Title: Volume FOIA 081

Release Date: 2014-03-20

Text: 26026

Volume 81 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 ?surrimarizeo? 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



26027

We happen to think that 3 months is a long time to languish in a brig awaiting an
opportunity to confront one's accusers, and we think Congress thought so, too.
Four months in the brig is even longer. We see nothing in Article 10 that suggests
that speedy-trial motions could not succeed where a period under 90 or 120
days is involved. At the same time, we recognize that there are many
circumstances thatjustify even longer periods of delay. However, where it is
established that the Government could readily have gone to trial much sooner than
some arbitrarily selected time demarcation but negligently or spitefully chose not
to, we think an Article 10 motion would lie.

38 M.J. at 261. Here, the time PFC Manning has spent languishing in pretrial conf1nement~ 845
days as of the date of this motion is unquestionably a long time. The Government could have
gone to trial much sooner than the currently scheduled 4 February 2013 trial date, if only it had
understood its basic discovery obligations from the inception of this case and did not have to be
corrected by this Court 698 days into the case. Therefore, an Article 10 motion lies in this case.
See id.

314. It should also be pointed out that the Govemment?s failure to understand basic discovery
rules continued at virtually every motions argument. In one instance, MAJ Fein refused to
accept that R.C.M. required him to turn over evidence that was obviously material to
the preparation of the defense, even in the absence of a defense request. The following email
exchange between the Court and MAJ Fein shows the Govemment?s utter lack of understanding
(or willful misreading) of basic discovery rules. Neither can be countenanced.

Court: So when you?re doing reviews then, are you looking at these reviews for
both 701(a)(6) and 701(a)(2)?

MAJ Fein: [pause] Ma?a.m for DIA information, we have been reviewing it for
701(a)(2) as well in anticipation if the Court does rule in favor based off a speci?c
request from the Defense so we do not have to review the documents again.

Court: Okay, let?s go a little bit more broadly here. When you are reviewing
documents for 701(a)(2), if the Government is alerted that this could be material
to the defense, the Government?s got an obligation to turn this over.

MAJ Fein: The Govemment?s the Government at least argues that it?s not just
that the documents themselves are material, it would be certain information ?just
like the defense is arguing or proffered to the court in their response to the ex
parte motions of 505(g)(2). Here are the categories of information. The
prosecution makes the initial determination of material to the preparation of the
defense and the defense argues provides as they?ve done and then it?s like
?Okay, that?s what we?re on notice of.? We?re absolutely on notice that any type
of damage that resulted, for instance, is material to the preparation of the defense
based off of the year and a half of requests. So as each discovery request comes
in, we process it, we add it to our database of what we?re reviewing and we start
again, churning the review of these documents. We maintain still based off

93

26028

today?s litigation that those documents are still not 70l(a)(2), subject to the
Court?s order, but because we do not have a speci?c request. It?s all documents at
DIA with some caveats. Not any type, not anything directed at a certain type of
information. I mean the Defense is in the best position to know exactly what was
and was not compromised from their client. They could be making speci?c
requests for what type of information they?re looking for. So it?s not that the
Defense is an odd position of not being aware of what could be out there and if, as
the Defense just stated on the record, as if the Information Review Task Force,
which it was, started to review all the possible compromised documents then they
should know what was compromised. We would know from reviewing the ?les
what?s there and they can make speci?c requests. But it goes back to, it?s a
generic request that?s copied and pasted from 701(a)(2) for pretty much every
type of document out there.

Court: What volume of information are we talking about??

MAJ Fein: Your honor, we have probably keep going, about I?ll get you that
information before we close the Court today.

MAJ Fein: If the Court?s willing to accept the Defense?s argument, that means
that any document that is in the possession, custody or control of military
authorities that they simply request and make no other showing, then they are
entitled to inspect. Your honor, especially dealing with classi?ed information, it
goes back to that this is a tactic in order to essentially slow this prosecution
down, slow this court martial down, on one hand arguing that, for instance, in the
upcoming Brady motion we?ve given too much information for them to identify
stuff and now they want everything, just because they?ve made a request. We?ve
maintained, the prosecution has maintained, from the very ?rst request, ?Provide
us with the speci?c. . .provide us with an adequate basis and a speci?c factual
basis and we?ll be able to process it.? All documents from DIA and IRTF is not
suf?cient. Yes, we have prepared because we do want to move this case and we
do not want to have unneeded delay in order to do this. And I have to review
thousands of pages of documents again, but again, these are classi?ed documents
and the Defense notes that. And yet they still maintain a general requestjust
because they make the request that it must be material to the preparation of the
defense with no other showing.

Court: I understand that, MAJ Fein, but when the Government is reviewing these
documents, the Government has a burden, an obligation, under R.C.M. 701(a)(2)
to disclose material to the preparation of the defense. So if the Government while
observing, while looking through these documents, sees something that you think
is material to the preparation of the defense, and you?re not turning it over
because they didn?t ask for it, I?m going to order everything turned over to me for
in camera review.

94

26029

MAJ Fein: Yes, ma?am.

Court: So is the Government going to look at this with an of the defense
counsel and

MAJ Fein: We absolutely will, ma?arn. Ah - to turn over material based off of just
what the Defense gives us and what they consider material to the preparation of
the defense, we will review the documents for that. Cause then, that would
qualify as a speci?c request and we would do it.

Court: We?re having a circular argument here again. If you?re looking at
document and you say, as MAJ Fein, ?Boy, if I were a defense counsel, I would
find this material to the preparation of the defense? are you going to hold onto it
until they request it?

MAJ Fein: No, your honor, we?re not.

Audio from Article 39(a) session, 6 June 2012. This passage illustrates that, up until 6 June
2012, the Government was still operating under an incorrect understanding of military discovery.
It almost seems unfathomable that an entire SJA shop could bungle discovery on so many
different fronts.

315. As is clear, the true cause of the discovery delay in this case, notwithstanding any
Government protestations to the contrary, has been the Govemment?s inexcusable failure to
understand its bedrock discovery obligations. The negligence inherent in such a failure is
manifest, and the delay that has been occasioned by this negligence is severe. Accordingly, the
second factor of the Article 10 procedural framework and the Sixth Amendment analysis must be
resolved in PFC Manning?s favor.

Untenable Government Discovery Positions

316. As if laboring under a chronic misunderstanding of its discovery obligations wasn?t
unbelievable enough, the Government has furthered undermined any con?dence in its discovery
abilities by putting forth numerous untenable discovery positions. These positions, some of
which are chronicled brie?y below, have been adopted to serve the Govemment?s obvious desire
to provide the Defense with as little discovery as possible. This tactic, in addition to being
contrary to the clear liberal tenor of the discovery rules in military practice, has caused yet
further periods of delay in this case.

317. The Government has taken the following meritless positions throughout discovery in this
case:

a) Maintaining that Brady does not require the Government to turn over documents that are
relevant to punishment;

b) Maintaining that R.C.M. 701 does not apply to classified discovery;

95

26030

c) Disputing the relevance of facially relevant items (such as damage assessments);

d) Using the R.C.M. 703 standard, instead of the appropriate R.C.M. 701 standard when dealing
with items within the military?s possession, custody and control;

e) Referring to damage assessments and other documents as ?alleged? to frustrate the Defense?s
access to them;

f) Maintaining that the Department of State and ONCIX had not ?completed? a damage
assessment;

g) Maintaining that it was ?unaware? of forensic results and investigative ?les;

h) Resisting production of the Department of State damage assessment under the ?authority? of
Giles v. Maryland, 386 U.S. 66, 117 (1967) (which provided no legal support for its position);

i) Despite understanding Defense discovery requests, de?ning ?damage assessments? and
?investigations? to avoid producing discovery. After instructing the Defense that it should not
use the term ?damage assessments? to refer to informal reviews of harm (instead, to use
?working papers?), then referring to working papers as ?damage assessments?;

j) Insisting on a threshold of speci?city for Brady requests that does not exist or some additional
showing of relevance;

k) Maintaining that the FBI investigative ?le was not material to the preparation of the defense,
to which the Court quizzically asked, ?How could the investigative ?le not be material to the
preparation of the defense??;

1) Maintaining that anything that predated the Department of State Damage assessment was not
discoverable because it was ?likely? cumulative;

m) Arguing with the Court at length about whether the Government was obligated to turn over
documents that were obviously material to the preparation of the defense absent a ?speci?c
request?;

n) Waiting until two days before the Defense?s Article 13 ?ling before reviewing 1374 emails
from Quantico which it had in its possession for over six months.

318. The United States advanced each of these positions in an attempt to frustrate the Defense?s
access to discoverable information. This necessitated further delay to correct the Govemment?s
untenable positions, either through motions practice, 802 sessions with the Court, or otherwise.
Therefore, these positions doubly compounded the already inexcusable delay caused by the
Govemment?s failure to understand its discovery obligations. The ?rst stage of delay that
occurred as a result of these meritless positions was the delay in the Defense receiving this
discoverable information. The second stage of delay caused by these positions was the litigation

96

26031

or conversations concerning their invalidity. Both stages of delay caused by these positions have
contributed to the incredibly slow pace of the Govemment?s discovery and to the continued
rescheduling of PFC Manning?s trial date. In short, each of these positions has caused further
unwarranted delay to pile up on the Mount Vesuvius of delay that the Government has caused to
accumulate in this case.

iv. Government?s Lack of Reasonable Diligence in All Aspects of Discovery

319. Finally, even apart from the Government?s inexcusable failure to understand its basic
discovery obligations and its continued assertion of untenable discovery positions, there is ample
evidence of the Govemment?s overall lack of reasonable diligence in the processing of this case.
One fact which speaks volumes is that the Government, by its own admission, did not start
searching for Brady discovery until 28 April 201 I, nearly one year after PFC Manning was
placed in pretrial con?nement. See Attachment A to Appellate Exhibit 243. What was the
Government doing for this year? The OCAS, it must be recalled, were ?in the process? of
completing the classi?cation reviews; the Defense had barely received basic discovery (it wasn?t
until 27 July 201 I that the Defense started to receive the bulk of the unclassi?ed CID ?le, and it
was not until 4 November of 201 1, the month prior to the Article 32 hearing, that the Defense
received any of the classi?ed discovery); PFC Manning was languishing in a Brig under
oppressive conditions. And what was the Government doing?? No one knows. More detailed
instances of a lack of diligence and unjusti?ed delay are discussed below.

(1) The Government?s Failure to Search Its Own Files in a Timely Manner

320. First of all, the Govemment?s Brady search of Department of the Army ?les its own
?les) completely ?outs the reasonable diligence standard. The Government sent out a memo on
29 July 2011 to HQDA requesting it to task Principal Officials to search for, and preserve, any
discoverable information. To put the 29 July 201 1 date into perspective, PFC Manning was
placed into pretrial con?nement on 29 May 2010. Charges were originally preferred on 5 July
2010. Thus, this 29 July 2011 memorandum shows that the Government waited over one year
after charges were preferred and PFC Manning was placed into pretrial con?nement before even
beginning its Brady search of its own ?les. Waiting a year to begin a Brady search of the
Govemment?s own ?les is not even close to reasonably diligent (and cannot be under any
sensible interpretation of the phrase).

321. Moreover, a 17 April 2012 HQDA memorandum con?rmed that no action had yet been
taken on the 29 July 2011 memorandum. In other words, if it wasn?t bad enough that the
Government waited over a year to even start a Brady search of its own ?les, it didn?t even realize
that nothing had been done on its request for almost another full year. Therefore, almost two full
years after PFC Manning?s arrest, the Government had not even been able to complete a Brady
search of its own ?les. This fact is disturbing, to say the least. To hold that the Govemment?s
discovery conduct has been reasonably diligent would make a complete mockery of that phrase.

322. Additionally, as the Defense pointed out in its Reply to the Government Response to the

Supplement to the Defense Motion to Compel Discovery 2, the Government was still conducting
its Brady search of DIA, DISA, CENTCOM, and SOUTHCOM ?les on 2 June 2012, 736 days

97

26032

after PFC Manning was placed into pretrial con?nement and 699 days after preferral of charges.
Again, these ?les are the Govemment?s own ?les. How the Government can assert in good faith
that it has conducted its discovery obligations in a reasonably diligent manner is beyond
comprehension. Whether the Government had been secretly conducting a re-review using the
correct Brady standard or had been negligently or intentionally dragging its feet in discovery is
ultimately beside the point. No matter the circumstances, the Government cannot justify the fact
that it is still, well over two years after PFC Manning was placed in pretrial con?nement, ?in the
process? of conducting its Brady search of its own ?les.

(2) The Government?s Failure to Conduct a Timely Brady Search of the Files of Non-
Military Agencies

323. The Government?s discovery mantra since referral has been that it is ?in the process? of
conducting its Brady discovery searches. Much like the situation described above with respect to
its own ?les, as of June 2012, the Government was still ?in the process? of searching the ?les of
closely aligned agencies (such as ODNI, FBI, ONCIX, etc.). While some of these documents
have since been produced??over two years after PFC Manning was placed in pretrial
con?nement??others have not.

324. On 25 July 2012, the Government requested leave of the Court until 14 September 2012 for
the following: to disclose ?les not subject to the Court?s 22 June 2012 order, if any, to the
defense or to the Court for in camera review IAW RCM 701 or MRE 505(g)(2), but which
may contain discoverable material, or, (2) if necessary, to notify the Court with a status of
whether the United States anticipates the custodian of classi?ed evidence will claim a privilege
IAW MRE 505(c) for the classi?ed information under that entity?s control and to ?le notice
IAW MRE See Appellate Exhibit 226. The Government stated that ?The United
States is in the process of completing its review of information that is not under the possession,
custody, or control of military authorities and has not been speci?cally requested by the defense
that is owned by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), and Of?ce of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). The United States is
reviewing the information in accordance with their ethical obligation to search for potential
Brady material and/or their legal obligations under Williams in accordance with the Court?s 22
June 2012 Order.? Id. Not surprisingly, the Government is still ?in the process? of reviewing all
this information for Brady. How the Government could not have completed the Brady search
839 days after PFC Manning was placed in pretrial con?nement de?es all logic. One would
think that a ?ve person prosecution team, backed by the resources of the United States
government, would not need 839 days to conduct a Brady search of certain closely aligned
agencies. Such delayed disclosure of Brady discovery hardly satis?es the R.C.M. 701(a)(6)
requirement that such discovery be produced ?as soon as practicable.?

325. Further, the Defense made a request for Brady material from the President?s Intelligence
Advisory Board in October 2011. In its response to the Defense Motion to Compel Discovery
the Government stated, in a footnote, that it was ?in the process? of searching for
discoverable information from the Intelligence Advisory Board Government Response. See
Appellate Exhibit XCVII, p. 4. The Government failed to explain why the Government was still
?in the process of searching for discoverable information? seven months after the request was
made. Why would it take seven months to search these ?les? The Defense would venture to

98

26033

guess that the Government?s ?diligent? search began when the Government received the
Defense?s motion to Compel Discovery #2 on 10 May 2012.

326. Likewise, as far as the Defense is aware, the Government is still ?in the process? of
conducting its Brady search of all 63 agencies involved in this case. It is deeply troubling that
the Government appears to be perpetually ?in the process? of conducting these searches without
ever reaching the ?nish line for any of them. Indeed, if there was ever a case where the
Government was inde?nitely moored in some ?waiting posture,? it would surely be this case.
See Mizgala, 61 M.J. at 129 (expressing concern about Government spending too long in a
?waiting posture?); Hat?eld, 44 M.J. at 24 (similar).

327. Equally troubling, it appears that the Government did not even begin reaching out to some
of the 63 agencies to begin its Brady searches until mid-February 2012, nearly two years after
PFC Manning was placed into pretrial con?nement. See Appellate Exhibit at 16-19.
This revelation came as part of the ONCIX debacle, discussed in detail below, where MAJ Fein
admitted that it was after reaching out to ONCIX that the Government became aware that it
needed to contact the 63 agencies directly.

328. This, in turn, is inconsistent with the representation that the Government made at the very
?rst 802 session on 23 February 2012 where it stated that it had already searched the ?les of the
63 agencies and not found any Brady material. See Article 39(a) Audio Recording 23 February
2012, (unauthenticated record of trial) at p. 39. The Government stated that it had searched
different sub-agency ?les, even going so far as to the Department of Agriculture.? In this
respect, the Court stated:

Court: The government advised the Court that although it has been extensively
engaged in evaluating executive branch and sub?branch ?les for discoverable
information prior to referral, the government?s due diligence obligations under
the Brady Williams case law; duty to ?nd, evaluate and disclose favorable and
material evidence to the defense will take additional time because of the need to
cull through voluminous classi?ed and unclassi?ed information contained
throughout executive branch [and] sub?branch agencies that have been involved in
the classi?ed information disclosure investigations.

Id. at p. 38. The Defense added the following:
Mr. Coombs: Just that when the government spoke about its Brady search they
stated at that time they had not found any Brady material even though they had

looked for over a year.

Id. at p. 39. The Court asked, ?Is that correct?? to which MAJ Fein responded:

27 ?Mr. Coombs: Even going so far as going to the Department of Agriculture to see if they had potential
information there. And then they stated; and they even state it here, that they have not found any Braajz material.?
Transcript at p. 106.

99

26034

MAJ Fein: Your Honor, that is correct but also at the same time [we] stated that
material continues to evolve because this is an on-going issue.

Id. Thus, it is not clear whether the Government began its Brady search of the 63 agencies prior
or subsequent to February 2012. The Defense believes that the Government conducted an initial
Brady review of documents at the 63 agencies under the incorrect Brady standard. After being
set straight about what Brady actually entailed, the Defense believes that the Government
secretly went back and re-reviewed the documents. The Government did not admit this, of
course, as to do so would be to admit a profound lack of diligence. The Defense?s theory is the
only way that the Govemment?s contradictory statements can be reconciled.

329. The inconsistencies in the Govemment?s story have become par for the course in the
deeply dysfunctional discovery process that has plagued this case. Whatever the truth of the
matter is, one thing is clear: there has been an overwhelming lack of diligence in conducting
Brady searches of the 63 agencies and of closely aligned agencies.

(3) The Government?s Failure to Review Any Discovery from the Department of State for
Nearly Two Years

330. The Government has charged PFC Manning with the release of hundreds of thousands of
diplomatic cables from the Department of State. One would think that approximately two years
into the case, the Government would have, at the very least, reviewed key Department of State
documents. Of course, as this Court knows, this is not so.

331. When the Government referred this case on 3 February 2012, it still had not reviewed the
Department of State damage assessment, a critical document in the case. And, it wasn't until 18
May 2012 that the Defense actually was given access to the Department of State damage
assessment, an assessment that had been prepared nearly a year earlier. The Defense?s receipt of
the Department of State damage assessment (or, more accurately, the ability to view the
document under controlled circumstances defined by the Government) came after months of
litigation about the meaning of a ?completed? damage assessment versus a ?draft? or ?interim?
damage assessment. Even after the Court ordered production of the damage assessment as
clearly being within the purview of the Govemment?s Brady obligations, the Government made
one last ?Hail Mary? attempt to avoid producing the document, under the authority of a
concurring opinion in a 50-year-old case that was not even remotely on point. See Appellate
Exhibit LXXV.

332. After the Court ordered that the Defense was entitled to discovery of the Department of
State damage assessment, the Defense then began the process of trying to obtain other Brady
discovery from the Department of State. The Government revealed in late May 2012, two years
after PFC Manning was placed in pretrial con?nement, that it had not even seen? much less
begun reviewing??any other documents from the Department of State. In fact, it had no idea
what documents existed at the Department of State. See Appellate Exhibit 100, at 2, (?The
prosecution has consistently stated that the prosecution intends to review all documents for
Brady and RCM 701 material that is provided by the DOS that are
supplied). That that Government didn?t get around to even obtaining potentially relevant

100

26035

documents from the Department of State for over 733 days speaks volumes about the lack of
diligence that has permeated this case. When juxtaposed with the Govemment?s witness list
produced a short while later (on 22 June 2012) which names twenty-two individuals from the
Department of State as witnesses, it is clear that what was going on: the Government was cherry
picking evidence and witnesses from the Department of State to build its case, while failing to
exercise even a modicum of diligence in ful?lling its Brady obligations for the Defense.

333. Unfortunately, the Department of State discovery saga did not end there. After the relevant
?les and documents were identi?ed for the Government via the testimony of three Department of
State witnesses, the Government requested an additional thirty days to respond. The
Govemment?s response after having been granted the additional thirty days to respond was more
of the same unreasonable litigation positions that the Defense had witnesses many times before.

334. The Govemment?s ?nal attempt to protect the Department of State from having to turn
over documents involved the Government arguing (undoubtedly at the behest of the Department
of State) that the requested documents were cumulative because they predated the damage
assessment. The Defense, by way of Response motion, pointed out the sheer absurdity of this
position:

The Government wants this Court to rule that anything that predated the State
Department damage assessment should not be produced because it is cumulative
and not relevant and necessary.

The Government is asking for permission to simply exclude from discovery
anything with a date that preceded the State Department damage assessment
which would, in effect, be practically everything at the State Department. It
would have the Court do so on the sheer conjecture that this information ?likely
contributed to[] the Department?s draft damage assessment.? Government
Response, at p. 5.

The Govemment?s request is breathtaking. It would have the Court deny
discovery of facially relevant information because this information was ?likely?
considered by the State Department in compiling the damage assessment. The
Government does not even bother to try to make the argument that the discovery
is actually cumulative it is duplicative of information in the damage
assessment). That argument would not be true. Instead, it makes the argument
that based on the fact that this material predates the damage assessment, it must be
cumulative it is defacto cumulative). The Govemment?s lack of logic
continues to dumbfound the Defense.

Consider the implications of this request. All an agency would need to do to
avoid discovery is to compile some type of ultimate assessment and then claim
that anything that predated that assessment was ?off limits? because it was
somehow ?considered? in developing the assessment. The contention is
ludicrous.

101



26036

Further, the volume of information that the Government would seek to have the
court exclude from its discovery obligations is in the ballpark of 5000 pages. The
Government believes that these 5000 pages must have ?likely contributed to? the
150 page State Department damage assessment. It is hard to believe that the
damage assessment is cumulative when, page-wise, there are thirty-three times
more pages in the disputed discovery than in the damage assessment itself.

See Appellate Exhibit CCII, p. 2-3.

335. This litigation position was patently unreasonable, as re?ected in the Court?s ruling. See
Appellate Exhibit CCXXII. However, having to litigate yet another frivolous Government
attempt to resist producing discovery further pushed back the discovery timeline.

336. The Government, after having thirty days to concoct the ?predates therefore cumulative?
theory, then asked for additional time to actually review the material that it resisted producing.
The Court generously granted the Government until 14 September 2012 to produce documents
from the Department of State, a total of 127 days after the Defense moved to compel discovery
of these documents on 10 May 2012. The Government, however, offered no explanation for why
it could not have completed this review sometime in the 742 days after PFC Manning had been
placed in pretrial con?nement. A reasonably diligent prosecutor would have been sure to review
all critical documents in this case well before referral, and certainly well before being ordered to
do so by this Court, so that the discovery period did not drag on for almost a year after referral.

337. On 14 September 2012, the prosecution made available to the defense for inspection all
Department documents responsive to the above Court Order, or otherwise discoverable, for
which redactions under RCM 70l(g)(2) or MRE 505(g)(2) are not sought approximately
6500 pages).? See Government in camera and ex parte Motion for Authorization of Redactions
of Department of State Records under MRE 505(g)(2) and RCM 701(g)(2), p.2. And yet, even
though the Government claims to have ?made available? all Department of State documents, the
Defense has not actually received these documents. In reality, the Government?s representation
is, in fact, a misrepresentation as evidenced by its subsequent clari?cation:

For any captioned or otherwise particularly sensitive documents (as explained
below, to include NODIS, EXDIS, Roger Channel, DS Channel, or DS-
controlled) for which redactions are not sought, the Department will make the
documents available to the defense counsel and their security experts to inspect at
the Department until the end of the court-martial. For all remaining documents
for which redactions are not sought, the prosecution will deliver these documents
to the defense by 21 September 2012. The defense counsel and their experts are
not authorized to share the information contained within these documents or their
notes with the accused.

Id. at 5. Apparently, the Government ?will make [certain] documents available? at the
Department of State at some unknown point in time. For other documents, the Government ?will
deliver these documents to the defense by 21 September 2012.? Id. Accordingly, it is clear that
the Government has not complied with the Court?s order to ?disclose all discoverable

102



26037

information to the Defense.? Instead of requesting leave of the Court to extend the deadline
once again, the Government simply granted itself extra time while making it look like it had
complied with the Court?s order by stating the information was available for inspection by the
Defense. In addition to being yet another example of word games played by the Government,
the inability to comply with the Court?s timeline further evidences the Government?s lack of
diligence in this case. Provided the Defense actually receives the Department of State discovery
on 21 September 2012 pursuant to the Government?s unilateral extension of time, these
documents will come 846 days after PFC Manning was placed into pretrial con?nement.

338. On 19 July 2012, the Court ordered the Government, inter alia, to provide to the Defense
certain discovery from the Department of State, including dates and times that the Mitigation
Team held meetings. It was not until 48 days later, 5 September 2012, that the Government
actually got around to completing this task?or more speci?cally, that the Government tasked a
paralegal from its arsenal of paralegals to complete the task. The list of meeting dates/times is
inconsistent with the testimony of Department of State witnesses who believed that these
meetings ended sometime in the summer of 201 1. In reality, the Mitigation Team was still
meeting as of 19 December 2011. This is information that is material to the preparation of the
defense that should have been, and could have been, disclosed much sooner. There was no
reason why the Government needed to sit on this aspect of the discovery request until 9 days
before the discovery was technically due. The Government?s actions, unfortunately, are
consistent with its overall approach to discovery in this case: as little as possible, as late as
possible.

(4) The Government?s Casual ?Discovery? of Critical Documents

339. In mid-June 2012, the Government noti?ed the Defense that it had ?discovered? an FBI
impact statement. The Government?s revelation was startling, since the Government and the FBI
had been conducting a joint investigation of the accused. The Government offered no
explanation for why it had only just now, over two years after PFC Manning was placed into
pretrial con?nement, ?discovered? the FBI impact statement. The Government also offered no
explanation for why it did not disclose the impact statement (or even the fact of its existence)
when the Defense requested ?any report, damage assessment, or recommendation as a result of
any joint investigation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or any other governmental
agency concerning the alleged leaks in this case? way back in January of 2012. The Government
has failed to answer even the most basic of questions: When was the impact statement prepared?
When did the Government learn of the impact statement? Why did the Government not disclose
its existence to the Defense or to the Court? At oral argument, the Defense pressed for answers
to these questions. So did the Court. The Court asked MAJ Fein when the Government learned
about the FBI impact statement.

Court: Alright, we will be addressing that aspect of this motion at the next

session. I understand the Defense?s argument. Government, are you prepared to
tell me when you did know about this impact statement or impact assessment?

103



26038

MAJ Fein: Your Honor, the Government would like to at least have a chance to
argue the due diligence argument ?rst and then answer that in (inaudible) Court?s
order.

Article 39(a) Audio Recording 6 June 2012. MAJ Fein indicated that he would provide an
answer to the Court?s very straightforward question as part of the Government?s due diligence
submission, for which he had requested a two-week extension. MAJ Fein did not address the
FBI impact statement at all in the Government?s 20 June 2012 submission. To date, the
Government has not answered any question about the FBI impact statement. Because to answer
any such question would be to reveal publicly what everybody already knows: the Government
has been wholly negligent in carrying out its discovery obligations.

340. The FBI impact statement is not the only document that the Government happened to
?discover? two years into the case. The Government also ?discovered? that the Department of
Homeland Security had conducted a damage assessment. But that?s not all. The Government
also ?discovered? that the Other Government Agency had conducted a second damage
assessment. See Appellate Exhibit CCVIIL28 And let us not forget that the Government
?discovered? that ONCIX did, in fact, have a draft damage assessment which would likely be
discoverable. It is inexcusable that the Government ?discovered? the existence of these
important documents, as if by pure chance. The Government is the agency that is prosecuting
PFC Manning. Its job is to ?discover? the existence, or potential existence, of these documents
in a timely manner. Its job is not to sit back and wait to stumble across relevant documents two
years into the case. The Government fails to explain why it did not, or could not reasonably
have, ?discovered? these documents earlier. Again, these casual and last minute ?discoveries?
speak volumes about the Govemment?s lack of diligence in prosecuting this case.

(5) The Government?s Attempt to Cover up Its Lack of Diligence with Respect to the
ONCIX Damage Assessment

341. The Defense maintains that the ONCIX ?asco reveals that the Government is not simply
inept, but untrustworthy as well. The Government?s dishonesty with respect to the ONCIX
damage assessment shows a ?deliberate intent to hann the accused's defense? and weighs
signi?cantly in the Article 10 calculus. See Simmons, supra at *9 (noting that ?negligence is
obviously to be weighed more than a deliberate intent to harm the accused?s defense?).

342. To recap brie?y, at the 15 March 2012 motions argument, the Government represented that
the Department of State had not ?completed? a damage assessment and that ONCIX had not
?completed? a damage assessment. After the motions argument, on 21 March 2012, the Court
asked the Government to respond to questions regarding whether certain agencies had damage
assessments. The Govemment?s responses with respect to the Department of State and ONCIX
were as follows:

a) DOS has not completed a damage assessment.?

28 The Government apparently did not know about this second damage assessment at the 6 June 2012 motions
hearing, as no mention was made of it when the Court specifically asked about ?les from the Other Government
Agency.

104





26039

b) ONCIX has not produced any interim or ?nal damage assessment in this
matter.?

See Prosecution?s Response to Court?s Email Questions dated 21 March 2012. The Court and
the Defense knew, based on previous oral argument and public statements, that the
Govemment?s statement regarding the Department of State meant that the Department of State
had something a draft) even though there was not a ?completed? damage assessment.

With respect to ONCIX, the Government?s phraseology that ONCIX had neither a completed nor
interim damage assessment was designed to deceive the Court and the Defense into believing
that nothing existed in the hands of ONCIX.

343. The Government had numerous occasions to correct the misimpression it had deliberately
created. It did not. The Court was troubled by this:

Court: Why did you tell me back on the 215? of March that NCIX or ONCIX had
no damage assessment? Those were not the exact words you used but go ahead
and tell me-

MAJ Fein: Correct your Honor. Your Honor, frankly. Because we do not have
access. Or even knowledge, absent us asking a question and receiving it to these
?les because of the nature of this type of assessment. We ask the questions based
off of the Defense?s discovery requests.

Article 39(a) Audio Recording 6 June 2012. MAJ Fein implied that he did not have any
?knowledge? of the damage assessment; he later admitted that he knew the whole time that
ONCIX was working on a damage assessment. If the Government knew that ONCIX was
working on a damage assessment, why did it not tell the Court on 21 March 2012? It was clear
what the Court was asking at the time did ONCIX have some type of damage assessment,
whether in dra? or ?nal form? The Government deliberately misled the Court in not supplying a
full answer to the Court?s question. This was an obvious attempt to avoid having to produce the
ONCIX damage assessment to the Defense.

344. MAJ Fein on behalf of the Government provided a long-winded and contradictory
explanation of what apparently happened between ONCIX and the Government. At bottom, he
maintained that the Government kept asking questions and ONCIX kept giving the Government
the same pro forma response: has not produced any interim or ?nal damage
assessments in this matter.? See Appellate Exhibit CLII, p.4. As argued in detail in Appellate
Exhibit the Government?s version of events simply does not ring true.

345. The ONCIX saga plainly shows one of two things. Either it shows: a) that the Government
in this case was not diligent in keeping abreast of what discovery was in the hands of ONCIX,
and then sought to cover up that lack of diligence through a series of half-truths; or b) that the
Government actually knew what was in the hands of ONCIX but avoided disclosing that
information until it felt that it could no longer get away with it, and the concocted a convenient
(but implausible) back-story to explain its failure to be forthright. Regardless of which actually

105



26040

transpired, both speak volumes about the abject failures of the Government to process this case
expeditiously and to exhibit candor with the Court.

(6) The Government?s Inability to Process Any Discovery Matter in an Expeditions
Manner

346. The Government has shown itself incapable of processing any discovery matter in this case
in a diligent and expeditious manner. For instance, the Government caused further delay as a
result of its failure to claim any privileges in a timely manner. The case was referred to this
Court on 3 February 2012. The Government, if it was processing this case in a reasonably
diligent manner, should have been in a position to claim any privileges on that date. Instead, the
Government needed to wait until 18 May 2012, almost four months after referral, in order to
decide whether it would claim any privileges. After that time, the Government would resort to
its ?we need to consult with the equity holders? refrain to request an additional 45-60 days to
determine whether to claim a privilege. See e. g. Appellate Exhibit CXCII, at 6 (?Assuming,
arguendo, the Court orders production of the above records or some portion thereof, the
prosecution requests no less than 45-60 days to notify the Court whether the Department will
seek limited disclosure under MRE 505(g)(2) or claim a privilege under MRE 505(c) and to
produce the documents under RCM 701(g), MRE 505(g)(2), or MRE 505(0), if necessary?).
Why couldn?t the Government consult with the equity holder in advance to determine whether
privilege would be claimed in respect of certain documents?? It?s not like the Government didn?t
know that the issue of privilege would come up; after all, this is a classi?ed evidence case. The
Government has apparently been unable to multi-task for the duration of this case.

347. As another example of the Govemment"s inability to complete any task in a timely manner,
even when the Government promised the Defense discovery by a certain date (which was always
long after the Defense requested the information), the Government proved itself unable to keep
its deadlines. For example, after notifying the Defense that most of the 14 computer hard drives
that were the subject of the first motion to compel and this Court?s 23 March 2012 order had
been wiped or were inoperable, the Government represented that the 4 remaining hard drives
would be provided by 18 May 2012. The hard drives were not provided on 18 May 2012. On 29
May, the Defense asked when it should expect to receive the hard drives. The Government
indicated that they would have approval by the end of the week. When it was all said and done,
the Defense did not receive the hard drives until 5 June 2012, almost three weeks after the 18
May 2012 deadline set by the Government. There are numerous other instances where the
Government has promised discovery by a certain date only to provide that discovery, if at all,
well beyond that deadline, but this already motion would turn into a tome if all of those
instances were chronicled.

348. A recent discovery request is also illustrative of the Govemment?s lethargic response rate.
On 9 July 2012, the Defense requested the following discovery from Quantico:

The Defense requests that the Government provide a copy of the video referenced in
Bates Number 00042936. According to LCPL .E. Miller, the Quantico Brig recorded an
incident where the guards had to assist in freeing PFC Manning from the suicide smock
that he was wearing.

106

26041

See Defense Discovery Request, dated 9 July 2012, Attachment 68

349. Despite various follow-up emails from the Defense, it wasn?t until 13 September 2012 that
the Government responded in a mere three sentences:

RESPONSE: The Quantieo video does not exist. The United States conducted a
search but could not locate the video. See Enclosure 1; Enclosure 2.

RESPONSE: The Prosecution has provided all matters requested that are in the
Govemment?s possession and understands its continuing obligation to provide
information responsive to this request.

See Government Discovery Response, Attachment 69. A 66-day turnaround time for a very
basic discovery request is not reasonable, but is unfortunately illustrative of the total lack of
diligence that the Government has exhibited throughout this case.

(7) The Government?s Failure to Review and Disclose the Existence of Quantieo
Documents that Had Been in Its Possession for Over Six Months

350. Finally, the Government substantially delayed the Article 13 motions hearing by its literal
eleventh hour disclosure of emails from Quantieo that it had been sitting on for months. The
Government represented to the Defense that it had the emails in its possession for at least six
months prior to the date the Defense Article 13 Motion was due. See 27 July 2012 Email from
MAJ Fein to Mr. Coombs, Attachment 64.

351. As far back as December 2010 when the Defense ?led its initial complaint concerning
Article 13, the Government knew that an Article 13 motion would be ?led. At the very latest,
the Government knew that the Defense would be ?ling an Article 13 motion after the ?rst
motions hearing in February 2012. And yet, despite knowing about the Article 13 motion before
it claims to have even received the emails, the Government did not begin its search of these
emails until 25 July 2012, two days before the Defense Article 13 Motion was due. See 27 July
2012 Email from Fein to COL Lind, MJ, Attachment 63. In defense of its incredibly late
disclosure of the emails, the Government attempted to point out that it disclosed the emails
within 24 hours of ?nding that some of the emails were ?obviously material to the preparation of
the defense for Article 13 purposes.? Id. This excuse neglects to mention why the Government
waited until two days before the motion was due before it began its review of the emails when
the emails had been its possession for over six months, knowing for that entire six-month period
about the certainty that an Article 13 motion would be ?led. The Government likely offered no
excuse for that delay because it is simply inexcusable. The failure to search emails between
Quantico of?cials concerning PFC Manning?s con?nement conditions until two days before the
motion challenging PFC Manning?s con?nement conditions while at Quantico is worlds apart
from reasonable diligence. What?s more, the Defense had made a speci?c discovery request for
any documentation pertaining to PFC Manning's con?nement on 8 December 2010, 596 days
before the Government even began its review of these emails. While the Government disclosed
a bevy of evidence responsive to this request, it surreptitiously withheld the emails.

107

26042

352. When it did ?nally disclose the emails to the Defense the night before the Article 13
motion was due, the Government provided the Defense with 84 emails that were ?obviously
material to the preparation of the defense.? See Attachment 62. The Defense was troubled by
the Government?s use of the expression ?obviously material to the preparation of the defense.?
Accordingly, the Defense sent an email to the Government asking whether there were documents
that were material to the preparation of the defense, but not obviously material to the preparation
of the defense. See Appellate Exhibit 243, Attachments; see also Appellate Exhibit 260. Two
prosecutors from the Government (CPT Morrow and CPT Overgaard) responded that the
Government has produced all emails that were material to the preparation of the defense, not
simply those that are obviously material the Government was not drawing a distinction
between ?material? and ?obviously material?). Id. The Defense then asked how many emails
the Government had reviewed; the Government indicated that it had reviewed 1374 emails. Id.
That the Government waited until 2 days before the Defense ?led the Article 13 motion before
even looking at one of the 1374 emails is astonishing. What would possess a prosecutor, sitting
on a trove of obviously relevant documents, to simply ignore them for months upon end? The
lack of diligence is beyond comprehension.

353. On 17 August 2012, the Defense submitted a motion to compel production of the remaining
1,290 emails. See Appellate Exhibit 243. At this point, the Government decided to voluntarily
disclose 600 more emails to the defense, as constituting documents that are ?material to the
preparation of the defense.? Accordingly, it is clear that the Government was not completely
truthful to the Defense about having disclosed all documents that were material to the
preparation of the Defense. Again, this is part of a pattern by the Government to withhold
damaging and embarrassing discovery at all costs.

354. The Court considered in camera whether the remaining 690 emails should be produced as
being material to the preparation of the defense. The Court ruled on 14 September 2012 that 678
of these emails were material to the preparation of the defense and ordered that they be produced
See Court Ruling Defense Motion to Compel dated 14 September 2012.

355. It is important to put in perspective the veritable gulf that existed between what the
Government originally believed what was material to the preparation of the defense and what the
Court believed was material to the preparation of the defense. The Government would have
produced a mere 6% of the emails as being material to the preparation of the defense. The Court,
on the other hand, saw 99% of the remaining emails as being material to the preparation of the
defense. What is clear is that the Government has no clue how to apply the standard in R.C.M.
701(a)(2). After all the Defense has endured with the Government?s tactics at hiding discovery,
the Govemment?s incompetence should come as no surprise. While there can be legitimate
arguments about what is or is not material to the preparation of the defense, when the
Government is that far off in gauging materiality, the conclusion is a singular one: the
Government has not been diligent in fulfilling its discovery obligations.

356. It is worth noting that it is only because the Government ?got caught? that the thousand

plus other emails have seen the light of day. Had the Defense simply accepted the Govemment?s
word that it had produced everything that was material to the preparation of the defense (as most

108

26043

defense counsel are forced to do), the Government would have been able to secret these emails
away to avoid the embarrassment that will eventually befall many individuals implicated in what
happened at Quantico. As a result of the Govemment?s profound lack of diligence with respect
to these emails, the consideration of this motion has been delayed even further. The Defense has
had to ?le a supplemental Article 13 motion, and may be required to ?le a further supplemental
motion. The Defense has also had to ?le and litigate a new request for witnesses. See
Argument, Part B.4, infra. Moreover, the late and piecemeal disclosure of these emails has
resulted in the Article 13 motion not being presented in the manner of the Defense?s choosing.
The fragmented nature of the Defense?s argument may (but hopefully will not) undermine the
persuasiveness of the overall argument.

(8) Multiple Discovery Issues are Still Outstanding

357. As discussed above, a large volume of discovery is still outstanding. As of 14 September
2012, 839 days after PFC Manning was placed in pretrial con?nement, the Government was still
in the process of producing discovery from the Department of Homeland Security, the
Department of State, Government Agency, ODNI and the FBI. See 14 September 2012 Email
from MAJ Fein to COL Lind, Attachment 70. On that date, the Government also provided the
Court with proposed redactions and substitutions for several documents under M.R.E. 505(g).
The Court will need to review these documents and decide whether the proposed redactions and
substitutions are adequate. If they are not, as has been the case with previous Government
M.R.E. 505(g) submissions, additional time will be required for the Court and the Government to
confer on appropriate redactions and substitutions. And, if the Court decides that that the
redacted information is necessary to enable the accused to prepare for trial, then the Government
will need additional time to determine whether an equity holder will claim a privilege. See
Government in camera and ex parte Motion for Authorization of Redactions of Department of
State Records under MRE 505(g)(2) and RCM 701(g)(2), 5 (?Should the Court ?nd the
redacted information is discoverable under RCM 701(a)(6) or Brady/Giglio, relevant and
necessary or responsive to the Court?s Order for production under RCM 703(f), or is ?necessary
to enable the accused to prepare for trial? under MRE 505(g)(2), then the prosecution requests
the opportunity to either: (1) address the Court's ?ndings with the relevant government agency to
determine whether a different alterative under MRE 505(g)(2) is appropriate and ?le that
alternative with the Court, or (2) allow for the relevant government agency to claim a privilege
under MRE 505(c) and the prosecution to move for an in camera proceeding under MRE


358. To be clear, we are not talking about one or two documents that are still outstanding.
Thousands of documents have yet to be produced to the Defense. The Government indicated
that there are at least 6500 pages from the Department of State that have yet to be produced. It
de?es logic that 839 days into the case, the Government has still not provided the defense with
all documents from a key organization. How can the defense prepare for both the merits and
sentencing when every document from the Department of State (except for the damage
assessment) has yet to be produced? How the Government could charge PFC Manning with the
compromise of hundreds of thousands of Department of State cables, but fail to provide any
documentation from the Department of State for well over two years de?es all logic and speaks
to an inept prosecution. Under no stretch of the imagination can the Govemment?s actions in
regard to this discovery be characterized as reasonably diligent.

109



26044

359. The foregoing is not meant to be an exhaustive list of the many instances that reveal the
Govemment?s lack of reasonable diligence in the discovery phase of this case.? Rather, the
purpose has been simply to provide this Court with telling examples of the Government?s
profound lack of reasonable diligence in order for it to more clearly see that the Govemment?s
processing of this case as a whole cannot be characterized as reasonably diligent under any
sensible interpretation of that term.

c. Total Delay

360. The undeniable fact of the matter is that PFC Manning has spent the last 845 days in
pretrial con?nement and still has not had his day in court. If this Court fails to grant the
appropriate relief, PFC Manning will have spent 983 days in pretrial con?nement before his trial
rolls around. This case has been marred with inexplicable discovery errors and an overall
unmistakably lethargic pace in the processing of this case. Try as it might, the Government
cannot convincingly explain away the fact that PFC Manning has spent 845 days in pretrial
con?nement (and will conceivably spend over a hundred additional days in pretrial con?nement
before any evidence is offered against him). Therefore, this second factor in the Article 10

procedural framework and Sixth Amendment analysis must be resolved in PFC Manning?s favor.

3. Demands for Speedy Trial

361. PFC Manning made two speedy trial demands. He made his ?rst request on 13
January 201 1. 13 January 2011 Defense Speedy Trial Request, Attachment 20. He then
renewed his speedy trial request on 25 July 2011. 25 July 2011 Defense Opposition to
Government Request for Delay, Attachment 40. Moreover, these speedy trial demands were
reiterated in each of the several Defense oppositions to the Government?s many requests for
delay of the Article 32 hearing. See 26 April 2011 Defense Response to Government Request
for Delay, Attachment 31 (requesting summaries of or substitutions for withheld classi?ed

29 There are countless other illustrations of the Govemment?s lack of diligence in this case, independent of the
discovery issues. Among them:

0 The Government has repeatedly requested additional time to complete simple tasks and to respond to
straightforward motions;

0 The Government has repeatedly promised to ?get back to? the Court on various issues in oral argument and
rarely does;

0 The Government still has not provided ?timely and meaningful? access to Ambassador Kennedy, as
promised when it required the Defense to ?le a Touhy request;

0 The Government has frequently shifted litigation positions, suggesting that its positions are borne of
convenience and not of principle (consider, for instance, the Govemment?s thrice?shi?ing argument on
whether Army Regulation 380-5 was punitive in nature and its arguments on ?exceeds authorized access?);

0 The Govemment?s email system has been plagued by errors that still have not been ?xed. Given the
volume of email traf?c, these issues should have been sorted out months ago;

0 The Govemment?s about-face on complying with the Protective Order with respect to Defense redacted
motions. The Government argued that it was simply too dif?cult for it to continue reviewing the
redactions;

0 The Govemment?s failure to organize logistical issues in a timely manner its requirement for a 30 day
OPLAN Bravo Order prior to the Article 32, etc.).

110

26045

evidence in order to minimize delay and requesting any delay be credited to the Government for
speedy trial purposes); 24 May 201 1 Email from Mr. Coombs to COL Coffman Opposing
Government Request for Delay, Attachment 34 (reiterating same position and requesting any
delay be credited to the Government for speedy trial purposes); 29 June 201 1 Email from Mr.
Coombs to COL Coffman Opposing Government Request for Delay, Attachment 37 (same); 27
August 201 1 Email from Mr. Coombs to COL Coffman Opposing the Government?s Request for
Delay, Attachment 44 (same); 27 August 201 1 Email from Mr. Coombs to COL Coffman
Opposing the Govemment?s Request for Delay, Attachment 47 (same); 25 October 201 1 Email
from Mr. Coombs to COL Coffman Opposing Government Request for Delay, Attachment 51
(same); 16 November 201 1 Email from Mr. Coombs to COL Coffman Opposing Government
Request for Delay, Attachment 55 (same). Since referral, the Defense has also raised its speedy
trial concerns in connection with the Government?s discovery delays. See Appellate Exhibit
at 4; Appellate Exhibit at 15.

362. Furthermore, PFC Manning?s 13 January 2011 speedy trial request, when judged in relation
to his total period of pretrial con?nement, was made early in the processing of his case, long
before his arraignment and the litigation of this speedy trial motion. In Thompson, the Court
observed that the accused ?did not make a speedy trial request during the entire pretrial day
period addressed by the military judge.? 68 MJ. at 313. Instead, the accused in Thompson did
not make her speedy trial request until a mere ?ve days before her arraignment and the litigation
of the speedy trial motion. See id. at 610. Here, by contrast, PFC Manning made his first speedy
trial request well in advance of both his arraignment and the litigation of this motion: 407 days
before his arraignment on 23 February 2012 and 657 days before the litigation of this speedy trial
motion, to be precise.

363. Finally, there can be no dispute regarding the genuineness of PFC Manning?s 13 January
2011 and 25 July 2011 speedy trial requests. Cf Kossman, 38 MJ. at 262 (indicating that an
accused speedy trial request must be genuine).

364. For these reasons, the third factor in the Article 10 procedural framework and Sixth
Amendment analysis must be resolved in favor of PFC Manning.

4. Prejudice to PFC Manning

365. As mentioned above, see Legal Framework, Part B, supra, the prejudice factor of the
Article 10 and Sixth Amendment inquiries is concerned with protecting three interests of the
accused which speedy trial rights were designed to protect: to prevent oppressive pretrial
incarceration; (ii) to minimize anxiety and concern of the accused; and to limit the
possibility that the defense will be impaired.? Barker, 407 U.S. at 532; Cossio, 64 MJ. at 257;
Mizgala, 61 M.J. at 129. In this case, all three of these interests of PFC Manning have been
violated by the Government?s processing of this case.

With regards to the first interest prevention of oppressive pretrial incarceration PFC Manning
endured extremely oppressive pretrial con?nement during his time in Quantico, Virginia. See
Appellate Exhibit 258, at 4, 8-11, 27, 35-37. For 265 days of the 845 days of PFC Manning?s
continuous pretrial con?nement as of the date of this motion, PFC Manning was held in

111

26046

conditions tantamount to solitary con?nement at the Quantico Brig. See id. at 4. Additionally,
he was also held on Suicide Risk in Kuwait for his ?rst two months of pretrial con?nement,
bringing his ?nal total of solitary con?nement-like conditions to 326 days out of his total 845
days in pretrial con?nement. See id. at 49. While at Quantico, PFC Manning was held under a
combination of MAX custody and P01 status. Id. at 8. That combination meant that for
approximately 9 months while at Quantico, PFC Manning was held in his 6x8 cell for 23-24
hours a day. Id. His cell did not have a window or any natural light. Id. PFC Manning was
subjected to constant monitoring, being asked by the Brig guards literally every ?ve minutes
whether he was alright. Id. at 9. Guards would sometimes wake him in the middle of the night if
his face was not visible while he was sleeping. Id. In addition, PFC Manning was prohibited
from talking to other detainees, exercising in his cell, or even lying down in his rack or leaning
up against the wall of his cell during the duty day. Id. at 8-1 1. Finally, PFC Manning was only
permitted 20 minutes of exercise time a day for the ?rst six months of his time at Quantico,
which he spent walking around a small concrete yard. Id. at 8. In December of 201 1, the
Quantico Brig graciously extended the 20 minutes of recreation call to 60 minutes. Id.

366. As if his solitary con?nement under MAX custody and P01 status was not onerous enough,
PFC Marming was subjected to heightened, Suicide Risk type restrictions on two occasions
during his con?nement at Quantico. Id. at 27. The Suicide Risk restrictions were severe. Id.
PFC Manning was stripped of all clothing with the exception of his underwear. Id. PFC
Manning?s prescription eyeglasses were taken away from him and he was forced to sit in his cell
in essential blindness. Id. At night, he was forced to surrender his underwear and sleep naked.
Id. For a consecutive four day period, PFC Manning was forced to stand naked at parade rest
where he was in view of multiple guards. Id. at 37. Finally, from 7 March 2011 until his transfer
from Quantico to the RCF on 20 April 2011, PFC Manning was required to wear a heavy and
restrictive suicide smock which irritated his skin and, on one occasion, almost choked him. Id.
In total, PFC Manning spent 53 of his 265 days at Quantico under these inhumane conditions.
Not surprisingly, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, Mr. Juan Mendez,
concluded that PFC Manning?s treatment at the hands of the Quantico of?cials constituted ?at a
minimum[,] cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of article 16 of the convention
against torture. If the effects in regards to pain and suffering in?icted on Manning were more
severe, they could constitute torture.? Id. at 41.

367. Moreover, this case is readily distinguishable from Thompson, where the Court identi?ed
two critical considerations that contributed to its ?nding that the accused?s pretrial con?nement
was not oppressive for purposes of Article 10. 68 M.J. at 313-14. First, the accused in
Thompson failed to raise even a single formal or informal complaint about her con?nement
conditions or to request a change in her con?nement conditions. Id. Second, the accused
entered into a pretrial agreement in which she expressly waived her ability to assert a claim for
relief under Article 13 for illegal pretrial punishment. Id. Here, by contrast, PFC Manning, both
of his own accord and through counsel, made numerous formal and informal complaints
regarding his harsh con?nement conditions at Quantico, in addition to several requests to be
taken off of MAX custody and P01 status. See Appellate Exhibit 258, at 47-49 (chronicling the
several requests made by Mr. Coombs to the Of?ce as well as PFC Manning?s DD Form
510 complaint, request for release from pretrial con?nement under R.C.M. 305(g), and Article
138 requests and rebuttals). Additionally, far from waiving the ability to assert an Article 13

112



26047

claim for relief, PFC Manning recently ?led an Article 13 Motion to Dismiss All Charges, which
spans 1 10 pages and lays out the oppressive treatment of PFC Manning in painstaking detail.

See Appellate Exhibit 258. A supplementary Article 13 motion was also ?led in response to the
late disclosure of critical emails. See Appellate Exhibit 260. This case, then, stands in stark
contrast to Thompson with respect to the two considerations relied on by the Thompson Court.
See 68 M.J. at 313-14.

368. Therefore, PFC Manning?s pretrial con?nement has plainly been oppressive for purposes
of the prejudice factor in the Article 10 analysis.

369. Turning to the second interest of the accused sought to be protected by the speedy trial
rights, PFC Manning suffered substantial anxiety and concern in his 845 days of pretrial
con?nement. See Appellate Exhibit 258, at 4, 13, 28, 31-33. As an initial matter, the sheer
inordinate length of PFC Manning?s pretrial con?nement itself leads to the common sense
conclusion that PFC Manning must have suffered serious anxiety and concern. The Navy-
Marine Court of Criminal Appeals? decision in Calloway is instructive in this regard. In
Calloway, the court reversed the military judge?s denial of the accused?s Article 10 motion to
dismiss and held that the Government had violated the accused?s Article 10 speedy trial rights by
not trying him after he had spent 1 15 days in pretrial con?nement. 47 M.J. at 787. The
Calloway Court explained the resolution of the prejudice factor in this case:

The prejudice suffered by the appellant is self-evident in the fact of his
con?nement. He has been deprived of his liberty for 1 15 days. Our supervisory
court has stated that ?3 months is a long time to languish in a brig awaiting an
opportunity to confront one?s We perceive that the 1 15 days that the
appellant languished in the brig was longer than Congress considers appropriate,
when there was no showing of a reasonably diligent effort by the government to
bring him to trial, or even to inform him of the charges against him.

Id." at 785 (quoting Kossman, 38 M.J. at 261) (citation omitted). Surely if prejudice is ?self-
evident? in the fact of 1 15 days of pretrial con?nement, id., the substantial prejudice involved in
languishing in pretrial con?nement for 845 days must be equally unmistakable, if not more so.

370. Moreover, apart from the ordinary anxiety and concern that accompanies any
pretrial con?nement, PFC Manning suffered anxiety and concern above and beyond the norm as
a result of the oppressiveness of his con?nement. For example, during his time in Kuwait from
31 May 2010 until 29 July 2010, PFC Manning?s mental health deteriorated. Appellate Exhibit
258, at 4. PFC Manning was anxious, confused and disoriented for much of his time in Kuwait.
Id.

371. Additionally, PFC Manning?s anxiety was only ampli?ed upon his arrival at the Quantico
Brig. As was explained by Captain William Hocter, the forensic for the Brig, the
?[s]uicide precautions and P01 [imposed upon PFC Manning while he was at the Brig] were
excessive and were making Manning unnecessarily anxious.? Id. at 13 (quoting af?davit
of Captain William Hocter). Indeed, the strain on PFC Manning caused by his excessive
con?nement conditions was readily apparent in an episode that occurred 18 January 201 1. After

113

26048

being harassed by the Brig guards both inside his cell and during his brief period of exercise,
PFC Manning suffered an anxiety attack. Id. at 28. His heart was pounding in his chest, and he
could feel himself getting dizzy. Id The stress PFC Manning was experiencing was so severe
that he needed to sit down to avoid falling down. Id. In his conversations with two Brig of?cials
after his anxiety attack, PFC Marming?s concern for and frustration at his con?nement conditions
was evident. As for the anxiety attack itself, PFC Manning explained that his anxiety increased
because the Brig guards who were harassing him were ?edgy? and ?anxious.? Id. at 31. He
further explained that he was feeling lightheaded because he was hyperventilating. Id. Moving
the conversation to the more general topic of his con?nement conditions at Quantico, PFC
Manning related that he was growing increasingly frustrated. Id. at 32. He revealed his ?main
concern? each day: ?[H]ow do I get off of P01 statusP01 status?? When
will I be taken off of POI status? What is being used to justify the precautions?? Id. PFC
Manning explained his frustrating belief that nothing he could do would change the conditions of
his con?nement: feel like the facility, honestly, I feel like the facility is looking for reasons to
keep me on POI status.? Id. at 33.

372. Of course, there was no improvement in PFC Manning?s con?nement conditions during the
remainder of his time at Quantico. In fact, things got even worse, as PFC Manning was placed
under a version of pseudo-Suicide Risk restrictions for a total of 53 days out of the remainder of
his 93 days at Quantico after 18 January 2011. Id. at 27, 35-37. These restrictions could only
exacerbate PFC Manning?s already heightened anxiety and concern caused by his pretrial
con?nement. In addition to being severely onerous, these restrictions above and beyond PFC
Manning?s MAX custody and P01 status restrictions were also humiliating and degrading; over a
span of four straight days, PFC Marming was forced to suffer, for no apparent legitimate reason,
the humiliation of standing naked at parade rest in front of several Brig guards for several
minutes each time. After PFC Manning realized that there was nothing he could do to change
the conditions of his con?nement, he became more withdrawn. As chronicled in the Article 13
motion, this was then used against him in justifying the MAX and P01 designations.

373. Therefore, PFC Manning?s pretrial con?nement has caused PFC Manning to suffer
substantial anxiety, concern, frustration and humiliation.

374. Finally, moving to the third, and most important, see Barker, 407 U.S. at 532; Cossio, 64
M.J. at 257; Mizgala, 61 M.J. at 129, relevant interest of the accused limiting the possibility of
impairment of the defense PFC Manning?s ability to effectively prepare his defense was
substantially impaired by the Government?s profound delay in processing his case. Most glaring
has been the Government?s inexplicable failure to understand its discovery obligations and to
timely conduct its required Brady searches. See Argument, Part B.2.b.ii, iv, supra. How much
evidence was either lost or destroyed as a result of the Government?s inexplicable failure to
understand its discovery obligations for 698 days? There is simply no way to know. The
Government will no doubt seize on this point, claiming that any assertion of prejudice resulting
from its profound misunderstanding of how military discovery operates is speculative at best.
But this argument would miss the point entirely. To the extent that the Defense?s claim that the
Government?s discovery missteps caused evidence to be lost or destroyed is speculative, this is
only because the Government?s failure to understand its discovery obligations for such a long
period of time raises serious concerns about spoliation of evidence. If the Government

114

26049

understood its discovery obligations from day one of this case, as any reasonably diligent
prosecutor would, the case would not still be mired in discovery and the Defense would have no
reason to fear that evidence has been lost or destroyed as a result of any inexcusable delay. But
this case has not been processed in a reasonably diligent manner. Therefore, because of the
substantial delay, which has been seriously compounded by the Govemment?s failure to
understand its discovery obligations for the first 698 days of this case, the impairment of the
defense cannot even be quanti?ed.

375. Plus, the Government is still ?in the process? of conducting its Brady searches, including
Brady searches of its own ?les. See Argument, Part B.2.b.iv, supra. This case has been ongoing
for 845 days. And the Defense is still waiting for the Government to ?nish its Brady searches.
In the meantime, the Defense has just recently received critical Brady discovery, and it is still
awaiting more critical discovery. When the Defense at long last receives all of the discoverable
information it has requested, the Defense will need time to review the evidence in planning PFC
Manning?s defense. Receiving discovery from the Government in dribs and drabs over the
course of two years is representative of the Government?s lack of due diligence.

376. PFC Manning has also suffered prejudice to the preparation and presentation of his defense
by the Govemment?s lack of diligence that is separate and apart from its inexcusable failure to
understand its discovery obligations. For example, the Govemment?s lack of diligence in
responding to the Defense?s discovery requests potentially resulted in the loss of evidence. On
21 September 2011, the Defense requested the preservation of 14 computer hard drives. It was
not until that 30 November 201 1 that the Government noti?ed the Defense that it was seeking to
preserve the requested forensic computer images of the hard drives. Moreover, even before the
Defense?s request, the CID requested that the hard drives be preserved in September 2010.
Nevertheless, the Government noti?ed the Defense on 16 April 2012, eighteen months after the
preservation request, that 2 drives were completely inoperable, 7 drives were wiped, and 1
drive was partially wiped. See Appellate Exhibit at 15-16. While the email did not state
when the 8 drives were wiped, if the Government had acted more quickly on the September 2010
CID preservation request, perhaps the wiped drives would have been preserved. Since the
Government waited until 30 November 2011 to begin the process of preserving the requested
forensic images, over a year and two months after the preservation request, the
Govemment?s lack of diligence may have resulted in this loss of evidence.

377. Moreover, the Govemment?s lack of diligence impacted PFC Manning?s ability to defend
himself at the Article 32 hearing. The Government unloaded a barrage of discovery and forensic
evidence in the month or so before commencement of the Article 32 hearing, despite the fact the
case had been ongoing for over a year and a half at that time. Because of the sheer volume and
lack of organization of this discovery, it was impossible for the Defense to sort through the
material and organize it in any coherent manner before the Article 32 hearing took place.
Accordingly, the Defense was deprived of the ability to use this evidence at the Article 32
hearing as a result of the Government?s untimely disclosure. See Footnote 3, supra.

378. Finally, the Govemment?s incredibly belated disclosure of the Quantico emails on the night

before the Article 13 Motion was due also prejudiced the Defense. The Defense was not able to
incorporate these emails into its original motion, so the Defense was required to ?le a 27 page

115



26050

supplemental motion shortly after receiving the emails. The emails impacted the witness list for
the motion. Because of the late disclosure of the emails, the Article 13 motions hearing was
pushed back yet again, from late August all the way to late November. Additionally, because the
Government only disclosed 84 of the over one thousand emails, the Defense was required to ?le
yet another motion to compel discovery. The Court has subsequently ordered that virtually all
the emails be produced to the Defense. The Defense will have to cull through all these emails
and potentially ?le another supplementary motion and/or update its witness list. Most
importantly, the Govemment?s lack of diligence prevented the Defense from presenting the
Article 13 motion in the manner of its choosing. The Defense would certainly have preferred to
have ?led one Article 13 motion, rather than one Article 13 motion plus two supplementary
motions (not to mention multiple replies to Government responses). If only the Government had
diligently reviewed the emails and disclosed them to the Defense, the Article 13 motions and
hearing would have been able to proceed on schedule. Because of the Govemment?s lack of
diligence, further delay has been piled upon PFC Manning. Therefore, PFC Manning?s defense
has been impaired by the inordinate delay that the Government has injected into this case. For
these reasons, the fourth factor of the Article 10 procedural framework and the Sixth
Amendment analysis also must be resolved in PFC Manning?s favor.

5. Balancing the Factors

379. Each factor in the Article 10 procedural framework and Sixth Amendment analysis points
unwaveringly to the conclusion that the Government has violated PFC Manning?s Article 10 and
Sixth Amendment trial rights. The sheer length of delay 845 days makes this case stand
apart from all other military cases. The reasons for delay, notwithstanding the Govemment?s
assertions to the contrary, are clear and damning. The Government has processed this entire case
from beginning to end at a snail?s pace. The classi?cation review process inexplicably lagged
for 566 days, causing the Government to delay the Article 32 hearing eight times. The
Govemment?s failure to understand its basic discovery obligations and how the discovery rules
operate in a classi?ed evidence for the ?rst 698 days of this case is as unprecedented as it is
inexcusable. Nothing the Government can offer can justify the 845 delay in bringing PFC
Manning to trial. Additionally, PFC Manning made a genuine speedy trial demand early on in
his con?nement, renewed this demand once more, and reiterated these demands every time the
Government sought to delay the proceedings further. Finally, PFC Manning has suffered
substantial prejudice to all three prejudice interests. Therefore, taking all of the factors together,
there can be no doubt that PFC Manning?s Article 10 and Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights
have been violated. Accordingly, this Court must dismiss all charges with prejudice. See
Kossman, 38 M.J. at 262 (explaining that dismissal with prejudice is the only remedy for
violation of an accuSed?s Article 10 rights); R.C.M. 707(d)(l) (?The charges must be dismissed
with prejudice where the accused has been deprived of his or her constitutional right to a speedy


CONCLUSION
380. A military accused?s right to speedy trial is fundamental. The Govemment?s processing of

this case makes an absolute mockery of that fundamental right. The mandate of R.C.M. 707(a)
that an accused be arraigned within 120 days of the imposition of restraint has been technically

116

26051

complied with in this case (if all of the Convening Authority?s many exclusions are upheld) only
because the Convening Authority abandoned any attempt to make an independent determination
of the reasonableness of any Government delay request. Instead, the Convening Authority
operated as a mere rubber stamp by granting all delay requests, which totaled 327 days, without
being provided with or itself providing any reasons that justi?ed the excluded delay as
reasonable. Additionally, the Govemment?s delay of the Article 32 hearing and its inexcusable
failure to understand its basic discovery obligations have completely ?outed the reasonable
diligence standard of Article 10. If PFC Manning?s right to speedy trial is indeed fundamental,
there can be no doubt that the Govemment?s tremendous lack of diligence in the processing of
this case violated that fundamental right.

381. In Kossman, Judge Wiss observed that ?[t]here are no winners when criminal trials are
unnecessarily delayed; all are losers.? 38 M.J. at 266 (Wiss, ., dissenting). All have lost as a
result of the Govemment?s shameful and unjustifiable delay in this case. PFC Manning has lost.
The United States Government has lost. The entire system of military justice has lost. There is
only one adequate remedy for such a total loss: dismissal of all charges with prejudice.

382. For these reasons, the Defense requests this Court to dismiss all charges and speci?cations
with prejudice because the Government has trampled upon PFC Manning?s speedy trial rights.

Respectfully submitted,

/4

DAVID EDWARD COOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

117

Speedy Trial Attachment 1

26052

26053

C^RO^OLO^Y
2^^a^^010 PI^C^annin^v^^uesoon^byCIDa^placcdmadmi^st^t^vel^Id
by the Company Commander with escorts.
29 May 2010

PFC Manning was placed into pretrial confinemenL

^O^a^^OlO PTCR6vie^cond^ted.
31 May 2010 PFC Manning translerred to Theater Field Confinement Facility (TFCF),
Camp Arif^an, ICuwaiL
31 May to 5 July 2010
5 July 2010
6 July 2010
^rI4J^ly2010

(No Apparent Govemment Activity 36 Days)

Original Charges Prelerred.
Appointment ofLTC Craig Merutka as the Article 32 Officer. Hearing set

11 July 2010 Delense requested a delay in the Article 32 hearing in order to conduct an
R C M . 706 board. The Request was denied.
12 July 2010 Delense renews request ^rdelay ofArticle 32 hearing in order to conduct
an R.C.M. 706 board. The Request is granted.
13 July 30 July 2010
29July20I0

(No Apparent Government Activity 17 Days)

Translerred fiom TFCF to ^uantico^ Virginia.

4 August 2010
11 .August 2010
aoR^CM^O^boa^

Appointment of LTC Paul Almanza as the new Article 32 Olficer.
Delense requested a delay inthe Article 32 hearing in order to conduct

12 At^ust 2010 Delense requested delay isapproved. The Convening Authority, COL
CarlR. Coffinan Jr., states "period from 11 August 2010 until the R.C M.706 Sanity Board
completion is excludable delense delay ."
25 August 2010 Delense request Ibr appointment of expert wilh expertise in Ibrensic
psychiatry to assist the Delense.
25August2010 The Convening Authority, COL Carl R Colfinan Jr. excludes the
period between 27 August 2010 and until the CGMCA takes action ofthe delense request Ibr
appointment ofa Ibrensic psychiatry expert consultant is excludable delay under R.C.M. 707(c).

26054

26 August 2010 Defense request for delay i n R C M . 7 0 6 board tocomply with
prohibitions on disclosure ofclassified inlbrmation.
3September2010 Delense request fbr appropriate security clearancesfi^rDelense team
and access (br PFC Manning.
17September 2010 Preliminary Classification Review of Accused'sMental
Impressions Order by COL Carl R.CofimanJr.
l^September 2010 Defense Response to the Preliminary Classification Review of
Accused'sMental Impressions.
22 September 2010 Superseding Order for Preliminary Classification Review of
Accused'sMental Impressions.
120ctober 2010 The Convemng Authority,COLCarlRCofinianJrexc1udes the
period fiom 12Ju1y2010unti112October2010asexc1udabledelayunderRCM707(c)
29 October 2010

Delense makes its first discovery requesL

lONovember 2010 The Convening Authority. COL Carl R.CofimanJr. excludes the
periodfioml2October2010until lONovember as excludable delay under R.C.M 707(c).
lONovember 2010
^December 2010
13December 2010
Govemment.

Delense makes its second discovery request.
Delense makes its third discovery requesU
Results ofPreliminary Classification Review provided to the

17December2010 TheConveningAuthority,COLCarlRCoffinanJrexcludesthe
period fiom lONovember 2010untill7December2010as excludable delay under R.C.M.
707(c)
lOJanuary 2011

Defense makes its Iburth discovery requesL

13January2011

Delense Request Ibr Speedy TriaL

14January 2011 The Convemng Authority.COL Cart R.CofimanJr. excludes the
period fioml7December2010untill4January2011as excludable delay under R.C.M. 707(c).
The Convening Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest for Speedy Trial
19January2011^Delense makes its fifih discovery requesL

26055

15 February 2011 The Convening Authority,COL Carl R.CofimanJr. excludes the
period fioml4January2011untill5February2011as excludable delay under R.C.M. 707(c).
The Convening Authority acknowledged the Defense'srequest fbr SpeedyTriak
16February 2011
14March2011

Delense makes its sixth discovery requesL
RCM.706 Board Extension Request by the Board.

18March 2011 The Convening Authority, COL Carl R.CofimanJr. approves oflhe
R.C.M. 706 Board Extension Request and directs the Board to complete its work by I6Apri1
20IL
18March2011 The Convening Authority, COL Carl R. Coffinan Jr excludes the
pertod fiom 15February2011untill8March2011as excludable delay under R.C.M. 707(c).
The Convening Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest Ibr SpeedyTriak
15 A p r i l 2 0 1 1 R . C M 706 Additional Extension Request bythe Board
20 April 2011 PFC Manning translerred fiom O^^fi^o to the Joint Regional
CorrectionalFacility atFort Leavenworth, l^ansas.
22April2011

TheRCM.706Boardsubmitsitsreport.

22 April 2011 The Convening Authority, COL Carl R.CofimanJr. excludes the period
froml8March20Ilunti122Aprtl2011asexeludabledelayunderRCM 707(c) The
Convening Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest Ibr SpeedyTriak
25 April 2011- Trial Cotmsel Request Ibr Delay of Article 32 hearing until the
Govemment receives consent fiom all of the Original Classification Authorities(OCAs)to
release discoverable classified evidence and inlbrmation to the Delense.
26 April 2011 Delense opposition to the Govemment'sexcludable delay request anda
request (br the Convening Authortty to direct either substitutions or summaries be provided to
the Delense to avoid any delay in the Article 32.
23 April through 12 May 2011

(No Apparent Govemment Activity 20 Days).

12May 2011 The Convening Authority,COL Carl R.CofimanJr. excludes the period
fiom22April2011unti112May2011asexcludabledelayunderR.CM
707(c) The
Convening Authority acknowledged the Defense'srequest f ) r SpeedyTriak
13May2011-Delcnse makes its seventh discovery request.
22 May 2011 Trial Counsel Request fbr Delay ofArticle 32 hearing until the
Govemment receives the proper authority to release discoverable unclassified and classified

26056

evidence and infbrmation to the defense.The Govemment also represented that the delay was
needed to give the delense adequate time to prepare forthe Article 32 investigation.
24 May 2011 E-mail by the Delense opposing the excludable delay. The Delense
repeated its position fiom the 26 April 2011memorandum.
17 June 2011 The Convening Authority, COL Carl R.Colfman Jr. excludes the period
707(c) TheConvening
fioml2May2011untill7June2011ase^cludabledelayunderRC.M
Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest for SpeedyTrial.
I3Maythroughl7June2011-(No Apparent GovemmentActivity 36 Days).
27 June 2011^Tria1 Counsel Request Ibr Delay of Article 32 hearing until the
Govemment receives the proper authority to release discoverable unclassified and classified
evidence and inlbrmation to the defense The Govemment also represented that the delay was
needed to give the defense adequate time to prepare fbr the Article 32 investigation.
29 June 2011-E mail by the Delense opposing the excludable delay. The Delense
repeated its position fiom the 26 April 2011memorandum.
5July 2011 The Convening Authortty,COL Carl R.CofimanJr. approves the
Govemment'srequest Ibr delay and excludes the period fiom 22 April 2011until 27 July 2011
as excludable delay under R.C.M. 707(e).
l^June through5July 2011

(No Apparent Govemment Activity l^Days).

25 July 2011^Trtal Counsel Request forDelay ofArticle 32 hearing until the
Govemment receives the proper authority to release discoverable imclassified and classified
evidence and information to the delense. The Govemment als^^ represented that the delay was
needed to give the defense adequate time to prepare forthe Article 32 investigation.
25 July 2011 The Delense opposes the Govemment'sdelay and requests that any
additional delay should be credited to the Govemment. The Defense renews its SpeedyTrial
demand and also makesademand under Article 10. Fina11y,the Defense points out that the
govemment has had overayear to obtain approval Ibr the release of classified and unclassified
inlbrmation to the Delense.
26 July 2011 The Convemng Authority, COL Carl R.CofimanJr.approvesthe
Govemment'srequest for delay and excludes the period fiom 22 April 201Iuntil 27 August
2011asexcludabledelay under R.C.M. 707(c).
6Julythrough26Ju1y2011

(No Apparent Govemment Activity 21 Days).

lOAugust 2011 The Convemng Authority, COL CarlRCoffinanJrexcludes the
period fiom 13 July 2011until lOAugust 2011as excludable delay underRC.M 707(c).The

26057

Convening Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest fbr speedy Trial dated 13January
2011and the Delense'srenewed request for SpeedyTrial dated 25 July 2011.
25 August 2011 Trial Counsel Request fbrDelay o f / ^ i c l e 32 hearing tmtil the
Government receives the proper authority to release discoverable unclassified and classified
evidence and inlbrmation to the defense. The Govemment also represented that the delay was
needed to give the delense adequate time to prepare Ibr the Article 32 investigation.
27 August 2011 E-mail fiom the Defense objecting to the Govemment'srequest for
excludable delay. The Defense requested that the delay should be credited to the Govemment
Ibr SpeedyTrial and ArticlelOpurposes.
29 August 2011 The Convening Authortty,COL Carl R.CofimanJr. approves the
Govemment'srequest for delay and excludes the period fiom 22 April 2011unti1 27 September
2011as excludable delay under R.C.M.707(c).
27 July through 29 August 2011
21 September 2011

(No Apparent Govemment Activity 34 Days).

Delense makes its eighth discovery request.

26 September 2011 Trial Counsel Request fbr Delay ofArticle 32 hearing until the
Govemment receives the proper authority to release discoverable unclassified and classified
evidence and inlbrmation to the delense. The Govemment also represented that the delay was
needed to give the delense adequate time to prepare Ibr the Article 32 investigation.
27 September 2011-E-mail fiom the Defense objecting to the Govemment'srequest Ibr
excludable delay. The Delense requested that the delay should be credited to the Govermnent
fi^r SpeedyTrial and ArticlelOpurposes.
28 September 2011-l^e Convening Authority, COL Carl R.CofimanJr.approvesthe
Govemment'srequest for delay and excludes the period from 22 April 2011unti1 27 October
20IlasexcludabIedelayunderR.C.M. 707(c).
30 August through 28 September 2011
130ctober 2011

(No Apparent Govemment Activity 30 Days).

Delense makes its ninth discovery request.

140ctober 2011 The ConveningAuthority,COLCarlRCoffmanJrexcludes the
period fiom 15 September 2011tmti114October2011as excludable delay under R.C.M.707(c).
The Convening Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest Ibr Speedy Trial datedl3
January 2011and the Delense'srenewed request for SpeedyTrial dated 25 July 2011.
240ctober 2011 The Govemment disclosed to the Delense the one page DISA
classification review, which bad been completed on6June 2011. The Govemment offered no
explanation for the delay between completion ofthe classification review and disclosure.

26058

25 October 2011 Trial Counsel Request fbr Delay of Article 32 hearing until the
Govemment receives the proper authority to release discoverable unclassified and classified
evidence and inlbrmation to the delense. The Govemment also represented that the delay was
needed to give the delense adequate time to prepare for the Article 32 investigation.
25 October 2011 Email fiom the Delense objecting to the Goverrmient'srequest Ibr
excludable delay, ^^e Defense requested that the delay should be credited to the Govemment
Ibr SpeedyTrial and ArticlelOpurposes.
27 October 2011 The Convening Authority, COL Carl R.CofimanJr. approves the
Govemment'srequest fbr delay and excludes the period fiom 22 April 2011until 28 November
2011asexcludabledelayunderR.C.M. 707(c).
29 September through 27 October 2011

(No Apparent Govemment Activity29 Days).

28 October through 15 November 2011

(No Apparent Govemment Activity 19Days).

4November 2011 The Govemment disclosed to the Delense the three page Apache
Video classification review,which was completed on 26 August 2010, anda28-page Other
Goverronent Agency classification review, fhe Govemment ofiered no explanation Ibr the
delay between completion of the ApacheVideo classification review and its disclosure.
8November 2011 The Govemment disclosed to the Defenseathree-page CENTCOM
PowerPoint classification review that was completed on21 Febmary 2011,a24page
CENTCOM classification review that was completed on210ctober 2011,atbur-page
C^BERCOM classification review thathas completed on21 July 2011,anda51-page
Department ofState classification review that was completed on 30 October 2011. The
Govemment oflered no explanation for the delays between completion of the CENTCOM
PowerPoint and C^BERCOM classification reviews and their disclosure.
15November20I1

Defense makes its tenth discovery requesL

16November2011-Delense makes its eleventh discovery request.
16November 2011 The Convening Authortty, COL Carl R.Cofiinan Jr. excludes the
period fiom 14October2011unti116November2011as excludable delay under R.C.M.707(c).
The Convening Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest for SpeedyTrial dated 13
January 2011and the Delense'srenewed request for SpeedyTrial dated 25 July 2011.
16November 2011 Trial Counsel requests the Convening Authority to exclude the
period between 16November2011andl6December2011as excludable delay under R.C.M.
707(c)in order Ibr the Govemment to obtain the final classification review fiom an OCA and to
provide the command with time to execute OPEANBRAYO.
16November 2011 E-mail fiom the Delense objecting to the Govemment proposed
start date and proposing an earlier date of 12 December 2011. l^e Defense also objected to any

26059

delay being excluded under R.C.M. 707(c)and instead requested the time be counted against the
Govemment for SpeedyTrtal and ArticlelOpurposes.
16November 2011 The Convemng Authority,COL Carl R.CofimanJr. approves the
Govemment'srequest for delay and excludes the period fiom 22 April 2011until16December
2011asexcludabledelayunderR.CM. 707(c)
I6November2011 The Convening Authority, COL Carl R.CoffinanJr. provides
special instmctions to the Article 32 Investigating Oflicer
I7Novemberthroughl5December 2011
IDecember 2011
Article 32 hearing.

Delense makes motion to compel production of evidence at the

16Decemberthrough22December2011
23 December 2011

(No apparent Govemment Activity 29 days)

Article 32 hearing

3January 2012 (NoapparentGovemmentActivityl2days)

3January 2012 The Convemng Authority, COL Carl R.CofimanJr. excludes the
period fioml6November2011until 15 December 2011as excludable delay under R.C.M.
707(c). The Convening Authority acknowledged the Delense'srequest for SpeedyTrial dated
13 January 2011and the Delense'srenewed request for SpeedyTrial dated 25 July 2011.
3January 2012 E-mail fiom then CPT Fein to Article 32 Investigating Officer,LTC
Paul Almanza, requesting that he exclude as reasonable delay anytime between 22 December
2011and3January 2012 that he did not work on the Article 32 investigation based on the
lederal holidays and weekends.
4January 2012 Email fiomLTC Paul Alman^ to CPT Fein stating that he will
exclude as reasonable delay the days between 23 December 2011and3January 2012 when he
did not work on the Article 32 investigation.
llJanuary2012-LTC Paul Almanza submits his Article 32 report and
recommendations.
12January

2Febmary 2012

(No apparent Govemment Activity 22 days)

20 January 2012

Defense makes its twelfih discovery requesL

3Febmary 2012

GCMCA refers the case

3Febmary 2012 Electronic Docket Notification submitted bylrial Counsel requesting
atrial date of3 April 2012

26060

6February 2012 Electronic DocketNotification submitted by Delense requestingatrial
dateof30 April 2012dueto fellow defensecounselbeinginlLEand other confiicts
8February2012

Initial 802Conference

16Febmary 2012 Defensefilesitsfirstmotiontocompeldiscovery.
23 Febmary 2012 Arraignment
15 I6March20I2-Article39(a)MotionsHearing
22 March 2012 Email sent by then-CPT Fein stating Govemment'sposition that
R.C.M. 701 did not apply to classified evidence cases.
23 26 ApriI2012 Article39(a) Motions Hearing
23 April 2012 CourtrulingonDefense Motion to DismissAll Charges, coDifirming
Govemment had been operating underamisunderstandingofitsdiscoveryobligationsand the
relevant discovery mies.
lOMay 2012 Defensefilesits second motion to compel discovery.
6 8June 2012 Article 39(a) Motions Hearing
25 June2012 Court orders Govemment to provide it withaduediligence statementno
laterthan25 July 2012
26 July 2012 Govemment discloses 84 emails "obviously material to the preparation of
the defense fbr Articlel3purposes" the night before the Delense Article 13 Motion was due.
Govemment represents that the emails had been in its possession Ibr six months, but that it had
just begun its review ofthe emails the day before, 25 July 2012.
17 August 2012 Delensefilesits third motion tocompel discovery.

26061

Speedy Trial Attachment 2

26062

ORIGINAL

CONFINEMENT ORDER

1. PERSON TO BE CONFINED

2. DATE

0. NAME /Last, first, Middle}
MANNING, Bramcy




a. GTADE





SSN

I e. miumw

20I00529

c. RESULT OF COURT MARTIAL:

TYPE:

SCM lj sr-cm



omecrmc courmmeu
57-
MATTHEW w,

AD. Commanding



d. DNA PROCESSING I I IS IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER U.S.C. 1565.
if or uEivT.i ix'n'r'icTEs
Anicle I28: Assault by :1 Amc.'i: 134 I. 793: \VrongI'u|

8. IF THE SENTENCE IS DEFERRED, THE DATE DFFERMENT IS TFRMINATED:


I . VACATED SUSPENSION



u. SIGNATURE

CHRISTOPHER D. GOREN
PT, JA, Trial Counsel

8.1. NAME. GRADE, TITLE OF LEGAL REVEW AND APPI

OVAL 7





Anny E-3 HHC, 3d I. MIN DIV (LI), COS Hammer, Iraq, APO AE 09308
or connusmsm
No Tb. nssun 20I00529

MEDICAL centurion:-" A

93. The above named inmate was examined by me at
Ti

I Inc)
for confinement. I certify that from this examination the execution of the
Dwill will not produce serious injury to the inmate?: health.

YMMDUI

b. The Iollowing irregularities were noted dur ng the examination none, so stare}-

HIV Test administered on ?~43 0" '3

:1 Pregnancy test administered on

on QOIOOSI1 and found to be

H: Un?t

foregoing sentence to con?nement

EXAMINER

I. TYPED NA

LE: II. sicmnuns NYE ld.TlME

??z??g?jng ilolo $21 I I73-F


HIE MTND.

d?sip?on mum:

.

o~
(V 1 mm:

THE mints NAMED move was seen necaveo son couriusivisur AT: fpcp;

{Facility Nam: and

no RM 2707. SEP 2005

ManningB_42959

5. reason neceurrmo son NMATE c. SIGNATURE. c. 6'41: .. nus
TYPED NAME. canoe AND mus:
421 t, 2
7753 5 Z?/d $31 I I 3
EDITION IS OBSOLETE. Aotbo?uosumd 7

ORIGINAL

26063

Speedy Trial Attachment 3

26064

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
H6A0QUA«TErlS, 20 BRIG * X COMBAT TEAM
iOTH MOUWTAIN DWISIDN (LIGHT INFANTRY
UNITED STATES DIVISION - CENTER
COS HAMMER. IRAQ
APO AE 0»M»

ro
trrcMiON or

.\: I)K-|:;|)..\

A July 2010

Mt-MOk.^NDl Vl FOR l.ieutcnant Colonel Craig Mmtka
SlIB.li.C I : .Appoinmcit as ..\nitic 32 Inve&iigaiing Officer in ihe Case of L.nili'aJilatesj^
I'nvalo I'it.il Cl^ii.s Brjdlcv h- Manning

1. in cuordmalion \Mih USF-I OSJA and Command. I appoint you as an invcsiigaiing officer
under the provisions of Article 32. Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to investigate the
attached charges ajiajtist Private i-ir.st Ciass Bradley b. Manning. Hcadquancrs and Headquarters
Company. 2d Bngade Combat Team. 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry). APO .^K 09308,
! his duty takes precedence over all other duties. Your duties arc to:
a. Conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the truth ofthe allegations;
h

CunsiJc.- the correcmess and the lorm ofthe chari^es; and

c. Make rceommendatioa'i us to the disposition of Ihc eharges in the merest ofjustice and
ji
2. Compiele your invesiigalion and report of investigation w-ithin 10 days from the date of this
mcmora:idujn. You \Aill schedule a time. date, and location for the hearinu. You ha\e the
aulhortiy to grant reasonable requests by the attorneys to delay this investiuution, Ifthe Accused
or the Accused's attorney cannot proceed on the selected dale, obtain a request for delay from
the .Accused's counsel in wnting and attach it to the report oflnvestigation I must approve
dclavs ir excess of 10 days.
.V Contact Captain Chad Mcl-arland. Chief. Administrative Law Division. OlTicc ofthe Stall'
Judge Advocate. 1st .Armored Division and United Stales Division Center. SVOIP 243-787L
for Ihe name of your assigned legal advisor. You will not seek legal advice from any other
attorney aswiciatcd with the case.
4, Captain I like Ruse. Chief .Militar) Justice. 1st Armored Division and United States Division
Center. Capta;n .Alison Atkins. 1 rial Counsel. Ist .Vrmored Divisior. and Lniled States
Division - Center, and Captain Chrisiopher Oorcn. Trial Counsel. 2d Brigade Combat Team.
iOlh Mountain Division (Light Infantry) are designated as the Government ,^eprescniatives and
arc authc ri/.cd to participate in this case, fhe Accused's counsels are Captain Paul Bouchard.
I'rial Defense Service Camp Liberty field Oflice. and Captain Michael Haton, I rial Defense
Service. Camp Victoiy Field Oflice. While either ofthese panics may call and question
witnesses, the responsibility to conduct the invcsligatian is yours. Both of tnese parties play an

26065

A!DR-»BA
SL'BJhC i : Appttintmcni as Article 32 Investigatinsi Officer in the Case of United Stales v.
Private first Class Bradiev h. Mannina
adversarial role in the procccdinjjs. You should not discuss the merits of the case with either
party outade formal Kssions where al! panics have the opportunily lo be present.
5 I he isi Armored Division and United States Division - Center Mililary Justice Oflke will
provide your clerical support.
0. You should become familiar with the following reference materials.'doeutnents:
a. /*jtiele3:.UCM.I
b.

RCM 4{H

c. 1 >epartment ol the Army Painphlei 27-17. Procedural Guide for .Article 32 Investigating
Oflicer. I6SepleMber 1990.
d. Department of Defense (DD) fonn 458, Charge Sheet
7. The nvestigaiing OHicer's Procedural Guide discusses in detail procedural aspects from
appointment to submission of the final report. Included in Appendix B is a sample formal for
noiilicat on ofthe Accused. You should modify the format by for^ardiny the notification
through he Accused s unit commander to the Accused to ensure that the unit commander is
aware ol the time and location ofthe hearing, thereby ensuring the prtsence ofthe .Accused at
the hearini;. !f counsel already represents the Accused, you should send the wTitten notice to that
counsel ard an information copy to the unit. You should also provide an inlormation copy to the
appropri-iie trial counsel.
8. A court reporter from I sl Armored Division and L'nited States Division Center will record
and transcribe the testimony, Absent my written approval, the investigation will not be
transcribed verbatim,
9. Submit the complete report of investigation. DD f orm 437. investigatinji Oflicer s Report,
w Ith enclosures, and a chronology of the investigation from receipt of file to submission of the
report to the Isl Armored Division and United States Division - Center, Military Justice Otliee.
no later than 10 days alter you complete the investigation.

DAVID M. MILi.HR
COL IN
Commanding

Speedy Trial Attachment 4

26066



DEPARTMENT OF THE ARIIY
uun-so sures uurv NUAL oersuse same:
can uaelmran omen
cm? unam mo

1! July 20l0

MEMORANDUM THRU LTC Craig Article 32 Investigation Officer. mama: of US v.
PFC Manning

FOR Convcning Authority

Request for delay in Article 32 hearing based on Defense request for a 706 board

1. The defense respectfully requsts that the July l-1" Article 32 investigative bearing in the
manner of US v. PFC Bradley Manning be delayed for the following reason:

On I I My 2010, at approximately I600 hours, the defense requested the Government
appoint and conduct a 706 board on PFC Manning. The defense is waiting to hear if such
a request will be approved by the converting authority.

9.
CPT. IA
Senior Defense Counsel

1. POC is the



26067

Speedy Trial Attachment 5

26068 1
I
I


26069

^

^

^

v^

^UB^

^

^
^ t:

B

^

^ ^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^A^^:^'^^t^^^^'^^^i^

^

.

^

,

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ v

^

^.:l

.

^

.1.

t.^

^^^^

^ ^

^t^^^

'^^.

^

^
^

^t

^

^

^1.^^

^^^^^^^^

^:

^

^ ^

,A^^.^^

^

^ ^^.^^^.^

.

...^^^^..t^,

^:::^^r^r.tt^^^^l^^

^ ^^,^,11,^ ^c^:^^^^t^...^^

^

It

.

^i^^e. ^

, ^

U..:^^^^^^^^B^-^^
^^^^^^ -^^^.^

..^,:^ ^ ^ t

Bst^

^

l^

^i^^^^„^^^

^^U^^^

^ ..^

^^tU t:^.:: v.^^^^^^

v...

e^^.,.^^^^..^^.t^^.^

^^^^:.^B^.,',i^i,^i^^^^,^^c^^t^.^^si,^^^^^

It

^
C

^

^l„

^^^^^t^

^

^
^

^
1

^

^

4

1^.. ^

^
^ ^

^ ^
^^0

^

1

^
^

1^ ^

^t^..

^•^^
^.^
t^

^

^
t

^

^

'^

t

4...

^

B
1^

.

^

..^^^

^

^

C

^
^

•^^^^v

4...
1^

t

^

4

^••^

^

^

^

^

^ ^v

^

^

1
^

1^^^^ ^

^
..^

t

t4
^.^

^

^

I

^

^

V^ V
^

^
^

^
^

^
^

^

^

4^1

^

t4

V

1^
^

^.^

^

t

^

^ct^^

l^.,i^^,,„::^,::^.^^B^..^^^.^:^.^^^.^^i,.

.BL

e
^i

^^.^^

^.^.^

te^
.^B^ .

.^^

•^^^^ t^^

^'^.

B:^

^te:B',.e^i.:l

^,

U:.i^^^4^et:^^::r^B:^^^^t^:^:^t:B^.^^:BA^^:^^f:^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^i:^tc^^^^^^y^^^^^^^ ^ ^ : ^ ^ . :4^

4

^
t

^

^

^

^ .

B

^-^^
..^^t^

.^^^^^
..^ ^

^c

^:^:.:t^sc^

l^^^:I^^B^:^:^^^^^t^l^::tt^^.^S^^^^

:^^^c:^c:^^^:^^^i:::.::T^^^^^^ ^•^i:v^^^^^i:^4Br^ :^^^B^^::il^^^^^^sc.^:r:^^^^^^
^::^^liBi^^^^:^^^^^^^^^.::^^^^^^^

',B'^t:.^^s^^^^^...il^:^..:i^:^^:sy^,^l^^^^^
:^,^A.:^.^^^,:^:B^:ti,^,B,'^IIB:^^^ti^^:,,i^^Bt^

Uncla8sHied_Di8covery_ManningB_000458

^ii:i:^A,^^^ ^^^^ ^:^:^^^^^^,

^f^^B^^.B^i^^^^v^^^^^^^B^:.:

^.^^ .^^ '^^^
26070

^^:^'^:^^^y^^T^v^^:B^^^it^:^:^^^^^^^r^^^^
B^^ ^^^.:^^:S^:i^::^^^^t^^B^U:^^^i^.^^:^^^^^^

^^^^B^^^t.^^t^^'^^^^^^':^^^^^^^^^
.^^.^^B,

^^^^ B^^^^^^^^,^^^^-:^:^^^i.:^:^i^^^^^^^

^

^^^^^^^^^^f:^::t^^^^^^^:^^t^^e^^t^Ct^^^^i^^^^B

the acceded 1 anc the 3i-C;;l;si i,:ap;iv;v
tt:: n-c
:l^es:,:^:^.^,^s:i^^S4^^t^^.::^,^:,::^^e^^i^^^i:.^tii:,^',
::^,^:.^^^^'::,^:B^.:^,'^v^Be:^^^et^^,^^.:^'B^i^ ^^:^:^ ,^^i^^^^^^^:^
^l^^^i^^^^^:!^^^^^:,:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
,^^:.:^^^^t-4'^^..:^:^^it^'^^^^:^^^','-^'^iv:^^^^^^^^^

::.:^tt:^^:^t'^^^^^^

^'^1^:.^: :^^^ t^^B::: :^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^:^^::,t^^,:^::^:t^:^i^BBy^:':^^^^^

^:^B,^A'^B^^

:^B^ ^^^4^^^^::.^t^^^t^^:^^f:l::^^^^^:4'^^^^^1^^4^:^::^,^^

-v::.:^^^^^^^^:-::^^^^^:^i^:^^^^^^^^^

^-^^ti'^,^^^^^,^::t^^^^^^,',^^^ •- i^^B4^i^^:i:^^ttv^t^:^

^^^rBA^^^^B4,r^^^

^ .^^:::^^^^i^:^e^^ if^.:ti^^:^c^:^-,:z^^^^
^^B^,^i:t^.^^,^^'^ ^ i
:^^l^^::^^^^:^^^^^-^^:i^-^^:^^^:,^^B^^^I^t^:^^^^
^ i i ^^^l:1^^i:^:-B^^^^^:ii ,^^^^:^^B^^t^^^^:^
^11^ A^^t^.^^^e:^^^^^'^^t^l|^^^^^.^ct-:t^^:-:^t^^:^^^A^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^B^^B^^'^ .ie^:^t.^B^^^^^.r^^:.^^:^c^^:^^4^^

^,1^^ i^^^^^^i,^'^^^^^^::^^:^e:,^^^i,^^^^:^^:^^^^^^
^.::^,:^c^'^'^^'^^:^.:c^::^^^4 ^^^:i^'^^^^^ ::t^^^
^:.B^^:i^.^^:^r4^ Bf^i^Bi,^^C^

^^^^ ^^^Y,.ist^ts^^^-^^i:^^'^^^^v^-^,^^^^^^^

Unclassifled_Disco«ery_ManningB_000459

26071

^4 U^^e.^t^u:y^.,B^^^^s:^^^^::^l :^-:tt'^:is^it'^^^it^^,c^^^^^^
l^ieB:^i::^A^:i^^:^^

^

^'^B^^^^^^t^^.^^^^:^^^^:::::^^^^^^^^^^

l^:^^^^.,^t^^::^^'.B.^^':::^4J^^^: B^.^^^^'k •'^^•^^^•^

:^r*^c ceticiusiiu":lic x.^uity. i::v: AL:tity irtxifvi n.j:»l
j v ti: : "L
' i.\:trc
: ^rtn;nt .''.^s
'.tf.MLi. it. 1.'',']^:. .'iC
R.C.'vi 'T'oC-'^c;!.';,. „)r;iy a r.at^rx'n; otiyi^ilirti! i*:'':he .';:::n . X : : wiL'.HUic \':%-;.,s ti'- lo ;hc qucstiui:."::: p:..r:.tk'rt:p.': '•il ti;nHJ)j'i >e w,'l Mir pp.r. dec i: L c f.ri;J
^^••ij.'.ci. A
leri'i't which n a* u cu.-lf :.;a:cmencs intiuc '•y P/U' Bra::ley vlu r r r u .
luiy
evidence cierived il/.^n: -t:cl: yufcir-ziil::. sLODiii i-.t proMJed tn CP
J [iy.iLj i r J Ml i h e l r i t . ' !
De^n^v Scrt'^cs Ul'ike i : C:%mr ui'vrt/, I:;.-;! Lnd'vrC!'r.\'f,cia;\. irtucr: !i'i,.c Inti Deieiw:;
^er-XcesOnict: .n t ::n:4. \";:t)r .

y

y—-.
!'.A:.:L R.

'•:r; .:A

-.' / ; . '
/''"
,i'
'"M.Ait'A

DeTcr.;.:.' L )u:isc

Unclassified_Discowery_ManningB_000460

26072

Speedy Trial Attachment 6




DEPARYMENT OF THE ARMY
UNITED STATES THAI. DEFENSE SERVICE :3 L1 5h -
CAMP menu new omce .
cm? ma .. SI

WLYTO
IITDIDON N:
AFZD-TD 12 July 2010

MEMORANDUM THRU LTC Craig Merutka, Article 32 Investigation Officer, matter of US v.
PFC Manning

FOR Converting Authority
SUBJECT: Request for delay in Article 32 hearing

1. The Defense respectfully requests that the July 14"? Article 32 investigative hearing in the
matter of US v. PFC Bradley Manning be delayed. This request is based on the following three
reasons, all of which need to be met for a proper Article 32 hearing to take place:

a. An Article 32 hearing should not take place until a 706 evaluation is conducted on the
accused to determine the important issues of mental responsibility and The Article
32 hearing should not take place until the Defense receives the long version of the 706 board's
?ndings and recommendations. (Note: the Defense has already requested a 706 evaluation be
undertaken in this matter. and has received notice that the Government supports such a request.
The Govcrrunent has informed the Defense that a 706 board could be convened and undertaken
in about two weeks);

b. An Article 32 hearing should not take place until the accused has decided whether he
will obtain the services of a civilian counsel and whether such a civilian counsel is properly
prepared for the Article 32 hearing. The Defense is currently researching this issue for the
accused. The Defense believes that if the accused selects a civilian attorney, then that selection
will take about two weeks to occur;

c. And an Article 32 hearing should not take place in this case until the Defense has an
expert on computer forensics on its team and that the computer forensics expert has ample time
to review the evidence which consists of ?ve CD Rom disks. On behalf of the accused, the
Defense will request Cybemgents. a company owned by Mr. Eric Lakes and based in Lexington,
Kentucky. to be an expert assistant in this matter. The Defense is ready to submit its request for
but we are waiting to hear from Mr. Lakes to con?mt his fee schedule. The
Defense anticipates requesting Mr. Lakes within the next 24 hours Dre Defense does not know
and cannot predict how long it would take an expert like Cybemgents to review the evidence.

2. The Defense believes a tentative date for the Article 32 hearing of 20 August 2010 should be
enough time for the three previously-mentioned conditions to he met.

3. The Defense reserves the right to request l'urther delays upon showing good cause for such
delay

26074
AIZC-JA -1 US

4. POC is ihc undersigned at

PAUL R. BOLJCHARD
JA
Scmor Defense Counsel

D-J

26075

Speedy Trial Attachment 7

26076

IK A GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL OF THE UNITED STATES
US AR}/Y TRIAL JUDICIARY. FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
UMTED

STATES

V.
BR.'WLEY^tANNlNG
' PFC. U.S ARJv^Y
Headquarters and : ieadquariers Co. 2d BCT
lO'*' Mounain Division (Ltgitt Infantry]
Contingency Operating Station I lammer. iraq
APCAE U9308
'

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

lU-.XE^'ED REQUhS": FOR
SAM! i Y BOARD
A^^DREQLIESTFOR
XiEDICAl EXPHR T

IB July 20! 0

On 1 j July 2010. the Defense, in the matter of L^S v. Manning, requested that a 706 Sanrt)Board be conducted on the accused. To date, the Defense has zo: been roiitled as to whether lhat
reqtjcsl has been approved ur denied.
2. .As OLtlincc in paragraph 4- bglow, the Defense renews its request to have a 706 Board
evaluate the accused, Adcittonaliy, the Defense respectfully requests tiiat a fourth medical expert
wth tlic proper medical qualifications be appointed to oversee the 3-member 706 board perform
their evaluation. Th,e Defense requests that this fourth, medical expert be appointed ag an assistant
to the Defense team. Moreover. :;te Delense respectfully amends paragraph 5 - it was originally
paragraph 3 - to read as follows:
That a board ofthree members be composed of: one forensic psychoiogist, one forensic
psychiatrist, and ottc neuro psycitieirist.
3. Pursuant ro R.C.M. 706. Manual for Courts-.Vlartiat. the cei^ense requests titc Convening
Authority appoint a sanity board to determine whether PFC BEtADLEY iMAMNIiVG was
mentally responsible lor ihc alleged oflenses he is charged w;u and whether he is competent to
stand trial.
4. b support ofthis requesi. the defense proffers the following:
PFC M&nning itas sought the assistance ofmilitary iztentai health professionals in the pasL
Specifically, on 22 May 2C! 0, CPT Edon Critchfield diagnosed PFC Manning wi± "adjustment
disorder wiiii mixed dismrbances of emotions, conduct: chronic." (See attachment named CPT
Critchf eld'sfindings).Moreover, MSG Adkins, on: of PFC Manning's high-ranking NCOs. has
wrinen three leUcrs (Uieir dates ar; 21 December 2009, and 26 .April and 8 May of 20! Oi
ouihning his concems as lo PFC Manning s mental health status. Lastly and very impormnlly.
PFC Manning is in pre-trial confinement l:\ Kuwait, and the staff of the detention facility there
has had to place PFC Manning on suicide watch in the past, .Moreover, PFC Manning is currently
tailing a medication as well

26077

Because ofthe aJ't>rementtoned reasons, and out ofan abundance uf caution, ihe defense
requests a 706 board to determine the extent of PFC Manning's mental health issues.
5. The defense requests that a board of three members consisting ofa forensic psychologist a
forensic psychiatrist, and a neuro psychitatnst, be appointed to examine the accused.
6. The undersigned requests that the board address the following questions concsmiiig PFC
Manning's mental condition:
a. Does the accused currently have a severe mental disease or defect? If yes, please answcr
the followingfivequestions:
il) Whal :s the clinical psychiatric diagnosis, using the .American Psychiatric
.A.ssocialtcn's Diagnostic and Statistical Mantial IV (DSM IV)?
(2.1 Is this severe mental disease or defect servicc-disqcaltiying?
(3) What is the accused's prognosis for recovery?
(4) Can this severe mental disease or defect be successfully controlled by treatmettt with
drugs?
(5} Does ioag-tcrra commitment of ths accused appear to be a necessary alternative?
b. 'what is the accused's intelligence leve',?
c. Does the accused have the menial capacity to understand the nature of the proceedings and
the seriousness ofthe charges against him? If not, please answer the following three questions:
(1) What is the clinical psychiatric diagnosis, iising DSM-IV?
(2) Can this mental disease or defect be successfully treated/controlled by treatment wilh
drjgs?

(3) What is the prognosis and expected time for recovery?
d. Does the accused have the menu! capacity to cooperate intelligently in his own defense?
ifnot. please answer the following three questions:
(1) What is the clinical psychiatric diagnosis, using DSM-IV?
(2) Can this mental disease or defect be successfully treated/controlled by treatment with
drugs?
(3} What is the prognosis and expected time (br recovery?

26078

e, At the time ofthe alleged criminal conduct, did the accused have a severe mental disease
or defect? If yes, please answer ihe following four questions:
(1) Whal is the clinical psychiatric diagnosis, using DSM-TV?
(2) At the time ofthe alleged criminal misconduct, and as a result of sucb severe mental
disease or defect, was the accused able to appreciate Ihe nature and quality or wtongfuiness ofhis
conduct?
(3) Is this severe mental disease or defect merely a defect of character or personality
caused by inadequate training and development, lack of moral restraint, or a personal, social, or
cultural standard of conduct wiiich differs from that of society as a whole?
(4) Was this impairment complete?
7. The sanity board should, at a minimum, consider ail of the following materials in reaching
their findings:
a. The acci;sed's mental health records;
b, Tbe accused's medical records:
e. Interviews with the accused;
d. The charge sheet and all allied papers,
8. Upon conclusion of the inquiry, the sanity board must comply with the disclosure prohibitions
of Mil. R. i-vid, 302, and R.C.M, 706fcx3), Only a statement consisting ofthe sanity board's
ultimate conclusions as to the questions in paragraph 3a through 3c will be provided to the trial
counsel. A full report, which may include statements made by PFC Bradley Manning, or any
evidence derived from such statements, should be provided to CPT Paul Bouchard at the Trial
Defense Services OlBce at Camp Liberty, Iraq and/'or CPT Michael Eaton of the Trial Defense
Services Office at Camp Victory. Iraq.

/; /?

^'KZ^^^^f/^/:,.,/
PAUL R. BOUCHARD
CPT. JA
Senior Defense Counsel

26079

Speedy Trial Attachment 8




.

.



4


Xi} :i 3 I


.,
?ii. a I .91? .1. n.



1' gex Imdcr 7-3ma?! \1.5
"1-.nl um." I) .77

Xv

2-?tr LI: :1

5 "mt ;.'xxL 9 .xx.

!3 2 :5 -.3 Us -vi?

:1 me 5'-us 33"?
ui ?lh; ti-.r~ :n .7 M1

rah? mg?! .

4..



all 1."aL' rt" ix?

Eizc In ul

In $115 mil l'::il

(?amt 'rc? mg . "aii tit:

5 r. xx. ntm. u-nmiztrui
iv: (.?Tn: -.32: --Z
3 -.: .: kin, ?gm.

1319.5 at Em. -



z. in 121:. .
1.1-- {T-m 11:;



513 ~52}
. I .
1 ls?! run-.1 Xv: L1 'm1ia1t'.' .nI1r.| xuii. ix?

26080


S1 \zntmun!. umicr

.3 uflur ?.311: will :9 ucmmic 10 um
5u?ln-a: l'iIc wztaplu ed 3
nf my !f_mu
95:: mt?l ul? 13.1:

Hus26081

26082

Speedy Trial Attachment 9

26083




DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
sures ARMY ram omens: SERVICE
oerzxsa counsr-:1 ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22203



REPLY TO
AYTENYION OF:

ll August 2010

MEMORANDUM THRU LTC Paul Almanza, 150"? fudge Advocate General Detachment,

Legal Support Organization, MG Albert (2. Lieber USAR Center, 6901 Telegraph Road.
Alexandria, Virginia 22310

FOR Commander, United States Army Garrison, loint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, 204 Lee
Avenue, Fort Myer, Virginia 22211-1199

Delay Request, United States v. Private First Class Bradley Manning.
Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer~llender.son
Hall, Fort Myer, Virginia 22211

1. The Defense requests a delay in the subject court-martial until the inquiry you ordered
under the provisions of Rule for (Iourt?Martial 706 is completed. The defense maintains
responsibility for this delay because Captain Paul Bouchard initially requested the inquiry
from PFC Manning's previous chain of command. This delay would terminate on the date
the results ofthe inquiry are received by PFC Manning's detailed defense counsel.

2. I am the point ofcontact for any questions or concerns regarding this request. I may be

THOMAS F. HURLEY

Defense Counsel



Speedy Trial Attachment 10

26085

25 August 2010
MEMORANDUM THRU Staff Judge Advocate, Office ofthe Staff Judge Advocate, US Army
Military District ofWashington, Fort Lesley J, McNair, Washington D.C. 30219
FOR Commander, US Army Military District of Washington, Fort Lesley J. McNair,
Washington D.C. 20319
SUBJECT: Request for Appointment ofExpert with Expertise in Forensic Psychiatry to Assist
the Defense in United States v. PFC Bradley Manning.

1. On 18 July 2010, the defense requested that a R.C.M. 706 sanity board be appointed in the
case ofUnited States v. Manning, and that a separate medical expert be appointed to the defense
to observe the R.C.M. 706 board,
2. On 25 August 2010, the defense received notification that a R.C.M. 706 board would begin its
assessment of PFC Manning on 27 August 2010. The defense requests that the sanity board be
delayed until a forensic psychiatrist can be appointed to the defense team. Ifthe govemment has
denied the former request, the defense hereby renews its request,
3. Pursuant to R C M . 703(d), PFC Bradley Manning requests that a forensic psychiatrist from
another branch of service be designated as a member ofthe defense team under Military Rule of
Evidence M.R.E. 502 and United States v. Toledo, 25 M.J. 270 (CMA 1987). PFC Manning
also requests that appropriate arrangements be made for the forensic psychiatrist to travel to
Quantico, Virginia to evaluate and work with PFC Manning prior to the R.C.M. 706 board.
4. A military accused has, as a matter of Equal Protection and Due Process, a right to expert
assistance when necessary" to present an adequate defense. United Slates v. Carries, 22 M.J, 288
(CMA 1986); United States v. Robinson 39 M.J. 88 (CMA 1994), and Ake v. Oklahoma, 470
U.S. 226 (1971), The Court of Appeals foi the Armed Forces has embraced a three-part test for
determining whether government-funded expert assistance is necessary. The defense must show:
"First, why the expert assistance is needed. Second, what would the expert assistance accomplish
for the accused. Third, why is the defense unable to gather the evidence that the expert assistant
would be able to develop." United States v. Gonzalez, 39 M.J, 459 (1994).
5. All of the above requirements for employment ofan expert are present and the defense is
entitled to have an expert appointed to the defense as a matter of law. The government has
begun the process of conducting a sanity board on PFC Manning and is presumably using the
best available Army doctors for this purpose. PFC Manning is only requesting a single forensic
psychiatrist from another branch of service be appointed to the defense team to assist in
understanding and preparing his defense.
a. Why Is Expert Assistance Needed? Expert assistance is needed to assist the defense in
understanding medical information conceming the mental status of PFC Manning on the date(s)
ofthe alleged crimes, to determine whether he is able to understand the nature and quality ofthe

26086

SUBJECT: Request for Appointment ofExpert with Expertise in Forensic Psychiatry to Assist
the Defense in United Slates v. PFC Bradley Manning.

wrongfulness ofhis conduct, to evaluate whether PFC Manning is able to intelligently assist in
his defense, and to prepare a possible sentencing case in extenuation and mitigation for the
accused. The knowledge required to do this is specialized, and concerns medical and psychiatric
data which is beyond the scope of defense counsel's understanding,
b. What Would the Expert Assistance accomplish for the Accused? A forensic psychiatrist
assigned to the defense would assist the defense by explaining complex medical terms and the
psychology involved at the time ofthe alleged crimes. The expert would also administer tests
which would aid in potential diagnosis and treatment. Finally, the expert would be able to
explain medical research in the field of forensic psychiatry and its relevance to the present case.
c. Why is the Defense Unable to Gather this Evidence on Its Own? The defense has neither
the experience nor expertise to adequately prepare this case. The defense counsel needs a basic
understanding of psychiatry in order to present the defense case, including the need to prepare
defense experts to testify. It would be impossible for the defense to properly prepare without
having an individual who has the confidentiality guaranteed to protect the accused. As a member
of the defense team, the defense appointed expert can freely discuss the defense theories ofthe
case without fear of compromising PFC Manning's rights.
6. For the above reasons, the defense requests that you issue an order appointing a forensic
psychiatrist from another branch of service as an expert; that you instruct him/her that he/she is a
"defense representative" and thus part of the defense team, and that matters related to him/her
during the course ofhis employment as a member of the defense team will be confidential.
Finally the defense requests that you direct that the R.C.M. 706 board be delayed until the
defense appointed fbrensic psychiatrist can be made available to monitor the examinations
conducted by the members ofthe board. The defense believes that the presence of a member of
the defense team will increase PFC Manning's willingness to cooperate with the sanity board.
Moreover, it will ensure that the defense team has first-hand knowledge of the accuracy and
quality of all examinations conducted by the members ofthe board. This will ultimately reduce
the need for future litigation on such issues,
7. The POC is the undersigned at (401) 744-3007 or by e-mail at
coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com.

DAVID E, COOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

26087

B^^^i„:t',r,:''^"^:':^^:.^^',
i^'^';^'r^^:^'::^:^ ^B^B^^'^:^^:^ B':"B:^^.i^^^:^

"'^' ^^^^^^111^^

"UU I i , . . ' :

^""":^
Sl

ManningB_00000473

:

26088

Speedy Trial Attachment 11

26089

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JWrr MSE NYER^jENOERSON HAU.
«M LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA
mwiY TO
ATTSmWOf

25 AUG
(M?MEMORANDUM FOR Director. Forensic l^ychcW&y Fellowship. Walter Reed .Army Medical
Centtr. Washington, DC 30307
SUB.1I>CT: Defense Delay Rtqueot ofR.C.M. 706 Sanity Board of PFC Bradley Manning
1 rcviwcd tiK defense requet* to dekty the R.C.M. 706 Sanity Board (iir PFC Mannings TTie
request i$:
. .
.11*^'^'
( y' i approved. The Sanity Board is delayed until the GCMCA take; action on iiie defentw
rtxjuest for gp^vintment of a forensic psychiatry expert consultanc (he pcrii-xj between 27
AuguA 2010 and tmtil fhe (K.'MC.'\ takes Action on the defense request is excludable delay under
R,C.M.707ie).
(

) disapproved, ( he Sanify Board wifl proceed a& prwioiwly ordered.

e\i?l R. ct;:4AlAi\, IK
t O f . AV
Commanding

MannlngB_00000474

26090

Speedy Trial Attachment 12

26091

^^^ugitsl^OlO
MEMORANDUM THRU Staffjudge Advocate, Officeofthe Staffjudge Advocate, US Army
Military District ofWashington, Fort Lesley J.McNair.WashingtonD.C. 30219
FOR Commander, US Army Military District ofW^ashington. Fort Lesley J.McNair,
WashingtonDC 203l9
SUBJECT:RequestlbrDelayintheRCM 706BoardtoComplywtthProhtbttionson
Disclosure ofclassified lnfbi"n"iation in ^/^^^^i::^,^^^t:^^t:^.'^"ttB^^C^^^^^^

1 Pursuant to Executive Order 12958,Section4,l,defense counsel hereby requests the
conveningauthoritydelaytheRCM, 706 board until procedurescan be adopted to safeguard
any classifted information that will be discussed during the board^sdetermination,
2. In support ofthis request, the defettse provides the follL^v^tng:
a. On 25 August 2010defense counsel spoke with PFC Manning telephonically to determine
ifhe would need to discuss classified information during the R.C.M.706 board inquiry.
b. Based upon our discussions witb PFC Manning, the defense counsel believes that in order
fbr him to participate in the R.C.M. 706 process and aid the members in their determination of
his mental state at the time ofthe alleged incidents, he will need to divulge classifted
infbrmation.
c. The infbrmation that PFC Manning will need to divulge will be Secret Sensitive
Compartmented Infbrmation andTop Secret SensttiveCompai-fmented Infbrmation.
3. Based on the preceding information, the defense requests that the Oovernment determine
from the Original Classification Authority(OCA)that the R.C.M,706 hasa"need to know" as
partoftheirassessmentofPFC Manning'smental condition,
4. Additionally,pursuant to Executive Order 12958,12968,and 13292 the defense requests that
all members of the R.C.M.706 board possess the requisite security clearances and that all
required steps are taken in order to safeguard the information that they receive from PFC
Maiming,
5. Since board members notes and any recordings will contain references to classifted
inft:innation,the delense requests that the government appoitttasecurity officer to the board to
assist them in the proper handling oftheir notes and disposal ofany infbrmation that may
contain references to classified information.
6. The defense also requests the results of tbe govemment'sclassiftcation review by the OCA.
Specifically.thedeterminationoftheclassificationreview regarding(l)theclassification level
ofthe infbrmation alleged to have been disclosed by PFC Manning when it was subjected to

26092

SUBJECT: Request for Delay in the R.C.M. 706 Board to Comply with Prohibitions on
Disclosure of Classified Information in United States v. PFC Bradley Manning.

compromise; (2) a determination whether another command requires review ofthe information;
and (3) the general description ofthe impact of disclosure on affected operations.
7. Finally, the defense requests strict compliance with the disclosure prohibitions ofMilitary
Rules ofEvidence 302 and R.C.M. 706. Specifically, the defense requests that the board
members are informed of the restrictions on disclosure referenced in RCM. 706 (c)(5).
8. The POC is the undersigned at (401) 744-3007 or by e-mail at
coombs(garmycotutmartialdefense.com.

DAVID E. COOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

26093

Speedy Trial Attachment 13

26094

3Seplemher^0I0
MEMORANDUM THRU StaffJudge Advocate, Officeofthe StaffJudge Advocate, US Army
Military District ofWashington,Fort Lesley J.McNair,WashingtonD,C, 30219
FOR Commander, US Army Oarrison, Joint Base Myer-F^enderson Hall, Fort Myer,Virginta
22211
SUBJECT:Request for Approptiate Security Clearances for the DefenseTeam and Access for
PFC Bradley Manning

1. The defet^se believes that in Older to adequately represent our client, each member ofthe
defense team will needaTopSecret^Sensitive Compartmented Information (FS-SCI)
clearance. The defense team is currently comprised ofthe following counsel: Mr. David
Coombs (MA.1(P) in the United States Army Reserves); MAJ Matthew J.I^emkes; CPT PauIR
Biouchard; and CPT Michael L.Eaton.
2, Access fbr each ofthe defense counsel is t"iecessary in order for PFC Manning to receive due
process andafair trial. Denial of access would impede PFC Manning'sdefense and prevent full
discussion concerning the case with our clienL Therefore, expedited access is requested.
3 The defense also requests limited authorization for PFC Manning'saccess to classified
information. It is likely that PFC Manning'saccess has been suspet^ded due to the preferred
charges. It is anticipated that the defense will need to discuss and share access to the classified
information at issue in this case with our clienL Therefore, the defense requested authorization
for limited access to classified infbrmation by the accused in accordance with M,R.E, 505(d)(4),
4 ThePOC is the undersigned at(401)744-3007 or byemail at
coombs@armycourtmarttaldefense,com.

DAVIDECOOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

26095

Speedy Trial Attachment 14

26096

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

I MN D-MHH-ZA

22 September 2010

MEMORANDUM FOR Mr. David E. Coombs, Civilian Defense Counsel
SUBJECT: Preliminary Classification Review of the Accused's Mental Impressions - U.S v.
PFC Bradlev Manning;

1. According to your four requests, dated 25 August 2010. 26 August 2010, 3 September 2010
(Expert), and 3 September 2010 (Defense Team), the accused's mental impressions are
potentially classified TS/SCI. which would require defense counsel, the RCM 706 board, and
any defense expert to possess security clearances at the TS/SCl level, in order to allow the
accused to fully participate in his defense and board.
2. Order. No later than 8 October 2010 and absent an extension by me, the accused is ordered
to meet with your security expert consultant and disclose the classified information the accused
wishes to discuss with you, the defense team, his detailed behavioral health providers, and the
RCM 706 board. Your security expert will take notes and conduct a preliminary classification
review of this information,
3. Preliminary Classification Review. No later than two weeks after the accused's final
interview and absent an extension by me, the defense security expert consultant will conduct his
preliminary classification review of the infonnation and provide an unclassified written response
to the following questions:
a. Is the information provided by Ihe accused classified al a level above Secret ("Yes " or
"No")?
b. Ifany ofthe information provided hy the accused is classified above Secret, does any of the
information fall within SCI comparlments, and if.4. Should the defense expert initially classify the disclosed information at a level above Secret,
the United States will continue to work diligently to comply with your requests to have defense
counsel, the defense expert, and the RCM 706 board fully cleared to discuss classified matters
with the accused, I will also make a determination on whether to authorize the accused to
disclose his classified information to the RCM 706 board and his behavioral health providers.
5. The notes from the defense security expert's meeting with the accused will remain privileged
and be turned over to you at the conclusion ofthe preliminary review, subject to any security
concerns that may be raised by the infomiation. Under no circumstances should your security

26097

IMND-MHH-ZA
SUBJECT: Preliminary Classification Review of the Accused's Mental Impressions - U.S v.
PFC BradleyManning
expert consultant release any privileged or substantive Information from the accused's
disclosures to anyone outside of the defense team,
6. The sole purpose oftfiispreliminary classification review is to provide the defense and United
States with a basis for granting security clearances to the defense team and the accused's
behavioral health providers, and determining the appropriate level of classification for the RCM
706 board. This preliminary classification review is not a substitute for an official classification
review conducted by an original classification authority (OCA) or an official designated by an
OCA.
7. This order supersedes my order dated 17 September 2010.

-MM

CM.LR. COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26098

Speedy Trial Attachment 15

26099

28 September 2010
MEMORANDUM THRU Staff Judge Advocate. Oitce ofthe Stafl Judge Advocate. US Army
Military District ofWashington, Fort Leslev J. McNair, W ashtngton DC, 30219
FOR Commander. US Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall. Fort Myer. Virginia
22211
SUBJECI: Preliminar}' Classification Review of the .Accused's Mental Impressions - & nf/eV
States y PFC' Brudhy Maniiviii
1, flic defense has received \our superseding preliminary classification order dated 22
Septemlxr 2010. The defense has discussed this order widi PFC Bradley Manning and with the
defense appointed security expert. Mr. Charles Ganiei.
2. Based upon the defense's discussions with Mr. Ganiei, the preliminary classification review
cannot he started until the following is.sues have been resolved:
a. Approved Facility: Mr. Ganiei does not belie\e that the Quantico Confinement Facility
has the required area in order to speak to PFC Manning about an\ classified infomiation.
Specifically. Ibr any Sensitive Compartmented Infonnation (SCli. Ihe discussion and stonige of
the infbrmation received must be in a facility that mecis ihe structural and security requirements
for a Sensitive Compartmented Infomiation Facilit)' (SCIF). SCI material cannot be viewed or
discussed unless in a SCIF in accordance with DoD 5103.21-M-l. chapter 3. page 3-1. paiiigraph
Af4). Therefore, unless Mr. Ganiei conducts his discussions with PFC Manning in an approved
SCIF. he will not be able to begin his preliminary classification rct iew.
b. Limited .Access: It is likely that PFC Manning's access to classified inftimiation has been
suspended due to the preferred charges. Mr. Ganiei v, ill not be able to discuss or validate anv
classified inlbrmation with PFC Manning unless PFC Manning is given an interim clearance.
Additionally, PFC Manning will not have access to any secured sites, specifically a SCIF. luiless
he has the requisite security clearance. Si^: DoD 5105-21 -M-1.
c. Storage: Mr Gatiiel will need the gov emment to provide him w iUi a Government Sen, ice
Administration (GSA) approved security container to store Secrci and Confidential infomiation.
Additionally. Mr. Ganiei will need the same GSA approved securiiv container with the requisite
additional .security precautions for the stomgc of Top Secret infbrmation in accordance with
Army Regulation 380-5. chapter 7. paragraph 7-4. Finally, Mr. Ganiei will need to have access
to a SCIF to store any Special .Access Program (SAP) or SCI informalion in accordance with
DoD 5I05-2I.M-1. chapter 3. page 3-10.
d. Verification: .Anvihing revealed to Mr, Ganiei has to he verified befbre he can make a
determination whether it is classified and, il necessary, its level of classilication. 1 his is a time
consuming process that Mr. Gitniel does not believe can he completed within the time
restrictions listed in the preliminary classification ie\ iew order.

26100

SUBJECT: Preliminaiy Classilication Review ofthe .Accused's Mental Impressions - OwW
.Swfc^ It f

&f;(//t'k A/^/M/7ti7i'

c. .Additional Securiw Fxr^en: Given ihe tusk required b\ the preliminary classilication
review order. Mr. Ganiei has requested that an additional security expert be appointed to the
defense team. Mr. Ganiei believes that the uddiiional expert will help expedite the process by
assisting him in reviewing the infbrmation, conducting document verification, conducting
document preparation, and by providing a second opinion regarding infomiation dial is either
SCI or ib pan of a SAP,
3. The POC is the undersigned ut (4011 744-3007 or by e-mail at
coombs a annvcounmartialdefcnse,com.
-•7

L' /

^

DAVID E. CCX)MBS^^
Civilian Defense Counsel



Speedy Trial Attachment 16

26102

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199

A - ' - ' ' ^ m^ '- %

al

^^"^2K

K&I'LT TO
AITEKTIOKQF

12
IMND-Mllli-ZA
MEMORANDUM FOR RI-( ORD
SUBJFCT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule Ibr Courts-Martial 707(c) -• U.S. v.
Pi c Bradlev Manning

1. PURPOSE, The purpose ofthis memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any
excludable delay under Rule fbr Courts-Martial ( RCM) 707(c) in the above-rclcrcnccd matter.
2. EXCLt'DABLE DELAY. The period from 12 July 2010 until the dale ofthis memorandum
is excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
}. BASIS OF DELAY I hc above delay is based on Ihc following defense requests, responses,
and the facts and circumstances ol thi,< case:
a. Original Classilication .Authorities (OCA) reviews of classilied infonnation
b. Defense Request Ibr Sanity Board, dated 1 I July 2010 and Defense Renewed Request for
Sanity Board, dated IX July 2010 (enclosed).
c. Defense Request lor Appointment of Expert with Expertise in Forensic Psychiatry to
.Assist the Defense, dated 25 August 2010 (enclosed).
d. Defense Request for Delay in the RCM 706 Board to Comply with Prohibitions on
Disclosure of Classified information, dated 26 August 2010 (enclosed).
c. Defense Request for Resiilt.s ofthe Government's Classification Reviews by the OCA.
dated 26 August 2010 (enclosed).
f. Defense Request for Appropriate Security Clearances for the Defense Team and Access for
PFC Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed).
g. Preliminary Classification Review of llie Accused's Mental Impressiors. dated 17
September 2010 (enclosed), and Superseding Order, dated 22 September 20lli (enclosed)
h. Defense Response to the Preliminary Classification Review ofthe .Acc.iscd's Mental
Impressions, dated 2K September 2010 (enclosed).

26103

IMND-MI1H-/A
.Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule fbr ( ouns-Manial 707(c) - I i.S. v. PI C Bradley
Manninu

4. PRE\'IOLS DEI..AVS. I hi.s aecouiiling ofexcludable delay 1^ nol iiiieiided to supersede
any previous delays, but merely accotiiit for excludable delays Irom the pi"cvi lus aeeountiiigti
the dale of this memorandum.

Ends
as

CT: (wo/encb)
l-'frial Counsel
1 -Defense Coun:,el

4em.

CARL K. COFFMAN. JR
COL. AV
Commanding:

26104

Speedy Trial Attachment 17

26105

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

REPLY TO
ATTENTION OP

JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199

1 0 NOV 2010
IMND-MHH-ZA

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Manial 707(c) - U.S. v. PFC Bradley
Manning
1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any excludable
delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-referenced matter.
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 12 October 2010 until the date of this memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3 BASIS OF DELAY. The above delay is based on the following defense requests, responses, and the
facts and circumstances ofthis case:
a. Original Classification Authorities (OCA) reviews of classified information.
b. Defense Request for Sanity Board, dated 11 July 2010 and Defense Renewed Request for Sanity
Board, dated 18 July 2010 (enclosed).
e. Defense Request for Delay in the RCM 706 Board to Comply with Prohibitions on Disclosure of
Classified Information, dated 26 .August 2010 (enclosed).
d. Defense Request for Results of the Government's Classification Reviews by the OCA, dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed).
e. Defense Request for Appropriate Security Clearances for the Defense Team and Access for PFC
Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed).
f Preliminary Classification Review of the Accused's Mental Impressions, dated 17 September 2010
(enclosed), and Superseding Order, dated 22 September 2010 (enclosed).
4, PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting of excludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to the date ofthis
memorandum.

fcfccwar
Ends
as
CF: (wo/encis)
1-Trial Counsel
I-Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN, JR,
COL, AV
Commanding

26106

Speedy Trial Attachment 18

26107

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
umreo snares ARMY res? mo EVALUATION comwmo
mo susouemwnn AVENUE
ABERDEEN PROVING no 210053103



I ?s

THRIL S1?-aft Judgc ()rT:cc US Army
.\1iliI;1r) Furl I..c:sicy J. \Vashit1gn'm 3021??

FOR (fommandcr. I Amn? Joint llasc I-?an .\-Iycr.
3371]



T: Prciintinar} l{cVic\v u1"Il:c .\-Icntal I-him!
1? PM

1. he defense sccurny have completed their
rcvicu upon your dalvd ZUEU. hen: arc mu
uritten In qucstiuns?

u) Illa? infarrnalimz pruru?/cu? by the r.u'cu.wd :1 Mn?! Na (rel
Amwcr: Yes.

17? um Q/?lizc mfmm.-timn Mr In u/wow dues? any of
I/ac mt/nn 51'! .-?Answer: Yes.

C) Gamma. and

2. [he ofcontucl for this memorandum are the N11. f?harlca J. (ianiclf

- and Mr. Hail at (-


w?

.
"u ?xii
C.?u1mnand. ?5.80 Information Hz-emit)" Divisioxl. (32
Arm? '1 est 8: I?xuiuution and Scc:zr1?ty (inmmand

Fur! Rclwir.

26108

Speedy Trial Attachment 19

26109

OEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

M f l Y TQ
AHEM TIONOF

JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON WALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1193

1 7 DEC

IMND-MUHZA

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUIUECI: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule lbf Courts-Manial 707(c) - U.S. v, PFC Bradlev
Manning
I PURPOSE. Ihe puiposc ofthis meinorandum is lo provide a |)eriodic accounting lor any excludable
delav under Rule for Courts-Miirtial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-relerenccd niuiler
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. fhe period from 10 November 2010 uiilil the date of this memnrandum is
excludable dcla\ under RCM 707(c).
3. HASIS OF DELAY. I he above delay is based on the following defense requests, responses, and llie
ffieis and circumsianees of Uiis ca\C;
a. Original Classificatii^i Aiiiht^rities (OCA) reviews ofclassified inlormation.
b. Deknsc Kcqtiesi for Sanity Board, dated 11 July 2010 and Delirnsc Renewed Request Ibr Sanitv
Board, dated 18 July 2010 (enclosed).
e. Defense Requeiit lor Delay in the RCM 706 Boaid lu Comply with Prohibitions on Disclosure ol
Classified Infomialion. dated 26 August 2010 (enclosed).
d Delense Request lor Results of tlie Covcmmeni s Classification Reviews by the (XTA. dated 2(*
August 2010 (enclosed)
c Defense Request lor .Appropriate Security Clearance; for the Defense I cam and .Access lor PFC
Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed).
t PREVIOUS BELAYS. I his accounting ofexcludable delmv i» not intended to supersede any
prev ious delays, but nienzl) account for excludable delays from the previous accounting lo ihe date ofthis
memorandum

_ncls
as

Cf: (wo.'enclh)
i -Trial Counsel
I-Deleuse Counsi l

CARER. COFFMAN, JR
COL. AV
Commanding

26110

Speedy Trial Attachment 20

26111

13 J:muarv20l I
MEMORANDUM THRU Staff Judge Advocate, Office ofthe Staff Judge Advocate, US Aimy
Military District ofWashington, Fort Lesley J. McNair. Washington D.C. 30219
FOR Commander, US .Army Ciarrison. Joint Base Mvcr-Henderson Hall, Fort Myer. Virginia
22211
SUBJECT: Request fbr Speedy 1rial- C/nircf/acT/fJ r. f F C Jw^//^' .Vf^fMumg
1. PFC Bnidle) Manning, through the below-signed counsel, requests Ihe Sixtli Amendniem
right to a speedy trial pursuant lo Rule for Couit-Martinl (R.C.M.) 707 and Article 10 ofthe
Uniform Code of Militar, Justice (UCMJ) i 10 U.S.C. $ 810),
2. Article 10 ofthe UCMJ, in pertinent part, states: "When any person subject to this chapter is
placed in arrest or confinement prior to trial, immediate steps shall be taken to inform him ofthe
specific WTong of which he is accused and fo try him or to dismiss die charges and release him."
PFC Manning has been in solilarv pretrial confinement since 29 May 2010.
3. Pursuant (o R.C.M, 905, the govemment must prove by a preponderance ofthe e\'idence that
it exeix;ised tea^onable diligence in processmg the case at all stages. &wW.%ww" i .
15
C.M.A. 350. 35 C.M.R. 322 (1*5). &We(y&«fg.f v. /?irff. 52 M J. 209 (C.A.A F. 1999).
Umr^tyjfmff.^ 1'. CbfJipcr, 58 MJ 54 (C.A..A F. 2003).
4. The POC is the undersigned at ^401; 744-3007 or by e-mail at
coombs,'a)armyeourUoartialdefi:nse.com.

/

DAVID E, COOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel

26112

Speedy Trial Attachment 21

26113

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENOERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

IMND-MHH-ZA

I 4 JAN POll

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Aeeounting of Excludable Delay under Rule lor Courls-Matiial 7117(e) - U.S. v. PFC fWiey
M&n.'nmg

1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a peri.xlic accounting for yny excludable
delay under Rule lor Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the abovc-refereneed matter,
2. EXCLllD.ABLE DELAY. The period from 17 December 2010 until the date ofthis memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(e).
3. B.ASIS OE DELAY. The above delay is based on the following defense requests, responses, and the
fuels and circumstances of this case:
a. Original Classilicaiion Authorities (OCA) reviews of classified information.
h. Defense Request for Sanity Board, dated 11 July 2(110 and Defense Renewed Request for Sanity
Board, dated IS July 2010 (enclosed).
e, Defense Requesi Ibr Delay in the RCM 706 Board lo Comply wiih Prohibitions on Disclosure ol
Cla.ssified Information, dated 26 August 2010 (enclosed).
d. Defense Ret]uest I'or Results of the Government's Classification Reviews by the CXJA. dated 20
August 2011) (enclosed)
e. Defense Request lot .Appropriate Seeurilv Clearances lor the Defense Team and Access lor PFC
Manning, daled 3 Sepiemher 2010 (enclosed).
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting of excludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, bul merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to the date of this
memorandum.
5. I acknowledge and reviewed the defense request for speedy trial, dated 13 January 2011 (enclosed).

Enels
as
CF: (wo/enels)
I -Trial Counsel
I Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN. J R.
COL, AV
Commanding

26114

Speedy Trial Attachment 22



26115

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
roar raven, VIRGINIA 22211-1199

REPLV TO
OF

Hm

MEMORANDUM FOR Chief. Forensic Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
Washington. DC 20307 500l

Order to Resume Ctinducting Sanity Board - PFC Bradley Manning

l. Background. On 3 August ZOI 0, I ordered a medical examination into the mental capacity
and mental responsibility of PFC Bradley Manning.-, Headquarters and
Headquarters Company, Anny Garrison, Fort .\vlyer. Virginia. 222l 1. Prior to the board
beginning their assessment. I received a request from defense counsel on 25 August 2010 to
delay the board until an expert consultant in forensic could be appointed to the
defense team. 1 approved that defense delay request on the same day. On 26 August 2010, I
received an additional defense request to delay the board until procedures could be adopted to
have the board comply with disclosure prohibitions on classi?ed information. I approved that
delay and subsequently addressed defense concems involving the disclosure of classified
information during the board process.

2. Order. I order your team to resume the medical examination into the mental capacity and
mental responsibility of PFC Bradley Manning.

3. Reasons. The reasons for my previous order were based on the information contained in the
Defense Request for Sanity Board. dated 1 July 2010 and the Defense Renewed Request for
Sanity Board, dated 18 July 2010. According to the defense request, PFC Manning had been
diagnosed with adjustment disorder with mixed disturbances of emotions and conduct. The
defense alleged that PF Manning?s leadership repeatedly expressed concerns about his mental
health. and PFC Manning was placed on suicide watch while in pretrial con?nement in Kuwait.

4. Composition of the Board. In accordance with Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C M.) 706(c),
the board shall consist of one or more persons who are physicians or clinical
Defense requested that the board consist of three members, including at least one forensic
one forensic and one You may. but are not required
to comply with the defense request. At least one member ofthe board. however. shall be either a
or a clinical You will conduct the board and designate the appropriate
personnel from within your staff to comprise all or part of the board.

5. Defense Request for Appointment of an Expert Consultant. appointed CA PT Kevin D.
Moore as a defense expert consultant in forensic and a member of the defense team
under U.S. v. Toledo, 25 M1. 270 (C.M.A. 1987) and Military Rule ofEvidence 502. The
defense requested this expert be permitted to evaluate and work with PFC Manning prior to the
R.C.M. 706 board and that the expert be pennitted to monitor the examinations conducted by

26116


SUBJECT: Order to Resume Conducting Sanity Board - PFC Bradley Manning

members ofthe board. As such, I authorize the senior member of the board, in consultation with
PFC lVlanning's primary behavioral health care provider, to address the defense requests and
determine the extent to which the defense expert consultant may participate in the board?s
inquiry.

6. Special Security Instructions. The defense proffered that PFC lVlannin;_{ would likely need
to divuige information potentially rising to the level in order to aid the members in their
determination ofhis mentai state at the time of the aiieged incidents. The following speciai
instructions apply to the portion of the board requiring discussion ofclassified information with
PFC Manning:

21. Each member of the board will be cleared up to the TSISCI level and be read on to the
following compartments: l'ntil each member of the board is read?on. the board
will not conduct the portion of the examination requiring discussions with PFC Manning.

b. Each member of the board has a ?need-to~know" for the purposes of discussing
classified information with PFC Martning during their inquiry. The only classified information
available to the board is the mental impressions of PFC Manning.

c. Each member of the board will read and acknowledge the enclosed Protective Order no
later than three duty days following the date of this memorandum.

d. The board will conduct all their examinations and testing in an
environment. except the portion ofthc cxaniination and testing requiring discussions with PFC
Manning will occur in a Sensitive Compartmented lnformation Facility (SCIFJ. The board will
organize their inquiry and examinations in a manner that minimizes the impact ofdelay due to
issues arising from the disclosure ofclassilied information by l\?lanning.

e. The board will notify the trial counsel no less than four duty days before conducting the
portion ofthe board requiring interviews with Manning. The trial counsct is responsible for
identifying an appropriate SCIF for the discussion ofclassilied information and providing
adequate privacy for the board.

f. To the extent possible. the board will take and maintain only unclassified notes and
transcriptions; however, any notes or transcriptions that must contain classified information or
potentially classified information be handled in accordance with applicable law, regulations,
the Protective Order. and any specific security procedures your security officer deiineates. A
security officer wiil review all notes and transcripts to determine the proper classification.

I appointed Mr. Charles Ganiei and Mr. Cassius Haii as defense security expert
consultants. Mr. Ganici or Mr. Hall will also act as the security officer for the board and should
be consulted when classi?ed information issues arise. The security expert is directly responsible
for storage and handling, ofali ciassitied information, to include the board members? notes and
any transcriptions. The security expert is not required to participate in the board proceedings.


4

26117


SUBJECT: Order to Resume Conducting Sanity Board - PFC Bradley Manning

but will be physically present at the location for on?site consultation, security inspections, and to
assist with handling and storage ofclassified information.

h. All reports drafted and submitted by the board to the parties in this case will be
unclassified. ifa report must contain classified information, submit a written request to me,
through the trial counsel.

7. Required Findings. The board is obligated in its evaluation to make separate and distinct
?ndings as to 7a?7c (below), using diagnostic tools that the board. in its professional discretion,
believes to be necessary and appropriate. In their request, defense counsel posed a number of
specific requests for matters to be evaluated and specific tests to be conducted. You may,
therefore, conduct the tests and answer the questions requested by the defense counsei in 7f 7k
and 9 (below), but are not required to do so.

a. Does PFC Manning currently have a severe mental disease or defect? if the answer to
is yes, answer the following questions:

I) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the American
Association?s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV (DSM

(2) is this severe mental disease or defect service disqualifying??
(3) What is PFC Manning's prognosis for recovery"?

(4) Can this severe mental disease or defect be successfully controlled by treatment
with drugs??

(5) Does the long-term commitment of PFC Manning appear to be a necessary
alternative??

b. Does PFC Manning have the mental capacity to understand the nature of the
proceedings and the seriousness of the charges against him?? if the answer to is no, answer
the following questions:

(1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the

(2) Can this mental disease or defect be successfully treated/controlled by treatment
with drugs"?

What is the prognosis and expected time for recovery?

c. Does PFC Manning have the mental capacity to cooperate intelligently in his own
defense?? If the answer to is no, answer the following questions:

i] What is the clinical diagnosis, using the

14.}

26118

IMND-MHH ZA
SUBJECT: Order to Resume Conducting Sanity Board - PFC Bradley Manning

(2) Can this mental disease or defect be successfully treated/controlled by treatment
with drugs?

(3) What is the prognosis and expected time for recovery?

d. At the time of the alleged criminal conduct, did PFC Manning have a severe mental
disease or defect?? If the answer to is yes, answer the following four questions:

(3) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the

At the time of the alleged criminal misconduct, and as a result of such severe
mental disease or defect, was PFC Manning able to appreciate the nature and quaiity or
wrongfulness of his conduct?

(3) Is this severe mental disease or defect merely a defect ofcharacter or personality
caused by inadequate training and development, lack of moral restraint, or a personal. social, or
cultural standard of conduct which differs from that of society as a whole?

(4) Was this impairment complete??

e. At the time of the alleged criminal misconduct, and as a result of such severe mental
disease or defect, was PFC Manning able to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of
his conduct?? lfthe answer to is yes, answer the following three questions.

(1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the

(2) Is this severe mental disease or defect merely a defect of character or personality
caused by inadequate training and development, lack of moral restraint, or a personal, social, or
cultural standard of conduct, which differs from that of society as a whole?

(3) Was this impairment complete??

f. Was PFC Manning, at the time of the offense, able to formulate a speci?c intent to
commit the alleged acts, to know the probable consequences of his actions, or to premeditate a
design to commit the acts?? If the answer to is no. answer the following questions:

l) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the

2) What is the prognosis??

g. What personality type does PFC Manning possess??

h. What is the PFC Manning's intelligence level??

26119


SUBJECT: Order to Resume Conducting Sanity Board PFC Bradley Manning

i. Does PFC Manning suffer from any mental condition that seriously interferes with his
ability to think, respond emotionally, remember, communicate, interpret reality, and behave

sl

appropriately?? If the answer to 1 is yes, answer the following questions:
(I) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the
(2) What is the prognosis??

j. Does PFC Manning have an organic brainmervous system disorder or impairment that
would impact his ability to think reason, perceive, recall, or in any way control his behavior or
his thoughts?? If the answer to is yes. answer the following questions:

(1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the
(2) What is the prognosis??

it. Does PFC Manning suffer from any level of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder?? If the
answer to is yes. answer the following questions:

(1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the
2) What is the prognosis?
8. Consideration.

a. The sanity board should, at a minimum, consider all of the following materials in
reaching their ?ndings:

(1) The results ofpsyehological and neuroiogieal tests, including raw
test data.

(2) PFC Manning?s mental health records.

(3) PFC Manning?s medical records.

(4) Interviews with Manning.

(5) The charge sheet.

b. You may consider, at your professional discretion, any additional questions or matters
posed by the defense if such matters are received no later than two weeks of the date of this

memorandum.

9. In conjunction with the sanity board. you shall also complete a comprehensive neurological
examination to include a CAT scan.

26120


Order to Resume Conducting Sanity Board PFC Bradley Manning

10. Movement for Appointments. The board will notify the trial counsel no less than four
ditty days before any scheduled appointment for medical evaluation or testing. in order for the
trial counsel to arrange adequate transportation and security.

l. Release of Report. Upon conclusion olthe inquiry, the sanity board must comply with the
disclosure prohibitions ofMilitary Rule of'Evidence 302, and R.C.M. 706(c)(3) and the special
security instructions in paragraph 6. above. Only a statement consisting of the sanity board?s
ultimate conclusions as to the questions in paragraph 7a through 7k will be provided to the trial
counsel. A full report, which may include statements made by PFC Manning or any evidence
derived from such statements, should be provided to PFC Manning's civilian and military
defense counsel, Mr. David E. Coombs and MAJ Matthew Kcmkes.

12. Telephone Numbers. PT Ashden Fein is the government counsel. (7 PT Fein may be
reached at Information pertaining to PFC Manning can be obtained from his
defense counsel, Mr. David E. Coombs. at l-800-588-all 56 or his military defense counsel, MAJ

Kemkesr at?

l3. Suspense. This medical examination and your ?ndings shall be completed no later than
four weeks from the date of this memorandum. Any extension of time must be submitted
through the trial counsel to me for approval.

1

5 Encls CARL R. JR.
1. Requests, 11 Jul 10, I8 .lul l0 COL,

2. Protective Order, l7 Sep 10 Commanding

3. Protective Order Acknowledgment

4. Charge Sheet

5. Allied Documents

26121

Speedy Trial Attachment 23

26122

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

15 Feb

IMND-MHH-ZA

2011

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(c1 - U.S. v. PFC Bradlev
Manning
1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any excludable
delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-referenced matter.
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 14 January 2011 until the date of this memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3. BASIS OF DELAY. The above delay is based on the following defense requests, responses, and the
facts and circumstances of this case:
a. Original Classification Authorities (OCA) reviews of classified infonnation.
b. Defense Request for Sanity Board, dated 11 July 2010 and Defense Renewed Request for Sanity
Board, dated 18 July 2010 (enclosed). Completed 3 February 2011 (enclosed).
c. Defense Request for Delay in the RCM 706 Board to Comply with Prohibitions on Disclosure of
Classified Information, dated 26 August 2010 (enclosed). Completed 31 January 2011.
d. Defense Request for Results of the Government's Classification Reviews by the OCA, dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed).
e. Defense Request for Appropriate Security Clearances for the Defense Team and Access for PFC
Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed). Completed 3 February 2011.
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting ofexcludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to the date ofthis
memorandum.
5. I acknowledge and reviewed the defense request for speedy trial, dated 13 January 2011 (enclosed).

Ends
as
CF: (wo/encls)
1-Trial Counsel
1-Defense Counsel

-4feMcfcr-

CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26123

Speedy Trial Attachment 24



26124

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
warm: uuv uenicu. ceuraa
wauen neen HEALTH cane avsreu
wast-Iuarou. Dc mow-com

MCHL-FPS 14 March 20ll

MEMORANDUM FOR: CONVENING AUTHORITY. COL CARL R. COFFMAN. Jr..
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL. 204 LEE AVENUE. FORT MYER. VIRGINIA
2221 I99

SUBJECT: Extension requested for Sanity Board - PFC Bradley Manning.

I. An extension is requested for completion of the RCM 706 Sanity Board in the case of PFC
Bradley Manning. The original order asked that the report be completed by 3 March 201 l.

2. The evaluators are coordinating suitable dates and times for the final evaluation session to
take place. This involves multiple parties. Additionally. the ?nal interview will take place at a
SCIF and this has resulted in the consumption of extra time for this aspect of the evaluation to be
coordinated. We anticipate that the final date for the evaluation should take place in the first ten
days of April 2011 and are expecting that this will be con?rmed today.

3. We are asking for three weeks from the date of the ?nal interview to deliver the completed
evaluation reports to the respective parties. Hence. we ask for a suspense date of Friday. 29
April 2011.

4. POC for this memorandum is Dr. Michael Swcda, WRAMC Department.
Forensic Service.

MICHAEL D, ABPP (Forensic)
CHIEF. FORENSIC SERVICE
Forensic

26125

Speedy Trial Attachment 25

26126

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER. VA 22211-1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

1 8 MAR ;0',1

IMND-MHH-ZA

MEMORANDUM FOR Chief, Forensic Psychology, Walter Reed Army Medical Center,
Washington, DC 20307-5001
SUBJECT: Extension Request for RCM 706 Sanity Board - U.S. v. PFC Bradlev Manning
I have reviewed the request for an extension of the RCM 706 Sanity Board for PFC Manning. The
request is:
(J|pextension oftime must be submitted through the trial counsel to me for approval.
(

) disapproved. The Sanity Board will proceed as previously ordered.

Q^tt^rOi X-Ar
CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding
CF: (wo/encls)
1 -Defense Counsel

26127

Speedy Trial Attachment 26

26128

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
REPLY TO
ATTENnON OF

IMND-MHH-ZA

' "

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(c) - U,l_v%
PFC Bradlev Maiming
1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any
excludable delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-referenced matter.
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 15 February 2011 until the date of this
memorandum is excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3. BASIS OF DELAY. The above delay is based on the following extensions, defense requests,
responses, and the facts and circumstances ofthis case:
a. Original Classification Authorities' (OCA) reviews of classified information,
b. OCA consent to disclose classified information.
c. Defen.se Request for Sanity Board, dated 11 July 2010 and Defense Renewed Request for
Sanity Board, dated 18 July 2010 (enclosed).
d. Defense Request for Results of the Government's CTassificafion Reviews by the OCA,
dated 26 August 2010 (enclosed).
e. Defense Request for Appropriate Security Clearances for the Defense Team and Access
for PFC Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed),
f RCM 706 Sanity Board Extension Request, dated 14 March 2011 (enclosed),
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting ofexcludable delay is not intended to supersede
any previous delays, bul merely account fbr excludable delays from the previous accounting to
the date ofthis memorandum
5. T he previous memorandum, dated 15 February 2011, inaccurately refiected that the sanity
board was completed on 3 February 2011. The sanity board is ongoing. The memorandum also
inaccurately reflected that PFC Manning was granted access to classified information on 3
February 2011. To date, the various OCAs involved in this case have not granted PFC Manning
access to classified information originating from their department or agency.

26129

IMNDMHHZA
Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(c) - U.S. v. PFC Bradley
Manninu
6, I acknowledge and reviewed the defense request for speedy trial, dated 13 January 2011
(enclosed).

-g^W^dbrEnds
as
CF: (wo/encls)
I -Trial Counsel
1 -f)efciise Coun:;

CARL R. COFFMAN. .IR
COL. AV
Commanding

26130

Speedy Trial Attachment 27

26131

.,

_
^

mj

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER
WALTER REED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, DC 20307-5001

MCHL-FPS

15 April 2011

MEMORANDUM FOR: CONVENING AUTHORITY. COL CARL R. COFFMAN, Jr.,
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL, 204 LEE AVENUE, FORT MYER. VIRGINIA
22211-1199
SUBJECT: Extension requested for Sanity Board - PFC Bradley Manning.
1. An extension is requested for completion of the RCM 706 Sanity Board in the case of PFC
Bradley Maiming. The current suspense is 16 April.
2. The final interview with SPC Manning was conducted on 9 April. The Board has been
diligently working on completion of the long report. We are nearing finalization of the report,
but have had limited availability to meet as a full board to discuss die report. This is because of
conflicting schedules and demands of the three board members.
3. The board respectfully requests an extension of the suspense to COB on Friday, 22 April
2011 to allow full and adequate time to discuss and review all pertinent findings.

MICHAEL SV^DA, PHTD, ABPP (Forensic)
CHIEF, FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY SERVICE
Forensic Psychologist

26132

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER. VA 22211-1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

fMND-MHH-ZA

,

MA^LTXI

MEMORANDUM FOR Chief, Forensic Psychology, Walter Reed Army Medical Center,
Washington, DC 20307-5001
SUBJECT: Extension Request for RCM 706 Sanity Board - U.S. v, PFC Bradlev Manning
I have reviewed the request for an extension of the RCM 706 Sanity Boatd for PFC Manning. The
request is:
i f ^ ) approved. The Sanity Board will be completed no later than 22 April 2011. Any other
extension of time must be submitted through the trial counsel to me for approval.
(

) disapproved. The Sanity Board will proceed as previously ordered.

^{^JLA '
CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding
CF: (wo/encls)
1-Defense Counsel

26133

Speedy Trial Attachment 28



26134

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
wuren tween ARMY MEDICAL ceurea
warren neeo HEALTH cane svsreu
wasumcrou. oc 20307-som

MCHL-FPS 22 April 2011

MEMORANDUM FOR CPT Ashden Fein, Trial Counsel, 210 A Street. Suite 300, Fort Lesley J.
McNair, Washington. DC. 203 l9 (202-685-4903).

SUBJECT: Sanity Board Evaluation of Bradley E. Manning, Private First Class (PFC), SSN

1. In accordance with the order of the commander, a sanity board convened to inquire into the
competency. mental responsibility, and diagnosis of PFC Manning.

2. The Board reached the following answers to the specific questions of the order for the Board:

a. Does the accused currently have a severe mental disease or defect? If the answer to is yes,
answer the following questions:

1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the American Association's
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-lV

2) is this severe mental disease or defect service disqualifying??

3) What is the accused's prognosis for recovery?

4) Can this severe mental disease or defect be successfully controlled by treatment with
drugs?

5) Does the long-terrn commitment of the accused appear to be a necessary alternative?

The Board replies: No, PFC Manning does not currently have a severe mental disease or
defect.

b. Does the accused have the mental capacity to understand the nature of the proceedings and the
seriousness of the charges against him? If the answer to is no. answer the following
questions:

1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the
2) Can this mental disease or defect be successfully treatedlcontrolled by treatment with
drugs?
3) What is the prognosis and expected time for recovery?

The Board replies: Yes, PFC Manning has the mental capacity to understand the nature of
the proceedings and the seriousness of the charges against him.

c. Does the accused have the mental capacity to cooperate intelligently in his own defense?
If the answer to is no. answer the following questions:

26135


SUBJECT: Sanity Board Evaluation of Bradley E. Manning, Private First Class (PFC), SSN



1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the
2) Can this mental disease or defect be successfully treated/controlled by treatment with
drugs?
3) What is the prognosis and expected time for recovery?

The Board replies: Yes, PFC Manning has the mental capacity to cooperate intelligently in
his own defense.

d. At the time of the alleged criminal conduct. did the accused have a severe mental disease or
defect? If the answer to is yes, answer the following four questions:

1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the

2) At the time of the alleged criminal misconduct. and as a result of such severe mental
disease or defect, was the accused able to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of
his conduct?

3) Is this severe mental disease or defect merely a defect of character or personality caused
by inadequate training and development, lack of moral restraint, or a personal, social, or cultural
standard of conduct which differs from that of society as a whole?

4) Was this impairment complete?

The Board replies: No, PFC Manning did not have a severe mental disease or defect at the
time of the alleged criminal conduct.

e. At the time of the alleged criminal misconduct, and as a result of such severe mental disease
or defect, was the accused able to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of his
conduct?? If the answer to is yes, answer the following three questions.

1) What is the clinical diagnosis, using the

2) Is this severe mental disease or defect merely a defect of character or personality caused
by inadequate training and development, lack of moral restraint. or a personal, social, or cultural
standard of conduct which differs from that of society as a whole?

3) Was this impairment complete?

The Board replies: No, PFC Manning did not have a severe mental disease or defect at the
time of the alleged criminal conduct that resulted in him being unable to appreciate the
nature and quality or wrongfulness of his conduct.

l".J

26136


SUBJECT Sanity Board Evaluation of Bradley E. Manning. Private First Class (PFC), SSN


3. Questions regarding this case can be directed to MAJ Benesh, Dr. Sweda, or LTC Hemphill at

Walter Reed Army Medical Center,

SAMANTHA M. BENESH. Psy.D.
MAJ. MS. USA
Forensic Fellow


1:r USA

Forensic Fellow

?/?c6Pw0

MICHAEL 5 ABPP (Forensic)
CHIEF, FORENSIC PROGRAM
Forensic

26137

Speedy Trial Attachment 29

26138

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORTMYER. VIRGINIA 22211-1199
HEPLY r o
ATTENTION OF

IMND-MHH-ZA

22 April 2011

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(c')-U.S. v.
PFC Bradley Manning
1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this memorandum is co provide a periodic accounting for any
excludable delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-referenced matter.
2 EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 18 March 2011 until the date ofthis
memorandum is excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3 BASIS OF DELAY. The above delay is based on the following extensions, defense requests,
responses, and the facts and circumstances of this case:
a Original Classification Authorities' (OCA) reviews of classified information,
b. OCA consent to disclose classified information,
c. Defense Request for Sanity Board, dated 11 July 2010 and Defense Renewed Request for
Sanity Board, dated 18 July 2010 (enclosed)
d. Defense Request for Results of the Govemment's Classification Reviews by the OCA,
dated 26 August 2010 (enclosed).
e. Defense Request for Appropriate Security Clearances for the Defense Team and .Access
for PFC Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed),
f RCM 706 Sanity Board Extension Request, dated 14 March 2011 (enclosed)
g, RCM 706 Sanity Board Extension Request, dated 15 April 2011 (enclosed).
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting of excludable delay is not intended to supersede
any previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting lo
the date of this memorandum.

26139

IMND-MHH-ZA
Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 7U7(c) - U S . v PFC Bradlev
MatminK
5. I acknowledge and reviewed the defense request for speeds trial, dated 13 January 2011
(enclosed).
.z''
. f

Ends
as
CF, (wo''end's)
1- I'rial Cotmsel
I-Defense Counsel

- ' - CARL R COFFMAN. JR,'
COL, AV
Commanding

26140

Speedy Trial Attachment 30



FOR

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
U.S. ARMY MIJTARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
210 A STREET
FORT LESLEY J. MCNAIR. DC 20319-5013

'0

RI OF

3:5 April TZOH

FOI-I Jomt Isase
H09

H.111. Icc Fart

91 of 32 - PH Br-adlcx

1. '|l1c in tin: you the 3.:
unt:I the l..'mtet'E $t;1tc$- ct?-nwnt from all the
and to the This is
in order for United to tuititl its CCMJ and the
Rules fur (RUM), as fl?-rthc pr-.-part: fur the 32


2. Outer: JINI (us and itrmy R:g_tt3atiotts
and the States tn a department or
to parties of the cxccutm: l.mr;1ttch without the ut the or their tltr?cgattr 9inct:
I 7 June Witt. the [muted has all of the and that
clussitted the and cndettcc to he to the and the accused
rctlacte-.1 cnmiex nt"tltc- Request? and
vs ithoul their Iltm-cvcr. b4.-t.-ztusc nf the epccial of this (7392.
the am-.-tmt-5 cla-ssi?cd digital ct"-ntatning c;qtaittf:s? and the
of ntorc In-Ipful to both States? anti the :m;tm-d. tm'\t'c ts?.
for exegutive to the t'rt>m their UCA or


3. _wu have the: to a rcastmablc
deIzt_\ lltt; lixus and uf? :1 Rzzasonu to grant :1 delay for
t*xan1pI::. the ttced for thus to to the case, or tune to the


1. 'I'itc :1 t-1' rcstartittg {Em 57
mm?. the of the I. En.s'.trv.- Rcqtursts and Re". icxw or
ZOI I. I-'ttrt't1c ah-Jvt: the limited the pt-tiotl .-Xprii 201 I
and 25' .\1etj. 201 I. or writer, be dcsigztutctl as delay ml!
provitlt: fun: mi ?update NU later than 25 20!]

5. Tim pnint for this is (ht: at?


I15 CPT,

Ina!






26141

26142

Speedy Trial Attachment 31

26143

26 .April 2011
MEMORANDUM FOR Commander. Joint Base Mvcr - Henderson Hall. 204 Lee Avenue. Fort
Myer. VA 22211-1190
ST BJECT: Government Request fbr Delay ofArticle 32 Investigation. United States vs. PFC
Bradlev H, Mannini?
1. On 25 April 2011. the (lovemmcnt requested that you delay restarting the .Article 32
Invesiigation until the United States received con.sent from all ofthe Original Classification
Auiliorities (OCAsi to release discoverable dassified evidence and infoimation to the dcfi^nse. It
appears that no OCA has given such approval siiKe the Defense has yet to receive any dassified
evidence or infomiation. Without this information, the Defense is unable to adequately prepare
Ibr the .Article 32,
2. In order to avoid any additional iimiecessary delay, the Defense requests that you order the
Govemment to:
a. Provide either a substitute for or a summary ofthe Itiformation for relevant classifiekl
documents;
b. y\How the Defense to inspect any and all unchissified documents, tungible items, imtl
repc'rts within the Govemmeni's connol. uhich are material to the Defense's preparation. Rule
fbr Court-Martiai (R.C.M.) 40.5(g)( 1 XAi. (g)(T)(B), and 701(a). The standard set oui in R.C.M.
405 and R.C.M. 701 requires the (Joveniment to tum over items that are within the
'Gov ernment's control." This means that the TrialCounsel, upon Defence requesi. has an
afflimative obligation lo seek out reques^ted evidence that is m the possession ofthe
Government even if that evidence is not ulready in tiie immediate possession ofthe Inal
Counsel. UMi'/e(/.S'w/e.\ r HWW/.v. 50M.J.436. 441 (C.A.A.F. 1999). fhe "prosecutor will be
deemed to have knowledge of and access to anything in the possession, custody, or control of
any fedeml agency participating in the Siime investigation ofthe defendant." LMWo'.S/wfe.s v.
A,
8(,8 F 2d 1032. 1036 (9'^ Cir. 1989); M m ^ a . 50 M.J. at 441 I lie Defense specifically
renews it:, request Ibr discoyeiy previously either denied or not provided by the Gvvemment
See Attachment A - F: AND
e. Ensure the Defense has equal .ueeess to CID and other law enfiircemeni w itnesscs bv
requiring the Trial Coimsel tc make ayaiiable any requested witness. R.C.M. 405(gl( 1)(B) and
70:i(a) establishes that the prosecution and defense "shall have equal opportunity to obtain
witnesses and evidence.' See also Article 46. UCMJ. The Defense has attempted to interv iew
several ofthe CID agents in this case Or 14 April 2011. the Defense received an email from
Deputy Director Daniel T. .Andrews of the Computer Crime Investigaiive Unit, requesting thai
the Defense coordinate all witness interview requests dirough MDW Trial Counsel Specifically,
the Defense requests the ability to speak with S.A Toni M, Graham, S.A Thomas ,A, Smith, S,A
Kenneth .A. Kin^. S.A Charles 1. .Ames Jr.. SA Mark .A. Mander SA Randall A. Bcthke. SA

26144

SUBJECT: trovernorent Request lor Delay of Article 32 Investigation, United States vs PLC
Bradlev E. Mantling
ManhevvJ Haywood, SA Jennie R Lisciandri,CW2 Nathan E Langley, SA Calder L.
RobertsonllLSADavidS Shaver, and S A Ronald Rock
3. Duetothelimiteddi^covery provided 30 far, it is likely that the Ai^icle 32 will need tobe
delayed again unless the above infbrmation is provided in a timely manner The Defense
reL^i^e^ that any additional delay b^ credited to theGovemment
4 Thepointofcontact fbr tlii^ memorandum is the undersigned at (401) 744 3007.

^
E^l^
As

0AVIDEDWARDC00M8S
Civilian Defense Counsel

26145

Speedy Trial Attachment 32

26146

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORTMYER. VIRGINIA 22211-1199
RE1>LY TO
AnE^TlONOF

12 HAY ./O''

IMND-MHH-ZA
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(c) U.S. v. PFC Bmdley
E. Manninu
I PURPOSE. The ixirpose of this tneinorandum is to provide a periodic accounting Ibr any excludable
delay under Rule Ibr Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-referenc#d matter
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 22 April 2011 until the date ofthis memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3. BASIS OF DELAY. The above delay is based on the followi.ig extensions, defense requests,
responses, andthe Facts and circumstances ofthis case:
a. Original Classificauon .Authorities' (b OCA consent to disclose classifiec information.
c. Defense Reiiuest for Results ofthe Government s Classification Reviews by the OCA, dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed).
d Defense Request for Appropriate Secirity Clearance;; for the Defense Team and Access fbr PFC
Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed)
e. Government Request for Delay of Article 32 Investigation, dated 25 .April 20! i (enclosed).
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting of excludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to Ihe date ofthis
memorandum.
5. I acknowledge and reviewed the det(:r,se request for speedy trial, dated 13 January 2011 (enclosed).

f\
End
as

CF I wo/encls)
I -Trial Counsel
l-Defeiise Counsel

C\RI R. COFFM.AX. JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26147

Speedy Trial Attachment 33



26148

VUR I \l ISL

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
u.s. ARMY MILITARY OF WASHINGTON
210 A smear
roar LESLEY .1. oc 203195013

REPLY TO
NTION 0?

22 May ZOI I

('omt1t.tr.dcr. Joint 30-} Lee l'0f'- Myer.
I199

for 32 -

PURPOSE. The an the case reqttc-st: you In
the ?a2 until the States the proper 2tutl.nrIt;.' to
and clamzitlcti and to (iefcnse. This consent In order for
the Umtcd States to ful?ll tl.\ dtscovcry obligations -16. arzti the Rulcs for (?nuns-
(RCM as ?n ch as fut to prepare fur 1?

2. The pr02~.ccutton IS cuntmuing to work relevant t)rn_m1ai Autlmriues
to obtain consent to cliscinsc and to the
.tl:1ssil'1cat:un In began ntaktng copies of
dagttal and for dt.sCl0.\ttfC to the ptusccutton learned
that several CXl?tll?otl$ and the casc ?le rcquirc to
apart frmr; any tnforntatmn. The US far the? IS
\\-nrktug tn ubtaun that Lm hchalfnt the from ticticrenl wtthin


3. As the authonty. yuu haw tu 3.-ran: a reasonable
delay tmcler the l'act~; ofa particular case. tn. :1 (it-Ea} :ncluthe for tum: to mrnpictc prm:ccd::1g;< rciutc-ti to the Jase. ear ta) the
at

-3 RICQU lhe .1 the 32
unttl the earlier utthc ofthc Request?. and
authortzattun to dI?Clt)sL? or June ZUI l. For the stated
ahmt. United States thy period 22 April 2')l and the restart ofthc 32

ln\ he as under RCM The proscgutinn Mil provide you an
uptlatc no later than 25 June Elli

5. The point for this 1; the

l.l\






Uitit i\l l\l

Speedy Trial Attachment 34

26149

26150

Print I Close Window
Subject: RE: US v . PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request) (UNCLASSIFIED)
From:

coombs@armycourtmartialdefense.com

Date: Tue, May 24, 2011 8:45 pm
To: "COFFMAN, CARL R COL MIL U S A I M C O M " (b) (6)
" M a t t h e w k e m k e s " (b) (6)
, " M o r r o w III, JoDean, CPT USA
JFHQ-NCR/MDW SJA" (b) (6)
" B o u c h a r d , Paul
CPT USCENTCOM USF-I USCENTCOM-TDS/FICI-JA-TBO"
, "Haberland, J o h n CPT MIL USA"
(b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6)
" O v e r g a a r d , Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-NCR/MDW
SJA" (b) (6)
" F o r d . Arthur D. W O l USA JFHQNCR/MDW SJA" (b) (6)
, " F e i n , Ashden CPT USA JFHQNCR/MDW SJA" (b) (6)
" J o s h u a Tooman"

(b) (6)

Sir,
The defense maintains it position as stated in the 26 April 2011 memorandum.
Given the limited discovery provided so far, it is likely that the Article 32 will
need to be delayed in order to provide the defense with the ability t o
adequately prepare. The defense requests that any additional delay be
credited t o the govemment.
v/r
David
David E. Coombs, Esq.
Law Office of David E. Coombs
11 South Angel! Street, #317
Providence, RI 02906

Office: 1-800-588-4156
Fax: (508) 689-9282
coombs (5*8 rmycourt ma rtiaidefense.com
www.armycourtmartialdefense.com
***Confidentjality Notice: This transmission. Including attachments, may
contain confidential attorney-client information and is intended for the
person(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, please
notify the sender and delete ail copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
use of this information may be unlawful and is p r o h i b i t e d . * * *

Original Message
Subject: Re: US v, PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request) (UNCLASSIFIED)
From: "COFFMAN, CARL R COL MIL USA IMCOM"
(b) (6)
;
Date: Tue, May 24, 2011 4:57 pm
To: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA JFHQ-NCR/MDW SJA"

26151

Cc: coombsOarmycourtmartialdefense.com,Matthew kemkes
(b) (6)
"Morrow H I , JoDean, CPT USA
JFHQ-NCR/MDW
SJA" "Bouchard, Paul CPT
USCENTCOM
USF-I USCENTCOM-TDS/FICI-JA-TBO"
(b) (6)
,"Haberland,John CPT MIL USA"
>."Overgaard, Angel M. CPT USA JFHQNCR/MDW
SJA" ."Ford. Arthur D. W O l
USA
:
JFHQ-NCR/MDW SJA" (b) (6)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Mr. Coombs,
Please provide me any comments you may have by COB 25 May 2011.
COL Coffman, Carl
On 0 5 / 2 3 / 1 1 , "Fein, Ashden CPT USA JFHQ-NCR/MDW SJA"
wrote:

(b) (6)

> Sir,
>

> The United States requests an additional delay of the Article 32.
Please see
> the attached request.
>

> v/r
> CPT Fein
>
>
>

> Ashden Fein
> CPT, JA
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Copyright © 2003-2011. All rights reserved.

26152

Speedy Trial Attachment 35

26153

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER. VIRGINIA 22211 1199

BKP:.V TO
ATTENTION OF

yuN 1 ? 2011

IMND-MHH / A

MliMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts Martial 707(c)
Manning

C&J^LJiFCBrWky

1. PURPOSE. The purpose of llii.s memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any excludable
delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above referenced matter,
2, EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 12 May 2011 until the date of this memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(e),
3, BASIS OF DELAY. The above delay is based on the following extensions, defense requests,
responses, and the facts and circumstances ol this case;
a. Original Classification Authorities' (OCA) reviews of classified information.
h, OCA consent to disclose classified informalion,
c. Defense Request for Results of the Government's Classification Reviews hy the OCA. dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed),
d. Defense Request for .Appropriate Security Clearances lor the Defense Team and Access for PFC
Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed).
e. Government Request for Delay of,Article 32 Invcstigalion, dated 22 May 2011 (enclosed).
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This aeeounting ofexcludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting lo the dale of this
memorandum.
b. 1 acknowledge and reviewed the defense requesi for speedy I rial, daled 13 January 201 i (enclosed).

« M
Ends
as

CF: (wo/encls)
I -Trial Counsel
1 - Delense C'ounsei

CARL R COFFMAN. JR.
COL. AV
Commanding

26154

Speedy Trial Attachment 36





(ii?l'1( 33.3 . 131:.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
u.s. ARMY Mnumm OF
219 A STREET
FORT LESLEY .1. Mcmm. DC 2a3:9-sum



ATTENNON OF

June Bill!

FOR My-cr


204 but For:

"1

for Delay of Articisz 32 . tater: xx



I, pwsecutitm in the cam: to
mu :\rtiulc_- umii Lfzximd States Eh: in
;:nz.i .::v?dcz1c:: and in [kc This
Comes)?? is in amier for me Uslizcd .?State.s ?0 fulfil} its uncle
Arl?cic. :u'zt! Ihc for as w:i% for Ehc in
zxciccmaicly prupurc for the zxrt?cic 33

2.

ex. The is cm11irzuing ya-{wk will?: relcvelzzl Original
In In and to ?isc along
wiih rccoivixwg mu enasloscd requests
fcumur11 em (Sigma! OCA consent in the

b. The subnn'1:cd (JET) same file In the National: Sucurity
(NSA) gum zmtsihtzr m1t:iiEg,t1zc:r to ?.hc:ir uxpcm the
fiia: for cqujlim The icicmificcl furihm by ihcir rnancr Hat: is retrmu? of
aha

c. .-Xnumcr; '5 tiimssc for 131:: is to an
from um on arsf 133;: iv
cc1?tai.I1 u.i0L?un1un1S in {hr dcihaznsc. ih: urdcri
been sigrau-<3, hu: 9. {cw rt:muin

d. Sim?: the ihc 10 pmducc the uf
the ,-?xrxray AR 1536-: and rizinhixl {ha dc yawr
dazed 32 .1 um: 3. the gurauwcution wit! inm1ca.1i21tcIy produce Eizcsc zma?
mmirm: an 223% As the 1:
in disciams and In the

26155

FUR 815


Request fm of 33
M.-1:

13ru.
3. As {ha authority, mu the In 3.1mm <2
d-:Ing. under facts and pzuiiculur case. Reasons? to za dang.?
mr cxumpls, the need for mm to mnupic-kc other proceedings related to me ur mm:
to seuura. Ihc of

4. ("he rcqucsts -.1 dcla}-? of rcsL.m1ng tier 32
unlil 212-; cuzlicr of the hf ihc Requeqs. (WA
In d:sc!ue:c- and mm!

review or aha: C11) file by me NS.-K and 00A. or 27 July ZUI I. For the reaeons stated aimx-?c.

Unizccl Sluice? requests the 37 April and the rcstem ml the Article
be dusignalcd as ?zxciudublc delay undcr RCM The pzusccutiun wxli
pmvidc ynu an upduic no later than 25 July IIUI 1.

5. The pain! of Iln? this xc lhr? umic:s.igncd

.\SiiHl-N
as JA
Trial F.nunsr:l


('uun.s'c|

T-4

1-UR 1 SE

26156

Speedy Trial Attachment 37

26157

26158

Print Close Window

Subject: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request) (UNCLASSIFIED)
From:
Date: Wed, Jun 29, 2011 8:37 pm

To: CARL COL MIL USA

?Matthew kemkes" -, "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA JFHQ-
NCRIM DW
"overgaard. Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW

?ford, Arthur 0. W01 USA DW

-, "Joshua Tooman" "Fem.
Ashden CPT USA OW





Cc:



Si r,

The defense maintains it position as stated in its 26 April 2011 memorandum. Once
the Government is able to provide the classified and unclassified discovery, we will
likely need to delay the Article 32 hearing in order to provide the defense with an
opportunity to adequately prepare. The defense requests that any additional delay be
credited to the government.


David

David E. Coombs, Esq.

Law Office of David E. Coombs

11 South Angell Street, #317
Providence, RI 02906

Office: 1-800-588-4156

Fax: (508) 689-9282




Notice: This transmission, including attachments, may contain
confidential attomey-client information and is intended for the person(s) or company
named. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all
copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or use of this information may be unlawful
and is

-- Original Message

Subject: Re: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request) (UNCLASSIFIED)
From: CARL COL MIL USA

Date: Wed, June 29, 2011 4:56 pm

To: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA


Cc: Matthew kemkes >,"Morrow JoDean,
CPT USA SJA

army,mil,"Overgaard,
Angel M. CPT USA

Arthur D. W01 USA
,Joshua Tooman
,"Ford, Arthur D. 1 USA




26159

SAID



Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Mr. Coombs,

Do you have any comments on the request?
COL Coffman

On 06/27/11. "Fein. Ashden USA
W'?te=

Sir,



The United States requests an additional delay of the Article 32. Please see
the attached request. We apologize for not providing an update sooner, but we
were hoping to have an approval before the end of last week.



v/r

CPT Fein



Ashden Fein

CPT, JA









Ashden Fein

CPT, JA

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

.. .. .. .

Copyright 2003-2011. All rights reserved.

Speedy Trial Attachment 38

26160 1
I

26161

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER - HENDERSON MALI
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211 1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION C r

5 JUL ;[

IW^D-MIIH-ZA
MEMORANDUM FOR SEEDlSTRIBUTIOr<
SUBJECT: Delay t^l Article 32 Investigation - PFC Bradley E. Manning

L On 27 June 2011, the prosccuiion s,uhmiited a request lo delay restarting the Anielc 32 Invcstigatitm
until the United Stales receives proper authority to release discoverable unclassified evidence and
informatitm. as well as eonseni Inim all the Original Classification Aulhurities (OCAs) involved in this
ease to release discoverable classified evidence and infoimillion to ihe defense, whichever is earlier. .Sec
Enclosure !. On 29 June 2011, the defense ptovided a response which maintained ils 2h .April 2(H I
position acknowledging the need fur additional discovery and noting the potential for further delay lor
defense to adet;uaie1y piepare for the Anielc 32.
Enclosure 2.
2. This rrijsics! is:

((\ Y' ) appntvcd. The .Article 32 lnvestig:ation is delayed until the eariier of the complctitm of ihe
OCA Disdosure Requests and OCA Classification Reviews, and authorization i^ granted to disclose
proieetcd unclassilied inlormation. or 27 July 2011. The period belwcen 22 April 2011 and ihc resiari ol
ihc Aitide 32 Invesiigation is includable delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) 1 he
prosccuiion is required to provide mc an update no later than 25 July 2011.
(

)

dlisapproved.

Ihe Article 32 Investigation will leslart within thirty days ofthis

memorandum
3. Aliif reviewing periineiti pontons ofthe case file, it is my understanding that ongoing national
security concerns exist in this ease, as well as an ongoing law enl'oreement investigation(s) into PEC
Manning and others, in light ot the national security concerns and ongoing invcsiigalion(N). the
prosecution will cautiously proceed with the disclosure of information, hut will comply with iis
ohiigations under .Article 4(). UCMJ, RCM 405. RCM 701, RCM 703. and appliuible ease law. In
addilion. onee the prosecution receives the authority to disclose previously undisclosed inlormation to the
(Id'ciise, il will do so expeditiously to minimize any unnecessary delay.

2 Ends
1. Proseeiilion Request, 37 June i i
2. Defense Rcs|)onse, 2^ June 11
DIS'lRIBimON:
i ,\rlielc 32 10
I -Trial Counsel
I-Defense Counsel

CARL K. c o n MAN. JR.
COL. AV
(iloinmanding

26162

Speedy Trial Attachment 39

26163

51%?
3 :1-m2'z? m=2xr' i?isiffi is s? zae?xif{a:qm::x1 fur LS2 ff;



Tm? in gar-.1 arnu5.i;1m: Ira a:icl:1y
the .-"mimic 33 until the the in
and cx and in1imn12;{iun in the This
IH in nrcicz the i._5z1i1cd an its L:mh:z?
Arlicic? -Hz. .md1'i1c' iliur as well as: fur (hr 10
Eu: .317.?



T1"|u: pmsL:cLm(m is
10 uhiuira cwit]; The UT.) 1x:pn::e we

prepared mr rt, iinas zippmvai lay Eh-2 emd {?nal {cw of
la mm 213:1.?

h. Thu. .suhmi11cd {hm fiiu: to the ?;m'm'ml
and In mi:
111:: cs;11iIi:: 51,. TM Eurnty
lay meme: The six
:";zrthi;r use


c. T113 ix on
okaaznzningg the in
10 am: ml? mu disc-Ensure
hmuc hmand iclexlud us. ask; the {inc board--?v--?-T
(?vi in min}. Thu;
?in fih; that zum 2'0; Eta};
rm iautr thy date As the 1'-sccix rs
it nil? ex in the



?iv; is


1-: Ex? Ji?

1- liflli.?


--. \4s Isl

mu?. mm. In I

?xi 1h;

RLQI. PS Xtl?csc
msfil ?In ?ah.

My 3 .;mi F: vr Kin?

1.7. . Had-:

Hlr;

hhUYc its
im In: in

-.im ff? i.

'3 [nun fur ix 111: "2 4'



Hzi.\
(?Pl


26164

?peedy Trial Attachment 40

26165

26166

25 July 2011
MEMORANDUM FOR Commander. Joint Base Myer - Henderson Hall, 204 Lee Avenue. Fort
Myer, VA 22211-1199
SUBJECT: Govemment Request for Delay ofArticle 32 Invcsfigation - United Stales vs. PFC
Bradlev 1% Manning
1. On 25 July 2011. the Government requested that you again delay restarting the Article 32
Invesugation until it has received consent from all ofthe Original Classification Authorities
(OCAs) to release discoverable dassified evidence and informafion to the defense. Although
classification reviews typically take time to complete, ilic Government has now had over a year
to do so. The latest request by the trial counsel for excludable delay docs not adequtttely explain
wtat has been done to require timely res|X)nse and reviews by the relevant OCAs.
2. Given the fact PFC Manning is currently in pretrial confinement, fhe {iovcmment mti.st
demonstrale due diligence in securing classificafion reviews. On 9 January 2011. tlie Delense
made a request Ibr speedy trial. The Delense once again renews this requesL f/w/i^J .S/o/es v.
TyMmp.YOM, 68 M.J. 308 (C.A.A.F. 2009)(holding that Article 10. UCMJ, creates a more exacting
speedy trial demand than does the Sixth Amendment).
3. The Defense also renews its request for you to order the Govenimenl to provide either a
substiiute Ibr or a summary of the information fbr the relevant classified documents: to allow the
Defense to inspect any and all unclassified d«)cumcnts. tangible items, and re^wrts within the
Government's control; to provide discovery to the Defense eiUier previously denied or nol
provided; AND to provide access to all CID and otlicr law enforcement agents who have worked
on this case. Rule for Court-Martial (R.C.M.) 405(g)(l)tA). (g)(lxB), and 701ta).
4. Any additional delay should not be esduded under R C M. 707(c). Instead, the requested
delay shi^uld fie credited to the (lovemmetit.
5. The point ofcontact for this memorandum is the undersigned at (ROO) 5SS-4156.

W v i D EDWARD C()OMBS
Civilian Defense (Counsel

26167

Speedy Trial Attachment 41

26168

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER - HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
R t P i Y TO
ATTEMTION OF

fMND-MHH-ZA

26 J u l y 2011

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION
SUBJECT: Delay of Article 32 Investigation - PFC Bradley E. Manning

1. On 22 July 2011, the prosecution submitted a request to delay restarting the Article 32 Investigation
until the United States receives proper authority to release discoverable unclassiSed evidence and
information, as well as consent from all the Original Classification Authorities (OCAs) involved in this
case to release discoverable classified evidence and information to the defense. See Enclosure 1. On 25
July 2011, the defense renewed its request to order tlie United States to provide eitlier a substitute for or a
summary ofthe infonnation for the relevant classified documents; to allow the defense to inspect any and
all unclassified documents, tangible items, and reports within the govemment's control; to provide
discovery to the defense either previously denied or not provided; and to provide access to all CID and
other law enforcement agents who have worked on this case. See Enclosure 2.
2. This request is:
i m p ' ' ' ) approved. The Article 32 Investigation is delayed until tlie earlier of the completion of the
OCADisclosurc Requests and OCA Classification Reviews, and audiorization is granted to disclose
protected unclassified information, or 27 August 2011, The period between 22 April 2011 and tbe restart
ofthe Article 32 Investigation is excludable delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c). The
prosecution is required to provide me an update no later than 2S August 2011,
(
) disapproved. The Article 32 Investigation will restart witltin tliirty days of this
memorandum.
3. After reviewing pertinent portions ofthe case file and receiving an update ofthe procedures being
followed in this case, it is my understanding tliat ongoing national security concerns BMSt in this case, as
well as an ongoing law enforcement investigalion(s) into PFC Manning and others. In tight ofthe
national security concerns and ongoing invesligation(s), the prosecution will cautiously proceed with the
disclosure of informalion, but will comply witli its obligations under Article 46, UCMJ, RCM 405, RCM
701, RCM 703, and applicable case law. (n addition, once the prosecution receives the autliority to
disclose previously undisclosed information to the defense, it will do so expeditiously to minimize any
unnecessary delay.

2 Ends
1. Prosecution Request, 2S July 2011
2. Defense Response, 25 July 2011
DISTRIBUTION:
1-Ai1icle32 10
1 -Trial Counsel
1-Defense Counsel

CARL R, COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26169

Speedy Trial Attachment 42

26170

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

j^AlACr k

IMND-MHH-ZA

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT; Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(e) - United States v.
PFC Bradley E. Manning

1. PURPOSE. The purpose ofthis memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any excludable
delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above referenced matter.
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 13 July 2011 until the dale of this memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3. BASIS OF DELAY, The above delay is based on ihe following extensions, defense requests,
responses, and the facts and circumstances of this case:
a. Original Classification Authorities' (OCA) reviews of classified information.
b. OCA consent to disclose classified information,
c. Defense Request for Results of the Government's Classification Reviews by the OCA. dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed).
d. Defense Request for .Appropriate Security Clearances for the Defense Team and .Access for PFC
Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed).
e. Government Request lor Delay of Article 32 Investigation, dated 25 July 2011 (enclosed).
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting ofexcludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to the date ol this
memorandum.
5. I acknowledge and reviewed the defense request for speedy trial, dated 13 January 2011 (enclosed),
and the renewed request for speedy trial, dated 25 July 2011 (enclosed).

Ends
as

CF; (wo/encls)
I-Trial Counsel
1-Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN. JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26171

Speedy Trial Attachment 43



26172

ltllit [Kiri

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
u.s. AFIMY MILITARY DISTRICT or
210 A STREET
roar LESLEY J. MCNAIFI, oc 20319-5013

REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF



ANJA-CL 25 August Bill 1

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, U.S. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer Henderson Hall,
204 Lee Avenue, Fort Myer, VA 22211-1 199

SUBJECT: Request for Delay of Articie 32 Investigation United States v. PFC Bradley
.M.a_n_rti_n.e

1. PURPOSE. The prosecution in the ah0ve~referenced case requests you continue to delay
restarting the Article 32 investigation until the United States receives the proper authority to
release discoverahie unclassified and classified evidence and infonnation to the defense. This
consent is necessary for the United States to fulfill its discovery obligations under Article 46,
UCMJ and the Rules for Courts-Martial (RCM), as well as for the defense to adequately prepare
for the Article 32 investigation.

2. UPDATE.

a. The prosecution is continuing to work with relevant Original Classification Authorities
(OCAs) to obtain consent to disclose classified evidence and information to the defense along
with receiving completed classi?cation reviews.

b. CID is conducting a secondary review of the derivative classification of the forensic
reports. Recently, the governnienfs security expert reviewed the forensic reports and advised
that portions of the reports should be reviewed based on the Security Classification Guides
governing the information. The prosecution intends to produce the full reports once a final
determination of the derivative classification is made by CID Command and the Army 02 gives
release consent. Three of these reports are unclassified in their entirety, and were given to the
defense on 25 Juiy 201 l.

c. The prosecution submitted the unclassified CID case file to the National Security Agency
(NSA) and another government intelligence organization (OGA) to have their experts review the
tile for classified equities. The NSA identified approximately twenty sensitive documents
requiring further review by their subject matter experts. The OGA identified approximately six
sensitive documents requiring further review by their subject matter experts. The OGA
completed its additionat review, but the NSA review is ongoing.

d. The US. Office for the Eastern District of\/irginia has obtained all
authorizations from the relevant district court judges on behalfof the prosecution, and the
prosecution is currently obtaining signed protective orders from defense. as required by the
district court judges, to allow disclosure of all relevant exhibits and documents to the defense.

l?t}i{ ii



26173

Ul"l"l(

ANJA-CL
SUBJECT: Request for Delay of Article 32 Investigation


e. The prosecution is continuing to work with the Federal Bureau of (FBI) and
the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) to receive authorization to disclose relevant portions of
any case files. This includes obtaining copies of the FBI and D55 case tiles, it any, to conduct a
search of the files for discoverable information.

I. Since the previous request. the prosecution produced 21,442 pages? of documents (hates
numbers ()2l3n4 The evidence and information disclosed included the vast majority ot
the unclassified case file. the MAJ (Tlausen administrative reprimand file. recordings all
visits with PFC Manning at MCB-Q. and various other documents. As the prosecution receives
other approvals. it will continue to disclose evidence and information to the

3. DELAY. As the convening authority, you have the authority to grant a
reasonable delay under the facts and circumstances of a particular case. Reasons to grant a delay
include. for example, tintc to enable counsel to prepare for trial in complex cases. time to obtain
appropriate security clearances for access to classified intorrnation, or time to secure the
availability of evidence. RCM 7(J7(c). Discussion.

4. REQUEST. Given the complexity of this case, stemming from the number of classification
authorities involved and the volume of information requiring classilicatiott reviews. the
prosecution requests a reasonable delay ot? restarting the Article 32 investigation until the earlier
of the completion of the OCA Disclosure Requests, OCA Classification Review s. final
determination of derivative classifications. final review of the CID case file by the NSA, and
release authority from relevant district court judges, or 27 September 2U?l I. The prosecution has
actively and diligently worked to resolve all outstanding issues to ensure timely release of all
possible information to the defense so their ability to represent and potentially defend their client
will be in no way impaired. For the reasons stated above. the United States requests the period
between 22 April 2()ll and the restart of the Article 32 investigation be designated as excludahle
delay under RCM 7(l7(c). The prosecution will provide you an update no later than 23
September I.

5. The point of Contact for this memorandum is the untlersigned at

FEIN
CPT,
Trial (?ounsel

CF:
Defense Counsel

ibi ti\l

26174

Speedy Trial Attachment 44

26175

Print I Close Window

Subject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request)
From:
Date: Sat. Aug 27, 2011 7:50 pm


"Matthew kemkes" "Tooman Joshua CPT MIL US
USA

orrow Ill JoDean CPT USA ow
Cc: "Overgaard, Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-

"Ford Arthur D. W01
USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW hden CPT USA
JFHQ-NCRIM DW SJA Fein'









.7.

Sir,

The Defense maintains its previous position that any additional delay should
not be excluded under R.C.M. 707(c). Instead, the requested delay should be
credited to the Government for speedy trial purposes under Article 10 of the
Unifonn Code of Military Justice.


David

David E. Coombs, Esq.

Law Office of David E. Coombs

11 South Angell Street, #317
Providence, RI 02906

Toll Free: 1-800-588-4156

Local: (508) 689-4616

Fax: (508) 689-9282




Notice: This transmission, including attachments, may
contain confidential attorney-client information and is intended for the
person(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, please
notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
use of this information may be unlawful and is

-- Original Message

Subject: Re: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request)
Fmm=?

Date: Sat, August 27, 2011 6:31 am

To: "Ashden CPT USA SJA Fein"



26176

"Tooman, Joshua CPT MIL US
USA








. "Morrow JoD'ean CPT USA

"Over aard An el M. CPT USA JFH -NCR MDW




01 USA
-

Mr. Coombs,

Do you have any issues or additions?
COL Coffman

Sent via B|acl
??-?-Original Message?~?~?

From: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA


Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 21:53:39

To: Coffman, Carl

Cc: Matthew kemkes
Tooman, Joshua CPT MIL
A TRAD -







Morrow JoDean CPT USA JFHQ-
SJA: Overgaard,

Angel M. CPT USA

ord, Arthur D. wo1
USA SJA
Subject: US V. PFC BM (An. J4 uciay

Si r,

The United States requests an additional delay of the Article 32.
Please
see the attached request.

v/r
CPT Fein

Copyright 2003-2011. All rights reserved.

26177

Speedy Trial Attachment 45

26178

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE tWYER - HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211 1199
REPLY TO
ArrtNTlOMOF

nv«m-M}i}i-ZA
MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION
SUBJECT: Delay of Arficle 32 Investigation - PFC Bradley Manning
1, On 25 August 2011, the prosecution submitted a request to delay restarting tlie Article 32 Investigation
until tlie United States receives proper authority to release discoverable unclassified evidence and
information, as well as consent from all the Original Classification Audiorities (OCAs) involved in this
case to release discoverable classified evidence and information to the defense. See Enclosure 1, On 27
August 2011, the defense maintained its previous position that any additional delay should not be
excluded under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c). See Enclosure 2.
2, This request is:
{(^^'^""^'f^pTovsd. The Article 32 Investigation is delayed until the earlier ofthe completion oftiie
OCA Disclosure Requests and OCA Classification Reviews, final determination of derivative
classifications, final review of the CID case file by the NS.A, and authorization is granted lo disclose
protected unclassified informalion, or 27 September 2011. Tlie period between 22 April 2011 and the
restart of the Arficle 32 Investigation is excludable delay under RCM 707(c). The prosecution is required
to provide me an update no later than 23 September 2011.
(
) disapproved. The .Article 32 Investigation will restart within thirty days ofthis
memorandum.
3, After reviewing pertinent portions of the case file and receiving an update of the procedures being
followed in this case, it is my understanding that ongoing national security concems exist in this case, as
well as an ongoing law enforcement investigation(s) into PFC Manning and others. In light of the
national security concerns and ongoing investigalion(s), the prosecution will cautiously proceed witli the
disclosure of information, but will comply witli its obligations under Article 46, UCMJ, RCM 405, RCM
701, RCM 703, and applicable case law. Iu addition, once the prosecution receives the authority to
disclose previously undisclosed information to the defense, it will do so expeditiously to minimize any
unnecessary delay.

^-C^btyyqc,
2 Ends
1. Prosecution Request, 25 August 2011
2. Defense Response, 27 August 2011
DISTRIBUTION:
1-Article 32 10
I -Trial Counsel
1-Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26179

gpeedy Trial Attachment 46

26180

EUR iihi"

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
u.s. ARMY MILITARY or
210 A smear
r-"om LESLEY J. ucnarn. ac 20319-5013

REM TO
ATTENTION OF



It? September it

FOR Arrny [Saint Fvlyer Hail, 304 Lee
Avenue, Fort Pvtyer, VA

SUBJECT: Request for Delay Article 32 Irtvestigzrtiorr v. PFC Brattllev

1? PURPOSE. The in the ah0ve~ret?ereneett case requests continue to delay restarting
the Article 32 irrvestigatinn until the United States receives the to release disetwerahie
urtclassitietl and evidenee and inferrmatirm to the This ecmstent is tor the
United States to fuifiil HS tliscm-?cry under Artieie UCMJ and the Rtties JVUT
(RCM), ?.114 well as for the defense to urjequately prepetre for the Artieie 32 investrguticm.

2. DATE.

The is eontinuin;,: to work with reievernt Autimrtties
ohtztin ctmsent tn evidence and to the defe rise and to receive completed
eiassitteatiorr reviews. Since the Iiir?i request. the received review {mm the
UCA at US. the is. with the ta!?
State and U.S. and expects to receive r'eviews fur more than
within the next two weeks.

h. CH) starter! the review nf the derivative the fttrertsit:
and the ftrrerrsic are in the {inert tit? review hefme release. /titer? its
review and once the Army gives Lun.-tent in relereze. the prosecution intends? to produce the tut? reportss,
with their and uttaehrnertts to the deienxe.

c. The prt?rsectrtitm suhntittcti the CID case file to the 5'ecurit_y Agettey-'
and another intelligence r"rrgartimtit'rtt ('OCjr\) to have their expert.< review the file for
equities. Both the NSA and OGA their ariditiunal review. The pmxecutiort is
xvork?ng with the NSA portion-ntarketi ver.
ti. The US. CJt?t7ee fur? the tzasterrt District tit? ?v?it?i;irri2t all .tuth0rizatit>t1s the
relevant district heit;t1ftrt' the pru.protective orders tram the tiet'en::e, as required by the di:-xtriet court _juah__1es, atimv tiixetrtsure at at!
exhibits? and to the

e. The proseeutitm ct.-ntinttes to work with the Federrtl Hermit (if (FBI) and the
Security Service (D83) to receive to disehtse relevant of tiny case fiies.
The received copies of the FBI and [333 case fiics and started to review these tiles; for
inforrnation. Once the itierttifies. eliseuverahie it writ work an tzbtairt
the atrtitori/.ati0n to the relevant portions? to the defen.?.e.

f. Since the pr'evimts; request, the prosectztitrrt 22,494 pages of
(342807-I)453Eilt The evitlenee and infurnmtitm dlSCi(tFrt?d included Lhrcumentatinrt from the confinement

mt-: err-its rm: 3553-

26181




Request for Delay of Article Investigation

tacilities. as well as the majority of two classilied military intelligence investigative case files. As the
prosecution receives other approvals. it will continue to disclose evidence and information to the defense.

g. The prosecution continues to work witlt the defense to lrontload any administrative requirements
for the defense members and their forensic computer experts to review classified information and
evidence. Since the last request, the prosecution provided the defense with specialized hardware and
soltwzire so that they are able to review all discovery and their experts may use their own
personal equipment to analyze and review lorettsic tluplieatcs of the evidence. Additionally. the
prosecution provided a large volume storage device to ID so that a torcnsic duplicate. of the evidence is
available to the dclettst: once the final autltortaation to release classified tntormatiun is obtained.

3. EXCLUDABLE DEIAY. As the convening authority, you have the authority to grant a reasonable
delay under the facts and circumstances of a particular case. Reasons to grant a delay include, for
example, time to enable counsel to prepare for trial in complex cases, time to obtain appropriate security
cleatunccs for access to classified information, or time to secure the availability of evidence. RCM
7(l7(cl, Discussion.

4. (?liven the complexity.? of this case, stenimirig from the number ofclassification
authorities involved amt the volume of inl'orm.'ition requiring classi?cation reviews, the

prosecution requests a reasonable delay of restarting the Article investigation until the earlier of the
completion of the OCA Disclosure Requests, OCA (flassificatioti Reviews, ?nal deterniination of
derivative classifications, receipt protective orders from the defense, and properly portion
inarlteil classilietl documents by the NSA. or 37 October l. The prosecution has and
diligently worked to resolve all outstanding issues to ensure timely release of all possible inforrnation to
the defense so their ability to represent and potentially defend thcil client will he in no way impaired. For
the reasons stated above. the United States requests the pcriod between April 2011 and the restart of
the Article 32 investigation be designated as delay under RCM 7(l7(c). The prosecution will
provide you an update no later than 25 October? 201

S. The point of contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at


(TPT. JA
Trial Counsel

Cl":
Defense

:f

26182

Speedy Trial Attachment 47

26183

Print 1 Qlose Windoyg

Subject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request)
From:
Date: Tue, Sep 27,2011 12:26 pm


"Matthew ke mke s"
DW




"Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA






Haberland, John CPT MIL

-, "Overgaard, Angel M. CPT
v, "Tooman, Joshua CPT MIL US
. "lbhden Fein"

Cc:




USA




Sir,

The Defense maintains its previous postion that any additional delay should not be
excluded under R.C.M. 707(0). Instead. the requested delay should be credited to the
for speedy trial purposes under Article ofthe Uniform Code ofMilitary
Jusnce.


David

David E. Coombs, Esq.

Law Office of David E. Coombs

1 South Angeli Street, #3 I7
Providence, RI 02906

Toll Free: 1-800-588-4156

Local: (508) 689-4616

Fax: (508) 689-9282

wmw. zmrivc iald ici isc.

Notice: This transmission. including attachments, may contain
con?dential altomey-client information and is intended for the person(s) or company
named. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all
copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or use ofthis infomiation may be unlawful
and is

Original Message

26184

Subject: US PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request)

From: "Fein Ashden CPT USA JFH


Date: Tue Se tember 27 2011 7:39 am

To:

Cc: "Matthew kemkes"
"Morrow JoDean, CPT USA













>l
"Haber1and,John CPT MIL
"Overgaard, Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-


sw
CPT MIL

Sir,

Attached is a signed version. Thank you.

v/r
Ashden




From: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJA
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 5:35 PM

To
Cc: ial Matthew kemkes; Morrow
JoDean,

CPT USA SJA: T:

Haber|and,John CPT MIL

Overgaard, Angel M. CPT USA Tooman,
Joshua CPT MIL US

USA TRADOC

Subject: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request)

Importance: High

Si r,

The United States requests a delay of the Article 32. Please see the
attached

request. Our digital scanner does not work, so I am providing an
unsigned but

final version. I will send an updated signed copy tomorrow.

v/r
CPT Fein

Ashden Fein
CPT, JA

Copyright 2003-2011. All rights reserved.

26185

26186

Speedy Trial Attachment 48

26187

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER - HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
REPLY TQ
ATTENTION OF

IMND-MHH-ZA
MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION
SUBJECT: Delay of Article 32 Investigation - United States v, PFC Bradlev Manning
1. On 26 September 2011, the prosecution submitted a request to delay restarting the Article 32
Investigation until the completion of Original Classification Authority (OCA) disclosure requests, OCA
classification reviews, a final determination of derivative classifications, receipt of signed protective
orders from the defense, and properly portion-marked classified documents by the National Security
Agency (NSA), or 27 October 2011. Sea Enclosure 1. On 27 September 2011, the defense maintained its
previous position that any additional delay should not be excluded under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM)
707(c). See Enclosure 2.
2. This request is:
(
approved. The Article 32 Investigation is delayed until the earlier of the completion of the
OCA disclosure requests, OCA classification reviews, afinaldetermination of derivative classifications,
receipt of signed protective orders from the defense, and properly portion-marked classified documents by
the NSA, or 27 October 2011. The period between 22 April 2011 and the restart of the Article 32
Investigation is excludable delay under RCM 707(c). The prosecution is required to provide me an
update no later than 25 October 2011.
(
) disapproved. The Article 32 Investigation will restart within thirty days of this
memorandum.
3. After reviewing pertinent portions of the case file and receiving an update ofthe procedures being
followed in this case, it is my understanding that ongoing national security concerns exist in this case, as
well as an ongoing law enforcement investigation(s) into PFC Manning and others. In light of the
national security concerns and ongoing investigation(s), the prosecution will cautiously proceed with the
disclosure of information, but will comply with its obligations under Article 46, UCMJ, RCM 405, RCM
701, RCM 703, and applicable case law. In addition, once the prosecution receives the authority to
disclose previously undisclosed information to the defense, it will do so expeditiously to minimize any
unnecessary delay.

2 Ends
1. Prosecution Request, 26 Sep 11
2. Defense Response, 27 Sep 11
DISTRIBUTION:
1-Article32 10
1-Trial Counsel
I -Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26188

Speedy Trial Attachment 49

26189

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211 1199
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

1 4 OCT 2011
IMND-MHH-ZA
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule I'or Courts-Martial 707(c) - United States v.
PFC Fjradlev Manning

1, PURPOSE. The purpose ofthis memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any excludable
delay under Rule for Courts-Mart ial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-referenced matter,
2, EXCLUDABLE DELAY. I he period from 15 September 2011 until the date of this memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3, BASrS OF DKI AY. The period of excludable delay is reasonable based on the following extensions,
defense requests, responses, and the facts and circumstances ofthis case;
a Original Classification Authorities' (OCA) reviews of classified information
b, OCA consent to disclose classified information,
c Defense Requesi for Results ofthe Governments Classification Reviews by the OCA. dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed).
d Defense Request for Appropriate Sec;urity Clearances for the Defense Team and Access for PFC
Manning, dated 3 September 2010 (enclosed).
c. Govemment Requesi for Delay of Article 32 Investigation, dated 26 September 2011 (enclosed),
4, PREVIOUS DELAYS. 1 his accounting of excludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to the date of this
memorandum.
5, I acknowledge and reviewed the defense request for speedy trial, dated I 3 January 2011 (enclosed),
and the renewed request for speedy trial, dated 25 July 2011 (enclosed).

-"AWijc^
V

Ends
as

Cb; (wo/encls)
1 - friai Counsel
1-Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.
COL. AV
Commanding

26190

Speedy Trial Attachment 50



26191



DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
u.s. ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
210 A STREET
FORT LESLEY J. MCNAIR, DC 20319-5013

REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

25 October 201 1

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander. US. Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer Henderson Hall,
204 Lee Avenue, Fort Myer, VA 2221 I-1190

SUBJECT: Request for Delay of/\rticle 32 Investigation v, PFC Bradiey
Manning

1. PURPOSE. The prosecution in the above-referenced case requests you continue to delay
restarting the Article 33 investigation until the United States receives the proper authority to
release discoverable classi?ed evidence and information to the defense. This consent is
necessary for the United States to tiil?ll its discovery obligations under Article 46, UCMJ and
the Rules for Couits?Martial (RCM). as well as for the defense to adequately prepare for the
Article 32 investigation.

2. UPDATE.

a. The prosecution is continuing to work with relevant Original Classification Authorities
to obtain consent to disclose classi?ed evidence and information to the defense and to
receive completed classi?cation reviews. Within the last several days, the prosecution received a
classification review of approximately one hundred documents and a video from the OCA at
US. Central Command, Additionally, the prosecution is contiriuing to work closely with the
Department ofState, a government intelligence agency (OGA), and US. Southern Command
and expects to receive classi?cation reviews for more than eighty documents before 1 November
201 l.

b. CID completed the necessary secondary review ofthe derivative classification oftbe
forensic reports, and the prosecution is currently processing and packaging the forensic reports,
enclosures, and attachments for delivery to the Army 02 no later than 27 October 201 1. These
reports consist ofover documents totaling more than pages. The prosecution
will release the final forensic reports to the defense once the review by the Army G2 is complete
and consent to disclose is received.

c. The prosecution submitted the unclassi?ed CID case ?le to the National Security Agency
(NSA) and an OGA to have their experts review the file for ciassified equities. Both the NSA
and OGA completed their additional review. Absent an unforeseen administrative issue. the
prosecution will produce portion~marlNSA and OGA no later than 27 October 20] l.

d. Based on discussions with multiple the prosecution's security expert is developing
an evidence classification guide (ECG) to aid law enforcement. prosecution, defense, and other








Request for Delay Article 32 investigation United States


government oflicials in understanding what specific investigative information is classi?ed.
Although this guide will not be a security classi?cation guide published by an OCA, this guide
based on derivative classifications can be used by all parties and potential witnesses to
understand what information is classi?ed or not. In the short -term, the guide will be used by
(i?.lD agents and other officials when discussing the case with the defense.

The prosecution continues to work with the Federal Bureau flnvest igation (FBI) and the
Diplomatic Security Service (DSS) to receive authorization to disclose relevant portions of any
case files. The prosecution received copies of the FBI and DSS case files and started to review
these files for discoverable infonnazion. Once the prosecution identi?es discoverable
information, it will work to obtain the proper authorization to produce the relevant portions to the
defense.

f. Since the previous request, the prosecut ion produced 771 pages ofdocuments (hates
numbers The evidence and information disclosed consisted ofadditional
documents from the CID case file. As the prosecution receives other approvals. it will continue
to disclose evidence and information to the defense.

g. The prosecution proposed a meeting with the defense for 8-1) November 201 1. The
purpose ofthc meeting is to assist the defense in the disposition ofthis case by the prosecution
presenting evidence supporting the charges against the accused and proposing potential plea
terms. The goal of the meeting is to help the defense locus their review fthe voluminous
forensic evidence and potentially minimize future delays.

h. The prosecution continues to work with the defense to frontloatl any administrative
requirements for the defense members and their forensic computer experts to review classi?ed
information and evidence. Since the last request, the prosecution effected the re-imaging
classi?ed laptop computers previously provided to the defense to process classified information.
Additionally?, the prosecution ordered several items requested by defense counsel, including a
color printer. a GSA-approved shredder, and iatge courier bags for transporting classi?ed
information.

3. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. As the convening authority. you have the authority to grant a
reasonable delay under the facts and circumstances ofa particular case. Reasons to grant a delay
include, for example, time to enable counsel to prepare for trial in complex cases. time to obtain
appropriate security clearances tor access to classi?ed information. or time to secure the
availability ofevidencc. RCM 707(c), Discussion.

4. REQUEST. Given the complexity ofthis case. stemming ?rom the number ofclassitication
authorities involved and the volume ofin formation requiring classi?cation reviews, the
prosecution requests a reasonable delay the Article 33 investigation until the earlier
ofthc completion ofthe OCA Disclosure Requests, OCA Classi?cation Reviews, and receipt of
signed protective orders from the defense, or 28 November 201 l. The prosecution has actively

26192

26193

FOR USE ONLY

ANJA-CL
SUBJECT: Request for Delay of Article 32 Investigation United States v. PFC Bradley
Manning

and diligently worked to resolve all outstanding issues to ensure timely release of all possible
information to the defense so their ability to represent and potentially defend their client will be
in no way impaired. For the reasons stated above, the United States requests the period between
22 April 201 1 and the restart of the Article 32 investigation be designated as excludable delay
under RC 707 The prosecution will provide you an update no later than 23 November

201 1.

5. The point of contact this memorandum is the undersigned

ASHDEN FEIN
CPT, JA
Trial Counsel
CF:
Defense Counsel
3

FOR OFFICIAI. ONLY



26194

Speedy Trial Attachment 51

26195

P_rir;t I ?12s_eJlt_?_ind

Subject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request)
From:
Date: Tue, Oct 25. 2011 6:49 pm



"Matthew ltemkes" "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA
DW
"Haber|and, John

Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIMDW
"Tooman, Joshua CPT MIL US
USA "Ashden Fein"







Sir.

The defense maintains its previous position that any additional delay should not be
excluded under R.C.M. 707(e). Instead. the requested delay should be credited to the
Govemment for speedy trial purposes under Article I0 of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.


David

David E. Coombs, Esq.

Law Oftiee of David E. Coombs

ll South Angell Street, #3l7
Providence, RI 02906

Toll Free: 1-800-588-4156

Local: (508) 689-4616

Fax: (508) 689-9282

:ll'l1b


Notice: This transmission, including attachments. may contain
confidential attomey-client infonnation and is intended for the person(s) or company
named. if you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all
copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or use of this infomiation may be unlawful
and is

-- Original Message

26196

Subject: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Delay Request)

From: "Fein. Ashden CPT USA

Dat Tue. October 9011 6:10 pm
To:
Cc: "Matthew kemkes"
"Morrow JoDean, CPT USA












'Habe and,John CPT MIL

-, "Overgaard, Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-


sw "woman. Joshua:

CPT MIL

Si r,



The United States requests a delay of the Article 32. Please see the
attached
request.

v/r
CPT Fein

Ashden Fein
CPT, JA

Copyright 2003-2011. All rights reserved.

26197

Speedy Trial Attachment 52

26198

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER - HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
ftSPLYTO
ATTiKHOH OF

nviND-MHH-ZA

27 OCT 2111

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION
SUBJECT: Delay of Article 32 Investigation - United States v. PFC Bradlev Manning
1. On 25 October 2011, the prosecution submitted a request to delay restarting the Article 32
Investigation until the completion of Original Classification Authority (OCA) disclosure requests, OCA
classification reviews, and receipt of signed protective orders from the defease, or 28 November 2011.
Sec Enclosure I . On 25 October 2011, the defense maintained its previous position that any additional
delay should not be excluded under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c), See Enclosure 2.
2. This request is:
( C ^ ' ^ r ^ p r o v e d . The Article 32 Investigation is delayed until the earlier of the completion of the
OCA disclosure requests, OCA classification reviews, and receipt of signed protective ordersfromthe
defense, or 28 November 2011. The period between 22 April 2011 and the restart ofthe Article 32
Investigation is excludable delay under RCM 707(c). The prosiKUtion is required to provide me an
update no later than 23 November 2011.
(
) disapproved. The Article 32 Investigation will restart within thirty days of this
memorandum.
3. After reviewing pertinent portions of the case file and receiving an update of the procedures being
followed in this case, it is my understanding that ongoing national security concerns exist in this case, as
well as an ongoing law enforcement investigation(s) into PFC Manning and others. In light ofthe
national security concems and ongoing investigation(s), the prosecution will cautiously proceed with the
disclosure of information, but will comply with its obligations under Article 46, UCMJ, RCM 405, RCM
701, RCM703, and applicable case law. In addition, once the prosecution receives the authority to
disclose previously undisclosed information to the defense, it will do so expeditiously to minimize any
unnecessary delay.

Ufjm
2 Ends
1. Prosecution Request, 25 Oct 11
2. Defense Response, 25 Oct 11
DISTRIBUTION:
1-Article 32 IO
1-Trial Counsel
I -Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26199

Speedy Trial Attachment 53

26200

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
HEPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

lkND\))i

IMND-MHH-ZA

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(c) - United States v.
PFC Bradley Manning

1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any excludable
delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above-referenced matter.
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 14 October 2011 unril the date of this memorandum is
excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3. BASIS OF DELAY. The period of excludable delay is reasonable based on the following extensions,
defense requests, responses, and the facts and circumstances ofthis case:
a. Original Classification Authorities' (OCA) reviews of dassified information.
b. OCA consent to disclose classified information.
c. Defense Request for Results of the Govemment's Classificauon Reviews by the OCA, dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed).
d. Government Request for Delay of Article 32 Investigation, dated 27 October 2011 (enclosed).
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting of excludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to the date of this
memorandum.
5. I acknowledge and reviewed the defense requesi for speedy trial, dated 13 January 2011 (enclosed),
and the renewed request for speedy trial, dated 25 July 2011 (enclosed).

--Wier
Ends
as

CF: (wo/encls)
1-Trial Counsel
I-Defense Counsel

CARL R. COFFMAN. JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26201

Speedy Trial Attachment 54



26202

FOR ONLY wl 2 OR 3)

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
US. ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
210 A STREET
FORT LESLEY J. MCNAJR, DC 203195013

REPLV TO
ATTENTION OF

16 November 201 1

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US. Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer l-Ienderson Hall, 204 Lee
Avenue. Fort Myer. VA 2221 1-1 I99

SUBJ ECT: Request to Restart Article 32 "Investigation United States v. PFC Bradley Manninsl

1. PURPOSE. The prosecution in the above-referenced case makes a two-fold request. First, the
prosecution requests you direct the investigating officer to restart the Article 32 investigation. The
prosecution is prepared to proceed and, by December 20l l, should receive all approvals and
classi?cation reviews necessary to proceed. Second. the prosecution requests the period from the date of
this memorandum to l6 December 20] 1 be approved as excludable delay.

ARTICLE 32 RESTART REQUEST. The prosecution requests you direct the investigating officer
to restart the Article 32 investigation. Since 25 October 201 l, the prosecution has continued to work
diligently to resolve the following issues that served as a basis for the delay of the Article 32
investigation:

a. Original Auzltorities 3 reviews informaition. The prosecution
received completed classi?cation reviews for all charged documents, except the final charged document
relevant to Speci?cation l5 of Charge See l-inelosure l. On l4 November 20! l, the prosecution
received written confimtation from an OCA delegate that the classification review for the final charged
document will be completed no later than 1 December 20l I, if it is determined that such a declaration is
necessary. Set? Enclosure 2. Based upon this commitment, the prosecution requests the Article
investigation restart at this time to avoid further delay.

b. todisclose classified information. Under Executive Orders l2958 and l3526 (as
applicable) and Army Regulations 380-5 and 380457, the United States cannot release classi?ed
information originating in a department or agency to parties outside of the executive branch without the
consent of the OCA or their delegate. The prosecution worked diligently with all of the departments and
agencies that originally classi?ed the information and evidence sought to be disclosed to the defense and
the accused. including CID, whose unclassified case file consisted of several exhibits and documents
containing classi?ed information. The prosecution disclosed such information upon receipt of the
Department of the Army?s approval. The prosecution recently produced approximately 380,000 pages of
discovery, including I) all charged documents; (2) all ?nal forensic reports; (3) the complete unclassified
CID ease ?le; (4) classi?cation reviews; and (5) two classi?ed military intelligence investigative case
?les.

c. Defense request for appropriate security clearances for the tlefense team and access for the accused.
On 3 September 2010, the defense submitted a request for security clearances for the defense team and
access for the accused. See Enclosure 3. All members of the defense team received their security
clearances on or before 13 October 20l I. On 4 November 20l 1, the prosecution received the ?nal
approval necessary for the defense team and accused to access all the charged classi?ed information. Sec?
Enclosure 2.

FOR ESE ONLY 2 OR 3)

26203

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY wl 2 OR 3}

A-CL
Request to Restart Article 32 Investigation United States v. PFC Bradley Mann_i_ng

3. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The prosecution requests the period from the date of this memorandum to
I6 December 201 I be approved as excludable delay under RCM for the following reasons:

a. The prosecution is continuing to work with a relevant OCA to obtain a completed classi?cation
review for the ?nal charged document relevant to Speci?cation 15 of Charge II. The prosecution
received written con?rmation from the OCA's delegate that the classi?cation review for the ?nal charged
document will be completed no later than I December 201 1. Sec Enclosure 2.

b. The command requires adequate time to execute OPLAN BRAVO, a prerequisite for the Article 32
proceeding given the facts and circumstances of this case and the public interest in this hearing. See
Enclosure 4.

(I) OPLAN BRAVO directs early planning for, and ensures coordinated and support
of, all aspects of the Article 32 proceeding. On order. OPLAN BRAVO requires the command to
coordinate travel, security. public affairs. infrastructure supp0t1., including Department of Army assets for
movement, and interagency support for both the substance and administration of the above-referenced
case. The mission?s key tasks include safely and securely transporting and maintaining custody of the
accused. providing physical security and support at all stages of the proceeding, and conducting public
zifl?aii.s and media support.

(2) The command, including its subordinate units and staff sections, requires thirty days to initiate
OPLAN BRAVO to execute the speci?ed tasks outlined in Enclosure 4, including allowing adequate time
for contracts to be executed. OPLAN BRAVO and its associated tasks/requirements do not begin until
you restart the Article 32 investigation.

4. The point of contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at

I


4 Encls
1. Classi?cation Reviews (X7l
2. Email, I-1 Nov ll Trial Counsel

3. Memo. 3 Sep 10
4. OPLAN BRAVO wl Attachments (LES)

Cl?:
Defense Counsel

Note: Enclosure I was produced in discovery. Enclosures 2 and 4 are on file with the prosecution and
available anytime for inspection by the defense.



FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY wl 2 OR 3)



26204

Speedy Trial Attachment 55

26205
:21:'12 Wo'ksnace Webmanl .. Punt

Prim I ?hose Window

Subject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Restart 8. Delay)

From:
Date: Wed, Nov 16, 2011 2:41 pm

To:
"Matthew kemkes"
JFHQ-NCRIM DW

CPT MIL

NCRIM DW










. "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA
-, "Haber|and, John
. "Overgaard, Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-

Cc: "Mhden Fein"




-, "Paul Bouchard"

"J?s'Wa


"Charles Ganiel"
"Lillian Smith"

"Melissa Santiago"
"Cassius Hall"











Bee:

"David oulton?
Sir,

On Monday, I had a conversation with CPT Fein and LTC Almanza. We discussed the
possible dates for the restart of the Article 32, and the need for time for the Government
to executed OPLAN Bravo. Later that day, I sent an email to CPT Fein requesting, in
anticipation of your order to restart the Article 32, that the Govemment begin its
preparations so that you could order a restart on 12 December 20! 1. Based upon the
Government's request today, it appears that nothing has been done between Monday
and today. Additionally, the Government has failed to provide you widr any justification
for the arbitrary in order to complete its OPLAN Bravo.

The Defense requests that you order the restart to occur on 12 December 2011. This
will provide the government with 27 days to execute its OPLAN Bravo. By ordering the
restart on 12 December 201 1, you will provide us with enough time to complete the
hearing prior to the holiday period. This would avoid any issues with obtaining needed
witnesses or unnecessarily requiring some witnesses to cancel their previously
scheduled holiday plans.

Additionally, the Defense objects to the Government's request that you determine that
the time period between today and the actual restart date should be excludable delay
under R.C.M. 707(c). This time period should instead count against the
for speedy trial purposes under Article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Best,
David

ma:l0S secureserver neUvrew_prinl_muiti Manning Article 328-aEmlPar.



26206
/21/12 Workspace Webma.| . Print

David E. Coombs, Esq.

Law Office of David E. Coombs
11 South Angell Street, #317
Providence, RI 02906

Toll Free: I-800-588-4156
Local: (508) 689-46l6

Fax: (508) 689-9282

sir) rta'a
,g;gm

Notice: This transmission, including attachments, may contain
con?dential attomey-client information and is intended for the person(s) or company
named. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all
copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or use ofthis infonnation may be unlawful
and is

Original Message
Subject: US v. PFC BM (Art 32 Restart Delay)
From: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA

Date: Wed, Novemger 16, 2011 !:13 pm


Cc: "Matthew kemkes"
"Morrow JoDean, CPT USA










"Haber|and,John CPT MIL
"Overgaard, Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-



. "Toomanl Joshua

CPT MIL

U5 USA

Si r,




The United States requests immediate action on this request to start
OPLAN

BRAVO. Attached is a request to restart the Article 32 investigation,
and a

request to exclude additional time under the RCM.

Thank you.

v/
C|ients.Manning.Amc|e



26207
.f21l12 Workspace Webmail Print

I CPT Fein

Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.

Manning.Art.icle 32&aErn!Par. ..



26208

Speedy Trial Attachment 56

26209

DEPARTMENT OFTHE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER - HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199
HEPLY TO
ATTEWriON OF

IMND-MHH-ZA

ik) NOO 1 I

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION
SUBJECT: Excludable Delay - United States v. PFC Bradlev Manning

1. On 16 October 2011, the prosecution submitted a request to exclude the period between the date of diis
memorandum and 16 December 2011 as excludable delay under RCM 707(c). The reasons for the
request were for the prosecution to obtain the final classification review from an Original Classification
Authority and to provide the command adequate time to execute OPLAN BRAVO. See Enclosure 1. On
16 November 2011, the defen.se objected to the govemment's proposed start date and proposed the Article
32 start on 12 December 2011. Additionally, the defense maintained its previous position that any
additional delay should not be excluded under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c). See Enclosure 2. I
reviewed both the prosecufion's request and its enclosures and the defense's response.
2. This request is:
( — ' ) approved. The Article 32 Investigation will restail no ciu-lier than 16 December 2011.
The period between 22 April 2011 and 16 December 2011 is excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
(
) approved, in part. The Article 32 Inve,stigation will restart no earlier than 12 December
2011. The period between 22 April 2011 and 12 December 2011 is excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
(

)

disapproved. The Article 32 Investigation will restaiT no earlier than 12 December 2011.

(
) disapproved. The Arficle 32 Invesfigafion will restart within thirty days of this
memorandum.
/.
2 Ends
1. Prosecution Request, 16 Nov 11
2. Defense Response. 16 Nov 11
DISTRIBUTION:
1-Article 32 IO
i-Trial Counsel
I -Defense Counsel

mw:

CARL R. COFFMAN, JR,
COL, AV
Commanding

26210

Sgeedy Trial Attachment 57



26211

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER HENDERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT IIYEFI. VIRGINIA 22211-1199

REPLY Y0
ATYENTION OF

ib ?ti.

MEMORANDUM FOR LTC Paul Almanza. 150th Judge Advocate General Detachment, Legal
Support Organization, MG Albert C. Lieber, USAR Center. 6901 Telegraph Road, Alexandria,
VA 22310

SUBJECT: Special Instructions for Investigation under Article 32, UCMJ

I. You are directed to resume the investigation of the enclosed charges and any other related
matters concerning PFC Bradley Manning, ?Headquarters and Headquarters
Company, U.S. Amiy Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, Fort Myer, VA, 2221 I. This
is your primary duty until the investigation is completed.

2. On 4 August 2010, I appointed you to investigate the original charges. dated 5 July 2010, and
any other related matters concerning the accused. On l8 March 201 l, dismissed the original
charges and directed you to investigate the additional charges preferred against PFC Manning.
dated I March 20! 1, and any other related matters eonceming the accused.

3. The accused is entitled to qualilied legal counsel as a matter of right, unless he expressly
waives this right. The accused is represented by Mr. David Coombs, civilian defense counsel,
and multiple members of the .S. Amiy Trial Defense Service (TDS). Trial counsel from the
Of?ce of the Staff Judge Advocate (OSJA), Military District of Washington (MDW), will
represent the United States. The trial counsel and the defense counsel each play an adversarial
role in the proceedings and you must avoid talking to either party about the meriLs of the case
outside of settings where all parties have the opportunity to be heard.

4. You will conduct your iiwestigation in accordance with Article 32. UCMJ, and Rule for
Courts-Martial (RCM) 405. You will also use DA Pamphlet 27-17 as a procedural guide in
conducting your investigation.

5. The accused is charged with Aiding the Enemy by Giving Intelligence. a violation of Article
104, UCMJ, as well as multiple violations of Articles 92 and 134, UCMJ relating to downloading
and transmitting various classi?ed documents. photographs, and videos from Secret lntemet
Protocol Router Network databases. You will use applicable portions of Military Rule of
Evidence (MRE) 505 as your procedural guide when classi?ed information is used during the
investigation, subject to the following instructions:

a. The accused is required to comply with the notice provisions of MRE 50S(h), and the
below special instructions.





26212

IMND-MHH-ZA
SUBJECT: Special for Investigation under Article 32, UCMJ

i) If the accused intends to disclose or to cause the disclosure of classified information in
any manner, or requests classified information not previously produced in discovery. the defense
counsel must provide written notice no later titan fourteen days before the scheduled date of the
Article 32 hearing. This request will be routed through you and the trial counsel to the
undersigned, but only if you determine that the requested information is relevant to the
investigation, not cumulative, and requested in a timely manner.

(2) At my direction, the trial counsel will attempt to obtain the requested classified
information on behalf of the defense or request authority for the defense to use the classified
information in their possession at the Article 32 investigation. lf the OCA does not agree t.o
produce the classified information and/or agree to its use during the Article 32, then the material
is not "reasonably available" under RCM 405(g)(2).

(3) IAW MRE 505, that decision may not be challenged until referral of the case to a
court-martial, but you will include a statement of the reasons for your determination in the record
of investigation and note any objection by the accused.

(4) All classified information used during your investigation is subject to my Protective
Order for Classi?ed Information, dated 7 September 2010.

b. Article 32 investigations are open to the public and you will ensure the Article 32 is kept
open to the public whenever possible. If either party intends to disclose or introduce classi?ed
information in an open forum during the Article 32. you will conduct a closure hearing as
outlined in RCM 806(b)(2) before closing the proceeding and cxcludi rig the public. To assist in
your detemiination under RCM 806(b)(2), you will require both parties to submit in advance a
proposed plan for the introduction of classified information during the proceeding, including
subject areas or lines of questioning that may elicit classi?ed responses during the testimony o.f
witnesses. You will review the potentially classified subject matter areas in advance to
understand how and why the subject area could involve a classi?ed matter and develop closure
procedures in consultation with your security officer.

c. You will have a security officer assigned to you for the duration of the proceeding, up to
and including the completion of your findings and recommendations. The security officer will
assist you whenever questions arise as to the classification of particular documents, proper
handling or storage of classified information, or subject areas that may involve classified matters.
You will consult your security officer when determining whether or not to close the proceeding
to the public to ensure that proper procedures are followed and classified information is not
inadvertently disclosed in a public forum. The security officer will be present during the entire
proceeding and should be prepared to assist you if any testimony, inquiry, discussion of
evidence, or documentary evidence could result in the disclosure of classi?ed information in a
setting not approved for disclosure.

6. You will schedule the time and date of the Article 32 hearing within seven days of receiving
this memorandum. However, you will not convene the Article 32 investigation any sooner than
thirty days from the date of this memorandum. The Article 32 will take place in the Fort Meade,

26213


SUBJECT: Special Instructions for Investigation under Article 32, UCMJ

Maryland courtroom, and thirty days of lead time is required to execute the OPLAN to ensure
proper security for the accused and other participants. establish the special infrastructure for the
hearings, and prepare to have the capability to conduct closed hearings.

7. You will complete your investigation no later than sixty days from the date of this
memorandum. The completed report will include a summarized transcript of the Article 32
investigation. Pursuant to RCM 707(c)(1), you may approve any reasonable delay of the Article
32 investigation; however, you are not authorized to grant a delay that would prevent you from
completing your investigation within sixty calendar days of the date of this memorandum.
Requests for delay beyond this time must be submitted to me for approval. All requests for
delays must be in writing and will be either approved or disapproved in writing.

8. Contact the Chief, Administrative Law Division, OSJA, MDW to coordinate with your legal
advisor. Consult your legal advisor before the hearing and throughout the Article 32 process for
advice as to procedure, guidance of law applicable to the case, and proper completion of the
report. The OSJA, MDW will provide administrative support for this investigation. Contact the
Chief Paralegal to coordinate adrrtinistmtive support.

0
I


2 Encls CARL R. COFFMAN, JR.

1. Appointment Memo, 4 Aug 10 COL, AV
2. Additional Charges Directive, l8 Mar 1 1 Commanding

CF: (wol encl)
Trial Counsel
Defense Counsel

Ln

26214

Speedy Trial Attachment 58

/21/12

26215
Workspace Webmail Print

Print Close Window

Subject:
From:
Date(Article 32 Update) (UNCLASSIFIED)

"Almanza, Paul LTC RES USAR
Wed, Jan 04, 2012 7:01 pm
"Fein, Ashden CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW

coombs@armycourtmartialdefense .com, "Overgaard,
Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW

"Holze r, Mark LTC MIL USA



-, Matthew kemkes
-, "Whyte, Jeffrey H. CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW
Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA JFHQ-

NCRIM DW
,"Ford, Arthur D. W01 USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW





Classification; UNCLASSIFIED

CPT Fein -

Thank you. I will exclude as a reasonable delay the days between 23 December 2011 and 3 January
2012 when I did not work on the Article 32 Investigation.

LTC Almanza

On 01/03/12, "Fein. Ashden CPT USA

M0162

Sir,


Happy New Year! Attached is the unclassi?ed portion of the hearing's
summarized transcript along with an e)d1ibit list. Ms. Williams ?nished

these on 28 Dec 11. The classified portion is ready for your review at
MDW and we will deliver a copy to the defense by tomorrow afternoon.



Additionally, the United States asks that you exclude, as a reasonable

delay, anytime between 22 December 2011 and 3 January 2012 that you did
not work on the Article 32 investigation based on the federal holidays

and weekends.



Thank you.



v/r



CPT Fein
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.

Clients.Manning.Amcle



26216

Speedy Trial Attachment 5 9

26217

U.S. V. Manning
Article 32 Investigating Officer's Chronology
DATE
Late Jul 10

EVENT
Contacted by then-Chief Trial Judge Henley to inquire whether I
would be available to serve as investigating officer (did not make
note of date)
4 Aug 10
Appointed to investigate original charges
5 Aug 10
Telephone briefing on Article 32 Investigations by original legal
advisor, Mr. Mike Egan
15 Oct 10
Telephone consultation with Mr. Egan concerning status of delay,
advised that the original defense delay request still stood
15 Feb 11
Telephone consultation with Mr. Egan conceming contacting
cotmsel to let them know of upcoming activation and asking about
length of govemment's case
17 Feb 11
Received defense request to compel discovery
25 Feb 11
Received govemment response to defense request to compel
discovery
28Feb l T ~ ' Telephone consultation with Mr. Egan conceming contacting parties
regarding defense discovery request
28 Feb 11
Responded to counsel conceming defense request to compel
discovery
20 Mar 11
Received directive to investigate additional charges and charge sheet
with additional charges
14 Nov 11
Telephone conference with Mr. Coombs and CPT Fein regarding
scheduling of hearing
16 Nov 11
Received special instructions for conducting the investigation
21 Nov 11
Reviewed memoranda directing investigation to take place and
providing special instmctions
22 Nov 11
Reviewed defense discovery request; received defense notice tmder
M.R.E. 505fhX3)
23 Nov 11
Provided Article 32 notification memorandum to PFC Manning
through counsel
PFC Manning provided notification memorandum and motion for
28 Nov 11
closed hearing under R.C.M 405(h)(3)
30 Nov 11
Introductory telephone consultation with second legal advisor, LTC
Mark Holzer
1 Dec 11
Reviewed defense motion to compel and govemment response to
request for production of evidence, submitted status email to parties

INV. OFCR, EXHIBIT ^'^Z

26218

5 Dec 11
6 Dec 11
7 Dec 11
9 Dec 11
10 Dec 11

11 Dec l i
12 Dec 11

13 Dec 11

14 Dec 11

15 Dec 11

Reviewed evidence at MDW
Introductory telephone conference with security officer, Mr. Prather;
telephone briefing on Article 32 investigations by LTC Holzer
Reviewed administrative matters, email to counsel regarding same
Reviewed defense request conceming administrative matters, email
to cotmsel regarding same
Reviewed defense request for Article 32 witnesses, govemment's
requested evidence list, and additional requested evidence list
Reviewed filings conceming defense request to close hearing and
defense request for witnesses
Telephone conference with counsel discussing defense closure
request, defense objections to evidence and witnesses, and
consideration of statements under penalty of perjury; telephone
consultation with LTC Holzer regarding defense closure request;
continued reviewing evidence at MDW
Telephone consultation with LTC Holzer regarding consideration of
statements tmder penalty of perjury; continued reviewing evidence at
MDW; issued IO s witness list; issued determination on defense
request for closure; defense request that SFC Adkins be produced at
hearing
Issued determinations conceming defense objections to govemment
evidence, IO s evidence list, considerations of statements tmder
penalty of perjury, request for reconsideration of denial of defense
closure request, defense request for media exclusion and gag order,
and effect of witness invocation of Article 31/Fifth Amendment
rights on their availability; provided counsel LTC Holzer's advice
regarding the effect of the invocation of Article 31/Fifth Amendment
rights and on statements imder penalty of peijury; provided revised
list of witnesses to appear in person/by telephone/by statement tmder
penalty of perjury; participated in telephone conference with counsel
conceming witness availability and closure issues, determining that
SFC Adkins, SGT Padgett, and CPT Keay would be produced in
person and WOl Balonek was not reasonably available and would be
available by phone
Issued determinations regarding defense-requested witnesses and
evidence; telephone consultation with legal advisor regarding
R.C.M. 405(f)(l 1) and 405(a)(1)(C); provided notice to counsel of
reconsideration of determinations concerning CPT Liebman , CPT
Worseley, and CPT Critchfield; received govemment notice of

26219

16 Dec 11

17 Dec 11

18 Dec 11

19 Dec 11

20 Dec 11

classified hearing; provided draft Article 32 hearing script to counsel
for review; participated in rehearsal of classified closure and opening
proceedings; provided revised list of witnesses to appear in
person/by telephone/by statement under penalty of perjuiy; issued
determination as to defense request for reconsideration of closure
request and request for media exclusion and ga£ order
First day of hearing; providedrightsadvisement to PFC Manning
and answered voir dire questions by cotmsel; received defense
request for recusal; informed counsel of seeking legal advisor's
advice conceming request for recusal; considered and denied defense
request for recusal; defense filed writs with Army Court ofCriminal
Appeals seeking a stay of proceedings and my recusal, which were
denied; issued revised determinations as to defense requested
witnesses
Second day of hearing; received defense request to consider sealed
stipulation of expected testimony for Ms. heard testimony of SA
Graham (telephonic), SA Robertson (telephonic), SA Mander (in
person), SA Bettencourt (in person), SFC Madrid (telephonic), and
CPT Lim (in person); issued revised determinations as to defense
requested witnesses
Third day of hearing; discussed issue of proffered stipulation of
expected testimony with counsel; heard testimony of CPT Fulton (in
person) SGT Maderas (telephonic), Mr. Millman (telephonic), CPT
Cherepko (telephonic), SFC Adkins (in person - invoked); WOl
Belonek (telephonic - invoked), SA Shaver (in person); conducted
classified closure hearing
Fourth day of hearing; heard testimony of SA Shaver (in person)
SPC Baker (in person); Mr. Johnson (in person); discussed issue of
Ms. Showman's testimony, determined to reconsider defense request
to close hearing for a portion of Ms. Showman's testimony; received
defense assertion of coramtmications-to-clergy privilege under
M R E. 503 for chats with Mr. Lamo
Fifth day of hearing; received govemment's response to defense's
MJR.E. 503 assertion; denied defense M.R.E. 503 assertion; heard
testimony of Ms. Showman (telephonic); conducted imclassified
closure hearing to reconsider defense's closure request and took 5
minutes of Ms. Showman's testimony while closed; heard testimony
of SSG Bigelow (telephonic); SA Williamson (in person); SA
Shaver (in person); SA Edwards (in person); Mr. Lamo (in person);
parties agreed at end of day to do closing arguments at 1000 22

26220

21 Dec 11

22 Dec 11
23 Dec 11
3 Jan 12
4 Jan 12
5 Jan 12
6 Jan 12
9 Jan 12
10 Jan 12
11 Jan 12

December; issued reconsideration of closure determination
conceming Ms. Showman's testimony
Sixth day of hearing; heard testimony of SGT Padgett (in person);
CPT Keay (telephonic); reviewed evidence; drafted written response
to defense assertion of communications-to-clergy privilege under
M.R.E. 503 for chats with Mr. Lamo
Seventh day of hearing; heard closing statements by cotmsel; closed
hearing; reviewed evidence
Reviewed evidence at MDW; received defense notice of evidence
Reviewed evidence; drafted 10 Report
Reviewed evidence; drafted IO Report
Reviewed evidence; drafted 10 Report
Reviewed evidence; drafted 10 Report
Reviewed evidence; drafted 10 Report
Reviewed evidence; drafted 10 Report; drafted memorandum
excluding the days between 23 Dec 11 and 3 Jan 12
Completed and submitted 10 Report

Speedy Trial Attachment 60

26222

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JOINT BASE MYER-HENOERSON HALL
204 LEE AVENUE
FORT MYER. VIRGINIA 22211-1199
HEPLY r o
ATTENTKM Of

STAwg»t2^

IMND-MHH-ZA

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Accounting of Excludable Delay under Rule for Courts-Martial 707(c) - United States v.
PFC Bradley Manning

1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a periodic accounting for any excludable
delay under Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 707(c) in the above referenced matter.
2. EXCLUDABLE DELAY. The period from 16 November 2011 up to and including 15 December
2011 is excludable delay under RCM 707(c).
3. BASIS OF DELAY. The period of excludable delay is reasonable based on the following extensions,
defense requests, responses, and the facts and circumstances ofthis case:
a. Original Classification Authorities' (OCA) reviews of classified informafion.
b. OCA consent to disclose classified information.
c. Defense Request for Results of the Govemment's Classification Reviews by the OCA, dated 26
August 2010 (enclosed).
d. Govemment Request for Delay of Article 32 Investigation, dated 10 November 2011 (enclosed).
4. PREVIOUS DELAYS. This accounting of excludable delay is not intended to supersede any
previous delays, but merely account for excludable delays from the previous accounting to the date of this
memorandum.
5. I acknowledge and reviewed the defense request for speedy trial, dated 13 January 2011 (enclosed),
and the renewed request for speedy trial, dated 25 July 2011 (enclosed).

Ends
as

CF: (wo/encls)
I -Trial Counsel
1-Defense Counsel

CARL R COFFMAN. JR.
COL, AV
Commanding

26223

Speedy Trial Attachment 61

26224
Print Page 1 of??

_E{r_i_n_t Close Window

Subject: RE: Bill of Particulars

"Fein, Ashden CPT USA


Date: Mon, Feb 27, 2012 8:28 am

To: "Lind, Denise COL MIL USA ome~

"Matthew l(emkes' "Bouchard, Paul CPT
USARMY "Santiago, Melissa CW2
USARMY "Morrow JoDean, CPT
USA
"Overqaard. Angel M. CPT USA JFHQ-N RIMDW

"Whvte. Jeffrey H. CPT USA JFHQ-
. "Ford. Arthur D. W01
"Jefferson,
"Williams,

From:














Cc:

USA
Dashawn MSG MIL USA
Patricia CIV

COL Lind.

The United States strongly disagrees with the defense's proposition that "the
parties and the Court" agreed at the time that the Government would have one
week to respond. During the initial telephonic RCM 802 conference, the

United

States stated that it would evaluate the defense?s motions and get back to

the Court as soon as possible on whether one week was sufficient to respond.
Pursuant to that commitment. the United States responded via email on 15
February 2012 at 1024 hours requesting three weeks and recounting that during
the telephonic RCM 802 conference, the United States did not commit to reply
within one week.

This email was received by all the parties. Unfortunately, because of the
email security problems, the United States did not receive the Court's
subsequent email which stated the request was denied. Without that email,
the United States was not aware that its request was denied nor that we were
required to submit a continuance until the arraignment on 23 February 2012.

As with all motions. the United States intends to answer the defense's motion
for a bill of particulars. Throughout this case, the United States

continuously endeavors to move the case fonrvard as fast as possible, while
remaining cognizant of the litany of security issues that are involved with

such a mass compromise of classi?ed information, as evidenced by the charge
sheet. The United States requests, that rather than cutting corners with
unusual requests or speeding forward with motions outside of your schedule,
that all parties adhere to your schedule and subsequent updates to the
schedule This will allow for proper planning to have security reviews of

all our documents and to ensure that no additional spillages occur.

Additionally. on Friday afternoon, the prosecution met with the Department of
Justice Litigation Security Group to discuss and understand how the federal
courts administratively process ?lings and other related matters in cases
dealing with classi?ed information, including the use of CSOs. We will have

5/10/2012

26225
Workspace Print Page 2 of 3

a draft of the protective order and procedures ready to share with the
defense this week, in order for us to work together to hopefully ?nd a
common ground.

v/r
CPT Fein



From:


Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 12:57 PM

To: Lind, Denise COL MIL USA OTJAG

Cc: Matthew kemkes; Bouchard. Paul CPT USARMY Santiago, Melissa 8 CW2
USARMY Morrow JoDean, CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIMDW Overgaard, Angel
M. CPT USA Whyte. Jeffrey H. CPT USA
Ford, Arthur D. W01 USA JFHQ-NCRIMDW Fein, Ashden CPT USA
Jefferson, DaShawn MSG MIL USA Williams, Patricia CIV
Fein. Ashden CPT USA SJA

Subject: Bill of Particulars

COL Lind,

As you know, the Defense submitted a Motion for Particulars on 14 February
2012. The parties and the Court agreed at that time that the Government
would have one week to respond. Because of the Government's email glitches,
the Government now has over three weeks to respond to this motion.
Consistent with its responses over the past year and a half, the Defense
anticipates that the Government will oppose some, or all, of the Defense?s
request for particulars.

Should you order that such particulars must be given to the Defense, the
Government will likely request an extension of time to provide those
particulars. Given that the Government will have over three weeks to address
this issue, the Defense would request that you direct the Government to be
immediately prepared to release the particulars if you rule in favor of the
Defense. in other words, if the Court deems that particulars should be
provided, the Government should not have any additional time to provide them.
The Defense needs such particulars to be able to prepare its case and in
order to ?nalize instructions for the various offenses. The particulars

sought by the Defense do not require the Government to coordinate with
multiple external agencies, search ?les, or engage in complex legal

research. Rather, the particulars simply ?esh out the charges that the
Government has preferred against my client, and that it has been preparing to
prosecute for the past 18 months. While I realize this request may be

unusual, the Defense believes that the Government had already
received a windfall owing to the email situation; it should not be able to
continue to press for extensions of responses to straightforward motions.

Any such extension would require the trial calendar to be pushed further out.
thereby affecting my client's right to a speedy trial.


David

5/10/2012





26226
Wt?irkspat'c Wobrmzil Print Page 3 of 3

David E. Coombs, Esq.

. Law Of?ce of David E. Coombs

2 11 South Angeli Street, #317

. Providence, RI 02906
Toll Free: 1-800-588-4156
Local: (508) 689-4616

Fax: (508) 689-9282


Notice: This transmission, including attachments. may

. contain confidential attorney-client information and is intended for the
person(s) or company named. if you are not the intended recipient, please
notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
use of this information may be unlawful and is prohibited.?

Copyright 2003-2012. Ail rights reserved.

5/ 10/2012

26227

Speedy Trial Attachment 62

26228

?--?Original

From: Fein, Ashden MAJ USARMY MDW (us)

Sent: Thursday, July 26. 2012 7:49 PM

To: David Coombs

Cc: 'Hurley. Thomas MAJ OSD OMC Defense?; Tooman, Joshua CPT USARMY
?Morrow Ill, JoDean_. CPT USA Overgaard, Angel CPT USARMY
Whyte, Jeffrey CPT USARMY 'von Elten, Alexander S. CPT USA JFHQ-
Ford, Arthur Jr CW2 USARMY (US)

Subject: Article 13 Emails

David,

In preparation for the upcoming Article 13 motion, the prosecution began reviewing emails
yesterday from members of the Quantico brig staff and the chain of command. The prosecution
found some emails that are obviously material to the preparation of the defense for Article 13
purposes. In an effort to get these emails to you as soon as possible, we intend to produce them
tomorrow and send them to you via email so that you have a copy immediately. We will also
produce them according to our normal process. We estimate there are approximately 60 emails.

26229

Speedy Trial Attachment 63

26230

-Original Message
From: David Coombs [mailto:coombs(^armycourtmartialdefense comj
SenLFriday.July 27,2012 12:54 AM
To: Lind, DeniseRCOL USARMY (US)
Cc:^Hurley,ThomasFMAJOSDOMCDefense^;Tooman,JoshuaJCPTUSARMY(US);
^Mon^owlIL^oDean,CPTUSAJFH^BNCR/MDWSJA;Overgaard,AngelMCPTUSARMY
(US);Whyte,JHunterCPTUSARMY(US);'vonEltcn,AlexanderSCPTUSAJFH^
NCR/MDW SJA';Ford,ArthurDJrCW2 USARMY (US); Fein, AshdenMAJtJSARMY
MDW (US)
Subject: RE: ArttcleI3EmaiIs
Importance: High
Ma'am,
Please see the email below MAJ Fein just notified the Defense of the existence of 60 emails
that the Govemment determined were material to the preparation of the defense for the Article
l3motion which, as you know,is due tomorrow, At2I15,MAJ Fein sent the Defense copies of
the emails The Defense cannot understand why it is getting these emails the night before its
motion is due. ITie Defense had requested any documentation pertaining to PFC Manning's
confinement while at Ouantico overayear andahalf ago, inadiscovery request dated^
December 2010.
After quickly reviewing the emails sent hy MAJ Fein, it is clear that we haveaproblem. The
Defi^nse had previous knowledge that there had been an order given by the Security Battalion
Commander, CoL Robert Oltman, to keep PFC Manning in maximum custody and under
prevention ofirtiury status indefinitely. This order was given on 13 January 2011and was made
in front ofthe Brig commander and staff. CapLWilliamHocter and CapLlCevin Moore
witnessed this order and would be testifying to this fact during the motions hearing. The emails
that the Defense has just received revealaconspiracy at much higher levels.
The email traffic shows that LtGen. George Flynn was directly involved in the custody status of
PFC Maiming. The t^uantico Base Commander, CoL Daniel Choike, and Col. Robert Oilman
seem to have been simply executing LtGen.Flynn'sdirectives The emails show how the entire
chain ofcommand from LtGenFlynn down to the NCO leadership in the Brig was involved in
reporting on every issue dealing with PFC Manning in order to support the decision to maintain
him in his custody status. The emails also show that the t^uantico Staff Judge Advocate, LtCoL
Christopher Greer, was aware ofthe issue and supported the chain of command's efforts. In
addition to this, the Defense has leamed many more specifics about the nature ofPFC Manning's
confinement conditions which support his Article 13claim.
This nev^ infbrmation will result inaneedfi:;ir additional witnesses. And.asisnodoubtapparenL
it will require additional time to brief. As you know,Ihave already completed whatlbelieved

26231

was the Defense^s Article l3motion and have sent the Court and the Government the
attachments.
AsIprcviouslyinfi:^rmcd the Court and the GovemmenLlwill be out of the office from 27 July
through9August for family reasons. At this poinLlam unclear on how to proceed. Iwould
greatly appreciate guidance from the Court in this respecL
v/r
David
David E.Coombs. Esq.
Law Office ofDavid E.Coombs
llSouth Angell Sfi^eeL ^317
Providence, RI 0290^
TollFree:1^00 5^^4I56
LocaL(50^)6^9 46I6
Fax:(50^)6^9 92^2
coombsi^armycourtmartialdefense.com
www.armycourtmartialdefense.com

'^^'^Confidentialityl'vlotice: This transmission, including attachments, may contain confidential
attorney-client information and is intended fi:^r the person(s)or company named. If you are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure,
copying or use ofthis information may be unlawftil and is prohibited.^'^'^

Speedy Trial Attachment 64

26232

26233

David Coombs

From: Fein, Ashden MAJ USARMY MDW (US)

Sent: Friday. July 27, 2012 12:35 PM

To: David Coombs

Cc: ?Hurley, Thomas MAJ OSD OMC Defense?; Tooman, Joshua CPT USARMY

?Morrow JoDean, CPT USA Overgaard, Angel CPT USARMY
Whyte, Hunter CPT USARMY 'von Elten, Alexander S. CPT USA
Ford, Arthur Jr CW2 USARMY (US)

Subject: RE: Update

David,
2. No objection.

3. We received the emails with the original documents approximately six months ago and prioritized their review for
Giglio/Jencks material based on potential witnesses, which is why we reviewed the material this week.

v/
Ashden

?--?-Original

From; David Coombs

Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 12:29 PM

To: Fein, Ashden MAJ USARMY MDW (US)

Cc: ?Hurley, Thomas MAJ OSD OMC Defense?; Tooman, Joshua CPT USARMY (US): ?Morrow ill, JoDean, CPT USA JFHQ-
Overgaard, Angel CPT USARMY Whyte, Hunter CPT USARMY 'von Elten, Alexander S. CPT
USA Ford, Arthur 0 Jr CW2 USARMY (US)

Subject: RE: Update

Ashden,
1. Thank you.

2. This is referring to the posting of the motion on my blog. The Government did not indicate whether it intended to ?le
any objection to the posting.

3. If I understand your email on the 84 emails, you just started looking at them on Wednesday. when did the
Government first receive the emails from Quantico?

Best,
David

David E. Coombs, Esq.

Law Office of David E. Coombs
11 South Angell Street, #317
Providence, RI 02906

Toll Free: 1-800-588-4156
Local: (508) 689-4616

Fax: (508) 689-9282

26234

Speedy Trial Attachment 65

26235

From: Fein, Ashden MAJ USARMY MDW (US)

Sent: Friday, July 27, 20l2 8:22 AM

To: Lind, Denise COL USARMY (US)

Cc: David Coombs; ?Hurley, Thomas MAJ OSD OMC Defense?; Tooman, Joshua CPT

SARMY 'Morrow JoDean, CPT USA Ovcrgaard, Angel
CPT USARMY Whyte, Hunter PT USARMY 'von Elten, Alexander S. CPT
USA Ford, Arthur Jr CW2 USARMY (LES)

Subject: RE: Article l3 Emails

Ma'am.
Below is the government response to the below email from the defense:

I. On 8 December 2010, the defense requested "(a]ny and all documents or observation notes by
employees of the Quantico con?nement facility relating to PFC Bradley Manning." The United
States produced all documentation from the Quantico Brig either as we received it or at the end
of the accused's pretrial con?nement at Quantico. In an effort to preserve all records involving
the accused, the prosecution requested Quantico preserve all documentation and their emails.
The purpose of this preservation request was to ensure the accused's right to a fair trial by
preserving any emails for future litigation concerning the discoverability of the emails and/or for
the prosecution to conduct a Giglio and Jeneks (RCM 9l4) check of the emails. On Wednesday,
the prosecution started reviewing the emails for potential impeachment evidence or Jencks
material, and during that review found 84 emails which we deemed obviously material to the
preparation of the defense for Article] 3 purposes. Within 24 hours. the United States noti?ed
the defense and sent the emails last night.

2. The United States objects to the defense's characterization of the emails showing a
conspiracy, rather the emails show the possible extent, if any. of USMC chain of command's
involvement, in the accused's pretrial con?nement.

3. This motions hearing is not scheduled until the end of August. Over the past few months, the
defense has been preparing its over 100 page motion and the government has a reply due on 17
August 2012. Understanding Mr. Coombs will be out of the office from 27 July to 9 August, the
United States still sees no reason why the defense will not have adequate time to prepare its
Article 13 motion, and especially since this the majority of these emails appear to only bolster
the defense's current argument, as proffered in the Article 13 witness list litigation. Additionally,
the military defense counsel can assist Mr. Coombs with interviewing other potential witnesses.
if the defense chooses to go down that path.

v/r

MAJ Fein

26236

Subject: RE: Update

From: "Fein, Ashden MAJ USARMY MDW

Date: Fri, July 27, 2012 12:34 pm

To: David oombs

Cc: "'llurley, Thomas MAJ OSD OMC Defense? "Tooman.
Joshua USARMY ms)" ?Morrow Ill. JoDean, cm
USA
CPT USARMY Hunter cm? USARM
ms)" "'von Elten, Alexander s. CPT USA
"Ford, Arthur 1) Jr CW2 USAKMY


David,
2. No objection.

3. We received the emails with the original documents approximately six months ago and
prioritized their review for material based on potential witnesses, which is why we
reviewed the material this week.

v/r

Ashden

Speedy Trial Attachment 66

26237


1

26238

From: DavidCoomhslmailto:coombs(^armycourtniartialdefense.coml
Sent:Friday,July 27,2012 ^:47 AM
To:'Fein,AshdenMAJUSARMYMDW(US)';'Lind,DeniseRCOLUSARMY(US)'
Cc:'Hurley, ThomasFMAJOSDOMC Defense';'Tooman,JoshuaJCPTUSARMY (US)';
Morrow III,JoDean,CPTUSAJFHQNICR/MDW SJA';'Overgaard,AngelMCPTUSARMY
(US)';'Whyte,JHunterCPTUSARMY(US)';'vonElten,AlexanderSCPTUSAIFHQ
NCR/MDW SJA';'Ford,ArthurDJrCW2 USARMY (tJS)^
SubjecLRE:Articlel3Emails
Ma'am,
lhave attached one email sent to us late last night by the GovemmenL This email is from the
Quantico Base Commander, CoL Daniel Choike, to the Security Battalion Commander, CoL
Robert Oilman. Whetherthis email indicatesaconspiracyorjust^'^context" really does not
matter at tfiis point(that will be the subject of argument). What matters is that ^4 emails were
dumped on the Defense the night befbre the Article I3motion was due, afterlhad already sent
the Defense attachments andjust prior to leaving the country fi:^r family reasons.
The Govemment avoids addressing the two issues thatlraised. FirsLlneed additional time to
incorporate these emails into my motion. The Govemment seems to suggest that the emails
simply support the arguments thatlwas in the process of already making, (i.e,Iwas on the right
track). However, these emails do much more than simply support our argumenL IJie emails
change the basis of the Defense'sargtnnent. When does the Govemment propose that the
Defi^nse incorporate these emails into om^motion^ Based upon the Govemment'semail it would
seem that it would have us do this today.
Second, due to the nature ofthese emails, the Defi^nse believes that additional witnesses will be
needed fbr the motion. The question is not necessarily just interviewing potential witnesses, but
likely litigating with the Govemment over whether the w itnesses will be produced.
How the Govemment could have waited so long to look at these emails which should have been
produced as part ofits discovery obligations is beyond me. The fact that the Govemment is now
trying to hold the Defense toatime line oftoday when the need fbradelay is due to their lack of
diligence is unbelievable The Defense has repeated since referral its concem that information
would be dumped on us on the eve of triaL This is an perfect example of the Defense'sconcems
coming to fruition.

v/r
I^avid

26239

David E. Coombs, Esq.
Law Office of David E. Coombs
11 South Angell Street, #317
Providence, RI 02906
Toll Free: 1-800-588-4156

Local: (508) 689-4616
Fax: (508) 689-9282
coombs(^armycointmartialdefense.com
www.armycourtinartialdefense.com

•••Confidentiality Notice: This transmission, including attachments, may contain confidential
attorney-client information and is intended for the person(s) or company named. Ifyou are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure,
copying or use ofthis infonnation may be unlawful and is prohibited.*

26240

Speedy Trial Attachment 67

26241

David Coombs

MT
From: Fein, Ashden MAJ USARMY MDW (US)
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:41 PM
To: Lind, Denise COL USARMY (US)
Cc: David Coombs; Hurley, Thomas MAJ USARMY Tooman, Joshua CPT USARMY

Morrow, JoDean (Joe) CPT USARMY USAMDW Overgaard, Angel CPT
USARMY Whyte, Hunter CPT USARMY von Elten, Alexander (Alec) CPT
USARMY (US): Ford, Arthur Jr CW2 USARMY (US): Williams, Patricia Ann (Trisha
Williams-Butler) CIV USARMY USAMDW Jefferson, Dashawn MSG USARMY
Moore. Katrina SFC USARMY (US)

Subject: Government Filing

Attachments: 120914-Government Ex Parte RCM 701(g)l2i 120914-Government
505(g)(2) Motion for DoS.docx: 120914-Government 505(g)(2) Motion for DoS.pdt;
120914-Government 505(g)(2) Motion for Encl 5 (Jorns).pdf; 120914-Government
Disclosure to Defense (CIA and DoS).pdf; 120914?Government Disclosure to Defense
(CIA and Dos) Encl.pdf; 120914-Government Disclosure to Defense (CIA and DoS).doc:
120914-Government Notice to the Court 120914-Government Notice to the
Court 120914-Supplement to 505(g)(2) Motion for FBI File.docx; 120914-
Supplement to 505(g)(2) Motion for FBI Filepdf

Ma'am,

Attached are the following government filings:

1. Government Ex Parte RCM 701(g)(2) Motion for a DHS document. The motion and its enclosures are being submitted
via NIPR in a separate email. Attached to this email is a redacted version for the defense.

2. Government MRE 505(g)(2) Motion for DOS Information. The motion and its enclosures are being submitted via NIPR
in this email. Two of the enclosures are being submitted via NIPR in a separate email.

3. Government MRE 505(g)(2) Motion for CIA Information. The motion and its enclosures are being submitted via SIPR
and hand delivery on Monday.

4. Government Notice to the Court for Government MRE 505(g)(2) Motion for DOS and CIA Information, which includes
the unclassified and redacted version of the CIA motion.

5. Government Notice to the Court for ODNI Information.

6. Government Supplemental Filing for MRE 505(g)(2) Filing for FBI Investigative File. The supplement is attached. The
classified enclosures are being submitted ex parte via SIPR and hand delivery on Monday.

v/r
MAJ Fein



Speedv Trial Attachment 68

26243

UNITEDSTATES
DEFENSE DISCOVERY
v. REQUEST

MANNING, Bradley E-2., PFC

us. Anny,

Headquarters and Headquarters Company. U.S.
Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer-Henderson llall.
Fort Myer, VA 222! I

DATED: 9 July 20l2



l. In accordance with the Rules for Couns-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence. Manual
for Courts-Martial. United States, 2008, Article 46. Uniform Code ofMililary Justice. and other
applicable law. request for discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case of
United States v. Bradley E. Manning.

2. The Defense requests that the Government provide a copy of the video referenced in Bates
Number 00042936. According to LCPL J.E. Miller. the Quantico Brig recorded an incident
where the guards had to assist in freeing PFC Manning from the suicide smock that he was
wearing.

3. Previously. the Defense requested copies of all audio and video footage of PFC Manning
while in con?nement. See Defense Discovery Request dated I5 November 2010, para.
The Defense alerted the Government that its request was a continuing request. Id. at para. 4.
The Defense requests that the Government ensure that it has produced all audio and video of
PFC Manning while in con?nement.

4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.

5. A copy ofthis request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 9 July oAvu)EDwARocooMBs
Civilian Defense Counsel

26244

Speedy Trial Attachment 69

26245

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
u s ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT O f WASHINGTON
Zia A STREET
FORT tESLEY J . MCNAIR, DC 29319-5013
W l l TO
AITENHONOf

ANJA-CL

13 September 2012

MEMORANDUM FOR Mr. David E. Coombs, Civilian Defense Counsel
SUBJECT" Response to Defense Requesi fbr Discovery, dated 9 July 2012
PFC Bradley Manmny

United States v.

1. The United Slates responds heiein to the Defense Request for Discovery dated P July 2012
The United States acknowledges its requirements under Article 46, UCMJ, the Rules for Court.sMartial, and relevant case law.
2 Discovery Response.
a. Discovery Request, paragraph 2.
RESPCMVSE: The Quanfico video does not exist. The United Stales conducted a search
but could not locate the video, .^ge Endosure I ; Enclosure 2
b. Discovery Request, paragraph 3
RESPONSE: The Piosccutionhas provided all matters requested (hat are in the
Govemment's possession and understands ils confinuing obligation to provide infoimation
responsive lo this request.
3. The point ofcontact is Ihc undersigned.

ALEXANDER vON ELTEN
CPT.JA
Assistant Trial Counsel
Enclosures
1. CW02 Barnes Statement dated 13 August 2012
2. CW02 Barnes Statement dated 12 September 2012

Speedy Trial Attachment 70

26246

26247

David Coombs

From: Fein, Ashden MAJ USARMY MDW (US)

Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 8:41 PM

To: Lind, Denise COL USARMY (US)

Cc: David Coombs; Hurley, Thomas MAJ USARMY Tooman, Joshua CPT USARMY

Morrow, JoDean (Joe) CPT USARMY USAMDW Overgaard, Angel CPT
USARMY Whyte, Hunter CPT USARMY von Elten, Alexander (Alec) CPT
USARMY Ford, Arthur Jr CW2 USARMY Williams, Patricia Ann (Trisha
Williams-Butler) CIV USARMY USAMDW Jefferson, Dashawn MSG USARMY
Moore. Katrina SFC USARMY (US)

Subject: Government Filing

Attachments: 120914-Government Ex Parte RCM 701(g)(2) 120914-Government
Motion for DoS.docx; 1209l4?Government Motion for DoS.pdf;
120914?Government Motion for DOS Encl (Jorns).pdf; 120914?Government
Disclosure to Defense (CIA and DoS).pdf; 120914--Government Disclosure to Defense
(CIA and Dos) 120914-Government Disclosure to Defense (CIA and DoS).doc;
120914-Government Notice to the Court (ODNl).pdf: 120914-Government Notice to the
Court (ODNI).docx: 120914-Supplement to Motion for FBI Fi|e.docx; 120914-
Supplement to 5o5(9)(2) Motion for FBI Filepdf

Ma'am,

Attached are the following government filings:

1. Government Ex Parte RCM 701(g)(2) Motion for a DHS document. The motion and its enclosures are being submitted
via NIPR in a separate email. Attached to this email is a redacted version for the defense.

2. Government MRE Motion for DOS Information. The motion and its enclosures are being submitted via NIPR
in this email. Two of the enclosures are being submitted via NIPR in a separate email.

3. Government MRE Motion for CIA Information. The motion and its enclosures are being submitted via SIPR
and hand delivery on Monday.

4. Government Notice to the Court for Government MRE Motion for DOS and CIA Information, which includes
the unclassified and redacted version of the CIA motion.

5. Government Notice to the Court for ODNI Information.

6. Government Supplemental Filing for MRE Filing for FBI Investigative File. The supplement is attached. The
classified enclosures are being submitted ex parte via SIPR and hand delivery on Monday.

v/r
MAJ Fein

26248

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO
DEFENSE SUPPLEMENT TO
MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
AND ADMISSION OF PUBLIC
STATEMENTS

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

27 September 2012
RELIEF SOUGHT

COMES NOW the United States of America, by and through undersigned counsel, and
respectfiilly requests this Court deny, in part, the Defense Supplement to Motion for Judicial
Notice and Admission of Public Statements. The defense has repeated the same arguments it
made for admission of public statements under Military Rule of Evidence (MRE) 801(d)(2)(B)
and MRE 801(d)(2)(D). However, the United States does not object to the admission of the
majority of the proffered statements under certain circumstances, described in detail below.

BURDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OF PROOF
As the moving party, the defense has the burden of persuasion on any factual issue the
resolution of which is necessary to decide the motion. Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM),
United States, Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 905(c)(2) (2012). The burden of proof is by a
preponderance of the evidence. RCM 905(c)(1).
FACTS
The United States stipulates to the facts set forth in ^ 3 and 4 of the defense supplement.
The United States stipulates to the admissibility of the statement made by Pentagon Press
Secretary Geoff Morrell and Special Envoy for Closure of the Guantanamo Detention Facility
Ambassador Daniel Fried, assuming the Court finds the statement relevant and not misleading or
confiising during presentencing. See Attachment A to the Defense Supplement. Portions of the
statement qualify as an exception to hearsay under MRE 803(8)(A), specifically as the statement
of the Department of Defense.
The United States stipulates to the admissibility of the statement made by President
Barack Obama on 27 July 2010, assuming the Court finds the statement relevant and not
misleading or confiising during presentencing. See Attachment B to the Defense Supplement.
Portions of the statement qualify as an exception to hearsay under MRE 803(8)(A), specifically
as the statement of the Office of the President.
The United States stipulates to the admissibility of the statement made by former
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates in a letter dated 16 August 2010, assuming the Court finds
the statement relevant and not misleading or confiising during presentencing. See Attachment C

APPELLATE EXHIBIT 1 ) ^ 1
PAGE REFERENCED:
PAGE
OF
PAGES

3^7

26249

to the Oefense SupplemenL Portions ofthe statement quality as an exception to bearsayunder
MRE 803(8)(A), specifically as the statement ofthe Department ofDefense.
WITNESSES/EVIDENCE
The United States requests this Court consider tbe previous pleadings filed bythe parties
on this issue. Appellate Exhibits C C X ^ V l l (Defense Motion) and CCX^^Vlll(Govemment
Response).
LEGALAUTHORIT^ AND ARGUMENT
Tbe defense moves this Court, under multiple theories, to admit the statements ofvarious
public officials during the presentencing portion ofthe court-martiaL For the reasons set forth
below,most ofthe statements are not admissible during the presentencing portion of the court
martial, unless the rules of evidence are relaxed under Rule fbr Courts-Martiall001(c)(3).
L

THE STATEMENTS ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDERMRE801(d)(2)(B)or
801(d)(2)(D)

Hearsay is ^^a statement, other than one made bythe declarant while testifying at tbe trial
or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth ofthe matter asserted.^^ MRE 801(c).
Admissions by party opponents are exempted from hearsay in five situations. ^^^MRE
801(d)(2). Under MRE 801(d)(2)(B), an admission byaparty-opponent is not hearsay if the
statement is offi^redagainstaparty and the party has manifested the party^sadoption or belief in
its truth. .^^^ MRE 80l(d)(2)(B).Under MRE 801(d)(2)(D), an admission byapartyopponent
is not hearsay if tbe statement is oflered againstaparty and isastatement by the party^sagent or
servant concemingamatter within the scope of the agency or employment while the agency or
employment relationship continues. 5'^^ MRE 801(d)(2)(D).
Tbe defense argues that tbe proffered statements are admissible under MRE 801(d)(2)(B)
or MRE 801(d)(2)(D). 5'^^ Def Supp. at 4-7. Intbeinterestsofjudicial economy and focusing
tbe issues, tbe United States does not deny that the statements were made fbr the purposes of
takingjudicial notice. However, the defense has offered no compelling case law to support tbe
proposition tbat the statements made by publicofficials in this case qualify as either the adoptive
admission ofaparty-opponent under MRE 801(d)(2)(B)orthe vicarious admission ofaparty
opponentunderMRE 801(d)(2)(D)
Witb respect to tbe admissibility ofthe statements under MRE 801(d)(2)(B), every case
cited by tbe defense isavariable ofthe same basic tact pattem—tbe defendant seeks to use the
admission ofthe prosecutorial arm ofthe govemment against the prosecution inalater case.
C^^^/^^ 5'^^/^,^v^^^^^^,581F.2d 933,938 (D.C. Cir 1978) (boldingtbat where tbe prosecution
manifested its beliefin tbe truth ofan out-of-court StatemenL tbat statement could be introduced
intoevidenceagainsttheprosecution);^^/^^^5'^^^^,^v.^^//^^,840F.2dll8,131 (1st Cir. 1988)
(^^Tbe Justice Department here bas, as clearly as possible, manifested its beliefin tbe substance
oftbe contested documents; it bas submitted them to other courts to show tbe truth oftbe matter
asserted contained therein."); ^^/^^^5'/^/^,^v.^^/^^^^,937F.2d 797,811 12 (2d Cir. 1991)

26250

(boldingtbatgovemment^sjury arguments in another case should havebeen admitted as
admissions ofaparty-opponent). Tbereasoningbehindthe^^^^^^lineofcases is clear. Ifthe
prosecution bas manifested its beliefin tbe truth ofastatementinacourt proceeding or judicial
documenL the statement should in faimess be admissible against tbe govemment when it takesa
contrary position. In this case, tbe prosecution bas neitbermanifested its beliefin any ofthese
^^statements,"nor has any otherprosecutorial entity adopted these statements inarelated or
unrelated matter.
As forthe admissibility oftbe proffered statements under MRE 801(d)(2)(D), tbe defense
relies heavily on one single district court civil case. 5'^^Def Supp.at4;^^/^^^5'/^^^,^v.
^^^^/c^^7'^/^7^^/C'^,498F Supp 353 ( D D C 1980) InB^^^^/c^^T^^/^^^^^^
admitted tbe statements made by officials ofExecutive Branch agencies oftbe United States
govemment at proceedings befbre the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ina
telephone antitrust action. 5'^^^^^^/c"^^7^i2/.^^^/.,498 F.Supp.at356. Tbe court referred
back toaprevious opinion in tbe case related to discovery, wherein tbe court specifically fbund
that all Executive Branch agencies, departments, and subdivisions comprised the plaintiffin tbe
case because antitrust laws ^^constituteameans fbr protecting tbe economic interests oftbe
citizens ofthis country,not infrequently onanational scale...." B^.at357(citingL^^//^^^/^/^,^
vBf^^^/c^^7^/^7^/C^,46IFSupp. 1314,1333).
The defense argues tbat becausealarge number of agencies were affected by leaks
occasioned by tbe accused, tbe proffered statements ofgovemment officials in various forums
should be treated as tbe admission ofan agent or servant ofthe ^^^/^^ govemmenL admissible in
Def Supp.at5. Tbe defense argument
acourt oflaw fbr the truth ofthe matter asserted.
basnomeriL Tbe statements in B^^^^/c^^^i^/.^^^/.were made by officials ofExecutive
Branch agencies oftbe govemment at proceedings befbre tbe FCC, tbe federal agency
specificallyresponsible fbr tbe regulation ofinterstate and intemational communications by
radio, television,wire, satellite and cable in all 50 states, tbe District of Columbia and tbeU.S.
territories.^ In contrasL none oftbe proffered statements ofofficials in this case were made
befbre anytypeofproceeding, judicial or otherwise. Some ofthe statements were made in tbe
midst ofpress conferences convened to address completely unrelated topics. 5'^^AttacbmentsD
andEto tbe Defense SupplemenL Others, like the statement ofRepresentativeConyersduringa
bearing befbre tbe House Judiciary Committee, could hardly be characterised asastatement by
an official witb tbe ability to ^^bind tbe sovereign" as the defense asserts. Def Supp. at 6. No
court^civil or criminal has extended MRE 801(d)(2)(D)and its federal equivalent as far as tbe
court inB^^^^/c^^^^/.^T^/.
^.^.,.^^//^^,840F.2d at 130 31 (^^Wbetber or not the entire
federal govemment in all its capacities should be deemedaparty-opponent in criminal
cases...the Justice Department certainly should be considered sucb."). Tbe defense argument
extends even beyond the limits ofBl^^^/t::^^^/.^^^/. because it claims all govemment actors,
including those outside proceedings, are party-opponents. Accordingly,tbis Court should
decline to adopt tbe defense argument and should adopt the position oftbe vast majority of
courts who bave examined this issue. ,^^^AECCXX^Vlll(discussing^^//^^^/^^^,^v.
.^^^^//^.^ line of cases).

^Federal Communications Commission. ^rhttp;//www.fcc.^ov/whatwedo (last visited Sen. 27,2012).

3

26251

II.

PUBLISHED NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDER THE
BUSINESS RECORDS EXCEPTION OR THE RESIDUAL HEARSAY RULE.

Tbe defense argues tbat the proffered statements, appearing in sources of news, are
admissible under MRE 803(6) and MRE 807.^ However, tbe defense bas cited no case in wbicb
a court has admitted published newspaper articles under the business records exception to tbe
hearsay mle. Instead, the defense cites United States v. Reese, in wbicb tbe court approved the
admission ofa hospital scrapbook containing newspaper clippings under Federal Rule of
Evidence 803(6). See United States v. Reese, 568 F.2d 1246 (6th Cir. 1977). In Reese, tbe
"business record" was not the newspapers themselves, but the hospital's scrapbook, admitted
through the testimony of a hospital employee. Id. at 1252. As sucb, tbe case does not support
tbe proposition tbat newspaper articles qualify for admission under the business records
exception. Further, tbe Govemment's own research in this area generally supports tbe
proposition that a newspaper never qualifies as an exception to hearsay under ERE or MRE
803(6). See, e.g.. United States v. Baker, 432 F.3d 1189, 1212 n.23 (11th Cir. 2005) (newspaper
article regarding identity of gunmen inadmissible as double hearsay of reporter's account of what
eyewitnesses stated); Horta v. Sullivan, 4 F.3d 2, 8 (1st Cir. 1993) (newspaper article contained
double hearsay and was inadmissible); Larez v. City of Los Angeles, 946 F.2d 630, 642 (9th Cir.
1991) ("As tbe reporters never testified nor were subjected to cross-examinadon, their
transcriptions of Gates's statements involve a serious hearsay problem."); May v. Cooperman,
780 F.2d 240, 262 (3d Cir. 1985) (Becker, J., dissenting on other grounds) ("Ordinarily, wben
offered to prove the tmtb of the matters stated therein, newspaper articles are held inadmissible
as hearsay."). Tbe lack of case law in this area is indicafive of the simple notion tbat a
newspaper article is more like the product of the newspaper business itself, rather than a record
kept for tbe purpose of conducting the business.
Tbe defense also argues tbat this Court should admit the newspaper articles under the
residual hearsay exception. See Def Supp. at 8. Like tbe argument for admissibility of tbe
proffered statements under MRE 803(6), the defense relies on a single case for tbe proposition
that newspaper articles in this case should be admitted under the MRE 807. See id.; Dallas
County V. Commercial Union Assur. Co., 286 F.2d 388 (5tb Cir. 1961). Aside from the fact tbat
tbe Dallas County case predates the federal residual hearsay exception, none of tbe
circumstances which prompted that court to admit a newspaper article are present in this case.
The court admitted the article because it was "necessary and tmstwortby, relevant and
material...." Dallas County, 286 F.2d at 398. It was the only evidence of a material fact—
namely, tbat a fire had occurred in a church more than 50 years earlier. Id. Under tbe military's
residual hearsay exception, a statement is admissible wben it is trustworthy and "(A) tbe
statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (B) the statement is more probative on tbe
point for wbicb it is offered than other evidence which tbe proponent can procure through

^ The defense in this section has failed to adequately address the Court's concems with respect to the problems
posed by the admission of statements within newspaper articles. The defense position, raised for the first time
during oral argument at the last Article 39(a) session, appeared to be lhat the first level of hearsay was satisfied by
the business records exception and the second level of hearsay was satisfied by the residual hearsay excepfion.
Instead of addressing the problem posed by double hearsay, the defense simply argues lhat "newspaper articles" are
admissible under MRE 803(6) and MRE 807. See Def Supp. at 7-9.

26252

reasonable efforts; and(C) tbe general purposes...and tbe interests ofjustice will best be served
by admission oftbe statement into evidence." MRE 807.
In this case, many of tbe statements proffered bythe defense are neither "more probative"
than other available evidence oflack of damage or barm, norrelevant to damage at alL As just
one example, AttacbmentFto tbe Defi^nse Supplement contains three separate intemet news
articles ofli^red to prove tbat Secretary Clinton stated tbat the State Department cables show
"diplomats doing tbe work of diplomacy." 5'^^AttacbmentFtotbe Defense SupplemenL Aside
from tbe obvious issues present wben eacb article in AttacbmentFquotes Secretary Clinton
differently,and it is unclear wbetber tbe "reporter" was even present fbr tbe remarks, tbe quote is
not probative ofany issue relevant to presentencing. If anything, Secretary Clinton is describing
tbe content of diplomatic cables leaked tbrougbWikiLeaks what tbe cables purport to describe
rather than tbe lack ofbarm resulting fiom tbe leak oftbe cables in tbe first place.
Accordingly,tbe newspaper articles and tbe proffered statements should not be admitted by this
CourtunderMRE807

IIL

THE PROFFERED STATEMENTS ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDERMRE 803(8).

Congressional bearings
Tbe defense argues tbat "official press releases and reports
are admissible under M.R.E.803(8)." Def Supp. at9. Although tbe defense does not specify
wbicb subparagraph under MRE 803(8) tbey are seeking to admit tbe proffered statements, tbe
United States concedes tbat tbe statements made in Attachments A, B,andCto tbe Defense
Supplement are likely admissible under MRE 803(8)(A), assuming tbe Courtfindstbe
statements relevant and determines tbat tbeirrelevance is not substantially outweighed bythe
danger ofconfiision and misleading the members. ^^^MREs401and403;^IV/^/^t^.
However, tbe proffered statements in Attachments D,E, and H^ to tbe Defense Supplement are
not admissible under MRE 803(8)(A)because tbey either do not constitutearecord oftbe
activities ofapublic office or agency,or tbey are tbe statement ofasingle individual and not
representative of an entire office or agency.
Under MRE 803(8)(A), records or statements ofpublic office or agencies, setting forth
tbe activities of tbe office or agency,are admissible as an exception to hearsay. i^^^MRE
803(8)(A). Tbe rule is designed asatool to allow into evidence public records and documents
not prepared fbr tbe purposesoflitigation. ^^/^^^5'/^^^,^v.l^^t^^^^,22M.J.762,765
( N M C M R 1986)(citing^^//^^^/^^^.^v^/^^^,604F2d922(5tbCir 1979) Further, under
the plain languageoftbe rule, courts considering whether to admit tbe records or statements of
pubbc agencies must determine wbetber the proffered statement is actuallythe statement oftbe
public office, and wbetber tbe proffered statement sets forth tbe "activities oftbe office or
agency" within tbe meaning oftbe rule. 5'^^MRE803(8)(A). In this case, tbe statements of
Secretaries Gates and Clinton in AttacbmentsDandE,respectively,consistofresponses to
questions during what appear to be news conferences. 5'^^ AttacbmentsDandEto tbe Defense
^Forthe purposes of this response, the United States assumes the defense is moving fbr admission of only six
statements under MRE 803(8) vice the other statements relevant to the motion. ,^^^Def Supp.at9("Statementsby
the President, Secretaries ofDefense and State andaCongressman made ataformal committee hearing dearly fall
within this exception.").

26253

SupplemenL Tbe news conference at wbicb Secretary Gates made bis statement was convened
in orderto comment on tbefindingsand recommendations oftbe working group formed to
review tbe issues associated with implementing repeal of"don't ask, don'ttell." 5'^^ Attachment
Dto tbe Defense SupplemenL Tbe news conference at which Secretary Clinton made her
statement was convened as part ofasummit to discuss tbe strategic partnership between tbe
govemments oftbe United States and l^a;^akbstan. 5'^^ AttacbmentEto tbe Defense
SupplemenL In short, neither statement can be characterised asaroutine and non-adversarial
statement oftbe Department ofDefense or Department ofState, made as part oftbe daily
function oftbe respective agency, ^ ^ ^ ^ i ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ , 22 M.J.at 765, Additionally,neitber statement
sets forth or records tbe activities oftbe Department ofDefense or tbe Department ofState.
Tbe proffered statement ofRepresentativeConyers in AttacbmentHto tbe Defense
Supplement is also inadmissible under MRE 803(8)(A). Tbe defense relies upon two cases in
wbicb courts held tbat tbe press releases ofpublic agencies were admissible under MRE 803(8).
.^^^ Def. Supp.at9. Notwithstanding tbe fact tbat one ofthe cases concemedastatement fbund
to be admissible under MRE 803(8)(C), tbe statement ofRepresentativeConyersduringaHouse
Judiciary Committee meeting can in no way be interpreted as tbe statement of an entireoffice or
agency. For example, if tbe House Judiciary Committee releasedareport, and followed tbat
report withapress release fiom Representative Conyers detailing tbefindingsand
recommendations, tbat statement might be admissible under MRE 803(8)(A). Tbat situation is
not present in this case. Further, even ifthis Court accepts tbe proposition that Representative
Conyers speaks fbr tbe entire committee, bis statement relevant to this case is miles away ft"oma
statement wbicb sets forth tbe activities oftbe House Judiciary Committee. 5'^^AttacbmentHto
tbe Defense Supplement ("Furtbermore,we are too quick to accept govemment claims tbat risk
tbe national security....").

IV

THE PROFFERED STATEMENTS ARENOTRELEVANTUNLESS OFFERED TO
PROVETHETRUTHOFTHEMATTERASSERTED

Tbe defense argues tbat all tbe proflered statements are admissible wben not offered fbr
tbe truth oftbe matter asserted, because tbe statements demonstrate tbat the official position of
tbe United States govemment was tbat tbe alleged leaks did not actually cause barm. 5'^^ Def
Supp.at 9-10. Tbe defense makes no attempt to distinguish tbe content ofthe proffered
statements, despite tbe fact that several ofthe statements do not discuss damage or harm in any
conceivable way. 5'^^ Attachments A, B,F,andHto tbe Defense SupplemenL Further, even if
this Court accepts tbat tbe statements relate to tbe lack ofdamage or barm caused by tbe leaks in
this case, tbe statements are not relevant fbr reasons not related to tbeir truth. Tbe govemment's
official position, as asserted through public statements on tbe leaks, is in no way relevant to tbe
issue of wbetber or not tbe accused'sconduct actually caused or did not cause damage. InfacL
tbat nuance would likely confitseapaneL As sucb, the statements not offered fbr tbeir truth
should be excluded on tbe basis tbat tbe probative valueoftbe evidence would be substantially
outweighed by tbe dangerofconft^sion and misleading tbe members. 5'^^ MRE 403.

26254

V

THE MAJORITY OFTHE PROFFERED STATEMENTS ARE ADMISSIBLE IFTHE
RULES OF EVIDENCEARE RELAXED

Assuming tbe Courtfindsthe statements relevant during presentencing proceedings,
either fbr tbeir truth or fbr some other reason, the United States concedes tbat the vast maiority of
tbe statements are likely admissible if tbe rules of evidence are relaxed underRCM1001(c)(3).
Tbe defense bas provided additional evidence relating to tbe authenticity and reliability oftbe
statements in its supplemenLwitb tbe exception oftbe "statement" allegedly made by Secretary
ofState Clinton in AttacbmentFto tbe Defense SupplemenL AttacbmentFis different because,
based on tbe evidence provided by tbe defense, it is difficult to determine wbereastatement
begins and ends, as well as wbetber tbe various articles quoted Secretary Clinton accurately.
AttacbmentFto tbe Defense Supplement(quoting Secretary Clinton differently in eacb article);
i^^^/^^5'/^^^,^v.(^^^^/,17M.J.1075,1077-78 ("Although hearsay evidence may,under some
circumstances, be admissible during sentencing proceedings because tbe rules are relaxed...the
hearsay evidence in this case,wbile relevant and material,is simply too far removed from its
source to bave sufficient indicia of reliability."). Accordingly,SecretaryClinton's"statement"
in AttacbmentFto tbe Defense Supplement should be deemed inadmissible.

GONGLUSIGN
Tbe United States respectfullyrequests this Court DENY,in part, tbe Defense
Supplement to Motion fbr Judicial Notice and Admission ofPublic Statements. Forthe reasons
stated above, tbe proffered statements are not admissible under tbe Military Rules ofEvidence.

^J^DEANMORROW
^PT,JA
AssistantTrial Counsel

Icertify tbatlserved or caused to be servedatrue copy oftbe above on Mr. David E.
Coombs, Civilian Defense Counsel, via electronic mail, on 27 September 2012.

B^^J^^N^OR^OW^
^PT,JA
AssistantTrial Counsel

26255

UNITEDSTATESOF AMERICA

)
^

V.
Manning, Bradley E.
PFCU.S.Army,
HHC, U.S. Army Garrison,
JointBaseMyerHendersonHall
Fort Myer, Virginia 222II

^
^
^
^
^
^
^

Prosecution Notification
to tbe Court:
^nestionnaires
21 September 2012

In accordance witb tbe Court's Order, tbe United States sent questionnaires to all panel
members on4September 2012. Tbe United States received responsive questiotmaires from
forty-four oftbe sixty-eight active panel members. Tbe following is list oftbe panel members
wbo bave not responded and explanations oftheir lack ofresponses:
1. COL Michael Stro^ier^bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire;
on convalescent leave
2. MSG Paul Riedel^requesting permanent excusalfi^om panel due to PCS to Fort Bragg
3. SGM Anthony Brion
retum

TDY until24September 2012; will complete questiotmaire upon

4. LTC Roosevelt Samuel^currently in tbe process of completing questiotmaire
5. LTC Jennifer Reynolds

have not yet received confirmation of receipt of questiotmaire

6. COLVincent Bryant stated be was opting not to answer tbe questiotmaire and intends
to answer tbe questions in court
7. COL Heino^linck
constant TDY

planning on requesting permanent excusal from panel due to

8. LTC David Applegate bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questionnaire
9. LTC Brandon Robbins have not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire;
currently in Afghanistan
10. LTC Thomas Goldner have not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire
11. LTCTom Alexander Jr.^bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questionnaire
12. COL Christopher Benya bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire;
on leave until24September 2012
13. COL Gregory Jaksec have not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire

API^^IT^AT^^^IBIT^^^
1^^^^

^O^^^t^t^i

26256

14. LTCTony Owens bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questionnaire
15. LTC Jay Persons^currently in tbe process of completing tbe questionnaire
16. COL Daniel Morris have not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questionnaire
17. MAJ Ronnie Park

currently in tbe process ofcompleting the questionnaire

18. CSM Richard Jessup requesting temporary excusal fiom panel due to beingAccused's
Battalion Sergeant Major
19. MSG Jonathan Martine^^bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire
20. CSM Daniel Hendrex^bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire
21. MSG Debra Spears have not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questiotmaire
22.SFC JosbuaVolcy have not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questionnaire
23.SFC l^ennetb Green was on leave until21September 2012; currently in process of
completing questiotmaire
24. MSG DeEttEaton^bave not yet received confirmation ofreceipt of questionnaire
Based on tbe Court's21September2012suspense, tbe prosecution will continue working
witb tbe Criminal Law Division, MDW,as well as tbe relevant panel members and tbeir
leadership to obtain tbe required responses as soon as possible. The original questiotmaires and
updated questionnaires are on file witb tbe prosecution and available to defense fbr inspection.

ANGEL OVERGAARD
CPT, JA
Assistant Trial Counsel
I certify tbat 1 served or caused to be served a true copy of the above on Mr. David Coombs,
Civilian Defense Counsel, via electronic mail, on 21 September 2012.

ANGEL OVERGAARD
CPT, JA
Assistant Trial Counsel

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page

ofPagc(s)

26257

IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY

FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES
DEFENSE ADDITIONAL
v. REQUESTED WITNESSES:

MANNING, Bradley E., PFC

U.S. Army,

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

ARTICLE 13 MOTION

DATED: 26 September 2012



I. On behalf of PFC Bradley E. Manning. his civilian counsel, David E. Coombs requests the
attendance of the following additional witnesses for purposes of his Article 13 motion:

3)

b)

2. The Defense reserves the right to supplement this witness list should it be necessary to do so
based upon any additional discovery being provided by the Government.



Col. Thomas V. Johnson, . Col. Johnson is
the former Chief Public Affairs Officer for Marine Corps Combat Development
Command and Marine Corps Base Quantico. Col. Johnson will testify about how he
assisted the command in addressing media questions and inquiries concerning the
treatment of PFC Manning. He was one ofthe individuals that assisted the command in
deflecting criticism of Quantico?s treatment of PFC Manning. He also advocated, on
behalf of the command, the justifications for why PFC Manning was being held in
Maximum Custody and Prevention of Injury Status. Col. Johnson will testify that he
provided frequent media updates to LtGen. and the command concerning PFC
Manning. He will also testify about how he provided PAO guidance to the command in
order to be portrayed in a more positive light in the media. Finally, he will testify that he
ran media questions concerning PFC Manning by LtGen. and others of the
command and staff prior to submitting his responses to the media.

Capt. Brian S. Villiard, . Capt. Villiard is a
fonner Public Affairs Officer for Marine Corps Combat Development Command and
Marine Corps Base Quantico. He will testify concerning his role as a PAO representative
in explaining the custody status of PFC Manning. Specifically, he will testify concerning
the commands? requirement for PFC Manning to surrender his clothing at night, and the
statements that Capt. Villiard gave to the media concerning this events on 2 March 2011.

Respectfully submitted,



DAVID EDWARD COOMBS
Civilian Defense Counsel



PAGE REFERENCED:
PAGE OF

A

26258

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 Disclosure
to the Defense
Speedy Trial Chronology
26 September 2012

Pursuant to Rule 3.2, Rules of Practice before Army Courts-Martial 2012, tbe United
States discloses the attached chronology of dates and events for the above-captioned courtmartial.
Tbe prosecution bas engaged in constant, complex interagency coordination, which will
be outlined in the govemment's response to the defense motion, to obtain evidence, classification
reviews, approvals for disclosure, and to responses to defense requests. Given tbe substance,
sensitivity, sheer volume of the compromised information, and the ongoing national security
issues, numerous govemment organizations and commands bave maintained a role in this case
since tbe accused was placed in pretrial confinement. As a result, the prosecution coordinated
daily with law enforcement organizations and the numerous affected agencies during tbe
investigation of, and response to, the compromises.
Tbe following approximately 6600 line chronology documents dates and activities recorded
by the prosecution. This chronology was constructed throughout tbe pretrial proceedings;
however, given tbe voluminous scope and classified nature of much of the compromised
information, tbe chronology does not document each and every govemment action. Moreover,
this chronology does not fully respond to the 117-page Defense Motion to Dismiss All Charges
and Specifications witb Prejudice for Lack of a Speedy Trial (Defense Motion), dated 19
September 2012. The prosecution intends to incorporate any alterations and additions to tbe
chronology in its response to the Defense Motion, if necessary.

ASHDEN FEIN
MAJ, JA
Trial Counsel
Enclosure
Govemment Speedy Trial Chronology

APPELLATE ESHBIT
Page.
^orPage(s)

26259

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

25-May-lO

Tue

LAMO REPORTS THE ACCUSED'S ALLEGED CRIMINAL ACTS TO LAW

25-May-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
0

0
0

ENFORCEMENT
evidence and witnesses, and idenfify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
27-May-lO

Thu

CID AND FBI NOTIFY THE CHAIN OF COMMAND OF THE ACCUSED'S
ALLEGED CRIMINAL ACTS

27-May-lO

Thu

ACCUSED IS CONFINED IN HIS CHU WITH ARMED GUARDS

27-May-lO

Thu

Worked generally to idenfify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and idenfify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

28-MaY-lO

Fri

Training Holiday - Memorial Day Holiday

1

28-May-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

1

1
1

evidence and witnesses, and idenfify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
29-May-lO

Sat

ACCUSED ENTERS THE KUWAIT THEATRE CONFINEMENT FACILITY FOR

2

2

PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT
Meeting-PTC hearing Camp Liberty

29-May-lO

Sat

2

2

29-May-lO

Sat

Meeting-with CID to discuss evidence, invcsfigation status, and view
chat logs

2

2

29-May-lO

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

2

2

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
30-May-lO

Sun

and associated equity holders
Phone call with CID & J2X about investigation status

3

3

30-May-lO

Sun

Received PTC Hearing findings and recommendations from CPT Ley

3

3

30-May-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

3

3

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
31-May-lO

Mon

Memorial Day Holiday

4

4

31 May-10

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

4

4

6

6

6
6

6

7

7

7

7

7

7

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
2-Jun-lO

Wed

2-Jun-lO

Wed

Accused collapses in the yard of the TFCF and is given immediate
medical attention
Email with CCIU to discuss forensic scans of computers

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

2-Jun-lO

6

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
3-Jun-lO

Thu

Accused collapses in his cell with his head and neck being supported by
the wall; TFCF personnel instructed accused not to move due to the
positioning ofhis neck; medical personnel arrived to assess his
condition and provide support

3-Jun-lO

Thu

3-Jun-lO

Thu

Email with CCIU to determine authority to "freeze" accused's shared
drive profiles

1 of 231

Email with DOS in regards to the INSCOM meeting

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page

orl»a8«(s)

26260

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
3-Jun-lO

WeekDay
EVENT
Thu
Meeting-with J2X at the Legal Center regarding the investigation

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

7

7

7
7

7
7

3-Jun-lO

Thu

3-Jun-lO

Thu

Researched electronic evidence foundations

3-Jun-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

7

7

4-Jun-lO

Fri

Attended TCAP Conference and discussed case with Chief of TCAP

8

8

4-Jun-lO

Contacted SSO to request interim TS Clearance for the case

8

8

4-Jun-lO

Fri
Fri

Meeting-with J2X and CID regarding the status of the investigation

8

8

4-Jun-lO

Fri

Phone call with CCIU about search authorizafions

8

8

4-Jun-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

8

8

5-Jun-lO

Sat

Attended TCAP Conference and discussed case with Chief of TCAP

9

9

5-Jun-lO

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

9

9

6-Jun-lO

Sun

Attended TCAP Conference and discussed case with Chief of TCAP

10

10

6-Jun-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

10

10

Meeting-with CID to receive chat logs

11

11
11
11

Phone call with INSCOM OSJA

evidence and witnesses, and idenfify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
7-Jun-lO

Mon

7-Jun-lO

Mon

Meeting-with J2X regarding investigation status

7-Jun-lO
7-Jun-lO

Mon
Mon

Phone call with DOS
Phone call with DSS/DOS

11
11
11

11

7-Jun-lO

Mon
Mon

Phone call with 0GA2
Worked generally to idenfify compromised information, develop

11
11

11
11

12

12

12

12

13

13

13

13

7-Jun-lO

evidence and witnesses, and idenfify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
8 Jun-10

Tue

8-Jun-lO

Tue

Phone call with CCIU for case update
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

9 Jun-10

Wed

and associated equity holders
Accused announces to other inmates that he is gay and, when asked by
TFCF personnel if he felt threatened by other inmates, he responded,
"no, but they might feel threatened by me"

9-Jun-lO

Wed

Meeting-Iraq TCs analyze evidence and worked on elements of proof
worksheet

2 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

26261

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
9-Jun-lO

10-Jun 10

WeekDay
EVENT
Wed
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Thu
Created draft charge sheet pending forensic results

Total Time
13

RCM 707 Clock 1
13

14

14

14

14

10-Jun-lO

Thu

11-Jun-lO

Fri

Email with CCIU received the nev^ search authorization

15

15

11-Jun-lO

Fri

Meeting-with J2X regarding investigation status

15

15

11-Jun-lO

Fri

SJA met with SJA USFlregarding interagency coordination

15

15

ll-Jun-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

15

15

12-Jun-lO

Sat

Email with CCIU regarding search and seizure authorization
requirements for digital devices

16

16

12-Jun-lO

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

16

16

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceandv^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
13-Jun-lO

Sun

Email with CCIU regarding search and seizure authorization

17

17

13-Jun-lO

Sun

requirements for digital devices
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

17

17

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
14-Jun-lO

Mon

Email with CIDabout signed search authorization for search of digital

18

18

14 Jun-10

Mon

information and shared drives
Special Agent obtained CPT Ley's signature on the new search

18

18

18

18

Tue

and associated equity holders
Communication with defense to inform o f t h e status ofpreferring

19

19

Tue

charges
Phone call with CCIU to discuss preliminary findingsand possible

19

19

Tue

charges
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

19

19

20

20

20

20

21

21

authorizations for the digital evidence and the shared drives, and sent
14-Jun-lO

Mon

themtoCCIU
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

15-Jun-lO
15-Jun-lO
15-Jun-lO

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
16-Jun-lO

Wed

and associated equity holders
Forensic analysis by CCIU continued

16-Jun-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand vi^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

17-Jun-lO

3 of 231

Thu

Phone call v^ith CCIU about updated proof matrix and charge sheet
based on vocal draft, preliminary report, and initial ROl from CCIU

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
_ofPage(s)

26262

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
17-Jun-lO

18-Jun-lO

WeekDay
EVENT
Thu
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and idenfify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

Fri

Total Time

Phone call with DOJ to discuss potential charges, panel instructions,

RCM 707 Clock 1

21

21

22

22

22

22

evidentiary issues, and prosecution of the case in general
18-Jun-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

18-Jun-lO

Fri

Worked on prosecution slideshow and drafted proposed charges

22

22

19-Jun-lO

Sat

Meeting-with Chief of Militaryjustice, USF-1, regarding investigation
and the status of preferring charges

23

23

19-Jun-lO

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

23

23

19-Jun-lO

Sat

Worked on prosecution slideshow

Sun

Email to defense counsel inviting them to sit down at MJ Office and

23
24

23

20-Jun-10

24

24

25

25

Drafted deposition orders for Lamo, Watkins, and Schmiedl

25

25

Email with NG and USAR units in Boston and Sacramento to figure out

25

25

25

25

26
26

26
26

26

26

24

talk about progression o f t h e investigation and preferral of charges
20-Jun-10

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

21-Jun-lO

Mon

21-Jun-lO

Mon

21-Jun-lO

Mon

and associated equity holders
Communication with defense counsel to discuss charges, initial
forensics, and to open dialogue.

if anyone can help with the depositions
21-Jun-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

22-Jun-lO
22-Jun-lO

Tue
Tue

22-Jun-lO

Tue

and associated equity holders
Email with CCIU about forensics
Tried to rush initial report since the accused is still not charged,
answered emails from California and Massachusetts regarding
depositions, and identified deposition office in California
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

23-Jun-lO

Wed

Email to CCIU and DOJ to coordinate a meeting in Germany for case

27

27

23-Jun-lO

Wed

preparation
Email with CCIU about forensics update

27

27

23-Jun-lO

Wed

27

27

4 of 231

Finalized draft charge sheet and sent it to DOJ counter espionage unit
and TCAP for review

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPEU.ATE EXHIBIT.
Page

ofPage(s)

26263

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

23-Jun-lO

Wed

EVENT
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Total Time
27

RCM 707 Clock 1
27

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
24-Jun-lO

Thu

and associated equity holders
Email with CCIU about forensics update, expected on 25 Jun

28

28

24-Jun-lO

Email with Div Psych regarding 706 board
Made changes on draft charges

28
28

28

24-Jun-lO

Thu
Thu

24-Jun-lO

Thu

Phone call with Dr. Weber in Kuwait regarding 706 board

28

28

24-Jun-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

28

28

32

32

28

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
28-Jun-lO

Mon

Email from DSJA explaining that accused is exhibiting behaviorial
problems and may need to be transferred to an RCF

28-Jun-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

32

32

29-Jun-lO

Tue

Received an update from CID regarding forensics report; forensics

33

33

29-Jun-lO

Tue

accused
Sent revised draft charge sheet to DOJ, CCIU, and TCAP for review;

33

33

29-Jun-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

33

33

report delayed, stressed importance of intial draft so we can charge

received feedback and made changes
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
30-Jun-10

Wed

Accused carried to his cell after babbling and failing to following orders

34

34

30-Jun-10

Wed

Accused refused to follow orders of TFCF personnel and was observed

34

34

30-Jun-10

Wed

screaming, shaking, and babbling
Email to DSJA with final draft of charge sheet for review and comment

34

34

30-Jun-10

Wed

Email with CCIU on talking to DOS about cables involved, including
putting CCIU in contact with defense counsel to see if the accused will
speak with investigators

34

34

30-Jun-10

Wed

USARC ENT SJA contacted USF-1 SJA to coordinate accused's movement

34

34

30-Jun-10

Wed

34

34

and associated equity holders
Accused is moved to a long term confinement facility

35

35

to a long term confinement facility
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
1-Jul-lO

Thu

1-Jul-lO

Thu

Email to 2/10 BCT and DSJA with second final draft charge sheet for

35

35

Thu

review and comment
Email to CCIU for clarification on the classification of some o f t h e

35

35

35
35

35
35

1-Jul-lO
1-Jul-lO
1-Jul-lO

Thu
Thu

cables for charging decisions
Email to CCIU, CPT Rose, and MAJ Brent reference 706 Board
Email to multiple offices trying to find someone to conduct the 706
board as no providers are willing to fiy to Kuwait

5 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26264

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
1-Jul-lO

WeekDay
Thu
EML(R^RLeave)

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

35

35

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

35

35

36
36

36
36

36

36

1-Jul-lO

Thu

2-Jul-lO
2-Jul-lO

Fri

EMt(R^RLeave)

Fri

Sent finaldraft to DSJA after receiving breakdown of classifications of
whole or mainly whole HTMLcableson personal computers finished
downloadingall forensic reports from SIPR

2-Jul-lO

Fri

Training Holiday

2-Jul-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

36

36

3-Jul-lO

Sat

37

Sat

EMt(R^RLeave)
Expeditionary Medical Facility in Kuv^ait examined accused and

37

3-Jul-lO

37

37

37

37

37

37

Independence Day Holiday

recommended relocation toafacility that could provide additional
care
3-Jul-lO

Sat

Sent final draft to DSJA ready for preferral who sent to USF-I for reviev^
and finalized press release with PAOand CPT McFarland;revievi^ed
press release and made some changes

3-Jul-lO

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

Sun

Administrative events leading to trial

38

38

4-Jul-lO

Sun

Communication with defense to give the preferral packetand
informed him preferral will be tomorrow

38

38

4-Jul-lO

Sun

Defense receives CID file (Iraq)

38

38

4-Jul-lO

Sun
Sun

EML(R^R Leave)
GCMCA, 3rd Army,ordered accused's transfer as soon as suitable

38

38

38

38

38

38

39
39

39
39

4-Jul-lO

4-Jul-lO

replacement with mental health care resources is found
4-Jul-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

5-Jul-lO
5-Jul-lO

Mon
Mon

and associated equity holders
ORIGINAL CHARGES PREFERRED
Charges preferred and forwarded to SCMCA; sent the preferred
charges to M/^Vorhees in Kuwait to serve on the accused and to CCIU
and the defense

5-Jul-lO

Mon

EML(R^Rteave)

39

39

5-Jul-lO

Mon
Mon

Independence Day Holiday
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

39

39

39

39

40
40

40

5-Jul-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
6-Jul-lO
6-Jul-lO

Tue
Tue

SPCMCA0RD5RSART1CLE32(1RA0)
Email with DOS to identify witness regardingdassification ofall DOS

40

cables

6 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
orPagc(s)

26265

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
6-Jul-lO

Week Day
Tue
EML (R&R Leave)

EVENT

Total Time
40

RCM 707 Clock 1
40

6-Jul-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

40

40

7-Jul-lO

Wed

Communication with defense regarding their request for a RCM 706
board

41

41

7-Jul-lO

Wed

EML (R&R Leave)

41

41

7-Jul-lO

Wed

41

7-Jul-lO

Wed
Wed

LTC Merutka appointed as Article 32 Investigating Officer (10)
Submitted witness list for Article 32 investigation

41
41

7-Jul-lO

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

41
41

41

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
8-Jul-lO

Thu

EML (R&R Leave)

42

42

8-Jul-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

42

42

9-Jul-lO

Fri
Fri

EML (R&R Leave)

43
43

43
43

9-Jul-lO

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

lO-Jul-lO

Sat

EML (R&R Leave)

44

44

lO-Jul-10
lO-Jul-lO

Sat

10 sends out notification for Article 32 investigation
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

44
44

44
44

45

45

Surgeon.
Defense requests a 706 board and a delay of Article 32 proceedings

45

45

45
45

45
45

45
45
45

45
45
45

46

45

•m:

45

Sat

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
11-Jul-lO

Sun

Contacted the USD-C Division Psychiatrist to find provider who would
conduct the RCM 706 board; referred to CENTCOM by USF-I Deputy

11-Jul-lO

Sun

11-Jul-lO
11-Jul-lO

Sun
Sun

EML (R&R Leave)
GCMCA, USD-C, signed memo requesting accused's transfer to the

11-Jul-lO
11-Jul-lO
11-Jul-lO

Sun
Sun
Sun

10 denied defense request for delay
Sent 10 government witness list for Article 32 investigation
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Mannheim ACF in Germany

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
SPCMCA GRANTS DEFENSE REQUEST FOR RCM 706 SANITY BOARD

12-Jul-lO

Mon

12-Jul-lO

Men

DEFENSE REQUESTS DELAY OF ARTICLE 32 INVESTIGATION FOR RCM

12-Jul-lO
12-Jul-lO

Mon
Mon

CCIU completed second interim forensic reports
Email with USF-I Deputy SJA for assistance in finding/tasking a provider

AND DELAY OF ARTICLE 32 INVESTIGATION
706 SANITY BOARD
46
46

45
45

for the 706 board

7 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
.ofPage(s)

26266

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

12-Jul-lO

Mon

EVENT
Email with USF-I Deputy Surgeon about tasking a provider for the 706

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

46

45

Board and had to refer to ARCENT or CENTCOM to request provider
12-Jul-lO

Mon

EML (R&R Leave)

46

45

12-Jul-lO
12-Jul-lO

Mon

SPCMCA Delay of Article 32 Investigation

46

45

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

46

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
13-Jul-lO

Tue

DEFENSE REQUESTS APPOINTMENT OF EXPERT IN COMPUTER
FORENSICS TO THE DEFENSE TEAM

47

45

13-Jul-lO

Tue

Defense requested expert assistant, Mr. Lakes

47

45

13-Jul-lO

Tue

Email with leadership about transferring accused as soon as possible
and not waiting until the start of the 706 board

47

45

13-Jul-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

47

45

14-Jul-lO
14-Jul-lO

Wed
Wed

GCMCA denied defense expert request
Meeting-TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting with DOJ and CCIU

48
48

45
45

Wed

to discuss the way forward for the case.
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

48

45

48

45

49

45

14-Jul-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
14-Jul-lO

Wed

Worked with Chief, MJ & Civil Law, US Army Europe and the
Operations Division Chief, Army Corrections Command to try and
transfer accused to the Mannheim ACF
Meeting-TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting with DOJ and CCIU

15 Jul 10

Thu

15-Jul-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

49

45

15-Jul-lO

Thu

Worked with Chief, MJ & Civil Law, US Army Europe and the
Operatoins Division Chief, Army Corrections Command to try and
transfer accused to the Mannheim ACF

49

45

16-Jul-lO
16-Jul-lO

Fri
Fri

Defense requested reconsideration for expert assistance
Meeting-TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting with DOJ and CCIU

50
50

45

50

45

to discuss the way forward for the case

45

to discuss the way forward for the case
16-Jul-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

16-Jul-lO

Fri

Worked with Chief, MJ & Civil Law, US Army Europe and the
Operations Division Chief, Army Corrections Command to try and
transfer accused to the Mannheim ACF

50

45

17-Jul-lO

Sat

Meeting-TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting with DOJ and CCIU
to discuss the way forward for the case

51

45

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
8 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPago(s)

26267

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

17-Jul-lO

Sat

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

51

45

18-Jul-lO

Sun

Defense renewed request for RCM 706 board

52

45

18-Jul-lO

Sun

Meeting-TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting with DOJand CCIU
to discuss the way forward for the case

52

45

18-Jul-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

52

45

53

45

53

45

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
19-Jul-lO

Mon

Meeting-TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting with DOJ and CCIU
to discuss the way forward forthe case

19-Jul-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

20-Jul-10

Tue

Meeting TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting v^ith DOJ and CCIU
to discuss the way forward for the case

54

45

20-Jul-10

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

54

45

55

45

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

55

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
21-Jul-lO

Wed

Meeting TDY to Wiesbaden, Germany for meeting with DOJ and CCIU
to discuss the way forward forthe case

21-Jul-lO

Wed

22-Jul-lO

Thu

Email with CCIUabout the restore points spoken about during meeting

56

45

Thu

in Germany
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

56

45

56

45

57

45

57

45

22-Jul-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
22-Jul-lO

Thu

and associated equity holders
Worked on getting defense expertaplace to work at Ft Knox since he
will have classified information and can'ttake it to bis lab; RFI from
CCIU to CID office at Ft. Knox; continued case prep with RFIs to CCIU
about certain items in the new forensic reports

23-Jul-lO

Fri

23-Jul-lO

Fri

SPCMCAAPPOINTS EXPERT INCOMPUTERFORENSICSTOTHE DEFENSE
TEAM(DEFENSEREO0EST,1310L10)
Communication vi^ith defense to send GCMCA'sresponse and began
movement to get information to expert prior to Article 32 investigation

23-Jul-lO

Fri

GCMCAapproved defense second request for expert assistance

57

45

23-Jul-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

57

45

58

45

evidenceand v^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
24-Jul-lO

Sat

and associated equity holders
Drafted protective order,sentto DOJ for review,gave the order to the
SJA for immediate signature by GCMCA

1 »nni?T I
9 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED^^FQRQFFICIAL USEONLY

\TF E X H I B I T _ _ _ _ —
APrh,U^A 1
—'
Page

_0fPage(s)

26268

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

24-Jul-lO

Sat

EVENT
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

58

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
25-Jul-lO

Sun

Defense received CID file-CONOS

59

45

25-Jul-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

59

45

27-Jul-lO

Tue

GCMCA agreed to take Court-Martial Jurisdiction

61

27-Jul-lO
27-Jul-lO

Tue
Tue

Reached out for initial classification of evidence
SJA reengaged OS F-l to find a provider for 706 board

61
61

45
45
45

27-Jul-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

61

45

28-Jul-lO

Wed

IAD GCMCA ISSUES PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION

62

45

28-Jul-lO

Wed

Defense expert signed MOU regarding classified information

62

45

28-Jul-lO

Wed

Email with CCIU to request classification review of apache video

62

45

28-Jul-lO

Wed

Email with CCIU to request classification review of cables on accused's
personal Mac computer

62

45

28-Jul-lO

Wed

Email with OTJAG to discuss classification reviews of Farah 15-6,

62

45

Apache video, the Gharani investigation, SOUTHCOM documents, and
28-Jul 10

Wed

CIDNE-I/CIDNE-A data
GCMCA signed protective order and transfer ofjurisdiction to MDW

62

45

28 Jul 10

Wed

SITREP sent to SCMCA and SPCMCA on jurisdiction transfer of accused

62

45

28-Jul-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

62

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
29-Jul-lO

Thu

Accused arrived at the Quantico Brig and began inprocessing

63

29-Jul-lO

Thu

Coordinated with IAD COJ/SJA on case file and status of actions

63

45
45

29-Jul-lO
29 Jul 10

Thu
Thu

Coordinated with 0GA2 personnel assigned to the case
Email with PAO confirming that accused arrived at Quantico at 2118

63
63

45
45

hours
Thu

OTJAG requested 1st CAV to conduct classification review on Apache

63

45

29-Jul-lO

Thu

video
TC in Iraq coordinated with TC in MDW

63

45

29-Jul-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

63

45

64

45

29-Jul 10

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
30-Jul-lO

Fri

Email with OTJAG explaining the Apache video is too large to be sent
via SIPRNET and will start coordinating alternate means of transmitting
the video to Fort Hood

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
10 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPagets)

26269

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

EVENT

Total Time

30-Jul-10

Fri

Email with OTJAG requested classification reivew of Apache video; put

64

45

30-Jul-10
30-Jul 10

Fri
Fri

FBI agreed to participate jointly in Wikileaks investigation
Phone call to discuss case with Iraq TCs

64
64

45
45

30-Jul-lO
30-Jul-lO

Fri
Fri

Received case file from IAD

64
64

45
45

31-Jul-lO

Sat

Administrative events leading to trial

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

65
65

45

31-Jul-lO

RCM 707 Clock 1

in touch with M M Fein as new lead Trial Counsel

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
1-Aug-lO

Sun

Administrative events leading to trial

66

45

1-Aug-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

66

45

2-Aug-10
2-Aug-lO

Mon

SPCMCA ORDERS ARTICLE 32 (MDW)

67

Mon

IAD GCMCA RELEASES JURISDICTION TO MDW GCMCA

67

45
45

2-Aug-lO

Mon

Communication with defense-Notification of MAJ Huriey identified as

67

45

temporary point of contact
2-Aug-lO

Mon

Email requesting US Army trial judge as Article 32 10

67

45

2-Aug-lO

Mon

Forwarded the charge sheet and accused's ERB to Chief Trial Judge to

67

45

2-Aug-lO

Mon

secure an Article 32 Investigating Officer
M M Hurley temporarily detailed as defense counsel for accused until a

67

45

2-Aug-lO

Mon

stateside attorney is found
Received first MDW Public Affairs Guidelines regarding the accused

67

45

2-Aug-lO

Mon

Requested Article 32 Investigating Officer from Chief Trial Judge

67

45

2-Aug-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

67

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
3-Aug-lO

Tue

SPCMCA ORDERS RCM 706 BOARD

68

45

3-Aug-lO

Tue
Tue

Email Coordinated a meeting with DOS at State
Email Initial contact with Dr. Sweda to assemble RCM 706 Board

68
68

45
45

3-Aug-lO

members; forwards the board order and charge sheet
3-Aug-lO

Tue

Email Received Article 32 10 information

68

45

68
68

45
45

68

45

68

45
45

3-Aug-lO

Tue

3 Aug-10

Tue

Email with DOS-began contacting DOS
Email with DOS-requested authorization to release information to

3-Aug-lO

Tue

defense
FBI becomes primary law enforcement organization relating to

3-Aug-lO
3-Aug 10

Tue
Tue

Wikileaks
Phone call Discuss case with Iraq TCs, DOJ, and DOS
Received 10 name for appointment from Chief Trial Judge; 10 detailed

68

by the Chief judge for the Article 32; Article 32 10 exchanged contact
information with the prosecution
r^PPFliATE EXHIBIT.—
11 of 231

UNCLASS,F,ED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

^^"^

1

26270

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
3-Aug-lO
3-Aug-lO

4-Aug-lO

Week Day
EVENT
Tue
SPCMCA ordered RCM 706 Board for accused
Tue
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Wed
Communication with defense-Iraq counsel meet with TDS to discuss

Total Time
68

RCM 707 Clock 1
45

68

45

69

45

69

45

69

45

69
69

45
45

case and deals for accused
4-Aug-lO

Wed

Email Dr. Sweda, RCM 706 Board, requests information about security
clearance requirements

4-Aug-lO

Wed

10 acknowledged appointment as Article 32 officer and notified the
prosecution that he will be contacting administrative law

4-Aug-lO
4-Aug-lO

Wed
Wed

Joined the prosecution team

4-Aug-lO

Wed

Served 10 the appointment orders, charge sheet, ERB and contact
information ofall counsel and staff

69

45

4-Aug-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

69

45

70

45

Phone call Conference call with Iraq TCs and CCIU

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
5-Aug-lO

Thu

Communication with defense-defense notified the RCM 706 board
there is no need for members o f t h e board to have a security clearance
because defense will ensure the accused does not divulge classified
information

5-Aug-lO

Thu

Communication with defense-defense requested the opportunity to
view both the long and short-form of the RCM 706 board results

70

45

5-Aug-lO

Thu

Communication-Defense counsel informs TCs and RCM 706 Board

70

45

Discussed clearances and timeframe for 706 members to complete the
board

70

45

there is no need for clearances as accused will try to refrain from
disclosing classified information
5-Aug-lO

Thu

5-Aug-lO

Thu

Meeting-receive CCIU forensic brief on the case

70

45

5-Aug-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

70

45

71

45

71

45

71
71

45
45

72

45

72

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
6-Aug-lO

Fri

Email Dr. Sweda requests a 3 month suspense to complete RCM 706
board

6-Aug-lO

Fri

Email LTC Almanza states that he will be sending out the notification
memo early next week and will hold the hearing on 13 August 2010

6-Aug-lO
6-Aug-lO

Fri
Fri

Meeting-receive CCIU forensic brief on the case
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

7-Aug-lO

Sat

7-Aug-lO

Sat

and associated equity holders
Communication with defense defense inquired what the government
would offer for an OTPG

12 of 231

CPT Rose TDY at MDW

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

26271

UNCLASSIFIED//FQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

7-Aug-lO

Sat

EVENT
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

72

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
8-Aug-lO

Sun

CPT Rose TDY at MDW

73

45

8-Aug-lO

Sun

Email Coordinating CCIU interview of service member who has defense

73

45

counsel and possibly committed separate crime with accused
8-Aug-lO

Sun

Meeting-receive CCIU forensic brief on the case

73

45

8-Aug-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

73

45

74

45

45
45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
9-Aug-lO

Mon

Communication with defense-with M M Hurley about RCM 706
suspense/requirements, delay requests, protection order, delay of

Article 32
9-Aug-lO

Mon

9-Aug-lO

Mon

Meeting-Iraq TCs meet with MDW TCs in DC and brief case

74
74

9-Aug-lO

Mon

Meeting-Prosecution first meets with DOJ

74

CPT Rose TDY at MDW

9-Aug-lO

Mon

Phone call with DOS equity meeting

74

9-Aug-lO

Mon

74

9-Aug-lO

Mon

Received IRTF establishment memo
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

45

74

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
lO-Aug-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-defense requested a six-week suspense
for the RCM 706 board to complete its report

75

45

lO-Aug-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-M/U Hurley explained to Dr. Sweda the
RCM 706 board should finish within 6 weeks, or then ask for an
extension

75

45

lO-Aug-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-with defense counsel, discussed

75

45

additional tests or focuses for RCM 706 Board, a 6 week suspense to
complete the board, another Article 32 delay request from the defense
until 706 Board is complete, and any objections the defense may have
CPT Rose TDY at MDW

75

45

Tue

Email from Dr. Sweda to all parties to state the first evaluation of

75

45

lO-Aug-lO

Tue

accused is scheduled for 27 August 2010
Email to Article 32 10 that the defense has submitted an Article 32

75

45

lO-Aug-lO
10 Aug-lO

Tue
Tue

delay
Meeting-ENCASE class with CID
Meeting-with DOJ and DOS to discuss classification reviews, discovery,

75
75

45
45

lO-Aug-lO

Tue

and the ongoing investigation
Meeting-with MDW security to discuss security clearances

75

45

lO-Aug-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

75

45

76

45

10-Aug-lO
lO-Aug-lO

Tue

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
11-Aug-lO

Wed

DEFENSE REQUESTS DELAY OF ARTICLE 32 INVESTIGATION FOR RCM
706 SANITY BOARD

13 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
Page

_orPage(s)

26272

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

llAuglO

Wed

Coordinated Article 32 delay thru 10 to SPCMCA

76

45

llAuglO

Wed

Email from Article 32 10 stating he has no objections to defense delay
and endorses the request

76

45

llAuglO

Wed

Meeting-with DOJ and EDVA to discuss classification reviews of DOS

76

45

76

45

77

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

information, the ongoing investigations, and discovery
llAuglO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

12AuglO

Thu

SPCMCA APPROVES DEFENSE'S REQUEST FOR DELAY OF ARTICLE 32
INVESTIGATION (DEFENSE REQUEST, 11 AOG 2010)

12-Aug-lO

Thu

Meeting-OSN Code 30 classified litigation training at MDW

77

45

12-Aug-lO

Thu

Meeting-with CCIO, DOJ, and the IRTF

12-Aug-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

77
77

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
13-Aug-lO

Fri

Meeting-USN Code 30 classified litigation training at MDW

78

45

13-Aug-lO

Fri
Fri

Meeting-with CCIU, DOJ, FBI, and the IRTF

78

Phone call with M M Huriey who explained he is no longer detailed to

78

45
45

Fri

the case
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

78

45

13-Aug-lO
13-Aug-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
15-Aug-lO

Sun

Email with LTC Greer to coordinate command visits to Quantico Brig

80

45

15-Aug-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

80

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
16-Aug-lO

Mon

1st Armored Division USD-C AR 380-5 investigation completed IAW AR

81

45

16-Aug-lO

Mon

15-6
Email with DOS for an update on the classification of actual "MRNs"

81

45

16-Aug-lO

Mon

Email with DOS-informed DOS of upcoming OCA review request

81

45

16-Aug-lO
16 Aug-lO

Email with 0GA2-coordinate for a meeting
Phone call with CW04 Averhart to discuss Brig policies

81
81
81

45
45

16-Aug-lO

Mon
Mon
Mon

16-Aug-lO

Mon

45

16-Aug-lO

Mon

Reviewed printed forensic reports

81
81

16-Aug-lO

Mon

Worked generally to idenfify compromised information, develop

81

45

81
82
82

45
45

Pulled MRNs from recovered unallocated space on the accused's

45

computer (800 pgs)
Reviewed Brig SOP and SECNAV instruction

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
16-Aug-lO
17-Aug 10
17-Aug-lO

Mon
Tue
Tue

Worked with PAO to answer AP query
Continued pulling MRNs from BM Computer
Email with DOS explaining "MRNs" are not classified, just the
substance of the cables
'

14 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

1
1
, »T17 F \ l I B I T _ _
h t f ^ELLAH • r..v
c(s) ^ ^ _ _ _ _ _ J
ge
<>fP"«
l l !

26273

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
17-Aug-lO
17-Aug-lO
17-Aug-lO

WeekDay
EVENT
Tue
Meeting-with multiple OGAs to discuss what assistance could be given
Tue

to law enforcement and potential discovery issues
Reworked checklist for PTC Visitation

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

82

45

82
82

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
17-Aug-lO

Tue

Worked on H&W questionnare for Chain of Command's Quantico visit

82

45

18-Aug-lO
18-Aug-lO

Wed
Wed

2/10 MTN RE-DEPLOYS TO FORT DRUM, NY
Email with DOS to discuss discovery

83
83

45
45

18-Aug-lO

Wed

Email with Iraq TC - Classification of MRNs and requests for review of
classified MRNs

83

45

18-Aug-lO

Wed

Meeting-with CCIU, discussed subpoenas, discovery letters, and

83

45

83

45

forensic analysis
18-Aug-lO

Wed

18-AuglO
18-Aug-lO

Wed

Requested the master MRN list from CCIU

83

45

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

83

45

83

45

84

45

Phone call with IRTF to discuss prosecution's access to the
compromised data sets

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
18-Aug-lO

Wed

Worked on spreadsheet depicting the flow of MRNs through different
digital media

19-Aug-lO

Thu

Created evidence flow spreadsheet showing how to look up different
cables on the NCD Portal

Thu

Email CPT Rose analysis of NCD portal and drafted template for

84

45

19-Aug-lO

Thu

classification review requests
Email with DlA-received response from DIA regarding IRTF request to

84

45

19-Aug-lO

Thu

84

45

19-Aug-lO

Thu

84

45

19-Aug-lO

Thu

84

45

and associated equity holders
Drafted the Department of State Classification Review request

85

45

Media inquiry regarding the charge sheet
Reviewed templates for sample cover letter, affidavit, drafted requests

85

45

85

45

Sent classification review request thru OTJAG to DoD
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

85
85

45
45

Email Edited classification review requests

87

45

19-Aug-lO

review materials
Email with IRTF to understand what type of information was
compromised and the extent of the compromise
Leader Professional Development Series
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

20-Aug-10

Fri

20-Aug 10

Fri

20-Aug-lO

Fri

20-Aug-lO
20-Aug-lO

Fri
Fri

22-Aug-lO

Sun

for classification reviews

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
Page
15 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ofPagets)

26274

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
22-Aug-lO

23-Aug-lO

WeekDay
EVENT
Sun
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Mon
Email with DOJ and CCIU discussing handwriting exemplars

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

87

45

88

45

23-Aug-lO

Mon

Email with Dr. Sweda to re-ask what type of administrative records the
board would like to review and what time frame they need

88

45

23-Aug-lO

Mon
Mon

Media inquiry response

88

45

23-Aug-lO

MG William Garrett approved the USF-I AR 15-6 investigation

23-Aug-lO

Mon

Phone call with DOJ and CCIU discussing handwriting exemplars

88
88

45
45

23-Aug-lO

Mon

Phone call with Dr. Sweda to discuss what type of information or

88

45

88

45

records would the board like to review and what time frame they need
23-Aug-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

24-Aug-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-M/U Kemkes about sending the

89

45

24-Aug-lO

Tue

accused's medical records to the RCM 706 board
Communication with defense-MAJ Kemkes discussion about his role on

89

45

89
89

45

89

45

the case and being the detailed military defense counsel
24-Aug-lO

Tue

Continued reviewing forensic reports

24 Aug-lO

Tue

Email with CPT Rose to get copies ofall the documents originally
provided to the defense at preferral so that they can be provided to
the RCM 706 board

24-Aug-lO

Tue

Gathered documents for RCM 706 board

45

24-Aug-lO

Tue

Media inquiry response

89

45

24-Aug-lO
24-Aug-lO

Tue
Tue

Phone call with DIA
Requested accused's medical records for RCM 706 board members

89
89

45
45

24-Aug-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

89

45

m:

45

m

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
SPCMCA APPROVES DEFENSE'S REQUEST FOR DELAY OF ARTICLE 32
INVESTIGATION (DEFENSE REQUEST, 25 AUG 2010)
ACCUSED RETAINS MR. DAVID COOMBS

25-Aug-lO

Wed

25-Aug-lO

Wed

25-Aug-lO

Wed

DEFENSE REQOESTS DELAY OF RCM 706 BOARD ONTIL FORENSIC
PSYCHIATRY EXPERT APPOINTED TO DEFENSE
'

25-Aug-lO

Wed

Communication with defense-Mr. Coombs notified prosecution that he

90

45

Wed

has been retained by the accused
Media inquiry response

90

45

25-Aug-lO

90

25-Aug-lO

Wed

25-Aug-lO

Wed

Meeting-CCIU syncronization meeting and update
Meeting Toured Quantico Brig and spoke with commander and SJA

90
90

45
45

25-Aug-lO

Wed

Meeting-with DOJ, EDVA, and DIA

90

45

APELLATE EXHIBIT
16 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Pace

ofPage(s)

26275

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
25-Aug-lO

Week Day
EVENT
Wed
Phone call with EDVA, CES and DoD

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

90

45

25-Aug 10

Wed

SPCMCA Delay of Article 32 Investigation

90

45

25-Aug-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

90

45

91

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
26-Aug-lO

Thu

and associated equity holders
DEFENSE REQUESTS DELAY OF RCM 706 BOARD UNTIL PROCEDURES
ADOPTED TO SAFEGUARD CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Communication with defense-defense notified RCM 706 board that
they have security concerns about RCM 706 board

91

45

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Communication with defense-Scheduled with defense counsel for 27
August 2010

91

45

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Compared TC and DC discs from Iraq and noted discrepancies

91

45

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Email To Dr. Sweda - Approved defense request for 706 Board delay

91

45

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Email with CPT Morrow explaining the Brig is not authorized to hold

91

45

91

45

classified information or have classified discussions and prosecution
needs to find an alternate location for RCM 706 board
26-Aug-lO

Thu

Email with CPT Rose requesting accused's OMPF, CID ROl, and Lamo

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Email with Dr. Sweda about rescheduling 706 Board for 27 August and
inquiry regarding allied documents

91

45

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

91

45

sworn statement

26-Aug-lO

Thu

45

Thu

Meeting-with EDVA
Read initial CID ROl from Camp Liberty field office

91

26-Aug-lO

91

45

26-Aug-lO

Thu

Received motion/request from defense counsel to comply with

91

45

26-Aug-lO

Thu

disclosure provisions
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

91

45

92

45

92

45

92

45

92

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
27-Aug-lO

Fri

Communication with defense-with defense, where Mr. Coombs
discussed whether separate protective orders need to be issued for

27-Aug-lO

Fri

the RCM 706 board members
Email Dr. Sweda - Initial interview of accused by 706 Board is
rescheduled due to the approval of the defense delay request.

27-Aug-lO

Fri

Email Drafted excel spreadsheet depicting which MRNs were found on
accused's personal computer

27-Aug-lO

Fri

Email TC synchronization meeting to discuss defense request for
expert in forensic pyschiatry, motion to comply with disclosure
prohibitions, clearances for defense counsel, documents for 706
Board, finalization of OCA cover letters, scrubbing for cables to review

27-Aug-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response

92

45

27-Aug 10

Fri

Meeting-with MDW security to receive read-on

92

45

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
17 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPage(s)

26276

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

27-Aug-lO

Fri

Provided summary of brig tour

92

45

27-Aug-lO

Fri

Researched issues relating to NDAs signed by the accused and
developed a list of outstanding issues for case to discuss with MDW
TCs

92

45

27-Aug-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

92

45

28-Aug-lO

Sat

Email from Iraq TC about accused items in Kuwait

93

29-Aug-lO

Sun
Mon

Email to Iraq TC about Kuwait records

94
95

45
45

30-Aug-lO

EVENT

Total Time

Communication with defense-defense returned classified documents

RCM 707 Clock 1

45

erroneously provided to defense without proper authority under
Executive Order 12958, sections 4.1 and 4.2
30-Aug-lO

Mon

Discussed the defense proffer regarding classified information to be

95

45

95

disclosed to the 706 board with MDW TCs
30-Aug-lO

Mon

30-Aug-lO

Mon

Email with DlA-attended IRTF meeting
Media inquiry response

95

45
45

30-Aug-lO

Mon

Meeting-with EDVA and DIA to discuss IRTF requests and discovery

95

45

30-Aug-lO

Mon

Phone call with TCAP to discuss defense request for a forensic

95

45

95

45

psychiatrist expert consultant
30-Aug-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

30-Aug-lO

Mon

Worked on getting transcripts of accused's calls while in the TFCF

95

45

31-Aug-lO

Tue

Email with SA Mander regarding seizure of NIPR Computers by CCIU

96

45

31-Aug-lO

Tue

45

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Phone call with Code 30 to discuss MRE 505
SPCMCA ordered RCM 706 Board for accused

96

31-Aug-lO
31-Aug-lO

96
96

45
45

31 Aug-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

96

45

97

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Communication with defense-stated that their expert consultant

1-Sep-lO

Wed

1-Sep-lO

Wed

Email conversations with COL Malone to locate available expert

97

45

1-Sep-lO

Wed

consultants with TS clearances for the defense
Email with COL Malone to identify a local expert forensic psychiatrist

97

45

1-Sep-lO
1-Sep-lO

Wed

for the defense request
Email with OTJAG referencing security clearances and MRE 505

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Meeting-CCIU synchronization meeting and obtain of interim forensic

97
97
97

45
45
45

Wed

reports
Meeting-with EDVA and FBI
Phone call with CCIU

97
97

45
45

would need a TS security clearance

1-Sep-lO
1-Sep-lO
1-Sep-lO

Wed

,\PPELL.\TE EXHIBIT.
18 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ot Page(s)

26277

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
1-Sep-lO
1-Sep-lO
1-Sep-lO

WeekDay
EVENT
Wed
Phone call with COL Malone to discuss availability of psychiatric expert
consultants with TS clearances
Wed
Phone call with EDVA

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

97

45

97
97

45
45

Wed

Phone call with FBI

1-Sep-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

97

45

2-Sep-lO

Thu

DEFENSE REQUESTS SECURITY CLEARANCE FOR EACH DEFENSE

98

45

98

45

COUNSEL
2-Sep-lO

Thu

DEFENSE REQUESTS ANY DEFENSE EXPERT POSSESS THE APPROPRIATE
SECURITY CLEARANCE AND READ-ON REQUIREMENTS (TS-SCl)

2-Sep-lO

Thu

Defense requested security clearance and authority to grant accused

98

45

2-Sep-lO

Thu

access to classified information
Defense requested that any defense expert have security clearance

98

45

2-Sep-lO

Thu

Email with CCIU to request mental and medical records from CID

98

45

2-Sep-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

98

2-Sep-lO

Thu

OTJAG began processing security clearances for defense and MRE 505

98

45
45

2-Sep-lO

Thu

Worked affidavits to search pocket litter at confinement facility

98

45

2-Sep-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

98

45

and associated equity holders
Worked to coordinate recording within the brig

98

45

Media inquiry response
Training Holiday - Labor Day Holiday

99
99

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

99

45
45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
2-Sep-lO

Thu

3-Sep-lO

Fri

3-Sep-lO

Fri
Fri

3-Sep-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
6-Sep-lO

Mon

Labor Day Holiday

102

45

6-Sep-lO

Mon
Mon

Media inquiry response
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

102
102

45
45

6-Sep-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
7-Sep-lO

Tue

and associated equity holders
Coordinated release of SOP, detainee handbook and visitor log

103

45

7-Sep-lO
7-Sep-lO

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Phone call with OTJAG referencing security clearances and Apache

103
103

45
45

7-Sep-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

103

45

Video classification review
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

19 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Page(s)

26278

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

8-Sep-lO

Wed

Communication with defense-request defense counsel provide
information for their security clearances

104

45

8-Sep-lO

Wed

Email to CCIU Requesting documentation regarding accused's
clearance level; trying to get defense equivalent clearances

104

45

8-Sep-lO

Wed

Email with CCIU to determine the classification of the forensic reports
and other evidence to gauge what classification the defense counsel
and their experts would need

104

45

8-Sep-lO
8-Sep-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response

104

45

Wed

104

8-Sep-lO

Wed

Meeting-CCIU synchronization meeting and update
Phone call with EDVA

104

45
45

8-Sep-lO
8-Sep-lO

Wed

Phone call with FBI

104

45

Wed

Phone call with MEDCOM OSJA about mental and medical records

104

45

8-Sep-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

104

45

105

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
9 Sep-10

Thu

2/10 MTN SHIPPING CONTAINERS (CONNEX) ARRIVE AT FORT DRUM,

9-Sep-lO

Thu

Communication with defense-request defense counsel provide
information for their security clearances

105

45

9-Sep-lO

Thu

Email from COL Malone listing members of the 706 Board needing

105

45

9-Sep-lO

Thu

Email from Dr. Sweda listing the clearance statuses of 706 Board
members as well as the roles of personnel identified

105

45

9-Sep-lO

Thu

Email to OTJAG with information on defense counsel security

105

45

NY

security access

clearances
9-Sep-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

105

45

9-Sep-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

105

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
10-Sep-lO

Fri

Drafted special security instructions for restarting RCM 706 board

106

45

10-Sep-lO

Fri

Email from LTC Almanza regarding the estimated time of completion

106

45

10-Sep-lO

Fri

for the 706 Board
Email to LTC Almanza explaining the assigned defense counsel, delays

106

45

of the Article 32 and 706 Board, and processing of the lO's security
lO-Sep-lO

Fri

clearance
Email to LTC Almanza requesting information for security clearance

106

45

lO-Sep-10

Fri

Email with 2/10 MTN about accused's uniforms

106

45

Email with COL Malone referencing contact information for COL Huff

106

45

106

45

lO-Sep-lO

Fri

and the 706 Board
10-Sep-lO

Fri

Email with DOS-checked-in with DOS regarding upcoming OCA review
request

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
20 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPage(s)

26279

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

lO-Sep-lO

Fri

EVENT
Email with OGAl focused on how the DOD and the military justice

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

106

45

system protects classified information, if its used during a trial
lO-Sep-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response

106

45

lO-Sep-lO
10-Sep-lO

Fri
Fri

Meeting-with DIA and OTJAG
Phone call with CCIU

106
106

45
45

10-Sep-lO

Fri

Phone call with EDVA about searches and seizures

106

45

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

106

45

lO-Sep-lO
"
12-Sep-lO

Sun

Email Iraq TC for SAMs research and Article 13

108

45

13-Sep-lO

Mon

Communication with defense-providing an update on forensic

109

45

109

psychologist expert, 706 Board members, and processing of security
clearances
13-Sep-lO

Mon

Media inquiry response

13-Sep-lO

Mon

Phone call with CCIU synchronization meeting and update

109

45
45

13-Sep-lO

Mon

Phone call with EDVA

13-Sep-lO

Mon

Phone call with OTJAG requesting assistance from Army G2 for security

109
109

45
45

Mon

experts and clearances for defense counsel
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

109

45

110

45

13-Sep-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
14-Sep-lO

Tue

Email with OTJAG to discuss security experts for defense. Government,
and Article 32 10/Military Judge security manager

14-Sep-lO

Tue

Media inquiry response

110

45

14-Sep-lO

Tue

Meeting-with CID

110

45

14-Sep-lO

Tue

Meeting-with DOJ and DOS to discuss classification reviews, discovery,

110

45

14-Sep-lO

Tue

and the ongoing investigation
Meeting-with FBI

110

45

14-Sep-lO

Tue

Phone call with FBI concerning pretrial confinement monitoring

110

45

14-Sep-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

110

45

15-Sep-lO

Wed

Attempted to attend Quantico command meeting

111

45

15-Sep-lO

Wed

Communication with defense-defense requested an update on the

111

45

IS-Sep-lO

Wed

classification reviews
Communication with defense-defense requested the prosecution

111

45

111

45

111
111

45
45

provide a timeline for when the RCM 706 will begin
IS-Sep-lO

Wed

Communication with defense-with defense counsel discussing IMC
request for CPT Bouchard and forensic psychiatrist for 706 Board

15-Sep-lO

Wed

Drafted questions for meeting with the Brig

15 Sep 10

Wed

Email from OTJAG with potential names of security experts

21 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT
Page

of Page(s)

26280

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
15-Sep-lO

Week Day

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

Wed

Media inquiry response

111

45

15-Sep-lO

Wed

Meeting-CCIU synchronization meeting and update

111

15-Sep-lO
15 Sep-10

Wed
Wed

Meeting-with Quantico Brig to discuss medical support
OTJAG identified security managers for the defense

111
111

45
45
45

15-Sep-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

111

45

16-Sep-lO

Thu

Drafted request for monitoring at Brig

112

16-Sep-lO

Thu

16-Sep-lO

Thu

Email with company to coordinate accused's uniform delivery
Email with DOJ and EDVA concerning search issue follow-on

112
112

45
45

EVENT

45

16-Sep-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

112

45

16-Sep-lO

Thu

16-Sep-lO

Thu

Phone call with DOJ and EDVA concerning search issue
Phone call with EDVA

112
112

45
45

16-Sep-lO

Thu

SPCMCA requested monitoring accused's conversations at the
Quantico Brig

112

45

16-Sep-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

112

45

Worked on evidentiary and case timeline for briefings to leadership

112

45

SPCMCA ISSUES PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING CLASSIFIED

113

45

113

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
16-Sep-lO

Thu

17-Sep-lO

Fri

INFORMATION
17-Sep-lO
17-Sep-lO

Fri
Fri

SPCMCA ORDERS PCRO #1
Brig sends signed memo agreeing to monitor the communications of

17 Sep 10

Fri

accused
Charles Ganiei appointed as expert for defense

113

17-Sep-lO

Fri

Email with company to coordinate accused's uniform delivery

113

45
45

17-Sep-lO

Fri

Email with Mr, Hall to discuss expectations of being defense security

113

45

17-Sep-lO

Fri

expert
Media inquiry response

113

45

17-Sep-lO

Fri

113

45

113

45

113

45

114

45

114

45

114

45

116

45

17-Sep-lO

Fri

Meeting-with DOJ
Quantico commander agreed to monitor accused's communications

17-Sep-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

113

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
18 Sep-10
18-Sep-lO

Sat
Sat

DEFENSE RESPONDS TO PCRO #1
Communication with defense-defense submitted response to PCRO to
Fort Myer Garrison CDR, discussed Brig monitoring proceedures, and
possible lead on forensic psychiatrist with a TS-SCl clearance

18-Sep-lO

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

20-Sep-lO

22 of 231

Mon

Communication with defense

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Page(s)

26281

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
20-Sep-10

Week Day
EVENT
Mon
Communication with defense to discuss forensic psychiatry expert

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock I

116

45

20-Sep-lO

Mon

Email from COL Malone indicating that he might have information on a
civilian as a forensic psychiatrist

116

45

20-Sep-10

Mon

Email with COL Huff (USAF) who related that he would be unable to act
as the defense expert in forensic psychiatry

116

45

20-Sep-lO

Mon

Media inquiry response

116

45

20-Sep-lO

Mon

Meeting-with LtCol Lyons to retrieve the visitor logs for Brig

20-Sep-lO

Mon

Phone call with COL Huff (USAF) who related that he would be unable
to act as the defense expert in forensic psychiatry

116
116

45

20-Sep-lO

Mon

Phone call with Mr. Ganiei to discuss expectations of being defense
security expert

116

45

20-Sep-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

116

45

116

45

117

45

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
20-Sep-lO

Mon

Worked on various defense counsel requests - updating tracker,
clarifying order to defense expert, looked at proposed defense counsel
changes to protective order

21-Sep-lO

Tue

21-Sep-lO
21 Sep-10
21-Sep-lO

Tue

Email with MDW security concerning access to classified information
for accused
Media inquiry response

117

45

Tue

Meeting-CCIU synchronization meeting and update

117

45

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

117

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
22-Sep-lO

Wed

and associated equity holders
SPCMCA ORDERS PCRO #2

118

45

22-Sep-lO

Wed

Email with COL Malone to provide additional instructions to COL

118

45

22-Sep-lO

Wed

Malone regarding the 706 Board
Email with DA-discussed use ofclassified information during court-

118

45

22-Sep-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response

118

45

22-Sep-lO
22-Sep-lO

Wed
Wed

Meeting-CCIU synchronization meeting and update
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

118
118

45
45

martial

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
23-Sep-lO

Thu

Email from COL Malone stating he may have candidates for forensic

119

45

23-Sep-lO

Thu

psychiatrists
Email with CCIU to obtain original classified documents from OGAl to

119

45

23-Sep-lO

Thu

Email with COL Malone to obtain COL Benedek as forensic psychiatry

119

45

23-Sep-lO

Thu

expert
Email with DOJ-DOJ filed motion to disclose grand jury matters

119

45

23 Sep-10

Thu

119

45

23-Sep-lO

Thu

119

45

conduct forenisic analysis

23 of 231

Media inquiry response
Phone call with DOJ referencing handwriting exemplars

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page.

ofPage(s)

26282

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

23-Sep-lO

Thu

EVENT

Total Time

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

RCM 707 Clock 1

119

45

120

45

120

45

120
120

45

120

45

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
24-Sep-lO

Fri

Communication with defense Sent the preliminary classification review
for accused to the defense and Mr. Coombs acknowledged

24-Sep-lO

Fri

Email with 2/10 MTN to provide update on case and have accused
assigned to MDW in the personnel system

24-Sep-lO
24-Sep-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response

Fri

Provided preliminary classification review of mental impressions to

24-Sep-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

45

brig
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
26 Sep-10

Sun

Email about access to JWICS

122

26-Sep-lO

Sun

Email to OGAl about use of documents

122

45

27-Sep-lO

Mon

123
123

45
45

27-Sep-lO

Mon

Began working on new charges for the charge sheet
Email with CCIU

27-Sep-lO

Mon

Email with OGAl to initiate contact and setup a meeting with OGC

123

45

27-Sep-lO

Mon

Media inquiry response

123

45

27-Sep-lO

Mon

Meeting with DIA

123

45

27-Sep-lO

Mon

Phone call with MEDCOM OSJA in reference to accused's behavioral
health records

123

45

27-Sep-lO

Mon

Researched ethics rules on contact with represented parties and

123

45

whether CID could gather medical records for investigation
27-Sep-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

123

45

28-Sep-lO

Tue

DEFENSE REQUESTS A SECOND DEFENSE SECURITY EXPERT TO ASSIST

124

45

28-Sep-lO

Tue

WITH PCRO #2
Communication with defense to discuss PCRO issues from defense

124

45

28-Sep-lO

Tue

security experts
Coordinated the inmate signature on monitoring agreement

124

45

28-Sep-lO

Tue

Defense made requests in response to PCR

124

45

28 Sep-10

Tue

Email with MEDCOM OSJA in reference to accused's behavioral health

124

45

Tue

records
Media inquiry response

124

45

28-Sep-lO
28-Sep-lO

Tue

Meeting-CCIU synchronization meeting and update

124

45

28-Sep-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

124

45

124
125

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
28-Sep-lO
29-Sep-lO

Tue
Wed

Worked on monitoring memorandum
Communication with defense-who notifies the prosecution thatthe

45

defense potential forensic psychiatrist is deploying
APPFt.I . ATE EXHIBIT
24 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPaae(s)

26283

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
29-Sep-lO

Week Day
EVENT
Total Time
Wed
Drafted several memorandums for SPCMCA(e.g, excludable delay,2nd
125

RCM 707 Clock
45

security expert, forensic psychiatry expert action)
29-Sep-lO

Wed

Email with DOJ DOJ informed prosecution that judge signed order
disclosing grand jury matters to prosecution

125

45

29-Sep-lO

Wed

Email with MEDCOM OSJA in reference to accused's behavioral health
records

125

45

29-Sep-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response

125

45

29-Sep-lO

Wed

Reviewed Response to defense Request to Amend Protective Order

125

45

29-Sep-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

125

45

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
29-Sep-lO

Wed

Worked on Excludable Delay Memo Dratt

125

45

30-Sep-lO

Thu

126

45

30-Sep-lO

Thu

Determined it was appropriate to keep medical and behavioral health
records based on MEDCOM Regulation
Email with CIDC to identifyaSCIF to conduct the PCRO interview

126

45

30-Sep-10

Thu

Email witb DA discussed classification revievi^sand evidence

126

45

30-Sep-lO

Thu

Email v^ith MEDCOM OSJA v^ho determined it was appropriate to keep
medical and behavioral health records based on MEDCOM regulations

126

45

30-Sep-lO

Thu

Email with OTJAG discussingallowing accused to discuss classified

126

45

30-Sep-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

126

45

30-Sep-lO
30 Sep-10

Thu
Thu

Meeting with MDW security in reference to clearances
Phone call with OTJAG discussing SCIF venues forany meetings tbat

126
126

45
45

30-Sep-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

126

45

1-Oct-lO
1-Oct-lO
1-Oct-lO

Fri

CommunicationDefense Counsel SCIF&expert statuses

127

45

Fri
Fri

Email with OGC, OGA to coordinateameeting
Media inquiry response

127
127

45
45

1-Oct-lO

Fri

Phonecallvi^ithOGAl

127

45

1-Oct-lO

Fn

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

127

45

130

45

material with defense attorneys

need to occur

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Drafted multiple emails with OTJAG outliningacourse of action in
reference to the defense'srequest for access to classified information
and stating that accused can discuss classified info with defense

4-Oct-lO

Mon

4-Oct-lO

Mon

Email with OTJAG in reference to accused discussing classified

130

45

4-Oct-lO

Mon

130

4-Oct-lO

Mon

information v^ith defense counsel
Media inquiry response
Meeting with MDW security about storage of classified information for

45
45

130

defense counsel

25 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Pagc(s)

26284

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
WeekDay

EVENT

Total Time RCM707 Clock

40ctl0

Mon

Phonecallv^ithDlA

130

45

40ctlO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

130

45

SOctlO

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response

131

SOctlO

Meeting with CID

131

45
45

SOctlO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

131

45

and associated equity holders
Media inquiry response

132

45

Meeting with OGAl for investigative leadsand approvals
PhonecallwithJ6,MDW(SlPRandJWICSaccess)
Phonecall with OSJA

132
132
132

45

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
60ctlO

Wed

60ctlO
60ctl0
60ctlO

Wed

60ctlO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

132

45

70ctlO

Thu

Communication with defense to discuss SCIF venue for with defense

133

45

70ctlO

Thu
Thu

133
133

45

Wed
Wed

45
45

counsel and security experts
70ctlO

Media inquiry response
Phonecall with INSCOM OSJAabout RCM 706board location withina

45

SCIF
70ctlO
70ctlO

Thu

PbonecallwitbJ6,MDW

133

45

Thu

70ctlO

Thu

Phone call vi^ith MDW security office
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

133
133

45
45

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
80ctlO

Fri

Media inquiry response

134

45

BOctlO

Fri
Fri
Fri

Phone call WilliamJohnson
Phonecallwith OSJA, CENTCOM

134

80ctlO
80ctlO

45
45

Training Holiday Columbus Day Holiday

134
134

80ctlO

Fn

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

134

45

45

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
lOOctlO

Sun

Email notification thatCClUbegandevelopingaprogram to track

136

45

lOOctlO

Sun

Department ofState MRNs
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

136

45

137

45

evidenceand v^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
llOctlO

Mon

llOctlO
llOctlO

Mon
Mon

Columbus Day Holiday
Draft SPCMCA accounting ofexcludable delay memorandum

llOctlO

Mon

Media inquiry response
Phone call with proposed defense psychiatry expert

llOctlO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

137
137

45
45

137

45

137

45

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

26of231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT
Page
ofPaget^)

26285

UNCLASSIFIED//FQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

12-Oct-lO

Tue

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

138

45

SPCMCA APPOINTS A SECOND DEFENSE SECURITY EXPERT TO ASSIST
WITH PCRO #2 (DEFENSE REQUEST, 28 SEP 10)

12-Oct-lO

Tue

SPCMCA APPOINTS EXPERT CONSULTANT IN FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY

12-Oct-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-defense requested contact information
for the second defense security expert

138

45

12-Oct-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-with defense to confirm the CIDC facility
is adequate for the PCR, also discussed client meetings at Quantico Brig
and the RCM 706 board

138

45

12-Oct-lO

Tue

Email to Mr, Hall notifying him he is appointed as the second defense

138

45

12-Oct-lO

Tue

Email with CIDC to use their facility and for rehearsal of accused's
movement

138

45

12-Oct-lO

Tue

Email with command to ensure proper frequency of visits to Quantico
Brig

138

45

12-Oct-lO

Tue

Email with INSCOM-sent INSCOM SPCMCA order re: approved facility

138

45

FOR DEFENSE (DEFENSE REQUEST 25 AUG 10)

expert

and storage for classified information
12-Oct-lO

Tue

Media inquiry response

138

45

12-Oct-lO

Tue
Tue

Meeting-CCIU synchronization meeting and update
Reviewed FBI timeline

138
138

45
45

Tue

SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum

138

45

12 Oct-10

Tue

SPCMCA responded to defense request to amend protective order

138

45

12-Oct 10

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

138

45

139

45

12-Oct-lO
12-Oct-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
13-Oct-lO

Wed

Communication with defense-defense requested contact information

13-Oct-lO

Wed

Communication with defense-with defense, forwarded excludable
delay memo; memo for appointment of 2d defense security expert,
memo for defense forensic psychiatry expert, response to defense
request to amend the protective order, and approved facility and
storage of classified information

139

45

13-Oct-lO
13-Oct-lO

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with DES security to discuss movement and security of the

139
139

45
45

13-Oct-lO
13-Oct-lO

Wed
Wed

accused
Meeting-with DOJ
Meeting-with FBI and CCIU, received update

139
139

45

13-Oct-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

139

45

140

45

for COL Benedek and Cassius Hall

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
14-Oct-lO

27 of 231

Thu

Communication with defense-defense inquired when the government
will complete the arrangement for the transportation of the accused
from Quantico to the PCR location

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page

of Page(s)

26286

UNCLASSIFIED//FQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

14-Oct-lO

Thu

Compiled list of uncia ss docs to give defense

140

45

14 Oct-10

Thu

140

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

14-Oct-lO

Thu

Email from LTC Almanza regarding when the RCM 706 board should be
finished
Media inquiry response

140

45

14-Oct-lO
14-Oct-lO

Thu

Meeting-with DOJ 2

140

14-Oct-lO

Thu
Thu

Meeting-with OGAl for investigative leads and approvals
Meeting-with OSJA

140
140

45
45

14-Oct-lO

Thu

Phone call with DOJ 1

140

45

14-Oct-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

140

45

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
15-Oct-lO

Fri

Email to Dr. Sweda to inform him that the 706 Board is still delayed for
clearance purposes

141

45

15-Oct-lO

Fri

Email with CCIU to request a search for requested MRNs and develop a
way to track them

141

45

15-Oct-lO

Fri

Email with CIDC to coordinate travel for the accused to SCIF, including

141

45

security information
15-Oct-lO

Fri

Email with DA-discussed preliminary classification review

141

45

15-Oct-lO

Fri

Email with Quantico Brig to coordinate receiving copies of weekly
updates

141

45

15-Oct-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response

141

45

IS-Oct-lO

Fri

Meeting-MDW TC Meeting (all cases)

141

45

IS-Oct-lO

Fri

45

Fri

Phone call with OSJA (all cases)
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

141

IS-Oct-lO

141

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
15-Oct-lO

Fri

Worked on discovery of unclass file

141

45

16-Oct-lO
16-Oct-lO

Sat

Phone call with DOJ
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

142
142

45

Mon

and associated equity holders
Email from LTC Almanza regarding when the RCM 706 board should be

144

45

18-Oct-lO

Mon

finished
Email with CENTCOM-prosecution received original classification

144

45

18-Oct-lO

Mon

144

45

Sat

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
18-Oct-lO

review for Apache video
Email with DA-discussed evidence classification

18 Oct-10

Mon

Media inquiry response

144

45

18-Oct-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

144

45

144
145

45
45

145

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
18-Oct-lO
19-Oct-lO

Mon
Tue

Worked on discovery of unclass file
Communication with defense- to discuss timeline for defense experts,
the PCRO rehearsal, COL Benedek's role in the RCM 706 board

19-Oct-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-defense inquired whether the convening
authority had a date for the PCR to be complete

AFPElXAlfc; E.XHlBi r
28 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Pane

ofPaee(s)

26287

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

19-Oct-lO

Tue

EVENT
Communication with defense-defense requested an update on the

Total Time
145

RCM 707 Clock 1
45

rehearsal, the contact information for the accused's movement, how
often the defense security experts can meet with the accused at the
PCR location, and whether there are any day/time restrictions on their
meetings
19-Oct-lO

Tue

19-Oct-lO

145

45

Tue

Email with CCIU to receive feedback on MRN RFI
Media inquiry response

145

45

19-Oct-lO

Tue

Meeting-with CIDC security expert for rehearsal of PCRO

145

19-Oct-lO
19-Oct-lO

Tue
Tue

Phone call with CIDC security expert for rehearsal of PCRO
Rehearsal for accused Interview at FIU facility

145
145

45
45
45

19-Oct-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

145

45

19-Oct-lO

Tue
Wed

Worked on discovery of unclass file

20-Oct-lO

Email with CENTCOM-discuss classification review

145
146

45
45

20-Oct-lO

Wed

Email with DA-discussed evidence classification

146

45

20-Oct-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response

20-Oct-lO

Wed

Meeting-at Quantico Brig with DES for brief regarding escorts

146
146

45
45

20-Oct-lO

Wed

Phone call with CCIU to discuss Intelink and the CIDNE charges

146

45

20-Oct-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

146

45

147

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
21-Oct-lO

Thu

Communication with defense to coordinate accused's interview at the
CIDC facility

21-Oct-lO
21-Oct-lO

Thu

Communication with defense-defense inquired whether he can pick up

147

45

Thu

the unclassified CID file and other discovery
Communication with defense-defense requested addiitonal

147

45

information for their security experts in preparation of the PCR
21-Oct-lO

Thu

Informed Quantico Brig of defense team members

147

45

21-Oct-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

147

21-Oct-lO
21-Oct-lO

Thu
Thu

Meeting-with FBI and DIA
Meeting-witness interview for US v. Carter

147
147

45
45

21-Oct-lO

Thu

Phonecallwith DOJ
Phone call with OSJA
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

147

21-Oct-lO

Thu

21-Oct-lO

Thu

45

147

45
45

147

45

148

45

Discovery production: Bates # 00000001 - 00000429 (429 pages),
including Preferral Packet [Unclassified]

148

45

Email with CENTCOM-prosecution received centcom classification

148

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
22 Oct-10

Fri

22-Oct-lO

Fri

22-Oct-lO

Fri

and associated equity holders
Communication-emailed bates stamped unclassified documents
previously disclosed to the defense and all other documentation up
until the accused retained Mr. Coombs as counsel

guides for PCRO

29 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Paget*)

26288

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
22-Oct-lO

WeekDay
Fri
Media inquiry response

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

148

45

22-Oct 10

Fri

Phone call with DOJ

148

45

22-Oct-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

148

45

Worked on discovery of unclassified file

148

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
22-Oct-lO
25-Oct-lO

Fri
Mon

Email with CCIU to receive additional feedback on MRN RFI

151

25-Oct-lO

Mon

Media inquiry response

151

25-Oct-lO

Mon

25-Oct-lO

Mon

Reviewed product developed by CCIU to track MRN
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

151
151

45
45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
26-Oct-lO
26-Oct-lO

Tue

Developed list of issues for the CCIU, including gathering a list of logs,

152

45

Tue

making sure CCIU met with CIDNE expert from IRTF
Email with DlA-requested to attend IRTF meeting

152

26-Oct-lO

Tue

Emergency Leave (funeral)

152

45
45

26 Oct 10

Tue

Media inquiry response

26-Oct-lO

Tue

Meeting-with DIA, CID, FBI, and DOJ

152
152

45
45

26-Oct-lO
26-Oct-lO

Tue
Tue

Phone call with CPT Casamatta
Phonecallwith OSJA

152

45
45

26-Oct-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

152
152

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
26 Oct-10

Tue

Worked with Fort Myer DES to transport accused to FIU for MTG

152

45

27-Oct-lO
27-Oct-lO

Wed
Wed

DEFENSE SECURITY EXPERTS INTERVIEW ACCUSED FOR PCR

45

Email with DlA-attended IRTF meeting

153
153

27-Oct-lO

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with CCIU and FBI to receive update on investigation,

153
153

45
45

153
153

45
45

27-Oct-lO

45

discussed DOS firewall logs, interviews of 0GA2 employees, and search
27-Oct-lO

Wed

27-Oct-lO

Wed

warrants
Meeting-with SPCMCA
PCR Interview - Manning TS-SCl for all personnel recommended

27-Oct-lO
27-Oct-lO

Wed
Wed

Phone call with FBI
Phone call with SPCMCA

153
153

45
45

27-Oct 10

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

153

45

154

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
28-Oct-lO

Thu

and associated equity holders
DEFENSE REQUESTS FOR APPOINTMENT OF EXPERT IN INFORMATION
ASSURANCE TO DEFENSE TEAM

28-Oct-lO

Thu

Email with CCIU, investigative lead for "R13" cable

154

45

28-Oct-lO

Thu

154

28-Oct 10

Thu

Media inquiry response
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

45
45

154

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

30 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Page(s)

26289

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

29-Oct-lO

Fri

Defense submitted discovery request

155

45

29-Oct-lO

Fri

Defense submitted requests in response to PCR

45

29-Oct-lO
29-Oct10

Fri
Fri

Email with DA-discussed method of classification research
Phone call with CCIU

155
155
155

45
45

29-Oct-lO

Fri

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of
classified information

155

45

29-Oct-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

155

45

155

45

156

45

156

45

158

45

158

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
29-Oct-lO

Fri

Worked on gathering information responsive to the defense's request
dated 29 Oct for the defense experts (BM training records, etc)

30-Oct-lO

Sat

Email with OSJA, FORSCOM about Apache classification review from
ICAV

30 Oct-10

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

1-Nov-lO

Mon

Communication with defense-defense requested the prosecution
provide its security experts with the classification guide used to classify
the information, and the link to the video that was allegedly released
by the accused

1-Nov-lO

Mon

Communication with defense-defense requested the prosecution
provide its security experts with the damage assessments conducted
by the OCAs

1-Nov-lO

Mon

Media inquiry response

158

45

1-Nov-lO

Mon

158

45

1-Nov-lO

Mon

Phone call with OSJA
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

158

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
1-Nov-lO

Mon

Worked on issues with the preliminary classification reviews

158

45

2-Nov-lO

Tue

Drafted summary of discussion with defense counsel for prosecution

159

45

2-Nov-lO

Tue

records
Email with DlA-discussed timing of the case

2-Nov-lO

Tue

Email with OTJAG to review memo requesting defense security experts
access to certain classified material and SIPRNET and JWICS

2-Nov-lO

Tue

2-Nov-lO

Tue

Media inquiry response
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

159

45

159

45

159

45

159

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
2-Nov-lO

Tue

and associated equity holders
Worked on access authorization request for defense security experts

159

45

3-Nov-lO
3-Nov-lO

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Phone call with MDW security

160
160

45
45

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
31 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ofPage(s)

26290

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

3-Nov-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

160

45

4-Nov-lO

Thu

Communication with defense to obtain signatures of protective orders

161

45

161

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

and SIPRNET/JWICS access for security experts
4-Nov-lO

Thu

Email with COL Malone, stated he can provide care for accused, in the
absense o f t h e USN provider, as he possesses the proper clearance and
has already developed a history with accused

4-Nov-lO

Thu

Email with DOS-received response and received request to meet

161

45

4-Nov-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

161

45

4-Nov-lO

Thu

4-Nov-lO

Thu

Phone call with DIA
Phone call with DOJ and EDVA

161
161

45
45

4-Nov-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

161

45

162
162

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
5-Nov-lO

Fri

5-Nov-lO

Fri

CPT Bouchard signs acknowledgement of protective order
Email with DA-discussed approval process

5-Nov-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response

162

45

5-Nov-lO

Fri

SPCMCA requested defense access to classified information

162

45

5-Nov-lO

Fn

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

162

45

164

45

164

45

164

45

Coombs signs acknowledgement of protective order
Email with CCIU, discussed forensic exams with SA Shaver

165
165

45
45

Kemkes signs acknowledgement of protective order

165

45

165
165
165

45
45
45

and associated equity holders
Draft SPCMCA accounting of excludable delay memorandum

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
7-Nov-lO

Sun

and associated equity holders
During review of Information Review Task Force (IRTF) material,
became aware that ONCIX was starting a similar review

7-Nov-lO

Sun

7-Nov-lO

Sun

Reviewed IRTF documents on JWICS; downloaded all the Department
ofState cables for potentially charging
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

8-Nov-lO

Mon

8-Nov-lO
8-Nov-lO

Mon
Mon

8-Nov-lO

Mon

Media inquiry response

8-Nov-lO
8-Nov-lO

Mon
Mon

Phone call with CCIU
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material

9-Nov-lO

Tue

166

45

9-Nov-lO
9-Nov-lO

Tue
Tue

Email with DIA -coordinate for a meeting

166

45

Email with DSS-Contacted DSS

166

45

9-Nov-lO

Tue

Media inquiry response

166

45

32 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
Page

ofPage(s)

26291

UNCLASSIFIED//FQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
9NovlO

9NovlO

9NovlO

WeekDay
EVENT
Tue
Meeting-with CCIU todiscuss investigation update,forensics, dates for
chatlogs, SOUTHCOM docs on SIPR computer,evidence of Farah
downloads
Tue
Meetingwith DOS legal advisers, briefed them on wbatwe needed to
prosecuteand the ongoing process of determiningthe proper OCA to
review specific documents
Tue
Phonecallwith DIA

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

166

45

166

45

166

45

166

45

166
166

45
45

9NovlO

Tue

9NovlO
9NovlO

Tue
Tue

9NovlO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand vi^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

166

45

lONovlO

Wed

Asst. Deputy Chief ofStaff, G2 granted request for defense access to

167

45

lONovlO

Wed

Delivered classified information to DepartmentofState for review

167

45

lONovlO

Wed

Discovery production: Batesff00000430 00000450(21 pages),
including Initial Article 32 Packet [Unclassifiedj

167

45

Phone call with MDW security
Phonecallwith OSJA
Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of
dassified information

Classified Material/Army Systems

lONovlO

Wed

Email with DA-receivedG2approval to disclose to defense

167

45

lONovlO

Wed

Email with DIA prosecution emailed state department cables to be
printed in bulk by DIA
Email with HQDA confirmed receipt

167

45

167

45

lONovlO

Wed

lONovlO

Wed

Email with HQDA-prosecution sent documents for informal
classification review

167

45

lONovlO

Wed

Email with OTJAG and HQDA todiscussdassification review of DAand

167

45

lONovlO

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Meeting v^ith SPCMCA todiscuss accounting of excludable delay

167

45
45

DOD information
lONovlO

167

memorandum
Meeting with D t ^ to pick up printed copies of documents

167

lONovlO

Wed
Wed

Phonecallwith CCIU

167

45
45

lONovlO
lONovlO
lONovlO

Wed
Wed
Wed

Phonecallv^ithDOS
Phone call with OSJA
SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum

167
167
167

45
45
45

lONovlO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

167

45

llNovlO

Thu

Discovery production: Batesff 00000451 00000474(24 pages),

168

45

lONovlO

including Initial Article 32 Packet [Unclassifiedl
llNovlO

Thu

Media inquiry response

168

45

llNovlO
llNovlO

Thu
Thu

Phone call with CPT Casamatta

168

Veterans Day Holiday

168

45
45

33of231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

26292

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
11-Nov-lO

12-Nov-lO

Week Day
EVENT
Thu
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Fri
Email with DOS

12-Nov-lO
12-Nov-lO

Fri
Fri

Media inquiry response
Phonecallwith OSJA

12-Nov-lO

Fri

Training Holiday Veterans Day Holiday

12-Nov-lO

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

168

45

169

45

169
169
169

45
45
45

169

45

15-Nov-lO

Mon

Defense submittedadiscovery request

172

45

15-Nov-lO

Media inquiry response

172

15-Nov-lO

Mon
Mon

Reviewed forensics for information relatingto CIDNE documents

172

45
45

15-Nov-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

172

45

evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
16-Nov-lO

Tue

Communication with defense defense requested coordination for the
accused'smovement, so that defense security experts can meet with
the accused

173

45

16-Nov-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-to discuss meeting date v^ith accused

173

45

outside of Quantico Brig
16-Nov-lO
16-Nov-lO

Tue
Tue

Email with DlA discussed WGET test

173

45

Email v^ith OTJAG and HQDA including documents to be reviewed

173

45

16-Nov-lO

Tue

Media inquiry response

173

45

16-Nov-lO

Tue

Meeting-with FBI agent (interview for employment ofprior

173

45

16-Nov-lO

Tue

Meeting-with OGAl to discuss investigative leads and potential use of
documents

173

45

16-Nov-lO
16-Nov-lO
16-Nov-lO

Tue
Tue
Tue

Phonecallvi^itbDIA

173
173
173

45
45
45

subordinate)

Phonecallv^ithOSJA
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

17-Nov-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response

174

45

17-Nov-lO

Wed

Meeting with IRTF focused on compromised information

174

45

17-Nov-lO

Wed

Phonecallwith DOJ

174

45

17-Nov-lO

Wed

Phonecallvi^ith INSCOM OSJAabout RCM 706board location withina

174

45

17-Nov-lO
17-Nov-lO

Wed
Wed

Phone call with OSJA
Updated defense request log

174
174

45
45

17-Nov-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

174

45

18 Nov 10

Thu

Media inquiry response

175

45

SCIF

34 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26293

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
18-Nov-lO
18-Nov-lO

Week Day
EVENT
Thu
OSJA Thanksgiving Lunch @ Fort Myer
Thu
Phone call with CCIU

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

175

45

175

45

Phone call with CPT Casamatta
Reviewed CIDNE-I documents for charging decision

175
175

45
45

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

175

45

Fri

Discovery production: Bates # 00000475 - 00000662 (188 pages),

176

45

Fri

including Initial Article 32 Packet [Unclassified]
Email with defense security expert-prosecution emailed defense

176

45

18-Nov-lO
18-Nov-lO

Thu
Thu

18-Nov-lO

Thu

19-Nov-lO
19-Nov-lO

security expert MNF-I SCG for preliminary class review
19-Nov-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response

176

45

19-Nov-lO
19-Nov-lO

Fri
Fri

Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with SPCMCA

19-Nov-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

176
176
176

45
45
45

177
178

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
20-Nov-lO

Sat

Email from Iraq TC about audio recording in Kuwait RCF

21-Nov-lO

Sun

Email to Iraq TC

22-Nov-lO

Mon

Communication with defense-to discuss all outstanding issues

179

45

22-Nov-lO

Mon

Email with CENTCOM-discussed evidence

179

45

22-Nov-lO

Mon

45

Mon

Media inquiry response
Phone call with CCIU

179

22-Nov-lO

179

45

22-Nov-lO

Mon
Mon

Phone call with FBI
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

179
179

45
45

22-Nov-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
23-Nov-lO
23-Nov-lO

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Phone call with CENTCOM

180
180

45
45

23 Nov-10

Tue

Phone call with OGAl to discuss the requirement for written requests

180

45

23-Nov-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

180

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
24-Nov-lO

Wed

Email with DlA-received recommendations on charging CIDNE reports

181

45

24-Nov-lO

Wed

Email with DOS to inform the us that they finished their preliminary
review of the proposed cables and are ready to schedule a meeting

181

45

24-Nov-lO
24-Nov-lO

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

181
181

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
25-Nov 10

Thu

Media inquiry response

182

45

25-Nov-lO

Thu

Thanksgiving Day Holiday

182

45

35 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26294

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

25-Nov-lO

Thu

EVENT
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

182

45

183

45
45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
26-Nov-lO

Fri

and associated equity holders
Media inquiry response

26-Nov-lO

Fri

Phone call with DIA

26-Nov-lO

Fri

Training Holiday - Thanksgiving Day Holiday

183
183

26-Nov-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

183

45

185

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
28-Nov-lO

Sun

28-Nov-lO

Sun

Requested information from OGAl to assist in on-going investigation

185

45

28-Nov-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

185

45

186

45

186

45

Email with DIA-prosecution confirmed receipt of CIDNE-1 reports for
charging decision

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
29-Nov-lO

Mon

DEFENSE REQUESTS FOR APPOINTMENT OF INVESTIGATOR TO

29-Nov-lO

Mon

Communication with defense-defense requested an update on when

DEFENSETEAM
the new charge sheet will be preferred and on POI restrictions for the
accused, as well as requested coordination for the defense's meeting
with the accused and the results of computer forensics
29-Nov-lO

Mon

Defense submited miscellaneous requests

186

45

29-Nov-lO
29 Nov-lO

Mon
Mon

Media inquiry response
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

186
186

45
45

187
187

45
45

187

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
30-Nov-lO
30-Nov-lO

Tue
Tue

Communication with defense to discuss all outstanding issues
Communication with defense-defense inquired whether the accused
can have hand and leg restraints removed during defense meeting

Tue

Communication with defense-defense requested that defense counsel

30-Nov-lO

Tue

the SJA
Communication with defense-defense requested that the accused

187

45

30-Nov-lO
30 Nov 10

Tue
Tue

wear ACUs during defense meeting
Email to OGAl with request for assistance
Email with CENTCOM-requested evidence

187
187

45
45

30-Nov-lO

Tue

Email with OA-requested classification review and assistance for IA

187

45

187

45

187

45

187

45

30-Nov-lO

meetings take place at the TDS office or an office under the control of

30-Nov-lO

Tue

expert
Email with DOS-request to meet regarding document review

30-Nov-lO

Tue

Email with Quantico to coordinate accused's mother visiting the Brig

30-Nov-lO

Tue

and possibility of relaxing the POI status

36 of 231

Media inquiry response

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

,\PPELL.\TE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Pagc(s)

26295

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

30-Nov-lO

Tue

Meeting-with DOS to discuss charged documents and classification
review

187

45

30-Nov-lO

Tue
Tue

Requested support for defense IA expert

187
187

45
45

30-Nov 10

EVENT

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

1-Dec-lO

Wed

Email with DOS-meeting regarding document review

188

45

1-Dec-lO
1-Dec-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response

1-Dec-lO

Meeting-with DOS and DOS FOIA
Meeting-with MDW for space utilization

188
188
188

45

Wed
Wed

1-Dec-lO

Wed

Phone call with DOJ

188

45

1-Dec-lO

Wed

Received official response from brig commander regarding POI
reduction

188

45

1-Dec-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

188

45

2-Dec-lO

Thu

2-Dec-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with CCIU and DOJ to discuss external hard drive

189
189

45
45

2-Dec-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

189

45

3-Dec-lO

Fri

Email to RCM 706 board members and defense counsel with order

190

45

3-Dec-lO

Fri

attached
Email with OGAl to clarify request

190

45

3-Dec-lO

Fri

3-Dec-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response
Phone call with OGAl to clarify request

190
190

45
45

3-Dec-lO

Fri

Requested IA Expert for defense

190

45

3-Dec-lO

Fn

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

190

45

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Worked on request for forensic psychiatrist

190

4-Dec-lO

Fri
Sat

Created "smart paper" regarding POI and custody classifications

191

45
45

4-Dec-lO

Sat

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

191

45

45

3-Dec-lO

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Mon

Email TC meeting concerning Brig
Email with CCIU in reference to the accused medical records

193
193

6-Dec-lO

Mon

Email with HQDA-prosecution sent sample declaration for classification

193

45
45

6-Dec-lO

Mon

review
Email with OTJAG and DOD along with CIDNE data sets for classification

193

45

6-Dec-lO
6-Dec-lO

Mon
Mon

193

45
45

6-Dec-lO
6-Dec-lO

Mon

review
Media inquiry response
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

193

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

37 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPEU.ATE EXHIBIT.
Pmg,_

- of PageW

26296

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

7-Dec-lO

Tue

Media inquiry response

194

45

7-Dec-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

194

45

8-Dec-lO

Wed

Communication with defense-defense requested coordination for the
accused's movement for defense meeting on 14-15 Dec 10

195

45

8-Dec-lO

Wed

Defense submits discovery request

195

45

8-Dec-lO

Wed

Email coordinated move of accused to meet with defense counsel on
Ft Myer

195

45

8-Dec-lO

Wed

Email coordinated the retrieval of accused's uniforms from the
prosecution

195

45

8-Dec-lO

Wed

Email with CENTCOM-discussed evidence

195

45

8-Dec-lO
8-Dec-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with CCIU

195
195

45
45

8-Dec-lO

Wed
Wed

EVENT

Meeting-with IRTF to determine what type of information could be

195

45

195

45

195

45

8-Dec-lO

Wed

downloaded in CIDNE
Received info about supply person from 10 MTN involved in the case

8-Dec-lO

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

9-Dec-lO

Thu

Completed smart paper regarding POI and custody classifications

196

45

9-Dec-lO
9 Dec-10

Thu
Thu

196

45
45

9-Dec-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with FBI and EDVA
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

196
196

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
10-Dec-lO

Fri

lO-Dec-lO

Fri

12-Dec-lO
12-Dec-lO

Sun
Sun

12-Dec-lO

Sun

and associated equity holders
Email with OA-followed up defense request for IA expert

197

45

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

197

45

Phone call witness interview with CPT Martin
Phone call witness interview with MSG Adkins

199
199

45
45

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

199

45

200

45

200

45

200

45

200

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
PCR COMPLETE

13-Dec-lO

Mon

13-Dec-lO

Mon

13-Dec-lO

Mon

Email with COL Malone focused on logistical issues of expediting
clearances for 706 members
Email with DlA-received additional information on extent of

Mon
Mon

compromise
Media inquiry response
Phone call with DOJ

13-Dec-lO
13-Dec-lO

38 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

200

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26297

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
13-Dec-lO

Week Day
Mon

EVENT

Total Time

Received update on forensic examination of SD card discovered at the

200

RCM 707 Clock 1
45

accused's aunt's house; discussed travel to New York with CCIU
13-Dec-lO

Mon

Reviewed 902nd Investigation

200

45

13-Dec-lO

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

200

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
14-Dec-lO

Tue

Drafted email for MDW SJA to send to COL Darpino regarding closed
CID report

201

45

14-Dec-lO

Tue

Email with INSCOM-prosecution received IMFRs relating to Ml

201

45

14-Dec-lO
14-Dec-lO

Tue
Tue

201
201

45
45

14-Dec-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

201

45

15 Dec 10

Wed

Communication with defense-meeting with defense counsel scheduled

202

45

15-Dec-lO

Wed

15-Dec-lO

Wed

202
202

45
45

investigation
Media inquiry response
Meeting-with OGAl and CCIU

but cancelled due to weather
Media inquiry response
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
16-Dec-lO

Thu

Communication with defense counsel to discuss various issues

203

45

16-Dec-lO

Thu
Thu

Draft SPCMCA accounting of excludable delay memorandum
Media inquiry response

45
45
45

16-Dec 10
16-Dec-lO
16-Dec-lO
16-Dec-lO

Thu

Phone call with CCIU to receive update

203
203
203

Thu

Secretary Army directed LTG Caslen to conduct AR 15-6 investigation

203

45

Thu

into the accused's alleged crimes
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

203

45

204

45

Media inquiry response

204

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
17-Dec-lO

Fri

and associated equity holders
SPCMCA DENIES DEFENSE REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF
INVESTIGATOR TO DEFENSE TEAM (DEFENSE REQUEST 29 NOV 10)

17-Dec-lO

Fri

17 Dec-10

Fri

Meeting with SPCMCA to discuss accounting of excludable delay

204

45

Fri

memorandum
Phone call witness interview with CW2 Ehresman

204

45

17-Dec 10
17-Dec-lO

Fri

45

Fri

Phone call witness interview with W O l Balonek
SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum

204

17-Dec-lO
17-Dec-lO

204

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

204

45
45

205

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
18-Dec-lO

Sat

Communication with defense-defense requested the names of those
members on the RCM 706 board

39 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
orPage(s)

26298

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
18-Dec-lO

19-Dec-lO

WeekDay
EVENT
Sat
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Sun
Communication with defense-received digital copy of completed SF 86

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

205

45

206

45

from Mr. Coombs
19-Dec-lO

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

206

45

Email requested CIDNE-A samples from CCIU
Email to LTC Almanza explaining the RCM 706 board will likely to start

207
207

45
45

207

45

20-Dec-10

Mon

20-Dec-10

Mon

20-Dec-10

Mon

Media inquiry response

20-Dec-10

Mon

Meeting-with CCIU

207

45

20-Dec-10

Mon

Meeting-with CCIU, EDVA, and DOJ about prosecutorial coordination

207

45

after new year

20-Dec-lO

Mon

Phone call with DOJ for forensic update

207

45

20-Dec-lO

Mon

Received SITREP from movement team regarding accused

207

20-Dec-lO

Mon

With OSJA to coordinate Quantico Brig confinement conditions

207

45
45

20-Dec-10

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

207

45

208

45

208

45

208

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
21-Dec-lO

Tue

Communication with defense-possible additional charges, different
forensic psychiatrists, disclosures by the defense under MRE 505(h)
and the RCM 706 board, and POI status

21-Dec-lO

Tue

Email from Dr. Sweda and CPT Benesh confirming appointment to 706

21-Dec-lO

Tue

Email received substitute name and information for clearance

21-Dec-lO

Tue

Email with CENTCOM-requested evidence

208

45

21-Dec-lO

Tue

Email with INSCOM prosecution was notifed of other documents in the

208

45

21-Dec-lO

Tue

Ml investigative files
Media inquiry response

208

45

21-Dec-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

208

45

Board
processing of new 706 Board member

22 Dec 10

Wed

Email with CENTCOM-prosecution confirmed receipt of ROl

209

45

22-Dec-lO

Wed

22-Dec-lO

Wed

Email with DIA about CIDNE data
Email with DlA-requested follow-up for CIDNE-A samples

209
209

45
45

22-Dec-lO

Wed

Email with DOS-received update regarding document review

209

45

209

22-Dec-lO

Wed

22-Dec-lO

Wed

Email with DOS-requested update regarding document review
Email with INSCOM-prosecution requested copies of all the exhibits in

209

45
45

22-Dec-lO

Wed

the Ml investigative files
Media inquiry response

209

45

22-Dec-lO

Wed

Reviewed and provided comments to AP query

209

45

40 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Page(s)

26299

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

22-Dec-lO

Wed

23-Dec-lO

Thu

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

209

45

Email with DOS focused on additional charges/charging documents,

210

45

and update on status of document classification review
23-Dec-lO

Thu

Media inquiry response

210

45

23-Dec-lO

Thu

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

210

45

24-Dec-lO

Fri

Christmas Day Holiday

211

45

24-Dec-lO

Fri

Media inquiry response

211

24-Dec-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

211

45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
26-Dec-lO

Sun

Email from witness to setup a time for interview

213

45

27-Dec-lO

Mon
Mon

Email with DA-discussed security clearances
Media inquiry response

214
214

45

Mon

Training Holiday - Christmas Day Holiday

Mon

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

214
214

45
45

Media inquiry response
Researched case law regarding PTC

215
215

45
45

27-Dec-lO
27-Dec-lO
27-Dec-lO

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
28-Dec-lO

Tue

28-Dec-lO

Tue

28-Dec-lO

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

215

45

29-Dec-lO

Wed

Drafted MFR documenting mental health records reviewed for MRE

216

45

29-Dec-10

Wed

513
Email with DA-discussed 706 logistics

216

45

29-Dec-lO

Wed

Email with Quantico Brig to coordinate releasing the weekly reports to

216

45

29-Dec-lO

Wed

Email with Quantico to coordinate phone records retrieval

216

45

29-Dec-lO
29-Dec-lO

Wed

Media inquiry response

45

defense

29-Dec-lO

Wed

Phone call with OGC, DISA

216
216

Wed

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

216

45

217

45

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
30-Dec-10

Thu

Communication with defense-defense submitted MRE 505(h) motion
for RCM 706 board; if MRE 505(h) notice is unnecessary, defense
requested the authority saying so

30-Dec-10

Thu

Media inquiry response

217

45

30-Dec-10
30-Dec 10
30-Dec-lO

Thu
Thu

Meeting-with DISA analyst to discuss web analysis
Meeting-with Sec Army 15-6 team to discuss investigate lanes

217
217

45
45

Thu

Meeting-witness interview with CPT Lim at Fort Meade, MD

217

45

41 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Page(s)

26300

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

30-Dec-lO

Thu

EVENT
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

217

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
31-Dec 10

Fri

and associated equity holders
Media inquiry response

218

45

31-Dec-lO

Fri

New Year's Holiday

218

31-Dec-lO

Fri

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

218

45
45

45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
1-Jan-ll

Sat
Sat

Email from Sec Army 15-6 about sworn statements
Email to Sec Army 15-6 about sworn statements

219
219

2-Jan-ll

Sun

2-Jan-ll
2-Jan-ll

Sun
Sun

Email with CENTCOM-requested classification review
Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with OSJA

220
220

45

2-Jan-ll

Sun

Phone call with TCAP

2-Jan-ll

Sun

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

220
220

45
45

221

45

221

45

Media inquiry response

221

45

Meeting-with DISA and CCIU to discuss web analysis
Phone call with CCIU

221
221

45
45

Phone call with EDVA
Phone call with OSJA

221
221
221

45
45
45

221
221
221

45
45
45

222

45

1-Jan-ll

220

45
45
45

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
3-Jan-ll

Mon

Developed course of action relating to the Secretary of the Army AR 156 investigation

3-Jan-ll

Mon

Discovery production: Bates # 00000663 - 00000771 (109 pages),
including Preliminary Inquiry [Unclassified]

3-Jan-ll
3-Jan-ll

Mon
Mon

3-Jan-ll

Mon

3-Jan-ll
3-Jan-ll
3-Jan-ll

Mon
Mon
Mon

3-Jan-ll

Mon

Researched unauthorized possession under 18 USC 1030

3-Jan-ll

Mon

3-Jan-ll

Mon

Training Holiday - New Year's Holiday
Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop

Phone call with TCAP

evidence and witnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders
Email with INSCOM-prosecution received multiple emails containing

4-Jan-ll

Tue

4-Jan-ll

Tue

Email with Office of Legal Policy regarding marine IG investigation

222

45

4-Jan-ll
4-Jan-ll
4-Jan-ll

Tue
Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Meeting-TDY to Fort Drum for witness interviews
Phone call with 2/10 MTN to prepare for TDY

222
222
222

45
45
45

4-Jan-ll
4-Jan-ll
4-Jan-ll

Tue
Tue
Tue

Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with EDVA and DOJ

222
222
222

45
45
45

4-Jan-ll
4-Jan-ll

Tue

Phone call with Sec Army 15-6 team

222
222

45

investigation files from military intelligence

42 of 231

Tue

Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with TCAP

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

45

26301

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

4-Jan-ll

Tue

Worked generally to identify compromised information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, and identify potentially discoverable material
and associated equity holders

222

45

S-Jan-ll

Wed

Communication with defense in reference to his beliefthat be must

223

45

223

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clocks

give MRE 505(h)(1) notice for RCM 706board
5-Jan-ll

Wed

Communication with defense-defense submitted memorandum
requestingchange o f t h e accused'sclassification and assignment

5-Jan-ll

Wed

Communication with defense-with CPT Patrick Sheldon, TDS, spoke
vi^ith potential witness who invoked her rights

223

45

5-Jan-ll

Wed

Communication with defense with defense to confirm receipt of

223

45

5-Jan-ll

Wed

request to change pretrial confinement classification status
Defense requested change to POI status

223

45

5-Jan-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response

5 Jan-11

Wed

223
223

45
45

S-Jan-ll

Wed

Meeting TDY to Fort Drum for witness interviev^s (all day)
Phonecallwith CCIU

223

45

5-Jan-ll

Wed

Phonecallwith OSJA

223

45

S-Jan-ll

Wed

Phone call v^ith Sec A r m y l 5 6 t e a m l

223

45

5-Jan-ll

Wed

Phone call v^itb Sec Army 1 5 6 t e a m 2

223

S-Jan-ll

Wed

Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify

223

45
45

6-Jan-ll

Thu

draftadditionalchargesand specifications
Email with DA updated security clearance discussions

6-Jan-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

224
224

45
45

6-Jan-ll

Meeting-TDY to Fort Drum for witness interviews(all day)
Phonecallwith CCIU

224

45

6-Jan-ll

Thu
Thu

224

45

6-Jan-ll

Thu

Phone call with DOS in reference to classification reviev^s and

224

45

6-Jan-ll

Phonecallvi^ithOSJA
Phone call with Sec Army 15-6 t e a m l

224

45

6-Jan-ll

Thu
Thu

224

45

6-Jan-ll

Thu

Phone call with Sec A r m y l 5 6 t e a m 2

224

45

Thu

Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify

224

45

225

45
45

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders,and

document selection

6-Jan-ll

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
Fri

draftadditionalchargesand specifications
Email with CENTCOM in reference to 0 1 ^ coordination for confidential

7-Jan-ll
7-Jan-ll
7-Jan-ll

Fri

markings and Garani video
Email v^itbCENTCOM discussed classification of evidence

Fri
Fri

Media inquiry response
Meeting TDY to Fort Drum for witness interviev^s (all day)

225
225
225

7-Jan-ll

Fri

Phonecallv^ithCClU

225

7-Jan-ll

Phonecallwith DOSl

225

45

7-Jan-ll

Fri
Fri

Phonecallwith D0S2

225

45

7-Jan-ll

Fri

Phonecallwith OSJA

225

Fri

Phonecallv^ithTCAP

225

45
45

7-Jan-ll

7-Jan-ll

43 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

45
45

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Pace
of Page(s)

26302

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
7-Jan-ll

8-Jan-ll
8-Jan-ll
S-Jan-ll

Week Day
EVENT
Fri
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity bolders,and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications
Sat
Phonecallwith CCIU
Sat
Phonecallwith OSJA
Sat
Phone call with Sec Army 1 5 6 t e a m

Total Time
225

RCM 707 Clock

226

45

226

45

226
226

45
45

45

8-Jan-ll

Sat

Phonecallvi^ithTCAP

8-Jan-ll

Sat

Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications

226

45

9-Jan-ll

Sun

45

Sun

227

9-Jan-ll

Sun

Communication with defense defense requested speedy trial
Meeting with CCIU and disc pickup
Phonecallv^ithCClU

227

9-Jan-ll

227

45
45

9-Jan-ll

Sun

Phonecallwith FBI

9-Jan-ll

Sun

Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify

227
227

45
45

10-Jan-ll

Mon

draftadditionalchargesand specifications
Defense submitted discovery request

228

45

10-Jan-ll
10-Jan-ll

Mon
Mon

Media inquiry response
Phonecallwith CCIU

228
228

45
45

lO-Jan-ll

Mon

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

228

45

228

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders,and

classified information
10-Jan-ll

Mon

Reviewed all the classfied documents requested by the Secretary of
the Army A R 1 5 6 t e a m

lO-Jan-11

Mon

Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders,and
draft additional charges and specifications

228

45

11-Jan-ll

Tue

229

45

229

45
45
45
45

11-Jan-ll

Tue

Email with INSCOM-prosecution received multiple emails containing
investigation files from military intelligence
Media inquiry response

11-Jan-ll

Tue

Meeting with DISA

11-Jan-ll
11-Jan-ll

Tue
Tue

Meeting with OGAl
Phonecallwith DOS

229
229
229

11-Jan-ll
ll-Jan-ll

Tue
Tue

Phonecallv^ithOSJA
Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify

229
229

45
45

230

45

45
45
45
45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
12-Jan-ll

Wed

draftadditionalchargesand specifications
Communication with defense defense requested CAPT Moore replace
c o t Benedek as forensic psychiatrist assigned to the defense team

12-Jan-ll
12-Jan-ll

Wed
Wed

Email with DOS-arranged meeting

230
230

12-Jan-ll
12-Jan-ll

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Phone call with DOS focused on classification reviewandendproducts

230
230

12-Jan-ll

Wed

Defense requested forensic psychiatry expert

for trial
230

Phone call with Sec Army 1 5 6 t e a m

45
1

44 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

-

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
Page

n '

26303

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
12-Jan-ll
12-Jan-ll
12-Jan-ll

Week Day
EVENT
Wed
Phone call with Sec Army 15-6 team legal advisor
Wed
Researched MRE 505(h) notification issues
Wed

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

230

45

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

230

45

230

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
12-Jan-ll

Wed

Worked on Secretary of the Army AR 15-6 coordination and review

230

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

CAPT Hocter leaves the brig and COL Malone assumes care of all

231

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

patients including accused
Communication with defense-defense requested speedy trial

231

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Communication with defense-defense requested that the prosecution

231

45

Thu

respond in writing to RCM 305(g) request
Communication with defense-with defense to discuss update on case,

231

45

13-Jan-ll

discussed POI status, clearances for defense team, medical records,
expert requests, RCM 305(g) request
13-Jan-ll

Thu

Draft SPCMCA accounting of excludable delay memorandum

231

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Email with OA-requested information regarding defense lA expert

231

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Email with OA-submitted clearance requests for defense

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Email with DIA-informed prosecution that NCIX wanted to meet to
discuss NCIX plans to compile a damage assessment

231
231

45
45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Email with MEDCOM to determine whether medical interns should

231

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

231

45

13-Jan-ll
13-Jan-ll

Thu
Thu

Phone call with 2/10 MTN leadership

231
231
231

45
45
45

231

45
45

request

assist in accused's mental health coverage

13-Jan-ll

Thu

13-Jan-ll

Thu

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with OGC, ODNI
Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with Sec Army 15-6 team

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Phone call with TCAP

231
231

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Received assistance coordinating meetings with ONCIX to discuss

231

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

ONCIX's charter regarding damage assessments
Requested access to classified information for civilian defense counsel

231

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

Requested security clearance for prosecution, defense, RCM 706

231

45

231

45

board, and IO
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

45

13-Jan-ll

Thu

14-Jan-ll

Fri

SPCMCA APPOINTS EXPERT IN INFORMATION AWARENESS TO

232

45

Fri

DEFENSE TEAM (DEFENSE REQUEST, 28 OCT 10)
Discovery production: Bates # 00000772 - 00000851 (80 pages),

232

45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

including 15-6 Investigation [Unclassified]
Drafted response to defense's MRE 505(h) Request

232

45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Email with OA-received update for information regarding defense IA

232

45

14-Jan-ll

expert request

45 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

I Page.

ofPagets)

26304

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
14-Jan-ll

Week Day
Fri

EVENT
Email with HQDA-prosecution sent redacted documents for SecArmy

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

232

45

232
232

45

15-6 to DA
14-Jan-ll

Fri

Email with INSCOM-coordinate for a phone meeting

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Email with investigator-prosecution sent all the Ml investigative files to

45

the SA 15-6 team
14-Jan-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

232

45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Meeting with SPCMCA to discuss accounting of excludable delay

232

45

14-Jan-ll
14-Jan-ll

Fri

Phone call with CCIU

Fri

Phone call with EDVA focusing on subpoena returns

232
232

45
45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Phone call with HQDA ACICA

232

45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Phone call with J6, MDW

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

232
232

45
45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

classified information
Phone call with SPCMCA

232

45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Phone call with TCAP

232

45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

Phone call witness interviews with additional 2/10 MTN individuals not
previously available (all day)

232

45

14-Jan-ll

Fri

14-Jan-ll
14-Jan-ll

Fri
Fri

Received name of defense IA expert
SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum
SPCMCA approved defense expert forensic psychiatry, CAPT Moore

232
232

45
45

232

45

14-Jan-ll
14-Jan-ll

Fri
Fri

Training Holiday - Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday

232

45

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

232

45

memorandum

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
15-Jan-ll

Sat

Reviewed AIRs and sworn statements from military intelligence

233

45

16-Jan-ll

Sun
Sun

234
234

45

16-Jan-ll

Phone call with OSJA
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
17-Jan-ll

Mon

Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday

235

45

17-Jan-ll
17-Jan-ll
17-Jan-ll

Mon
Mon

235
235

Mon

Media inquiry response
Phone call with TCAP
Requested chain of command have proper clearances for case to MDW

235

45
45
45

17-Jan-ll

Mon

Security Manager
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

235

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
17-Jan-ll

Mon

Worked on additional charges and specifications

235

45

18-Jan-ll

Tue

Communication with defense-to provide contact information for

236

45

Tue

defense IA Expert
Email with CPT Ley to confirm emails and affadavits by SA Graham for

236

45

236

45

18-Jan 11

Search and Seizure Auths.
18-Jan-ll

Tue

Email with DA-discussed classification review declarations

APPELLATE EXHIBIT
46 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPagcis)

26305

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

18Janll

Tue

Email with HQDA sentdraftaffidavit

236

45

18Janll

Tue

Email with investigator prosecution resentalltheMlinvestigative files
totheSA156team

236

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clocks

18Janll

Tue

Media inquiry response

236

45

18Janll

Tue

Phone call with CCIU to focus on other documents found on accused's
SIPR

236

45

IBJanll

Tue

Phonecallwith TCAP

236

45

IBJanll

Tue

Reviewed draft classification review declarations; worked on draft
charges and specifications

236

45

18Janll

Tue

Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify

236

45

potentially discoverable materialand associated equity holders,and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications
18Janll

Tue

Worked on getting contact information for potential witnessesl

236

45

18Janll

Tue

Worked on gettingcontactinformation for potential witnesses2

236

45

19Janll

Wed

Communication with defense defense requested that Quantico brig
commander discuss the Artide 138 complaint with COL Malone

237

45

19Janll

Wed

Communication witb defense defense submitted Article 138 complaint

237

45

19Janll

Wed

Communication with defense defense submitted preservation request

237

45

19Janll

Wed

Media inquiry response

237

45

19Janll

Wed

19Janll

Wed

Phonecallwith DIA
Phonecallwith OSJA

237
237

45
45

19Janll

Wed

Phone call witness interview v^ith additional 2/10 MTN individual

237

45

19Janll

Wed

Requested Original Classification Authority(OCA) review by DoD

237

45

19Janll

Wed

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable materialand associated equity holders,and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications

237

45

19Janll
19Janll

Wed
Wed

Worked on additional cbargesand specifications
Worked on getting potential witnesses TDY t o M O W for interviews

237

45

237

45

with prosecution and A R 1 5 6 t e a m
20Janll

Thu

Communication with defense to discuss confinement conditions

238

45

20Janll

Thu

Email with Quantico Brig to be informed that Mr.Coombs spoke with

238

45

20Janll
20Janll

Thu
Thu

Brigabout confinement conditions
Media inquiry response
Phonecalfwith SPCMCA

238
238

45
45

20Janll
20Janll

Thu
Thu

SPCMCA requested release of Quantico Brig documents
Worked generally to develop evidenceand witnesses, identify

238
238

45
45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders,and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications

47of231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFORQFFICIAL USEONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT
Page
otPaget^l

26306

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFQRQFFICIAL USEONLY
Date
20Janll

WeekDay

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

Thu

Worked on additional cbargesand specifications

238

45

20Janll

Thu

Worked on getting tbe video footage from the TFCF in theatre
regardingaccused'scollapse

238

45

21Janll

Fri

Communication witb defensetodiscussMRE 505 and defense "need
toknov^"

239

45

21Janll

Fri

Drafted RCM 305(g) response

239

45

21Janll

Fri

Email from SFC Carlile directing members of the defense team and LTC

239

45

EVENT

Hemphill (RCM 706 Board) to have theirfingerprints taken to expedite
clearance investigations, assisted the civiliandefense counsel in finding
a place to complete the fingerprint requirements
21Janll

Fri

Email to personnel requiringTS Clearances detailing pre requisite
completion instructions

239

45

21Janll
21Janll

Fri

10 granted TS-SCl Clearance
Media inquiry response

239
239

21Janll

Fri
Fri

Meeting with CCIU, FBl,andEDVAfocusingon forensic update

239

45
45
45

21Janll

Fri

Meeting witnessinterviewswithadditional 2/10 MTN individuals not
previously available

239

45

21Janll
21Janll

Fri
Fri

Notifed tbat CW4 Averhart is leaving the brig
Phone call vi^ith COL Malone to discuss POI status of accused

239
239

45
45

21Janll

Fri

Phone call with HQDA Security Clearnancet^ice to discuss TS/SCl

239

45

clearances for defense, RCM 706 board, and Article 32 10
Fri

Phonecallv^ithOSJA

239

45

21Janll

Fri

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

239

45

21Janll

Fri

classified information
Phone call with Sec Army 15-6 team

239

45

21Janll

Fri

Received notification from HQDAG2thatadditional information is

239

45

21Janll

needed of RCM 706 board member to process the eQuip application
21Janll

Fri

SPCMCA denied defense RCM 305(g) request

239

45

21Janll

Fri

21Janll

Fri

SPCMCA submitted requestto reduce POI
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

239
239

45
45

Worked on clearances for defense team

239

45

Worked on completing requirements for TS SCl clearance
RCM 706 board member completed fingerprints v^hich were sent to

239
240

45
45

240

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders,and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications
21Janll

Fri

21Janll

Fri

22Janll

Sat

22Janll

Sat

22Janll

Sat

23Janll

Sun

the investigations office
Worked generallytodevelopevidenceaod witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications
Worked on completing requirements for TS SCl clearance
Communication with defenseconcerninga"nonattribution

240

45

241

45

discussion" in reference to the likely additional charges and types of
evidence

48of231

UNCLASSIFIED//FQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT
Page
otPage(^i

26307

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

23-Jan-ll

Sun

Phone call with DOJ

241

45

23-Jan 11

Sun

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

241

45

23-Jan-ll
24-Jan-ll

Sun

Worked on completing requirements for TS-SCl clearance

Mon

Communication with defense defense requested coordination to meet
with the accused at Fort Myer on 11 Feb 11

241
242

45
45

24-Jan-ll

Mon

Communication-coordinated with defense for visit of accused to Fort
Myer

242

45

24-Jan-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response

242

45

24-Jan-ll
24-Jan-ll

Mon
Mon

Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with OSJA

242
242

45
45

24-Jan-ll

Mon

24-Jan-ll

Mon

Phone call with TCAP
Received information on new Brig Commanding Officer

242
242

45
45

24-Jan-ll

Mon

Received report that David House was unable to visit the accused due

242

45

242

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

to expired tags
24-Jan-ll

Mon

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

24-Jan-ll

Mon

Worked on additional charges and specifications

242

45

24-Jan-ll

Mon

Worked on completing requirements for TS-SCl clearance

25-Jan-ll

Tue

Email to LTC Alamanza to outiine read-on procedures for clearance and
scheduling of 32 with 32 10

242
243

45
45

25-Jan-ll
25-Jan-ll

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Notified the defense, 10, and other necessary parties that they are

243
243

45
45

243

45

243

45

243

45

243

45

243

45

244

45

Defense counsel notified the prosecution that he will not redeploy
from Iraq until May and will fall under 25th Infantry Division

244

45

Email with HQDA-prosecution coordinated for read-on for defense

244

45

244

45

ready to schedule their indoctrination for clearance purposes
25-Jan-ll

Tue

25-Jan-ll

Tue

Phone call with OSJA
Updated the 10 with the current status of the Article 32 delay, and that
the 10 will not be available during the time other parties are read on

25-Jan-ll

Tue

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

25-Jan-ll

Tue

25-Jan-ll

Tue

Worked on additional charges and specifications
Worked on completing requriements for TS-SCl clearance and

26-Jan-ll

Wed

scheduled indoctrinations for all parties
Completed requirements for TS-SCl Clearance and scheduled

26-Jan-ll

Wed

26-Jan-ll

Wed

indoctrinations for prosecution and defense members

counsel
26-Jan-ll

49 of 231

Wed

Media inquiry response

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26308

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

26-Jan-ll

Wed

Meeting-with FBI and DIA in reference to investigation, Garani video,

244

45

26-Jan-ll
26-Jan-ll

Wed
Wed

and CIDNE background
Notified the 10 to schedule read on
Phone call with DIA

244
244

45
45

26-Jan-ll

Wed
Wed

244
244

45
45

Communication with defense-Received Request for SCI access for
Defense counsel from Regional Defense Counsel

245

45

LTC Hemphill (706 Board Member) states that he will attempt to make

245

45

26-Jan-ll

EVENT

Total Time

Phone call with DOJ
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

RCM 707 Clock 1

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
27-Jan-ll

Thu

27-Jan-ll

Thu

the final corrections to his eQuip form today
27-Jan-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

245

45

27-Jan-ll

Thu

245

27-Jan-ll

Thu

Meeting-with DOJ
Meeting-with DOS to give case update

245

45
45

27-Jan-ll

Thu

Meeting-with IRTF and FBI

245

45

27-Jan-ll
27-Jan-ll

Thu
Thu

Phonecallwith OSJA
Quantico MCB responds to SPCMCA request

245
245

45
45

27-Jan-ll

Thu

Received defense request for SCI access from Regional Defense

245

45

27-Jan-ll

Thu

Counsel
Requested INSCOM SCIF for RCM 706 board

245

45

27-Jan-ll

Thu

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

245

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
27-Jan-ll

Thu

Worked on completing requriements for TS-SCl clearance and
scheduled indoctrinations for all parties

245

45

27-Jan-ll

Thu

Worked on special security instructions for the RCM 706 inquiry

245

45

28-Jan-ll

Fri

Communication with defense-defense requested whether the

246

45

Quantico SJA had released the requested brig documents concerning
the accused's classification and assignment to the prosecution and
whether there is an investigation into why the accused was place on
suicide risk
Fri

Drafted memorandum for Brig identifying the members of defense

246

45

28-Jan-ll

Fri

team
Email with MDW security to explain HQDA security clearance process

246

45

28-Jan-ll

Fri

Emailed INSCOM DSJA to request space to conduct the RCM 706 Board

246

45

28-Jan-ll

Fri

246

45

28-Jan-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response
Phone call with DOS to receive update on charged document review

246

45

28-Jan-ll
28-Jan-ll

Fri
Fri
Fri

Phone call with Fort Meade OSJA
Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

246
246
246

45
45
45

28-Jan-ll

28-Jan-ll

classified information

50 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
Page

ofPage(s)

26309

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

28-Jan-ll

Fri

EVENT
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

246

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
Worked on additional charges and specifications

28-Jan-ll

Fri

246

45

28-Jan-ll

Fri

Worked on completing requriements for TS-SCl clearance and
scheduled indoctrinations for all parties

246

45

28-Jan-ll

Fri

Worked on getting a response from 2/10 MTN regarding accused's
counseling packet

246

45

29-Jan-ll

Sat

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

247

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
29-Jan-ll

Sat

Worked on additional charges and specifications

247

29-Jan-ll

Sat

Worked on getting a response from 2/10 MTN regarding accused's

247

45
45

249

45

249

45

counseling packet
31-Jan-ll

Mon

ALL RCM 706 BOARD MEMBERS GRANTED SECURITY CLEARANCE (TSSCl) AND READ-ON (SCI)

31-Jan-ll

Mon

31-Jan-ll

Mon

All RCM 706 members read-on

249

31-Jan-ll

Mon

Email Civilian Defense Counsel granted TS-SCl, awaiting read on

249

45
45

31-Jan-ll

Mon

Email with MDW security to explain HQDA security clearance process

249

45

31-Jan-ll

Mon

Indoctrination for TS-SCl clearance

249

45

31-Jan-ll

Mon

10 is read-on for TS-SCl clearance

31-Jan-ll
31-Jan-ll

Mon
Mon

Media inquiry response
Phone call with DOJ

249
249
249

45
45

31-Jan-ll

Mon

31-Jan-ll
31-Jan-ll

Mon
Mon

Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with OSN Code 30
Received clearance statues update from HQDA, OOCS

249
249
249

45
45
45

31-Jan-ll

Mon

249

45

31-Jan-ll

Mon

Reviewed Secretary of the Army AR 15-6 exhibit list
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

249

45

CIVILIAN COUNSEL, MR. DAVID COOMBS, GRANTED TOP SECRET
SECORITY CLEARANCE

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
Mon

draft additional charges and specifications
Worked on additional charges and specifications

249

45

31-Jan-ll

Mon

Worked on completing requriements for TS-SCl clearance and

249

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

scheduled indoctrinations for all parties
Civilian defense counsel advised that indoctrination will be scheduled

250

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

soon
Communication with defense-defense requested confirmation on brig

250

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

visiting hours
CPT Bouchard, defense counsel, read on

250

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

Email coordinated read-on for Mr. Coombs in Charlottesville, VA

250

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

Email with AD LAW department to respond to FOIA requests

250

45

31-Jan-ll

51 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT_.
Page

ofPagc(s)

26310

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

1-Feb-ll

Tue

1-Feb-ll
l-Feb-ll

Tue
Tue

1-Feb-ll
l-Feb-ll

EVENT
Lillian Smith, a defense security expert, sent information needed to

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

250

45

RCM 706 Board coordination

250
250

45
45

Tue

Received exhibit list from Secretary of the Army AR 15-6

250

45

Tue

Received information about accused's mother would be visiting the

250

45

expedite clearance to prosecution team
Media inquiry response

brig
1-Feb-ll

Tue

Received information that distinguished visitors would be visiting the
brig

250

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

Reviewed draft language proposed by Department of State

250

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

250

45

1-Feb-ll

Tue

Worked on additional charges and specifications

2-Feb-ll

Wed

Email from OGAl with request to obtain list of DOS cables

250
251

45
45

2-Feb-ll

Wed

Email with HQDA-prosecution requested use of certain documents for

251

45

charging
2-Feb-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response

251

45

2-Feb-ll

Wed

Meeting-with NCIX to understand what they are doing and the damage

251

45

2-Feb-ll

Wed

Phone call with COL Malone to discuss confinement status

251

45

2-Feb-ll

Wed

Phone call with INSCOM DSJA for executing the RCM 706 board

251

45

2-Feb-ll

Wed

RCM 706 board coordination

251

45

2-Feb-ll

Wed

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

251

45

3-Feb-ll

Thu

SPCMCA ORDERS RCM 706 RESUMED
CIVILIAN COONSEL, MR. DAVID COOMBS, READ-ON (SCI)

252

3-Feb-ll

45
45

assessment process

3-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

3-Feb-ll

Thu

Discussed defense discovery requests

3-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with OSJA

3-Feb-ll

Communication with defense-discussion of various issues

252
252

45

252
252

45

252

45

252
252
252

45
45
45

252
252

45
45

draft additional charges and specifications
Worked on getting charge sheet preferred

252

45

Worked with OCAs to get disclosure authority for defense

252

45

Email to OGAl with request for approval to charge documents

253

45
45

3-Feb-ll
3-Feb-ll
3-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu
Thu

Phone call with CCIU
Prepared MRE 505 rebuttal
RCM 706 board coordination

3-Feb-ll
3-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

Submitted request to INSCOM for support with RCM 706 board
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
3-Feb-ll
3-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

4-Feb-ll
4-Feb-ll

Fri
Fri

Email with DOS-received update regarding document review

253

4-Feb-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

253

45

Phone call with JlEDDO to discuss damage

253

45

4-Feb-ll

52 of 231

Fri

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
Page

ofPagcts)

26311

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

4-Feb-ll

Fri

Phone call with OSJA

4-Feb-ll

Fri

4-Feb-ll

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

253

45

Phone call with TCAP

253

45

Fri

RCM 706 board coordination

45

4-Feb-ll

Fri

Received draft Secretary of the Army AR 15-6 for review

253
253

4-Feb-ll

Fri

Reviewed documents included in the Farah AR 15-6 investigation for
charging decision

253

45

4-Feb-ll

Fri

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

253

45

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
4-Feb-ll

Fri

Worked on additional charges and specifications

253

45

SFebll

Sat

Phone call with CCIU

254

45

SFebll

Sat

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

254

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
7-Feb-ll

Mon

Background interview for TS/SCl clearance

256

7-Feb-ll

Mon

Communication with defense-defense notified RCM 706 board that the

256

45
45

256

45

board should feel free to take the time necessary to conduct a
thorough and complete examination, and that any request for an
extension of time by the board would undoubtedly be granted
7-Feb-ll

Mon

Communication with defense-defense requested that Dr, Sweda allow
the defense psychiatric expert to observe the 706 Board Proceedings

7-Feb-ll

Mon

Copied prom orders for trials involving Article 104 and Article 80

256

45

7-Feb-ll

Mon

offenses
Email coordinated delivery of allied documents to Dr. Sweda via M M

256

45

256
256

45

Benesh
7-Feb-ll

Mon

Email coordinated with brigand unit for movement of accused

7-Feb-ll
7-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

Email notified Brig of accused's mother visiting
Email with CENTCOM-discussed approval

7-Feb-ll

Mon

7-Feb-ll
7-Feb-ll
7-Feb-ll

256

45
45

Email with company commander regarding accused's counseling

256

45

Mon

packet
Email with OA-received update on classification review

256

45

Mon

Email with DlA-requested assistance regarding techinical equipment

256

45

Mon

Media inquiry response

256

45

7-Feb-ll

Mon

Phone call with 2/10 MTN

256

45

7-Feb-ll

Mon

Phone call with OOS to finalize selection of charging documents

256

45

7-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

Phone call with TCAP
RCM 706 board coordination

256

7-Feb-ll

45
45

7-Feb-ll

Mon

RCM 706 board member signed protective order and

256
256

Mon

acknowledgement of protective order
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

256

7-Feb-ll

45
45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

r
APPELLATE EXHIBIT

53 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPage(s)

26312

UNCLASSIFIED//FQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

8Febll

Tue

Media inquiry response

257

45

8Febll

Tue

MeetingwithTCAP

257

45

8Febll

Tue
Tue

Phonecallwith 2/10 MTN
PhonecallwithJIEDDO

257
257

45
45

8Febll
8Febll

Tue

Phonecallwith OGAl
Phonecallwith OSJA

257
257

8Febll

Tue

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of
classified information

257

45
45
45

8Febll

Tue

RCM 706 board coordination

Tue

RCM 706 board member signed acknowledgement of protective order

257
257

45

8Febll
8Febll

Tue

257

45

8Febll

Tue

Received WikiLeaks affidavitand complaint from CID
Reviewed appellate recordsatACCA

257

45

8Febll

Tue

Worked generallytodevelopevidenceand witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity bolders,and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications

257

45

8Febll
9Febll

Tue
Wed

Worked on additional charges and specifications
Defense received USDCAR156investigative file

257
258

45
45

9Febll
9Febll

Wed
Wed

Delivered accused'sdocuments to RCM 706 board members
Discovery production: Batesff00000852 00001049(198 pages),

258
258

45
45

258

45

258

45

8Febll

Tue

EVENT

Total Time

RCM707 Clockl

45

including Medical Records [Unclassified]
9Febll

Wed

Discovery production: BatesffOOOOlOSO 00001051 (2 pages),
including Certificate of Service to Liberty TDS [Unclassified]

9Febll

Wed

Email with Dr. Sweda to discuss conducting evaluations at Quantico
and the presence of CAPT Moore during the 706 Board

9Febll

Wed

Media inquiry response

258

45

9Febll

Wed

Phonecallwith 2/10 MTN

45

9Febll

Wed
Wed

Phonecallwith CCIU
Phonecallwith OSJA

258
258
258

9Febll
9Febll

Wed
Wed
Wed

RCM 706 board coordination
Reviewed draft Secretary of tbe Army AR 15-6
Reviewed listofapproved cables provided by DepartmentofState

258
258
258

45
45
45

9Febll

Wed

Worked generally to develop evidenceand v^itnesses, identify

258

45

258

45
45

9Febll
9Febll

45
45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draftadditionalchargesand specifications
9Febll

Wed

lOFebll

Thu

Worked on additional charges and specifications
Email conducted research into dismissal ofchargesand preferral of

259

additional charges
Media inquiry response
Meeting with DOJ

259
259

45

lOFebll

Thu
Thu

lOFebll
lOFebll

Thu
Thu

Phonecallwith 2/10 MTN
Phonecallvi^itbOGAl

45
45

lOFebll
lOFebll

Thu

Phonecallv^ithOSJA

259
259
259

RCM 706 board coordination

259

lOFebll

Thu

45

45
45

APPELLATEEXHIBIT
54of231

UNCLASSIFIED^^FOROFFICIAL USEONLY

Page

otPag^l^l

.

26313

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
10-Feb-ll

WeekDay
EVENT
Thu
Reviewed issues with confinement facility documents and POI

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

259

45

259

45

recommendations
lO-Feb-11

Thu

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and

Fri

draft additional charges and specifications
Media inquiry response

260

45

Fri

Meeting-with JlEDDO

260

45

ll-Feb-ll
11-Feb-ll
ll-Feb-ll

Fri

Phone call with 2/10 MTN

260

45

11-Feb-ll

Fri

RCM 706 board coordination

260
260

45
45

ll-Feb-ll

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

13-Feb-ll

Sun

Emailed CCIU in reference to witness interview

262

45

13-Feb-ll
13-Feb-ll

Sun

Emailed OGAl

Sun

Emailed TCAP about Article 104

262
262

45
45

14-Feb-ll

Mon

SECRETARY OF THE ARMY AR 15-6 INVESTIGATION COMPLETED

263

45

14-Feb-ll

Mon

Draft SPCMCA accounting ofexcludable delay memorandum

263

45

14-Feb-ll

Mon

Email from Dr. Sweda informing prosecution the board will start

263

45

Email with DA-discussed 706 issue

263

45

conducting unclassified portions of 706 Board at the Brig on 16
February
14-Feb-ll

Mon

14-Feb-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response

263

45

14-Feb-ll

Mon

263

14-Feb-ll

Mon

Notified of protest at Quantico
Phone call with JlEDDO

263

45
45

14-Feb-ll
14-Feb-ll
14-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon
Mon

RCM 706 board coordination
Researched Article 104 charge
Responded to defense's MRE 505(h)(1) request

263
263
263

45
45
45

14-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

263
263

45

14-Feb-ll

Witness interview
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
45

14-Feb-ll

Mon

14-Feb-ll

Mon

Worked on getting a courier card for classified information
Worked on getting a digital copy of defense-requested video showing

263
263

45

14-Feb-ll

Mon

accused's collapse in confinement
Worked on response to defense's MRE 505(h)(1) request

263

45

15-Feb-ll

Tue

Defense replied to prosecution's MRE 505 response

264

45

15-Feb-ll
15-Feb-ll
15-Feb-ll

Tue

Email contacted USMC regarding accused confinement status

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Meeting with SPCMCA to discuss accounting of excludable delay

264
264
264

45
45
45

Tue

memorandum
Meeting-with CCIU focused on examining unallocated space on

264

45

15-Feb-ll

accused's media
IS-Feb-ll
IS-Feb-ll

Tue
Tue

Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with GAD

264
264

45
45

15-Feb-ll

Tue

Phone call with TCAP

264

45

15-Feb-ll

Tue

RCM 706 board coordination

264

45

55 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Page(s)

26314

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
15-Feb-ll
15-Feb-ll
IS-Feb-ll

WeekDay
EVENT
Tue
RCM 706 board notified CAPT Moore that the board will convene
tomorrow
Tue
SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum
Tue
Updated 10 on Article 32 status

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

264

45

264

45

264

45

15-Feb-ll

Tue

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

264

45

16-Feb-ll

Wed

Defense submitted discovery request

265

16-Feb-ll
16-Feb-ll

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Phone call with DIA

265
265

45
45
45

16-Feb-ll
16-Feb-ll

Wed

RCM 706 board convened

Wed

RCM 706 board coordination

265
265

16-Feb-ll

Wed

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

265

45
45
45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
16-Feb-ll

Wed

Worked on charges and specifications

265

45

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Defense requested 10 to compel discovery

266
266

45
45
45
45

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Defense submitted motion to compel discovery

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Email from OGAl with concurred with charging document

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Email with FBI-conducted file review

266
266

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Email with HQDA-prosecution sent informal request to use a charged

266

45

17-Feb-ll

Thu

document
Email with INSCOM-requested authorization to use document in

266

45

266
266

45
45

266

charging decision
17-Feb-ll
17-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response
Phone call with INSCOM DSJA focused on classified portion of RCM 706
board

266

45
45

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Phone call with OSJA
RCM 706 board coordination

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Researched discovery issues relating to attorney work-product

266

45

17-Feb-ll

Thu

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

266

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
IS-Feb-ll
18 Feb 11
18 Feb-11
18-Feb-ll
IS-Feb-ll

Fri

draft additional charges and specifications
DEFENSE REQUESTS FOR APPOINTMENT OF NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST TO

267

45

Fri

DEFENSETEAM
Communication with defense-defense requested assistance with the

267

45

Fri

visit by the accused's family to the brig
Defense requested expert for neuropsychology

267

45

Fri

IS-Feb-ll

Fri
Fri

IS-Feb-ll

Fri

IS-Feb-ll

Fri

IS-Feb-ll

Fri

56 of 231

267

45

Phone call with J6, MOW

267
267

45
45

Phone call with NCIX to request assistance

267

45

Phone call with OSJA
RCM 706 board coordination

267

45

267

45

Media inquiry response
Phone call with CCIU

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page

of Pagc(s)

26315

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

IS-Feb-ll

Fri

Requested assistance of ONCIX to obtain individual damage

IS-Feb-ll
IS-Feb-ll

Fri

Training Holiday - President's Day Holiday

Fri

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

267

45

267
267

45
45

assessments from which ONCIX requested input

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
IS-Feb-ll

Fri

Worked to resolve issue with accused's mother visiting the brig

267

45

20-Feb-ll

Sun
Sun

Phone call with OSJA
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

269
269

45
45

270

45

270

45

270
270

45
45

20-Feb-ll

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
21-Feb-ll

Mon

Communication with defense-defense requested that the prosecution
arrange for a SCIF to be available for the defense to meet with the
accused

21-Feb-ll

Mon

Communication with defense-to discuss defense MRE 505 proposal,
scheduling recon of SCIF at INSCOM facility and defense schedule in
order to arrange a client visit

21-Feb-ll
21-Feb-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response
Phone call with OSJA

21-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

President's Day Holiday

270

45

21-Feb-ll

Mon

RCM 706 board coordination

270

45

21-Feb-ll

Mon

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

270

45

271

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
22-Feb-ll

Tue

CENTCOM completed classification review o f t w o powerpoint
presentations

22-Feb-ll

Tue

Email with DA-discussed request for OCA disclosure

271

45

22-Feb-ll

Tue

Gathered all documents supporting preferral for review by accuser

271

45

22-Feb-ll
22-Feb-ll
22-Feb-ll

Tue

Media inquiry response

271

Tue
Tue

Meeting-M/\J Fein attends Division Chiefs Meeting
Organized internal database

271
271

45
45
45

22-Feb-ll
22-Feb-ll
22-Feb-ll

Tue
Tue
Tue

Phone call with OSJA
RCM 706 board coordination
Received BRIG SOP from Quantico

271
271

45
45

271

45

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

271

45

22-Feb-ll

Tue

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
23-Feb-ll

Wed

Email with DA-discussed OCA request

272

45

23-Feb-ll

Wed

272

45

23-Feb-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response
Motion to Compel items given to defense

272

45

23-Feb-ll
23-Feb-ll

Wed
Wed
Wed

Phone call with Company Commander
Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

272
272
272

45
45

23-Feb-ll

45

classified information

57 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT_
Page
.ofPage(s)

26316

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

23-Feb-ll

Wed

23-Feb-ll
23-Feb-ll

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

RCM 706 board coordination

272

45

Wed

Researched UMC, multiplicity
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

272
272

45

Wed

45

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
24-Feb-ll

Thu

draft additional charges and specifications
Media inquiry response

273

45

24-Feb-ll

Thu

Meeting-TDY to interview witnesses in Chariottesville, VA (all day)

273

45

24-Feb-ll

Thu

Notified that JTF-GTMO and CEfTTCOM would be sending affidavits
directly to the prosecution team

273

45

24-Feb-ll

Thu

Phone call with CCIU

273

24-Feb-ll
24-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

Phonecallwith OIA

45
45

Phone call with OGAl

273
273

45

24-Feb-ll
24-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

RCM 706 board coordination

273
273

45
45

24-Feb-ll

Thu

Received accused's counseling documents and ensured there were no

273

45

24-Feb-ll

Thu

other missed counselings for accused
Received courier card

273

45

24-Feb-ll

Thu
Thu

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

273
273

45
45

274

45

274

45

24-Feb-ll

Phone call with OSJA

Reviewed release of Fort Huachuca documents under FOIA
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Communication-from Mr. Coombs to the Article 32 10 justifying its
discovery request along with a discussion of MRE 505 and scheduling
use o f t h e INSCOM SCIF

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Discussed MRE 505 (h)(1) issues, Motion to Compel response,
scheduling recon of SCIF at INSCOM facility and defense's schedule in
order to arrange a client visit

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Discussed requirements of RCM 706 board with INSCOM SCIF NCOIC

274

45

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Gathered documents, briefed accuser on facts and evidence for review

274

45

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

274

45

25-Feb-ll

Phone call with company commander
Phone call with FBI

274
274

45

25-Feb-ll

Fri
Fri

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Phone call with OGAl

274

45
45

45

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Phone call with SCMCA

274

25-Feb-ll
25-Feb-ll

Fri
Fri

Phone call with SPCMCA
Preliminary classification review of accused's chat logs with Lamo and

274
274

45
45

25-Feb-ll
25-Feb-ll

Fri
Fri

Assange completed
RCM 706 board coordination
Submitted response to Motion to Compel Discovery to 10

274
274

45
45

25-Feb-ll

Fri

274

45

58 of 231

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXIBBIT.
Page—-of Paget*)

26317

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

EVENT

Total Time

25-Feb-ll

Fri

Worked on the uniform issue when accused is moving to appointments

274

45

26-Feb-ll

Sat

Meeting-with TCAP and GAD

26-Feb-ll

Sat

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify

275
275

45
45

RCM 707 Clock 1

potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications
27-Feb-ll

Sun

Phone call with USN Code 30

276

45

27-Feb-ll

Sun

Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

276

45

2S-Feb-ll

Mon

COL Malone is out of the office

277

45

2S-Feb-ll

Mon

Communication with defense-to discuss a set date to meet with

277

45

28-Feb-ll

Mon

Email from Department of State granting authority to use select
classified information in trial so long as it remains classified

277

45

28 Feb 11

Mon

Email with company commander regarding the soldiers assigned to S2

277

45

28-Feb-ll

Mon

277

45

2S-Feb-ll

Mon

277

45

2S-Feb-ll
2S-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

277
277

45
45

28-Feb-ll

Mon

10 notified the defense that the defense must wait until the 10 receives
evidence beyond accused's charge sheet and ERB to request the
production of additional documents

277

45

2S-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with civilian criminal law expert in reference to Charging

accused and other admin issues

with accused
Email with DA-discussed OCA disclosure request and request for
approval

28-Feb-ll

Email with DOS to received authority to use classified information in
trial so long as it remains classified
Email with DOS-discussion of disclosure approval
Email with ODNI-discussed declaration

277

45

277

45

277
277

45

277

45

Article 104, UCMJ
28-Feb-ll

Meeting-with OSJA

2S-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

28-Feb-ll

Mon

2S-Feb-ll

Mon

28-Feb-ll
28-Feb-ll

Mon
Mon

Phone call with OGAl
Phone call with SCMCA to review evidence for preferral
RCM 706 board coordination

277
277

45
45

277

45

28-Feb-ll

Mon

Received the point of contact information for the INSCOM SCIF

277

45

28-Feb-ll

Mon

277

45

28-Feb-ll

Mon

Researched asserting the MRE 505 privilege
Worked generally to develop evidence and witnesses, identify
potentially discoverable material and associated equity holders, and
draft additional charges and specifications

277

45

2S-Feb-ll

Mon

Worked on getting the documents from accused's PTC packet for

277

45

28-Feb-ll

Mon

discovery
Worked on getting the original protective orders from defense security

277

45

Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with DOJ, CES - discussed prudential search request

45

experts

59 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE E.\HIBIT
— ofPage(s)

26318

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
1-Mar-ll

WeekDay
Tue

EVENT
SCMCA PREFERS ADDITIONAL CHARGES

278

45

l-Mar-ll

Tue

COL Malone is out of the office

278

45

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Communication with defense-to provide notice of additional charges
prior to service of charges

278

45

1-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue

Coordinated RCM 706 board

1-Mar-ll

Email with DA-discussed OCA request

278
278

45
45

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Email with Quantico Brig to provide warning of additional charges

278

45

1-Mar-ll
1-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue

Finalized charges and specifications
Media inquiry response

278
278

45
45

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Meeting-with NCIX for update

278

45

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Meeting-with ODNI

278

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Phone call with SCMCA to review evidence for preferral

278

45
45

1-Mar-ll
1-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue

Received discovery documents from BOLT
Received info regarding accused's Article 138 complaint

278
278

45
45

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Scheduled a tour of the INSCOM SCIF for the 706 board

278

45

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

278

45

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Worked on getting EO complaint filed by accused

278

45
45
45

1-Mar-ll

Tue

Worked with administrative law section on FOIA request

278

2-Mar-ll
2-Mar-ll

Wed

Article 138 Response given to accused and the defense team

Wed

COL Malone is out of the office

279
279

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Communication with defense

279

45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

279

45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Email with HQDA-prosecution sent excerpts of chat logs to DA

279

45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Email with Quantico Brig to discuss additional charges

279

45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with CCIU

279
279

45
45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with DOJ to discuss additional charges

45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with HHC, USAG, Company Commander, CPT Casamatta

279
279

2-Mar-ll
2-Mar-ll
2-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed
Wed

Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with SPCMCA for receipt of charges

45
45
45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with TCAP
Received information regarding accused's Article 138 complaint

279
279
279
279

45

2-Mar-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

279

45

45

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
2-Mar-ll

Wed

Worked on RCM 305(g) memorandum; classification reviews; OCA

279

45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

consent to disclose
COL Ma lone is out of the office

280

45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Coordinated RCM 706 board

280

45

60 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

26319

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Defense IA expert signed acknowledgement of protective order

280

45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Email coordinated with Quantico Brig in reference to elevated
conditions

280

45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Email with INSCOM facilities manager requesting the use of the third
fioor conference room for accused's meetings with medical personnel
and the defense counsel

280

45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

280

45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Meeting-with DOS focusing on possible discovery and completion of
formal classification reviews

280

45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Meeting-with INSCOM facilities manager to tour SCIF for RCM 706
board, including how to provide accused the most privacy in the
building

280

45

3-Mar-ll
3-Mar-ll

Thu
Thu

Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with DIA

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Phonecallwith OSJA

280
280
280

45
45
45

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Received an email from the CENTCOM OSJA stating that the AR 15-6

280

45

280
280

45
45

280

45

281
281

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

approval memo is in the process of being declassified
3-Mar-ll
3-Mar-ll

Thu
Thu

Sent the Article 138 response to the defense and accused
Team analysis and work product

3-Mar-ll

Thu

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

4-Mar-ll

Fri

CAPT Moore signed acknowledgement of protective order

4-Mar-ll
4-Mar-ll

Fri
Fri

COL Malone is out of the office
Coordinated RCM 706 board

281

45
45
45

4-Mar-ll

Fri

Drafted memoranda requesting classification reviews and OCA consent

281

45

4-Mar-ll

Fri

to disclose
Media inquiry response
Meeting-with DOJ to discuss Article 104 and federal law

281

45

281
281

45

4-Mar-ll

Fri

4-Mar-ll
4-Mar-ll

Fri

4-Mar-ll
4-Mar-ll

Fri
Fri

Fri

4-Mar-ll

Meeting-with SPCMCA
Phone call with OSJA

281

45
45

Researched 18 USC 641 offenses
Team analysis and work product

281
281

45

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

281

45

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
4-Mar-ll

Fri

Worked on discovery responses

281

5-Mar-ll
5-Mar-ll

Sat
Sat

COL Malone is out of the office
Communication with defense-defense requested coordination to meet

282
282

45
45
45

5-Mar-ll

Sat

with the accused on 11-12 Mar 11
Communication with defense-with defense explaining a SCIF is

282

45

available any Saturday after today for the defense to meet with the
accused before the RCM 706

61 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT.
Page_

ofPage(s)

26320

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

5-Mar-ll

Sat

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

282

45

6-Mar-ll
6-Mar-ll

Sun
Sun

COL Malone is out of the office

283

Phone call with OSJA

283

45
45

6-Mar-ll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

283

45

284
284

45
45

284

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
7-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon

COL Malone is out of the office

7-Mar-ll

7-Mar-ll

Mon

Communication with defense-with defense where he requested the

Communication with defense-defense requested to meet with the
accused before the RCM 706 board interviews the accused and for that
meeting to take place on 25-26 Mar 11; defense cited the increase in
cost of transportation
date move to the right to 25 or 26 March 2011 to allow him more time
to purchase tickets, which effects the beginning o the RCM 706 board

7-Mar-ll

Mon

Coordinated RCM 706 board

284

45

7-Mar-ll

Mon

Email with CCIU 2

284

45

7-Mar-ll

Mon

Email with CCIU in reference to accused's IA training

284

45

7-Mar-ll
7-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon

Email with FBI-coordinate for a phone meeting
Media inquiry response

284
284

45
45

7-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon

Notified of clothing removal of accused
Phone call with CCIU 1

45
45

Mon

Phone call with FBI
RCM 706 board member signed acknowledgement of protective order

284
284
284
284

45

7-Mar-ll
7-Mar-ll

45

7-Mar-ll

Mon

7-Mar-ll

Mon

Received documents mailed by 2/10 MTN

284

45

7-Mar-ll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

284

45

284
285

45
45

285
285

45
45

285
285

45

285

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
7-Mar-ll
8-Mar-ll

Mon
Tue

investigation
Worked on obtaining a defense neuropsychologist
DEFENSE REQUESTS FOR APPOINTMENT OF MITIGATION EXPERT TO

8-Mar-ll
8-Mar-ll

Tue

DEFENSETEAM
Additional charges transmitted

8-Mar-ll
8-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue
Tue

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Delivered discovery to MAJ Kemkes
Discovery production: Bates # 00001052 - 00011448 (10397 pages),

45

including 35F TRN POI and Quantico Art 138 Response [Undassified]
S-Mar-11

Tue

Email with HQDA prosecution asked for update on request to use a
charged document and asked how to route request to disclose Ml
investigations

62 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

-^r::, page-

26321

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

8-Mar-ll

Tue

Media inquiry response

285

45

S-Mar-11

Tue

Meeting with OGC, ODNI to discuss discovery and classification review
of intelink logs

285

45

8-Mar-ll

Tue

Phone call with OSJA

285

45

8-Mar-ll

Tue

285

45

S-Mar-11

Tue

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of
classified information
Pickup records of trial for research

285

45

8-Mar-ll

Tue

RCM 706 board requested to conduct interview of the accused on 26
Mar 11

285

45

S-Mar-11

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

285

45

9-Mar-ll
9-Mar-ll

Wed

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Created access roster for internal reference

286
286

45

Wed

9-Mar-ll

Wed

Drafted request for agencies to search, preserve, and disclose any

286

45

286

45

286
286

45
45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

45

material relating to the case
9-Mar-ll

Wed

Email to INSCOM facilities manager to notify that the first day the SCIF

9-Mar-ll
9-Mar-ll

Wed

would be used is on 26 March
Email with CENTCOM-discussed classification review

Wed

Email with OA-requested update regarding classified evidence

9-Mar-ll

Wed

Email with INSCOM-prosecution was notified that request to use one
charged document had been routed to another organization

286

45

9-Mar-ll

Wed

Email with MDW security for DSJA security clearance

286

45

9-Mar-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response

286

45

9-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with CCIU

286

45

9-Mar-ll

Wed

286

9-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with OSJA
Received signed protection order from CAPT Moore

286

45
45

9-Mar-ll

Wed

286

45

9-Mar-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
Worked on memorandua requesting classification reviews and OCA

286

45

consent to disclose
10-Mar-ll

Thu

Coordinated RCM 706 board

287

45

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Coordinated with various security managers to finalize access roster

287

45

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Defense submitted rebuttal for Article 138 complaint

287

45

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Email with OA-received update regarding classified evidence

287

45

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

287

45

10-Mar-ll
10-Mar-ll
10-Mar-ll

Thu

Phone call with OGAl
Phone call with OSJA
Provided timeline of the day that Article 138 matters and the charge

287
287
287

45
45
45

Thu
Thu

sheet were served on accused
APPELLATE EXHIBIT
63 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

of Paget:)

_

26322

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Received certification letter from CID regarding accused's lA training

287

45

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

287

45

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Worked on expediting clearance packets

287

10-Mar-ll

Thu

Worked on forensic notes, reviewing statements

287

45

11-Mar-ll

Fri

11-Mar-ll

Fri

Communication-defense counsel meet with accused
Coordinated RCM 706 board

288
288

45
45

11-Mar-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

288

45

11-Mar-ll

Fri

Meeting-with 0GA2 to discuss discovery and classification reviews

288

45

11-Mar-ll
11 Mar-11

Fri
Fri

Phone call with FBI
Phone call with OSJA

288
288

45
45

11-Mar-ll

Fri

RCM 706 board rescheduled to begin on 27 March, instead of 26

288

45

March
11-Mar-ll

Fri

Team analysis and work product

288

45

11-Mar-ll

Fri

Trial EXORD for ISO Task Force Support published
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

288
288

45
45

Communication-defense counsel meet with accused

289

45

Email with CCIU to request CCIU to review all classified information in

289

45

289

45
45

11-Mar-ll

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
12-Mar-ll

Sat

12-Mar-ll

Sat

the case file to determine which OCAs are in the file
12-Mar-ll
12-Mar-ll

Sat
Sat

Phone call with CCIU
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

289

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
13-Mar-ll
13-Mar-ll

Sun
Sun

investigation
Phone call with CCIU

290

45

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

290

45

291

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
14-Mar-ll

Mon

PROSECUTION MEMORIALIZES ITS REQUESTS FOR APPROVAL TO

14-Mar-ll
14-Mar-ll
14-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon
Mon

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Discussed scheduling of RCM 706 board and Article 32 with 10
Email with DOS-disclosure request

291
291
291

45
45
45

14-Mar-ll
14-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon

Email with DOS-OCA disclosure request
Email with HQDA-prosecution sent OCA disclosure request to DA G2

291
291

45
45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Email with ODNI-submitted disclosure request

291

45

DISCLOSE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TOTHE DEFENSE

64 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26323

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Email with 0GA2-sent request forapproval of discovery disclosure

291

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Finalized memoranda requesting OCA consent to disclose

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

MDW SJA nominates members of prosecution as transfer agents

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Prosecution team member arrived to the team

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

RCM 706 board confirmed t h a t 9 A p r i l would be preferred over4April

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

RCM 706 board memberagreed to arrange an appointmentfor brain

291

45

imagingand neurological examination foraccused, and informed the
prosecution thataRCM 706 board member will be on leave o n 2 A p r i l
14-Mar-ll
14-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon

RCM 706 board submitted extension request
Requested approval to disclose classified discovery to the defense (DA,
G2)

291
291

45
45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Requested approval to disclose classified discovery to the defense
(DOS)

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Requested approval to disclose classified discovery to the defense

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

291

45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Requested authority to disclose Intelink logs
Team analysis and v^ork product

291
291

45
45

14-Mar-ll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

291

45

292
292

45
45

292

45
45

(ODNI)
Requested approval to disclose classified discovery to the defense
(0GA2)

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
15-Mar-ll

Tue

investigation
Case familiarization for nev^ member of prosecution team

15-Mar-ll

Tue

Coordinated RCM 706 board

15-Mar-ll

Tue

IS-Mar-ll

Tue

Email to OGAl with request for conto disclose
Email with DIA requested approvals and contact information for

292

relevant POC
IS-Mar-ll
IS-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Phonecallv^ithFBl

Tue

IS-Mar-ll
15-Mar-ll
IS-Mar-ll

15-Mar-ll

15-Mar-ll
15-Mar-ll

292

45
45

Phonecallwith TCAP

292
292

45

Tue
Tue
Tue

Procured defense neuropsychologist
Scheduled JP/^set upand training
Submitted MFR for receipt of advanced copy ofSecretary of the Army

292
292
292

45
45
45

Tue

AR156investigation
Team analysisand work product
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

292
292

45
45

292

45

Tue

evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders,and prepare for Article 32
investigation
15-Mar-ll

Tue

Worked on discovery responses

APPEULATE EXHIBIT.
65 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Pag,^

OfPagcts)

26324

UNCLASSIFIEDB^FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

15-Mar-ll

Tue

Worked on gathering evidence vouchers

292

45

16-Mar-ll

Wed

293

45

16-Mar-ll

Wed

Case familiarization for new member of prosecution team
Coordinated RCM 706 board

293

45

16-Mar-ll

Wed

Email with CENTCOM-prosecution received unclass class review for

293

45
45
45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

Apache video
16-Mar-ll

Wed

Email with FBI-coordinate for a meeting

293

16-Mar-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response

293

16-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed

Meeting-with CCIU

293

Meeting-with EDVA

Wed

Meeting-with FBI

293
293

16-Mar-ll
16-Mar-ll

45
45
45

16-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with DIA

293

45

16-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with OGAl to discuss the discovery production request

293

45

16-Mar-ll

Wed

Phone call with OSJA

16-Mar-ll

Wed

293
293

45
45

294
294

45
45

294

45

294

45

Email with OlA-assisted in determining information ownership

294

45

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

17-Mar-ll

Thu

Case familiarization for new member of prosecution team
Coordinated RCM 706 board
Draft SPCMCA accounting of excludable delay memorandum

17-Mar-ll

Thu

17-Mar-ll

Thu

17-Mar-ll

Thu

Email coordinated with WRAMC to move accused through the facility
with minimal contact and mitigated potential for public notice

17-Mar-ll

Thu

17-Mar-ll

Thu

Email with DIA-completed review of chat logs for possible classified

294

45

Thu

information
Email with INSCOM-prosecution re-sent several outstanding requests

294

45

294
294
294

45

investigation
Worked on requests for agencies to search, preserve, and disclose any

294

45

295

45

17-Mar-ll

to INSCOM
17-Mar-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

17-Mar-ll

Thu
Thu

Phone call with CCIU
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

17-Mar-ll

45
45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
17-Mar-ll

Thu

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

material relating to this case
SPCMCA DISMISSES ORIGINAL CHARGES

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

PROSECUTION MEMORIALIZES ITS REQUESTS FOR CLASSIFICATION

295

45

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

REVIEWS
Case familiarization for new member of prosecution team

295

45

295

45
45

Fri

IS-Mar-ll
IS-Mar-ll

Fri

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

66 of 231

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Email with DA-discussed OCA review
Email with DlSA-request for classification review

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

295
295

APPELLATE EXIBBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

45

26325

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Email with OOS to discuss implementation ofrequest for consent to
disclose classified information

295

45

IS-Mar-ll
IS-Mar-ll

Fri
Fri

Email with DOS-requestfor classification reviev^l
Email with DOS-request for classification review2

295
295

45
45

IS-Mar-ll
IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Email with OSS discussed approvals

295

Fri

Email with HQDA prosecution sent OCA classification review requests
toDAforallofOOD

295

45
45

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Email with ODNl submitted requestforclassification review

295

45

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Finalized memoranda requesting classification reviews

295

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

IRTF completed line by-line review of chat logs to send to appropriate
OCAs

295

45
45

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Issue with civilian defense counsel'saccess to brig because of OCS
graduation

295

45

295
295

45
45
45
45
45
45

EVENT

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Meeting witb SPCMCA to discuss accounting of excludable delay
memorandum

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Original charges dismissed

Total Time

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Phonecallwith CCIU

295
295

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

295
295

RCM 707 Clock 1

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Phone call with DIA
Requested classification reviev^ (CENTCOM)

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Requested classification reviev^(CYBERCOM)

295

45

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Requested classification review (INSCOM)

295

45

IS-Mar-ll
IS-Mar-ll

Fri
Fri

Requested classification review(OGAl)
Requested classification review (0GA2)

295
295

45
45

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

Requested classification review (SOUTHCOM)
Requested 0GA2 complete classification review ofinformation that

295
295

45
45

45

experts identified as potentially classified in CID file
IS-Mar-ll
18 Mar-11

Fri
Fri

SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum
SPCMCA approved RCM 706extension until 16Apr 11

295
295

45

IS-Mar-ll

Fri

SPCMCA conducted RCM 305(g) review

295

IS-Mar-ll
IS-Mar-ll

Fri
Fri

SPCMCA directed 10 to investigate additional charges
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

295
295

45
45
45

evidenceand vi^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
IS-Mar-ll
19-Mar-ll

Fri

Worked on requests for agencies to search, preserve, and discloseany

295

45

Sat

material relating to this case
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

296

45

296
297

45
45

297

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
19-Mar-ll
20-Mar 11
20-Mar-ll

Sat
Sun
Sun

Worked on discovery responses
Email from OGAl with request to look at DOS cables
Email with CCIU to discuss equipment needed toamount and type of
classified information

APPELLATE EXHIBIT_
67 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

of Paget*)

26326

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Oate

Week Day

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

20-Mar-ll

Sun

Provided 10 with the new instructions from the SPCMCA

297

45

20-Mar-ll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

297

45

21-Mar-ll

Mon

Coordinated RCM 706 board

298

45

21-Mar-ll

Mon

Email started coordination to obtain a an unclassified copy of the USF-I

298

45

298
298

45
45

298

45
45

EVENT

AR 15-6 Investigation to the SJA
21-Mar-ll
21-Mar-ll

Mon

Email to OGAl with list of DOS cables

Mon

Email to OGAl with request for classification review

21-Mar-ll

Mon

21-Mar-ll

Mon

Email with DIA-sent request for disclosure of discovery
Email with OlSA-sent request to release discovery

21-Mar-ll

Mon

Email with OGA2-requested additional review of IRTF damage

21-Mar-ll

Mon

298
298

45

298

45

assessment information
10 inquired about the delay and is notified of the new RCM 706
suspension

21-Mar-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response

298

21-Mar-ll

Mon

Notified 10 of new RCM 706 suspension

298

45
45

Protest at Quantico resulting in 30 arrests
Received confirmation from the RCM 706 board that the board will

298
298

45
45
45
45
45

21-Mar-ll

Mon

21-Mar-ll

Mon

21-Mar-ll

Requested approval of discovery disclosure (DIA)

21-Mar-ll
21-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon
Mon

Requested approval of discovery disclosure (DISA)
Reviewed forensic notes and witness notes

298
298
298

21-Mar-ll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

298

45

45

convene on 9 April and asks for address to INSCOM SCIF

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
Worked on neuropsychologist request with WRAMC

45

22-Mar-ll

Tue

Arranged meeting with CID

298
299

22-Mar-ll

Tue

Communication with defense-to discuss accused signed the protective

299

45

22-Mar-ll

Tue

order
Contacted Kuwait RCF regarding discovery items requested by defense

299

45

22-Mar-ll
22-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Email with DISA-resent request to release discovery

299
299

45
45

22-Mar-ll

Tue

Email with DOS-received notification of processing disclosure request
and request for classification review

299

45

22-Mar-ll

Tue

Media inquiry response

299

45

22-Mar-ll
22-Mar-ll
22-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue
Tue

Reviewed forensic notes and witness notes
Sent acknowedgement of COMSEC training for team
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

299
299

45
45

299

45

300

45

21-Mar-ll

Mon

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
23-Mar-ll

68 of 231

Wed

Accused had MRl and was seen by neurologist

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26327

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

23-Mar-ll

Wed

Accused taken to Walter Reed for testing portion of RCM 706 board

300

45

23-Mar-ll
23-Mar-ll

Wed

Coordinated RCM 706 board

300
300

45

Wed

45

EVENT

Email from COL Malone stating that the Brig request for mental health

45

provider augmentees is unrelated to his treatment plan for accused
23-Mar-ll

Wed

Email to discuss high visibility military justice case budgets

300

23-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
Phone call with DOJ

300

45

Wed

Phone call with TCAP and GAD

300
300

45
45
45
45

23-Mar-ll
23-Mar-ll
23-Mar-ll

Wed

Received Secretary of the Army AR 15-6 investigation

300

23-Mar-ll

Wed

Received Sworn Statement from Kuwait RCF

23-Mar-ll

Wed

Reviewed forensic notes and witness notes

300
300

45

23-Mar-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

300

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
24-Mar-ll

Thu

Continued planning for prosecution budget for SJA's approval

301

45

24-Mar-ll

Coordinated RCM 706 board

24-Mar-ll

Thu
Thu

301
301

45
45

24-Mar-ll

Thu

Email with DISA-received approval to disclose discovery

301

45

24-Mar-ll
24-Mar-ll

Thu
Thu

Logistics demonstration
Media inquiry response

301
301

45
45

Email from OGAl with concurred with request for defense access to
charging documents

45

24-Mar-ll

Thu

24-Mar-ll

Thu

OGAl authorized disclosure of charged documents
Phone call with CCIU to discuss witness availability

301
301

45

24-Mar-ll

Thu

Phone call with Fort Meade OSJA

301

45

24-Mar-ll

Thu
Thu
Thu

Phone call with 0GA2
Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with SPCMCA

301

24-Mar-ll
24-Mar-ll

301
301

45
45
45

24-Mar-ll

Thu

Reviewed forensic notes and witness notes

24-Mar-ll

Thu
Thu

Team analysis and work product
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

24-Mar-ll

301
301
301

45
45
45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
24-Mar-ll

Thu

Worked on defense's neuropsychologist request

301

25-Mar-ll

Fri

Communication-accused meets with defense Counsel at Fort Myer

302

45
45

25-Mar-ll

Fri

45

Fri
Fri

Coordinated RCM 706 board meeting
Delivered copy of Secretary of the Army AR 15-6 to CID
Email from COL Malone suggesting that the mental health provider for

302

25-Mar-ll

302

45

302

45

25-Mar-ll

Fri

accused change due to his relocation
Email to discuss specialized discovery software for high visibility case

302

45

25-Mar-ll

Fri

Email with 0GA2 -sent request for OCA Classification Review

302

45

25-Mar-ll

69 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT^
Page.
ofPagefs)

26328

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

25-Mar-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

302

45

25-Mar-ll
25-Mar-ll

Fri

Meeting-Team analysis and work product
Phone call with OSJA

302
302

45
45

25-Mar-ll

Fri

Fri

25-Mar-ll

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

Received Protection Order signed by accused

302

45

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

302

45

26-Mar-ll

Sat

Communication-accused meets with defense counsel at INSCOM SCIF
for pre-RCM 706 interview meeting, based on defense request

303

45

26-Mar-ll

Sat

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

303

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
27-Mar-ll

Sun

Completed good time compensation memorandum

304

45

27-Mar-ll

Sun

Completed memorandum outiining history of Article 104 UCMJ

304

45

27-Mar-ll

Sun

27-Mar-ll

Sun

Email to 2/10 MTN coordinating evidence
Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

304
304

45
45

classified information
27-Mar-ll

Sun

Researched 18 USC 641

304

45

27-Mar-ll
27-Mar-ll

Sun
Sun

Researched Article 121
Researched espionage caselaw

304
304

45
45

27-Mar-ll

Sun

27-Mar-ll

Sun

Reviewed forensic notes and witness notes
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

304
304

45
45

305

45

305

45
45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
28-Mar-ll

Mon

investigation
CCIU inoperable due to office relocation

28-Mar-ll
28-Mar-ll

Mon
Mon

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Email with Hasan prosecution to discuss specialized discovery software

305

for high visibility case
305

Mon

Media inquiry response
Phone call with CCIU

305

45
45

28-Mar-ll

Mon

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

305

45

28-Mar-ll

Mon

305

45

45

28-Mar-ll
28-Mar-ll

Mon

classified information
Walter-Reed psychology department reached out to the Psychology
Consultant to the Surgeon General to find a neuropsychologist for the
defense team
28-Mar-ll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

305

29-Mar-ll

Tue

CCIU inoperable due to office relocation

306

45

306

45

29-Mar-ll
70 of 231

Tue

Coordinated RCM 706 board
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APELLATE EXHIBIT_
Pnoe

otPage(s)

26329

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Department ofState authorized disclosure of discovery

306

45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Email witb DOSDOSapproval of disclosure request

306

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Email with HQDA-prosecution re-sent OCA classification review
requests t o D A f o r a l l o f O O D

306

45
45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Email with JAVs technician about audio/visual support in courtroom

306

45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Media inquiry response

306

45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Phone call v^ith CAPT Ralphaboutbeinganeuropsychologistfor706
Board

306

45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Phonecallwith CCIU

306

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Phone call with Fort Huachuca, AZ OSJA

306

45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Potential neuropsychologist for RCM 706 board identified, but would
not be available until 11 April

306

45

29-Mar-ll
29-Mar-ll

Tue
Tue

Processed International Amnesty Letters
Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes

306
306

45
45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Scheduled witness interview

306

45

29-Mar-ll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

306

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
29-Mar-ll

Tue

Worked on getting copies of accused's LES since confinement

306

45

30-Mar-ll

Wed

CCIU inoperable due to office relocation

307

30-Mar-ll
30-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Email with CCIUabout location of Quantico recordings

307
307

45
45
45

30-Mar-ll
30-Mar-ll
30-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed

Email witb DAreceived disclosure ofdiscovery authority

307
307
307

45
45
45

30-Mar-ll

Wed

Phonecallwith CCIU

30-Mar-ll
30-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed

Phonecallwith DOJ
Phonecallvi^ithOSJA

307
307

45
45

30-Mar-ll

Wed

30-Mar-ll
30-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed

Phone call with TCAP
Provided facility information to all parties for RCM 706 board

30-Mar-ll
30-Mar-ll

Wed
Wed

Wed

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with MDW security

307

45

307

45

Received LES spreadsheets for accused

307
307

45
45

Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

307
307

45
45

308

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Artide 32
investigation
31-Mar-ll

Thu

31-Mar-ll

Thu

31-Mar-ll

Thu

31-Mar-ll

Thu

Analyzed brig rules
CCIU inoperable due to office relocation
Communication with defensedefense requested thatthe unit obtaina

308

45

308

45

new ACU uniform for the accused
31-Mar-ll

Thu

Coordinated RCM 706 board
Email coordinated with DES and PMOfor accused's movement

31-Mar-ll

Thu

Email receipt ofArticle 138 complaint documents

31-Mar-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

308

45

308

45

308

45

Al'ir^^
Page

71 of 231

UNCLASSIFIEDB/FOROFFICIAL USEONLY

ATT-

ofPage(s)

26330

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFORQFFICIAL USEONLY
Date

WeekDay

31Marll

Thu

31Marll

Thu

Meeting walkthrough of Fort Meade courtroom
Phonecallwith EDVA

31Marll
31Marll

Thu

Phonecallwith USNCode 30

Thu

Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes

308
308

31Marll

Thu

Sent list of documents released to defense to CIO

308

31Marll

Thu

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand vi^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

308

45
45

lAprll

Fri

CCIU inoperable due to office relocation

309

45

lAprll

Fri

Coordinated RCM 706 board

309

45

lAprll

Fri

Email with OTJAG to discuss request for consent to disclose and
classification reviews

309

45

lAprll

Fri

lAprll

Fri

Media inquiry response
Phonecallwith OSJA

309
309

45
45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

308

45

308

45
45
45

lAprll

Fri

Received Brig Visitation list for accused

309

45

lAprll

Fri

Reviewed FBI forensic files

309

45

lAprll

Fri

Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes

309

45

lAprll
lAprll

Fri
Fri

Scheduled logistics demonstration
Sent documents for discovery to CID

309
309
309

45
45
45

310
310

45
45

lAprll

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders,and prepare for Article 32
investigation

2Aprll
2Aprll

Sat
Sat

Phonecallv^ithOSJA
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

4Aprll

Mon

CCIU inoperable due to office relocation

312

45

4Aprll

Mon

4Aprll

Mon

Coordinated RCM 706board
Email with CCIU to receive additional contact information for witness

312
312

45
45

4Aprll

Mon

Email with finance to request clarification for entries on accused's LESs

312

45

4Aprll

Mon

Media inquiry response

312

45

4Aprll

Mon
Mon

Meeting with DOJ
PhonecallwithCCIU
Received authority to transport an unclassified portable computing

312

45

312
312

45

312

45

312

45

4Aprll
4Aprll

Mon

45

device in computer clearance
4Aprll

Mon

4Aprll

Mon

Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

72 of 231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATEEXHIBIT
Page
ofPaget^)

26331

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

SAprll

Tue

SPCMCAAPPOINTSNEUROPSYCHOLOGISTTO DEFENSETEAM
(DEFENSE REQUEST,1S FEB 11)

SAprll

Tue

SPCMCA DENIES DEFENSE REQUEST FORAPPOINTMENT OF
MITIGATION EXPERT(DEFENSEREQUESTSMAR 11)

5-Apr-ll

Tue

5-Apr-ll

Tue

CClUinoperable due to office relocation
CID review of documents

313
313

45
45

5-Apr-ll

Tue

Coordinated RCM 706 board

313

45

5-Apr-ll

Tue

Email coordinated v^ith Brigand defense regarding CAPT Hoctor

313

45

5-Apr-ll

Tue

Email with DOS to discuss request for consentto disclose classified

313

45

5-Apr-ll

Email with witness to obtain self authenticating certificate
Media inquiry response

313

5-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue

313

45
45

5-Apr-ll

Tue

Meeting review CCIU case file atCClU

S-Apr-ll

Tue

Meeting with J6, MDW to discuss computer systems for discovery

313
313

45
45

S-Apr-ll

Tue

Meeting with ODNI, OGAl, 0GA2,D0D,and OTJAG todiscusssensitive
subject

313

45

5-Apr-ll

Tue

Meeting with SPCMCA

313

45

5-Apr-ll

Tue

Phonecallv^ithOSJA

313

5-Apr-ll

Tue

Received additional documents regardingaccused'slA training

313

45
45

5-Apr-ll
5-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue

Received Fort Gordon Certification Letter from CIO
Requested supplies for prosecution team

313

5-Apr-ll

Tue

5-Apr-ll
5-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue

Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes
Team analysis and v^ork product
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

313
313

EVENT

Total Time RCM 707 Clock
313
45

information and serverand firewall logs

313
313

45
45
45
45
45

evidence and v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Artide 32
investigation
6-Apr-ll
6-Apr-ll
6-Apr-ll

Wed
Wed
Wed

Asked to contact brig for daily updates
CCIU inoperable due to office relocation
Communication witb defense-defense requested clarification on the

314
314
314

45
45
45

brig's interpretation of its rules relating to visitors
Coordinated RCM 706 board
Email with witness to coordinate civilian travel to Washington, DC

314

45

314

45

6-Apr-ll

Wed

6-Apr-ll

Wed

6-Apr-ll

Forwarded defense team memo to brig

314

45

6-Apr-ll

Wed
Wed

Logistics demonstration

314

45

6-Apr-ll
6-Apr-ll
6-Apr-ll

Wed
Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
MeetingreviewCClUcase file at CCIU

314
314
314

45
45
45

6-Apr-ll
6-Apr-ll
6-Apr-ll

Wed
Wed
Wed

314
314
314

45
45

73of231

Meeting-with CCIU
Phonecallwith OSJA
Received brig monitoring acknowledgments
Received brig weekly update

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

45

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26332

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

6-Apr-ll

Wed

Requested security clearances for counsel and administrative
personnel

314

45

6-Apr-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders,and prepare for Article 32
investigation

314

45

7-Apr-ll

Thu

CClUinoperable due to office relocation

315

45

7-Apr-ll

Thu

Coordinated RCM 706 board

Thu

DIA authorized disclosure of discovery

315
315

45

7-Apr-ll
7-Apr-ll

Thu

Discovery production: Batesff 00011449 00011462 (14pages),

315

45
45

7-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with CCIU to discuss DISA CD Burning, logs from 902d Ml, CD
from JlEDDO, scheduling witness interview,anotherv^itness interview,
forensic review plan, DCGS-A capabilities, interview ofanother witness,
and federal subpoenas

315

45

7-Apr-ll

Thu

Email v^ithOA discussedlA support

315

45

7-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with 0GA2 requested update on status of discovery disclosure

315

45

7-Apr-ll

Thu

MDW SJA forv^arded prosecution request for security clearances for

315

45

7-Apr-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

315

45

315

45

315
315

45
45

315
315

45
45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

including Art 138 Response [Unclassified]

counsel and administrative personnel
7-Apr-ll

Thu

7-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

MeetingreviewCClUcase file at CCIU
Meeting with DOS to deliver classified material
Phone call vi^ith Fort Meade OSJA

7-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

Received accused disclosure documentfrom OIA
Received and reviev^ed information from CAPT Hoctor to his chain of

7-Apr-ll

Thu

Received info regarding second Article 138 complaint

315

45

Thu

Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

315
315

45
45

7-Apr-ll
7-Apr-ll

command
7-Apr-ll
7-Apr-ll

Thu

evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders,and prepare for Article 32
investigation

Fri

45

Fri

CCIU inoperable due to office relocation
Email from LTC Hemphill confirming thatthe 706 board intends to

316
316

45

Fri

meet o n 9 A p r i l 2011
Email v^ith RCM 706 board members to coordinate continued support

316

45

S-Apr-ll

Fri

in case ofagovernment furlough
Intake of Article 138 complaint

316

45

S-Apr-ll
S-Apr-ll

Fri

Media inquiry responses
Meeting-at Fort Meade Courtroom to walk through for consruction

316
316

45
45

S-Apr-ll

Fri
Fri

OCONUS Leave

316

45

Phonecallv^ithCClU

316

45

Fri
Fri

Phonecallv^itbOlA

316

45

Phonecallwith INSCOM DSJAaboutRCM 706 meetingdate

316

45

S-Apr-ll
S-Apr-ll
S-Apr-ll

Fri

requirements
S-Apr-ll
S-Apr-ll
S-Apr-ll
74 of 231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOROFFICIAL USEONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT
Pa^ie
of Paget:)

26333

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

S-Apr-ll

Fri

Phonecallwith OSJA

316

45

S-Apr-ll

Fri

Phone call with OTJAG todiscuss request for consent to disclose and
classification reviews

316

45

S-Apr-ll

Fri

Received documents clarifying entries on accused'sLES

316

45

S-Apr-ll

Fri

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

316

45

S-Apr-ll
9-Apr-ll

Fri
Sat

Worked on getting information for security clearances
Assisted RCM 706 board proceedings

316
317

45
45

9-Apr-ll

Sat

Discovery production: Batesff00011463

317

45

EVENT

TotalTime

00011573(111 pages),

RCM 707 Clock 1

including Art 138 Response [Unclassified]
9-Apr-ll

Sat

Meeting RCM 706 Interview of accused

317

45

9-Apr-ll

Sat

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

317

45

evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
10-Apr-ll

Sun

Accused filed Article 138 complaint to Secretary o f t h e Navy

318

45

10-Apr-ll
10-Apr-ll

Sun
Sun

Received EXSUMsforaccused'smovement
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

318
318

45
45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
11-Apr-ll

Mon

Confirmed travel arrangements for witness

319

45

ll-Apr-ll

Mon

ll-Apr-ll

Mon

Email with DA requestedmeetingfor update
Email with DIA received contact information for NMEC support

319
319

45
45

11-Apr-ll

Mon

ll-Apr-ll

Mon

Intake JRCF documents
Media inquiry responses

319
319

11-Apr-ll

Mon

Meetingwith CCIUl

319

45
45
45

11-Apr-ll

Mon

319

45

11-Apr-ll
11-Apr-ll

Mon

Meetingwith CCIU2
Phone call with CCIU reference PPP Logs

Mon

Phonecallwith USNCode 30

319
319

45
45

11-Apr-ll
ll-Apr-ll

Mon
Mon

RCM 706 board coordination
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

319
319

45
45

319

45

320

45

320
320

45
45

320

45

evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
ll-Apr-ll

Mon

12-Apr-ll

Tue

Worked on discovery responses
Discovery production:Batesff00011574

00012711(1138 pages),

including Security Classification Guide, OMPF,Enemy Information
[Unclassified]
Email with DOS request input for valuation evidence

12-Apr-ll
12-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue

12-Apr-ll

Tue

Email with DSS requested valuation evidence
Filed response to defense discovery request, dated l O J a n l l

12-Apr-ll

Tue

Filed response to defense discovery request, dated 16 Feb 11

15__
AI^PELLATE EXHIBIT

75 of 231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

P"««—__ofPagc(s)

26334

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
12-Apr-ll

WeekDay
Tue

Media inquiry responses

320

45

12-Apr-ll

Tue

320

45

12-Apr-ll

Tue

Meeting with DOJ to discuss discovery issues, preservation requests,
and prudential search requests
RCM 706 board coordination

320

45

12-Apr-ll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

320

45

13-Apr-ll

Wed

Communication with defense-defense requested coordination to meet
with the accused on 28 Apr 11

321

45

13-Apr-ll

Wed

Intake additional JRCF documents

321

45

13-Apr-ll

Wed

Requested attestation certificate from provider of LES

321

45

13-Apr-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

321

45

322
322

45
45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
14-Apr-ll
14-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

Compiled Wget events
Coordinated movement to Fort Myer for 28 April

14-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with DlA-requested update regarding IRTF documentation

322

45

14-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with DlA-response to request for update on IRTF documentation

322

45

14-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

Email with 0GA2-coordinate for a phone meeting

14-Apr-ll

Made arrangements for counsel to attend the Classified Information

322
322

45
45

14-Apr-ll

Thu

Litigation course
Media inquiry responses

322

Meeting-with HQDA Information Assurance for meeting to discuss

322

45
45

14-Apr-ll

Thu

protection of prosecuiton, defense. Article 32 10, and command
14-Apr-ll

Thu

Phone call with 0GA2

322

45

14-Apr-ll
14-Apr-ll

Thu

Phone call with SPCMCA

45

Thu
Thu

RCM 706 board coordination
Received signed protective order from Cassius Hall

322
322
322

45
45

14-Apr-ll

Thu

Received signed protective order from LCDR Kennedy

322

45

14-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

Reviewed forensic notes and witness notes

322

45

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

322

45

322

45

14-Apr-ll

14-Apr-ll

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
14-Apr-ll

Thu

Worked on scheduling counsel's indoctrination for security clearance

15-Apr-ll

Fri

Completed requirements for iPerms access Request

323

45

15-Apr-ll

Fri

Email from RCM 706 board which stated it will complete the final

323

45

323

45

report this evening and no longer needs an additional week
15-Apr-ll

76 of 231

Fri

Intake brig weekly reports

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

fTpPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Pagc(.s)

26335

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

15-Apr-ll

Fri

Media inquiry responses

323

45

15-Apr-ll

Fri

323

45

15-Apr-ll
IS-Apr-ll

Meeting Team analysis and v^ork product
Phonecallwith FBI

323

45

Fri

Fri

EVENT

TotalTime

RCM 707 Clock

15-Apr-ll
IS-Apr-ll

Fri

Phone call v^ithJ6, MDW in reference to discovery computers
Phonecallv^ith SPCMCA

Fri

Phone call with v^itness interviews

15-Apr-ll

Fri

RCM 706 Board requested extension

15-Apr-ll

Fri

SPCMCAapproved RCM 706 Board's extension request

323

45

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

323

45

15-Apr-ll

323

45

323
323

45
45

323

45

17-Apr-ll

Sun

Email from CCIU about defense interviews

325

45

17-Apr-ll

Sun

IS-Apr-ll

Mon

Email to TC about Article 138 complaint
Communication with defense defense requested clarification v^hy

325
326

45
45

326

45

Email sent authenticity certificate to viBitness
Leave

326

45

326

45

326
326

certain documents were provided indiscovery and what the source of
those documents v^ere
18-Apr-ll

Mon

Discovery production: Batesff00012712

00012720(9 pages),

including Art 138 Response [Unclassified]
lS-Apr-11

Mon

IS-Apr-ll

Mon

18-Apr-ll

Mon

Media inquiry responses

lS-Apr-11
18-Apr 11

Mon
Mon

Meeting with DC3 to discuss capabilities
Phone call with COL Malone to request he travel with the accused

IS-Apr-ll
lS-Apr-11

Mon

duringmovementto Fort Leavenworth, KS
Phonecallv^ithOSJA

326

45

Mon

Phonecallwith SPCMCA

326

45

lS-Apr-11

Mon

326

45

18-Apr-ll

Mon

RCM 706 board coordination
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

326

45

327

45

326

45
45
45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
Communication with defensewithMr.Coombs to notify him o f t h e

19-Apr-ll

Tue

19-Apr-ll

Tue

45

Tue

Email with FBIcoordinateforameeting
Email with witness to fix DTS issues

327

19-Apr-ll

327

45

19-Apr-ll
19-Apr-ll
19-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue
Tue

Media inquiry responses
Meeting-with FBI to coordinate reviev^ of paper file
Meeting with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

327
327
327

45
45
45

19-Apr-ll

classified information
Military Justice Division syncronization meeting
Obtained Westlaw access for prosecution member

327

45

19-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue

327

45

19-Apr-ll

Tue

Phone call with CCIU to discuss forensic reports and finalizingall

327

45

19-Apr-ll

Tue

reports for classification review
Phone call with COL Malone to request he travel with the accused

327

45

accused's movement to the JRCF and other issues

duringmovementto Fort Leavenworth, KS

77 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26336

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

19-Apr-ll

Tue

Phone call with FBI Legal to coordinate review of paper file

327

45

19-Apr-ll

Tue

Phone call with OSJA

327

45

19-Apr-ll
19-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue

RCM 706 board coordination
Received iPerms access

327

45

19-Apr-ll
19-Apr-ll

Tue
Tue

Received memo dealing with placing inmate in segregation
Submitted request to review FBI files relevant to the accused

19-Apr-ll

Tue

20-Apr-ll

EVENT

327

45

327

45

327

45

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

327

45

Wed

Began to retrieve all of accused's documents for Quantico

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Communication with defense

328
328

45
45

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Communication with defense-defense requested a replacement

328

45

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Communication with defense-defense requested the following: (1)

328

45

neuropsychologist
phone contacts to speak with the accused; (2) mailing address to send
attorney-client information to the accused; (3) JRCF rules and
regulations; (4) visitation days/hours; (5) who will be responsible for
transporting the accused to TDS and how the defense can make such a
request; (6) whether arrangements will be made for defense and
accused to have access to classified information at Leavenworth

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Defense requested expert neuropsychologist for Fort Leavenworth

328

45

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Drafted memorandum regarding the accused's confinement at

328

45
45
45

Leavenworth
20-Apr-ll

Wed

Email received authentication certificate from witness

328

20-Apr-ll
20-Apr-ll

Wed
Wed

Email with DIA-coordinate for a meeting
Email with FBI about prudential search request

328
328

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Email with ODNI requested update regarding status of OCA disclosure

328

45

20-Apr-ll

Wed

consent request and OCA classification review
Media inquiry response

20-Apr-ll

Wed

20-Apr-ll

45

328

45

328

45

Wed

Meeting-with National Media Exploitation Center (NMEC) to discuss
what they do and how they could assist
Phone call with DOS to receive an update

328

45

20-Apr-ll
20-Apr-ll

Wed
Wed

Phone call with FBI
Phone call with Fort Leavenworth, KS OSJA

328
328

45

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Phone call with OGAl

328

45

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Phone call with OSJA

328

45

20-Apr-ll

Wed

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

328

45

20-Apr-ll
20-Apr-ll

Wed
Wed

328

45
45

45

classified information

78 of 231

RCM 706 board coordination
Researched computer-related terminology relevant to this case

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

328

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPagc(s)

26337

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

20-Apr-ll

Wed

21-Apr-ll
21-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

21-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with JAVs technicians discussed equipment issues

329

45

21-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with ODNI for update on intelink log disclosure approval, and
they have to rely on other agencies for approval

329

45

21-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with ODNI-OONl informed prosecution that classification review

329

45

329
329

45
45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

328

45

Draft SPCMCA accounting of excludable delay memorandum

329
329

45
45

Email with CENTCOM-requested notification of receipt of classified
mail

is proceeding and is complicated by number of entities involved
21-Apr-ll
21-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

Leave
Media inquiry response

21-Apr-ll

Thu

Phone call with 0GA2

329

45

21-Apr-ll

Thu

Phone call with OGC, Bureau of Prisons to discuss special
administrative measures within the federal system

329

45

21-Apr-ll
21-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

Phone call with OSJA
RCM 706 board coordination

329
329

45
45

21-Apr-ll

Thu

Researched conducting Article 32 investigation without classification

329

45

21-Apr-ll

Thu

21-Apr-ll

Thu

Searched for neuro-psycholegist in the area near Leavenworth
To NCIX requesting copies of review letters

329
329

45
45

21-Apr-ll
21-Apr-ll

Thu

Verified custodian of accused's counseling records
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

329
329

45
45

329

45

329
330

45
45

330
330

45
45

330

45

reviews

Thu

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
Thu

investigation
Worked on requests for agencies to search, preserve, and disclose any

21-Apr-ll
22-Apr-ll

Thu

material relating to this case
Worked on witness DTS

Fri

RCM 706 BOARD CONCLUDES

22-Apr-ll
22-Apr-ll

Fri

Email witb CENTCOM-confirmed receipt of disks
Email with OA-discussion pertaining to continued administrative

21-Apr-ll

Fri

segregation
22-Apr-ll

Fri

Email with JAVs to discuss audio/visual support for Article 32
technicians

22-Apr-ll

Fri

Leave

330

45

22-Apr-ll

Fri
Fri

Media inquiry response
Meeting with SPCMCA to discuss accounting of excludable delay
memorandum

330
330

45
45

Fri
Fri

Meeting-with Dr, Sweda to receive final report
Phone call with FBI
Phone call with OSJA

330
330
330

45
45

22-Apr-ll
22-Apr-ll
22-Apr-ll
22-Apr-ll

79 of 231

Fri

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPEU.ATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

45

26338

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

22-Apr-ll

Fri

22-Apr-ll

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of
classified information

330

45

22-Apr-ll

Fri
Fri

RCM 706 board coordination
RCM 706 board submitted results in short form

330
330

45
45

330

45

22-Apr-ll

Fri

Reviewed forensic notes and witness notes

22-Apr-ll

Fri

SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum

330

45

22-Apr-ll

Fri

With multiple agencies and department to receive updates for

330

45

330

45

331

45

331
331

45
45

332
332

45

government delay request
22-Apr-ll

Fri

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32

23-Apr-ll

Sat

investigation
Email with DA-discussed classified evidence

23-Apr-ll

Sat

Leave

23-Apr-ll

Sat

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

24-Apr-ll

Sun

Leave

24-Apr-ll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
25-Apr-ll

Mon

Draft government request to delay the Article 32

333

45

2 5-Apr-ll

Mon

Email from Dr. Jehle, at Fort Leavenworth, stating that he will check to
see if he can provide care for accused as a neurologist assigned to the
defense team

333

45

25-Apr-ll

Mon
Mon

Email with DA-discussed classified evidence
Email with FBI-received approval to coordinate to review FBI file

333
333

45
45

Mon
Mon

Email with FBI-received response to request to look at FBI file

333

45

Email with JAVs to discuss audio/visual support for Article

333

45

Government Request to Delay Article 32
Media inquiry response
Meeting-with CCIU to coordinate for specific screenshots

333
333
333

45
45

Meeting with ODNI to pickup interagency documents

333
333
333

45
45
45

333

45

25-Apr-ll
25-Apr-ll
25-Apr-ll

32Technicians
25-Apr-ll
25-Apr-ll
25-Apr-ll

Mon
Mon
Mon

25-Apr-ll
25-Apr-ll
25-Apr-ll

Mon
Mon
Mon

25-Apr-ll

Mon

Meeting-with SPCMCA
Phone call with DOJ to discuss prudential search requests
Phone call with Dr. Jehle, at Fort Leavenworth, discussing expert

25-Apr-ll

Mon

request
Requested a delay of the Article 32

25-Apr-ll

Mon

25-Apr-ll

Mon

SO of 231

SPCMCA email to defense for input on request
SPCMCA requested monitoring and protective custody at JRCF

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

45

333

45

333

45

333

45

APPEU.ATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPago(s)

26339

UNCLASSIFIED//FQR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

25Aprll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

333

45

25Aprll
26Aprll

Mon

Worked on getting better access to CCIU

Tue

Defense Email Response to Government Request for Art 32 Delay

333
334

45
45

26Aprll

Tue

Email contacted potential witness regarding MFRfor accused's EO
complaint

334

45

26Aprll

Tue

Email with JAVs to discuss audio/visualsupport for Article
32Technicians

334

45

26Aprll
26Aprll

Tue

Media inquiry response

Tue

Meeting-M/^ Fein attended Division Chiefs Meeting

334
334

45
45

Tue
Tue

Meeting M / ^ Fein led military justice division meeting
Phone call witb company commander

45
45
45

26Aprll

EVENT

Total Time

26Aprll

Tue

Phonecallv^itbOlA

334
334
334

26Aprll

Tue

Phone call v^ith FBI to discuss reviev^ofpaper file

334

26Aprll

RCM 707 Clock 1

45

26Aprll

Tue

Reviewed forensic notesand witness notes

334

45

26Aprll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders,and prepare for Artide 32
investigation

334

45

26Aprll

Tue
Wed

Worked on gettingSIPRaccounts
Email with planners for OPLAN BRAVO

334

27Aprll

45
45

27Aprll
27Aprll

Wed
Wed

Media inquiry response
M e e t i n g w i t h J l , MDW to discuss MOW juridiction(notfor case)

335
335

45

27Aprll

Wed

Meeting with planners for OPLAN BRAVO

335

45

27Aprll

Wed
Wed

New member joined prosecution team

335
335

45
45

Wed

Phonecallwith FBI
PhonecallwitbSPCMt^
Phone call v^ith witness's corporation OGCabout witness's testimony

335

45

335
335

45
45

335
335

45
45

335

45

27Aprll
27Aprll
27Aprll
27Aprll

Wed
Wed

335

PhonecallwithCCIU

27Aprll
27Aprll

Wed
Wed

Reviewed FBI case file
SPCMCA sent email clarifying monitoring and protective custody

27Aprll

Wed

request to PMG
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

45

evidenceand v^itnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders,and prepare for Artide 32
investigation
27Aprll

Wed

Worked on logistics

335

45

27Aprll
2SAprll

Wed
Thu
Thu

Worked on statement o f w o r k for logistics

335

Oefense discovery request sent to MCB Quantico
Draft SPCMCA action memorandum for request of delay of Article 32

336
336

45
45

28Aprll

Investigation

81 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

45

26340

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

28-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with DOS-received request to discuss OCA declaration and
valuation evidence

336

45

2S-Apr-ll
28-Apr-ll

Thu

Email with 0GA2-coordinate for a meeting

Thu

Finalized research on classification reviews for Article 32

336
336

45
45

28-Apr-ll
28-Apr-ll

Thu
Thu

Media inquiry response

336
336

45
45
45

EVENT

28-Apr-ll

Thu

0GA2 approved discovery disclosure
Phone call with 0GA2

28-Apr-ll

Thu

Phone call with OSJA

336

45

28-Apr-ll

Thu

PMG email responding to SPCMCA request for monitoring and
protective custody

336

45

336

2S-Apr-ll

Thu

Reviewed FBI case file

336

45

2S-Apr-ll

Thu

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

336

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
2S-Apr-ll

Thu

Worked on logistics for classified and unclassified discovery

336

45

28-Apr-ll
29-Apr-ll

Thu
Fri

Worked on statement of work for logistics
Confirmed receipt by FBI of unclassified case file

336
337

45

29-Apr-ll
29-Apr-ll

Fri
Fri

Confirmed receipt of material sent to CIO

45

45

29-Apr-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

337
337
337

29-Apr-ll

Fri

Meeting with SPCMCA to discuss government request for delay of

337

45

29-Apr-ll

Fri

Article 32 Investigation
OSJA Promotion

337

45

29-Apr-ll
29-Apr-ll

Fri
Fri

337
337

45

Email with DOS-discussed prudential search request draft

Phone call with CCIU
Phone call with DOJ
Phone call with DOS focused on updates on OCA declaration and other

45
45

337

45
45

29-Apr-ll

Fri

29-Apr-ll
29-Apr-ll

Fri
Fri

Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with SPCMCA

337
337

45
45

29-Apr-ll

Fri

29-Apr-ll
29-Apr-ll

Fri
Fri

Reviewed FBI case file
SPCMCA Approved Delay of Article 32 Investigation
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

337
337
337

45
45
45

Email to Quantico Brig about preservation request
Communication with defense-requesting a neuropsychologist

339

45

340

45
45

340

45
45

340

45

340

45

340 ,

15

evidentiary issues

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
1-May-ll

Sun

2-May-ll

Mon

2-May-ll

Mon

Drafted project status graphs

340

2-May-ll

Mon
Mon

Drafted research memorandum for agency's review
Email from Or. Jehle stating he will work to confirm his availability as

340

2-May-ll
2-May-ll

Mon

Email with CENTCOM-received request for disks for classification

2-MaY-ll

Mon

review
Email with DA-discussed classified evidence

Mon

Media inquiry response

soon as possible

2-May-ll

82 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

p__

APPELLATE EXHIBIT,
Page
ofPagc(s)

1

26341

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFORQFFICIAL USEONLY
Date

WeekDay

TotalTime

RCM 707 Clock

2Mayll

Mon

Neuropsychologist's chain ofcommand approved

340

45

2Mayll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Artide 32
investigation

340

45

3Mayll

Tue

Drafted defense request approval memo for SPCMCA

341

45

3Mayll

Tue

Email from Dr.Jehle stating confirms availability to assist in the care of
accused

341

45

Finalized research memorandum for agency's review
Media inquiry response

3Mayll

Tue

3Mayll

Tue

3Mayll

Tue

3Mayll
3Mayll

Tue
Tue

3Mayll

Tue

3Mayll

Tue
Tue

3Mayll

EVENT

341

45

341

45

Phone call with CENTCOM who asked for new classification review
discs because the original copies did not work in CENTCOM classified
computers

341

45

PhonecallwithJ6,MDW
Phone call with ODNI on approval for certain charged documents

341
341

45
45

Phonecallwith OGAl

341

45

Phone call v^ith OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

341

45

classified information
Phone call with witness interview

341

45

3Mayll

Tue

Reviev^ed FBI case file

341

45

3Mayll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

341

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
4Mayll

Wed

investigation
Attended Intelligence Community legal conference

4Mayll

Wed

Finalized memorandum discussing 18 USC 641 offense

342
342

45
45

4Mayll

Wed

Media inquiry response

342

45

4Mayll
4Mayll

Wed
Wed

Phonecallwith OSJA
Phonecallv^ith SPCMCA

342
342

45
45

4Mayll

Wed

342

45

342

45

342

45

4Mayll

Wed

Prepared evidence CDs for analysts
SPCMCA approved defense request for expert in neuropsychology

4Mayll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

4Mayll
SMayll

Wed
Thu

Worked on logistics
Attended Intelligence Community legal conference

342
343

45
45

SMayll

Thu
Thu
Thu

Email witb Fort Meade t^JA about courtroom update

343

SMayll
SMayll

Media inquiry response

45
45

PhonecallwithCCIU

343
343

SMayll

Thu

Phonecallv^ithOSJA

343

APPELLATEEXHIBIT
Page
ofPaget^)
S3of231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

45
45

26342

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

SMayll

Thu

SMayll

Thu

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

343

45

343

6-MaY-ll

Fri

Worked on fixing issues with courtroom equipment
Attempted to contact LTC Hilton

344

45
45

6-May-ll

Fri

Email with OA-request meeting to discuss discovery

344

45

6-May-ll

Fri

344

45

6-May-ll

Fri

Email with DOD OGC, OTJAG, and DOJ to setup a meeting about DOD
prudential search request
Media inquiry response

344

45

6-May-ll

Fri

Phone call with FBI

Fri

Requested classification review and approval to disclose to the defense
ofclassified material (OGAl)

344
344

45

6-May-ll
6-May-ll

Fri

Researched logistics for discovery

Fri

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

344
344

45

6-May-ll

45
45
45

45

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
SMayll
8-May-ll

Sun
Sun

Email to OGAl with SOUTHCOM documents
Ensured all brig recordings received worked correctly

SMayll

Sun

Requested and received clarification on files received from CIO

346
346
346

SMayll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

346

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
8-May-ll

Sun

Worked on Article 10 timeline

346

45

9-May-ll

Mon

Joined prosecution team

45

9-MaY-ll

Mon
Mon

Media inquiry response

347
347

Phone call with DOJ in reference to DOD prudential search request

347

45

9-MaY-ll
9-May-ll

Mon
Mon

Phone call with TCAP
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

347
347

45
45

9-May-ll

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
9-May-ll

Mon

Worked on Article 10 timeline

347

45

lO-May-11
lO-May 11

Tue
Tue

Arrived at MDW
Completed security clearance prerequisites

348
348

45

lO-May-11

Tue

Inprocessing

348

45

lO-May-11

Tue

Inventory all purchased items

45

lO-May-11

Tue

Media inquiry response

348
348

lO-May-11

Tue

Meeting-with DOD OGC, OTJAG, and DOJ in reference to DOD
prudential search request

348

45

84 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

45

45

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page

of Page(s)

26343

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

10-May-ll

Tue

EVENT

Total Time

Phone call with EDVA to discuss how to obtain access for defense

RCM 707 Clock 1

348

45

counsel to grand jury subpoena information and documents under seal
lO-May-11

Tue

Phone call with OSJA

348

45

lO-May-ll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

348

45

11-May-ll

Wed

11-May-ll

Wed

Assisted new member of prosecution team with inprocessing
Checked on the status of courier cards

349
349

45
45

11-May-ll

Wed

Draft SPCMCA accounting of excludable delay memorandum

349

45

11-May-ll

Wed
Wed

Email with DlA-discussed information flow to OA outside IRTF
Inprocessing

349
349

45

11-May-ll
ll-May-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response

Wed

Meeting-at Fort Meade courtroom to discuss renovations

11-May-ll

Wed

Requested personnel clearance and access

349
349
349

45
45
45

11-May-ll
11-May-ll

Wed
Wed

Team analysis and work product at Fort Meade, MD

349

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

349

45
45

11-May-ll

Wed

Worked on getting security clearances processed for new members of

349

45

12-May-ll

Thu

prosecution team
Defense received US Forces-Iraq AR 15-6 investigative file

350

45

12-May-ll

Thu

Discovery production: Bates # 00012721 - 00012924 (204 pages),

350

45

11-May-ll

45

including Art 138 Response [Unclassified]
12-May-ll

Thu

Drafted statement of work for logistics

350

45

12-May-ll

Thu

Email to MOW security to request courier card

12-May-ll
12-May-ll

Thu
Thu

Inprocessing
Media inquiry response

350
350
350

45
45
45

12-May-ll
12-May-ll
12-May-ll

Thu

350
350
350

45

Thu
Thu

Meeting-with Fort Meade, OSJA 2
Meeting-with MDW security for security officer training
Meeting-with SPCMCA

12-May-ll
12-May-ll

Thu
Thu

Phone call with Fort Meade, OSJA 1
Phone call with ODNI

350
350

45

12-May-ll

Thu

Prepared DA 3161 for purchased equipment

350

45

12-May-ll

Thu

Researched logistical needs

350

45

Thu
Thu

SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

350
350

45
45

351
351
351

45
45
45

12-May-ll
12-May-ll

45
45
45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
Defense submitted discovery request
Leave

13-May-ll

Fri
Fri
Fri

13-May-ll

Fri

Researched discovery issues

13-May-ll
13-May-ll

Media inquiry response

351
APPEU,ATE EXHIBIT

85 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Page

ofPage(s)

26344

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
13-MaY-ll

WeekDay
EVENT
Fri
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

351

45

352
352

45
45

Joined prosecution team

353

45

14-May-ll

Sat

Leave

14-May-ll

Sat

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

15-May-ll

Sun

15-May-ll

Sun

Leave

353

15-May-ll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

353

45
45

16-May-ll

Mon

Inprocessing

354

45

16-May-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response

354

45

16-May-ll

Mon

Meeting-Team analysis and work product

354

45

16-May-ll

Mon

Meeting-with OTJAG and 0GA2 to discuss classification review of
unclassified CID information

354

45

16-May-ll

Mon

Pulled documents showing accused's leave dates from Iraq

354

45
45

16-May-ll

Mon

Researched discovery issues

354

16-May-ll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

354

45

355

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
17-May-ll

Tue

Arranged for members of the prosecution to attend the National
Advocacy Center Course

17-May-ll

Tue

Communication with defense-with defense to discuss administrative
issues

355

45

17-May-ll

Tue

Drafted language to be used by EDVA to obtain federal disclosure and

355

45

protective orders to authorize production to defense
17-May-ll

Tue

Email with HQDA-sent draft affidavit for CYBERCOM

355

45

17-May-ll
17-May-ll

Tue

Inprocessing
Media inquiry response

355
355

45

17-May-ll

Tue

Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

355

45

17-May-ll

Tue

classified information
Provided case update to new members of prosecution team

355

45

17-May-ll
17-May-ll

Tue
Tue

Researched discovery issues
Scheduled inprocessing appointments for new member of prosecution

355
355

45
45

17-May-ll

Tue

355

45

Tue

45

team
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

86 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26345

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
17-MaY-ll
18-May-ll
18-May-ll

WeekDay
EVENT
Tue
Worked on discovery review list from CID case file
Wed
Case familiarization for new member of prosecution team
Wed
Drafted DOJ memo listing discoverable documents

Total Time

RCM 707 Clocks

355

45

356

45

356

45

lS-May-11

Wed

Dropped off potential evidence for review

356

45

lS-May-11

Email with OSS-discussed OSS files
Media inquiry response

356

ISMayll

Wed
Wed

18-May-ll

Wed

Meeting-at Andrews Air Force Base courtroom for visit

356
356

45
45

18-May-ll

Wed

Phone call with ODNI to discuss intelink logs

356

45

18-May-ll

Wed

Phone call with OGAl to discuss OGAl equities in unclassified CIO
information

356

45

lS-May-11

Wed

Prepared documents to send to analysts

356

45

lS-May-11

Research discovery issues

356

18-May-ll

Wed
Wed

Reviewed FBI file

356

45
45

lS-May-11

Wed

Scheduled read-on for new members of prosecution team

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

356
356

45

IS-May-ll

356

45

45

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
lS-May-11

Wed

Worked on getting members of the prosecution into the legal citation

19-May-ll

Thu

Case familiarization for new member of prosecution team

357

45

19 May-11

Thu

Compiled Wget events

19-May-ll

Thu

Coordination for discovery software 1

45
45

19-May-ll

Thu

Coordination for discovery software 2

357
357
357

19-May-ll

Thu

19-May-ll

Thu

Email from 0GA2 with OCA completed review of chat logs
Email from 0GA2 with provided notice of sensitive document in

357
357

45
45

19-May-ll

Thu

Email with DISA-resent request for classification review

19-May-ll

Thu
Thu

Email with J6, MDW
Email with 0GA2-received classification review

357
357

45

19-May-ll

357

45
45

19-May-ll

Thu

357

45

19-May-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with FBI to discuss discovery timeline and requirements

357

45

19-May-ll
19-May-ll

Thu
Thu

Phone call with OSJA
Phone call with TCAP and GAD to coordinate meeting to discuss

357
357

45
45

Thu

prudential search requests
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

357

45

357

45

358

45

and research seminar

45

discovery

19-May 11

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
19-May-ll

Thu

20-Mav-ll

Fri

Worked on obtaining list of case-specific records that may contain SCI
material
FEDERAL JUDGES BEGIN ISSUING DISCLOSURE AND PROTECTIVE
ORDERS GOVERNING MATERIAL RELATING TOTHE COORT-MARTIAL

l^^^^^^l^ATEEXH^BIT^^^^
^^^g^
^^^Page^i^^
87 of 231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

26346

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

20-May-ll

Fri

Arranged for inprocessing of new member of prosecution team

358

45

20-May-ll
20-May-ll

Fri
Fri
Fri

Email with INSCOM-requested classification review
Media inquiry response

358
358

45
45

Phone call with DIA

Fri

Research discovery issues

358
358

45
45

Fri

With multiple agencies and department to receive updates for

358

45

358

45

2D-MaY-ll
20-MaY-ll
20-May-ll

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

government delay request
20-May-ll

Fri

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

22-May-ll

Sun

Article 32 delay request submitted

360

45

22-May-ll

Sun

22-May-ll
22-May-ll

Sun

Case familiarization for new member of prosecution team
Draft government request to delay the Article 32

Sun

Email with 0GA2-sent request to review unclass CID case file

360
360
360

45
45
45

22-May-ll

Sun

Government Request to Delay Article 32

Sun

Phone call coordination with defense and LTC Almanza for encrypted

360
360

45

22-May-ll
22-May-ll

Sun

emails
Requested OGA2 to review unclassified CID case file

45

22-May-ll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

360
360

361
361

45

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
23-May-ll
23-May-ll

Mon
Mon

Case familiarization for new member of prosecution team
Confirmed the availability of a witness

23-MaY-ll

Mon

Drafted prudential search request

361

45
45
45

23-May-ll

Mon

Emailed regarding fingerprinting for new member of prosecution team

361

45

23-May-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response

361

45

23-May-ll

Mon

Meeting-delivered unclassified information to 0GA2 for classification

361

45

23-May-ll

Mon

review
Meeting-with TCAP and GAD discussing prudential search requests

361

45

23-May-ll

Mon

Phone call coordination with defense and LTC Almanza for encrypted

361

45

emails
23-May-ll

Mon

Phone call with OSJA

361

45

23-May-ll

Mon
Mon

Received accused's IA training documents from CID
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

361

23-May-ll

361

45
45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
24-May-ll

Tue

Defense Email Response to Government Request for Art 32 Delay

362

45

24-MaY-ll

Tue

Discussed obtaining full SecArmy 15-6 for discovery and methods of

362

45

protecting the information

88 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

26347

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

24-May-ll

Tue

EVENT
Drafted discovery memorandum

362

45

24-May-ll

Tue

Drafted prudential search request

362

45

24-May-ll

Tue

Email with DOD-sent response to OOJ's prudential search request to
prosecution

362

45

24-May-ll

Tue

Email with OSS-arranged meeting concerning OSS files

24-May-ll

Tue

362
362

45
45

Total Time

Email with HQDA-prosecution requested access to JS portal to

RCM 707 Clock 1

understand what information was collected for previous prudential
search request
24-May-ll
24-May-ll

Tue
Tue

Logistics set-up
Media inquiry response

362
362

45
45

24-May-ll

Tue

Meeting-with DOS to determine full extent of DSS law enforcement file

362

45

24-May-ll

Tue

Phone call coordination with defense and LTC Almanza for encrypted

362

45

emails
24-May-ll

Tue

Phone call with MDW security for JPAS access

362

45

24-MaY-ll

Tue

Phone call with OSJA

362

45

24-May-ll

Tue

Prepared delay memorandum

362

24-May-ll

Tue

SPCMCA email to defense for input on request

362

45
45

24-May-ll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

362

45

363

45

363

45

363

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
25-May-ll

Wed

PROSECOTION MEMORIALIZES ITS REQUESTS FOR OTHER
GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION TO SEARCH, PRESERVE, AND DISCLOSE

25-May-ll

Wed

ANY MATERIAL RELATING TO THE COURT-MARTIAL
Communication with defense-defense requested the following: (1)
forensic images of all media involed; (2) copy ofall digital forensic
reports; (3) copies of the CVs of government experts; (4) whether
defense forensic experts must review digital media in government
facility
Draft SPCMCA action memorandum for request of delay of Article 32

25-May-ll

Wed

25-May-ll

Wed

Drafted email update on case for partners

363

45

25-Mav-ll
25-May-ll

Wed

DSS document review and discussion

25-May-ll

Logistics set-up
Media inquiry response

363
363
363

45

Wed
Wed

25-May-ll

Wed
Wed

Meeting-with DOS
Meeting-with DSS to discuss sensitive cable and review of DSS files for
discovery

363
363

45

25-May-ll
25-May-ll

Wed

Phone call coordination with defense and LTC Almanza for encrypted

363

45

25-May-ll

Wed

emails
Phone call with CCIU

363

45

25-May-ll

Wed
Wed

Phone call with OSJA
Prepared for request for agencies to search, preserve, and disclose any

363

45

363

45

Investigation

25-May-ll

material relating to this case

89 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPEU^ATF. EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPagc(s)

45
45
45

26348

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

25-Mav-ll

Wed

EVENT

Total Time

Requested assistance with DoD request to search, preserve, and

RCM 707 Clock 1

363

45

363

45

disclose any material relating to this case and the release of Secretary
o f t h e Army AR 15-6
25-May-ll

Wed

Requested that agency search, preserve, and disclose any records
relating to this case (DIA)

25-May-ll

Wed

Requested that agency search, preserve, and disclose any records
relating to this case (000)

363

45

25-May-ll

Wed

Requested that agency search, preserve, and disclose any records
relating to this case (DOS)

363

45

25-May-ll

Wed

Requested that agency search, preserve, and disclose any records

363

45

relating to this case (NCIX)
25-MaY-ll

Wed

Requested that agency search, preserve, and disclose any records
relating to this case (ODNI)

363

45

25-MaY-ll

Wed

Requested that agency search, preserve, and disclose any records
relating to this case (OGAl)

363

45

25-May-ll

Wed

Requested that agency search, preserve, and disclose any records

363

45

25-May-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

363

45

26-May 11

Thu

Developed processes to intake and review discovery

364

45

26-May-ll

Thu

26-May-ll

Thu

Drafted request for security expert
Email to OGAl with prudential search request

364
364

45
45

26-MaY-ll

Thu

26-May-ll

Thu

Email with OA-submitted security expert request
Email with HQOA-confirmed receipt of certain military intelligence

364
364

45
45

26-May-ll

Thu

364

45

26-MaY-ll

Thu

Logistics set-up

364

45

MDW SJA forwarded prosecution request for security expert and

364

45

Media inquiry response
Meeting with SPCMCA to discuss government request for delay of
Article 32 Investigation
Meeting-conducted new office space walk-through

364

45

364

45

364

45

relating to this case (0GA2)

investigation on CD
Email with HQDA-prosecution confirmed receipt of email about
specific military intelligence investigation
26-May-ll

Thu

26-May-ll

Thu

26-MaY-ll

Thu

26-May-ll

Thu

26-May-ll

Thu

Phone call coordination with defense and LTC Almanza for encrypted

364

45

26-May-ll

Thu

emails
Phone call with J6, MDW

364

45

26-May-ll

Thu

Phone call with SPCMCA

364

45

26-MaY-ll

Thu
Thu

Requested security expert
Requested to disclose Secretary of the Army AR 15-6 to the defense

364

26-MaY-ll

45
45

26-May-ll
26-May-ll

Thu
Thu

Researched discovery issues
Researched on specific discovery issue

364
364

45
45

26-MaY-ll

Thu

SPCMCA Approved Delay of Article 32 Investigation

364

45

request to disclose Secretary of the Army AR 15-6

90 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

364

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPagets)

26349

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

26-MaY-ll

Thu

27-MaY-ll

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

364

45

Fri

Email from 0GA2 with confirmed receipt of prudential search request
and request to discuss

365

45

27-May-ll

Fri

Email with DOS-prudential search request submitted

365

45

27-MaY-ll

Fri

Email with ODNI-prudential search request submitted

365

45

27-May-ll
27-May-ll

Fri
Fri

Email with 0GA2-sent prudential search request
Media inquiry response

365
365

45
45

27-May-ll

Fri

Phone call coordination with defense and LTC Almanza for encrypted
emails

365

45

27-MaY-ll

Fri

Training Holiday - Memorial Day Holiday

365

45

27-May-ll

Fri

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

365

45

28-MaY-ll

Sat

Witness and evidence preparation

366

45

30-MaY-ll
30-MaY-ll

Mon
Mon

Email with OSS-discussed DSS files

368

45

Media inquiry response

368

45

30-May-11

Mon

Memorial Day Holiday

368

45

30-May-ll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

368

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
31-MaY-ll

Tue

Document processing

369

45

31-May-ll

Tue

Email with OA-received update regarding security expert request

369

45

31-MaY-ll
31-MaY-ll

Tue
Tue

Media inquiry response
Meeting-with OGC, OGl

369
369

45
45

31 May-11

Tue

Meeting-with OMC clerk's office to discuss discovery processes and

369

45

31-MaY-ll

Tue

programs
Phone call with DOJ

369

45
45

Tue
Tue

Received discovery AIRs from CID Case File

369

Researched on specific discovery issue

369

45

31-MaY-ll

Tue

Researched topic

369

45

31-May-ll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

369

45

370

45

370
370

45
45

31-May-ll
31-MaY-ll

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
1-Jun-ll

Wed

investigation
CPT Overgaard and CPT Whyte attend Classified Information Course

1-Jun-ll
1-Jun-ll

Wed
Wed

Documentary Evidence Processing (Adobe Pro)
Email with CCIU to receive update on 0 0 0 IG subponea returns

l-Jun-ll

Wed

Media inquiry response

91 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

A P P a m nn:; ivmniT^S

1

Page

1

.ofPage(s)

26350

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

1-Jun-ll

Wed

Meeting-at Quantico to obtain documents pertaining to accused

370

45

1-Jun-ll

Wed

Meeting-with ODNI

l-Jun-ll

Wed

Meeting-with OGAl

370
370

45
45

1-Jun-ll
l-Jun-ll

Wed
Wed

Phone call with OGAl
Phone call with OSJA

370
370

45
45

1-Jun-ll

Wed

Phone call with witness interview

370

45

l-Jun-ll

Wed

Received declaration of records from company commander

370

45

1-Jun-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

370

45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
2-Jun-ll

Thu

CPT Overgaard and CPT Whyte attend Classified Information Course

371

45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

DADT Training

371

45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

Developed list of issues that needed to be addressed with each

371

45

371

45

dept/agency - what we owed them and what they owed us
2-Jun-ll

Thu

2-Jun-ll

Thu

Documentary Evidence Processing (Adobe Pro)

371

45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

Drafted prudential search request

371

45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

2-Jun-ll

Thu

Email requested DTS information for witness travel
Email with DlA-darified prudential search request

371
371

45
45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

371

45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

Email with ODNI-OONl offered to brief on status of damage
assessment in response to prosecution request
Email with 0GA2 to inform them we received authority to disclose

371

45

Developed system to track Protected Documents and Approvals

grand jury information, preparing to draft new protective order for
their review
2-Jun-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

371

45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

ONCIX notifies prosecution that its damage assessment team would

371

45

2-Jun-ll

Thu

Phonecallwith OSJA

371

45

Picked up Quantico MCB Discovery docs
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

371
371

45
45

like to brief the prosecution
2-Jun-ll
2-Jun-ll

Thu
Thu

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
3 Jun 11

Fri

investigation
CPT Overgaard and CPT Whyte attend Classified Information Course

372

45

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Developed system to track Protected Documents and Approvals

372

45

3-Jun-ll
3-Jun-ll

Fri
Fri

Documentary Evidence Processing (Adobe Pro)

372
372

45

Email with CAPT Neill to retrieve encrypted emails

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Email with DOS-requested update regarding OCA declaration

372

45

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Email with ODNI-clarifled prudential search request

372

45

92 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

45

APPEU.ATE EXHIBIT
Page.

. of Page(s)

26351

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Media inquiry response

372

45

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Meeting with CCIU and witness

Fri

Meeting with DOS to discuss prudential search request

372
372

45

3-Jun-ll
3-Jun-ll

Fri

Meetingwith USN prosecution of POI Martin(national security case)

372

45
45

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Phonecallv^ithOSJA

372

45

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Phone call v^ithUSNCode 30

372

45

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Revised disclosureand protective orders

45

3-Jun-ll

Fri

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

372
372

4-Jun-ll

Sat

Developed system to track Protected Documents and Approvals

373

45

4-Jun-ll

Sat

Drafted email discussing issuesand discovery todefense

373

45

4-Jun-ll

Sat

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

373

45

EVENT

TotalTime

RCM 707Clockl

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
5-Jun-ll

Sun

Developed system to track Protected Documents and Approvals

374

45

S-Jun-ll

Sun

5-Jun-ll

Sun

Intake ofCID documents received
Meeting-outside support structure planning and site recognizance at

374
374

45
45

5-Jun-ll

Sun

374

5-Jun-ll

Sun

374

45
45

375

45

Fort Meade
Prepared 2nd Article 138 complaint for discovery
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
6-Jun-ll

Mon

investigation
Developedsystem to track Protected Documentsand Approvals

6-Jun-ll
6-Jun-ll

Mon
Mon

Documentary Evidence Processing(Adobe Pro)
Email with DA-discussed classification review

375
375

45
45

6-Jun-ll
6-Jun-ll

Mon
Mon

Email with DlSA received classification review
Email witb HQDA prosecution requested an update from OA on its

375
375

45
45

Mon

case
Email with OGAl-sought clarification regarding prosecution's

375

45

requestto search, preserve,anddiscloseany material relating to this
6-Jun-ll

prudential search request
6-Jun-ll

Mon

Internal bates numbered accused'sArticle 138 Complaint

375

45

6-Jun-ll

Mon

Media inquiry response

375

45

375

45

375

45

375

45

6-Jun-ll

Mon

6-Jun-ll

Mon

Member leaves theTeam
Phone call with Civilian Defense Counsel to pretrial confineeatJRCF

6-Jun-ll

Mon

Phone call with Fort Meade OSJA

93 of 231

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOROFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPEU.ATE EXIflBIT.
Page
.ofPagc(s)

26352

UNCLASSIFIEDBBFOROFFICIAL USEONLY
Date

WeekDay

EVENT

TotalTime

RCM707Clockl

6Junll

Mon

Prosecution requests Classification Review (DISA)ManningB 00376874

375

45

6Junll

Mon

45

Mon

Research/memo on specific discovery issue
Submit prudential search request to DOD

375

6Junll

375

45

6Junll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders,and prepare for Article 32
investigation

375

45

7Junll

Tue

Developed system to track Protected Documents and Approvals

376

45

7Junll

Tue

Documentary Evidence Processing(Adobe Pro)

376

45

7Junll

Tue

Email to 0GA2 with request update on 0GA2 review of CIO documents

376

45

7Junll
7Junll

Tue
Tue

Email with DA requested OCA update
Media inquiry response

376
376

45
45

7Junll

Tue

Meeting-with EDVAand DOJ to review all search warrants,2703(d)

376

45

orders, and grand jury returns
7Junll

Tue

Meeting with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

376

45

7Junll

Tue

classified information
Meeting with planners for OPLAN BRAVO

376

7Junll

Tue

Phonecall with J6, MDW

376

45
45

7Junll

Tue

Phone call with JAVs

45

45

7Junll

Tue

PTAand Brady research/memo

376
376

7Junll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

376

45

Analyzing Intelink Logs
Compiled UnclassCCIUCase log
Developed system to track Protected Documents and Approvals

377
377
377

45
45
45

377
377

45
45

377
377

45
45

377

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
SJunll

Wed

SJunll
SJunll

Wed
Wed

SJunll
SJunll

Wed

Documentary Evidence Processing(Adobe Pro)

Wed

SJunll
SJunll

Wed
Wed

Drafted Protective Orders
Email with DOS received request for draft of OCA declaration
Email with HQDA DA notified prosecution that it forwarded request to
0 0 0 Office of General Counsel

SJunll

Wed

MDW OPLAN Bravo drafted fortransportand well being o f t h e
accused, and orderly execution ofArticle 32 proceedings

SJunll

Wed

Media inquiry response

377

45

SJunll
SJunll

Wed

377

Wed

Meeting-with DOJ
Meeting with HQDA classification expert to review all unclassified CIO

377

45
45

SJunll

Wed

files
Meeting with OGAl, 0GA2, DOJ, ODNI, OTJAG,andDODabout

377

45

SJunll

Wed

sensitive subject
Meeting with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

377

45

classified information

94of231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

26353

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
8-Jun-ll

Week Day
Wed

Phone call with J6, MDW

377

45

S-Jun 11

Wed

S-Jun-11

Wed

PTA and Brady research/memo
Sentencing Research

377
377

45
45

S-Jun-ll

Wed

SGT Waybright GPC Training

377

45

8-Jun-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

377

45

378
378

45
45

EVENT

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock 1

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
9-Jun-ll

Thu

Analyzing Intelink Logs

9-Jun-ll

Thu

Developed system to track Protected Documents and Approvals

9-Jun-ll

Thu

Discovery production: Bates # 00012925 - 00012933 (9 pages),
including Art 138 Response [Unclassified]

378

45

9-Jun-ll
9-Jun-ll

Thu
Thu

Documentary Evidence Processing (Adobe Pro)
GCMCA Panel Adoption

378
378

45
45

9-Jun-ll

Thu

GPC Training

378

45

9-Jun-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response

9-Jun-ll

Thu

Meeting-with CCIU to receive copy of forensic evidence, loose

378
378

45
45

9-Jun-ll

Thu

harddrives, specialized programs, and forensic report
Meeting-with planners for OPLAN BRAVO

378

45

9-Jun-ll

Thu

Phone call with OSJA

378

45

9-Jun-ll

Thu

PTA and Brady research/memo

9-Jun-ll

Thu

378
378

45
45

9-Jun-ll

Thu

Sentencing Research
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

378

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
10-Jun-ll

Fri

Analyzing Intelink Logs

379

45

10-Jun-ll

Fri

Communication with defense-defense requested for discovery to be

379

45

delivered to Mr. Coombs and to M M Kemkes, and for a defense safe to
be located in the Fort Myer and Fort Leavenworth TDS offices
10-Jun-ll

Fri

Documentary Evidence Processing (Adobe Pro)

379

45

10-Jun-ll

Fri
Fri

GPC Training
Media inquiry response

379
379

45

10-Jun-ll

45
45

10-Jun-ll

Fri

Meeting-with DOJ

379

10-Jun-ll

Fri
Fri
Fri

Meeting with Open Source Center to discuss approvals
OSJA Roundtable Discussion ( M M Fein wasa participant)

379
379
379

45
45

379
379
379

45
45
45

381

45

10-Jun-ll
10-Jun-ll
10-Jun-ll
10-Jun-ll
10-Jun-ll

Fri
Fri

Phone call with OSJA
Received log book sheets from brig
Sentencing Research
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
12-Jun-ll

95 of 231

Sun

TDY Charlottesville, VA (LAC)

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

[ AHPPLLATE EXHIBIT
I pas*

ol Pagels)

26354

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

Week Day

Total Time

RCM 707 Clock

12-Jun-ll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

381

45

13-Jun-ll

Mon

Analyzing Intelink Logs

EVENT

13-Jun-ll

Mon

Email coordinated service of Article 138 at Fort Leavenworth

382
382

13-Jun-ll

Mon

Email with HQOA-review of CCIU file and advises prosecution to refer

382

45
45
45

13-Jun-ll

Mon

specific files to agencies for review
Media inquiry response

13-Jun-ll

Mon

Meeting-with NCIX to receive update brief

382
382

45
45

13-Jun-ll

Mon

OSJA MDW Awards Ceremony

382

45

13-Jun-ll

Phone call with J4, MOW

382

13-Jun-ll

Mon
Mon

Phone call with OSJA

382

45
45

13-Jun-ll

Mon

TOY Charlottesville, VA (LAC)

45

13-Jun-ll

Mon

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

382
382

383
383
383

45
45
45

383

45

45

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
14-Jun-ll

Tue
Tue

14-Jun-ll
14-Jun-ll

Tue

14-Jun-ll

Tue

14-Jun-ll

Tue
Tue

Analyzing Intelink Logs
Draft SPCMCA accounting of excludable delay memorandum
Email from OGAl with concurred with request for defense access to
charging documents

14-Jun-ll

Email to OGAl with request for authority to disclose additional
charged document
Email with 0GA2-sent updated prudential search request

383

45

Leave

383

45

14-Jun-ll

Tue

Media inquiry response

383

45

14-Jun-ll

Tue

Meeting-with planners for OPLAN BRAVO for budgeting

383

14-Jun-ll

Tue
Tue

Meeting-with planners for OPLAN BRAVO for OPSEC
Phone call with OOS to receive update on classification review and

383
383

45
45
45

Phone call with OSJA

383
383

45

Tue

Received and bates stamped SFC Adkins Board Results
Submit prudential search request to DIA
Submit prudential search request to DOS

383
383
383

Tue

Submit prudential search request to ODNI

383

45

14-Jun-ll

Tue
Tue

Submit prudential search request to OGAl
Submit prudential search request to 0GA2

383
383

45
45

14-Jun-ll

Tue

Submitted OGAl Consents to Disclose Specific Charged Oocument(s)s

383

45

14-Jun-ll

Tue

TDY Charlottesville, VA (LAC)

383

45

14-Jun-ll

Tue

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

383

45

14-Jun-ll

prudential search request
14-Jun-ll
14-Jun-ll
14-Jun-ll
14-Jun-ll
14-Jun-ll
14-Jun-ll
14-Jun-ll

Tue
Tue
Tue
Tue

Phone call with J4, MDW

evidence and witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation

96 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

APPELLATE EXHIBIT.
Page
of Pagc(s)

45
45
45
45

26355

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date
15-Jun-ll

WeekDay
Wed
Leave

15-Jun-ll

Wed

15-Jun-ll
15 Jun-11

Wed
Wed

15-Jun-ll

Wed

EVENT

Media inquiry response
Phonecallwith DIA
Phonecallwith DOJ

Total Time

RCM707 Clock

384

45

384

45

384
384

45
45

384

45

15-Jun-ll

Wed

Phone call with 0GA2 to receivefinal input on draft protective order
for unclassified but protected information
Phonecallwith OSJA

384

45

15-Jun-ll

Wed

TDY Charlottesville, VA(LAC)

384

45

15-Jun-ll

Wed

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

384

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
16-Jun-ll

Thu

Email from 0GA2 with completed review of CID case file documents

385

45

16-Jun-ll

Thu

Email to OGAl with updated prudentialsearch request

385

16-Jun-ll

Thu

Email to 0GA2 with committed to looking for t ^ A 2 info in certain

385

45
45

charged documents
16-Jun-ll

Thu

Leave

385

45

16-Jun-ll

Thu

16-Jun-ll

Thu

Media inquiry response
Meeting with planners for OPLAN BRAVO

385
385

45
45

16-Jun-ll

Thu

Phonecallwith OSJA

385

45

16-Jun-ll

Thu

Reviewed CID Subpoena tracker for updates

385

45

16-Jun-ll

Thu

Submitted Request for Access(OGAl)

16-Jun-ll

Thu

TOY Charlottesville, VA(LAC)

385
385

45
45

16-Jun-ll

Thu

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

385

45

386
386

45
45

386

45
45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders,and prepare for Article 32
investigation
17-Jun-ll
17-Jun-ll

Fri

Email with DA discussed discovery

Fri

Leave

17-Jun-ll

Fri
Fri

Media inquiry response
Meeting with SPCMCA to discuss accounting of excludable delay

17-Jun-ll

386

memorandum
17-Jun-ll
17-Jun-ll

Fri
Fri

Phone call with company commander
Phone call with DOS discussed scope of prudential search request and

386
386

45
45

preservation aspect of letter
17-Jun-ll

Fri

17-Jun-ll

Fri

386
386

Phonecallwith OSJA
Phone call with OTJAG in reference to handling, use, or discovery of

45
45

classified information
386
386

45

17-Jun-ll
17-Jun-ll

Fri
Fri

Received additional discovery documents from CIO
SPCMCA Accounting of Excludable Delay Memorandum

17-Jun-ll

Fri

TDY Charlottesville, VA(LAC)

386

45
45

17-Jun-ll

Fri

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

386

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Artide 32
investigation

97 of 231



UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

^TE EXHIBIT.
ofPage(s)

26356

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Date

WeekDay

EVENT

TotalTime

17-Jun-ll

Fri

Worked on protective orderfor unclassified, law enforcement sensitive
information

386

45

387
387

45
45

388

45

18-Jun-ll

Sat

Leave

IS-Jun-ll

Sat

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop
evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
materialand associated equity holders, and prepare for Artide 32
investigation
Developed defense request tracking system

RCM 707 Clocks

19-Jun-ll

Sun

19-Jun-ll

Sun

Developed discovery tracking system

388

19-Jun-ll

Sun

Email with DlSAreached out to DISA to discuss prudentialsearch
request

388

45
45

19-Jun-ll

Sun

Email with 0GA2 sent draft protective order for unclass LES
information

388

45

19-Jun-ll
19-Jun-ll

Sun

Leave
Meeting with OSJA

388

Sun

388

45
45

19-Jun-ll

Sun

Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

388

45

389
389

45

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders,and prepare for Article 32
investigation
20-Jun-ll

Mon

20-Jun-ll

Mon

Developed defense request tracking system
Developed discovery tracking system

20-Jun-ll

Mon

Email from t ^ A l with confirmed receipt of prudential search request

389

45

20-Jun-ll

Mon

Email with DlSA sent DOJ information to assist in discovery

389

45
45
45

45

20-Jun-ll
20-Jun-ll

Mon
Mon

Email with DlSA sent draft prudential search request
Email with FBlcoordinateforapbone meeting

20-Jun-ll

Mon

Email with OGAl to prudentialsearch request

389
389
389

20-Jun-ll

Mon

Email with OGAl provided additional guidance on prudential search

389

45

20-Jun-ll

Mon

request
Email with 0GA2 to review final draft ofprotective order to push out

389

45

20-Jun-ll

Mon
Mon

Leave
Media inquiry response

389
389

45
45

Mon
Mon
Mon

Meeting-with OSJA
Phone call with OGAl to discussuse request
Phone call with OGAl to receive update on one set of charged

389
389
389

45
45
45

Mon

documents and its review of the unclassified case file
Phone call with 0GA2 to review final draft of protective order to push

389

45

outdiscoveryl
Request DoD Personnel Clearance and Access
Worked generally to produce discoverable information, develop

389

45

389

45

390

45

45

discovery2
20-Jun-ll
20-Jun-ll
20-Jun-ll
20-Jun-ll
20-Jun-ll
20-Jun-ll
20-Jun-ll

Mon
Mon

evidenceand witnesses, identify other potentially discoverable
material and associated equity holders, and prepare for Article 32
investigation
21-Jun-ll

Tue

Communication Coordinate with defense for encrypted
communication

98 of 231

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

i

APPEII.ATE EXHIBIT.
Page
ofPage(s)

26357

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