| In CIA Leaks Trial Schulte
Lawyer Says US Had No Idea Who Did It So
Focuses On Prison Notebooks
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Thread
BBC
- Decrypt
- LightRead - Honduras
-
Source
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Feb 4 – 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, the last one here.
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
objected 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
February 4, Inner City Press
live-tweeted the opening
arguments, here.
AUSA David
Denton said Schulte committed
this most damaging leak
because he was angry that his
false accusation against a
co-worker was rejected by the
CIA.
Schulte's
lawyer Sabrina Shroff in her
opening emphasized that the
CIA had not idea information
had been taken, and still
doesn't know who did it, or
when. Instead, she said, the
prosecution will focus on
Schulte's time in the MCC. But
she asked the jurors to
consider if they too wouldn't
be desperate if in the MCC, to
reach out and prove their
innocence.
The
government put forward as a
proposed first witness and
expert Paul Rosenzweig of GWU
Law School among other
affiliations. Shroff objected
to him being deemed an expert.
And the trial was off - Inner
City Press will live tweet it
as much as possible. Watch
this site.
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
|
,
