Title: Memoranda Reqing Classification Reviews

Release Date: 2014-03-20

Text: UNITED STATES OF AMERICAv.Manning, Bradley E.PFC, U.S. Army,HHC, U.S.'Army Garrison,Joint Base Myer-Henderson HallFort Myer, Virginia 22211Prosecution Response toDefense Motion to Dismissfor Lack of Speedy TrialEnclosure 2010 October 2012 . FUR UH lffi \l .DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYus. ARMY munmr or WASHINGTON210 A smearsoar LESLEY J. ueum, oc 203155013REKY ToATTENTION OF28 July 201!EMOR AN UM THR Office of the Judge Advocate General 2200 Army Pentagon.Washington. DC 20310Deputy Chief of Staff for 2200 Anny Pentagon, Washington. DC 203l0FOR Commander. US. Army Intelligence and Security Command. 8825 Beullah Street. Fort Belvoir. VA22060EC Tr Updated Request for Classi?cation Review - l_J_nited States v. PFC Bradlev E, Manning1 . PU RPOS E. The prosecution in the above-referenced case requests the appropriate authority their classi?cation reviews of the documents listed on the prosecution's original written request. dated 18March 201 I.2. BACKGROUND. Manning is charged with downloading various classi?ed documents.photographs. and videos from Secret Internet Protocol Router Network websites andtransferring them to his personal computer. PFC Manning is also charged with transmitting thisinformation to persons or organizations not entitled to receive it. in violation of United States law. Thisrequest is the second written request that memorialiaes previous discussions eoneeming the use ofdocuments and evidence at trial originating in your agency and the classification of those documents andevidence.3. SPEEDY TRIAL. Under Article 10. UCMJ. when an accused is in pretrial con?nement. the UnitedStates is required to use "reasonable diligence" to continue forward motion on resolving criminal cases.See 10 U.S.C. ?8lO. The only remedy for an Article 10 violation is dismissal of the charges withprejudice. Additionally. the United States must ensure it does not violate the accused's Sixth Amendmentright to a speedy trial. See Earka v. 407 US. 414 (l 972). All existing and future delays by yourorganization could severely hinder the prosecution.4. SUSPICNSE. [he prti_sgcutioii reviews 10 August 201 The purposeof this suspense is to ensure the prosecution taim has the adequate documentation for the pre-trialinvestigation. pursuant to Article 32, UCMJ and to minimize any ?xture delays.5. The point of contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at-.M. --ASHDEN Fl?lNCPT. ATrial CoursclCF:Mr. (OTJAG, DA)Ms. - DOJ)Ul"l'7lf. Hi i. . FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY .DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYu.s. AHIIY ururnnv or WASHINGTON210 A STREETFOFIT ussuzv J. MOHAIR. oc 20319-50137 September 2011MEMORANDUM THRUOffice of the Judge Advocate General 22(1) Arrny Pentagon,Washington, DC 20310Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence (DAMI-ZB), 2200 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC20310 FOR Commander, U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 8825 Beulah Street, FortBelvoir, VA 22060SUBJECT: Updated Request for Classi?cation Review - United States v. PFC Bradley Manning1. PURPOSE. The prosecution in the above-referenced case requests the appropriate authority their classi?cation reviews of the documents listed on the prosecution's original writtenrequest, dated 18 March 2011. This request is in addition to the previous request dated 28 July2011. -12. BACKGROUND. PFC Manning is charged with downloading various classi?ed documents,photographs, and videos from Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (S IPRNET) websites andtransfening them to his personal computer. PFC Manning is also charged with transmitting thisinformation to persons or organizations not entitled to receive it, in violation of United Stateslaw. This request is the second written request that memorializes previous discussionsconcerning the use of documents and evidence at trial originating in your agency and theclassi?cation of those documents and evidence.3. SPEEDY TRIAL. Under Article 10, UCMJ, when an accused is in pretrial con?nement, theUnited States is required to use "reasonable diligence" to continue forward motion on resolvingcriminal cases. See 10 U.S.C. ?810. The only remedy for an Article 10 violation is dismissal ofthe charges with prejudice. Additionally, the United States must ensure it does not violate theaccused's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial. See Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 414 (1972).All existing and future delays by your organization could severely hinder the prosecution-Enclosed is an information paper to further explain an accused's speedy trial rights in the militaryjustice system.4. SUSPENSE. The rosecution re uests A rev'ew be In leted 11.The purpose of this suspense is to ensure the prosecution team has the adequate documentationfor the pretrial investigation, pursuant to Article 32, UCMJ and to minimize any future delays.FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USEONLYANJA-CLSUBJECT: Updated Request for Classi?cation Review - United States v. PFC Bradlcv Manning5. The point of contact for this memorandum is the undersigned at_UKEncl ASHDEN FEINas CPT, IATrial CounselCFD01)2FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYu.s. mm IIUTARY DISTRICT 05 210 A smearFORT LESLEY J. ucmm, DC 20319-501330 November 201070*? MEMORANDUM THRULesley J. McNair, DC 20319Office of the Judge Advocate General 2200 Army Pentagon,Washington, DC 20310FOR Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence 2200 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC20310SUBJECT: Request for Classi?cation ReviewsI. The prosecution team in the case of United States v. Private First Class (PFC) Bradiev E.?1_n_n_i_gg requests your assistance and direct oversight in ensuring the appropriate OriginalClassi?cation Authority (OCA) or their subject matter expert conduct a classi?cation review ofthe following Department of Defense material no later tl_i__a_n 1 .lanuan' .2010:a. PowerPoint presentation ?le named ?Brief to- Findings and Recs 8 Juneppt?(enclosed).b. PowerPoint presentation file named ?Farah Brief FINAL v8 24 May 09.ppt? (enclosed).c. JTF-Guantanamo Bay Detainee Assessments (enclosed).2. PFC Manning is currently charged with downloading various documents, photographs,and videos from Secure Internet Protocol Router (SIPR) websites and transferring them to hispersonal computer. PFC Manning subsequently transmitted this infomiation to persons ororganizations not entitled to receive them, in violation of U.S. law. 3. The classi?cation review should answer the following questions:a. Whether the information was appropriately classi?ed under applicable law at the time itwas compromised?b. What is the current classi?cation level of the infomtation in the document?c. Whether disclosure of the information to the public could reasonably be expected to causedamage to the national security of the United States in the degree warranted by theclassi?cation?I ANJA-C SUBJECT: Request for Classi?cation Review4. The prosecution team requests each OCA or their subject matter expert on classi?edinformation use the enclosed sample declaration to answer the above questions. This requestsupplements previous informal requests made by the prosecution team to the different OCAs.S. The point of contact for this request is the undersigned at -orkgEncl ASHDEN FEINas Chief, Military Justice2 FOR OFFICI .. USE ONLY wf l)DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYu.s. ARMY mmanv DISTRICT or WASHINGTON210 A STREETFORT LESLEY .1. ucmun, oc 20319-5013ANJA-CL 13 March 2011MEMORANDUM Tritium Law Enforcementand Intelligence, United States Department of StateFOR Original Classi?cation Authority (OCA), United States Department of StateSUBJECT: Request for Classi?cation Review - United States v. Private First Class (PFC)Bradlev E. Manning 1. PURPOSE. The prosecution team in the above-referenced case requests the appropriateauthority ?nalize their classi?cation reviews of the enclosed documents and evidence to be usedin the criminal prosecution of PFC Manning. See Enclosure 1.2. BACKGROUND. PFC Manning is charged with downloading various classi?ed documents,photographs, and videos from Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) websites andtransferring them to his personal computer. PFC Manning is also charged with transmitting thisinformation to persons or organizations not entitled to receive it, in violation of United Stateslaw.? This request memorializes previous discussions concerning the use of documents andevidence at trial originating in your agency and the classi?cation of those documents andevidence. This request is in addition to the Request for Consent to Disclose Classi?edInformation to the Accused and the Defense, dated 14 March 2011. 1 PFC Manning is currently charged with multiple violations of the UCMJ, including violating Articles92, I04, and B4 ofthe UCMJ (I8 U.S.C. 793 and I8 U.S.C. I030). See Enclosures 2 and 3.FOR OFFICIAL ONLY WI ENCLOSURE I) ?la? "ll ?l . SI EBJ Request for Classification Review United _States v. Private ljirst (?lassg PFC)FUTURE REQUESTS. This request includes all information presently within thepossession of law enforcement and the prosecution which is expected to he used at trial. as setforth in Enclosure 1. The prosecution team may submit future requests for classification reviewsifadditional documents and evidence are determined to be useful during the court-martialprocess. ln addition, the prosecution may submit future requests for classification reviews ofclassilied information the defense intends to introduce during the court-martial. subject to theprocedures outlined below.6. OF CLASSIFIED 21 l3etain_Qlassiticati_Qn. This request will not affect the classification ofany ofthe subjectinformation.2 ?lfthe accused reasonably expects to disclose or to cause the disclosure ofclassitied information in anymanner in connection with a court?martial proceeding. the accused shall notify the trial counsel in writingof such intention and file :1 copy of such notice with the military judge. Such notice shall be given withinthe time specified by the militaryjudge under subdivision or. ifno time has been speeilied- prior toarraignment ofthc accused." S05(h)( ?Courts-martial shall be open to the public unless there is a substantial probability that an overridinginterest will be prejudiced ifthc proceedings remain open; (3) closure is no broader than necessary toprotect the overriding interesr. (3) reasonable alternatives to closure were considered and foundinadequate; and (4) the military judge makes case-speci?c findings on the record justifying closure."RCM 806(b)(3). A classification review ofthe information is the usual method of demonstrating the?overriding interest" that will be prejudiced ifthe proceed ings remain open.ts: tut i-at l*l)I{ lot Si I t)\l I)SUBJECT: Request for (?lassilication Review - United Statesv. Privag?rst (PIE)Bradley E, Manningb. Protective Order. Prior to disclosure and subsequent access to clmsilied information. eachmember of the defense team will sign a protective order. acknowledging their limitations ofaccess and use. See Enclosure 6.e. Clearances Each member of the deferue team has security clearances ul the minimum levelof "Secret." Only cleared individuals appointed to the defense team by the convening authorityand PFC Manning will have access to the disclosed information. under supervision. All panelmembers and the military judge will have security clearances at the minimum level of "TopSecret.?d. cure Facilitv. All classified information will be stored ina United States governmentappmved secure facility and storage container. The information will only be viewed or testedwithin a secure facility. pursuant to Executive Order and US. Army regulationse. Security At all times during the viewing or testing of the classified infonnation. atleast one defense security expert. appointed and employed by the United States will be presentto oversee the proper handling and storage of the classi?ed infonriation. A government securityexpert will be present for all pretrial and trial proceedings.7. team requests this approval by 31 March lol I. The purpose ofthis suspense is to ensure the prosecution team has the adequate documentation for the pre?trialinvestigation. pursuant to Article 32. UCMJ.8. "ll-re point for this request is the undersigned at I6 Encls ASHDEN FEINClassified lividence for Review CPT. JA. Charge Sheet. 5 Jul l0 Chief. Military Justice23. Charge Sheet. Marl 4. Sample Aflidavit5. Sample (?over letter for OCA6. Protective Order. l7 Sep I0(OTJAG. DA) 3Hill i'l( f)\l t\l-t RF v\ Hi Hf l. . .DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYu.s. ARMY uiuruzv DISTRICT or WASHINGTON210 A smearroar LESLEY J. ucumz oc 20319 5013REPLY TO5 18 March 20l Tl-lRliOftice ofthe Judge Advocate General -. 2200 Army Pentagon.?Washington. DC 20310Deputy For Intelligence 2200 Army Pentagon. Washington. DC20310FOR Commander, US. Army Intelligence and Security Command. 8825 Beullah Street. FortBelvoir. VA 2060SUBJECT: Request for (?lassi?cation Review l_i_r_i_ited States v. Private First Bradley E. Mannine -l. PURPOSE. The prosecution team in the above-referenced case requests the appropriateauthority?nalize their classi?cation reviews of the enclosed documents and evidence to be usedin the criminal prosecution of PFC Manning. Sec Enclosure 1.2. BACK GROUND. PFC Manning is charged with downloading various classi?ed documents.photographs, and videos from Secret lnternet Protocol Router Network websites andtransferring them to his personal computer. PFC Manning is also charged with transmitting thisinformation to persons or organivations not entitled to receive it in violation of United Stateslaw.? This request memorializes previous discussions concerning the use of documents andevidence at trial originating in your agency and the classi?cation ofthose documents andevidence. This request is in addition to the Request for Consent to Disclose (?lassiliedlnformation to the Accused and the Defense, dated l4 March 201 l. Manning is currently charged with multiple violations of the violating Aniclcs92. I04. and l34 ofthe UCMJ (l3 USC. 793 and l8 I030). Sec Enclosures land 3.{Kt -z\i ?xi Request for Classi?cation Review United States v. Private First Class Bradlet lei. Mannine 4. FUTURE This request includes all information presently within thepossession of law ettforcemetit and the prosecution which is expected to be used at trial. as setforth in Enclosure l. The prosecution team may submit future requests for classi?cation reviewsif additional documents and evidence are determined to be useful during the court-martialprocess. in addition, the prosecution may submit future requests for classi?cation reviews ofclassi lied infonuatioit the defense intends to introduce during the court-martial. subject to theprocedures outlined below.6. OF CLASSIHED 3 ?ifthc accused reasonabiy expects to disclose or to cause the discio~3ure ofclassilied ittforntatiori in anymanner in connection with a court?martial proceeding. the accused shall notify the trial cotmsei in writingoisuch intention and tile a cop); of such notice with the judge. Such notice shall be given withinthe time speci?ed by the under subdivision or. ifno time has been speci?ed. prior toarraignment ofthe accused? 505th)( i.ii "Courts-martial shaft be open to the public unless there a substantial probability that an overriding.interest will be prejudiced ifthe proceedings remain open; (2) closure is no broader than necessary toprotect the overriding interest; (3) reasonable alternatives to closure were considered and foundinadequate: and (4) the rnilitary judge ma kes case-specific Findings on the record justifying closure."RCM 80b(b)(2). A classilicatioit review oi? the information is the usuai method ol'detnonstr2ttim_1 the?overriding i nterest? that be prejudiced ifthe proceed ings remain open. NI t)\l lgANJA-CLSUBJECT: Request for (?lassilication Review? ni States v. Private la Bradlev ll a. Retain Classification. This request will affect the classi?cation of any of the subjectinformationProtective ()rde_r. Prior to disclosure and subsequent access to classilied information. eachmember of the defense team will sign a protective order. acknowledging their limitations ofacoes and use. See Enclosure 6.(?learan_c??. Each member of the defense team has security clcarancs at the minimum levelof ?Secret.? Only cleared individuals appointed to the defense team by the converting authorityand PFC Manning will have to the disclosed infomtation. under supervision. All panelmembers and the military judge will have security clearances at the minimum level of "TopSecret."d. Secure Facilitv. All classi?ed information will be stored in a United States governmentapproved secure facility and storage container. The information will only be viewed or tstedwithin a secure facility. pursuant to Executive Order and U.S. Army regulations.e. Securitv At all times during the viewing or testing of the classified atleast one defense security expert. appointed and employed by the United States. will be to oversee the proper handling and storage of the classified information. A government securityexpert will be present for all pretrial and trial proceedingsThe prosecution learn mctuests this approval bv 31 . The purpose ofthis suspense is to ensure the prosecution team has the adequate documentation for the pre-trialinvestigatiorL pursuant to Article 32. UCMJ.8. The point of contact for this request is the undersigned a 6 Encls ASHDEN FEINl. lassi?ed Evidence for Review CPT. JA1 Charge Sheet. 5 Jul l0 Chief. Military Justice3. Charge Shoct. I Mar I 4. Sample Aflidavit5. Sample Cover Letter for 6. Protective Order. l7 Sep I0CF: (wlencls)Mtl)'Vl\ kl \t Kl it 3 1? DEPARTMENT OF THE ARIIYU.S. ARMY IAIIJTARY OF WASHINGTON210 A smearFORT LESLEY J. ucmun. DC 20319 5013T0ATTENTION OF18 March 20llTHRU Office of the General Counsel.National Security AgencyFOR Original Classi?cation Authority (OCA). National Security AgencyRequest for (?lassilication Review - United States v. Private Fir_st_?lass l. The prosecution team in the above-referenced case requests the appropriateauthority /inulizc their classi?cation reviews of the enclosed documents and evidence to be usedin the criminal prosecution of PFC Manning. Sue Enclosure l.2. PFC Manning is charged with downloading various classified documents.photographs and videos from Secret lntemet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) websites andtransferring them to his personal computer. PFC Manning is also charged with transmitting thisint'ormation to persons or organizations not entitled to receive it. in violation of United Stateslaw.' This request memorializes previous discussions concerning the use of documents andevidence at trial originating in your agency and the classi?cation of those documents andevidence This request is in addition to the Request for Consent to Disclose Classi?edto the Accused and the Defense, dated :4 March 20:1. PFC Manning is currently charged with multiple violations ofthe UCMJ. including violating Articles92. I04, and I nfthe UCMJ (l 8 USE. 793 and l8 l030). Sec F.nclosures 2 and 3.I-til? ?l?lli ll 1 xi l\Iil 1'18! l: xi Request for Classi?cation Review - United States v. Private First (?lags Liras?ci 4. This request includes all information presently within thepossession oflaw enforcement and the prosecution which is expected to be used at triaL as setforth in Enclosure l- The prosecution team may submit future requests for classification reviewsif additional documents and evidence are determined to be useful during the court-martialprocess. In addition. the prosecution may submit future requests for classification reviews ofclassified information the defense intends to introduce during the court-martial. subject to theproctxiures outlined below.6. OF CLASSIFIED EL Retain Classification. This request will not affect the classification ofany of the subjectinfomtation.3 ?If the accused reasonably expects to disclose or to cause the disclosure ofclassified information in anymanner in connection wih a court-martial proceeding. the accused shall notify the trial counsel in writingof such intention and file a copy ofsuch notice with the Such notice shall be given withinthe time speci?ed by the militaryjudge under subdivision or. if no time has been specified. prior toarraignment ofthc accused." .'v1Rli S05(h)(l)."(?oui1s?mz1rtial shall be open to the public unless( there 6 a substantial probability that an overriding,interest will be prejudiced ifthe proceedings remain open; (2) closure is no broader than necessary toprotect the overriding interest; (3) rtzsonablc alternatives to closure were considered and foundinadequate. and (4) the military judge makes case-specific findings on the record justifying closure."RCM 806(b)(2i. A classification review oftlte information is the usual method of demonstrating the"overriding interest" that will be prejudiced ifthe proceedings remain open.(Pi ivtt ft FUR SF so-" I. l)-SUBJECT: Request for Classification Review - United States v. Private First Bg?lgv l-L Manningb. Protective Order. Prior to disclosure and subsequent acces to classi?ed inl'ormation..eachmember of the defense team will sign a protective order. acknowledging their limitations ofaccess and use. See Encloatre 6.. Each member of the defense team has security clearances at the minimum levelof ?Secret.? Only cleared individuals appointed to the defense team by the convening authorityand PFC Manning will have access to the disclosed information. under supervision All panelmembers and the military judge will have security clearances at the minimum level of ?TopSecret.?d. Secure Facilitv. All classified information will be stored in a United States govemmentapproved secure facility and storage container. The information will only be viewed or testedwithin a secure facility.-pursuant to Executive Order and US. Anny regulationse. S?ct_t_r1?ty At all times during the viewing or testing of classilied infonnation. atleast one defense security-expert. appointed arri employed by the United States. will be presentto oversee the proper handling and storage of the clmsifred infortmtion. A government securityexpert will be present for all pretrial and trial proceedings7. SUSPENSE. The prosecution team this approval bv 3| Mich 20l I. lhe purpose ofthis suspense is to ensure the prosecution team has the adequate documentation forthe we-trialinvestigation. pursuant to Article 32. UCMJ.8. The point of contact for this request is the undersigned at Lang?6 F.ncls ASHDEN FEINl. Classi?ed Evidence for Review CPT. JA2. Charge Sheet. 5 Jul IO (mar. Military Justice3. Charge Sheet, Mar I I4. Sample Aliidavit5. Sample Cover Letter for OCAProtective Order. I7 Sep I0CF: (w/ends)Mr. (OT JAGill" ll 3. It [0 xi l?i?DEPARTMENT OF THE ARIIYu.s. ARIIY muranv or WAS moron210 A smearroar LESLEY J. ucmun, oc 203195013REPLY TOATTENTKN OF I8 March 201 1Intelligence. Ollie:ofthe Director olilxatio ml FUR Original Classi?cation Authority ()tTree olithe Director ofNational IntelligenceSUBJECT: Request for Classification Review - United States v._Private first Class Ll?l"C)Bradl ex" i_n_g. PURPOSE. The prosecution team in the above-referenced ease requests the appropriateauthority ?nalize their classification reviews ofthe enclosed documents and evidence to be usedin the criminal prosecution ot?l?l7C Manning. See Enclosure .2- PFC Manning is charged with downloading various elassitied documents.photographs and videos from Secret lnternet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) websites andtransferring them to his personal computer. PFC Manning is also charged with transmitting thisinfonnation to persons or organimtions not entitled to receive it. in violation of United Stateslaw.? This request memorializes previous discussions concerning the use of documents andevidence at trial originating in your agency and the classi?cation ofthose documents andevidence. This request is in addition to the Request for Consent to Disclose Classifiedlnfomiation to the Accused and the Defense, dated l4 March 20l . Manning is currently charged with multiple violations ofthe UCMJ. including violating ArticlesI04. and l3~l ofthe UCMJ (I8 793 and I8 U.S.C. 53 W30). Sec Enclosures la?: bit 1. rag; t?A NJ SUIEJECT: Request for Classification Review linited States V. Private First Class -1. FUTURE REQUESTS. This request includes all inliirrnation presently within thepossession of law enforcement and the prosecution which expected to be used at trial. as setforth in Enclosure l. The prosecution team ntay submit future requests for classification reviewsifadditional documents and eviclence are determined to be useful during the court-martialprocess. in addition. the prosecution may submit future requests for classificmion reviews ofclassi?ed i ttliinnution the defense intends to introduce during the court-rnitrtial- subject to theprocedures outlined below.6. OF CLASSIFIED This request will git aftect the classi?cation fan}; of the subjectinformation.I ?lfthe accused reasonably expects to disclose one cause the disclosure of classitied information in anymanner in with a cnu.rt-ma rtial proceeding. the accused shall notify the trial counsel in writingolisuch intention and lile :1 copy oil such notice with the military ridge. Such notice shall be given withinthetime specified by the military judge under subdivision let or. ifno time has been speci?ed. prior toarraignment otitht: accused.? RE 5/ll?lhlt ll.5 ?Cntu1s-martial shall be open to the public unlessl there :1 substantial that an overridinginterest will be preiudiced ifthe proceedings remain open; (3) closure is no broaderthan necessary toprotect the overriding. interest: (3) reasonable alternatives to closure were considered and foundinadequate; and the military makes case~spccitic ?nding;-; on the record justifyittg closure-"RCM 806l_b)t 2). A clzuzsiliczitiun review of the information is the usual method the?m?'erriding interest" that ill be prejudiced iltht: proceedings remain open.Request for Classification Review - vi Private First Class h. P_r_otective Order. Prior to disclosure and subsequent access to classilicd information. eachmember ofthe defense team will sign a protective order. acknowledging their limitations ofaccess and use. See linclosttre o.c. l-Lach member olithe defense team has security clearances or 1/14: mmimum /ever?cleared individuals appointed to the defense team by the convening authorityand PFC Manning will have access to the disclosed infomtation. under supervision. All panelmembers and the military judge will have security clearances at the minimum level ol"?TopSecret.?d. All classilied information will be stored in a United States govemmentapproved secure and storage container. The infomtation will only be viewed or testedwithin a secure tiacility. pursuant to I-Ixecutive Order and LS. Army regulations.e. At all times during the viewing or testing of the classi?ed information. atleast one defense security expert- appointed and em?plo_yed by the United States will be presentto oversee the proper handling and storage ofthe classified information. A government securityexpert will be present For all pretrial and trial proceedings.7. SIISPEEVSE- this approval h\ 3! March 201 I. The purpose ofthis suspense is to ensure the prosecution team has the adequate documentation for the pre-trialinvestigation. pursuant to Article 31 8. The point ofcontact for this request is the undersigned at 6 lincls l. (?Eassitied Evidence for Revieu 2. (?harge Sheet. 5 Jul It") (Thief. Militar_\' Justice(?harge Sheet. .\lar 4. 5. Sample Cover Letter for 6. Protectiveorder. 17 Sep Cl?: (w/encls) Mr. (NSA)Ms . V) lifiivf tlfill I sf . rxi Rt DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYu.s. Aruav uruunv DISTRICT or wssumoron210 A smearsoar LESLEY J. ucumn, oc 20319-5013REPLY 70or 18 March 2011EMO RAN DU THRUOllice of the Judge Advocate General i_ 2200 Anny Pentagon.Washington. DC 20310Deput) Chiefol?StatT for Intelligence 2200 Army Pentagon. Washington. DC203 l0 FOR Commander, US. Southern Command. 351 1 Northwest 91st Avenue, Miami, FL 33l72SUBJECT: Request for Classi?cation Review States v. Private First Class I l?l?C)8. rd. d. l. The prosecution team in the above-referenced case requests the appropriateauthority finalize their classification reviews olithe enclosed documents and evidence to be usedin the criminal prosecution Manning. Sec Enclosure 1.2. PFC Manning is charged with downloading various classi?ed documents.photographs. and videos from Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRN ET) websites andtransferring them to his personal computer. PFC Manning is also charged with transmitting thisinfomiation to persons or organizations not entitled to receive it. in violation ol'United Stateslaw.? This request memorializes previous discussions concerning the use of documents andevidence at trial originating in your agency and the classi?cation ofthosc documents andevidence. This request is in addition to the Request for Consent to Disclose Classi liedInformation to the Accused and the Defense, dated 14 March 20l . PFC Manning is currently charged with multiple violations of the UCMJ. including violating Articles92. 104. and I34 ofthe (I8 U.S.C. 703 and I8 I030). Sec Enclosures 2 and 3.i\l. i \l U515 UNI it l

e-Highlighter

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

Un-highlight all Un-highlight selectionu Highlight selectionh