In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Honduras - Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 29 – A week before the trial of accused CIA leaker Joshua Schulte, set to begin February 3, a public hearing was held on January 27 about the US Attorney's requests to seal the courtroom for some witness and limited media attendance to a single pool reporter banned from reporting any physical characteristics of the CIA witnesses.

   On this issue, Inner City Press before the public hearing filed three one-page letters in opposition. Third letter here on Big Cases Bot.

  Now two days later, with still no ruling by Judge Crotty on the sealing Inner City Press thrice opposed, this from Schulte's lawyers: "We respectfully ask the Court to direct the government to identify for the Court and for defense counsel, as soon as possible, the specific language in the MCC notebooks and other prison documents that the government will claim at trial constitutes “classified information” or information “relating to the national defense.” The government’s filings on this issue do not state with specificity what exact language it considers to be national defense information. Specificity is necessary; only then will the Court be able to properly rule on the admissibility of the information at issue in Count Four of the second superseding indictment. We further request the government be directed to identify the form (e.g., classified, redacted, altered, etc.) in which these documents will be presented to the jury, and whether that information will be kept from the public and the press." The Press wants to know.

   At the end U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Paul A. Crotty asked Assistant US Attorney Matthew Laroche if his Office objects to live video feed to the SDNY Press Room, not showing the witnesses' faces. AUSA Laroche said no objection - which should mean feeds for this all other proceedings, when requested.

  On the issue of the trial exhibits, on which Inner City Press noted in writing and orally that the US Attorney's Office has of late denied requests for exhibits, ignoring for example Inner City Press' FOIA request for its OneCoin / US v. Mark Scott exhibits, AUSA Laroche said exhibits will be made available the next day. There seems to be no reason this should not and will not apply to other criminal proceedings in the SDNY. More on Patreon here.

 On transcripts, Inner City Press raised the issue of the high cost, for less corporate media. AUSA Laroche, seemingly contrary to his letter, said that transcript will be made available on some undefined delay, for redaction. But what about the costs? The Daily News noted no closures for El Chapo in the EDNY; the New York Post noted that a written description like blond or bald could hardly identify a witness and the AP correctly noted that in-house journalists in the SDNY do not seek to put anyone in danger.

  Judge Crotty said he will issue an order soon; the request for US v. Schulte feeds has already been made. Watch this site.

   Back on January 24, for which a feed was denied, an issue that arose was Schulte's letters complaining that his assigned counsel James M. Branden is not providing assistance of counsel. Now in the docket is a letter from Branden, dated January 24, stating that because of a hearing in White Plains he could not attend the final pre-trial conference for Schulte. Something is very wrong with this. And this:

  A basic PACER search by Inner City Press finds that Schulte in April 2019 filed a civil lawsuit against the US Attorney General. There is a docket number: 19-cv-3346. Photo here.

  But even on the SDNY Press Room PACER terminal when Inner City Press clicked on the Complaint, it replied, "You do not have permission to view this document." So who does? And is this a public court system? We will have more on this.

   Assistant US Attorney Matthew Laroche argued that while prospective jurors will be shown witnesses real names, it will only by in hard copy and thereafter some 17 of them will be referred to by pseudonyms.

  Schulte's lawyer Sabrina Shroff, still with the Federal Defenders for purposes of this case, insisted on calling these "fake names," and complained about the difficulties imposed in conducting basic research on potential witnesses.

US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Geoffrey S. Berman is asking to have the public excluded from the courtroom during the testimony of several of these CIA witnesses: ten called by the prosecution, and seven the defense seeks to call.

See Inner City Press filing into the docket on Big Cases Bot, here. Watch this site. The case is US v. Schulte, 17-cr-548 (Crotty).

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2020 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for