnecessarily anxious. This could be
detrimental to his mental health. Iwas concerned about his physical health until
they started to give him more time to exercise. Since Max status is nota
psychiatric classification,Idid not makearecommendation regarding it except to
say that it easily(asasecondary effect of checking on him everyl5minutes)met
his psychiatric safety needs at the time.
OuestionF. With respect to PFC Bradley Manning, have you seen or
documented any behaviortosuggestthatheisarisl^to harm othersor
himself,adisruptive detainee, or otherwise noncompliant with O^^^fi^^ Brig
rules and procedures^
l.Notsincelmethim. Given the report from I^uwait,Ihad expected more
difficulty.
OuestlonG. Without violating any patient-client confidentiality,can you
address the events ofl^January2010and2March 2011 which the Oti^^^fi^o

13

23467

United StatesvPFC BradleyFManning
Defense Article 13Motion

Brig has used to further restrict PFC Bradley Mannlng^s confinement
conditions^
1. Iflremembercorrectly,there had been some kind of disagreement between
Manning and the staff andlwas called urgently to come over at the end ofthe
work day in order to see Manning. Iremember beingabit annoyed becauselhad
to report to Lejeune in less than 4^ hours. Icame over and it appeared that the
staff was gearing up(and suiting up)foracell extraction.^ Iwas able to defuse
the situation, but frankly cannot remember what the disturbance was about. 1
remember it did not seem to be anything terribly serious, but my memory fails
otherwise. CAPT Moorejoined me halfway through this experience and may
haveabetter recollection. By2March,lwasinAfghanistan.
^^^Attachment7.

A"cell extraction" isaterm used in correctional facilities to describe the process of forcible removal of an inmate
trom his cell. The website http:^^celle^traclions.com^ describes whata"cell extraction" entails:
The use offbrce is inherent in the very nature ofinvoluntary confinement. In prisons.^^he responsible
deploymentofforce is notonlyjustifiableonmany occasions, butabsolutelynecessarytomaintainthe
security ofthe institution." The need to use force inaprison may sometimes include the forcible
removal of an inmate trom bis cell,calleda"cell extraction."
^ell extractions are security measures, not disciplinary mechanisms. In well-managed correctional
systems, they are used only in response to an imminent and serious risk to the safety and security ofan
individual or of the institution. In such prisons, officers know cell extractions are rarely needed; in
some prisons, however, the institutional culture permits cell extractions simply to show inmates
"who'sin charge" or to retaliate against defiant inmates, even if there is no real emergency.
whenthe decision has been made that an inmate cannot be allowed to remain in his cell,properly
trained staff will make every effort to avoidaforced cell extraction. Officers will talk with the inmate.
Indeed,it may be necessary for corrections staff to talk to an inmate tbraprolonged period and then
allow the inmatea"cooling down" period to increase chances that forcible extraction will not be
necessary, t^ounselors or mental health staffmay be brought in to talk to the inmate. If verbal efforts
fail,in many facilities pepper spray is used to overcome the inmate'sresistance.
If officials decide to go ahead withatbrcible cell extraction, the increasingly prevalent practice is to
useateam of four to si^ specially trained correctional olficers. They wear protective equipment that
typically includes major torso padding, l^evlar sleeves, big blacl^gauntlets.ahelmet.aface plate, and
agroin guard. The team lines up in tront ofthe cell,and the officers ask the inmate one more time
whether he is willing to "cuff up"—submit to restraint and leave the cell. Ifthe inmate continues his
resistance, the team enters the cell. Often,the first member of the team to enter the cell carriesalarge
convex l^le^iglas shield orastunshield(ashield equipped with an electric current which stuns the
inmate on contact^with which he pins the inmate against the wall. The other members ofthe team
then gain control of and place restraints on the inmate'sarms and legs. In most cases.awell trained
cell extraction team is able to secure the removal of evenaviolent prisoner with minimal or no harm to
him or staff.

14

23468

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

22. O n l 4 April 2010, Capt. Hocter filedasupplemental affidavit, in response toarequest for
clarification and amplification ofcertain points from Defense counsel:
OuestionA. Do you mal^e recommendations to theO^^^fi^o Brig concerning
whetheradetainee is placed on either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention of Injury
Status7
Imake recommendation about suicide precautions,POI,and occasionally steps
that Brig might take to betteradetainee'scondition or deportment(more time to
exercise, give himajob, help him with the legal work on financial problem, let
him talk to his wife or girlfriend more often, please make sureachaplain sees
him). The Brig takes these under advisement and sometimes follows them,
usually not. In Manning'scase,Irequested, in addition to removal of
precautions, more time to exercise. After quite some time, and numerous requests
(it became almost comical), this was granted.
O^cstionB. In your experience, does the Ot^^^fi^o Brig follow your
recommendation concerning either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention of Injury
Status^
The Brig frequently ignores or delays my recommendation regarding precautions,
including suicide precautions. This differs from any ofthe previousjails, brigs, or
prisons in whichlhave worked, military or civilian. This occurred even before
the suicide ofadetainee in January2010. Prior to the Manning case, this, among
other issues, had make working at the Brig so frustrating thatlasked to be
relieved ofthese duties. This was not permitted. lhave struggled to make the
best ofasituation that was not professionally pleasing. The addition offorensic
psychiatry fellows to the milieu(for me to teach) has been invigorating and lifted
my morale.
OuestionC. Have you madeanyrecommendationconcernmgPFC Bradley
Manning^s custody and classification status^ I f so, what were your
recommendations^
Nothing ftirther.
Ot^estionD. Have your recommendations been followed by the Ot^^^fi^^
Brig7 I f not,have you been given any reason fortheO^^^fi^o Brigs
decision notto followyourrecommendations7
Neither the Brig Commander nor the Security Battalion Commander gave me any
reasons for maintaining the POI precautions other than his safety. The Security
Battalion Commander intimated that he was receiving instructions fromahigher
authority on the matter but did not say from whom. Iknow that the higher base

15

23469

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

authorities hadafrequent(sometimes weekly) meeting to discuss Manning, for
whichlsupplied my CO withastatus report^nothing that Manning had told me,
mind you, but his condition and my recommendations, particularly to remove
conditionslfeh were unnecessary. Idid not attend these meetings, mainly to
protect Manning'sconfidentiality against inadvertent slips. On one occasion,
concem was relayed to me about the odd behaviors seen in the cell mentioned in
my previous affidavit. Ireportedthatlwas not worried about the sleep walking
and the dancing.
Ido not recallameeting with the Base Commander(CoI.Choike). ThemeetingI
recall was with the Security BNCO,whosenameIdo not recall. He indicated
that Manning would remain in current status (POI) unless and until he received
instructions from higher authority(unnamed). Idonotrecall him saying he
would be kept that way until his legal process was complete, but the impression
he left was not to expect any changes in the near future. Icannotrecalladirect
quote.
O^estionE. With respect to PFC Bradley Manning, is being held under
Maximum Custody and eitherSuicideRisl^ or Prevention ofln^uryStatus
since31 July 2010detrimental to his mental orphysicalhealth7 Why orwhy
not7
PFC Manning, according to his records from l^uwait,exhibitedadisturbing level
of mental instability,including suicidal behaviors. Thankfully,he was doing
much better during his time with me. Inappropriate use ofPOI and other
precautions can resuhinaloss of privacy and dignity that can worsen someone's
condition. This could occur in Manning'scase and lead to regression and
additional suicidal behaviors. Whether the precautions are inappropriate now,I
leave to the current treating psychiatrist.
OuestionF.Withrespectto PFC Bradley Manning,have you seen or
documented any behavior to suggest that he isarisl^ to harm others or
himself,adisruptive detainee, or otherwise noncompliant with O^^^fi^^ Brig
rules and procedures^
Given the amount ofscrutiny he received from the Brig, and the seriousness ofhis
charges,lhad expected him to have many more problems, lhad initially
suspected that we would see regression and perhaps some suicidal behaviors. He
held up remarkably well. He was generallyawell behaved detainee.
Ot^cstionG. Without violating any patient-client confidentiality,can you
address the events ofl^January2010and2March 2011 which the O^^^fi^o
Brighasused to furtherrestrictPFC Bradley Manningsconfinement
conditions^

16

23470

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

Ithink that Manning was beginning to chafe at the conditions ofhis incarceration
(including POI) among other things, butlreally don't remember the specifics. As
you recall,Iwas due in Camp Lejeune in less than2days to begin training for
deployment, still had some last minute packing to do, and needed to say good bye
to my large family. Inshort,lhadalotonmymind. Ireally don't recall the
specifics. Ido recall having the thought, aslwas sitting in the Brig talking to
Manning that the whole situation could have been avoided.
Attachments.
23. COL Malone also provided an affidavit to the same effect:
1, COL Ricky Malone, the undersigned, do hereby certify and swear that the
following is true;
lam an active duty member ofthe Flnited States Army, lhave over ten years of
experience asaforensic psychiatrist. My current duty position is Chief, Walter
Reed Forensic Psychiatry Service, andlam the Forensic Psychiatry Consulting to
theU.S.Army Surgeon General. In my duty position,lam responsible for
overseeing the professional services and training activities for eight forensic
psychiatrists and psychologists.
OuestionA. Do you mal^e recommendations to the Ot^^^fi^^ Brig concerning
whetheradetaineeis placed on eitherSuicideRisI^ or Prevention o f l n j u r y
Status7
1. his my understanding that the Brig staffis authorized to initiateaSuicide
Watch, but it requests concurrence by the psychiatrist to maintain it. Prevention
oflnjury,however, is treated asacustodial status to be determined by the Brig
andldo not makearecommendation on the ultimate issue. Iconducta
behavioral risk assessment to estimate the risk ofharm to selfor others (low,
moderate, or high), based on static risk factors, modifiable risk factors, and
protective factors, and provide that input to the Brig.
OuestionB.Inyourexperlence,doestheOt^^^fi^oBrigfollowyour
recommendation concerning either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention o f l n j u r y
Status7
1.They initiate more precautions thanlwould fiomapsychiatric perspective.
Were he not in custody,at this point he would be appropriate for routine
outpatient care.

17

23471

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

Ot^estionC. Have you made any recommendation concerning PFC Bradley
Manning^s custody and classification status^ If so, what were your
recommendations^
1. No. lhave stated that there is no psychiatric reason for him to be segregated
from the general population, realizing that would only be one consideration.
Ot^cstionD. Have your recommendations been followed by the O^^^fi^o
Brig^ I f not, have you been given any reason for the O^^^fi^oBrig^s
decisionnottofollowyourrecommendations7
1. They have expressed concerns about his demeanor with no medical personnel
are there, describing him as more withdrawn and reading less.
OuestionF.Withrespectto PFC Bradley Manning,isbeingheld under
MaximumCustodyandeitherSuicideRisl^or Prevention ofln^uryStatus
since31 July 2010detrimentalto his mentalorphysicalhealth7 Why orwhy
not7
1. It has long been known that restriction ofenvironmental and social stimulation
hasanegativeeffecton mental functioning. Nevertheless, PFC Manning has
been able to adapt somewhat and his anxiety disorder is currently in remission,
significantly reducing his risk of selfharm.
OuestionF.Withrespectto PFC Bradley Manning,haveyouseen or
documented any behavior to suggest that he isarisl^ to harm others or
himself,adisruptive detainee, or otherwise noncompliant with O^^^fi^o Brig
rules and procedures^
1. Whenlfirst saw him in August 2010Iconsidered him to be at moderate to
high risk of selfharm. However, that has changed over the months andlhave not
had any further concerns, lhave never heard ofhim being disruptive, but he does
make provocative comments to the staff as part ofhis intellectualization(e.g.2
March20Il).
OuestionG.Withoutviolatinganypatientclientconfidentiality,canyou
address the events ofl^January20100and2March 2011 which the
Ouantico Brig has used to further restrict PFC Bradley Manning s
confinement conditions^
1. On2March2011 PFC Manning madeacomment(outoffiustration when he
described it to me), basically ridiculing the POI precautions because ifhe really
wanted to kill himselfhe could use his fiipfiops or underwear waistband. The

1^

23472

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

Brig stafftook this as evidence that he was at least thinking about it and removed
them.
^^^Attachment9.
24. Thus, as is clear, Capt. Hocter and COL Malone recommended for eight months that PFC
Manning be removed from POI. O^^^tico officials chose time and again to ignore these
recommendations.
E.

PFC Manning WasaModelDetaineeDuringhisTimeatO^^^fico

25. Although the Brig psychiatrists generally did not make any additional recommendations
regarding MAX to MDl,the observation notes ofPFC Manning during this time demonstrate
that PFC Manning was consistently consideredamodel detainee. .^^^Attachment5.
a)

3August2010Fntry:"SND^PFC Bradley Manning] did not receive any
disciplinary reports or adverse spot evaluations and received an average
work and training report." The entry also notes,"SNDs conduct has
been average and has presented no problems to staff or inmates. During
the interview SND was respectful and courteous and was well spoken.
SND stated that he was doing well and was not having suicidal or
homicidal feelings."

b)

12August2010Entry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports or
adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry also notes,"SND stated that he would likeajob in
the facility library i f i t became possible. Tothis point in confinement
SND'sconduct has been average and has presented no problems to staff
or inmates. During the interview SND was quiet, but courteous and
respectful. SND answers questions but speaks very little unless
responding toaquestion. Currently SND appears to be trying to adjust
to the daily routine and observing what is going on around him. During
the interview SND was well spoken, neat in appearance and maintained
eye contact. SND stated that he does not have any suicidal feelings at
this time."

c)

16August2010Entry; "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychologist
and found not to beathreat to himself his recommended that SND be
removed from SR, and be placed on P01(sic)remain MAX custody."

d)

17 August 2010Entry;"The Brig Psychiatrist found SNDto bea
reduced threat to himself on6August2010."

19

23473

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

e)

24 August 2010Entry; "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports or
adverse spot evaluation and received an average work and training
report." The entry also notes "^t]o this point in confinement, SND has
presented no problems and has been courteous and respectful to staff
SND'sconduct has been excellent, so much so that is it apparent that he
is extremely cautious about what he says or how he acts. During the
interview SND was well spoken, groomed and neat in appearance."

f)

27August2010Entry: "SND has not presented any problems since his
last review on 20 August 2010and has been an overall average
detainee."

g)

31 August 2010Fntry: "SNDdid not receive any disciplinary reports or
adverse spot evaluations and received an above average work and
training report." The entry also notes "SND was evaluated by the Brig
Psychiatrist on 27August and was recommended to be removed from
POI status. The C^A Board reviewed SND on the same date and
recommended that he still remain POI. SND remains courteous and
respectful to staffand has presented no problems toward staff or inmates
thus far. During the interview SND was well spoken, groomed and neat
in appearance."

h)

3September2010Fntry: "SND has not presented any problems since
his last review on 27August2010and has been an overall average
detainee."

i)

^September 2010Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry also notes,"SND was evaluated by the Brig
Psychiatrist on3September and was recommended to be removed from
POI status." Additionally it states,"SND continues to be cooperative
with Brig staffand has presented no disciplinary problems. During the
interview SND was well spoken and neat in appearance. SND'smood
and appearance were consistent with his normal character and he
continues to state that he is not suicidal."

j)

10September2010Entry: "SND has not presented any problems since
his last review on3SFPT2010and has been an overall average
detainee."

k)

14September2010Entry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary
reports or adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and
training report." The entry also notes,"SND was evaluated by the Brig
Psychiatrist onlOSeptember and was recommended to be removed

20

23474

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

from POI status." Finally,the entry notes,"SND has been cooperative
with Brig staffand has presented no disciplinary or behavioral problems.
When observed in his cell, SND is always sitting quietly on his rack and
appears to be content with doing nothing else. During the interview
SND was well spoken and neat in appearance. SND'smood and
appearance were consistent with his normal character and he continues
to state that he is not suicidal."
I)

2^ September 2010Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary
reports or adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and
training report." The entry also notes,"SND was evaluated by the Brig
Psychiatrist on24September and was recommended to be removed
from POI status. Later, the entry notes,"SND continues to be
cooperative with Brig staffand has presented no disciplinary or
behavioral problems. During the interview SND was well spoken and
neat in appearance. SND'smood and appearance were consistent with
his normal character and he continues to state that he is not suicidal."

m)

4October2010Fntry: "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist on
24Sep2010and recommended to be removed from POI. SND has not
presented any problems since his last review and has been an overall
average detainee."

n)

6October2010Fntry: "SNDdid not receive any disciplinary reports or
adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry notes,"SND appears to be content with his situation
and goes through the motions ofthe Brig'splan ofthe day without
incident. SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist onlOctober and
was recommended to be removed from POI status." The entry also
notes,"SND continues to be cooperative with Brig staff and has
presented no disciplinary or behavioral problems. During the interview
SND was respectful, neat in appearance and maintained eye contact.
SND'smood and appearance were consistent with his normal character
and he continues to state that he is not suicidal."

o)

12October2010Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an above average work and
training report."

p)

14October2010Fntry: "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist on
(no date givenjand recommended to be removed from POI. SND has
not presented any problems since his last review..." The entry also
notes "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports or adverse spot
evaluations and received an above average work and training report."

21

23475

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

q)

22 October 2010Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an above average work and
training report." The entry notes,"SNDwas evaluated by the Brig
Psychiatrist this past week and found fit from(sic)removal of
prevention ofinjury classification fiomapsychiatric standpoint." The
entry also notes,"SND was respectful and courteous and well spoken.
SND'sattitude and demeanor were consistent with his normal character
and he continues to state that he is not suicidal."

r)

2^ October 2010Fntry: "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist on
I5October2010and recommended to be removed from POI. SND has
not presented any problems since his last review onlOctober 2010and
has been an overall average detainee." Another entry on this date notes
that "SND was evaluated bythe Brig Psychiatrist on 22 October 2010
and recommended to be removed fiom POI. SND has not presented any
problems since his last review on 150ctober and has been an overall
average detainee."

s)

2November2010Entry: "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist
on 29 October 2010and recommended to be removed from POI. SND
has not presented any problems since his last review on 22 October 2010
and has been an overall average detainee."

t)

5November2010Entry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry also notes,"SND was evaluated by the Brig
Psychiatrist on 29 October 2010and found fit to be removed from
prevention ofinjury classification fiomapsychiatric standpoint."
Finally,the entry notes,"During the interview SND was respectful and
courteous and was well spoken. SND appears to be in high spirits and
haveapositive attitude. SND'sattitude and demeanor were consistent
with his normal character and he continues to state that he is not
suicidal."

u)

15November2010Fntry; "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist
onl3November2010and recommended to ...^be removed from] POI.
SND has not presented any problems since his last review on5NOV
2010and has been an overall average detainee."

v)

17November2010Fntry; "SND did not receive any disciplinary
reports or adverse spot evaluations and received an above average work
and training report." The entry also noted that "during the interview
SND was respectful and courteous and was well spoken. SND'sattitude

22

23476

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

and demeanor were consistent with his normal character and stated that
he is not suicidal."
w)

23 November 2010Fntry: "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist
onl9November2010and recommended to be removed from POI.
SND has not presented any problems since his last review."

x)

3December2010Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report."

y)

6December2010Entry; "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist
on2December2010and recommended to be removed from POI. SND
has not presented any problems since his last review on^no date given]
and has been an overall average detainee."

z)

7December2010Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an above average work and
training report." The entry also noted,"^d]uring the interview SND was
courteous and well spoken and he maintained good eye contact. SND's
mood and character were consistent with his normal character."

aa)

14December2010Fntry; "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist
onlODecember2010and recommended to remain on POI.(The Brig
noted that this was the first time since 27August2010that Capt. Hocter
recommended PFC Manning remain on POI. His main criteria was that
it seemed PFC Manning was not doing well). SND has not presented
any problems since his last review and has been an overall average
detainee."

bb)

17December2010Fntry: "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist
onl7December2010and recommended to be removed from POI. SND
has not presented any problems since his last review and has been an
overall average detainee."

cc)

22 December 2010Entry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an above average work and
training report." The entry also notes,"overall,SND was respectful and
cooperative during the interview."

dd)

29 December 2010Entry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry also stated,"SND was evaluated by Capt. Hocter on
23 December 2010, and although further mental evaluation was deemed

23

23477

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

necessary,SND was recommended to be removed from POI
classification fiomapsychiatric standpoint."
ee)

6January2011Fntry; "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist on
30 December 2010and recommended to be removed from POI. SND
has not presented any problems since last review and has been an overall
average detainee."

ff)

7January2011Entry; "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist on
7January2011and recommended to be removed from POI. SND has
not presented any problems since his last review and has been an overall
average detainee." The entry also notes that "SND did not receive any
disciplinary reports or adverse spot evaluations and received an average
work and training report." Finally,the entry notes that PFC Manning "is
respectful and courteous to staff During the interview SND was well
spoken, maintained eye contact and his demeanor was consistent with
his normal character.

gg)

11 January 2011 Entry; "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports or
spot evaluations and received an above average working and training
report."

hh)

14January2011 Entry: "SND was evaluated by the Brig Psychiatrist on
14January2010and recommended to be removed from POI. SND has
not presented any problems since his last review and has been an overall
average detainee."

ii)

l^January2011 Fntry; This is the first entry where any negative
conduct is noted. This conduct is explained below.

jj)

2^ January 2011 Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and receive(d) an average work and training
report." The entry also notes,"SND was evaluated by Col Malone on21
January 2011and, although further mental evaluation was deemed
necessary,SND was recommended to be removed from POI
classification fiomapsychiatric standpoint."

kk) 2February2011Entry; "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports or
adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry also notes,"SND was well spoken, respectful and
maintained eye contact."
11)

7February2011 Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports or
adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training

24

23478

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

report." Theentryalsonotes,"...SNDwaswell spoken, respectful and
maintained eye contact."
mm)17February2011Entry; "SND has not presented any problems since his
last review and has been an overall average detainee."
nn)

25 February 2011Fntry: "SNDdid not receive any disciplinary reports
or adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry also notes,"...SND was well spoken, respectful and
maintained eye contact."

oo)

2March2011Entry; "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports or
adverse spot evaluations and received an average work and training
report." The entry also notes,"...SND was well spoken, respectful and
maintained eye contact."

pp)

9March2011Fntry; The entry notes that "SND was counseled on2
March 2011by the Brig supervisor for disobedience." This incident is
discussed further below.

qq)

llMarch2011 Fntry; "SND has not presented any problems since his
last review and has been an overall average detainee."

rr)

l^March2011 Fntry: "SND has not presented any problems since his
last review and has been an overall average detainee."

ss)

25 March 2011 Entry; "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports but
did receive one adverse spot evaluation onl6March2011for interfering
with the application ofhand restraints and restraint belt." The entry also
notes "he was respectful and courteous..."

tt)

30 March 2011 Fntry: "SND did not receive any disciplinary reports to
adverse spot evaluations, and received an average work and training
report."

uu)

5April2011 Fntry: "SND has not presented any problems since his last
review and has been an overall average detainee."

vv)

7April2011 Fntry; "SNDdid not receive any disciplinary reports or
spot evaluations, and received an average work and training report."

ww) 11 April 2011 Fntry; "SND has not presented any problems since his
last review and has been an overall average detainee."

25

23479

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

xx)

15 April 2011Entry: "SND has not presented any problems since his
last review and has been an overall average detainee."

Despite beingamodel detainee, and despite the doctors'recommendations, PFC Manning was
kept in MAX custody and under POI for the entirety ofhis time at O^^^fico,atotalof265 days.
F.

The Classification and Assignment(C^A) Board Review of PFC Manning^s
Confinement Status

26 UnderSECNAVINST16409C,aClassificationandAssignment(C^A)Board is required
to be established and is responsible for making recommendations to the PCF Commander
conceming the classification and assignment of detainees. Lnder the regulation, an objective
based classification system is required. The purpose ofthe custody classification is to establish
the degree ofsupervision needed for the control ofan individual detainee. ^^^Aftachment3.
27. The regulation recognizes that among detainees there are wide variations in personality and
mentality. Some detainees are deliberately uncooperative. These detainees are chronic sources
oftrouble and may either be highly aggressive or acutely depressed. These types of detainees
are identified under the regulation as being appropriately held in MAX. Detainees in MAX are
those detainees "requiring special custodial supervision because ofthe high probability of
escape, are potentially dangerous or violent, and whose escape would cause concern ofathreat
to life, property,or national security.".^^ SFCNAV1NST16409C also cautions that "^ujltra
conservative custody classification results inawaste of prisoner and staff manpower."
2^. Classification decisions are supposed to follow "established, but fiexible, procedures." The
regulation notes that classifications involving MAX or MDl include the following factors:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
1.

Assaultive behavior.
Disruptive behavior.
Serious drug abuse.
Serious civil^military criminal record(convicted or alleged).
Low tolerance of frustration.
Intensive acting out or dislike ofthe military.
History ofprevious escape(s).
Pending civil charges^detainer filed.
Servingasentence which the individual considers to be unjust or severe,
Poor home conditions or family relationships.
Amental evaluation indicating serious neurosis or psychosis.
Indication of unwillingness to accept responsibility for personal actions past and
present.
m. Demonstrated pattem of poorjudgment.
n. Length, or potential length, of sentence.

26

23480

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

Although these factors apply equallyto the determination o f M A X or MDl, the regulation notes
that MDl detainees are those that "are not regarded as dangerous or violent."
The regulation
also cautions that "^o]rdinarly,onlyasmall percentage of prisoners shall be classified as MAX."

29. In spite ofthe F^O notes indicating PFC Manning wasa"polite, courteous, and respectful
detainee" who did not receive any disciplinary or adverse spot reports, and the repeated
recommendations by the Brig psychiatrists that PFC Manning was notarisk of selfharm or of
harm to others and should be removed from POI, the C^A Board consistently recommended that
PFC Manning remain in MAX and POF ^^^Attachments5and6. The recommendation ofthe
C^A Board was always approved by the PCF Commander.
30. Although the C^A Board apparently met onaweekly basis, it failed to document its
recommendations on the required Brig Form 4200 for over five months.
Attachment 6. The
Brig filled outaForm 4200 on 29 July 2010to document PFC Manning'sinitial intake, hdid
not fill out another form until3January 2011.
Notably,this was around the same time
period that O^^titico Brig began to come under outside scrutiny.
31. Week after week, month after month, the C^A Board unanimously recommended that the
PCF Commander retain PFC Manning in MAX and on POI. The PCF commander always
followed this recommendation.
G.

PFCManningIsPutOnSuicideRisl^Statusonl^January2011and2March2011

32. On two separate occasions, the PCF Commander elected to increase the special handling
instructions on PFC Manning. The first occurred onl^January 2011. On that date, CW04
Averhart, over the recommendation ofCapt. Hocter and the defense forensic psychiatrist, Capt.
Moore, placed PFC Manning under Suicide Risk. The Suicide Risk designation resulted in PFC
Manning being required to remain in his cell for 24hoursaday. PFC Manning was stripped of
all clothing with the exception ofhis underwear. PFC Manning'sprescription eyeglasses were
taken away from him and he was forced to sit in his cell in essential blindness. Aguardwas
placed, sitting inachair, immediately outside ofPFC Manning'scell. At night, PFC Manning
was forced to surrender his underwear and sleep naked. PFC Manning remained on Suicide Risk
until21January2011when he was then downgraded back to POI. ^^^Attachments4,5,6.
33. The events that led to PFC Manning being placed in Suicide Risk began when he was pulled
out ofhis cell onl^January2011for his recreation call. When the guards came to PFC
Manning'scell,PFC Manning noticedachange in their usual demeanor. Instead ofbeing calm
and respectful,they seemed agitated and confrontational. Also, instead ofthe usual two to three
guards, there were four guards. Almost immediately,the guards started harassing PFC Manning.
The first guard told PFC Manning to "turn left." When he complied, the second guard yelled,
"don't tum left." When PFC Manning attempted to comply with the demands ofthe second
guard, he was told by the first,"l said turn left." PFC Manning responded,"yes. Corporal" to the
first guard. Atthis point, the third guard chimed in by telling PFC Manning that "in the Marine

27

23481

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

Corps we reply with'aye'and not'yes.'" He then asked PFC Manning ifhe understood. PFC
Manning made the mistake ofreplying "yes. Sergeant." At this point the forth guard yelled,
"you mean'aye,'Sergeant."^
34. The harassment by the guards continued as PFC Manning was escorted to his one hour of
recreation. When PFC Manning arrived at the recreation room, he was told to stand still so the
guards could remove his leg restraints. As PFC Manning stood still,one ofthe guards yelled,"!
told you to stand still." PFC Manning replied,"yes Corporal,lam standing still." Another
guard then said,"you mean'aye'Corporal." Next, the same guard said "1 thought we covered
this, you say'aye'and not'yes,'do you understands" PFC Manning responded,"aye Sergeant."
Right after PFC Manning replied, he was once again yelled at to "stand still." Due to being
yelled at and the intensity of the guards, PFC Manning mistakenly replied,"yesCorporal,lam
standing still." As soon as PFC Manning uttered his response he attempted to correct himselfby
saying"aye" insteadof"yes,"butitwastoo late Oneoftheguardsstartingyellingat PFC
Manning again,"what don't you understand" and "are we going to haveaproblem"^"^
35. Once the leg restraints were taken off ofPFC Manning, he tookastep back from the guards.
PFC Manning'sheart was pounding in his chest, and he could feel himself gefting dizzy. Capt.
Hocter determined that this event was likely an anxiety attack due to the situation. After his
restraints were removed, PFC Manning sat down to avoid falling. When he did this, the guards
tookastep towards him. PFC Manning instinctively backed away from the guards. As soon as
PFC Manning backed away, the guards walked toward him as ifto prepare to restrain PFC
Manning. PFC Manning immediately put his hands up in the air, and said " I am not doing
anything,lam just trying to follow your orders." The guards then told PFC Manning to start
walking. PFC Manning complied with their order by saying "aye" instead of'yes."
36. PFC Manning was allowed to complete his hour of recreation. During the hour, the guards
did not harass PFC Manning further. The guards also did not harass PFC Manning when he was
escorted back to his cell. Only later did PFC Manning learn that there had beenaprotest outside
the gates ofO^^titico the previous day. The rally was intended to bring attention to the
conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement and had caused disruption at the main gate to
Otiantico.
37. After being retumed to his cell,PFC Manning started to readabook. About 30 minutes
later, CW04Averhartcameto PFC Manning'scell. He asked PFC Manning what had happened
during his recreation call. As PFC Manning tried to explain to him what had occurred and to
convey fiustration with the continued conditions ofhis confinement, CW04Averhart stopped
•* LCPL Tankersley states, "I told [PFC Manning] to face the door. [PFC Manning] faced the door without
responding. I informed [PFC Manning] that whenever a guard gives him an order, he is to respond in the correct
manner (aye, aye, rank of person). [PFC Manning] then said he doesn't understand. CM2 Webb, the DBS, tried to
inform [PFC Manning] that when a guard gives him an order, he needs to respond in the correct way." See
Attachment 24.
' The situation with the "aye" vs. "yes" is corroborated in GM2 Webb, LCPL Tanskersly, and LCPL Cline's account
of the incident. See Attachment 24.

28

23482

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

PFC Manning and said " I am the commander" and "no one will tell me what to do." CW04
Averhart also said that he was, for all practical purposes,"God." PFC Manning responded by
saying,"you still have to follow Brig procedures." PFC Manning also said,"everyonehasaboss
that they have to answer to." As soon as PFC Manning said this, CW04Averhart ordered that
PFC Manning be placed in Suicide Risk. After being ordered into Suicide Risk, PFC Manning
became upset. Out offrustration, PFC Manning placed his hands to his head and clenched his
hair with his fingers. PFC Manning then yelled,"why are you doing this to me7" He also
yelled,"whyamlbeingpunished7" PFC Manning then asked CW04Averhart "what havel
done to deserve this type oftreatment7"
3^. CW04Averhart did not answer any ofPFCManning'squestions. Instead, CW04Averhart
instructed PFC Manning to surrender all ofhis clothing. At first PFC Manning tried to reason
with CW04Averhart by telling him that he had beenamodel detainee and by asking him to just
tell PFC Manning what he wanted him to do and that he would do i f Eventually, CW04
Averhart left and instructed Master Sergeant (MSGT) Brian R. Papakie to take over. MSGT
Papakie ordered PFC Manning to take offhis clothes. PFC Manning complied with the order
and took offhis clothes.
39. The following conversation then took place, first between PFC Manning and MSGT
Papakie, and then between PFC Manning and CunnerySergeant(CSYGT) Craig Blenis:
MSGT Papakie:lknow what you're getting at, ok7 I'm telling you that we're not
outside the rules and regulations ofanything that we're doing.
We're
not. Solneed your clothes.
PFC Manning:That'sfine,sir.^Manning strips to his underwear.The rest of the
conversation takes place with PFC Manning in his underwear].
MSGT Papakie: Skivvies say on7
Otherguard;yes.... leave those on.
MSGT Papakie: We're going to get someone over here to talk to you. ...You
have one mattress, right7 You have the one suicide blanket, rights
PFCManning:Yes.Yes,sir.
MSGT Papakie; Shower shoes are fine. Let'sget the doc over here. Doc Hocter.
Sitdownandseewhat'sgoingon. Alright7 Ineed you calm right now,alright7
The escalation in your demeanor, alright,weighs us on the side of caution. Do
you understand that7
PFC Manning;Yes, MSGT.

29

23483

United Statesv.PFC BradleyFManning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

MSCT Papakie; The best way to explain that to you is you had an outburst. You
were moving around. You almost punchedawall. You're kind ofthrowing
yourselfaroundinthecell. Tomake sure you don't hurt yourself we're putting
you onasuicide risk status. We're upgrading your status.
PFC Manning: But I'mnotasuicide risk.
MSGT Papakie; That'snot for me to decide. lhave to make sure, the brig officer
has to make sure, that you're taken care of
PFC Manning: lunderstandMSGT.
MSGT Papakie: In the manner that you're not going to hurt yourself Right now,
Idon't know that. With the displaylsaw right now,l'mnot comfortable with.
He'snot comfortable with. Flntil we get something otherwise, this is how it's
going to be.
PFC Manning; Why waslon, why waslon prevention of status for almost6
months^
MSCT Papakie; ^chuckles to himself]Iknow this is no secret to you...lhave
plenty of documentation. Plenty ofdocumentation based on things that you've
said, things that you've done. Actions^Ihave to make sure,we have to make
sure, that you're taken care of
PFC Manning;Yes, MSGT
MSGT Papakie: Things that you've said and things that you've done don't steer
us on the side of"ok,well,he canjustbeanormal detainee." They make us stay
on the side of caution.
PFC Manning; But what about recommendations by the psychiatrist to remove
meoffthestatus7
MSGT Papakie; Who'shere every day7 Who'shere everyday"^ Weare. Who
sees you everyday"^ That'sallheis,isarecommendation. Wehave, by law,
rules and regulations set forth to make sure fromajail standpoint that Bradley
Manning does not hurt himself Maybe fiomapsychiatric standpoint, the
recommendation he'sgiven,Igetit,lgot it, understand, 01^7 But he'snot the
only decision maker. Amental health specialist is not the only decision that gets
made.
PFC Manning: lunderstand that, sir.

30

23484

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

MSGT Papakie: However...
^MSGT Papakie leavesand GYSGT Blenis enters] ^inaudible]
PFC Manning; Igot dizzy...
GYSGT Blenis: Wasn'tdehydration7
PFC Manning: No,lwas anxious becauseldidn't know why the guards were so
edgy. ...Theyraisedtheirvoice...AndIdidn't...Iwas getting anxious
because they were getting anxious. Solwas trying to figure out what was the
cause ofthem getting anxious. It seemed to me that they were looking for
something wrong...
GYSCT Blenis; Something wrong as inarules violation, or something wrong as
in...
PFCManning:Yes.
GYSGT Blenis:Rulesviolation7
PFC Manning: Yes, sir. Because I've been here foralong time, so everything
becomes automatic. Soldon't know iflsay something and they respond. Idon't
know what happened. I've been in, inside so long Idon't remember the last
timelwas outside.

^Portions ofthe rest ofthe dialogue between Blenis and PFC Manning are
inaudible]
GYSGT Blenis; So, let'sgo back to when you fell down. Did you fall down or
didyousitdown7 0 r . . .
PFC Manning: Ah, it was mixed. Imean,Iwas getting lightheaded becausel
was hyperventilating. So,Iwas trying to stand up. Iwas trying to keep from
falling becauselwas worried that iflfell,then everybody would panic and that
would make matters worse. So,ltried to stand up andlended up falling...

GYSGT Blenis: Take me fiom end of rec hall to...where we are now...
PFC Manning; Ok, yes,Istarted,lgot in here and it was normal. Andtheni
started reading my book. Andthen,lwanttosayitwasMSGT^inaudible]that
was the first to show up. And then he came in and was asking me all these

31

23485

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

questions. Iwas, ah, trying to figure out how to word the answers without
causing any more anxiety. Iwas trying to figure out ways of not sounding, or not
being construed as...ways that things weren't going to be construed so that...
just trying to figure out ways in whichlcould tactfully say whatlwas trying to
say without violating any rules and regulation or raise any concem about...
GYSGT Blenis: Concern'salready raised...^inaudible]
PFC Manning; Yes, but I'm trying not, l'mtrying,l'mtrying to avoid the
concern, and it'sactually causing the concern. Imean, cause, I'mgetting...
every daythatpassesby,1'm getting increasinglyfrustrated,1'mnotgoingto lie
Because I'mtrying to do everything thatlcan^^^^^^^aconcern,thereforeI
appear as thoughlam causing more concem. O r l . . . O r it seems that I'm
causing more concern or everybody'slooking for something to cause concern. So
that'swhat frustrates me. ...Trying to work out the most politically correct way
of
GYSGT Blenis: ^largely inaudible] Fet'sgo back to today....The anxiety here,
today. That'snot the first time it'shappened since you've been in confinement.
As far aslknow,it is the first time it'shappened since you've been here...buta
similar situation...
PFC Manning: Iwasn't, in I^uwait,lhad no idea what was going on generally.
GYSGT Blenis; But,would you say it was similar situation7
PFC Manning: No, no. The situation that happened today was more of...you
know,l'm lucid and aware andjust trying to figure...It'sjustaquestion of
trying not to appear likelwas in I^uwait. Because that'smy main concem every
day,ishowdolgetoffofP01status7 HowdolgetoffofP01status7 When will
Ibe taken off ofP01status7 What is being used tojustify the precautions7 You
know...What concerns, you know,whatamldoingthat'sconcerning
^inaudible]7 So Fmconstantly trying to figure out, run through all of those
things. And trying to make sure I'm not doing anything...
GYSGT Blenis: ^inaudible]...As time goes on,we have less ofaconcern,ok7
PFC Manning: Yes, GYSGT. But the restrictions were still in place. Andlwas

GYSGT Blenis: Right. And we continually...Weunderstandit'snot normal that
we have someone in POI for this period oftime...
PFC Manning; Yes.

32

23486

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

GYSGT Blenis: lt'snot^normal]...lguess we'll just leave it at thaf So as we
go on, we're going to lessen your restrictions. They're still be restrictions in place
... ^inaudible] Butlwould have to disagree with you as far as what happened
today happened in I^uwait...anxiety attack...
PFC Manning: No,inI^uwait,lwasn'tlucid. lhad....^guard interrupts], hwas
likeadream...
GYSGT Blenis: But, they both ultimately ended up in you having an anxiety
attack...controlled fall,but...
PFC Manning: No,ldon't remember falling in l^uwait at all.
GYSGT Blenis; Well,lean tell you, that'swhat was reported to us...none of us
were there^refers again to PFC Manning'ssuicide status l^uwait]...Us, asa
facility,we have to always err on the side of caution, okay. And notjust the side
ofcaution, but over-caution. Especially when we're talking about suicide, okay7
Nobody'ssaying you're going to kill yourself, alright7 ^inaudible] But we always
have to be more cautious than that. But you're saying that'nobody else is on
suicide watch.' The thing is what happened in l^uwait,what happened today...
PFC Manning; Those are totally different. Iunderstand,Iunderstand,l
understand,where you're getting that ...from the documentation. 1mean,lquite,
Iknow wherelam. l k n o w l a m . . . I k n o w l a m at O^^titico base facility. I
know that I'matabrig. Imean,I'm lucid and aware of wherelam. I'mnot...
GYSGT Blenis: You asked ^MSGTjaquestion...about why you're on suicide
watch, I'mtrying to answer that question, okay7 Didlanswerthat7
PFC Manning: Uh

no. No,with context. Because the fact that...

GYSGT Blenis: ^inaudible] Did you understand that7
PFC Manning: Iwould have understood had...hadlnot been ... Iwouldhave
understood had...hadlnot been...Imean, I'mtrying to think ofhow to word
this proper...
GYSGT Blenis: Provoked7Provoked7
PFC Manning: Yes,alittle. Ifeel like the facility,honestly,Ifeel like the facility
is looking for reasons to keep me on POI status.
GYSGT Blenis: Inaudible lean tell you'no'...

33

23487

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

PFC Manning: Imean, at least not at the stafflevel,l'mthinking the CO^me,
myself, personally.
GYSGT Blenis: Inaudible...Fromalogistical standpoint, it'saburden on us....
PFC Manning: Yes, MSCT.
GYSGT Blenis: Nobody finds that asajoy. It'snotapunitivething,I
understand why someone would see it asapunitive thing because restrictions
placed ^inaudible] ...lean tell you that...since you have been here...IwishI
hadahundred Mannings...
PFC Manning: And that'swhat...And that'swhereldon't understand why the
continuation ofthe policy and restrictions beyond the time recommended by you
and the psychiatrist. Imean the psychiatrist, is saying. Imean, I've got my own
forensic psychiatrist that'ssaying now that the POI status is actually doing
psychiatric harm and not, you know,and it'sactually, you know,increasing my
chances, rather than decreasing...
GYSGT Blenis: Did you feel like that two weeks ago7
PFC Manning: What'sthat7
GYSGT Blenis; Did you feel like that two weeks ago7
PFC Manning:Yes GYSGT
GYSGT Blenis; Uh, two weeks ago,Iasked you, like, how you were feeling and
you said you were fine, do you remember that7
PFC Manning: Yes, andlstill feel fine. Imean,Ifeel,Ifeel fine, but at the same
time, I've been putting in, I've been putting in...
Attachment 25.
40. Laterthat day, Capt. Hocter and Capt. Moore arrived at the facility. Capt. Hocter and Capt.
Moore interviewed PFC Manning and assessed his mental state. They did not concur with
CW04Averhart'sdecision to place PFC Manning on Suicide Risk status. Both mental health
professionals believed PFC Manning was notasuicide risk. Out of an abundanceof caution,
Capt. Hocter recommended that PFC Manning be placed in24hour POI status. CW04Averhart
ignored this recommendation and kept PFC Manning on Suicide Risk status.
Attachments 2,
^^7,^

34

23488

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

41. In CW05 Abel Calaviz'sinvestigation ofthe conditions ofPFC'sManning'sconfinement,
he found that the failure to immediately take PFC Manning offofSuicide Risk status upon the
psychiatrist'srecommendation was in violation ofNavy rules:
It warrants mentioning, however, that on two occasions,6August2010andl^
January 2011,amedical officer determined that suicide risk status was no longer
warranted and the brig staffdid not immediately take PFC Manning off suicide
risk status. ...Paragraph 4205.5b of reference(a)states "When prisoners are no
longer consider to be suicide risks byamedical officer, they shall be returned to
appropriate quarters,"in these cases, once the medical officer'sevaluation was
provided to the brig staff, steps should have been taken to immediately remove
him from suicide risk, toastatus below that.
Attachment 22.
42. Col.DanielJ.Choike, the Commander ofMarine Corps.Base, Ott^^tico, balked that
Ott^^fico had done anything wrong by not removing PFC Manning from Suicide Risk upon the
recommendation ofamedical health provider, stating "there is no requirement...that requires
an immediate removal from suicide risk after the PCF mental health care provider or medical
officer recommends it."
Attachment]^. Tellingly,though, Col.Choike later changed the
Brig regulation such thatamedicalprovider'sopinion on terminating suicide risk status would
be binding on the Brig. ^^^Attachmentl9.
43. The second incident where the special handling instructions were increased occurred on2
March 2011. On that date, PFC Manning was informed by Col. Choike that no relief would be
granted with respect to PFC Manning'spreviouslyfiled Article 13^ Complaint. Understandably
frustrated by this decision after enduring(at that point)over seven months in unduly harsh
confinement conditions, PFC Manning asked the Brig Operations Supervisor, MSGT Papakie,
what he needed to do in order to be downgraded from MAX and POI. MSGT Papakie responded
by essentially telling PFC Manning that there was nothing he could do to downgrade his detainee
status and that the Brig simply considered himarisk of selfharm. Out offrustration, PFC
Manning responded that the POI restrictions were absurd. PFC Manning sarcastically told
MSGT Papakie that ifhe wanted to harm himself, he could conceivably do so with the elastic
waistband ofhis underwear or with his fiipfiops. MSGT Papakie did not indicate to PFC
Manning at that time that he was concerned about PFC Manning'scomment.
44. Later that same day,PFC Manning was approached byGYSGT Blenis. CYSGT Blenis
asked PFC Manning what he had done wrong. He told PFC Manning that the new PCF
Commander, CW02 Denise Barnes, had ordered PFC Manning to be stripped naked at night.
PFC Manning responded that he had not done anything wrong. PFC Manning told GYSGT
Blenis that he hadjust pointed out the absurdity ofhis current confinement conditions.
45. Without consulting any of the Brig'smental health providers, CW02 Barnes increased the
restrictions imposed upon PFC Manning under the pretense that PFC Manning wasasuicide

35

23489

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

risk.
Attachment 4. PFC Manning was not, however, placed underthe designation of
Suicide Risk. In order to keep PFC Manning in Suicide Risk, CW02 Barnes would have needed
asupporting recommendation from one of the Brig'smental health providers. While CW02
Bames needed the Brig psychiatrist'srecommendation to keep PFC Manning under Suicide
Risk, no such recommendation was needed in order to increase PFC Manning'sspecial handling
instructions under POF
46. In response to this specific incident, COL Malone met with the PFC Manning. After
speaking to PFC Manning, he assessed PFC Manning asa"low risk and requiring only routine
outpatient followup^withjno need for ...closer clinical observation."
Attachment 2. In
particular,he indicated that PFC Manning'sstatement about the waist band ofhis underwear was
innowaypromptedby"apsychiatriccondition"^^ Ratheritwaspartofhisprocessof
"intellectualizing" the conditions ofhis confinement.
47. CW02 Bames chose to ignore the assessment by COL Malone. From2March2011until
the time he was transferred to the Joint Regional Correctional Facility(JRCF) at Fort
Leavenworth, l^ansas on 20 April 2011, PFC Manning was stripped of all his clothing at night.
For the first couple ofdays, after surrendering his clothing to the Brig guards at night, PFC
Manning had no choice but to lay naked in his coldjail cell until the following moming.
4^. On3March 2011,PFC Manning was told to get out ofbed for the morning DBS inspection.
PFC Manning was not given any ofhis clothing back before the morning inspection. PFC
Manning walked towards the front ofhis cell with his suicide blanket covering his genitals. The
Brig guard outside his cell told him that he was not permitted to cover himselfwith his blanket
because that would mean that he would not be standing at parade rest. PFC Manning
relinquished the blanket and stood completely naked at parade rest,which required him to stand
with his hands behind his back and his legs spaced shoulder width apart. PFC Manning stood at
parade rest for about three minutes until the DBS arrived. Once the DBS arrived, everyone was
called to attention. The DBS and the other guards walked past PFC Manning'scell. The DBS
looked at PFC Manning, paused fbramoment, and then continued to the next detainee'scell.
After the DBS completed his inspection, PFC Manning was told to go sit on his bed. Several
minutes later, PFC Manning was given his clothes and allowed to get dressed. PFC Manning
was also required to stand naked at attention the next four days.
49. After apparent outside pressure on the Brig due to PFC Manning'smistreatment, PFC
Manning was provided withasuicide smock to wear at night.
Attachment 26. However,
due to PFC Manning'ssize and the coarseness of the smock, he had difficulty sleeping. PFC
Manning is five foot three in height and weighs approximatelyll5pounds. The smock was not
designed for someone ofhis size. On one occasion, PFC Manning was being choked by the
smock and was unable to fiee himself As PFC Manning struggled to get out ofthe smock, two
guards entered his cell and assisted in removing PFC Manning from the smock.
Attachment
27.

36

23490

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

50. Torecap,onl^January2011and5March 2011,the Brig increased the already onerous
restrictions placed on PFC Manning in the following manner;
a) From l^January2011until 20 January 2011,PFC Manning was forced to strip down to
his underwear during the day.
b) Froml^January2011until 20 January 2011,PFC was forced to sleep naked at night.
c) From l^January2011until 20 January 2011,PFC Manning'seyeglasses were taken
away from him.
d) Froml^January2011until 20 January 2011,PFC Manning was not permitted out ofhis
cell and was on24-hour suicide watch.
e) From2March2011until6March 2011,PFC Manning was forced to surrender all his
clothing at night and sleep naked.
f) From2March2011until6March 2011,PFC Manning was forced to surrender his
eyeglasses during the day and at night. After6March 2011,his eyeglasses were retumed
to him during the day,but continued to be removed from him at night.
g) On3March2011until6March 2011,PFC Manning forced to stand naked at parade rest
where he was in view of multiple guards.
h) From7March2011onward, PFC Manning was required to wearaheavy and restrictive
suicide smock which irritated his skin and, on one occasion, almost choked him.

H.

CoLRobertOltmansOrderthatPFCManningWouldNotBeDowngradedfrom
POI and MAX

51. On 13January 2011,Col.RobertGOltman, the Security Battalion Commander and senior
rateroftheBrigCommander,heldameetingtodiscuss PFC Manning'sconfinement conditions.
The current Brig Commander, CW04Averhart, and his leadership staff were present. So too
was the incoming Brig Commander, CW02 Barnes. Along with the Brig leadership, the Brig
psychiatrists(Capt. Hocter and CapL Moore)and the BrigJudgeAdvocate,were also present.
52. At that meeting. Col. Oltman ordered that PFC Manning would be held in maximum custody
and POI indefinitely. Col. Oltman stated that "nothing is going to happen to PFC Manning on
my watch." Col.Oltman also said,"nothing'sgoing to change. He won't be able to hurt himself
and he won't be able to get away,and our way of making sure of this is that he will remain on
this status indefinitely." At this point, Capt. Hocter go very upset and voiced his concerns. Capt.
Hocter said something to the effect of, "Sir,lam concerned because if you're going to do that,
maybe you might want to call it something else, because it'snot based on anything from

37

23491

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

behavioral health." In response. Col.Oltman said "We'll do whatever we want to do. You^the
Brig psychiatrists] make your recommendation andlhave to makeadecision based on
everything else." CapL Hocter responded,"Then don't say it'sbased on mental health. You can
say it'sMAXcustody,butjust don't say that we're somehow involved in this." Col.Oltman
said,"That'swhat we're going to do."
53. Col. Oltman made it clear to those present at the meeting that the decision to keep PFC
Manning in MAX and POI was coming from those higher in the chain ofcommand.
Attachment^C'He indicated that Manning would remain in current status (POI) unless and until
he received instructions from higher authority(unnamed). Ido not recall him saying he would
be kept that way until his legal process was complete, but the impression he left was not to
expect any changes in the near future."; "The Security Battalion Commander intimated that he
was receiving instructions fromahigher authority on the matter but did not say from whom.").
54. During this meeting, CapL Moore informed Col. Oltman that he would likely be appointed
asamember ofthe Defense team. In response. Col.Oltman told him that "that'snot going to
happen, doc." The next day,14January 2011,CapL Moore received his appointment order
assigning him asamember of the Defense team. After this date, CapL Moore was no longer
invited to attend the weekly meetings with Col. Oltman.
55. CapL Hocter was also aware that Installation Commander, Col. Choike, had fiequent,
sometimesweekly,meetingstodiscuss PFC Manning'sconfinement classification and
assignmenL As part ofthese meetings, CapL Hocter was required to provide the Brig
Commanderwithastatusreporton PFC Manning. ^^^Attachment^("l know that the higher
base authorities hadafrequent(sometimesweekly)meeting to discuss Manning, for whichi
supplied my CO withastatus report^nothing that Manning had told me, mind you, but his
condition and my recommendations, particularly to remove conditionslfeh were unnecessary.").
L

Domestic and International Reaction to PFC Manning s Conditions of Confinement

56. The conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement while at Ott^titico sparked domestic and
intemational outrage. Among those that spoke out about PFC Manning'sinhumane conditions
ofconfinement were the following;
a) Amnesty International wrotealetter calling for the restrictive conditions of confinement
to be lifted;
Attachment 2^.
b) Agroupof300 law professors denounced the confinement conditions being endured by
PFC Manning as being"degrading","inhumane,""illegal,"and "immoral"; .^^^
Attachment 29.
c) Preeminent constitutional law scholar Professor LaurenceTribe spoke out that the
conditions under which PFC Manning was being held were "not only shameful but
unconstitutional"; ^^^http:^^www.guardian.co.uk^world^2011^apr^l0^bradley-manninglegalscholars-letter.

38

23492

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

d) Psychologists for Social Responsibility wrotealetter outlining the very harmful effects of
prolonged solitary confinement and implored officials to "rectify the inhumane, harmful,
and counterproductive treatment ofPFC Manning";
Attachment 30.
e) Department ofState spokesmanP.J.Crowley referred publicly to PFC Manning's
conditions of confinement being "ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid." He was
later fired for his commenL ^^^http:^^www.guardian.co.uk^commentisfree^cifamerica
^2011^mar^29^radley-manningwikileaks.
f) European leaders urged the United States to allow the Flnited Nations to investigate
claims ofillegal pretrial punishment; ^^^Attachment31.
g) Concerned citizens called Oti^^tico and organized rallies and marches to bring awareness
to PFC Manning'sconditions of confinemenL
h) Congressman l^ucinich pleaded for access to PFC Manning and compared the conditions
ofhis confinement to Abu-Ghraib;^^^http;^^ucinich.house.gov^news^documentsingle.a
spx7DocumentlD^227362
All these pleas fell upon deaf ears. O^^^fi^o continued to hold PFC Manning under MAX and in
POI(or under Suicide Risk) for almost nine months.
57. Additionally,the United Nations Special Rapporteur onTorture, Mr.JuanMendez, tried for
months to set up an unmonitored meeting with PFC Manning where he could investigate claims
ofillegal pretrial punishmenL All his requests were denied. InalettertoMr.MendezfromJeh
Johnson, General Counsel for the Department ofDefense, Mr. Johnson told Mr.Mendez "You
should have no expectation ofprivacy in your communications with PFC Manning."
Attachment32.
5^. Mr.JuanMendez published his findings in the 29 February 2012Report of the Special
Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishmenL
United States of America
(a)LA30^12^2010CaseNoOSA20^2010State reply: 27^01^201119^05^2011
Allegations of prolonged solitary confinement ofasoldier charged with the
unauthorized disclosure ofclassified information.
170.The Special Rapporteur thanks the Covernment ofthe Flnited States of
America for its response to this communication regarding the alleged prolonged
solitary confinement ofMr. Bradley F.Manning,aUS soldier charged with the
unauthorized disclosure ofclassified information. According to the information
received, Mr.Manning was held in solitary confinement for twenty-three hoursa
day following his arrest in May 2010in Iraq, and continuing through his transfer
to the brig at Marine Corps Base O^^^fi^o. His solitary confinement-lasting
^Congressman Dennis k^ucinich and officials at Amnesty International also tried to set up an unmonitored visit with
PFC Manning, also to no avail.

39

23493

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

about eleven months-was terminated upon his transfer fiom Oti^^fico to the Joint
Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Feavenworth on 20 April 2011. In his
report, the Special Rapporteur stressed that "solitary confinement isaharsh
measure which may cause serious psychological and physiological adverse effects
on individuals regardless oftheir specific conditions." Moreover,"^d]epending
on the specific reason for its application, conditions, length, effects and other
circumstances, solitary confinement can amount toabreach of article7of the
Intemational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and to an act defined in
articlelor article 16of the Convention againstTorture." (A^66^26^ paras.79 and
^0) Before the transfer ofPfc Manning to Fort Feavenworth, the Special
Rapporteur requested an opportunity to interview him in order to ascertain the
precise conditions ofhis detention. The US Covernment authorized the visit but
ascertained that it could not ensure that the conversation would not be monitored.
Sinceanonprivate conversation with an inmate would violate the terms of
reference applied universally in fact finding by Special Procedures, the Special
Rapporteur had to decline the invitation. In response to the Special Rapporteur's
request for the reason to hold an unindicted detainee in solitary confinement, the
government responded that his regimen was not "solitary confinement" but
"prevention ofharm watch" but did not offer details about what harm was being
prevented. Tothe Special Rapporteur'srequest for information on the authority
to impose and the purpose ofthe isolation regime, the government responded that
the prison rules authorized the brig commander to impose it on account ofthe
seriousness ofthe offense for which he would eventually be charged. The Special
Rapporteur concludes that imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on
someone who has not been found guilty of any crime isaviolation ofhis right to
physical and psychological integrity as well as ofhis presumption ofinnocence.
The Special Rapporteur again renews his request foraprivate and unmonitored
meeting with Mr.Manning to assess his conditions of detention.
(b)AL15^06^2011CaseNoUSA^^2011State reply: None todateFollowup to
aletter sent 13May2011requestingaprivate unmonitored meeting with Private
(Pfc.)Bradley Manning.
171.The Special Rapporteur thanks the Govemment ofthe United States of
America for its response to the communication dated 13May2011requestinga
private unmonitored meeting with Private Bradley Manning. Regrettably,to date
the Government continues to refuse to allow the Special Rapporteur to conduct
private, unmonitored, and privileged communications with Private Manning, in
accordance with the working methods ofhis mandate (F^CN.4^2006^6 paras.2027)

40

23494

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

59. MrMendez told the British newspaper. The Guardian, that: " I conclude thatthellmonths
under conditions of solitary confinement(regardless of the name given to his regime by the
prison authorities)constitutes ataminimum cruel,inhuman and degrading treatment in violation
of article 16ofthe convention against torture.Ifthe effects in regards to pain and suflcring
infiicted on Manning were more severe, they could constitute torture.".^^^http:^^www.guardian
.co.uk^world^2012^mar^l2^bradleymanning-cruelinhuman-treatment-un.
60. The Defense tried repeatedly to assist Mr.Mendez(along with Congressman I^ucinich and
Amnesty Intemational) in setting up an unmonitored visit with PFC Manning. TheGovemment,
along with the Brig, insisted that none ofthese would qualify as an "official" visit, and therefore
must be monitored.
61. The O^^^tico Brig rules provide for both "authorized visits" and "official visits." The latter
are not monitored. The rules provide as follows:
317CORRFSPONDFNCF AND VISITATION: Confinementshouldnotstopa
prisoner from keeping in contact with members oftheir immediate family and
authorized visitors via mail or personal visits. Fachprisoner'sfamilywillbe
interested in their progress and concerned about their well-being and morale.
Morale isatwo way street and family members need be encouraged just as much
as the prisoner. Prisoners are strongly urged to correspond and arrange visits.
Prisoners are encouraged to place all potential visitors on their visitor list even if
the chance or their visiting is remote. In the event during your confinement you
wish to add additional people to the visitation list you must submitaDD Form
510with name, relationship, age, and address to the Admin Chief Thefollowing
guidelines are applicable:
a. Authorized; No limitations will be imposed as to the number or persons who
may visit withaprisoner, except as to maintain security,control,or to exclude
persons disapproved by the Commanding Officer for cause. Authorized visitors
include the prisoner'simmediatefamily(spouse, children, parents, brothers,
sisters or guardians)or anyone who has establishedaproper relationship with the
prisoner prior to him being confined.
b. Official: These visits are for the purpose ofconducting official govemment
business, either on behalfofthe prisoner or in the interest ofjustice. Visits fiom
lawyers, military officials, civilian officials, or anyone listed asaprivileged
correspondence in paragraph3.17f of this regulation, having official business to
conduct are considered official visits and may be authorized by the Commanding
Officer to visit at any time during normal working hours. All prisoners will be
required to see official military visitor(s). Refusal to visit with official military
visitors will be subject to disciplinary action.

41

23495

United StatesvPFC BradleyFManning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

Privileged Correspondence: All incoming and outgoing correspondence(mail)
betweenaprisoner and the following is privileged and not subject to inspection
unless reasonable doubt exists as to the correspondence being bona fide:
a. The President or Vice President ofthe Lnited States.
b. Members ofCongress ofthe United States.
c. The Attorney Ceneral of the Lnited States and Regional
Ofl^ces ofthe Attorney General.
d. TheJudge Advocate Ceneral of each military service or
his^er representatives.
e. Prisoners Defense Counsel or any military^civilian attorney
of record.
f Any attorney listed in professional or other directories or an
attomey'srepresentative.
g. Prisoner's clergyman,when approved by the chaplain.
Attachment 34.
62. On31March 2012, Mr. Coombs wrote the following to CPT Fein;
lhave informed Congressman l^ucinich that he is authorized to visit PFC
Manning under the rules and regulations for the O^^^tico Brig. Under Brig Order
P1640.1C,paragraph3.17,there are two types of visitors fbradetainee,
authorized and official.
1) Authorized visitors are required to be added by the detainee and approved by
the O^^titico Brig. Any person added to the authorized visitors list may visit the
detainee on any Saturday or Sunday between the hours ofl2:00and3:00 p.m.
These visits are monitored by the Brig. The Brig requires the visits to take place
inano-contact booth for any detainee held in Maximum Custody. The doors to
the booth must remain open and the entire visit will be recorded by the Brig.
Anything said during these visits is not privileged and can be used later by the
govemment inacourt-martial proceeding.
2) Official visitors are for the purpose ofconducting official govemment
business, either on behalfofthe detainee or in the interest ofjustice. Official
visits may be authorized by the Brig Officer to visitadetainee at any time during
normal working hours. The official visits are considered privileged, and are not
subject to recording or monitoring. The Brig'srules and regulations identify the
following individuals as qualifying for official visits:
a) Military officials.
b) Civilian officials.

42

23496

United StatesvPFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

c) The President or Vice President ofthe United States.
d) Members ofCongress ofthe United States.
e) The Attorney General of the United States and Regional Offices of the
Attorney Ceneral.
f) The Judge Advocate General ofeach military service or his or her
representative.
g) Prisoner'sDefense Counsel or any military or civilian attorney of
record.
h) Any attorney listed in professional or other directories or an attorney's
representative.
i) Prisoner'sclergyman when approved by the chaplain.
Given the difference between authorized and official visits, PFC Manning does
not want to waive his entitlement to haveaprivileged conversation with
Congressman l^ucinich.You should know,that Amnesty International is also
makingarequest for an official visit as well as Mr.JuanMendez, the United
Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishmenL
lhave recommended that each ofthe above individuals contact the facility
directly to arrange for an official visiL lam hoping that you will indeed ensure
that the O^^t^fi^o Brig honors its own rules and regulations.
Attachment 33.
63. O n l April 2011,Mr. Coombs contacted LLCoF Greer, the StaffJudge Advocate for Marine
Corps. Base O^^titico, regarding an official visit:
lhave been informed by Congressman I^ucinich'soffice and byAmnesty
International that they have been told by your office they do not qualify for an
official visiL Instead, they are being directed to request to be added to PFC
Manning's"authorized" visitors lisL Additionally, Congressman k^ucinich's
office is being told that the Brig Order that his office is referencing does not exisL
lhave seen Brig OrderP16401C,datedlJuIy 2010. This order clearly provides
for both authorized and official visits.
Thus, it appears that Brig Officials lied to Congressman I^ucinich about the very existence of
BrigOrderP16401C
6 4 . 0 n 5 A p r i l 2011,CPT Fein responded:
1. Brig Visitors.

43

23497

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

While we understand your view ofthe Brig Order, we respectfttlly disagree with
your interpretation ofthe attached relevant portion ofthe Brig Order with regard
to visitation.
While you correctly recite what an "authorized" visitor is, an "official" visit is
"for the purpose ofconducting official government business, either on behalfof
the prisoner or in the interest ofjustice,"seepara3.17b. The next sentence
simply states that "lawyers, military officials, civilian officials, or anyone listed as
aprivileged correspondence in para3.17f...having official business to conduct
are considered official visits"(emphasis added) and may visit at any time during
normal working hours, subject to authorization by the Commanding Officer.
Critical is the next sentence,"All prisoners will be required to see official military
visitor(s)"(emphasis added). Therefore, an official visit to the brig byaMember
of Congress conducting official govemment business or byanongovernment
organization'srepresentative does not necessarily includeavisit with PFC BM
without PFC BM'sconsenL
You also state,"official visits are considered privileged, and are not subject to
recording or monitoring"(emphasis added); however this not in the Brig Order.
As noted in para3.17f,which you cite as the authority,"all incoming or outgoing
correspondence(mail) betweenaprisoner and the following is privileged and not
subject to inspection,"refers to, as stated,"mail" and not visitation(emphasis
added). While you also state,"The Brig'srules and regulations identify the
following individuals as qualifying for official visits,"the reference you cite (para
3.17f)providesalist of govemment officials, including "Members ofCongress."
Again, that para refers to "mail" and not visitation protected under SectionVof
the MRE. Therefore,avisit byaMember of Congress would not be privileged
within the meaning ofthe Brig Order, and would be monitoredjust like any other
visitor.
The prosecution and brig'sinterpretation of the Brig Order outlines these types of
visitors:
a. "Authorized" visitors.Visitors that PFC BM places on his visitation list.
b. "Official"visitors.Those officials listed in para3.17b conducting official
government business.
Aperson'smembership in an organization does not necessarily confer upon that
person "official" status. AMember of the Congress is conducting an "official"
visit ifhe is conducting official Covernment business.
Amemberofanon-government organization is not "official" as they are not
conducting govemment business. Should PFC BM desire to meet with any ofthe
individuals whom you have mentioned as potential visitors, he will need to either

44

23498

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

add them to his "authorized" visitor list or approveameeting, through you, if the
individuals make an "official" visiL As you know,fiom the beginning ofPFC
BM'sconfinement at O^^^fico, the rule requiring an "authorized" visitor to have
apreexisting relationship with PFC BM has been relaxed to allow any visitorto
visit, subject to standard security vetting and monitoring for national security
purposes. This accommodation was based on the potential for his long-term
pretrial confinement and for his benefit, well being, and morale.
Regardless of the interpretation of the Brig Order, the SPCMCA issuedastanding
order on 16SeplO,which directs the Brig to monitor communications of third
parties while confined at the Brig. This requirement includes all ofPFCBM's
phone calls,visitations, and mail. This requirement does not include monitoring
ofany privileged communications between PFC BM and his attorneys, mental
health providers, and brig chaplains.
Further, as the United States has charged your client, you surely acknowledge our
concernthatPFCBM'sright to counsel be scrupulously honored. Absent the
command'sweeklyvisit,which is limited to discussing PFC BM'swelfare,we
would not allowaU.S.Government representative to meet with your client
without counsel being present or an affirmative waiver ofthat right by PFC BM.
Properly addingavisitor as an "authorized" visitor will be deemed consent to
speakwithagovernment representative bythe defense. Any such visit will be
subject to monitoring unless it is subject toarecognized privilege under Section
V,MRF(falls underthe SPCMCA'sexception)
In the future, please do not direct any organization to directly contact the Brig to
coordinate any visiL If someone is trying to coordinateaformal meeting in an
"official"capacity,theyshouldcoordinatethrough DOD Legislative Affairs
(COLTiaJohnson)and their request to meet with PFC BM will be ultimately
forwarded through you to PFC BM for consent to meet during suchavisiL
Wewill continue to notify you when we receive information that someone wishes
to meet with your client in an "official" capacity,and request the same courtesy in
retum, once your client agrees to meet with them.

65. On6April 2010, Mr. Coombs sent the following response to CPT Fein:
1.Thank you for your reply. Is the interpretation ofthe Brig Order the MDW
SJA'sinterpretation, the O^^^fi^o Brig'sinterpretation, or simply your
interpretation7
The sentence that you gloss over in your reply is actuallythe critical one from the
Brig Order.This sentence states that "^vjisits fiom lawyers, military officials.

45

23499

United Statesv.PFC BradleyFManning
Defense Article 13 Motion

civilian officials, or anyone listed asaprivileged correspondence in paragraph
3.17f of this regulation, having official business to conduct are considered official
visits..."(Emphasis added).Congressman l^ucinich, Mr.JuanMendez fiom the
United Nations, and any representative from Amnesty Intemational would clearly
fall within the scope ofindividuals identified in paragraph3.17f and are therefore
deemed to be official visits under the Brig Order.
Under the interpretation advanced in your previous message,amember of
Congress is conducting an "oflicial" visit only ifhe is conducting "official
govemment business" andamemberofanongovernment organization is not
"official'as they are not conducting "govemment business." Besides being an
^sicjperfunctory argument without support under the Brig Order, it is also one
that is easily nullified by using the example ofacivilian attorney. Paragraph
3.17f states thata"civilian attorney of record" is deemed to be an official visiL A
civilian attomey is clearlyanongovernment entity and as such is not conducting
"official government business." This clearly belies any attempt to argue official
visits are limited in the way that you suggesL
Moreover, official visits are clearly privileged under the Brig Order. While
section3.17f speaks to mail correspondence being privileged, it must follow that
oral communications are also privileged. It would not make sense thatadetainee
would enjoythe protection ofaprivileged communication fiom an individual
listed in paragraph3.17fif the correspondence came by way of mail as opposed to
an in-person conversation with the same individual.
With regards to the SPCMCA'sstanding order dated 16September 2010, his
failure to recognize other individuals who are entitled by the Brig Order to havea
privileged conversation is not dispositive. The order is unenforceable given the
fact it would authorize the recording ofprivileged conversations. Likewise, the
government'sconcernsurroundingPFCBM'sright to counsel is misplaced.
Mental health providers and brig chaplains are able to speak with PFC BM
without coordination with civilian counsel. As long as the conversations are
privileged, the government'sconcern would seem unwarranted.
Given the above,lrequest that you clarify the O^^^ticoBrig'sofficial position on
this issue.

66. CPT Fein then clarified on7April2011that "Our interpretation is the Govemment's
interpretation, to include the SJAand the Brig."
Owing to the interpretation ofthe Brig
policy,PFC Manning was never permitted an unmonitored visit with the Lnited Nations Special
Rapporteur onTorture, Congressman Dennis k^ucinich, or Amnesty International.

46

23500

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

J.

PFC Mannings Repeated Pleas for RellefFromtheOnerous Conditions ofHis
Confinement

67. PFC Manning repeatedly requested to be removed from MAX and POI. Additionally,PFC
Manning'scivilian counsel made numerous requests of the Flnited States Army Staff Judge
Advocate'sOffice for the Military District ofWashington to assist in removing PFC Manning
from MAX and POF
6^. In the fall of2010, Mr. Coombs and CPT Fein had several telephone conversations about the
onerous conditions ofPFCManning'sconfinemenL On3December 2010, Mr. Coombs wrote to
CPT Fein asking whether he had "an update on the POI issue with PFC Manning."
Mr.
Coombs continued,
CapL Hocter saw PFC Manning onThursday. It is my understanding that after
speaking with PFC Manning, he is still recommending that the POI restrictions be
lifted. As mentioned earlier, given the recommendation of CapL Hocter,ldo not
believe the confinement facility hasalegitimate non-punitive basis to keep PFC
Manning on the POI status. Additionally,it is my understanding that other than in
this instance, the confinement facility has never had anyone under POI restrictions
for this length oftime. This fact also cuts againstalegitimate non-punitive basis.
CPT Fein responded,"Althoughlunderstand your concern we are absolutely working this
issue as our highest priority. Currently,thereisadisconnect in multiple services with multiple
competing regulations and we have to ensure the correct applicable rules apply."
69. On^December 2010, CPT Fein had still not addressed the POI issue. Mr. Coombs wrote to
him again saying,"How is the POI issue coming along7 My understanding is that CapL Hocter
is still recommending that the POI be lifted.".^^. CPT Fein responded,"we are still actively
addressing the POI issue with O^^titico.".^^. Mr. Coombs responded,
Doyouhaveatime-tableonthePOIissue. Farliertoday,lspoke with CapL
Hocter. He told me that he is still recommending that PFC Manning be taken off
ofPOl status. He told me that the behavior witnessed by the guards appears to be
aresult ofaside effect from PFC Manning'ssleep medication.
Aslhave said before,Ibelieve the current confinement conditions rise to the
level ofunlawful pretrial punishmenL Mr.Averhart does not havealegitimate
basis to continue to ignore the advice ofhis mental health professional.
Maintaining the POI status prevents PFC Manning from exercising, having basic
items such asapillow and sheet, and subjects him to prolonged isolation. Please
tell me what you have done so far to address this issue, and the additional steps
that you plan to take to resolve iL

47

23501

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

The next day,on9December 2010, CPT Fein responded to Mr. Coombs, stating,
"Tomorrow the Ot^^^tico Brig is holding their Classification and Assignment Board, which
makes recommendations to the Brig OIC. Werequested the OIC to consider the issues you
presented in his determination ofPFCManning'sstatus. Weshould find out by COB tomorrow
on whether his status is going to change."
70. Ofcourse, PFC Manning was not taken off^MAX or POI status. And it is clear that CPT
Fein and the Government did not advocate for the rights ofPFC Manning during this period
despite repeated protestations from the Defense that PFC Manning was being subjected to illegal
pretrial punishmenL In late November 2010,just prior to the emails chronicled above, someone
from the Government (i.e. the prosecution team)contacted the Brig and said the following:
Defense has madearequest that PFC Manning'sstatus be reduced from POI to
some other status where he is able to have more time outside or workout in his
cell. My understanding is that his status determination is made based uponalist
offactors including his charges, mental health and behavior. Since the Defense
has made this request to lower his status ^^^^.^.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^v^^^^^^^^.^^
Is therealesser level ofPOl that PFC Manning could be moved to. If
the^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^^^^^^^.^^^^^^^.^^^^^v^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^,wejustneedtohave it addressed to the DefenseCounsel. (emphasis added).
i^^^Attachment35.
71. Thus, it appears that the Government did not actually try to have PFC Manning removed
from POI status ("Ifthe recommendation ofthe Brig personnel is to have him remain on POI that
is fine"), but simply made inquiries ofthe Brig to "at least address" the concerns raised by the
Defense.
72. During this time, the Covernment also requested copies ofsunshine logs maintained by the
Brig;
The defense counsel is concemed about PFC Manning'smental and physical
health in relation to his small amount oftime outside. In order to combat any
potential Articlel3issueslwould like to getacopy of the logs that show when
PFC Manning went outside and how long he stayed there. Iknow that he usually
gets 20 minutes daily butlneed to have the logs to show thaL
Far from trying to remedy the situation, the Govemment was just looking fi:^r documentation
that could be used to "combat any potential Article 13issues."
73. All of the Defense'srequestsforachange in confinement conditions were met with
assurances that the confinement conditions were being reviewed and would be adjusted in time.
However, despite these assurances, PFC Manning remained in MAX and POI at O^^^fi^o for

48

23502

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

over eight months. When combined with the time he spent on Suicide Risk in k^uwait, PFC
Manning was in the equivalent ofsolitary confinement for almost eleven months.
74. On5January 2011,PFC Manning filedacomplaint with the O^^^tico Brig Commander and
aDDForm510complaint through the Brig'sgrievance process.
Attachments 10,36. The
complaint and the official grievance requested that the Brig commander remove PFC Manning
from MAX and POI or providejustification for his decision to keep PFC Manning in MAX and
POF PFC Manning was not provided with any form ofredress through the grievance process.
75. Onl3January 2011,PFC Manning filedarequest for release fiom pretrial confinement
under R.C.M.305(g). ^^^Attachmentll. PFC Manning cited the unduly harsh confinement
conditions, the O^^^fi^o Brig commander'sfailure to respond to his grievance request, and the
failure ofthe military magistrate to seriously consider other options under R.C.M.304 to ensure
PFC Manning'spresence at trial. COL Carl R.CoffmanJr.,the Special CourtMartial
Convening Authority(SPCMCA), subsequently denied PFC Manning'srequest and informed
PFC Manning that he would address the POI issue inaseparate action.
Attachment 12.
COL Coffman did not address the POI issue raised by PFC Manning.
76. On 19 January 2011,PFC Manning filedarequest for redress under Articlel3^,UCMJ with
the Oti^^fico Base Commander, Col. Choike.
Attachment 13. The O^^^tico Brig
Commander, CW04Averhart,filedaresponse to PFC Manning'sArticle 13^ Complaint on24
January 2011. i^^^Attachmentl5. So too did Col.Oltman. ^^^Attachmentl7. OnlMarch
2011,Col.Choike filedaresponse to PFC Manning'sArticlel3^ ComplainL
Attachment
1^. This response was served on PFC Manning on2March 2011. All three determined that no
reliefwasappropriateanddenied PFC Manning'srequest for redress.
77. On lOMarch, 2011,PFC Manning filedaRebuttaltoCol.Choike'sdenial ofhis Article 13^
ComplainL .^^^ Attachment 14. In this, PFC Manning also raised the incident on2March 2011
where he was placed on Suicide Risk. CW04Averhart and CW02 Barnes filed responses where
they recommended denying PFC Manning'spetition for redress. ^^^Attachmentsl6, 20,21.
Col.Choike denied PFC Manning'sArticlel3^Complaintasecond time on^April 2011.
Attachmentl9. Two days prior, on6April 2011,Col.Choike determined that he would not
consider the new matter raised by PFC Manning'sArticlel3^ ComplainL OnlOApril,PFC
Manning filedasecond rebuttal to Col.Choike'sresponse and requested that he consider the
new matters raised in the Article 13^ ComplainL i^^^Attachmentl9.
7^. All ofthese matters were forwarded to the Secretary ofthe Navy for his final action. On 13
June 2011,Juan Garcia, Assistant Secretary ofthe Navy,took final action on the Article 13^
Complaint by denying PFC Manning'srequest for redress. ^^^^ Attachment 23. He stated "even
if your complaint has merit, your transfer to ^Fort Leavenworth] isasuperseding and intervening
event that has made your request for relief unavailable."
79. On 20 April 2011, PFC Manning was transferred to the Joint Regional Correctional Facility
(JRCF) at Fort Leavenworth, k^ansas. Afteraroutine indoctrination period, PFC Manning was

49

23503

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

placed in Medium Custody with no prevention ofinjury restrictions. He has been held in that
status for the past 15months.
ARCUMFNT
80. Articlel3 provides that "no person,while being held for trial,may be subjected to
punishment or penalty other than arrest or confinement upon the charges pending against him,
nor shall the arrest or confinement upon the charges be any more rigorous than the circumstances
required to insure his presence." Article 13thus prohibits both;(l)the imposition of punishment
or penalty prior to trial; and (2)confinement conditions more rigorous than necessary to ensure
the accused'spresence at trial. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^v.C^^i^^^,62M.J.411,414(C.A.A.F.
2006); ^^^^^^^^^^^.^v .^^^^,61M.J.225,227(C A A.F 2005);^^^^^^^^^^^^
460,463 ( C A A F 2003);^^^^^^^^^^^^v^^^^^^^,53MJ 149,154(CAAF^
accused can demonstrate an intent to punish or the imposition ofunduly onerous confinement
conditions, he is entitled to relief under Article 13. i ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ .
81. The first prohibition of Articlel3 requires an accused to show an intent to punish.
^^^^^^^^^^^.^v.^^^^^ 40 M.J.225,227(C.M.A.1994).This intent can be determined by
examining the intent ofthe detention officials, or by examining the purposes served by the
conditions of confinemenL ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^v^^^^,61ML 225,227 ( C A A F 2005)
"Absentashowing of an expressed intent to punish on the part detention facility officials, that
determination generally will turn on'whether an alternative purpose to which^the restriction]
may rationally be connected is assignable for it, and whether it appears excessive in relation to
the alternative purpose assigned ^ t o i t ] ' " ^ ^ ^ ^ v ^ ^ . ^ ^ ^ 4 4 1 U S 520, 538(1979)
82. On the other hand, the second prong of Articlel3focuses on the conditions endured by the
accused, and whether they are more rigorous than necessary to guarantee the accused'spresence
attrial.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^v^C^^^^^,47M.L162,165(CAA.F 1997) Conditionsthatare
sufficient egregious may give rise toapermissible inference that an accused is being punished,
or the conditions may be so excessive as to constitute punishmenL (^^^^^^^^^^^^.^ v
70MJ 169,174(CAAF2011)
83. In this case, there isaclearly expressed intention to punish PFC Manning. Col.Oltman had
decided that PFC Manning would remain in MAX and POI for as long as he was at O^^^fi^o
because nothing was going to happen "on his watch." Even if there weren't suchaclearly
expressed intention to punish PFC Manning, the restrictions that were placed on PFC Manning
were not related(much less rationally related) to any legitimate government objective. Finally,
the egregious conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement for over eight months permit the^^^.^^
inference that PFC Manning was punished in contravention ofhis constitutional rights.
A.

O^^^fi^^ Brig Officials Intended to Punish PFC Manning

84. There is clear evidence showing that the conditions imposed on PFC Manning were
motivated by factors which had nothing to do with PFC Manning'srisk of self-harm,harm to
others, or potential fiight risk. In particular, the Brig'sarbitrary policy to keep PFC Manning
50

23504

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

subject to the harshest conditions possible shows an intent to punish PFC Manning. ^^^(^^^^^^
i^^^^^.^v.C^^i^^^, 62 M.J.411,416(C.A.A.F.2006)("wedo^not] condone arbitrary policies
imposing'maximum custody'upon pretrial prisoners. Wewill scrutinize closely any claim that
maximum custody was imposed solely because of the charges rather than asaresuhofa
reasonable evaluation ofall the facts and circumstances ofacase.").
a) Col.Robert Oltman'sOrder That PFC Manning Would be l^et^t on MAX and POI
Indefinitely
85. The confinement conditions imposed on PFC Manning at Ott^titico were motivated bya
desire to punish PFC Manning for the crimes he is alleged to have committed; the media scrutiny
that his case has generated; and the comments that PFC Manning made in attempting to have the
restrictive confinement conditions lifted.
86. PFC Manning is alleged to have leaked hundreds ofthousands ofclassified documents to
WikiLeaks. He has been denounced asatraitor in the media. Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman
ofthe Joint Chiefs ofStaff, indicated that PFC Manning "might already have blood on his
hands." Members of Congress have called for PFC Manning'sexecution. PFC Manning has
been charged with "aiding the enemy,"acharge that is closely related to treason.
87. In response to the high-profile nature ofthis case, and the apparent predetermination by Brig
officials that PFC Manning is guilty, Col.Oltman issuedadirective reminiscent o f ' A F e w Good
Men"^ that PFC Manning would be held under MAX and POI because nothing was going to
^In an infamous scene trom the movie"AFewCoodMen,"Co1.Jessup (played by Jack l^icholson)
unapologetically boasts that he ordereda"Code1^ed":
Judge l^andolph: ^Consider yourselfinContemptl^
l^affee: ^Colonel Jessep, did you order the Code l^ed7^
Judge 1^andolph:you^don^t^ have to answer that ^uestionl
Col. Jessep: 1^11 answer the ^uestionl
[^^^^^]
Col.Jessep:you want answers7
1^affee:lthinkl'mentitledto.
Col. Jessep:^'^ou want answers7^
k^affee:^! want the truthl^
Col. Jessep:^'^ou can't handle the truthl^
[^^^.^^.^]
CoL Jessep: Son, we live inaworld that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's
gonna do it7 you7 ^ou,Lt.^einburg7 lhaveagreater responsibility than you could possibly fathom, ^ou
weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines, you have that luxury, you have tbe luxury ofnot knowing what
Iknow. That Santiago'sdeath,while tragic,probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and
incomprehensible to you, saves lives, you don't want the truth because deep down in places you don'ttalk
about at parties, you want me on that wall,you need me on that walL Weuse words like honor.code, loyalty.
Weuse these words as the backbone ofalife spent defending something, you use them asapunchline. lhave
neither the time nor the inclination to explain myselftoaman who rises and sleeps under the blanket ofthe very
freedom thatlprovide, and then questions the manner in whichlprovide it. Iwould rather you just said thank
you, and went on your way.C^tberwise,lsuggest you pick upaweapon, and standapost. thither way,1don't

51

23505

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

happen "on ^hisjwatch." When challenged by CapL Hocter, CoF Oltman responded that
"nothing'sgoing to change. He won't be able to hurt himselfand he won't be able to get away,
and our way ofmaking sure ofthis is that he will remain on this status indefinitely." CapL
Hocter said something to the effect of, "Sir,Iam concemed because if you're going to do that,
maybe you might want to call it something else, because it'snot based on anything from
behavioral health." In response. Col.Oltman said,"We'll do whatever we want to do. You^the
Brig psychiatrists] make your recommendation andlhave to makeadecision based on
everything else." CapL Hocter responded,"Then don't say it'sbased on mental health. You can
sayit'sMAXcustody,butjustdon'tsaythatwe'resomehowinvolvedinthis"Col01tman
said,"That'swhat we're going to do."
88. The very next day,onl4January 2011,CapL Hocter evaluated PFC Manning and found(as
he had for the previous five months)that he did not require POI restrictions. The tone ofthis
evaluation was different than the others and he appears to reference to Col.Oltman'sorder from
the day before. CapL Hocter writes:
Pt ^patient] continues to not be suicidal and does not require POI. Please remove
him. Ifhe requires enhanced security for other reasons, please consider writinga
separate SOP.
Attachment 2.
89. It was clear to those at thel3January2011meeting that the directive from Col.Oltman was
coming from "higher up." ^^^Attachment8("He indicated that Manning would remain in
current status (POI) unless and until he received instructions from higher authority(unnamed). I
do not recall him saying he would be kept that way until his legal process was complete, but the
impression he left was not to expect any changes in the near future."; "The Security Battalion
Commander intimated that he was receiving instructions fiomahigher authority on the matter
but did not say fiom whom.").
90. Although the meeting took place in January of2011,it is safe to assume that the order that
PFC Manning would remain in MAX and POI had been in place since PFC Manning arrived at
Ot^^^fico. This was just the first time that the Brig psychiatrists(and later, the Defense)leamed
what was really going on.
91. The decision early on to hold PFC Manning under these onerous conditions with no hope
for improvement was clearly based on the desire to punish PFC Manningft^rthe crimes that he
was alleged to have committed. An official'sexpressed desire to punish constitutes
unconstitutional punishmenL ^^^.^^^^v ^^^.^^^441U.S.520(1979); ^^^^^.^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^v
giveadamn what you think you are entitled to.
k^affee: Did you order the Code l^ed7
Col.Jessep:ldidthejobl...
kaflee:^Did you order the Code l^ed7^
CoL Jessep: ^you're Ooddamnrightldidl^

52

23506

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

^B^^^^^^ 53 M.J.149,155 (C.A.A.F.2000)(accused alleged that he was placed in solitary
confinement for an extended period oftime because prison officials were attempting to "break
him"; court indicated thaf'coercingaconfession is notalegitimate governmental objective.").
92. Moreover,wherearesuh is already pre-determined, by definition, procedural due process is
denied. ^^^^^^^v^^^^^^^^^C^^7^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^^^185F3d 751,762
(producing "evidence that the decision has already been made and any hearing would beasham"
sets forthaprocedural due process claim);^^^^^^^v.^^^^^,953 F.2d 1240, 1245 (10th Cir.
1992)(holding that due process requires an impartial tribunal that has not predetermined facts);
^^^^^^.^v.C^^^^^^^,891F.2d 43,46 (2nd Cir.l989)("^l]t is axiomatic thataprison disciplinary
hearing in which the resuh is arbitrarily and adversely predetermined violates^the right of due
process].").
93. In (^^^^^^^^^^^.^^^.^^^.^^^^^^^Vi^^^^^^^^.^.^^,74S.CL499(1954), the Supreme Court
fbundaviolation of procedural due process in circumstances far less glaring than the instant
case. In i^^^^^^^^.^.^^,the petitioner broughtahabeas action in which he attacked the validity of
the denial ofhis application for suspension of deportation. He alleged that he was "prejudged"
because prior to the immigration board'shearing, the Attorney General publishedaconfidential
list ofunsavory characters." ^^at500. The Supreme Court found that the petitioner's
procedural due process rights were violated because the "issuance ofthe list and related publicity
amounted to public prejudgment by the Attorney General so that fair consideration ofthe
petitioner'scase by the Board oflmmigration Appeals was made impossible."
at 502.
Notably,the Supreme Court stated,"Tobe sure, the petition does not allege that'the Attorney
General ordered the Board to deny discretionary reliefto the listed aliens.' Itwouldbena^veto
expect suchaheavy handed way of doing things."
at 503. And, yet, this "heavy handed way
ofdoing things" is exactly how Col.Oltman handled the determination ofthe conditionsofPFC
Manning'sconfinemenL Ifanot-so-subtle "hint" at the resuh sought constitutesaviolation of
due process as the Supreme Court held in ^^^^^^^^^.^.^^,then surely an explicit order by the
Security Battalion Commander to keep PFC Manning under MAX and POI amounts to violation
ofPFCManning'sconstitutional rights.
94. Col.Oltman'sunlawful order that PFC Manning be maintained in MAX and POI status was
made even more egregious by the fact that it was made in the presence ofaJAGofficer, thus
giving italegal "blessing." ThataJAGofficer stood by mutely whileacommander issued an
order which clearly violated an accused'sconstitutional rights cannot be countenanced. It isa
particularly sad day when the guardians ofthe system are the ones failing iL
95. On31 January 2011,justafew weeks after the meeting where Col.Oltman directed that
PFC Manning would not be removed fiom MAX or POI because "nothing was going to happen
on ^his]watch,"Col.Oltman recommended that PFC Manning'sArticle 138 Complaint be
denied. ^^^Attachmentl7. Col.Oltman stated that CW04Averhart's"classification and
assignment decisions in this case have been appropriate and within applicable regulations."
Ofcourse, Col. Oltman thought these recommendations were "appropriate."
After all, CoF
Oltman was the one who issued the order to make those recommendations in the first place.

53

23507

United Statesv.PFC BradleyFManning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

b) Col.Oltman'sOrder Provides Context forthe Repeated Recommendations of the C^A
Board and the PCF Commanderto Retain PFC Manning in MAX and in POI Over the
Recommendations ofBrig Psychiatrists
96. When viewed against the backdrop of Col.Oltman'sorder, the continued recommendations
of the C^A Board and of CW04AverhartandCW02 Barnes to retain PFC Manning on MAX
and POI now make sense.
Attachment 6. In his Response to PFC Manning'sArticle 138
Complaint, Col. Choike writes:
In your case, the PCF mental health provider recommended removal ofPOl status
neartheendofAugusL Except for one week in December, the PCF mental health
provider has consistently recommended that you be removed from POF However,
the C^A Board has consistently recommended that you remain in POI status
given your intake document that you were'always planning'suicide. his within
the direction of the PCF Commander to retain you inaPOl status. Inote that the
PCF Commander has the inherent authority over those in his custody to maintain
order and discipline and the responsibility to ensure safety and security in the
PCF
^^^Attachmentl8.
97. TheC^A Board, along with CW04Averhart and CW02 Barnes, had been told whatthey
needed to do keep PFC Manning subjected to the most rigorous conditions possible. So no
matter what the psychiatrists recommended,week-after-week, month-after-month, nothing ever
changed because everyone at the Brig had their marching orders from Col.01tman,who in tum
had his marching orders from someone higher up in the chain ofcommand. In effect, the
psychiatric opinions werejust "window dressing" to make it look like PFC Manning was
accorded due process^when it was abundantly clear that he was noL
98. Acareful look at the C^A Board reviews shows that the entire "process" was justasham.^
First, the C^A Board failed to fill out the appropriate forms foratotalof^v^ months.
Attachment 6. ^^^^^.^^ Attachment 19(Col.Choike acknowledging that "not each decision was
documented utilizing the local generated'Form 4200'."). It was only when it was clear that
Ouantico was being subjected to outside scrutiny that the Board thought it necessary to createa
paper trail to make it appear like PFC Manning was being accorded due process. The failure to
document the continued decision to maintain PFC Manning in MAX and POI is refiective ofthe
fact that the "decision" was already predetermined. ^^^^^C^^^v.^^^^.4F.Supp. 2d 195,213
(W.D.N.Y.1998)("Due process is not satisfied where the periodic reviews areasham.");
^^^^^^^^v.^^^^^.^^^,791F.2dl094(1101(3dCir.l986)(while"themonthlyreview

^CW04Averhart notes that the weekly C^A Board evaluations have ^'unanimously" recommended retaining PFC
Manning in MA^ and POL ^^^Attachmenll5. Ifaprocess were actually neutral (i.e.not already predetermined),
one would have expected to see .^^^^ disagreement in the three do^en times the Board convened. The only thing
that can explain the unanimity is that everyone was sold exactly how they had to vote.

54

23508

United StatesvPFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

procedures...were facially adequate" the prisoner'sdue process rights were violated because
the reviews were merely "perfunctory.").
99. Further evidence ofthe fact that the resuh was predetermined is found in the reviews fiom3
January 2011until the time that PFC Manning was transferred to the JRCF. For instance, week
after week, the following boxes were generally ticked as supporting the continued decision to
retain PFC Manning in MAX and on POF low tolerance offrustration; poor home conditions or
family relationships; length, or potential length, of sentence. B^. Notably,"poorhome
conditions or family relationships" and "length, or potential length, ofsentence" are immutable
factors. That is, there is nothing PFC Manning could ever do to change the fact that he might
have had poor home conditions and was facingalengthy sentence.
100. Further, the decision to continually check the "low tolerance offrustration" box is
oftentimes in direct contravention ofthe mental health providers'determination that PFC
Manning had "an average tolerance offrustration^stress" (note: there is no option of ticking that
an inmate hasa"good tolerance of frustration^stress"). For instance, on 30 December 2010,
CapL Hocter indicated that "inmate has an average tolerance of frustration^stress." .^^^
Attachment 2. In the next C^A Board review four days later, on3January 2011,CW04
Averhart ticked the box indicating that PFC Manning has "low tolerance offrustration." i^^^
Attachment 6. Thus, it appears that the Brig has made the decision that despite what the doctors
say,^^^^^^^^^^^^.^^^^^v^^^,PFC Manning hada"low tolerance of frustration." Consequently,
there was absolutely nothing that PFC Manning could do with respect to the factors that the Brig
continually used tojustify the MAX and POI status.
101. After thel8January2012incident where PFC Manning had an anxiety attack, the C^A
Board realized that it could tick yet another box to bolster its already predetermined conclusions
"assaultive^disruptive behavior." The C^A Board, however,didn't realize that right away. So
in the21 January 2011review,CWO4Averhart ticked the usual three: "low tolerance of
fiustration","poor home conditions" and "length, or potential length, of sentence."
Attachment 6. By 28 January 2011, CW02 Barnes added "assaultive^disruptive behavior" and
kept it on the list for the next month. 7^. his unclear how PFC Manning'sanxiety attack,
prompted by harassment by Brig guards, can properly be regarded as either "assaultive" or
"disruptive."
102. On the 28 January 2011C^A Board review form, CW02 Bames checked the box that
read:"Amental evaluation indicatingseriousneurosisorpsychosis"7^ There was^^v^^any
mental evaluation during this period indicating "serious neurosis or psychosis." That exact same
day,28 January 2011,COF Malone recommended removing PFC Manning fiom POF indicating
that "inmate does not poseathreat to himself and "inmate does not need to be segregated from
general population." i^^^Attachment9. In the Medical Officer'sRemarks, COL Malone
indicates that "^PFC Manning] requires routine outpatient follow up." 7^. This hardly
constitutes an "evaluation indicating serious neurosis or psychosis" as CW02 Bames had
indicated on the C^A Board review form. CW02 Barnes also checked the same box the
following week, despiteanotation that psychiatrists "recommend to be placed offPOI."

55

23509

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

Thus, it appears that the C^A Board was taking great liberties with the grounds it was using to
keep PFC Manning on MAX and on POI and ticking boxes willy nilly with no regard for
whether they were actually true.
103. Onl8February 2011,the C^A Board addedabox labeled "potential mental disorders."
Attachment 6. This seems to also have been made up out ofwhole cloth, as the psychiatric
review conducted that same day stated,"Mental disorder is resolved" and the recommendation
was that PFC Manning"does not need to be segregated from general population due toa
treatable mental disorder." ^^^^ Attachment 2. How could the Brig use "potential mental
disorders" to justify PFC Manning'scontinued classification decision when Brig psychiatrists
came to the directly opposite conclusion (i.e. that any "mental disorder is resolved")7 Again, this
shows the C^A Board arrogantly placing its armchair psychiatry above the opinions of qualified
mental health providers.
104. In the "Remarks" section ofthe C^A Board reviews, the following comment appears in
some variation in ^^^^^^,oftentimes verbatim:
SNDhas previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was
transferred fromTFCF Camp Arifjan due to the lack of specialized mental health
care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recently as^date]. SNDhasa
potential gender identity disorder and is pendinga706 sanity board hearing.
Attachment 6. Apparently,theC^A Board feh it appropriate to cutandpaste the exact
same thing over and over again for four months in order tojustify the determination to keep PFC
Manning in MAX and POF This cut-and-paste job does not bear the hallmarks ofaneutral,
considered C^A Board process.
105. Moreover, there was absolutely nothing PFC Manning could have done to change any of
the cited reasons for keeping him in MAX and on POI. PFC Manning apparently had
demonstrated suicidal ideations when held in I^uwait; he was pendinga706 Board; he did havea
potential gender identity disorder; and Brig officials always found something they considered
erratic about his behavior. After PFC Manning'sanxiety attack onl8January 2011,the
following notation began to appear in subsequent C^Areports,"Onl8January,SND had an
anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himselfin the presence ofthe Brig OIC and
Supervisor." 7^ The notation appeared up until3March 2011. 7^ Again, there was nothing
PFC Manning could do about any ofthese notations that continued to ft^rm the basis to hold him
in the functional equivalent ofsolitary confinemenL
106. There is alsoastrange, but telling, annotation onl8February 2011. In typewritten font, in
the "Remarks" section, the C^A Board states,"Due to the nature ofSND'scharges and national
security concerns, SND is potentially facingasevere sentence to confinement." Someone, in
handwriting, inserted the word "alleged" between "SND's" and "charges." 7^. What is clear is
that the Brig was trying to avoid the appearance that it was punishing PFC Manning based on the

56

23510

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

nature of the charges against him, hence the word "alleged"(even though it did not fit into the
sentence).
107. By the end ofPFCManning'stime at O^^titico, the C^A reviews refiect the fact that PFC
Manning had withdrawn from the C^A process and was being guarded with staff That, in tum,
was used against him asabasis upon which to continue his POI and MAX status. Onl8March
2011(after PFC Manning was subjected to additional restrictions owing to his comment about
his underwear), the C^A Board noted "SND'sdemeanor has become secluded^sicjfiom the
majority ofthe Brigstaffand previous visitors"7^halsonoted"SNDhasrecentlybegun to
isolate himself, showing limited interest in conversation with staff or his counselor..." 7^. On
25 March 2011, there is the exact same entry: "SND has recently begun to isolate himself,
showing limited interest in conversation with staff or his counselor..." 7^ O n l ApriFtheC^A
Board repeats once again,"SNDcontinues to isolate himself, showing limited interest in
conversation with staff or his counselor..."7^ On8April,not surprisingly, the exact same
entry appears: "SND continues to isolate himself, showing limited interest in conversation with
staff or his counselor..."
108. lncredulously,at least two of the entries towards the end ofPFC Manning'sconfinement at
Ouantico suggest that there is actually something PFC Manning could do to have the onerous
conditions ofhis confinement removed. O n l April 2011,CW02 Barnes writes,"SND'smood
has been somber. There is no detailed conversations as in the pasL NolitecontacL Lately,has
not requested any special accommodations; has not been appearing in front ofthe C^A Board to
give input to makeadifference."
CW02 Barnes actually had the audacity to suggest that if
PFC Manning were to appear before the C^A Board, it would "makeadifference." Based on
the entries in the C^Areviews(which were, of course, done at the behest ofCol.Oltman), it is
clear that there was nothing PFC Manning could ever do to change the circumstances ofhis
confinemenL In f^ct,when PFC Manning did appear before the C^A Board on 25 February
2011,the Board wrote "SND requested to appear infiont^sicjofthe classification and
assignment board, but had no new issues to bring to the board'sattention, that were not already
voiced in his previous appearances before the board." 7^ Thus, it is clear that when PFC
Manning did appear before the C^A Board, it wholly discounted what he had to say.
109. Moreover, the Board'scomment that "^PFC Manning] had no new issues to bring to the
board'sattention that were not already voiced in his previous appearances before the board" is
wholly absurd. At the time ofthe review in question, PFC Manning had been in the functional
equivalent ofsolitary confinement for eight months what "new issues" could PFC Manning
have possibly raised7 That is,what "new" reason could PFC Manning have provided to the
Board that would have made the Board members think,"Thanks for bringing that up. Maybe we
should lessen your confinement restrictions."7 It is ridiculous to think that the Brig would bait
PFC Manning into participating in the process (by suggesting that there was something he could
do or say to change the conditions ofhis confinement) but then dismiss his participation in the
process because he didn't say anything "new."

57

23511

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

110.Onl5April 2011,CW02 Bames writes in the C^A Board notes, "SND remains guarded.
Spoke to SND on 20110411regarding being more open and engaging in communication in
efforts to adjust handling but no change has been seen. SND has not spoken to me about coming
offPOlalthoughlexplainedwhatheneedstodo."
Again, it is unbelievable that O^^^fico
Brig officials would suggest that there was something that "he needs to do" to get off ofPOl
status. Ifeight months ofrepeated recommendations from Brig psychiatrists, coupled with pleas
fiom PFC Manning, his lawyer and the community at large, did not resuh ofalessening of
restrictions, nothing ever would, his abundantly clear that ifPFC Manning had not been
transferred to theJRCF,he would still be in MAX and on POI at O^^titicotoday,stripping naked
every night,wearingasuicide smock, sleeping on suicide bedding, and covering himself witha
suicide blankeL
111. his also clear from looking at the C^A Board notes that no weight was accorded to the
psychiatrists'recommendations to remove PFC Manning from POI. Sometimes, the entries
would annotateasentence or two from the psychiatrists'recommendations, but would make
absolutely no effort to explain why the recommendation was overridden. For instance, on 25
February2011,the Remarks section reads:
SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND does not
have strong family ties, and or relationships with immediate family. SND
requested to appear infront^sic] ofthe classification and assignment board, but
had no new issues to bring to the board'sattention, that were not already voiced in
his previous appearances before the board. SND was evaluated by Col Malone on
20110225. Col Malone annotated the SND'sbehavior and thought content is
normal and his thinking process is clear. Col Malone annotated that SND does
not need to be segregated from general population due toatreatable mental
disorder and that SND would only need routine examinations in the future. Col
Malone stated that SND remains in early remission ofan anxiety disorder. Col
Malone is also tapering SND offofhis prescribed medications. Due to the nature
ofSND'salleged charges and national security concerns, SND is potentially
facingasevere sentence to confinemenL
The "Remarks" section isacompletenonsequitur,withabunch of random facts and no
justification for the decision to retain PFC Manning in POI and MAX. The Brig makes no
attempt to explain why the opinion ofCOF Malone is outright ignored.
112. The C^A Board reviews are not the only evidence that the psychiatrists'opinions meant
nothing to the Brig given the order by Col. Oltman that PFC Manning would not be removed
from MAX and POF In PFC Manning'sconversation with MSGT Papakie following the first
incident where PFC Manning was placed on Suicide Risk, it is obvious that Brig officials would
never be swayed by the opinions ofpesky mental health providers. The conversation between
the two went as follows,with MSGT Papakie speaking inaloud and booming voice:

58

23512

United Statesv.PFC BradleyFManning
Defense Article 13 Motion

PFC Manning: Why waslon, why waslon prevention of status for almost6
months7
MSGT Papakie; ^chuckles to himself^lknow this is no secret to you...lhave
plenty ofdocumentation. Plenty ofdocumentation based on things that you've
said, things that you've done. Actions lhave to make sure, we have to make
sure, that you're taken care of
PFC Manning; Yes, MSCT.
MSGT Papakie; Things that you've said and things that you've done don't steer
us on the side of"ok,well,he canjustbeanormal detainee." They make us stay
on the side ofcaution.
PFC Manning; But what about recommendations by the psychiatrist to remove
meoffthestatus7
MSGT Papakie: Who'shere every day7 Who'shere every day7 Weare. Who
sees you every day7 That'sallheis,isarecommendation. Wehave, by law,
rules and regulations set forth to make sure fromajail standpoint that Bradley
Manning does not hurt himself Maybe fiomapsychiatric standpoint, the
recommendation he'sgiven lgetit,lgot it, understand, 01^7 But he'snot the
only decision maker. Amental health specialist is not the only decision that gets
made.
Attachment 25. MSGT Papakie also repeated on2March2011that there was nothing PFC
Manning could ever do to remove himselffrom POF despite the recommendations of mental
health providers.
113. Col. Choike also discounted the medical health providers'recommendations. He stated
that POI status is assigned to those "prisoners who have given an indication that they intend or
are contemplating harming themselves. This status is not linked toamedicalofficer'sapproval.'
^^^Attachmentl8. He also stated,"Amental health provider does not need to authorize
administrative segregation to prevent self-injury provided the segregation is not being done to
circumventamedialprofessional'sopinion that suicide risk is not necessary."^
Attachment
19
114. It is clear from the C^A Board notes. Col.Choike'sstatements, and MSGT Papakie's
comments that the repeated recommendations ofthe psychiatrists meant ^^.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ to
Otiantico Brig officials. After alF they all knew what had to be done follow Col. Oltman's
order and maintain the status quo at all costs.

^Col.Choline deliberately avoids the million dollar question: If you are going to ignore the repeated
recommendations ofpsychiatrists for nine months, why bother having their input at all7

59

23513

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

115. CapL Moore, the psychiatrist who was originallyaBrig psychiatrist and later appointed to
the Defense team, expressed extreme frustration about the "bizarre" circumstances at O^^^fico:
The way that they're treating this is so...it'sjust bizarre all the way around. I'm
just surprised that they would become so intrusive because I'dbe concemed about
what that looks like later on. And they've not seemed to have any qualms at all
about reaching down so heavy handed. And when I've asked...and again,
there'snodocumentation^ljust have people, either the guards or the corps man
or anyone else telling me,"Why in the world is this going on7"

And whenltried to talk to CapL Fewis, she basically said,"AIlIknow is thati
don't want to be involved in thisl" And shejust came back fiom working with
Guantanamo Bay,and so she hasalotofher concerns about,"What are you guys
doing with this7 How is this consultant helping you with Manning7 lmean,what
are they doing7" Andldon't know either. It'snot an interrogation,1don't think.
He'snot been adjudicated, so there'salot of risk to putting too many services out
there when somebody is in this pretrial situation. Idon't know. Idon't know.
It'sbizarre. Ilook at is like if there'sachild sex abuse person who has an
accusation you don't now bring in some psychologist or something to figure out
how we're going to manage this person. Because you don't know. They're
supposed to be assumed innocenL What you're supposed to be doing is
protecting where they're not incriminating themselves. So,Idon'tknow. It's
beenabizarre thing...I've never seen anything like iL

^PFC Manning] comes fiom suchachaotic, neglected background to begin with.
In some ways, it'sjust the latest form of what he'shad to endure. It'sjust sad. It
seems like all the protections you would ever have for somebody that'saccused
he'snot even convicted of anything. He doesn't have any rights at all. It'sjust
...Idon't know. Itry to get the emotions out ofit because it'sso frustrating to
me.
Oral Statement by CapL Moore to Mr. Coombs.
116. Those "bizarre" circumstances that CapL Moore refers to circumstances that the Defense
submits clearly amount to pretrial punishment can in fact be understood when placed against
the backdrop ofsomebody deciding very early on that PFC Manning would never be removed
from MAX and POI so long as he was at O^^^tico.
c) The Entire Articlel38ProcessWasTainted By Col.Oltman'sOrder

60

23514

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

117. his clear that CW04Averhart was at the meeting where Col.Oltman issued his order to
keep PFC Manning on MAX and on POI indefinitely. Accordingly, CW04Averhart's
justification ofhis actions and decision to retain PFC Manning in these conditions must be
viewed in light ofthe fact that he was ordered to do so. In short, CW04Averhart'ssubmissions
in Aftachmentl5andl6are tainted by his role in effectuating Col.Oltman'sorder.
118. CW04Averhartpaintsapicture where he balanced competing interests and, using his
discretion as the BrigOlC,determined that MAX and POI was the appropriate classification for
PFC Manning. He states that "at all times, my decisions have been guided by recommendations
fiom the Brig staff, the C^A Board, and mental health providers and also through interactions
with PFC Manning." ^^^Attachmentl5. This could not be further from the truth. CW04
Averhart'sdecisions were based on marching orders from Col.Oltman that PFC Manning would
be held in MAX and POI indefinitely.
119. Because CW04Averhart'sresponses to PFC Manning'sArticlel38 Complaint were relied
on by Col. Choike in denying redress, the whole process was corrupted from the start. PFC
Manning thus never stoodachance of getting relief from the conditions of confinement at
Ouantico because those with the keys to relieving him ofthese conditions were part ofthe
process that created those conditions to begin with.
d) The Incident onl8January2011 was Retribution for the Protest Outside Ouantico the
Previous Day
120. The conversation between MSGT Papakie and PFC Manning, discussed above, stemmed
from the incident on18January2011whereCWO4Averhart decided to put PFC Manning on
Suicide Risk status after PFC Manning had an anxiety attack at recreation call. The Defense
submits that Brig guards provoked the anxiety attack because they were angry aboutaprotest
that took place the day before outside the gates of Oi^^titico that was designed to bring attention
to the conditions ofPFCManning'sconfinemenL Onavideo filmed by one of the protestors,
Ot^^^tico guards can be heard saying,"Ouit asking questionsl Otii^ asking questionsl" and
"You're not helping out, man, you're not helping out."^^
121. Onl8January 2011,Brig guards were agitated and confrontational with PFC Manning.
Instead ofthe usual two to three guards, there were four guards assigned to PFC Manning. They
immediately began issuing confiicting orders, and were insistent that PFC Manning use the
expression "aye, sir" rather than "yes, sir." The harassment continued when the guards escorted
PFC Manning into the recreation hall. Due to the belligerence ofthe guards and being yelled at,
PFC Manning began to feel faint and dizzy. He tookastep away from the guards, as they got
ready to restrain him. PFC Manning immediately put his hands in the air and said,"l'mnot
doing anything,1amj^ust trying to follow your orders." In GM2Webb'saccount of the events.

' See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4eNzokgRIw.

61

23515

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

he states that after the incident, and while still at recreation ca11,"^PFC Manning] stated he didn't
understand why he was being treated different and that it seemed that all the guards were anxious
and it was making him anxious." ^^^Attachment24. Not surprisingly,Brig guards reported the
incidentthatthey,themselves, had created. ^^^Attachment3,SFCNAVlNST1640.9C, Section
4401(3)(warning that "arbitrary actions ^by Brig officials] may precipitateadisturbance.").
122. Later that day,about 30 minutes after he had been returned to his cell,the PCF
Commander, CW04Averhart, visited PFC Manning in his cell. When PFC Manning tried to
explain what happened earlier that day during the recreation call and expressed continued
frustration over the conditions ofhis confmement,CW04Averhart stopped PFC Manning and
said,"1 am the commander" and "No one will tell me what to do." He also stated to PFC
Manning that he was, for all practical purposes "God." PFC Manning responded by saying that
CW04Averhart still had to follow Brig procedures and that everyone hasaboss they have to
answer to. When PFC Manning made these comments, CW04Averhart placed PFC Manning
on Suicide Risk status.^^
123. The facts permit the logical inference that PFC Manning'sharassment at the hands of the
guards onl8January 2011 was in response to the protests outside O^^t^fi^o the previous day.
When the guards'harassment resulted in PFC Manning being overcome with anxiety,CW04
Averhart used this asapretextual justification for placing PFC Manning on Suicide Risk.
Moreover, the timing ofthe Suicide Risk order (i.e.after PFC Manning had made comments
challenging CW04Averhart'sauthority)strongly suggests that the Suicide Risk designation was
retributive in nature. Two separate Brig psychiatrists expressly disapproved ofthe Suicide Risk
designation by CW04Averhart. Finder the Navy'sownrules,"When prisoners are no longer
considered to be suicide risks byamedical officer, they shall be returned to appropriate
quarters." PFC Manning was not removed fiom Suicide Risk until 20 January 2011 in violation
ofNavy Regulations. ^^^Attachment3;^^^^^.^^ Attachment 22 ("hwarrants mentioning,
however, that on two occasions,6August2010andl8January2011,amedical officer
determined that suicide risk status was no longer warranted and the brig staffdid not
immediately take PFC Manning offsuicide risk status. ...Paragraph 4205.5b of reference(a)
states "When prisoners are no longer consider to be suicide risks byamedical officer, they shall
be returned to appropriate quarters,"in these cases, once the medical officer'sevaluation was
provided to the brig staff, steps should have been taken to immediately remove him fiom suicide
risk, toastatus below that.").
124. Where Brig officials fail to follow their own rules, this provides evidence ofan intent to
punish^^^^^v^.^7^^^^^^^,42MJ 547,562(A.F.CLCrimAppl995)(''if orders or other
action independently violate law or regulation, that may beareason to inferapunitive intent or
reject an asserted nonpunitive objective."). The circumstances surrounding this incident lead toa
singular conclusion; that PFC Manning was punished foraprotest beyond his control and for
^^CWt^4Averhan denies that this conversation took place. As evidence that tbe conversation did not take place, he
states,"had he spol^en to me in that manner.lwould have madeadiscipline report on him for insubordination and
staffharassment."^^^ Attachment 14. It is ironic that CWt^4Averhart admits that had PFC Manning insisted that
C^04Averhart follow Brig rules, the result would have beenadisciplinaryintraction.

62

23516

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

insisting that Brig officials follow their own procedures. ^^^^^^^^^v.^^^^^^.^,375 F.3d
1269, 1274(11^^ Cir.2004)(vacating the judgment of the district court where the court failed to
take into account plaintifFsallegations that the more the plaintiff complained to prison and jail
officials about his treatment, the more he was treated inasevere manner).
e) The2March2011Decision to Strip PFC Manning ofHisClothin^Was Retaliation for
PFC Mannin^'sQuestionin^ of the Conditions ofHis Confinement
125. Further evidence of retaliatory punishment is found in the2March2011decision to strip
PFC Manning ofall his clothing. When PFC Manning was informed that his Articlel38
Complaint had been denied, he asked Brig guards what he could do to improve his confinement
conditions. When the Brig Operations Supervisor, MSCT Papakie, responded that there was
nothing that PFC Manning could do to change the circumstances ofhis confinement, PFC
Manning became upset and frustrated. PFC Manning stated that he was not going to kill himself,
and pointed out how ludicrous the whole situation was by stating that ifhe wanted to kill
himself, he could do so with the elastic band ofhis underwear or his fiip-fiops. Brig officials
used PFC Manning'ssarcastic comment asajustification to further worsen the conditions ofhis
confinemenL The only logical conclusion to be drawn from the facts is that Brig officials
intended to punish PFC Manning for speaking out about the absurdity ofthe situation. Thisis
particularly so given that Brig mental health officials expressly indicated that PFC Manning's
comments were not indicative ofan intention to cause self-harm. Ratherthey were part ofthe
process ofPFCManning's"intellectualization" of the extremely rigorous conditions ofhis
confinemenL
Attachments 2, 9.
126. Moreover, the degradation and humiliation to which PFC Manning was subjected on the
momingsof3March2011through7March2011by being forced to stand naked at attention
also shows an intent by the Brig to punish PFC Manning for the comments he made on2March
2011. Marine spokesperson First FLBrianVilliard explained that "Private Manning will also be
required to stand outside his cell naked duringamoming inspection, after which his clothing will
be retumed to him." Hisjustification for not allowing PFC Manning to have his clothes for
morning inspection was thaf'detainees are awakened each morning and immediately come out
oftheir cells. Private Manning cannot be given his underwear back before then...because that
would require waking him up ahead oftime." ^^^http;^^www.nytimes.com^2011^03^05^world^
05manning.html. So the officialU.S.Government position is that it is better to forceapretrial
detainee to stand naked at attention than wake him upafew minutes earlier to give him back his
c1othing7
127. There is no conceivable legitimatejustification for requiringadetainee to stand naked at
attention. Former Secretary ofState Spokesperson,P.J.Crowley,who was fired for calling PFC
Manning'streatment at O^^titico "ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid,"spoke specifically
about PFC Manning'sfdrced nudity at the hands ofOti^^fi^o officials. He stated:
Based on 30 years of government experience, if you have to explain whyaguy is
standing naked in the middle ofajailcelF you haveapolicy in need of urgent

63

23517

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

review. The Pentagon was quick to point out that no women were present when
he did so,which is completely beside the poinL
The issue isaloss of dignity,not modesty.
Our strategic narrative connects our policies to our interests,values and
aspirations. While what we do, day in and day out, is broadly consistent with the
universal principles we espouse, individual actions can become disconnected.
Every once inawhile,evenatop-notch symphony strikesadiscordant note. So it
is in this instance.
The Pentagon has said that it is playing the Manning case by the book. The book
tells us what actions we can take, but not always what we ^^^^^^ do. Actions can
be legal and still not smart. With the Manning case unfolding inafishbowl-like
environment, going strictly by the book is not good enough. Private Manning's
overly restrictive and even petty treatment undermines what is otherwiseastrong
legal and ethical position.
When the United States leads by examp1e,we are not trying to winapopularity
contesL Rather,we are pursuing our long-term strategic interesL The United
States cannot expect others to meet international standards ifwe are seen as
falling short. Differences become strategic when magnified through the lens of
today'srelentless24^7 global media environmenL
So,whenlwas asked about the "elephant in the room,"Isaid the treatment of
Private Manning,whilewe11-intentioned,was "ridiculous" and
"counterproductive" and, yes,"stupid".
Istandbywhatlsaid. The United States should set the global standard for
treatment ofits citizens and then exceed iL his what the world expects of us. It
is what we should expect of ourselves.
^^^http:^^www.guardian.co.uk^commentisfree^cifamerica^2011^mar^29^brad1eymanningwikileaks.
128. It is well established that forced nudity isaclassic humiliation technique. Theonly
permissible inference is that the Brig intended to punish PFC Manning by subjecting him to
humiliating treatment because PFC Manning correctly pointed out the absurdity ofhis POI
status. Brig officials further added insuh to injury when they stated publicly that it would be
"inappropriate" to discuss the decision to strip PFC Manning and stand naked at attention
"becausetodiscussthedetailswouldbeaviolationof^PFC Manning's] privacy." ^^^http:^^
www.nytimes.com^2011^03^05^wor1d^05manning.htmF Again, the Govemment'sposition is that
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ PFC Manning'sforced nudity is the action that violates PFC Manning'sprivacy7
Really7 How about the forced nudity itself7
129. Federal courts have found constitutional violations of an accused'sconstitutional rights in
circumstances far less invasive than these. In7^^B^^^v.Bf^^^^,378 F.3d1020,1029(9thCir.

64

23518

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Article13Motion

2004), pretrial detainees challenged the practice ofprisonstafi^usingwebcams to stream live
images ofpretrial detainees on the interncL The Ninth Circuit Court ofAppeals indicated that
"having every moment of one'sdaily activities exposed to general and world-wide scrutiny
would anyone uncomfortable...^The practice] constitutesalevelofhumiliation that almost
anyone would regard as profoundly undesirable and strive to avoid." 7^. at 1030-31. Certainly,
being required to stand naked at attention for several minutes in full view of guards who
happened to be in the vicinity is at least as humiliating as having one'sclothed image captured
byawebcam. Toborrow language from 7^^^^^,the additional impact on PFC Manning of
being forced to stand naked in full view ofBrig guards is "greater by several orders of magnitude
than the intrusion inherent in incarceration." 7^.atl030. The exploitation ofPFC Manning in
this manner can be seen as nothing short of retributive. 7^. at 1030-31(noting that retribution is
notalegitimate govemment objective than can justify adverse conditions of detention for pretrial
detainees); ^^^^^.^^16C C.J.S.Constitutional Faw^l549 ("What might otherwise bealawful
detention becomes an unconstitutional restriction when prison conditions become so
dehumanizing as to constitute an additional hardship beyond the need for custody in violation of
the detainees'due process rights).
130. Military courts have also found unlawful pretrial punishment in circumstances where the
conduct at issue was designed to humiliate an accused. 1n(7^^7^^^^^^^.^v.C^^^.^,47M.J.330,
332 (C.A.A.F.1997), the Court of Appeal for the Armed Forces emphasized that:
the courts will not tolerate egregious, intentional misconduct by command where
there is no evidence ofalegitimate, non-punitive objective for the conduct
complained of, the apparent singling out ofan accused for personal humiliation,
and restrictions on liberty so oppressive as to be more consistent with the status of
prisoner.
Similarly, in (7^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^^^^^^^^, 59 M.J.618, 625 (Army CL Crim.App. 2003), the Army
Court ofCriminal Appeals stated,"^w]hen commanders and superiors publicly denounce,
degrade, or humiliate an accused prior to trial, ^this] may constitute unlawful pretrial punishment
warranting confinement credit." 1n^^^7^^.^^^^^.^v.^^^^^^^^^,55M.J.92,94(C.A.A.F.2001),
the Court ofAppeals for the Armed Forces indicated that "^pjretrial punishment includes public
denunciation and degradation." In that case, the accused(who was pending administrative
discharge)was ordered to the front ofhis unit formation while the detachment commander read
the charges against him and read the accused his rights inaloud voice. The militaryjudge, in
awarding sentencing credit, indicated that "^t]he actions that occurred in this case are
inexcusable, reprehensible, and cannot be condoned by any court." ^^ at93. ^^^^^.^^^^^7^^
^^^^^.^v. F^7^^^^7 7^^^^^.32M.J.341,342^3(C.M.A.1991)(supervisingofficer'spostingon
workplace bulletin board ofaserious incident report,which included Specialist Perez'salleged
drug offense andaprior letter of reprimand,was prohibited byArticle13);^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.
^^^^^^^^39 M.J.1097,1100(A.C.M.R.1994)(finding company commander'sremarks to
accused in front of others identifying him asacriminal suspect withapropensity to steal
constitutedpretrialpunishment);^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.7^^^^^^34M.J.596,597(A.C.M.R.
1992)(grantingArtic1el3relief where first sergeant sarcastically referred to accused as his

65

23519

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

"favoriteAWOL case" before unit formation); ^^^^^^.^^^^^^v.^^^^^^^^^,59MF618, 625
(Army CL Crim. App. 2003)(awarding confinement credit for unlawful pretrial punishment
where guards or other persons in authority called the accused, an infantry sergeant,"private");
^^^7^^^^^^^^v7^^^^^^,2009WL4917899, ^2 (NMCLCrimApp)(finding illegal pretrial
punishment where the circumstances ofthe accused'sappearance in irons before his shipmates
could cause court to question whether accused sufferedaloss of the presumption ofinnocence
before potential court-martial members).
131. Surely ifdeliberately calling someone by the wrong rank or discussing the charges against
the accused in front ofothers constitutes humiliating or degrading treatment which military
courts will not countenance, so too does requiring an accused to stand naked at attention in full
view ofothers. The fact that this action was later "justified" on the basis that it would have been
too difficuh to wake PFC Manning up earlier to give him back his clothes and that officials
refused to discuss the forced nudity any further because to do so would "violate PFC Manning's
privacy" is ftirther illustrative ofthe general level ofabsurdity at the O^^^fico Brig.
f) The Evidence Shows that Ouantico SimplyWanted to Protect Itself at the Expense of
PFC Manning
132. The evidence further bears out the conclusion that Oti^^tico Brig officials maintained PFC
Manning in MAX and on POI for nine months in an effort to protect ^^^^.^^^v^.^ professionally
and institutionally at the expense ofPFC Manning. On31January2010,apretrial detainee
awaiting court martial at O^^^fico committed suicide; the detainee was not in MAX or POF^^ In
an effort to ensure that no other prisoner would die "on their watch" (to borrow an expression
fiom Col.Oltman), the Brig simply decided that it would not risk the embarrassment ofanother
suicide and thus placed PFC Manning in MAX and POI with no hope for re-classification.
133. Given the high-profile nature ofPFC Manning'scase, the Brig simply refused to take any
chance(evenifinfinitesimally small) that it would be publicly embarrassed once again. Indeed,
CapL Hocter references this in his affidavit where he states:
The Marine Corps, including O^^titico, has hadamiserable time with the problem
ofsuicide recently. 1am certain, from their point of view,the best way to avoida
tragedy is to watchasituation very closely and take action quickly. It has been
difticuh to help them see that good intentions can have unintended consequences
(e.g., making the detainee more anxious and causing occasional agitation).
^^^Attachment7. In fact, the concem about embarrassment is so real atthe O^^^fi^o Brig thata
special rule was implemented to deal with iL ^^^Attachment3,SFCNAV1NST1640.9C,
Section 4401(4)("Seriousincidents^a11eged incidents that could resuh in embarrassment to the
naval service or focus public attention on the confinement facility in question shall be reported to
NAVPERSCOM(PFRS68)orCMC(PSFCorrections)perarticle8112ofthis manual") A
• See http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/02/marine quantico brig death 02041Ow/.

66

23520

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

desire to protect one'sprofessional reputation and avoid public embarrassment is notalegitimate
non-punitive purposejustifying the imposition ofrestrictive confinement conditions.
134. Further, evidence shows that certain Brig officials made decisions regarding PFC
Manning'sconfinement either "because they could" or in order to further their own professional
self^interesL CW04Averhart'sdecision to place PFC Manning under Suicide Risk came right
after he told PFC Manning that he was, for all practical purposes "God" and that consequently,
he could make any decision he wanted. CW02 Bames is understood to have indicated that she
would not change PFC Manning'sconfinement conditions because it was not worth the risk to
her career. Both of these officials'decisions were arbitrary,capricious, and refiectedadesire to
protect their self-interest at the expense ofPFC Manning. Since the decisions were made for
nonlegitimate purposes, they constitute punishment in contravention ofPFC Manning'sArticle
13 rights.
g) Ouantico Bri^ Officials Were Grasping At StrawsToUse Anything PFC Manning Did
and Said(or Didn't Do or Didn't SayJA^ainst Him
135. Further evidence ofintent to punish PFC Manning is found in the Brig'spracticeoftrying
to find ^^^^^^^^ about PFC Manning'swords, conduct and demeanor that could be used against
him. This is clearly evidenced in the conversation between PFC Manning and GYSGT Blenis
that took place after PFC Manning had an anxiety attack at recreation call onl8January 2011:
PFC Manning: Igot dizzy...
GYSGT Blenis; Wasn't dehydration7
PFC Manning: No,1was anxious becauseldidn't know why the guards were so
edgy. ...Theyraisedtheirvoice...And1didn't...Iwas getting anxious
because they were getting anxious. Solwas trying to figure out what was the
cause ofthem getting anxious. It seemed to me that they were looking for
something wrong...
CYSGT Blenis: Something wrong as inarules violation, or something wrong as
in...
PFC Manning: Yes.
CYSGT Blenis: Rules vio1ation7
PFC Manning: Yes, sir. Because I've been here foralong time, so everything
becomes automatic. Soldon't know iflsay something and they respond. Idon't
know what happened. I've been in, inside so long Idon't remember the last
timelwas outside.

67

23521

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

^Portions ofthe rest ofthe dialogue between GYSGT Blenis and PFC Manning
are inaudible]

PFC Manning: Ok, yes,1started,1got in here and it was normal. Andtheni
started reading my book. Andthen,1wanttosayitwasMSCT^inaudible]that
was the first to show up. And then he came in and was asking me all these
questions. Iwas, ah, trying to figure out how to word the answers without
causing any more anxiety. Iwas trying to figure out ways of not sounding, or not
being construed as...ways that things weren't going to be construed so that...
just trying to figure out ways in whichlcould tactfully say whatlwas trying to
say without violating any rules and regulation or raise any concem about...
GYSGT Blenis: Concern'salready raised...^inaudible]
PFC Manning: Yes, but I'mtrying not, I'm trying, I'm trying to avoid the
concern, and it'sactually causing the concern. Imean, cause, I'mgetting...
every day that passes by,1'm getting increasingly frustrated, I'mnot going to lie.
Because I'mtrying to do everything that1can^^^^^^^^aconcern,therefbre1
appear as thoughlam causing more concem. O r l . . . O r it seems that I'm causing
more concem or everybody'slooking for something to cause concern. So that's
what frustrates me....Trying to work out the most politically correct way of...

PFC Manning: No, no. The situation that happened today was more of...you
know,1'm lucid and aware and just trying to figure...It'sjustaquestion of
trying not to appear likelwas in k^uwaiL Because that'smy main concern every
day,ishowdo1getoffofP01status7Howdo1getofl^ofP01status7 When will
Ibe taken off ofP01status7 What is being used tojustify the precautions7 You
know...What concems, you know,whatamldoingthat'sconcerning
^inaudible]7 So I'm constantly trying to figure out, run through all ofthose
things. And trying to make sure I'mnot doing anything...

PFC Manning: Yes,a1itt1e.Ifee1 like the facility,honestly,is looking for reasons
to keep me on POI.
GYSGT Blenis: Inaudible. Icantellyou'no'...

68

23522

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

PFC Manning; Imean, at least not at the stafi^leveFFmthinking the CO^me,
myself, personally.
GYSGT Blenis: Inaudible...Fromalogistical standpoint, it'saburden on us....
PFC Manning: Yes, MSGT
GYSGT Blenis: Nobody finds that asajoy. 1t'snotapunitivething,I
understand why someone would see it asapunitive thing because restrictions
placed ^inaudible] ...lean tell you that...since you have been here...IwishI
hadahundred Mannings...
PFC Manning: And that'swhaL..And that'swhereldon't understand why the
continuation ofthe policy and restrictions beyond the time recommended by you
andthepsychiatrisL Imean the psychiatrist, is saying. Imean, I've got my own
forensic psychiatrist that'ssaying now that the POI status is actually doing
psychiatric harm and not, you know,andit'sactually,youknow,increasing my
chances, rather than decreasing...
GYSGT Blenis: Did you feel like that two weeks ago7
PFC Manning: What'sthat7
GYSGT Blenis: Did you feel like that two weeks ago7
PFC Manning: Yes GYSGT
CYSGT Blenis: Uh, two weeks ago,1asked you, like, how you were feeling and
you said you were fine, do you remember that7
PFC Manning; Yes, andlstill feel fine. 1mean,1feel,Ifeel fine, but at the same
time, I've been putting in, I've been putting in...
Attachment 25.
136. The conversation clearly shows that PFC is struggling to convey his thought to GYSGT
Blenis without "getting in trouble."^^ PFC Manning is desperately trying to find the right words
to express his frustration with his continued classification without raising "more concem" in the
minds ofthe Brig officials.
137. The end ofthe videotaped conversation is particularly telling. PFC Manning tries to
express the common sense observation ofhis psychiatrist that the POI status may be causing him
This is especially apparent ifone watches the video.

69

23523

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

psychological harm. PFC Manning says,"1 mean, I've got my own forensic psychiatrist that's
now saying the POI status is actually doing psychiatric harm and not, you know,and is actually,
you know,increasing my chances, rather than decreasing..." B^. Although the video is inaudible
in parts, it seems like GYSGT Blenis latches on to that particular comment to raise the red fiag.
That is, PFC Manningjust said that POI might be causing psychological harm and might
"increase^ej^his] chances, rather than decreased] ^his chances]." 7^ What more proof do we
needthatP01is,infact,justified7 GYSCT Blenisthen prods PFC Manning, seeking to geta
damning admission from him: "Two weeks ago,1asked you, like, how you were feeling and you
said you were fine, do you remember that7"
PFC Manning does not take the bait after he
realizes where GYSCT Blenis is going. He says,"Yes, andlstill feel fine. Imean, yes,Ifeel
fine. Yes, but at the same time, I've been putting in..."
As is abundantly clear, PFC
Manning is in an absolute "no win" situation. Ifhe points out that POI might be causing
additional psychological harm(as indicated by Brig doctors), the Brig officials will use that
against him to continue tojustify the conclusion that he is at risk of selfharm.
138. On21January 2011,PFC Manning appeared before the C^A Board and was asked about
the statement on his intake questionnaire regarding suicide that he was "always planning but
never acting." CW02 Barnes describes the event as follows:
^PFC Manning] told the Board that this statement may have been false. This then
raised the obvious concern ofwhether he was sincere in his statements that he did
not currently intend to harm himself Amemberofthe Board asked how they
could trust any ofthe statements given his admission that he may have madea
false statement about his suicidal thoughts at intake into the PCF. PFC Manning
was also asked i f i t was fair to assume that the statement to the Board that he did
not intend to harm himselfcould be false and he replied "yes." This caused great
concern among the Board members given their responsibility to ensure PFC
Manning'ssafety.
^^^Attachment2F
139. his clear to any reasonable person what happened at this meeting. PFC Manning was
trying desperately to get o f f o f P O l status after so many months. He then backtracked on the
statement that he had made in the intake questionnaire in the hopes that the confinement facility
would see reason and remove him from POF The C^A Board then used PFC Manning's
statement against him inaclassic "gotcha" moment: ^^7^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^7^^^^^^^^^^7.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^7^^^ ^^^^7^^^^^^^
There is actually only one honest answer to this question and that is the answer that PFC
Manning gave "yes,1could be lying. ^^^^7^^^^ " But it was too late. The C^A Board had
tricked PFC Manning into giving them an answer that they could document in their paperwork to
continue tojustify MAX and POF Apparently,theC^A Board saw themselves as more
appropriately placed to opine on PFC Manning'srisk of selfharm based onatrick question than
several "06" mental health providers who continued to maintain that PFC Manning was not at
risk of self harm.

70

23524

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

140. Afterthis meeting, PFC Manning largely tried to avoid engaging in extensive dialogue with
Brig officials. After all, anything he said or did(or didn't say or didn't do)was going to be used
against him. 1ronically,the fact ^7.^^^that he had become quieter and more reserved was then
used against him. In CW02 Barnes'statementjustifying why she increased the POI restrictions
on PFC Manning, she states.
There wasalack of rapport and trust between PFC Manning and the PCF staff
The fact that PFC Manning was not communicating with the staffas much as he
hadinthepast...wasalsoaconcernfdrme.
^^^Attachment21. There is no more apt illustration ofthe saying,"You're damned if you do.
You're damned ifyou don't." IfPFC Manning spoke to Brig staffand participated in the C^A
process,^^ his words and conduct were used against him to keep him in MAX and POF IfPFC
Manning didn't speak as much to Brig staffand refused to participate in the C^A process,his
lack ofwords and his conduct were used against him to keep him in MAX and POF
141. In short, PFC Manning was doomed from D a y l . Brig officials looked for any little thing
to use against PFC Manning to continue to effectuate Col.Oltman'sorders that PFC Manning
would remain in MAX and on POI for the duration ofhis time at Ot^^^fi^o. This would enable
them to create the paper trail that they could later use for plausible deniability. Such is
abundantly clear in MSGT Papakie'sresponse to PFC Manning'squestion of why he was still in
POI after so many months:
MSCT Papakie; ^chuckles to himself]lknow this is no secret to you...lhave
plenty ofdocumentation. Plenty ofdocumentation based on things that you've
said, things that you've done. Actions^lhave to make sure,we have to make
sure, that you're taken care of
Attachment 25.
142. Ott^^fico officials were never interested in actually evaluating whether PFC Manning
belonged in MAX and on POI ifthey were, they would have listened to recommendations from
three separate Brig mental health providers. Instead, they were looking to chronicle every little
thing that PFC Manning did or didn't do, or said or didn't say in order to provide them with the
"plenty ofdocumentation" they needed to support their continued decision to retain PFC
Manning in MAX and on POF
C.

FFC Manning s Article 13 Rights Were Violated Because the Imposition of Onerous
Confinement Conditions Served No Legitimate Government Objective

Tbe Defense is using the term "process" loosely here since it was clearthat the outcome was already
predetermined.

71

23525

United StatesvPFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

143. There was no legitimate govemment objective served by placing PFC Manning in MAX
and P01(collectively,the functional equivalent of solitary confinement)for9months and by
forcing him to endure humiliating treatmenL There are only three potential legitimate objectives
that could be conceivably served by the imposition ofmore restrictive than normal confinement
conditions:
a) Preventing PFC Manning from harming himself;
b) Preventing PFC Manning from harming others; and
c) Ensuring PFC Manning'spresence at trial.
^^^(7^^7^^^^^^^.^vC^^^^^, 62 M.J.411,414(C.A.A.F.2006)(notingthat legitimate
government objectives are "ensuring^detainee's] presence for trial" and "the security needs of
the confinement facility"); ^^^7^^.^^^^^.^v ^^7^^^^^^7^^,56M.J.671,679(ArmyCLCrim.App.
2001)(legitimate and non punitive government objectives are "to secure and safeguard the
confinement facility and to insure^detainee's] presence at trial."); ^^^^v. ^^.^^,441U.S.520,
540(1979)("1t is enough simplyto recognize that in addition to ensuring the detainees'presence
at triaF the effective management ofthe detention facility once the individual is confined isa
valid objective that may justify imposition of conditions and restrictions of pretrial detention").
^^^^^.^^Attachment3,SFCNAV1NST1640.9C,Section5101(3)(i)("Rightsarenotremoved
fiomaprisonerasapunishmentforarules
violation, but may be restricted, however,when there
isalegitimate penological interest, such as security or safety."). The conditionsofPFC
Manning'sconfinement were not at all related(much less rationally related) to any of these
objectives.
a) Preventing PFC Manning from Harming Himself
144. There was no psychiatric evidence to suggest that PFC Manning was at risk ofself-harm
during his time at O^^titico. Tothe contrary,the overwhelming evidence is that PFC Manning
was decidedly
at risk ofself-harm. Brig psychiatrists had,with very few exceptions,
consistently recommended for over eight months that PFC Manning be removed from POF
These recommendations were outright ignored no less than 30 times by the PCF Commander.
145. In his affidavit, CapL Hocter references his repeated recommendations to remove PFC
Manning from POI status all ofwhich were ignored by the Brig:
Ot^estionB. In your experience, does the O^^^fi^o Brig follow your
recommendation concerning either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention of Injury
Status^
l.No.They generally keep patients on precautions longer thanlrecommend.

72

23526

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

OuestionC. Have you made any recommendation concerning PFC Bradley
Manning s custody and classification status^ If so, what were your
recommendations"^
1. ... linitially recommended observing PFC Manning on suicide precautions for
the first couple ofweeks after his arrival,both because ofhis suicidal behavior in
l^uwait and because his medical record from k^uwaitincludedaquote ora
paraphrase from PFC Manning to the effect that he could be patient when it
comes to suicide.
2. Afteracouple of weeks, it seemed reasonable to downgrade his precaution
level to Prevention of Injury (POI) status, k^nowing that the Brig was very
concerned about his safety,and because there had beenasuicide in the Brig
earlier that year,1obtained the services of another forensic psychiatrist(Col.Rick
Malone)tobeaconsultant^second opinion. He evaluated the patient and
concurred that POI was appropriate. The Brig, aslbest recalFwaitedacouple of
weeks to put this recommendation into effecL
3. Subsequently,1recommended that he be removed from POI as he continued to
do relatively well in the Brig(occasional mild, odd behaviors such as dancing
around were noted in the log as well as possible sleep walking). Col. Malone
concurred. These recommendations were not followed.
4. In the fall (1am uncertain ofthe date); PFC Manning became agitated after an
odd incident with staff As best aslcould tell from discussing the matter with
Manning and with staff, he had been performing some kind ofyoga move in
which he contorted his limbs in suchaway that staff thought he was trying to hurt
himself They intervened and returned him to his cell. He was very upset about
this(not suicidal) and solbriefiy recommended he be put back on POI status asa
safeguard because he was so upseL Irescinded this recommendation the
following week as he had calmed.
5. Since then,lhave continued to recommend that POI precautions be removed.
As ofthe time ofmy leaving for Camp Fejeune to prepare for deployment, the
recommendations had not been followed. CAPT Moore and Col. Malone can
provide details ofwhat occurred nexL
OuestionD. Have yourrecommendations been followed bytheOt^^^fi^^
Brig7 If not,have you been given any reason fortheO^^ofi^oBrig^s
decision not to follow your recommendations^
l . N o . My understanding is that the Brig has not followed my recommendations
because ofgreat concern and worry that Manning will harm himself ItoldthemI
thought the Max status(witheveryl5minute visual checks ofthe detainee vice

73

23527

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

POI with every5minutechecks)was more than suflicient to ensure his safety,
fiomapsychiatric perspective. The every5minute checks done for POI is
extremely rigorous, particularly forasecond tier precaution. Fvery15minute
checks was common for suicide precautions in otherjails and correctional
facilities wherelhave worked.

^^^Attachment7.
146. CapL Hocter provided further elaboration inasubsequent affidavit:
Ot^cstionA. Do you mal^e recommendations to the O^^tttico Brig concerning
whetheradetainee is placed on either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention o f l n j u r y
Status^
Imake recommendation about suicide precautions, POF ^nd occasionally steps
that Brig might take to betteradetainee'scondition or deportment(more time to
exercise, give himajob, help him with the legal work onfinancialproblem,let
him talk to his wife or girlfriend more often, please make sureachaplain sees
him). The Brigtakes these under advisement and sometimes follows them,
usually noL In Manning'scase,1requested, in addition to removal of
precautions, more time to exercise. After quite some time, and numerous requests
(it became almost comical), this was granted.
OuestionB.Inyourexperience,doesthe0^^^fi^oBrigfollowyour
recommendation concerning either Suicide Risl^ or Prevention of Injury
Status7
The Brig frequently ignores or delays my recommendation regarding precautions,
including suicide precautions. This differs from any ofthe previousjails, brigs, or
prisons in whichlhave worked, military or civilian. This occurred even before
the suicide ofadetainee in January 2010. Prior to the Manning case, this, among
other issues, had make working at the Brig so frustrating thatlasked to be
relieved ofthese duties. This was not permitted, lhave struggled to make the
best ofasituation that was not professionally pleasing. The addition offorensic
psychiatry fellows to the mi1ieu(fbr me to teach)has been invigorating and lifted
my morale.

OuestionD.HaveyourrecommendationsbeenfollowedbytheO^^^fi^o
Brig7 I f not,have you been given anyreasonfortheOt^^^fi^o Brigs
decision not to follow your recommendations^

74

23528

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

Neither the Brig Commander nor the Security Battalion Commander gave me any
reasons for maintaining the POI precautions other than his safety. The Security
Battalion Commander intimated that he was receiving instructions fromahigher
authority on the matter but did not say from whom. Iknow that the higher base
authorities hadafrequent(sometimesweekly)meeting to discuss Manning, for
whichlsupplied my CO withastatus report nothing that Manning had told me,
mind you, but his condition and my recommendations, particularlyto remove
conditionslfeh were unnecessary. Idid not attend these meetings, mainly to
protect Manning'sconfidentiality against inadvertent slips. On one occasion,
concern was relayed to me about the odd behaviors seen in the cell mentioned in
my previous affidaviL Ireportedthatlwas not worried about the sleep walking
and the dancing.
Ido not recallameeting with the Base Commander(Co1.Choike). ThemeetingI
recall was with the Security BNCO,whosenameldo not recall. He indicated
that Manning would remain in current status (POI) unless and until he received
instructions from higher authority(unnamed). Ido not recall him saying he
would be kept that way until his legal process was complete, but the impression
he left was not to expect any changes in the near future. Icannotrecalladirect
quote.
Attachment 8.
147. COF Malone also confirms that the Brig simply ignored the recommendations of mental
health providers:
OuestionB.Inyourexperience,doesthe0^^^fi^oBrigfollowyour
recommendation concerning eitherSuicideRisI^ or Prevention o f l n j u r y
Status7
1.They initiate more precautions thanlwould fiomapsychiatric perspective.
Were he not in custody,at this point he would be appropriate for routine
outpatient care.
OuestionC. Have you made any recommendation concerning FFC Bradley
Manning s custody and classification status^ If so, what were your
recommendations"^
1. No. lhave stated that there is no psychiatric reason for him to be segregated
from the general population, realizing that would only be one consideration.
OuestionD. Have your recommendations been followed by the O^^^fi^o
Brig"^ If not, have you been given any reason for the O^^^fi^^ Brig s
decision not to follow your recommendations"^

75

23529

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

1. They have expressed concerns about his demeanor with no medical personnel
are there, describing him as more withdrawn and reading less.
^^^Attachment9.
148. Not only did the Brig ignore the repeated recommendations to remove PFC Manning from
POF they also ignored medical opinions that POI was actually ^^^.^^7^^ PFC Manning psychiatric
harm. CapL Hocter states in his affidavits:
Ibelievethat(at the timellast saw him)Suicide precautions and POI were
excessive and were making Manning unnecessarily anxious. This could be
detrimental to his mental health. Iwas concerned about his physical health until
they started to give him more time to exercise. Since Max status is nota
psychiatric c1assification,ldid not makearecommendation regarding it except to
say that it easily(asasecondary effect of checking on him every 15minutes)met
his psychiatric safety needs at the time.

PFC Manning, according to his records from 1^uwait,exhibitedadisturbing level
of mental instability,including suicidal behaviors. Thankfully,he was doing
much better during his time with me. Inappropriate use ofPOl and other
precautions can resuhinaloss of privacy and dignity that can worsen someone's
condition. This could occur in Manning'scase and lead to regression and
additional suicidal behaviors.
^^^Attachments7,8. COF Malone agreed that POI restrictions could be detrimental to mental
health, though noted that fbrtunately,PFC Manning "has been able to adapt somewhat":
It has long been known that restriction ofenvironmental and social stimulation
hasanegativeeffecton mental functioning. Nevertheless, PFC Manning has
been able to adapt somewhat and his anxiety disorder is currently in remission,
significantly reducing his risk of selfharm.
^^^Attachment9.
149. The psychologists made it known to Brig Commander that keeping PFC Manning in POI as
they were was an additional stressor and damaging fromapsychological perspective. The Brig
Commander did not address the mental health concerns raised by the psychologists and
continued to subject PFC Manning to POI restrictions.
150. Applicable Navy confinement rules themselves explicitly recognize the deleterious effects
ofsolitary confinement and harsh conditions ofconfinement: "When prisoners spend long hours

76

23530

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

in idleness and feel harassed by unnecessary restrictions, hostility is created and the desire to
escape or resist become dominant forces.".^^^Attachment3,SFCNAV1NST1640.9C, Section
4301.5. As such, PFC Manning faced the perverse scenario that, the longer the Brig maintained
the POI status, the more likely it was that his mental health would deteriorate, thus necessitating
the POI status.
151. The medical literature is replete with references to the deleterious effects ofsolitary
confinemenL In his recent testimony before the Senate, Professor Haney opines that "solitary
confinement places
of the prisoners exposed to it at grave risk ofharm."(emphasis in
original). He continues;
Despite the methodological limitations that come from studying human behavior
in suchacomplex environment, most ofthe research has reached remarkably
similar conclusions about the adverse psychological consequences ofsolitary
confinemenL Thus,we know that prisoners in solitary confinement suffer froma
number ofpsychological and psychiatric maladies, including: significantly
increased negative attitudes and affect, irritability,anger, aggression and even
rage; many experience chronic insomnia, free fioatinganxiety,fearofimpending
emotional breakdowns,a1oss of control,and panic attacks; many report
experiencing severe and even paralyzing discomfort around other people, engage
in self-imposed forms ofsocialwithdrawaF and suffer from extreme paranoia;
many report hypersensitivity to external stimuli(such as noise, light, smells), as
well as various kinds ofcognitive dysfunction, such as an inability to concentrate
or remember,and ruminations in which they fixate on trivial things intensely and
over long periods of time;asenseofhope1essness and deep depression are
widespread; and many prisoners report signs and symptoms of psychosis,
including visual and auditory hallucinations. Many ofthese symptoms occur in
and are reported byalarge number ofisolated prisoners. Forexample, ina
systematic studyldidofarepresentative sample of solitary confinement prisoners
in Califomia, prevalence rates for most ofthe above mentioned symptoms
exceeded three-quarters ofthose interviewed.
In addition to the above clinical symptoms and syndromes, prisoners who are
placed in longterm isolation often develop whatlhave characterized as "social
pathologies,"brought about because ofthe pathological deprivations of social
contact to which they are exposed. The unprecedented totality ofcontrol in these
units occurs to such an exaggerated degree that many prisoners gradually lose the
ability to initiate or to control their own behavior, or to organize their personal
lives. Prisoners may become uncomfortable with even small amounts offreedom
because they have lost confidence in their own ability to behave in the absence of
constantly enforced restrictions,atight extemal structure, and the ubiquitous
physical restraints. Fven the prospect of returning to the comparative "freedoms"
ofamainline maximum security prison (let alone the fiee world) fills them with
anxiety.

77

23531

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

For many prisoners, the absence of regular,normal interpersonal contact and any
semblance ofameaningful social context in these isolation units createsa
pervasive feeling of unreality. Because so much ofour individual identity is
socially constructed and maintained, the virtually complete loss of genuine forms
ofsocial contact and the absence ofany routine and recurring opportunities to
ground thoughts and feelings inarecognizable human context lead to an
undermining of the sense of self andadisconnection of experience from meaning.
Some prisoners experienceaparadoxical reaction, moving from initially being
starved for social contact to eventually being disoriented and even frightened by
iL As they become increasingly unfamiliar and uncomfortable with social
interaction, they are further alienated from others and made anxious in their
presence. In extreme cases, another pattern emerges: this environment is so
painful, so bizarre and impossible to make sense of, that they create their own
reality—they live inaworldoffantasy instead. Finally,the deprivations,
restrictions, the totality ofcontrol,and the prolonged absence ofany real
opportunity for happiness orjoy fills many prisoners with intolerable levels of
frustration that, for some, turns to anger,and then even to uncontrollable and
sudden outbursts of rage.
^^^Attachment37. Based upon well-documented medical literature, it is clear that prolonged
periods ofsolitary confinement causes severe psychological consequences. This extensive
scientific evidence has been widely accepted by federal courts. For instance, the Seventh Circuit
observed that "the record shows,what anyway seems pretty obvious, that isolatingahuman
being from other human beings year after year or even month after month can cause substantial
psychological damage, even ifthe isolation is not total." ^^v^^^^^^v.7^^.^^^^^^^.^,844 F.2d
1310, 1313 (7th Cir.1988). In ^^v^^^^^^, the court recognized that "there is plenty of medical
and psychological literature conceming the ill effects of solitary confinement(of which
segregation isavariant)....". i^^^^^.^^^.^^7^^^^^^^^..B^^^.^v.^^^^^^^,231F.3d1248,1252
(9th Cir.2000)("it is well accepted that conditions such as those present in the^super-max unit].
..can cause psychological decompensation to the point that individuals may become
incompetent"); C^^^^^v^^^^^^^^215F.3d910,915(9^^Cir.2000)("we and other courts have
recognized that prison conditions remarkably similar to^thesuper-max unit] can adversely affect
aperson'smentalhealth");7.^^vC^^^^^^7^,26FSupp2d615,637
( S D N Y 1998)("^t]he
effect ofprolonged isolation on inmates has been repeatedly confirmed in medical and scientific
studies"); ^^C^^^v7^^^^,4FSupp2d 195, 208 (WDNY1998)("^the notion that]
prolonged isolation from social and environmental stimulation increases the risk of developing
mental illness does not strike this Court as rocket science"); .^^^^^v.^^^^^,889 F.Supp.
1146, 1265 (N.D.Cal.l995)("many,if not most, inmates in the SHFl experience some degree of
psychological trauma in reaction to their extreme social isolation and the severely restricted
environmental stimulation in ^the Security Housing Unit]"); ^^^^v^^:^^^,450F.Supp.934,
946 (F.D. 111.1978)("^p]laintiffs'uncontroverted evidence showed the debilitating mental effect
on those inmates confined to the control unit"), ^"^^7^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^7^^^^^^^^^^^^
^B^^^^.^,620 F2d609(7thCirl980);7^^^7^v^^^^^,216FSupp2d 994, 1001 ( D A r i z

78

23532

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

2001)(experts agreed that extended isolation causes "heightened psychological stressors and
createsarisk for mental deterioration"); ^^^^^^^7^^v..^^^.^^,691F.Supp.432,446^7 (D.D.C.
1988)(citing expert testimony on sensory disturbance, perceptual distortions, and other
psychological ^^^^.^^.^^^^^^^^^^T^^^^^^v^^^^^^^^B^^^^^^.^.^^^^^^.^^^^^
884 F 2 d 6 1 5 ( D C C i r 1989)
152. Thus, in ostensibly "protecting him from himself"(which the Defense submits is not what
the Brig was actually doing), confinement facility officials were actually ^^^.^^7^^ PFC Manning
psychological harm. In other words, the Brig authorities used the pretext of safeguarding PFC
Manning from his own mental instability to keep him under conditions of extreme psychological
stress for nearly nine months. In this respect, the Defense requests that this Court also consider
the ^^^^^.^filing fiom Psychologists for Social Responsibility. ^^^Attachment41.
153. The Brig continually pointed to PFC Manning'sSuicide Risk status in k^uwait tojustify the
decision to maintain PFC Manning on POI status. In his Response to PFC Manning'sArticle
138 Complaint, Col.Choikejustified the POI status as reasonable in light ofall the information
"including his concern over ^PFCManning'sjcomment regarding'always planning'suicide at
initial intake, his actions in actually makinganoose at the previous facility^and] his erratic
behavior at the previous facility." ^^^Attachmentl9. All ofthese events occurred
approximately8monthspriortoPFCManning'sfi1ingoftheArticlel38Complaint,whenPFC
Manning was first arrested,was in an unfamiliar environment, and did not have the support of
fiiends, family and counsel. PFC Manning tries to explain this to GYSGT Blenis, to no avail;
GYSGT Blenis; ^largely inaudible] Fet'sgo back to today....The anxiety here,
today. That'snot the first time it'shappened since you've been in confinemenL
As far as1know,it is the first time it'shappened since you've been here...buta
similar situation...
PFC Manning:1wasn't, in l^uwait,1had no idea what was going on generally.
The Defense submits that, to the extent that there might have been isolated instances of unusual behavior,it is tbe
direct result ofbeing lodged behind bars, starved of all human contact, and watched lil^eazoo animal foraperiod of
^months. .^^^ Attachment 40. Indeed, Brig psychiatrists were not at all concemed about some ofthe apparent odd
behavior exhibited by PFC Manning(to the extent that it occurred). For instance, CapL ttocter stated in bis
af^davits:
Subsequently,Irecommended that he be removed from POI as he continued to do relatively well in
the Brig(occasional mild,odd behaviors such as dancing around were noted in tbe log as well as
possible sleep walking). CoL Malone concurred. These recommendations were not followed.
On one occasion, concern was relayed to me about the odd behaviors seen in the cell mentioned in my
previous aflidaviL Ireportedthatlwas not worried about the sleep walking and the dancing.
COL Malone also factored in the apparent odd behavior in making bis weekly recommendation that PFC Manning
wasnotatriskofself^barm. What is clear, though, is that the Brig ^^.^^^created tbe circumstances which il then
used tojustify the conditions of confinemenL

79

23533

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

GYSGT Blenis: But, would you say it was similar situation7
PFC Manning; No, no. The situation that happened today was more o f . . . y o u
know,1'm lucid and aware and just trying to figure...It'sjustaquestion of
trying not to appear likelwas in k^uwaiL Because that'smy main concern every
day,ishowdoIgetoffofPOIstatus7 HowdoIgetoffofPOIstatus7 Whenwil
Ibe taken off ofP01status7 What is being used tojustify the precautions7 You
know...What concerns, you know, what amldoingthat'sconcerning
^inaudible]7 So Fmconstantly trying to figure out, run through all of those
things. And trying to make sure I'm not doing anything...
GYSGT Blenis; ^inaudible] ...As time goes on,we have less ofaconcem,ok7
PFC Manning:Yes, GYSGT. But the restrictions were still in place. Andlwas

GYSGT Blenis: RighL And we continually...Weunderstandit'snot normal that
we have someone in POI for this period of time...
PFCManning:Yes.
GYSGT Blenis; 1t'snot^normal]...1guess we'll just leave it at thaL So as we
go on,we're going to lessen your restrictions. They're still be restrictions in place
... ^inaudible] Butlwould have to disagree with you as far as what happened
today happened in l^uwait...anxiety attack...
PFC Manning; No,in1^uwait,lwasn't1ucid. lhad....^guard interrupts] It was
likeadream...
GYSGT Blenis; But, they both ultimately ended up in you having an anxiety
attack...controlled falF but...
PFC Manning; No,1don't remember falling in k^uwait at alF
GYSGT Blenis; WelFlcan tell you, that'swhat was reported to us ...none of us
where there^refers again to PFC Manning'ssuicide status l^uwait]...Us, asa
facility,we have to always err on the side of caution, okay. And notjust the side
ofcaution, but over-caution. Especially when we're talking about suicide, okay7
Nobody'ssaying you're going to kill yourse1Falright7 ^inaudible] But we always
have to be more cautious than thaL But you're saying that'nobody else is on
suicide watch.' The thing is what happened in l^uwait,what happened today...

80

23534

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

PFC Manning: Those are totally differenL Iunderstand,1understand,1
understand, where you're gefting that ...from the documentation. Imean,1quite,
Iknow wherelam. 1knowlam...lknow1amat0^^titicobasefacility.1know
that I'matabrig. Imean, I'mlucid and aware of wherelam. I'mnot...
Attachment 25.
154. The concems about I^uwait could not legitimately continue to indefinitely form the basis
fbrPFC Manning'sPOI status, over the more compelling recommendations of multiple mental
health providers. Thejustification was thus disingenuous and pre-textual in light ofthe clear
psychiatric evidence to the contrary,and the Brig'sown stated procedures for reviewing POI
status. Brig officials appeared to be saying that ifadetainee ever makesacomment about
suicide at any point in his incarceration, the detainee is ^^7^^^^ at risk for suicide.
Consequent1y,nothing the detainee could ever say or do subsequently would matter in the
classification ofthe detainee.
155. Even if the Brig'sconcern about PFC Manning'srisk for self-harm were not pre-textual
(which the Defense submits that it was), suchaconcem was nonetheless exaggerated and grossly
out-of^proportion to the risk presented. Wherearestriction imposed onadetainee is "arbitrary"
or "excessive" the restriction does not servealegitimate government purpose. ^^^^^^7^^^^^^^.^
v.C^^^^^^, 62 M.J.411,414(C.A.A.F.2006)(constitutional violation is established where
"conditions^are] unreasonable or arbitrary in relation to both purposes" of'ensuring...presence
for trial and the security needs ofthe confinement facility"). Here, the burdens placed upon PFC
Manning under the guise of protecting him from self-harm were arbitrary,unreasonable and
excessive, mandatingaconclusion that PFC Manning'sArticlel3 rights have been violated.
156. The Brig'sresponse to PFC Manning'scomment about the waistband ofhis underwear is
illustrative of the(willful) lack oflogic that confinement officials brought to bear when it came
to PFC Manning. Any reasonable person could see that after eight months in MAX and under
POF^^ctainee would become increasingly frustrated and might say something provocative. A
reasonable person would see that PFC Manning was not actually planning on killing himselfwith
the elastic band ofhis underwear. And yet, the Brig refused to see logic. This is true even
though Brig psychiatrists had specifically opined that PFC Manning'scomment about the elastic
band ofhis underwear was part ofthe process ofhis "intellectualization" ofhis conditions of
confinement and was in no way related to any suicidal ideations on the part ofPFC Manning.
Attachments 2,9.The4March2011C^A Board noted that, "^PFCManning'sjcomments
have raised concern that ^PFC Manning] may be formulatingaplan to potentially kill himself."
1^^^ Attachment 6. IfPFC Manning were truly "formulatingaplan to potentially kill himself,"
would he tell Brig guards exactly how he was going to do it7 Again, logic seems to have been
checked at the gates ofthe O^^^fi^^^^^fit^^tnent facility.
157. After PFC Manning made this comment, the Brig increased the special handling
instructions on PFC Manning, such that there was nowarequirement that he strip naked and
wearasuicide smock at nighL
Attachment 26. This requirement was arbitrary,

81

23535

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

unreasonable and excessive in light ofthe perceived threat ofself-harm. PFC Manning was
under 24-hour surveillance,with guards never being more thanafew feet away from his cell.
Even ifhe wanted to, how could PFC Manning use his underwear to potentially commit suicide
without anyone noticing7 Presumably,aguard would notice PFC Manning removing his
underwear and pulling at the elastic band in an effort to extract it from his underwear and then
attempt to use it to kill himself Moreover, PFC Manning was permitted to have his underwear
and clothing during the day,with no apparent concern that he would harm himself during
daylight hours.
158. Further, the smock itself posedagreater risk to PFC Manning in terms ofbeingachoking
hazard than PFC Manning'sunderwear. On one occasion, PFC Manning got trapped inside the
smock. The situation is explained in an Incident Report on 13 March 2011:
Ma'am, on the above date and time while performing my duties as special
quarters supervisor,FFCPFMiller,noticedDeLManning^l0075/9504 had his
head and arms inside ofhis POI jump suiL Ithen woke up SND and told him that
Ineed to see his face and to poke his head ouL While doing whatlinstructed him
to do, SND realized he was stuck and began to roll around, saying,"1 hate this
stupid thing." Ithen told SND to calm down and stand up and try to pull the POI
jump suit over his head, but his arms were still stuck. Ithen called for the watch
supervisor, CPF Sanders, to come down to special quarters to look at the situation
andgetpermissiontoopencell 191 and help SND. Upon CPL Sanders arrivaF he
evaluated the situation and opened celll91to help SNDfree his arms. Once
SND was situated,1then told him not to put his head and arms inside his POI
jump suit again, and that ifhe is cold to use his second POI blanket instead. The
DBS was then notified and this report was written, and the incident was recorded
on camera.
Attachment 27.
159. Despite this incident and the recommendation ofBrig psychiatrists, CW02 Barnes refused
to change the decision to require PFC Manning to surrender his clothing and wearasmock at
nighL She stated,"1 have considered your complaint that the decision to remove your clothing
during sleeping hours is improper. Idisagree. The removal of your clothing on2March 2011
was done to ensure your safety and wasadirect result of your comment...regarding the
waistband in your underwear which you considered to be dangerous."
Aftachment 20.
Despite all logic to the contrary,Brig officials continued to require that PFC Manning wear the
smock at night, apparently out ofconcem that PFC Manning planned to kill himselfwith his
underwear.
160. Further evidence ofthe lack ofrational connection between measures adopted by the Brig
andalegitimate government objective is found in the measures associated with placing PFC
Manning on Suicide Risk onl8January 2011. Col.Choike noted in his response to the Article
138 Complaint that the decision to place PFC Manning on Suicide Risk on that date necessitated

82

23536

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

"onlyafew" additional special handling instructions, one of which was the removal ofPFC
Manning'seyeglasses.^^ ^^^Attachmentl9. his impossible to conceive ofalegitimate
govemment objective to be served in removing PFC Manning'seyeglasses, forcing him to sit for
three days in his cell in essential blindness, dizzy and disoriented.
161. his similarly impossible to rationalize any ofthe other restrictions imposed on PFC
Manning under either his POI or MAX status. Afew ofthe absurd restrictions are outlined
below;
a) Constant Monitoring^hstands to reason that asking PFC Manning every five minutes
"are you okay7" would not ensure that PFC Manning was, in fact, okay. Moreover,
common sense dictates that that being asked "are you okay7" thousands oftimes over the
course of nine months would actually exacerbateadetainee'ssenseoffiustration and
cause mental anxiety.
b) Inability to Lay Down in His Cell or Place His Bacl^ Against the ^alLThere does not
appear to be any legitimate penological reason for refusing to allow PFC Manning to lay
down in his cell, particularly when he was locked in it for over 23 hours per day. How
would allowing PFC Manning the ability to lay down increase his risk of se1f harm7
Similarly,what possible justification could there beft^rnot allowingadetainee to lean his
back against the wall, instead requiring him to sit up straight for all his waking hours7
c) Limitations on Reading Materials It is unclear how allowing PFC Manning only one
book or magazine in his cell atatime is related to the prevention of self-harm(especially
because PFC Manning was permitted to haveacopy of the Brig'srules and regulations in
his cell at all times). How would having two or three books or magazines in his cell
increase PFC Manning'srisk of self^harm7
d) Restrictions on Correspondences For much ofthe time that PFC Manning was at
Ott^^fico, he was only permitted one hour ofcorrespondence time. Again, how would
permittingadditionalcorrespondencetime increase PFC Manning'srisk of self-harm7
e) Refusal to Allow PFC Manning Basic Hygiene Items^ It is impossible to understand
why PFC Manning was not permitted to have toilet paper in his cell and instead was
required to ask for it every time he wanted to go to the bathroom. This restriction was
arbitrary,excessive and degrading.
f) Restrictions on Exercise; PFC Manning was prohibited fiom exercising in his cell.
However,he was permitted to exercise at recreation call. It is unclear what the difference
between the two is, and why one does not presentarisk of self-harm,while the other
The fact that placing PFC Manning on Suicide l^isk necessitated "onlyafew" additional handling instructions
demonstrates that there is notasignificant distinction between Suicide l^isk and POI status, ttowever, the Brig was
not permitted to maintain PFC Manning on Suicide l^isk status because that would have required tbe
recommendation of the Brig'smental health provider(which the Brig decidedly did not have).

83

23537

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

does. Moreover, CapL Hocter pleaded with the Brig to allow PFC Manning to exercise in
his cell. On2December 2010, for instance, CapL Hocter wrote in his psychiatric
evaluation:
Pt reports good mood and noSl^suicidal ideations]. Does not require POI
fiomapsychiatric perspective.

^^^^^^^^l^^l^t^o^^^i^l^^^fii^^ifi^i^^^^^. ^ ^ ^ f i ^ ^ .
^^^Attachment2(large writing in original).
162. In short, the conditions imposed on PFC Manning to purportedly ensure that he would not
harm himselfwere wholly nonsensical. ^^^^^^.^^^7^^ ^^^^^.^v. 7^^^^^.^^.^^^ 2008 WF 2259762
(A. F.CL Crim. App.)("Nor are we able to see how forcing the appellant to remain on her bed,
without talking, somehow increased the government'sassurance that she would be available for
trial beyond that guaranteed by her general confinement").
163. In ^^^7^^.^^^^^.^v^^^^^7^^,20M.F90(C.M.A. 1985), ChiefJudgeFverettfound that
conditions less restrictive than the ones imposed on PFC Manning were not related toa
legitimate govemment objective. He stated:
For purposes ofthe motion, the Government admitted that appellant was initially
placed inasingle cell about6 feet by7feet,withadesk, toilet, chair,and bed.
He was only allowed to wear his undershorts, and to either sit at the desk or stand
from 0400 hours to 2200 hours. His only reading materials wereaBible and the
brigregulations. He was not allowed to write or receive letters, lie on the bed
between reveille and taps, or communicate with other prisoners.
Some ofthese conditions ^^^7^^^^^^^^^^^^.^ than would be required to assure
the detainee'spresence and so they violated Articlel3.Regardless ofthe
restrictions that might be imposed on sentenced prisoners without violating
Article55,^] it is hard to see whyapretrial detainee should be prohibited from
corresponding with persons outside the facility,such as his lawyers, family,or
friends; or be required to be only in undershorts and in the daytime to sit or stand,
rather than to lie in bed. No "alternative purpose" which seems reasonably related
toalegitimate governmental objective "is assignable for" these conditions.
at 99-100(emphasis supplied). ChiefJudge Everett also emphasized that "^i]n arriving at this
conclusion,lhave heeded the Supreme Court'swaming that "^s]uch considerations are
peculiarly within the province and professional expertise ofcorrections officials, and, in the
absence ofsubstantial evidence in the record to indicate that the officials have exaggerated their
response to these considerations, courts should ordinarily defer to their expertjudgment in such
mafters."

84

23538

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

164. Even if the restrictions placed upon PFC Manning were in some way related toalegitimate
government objective, they were nonetheless grossly exaggerated in light ofany actual evidence
that PFC Manning was at risk ofself-harm. For instance, for five months, PFC Manning was
forced to "exercise" while his hands and feet were shackled,withaguard accompanying his
every step. While this would certainly ensure that he wouldn't harm himself, others, or escape
from the confinement f^cility,sucharequirement appears wholly out-ofproportion to the risk
presented.
^^^7^^ ^^^^^.^v.C^^^^^^.^,2011WL2864311,^5 ( N M . C L Crim. App)("We
agree with the militaryjudge that while it was permissible to assign the appellant cleaning
responsibilities, it was impermissible to have him clean in hand and leg irons.").
165. his clear that the numerous restrictions placed on PFC Manning owing to his classification
asaMAX detainee under POI status were not related to the legitimate government objective of
preventing PFC Manning from harming himself Nor, as discussed below,were the restrictions
placed on PFC Manning legitimately related to either protecting other inmates or ensuring PFC
Manning'spresence at trial.
b) Preventing PFC Manning from Harming Others
166. There was equally no basis to conclude that PFC Manning wasarisk to others, thereby
justifying his continued classification in MAX custody. The Brig notes continually indicate that
PFC Manning had been an "above average"detainee. i^^^Attachment5. GSYGT Blenis, in his
conversation with PFC Manning, indicated that he "wish^ed] he hadahundred Mannings."
Attachment 25. The Pentagon has claimed publicly that PFC Manning has been an "exemplary"
detainee. PFC Manning had always been pleasant, respectful and cooperative with Brig officials
and guards.
167. PFC Manning had never exhibited any violent tendencies towards other inmates at
Oti^^fico. The Brig psychiatrists indicated that he was notarisk to others. In response toa
question as to whether they had "seen or documented any behavior to suggest that he isarisk to
harm others or himself,adisruptive detainee, or otherwise noncompliant with O^^^fi^o Brig
rules and procedures,"CapL Hocter and COF Malone responded as follows:

In his24 January 20llsubmission,CWO4Averban states that PFC Manning bad violated prisoner rules and
regulations by not following instructions, tte further states,"! have not imposed any disciplinary segregation, but
these incidents do cause me continuing concem regarding his safety and intentions." ^^^Attachment15. Therules
'^violations" that CW04Averhart refers to are exceedingly minor(^^^ Attachment ^^)and do not provideabasis,
under any stretch of the imagination, tbra"continuing concem regarding his safety and intentions." Forexample,
on one occasion.aBrig guard documents an incident where PFC Manning was choking onapiece of meat; after the
guard dislodged iL PFC Manning indicated that he did not need medical care. On one occasion, PFC Manning
declined his recreation call because his medication made him extremely tired. On yet another occasion.aBrig guard
reported that at^er explaining to PFC Manning something dealing with the television schedule, PFC Manning
indicated he was done watching T^ and it could be tumed off. Frankly.with some ofthese reports, it is not even
clear what the "incident" is or why it is at all significanL l^egardless, these are apparently the sorts ofincidents that
CW04Averhart refers to as somehow supporting the conclusion that he had "continuing concem" regarding PFC
Manning'ssafety and intentions. Alook at tbe incident reports themselves, however, completely undermines
CW04Averhan'sstatemenL

85

23539

United StatesvPFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

CapL Hocter;
Notsincelmethim. Given the report fiom k^uwait,lhad expected more
difficulty.
Given the amount ofscrutiny he received fiom the Brig, and the seriousness ofhis
charges,1had expected him to have many more problems, lhad initially
suspected that we would see regression and perhaps some suicidal behaviors. He
held up remarkablywelFHewas generallyawell behaved detainee
COF Malone;
lhave never heard ofhim being disruptive, but he does make provocative comments to
the staff as part ofhis intellectualization(e.g.2March 2011).
i^^^Attachments7-9.
168. Notab1y,the offenses with which PFC Manning is charged—offenses ofwhich PFC
Manning has not been convicted—do not involve violence. There was absolutely no reason to
believe that the safety ofother inmates would be compromised ifPFC Manning were classified
asaMedium Custody detainee. ^^^^^^^v,7^^^^7^.^.641F.2d488, 494(7^^ Cir. 1981)(the
"state'sinterest in secure confinement of^pretrial detainees] may justify confinement of
particular detainees because of their ^^^^^^7^^^^^^^B^.^^^c.^,...additional severity in treatment in
the absence ofknowledge oftheir individual characteristics is clearly excessive and amounts to
punishment")(emphasis supplied). ^^^^^.^^(7^^7^^^^^^^.^ v^^^^,45M.J.672(N-M.CLCrim.
App.1996)(solitary confinement justified to protect other detainees); ^^^7^^i^^^^^.^vC^^^^^^,
62 M.J.411,415(C.A.A.F.2006)(maximum custody appropriate where accused presenteda
"high risk offuture serious misconduct including mass violence and physical harm to others").
169. In ^^^7^^^^^^^.^v. .^^7^^^^^^^, 59 M.J.618(ArmyCL Crim.App. 2003), the accused was
held for57 days in special quarters before he was transferred to the general confinement
population. In that case, the accused had been charged with "serious,violent offenses" (rape ofa
minor), had failed to comply with restrictions ordered by his company commander, and hada
serious drug and alcohol problem. 7^. at 623-4. Thus, the temporary placement ofthe accused in
special quarters for 57 days was justified. Here, PFC Manningspentapproximately265 days in
solitary confinement at Ott^tttico. He was not charged withaviolent offense; he did not have
any disciplinary issues; and did not have any drug or alcohol problems. I f i t was not necessary to
keepaviolent sex offender who disobeyed orders in special quarters, surely it was not necessary
to keep PFC Manning in MAX custody in order to protect others.
170. hshould be noted once again that PFC Manning is 5'3 in height andl15pounds in weighL
Presumably,Brig guards would have been able to easily restrain PFC Manning in the extremely
unlikely event that he were to be disruptive and poseadanger to others. Moreover, the Defense
would venture to guess that other pretrial detainees could "hold their own" ifsome sort of
altercation ensued. Placing PFC Manning in shackles and locking downaMarine confinement
facility every time PFC Manning was moved(e.g. to speak with his counsel on the phone; to
86

23540

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

attend his sunshine call) was clearly excessive and arbitrary in considering whether PFC
Manning'sconfinement conditions serve the government objective of ensuring the safety of
other detainees.
c) Ensuring PFC Mannin^'sPresenceAtTrial
171. FinaI1y,PFC Manning'sconfinement conditions were not rationally related to the
government objective of ensuring PFC Manning'spresence at trial. There is no indication that
PFC Manning wasafiight risk at the time ofhis confinement at O^^^fico. ^^^7^^i^^^^^.^v
C^^^^^^, 62 M.J.411,415(C.A.A.F.2006)(additional restrictions warranted because detainee
was "bothafiight risk andaserious risk of future misconduct."); (7^^7^^^^^^^.^v. ^^7^^^^^^^^,
56 M.J.671,678 9(ArmyCL Crim.App. 2001)(additional restrictions warranted because "Brig
officials clearly had reason to believe thatadetainee] wasafiight risk and posedarisk to others
...The record establishesalitany of violent, predatory,and dangerous criminal behavior.").
172. In PFC Manning'scase, he was an exemplary inmate who never gave Brig officials reason
to believe he wasafiight risk. ^^^(B^^7^^^^^^^.^v.^^.^^^,54M.J.523,526(N-M.CLCrim.
App. 2000)(holding that imposition ofharsher conditions on accused was notjustified on the
basis that accused wasafiight risk, noting that the accused "was nota'managementproblem'or
adisciplinary problem in the brig. His conduct was consistently evaluated as'sat,'
(satisfactory)."); ^^^7^^ ^^^^^.^v^^^^^, 2006 WF1662963,'^4(NM.CL Crim. A p p ) ( " . .
this court has warned ofthe danger ofbasing pretrial confinement decisions .^^^^^ on the
seriousness ofan offense or the maximum punishment authorized. In this case, the appellant had
already demonstrated that he was notafiight risk for an extended period of time.").
173. The Brig, however, used the seriousness ofthe charges to conclude for all time and for all
purposes that PFC Manning wasafiight risk. The seriousness ofthe charges themselves,
however, cannotjustify an automatic conclusion thatapretrial detainee isafiight risk and thus
belongs in MAX custody.
(7^^^^^^^^^^.^v.^^^^^B^^^, 52 M.J.539,544 ( N M . C L Crim.
App.l999)(finding that the "focus on the possibility of the^accused's] escape due to the
seriousness of the charges, as the reasons] to assign him to "Special 0^^riers,"resulted in the
imposition of conditions more rigorous than necessary to ensure his presence for trial.");(7^^7^^
^^^^^.^v.^^^^^^^, 2011WF 2557622 ( N M . C L Crim App)(finding unlawful pretrial
punishment where the accused had spent 136 days in solitary confinement as an arbitrary
response to the seriousness of the charges against him); ^^^7^^ ^^^^^.^ v. ^^^7^,2006WL
4579019(N.M.CL Crim.App.)(finding illegal pretrial punishment where custody determination
was based solely on the severity ofthe murder charge against the accused; court noted that "the
maximum custody conditions were not rationally based on security concerns taking into account
all ofthe circumstances, and the resulting conditions were more rigorous than necessary to
ensure the^accused's] presence at his trial."); ^^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^7^^^^,56 M.J.739 (N-M.CL
Crim.App. 2001)(finding illegal pretrial punishment where Marine brig hada"standard
procedure...that detainees facing more than seven years of confinement were considered escape
risks perse, and assigned to special quarters"). Otherwise, any detainee facing serious criminal

87

23541

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

charges would automatically be deemedafiight risk and relegated to MAX custody fi^rthe
duration ofhis time in pretrial confinemenL
174. That the seriousness ofthe charges formed the basis fbrthe decision to retain PFC Manning
in MAX and on POI is evident in Col. Choike'sResponse to PFC Manning'sArticle 138
ComplainL Col. Choike states:
Classification of prisoners is governed by reference(c). Classification criteria...
include, but are not limited to; assaultive behavior, serious criminal record
(convicted or alleged), low tolerance offrustration, poor home conditions or
family relationships, mental evaluations indicating serious neurosis or psychosis,
demonstrated pattem ofpoorjudgment, and length of potential sentence. The
charge sheet available to the PCF upon confinement alleged breaches of security
regulations and the leakage ofclassified documents involving national security.
^^^Attachment18.
175. What is telling is that Col. Choike proceeds to list all the factors that should be considered
in the classification decision, but only hones on one: the seriousness ofthe charges.
("Although yourmentalstatewasaprimaryconcemand focus, itwasnottheonlyfactor
justifying MAX custody. You are facing serious charges involving wrongfully accessing and
transferring classified information andamaximum punishment of 52 years of confinement anda
dishonorable discharge.").
176. In CoF Choike'sResponse to PFC Manning'sRebuftal to the Article 138 Complaint, he
states:
lhave reviewed the entire record and concur that maximum custody is the
appropriate classification for PFC Manning. This does not forecloseafuture
change in his custody classification. For this reason, his classification and
assignment is continuously reviewed. However, he is pending extremely serious
charges with national security implications.
^^^Attachmentl9.
^^.^^^ Attachment 15(CW04Averhart indicating that "it is my
professional opinion that PFC Manning'smaximum custody classification is based upon his
charges, national security concerns and his behavior while in the facility.").
177hisabundantlyclearthattheseriousnessofthechargesthemselveswastheprimaryreason
why the Brig(and Col.Choike)thought it appropriate to keep PFC Manning on MAX and POF
This is further evidenced by Mr.JuanMendez'sfindings where he states that,"^t]o the Special
Rapporteur'srequest for information on the authority to impose and the purpose of the isolation
regime, the govemment responded that the prison rules authorized the brig commander to impose
' This is also clear when one looks at the C&A Board reviewsfi-om3 January 2011 onward. See Attachment 6.

88

23542

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^^^^^^^.^^^.^.^^^^^^^^.^^ for which he would eventually be charged."
Attachment32(emphasis added).
178. Applying some common sense fbramoment, given that PFC Manning was inasecure
Marine facility,containedwithinaMarine compound, it is hard to imagine any scenario under
which PFC Manning would have been able to escape. Apparently,security at Oti^^tico includes
"a single chain-link fence about 20 feet high with razor wire, cameras, and guards."
http:^^en.wikipedia.org^wiki^Marine Corps Brig, Ot^^^^i^^^ Recall again that PFC Manning
diminutive in size. The average Marine Brig guard would likely be nearly6feet tall and about
200 pounds, hdefies logic to think that somehow, even ifhe wanted to, PFC Manning could
escape from Ott^titico. Thecaseof(7^^7^^^^^^^.^v..^^.^^^,54M.J.523,526(N-M.CLCrim.
App. 2000) is apposite in this contexL In that case, the trial counsel argued;
Your Honor, the reason why the accused is in special quarters is because ofhis
medical condition. It'snotafbrm of punishmenL It'sbecause it is to protect
himselfand to maintain good order within the brig. B^. at 526.
179. The court did not accept what it saw asanonsensical argument, stating,"Wecannot
condone the imposition ofharsher conditions uponamilitary accused because he has an injury
or, for that matter,suffers from some other illness. Wethink it is somewhat obvious that having
astrained right knee does not make an accusedagreater fiight risk or that placement in'special
quarters'is necessary to ensure the presence of such injured personnel for trial."
at 527.
Likewise, the Defense submits that it is "somewhat obvious" that, given PFC Manning's
physical stature and his location inasecure confinement facility ^^7^^^asecure Marine
compound, that he was not legitimate fiight risk.
180. Moreover, the Govemment did not haveagreater interest in ensuring that PFC Manning
appeared at trial than it did with any other pretrial detainee confined at the Oti^titico Brig. And
yet, other detainees were not subjected to these conditions. ^^^^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.^^^^^.^,2007
WF1702575,^2(finding illegal punishment where "the Government presented no evidence that
^detainee] wasafiight risk or that there was any risk that he would harm himself or others if
lesser degrees of restraint were utilized.");(B^^7^^.^^^^^.^v.^^^7^^^. 53 M.J. 149,154(C.A.A.F.
2000)(noting that conditions similar to those alleged by accused^confinement in cell for 23
hoursaday] "have previously been considered far more onerous than would be required to
assure^accused'sjpresence^at trial].")(citations omitted).
181. In his response to PFC Manning'sArticlel38 Complaint, CoF Choike noted that in
determining PFC Manning'sclassification status, relevant concerns included "national security
concerns and protection ofclassified material." i^^^Attachmentl9. It is impossible to fathom
how "national security concerns" and "protection ofclassified material" would be impacted i f
PFC Manning were to be retained in MD1(rather than MAX) and not under POI status. Assuch,
these factors are unrelated to any legitimate government objective and in particular, to the
objective of ensuring PFC Manning'spresence at trial. Also in this Response, Col.Choike
astoundingly refers to all these conditions as "narrowly tailored."
Not only were the

89

23543

United StatesvPFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

conditions decidedly not narrowly tailored, they were arbitrary,purposeless and bore no relation
toalegitimate governmental goal. .^^^^^^7^^.^^^^^.^v.C^^^^^,62M.J.411,416(C.A.A.F.
2006)("we^do not] condone arbitrary policies imposing'maximum custody'upon pretrial
prisoners."); (7^^7^^^^^^^.^v.7^^^.^, 28 M.L214,216(CMA.1989)(conditions thatare
arbitrary or purposeless can be considered to raise an inference of punishment).
182. The decision to retain PFC Manning under MAX and POI cannot bejustified by general
averments that "the PCF Commander has the inherent authority over those in his custody to
maintain good order and discipline and the responsibility to ensure safety and security in the
PCF."^^^Attachmentl8. Asthe7^^Circuitaptlystatedin7^^^^v.7^^^^7^^,641F.2d488,498
(7th Cir.1981), courts need nof'grant automatic deference to ritual incantations by prison
officials that their actions foster the goals oforder and discipline." In this case, there has been
nothing but "ritual incantations."
183. It is evident that the decision to retain PFC Manning in the functional equivalent ofsolitary
confinement for almost nine months was arbitrary,capricious and not rationally related toa
legitimate government objective. It is worth noting that the Marine Corps has long history of
arbitrary and unreasonable Brig policies which amount to pretrial punishmenL
184 For instance, in ^^^7^^ .^^^^^.^v.^^^^^.^^^. 49 M.F 575 (N-M.CL Crim.App. 1998), the
court found that there was an "unwritten policy" at the Camp Pendleton Marine confinement
facility that "places pretrial confines in maximum-custody status based solely on whether the
potential confinement they face is greater than5years." 7^. at 576. In finding that this
constituted unlawful pretrial punishment, the court stated;
Based on the information available to the court,we are very concerned about what
appears to be an arbitrary policy to place in maximum confinement all persons
who faceaperiod of confinement in excess of5years. All such persons
apparently remain in maximum confinement,with all the deprivations that entails,
until trial or such time as the service member enters intoapretrial agreement
capping confinement at5years or less.
Werecognize, ofcourse, thatthe potential length of confinementaservice
member faces isarelevant factor in determining the likelihood he may attempt to
fiee. Moreover, the seriousness and nature ofthe offenses can be relevant in
determining both the individual'sfiight risk as well as whether he representsa
danger to others in the brig. Weare hesitant to second-guess the decisions ofbrig
personnel, who are required to maintain good order and discipline under difficult
circumstances. Based on their extensive training and experience,we recognize
that such personnel are generally much better equipped than are we to make such
tough calls. Had the decision making process considered all the relevant factors,
we would intervene only under the most unusual circumstances. Here, however,
the Government has made no effort to rebut the appellant'scontentions that the
length ofpotential confinement was the
factor brig personnel considered.

90

23544

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

Before significantly curtailing the fieedomofMarines facing general courtsmartial, this court and others responsible for the militaryjustice system must
ensure the integrity ofthe system. These decisions cannot be based onasingle
blanket criterion to the exclusion ofall other factors.
at 576-7 (emphasis in original).
185. The Court also expressed concem "about this policy'scoercive effect on pretrial confinees.
It places considerable pressure on them to enter intoapretrial agreement and then plead guilty
simply to get out of maximum custody."7^. The court further admonished those involved "in
the administration ofNavy and Marine Corps brigs" to "ensure that decisions whetherto place
pretrial confines inamaximum-custody status are based on all relevant factors." 7^.
186. B^^^^^.^^^ is not the only case to address the arbitrary Brig policy at Camp Pendleton. .^^^
^^^7^^ ^^^^^.^v^v^^.^,55M.J.732 ( N M C L Crim. App 2001)("As we have found in other
cases, however, we find that the decision to place the appellant in Special O^^rierslwas made
in conformance with the standard operating procedures^SOP] then in existence within the brig at
Camp Pendleton. That SOP required that anyone facing more than five years confinement to be
automatically placed in Special Oti^rtersl. Accordingly, we find that the decision to place the
appellant in Special Oti^rterslwas based on an arbitrary policy and resulted in the imposition of
conditions more rigorous than necessary to insure his presence for trial.")(citations omitted);
^^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^^^^^^^,2002 WF31433595 (NM.CLCrim.App.)("Totheextenthis
custody determination was based solely on that criterion, it resulted in conditions more rigorous
than necessary to ensure the appellant'spresence for trial. Based upon the evidence presented to
us,we find that the appellant has met his burden and the Covernment has noL Accordingly,we
find that the decision to place and keep the appellant in special quarters was based solely upon an
arbitrary policy in place at the Camp Pendleton Brig and resulted in the imposition of conditions
more rigorous than the circumstances required to insure the appellant'spresence at
trial.")(citationsomifted); ^^^7^^ ^^^^^.^v^^^^T^^.^, 1999 WF 1076885,^4(NM.CL Crim.
App.)("1n light ofthe available facts,we are convinced that the5 year criterion for maximum
custody dispositions existed at the Camp Pendleton Base Brig at the time ofthe appellant's
pretrial confinemenL And, in the absence ofmore convincing evidence that this rule was not
applied to him, and in the interest ofjudicial economy,we will afford the appellant an additional
128 days ofjudicially ordered credit to be applied against his approved sentence."). Nor is the
policy that existed at Camp Pendleton an isolated one. ^^^^^^7^^.^^^^^.^v.^^7^^^^,56M.J.739,
741(N M.CL Crim. App. 2001)(arbitrary brig policy existed at Camp Fejeune).
187. Fike in Bf^^^^.^^^ and in all the cases cited above, the Marine brig at O^^titico had an
arbitrary policy to keep PFC Manning(and only PFC Manning) in MAX and on POI
indefinitely. As the Court of Appeal for the ArmedForces has said,"wedo^not] condone
arbitrary policies imposing'maximum custody'upon pretrial prisoners. Wewill scrutinize
closely any claim that maximum custody was imposed solely because ofthe charges rather than
asaresuhofareasonable evaluation of all the facts and circumstances ofacase." ^^^^^^7^^
^^^^^^vC^^^^^, 62 M.F411,416(C.A.A.F.2006).Thepolicyto keep PFC Manning on

91

23545

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

MAX and POI was not based on any legitimate govemment objective, such as protecting PFC
Manning from self-harm,protecting others, or ensuring PFC Manning'spresence at trial.
Instead, the decision was an "unwritten policy" by the higher-ups at Oti^^tico who had decided
that, as long as PFC Manning remained at Oti^^tico, nothing would ever change. ^^^^^^^^^^^.^
v Bf^^^^.^^^^49M.J.575 (N M.CLCrim App. 1998).
188. But after PFC Manning was moved to the Fort Feavenworth Joint Regional Correctional
Facility(JRCF), things did change. Afteraroutine indoctrination period, PFC Manningwas
assigned to Medium Custody. The severe restrictions on his liberty have been lifted. He is now
permitted to eat with other detainees, socialize with other detainees,walk around without metal
shackles, have personal and hygiene items in his celF etc. PFC Manning has been held in this
status for approximately the past 15months.
189. The fact that PFC Manning went from MAX and POI at O^^^fico to Medium Custody at
the JRCF virtually overnight is evidence that he was improperly held in MAX and POI to begin
with^^^(B^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^7^^^^,56MF 739, 741 ( N M C L Crim.App. 2001)(''Thefactt
the appellant was released fiom special quarters the very next day after securingapretrial
agreement that limited his post-trial confinement to only three years is strong evidence that his
assignment to special quarters was based primarily uponalength-of-sentencepolicy,and not
upon other appropriate factors. Accordingly,we find that the decision to place the appellant in
special quarters was based on an arbitrary policy and resulted in the imposition of conditions
more rigorous than necessary to insure his presence for trial.").
190. For the reasons outlined above, it is clear that the conditionsofPFC Manning's
confinementwerenotrelated much less rationally related to the only permissible govemment
objectives in imposer greater than normal confinement restrictions; protecting PFC Manning
fiom harming himself; protecting PFC Manning from harming others; and ensuring PFC
Manning'spresence at trial.
D.

TheConditionsofPFCManningsConfinementWeresoOnerousthattheyFermit
the ^^B^^^ Inference that his Article 13 Rights were Violated

191 In ^^^7^^.^^^^^.^v/^C^^^^^^ 47 M.F 162, 165 (CAA.F.1997),theCourtof Appeals for
the Armed Forces held that conditions ofconfinement may be so egregious and onerous that
"they give rise toapermissible inference that^the accused] is being punished, or may be so
excessive as to constitute punishment." Such is the case here. The harsh conditions under which
PFC Manning was confined over the course ofnine months while in pretrial confinement at
Ottantico give riseasole permissible inference: PFC Manning was punished in violation ofhis
Article 13rights. ^^^^^.^^(7^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^^^^^,52M.J.767 (A.F.CLCrim.App.
2000)(noting that "the actions ofthe confinement staff were so egregious that we...are
inescapably led to only one conclusion: The^accused] was intentionally subjected to unduly
rigorous conditions which cannot be supported by any legitimate government purpose.").
a) The ConditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement in MAX and on POI were Unduly
Onerous
92

23546

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

192. PFC Manning served over nine months ofconfinement in MAX custody and under either
Suicide Risk or POF While PFC Manning was not technically held underthe classification of
"solitary confinement"(aclassification that the Oti^^fico Brig does not have^^), the cumulative
effect ofPFC Manning'sconfinement conditions were tantamount to solitary confinemenL
^^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^^^^,2009WF1936444,^l(A.FCLCrim.App.)(accused'sconfinementin
"protective custody" was "tantamount to solitary confinement").
193. In hisTestimony before the SenateJudiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil
Rights, and Human Rights Hearing on Solitary Confinement,^^ Professor Craig Haney described
the characteristics ofsolitary confinement as follows;
^^^^^ Attachment l^("The Ouantico base pretrial confinement facility does not have solitary continement").
The Committee was established to investigate the "serious human rights, fiscal, and public safety consequences"
associated with the use ofsolitary confinement in American Prisons.
Statement ofTheFlonorable Patrick
l^eahy,Attachment37. Senator Leahy writes:
Although solitary confinement was develop asamethod for handling highly dangerous prisoners,
it is increasingly being used with inmates who do not poseathreat to staff or other inmates. Far
too often, prisoners today are placed in solitary confinement for minor violations that are
disruptive but not violenL At the same time, conditions within segregation units have become
increasingly harsh. In many cases, human contact is virtually eliminated. Officers deliver meal
trays tbroughadoor slot, and visits by mental health staff are conducted through the cell door.
Interaction with other prisoners is often not allowed, and visits with family members may be
prohibited forayear or more.
There are significant fiscal, safety and humanitarian consequences for this trend toward
increasingly harsh conditions ofsolitary confinement and its more trequent use to punish nonviolent behavior. Fvidence provided by the ^era Institute and others now suggests that placing
inmates in solitary confinement with minimal human contact for days, months and years is
exceptionally expensive and, in many cases, counterproductive, ^ot only do these studies show
that segregation does little or nothing to lower overall rates ofviolence, there is evidence that it
actually increases recidivism rates after release, posingadanger to the public.
B^. Similarly, Senator Dick Durbin expresses the following views on solitary confinement:
In I^^^,a1ederal district court described similar cells at Califomia'sPelican Bay State Prison:
"The cells are windowless; the walls are white concrete. . . .The overall effect [] is one
ofslark sterility and unremitting monotony. Inmates can spend years without ever
seeing any aspect ofthe outside world except forasmall patch of sky. One inmate
fairly described [it] as being ^likeaspace capsule where one is shot into space and let^
in isolation.'"
1maginespending23boursadayinacelllikethat
for days, months, years with no window to
the outside world and very little, if any.humancontacL
The LUnited States holds far more prisoners in solitary than any other democratic nation. The
Bureau ofjustice Statistics found that in 200^,L^.S.prisons held^1,^22 people in some l^ind of
restricted bousing. In my home state oflllinois,^^^ ofthe prison population has spent time in
segregation.

93

23547

United Statesv.PFC BradleyFManning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

Ishould acknowledge that the term "solitary confinement" isaterm of art in
corrections. Solitary or isolated confinement goes byavariety of names in U.S.
prisons—Security Housing, Administrative Segregation, Close Management,
High Security, Closed Cell Restriction, and so on. But the units all have in
common the fact that the prisoners who are housed inside them are confined on
average 23 hoursaday in typically windowless or nearly windowless cells that
commonly range in dimension from 60 to 80 square feeL The ones on the smaller
side ofthis range are roughly the size ofaking-sized bed, one that containsa
bunk,atoilet and sink, and all of the prisoner'sworldly possessions. Thus,
prisoners in solitary confinement sleep, eat, and defecate in their cells, in spaces
that are no more thanafew feet apart from one another.
1^^^ Attachment 37. Thus, the combination ofPFCManning'sMAX and POI status(coupled
with his periodic Suicide Risk status)most certainly amounts to what would colloquially be
known as "solitary confinement."^^
194. Therewasabsolutelynojustification and there can be no justification for the continued
decision to hold PFC Manning in solitary confinement for over nine months. 1n^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.
^^7^^,61 M.F 225, 229(C.A.A.F.2005), theCourt of Appeal fbrthe Armed Forces fbundan
Article13 violation where the accused was arbitrarily placed in solitary confinement fbramere
two weeks. In that case, the court said,"^p]lacing^an accused] inasegregated environment with
all the attributes of severe restraint and discipline,without an individualized demonstration of
cause in the record,was so excessive as to be punishment...". Similarly,in^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.
2009 WF1936444(A.FCLCrimApp), theCourt foundaviolation of Article 13and
awarded 4-for-1credit where the accused spent 33 days in conditions tantamount to solitary
confinemenL Ifafew weeks of solitary confinement cannot be tolerated,what are we to say
about approximately 265 days7
195. Even where solitary confinement serves some sort oflegitimate non-punitive objective,
military courts have considered the length thataprisoner is placed in solitary confinement in
order to discem whether the condition is imposed as punishment in violation of Articlel3. In
(7^^7^^^^^^^^v^^^^^^,2011WF 5221266 (N.M.CL Crim. App.), the courtfound thatthe
accused spent 59 days in solitary confinement inaJapanese prison fbralegitimate non-punitive
reason. The Court in that case emphasized that,"The conditions in special quarters were neither
so onerous, ^^^^^7^^^^^^.^^^^^^, as to constitute punishment,..." 7^.at'^4. Here, even i f M A X
and POI were rationally related toalegitimate govemment objective(which the Defense submits

...But we now know that solitary confinement isn'tjust used for the worst ofthe worsL Instead,
we are seeing an alarming increase in isolation forthose who don't need to be there and for
vulnerable groups like immigrants, children, L^BT inmates, supposedly l^r their ov^ protection.
PFC Manning'scell at O^^^tico was much smaller that the cells typically seen by Professor tJaney in solitary
confinemenL PFC Manning'scell wasawindowless cell that was 4^ square feet in dimension(^^^).

94

23548

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Article 13 Motion

they were not), the conditions did in fact "linger so long^] as to constitute punishment" in
contravention of Article13.
196 Even Brig official GYSGT Blenis admitted to PFC Manning that his treatment at O^^^fico
was "not normal." He stated,"Weunderstand it'snot normal that we have someone in POI for
this period of time...lt'snot^normal]...1guess we'll just leave it at that."^^^ Attachment 25.
Not only was the treatment not normal, it was onerous, degrading and harmful to PFC Manning's
mental health.
197. his trite law that PFC Manning is presumed innocent until proven guilty. And yet, PFC
Manning has been treated inamanner that would not even be appropriate for ^^^v^T^^^^
offenders. C^^^^^^^v C^^^^^^^,623 F.2d 503 (8^^Cir.l980)("conditionsfoundtoconstitute
cruel and unusual punishment when imposed on convicted inmates would surely be viewed as
unconstitutional punishment when imposed on similarly situated unconvicted detainees"). In
fact, COF Malone, one ofthe treating psychiatrists at the Brig, has indicated that the only time
he has ever seen anyone held in conditions similar to PFC Manning was when he treated
prisoners
Thatapsychiatrist with overadecade of experience has only witnessed
conditions like the ones endured by PFC Manning when he visited death row should speak
volumes as to how far outside the lines O^^titico acted in imposing pretrial punishment on PFC
Manning.
198. The conditions under which PFC Manning was held for over eight months ride roughshod
over PFC Manning'sright to be presumed innocent and his right against pretrial punishmenL
Even leaving aside any conceivablejustification for the imposition ofthese restrictions, it is clear
that these conditions amount to ^^B.^^ unlawful pretrial punishmenL
b) TheConditionsofPFCMannin^'sConfinementSparked Domestic and Intemational
Outrage
199. The egregious conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement sparked both domestic and
international outrage. Inaletter to Secretary ofDefense Gates, the program director of Amnesty
International wrote:

^Theexcessiveness ofthe restrictions placed on PFC Manning are highlighted when one looks at the
corresponding Army l^egulation governing corrections practices. Lender Army l^egulationl^O-47,designation in
special quarters is determined "upon recommendations ofthe professional support staffor correctional treatment
staff^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^B^^^^." ^^^Sectionl2^. t^ven where "determined necessary byamedical authority.prisoners
designated for special quarters should be allowed to participate in work/training activities, consume meals with the
general population, and participate in recreation programs. Special quarters will be terminated as soon as it is
determined that the prisoner can be quartered satistactorily within tbe general population." B^. Although the
regulation does not provide an outermost guidepost to the length of timeadetainee can spend in special quarters, it
does provide that "Disciplinary segregation ...normally should not exceed ^0 consecutive days. Prisoners held in
disciplinary segregation for periods exceeding todays will be provided tbe same program services and privileges as
prisoners in administrative segregation and protective custody."

95

23549

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

Amnesty International recognizes that it may sometimes be necessary to segregate
prisoners for disciplinary or security purposes. However, the restrictions imposed
in PFC Manning'scase appear to be unnecessarily harsh and punitive, in view of
the fact that he has no history ofviolence or disciplinary infractions and that he is
apretrial detainee not yet convicted ofany offence. The conditions under which
PFC Manning is held appear to breach the USA'sobligations under international
standards and treaties, including Article lOofthe International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights (1CCPR) which the FISA ratified in 1992 and which states
that "all persons deprived oftheir liberty shall be treated with humanity and with
respect for the inherent dignity ofthe human person". The UN Human Rights
Committee, the 1CCPR monitoring body,has noted in its General Comment on
ArticlelOthat persons deprived of their liberty may not be "subjected to any
hardship or constraint other than that resulting from the deprivation ofliberty;
respect for the dignity ofsuch persons must be guaranteed under the same
conditions as for that office persons...".
The harsh conditions imposed on PFC Manning also undermine the principle of
the presumption ofinnocence,which should be taken into account in the
treatment ofany person under arrest or awaiting trial. Weare concemed that the
effects ofisolation and prolonged cellularconfinement which evidence suggests
can cause psychological impairment, including depression, anxiety and loss of
concentration^may,further, undermine his ability to assist in his defence and
thus his right toafair trial.
In view of the concems raised,we urge you to review the conditions under which
PFC Manning is confined at the Ot^^^fi^o naval brig and take effective measures
to ensure that he is no longer held in 23 hour cellular confinement or subjected to
other undue restrictions.
Attachment 28.
200. Further, almost 300 law professors signedaletter admonishing the government for the
"degrading," "inhumane," "illegal,"and "immoral" conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement;
The sum of the treatment that has been widely reported isaviolation of the Fighth
Amendment'sprohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, and the Fifth
Amendment'sguarantee against punishment without triaF 1fcontinued,itmay
well amount toaviolation of the criminal statute against torture, defined as,
amongotherthings,"theadministrationorapplication...of..procedures
calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality."
Private Manning has been designated as an appropriate subject for both Maximum
Security and Prevention oflnjury (POI) detention. But he asserts that his
administrative reports consistently describe him asawell-behaved prisoner who

96

23550

United StatesvPFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

does not fit the requirements for Maximum Security detention. The Brig
psychiatrist began recommending his removal fiom Prevention oflnjury months
ago. These claims have not been publicly contested.lnanOrwellian twist, the
spokesman for the brig commander refused to explain the forced nudity "because
to discuss the details would beaviolationofManning'sprivacy."
The Administration has provided no evidence that Manning'streatmentrefiectsa
concern for his own safety or that ofother inmates. Unless and until it does so,
there is only one reasonable inference; this pattern ofdegrading treatment aims
either to deter future whistleblowers, or to force Manning to implicate Wikileaks
founder Julian Assange inaconspiracy,or both.
IfManning is guilty ofacrime, let him be tried, convicted, and punished
according to law. But his treatment must be consistent with the Constitution and
the Bill ofRights. There is no excuse for his degrading and inhumane pretrial
punishmenL AstheStateDepartment'sPJCrowleyputitrecently,theyare
"counterproductive and stupid." And yet Crowley has now been forced to resign
for speaking the plain truth.
The WikiFeaks disclosures have touched every corner ofthe world. Nowthe
whole world watches America and observes what it does; not what it says.
President Obama was onceaprofessor of constitutional 1aw,and entered the
national stage as an eloquent moral leader. The question now,however, is
whether his conduct as Commander in Chiefmeets fundamental standards of
decency. He should not merely assert that Manning'sconfinement is "appropriate
and meet^s] our basic standards,"as he did recently. He should require the
Pentagon publicly to document the grounds for its extraordinary actions—and
immediately end those which cannot withstand the light of day.
Attachment 29.
201. American'sfbremost constitutional law scholar. Harvard Professor FaurenceTribe,
denounced PFC Manning'sconditions of confinement as "not only shameful but
unconstitutional." ^^^http:^^www.guardian.co.uk^world^2011^apr^l0^brad1ey manning-legalscholars-letter. ProfessorTribe stated that the treatment was objectionable "in the way it violates
his person and his liberty without dueprocessoflaw and in the way it administers cruel and
unusual punishment ofasort that cannot be constitutionally infiicted even upon someone
convicted of terrible offences, not to mention someone merely accused of such offences."7^.
202. Medical professionals also decried PFC Manning'streatment as amounting to "needless
brutality." Psychologists for Social Responsibility (PsySR)sent the following letter to Secretary
ofDefense Gates:

97

23551

United StatesvPFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

As an organization ofpsychologists and other mental health professionals, PsySR
is aware that solitary confinement can have severely deleterious effects on the
psychological well-being ofthose subjected to iL Wetherefbrecallforarevision
in the conditions ofPFCManning'sincarceration while he awaits trial,based on
the exhaustive documentation and research that have determined that solitary
confinement is, at the very least,afbrm of crueF unusual and inhumane treatment
in violation ofU.S.law.
In the majority opinion of theC.S.Supreme Court case Med1ey,Petitioner, 134
US.1690(1890), U.S. SupremeCourtJustice Samuel Freeman Millerwrote,"A
considerable number ofthe prisoners fell,after evenashort confinement, intoa
semi-fatuous condition, from which it was next to impossible to arouse them, and
others became violently insane; others stilF committed suicide; while those who
stood the ordeal better were not generally reformed, and in most cases did not
recover sufl^cient mental activity to be ofany subsequent service to the
community." Scientific investigations sincel890 have confirmed in troubling
detail the irreversible physiological changes in brain functioning fiom the trauma
ofsolitary confinemenL
As expressed by Dr. Craig Haney,apsychologist and expert in the assessment of
institutional environments,"Empirical research on solitary and supermax-like
confinement has consistently and unequivocally documented the harmful
consequencesoflivinginthesekindsofenvironments... Fvidence ofthese
negative psychological effects comes from personal accounts, descriptive studies,
and systematic research on solitary and supermax type confinement, conducted
overaperiodoffbur decades, by researchers from several different continents
who had diverse backgrounds andawide range of professional expertise...
^Djirect studies ofprison isolation have documented an extremely broad range of
harmful psychological reactions.These effects include increases in the following
potentially damaging symptoms and problematic behaviors: negative attitudes and
affect, insomnia, anxiety, panic,withdrawal,hypersensitivity,ruminations,
cognitive dysfunction, hallucinations, loss of control,irritability,aggression, and
rage, paranoia, hopelessness, lethargy,depression,asenseofimpending
emotional breakdown, self^mutilation, and suicidal ideation and behavior" (pp.
130 131, references removed).
Dr.Haneyconcludes,"Tosummarize, there is notasingle published study of
solitary or supermax like confinement in which non voluntary confinement
lasting for longer thanlOdays where participants were unable to terminate their
isolation at will that failed to resuh in negative psychological effects" (p. 132).
Weare aware that prison spokesperson First FieutenantBrianVilliard has told
AFP that Manning is considereda"maximum confinement detainee,"as he is
consideredanational security risk. But no such putative risk can justify keeping
someone not convicted ofacrime in conditions likely to cause serious harm to his

98

23552

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

mental health. Further, history suggests that solitary confinement, rather than
beingarational response toarisk, is more often used asapunishment for
someone who is considered to beamemberofadespised or "dangerous" group.
In any case, PFC Manning has not been convicted ofacrime and, under our
system ofjustice, is at this point presumed to be innocenL

In addition to the needless brutality ofthe conditions to which PFC Manning is
being subjected, PsySR is concerned that the coercive nature ofthese conditions-along with their serious psychological effects such as depression, paranoia, or
hopelessness-may undermine his ability to meaningfully cooperate with his
defense, undermining his right toafairtrial. Coercive conditions of detention
also increase the likelihood ofthe prisoner "cooperating" in order to improve
those circumstances, even to the extent ofgiving false testimony. Thus, such
harsh conditions are counter to the interests ofjustice.
Civen the nature and effects ofthe solitary confinement to which PFC Manning is
being subjected, Mr. Secretary,Psycho1ogists for Social Responsibility calls upon
you to rectify the inhumane, harmfuF^nd counterproductive treatment ofPFC
Bradley Manning immediately.
Attachment 30. This organization has also submitted an amicus filing for this Court's
consideration. ^^^Attachment41.
203. One member ofthe Obama administration was fired for his comments regarding PFC
Manning'sconditions of confinemenL In March 2011,State Department spokesmanP.J.
Crowley was asked the following question,"There'san elephant in the room during this
discussion;Wikileaks.The LS government is torturingawhistleblower in prison right now."
Crowley replied by denouncing the abuse ofPFC Manning as "ridiculous and counterproductive
and stupid."^^ P.J. Crowley was forced to "resign" shortly after he made the commenL P.J.
Crowley later stood by his statement, saying that " i f you have to explain whyaguy is standing
naked in the middle ofajail cell, you haveapolicy in need of urgent review."^^
204. European leaders have also criticized the United States for its treatment ofPFC Manning.
In an open letter to President Barrack Obama, among others, members ofthe European
parliament wrote to express concerns about human rights abuses against PFC Manning. They
urged the Flnited States to allow the United Nations to investigate the claims:
By preventing UN officials fiom carrying out their duties, the United States
govemment risks undermining support fbrthe work ofthe United Nations
.^^^ http://www.nytimes.com/20l1/03/l4 /us/politics/l4crowley.htmL
^^^^^http://v^^^vw.guardian.co.uk/commentistree/cifamerica/2011/mar/2^/brad1ey-manning-wiki1eaks.

99

23553

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

elsewhere, particularly its mandate to investigate allegations oftorture and human
rights abuses. In order to uphold the rights guaranteed to Bradley Manning under
international human rights law and the US constitution, it is imperative that the
United Nations special rapporteur be allowed to properly investigate evidence of
rights abuses. PFC Manning hasaright to be free from cruel and unusual
punishmenL People accused ofcrimes must not be subjected to any form of
punishment before being brought to trial.
^^^Attachment2F
205. That the conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement while at Ot^^^fi^o sparked domestic
and international outrage should have signaled that what the Brig was doing was not only wrong,
but egregiously wrong. Nearly every constituency that has heard about the conditionsofPFC
Manning'sconfinement, from doctors to lawyers to politicians, has considered these conditions
to constitute not only "unlawful pretrial punishment" but alsoagross violation ofPFC
Manning'sbasic human rights.
c) The United Nations Special Rapporteur onTorture Was Not Permitted to Investigate the
ConditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement
206. The Lnited Nations Special Rapporteur onTorture, Juan Mendez, repeatedly attempted to
investigate the harsh conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement only to be met with Brig
assertions that any interview ofPFC Manning would be subject to monitoring. InaPress
Release issued by the Flnited Nations Office ofthe High Commissioner, the CN.expressed
grave concern that the United States would not permit unrestricted access to PFC Manning:
12July2011
GFNEVA^The Special Rapporteur onTorture today expressed concerns about
restrictions placed by the United States Government on his interaction with
detainees.
Commenting on his attempts to gain unrestricted access to Private first class
Bradley Manning,aFlnited States soldier detained for allegedly leaking classified
US communications to the WikiFeaks website, Mendez said: "1am assured by the
US Govemment that Mr.Manning'sprison regime and confinement is markedly
better than it was when he was in O^^^fico. However, in addition to obtaining
first hand information on my own about his new conditions of confinement,1
need to ascertain whether the conditions he was subjected to for several months in
Ouantico amounted to torture or crueF inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishmenL For that, it is imperative thatltalk to Mr.Manning under conditions
wherelcan be assured that he is being absolutely candid."
At the Special Rapporteur'srequest and after several meetings, the FIS
Department ofDefense has allowed Mendez to visit Pfc.Manning but warned
100

23554

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

him that the conversation would be monitored. Suchacondition violates longstanding rules that the UN applies for prison visits and for interviews with
inmates everywhere in the world. On humanitarian grounds and under protest,
Mendez offered to Manning, through his counseF to visit him under these
restrictive conditions, an offer that Manning has declined.
The Special Rapporteur has, since the beginning ofthe year, been in negotiations
with the LS Covernment over unrestricted access to Manning. Fast month, the
Government informed him that it was not inaposition to accede to the request for
aprivateand unmonitored meeting with Manning.
"The question of my unfettered access toadetainee goes beyond my request to
meet with Mr. Manning^it touches on whetherlwill be able to conduct private
and unmonitored interviews with detainees iflwere to conductacountry visit to
the United States,"Mendez said.
He added that maintaining the principle ofunfettered access to detainees is an
important part ofhis responsibility as the FIN expert on torture. It also determines
whether UN experts can conduct credible enquiries into allegations oftorture and
ill treatment when they visit places of detention and detainees. In 2004, the US
Covemment allowed Mendez'spredecessor, Manfred Nowak, and three other
mandate-holders, access to the Cuantanamo Bay facilities, but the GeorgeW
Bush administration imposed conditions that the FIN mandate-holders could not
accepL Farly in his tenure,which began on November],2010, Mendez formally
asked the US Government for permission to visit Cuantanamo Bay,apetition that
has been renewed on several occasions since then. No answer has yet been given
to this requesL
"The United States, asaworld leader, isastrong supporter of the international
human rights system. Therefore, its actions must seek to set the pace in good
practices that enhance the role ofhuman rights mechanisms, ensuring and
maintaining unfettered access to detainees during enquiries,"he added.
Aftachment 32.
207. On 29 February 2012, the U.N.Special Rapporteur issuedastatement condemning the
conditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement and the United States'violation of the "terms of
reference applied universally in fact finding by Special Procedures" (i.e. its failure to permit an
unmonitored visit). Mr.Mendez wrote:
United States of America
(a)UA30^12^2010CaseNoUSA20^2010State reply; 27^01/201119^05^2011
Allegations of prolonged solitary confinement ofasoldier charged with the
unauthorized disclosure ofclassified information.

101

23555

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

170. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government ofthe FInited States of
America for its response to this communication regarding the alleged prolonged
solitary confinement ofMr. Bradley E.Manning,aUS soldier charged with the
unauthorized disclosure ofclassified information.According to the information
received, Mr.Manning was held in solitary confinement for twentythree hoursa
day following his arrest in May 2010in Iraq, and continuing through his transfer
to the brig at Marine Corps Base O^^titico. His solitary confinement lasting
about eleven months was terminated upon his transfer from O^^^tico to the Joint
Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Feavenworth on 20 April 2011. In his
report, the Special Rapporteur stressed that "solitary confinement isaharsh
measure which may cause serious psychological and physiological adverse effects
on individuals regardless oftheir specific conditions."Moreover,"^d]epending on
the specific reason for its application, conditions, length, effects and other
circumstances, solitary confinement can amount toabreach of article7of the
Intemational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and to an act defined in
articlelor article 16ofthe Convention againstTorture." (A^66^268 paras.79 and
80) Before the transfer ofPfc Manning to Fort Feavenworth, the Special
Rapporteur requested an opportunity to interview him in order to ascertain the
precise conditions ofhis detention. The LS Government authorized the visit but
ascertained that it could not ensure that the conversation would not be monitored.
Sinceanon-private conversation with an inmate would violate the terms of
reference applied universally in fact finding by Special Procedures, the Special
Rapporteur had to decline the invitation. In response to the Special Rapporteur's
request for the reason to hold an unindicted detainee in solitary confinement, the
govemment responded that his regimen was not "solitary confinement" but
"prevention ofharm watch" but did not offer details about what harm was being
prevented. Tothe Special Rapporteur'srequest for information on the authority
to impose and the purpose ofthe isolation regime, the government responded that
the prison rules authorized the brig commander to impose it on account ofthe
seriousness ofthe offense for which he would eventually be charged. The Special
Rapporteur concludes that imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on
someone who has not been found guilty of any crime isaviolation ofhis right to
physical and psychological integrity as well as ofhis presumption ofinnocence.
The Special Rapporteur again renews his request foraprivate and unmonitored
meeting with Mr.Manning to assess his conditions of detention.
(b)AF15^06^2011CaseNo.USA8^2011Statereply:NonetodateFollowupto
aletter sent 13May2011requestingaprivate unmonitored meeting with Private
(Pfc.)Bradley Manning.
171. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Covernment ofthe United States of
America for its response to the communication datedl3May2011requestinga
private unmonitored meeting with Private Bradley Manning. Regrettably,to date

102

23556

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

the Govemment continues to refuse to allow the Special Rapporteur to conduct
private, unmonitored, and privileged communications with Private Manning, in
accordance with the working methods ofhis mandate (F^CN.4^2006^6 paras. 2027)

208. In March 2012,Mr. Mendez, speaking ataU.N.Human Rights Council meeting in
Geneva, condemned PFC Manning'streatmentas "cruel,inhuman and degrading treatment,"
specifically citing "the excessive and prolonged isolation he was put in during the eight months
hewasinO^^titico." He also rejected thejustifications offered by government officials for what
was done to Manning: "the explanationlwas given for those eight months was not convincing
forme." 7^. It is hypocritical for the United States to admonish other countries for their lack of
transparency in the treatment of prisoners,while refusing to allow the FInited Nations meaningful
access toapretrial detainee onU.S.soil.
209. By insisting that the visit be monitored.^^O^^^tico officials could thwart the very purpose
ofthe process: to allow PFC Manning to speak candidly about the conditions ofhis confinement
without fear of reprisal. The Defense submits that the failure to allow PFC Manning to have
access to Mr.Mendez for an unmonitored visit where PFC Manning could freely discuss the
conditions ofhis confinement in the hopes of getting some typeofreprieve from them ^7.^^^
amounts to unlawful pretrial punishmenL Because everyone at the O^^^fi^o Brig was abiding by
Col.Oltman'sunlawful order to not remove PFC Manning from MAX or POF there was
nowhere for PFC Manning to go^other than outside the chain of command^to potentially get
relief The failure to permit PFC Manning an unmonitored visit with theL.N.Special
Rapporteur onTorture was designed to cover up from public view the wrongs that were being
perpetrated at O^^titico. Not only were Ot^^^fi^o officials insistent on keeping PFC Manning in
MAX and on POI for the duration ofhis pretrial confinement, they were also insistent on
shutting him up about it by foreclosing the only remaining avenue of redress^an organization
outside the Fl.S.governmenL
210. The Brig'sfailure to allow PFC Manning access to the United Nations Special Rapporteur
onTorture, in clear violation ofintemational norms, itself amounts to punishment and also
permits the^^^.^^ inference that PFC Manning was being punished in contravention ofhis
Articlel3rights.
d) The ConditionsofPFC Manning'sconfinement Permit the ^^B^^ Inference that PFC
Manning was Punished inViolation of Article13
211. The cumulative conditions under which PFC Manning was held are unduly onerous,
degrading, and detrimental to PFC Manning'smental health. Fven leaving aside any
conceivable governmentjustification for these restrictions, the severity ofthe conditions under
which PFC Manning was held permit the ^^^^^ inference that the conditions were meant to
The Brig, through the l^overnment in tbis case, advanced tbe most narrow and nonsensical reading ofthe Brig's
visitation rules. See
Facts. I^egardless.wellestablished norms ofintemational law clearly lake precedence
over Ouantico'spoorly-drafted visitation policy.

103

23557

United Statesv.PFC Bradley E. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

punish PFC Manning^^^^^v7^^^^^.^,2007WF1702575,'^2 ("When anarbitrarybrigpolicy
results in particularly egregious conditions ofconfinement, the court may inferthat an accused
has been subject to pretrial punishment").
212. Indeed, courts have found Article 13 violations in circumstances far less egregious than
these.
(7^^^^^ ^^^^^.^v^^^^^^^^^,52MF 539(NM.CL Crim.App. 1999)(finding illegal
pretrial punishment where accused held in medium custody special quarters for 87 days; in these
special quarters, the accused was segregated from other prisoners and housed inasmaller cell for
23 hoursaday); (7^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^.^^^, 54 M.F 523,526 ( N M . C L Crim App. 2000)(finding
illegal pretrial punishment where accused spent 32 days in special quarters; the conditions under
which the accused was held included " a 6 ' x 9 ' c e l l with no windows and having to remain in his
cell24hours per day except for chow andaone-hour recreation break Monday through
Friday ''); ^^^7^^.^^^^^^ v^^^^^^7^^^ 2009 WF1936287 (A F CLCrim App)(findingunl^^^
pretrial punishment where accused was placed in administrative segregation for75 days,
confinedtoasinglecell up to 23.5 hoursaday). ^^^^^.^^.^^^^v.7^^^^7^.^^641F.2d 488,494 (7^^
Cir.1981)(findingadue process violation where pretrial detainees spent at 22 hours daily in their
cells); C^^^^^^^v.C^^^^^^^,623 F.2d 503 (8^^ Cir.l980)(findingadue process violation where
pretrial detainees were locked in cells twenty-four hours per day,with release only three times
weekly; these detainees, however,were not in solitary confinement); ^^^^.^v..^^^^^485 F.
Supp. 122 (D. Colo. 1979)(district court finding conditions of confinement unconstitutional and
ordering that no prisoner could be housed in less than 80 square feet for more than 20 hours per
day); ^^^^.^v^^^^^^,838 F2d 28, 29(1^^ Cir 1988)("1n view ofthe apparently small area of
confinement,we are further troubled by the appellant'scontention that he was confmed to his
cell for 22-23 hours per day fora27day period"); ^^^^^^Vi^^^^^^.^,375 F.3d 1269,1274
(11^^ Cir.2004)(11^^ Circuit "readily concluded" that the plaintiff statedaclaimfbrasubstantive
due process violation where "plaintifl^was confined under extremely harsh conditions^in
solitary confinement(under conditions unlike other pretrial detainees or even convicted
prisoners), locked in an extremely smalF closet-sized space, and with minimal contact with
human beings foraprolonged time..."; in
unlike the situation here, the plaintiff was
actuallyafiight risk, as evidenced by officials'investigation into four separate escape plots.).
213. Thus, the conditions that PFC Manning endured for nine months are not constitutionally
permissible. The conditions were so draconian and so far removed from the outer boundaries of
propriety that they permit the^^^.^^ inference of punishment in violation of Articlel3.
E.

Dismissal of All Charges is the Only Appropriate Remedy in this Case

214. Although some form ofconfinement credit is the typical remedy in cases involving
unlawful pretrial punishment, dismissal is available asaremedy in an appropriate case. The
Defense submits that if dismissal is not warranted in this case, then w^^^^^.^^ would dismissal
everbewarranted7 The Defense does not believe that there has ever been such an egregious
case ofunlawful pretrial punishment in Army history. This Court needs to sendamessage that
an unlawful order to keepapretrial detainee in the equivalent of solitary confinement for almost
nine months cannot^and will not^be tolerated.

104

23558

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

215. 1ntherecentlydecidedcaseof^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.^^B^^^^^^,70MF169,175 (CA.A.F.
2011), the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces said, in no uncertain terms, that dismissal isa
potential remedy for Article 13 violations:
Our inquiry does not end there, however. As previously noted, R.C.M. 305(k)
does not limit the availability ofother remedies under Article 13,UCMJ. It is
axiomatic, forexample, thatacourtwithappropriatejurisdiction may remedy an
ongoing Article 13,LCMJ,violation through the writ ofhabeas corpus. No
doubt, additional credit under R.C.M.305(k)isaremedy for violations of Article
13,UCMJ. Indeed, it isanormative remedy and one that has been expressly
endorsed in the rules. But this Court has never held that R.C.M. 305(k) is the
exclusive remedy for Article 13,UCMJ,violations. Tothe contrary,our case law
explicitly recognizes that certain circumstances may warrant other relief In
C^^^^^^^ for example,we said that "^wjhere we find that maximum custody was
arbitrary and unnecessary to ensure an accused's presence for trial, or unrelated to
the security needs of the institution,we will consider appropriate credit ^^^^^^^
^^^^^to remedy this type of violation of Articlel3,UCMJ." Prior case law has
recognized that "other relief for Article13, UCMJ, violations may range from
disapproval ofabadconduct discharge, to complete dismissal ofthe charges,
depending on the circumstances. It follows that ifacourt can dismissacharge in
response to violations of Article 13,UCMJ,as in/^^^.^^^,acourt can do
something less by setting asideadischarge.
Therefore,wereiteratethisCourt'spriorholdings,thatalthough R.C.M.305(k) is
the principal remedy for Articlel3,CCMJ,violations, courts must consider other
relief for violations of Article13,FlCMJ, where the context warrants.
7^. (citations omitted). ^^^^^.^^^^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.^^^^^^,52M.J.767,769(A.F.CLCrim.App.
2000)("Weconclude that where no other remedy is appropriate,amilitary judge may,in the
interest ofjustice, dismiss charges because of unlawful pretrial punishment,which violates
Article 13")
216. In ^^^^^^^^^,the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forced emphasized that relief under
Articlel3must be "meaningful."
This Court first addressed the question ofwhether meaningful reliefis required
for violations of Articlel3,UCMJ,in
In A^^^.^^^. the appellant pled
guilty to various violations ofthe FICMJ,including unauthorized absence,
violatingalawful general order, possession of marijuana, and breach of
restriction, and was sentenced toabadconduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and
allowances, confinement at hard labor for six months, and reduction toF 1. The
appellant was placed in pretrial confinement under circumstances
indistinguishable from those ofadjudged and sentenced inmates including

105

23559

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

identical indoctrination, dress, living, eating, and labor requirements. This Court
reversed the board of review,holding that the appellant's pretrial confinement
conditions constituted pretrial punishment in violation of Articlel3,LCMJ,and
due process. The appellant having already served his sentence, the only
unexecuted portion ofthe sentence was the punitive discharge. The appellant
requested reliefin the form ofdismissal ofthe charges and specifications.
Although the court recognized that the board ofreview was the proper authority
for reassessing the appropriateness ofthe sentence, the Court nonetheless
concluded that "modification ofthe sentence is in order." Specifically,the Court
held:
Under these circumstances,were we simply to retum the case to
the board of review for reassessment of the sentence,we would
thereby imply that the bad-conduct discharge may be affirmed.
Suchacourse would deprive the accused of all meaningful relief,
and would rightly suggest that this Court is prepared to wink at
such grossly illegal treatment ofmen in pretrial confinemenL The
disastrous effects of suchasituation upon the system of military
justice itselfare so manifest as to require us to eliminate that
possibility.
Since A^^^.^^^^ this Court has sought to "ensure meaningful reliefin all future
cases" involving violations of Articlel3,UCMJ. However, as in the context of
appellate due process delay,the question of what reliefis due to remedya
violation, if any,requiresacontextual judgment, rather than the pro forma
application offormulaic rules. Whether meaningful reliefhas been granted and
should be granted will depend on factors such as the nature ofthe Artic1el3,
LCMJ, violations, the harm suffered by the appellant, and whether the relief
sought is disproportionate to the harm suffered or in light ofthe offenses for
which the appellant was convicted.
In light of these cases,we conclude that meaningful relief for violations of Article
13,UCMJ,is required...
7^.(citations omitted).
217. The Defense believes that simple "X-for-l"credit does not remedy the egregious
punishment to which PFC Manning was subjected for almost nine months at Ot^^^fi^o and which
sparked both domestic and intemational outrage. An award ofpretrial sentencing credit would
simply permit Brig officials, now and in the future, to punish soldiers with absolute impunity.
From the Brig'sperspective,ifasoldier is facingahigh enough sentence(e.g. life in prison)
there is no reason ^^^^^ subject the soldier to Articlel3 punishmenL In PFC Manning'scase,
assume that the Government could prove its case and that PFC Manning were to be sentenced to
life in prison,without the possibility of parole. Assume further that PFC Manning was subjected

106

23560

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F.Manning
DefenseArticle 13Motion

to 258 days ofillegal pretrial punishments^ for which he was awarded3fbr-lcredit(amounting
to774days). Where would this leave him7 In the exact same position that he would be in
^^7^^^^ the sentencing crediL In other words, as long asasolider is charged with very serious
crimes, there is no disincentive for Brig officials to refiain from imposing punishment prior to
adjudication.
218. One might argue that Brig officials will refrain from illegally punishing accuseds because
they,themselves, might face consequences for subjecting soldiers to Articlel3punishmenL The
Defense is not aware ofany case where confinement officials were called to task for imposing
Article13punishmentonapretrial detainee. 1nfact,in(7^^7^^^^^^^.^v^^^^^.^^^49M.J.575
(N-M. CL Crim. App.1998), the Court learned of an unwritten Marine policy which ^^^.^^
amounted to unlawful pretrial punishment and, ^T^^T^^^^^^^, the court encouraged those
involved "in the administration ofNavy and Marine Corps brigs" to "ensure that decisions
whether to place pretrial confines inamaximum-custody status are based on all relevant
factors." 7^. This footnote hardly screams outrage.
219. This is not the message that we want to send either to those who punish soldiers
unlawfully,or to those soldiers who are unlawfully punished. Toallow the deplorable actions of
those at O^^^fico(not to mention those who turnedablind eye to those actions)to go unchecked
would make an absolute mockery ofthe constitutional protections which PFC Manning should
be afforded. Articlel3provides that "No person,while being held for trial,may be subjected to
punishment or penalty other than arrest or confinement upon the charges pending against him,
nor shall the arrest or confinement imposed upon him be any more rigorous than the
circumstances require to insure his presence." This isacodification of the constitutional
protection that PFC Manning enjoys by virtue ofthe Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause. ^^^^
V. ^^.^^^441U.S.520(1979). The clause provides thataperson shall not be "deprived oflife,
1iberty,orproperty,without dueprocessoflaw." The Due Process Clause does not provide that
one can permissibly be deprived of such liberty,so long asamilitaryjudge tacks on some
illusory credit when sentencing an accused. Confinement officials do not get to trammel on an
accused'sconstitutional rights and "buy" their way out o f i t through judge-imposed sentencing
crediL Ifthe constitutional protection against pretrial punishment is to mean anything, then all
charges again PFC Manning must be dismissed with prejudice.
220. In this case, PFC Manning personally and through his counsel complained for over eight
months about the draconian conditions ofPFCManning'sconfinemenL The Government in this
case did nothing about iL In late November 2010, the Covernment contacted the Brig about the
following:
Defense has madearequest that PFC Manning'sstatus be reduced from POI to
some other status where he is able to have more time outside or workout in his
Tbe Defense concedes that PFC Manning'sinitial classification in MA^ and under Suicide l^isl^ could have been
legitimate based on information l^nown by the Brig at the time. Uowever, continuing to hold PFC Manning in
Suicide l^iskatter^August 2010, in contravention of the mental health provider'srecommendation, amounted to
pretrial punishmenL

107

23561

UnitedStatesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

cell. My understanding is that his status determination is made based uponalist
offactors including his charges, mental health and behavior. Since the Defense
has made this request to lower his status it is something that we have to at least
address. Is therealesser level ofPOl that PFC Manning could be moved to. If
the recommendation ofthe Brig personnel is to have him remain on POI that is
fine,we just need to have it addressed to the Defense counsel.
^^^Attachment35.
221. The Govemment'srequest shows that the Govemment could not care less whether PFC
Manning was actually removed from POI status ("Ifthe recommendation ofthe Brig personnel is
to have him remain on POI that is fine"); itjust wanted to protect itself against an Articlel3
claim. This is further evidenced when the Govemment states:
ThedefensecounselisconcernedaboutPFC Manning'smental and physical
health in relation to his small amount oftime outside. In order to combat any
potential Article 13issues1would like to getacopy ofthe logs that show when
PFC Manning went outside and how long he stayed there. Iknow that he usually
gets 20 minutes daily butlneed to have the logs to show that."
7^. Far fiom trying to remedy the situation and uphold PFC Manning'sconstitutional rights, the
Government was simply looking for documentation that could be used to "combat any potential
Article13issues." 7^
222. Not only did the Government not do anything about it, ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ did anything about iL The
Staff Judge Advocate'sOffice did nothing about it; the O^^^tico confinement facility did
nothing about it; CW04Averhart did nothing about it; CW02 Barnes did nothing about it; Col.
Oltman did nothing about it; Col. Choike did nothing about iL How an American soldier could
be left to languish in solitary confinement for nine months is incomprehensible. This case has
given American justice, and military justice in particular,abad name.
223 ln^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.^^^^^^,55MF 88,90 91 (C.A.AF 2001),ChiefJusticeCrawford
stated:
Acourt should not use its supervisory authority to impose extraordinary remedies
to vindicate wrongs unless the person allegedly wronged has sought, and failed to
obtain, reasonable, remedial relief through, ^.^^command channels, either
directly orunder Article 138, UCMJ, 10USC^ 938; the InspectorCeneral's
Office; or the Chaplaincy. If the command and staff offices have turnedablind
eye toward an egregious situation, dismissal ofcourt-martial changes would be
warranted as an extraordinary measure.
The quote could not be more apt ifspoken about the instant case. Here, PFC Manning had
repeatedly sought remedial relief through every avenue available fbraperiod of eight months.

108

23562

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
DefenseArticle 13 Motion

Everyone involved "turnedablind eye toward an egregious situation." 7^. This Court cannot
also tumablind eye toward this egregious situation. Accordingly,dismissal is available as an
appropriate remedy; indeed, the Defense submits it is the only appropriate remedy. ^^^^^.^^^
^^^7^^ ^^^^^.^v.^^^^^^^^^,70MF 169,172(C.A.A.F.2011)(finding illegal pretrial punishment
where "specific complaints...should have put the commander on notice that^the accused] was
being illegally punished ^but] he didn't care because he thought the punishment was appropriate
for the crimes he had done overcoming the accused'spresumption ofinnocence.").
224. Tothe extent that this Court does not believe that dismissal of all charges with prejudice is
an appropriate remedy(which the Defense submits that it is), the Defense asks that this Court
award at leastlO-fbr-lcredit for the egregious Articlel3 violations outlined above. In addition,
the Defense requests that, depending on PFC Manning'sforum selection, this Court also
consider the illegal pretrial punishment in fashioning an appropriate sentence. 1n^^^7^^^^^^^.^v.
7^^^^^^, 52 M.J.767 (A.F.CL Crim.App. 2000), the militaryjudge found that there had been
105 days ofillegal pretrial punishmenL He determined that he would "factor in^the illegal
pretrial punishment] facts and determine an appropriate sentence"^^^he would order credit for
the punishment endured.
225. That at leastlO-for-lcredit is warranted is supported by ^^^7^^.^^^^^.^v..^^^^^^^^^,70
M.J.169(C.A.A.F.2011). In thatcase, the accused was in "virtual lockdown" status fora
period o f l l 9 d a y s while in pretrial confinemenL The accused was denied access to mental
health counseling, despite repeated requests. The militaryjudge ultimately awarded 4-for-1
credit, but noted that "the court is very tempted to provide ten-for-one credit solely on the mental
health issue considering this installation'snotice of the seriousness of the mental health issues."
In ^^^^^^^^^,the4fbrlcredit proved to be "meaningful relief since the accused was only
sentenced to confinement for six months(and thus, the confinement credit exceeded his
sentence). ^^^(7^^7^^^^^^^.^v .^^^^^^^^^,2012 WF215865 (A.F.CL Crim.App.); ^^^^^.^^
(7^^7^^^^^^^.^v T^7^^^^^,44 M.J.493 (C.A.A.F.1996)(awardingtenforone credit for illegal
pretrial confinement in contravention ofjudge'sorder).
226. In the instant case, the Defense submits that, ifthis Court is not inclined to dismiss the
charges, confinement credit of at least l O f o r l m u s t be applied against any potential sentence.
PFC Manning was held in "virtual lockdown" for more than double the length oftime ofthe
accused in
Fike in
the Brig repeatedly ignored serious mental health
concerns^that continuing to hold PFC Manning in the equivalent of solitary confinement was
detrimental to his mental health. The remedy in .^^^^^^^^^ meant that the accused was
immediately released fiom pretrial confinement upon his conviction. Fikewise, any remedy
crafted by the Court here must also provide meaningful relief which the Defense submits
would consist of considering the Articlel3issue in sentencing (ifPFC Manning proceeds judge
alone)and awarding at leastlO-for-lcrediL
CONCFUSION

109

23563

United Statesv.PFC Bradley F. Manning
Defense Articlel3Motion

227. In light ofthe foregoing, the Defense requests this Court dismiss all charges with prejudice
owing to the fiagrant violation ofPFCManning'sconstitutional right to not be punished prior to
triaF Should this Court determine that dismissal is not an appropriate remedy,the Defense
requests meaningful reliefin the form of at least lOforlsentencing credit for the 258 days PFC
Manning inappropriately spent in the equivalent ofsolitary confinement and, ifPFC Manning
elects to proceedjudge-alone, consideration ofthe unlawful pretrial punishment issue in
sentencing.
Respectfully submitted,

DAVID EDWARDCOOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

110

23564

ATTACHMENTS
The Defense respectfully requests that this Court consider the following Attachments:
1.
2.
3
4.
5.
6.
7
8
9
10.
11.
12.
13
14
15.
16
17.
18.
19.

20.
21
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38
39.
40.
41.

Initial Custody Classification Determination
Psychiatrists'Weekly Recommendations
Secretary ofNavy Instruction (SFCNAV1NST)1640 9C
Special Handling Instructions
Observation^Fvaluation(O^F) Notes
Classification^Assignment(C^A)I3oard Reviews
CapL Hocter Affidavit^l
CapL Hocter Affidavit^2
COF Malone Affidavit
Memorandum to CW04Averhart About Conditions of Confinement,5January2011
Request for Release From Confinement,13January2011
COF Carl R.CoffmanJr.,Response to Request for ReliefFromConfinement,21January2011
PFC Manning Article 138 Complaint, 19January 2011
PFC Manning Rebuttal to ColChoike'sResponse to Article 138 Complaint, lOMarch 2011
thereinafter "Rebuttal to Articlel38 Complaint"]
CW04JamesAverhart Response to Articlel38Complaint,24January2011
CW04Averhart Response PFC Manning Rebuttal to Article 138 Complaint, 16March 2011
Col Oltman Response to Articlel38Complaint,31January 2011
Col.Choike Response to Article 138 Complaint,lMarch 2011
Col.Choike Notification ofSeparate Filing for New Matters Raised,6April2011;Col.Choike
Response to PFC Manning Rebuttal to Article 138 Complaint,8April2011;PFC Manning Rebuttal
^2 and Request to Consider New Matter Raised, AprillO
CW02 Denise frames Response to Articlel38Complaint,7April 2011
CW02 Barnes Response to PFC Manning Rebuttal to Articlel38 Complaint, lOMay 2011
CW05 Abel Calaviz Investigation in Response to Articlel38 Complaint and Appointment
Memorandum
Juan Carcia Final Action on Articlel38Complaint,13June 2011
Affidavits ofBrig Guards Regarding Incident onl8January2011
Video Recording oflncident at Oi^^^ficoI^rigonl8January2011
Photo ofSuicide Prevention Smock
Affidavit ofBrig Cuard Documenting Incident Where PFC Manning wasTrapped in the Suicide
Smock
Amnesty International Fetter
Faw Professors'Fetter
Psychologists for Social Responsibility Letter
FuropeanFcaders'Fetter
Materials Related to the United Nations Special Rapporteur onTorture, Mr.JuanMendez
Fmails between Mr. Coombs and CPT Fein related to:a)PFC Manning'sPOI status at Oi^^^fico;
andbjarrangingaunmonitored official visit
Oi^^^fico Brig Policy onVisitation
CW04Averhart Memorandum to the Office of the Regimental Judge Advocatc,lDecember 2010
PFC Manning DD510Crievance Re: Conditions of Confinement
Statement from Professor Haney on Solitary Confinement and Other Documentation From the
Lnited States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Work Reports
Incident Reports
5-minute Observation Notes(sample)
Amicus Filing from Psychologists for Social Responsibility

23565

ATTACHMENT 1

23566

REPORT DATE
INMATE SUMMARY DATA 30100710
1. NAME (last, Middle) 2. SSN 3. ID NUMBER
MANNING, BRADLEY E. - -

4.

CONTENTS: ADMISSION SUMMARY (Complete 5, 6, and 7) PROGRESS SUMMARY {Complete 7, 8, and 9)

5.

. PRIOR OFFENSE

. EVALUATION AND PLANNING

. ASSIGNMENT PROGRAM

. CONFINEMENT PROGRESS

CURRENT OFFENSE
a. OFFICIAL INFORMATION
b. VERSION

a. CIVIL
b. MILITARY

a. IMPRESSIONS BASED ON PERSONAL HISTORY
b. CURRENT MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION (INITIAL)

. CURRENT CUSTODY

. CURRENT QUARTERS

. CURRENT TRAINING

. CURRENI WORK ASSIGNMENTS

. SPECIAL TREATMENT PROGRAMS

PLANNED DISPOSITION



a. NEW INFORMATION

b. PROGRESS IN CONFINEMENT

c. CURRENT MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION

d. PAROLE OFFICER EVALUATION

5. CLRRENT OFFENSE

a. OFFICIAL INFORMATION: SND IS CON FINEI) FOR THE ALLEGED VIOI.ATIONS OF ARTICLE ASSAULT
BY BATTERY AND ARTICLE I34. WRONGFIJLTRANSMISSION OF DEFENSE INFORMATION.

b. VERSION: SND CHOOSES NOT TO MAKE A STATEMENT.

6. PRIOR
2L CIVIL: SND CLAIMS NO PRIOR OFFENSES.

b. MILITARY: ZOIOOSO6: CLAIMS I NIP FOR VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I28.

7. EVALUATION AND PLANNING
a. IMPRESSIONS BASED ON PERSONAL HISTORY: SNP IS OF ABOVE AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE. HE UNDERSTANDS HIS
AND FEELS THAT HE WILL HAVE NO ADJUSTING TO

II. CURRENT HEALTH (INITIAL): SNP APPERARED STATED AGE OF 22 WAS WELL GROOMED.
AND NEAT IN APPEARANCE. SND WAS ALERT ORIENTED TO PERSON PLACE AND TIME. SNP MAINTAINED GOOD EYE
CONTACT AND WAS COOPERATIVE THE INTERVIEW. SNP SPOKE ATA MODERATE RATE WI TH
MODERATE VOLUME. SNP STATED TH AT HE HAS DEPLOYED TO A COMBAT ZONE. AND HAS NOT BEEN DIAGNOSED
WITH PTSD. OR A TBI. SNP DENIED SUICIDAL OR IIOMICIDAL THOUGHTS AT THIS TIME. SNP FURTHER DENIED ANY
PERCEPTUAL DISTORTIONS OR ESCAPE IDEATIONS AT THIS TIME.

BLENIS CM. PROGRAMS CHIEF

DD FORM 2715-2, NOV 1999

Page I of 2

ManningB__42948

Adobe Pmlessaonal .7

23567

neponr one
CONTINUATION SHEET

20100730
1. TITLE or FORM 2. oo FORM
INMATE SUMMARY DATA 2715-2
3. NAME (Last. First, Middle) 4. 5. ID NUMBER

MANNING, BRADLEY E.

SND is a 22 year old male from Crescent, OK. He was raised in an average middle class family by his mother and father until they
divorced in 2000. Following his parents divorce, SND moved to the United kingdom with his mother where he graduated from
Tasker Milward VC high school in 2005. After graduating, SND moved back to Oklahoma with his father and was kicked out ofthe
house because his step mother did not like him. In 2006 SND moved to his Aunt's home in Maryland and and took classes at the
University ofMaryland for two years before dis?ern'olling due to lack of financial support. SND enlisted in the U. S. Anny in 2008
as an Intel Analyst for GI bill bene?ts. SND stated that he has one older sister that he was never close to because oftheir age
difference, and he has no contact with his father. SND stated that he was close to his mother but after she had 2 strokes she was not
coherent to what was going on around her and his relationship with her became distant. SND states that he has little relations with
arty of his family except for his Aunt. SND has only been tleployetl once to a combat theatre and was taken into custody during his
deployment. SND is single with no children and claims that he is a woman inside a male body. He states that he has been diagnosed
with an anxiety disorder, dcptessiott, ADDHD and a gender identity disorder. is confined for I speci?cation ofarticlc l28 and
1 speci?cation for Article I34 and does not want to speak about his confining offenses. SNP states that he was suicidal previously
and did make plans to hang hintselfbut does not currently have stiicitlal feelings. SND states that his suicidal feelings subsided
when he began taking his prescribed medications 2-3 weeks ago. SND claims no homicidal or escape ideations at this time
and has no questions or concerns at this time.

BLENIS C.M. PROGRAMS CHIEF



DD FORM 2719, NOV 1999 Page 2 ol 7



Adobe Professional 7.0

ManningB_42949

23568

INITIAL CUSTODY CLASSIFICATION

1. DATE 2. NTERVIEWER NAME 3, (xong)
20100729 HANKS, 3 WW0

4. IDENTIFICATION

a. PRISONER NAME (Last, First. Middle) SSN c. GRADE d. SEX (X one)

MANNING, BRADLEY B. 5-3
FEMALE

5. ADMNISTRATIVE FACTORS (X as applicable) NO YES

I. SUICIDE RISK

b. PHYSICAL HEALTH PROBLEM

c. MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEM

d. SPECIAL QUARTERS

6. MANAGEMENT FACTORS (Enter point values) POINTS
OFFENSE

OFFENSE SEVERITY - 1 - 8

b. SUBSTANCE ABUSE 0
YESI3-3

c. PENDING 0
N0 0 YES - (Enter points from Offense Severity Scale)

HISTORY OF VIOLENCE 4
QUESTION (2) - YES 2 QUESTION (3) YES - 4 QUESTION (4) - YES 6 QUESTIGJ (5) - YES - 8

e. HISTORY OF ESCAPE SENTENCE THE REMAINING
DETANEE OR0-QODAYS-O 91DAYS-1YEAR 1 1+ T03YEARS- 2 3+ TOSYEARS =3 0
5 -0- TO 10 YEARS - 5 10+ YEARS 7 - 8

9. TOTAL POINTS 5

7. SCREENING DECISION (X one)
MEDIIRJ-IN (0- 11 Points) MAXIIMJM Points)

In
3

NAL DECISION

a. OVERRIDE (X one)
NO YES - CODE NOT APPLICABLE (Policy)

I). RATIONALE

SND WAS UNDER CONSTANT SUICIDE WATCH PRIOR TO BEING CONFINED IN THIS FACILITY FOR MULTIPLE
MONTHS.

9. DECIDING

I. NAME I). GRADE c. TITLE (1. NATU
HANKS, W. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

CUSTODY DECISION


DD FORM Z711. NOV 1999 P3985

ManningB_42950

23569

CLASSIFICATION
11. DATE 1 2. 1 3. INTERVIEWER 14_ (x one;
20100729 2200 HANKS, R. 3 DETNNED
ADJUDGED
15. FACTORS
a. SUICIDE ms:
(1) HOW oo You FEEL ABOUT acme
SND STATES THAT HE FEELS CONFUSED
No YES
(2) HAVE You EVER THOUGHT ABOUT COMMITTING
(3) DID You MAKE A PLAN TO COMMIT
(4) HAVE YOU EVER ATTEMPTED (If Yes. when and how?) It
PHYSICAL HEALTH PROBLEM No YEs
(1) Do You HAVE A CONTAGIOUS (If Yes, what?)
(2) DO YOU HAVE ANY PHYSICAL {If Yes, what?)
(3) ARE YOU TAKING ANY MEDICATIONST (If Yes, give reason)
ANXIETY AND DEPRESSION
C. MENTAL HEALTH No YEs
(1) no You HAVE ANY MENTAL (If Yes, wnam
GENERALIZED ANXIETY DISORDER, DEPRESSION, GENDER IDENTITY DISORDER, ADDHD
(2) WERE YOU EVER HOSPITALIZED ron MENTAL (rr Yes. when?)
a. SPECIAL QUARTERS No YES
To YOUR KNOWLEDGE, no You HAVE ANY ENEMIES IN THIS (If Yes, who and why?)
DD FORM 2711, NOV 1999 Page 2 of 4 Pages

ManningB_42951



23570

CLASSIFICATION WORKSHEET (Continued)

16. MANAGEMENT FACTORS
3. WHAT ARE YOU CONFINED

128, 134
b. SUBSTANCE ABUSE NO YES
DRUGS
YOU USED RUGS ALCOHOL
I HAVE EVER
DRUGS
RU I OHOL IN THI ENU
(2) AV YOU USED GS ALC 5 ME ALCOHOL
(If answer to both (1) and (2) is No, skip to 16.c. If either (1) or (2) is Yes. continue lines (3) through
(3) HAVE YOU EVER BEEN DISCIPLINED IN THE SERVICE OR FIRED FROM A JOB BECAUSE OF DRUG OR ALCOHOL

(4) HAS DRUGIALCOHOL USE EVER LED TO FAMILY PROBLEMS OR
(5) HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ARRESTED WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF DRUGS OR
(6) HAS USE OF DRUGSIALCOHOL RESULTED IN OTHER PROBLEMS, SUCH AS BLACKOUTS OR LOSS OF
c. PENDING CHARGESIWARRANTSIDETAINERS NO YES
DO YOU HAVE ANY OUTSTANDING WARRANTSIDETAINERS OR ADDITIONAL PENDING (If Yes, explain}
d. HISTORY OF VIOLENCE (X) NO YES
(1) HAVE YOU EVER ASSAULTED ANOTHER If
(If No, skip to 16.9. If Yes, answer (2) through
(2) NON-PHYSICAL ALTERCATION
(3) ASSAULT WITHOUT A WEAPON
(4) ASSAULT WITH A WEAPON
(5) MULTIPLE ASSAULTS
(6) AGE AT TIME OF
22

(7) EXPLAIN
PUNCHED A FELOW SOILDER FOR NO REASON

9. HISTORY OF ESCAPE (X as Assign 6 points in Item 6.e, If answerfs Yes to any of the following questions.) NO YES
(1) HAVE YOU EVER ESCAPED OR ATTEMPTED TO ESCAPE
(2) WERE YOU EVER APPREHENDED ON A PAROLE
(3) HAVE YOU EVER RESISTED
(4) DID YOU EVER INITIATE A PERIOD OF UNAUTHORIZED ABSENCE WHILE OTHER CHARGES WERE If
DD FORM 2711 . NOV 1999 Page 3 of 4 Pages

ManningB_42952

23571

CLASSIFICATION WORKSHEET (Continued)

IMPRESSION

SND IS A 22 YEAR OLD SINGLE SOLDIER WITH AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE.
SND WAS COOPERATIVE DURING THE INTERVIEW.

SND WAS TALKATIVE DURING THE INTERVIEW.

SND DOES APPEAR TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS ACTIONS.

SND HAS ADEQUATE LEVEL OF SELF AWARENESS.

SND HAS AN AVERAGE LEVEL OF TOLERANCE FOR STRESS.

SND IS NOT AWARE OF ANY KNOWN ENEMIES IN THE BRIG.

SND SHOWS NO SIGNS OF DEPRESSION.

SND CLAIMS HE DOES NOT WANT TO HARM HIMSELF.

SND DENIES THAT HE IS SUICIDAL.

DD FORM 271 1 . NOV 1 999 Page 4 of 4 Pages

Manm'ngB__42953





23572
REPORT DATE
INMATE BACKGROUND SUMMARY
SECTION 1 . PERSONAL DATA go|g9??gq
1. NAME (L651, First, Middle) 2. SSN 3. ID NUMBER
eeautf Eoum
4. MAIDEN NAME 5. NICKNAME 6. ALIASIESI

7. AGE 8. SEX: 9. PLACE OF BIRTH /CIry, Counry and 51319; DATE OF BIRTH
MALE


11. RACE (X one or more) 12. ETHNICITY (X one]

AMERICAN INDIANI NATIVE NATIVE HAWAIIAN on omen pAcI:Ic ISLANDER on LATINO

1? ASIAN WHITE HISPANIC on LATINO

1 BLACK on AFRICAN AMERICAN DECLINE To nssvono CECLINE RESPOND
13. NATIONALITY 14. RELIGION

15. HEIGHT 16. WEIGHT 17. MARKS (scars, Ianoos, erc.I Yes, see
gik XNO I TYES
18. HAIR COLOR nne/ 19. EYE COLOR (X one}
AUBURN BROWN suvza GREEN vIoLr.r
GnAv WHITE
eLoNo RED BALD HAZEL
CIANL: AMEILUCATICN (City. srm-I
NC [um] was
21. ASSOCIATION: CJLT ICIIV. Slaw!
I NO
22. DOES YOUR FAMILY KNOW YOUR WHEREABOUTSI
No mus -
23. no THEY NEE) TO BE NOTIFIED:
NO YES Ill Vex, Name, Relax/onshIp. Phone]
24.1 HAVE VOU EVER TRIED TO COMMIT I). DO YOU FEEL SUICIDAL AT THIS
000 kzbo I1 000

25. ARE THERE ANY ISSUES THAT NEED IMMEDIATE MEDICAL (Communicable diseases 0/ disobi/Itiesl

.

26. A17 THERE ANY ISSUES THAT NEED IMMEDIATE

b. DATE c. TIME

00.00000

28. ACTIONS TAKEN IF NECESSARY:

29.3. ACTION TAKEN BY: b. DATE c. TIME

DD FORM 2710, NOV 2002 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 5 Pages

Adobe Prohsvoml 7

ManningB_42954

23573

REPORT DATE
SECTION 2 - MILITARY BACKGROUND
ac Io
1. NAME (Last, M/dd/9} 2. SSN 3. ID NUMBER
mvww?) BMW jw 1
4. BRANCH OF SERVICE
AIR FORCE RI ARMY Ij NAVY I rvmmuas COAST GUARD SERVES

5. MILITARY UNIT 6. MILITARY INSTALLATION

ems? mm?! soar Datum? MI

7. HOME OF RECORD (Cuy, State): 8. ACTIVE OUTY BASE DATE 9. DATE ENTERED CURRENT TERM


mgawm Qoo?ACTIVE DUTY OBLIGATION 11. TOTAL ACTIVE LENGTH OF SERVICE

I?"mmIs
12. METHOD OF ENTRY (Choose one).-

I INDUCTION I INITIAL ENLISTMENT I I REENLISTMENT I I DIRECT ARPOINTMENT
Al I

13. HIGHEST PAYGRA AINED: 14. CURRENT MOSIRATE OR SPECIALTY: 15. PREVIOUS DISCHARGE RECEIVED

I Type and aIe-
- *3 9

16. PRIOR SERVICE PRIOR BRANCH OF SERVICE

YES AIR FORCE I ARMY Ih I I NAVY I I MARINES I I COAST GUARD RESERVES

AWARDS AND DECORATIONS

18. MAJOR MILITARY SCHOOLS ATTENDED

DATE COMPLETED
COURSBE TITLE COURSE EOCATION
1

ml?? we/V3?

19. PREVIOUS MILITARY OFFENSES

DATE OF INCIDENT CONFINEMENT
ARTICLE 15 OR COURT MARTIAL OR ACTION OEFENSES DISPOSITION


mm? 9.01003: 65 AW ?ll?

20. MILITARY HISTORY NARRATIVE
3 GENERAL MIUTARY SERVICE BACKGROUND

(559; Taazuxue ace??-
3003

Two

DD FORM 2710, NOV 2002 Page 2 0' 5 P6985

ManningB_42955

23574

REPORT DATE
SECTION 3 - CIVILIAN BACKGROUND
3.0 is 9-9.1

1. NAME (Last, First, Middle! 2. SSN 3. ID NUMBER

{Du ARD

4. CIVILIAN EDUCATION (List High School, Colleges, and Trade Schools)

NAME AND ADDRESS or SCHOOL AGE ?"59 GRADEIS) oscnes

DATE
. Mooi

vC,uK 1'5 ?llbO\ NA 9.003?

6 l~ '7 484/?. $2901

3? 3.00% N/a~ ?200??

9 HIGHEST GRAOECOMPLETELREASON son LEAVING scnoo-L:

5. CIVILIAN EMPLOYMENT

FULL on DATE5

NAME AND OF EMPLOYER TYPE or wom< SALARY PART TIME REASON FOR LEAVENG
a b. c. d. e. f.

"CoN>xn?i2s' Fvu_ lmgi Tgnk?sm?

FULL ?Ex;

We NM 9?

6. CIVIUAN ARREST RECORD

OFFENSE (Exclude minor Ila//ic DATE CONFINED
o//gnses - include PLACE OF ARREST OR SENTENCE
a.

MD: x5!

nu: wit? 15/ in

MIA SM

7. PERSONAL HISTORY
a. EDUCAYIONAL BACKGROUND
b. OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND

(2. GENERAL BACKGROUND
. BF 909?
p?qsks

9 Qonbiik
AL. 371:4 Kit

00 FORM 2710, NOV 2002 Page 3 of 5 Pages

ManningB__42956

23575

REPORT DATE
SECTION 4 - FAMILY BACKGROUND
30 In 09.11

1. NAME {Lash First, Middle} 2. SSN 3. ID NUMBER

mIwxweIW*vL4< I I

4 MARITAL STATUS CODES /CurreIIl)__

1 MARRIAGE ANNULLED :3 INTERLOCLJTORY MARRIED 1* |7 wnooweu

2 DIVORCEO 4 LEGALLY SEPARATED NEVER MARRIED
5. LIVING STATUS:

A WITH spouss - I wum DA 1; moqm
RELATIVE COHABITNG JMILITARY OTHER.

7. NUMBER or FAMILY MEMBERS








ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER
NAME /Street, (Include Area Code,? AGE
a d. e.
sump meme worm: DWITEI7 54

gm? r:I>:m1k 55-
g;s-ndf 90 ?UrnmA?, 60
3? 3

9. NEXT OF KIN
3. NAME (Lou hrsr, Inmal) 0 ADD

VAN

10. EMERGENCY CONTACT (II Men of Kin, indicate SAME).

TEI EPHONE (Incl



I. NAME (Last, M/dd/o Inmall ADDRESS (Street, C/ry, $IaIe, ZIP Code} c. TELEPHONE (Incl Area Code)
11. LENGTH OF RESIDENCY 12. LENGTH OF RESIDENCY 13. LENGTH OF TIME 14. HAS ANY FAMILY MEMBER EVER BEEN
AT CURRENT ADDR ss: IN THE LOCAL AREA: APART FROM PARENTS: CONVICTED OF A
YEARS 5 MONTHS 5 YEARS MONTHS 3 MONTHS I IVES I IJNKNOWN
15. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO OR PARTICIPATED IV A MILITARY FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM OR

PROTECTIVE SERVICES

2 NO YES {ll Yes, stale where, when and reason.)



16. ARE YOU PRESENTLY UNDER A COURT ORDER CONCERNING FAMILYIOTHERS (restrain! order, no-conract order)?
N0 YES Yes, gm.? dares, pa/sons, condmons and name or ,urisdIctIon.}

17. FAMILY NARRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION:
A
3. GENERAL FAMILY BACKGROUND
b. IF APPLICABLE INCLUDE:
-sTATus OF MARRIAGE
. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS =oR FAMILY

DD FORM 2710. NOV 2002 P898 4 0' 5 ?69?5

ManningB_42957

23576

SECTION 5 - HEALTH BACKGROUND

REPORT DATE

9,0

2. SSN

1. NAME ILasr, First, Middle)

Ma V1-N L7 'i0-M30

3. ID NUMBER

4. HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE YOUR CURRENT PHYSICAL CONDITION:

excmem soon [3 PAIR P009

5. LIST ANY PAST SERIOUS ILLNESS. INJURY OR PHYSICAL AILMENT YOU HAVE SUFFERED OR ARE CURRENTLY SUFFERING AND

DATE OF OCCURRENCE: q?

6. 00 YOU HAVE A PHYSICAL HANDICAP: END YES

7. LAST HIV TEST DATE

8. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN HOSPITALIZED IN A MENTAL NO {Stale IODSOD OI1dd'lf0)

.

9. HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED i

3 NO YES {Explain}
-. -

YES (Exp/am)

10. HAVE YOU EVER ATTEMPTED SUICIDE:

1. PERSONAL HABITS

ALCOHOL use CLAIMED: gwons
IXINO

HAVE vou even nscenvso ALCOHOL no

MODERATE HEAVY omen
'55

YES (Stare and dare}

WAS ALCOHOL ABUSE

I: Moosaxng I HEAVY I: OTHER Iixploml

DRUG USE CLAIMED:

BTIONE OCCASIONAL
onus use @140

HAVE YOU EVER RECEIVED DRUG YES (Sieve fact/try and dare}

GAMBLING:

rneousunv OCCASIONALLY gvevsn

12. HEALTH BACKGROUND INFORMATION
a SPORTS AND HOBBIES
b. SPECIAL SKILLSIABILITIES
NOTES (Is there on ms lorrn witch is not covered that you Ieel should be broughr to the anennon oi the factory?)

3

DD FORM 2710, NOV 2002

Man ningB_42958

Page 5 5 Pages



ATTACHMENT 2

From:

To:

dlninutc DOES pose a threat to

I I [7ut?tl1crincntalcvuluation IS necessary

Tntnute to bc from general


?lninutc liris :1 )l .l-1R of lrustixition I stress

23578
SUICIDE RISK /In AEVENTION OF INJURY REVIEW
Cagtain Iioctcr 20100730
Classification and Assignment Board DATE
BRADLEY 3-
Lust. First. Middle lnit. SSN RCN
The following action is for subject:
Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-I SR

[3 Inniutc DOES NOT pose a
Furt|:cr mental evaluation is NOT necessary
liimutc DOES NOT need to he scgicgzitctl lroni

general population

Inmzito has an ERANCTF. til?
frustraition I stI?cs.s

Cl



A clz/m/~ 4.71 ll i,/J13?







ManningB_43179


william J. Hocter, MD

CAPT MC USN


23579
SUICIDE RISK I PREVENTION OF INJURY ASSIGNEVIENT REVIIQW
From?. Captain 20100805
To: Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE
MANNING, BRADLEY E.
SSN RCN
l. The. following action is recommended for subject:
Custody: Squad Buy: lob:
SR
DOES pose 1| ll?Il?CLll lo lnm;ilc DOES NOT pose .1 threat to himself
B/Furtlutr nienlal evaluation necessary Furllici? iziciilnl evaluation IS nc-;css;uy
DOES NERD (o be scgi'cg;iIcLl from lnl1?.?llC need to has
y,cnci;il populaticm
Inmulc has :1 LOW of ll /slicss Imnulcl1;i.s .m oli
lmusunlnni/sucss
.
?Pl moi? QM 0?
ad? I-omH/x Lu!/Le/~ 5
.
club
CowwmJ4 _Ao
uuxzing 14?; laeairz, maft .

..
AA)

wilffamv Hocter, MD
CAPT MC USN




ManningB_43178 I



23580
SUICIDE RISKI PREVENTION OF INJURY ASSIGNMENT REVIEW
FFOMI Captain Hoclcr 20100330
To: and Board DATE
5-
SSN RCN
1. The following action is recommended for subject:
Cuslodyz Squad Buy: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-I SR
?I\I11:1lu In |1ims?cH'
3} .

mcnlul IS Furth-:1 ix NOT necessary
In ?wc lmsxu Imnulc NOT to In?
gmpulnlinn
lutmulc :1 J1

fruslmtion



Ia/UVui?
/1 I

Qjuvy


I

Mi?iag ./Hocter, MD
CAPT USN


ManningB_43170

23581
SUICIDE RISK OF INJURY ASSIGNMENT REVIEW
From? Captain Hooter 20100927
T03 Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE

Last, First, Middle Init. SSN RCN
I. The following action is recommended fox subject:
Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ- I
Inmate DOES pose a threat to himseif B?niate DOES NOT pose a thieat to himself
[Z/Further mental evaluation IS necessary Further mental evaluation is necessary
Inmate DOES NEED to be segregated timii general nm.i=.e DOES NUI need to he segre_g;ited from
population geneial population

[1 Isimtite has :1 LOW of t't'ustr;iti0n stress izitt: has an of

iiustratimi stress

Ci

km

.
HE - an eui?-v?vq 1- -

I 9?
M11044 9 rovtcuas -I-

lf: Au] S-1 . . wimp?
1/ r-
a/ OVL I

-?Ma no? .. ml in
Luws







w1

CAPT MC USN


ManningB__43177

23582
SUICIDE RISK I PREVENTION OF INJURY REVIEW
From: Captain Hocter 20100903
To: Clussificntit)n and Assignment Board DATE
BRADLEY 3?
Last. First, Middle Inn. SSN RCN
l. The following uetton IS recommended for subject:
Cuctudy: Bay: Job:
SQ-I POI
DOES pose a threat to himself 'lnm;:te DOES NOT pose a threat to himself
Ftnuher mental ev.1luntmn IS Further mentnl evnluntton NOT necessary
DOES Nl7.lEl') to he lmnute NOT need to be [tom

.1 LOW '1 of stress _.lnFn.'m: has an 01
ll um .ttiun

l:l Cl

WnillLambwhim. 4&3/pm. I gm?xy
.- - 6? ?iqinlx/5),



A



CAPT MC USN


ManningB_43176

23583
SUICIDE RISK I HREVENTION OF INJURY ASSIGNMENT REVIEVV
From: C.lpl.1in Hocler, 201 009 10
To: Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE
3-
Lasl, First, Middle lnil. SSN RCN
l. The action is for
Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
SQ- I POI

I3 pose a lhrcal lo






El

lnmuh? NI la) hc hum
pnpLIl;1lluIl

:1 Low

B/lnmale DOES NOT pose a ll1rC'.ll I0 himself
mental cvaluulion is NOT

D0155 need to he {mm

pupululiun

Cl

lnmalc Inn Kitlilall MD

CAPT MC USN



ManningB_43175

23584
SUICIDE RISK PREVENTION OF INJURY REVIEW
From: Captain Hoctcr, WJ. 20?-00917
Tu: Classificalion and Bugrd DATE

MANNING, BRADLEY E.
Lz1sl,FirsI,Middlc lnit.

I. The following action is recommended for subject:

Cuelody:
MAXIMUM

I Inmalc DUES pose :1 threat to himself
mental cx-ahmliun IS necessary



lmn-.114: DOES Nlilil) to in scgn;g;1lc(J
pupululiun

El lnmzuc has :4 LOW ol"



SSN RCN

Job:
POI

Squad Buy:
SQ-I

Inmalc DOES NOT pose a threat lo himself

Further mental cvullmlion is NOT






Inmate D0138 need no he F.cgucg,.1tcd from


Inmulc has ManningB_43174





Vi11I'i_Km Hocter, MD
CAPT MC USN


23585
SUICIDE RISKII BREVENTION OF INJURY ASSIGNMENT REVIEW
I-?mm: Captain Hocter. W.J. 20100924
Tu: Clazasificulion and Board DATE
BRADLEY 3-
Last, First, Middle Init. SSN RCN
I. The following action is for subject:
Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-I P01
Inmate DOES pose a threat to himself NOT posc a thrcal to
IS inciilul is NOT
NIZIED in In: from lnimic NOT need to lie
popululitm

nmzilc m? an nl?






MW )c~Wa?

Wilf??m J. MD
CAPT MC






23586

SUICIDE RI-SK PREVENTION OF INJURY REVIEW
From: Colonel R. D.
Classification and Assignment Board

3-
Last. First, Middle Init. SSN RCN
The action IS for

Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
POI
l)Ol?S post :1 Ilncul In himself lmnalc DOES NOT pusc. :1 In himself

IS Furlhcu um.-nlal is zzccux?my
Wacky

DOES I\'IiliI) I0 he from DOF-LS to he
population (A,

Inmate Imnulc hm an AVERAGE

stress






No okauyr 41: ~I?oU?v?-v5
i?i? Ivn?v/??Vj

a-v~A OL

Mg
Ricky D. Malone, MD
COL MC USA



ManningB_43155

23587

SUICIDE RISK OF INJURY ASSIGNMENT REVIEW

From: Captain Hoctcr, WJ. 20 1 0 1 015
To: Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE
BRADLEY 3- ll
Last. First. Middle Init. SSN RCN

I. The following action is recommended for subject:

Custody: Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM POI
Inmate DOES pose a threat to himself DOES NOT pose a threat to himself
E/Further mental evaluation lS necessary Ftirtlier mental evaluation is NOT necessary
nninte DUES NEED to be segregated lroni general NOT need to Le segregated
population general population
Inmate Inn [1 LOW of lrusti':ttinn stress Timate has an of
frusIi'ati0n stress

Cl

0fl'ig.jer\

KSIYLAL eff!
44- . II 4 .4_dIlA. It A I
i??Ql?A?



z--5



?lm MD
CAPT MC USN


ManningB_43172



23588

RISKZ QF INJURY NI

From: Captain Hoctcr. WJ. 20101022

To: Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE

MANNING: BRADLEY 5-

Last, First, Middle lnil. SSN RCN

l. The following action is recommended for Subject:

Custody: Squad Day: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-I POI
Inmate DOES pose a threat to himself E?inalc DOES NOT pose a threat to himself
I Further mental evaluation [5 necessary Further mental evaluation is NOT necessary
Inmate to be segregated from general nmatc DOES NOT need to be segregated from
pnpulalinn populutiun

Inmate hm" 2: LOW stress of
I

Cl

Mctlieal Remarks:

- 9+ llcx?ManningB_43171



From;
To:

lnmatc DOES pose :1

IS necessary



lnm:1tcl1;ts;I LOW



23589
I PREVENTION OF IN URY ASSIGNMENT REVIEW
Captain lloctcr, 20101029
Clussificzttiun and Assignment Board DATE

BRADLEY E.

lmnutc DOES Nlilill to he from




Last, First. Middle Init. SSN RCN
The following action is recommended for subject:
Custody: Squad Buy: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-I POI

B?nntc DOES pose a thrc.?1l to himself
is NOT

lnmalc. NOT nerd In he
pnpulatitm

has an of
lruximtinn s1I'css

ManningB_43169




-






23590
SUICIDE RISK PREVENTION OF INJURY
From: Captain 30101119
T0: and Buurd DATE

Mmwc. mom E. j2_j_

Last. First. Middle lnil. SSN RCN

l. The following action is recommended for subject:

(fustodyt Squad Bay: Job?
MAXIMUM P()l
Inmate DOES pose .1 threat to himself te DOES NOT pose .1 thneat In himself
. . . .
I-urlher mental emluallon IS necessary l~urlher mental exalunuon XS necessary

DOES NEED to be l]'0m -_:enerzll mle DOES NOT need to he segregzlled
popululitm gcnelul $79 .

mxlI':ulm11/ mess

|j lmnule lung :1 LOW ER uf I ~.lrc?s Wn?fznle has E012



willie . Hocter
CAPT USN
tri

ManningB_43168



23591



SUICIDE RISK OF INJURY REVIEW

I?-mm? Captain Hocler. J. 20101202
T01 and Assignznenl Board DATE

MNNINGI BRADLEY 3- El-_

Middle lnil. SSN RCN

I. The action is recommended for subject:

Squad Bay. Job:
POI
lnm.:le L)(lliS pose a to himself le DOES NOT pnse .1 In himself
I 3 menI..| evzulualmn IS mental is NOT necessary
Inmate DUES from

has :1 LOW ml" m?;xIc an T01 of
l'rusl:'ulion stress?

Cl
d\ AA) ?Sr?

mo?: U?ersgechvv

Z3 _n I
LE4

VH5 Ukg, av



?gjiggzh Hocter, MD
AP MC


ist







ManningB__43167



23592

SUICIDE RISK PREVENTION OF INJURY REVIEW

From: CUJ)li.ll? I-Ioclcr. WJ. 33101210
Classification ard Assignincnl Bnurd DATE
MANNING. Ll.
Lust, Filsl, Middle Inil. SSN RCN

l. The following aclinn ia rucmnniumlcd for

Custody: Squad Buy: Job:
SQ-I

lnIn::lc DOES pose a threat [0 liiumclli Inmulc DUI-LS 3 lhrcul In himself
I '/ll FlIl|l)cI' nicnlul .. IS El l"urtlicr
lnm;ilc NEED to he llzmi lmnzitc DOES NU l' [0 be lrmu
-. s.
populzilzon gcuivml popnluliun

,i ?Inmate has .1 LOW T()lug? 4
?02

dill)
William J. Hocter, MD 3

CAPT MC USN


ManningB_43166

From:

E1

M0

ManningB_43165

23593
SUICIDE RISKI OF INJURY ASSIGNMENT
Captain Hoctcr, WJ. 20101213
Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE

MANNING. wow 5-

Inmate DOES page
C_a'Eux menial cvahsation IS

Inmate DOES NEED to be flu-.n
population

Inmate a of

Mcd?c 1 Rcmarktz
?Ar



Last, First, Middle Init. SSN RCN
The following action is rccommcm?.cd for subject:

Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-I POI


Imtzate DOES NOT post: :1 tlncat Io
3 Further mental is NOT

,~h?maIc D0153 NOT need to be segregated from

general

-utmatc has an AVERAGIS WILIERANCIZ of
frustration



It-?sf






wi igjz?m

CAPT MC USN




23594

SUICIDE QE REVIEW

From: Captain Hooter, W.J. 20101217
To: Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE
MANNING. mum-sv 3-
Last, First, Middle Init. SSN RCN

1. The following action is recommended for subject:

Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-1 POI
lmnatc DOES pose a threat to himself [Z/Inmate DOES NOT pose a threat to himself
[zr?ntlier mental evaluation IS necessary Further mental evaluation is NOT necessary
Inmate DOES NEED to be segregated from general nmate DOES NOT n?-ed to be segregated from
population general population
Inmate has a LOW TOLERANCE of lrustmtion stress n?mate has an AVERAGE TOLERANCE of
frustration I stress



Medical Remarks: ALIA I (t I
?Fol/ow, Mas: s/?cvno we.




/unmzg .u er, Mo

CAPT


ManningB_43164



23595

SUICIDE RISK OF INJURY ASSIGNMENT REVIEW

From: Captain I-Ioclcr, WJ. 20101223
T0: and Board
BRADLEY . 1
Last, First, Middle Inil. SSN RCN

l. The fullowing acnun is recommended for

Custody: Squad Ray: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-I POI
DOES pose a threat I0 himself utc DOIZS NOT pose :1 threat to himself

|"url|ncr mcnl:nl evaluation 15 FIu"lhcr mental evaluation I3 NOT
Iumzuc DUES In In: from ;_:cncrul ?I'r'nn.n; to In; fmun
general
has :1 LOW of I stress" Imnutc has an of
I stress



Mgdical
A 3} Zq?xk
7 90,1



A

mp??m octer, MD



ManningB_43163

23596
SUICIDE RISK f. KEVENTION QF ASSIQIV, ENT BLQIEW
From: Captain Hocter, W.J. 20101230
T02 Classi?cation and Assignment Board DAE
BRADLEY 8-
Last, First, Middle lnit. SSN RCN
l. The following action is recommended for subject:
Custody: Squad Bay: lob:
MAXIMUM SQ-1 POI

Initiate DOES pose a threat to himself DOES NOT pose a threat to himself
[3/Further mental evaluzition IS necessary Further mental evaluation is NOT necessary
DOES NEED to be segregated from general Inmate l)0t??S NOT need to be sc-gregatcd front
population general population
Inmate has a LOW TOLERANCE of frustration stress mate has an AVERAGE TOLERANCE of
fnistmtionl stress
Medical O_cer?s RemarksInlill/Iain pruoctfr?, MD

CAPT MC USN



ManningB_43159



23597

SUICIDE J- PREVENTION OF INJURY ASL VIEW

From: Captain Hocterl WJ. 201 10 107
To; Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE
MANNING, mm 2. j1_j_
Last, First, Middle Init. SSN RCN

1. ?me following action is recommended for subject:

Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-1 POI
lmnate DOES pose a threat to himself mmatc DOES NOT pose a threat to himself
Ej?rther mental evaluation IS necessary I-?unhcr mental evaluation is NOT necessary
Inmate DOES NEED to bc segregated from general nmzite DOES NOT need to be gregatcd ?Oil:
population general population (1 LVKQ
Inmmc has 21 LOW TOLIERANCE of frustration/ stress ale has an AVERAGE TOLERANCE of
frustration I stress

Cl

Medical ()lTiocr?s Remarks:

A .
C- vpgg/majmmovxg


M)
williain Jf??ter?, MD
CAPT MC USN



ManningB_43158



23598



From: Calnain Hoclcr, W.I. 2011011 4
To: Classificalion and Assignment Board DATE

5- 11

Last. First. Middle Inil. SSN

1. The lb?mxing action is recommended for subject:

Custody: Squad Day: Job:
MAXIM UM SQ-I POI

I: [nmmc DOES an llncut DOES NOT [)0St: a threat to himself
cvuluznion IS mcnl.'nl is necessary

Inmulc DOES NEED In he from Inmutc NOT nucd to be xcguqzulcd from
pupulation -_;cncrul population

has .1 LOW ANCE of mess lnmutc has an AVERAC-I3 of

fruslrutmn
. ..
hoW Ly
W.

JA Wexame Ft Mott- Huh.
v? (Fast) :43)




/3



z-W


MD
CAPT MC USN


ManningB_43157



23599



From: Colonel Malone, R. D. 20110118
To: Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE

BRADLEY 3-

Last, First, Middle Inil. SSN RCN

1. The following action is recommended for subject:

Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SUICIDE RISK
Inmate DOES pose it threat to himself Inmate DOES NOT pose a threat to himself
Further mental evetlualion IS Furtl~.er mental evaluation is NOT necessary
Inmate NI lit) to he segregated l'rom general Inmate neeal to ix: from
population gcnetul population
Inmate has .1 LOW of stress inmate has an AVEIRAGE of
I'ruxtt'ation stress

Cl



I



tau .9 Page wt 5 wag wwmdenl

Ricky D. Malone, MD
COL MC USA






CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REQUEST



23600

REPORT DATE





201 10120
INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) new
Manning, Bradley E.
a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I now CELL 3
MAX DET SQcusroov LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAJ d. OUARTERS I now I CELL 1:
MAX DET POI SQ-1 I A 192
INFORMATION Ir? UFFENSE SENTENCE INFORMATION

SND is a Change of Classification

Article 128, 134

Pre-Trial

REMARKS:

Authorized and Approved by Brig Commanding Officer.
Under direction of Brig Supervisor.
Special Handling instruction will be completed by Programs.

REQUESTING OFFICIAL

a. NAME (MST, FIRST /wn)
Garnett, Steven A.


b.
x?

c. DATE
201 10120

BRIG FORM 4200, JAN

ManningB_43161

2011

23601

ICIDE RISKV



From: Colonel Malone, R. D. 2011012? 1

T01 Classi?cation and Assignment Board DATE

MANNING. wow

Last, First, Middle lnit. SSN RCN

l. The following action is for subject:

Custody: Squad Bay: Job:
MAXIMUM SQ-1 SUICIDE RISK
lnmalc l)()l3S pose a threat to himself lnmzilc poxc ii threat to linnsull'
Fuillicr mciilal cvalualion necessary CI is NOT
lnmalc was INTIED to be Inmate I0 be segregated l'i'om
populzilion gciiciul pupulnlioii

lnmulc has :Modicxil Remarks:

N1 cw/?
4L?/Mzovl +0 9: vvi?- pg?! [901



Ricky D. Malone, MD
COL MC USA


ManningB_43160

From:

To:

1 .

lnmaic l)()ljS pose an lliicat lo liimscif
gl?tii?il1c1' mvnlul cvuluutimi IS

lnmulc Dt )liS NEED to be l"rom gciicrzii
population

lnmulc has :1 LOW of I mess



23602

SUICIDE PREVENTION OF .MENT REVIEW

Colonel MaloneClassi?cation and Assignincnt Board


MANNING, BRADLEY 8.

ng

Last, First, Middle lnii.

SSN RCN
The following action is for
Custody: Squad Bay: .l0l\Z
MAXIMUM

P()l
8 Inmate DOES NOFposc zi throat to himself

l"url1ici? nicntal is?

Ininutc DOES NOT to bu .?cgl?cg;1lcd from
general population

lnmrilc has an AVERAGF. of
fruslralioii





ml? o-l? stall" 19 (Not

uvnkl mil?


?Ffus

a. level
ol'

(z

V?oOliv~??
?lo lc??cw~Ce, ?gyhp?ouv

izzelu ??ol

lavl l4-Lgclilqqg?

ANY, 6~rl'

'I'-Lvrc I

ManningB__43162



Ricky D. Malone, MD
COL MC USA




23603

REPORT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALUATION
CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD

NAME (Last, First, MI):

Noumxc, ?gamiv

SS RCN:



REASON FOR BH EVALUATION



SUICIDE WATCH OF INJURY OTHER:
MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION ALL THAT APPLY)

BEHAVIOR: HYPERACTIVE AGGRESSIVE HOSTILE susmcaous anzmae
LEVEL os ALERTNESS: DULL SOMNOLENT

LEVEL OF omammon; PARTIAL oasomermao

MOOD mo AFFECT: FLAT oepaesseo LABILE MANIC OR HYPOMANIC
THINKING Pnocess conmseo BIZARRE Loos ELY cowmecreo

moucnr coureur ABNORMAL PARANOID noemou oewsnows
MEMORY: FAIR pooa

ANY ABNORMAL FINDING IN REMARKS
- .


MENTAL ousorzoea us: ne?ve? swnovwc; smauz DETERIORATING um

RISK roa mm IS: 69 MODERATE men

RISK FOR IS: ?13 HIGH

IS NOT DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL DISORDER

IQ IELDAIHIE

BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE: I8
INMAYE: DOES 0 . -. NEED TO BE SEGREGATED FROM GENERAL POPULATION DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL
DISORDER
NEEDS FURTHER WITHIN 24 HOURS WITHIN 72 HOURS NIA
OTHER (399 Remarks)

EVALUATOR:

scmmagady Co PRINTED Iov~~( JWD

ManningB_43239

23604

REPOFI DF BEHAVIORALHEALTH EVAI WTION
CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT

A


REASON FOR BH



SUICIDEWATCH \7o PREVENTIONOF INJURY

OTHER:

MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)



BEHAVIOR: HYPERACTIVE NORMAL LI PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE .3 HCSTILE SUSPICICUS BIZARRE
LEVEL OF ALERTNESS: FULLY ALERT DULL Li SOMNOLENT

LEVEL OF ORIENTATION: )9 FULLY ORIENTED PARTIAL DISORIENTED

MOOD AND AFFECT: UNRENIARKABLE FLAT DEPRESSED LABILE MANIC OR HYPOMANIC
THINKING PROCESS )c CLEAR CONFUSED I BIZARRE ll LOOSELY CONNECTED

IHOUGHT CONTENT NORMAL ABNORMAL II HALLUCINATION PARANOID IDEATION DELUSIONS
MEMORY: GOOD FAIR POOR

FINDING IN REMARKS

FINDINGS

MENTAL DISORDER IS. >4 RESOLVED Ij IMPROVING LI STABLE II DETERIORATING NIA

RISK FOR LOW II MODERATE _j HIGH

RISK FOR VIOLENCE IS: LOW MODERATE

BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE TREATABLE MENTAL DISORDER

INMATE: DOES I DOES NOT NEED TO BE SEGREGATED FROM GENERAL POPULATION DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL

DISORDER

NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION: 3 WITHIN 24 HOURS I WITHIN 72 HOURS ROUTINE in

'3 OTHER (See Remarks)

REMARKS:

Tbvwox-LIA; 1.. WI) LII

01! w-6? ow-aI
cf

we?

VA. II

DATE

EVALUATOR:



PRINTED NAME

ManningB_43238

23605

REPORT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALUATION
CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD

NAME (Last, First, MI): SSN: RCN: A

4 REASON FOR BH EV
SUICIDE WATCH OF INJURY OTHER:

MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)



HYPERACTIVE PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE HOSTILE SUSPICIOUS BIZARRE
LEVEL OF ALERTNESS: DULL SOMNOLENT

LEVEL OF ORIENTATION: PARTIAL DISORIENTED

MOOD AND AFFECT: FLAT DEPRESSED LABILE OR HYPOMANIC
THINKING PROCESS CONFUSED BIZARRE LOOSELY CONNECTED

THOUGHT CONTENT NO ABNORMAL HALLUCINATION PARANOID IDEATION
MEMORY: (3 FAIR POC-R

ANY ABNORMAL FINDING IN REMARKS
FINDINGS

MENTAL DISORDER IS: 33 IMPROVING STABLE DETERIORATING NIA

FOR SUICIDEISELF-HARM Is?? I.-IODERATE HIGH

RISK FOR VIOLENCE IS: MODERATE HIGH

BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCEZ IS NOT DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL DISORDER I

INMATEI DOES NEED TO BE SEGREGATED FROM GENERAL POPULATION DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL

DISORDE
UTI NIA

NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION: WITHIN 24 HOURS IVITHIN 72 HOURS

OTHE (See Remarks)

REMARKS:
047/?
IZWI4 IWJ

I3. A/Vsqj?s ?<54



EVALUATOR:


DATE SIGNATU ~oRb MD

PRINTED NAME 970?? Ma Cb M5

MannIngB_43237

23606

OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH IATION
CLAJSIFNCATHON AND ASSIGNMENT

NAME (Last, First. MI): SSN: RCN: .

REASON FOR BH EVAL

SUICIDE WATCH PREVENTION OF INJURY OTHER:

MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)

BEHAVIOR: HYPERACTIVE )1 NORMAL PASSIVE AGGRESSNE HOSTILE SUSPICIOUS BIZARRE
LEVELOFALERTNESS: FULLYALERT DULL SOMNOLENT

LEVELOFORIENTATION: vi2__ FULLYORIENTED PARTIAL DISORIENTED

MOODANDAFFECT: 34. UNREMARKABLE FLAT LI DEPRESSED II LABILE MANICORHYPOMANIC
THINKINGPROCESS )2 CLEAR 0 CONFUSED BIZARRE r_r LOOSELYCONNECTED
THOUGHTCONTENT fa NORMAL ABNORMAL I3 HALLUCINATION PARANOIDIDEATION DELUSIONS
MEMORY: GOOD FAIR POOR

ANY ABNORMAL FINDING IN REMARKS
FINDINGS

RESOLVED IMPROVING II STABLE DETERIORATING .3
LOW II MODERATE II HIGH

LOW MODERATE HIGH

BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE: IT IS II ISNOT DUETOATREATABLEMENTAL DISORDER

INMATE: DOES DOESNOT NEEDTOBE DUE TOATREATABLEMENTAL

DISORDER
NEEDSFURTHEREXAMINATION: I1 WITHIN 24 HOURS I3 WITHIN 72HOURS )g ROUTINE

OTHER (See Remarks)

REMARKS:
In
Iov 55/ -
Wax! 94+

Lick

EVALUATOR:

II II .
WW PRINTED M6

ManningB_43236

23607

REPORT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALUATION
CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD

NAME (Lasr, First, I):

SSN: RCNSUICIDE WATCH


EVENTION OF

OTHER:

MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)



BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE: IS

INMATEI DOES DOES NQ
DISORDER
NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION: WITHIN 24 HOURS

OTHER (See Remarks)

WITHIN 72 HOURS

BEHAVIOR: HYPERACTIVE PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE HOSTILE SUSPICIOUS BIZARRE
LEVEL OF ALERTNESS: DULL SOMNOLENT

LEVEL OF ORIENTATION: PARTIAL DISORIENTED

MOOD AND AFFECT: FLAT DEPRESSED LABILE MANIC OR HYPOMANIC
THINKING PROCESS CONFUSED BIZARRE LOOSELY CONNECTED

THOUGHT CONTENT ABNORMAL HALLUCINATION PARANOID IOEATION DELUSIONS
MEMORY: FAIR POOR

ANY ABNORMAL FINDING IN REMARKS
FINDINGS
Jill??
MENTAL DISORDER IS: IMPROVING STABLE DETERIORATING

RISK FOR IS: MODERATE HIGH
RISK FUR VIOLENCE Is: MODERATE HIGH


IS NOT DUE TO A TREA TABLE MENTAL DISORDER

NEED TO BE SEGREGATED FROM GENERAL POPULATION DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL

ROUTIND



REMARKS:

u
NO

Awxte-I3 Ivx

EVALUATOR
?3

DATE

SIGNATURE

LAD

PRINTED NAME I,

ManningB_43235





23608

REPORT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALUATION
CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD

NAME (Last. Firsr, RCN1

FIIHJII I I.) 6? DLEV

meggson FOR BH EVALUATIO
SUICIDE WATCH IWTIOTJ OF INJURX



MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT

BEHAVIOR: HYPERACTIVE PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE HOSTLE SUSPICIOUS
LEVEL or ALERTNESS: FULLY ALE OULI. SOMNOLENT

LEVEL or ORIENTATION: omew PARTIAL ousoezesrreo

AND AFFECT: FLAT DEPRESSED MANIC OR HYPOMANIC
pnocess conrusco LOOSEIY comwecreo

THOUGHT CONTENT ABNORNIAL LULIINATION -OEATION DELUSIONS
mu roon

/wv ABNORMAL FINDING In
FINDINGS

DISORDER RE SQLVEU IMPROVING STABLE TING

FOR us: HIGH


son vuowuce Is: -LORD HIGH



BEHAVIORAL DJSTURBMICETREATABLE MENTAL DISORDER

mums: oo?? DOES NOT NEED TO BE SEGREGATEO FRCM GENERAL.-POPULATION TO A TREATABLE



DISORDER





NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION: WITHIN 24 HOURS WITHIN 72 HOURS NIA

OTHER (See Remarks)

REMARKS: 9Lrvm_ membz?e (Ame ta?,

Ream
IVLICRWQ plum
amzo. r?QdL\ .
U9 oi-I705 QIMQ. Inn; I3HtrIory of
~3v\\o\c3uJ~ Qua.

{vx

Ofubvas Vk?w I

"7 -Io WAJI.

can hm hgc.
:2 P017

Inns

Isa m?8.scI.F O\v\v.Q- 44?

7: Mom. .

EVALUATOR: tag?-
HI 6 7.01) I
I one NAME Rugbq

(Z

ManningB_43234



CLASSIFICATION AND

REPORT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALUATION

GNMENT BOARD

BE HAVIORAL DISTURBANCE: IS

DOES DOES


NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION:

INMATE:
DISORDER

WITHIN 24 HOURS

OTHER (See Remarks)

IS NOT DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL DISORDER

WITHIN 72 HOURS

NAME (Last, First, MI): SSN: I
I3rc~FOR BH EV
SUICIDE WATCH PREVENTION OF OTHER:
MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
.3

BEHAVIOR: HYPERACTIVE NOR 1. PASSIVE AGGRESSNF. HOSTILE SUSPICIOUS BIZARRE
LEVEL OF ALE RTNESS: FULLY Auag) DULL SOMNOLENT

LEVEL OF ORIENTATION: PARTIAL DISORIENTED

MOOD AND AFFECT: Miyaie FLAT DEPRESSED LABILE MANIC OR HYPOMANIC
THINKING PROCESS CCLEA133 CONFUSED BIZARRE CONNECTED

THOUGHT CONTENT ABIJORMAL HALLUCINATION PARANOID IDEATION DELUSIONS
MEMORY: ?06 FAIR POOR

ANY ABNORMAL FINDING IN REMARKS

.
MENTAL DISORDER I31 IMPROVING STABLE DETERIORA TING

RISK FOR IS: (L,c3j97 MODERATE Hl(3?r{

RISK FOR VIOLENCE IS: MODERATE HIGH



NEED TO BE SEGREGATED FROM GENERAL POPULATION DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL



NIA

REMARKS:








EVALUATOR:

N317



ATE

PRINTED NAME 41-9?, C17,

ManningB_43233

23610

OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALDA TION

CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD




NAME (Lasr, First, MI): SSN: RCN:
I an EOE
FOR BH EVAL
SUICIDE WATCH PREVENTION OF INJUR OTHER:
1
MENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)

BEHAVIOR: HYPERACTIVE PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE SUSPICIOUS BIZARRE
LEVEL or ALERTNESS: DULL SOMNOLENT

LEVEL OF ORIENTATION: PARTIAL OISORIENTED

MOOD AND AFFECT: FLAT DEPRESSED LABILE MANIC OR HYPOMANIC
THINKING PROCESS CONFUSED BIZARRE LOOSELY CONNECTED

THOUGHT CONTENT ABNORMAL HALLUCINATION PARANOID IITEATION DELUSIONS
MEMORY: FAIR POOR

ANY ABNORMAL FINDING IN REMARKS
FINDINGS

DISORDER Is: RESOLVED IMPROVING STABLE DETERIORATING

RISK FOR SUICIDEISELF-HARM IS: MODERATE HIGH

RISK FOR VIOLENCE IS: MODERATE HIGH

BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCEZ IS IS NOT DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL DISORDER

INMATE: DOES NOT NEED TO BE SEGREGATED FROM GENERAL

DISORDER

ooEs DUE TO A TREATABLE MENTAL A-

NEEDS FURTHER EXAMNATION: WITHIN 24 HOURS WITHIN 72 HOURS ROUTINE
OTHER (See Remarks)
REMARKS:

bN\ 51}? or
No Otvks owxxa Iobues .
Vcabocxxvo do am] gay-
554:? . .
AV: mm, P/yam!
M633.

. Af'I?o37ccA5zr~Jo\e.
h6N\ am MT sh w?m If 5u.Q?vy. I-casmu, L;k.Letmatoiai mix0wx& omcawoufl. Oomp?iaN9. - w7\\ (II.

Q'\f 7'r\


Wm.



51? 1?

lg LUATOR: bbi
I gpgzox - Ll
DATE PRINTED NAME

ManningB_43232

23611

ATTACHMENT 3

23612

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
1000 NAVY PENTAGON
WASHINGTON, DC 20350-1000

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
PERS-68
03 Jan 2006
SECNAV INSTRUCTION 1640.9C
From:

S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Navy

Sub]:

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY CORRECTIONS MANUAL

Ref:

(a
(b
(d
(e
(f
(g
(h
(i
(j
(k
(1
(m
(n

(P
(q
(r
(s
(t
(u
End:

U n i f o r m Code o f M i l i t a r y J u s t i c e (UCMJ)
U.S. Navy R e g u l a t i o n s , 1990
NAVSO P-6064, Manual f o r C o u r t s - M a r t i a l (MCM),
U n i t e d S t a t e s (2005 e d i t i o n )
10 U.S.C, Chapter 48
SECNAVINST 5815.3J
Judge Advocate General Manual (JAGMAN)
NSEC H u l l Type Drawing 804 5959213 (NOTAL)
OPNAVINST 1640.8
MCO 1640.3F (NOTAL)
NAVFAC P-80, P l a n n i n g C r i t e r i a f o r Navy and Marine
Corps Shore I n s t a l l a t i o n s o f 1 Oct 82 (NOTAL)
M i l i t a r y Handbook 1037/4, B r i g s and D e t e n t i o n
F a c i l i t i e s o f 15 J u l 89 (NOTAL)
NAVMED P-117, Manual o f t h e M e d i c a l Department,
U.S. Navy (NOTAL)
NAVSO P-1000, F i n a n c i a l Management P o l i c y Manual
SECNAVINST 5212. 5D
NAVPERS 15560D, Navy M i l i t a r y P e r s o n n e l Manual
(MILPERSMAN)
SECNAVINST 5800. I I A
Defense J o i n t M i l i t a r y Pay System Procedures T r a i n i n g
Guide (DJMS PTG) (NOTAL)
F o l i o f o r Navy Standard I n t e g r a t e d Personnel System
(NSIPS) (NOTAL)
DODI 1325.7 o f 17 J u l 01
DOD 1325.7-M o f 27 J u l 04
OPNAVINST 6110. IH

(1) Department o f t h e Navy C o r r e c t i o n s Manual

1.
Purpose• To i s s u e s t a n d a r d i z e d p o l i c i e s and procedures f o r
the o p e r a t i o n o f Navy and Marine Corps c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s .
T h i s i n s t r u c t i o n i s a complete r e v i s i o n and s h o u l d be r e v i e w e d
in i t s entirety.

PCN 21600048000

23613

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006

Cancellation.

SECNAVINST 1640.9R and SECNAVINST 1640.7D.

3.
Discussion.
P r o v i s i o n s o f e n c l o s u r e (1) a p p l y t o Navy and
Marine Corps c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s (ashore and a f l o a t ) and
detention f a c i l i t i e s .
References (a) t h r o u g h (u) a r e
applicable.
Supplemental i n s t r u c t i o n s may be i s s u e d as
n e c e s s a r y f o r o p e r a t i o n o f each c o n f i n e m e n t and d e t e n t i o n
facility.
4.
Action.
Each addressee i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f
Department o f t h e Navy (DON) c o r r e c t i o n s program p e r t h i s
manual. Recommended changes s h o u l d be f o r w a r d e d v i a t h e c h a i n
o f command t o A s s i s t a n t S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Navy (Manpower and
Reserve A f f a i r s ) (ASN (M^RA)).
5.

Forms and Reports

a.
R e g u i s i t i o n and a v a i l a b i l i t y o f forms i s p r o v i d e d i n
appendix A.
b.
R e p o r t i n g r e g u i r e m e n t (EUPERS 1640-1) c o n t a i n e d i n
a r t i c l e 8110 o f t h i s manual i s r e g u i r e d , u n l e s s C o r r e c t i o n a l
Management I n f o r m a t i o n System (CORMIS) i s used.
c.
A l l o t h e r r e p o r t s a r e e:^empt from r e p o r t s c o n t r o l by
SECNAVINST 5214.28.

W i l l i a m A. Navas, J r .
A s s i s t a n t S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Navy
(Manpower ^ Reserve A f f a i r s )
Distribution:
E l e c t r o n i c o n l y v i a Navy D i r e c t i v e s w e b s i t e
http:BBneds.daps.dla.mil

23614

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
4105.

SALLY PORT OPERATIONS

1. A s a l l y p o r t i s b a s i c t o t h e secure o p e r a t i o n o f any
confinement f a c i l i t y .
Used p r o p e r l y , i t a f f o r d s s e c u r i t y and
c o n t r o l over e n t r y t o and e ^ i t from t h e c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y .
2.
F o l l o w i n g p r o c e d u r e s s h a l l be f o l l o w e d i n s a l l y p o r t
operations:
whether g a t e o r door l o c k s a r e )^eyed m a n u a l l y o r
a.
o p e r a t e d e l e c t r i c a l l y , p r o v i s i o n s s h a l l be made t o p r e v e n t
from b e i n g i n a d v e r t e n t l y opened a t t h e same t i m e .

both

b.
I f s a l l y p o r t doors o r g a t e s a r e e l e c t r i c a l l y o p e r a t e d ,
the c o n t r o l s s h a l l be l o c a t e d i n s i d e t h e c o n t r o l c e n t e r o r
w i t h i n a secure p o s t which has an u n o b s t r u c t e d view o f t h e s a l l y
port.
c.
I f t h e s a l l y p o r t i s used p r i m a r i l y f o r v e h i c l e s , i t
s h a l l be c o n s t r u c t e d so t h e l a r g e s t v e h i c l e e n t e r i n g can be
contained w i t h i n i t w i t h both gates closed.
Ensure t h a t any
p r i s o n e r s accompanying a v e h i c l e have been p r o p e r l y l o g g e d o u t
o f t h e c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y by t h e c o n t r o l c e n t e r s u p e r v i s o r .
A l l v e h i c l e s e n t e r i n g a s a l l y p o r t s h a l l be searched.
d.
Other s t a f f members may a s s i s t t h e s e c u r i t y s u p e r v i s o r
i n s e a r c h i n g p r i s o n e r s and v e h i c l e s , b u t t h e u l t i m a t e
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r e n s u r i n g t h a t no c o n t r a b a n d o r u n a u t h o r i z e d
p r i s o n e r s pass t h r o u g h t h e s a l l y p o r t r e s t s w i t h t h e s e c u r i t y
supervisor.
SECTION 2.
4201.

PRISONER CUSTODY CLASSIFICATION

PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS

1. Purpose. Purpose o f c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s t o e s t a b l i s h
the degree o f s u p e r v i s i o n needed f o r c o n t r o l o f i n d i v i d u a l
prisoners.
Custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n p r o v i d e guidance f o r
s u p e r v i s i o n o f p r i s o n e r s and p e r m i t e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f s e c u r i t y
measures c o n s i s t e n t w i t h r e g u i r e m e n t s o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l .
Among
p r i s o n e r s t h e r e a r e wide v a r i a t i o n s i n p e r s o n a l i t y and
mentality.
^here t h e r e i s f a i r and i m p a r t i a l t r e a t m e n t ,
p r i s o n e r s g e n e r a l l y p r e s e n t no s e r i o u s d i s c i p l i n a r y problems.
There a r e some p r i s o n e r s , however, who a r e d e l i b e r a t e l y

4-6

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23615

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
uncooperative.
Some have p e r s o n a l i t y d i f f i c u l t i e s which make
them c h r o n i c sources o f t r o u b l e , such as t h e h i g h l y a g g r e s s i v e
person o r those a c u t e l y depressed. E f f o r t s must be made t o
i d e n t i f y a l l s p e c i a l cases, and c o n t r o l measures i n s t i t u t e d t o
ensure t h e safe and o r d e r l y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e c o n f i n e m e n t
facility.
An o b j e c t i v e c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n process which
addresses t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be used p e r
r e f e r e n c e ( t ) ^ t h e C o r r e c t i o n a l Management I n f o r m a t i o n System
(CORMIS) e l e c t r o n i c e g u i v a l e n t i s a l s o a u t h o r i z e d .
2.
Classification Definitions.
Every p r i s o n e r s h a l l be
a s s i g n e d one o f t h e f o l l o w i n g c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s :
a.
Maximum Custody (MA^). P r i s o n e r s r e g u i r i n g s p e c i a l
c u s t o d i a l s u p e r v i s i o n because o f t h e h i g h p r o b a b i l i t y o f escape,
are p o t e n t i a l l y dangerous o r v i o l e n t , and whose escape would
cause concern o f a t h r e a t t o l i f e , p r o p e r t y , o r n a t i o n a l
security.
O r d i n a r i l y , only a small percentage o f p r i s o n e r s
s h a l l be c l a s s i f i e d as MA^.
(1) S u p e r v i s i o n must be immediate and c o n t i n u o u s .
A
DD 509, I n s p e c t i o n Record o f P r i s o n e r i n S e g r e g a t i o n , s h a l l be
p o s t e d by t h e c e l l door and a p p r o p r i a t e e n t r i e s made a t l e a s t
e v e r y 15 m i n u t e s .

the

(2) They s h a l l n o t be a s s i g n e d t o worl^ d e t a i l s
cell.

outside

(3) They s h a l l be a s s i g n e d t o t h e most secure g u a r t e r s .
(4) Two o r more s t a f f members s h a l l be p r e s e n t
prisoners are out of t h e i r c e l l s .

when MAB^

(5) MA^ p r i s o n e r s s h a l l wear r e s t r a i n t s a t a l l times
when o u t s i d e t h e maximum-security area and be e s c o r t e d by a t
l e a s t two e s c o r t s (confinement f a c i l i t y s t a f f o r c e r t i f i e d
e s c o r t s , p e r a r t i c l e 7406).
(6) On a case-by-case b a s i s , t h e COBOICBCPOIC may
a u t h o r i z e a d d i t i o n a l r e s t r a i n t f o r movement o f s p e c i f i c MA^
p r i s o n e r s . A m i l i t a r y iudge may d i r e c t t h a t r e s t r a i n t s be
removed from a person i n t h e c o u r t r o o m i f , i n t h i s iudge^s
o p i n i o n , such r e s t r a i n t i s n o t necessary.
I n a l l cases, t h e
l i m i t a t i o n s o f a r t i c l e 1102 o f r e f e r e n c e (b) s h a l l be observed.

4-7

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23616

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
b.
Medium Custody I n (MDl).
P r i s o n e r s who p r e s e n t s e c u r i t y
r i s l ^ s n o t w a r r a n t i n g MA^. They a r e n o t r e g a r d e d as dangerous o r
violent.
(1) S u p e r v i s i o n s h a l l be c o n t i n u o u s w i t h i n t h e s e c u r i t y
p e r i m e t e r and immediate and c o n t i n u o u s when o u t s i d e t h e s e c u r i t y
perimeter.

security

(2) They s h a l l n o t be a s s i g n e d t o wor^ o u t s i d e t h e
perimeter.

perimeter

(3) They s h a l l wear r e s t r a i n t s o u t s i d e t h e s e c u r i t y
u n l e s s t h e COBOICBCPOIC d i r e c t s o t h e r w i s e .

(4) They s h a l l be e s c o r t e d by a t l e a s t two c o n f i n e m e n t
f a c i l i t y s t a f f o r c e r t i f i e d e s c o r t s , p e r a r t i c l e 7406, u n l e s s
t h e COBOICBCPOIC d i r e c t s o n l y one e s c o r t i s r e g u i r e d .
(5) They may be a s s i g n e d d o r m i t o r y
c. Medium Custody Out (MDO).
r i s k s n o t w a r r a n t i n g MDl.

guarters.

Prisoners

who p r e s e n t

security

(1) S u p e r v i s i o n s h a l l be immediate and c o n t i n u o u s when
o u t s i d e t h e s e c u r i t y perimeter o f t h e confinement f a c i l i t y .
(2) They may be a s s i g n e d t o any r e g u l a r work i n s i d e o r
outside the f a c i l i t y .
(3) They s h a l l r e g u i r e a t l e a s t one e s c o r t when o u t s i d e t h e
s e c u r i t y perimeter.
f o r k i n g p a r t y and o t h e r e s c o r t r a t i o s s h a l l be
d e t e r m i n e d by t h e COBOICBCPOIC when e s c o r t e d by c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y
s t a f f s e s c o r t r a t i o s f o r u n i t e s c o r t s s h a l l be no l e s s t h a n one
e s c o r t p e r f i v e MDOs.
d.
Minimum Custody (MIN).
P r i s o n e r s who p r e s e n t
r i s k s n o t w a r r a n t i n g t h e above c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s .
(1) C u s t o d i a l s u p e r v i s i o n may be o c c a s i o n a l
a system o f checl^s i s u s u a l l y s u f f i c i e n t .

security

or periodica

(2) They a r e u s u a l l y a s s i g n e d wor^ o u t s i d e t h e f a c i l i t y .

4-8

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23617

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
(3) They s h a l l r e g u i r e a t l e a s t one e s c o r t when o u t s i d e the
security perimeter.
^ o r ) ^ i n g p a r t y and o t h e r e s c o r t r a t i o s s h a l l be
d e t e r m i n e d by t h e COBOICBCPOIC when e s c o r t e d by c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y
s t a f f s e s c o r t r a t i o s f o r u n i t e s c o r t s s h a l l be no l e s s t h a n one
e s c o r t per 10 MINs.
e.
I n s t a l l a t i o n Custody ( I C ) . C e r t a i n p o s t ^ t r i a l p r i s o n e r s
who r e g u i r e o n l y l i m i t e d c u s t o d i a l s u p e r v i s i o n . They may work
and move about much t h e same as i n d i v i d u a l s i n normal d u t y
status.
F o l l o w i n g g u i d e l i n e s a p p l y t o p l a c i n g persons i n
i n s t a l l a t i o n custody:
(1) Have completed a t l e a s t one h a l f o f the c o n f i n e m e n t
adjudged, or the c o n v e n i n g a u t h o r i t y has t a k e n a c t i o n , w h i c h e v e r
occurs f i r s t .
(2) Are

n o t more t h a n 12 months from minimum

release

date,
(3) Have n o t p r e v i o u s l y been removed from t h i s
grade f o r cause.

custody

(4) May be b e r t h e d i n s i d e or o u t s i d e t h e s e c u r i t y
perimeter of the confinement f a c i l i t y .
Additional authorized
p r i v i l e g e s , such as a t t e n d i n g t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n t h e a t e r , l i b r a r y ,
s p o r t s e v e n t s , and s i m i l a r a c t i v i t i e s may be a u t h o r i z e d by t h e
a c t i v i t y (Navy) or i n s t a l l a t i o n commander.
(5) Person^s u n i f o r m o u t s i d e a Navy c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y
s h a l l n o t i d e n t i f y t h e i n d i v i d u a l as a p r i s o n e r .
Prisoners
c o n f i n e d i n Marine Corps c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s s h a l l wear t h e
s t a n d a r d i z e d p r i s o n e r u n i f o r m per MCO 1640.5E.
(6) A l l IC^s must s i g n a DD 512 and c a r r y i t w i t h them
a t a l l times o u t s i d e t h e f a c i l i t y .
A l o c a l l y prepared
agreement, l i s t i n g t h e l i m i t a t i o n s on movement o u t s i d e the
f a c i l i t y , s h a l l be agreed t o and s i g n e d by IC p r i s o n e r s and
c o u n t e r s i g n e d by t h e COBOICBCPOIC or d e s i g n e e . DD 512 s h a l l be
t u r n e d i n and checl^ed out from the c o n t r o l c e n t e r s u p e r v i s o r as
r e g u i r e d . Assignments s h a l l depend on a b i l i t y t o handle
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and, whenever p o s s i b l e , be commensurate t o
i n d i v i d u a l ' s t r a i n i n g , s k i l l , needs o f t h e s e r v i c e , and
p o t e n t i a l t r a i n i n g v a l u e t o the p r i s o n e r . Maximum use o f
i n s t a l l a t i o n c u s t o d y s t a t u s i s encouraged.

4-9

Enclosure

(1)

23618

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
4202.

CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA

1. A c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s h a l l be based on amount o f
s u p e r v i s i o n and r e s t r a i n t each p r i s o n e r r e g u i r e s .
2. A l l new p r i s o n e r s , except t h o s e s p e c i f i c a l l y deemed t o be
s e r i o u s management problems (MA^), s h a l l be a s s i g n e d a MDl
c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n d u r i n g t h e r e c e p t i o n phase.
Detainees
s h a l l n o t be a s s i g n e d a MDO, MIN or IC c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .
3. U l t r a - c o n s e r v a t i v e c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n r e s u l t s i n a waste
o f p r i s o n e r and s t a f f manpower. A l a r g e number o f MA^ and MDl
p r i s o n e r s reduce t h e number o f s t a f f a v a i l a b l e f o r s u p e r v i s i o n
o f t h e k i n d s o f p r o d u c t i v e wor^ a v a i l a b l e t o l e s s e r c u s t o d y
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s ( I C , MIN, MDO).
C l a s s i f i c a t i o n system must
f o l l o w e s t a b l i s h e d , but f l e x i b l e , procedures.
4.
P r i s o n e r s i n l e s s e r c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s ( I C , MIN) s h a l l
have t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a d d i t i o n a l p r i v i l e g e s , as opposed t o
i n c e n t i v e s , s i m p l y because o f t h e r e g u i r e m e n t f o r reduced
s u p e r v i s i o n and i n c r e a s e d m o b i l i t y .
A p r i s o n e r i n any c u s t o d y
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n may be g r a n t e d e ^ t r a i n c e n t i v e s , w i t h i n s e c u r i t y
c o n s t r a i n t s , f o r above average performance.
I n c e n t i v e s must be
earned and are n o t a u t o m a t i c w i t h a c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .
P r i s o n e r s s h a l l be p l a c e d i n t h e l o w e s t c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n
as soon as p o s s i b l e .
Thus, i t i s n o t a p p r o p r i a t e t o ^^promote^^
p r i s o n e r s t h r o u g h c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s i n seguence.
5.
F o l l o w i n g are f a c t o r s , though n o t a l l i n c l u s i v e , t o be
c o n s i d e r e d i n a s s e s s i n g h i g h e r c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s (MA^
MDl):
a.

Assaultive behavior.

b.

Disruptive behavior.

c.

S e r i o u s d r u g abuse.

or

d. S e r i o u s c i v i l B m i l i t a r y c r i m i n a l r e c o r d ( c o n v i c t e d or
alleged).
e.

Low

tolerance of

frustration.

f.

I n t e n s i v e a c t i n g o u t or d i s l i k e o f t h e m i l i t a r y .

4-10

Enclosure

(1)

23619

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
g.

H i s t o r y of previous escape(s).

h.

Pending

civil

chargesBdetainer

filed.

i . S e r v i n g a sentence which t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o n s i d e r s t o be
u n j u s t o r severe.
].

Poor home c o n d i t i o n s o r f a m i l y

relationships.

1^. A m e n t a l e v a l u a t i o n i n d i c a t i n g s e r i o u s n e u r o s i s o r
psychosis.
1.
I n d i c a t i o n o f u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o accept r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r
p e r s o n a l a c t i o n s p a s t and p r e s e n t .
m.

Demonstrated

p a t t e r n o f poor

judgment.

n.

L e n g t h , o r p o t e n t i a l l e n g t h , o f sentence.

6. F o l l o w i n g a r e f a c t o r s t h a t i n d i c a t e l o w e r c u s t o d y
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s (MDO, MIN, o r I C ) .
a.

C l e a r m i l i t a r y r e c o r d , a s i d e from p r e s e n t o f f e n s e .

b.

Close f a m i l y t i e s ^

c.

The o f f e n s e ( s ) charged i s n o t s e r i o u s .

good home c o n d i t i o n s .

d. A p p a r e n t l y s t a b l e m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n
actions).
e.

( r e s p o n s i b l e f o r own

I n d i c a t i o n s t h e i n d i v i d u a l wishes t o r e t u r n t o d u t y .

f.
C o m p a r a t i v e l y s h o r t sentence t o confinements however,
l e n g t h o f sentence s h a l l n o t be an o v e r r i d i n g f a c t o r .
g.

Behavior d u r i n g a previous confinement.

h. C o m p l e t i o n o f , o r a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n , t r e a t m e n t
programs o r groups.
7.
I t must be u n d e r s t o o d t h e f a c t o r s mentioned above a r e o n l y
i n d i c a t o r s , n o t i r o n c l a d r u l e s ^ t h e r e f o r e , t h e COBOICBCPOIC
s h a l l c o n s i d e r o b j e c t i v e based o v e r r i d e s where a p p l i c a b l e . An

4-11

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23620

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
e v a l u a t i o n o f a l l phases o f t h e p r i s o n e r ' s performance s h a l l be
made p r i o r t o each c u s t o d y change. By f o l l o w i n g t h e c r i t e r i a
and concepts o u t l i n e d above, t h e COBOICBCPOIC s h a l l be a b l e t o
ma)^e more e f f i c i e n t use o f s t a f f and p r o v i d e an atmosphere i n
which r e s t o r a t i o n e f f o r t s s h a l l be more e f f e c t i v e .
8. A d u l t I n t e r n a l Management System (AIMS).
An AIMS
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s h a l l be d e t e r m i n e d f o r each p r i s o n e r c o n f i n e d i n
Navy c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s .
This i s a f i v e ^ l e v e l
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f p r i s o n e r s based on a g g r e s s i v e n e s s o f
p e r s o n a l i t y and methods o f problem management used by an
individual.
AIMS i s never used f o r c u s t o d y o r i n c e n t i v e
d e t e r m i n a t i o n , b u t i s v e r y u s e f u l f o r h o u s i n g and programming
p r i s o n e r s t o g e t h e r i n o r d e r t o ma:^imize t h e i r o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o
succeed and t o u t i l i z e programs o f f e r e d .
Use o f AIMS i n each
c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y i s r e g u i r e d ^ each c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and
assignment b o a r d o r u n i t board s h a l l c o n s i d e r a p r i s o n e r ' s AIMS
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n assignment o f b e r t h i n g , program, and wor^.
AIMS i s used i n Marine Corps c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s a t
d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e CO.
4203.

EVALUATION OF PRISONERS

1. An e v a l u a t i o n program as i s s u e d by NAVPERSCOM (PERS-68)
s h a l l be implemented i n a l l Navy c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s and
c o r r e c t i o n a l custody u n i t s .
Factual i n f o r m a t i o n concerning
p r i s o n e r s , such as home and community background, e d u c a t i o n ,
s e r v i c e a d j u s t m e n t , a t t i t u d e s , o f f e n s e and c i r c u m s t a n c e s ,
sentence, and any o t h e r p e r t i n e n t i n f o r m a t i o n s h a l l be assembled
e a r l y i n t h e i r c o n f i n e m e n t . Through o b s e r v a t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n
r e p o r t s , s t a f f c o n t a c t s , and recommendationsBactions o f h i g h e r
a u t h o r i t i e s , h i s t o r i e s o f p r i s o n e r s can be developed f o r use i n
d e t e r m i n i n g t h e i r response t o t h e c o r r e c t i o n s program.
This i n
t u r n s h a l l i n d i c a t e p o s s i b l e program changes.
2.
R e c e i v i n g and r e l e a s e s u p e r v i s o r s h a l l ensure t h a t a
DD 2710, Inmate Background Summary, i s completed on each
p r i s o n e r as p a r t o f t h e a d m i s s i o n p r o c e s s .
I t s h a l l be r e v i e w e d
by t h e b r i g d u t y o f f i c e r B d u t y b r i g s u p e r v i s o r and f o r w a r d e d t o
the c o r r e c t i o n a l c o u n s e l i n g s t a f f .
3. A l l members s u p e r v i s i n g p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r
e v a l u a t i n g p r i s o n e r s i n t h e i r charge and s h a l l submit p e r i o d i c
w r i t t e n r e p o r t s on t h e i r performance.
T h i s must be done on a

4-12

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23621

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
s c h e d u l e d b a s i s , p r e f e r a b l y weekly, t o show l e v e l s o f
performance on a c o n t i n u i n g b a s i s . The e v a l u a t i o n s h a l l be
s u b m i t t e d on a DD 2712, Inmate ^ o r ^ and T r a i n i n g E v a l u a t i o n .
a.
Each r e p o r t s h a l l d e s c r i b e p r i s o n e r ' s a t t i t u d e , wor^
performance, o v e r a l l performance, a b i l i t y t o g e t a l o n g w i t h
o t h e r s , problems ^nown t o t h e s u p e r v i s o r , and any recommended
c u s t o d y o r program changes.
b.
Supplementary r e p o r t s s h a l l be s u b m i t t e d when a p r i s o n e r
demonstrates b e h a v i o r which i s o u t o f t h e o r d i n a r y , e i t h e r good
or bad.
4. A ^^treatment f i l e ^ ^ s h a l l be developed f o r each p r i s o n e r t o
m a i n t a i n a l l p e r t i n e n t t r e a t m e n t and c o u n s e l i n g r e l a t e d
information.
T h i s f i l e s h a l l be made a v a i l a b l e t o s t a f f members
on a ^^need-to-^now^^ b a s i s . I t s h a l l be made a v a i l a b l e f o r
o f f i c i a l r e v i e w s o f a d j u s t m e n t t o c o n f i n e m e n t and f o r board
usage.
5. Each s t a f f member has r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r p a s s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n
concerning p r i s o n e r s t o t h e proper a u t h o r i t y i n the confinement
facility.
^ h a t seems t o be a b i t o f t r i v i a l i n f o r m a t i o n may
prove t o be s i g n i f i c a n t when c o u p l e d w i t h o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n on
hand. B e h a v i o r and a t t i t u d e o f t h e p r i s o n e r i n t h e b e r t h i n g
a r e a , a t work, i n r e c r e a t i o n , and i n a c l a s s r o o m s h a l l p r o v i d e a
good o v e r a l l i n d i c a t o r o f problem areas and a d j u s t m e n t p r o g r e s s .
Continuous s t a f f e v a l u a t i o n o f each p r i s o n e r cannot be
overemphasized.
4204. CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT (C^A) BOARD. The C^A board
s h a l l e s t a b l i s h an i n d i v i d u a l p r i s o n e r ' s c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n
using o b j e c t i v e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n B r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n procedures,
^hen t h e C^A b o a r d d e t e r m i n e s c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , i t s h a l l
be composed o f t h e BRIG O o r d e s i g n a t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , one
s e n i o r s t a f f member f r o m s e c u r i t y and one f r o m programs, and any
o t h e r members a p p o i n t e d by t h e BRIG 0. See a r t i c l e 6303 o f t h i s
manual f o r program f u n c t i o n s o f t h e C^A board.
4205.
1.

SPECIAL QUARTERS

Policy

4^13

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23622

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
a.
Some p r i s o n e r s r e g u i r e a d d i t i o n a l s u p e r v i s i o n and
a t t e n t i o n due t o p e r s o n a l i t y d i s o r d e r s , b e h a v i o r a b n o r m a l i t i e s ,
r i s k of s u i c i d e or violence, or other character t r a i t s . I f
r e g u i r e d t o p r e s e r v e o r d e r , t h e BRIG Os o r , i n t h e i r absence,
t h e b r i g d u t y o f f i c e r s B d u t y b r i g s u p e r v i s o r s may a u t h o r i z e
s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s f o r such p r i s o n e r s f o r purposes o f c o n t r o l ,
p r e v e n t i o n o f i n j u r y t o themselves o r o t h e r s , and t h e o r d e r l y
and s a f e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e confinement f a c i l i t y .
A hearing
t o d e t e r m i n e t h e need f o r c o n t i n u e d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s e g r e g a t i o n
of t h e p r i s o n e r s h a l l be conducted. T h i s h e a r i n g may be by
board a c t i o n o r by a member o f t h e confinement
facility
a p p o i n t e d i n w r i t i n g by t h e BRIG 0, and a w r i t t e n recommendation
t o t h e BRIG 0 w i l l be p r o v i d e d w i t h i n 72 hours o f t h e p r i s o n e r ' s
entry into segregation.
b.
S p e c i a l g u a r t e r s i s a group o f c e l l s used t o house
p r i s o n e r s who have s e r i o u s a d j u s t m e n t problems o r c e r t a i n
m e d i c a l i s s u e s , a r e h i g h l y temperamental o r e m o t i o n a l ,
a n t i - s o c i a l , some m e d i c a l cases, o r who cannot g e t a l o n g w i t h
o t h e r p r i s o n e r s , o r a r e p e r s i s t e n t c u s t o d i a l problems.
Special
g u a r t e r s a r e n o t a p u n i t i v e measure and s h a l l n o t be used as
such. P r i s o n e r s must be made aware o f t h e reason t h e y a r e
berthed i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s . Prisoners are assigned t o s p e c i a l
g u a r t e r s by t h e BRIG 0 and s h a l l n o t have normal p r i v i l e g e s
r e s t r i c t e d u n l e s s p r i v i l e g e s must be w i t h h e l d f o r reasons o f
s e c u r i t y o r p r i s o n e r s a f e t y (e.g., s u i c i d e r i s ^ s o r a g g r e s s i v e ,
a s s a u l t i v e o r p r e d a t o r y p r i s o n e r s ) . For each p e r i o d o f 30 days
a p r i s o n e r i s r e t a i n e d i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s , t h e C^A board s h a l l
r e v i e w and p r o v i d e a recommendation t o t h e BRIG 0, who s h a l l
d e t e r m i n e and c e r t i f y t h e r e g u i r e m e n t f o r c o n t i n u a t i o n i n
special guarters.
c.
D i s c i p l i n a r y segregation i s provided f o r i n a r t i c l e
5105.3e.
d.
P r i s o n e r s who have t h r e a t e n e d s u i c i d e o r have made a
s u i c i d e g e s t u r e b u t a r e found f i t f o r confinement may be p l a c e d
w i t h i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s under c o n t i n u o u s o b s e r v a t i o n w h i l e i n
the category o f s u i c i d e r i s ^ .
COBOICBCPOIC may d i r e c t removal
of p r i s o n e r ' s c l o t h i n g when deemed necessary. P r i s o n e r must be
under o b s e r v a t i o n o f a s u p e r v i s o r o f t h e same se^. Closed
c i r c u i t t e l e v i s i o n may be i n s t a l l e d a t a l i m i t e d number o f c e l l s
f o r o b s e r v a t i o n , a l t h o u g h c r o s s gender m o n i t o r i n g i s n o t
authorized.

4^14

Enclosure

(1)

23623

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
2.
Procedures. A l l p r i s o n e r s i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s s h a l l be
under c o n t i n u a l s u p e r v i s i o n .
S p e c i a l p r e c a u t i o n s s h a l l be f a l l e n
i n e g u i p p i n g , i n s p e c t i n g , and s u p e r v i s i n g t h e i r g u a r t e r s t o
p r e v e n t escapes, s e l f - i n j u r y , and o t h e r s e r i o u s i n c i d e n t s . They
s h a l l be s i g h t e d a t l e a s t once e v e r y 15 m i n u t e s by a s t a f f
member and s h a l l be v i s i t e d d a i l y by a member o f t h e m e d i c a l
department and t h e BRIG 0. I n a d d i t i o n , i t i s h i g h l y d e s i r a b l e
t h a t p r i s o n e r s i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s be v i s i t e d d a i l y by a
chaplain.
Each s i g h t i n g o f and v i s i t t o any s e g r e g a t e d p r i s o n e r
s h a l l be o f f i c i a l l y r e c o r d e d and i n c l u d e d a t e , t i m e , name o f
v i s i t o r , and any a p p r o p r i a t e remar)^s.
DD 509, I n s p e c t i o n Record
o f P r i s o n e r i n S e g r e g a t i o n , s h a l l be used t o r e c o r d v i s i t s .
3.
B e h a v i o r and Custody Problems. On r a r e o c c a s i o n s i t may be
necessary t o c o n f i n e v i o l e n t p r i s o n e r s i n c e l l s w i t h o u t
f u r n i s h i n g s t o p r e v e n t them from i n j u r i n g themselves o r o t h e r s .
Such a measure s h a l l be used o n l y upon s p e c i f i c d i r e c t i o n o f t h e
BRIG 0. A s e g r e g a t e d p r i s o n e r s h a l l be r e l e a s e d t o r e g u l a r
g u a r t e r s as soon as t h e need f o r s p e c i a l s e g r e g a t i o n i s p a s t .
4. Homosexuals. Persons who a r e s u s p e c t e d , accused, o r
c o n v i c t e d o f homosexual a c t s s h a l l n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y be
segregated o r berthed i n c e l l s .
Confinement i n a c e l l may be
a p p r o p r i a t e when t h e p r i s o n e r has been i n v o l v e d i n a c t s t h a t may
jeopardize the prisoner's safety or the safety of others.
Homosexuals s h a l l n o t be r e s t r i c t e d from normal p r i v i l e g e s and
s u p e r v i s e d a c t i v i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o o t h e r p r i s o n e r s i n t h e same
c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i f t h e i r conduct i n c o n f i n e m e n t i s n o t
s e x u a l l y a g g r e s s i v e and o t h e r w i s e s a t i s f a c t o r y .
5.

Suicide

Risks

a.
P r i s o n e r s w i t h a h i s t o r y o f s u i c i d e a t t e m p t s o r who a r e
c o n s i d e r e d t o be s u i c i d a l s h a l l be i m m e d i a t e l y r e f e r r e d t o t h e
m e d i c a l d e p a r t m e n t B c l i n i c a l s e r v i c e s B m e n t a l h e a l t h department
f o r f u r t h e r e v a l u a t i o n and a p p r o p r i a t e a c t i o n , which may i n c l u d e
hospitalization.
NAVMEDCOMINST 6320.11 p r o v i d e s g u i d e l i n e s i n
t h o s e cases i n v o l v i n g emergencies, s p e c i a l i z e d t r e a t m e n t o r
e v a l u a t i o n , o r p s y c h i a t r i c t r e a t m e n t t h a t can n o t be d e f e r r e d .
b.
P r i s o n e r s who have t h r e a t e n e d s u i c i d e o r have made a
s u i c i d a l g e s t u r e , b u t a r e found f i t f o r c o n f i n e m e n t , may be
p l a c e d i n t h e c a t e g o r y o f ^^suicide risk^^ f o r o b s e r v a t i o n .
They
s h a l l be p l a c e d i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s under c o n t i n u o u s

4-15

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23624

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
observation.
COBOICBCPOIC may d i r e c t removal o f the p r i s o n e r ' s
c l o t h i n g when deemed n e c e s s a r y . P r i s o n e r must be under
o b s e r v a t i o n o f a s u p e r v i s o r o f t h e same se^.
Closed c i r c u i t
t e l e v i s i o n may be i n s t a l l e d a t a l i m i t e d number o f c e l l s f o r
observation.
Use o f t h i s eguipment would be i n a d d i t i o n t o the
r e g u i r e m e n t above.
c.
Such p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be b e r t h e d i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s and
p h y s i c a l l y checked e v e r y 5 m i n u t e s . Such checks s h a l l be
a n n o t a t e d on an o p e r a t i o n a l r e p o r t , or o t h e r l o c a l l y g e n e r a t e d
form, and s h a l l accompany the p r i s o n e r ' s DD 509.
They s h a l l n o t
be p e r m i t t e d t o r e t a i n implements w i t h which t h e y c o u l d harm
themselves.
d.
^hen p r i s o n e r s are no l o n g e r c o n s i d e r e d t o be s u i c i d e
r i s ) ^ s by a m e d i c a l o f f i c e r , t h e y s h a l l be r e t u r n e d t o
appropriate guarters.
6.
Human I m m u n o d e f i c i e n c y V i r u s (HIV)BAcguired Immune
D e f i c i e n c y Syndrome (AIDS). See a r t i c l e 10104.
4206.

BERTHING

1. ^here f a c i l i t i e s p e r m i t , newly a d m i t t e d p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be
housed s e p a r a t e l y from t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n u n t i l
i n d o c t r i n a t i o n i n p r i s o n e r r e g u l a t i o n s and o t h e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
d e t a i l s o f r e c e p t i o n are completed. During t h i s p e r i o d o f
o r i e n t a t i o n , p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be o b j e c t i v e l y e v a l u a t e d and a
c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a s s i g n e d p r i o r t o t r a n s f e r t o the g e n e r a l
population.
2.
A l t h o u g h p r e f e r r e d , t h e r e i s no r e g u i r e m e n t t h a t p r i s o n e r s
o f d i f f e r e n t l e g a l s t a t u s ( d e t a i n e d or sentenced) be b e r t h e d
separately.
S e p a r a t i o n o f p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be by c u s t o d y or AIMS
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n (see a r t i c l e 4202.8). Optimum s i t u a t i o n would
p e r m i t housing d i f f e r e n t custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n p r i s o n e r s i n
d i f f e r e n t and s e p a r a t e a r e a s .
I n many c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s ,
p r a c t i c a l i t y d i c t a t e s c o m m i n g l i n g o f p r i s o n e r s i n t h e same
g u a r t e r s ^ however, e v e r y e f f o r t s h a l l be made t o m a i n t a i n
s e p a r a t e b e r t h i n g where p o s s i b l e . ^here optimum c o n d i t i o n s do
n o t e ^ i s t , p r i s o n e r s i n medium and minimum c u s t o d y
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s may be housed t o g e t h e r .

4-16

Enclosure

(1)

23625

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
Definitions
a.
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S e g r e g a t i o n (ADSEG). I n v o l u n t a r y o r
v o l u n t a r y s e p a r a t i o n , f o r s p e c i f i c cause, o f s e l e c t p r i s o n e r s
from the g e n e r a l p r i s o n e r p o p u l a t i o n and a u t h o r i z e d movement o f
a p r i s o n e r t o s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s (Si^) by t h e COsBOICs o r , i n t h e i r
absence, t h e b r i g d u t y o f f i c e r (BDO)Bduty b r i g s u p e r v i s o r (DBS)
f o r purposes o f c o n t r o l , p r e s e r v i n g o r d e r , p r e v e n t i o n o f i n j u r y
t o themselves o r o t h e r s , and f o r t h e o r d e r l y and safe
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of t h e confinement f a c i l i t y .
b.
D i s c i p l i n a r y S e g r e g a t i o n (DS).
The d i r e c t e d placement
o f p r i s o n e r s i n s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s (SO) i n o r d e r t o s e p a r a t e them
f r o m t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n o f t h e c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y as a
r e s u l t o f d i s c i p l i n a r y and a d j u s t m e n t (D^A) Board p r o c e s s and
s p e c i f i c a l l y a u t h o r i z e d by t h e COBOIC.
c.
I n c e n t i v e s . T a n g i b l e and i n t a n g i b l e o p p o r t u n i t i e s ,
beyond t h e scope o f p r i v i l e g e s , a v a i l a b l e w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e m e n t
f a c i l i t y ' s c o r r e c t i o n s program t o encourage and m o t i v a t e
p o s i t i v e p r i s o n e r a t t i t u d e , b e h a v i o r , and accomplishment.
I n c e n t i v e s r e c o g n i z e b o t h i n d i v i d u a l and group a t t a i n m e n t . The
u l t i m a t e g o a l s a r e t o b u i l d s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e and s e l f - r e l i a n c e i n
t h e i n d i v i d u a l B g r o u p and improve t h e f u n c t i o n i n g o f the b r i g .
Incentives are not associated w i t h authorized d i s c i p l i n a r y
a c t i o n s b u t may be a p p l i c a b l e o r a f f e c t e d as a r e l a t e d
management a c t i o n as implemented w i t h i n c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y
p o l i c y and p r o c e d u r e s .
d.
Legitimate Penological I n t e r e s t .
A bona f i d e concern
f o r e s s e n t i a l c o r r e c t i o n a l o p e r a t i o n s t h a t may r e g u i r e
curtailment a prisoner's rights.
e.
Ma^or D i s c i p l i n a r y A c t i o n s (Ma^or Punishments).
A u t h o r i z e d d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s as a r e s u l t o f D^A Board p r o c e s s
and s p e c i f i c a l l y a u t h o r i z e d by t h e COBOIC t o i n c l u d e :
f o r f e i t u r e o f GCT, ET, o r SAA^ DS^ d i s c i p l i n a r y s e g r e g a t i o n w i t h
s p e c i a l d i e t (DSSD)^ and a s s o c i a t e d management a c t i o n s (e.g.,
v a c a t i o n o f s u s p e n s i o n o f o u t s t a n d i n g ma^or p u n i s h m e n t s ) .
f.
Management A c t i o n s .
d i s c i p l i n a r y and a d j u s t m e n t
a u t h o r i z e d by the COBOIC o r
( i o b and o r ET work l e v e l ) ^

A u t h o r i z e d a c t i o n s as a r e s u l t o f
D^A Board p r o c e s s and s p e c i f i c a l l y
designee t o i n c l u d e : d e t a i l change
change i n c o n t i n u o u s employment

5-2

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23626

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
date^ b e r t h i n g changed s u s p e n s i o n or v a c a t i o n o f an imposed
d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s i n c e n t i v e l e v e l changed and c u s t o d y
reduction.
g. Minor D i s c i p l i n a r y A c t i o n s (Minor P u n i s h m e n t s ) .
A u t h o r i z e d d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s as a r e s u l t o f D^A Board process
and s p e c i f i c a l l y a u t h o r i z e d by t h e COBOIC or d e s i g n e e t o
include:
a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e p r i m a n d or warnings l o s s o f
p r i v i l e g e s ^ e ^ t r a d u t y ^ and a s s o c i a t e d management a c t i o n s (e.g.,
v a c a t i o n o f s u s p e n s i o n o f o u t s t a n d i n g minor p u n i s h m e n t s ) .
h.
P r i v i l e g e s . Any s e r v i c e t h a t i s n o t , by law or p o l i c y ,
c o n s i d e r e d t o be an e s s e n t i a l s e r v i o e .
P r i v i l e g e s are b e n e f i t s
a f f o r d e d t o p r i s o n e r s over and above minimum s t a t u t o r y
reguirements.
P r i v i l e g e s i n c o r r e c t i o n s serve as a p r a c t i c a l
method o f r e d u c i n g p r i s o n e r t e n s i o n s and m o t i v a t i n g or
c o n t r o l l i n g prisoner behavior.
P r i v i l e g e s can be removed from a
p r i s o n e r as punishment f o r a r u l e v i o l a t i o n , b u t o n l y a f t e r a
due process h e a r i n g (e.g., D^A B o a r d ) .
Privileges often
i n c l u d e , b u t are n o t l i m i t e d t o : commissary (H^C) v i s i t s ^
v i s i t s ^ phone c a l l s ^ t e l e v i s i o n s r a d i o s movies^ r e c r e a t i o n s
s p e c i a l events^ and s p e c i a l v i s i t s .
P r i v i l e g e s are d i s t i n c t l y
s e p a r a t e from i n c e n t i v e s and i d e n t i f i e d as such, i n w r i t i n g , t o
s t a f f and p r i s o n e r s .
i. Rights.
An e s s e n t i a l s e r v i c e t h a t must be p r o v i d e d t o a
prisoner.
P r i s o n e r r i g h t s are e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
C o n s t i t u t i o n and d e f i n e d by Department o f Defense (DOD),
S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Navy (SECNAV), and o t h e r n a v a l o p e r a t i n g
instructions.
R i g h t s are n o t removed from a p r i s o n e r as a
punishment f o r a r u l e s v i o l a t i o n , b u t may be r e s t r i c t e d ,
however, when t h e r e i s a l e g i t i m a t e p e n o l o g i c a l i n t e r e s t , such
as s e c u r i t y or s a f e t y . R i g h t s i n c o n f i n e m e n t i n c l u d e , b u t are
n o t l i m i t e d t o : minimum s t a n d a r d o f l i v i n g s freedom from
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n on t h e b a s i s o f race, r e l i g i o n , creed, n a t i o n a l
o r i g i n , or se^^ l i m i t e d r i g h t s t o p r a c t i c e speech and r e l i g i o n s
p r o h i b i t i o n o f c r u e l and unusual punishments d u t y t o p r o t e c t s
due process i n t h e i r r i g h t t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e appeals^ meals^
h e a l t h care^ correspondence or o t h e r access t o c o r r e s p o n d i n g or
c o n s u l t i n g w i t h counsels and due process h e a r i n g f o r
disciplinary actions.

Enclosure

(1)

23627

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
Discipline
a. D i s c i p l i n e , n o t harshness, i s t h e h e a r t o f t h e
c o r r e c t i o n a l process.
Nowhere i s i t more i m p o r t a n t t h a n i n
m i l i t a r y c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s , s i n c e persons r e t u r n i n g t o d u t y
a f t e r c o n f i n e m e n t can serve s a t i s f a c t o r i l y o n l y i f t h e y a r e a b l e
t o conduct themselves i n a d i s c i p l i n e d manner. Most p r i s o n e r s
i n n a v a l c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t i e s a r e young and a r e i n c o n f i n e m e n t
due t o t h e i r l a c k o f s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e .
b.
D i s c i p l i n e can be l e a r n e d o n l y i n a d i s c i p l i n e d
e n v i r o n m e n t . Confinement f a c i l i t i e s must a t a l l t i m e s p r o v i d e
such an e n v i r o n m e n t , which i s enhanced by r e g u i r i n g a h i g h
standard o f s t a f f d i s c i p l i n e .
I f every member o f t h e s t a f f
meets h i g h p e r s o n a l s t a n d a r d s o f d i s c i p l i n e and i f s t a f f morale
i s h i g h , p r i s o n e r s s h a l l observe t h i s and most w i l l respond
positively.
The o b j e c t i v e i s t o i n s t i l l d i s c i p l i n e by t e a c h i n g
and d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e v a l u e o f s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e and
self-reliance.
c. Rules f o r p r i s o n e r s s h a l l r e f l e c t t h e Department o f Navy
(DON) p o l i c i e s and s h a l l cover e s s e n t i a l elements o f t h e
c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y ' s c o r r e c t i o n a l program and d a i l y r o u t i n e .
New p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be g i v e n a copy o f t h e f a c i l i t y ' s
d.
r u l e s g o v e r n i n g p r i s o n e r c o n d u c t , t o be r e t a i n e d by them u n t i l
t h e i r release.
e. I n s t r u c t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g v a r i o u s p r i s o n e r r o u t i n e s and
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s s h a l l be t h o r o u g h l y e x p l a i n e d i n t h e r e c e p t i o n
phase. I t must be r e a l i z e d t h a t newly a r r i v e d p r i s o n e r s a r e i n
u n f a m i l i a r surroundings.
They must be i n f o r m e d o f l i m i t a t i o n s
p l a c e d on t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s as w e l l as o p p o r t u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o
them f o r s e l f - i m p r o v e m e n t .
f.
D a i l y r o u t i n e and s c h e d u l e s o f s p e c i a l a c t i v i t i e s
be p r o m i n e n t l y d i s p l a y e d i n p l a c e s r e a d i l y a c c e s s i b l e t o
prisoners.
g.

shall

B a s i c a l l y , three r u l e s are reguired o f p r i s o n e r s .
(1) ^^Do n o t escape, a t t e m p t

t o escape, o r a i d a n o t h e r t o

escape.

5-4

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23628

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
(2) ^^Do not have c o n t r a b a n d i n your p o s s e s s i o n .
(3) ^^Do n o t engage i n d i s r u p t i v e b e h a v i o r .
Each p r i s o n e r i s expected t o comply w i t h the c o n f i n e m e n t
h.
f a c i l i t y r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s and each s h a l l be i n f o r m e d t h a t
any a t t e m p t t o c i r c u m v e n t the r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s s h a l l be
p u n i s h a b l e as a b r e a c h o f d i s c i p l i n e .
i . Prisoners are subject t o reference
discharge s t a t u s .

(a), regardless o f

].
P e r s o n n e l i n c o n f i n e m e n t s h a l l observe m i l i t a r y
c o u r t e s i e s p e r s e r v i c e customs and t r a d i t i o n s as a p p r o p r i a t e .
They s h a l l n o t be r e g u i r e d t o observe o r p r a c t i c e m i l i t a r y
c o u r t e s i e s o r o t h e r r e g u i r e m e n t s t h a t a r e u n o r t h o d o x and n o t
s t a n d a r d m i l i t a r y p r a c t i c e s . F o l l o w i n g a r e examples o f
p r o h i b i t e d reguirements:
(1) R e g u i r i n g p r i s o n e r s t o s a l u t e o r address e n l i s t e d
p e r s o n n e l as ^^sir^^ o r ^^ma^am^^ o r t o r e f e r t o themselves by a
number o r nickname, v i c e t h e i r name.
(2) R e g u i r i n g a l l p r i s o n e r s t o b e g i n o r end a l l
s t a t e m e n t s t o e n l i s t e d p e r s o n n e l w i t h ^^sir^^ o r ^^ma^am^^.
(3) R e g u i r i n g p r i s o n e r s t o face bulkheads a t c l o s e
i n t h e passage o f s t a f f members.
(4) R e g u i r i n g

prisoners t o reguest

permission

range

t o speak.

(5) P r i s o n e r s s h a l l be r e g u i r e d t o p e r f o r m o n l y t h a t PT
p r e s c r i b e d i n t h e d a i l y r o u t i n e B p l a n o f t h e day.
Use o f PT o r
c l o s e o r d e r d r i l l , as punishment, as a means o f m o t i v a t i o n a l
t r a i n i n g , o r by any o t h e r reason, i s p r o h i b i t e d . D i s c h a r g e d
m i l i t a r y p r i s o n e r s w i l l be a l l o w e d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y , b u t a r e n o t
r e g u i r e d , t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n o r g a n i z e d PT. ^hen p a r t i c i p a t i n g ,
t h e y w i l l f o l l o w t h e same p r o t o c o l s r e g u i r e d o f n o n - d i s c h a r g e d
prisoners.
D i s c h a r g e d p r i s o n e r s who e l e c t n o t t o p a r t i c i p a t e
w i l l remain i n t h e i r c e l l s B r o o m s d u r i n g t h e e v o l u t i o n .
k.
M i l i t a r y c o u r t e s i e s and d i s c i p l i n e s h a l l be t a u g h t and
r e g u i r e d i n a c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y as t h e y are p r a c t i c e d i n a
r e g u l a r m i l i t a r y u n i t o r aboard a s h i p o r s t a t i o n .
Unless

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23629

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
s p e c i f i c a l l y a u t h o r i z e d by the CO, OIC, o r c h i e f p e t t y o f f i c e r
i n charge (CPOIC), and p r e s c r i b e d i n the p l a n o f t h e day, e ^ t r a
m i l i t a r y i n s t r u c t i o n (EMI) s h a l l not be d i r e c t e d .
1.
5102.

Gambling among p r i s o n e r s

is specifically prohibited.

AUTHORISED DISCIPLINARY PROCESS, PROCEDURES, AND ACTIONS

1. A u t h o r i t y .
COsBOICs and o t h e r s as s p e c i f i e d h e r e i n may
impose d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s on p r i s o n e r s a f t e r due p r o c e s s (D^A
B o a r d ) . D i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n s are a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n n a t u r e and
do not p r e c l u d e t r i a l by c o u r t s - m a r t i a l o r a c t i o n under
r e f e r e n c e ( a ) , a r t i c l e 15.
2.

P u n i s h a b l e Conduct

a.
^ h i l e confined a t m i l i t a r y confinement f a c i l i t i e s , a l l
p r i s o n e r s are s u b j e c t t o d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n f o r v i o l a t i o n s o f
r e f e r e n c e ( a ) , r e l e v a n t F e d e r a l laws, and c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y r u l e s
and r e g u l a t i o n s , even a f t e r d i s c h a r g e from t h e M i l i t a r y S e r v i c e .
J u r i s d i c t i o n over a p r i s o n e r c o n t i n u e s even a f t e r d e p a r t i n g the
c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y (e.g., p a r o l e , s u p e r v i s e d r e l e a s e , o r excess
l e a v e ) , as l o n g as t h e member remains under t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
c o n t r o l o f t h e armed s e r v i c e s .
Misconduct i s d e a l t w i t h t h r o u g h
t r i a l by c o u r t s - m a r t i a l , v i o l a t i o n s b r o u g h t b e f o r e a D^A Board, and
o t h e r management o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a c t i o n s .
b.
Rules o f a c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y must be e n f o r c e d i n a
i u s t and i m p a r t i a l manner. V i o l a t i o n s must never be i g n o r e d o r
condoned, and s t a f f members s h a l l d e a l w i t h minor v i o l a t i o n s on
the spot.
N o r m a l l y , c a l l i n g p r i s o n e r s a s i d e and e x p l a i n i n g why
t h e i r b e h a v i o r i s u n a c c e p t a b l e w i l l s u f f i c e . E x c e s s i v e use o f
DD 2714s, Inmate D i s c i p l i n a r y Report (DR), reduces t h e i r
effectiveness.

is

c.
Mass o r group punishment f o r an o f f e n s e by an i n d i v i d u a l
s t r i c t l y prohibited.

DRs s h a l l be r e s e r v e d f o r s e r i o u s o f f e n s e s , o r t o
d.
i n t e r r u p t a p a t t e r n o f u n a c c e p t a b l e b e h a v i o r , such as a s e r i e s
of minor i n f r a c t i o n s i n a s h o r t p e r i o d o f t i m e as documented on
DD 2713, Inmate O b s e r v a t i o n Report (OR).

5-6

E n c l o s u r e (1)

23630

SECNAVINST 1640.9C
03 Jan 2006
e.
ORs p l a c e d i n p r i s o n e r s ^ f i l e s p r o v i d e an e : ^ c e l l e n t
means o f e v a l u a t i n g t h e i r performances however, no i n f e r e n c e
s h a l l be drawn t h a t e v e r y minor i n c i d e n t must be p u t i n w r i t i n g .
3.
I n i t i a l Procedures. The f o l l o w i n g p r o c e d u r e s s h a l l be
f o l l o w e d when a p r i s o n e r a l l e g e d l y commits an i n f r a c t i o n o f
r e g u l a t i o n s and a v e r b a l c o r r e c t i o n B O R i s n o t c o n s i d e r e d
appropriate:
a.
^hen a s t a f f member r e p o r t s an o f f e n s e , t h e p r i s o n e r
s h a l l be i m m e d i a t e l y i n f o r m e d o f t h e n a t u r e o f t h e a l l e g e d r u l e s
violation.
DR, s h a l l be used i n r e p o r t i n g o f f e n s e s .
Contraband
or o t h e r e v i d e n c e s u b s t a n t i a t i n g t h e charge i s t o be s u b m i t t e d
w i t h t h e DR. DRs, once s u b m i t t e d by t h e s t a f f member t o t h e
CDOBDBS, s h a l l n o t be d i s m i s s e d e:^cept by t h e ^OBAOICBBRIG 0
a f t e r t h e i r r e v i e w o f t h e r e p o r t and i n f o r m a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n .
The b r i g CDOBDBS s h a l l i n i t i a l l y r e v i e w t h e DR f o r c l a r i t y ,
c o m p l e t i o n , and, where n e c e s s a r y , ta)^e i n t e r i m a c t i o n t o ensure
s a f e t y , and good o r d e r and d i s c i p l i n e w i t h i n t h e confinement
facility.
A due process h e a r i n g t o d e t e r m i n e t h e need f o r
c o n t i n u e d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s e g r e g a t i o n o f t h e p r i s o n e r s h a l l be
c o n d u c t e d by a n e u t r a l member o f t h e b r i g s t a f f , a p p o i n t e d by
t h e COBOIC, t o r e v i e w and ma)^e recommendations t o t h e COBOIC
w i t h i n 72 hours o f t h e p r i s o n e r ' s e n t r y i n t o s e g r e g a t i o n .
b.
I n a l l cases where a DR i s s u b m i t t e d , an i n f o r m a l
i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o t h e f a c t s and c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e a l l e g e d
v i o l a t i o n s h a l l be made by a s t a f f member u n i n v o l v e d i n t h e
incident.
P r i s o n e r s who a r e on r e p o r t may make a s t a t e m e n t i n
t h e i r own b e h a l f , a f t e r t h e y have been warned a g a i n s t
s e l f - i n c r i m i n a t i o n i n compliance w i t h r e f e r e n c e ( a ) , a r t i c l e 3 1 ,
and i n f o r m e d o f t h e i r r i g h t s t o c o n s u l t w i t h c o u n s e l .
After
h a v i n g t h e i r r i g h t s e x p l a i n e d , p r i s o n e r s may s i g n a w a i v e r o f
t h e i r r i g h t s and r e g u e s t a h e a r i n g by D^A Board w i t h o u t
c o n s u l t i n g counsel, o b t a i n i n g personal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , o r
c a l l i n g witnesses.
The DR and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s h a l l be f o r w a r d e d t o t h e
c.
^OBAOICBBRIG 0 f o r r e v i e w .
I n cases where t h e ^OBAOICBBRIG 0
d i r e c t s a h e a r i n g by t h e D^A Board, w r i t t e n n o t i c e o f t h e
a l l e g e d v i o l a t i o n s s h a l l be g i v e n t o p r i s o n e r s a t l e a s t 24 hours
i n advance o f t h e h e a r i n g . A t Naval C o n s o l i d a t e d B r i g s
(NAVCONBRIG) t h e ^0 s h a l l r e f e r t h e d i s c i p l i n a r y case t o e i t h e r
a command-level o r d e p a r t m e n t a l - l e v e l board, as a p p r o p r i a t e .

E n c l o s u r e (1)



ATTACHMENT 4

23632

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20100729
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI 2. 3. RCN
MANNING. BRADLEY E.
4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. sTATus 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. QUARTERSI now I CELL ii
MAX DET INDOCTRINATION SUICIDE RISK SQ-1 191

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty
Brig Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center
Supervisor will commence facility lockdown.

b. IS NOT authorized recreation call; IS NOT authorized television call; IS NOT authorized library call;
IS NOT authorized to conduct calisthenics in cell.

c. IS NOT authorized to make/receive phone calls.

d. IS NOT authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation.



e. IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will
be verified by a profile from medical personnel.

f. IS NOT authorized to speak to occupants of other cells.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations,
one religious book, one toilet paper roll, one mattress, one underwear, and one POI blanket.

h. remain in cell during lire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig
Supervisor, Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and
WILL remain at attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at
parade rest. WILL be required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon plastic utensils only.

k. WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal
visits will be conducted at cell or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail. legal papers, letter paper,
envelopes, DD51O Forms, and one pencil or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
[5100 I certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

INMATE
3. mm: (oasr, F/nsr MI.) c. DATE
MANNING, BRADLEY E. 20100729
12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR /7

a. NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) b. 4 c.
HANKS, R. W. 20100729
13. OFFICER REVIEW 4]

NAME. GRADE, TITLE i c. DATE
AVERHART JR, J.T. OFFICER 20100729

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43269





23633

Ul\ll'l'l3D CORPS
l'trr_~ (.mnp;iIi\
urn?




in Special yot; will conduct yoursel?l' in proper strictly atlliering to the
rules. and regulations. Failure to do so can result in action. and 1nzi_\ hr; 1-alter-1-e,u
to your coinniand rm lurthe: nunishtneiit. The ruler. and appl} dire;;tl_\ to Special

Quarters:

l. You will always assume the position ol'l?arade Rest when addressing or heing addressed
ii 'oy enlisted sia1?i"persoiinel. You will stand at the position ol'Attenti on when or
ll heing addressed an

During your entire time of con?nement you will be subject to searches of your person as

.

well as your personal possessions.

Vxrhen you are assigiied to a cell. the Special Quarters Supervisor will complete a ell
discrepancy sheet. listing all discrepancies inside the cell. At this time you will checlc
your cell and verify all discrepancies noted the Special Quarters Supervisor to ensure
it is correct. Upon release from Special Quarters. you will he held responsible for any
additional discrepancies noted alter your cell is checlced agaiir and you -will he subject to
being charged with destruction of goyeninient property if any further discrepancies are

Egg? fouricl.

4. There will be no alterations oflights. such as with sheets, hlanlcets. and
if?? unifonns. Self~constructed devices for turning on and off the lights are prohibited.

3.

Egtlt 5. You will keep your cell in at high state of police in accordance with Special Quarters cell
diagram that is provided to you when you arrive in Special Quarters.

6. You will not pass anything from cell to cell or to any other Prison er or Detainee.

Kb 7. While in your cell you will sit on your racl; with your feet ?flat on the deck, allowing no
part of your back to touch the hullthead or cell door.

Bf}-e 8. Your rack will he made in it military nianner with no more than 8 inches of white
l3 inches will he the bottom white sheet and the other 6 inches will come front
a fold niade with the top sheet and the green hlanlret. Your head will face the ?far end oi"

the cell.

Km? 9. You allowed to tall; to other Prisoners or Detainees in Special Quarters according.
to your Special Letter.

ManningB__43866

23634

gigs l0. When requesting staff personnel for assistance, you will call in a clear loud voice,

?Special Quarters Supervisor," or the rank and name of the supervisor. followed by your
cell number.

1. When attention on deck is called. you will stand al attention lacing the cell door on the
yellow footprints. You will remain at attention until Iold to carry on.

gt? 12. During meal periods. you will eat _vour meals when served. All leftovers will be given
back upon completion of the meal period. No food items. utensils. or trash will be ltept in
your cell.

ml? l3. All mail and correspondence will be placed in the appropriate box and processed through

the inailroom. Any privileged correspondence will he requested via DDS 0 submitted to
the Brig supervisor for approval.

14. When a female comes on deck. the guar rill announce ?female on declc? at which you
will sound off ?clear? or not ?not clear" to non guard that you are or are not
dressed or rnakinu a head call

ln any case not covered by these rules: and regulauohs asl< sta'l"l'personnel For assisimice
urnuh.

Prisoner/Detainee (PIUNT)

QM rut. 510:0

Prison {ainee (SIGN Ann .

'sEe?oiai ouare? (SIGN ANDTJATB)

ManningB_43867



23635







I 3 If

Wf?m; . UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
I, Cmanlnco |?te~TrmI Conlmemem
9" 3247 Ave
(Juamico_ VA 22134
Ii
1640
275
so JU1 IL
rom SPC Mann i no Essacll ey
Rank Last Name Firs: Nave Ml SSN Lranrr of $erv;ce

To. Brig Supervisor, Pretrial Confinement Facility, MCAE Jwakuni, Japan

Subj ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE CONFINEMEN7 FACZLITE,

MCB QUANTICO, VIRGINIA.
Ref: SECNAVINCT

1. In accordance with the reference, the following has been read or explained to me.
a. As a prisoner/detainee you are not in charge of anyone but yourself. DO NOT
ATTEMPT to lead or influence others.
b. During your confinement you will be subject to trree types of searches:

ll Frisk Search. Strip Search. and Area Search.

There are three basic rules YOU MUST ADHERE

2) Do not escape, attempt to escape, or aid another to escape.

3) Do not have contraband in your possession.

0) Do not engage in disrup:;ve behavior.

2. Any violation of the rules and regul ticns will be noted by the staff members and
forwarded to the Brig Commanding fficer. I fully understand Qhe Rules and Regulations
that govern this facility and will comply with them.

20100730

Manning, Bradley

Prisoner Print Name Signature of Prisoner Date
.
?591 452/ 20100730
Si?n?turevof witness Date

wilness Print Name

ManningB_43871






23636

RE PORT DATE

SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20100302
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIFISTMI.) 2. SSN 3. RCN
MANNING. BRADLEY E. -
4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. I
MAX DET SUICIDE RISK

8. SPECIAL INSTRUC TIONS

a. wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty
Brig Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center
Supervisor will commence facility lockdown.

b. authorized recreation call; l_S_ authorized television call; authorized I brary call; IS NOT authorized
to conduct calisthenics in cell.

c. l_S_ authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. l? N91 authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bep{est. Bed rest will
be verilied by a profile from medical personnel.

f. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and reguI..iti0ns,
religious book. one toilet paper roll, one mattress, one underwear, and one POI blanket.

li. WILL remain in cell during tire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig
Supervisor, Operations Chief, or the D88.

i. come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and
remain at attention until told to carry on. address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at
parade rest. WILL be required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon plastic utensils only.

k. have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal
visits will be conducted at cell or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail, legal papers, letter paper,
envelopes, DD510 Forms, and one pencil or pen.

b. receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

1 . STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
that have been briefed regarding the above instructions. and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE

a. NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) b. ATURE c. DATE

MANNING, BRADLEY E. 20100802

12. ourv BRIG SUPERVISOR /2

a. NAME (LAST, b. SIGNATURE c. DATE
20100802

13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

a. NAME. cmxoe, TITLE b. SIGNATUR c. one

AVERHART JR, 20100802

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43268



23637

SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS

REPORT DATE

20100809
JNMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST Ml.) 2. SSN - 3. RCN
MANNING BRADLEY E. ?i
4. cusropv LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. QUARTERS I ROW I CELL
MAX DET SUICIDE RISK I A I 191

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.

medical personi.el.

mattress. and one POI blanket. All other gear will be stoi ed outside of cell.

the DB8.

position of attention for count until carry on is sounded,

j. WILL eat in cell with a METAL SEQQN QNLY.

or in a non-contact booth.

d. authorized WeckendIHoliday visitation in a non-contact booth.

I. SNPISND authorized lu speak to occupaiits of other ci:-ils in a low conversational lone.

a WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig Supervisor will be
notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will commence facility lockdown.

b. authorized sunshine call; authorized television call; authorized library call; NQI authorized to conduct calislhenics in

e. SNPISND IS NOT authorized to lie on ra:l< between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by a profile Irom

g. IS NOT autlicrized to keep any gear inside his cellwilh the exception of. one rules and regulations. one religious book. one
h. ml; remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by he Commanding Officer. Brig Supervisor. Operations Chief, or
i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at attention until

told to carry on WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest WILL be to stand at the

k. SNPISND WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be conducted at cell

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

and one pencil or pen.

a. SNPISND WILL receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail, legal papers, letter paper, envelopes. DD510 Forms,

b. SNPISND WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

Operations Chief are aboard the facility.

c. SNPISND WILL receive a 20 minute sunshine call in the special quarters recreation yard only while the Brig Officer, Brig Supervisor or

d. SNPISND will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST WIEN LEAVING THE FACILITY AT ALL TIMES.

L10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING

certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my resotinsibillties.

11. INMATE

a. NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.)
MANNING BRADLEY E.

b.S /1

DATE
20100309

12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.)

30.

c. DATE
20100809

13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

3. NAME, GRADE, TITLE
AVERHART JR.. J.T. COMMANDING OFFICER

c. DATE
20100809

BRIG FORM 4205. AUG 2009

Manning





- REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20100311
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) - 2. SSN 3. RCN
MANNING. BRADLEY E. - - -
4. cusroov LEVEL 5. sums 5. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. ouAaTens/now/c
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY 30-1 JH2

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig Supervisor will be
notitied prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor commence lacilaty lockdown.

authorized sunshine call; authorized Ie-evislon call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct calisthenics in
cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)



authorized to make/receive phone calls.
-?ti .
authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-Contact booth.

egtsl??/SND [5 authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest wi:I be verilied by a pro?le from
inc.-diisalpersonnel. -

authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

NOT autl1ori7ed to any gear inside Hr. cell with the exrzeption 01; one rules and regulations, one mattress. and one set
gear (during hours of reveille). will receive one underwear and one POI blanket during ol taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL INST FIUC TIONS
BELOW)

WILL remain in cell during I-re drills unless ollierwisze directed by the Coininilnding Ollicer, Bug Supervisor, Operations Chief, -Jr
the DB8.

come to the position ol attention in Iiont ol hatch upon entry 01 any commissioned ollicer and WILL remain at attention until
told to cairy on WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be required to stand at the
position at attention lor count Carry on is sounded.



WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

WILL have sick call, med-cation catl, and chaplain visits conducted at cell -hatch. Command and legal visits will be conducted at cell
or -n a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail, legal papers. envelopes. D0510 forms. one pencil or
pen. and one book (religious or non-religious)

iiems with the P00 only.

WILL call in the special quarters recreation yard.

d. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception ol one mattress, one underwear and one POI blanket.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
I certify that I have been briefed regarding the above Instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

INMATE

3. (L AST. FIRST MI.) I). TURE c. DATE
MANNING. BRADLEY e. 20100011
12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR I7

NAME (LAST, FIRST I) c. DATE
'30 (?an N. 20100811

13. COMMANDING oeeiden REVIEW

7
a. NAME, .
AVERHART OFFICER g_ A 20100811

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB__43266

23639

nepoer one
HANDLING . . 1. . 20100019
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI) 2. SSN 3. FICN
MANNING. BRADLEY E. X-
4. cusroov LEVEL 5. smrus a. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. :1
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig Supervisor will be
notified prior to SNPISND moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will commencetaciliiy Iockdown.

authorized sunshine call; LS authorized television call; l_S_ authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct calisthenics in
Cell. (SFF ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. SNPISND authorized to make/receive phone calls.

authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation a non-Contact booth.

IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between ieveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by .1 protile trom
medical personnel.

I. gill-li:5ND authorized to speak to ocr.i.ipar=ts ot other cells in a low conversational tone.

ggvt?/SNI) IS NOT author izrzd to keep ai iy gear inside 3 cell with the exception ot; one rules and regulations, one mattress. and one set I
gear (during hours 0t reveille). receive one underwear and one POI blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL
BELOW)

SNPISND WILL remain in cell during tire drills unless directed by the Commanding Otticer, Brig Supervisor, Operatinris Chiel, or
the DB8.

i WILL come to the position 0' attention in Iront ot hatch upon entry ol any commissioned ollicer and WILL remain at attention until
told to carry on. SNPISND WILL address all duly personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. SNPISND WILL be required to stand at the
position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be conducted at cell
or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. SNPISND WILL receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail, legal papers. envelopes. DD510 Iorrns, one pencil or
pen. and one book (religious or non-religious)

b. SNPISND WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

c. SNPISND WILL receive a 20 minute sunshine call it the special quarters recreation yard.

d. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress, one underwear and one POI blanket.

e. SNPISND will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

0. TATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
certify that I have been brieted regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.



3. NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) it slaw? pas? c. DATE
MANNING. BRADLEY E. 20100319
12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. AST. FIRS I.) b. SIGNATUR c. DATE
20100319

13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

GRADE, TITLE b. IG 1
AVEFIHART OFFICER aw, 20100819

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

I




. 3640




REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20100330

I. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.)

2. SSN
MANNING, BRADLEY E. - -f

3. RCN

6. SPECIAL DETAIL

4. cusroov LEVEL 5. STATUS
MAX DET

7. OUARTERSI HOW I CELL
so-1 Iqi

PREVENTION OF INJURY
8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence lacilily lockdown.

b. authorized sunshine call; authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

l? authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. LS authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.

I. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious one mattress, one set PT gear, and one pair shower shoes. will receive one underwear and
one POI blanket during hours of laps. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper upon
request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during tire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Ollicer. Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chiel, or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned oflicer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. WILL have sick call. medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted at cell or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. SNPISND WILL receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail. legal papers. envelopes. D0510 forms. and one pencil
or pen.

b. SNPISND WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

a 20 minute sunshine cafm the yard.

(I. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress. one underwear and one POI blanket.

e. SNPISN9 will 8 SECOND CHANCE VEST WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

1 . STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 3| c. DATE

MANNING, BRADLEY E. 7 20100330

12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. NAME (LAST. FIRST MI.) b. SIGNA c- DATE
(Lw

13. COMM NDING OFFICER REVIEW

a. NAME, GRADE, TITLE . IGNATURE DATE

AVER HART JR., J.T. CWO4 OFFICER (7.5 5; . 20100830
BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43264

23641

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20101003
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, HFISTMI.) 2. SSN 3. new
MANNING, BRADLEY E.

4. cusroov LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. OUARTERS mow CELL :2

MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 191

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility lockdown.

b. l? authorized sunshine call; authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.
cl. authorized Weekend/Holiday msitation in a non-Contact booth.

e. IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.

l. LS authorized to speak to occupz-ints of other cells in a low conversational tone.

9. IS NOT to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious), one mattress. one set PT gear, and one pair shower shoes. will receive one trnderwear and
one POI blanket during hours of laps. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper upon
request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during tire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Olficer, Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry ofany commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted at cell or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to Include mall. legal papers. envelopes. DD510 forms. and one pencil
or pen.

WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

c. WILL receive a 20 minute sunshine call in the special quarters recreation yard.

All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress, one underwear and one POI blanket.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
I certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE

3. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 0, slam c. DATE
MANNING. BRADLEY E. 20101008
12. ourv BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) I). SIGNATURE -- c. DATE

I9. ?7 20101000

13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

TITLE b.S AT RE c. DATE
AVERI-IART OFFICER 20101008

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43263


23642

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20101014
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 2. SSN 3. RCN
MANNING. BRADLEY E.
4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. QUARTEFIS I HOW I CELL if
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY so-1 191

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility Iockdown.

b. is authorized sunshine call; authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.

f. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious). one mattress. one set PT gear, and one pair shower shoes. will receive one underwear and
one POI blanket during hours of laps. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTFIUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper upon
request only.

Il. WILL remain in cell during lire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. SN to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. SN WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. SN WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits condicted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted at cell or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail, legal papers. envelopes, D0510 forms. and one pencil
or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

c. WILL receive a 20 minute sunshine call in the special quarters recreation yard.

d. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress. one underwear and one POI blanket.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAH WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
certily that I have been brieled regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE
a. NAME LAST, FIRSTMI. c. DATE
MANNING, (20101014)
12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR
a. NAME FIRST MI.) b. SIGNATU c. DATE

/Wm, 72?/
13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW
a. NAME, GRADE, TITLE 5 c. DATE
AVEFIHART J.T. /cwo4 COMMANDING OFFICER 20101014

BRIG FOFIM 4205. AUG 2009

ManningB_43262



23643

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20191020

1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 2. SSN 3. RCN

MANNING, BRADLEY E.

4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. QUARTERS IROW ICELL

MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-I

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be noti?ed prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility lockd own.

b. authorized sunshine call: authorized television call; authorized library (tall; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. l_S_ authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-co ntact booth

e. IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest be veri?ed by
a pro?le from medical personnel.

authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.



g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of, one rules and regulations. one book
(religious or non-religious), one mattress, one set PT gear, one pair shower shoes and one POI blanket. receive one
und:iwear and one additional POI blanket during oftaps (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will
receive toilet paper upon request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer. Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, orthe D88.

i. IMLL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned ofticer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. IMLL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted at cell or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. SNPISND WILL recelve correspondence material from 2020-2120 to include mail. legal papers. enveiopes, D0510 forms, and one pencil
or pen.

I). SNPISND WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

c. SNPISND receive a 20 minute sunshine call in the special quarters recreation yard.

(I. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception 0! one mattress. one underwear and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

10. STATEMENT OF UNIERSTANDING
I that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE

3. NAME LAST, FIRST Ml. c. DATE

MANNING. BRADLEY) E. bif?? {;0101020)

12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. AME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 33, SIG C. DATE
20101020

13. COMMANOING om?n REVIEW 7

a. NAME. GRADE. TITLE b_ c. DATE

AVERHART JR, J.T. I cwo4 I COMMANDING OFFICER 3594/ 20101020

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43261





23644

commence facility Iockdown

a profile from medical personnel.

Operations Chief. or the DBS.

conducted at cell or in a non?contact booth.

c. SN PISND authorized to make/receive phone calls.

d. authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

I. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational lone.

j. SN WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

. REPORT one
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20101027
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 2. SSN 3. RCN
BRADLEY
4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL ?7 7. OUAFITEFISI HOW I CELL it
I MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY so-1
8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will

b. SN authorized sunshine call; authorized television call; t? authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell, (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

e. NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveillo and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by

g. SN IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious). one mattress. one set PT gear (sweat pants and top are authorized), one pair shower shoes and one
POI blanket. will receive one underwear and one additional POI blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAI.
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper upon request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig Supervisor,
i. SN WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at

attention until told to Carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

k. WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in with the POD only.

WILL receive a 20 minute sunshine call in the special quarters recreation yard.

a. WILL receive correspondence material from 1920-2120 to Include mail, legal papers, envelopes, D0510 forms, and one pencil

d. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress, one underwear and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING

I certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.)
MANNING. BRADLEY E.

c. DATE
20101027

12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR



a NAME (LAST. FIRST MI. I

/m


XX



c. one
20101027

13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

a. NAME. GRADE, TITLE

AVERHART J.T. COMMANDING OFFICER

c. one
20101027

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43260


.


23645

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20101115
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIHSTMI.) 2. SSN 3. RCN
MANNING. BRADLEY E. 2.
4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. OUARTERS I ROW I CELL If
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY so-1 191

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility lockdown.

b. SN LS authorized sunshine call; authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW) 4.

c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. authorized WeekendlHo|iday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.

I. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. l? NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious), one mattress, one set PT gear (sweat pants and top are authorized), one pair shower shoes and one
POI blanket. SN will receive one underwear and one additional POI blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper upon request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commandng Officer. Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted at cell or in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material from 1920-2120 to include mail, legal papers. envelopes. DD510 forms, and one pencil
or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with the POD only.

c. WILL receive a 20 minute sunshine call in the special quarters recreation yard.

d. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress. one underwear and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

0. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) c. DATE
MANNING. BRADLEY E. 20101115
12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. NAME (LAST, b. SIGNATU C. DATE
20101115
13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

3. NAME, GRADE, TITLE 1 c. DATE
AVEFIHART JR., J.T. COMMANDING OFFICER 20101115

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43259







nepom one
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20101210
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, 2. SSN 3. new
MANNING. BRADLEY E.
4. cusroov LEVEL 5. STATUS 5. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. oumreas I ROWICELL
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY 80-1 192

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor wilt
commence facility lockdown.

b. authorized recreation call; authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cel. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. authorized to makeireceive phone calls.
d. SN authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. SN IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.



f. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one r.iles and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious), one mattress. one set PT gear (sweat pants ai1d top are authorized), one pair shower shoes and one
POI blanket. will receive one unijerwear and one additional POI blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper upon request only.

h. SN WILL remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. WILL have sick call, medication call. and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material lrom 1920-2120 to include mail, legal papers, envelopes, DD510 Iorms,
and one pencil or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with POD only.

c. WILL receive a 1 HOUR recreation call in the special quarters recreation yard or inside recreation area in case
of inclement weather. SND's restraints will be removed during recreation call.

d. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress. one underwear and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE
AT ALL TIMES.

1 STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
I certify that have been briefed regarding the iibove instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

INMATE

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST Mi.) b. SIGN - c. one
MANNING.BRADLEY E. 20101210


12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST Ml.) b, c. DATE
Guru?! 5; A 20101210

13.coMMANbiN6oi=i=IceR REVIEW

a. c. DATE

OFFICER 20101210
.7

ManningB_43258

23647

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20110113
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 2. ss~ 3. RCN
MANNING. BRADLEY E. -
4. cusroov LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL 7. OUARTEFISI ROWICELL ii
MAX DET SUICIDE RISK

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. mg; wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig

Supervisor will be notitied prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence lacility lockdown.

b. authorized sunshine call; authorized television call; IS uthorized library call; NOT authorized to
conduct catisthenics in cell.
c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.
(1. SNFUSM) autl1orized Weekend/llotiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. SN is NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a piolile from medical personnel.

I. l_S_ authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational lone.
g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one mattress. one underwear, one POI

blanket and one pair shower shoes. will receive toilet paper upon request only. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
BELOW)



h. WILL remain in cell during lire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer. Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in lront of hatch upon entry ofany commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position ol attention lorcount until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a SPOON ONLY.

k. WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted in a noncontact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL NOT receive correspondence material until approved by the Brig OIC.

b. WILL receive hygiene items In accordance with POD only.

c. MAY receive one book upon request.

d. WILL receive one additional POI blanket during hours oi TAPS

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

I. will not maintain eyeglasses in his cell. SND may receive eyeglasses while reading or moving outside cell.

10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
I certify that I have been brieled regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE
a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 51 - c. DATE
MANNING, BRADLEY E. 20110118
12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR I
a. NAME (LAST. FIRST Ml.) c. DATE

AZ, ?vvz 1' 20110118
13. co'?lTA?Fll5i?E REVIEW
a. NAME. GRADE, TITLE b. siG~)Tu c. DATE
AVERHART J.T. /cwo4 OFFICER I - 20110118

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43257



23648


FIEPOFIT DATE

SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20110120
1. INMATE NAME (LAST. FIRST MI 2. SSN 3. RCN
MANNING. BRADLEY E. -
4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS SPECIAL DETAIL 7. QUAFITEFIS I now I ii

MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility lockdown.

b. authorized recreation call; authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.
(1. authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.

I. l_S authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious). one mattress, one set PT gear (sweat pants and top are authorized), one pair shower shoes and one
POI blanket. will receive one underwear and one additional POI blanket during hours of laps. (SEE ADDITIONAL
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). SN will receive toilet paper upon request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. SN WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL receive correspondence material from 1920-2120 to include mail, legal papers, envelopes, DD510 forms,
and one pencil or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with POD only.

c. WILL receive a 1 HOUR recreation call in the special quarters recreation yard or inside recreation area in case
of inclement weather. SND's restraints will be removed during recreation call.

d. All gear will be removed lrom cell alter Taps with the exception of one mattress, one underwear and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE
AT ALL TIMES.

0. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
")certily that I have been brieled regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE
a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) c. DATE
MANNING, BRADLEY E. *7 20110120

12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 4r'?G UR c. DATE
jg

OFFICER REVIEW

a. NAME, GFIADE, TITLE Ci?zf NATURE c. one

AVERHART JR, J.T. cwo4 COMMANDING OFFICER 1: 20110120



ManningB_43256



23649

REPORT DATE

SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20110123

1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI. I 3. new

MANNING, BRADLEY E.

4- CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS 5. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. QUARTEFIS I HOW I CELL
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1

TsPeclAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. SN WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to SN moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility lockdown.

b. authorized recreation call; l_S authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
Calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. l? authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. SN PISND l_S_ authorized Weekend/Holiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. IS N01 authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verilied by
a profile from medical personnel.

f. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations. one book
(religious or non-religious), one mattress, one set PT gear (sweat pants and top are authorized), one pair shower shoes and one
POI blanket. will receive one underwear and one additional POI blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). SN PISND will receive toilet paper upon request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during lire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief. or the DB8.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.



j. SN PISND WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. SN PISND WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted in a non-contact booth.

3. ADDITIONAL msrnucrrous
a. WILL receive correspondence material lrom 1920-2120 to include mail, legal papers. envelopes, DD510 forms,

and one pencil or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with POD only.

c. WILL receive a 1 HOUR recreation call in the special quarters recreation yard or inside recreation area in case
01 inclement weather. restraints will be removed during recreation call.

Ail gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception ot one mattress, one underwear and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAFI WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE
AT ALL TIMES.

10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
I certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE

Z7) 1-

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI. b, c. one
MANNING, BRADLEY E. /by 20110128
12. ourv BRIG SUPERVISOR 7

3. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) c. one
SANCHEZ, F. I SGT DBS . 20110128
13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW 7 I I

a. NAME, GRADE, TITLE on - c. on:
BARNES, D. V. COMMANDING OFFICER 20110128

ManningB_43255



23650

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20110211
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 2. SSN 3. RCN I
MANNING. BRADLEY E.
4. cusroov LEVEL 5. STATUS 6. SPECIAL DETAIL 7. OUARTERS I now I CELL :1
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted accordng to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility Iockdown.

b. authorized recreation call; l? authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. l? authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. authorized Weekend/Holiday visilzzt-on in a non-contact booth.

e. LS NQT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on merlical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.

f. LS authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in .1 low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious), one mattress, ore set PT gear (sweat pants and top are authorized), one pair shower shoes and one
POI blanket. receive one underwear and one additional POI blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper upon request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief, or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry din. SN WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. WILL have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL receive correspondence material from 1920-2120 to include mail, legal papers, envelopes, DD510 forms. and one pencil
or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with POD only.

c. WILL receive a 1 HOUR recreation call in the special quarters recreation yard or inside recreation area in case ol inclement
weather. SND's restraints will be removed during recreation call.

(I. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress, one underwear and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

0. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
I certify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.


b.Sl c. DATE
BRADLEY E. . bf 20110211

a. NAME (LAST, FIFIS MI.) DATE
BOAFO. M. /sser oes /?ii 20110211


12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR A
Ank

13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW <76?




a. NAME. GRADE. TITLE b. one
BARNES. D. V. COMMANDING OFFICER 20110211

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

ManningB_43254

23651



REPORT DATE

SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20110302
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 2. SSN 3. RCN
MANNING, BRADLEY E. -5
4. CUSTODY LEVEL 5. STATUS SPECIAL DETAIL 7. OUARTERS I ROW I CELL It
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-I 192

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to SNPISND moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence Iacility lockdown.

b. authorized recreation call; l_S_ authorized television call; authorized library call; IS NOT authorized to conduct
calisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.
authorized Weekend/Holiday vfsitntion in a non-contact booth.

e. IS NOT authorized to lie on rack between reveille anti taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest be verified by
a profile from medical personnel.

f. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or non-religious). one mattress. one detainee uniform, one pair shower shoes and one POI blanket. SNPISND will receive
one additional POI blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). will receive toilet paper
upon request only.

h. WILL remain in cell during tire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer, Brig Supervisor.
Operations Chief. or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at
attention until told to carry on. WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. WILL be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

j. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

gm), have sick call, medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted in a non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material from 1920-2120 to include mall, legal papers, envelopes. DD510 forms, and one pencil
or pen.

b. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with only.

c. WILL receive a 1 HOUR recreation call in the special quarters recreation yard or inside recreation area in case of inclement
weather. SND's restraints will be removed during recreation call.

cl Allgear will be removed from cell alter Taps with the exception of one mattress, and two POI blankets.

e. willwear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

OF UNDERSTANDING
k?lcertify that I have been briefed regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

I1. INMATE

1. NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) b. si c. DATE
IIANNING. BRADLEY E. 2oi 10302
I2. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

I. NAME (LAST, FIHS MIDATE

201 10302

COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

I. NAME. GRADE. TITLE
IARIES. D. V. OFFICER

Tom 4205, 2009

IT
I I
. SIG DATE
2oiio3o2

ManningB_-43253





23652



REPORT DATE

SPECIAL HANDLING INSTRUCTIONS 20110403
1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) 2. SSN 3,
MANNING. BRADLEY E.
4. cusroov LEVEL 5. STATUS 6' SEGREGATION 7. OUARTERSI now I It
MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY 30'?

8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. y1l_l_l, wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duly Brig
Supervisor will be notified prior to moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will
commence facility lockdown.

b. SN PISND authorized recreation call; authorized television call; authorized library call; l? NOT authorized to conduct
catisthenics in cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. authorized to make/receive phone calls.
d. authorized Weekezirl/l-luliday visitation In a iion-Contact booth.

e. IS authorized to lie on rack between revnille and taps unless on medical bed rest. Bed rest will be verified by
a profile from medical peisonnel.

f. authorized to speak to occupants of other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. IS NOT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception of; one rules and regulations, one book
(religious or HCH-IGIIQIOUS), one mattress, one detainee uniform, one pair shower shoes and one POI blanket. will receive

one additional l?O| blanket during hours of taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). SN will receive toilet paper
upon request only.

h. remain in cell during fire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Officer. Brig Supervisor,
Operations Chief. or the DBS.

i. WILL come to the position of attention in front of hatch upon entry of any commissioned officer and WILL remain at

attention until told to carry on. SN WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. be
required to stand at the position of attention for count until carry on is sounded.

I. WILL eat in cell with a metal spoon only.

k. WILL have sick call. medication call, and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be
conducted in a non-contactbooth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. WILL receive correspondence material from 1920-2120 to include mail, legal papers. envelopes, DD510 forms. and one pencil

or pen.
to. WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with POD only.

c. WILL receive a 1 HOUR recreation call in the special quarters recreation yard or inside recreation area in case of inclement
weather. SND's restraints will be removed during recreation call.

d. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress. and two POI blankets.

e. will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

10. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
f'\t certify that I have been brteted regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE .

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) I). SIGNA c. DATE
MANNING. BRADLEY E. 20110408
12. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR g?

7 .

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) b. SIGN c. DATE
WEBB, T. I GM2 I DBS

20I10408

13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

BRIG FORM 4205, AUG 2009

4_

a. NAME. GRADE, TITLE b. SI NA c. DATE
BARNES. D. V. COMMANDING OFFICER 20110408

ManningB_43252

23653

1 Ir

REPORT DATE
SPECIAL HANDLING 201 10.111

1. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) 2. SSN 3.

MANNING, BRADLEY E. 2

4. custom LEVEL 5. STATUS 5' SEGREGATION 7. OUAFITEFISI ii
MAX 957 PREVENTION OF INJURY 50"



8. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

a SNPISND WILL wear restraints and be escorted according to custody classification when leaving cell. The Duty Brig Supervisor will be
notilied prior to SNPISND moving outside any area outside Special Quarters. Control Center Supervisor will commence lacilily lockdown.

SNPISND authorized recreation call; authorized television call: authorized library call: is NOT authorized to conduct calisthenics in
cell. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW)

c. SNPISND authorized to rnaltelreceive prone calls.
(I. SNPISND authorized Weekend/Hoiiday visitation in a non-contact booth.

e. SNPISND IS QT authorized to lie on rack between reveille and taps unless on medical bed rest Bed rest will be by a prolile Irom
medical personnel.

I. SNPISND authorized to speak to occupants oi other cells in a low conversational tone.

g. SNPISND IS QT authorized to keep any gear inside his cell with the exception oi; one rules and regulations, one book (religious or non-
religious). one mattress. one detainee uniform. one pair shower shoes and one POI blanket. SNPISND will receive one additional POI blanket
during hours ol taps. (SEE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS BELOW). SNPISND will receive toilet paper upon request only

h. SNPISND WILL remain in cell during lire drills unless otherwise directed by the Commanding Ollicer. Brig Supervisor, Operations Chiel. or
the DBS.

I. SNPISND WILL come to the position ol attention in tront ol hatch upon entry oi any commissioned ollicer and WILL remain at attention until
told to carry on. SNPISND WILL address all duty personnel (enlisted) by their rank at parade rest. SN WILL be required to stand at the
position ol attention lor count until carry on is sounded.

I SNPISND WILL eat in cel with a rnelal spoon only.

It. SNPISND WILL have sick call, medication call. and chaplain visits conducted at cell hatch. Command and legal visits will be conducted in a
non-contact booth.

9. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS
a. SNPISND WILL receive correspondence material from 1920-2120 to include mail, legal papers. envelopes. DD510Iorms. and one pencil
or pen.

b. SNPISND will be allowed to have (1) pen or pencil. (1) highlighter and (5) sheets ol note paper while reading during the day. SNPISND
will return these items along with the booklmagazine to his personal effects when not in use.

c. SNPISND WILL receive hygiene items in accordance with POD only.

d. SNPISND WILL receive a 1 HOUR recreation call in the special quarters recreation yard or inside recreation area in case of inclement
weather. SND's restraints will be removed during recreation call.

e. All gear will be removed from cell after Taps with the exception of one mattress, and two POI blankets.

I. SNPISND will wear a SECOND CHANCE VEST AND KEVLAR WHEN LEAVING THE FACILITY ON TEMPORARY ABSENCE AT ALL TIMES.

Q9. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
IS. certify that I have been bneled regarding the above instructions and understand them and my responsibilities.

11. INMATE
I

a. NAME (LAST, FIFISTMI.) D. A c. DATE

MANNING.BRADLEY E. 20110411

I.

I2. DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR

a. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.)
TERRY, I SSGT IDBS

13 COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW

T11

I .
I
b. c. DATE
I 20110411

a. NAME. GRADE, TITLE b. SIGN c. DATE
BARNES. D. v. /cwoz I COMMANDING OFFICER 20110411
BRIG FORM 4205. AUG 2009 K)

ManningB_4386O

23654

ATTACHMENT 5



I'll I.

23655




Oow_m

U. D98

029 No. 78.8

22.95. roe 010.?







v_.omB3 Em: -

no o.o.3

:53

Domnluzoa

-
Vol.
m3Q

wom:_

mo .

za,__a




mmam..mn_oJ.
9. >35



.mo
N9 Tofu






8. Ix- mm?m?mo >76 OOZOCW - 933 wrmza

No. 53?. 332mm mzo EB 8228 52 am 958% ea m$Em
soc: ca Rania; 3 an ma; woma 8&3 3. 4
Q3. M20 ga max 9.353 man ma 33:3. 8 wvvoma
.333 so. Eomoaoa ma? _=oc_o3m msoa Eu man :3 cow:
2. 963: mx
ocmpoqx. 833: 5.. 2a 332: 3 mo; . I mmo H039:

V3: -



00:31
298

..-. ..-. . . . -



>920



N2 To? 3 No

AC mzo 8o?m332_?a 28:20:. mzo 3a .3. oo33m=.28.82..
3822. 1m: 3.03 Em 3:53. aomoauo oocau?. 39.. Zoarmm.
ca 4 No. ea 38 mvoxo :3 o<2 :6 o:
rmzo 32 Em aamaama .Son?? max Ruozm om ma?aa muo. Ea
2922. ms 20} mag 2.33am

A8 053?. 5a mzu 39? 2.5: .5 sum cow: :5 Ema
mm9:5 :5 Emocmaos. 0.53: M20 8 cm ao_=m in:
aa .5 mzzaq o.5 28 o: 8_:_uoEJ. Ea Eooxai mi. rm En

LL9zv?a5u!uuew

23656

-


omnn.
whims nm

.

mo. .-E-om

mm:mnmn.oJ.
0.. >_uo
-Ell? .I.

nv.r.c2v Uclsm :6 Emm m:n.
nocznocm ma. 5 an .3 moon. Boon. mam noimn.
3 En n.:nm:o: 2 En man. Em Emm .umo.n 8
Emm .: .m.o 8.: Ema: 2:2. .5 5mm 3:0: Bonn. own: 6
n:mn:mm.o:. I 05% w_9.a

.
.
.
.
.

G..1..:onm E03 :0 Roozmnmam. 0.0 mzva .m:mn .0 m..oE
.13 8 :m
G. mzu Emm 3 Go. .Sm.o:n 0: >31. mo. .. Go. zozwn.
Em. .m m.m_u.n man. .: 83.3.02. mzu Emm Simian. .5. 2.5
man. >mm.m:3m:. woman on mo: man. Emm 3 .2
.uO. mzu Emm mmoaa 8 mnvomn 31.03 :6 3o3.mQ.m ofsw woman. .3:
93.32.. 138 w:_m O39: oozoczdn. En mun. >mm.m:3m:.
.uomnn..m man. 8 mm
9583. aQm.:ow o: HVOH. mzu co Simian. 3. :6
mzn. wom_.23-3 wm?m?mc >25 OOZOCW - m


23657

ma:



Ema 25:3 Em: Em ncmnomv. M5: mSEm
cm 830200 3 3m m:a >mm_m:3m:H momma 803? moq 0.
3305. E0 :m$33 30 woman:mm 0:30:80 m::om Em _mm: 8502 2a :3 com:
m: 033: 09:300. Em: cm
2.20%. wow 833: W: I mmo H023:

WEE -
Palm



29$

02 rofom

>976

we .0904

mo. N: Emoiw o0::mo::m $5
m2: Ha :0 amcnm on o0:nm?:m Em: Emma: 28:20:. mzo
m??0030:":
35 9.5: :5 ?aa_8:a. $nQ03a 0003? m_:oo Em Em: mzo ma muamw
09.5 00033 0: .8 330:. m:n_ A Mo. 95: :8 030:0. :3 :2
_.ano.m:3 mo: om m:a m_3:028 3 E0 0:303: ma 00:203. mzu 009 awn
00:32 3. :5 0:310: 03:0 ::83:mE- mZU.m Sam m:a .53 Emma Sam:
NS: :?o233:0: om 38:30:. Emma 32?:

Hugh -

9:3.

woman



M2


0: >_u0
8. 73.3

NS 3838 wm?m?mo >20 OOZOCW - 0.30:. wrmza

mo. _-E-om Emm :0:mna Em: Em ocm?ona.
20:5 :0 3305.00 3 :8 m:m woman 503% mom 4
Q3. 3302. MZU ma :95 n:om:0:m N5: 05 8
U038 Ea woman. mzu Emm 3 En mam 31.532 0: >29.
mo_ MZU rum w8m0:8a Unogaam m_:na Em Ema Sims. m:a :3 cam:
m: o220%. wow NDQ 830,: I mmo H023:

EVE -

MBQ

09:50.
298

No.

>976

Mo. -80:

02 78-8 3358

CV Em 28.3 ._:82:mE 0: Mm Ewan: Mm: m:n_ 3:0 :0 Emcam

6z9zv?a5u!uuew
23658



Em. 3&2. m.m.mn_ Em. :m ma .mnm:Sm: Em. Emm: man 3823 :0 _umGo:m_ 9.6: ?mmrm:m. mzo En.
mwmm: Em m:oEmv. oE:=m o: 13> .0 mo: Zmwma. mzo ma m3. oa
mvo. m:a m: E01. m:n_ qmvoz.
mzo Emm mo::mm_mn_ 3. m.mDno: um Zmam: M2 .2 momm.m.. .m:um.

A8 U:1:m MZU Emm Eumm. n_:m .o :mEm :mEm
.0 Ex mzu Emm mzmo Eumm. mdoc. :mmm:E,m :oo: 38.. MZU s?m 85 .0 .m:m Umnmozmzw
.5: En. Em mo::m .0 Emwm ?Em: on mm:
n:mm:o:m Emu. mo..:m.:Em om.:m o2::mJ.. mzo m.m.ma :m an
::amE.m:q .:Emm mam m: imam m:a 5.5.2. Em.
mam? mcm: MZU m.m.ma Em. :m 2mm o: m.1:m.
U:1:m w:.mE.:mE mzo Em: 9.1% Em
Em. 2mm: .5: Em. Emam MZU ?23
an Emmr MS: mcmama m3.
3.8 MZU :m :mm m.m:ma ammE:m :mE .o E:mn: :m :3
mzo m.m.ma Em. :m :o m:.mamm. nmm.::m .5: Em. :m
.o m.:nJ_ :m ammam. Em :5 qmmim .0 :mEm comm mmwma mzo 2 :m :3 m3. .5 Gum
vcwimm. m.m. nnommioam on mcaorc. .0 2:5: :m 83$ mzo
m2omm:. 2:m: mcoc. .5: m.m.ma Em. Eomm J?m vcwimm
mam ::m_o2 5.5. mzo Emm .o mm.
mo:?m:m Em. :m 225 E8 Scum ?530: wmoEm. 9: m. Em mmam
muwmma .o Uczuommc? B33: @532. 30:: E.mBm.:o:. U:1:m 35:32.
mzu amEE:mn_ ammumm.?_ m:a moc?mocm m:a EE:.m::mm mam no:.mn. 50mvorm. ma:
.o Em mx.m:. om Em 202:2 03% E23





23659

A3 .358 E8 ozo Eco: 25358 on Mm gown:
NS 7 mZU.m 3% 2. oomwm 5 mm: Em 3: :oo: :53.

A3 mzo Sam :9 3 Oo_ Emzozo o: 3 Emma: we 95 Ho mzoq
momoaoo. Ozmm? wan; ma mummw Go? Emmz?zm
mzoa $3252 on Evans N2 moo mzddormzma 5 3.2%
mmzom mule Emma: M2 mzo Emm 852?. 3. So moo
>mm_m:EmB woman on 8 Ewan: 8: moo Emm Rnoaamoomo 5 825.: 3
woo m?Em. .26 02:59. nosoclnq So ea
moo mzo 8
mm 958% qazdomn on wow mzo 3 Simian .3 :6
moo woman o: mo. H.

NS 78.8








EVE - Ema mzow 058% 2a Emm :u
mm: _-om-mm on >co
V. 3 En 9. anacnm? Ho mEunm:. 833 Sn woman man 8

:wBvonmQ mvmnona. mzo :3 so. mow m_:oa Em SE aain?
mam 31.08 m: o333: 792% ocm?oaw. REE: woo. aa 332: 5 Ozmmn
M2

- 00:31 O: 9. 3.30: S: 933 moowa mzo Em on: mm?zm so

2: _-8-om >975 NE 78.3 . t. . .. 4.,

mane Zo?m Emm oozom moo E9: 55: E::o so Emm o: 8E_uo$Q momozoo 5

mzo 228 E2 :m Emm aoim mom cc. Em amaomooa Emm <53?
amoaa Sm: Erma pm mzo ?23; m?mzom Eu 8 mnna? mS2.n_En_n?
3.: :5 13m 3 Emm m_oE. in Bm::m_:m own no_:mQ 2:2.
muom?zm. on cnim muowa

L99zv?a5u!uuew

Edi -
19+.
Saw

Oo:a_ma_
228

Mo. 78-5

>035

8. 78.8 .

a n:ooaa.:_ 9: a::m .55 Sum _oEaa a:ma_ 55: mm Sum
mma.

mzo aomm :m383$ Sam: 35 an 322. Ewan: .2 2mm Em Ema 33? .:ma
mzo :3 muowm an 239. 3 Ba :39 E8 cmnoaasm aoE:_o.
W300 Ema 3.9 :3 com: mcmaamm maoa 55 amm_ Emncmaoz
mam Em mmaa?mzoa :3 com: Eoam moazvoa. 3:95 :2 :5 EB: oozaazucszm
mmnaoam mam amoo::a_m :5 n:mama m:mmam:Q a:m >a:o_m Gm aamnozma o:
Ewan: Mo_ :3 no. muowm: En ma _aa_ma: anon amoiszm Emma
32325 axnmva moa oza _:m.m:no Ewan: Mo. 3 :5 3m. 23? Emm Ema?
:a_mm mm 20:. no moi mm Eoaa: asazaoazm Ema mzo Emm 339.3
macs: m: 3232503 on A Ewan: N9 maa Em n_aBnma_oa mm
noannmamga 8 2:5 Emm 32.332. noa_:a_o3m2 5 52%.

1H::m mazaw mm coim 33? on Mm gmao: M2 mbma mwoca
anoaa ma :oSa Em. am? ma on aocam 8 Eoaw a::m Soaazm. :ma_ Ema Em
aoasmmzoa Emm mo oca omoan:a_ma< moa :3 :23 .0 ca aoncasazana
2.5% om Snow? =08. mmvaommg ooamamlzm 2.3 :0 ao3ozmazmm $03 Em Bm: maa Em mma:oa. Oman Eocmo mam
.Ham
No. 35.8

CV mzo :5 500?? o: Ewan: MOS mam :mn_ so
Em. :ann_an_ 552:? 23.50:. 223 a:ma :o n:n_ anemia ooaazsmza
am: Ema 20% aa anoa:muowa Em mzoazow. Ooo?cm. o



23661



maom :23 man So :oF mzo _.on9_.ouo_.r

AB Ucazm En mzo E5 259 2a m:oEmm no ESRMH 5
oo::mn_nn_ mzo on 2:3 mm mm aonmmzoo
ea Eur m=:ocm: :0 mm Eon. 8 n:m 3.5.5 o3om:m::m vomzm :o a 8
3:02 50 9330: om Ea 303:9 2a :2 B95 325a 5 :6 Ednomm
ca: mwEosmm 2a 333. anon :o :3 mnEm Sm: Ea guano: =3 mzo 3:3 En 38.013. o?:n
:95 :2 21:2. _o:oa on <58: mo :w 8303: :53. In mac manna
35mm :2 55: oo:n_a mo :0 :3
Uclnm. En mzu 3.03 maxim 58
23 Sum /53? nomvosmom. Ea E3 3muoQ_?_ man.
ooczoocm Ea :3 aoaomnoq E3 2.3 Em
Ouxmmn m_2..m .

Ev .H.:o8 Ema :0 awuolmm Soaoim om EEm:m_ ?339 mo3o:m:.m8n_ 3..
U2 Emzizm.

A3 mzo Emm 3 Oo_ Zmzoza on _m Ewan: M9 02 75.020
m::o_m8n_ EB mzoa main? 3 3:13.Simian 3 :6 mam
>mmwm=3Q: woman o: 5 330: M2 m:n_ Emm 833: 3
WOH mBBm. .26 01.89 no:nE:.wn_ :5 mam
:om3..n. 300333332 mam m_u9omm Bmxwac? ncm?omv. 33:8 on HUOH.

e99zv?EI5u!uuew

23662



mzo 2.: ca 8395:. :5 mum >mmwm=Em_: woman 9:
mm No.

.

Edd- woman.
mm? Wmiw? 16.;
m3? Wmmia
.






EVE- Go: mm_
2
onmm
MBQ


9 >co




82.8.;

No_

Emm 3233 251% 9.20% mag 29.5 cm $Ea wga Baum 3., .5 832? mi 2.23% mag ma :9 Z?cm? 8 $38 :6 comaEKNOE NE :mm :9
Eammzaa Ed. _u8Em5m mmaom Em E2 Ea sum cam: ms oa awooaamnmma EB mzo cm ZCPX ncm?oqw. ESE: mor
man 33mm: 5. MOL. I 03%

M9

zwomraq Em Eom_nJ1:82mmE on _m 32.2. No: man Ea no Sm.
smegma ?38.55 manages. mzo 228 BE so ma no3Em:n_ Sm:
Em? Saar man 8828 Eco wmamosi <58 9.3 :5 mzca imzoa
E3 mam mS3 mace 8 cm Emnma E8 Em mam
3m 23% Emma nanam?wa W: 5 Em mnno:_:. mzu m_mo mvown Em mzoaznm.
Umsa Ooo?sm. on:mn?::mJ. Steam oa 3,530 mug 33.303 man 3828 ms 20%
mag 2m_3=m 8303.

Ev Dcanm :8 mzo Emm 52? :58 52 (can?
383. M59: :6 8:3mBoE $5253. >33 #03 nozamo

v99av?a5u!uuew
23663

. .
. Umm_8:um__. mzo Sum 9:5. mam mas; Em. :m :3 so _mm:om EB Ez

28:30:.

Uclzm :6 mzo Emm 3m_uon__m:_ ms; 36 no:Eor US .5
3: mmummamn mcmimn $05 maxim 58 3
mmwz?q 8 cm 5 mo?wmq :58. Em 8:6mBEo_: Ema 23. Em
sold?: I Ozmmn w_o:_m

.258 Ewan :0 38:8 wznaoam om EEm:m_ 3.
U2 gmzazm.

T: Emm 95328 3 Oo_ 320:0 o: Kmno: Oo_ 3m_o:n
maao??m EB main? Emoaaoq 8333. .3 3353: ea
:wBm_:m :wBo$03 ::o:onEm_ mm. mm?am. qoowm mam

A3 comm smca m3%ox_3m8_< 5-5 nmamoza 305 mam Rnowcnm
mesa? >323?: 30:25. mzo m_mo rum mnnamm 8 So mam
Erna rm 3m.< qo2oE coowm $03.

Emm 3No mag Emm 3noEBa:n_aa_ 5 32:5: 5 3. mBEm- .36 wlm. 02.82
noznc?om :5 man woman;
mam mE%omzu SE Um Ria?ma 3 :6 mam woman
o: 5 Ewan: M2

99ez1r?a6u!uuew

23664

Edi -
val.
MEJ.

woman
Woin? .w
Wamcrm

M2 78;


on >33

Mo.

No 78-: 512.3

mzo E3 zosma SE Em ncm?oam mug mSEm Eoca ca Rso?aa 3 So
mam >m&msEw3 woman 83% 3. 4 ,5 aoim?. mzu an :2
:35 Ed. ?233 Ba ma no? zwncom? 8 muuomq $33 :5 33?. mzd/amm
Ed. uaogm?m mwzna Em :5 nmiocc Ea cam: mu mH, zwooa?ozaoa Em. ca 825:. 833: wow
man _.m3m:1: mo; . I

-

MEQ

Oo::mm_
228

we _-om-om

>375

M9 $9

Mo 78 -00 33:5

CV 8n9SE .533 wEBo&m:w 38:30:. mzo m?paa 32 :w ma _.nn93.. E2 Emor mag :wn9mnorm Em mQo3o.mum Ro9Ewan: M2 . ?3 nocsmloa 3. En mam OHO mom Emaomnan? man
8 mam 0: So mmao 38 rm Emm noczmloa cm
:5 m?ga moa Bm?zm (<33 m_waBm_o a
O: A EwanEmzumumor o?:amm os?mm 55$ amnoaqom c: mzcw. 33.

A8 Ucaum So E?igm? mzo Emm ox:m3o_m 252 Ed mroiou :o E?nom? 3
muam?moozzm. :3 E: E3 55. mac: 3

998zv?a5u!uuew

23665

-v

Rmuosmo Ba 3528 so 733528 8 mo? 3
oo:8E.:mSa2 9: 3 Ba 3 Sum :2 ::o8m8a :5 ?mph 052 Em Em? mmEoowm mzo :3 5 Samoa U5 :5 5% rm manna 8
:96 z?ozoa 8 :02 so Emm acanm am 32 monozmzoaoa 5 9258. Sa?asm 58 95% En 1.83.32. Emm $muoo%:_ mam
36 00:39. >mEa $03 Em 32.8. Em qoaomso? Emm Em
n:mBo87 I Owmm? maam

12.08 Emm osm 38:2. 3052; ?332 %aoaE:8 3 U2
Emsinm.

A3 0: Zman: Mm: 7 mzo Emm oum2Eamozu

T5 0: Kmqn: M2 ma m&?m3 8 U9 :wom_cm :5 wlm. 33:003. .36 Emm Em 9.4.0 ow m?msamna Emma mnmoaam
nmi. Ear. aonoqm?ma E3. Emm _.a9$m8 W:
Danna; Ommaw. :5 G.w. >23. 03% mm :5 Em
Ea o2._o_m_ RES H: :5 among 5: Zoo? 126 Ocmunoo mam
Emm Hmco_om mm mo:EQ 02.9022: 125 mam mama
Ea RES 2533 8 do mama aa 33 Do: Ommow E5 :9 46
32%. 95 8 En nom? 038 o: 25% Ema. So
mwuomamnna om :5 man :5 22? om mic.
cm. >23 Oolonzoam 005335 Ea 1020 Br Oo?onzozm Ewan: $68
oozrmoaa Ea 3338 :5 3823. i5 23 28.38
mm a: 2:9. 26:. ouonoq Ea .36 ooaona E08 maonzzm 8a
am.=2_ 3 9518 >23 mam magma EB 9:239. unoom 33
U2 Euzanm camam 52:81 am 30 mam OHO E338 Ufzmamv man



23666

Com 8 So mozaoim 5350 won mn?aomm coim :8 Eng a .33
oom?oxoa ino 383mm 8 So momma? mm 2 283 on 8 095::
030% W: Ea woimmoo.

A3 0: Ewan: mo Ea mam wcuoaimo? ?23 Do.?
oozoonaom Em ncomsoiom om mam moo vnonnacwom_uO_ m?m?cm oa zoo uqooaacnom. .H:o win mcuoqsmoa
96538 8 mzo Em mSEm moo Emo Ema so mm 8 oo3_o_w En oaonm
m7.a: 8 E3 m: mom moan. Uclom En ooE.mo 3. En Ea mzo
mB.on_ so so. _ama?a E3 Em :23 man qoBoEn mxomwaoo 91:5 E3222: 22:: :5 m_mm.._o S3 mm Ea Bow.
amomoaocm 3mm. wmomxmo .3233 :5 mam OHO amzonn.
:5 23:0 33 3 Em E5229: mom Ea OH0 naoaa 3 macaw. U9
rmoazzm. 8:3 mag :35 Em coom?comn 3333 Won. Em no:
Qclom .55 om Bvm.

A9 0: 330: ME mzo moozooa 032% moon. ooznmmiom So
3:95am mzomao nsm?momu S0320: 2. 8 2.75
mwmommomaoamv. 305:0: om ma?a SA noon mvmommomaoi mom 50:58 om
53 co

4.3 O: Emma: NE mzo ?mm 338 30300320.5 o: u. Emma: N2 H.
2503.8 Em: mzoa ma?a? Emoaoa Ramona 5 nooimmwoo mam Ema mzo
Emm qo3o.9: 1% mom Ewan :mSimian 3.. So moo woman on A 330: No. moo

999av?a5u!uuew
23667

. ?mm 8 3 won ?mazm. .26 mam came: oozncaamn
. Ea man >mmnm=3m.: man mvuao?n

. mzo 8 332.. mm 05.03. o: mzo EE
wm 8s9
mo

ma: 78-8 3033 wm?m?mo >20 OOZOCW - Qamoa mrmza

- woman NS 78.2 335nm mzo Emm Ema Em oc?onm man mamacm
wmaa. Wnim? No 78-3 on we 78 Eo:_n wm aoio?on 3. 2.5 man >mmnm=aa_na: woman mzo
mazaw oa >wo
5 Ema mzo zmx. aoanmnn mom. man aoasmna .2 mo- .
mmo 3&2.

. mo 78.8 wm?m?mo >20 OOZDCW - oamoa wmmza

mo 78.8 mzo Emm 2258 Ema Em ocmaonm m:n mamacm
Eo:_n wm amim?mn :8 n_3a:8:o= man woman .onmv_. mzo
ma so. wm2.6 829.2 035 woman mzo 223 Sm. .5 no 8
mwmao awn woman Em. wa a_o~ m_aomno. ?28 3 uanoa womanm. Emm
265.3 8 :6 ncamomm ommunmmanzm womoao Em woman. 5 8 wanam 8

3.5 - woman
vol. Wmim? ma. M2 T83
masaw

mo _-om-om

oa >wo>mmnm:a:o:r oa ma 5 So nonnmno: owmsmo mzoa ocaaoaz
mun mzu m?mamn Sm. awn mam umwnwo_omnmocaaoa anmnmomsoz. man Ema wm mm m_mo_om:m wmzma ma
Ema mzo amammi amasmr. o: won. man 833: 5 mom i
mmo

699zv?a5u!uuew

23668

woman Zm?coa
03% me?
man ._o3m:

mm, 02:2.

2:2 -
vol.
m3Q

Oo:zmo_
Zo?m

NS 78.2



NE 78.8

R: 78.8 be 3558

CV 88:3 Em on mm mo_uEmQ N2 ea :3 no
5:8 Sm: .588 33338 25:33. mnm?a Em: :m ma 8oo_oo33m=n_ Em: Em? ?mow aa 53 ga?_ 3 Em 33?: ea 39% 9.9 :5
2835. m_mo muowo 25,. Em mzonzww. via Ooo?cmwoo?mug 95.532. ea Ro9
By Uclzm :5 Emm 9.5 M: mam? 9: En: ::mEo8n_ 5
wow 3302 ms :05. mzmEmm 3:2 :05. mvowm. 39:
Em _uo8::m_ Emzm ozom 353$ mmo? oozmnm?ai. mzo mvowm. :5
so SE mmno onom Up: a nonmqmi .5 cm
mozmzm mam swim. m.mEo.
muuwmaoa 8 cm 5 moon 38? mum Emm aim 8 Sam: m:n:o_8 :50 Uclzm
Ea Emm muoxoz. 8mUmo5.__ ea 38 noamnr I
Qwmm?. m_o=_m

CV H.:o8 Emma :0 38:3 mznaoim 2 EEm:m_ cosmioa we



o68zv?af3u!uuew

23669

.-

U2 Emzzim.

Ts 5.3 95:53 3 Oo_ Eaono on 8 m8:_mQ Go. 330:0
m:=oS8q mZU_m 233 Emoamwa 8333 5 2.: 3:33: Ea
Em: mzo Emm 8_oS3:m :6 R63 o2 O0. E?osa song. 33
mzu czanazzam En 13% aa 2 33 znasna Ease: 283.5:
$3.515 32.03% 8 ::o:ooEm_ Emm Simian 3.
En Qmmw?omzos mag woman on 8 ma.uEmQ mm: mam E3
8833253 8 3 m?zcm. ?rm mam, 02.83 En
O_mm3mom:o: ea >m9m:3o:n comztm ea ?228 mzu
8 333: mm 323.53 2583 33:8 0: wow MZU cm
839:8 3. En ea >mm.m:Bo:? woman on 5. 393: N9

GV 0: mm mmcacmnm NS mzo Emm oocnmarwm 3. En mam mcumaimoa
ooznmaazm Em m_81:m 2? :5 owz>< $33 mwamnammaoz om: maniac MZU Emm 3.2a 5 Euro E122. mS83m_?:
aooc?wzazm Em 33:3. 23% mzu mmawma 8 no :oEmmm< 32qoam :9 5 Burn 21:3 mszw?mi N: 3.: :mzU mon:Bm:_ .25 mam 8
mza 9m 33: ucauomm 2 :5 mS83m_: 3 Fa Em mama __amn_aam:? 8
_n:oE EB mzo Emma 25 998 8 :9 38:? Snammzon om: inn :5
mmn:1J_ Em? anz?zm 2 SW u1< 32:. mzu 228 .5
csmwam?ooa Em: so a :2 8 35 32.: oa mam 2:2. o3Qm__ 32: Ba Emo
Em: so czaoa?msam Em: mm :2 8 23% m3. sizoz?mm??aau. 8
mam mam? mzu Emm m_mo noczm?339 .28
mam OHO Bmo nxu_B=on_ 8 mzu EN: .5 55:3 :9 3 3 3 Bi
30:5 E_om so osomo :2 no 328 mzzmaoa man. no mono: .
55:5 cm 3:8: 9. En mam. .25 mam OHO 31:2 Em: an

L69av?e6u!uuew

23670



n:oomo 3 SE8 m?zaaoz. ea 8 qoncaozr :0 20:5 :o
mono::B:_a 3. Emo:mEm:nm owaoacnamanooa Em um sa:.

-

ma:

womi
an
W853

MS Tom;

mmam?oa
ow

NS 78.8

M9 78.? go?mma mm?m?mu PZU OOZOCW - ommoa mrmz?

N9 T818 H333 mzo Emm gonna Em: Em mSEm
55:5 :m 85923 3 Sn mam >mmEm=Bo:. woman .032. mzu
ma :9 :95 max acomaoam ea ma :2 Bacon; 8 :o_oo_.o 30 :33. H.
a mzo 833: 25x. wow mam 5 I
mmo .32?

-
pi.


00:23.


we SS

>275

ME .8.8

78.8 No 3353 mzo Rania: Em Emm?m E?jxm32.3 _33mn:m8 mzo ma
no. 289% mam Emo:u::mQ Ebola. on mam: mcaamma Eoln aa Econ. Uclzm. Em mzm. Emm
35$ mum Emm :2 558,8 3 monmsm 38 mzo
30:3: Em am: 0: 8 mm:EmQ we M.
5:3. ow Em so :om_.u Emu. man Emm :50 :32 Emm
::w2:_u8a E::a :o Emm .5 En SEEG om?msam :2 38 n_1_._.mZU Emm SE
5m: 3m 30:5? :8 no 838. 5:3 Eomo :mEoo? 2a :2 En E8
?mB:m: noanm ocna ozoo Bonn: ma 32:03 :33 8 a1:m ?ca En
mzu 5.3.2. 8 :0 mo 95:3 965:8 Emm mo? Ea
39.5 8 522.8: 5 20:99.3 5 952 2. :3 maaqmuaznz. mzo
:mm.u: 8 muwmw :23 :5 .2 3
oo:.33. mzo muuam?ma 5 :96 mo3mnEamcwm oa U:1=mH:m mzo Em:
muowoz man _.mmuoQ::. Ba moon 35 noimnw smmo

Egg -

m3J.

09:50.
Zo?m

mo. 78.;

mo:-B-3.

N9 78-: mo 35.8


23671

2 mzo $232. Em Ema?v. 383.Em: Ra? _S3mn:m8 mzazsos. mS8n_ Em: 5 ma 8875
noSSm:a am: am? Emmw man 23 saga 3 Em 32:2. ea 85:. 9.3
So 28_?a. Emo mmowa 9:2. :5 wsozo am mzoazmz. U35
Oooacm. o: mocacmi N9 mzo an no. 8n9maSuez.

AB Uczam. Em mzo Emm mx?aa?v. D59 Emm =9 38_.mm8n_ 3
mmazm. ES >29. mzo comm:
9.. :39 388m. 3 ammonium. nos?wammoz. mzo mvowa
E33 255 Em ea manna :m Emm oozomazma 25,: Em Bozgoim
39:3. 083: mzo 8 .3 5% moon 389 munmmaoa
8 ca oozo?dma mco? Em: coSm::m E3. 9.. 223 E2
zozizm Emm ?Seam 3 Sa 13?. Emm Ea: mnowm:
man. 3mwan:.:_ 9: Emm _amm Sm: I Ema:

A8 mzo 2mm 3 O2 ?m_o:a on mo_uEmQ B: 95 8 mzo
clam on :w3uoSQ 8 mo: gamma

.23 3,323 cw Ea mam woma on
32:3 ME man ?mm 28033238 8 W: HUGH mSEm_. .26 mam
0309 oo=oE.Rn_ 2.5 man. >mam:Ba:~ cop2_.m
300332330: ea ?u_u3mzo SE co Rsm?ma 3 En man woman. o:
Hm mmcacmi mo H.

Ev 39.0 :o 332.2 om 915:2 av.

llil/II?


23672

A U2 Kmaasm.

Mo: Tom- 32:38 mzo Emm 8 n:oomw 8 ca :2 8 munmma ?38
Ea :82. 95 8 ?538 on - w_m:

we 78-: 3.25% mzo 5mm 8.52. :5 2203.53
55:5 co Simian 3 mam >mm:m:Bw::w om=_d 8:3 2:
No. Tom; 4 Q3. Eimi. mzo an :2 :m$33 :5 :33mZU.__.m mcmaznm 8 Ema mwnorzaoa. :mm :2 uzwmmamm
m3. Eo?wam mama Em :5 Rsm? man. :8 ms oH. a awnoaamsaom cm 333: 25% ncmnoncr 33%: wow ms:
333: 5 mo? I 03% Emmi

EH: - mama
val. Waims
ma?



we TOP: 9.

2: Tom; .8 3:35am

CV mzo Bo9:3 389a ::3on:m8 2523:. mzo m$8n_ Em: :o an _.aomZm noaamza
am: 52 Ema: mam Emm 398m. 3. Emma mam m:oBm<
mzo Ema 25.8 u:o:m Em mzo?smw. OM25 00033. on
_mo:EmQ we ma :9 amomra n=mo:u:=mQ amnonm ow mn_ea 8nm:38232 mzo Sum mx2m3m_< 9:2 mm 32 :5 m?ma 32 Emm m:_m
8 mo? 8 303: cu man. Siam m:oE _m:m:3m :39 mzo mama: :o 23 aoim man Emm _ooE=m
3:?a 8 8:3m3oE. Omoon :58 qmammsoa Emm nozmazu: Em n:E.mn87
Ocazm :w 38:32. mzo Emm Em: muorm? mam 86

ooimor I 95% wasa .

E4: -
val.
ma:

00:32

No 78-3 >276 MS row;
Zo?m

7

AB mzo Sum w92:2 Boss: E3 9833 mam. meow


23673

son :m:oumwnamio 02 2.30% an 3:088 Sm: E3 3 _oE 8
33038 1% 8 mo: :33 :5 3: noazacom 8 ?8 32:9
E5088: Sm: :68 m8 no n:m:mnm 8 ow 3:05 E. 255338;
ea _omm_ man. Ea nmcmoa 3


mzo Emm 3 :6 O_mmamnm:o: Ea >mmrm:3oE woman on A
mo::EJ. No: 2a 5.2.. qanoaamsama 5 832: 5 :9 mBEm. A,:m
85953 En man :om_a.m
Enoaimsamuos mam mE.3MZU 3: an 3395:. 3. Em mag >mmwm:3m2 maa on
we H.

G: ,H.:o8 Sum osm wmuozma imam?: :m:m3oa 3 UR
333$.

A3 A N2 7 mzu Sum o:mm2mn_ mB:n::m .2 Em nwanmnomim on: man
m?mlam 36 .:woo3m_. 3 _uqo_o:mma colon 1 33mm: ma; n:omn
8 Em?o: 8550.. Em?ma. mzu 2:3 9: m?mzwami


Hug: -

woman

ME

N2 $8-2 NS v8-2 3:253

mm:Bw?oQ

969zv?a5u!uuew
23674

mi. Wmim? Aw om >_mo
MBJ. Wamczm



mzu Emm Sm. Em n:m8a< man mSEm 29.3 do mmsm?mq 3. 3m
Ea woman. .032. ma :2 :35 max acmmsosm
mam ma maacamm 8 $38 2.5 comma. Uclam So om Bo comma
mzo mmwma ea 25% mB83o_:m mammnam. Em ncm?oaw
ea mmwaa pcomsonm 5 Bmmam 8 Em 5:58
m:33mQ 230: :m aomzg 9:2 32.32% .03? mza
Ba 823253: 9.15 :5 coma ea mm ?2.03 mama rm ama
Ema. mzu mmroa 352 momma om :6 mzm?omm EB Emma 5 8
Em msnam 1% mm?omm. mzo m?cma 3 En mango: mmE.:m .25 32
oonmannma macaw. Em mnm?mm ._m_Em0323 mB83o_,: ea Em. rm Emm clam. 2:9. .8 E88

m_mo ara .5 Sum Swing 8 2:9 _=3Emm. mag Ema
Sm om Em comma 2:2 :5 m:
munzam on HUGH mSEm. mzu Sum SE En Wm mcoc?m 285 F:
:3 93: man: 8 ca Ban: _o=ma7 m: %%.a5m on Em man.
m:3o::n:=comma
2.5: .5 ?mm 33?? Emnmq o: HUGH m$Em. :0 Sum
28:8 33:83 8 oSm1=Sm8m oT:o mman mom m?Em. En Emm m_mo SE
mm :30 moan om :5 35.233 9: 3 Emma
Pm; 3.33.5 cowzm 3338 Eyzn oozacogzm raoom 823.com om:
m_So:m: so mm 5 B3 mSEmgonna
9: Em no:n_:nn _on_ 8 En monsoon ?amigo: man 3: _m
:2 En::nm_ 8 9:2 352mm 3 o:m.on< om mom mSEm.

32:2 m?zma Sm. :m a :2 m5nEm_. ea SE Sm mam
0o_o:m_ E?ozm. mm oonmamazm mzca .53 3 .wZU.m mam.
mS8Bm2 8 So comma Emm EB mzu, Ea Sm cam. :mmmn:1J. mm uaoa? U5 Ea :m
mo?




55332

Emam


mmo

.. ..

Hug: -
val.


Oo::mo_
Zonmm

mo. 78-9



Mn: TOMA:

78.2 No

CV mzo Em Snow? 38282 on NE man. :3 so 3.3
52 .583 5325:? 28:30:. mzo mS8n_ SB rm ma Rania ooaamsa
am: :5 Snow Ea Emm 3 Em 323 C35 Eozmo :58 95.. :8
285.5. mzo mwo muowo En: Em m:o38> U33 9033 mm. Ea mm
535% mm: ma :9 8875 Ed? Emn6:=mQ amuonm on ma?am mno?
man. Rowing m: m2:528 :58 82$ 53 mzoa mmxma E3 1
Sum 31m:So E32. mzo 32.8 ?mm. mzo momamd SWO: 25%
8 En man manna E2 Em Emm Em 53? 8n_m< moamosm sun.
Era 33 33? mzwa Sum 35 8 mm?
3 noioamaoa 25.: cm 3583? man E?oar mwuomqma :88
3.5 Ba ooscmamzoa M9 msnaa E: mama as mzu
cazaam?a ooszziam :8 noa?nmmaoz. mzu mm?? magma E2 .3
Sum momzm mam man EN: 3 aa so zomama
E?nim?. Sum 56: 7wm_umn:u:_ mam aa2a=2_ 85 8:52. I
waam .

L69zv?a5u!uuew
23676

A5 mzo Emm oE239 Sana: Emm amaaoq Sum Eqooaamsqma 8
cm 8333 .403 vm320.; aa E5038 Em: mzo Emm Bonanza 1:20 mo: :33 9: 3:
mica ma. 213:3: Ocmzsoo. 5 Emm 32:9 mszomm?a mzoa
8_oE:om :3 590,3 9: 9:02 um_uEQ 8 868% 9 Ea3?a Em mnozsmm. mzo 25 85928 3.
So mam woman on mm we WEE EB
8 833: 3 Hug mSEm. mam C2152 <33; Sm
ea >mam:Eo:H com?d 8no33o:am:o: ea m,Eu38 833Qmm?momsoz mag weed :92 on A mo.

Ow .268 $68 Quezon Eoamam 2
dz U2 gmzinq.

A5 8 NE mzo E3. owmE.8:2.

AS 8 32:24 me 7 mzo Emu. owu.n2a; ams?nm W: Eu.

A8 3 ._m:cmJ. NS 7 mzu Emm 8 Su?sm
:93

Q: mmcacmnw mm: 7 mzo E3 8823 Snow 3 Eawn?usa


23677

8 333: 3 :5 3:49.

A3 NE mzo Emu oqmaiaa aonfnm 33.8: 3% man 32: 3: 9
v_.o_oamma R18 om 33? Erzm 3 Em

AD me mzo Emm E3moHm_3 :6 3319
50: Ream Ea aux.

EV mo. 7 Emm oUmo2on_ mS=n::m 3 :6 0030.. o2:m om: Ea
m?mlzm 38 :6 003.9. 3. v3_o=mma union. 3. 33?.

Q3 mmcEmQ we mzo Emm Em mnooz 81mm8n:< mm
Ewan as man 983 nozm.

3 mmcacmax NE mzu Ema oUmmqmvummn $03 Em awning? vole; o_m 33a.

9 3 ma?EmQ 333:. .9 waomonmma om :39 mm :0 $63 moq mo3oo:o 5
:3 330339

-
Human

woman
Wm?m? ma .

M9 2:2


om >ao
NE ream

NS To Em E853 wm?m?mo >20 OOZOCW - ommow mrmza

23678




33:25 mzo Emm aogma SB Em wSEm
22.5 cm :w39. an :9 :35 25. $5233 ea ma :2 Epsom. 8 mcummn 3% Sn coma.
3 EBB: ZEN. 8:mmo 333

Womcrm

we 8 CV :wo9
No: ea :3 =0 amcmm EB zooana mzo
ms?a 2515 ma Rania ooaamza Sm: 3% Snow man Ema 3 Em
no.5: omaUcazm Sm 58232 mzzwa 52 so sum ?aaw Ea ma?a
2.2.5 8% ea Wm namumasm 8 cam; zm? o:o. 3
Ezmz? 32: Own?. coma BE :28 32 :m

So EH8 0.6 232.3630: Ema

En 2:232. MZU Sum Em: mam 36 noz?mnr
mzoa 338.5. Emm :w_mxmn_ E5 ,5 Ozwm? Eoim




.. . ..-.. .. A

WEE -
$3 nmmW..mo_ NS TEE >275 we Sim
was 3 mzo Emm 95.528 3 02 2302.. 2. 8: ea.
32:9 Bass: 95:30: Ema goo?ng mzu Emm Sdoaanzawa 8
cm :w3o819:3 3. :6 BE woman 0: m_ mo:
ea Emm Eooa?wnaoa 8 833: 3 R: msem. ism 03.8. nozocnma
95: So Ba a8a.w zwnoaamzamaou mam
mzo 8 R53: mm wO_ Q9328. cm
3 :5 m:n_ womanmomma on: To_.m_ maamioa M9 9-3 J3 72-2 FEB mzu E3 Sios>wo


ooeav"a5u!uuew
23679

MBQ



Mn: 5 $.03 ?>uQUm.Emm mBEm no mz 8
gunman ammonm Sm comma mza m.B:.ma Em amocmmr Ucaam Em aoona mzo
mmzma Sm: :m aomm :2 _um=m:3 no om Eammx. mzo 31:2 mzzma 32 Tm aomm :33.5 232 :aza?_m. mzo Ea 23m 53 :m am:m$.03 uouimaoa maa uommzoi .5 n3?mmamcm?oae mazcm. Ucazm Em coma. mzo magma Em? .5 aomm Em: Em
E2395 oa 53% Sssaa Eamm?oa M2 5.
39.: am 3 mo:m.amB:o= rm .amm_m Emnm onocmz? on 3 Em
5 moa mBE.n.. mzo 32:2 228 am am:Somamaa mna Em aammwao?z :m Ha moamnma 3 m:o:_a :2
am Emma 58 mouaamnmaoa. mzo Emm mmrma E3 Em ?saga. aqmmwao?s
:mEom:ma 5 8 239 MZU am_o:ma 2H Ema rm? 5 303. :2
m:oEma 8 E18 _m:mnm. on m:oEma 8 328 urozm om:m.: mzo Ema Sm:
mmwma Eomm Emam Em 23 9852: 2 Wainurozm oa E18 _m:mE am a
m:o?ma 8. mzo m::.ma :m =2 8 ?<18 9 338 nzoam
om Sm ammimaoam on E5. dam aomaa mxuraama
8 mzo Em: Emam mam no ammimaozm on maa E2 rm
3.5% om SEQ amzma oa 338 mm BBQ u:o=m mm:m mm am E33. mzo
32:2 m?mnma E2. iam am aa zoomm Sm? mama. zmwumzma
2 _o=m :25 mmo_ Him Em?amam o::m O%m> comma mxuraama mzo
Em?zm aoomm Erzm 3 mo=m=m5m:_ a Soaz? omo nozmmamwma
mzo Emu. mmwma 3 3m 93? coma E3: on Ev. mm??
rm E38 =m95.. 83328 ?seams mzo 222. 8 3m Emaamwm om Sm coma
SB :53 Bow :mcomma Bow :m52% Ho :33 wocammrn _m mamo Ho aw ncmmaoz. mzo mzm?mama
9a. mmumn?m 3232 Em 3x8 2 m2U
Em ncmmaoz sm Sum 355. no 229 _.mu:ma 28 mxnaazma
8 mzo EB Sm Bmaama om Sm 09>, coma mm :2 am ma: ?903 o: 93?

. amnion. Mia 32 :m 33. mEomm_ m3. ammaao: Smam 3 Em mam OHO ea ma:

53:85? am 8 Epmr mzo mzzma 52 :m :=amB_S=am
lmz?. Ucaam Sm 8252 9:3 aomaa. Emm Em: _oE

Loezt-?a?utuuew
23680

. -. .. .. .

mE:o8n. 30:3 :25 man _u_mnP Emm Sm:o_< =oaEm: mzo ocm?onvr R33: won mama; mun
5.35 338 mo; . I Dzmm?

woman Eoanoam
Onommx waam
Gamma 9:2

.





woman
Woim? mm


we TOTE


oa >_oo


2: TOTMO mzo Emm 32 Em no
Bio?mn 3. 3m man >mmnm:3o_: woman O: _m
mo. Em mam one 3823 92 Um Emoon on mcnomomuamm 8
93% o3ono_._m_ oE_oE.m8 man mono: Ho?cmam
mzo Emm SE no 833: nqmmoi mHmEm man no
o: w_ nm=:mQ NE EB 8333 o:m3.n< man
358 3 mo? I wrmza

-
$9
7 m3J..

Ooc:mo_
Zo?om



>on
mm: 72.8

NS :a:a5_ A0 35:8? A: mzo Em Eooaw rzoaio? on
5 N2 man :o nmmcom zmonon _33on_m8 28:90:. mzo
223 Em: :o ma =womnEm s8_?a. mzo m_mo muoro Em mzowzoz. Pza Ooo_.n.om 0:
Hmacmi B5.

mzo En :2 3875 m3. uouonm 3 358 $9 man
Banyan nm_oE m?qmmo soar man Econ. mzo 5053 8 am: Em
?oln m=n coomcwo so an :9 mmaoo 21:25 m.B_nom. mzo
zwoon?wn an mamnnm Ema so nonmr?m 285 $03 :5
23250: om?moar 2:96 rm mamnm an SE0: a Q3238 mm
mzo. Emw m_mo oocnmonon E. 03 mmoE._Q 3383812

zo5a12?a5u!uuew
23681

EmoEmn:m:mm 953m Em nmm. ?mmw.

E19 8 Em Ezmmim? SE Em mo::mm_or m.:.mEm EmEmmcanm mm: Ema Edam? 23%. mzo _mnm_. Emma:
mEoE_:m Sssa E::mmE.. Ea s.E=m mnmm?sm 8
Em Em mcummsmon mag mam mam OHO Eam?ma Em
on mimam 1% mSEm. Uclsm Em 3553 EE Em mo::mm_o1 228
Em? Em ma :2 .=a2m?a E3 mEmEmio7 mZU.m mm_o_. mx?mimm mzo Em 2 Em. mam mB2..m
mo:mmE mam Em? 8 9.082 mzu $03 E_Emm_mm..Sn_ oEmam.
mzo ms?ma Em: Em ma :9 E5253 E3 Em 8&3 ?mo SEE
mo:mmE maosm Em mS2..9. E3 Em Emm Emmnm on 1% mSEm.
>mEm Eda 23% EmEm3on Ba mmgonm. mzzma Em:
Em Emm mam mam ma muumma E2 Em Emm 85m Em=. mam ERG
Emm mEmBQm_..
Eoox mEoE mmsmamm mam ma mEoS E.m8Em man Em
Eoox. mzo Emm Em: ?0.89 3m::m3mn_ m:2 m:_mEm_. I m._mEm

A8 Em mam OHO :49 EE Um? Kmsasm 2 Em mm; min .E:Em?mn_ Em
Ew mm?sm Em Emm aoim. Um?
Em: Em Emm moam Em=. mam Q0 mo:EEma Ev. mm?zm _s%S3
aclnm mzo Emom?m mmxm?ma mam
OHO SE mzo 8 ~m_mx. m: ao?s mam E_,mmEm. mzu m,S2ma
m?cnmasm. :m:Em Emm w3._m mac m?zasm E::mm: 3 Em Emma Emsam.
.m3 Emma: mam 3: moam 1_;Em mam OHO
SE mzo 8 am_mx mam 2:3 ao?s. mzo 82:23 8 miwm E.Bmm= ea m?ooa
cw mE:m1:m ea 3:32am 8 EE:mm_m3353
mzo Em: Em Emm Ezmmazm Em. Em Enema on msmam mzu

. Eomm Him Em: Em_.m Emm so zmma 3.. EB 8 Em Emnma o:
mimam 1% m$Em mam Em.? Em ma :9 Em Emm Emim cE:mEma
Ex Emmsm on EOH mSEm. 3 Emm 13m ozmm Emim ::.o3mma Em: Em Emm Emim
Enema on mimam mSEm. mzo 28328 8 zmmos?m Em mam CHO





4' I


23682

:9 3 co Enema o: mcwnam 1% m$Em. mzu Umomao 385.2 8 Em
8 3m mam mcn?imoq 3 SEEmam mam? cam? 5 3.3 32.. man oon?zoa m: onamam 3. wlm.
?rm mam OHO 32 So mam 8:89 03.: $022 .25 man Em: so
noam mom U2 Emzasm. mm moo: mm Om? mon?owmnowm
mzo, :5 win OHO mm? wuowo U2 Emsazm ma E30: :30 mzo
m_uo_om?ma 8 Sa mam OHO 31% 83%. 23 $332. .

A8 E3 m
. 9.52 Sum 538 Emm zxwoaamzama 8
cm 3338 HUOH vmvaamin mzu ?3
Esw?ma 3 En Qmwamomzoz mag woman on Hm_5:mQ 8:
man. sew 8 .633: 3 wow mBEm. ?rm mam Q33
:5 mam u2.a.v. EnoEBn:n_mAo: mam
mEu3
T5 mzo E3 3 02% $099 on 55$ 85 anon mzua
magma. 25% ea 059.2. 02: E092 8 En OE man. man.
33 U2 Hsmzazm 2.85 an Emoom 0: om
Ba 3__o?a Eu 3. _uo:mSoB_ 39:3 co

Rio?na 3.28 O?mmzmomsoz Ea momma oi?.
ME

NS TOTE m2_am?oQ NS 72.8 NS TOTNO E3. 3:E8m Emm aommoa Em ncm?oaz Ea mSEm


23683

Huoan
m::Q

Waio? mu


oa

an Simian 3 En ea >m2m=3o:mmomB 8&3. moa M. 4
Q8. Rani. MZU ma :2 :36 max ?833 aa ma :2 Epsom? 8 muvoma
came.? :5 comaman Rnoaamsmoa 8 an :wEo_u3EmBm anon Em Em" aoims. man :8 com: ms 963: mSooaamsaoa E2 mzo cm 833: 9.5.03: 333: ma


Eumm -
wolu
BE

Dogma.
Zo?m







M9 TOTE :E::8m mzo 88%: Em Emmi: Ezuaia? c: 2
.5253. N9 BE :3 so Emmcom E3 382. ::EaEm8 mzo an
:2 aonmmca BE Emo6:=mG nonozm on muo? man 8n_m?oa ma m:omaoma. Ea Em. moan ow Em Uoowm E08 rzwamasm mam Emacs: .83 MZU
mcorm 255 Em 98:22:: :38: mo :m ow: Ema: Sn no:_wma :mm_88m=
o:mE_Eo:m::u mason :a 323% Qdozm r_:B 2:5 ow ?am:
Ea mB.a=3 9: :So_8r mzo 2.53% 8 :9 E2: 8 .5
S?m?m :5 man. on Ea E28332. 3: ma =oH_ _=Em8 m3. 9.
En no:noE.8o:m 822% Uclsm. Em nocamm om Ea MZU 23 En:
macro: man noamn. man Em amaomzoa Emm nostm?ms? Em
3232 n:mSo8~. H023: .

Ema 2a_?8 3 03% Eon?a on 4 No: man. 32:9
Emm @838 mzo Ema 88332.58 8 cm
_.m3ooxuoo?oa 8 :o 3. 02: E029 mm?? on E. 32:93? E:



EJE -
Hum;
ma:

0o::mo_
Zo?mm

NS 79.8



Mo_

NE 79.3 razaca 5 9.55%

.


A3 MZU aoonrxwa Em Eon./.J\ 0: Hm::mJ\ No: may :mn_ :0 Ewmcom
Em: zonnoa mzoznoz. mnmana SE :a ma Sonia no::=m=q

..

906zv"a5u!uUew
23684

Em: Em: Ema: MS: Emm Em coca? 0::m8::mq M5:
Em Dag.? >_mS5w 95:. Eoo_8_._a. mz: m_mo ruoww
m:o33n Umsa Ooo3:m o: mo UmomE:m_. M05. m2: :5 :2 ~_oo9n:mn?::mQ 8:05 o: mvo: NS: m: <81:
U:1Em: :ww:mn_ 38:30:. U:1:m 3:8:
:m Emm :wmn::m moQo_om_< Wow: :5 w1m::EG N5: Em: mnoww
no::mm_9. m:oS mo:58 Sm: :m aomm :5 mg: aowm :2
. oo:noczmocm 8 2:2. U:1:m mz: Emm Em: m:o_8:w 335353

. 35 8:82 Em :m3n::9. Emw no:m.m:m:: :5 m:mEQm.: I


AB 0: buss?? we 7 mam uoGo:m:< 39 U2 W:
Tomqmam ommoo. mzo mamamom:m Ems. Em: Em :non_m 59.0 So: NE: SE :a ?3 2023
m2: :3 :o 9 oo:oQ:m Em: Roam: Em mam OHOJ
38:30:.

Ev mzu Sum :2 Own: 2023 o: mo M9
. 33$. Ema 3.mxunorwa 8 :6 03: $029. 3.2: o: 1.: 3:53 ME H. mzu Emm
Simian :8 m:n_ >mmwm:Em:: woman o:
Ema zwooaawzama 8 833: 3 mo: .25 02.82
Em ms: :om3.m Mj_n_
m2: 8 SEE: mm :mS:_mw. H:a mam OHO m:m893% m2: W: :m_m:8:mn_ mwnE:< 3:39 rm. om
E5. m2: ooEE2om Em :33. :m
amio?ma m:n_ woman :92 .qm::mJ.

Mo:.

9o6zv?af3u!uuew
23685

T: Ema o:0 309:0: 59:02 om :0Eo:m:mn0: :z
U0. O: A 3:53 N2 Emm ea 8
30: :0m::m :23: o: 30 0:02. .

M9 TOTO: mz: Sum 5220: Em. n:m8:<
:0 :w 30 :25: 8:3 3.
:3 H0305. mz: :2 :3 n_:0m:o:m :5 :2 8p:0m.

- mama: . . . .
:05 Z0305 mm . mo: TOTO: M02670H0330: $03 m2: :3 :2 900020n3:_0Em 2:00 :5 Em? 850$. :3 :00: m: 9.03: m<0$mm _m
m2: :0 0:m8:v.. 0033: 830.: 5
I 900. w_0:_m
mo. 79 -0: mzo Emm 3:30: 251% n:m.o:v.
$55: :0 33020: :2 >mm:m:a:0:H :02: 8:3? 3; 4
- :3 H0302. mz: E: :2 :m<0 :3 n_c0m:o:m :2 ~0n:0__mH 8 3:03
WEE woma: . . . . .
:01? mm mo: mm:m_qm2oQ mo: TOTO: :0.qoa0 n:0 mz: Emm 05.5.0: :2 :20 n:
. on U0o0:.:nn0m0:?0: :3 _u8:_0Em 2:00 :5 Km? n05 a ~0noEB0::0: m2: :0 H033: ZEN mop
8.: I 050: w_0:_m
No. T070: mzu Emm Em 0:m8:% mSEm
:55: :0 83050: womm: 8:3? 3.. 4
H0502. m2: :9 :m<0 :3 2:0m:o:m E: n0n_:0__w. 8 magma
:0:.oq0 woma: :2 n0oo330::0: 8 :0 HUGH. MZU :mw
mm :2 0.5.3 on mo: bro: u?0m0:H0: 03? 3:00 Em _mm. 3302 :3 :00: m: 9.03: m<0Bm0
m3J, W0m::m :0Bm:00. 0:3 m2: :0 H.053: 3.2% H053:

333: 3 mo? IOv.mmZw:0:mm

L06zv?a5u!uu9w
23686

we AS mi: 80076: Em 28:? on
mm UaomE:mq ~05 ma: :3 so amcmm Sm? .538 ::3ma.E8 mzo
Emma: Sm: :w ma 882m 83325 2.5: SE 2mm: mam 2mm :2 Em A
nocmwz. Wo:m: >_mS5m. 9.52 Em 2mm_8:n_. m2U m_mo muoma :3
mzoasaw. Uni: 0ooB:m on 8 Umnm3:m_Emozm on maHa Rue? Em maze: :m mm: moon.
28.85: Ea Em: 2mm. mzva 2mm
m:_m 8 mma MZU W: m:oE oo?nczu.
ma: mmman. 383.: BE mason Ema :0 mm: mm moo: mm? :m ma Sm.
2mm 38:3 .58 nosmsmamsn m:om_d Ozmssoo. mzo 2mm :2 Oman
E0082 on Mm Uoom:_:w~ 86 man. 32:9. Swarm. 2mm
manna: m2: 8 :m qm:6n_mwm5nmno: $03 mm oxumo?a co :m
3 Om? E0082 on we UmnwB:oq ~05. 23 84.913 o: 8
UnnmE:mn M05 3 Em ms: woman 00:31 . . 8 3:55 5 :9 mSEm. H:m 038. oosoc?aa :6
Zo?m Mo_o-_N-Nm >22: ms: :om&.m mam mzo

8 E333m: mzu 8:53 3 :m.m:8:na 30:12 mBEm. rm. an 3.33:

mzo no:6_m8m uosawam 3:5 :33. mzu 25 :0 :2 So
mam woman: on we Uono3:na ES.
MZU 2mm 8m_umn3.__ mam 955% So 38:302. MZU muvnmqoa 8

:0 5 moon. =58 noaumnoa 8 :5 22?: man Em qnammsoq 2rm oosmr?os?

=o2=m_ n:uSn8?. mzu muumuam n_,Qm_nuE\ mum

ma: mzu m?zmm :3 :m mom: mam

I m._mE.m



A8 O: mm _uanm:_:m~ N03. Sm mam OHO E2 62 32.33% .5
H:m mqomqmam 2:8. mama: 8 :m mam OH0 Em: 2mm
mowzm. 2m:. Em: Em naamm 2:8 Ban mam :m 2mm :.am8m
MZU :3 :0 5:3 o?nozomazm Em: 3.5 _w1m 1



. 2550:.

,2

eosatfa?uluuew

23687

Bu .258 Emm ozm 80038 3052: om EEm:m_ cmsmioa amaoam?m?a 3.
Co?

T3 0: 8 Umooacwa 85. 32.2.8 8 :mom: moo?mq mule. mzu sum Emqcoma 8 Emwm E129. mE83m:. mmism
:m Emm 983% 8 =2 8nw_no mo. Emm .29 no::mm_wn_ 3 02mm. w_m3m .1: En Elna:
mS.mBm2 _m =2 %um:2_ 8 an 388. 9: oz? 2:

mzo m?mnmq .5 csamanoou mum 55:5 338 Sn ?122. MSSEQ. .

5 :5

ma: 3



00:26.
Zo?w

Mo5-Hm-_ m.



No. o- M-MM

3 AC mzo qonorxoa Em Eoo?x o:
Umooacoa M05 msa :mn_ :0 wmmcom sooaom _B:_on:m8 mzo
ma :9 Sonia max m:wo?::mJ\ Bnozm on mqcoao muo? ea
~noommzo mS8n_ :51; Sum mowzm Em: Ea Ea so oa nosomnsm.
Sum 252 9:3 :5 2a .2522. :0 .2889 5
Emm noczwocm 2.5: m=mEw1:m U5 mmmzm?oa. an no. .5 maw oo:Emm 8 $33: on mBEm. Om? Ioonmq Smamrsm 8:518
Ema mzo 2mm :2 nomsm Sn: 9.. Emm so. mwmo?n. Sum Ew ma. Q30
anon B. >:m:mn M05 Sm amnoaawzqom E20 8 an on
E3 mSEm. mzu Emm Sia?ma on .0 Umowac?. 8. 3. :5
man >mm_m=Bw2 woman. man Emm Bnoaamzuma 8 883: 5 WOH mSEm. .25
mam 0309 nosnc?mu SE. Sm Ea roman:
ea m_uv3mzo SE cm 333$ 3 :8 m=n_ wmoma :82 o:
3 Umomiuon M05- mzu mm BE Em manna:
Ea won? Ema oo_._m_m8E Em mzo



606zv?eI5u!uUew
23688

E3 308 :23 53 Sam? mzu Wm ozom mm?? mm :m :3
com: 5 En om Em nonmzmawi. waam

Ev Hsmwo Ewan 3% 5 :6 mania Em3_._ Emcoow Um"
3530..

A3 O: Umnmacma NOS. mzo Emm oUmm~
AS O: 0 Uonoacaa mg MZU. Emm ocmmiaa .: Em .26 magma
Eoadmw Swan :6 Q5. Emm mmwwa :05. so Emm mat Ozmm.
22% Emm Em. Emm noEUmE.c_m 8 :33:

A3 0: 0 Uonm?c? B5 Emm maao?m?a mzo Una:
032,3 Emism :Ummw-m-?oo: :8 am: 21207.

x- . AS 0: U. Uonaacoq N9 o. $03 >3mwo:.no3 Emm 8 :5
., A mam 3. 83.23% Eolnoa Ero unaiocm noncomn 3 nmowmmo 3 D2 man. 383 Emm :0
3 m?o: 3 En mam OHO. mcocn
mam Em: an U9 Emnzim Ewan 2mm
:9 3.58 2 BE 9: Eocms? EB 33.? Bmaconm 33 cm moaozzsm
95 8 3m ?00.55 9:33. 55 _m Umwzm ?a 8
$32 95 8 :8 52:51: 232.. Emm Sn?cmu _3oE_?n_ma om :5 umormmo 3 mzc. mam 25.8 Ema so can.

. m_uu3
oL6zv"a6u!uuew

23689





T: O: E. Uonoacaa B. o. MZU Emm Era: 9: om Ea 32:; 826033?
930500 no Hue: gamma 5 _omm_ mwmomz?aonr a

A8 0: Uonmacna NOE. Emu v3one Bonn UEOE.

93

Uonoacoa x0823 uroam om: $03 Umia Ooo?qm. mzonsmm.
9v 5 Uoomacna No.0? oo3:.m?nEnm_ Sm: no:c:_c8n_ cm 03: Eon?a mam CO2

. mmam 03:02. $03 Wag.

EV Umnmz?ma No.0? Ramona. Em: 3.03 Nova: /Am:



A3 5 Umoa?caq wmnoima im: 3.03 03.5 mo_:mm. Rea.



.



23690



Ed: -



Oo::mo_
Zoam

N: 0.. who

>35

N: o- Pom

50-5-8 A: mzo So9no Dmnm?cmq MOS m:n_ E: :0 32.3 ::3on::S mom2:358. MZU m?Sa Em: :o Sonia
Smvia Eocmo 95: 2S
2038:? mzo m_mo 25083:2 M05. mzo n_E :2 S095 Suozm

muo? m:n_ Soo_Suez. U:1:m. ES mzo 2:8: Em mzo Emm comm. :0 33:2 om:_S Sm:
:5 ?So_S:n_ 3:8 Em .Em omm? :13? GE ronnm Saw .3:
an o39: Ema. Y: 2.5. 28:. m2: 9: :9 23% moor, EH: Emm
_oo::o1:m. E3. ma 35 DD M5 Sncom?m n_:1:m En umm. EOOW.
?ow :2 Emm Sncam? 5 _uoowm 8 on 3 ES :03:
mo .5 33 S875 moan :85 $03 Em 933.. .26 Emm Sncomn 3:
m: oBmamS:n< RES 3: 8 Em 52%? SmmR::m. :5 S8 aom
was. M20 :3 :9 2:2 8 n:mo:mm 2.5 Sumo: 31:; Sm_:mm1uE UQSS
32 ES Sumo: a Emo Sm mm ES Sumo: mom mzo mEoom::_m Eummr mzo
Emm 9.528 3 02% E029 o: Ba. 32:3
5.55:: Emm 9333 :aoomm:Q. mzo Eom 8 on
S::oSo Hug $03 ummnamin mS:n_n9:rm mzo a
9686: 3 an 3 E093 o: mm mo 5- mzo
Sum SESE3 o: 383:2 N05 3 :5 Ea
momma m:n_ Emm 8 SEE: W: HUOH m_:Em. .26 mam 0309

So m:a >mmr.w:Eo:H com_.a.m Soo_EEo:n_m:o:

. m:n_ mzo 8 mm HUGH QSEESS. m2:: 3: do

3:928 3 ES Ba :83 232.0: .8 USSBUQ
M05. OSS: mzo Emm 3m:85__ ms: n_:1:m ES
mzo mmoama coma? m:n_ Em ao?omooa ?Sam SE: Em
o__:SoSn mzo 2:8: :a 8mm :25: :3 moo :mm :0 2.5.3:

Enm:o:m. w_o_:m



zLezv"a5u!uuew

23691

29? so 3838 Seamus om :m:mUm.

CV O: UmoQ::9 NED. mzo OE o?:w 92.5 0: 83uo_.9<
m:mm=UonmB:9 N05. W20 23 $32 a
ozm Emma E:o2.

Gv O: 5 UooQ::9 .85. H:o cam mm? 09:02. 3828 ms
v:o=w am: $03 55% En w1m.m Smzim :o9m.m:n_ mS::m. E2 m:a

29.: :n 855 8 3: U2 gmsazm. :5 cam E238 O25
235:0: 3:82 2 2:8: can 2o3m= :oom3o :38 mB:=m. m:o 23
BEUS9 Ea 8:8 25: 2:oo<9 :0 22.8 2:339 m:m 2p: m. 2oBm=
mac man: U2 a 25o?:o mam Ea :o.mm= awmo1:m 203:: 3:58
8 903:0 :9 3250 man 8530 Ba m:o 29.5 :0 .530
3.922 mun. coma. 8:9 no::_Eoa .0 ammo :9 <98 2 2:3:
:25 H:o Ea $31.58: :5



0: mo UmnoE:9 mo Q. Em mam OHO v9mo:m:v. 39 gmsazm 3
H:o wnomnm?m O:mo_:m 3:8. 2.28 So Em OHO Em: 2mm
momzm 2m=. Em. Em smmam 29m Ba. ma :0 2mm 28.8

. mE9ow1m8_
mzozsoa.

5
3366292 8

Ad o: No Uanwacmn ~05. Em OHO 622 35038
Ermmam. n_mm3m 3 an m: T03 mm: _om_m_ 09.136
Emma oxvqommom :5 3.25% oosoansm om mzoa no:n.::o:m ea

35 Em: mzo 33.55 Eola mam nozamamsm onuozczinm.



.



FEE 5::;om mzo Emm aosma Em: Em 258% mam mBEm

cm Simian 3 :5 mam SEQ moa 4

amv. $308. mzu ma :2 :m
EUE - woman . . . .
ma. 2:2. mm 25-5232:3 m?no Em Ema man. Em raw: ms o.5 3833258 3 S33: ncm.83_.: ?mama wow
mam SS3: 3 MOL. 03%
~20; PE :53 mzu 29.. 3258 20:5 co 3 26 man. woma 532 2: 4
- woman . . mum Rios. mzo an :2 :m. . R38 :6 coma. mzo Emm 3 :5 mmHuwsq. an No_o-_m-_o om .>Uo. . . . .
Eoimaw m?om Em Ema Esm? mam rum 3% ms 953:
. Rooaamsgma EB cm 833: EPA oc?onar SEE: mow mam
833: 3 mo; . I Owwm?
M. 85-518 no mzo $nom. 985Doc: 22,3 rm $3 9.3 Er mom _.mnm7.m
val. Zozwwm mo_o-_m-oq 59 ma mm o.mM._mm 8 8:52
m3Q . 0 Roma mzo mS8n_ sn :3 no Bmcom znoamm mo:o:

$03 Em noE3m=n_ 9: 3; 23m _5 29.: E8 8 mmn::o:m_

man 833: :23 Ba Ema. :92 noacm: E:_:om _:wo__mm Em

vL5zv?a5u!uu9w
23693

Q3 :2 _.wnn7.m zwuo?m ow mn_Bnmwmzo M323 .5 Ema qomzm man :3 :o ~:oZn_:m 2. nozrumqzm. MZU
2m:2_ Em. Em Snowman. Emm m_oE mam ?52 Em: Ian. mzu
mom?om 8 an M: @032. Soon FR Snow wan Ewm Bonn S:8:
. 9.50 co?cmzm 2 won: Emzuo? mzo Ewe W:

moor: Ea mza zm olmmz. M20 m??a rm :3
can: m_oE_v. nmm?zm :5 magaqa >_:m1nm= 7.: 33:0. main; mi
323. mzo mm 3: 2 noznmn cmm_8Em__n :m :9
max ?ma man 3.2. Em. rm 0:3. H1o__oEm ?own?


mzo Sum 3? Om? E029 0: 98:62 M05
35:2 39.5. o
an B3omx_u.m2nn_ 8 co 3 mm? E023 on 5 Umnnacmq N9 0.
23 535.2. o: M05 3 En ea
woman. Ba Emm aonoaanzama 8 333: 5 HUOH m.mEm. ?rm mam O32:

En ea

. EH. mEu.no
22528 3 Em 0.9320930: woman. o: _5 Umnw?con
N90. Wm aowzm. in: man :3 no 33252
mzu E5 ooczmocm man. mvowo: mam rm moon. $5 8:59.
mzoa Boom ormamnnoa Emma nozamams. Em oswnmo?a nogmm.
waam

A

9

23694

Emm ozm 9.2% 3% E: :5 mioam Emma: _omcoo_n U2
?m=E=m.m amigo: O: 985.5 ~05. mzo Emm uommam 2,5 mmxmam Em
:Emn_om E: $02. 2 2.6 3:81: Em

Ed: -
val.


woman
Wmin? mu


we O- Pom


oa >Uo
No ~01 Pom

~Eo-_m-cm FEE ::=Emm mzo Sum Em 958% wwa m.mEm
55:5 an Sia?nm 3. En mam woman. .on_m< as as.
En. :m333 Sn coma. Emm nea 3833258 8 cm 8SoE.oEmBm mica Em Ema 859: on mam sum can: ma oEm Eno??ozama EB mzo an ERA n:m8&: EBB: wow ea E33:
5 w_nEm

-
wan


Oo:=mw_
Zoamm



~Eo-:-mo

>035

85-5-8 .

85-5-8 :E=Enm mzu Bantam. Em Sonia 0: mo
Zom$8n_ so Rowing noBBw:a am: $03 mm" Em. Swan 23

. ma no. Rania 3Q umnmoz? En swarms? ma qwomra

SQ Emn?::mJ\ Ruozm om maEoln Ea Ucazm Em mzo mxzwa E3 :0 Sum
man. =0 mzo 223 .33 Em si?a Emm
?52 man. nm_mx.5m. msaa 35 rm ma _.mnnmom moaamo >523?: SE9 .3 sum comcan: N50. aoowm ea 3 3E.5m? ._2m8:mm
.m_mSnow 95 3 :5 238.5 ea :6 win m.mv_oEmEmH..m mcmoaom.

A mzo nxuao?a 8 an man: 3. En mam mm
N9 0. mzu Emm :9 85029$26.5. MZU SE Easnsa cm
:6 wan wsa :92 0: Umomaa?. N05. mzo
Sum :53 9:2 Em: cmca Ba 2333 3

Sim: 3:2. sum rm mmzma mm_m5 SE .5 Emm ..

aoim in: ma HE no u3EmBm. O53: mzu w_d.mEnm__< mvnomzom man

9 Lezt-?a?uluuew
23695

an E3 mwowmz. WZU Emm oo.E:..o:m Ea zwmum?r: Ur: Em udooa Emm
35: Iowmm? w?im A

zoamm?

.. AS :9 on minim 221.. Sn mam 02.83 W: Ozmwma mum 9323
F: A 52 max EEm:m_ on ::o::on_ox $312 n:mEmBnonama 3 :6 mioam ?20: Emcoor.

AB 1:53 23 Q3 Ewan 5 :8 macaw $58: Emaoor U2
carmioa. O: No No.0. mzu Emm ocmmi?a 5
on :5 .3201: Em 00:. A

CV 43? OHO muuaocaa U2 mm: 8 rm AS2528
2:30.: Ba .3583? 2 En mim. OHO. mam Sm Ouaamaozm
A A A 033.. 332NOEL 78 5 35:2 MZU Zunmmcaa Em 23% on Mm
A 2033.5 ~05 mac :3 no ._mm:mm Em: zmmama mzo

A ?maa 52 so Ea .mo?
EBno::mm_ . A 83. om Em mm nonco?oa Em ooaamza Sm: o: 5. 20,532
228 N9 o. 2.5 No.0- Tum A M05. mzu ma Rania SQ n:mo:u:=mQ Bnozm on mm
a. . .
Em MZO 3.8; SE .5 Sam in: man umoEm3m 9

mzu an :9 302 HQ ammwm 8 3 oo=
Em Em: cmim. 8 mzoec 33 :m mama: 8 an an 8 383:,

?I'll .


23696

ea ?m?m :m qomm :2 ma: coama Em mzo ma W38 an E3
m?oiam Sm M92520 >Bm1nmm=o.Emn_ Rom?n mzo 5.2 32 rm :mm
.52. Em.oE_._m 8.0390: Em?mzw ea Eam 8 San: ncimi 9.538. :5 SE
0930.55 HQ 28:30: 5 05$ uwomamam Em?maa oz2o m: 5 so 8Bo3232 Bass: mzo mm nxumosma
Um _.mimEmn_ 3. :5 0: mm Zo~mms; 23 amnoa?mzgma no 333: W: HUOH mBEm. .H:w mam oaqa? 8:258
Em aa UomR_.m Enoaanzaxnmz Ea

mzu no 333: mm HVOH

.. .

Ucasm En mzo 23 En: mwowoz Ea ooczaocm. mz?dm
ea Em 25:52 min. m?soa Sm: rm
sum .5 Eomsozm. Imam,

zoamm?

AS 0: mm Zo?acmn N05. Emm 2:8: 9: 2 :6 _qmo:E_ or 83.55%
8 mo: w1
.



..
. A8 0: N05. mZU.m nocam?oa Emm :_mo_.Emn_ 3. _m Bmacma om
. So 3952 mB2..:m: 95$ 3 mzva

9L6zv"a5u!uuew

23697

oozac? :3 com: csozzoaox W:

Qt mzu :3 won: o_umoa
ad MZU :8 can: oammn
mnEm_ Ea mxmaaoz.

Q3 mzo cam: o_ummn2 Eamim.

EV mzu :3 _umm= o_umm2mn_ So am; 8 Em no: 2 mam.

a

78 Sum 3.58 32 am 058% mi 5%

Eoc? am 33928 we :5 8:0: ea >m&m=Bm2 wom_d__ .83. 3.
Q3 Sims. as :2 max ?2.33 Q3 so. 8 mvumma

Baa - . . . .
wanm mo. 933 :5 comaman. Wmm::m . 9 >33 2oHamming EE u_.oEo3m mmzno Em Em. Sims o: Ea com: 2; oWm Bnoaa?amq EB MZU cm 833: EPA 2583:
353: wow min 333: waam
.. . .
4 3 Hm Em Eoo?v. o: 5
EA: - 00:33 . 20,539NOEL iooiw noS3m=n_ Sm: Ema 28w E3 Ema Sm:on_
ZoMSG. .. 3. :5 m5: 952% Eamwozq. ma :2 ~mno_


wacoam muoa ea 8omm
6
23698

. uoam. waam

Uclzm Em mzo m.m.mQ Em. an Emm ao.=m En: mam Em. .5
9.. 233: .:.ma.UU MS .25 mamcmomcmo. .5 _uo:m_m.mm. Emm ::mEm 8 cm no:.mo.ma mo Em Oon?mzz Own.
Emm 3. Qwmm. w?mim o:

A No.353. om

no::dm:n_ mam Eozzolzm Smzmm3. mzno o. 02.52 Em
noSEm:._ man so 53. B?mwm 5.02 So ?30? a
.30 83523 Emm Ewe 5.0.58 Em. Km?.
v1<=wmmn_ mum mam 3038.8 Em _uw:oa mo.:m:oE Bo3.o::m. Em noscmamzozm 4:5 Em
3.2.8 DU MS 23 waacmm. .0 :wn.w..o ma?a? >Sm:nm= .25 Epsom. Sum MAE mzca
.. .o >mEm Em DU 5.3
mam ma mroEma Em. Emir. 95 .0 En mam
mdmoanm. WZU Emm o: .M No.6 3. :5
man. momma ea Emm .3 3:3: .:
_uO. ?rm o.m8. oosn?m .30 03.5350: Ea mmamsaos.
woman man. .033: Em Eamon. m.m.:m om Uclsm in 3.9.302
mzo imm .omumo..nE ea ooczoocm mag 23 En: muoroz. mZU._m ea
anammzo. :58 Em 233.: n:m.mo.ma?

weed
Wnias. mm
.~omE.m



mm.m?qmo.oJ.
om .brUc


SEE: .90.. m=n_ 853: .3 1 0.: E30:

185- 3-5 309:8 OOZOCW - oamoiwrmza

No.0- .73 352.3 MZU Emm :0 Ema Em 2.20% m.m.:m

55:3 .5 Simian. 3. En mag momaa .83. .2
ma ~15. 25 so. .o muuamw

:5 Emm E. :6 0: 5 20/.

. No.0 mum 3833258 .0 33.3: o: MZU rum m3.

1.0503,. Anon. Em Em. Rios o: 20?. No.0 mam rum om
oz6zv'a6u!uuew

23699

EVE -
Human


Oo::mo_
Zo?nm



>275

85-2-5

. No.0; 3 mzo Sagan. Em 28$ 382.2. on

Zoso. Bnmra mam zwvozm mm_ms m5% momzm Em: ea Ha =0 nosooqzm :5 3:m3? ocaam ow so 28 MZU 8
39: 38330: on mam? 23. mm:

A muumma no on noim? ummzm F3 8 Ucanm En mzu Emm

mam noczoocm mam Ema En: muowoa. mzoa mzzcan mwa Qnammzoa
Ewan <13 Em :o2=m_ nsmamonwa Ea mm :9 mania. I

.

208%

AC O: Zo8 E70 :3 Una Gamma

. Sm E_uo_.8? Ea m?mzwa mZU.m imzmsos mm :2 Smzna

. wzoioamo Ba En noazo?oa 1235.: 55:5 co
.. anon? ?8 8 no:BQ 2.5 aim. 038 E3 awn. m3.

noznozra. nommanzzm U9 Emzizq.

Oocsmi
202%



>275



85; Tom 3 33:5. mzo Em Sonia 0:
Zomin; Em: so ma 38:5 Em 23.3. noaamza 29% 38:8
:0 _un~mo:m_ imzm Ea 28_8.a. O: No 0282 M05 _,wZUwuo_8
Em U33 Oooacm. oHQ n:mn?::mJ\ mm? man _.mo9Eoln mam ammo? MZU 2536 Emu 9.5

. . .
55: ea Emu .95. M20 m:oEon_ so anazw no

. 3 Ed. mama T2: :05. so 63 aomam man 2 Em mzowznm Ea
3:3. 8 39? ?Bass: 383: 3 m3. 3

mam? mag mm: muunmam 8 on 8:82 am a 338:?.

mzu Emm n


23700



35a 9 8 3 :w3oE2392. mza 8:22. on So 33? amzw cw Em
mam woman man Emw
m$Em. .25 wlm. 039$ ooaocqm :5 mam

comaa man. _.n3mm: Em .?mEm om vow. Uclsm :5

. mzo Emu a%83__ mam no::no:m mam Emu Em: msojma. mzo
. mEummwm Ho rm 3 Em: 2113 man. 376 mom_3
E03 oo:m_m:wE Em :o2:m_ n:mEn8_mEnEm_. waam.

zoamw

2V 0: 0282 N05. :8 mam OHO misoluma D2 Emaazwozm
mn_n::o:m_ om nozdmuozanznn 33? 33. .

.

0: 0232 5. MZU Emu Swan 9: on ma ::mo:oa:_oa_ 83uoEQ

8 mo? 292.9 :5 3. wm_
ooimoaa So mam 3. Emmnocr Sm E5

. mmoozm 3:3 no 203% Umghmazwzm owes. Um.?

ozm can .55: cue: Em 8 En mam.

3.5 -
Human.


woman
Wmimcc .


~oE-:-om


o_1 >co
..

Tom Eoema Wosn?ma mum 8:9: - 05% was:

Tom 33:2; MZU Emm 5233 Ema Em ncm?oaw A3 mBEm
55:5 an 8:928 cw :5 Ea woman. 83% won 9
mum 8505. ma so? :38 8% E333 .25 ea :2 5 muca?

. 833 Sn coma.833: on wow rum :2 Eamms?am paw u8EmEm
anon Em Em. Bso? on 0282 N90 man. rum cam: ms m
zz6z1z"95u!uuew

23701

7.. 3003302000 32 mzu _0o SEE: EPH nc?oqmm ESE: wow

man. 830.: 3 I OE 3:00:

85-. mzo Emm 20.500 Em 0:303. aa

?050 00 30 M50 womafoamw

I 03. 2.232. mz0 ma :9 :36 ?52.03 man 03 Eczema 5 00003

. an 80020 03 n:wo:0::mJ. Buozm on ?00moan. Waio? m? mo_o-_o-mo ~90; Tom _09qo_.n En comma. Emu 3 So No Q2009.
m3J. 0.. >_00<0 . NOE 0:0 700005005000 .0 00 3E01 un0E0.dm E200 Em ?mm. .0302 0: 00.0.09. N05 man :3 _000:_ 0:

I m<0Bmm 003500. 5 3 8003302000 EB 00

.. . ESE: mow mam 350:1: I 90% waam

FEM: mzu EB .5323 Em: Em 0:203. ma msem

?050 00 8305.00 3. E0 0:0 w0mR__ 803. 3. 1..
EUEH - woman. I 002 SE06. MZU 90 03? @0030: 3.0 ma .0 30003

val We . MOE. Hobo mo. o-_o mm 0038 30 0003. MZU Emm 3. :5 503232 MN 02000..
man. 5 I on >005 . - N90 mam .0 00 830,60 $03 wow mzo =3 038380 mam
.. u~0_0_n3m 9:00 310% wnio?. 0: 3 09009 NOS man :3 000.? m: 053:

.0 . m<0Emn 0 9.2 020 00 ESE:

BEE: man 853: 5 I 000% ms;

M05- Sam FEB 5353 mzo Emm 20:33 32 :5 2.3% mg mSEm

. 20:5 00 330200 0% E0 0:0 momma 8030 mama . . aux 020 ma 320 max man. 90 Bn_:om_. 8 2000?:

val. Wmio? ma . moHoLo 3 No.95 mm _0Qo0_.o :8 0003. mzu Emm 3 En mam _umma: 0 - I 0a >095 I - mos mam 800339.000 8 00 850,60 $03 ~09. mzo :8 mi
0. uao_0_mSm 2:00 Em Fm; 3305. 0: 02002 No5 2.0 :mm 000: E. 083:

. m<0Emo 005300. 5 Wm ..nooSEo:0on_ Em: 00 SSE:

I . mow 0:0 Ozmmn . . -. . . I
mI we B:_Emm mzu B00760 Em E023. rzm?iai 0: 6
09003 N05 M50 Ea :0 038 3&8 mz0 E080
Sums - . 00:80. . 33 so 90 80020 Em 20%? o0::=Ea 32 Km? 22% man :0 <35
wean mos- 5-5 .9275 85.8.8 033:0 E01820. :3 Ban :0 080:3 50:0 omzm 9: Q3 muomx
. Z080 . . . . . . 0 .0 0

mad? Em Em 25:0: UNZE 00053 98.. En 200:0 0: 3 008.09? No.9.





Hmnordq m: 0.008. m
23702

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING AND ARRANGING RECORD OF TRIAL
USE OF FORM - Use this form and MCM, 1984,
Appendix 14, will be used by the trial counsel and
the reporter as a guide to the preparation of the
record of trial in general and special court-martial
cases in which a verbatim record is prepared. Air
Force uses this form and departmental
instructions as a guide to the preparation of the
record of trial in general and special court-martial
cases in which a summarized record is authorized.
Army and Navy use DD Form 491 for records of
trial in general and special court-martial cases in
which a summarized record is authorized.
Inapplicable words of the printed text will be
deleted.

8. Matters submitted by the accused pursuant to
Article 60 (MCM, 1984, RCM 1105).

COPIES - See MCM, 1984, RCM 1103(g). The
convening authority may direct the preparation of
additional copies.

12. Advice of staff judge advocate or legal officer,
when prepared pursuant to Article 34 or otherwise.

ARRANGEMENT - When forwarded to the
appropriate Judge Advocate General or for judge
advocate review pursuant to Article 64(a), the
record will be arranged and bound with allied
papers in the sequence indicated below. Trial
counsel is responsible for arranging the record as
indicated, except that items 6, 7, and 15e will be
inserted by the convening or reviewing authority,
as appropriate, and items 10 and 14 will be
inserted by either trial counsel or the convening or
reviewing authority, whichever has custody of
them.

13. Requests by counsel and action of the
convening authority taken thereon (e.g., requests
concerning delay, witnesses and depositions).

1. Front cover and inside front cover (chronology
sheet) of DD Form 490.
2. Judge advocate's review pursuant to Article
64(a), if any.
3. Request of accused for appellate defense
counsel, or waiver/withdrawal of appellate rights,
if applicable.
4. Briefs of counsel submitted after trial, if any
(Article 38(c)).
5. DD Form 494, "Court-Martial Data Sheet."

9. DD Form 458, "Charge Sheet" (unless included
at the point of arraignment in the record).
10. Congressional inquiries and replies, if any.
11. DD Form 457, "Investigating Officer's Report,"
pursuant to Article 32, if such investigation was
conducted, followed by any other papers which
accompanied the charges when referred for trial,
unless included in the record of trial proper.

14. Records of former trials.
15. Record of trial in the following order:
a. Errata sheet, if any.
b. Index sheet with reverse side containing
receipt of accused or defense counsel for copy of
record or certificate in lieu of receipt.
c. Record of proceedings in court, including
Article 39(a) sessions, if any.
d. Authentication sheet, followed by certificate
of correction, if any.
e. Action of convening authority and, if appropriate, action of officer exercising general courtmartial jurisdiction.
f. Exhibits admitted in evidence.

6. Court-martial orders promulgating the result of
trial as to each accused, in 10 copies when the
record is verbatim and in 4 copies when it is
summarized.

g. Exhibits not received in evidence. The page
of the record of trial where each exhibit was
offered and rejected will be noted on the front of
each exhibit.

7. When required, signed recommendation of
staff judge advocate or legal officer, in duplicate,
together with all clemency papers, including
clemency recommendations by court members.

h. Appellate exhibits, such as proposed instructions, written offers of proof or preliminary
evidence (real or documentary), and briefs of
counsel submitted at trial.

DD FORM 490, MAY 2000

Inside of Back Cover

e-Highlighter

Click to send permalink to address bar, or right-click to copy permalink.

Un-highlight all Un-highlight selectionu Highlight selectionh