Witness | US v Pfc. Manning, Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU

  • posted December 20, 2011

UPDATE POST COURT-MARTIAL

United States v. Pfc. Manning was conducted in de facto secrecy. The public was not granted contemporaneous access to court filings or rulings during her trial. In addition to reporting on her trial, I transcribed the proceedings, reconstructed the censored appellate list, and un-redacted any publicly available documentation, in order to foster public comprehension of her unprecedented trial.

As a result of a lawsuit against the military judge and the Military District of Washington brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights, as well as my own FOIA requests and research, an official court record for US v. Pfc. Manning was released seven months after her trial. That record is not complete.

The official trial docket is published HERE and the entire collection of documents is text searchable at usvmanning.org.

*During the pretrial proceedings, court-martial and sentencing of Pfc. Manning, Chelsea requested to be identified as Bradley and addressed using the male pronoun. In a letter embargoed for August 22, 2013 Chelsea proclaimed that she is female and wished to be addressed from that moment forward as Chelsea E. Manning.

General Description

Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU testified that he had worked for the US Army Criminal Investigation Command for three and a half years and in law enforcement for approximately 12 years.

Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU testified that he received an email from Chet Uber in which Uber said he was aware of an individual who was in contact with an Army intelligence analyst releasing information to an Australian national in charge of WikiLeaks.

Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU, testified that he himself came into contact with the individual said to be in contact with an Army intelligence analyst releasing information to an Australian national in charge of WikiLeaks, and it was Adrian Lamo. Edwards testified that his first contact with Adrian Lamo was on 25 May 2010, when Chet Uber connected Edwards to Adrian Lamo.” Edwards testified that the communication with Lamo lasted “minutes” and the purpose was to establish Lamo as the person connected to the US intelligence analyst. Edwards testified that the only other time(s) he communicated with Lamo after that was to set up a meeting date. Edwards testified that he came into physical contact with Lamo on June 11, 2010, when Edwards met with Lamo in Carmichael, CA. Edwards testified that he physically met with Adrian Lamo to collect chat logs. Edwards testified that he collected a removable hard drive from a mobile laptop and an HP mini laptop that had a hard drive in it that belonged to Adrian Lamo. On cross examination, Edwards testified that he did not obtain search warrants because Adrian Lamo consented to the examination of the removable hard drive from a mobile laptop and an HP mini laptop that had a hard drive in it that belonged to Lamo. On cross examination, Edwards testified that the only limitation to Lamo’s consent was for “specific search of communication and chats with Pfc. Bradley Manning.” Edwards testified that the he communicated with Adrian Lamo after the June 11, 2010 meeting only to “discuss extent of chats” and to try “to come up with a meeting point.” [The latter confuses me, since he met with Lamo on 11 June 2010.]

Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU, testified that he collected two thumb drives from George W. [last name sounds like “Street”. Reitman notes the name as “George W. Shreik (sp.)”]. Reitman notes, “The chat logs had been provided to this individual on two thumb drives.”

Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU, testified that Adrian Lamo was a confidential informant whose “mission” was to “collect whatever would help the investigation” and that Lamo was not paid “any money other than expense reimbursement.” Edwards testified that information provided to Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) by Adrian Lamo in exchange for expenses wasn’t substantive to the investigation, but was provided. Edwards testified that Adrian Lamo did not provide the information because Lamo was getting his expenses paid, and that Lamo currently is not a confidential informant. Reitman notes, “Edwards stated that during the conversations with BradAss87, Lamo was not operating as a confidential informant.” On cross examination, Edwards testified that Adrian Lamo was a confidential informant for the Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) beginning in the “latter part of July 2010” until August or September of 2011.

Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU, testified that he attempted to interview Danny Clark between 18 and 23 June 2010, but that he did not interview Clark, because Clark invoked his right to counsel. Edwards testified that he had knowledge that Danny Clark communicated with Adrian Lamo, because Adrian Lamo provided Edwards with the chat log between Lamo and Clark “around July 22 [2010].” Edwards testified that Adrian Lamo did not receive the suggestion or “specific guidance” by law enforcement to search for information, “but if [Lamo] does collect information, [Lamo] should let [law enforcement] know.” Edwards testified that Lamo “knew there were other individuals involved and opportunities in that community with other hackers,” and if Lamo “was to discover anything” that it was suggested by law enforcement that Lamo “should share that information.” On cross examination, Edwards testified that law enforcement was interested if Lamo found something, but “tread lightly. Do not be deceptive. Don’t do anything illegal.”

No. 9 on the December 2, 2011 Defense Request for Article 32 Witnesses

9.) XXXXXXXXXX [SPECIAL AGENT ANTONIO PATRICK EDWARDS] is one of the law enforcement agents that conducted work on this case. He was the first agent to make contact with XXXXXXXXXX [ADRIAN LAMO] on 25 May 2010 in order to obtain the alleged chat logs between XXXXXXXXXX [ADRIAN LAMO] and PFC Manning. The defense requests that XXXXXXXXXX [SPECIAL AGENT ANTONIO PATRICK EDWARDS] be instructed to provide the Investigating Officer [Lt. Col. Paul Almanza] and the defense with a complete copy of FBI case file number XXXXXXXXXX [WHAT IS THIS NUMBER?] any other collateral investigations by the F.B.I. related to this case at least two weeks prior to the start of the Article 32 hearing.

Individuals named in the testimony of Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU

  • Chet Uber
  • Julian Assange
  • George W. [last name sounds like “Street”. Reitman notes the name as “George W. Shreik (sp.)”] WHO IS THIS? FBI? provided with alleged chat logs between Adrian Lamo and bradass87 on two thumb drives BY WHOM?
  • Danny Clark
  • unnamed individuals in the hacker community that Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU testified Adrian Lamo “knew were involved”

Evidence named in the testimony of Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU

  • Email from Chet Uber to Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU concerning an individual who was in contact with an Army intelligence analyst releasing information to an Australian national in charge of WikiLeaks.
  • Alleged chat logs provided to Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU during early interviews with Mr. Lamo that were not the complete record of the alleged cat logs between Adrian Lamo and Bradley Manning.
  • A removable hard drive from Adrian Lamo’s mobile laptop.
  • HP mini laptop that had a hard drive in it that belonged to Adrian Lamo.
  • Two (2) thumb drives of George W. [last name sounds like “Street”. Reitman notes the name as “George W. Shreik (sp.)”]. Reitman notes, “The chat logs had been provided to this individual on two thumb drives.”
  • Alleged chat logs between Adrian Lamo and Danny Clark provided to Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU by Adrian Lamo.

Special Agent Antonio Patrick Edwards, CCIU, testimony at US v Pfc. Bradley Manning, Article 32 Pretrial Hearing, 12/20/11

See Transcript of US v Pfc. Bradley Manning, Article 32 Pretrial Hearing, 12/20/11

UNITED STATES CALLS SPECIAL AGENT ANTONIO PATRICK EDWARDS, CCIU

Prosecution: What’s your job?

Edwards: Investigator with Computer Crimes Investigative Unit with Army CID. Have been CID agent for just over 3.5 years. Have been involved in law enforcement for approximately 12 years.

Prosecution: Training?

Edwards: Forensics examination training for computers. [He goes on to list his qualifications.]

Prosecution: How did you get involved in the case?

Edwards: Email from Chet Uber in which he relayed that he was aware of an individual who was in contact with an Army intelligence analyst, who was releasing information to an Australian national in charge of WikiLeaks. I came into contact with him and discovered that he was Adrian Lamo.

Prosecution: When…?

Edwards: June 11, 2010 was when I came into physical contact. Met him in Carmichael, CA.

Prosecution: Why meet?

Edwards: Collected chat logs.

Prosecution: What…?

Edwards: One removable hard drive from a mobile laptop. Also an HP mini laptop that had a hard drive in it, also belonging to Mr. Lamo.

Prosecution: Other devices?

Edwards: Two thumb drives collected from George W. [last name sounds like “Street”. Reitman notes the name as “George W. Shreik (sp.)”]. Chat logs provided during earlier interviews with Mr. Lamo but were not the complete record. The thumb drives were also transported back to [the offices] where they were [missed]. [Reitman notes, “The chat logs had been provided to this individual on two thumb drives.”]

Prosecution: Has Mr. Lamo ever been a Confidential Informant (CI)?

Edwards: Yes.

Prosecution: Mission?

Edwards: To collect whatever would help us with the investigation.

Prosecution: Did the Army pay Mr. Lamo any money other than expense reimbursement?

Edwards: No.

Prosecution: Any other compensation?

Edwards: No.

Prosecution: CID receive any information in exchange for those expenses?

Edwards: Yes. There was information that was provided. It wasn’t substantive to this investigation, but it was provided.

Prosecution: Provide information because he was getting expenses paid for?

Edwards: No.

Prosecution: Currently Confidential Informant?

Edwards: No.

Prosecution: [Missed.]

[Reitman notes, “Edwards stated that during the conversations with BradAss87, Lamo was not operating as a confidential informant.”]

DEFENSE EXAMINES SPECIAL AGENT ANTONIO PATRICK EDWARDS, CCIU

Defense (Blouchard): Agent Edwards, you mentioned Lamo was a Confidential Informant for CID?

Edwards: Yes.

Defense (Blouchard): When did it begin?

Edwards: Latter part of July 2010 to three or four months ago.

Defense (Blouchard): Has two computers?

Edwards: Yes.

Defense (Blouchard): Met with him in June, he had an external hard and computer with a hard drive in it?

Edwards: Correct.

Defense (Blouchard): Obtain search warrants?

Edwards: No, he consented to examination.

Defense (Blouchard): Any limitations?

Edwards: Specific search of communication and chats with Pfc. Bradley Manning.

Defense (Blouchard): Familiar with Mr. Danny Clark?

Edwards: I attempted to interview Mr. Danny Clark in Boston.

Defense (Blouchard): When…?

Edwards: Between June 18 through June 23, 2010.

Defense (Blouchard): Interview him?

Edwards: No.

Defense (Blouchard): Why…?

Edwards: He invoked his right to counsel.

Defense (Blouchard): Knowledge of Mr. Clark having communication with Lamo?

Edwards: I do.

Defense (Blouchard): How?

Edwards: Lamo provided chat log he had with Clark.

Defense (Blouchard): When was it provided to you?

Edwards: Want to say around the July 22 [2010] period.

Defense (Blouchard): Anyone from law enforcement direct Lamo to have communications with Clark? Suggest it?

Edwards: No. No. We said he has no specific guidance to search, but if he does collect information, he should let us know. I think he knew there were other individuals involved and opportunities in that community with other hackers. If he was to discover anything, he should share that information.

Defense (Blouchard): Was Mr. Lamo encouraged?

Edwards: [Repeats himself.] If he found something, yes of course we’re interested. But tread lightly. Do not be deceptive. Don’t do anything illegal.

Defense (Blouchard): 11 June 2010 was your first meeting with Lamo? Any prior communication?

Edwards: 25 May 2010. When Mr. Uber connected me to Mr. Lamo.

Defense (Blouchard): Conversation length?

Edwards: Minutes.

Defense (Blouchard): Nature of communication?

Edwards: Basically establishing Mr. Lamo was the person connected to the US intelligence analyst.

Defense (Blouchard): After May, any communication?

Edwards: Just to set up meeting date.

Defense (Blouchard): After 11 June?

Edwards: Only discussing extent of chats and trying to come up with meeting point.

SPECIAL AGENT ANTONIO PATRICK EDWARDS, CCIU PERMANENTLY EXCUSED

Other Resources