Title: Multiple Def Discovery Req

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 6810 October 2012 UNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYREQUESTMANNING. Bradley E., PFCus. Army. Headquarters and Headquarters Company. Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall.Fort Myer. VA 2221 DATED: 29 October 20101. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules ofEvidence. Manual for United States, 2008. Article 46,Uniform Code ofMilitary Justice, and other applicable law, request fordiscovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case of United Statesv. Bradley E. Manning.a. A copy of any handwritten. typed or recorded statements by the accused orany other potential witness in connection with the investigation of this casemade to representatives of the government to include summaries ofconversations with representatives of the government. which were notattached as allied papers at the time the charges were preferred.b. The-contents of all statements, oral or written, made by the accused thatare relevant to the case. known to the trial counsel, and within control of thearmed forces. The defense specifically requests that any statement made bythe accused that the trial counsel intends to introduce into evidence bereduced to writing and disclosed to the defense. The defense needs thesestatements in written form in order to prepare motions to suppress underThe defense also requests any derivative evidence bedisclosed to the defense M.R.E. "?Speci?cally, defenserequests the complete Instant Message chat log and any emails allegedly sentbetween PFC Manning and Mr. Adrian A. Lamo.c. Disclosure of all evidence seized from the person or property of theaccused, whether believed to be owned by the accused or anyone else, that theprosecution intends to offer into evidence against the accused at trial.*Speci?cal|y. defense requests the results of any examination of computersallegedly used or owned by PFC Manning. and for the government to makethe hard drives from these computers accessible to the defense computerforensic expert Mr. Eric Lakes ofCyber Agents lnc., 128 Southland Drive.Lexington, Kentucky?. 40503.Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningd. Copies of all medical and mental reports relating to the accused.*Specifically, the defense requests copies of any behavioral healthassessments of PFC Manning both before, during, and after the deployment tolraq.e. Any known evidence tending to diminish credibility of any witnessincluding, but not limited to, prior convictions under M.R.E. 609, evidence ofother character, conduct, or bias bearing on witness credibility under M.R.E.608. Speci?cally, the defense requests the name and contact information forany law enforcement agent working with Mr. Adrian A. Lamo. See Brady v.Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); Um'redS!ares v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976).The defense also requests any other evidence in the possession of thegovernment favorable to the accused, or tends to negate the guilt of theaccused of any offense charged, or reduce the punishment for any offensecharged. f. The names and contact information for all government investigators whohave participated or are presently participating in the investigation of thecase.g. Any evidence ofother crimes, wrongs, or acts which the prosecution seeksto introduce for any purpose whatsoever. See M.R.E. -104(b).h. All personal or business notes, memorandurns. and writings prepared byinvestigators in said case which are not furnished pursuant to any otherprovisions ofthis request.i. The military status of all witnesses. Where applicable. the defense requeststhe date of separation from the Army, and the discharge provisions used toeffect such discharge iffor otherthan completion ofthe obligated term ofservice. Pursuant to M.R.E. 301(c)(2), disclosure is requested of anyimmunity or leniency pertaining to witnesses or potential witnesses.j. The Tactical Sensitive Compartment lnformation (T-SCIF) accreditationpacket for FOB Hammer. The SOP for the at FOB Hammer. Thename and contact information for the security manager at the T-SCIF at FOBHammer. A copy ofthe Security Classification Guide (SCG) for the at FOB Hammer. PFC Manning?s training records related to his MOS. Any?documentation PFC Manning has signed dealing with information security.A list of any refresher training or in-country training PFC Manning hasreceived on infonnation security. Ik. Any evidence of prior Article 15 action, civilian or military convictions,and adverse administrative actions relating to any of the government'sI Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningwitnesses, defense witnesses, or the accused. Any evidence that thegovemment intends to use for impeachment purposes ofthe accused. or anyother witness. This includes any character evidence the government intendsto introduce at trial under M.R.E. 404.l. A list of all witnesses the prosecution intends to call during the Article 32along with their addresses and phone numbers and copies of all prior writtenstatements.m. Copies of all business and official records which the prosecution intendsto introduce either during the Article 32 or at trial.n. A list of all exhibits the govemment plans to utilize at the Article 32 or attrial.o. Any evidence. testimony. or witnesses the government intends to use atthe Article 32 or at trial that have been obtained through grants ofimmunity,or any other concessions being granted to a witness, the content of suchtestimony or evidence. and the terms of any such grants ofimmunity orconcessions.p. .All documents, memoranda. or records of conversations pertaining to thiscase, whether prepared by investigators, commanders, convening authority orany other person. The request in this paragraph includes but is not limited to:A compete copy ofthe CID file(s) (including but not limited to the so-called "right" and "left side") interviews, notes, and Agent ActivitySummaries or any other files maintained by a law enforcement agency at FortMyer. Fort Drum, Contingency Operating Station Hammer. or any otherinstallation that participated in the investigation ofthis case.(2) A complete copy of any other documents or ?les pertaining to theabove named individual.(3) A complete copy of any emails or memorandums relating to thepreferral of charges in this case or to the level ofcourt-martial.q. Any writings used to refresh the memory of any government witness. IAWM.R.E. 612.r. Copies ofthe report concerning the polygraph examinations administeredto any person related to this case. This includes copies ofstatements takenafter the polygraph exam.Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manning5. A copy of any Freedom oflnformation Act (FOIA) request and anyresponse or internal discussions ofany such FOIA request that is related tothe classi?ed video charged in Speci?cation 1, Chargel and Specification],2, and of Charge ll.2. The defense requests that the govemment informs the defense counsel ifitdoes not intend to Comply with any speci?c provision ofthis request.3. It is understood that this is a continuing request.-1. A copy ofthis request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 29October 2010.4DAVID EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED suresDEFENSE DISCOVERYREQUESTMANNING, Bradley E.. PFCU.S. Army. -Headquarters and Headquarters ompany, U.S.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall.Fort Myer, VA 2221 IDATED: 15 November 20101. In accordance with the Rules for ourts-Martial and the Military Rules ofEvidence, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 2008. Article 46.Uniform Code of Military Justice, and other applicable law, request forsupplemental discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case ofUnited States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The defense requests that the govemment respond to each item listed in its29 October 2010 discovery request and the following additional discovery:a. The names and contact information for all govemment investigators whohave participated or who are presently participating in the investigation of thecase. previously requested on 29 October 2010. Specifically. the names ofthe investigators and an inventory of the items seized from the home of Ms.Debra Van 1492 Selworthy Road, Potomac, MD 20854 on 2November 2010. Additionally, a list ofitems seized from Mr. David Houseand a copy of all reports or analysis of the items seized by the Department ofHomeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), or any othergovernment agency on 3 November 2010. Finally, a copy of all fieldinterviews and reports conducted by the FBI or any other governmentalorganization involving .witnesses from Boston. Massachusetts or any othercity from'24 May 2010 to the present involved in this case.b. The entire counseling packet for PFC Manning. Specifically, anycounseling or assessments done of PFC Manning by his chain of command,MSG Paul Adkins. CPT Casey Martin. SSG Peter Bigelow, CPT MatthewFreeburg, or ISO Mark Woodwonh.c. All Behavioral Health Assessments (BHA) or mental evaluations of PFCManning, previously requested by the defense on 29 October 2010. Thedefense requests any assessment by CAPT Kenneth J. lverson, CAPT BruceBalfour, CAPT William Hocter. CPT Eden Critchiield, CPT Dale Hill or anyother individual who has evaluated or commented on PFC Manning?s mentalState at any time. Specifically. the defense requests the 22 May and 28 MayDefense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manning2010 BI-IA, and all assessments for POI recommendations to the QuanticoCon?nement Facility.d. Any and all documents or emails considered by CPT Kevin Ley as themilitary magistrate to support his search and seizure authorizations.e. Recorded video footage of when PFC Manning collapsed in con?nementas referenced at 000095 and any other recorded audio or video footage ofPFC Manning while in con?nement either in Iraq, Kuwait, or the UnitedStates.f. Network logs for all computers searched by CPT Thomas Cherepl-co or anyother government employee or investigator as referenced at 000186-87.g. The application. Security and System Network logs obtained from PFCBlake Dudley as referenced at 0000187.h. The results of SA Calder Robertson and SA David Shaver?sanalysis of any computers analyzed in this case as well as copies of anyinvestigative notes or assessments by Computer Crimes Investigative Unit(CCIU). Additionally, the names ofall individuals from the CCIU or anyother government agency that have performed or are performing anycomputer forensic analysis in this case.i. All documentation or information provided by the government to LTCCraig Merutka. Speci?cally, copies of the chat logs referenced at 000455 andcopies ofthe CCIU reports referenced at 000463.j. The results of inquiry/investigation and all discussions and assessmentsdone in compliance with Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 5210.50,DOD Directive 5200.l Chapter 10, DOD Instruction5240.4, and Executive Order 13526. Speci?cally, the defense requests theanswers to the following required investigative determinations by the aboveDirectives, Instruction, and Executive Order: When, where, and howdid the incident occur? What persons, situations, or conditions caused orcontributed to the incident? What classi?ed information was compromised?If a compromise occurred, what speci?c classi?ed information and/ormaterial was involved? If classi?ed information is alleged to have been lost,what steps were taken to locate the material? In what specific media articleor program did the classi?ed information appear? To what extent was thecompromised information disseminated? Was the information properlyclassi?ed? Was the information oflicially released? Are there any leads tobe investigated that might lead to identi?cation of the person(s) responsiblefor the compromise?l\J Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningk. The defense also requests copies of any noti?cation to the OriginalClassi?cation Authorities (OCA), the contact information for the OCAS, andthe required answers by Directive that states when noti?ed of thecompromise of classi?ed information or material, the original classi?cationauthority for that information or material shall: Verify the classi?cation andduration of classi?cation initially assigned to the information; Reevaluate theclassi?cation of the information to determine whether the classi?cationshould be continued or changed; and complete a damage assessment inaccordance with Instruction and Directive. The veri?cation,reevaluation and damage assessment process is required by DOD Directive tobe completed as soon as possible following noti?cation of a compromise.3. The defense requests that the government informs the defense counsel if itdoes not intend to comply with any speci?c provision of this request.4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.5. A copy ofthis request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 15November 2010. Civilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDISCOVERYREQUESTMANNING. Bradley E.. PFCU.S. Army.Headquarters and Headquarters Company. US.Army Garrison. Joint Base .Vl_ver-Henderson Hall,Fort Myer. VA 2221 DATED: 8 December 2010l. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence.Manual for Courts-Martial. United States. 2008. Article 46. Uniform Code ofi\lilitaryJustice. and other applicable law. request for supplemental discovery is hereby made forthe charged offenses in the case of United States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The defense requests that the government respond to each item listed in its 29 Octoberand l5 November 2010 discovery requests and the following additional discovery:a) The names and contact information for all govemment investigators who haveparticipated or who are presently participating in the investigation ofthe case. previouslyrequested on 29 October and 15 November 2010. Speci?cally. contact information forSA Hyung Kim from the Department ofDefense and SA Richard Bowen from the ArmyComputer Crimes Unit and an inventory ofthe items seized from the home of Mr. PaulFrancia at 601 Hazelwood Terrace, Rochester. New York M609.b) All forensic results and investigative reports by the Department of State regarding theinformation obtained by Wikileaks as referenced by Assistant Secretary ofState forPublic Affairs P.J. Crowley. Additionally. any specific damage assessment by theDepartment of State regarding the disclosures ofthe diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks.Any assessment, report. e?mail. or document by Secretary of State Hillary RodhamClinton regarding the disclosures of diplomatic cables by Wikileaks. Any report. e-mail.or document discussing the need for the State Department to disconnect access to its tilesfrom the govemment's classi?ed network.c) All forensic results and investigative reports by the Department of Defense regardingthe information obtained by and the results ofany joint investigation with theFederal Bureau of Investigation (F Bl) as referenced by Secretary of Defense Robert M.Gates. Additionally, any specific damage assessment by the Department ofDefenseregarding the disclosure ofclassified documents and videos. the subject ofthis case. byWikiLeaks.Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningcl) Any and all documentation related to the Department oflustice investigation into thealleged leaks by WikiLeaks as referenced by Attorney General ofthe United States EricH. Holder.e) Any and all documentation related to President Barack H. Obama?s order for aninvestigation and a government wide?review of how agencies safeguard sensitiveinformation. Additionally, any and all documents related to the steps the administrationis considering regarding these leaks and the nature of the criminal investigation underwayinto how the documents were made public as referenced by Robert Gibbs. the WhiteHouse spokesman.1) Any assessment given, or discussions concerning, the Wikileaks disclosures by anymember ofthe government to President Obama. Any e-mail, report, assessment,directive. or discussion by President Obama to the Department of Defense. Department ofState or Department of Justice.g) Any and all documents relating to the Government Task Force created to review thevarious WikiLeaks releases for potentially damaging information prior to the actualreleases. This Task Force apparently had over 120 members reviewing the documentsthat were either released or pending release to determine the possible harm to nationalsecurity.h) The results ofany investigation or review by Mr. Russell Travers who has beenappointed by President Obama to head an interagency committee assigned to assess thedamage caused WikiLeaks exposures and to organize efforts to tighten security measuresin government agencies.i) Any and all documentation related to the Pentagon's review on the policy andtechnological shortfalls that led to the WikiLeaks disclosures as referenced by Pentagonspokesman Bryan Whitman.j) Any and all documentation related to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)investigation of Wikileaks announced by CIA Director Leon Panetta and any internal orexternal memorandums addressing the investigation of Wikileaks, PFC Bradley Manningor the nature ofthe Office of Security?s investigation into these matters.k) Any and all documentation relating to the govemment?s position oftaking a hard lineon unauthorized leaks of information, as demonstrated by the prosecutions ofa formerNational Security Agency official, a Federal Bureau oflnvestigation linguist, and a StateDepartment contractor and referenced by CIA Director Leon Panetta. Additionally, anyand all meniorandums. e-mails. or other references by Congressmen. Senators, orgovernment officials concerning the disposition ofthis case or the need to punish PFCBradley Manning.Defense Discovery Request - Bradley E. Manning1) Any and all documentation. e-mails, or reports given to the Summary Court-MartialConvening Authority, the General Court-Martial Convening Authority, or the Staff JudgeAdvocate concerning the disposition of PFC Bradley Manning?s case or the nature ofthecharges or possible charges against PFC Manning. Speci?cally, any attempt to in?uencethe independent discretion of anyone involved in the military justice process.rm) Any and all documents or observation notes by employees ofthe Quanticoconfinement facility relating to PFC Bradley Manning.n) The results ofthe 15-6 investigation into the govemmenfs improper release ofclassi?ed information to the defense. Whether the 15-6 investigating officer looked intothe following additional potential spillage:i. The disc allegedly found in PFC Mannings Room indicated the contents wereSECRET. A photo ofthe disk can be found at 000293. Was the title on the diskclassi?ed or not?ii. The photos ofthe T-SCIF show a map in the background that was partiallyexposed (000301 and 000302).The snapshots of the computer screens in the T-SCIF were exposed. Was thereclassi?ed information being viewed on the screen?? (000305 and 000306).iv. The snapshots ofthe computers had documentation on the table appear to showclassi?ed information. (000333, 000334, and 000335).v. Was the investigating of?cer made aware ofthe govemment disclosure oftheoriginal five discs to the military defense counsel??3. The defense requests that the government inform the defense counsel if it does notintend to comply with any speci?c provision ofthis request.4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.5. A copy ofthis request was served on Trial Counsel by e?mail on 8 December 2010. X, I Ix [Davin BSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYREQUESTMANNING. Bradley E1. PFCU.S. Army, Headquarters an ea quarters Company. U.S.Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall.Fort Myer. VA 22211?lDATED: 10 January 201 1. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence.Manual for Courts-Martial. United States. 2008. Article 46, Uniform Code of MilitaryJustice. and other applicable law. request for supplemental discover)? is hereby made forthe charged offenses in the case of United States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The defense requests that the government respond to each item listed in its previousdiscovery requests on 29 October, l5 November, and 8 December 2010 and to alsorespond to the following additional discovery:Any information relating to 18 U.S.C. 2703 order or any search warrant by thegovernment of witter, accbook. Google or any other social media site. Any metadata,MD5 hash marks or other unique identifying information obtained from the 2703(d) orderor search warrant.b) The results and all supporting documents for the investigation conducted by LTGRobert Caslen Jr. The report is directed by the Secretary of the Army John Mcllugh andis supposed to be completed by 1 February 2011. it will address hon PFC BradleyManning was selected tor his job. how he was trained- whether his superiors missedwarning signs that he was downloading documents that he did not need to read and howPFC Manning allegedly released the documents.ct Results of any inquiry and testimony taken by House of Representative oversightcommittee led by Representative Darrell lssa. The committee is due to look intoWikileaks. the actions of Attorney General Eric Holder. and the investigation of PFCBradley Manning.d) A copy of all Agents investigation Reports maintained under CID Regulation 195-]not previously provided to the defense. A copy of all agent notes. other governmentalinvestigative reports. and sworn statements.3. The defense requests that the government inform the defense counsel if it does notintend to comply with any specific provision of this request.4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manning5. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by e-mail on 10 January 2011. ID EDWARD .Civilian Defense Counsel UNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYREQUESTMANNING. Bradley E.. PFCU.S. Arm)?. -4Headquarters and Headquarters Company. US.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,Fort Myer. VA 22211DATED: 16 February 201 ~ov' h?r -5: I. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence,Manual for Courts-Martial. United States. 2008. Article 46. Uniform Code of MilitaryJustice. and other applicable law, request for supplemental discovery is hereby made forthe charged offenses in the case of United States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The defense requests that the government respond to each item listed in its previousdiscovery requests on October. 15 November, 8 December 2010, and I0 January 201land to also respond to the following additional discovery:a) The defense team has learned that a number of soldiers at Fort Drum have received aimposed flag as a result ofinvestigations into the alleged leak by PFC Manning.The defense requests the names of the soldiers who have been flagged. the nature for whythey were ?agged, who imposed the flag. and any other derogatory information relating tothis case to include. but not limited to: any reprimand (oral or written), UCMJ action, oradministrative separation actions.b) The defense team has leamed that Army CID has audio surveillance of the firstvisitation booth immediately adjacent to the control room where we meet with PFCManning. This appears to be the booth where attomey-client visits take place. Thedefense requests a copy of any and all audio or video tapes of PFC Manning at any timewhether they be from in person visits or from telephonic conversations.A copy of the latest CID investigation report and all Agents Investigation Reportsmaintained under CID Regulation I95-I not previously provided to the defense.Additionally. a copy ofall agent notes. other govemmental investigative reports. andswom statements. d) A roster of all individuals assigned to HIIC. 2BCT, Division, speci?callyany soldier assigned in the S2 Section The defense requests full name. rank,email and phone contact information for each individual.e) Access to all classi?ed infonnation that the govemment intends to use in this case.To include any damage assessment or information review conducted by anygovemmental agency or at the direction of a govemmental agency.Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manning3. The defense requests that the government inform the defense counsel if it does notintend to comply with any speci?c provision of this request. 4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.5. A copy ofthis request was served on Trial Counsel by e-mail on 16 February 201 1.o'_7wir> EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYREQUESTV.U.S. ArmyHeadquarters and Headquarters Company. U.S.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,Fort Myer, VA 22211IMANNING, Bradley E., PFC .3DATED: 13 May 2011.1. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence,Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 2008, Article 46, Uniform Code of -MilitaryJustice. and other applicable law, request for supplemental discovery is hereby made forthe charged offenses in the case of United States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The defense requests that the government continue with its obligation to providediscovery in response to each item listed in its previous discovery requests on 29 October2010,15 November 2010, 8 December 2010, 10 January 2011. and 16 February 20ll andto also respond to the below requested discovery.3. The defense requests that the government produce any and all documents (sworn orsigned statements, photographs, emails tangible items (books, papers, andreports (investigative summaries, damage assessments, Original Classi?cation Authority(OCA) determinations, etc..) conducted by the United States Army, the Department ofDefense. the Department of Justice, the National Security Agency, the DefenseIntelligence Agency, the Department of Homeland Security Office of Intelligence andAnalysis, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and theBureau of Diplomatic Security (DS). The trial counsel, upon defense request, has anaffirmative obligation to seek out requested evidence that is in the possession of thegovernment even if that evidence is not already in the immediate possession of the trialcounsel. United States v. Williams, 50 MJ. 436, 441 (C .A.A.F . 1999); United States v.Bryan, 868 F.2d 1032, 1036 Cir. 1989); United States v. Brooks. 966 F.2d 1500, 1503(1992) (the government is considered to have possession of information that is in thecontrol of agencies that are ?closely aligned with the prosecution?).4. The defense requests any Brady material in the government?s possession. Braay v.Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (holding that due process requires the government to turnover exculpatory evidence in its possession). The defense also requests any material in the government?s possession. Jencks v. United States, 353 U.S. 657 (1957)(holding that, in a criminal prosecution. the government may not withhold documentsrelied upon by government witnesses, even where disclosure of those documents mightdamage national security matters). Speci?cally, the defense requests copies of allstatements, oral or written. by any witnesses. The defense also requests any evidence inDefense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningthe government?s possession that contradicts or is inconsistent with the government?stheory of the case.5. The defense requests that the government inform the defense counsel if it does notintend to comply with any speci?c provision of this request.6. It is understood that this is a continuing request.7. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by e-mail on 13 May 2011.DAVID EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED TATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYv. REQUESTMANNING, Bradley E.. US. Amiy. Headquarters an ea quarters Company. US.Army Garrison. Joint Base Myer-llenderson Hall.Fort Myer, VA 2221 1DATED: 13 October 201 I. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence, Manualfor Courts?Martial. United States. 2008. Article 46. Uniform Code of Military Justice. and otherapplicable law. request for discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case ofUnited States v. Bradley E. Manning. a. A copy of any adverse administrative or UCMJ action. all supporting documentation. and anyrebuttal materials to such action based upon the 15-6 investigation conducted by LTG Robert Caslen Jr. or any other govemmental investigation. with regards to any individual that was thesubject of such an adverse action in relation to the alleged leak of classi?ed infonnation in thiscase. The request includes. but is not limited to. the following individuals: COL. David M.Miller, COL Paul R. Walter. Brian D. Kerns, LTC Rodney Gar?eld. LTC RandolphWardle, MAJ Eric Davis. MAJ Eric Graham. MAJ Jason A. Morrow. MAJ Clifford D. Clausen.MAJ Elijah A Dreher. PT Matthew W. Freeburg. ISG Eric I-I. Usbeck. CPT Thomas M.Cherepko, CPT Steven J. Lim. PT Barclay D. Keay, CPT Casey Martin, 1LT Tanya M.-Gaag.1LT Elizabeth A. Fields. CW2 Joshua D. Ehresman, CW2 Chad Eastep, CW2 Alfred Lyons,W01 Kyle J. Balonek. SFC Paul D. Adkins, SSG Lawrence W. Mitchell. SPC Daniel W.Padgett. and PFC Jirleah W. Showmanb. An inspection of all seized governmental computers from the Tactical SensitiveInformation Facility (T-SCIF) and Tactical Operations Center (TOC) ofHeadquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC). 2nd Brigade Combat Team (BCT), l0Mountain Division. Forward Operating Base (FOB) Hammer. Iraq for the presence of any and allunauthorized computer programs to include. but not limited to: mlRC? a full featured InternetRelay? Chat client for Windows that can be used to communicate. share. play or work with otherson IRC networks): get (a web crawler program designed for robustness over slow or unstablenetwork connections); GEOTRANS (an application program which allows a user to easilyconvert geographic coordinates among a wide variety of coordinate systems. map projectionsand datums); and Grid Extractor (a binary executable capable of extracting MGRS grids frommultiple free text documents and importing them into a Micro.sol?t Excel spreadsheet).c. The defense requests any Brady material in the govemment?s possession. Brady v. Maryland.373 U.S. 83 (1963) (holding that due process requires the government to turn over exculpatoryevidence in its possession). The defense also requests any material in the govemmenfsDefense Discovery Request PFC Bradiey E. Manningpossession. in United States". 353 US. 657 (1957) (holding that. in a criminalprosecution. the government may not withhold documents relied upon by government witnesses.even where disclosure of those documents might damage national security matters). The defensespeci?cally requests the following information:i) White House: any report or recommendation conceming the alleged leaks in this case byMr. Russell Travers. National Security Staffs Senior Advisor for Information Access andSecurity Policy. Mr. Travers was tasked to lead a comprehensive effort to review the allegedleaks in this case. Any and all documentation related to President Barack H. Obama?s order foran investigation and a government wide-review of how agencies safeguard sensitive information.Additionally. any and all documents related to the steps the administration is consideringregarding these leaks and the nature of the criminal investigation underway into how thedocuments were made public as referenced by former White House Press Secretary RobertGibbs. Any assessment given. or discussions concerning. the Wikileaks disclosures by anymember of the government to President Obama. Any e?mail. report. assessment. directive. ordiscussion by President Obama to the Department of Defense. Department of State orDepartment of Justice:ii) President?s Intelligence Advisory Board: any report or recommendation concerning thealleged leaks in this case by Chainnan Chuck Hagel or any other member of the IntelligenceAdvisory Board:Central Intelligence Agency: any report. damage assessment or recommendation by theWikileaks Task Force or any other CIA member concerning the alleged leaks in this case. Anyinternal or external memorandums addressing the investigation of Wikileaks. PFC BradleyManning or the nature of tl1e Office of Securitys investigation into these matters:iv) Department of Defense: All forensic results and investigative reports by the Departmentof Defense regarding the information obtained. by Wikileaks and the results of any jointinvestigation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as referenced by Fonner Secretaryof Defense Robert M. Gates. Additionally. any speci?c damage assessment by the Departmentof Defense regarding the disclosure of classified documents and videos, the subject of this case.by WikiLeaks. Speci?cally, any report by the Information Review Task Force (IRTF) that wasresponsible for leading a comprehensive Department of Defense review ofclassi?ed documentsobtained by the Wikileaks website and any other associated materials;v) Department oflusticez Any and all documentation related to the Department of Justiceinvestigation into the alleged leaks by ikilieaks as referenced by Attorney General of theUnited States "Eric H. Holder:vi) Department of State: Any and all documentation relating to a review of the alleged leaksin this case and any specific damage assessment by the Department of State regarding thedisclosure ofdiplomatic cables. the subject ofthis case, by WikiLeaks; Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningvii) Of?ce of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI): Any and all documentationrelating to any review or damage assessment conducted by ODNI or in cooperation with anyother government agency;Other Govemment Intelligence Agencies: Any and all documents relating to any taskforce or other governmental intelligence agency review of the various alleged leaks in this caseto include. but not limited to. any damage assessment based upon the alleged leaks or anycorrective action taken by the United States Government due to the alleged leaks: ANDix) House of Representatives: Results of any inquiry and testimony taken by House ofRepresentative oversight committee led by Representative Darrell Issa. The committeediscussed the actions of Wikileaks. the actions of Attorney General Eric Holder. and theinvestigation of PFC Bradley Manning.d. The defense requests a copy of the Preliminary Inquiry Report. According to Department ofDefense 5 l05.21-M-l. once an SCI Security Official determines that a security violationhas occurred. the SCI Security Official must report the violation within 72 hours of discovery tothe appropriate Senior Of?cials of the Intelligence Community (SOIC) or Senior IntelligenceOfficer (S10). e. The defense requests a copy ofthe Damage Assessment ofCompromiscd Information that isrequired to be submitted to the Special Security Officer (SSO) under 5105.21-M-l once anSCI Security Of?cial determines that a security violation has occurred. The damage assessmentis supposed to contain the date of the assessment; the name and office symbol conducting theassessment; subject/title, date. number. originator and original classification of document;whether the document can be declassified or downgraded. either in whole or in part; justi?cationfor classi?cation (the speci?c statements in the document which are classified. the basis forclassi?cation. and a complete bibliography of all classi?ed source materials used in preparationof the document); whether the classi?ed information identi?ed is accurate; whether the classi?edinformation identi?ed was the subject of any official release; and whether the infonnationidenti?ed as classi?ed can be edited for the purpose of prosecution.f. The defense requests a copy of the ?nal security violation investigation report submitted to theSSO Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under The report is used toassess intent. location ofthe incident. risk ofcompromise, sensitivity of information. andmitigating factors in arriving at a ?nal analysis of the incident.g. A copy of all SCI security management and self?inspection reports for the of HHC,2nd BCT, 10 Mountain Division, FOB Hammer. Iraq.2. The defense requests that the government informs the defense counsel if it does not intend tocomply with any speci?c provision of this request.3. It is understood that this is a continuing request.Defense DisCover}- Request -- Bradley Manning4. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 13 October 201 1. Civilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYv. REQUESTMANNING, Bradley E., PFCUS. Army, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S.Anny Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,Fort Myer, VA 22211DATED: 15 November 20111. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence, Manualfor Courts-Martial, United States, 2008, Article 46, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and otherapplicable law, request for discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case ofUnited States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The Defense requests that the Government respond to each item listed in its previousdiscovery requests and to also respond to the following additional discovery:a) Whether any NIPR or SIPR computer within the 2d BCT T-SCIF or Supply Annex requiredan end-user to have their ID CAC Card in the computer;b) The required log-in procedure for use of the HP laptop, touch smart TS2, serial numberCNF8492K3 c) All NIPR and SIPR logs for any computer within the 2d BCT T-SCIF from 1 November 2009to 27 May 2010;d) An EnCase forensic image of any computer seized by the government and all otherinformation relied upon by the government to claim information leaked to Wikileaks wasobtained by any terrorist group such as Al-Qaeda or Hizb-L Islami Gulbuddin e) A current curriculum vitae for each forensic expert who has worked on this case for thegovernment;0 Any classification review and damage assessment for documents related to Speci?cation 8and 9 of Charge 11;g) Any classi?cation review and damage assessment for the document related to Speci?cation15 of Charge 11.3. The Defense requests that the Government provide notice in writing if it does not intend tocomply with any specific provision of this request.4. It is understood that this is a continuing request. Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manning5. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 15 November 2011.DAVID EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYv. REQUESTMANNING, Bradley E., PFCus. Amy, 3Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,Fort Myer, VA 2221 1DATED: 16 November 201 1I. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence, Manualfor Courts-Martial, United States, 2008, Article 46, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and otherapplicable law, request for discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case ofUnited States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The Defense requests that the Government respond to each item listed in its previousdiscovery requests and to also respond to the following additional discovery:a) An EnCase forensic image of any computer seized by the government and all otherinfonnation relied upon by the government to claim infonnation alleged to have been disclosedin this case was in the possession of an unauthorized individual in December of 2009 (accordingto the Government, this individual was a representative of WikiLeaks);b) Any damage assessment or review completed in this case either by or with the assistance ofthe Defense Intelligence Agency, the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive orany other governmental agency;3. The Defense requests that the Government provide notice in writing if it does not intend tocomply with any specific provision of this request.4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.5. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 16 November 201l.DAVID EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYREQUESTMANNING. Bradley F.., PFCU.S. Amiy, Headquarters an ea quarters Company, U.S.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall.F011 Myer. VA 2221 DATED: 20 January 2012I . In accordance with the Rules for Courts?Manial and the Military Rules of Evidence, Manualfor Courts-Martial, United States. 2008. Article 46. Unifonn Code of Military Justice. and otherapplicable law, request for discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case ofUnited States v. Bradley E. Marming. 2. The Defense requests that the Government respond to each item listed in its previousdiscovery requests of 29 October 2010, 15 November 2010. 8 December 2010. 10 January 2011,19 January 2011.16-February 20ll,13 May 2011, l3 October 2011,15 November 201 1. and 16November 201 and to also respond to the following additional discovery:a) Complete contact infonnation for Mr. Robert E. Betz. USCYBERCOM ChiefClassification Advisory Officer;b) Complete contact infonnation for Mr. Patrick F. Kennedy. Under Secretary of State forManagement;c) Complete contact information for Mr. Robert Roland:d) Complete contact information for the individual that completed the Classi?cation Reviewfor the item charged in Speci?cation l5 of Charge II. The Defense also requests a copy of theClassi?cation Review for the item charged in Specification 15 ofCharge ll.3. The Defense requests that the respond to the following additional questionsregarding previously requested discovery:a) Does the Government possess any report. damage assessment or recommendation by theWikiLeaks Task Force or any other CIA member concerning the alleged leaks in this case?? ifyes. please indicate why these items have not been provided to the Defense. If no. pleaseindicate why the Government has failed to secure these items:b) Docs the Government possess any report. damage assessment. or recommendation as aresult of any joint investigation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or any othergovemmental agency concerning the alleged leaks in this case?? if yes. please indicate why theseDefense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningitems have not been provided to the Defense. If no, please indicate why the Government hasfailed to secure these items?.c) Does the Government possess any report, damage assessment, or recommendation by theInformation Review Task Force (IRTF) concerning the alleged leaks in this case? If yes, pleaseindicate why these items have not been provided to the Defense. If no. please indicate why theGovernment has failed to secure these items;d) Does the Government possess any report. damage assessment, or recommendation by theDepartment of Justice concerning the alleged leaks in this case? lfyes, please indicate why theseitems have not been provided to the Defense. If no, please indicate why the Government hasfailed to secure these items;e) Does the Government possess any report, damage assessment, or recommendation by theDepartment of State concerning the alleged leaks in this case?? If yes, please indicate why theseitems have not been provided to the Defense. If no, please indicate why the Government hasfailed to secure these items:Does the Government possess any report, damage assessment. or recommendation by theOffice of the Director of National Intelligence concerning the alleged leaks in this case? If yes,please indicate why these items have not been provided to the Defense. If no, please indicatewhy the Government has failed to secure these items;g) Does the Government possess any report, damage assessment. or recommendation by theDefense Intelligence Agency concerning the alleged leaks in this case? If yes. please indicate why these items have not been provided to the Defense. If no, please indicate why theGovernment has failed to secure these items;h) Does the Government possess any report, damage assessment, or recommendation by theOffice of the National Counterintelligence Executive concerning the alleged leaks in this case?If yes, please indicate why these items have not been provided to the Defense. If no, pleaseindicate why the Government has failed to secure these items;4. The Defense requests that the Government provide notice in writing if it does not intend tocomply with any speci?c provision of this request.5. It is understood that this is a continuing request.6. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 20 January 2012.1/ fr?QM/vio EDWARD coomnsCivilian Defense Counsell-JUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYv. REQUESTMANNING, Bradle E., PFCU.S. Army,Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,Fort Myer, VA 22211DATED: 26 June 20121. In accordance with the Rules for Courts?Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence, Manualfor Courts-Martial, United States, 2008, Article 46, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and otherapplicable law, request for discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case ofUnited States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The Defense requests that the Government provide the following information:a) The memorandum from the Government Counsel to HQDA requesting the preservationand production of records relating to the court martial case of U.S. v. PFC Manning.b) Pursuant to the Court?s Order, the Government produce any Department of Defense ?lepertaining to PFC Manning IAW R.C.M. 70l(a)(2) and 70l(a)(6).3. The Defense requests that the Government provide notice in writing if it does not intend tocomply with any speci?c provision of this request.4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.5. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 26 June 2012.DAVID EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYv. REQUESTMANNING, Bradley E., PFCU.S. Army,Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,Fon Myer, VA 22211DATED: 9 July 20121. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial and the Military Rules of Evidence, Manualfor Courts-Martial, United States, 2008, Article 46, Uniform Code of Military Justice, and otherapplicable law, request for discovery is hereby made for the charged offenses in the case ofUnited States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. The Defense requests that the Government provide a copy of the video referenced in BatesNumber 00042936. According to LCPL .E. Miller, the Quantico Brig recorded an incidentwhere the guards had to assist in freeing PFC Manning from the suicide smock that he waswearing.3. Previously, the Defense requested copies of all audio and video footage of PFC Manningwhile in con?nement. See Defense Discovery Request dated 15 November 2010, para. The Defense alerted the Government that its request was a continuing request. Id. at para. 4.The Defense requests that the Government ensure that it has produced all audio and video ofPFC Marming while in con?nement.4. It is understood that this is a continuing request.5. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by email on 9 July 2012.DAVID EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense CounselUNITED STATESDEFENSE DISCOVERYv. REQUESTMANNING, Bradley E., PFCUS. mmy Headquarters an ea quarters Company, U.S.Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall,Fort Myer, VA 22211DATED: 1 August 20121. In accordance with the Rules for Courts-Martial 70l(a)(2), 70l(a)(6) and the Military Rulesof Evidence, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 2008, Article 46, Uniform Code ofMilitary Justice, and other applicable law, request for discovery is hereby made for the chargedoffenses in the case of United States v. Bradley E. Manning.2. PFC Manning was held at Marine Corps Base Quantico from 29 July 2010 to 20 April 2011.During this time, he was held in Maximum Custody (MAX) and under Prevention of Injury(POI) watch.3. On 8 December 2010, the Defense made a discovery request for all documentation fromQuantico pertaining to PFC Manning. The Government provided extensive documentationrelated to PFC Manning?s con?nement at Quantico in October of 201 1. The Defense believedthat this was the full extent of the information the Government had from Quantico.4. On 26 August 2012, the Government produced 84 emails from valious individuals. TheGovernment indicated that these emails were ?obviously" material to the preparation of thedefense for the Article 13 purposes. MAJ Fein indicated that the Government received theseemails from Quantico approximately 6 months ago. However, the Government did not beginreviewing the emails until 25 July 2012.5. On 31 August 2012, CPT Joe Morrow, by e-mail, informed the Defense that the Governmenthad ?made a generalized request for Quantico to gather and preserve documents and informationpertaining to PFC Manning?s confinement.? CPT Morrow stated that ?they responded byproviding documents and information pertaining to his con?nement. and included some emails.?6. The Defense requests that the Government provide the following discovery:a) The memorandum/e-mail/document from the Government to Quantico requesting thatthey preservation and produce documents and information pertaining to PFC Manning?scon?nement;b) The names of the individuals who the Government sent the Quantico preservation requestto and the date which the Government made its request; Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningc) All documentation provided by these individuals in response to the Govemment?srequest, the date this information was provided, and the individuals who provided therequested information; andd) Any other e-mails or documentation that the Government is aware of and has notpreviously provided to the Defense dealing with PFC Manning?s con?nement conditionswhile at Quantico.7. The Defense also requests any e-mails or documentation relating to PFC Manning or PFCManning?s con?nement conditions from or to the following speci?cally listed individuals:a) LtGen. George J. Commanding General, 3300 RussellRoad Building: 3300 Floor: 2 Room, Quarters 1 /Command Suite, Quantico, VA 22l34.b) Christopher Miner, ?t Staff Judge Russell Road Building 3300 Floor 2, Room 227, Quantico, VA 22134c) Col. Royal Chief of Staff, 3300 Russell RoadBuilding: 3300 Floor: 2 Room: 224, Quantico, VA 22134. -d) COL Carl R. Coffman 205 Lee Avenue, Joint BaseMyer-Henderson Hall, Virginia 22211. -e) Col. Daniel J. Choike, c?l, Base Commander, 3250 Catlin Ave.,Building 3250, Floor 2, RoomCube Suite, Quantico, VA 22134. 0 Col. Mark M. Kauzlarich,?l, Chief of Staff, 3250 Catlin Ave.,Building 3250, Floor B, Room 28, Quantico. VA 22134 g) CDR Han Bui,?l, Building IA Floor 2, Room 9, Norfolk, VA23511 Capt.MaryNei1I. i) LtCol. Christopher M. Greer, Staff Judie Advocate,Building: l0l9, Floor: 1, Room: SJA, Quantico, VA 22134j) LtCol. Amy R. Ebitz, ?Executive Of?cer, 2043 Baranett Ave,Quantico, VA 2213-.k) CPT John Haberland il, Regimental Judge Advocate,20lJackson Ave, Fort Myer, VA 22003. 1l) Abel Galavizi, Building Pentagon, Floor 4, Room/Cube4A324, Washington D.C., Defense Discovery Request PFC Bradley E. Manningm) CW04 James T. AveN)0)pl9)rhart l, S-3 Officer, 2043 Baranett Ave,Quantico, VA 22134 ACWO2 Denise Barnes, Brig Executive Of?ccr, Camp HansenBldg: Floor 1, Room 107, PFO, APBrian R. Papakie, Brig Supervisor, 3247 Elrod AveBuilding: 3247 Floor 1, Room 110, Quantico, VA 22134 Craig M. Blenis, l. Sergeant Instructor, 2189 Elrod AveBuilding 5001, Floor 1, Room 1, Quantico, VA 22134 William R. FullerPSC 561, Building 608, Floor, 1Room/Cube 211, FPO, AP. . 8. The Defense requests that the Government provide notice in writing as soon as possible if itdoes not intend to comply with any specific provision of this request. The Defense will needtimely notice of the Govemment?s intent to not comply in order to immediately file a motion tocompel discovery. Timely notice by the Government will avoid the need for an additional delayfor the Article 13 motion.9. It is understood that this is a continuing request.10. A copy of this request was served on Trial Counsel by e-mail on I August 2012.DAVID EDWARD COOMBSCivilian Defense Counsel UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYOF THE ARMYu.s. ARMY MILITARY or wasmusrou210 A STREETFORT LESLEV J. CNNR. DC 2n319~5n13REPLY TOATTENTDN OFANJA CL 13 September 2012MEMORANDUM FOR Mr. David E. Coombs, Civilian Defense CounselSUBJECT: Response to Defense Request for Discovery of CIA Information, dated 19 July20l 2llnil?d?jal?x, PFC Bradle ALI1_nggI . The below responses tothe defense discovery request account for the ongoing nationalsecurity concerns of this case, the ongoing law enforcement investigation(s), and comply withthe limitations of applicable Executive Orders. The United States acknowledges its requirementsunder Article 46, UCMJ, the Rules for Courts-Martial, and relevant case law.2. Discovery Response.a. Discovery Request, paragraph I.RESPONSE: The United States will produce this information in accordance with itsobligations under Rule for Courts-Martial 70l(a)(6) and Brady v. Maryland.b. Discovery Request, paragraph 2.RESPONSE: The United States will not provide the requested information. Thedefense has failed to provide an adequate basis for its request. The requested information isaggravating in nature and the United States will not use the information duiing trial.c. Discovery Request, paragraph 3.RESPONSE: The United States will not provide the requested information. Thedefense has failed to provide an adequate basis for its request. The requested information isaggravating in nature and the United States will not use the information during trial.d. Disoovery Request, paragraph 4.RESPONSE: The United States will not provide the requested information. Thedefense has failed to provide an adequate basis for its request. The requested information isaggravating in nature and the United States will not use the information during trial.e. Discovery Request, paragraph 5.UNCLASSIFIEDIIFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY UNCLASSIFIEDHFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYANJA-CLSUBJECT: Response to Defense Request for Discovery of CIA Information, dated 19 July 2012PFC ManningRESPONSE: The United States will not provide the requested information. Thedefense has failed to provide an adequate basis for its request. The requested information isaggravating in nature and the United States will not use the information during trial.f. Discovery Request, paragraph 6.RESPONSE: The United States will not provide the requested information. Thedefense has failed to provide an adequate basis for its request. The requested information isaggravating in nature and the United States will not use the infonnation during trial.g. Discovery Request, paragaph 7.RESPONSE: The United States will not provide the requested information. Thedefense has failed to provide an adequate basis for its request. The Court previously approvedthe summary which listed the component?s name. Additionally, with respect to the informationreferenced on page 4, a different component reviewed the information and provided input to thetask force.h. Discovery Request, paragraph 8.RESPONSE: The United States will not provide the requested information. Thedefense has failed to provide an adequate basis for its request. The requested information isaggravating in nature and the United States will not use the information duringtrial.i. Discovery Request, paragraph 9.RESPONSE: Absent the assessment identi?ed in the notice provided to the Court on 12July 2012, there are no other assessments or follow-on reports. The United States understands itscontinuing obligation to provide discovery.3. The point of contact is the undersigned. 1/ iv:i ifASHDEN FEINMAJ, JATrial Counsel2UNCLASSIFIEDIIFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

e-Highlighter

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

Un-highlight all Un-highlight selectionu Highlight selectionh