Title: Volume FOIA 074

Release Date: 2014-03-20

Text: 23703Volume 74 of 111SJAR ROTFOIA VersionVERBAT IM 1RECORD OF TRIAL2(and accompanying papers)of(Name: Last, First, Middie initiai) (Sociai Security Number) (Rank)Headquarters andHeadquarters Company,United States Army Garrison U-S- Army FCDIJC Ml/er: VA 22211(Unit/Command Name) (Branch of Service) (Station or Snip)ByGENERAL COURT-MARTIALConvened by Commander(Titie of Con vening Authority)UNITED STATES ARMY MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON(Unit/Command of Con vening Authority)Tried atFort. Meade, MD on see below(Piace or Piaces of Triai) (Date or Dates of Triai-9Date or Dates of Trial:23 February 2012, 15-16 March 2012, 24-26 April 2012, 6-8 June 2012, 25 June 2012,16-19 July 2012, 28-30 August 2012, 2 October 2012, 12 October 2012, 17-18 October 2012,7-8 November 2012, 27 November - 2 December 2012, 5-7 December 2012, 10-11 December 2012,8-9 January 2013, 16 January 2013, 26 February - 1 March 2013, 8 March 2013,10 April 2013, 7-8 May 2013, 21 May 2013, 3-5 June 2013, 10-12 June 2013, 17-18 June 2013,25-28 June 2013, 1-2 July 2013, 8-10 July 2013, 15 July 2013, 18-19 July 2013,25-26 July 2013, 28 July - 2 August 2013, 5-9 August 2013, 12-14 August 2013,16 August 2013, and 19-21 August 2013.1 insert ?verbatirri or ?surrimari'zeo? as appropriate. This form be used by the Army and Navy for verbatim records of triai 2 See inside back co ver for instructions as to preparation and arrangement.DD FORM 490, MAY 2000 PREWOUS OBSOLETE Front Cover9z6zv?a5u!uuew23704mzo 228 EN: 3 Emm aomnm. Em: 9: o?smismm 833:3 Ho Eoco395M2953m2o-E-E mzu Emm aozma Sm: Em 958% ea mBEm56:5 an 8538 3 :8 mam >mmEm:3o_: momma .83. 2: Q3 mosoino. Sncomm 8 mnnomm$3 a So comma. mzu ?mm So mam wmwoEm.:m. on E38 on 83o276NoS-_o-? NS Emm zosma Em 9583 ms: mS_:m 95:5 :o$3022. ea woman :3Rani. mzu En. :2 :98 Ed. ?2.53 mam ma :2 32:3? 8 :om2_. mzu Emm mam o: man Awno?anzawa5 cm P2: HUD: mzo :3 u3:_nEm W58 Em955: m095mo o-om-mmmoS-%-mm 3 355mm Em Emm?w on MSG man. Ema E2 zmmama wnmzaoaEmmiw moaamsa Sm: Em" Emmw DDQ Sum3:3 3 Em o276New Amo_o-om-E 3:55, mzu 38:8 Em 29%: m_:_m39285 noSSm:n_ Sm: Ema Emmw BE Emm 5:83. Em E32 oUo_uo20 OOZOCW - oamoe mEo-%-8 353 21:58 Sum soama EB Em 958% mSEm?o:E an 8nE woman on Em mmn? ammo man. mam: rm mm: 833: wow moamwsm no nmocm Ea $10 ma?a easum uamaaoa =0 Eogmam 5:53 m?m om .SBm8m :Em 3.. Ucmzm :8mzu Sum Em: muowmz. man 9 mzu6z6a1v'a6u!uuew237102&3 Em: :m :3 :9 :3 mmozamm minm Ocpaano mam3m=E=< am: mooa. loam, Ems; 2.5 -womzdAmWom::m_mm:Bnm2oQNo_o-om-B 2 >86N2 mSo-om-B Kc WZU mm:m=BmE woman :83 3? 43: Rani. mzu ma :9 :m:m:mn ~05. Q3 :9Sonya Ed. qonozm oq mn_cm:mn MOE mam rum Una: oUo395Mo3-om-a .N2 o-om- 1.. 3858 125 wmwnamim? 3:3? mzo 8 an 32$:8 EEmo:..oa N05 - Oxmm? w_2_w 86-3-5 H253 ::=Emm mzn. Emm 2528 SE Em 0553 BE mSEm29.5 cm Simian. 3. So man. woman mzoea :2 :m33~oS-om-5 .85.8. mo Bmsc?mm mzo nono__uo_uoDm man $33 nnuoz. Ea 530232 mzu?mm SB :0 SE Raw? 3 2.5% 1% mEEm 2.5 wmwormmim? :woo_:3n:mm ea :8 mam OoS3m:&:m 0462 EEoorm< UB9wlm. 95 503691 3:9UB9ATTACHMENT 6I 23716REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REQUEST 201907291. INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRSTMIJ 2. SSN 3. RCNMANNING, BRADLEY E. 4. FORMER STATUSa. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTERS I How I CELL IIR-R New Confinement (NC) R-R5. CURRENT STATUSa. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERSI Row I CELL I:MAX DET Indoctrination (INDOC) Suicide Risk (ADSSR) 801 A 1916. REQUEST INFORMATION 7. OFFENSE INFORMATION 8. SENTENCE INFORMATIONis a New Confinement128. 1349. REMARKSSND WAS PLACED IN SPECIAL QUARTERS DUE TO RECENT CONFINEMENT.10. REQUESTING OFFICIALa. NAME (LAST, b. SIGNAT .-RE c. DATE ALLDREDGE, J.D. ?Ti 20100729 AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD ACTION . T1. APPROVED STATUSa. LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL max 961? 5w/A (?IiHIGHER CUSTODY FACTORSLOWER CUSTODY FACTORSAVERHART JR. J. T., CWO-4, COMMAN DING OFFICERASSAULTIVE I DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR CLEAR MILITARY RECORD, ASIDE FROM PRESLNT OFFENSESERIODS DRUG CLOSE FAMILY GOOD HOME CONDITIONSSERIOUS CIVIL I MILITARY CRIMINAL RECORD THE NOT Low TOLERANCE OF PRUSTRATION APPARENTLY STAELE MEN IAL INTENSIVE OUT OR DISLIKC Or THE MIUTARY INDICATIONS THC INDIVIOLIAL To To INDICATION OF UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPARATIVELY SHORT SENTENCE TO HOWEVER,PERSONAL PAST AND PRESENT LENGIH OF SENTENCE SHALL NOT BE AN OVERRIDING FACIORPENDING CIVIL CHAFIGESI DCTAINCR FILED BEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINE MCNTSERVING A SENTENCE WHICH THE INDIVDUAL CONSIDERS TO HE COMPLETION OF, OR ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN, TREATMENTUNJUST OR SEVERE PROGRAMS OR GROUPS[3 POOR HOIVE CONDITIONS OR FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS OTHER:A MENTAL EVALUATION INDICATING NEUROSIS OR .CI HISTORY OF PREVIOLIS ESOAPEISI OTHER:[j OEMONSTRATED PATTERN OF POOR JUDGEMENT (j OTHER:LENGTH. OR POTENTIAL LENGTH. OF SENTENCE OTHER:OTHER: OTHER:PHASE OF CONFINEMENT MANDATORY REVIERECEPTION PRE-RELEASE I I RESTORATION FOR: AGAINST: RE MARKS:12. SENIOR BOARD MEMBEFTa. NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) b. SI c. DATE /S/ems. Cm. 2?/oovsoI I REMARKS: 13. COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW a. NAME, GRADE. TITLE o. ATU c. DATE 20100730REMARKS:BRIG FORM 4200, SEPT 2009Manning8_42847 23717REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110103INMATE NAME (LAST, RCNMANNING. BRADLEY E. -. -I. I CURRENT -a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL cl. IIMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 I92CURRENT CHARGES: ART 92, 128. I34DISCIPLINARY REPORTS:NONEOBSERVATION REPORTS:NONEWORK 8. TRAINING REPORTS: 20110102: AAREVIEW20101230: RECOMMEND REMOVE FROM POIBA: 0 AA: 8 OS: 0RECOMMENDED STATUSa. CUSTODY LCVEI. b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. CIUARTERSIROWICELL ItMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SO-I HIGHER CUSTODY FACTORS LOWER CUSTODY FACTORSASSALILTIVE I DISRUPI IVE BEHAVIOR CLEAR MILIYAFY RECORD ASIDE FROM OFFENSESEWOUSDRUGARHSE El SERIOUS CIVIL I MILITARY CRIMINAL FECORD THE CI-FENSEISI CHARGE-3 Is NOT SERIOUSLOW (IF FHIISTRATION MENTAL CONDITIONINTENSIVI-L OUT OR DISLIKI: OF fHl- INDICAI IONS IHE wIsI?Es TO RE TURN To DUTYINDICATION OF UNWILLINGNESS To HESPONSILIILITY FO-1 COMPARATIVCLY SHORT SLNTENCE TO ACT IONS PAST AND LENGTH OF SHALL NOT BE AN OVERRIDING FACTORPENDING CIVIL CHARGES DETAINER FILED [3 BEI-IAVIOR DURING A PREV OUS CONFINEMENTSERVING A SENTENCE WHICII THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERS TO SE COMPLETION OF. OR ACTIVE IN. TREATMENTOFI SEVERE PROGRAMS OR GROUPSPOOH IIOVIE CONDITIONS OR FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS A MENTAL EVALUATION IND-CATING NEUROSIS ORHISTORY OF PHEVIOUS ESCAPEISI lj DEMONSTRATED PATTERN or POOR or: ICRILENGTH OR POTENTIAL OF SENTENCE [3 OTHEROTHER. OTHER.REMARKS:SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferred from TFCF Camp Aritian due to thelack of specialized mental health care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recentiy as 28 December 2010. SND has aAVERHART JR., J.T. I COMMANDING OFFICERpotentiaI gender identity disorder and is pending a 706 sanity boa rd hearing. 9 . . . BOARD MEMBER .- . . NAME I GRADE I TITLE YES NO REMARKS SIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBER BLENISI C.M. I PROGRAMS CHIEF BOARD MEMBER 2 AJORDAN. R.N. I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELOR I BOARD MEMBER 3 ILEE. C. J. I SECURITY CHIEF 3? I . -- APPROVED STATUS 1? -. a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I Row I CELL IIMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SO-1 I 192COMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW. . - -: a. NAME I). SI AT IV c. DATE 20110103BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 2011ManningB_4284623718CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEWREPORT DATE 20110107INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) RCNMANNING. BRADLEY E. I CURRENT 5' a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. DETAIL d. QUARTE RSI Row ICELL IIMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 I 192CURRENT CHARGES: ART 92, I28, 134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS:OBSERVATION REPORTS:NONE NONEWORK TRAINING REPORTS: 20110102: AA REVIEW20110107: RECOMMEND REMOVE FROM POIBACUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I ROW I CELL 11MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 IA I 192. -if HIGHER CTORS. 4' 4. - LOWER CUSTODY FACTORS ..ASSAUI TIVF UISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR CLEAR MILITARV RECORD. ASIDE FROM PRESENT OFFENSESERIOUS DRUG ABUSE CLOSE FAMILY GOOD HOME OOIIDIT IONSSERIOUS CIVIL /Mll II AIIY CRIMINAL THE IS NOT SERIOUSIj LOW TOIICRANCE OF TRUSTRATION APPARENTLY STABLE MENTAL CONDITIONACTING OIIT OR DISLIKF. OF THE MILIIARV INDICATIONS THE INDIVIDUAI wIsREs TO RETURN TO INDICATION or UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT FIESPONSIBII ITY FOR COMPARATIVELV SHOR I SFNTENCI: TO PERSONAL Ac PAST AND one 31 LENGTH OF SEN SRAL l- NOI BE AN OVERRIDING rAcToRPENDING CIVIL CHARGES I FILED DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTSERVING A WHICH TIIE INDIVIDUAL TO BE COMPLETION OF. OR ACTIVE IN, TREATMEI-ITUNJUST OR SEVERE PROGRAMS OR GROUPSPOOR HOME CONDITIONS OR FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS A MENTAL EVALUATION INDICATING SERIOUS NEUROSIS OR .CI Oman?HISTORY OF PREVIOUS ESCAPEISI DEMONSTRATED PATTERN OF POOR JUDGEMENI LENGTII. OR POTENTIAL LENGTH, OF SENTENCE OTHER:OTHER: IHER:REMARKS:SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferred from TFCF Camp Arifian due to thelack of specialized mental health care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recently as 04 January 2011. SND has apotential gender identity disorder and is pending a 706 sanity board hearing. A 3* ?awn NAME I GRADE I TITLE YES NO REMARKSSENIOR BOARD MEMBERBLENIS C.M. I I SECURITY CHIEFBOARD MEMBER 2JORDAN, R.N.I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELOR BOARD MEMBER 3M. I SSGT I ADMIN CHIEF I a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL OUAFITERS I ROW I CELL 8 BRIG FORM 4200.1. JAN 2011ManningB_42845?g . . FFICER REVIEW a. NAME b. SIGN TU c. DATE AVERHART JR.. J.T. CWO4 I COMMANDING OFFICER 20110107I23719 REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110114INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRSTMI.) SSN RCNMANNING. BRADLEY CUSTODY LEVEL D. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTERS I CELL MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 IA I 192CURRENT CHARGES: ART 92, 128, 13-1DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: OBSERVATION REPORTS:NONE NONEWORK TRAINING REPORTS: 20110102: AA REVIEW20110107: RECOMMEND REMOVE FROM POIBACUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS C. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTERSI ROWICELL IIMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 HIGHER CUSTODY FACTORS - . . . LOWER QUS IODY FACTORSASSAULTIVE I OISRUPTIVT-: BEHAVIOR CLEAR MILITARY RECORD. ASIDE FROM PRESENT OFFENSESERIOUS DRUG ABUSE CLOSE FAMILY TIES: GOOD HOIVE CONDITIONSSERIOUS CIVIL I MILITARY CRIMINAL RECORD THE OFFENSEISI CHARGED IS NOT SERIOUSLow TOLERANCE OF FRUS IRATION APPARENTLY IABLE MENTAL CONDI TION[j INTENSIVE ACTING OR DISLIKE OF THE MILITARY INDICATIONS THE INDIVIDUAL WISHES TO RETURN TO DUTYINDICATION CF UNWII I -I-IGNESS TO RFSPONSIBILITY FOR COMPARATIVELY SHORT TO CONFINEIVENT. PERSONAL ACTIONS PAS AND PRESENT LENGTH OF SENTENCE SHALL NOI BE AN IJVERRIDING FACTORPENDING CIVIL CHARGES I DETAINER FILED BEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTSERVING A SENTENCE WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERS TO BE COMPLETION OF, OR ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN, TREATMENTUNJUST OR SEVERE PROGRAMS OR GROUPSPOOR HOME CONDITIONS OR FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS OTHER:A ME EV ALUATI INDICATING SERI NEUROSIS OR OTHERHISTORY OF PREVIOUS OTHERDEMONSTRATED PATTERN OF POOR JUDGEMENT OTHER[3 LENGTH, OR POTENTIAL LENGTH, OF SENTENCE OTHER:OTHER: OTHERREMARKS:SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferred from TFCF Camp Arifjan due to thelack of specialized mental health care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recently as 04 January 2011. SND has apotential gender identity disorder and is pending a 706 sanity board hearingNAME I GRADE I TITLE YES NO REMARKS SIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBER JORDAN, R.N. I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELOR . BOARD MEMBER 2 BUCK.J. M. I SSGT I ADMIN CHIEF 1BOARD MEMBER 3 PURDON, W.M. I CPL I COUNSELOR a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTE I ROW I CELL ,m/-Ix 39 so-I a. NAME SIGNATU c. DATE AVERHART JR., J.T. I CWO4 I COMMANDING -7 . 20110114BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 2011 ManningB_42844 I123720nspom? om-: (wvmmoo)MAX DET POICLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REQUEST 20110113INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) SSN ncuMANNING, BRADLEY -5. gin: mg, -FORMER STATUS -{sf - 2 a. CUSTODY LEVEL sums c. ASSIGNED oemn. d. ouAnTEns/now/cELL? A asLa?? 8. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAILMAX DET SUICIDE RISKd. QUARTEFISIFIOWICELL IISQ-1 I A1192r. OEFENSEVNFORMATION-..2'REMARKS:DUE TO SND ACUONS HE IS BEING PLACED ON SUUICIDE RISK BY ORDER OF THE BRIG OFFICER.REQUESTING OFFICIAL 3. NAME (usr, FIRST MI) c. one wees. T. 20110113 . .: rm IAPPROVED STATUS3. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS C. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUAFITERS I ROW 8Df-r? 9i.ioAI1o uwaeavora?? s? Q. 7" -. I con: 3AGAINST: REMARKSNAME (LAST, MI.) c. DATE /an-5. L: 202/011 9REMARKS: 7 I BRIG FORM 4200, JAN 2011ManningB__42848 237211 ll REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110119INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) SSN RCNBRADLFV - 3:15 -. CURRENT A . . a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTE RS I ROW I CELL ItMAX DET SUICIDE RISK SO-1 IA I 192CURRENT CHARGES: ART 92,128,134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: OBSERVATION REPORTS:NONE NONEWORK 8. TRAINING REPORTS: 20110116: BA REVIEW20110118: RECOMMEND TO BE PLACED ON POI STATUSBA?As. RECOMMENDED STATUS . - a. CUSTODY LEVEL I). STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I ROW ItMAX DET SUICIDE RISK CO-1 IAI I921 HIGHER CUSTODY FACTORS I. LOWER CUSTODY FACTORS . IX: I3t I IAVIOR CLEAR RECORD. ASIDE FROM PRESENT OFFENSECI seems ABUSE CLOSE FAMILY rncs; 0000 HOME CONDITIONSSERIOUS I MILITARY CRIMINAL RECORD TIIE CHARGED Is Nor SERIOUSI211 LOW TOLERANCE OF FRUSTRATION APPARFNTIY STIU3I.F MFNTAL CONDITIONACTING OUT OR TI MILITARY INDICATIONS THE INOIVDUAL WISHES To RETURN TO DUTYINDICATION or UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCEPI FOR SHORT SENTENCE To PERSONAL. PAST AND PRESENT I OF SHAI I nor BE AN OVFRRIDING FACTORPENDING CIVIL CHARGES FILED BEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTSERVING A SENTENCE THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDER3 T0 ET: COMPLETION OF. OR ACTIVE IN, TREATMENTUNJUST OR SEVERE PROGRAMS OR GROUPSPOUR HUME UH FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS OTHER:ON 0 0 IS NE IROSIS ORINDI A IN I [3 OTHERHISTORY OI OIHER:DEMONSTRATED PATTERN OF POOR JUDGEMENT 1] OT HER:LENGIH. OH POTENTIAL LENGTH. OF SENTENCE OTHER:OTHER: 1] REMARKS:SND has previous demonstrated suicidal idealions and gestures. SND was transferred from TFCF Camp Arifjan due to the lack ofspecialized mental health care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recently as 18 January 2011. SND has a potential gender Identitydisorder and is pending a 706 sanity board hearing.On 18 January 2011, SND had an anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himself In the presence of the Brig OIC andSupervisor.A -I E1 atom vow: NAME I GR ADE I TITLE YES NO REMARKS SIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBER BLENIS. c. I I PROGRAMS CHIEF Jr 4? BOARD MEMBER 2 FULLER. W. I I SECURITY CHIEF 9,4 BOARD MEMBER 3 IBUCK.J. M. ISSGTI ADMIN CHIEF STATUS . . A 4 -- -a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTER IRO/42? I76 1" 5c/Icz fatsCOMMANDING OFFICER REVIEW 7- .- -I. .a. NAME I). SIGNATURE c. DATE AVERHART JR., J.T. I CWO4 I COMMANDING OFFICER 20110119BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 2011 Manning 23722CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMEN1 REVIEW I. M. \t~tNtt~.~G, URRE N1 STATUSDETAII - POI C511 50.; /192OTJY It/Iii)! STATUS OFTCHARGES ART 92, 128.134OQSERVAT ION REPORTSDISCIPLINARY REPORTSNLINI P.f\llEwWORI-I 3 TRAINING moms21-. Di 0 10 C-5. (1 .-A/1 3:9;51 iaj 10 tut?/JJE. It. BEFOF1, lutvutu I A.4 I .I nu'~1uL' Tu? I Int lu.' it nut?. tn SHORT -1- Lu-11.. non. -mrp INMATE CHOOSES Tozfz? .1 NOT TO: APPEAR BEFORE BOARD. vi 1 . . ?:34ASSAULTIVF I IVE BEHAVIOR CLEAR MILITARY RECORD: ASIDE PRESENT OFFENSEsemous onus muss CLOSE r=n.m.v Good HOME cowomons[j SERIOUS CIVIL 1 MILITARY CRIMINAI, RECORD EL THE OFFENSEIS) CHARGED IS NOT semcusTOI ICRANCE. OF FRUSTRA vow r\Prw=L=rInY MENTAL couomouACTING out OR OISLIKE OF IHI: mt wishes r0 RETURN to co IVOF UNWILLINGNIESS TO RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERSONAL COMPARATIVEL I ZHORT SENT EVCE TO HOWEVER. AC I IONS PAST AND PRESENT SENTENCE IALL BE AN PENDING CNIL cmaaes 1 oermea FILED BEHAVIOR ouams A Par.-J-ous CONFNEMENTSERVING A SENTENCE WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIOERS TO BE UNJUST OR COMPLETION OF. OR AC TIVE PARTICIPATION IN. TREATMENT PROGRAMS ORsevens cnouvsPOOR HOME CONOITDNS OR FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS [1 A MENTAL EVALUATION INDICATING SERIOUS NEUFIOSISOR OTHER:H-sronv OF PREVIOUS Escmeisr [1 OTHERDEMONSIRATED PATTERN OF POOR OTHERLENGTH, OR POTENTIAL OF SENTENCE OTHEROTHER:REMARKS: SND has previous demonstrated suicidal Ideations and gestures. SND was transferred Irom TFCF Camp Arlfjan due to the lackof specialized mental health care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recently as 18 January 2011. SND has a potential genderidentity disorder and is pending a 706 sanity board hearing.On 18 January 2011, SND had an anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himseit in the presence of the Brig OIC and Supervisor. A . NAMEIGRADEITITLE YES NO REMARKS SIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBERBLENIS, c. I PROGRAMS CHIEF 6/ BOARD MEMBER 2 FULLER, w. I SECURITY CHIEF . BOARD MEMBER 3 .-. . eucx. .1 I CHIEF I 1 . - 1. AVERHART JR., J.T. CWO4 COMMANDING OFFICER 1 . 4 2111111121in 7'7 1. I a. custom: LEVEL e. smrus c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERSIROWICELL 23 P02. 549 /9 L-REMARKS: 7 /4/r?/Zwvv? :4 7 BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 201123726 REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110123INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) SSN RCNBRADLEY 2- . URRE msmrus a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I ROW I CELL ItMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 192CURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE 92, I28, 134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: NONE OBSERVATION REPORTS: NONEWORK 8: TRAINING REPORTS: REVIEW20110128 RECOMMEND TO BE PLACED OFF POIBARECOMMENDED i-i .. i a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS IROWI CELL :3MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY 80-1 I 192INMATE SELECTION TO APREAR BEFORE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARDINMATE SI INMATE CHOOSES . T0: . APPEAR BEFORE BOARD. . - . - 1: ASSAULTIVEI QIERUPTI BEHAVIOR CLEAR MILITARY RECORD. ASIDE FROM PRESENT OFFENSEFE scrrous DRUG ABUSE CLOSE FAMILY rues: (3000 Hour. co~omo~s -5 SERIOUS CIVIL I MILITARY THE OFFENSEISI CHANGED Is NOT ssazousOF FRUSTR-U APPAHENTL "r STIVFLE MENTAL coNDm0>IINTENSIVE ACTING OUT OR OF II ITARY INC-ICATIOI-IS WISHES TO FIEILRN TO DUTYII-II OF LAVJILL NGNESS TO PI RESPONSIBILITY COMFACATIVELY SI-ORT SENTENCE TO HOWEVER, LENGTH OI:ACTIONS PAST mo PRESENT SENTENCE sum NOT es AN ovennuomc; mcron[j PENDING CIVIL OIAPGES I DETAINER FILED BEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTSERVING A SEVTENCE WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERS IO BE UNJUST OR COMFLHION OF, OR ACTIVE FARTICIPAT ION IN. TREATMENT PROGRAMS ORSEVERE caaupsPOOR HOME conomous on FAMILY ups CI on IER.A MENTAL EVALL-ATION INDICATING sznsous NEUFIOSIS on omenHISTORY OF PREVIOUS [1 OTHEROEMONSTRATED PATTERN or POOR JUDGEMENT [3 OTHERLENGTH. on POTENTIAL LENGTH, or SENTENCE omen;OTHER: omenREMARKS: SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferred from TFCF Camp Ariljan due to the lackol specialized mental health care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recently as 18 January 2011. SND has a potential genderidentity disorder and is pending a 706 sanity board hearing.On 18 January 2011, SND had an anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himself In the presence of the OIC andSupervisor. YES REMARKS SIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBERBLENIS. C. I I PROGRAMS CHIEF BOARD MEMBER2 . . I FULLER, w. I I SECURITY CHIEF 3 BOARD MEMBER 3JORDAN, R. I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELOR . .1 . .1 ?23975 BARNES. D. v. I CWO2 I COMMANDING OFFICER I 20110123 We .1 a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED ICELLIICI 50; I1 A Hg ajmeaow be 6.?2?nwdMaI4??Jw44?L?I J/Zeaxgtk I. BRIG FORM 4200.1. JAN 2011 .. I Manning 23727I REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110204INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) SSN RCNMANNING. BRADLEY E. a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. I Row I CELL MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 CHARGES: 134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: NONE OBSERVATION REPORTS: NONEwoRI< 3. TRAINING REPORTS: REVIEW:UN: Av: 20 Ex: 0 20110203 RECOMMEND TO BE PLACED OFF POIBA: 1 AA: eqCUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL a. I Row I CELL IIMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 I 192 9 INMATE sue E3, IINMATE cuoos Es TO: TO: APPEAR BOARD. #3ASSAULTIVEI BEHAVIORSERIOUS DRUG ABUSESERIOUS CIVIL I MILITARY CRIMINAL RECORD T: . CLEAR MLITARY RECORD, ASIDE FROM PRESENT OFFENSECLOSE FAMILY GOOD HOME CONDITIGQSTHE IS NOT semcus LOW TOLERANCE OF FRUSTRATION AFPARENTLY STABLE MENTAL CONDITIONINTENSIVE ACTING OUT OR DISLIKE OF THE MILITARY INDICATIONS THE INDIVIDUAL WISHES TO RETURN TO DUTYCOMPARATIVELY SHORT SENTENCE TO HOWEVER, LENGTH OFSENTENCE SHALL NOT BE AN OVERRIDING FACTORINDICATION OF UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERSONALACTIONS PAST AND PRESENTPENDING CIVIL DETAINER FILED BEHAVIOR DURNG A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTSERVING A SENTENCE WHICH THE IBDIVIDUAL CONSIDERS TO BE UNJUST OR COMPL ETION OF. OR ACTNE PARTICIPAI ION N, TREATMENT PROGRAMS OREIIZIDIZIEIIZIDDEICIIZI SEVERE GROUPSpoon HOME coNoITIoNs oR FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS OTHER:A MENTAL semous NEuRosIs on oTI-Ian;HISTORY or paewous OTHER:DEMONSTRATED PATTERN or room JUDGEMENT OTHER:LENGTH, on POTENTIAL LENGTH. or SENTENCE omen;DTRER: omen:FIE VIAH KS: SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferred from TFCF Camp Arifjan due to the lackot specialized mental health care. SND has demonstrated erratic behavior as recently as 18 January 2011. SND has a potential genderidentity disorder and is pending a 706 sanity board hearing.On 18 January 2011, SND had an anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himself in the presence of the Brig OIC and Su oervlsor. . ..N0 REMARKS SIQIIATUHESENIOR BOARD MEMBERBLENIS, C. I I PROGRAMS CHIEFBOARD MEMBER 2FULLER, W.l CHIEF .BOARD MEMBER 3JORDAN, R. I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELOR I . I 1 .. BARNES. D. v. cwoz I COMMANDING OFFICER 20110204a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. sTATus IGNED DETAIL d. DUARTE s/R WICELLIIbe-I? 0. . 50- I A /92REMARKS: . BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 2011ManningB_4374823728REPORT DATE CLASSIFZCATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW201 10211 INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI) ssu MANNING. BRADLEY CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS C. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I ROW I CELMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 192CURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE 92,128,134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: NONEOBSERVATION REPORTS: NONEWORK 8: TRAINING REPORTS: REVIEW20110203: RECOMMEND TO BE PLACED OFF POIBARECOMMENDED STATUS - -. . -a. CUSTODY LEVEL 1). STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I ROW I CELL #3MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY 80-1 192INMATE SELECTION TO APPEAR BEFORE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENTBOARDINMATE SIGNATURE:INMATE CHOOSES I NOT TO: APPEAR BEFORE BOARD.QUSTODV FACTORS FA AssAuLrIv~: BEHAVIOR CLEAR necono. ASIDE sac.-.I PRESENT OFFENSEssmous DRUG ABUSE CLOSE FAMILY 1IEs. GOOD IICME cc.~omoNsSERIOUS CIVIL MILITARY CRIMINAI THIS CHATIGED IS NOT SERIOUSLCW TOLERANCE FRUSTHATION [j STABLE MI IAL CONDITION[3 NTENSIVE our on or [j THE WISHES TO RETUFN 10 ouwwe z,Ano~ 01: UNWILLIHGNESS To ACCEPT Ion snom SENTENCE to ACTIONS PAST AND PRESENT SENTENCE SHALL ~07 as AIN oveqnuomc FACTORPENDING VIL cI-Anees ecs-IAvIc-n omwc A r~r-Lwous SEWING A SENTENCE WHICH me INDIVIDUAL cowsuoens to UNJUST OR COMPLETION OF. OR ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN, TREATMEPF PROGRAMS onsevens GROUPSET noon co~omo~s on FAMILY RCLATIONSI ups A MENTAL EvALuAno~ TNDICATING semous NEUFIC-SIS on OTHER.[1 msroav on PREVIOUS OTHER[3 osmonsnwea prmenu OF POORJUDGEMENT omenLENGTH. o=I POTENTIAL LENGTH. OF SENTENCE omsaomen omenhas S.u.'c.'d4I Has mole EM) ./erL..I 5+1 If) I a- I/??blr? 015?? f7 was NO REMARKS sIc}I?AruaEsemon BOARD MEMBER CHIEF I, BOARD MEMBEFI2 FULLER, w. SECURITY CHIEF BOARD MEMBER 3 I JORDAN. R. I I semon COUNSELOR .;Ig_o BARNES. 0. v. OFFICER 20110211a. custom LEVEL c. ASSIGNED DETAIL /13REMARKS:BRIG FORM 4200.1. JAN 2011ManningB_42839 23729maDATE: 20110225 INMATE NAME: MANMNG, BRADLEY 5. LAST 4 ?cw: cuanem STATUSCUSTODYLEVE1: MAX smrus: oer ASSIGNED DETAIL: POI QUARTERS ROW CELL: so-1 192CURRENT CHARGES: ART 92, 128, 134NONE NONE20110225BA: 1 AA: 10 05:0. . . . .1 114-}; . . CUSTODY LEVEL: Mitt X7 UCIAILI POI QUARTERS ROW Tr? I 192rusuoassxe Bi, INMATE CHCOSL 5 TO: NOT 'ro. APPKAR so-one BOARD 4? as . . BEHAVIOR MILITARY RECORDSERIOUS DRUG ABUSE CLOSE FAMILY TIES HOME CRIMINAL RECORD THE OFFENSE CHARGED ARE NOT SERIOUS?ll Low 10: FRANCE or STABLE MENTAL c'oNo.i.o~IN TENSIVE we OUT OR DISL KE OF THE r~oicA?nnM THAT ms wnsues non 55-? cr Pt)?g sac-nr s?Nr?Ncs ro CONFINEMENTPENDING CIVIL CHARGES FILH) BEHAVIOR DURING A sumac A wmcu CONSIDIISYO at Jiuusr co Q5 Q3 Eegrgeeno? mg?mgu, POOR HOME OR FAMILV OTHER:Auevm-t OTHER:His-roar or PREVIOUS 1 omca: timed .-.1 tn 'iI;v~i Yr?gn-buOEMONSTRATEO PATTERN OF POOR IUDGEMENT Lag 51? I ZK LENGTH OR POYENTIAL LENGTH SENTENCE OTHER:OTHER: oi: omen:SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SNO does not have strong fa miiy ties. and or relationships withimmediate family. SND requested to appear infront of the classi?cation and assignment board, but had no new issues to bring to the board'sattentionjhat were not already voiced in his previous apperances beforethe board. SND was evaluated by Col Malone on 201 10225. Col Maloneannotated that SNO's behavior and thought content is normal and his thinking process is clear. Col Malone annotated that SND does not need to besegregated from general population the to a treatable mental disorder and that SND would onlY need VOWW Malone stated that SND remains in early full remission of an anxiety disorder. Col Malone is also tapering SND offof his prescribed medicationsDue to the nature of SNO's alleged charges and national security concerns, SND is potentially facing a severe sentenceto con?nment. 9451')? 4 Mi?! -s~?m?busCon?t)( FULLER, w. I I ops CHIEFIORDAN, R. l. ISSGI SENIOR COUNSELOR(BARNETT, S. I ADMIN ISTATIJS: MSIGNEO ROW CPJ.ManningB_42837 23730-?-.39DATE: 20110218INMATE NAME: MANNING, BRADLEY E.LAST 4 RCN: CURRENT STATUSCUSTODY LEVEL: MAX STATUS: DET ASSIGNED DETAIL: POI 192CURRENT CHARGES: ART 92, 128, 134REPORTS NONE NONERTS I 20110218REVIEWEDMAX IJE TAIL: POI OUARTERS I ROW (Fl! 50-] I I9)need to be segregated lrDue to the nature of SND s'_cSND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferred from TFCF Camp Arifjan due to the lack ofspecialized mental health care and has a potential gender identity disorder. while confined in Kuwait, SND made a noose out of a bed sheet whichwas lound in his cell. On 18 January 2011, SND had an anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himsell in the presence of the Brig OICand Supervisor. SND has made a potential written suicide '-deation which he has claimed may have been false. SND currently states that he is notsuicidal but has also stated that his written and verbal statements may have been false. SND was evaluated by Col Malone on 20110218. ColMalone annotated that behavior and thought content is normal and his thinking process is clear. Col Malone annotated that SND does notcanjguwiopulation due to a treatable mental disorder and that SND would need only routine further examination.rges and national security concerns, SND is potentially facing a severe sentence to confinment.INMATE SELECTION 1c APPEAR stroke AND ASSIGNMENT etwt?. i:iM/:1: Lil-ht.-SE5 NUI ll)? APPEAR BEFORE BOARD 1 FA 1 Q) oisnuen-.1: BEHAVIOR 1/ CLEAR MILITARY RECORDSERIOUS onus Asziiss ciusi: HES GOOD VOME CONDITIONSs. is. /mu i lnl-V tiiwim.-it RECORD STABLE MENTAL conmnori:isivi. Ac IINS our on i)l$l IKE or Tl .i -nou?jifi?frrur wisrts-to ic PL .1 or to nr-aw:-at-I nice :0 coiiriuer. . HTPENDING CIVIL CHARGES IJETAINLIL FILED DEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTA >tNl Illr. TO 81 UMLSTOI 1| u? ACTIVE TIEATIATBT NOGPAMS ORGROUPSPOOR HOME CONDITIONS 0: FAMILY omen;ll .'Am?rAt sinuous Ntuaosrs on vsvcuosis on-if or PREVIOUS onim;or POOR JUDGEMENT OTHER:LENGTH on eoisnrixu omen:dzisord M1 OTHER . .-. is we .-.. OMID .- ?lift? WNU - i . c. CH.EF pic) IJORDAN, R. J. ISSGI SENIOR COUNSELOR - COMMANDING OFFICER REVLEW YES.-.-2: BARNES, 0. v. /cwoz BRIG . CUSTODY LEVEL: /ysgx ISTATUS: Df-f IASSIGNEO DETAIL: IQUARTERS now CELL. SQManningB_4283823731 . REPORT DATE (Y CLASSIFICA1 now AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110304INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) SSN MANNING. BRADLEY e. 2. . - .. ?czsanemsmrus . 1- - - A .a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTERS I ROW I CELL ItMAX oer PREVENTION or INJURY so-1 I 191CURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE 92. 104. 134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: NONEOBSERVATION REPORTS: NONEWORK TRAINING REPORTSCUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS C. ASSIGNED DETAILREVIEW:201 10304 d. QUARTERS IIROW I CELL OTHER bok?wofMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY IA I 191 INMAT . I INMATE CHOOSES TO: I NOT TO: APPEAR BEFORE BOARD413.1. ASSAULT IVE IDISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR CLEAR MILITARY RECORD, ASIDE FROM PRESENT OFFENSEsemous om.-0 ABUSI: [j 081- rm:-Lv Hes. noon HOME conomoussemous CIVIL I mumnv CRIMINAL RECORD Fl me oseenseus) crwaceo 13 NOT semousLOW TOLERANCE or eausmmou ?opmeunv sraaue MENTAL couomouu.-reussve ACTING our on onsuxe or me Lmuw NUICAHONS me mouvauum w1sHEs ro nerumu 1o ou I HON OF UNWILLINGNESS TO RESPONSIBILITY FOR PI CIJMIMRA TIVFI SHORT SENTENCE TO IACWOINS PAST AND PRESENT Si! SHALL NOT BE AN OVERRIOING FPCTORPENDING LIVIL UHARGFS IDUAINER FILED DURING A PREVIOUS SERVING A SENTENCE WHCH TI-E INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERS TO BE UNJUST pl? COMPT ETION OF. OR AC FIVE PARTICIPATDN IN, TREATMENT ORSEVERE snoupsmow HOME comomous OR FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS OwenA MENTAL EVALUATION woucarms semous ueunosas on omen;msronv or paevuous omen;mneam or POOR Juoeemem omen.-LENGTH, on poreurm LENGTH oe SENTENCE omen;omen. 2? 2 NAME I GRADE ITITLESIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBERBLENIS, C. PROGRAMS CHIEFlac? Ieuvuvx Fox. . BOARD MEMBER 2FULLER, W. I I SECURITY CHEFL0 BOARD MEMBER 3JORDAN. R. I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELOR I D. CUSTODY LEVEL D. STATUS d. QUARTE I ROW I CELL n~Ax I so-: .BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 2011 Page OT 1Manning 23732REPORT DATE (Y CONTINUATION SHEET '20! l0304r. 't'l'l?LE or rrorm 1 2. no FORMClassification and Review 1 Brig Form 4200.siij?r?giiManning. Bradley E. Counselor notes SND has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferredfrom TFCF Camp Aritjan due to the lack of specialized mental health care and has a potential genderidentity disorder. While continecl in Kuwait, SND made a noose out of a bed sheet which was found in hiscell. On l8 January 201 l. SND had an anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himself in thepresence of the Brig and Supervisor. SND has made a potential written suicide ideation which he hasclaimed may have been false. SNI) currently states that he is not suicidal hut has also stated that his writtenand verbal may have been false.MHU Notes: SND was. evaluated by Col Malone on 1030-l. (fol Malone annotated that SND's riskassessment is low and that SND has been removed from all rnedicatiotts. (See attached healthevaluation).Offense Notes: Additional charges were prel?errcd on '2 March 2l)| I. Specifically SND was charged withviolation ot'Article I04 (aiding the enemy) which carries a maximum punishment ofdeath. Additional notes: On '2 March 201 I, SND made statements to the Brig to the effect of allowed to have my underwear which, with the elastic band is the most dangerous piece ot"cluthing".comments have raised the concern that SND may be formulating a plan to potentially kill himsell?.On 3 March 201 I, SND also made several statements to the Brig re-iterating what he has previouslystated to the board. These statements addressed his written and verbal comments of potentiallyharming ltimself possibly being false.Board Notes: SND chose not to appear before the Board. The Board did recommendthat handling letter be changed l0 state WILL receive correspondence material as requested. to includemail, legal papers. envelopes. D0510 forms. and one pencil or pen. Correspondence material will be removed from cell when notin use." The Brig Supervisor concurs with the recomrnendation but will wait for the Brig finaldecision.01) FORM 2719, NOV 1999 Page 0? of ManningB_-1283623733OF EVALLIATION -CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD NAME (Last, Fm, SSN. -: a?REASON FOR an EVALUATIONSUICIDE WATCH OF INJURY OTHER:MENTAI, STATUS ALL THAT APPLY)IPASSIVE BIZAI-ERE LEVEL 0! DJ..- . gac - ILEVEL or ORIENT A1 ION OISORIEIJTE5 -391.Moor? mo Imam MAMC. THINKING paocess alzmae I. THOUGHT CONTENT IOEATIOI-I DELUSIONS.. GCOL. poor. -ANY AOIJORTJTAL FINDING IN REMARKS ... RESOLVED 3. RISK F-OF HIGI-.LOW MDDERI-.TE DYSTURBANCE. /18 IS NOT DUE DOES NEED TO as SEGREGATE wow GENERAL nue Tc. . .NEEDS HOJES -I OTHEF-. {See Remarks) .IREMARKS:- . _Ir\ If; V. uJ .HgI-/ix 1 IEVALUATORDATE ManningB_4376923734REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110311INMATE NAME (LAST. I-IRST MI.) SSN RCNMANNING, BRADLEY E. - -1- CURRENT. STATUS . . 9 3-. 2a. CUSTODY LEVEL STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I CELL IIMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 191CURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE 92, 104. 134DISCIPLINARY NONE OBSERVATION REPORTS: NONEWORK TRAINING REPORTS: REVIEW20110311BA: I AA: 10 Os: 0 STATUS CUSTODY LEVEL b. STAT US c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. OUARTERS I Row I CELL IIMAX DET PREVENTICN OF INJURY SO-1 .- . INMATE SELECTION To APPEAR BEFORE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENLQOARDKTUR . --1 INMATE CHOOSES I NOT TO: APPEAR BEFORE BOARD. -J7 4 1- FACTORS [3 IISSAULTIVCI I: FAR RECORD PROM OFFENSESERC-US DRUG ABUSE 0.035 TIES, soot:-I -CME SERIOUS CIVIL CHAHISEFI Is NOT 18 Low PI STABLE I CONE-ITICTI[j l\I" TIN3 our OR or -I.-.21. TO RE Tc DUTYIL) I ONSIBILITY FOR ITIVELY I0 NT. LENG IH -AST AND RI-ESENT I. SE I-N PENDING CIVIL DETAINL HLEC BEHAVIOR DURILG A PREVIOUS LONFINEMENISERVING A SENTENCE WHICH THE CCNSIDEFIS TO BE UNJJSI ON COMPLETION OF, DR PARTICIPATION N. TREAII DROGRAMS ORPOOR HO-VIE CONDITIONS FAMILY RTLAIIONSII F5 A EVAZLIATION INDICATING SERIOUS CIR on HISTORY or [1 OTHERDEMONSTRATEO PATTERN OF POOR JUDGEMENT OTHER.8 LENGTI1. on POIENIIAL LENGTH. OF SENTENCE [1 OTHER3 oI3 u'n..Nc. '3 REMARKS271 4 oLu..?I.?a- -. 2-. NAME I GRADE I TITLE YES NO REMARKS SIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBER -, -BLENIS. CHIEF BOARD MEMBER 2 JORDAN, R. I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELOR 4 :1BOARD MEMBER 3TERRYor?-cermevnew ?Es )6 . BARNES. D. I CWO2 I COMMANDING OFFICER 201-.0311 I a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTER IR WICELLII/?Ax ,4 REMARKS: 7BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 2011 Page of ManningB_42833 23735.REPORT DATE CONTINUATION SHEET 20110311TITLEOF 2. on FormClassi?cation and Assignment Review I Brig Form 4200ii) Niif??aii Mam~mwdieyE- ij .3Counselor notes has previous demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. SND was transferredfrom TFCF Camp Ari tjan due to the lack mental health care and has a potential genderidentity disorder. While con?ned in Kuwait. SND made a noose out ofa bed sheet which was found in hiscell. On 18 January 201 l, SND had an anxiety attack and began acting aggressively toward himselfin thepresence ofthc Brig 01C and Supervisor. SND has made a potential written suicide ideation which he hasclaimed may have been false. SND currently states that he is not suicidal but has also stated that his writtenand verbal statements may have been false.SND was ex riliizitetl by Col Malone on 20| l()3l 1. Col Malone annotated that anxietydisorder remains in remission and SND remains medication tree. Col Malone notes that riskassessinent remains low for suicide./selfliarm and he could bene?t from books, games and magazines.(See attached health evaluation).Offense Notes: Additional eliarges were preferred on 2 March 201 1. Speci?cally SND was charged withviolation ofArticle I04 (aiding the enemy) wltich carries a maximum punishment ofdcath.Additional notes; On 2 Mzireli l, SND made statements to the Brig Supervisor to the effect ot??l?mallowed to have my underwear which, with the elastic band is the most dangerous piece of clothing?. On 3March 201 l, SND also made several statements to the Brig OIC re-iterating what he has previously statedto the board, in of statements possibly being false regarding whether or not or not he intends tokill himself.Board Notes: DD FORM 2719, NOV 1999 Page of Manning 23736?T-Lgrsay? 13757;:CLA AND L. ..-- . -..- (Lust, MI). I I REASON FOR BH EVALUATIONSUICIDE WATCH PREVENTEON OF INJURY OTHERMENTAL STATUS EXAMINATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)BEHAWOR NORMAL PASSIVE Jsramnug II LEVEL OF ALERT 3ILEVEL or . PARTIAL :ns::mrcwEr. MOOD AND AFFECT MANIC. as THINKING. PROCESS . LLEAF ~E~ I1Counselor notes: SND has previously demonstrated suiKuwait, SND made a noose out of a bed sheet which wasindividuals who have repeatedly come to visit with SND.evaluation).Offense Notes: SND is charged with violation of Articlemaxiiuum punislunent Additional notes: NONEBoard Notes: NONEDD FORM 2719, NOV 1999ManningB_42832aggression toward himself in the presence of the Brig OIC and Supervisor. SND has made a potentialwritten suicide ideation which he has claimed may have been false. SND currently states that he is notsuicidal but has also stated that his written and verbal statements may be false.- Si\'l) made statements to the Brig Supervisor to the effect of ?I'm allowed to have my which, ith the elastic band is the must piece of clothing".- has recently began to isolate showing limited to no irterest in conversation with staff orhis counselor ?ll}(l requested to have 18 n;une.\ removed froin his mail and visitation list including severalMHU Notes: SND was evaluated hy (?ml on I X. (See attached behavioral healthcidal ideations and gestures. While confined infound in his cell. SND has demonstrated104 raiding the enemy) which carries aPage of 237394CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW20110325REPORT DATE FICN. - INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) SSNMANNING, BRADLEY E.. . . - CURRENT STATUSa. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAILMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURYd. QUARTERS IROWICELL ItCURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE 92. 104,134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: NONEOBSERVATION REPORTS: (1) 201 10316 (ADVERSE)WORK 8: TRAINING REPORTS:REVIEW: 20110325 BE-FIEJIEWED. PREVENTION OF INJURYu. IISOCUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAILMAX DETINMATE SELECTION AND ASSIGNMENT INMATE CHOOSES TO: NOT TO: -APPEAR BEFORE BOARD.INMATE moMILITARY RECORD, ASIDE FROM PRESENI ccruI:;I;IOIJS UR JG ABUSE [j -5 FAMILY TIES. GOOD -IOME CONDITIONS3.vI.Iou-3 I MILITARY cR MINIIL RECORD [1 CHARGEDIS SERIOUSLow op muswmmow [j STABLE MENTAL CONDITIONIN. r'J . OUT ON DISI IAF Ur IHE MILITARY INI ONS rm INI WISHES I0 FETURN . I3: UNWILLINSMESS TO ACCEPT . OR I LIISONAL SHORT TO DDNI II -WI-.VI-H. mu I IV Ub-AND RRESENT SHALL BE AN DVEFIRIDING FACTORDETAINER FILED BEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTA SENTENCE WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERS 10 BE on OF. on ACTIVE PAHTICIPAI ION Ir-r-A1 PM anon 55 noon HOME coN3n I-3N5 on rm LY omenA MENTAL EVALUATION IMJIIZA llN('i SERIOUS NEUI-I OR 5 OTHER[3 HISTORY us Ratvmus OTHERmu IERN POOR OTHER:8 LENGTH. OR POTENTIAL LENGTH OF SENTENCE omcn.8 OTHER: sec? 4 OTHER:REMARKS:?_;yg4 va-I .I: . I BOARD . NAME I GRADE I TITLE YES NO REMARKS SIGNATDRESENIOR BOARD MEMBER /gin?/1 '01 I BLENIS. c. I PROGRAMS CHIEF 6-DDARD MEMBER 2 FULLER, w. I OPERATIONS CHIEF xi?. BOARD MEMBER 3 JORDAN. couNsELoR Co,? CDMMANDINQ OFFICER REVIEW: .Y.ES BARNES. D. v. cwoz I COMMANDING OFFICER 20110325 - . . - I a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d.ouART i REMARKS:BRIG FORM 4200.1, JAN 2011 Page ManningB_4282923740CONTINUATION SHEET7 REPORT DATE 20l l03251. TITLE OF FORMClassifimlion and Assignment Review2. DD FORMBrig Form 4200.1, Jan 20ll3. NAME (Last, First, A/Iiddle)Manning, Bradley E.4. SSNxx-5. ID NUMBERmaximum punislunent ofdeath. individuals who have repeatedly come to visit withabsence.Counselor notes: SND has continued to show little interest in discussion and aside from 20l lO322during his weekly interview, he has appeared more somber than usual.MHU Notes: SND was not evaluated on 20110325 due to temporary absence.Offense Notes: SND is climged with violation of Article 104 (aiding the enemy) which carries :1Additional notes: SND has previously demonstratedsuicidal ideaticns and gestures. While confined inKuwait, SND tirade a noose out of a bed sheet which was found in his cell. SND. aggression toward hiniself in the p_rc_scnce of the Brig 01C and Supervisor. has made a written" idcation which he has claimed may have been tli?zi't'lie is not 7 suicidal but has also slated that his written and verbal statenients may be talse.SND made statements to the Brig .?.Iupervisor to the effect of ?l?nt allowed to have underwear which,with the elastic hand is the m-nst dangemus piece oi? - SND has recently began to isolate himself, showing limited to no interest in conversation with stafforhis counselor and requested to have 18 names removed 111 his mail and visitation list, including several0 Board Notes: SND was not able to request to appear before the Board due to temporary Ha 5m- 1 i) 33.7?DD FORM 2719, NOV 1999Manning Page of 23741- REPORT DATE AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110401INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MlLEVEL STATUS c. Assleueo DETAIL QUARTERSIROWICELL 1:MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 I 191CURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE 92, 104, 134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: NONE OBSERVATION REPORTS: (1) 20110316 (ADVERSE)WORK 8- TRNNING REPORTS: REVIEW: 201 10401UNcusroov LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL I ROWICELL 1:MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY SQ-1 I 191- . INMATE SIG AIUR -- INMATE CHOOSES NOT TO: 539:! I APPEAR BEFORE BOARD. _/ji 7- 51 0.--FF CLEAR Mu OFFENSECLOSE was, 0000 HOME cocuomonsTHE CHARGED Is NOT semousASSAULTIVE I DISRUSERIC-US DRUG ABUSESERIOUS CIVIL I MILITARY CRIMINAL RECORDLOVV TOLERANCE OF FRUSTRATION APPARENTLY STABLE MENTAL CONDITIONINTENSIVE ACTING OUT OR OISLKE OF TI-E MILITARY NOICATIOHS THE INDIVIDUAL WISHES TO RETURN TO DUTYCOMPARATIVELY SHORT SENTENCE TO HOWEVER, LENGTH OFS3-TTJTENCE SHM, NOT BE AN OVERRIIJNG FACTOROF TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERSONALIACHONS PART AND PRESENTPEPJDENG CIVIL CHARGES I FLFD BEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMEKTSERVING A SENTENCE WI-GCH THE INDIVDUAL CONSIDERS TO BE UNJUST OR COKPLETION 053, OR ACTIVE IN, TFEATMENT PROGRAMS OR:1 DDCIIDEID 13:11: 1:11:11sEvg3E GROUPSOTHERA MENTAL EVALUATION INDICATING SERIOUS NEUROSIS oR ovummswomr our PREVIOUS DEMONSTRATEO PATTERN or POOR JUDGEMENT OTHERLENGTH, oR POTENTIAL LENGTH, OF SENTENCE OTHER[3 POOR HOME couomons on FAMILY RELAnoNs?-upsCl[30111512. 1900-Q.) omenREMARKs: Sub GEK4 Qua-;gd> s1EsuA1uRE SENIOR aoA?Ro MEMBER gwm? 74? FULLER. CHIEF Cow? 3 .BOARD MEMBER 2 JORDAN, R. I SSGI SENIOR COUNSELOR BOARD MEMBER 3 TERRY, M. SSGT I DBS go ?out, BARNES, D. V. ICWOZI COMMANDING OFFICER LEVEL c. REMARK: or 1 ya L3 /10 d?lag (1 ?azgf?f?vm .3 Mr (1 3% $23? 4% ML L-12/elk )0 if /kg 4 to Manning 23742REPORT DATE CONTINUATION SHEET 201104011. TITLE OF FORM 2. DD FORMClassi?cation and Assignment Review Brig Form 1200.1, Ian 20| 3. IN NAME (l.asr, First, Middle) 4. SSN 5. ID NUMEER- -Counselor notes: SND has remains with drawn, and continues to not engage in discussion. SND hasrecently been counseled about his attitude and conduct towards sta??MHU Notes: SND was reviewed by the Brig on I (See attached behavioral healthevaluation).()lTense Notes: SND is charged with violation of Article 104 (aiding the enemy) which carries amaximum punishment of death.Additional notes: SM) has previously demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. While con?ned inKuwait, SND made a noose out ofa bed sheet which was found in his cell. SND has demonstratedaggression tmvai'd the presence ofthe Brig 01C and Supewisor. SND has previously maderaise concern over his potential for self harm. SND has not given de?nite answers and thathis statements may or not be false.- SND C0l1ll22I.tCS to isolate himself, showing limited to no interest in conversation with stallor hiscounselor and requested to have l8 names removed from his mail and visitation list, including severalindividuals who have repeatedly come to visit with SND.Board Notes:01) FORM 2719, NOV 1999 Page of REPORT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH EVALUATIONAND BOARDMI) II .. FOR BH RON.UATIIf]: C-F .., '37 LEVEL IJOCJD AH: AFFECT n-numucs FM . ll-3 REMARVS?Ali-IPAT-TTIA.NGS-.Cv{9 5 nun 3.3 I IDSLTIQI0055. N07TI 0055-509.05:35.?T-IDOL-, ., (D5(OY?.ru.v?l?I-..II . I r?24us/laManningB_437415 7 A "Ill" I 1.4 23744 REPORT DATE AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110403INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) RCNMANNING. BRADLEY E. - -. .-a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c' SEGREGAWON d. QUARTERS I RON I CELL 1!MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY CURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE 92. 104, 134DISCIPLINARY REPORTS: NONEOBSERVATION REPORTS: (1) 20110316 (ADVERSE)WORK 8- TRAINING REPORTS: REVIEW: 20110408UNLEVEL b. STATUS SEGREGATION MAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY 19?.- INMATE CHOOSES TO:- TO: E51. '1 APPEAR BEFORE BOARD. 2? by DISRUPTNE OLEAR MILITARY RECORD. ASIDE FROM PRESENT OFFENSE.SERIOUS ORUO ABUSE OLOSE FAMILY TIES, GOOD HOME CONDITIONSSERIOUS I MILITARY CRIMINAL REOORO 5 THE OHAPOEO IS NOT SERIOUSLON OF FRUSTRATION [j APPARENTLY STABLE MENTAL OONOITIONINTENSIVE Acme OUT OR or THE THE IuoIvIouAL WISHES To RETURN TO DUTYOF To AOCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERSONAL COMPARATIVELY SHORT SENTENCE TOCONFINEMENT. LENGTH OFAOTIONS PAST AND PRESENT SENTENCE SHALL NOT BE AN OVERRIDNG FACTORPENDING CHARGES I OBAINER FILED BEHAVIOR DURING A PREVIOUS CONFINEMENTSERVING A SENTENCE WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL OONSIOERS TO BE UNJUST OR COMPLETION OF, OR PARTIOIPATION IN. TREATMENT PROGRAMS ORSEVERE GROUPSPOOR HOME cONOrrIoNs OR [1 OTHER.A MENTAL EVALUATION INDICATNG SERIOUS NEUROSIS OR OTHER:HISTORY OF PREVIOUS OTHER:[1 OEMONSTRATEO PATTERN OF POOR JUDGEMENT [1 OTHER.LENGTH, OR POTENTIAL LENGTH. OF OTHER:OTHER: Bron? doom OTHER:REMARKS: I ORAOE SIGNATURESENIOR BOARD MEMBERBLENIS, C. PROGRAMS CHIEFBOARD MEMBER 2FULLER, W. I I OPERATIONS CHIEFBOARD MEMBER 3JORDAN, R. I SSG I SENIOR COUNSELO d. OUARTR ManningB_4282575109}23745RE PORT DATE CONTINUATION SHEET 20! 7. TITLE OF FORM 2. on Classification and Assignment Review Brig Form 4200. I. Jun 201 I3. NAME (Last. First. Middle} -1. SSN 5. ll) NL7MBF.RManning. Hizitlley E. XX - 1Counselor notes: SND remains withdrawn, and continues to not engage in discussion. SND avoids anyunnecessary interaction with staff and no longer attempts to maintain contact.MHU Notes: SND was reviewed by the Brig on I l0408. (See attached behavioral healthevaluation).Offense Notes: SND is charged with \=iol;ition of Article [04 (aiding the enemy) which carries amaximum punishment of death.Additional notes: SND has previously demonstrated suicidal ideations and gestures. While confined inKuwait, SND made a noose out of a bed sheet which was found in his cell. SND has demonstratedaggression toward himself in the presence of the Brig OIC and Supervisor. SND has previously madestatements that raise concern over his potential for self harm. SND has not given definite answers and thathis statements may or not be false.-SND continues to isolate himself. slinwing limited to no interest in with staff or hiscounselor.- SND requested to have 18 names removed from his mail and visitation list, including several individualswho have repeatedly come to visit with SND.Board Notes: SND chose not to appear before the board although he was afforded theopportunity.DD FORM 2719, NOV 1999 Page 53 of 2ManningB__4282623746REPORT ox: BEHAVIORAL HEALTH . CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT BOARD- W- .7 '3 FOR EVALUATIONOF 11.. WENTAL mm? ADC- .I i I LEVEL or s: 59;; LEVEL or moon ANC mrrecw. F47 rw PROCESS Sd?mi. co'4:usE:~ aezmus THOUGHT CONTENT ID-EAT on memonv; 0065 cm: DoorANY REMARKSI Ias mask us Kev?" ms? us. tgavc -wasIoasruasnuca as ssum MENTAL 32539.35: 1. . 9[3035 "6055 Not NEEC 35 s=P.0w. GENERAI. Ag-5 . ousoeos; IIIH. -MT-1ll~ ?me: s- .OTHER (See Remarks; 1IREMARKSManningB__-43744 23747REPORT DATE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT REVIEW 20110415INMATE NAME (LAST, FIRST MI.) MANNING. BRADLEY E. -6 CURRENT sTATus_7i.7T a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS d. I Row I CELL IIMAX DET PREVENTION OF INJURY 504 CURRENT CHARGES: ARTICLE DISCIPUNARY REPORTS: NONE OBSERVATION (1) 20110316 (ADVERSE)WORK 3- TRNNING REVIEW: 20110415UNSTATUS TO BE REVIEWED . a. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS d. 1 Row I CELL IIMAX DET PREVENTION Or INJURY 504 INMATE SELECTION TO APPEAR BEFORE CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT INIVIATE SIG A INMATE CHOOSES TO: APPEAR BEFORE BOARD. . - cu?Toov Lowen ggug?qg . Ij ASSAULTIVE D-SRUPTIVE on EAR wmm: Iaecoao, ASIDE om PRESENT semous onus ABUSE mm: HOME CONDIT-OKSSERIOUS MILITARY CHIMINAI. HELUHU I.I- (.r1f5 BOARD MEMBER 3 /2 . Qor-Km 4/ 556 $01 (Jr )4 coMw-oI~e omcen 1,1 DATE BARNES. D. 1 COMMANDING OFFICER 20110415I Aa. CUSTODY LEVEL b. STATUS c. ASSIGNED DETAIL d. QUARTERS FRW CELL061' A Ixecs 01; Xtaameam '5>uI-3 anv/e14/I?/wgav?y(1)40-n -24 - /x?tobaaxRIG 0.1, AN 011 em; uon?gfmf 73/7?! I V. 770']: 6? ManningB_42823 23748I7 REPORT DATE CONTINUATION SHEET 1 10! I04t51. TITLE or FORM i 2. on FORMClassification and Assignment Review 3 Brig l alier his arrival. Ix)lh because nr his suicidalbcha\ inr in Kuwait and hecau-^e hi.s nicdiea! recnrd from Kuwait ineludi\l a ({urtte nr paraphrasefrom M ( Manninglu the ellect that lie could be \er\ patient witen it comes tn suicide.2. .Alter .1 cnuple wcek^. it sceincil reasonable ;n dnu ngrade hi\ iireeautinn level tyehiatns; (( nl, Riek Malnne) in lie a ennsoliant second nptmnn. He evaluated Ihu patient andenneurred that I'* )l Y\ as apprnphdtc. I he Brig, as I best recall. \< ailed a couple w ee"ks tn put tiu\reeoinincndalinn into ellect..V Suh.^e(;uently. I lecununendiil that he he leinnvL-Ll linuia.\ lie continued tn dn i elati\elvwell in the Hrii:, (neeasional nnld. odd beha\ inrs such as dancing arniind were nnted in the Inu a-,well as pos-.ible sleep walking). Col. \lainnc enneurred. I hcse reenininendatinns ueiv ntxInllnwed.4. In the lall (I am uncertain nTihe date):Manning hee.mie agitated 'jtic: an (xld ineideni w ilh.stalt. ,\s best as I could tell liom discussing the mailer w ith Manning aiW with \t:IL he had beenpetlnnmng some kind nl'yi»ga mn\e in which he enntnned his limbs in such .1 \\ a\ that staH'thnogbl he \\ a>lr\ingln hun hnnsell. Htcy intcnencd and lelunicd him tn his cell. He \^us\eiA23753upset about this (not suicidal) and so I brief!v reenmniended he he put back on POI status as asalegtiard because he was so upset. I rescinded this recommendation tlie liilkiwing vvcck as hehad calmed.j^. Since then. I have continued to recommend thai POI precautions he rcmovi-d. .As ol'the tnue ofmy leaving ti^r Camp I .ejeune to prepare Ibi deployment, the recommcndati(*ns had not beenlollowed. C AP I Munre and Col, Makme can provide details nlAvhateverneeunxd ne\t.QuislioH I) Have vour rtcomniendalions hevii lollowed hy (he QuuHfieo Bri^? If noL haveyou been ^i^cn aiiv roison for the Quantico l*ri*»\ decision imt to follow yourrecommendations.*1. \ o . Mv understanding is that the Uhg has nni Inllowed my reei#mmendatiniis because nl greatconcem and won v that Manning vv ill h.mn himselt. I tnid thcni I iliought thestatus hvithev cr) 15 mmute v isuat cheeks on the detainee \ ice POI w iih cv er) > minute checks) \vas morethan sufHcienl tor his salety. Irnm a psyehiatnc perspective Theevcrv 5 minute checks done torPCJl is extremely rigorous, particularly tnr a secnnd lier preeaulinn. i-\ei} 15 minute cheeks ^ascommon tnr suicide prccauiions in nther jails and correctional Tacilitics where I have worked.2. I wish to add that I d(^ not believ e the stalTha> disregarded my recommendations nut nrmalieetoward Mai^ning. The Marine (. orps. including (,)uanlicn. has had a miserable time with theproblem ot suicide rceentlv. I am certain. Ii\*m thar point orv icvv. the best w av to avnid atragitly is i(i watch a situation very clnsuly and take action i|iiickly It ha> been ditlieull in helptlicm sec that gtxxl intentions can have unintended e(^nset|uenees (e.g.. making the detaineemore an.vious and causing ixrcasinnal agitation).Question K. \ \ ith res|K'c( lo PK Bradkv MuiiiiiH«i. is hein^ held under Maxitnum ( u\(odv23754and either Suicide Risk or Pi evention of I n j u n Siattis since J^l Iwly 2010 detrimental to bismental or physical health? W hy or why not?II hehevc thai (al ihe time I lazst saw him) Suicide precautions and POI were excessive and weremaking Manning unnceess;mly an.xious. 1 his could be delnmental to his mental health. I wascnncented about his physical Iteallb until tliey started to give him more time to e.wTcise. SinceMax status is not a psyehiatric classiltcation. I did rk»( make a recommendation reg^irdmg nexcept to sa\ that it easilv las a scL'ondan elfcci of checking on him every 15 minutcs)inLt hispsvchiatrie safLty needs al the time.Question I . With respect to P K Bradlcv Mannin*;, have \ou seen or documented auvbehavior to suggest that he is a risk to harm others or himselt, ;t disruptive detainee, orotherwise noneompliant with Quantico Brig rules and procedures?I \ot if;n'.:/;s of hir.: charges, r iiad e%p%ctcd him t n hav-:: r.any m.oreproblr'ms. 1 had i n i c i a l l y expected t h a t we would see regression and23760Question G. Without v i o l a t i n g any p a t i e n t - c l i e n t c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y , canyou address the events of 18 January 2011 and 2 March 2011 which theQuantico B r i g has used t o f u r t h e r r e s t r i c t PFC Bradley Manning'sconfinement conditions?/inca 1 c e r a t i o r ,t'.(ir.cludirg-, '1\r'-1PO.L) anioiiq or.her t h i n g s , b u t 2 .rea 1 l y do::' t(LIIVery Respectfully,William J. Hocter, J r . , MDCAPT, MC, USN14 A q r i l 2011I-.23761ATTACHMENT 923762UNITED STATES ARMY COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALSBeforeAppellate Military JudgesPrivate First Class (E-3),BRADLEY EDWARD MANNINGUnited States Army, Petitioner))AFFIDAVITUNITED STATES, RespondentUnited States Army, AppellantARMYI, COL Ricky Malone, the undersigned, do hereby certify and swear that the following is true:I am an active duty member of the United States Army. I have over ten years of experience as aforensic psychiatrist. My current duty position is Chief, Walter Reed Forensic Psychiatry Service,and I am the Forensic Psychiatry Consultant to the U.S. Army Surgeon General. In my dutyposition, I am responsible for overseeing the professional services and training activities for eightforensic psychiatrists and psychologists.Question A. Do you make a recommendation to the Quantico Brig concerning whether adetainee is placed in either Suicide Risk or Prevention of Injury Status?1. It is my understanding that the Brig staff is authorized to initiate a Suicide Watch, but it requiresconcurrence by the psychiatrist to maintain it. Prevention oflnjury, however, is treated as acustodial status to be determined by the Brig and I do not make a recommendation on the ultimateissue. I conduct a behavioral risk assessment to estimate the risk ofharm to self or others (low,23763moderate, or high), based on static risk actors, modi^able risk fetors, and protective fetors, andprovide that input to the Brig.Questions. Inyoure^perienee^doestheQuantieoBrigfoIlowyourreeommendationsconcerning Suicide Risk or Prevention oflnjury Status?I.They institute more precautions thanlwould Iromapsychiatric perspective. Were he not incustody,at this point he would be appropriate Icir routine outpatient care.Question C. Have you made recommendations concerning PFC Bradley Manning s custodyand classil^eation status? If so^whatwere your recommendations?I . No. lhave stated that there is no psychiatric reason icir him to be segregated Irom the generalpopulatiotT, realizing that would only be one consideration.QuestionD^IIaveyourreeommendationsheenfollowedhytheQuantieoBrig?Ifnot^haveyou heen given any reason for the Quantico Brig^sdecision not to followyourrecommendations?L They have expressed eoncerus about his demeanor when no medical persontiel are there,describing him as more withdrav^ and reading less.QuestionE.^ithrespecttoPFCBradleyManning^isheingheldunderMa^imum Custodyand either Suicide Risk or Prevention oflnjury Status sinee^l^uly^^l^detrimental to hismental or physical health? ^ h y or why not?I . It has long been knowti that restriction of environmental and social stimulatiouhasanegativeeflect on mental ^nctioning. Neveriheless, PFC Manning has been able to adapt somewhat and hisarrxtety disorder is currently in remission, stgnilteantly reducing his risk of selfharm.QuestionE^ithrespeettoPECBradleyManning^haveyouseenordoeumentedany23764hehavior to suggest that he isarisk to harm others or himself^adisruptive detainees orotherwise noneompliantwith Quantico Brig rules and procedures?LWhenllirst saw him inAugust^^l^Iconsidered him to be at moderate to high risk of selfharm.l^owever, that has changed overthe months andlhave not had any fttrther concems. lhave neverheard ofhim being disruptive, but he does occasionally make provocative comments to the staffaspart ofhis intellectualization(e.g.,^March^OII).Questioned without violating any patientclienteonfidentiality^ean you address the events ofI^^anuary^OIIand^Mareh^OII which the Quantico Brig has used to further restrict PFCBradley Manning^sconlinement conditions?I . OnlMarch ^^IIPFC Manning madeacomment(outofIrustration when he described it tome), basically ridiculing the POI precautions because ifhe really wanted to kill himselfhe could usehis^ipflopsorunder^earwaistband. The Brig stafftook this as evidence that he was at leastthitrking about it and removed them.^^^^^^^^^RIC^YDMALONE,MD,MPUCOL,MC,SFSChief, Forensic Psychiatry Service23765ATTACHMENT 102376605 Jan 11M6M0RAt^t^UMFro^O a v l d E. Coombs^oC^O^ Ja^es A v e r b a r tViaS t a f f Judge A d v o c a t e , O f f i c e o f t h e S t a f f Judge A d v o c a t e ,Army M i l i t a r y t ^ l s t r l c t o f Washington, F o r t T,esley J . Mct^alrSubj^COt^FIt^EMEI^T CO^t^ITIOt^S OF PFCRef^ta^ SECt^AVI^ST 1^^9.9CUSBRAOLE^ MAI^t^I^C1.T h i s memorandum i s w r i t t e n t o r e g u e s t t t ^ a t ^ou remove PFC B r a d l e yManning f r o m P r e v e n t i o n o f I n j u r y tPOI^ ^ a t c h and r e d u c e b i sc l a s s i f i c a t i o n l e v e l f r o m Maximum ^MAX^t o a t l e a s t Medium Custody I ntMt^I^ .2. A servlcemember I s e n t i t l e d , b o t h by s t a t u t e and t h e E i g h t hAmendments t o p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t c r u e l and u n u s u a l p u n l s t ^ e n t .^eeu n i t e d S t a t e s v. ^ a t t h e ^ s , 1 ^ M.J. 35^, 3^8 tCMA 1983^^ A r t i c l e 55,U n i f o r m Code o f M i l i t a r y J u s t r c e tt^CMJ^^ 10 U.S.C. ^ 855. As such.S e c r e t a r y o f t b e t^avy I n s t r u c t i o n tSECI^AVI^ST^ 1^^9.9C d e t a i l s t h ep r o p e r p r o c e d u r e s and s a f e g u a r d s f o r p r o p e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f Inmates^e v a l u a t i o n o f i n m a t e s and t h e l i m i t e d use o f s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s .I n thec u r r e n t c a s e , PFC Manning does n o t f i t i n a n ^ o f t h e c r i t e r i a f o rp r e t r i a l maximum c u s t o d y c o n f i n e m e n t as s e t f o r t h i n PP ^202, ^205,o f SEC^AVI^ST 16^9.9C t J a n . 3, 200^^.3. PFC Manning a r r i v e d a t t h e Q u a n t i c o B r i g on 29 J u l y 2010.tte wasp l a c e d I n MAX and under s u i c i d e w9tct^. On ^ August 2010, Capt. W i l l i a mt t o c t e r ^ t h e f o r e n s i c p s y c h i a t r i s t f o r t h e B r l g ^ recommended t h a t PFCManning be moved f r o m s u i c i d e w a t c h t o POI. Over t h e c o u r s e o f t h ef o l l o w i n g weeks, Capt. H o c t e r met w i t h PFC Manning on a f r e g u e n t b a s i s .PFC Manning r e s p o n d e d f a v o r a b l y t o t h e t r e a t m e n t o f Capt. H o c t e r . t^uet o PFC Manning's improvement, on 2'^ August 2010, Capt. H o c t e rrecommended t h a t PFC Manning be t a k e n o f f o f POI w a t c h and t h a t b i sc o n f i n e m e n t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n be changed f r o m MAX t o Mt^I.^. Over t h e c o u r s e o f t h e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e montbs, Capt. H o c t e rc o n s i s t e n t l y recommencled PFC Manning be t a k e n o f f o f POI w a t c b , andt h a t h i s c o n f i n e m e n t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n be r e d u c e d f r o m MAX t o MOI.Tbeo n l y e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s was on 10 Oecember 2010 wt^en be recommended t b a tPFC Manning r e m a i n u n d e r POI w a t c h f o r one week. The f o l l o w i n g week,Capt. H o c t e r once a g a i n recommended t h a t PFC Manning be removed f r o mPOI w a t c h . D e s p i t e C a ^ t . H o c t e r ' s c o n s i s t e n t recommendations,PFCManning has r e m a i n e d on POI watcb and i n MAX c u s t o d y .5. Capt. H o c t e r ' s recommendation comes as no s u r p r i s e giv^en t h e f a c tPFC Manning has been a model i n m a t e . A t no t i m e has he beend i s r e s p e c t f u l , v i o l e n t o r n o n c o m p l i a n t . PFC Manning does n o t e x h i b i tany o f t h e c r i t e r i a n o r m a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d f o r MAX c u s t o d y under t h e t^av^Instruction.C i v e n t h e c o n s i s t e n t recommendation o f Capt. H o c t e r andPFC Manning's model b e b ^ v i o r , i t i s u n c l e a r wh^ he i s s t i l l H e l d i n MAXc u s t o d y and u n d e r POI w a t c h .23767Subj-CO^FIt^EMEt^T CO^t^ITIONS OFPFC6RA0LEY t ^ t ^ ^ I t ^ C^. tender SECt^AVI^ST I^^9.9C, I 2 0 I ^ ^ d i s c i p l i n e i s t o be a d m i n i s t e r e d ona c o r r e c t i v e r a t b e r l^b^n 9 p u n i t i v e b a s i s . " A d d i t i o n a l l y SECt^AVI^ST16^9.9C, ^202.2.1 s t a t e s ^^no p e r s o n s , w h i l e b e i n g h e l d f o r t r i a l may bes u b j e c t e d t o punisfm^ent o r p e n a l t y o t b e r t b a n a r r e s t o r c o n f i n e m e n t ,n o r s h a l l t h e a r r e s t o r c o n f i n e m e n t imposed upon them be any morer i g o r o u s t h a n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s r e g u i r e . " PFC Manning's c o n f i n e m e n tc l a s s i f i c a t i o n and h i s POI w a t c h a r e i n c o n t r a v e n t i o n o f t h i s mandate.^.I n o r d e r t o e n s u r e a servlcemember i s n o t a r b i t r a r i l y m a i n t a i n e d i ns o l i t a r y c o n f i n e m e n t f o r p r o l o n g e d p e r i o d s o f t i m e , SECI^AVIt^ST 16^9.9C,^20^ r e g u i r e s a C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Assignment tC^A^ b o a r d t o e s t a b l i s ban i n d i v i d u a l i n m a t e ' s c u s t o d y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n u s i n gobjectivec l a s s i f i c a t i o n ^ r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n procedures."I t i s u n c l e a r wbat t h eC^A Board recommended t o ^ou o r t h e b a s i s f o r i t s recommendation.However^ i t i s c l e a r t h a t ^ou have t b u s f a r made t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n t okeep PFC Manning i n MAX c u s t o d y and under POI w a t c h .8.I f you d e c i d e t o deny t h i s r e g u e s t and m a i n t a i n PFC Manning underh i s c u r r e n t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and a s s i g n m e n t , I r e g u e s t t h a t ^ou i n d i c a t e^ o u r b a s i s f o r sucb a d e t e r m i n a t i o n i n w r i t i n g and s e r v e i t upon t h ed e f e n s e i n a t i m e l y manner. A d d i t i o n a l l y , i n o r d e r t o assess t h er e a s o n a b l e n e s s o f y o u r d e t e r m i n a t i o n , t h e d e f e n s e r e g u e s t s t b a t ^our e l e a s e t o U.S. Army t r i a l c o u n s e l , CPT Ashden F e i n , t h e f o l l o w i n ginformationsa.t^t^ 2^10, Inmate Background Summary f o r PFC Manningb.Dt^ 2'^ 15 2, Inmate Summary t^ata f o r PFC Manningc.Ot^ 2^19, a n ^ C o n t i n u a t i o n Sheet f o r PFC Manningd. An^ o t b e r assessment o f PFC Manning b ^ a b r i g m e n t a l b e a l t bp r o f e s s i o n a l , g u a r d , c o u n s e l o r o r case managere. An^ assessment o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n b ^ ^ou o r a member o f y o u rs t a f f c o n c e r n i n g PFC Manningf.An^ a d b i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n ^ou r e l ^ upon t o make t b ed e t e r m i n a t i o n o f PFC Manning's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and c o n f i n e m e n t s t a t u s9.The p o i n t o f c o n t a c t f o r t b i s memorandum i s t h e u n d e r s i g n e d a tt^Ol^^^^^300^ o r b y e m a i l a t coombs^armycourt::^artialdefense.com.0. E. CoombsLTC, USARC i v i l i a n t^efense Counsel23768ATTACHMENT 112376913 January ^^11MEMORANDUM TFIRU StaffJudge Advocate, Officeofthe StaffJudge Advocate, US ArmyMilitary District ofWashington, Fort Lesley J.McNair,WashingtonD.C. 3I^^1^FOR Commander, US Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-UendersonUall,Fort Myer,Virginia^^^11SUBJECTRequestlDr Release trom Continement UnderRCM. 3^^(g)1. Purpose. Pursuant to the provisionsofRulelcir Courts-Martial (R.C.M.)3l^^(g), the defenserequests that you direct the release ofPFC Bradley Manning from pretrial conttnement. Thisrequest is based upon the tact that the conltnement conditions currently being endured by PFCManning are more rigorous than necessary to guarantee his presence at trial.^. BaekgroundFacts. PFC Manning arrived at the t^uanttco Brig on ^^July^^l^. Upon hisarrival,he was placed in Maximum (MA^) custody and under suicide watch. OnlAugust^I^II^,Capt.William fJocter, the forensic psychiatrist for the Brig, recommended that PFCManning be moved trom suicide watch to Prevention ofltTjury (POI) watch. Over the course ofthe fallowing weeks, Capt. Elocter met with PFC Manning onafrequent basis. Due to PFCManning^spositive response to treatment, on ^^August^^l^,CapL Ifocterrecontmended thathe be takenoffofPOI watch and that his confinement classilication be changed from M A ^ toMedium Custody In (MDl).3. Over the course ofthe following three months, Capt. Flocter consistently recommended PFCManning be taken offofPOl watch. The only exception to this was onl^December^^I^whenhe recommended that he remain under POI watch for one week. The following week, CapLI^octer once again recommended thatPFC Manning be removed ^om POI watch. Despite CapLIfocter^sconsistent recommendations, PFC Manning has remained on POI watch and in MA^custody.^. Under PFC Manning^scustodyclassittcation and the POI watch, he is being held in solitarycontinemenL For ^3 hours per day,PFC Manning sits in his cell. Lhe guards check on himevery live minutes by asking him ifhe is okay PFC Manning is required to respond in someaftirmative manner. At night, if the guards cannot see PFC Manning clearly,because he hasablanket over his head or is curled up towards the wall, they will wake him in order to ensure he isokay. Ele receives each ofhis meals in his cell. Ue is not allowed to haveapillow or sheets. E^eis not allowed to have any personal items in his cell. Ue is only allowed to have one book or onemagazine at any given time to read in his cell. The book or magazine is taken away trom him atthe end ofthe day before he goes to sleep. Ue is prevented from exercising in his cell.Ifheattempts to do push ups, sit ups, or any other form of exercise he will be forced to stop. Uereceives one hour ofexercise outside ofhis cell daily. The guards take him to an empty roomand only allow him to walk. PFC Manning normally just walks ttgure eights in the room tor theentire hour. Ifhe indicates that he no long feels like walking, he is immediately returned to hiscell. When PFC Manning goes to sleep, he is required to strip down to his boxer shorts andsurrender his clothing to the guards. Uis clothing is then retumed to him the next moming.SUBJECTRequestfor Release from ConttnementUnderRCM3^^(g)23770^. Lhe defense has raised its objection to these conttnement conditions on multiple occasionswith the Quantico conltnement lacility and the Staff Judge Advocate^s(SJA)Oftice. On^January^^II,the defense tiledaformal complaint with the commander of the Quantico Brig.See Enclosurel. On the same day^PFCMamiing also Itledaf^rmal complaint through thecontinement grievance process. Both complaints requested that the confinement facility removePFC Manning from Prevention oflnjury (POI) watch and that his classittcation level be reducedfrom M A ^ to MDl. The continement facility did not respond to either complainL^. Law. Ariiclel3 safeguards against unlawful pretrial punishment and embodies the preceptthat an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Articlel3providesthat:No person,while being held f^r trial,may be subjected to punishment or penalty otherthan arrest or continement upon the charges pending against him, nor shall the atTcst orcontinement imposed upon him be any more rigorous than the circumstances required toinsure his presence, but he may be subjected to minor punishment during that period forintractionsof discipline.Military couris have consistently asserted At^iclel3protection broadly to protect soldiersawaiting trial. Illegal pretrial punishntent can take many forms. The most common examplesare unreasonable or harassing restraint that creates an appearance that the soldier is guilty andonerous pretrial continement conditions. AtTicleI3 provides that pretrial continement shouldnot be ^^more rigorous than the circumstances require to insure^^ the soldier^spresence at court.^^Conditions that are sufficiently egregious may giverisetoapermissiveitTterence that anaccused is being punished....^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^.^T^.^^^^^,^IM.J.^^^,^^^-^^(C.A.A.F.^^^^)^.^^^^^.^^^^^^^^^i^^^^^,^v C^^v^^^^^^,^^M.J.^ll(C.A.A.F.^O^t^). Arbitrary or purposelessconditions also can be considered to raise an inference of punishmenL ^^^^^,^lM.J.at^^^-^^(^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^.^t^^^^^^^^,^^MJ^l^,^l^(CMAI^^^^^. In order to address an issue ofunlawful pretrial punishment due to the onerous nature ofpretrial continement, the commander is authorized to order the removal ofthe soldier frompretrial continemetiLRCM3^^(g),^^^^^^^^^^^^v^^^^^^^,^7ML^^^(ACMR^l^^^^. Argument. Once the Goverrmient had decided to detainasolider in pretrial continementpending trial, it obviously is entitled to employ devices to effectuate this decision. Uowever,theGovernment may not place conditions on that conltnement that are so excessive or onerous as togive rise to an interence that the soldier is being illegally punished prior to trial. In the instantcase, the mental health careofficial relied upon by the continement facility to makedeterminations about an inmate^sconfinement assignment to special quariers, has consistentlyrecommended that PFC Manning be removed tt'om POI watch. Inexplicably, hisrecommendations have been ignored.^. The tact that CapL Uocter has consistently recommendedadowngrade in PFC Manning^scontinement classittcation and assignment comes as no sut^rise given the fact PFC Manning hasbeenamodel inmate. At no time has he been disrespectful,violent or noncompltanL PFCSUBJECT: Request for Release from Confinement Under R.C.M. 305(g)23771Manning does not exhibit any of the criteria established for MAX custody under NavyInstruction 1640.9C. Given the consistent recommendations of Capt. Uocter and PFCManning's model behavior, it is unclear why, other than for the purpose of punishment, he is stillbeing held in MAX custody and under POI watch.10. As the commander for PFC Mamiing, you have the authority to address this issue byordering PFC Manning to be removed from pretrial confinement. At the time PFC Manning wasordered into confinement, the military magistrate determined that "the conditions on libertywhich are necessary to safeguard Soldiers and national security are tantamount to confinement."See Enclosure 2. Ue therefore determined that there was "no way, short of confinement, toensure PFC Manning is denied access to a computer which he could use to release classifiedinformation or to ensure the safety of Soldiers around him." See Enclosure 2. In this case, themilitary magistrate did not seriously consider other options under R.C.M. 304. One such optioncould be arrest. Arrest is the restraint of a soldier by ordering him to remain within specifiedlimits. A soldier under arrest could be required to have escorts, required to sign in on a frequentbasis, and to wear an ankle bracelet.11. Seven months after the initial pretrial confinement determination, the Government now hasthe benefit of additional information concerning the need for ongoing pretrial confinement ofPFC Mamiing. First, the Government's investigation undoubtedly can establish that there is nolonger a risk PFC Manning could use a computer to release classified information. Next, themental evaluation by Capt. Uocter indicates that PFC Manning is no long a risk of selfharm orto harm to others. Lastly, PFC Manning has demonstrated by his model behavior while inconfinement that he can follow orders conceming his behavior. Thus, it is clear that the concernsraised at the time pretrial confinement was authorized are no longer applicable.12. Conclusion. Due to the nature of the onerous conditions of PFC Manning's confinement,the indifference shown by the Quanico Brig to remedy this situafion, and PFC Manning's modelbehavior, the defense requests that you order his removal from pretrial confinement. Thedefense further requests that you consider lesser forms of restraint under R.C.M. 304.13. The POC is the undersigned at (401) 744-3007 or by e-mail atcoombs@armycourtmartialdefense .com.Ends1. Quantico Brig MFR2. Military Magistrate's ReviewDAVID E. COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselATTACHMENT 1223773DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYJOINT BASE MYER - HENDERSON HALL204 LEE AVENUEFORT MYER, VIRGINIA 22211-1199REPLY TOATTENTION OFIMND-MI-IH-ZA21 January 201MEMORANDUM FOR David E. Coombs, Civilian Defense CounselSUBJECT: Response to Request for Release from Confinement under R.C.M. 305(g)L General. I reviewed your enclosed request under R.C.M. 305(g) that I direct the release ofPFC Bradley Manning from pretrial confinement. Your request is denied. I believe thatconfinement is necessary because of the nature and circumstances of the offenses charged, thelikelihood that PFC Manning can and will commit further serious criminal misconduct, and theinadequacy of less severe forms of restraint.2. Probable Cause as to Offenses Committed. I have probable cause to believe that PFCMamiing committed the following charged offenses: four specifications of Article 92, UCMJ,and eight specifications of Article 134, UCMJ, Clause 3.3. Necessity for Confinement.a. Nature and Circumstances of the Offenses Charged. PFC Manning faces multiplecharges related to his alleged disclosure of classified information to persons not entitled toreceive that information. Under R.C.M. 305(h)(2)(B), serious criminal misconduct includesoffenses which pose a serious threat to the national security of the United States. 1 believe thedisclosure of classified information poses a serious threat to the national security of the UnitedStates. As such, PFC Manning's charged offenses amount to serious misconduct and he warrantspretrial confinement.b. Further Serious Criminal Misconduct. Shortly after CID opened an investigation, PFCManning was placed under supervision by his unit and required an escort. He was denied accessto computers and other electronic devices. Despite the presence ofhis escorts, PFC Manningmanaged to hand a piece of paper with his email address and password to another Soldier in hisunit and asked her to check his email for him. I believe it is likely that PFC Manning willcommit fiirther serious misconduct ifhe is released from pretrial confinement.c. Less Severe Forms of Restraint are Inadequate. I reviewed the other options availableto me under R.C.M. 304 and 1 find them inadequate. Although it is unlikely that PFC Manningwould have personal access to classified information systems if released from confinement, thatdoes not obviate the risk that he could further release previously acquired classified information.4. Prevention o f l n j u r y (POI) Status. You additionally requested me to reconsider PFCManning's POI status and I will address those concerns in a separate memorandum or action.23774IMNDMIlllZASUB.IECT: Response to Request tor Release from Confinement under R.C.M. 305(g)^. Conclusion. Lhere is probable cause to believe thatPFC Manning committed seriouscriminal misconduct, which posesathreat to the national security ofthe United states. Ibelievehe will lil^ely commit fiirther serious criminal misconduct if released from confinemenL Becauseofthe national security concerns in this case, less severe forms ofrestiaint are inadequate. PFCManning will remain in pretrial confinement until completion of the pending court martialaction.EndasCARL R. COFFMAN, JR.COL, AVCommanding23775ATTACHMENT 132377619 Jan 11MEMORANDUMFrom:To:Via:PFC B r a d l e y E. ManningCol. D a n i e l J. Choike(1) CW04 James A v e r h a r t(2) S t a f f Judge Advocate, O f f i c e o f t h e S t a f f Judge Advocate, USArmy M i l i t a r y D i s t r i c t o f Washington, F o r t L e s l e y J. McNairSub]:REQUEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, UCMJ) OF PFC BRADLEY MANNINGRef:(a) SECNAVINST 1649.9C(b) ARTICLE 138, UCMJ1. I , PFC B r a d l e y E. Manning, am a member o f t h e US Army on a c t i v ed u t y , assigned t o Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. ArmyG a r r i s o n , J o i n t Base Myer-Henderson H a l l , F o r t Myer, V i r g i n i a .On 29J u l y 2010, I was t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e Quantico B r i g from Kuwait. Upon mya r r i v a l , I was p l a c e d i n Maximum (MAX) custody and under s u i c i d e r i s k .2. On 6 August 2010, Capt. W i l l i a m Hocter, t h e f o r e n s i c p s y c h i a t r i s tf o r t h e B r i g , recommended t h a t I be moved from s u i c i d e r i s k t oP r e v e n t i o n o f I n j u r y (POI) watch. CW04 A v e r h a r t f o l l o w e d t h a trecommendation and I was moved t o POI watch. Due t o my improvement andadjustment t o confinement, Capt. Hocter recommended on 27 August 2010t h a t I be t a k e n o f f o f POI watch and t h a t my confinement c l a s s i f i c a t i o nbe changed from MAX t o Medium Custody I n (MDl).3. Over t h e course o f t h e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e months, Capt. Hocter and t h eo t h e r B r i g f o r e n s i c p s y c h i a t r i s t , COL Ricky Malone, c o n s i s t e n t l yrecommended t o CW04 A v e r h a r t t b a t I be t a k e n o f f o f POI watch. Theo n l y e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s was on 10 December 2010 when Capt. Hocterrecommended t h a t I remain under POI watch f o r one week. The f o l l o w i n gweek, be once a g a i n recommended t o CW04 A v e r h a r t t h a t I be removed fromPOI watch. D e s p i t e Capt. Hocter and COL Malone's c o n s i s t e n trecommendations, I remained on POI watch and i n MAX custody.4. On 18 January 2011, over t h e recommendation o f Capt. Hocter and t h edefense f o r e n s i c p s y c h i a t r i s t , Capt. B r i a n Moore, CW04 A v e r h a r t p l a c e dme under s u i c i d e r i s k .The s u i c i d e r i s k assignment means t h a t I s i t i nmy c e l l f o r 24 hours a day.I am s t r i p p e d o f a l l c l o t h i n g w i t h t h ee x c e p t i o n o f my underwear.My p r e s c r i p t i o n eyeglasses are t a k e n awayfrom me. I am f o r c e d t o s i t i n e s s e n t i a l b l i n d n e s s w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o no f t b e times t h a t I am r e a d i n g o r g i v e n l i m i t e d t e l e v i s i o n p r i v i l e g e s .During those t i m e s , my g l a s s e s are r e t u r n e d t o me. A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e r ei s a guard s i t t i n g o u t s i d e o f my c e l l w a t c h i n g me a t a l l t i m e s .5.L i f e was not much b e t t e r f o r me under t h e p r e v i o u s confinementassignment o f POI watch. L i k e s u i c i d e r i s k , I was h e l d i n s o l i t a r yconfinement. For 23 hours per day, I sat i n my c e l l .The guardschecked on me every f i v e minutes by a s k i n g me i f I was okay.I wasr e q u i r e d t o respond i n some a f f i r m a t i v e manner. A t n i g h t , i f t h eguards c o u l d not see me c l e a r l y , because I had a b l a n k e t over my heador I was c u r l e d up towards t h e w a l l , they would wake me i n o r d e r t o23777Subj:REQUEST FOR REDRESS (ARICLE 138, UCMJ) OF PFC BRADLEY MANNINGensure t h a t I was okay. I r e c e i v e d each o f my meals i n my c e l l .I wasnot a l l o w e d t o have a p i l l o w o r sheets. I was not a l l o w e d t o have anyp e r s o n a l items i n my c e l l .I was o n l y a l l o w e d t o have one book o r onemagazine a t any g i v e n t i m e t o read. The book o r magazine was taken awayfrom me a t t h e end o f the day b e f o r e I went t o sleep. I was p r e v e n t e dfrom e x e r c i s i n g i n me c e l l . I f I a t t e m p t e d t o do push-ups, s i t - u p s , o rany o t h e r form o f e x e r c i s e I was f o r c e d t o s t o p . I r e c e i v e d one hourof e x e r c i s e o u t s i d e o f my c e l l d a i l y .The guards would t a k e me t o anempty room and a l l o w me t o walk.I u s u a l l y walked i n f i g u r e e i g h t saround t h e room. When I went t o s l e e p , I was r e q u i r e d t o s t r i p down t omy underwear and s u r r e n d e r my c l o t h i n g t o the guards.My c l o t h i n g wasthen r e t u r n e d t o me the next morning.6. My defense counsel, Mr. David Coombs (a reserve L i e u t e n a n t C o l o n e li n the Army) and I have r a i s e d o u r o b j e c t i o n t o these confinementc o n d i t i o n s on m u l t i p l e occasions.On 5 January 2011, my a t t o r n e y f i l e da f o r m a l c o m p l a i n t w i t h CW04 A v e r h a r t . On the same day, I a l s o f i l e d af o r m a l c o m p l a i n t t h r o u g h t b e confinement grievance process.Bothc o m p l a i n t s r e q u e s t e d t h a t I be removed from POI watch and t b a t myc l a s s i f i c a t i o n l e v e l be reduced from MAX t o MDl.CW04 A v e r h a r t d i d notrespond t o e i t h e r c o m p l a i n t as r e q u i r e d by SECNAVINST 1649.9C PP8301(21).7. Based on t h e f o r e g o i n g , I b e l i e v e t h a t the a c t i o n o f h o l d i n g meunder POI watch f o r over f i v e months and p l a c i n g me on s u i c i d e r i s k i swrong under A r t i c l e 138, UCMJ. I do not b e l i e v e t h a t CW04 A v e r h a r t , astbe B r i g commander, has t b e d i s c r e t i o n t o keep me i n confinement underthese c i r c u m s t a n c e s .8.I b e l i e v e tbe c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f me i n MAX and under an assignmentof s u i c i d e r i s k i s based upon an i n a p p r o p r i a t e reason and i s t h e r e f o r ean abuse o f CW04 A v e r b a r t ' s d i s c r e t i o n , anb a wrong w i t h i n the meaningo f A r t i c l e 138, UCMJ. As r e d r e s s , I request t h a t you o r d e r my removalfrom s u i c i d e r i s k and POI watch and t b a t you orber the r e d u c t i o n o f myc l a s s i f i c a t i o n l e v e l from MAX t o MDl.B. E. ManningPFC, US ArmyI have a s s i s t e d PFC B r a d l e y Manning w i t h the d r a f t i n g o f h i s requestf o r r e d r e s s , and have s i g n e d f o r him g i v e n tbe p r e s e n t circumstances.I concur w i t h t b e m a t t e r s be has expressed i n h i s r e q u e s t , and j o i n himi n r e q u e s t i n g t b a t you o r d e r h i s removal from s u i c i d e r i s k and a l s ofrom POI watch and t h a t you o r d e r a r e d u c t i o n i n h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o nl e v e l from MAX t o MDl.D. E. CoombsC i v i l i a n Defense Counsel 23778ATTACHMENT 142377910 Mar 11MEMORANDUMFrom:To:Via:PFC B r a d l e y E. ManningCol. D a n i e l J. Choike(1) CW02 Denise Barnes(2) S t a f f Judge Advocate, O f f i c e o f t h e S t a f f Judge Advocate,U.S. Army M i l i t a r y D i s t r i c t o f Washington, F o r t McNairSubj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYRef:(a) A r t i c l e 138, UCMJ(b) SECNAVINST 1640.9C (Navy C o r r e c t i o n s Manual)1.I , PFC B r a d l e y E. Manning, am a member o f t h e U.S. Army on a c t i v ed u t y , assigned t o Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. ArmyG a r r i s o n , J o i n t Base Myer-Henderson H a l l , F o r t Myer, V i r g i n i a . On 2March 2011, I r e c e i v e d your response t o my A r t i c l e 138 Complaint f i l e don 19 January 2011.I have e l e c t e d t o f i l e t h e f o l l o w i n g r e b u t t a l t oyour response.2.F i r s t , my a l l e g a t i o n s o f improper t r e a t m e n t were n o t c o r r e c t l yn o t e d by you i n your 1 March 2011 memorandum. A d d i t i o n a l l y , I ammaking a new a l l e g a t i o n o f wrongdoing based upon r e c e n t d e c i s i o n s bythe P r e t r i a l Confinement F a c i l i t y (^^PCF^^) Commander. I request t h a tyou c o n s i d e r t h e f o l l o w i n g s p e c i f i c a l l e g a t i o n s :a. That t h e d e c i s i o n t o r e t a i n my c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as a MaximumCustody (^^MAX'') d e t a i n e e and t o r e t a i n me under P r e v e n t i o n o f I n j u r y(^^POI'') S t a t u s a f t e r 27 August 2010 was improper.b. That t h e d e c i s i o n t o p l a c e me on S u i c i d e Risk on 18 January2011 was improper.c. That t h e d e c i s i o n t o s t r i p me o f a l l my c l o t h i n g a t n i g h t2 March 2011 W8s and c o n t i n u e s t o be improper.since3. Addressing each o f t h e a l l e g a t i o n s , I would l i k e t o o f f e r t h ef o l l o w i n g i n r e b u t t a l t o your response:a.Tbat t b ^ d e c i s i o n t o r e t a i n my c l a s s i f ^ i c a t i o n as a t^lAX Custodyd e t a i n e e and t o r e t a i n me under ^OL S t a t u s a:fter 27 August 2010 ^asim^ro^er.(1) While i t may have been understandable t o c l a s s i f y me as aMAX d e t a i n e e i n i t i a l l y , I s h o u l d have been downgraded t o MediumCustody^In (MDl) a f t e r 27 August 2010.As you noted, my i n i t i a le v a l u a t i o n by t b e d u t y b r i g s u p e r v i s o r (^^DBS'') gave me a score o f ^^5^'a f t e r r e v i e w i n g t b e DD Form 2710, inmate background sunm^ary, andc o m p l e t i n g t h e 00 Form 2711, i n i t i a l custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . A scoreo f ^^5'' was s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than the ^^12^' o r h i g h e r score n o r m a l l yr e q u i r e d f o r MAX custody.Despite my low score, t h e OBS overrode t h escore, and i n d i c a t e d t h a t he c o n s i d e r e d my p r e v i o u s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i nKuwait as t h e p r i m a r y f a c t o r i n h i s d e c i s i o n .23780Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMY(2) Tbe d e c i s i o n t o m a i n t a i n me i n MAX Custody a f t e r 27 August2010 has been an abuse o f d i s c r e t i o n . Although t h e u l t i m a t e d e c i s i o nr e g a r d i n g my c l a s s i f i c a t i o n r e s t s w i t h t h e PCF Commander, t h i s d e c i s i o ncannot be an a r b i t r a r y one. I n t b e i n s t a n t case, t h e PCFC l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Assignment Board (^^C^A Board^^) and t h e PCF Commanderf a i l e d t o p r o p e r l y review my s t a t u s and take i n t o account a l l r e l e v a n tfactors.I n s t e a d , t h e C^A Board's recommendations and t h e PCFCommander's d e c i s i o n s have been p e r f u n c t o r y i n n a t u r e .(3) Tbe PCF C^A Board f a i l e d t o always document i t srecommendation concerning my custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and s t a t u s on t h er e q u i r e d B r i g Form 4200. This f a i l u r e i s i n d i c a t i v e o f bow t h e C^ABoard viewed i t s t a s k . I t i s c l e a r t h a t t b e C^A Board and t h e PCFCommander unduly weighted my b e h a v i o r i n Kuwait, p r i o r t o r e c e i v i n gadequate t r e a t m e n t , and t b e n a t u r e o f t h e charges a l l e g e d a g a i n s t me i nd e t e r m i n i n g my custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and s t a t u s . A s t r a i g h t f o r w a r dreview o f t h e B r i g ' s own o b s e r v a t i o n records a t t a c h e d as Enclosure 2 o fthe PCF Commander's response proves t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s o f my custodyc l a s s i f i c a t i o n and s t a t u s . The f o l l o w i n g a r e e x c e r p t s from t h e B r i g ' sobservation records:i)3 August 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND (PFC Bradley Manning) d i dnot r e c e i v e any d i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s andr e c e i v e d an average work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes,^^St^Ds conduct has been average and has p r e s e n t e d no problems t o s t a f for inmates.During t h e i n t e r v i e w SND was r e s p e c t f u l and courteous andwas w e l l spoken. SND s t a t e d t h a t he was d o i n g w e l l and was n o t havings u i c i d a l or homicidal f e e l i n g s . "ii)12 August 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND s t a t e dt h a t he would l i k e a j o b i n t h e f a c i l i t y l i b r a r y i f i t became p o s s i b l e .To t h i s p o i n t i n confinement SND's conduct has been average and hasp r e s e n t e d no problems t o s t a f f o r inmates.During t h e i n t e r v i e w SNDwas q u i e t , b u t courteous and r e s p e c t f u l .SND answers q u e s t i o n s b u tspeaks v e r y l i t t l e unless responding t o a q u e s t i o n . C u r r e n t l y SNDappears t o be t r y i n g t o a d j u s t t o t b e d a i l y r o u t i n e and o b s e r v i n g whati s g o i n g on around him. During t h e i n t e r v i e w SND was w e l l spoken, neati n appearance and m a i n t a i n e d eye c o n t a c t . SND s t a t e d t h a t he does n o thave any s u i c i d a l f e e l i n g s a t t h i s t i m e . "iii)16 August 2010 E n t r y :^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i gP s y c h o l o g i s t and found n o t t o be a t h r e a t t o h i m s e l f . I t i srecommended t b a t SND be removed from SR, and be p l a c e d on POI( s i c ) r e m a i n MAX custody."iv)17 August 2010 E n t r y :^^The B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t foundSND t o be a reduced t h r e a t t o h i m s e l f on 6 August 2010."v) 24 August 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d n o t r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n and r e c e i v e d an averagework and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes ^^^t^o t h i s p o i n t i nconfinement, SND has p r e s e n t e d no problems and has been courteous andrespectful to staff.SND's conduct has been e x c e l l e n t , so much so t h a t23781Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYi s i t apparent t h a t he i s e x t r e m e l y c a u t i o u s about what he says o r howhe a c t s . D u r i n g t h e i n t e r v i e w SNO was w e l l spoken, groomed and neat i nappearance."vi)27 August 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND has not p r e s e n t e d anyproblems s i n c e b i s l a s t review on 20 August 2010 and has been ano v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "vii)31 August 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an aboveaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes ^^SND wase v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 27 August and was recommended t obe removed from POI s t a t u s . The C^A Board reviewed SND on t h e samedate and recommended t h a t he s t i l l remain POI. SND remains courteousand r e s p e c t f u l t o s t a f f and has p r e s e n t e d no problems toward s t a f f o rinmates thus f ^ r .During t h e i n t e r v i e w SNO was w e l l spoken, groomedand neat i n appearance."viii)3 September 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND has n o t p r e s e n t e d anyproblems s i n c e b i s l a s t review on 27 August 2010 and has been ano v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "ix)8 September 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d n o t r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND wase v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 3 September and was recommendedt o be removed from POI s t a t u s . " A d d i t i o n a l l y i t s t a t e s , ^^SND c o n t i n u e st o be c o o p e r a t i v e w i t h B r i g s t a f f and has p r e s e n t e d no d i s c i p l i n a r yproblems.D u r i n g t h e i n t e r v i e w SND was w e l l spoken and neat i nappearance. SND's mood and appearance were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s normalc h a r a c t e r and he c o n t i n u e s t o s t a t e t h a t he i s n o t s u i c i d a l . "x) 10 September 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND has n o t presented anyproblems s i n c e b i s l a s t review on 3 SEPT 2010 and has been an o v e r a l laverage d e t a i n e e . "xi)14 September 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d n o t r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " Tbe e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND wase v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 10 September and was recommendedt o be removed from POI s t a t u s . " F i n a l l y , t h e e n t r y notes, ^^SND hasbeen c o o p e r a t i v e w i t h B r i g s t a f f and has p r e s e n t e d no d i s c i p l i n a r y o rb e h a v i o r a l problems.When observed i n h i s c e l l , SND i s always s i t t i n gq u i e t l y on b i s r ^ c k and appears t o be c o n t e n t w i t h doing n o t h i n g e l s e .During t h e i n t e r v i e w SND was w e l l spoken and neat i n appearance. SND'smood and appearance were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s normal c h a r a c t e r and hec o n t i n u e s t o s t a t e t h a t he i s n o t s u i c i d a l . "xii)28 September 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d n o t r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND wase v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 24 September and was recommendedt o be removed from POI s t a t u s . L a t e r , t h e e n t r y notes, ^^SND c o n t i n u e st o be c o o p e r a t i v e w i t h B r i g s t a f f and has p r e s e n t e d no d i s c i p l i n a r y o rb e h a v i o r a l problems.During t h e i n t e r v i e w SND was w e l l spoken and neat23782Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYi n appearance.SND's mood and appearance were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h b i snormal c h a r a c t e r and he c o n t i n u e s t o s t a t e t h a t he i s n o t s u i c i d a l . "xiii)4 October 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t b e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 24 Sep 2010 and recommended t o be removed from POI.SND has not p r e s e n t e d any problems since h i s l a s t review and has beenan o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "xiv)6 October 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y notes, ^^SND appears t o bec o n t e n t w i t h h i s s i t u a t i o n and goes through t h e motions o f t h e B r i g ' sp l a n o f t b e day w i t h o u t i n c i d e n t .SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 1 October and was recommended t o be removed from POIs t a t u s . " The e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND c o n t i n u e s t o be c o o p e r a t i v e w i t hB r i g s t a f f and has p r e s e n t e d no d i s c i p l i n a r y o r b e h a v i o r a l problems.During t h e i n t e r v i e w SND was r e s p e c t f u l , neat i n appearance andm a i n t a i n e d eye c o n t a c t . SND's mood and appearance were c o n s i s t e n t w i t hh i s normal c h a r a c t e r and he c o n t i n u e s t o s t a t e t b a t he i s n o tsuicidal."XV)12 October 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an aboveaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . "xvi)14 October 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t b e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on (no date g i v e n ) and recommended t o be removed from POI.SND has not p r e s e n t e d any problems since h i s l a s t r e v i e w ..." Thee n t r y a l s o notes ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e any d i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s oradverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an above average work andtraining report."xvii)22 October 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an aboveaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y notes, ^^SND was e v a l u a t e dby t h e B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t t h i s past week and found f i t from ( s i c )removal o f p r e v e n t i o n o f i n j u r y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n from a p s y c h i a t r i cs t a n d p o i n t . " Tbe e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND was r e s p e c t f u l and courteousand w e l l spoken. SND's a t t i t u d e and demeanor were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i snormal c h a r a c t e r and he c o n t i n u e s t o s t a t e t h a t he i s not s u i c i d a l . "xviii)28 October 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 15 October 2010 and recommended t o be removed from POI.SND has not p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s t review on 8 October2010 and has been an o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . " Another e n t r y on t h i sdate notes t h a t ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by the B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 22October 2010 and recommended t o be removed from POI. SND has n o tp r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s t review on 15 October and has beenan o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "x i x ) 2 November 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 29 October 2010 and recommended t o be removed from POI.SND has not p r e s e n t e d any problems since h i s l a s t r e v i e w on 22 October2010 and has been an o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "23783Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYxx)5 t^ovember 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND wase v a l u a t e d by t b e B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 29 October 2010 and found f i t t obe removed from p r e v e n t i o n o f i n j u r y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n from a p s y c h i a t r i cs t a n d p o i n t . " F i n a l l y , t h e e n t r y notes,During t b e i n t e r v i e w SND wasr e s p e c t f u l and courteous and was w e l l spoken. SND appears t o be i nh i g h s p i r i t s and have a p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e .SND's a t t i t u d e and demeanorwere c o n s i s t e n t w i t h b i s normal c h a r a c t e r and he continues t o s t a t et h a t he i s n o t s u i c i d a l . "xxi)15 November 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h eB r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 13 November 2010 and recommended t o ... ^beremoved from^ POI. SND has n o t p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s treview on 5 NOV 2010 and has been an o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "xxii)17 November 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an aboveaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " Tbe e n t r y a l s o noted t h a t ^^duringt b e i n t e r v i e w SND was r e s p e c t f u l and courteous and was w e l l spoken.SND's a t t i t u d e and demeanor were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s normal c h a r a c t e rand s t a t e d t h a t he i s n o t s u i c i d a l . "xxiii)23 November 2010 E n t r y :^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h eB r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 19 November 2010 and recommended t o be removedfrom POI. SND has n o t p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s t r e v i e w . "xxiv)3 December 2010 E n t r y :^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . "xxv)6 December 2010 E n t r y :^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 2 December 2010 and recommended t o be removed from POI.SND has n o t p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s t review on ^no dategiven^ and has been an o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "x x v i ) 7 December 2010 E n t r y :^^SND d i d n o t r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an aboveaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o noted, ^^^d^uring t b ei n t e r v i e w SND was courteous and w e l l spoken and he m a i n t a i n e d good eyec o n t a c t . SND's mood and c h a r a c t e r were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s normalcharacter."xxvii)14 December 2010 E n t r y :^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h eB r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 10 December 2010 and recommended t o remain on POI.(Tbe B r i g noted t b a t t b i s was t h e f i r s t time s i n c e 27 August 2010 t h a tCapt Hocter recommended PFC Manning remain on POI. His main c r i t e r i awas t h a t i t seemed PFC Manning was n o t d o i n g w e l l ) .SND has n o tp r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s t review and has been an o v e r a l laverage d e t a i n e e . "xxviii)17 December 2010 E n t r y :^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by t h eB r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t on 17 December 2010 and recommended t o be removedfrom POI. SND has n o t p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s t review andhas been an o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e "23784Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYx x i x ) 22 December 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an aboveaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes, ^ ^ o v e r a l l , SNDwas r e s p e c t f u l and c o o p e r a t i v e d u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w . "xxx)29 December 2010 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o s t a t e d , ^^SND wase v a l u a t e d by Capt Hocter on 23 December 2010, and a l t h o u g h f u r t h e rmental e v a l u a t i o n was deemed necessary, SND was recommended t o beremoved from POI c l a s s i f i c a t i o n from a p s y c h i a t r i c s t a n d p o i n t . "xxxi)6 January 2011 E n t r y :^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by the B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 30 December 2010 and recommended t o be removed fromPOI.SND has not p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e l a s t review and has beenan o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "xxxii)7 January 2011 E n t r y : ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by the B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 7 January 2011 and recommended t o be removed from POI.SND has not p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e h i s l a s t review and has beenan o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "The e n t r y a l s o notes t h a t ^^SND d i d n o tr e c e i v e any d i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s andr e c e i v e d an average work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " F i n a l l y , the e n t r ynotes t h a t PFC Manning ^^is r e s p e c t f u l and courteous t o s t a f f .Duringtbe i n t e r v i e w SND was w e l l spoken, m a i n t a i n e d eye c o n t a c t and h i sdemeanor was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s normal c h a r a c t e r .xxxiii)11 January 2011 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e d an above averageworking and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . "xxxiv)14 January 2011 E n t r y : ^^SND was e v a l u a t e d by the B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t on 14 January 2010 and recommended t o be removed from POI.SND has not p r e s e n t e d any problems s i n c e b i s l a s t review and has beenan o v e r a l l average d e t a i n e e . "xxxv) 18 January 2011 E n t r y : This i s the f i r s t e n t r y whereany n e g a t i v e conduct i s noted.I w i l l explain t h i s entry i n greaterd e t a i l i n paragraph 4 below when I address my a l l e g a t i o n t h a t t h ed e c i s i o n t o p l a c e me on S u i c i d e Risk by the PCF Commander on 18 January2011 was improper.x x x v i ) 28 January 2011 E n t r y : ^^SND d i d not r e c e i v e anyd i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t s o r adverse spot e v a l u a t i o n s and r e c e i v e ( d ) anaverage work and t r a i n i n g r e p o r t . " The e n t r y a l s o notes, ^^SND wase v a l u a t e d by Col Malone on 21 January 2011 and, a l t h o u g h f u r t h e r mentale v a l u a t i o n was deemed necessary, SND was recommended t o be removed fromPOI c l a s s i f i c a t i o n from a p s y c h i a t r i c s t a n d p o i n t . "(4) Thedefense counsel,cover my conduct2011.Although,t o p r e s e n t , I amabove o b s e r v a t i o n r e p o r t s were p r o v i d e d t o me and myDavid E. Coombs, on 4 February 2011.The r e p o r t ss i n c e my a r r i v a l on 29 J u l y 2010 t h r o u g h 28 JanuaryI do not have the o b s e r v a t i o n r e p o r t s from 29 Januaryc o n f i d e n t t h a t they would i n d i c a t e I have been an23785Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYexemplary d e t a i n e e . I am a l s o c o n f i d e n t t h a t t h e r e p o r t s would r e f l e c tthe B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t s ' c o n s i s t e n t recommendation t h a t I am a ^^lowr i s k " o f s e l f - b a r m and should be removed from MAX Custody and POIStatus.(5)I am b e i n g t r e a t e d d i f f e r e n t l y from any o t h e r d e t a i n e e a ttbe Quantico B r i g . While t h e PCF Commander f o l l o w s t h e recommendationof t h e B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t i n d e a l i n g w i t h o t h e r d e t a i n e e s , t b i s does n o thappen i n my case. Other d e t a i n e e s u s u a l l y remain on MAX custody o r i nPOI S t a t u s f o r about two weeks b e f o r e they a r e downgraded. I , however,have been l e f t t o l a n g u i s h under t b e unduly harsh c o n d i t i o n s o f MAXCustody and POI S t a t u s s i n c e my a r r i v a l on 29 J u l y 2010.I n f a c t , I amc u r r e n t l y t h e o n l y d e t a i n e e b e i n g h e l d under MAX Custody and the o n l yd e t a i n e e b e i n g b e l d i n POI s t a t u s by the B r i g . Any o b j e c t i v e personl o o k i n g a t t h e above f a c t s would have t o conclude t h a t t h i s t r e a t m e n tis u n j u s t i f i e d .The d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o r e t a i n me i n MAX Custody andunder POI S t a t u s a f t e r 27 August 2010 was improper and c o n s t i t u t e su n l a w f u l p r e t r i a l punishment.b.Tbat t b e d e c i s i o n t o ^ l a c e me on S u i c i d e ^ i s t ^ on 18 January2011 ^as i m ^ r o ^ ^ r .(1) On 18 January 2011, over t h e recommendation o f Capt. Hocterand t h e defense f o r e n s i c p s y c h i a t r i s t , Capt. Moore, CW04 A v e r h a r tp l a c e d me under S u i c i d e Risk. The S u i c i d e Risk assignment r e s u l t e d i nme b e i n g r e q u i r e d t o remain i n my c e l l f o r 24 hours a day.I wass t r i p p e d o f a l l c l o t h i n g w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f my underwear. Myp r e s c r i p t i o n eyeglasses were t a k e n away from me and I was f o r c e d t o s i tin essential blindness.(2)The b a s i s f o r t h e above t r e a t m e n t was due t o my a l l e g e de r r a t i c b e h a v i o r on 18 January 2011.On t h a t date, I was p u l l e d out o fmy c e l l f o r my one hour o f r e c r e a t i o n c a l l .When t h e guards came t o myc e l l , I n o t i c e d a change i n t h e i r u s u a l demeanor. I n s t e a d o f beingcalm and r e s p e c t f u l , t h e y seemed a g i t a t e d and c o n f r o n t a t i o n a l .Also,i n s t e a d o f t h e u s u ^ l two t o t h r e e guards, t h e r e were f o u r guards.Almost i m m e d i a t e l y , t h e guards s t a r t e d h a r a s s i n g me. The f i r s t guardt o l d me t o ^^turn l e f t . "When I complied, t h e second guard y e l l e d^^don't t u r n l e f t . "When I a t t e m p t e d t o comply w i t h the demands o f t h esecond guard, I was t o l d by t b e f i r s t , ^ ^ I s a i d t u r n l e f t . "I responded^^yes. C o r p o r a l " t o t h e f i r s t guard.A t t h i s p o i n t , t h e t h i r d guardchimed i n by t e l l i n g me t b a t ^^in t h e Marines we r e p l y w i t h ^aye' andnot ^yes.'"He then asked me i f I understood.I made the mistake o fr e p l y i n g ^^yes. Sergeant."A t t h i s p o i n t t h e f o r t h guard y e l l e d , ^^youmean ^aye,' Sergeant."(3)The harassment by t h e guards c o n t i n u e d as I was e s c o r t e dt o my one hour o f r e c r e a t i o n . When I a r r i v e d a t t h e r e c r e a t i o n room, Iwas t o l d t o s t a n d s t i l l so t h e y c o u l d remove my l e g r e s t r a i n t s . As Is t o o d s t i l l , one o f t h e guards y e l l e d ^ ^ I t o l d you t o stand s t i l l . "Ir e p l i e d ^^yes C o r p o r a l , I am s t a n d i n g s t i l l . "Another guard then s a i d ,^^you mean ^aye' C o r p o r a l . " Next, t h e same guard s a i d ^ ^ I thought wecovered t b i s , you say ^aye' and not ^yes,' do you understands"Iresponded ^^aye Sergeant."R i g h t a f t e r I r e p l i e d , I was once againy e l l e d a t t o ^^stand s t i l l . "Due t o b e i n g y e l l e d a t and t h e i n t e n s i t y723786Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYof t h e guards, I m i s t a k e n l y r e p l i e d , ^^yes C o r p o r a l , I am s t a n d i n gstill."As soon as I s a i d t h i s , I attempted t o c o r r e c t myself bys a y i n g ^^aye" i n s t e a d o f ^^yes," but i t was t o o l a t e .One o f the guardss t a r t i n g y e l l i n g a t me a g a i n , ^^what don't you understand" and ^^are weg o i n g t o have a problems"(4)Once t b e l e g r e s t r a i n t s were t a k e n o f f o f me, I t o o k as t e p back from t h e guards.My h e a r t was pounding i n my chest, and Ic o u l d f e e l myself g e t t i n g d i ^ ^ y .I sat down t o a v o i d f a l l i n g .When Id i d t h i s , t b e guards t o o k a step towards me. I i n s t i n c t i v e l y backedaway from them. As soon as I backed away, I c o u l d t e l l by t h e i r facest b a t t b e y were g e t t i n g ready t o r e s t r a i n me. I immediately put myhands up i n t h e a i r , and s a i d ^ ^ I am not d o i n g a n y t h i n g , I am j u s tt r y i n g t o f o l l o w your o r d e r s . " The guards then t o l d me t o s t a r twalking.I complied w i t h t h e i r o r d e r by s a y i n g ^^eye" i n s t e a d o f ^^yes."(5)I was a l l o w e d t o complete my hour o f r e c r e a t i o n .Duringthe hour, the guards d i d not harass me f u r t h e r .The guards a l s o d i dnot harass me when I was e s c o r t e d back t o my c e l l .Only l a t e r d i d Il e a r n t h a t t b e r e bad been a p r o t e s t o u t s i d e t h e gates o f Quantico t h ep r e v i o u s day. (See http:BBwww.youtube.comBwatch7v^x4eN^okgRIw). Ther a l l y was i n t e n d e d t o b r i n g a t t e n t i o n t o t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f myconfinement.I t i s my b e l i e f t h a t my t r e a t m e n t on 18 January 2010 bythe guards and l a t e r by t h e PCF Commander was r e l a t e d t o t h i s p r o t e s tand my e a r l i e r c o m p l a i n t s .(6)A f t e r b e i n g r e t u r n e d t o my c e l l , I s t a r t e d t o read a book.About 30 minutes l a t e r , t h e PCF Commander, CW04 James A v e r h a r t , came t omy c e l l .He asked me what had happened d u r i n g my r e c r e a t i o n c a l l . AsI t r i e d t o e x p l a i n t o him what had o c c u r r e d , CW04 A v e r h a r t stopped meand s a i d ^^1 am the conm:^ander" and t h a t ^^no one c o u l d t e l l him what t odo."He a l s o s a i d t h a t he was, f o r a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes, ^^God." Iresponded by s a y i n g ^^you s t i l l have t o f o l l o w B r i g procedures."I alsos a i d ^^everyone has a boss t h a t t h e y have t o answer t o . " As soon as Is a i d t b i s , CW04 A v e r h a r t o r d e r e d t h a t I be p l a c e d i n S u i c i d e RiskStatus.(7)A d m i t t e d l y , once I heard t h a t I would be p l a c e d underS u i c i d e Risk, I became upset. Out o f f r u s t r a t i o n , I placed my hands t omy head and clenched my h a i r w i t h my f i n g e r s .I d i d y e l l ^^why are youd o i n g t h i s t o me7" I a l s o y e l l e d ^^why am I b e i n g punished^" and ^ ^ Ihave done n o t h i n g wrong."I then asked CW04 A v e r h a r t ^^what have Idone t o deserve t h i s t y p e o f t r e a t m e n t 7 "(8)CW04 A v e r h a r t d i d not answer any o f my q u e s t i o n s . Hei n s t r u c t e d t h e guards t o e n t e r my c e l l and t a k e a l l my c l o t h i n g . A tf i r s t I t r i e d t o reason w i t h CW04 A v e r h a r t by t e l l i n g him t h a t I hadbeen a model d e t a i n e e and by a s k i n g him t o j u s t t e l l me what he wantedme t o do and t h a t I would do i t . However, I gave up t r y i n g t o reasonw i t h him once t h e guards e n t e r e d my c e l l and o r d e r e d me t o s t r i p .I n s t e a d , I lowered my head and s t a r t i n g t a k i n g o f f my c l o t h e s .(9)CW04 A v e r h a r t p l a c e d me on S u i c i d e Risk, over t h erecommendation o f Capt. Hocter and t h e defense f o r e n s i c p s y c h i a t r i s t ,Capt. Moore. H i s d e c i s i o n was a l s o i n v i o l a t i o n o f S e c r e t a r y o f Navy23787Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYI n s t r u c t i o n (^^SECNAVINST") 1649.9C Paragraph 4205.5d. As a r e s u l t o fb e i n g p l a c e d on S u i c i d e Risk, I was c o n f i n e d t o my c e l l f o r 24 bours aday.I was a l s o s t r i p p e d o f 8 l l c l o t h i n g w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f myunderwear. A d d i t i o n a l l y , my p r e s c r i p t i o n eyeglasses were taken awayfrom me. Due t o n o t h a v i n g my glasses, I was f o r c e d t o s i t i ne s s e n t i a l b l i n d n e s s d u r i n g t h e day. I remained on S u i c i d e Risk u n t i l21 January 2010. The d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o p l a c e me on S u i c i d e Risk wasw i t h o u t j u s t i f i c a t i o n and t h e r e f o r e c o n s t i t u t e s u n l a w f u l p r e t r i a lpunishment.o.Tbat t b e d e c i s i o n t o s t r i ^ me of^ a l l my c l o t b l n g a t n i g b t2 t ^ r c b 2011 ^as and c o n t i n u e s t o be i m ^ r o ^ e r .sinc^(1) On March 2, I was i n f o r m e d o f your d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g myA r t i c l e 138 c o m p l a i n t . Understandably f r u s t r a t e d by t h i s d e c i s i o na f t e r e n d u r i n g over seven months o f unduly harsh confinementc o n d i t i o n s , I asked t h e B r i g Operations O f f i c e r , MSG Papakie, what Ineeded t o do i n o r d e r t o be downgraded from Maximum Custody and POIS t a t u s . MSG Papakie responded by t e l l i n g me t h a t t h e r e was n o t h i n g Ic o u l d do t o downgrade my d e t a i n e e s t a t u s and t h a t t h e B r i g s i m p l yc o n s i d e r e d me a r i s k o f s e l f - h a r m . Out o f f r u s t r a t i o n , I respondedt h a t t h e POI r e s t r i c t i o n s were absurd ^nd s a r c a s t i c a l l y t o l d him i f Ir e a l l y wanted t o harm m y s e l f , t h a t I c o u l d c o n c e i v a b l y do so w i t h t h ee l a s t i c waistband o f my underwear o r w i t h my f l i p - f l o p s .(2) L a t e r t h a t same d^y, I was approached by GYSGT B l e n i s . Heasked me what I had done wrong. I t o l d him t h a t I d i d not know what hewas t a l k i n g about. He s a i d t h a t I would be s t r i p p e d naked a t n i g h t duet o something t b a t I had s a i d t o MSG Papakie. Shocked, I t o l d him t h a tI hadn't s a i d a n y t h i n g .I t o l d GYSGT B l e n i s t h a t I j u s t p o i n t e d o u tthe a b s u r d i t y o f my c u r r e n t confinement c o n d i t i o n s .(3) Without c o n s u l t i n g any B r i g mental h e a l t h p r o v i d e r . C h i e fWarrant O f f i c e r Denise Barnes used my s a r c a s t i c comment asj u s t i f i c a t i o n t o i n c r e a s e t h e r e s t r i c t i o n s imposed upon me under t h eg u i s e o f b e i n g concerned t h a t I was a s u i c i d e r i s k .I was n o t ,however, p l a c e d under t h e d e s i g n a t i o n o f S u i c i d e Risk. This i s becauseS u i c i d e Risk would have r e q u i r e d a B r i g mental h e a l t h p r o v i d e r ' srecommendation i n o r d e r f o r t h e added r e s t r i c t i o n s t o c o n t i n u e . Whilet h e PCF Commander needed t h e B r i g P s y c b i a t r i s t ^ s recommendation t o keepme under S u i c i d e Risk, no such recommendation was needed i n o r d e r t oi n c r e a s e my r e s t r i c t i o n s under POI S t a t u s . The c o n d i t i o n s o f POIS t a t u s r e q u i r e o n l y p s y c h i a t r i c i n p u t , b u t u l t i m a t e l y remain t h ed e c i s i o n o f t h e PCF Commander.(4)I n response t o t h i s s p e c i f i c i n c i d e n t , t h e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t met w i t h me. A f t e r speaking t o me, he assessed me as a^^low r i s k and r e q u i r i n g o n l y r o u t i n e o u t p a t i e n t f o l l o w - u p ^with^ noneed f o r ... c l o s e r c l i n i c a l observation.'^I n p a r t i c u l a r , he i n d i c a t e dt h a t my statement about t h e w a i s t band o f my underwear was i n no wayprompted by ^^a p s y c h i a t r i c c o n d i t i o n . "(5) Since 2 March 2011, I have been s t r i p p e d o f a l l myclothing atnight.I have been t o l d t h a t t h e PCF Commander i n t e n d s oncontinuing t h i s practice i n d e f i n i t e l y .I n i t i a l l y , aftersurrendering23788Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYmy c l o t h i n g t o t h e B r i g guards, I bad no choice but t o l a y naked i n myc o l d j a i l c e l l u n t i l t h e f o l l o w i n g morning.The next morning I wast o l d t o get o u t o f my bed f o r t h e morning Duty B r i g S u p e r v i s o r (DBS)inspection.I was n o t g i v e n any o f my c l o t h i n g back. I g o t o u t o f t h ebed and i m m e d i a t e l y s t a r t e d t o s h i v e r because o f how c o l d i t was i n mycell.I walked towards t h e f r o n t o f my c e l l w i t h my hands c o v e r i n g mygenitals.The guard t o l d me t o s t a n d a parade r e s t , which r e q u i r e d met o s t a n d w i t h my hands behind my back and my l e g s spaced shoulder w i d t hapart.I s t o o d a t ^^parade r e s t " f o r about t h r e e minutes u n t i l tbe DBSa r r i v e d . Once the DBS a r r i v e d , everyone was c a l l e d t o a t t e n t i o n . TheDBS and t h e o t b e r guards walked p a s t my c e l l .The DBS l o o k e d a t me,paused f o r a moment, and then c o n t i n u e d t o the next d e t a i n e e ' s c e l l . Iwas i n c r e d i b l y embarrassed a t h a v i n g a l l these people s t a r e a t menaked. A f t e r t h e DBS completed h i s i n s p e c t i o n , I was t o l d t o go s i t onmy bed. About t e n minutes l a t e r I was g i v e n my c l o t h e s and a l l o w e d t oget dressed.(6) A f t e r apparent o u t s i d e p r e s s u r e on the B r i g due t o mym i s t r e a t m e n t , I was g i v e n a s u i c i d e p r e v e n t i o n a r t i c l e o f c l o t h i n gc a l l e d a ^^smock" by t h e guards. A l t h o u g h I am s t i l l r e q u i r e d t o s t r i pnaked i n my c e l l a t n i g h t , I am now g i v e n the ^^smock" t o wear. Atf i r s t , I d i d not want t o wear t b i s i t e m o f c l o t h i n g due t o how coarsei t was and how u n c o m f o r t a b l e i t f e l t .However, the B r i g now o r d e r s met o wear t h e ^^smock" a t n i g b t .(7) Given t b e above c i r c u m s t a n c e s , tbe d e c i s i o n t o s t r i p me o fmy c l o t h i n g every n i g h t f o r an i n d e f i n i t e p e r i o d o f t i m e i s c l e a r l yp u n i t i v e i n n a t u r e . There i s no mental h e a l t h j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h edecision.I am under 24 hour s u r v e i l l a n c e , w i t h guards never b e i n gmore t h a n a few f e e t away from my c e l l .I am p e r m i t t e d t o have myunderwear and c l o t h i n g d u r i n g t h e day, w i t h no apparent concern t h a t Iw i l l barm m y s e l f d u r i n g t h i s t i m e p e r i o d . The d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o s t r i pme o f a l l my c l o t h i n g every n i g h t s i n c e 2 March 2011 i s w i t h o u tj u s t i f i c a t i o n and t h e r e f o r e c o n s t i t u t e s u n l a w f u l p r e t r i a l punishment.4. I have, b o t h by s t a t u t e and t h e E i g h t h Amendment, t h e r i g h t t op r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t c r u e l and unusual punishment.See (^nit^d .states v.^ a t t b e ^ s , 16 M.J. 354, 368 (CMA 1983)^ A r t i c l e 55, Uniform Code o fM i l i t a r y J u s t i c e (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. ^ 855.The S e c r e t a r y o f the NavyI n s t r u c t i o n 1649.9C d e t a i l s the procedures and safeguards f o rc l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f inmates, e v a l u a t i o n o f inmates and t h e l i m i t e d use o fs p e c i a l q u a r t e r s . The Navy I n s t r u c t i o n s t a t e s ^ ^ d i s c i p l i n e i s t o bea d m i n i s t e r e d on a c o r r e c t i v e r a t b e r t h a n a p u n i t i v e b a s i s . "A d d i t i o n a l l y i t s t a t e s ^^no persons, w h i l e b e i n g h e l d f o r t r i a l may bes u b j e c t e d t o punishment o r p e n a l t y o t h e r tban a r r e s t o r confinement,nor s h a l l t h e a r r e s t o r confinement imposed upon them be any morer i g o r o u s t h a n t h e circumstances r e q u i r e . " My confinementc l a s s i f i c a t i o n and s t a t u s a r e i n c l e a r c o n t r a v e n t i o n o f t h e NavyInstruction.5. Under my c u r r e n t r e s t r i c t i o n s , i n a d d i t i o n t o b e i n g s t r i p p e d a tn i g h t , I am e s s e n t i a l l y h e l d i n s o l i t a r y confinement. For 23 hours perday, I s i t alone i n my c e l l .The guards checked on me every f i v eminutes d u r i n g t h e day by a s k i n g me i f I am okay. I am r e q u i r e d t orespond i n some a f f i r m a t i v e manner. A t n i g h t , i f the guards can n o t1023789Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYsee me c l e a r l y , because I have a b l a n k e t over my head o r I am c u r l e d uptowards t h e w a l l , t h e y w i l l wake me i n o r d e r t o ensure t h a t I am okay.I r e c e i v e each o f my meals i n my c e l l .I am n o t a l l o w e d t o have ap i l l o w o r sheets.I am n o t a l l o w e d t o have any p e r s o n a l items i n mycell.I am o n l y a l l o w e d t o have one book o r one magazine a t any g i v e ntime t o r e a d . The book o r magazine i s taken away from me a t t h e end o ftbe day b e f o r e I go t o s l e e p . I am p r e v e n t e d from e x e r c i s i n g I n mycell.I f I a t t e m p t t o do push-ups, s i t - u p s , o r any o t h e r form o fe x e r c i s e I am f o r c e d t o s t o p by t h e guards.F i n a l l y , I receive onlyone hour o f e x e r c i s e o u t s i d e o f my c e l l d a i l y . My e x e r c i s e i s u s u a l l yl i m i t e d t o me w a l k i n g f i g u r e e i g h t s i n an empty room.6. My defense counsel, Mr. David Coombs (a r e s e r v e L i e u t e n a n t C o l o n e li n t h e Army) and I have r a i s e d our o b j e c t i o n t o these confinementc o n d i t i o n s on m u l t i p l e occasions.Based on t h e above, I b e l i e v e t h a tthe a c t i o n o f h o l d i n g me under MAX Custody and POI Status from 27August 2010 t o p r e s e n t , p l a c i n g me on S u i c i d e Risk on 18 January 2011,and f o r c i n g me t o s t r i p naked a t n i g h t s i n c e 2 March 2011 i s wrongunder A r t i c l e 138, UCMJ. I do n o t b e l i e v e t h a t t h e PCF Commander hasthe d i s c r e t i o n t o keep me i n confinement under these circumstances.7. I b e l i e v e my c l a s s i f i c a t i o n custody and POI S t a t u s i s based uponi n a p p r o p r i a t e reasons and i s t h e r e f o r e an abuse o f t b e PCF Commander'sd i s c r e t i o n , and a wrong w i t h i n t h e meaning o f A r t i c l e 138, UCMJ. Asr e d r e s s , I r e q u e s t t h a t you o r d e r my removal from POI Status and t h a tyou o r d e r t h e r e d u c t i o n o f my c l a s s i f i c a t i o n l e v e l from MAX t o MDl.BSBB. E. ManningPFC, US ArmyI have a s s i s t e d PFC B r a d l e y Manning w i t h t h e d r a f t i n g o f h i s requestf o r r e d r e s s , and have s i g n e d f o r him g i v e n t h e p r e s e n t circumstances.I concur w i t h t b e m a t t e r s he has expressed i n h i s r e b u t t a l , and j o i nhim i n r e q u e s t i n g t b a t you o r d e r h i s removal from POI S t a t u s and t h a tyou o r d e r a r e d u c t i o n i n h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n l e v e l from MAX t o MDl.BsBD. E. CoombsC i v i l i a n Defense Counsel1123790ATTACHMENT 1523791UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSHEADQUARTERS COMPANYSECURITY BATTALTION2 043 BARNETT AVENUEQUANTICO, V I R G I N I A 2 2 1 3 4 - 5 0 1 3IH REPLY REFER TO:1000B 27524 J a n 11From:To:Via:C h i e f Warrant O f f i c e r 4 James A v e r h a r t USMC, B r i g O f f i c e r i n ChargeCommanding O f f i c e r , MCB Q u a n t i c o , Va(1) Commanding O f f i c e r , S e c u r i t y B a t t a l i o nSubj:RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, UCMJ) OF PFC BRADLEYMANNING DATED 19 JANUARY 2 011Ref:(a) SECNAVINST 1640.9C(b) B r i g Order P1640.1C ( P r i s o n e r Rules and R e g u l a t i o n s )(c) A r t i c l e 138, UCMJEnd:(1) DD Forms 2710, 2711, Kuwait c o n f i n e m e n t(2) C&A b o a r d Recommendationsdocuments1.I n t h e performance o f my d u t i e s as t h e B r i g O f f i c e r , MCB Q u a n t i c o , I amg o v e r n e d b y r e f e r e n c e s (a) t h r o u g h ( c ) . I have been a p p o i n t e d and c h a r g e d t op e r f o r m my d u t i e s i n a f a i r , f i r m and i m p a r t i a l manner, w h i l e e n s u r i n g t h ec u s t o d y and s a f e t y o f a l l p e r s o n n e l , be i t p r i s o n e r s , s t a f f o r v i s i t o r s .2.I n response t o t h e A r t i c l e 138 c o m p l a i n t d a t e d 19 January 2011, PFCManning was i n i t i a l l y c o n f i n e d a t MCB Q u a n t i c o B r i g on 29 J u l y 2010. andc l a s s i f i e d as a maximum c u s t o d y d e t a i n e e on s u i c i d e r i s k s t a t u s . A t t h e t i m eof h i s i n i t i a l c o n f i n e m e n t , I was t h e B r i g Commander. I r e l i n g u i s h e d commandon 24 J a n u a r y 20011 p u r s u a n t t o PCS o r d e r s . D u r i n g t h e i n i t i a l i n t e r v i e w ,PFC Manning s t a t e d t h a t he has had s u i c i d a l t h o u g h t s and d i d make a p l a n t ocommit s u i c i d e . PFC Manning a l s o s t a t e d t h a t he has been d i a g n o s e d w i t hd e p r e s s i o n and a n x i e t y d i s o r d e r . D u r i n g t b e i n i t i a l r e c e p t i o n phase, PFCManning a l s o s t a t e d t o t h e c o u n s e l o r t h a t he was a "woman". D u r i n g t h i s phaseof c o n f i n e m e n t , PFC Manning completed a DD f o r m 2710 (Inmate BackgroundSummary) i n w h i c h he w r o t e "always p l a n n i n g , never a c t i n g " where asked i f hehas ever c o n s i d e r e d s u i c i d e . See e n c l o s u r e ( 1 ) .3. P r i o r t o r e c e i v i n g PFC Manning, MCB Q u a n t i c o B r i g r e c e i v e d d o c u m e n t a t i o nf r o m t h e c o n f i n e m e n t f a c i l i t y i n Kuwait s t a t i n g t h a t PFC Manning becameu n r e s p o n s i v e t o s t a f f and would have a n x i e t y a t t a c k s a t t i m e s . PFC Manningwas p l a c e d on s u i c i d e w a t c h w h i l e c o n f i n e d i n Kuwait and was a l s o f o u n d t ohave made a noose o u t o f h i s b e d s h e e t . PFC Manning was e v a l u a t e d s e v e r a lt i m e s b y m e n t a l h e a l t h p r o f e s s i o n a l s w h i l e i n Kuwait and f o u n d t h a t he was ah i g h r i s k barm t o h i m s e l f . I t was f u r t h e r r e q u e s t e d t h a t PFC Manning bet r a n s f e r r e d t o a f a c i l i t y w i t h s p e c i a l i z e d resources f o r h i s mental s t a t e .4. D u r i n g t h e i n i t i a l i n t e r v i e w w i t h h i s c o u n s e l o r i n Q u a n t i c o , PFC Manningwas asked i f he was c u r r e n t l y s u i c i d a l t o w h i c h PFC Manning r e p l i e d "no".D u r i n g t h e i n t e r v i e w , PFC Manning was asked about t h e noose he made o u t o f abed s h e e t . PFC Manning s t a t e d t h a t he made a noose o u t o f sand bag t i e s , n o ta b e d s h e e t . The d i s c r e p a n c y between t h e d o c u m e n t a t i o n r e c e i v e d and PFCManningB_0001135523792Sub^:^^^^^RESPONSE TO R^^JEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, UcMJ) OF PFC BRADLEYMANt^INC DATED 1^ JANItARY ^011Mannin^^s statement r a i s e d the concern of PFC Manning's mental a b i l i t y t od i f f e r e n t i a t e between a bed sheet or sand bag t i e s , or i f PFC Manning madem u l t i p l e nooses. Due t o tbe documentation provided, PFC Manning's v e r b a l andw r i t t e n statements, and tbe a c t of making at l e a s t one item t o commit s u i c i d ew i t h , I decided t h a t PFC Manning would remain on s u i c i d e watch. I alsodecided t h a t PFC Manning would be c l a s s i f i e d as a maximum custody inmate.5. Per SECt^AVIt^ST 1^40.9C, inmates r e t i r i n g immediate and continuoussupervision o r r e g u i r i n g special c u s t o d i a l s u p e r v i s i o n w i l l be c l a s s i f i e d asa maximum custody detainee. Per SECNAVINST 1^40.9C, inmates who hav^ethreatened s u i c i d e or have made a s u i c i d e gesture but are found f i t f o rconfinement may be placed w i t h i n s p e c i a l guarters under continuousobservation w h i l e i n the category of s u i c i d e r i s k . The f o l l o w i n g arereguirements s t a t e d i n SECNAVINST 1640.9C:(a) Supervision must be immediate and continuous. A DD 509, I n s p e c t i o nRecord of Prisoner i n Segregation, s h a l l be posted by the c e l l door andappropriate e n t r i e s made a t l e a s t every 15 minutes.(b)They s h a l l not be assigned t o work d e t a i l s outside the c e l l .(c)They s h a l l be assigned t o the most secure guarters.(d) Two or more s t a f f members s h a l l be present when maximum custodyinmates are out of t h e i r c e l l s .(e) Maximum custody prisoners s h a l l wear r e s t r a i n t s at a l l times whenoutside the maximum-security area and be escorted by a t l e a s t two escorts.(f)The B r i g OIC may d i r e c t removal of c l o t h i n g when deemed necessary.(e)Inmates must be under observation of a supervisor of the same sex.(f)Prisoner must be under observation of a supervisor of the same sex.(^) Sucb p r i s o n e r s s h a l l be berthed i n special quarters and p h y s i c a l l ychecked every 5 minutes.^. Per SECt^AVINST 1^40.9C, inmates i n a maximum custody status reguire twoescorts a t a l l times w h i l e outside of t h e i r c e l l . While outside of the c e l l ,maximum custody inmates w i l l normally wear f u l l r e s t r a i n t s i . e . l e ^r e s t r a i n t s , hand r e s t r a i n t s and a r e s t r a i n t b e l t . The B r i g OIC may a u t h o r i s eless form of r e s t r a i n t or a d d i t i o n a l escorts when necessary. Normally lessform of r e s t r a i n t i s authorised w h i l e showering, p a r t i c i p a t i n g i nr e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , medical exams or i n a court room. While a maximumcustody inmate i s outside of a secured area, tbe f a c i l i t y w i l l commence alockdown u n t i l tbe inmate i s returned t o a secured area. No other inmates areallowed t o move throughout t h e f a c i l i t y w h i l e a maximum custody inmate i so u t s i d e of a secured area. At no time w i l l two maximum custody inmates beoutside of a secured area a t any time. Due t o t h i s requirement, maximumcustody i n m a t e s d o n o t commingle w i t h other i n m a t e s d u r i n g r e c r e a t i o n orgroup a c t i v i t i e s . Maximum custody inmates are not p r o h i b i t e d from speakingw i t h inmates i n other c e l l s provided t h a t i t does n o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e goodorder and d i s c i p l i n e of the f a c i l i t y .7. On ^0 J u l y 2010, CAPT Hoctor, the B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t , made h i s f i r s tassessment o f PFC Manning and recommended PFC Manning remain on s u i c i d eI^anning5^000tt35^23793Subj:^^^^^^^^RESPONSE TO R^^^J^ST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, U^,^^^J) OF PFC BRADLEYMANNING DATED 19 JANUARY ^011watcb. Tbe B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t also s t a t e d t h a t PFC Manning should not haveaccess t o bootlaces, t r a s h bags, b e l t s e t c . One week l a t e r on ^ August ^010,the B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t recommended t b a t PFC Manning be removed from s u i c i d ewatch and placed on p r e v e n t i o n of i n j u r y . On 27 August 2010, the 5 r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t recommended PFC Manning be removed of a l l s u i c i d a l precautionsbecause no s u i c i d a l thoughts were r e p o r t e d . The B r i ^ P s y c h i a t r i s t also notedt h a t PFC Manning had an average t o l e r a t i o n t o f r u s t r a t i o n and s t r e s s . Duringf o l l o w i n g reviews made by the B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t , i t was noted t h a t PFCManning sometimes had a low t o l e r a t i o n f o r f r u s t r a t i o n and s t r e s s and a tother times PFC Manning bad an average t o l e r a t i o n f o r f r u s t r a t i o n and s t r e s s .Per SECNAVINST 1640.9C, a low t o l e r a t i o n f o r f r u s t r a t i o n and s t r e s s i s af a c t o r f o r determining i f maximum custody i s warranted. Due t o the s h o r tp e r i o d o f time since PFC Manning made a noose, PFC Manning's w r i t t e n andv e r b a l statements on planning t o barm himself, the s h o r t timeframe betweenthe B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t s ^ recommendation f o r PFC Manning t o be on s u i c i d e r i s kand remov^al of a l l precautions and the f l u c t u a t i o n s of the B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t ' s ev^al^ations, i t was determined t h a t PFC Manning remain i n ap r e v e n t i o n of i n j u r y status f o r h i s own s a f e t y , tte also remained i n a maximumcustody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .8. Per SECNAVINST 1640.9C, a C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Assignment (C^A) board s h a l lbe e s t a b l i s h e d and ^111 be responsible f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a lp r i s o n e r ' s program upon completion of o r i e n t a t i o n . Tbis board s h a l l becomposed, a t a minimum, of the next s e n i o r s t a f f member t o tbe B r i g OIC, o rdesignated r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , one senior s t a f f member from s e c u r i t y , one fromprograms, and any other members appointed by the B r i g OIC. Representativesfrom o u t s i d e the confinement f a c i l i t y . I n c l u d i n g s t a f f s p e c i a l i s t s , sucb as apsychologist or chaplain, may be appointed t o the board. Inmates may appearbefore t b i s board t c discuss t h e i r program or changes t h e r e t o i f considerednecessary. Tbe C^A Board^s recommendations s h a l l be recorded and signed bytbe B r i g OIC or designated r e p r e s e n t a t i v e as approving o f f i c e r . Whencircumstances i n d i c a t e n e c e s s i t y f o r immediate a c t i o n , theB r i g OIC o r designated representativ^e may make changes i n custody,c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , etc., w i t h o u t board a c t i o n . Changes s h a l l be a p a r t of theagenda of the next C^A board meeting.C u r r e n t l y the C^A Board i s comprised of t b e Programs Chief, Senior Counselor,Operations Chief, Admin Chief, S e c u r i t y Operations Chief or tbe Duty B r i ^Supervisor. Tbe C^A Board c o n s i s t s of three v o t i n g members and a recorder.The C^A Board's recommendation i s normally forwarded t o the B r i g OIC f o rapproval. PFC Manning's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and s t a t u s i s rev^iewed by the C^ABoard weekly. An e v a l u a t i o n by the B r i g P s y c h i a t r i s t i s normally conductedp r i o r t o the C^A Board's convening and h i s recommendation i s forwarded t o t b eC^A Board. I make a f i n a l determination regarding an inmate's c l a s s i f i c a t i o nand s t a t u s based upon tbe C^A board's recommendation and my personalobservations and experience. Tbe proceedings o f the C ^ boards f o r PFCManning a r e attached as enclosure (^).t ^ n t i l 18 January 2011, CAPT W i l l i a m H o c t e r was assignedas t h e B r i gP s y c h i a t r i s t . Colonel Ricky Malone, an Army p s y c h i a t r i s t , had been consultedby CAPT ttocter. Col Malone d i d not make a recommendation t o tbe C^A Board, ashe i s n o t a member of tbe B r i g s t a f f and only a c o n s u l t a n t of CAPT Hoctor.During CAPT Hocter's tenure, be has also consulted CAPT Brian Moore, who t b edefense has now i d e n t i f i e d as a member of PFC Manning's defense team. Thisi n f o r m a t i o n was not p r o v i d e d t o the c o r r e c t i o n f a c i l i t y p r e v i o u s l y and i s , i nmy opinion, a c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t . I t cannot be determined t o what extentI^anr^ing8^(^0t^t^35723794^^^^^RESPONSE TO R^^^JEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, U^^^rJ) OF PFC BRADLEYMANNING DATED 19 JANUARY 2011CAPT Moore^s opinions a f f e c t e d CAPT Hoctor^s recommendations. However, If e e l i t i s important t h a t t b i s r e l a t i o n s h i p be h i g h l i g h t e d f o r the record.Sub^:9. tipon PFCManning's I n i t i a l confinement i n Q u a n t i c o , he was placed ons u i c i d e r i s k status u n t i l 11 A u ^ s t 2010, when he was placed on p r e v e n t i o n ofi n j u r y s t a t u s . Both SR and POI s t a t u s r e g u i r e maximum s e c u r i t y custody.Inmates on SR or POI s t a t u s are not denied any p r i v i l e g e s or r i g h t s . For t b epurpose o f s a f e t y and s e c u r i t y , the B r i ^ OIC may r e s t r i c t c e r t a i n p r i v i l e g e sf o r inmates i n SR or POI s t a t u s .a.Clothing.(1) Inmates on SR status are normally c l o t h e d i n only underwear andshower shoes and provided w i t h one t e a r proof s e c u r i t y blanket. A secondblanket i s provided a f t e r taps.(2) Inmates on POI status are normally c l o t h e d i n seasonal PT gearand shower shoes and p r o v i d e d w i t h one s e c u r i t y b l a n k e t . During hours a f t e rtaps, t h e inmate i s c l o t h e d i n only underwear and ^ i v e n one a d d i t i o n a ls e c u r i t y blanket.b.Bedding.(1) Inmates on SR or POI status are n o t provided w i t h bed sheets or ap i l l o w , b u t are provided w i t h the same type of mattress as a l l other inmates.(2) Due t o tbe extended amount o f time PFC Manning has been placed onPOI s t a t u s , a s a f e t y mattress was acquired from the Rappahannock County J a i l .Tbis i s a i s a one piece mattress w i t h a b u i l t i n p i l l o w .c.Personal effectsBhy^iene items.(1) During d a y l i g h t hours, inmates on SR or POI status maintain a l lpersonal items i n an adjacent c e l l , w i t h tbe exception of the c l o t h i n g beingworn, one book and one copy of r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s . Hygiene items, t oi n c l u d e t o i l e t paper, are o n l y ^ i v e n t o t h e inmate d u r i n g h y g i e n e c a l l o r asneeded. No inmate, regardless of custody or c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , i s a u t h o r i s e d t om a i n t a i n shoes or boots w h i l e i n s i d e of h i s c e l l . Inmates are only givenrazors a t r e v e i l l e and they are r e t u r n e d t o the Special Quarters supervisorimmediately a f t e r shaving.d.Correspondence timeBpbone c a l l s .(1) Inmates on SR or POI s t a t u s are not denied correspondence orphone p r i v i l e g e s . Inmates, regardless of custody or c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , are o n l yallowed t o make phone c a l l s or w r i t e l e t t e r s d u r i n g f r e e time as o u t l i n e d i nthe p l a n o f the day (POD). The only r e s t r i c t i o n t o an inmate on SR or POIstatus concerning correspondence m a t e r i a l i s the l e n g t h o f time.(2) U n t i l 27 October 2010, inmates on SR or POI s t a t u s receivedcorrespondence m a t e r i a l f o r one hour d a i l y d u r i n g f r e e time. Due t o t h eextended d u r a t i o n of PFC Manning's POI s t a t u s , I authorised t h i s time t o beextended by one hour. A l l inmates are a f f o r d e d the same o p p o r t u n i t y andd u r a t i o n t o make personal phone c a l l s .(3) A l l inmates are a f f o r d e d t h e same o p p o r t u n i t y t o speak w i t h t h e i rparent command or a t t o r n e y v i a government phone. Inmates are r e q u i r e d t oI^anning0^000tt35823795Subj:RESPOt^SE TORE^^JEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, LtC^^^) OF PFC BRADLEYMANNING DATED 19 JA^ARY 2011submit a DD 510 t o t h e i r counselor s t a t i n g the nature of t h e i r reguest. Theircounselor o r designated s t a f f member w i l l normally respond t o t h e i r reguestw i t h i n three business days and make every attempt t o get the inmate i ncontact w i t h t b e r e v e s t e d p a r t y . PFC Manning i s r o u t i n e l y placed on t h ephone w i t h h i s a t t o r n e y approximately two times a week f o r approximately 45minutes.e.Visitation.(1) A l l inmates, regardless of custody or c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , arerequired t o receive a command v i s i t weekly. I f t h i s reguirement i s not met, as t a f f member from t h e Programs section makes l i a i s o n w i t h the inmates commandand informs them of t h e i r d e f i c i e n c y .(^) A l l inmates, regardless o f custody, are allowed t o r e c e i v epersonal v i s i t s on weekends or h o l i d a y s as t h e POD s t a t e s . The o n l y inmatesdenied personal v i s i t s are tbose i n a d i s c i p l i n a r y segregation or loss ofp r i v i l e g e s s t a t u s . Tbe o n l y l i m i t a t i o n placed on maximum custody inmates i sthat they must meet w i t h t h e i r v i s i t o r s i n a non-contact booth. Thisl i m i t a t i o n i s o n l y due t o t h e requirement of a f a c i l i t y lockdown w h i l e amaximum custody inmate i s outside of a secured area.(3) A l l inmates are allowed t o receiv^e l e g a l v i s i t s during normalbusiness hours. Exceptions t o these hours may be made upon p r i o r request ofthe v i s i t i n g p a r t y . A l l l e g a l v i s i t s are conducted i n a n o n - c o n t a c t b o o t b .f.TelevisionBrecreation.(1) Inmates a r e o n l y allowed t o watch t e l e v i s i o n during f r e e time asprescribed i n t h e POD. There i s one t e l e v i s i o n i n the r e c r e a t i o n room l o c a t e di n the housinq area and another on a c a r t . The t e l e v i s i o n i n the day room i sused by a l l general p o p u l a t i o n inmates. The t e l e v i s i o n on the c a r t i s used bya l l maximum custody inmates. The c a r t i s r o l l e d i n f r o n t o f t h e inmate^s c e l lduring authorised telev^ision viewing hours. Tbe viewing time i s dependentupon the number o f maximum custody inmates b e i n ^ housed a t one time. PFCtanning i s c u r r e n t l y t b e only maximum custody inmate and may view telev^isionfrom b i s c e l l d u r i n q f r e e time. Tbere are no viewinq r e s t r i c t i o n s placed onmaximum custody inmates. The only exception t o t h i s was when i t was reportedon the news t b a t PFC Manning bad committed s u i c i d e . When t h i s was reported,PFC Manning w a s n o t a l l o w e d t o v i e w the news. T h e d u r a t i o n o f TV time mayf l u c t u a t e depending on how many maximum custody inmates are present. I f morethan one i s present, tbey share tbe TV on tbe c a r t .(2) A l l inmates are authorised one hour of r e c r e a t i o n c a l l d a i l y .Maximum custody inmates conduct r e c r e a t i o n c a l l i n d i v i d u a l l y i n a securedarea inside t b e r e c r e a t i o n yard. While i n t h i s secured area, t h e inmate'sr e s t r a i n t s are removed. Durinq inclement weather or when the temperature i sbelow 32 deqrees, r e c r e a t i o n c a l l i s conducted indoors.(3) Because t h e indoor r e c r e a t i o n area i s n o t a secured area,r e s t r a i n t s are not normally remov^ed from maximum custody inmates. A l linmates, unless i n a SR, POI or d i s c i p l i n a r y status a r e allowed t o exercisewhile i n t h e i r c e l l s provided that i t does not d i s r u p t the ^ood order andd i s c i p l i n e o f t h e f a c i l i t y . Due to t h e extended p e r i o d o f time t h a t PFCManning has been i n a SR or POI s t a t u s , and not allowed t o exercise w i t h i nhis c e l l , I a u t h o r i s e d PFC Manning's r e s t r a i n t s t o be removed w h i l econductinq r e c r e a t i o n c a l l i n s i d e although he i s not i n a secured area.I^anning8^000tt35^23796Subj:RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, U^^^lj) OF PFC BRADLEYMANNING DATED 19 JAt^UARY 2011W i t h i n t h i s r e c r e a t i o n area, tbere are s t a t i o n a r y b i c y c l e s , e l l i p t i c a lmachines, weight t r a i n i n q equipment, t r e a d m i l l s and s t a i r masters. There i s af o o s b a l l t a b l e and pinq ponq t a b l e s t h a t may be set up so he does not needanother inmate t o p a r t i c i p a t e . PFC Manninq i s allowed t o choose h i s a c t i v i t ybut chooses t o walk i n c i r c l e s or f i g u r e eights on h i s own f r e e w i l l . He w i l loccasionally do push-ups, crunches and s i t ^ u p s on a mat t h a t i s provided. Onseveral occasions he has requested t h a t h i s r e c r e a t i o n c a l l be secured e a r l yand t h a t be be returned t o b i s c e l l . When be makes t h i s request, he i sescorted back t o h i s c e l l and asked t o p r o v i d e a w r i t t e n statement sayingt h a t he chose t o have h i s r e c r e a t i o n c a l l secured e a r l y . PFC Manninq hasprovided a couple of these statements but has also r e f u s e d as w e l l .10. Per SECNAVINST 1640.9C, there must be p e r i o d i c bed checks of a l l inmatesa t n i q h t . Per p r i s o n e r r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s , inmates are not a u t h o r i s e d t ocover t h e i r e n t i r e face w i t h blankets w h i l e sleepinq. Inmates are n o t t o beawakened f o r the purpose o f bed checks, however p o s i t i v e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n mustbe made i f no p a r t of an inmate i s v i s i b l e . The only way f o r t h i s t o bepossible i s t o e i t h e r awaken the inmate or i n s t r u c t him t o uncover b i s faceor have tbe c e l l opened, enter and uncover tbe inmate which i s a r i s k t os t a f f safety and not authorised.11. Recent I n c i d e n t s : On 18 January 2011, PFC Manning bad what appeared asan a n x i e t y a t t a c k i n the r e c r e a t i o n room as h i s r e s t r a i n t s were beinqremoved. PFC Manning f e l l t o the f l o o r and was cauqht by two s t a f f memberswhich softened h i s f a l l . PFC Manninq then p u l l e d away from the s t a f f membersand ran behind an exercise machine appearing t o cry. A f t e r PFC Manninq gainedb i s composure he was allowed t o continue h i s r e c r e a t i o n c a l l a f t e r speakinqw i t h the operations chief who a u t h o r i s e d the continued r e c r e a t i o n c a l l . Laterthe same date, PFC Manning became a q i t a t e d when speaking t o t h e B r i gSupervisor and the B r i q OIC. While I was conductinq my d a i l y rounds i nSpecial Quarters, I spoke t o PFC Manninq as always w h i l e o b s e r v i n q b i sa c t i o n s . I n i t i a l l y he appeared t o be p h y s i c a l l y okay. I asked him how he wasdoinq and he r e p l i e d ^^fine s i r " . I then asked PFC Manninq was he sure^ Hes a i d ^^yes s i r " . I questioned detainee Manninq reqardinq r e p o r t s from 5 r i gS t a f f i n which detainee t ^ n n i n q became anxious and e x h i b i t e d laboredbreathing d u r i n q r e c r e a t i o n c a l l . I then asked PFC Manninq about the i n c i d e n tof f a l l i n q w h i l e a t r e c r e a t i o n c a l l . PFC Manninq s t a t e d t b a t he became l i q h tbeaded. I a q a i n a s k e d b i m b o w was be f e e l i n g a n d h e b e q a n y e l l i n q ,s t u t t e r i n g , and f l a i l i n g h i s arms. PFC Manninq began t o y e l l out t b a t hewanted t o qo home. He asked, ^^Why d i d a l l those Marines show up". He alsoy e l l e d out ^why are you psycho-analy^inq me7" PFC Manninq also s a i d ^^why areyou s t a r i n q a t me^" He then said ^stop y e l l i n q a t me". I i n s t r u c t e d PFCt ^ n n i n q t o r e l a x and calm down. I also i n s t r u c t e d him t o s i t down on t h e r a c ^and breathe. PFC Manninq s a i d be wanted t c qo home and began p h y s i c a l l ys t r i k i n q himself i n tbe bead very v i o l e n t l y and aqqressively. Due t o PFCManninq's a c t i o n s , which caused an immediate concern, I d i r e c t e d tbe B r i gSupervisor t o ^^special move" PFC Manninq's status and ordered that he beplaced back i n a s u i c i d e r i s k s t a t u s . A f t e r PFC Manninq's o u t b u r s t , andp h y s i c a l contact t o himself, the :Briq P s y c h i a t r i s t was contacted and asked t omeet w i t h PFC Manninq. A f t e r PFC Manninq was informed t h a t he was qoinq t o beplaced i n a s u i c i d e r i s k s t a t u s , PFC Manninq beqan t o attempt t o neqotiate t onot be placed on t b i s status and delayed i n q i v i n q the requested c l o t h i n qitems. He was i n i t i a l l y non-compliant and refused t o qive the c l o t h i n q itemsto tbe B r i q Supervisor when asked, t^en I n o t i c e d t b a t PFC Manninq was beinqnoncompliant I ordered the dialoque and actions t o be videotaped. Once PFCManning n o t i c e d t h a t he w a s b e i n g videotaped, he immediately becamecompliantl^anningO^OOOtt^^O23797Subj:RESPONSE TO REQUEST FORREDRESS (ARTICLE 138, UCMJ) OF PFC BRADLEYMAt^NING DATED 19 JANUARY 2011and provided the c l o t h i n q item as requested. He also calmed down butcontinued to comment about not wantinq t o be on SR and POI.12. P r i o r to the a r r i v a l of Dr. Hoctor, I d i r e c t e d t h a t PFC Manninq remain i nt h i s s t a t u s u n t i l 20 January 2011 and, provided t h a t PFC Manninq's actions donot continue, t h a t he be reviewed by the C^ board a t t h a t time. CAPT Hocterand CAPT Moore met w i t h PFC Manninq on the same date and recommended t h a t PFCManninq be placed on a ^4 hour POI s t a t u s . PFC Manning was removed from SRstatus on 20 January 2011 and assigned on POI s t a t u s .13. On 21 January 2011, I received a DD 510 from PFC Manning requesting t b a the be taken o f f o f maximum custody and POI s t a t u s . This request was dated 7January 2011. PFC Manning was reviewed by the C^A Board on 21 January 2011and was allowed t o appear before the board. The C ^ Board recommended t h a tPFC Manninq remain c l a s s i f i e d as a maximum custody inmate i n prevention ofi n j u r y s t a t u s due t o previous w r i t t e n and v e r b a l statements, s u i c i d a li d e a t i o n s and statements t h a t he made t o the members of the C^A Board.Althouqb PFC Manning denied any s u i c i d a l thoughts or f e e l i n g s , PFC Manningalso i m p l i e d t h a t he may not be completely t r u t h f u l . When asked about thedate o f 7 January ^011 as the date of submission on the DD510, PFC Manninqj u s t looked at me and s t a t e d t h a t i t i s possible f o r h i s dates t o be o f f andp r o v i d e d no f u r t h e r explanation. I denied h i s request t h a t he taken o f fmaximum custody and POI status. This i s the only time he has f o r m a l l yrequested t h a t I take such a c t i o n throuqh the DD 510 process. This i s t b eqrievance t h a t PFC Manninq i d e n t i f i e s i n paraqraph 6 of his complaint.14. Since i n i t i a l confinement, PFC Manninq has displayed unusual behaviorcausinq me concern. There has been unusual behavior such as wakinq up andl i c k i n q the c e l l bars, sleep walking, sword f i g h t i n g , p l a y i n q peek-a-boo i nthe m i r r o r , wakinq up a t n i g h t t a l k i n g , simulated l i f t i n g weights, t a l k i n g ,mumbling and q i q q l i n q a t himself, beating on h i s chest, and rock s t a r headbanqinq simulation. Since confinement, PFC Manninq has also v i o l a t e d p r i s o n e rr u l e s and r e q u l a t i o n s by not f o l l o w i n q i n s t r u c t i o n s . He has received aneqative hard card e n t r y f o r disobedience and several counseling f o r f a i l u r eto f o l l o w i n s t r u c t i o n s . Although minor i n nature, a l l prisoners are r e q u i r e dto f o l l o w the r u l e s and r e q u l a t i o n s o f the f a c i l i t y . I have not imposed anyd i s c i p l i n a r y segregation, but these i n c i d e n t s do cause me c o n t i n u i n g concernreqardinq h i s safety and i n t e n t i o n s .15. I n t h i s f a c i l i t y , a l l p r i s o n e r s and detainees are berthed i n SpecialQuarters. A l i v i n g area comprised of 30 i n d i v i d u a l c e l l s w i t h each c e l ldimension size of 6x8x8. Each c e l l has one t o i l e t , rack, sink and waterfaucet. The Quantico base p r e t r i a l confinement f a c i l i t y does not haves o l i t a r y confinement. I t does have a d i s c i p l i n a r y seqregation u n i t .Sinceconfinement PFC Manninq has been berthed i n Special Quarters i n c e l l ^192.16. As the B r i g OIC w i t h over 20 years of c o r r e c t i o n experience, Iunderstand the d u t i e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the b i l l e t which I am assiqned.I am charqed w i t h the s e c u r i t y , custody and c o n t r o l o f a l l inmates i n mycustody while remaining f i r m , f a i r and i m p a r t i a l . At no time have I acted outof the scopeof m y d u t i e s or abused t h e a u t b o r i t y g i v e n t o m e p e r thed i r e c t i v e s t h a t govern my decisions regarding PFC Manninq. Due t o PFCManning's continuous, sporadic, unusual behavior, w r i t t e n and v e r b a lstatements, past s u i c i d a l i d e a t i o n s and gestures, i t i s my p r o f e s s i o n a lopinion t h a t prevention o f i n j u r y s t a t u s i s c u r r e n t l y necessary t o ensure PFCManning's personal safety, as w e l l as the s a f e t y of other prisoners ands t a f f . Further, i t i s my p r o f e s s i o n a l opinion t h a t PFC Manning's maximumI^anning8^000tt(3^t23798Sub^:RESPONSE TO REQtTEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, UC^^J) OF PFC BRADLEYM^Nt^INGDATED 19 JANUARY 2011custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s j u s t i f i e d based upon h i s charges, n a t i o n a l s e c u r i t yconcerns and h i s behavior w h i l e i n the f a c i l i t y . At a l l times my decisionshave been guided by recommendations from the B r i q s t a f f , the C^A board, andmental h e a l t h providers and also through i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h PFC Manninq.However, I must make the f i n a l determination based upon my judgment andexperience and have continued t o do so.^2-^^)9^.T. AVERHART JRManningB_00011362^I ATTACHMENT 1623800nUNitED STATES MARINE CORPSMARINE CORPS BASEQUANTICO, VIRGINIA22134-5001IN REPLY REFER TO!5800jta16 Mar 11SECOND ENDORSEMENT on PFC Manning's I t r of 10 Mar 11From: Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4 James Averhart (Respondent)To:• Commander, Marine Corps Base Quantico, V i r g i n i aVia:(1) Commanding O f f i c e r , Security B a t t a l i o nSubj: REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 13 8 UCMJ BY• PRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S ARMYRef:(a) JAGMAN,•chapter I I I1. Readdressed and forwarded. I have reviewed the general courtm a r t i a l convening a u t h o r i t y ' s record of proceedings and PFC Manning'sr e b u t t a l as w e l l as the records p e r t a i n i n g t o the i n c i d e n t on 18January 2 011.2. I executed a permanent change o f s t a t i o n t r a n s f e r on 7 February2011 t o the Navy Brig i n Norfolk, V i r g i n i 9 .3 . My decision t o place PFC Manning on suicide r i s k was based upon myobservations of his conduct on 18 January 2011.I was concerned f o rhis safety a f t e r he displayed extreme anxiety over h i s s i t u a t i o n . Asthe f a c i l i t y commander, I had frequent i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h PFC Manning.His behavior on 18 January was unusual. Given b i s s e l f disclosedh i s t o r y of planning suicide and my observations of h i s behavior, I wasconcerned f o r his safety and placed him i n a suicide r i s k status. Theconversation he describes i n paragraph b.(6) i n h i s r e b u t t a l d i d n o toccur. Had he spoken t o me i n t h a t manner, I would have made ad i s c i p l i n e r e p o r t on him f o r insubordination and s t a f f harassment.Further, as an assistant m i n i s t e r i n my church, I would never r e f e r t omyself as "God". I f i n d t h a t comment t o be o f f e n s i v e . I was awaret h a t t h a t there had been a c o r r e c t i v e dialogue between Manning and t h es t a f f a t r e c r e a t i o n c a l l . My purpose i n t a l k i n g t o bim was t o f i n dout wbat bad happened. I t was during t h i s conversation t h a t be beganto act out and also t o p h y s i c a l l y h i t himself i n the head, he.becameupset and began t o s t u t t e r . I was extremely concerned over t b i soutburst. I took immediate a c t i o n t o p r o t e c t bim from s e l f harm. Hewas placed under constant watch and b i s c l o t h i n g was removed from h i sc e l l . He was i n i t i a l l y non-compliant when the B r i g supervisor askedf o r h i s c l o t h i n g , b u t when he saw we were prepared t o enter h i s c e l l ,and when he saw t h a t we were videoing the exchange, he becamecompliant.He was allowed t o r e t a i n h i s underwear. The f a c i l i t ymental health provider met w i t h Manning t h a t day f o r a short time andrecommended he be placed on POI. I removed Manning from suicide r i s ktwo days l a t e r . My decision was not connected t o p r o t e s t a c t i v i t youtside the base as alleged by PFC Manning. I acted w i t h i n myd i s c r e t i o n and i n the best i n t e r e s t of ensuring PFC Manning's safety.13./ of _/8MannlngB_00011564Miosure(7)23801Subj:REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BYPRIVAT2I FIRSTCLASS BRAl^LE^MANNINGU.S ARMY4. PFC Manning's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as a maximum custody detainee wasreviewed on a weekly basis. The PCF s t a f f provided me a c o n s i s t e n trecommendation that PFC Manning by c l a s s i f i e d as a maximum custodydetainee and I concurred. I considered the seriousness of the allegedoffenses, the national s e c u r i t y aspects of h i s case, PFC Manning'ss e l f disclosed s u i c i d a l ideations, h i s f a m i l y s i t u a t i o n , h i s mentalhealth, my observations of h i s behavior and t b e recommendations of t b es t a f f i n reaching my decision. These factors were balanced againsth i s conduct as a detainee w i t h i n the f a c i l i t y which was o v e r a l laverage t o above average. The weight t h a t I gave each f a c t o r wasmatter w i t h i n my d i s c r e t i o n . I believe that maximum custody was tbeappropriate c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n l i g h t of a l l of the i n f o r m a t i o navailable._ Z. k^SZL^ZZ?,.JAMES T . AVERHART J R .14'l\/lanningB_00011565isJC23802ATTACHMENT 1723803UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSSECURITY BATTALION2043BARNETTAVENUEQUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134IN REPLY REFER TO:1000B27M...m mFIRST ENDORSEMENT on CW04 Averhart's I t r 1000 B 275 of 24 Jan 11From:To:Commanding O f f i c e r , S e c u r i t y B a t t a l i o nCommander, Marine Corps Base QuanticoSubj:RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR REDRESS (ARTICLE 138, UCMJ) OFPFC BRADLEY MANNINIG DATED 19 JANUARY 20111. Forwarded. I have reviewed the subject complaint and ChiefWarrant O f f i c e r 4 Averhart's response.I have been p e r s o n a l l yb r i e f e d on PFC Manning's confinement c o n d i t i o n s r e g u l a r l ythroughout the d u r a t i o n of h i s confinement. Given h i s almostd a i l y i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h PFC Manning and the d i r e c t i n p u t hereceives from the B r i g s t a f f , Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4 Averhart i si n the best p o s i t i o n t o ensure the safety and w e l f a r e o f PFCManning. Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4 Averhart's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n andassignment decisions i n t h i s case have been a p p r o p r i a t e andwithin applicable regulations.I recommend t h e request f o rredress be denied.ManningB_0001135423804ATTACHMENT 1823805( )UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSMARINE CORPS BASEQUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5001INREFLYREFERTO:5800B052MAR 01 2011From:To:Commander, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, V i r g i n i aPrivate F i r s t Class Bradley Manning US ArmySubj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BY PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYRef:(a) A r t i c l e 138, UCMJ(b) JAGMAN, Chapter I I I '(c) SECNAVINST 1640.9C (Navy Corrections Manual)(d) PCF SOP of 1 J u l 10End:(1) O r i g i n a l complaint w i t h enclosures and endorsements(2) CMOS Galiviz' review o f 23 Feb 11(3) C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Assignment Reguests(4) MCBQ DepIG's I t r o f 28 Dec 10(5) Charge p r e f e r r e d 5 J u l 101. I n accordance w i t h references (a) and (b), enclosures (1) through(5) are provided. I n my capacity as the Marine Corps Base Quantico("MCBQ") Commander, I am responsible f o r the operation o f the MCBQP r e t r i a l Confinement F a c i l i t y ("PCF"). The PCF Commander i s assignedto Security B a t t a l i o n , MCBQ and f a l l s under my general c o u r t - m a r t i a ljurisdiction.2. Although confined i n the MCB PCF, the Army r e t a i n s commanda u t h o r i t y over you. I n t h i s context, the PCF Commander i s not your"commanding o f f i c e r " as that term i s normally applied. However, f o rthe purposes o f paragraph 0302.a o f reference (b) , I have determinedthat the PCF Commander d i d make the decisions t h a t are the subject o ft h i s complaint and t h a t your Army chain o f command i s u n l i k e l y t o bei n a p o s i t i o n t o a f f o r d you the r e l i e f reguested. Accordingly, as thegeneral c o u r t - m a r t i a l convening a u t h o r i t y over the PCF Commander, I amprocessing t h i s complaint i n accordance w i t h the references, t o dootherwise would e f f e c t i v e l y thwart your a b i l i t y t o p e t i t i o n f o rredress unless or u n t i l your charges are r e f e r r e d t o a c o u r t - m a r t i a l .3. Your complaint i n enclosure (1) was not submitted i n the formatrequired by Appendix A-3-a of reference (b) nor does i t contain a l l o fthe required information. However, pursuant t o my a u t h o r i t y underparagraph 0306 of reference (b) , I am waiving the defects i n formatand i n f o r m a t i o n . A copy o f the response from Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4James Averhart, the respondent, and forwarding endorsement wasprovided t o you on 4 February 2011.4. To a s s i s t i n evaluating your complaint, I requested a review o fthe decisions made by the PCF Commander i n t h i s case. This review wasconducted by a senior corrections s p e c i a l i s t i n the Marine Corps,ManningB_0001134523806^^^^Subj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ B^ PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYChief Warrant O f f i c e r 5 Abel Galaviz. CW05 Galaviz i s not a p a r t o fMCBQ and i s assigned to Headquarters, U. S. Marine Corps. His reviewis documented i n enclosure ( 2 ) .5.I n enclosure (1), you make the f o l l o w i n g a l l e g a t i o n s :a. That the decision to c l a s s i f y you as a maximum custody ("MA^")detainee was improper.b.ofThat the decision to place you on suicide r i s k was improper.c. That the decision t o place you and r e t a i n you i n a preventioni n j u r y ("POI") status was improper.6. Regarding the allegations i n paragraph 5, above, I have made thef o l l o w i n g determinations:a. Tbe decision t o c l a s s i f y you as a MA^ detainee wasappropriate.(1)C l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f prisoners i s governed by reference ( c ) .C l a s s i f i c a t i o n c r i t e r i a are set f o r t h i n paragraph 4202 o f reference(c) and include, but are not l i m i t e d t o : assaultive behavior, seriousc r i m i n a l record (convicted or a l l e g e d ) , low tolerance o f f r u s t r a t i o n ,poor home conditions or family r e l a t i o n s h i p s , mental evaluationsi n d i c a t i n g serious neurosis or psychosis, demonstrated p a t t e r n o f poorjudgment, and length or p o t e n t i a l length o f sentence. The chargesheet available t o the PCF upon confinement alleged breaches o fs e c u r i t y regulations and the leakage o f c l a s s i f i e d documents i n v o l v i n gn a t i o n a l security.(2)Upon i n i t i a l confinement i n the MCBQ PCF on 29 July 2010,you were evaluated by the duty b r i g supervisor ("DBS"). The DBSreviewed the DD From 2710, irm:^ate background summary, and completed aDD Form 2711, i n i t i a l custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Although the i n i t i a lscore was a "5", the DBS overrode the score and i n d i c a t e d t h a t he hadconsidered your previous suicide watch as the primary f a c t o r i n h i soverride decision.(3)On 30 July 2010, the PCF C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and AssignmentBoard ("C^A Board") reviewed the intake documentation and i n i t i a lc l a s s i f i c a t i o n and assignment u t i l i z i n g Brig Form 4200 and concurredt h a t you be c l a s s i f i e d a MA^ detainee and assigned a d e t a i l ofi n d o c t r i n a t i o n B s u i c i d e r i s k . See enclosure ( 3 ) . I n a d d i t i o n , the PCFmental health care provider provided input. The PCF Commanderconcurred i n t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and assignment. Although the C^Aboard d i d not check any of the boxes on the B r i g Form 4200, i t i sclear from my review t h a t the C^A Board reviewed a l l a v a i l a b l edocumentation i n reaching i t s unanimous decision t h a t you bec l a s s i f i e d as a MA^ detainee, i n c l u d i n g your previous c l a s s i f i c a t i o nand assignment at the confinement f a c i l i t y i n Kuwait. A review o f theI^anning8^0001^34523807Subj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ B^ PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYintake documents reveal t h a t many o f the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n c r i t e r i al i s t e d i n paragraph 4202 of reference (c) as factors t o be consideredi n assessing higher custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s were present. Althoughyour mental state was a primary concern and focus, i t was not the onlyf a c t o r j u s t i f y i n g MA^ custody. You are f a c i n g serious chargesi n v o l v i n g wrongfully accessing and t r a n s f e r r i n g c l a s s i f i e d i n f o r m a t i o nand a maximum punishment of 52 years confinement and a dishonorabledischarge.(4)Enclosure (2) reviewed the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n decisions madeby CW04 Averhart and concluded t h a t he d i d not abuse b i s d i s c r e t i o n i nc l a s s i f y i n g you as a MA^ detainee.(5)The ultimate decision on c l a s s i f i c a t i o n r e s t s w i t h thePCF Commander. He i s i n the best p o s i t i o n t o make t h i s d e c i s i o n givenhis experience, his i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h you, h i s observations o f yourbehavior and his close working r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h his s t a f f . There i sno evidence t h a t CW04 Averhart abused h i s d i s c r e t i o n or f a i l e d t of o l l o w applicable regulations i n making t h i s d e c i s i o n . The only othera v a i l a b l e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r a p r e t r i a l detainee i s Medium-Inside(MDl). MA^ was c l e a r l y the appropriate c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n your case.(6)Your MA^ c l a s s i f i c a t i o n has been evaluated weekly sinceyour i n i t i a l confinement. These evaluations are documented i nenclosures (1) and (3). ( I t should be noted t h a t Brig Form 4200 wasnot used t o document the weekly C^A board f i n d i n g s u n t i l a change o fPCF procedures i n January 2011. P r i o r t o t h a t time, w i t h the exceptionof the i n i t i a l Board, the f i n d i n g s were documented w i t h i n theCorrections Management Information System (CORMIS) e n t r i e s found a tenclosure (1).) Each C^A board was c o n s t i t u t e d i n accordance w i t hreference ( c ) . You were provided an o p p o r t u n i t y t o present mattersand chose not t o do so u n t i l 21 January 2011. These weekly C^A boardevaluations have unanimously recommended t o r e t a i n you i n MA^. I neach case the PCF Commander concurred i n these recommendations.(7)I r o n i c a l l y , a t the same time you requested t o be removedfrom MA^ custody on 21 January 2011, you also t o l d the Board t h a t youshould be segregated from the general p o p u l a t i o n and p o s s i b l y placedi n p r o t e c t i v e custody. You made t h i s statement ostensibly o u t o fconcern f o r your own safety, which i s a f a c t o r the PCF Commander mayalso consider i n determining your c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .b.The decision t o place you on suicide r i s k was a p p r o p r i a t e .(1)You a r r i v e d at the MCBQ PCF i n a suicide r i s k s t a t u s . I nyour intake paperwork you stated t b a t you had thought about s u i c i d eand had made a plan t o commit suicide. Further, the PCF Mental h e a l t hp r o v i d e r recommended t b a t you remain on s u i c i d e watch.(2)On 6 August 2010 the PCFmental h e a l t h providerrecommended t h a t you be removed from suicide watch. At the subsequentI^aiiiiiiig8^000^^34723808Subj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ B^ PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYC^A Board evaluation, i t was recommended t h a t you be removed fromsuicide r i s k and placed i n a POI status. The PCF Commander concurredand removed you from suicide watch on 11 August 2011.(3) On 18 January 2011 you were placed on suicide r i s k f o rapproximately 48 hours. This decision was made by the PCF Commanderbased upon his observations of your mental state and your conduct.You were then evaluated by the PCF mental health provider, who d i d n o tconcur t h a t you be placed on suicide r i s k but recommended POI. Youwere removed from suicide r i s k on 21 January 2011.(4) Reference (c) states that "prisoners who have threatenedsuicide or made a s u i c i d a l gesture, but are found f i t f o r confinement,may be placed i n the category of suicide r i s k f o r observation.Therei s no requirement f o r pre-approval from a medical o f f i c e r p r i o r t o tbePCF Corr^ander making the determination t h a t suicide r i s k i sappropriate. While i n t h i s status, prisoners are placedundercontinuous observation and the PCF Commander may d i r e c t the removal ofthe prisoner's c l o t h i n g and any implement w i t h which the prisoner mayharm himself. When prisoners are no longer deemed t o be suicide r i s k sby a medical o f f i c e r , they s h a l l be returned t o special quarters. ( I tshould be noted t h a t ALL prisoners i n the MCBQ PCF are i n specialquarters and the r e t u r n t o special quarters as contemplated i nreference (c) i s inapplicable i n the context o f the MCBQ PCF.) I nyour case, you were removed from suicide r i s k status uponrecommendation by the PCF mental health provider. I n both cases, thedecision t o place you i n a suicide r i s k status was made by the PCFCommander and you were removed from suicide r i s k status s h o r t l y a f t e rthe PCF mental health provider recommended your removal.(5) Tbe decision t o place you on suicide r i s k on 29 July 2010was c l e a r l y j u s t i f i e d by your responses on the intake documentation,your p r i o r suicide r i s k status i n Kuwait and the lack o f personalobservation by PCF s t a f f . This decision was w i t h i n the a u t h o r i t y ofthe PCF Commander and was tbe r e s u l t of a unanimous recommendation bythe i n i t i a l C^A Board.(6) The decision t o place you on suicide r i s k on 18 January2011 was c l e a r l y j u s t i f i e d by an extreme d e v i a t i o n from your normalconduct and the concern by PCF s t a f f over your mental well-being.This decision was w i t h i n the d i s c r e t i o n of the PCF Commander.(7) Enclosure (2) reviewed the PCF Commander's decisions andfound that he d i d not abuse h i s d i s c r e t i o n i n placing you on suicider i s k but found t h a t the PCF Commander should have removed you fromsuicide r i s k status immediately f o l l o w i n g the PCF mental healthprovider's recommendation. There i s no requirement i n references (c)or (d) t h a t requires an immediate removal from suicide r i s k a f t e r thePCF mental h e a l t h care provider or medical o f f i c e r recommends i t .Reference (d) s p e c i f i c a l l y requires t h a t the PCF Commander approve themove from suicide r i s k t o a lesser status. On both occasions, theI^8iining8^0001134823809Subj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ B^^PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYrecommendation o f the PCF mental health provider was passed t o the C^ABoard and they recommended that your status be changed from suicider i s k t o POI. The PCF Commander concurred i n t h a t recommendation onboth occasions and ordered your status changed. I f i n d the passage o ftime between the recor^endation of the PCF mental h e a l t h provider andthe PCF Commander's order t o be reasonable i n l i g h t of a l l o f theinformation available t o the PCF Commander and applicable PCFprocedures. I do not concur w i t h enclosure (2) that an "immediatemove" i s required.c. The decision t o place you i n POI status and r e t a i n you i n POIstatus was appropriate.(1) POI status i s not defined i n reference ( c ) . However,paragraph 4205a of t h i s reference allows PCF commanders t o authorizespecial quarters f o r "prevention of i n j u r y " . Reference ( d ) , a MCBQPCF p u b l i c a t i o n , states that POI status i s assigned t o those"prisoners who have given an i n d i c a t i o n that they i n t e n d or arecontemplating harming themselves". This status assignment i s notlinked t o a medical o f f i c e r ' s approval and i s w i t h i n the d i s c r e t i o n o fthe PCF Coriander.(2) I n your case, the PCF mental health provider recommendedremoval o f POI status near the end o f August. Except f o r one week i nDecember, the PCF mental health provider has c o n s i s t e n t l y recommendedt h a t you be removed from POI. However, the C^A Board has c o n s i s t e n t l yrecommended that you remain i n POI status given i t s concern over yourstatement i n the intake documents t h a t you were "always planning"suicide. I t i s w i t h i n the d i s c r e t i o n of the PCF Commander t o r e t a i nyou i n a POI status. I note t h a t the PCF Commander has the inherenta u t h o r i t y over those i n his custody t o maintain good order andd i s c i p l i n e and the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o ensure safety and s e c u r i t y i n thePCF.7. I n your complaint, you reference the conditions o f yourconfinement and state t h a t you do not believe the PCF Commander hasthe d i s c r e t i o n t o keep you i n confinement "under these circumstances".To the contrary, I have examined the conditions of your confinementand f i n d them i n compliance w i t h references (c) and (d) and w e l lw i t h i n the d i s c r e t i o n of the PCF Con:^ander. As a precautionarymeasure, and p r i o r t o your complaint, I d i r e c t e d the MCBQ InspectorGeneral t o conduct an inspection o f your confinement conditions and hefound t h a t the PCF s t a f f was complying w i t h a l l applicabler e g u l a t i o n s . The r e s u l t s of t h i s inspection are provided i n enclosure(4). Further, enclosure (2) found t h a t the conditions of yourconfinement are authorized by applicable Navy and Marine Corpsregulations.8. I have determined t h a t no r e l i e f i s appropriate i n your case.Accordingly, your request f o r redress i s denied. This determinationi n no way l i m i t s the a u t h o r i t y o f the PCF Commander and s t a f f t oI^8niiiiig8^000^^34^23810Subj:i ,)ICOMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BY'PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYcontinue t o evaluate your c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and assigr^ent and t o makeadjustments i n the f u t u r e . I t i s my expectation t h a t the newlyassigned PCF Commander, Chief Warrant Officer-2 Denise Barnes, w i l lcontinue t o evaluate your confinement conditions and exercise herd i s c r e t i o n and t o operate w i t h i n the guidelines established byapplicable regulations.9. I have directed t b a t t b i s response be provided t o you f o r yourr e b u t t a l . I f you desire t o submit any matters i n r e b u t t a l , you may doso, i n w r i t i n g , w i t h i n 10 working days of your r e c e i p t of t h i smemorandum. A f t e r t b a t date I w i l l complete my action on yourcomplaint and forward a r e p o r t o f your complaint and tbe proceedingsthereon t o the Secretary o f the Navy, who^ c t ^ . ^ the f i n a l reviewa u t h o r i t y i n your case.D. J. CHOIKEManningB_00011350 ATTACHMENT 19 23812UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSMARINE CORPS BASEQUANTICQ. VIRGINIA 22134-5001IN REPLY REFER T025800B052APR 0 6 2011Commander, Marine Corps Base Quantico, VirginiaTo: Private First Class Bradley ManningVia: (1) Commanding Officer, Security Battalion(2) Commander, Pretrial Confinement FacilitySubj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYRef: JAGMAN, chapter PFC Manning's Art 138 complaint of 19 Jan 11Encl: (1) PFC Manning's Art 138 rebuttal of 10 Mar 111. Pursuant to reference the enclosure is forwarded.2. The third allegation raised by you in the enclosure is a new matternot raised in reference This new and separate allegationidentifies a new respondent, Chief Warrant Officer 2 Barnes.Accordingly, this new matter is forwarded to Chief Warrant Officer 2Barnes as an initial request for redress in accordance with paragraph0306a of reference If you are not satisfied with Chief warrantOfficer 2 Barnes? response, you may files a new and separate Article138 complaint against her, pursuant to paragraph O306h of reference3. Chief Warrant Officer 2 Barnes is directed to provide a response toyou by 10 April 2011 via an endorsement on this letter. A copy of herresponse shall be provided to this Headquarters.4. My point of contact in this matter is Lieutenant ColonelChristopher Greer. He may be reached I or commercial J. CHOIKEManningB__OO011451 UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSMARINE CORPS BASEQUANTICO. VIRGINIA 22134.5oo1From: Commander, Marine Corps Base Quantico, VirginiaTo: Secretary of the Navy .Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development CommandVia: (1)(2)(3)Commandant of the Marine Corps (JAR)IN REPLY REFER TO:5800B05203 2011Office of the Judge Advocate General (Code 13)Subj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATEBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYRef: Encl: (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)forwarded.(MCBQ) pretrial confinement facility (PCF).to a pretrial confinement order issued by the Army.JAGMAN, chapter -SECNAVINST 1640.9CPCFO PFC Manning's Art 138 complaint of 19 Jan 11FIRST CLASSResponse by the Respondent of 24 Jan 11 w/endosDepIG's Brig Inspection of 28 Dec 10Head, Corrections (HQMC) of 23 Feb 11GCMCA's response to complaint of 1 Mar 11PFC Manning's rebuttal of 10 Mar 11Respondent's endorsement of 16 Mar 111. Pursuant to reference enclosures (1) through (7) arePrivate First Class (PFC) Bradley Manning is an Armysoldier being held in pretrial confinement at the Marine Corps BaseHe is being held pursuantMCBQ is theinstallation responsible for the operation of the PCF, accordingly, Iam responding to PFC Mannings?s complaint regarding the conditions ofhis confinement at enclosure (1).Prior to his complaint, I orderedan inspection of the PCF by my Deputy Inspector General. Thisinspection is included as enclosure (3).After receiving enclosureI conducted a thorough inquiry into PFC Manning's allegations,including an independent evaluation by a corrections specialist(enclosure and provided a copy of my conclusions to PFC Manningon 2 March 2011 through enclosure (5).March 2011(enclosure He provided a rebuttal on 10This rebuttal was forwarded to theoriginal Respondent and he provided a response on 16 March 2011(enclosureIn order to facilitate the review of the manydocuments considered during this review, I have re?ordered andrenumbered the enclosures as listed above.were tendered unsigned by PFC Manning's counsel.Enclosures(1) and (6)As noted inenclosure (5) I have waived a number of procedural errors in order toallow PFC Manning a forum for redress. 2. In enclosures (1) and (6), PFC Manning makes the followingallegations: _t 23814Subj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYa. That the decision to retain PFC Manning as a maximum custodydetainee and to retain PFC Manning in a prevention of injury statusafter 27 August 2010 was improper; -b. That the decision to place PFC Manning on suicide risk on 18January 2011 was improper; and,c. That the decision to remove PFC Manning's clothing at nightsince 2 March 2011 is improper.3. The third allegation raised by PFC Manning is a new matter notraised in his original 19 January 2011 complaint. This new allegationidentifies a new Respondent, Chief Warrant Officer 2 Barnes, and wasnot addressed in my 1 March 2011 response letter to PFC Manning.Accordingly, I will forward this new issue under separatecorrespondence to the new Respondent, Chief Warrant Officer 2 Barnes,and direct her to consider this as an initial request for redress inaccordance with paragraph 0306a of reference If PFC Manning isnot satisfied with Chief Warrant Officer 2 Barnes? response, he mayfile a new Article 138 complaint on this new and separate matter.4. Regarding the allegations raised in paragraph 2, above, I have madethe following determinations: -a. The decision to retain PFC Manning as a maximum custodydetainee and to retain PFC Manning in a prevention of injury statusafter 27 August 2011 was appropriate.(1) PFC Manning was initially classified as a maximum custodydetainee upon entry into the PCF on 29 July 2010 by the duty brigsupervisor. This decision was reviewed by the PCF Classification andAssignment Board Board) on 30 July 2010. The Board concurredin this recommendation. Pretrial detainees may only be classified asmaximum custody or medium?inside custody. As authorized by referencethe PCF Commander determined that the appropriate classificationfor PFC Manning was maximum custody. I have reviewed thediscretionary override exercised by the duty brig supervisor uponinitial intake. This override took into account the seriousness of thecharges, concerns for PFC manning's welfare, and the informationavailable on intake. That discretionary override is authorized underreference and was considered by the subsequent board and thePCF Commander in making their initial custody classificationdetermination.(2) Custody classification is guided by reference andrequires an objective custody classification process. Classificationcriteria relevant to this case include the seriousness of theoffense/potential length of confinement, low tolerance forfrustration, poor family relationships, and a demonstrated pattern ofpoor judgment. Reference makes it clear that the listed factorsare not all inclusive and the classification authority may considerother relevant factors in determining the proper custodyManningB__O0011464 023815Subj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYclassification. These other relevant factors included nationalsecurity concerns and protection of classified material.(3) PFC Manning entered the MCBQ PCF classified as maximumcustody. He was also on suicide risk. He was pending and continuesto face serious charges alleging multiple compromises of classifiedinformation. Further, the intake documentation provided on PFCManning indicated poor decision making, poor family relationships,and erratic behavior. An objective evaluation of the charges and otherrelevant factors.support a maximum custody classification. Thus I donot find that the PCF Commander abused his discretion in making thecustody classification determination.(4) Maximum custody detainees are held in a specific area inthe MCBQ PCF. Because the MCBQ PCF is a pretrial confinement-onlyfacility with limited staff, all detainees are held in single cellswithin a 30?cell block known as ?Special Quarters This cell blockis further broken down into specific areas depending on custodyclassification or other reasons requiring segregation. Maximumcustody detainees are held in cells nearest the guard post tofacilitate observation. Additionally, prisoners not classified asmaximum custody, but requiring additional supervision and attentionmay also be moved to cells near the guard post. PFC Manning is beingheld in Special Quarters 1 with all other detainees; he is not insolitary confinement (MCBQ PCF does not have solitary confinement andreference does not recognize a solitary confinement category.)Consistent with his custody classification, PFC Manning is held in thearea in Special Quarters 1 reserved for maximum custody detainees.(5) PFC Manning's custody classification is reviewed weekly.During this review, the Board reviews his progress, inputs fromthe PCF staff, medical input from the PCF medical and mental healthproviders and the classification factors. The Board hasconsistently recommended that PFC Manning remain classified as amaximum custody detainee and the PCF Commander has concurred.(6) PFC Manning alleges that after 27 August 2010 his custodyclassification should have been downgraded to medium?inside and thatall Board actions after that date were ?perfunctory? in nature andrelied too heavily on his conduct prior to his arrival in the MCBQPCF. He further alleges that the administrative record is inadequateto support a maximum custody classification. I disagree. I havereviewed the entire record and concur that maximum custody is theappropriate custody classification for PFC Manning. This does notforeclose a future change in his custody classification. For thisreason, his classification and assignment is continuously reviewed.However, he is pending extremely serious charges with nationalsecurity implications. I recognize that he has been an averagedetainee with no significant disciplinary record within the PCF.However, behavior within the facility is but one of many factors a PCFCommander must weigh in making the custody classification decision.Despite PFC Manning's statements to the contrary, and his lack of- .. 23816COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYSubj:participation in the process (detainees may appear at the Board), I am confident that both the Board and the PCF Commandertook the classification decision very seriously and appropriatelyapplied the relevant classification factors. Although not eachdecision was documented utilizing the local generated ?Form 4200? (anoptional form not required by reference each decision wasproperly documented in the Correctional Management Information System(CORMIS) as required by reference (7) The special handling instructions placed on PFC Manningfor prevention of injury are separate from the custody classificationdecision placing him in maximum custody. Per reference prevention of injury is a valid factor for the PCF Commander toconsider in placing PFC Manning in administrative segregation. Injuryrisk is distinct from suicide risk. Injury to oneself that does notrise to the level of suicidal can be dangerous behavior that isintended to cause or can result in personal physical injury. Thehealth and welfare of a detainee is the responsibility of the PCFCommander and is independent and in addition to a medicaldetermination of risk._ If the objective behavior what adetainee says and does) of a detainee indicates he may harm himself,it is the PCF Commander's obligation to minimize that risky behavior.Since PFC Manning was already administratively segregated due to-hismaximum custody classification, the PCF Comander imposed specifichandling instructions for prevention of injury. A mental healthprovider does not need to authorize administrative segregation to?prevent self injury provided the segregation is not being done tocircumvent a medical professional?s opinion that suicide risk is notnecessary.(8) The handling instructions for PFC Manning were narrowlytailored to meet the Concern of the PCF Commander that PFC Manningcontinues to pose a risk of self harm and were not done to circumventthe mental health provider's recommendation. The specific handlinginstructions imposed by the PCF Commander to mitigate the risk of selfharm were (1) to remove all personal belongings from PFC Manning'scell and (2) to visually check on PFC Manning every 5 minutes vice theminimum requirement of every 15 minutes. There are no otherrestrictive measures placed on PFC Manning for prevention of injury.?All other handling instructions derive from his custodyclassification.(9) These steps were reasonable in light of all of theinformation available to the PCF Commander, including his concern overPFC Manning's comments regarding ?always planning? suicide at initialintake, his actions in actually making a noose at the previousfacility, his erratic behavior at the previous facility, his lack ofrapport with the PCF staff, and his observed occasional erraticbehavior at the MCBQ PCF. The PCF Commander is responsible for the1 The removal of underwear during sleep periods is not addressed in thiscomplaint. That handling instruction began on 2 March 2011. 23817Subj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYsafety and welfare of PFC Manning and he and his staff maintaindirect, objective and continuous observation of PFC Manning. Theconcern over the risk that PFC Manning may injure himself is supportedby their observations and their review of his past behavior.Therefore, the special handling instructions for the prevention ofinjury were appropriate.(10) PFC Manning's treatment is not inconsistent with the?guidance under reference He has been treated no differently than any other detainee within the PCF. The fact that he, at times, hasbeen the only maximum custody detainee at the facility has norelevance to the decision to place him in maximum custody. Otherconfinees have been placed in maximum custody and other detainees havebeen segregated for suicide risk or prevention of injury. My review,including an inquiry by an independent officer, revealed no evidencethat PFC manning was being singled out or treated improperly. Hisclassification is a result of a careful application of the factorsauthorized in reference and not as retribution or punishment.(11) ?This review has revealed that the MCBQ PCF regulationsat reference improperly require a person being administrativelysegregated for prevention of injury or suicide risk be automaticallyclassified as maximum custody. have directed that this automaticclassification scheme be deleted from reference However, thatchange is not relevant to PFC Manning's allegations, as he was notI) assigned to maximum custody based solely over concern that he may cause injury to himself. He was properly classified as a maximum custody detainee based on the factors noted above. (12) My review has also revealed the need to ensure that local regulations properly characterize what constitutes prevention of injury and what steps may be taken to protect a detainee from injury. 5I have directed that local regulations clearly define whenadministrative segregation for prevention_of injury, including self?injury, is appropriate.b. The decision to place PFC Manning on suicide risk on 18January 2011 was appropriate.(1) Reference allows a PCF Commander to take immediateaction to address behavior within the PCF. This includes theauthority to segregate a detainee as a suicide risk. Reference states that prisoners ?who are considered to be suicidal shall beimmediately referred? to medical or mental health providers. It doesnot state, however, that a PCF Commander must wait until the medicalhelp arrives before placing a detainee on suicide risk. Such acondition precedent unreasonably and unrealistically places the safetyof the detainee concerned at immediate risk while awaiting theavailability of medical or mental health providers.(3 (2) On 18 January 2011, after observing erratic behavior onthe part of PFC Manning, including an outburst showing severe23818Subj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMY. frustration by PFC Manning and physical behavior of hitting himself inIthe head, the PCF Commander ordered that Manning be placed on suiciderisk and immediately requested a mental health evaluation.(3) As PFC Manning was already administratively segregated asa maximum custody detainee and under special handling instructions forthe prevention of injury, the only additional instructions for suiciderisk was the removal of PFC Manning's outer garments and hiseyeglasses and the posting of a guard who could keep PFC Manning undercontinuous observation.(4) The PCF mental health provider, Dr. Hoctor, responded tothe facility. He did not concur that suicide risk was necessary andrecommended removal. Accordingly, the PCF Commander removed PFCManning from suicide risk.(5) The initial actions of the PCF Commander on 18 January2011 by assigning PFC Manning to suicide risk were appropriate. Ibelieve a reasonable interpretation of reference is that a PCFCommander may take immediate steps to protect a detainee by placingthem on suicide risk and then calling for medical or mental healthassistance. As I noted in my response to PFC Manning, I believe thepassage of time between Dr. Hoctor?s recommendation and the actualremoval of suicide risk was reasonable. However, I have directed thePCF to update its regulations to specifically address the role of themental health provider in determining if suicide risk is necessary.If the medical officer determines that a detainee is no longerconsidered a suicide risk, that determination is binding on the PCFstaff and the detainee shall be removed from suicide risk.(6) In his rebuttal, PFC Manning raises new reasons for hisoutburst on 18 January 2011. I have considered his statements as wellas the written statements provided by the PCF staff on 18 January2011. It does appear that there was friction between the guard forceand PFC Manning that preceded his outburst. However, the actions ofthe guard force were appropriate. PFC Manning is required to complywith instructions from the staff. His frustration over hisconfinement does not justify the questioning of procedures orinstructions. There are mechanisms in place by which he may addresshis concerns.5. In enclosures (1) and (6), PFC Manning requests the followingrelief:a. That his custody classification be changed to medium?insidecustody.b. That the handling instructions regarding prevention of injurybe lifted.6. I have determined that the requested relief is not appropriate inthis case. The PCF Commanding officer and the PCF staff are best 23819Subj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYpositioned to determine the appropriate custody classification andhandling instructions in this case. I have carefully considered thepositions of both PFC Manning and the PCF staff and have conducted athorough inquiry, including consultations with correction specialists,medical providers, legal counsel, management specialists andfacilities managers in reaching my conclusions. I do not find thatthe decisions in this case have been arbitrary or capricious asalleged by PFC Manning. Instead, they were and continue to be based.on an objective evaluation of the standards contained in reference7. My point of contact in this matter is Lieutenant ColonelChristopher Greer. He may be reached at DSN 278-3678 or commercial703-784-3678.8. By copy of this letter, PFC Manning has been advised of the actionI have taken as the general court?martial convening authority. 2382010 Apr 11MEMORANDUMFrom: PFC Bradley E. ManningTo: Secretary of the NavyVia: (1) Col. Daniel J. Choike(2) CWO2 Denise Barnes(3) Staff Judge Advocate, Office of the Staff Judge Advocate,U.S. Army Military District of Washington, Fort McNairSubj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE l38 UCMJ BY PRIVATE FIRSTCLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYRef: Article 138, UCMJSECNAVINST l640.9C1. I, Private First Class Bradley E. Manning, am a member ofthe U.S. Army on active duty, assigned to Headquarters and HeadquartersCompany, U.S. Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer?Henderson Hall, Fort Myer,Virginia. On 8 April 2011, I received Colonel Choike?saction, along with enclosures 1-7, on my Article 138 Complaint filed on19 January 2011. I have elected to file the following rebuttal to hisaction.2. I have reviewed Col. Choike?s response and also the response byChief Warrant Office 2 I do not agree with Col.Choike?s determination that my allegation concerning the 2 March 2011decision of CWO2 Barnes is a new and separate matter requiring aseparate Article 138 complaint. Although I filed my Article 138complaint on 19 January 2011, I have been complaining about myclassification and assignment since October of 2010. Given the amountof time it has taken to conduct the review of my initial complaint, Ishould not be required to wait for several additional months before myallegation concerning CWO2 Barnes is reviewed. I respectfully requestthat this matter be considered by you under my initial Article 138complaint. If this is not possible, then I request that thismemorandum serve as my Article 138 complaint regarding the decision byCWO2 Barnes to require the removal of my clothing at night since 2March 2011. I further request that Col. Choike be required to taketimely action on this matter and forward it to you for your finaldecision.3. I am currently being held in maximum custody and on prevention ofinjury status with a requirement that I surrender all of my clothing atnight. Contrary to Col. Choike?s assertion, I have absolutely no hopefor a future change in my custody classification or assignment. Thisfact has been made abundantly clear to me by the statements of theboard members during my participation with previous Classification andAssignment Board Board?) meetings. Given the board'spredetermined outcome, I have elected to stop participating in thisunfair process. Likewise, given the fact that the Brig staff useanything I say or do against me, I have curtailed my interaction withthe staff. I now limit our exchanges to only those required by Brigoperations. 23821Subj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BY PRIVATE FIRSTCLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMY4. The memorandum by Col. Choike correctly notes that custodyclassification determinations are required to be based upon anobjective custody classification process. This process is supposed totake into account a host of relevant factors, and be reviewed weekly toensure that a detainee is not unnecessarily being held under the harshconditions of maximum custody and prevention of injury status.Clearly, the weekly Board requirement is meant to evaluate whetherthe circumstances have changed enough to warrant a change in thecustody classification and assignment of a detainee.5. The Board process is best accomplished when the board membersare truly objective and open to considering changes in circumstances.Unfortunately, this has not been true of my experience with the Board. Instead, the Board, much like Col. Choike in his memorandumdated 8 April 2011, consistently point to the seriousness of thecharges against me, the national security concerns, and the fact myintake documentation indicated poor decision making, poor familyrelationships, and erratic behavior in order to come to its inevitableconclusion.6. The basis used by the Board, the Pretrial Confinement FacilityCommander and Col. Choike to support my current classificationand assignment are all factors that I am powerless to change. I cannotdo anything about the nature of the allegations against me nor the factthat these allegations may raise, however unlikely, national securityconcerns. Likewise, I cannot change the nature of my intakedocumentation. However, I can control my conduct while in confinement.Contrary to Col. Choike's assessment, I have been an above averagedetainee. In fact, given the harsh circumstances and the prolongedsensory deprivation that I have been subjected to, I have beenexemplary. Unfortunately, this does not seem to matter.7. In addition to my exemplary behavior, the Brig nowfour in total, have all independently concluded that there is nomedical basis for my prevention of injury assignment. Despite theconsistent recommendations to remove me from prevention of injurystatus, the Board and PCF Commander have chosen to disregard theopinions of the mental health providers. Regrettably, Col. Choikesanctions this conduct by determining that the PCF Commander has theauthority to impose specific handling instructions for prevention ofinjury in spite of the recommendations by the mental health providers.The basis used to justify the PCP Commander's decision is apparently myactions in Kuwait in June of 2010, the comments made by me upon myinitial intake in July of 2010, and undefined occasional erraticbehavior. All of these factors have been considered by those with theexpertise to assess risk of self harm. None of these factors, eventaken collectively, warrant me being held in prevention of injurystatus.8. The regulation covering the ability of the PCF Commander todetermine a detainee is a risk of self harm is silent regarding therequirement of a mental health provider's recommendation. Preventionof injury status, like suicide risk, severely restricts theentitlements given to a detainee. Thus, there is no basis, other thana poorly drafted regulation, for a determination that prevention of23822Subj: COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BY PRIVATE FIRSTCLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYinjury status should not also require a supporting recommendation froma mental health provider.9. Lastly, I want to correct a statement made by Col. Choike regardingthe timing of Capt. Hocter?s recommendation on 18 January 2011. At thetime CW4 Averhart ordered me into suicide risk status, Capt. Hocter hadarrived at the facility. Once Capt. Hocter spoke with me and assessedthe overreaction by the facility, he determined that I was not asuicide risk. Despite this determination, CW4 Averhart ordered me intosuicide risk status in violation of Secretary of Navy Instructionl649.9C Paragraph 4205.5d. I was held in this statusfor three days, also in violation of the regulation.10. I believe my classification custody and prevention of injurystatus is based upon inappropriate reasons and is therefore an abuse ofthe PCF Commander's discretion, and a wrong within the meaning ofArticle 138, UCMJ. As redress, I request that you order my removalfrom prevention of injury status and that you order the reduction of myclassification level from maximum custody to medium detention-in.B. E. ManningPFC, US ArmyI have assisted PFC Bradley Manning with the drafting of his responseto Col. Choike?s action, and have signed for him given the presentcircumstances. I concur with the matters he has expressed in hisresponse, and join him in requesting that you order his removal fromprevention of injury status and that you order a reduction in hisclassification level from maximum custody to medium detention-in.D. E. CoombsCivilian Defense CounselATTACHMENT 202382323824UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSHEADQUARTERS COMPANYSECURITY BATTALIONMARINE CORPS BASEQUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5001INREFLYREFERTO:5800DVB7 Apr 11SECOND ENDORSEMENT on MCBQ CDR'S I t r 5800 B052 o f 6 Apr 11From:To:Commander, P r e t r i a l Confinement F a c i l i t yP r i v a t e F i r s t Class Bradley ManningSubj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 13 8 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASSBRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMY1.Forwarded.2, I have considered your complaint t h a t the d e c i s i o n t o remove yourc l o t h i n g d u r i n g sleeping hours i s improper. I disagree. The removalof your c l o t h i n g on 2 March 2011 was done t o ensure your s a f e t y andwas a d i r e c t r e s u l t o f your comment t o Master Sergeant Papakieregarding t h e waistband i n your underwear which you considered t o bedangerous.Per SECNAVINST 1640.9C, p r e v e n t i o n o f i n j u r y i s a v a l i df a c t o r t o consider when p l a c i n g you i n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s e g r e g a t i o n .The removal o f c l o t h i n g i s an a d d i t i o n a l h a n d l i n g i n s t r u c t i o n t h a t Iimposed a f t e r considering your behavior, your past statementsregarding s e l f harm and my o b l i g a t i o n t o p r o t e c t you from i n j u r y .Accordingly, your request f o r redress i s denied a t t h i s t i m e .3. This response does not mean t h a t your h a n d l i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s w i l lnot change over time. The removal o f your c l o t h i n g during s l e e p i n gperiods i s a handling i n s t r u c t i o n t h a t i s reviewed a t l e a s t weekly, o rmore o f t e n i f warranted by the circumstances. I encourage you t o uset h e avenues a v a i l a b l e t o you through t h e use o f t h e DD Form 510(Request f o r I n t e r v i e w ) and the C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Assignment boardprocess. As I s t a t e d t o you b e f o r e , j t ^ n r h e a l t h and w e l f a r e remain myprimary concern.ManningB_0001144923825ATTACHMENT 2123826^^UNITEDSTATES MARINECORPSI^EAOQUARTERSCOMPANYSECtlRITYBATTAtlONMARINE ^RRSBASEQUANTICO^ VIRGINIA22134 5001II^REFL^REFEI^TO:5800DVB10 May 11FIRST ENDORSEMENT on PFC Manning's I t r of 10 Apr 11From: Commander, P r e t r i a l Confinement F a c i l i t yTo:Commander, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, V i r g i n i aSubj: SECOND COMPLAINTOF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE138 UCMJ BY PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEYMANNINGU.S. ARMY1. Forwarded. Tbe subject l i n e has been modified t o more accuratelyr e f l e c t t b e s u b j e c t complaint. I b a v e r e v i e w e d PFC Manning's 10 A p r i l2011 A r t i c l e 138 complaint regarding my decision t o remove b i sc l o t h i n g as a^safety precaution during sleep periods. Tbis decisionwas made on 2 March 2011 and remained i n effect u n t i l b i s departurefrom t b i s f a c i l i t y on 20 A p r i l 2011. As the P r e t r i a l ConfinementF a c i l i t y (PCF) Commander, I take f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r everythingtbat goes on under my charge.2. My primary concem i s tbe health and welfare of every inmate i n tbePCF. Further, my mission i s t o ensure safety and security w i t h i n tbePCF. I informed PFC Manning tbat my decision was based upon myconcern f o r bis safety and well-being. My decision t o direct tberemoval o f his clothing between taps and r e v e i l l e was not madea r b i t r a r i l y and certainly was not done t o punish bim. Tbere wereseveral actions tbat prompted my decision:9. PFC Manning made a comment t o tbe PCF Supervisor, MasterSergeant Papakie, regarding tbe e l a s t i c band i n bis underwear beingdangerous. I d i d not take t b i s comment l i g h t l y nor could I overlooki t . Given PFC Manning's past h i s t o r y of suicidal ideations andgestures, t h i s comment was g i v e n a l o t weight i n my decision.b. Tbere was a lack of rapport and t r u s t between PFC Manning andtbe PCF s t a f f . This lack of t r u s t made i t d i f f i c u l t f o r me t o placeManning's comment i n content. I n t r y i n g t o understand b i s thoughts ons e l f harm, PFC Manning appeared i n f r o n t of tbe c l a s s i f i c a t i o n andassignment board on 21 January 2011, and was asked about tbe statementon tbe intake questionnaire i n which be wrote tbat be was ^^alwaysplanning but never acting" on thoughts of suicide. He t o l d tbe Boardtbat t b i s statement may have been f a l s e . Tbis then raised tbe obviousissue of whether be was sincere i n his statements tbat be d i d notcurrently intend t o barm himself. A member of the Board asked bowtbey could t r u s t any of bis statements given bis admission tbat he mayhave made a false statement about b i s suicidal thoughts at intake i n t otbe PCF. PFC Manning was also asked i f i t was f a i r t o assume tbat tbestatement t o the Board that be d i d not intend t o barm himself could1^^^l^aniiingB^00012927^ ^ 4 ^ ^ ^^i ^^23827^^^^Subj: SECOND COMPLAINTOF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138 UCMJ BY PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEYMANNINGU.S. AR^a l s o b e false andhereplied^^yes". This caused great concern amongthe Board members given t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y toensure PFC Manning'ssafety.c. On2March2011, PFC Manning receivedanew charge s h e e t w i t hadditional charges andspecifications, one of whichwas A r t i c l e 104which has a maximum sentence of death. Given the serious nature ofthe new allegations, I was concerned about bis mindset and took thati n t o consideration i n weighing what actions I should take regardingb i s comment t o MSgt Papakie.3. I n making my decision to remove PFC Manning's c l o t h i n g duringsleepperiods, I weighed his statement toMSgt Papakie, his pastactions w i t h i n the PCF, his behavior while confined both i n Quanticoand Kuwait, the intake form statements and a l l other factors availabletomeA f t e r doingso, I f e l t t h e r e w a s a l e g i t i m a t e concernregardingPFC Manning's safety a n d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y tbat hemayharmhimself. I n my position, l a m obligated t o putmeasures i n place t okeep a l l inmal^es safe fromharm, even i f i t i s self-harm. The f a c tthat PFC Manning was not communicating w i t h t h e s t a f f as much as behad i b the past, and providing only non-definitive comments when askedabout h i s thoughts on suicide, was also a concem f o r me. T took t h i si n t o account as I assessed whether b i s clothing should continue to beremoved. As we moved forward from 2 March 2011, I saw no actions thatwould reassure me tbat there was not a continuing p o s s i b i l i t y that hemay harm himself.4. I n taking my action, I determined to impose the least i n t r u s i v eprecautions available. I determined that removal of PFC Manning'underwear during sleep periods when PCF s t a f f i n g was minimal was themost appropriate action I could take to minimize the r i s k of himharminghimself. During normal working hours, PFCManning was allowedto wear normal detainee clothing. I f e l t tbat any r i s k during normalbusinesshours were mitigated by the PCF d a i l y r o u t i n e a n d t h eincreased number of personnel present.5. From 2^ January 2011 when I took command of the PCF, PFC Manningwas t o l d that I took communication between myself and the detaineesseriously and t h a t I holdmy s t a f f accountable f o r t h e i r actions. It o l d bim tbat i f he d i d not address concems with me, I have no way ofknowing that a problem exists and that i t was imperative that thelines of communication remain open. I spoke with PFC Manning oftenw i t h and without the presence of PCF s t a f f regarding h i s treatment andconcerns, both inside the PCF and during times whenhe was releasedf o r l e g a l o r m e d i c a l a p p o i n t m e n t s . Thiscommunicationwasdonetoensure that he understoodmy concems f o r his health, welfare andsafety. I am committed as I have always been t o accomplish themission and ensure t b a t every detaineeBprisoner i s safely releasedfrom my custody. I n t b i s case, I acted upon my legitimate concern f o rPFC Manning's safety based upon my judgment, correctional e^erience^^^^l^aiiiiiiigB^0001292823828C)Subj: SECOND COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 13 8 UCMJ BY PRIVATEFIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING U.S. ARMYand the advice of.my s t a f f a f t e r considering a l l information availableto me and the c a p a b i l i t i e s of the f a c i l i t y .6. This response was delayed by theQuantico PCF and scheduled annual l earture of PFC Manning from ther.7^ManningB_000129293BARNES23829ATTACHMENT 2223830UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSMARINE CORPS BASEQUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5001IN REPLY REFER TO:1000B052FEB 11 2011From: Commander, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, V i r g i n i aTo:Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 5 Abel Galaviz 6571/5804 USMCSubj:SPECIAL INQUIRY INTO THE ARTICLE 13 8 COMPLAINT SUBMITTED ON 19JANUARY 2011 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING, U.S. ARMYRef;(a) JAGMANEnd:( l ) PFC Manning's A r t 13 8 complaint w/ response1. This appoints you, per chapter 3 of the reference, t o conduct areview of the facts and circumstances surrounding the d e c i s i o n s madeby the Command of the Quantico p r e t r i a l confinement f a c i l i t y aso u t l i n e d i n the enclosure. I n h i s complaint. Private F i r s t ClassManning (PFC Manning) alleges that h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as a maximumcustody detainee by Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4 Averhart was an abuse ofd i s c r e t i o n . He further alleges that h i s assignment as a s u i c i d e r i s ki s based upon an inappropriate reason and i s also an abuse o f ChiefWarrant o f f i c e r Averbart's d i s c r e t i o n . He also that p l a c i n g i n aprevention of i n j u r y status f o r over f i v e months was o u t s i d e ChiefWarrant O f f i c e r Averbart's d i s c r e t i o n .2. I request that you review t h i s matter and provide s p e c i f i c f i n d i n g son the f o l l o w i n g issues:a. Are the conditions of PFC Manning's confinement a u t h o r i z e d byapplicable Navy and Marine Corps regulations?b. Did Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4 Averhart abuse h i s d i s c r e t i o n i nc l a s s i f y i n g PFC Manning as a maximum custody detainee?.c. Did Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4 Averhart abuse h i s d i s c r e t i o n i n .placing PFC Manning i n a prevention of i n j u r y status?d. Did Chief Warrant O f f i c e r 4 Averhart abuse h i s d i s c r e t i o n i nplacing PFC Manning i n a suicide r i s k status?3. I n accordance with chapter 3 of the reference, I am r e g u i r e d t oresolve t h i s issue w i t h i n 9 0 days of r e c e i p t o f the i n i t i a l complaint.Accordingly, you w i l l provide a w r i t t e n report t o me no l a t e r than 28February 2011. Should you require more time t o complete t h i s i n q u i r yyou must reguest a d d i t i o n a l time v i a e-mail t o my S t a f f JudgeAdvocate, LtCol Christopher M. Greer. A reguest f o r delay longer than14 days should be addressed t o me.j4. By copy of t h i s appointing order, the Commanding o f f i c e r , S e c u r i t yB a t t a l i o n , i s directed t o f u r n i s h necessary access t o personnel and^o f fManningB_0001153823831Subj:( ^SPECIAL INQUIR:^ INTO THE ARTICLE 138 COMPLAINT SUBMITTED ON 19JANUARY 2011 BY PRIVATE FIRST CLASS BRADLEY MANNING, U . S . ARMYdocumentation. As PFC Manning i s r e p r e s e n t e d by c o u n s e l , s h o u l d i tbecome necessary t o speak: w i t h him i n t b e course o f t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n ,you must coordinate any c o m r ^ n i c a t i o n t o h ^ v j ^ the S t a f f JudgeAdvocate.^ ^ ^ ^l^anningB^0001^53923832UNITED STATES MARINE CORPSMARINECORPS BASEQUANTICO, VIRGINIA 22134-5001IN REPLY REFER TQ0581580028 Dec 10MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD .From:To;Deputy Inspector GeneralBase CommanderSubj : •• INSPECTION OF QUANTICO BRIG ICO PFC MANNINGRef;(a) Newspaper a r t i c l e C h r i s t i a n Science Monitor d t d 17December 2010(b) Newspaper-article, Associated-Press d t d 22 December2010(c) Newspaper a r t i c l e , Salon.com d t d 23 December 2010(d) SECNAVINST 1640.9C(e) Quantico B r i g Order P1640.1C, Standing O p e r a t i n gProcedures1. Purpose. This memorandum f o r the record r e p o r t s t h e.findings of my b r i g i n s p e c t i o n on 27 December 2010.2. Scope. AS the Deputy i n s p e c t o r General, I i n s p e c t e d andevaluated the Quantico B r i g on 27 December 2010. During mycomprehensive b r i g tour, I observed the environment and l i v i n gconditions of the i n d i v i d u a l s i n p r e t r i a l confinement. The b r i gtour was given by CW04 James Averhart, t h e B r i g CO. I a l s o , •interviewed Capt W i l l i a m Tomaszek and MSgt B r i a n Papakie, t h eb r i g supervisor, t o complete t h i s memorandum.3. Background 'Information. During the past several weeks, t h e r e. have been numerous media r e p o r t s regarding t h e care andtreatment of Pfc Bradley Manning i n t h e Quantico b r i g . Three ofthese a r t i c l e s are included as references t o t h i s memorandum( r e f a-c) .. These a r t i c l e s have prompted numerous emails andphone c a l l s t o the base from concerned c i t i z e n s .To date, t h ecommand duty o f f i c e r has received 119 phone c a l l s . I n a d d i t i o nt o these phone c a l l s , the inspector general's o f f i c e hasreceived f i v e emails from i n d i v i d u a l s expressing t h e i r concerns.These i n q u i r i e s have prompted a command b r i g i n s p e c t i o n t h a t wasconducted on 27 December 2010 and reduced t o w r i t i n g i n t h i smemorandum.4.Findings/ I n i t i a la.Observations.At 1330 on 27 December 2 010, CW04 Averhart p r o v i d e d a1_^£J_ManningB_00011530EDcIosure(gI .123833/^ U b j : INSPECTION OF QUANTICOBRIGICO PFCMANNINGcomprehensive tour of the b r i g that included the c h o w h a l l ,supply, the recreational areas, the s o l i t a r y confinement c e l l sand special b a r t e r s .b. My i n i t i a l observation of the b r i g , was t h a t i t ^as aw e l l l i t and dean f a c i l i t y . A l l areas appeared to be well-^keptand i n a state o^ good r e p a i r . Throughout my v i s i t , I d i d n o tobserve any dangerous or unsanitary c o n d i t i o n s .c. The f i r s t area I observed was the chow h a l l . The chowH a l l was neat and t i d y and the workers I observed p r e p a r i n g t b efood were wearing gloves. A l l p r e t r i a l detainees are p r o v i d e dthe samemeal choices as the other marines i n the various chowh a l l s aboard thebase f o r each p a r t i c u l a r day. The f o o ^ o f f e r e dandprovided on the l i s t looked well-balanced and adequate.d. The next area I observed was the s o l i t a r y confinements e c t i o n of t h e b r i g . This area of the b r i g had more accessc o n t r o l measures andwas more secluded than the s p e c i a l ^ a r t e r s ^confinement area. There were no detainees housed i n t h i ^ areaof the b r i g .e. There are c u r r e n t l y eight i n d i v i d u a l s being h e l d i np^retriai confinement. A l l eight of these i n d i v i d u a l s , i n c l u d i n gl^anning are being held i n the special guarters area of the b r i g .f . Every detainee at Quantico i s i n a c e l l by themselves,i n d u d i n g Pfc Manning. There are walls between t h e c e l l s w i t hbars on the f r o n t of the c e l l . Due t o the arrangement o f c e l l s ,no^^detainee at Ouantico can see another detainee.g. The indoor r e c r e a t i o n a l f a c i l i t y i s more than a d e ^ a t ef o r physical t r a i n i n g . There are numerous machines whic:hp r o v i d e a wide range of exercise to include cardiovascular andweight t r a i n i n g . The outdoor f a c i l i t y also p r o v i d e s a m p l e roomf o r physical t r a i n i n g . However, the area f o r maximum s e c u r i t ydeatainees i s much smaller and l i m i t e d which does not p r o v i d e awide r a n g e o f physical t r a i n i n g c p t i o n s o u t s i d e o f b a s k e t b a l l .h. There i s a complaint system i n place and detainees a l s ohave the o p t i o n t o r e v e s t mast. There are several anonymousboxes located throughout the b r i g where a detainee can drop o f fa form 510-^ prisoner r e v e s t form. These boxes are locked andonly accessible to C^04 Averhart.^^^^^^l^aoiiiogB^000^^53^23834Subj:5.INSPEGTIONOFQUANTICO BRIGICO PFG^^^IANNINGFindings regardint^ Pfc Manning.a.I t has been alleged that Pfc Manning i s b e i n g h e l d i ns o l i t a r y confinement, ^ e n detainees are processed i n t o t h ebr^ig, t h e i r f i l e goes before a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ^ a n d assignmentboard, (ref (d))h.This board assigns both a custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n andalso a status c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .c.Each detainee i s assigned a custody c l a s s i f i c a t i o n basedon the charges of the case.^ Theboard has assigned P f c b a n n i n ga maximum custody d a s s i f i c a t i o n .d.P r i o r to his a r r i v a l at the Quantico b r i g , Pfc Inarminge x h i b i t e d s u i c i d a l tendencies, so he was assigned a p r e v e n t i o no f i n j u r y (POI) statns. PfcManning's custody and s t a t u sc l a s s i f i c a t i o n are i n place f o r his own p r o t e c t i o n , so t b a t hed o e s n o t harm himself and so that other detainees do not have ^the opportunity to cause him harm.e.^ i l e h i s custody and status d a s s i f i c a t i o n doe^ a f f e c tsome of the p r i v i l e g e s that Pfc banning would otherwise r a t e ,t h i s determinationhas had no a f f e c t on h i s l o c a t i o n i n t h eb r i g . Pfc Manning i s b e i n g held i n the same s p e c i a l c h a r t e r ssection of the b r i g , i n the same type o f c e l l as the o t b e r sevenp r e t r i a l detainees. A l l detainees i h the special b a r t e r ssection o f the b r i g are under constant s u p e r v i s i o n . Pfc l^anningi s not being held i n s o l i t a r y confinement.f.Pfc manning's c e l l i s located r:^ght i n f r o n t of t h e d u t yhut so t h a t he c a n b e m o n i t o r e d b y the guards 24^7. I asked i fPfc Manning was allowed and able t o i n t e r a c t w i t h otberdetainees i n h i s area and was informed t h a t detainees c o u l d^peak to one another as long as i t does not become disrup^tive o rcontrary to good order and d i s c i p l i n e .g. - There were no detainees on e i t h e r side o f Pfc b a n n i n g , ..but I was informed t h a t there was a detainee located i n t h e ^ c e l lnext to Pfc M a n n i n g j u s t l a s t week. Pfc banning i s not b e i n gi n t e n t i o n a l l y i s o l a t e d i n the special quarters s e c t i o n o f theb r i g , as every detainee i n t h e b r i g d i d not have anotherdetained located i n an.adjacent c e l l .h.Due to Pfc Manning's prevention of i n j u r y s t a t u s , he i ss3 Q-f- -S,ManningB_0001153223835B^^^^Subj:BINSPECTION OF QUANTICOBRIG ICO PFG^^^^ANNINGnot afforded the sameprivileges as another detainee w i t h o u tt h i s status. Examples of t h e s e p r i v i l e g e s include: Pfc banningdoes not have any physical contact w i t h any other detainee, Pfc^ a n n i n g u s e s a l l recreational areas of the b r i g on h i s own, P f ^banning watches t.v. andeats i n h i s c e l l , Pfc Manning i2 underobservation 24^7, Pfc Nanning i s provided a d i f f e r e n t mattress^and bedding then the other detainees.i . Reference (c) states t h a t Pfc ^a^ning i s being tr^eatedinhumanely and that he i s only allowed out of h i s c e l l one hourper day. Per reference (d) and (e), due to h i s l i s t i n g as b o t ha maximum custody detainee and h i s assessment as a POI detainee,Pfc Manning i s only permitted one hour per day out o f h i s c e l l .A d d i t i o n a l l y , reference (e) does not allow any detainee t oexercise i n t h e i r c e l l due to s a f e t y concerns.j . Reference (c) also states that Pfc Manning i s s u b j e c t e dto cruel treatment and torment t o include responding t o guardsevery 5 minutes. While i t i s true t h a t POI detainees a r ^observed andmonitored 24-7 and logbook e n t r i e s are made on PfcManning every 5 minutes, Pfc Manning i s l e f t undisturbed i n h i sc e l l t o read maga:^ines, books or w r i t e l e t t e r s throughout t h eday.Reference (c) alleges that Pfc Manning i s s u b j e c t e d t ok.various sleep^deprivation measures t o i n c l u d e sleeping w i t h t h el i g h t s on, uncomfortable bedding and being awaken a t v a r i o u stimes throughout the n i g h t . I ' i n q u i r e d i n t o these a l l e g a t i o n sand was t o l d that a t 220(^ every n i g h t , the l i g h t s are t u r n e d o f fand t h a t onlv dim night l i g h t s are used thrcu^hout the sp^ecialquarters section of the b r i g . From 220(^^0500, Pfc Maiming i sl e f t undisturbed i n h i s c e l l .1.Due to h i s POI status, Pfc Manning was issued ad i f f e r e n t type of mattress padding and bedding than the o t h e rdetainees. The mattress i s one piece t h a t includes a b u i l t i np i l l o w . The mattress i s padded so he i s not subjected t o a hardrack. The blanket issued t o Pfc Manning i s designed t o preventt e a r i n g , so that the m a t e r i a l cannot be used f o r s t r a n g u l a t i o n .m. PfcManning i s a l l o t t e d a t l e a s t one hour of t e l e v i s i o ntime a day, but o f t e n he i s given two or more hours a day. PfcManning i s allowed to watch whatever programs he chooseri n d u d i n g the news. Pfc Manning i s also allowed use of t h etelephone. This time does not count against h i s a l l o t t e d onehour of r e c r e a t i o n a l time outside of h i s c e l l .^^^^^l^aoningB^000^^53323836Subj:INSPECTION OF QUANTIGOBRIG ICO PFCMANNINGn. Pfc Manning i s allowed to w r i t e l e t t e r s t o h i s f a m i l yand friends, ^ h i l e t h i s mail i s scanned w i t h a program, i t i snot read f o r content before i t i s mailed.o. I observed Pfc Manning f o r approximately 5-^10 minutesduring my b r i g tour. ^ This observation was conducted from t h eduty hut which has one sided glass. Pfc Manning appeared t o bei n good health andlooked l i k e he hadproper hygiene. PfcManningwas dressed i n p t gear, which was more than adequate f o rthe temperatureslwas presented i n t h e b r i g .p. Pfc Manning i2 being treated j u s t l i k e every o t h e rdetainee i n t h e b r i g . I n m y o p i n i o n , his treatment i s f i r i ^ ,f a i r and respectful. I d i d not observe any inhumane orinhospitable conditions throughout my tour i n the b r i g . A.ftermy tour of the b r i g , I have determined that the a r t i c l e s , phonec a l l s and emails are speculative a t best and not founded on anyclear and convincing f a c t s ..^^^^l^anoiiigB^000^^53423837ATTACHMENT 2323838DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYOFFICE OF THE A S S I S T A N T SECRETARY(MANPOWER AND RESERVE A F F A I R S )1000 NAVY PENTAGONW A S H I N G T O N DC 2 0 3 5 0 - 1 0 0 0From:To:Via:' JUN 113. 2011A s s i s t a n t S e c r e t a r y o f t h e Navy (Manpower and ReserveAffairs)P r i v a t e F i r s t Class B r a d l e y Manning, U.S. ArmyCommandant, U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s c i p l i n a r y B a r r a c k sSubj:COMPLAINT OF WRONGS UNDER ARTICLE 138, UCMJ, BY PFCBRADLEY MANNING, U.S. ARMYRef:(a) JAGMAN, Chapter I I I(b) Your c o m p l a i n t o f 19 J a n 1 1 , w/ends(c) CDR, MCBQ I t r 5800 B052 o f 8 Apr 11 w/encls and w/ends1.I n accordance w i t h r e f e r e n c e ( a ) , t h i s l e t t e r i s i n responset o y o u r c o m p l a i n t o f wrongs, r e f e r e n c e ( b ) , under A r t i c l e 138,UCMJ, a g a i n s t C h i e f Warrant O f f i c e r Four James A v e r h a r t , USMC,f o r m e r B r i g Commander, P r e t r i a l Confinement F a c i l i t y , MarineCorps Base Q u a n t i c o .2. The General C o u r t - M a r t i a l Convening A u t h o r i t y (GCMCA),Commander, M a r i n e Corps Base Q u a n t i c o , r e v i e w e d y o u r c o m p l a i n ti n accordance w i t h r e f e r e n c e ( a ) , and found your a l l e g a t i o n s t obe c o g n i z a b l e b u t w i t h o u t m e r i t , and g r a n t e d no r e l i e f .Afterc a r e f u l r e v i e w o f r e f e r e n c e s (b) and ( c ) , I concur w i t h t h ea c t i o n s o f t h e GCMCA i n d e n y i n g r e l i e f .Specifically, I findt h a t t h e GCMCA d i d n o t abuse h i s d i s c r e t i o n when he d e t e r m i n e dt h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t CW04 A v e r h a r t exceeded h i s a u t h o r i t yor abused h i s d i s c r e t i o n as B r i g Commander.3. Even i f y o u r c o m p l a i n t had m e r i t , y o u r t r a n s f e r t o t h eU n i t e d S t a t e s D i s c i p l i n a r y B a r r a c k s , F o r t Leavenworth on A p r i l20, 2011 i s a s u p e r s e d i n g and i n t e r v e n i n g event t h a t has madeyour request f o r r e l i e f u n a v a i l a b l e .4. T h i s d e c i s i o n c o n s t i t u t e s f i n a l a c t i o n on y o u r c o m p l a i n t .You may p e t i t i o n t h e Army Board f o r C o r r e c t i o n o f M i l i t a r yRecords t o remove o r c o r r e c t any e r r o r o r i n j u s t i c e y o u b e l i e v ee x i s t s i n your m i l i t a r y records.GarciaCopy t o :Mr. Coombs, C i v i l i a n Defense Ct^ijlnselHQMC (JAR)Commander, MCBQSJA, US Army M i l i t a r y D i s t r i c t WashingtonCW04 A v e r h a r tManningB_00012934 23839ATTACHMENT 2423840 I whom i Icnow to be QUANTICO PRE-TRIAL CONFINEMENT FACILITY SUPERVISORI statement is given oonceming my knowledge ofDETAINEE MANNING, CONDUCT WHILE ON RECREATION CALL.HARD BREATHINGPANIC, AND THAT HE WAS SHAKING. I 1. PLAI.DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY CU CO BASE BRIGVOLUNTARY STATEMENT 2 DATE - 2011 01 18FULLER. WILLIAM R. I make the followingfree and voluntary statement to MSGT PAPAKIE, BRIAN I make this statement of my own tree will and without any threats or promises extended to me. I fully understand that thisON THE ABOVE DATE, ON ORABOUT 1000, I WAS APPROACHED BY LCPL ARTILLIES. HE SAIDTHAT THE DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR (DBS), GM2 WEBB NEEDED ME RIGHT AWAY IN DORM 1. IIMMEDIATELY MADE MY WAY DORM 1. AS I ARRIVED I NOTICED THAT DETAINEE MANNINGWAS SITTING IN A CHAIR AND THAT HE WAS NOTICEABLY DIST RAUGI-IT . GM2 WEBB, LCPL GM2 D.. -TO ME THAT DETAINEE MANNING HAD BEEN TAKEN FROM SPECIAL QUARTERS ORM 1 FORRECREATION CALL AND TI-IEY REMOVED HIS RESTRAINTS HE FELL '10 THE DECK.HEFELL, MANNINGWAS HELPEDUP ANDTHENRANTOTHE OTHERSIDEOFTHEDORMAWAYFROM THE STAFF MEMBERS.AFTER I TALKED TO GM2 WEBB I WENT TO MANNING AND BEGAN TALKING CALMILY TO HIM TOFIND OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON. DURING OUR CONVERSATION APPEARED THAT HE HAD AUNCONTROLLABLY. HE ALSO HAD SLURRED SPEECH AND HAD A DIFFICULT TIME SPEAKINGCLEARLY. AFTERI STARTED TALKING TO HIM, HE BEGAN TO TRY TO EXPLAIN WHAT WASBOTI-IERING HIM. HIS THOUGHTS WERENOT COHERENT AT FIRST ANDI REALLY COULDNIT GETA CLEAR REASON AS TO WHY HE PANICKED, BUT AFTER APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES OFTALKING, DETAINEE MANNING WAS BACK TO NORMAL BEHAVIOR AND VERY TALKATIVE. HEMENTIONED THAT HE WAS SORRY AND REPEATEDLY APOLOGIZED, ALTHOUGH FOR WHAT HEWAS NOT REALLY SURE. I VERIFIED WITH MANNING THAT HE-WAS FEELING BETTER ANDMEN TIONED TO HIM THAT IF HE WANTED, HE WOULD STILL BE AUTHORIZED RECREATIONCALL. HE SAID THAT HEWOULDLIKETO CONTINUEWITH THEREMAINDEROF HIS TIIVIEAND ILEFT HIM WITH THE DBS, CPL BALDWIN AND ONE 0 OF THE PCF STAFF MEMBERS. . LERUSMC HE STATED THAT HE SURE WHAT HAPPENED OR WHY SND FELL BUT SAID THAT AFTER OPNAV 5527I2 (12-82)em Designed Using FoImFlow 215. HQMGIARAE. May as-ManningB_00011568 A INCIDENT REPORT FACILITY)i 6-B3)\;nplete form In TRIPLICATE. Ensure that all Information ?Is CORRECT and LEGIBLE. Fonrvard original and one copy to the- _._.ImInistratIon Chlet. One copy is to be retained by the Security Chbet or OIC of the tndIvtduaI's organtgauon If the incldent occured oursidethe -I QUANTICO BASE BRIG 1319 20110118LVID NUMBER NAME FIRST. INJURED DUTY STATUSMANNING E. NO STATUS - Light Dug; No Du%. Bed Rest; Admitted NRMC, OtherI SIR ON THE ABOVETIME AND DATE WHILE PERFORMING MY DUTIES AS DUTY BRIG SUPERVISOR, I GM2 WEBBWAS GETTING SND READY FOR HIS DAILY RECREATION CALL ALONG WITH LCPLTANKERSLY PLACED SND IN FULL RESTRAINTS AND CALLED ON THE RADIO TO SOUND STAND BY FORI LOCKDOWN. LCPL TANKERSLY THEN ESCORTED SND OUT OF HIS CELL AND INSTRUCTED HIM TO FACE THE ROW EXIT. SND FACED THE DOOR THEN LCPL TANKERSLEY STATED AYE AYE LCPL. SND ASKED LCPL TANKERSLEY THEN EXPLAINED TO SND ANYTIME HE RESPONDS TO A STAFF MEMBER HE IS TORESPOND AYE AYE. YES OR NO SAID PERSONS RANK IF ENLISTED AND SIR OR IF COMMISSIONED.LCPL TANKERSLEY TOLD HIM LETS GO AND SND SAID ITHEN EXP LAINED TO SND THAT HE IS ADETAINEE INSIDE THIS FACILITY AND ANY TIME HE IS ADDRESSED BY STAFF MEMBERS HE NEEDS TO RESPONDUSING RANK OR TITLE. SND SAID YES GM2. I THEN ASKED IF WAS READY TO CONTINUE WITH HIS/r CALL AND SND REPLIED YES GM2. LOCKDOWN WAS COMMENCED AND WE (GM2 WEBB LCPLI INKERSLY AND LCPL CLINE) ESCORTED SND TO DORM ONE FOR HIS RECREATIONAL CALL . UPON ARRIVAL TOONE WE ENTERED THE HATCH AND ESCORTED SNDTO THE CENTER OF -THE SPACE TO EMOVE HISRESTRAINTS. LCPL TANKERSLY INSTRUCTED SND NOT TO MOVE WHILE HE WAS REMOVING HIS RESTRAINTS-SNCRESPOND SO LCPL TANKERSLY REPEATED HIMSELF TELLING SND TO MOVE SND STATED NOTLCPL TANKERSLY TOLD SND HE NEEDED TO SAY LANCE CORPORAL THEN SND STATED LANCELCPL TANKERSLY REMOVED RESTRAINTS AND ONCE HE REMOVED HIS HAND RESTRAINTSSND FELL BACKWARDS FALLING ON HIS BUTTOCKS LCPL TANKERSLY AND MYSELF REACHED OUT TO CATCHHIM AND I ASKED IF HE WASOK. HE THEN JUMPED UP AND QUICKLY RAN BEHIND A WORKOUT MACHINEMUMBULING SOMETHING AND COVERING HIS FACE. ITHEN CALLED THE SECURITY CHIEF TO COMETO DORM.ONE AT THAT TIME HE UNCOVERED HIS FACE AND STARTED YELLING SORRY GM2 IMSORRY I INSTRUCTED LCPL CLINE TO GRAB A CHAIR SO THAT SND COULD SIT AND CALM DOWN.FULLER ARRIVED AT DORM ONE AND I EXPLAINED THE OCCURRENCE OF EVENTS TO HIM. HE THENASKED SND IF THERE WAS ANY PARTICULAR EVENT THAT TRIGGERED REACTIONS . SND STATED HEUNDERSTAND WHY HEWAS BEING TREATED DIFFERENT AND THAT IT SEEMED THAT ALL THE GUARDSWERE ANXIOUS AND IT WAS MAKING HIM ANXIOUS . FULLER ASKED WHAT COULD WE DO TO HELP YOUme AMBULNCE caueo we saw rd am an was sent 10 HOSPITAL [rune ro FACILITY -. I GM2 WEBB TITLE ADMIN CHIEFROGRAMS CHIEFOPERATIONS CHIEFSUPERVISORI IG COMMANDERenaoaonsauzmou.WEBB GM2 MSGT AKIEO4 AVERHART 1535 20110118 USE ManningB_00011569. F7 . REPORT I DNAL FACILITY) r"(Rev. 5-33). SND STATED HE KNOW . HE WAS THEN ASKED IF HE WANTED TO GO BACK TO HIS CELL OR CONTINUERECREATIONAL CAIJ. SND STATED HE WAS AND IF POSSIBLE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE WITH HISRECREATIONAL CALL. I CALLED FOR 2 DIFFERENT ESCORTS TO ASSIST WITH RECREATIONAL CALL AND RELIEVE LCPL TANKERSLY AND LCPL CLINE. CPL BALDWIN AND LCPL ARTILES ARRIVED. SND RODE A SPINBIKE AND COMPLETED HIS RECREATIONAL CALL WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. E08'7 ISFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY IHEVEIISE5ManningB_DOO11570- I WAY. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAW QUANTICO BASE BRIGVOLUNTARY 2- . 20110113I, LCPL TANKERSLEY . .- make the followingfree and voluntary etatemertt to MSGT PAPAKIE I - . whom I know-to be BRIG -SUPERVISORI make statement of my own and without any threats or promtses extended to me. I fully understand that 9statement ls gtven concemlng my knowledge ofTHE INCIDENT CONCERNING MANNING 9504/ 10075. SIR, ON THE ABOVE DATE WHILEPERFORMINGMY DUTIES AS ESCORT, I, LCPL TANKERSLEY PUT SND IN FULL RESTRAINTS.UPON WALKING OUT OF HIS CELL SND STOPPED AND STARTED LOOKING AROUND. I TOLD SNDTO FACE THE DOOR. SND FACED THE DOOR WITHOUT RESPONDING. I INF ORMED SND THATWHENEVERA GUARD GIVES HIM AN ORDER, HE IS TO RESPOND IN THE CORRECT MANNER.(AYE AYE, OF PERSON SND THEN SAID HE DOESNT UNDERSTAND. GM2 WEBB, THE DBS,TRIED TO INFORM SND THAT WHENA GUARD GIVES HIM AN ORDER, HE NEEDS TO RESPOND INMULTIPLE TIMES. SND THEN CALMED DOWN AND GM2 WEBB ASKED SND IF HE WAS READY TOCONTINUE HIS RECREATION CALL. SND SAID YES AND GM2 WEBB, LCPL CLINE, ANDMYSELF SND TO DORM ONE. ONCE INDORM ONE I TOOK THE RESTRAINTS OFF SNDAFTER I TOOK THE I-IAND RESTRAINTS OFF SND, HE FELL BACKWARDS INTO THE SITTINGPOSITION. GM2 WEBB AND MYSELF REACHED TO HELP SND, BUT SND GOT BACK UP ON HISOWN. I GRABBED ARM TO HELP HIM AND SND SHOOKIT OFF WHILE MOVING TOWARDS AFITNESS MACHINE IN A QUICK MANNER. WHEN REACHING THE FITNESS MACHINE HE GOTBEHIND IT, LEANED ON IT, COVERED HIS FACE, AND STARTED CRYING. AT THIS TDVEE GM2WEBB CALLED FOR THE SECURITY CHIEF, FULLER, TO COME TO HIS LOCATION IN DORMONE. SND THEN STATED IM SORRY, IM SORRY. AFTER THAT FULLER ARRIVED. E.O.S.{1a5pE,c,TFoL.Ut -auemn?b U-5mc./ opmv 5s27:2 (12-82) am 0107-LF-U55-2710?Sp Is? to?ManningB__O0011572Dealgned Ualng 2.15, HQMCIARAE, May QT . - 1. PLACE . -I J) DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY QUANTIC0 BASE BRIGVOLUNTARY STATEMENT 2' DATE20110118LCPL CLINE - make the followingfree and votuntary statement to MSGT PAPAKIE whom! know to ?be BRIG SUPERVISORI make statement of my own free will and without any threats Or promises extended to me. I fully understand that thisstatement Is iven concemln knowled 8 Of TI-IE INCID CONCE ET MANNING #9504/10075. WHILE PERFORMING MY DUTIESAS AN ESCORT I WITNESSED SND HAVE AN OUTBURST INSIDE SND WAS TOLD BY LCPLTANKERSLEY THAT WHEN HE RECEIVES AN ORDER FROM A GUARD HE IS TO RESPOND BYSAYING, FOLLOWED BY THE RANK OF THE GUARD. SND DID NOT RESPOND AND WHENHE WAS TOLD AGAIN SND BEGAN TO BREATHE HEAVILY AND SAY HE UNDERSTANDWHY SEVERAL TIMES. SND THEN TOLD DBS GM2 WEBB HE THINK OF THE WORD HEWAS LOOKING FOR. SND WAS THEN ASKED IF HE WAS READY TO CONTINUE WITH HISRECREATION CALL. IN RESPONSE SND YELLED, AT WHICH POINT DBS GM2 WEBB- - - YELL AND -TO CALM-DOWN: SND-W-AS AGAIN ASKED-IF-PIE -WASRE-A-DY-FORHIS RECREATION CALL AND SND RESPONDED YES. SND WAS THEN ESCORTED TO DORM 1 BYDBS GM2 WEBB, LCPL MYSELF. WHILE REMOVING THE RESTRAINTS FROMSND LCPL TANKERSLEY TOLD SND NOT TO MOVE. SND DID NOT REPLY WAS ONCE AGAIN COUNSELED ON THE MATTER. AFTER BEING TOLD THIS SND BEGAN SHAKJNG AND ONCE ALL1/ OF THE RESTRAINTS WERE REMOVED HE FELL BACKWARDS AND SAT ON THE GROUND AS IF HEPASSED OUT. DBS GM2 WEBB AND LCPL TANKERSLEY REACHED OUT TO HELP SND WHEN HEIUMPBD UP AND SHOOK HIS ARM AWAY FROM THE GUARDS. SND RAN BEHIND AN EXERCISEMACHINE AT WHICH POINT SND SAID, ME SND THEN PUT HIS HANDS OVER HIS IFACE AND BEGAN TO CRY. DBS GM2 WEBB NOTIFIED THE SECURITY CHIEF FULLER WHO CAME 1. E08. I9/541.612OPNAV 552712 (12-32) SIN Designed Ustng FormFIow 2.15. HQMCIARAE, May as IO or /5ManningB_0O01157323845A ATTACHMENT 2523846Appellate Exhibit 258Attachment 25have been entered intothe record as a CD/DVDand will be maintainedwith the originalRecord of Trial23847ATTACHMENT 2623848https://www.bobbarker.com/web/product.asp?AppriseWebKev=033700828.02402759&AppriseCustCode=WEBGUEST&product^505Isolation/Suicide Cell Smock, Green.•.Velcro fastening pieces adjust toaccommodate adults w/eighing from 100to 300 lbs. The chest area of the smockadjusts from 44" to 56".Our construction provides an extrameasure of security against accidentalopening, for greater protection of thewearer's dignity.Calming Sherwood Green color is stainresistant and suitable for use by bothmen and women.Click image for enlarged viewFor peace of mind, protection, and compassionate care.Quality Construction •Two heavy-duty 650-denier polyester outside fabric faces, lockstitch quilted to a 8 oz. polyesterinner batting. Durable bonded nylon thread used for all stitching. We manufacture our blanketsand smocks to stand up to tough treatment and give you long, dependable service.Very Safe and Secure -•Flame-resistant and virtually impossible to tear. Can't be easily disassembled. Can't be easilytwisted into knots or nooses. Our blankets and smocks are designed and constructed to meet thechallenge of your tough safety and security issues.Comfortable to Use -•Outside layers aren't overly coarse and heavy, and won't chafe or irritate bare skin. 8 oz. innerbatting provides ample mass for security and soothing warmth. Our Isolation/Suicide productsprovide an enhanced level of comfort, without compromising safety or security in any way.Easy to Care For -•No special laundering procedures to follow. Our blankets and smocks wash easily, dry rapidly,and are ready to go back into service fast.Priced for Tight Budgets Our advanced manufacturing techniques keep our costs low, and we pass those savings on toyou. ATTACHMENT 2723850INCIDENT REPORT (CORREFWONAL FACILITY)(Rev. 6-83)CotnpIete 1I1is torn-I in TRIPLICATE. Ensure that all information is CORRECT and LEGIBLE. Forward original and one copy to the009-? CODY '8 10 be fetalned by the Security Chief or OIC ot the indIviduaI?s organization if the incident oocuredourside the facility. NT ?Mt UhggMARINE CORPS BASE PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT FACILITY c.c.I?o 20110313INVOLVEDID NUMBER NAME (LAST. FIRST, MI.) INJURED DUTY STATUSMANNING SQ NO NIA Li9ht Duty. No Dunn Bea NRMC. other .. I:ascRI ON THE ABOVE DATE AND TIME WHILE PERFORMING MY DUTIES AS SPECIAL QUAR TERSSUPERVISOR I. LCPL MILLER, NOTICED DET MANNING HAD HIS HEAD AND ARMS INSIDE OF HISPOI JUMP SUIT. I THEN WOKE UP SND AND TOLD HIM THAT I NEED TO SEE HIS FACE AND TO POKE HIS HEADOUT. WHILE DOING WHAT I INSTRUCTED HIM TO DO, SND REALIZED HE WAS STUCK AND BEGAN TO ROLLAROUND SAYING, HATE THIS STUPID I THEN TOLD SND TO CALM DOWN AND STAND UP TO TRY TOPULL THE POI JUMP SUIT OVER HIS HEAD. BUT HIS ARMS WERE STILL STUCK. I THEN CALLED FOR THEWATCH SUPERVISOR, CPL SANDERS, TO COME DOWN TO SPECIAL QUARTERS TO LOOK AT THE SITUATIONAND GET PERMISSION TO OPEN CELL 191 AND HELP SND. UPON CPL SANDERS ARRIVAL HE EVALUATED TIIESITUATION AND OPENED CELL 191 TO HELP SND FREE HIS ARMS. ONCE SND WAS SITUATED I THEN TOLD I IIMNOT TO PUT HIS HEAD AND ARMS INSIDE HIS POI JUMP SUIT AGAIN, AND THAT IF HE IS COLD TO USE HISSECOND POI BLANKET INSTEAD. THE DBS WAS THEN NOTIFIED AND THIS REPORT WAS WRITTEN, AND THEINCIDENT WAS RECORED ON CAMERA. EOSRSR.. J. E.1 -41.PU sec IITIME SENT TO VDSPITAL TIME RE TURPID TO FACILITYTIME NHULANCE CALLED TM: T0 anNIA NIA FOLLOWING PERSONS NOTIFIED NAME 0 TITLE TIME lb0 SGT GARNETT BLENIS - - ADMIN CHIEFPROGRAMS CHIEFOPERATIONS CHIEFBRIG SUPERVISORBRIG COMMANDERwwz. canoe.LC PL MILLERTHIS 20110313DATE FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYManningB_42936 23851ATTACHMENT 2823852Ref: AMR 51/2011/005COL Carl R. Coffman Jr.Commander, US Army Garrison204 Lee AvenueJoint Base Myer-Henderson HallFort MyerVirginia 22211USAAMNESTYINTERNATIONALAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIATPeter Benenson House, 1 Easton Street,London WC IX ODW, United KingdomT;+44 (0)20 7413 5500F: +44(0)20 7956 1157E: amnestyis@aninesty.orgW: www.amnesty.org19 January 2011Dear Colonel CoffmanI enclose a copy of a letter which Amnesty International has today sent to the Secretary of Defenseregarding the conditions of confinement of PFC Bradley Manning at the Quantico Marine Corps Base,Virginia.We would be grateful for your comments and urge you to ensure that PFC Manning is subject tohumane treatment which is consistent with his untried status.Yours sincerely,Susan LeeProgram DirectorAmericas Regional ProgramCompany Registration 01606776Registered in England and Wales23853BY FAX AND MAILRef: AMR 51/2011/004AMNESTY~ t o " ' " ' 'INTERNATIONAL1400 Defense PentagonWashington DC 20301AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIATUSAPeter (Jenenson House, 1 Easton Street,London WCIX ODW, United KingdomT. +44 (0)20 7413 5500T- +44 (0)20 7950 1157E: amnestyisoamriestyorgWi www.amnesty.org19 January 2011Dear Secretary of DefenseI am writing to express concern about the conditions under which Private First Class (PFC) BradleyManning is detained at the Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia.We are informed that, since July 2010, PFC Manning has been confined for 23 hours a day to a singlecell, measuring around 72 square feet (6.7 square metres) and equipped only with a bed, toilet andsink. There is no window to the outside, the only view being on to a corridor through the barred doorsof his cell. All meals are taken in his cell, which we are told has no chair or table. He has noassociation or contact with other pre-trial detainees and he is allowed to exercise, alone, for just onehour a day, in a day-room or outside. He has access to a television which is placed in the corridor forlimited periods of the day. However, he is reportedly not permitted to keep personal possessions in hiscell, apart from one book and magazine at a time. Although he may write and receive correspondence,writing is allowed only at an allotted time during the day and he is not allowed to keep such materialsin his cell.We understand that PFC Manning's restrictive conditions of confinement are due to his classification asa maximum custody detainee. This classification also means that - unlike medium security detainees— he is shackled at the hands and legs during approved social and family visits, despite all such visitsat the facility being non-contact. He is also shackled during attorney visits at the facility. We furtherunderstand that PFC Manning, as a maximum custody detainee, is denied the opportunity for a workassignment which would allow him to be out of his cell for most of the day. The United Nations (UN)Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (SMR), which are internationally recognizedguiding principles, provide inter alia that "Untried prisoners shall always be offered opportunity towork" should they wish to undertake such activity (SMR Section C, rule 89).PFC Manning is also being held under a Prevention of Injury (POI) assignment, which means that he issubjected to further restrictions. These include checks by guards every five minutes and a bar on hissleeping during the day. He is required to remain visible at all times, including during night checks.His POI status has resulted in his being deprived of sheets and a separate pillow, causinguncomfortable sleeping conditions; his discomfort is reportedly exacerbated by the fact that he isrequired to sleep only in boxer shorts and has suffered chafing of his bare skin from the blankets.We are concerned that no formal reasons have been provided to PFC Manning for either his maximumsecurity classification or the POI assignment and that efforts by his counsel to challenge theseassignments through administrative procedures have thus far failed to elicit a response. We are furtherconcerned that he reportedly remains under POI despite a recommendation by the military psychiatristoverseeing his treatment that such an assignment is no longer necessary.Amnesty International recognizes that it may sometimes be necessary to segregate prisoners fordisciplinary or security purposes. However, the restrictions imposed in PFC Manning's case appear toCompany Registration 01606776Regisleced in England and Wales23854AMR 51/036/2011Barack ObamaThe PresidentThe White HouseOffice of the President1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NWWashington DC 20500USAAMNESTYINTERKATIOKALAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIATPeter Benenson House, 1 Easton Street,London WCIX COW, United KingdomT +44 (0)20 7413 5500F. +44 (0)20 7956 1157E 3mnesty1s@amnesty.orgW: www.amnesty.org24 March 2011Dear Mr PresidentRE TREATMENT IN CUSTODY OF PFC BRADLEY MANNINGEarlier this year Amnesty International wrote to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates about the treatmentof PFC Bradley Manning in pre-trial detention at the Quantico Marine Corps Base. We expressedconcern that his conditions of confinement - which include 23-hour confinement to a small, sparselyfurnished cell and other deprivations - were unnecessarily harsh and in breach of internationalstandards for humane treatmentWe understand that Private Manning's conditions have not improved and have been defended by themilitary authorities as in keeping with their procedures. However, Amnesty International remainsconcerned that his conditions fall short of international standards for humane treatment and areinconsistent with his status as an untried prisoner. We are further concerned by the impact that hisconditions may have on his psychological health which, in turn, may affect his ability to assist in hisdefence and thus his right to a fair trial.I enclose a copy of a further letter which Amnesty International has today sent to the Secretary ofDefense regarding Bradley Manning's detention conditions. We urge that measures are taken to ensurethat he is no longer held in 23-hour solitary confinement and subjected to other undue deprivations.Yours sincerely.Susan LeeProgram DirectorAmericas Regional ProgramCompany Registration- C1606776Regislered m England and Wales23855Ref: TG AMR 51/038/2011COL Carl R. Coffman Jr.Commander, US Army Garrison204 Lee AvenueJoint Base Myer-Henderson HallFort MyerVirginia 22211USAAMNESTYIN11RNAT10NALAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIATPeter Benenson House, 1 Easton Street,London WCIX ODW, United KingdomF +44 (0)20 7956 1157T +44 (0120 7413 5500E. amnestyis@amnesty.orgW: www.amnestyorg24 March 2011Dear Colonel Coffman,1 enclose a copy of a letter which was sent today to President Barack Obama and a second letter sent toSecretary of Defense Robert M. Gates. The letters concern the conditions of confinement of PFCBradley Manning at the Quantico Marine Corps Base, Virginia.The letter to the Secretary of Defense follows an earlier letter sent on 19 January 2 0 1 1 . A copy of thisearlier letter was emailed and posted to you. In this correspondence we requested your comments onthe concerns raised and urged you to ensure that PFC Manning is subject to humane treatment,consistent with his untried status. We note that we have not received a response from you to thisearlier correspondence.Copies of the two letters have also been sent to Colonel Daniel J. Choike.We would be grateful for your response.Yours sincerely,Susan LeeProgram DirectorAmericas Regional ProgramCompany Registration 016067/6 Registered in England and Wales23856ATTACHMENT 2923857Private Manning's HumiliationBradley Manning is the soldier charged with leaking U.S. government documents to Wikileaks.He is cun-ently detained under degrading and inhumane conditions that are illegal and immoral.For nine months, Manning has been confined to his cell for 23 hours a day. During his oneremaining hour, he can walk in circles in another room, with no other prisoners present. He is notallowed to doze off or relax during the day, but must answer the question "Are you OK?"verbally and in the affirmative every five minutes. At night, he is awakened to be asked again,"are you OK" every time he turns his back to the cell door or covers his head with a blanket sothat the guards cannot see his face. During the past week he was forced to sleep naked and standnaked for inspection in front ofhis cell, and for the indefinite future must remove his clothes andwear a "smock" under claims of risk to himself that he disputes.The sum of the treatment that has been widely reported is a violation of the Eighth Amendment'sprohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, and the Fifth Amendment's guarantee againstpunishment without trial. If continued, it may well amount to a violation of the criminal statuteagainst torture, defined as, among other things, "the administration or application... of...procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality."Private Manning has been designated as an appropriate subject for both Maximum Security andPrevention of hijury (POI) detention. But he asserts that his administrative reports consistentlydescribe him as a well-behaved prisoner who does not fit the requirements for MaximumSecurity detention. The Brig psychiatrist began recommending his removal from Prevention ofInjury months ago. These claims have not been publicly contested. In an Orwellian twist, thespokesman for the brig commander refused to explain the forced nudity "because to discuss thedetails would be a violation of Manning's privacy."The Administration has provided no evidence that Manning's treatment reflects a concern for hisown safety or that of other inmates. Unless and until it does so, there is only one reasonableinference: this pattem of degrading treatment aims either to deter future whistleblowers, or toforce Manning to implicate Wikileaks founder Julian Assange in a conspiracy, or both.If Manning is guilty of a crime, let him be tried, convicted, and punished according to law. Buthis treatment must be consistent with the Constitution and the Bill ofRights. There is no excusefor his degrading and inhumane pre-trial punisliment. As the State Department's PJ Crowly put itrecently, they are "counterproductive and stupid." And yet Crowley has now been forced toresign for speaking the plain truth.The Wikileaks disclosures have touched every corner of the world. Now the whole worldwatches America and observes what it does; not what it says.President Obama was once a professor of constitutional law, and entered the national stage as aneloquent moral leader. The question now, however, is whether his conduct as Commander inChief meets fundamental standards of decency. He should not merely assert that Manning'sconfinement is "appropriate and meet[s] our basic standards," as he did recently. He should23858require the Pentagon publicly to document the grounds for its extraordinary actions-andimmediately end those which cannot withstand the light of day.Signed:Bruce Ackerman,^aleUaw School^ochaiBenkler,HarvardI^aw SchoolAdditional Signatories (institutional affiliation, tor identification purposes only):Jack Balkin,^aleUaw SchoolRichardU^bel,UCUAUawDavid Abrams, Harvard Uaw SchoolMartha Ackelsberg, Smith CollegeJulia Adams, Sociology,^ale UniversityKirstenAinley,Uondon School ofEconomicsJeffreyAlexander,^ale UniversityPhilip Alston, N ^ U School ofUawAnne Alstott, Harvard I^aw SchoolElizabeth Anderson, Philosophy andWomen^s Studies, University ofMichiganKevin Anderson,University ofCalitorniaScott Anderson, Philosophy,UniversityofBritish ColumbiaClaudia Angelos,N^U School ofEawDonald K.Anton. Australian National University College ofEawJoyce Appleby,History,UCEAKwameAnthonyAppiah,Princeton UniversityStanleyAionowitz,Sociology,CUN^Oraduate CenterJean Maria Arrigo,PhD,social psychologist, Project on Ethics and Art inTestimonyReuvenAvi-^onah, University ofMichigan EawH.Robert Baker, Ceorgia State UniversityKatherine Beckett, University ofWashingtonDuncan Bell, Politics and Intemational Studies, University of CambridgeSteve Berenson,ThomasJefterson School ofUawMichaelBeitrand,UNCChapelHillChristophBezemek, Public Eaw,^ienna University ofEconomics and BusinessMichaelJ.Bosia, Political Science, Saint Michael^s CollegeBret Boyce, University ofDetroit Mercy School ofUawRebecca M.Bratspies,CUN^ School ofUawJason Brennan,Philosophy,Brown UniversityTalbot Brewer,Philosophy,University of^irginiaJohn Bronsteen,Eoyola University ChicagoPeter Brooks, Princeton UniversityJames Robert Brown,UniversityofTorontoSandeE.Buhai,EoyolaEaw School, Eos AngelesAhmedIBulbulia,Seton Hall Eaw SchoolSusannah Camic, University ofWisconsinEaw SchoolEaurenCarasik,Westem New England College School ofUawTeriE.Caraway,UniversityofMinnesotaAlexander M.Capion, University ofSouthern Califomia, Could School ofEaw23859MichaelW.Carroll,Eaw American UniversityMarshall Carter-Tripp, Ph.D, Foreign Service Officer, retiredJonathan Chausovsky,Political Science, SUN^-FredoniaCarol Chomsky,UniversityofMinnesota Eaw SchoolJohn Clippinger,Berkman Center tor Intemet and SocietyAndrew Jason Cohen,Creorgia State UniversityEizabeth Cohen, Harvard UniversityMaijorieCohn,ThomasJefIerson School ofEawDoug Colbert, Maryland School ofEawSheila Collins, William Paterson UniversityNancy Combs, Williams Mary Eaw SchoolStephen A. Coi^ad, Indiana University Mauer School ofEawSteve Cook, Philosophy,Utica CollegeRobert Crawtoid,Arts and Sciences,University ofWashingtonThomasP.Crocker,UniversityofSouth CarolinaJennifer Curtin,UCI School ofMedicineDerylD.Dantzler,WalterF.Corge School ofEaw ofMercer UniversityBenjaminCDavis,University ofToledo College ofEawRochelle Davis, School ofForeignService,Ceorgetown UniversityWolfgang Deckers, Ricl^^ondUniversity,EondonMichelle M.Dempsey,^illanova University School ofEawWaiCheeDimock,English,^ale UniversitySinanDogramaci,Philosophy,University ofTexas at Austin^aydDohrn, Northwestern UniversityJasonP.Dominguez,Texas Southern UniversityJudith Donath,Fellow,Berkn^an Center for Intemet and SocietyNorman Dorsen,NewYork University School ofEawMichaelW.Doyle, International Affairs, Eaw and Political Science,ColumbiaBruceT.Draine, Astrophysics,Princeton UniversityJay Driskell,History,Hood CollegeMichael C.Duff, University ofWyomingCollegeofEawEisaDuggan, Social and Cultural Analysis, N ^ UCynthiaFuchsEpstein,CraduateCenter,CU^^Stephen M.Engel, PhD, Political Science, Marquette UniversitySimonEvnine,Philosophy,UniversityofMiamiMarkFenster,Eevin College ofEaw, University ofFloridaMartha Field, Harvard Eaw SchoolJustin Fisher, Philosophy,Southein Methodist UniversityWilliam Fisher, Harvard Eaw SchoolJoseph Fishkin,University ofTexas School ofEawMark Fishman,Sociology,Brooklyn CollegeMartin S.Flaheity,Fordham Eaw SchoolCeorgeP.Fletcher, Columbia University,School ofEawJohn Flood, Eaw and Sociology,UniversityofWestminsterMichaelFon^an,University ofWashingtonTacomaBryan Frances, Philosophy,Fordham University23860Katherine Franke, Columbia Eaw SchoolNancy Fraser,Philosophy and Politics, New School tor Social ResearchEric M.Freedman,Hofstra Eaw SchoolMonroe H.Freedman,Hofstra University Eaw SchoolKennan Ferguson, University ofWisconsin, MilwaukeeJohnR.Fitzpatrick,Philosophy,UniversityofTennessee/ChattanoogaA.Michael Froomkin, University ofMiami School ofEawCeraldFrug, Harvard Eaw SchoolEouisFurmanski,University ofCentral OklahomaJames K.Calbraith,EBJ School ofPublic Affairs, University ofTexas at AustinHerbertJCans, Columbia UniversityWilliam Cardner, Pediatrics, Psychology,^ Psychiatry, The Ohio State UniversityUrsOasser, Harvard Eaw School, Berkman Center for Intemet and SocietyJuliusCCetman, University ofTexas Eaw SchoolTodd Citlin, Columbia UniversityBob Ooodin, Australian National UniversityAngelina SnodgrassCodoy,Human Rights, University ofWashingtonDavid Colove,N^U School ofEawJames R.Coetsch Jr.,Philosophy,Eckerd CollegeThomas Ookey,Art and Information Studies,Syracuse UniversityRobertW.Oordon,^ale Eaw SchoolStephen E.Oottlieb, Albany Eaw SchoolMark A.Oraber, University ofMaryland School ofEawJorieOraham, Harvard UniversityRoger Oreen, Pol. Sci. and Pub. Admin., Florida Culf CoastDaniel JHOreenwood,Hofstra University School ofEawChristopher E.Oriffin,^isiting, Duke Eaw SchoolJames Orimmelmann, NewYork Eaw SchoolJames Crronquist,Charlotte School ofEawJean Orossholtz, Politics, MountHolyoke CollegeEisaOuenther,Philosophy,^anderbilt UniversityChristopher Ouzelian,Thomas Jefferson School ofEawOillianK. Hadfield,Eaw,Economics, University ofSouthern CalifomiaJonathan Hafetz,Seton Hall University School ofEawEisa Hajjar, University ofCalifomia Santa BarbaraSusan Hazeldean, Robert M.Cover Fellow,^ale Eaw SchoolDirk t.D.Held, Classics, Coni^ecticut CollegeKevin Jon Heller, Melbourne Eaw SchoolEynne Henderson, UNE^-Boyd School ofEaw(emerita)Stephen Hetherington,Philosophy,UniversityofNewSouthWalesKurt Hochenauer, University ofCentral OklahomaEormyHoffi^an,UnivofHouston Eaw CenterMichael Hopkins, MHC Intemational EtdNathan Robert Howard, St. AndrewsMarc Morje Howard, Covemment, Ceorgetown UniversityKyronHuigens,Cardozo School ofEaw23861Alexandra Huneeus,University ofWisconsin Eaw SchoolDavid Ingram, Philosophy, Eoyola University ChicagoDavid Isenberg, Isen.comSheila Jasanoff, Harvard Kennedy SchoolChristopher Jencks, Harvard Kennedy SchoolPaula Johnson, Alliant Intemational UniversityRobertN.Johnson, Philosophy,UniversityofMissouriAlbyn C.Jones, Statistics, Reed CollegeEynneJoyrich, Modem Culture and Media, Brown UniversityDavid Kaiiys,Beasley Eaw SchoolEileen Kaufman,Touro Eaw CenterKevin B.Kelly,Seton Hall University School ofEawAnttiKauppinen,Philosophy,Trinity College DublinRandall Kennedy, Harvard Eaw SchoolDaniel Kevles,^ale UniversityHeidi Kitrosser, University ofMinnesota Eaw SchoolCillianR.Knapp, Princeton UniversitySethF.Kreimer University ofPennsylvania Eaw SchoolAlex Kreit,Thomas Jefferson School ofEawStefan H.Krieger,Hofstra University School ofEawMitchell Easser, Cornell Eaw SchoolMark EeBar, Philosophy, Ohio UniversityBrian Eeiter,University of ChicagoMary Clare Eem^on,Sociology,TheCraduateCenter,CUN^OeorgeEevine,Rutgers UniversitySanfordEevinson, University ofTexas Eaw SchoolMargaret Eevi,Pol.Sci.,University ofWashington and University ofSydneyTracy Eightcap, Political Science, EaCrange CollegeDaniel Eipson, Political Science, SUN^NewPaltzStacy Eitz,Drexel UniversityFiona deEondras, University College Dublin, IrelandJohn Eunstroth, University ofHouston Eaw CenterDavid Euban,Ceorgetown University Eaw CenterPeter Eudlow,Philosophy,Northwestem UniversityCeceliaEynch, University of CaliforniaDavidEyot^s,Boston UniversityColin Maclay, Harvard University, Berkn^an CenterJoan Mahoney,Emeritus,Wayne State University Eaw SchoolChibhMallat,^isiting Professor, Harvard Eaw SchoolPhil Malone, Harvard Eaw SchoolJane Mansbridge, Harvard Kennedy SchoolJeffManza,Sociology,New^ork UniversityDan Markel, Florida State UniversityDaniel Markovits,^ale Eaw SchoolRichard Markovits, University ofTexas Eaw SchoolMichael R.Masinter, Nova Southeastern University23862Ruth Mason,UniversityofConnecticut School ofEawRachel A.May,UniversityofSouth FloridaJamie Mayerfeld, Political Science,University ofWashingtonDiane H.Mazur,University ofFlorida Eevin College ofEawJason Mazzone, Brooklyn Eaw SchoolJeffMcMahan, Philosophy, Rutgers UniversityRichardJ.Meagher Jr.,Randolph-Macon CollegeAgustin Jose Menendez,UniversidaddeEeon and University ofOsloHope Metcalf^ale Eaw SchoolFrankEMichelman, Harvard UniversityOaryMinda, Brooklyn Eaw SchoolJohn Mikhail,Oeorgetown University Eaw CenterCregg Miller, Political Science,University ofWashingtonEbenMoglen, Columbia Eaw School and Software Freedom Eaw CenterImmanuelNess,BrooklynCollege, City University ofNew^orkCharles Nesson, Harvard UniversityJoel Ngugi,Eaw,African Studies, University ofWashingtonRalitzaNikolaeva,ISCTE Business School, Eisbon University InstituteJohn Palfrey, Harvard Eaw SchoolJames Paradis, Comparative Media Studies, MITEmma Perry,Eondon School ofEconomics and Political ScienceCharles Pigden, University ofOtagoAdrian duPlessis,Wolfson College, Cambridge UniversityPatrick S.O^Donnell,Philosophy,Santa Barbara City CollegeHans Oberdiek,Philosophy,Swarthmore CollegeDuaneOldfield, Political Science, Knox CollegeMichael Paris,Political Science,The College ofStatenlsland(CUN^)Philip Pettit,University Professor ofPolitics and Human^alues, PrincetonFrank A. Pasquale,Seton Hall Eaw SchoolMatthew Pierce, University ofNorth CarolinaCharles Pigden, Philosophy,UniversityofOtagoEesliePlachta,MDMPH, Albert Einstein College ofMedicineThomas Pogge,^ale UniversityOiovarmaPompele,University ofMiamiJoelPust,Philosophy,UniversityofDelawareUlrichK.Preuss,Eaw^ Politics, Hertie School ofCovernance, BerlinMargaretJaneRadin, University ofMichigan and emerita, Stanford UniversityAziz Rana,Comell University Eaw SchoolCustavRanis,^ale UniversityRahul Rao,School ofOriental^Afiican Studies, University ofEondonCalairRasmussen, Affiliation: Political Science, University ofDelawareDaniel Ray, Thomas M. Cooley Eaw SchoolJeff^.Redding, Saint Eouis University School ofEawC.D.C.Reeve, Philosophy,University ofNorth Carolina at Chapel HillBryan Register,Philosophy,Texas State UniversityRobert B.Reich, University of Califomia, Berkeley23863Cassandra Burke Robertson, Case Western Reserve University School ofEawJohn A. Robertson, University ofTexas Eaw SchoolCorey Robin, Brooklyn College and the CUN^Craduate CenterClarissa Rojas,CSUEong BeachKermit Roosevelt, University ofPennsylvania Eaw SchoolSusan Rose-Ackerman,Eaw,PoliticalScience,^ale UniversityNorm Rosenberg, History,Macalester CollegeClifford Rosky,UniversityofUtahBrad R. Roth, Poll.Sci.and Eaw,Wayne State UniversityBarbara KatzRotl^an,Sociology,City University ofNew^orkBo Rothstein Political Science,University ofCothenburgEauiaE.Rovner,UniversityofDenverCollegeofEawDonald Rutherford,Philosophy,UniversityofCalifornia, San DiegoEeonardRubenstein,JD,Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School ofPublic HealthChester M.Rzadkiewicz,History,UniversityofEouisiana at EafayetteDeWitt Sage, FilmmakerCindy Skach, Comparative Covemment and Eaw, OxfordWilliamJ.Talbott, Philosophy,University ofWashingtonNatsuTaylorSaito,Ceorgia State University CollegeofEawDean Savage, queens College, Sociology,CUN^KentD.Schenkel,New England EawKim Scheppele, Princeton UniveristyBen Schoenbachler,Psychiatry, University ofEouisvilleJeffrey Schnapp, Harvard UniversityKenneth Sherrill, Political Science, Hunter CollegeClaire Snyder-Hall, Ceorge Mason UniversityJeffrey Selbin,^ale Eaw SchoolWendy Seltzer,Fellow,PrincetonCenterforInformationTechnology PolicyJose M.Sentmanat,Philosophy,Moreno^alley College,CaliforniaOmnia El Shakry,History,UniversityofCaliforniaScott Shapiro,^ale UniversityStephen Sheehi,Eanguages,Eit. and Cultures,University ofSouth CarolinaJames Silk,^ale Eaw SchoolRobertD.Sloane, Boston University School ofEawRonald C.Slye,Eaw,Seattle UniversityMatthew Noah Smith, Philosophy,^ale UniversityStephen Samuel Smith, Political Science,Winthrop UniversityJohn M.Stewart, Emeritus, Psychology,Noi^hland CollegePeter O^Stillman,^assar CollegeAlec Stone Sweet,^ale Eaw SchoolRobertN.Strassfeld,CaseWestem Reserve University School ofEawMateoTaussig-Rubbo,SUN^-Buffalo Eaw SchoolJeanneTheoharis, Brooklyn College o f C U ^ ^Frai^ Thompson, University ofMichiganMatthewTitolo,West Virginia University College ofEawMassimo delaToi^e, University ofHull Eaw School23864JohnTorpey,CUN^Craduate Center^ilnaBashiTreitler, Blacks Hispanic Studies,Baruch College, CityEaurenceH. Tribe, Harvard UniversityDavid M.Trubek, University ofWisconsin(emeritus)Robert E.Tsai,American University,Washington College ofEawPeter^allentyne, Philosophy,University ofMissouriJoan^ogel,^ermont Eaw SchoolPaul^oice,Philosophy,Bennington CollegeVictor Wallis,BerkleeCollegeofMusicDavidWatkins, Political Science,UniversityofDaytonJonathanWeinberg,Wayne State UniversityHenry Weinstein,Eaw,EiteraryJoumalism, University ofCaliforniaMargaret Weir, Political Science,UniversityofCalifornia, BerkeleyChristina E.Wells, University ofMissouri School ofEawDanielle Wenner, Rice UniversityBryan H.Wildenthal,Thomas Jefferson School ofEawEangdonWinner,Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteNaomiWolf, authorEauris Wren, Hofstra Eaw SchoolElizabethWurtzel,Attomey and authorBetty^orburg, Emerita, City University ofNew^orkBenjamins.^ost,Philosophy,Providence CollegeJonathan ^asloffUCEA School ofEawMichaelJ.dimmer. Professor ofEaw,Eoyola University ChicagoEee Zimmerman, English, Hofstra UniversityMary Marsh ^ulack, Columbia Eaw SchoolUP^AT^: Our initial draft relied on news reports in the major news outlets. Comments wereceived since then lead us to think that two facts may be overstated in the original draft:1. The instance offorced nudity ovemight and in morning parade apparently occurred once. Thecontinuing regime apparently commands removal ofPvt.Manning^s clothes and his wearinga"smock" at night.2. The shackling apparently occurs when Private Manning is moved from his cell to the exerciseroom, but not while walking during the one hour ofexercise.Other responses we have received suggest that there are claims ofmyriad other abuses that makeconditions worse in various ways than we describe.Wedo not, and cani^ot, seek to adjudicatethese factual claims.The confiicting responses underscore the need forapublic,transparent, andcredible response to the reported abuse, and cessation ofthose among them that cannot bejustified.Sources:http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2^11/apr/2^/private-mannings-humiliatioi^http://balkin.blogspot.com/2^11/^3/statement-onpiivate-mannings-detention.html23865ATTACHMENT 3023866PSYCHOLOGISTS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYs t a t e m e n t on t h e Pretrial Solitary Confinement of PFC Bradley ManningStephen Soldz, Ph.D.Past President, Psychologists for Social ResponsibilityTrudy Bond, Ed.D.Psychologists for Social Responsibility Steering CommitteeFor the Psychologists for Social Responsibility Steering CommitteePsychologists for Social Responsibility (PsySR) is a national organization of psychologists and othermental health experts and behavioral scientists devoted to using psychological knowledge and expertise forpeace, social justice, and environmental sustainability. The PsySR Steering Committee has delegated thewriting of this statement to two ofits members, Stephen Soldz, Ph.D. and Trudy Bond, Ed.D. Dr. Soldz is aclinical psychologist, psychoanalyst, and researcher. He is Professor and Director of the Center forResearch, Evaluation, and Program Development at the Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis. He haspublished extensively on psychopathology, psychosocial treatments, and on psychological torture andabuse. He has been a psychological consultant on several of the trials at Guantanamo Naval Base. Dr.Bond is an independent and forensic psychologist in Toledo, Ohio. She has written on issues of psychologyand human rights, and focused extensively in the past several years on the accountability of psychologists,licensing boards and professional organizations as relating to psychological abuse and torture.PsySR has a long-standing involvement with issues of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatmentof prisoners. We have long followed the case of PFC Bradley Manning, due to concerns regarding theconditions to which he was subjected during his pretrial detention.PFC Manning was reportedly held for over six months in his cell at Quantico Marine Base forapproximately 23 hours a day, a cell approximately six feet wide and twelve feet in length, with a bed, adrinking fountain, and a toilet. For no discernible reason other than punishment, he was forbidden fromexercising in his cell and was provided minimal access to exercise outside his cell. Further, despite havingvirtually nothing to do, he was forbidden to sleep during the day and often had his sleep at night disrupted.As an organization of psychologists and other mental health and behavioral science professionals, PsySRpossesses the professional and psychological knowledge of the severely deleterious effects of solitaryconfinement on the psychological well-being of those subjected to it. In the psychological and psychiatricliterature there is exhaustive documentation and research that the effects of solitary confinement are of suchseverity that they at times constitute torture. At the very least, solitary confinement is a form of cruel,unusual and inhumane treatment in violation of U.S. law.Recognition of the profound harm caused by solitary confinement is long standing in both our medicalpsychological and legal communities. In the majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court case Medley,Petitioner, 134 U.S. 1690 (1890), U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Freeman Miller wrote, "Aconsiderable number of the prisoners fell, after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition,from which it was next to impossible to arouse them, and others became violently insane; others still,committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better were not generally reformed, and in most casesdid not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community."258 Harvard Street, PMB 282, Brookline, MA 02446 | Phone: 202-543-5347 | Email: info@psysr.org23867PSYCHOLOGISTS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYScientific investigations since 1890 have confirmed in troubling detail the irreversible physiologicalchanges in brain functioning from the trauma of solitary confinement. In 2008, 24 experts on solitaryconfinement from the disciplines of medicine, psychology, law, and criminal justice expressed theconsensus of professional opinion in their Istanbul Statement on the Use and Effects of SolitaryConfinement:It has been convincingly documented on numerous occasions that solitary confinementmay cause serious psychological and sometimes physiological ill effects. Researchsuggests that between one third and as many as 90 per cent of prisoners experience adversesymptoms in solitary confinement. A long list of symptoms ranging from insomnia and confusionto hallucinations and psychosis has been documented. Negative health effects can occur after only afew days in solitary confinement, and the health risks rise with each additional day spent in suchconditions (p. 64, references omitted).In a 2003 review. Dr. Craig Haney, a psychologist and expert in the assessment of institutionalenvironments provides further elaboration on these negative effects:Empirical research on solitary and supermax-like confinement has consistently and unequivocallydocumented the harmful consequences of living in these kinds of environments . . . Evidence ofthese negative psychological effects comes from personal accounts, descriptive studies, andsystematic research on solitary and supermax-type confinement, conducted over a period of fourdecades, by researchers from several different continents who had diverse backgrounds and a widerange of professional expertise... [D]irect studies of prison isolation have documented an extremelybroad range of harmful psychological reactions. These effects include increases in the followingpotentially damaging symptoms and problematic behaviors: negative attitudes and affect, insomnia,anxiety, panic, withdrawal, hypersensitivity, ruminations, cognitive dysfunction, hallucinations,loss of control, irritability, aggression, and rage, paranoia, hopelessness, lethargy, depression, asense of impending emotional breakdown, self-mutilation, and suicidal ideation and behavior (pp.130-131, references removed).The risk of adverse psychological impacts rises rapidly with length of solitary confinement. As Haneyconcludes, "To summarize, there is not a single published study of solitary or supermax-like confinement inwhich non-voluntary confinement lasting for longer than 10 days where participants were unable toterminate their isolation at will that failed to result in negative psychological effects" (p. 132). A Danishstudy found that pretrial prisoners kept in solitary confinement for over four weeks had a 20-fold increasein the likelihood of being psychiatrically hospitalized (Sestoft, Andersen, Eillebaek, & Gabrielsen, 1998).Similarly, the psychiatrist Dr. Stuart Grassian (2006), who has conducted extensive clinical investigationsof solitary confinement, reports brain changes after relatively brief periods of solitary confinement:"Indeed, even a few days of solitary confinement will predictably shift the electroencephalogram (EEG)pattem toward an abnormal pattern characteristic of stupor and delirium" (p. 331).These negative effects of solitary confinement result from a combination of social isolation and sensorydeprivation. Humans are by nature social creatures. We function and form our identity in a daily matrix ofrelationships with family members, significant others, friends, coworkers, acquaintances and strangers withwhom we interact over the course of a day. Removing all those contacts rapidly causes a loss of our senseof identity, leading to profound distress and often to increased psychiatric symptomatology.258 Harvard Street, PMB 282, Brookline, MA 02446 | Phone: 202-543-5347 | Email: info@psysr.org23868PSYCHOLOGISTS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYThis social isolation is exacerbated by the sensory deprivation that occurs when an individual is locked inthe same cell for 22 or more hoursaday,with no variation of sights, sounds and smells.Grassian discussesthe effects ofthis continual sensory deprivation:The inability to shift attention results inakindof^tunnel vision'in which the individual'sattentionbecomes stuck, almost always on something intensely unpleasant, and in which he cannot stopthinking about that matter; instead, he becomes obsessively fixated upon it.These obsessionalpreoccupations are especially troubling. Individuals in solitary confinement easily becomepreoccupied with some thought, some perceived slight or irritation, some sound or smell comingfromaneighboring cell,or, perhaps most commonly,by some bodily sensation.Tortured by it,such individuals are unable to stop dwelling on it. In solitary confinement ordinary stimuli becomeintensely unpleasant and small irritations become maddening (p. 331).Grassian also points out that for many,symptoms resulting from solitary confinement may be long-lasting:I^M^any—including some who did not become overtly psychiatrically ill during their confinement insolitary—will likely suffer permanent harm asaresult of such confinement.This harm is mostcommonly manifested byacontinued intolerance of social interaction,ahandicap which oftenprevents the inmate from successfully readjusting to the broader social environment of generalpopulation in prison and, perhaps more significantly,often severely impairs the inmate'scapacityto reintegrate into the broader community upon release from imprisonment (pp. 322 323).The United Nations Special Rapporteur onTorture and Other Cruel,Inhuman or DegradingTreatment orPunishment, Juan E.Mendez, devoted much ofhis 2011report to the United Nations General Assembly tothe topic ofsolitary confinement. His review ofthe literature corroborated the opinions ofDrs.Haney andGrassian as well as that ofthe Istanbul Statement in that solitary confinement can cause serious andsometimes long-lasting psychological harm and is thus illegal under international law:The adverse acute and latent psychological and physiological effects ofprolonged solitaryconfinement constitute severe mental pain or suffering.Thus...prolonged solitary confinementamounts to acts prohibited by article7ofthe Covenant I^United Nations International Covenant onCivil and Political Rightsj,and consequently to an act as defined in articlelor articlel6oftheConvention ^United Nations Convention againstTorture or Other Cruel,Inhuman or DegradingTreatment or Punishmentj (p. 21).The Rapporteur concluded "any imposition of solitary confinement beyondl^days constitutes torture orcruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, depending on the circumstances" (p. 21). Our ownconclusion,based upon the literature and research consulted over several years of study,is in agreementwiththe Rapporteur'sassessment.While the reasons for PFC Manning'ssolitary confinement are hard to discern from the press, oneexplanation reported was that PFC Manning posedasuiciderisk.This is the same explanation that wasgiven when PFC Manning was forced to sleep naked for three days in March 2011, as well as to stand atattention for roll call naked,though after those three days, he was issuedasuicide smock.This explanationis ofspecial concern to us as psychologists and mental health experts. Isolation or solitary confinement isamong the most harmful conditions that can be imposed upon depressed or suicidal individuals. In nomental health hospital in the country would prolonged solitary be considered acceptable treatment for258 Harvard Streets PMB 282^ Brookline,MA 02446^Pl^one:202 543 5347^Email:info@psysrorg23869PSYCHOLOGISTS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYdepressed individuals. Rather,as indicated above, any psychological symptoms present in PFC Manningwere likely to be exacerbated by his months ofprolonged confinement. For these reasons, the SpecialRapporteur fbrTorture stated his belief"that its l^solitary confinements imposition,^^^^^^^^^^^^^, onpersons with mental disabilities is cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment and violates article7oftheCovenant and articlel6of the Convention" (p.21,emphasis added).Additionally,the persistent sleepdisruption to which PFC Manning was exposed as well as the humiliation resulting ftom his forcednakedness likely placed him at increased risk ofexacerbating any existing psychiatric symptomatology andcould increase rather than reduce suicidality.Weare aware that conditions such as those to which PFC Manning was subjected pretrial exist in manysupermax prisons in our country.Wepoint out, first, that supermax prisons are for people who have beenconvicted ofacrime,which was not the case with PFC Manning at the time he was subjected to solitary.Wealso point out^as have Drs.Haney, Grassian, and many others^that the conditions in many supermaxprisons are deleterious to the mental health ofthose subjected to them.It is especially disconcerting tosubject someone not convicted ofany crime to these dangerous conditions.Because ofthe extensive evidence that solitary confinement for as little as two weeks can cause acutedistress as well as serious and potentially longlasting psychiatric symptomatology,Psychologists forSocial Responsibility is concerned that PFC Manning was treated during his pretrial incarceration in suchamanner as to posearisk on psychological harm.For PFC Manning to be kept in solitary confinement forover six months has undoubtedly caused serious distress above that naturally incumbent upon incarcerationand has exposed him toagreatly increased likelihood of suffering serious, potentially long-lastingpsychiatric problems. This conclusion raises the question as to whether he was subjected to unnecessarypunishment duringatime when he should have been presumed innocent by our cherished legal traditions.Works CitedAyan, A., Baykaly, T., Beynon, J., Dromer, C, Fincanci, §. K., Gautier, A., et al. (2008). The IstanbulStatement on the Use and Effects of Solitary Confinement. Torture, 18(1), 63-66. Retrieved fromhttp://www.univie.ac.at/bimtor/dateien/topic8_istanbul_statement_effects solconfinment.pdfGrassian, (2006). S. Psychiatric effects of solitary confinement. Journal ofLaw & Policy 22, 325-383.Haney, C. (2003). Mental health issues in long-term solitary and "supermax" confinement. Crime &Delinquency, 49(1), 124-156.Mendez, J. E. (2011). Interim report of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on torture andother cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Available from http://daccess-ddsnv.un.ore/doc/UNDOC/GEN/NI 1/445/70/PDF/N1144570.pdf?OpenElementSestoft, D. M., Andersen, H. S., Eillebaek, T., & Gabrielsen, G. (1998). Impact of solitary confinement onhospitalization among Danish prisoners in custody. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,27(^7;, 99-108.258 Harvard Street, PMB 282, Brookline, MA 02446 | Phone: 202-543-5347 | Email: info@psysr.org23870ATTACHMENT 3123871To:US President Barack ObamaMembers ofthe US SenateMembersofthe US House ofRepiesentativesUS secretary ofdefenceEeon PanettaUS secretary ofthe armyJohi^McHughUSam^ychiefofstaffRaymondTOdiernoAs members ofthe European parliament,who were elected to represent our constituentstl^oughoutEurope,we are writing to express our concerns about alleged human rights violationsagainst Bradley Manning,ayoung soldier who has been accused ofreleasing classifiedinformation pertaining to possible US war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.Weare concemed thatthe US army has charged Bradley Manning with "aiding the enemy,"acapital offence that ispunishable by death.Wehave questions about why Mr Manning has been imprisoned forl7months without yet having had his day in court.Weare troubled by reports that Mr Manning hasbeen subjected to prolonged solitary confinement and other abusive treatment tantamount totorture.And we are disappointed that the US government has denied the request ofthe UnitedNations special rapporteur on torture to meet privately with Mr Manning in order to conduct aninvestigation ofhis treatment by US military authorities.Wecall upon the United States govemment to allow Juan Mendez, the United Nations specialrapporteur on torture,to conductaprivate meeting with Bradley Manning, the accusedWikiEeaks whistle-blower. Mr Mendez has made repeated requests to American officials to meetprivately with Mr Manning in response to evidence that he was subjected to abusive confinementconditions while he was detained atafacility in Quantico,Virginia. Mr Manning was held insolitary confinement for 23 hours per day during the eight months he was incarcerated at thatlocation. It appears that he was at times forced to sleep and stand at attention without anyclothing. His legal counsel has documented additional incidents which indicate the possibility ofother rights violations.Hundreds ofUS legal scholars have signed an open letter to the Obama administration, arguingthat the conditions ofconfinement endured by Mr Marming at Quantico may have amounted totorture.Following worldwide calls for an end to the abusive treatment. Manning was moved toafacility inFortEeavenworth,Kansas,where his conditions are said to have improved.The USmilitary conducted an intemal investigation into the allegations ofmistreatment at Quantico.Thepreliminary results ofthis investigation found that Mr Manning was improperly placed on"prevention ofinjury" status, against the recommendations ofqualified medical personnel.However, thesefindingswere ultimately overturned byamilitary prison official who wasimplicated by the report. Therefore, the US military's internal investigation has beencompromised by clear confiictsofinterest.This so-called "prevention ofinjury" status was the23872justification foranumber of extraordinary measures, such as denying Mr Manning comfortablebedding and not allowing him to exercise.By preventing UN officials fiom carrying out their duties, the United States government risksundermining support for the work ofthe United Nations elsewhere, particularly its mandate toinvestigate allegations oftorture and human rights abuses.In order to uphold the rightsguaranteed to Bradley Manning under intemational human rights law and the US constitution, itis imperative that the United Nations special rapporteur be allowed to properly investigateevidenceofrights abuses.PFC Manning hasaright to be fiee from cruel and unusualpunishi^ent. People accused ofcrimes must not be subjected to any form of punishment beforebeing brought to trial.Finally,we in the European Union are totally opposed to the death penalty.And we certainly donot understand why an alleged whistleblower is being threatened with the death penalty,or thepossibility oflife in prison.Wealso question whether Bradley Manning^s right to due processhas been upheld, as he has now spent overI7months in pretrial confinement.Furthermore, Bradley Manning should not be forced to waive his right against self-incriminationin order to speak with anyone who seeks to investigate evidenceof abuse in their officialcapacity.Consistent with these intemationally recognised standards, as well as the rules governing hismandate. United Nations special rapporteur on torture Juan Mendez must be allowed to conductan unmonitored meeting with Bradley Manning,without any further delay.^ours sincerely,1. MarisaMatias2. Christian Engstrom3. Ana Gomes4. MarieljeSchaake^.Christopher Fjellner^.JanAlbrecht7. MargreteAuken8. Alexander Alvaro9.SandrineBelier10 EotharBisky2387311. Pascal Canfin12. Fran^oiseCastex13. NessaChilders14. NikolaosChountis15. Daniel Cohn-Bendit16. TaijaCronberg17. ^eroniqueDeKeyser18. BasEickhout19. Cornelia Ernst20 Jill Evans21. Goran Farm22.IldaFigueiredo23.SvenGiegold24. MikaeIGustafsson25. Thomas Handel26. Rebecca Harms27. AnnaHedh28. JackyHenin29. ElieHoarau30. Richard Howitt31. ^annickJadot32.SkaKeller33.JurgenKlute2387434. JeanEambert35. Philippe Eambert36. KartikaEiotard37. Sabine Eosing38.011eEudrigsson39 UlrikeEunacek40 Willy Meyer41. Paul Murphy42. Miguel Portas43HeideRiihle44. Judith Sargentini45CarlSchlyter4^. Helmut Scholz47. MarcTarabella48. RuiTavares49KeithTaylor50. EmilieTurunen51. MaritaUlvskog52. Derek^aughan53 AsaWestlund54. Gabriele dimmerSources http://w^ guardian.co.uk^world/2011/nov/29/bradley-manning-mep-open-letterNote^ lOadditional European leaders subsequently signed on to the letter, bringing the totalsignatories to 64.23875ATTACHMENT 32A/HRC/19/61/Add.4United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland(a)UA 23/02/2011 Case No. GBR 1/2011 State reply: None to date Alleged risk of torturefor asylum seeker facing deportation.168. The Special Rapporteur regrets thai the Government of the United Kingdom ofGreat Britain and Northern Ireland has not responded to this communication, therebyfailing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council. Thecommunication referred to allegations of risk of torture for Mr. X, a homosexual man, ifretumed lo Burundi. The Special Rapporteur reiterates that article 3 of the UN Conventionagainst Torture holds that no State party shall expel, return ("refouler"), or extradite aperson to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the personwould be in danger of being subjected to torture. Based on the information received, theSpecial Rapporteur determines that the rights of Mr. X under the UN Convention againstTorture are at risk ofbeing violated. The Special Rapporteur calls on the Government not loextradite Mr. X until a fair assessment of his risk of torture is conducted. In this context,diplomatic assurances do not mitigate the Govemment's obligation to refrain from violatingthe non-refoulement provision.(b) JAL 11/11/2011 Case No. GBR 6/2011 State reply: 13/01/2012 26/01/2012 Concernsregarding the remit and conduct of the forthcoming United Kingdom of Great Britainand Northern Ireland (UK) Detainee Inquiry.169. The Special Rapporteur is grateful to the Government for its responses lo thiscommunication. Given the on-going dialogue between the mandate and the Govemment onthis case, the Special Rapporteur decides not to make observations on this case in thepresent report.United States of America(a)UA 30/12/2010 Case No. USA 20/2010 Slate reply: 27/01/201 1 19/05/2011 Allegations ofprolonged solitary confinement of a soldier charged with the unauthorized disclosureof classified information.170. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of the United States of America forits response to this communication regarding the alleged prolonged solitary confinement ofMr. Bradley E. Manning, a US soldier charged with the unauthorized disclosure ofclassified information. According to the information received, Mr. Manning was held insolitary confinement for twenty-three hours a day following his arrest in May 2010 in Iraq,and continuing through his transfer lo the brig at Marine Corps Base Quantico. His solitaryconfinement - lasting about eleven months - was terminated upon his transfer fromQuantico to the Joint Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Leavenworth on 20 April 2011.In his report, the Special Rapporteur stressed that "solitary confinement is a harsh measurewhich may cause serious psychological and physiological adverse effects on individualsregardless of their specific conditions." Moreover, "[d]epending on the specific reason forits application, conditions, length, effects and other circumstances, solitary confinement canamount to a breach of article 7 of the Intemational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,and lo an act defined in article 1 or article 16 of the Convention against Torture." (A/66/268paras. 79 and 80) Before the transfer of Pfc Manning to Fort Leavenworth, the SpecialRapporteur requested an opportunity to interview him in order to ascertain the preciseconditions of his detention. The US Govemment authorized the visit but ascertained that itcould not ensure that the conversation would not be monitored. Since a non-privateconversation with an inmate would violate the terms of reference applied universally infact-finding by Special Procedures, the Special Rapporteur had to decline the invitation. In742387623877A^HI^^^l^^^t^AddBIresponse to the Special Rapporteur'srequest for the reason to hold an unindicted detaineein solitary confinement, the govemment responded that his regimen was not "solitaryconfinement" but "prevention ofharm watch" but did nol offer details about what harm wasbeing prevented. Tothe Special Rapporteur'srequest for information on the authority loimpose and the purpose of the isolation regime, the govemment responded that the prisonrules authorized the brigcommander to impose ilonaccounlof the seriousness oftheoffense for which he would eventually be charged. The Special Rapporteur concludes thatimposing seriously punitive conditions ofdetention on someonewhohas not been foundguilty of any crime isaviolation ofhis right to physical and psychological integrity as wellas ofhis presumption ofinnocence.The Special Rapporteur again renews his request foraprivate and unmonitored meeting with Mr. Manning to assess his conditions ofdetention.(h)AL15/06/2011 CaseNoUSA8/2011Slale reply: None to date I^OllOWUPtoalettersentl^l^ay^Ott reguestingapri^ateunmonitoredmeetingwifhl^ri^ate(^fc.)5radleyl^anning171. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Govemment of the United Stales of America foritsresponse to thecommunicationdated 13 May2011 requestingaprivateunmonitoredmeeting with Private BradleyManning.Regrettably,to date the Govemment continues torefiiseloallow the Special Rapporteur to conduct private, unmonitored, andprivilegedcommunications withPrivate Manning, inaccordance withthe working methods ofhismandate (L/CN 4/2006/6paras 20 27)(C) JUAI9/08/2011 CaseNoUSA15/2011Statereplv: None todate Alleged torture and illtreatment in immigration facilities.172. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government ofthe United States of Americato dale has not responded to the communication dated 19 August 201L regarding theallegations of torture and ill-treatment in immigration facilities. According lo theinformation received, 16gay and transgender individuals have allegedly been subjected losolitary confinement, torture and ill-treatment while in detention in U.S. immigrationfacilities. Furthermore, there was reportedly a lack of protection from persecution andrespect for the principle of non-refoulement for thosewhorisklortureifretumedtotheirhome countries on account oftheir sexual orientation,gender identity or Hl^status.In thisregard, the Special Rapporteur would like to draw the attention of the Govemment toparagraph6of General Comment No.20 of the Human Rights Committee,to article7ofthe Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, to the Body of Principles for theProtection o f A l l Persons under Any Form ofOetenlion or Imprisonment and the StandardMinimum Rules for IheTreatmentofPrisoners, particularly rule 22 (2).Given the lack ofany evidences to the contrary, the Special rapporteur believes that the fact reveal that therehavebeen various violationsof theprovisions underthe Convention againstTorture, inparticular breach of articles7and 12.The Special Rapporteur calls on the Govemment toundertake a prompt and impartial investigation on the conditions of detention, solitaryconfinement and ill-treatmenloftheimmigranls,prosecuteandpunishihoseresponsible,and ensure that the victims obtain redress, including fair and adequate compensation, andsas full rehabilitation as possible.(d)ALI6/09/2011 CaseNoUSA16/2011Slalerer^lv:30/ll/201lAlleoed widespread useofsolitary confinements including its prolonged and indefinite use and the imposition ofsolitary confinement on individuals with mentaldisahilities.173. The Special Rapporteur is graleftil thatthe Govemment ofthe United States ofAmerica repliedtothe allegation letter of 16September2011. Considering theongoingdialogue on the issues raised between the mandate and the Government, the SpecialRapporteur decides not to make observations on this case in the present report. Heencourages the Govemment to continue its engagement with the mandate.7523878UTflTED NATIONSNATIONS DMESHAta' CWOvOSSAfUAT PES NATIONS Vh'lESAUX DROITS DE UHOMMEOFFlCnGOyTHEUMrrED NATIONSEIGa COkOaSSZOXEK f ORHmiANPROCEDURESDVSPECIAL PROCEBIOBES Of TMECONSEH DES DROITS DE UHOAtMEHUIMAX RIGBTS COmClI,Maasiata* ofthe SpeeisS Raj»port*ttr oa tortiiire aad other crwft!, mhumaia or ijftgjadmg hreatmem* OP puakhmeatTRgkc (43-£i)-9:7 9006tcJiijjfsaasj, (•I'iAVivNS. OC'EVETclKc; 4] 24 6xr i ^ f a w £ - &:i-X2)-i>f? iM. 49ISUZRKCf IxjW .CTgXv£a.2i: ufgMlf iiSiSagyJfojiw.vJSAiSSX:ii:4=5 Ni>.ii«;«::r:i(XNEV%(9SijflilNgMtS: iJAO/SOviftrs.CiSjo30 December 2010Excellency,I have the honour to address you in my capacity as Special Rapporteur on torturesnd other cruel, inhuman or degrading trea.tment or punishment pursuant to HumanRights Council resoWou S/8.In Ibis connection. I would like to draw the attention of your Excellsncy'sGovamment to infonnation I have received regarding the situation of Mr. BradleyManning, born in 1 $8?, a United Stated (U.S.) Private First Class Army Soldier, who isreportedly being held in solitary conSnement at the Marine Corps Brig, Quantico,Virginia, snd is expected to face a court-martial in 2011.According to the information received, in May 2010, Mr. Manning was arrestedby agents ofthe U.S. Anny Criminal Investigation Command and held in pre-trialdetention in a military jail at Camp .Arifjan in Kuwait for two months before hewas transferred to the U.S. Marine Corps Brig in Qusntico, Virginia, where he hasbeen held for the past five months. In July 2010, Mr. Manning was reportedlycharged with tlie unauthorised disclosure of U.S, classified infbrmation toWikiLeaks, It is further reported that since his atrest in May 2010, Mr. Manninghas been confined to his cell for twenty-three hours & day. The prolonged periodof isolated confinement which Mr. Manning has allegedly been subjected to forseven months is believed to have been imposed in an effort to coerce him into"cooperation" with the authorities, allegedly for the purpose of persuading him toimplicate others.In view of the allegations indicating tbat Mr. Manning continues to remainconfined to his cell for t%'enty-tbree hours a day, and that such a regimen has reportedlyHer ExcellencyMrs. Betty E. KingAmbassador Extraordinary and PlenipotentiaryPennanent Representative of the United States of Americato the United Nations OfBce at Geneva..J223879now been in effect for about eight months, serious concern is expressed about its eftecton the physical and mental integrity of Mr. Manning.Without in any way implying any conclusion as to the facts of the case, I shouldlike to appeal to your Excellency's Government to seek clarification of the circumstancesregarding the case ofMr. Manning. I would also like to stress that each Government hasthe obligation to protect the right to physical and mental integrity of all persons. Thisright is set fbith inter alia in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the InternationalCovenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and OtherCruel, inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.In this context and with regard to the allegations of holding Mr. Manning inprolonged solitary confinement since his arrest in May 2010,1 would like to draw yourExcellency's Government's attention ro paragraph 6 of General Comment 20 of theHuman Rights Committee. It states that prolonged solitar)' confinement of the detained orimprisoned person may amount to acts, prohibited by article 7 [on the prohibition oftorture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment] of theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted at the 44th session of theHuman Rights Committee, 1992). In this regard, I would also like to draw your attentionto article 7 of the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, which provides that"efforts addressed to the abolition of solitary confinement as a punishment, or to therestriction of its use, should be undertaken and encouraged" (adopted by the GeneralAssembly by resolution 45/111 of 14 December 1990).Furthermore, 1 would like to draw your Excellency's Govemment attention toparagraph 21 of the UN General Assembly Resolution 64/153 of 26 March 2010, which"Emphasizes that conditions of detention must respect the dignity and humanrightsofdetainees, highlights the importance of reflecting on this in efforts to promote respect forand protection of the rights of detainees, and notes in this regard concems about solitaryconfinement."I would further like to draw your Excellency's Government attention to thejurisprudence of the United Nations Human Rights Committee that has previously foimda specific isolation regime to violate both article 7 and article 10 of the IntemationalCovenant on Civil and Political Riglits (Campos v. Peru, judgment of 9 January 1998),The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has also stated that prolonged solitaryconfinement constitutes a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment prohibited underarticle 5 of the American Convention on Human Rights (Castillo Petruzzi et ai., judgmentof 30 May 1999).I would also like to draw your Excellency's Government attention to the UNGeneral Assembly report (A./63/175 of 28 July 2008), where the fomer SpecialRapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishmentnoted that "the practice of solitary confinement has a clearly documented negative impacton mental health, and therefore should be used only in exceptional circumstances or whenabsolutely occcssary for cnmlnal investigation purposes. Incases, solitary23880confinement should be used for the shortest period oftime."In this respect, 1 would liketo bring to your Excellency's Govemment attention the Istanbul Statement on the Useand Effects of Solitary Confinement adopted on 9 December 2007 at the InternationalPsychological Trauma Symposium in Istanbul, according to which "it has beenconvincingly documented on numerous occasions that solitary confinement may causeserious psychological effects.A long list of symptoms ranging 6om insomnia andconfusion to hallucinations and psychosis have been documented. Negative health effectscan occur after only a few days in solitary confinement, and the health risks rise witheach additional day spent in sucb conditions."Furthermore, I would like to draw your Excellency's Government'.? attention tothe Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. (Adopted by the Economicand Social Council by resolutions 663 C pCXI^f") of 31 July 1957 and 2076 (LXIf) of 13May 1977), I would also like to draw your attention to the Body of Principles for theProtection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment adopted by theGeneral Assembly on 9 December 1988 (Adopted by General Assembly resolution43/173 of 9 December 1988). The Committee against Torture and the Human RightsCommittee have consistently found that conditions of detention can amount to inhumanand degrading treatment.I would also like to draw your Excellency's Government's attention to Principle19 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form ofDetention or Imprisonment adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1988 whichstates that, "A detained or imprisoned person shall have the right to be visited by and tocorrespond with, in particular, members of his family and shall be given adequateopportunity to communicate with the outside world [-••]-" I would also like to draw yourattention to rule 37 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisonersadopted on 30 August 1953 by the First United Nations Congress on the Prevention ofCrime and the Treatment of Offenders, which provides that "Prisoners shall be allowedunder necessaiy supervision to communicate witli their family and reputable friends atregular intervals, both by correspondence and by receiving visits."1 urge your Excellency's Government to take all necessary measures to guaranteethat the rights and freedoms of the above mentioned person are respected and, in theevent that your investigations support or suggest the above allegations to be correct, toensure the accountability of any person responsible for the alleged violations. I alsorequest that your Excellency's Government adopt effective measures to prevent therecurrence ofthese acts.In view of the urgency of the matter- I would appreciate a response on the initialsteps taken by your Excellency's Govemment to safeguard the rights of the abovementioned person in compliance with the intemational instruments cited.Moreover, it is my responsibility under the mandates provided to us by theHuman Rights Council, to seek to clarify all cases brought to our attention. Since 1 ame:q)ected to report on these cases to the Hitmaii Rights Council, I would be gi@t«f;l &r23881your cooperation and your observations on the following matters, when relevant to thecase under consideration:1.Are the facts alleged in the above summary of the case accurate?2.Has a complaint been lodged by or on behalf ofthe alleged victim?3.Please provide information concerning the legal grounds for the arrest andfor the decision to place Mr. Manning in solitary con^nement, as well as factual detailsof the incarceration regimen to which he is subject and how such measures arecompatible with international noons and standards as stated, inter alia, in theIntanational Covenant on Civil and Political Rigiits and the Convention against Torture.4.Please provide the details, and where available the results, of anyinvestigation, medical examinations, andjudicial or other inquiries carried out in relationto this case. If no inquiries have taken place, or if tliey have been Inconclusive, pleaseex#anv&y.5.Ifthe imposition of excessive solitary confmement has been the action ofone or more individuals acting outside the scope oftheir authority, please provide the fulldetails of any investigation or prosecution which have been tmdertakeo. Have penal,disciplmary or admioistiative sanctions been imposed on the alleged perpetrators?6.Please provide information on the measures taken to ensure the physicaland mental integrity of Mr, Manning.I undefUke to ensure that your Excellency's Govemment's response to each ofthese questions is accurately reflected in the repoit I will submit to the Human RightsCouncil for its consideration.JJuan E. MfedezSpecial Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment23882• NATIONS UNIES,(^^\^HAUT COMMISSARIAT DES NATIONS tJNIES. AUX DROITS D E L ' H O M M E .'W ^ s MUNITED NATIONS .OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONSHIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTSPROCEDURES SPECIALESDUCONSEILDES DROITS D E L ' H O M M E 'SPECIAL PROCEDURES OF THE. HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCILMandate of the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture and other cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment or punishmentTilefiix: (4I-22)-917 90O6TiKgrammes-.UNATIDNS, GENEVET41ex:41 29 62Tildphone:+41(0)22.917.9711Inlemet: www.olichr.oigE-inail:sr-lor(urt(«|oliolir.org•'ifiMxCglvAl•-_'-*>7-^Address:- Palais d»s Nations. CH-1211 GENEVE 10•REFERENCE: G/SO 214 (53-24)'• 4 February 2011Excellency,In view of the forthcoming meeting with United States Government officials this .'month in Washington, D.C, and.Airther to my most recent communication of 30 December2010 (UA G/SO 214 (53-24) USA- 20/2010), Iwish to address you again as SpecialRapporteur on the. question oftorture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment.In relation to the above mentioned communication, I note from'your Excellency'sGovernment's letter of 27 January 2011 that a reply will be forthcoming shortly, and wouldlike to thank your Excellency's Govemment for its efforts in this regard.In this connection, I wish to inform you that I was approached by Mr. Bradley E.Manning's defense counsel, Mr. David E. Coombs, with a view to meeting with and speakingto Mr. Manmng at the Marine Corps Brig, Quantico, Virginia. In view of the seriousallegations ofhuman rights violations, as detailed in my communication, I wish to take upthis invitation and would therefore like to request your Excellency's Govemment's consent.I•'The purpose ofthis visit is to get appraised in detail and in an objective and impartialmanner about the situation and conditions ofdetention ofMr, Manning in order to continue aconstructive and confidential dialogue with the relevant U.S. authorities.'72Her Excellency .Mrs. Eileen Chamberlain' DonahoeRepresentative of the United States of America to the Human Rights Council11, Route de Pregny1292 Chambdsy '. • 'Fax: 022 919 19 81.23883Furthermore^lwishtoinformyouaboutmyintentionto attend an appellate hearingbefbreaMilitary Commission to be held onl7March2011 in'^ashington,D.C., in relationtdthecaseofMr.SulimanAhmedAlBahlul, who remains detained atthedetention facilityofCuantanamoBay. .Iwould very much appreciate your Excellency's Oovemment^scooperationin thematters mentioned aboveahdstandreadyfor any consultation thatyoudeemn^ecessaryinthisregard.Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideratiomluanE. MendedSpecialRapporteurontorture and other cruel, ir^umanordegradingtreatment or punishment,DisplayNewsPage 1 of 223884UNITED NATIONSHUMAN RIGHTSs, "Haberland, Cc: John CPT MIL We will start working on it immediately, although this late on a Friday of aHoliday weekend, might be an issue.Ashden FeinCPT, JAChief, Military JusticeU.S. Army Military District of Washington (MDW) From: Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 3:03 PMTo: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJACc: Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA Carlile, Monica L. SFC USAMatthew kemkes; Haber|and,John CPT MIL USASubject: Quantico VisitationAshden,I know this is late notice, however, I have a small Quantico issue that I amhoping you can assist on. Last weekend, PFC Manning's aunt and mother wentto Quantico to see him. His aunt has been to Quantico on numerous occasions.Unlike in the past, she was forced to wait at the gate until she could beescorted to the brig by military police. This requirement cut into theirvisitation time since they had to wait at the gate for over a half of an houron each day. The family is going to see Manning again this weekend. I waswondering if anything can be done to find out why this is a new requirement,and whether it is truly necessary. Thanks.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs45 North Main Street, 5th Floormai|05.secureserver.neUview_ Fein&aEmlPart=0 Workspace Webmail PrintFall River, MA 02720 23919Office: 1-800-588-4158Fax: (508) 324-9896Notice: This transmission, including attachments, maycontain confidential attorney?c|ient information and is intended for theperson(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, pleasenotify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying oruse of this information may be unlawful and is Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.Fein&aEmlPart=0-/29/12 Workspace Webmail Print I23920Print Close WindowSubject: Re: Article 138 ComplaintFrom: "Greer LtCol Christopher Date: Thu, Feb 17, 2011 6:32 pmTo: Ill scan and send to you but we will formally serve on manningSent using B|ackBerryFrom: To: Greer LtCo| Christopher Sent: Thu Feb 17 18:09:36 2011Subject: RE: Article 138 ComplaintLtCo| Greer,Thank you for providing me with an update. Will the response be served uponme as well? I will undoubtedly be the one completing the rebuttal, ifnecessary.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs45 North Main Street, 5th FloorFall River, MA 02720Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 324-9896Notice: This transmission, including attachments, maycontain confidential attomey-client information and is intended for theperson(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, pleasenotify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying oruse of this information may be unlawful and is -- Original Message Subject: RE: Article 138 ComplaintFrom: "Greer LtCo| Christopher Date: Wed, February 16, 2011 4:41 pmTo: Manning.Artic|e 1/ ?/29/12Workspace We-bmail :2 PrintWe have the GCMCA review underway. We hope to be able to give to your client by the end next week for his rebuttal but since theGCMCA has not yet reviewed, 1 can't speak to the findings. We have90 days to resolve this and do not intend to take that long. I am sorryI cannot give you a firm date. 1 ILtCol GreerMCBQ SJAFrom: Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 16:17To: Greer LtCol Christopher Subject: Article 138 ComplaintLTC Greer,Can you give me an update on the status of the Article 138 complaint?I would like to get an idea on when I might hear a response in orderto plan for the writ to ACCA. Thank you.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs45 North Main Street, 5th FloorFall River, MA 02720Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 324-9896Notice: This transmission, including attachments,may contain confidential attorney-client information and is intendedfor the person(s) or company named. If you are not the intendedrecipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorizeddisclosure, copying or use of this information may be unlawful and isCopyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.Manning./Xrlicle 2/-/29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23922Close WindowSubject: RE: SCIFFrom: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA DW Date: Thu, Mar 03,2011 10:22 pmTo: "Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA DW Cc: "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA DW David. Below are answers or comments to your emails today.1. We completed the leader recon of the SCIF location and secured anideal location. It's ideal because it's in a building that will provide PFCManning with very little exposure to third parties and is large enough toaccommodate the defense team and the RCM 706 board. The location is justnorth of Ft. Belvoir, in Alexandria. We are planning on using Saturdays forthe SCIF access to minimize the 3d party pedestrian traffic, because thisfacility is shared by the USG although belonging to the US Army INSCOM. Thelatrines are nearby and the access procedures will be easier for you and yourteam, compared to other locations.2. We will schedule PFC Manning to be at MAJ Kemkes office the Fridaybefore the SCIF meeting. We expect to have the Saturday schedule tomorrow andwill immediately contact you to figure out when you will be available to comedown.3. Please send us who, from the defense team, will be participating inthe SCIF meeting with PFC Manning.4. We are working on your expert request. The convening authority hasbeen TDY and on leave, although we are in contact with him. We are workingwith the medical folks to determine the availability of an expert, so that wecan present the request to the convening authority. We expect to have ananswer by the middle of next week, which should be well before the RCM 706board resumes its work- based on the SCIF arrangements.5. We will work to determine the reason for PFC Manning being requiredto ?strip naked at the end of the day".6. We will work to determine what the situation is concerning thewireless headset telephone. is this only when you and the defense teamcalls, for all his calls?AshdenAshden FeinCPT, JAChief, Military JusticeU.S. Army Military District of Washington (MDW) Fein&aEmIPart=O~/29/12Fein&aEmIPart=0 Workspace Webmail Print23923From: Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 8:55 PMTo: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJACc: Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA Matthew kemkes; Morrow Ill,JoDean. CPT USA ISubject: [Suspected SCIFImportance: LowAshden,Any update on when lwill be able to use a SCIF to speak with PFC Manning?Also, once we identify the date, Iwould like to have PFC Manning pulled outthe day before to meet with me at MAJ Kemkes' office.Finally, I wanted to alert you to a couple of issues with the confinementfacility. First, they are requiring Manning to strip naked at the end of theday and then to stand at attention naked during the 0500 DBS review. I can'timagine the reason for this to happen. Second, the facility has been using awireless headset for his telephone conversations. Besides being insecure,the quality of the connection is compromised.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Of?ce of David E. Coombs45 North Main Street, 5th FloorFall River, MA 02720Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax (508) 689-9282Notice: This transmission, including attachments, maycontain confidential attorney-client information and is intended for theperson(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, pleasenotify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying oruse of this information may be unlawful and is -- Original Message Subject: Charge SheetFrom: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA Date: Wed, March 02,2011 3:57 pmTo: Cc: "Car|ile, Monica L. SFC USA "Matthew kemkes""Morrow JoDean, CPT USA /29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23924Print Close WindowSubject: SCIF and BrigFrom: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA ow Date: Sat, Mar 05, 2011 11:47 amTo: "Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA "Matthew kemkes"Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW Cc: David. Good morning. As per our previous conversation and emails, wereceived authorization to use the SCIF on Saturdays to minimize the accused'sexposure to third parties. The SCIF is available any Saturday after today.Please look at the calendar and let us know when the soonest Saturday you canbe here, so that we can schedule the conference room, security detail, theaccused's meals, and the Friday before meeting at Myer. Once you send thatinformation, then we coordinate the RCM 706's meeting in the SCIF.We spoke with the Brig about the removal of the accused's underwear at night.His underwear was taken from him because of a specific statement that he madeto Papakie at the Brig. After he was served his new charges and MAJKemkes left the Brig, the accused asked why all of his items were taken atnight with the exception of his underwear under POI status. According to theBrig of?cials, the accused then talked about the elastic band in hisunderwear and how that would be "probably the most dangerous piece" ofclothing or words to that effect. Papakie believed that the accused wasinsinuating that he could harm himself with the elastic band on his underwearand discussed the issue with the accused. After this conversation, the Brigstaff took this threat seriously and believes that the accused may have hadrecent thoughts or ideas as to the uses of the elastic band from hisunderwear to harm himself. The Brig staff removed his underwear to ensurethat he does not harm himself. The next time you speak with your client,please ensure that he understands that any comment that could be reasonablyconstrued as an intimation that he might harm himself, will be taken veryseriously by the Brig staff, because their primary mission is to ensure theaccused's well being and safety.In addition, the accused was instructed to cover himself with his blanketduring the morning "stand-to." Despite the Brig staff allowing him tocover-up during this morning process, he elects to stand naked in his cellrather than to cover himself with his blanket.COL Malone was on emergency leave the day the accused was served withadditional charges; however he came back yesterday and visited with theaccused. Also, COL Malone is still working the accused's request to have afemale mental health provider.1/ /29/12 Workspace Webmail PrintWe are still working on the portable phone issue you brought up this pastweek. Despite the quality of the phone call, there is no monitoring of anycommunications between members of the defense team and the accused.AshdenAshden einCPT, JAChief, Military JusticeMilitary District of Washington (MDW) Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.Fein&aEmIPart=0 23925'3 ~/29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23926Print Close WindowSubject: Re: [Suspected RE: SCIF and BrigFrom: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA DW Date: Sat, Mar 05,2011 5:35 pmTo: "CarIi|e, Monica L. SFC USA DW "Matthew kemkes"-, "Morrow JoDean, CPT USA DW Cc: David. We will need until monday morning to con?rm with the command the security detail. Weshould know by 1200 on monday.Ashden FeinCPT, JAFrom: To: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJACc: Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA Matthew kemkes; Morrow JoDean, CPT USA Sent: Sat Mar 05 17:19:11 2011Subject: [Suspected RE: SCIF and BrigAshden,My facts about what was said and how it was said are somewhat differentthan what was provided to you. More importantly, COL Malone saw PFCManning on Friday and assessed him as a low risk and requiring only routineoutpatient follow?up. Specifically, he determined that there was no need foradmission for closer clinical observation. Despite this, the Brigmaintains they are stripping him at night for his own protection. It appearsthat he is in a Catch?22. If he does everything he is told to do, the Brig startsto wonder what are they missing. If he does anything out of boredom orstarts to question the absurdity of his treatment, then they determine this isa threat and overreact.I would like to meet with Manning on the 11th and 12th. Can you arrangeeverything with this short of notice? If not, then the 25th and 26th of Marchis my next window. Let me know ASAP and I will make my travelarrangements.Best,DavidFein&aEmlPart=0-/29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23927Print Close WindowSubject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Update)From: ?Fein, Ashden CPT USA DW Date: Tue, Apr 05,2011 10:08 pmTo: atthew ke mke s"JFHQ-NCRIM DW -, "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA"Haberland, John CPT IL iJsA"-, "Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA JFHQ-NCRIM ow Cc:Attach: Brig Order Excerpt.pdfCA Appointment of Defense Expert Consultant in (M anningB).pdfCA Appointment of Defense Mitigation Expert (ManningB).pdfsmime.p7sDavid,The purpose of this email is to update you on different issues we havediscussed over the past week. Please view this email in format.?1. Brig Visitors.while we understand your view of the Brig Order, we respectfully- disagree with your interpretation of the attached relevant portion ofthe Brig Order with regard to visitation.while you correctly recite what an ?authorized? visitor is, an?official? visit is ?for the purpose of conducting official governmentbusiness, either on behalf of the prisoner or in the interest ofjustice,? see para 3.17b. The next sentence simply states that?lawyers, military officials, civilian officials, or anyone listed as aprivileged correspondence in para 3.17f . . . having official businessto conduct are considered gffigial visits? (emphasis added) and mayvisit at any time during normal working hours, subject to authorizationby the Commanding Officer. Critical is the next sentence, ?Allprisoners will be required to see official military visitor(s)?(emphasis added). Therefore, an official visit to the brig by a Memberof Congress conducting official government business or by a non-government organization?s representative does not necessarily include avisit with PFC BM without PFC consent.You also state, ?official visits are considered privileged, and are notsubject to recording or monitoring? (emphasis added); however this notin the Brig Order. As noted in para 3.17f, which you cite as theauthority, ?all incoming or outgoing correspondence (mail) between aprisoner and the following is privileged and not subject to inspection,?Workspace Webmail Print;refers to, as stated, ?mail? and not visitation (emphasis 5 you also state, ?The Brig's rules and regulations identify the followingindividuals as qualifying for official visits,? the reference you cite(para 3.17f) provides a list of government officials, including ?Membersof Congress.? Again, that para refers to ?mail? and not visitationprotected under Section of the MRE. Therefore, a visit by a Member ofCongress would not be privileged within the meaning of the Brig Order,and would be monitored just like any other visitor.The prosecution and brig?s interpretation of the Brig Order outlinesthese types of visitors:a. ?Authorized? visitors. Visitors that PFC BM places on hisvisitation list.b. ?Official? visitors. Those officials listed in para 3.17bconducting official government business.A person?s membership in an organization does not necessarily conferupon that person ?official? status. A Member of the Congress isconducting an ?official? visit if he is conducting official Governmentbusiness.A member of a non?government organization is not ?official? as they arenot conducting government business. Should PFC BM desire to meet withany of the individuals whom you have mentioned as potential visitors, hewill need to either add them to his ?authorized? visitor list or approvea meeting, through you, if the individuals make an ?official? visit.As you know, from the beginning of PFC confinement at Quantico, therule requiring an ?authorized? visitor to have a preexistingrelationship with PFC BM has been relaxed to allow any visitor to visit,subject to standard security vetting and monitoring for nationalsecurity purposes. This accommodation was based on the potential forhis long?term pretrial confinement and for his benefit, well-being, and_morale.Regardless of the interpretation of the Brig Order, the issued astanding order on 16 Sep 16, which directs the Brig to monitorcommunications of third parties while confined at the Brig. Thisrequirement includes all of PFC phone calls, visitations, and mail.This requirement does not include monitoring of any privilegedcommunications between PFC BM and his attorneys, mental healthproviders, and brig chaplains.A Further, as the United States has charged your client, you surelyacknowledge our concern that PFC right to counsel be scrupulously- honored. Absent the command?s weekly visit, which is limited todiscussing PFC welfare, we would not allow a U.S. GovernmentFein&aEmlPart=O 2/~/29/1 2an affirmative waiver of that right by PFC BM.the Brig to coordinate any visit.Workspace Webmail Printrepresentative to meet with your client without counsel being pres?%? orProperly adding avisitor as an ?authorized? visitor will be deemed consent to speak witha government representative by the defense. Any such visit will besubject to monitoring unless it is subject to a recognized privilegeunder Section V, MRE (falls under the exception).In the future, please do not direct any organization to directly contactIf someone is trying to coordinate aformal meeting in an ?official? capacity, they should coordinate throughDOD Legislative Affairs (COL Tia Johnson) and their request to meet withPFC BM will be ultimately forwarded through you to PFC BM for consent to1 meet during such a visit.i we will continue to notify you when we receive information that someone- forward.expeditiously get answers for you.. our intent is to streamline this RFI process for you and ensure PFC needs are adequately and reasonably met.wishes to meet with your client in an ?official? capacity, and requestthe same courtesy in return, once your client agrees to meet with them.2. Defense Request for Expert.The approved the request today.appointed as a member of the defense team. She just to Quantico,MCB and should be best suited for your request. She will have easyaccess to your client based on her proximity and will be available toyou for consult and meetings. Although she is currently TDY for theLCDR Carrie Kennedy, USN, is. remainder of this week, she will be available to speak starting 11 Apr11 at (546) 529-3862. Attached is her appointment order.Defense Request for Mitigation Expert.The disapproved the request today. Please see attached actionfor his explanation.4. CAPT Hoctor Info.CAPT Hoctor may be reached at Nilliam.hoctor@afg.usmc.mil. Pleasedirect any future requests for information from the Brig personnel,LtCol Greer, or any other USMC official to the prosecution and we willAs the command?s representatives,5. ACU Uniforms.we sent your request to the command for them to figure out the wayAs with all pretrial confinees, they understand theirresponsibilities and will ensure they assist PFC BM in having theappropriate uniform.Fein&aEmlPart=D /29/12 Workspace Webmail Print239306. Government Discovery Responses.we are finalizing our discovery responses and expect to have them to youby the end of the week.7. OCA Discovery Consent Classification Reviews.All the different 0CAs are currently working to review the classifiedinformation and provide the consent for us to turn over the pieces ofevidence and the derivative reports to you and your team.Classification reviews are ongoing for the classified information weintend to introduce at the Article 32 and trial.v/rAshdenAshden FeinCPT, JAFrom: Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2911 9:63 AMTo: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJACc: Matthew kemkes; Morrow JoDean, CPT USA Haberland,John CPT MIL Carlile,Monica L. SFC USA SJASubject: [Suspected RE: US v. PFC BM (Update)Importance: Low Ashden,I have informed Congressman Kucinich that he is authorized to visit PFCManning under the rules and regulations for the Quantico Brig. UnderBrig Order P1640.1C, paragraph 3.17, there are two types of visitors fora detainee, authorized and official.1) Authorized visitors are required to be added by the detainee andapproved by the Quantico Brig. Any person added to the authorizedvisitors list may visit the detainee on any Saturday or Sunday betweenthe hours of 12:00 and 3:00 p.m. These visits are monitored by theBrig. The Brig requires the visits to take place in a no-contact boothfor any detainee held in Maximum Custody. The doors to the booth mustremain open and the entire visit will be recorded by the Brig. Anythingsaid during these visits is not privileged and can be used later by theFein8.aEmlPar1=0429112Workspace Webmail Printgovernment in a court-martial proceeding. Official visitors are for the purpose of conducting official5 government business, either on behalf of the detainee or in the interest3 of justice.visit a detainee at any time during normal working hours.Official visits may be authorized by the Brig Officer toThe officialvisits are considered privileged, and are not subject to recording ormonitoring. The Brig's rules and regulations identify the followingindividuals as qualifying for official visits:a) Military officials.b) Civilian officials.c) The President or Vice President of the United States.d) Members of Congress of the United States.e) The Attorney General of the United States and Regional Offices of. the Attorney General.if)The Judge Advocate General of each military service or his or herrepresentative.g) Prisoner's Defense Counsel or any military or civilian attorney ofErecord.h) Any attorney listed in professional or other directories or anattorney's representative.i) Prisoner's clergyman when approved by the chaplain.Given the difference between authorized and official visits, PFC Manningdoes not want to waive his entitlement to have a privileged conversationwith Congressman Kucinich. You should know, that Amnesty Internationalis also making a request for an official visit as well as Mr. JuanMendez, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and othercruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.I have recommended that each of the above individuals contact thefacility directly to arrange for an official visit. I am hoping thatyou will indeed ensure that the Quantico Brig honors its own rules andregulations.-Break-Thank you for the update. I am glad to hear that you have identified afor the defense team.I -Break-Good to hear the DNA samples are not being lost.?/29/12Workspace Webmail Print-Break- 23932will the CA take action on the mitigation expert request??Break-when do you anticipate a government discovery response??Break?Can you request that the unit obtain a new ACU uniform for PFC Manning?His current uniform is not acceptable. It is a mixture of a fireresistant bottom and a summer weight top and looks soiled. PFC Manningneeds a new patrol cap - Size 7 with PFC insignia sewed on and one"Manning" name tape. Additionally he needs 1 xshort/xsmall ACU top and1 xshort/xsmall ACU bottom. Finally, he needs 1 pair of boots size 7regular. Lastly, does the unit have his Class As?Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs45 North Main Street, 5th FloorFall River, MA 02729Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (598) 689-9282Notice: This transmission, including attachments, maycontain confidential attorney?c1ient information and is intended for theperson(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient,please notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorizeddisclosure, copying or use of this information may be unlawful and is-- Original Message Subject: US v. PFC BM (Update)From: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA Fein&aEmlPar1=0/29/12 Workspace Webmail PrintDate: Thu, March 31, 2911 8:29 am 33333To: Cc: "Matthew kemkes" "Morrow JoDean,cm usA sw . "Haberland,John CPT MIL "Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA David, Representative Kucinich has directly asked the Brig whether hecan visit PFCBM. As we passed to you before, if PFC BM would like to visit?with RepKucinich, then he needs to add him to his visitation list and theBrig willaccommodate, just like with all other visitors. The purpose ofthis email isto ensure that you and your client know of his request so thatthe personaldecision may be made whether to allow Rep Kucinich to visit withyour client.If willing, could you please let me know whether PFC BM intendsto add RepKucinich to his visitor log, so that we can properly notify hisoffice.Again, this is PFC personal decision and we will ensure theBrigrules/regulations are followed for any visitors, including RepKucinich.-Break-we identified a to present to the conveningauthority. Ifapproved, this doc will be based from Quantico, MCB and should bequiteconvenient for the defense team.-Break-There will be no DNA collection. PFC BM's DNA was collectedpreviously.v/rAshden Workspace Webmail Print23934Ashden FeinCPT, JACopyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.Fein&aEmlPart=0-/29/12Print Qlose WindowSir,- Manning.Arlic|e 138&aEmlPart=0Workspace Webmail Print23935RE: Article 138 ucou cmistopner Wed, Mar 30. 2011 5:34 pmsmime.p7sSubject:From:Date:To:Attach:I have no info regarding Army plans for movement of your client. The recent protest and other issueshave delayed the final GCMCA action on the 138 complaint. As soon as that is finalized. I will ensure youget a copy.VRLtCo| GreerMCBQ SJAFrom: Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 10:16To: Greer Christopher Subject: Article 138LTC Greer,I have tried to reach you on your phone regarding the Article 138. I know that you may not have anexact date, but I was wondering if you could give me a time line for the final action. Also, have you heardanything regarding a potential move of my client from Quantico to the PTC section at Fort Leavenworth?Thank you in advance for your response.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs45 North Main Street, 5th FloorFall River, MA 02720Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 689-9282?Confidentiality 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 intendedrecipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or use of thisinformation may be unlawful and is Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved../29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23936Print Close WindowSubject: Official VisitsFrom: Date: Fri, Apr 01,2011 9:09 am"Greer "Pau| Bouchard" "Ashden Fein"-, "John Haberland""ll| Morrow"r, "Monica Carlile"Cc:Lt. Col. Greer,I have been informed by Congressman Kucinich's office and by AmnestyInternational that they have been told by your office they do not qualify for anofficial visit. Instead, they are being directed to request to be added to PFCManning's "authorized" visitors list. Additionally, Congressman Kucinich'soffice is being told that the Brig Order that his office is referencing does notexist. I have seen Brig Order P16401C, dated 1 July 2010. This order clearlyprovides for both authorized and official visits.Under Brig Order P1640.1C, paragraph 3.17, there are two types of visitors fora detainee, authorized and official.1) Authorized visitors are required to be added by the detainee and approvedby the Quantico Brig. Any person added to the authorized visitors list mayvisit the detainee on any Saturday or Sunday between the hours of 12:00 and3:00 p.m. These visits are monitored by the Brig. The Brig requires the visitsto take place in a no-contact booth for any detainee held in Maximum Custody.The doors to the booth must remain open and the entire visit will be recordedby the Brig. Anything said during these visits is not privileged and can beused later by the government in a court-martial proceeding.2) Official visitors are for the purpose of conducting official governmentbusiness, either on behalf of the detainee or in the interest of justice. Officialvisits may be authorized by the Brig Officer to visit a detainee at any timeduring normal working hours. The official visits are considered privileged, andare not subject to recording or monitoring. The Brig's rules and regulationsidentify the following individuals as qualifying for official visits:a) Military officials.b) Civilian officials.c) The President or Vice President of the United States.d) Members of Congress of the United States.e) The Attorney General of the United States and Regional Offices of theAttorney General.f) The Judge Advocate General of each military service or his or her- Manning.Article representative. Workspace Webmail Print23937g) Prisoner's Defense Counsel or anv militarv or civilian attorney of record.h) Any attorney listed in professional or other directories or an attorney'srepresentative.i) Prisoner's clergyman when approved by the chaplain.Given the difference between authorized and official visits, PFC Manning doesnot want to waive his entitlement to have a privileged conversation withI Congressman Kucinich, Amnesty International, and Mr. Juan Mendez, theUnited Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment or punishment. Additionally, under the Brig Rules, noneof the above individuals would qualify as an authorized visitor. Paragraph 3.17a of the Brig Order states "[A]uthorized visitors include the prisonersimmediate family (spouse, children, parents, brothers, sisters or guardians) or1 anyone who has established a proper relationship with the prisoner prior toconfinement." (emphasis added). As such, even if PFC Manning wanted toadd the above individuals on his visitor's list, he could not do so.I request that this matter be addressed as soon as possible, and thatnecessary arrangements are made for Congressman Kucinich's visit as well asfor representatives from Amnesty International and from the United Nations.Please feel free to call me if you have any questions.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs11 South Angell Street, #317Providence, RI 02906Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 689-9282Notice: This transmission, including attachments, maycontain confidential attorney?c|ient information and is intended for theperson(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, pleasenotify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or- Manning.Artic|e use of this information may be unlawful and is Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.-/29/12 Workspace Webrnail Print23938Erin; I Win Subject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Update)From: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIMDW Date: Thu. Apr 07, 2011 7:00 pmTo: "Matthew kemkes"JFHQ-NCRIM DW "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA>1-, "Habe rland, John CPT MIL . "Carlile, Monica SFC USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW Cc:Attach: Unclassified Discovery (011449-011462) (ManningB).pdfsmime.p7sDavid.Attached is the part of the Brig's response to the Art 138. Because new matters were alleged in PFCBM's rebuttal, they bifurcated the original Art 138 and now initiated another redress process on the newmatters. This was supposed to be served on your client today.1. Our interpretation is the Government's interpretation, to include the SJA and the Brig. We areconfused by your interpretation and welcome a phone conversation to discuss this issue.2. Response to your We currently estimate the OCA's to be ?nished providing their consent in thenext two weeks.v/rAshdenAshden FeinCPT. JA--??-Original Message--?From: Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 9:29 PMTo: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJACc: Matthew kemkes; Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA Haberland.John CPT MIL Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA JFHQ-SJASubject: [Suspected RE: US v. PFC BM (Update)Importance: LowAshden,1. Thank you for your reply. is the interpretation of the Brig Order the MDW SJA's interpretation, theQuantico Brig's interpretation, or simply your interpretation?The sentence that you gloss over in your reply is actually the critical one from the Brig Order. ThisFein&aEmlPar1=0-.?29l12Workspace Webmail Printsentence states that "[v]isits from lawyers, military officials, civilian officials, or anyone listed as2a939. privileged correspondence in paragraph 3.17f of this regulation, having official business to conduct areconsidered official (Emphasis added). Congressman Kucinich, Mr. Juan Mendez from the UnitedNations, and any representative from Amnesty International would clearly fall within the scope ofindividuals identified in paragraph 3.17f and are therefore deemed to be official visits under the BrigOrder.Under the interpretation advanced in your previous message, a member of Congress is conducting an"official" visit only if he is conducting "official government business" and a member of a non-governmentorganization is not "official" as they are not conducting "government business." Besides being anperfunctory argument without support under the Brig Order, it is also one that is easily nullified by usingthe example of a civilian attorney. Paragraph 3.17f states that a "civilian attorney of record" is deemedto be an official visit. A civilian attorney is clearly a non?government entity and as such is not conducting- "official government business." This clearly belies any attempt to argue official visits are limited in theway that you suggest.Moreover, official visits are clearly privileged under the Brig Order. While section 3.17f speaks to mailcorrespondence being privileged, it must follow that oral communications are also privileged. It would notmake sense that a detainee would enjoy the protection of a privileged communication from an individuallisted in paragraph 3.17f if the correspondence came by way of mail as opposed to an in?personconversation with the same individual.With regards to the standing order dated 16 September 2010, his failure to recognize otherindividuals who are entitled by the Brig Order to have a privileged conversation is not dispositive. Thei order is unenforceable given the fact it would authorize the recording of privileged conversations.Like\M'se, the government's concern surrounding PFC BM's right to counsel is misplaced. Mental healthproviders and brig chaplains are able to speak with PFC BM \M'thout coordination with civilian counsel.As long as the conversations are privileged, the government's concern would seem unwarranted.Given the above, I request that you clarify the Quantico Brig?s official position on this issue.2. Thank you for notifying the defense of LCDR Carrie Kennedy's appointment as a member of thedefense team.3. Understood.4. If I cannot obtain information independently, lvvill certainly direct my RFI to the prosecution.5. Thank you.-/29/12 Workspace Webmail it Print6. I look forward to the discovery responses. 239407. Thank you for the update. Do you have an estimated date for the OCA's consent for you to turn overthe pieces of evidence and the derivative reports?Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs11 South Angell Street, #317Providence, RI 02906Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 689-9282Notice: This transmission, including attachments, may contain con?dential attorney-client information and is intended for the person(s) or company named. If you are not the intendedrecipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or use of thisinformation may be unlawful and is -- Original Message Subject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Update)From: ?Fein, Ashden CPT USA Date: Tue, April 05, 2011 10:08 pmTo: Cc: "Matthew kemkes" CPT USA "Morrow Ill, JoDean, "Haberland.John CPT MIL "Car|i|e, Monica L. SFC USA David,The purpose of this email is to update you on different issues we have discussed over the past week.Please view this email in format."1. Brig Visitors.While we understand your view of the Brig Order, we respectfully disagree with your interpretation of theattached relevant portion of the Brig Order with regard to visitation.While you correctly recite what an "authorized" visitor is, an ??official?' visit is "for the purpose ofconducting official government business, either on behalf of the prisoner or in the interest ofjustice,"see para 3.17b. The next sentence simply states that ?lawyers, military officials, civilian officials, oranyone listed as a privileged correspondence in para 3.17f. . . having official business to conduct areconsidered of?cial visits? (emphasis added) and may visit at any time during normal working hours,subject to authorization by the Commanding Officer. Critical is the next sentence, "Al| prisoners will berequired to see official military visitor(s)? (emphasis added). Therefore, an official visit to the brig by a-/29/12arm ISubject:From:Date:To:Cc:Attach:David,Workspace Webmail Print23941Close WindowUS v. PFC BM (Discovery 011463-011573) 1 of 3"Fein, Ashden CPT USA JFHQ-NCRIM ow Sat, Apr 09, 2011 11:43 amatthew ke mkes"JFHQ-NCRIM DW -, "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA -, "Haberland, John CPT MIL "Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW -, "Feito, Beatriz SGT USA JFHQ- NCRIM DWUnclassified Discovery (011463-011573) (M Good morning. Attached to this email and the subsequent two emails is theUSMC GCMCA memo to SecNav in reference to the original Art 138 complaint.PFC BM was served this document yesterday. We are completing the discoveryrequests this weekend and lexpect to provide additional discovery and theresponses by COB Monday.v/rAshdenAshden FeinCPT, JACopyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.Fein&aEmlPar1=0 Workspace Webmail Print 23942Subject: Re: [Suspected Movement of ManningFrom: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA Date: Tue, Apr 19, 2011 4:08 pmTo: David. I am ?nding out what is going on. lwill call asap when I get an update.Ashden FeinCPT, JAFrom: To: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJACc: Matthew kemkes; Morrow JoDean, CPT USA Bouchard, PaulCPT USCENTCOM USF-I Haberland,John CPT MIL USACarlile, Monica L. SFC USA Feito,Beatriz SGT USA JFHQ- SJASent: Tue Apr 19 15:53:07 2011Subject: [Suspected Movement of ManningAshden,Please call me when you receive this message.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs11 South Angeli Street, #317Providence, RI 02906Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 689-9282Notice: This transmission, including attachments, maycontain confidential attomey-client information and is intended for theperson(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, pleasenotify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying oruse of this information may be unlawful and is -- Original Message Subject: RE: US v. PFC BM (Discovery)From: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA Fein&aEmlPart=0./29/12 Workspace Webmaii .: Print23943Print Close WindowSubject: RE: [Suspected RequestFrom: "Fein, Ashden CPT USA DW i Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 9:38 amTo: "Matthew ke mke s"DW CPT USCENTCOM USF-I "Haberland, John CPT MIL "Carlile, Monica L. SFC USA JFHQ-NCRIM DW "Feito, Beatriz SGT USA JFHQ- NCRIM DW "Morrow Ill, JoDean, CPT USA"Bouchard, Paul Cc:Attach: smime.p7sDavid,We will start working the issues ASAP. Please route your requests through us,so that we may ensure the meeting is scheduled and the right resourcing isavailable. Are you planning on going alone, or with members of the defenseteam?V/rAshdenAshden FeinCPT, JAFrom: Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 9:37 AMTo: Fein, Ashden CPT USA SJACc: Matthew kemkes; Morrow JoDean, CPT USA Bouchard,Paul CPT USCENTCOM USF-I Haber|and.John CPT MILCarlile. Monica L. SFC USA Feito, Beatriz SGT USA JFHQ-SJASubject: [Suspected RequestImportance: LowAshden.Please see the attached request for a replacement Also, doyou know how the move will affect obtaining new set of ACUs for PFC Manning?Finally, I have contacted the JRCF commander, LTC Dawn Hilton, to request tosee PFC Manning on the 27th and 28th of April. I have not yet heard back fromher, but I would appreciate any assistance that the government could offer infacilitating such a visit.Best,DavidFein&aEmlPart=0./29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23944Print I CLose WindowSubject: RE: Art 138 (II)From: Date: Wed, Apr 20, 2011 1:16 pmTo: "Greer LtCol Christopher LtCo|. Greer,Please continue with the processing of both 138 complaints. Even though therequested relief may be mooted by the transfer, I believe the actions shouldnonetheless be reviewed by the GCMCA and Secretary Mabus.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs11 South Angell Street, #317. Providence, RI 02906Office: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 689-9282. Notice: This transmission, including attachments, maycontain confidential attomey-client information and is intended for theperson(s) or company named. If you are not the intended recipient, pleasenotify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure, copying oruse of this information may be unlawful and is -- Original Message Subject: Art 138 (II)From: "Greer LtCol Christopher Date: Wed, April 20, 2011 12:57 pmTo: Mr Coombs,Does your client wish to proceed on the second Art 138 complaint?This is the issue regarding removal of underwear. Obviously therequested redress has been mooted by the transfer of your client. Irecognize that issue may well become a trial motion but do notbelieve a 138 complaint is necessary to preserve this issue for trial.We will process the complaint unless you provide us written notice ofwithdrawal.- Manning.Article ?l38&aEmlPart=O-/29/12Workspace Webmail PrintThank YouCHRIS GREERLtCo|, USMCSJA, MCB QuanticoCopyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.- Manning.Artic|e 23945-/29/12 Workspace Webmail 2: Print. 23946Print I Close WindowSubject: Second 138 complaintFrom: "Greer LtCo| Christopher Date: Fri, Jun 03, 2011 10:04 amTo: Attach: AR-M 355N_20110603_111228.pdfsmime.p7sSir,Attached is the package giving your client an opportunity to rebut the respondent's endorsement on hissecond article 138 complaint. lam having this document delivered to your client in the PCP but I imaginehe will not get it until sometime next week as I am sending it through the trial team. I wanted to be sureyou had it so if your client had questions, you would already have seen it and can advise him.To ensure I have a record of delivery, Iask that your client sign the acknowledgment. lknowwediscussed whether he wanted to withdraw the complaint. I included an election in case he wanted towithdraw this complaint regarding the underwear.The response, if any, should be routed to the MCBQ Commander via the C0 of the Leavenworth facilityand CWO2 Barnes, the respondent. If there is no response, please let me know so I can work theGCMCA report and forward on the SECNAV.The ?rst complaint is still pending at the SECNAV level.CHRIS GREERLtCol, USMCSJA, MCB Quantico Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.- Manning.Ar1icle ~/29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23947Print Cloj_e WindowSubject: RE: Second Art 138 ComplaintFrom: "Greer LtCol Christopher Date: Thu, Jun 23, 2011 7:17 amTo: Attach: smime.p7sThanks for the quick response.VfLtCol GreerMCBQ SJAFrom: Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 20:38To: Greer LtCol Christopher Subject: RE: Second Art 138 ComplaintLtCol Greer,lam sorry for not sending you notification of PFC Manning's decision. He does not intend to submit anadditional rebuttal to the 6 June matters. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions.Best,DavidDavid E. Coombs, Esq.Law Office of David E. Coombs11 South Angell Street, #317Providence, RI 02906Of?ce: 1-800-588-4156Fax: (508) 689-9282?Confidentiality Notice: This transmission, including attachments, may contain con?dential attorney-client information and is intended for the person(s) or company named. If you are not the intendedrecipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. Unauthorized disclosure. copying or use of thisinformation may be unlawful and is prohibited.*?-- Original Message Subject: Second Art 138 ComplaintFrom: "Greer LtCol Christopher Date: Wed, June 22,2011 6:32 pmTo: Mr Coombs,- Manning.Article 138&aEmlPart=O 11-/29/12 Workspace Webmail Print23943Does your client intend to submit a rebuttal to the matters served on him 6 June? Per the JAGMAN. hehad 10 working days to submit a rebuttal. I have received no information regarding a rebuttal from youor via his chain of command. The 10 working day period expired on 20 June.If he does not intend to submit a rebuttal, Iwill complete the report and forward to SECNAV.CHRIS GREERLtCo|, USMCSJA, MCB Quantico Copyright 2003-2012. All rights reserved.- Manning.Artic|e 138&aEmlPart=0 ATTACHMENT 342394923950c. Prisoners may not join clubs, enter lotteries or conlcsl. operate a business, or incuradditional personal debt while in confinemeDlJoiHing mcmbcrsltip clubs that sliip merchandise on crcdil is proliibiicd.3.14. PX C A L L S : PX calls arcsclitrdiilwJ for the I " and 3"* Wednesdays ofltic moiilli.Prisoners on a pay status w i l l utilize the brig generated fomi I64».'I3 to purcliase goods. TheDD Fonn 504 is utilized forprisoneis on a non-pay status Tlic 1" Wednesday ofthe mom I; isreserved for prisoners on a pay and non-pay status to purcliase items from the PX The 3"'Wednesday of llic month is reserved for pay status prisoners only. PX fonns musi be completedand legible. When ordering items be specific or the item will not he procured. Specific item;may not be available, and unless an altcmaie ilcm is annotated on the fonn. no item w i l l beordered.3 I-^BARBERSHOP CAM-S: All prisoners in a pay status will receive a seivicc regulationhaircut once a week, normally on Tuesday at I 30(J. All prisoners nol on a pay status will receivea haircut every oilier week. Prisoners will not cut their own hair or have shaved heads. Hairewswill be ill accordance with seivice regulations. Prisoner's hair w i l l be neatly groomed and willnot present an CKircmc, ragged or unkempt appearance Post trial prisoners will receive (hefacility service regulation haircut.3.IC1. ^'ALUAHLES FVCQ All requests conceming money or valuables w i l l be submitted ona OD I-onn 510 tothe Valuables NCO.3.1 7. CORRESPONDENCE ANO V I S I T A T I O N : Conrmcment should not stop a prisonerfrom keeping in contact witli members of ilicir immediate family and auihonzcd visitors via mailor personal visits. Each prisoner's family will be interested in their progress and concernedabout their well-being ajid morale. Morale is a two way street, and family mcinbere need to beencouraged just as much as the prisoner Prisoners arc strongly urged lo correspond and arrangevisits. Prisoners arc encouraged lo place all poienliat visitors or their visitor list even if thechance of llieir visiting is remote. In ihc event during your conliiiemenl you wish lo addadditional people to the visitation list you must submit a DD 1 orm 51U with name, relationship,age. and address to ihe Admin Chief The following guidelines are applicable:a. AuHiofizcd: Nn limitations w i l l be imposed as to the number of persons who mayvisit with a prisoner, except as to maintain security, control, or 10 exclude personsdisapproved by ihc Commanding Officer for cause. Authorized visitors include theprisoner's immediate family (spouse, children, parents, brotliers. sisters or gnnrdianslor ajiyonc who has established a proper relationship wiili the pnsoncf prior to himbeing confmed.b Qgjcial: These visils are for tlie pur^iose of conducting oflicial govemmentbusiness, either on behalfof the prisoner or in ilit interest ofjustice Visits fiomlawyers, mililar\' officials, civilian officials, or anyone listed as a privilegedcorrespondence in paragraph 3.l7f of Hits rt^tilaiion. having official business loconduct are considered oflicial visits and may be authorized by the Commanding23951Officer to visit at any lime during norma! working hours All prisoners will berequired to see oflicial miliiaty visiiorfs). Refusal to visit wiili oflicial militaryvisitors will be subject lo disciplinary action.Command Visits: Command Visits arc normally conducted on Thursday's ofeach week and are considered official visits Prisoners do not have the right lo refusesuch visits. Refusal to do so may be subjecl to a disciplinary report The purpose ofthese visits are designed to maintain continued contact through a rcprcscnlaiivc withthe parent command and to provide wliaievcr assistance, e.g., adminislraiivc. neededwhile the seivice member is confined.Chaplain Visits. Visils from either the Brig Chaplain or theprisoner's Command Chaplain is usually reserved for Thursday's.However, a prisoner desiring or requesting to see a chaplain maydo so via DD Konti 5IU at any lime provided the chaplain isavailable.2. Spt.'c:igl yi,p;is: Visits that cait take place during iionnal andoutside normal visiting lioias. Prisoners may request special visitstroEii authorized visitors outside the normal visitation hours, A DDForm 5 1 * will be submitted lo the Brig Supervisor withinfonnation conceming the parties visiting, i.e., name, relationship,time atid dale of visit, ages, and where ihcy are coming from Thisrequest must be submitted withinhours prior to the visit furapproval. Consideration for such visils will include ihc distancetraveled.rr,iv,i,f.cgcd Correspondence: All incoming and outgoing correspondence fmaillbetween a prisoner and the following is privileged and not subject to inspectionunless reasonable doubi exists as to the correspondence being bona fide:a. The President or Vice Picsideiit of (he United States.b. Members ofCongress of the United States.c The Alionicy General of the United States and RegionalOfTicciof the Attorney General.d. The Judge Advocate General ofeach inilitarj-setvice orhis/her representatives.e. Prisoners Defense Counsel or any military/civilian aliontcyof record.r Any attorney listed in professional or oilier directories or ajiattorney s representative,g. Prisoner's clergyman, w lien approved by the chaplainAny documentation of a "privileged" nature will be subject to inspection duringsearches. If a prisoner desires tn ensure privacy, the material may be destroyed,mailed out. or stored with personal property in the Valuables Office, provided ATTACHMENT 3523953UNITED STATES MARINE CORt.tj£^^/vT^&^TODcCOMBJi23YSECURITY BATTALIONMARINE CORPS BASEQUANTICO, V I R G I N I A 22134INREFLYREFERTO:B275OIC1 Dec 10From:To:O f f i c e r i n Charge, P r e - T r i a l ConfinementO f f i c e o f r n e R e g i m e n t a l Judge A d v o c a t eSrrtaj:rRnjVUiiNXXON ucRef:INOUKY( t ^ i ) b'xAxuaFacilityRtisfONSt(a) SECNAVINST 1640.9c[ OIX'lv^Oi D "i U .DQuestion:1.MAX Custody procedures. I have been l o o k i n g a t the r e g u l a t i o nr e g a r d i n g MAX custody detainees and t h e i r movement and I have a fewq u e s t i o n s . The u n i f o r m s e c t i o n t a l k s about detainees being moved i nt h e u n i f o r m o f t h e i r s e r v i c e . Does t h i s mean t h a t PFC Marwning shouldbe moved i n ACU's r a t h e r than i n t h e p r i s o n uniform?I f t h e detaineesshould remain i n t h e i r detainee u n i f o r m then do we have another Armyd e t a i n e e where we adhered t o these standards.I would l i k e t o havesome examples t o c i t e t o Defense f o r t h e reasons t h a t we have t o movePFC Manning i n h i s detainee u n i f o r m and why h i s r e s t r a i n t s have t oremain on.Answer:(la)No, i t does n o t mean t h a t PFC Manning s h o u l d be t r a n s p o r t e d i nt h e ACU; b o t h p r e - t r i a l and post t r i a l inmates w i l l be housed andt r a n s p o r t e d according t o t h a t confinement f a c i l i t y o p e r a t i n g under t h eOrders and D i r e c t i v e s o f t h e r e f e r e n c e s .- SECNAVINST 1640.9C par.4201. pg 4-9. (5) Person's u n i f o r m o u t s i d e aNavy confinement f a c i l i t y s h a l l n o t i d e n t i f y t h e i n d i v i d u a l as ap r i s o n e r . P r i s o n e r s c o n f i n e d i n Marine Corps confinement f a c i l i t i e ss h a l l wear t h e s t a n d a r d i z e d p r i s o n e r u n i f o r m p e r MCO 1640.5B.- MCO 1640.5B 1. Purpose. To e s t a b l i s h procedures f o r wearing t h es t a n d a r d i z e d p r i s o n e r u n i f o r m by p r e t r i a l and p o s t - t r i a l p r i s o n e r sc o n f i n e d i n Marine Corps b r i g s .- P a r . ( 5 ) . P o l i c y - under s e c t i o n s (a) and ( f )- ( a ) . A l l p r e t r i a l and p o s t - t r i a l p r i s o n e r s i n a l l custody grades, t oi n c l u d e i n s t a l l a t i o n custody, s h a l l wear t h e s t a n d a r d i z e d p r i s o n e runiform.- ( f ) . The p r i s o n e r uniforms w i l l be worn t o a l l a c t i v i t i e s w i t h t h ee x c e p t i o n o f c o u r t s - m a r t i a l , c i v i l h e a r i n g s , and when being2tll^^:^^^V^^^IO^1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ (^01)23954t r a n s f e r r e d t o o t h e r confinement f a c i l i t i e s , a t which time t h ea p p r o p r i a t e seasonal u n i f o r m o r c i v i l i a n a t t i r e , dependent ond i s c h a r g e s t a t u s , s h a l l be worn.Restraints:- ^ECNA^ 1640^9C 4201,.- (5) MAX p r i s o n e r s s h a l l wear r e s t r a i n t s a t a l l times when o u t s i d et h e maximum-security area and be e s c o r t e d by a t l e a s t two e s c o r t s(confinement f a c i l i t y s t a f f or c e r t i f i e d e s c o r t s , p e r a r t i c l e 7406).- (6) On a case-by-case b a s i s , t h e COBOICBCPOIC may a u t h o r i z ea d d i t i o n a l r e s t r a i n t f o r movement o f s p e c i f i c MAX p r i s o n e r s . Am i l i t a r y ^udge may d i r e c t t h a t r e s t r a i n t s be removed f r o m a person i nt h e courtroom i f , i n t h i s fudge's o p i n i o n , such r e s t r a i n t i s n o tnecessary. I n a l l cases, t h e l i m i t a t i o n s o f a r t i c l e 1102 o f r e f e r e n c e(b) s h a l l be observed.Question:2. D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f POI s t a t u s . Defense has made a reguest t h a t PFCManning 's s t a t u s be reduced from POI t o some o t h e r s t a t u s where he i sa b l e t o have more time o u t s i d e o r workout i n h i s c e l l .Myu n d e r s t a n d i n g i s t h a t h i s s t a t u s d e t e r m i n a t i o n i s made based on a l i s tof f a c t o r s i n c l u d i n g h i s charges, m e n t a l h e a l t h and b e h a v i o r .sincet h e Defense has made t h e reguest t o lower h i s s t a t u s i t i s somethingt h a t we have t o a t l e a s t address. I s t h e r e a l e s s e r l e v e l o f POI t h a tPFC Manning c o u l d be moveo r o . i f r n e recommendarion o f r n e 8 r i gp e r s o n n e l i s t o have him remain on POI s t a t u s t h a t i s f i n e , we ^ustneed t o have i t addressed t o t h e Defense counsel.Ar^swer:There i s no subsequent l e v e l t o P r e v e n t i o n Of I n j u r y (POI); undert h e c o n d i t i o n s o f Detainee Manning's p r e v i o u s s u i c i d a l g e s t u r e and t h emost r e c e n t note o f behavior a b n o r m a l i t i e s , I have determined t h a tDet. Manning w i l l remain POI d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d and u n t i l f u r t h e re v a l u a t i o n . The s t a t u s o f POI g i v e s t h e f a c i l i t y commander t h ef l e x i b i l i t y o f t a k i n g t h e necessary p r e c a u t i o n s f o r an inmate w i t h t h ep o t e n t i a l t o harm themselves, b u t reduce t h e number o f r e s t r i c t i o n sp l a c e d on t h e i n d i v i d u a l . POI Status i s n o t a form o f punishment b u tr a t h e r a p r e c a u t i o n a r y measure.SECNAV 1640.9C - pg 4-14- a. Some p r i s o n e r s r e g u i r e a d d i t i o n a l s u p e r v i s i o n and a t t e n t i o n duer o p e r s o n a l i t y d i s o r d e r s , behavior a b n o r m a l i r i e s , r i s k o f s u i c i d e o rv i o l e n c e , or o t h e r c h a r a c t e r t r a i t s . I f r e g u i r e d t o preserve order,t h e BRl^ Os o r , i n t h e i r absence, t h e b r i g duty o f f i c e r s B d u t y b r i gsu^pervisors ^^ay a u t h o r i z e s p e c i a l g u a r t e r s f o r such p r i s o n e r s f^orpurposes o f c o n t r o l , p r e v e n t i o n o f i n j u r y t o themselves or o t h e r s , andt h e o r d e r l y and safe a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e confinement f a c i l i t y . ASubj:PREVENTIOJF INJURY(POI) STATUS RES23955NSEh e a r i n g t o d e t e r m i n e t h e need f o r c o n t i n u e d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s e g r e g a t i o no f t h e p r i s o n e r s h a l l be conducted. This h e a r i n g may be by board"a c t i o n o r by a member o f t h e confinement f a c i l i t y a p p o i n t e d i n w r i t i n gby t h e BRIG O, and a w r i t t e n recommendation t o t h e BRIG 0 w i l l bep r o v i d e d w i t h i n 72 hours o f t h e p r i s o n e r ' s e n t r y i n t o s e g r e g a t i o n .- d. P r i s o n e r s who have t h r e a t e n e d s u i c i d e o r have made a s u i c i d eg e s t u r e b u t a r e found f i t f o r confinement may be p l a c e d w i t h i n s p e c i a lq u a r t e r s under c o n t i n u o u s o b s e r v a t i o n w h i l e i n t h e c a t e g o r y o f s u i c i d er i s k . COBOICBCPOIC may d i r e c t removal o f p r i s o n e r ^ s c l o t h i n g whendeemed necessary. P r i s o n e r must be under o b s e r v a t i o n o f a s u p e r v i s o rof t h e same sex. Closed c i r c u i t t e l e v i s i o n may be i n s t a l l e d a t al i m i t e d number o f c e l l s f o r o b s e r v a t i o n , a l t h o u g h cross gendermonitoring i s not authorized.- SOP s e c t i o n 6004.CLASSIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT (CSA).- (e) P r e v e n t i o n o f I n j u r y (POI). Those p r i s o n e r s who have g i v e n ani n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e y i n t e n d o r are c o n t e m p l a t i n g harming themselves o ro t h e r s w i l l be a s s i g n e d Maximum Custody.3.Sunsums C a l l Logs. The defense counsel xs concejrnsd aboutPFC Manning's m e n t a l and p h y s i c a l h e a l t h i n r e l a t i o n t o h i s s m a l lamount o f t i m e o u t s i d e . I n o r d e r t o combat any p o t e n t i a l A r t i c l e 13-3 S2' -,.£3Tu_,. . 1 ..JWv-Zk-ta-VA1 4 1...,j _ j _ JVO4-^t-w..^^4kjt^o.-.t-'W^^y^ fV j_L. i i C1 ^ ^ ..._i_w.-jOi f Ct^ U ^ . r^ ^..V.^^vv i i C i *HlTPr^i. j_Manning went o u t s i d e and how l o n g he s t a y e d t h e r e . I know t h a t heu s u a l l y gets 20 m i n u t e s d a i l y b u t I need t o have t h e l o g s t h a t showthat.Answer:I w i l l approve t o p r o v i d e you access t o copies o f t h e logbooks.Please make t h i s r e q u e s t t h r o u g h t h e o f f i c i a l channel from t h e O f f i c eof t h e Regimental Judge Advocate t o Marine Corps Base, QuanticoCommanding O f f i c e r , v i a t h e CO o f S e c u r i t y B a t t a l i o n . W i t h t h i sa p p r o v a l , please c o o r d i n a t e w i t h me t o schedule t h e v i s i t andd i s s e m i n a t i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n . I a l s o ask t h a t you p r o v i d e a p a r a l e g a lo r c l e r k t o do t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t a s k o f making t h e a p p r o p r i a t ecopies. Eacn logbook covers a p e r i o d o f approx one monrh; due r o Der,Manning confinement l e n g t h , t h e p e r i o d covered would be approx f i v e(5) l o g books. T h i s t a s k w i l l r e q u i r e a s u b s t a n t i a l amount o f papert h u s t h e need f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s u p p l i e s f r o m your o f f i c e .^ . ^ iw^O-.QvAVERHART JR ATTACHMENT 3623957-- - . 4: mm.3- i -35 THE PERSON ,3 NAME OF. TITLEIIPURDOJE 0: H5 Reauzsr OF sr?wa mop.) OF Maxi MUM costogg :3 {1Tc)s,53- la. 515 D.uL?b Mb ueeumnam, mu 9'33. 4317 gm DEDT or MIL pa mew 3: nmsowen 1 I "j .r4 -Hf: -nm.u-MRNNIIUG. 55:5 92.. DNTERVIEW ~/ms In 01.7; - I N07 AUTHORIZED .?SIu;vr Ieusum. muwr cum: wakaner Mi 108. FORWARDEU IN.um -mu mmrew 0 DATE IWAS HELD WITH (mice. and unmet}! 0 DATE 31: REMARKS 54/0 5?/ind? 15/ 9 7? 12,313 '76 6: row? or; Par/for puore, mar/mu ante? z/Ind xgcaiuag 44+ 3% 71/91/11 non}/. [71 marwz aw: GRADE or CONFINEMEET .II ikjqmeg f. /5 7' DC PORN: 510, SE9 200? ManningB_43241ATTACHMENT 3723959Testimony of Professor Craig HaneySenate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, andHuman Rights Hearing on Sohtary ConfinementJune 19, 2012Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Graham, and distinguished membersof the Subcommittee: My name is Craig Haney. I am a Professor of Psychology atthe University of California, Santa Cruz, and someone who has been studying thepsychological effects of solitary confinement for well over 30 years. My academicinterest in prisons more generally began even earlier in my professional life. In19711 was one of the principal researchers in a widely publicized study that cameto be known as the "Stanford Prison Experiment." My colleagues and I placed acarefully screened group of psychologically healthy college students in a prisonlike environment, randomly assigning half to be guards, half prisoners. Weobserved with increasing concern and dismay as the behavior of the otherwisepsychologically healthy volunteers in our simulated prison rapidly deterioratedinto mistreatment and emotional breakdowns.^ When I began to study realprisons, examining and evaluating conditions of confinement in prison systemsthroughout the United States and in a number of foreign countries, I continued tobe guided by the early lesson of the Stanford Prison Experiment: prisons arepsychologically powerful places, ones that are capable of shaping andtransforming the thoughts and actions of the persons who enter them, often inunintended and adverse ways.' For example, see: C. Haney, Curtis Banks & Philip Zimbardo, Interpersonal Dynamics in aSimulated Prison, i International Journal of Criminology and Penology 69 (1973); and C. Haney& Philip Zimbardo, The Past and Future of U.S. Prison Policy: Twenty-five Years After theStanford Prison Experiment, 53 American Psychologist 70Q-727 (1998).23960Since that time,Ihave toured and inspectednumerous solitaryconfinement units across the country,in state prison systems fromMassachusetts to California,and the federal"supcrmax"inElorence, Colorado^AD^^.lhave conducted systematic psychological assessments of approximatelytooo isolated prisoners, most ofwhom have been confined in solitaryconfinement units for periods of years, and even decades, during which time theyhave been kept separate from other prisoners, and denied the opportunityto haveany normalhuman social contact or to engage in any meaningful socialinteraction.^The Historical Context.^Imentioned above,the increased use of isolated or solitaryconfinement in American prisons began in the late r97^s and earlyt9Sos.Inacertain sense, it representedareturntoalongdiscredited practice that thenation had abandonedacentury a g o . y o u may know,therewasatime in ourhistorywhenallprisonswereoperatedassolitaryconfinementunits,ornearlyso. However.as theU.S.Supreme Court noted in an tS^^ case. In re Medlev.bythe end of the t9^^century,solitary confinement had already come to be known asan "infamous punishment,"largely because,as the Court acknowledged:"^^^uch of my professional access to conditions of solitary confinement and to the large number ofprisoners and staff whomlhave interviewed has occurred in the context of constitutionallitigation in whichlhave been asked or appointed to help determine whether and howisolatedprisoners were being subjected to potentially cruel and unusual punishment. For example, see,^adridv.^ome^,S89F.Supp.u^^(1^0Cal.^995^^Rui^v.Johnson,37FSupp.2d855(S.O.Text999^Iwastheprincipalauthorofthe Brief ofProfessorsandPractitionersofPsychologyand Psychiatry As Amicus Curiae in Austinv.^illdnson,^^^ U.S.209(200^^.This work hasprovidedmewitharareopportunitynotonlytoconductindepthinspectionsofmanysolitaryconfinement units and to interview numerous prisoners and staff members who live and workthere,but also to review an extensive number ofprison documents, records,and files that pertainto the operation ofthe units themselves.23961considerable number of the prisoners ^insolitary^fell, after evenashortconfinement, intoasemifatuous condition, from which it was next to impossibleto arouse them, and others became violently insane^ others still, committedsuicide, while those who stood the ordeal betterwere not generally reformed andin most cases did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsec^uentservice to the community."^Indeed, the Court^sMedley opinion echoed observations that had beenmade even earlier by Alexisd^Tocc^ueville, who concluded thatsolitaryconfinement in ^^^ericanprisons"devours^its^victims incessantly andunmercifully^and noted that the "unfortunate creatures who submitted to ^it^wasted away,^^^and by Charles Dickens,who, although himselfno stranger toharsh and degrading conditions, termed solitary confinementa"dreadful"punishment that inflicted terrible psychic pain that "none but the sufferersthemselves can fathom, and which no man hasaright to inflict upon his fellowcreatures."^Iwishlcouldsaythat the nation^sreturn to this long discredited practicewas occasioned by significant advances in the waythat solitary confinement isnow implemented, orthat new psychological insights had emerged to lessenpreviously widespread concerns about its damaging effects.Icannot.Instead,Ibelieve the renewed use oflongterm solitary confinement is the result of theconfluence ofthree unfortunate trends^the era of"mass imprisonment" thatbegan in the mid t970s and produced widespread prison overcrowding, the shiftin responsibilityfor housing the mentally ill to the nation^sprison systems, and3 In re Medley, 134 U.S. 160,168 (1890).4 Quoted in Torsten Eriksson, The Reformers, An Historical Survey of Pioneer Experiments in theTreatment of Criminals. New York: Elsevier (1976), at 49.5 Charles Dickens, American Notes for General Circulation. London: Chapman and Hall (1842), at 119-20.23962the abandonment of the rehabilitative ideal and its corresponding mandate toprovide prison programming and treatment. The renewed widespread use ofsolitary confinement emerged as an administrative stop gap^anill advised butexpedient measure to keep the resulting and potentially very problematic prisondynamics in check.Ibelieve it has become increasingly clear that this approach toprison management has created far more problems than it solved.The Conditions of Solitary ConfinementIshould acknowledge that the term "solitary confinement^^ isaterm of artin corrections. Solitary or isolated confinement goes byavariety of names in U.S.prisons^Security Housing, administrative Segregation, Close Management, HighSecurity,Closed Cell Restriction, and so on.^ut the units all have in common thefact that the prisoners who are housed inside them are confined on average 23hoursaday in typically windowless or nearly windowless cells that commonlyrange in dimension fromto S^ square feet. The ones on the smaller side ofthis range are roughly the size ofakingsized bed, one that containsabunk,atoilet and sink, and all of the prisoner^sworldly possessions. Thus, prisoners insolitary confinement sleep, eat, and defecate in their cells, in spaces that are nomore thanafew feet apart from one another.beyond the physical limitations and procedural prohibitions that are centralto solitary confinement units, these places must be "lived in,"typically onalongterm basis. Reflect foramoment on whatasmall space that is not much largerthanakingsizedbedlooks, smells, and feels like when someone has lived in itfor 23 hoursaday,day after day,for years on end. Property is strewn around,stored in whatever makeshift way possible, clothes and bedding soiled fromrecent use sit in one or another corner or on the floor, the residue of recent meals23963(^thatare eaten withinafew feet of an open toilet^here and there, on the floor,bunk, or elsewhere in the cell.^entilation is often substandard in these units, sothat odors linger,and the air is sometimes heavy and dank. In some isolationunits, prisoners are given only small amounts of cleaning materials^a Dixie cuporso of cleanser^onceaweek, making the cells especially difficult to keep clean.Inside their cells, units, and "yards,"isolated prisoners are surrounded bynothing but concrete, steel, cinderblock, and metal fencing^often gray orfadedpastel, drab and sometimes peeling paint, dingy,worn floors.There is no timewhen they escape from these barren "industrial"environments.Manyprisonerssit back on their bunks, look around atwhat has become the sum total of theirentire lives, hemmed in bythe tiny space that surrounds them and, notsurprisingly,become deeply despondent.virtually all of the solitary confinement units with whichlam familiarprohibit contact visits of any kind, even legal visits. This means that prisoners goforyears^in some cases, for decades^never touching another human being withaffection. Indeed, the only regular "interactions" that prisoners housed in theseunits routinely have occur when correctional officers push food trays through theslots on their doors two or three timesaday in order to feed them. The only formof actual physical "touching" they experience takes place when they are beingplaced in mechanical restraints^leg irons, belly chains, and the like^inaprocedure that begins even before their cell doors are opened, and which is doneevery time they are taken out of their cells by correctional staff, on the relativelyinfrequent occasions when this occurs.When prisoners in solitary confinement or "lockup"units leave their cellsfor what is, typically,an average of one houraday,it is usually to go toasocalled"yard."Isay"socalled"because the "yard" in most of these units bears norelationship to the image this word ordinarily conjures. Instead, the yard often23964consists ofametal cage, sitting atopaslab of concrete or asphalt or, in the case ofCalifornia^sPelican^ay,aconcreteenclosed pen, one surrounded by high solidwalls that prevent anyview ofthe outside world. Eederal Judge TheltonHenderson, who presided overalandmark case examining conditions ofconfinement atthe Pelican ^ay Security Housing Unit or "SHU,"noted that theimage of prisoners trying to exercise in these concrete pens^their only regularopportunityto be out oftheir windowless cells each day^was"hauntingly similarto that of caged felines pacing inazoo."^Itis an apt description thatunfortunately applies to many prisoners in many such"yards"around thecountry.In fact, the haunting similarities to zoos are not limited merely to thenature of the yards^ one is hard pressed to name any other place in our societywhere sentient beings are housed and treated the ways that they are in solitaryconfinement.The emptiness and idleness that pervade most solitary confinement unitsare profound and enveloping. The prison typicallyprovides the prisoners in theseunits with literally nothing meaningful to do. That emptiness, when combinedwith the total lack of meaningful social contact, has led some prisoners intoaprofoundlevel of what might be called"ontologicalinsecurity"^they are not surethat they exist and, if they do, exactly who they are.^number of prisoners havetold me over the years that they actually have precipitated confrontations withprison staff members^that sometimes result in brutal"cell extractions"^ in orderto reaffirm their existence.The Makeup of Solitary Confinement Units6 Madrid, supra note 2, at 1229.23965youare no doubt wondering who is confined in these units. That is,whatdoesaprisonerhavetodoinordertobehousedinsuchaplace7Infact,someofthe prisoners have done very serious things, including assaulting other prisonersor even staff members^ some have even committed in prison homicides.However,in most isolation units these prisoners are the exception rather than therule.^numberofprisoners are in solitary confinement for having committed anunacceptably high number of minor offenses.even larger number are housedthere because they are alleged to be prison gang members or associates, anoffense that, in and ofitself, can result in indefinite solitary confinement, eventhough the prisoners in c^uestion may not have engaged in any overt ruleviolations other than their alleged connection to the gang, and may remainentirely free of disciplinary writeups during the manyyears of their indefiniteisolation, ^legations of gang membership are inherently subjective and can beunreliable. Prisoners who are erroneously classified in this way are hard pressedto establish facts and may be confined in isolation on this incorrect basisindefinitely.^In addition, there are two very problematic but little publicized facts aboutthe group ofprisoners who are housed inside our nation^ssolitary confinementunits. The first is thatashockingly high percentage of them are mentally ill,andoften profoundly so. In some cases, the mental illness was pre existing and mayeven be the primary cause ofthe disciplinary infraction that brought them to thesolitary confinement unit in the first place. In other instances, however, the signsand symptoms of mental illness appear to have emerged only after the prisoner'sterm in solitary confinement began. Studies indicate that approximatelyathird of7 For example, see: Erica Goode, Fighting a Drawn-Out Battle Against Solitary Confinement, NewYork Times, March 30, 2012. [available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/31/us/battles-tochange-prison-policy-of-solitary-confinement.html?pagewanted=all]23966the prisoners in solitary confinement units suffer from mental illness,^but insome units the figure is higher^halfor more.approximatelyofall prisonsuicides occur in solitary confinement units.^The other very troublesome but rarely acknowledged fact about solitaryconfinement is that in many^urisdictions it appears to be reserveddisproportionately for prisoners of color. That is, the racial and ethnicoverrepresentation that occurs in our nation^sprisons generally is, in mypersonal experience, even more drastic inside solitary confinement units.Although these data are not systematically collected and made available foranalysis overall,astudythatlconductedinaSecurity Housing Unit in Californiaconfirmed that approximately 9^^ of the prisoners housed there were of color^i.e.,Eatinoor^rican^^erican^.The Psychological Effects of Solitary ConfinementWhat are the consec^uences of confinement in such harsh and deprivedplaces7^our colleague. Senator John McCain, characterized solitary confinementas"an awful thing,"notingthat:"It crushes your spirit and weakens your^Specifically,two separate studies have found that 29^ of the prisoners in solitary confinementsu^erfroma^^serious mental disorder.^^Hodgins,S.,and Cote,G.,The MentalHealth ofPenitentiary Inmates in Isolation,33 Canadian Journal of Criminologyi77i82(i99i^^ Novell,D.,Cloyes,!^.,Allen,D.,^Rhodes,L.,^ho Lives in Super Maximum Custody^A^ashington StateStudy.^4 Federal Probation^^^8 (^2000^.If the definition of mental illness is broadened toinclude ^^psychosocial impairments,^^ then one study has found approximately 4^^ of solitaryconfinement prisoners are so afflicted.^Mears,D.P.^^atson,J.,TowardsaFair and Balanced Assessment of Supermax Prisons,23Justice Quarterly.2^2(200^^:^ay.B.,Miraglia,R.,Sawyer,D.,Beer.R..^Eddy.J.(2009^.Factors Related to Suicide in NewYork State Prisons,28 InternationalJournal of Law andPsychiatry.207(200^1: Patterson. R.F.^Hughes.^..Review of Completed Suicides in theCalifornia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. 1999 to 2004. 99 Psychiatric Services^7^^82(2008^.See,also: Cloyes,I^.,Lovell,D.,Allen,D.,^Rhodes, L. Assessment ofPsychosocial Impairment inaSupermaximum Security Unit Sample,Criminal Justice andBehavior 7^0781(200^^.23967resistance more effectivelythan any other form of mistreatment. Having no oneelse to rely on, to share confidences with, to seek counsel from, you begin todoubt your judgment and your courage."^^ My observations of the effects ofsolitary confinement as it is practiced inside our nation^sprisons are consistentwith Senator McCain^s.The level ofsuffering and despair in many ofthese unitsis palpable and profound.^thefederal^udge who heard testimony about California^sPelican^aySecurity Housing Unit concluded, the severe deprivation and oppressive controlconditions in these places "may press the outer bounds of what most humans canpsychologically tolerate,"^^Eoranumber of prisoners, those bounds are greatlyexceeded, and the consec^uences of their long term solitary confinement are trulyextreme. Serious forms of mental illness can result from these experiences.Moreover,manyprisoners become so desperate and despondent that they engagein selfmutilation and, asInotedearly,adisturbingly high number resort tosuicide.Indeed, it is not uncommon in these units to encounterprisoners whohave smeared themselves with feces, sit catatonic in puddles of their own urineon the floors of their cells, or shriek wildly and bang their fists ortheir headsagainst the walls that contain them. In some cases the reactions are even moretragic and bizarre, including grotesque forms of self harm and mutilationsprisoners who have amputated parts of their own bodies or inserted tubes andother objects into their penises^and are often met with an institutional matterof factness that is ec^ually disturbing.Irecallaprisoner in ^ew Mexico who was floridly psychotic and usedamakeshift needle and thread from his pillowcase to sew his mouth completely10 Quoted in Richard Kozar, John McCain: Overcoming Adversitv. Chelsea House (2001), at p. 53." Madrid, supra note 2, at p. 1267.2396810shut. Prison authorities dutifully unstitched him, treated the wounds to hismouth, and then not only immediately returned him to the same isolation unitthat had caused him such anguish but gave himadisciplinary infraction fordestroying state property (^i.e., the pillowcases, thus ensuring that his stay in theunit would be prolonged.^prisoner at the federal supermax prison^^D^^whohad no pre existing mental disorder before being placed in isolation, has sufferedfrom severe mental illness foryearsnow.While in solitary confinement he hasamputated one ofhis pinkie fingers and chewed off the other,removed one ofhistesticles andscrotum, sliced offhis ear lobes, and severed his .Achilles tendonwithasharp piece of metal.He remains inastandard solitary confinement unitrather thanapsychiatricfacility.^othcrprisoner,housed longterm inasolitaryconfinement unit in Massachusetts, has several times disassembled the televisionset in his cell and eaten the contents. Each time, his stomach is pumped and,afterabrief stay inapsychiatric unit, he is returned to the same punitiveisolation where this desperate and bizarre behavior occurred.beyond these extreme cases, solitary confinement places all of theprisoners exposed to it at grave risk ofharm. In fact, the scientific literature onthe effects of solitary confinement has been accumulated over many decades, byresearchers fromanumber of different countries who have varying academicbackgrounds. Despite the methodological limitations that come from studyinghuman behavior in suchacomplex environment, most of the research hasreached remarkably similar conclusions about the adverse psychologicalconsec^uences of solitary confinement. Thus, we know that prisoners in solitaryconfinement suffer fromanumber of psychological and psychiatric maladies,including: significantly increased negative attitudes and affect, irritability,anger,aggression and even rage^ many experience chronic insomnia, free floatinganxiety,fear of impending emotional breakdowns,aloss of control, and panic2396911attacks^ many report experiencing severe and even paralyzing discomfort aroundother people, engage in self imposed forms of social withdrawal, and suffer fromextreme paranoiac many report hypersensitivity to external stimuli (^such asnoise, light, smells^, as well as various kinds of cognitive dysfunction, such as aninabilityto concentrate or remember,and ruminations in which they fixate ontrivial things intensely and over long periods of time^asenseofhopelessness anddeep depression are widespread^ and many prisoners report signs and symptomsof psychosis, including visual and auditory hallucinations.^^ Many ofthesesymptoms occur in and are reported byalarge number of isolated prisoners. Porexample, inasystematic studyldidofarepresentative sample of solitaryconfinement prisoners in California, prevalence rates for most of the abovementioned symptoms exceeded three c^uarters of those interviewed.^^In addition to the above clinical symptoms and syndromes, prisoners whoare placed in longterm isolation often develop whatlhave characterized as"social pathologies,"brought about because ofthe pathological deprivations ofsocial contact to which they are exposed. The unprecedented totality of control inthese units occurs to such an exaggerated degree that many prisoners graduallylose the ability to initiate or to control their own behavior, or to organize theirpersonal lives. Prisoners may become uncomfortable with even small amounts offreedom because they have lost confidence in their own ability to behave in theabsence of constantly enforced restrictions,atight external structure, and theubiquitous physical restraints. Even the prospect of returning to the comparative1^ For citations to the studies in which these specific adverse effects have been reported, see: C.Haney.MentalHealth Issues in LongTerm Solitary and ^^Supermax^^ Confinement,4^ CrimeaDelinquency 124-19^(200^^.and C. Haney, The Social Psychology ofisolation: ^ h y SolitaryConfinement is Psychologically Harmful, Prison ServiceJournalUI^(Solitary ConfinementSpecial Issued,Issue 181,1220(2009^.i3Seesu^ra,notei2,Haney,2003.239701^"freedoms"ofamainline maximum securityprison(^let alone the free worlds ^llsthem with anxiety.Eormanyprisoners,theabsenceofregular,normalinterpersonal contactand any semblance ofameaningful social context in these isolation units createsapervasive feeling of unreality.^ecause so much of our individual identity issocially constructed and maintained, the virtually complete loss of genuine formsof social contact and the absence of any routine and recurring opportunities toground thoughts and feelings inarecognizable human context lead to anundermining of the sense of self andadisconnection of experience frommeaning. Some prisoners experienceaparadoxical reaction, moving frominitially being starved for social contact to eventually being disoriented and evenfrightened by i t . ^ t h e y become increasingly unfamiliar and uncomfortable withsocial interaction, they are further alienated from others and made anxious intheir presence. In extreme cases, another pattern emerges: this environment is sopainful, so bizarre and impossible to make sense of, that they create their ownreality^theyliveinaworldoffantasyinsteadEinally,thedeprivations,restrictions, the totality of control, and the prolonged absence of any realopportunityforhappinessor^oyfillsmanyprisonerswithintolerablelevelsoffrustration that, for some, turns to anger, and then even to uncontrollable andsudden outbursts of rage.ACultureofHarmMost of the analyses of the harmfulness of solitary confinement are directedat the extreme levels of material deprivation, the lack of activity and other formsofsensoiystimulation,and,especially,theabsenceofnormalormeaningfulsocial contact that prisoners experience and suffer from in these settings. This239711^emphasis is not misplaced. There is no widely accepted psychological theory,correctional rationale, or conception ofhuman nature of whichlam aware tosuggest that exposure to these powerful and painful stressors is neutral or benignand does not carryasignificant risk ofharm.Tobe sure, the extreme deprivation, the isolating architecture, thetechnology ofcontrol, and the rituals ofdegradation and subjugation that exist insolitary confinement units are inimical to the mental health of prisoners.However,it would be naive to assume that the nature of these environments doesnot also affect the staffwho work inside.^^ In many such places, thinly veiledhostility,tension, and simmering conflict are often palpable. The interpersonaltoxicity that is created in these environments can engender mistreatment andeven brutality.What might be termed an"ecology of cruelty" is created in manysuch places where, at almost every turn, guards are implicitly encouraged torespond and react to prisoners in essentially negative ways^throughpunishment, opposition, force, and repression.Eormanycorrectional officers, at least initially,thisapproach toinstitutional control is employed neutrally and even handedly^without animusand in response to actual or perceived threats. However, when punishment andsuppression continue^largely because of the absence of any available andsanctioned alternative approaches^they become functionally autonomous andoften disproportionate in nature.Especially when the use ofthese technic^uespersists in spite of the visible pain and suffering they bring about, it representsaform of cruelty (^notwithstanding the possible lack of cruel intentions on the partofmany ofthose who employ the harsh techniques themselves^.Unfortunately,the culture ofharm that is created in many of these units14 C.Haney,ACulture of Harm:Taming the Dynamics of Cruelty in Supermax Prisons,35Criminal Justice and Behavior 99^98Bi(20o8^:239721^also affects service providers, including those who are supposed to address themental health needs of prisoners. Despite the large concentration of mentally illprisoners in solitary confinement, the duality of mental health care in these unitsis sometimes much worse than elsewhere in the prison system. Some of this isdue to limited resources^ some prisons simply do not have the personnel toprovide the kind ofcare that solitary confinement prisoners need.Some ofitstems from built in practical limitations. That is, solitary confinement units arelocated in separate, distant areas of the prison, access to the units themselves isdifficult, and the procedures wherebyprisoners are transported from their cellsare cumbersome, ^ut some of the poor equality care in certain units derives fromthe culture ofharm to whichlreferred and the ease with which it is possible tosimply"getusedto"practicesandproceduresthatwouldbeseenasunacceptablycompromised and inadec^uate in any other setting. Por example, in many solitai^confinement units it is not uncommon for mental health services to be deliveredin"treatment cages" (^or what prisoners sometimes refer to as"shark cages"because oftheir resemblance to those underwater contraptions^^telephonebooth sized metal cages in which prisoners are confined during their "therapeutichour."Public Safety Concerns^critically important but widely overlooked aspect of solitary con^nementintheUnitedStatesisthepotentialthreatitrepresentstopublicsafetySolitaryconfinement not only subjects prisoners to the kind of psychologically damagingexperienceslhave described above but also does so without providing them withany opportunities to obtain meaningful programming or rehabilitative services.2397315^aresult, many prisoners are significantly handicapped when they attempt tomake their eventual transition from prison back into the free world.Indeed, there is some recent, systematic evidence that time spent insolitary confinement contributes to elevated rates of recidivism.^5 Theexplanation forthis troubling fact is not difficulttodiscern.Withoutoversimplifying, one of the things we have learned about how prisoners makesuccessful transitions back into their communities of origin is that positive reentry depends on their ability to connect toasupportive, caring group of otherpeople, and the ability and opportunity to become gainfully employed. Solitaryconfinement significantly impedes both things.Prisoners^social skills atrophyseverely under their starkly deprived and isolated conditions of confinement. Theabsence of any meaningful activity (^let alone rehabilitative programming^ insolitary confinement means that their often already limited educational andemployment skills will have further deteriorated by the time they are released.Many prisoners come out of these units damaged and functionally disabled, andsome are understandably enraged by the ways in which they have beenmistreated. Crime^sometimes violent crime^is one predictable result.Moreover, veryfew solitary confinement units operate "step down"ortransitional programs that assist prisoners in negotiating the steep barrier fromisolation to the intensely social world outside of prison.In some instances, the failures that solitary confinement prisonersexperience when they try to make this nearly impossible transition on their ownare tragic, notjust forthemselves but for others who may become the innocentvictims of their desperate plight.Eor example, some years agolencountered one15 For example, see: Lovell, D., Johnson, L., & Cain, K., Recidivism of Supermax Prisoners inWashington State, 53 Crime & Delinquency 633-656 (2007); Mears, D., & Bales, W., SupermaxIncarceration and Recidivism, 47 Criminology 1131 (2009).239741^California prisoner who had been convicted of non violent drug offenses, andentered the prisonsystem with no preexisting symptoms of mental illness.^et,whenlsaw him he was lying catatonic, unresponsive, and incoherent on the floorofhis isolation cell inaCalifornia SHU unit. He was eventually diagnosed asschizophrenic, but was retained in the same unit where his mental illness hadoriginated. The next timelencountered him was several years later,after he hadbeen released from prison. He was on trial for capital murder,an offense that hadbeen committed^ust months after being taken directly from his isolation cell,placed onabus and eventually onto the streets ofaCaliforniacity,with no prerelease counseling ortransitional housing of any kind.Iwish thatlcouldsay thatthis tragic and extreme outcome was the only one of its kind thatlhavepersonally encountered, but it certainly is not.Proposed RemediesSolitary confinement continues to be used onawidespread basis in theUnited States despite empirical evidence suggesting that its existence has donelittle ornothing to reduce systemwide prison disorder or disciplinaryinfractions.^^ In fact, at least one prison system that drastically reduced thenumber ofprisoners whom it housed in solitary confinement by transferringthem to mainline prisons experienced an overall reduction in misconduct andviolence systemwide.^^^prison populations continue to gradually decline, andthe nation^scorrectional system rededicatesitselftoprogramorientedi^Briggs,C.,Sundt,J.,^Castellano,T.,The effect of Supermaximum Security Prisons onA^^re^ate Levels oflnstitutionaiyiolence.^i Criminology 1^^1-1:^76(200^^.17 See T.I^upers,T.Dronetetal,Beyond SupermaxAdministrative Segregation: Mississippi'sExperience Rethinking Prison Classification and CreatingAlternativeMentalHealth Programs,36CriminalJusticeandBehaviorio^7i09o(200^.2397517approaches designed to produce positive prisoner change, the resourcesexpended on longterm solitary confinementshould be redirected toamore costeffective and productive strategy of prison management.Several years ago, after it had conductedanumber of public hearings inlocations around the country,the bipartisan Commission on Safety and ^buse in^^^erica^sPrisons, chaired by former A^ttorney Ceneral Nicholas I^atzenbach,called supermax prisons"expensive and soul destroying"^^ and recommendedthat prison systems"end conditions ofisolation."^^ Short of that, in my opinion,there are some things that can and should be implemented onanationwide basis.Solitary con^nement continues to be structured and operated in ways that aredesigned to deprive, diminish, and punish.With that in mind, steps need to betaken to entirely exclude the most vulnerable prisoners from exposure to theseconditions,^^ significantly limit the time that all other prisoners are housedthere,^^ provide all prisoners with meaningful steps orpathwaysthatthey canpursue to accelerate their release from solitary.^^ significantly change the naturei^Gibbons,J.,^I^atzenbach,N(20o6^. Confronting Confinement:AReportoftheCommissionon Safety and Abuse in America^sPrisons.NewYork: ^era Institute of Justice.at p.99.1^ Id. at 57.^0 Persons underthe age of iSand those who suffer from serious mental illness are singularlyunsuited for long-term solitary confinement and they should be absolutely excluded from bein^housed there. In fact, persons vrith serious mental illnesses are categorically excluded fromsolitary confinement inanumber of states(e.g.,California,Wisconsin,Ohio^,but not all.Moreover.the ABA Standards on theTreatmentofPrisoners(at section 2^-2.8(a^^require this.See:http://ww^.americanbar org/publications/criminal justice section archive/crim^ust standards treatmentprisoners.html^2^-2.7^1 In terms oftime limits,the new ABA Standards define ^^longterm^^ segregation as 30 days ormore,and imposeapresumptive limit of one year on placement in disciplinary housing(section^343^^^^ 1 ^ ^ ^ opinion,that limit is arguably too long. However,if US prisons complied evenwiththeABAStandards, it would result inasignificant improvement.For example,see the general discussion in: C.Haney,The Psychological Impact ofIncarceration: Implications for PostPrisonAd^ustment,at pp. 3366.,^^^,o^^o,Joan Petersilia,When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry.NewYork: Oxford University Press(2003^239761^of the isolation units themselves to mitigate the damage that they inflict,^^ andprovide prisoners who are being released into mainline prison populations orinto free world communities with effective transitional services to ensure theirpostsolitary success and reduce the risk ofharm to others once they are released.The grave psychological risks posed by solitary confinement make theoverall mental health recommendations urgently important. Prisoners must besystematically screened for mental illness as they come into solitary confinementunits, and continuously monitored for signs of developing mental illness. Thosewhose problems mayfall below the standard rec^uired for exclusion and whotherefore remain in solitary confinement must be given access to enhanced^rather than substandard^ mental health resources. Einally,all isolated prisonersmust be provided with transitional or"stepdown"services and programsdesigned to meaningfully address the psychological changes that they are likely tohave undergone in the course of their solitary confinement.Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this historic hearing and tohelp the Subcommittee address this very significant issue.lam hopeful that it^^Elsewherelhave proposed list of^^limitingstandards^^thatlbelieve should be enforced in allsolitary confinement units.See C. Haney and Mona Lynch,Regulating Prisons of the Future:APsychological Analysis of Supermax and Solitary Confinement.NewYork Review of Law^SocialChan^, 23,477-570(1997^, at pp. 558-566.These standards that are rooted in the psychologicalliterature and intended as the basis foramore effective,realistic,and psychologically meaningfuloversight^^of solitary confinement Id.at p.560.Many of our proposed standards were designedto prevent or limit the potential damage ofthe harsh solitary confinement regime on prisoners,including due process protections for all prisoners in advance oftheir placement in isolation(irrespective of the purpose forthatplacement^^ screening prisoners out of solitary confinement iftheir specific medical ormental health conditions(not^ust serious mental illness^made themespecially vulnerable to the harmful consequences that we identified^ prohibiting the placementof prisoners in isolation that whose disciplinary infractions resulted from pre existing psychiatricdisorders^ placing severe time limits on the duration ofconfinement for all prisoners (prohibitingtotal isolation and extreme segregation of the sort that occurs in dark cells,^^whilepermittingsomewhat longer periods ofisolation for less draconian segregated housing^^ monthly mentalhealth evaluations to determine continued fitness for segregated housings and access to therapy,work, educational, and recreational programs and visitation^comparable to what is offered inmainline units^for prisoners confined in solitary confinement for longer than3months.239771^will mark the beginning of urgently needed and long term Congressionaloversight and reform.23978iBetyarimeni of 3Iw»ticeSTATEMENT OFCHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR.DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONSBEFORE THECOMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARYSUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION, CIVIL RIGHTS AND HUMAN RIGHTSUNITED STATES SENATEREGARDINGREASSESSING SOLITARY CONFINEMENT: THE HUMAN RIGHTS, FISCAL, ANDPUBLIC SAFETY CONSEQUENCESPRESENTEDJUNE 19, 201223979http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm^United States Senate Iyi, ./ Committee on the Judiciary< Return To HearingStatement ofThe Honorable Patrick LeahyUnited States SenatorUnited States SenateJune 19, 2012Today the Senate Judiciary Committee is holding a hearing on the use of solitary confinement in ourprisons. I want to thank Senator Durbin for his effort to shine a light on this critical issue that hasserious human rights, fiscal, and public safety consequences.Many Americans know that solitary confinement is regularly used as a disciplinary tool in prisonsacross the country at both the state and federal levels, but we rarely stop to think about whether theuse of solitary confinement is actually effective. In the face of mounting evidence that the use ofsolitary confinement may in fact be counterproductive, this hearing is an excellent opportunity for theCommittee to get a better understanding of this practice.In order to be an effective deterrent, a prison sentence is not meant to be a pleasant experience, andas a former prosecutor I believe that individuals convicted of serious crimes deserve to face seriousconsequences. Once criminals enter the prison system though, we cannot forget our obligations tocontinue to treat them fairly and humanely. Nor can we forget that the vast majority of prisoners willsomeday be released back into our communities.Although solitary confinement was develop as a method for handling highly dangerous prisoners, it isincreasingly being used with inmates who do not pose a threat to staff or other inmates. Far too often,prisoners today are placed in solitary confinement for minor violations that are disruptive but notviolent. At the same time, conditions within segregation units have become increasingly harsh. Inmany cases, human contact is virtually eliminated. Officers deliver meal trays through a door slot, andvisits by mental health staff are conducted through the cell door. Interaction with other prisoners isoften not allowed, and visits with family members may be prohibited for a year or more.There are significant fiscal, safety and humanitarian consequences for this trend toward increasinglyharsh conditions of solitary confinement and its more frequent use to punish non-violent behavior.Evidence provided by the Vera Institute and others now suggests that placing inmates in solitaryconfinement with minimal human contact for days, months and years is exceptionally expensive and,in many cases, counterproductive. Not only do these studies show that segregation does little ornothing to lower overall rates of violence, there is evidence that it actually increases recidivism ratesafter release, posing a danger to the public.I believe strongly in securing tough and appropriate prison sentences for people who break our laws.But it is also important that we do everything we can to ensure that when these people get out ofprison, they reenter our communities as productive members of society. That is why I have long beena champion of the Second Chance Act and why I am working hard to see that important lawreauthorized. We must do more than simply warehouse inmates, and solitary confinement is theextreme end of this approach. By giving inmates the tools to better themselves through job skills23980training, treatment and counseling, and support for transitional housing programs designed to easethe reentry process, we canimprove their lives and the safety of communities across the country.Unfortunately the use of solitary confinement can hinder those efforts for rehabilitation and does so atextraordinary financial andhumanitarian cost.Prison costs are crippling state,and federalbudgets,and overcrowding has b e c o m e a s e r i o u s safety risk in many facilities.The mental health problemscaused or exacerbated by solitary confinement create very serious human rights concerns for inmates.There is evidence that solitary confinement is used more frequently to house inmates with mentalillness. These are often the individuals who most need human contact and support, and the use ofsolitary confinement a s a b e h a v i o r a l management tool in these cases raises significant humanitarianconcerns, as well as the risk of increased recidivism.I w a n t to thank Senator Ourbin for holding this important hearing.This is an issue that has farreachingimplications and deserves to be better understood.We must find an alternative to moreprisons and harsher sentences. There are far better ways to keep future generations safe and savetaxpayers money at the same t i m e . I l o o k forward to hearing from all of the witnesses.23981Opening Statement of Senator Dick Durbin"Reassessing Solitary Confinement: The Human Rights, Fiscal and PublicSafety Consequences"Hearing before the Senate Committee on the JudiciarySubcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human RightsTuesday, June 19, 2012As Prepared for DeliveryAmerica has led the fight for human rights around the world. This Subcommitteehas tried to play a part in this effort, holding the first Congressional hearings onissues like rape as a weapon of war, and passing legislation like the GenocideAccountability Act.But we also have an obligation to look in the mirror and consider our own humanrights record. Today in the United States, more than 2.3 million people areimprisoned. This is - by far - the highest per capita rate of prisoners in the world.And African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites,while Hispanics are incarcerated almost twice as much. These numbers translateinto human rights issues that we cannot ignore.That's why I held a hearing on mental illness in prison in 2009. That's why Iauthored the Fair Sentencing Act, which reduces the sentencing disparity betweencrack and powder cocaine.And that's why we're here today. This is the first-ever Congressional hearing on"solitary confinement," also known as supermax housing, segregation, andisolation, among other names.At the outset, I'd like to show a short video clip.Seventeen year-old James Stewart was held in solitary confinement in an adultprison for two months. His sister Nicole Miera joins us today. Nicole, pleasestand. Thank you for sharing your brother's story.Unfortunately, Jimmy's story is all too common. Approximately fifty percent ofall prison suicides occur in solitary confinement. Jimmy was locked up in a celllike the one to my left. This replica is built to the scale of a standard solitaryconfinement cell.23982In 199^,afederal district court described similar cells at Califomia'sPelican BayState l^rison^"The cells are windowless^ the walls are white concrete. ...The overall effectis one ofstark sterility and unremitting monotony. Inmates can spendyears without ever seeing any aspect ofthe outside world except forasmallpatch of sky.^ne inmate fairly described ^it^as being ^likeaspace capsulewhere one is shot into space and left in isolation."'Imagine spending 23 hoursaday inacell like that^for days,months, years^withno window to the outside world and very little, if any,human contact.The United States holds far more prisoners in solitary than any other democraticnation. The Bureau ofjustice Statistics found that in 200^,U.S.prisons held^1,^22 people in some kind ofrestricted housing. Inmyhomestateoflllinois,^^^ofthe prison population has spent time in segregation.^edidn'talwaysusesolitaryconfinementatsuchahighrate Butinthel^^O's,states began creating expensive "supermax" prisons designed to hold people inisolation onamass scale. These supermaxes, just like the crack cocaine sentencinglaws,werepartofthetough-on-crime policies that seemed to make sense at thetime.But we now know that solitary confinement isn'tjust used for the worst oftheworst. lnstead,we are seeing an alarming increase in isolation for those who don'tneed to be there^and for vulnerable groups like immigrants,children, UGBTinmates, supposedly for their own protection.That'swhyladvocatedforachangeintheJusticeOepartment'sprisonrapestandards, to help ensure that sexual assault victims are only placed in solitarywhen absolutely necessary. And you heard ftom Nicole l^iera about the tragicconsequences oflocking up children in isolation. That'swhy the AmericanAcademy ofChild and Adolescent f^sychiatry has called foraban on solitaryconfinement for children underl^. lnJanuary,lyisited an immigration detentioncenter in Illinois, and saw segregation units like those found at any county jail^forpeople who have not been convicted ofany crime.Bven for adults convicted ofserious crimes, experts say far too many are in solitaryconfinement. Some are already seriously mentally ill and require intensivemonitoring and treatment, theexactoppositeofisolation Others who maynot23983have any psychological problems before isolation can become psychotic orsuicidak And there is also the more basic question ofhow prisons treat people insolitary. Their conditions ofconftnement need to meet basic standards of decency.As far back asl^^O, the Supreme Court recognised the risks of solitary,describingthe isolated inmates at one prison this way^"Aconsiderablenumberoftheprisoners fell, after evenashort confinement,intoasemi-fatuous condition, ftom which it was next to impossible toarouse them, and others became violently insane^ others still, committedsuicide."And our colleague and former J^O^John McCain said,"lt'san awful thing,solitary. It crushes your spirit and weakens your resistance more effectively thanany other foriTi ofmistreatment."This is alsoapublic-safety issue. As the bipartisan Commission on Safety andAbuse in America'sPrisonsfound,"lncreasing the useofhigh-security segregationis counterproductive, often causing violence inside facilities and contributing torecidivismafterreleaseB^ehavearesponsibilitytoprotecttheprison guardswho put their lives on the line to protect all ofus. But we also must haveacleareyed view ofthe impact ofisolation on the vast majority ofprisoners who will bereleased one day to rejoin our communities.Solitary conftnement is also extremely costly. Forexample,Tamms,lllinois'sonly supermax prison, has by far the highest per prisoner costofany Illinois prison^^^1,^22 in FiscalYear2010^as compared to an average of^22,0^3 for otherprisons.Anumberof states are starting to reassess solitary conftnement. They haveimplemented reforms and reduced the useof solitary,lowering prison violence andrecidivism rates, and saving millions of dollars.Asaresult ofthe work we have done preparing for this ftrst-of-its-kind hearing,!am working onlegislationtoencouragereforms in theuseofsolitary conftnement^ecan no longer slam the cell door and tum our backs on the impact our policieshave on the incarcerated and the safety ofour nation.23984ATTACHMENT 38 C)C3SQUADBAY QUARTERS VVORIC AND TRAINING ADDENDUM PAGEThe purpose this evaluation provide a practical means by which the performance oi'Detainees ancl I?ris.oners can beaccuratelv and uniI'or1nl_v evaluated. While in the process of evaluating a Detainee Prisoner, do not allow personal feelingsor opinions to influence your evaluation. ake your evaluation with the utmost care and tliouglit. ensuring it is fair andimpartial.Nmne E. . /cc; Lust 4 9,5 6' L.ivin.'.' Q\utr1cr.s S5: .-SECTION 1 ATTITUDE AND TRAITS MON WED I FRI I SAT 'st'J'Ngal?; CFC I SLIPERVISOR NAME - awn? n-xuell . cowoucr 4 t\3J\ I IIi SUPERVISION REQUIREDATTITUDE TOWARDS SUPERVISORCOOPERATIONPERSONALITYGROUP CONFORMITYVi:INFLUENCE ON OTHERSINITIATIVETEMPERAMENTU.INTEREST IN FACILITY TREATMENT PROGRAMSUr (5) Exetnplarv(4) Always. confonns(3) Conforms(2) BorderlineI UnsatisfactoryAttitude Toward Sttnervistw(5) Respectful(4) Good(3) Borderline(2) Unprofessional1) PoorGroup CnnI'm?mitv(5) Self-Reliant(4) Above Average(3) Complies(2) Below Average(1) Easily LedTemperament(5) Stable(4) Pleasant(3) Indifferent(2) Some Probleins(I) Volatile(55) OutstandingManningB_43836(44-54) Above -P.(5) No infractions(4) Few infraC.t10n.k(3 Minot iniractionx(2) Received spot evul(1) ActionCnngerntimt(5) Cooperative(4) Mostly cooperative(3) Moderate(2) Somewhat resistant(I Uncooperativelnfluence on Others(5) Positive(4) Good(3) Neutral(2) Negative(I) DisrtiptivellI.I?t?5l.I(5)lv1i.nima1(4) Sonic(3) Moderate(2) FrecluentConstant(5) Exceptional(4) Good(3) Fair(2) MarginalI Unfavorableluitiative(5) Energetic(4) Above Average(3) Average(2) Low(I) MinimalInterest In (5) Active ]"artieipation(4) Regular I?arlicipatton(3) l?artictpates(2) Low l?articipation(I Minimal(ll-2I)Unsa1ENCLOS (6) 23986SQUADBAY I SPECIAL QUARTERS AND TRAINING REPORT ADDENDUM PAGECTION2-WORK PERFORMANCE MON TUE A"f" UPE ALITY TY - - .OTALS - .- i 49?In the event worl; is not uliservetl (1.6. the prisoiier/detainee is on temporary release) the work blocks will be marked Quality 0fW0rL Prodiiegivity Safety(5) Outstanding (5) Excellent Output (5) Safety Conscious (4) Good (4) Above Average 4) Very Observanl(3) Acceptable (3) Average (3) Follow; Rules(2) Marginal (2) Below Average? Sometimes Negligent(1) Poor (1) Minimal (1) Careless Overall Rating? (70) Outstanding (56-69) Above Average (42-55)Average Average I.Sunday}: Squadbay Special supervisor will obtain hard card and give an overall grade for the., Additional Cgmments:T79 Sunday Supervisor's Name (Print) DetaineeJPrisoner's ame (Print)Sunday Signature and Date Detainee/Prisqner?s Signature and DateKN(BACK)PAGEQOF2ManningB_43837 23987r: -- nw:/G: wcm. mu: - iI ?i NAME Fuz: Ivivamr.-: -351-; . 16.6- 1" 4 BRANCH Housuusuwr. -5 nznu; 2 II7901 8 3 EVALUATION name: wmu Urns:D33p33ln9,_ EUAQL I-.. 4-2omw sum. 5,Jv\ on-ass.-A. JATION In con-u-exe-2 Iv.-tuor onI\- comou-.e-5 .u J. I - ATTITUDE JKNY. {Lu ue Inn - 1? miBnu1crIIn;oon-r la'voop__dATm~ vr. Lmiavur.nmt- . Excenuonnc.Rou? comoawurv . . wnusncs ow . . . Mumma? - Average - EnergeuVotaule - snauI1eren' Liable .3(.1. :2 :3 5IN - M.nu-nu 3 lA:twc~ Pamcoauo: TREATMENT pnosmuv. I 15? 3TOTALS (aEVNLUATION I I Below Average 9 Average Above lwerage SUBTOTAL 11.21 22-32 33.42 . 55:1 sscnow 2 - wont: PERFORMANCE Dom-1'5- . Poor I i Acne-otoow i Ouzstano-ng outum 0. wowMmlmal . Averagr I I Ouibdi -I 41- I (3. M. (5) Laaeless 5 Follows Rules saletv OVERALL UATION Bemv kvemgn Above Avuaqe Ouzszann-n9GRAND TOTAL ?l 56-6? 701 1UI-F Mi =lJ2712. NOV 1999 AOCLR ManningB_42966239881 INMATE ANS: -I 201109191 (us: E1..- Housmc. um"? 0213;" ._i05 EVALUATION '0:sposmou. wum mass 1rob Dsbesmok 4. Wm inuacTn|? tom-.urw Sc.-cuun om. wu. Sc-_uon; an. 1.. .. I SECTION AND arr? Irozlcn . - - . Q72 3 3I OISVH1 W: ALIIOI K. In. ?i I.. .. Rsoumsr. 1 I. . . TOWAF-P - F-uor - Fsoruevlmr a;a1olta IE :2 (31. - I7- LSROUD (L :5 ON I lve?uu'a' Posnuus ..vmv; I ,2 I- - Vonaue - mom;-ran Stabln 1 1: La)IN FACILITY Nhnm'm- . 90! Les Azuv: F?-IrucnzaanurTREATMENT oaocnnm (H I 43' 7 ~14? - 45' TOTALS OVERALL VALUATION I unsatratactorv I We-09? 5 Above I-weraue Dulstandl. . "9SUBTOTAL 11-21 2 -32 i 44.5: 55.ISE WORK PERFORMANCE POINTSPoor 3 1 Aczeotable I 0uLs'ancung Iouamx Munumal . Avon I . Output ihp 1 9oou. Ivnrv I .Lavelgss Rune: I Salely CunscuoutTOTALS Unsaual--:xor\ ?~vc~iQ! Averagw Aoovr I-wwaoe GRAND mm: 24.27 . 42.55 st-.65 7" lc-W EVALUL. ME '01?--rs '1XEHPR 4 RC. CPLAGMC. DD FORM 2712, 1999 ..oou= Lvnlessrona Ma nningB_-42967 INN: II:I 9- Hi?:-.1-. iTI~i:?. 2398913:!. . 1., ?(nu n- [:112. 2: I .-.-nmu. 4 ..-. I-'-I-Ulcruu ).--.-.- - . 5-35? 1 M1. Lennmm- ..I 97' .I?jt""f .. ?mw _gINTERBT lk Mqmm; A:m-p 1?uor.r :3 (5)TOTALS . (1OVERALL EVALUATION . Unsalnslacwry . Hcuuv. Ave:ag+ I Average Above Average GRAND TOTA 1a.:7 I 2: 41 I 42-55 St--69 ToI i ENMAT ATURE DATE 5 Aw-oz EVA NAME - Imus DD FORM 2712, NOV 1999ManningB_42981 24004INMATE WORK AND TRAINING EVALUATIONREPORT DATE El/0 1. NAME (Last, First, Middle)32. SSN3. ID NUMBER5. HOUSING UNIT50. I4. BRANCH OF SERVICEU?rfS. DETAILPM144347. CUSTODY LE VEL8. PURPOSE OF EVALUATION: DISPOSITION BOARD CLASSIFICATION BOARDWORK ASSIGNMENT1oneIF FOR DISPOSITION BOARD (Check type):I: OTHER (Specify)PERIOD COVERED:FROM 239: TO DUTYI: CLEMENCYCOMPLETED BY:DORMSUPV SPECIAL WORKWORK WORKJCUSTODYCl FEDERAL TRANSFERlj OTHERAREAS OF EVALUATION: (Check the appropriate spaces)The dormitory supervisor completes Section ionly. The work supervisor completes Sections land 2.SECTION - ATTITUDE AND TRAITS (Circle one box per row) POINTS. Unsatislactory Conforms ExemplaryCONDUCT (1) I2) (3) (5)Disciplina Action Minor inliactions No InfractionsDISCIPLINE {git (2) (3) in (5)SUPERVISION REQUIRED (9, Moderate Q3) ATTITUDE TOWARD Poor Borderline 0 RespeciiuiSUPERVISOR (2) 4 (5)Uncooperative Moderate CooperativeCOOPERATION (U (2) (3) I bl Fa"! Except onalPERSONALITY a?Self-ReliantGROUP 35?) 9 (2) OJTITIIES (5)INFLUENCE ON OTHERS Disri(Jp)tive (2) Ne(L5t)raI Positivenirnal Average EnergeticINITIATIVE 'm (2) Egg (5)Volatle Ind Here nt Sta bteTEMPERAMENT (2) (3) Kg?) (5)INTEREST IN FACILITY Minimal Participates Active ParticipationTREATMENT PROGRAM (1) I2) (3) I5)TOTALS OVERALL EVALUATION Unsatisfactory Below Average Average Above Average OutstandingSUBTOTAL 11-21 22-32 33-43 44-54 55SECTION 2 - WORK PERFORMANCE POINTSPoor Acce table OutstandingQUALITY OF wORi< (1) (2) (4) (5)Minimal Average Excellent OutputPRODUCTIVITY (1) (2) (4) (5)Careless Follows Rules Safety Conscious(1) I2) (3) (4) (5)TOTALS OVERALL EVALUATION Unsatislactory Below Average Average Above Average OutstandingGRAND TOTAL 14-27 28-41 42-55 56-69 70DATE ?/woo gsINMATESJGN DATE Q/70/by DD FORM 2712, NOV 1999ManningB_4298224005 REPORT DATE INIVIATE WORK AND TRAINING EVALUATION'96 as: soI NAME (Ln.sz_ /71/51. 2? 3 ID NUMBER. -II BRANCH Iii" SERVICE II 1; HIIUSINIJ UNIT uumu; ,-worux (mun role I ?r V) '11 ?lu'Ul'?K I- muon FROM 7013? 9? A -. I nv uomvr . unmv - umw(I YI II) 3 1--.. AREAS OF EVALUATION. The dotmumry supermsm 1 only work bupurvusol ?:ompI0II-s Summons 1 and 2SECTION I - ATTITUDE AMI) I um? um pm rm--..- . 1I I Mmul rduunnATTITUUIT TOWARD I"mr Ron-urlnm nnc1IuI . ?Rom, I2) Sell INFLUENCE ow OIHLRS Mummr? Avuraqe I EnergetncINITIATIVE I1) IZI I3) (175)) I :51Vofaule Indulte-rem Stable TEMPERAMENT (1) 12] (4) 45. INTEREST IN FACILITY Mmlmal amcnpates I Aclwe Pamcnpatbon 3TREATMENT PROGRAM (1) I3) (41 . I5) TOTALS - I)I OVERALL un-aau-.IacInry Below Avetaqe Atmve Av:-rage I SUBTOTAL I H727 I 2232 M54 55SECTION 2 - WORK PERFORMANCE POINTS., ?oor ltccepmble OUALITI OF VLIORK 4 12' (4, Mmlmal Average Excellent Oulaul1..-. .- -- . .. I I I Una. Iwlmr. "\vumuI- . I-mu--2 Mn-vI~ uvemqu 5 GRAND TOTAL ?w?j I DATE aw .3:3 271:. Mow 2999 INMATT arc (VAR: Manning 24006INNIATE WORK AND TRAINING EVALUATIONrcwonr UAIE .2 vvunmavz II II NAME Mmalel 2. 3 no NIJMBER I13 QNCH T5 HOUSING UNIT I 6. DETAIL 7 LLVIZI.osr-\ M1. -II FION I I CLASSIFICATION I I wowBOARD I I I - WOI. J: ztrm? IThoucm/tazzu I I I . To CHNUOI I1. I nonm sun: now mm I AREAS OF EVALUATION. The do.-.mmry completes Section 1 only The wow am: 2.- AND TRAITS box 00: I IIUINI F... I (:nnImmH.-I - I Mmul .. REQUIRED I I I. [31 I . I.. Uncnoputlmuvc I I CUOI . Easnly Led Complies A GROUICJNFORMLI HI Ia I3 I (5I rm mums - .. Mummal iwcraqe Enerqeucml . mm I2) I TEMPERAMENT VuII))lIle (2) IndI!ne)mnI I INTEREST IN FACILITV Ml?lmd I ?cuve TREATMENT PROGRAM H) I31 I51 ?1TOTALS em II. I Unsauslacxovy Below Avcraqe Averam Ah OutslandmgI 1?-21 22-32 33-43 55SEC - WORK PERFORMANCE VOINTSPoo: Acceptable - (2) I3) (4) IsaIvnogucru AVIESIIQII M) fxre?enl Omnul- II 3. I - -1 Ruins. -my (ZnrucnnuT011 II - - .- L. I ION -Jnx iwluw I Almw in -nqe ?uh uummq. zn.-I1 I ILDIO i DATE B?tu DD ICRM Manning 04" and/(-Ilnlr 24007arcrvu:I NON PERIOD "nrzm-/. mus: torzcz. .. 113/!? 5.: -I onl\' In-; wort fnzcuunt. and ANE um 51.: uzw? ., ., .. Exrunpmn (.777non. I 3_ '7 IIa.ISIGNATUR DD FORM 2712. NOVManning8_42987T999 DATE I. SECTION I - ATTITUDE AND TRAITS (CIICIC one box pa.-r raw) POINTS- . . CONUHLI (2) cm mas xcr(I-griplary Disc pl nary Act-on Mmol Inlracuon-.. Nu Inluanluons .mscwums (Z) (5) Constant Modctale SUPERVISION REQUIRED (1, (2) (3) (5) :1ATTITUDE TOWARD Pout sunsnuuson I11 (2) (3) ?kill (uonvum now (2, (ll) Ilmnvurable I-?aw Exce I-onalPERSONALITY (1) (2) (3) 5) of. Led Compies Set!-ReliantGROUP CONFORMITY(2) (3) 00 I I I INFLUENCE on omens (2) (5, ,4Mammal Average Energetnc(2) (3) I5) :1. Volaule Indafferent Stable(2) (3) (5) INTEREST IN FACLITV Mammal Par res Acme Paluccpallon -TREATMENT PROGRAM (1) (2) I4I I5) 3TOTALS . 30.1- . . ..IOVERALL EVALUATION Unsauslactory Below Average era Above Average OutstandmgSUBTOTAL 11-21 22-32 33-43 44.54 55SECTION 2 WORK PERFORMANCE POINTS. Poor Acceptable outstanding QUALITY OF /vonx (2) 59 MummaI Average I Excc amt Output.1) I2) (3) LIST L31I II let ConscuousSAFETY OVERALL EVALUATION Flelow Avcraqo i Ave A:.ove AL .-aqe TOTAL 0 14-27 I 29--nnr-9 Pmewona I V:24012INMATE WORK AND TRAINING EVALUATIONREPORT DATE 1.2.541 NAME (Last, First, Middle)4. BRANCH OF SERVICEIs. HOUSING UNITI G. DETAILFm 3. ID NUMBERCUSTODV LEVEL*4 8. PURPOSE OF EVALUATION: DISPOSITION some I ICLASSIFICATION BOARDI I WORK ASSIGNMENTI OTHERIF FOR DISPOSITION BOARD [Chock .'ypc)OTHER (Spec:/y)I I CLEMENCVRE STORATIONIRET URNT0 DUTVI I PAROLESPECIAL WORKI WORKICUSTODYFEDERAL TRANSFE PERIOD COVERED:(VYY YMMODIFROMTO:COMPLETED 00m I WORK OTHERAREAS OF EVALUATION: (Check the appropr/are spaces)The supervisor completes Section I oniy. The work supervisor completes Sections I and 2. SECTION 1 - ATTITUDE AND TENTS (Circle one box per row) FOINISI. I I I I Ilia )1(l0fy I on(3o)vms I(13;ac Ions I (1 0 I ac InnREQUIRED Constant I I IfATTITUDE TOWARD I ?I3;u:nI:e I Rn4 ?IllsIn I 114- -1 In ?IlIf.IInI:.:v.num|vlIlm!I.pIf -I .?(emu ..xv.;nLI- Pun-I'.v 1-: Ixrx -I--I 3(5 51-. um umnrz mr?loulNumnm ?Av ?Hr .Imnu-1Ir'.fI' i [g Nu-mnmv U1?lnv~- Iwu-mm I?-I-mu nm-v..n- . !ml'.l.umuwImus fm-.-.1.umu-u-I. .. lw I - -rum . - --?.221xwuvar ManningB_4299824023INMATE WORK AND TRAINING EVALUATIONREPORT DATE 2oI0099?t1. NAME (Last, First. Middie)A 3. ID NUMBER4. BRANCH OF SERVICEUSA5. HOUSING UNIT54 6. DETAILP01 BAYe. or EVALUATION: DISPOSITION aoARo CLASSIFICATION eoARowont-( OTHERIF FOR DISPOSITION BOAFID OTHER (Specify)'3TO ourv PAROLECLEMENCYlj WOFTKICUSTODYFEDERAL TRANSFERSPECIAL WORKPERIOD TO: COMPLETED BY: suPv WORK supv I I OTHERAREAS OF EVALUATION: (Check the appropriate spaces)The dormitory supervisor completes Section Ionly. The work supervisor completes Sections tand 2. SECTION 1 - ATTITUDE AND TRAITS (Circle one box per row) POINTSUnsatisfactory Coniorms Exemplarycowucr U) B) (5) DISCIPLINE I 0rscIDIInz:r1y) Action (2) Minor Infractions ?jg No Inlractions jnuj . .4, . - Constant Moderate ATTITUDE TOWARD Poor Borderline .1 RespectfulSUPERVISOR I1) (2) (3) (5)COOQEHM ION Uncooperatwe Moderate Cooplerartve (2) 4 Untasiogable (2) ?g (IILed Co pI'e II-R GROUP CONFORMITY 35% (2) T3): 5 1 (stiian D'srupt' Ne trai Po IINFLUENCE ON OTHERS (5, 7:53? 2 Minimal Avera En I tcINITIATIVE (2, (3)99 13? 77Volatile Inditterent StableTEMPERAMENT U) (2) (3) (5) LiINTEREST FACILITY Minirnal Participates Active Participation TREATMENT PROGRAM (1) (2) (3) 4) (5)\lTOTALS LIOVERALL EVALUATION Unsatisfactory Below Average Average Above Average OmstandmgSUBTOTAL 1121 22-32 33-43 44-54 55SECTION 2 - WORK PERFORMANCE POINTSPoor Acceptable OutstandingQUALITY OF WORK U) (2) (3) (4) (5)Minimal Average Excellent OutputPRODUCTIVITY (1) (2) B) (4) (5)Careless Follows Rules Satet Consc'o (1) I2I I3) (4) (5) TOTALS OVERALL EVALUATION Unsatisfactory Below Average Average Above Average OutstandingGRAND TOTAL *4-27 28-41 42-55 56-69 70INMATE ATUFIE. DATE - .. &t>Ioo?3O ?xv A . EVALUATOITS CPLWI, DATE DD FORM 2712, NOV 1999ManningB_4299924024REPORT DATE INMATE WORK AND TRAINING EVALUATION?ower 7'3-1. NAME (Last, Middle) 2. SSN 3. NUMBERWe4. BRANCH OF SERVICE 5. HOUSING UNITUsePURPOSE OF EVALUATION: DISPOSITION BOARD CLASSIFICATION BOARD WORK ASSIGNMENT EOTHERIF FOR DISPOSITION BOARD (Check type): PAROLE woRI

e-Highlighter

Click to send permalink to address bar, or right-click to copy permalink.

Un-highlight all Un-highlight selectionu Highlight selectionh