Transcript | US v Pfc. Manning, Article 39(a) Session, 11/08/12
- posted November 8, 2012
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.
This transcript of the Article 39(a) Session held on November 8, 2012 at Fort Meade, Maryland in US v Pfc. Manning was taken by hand from the public gallery. It, therefore, may contain omissions or errors. All amendments or updates will be noted.
- Judge: Army Col. Denise Lind
- Prosecution: Major Ashden Fein, Captain Joe Morrow, Captain Angel Overgaard, Captain Hunter Whyte
- Defense: Mr. David Coombs, Captain Joshua Tooman, Major Thomas Hurley
- Col. Carl Coffman, Commander of the US Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, Special Convening Authority
ALL RISE
Judge Lind
Please be seated. This Article 39(a) Session is called to order…go over house keeping before bringing in the witness…prosecution request for leave on…OCA interrogatories…
Prosecution (Fein)
[Appellate exhibit 379] …after [yesterday’s] session, defense and the Government [had a] discussion. [From a previous session defense and the Government arranged that the] Government would review [defense interrogatories related to the Speedy Trial motion in lieu of calling witnesses from the Original Classification Authorities witnesses who testify in person]…Government felt confused [about certain defense questions]…we proposed different language. We gave…this morning to defense…once that is done we will offer to the Court. [Fein is saying that the questions will be disseminated to the OCA’s and then answers returned to Government counsel then given to defense.]
[This next part concerns interrogatories from the defense to the prosecution concerning the Speedy Trial motion. Interrogatories to prosecution were arranged in lieu of defense calling witnesses from the various federal agencies concerning discovery.] …form of different commands the prosecution would provide to Court and defense via an affidavit.
…because of all that an unanticipated number of questions from defense…prosecution has asked Court for motion to leave…26 November to 5 December to answer 137 questions. Prosecution submitted request for leave last night.
Judge Lind
Your motion says that defense does not object. [Judge Lind reads from the Government’s motion] …one, Notify me by 8 November…two, continuance till 5 December. [Judge Lind asks defense if they have an objection.]
Defense (Coombs)
No objection…
Judge Lind
…concerned Government agencies will not respond… I am deferring ruling on OCA from responses. [This section here concerns the Judge asking if the Government agencies will answer in a timely fashion with the Government’s motion for continuance suspense date…]
Defense (Coombs)
…Government did not say they anticipated that happening…
Judge Lind
…will agencies participate?
Prosecution (Fein)
We don’t anticipate that… [Fein is saying that he does not anticipate that the Government will not get their answers from OCAs and other federal agencies back in time]
Judge Lind
Granted. Government please ensure that the case calendar is updated.
Parties met briefly in an [RCM] 802 [conference]…[concerning] Government MRE [Military Rules for Evidence] 505(g) motion in regards to unclassified motion [NB as per a previous ruling by the Court that every time the Government files an ex parte motion for MRE 505(g) review for limited disclosure, the Government must file a unclassified version for defense.] I am confused with that motion, So I have scheduled an ex parte review. Part of the motion [was] discussed yesterday to allow defense to look at metadata on media in the redacted motion filed by [the Government with the] Court. Defense [said] yesterday, you were not ready to discuss? [missed…]
Defense (Coombs)
They [defense forensic experts] will look at [digital media and files in question as per parameters of the Government motion] and [if there is a problem] with [the parameters set forth in the] the un-redacted motion bring back to the Court.
Prosecution (Fein)
…search terms provided to defense.
Judge Lind
…I need technical order, Government please provide… Any other issue before Coffman?
Defense (Coombs)
No…
Prosecution (Fein)
No…
Judge Lind
[to Government] …more questions, talked about notebook of information…Col. Coffman…number 11, enclosure 78…is tab one same as enclosure?
Prosecution (Whyte)
…enclosure 80 spread throughout the binder…as Court scrolls, see number 80…that is placed within the binder…[missed…]…very first one…12 August 2010, number 8…this binder is appellate exhibit 376 alpha [376(a)], defense has additional documents in appellate exhibit 376(b).
Defense (Coombs)
…I have provided a copy for Court with the Court reporter.
Judge Lind
[to defense] No objection for Coffman to have the documents, defense?
Defense (Coombs)
No objections.
Prosecution (Whyte)
US CALLS Col. Carl Coffman… [Col. Carl Coffman enters the Court room towards the witness stand.]
PROSECUTION SWEARS IN COL. CARL COFFMAN
Are you Col. Carl R. Coffman…[Transcriber needs to verify that Coffman is Chief of Staff], NATO Training Mission Afghanistan…former Special Convening Authority?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Thank you. …you came all the way from Afghanistan…[I am going to give you start by giving you] a roadmap of questions…[we will start with] background, [then] following period of delay to restart RCM 706 [board] early February, …actual delay, …706 [board] completed until Article 32… [Government then starts with asking Col. Coffman on background.] You are [Chief of Staff – need to verify exact title]…NATO Training Mission Afghanistan…until August [2012 you were the Commander [US Army Garrison] Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall…responsible for installation support services…for reserves National Capital Region? Who did you rely on?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. …staff.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Make up of command…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Three locations Fort Meyer, Fort McNair, Headquarters Battalion, which included two companies…in addition Special Convening Authority for 6,500 soldiers…responsible for UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] for these individuals.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What kind?
Col. Carl Coffman
Court Martial
Prosecution (Whyte)
How many [Court Martials]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Twenty-four to thirty at any given time.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…actual work?
Col. Carl Coffman
…dozen.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Explain why the difference in numbers. 6,500 soldiers…handful of work?
Col. Carl Coffman
Headquarters had two subordinate commands, two company commands, and a Battalion Commander accountable for soldiers…don’t directly work for me, but for Other Government Agencies.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…previous position?
Col. Carl Coffman
Executive Officer of Secretary of Army installation…[Military Assistant and Executive Officer for the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations and Environment).]
Prosecution (Whyte)
..arrived>
Col. Carl Coffman
SES [Senior Executive Service] …civilian Major…Lt. Col. Assistant …primarily responsible for outside, executive officer primarily responsible for inside office.
Prosecution (Whyte)
You have experience working with Senior Government officials?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…previous?
Col. Carl Coffman
..commander of [US Army Garrison, Hunter Army Airfield]
Prosecution (Whyte)
…branch?
Col. Carl Coffman
…aviator.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…involvement?
Col. Carl Coffman
SCCA [?]
Prosecution (Whyte)
…assume command of [Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall]…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…August 2010
Prosecution (Whyte)
…Special Convening Authority through…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…until change of command.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…responsibilities?
Col. Carl Coffman
Most UCMJ in last command as brigade…runs gamut…any thing from minor misconduct to something significant.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…how many cases?
Col. Carl Coffman
Roughly a dozen.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What is tracker?
Col. Carl Coffman
…[because] big population had tracker listed all actions…go bi-weekly conduct, the fallen, and UCMJ.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…reprimand etc.?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…how many Court martials?
Col. Carl Coffman
…half dozen.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Describe relationship between trial counsel and Convening Authority?
Col. Carl Coffman
…as commander Staff Judge Advocate and trial counsel…
Prosecution (Whyte)
…rely on trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
…no, rely on commanders…not just trial counsel…
Prosecution (Whyte)
If they approach me with document…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Discuss, give consideration not only to trial counsel…
Prosecution (Whyte)
…but also defense?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…formal training?
Col. Carl Coffman
[had] the option of a leadership course…
Prosecution (Whyte)
…how long?
Col. Carl Coffman
…one week.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Now we are going to talk about delays. [Prosecution hands the witness, Col. Carl Coffman a binder identified at appellate exhibit 376 alpha.] I am handing you appellate exhibit 376 alpha. These documents are…please refrain from opening up or flipping… What was the status when the case came to you?
Col. Carl Coffman
…case came to me [in the midst of an] Article 32 request for delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…before you? [this question concerns a delay in effect when Coffman assumed command and became Special Convening Authority in August 2010.]
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. When the case came to me it had a delay in effect.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…did you order the same?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…look at Tab 4
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Prosecution (Whyte)
this is your document…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Chief of forensic [psychiatry] at Walter Reede…
Prosecution (Whyte)
…consult with trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Initial suspense was two weeks.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did defense ask for this [sanity board]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab one, page eight. Take a look at the document.
Col. Carl Coffman
Major Hurley [defense] to me…11 August [2010].
Prosecution (Whyte)
What is it?
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense request for a delay till 706 [board also known as the sanity board] complete.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Defense request this before..?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Act on this for defense…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page nine, tab one. What is it?
Col. Carl Coffman
My memo to Col. Almanza granting delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
3 August [2010] worked…sanity board?
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed…] No time to complete full review.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab one, page 16. Remember dealing with…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What…?
Col. Carl Coffman
My approval of an extension [till 706 board was complete].
Prosecution (Whyte)
…subsequent?
Col. Carl Coffman
Email between Dr. Sweda and defense, and cc’d to other trial counsel…discussion was 706 [board], and length to complete…
Prosecution (Whyte)
What was the updated suspense date…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Six weeks.
Prosecution (Whyte)
[Was it actually completed in the time frame of the] sex weeks suspense?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Why?
Col. Carl Coffman
Several reasons. Sanity board needed security clearances…process of preliminary classification to determine what [Pfc.] Manning will talk about…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Anything else…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…experts.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab [?, Page? 23 and 24] Read over. What is the date?
Col. Carl Coffman
25 August [2010].
Prosecution (Whyte)
From…? To…?
Col. Carl Coffman
From defense to me requesting for appointment of an expert in forensic psychiatry.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Defense ask for a delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t remember particular delay, we needed expert with [clearance].
Prosecution (Whyte)
Read paragraph…
Col. Carl Coffman
…706 until defense got expert…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Act on this delay from defense…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Next tab. What is it?
Col. Carl Coffman
25 August [2010]. Approval of sanity board delay until defense appointed expert with TS-SCI [Top Secret / Sensitive Compartmented Information]…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did defense request TS-SCI?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t know.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Turn to page 46, tab one.
Col. Carl Coffman
Request from defense for TS-SCI who is doctor to me dated 2 September [2010].
Prosecution (Whyte)
Act on request…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab [?, page? 27]
Col. Carl Coffman
Okay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Familiar?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Date?
Col. Carl Coffman
12 October 2010.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What is it?
Col. Carl Coffman
Memo back to defense approving the request.
Prosecution (Whyte)
You said there were two reasons why the sanity board did not complete…in six weeks.
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense requested expert with [security clearance]. Request was unusual before we appointed board, we needed to determine if Pfc. Manning would discuss anything classified [This is in reference to a classification review the Government required for the RCM 706 “sanity board”]…if there is classified documents [that would] come out.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab [?, page? 28 and 29] Date?
Col. Carl Coffman
26 August [2010]. To me from defense. Request for delay from 706 classification…defense [notice] we will need to reveal classified information. They requested any results from OCA [Original Classification Authorities] be released as well.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you delay the 706 [board] until review complete?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Classification of charged documents…?
Col. Carl Coffman
2 September [2010]… [missed…]
Prosecution (Whyte)
706…?
Col. Carl Coffman
706 sanity board review…so we moved on with the 706…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you act on the defense’s 26 August request?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
How…protect classified information?
Col. Carl Coffman
…issued protective order.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab one, pages 30 to 34. Protective order. Recognize?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Date 17 September 2010, consulted with trial counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
After…defense would discuss TS-SCI info…anything else?
Col. Carl Coffman
…security experts to determine of classified.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…assume he [Pfc. Manning] would need to discuss TS-SCI [for RCM 706 sanity board]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense said…
Prosecution (Whyte)
[What did you] determine?
Col. Carl Coffman
…preliminary classification review.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…page 33?
Col. Carl Coffman
…memo primary classification reviews. What [?] will be discussed to know classification of documents…preliminary [review]…[what classified information would be] revealed to board members, etc.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…after defense alleged that TS-SCI would be discussed…?
Col. Carl Coffman
We had a general idea…TSC-SCI clearances not easy to get.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consult with trial counsel…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense objected.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab one, page 36 to 38?
Col. Carl Coffman
Date 18 September 2010, defense to me, defense response back to me on preliminary classification review.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page [?] to 40, Tab one?
Col. Carl Coffman
22 September 2010, my response to Coombs, going to conduct preliminary classification review.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…anyone respond?
Col. Carl Coffman
Not that I recall.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Turn to pages 41 to 42, Tab one.
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense document 28 September [2010], defense to me, in reference to a preliminary classification review [for RCM 706 sanity board].
Prosecution (Whyte)
What are some of the things requested?
Col. Carl Coffman
They understood. So, no more argument regarding preliminary classification review. They understood their obligation to protect classified information.
Prosecution (Whyte)
2 echo [2e]?
Col. Carl Coffman
…preliminary classification review, [classified] information going to be released, have one security expert, need another…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Granted to defense…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Look at document on page 43, tab one.
Col. Carl Coffman
12 October 2010. Memo from me to defense about additional security expert at TS-SCI.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Do you remember it included page 44, tab one?
Col. Carl Coffman
Document from two experts to me and the subject and preliminary classification review dated 13 December 2010.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What did they tell you?
Col. Carl Coffman
Confirmed TS-SCI would be discussed. We then focused on getting 706 board security clearances.
Prosecution (Whyte)
How long [does it normally take to get a TS-SCI clearance]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Could take up to a year depending on the individual.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…reason why…delay in 706 board?
Col. Carl Coffman
We gave extension on 706…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Why delay 706…? How did you account for the delay…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Account for the delay memorialized in documents…[in addition in terms of communications] we had memorandum, emails, and phone calls. I don’t recall specific document.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Requests for delay, approvals for delays…what types of documents?
Col. Carl Coffman
Accounting memorandums.
Prosecution (Whyte)
How frequent..?
Col. Carl Coffman
Accounted for four delays through out prior to the Article 32.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consistently act…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Every 30 days.
Prosecution (Whyte)
So separately..?
Col. Carl Coffman
…delay…accounting memorandum. [He is saying that every delay had an accounting memorandum.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Turn to page 45 and 46, tab one.
Col. Carl Coffman
…accounting of executable delay memo for the record, for me.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 45 to 50, tab one?
Col. Carl Coffman
Accounting memos…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Period it covered…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…each different, not set standard, 30 days, [but] different time period…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 45, Tab one…? 12 October [2010]?
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Prosecution (Whyte)
August 2010, you started [as Special Convening Authority]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. When case came to me, …already under delay. Defense …responsible for the delay…[accounting memoranda] memorialize entire case.
Prosecution (Whyte)
12 July to October… [missed]
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Prosecution (Whyte)
…page 48, tab one?
Col. Carl Coffman
12 October [2010] to 10 November [2010]
Prosecution (Whyte)
page [?], tab [?]?
Col. Carl Coffman
10 November [2010] to 17 December [2010]
Prosecution (Whyte)
page 49…?
Col. Carl Coffman
17 December [2010] to 14 January 2011.
Prosecution (Whyte)
..page 50?
Col. Carl Coffman
14 January [2011] date of memo to 15 February [2011].
Prosecution (Whyte)
…pages 45 to 50 for delays from 12 July 2010 to 15 February 2011?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…page 45 12 October 2010 memorandum…walk me through.
Col. Carl Coffman
Purpose of the first paragraph to provide what is in the memorandum. Second paragraph explains time period. Third paragraph [gives] reasons for the delay. Sent to prosecution and defense…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph three [gives] reasons for executable delay…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Do you remember when…after mid December, finalized preliminary classification review…remember when sanity board resumed…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Beginning of February…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Talk about that delay. Go to Tab 2, pages 1 to 6.
Col. Carl Coffman
Memo dated 3 February from me to chief of forensic psychiatry at Walter Reede to resume 706 board.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…page two, tab two. What special security measures…for this?
Col. Carl Coffman
They had to have TS-SCI and…read on according to the protective order [that had been] written…discuss that security experts would be available.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph 6, subparagraph delta…other measures?
Col. Carl Coffman
Interview [for the RCM 706 sanity board, one of them] would need to be conducted in a SCIF [Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility]…because TS=SCI would be discussed.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…initial suspense?
Col. Carl Coffman
One month.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…memo to someone at Walter Reede?
Col. Carl Coffman
Chief od Staff…Psychiatry at Walter Reede.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Familiar with requests to Walter Reede…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…Severe [wounded]…soldiers…Headquarters submit to my command…National [Calvary]…come to Walter Reede…of Wounded Warriors…ongoing behavioral healthcare account for… [Coffman is saying that he has experience dealing with requests at Walter Reede in his professional capacities. ]
Prosecution (Whyte)
You gave 30 days for the 706 sanity board…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Recall four weeks.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph 13, page six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Four weeks until beginning of March [2011].
Prosecution (Whyte)
Complete…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. They continued to conduct interviews…kept having scheduling difficulties with SCIF. Trial counsel, [Major] Fein, updated me on case every week…phone call every week…or email update…let me know sanity board having challenges getting complete. Travel issues, scheduling issues with…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Updates…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Emails to and with trial counsel. [NB When Coffman says trial counsel he is referring the prosecution.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Phone calls?
Col. Carl Coffman
phone calls from [Major] Fein once a week.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Why was the [last interview] so difficult to schedule?
Col. Carl Coffman
One…schedule themselves… Two…schedule SCIF, try to do it after duty hours.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Why after [duty hours? Why on the weekend]…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…high visibility case…didn’t want him exposed to media attention for sanity board. …in DC not to many Government buildings are occupied on the weekend. He [Pfc. Manning] doesn’t need media attention…
Prosecution (Whyte)
After 3 March…?
Col. Carl Coffman
..asked for additional delay going before the [706 board]… Keep going…gave them additional suspense… I gave them until the end of the month. They had one interview left in April… Request was they thought by the 10th. …believe it actually happened on the 11th. I didn’t give them a month, but I gave them more time.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…page 7 and 8, tab two of appellate exhibit 376(a). What is this?
Col. Carl Coffman
Request for extension from Dr. Sweda, forensic psychiatrist. I did not correspond directly with Dr. Sweda. Trial counsel was dealing with him.
Prosecution (Whyte)
You were being updated?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Missed but affirmative.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you act on the request for an extension of the sanity board?
Col. Carl Coffman
…granting extension. 16 April must be complete…Came back 15 April, said 22 April…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Update 22 April…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Ordered sanity board to resume early February…reported 22 April [as complete]?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Missed but affirmative.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 11 and 12, tab 2. What is this?
Col. Carl Coffman
Accounting memo 18 March 2011 for 15 February to 15 March time period…reason what I gave…”
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph five…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…[concerned] what updates regarding accused’s access to information during this…memorandum [concerns what if any classified information] that Pfc. Manning was granted access to [This question references the date 3 February 2011]
Prosecution (Whyte)
…had he been?
Col. Carl Coffman
…3 February he had [answer is unclear from transcriber’s notes.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
…anyone else require security clearance from this period?
Col. Carl Coffman
All members of the sanity board…additional defense expert required security clearance…
Prosecution (Whyte)
[missed next tab and page number] What is this?
Col. Carl Coffman
18 February 2011 to me from defense requesting for appointment of neuro psychologist with TS-SCI clearance.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…you said you accounted…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 16 and 17, tab 2?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. 22 April for record from me to trial counsel and defense.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Reason?
Col. Carl Coffman
Paragraph 3.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 17?
Col. Carl Coffman
Paralegal from MDW signed, not unusual…
Prosecution (Whyte)
You approved…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Period of delay 22 April to mid May…what happened after sanity board…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…[concluded] sound mind…conducting Article 32…There were several requests to delay the Article 32.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab 3, one month delay..? [These questions were in sets of three’s: Prosecution identifies page and tab; asks ‘What was the date?’; ‘Who from and to whom is the document?’; ‘What is the document?’ Transcriber consolidated at times.]
Col. Carl Coffman
25 April 2011. To me from trial counsel. Request for delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
[Reasons and] process for considering…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Classification Authority to validate classified [from Government] and permission from OCA on disclosing documents from defense…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Received…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Received request from Major fein. He would come in person or via email. He would make his recommendation, [and I would] make decision.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…seek input from defense?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page two, tab three.
Col. Carl Coffman
Email to several members from me to trial counsel and defense. Asked Mr. Coombs to provide feedback on trial counsel request of 25 April 2011.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did defense object…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page three and four, tab three…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense response to 25 April request. 26 April date of the document.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consulted with trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph one, last sentence what did it say…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense said…indicated would be without information, unable to adequately prepare for Article 32.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you consider this request…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. [Government] requests provided a summary of information as opposed to going through review, offered substitute and summary. [He is saying the he is getting very high level updates from Government. He is not aware of the details of the requests or how many documents are at how many agencies.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you consult with the Government?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Classification reviews; deposition requests were required to conduct a thorough Article 32.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page five, tab three. What is this?
Col. Carl Coffman
Memo for distribution from me…approves Government request for delay of the Article 32. Sent [to] trial counsel and defense counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What did you consider…?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Reasons for the delay was there was] classified information…a lot of it. So I determined that classification reviews needed to be complete. Trial counsel was providing updates. …considered defense counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page six, tab three. What is it?
Col. Carl Coffman
Memo for…12 May 2011 account for executable delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…back…page five paragraph three. What did you do to make sure classification reviews…
Col. Carl Coffman
…said they needed to provide that information to defense. …getting updates weekly from trial counsel at office or Fort McNair…SJA [Staff Judge Advocate’s] Office.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…during normal business hours?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Missed]
Prosecution (Whyte)
After business hours…?
Col. Carl Coffman
On blackberry.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Security clearances…who needed them?
Col. Carl Coffman
Every team member. 20 April 2011 defense…to me…request for a neural psychologist.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Level…?
Col. Carl Coffman
TS-SCI.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Next period of delay, after approval of delay. What happened?
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel came to me and requested additional delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab four?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Request from trial counsel to me 22 May [2011].
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph two. Did you considers updates prosecution provided? [Missed…]
Col. Carl Coffman
Prosecution called weekly.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What generally did you do?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Missed…] 24 May email from [?] to me restates 26 April [reasons] on initial delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What was your decision for the delay [request]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Granted it.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page four, tab four. What is this?
Col. Carl Coffman
Document where I granted delay 26 May.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What did you consider?
Col. Carl Coffman
Discussion with trial counsel including…from defense and 26 May memo.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you consider the facts of this case?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Later memorialized reason to delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes…all.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page five, tab four. What is this?
Col. Carl Coffman
This is the accounting memorandum.
Prosecution (Whyte)
How often…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Discussed case once a week [with trial counsel].
Prosecution (Whyte)
What period of time?
Col. Carl Coffman
12 May to 17 June.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Next period? Resume? [Coffman] left of mid June to mid July 2011 suspense [dates]…
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel requested additional delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page one, tab five. What is the date?
Col. Carl Coffman
27 June 2011. To me from [Major] Fein. Request for delay of Article 32.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph two…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I considered these. Trial counsel provided updates. Similar to the other delays, send to defense counsel for input.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page three, tab five.
Col. Carl Coffman
…asking comments from Coombs on request.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Any objections?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page four, tab five…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Email from Mr. Coombs, maintain 26 April 2011 memo [the defense objection that is], defense [objected] saying the [time should be] credited to Government 29[this is either 19 or 29] June 2011. [I] granted the delay to the Government.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page five, tab five…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Document granting delay request for Article 32, 5 July 2011.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What did you consider…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Same considerations as previous: classifications reviews, disclosure request from defense, security clearances.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consider updates from prosecution?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Started getting [specifics?] from OCAs, where they were on classification reviews.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you account…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. 13 July 2011 document accounting for delay. 17 June…date of memo, paragraph three, reason I [decided ?].
Prosecution (Whyte)
Next period?
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel submitted additional request.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page one, tab six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Document request from trial counsel to me.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph two, consider update…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Other updates…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Weekly phone calls.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page three, tab [?] ?
Col. Carl Coffman
Email…25 July 2011, me to defense, if they had an issue with the Article 32 delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Object?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page four, tab six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Document for me from defense…their opinion or issues with delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Act on request?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Granted delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page five, tab six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
My response to the request by trial counsel for a delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What did you consider…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Very similar to previous delay: disclosure request and OCA’s…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consider updates?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consider defense objections?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
notify parties on 26 July?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Memorialize reasons…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab six, page six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Accounting memo 10 August [2011]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph three…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Basis of the consideration to make the determination.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Sub paragraph, delta…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Security clearances through out, we had changes in experts that required security clearances.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page seven, tab six…? Date?
Col. Carl Coffman
3 August [2011]. To SJA through me from defense counsel. Consulted with trial counsel, granted with caveat. They [defense] requested a particular individual, but granted another individual with same skill set. Not that individual.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page nine, tab six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…memo request for a defense expert 10 August 2011.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…anyone else security clearances request…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t remember one month to others. All memorialized.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…page 14, tab six. What is this?
Col. Carl Coffman
9 August 2011 to me from defense. Request for a computer forensic expert to help defense…they need a TS-SCI clearance. [I] continued to get updates from trial counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Pages 19 to 22, tab six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Email between trial counsel and defense counsel. Trial counsel updating information being disclosed from [then] Captain Fein to me and defense counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Pag 19…?
Col. Carl Coffman
First email. Fein to me.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Subsequent is a forwarded email? [Missed…?]
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
[What was the] subsequent email…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Coombs to Ashden [Coffman calls lead military prosecutor by his first name.] Major Fein to Coombs what they were sen…2 August 2011. Second email trial counsel Major Fein to me 9 August 2011, updating on…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 22, tab six…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Additional email forward from Fein to me. previous email from trial counsel to defense on update on discovery…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Were you updated on discovery…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
[For the earlier] court martials [you mentioned that] you were Special Convening Authority on were you updated on discovery…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Other requests…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Additional defense experts. Request to ensure discovery provided; classification review disclosures…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Remember other requests…?
Col. Carl Coffman
not in particular.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Would anything help you refresh your memory…? Page 23 and 24, tab six data…?
Col. Carl Coffman
6 August to me from defense. Request for a computer hardware software…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 29, tab sic…?
Col. Carl Coffman
My approval or previous request.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Mid August to mid September [2011]…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel additional delay…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page one and two of tab seven…?
Col. Carl Coffman
25 August 2011. Request from trial counsel to delay to me.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph two…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…consider these updates.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Defense object…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page three, tab seven…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Process. Sent Coombs an email asking if there were any issues…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Objection…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Responded.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page four, tab seven…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Email from Coombs to me [where he] maintained [that the time should be] credited to the Government. I granted the delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Are you familiar with this document?
Col. Carl Coffman
I signed it. 29 August continued updates, defense response yo request I sent him from orignal delay request.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Who did you notify…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Investigating Officer, trial counsel, defense counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
How did you memorialize?
Col. Carl Coffman
Accounting memorandum.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Familiar with this document?
Col. Carl Coffman
15 September 2011 Accounting memo [for time period of] 10 August to 15 September.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph three…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Basis for delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Turn to page seven, tab seven…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Email document from trial counsel to me offering me situational awareness on email just sent on discovery update. [1 December ?] email…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Mid September to mid October, next period of delay…?
Col. Carl Coffman
6 September 2011 to me from trial counsel request for a delay of the Article 32.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consider any updates…?
Col. Carl Coffman
We talked or was [briefed ?].
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did defense object…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Email from defense to me objecting.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Did you consider defense..?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. I granted the delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page four, tab eight.
Col. Carl Coffman
…approved previous requests [to delay] Article 32…weekly updates [from trial counsel]…defense objected.
Prosecution (Whyte)
[?] review, defense objected…? [Not clear from transcriber notes.]
Col. Carl Coffman
…in our accounting memo that any disclosure was provided.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Recognize…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Accounting memo. 13 September to 14 October.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph three…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Basis of delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
During this time trial counsel was providing you updates…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab [?] familiar…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Major Fein forwarding email sent to defense counsel. [I was] cc’d. We provided to defense. [During his testimony Coffman often used the phrase “my trial counsel” I cannot say with certainty the use of first person plural occurred here.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Date of those emails…?
Col. Carl Coffman
One, 13 October and two, 21 October.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Any other defense request at the time…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…don’t know if this period or another…don’t recall.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page eight, tab eight.
Col. Carl Coffman
Request from defense for security clearances.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Mid October to…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Additional request for Article 32 delay. follow in request for Article 32. 25 October 2011.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph two…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…weekly updates from defense counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Col. Carl Coffman
Prosecution (Whyte)
Defense object…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. I received weekly updates from trial counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page four, tab [?]
Col. Carl Coffman
Email from Coombs 25 October to me, [the defense] position on request.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consider their objection…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. I granted the delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page five, tab nine…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. 27 October…my approval of delay request. I considered previous memorandum [from? Major Fein, unclear from transcriber notes.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
What did you do…?
Col. Carl Coffman
[It was a] continuing process…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Didn’t prepare…?
Col. Carl Coffman
16 November 2011. Document is accounting memo for 14 October to 16 November time period.
Prosecution (Whyte)
This provided to…?
Col. Carl Coffman
trial counsel and defense counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Updates…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes weekly.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page seven and eight, tab nine…?
Col. Carl Coffman
4 November 2011. Email exchange forwarded to me [between trial counsel and defense counsel] on what we had made available to them to turn over in [disclosure.] [Coffman definitely used the first person plural “we”]. One remaining Official Classification Authority for a classification review [was left]. Time period to restart because thought OCA would be complete in [time for Article 32].
Prosecution (Whyte)
How many classification reviews [were you] waiting on…?
Col. Carl Coffman
4 november believe one or two left… getting close. By mid November one complete.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Last delay when…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…got it towards mid [?]…now final OCA [classification review] before the Article 32 assumed would be in about the beginning of the month…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page one and two, tab ten…
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Request by trial counsel to restart the Article 32.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Paragraph 32, and updates provided to you?
Col. Carl Coffman
…[trial counsel updates said] getting through classification reviews, down to one outstanding classification review…
Prosecution (Whyte)
What if any update…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t remember. We had continuously been…[missed…]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Last sentence…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…including in document updates on evidence seeking to disclose [to defense] [NB the accounting memorandum that Coffman signed and is testifying to was drafted by trial counsel and signed by the Colonel.]
Prosecution (Whyte)
What if any updates on security clearances…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense had received security clearances.
Prosecution (Whyte)
When did Article 32 begin?
Col. Carl Coffman
…30 days from… [missed…]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Execute…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Conduct Article 32…
Prosecution (Whyte)
What is required…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Operational Plan Bravo. OP PLAN BRAVO. Plan to execute as order all…required to pull together and conduct Article 32. One, transportation, security, other affairs, facilities, based on the attention of the case. [We] had picked Fort Meade to conduct.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Who was involved…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I am the support unit. MDW wrote OP Plan Bravo. They are 14 units. I don’t have the resources to conduct from media… I have to go out and ask for help…came from the Headquarters Battalion, Fort Meade Garrison, and MDW.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Why couldn’t you conduct…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t have the resources.
Prosecution (Whyte)
To execute [OP PLAN Bravo] just military resources..?
Col. Carl Coffman
…civilian resources…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Prosecution request for delay, did defense object?
Col. Carl Coffman
Defense understood requirements, objected to time period…[wanted a] week earlier.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 47, tab 10…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. 16 November from Coombs to me. Response to my decision to restart the Article 32 [Coombs wanted] 12 December.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Prosecution wanted 16 December, he [Coombs] wanted 12 December?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Defense ever object to OP PLAN BRAVO…?
Col. Carl Coffman
He [Coombs] understood OP PLAN BRAVO requirements, wanted an earlier start…prior to the holiday period. I approved Government request.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab [?]…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Executable delay memorandum to restart Article 32 for 16 December, accounted for 22 November to 16 December executable delay.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…[there was still] one outstanding classification review…? Why didn’t you wait until [that classification review] was done…
Col. Carl Coffman
…I was confident. The OCA was confident would be done in two weeks.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Why didn’t you wait…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No reason to wait.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Why?
Col. Carl Coffman
No reason to wait. [repeats himself] No reason to wait. Trying to move on. Exactly what I said. Where ever we can gain time…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consider the rights of the accused…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Where ever we can gain time…I considered the rights of accused from beginning.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 49, tab 10…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I signed it. Accounting memo…16 November to 15 December…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Remember any other request…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Anything…request particular item…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 50 and 51, tab 10…?
Col. Carl Coffman
28 November for me from defense request for software to conduct computer forensics…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Page 52, tab 10…?
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Prosecution (Whyte)
Date of this…?
Col. Carl Coffman
6 December to me from Major Fein. Email on when he received the final classification review. OP PLAN BRAVO primarily discussing movement and confinement…
Prosecution (Whyte)
Mid July 2010 to Article 32 in December 2011 there was a significant period of delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. We were concerned about how long…a fair Article 32…120 day requirement.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Explain.
Col. Carl Coffman
Concern is when you have one of your soldiers in Pretrial confinement. Especially in this case with the volume of information… Classification important to process from Government agencies. …if din’t have complete.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Ever contact Government agencies…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. I never personally contacted OCA. Confident my trial counsel is making appropriate contact. [Coffman uses possessive pronoun “my” in his answer.] I have no reason not to believe in trial counsel.
Judge Lind looks up and over at Col. Coffman.
Prosecution (Whyte)
You are a senior officer. Why would you not call Government agencies…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I am comfortable receiving information from trial counsel.
Prosecution (Whyte)
In your opinion, having an O-6 Colonel expedite…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…in DC…certainly one aspect you are one of ranks in these agencies…senior government officials and flag officers.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…and you have experience working with agencies?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Contact G-2 [in regards to] security clearances?
Col. Carl Coffman
Didn’t feel…did not have to get involved in…trial counsel never [gave me reason to]
Prosecution (Whyte)
What is end state?
Col. Carl Coffman
Article 32 then recommendation to general court martial Convening Authority. Can’t get without proper evidence then have to go back and get anything else.
…
[END OF PROSECUTION EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
…
[RECESS CALLED]
ALL RISE
Judge Lind
Please be seated. This Article 39(a) Session is called to order…all parties present since we last called recess…
Over extended lunch Court signed protective order, appellate exhibit…?
Prosecution (Fein)
Not yet. Being redacted…once copied…
[DEFENSE EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Defense (Coombs)
706 board…3 August 2010?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Lt. Col. Almanza?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
11 August 2010 defense requested delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Approved on 12 August…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Period 11 August until 706 board completed executable delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…approved defense delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Missed…] Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…because 11 August first time you received request from defense?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You ordered preliminary classification reviews…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…close to 22 September.
Defense (Coombs)
Request for preliminary classification review in your mind reason to delay 706 board?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
Might discuss classified information…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Pfc. Manning might discuss at TS-SCI level…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Aware of some information might be leaked…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…because defense told you [Pfc. Manning] might discuss TS-SCI information?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You said defense objected to preliminary classification review?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
We didn’t object to review but aspect of disclosing what he would divulge to defense counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
Preliminary classification review completed 13 December 2010?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t remember.
Defense (Coombs)
Look at tab one, page 44?
Col. Carl Coffman
Document is dated 13 December 2010.
Defense (Coombs)
Was not till 3 [?] 2011 that the 706 [board] resumed work?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
On 13 December, …didn’t know if 706 [board members had] been identified?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask trial as of 13 December 2010 not identified?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Know how many members on board…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Three.
Defense (Coombs)
Remember when trial counsel told you name…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t know.
Defense (Coombs)
[Missed.]
Col. Carl Coffman
One had, two had not.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask why 706 didn’t [find] two members with TSC-SCI security clearances?
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Defense (Coombs)
All RCM granted TS-SCI read onto SCI…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel let me know they were ready…[missed] 706 board.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask trial counsel why 13 December to 13 January to get all members [706 board] with TS-SCI clearances?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
[You testified] you wanted to save time where ever you could save time… [Missed…]
Col. Carl Coffman
[Answered in the negative to the second question.]
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel requested clearances…prior to 13 December 2010?
Col. Carl Coffman
We didn’t know was required. [Coffman answered in second person plural.]
Defense (Coombs)
[You testified] “Where ever we could save time…”
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[Wouldn’t it] ..behoove to get members with TS-SCI if possible, you indicated it would take a year [to get clearances]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Would be a good idea to start process…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…if process has been started 13 December 2010?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Had you identified members with clearances you could have started the board on that day?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
Were you concerned [706] board as of 13 December 2010 not ready to resume?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
[All that was needed to complete was] on meeting in a SCIF?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Not sure how many in T-SCIF, did not go into details with trial counsel.
Defense (Coombs)
Did not know how many meetings in a T-SCIF?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Since [previous meetings with 706 board] was unclassified nothing prevented [such meetings]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…if what was discussed was unclassified?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask trial counsel why…13 December?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel ever suggest it?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Do you know when did trial counsel started looking for SCIF?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
According to trial counsel chronology, page 50, appellate exhibit 330, [20 January to locate] contacted INSCOM to [access?] SCIF. Did they inform you?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. We had discussions but did not get into details. Trial counsel didn’t tell me.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel scheduled reconnoissance February 2011 [missed]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Knew they were trying to get a facility.
Defense (Coombs)
As late as 25 February 2011 reconnoissance for your oder on [?] December?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You believe they should have executed that on date you asked to resume?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[to Court] M’am first reference page 50 of appellate exhibit 330. Second on page 58. I am now referencing page 60.
[to Col. Coffman] 1 March…trial counsel chronology [is a] tour of INSCOM SCIF for 706 board. Did you know about it?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel tell you why they needed to do a tour?
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel gone through process related to cap [capacity?] and access. Most of these…where and when they needed to be…
Defense (Coombs)
…tour of 706 board members to see security facility?
Col. Carl Coffman
Reconnaissance to make sure facility…
GOVERNMENT OBJECTION
Prosecution (Fein)
There is no fact 706 board toured facility. [Page 60, appellate exhibit 330] 1 March such tour for 706 refers to prosecution touring for the board.
Defense (Coombs)
Did trial counsel tell you of a tour of INSCOM facility?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. They needed to know if the facility met their requirements.
Defense (Coombs)
Wanted to schedule to give him privacy [so] on weekends or after hours?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
Discuss with trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
Guidance I gave them on weekends or [after duty hours] on weekends…less individuals around.
Defense (Coombs)
Inform INSCOM for Saturday only?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall.
Defense (Coombs)
Obviously, what with your concern after duty hours and ‘de-conflicting’ facility discussed earlier [in his testimony]…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Pfc. Manning movement into facility, privacy aspect…getting a lot of attention in media. Have privacy from vehicle from car to SCIF. Media find out, other people find out.
Defense (Coombs)
If you scheduled on a Saturday, media and people could find out?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
4 March 2011…board did not submit on 4 March 2011 suspense date?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
On 14 March Dr. Sweda [from the] 706 board sought an extension?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes [via] email.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you ask him why prior to 4 [or 14? may be a mistake in my notes] March…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Had a discussion…not complete…through phone call. …went through process.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you ask Dr. Sweda why he had not submitted?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
You are not, as a commander, not use to not being given a heads up…give you advanced notice [normally if something is not ready as ordered or scheduled]…
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Dr. Sweda memo. Tab two, page seven relates need [57?] more days because ‘evaluators are coordinating simple date and time…’
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
They needed to meet once in a SCIF?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Dr. Sweda having problems…did you ask why?
Col. Carl Coffman
I did not ask Dr. Sweda.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask why board could not coordinate simple dates and times?
Col. Carl Coffman
We had discussion …706 board…
Defense (Coombs)
…because they were limited to Saturday?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Ever ask why not meet on another day…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Did not have that [missed].
Defense (Coombs)
Ever know about Dr. Sweda’s request to meet on day other than Saturday?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
18 March 2011, page nine…?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Looks at document] Yes. 18 March…
Defense (Coombs)
Why four day delay in dealing with request…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t know.
Defense (Coombs)
[Missed]
Col. Carl Coffman
Original request until 29 [missed].
Defense (Coombs)
You conveyed to board needed to complete by 16 April?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
All they needed was to meet in a SCIF?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You had SCIFs in your command and control?
Col. Carl Coffman
We did at Fort McNair used by MDW and Joint force as opposed to INSCOM…was a wash.
Defense (Coombs)
You said before that you had not tried another SCOF?
Col. Carl Coffman
We did discuss Fort McNair SCIF.
Defense (Coombs)
15 April 2011, Dr. Sweda number two request, tab two, page eight…
Col. Carl Coffman
[looking] page eight?
Defense (Coombs)
…delay because board limited…go to paragraph two. Ever ask why board was having difficulty?
Col. Carl Coffman
Did not talk to Sweda.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel talk to Dr. Sweda?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t know.
Defense (Coombs)
706 duty was primary duty [for 706 board members]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes
Defense (Coombs)
You approved Dr. Sweda’s 15 April 2011 request, tab two, page 10?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes for 22 April 2011.
Defense (Coombs)
On 22 April 706 board submitted final report…talk about monthly executable delay. Tab one, page 45?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
12 October 2010…monthly executable delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[You had] conversation [with trial counsel]…monthly with executable delay memo. Did you write [the memo]?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel wrote [the memo]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
12 October 2010 [memo said] ’12 July to date is executable under RCM 707′?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes
Defense (Coombs)
On 11 August delay request that is when you delayed the Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
11 August 2010 forward…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t know exact dates.
Defense (Coombs)
From initial approval 11 August 2010 forward…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
If you did not receive 11 August 2010…Article 32 by 13 August 2010?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…for this 12 August 2010 why not started until July 2012…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…already under delay request.
Defense (Coombs)
You are [saying] you did not exclude delay because [a delay] ‘already in place’?
Col. Carl Coffman
When we got case, already in place by defense.
Defense (Coombs)
Sir, earlier, you ordered Article 32 within ten days…
Col. Carl Coffman
But now excludable delay on July…
Defense (Coombs)
12 August 2010 you did not take it back to 12 July correct?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Article 32 needed to be done in ten days?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
When you ordered it..case was new to you…no defense counsel had asked you until 11 August?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes, until 11 August.
Defense (Coombs)
12 October 20[1?]…[did you] identify [the] following [as reasons for executable delays] [Missed]
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…basis for executable delay…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[missed]
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Original Classification Authorities mean [classification reviews for] one, charged documents and two, information released to defense.
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Two primary considerations.
Defense (Coombs)
As of 12 October 2010 [your ordered executable delays] in order to complete classification reviews.
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
…review of charged documents or [did the Government] select all documents..?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You did not know the OCAs by name or what they were being asked to review?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
…talk about other executable delay memos. [?] to 15 February…4 September executable delay, pages 47 to 50. Take a moment to glance at it. These four memorandum 14 January 2011, 15 February 2011 exclude 105 days…
Col. Carl Coffman
If those numbers are correct…sounds about right.
Defense (Coombs)
Memo is the same [as previous month]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Very close to the same…
Defense (Coombs)
…except date?
Col. Carl Coffman
First and last one are different…
Defense (Coombs)
…other than that, they are the same?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…are drafted by trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
No substantive change?
Col. Carl Coffman
No substantive changes.
Defense (Coombs)
When one memo was presented to you, you would speak to trial counsel for 10 to 15 minutes?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
After that you would sign memo?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
During this, did you know what the OCAs were doing?
Col. Carl Coffman
[Talks about discussions with trial counsel. He stressed through out testimony it was high level, no details.]
Defense (Coombs)
Did you know each OCA?
Col. Carl Coffman
No [missed].
Defense (Coombs)
Ever ask,how much longer?
Col. Carl Coffman
Not particularly.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel never briefed you.
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Never asked…never briefed how many documents OCAs were reviewing?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
You never asked?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel sais, ‘OCA’s continue to press on…’?
Col. Carl Coffman
Even prior to March, some came back quicker than others. I had no reason to believe trial counsel could not be trusted.
Defense (Coombs)
[missed]
Col. Carl Coffman
As far as me talking to OCAs, I did not have a tracking sheet by OCA by document etc.
Defense (Coombs)
13 February 2011, defense made first demand for Speedy Trial.
Col. Carl Coffman
I remember two occasions.
Defense (Coombs)
13 January 2011 sound right?
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Defense (Coombs)
Spoke to trial counsel…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You understood that after you took out executable delays, trial needed to happen in 120 days?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
Understood [you had an accused in pretrial confinement]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel explained what RCM 707, …Article 10…taked to you about due diligence?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Not familiar in particular with Article 10.
Defense (Coombs)
Wouldn’t expect you to be. If you would take a look at tab two, page 16…go to page 11. Take a look and page 16 too. These are two other executable delays. 18 March 2011 and 22 April 2011. 18 March 2011…[updates]?
Col. Carl Coffman
‘OCA consent to disclose classified information.’
Defense (Coombs)
What does that mean?
Col. Carl Coffman
OCA consented that they have to disclose…
Defense (Coombs)
During 15 February to 22 April did you know what the OCA was doing…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Work on classification reviews. I did not contact the OCA. …based on information from trial counsel. They were telling me, they were continuing to press on…
Defense (Coombs)
Did they give you any specifics?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall. I don’t remember specifics…we were turning that over…
Defense (Coombs)
…you didn’t receive anything? Agencies…again asking based upon trial counsel doing their jobs and OCAs doing their job?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab three, page one. Government submits the first of many delays?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
‘US receives consent for classified evidence [disclosure] to defense.’
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…delay was in order to obtain classification reviews, charged classified information to defense…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Government provided you part of memorandum with redacted copies…14 March…OCA classification review request 18 March..?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[Coombs hands Col. Coffman a binder marked appellate exhibit 376(b).] ..marked appellate exhibit 376(b). Hold onto that…glance at it, enough to refresh…I will ask remainder…
OCA 14 March 2011…charge document disclosure consent…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you review documents that were enclosures?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall.
Defense (Coombs)
…for this recall [does?] looking at these documents [help you recall?]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall.
Defense (Coombs)
you never looked at because…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall.
Defense (Coombs)
14 March…Department of State, G-2, OGA no. 1,…they consented to disclosed classified information to defense..?
Col. Carl Coffman
This is what is in redactions.
Defense (Coombs)
Paragraph…scope ‘classified information, classified evidence etc. originating from blank.’ Ever ask why they waited so long to disclose information to defense…29 March 2011?
Col. Carl Coffman
I know enclosure…Department of State.
Defense (Coombs)
Do you know…Army G-2…30 March 2011?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
…enclosure one email 03287?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Also on 29 March…Government motion page 11…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Defense Intelligence Agency…March 2011?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. Information I got, ‘We are getting information back…’ My concern was not each page, each agency, getting OCA complete.
Defense (Coombs)
OCA reviews. Look at that, appellate exhibit 376(b), thumb through memos. Number one, 18 March 2011, see where trial counsel requested OCA to finalize charged documents…?
Col. Carl Coffman
18 March, first paragraph. It is in quotes.
Defense (Coombs)
Finalized is stressed…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
In this request from the Government repeated since 17 June 2010 with OCAs and evidence, did they make that request to you?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Don’t remember exact language.
Defense (Coombs)
As far as date, does 17 June date sound right…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I wouldn’t tell you a specific date…
Defense (Coombs)
[missed]
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Defense (Coombs)
Look back at tab three, page one, goto background. See second full sentence…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…’Since 17 June 2010…’
Defense (Coombs)
They reported that they had been working on this since 17 June 2010…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…to April 25 2011 do you realize that covers 313 days?
Col. Carl Coffman
I will trust your math.
Defense (Coombs)
…after that [memo] did you ask [trial counsel] what they meant by ‘finalize’?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. I didn’t…talk to OCAs.
Defense (Coombs)
Did any OCAs provide estimated date of completion?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Did trial counsel provide you with any information of how OCA…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I did not know if one OCA was working harder than another. They are not giving me [information] that ‘this OCA is at 50%…’
Defense (Coombs)
If they were not providing you detail, you had no ability to drill down…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
You didn’t know if they were working on it or…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Defense opposed 25 April…look at tab three, page three…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…your 26 April opposing…
Defense (Coombs)
…now in this delay actually…in this delay request we are opposing delay and [minimum?] need for further delay. Did you consider the defense response?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Talk to trial counsel about defense request…? [This questions concern the actual need for classification reviews to conduct the Article 32 as opposed to using summaries and substitutions.]
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. …summaries and substitutions I talked to trial counsel about that defense request. …group of docs was classified.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab three, page five. In that state Article 32 delay until earlier OCA and OCA classification reviews…based upon your approval. One was a [core?] requirement…
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[Missed…] …25 May 2011?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
If you have 12 May…OCA…Article 32 would have started…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
Lets look at tab three,page six. You issued an executable delay 22 April 2011 to 12 May…was [an] executable [delay] under RCM 707(c)…?
Col. Carl Coffman
That is what I see.
Defense (Coombs)
…[the] reasons [given] were OCA reviews; OCA disclosures; December…3 September [2010]…security clearances; access for Pfc. Manning…? Correct?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel typed this?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You had the opportunity to make changes…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I could if I wanted to.
Defense (Coombs)
Talk to trial counsel before signing…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Regarding 3 September 2010…you testified this basis would not hold up the Article 32, based on your…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Well if you have defense counsel…
Defense (Coombs)
But defense counsel would not make request..?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Absent defense request would [these reasons] hold up Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
22 May 2011 trial counsel submits second delay request. Trial counsel says, ‘continuing to work with OCAs correct’?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask trial counsel what they mean by ‘continuing to work…’?
Col. Carl Coffman
…are OCA’s making progress…
Defense (Coombs)
They did explain what they meant by ‘continuing…’?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Trial counsel delay [regarding] Article 32, the OCA classification reviews and protected unclassified information…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Repeat.
Defense (Coombs)
Did the Government give you any indication what… [time frame OCA reviews would be complete]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Did not have a set time.
Defense (Coombs)
No particular time?
Col. Carl Coffman
No particular time.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you ask if anything given to execute process?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
What was factual basis…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…updates by trial counsel.
Defense (Coombs)
Did trial counsel ever ask you for assistance?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
You told me you didn’t lose sleep that the OCAs were not completed.
Col. Carl Coffman
No, not at all. [No means in this answer, that Coffman did not lose sleep.]
Defense (Coombs)
How many more months would you wait…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Didn’t have a set time.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask trial counsel… Everyone has someone above them…and avail yourself of having the power of O-6 in DC capital region. You know people above. You speak to the MDW General Convening Authority [Major Gen. Michael S. Linnington Commander of Joint Task Force – National Capital Region the General Court Martial Convening Authority]?
Col. Carl Coffman
More than I like to.
Defense (Coombs)
Ever consider three star general in your chain of command to get things moving?
Col. Carl Coffman
I don’t think with OCAs…these aren’t staffers that are doing these. They are senior executives and general officers. I did not feel I had to…required to start walking up the chain of command.
Defense (Coombs)
You are basically dealing with the Government?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
We are talking to ourselves?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t know what you mean actually.
Defense (Coombs)
We are dealing with the USG who was prosecuting my client. …conversation among myself?
Col. Carl Coffman
Myself?
Defense (Coombs)
Government people. [You]…never maybe [thought about] getting command influence on it or General Court Martial Convening Authority emphasis on it?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
…approval of second delay for Article 32 ‘delay under OCA requirement…25 June 2011’ and defense sent an email and defense requested time should be credited to Government. Ever consider not approving?
Col. Carl Coffman
I considered Government and your requests.
Defense (Coombs)
Ever consider request…[deciding] going to delay your request…to Government, but going to credit you [the time]?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
If you found out all the reviews were completed and information disclosed would you have started Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
If defense said substitutions [would have been fine for Article 32 in lieu of full on classification reviews for allegedly leaked documents or evidence disclosed to defense]…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…never presented itself. [Coffman is saying the option was never presented to him.]
Defense (Coombs)
If that had been the case would that have [been reason] held up the Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Do you need a break?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
[LEAD MILITARY PROSECUTOR MAJOR FEIN ASKS FOR A BREAK. COURT GRANTS A COMFORT BREAK]
ALL RISE
Judge Lind
Please be seated. This Article 39(a) Session is called to order…
[DEFENSE CONTINUES CROSS EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Defense (Coombs)
Take a look at tab four, page five. This is 1[7?] June executable delay. Same you gave in May?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Would you agree they look the same except for the date?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Nowhere is authorization to disclose in explaining [reason for delay]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
If only thing was authorization to disclose protected unclassified…reason to uphold Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. I never thought about…never presented as an option.
Defense (Coombs)
If you look at three delay requests tab five, page one 27 June 2011 request update 25 June 2011…they talk about information [they have?] now and updating…[missed]? [In this question defense was asking Col. Coffman why trial counsel had missed a suspense date from the previous filing.]
Col. Carl Coffman
in written format? I talked to them [trial counsel] once a week. [Col. Coffman essentially says that he was given a verbal update, that is why he received subsequent request for a delay from the Government past the suspense dat.]
Defense (Coombs)
As far as written yes?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Government requested another delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you ask why it was not submitted in writing before or after 27 June?
Col. Carl Coffman
I was comfortable with verbal updates.
Defense (Coombs)
Could have happened after 27 June since not in writing?
Col. Carl Coffman
Possible.
Defense (Coombs)
Ever considered writing to OCAs…?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
…OCA classification reviews; Army CID and Other Government Agency case file. Did you ask … why it had not sought…why hadn’t…protected unclassified information… [This question as noted by transcriber is not clear]
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Any understanding as to how long it would take?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Did trial counsel give you any idea what steps they needed [to complete classification reviews]?
Col. Carl Coffman
What I am tracking is general condition of where we are, [and not] tracked by government [agency].
Defense (Coombs)
This is for unclassified protected information…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Not that I recall.
Defense (Coombs)
Ask why they [trial counsel] needed to obtain…NSA and OGA review of the Army CID case file?
Col. Carl Coffman
What was in the Army CID case file related directly to NSA and OGA elements, so NSA and OGA had to review to authorize disclosure.
Defense (Coombs)
Did they tell you why trial counsel felt the delay of the Article 32 was needed in order to make this happen?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Go to tab five, page five. 5 July 2011 you approved [Government request for a delay of the Article 32]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Over defense [objection]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Page six, 13 July 2011 executable delay the basis for exclusion was the same as May and June executable delays?
Col. Carl Coffman
Appears to be true.
Defense (Coombs)
Only thing that has changed is the date?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
No where is NSA or OGA mentioned?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Know why?
Col. Carl Coffman
I don’t.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab six, page one. 2[?] July 2011. Basis same as June request. Again prosecution [reasons] until earlier OCA classification reviews and final review of Army CID case file by NSA and OGA?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Defense opposed?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab six, page four. Defense objection?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
In our objection we point out that [the Government] had over a year yo complete classification review process, correct?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…been a year nothing done, [trial counsel] did not provide any specifics as to what they had done?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Also point out in memo [the directive] to formalize what they have done and finalize response?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
that defense renews speedy trial?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you understand that it had been 360 days?
Col. Carl Coffman
Not tracking exact number of days.
Defense (Coombs)
Dd you ever ask if you even needed classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Did trial counsel explain to you [possibility] of going forward without classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
We had speedy trial discussions frequently, can’t tell you when prior to that.
Defense (Coombs)
Did trial counsel ever bring up doing the Article 32 without classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Defense (Coombs)
When trial counsel said that [missed]?
Col. Carl Coffman
I recall saying to confirm on… [missed].
Defense (Coombs)
Recall any discussion… [missed]?
Col. Carl Coffman
no.
Defense (Coombs)
Know why they needed classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
So prosecution and defense have classification reviews to conduct a fair and thorough Article 32.
Defense (Coombs)
At this point you have no idea how much longer?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
What reference point [in terms of time] for OCAs was reasonable?
Col. Carl Coffman
Every month conditions changed. Some where the same. We were making progress. I remember [considering] if I changed command in 2012 [July 2012], can we get this done prior to change of command? …own thing was I … What if I changed command before the Article 32 was complete? I was comfortable we were making progress.
Defense (Coombs)
What reference point from OCA [classification reviews] to determine if time they were taking was reasonable?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t have one.
Defense (Coombs)
…if [in] Summer of 2012 [was your] change in command…?
Col. Carl Coffman
If Article 32, if it does go…
Defense (Coombs)
Were you concerned if the OCA classification reviews would not be done by change of command?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. I knew that we would eventually get them.
Defense (Coombs)
You don’t always trust everyone around you, but you trusted trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Even if you trusted was there anything preventing you from reaching out to OCAs?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you know if trial counsel had reached out to OCAs on…? …anyone in trial counsel memos to various OCAs ‘under Article 10…reasonable due diligence…only remedy dismissal of charges…all existing and future delay would hinder your prosecution?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t remember seeing this…it was July 2011.
Defense (Coombs)
Meaning it was so long ago?
Col. Carl Coffman
Right.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you ask trial counsel about speedy trial?
Col. Carl Coffman
We had discussions frequently.
Defense (Coombs)
Were you concerned about violating his speedy trial rights?
Col. Carl Coffman
I wasn’t concerned about violating [his speedy trial rights], but getting him a speedy trial and yes, I was concerned.
Defense (Coombs)
Do you see 10 August 2011 to ‘finalize’ …they would tell OCAs to complete classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t remember.
Defense (Coombs)
Did you ever give trial counsel a suspense date to go forward?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
26 July 2011, fourth request in that approval… delayed …[reasons cited] OCA [classification reviews] disclosure requests and authorization to grant…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
This memo…despite speedy trial, doesn’t reference that. Know why?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Page six, 10 August 2011 executable delay same as May, June, and July…only basis you gave.
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
No where is final review by OGA and NSA?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
At this time, did you have any idea how much longer [the Article 32] needed to be delayed?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Greater specificity…did you have anything outstanding?
Col. Carl Coffman
Specifically no.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab seven, page one. 25 August 2011 memorandum. Fifth request. Government requests …until nearly [all] of [the] OCA [classification] reviews request; OCA reviews final of derivative [classification]…; [Army] CID [case file reviewed] by NSA, relevant district Court judge… At the time did they explain what final derivative classification meant?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
So based on [trial counsel] not explaining, you wouldn’t know how not to get derivative classification?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
District Court judges?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t remember details of discussion.
Defense (Coombs)
…because it was a long time ago?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Don’t recall. So, you don’t know relevant district Court judges?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Did prosecution explain why OGA had completed but not NSA?
Col. Carl Coffman
[missed]
Defense (Coombs)
Were you concerned another month had gone by but not another…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Always concerned about speedy trial [with an accused in] pretrial [confinement], but classification reviews [were necessary] for a fair and thorough Article 32…evidence. Not concerned.
Defense (Coombs)
Obviously 25 August suspense of 10 August…ask why OCAs failed to meet suspense dates?
Col. Carl Coffman
We had weekly class, wasn’t going back [as in backwards]…as long as I was getting information that we were making progress.
Defense (Coombs)
With regards to suspense date, did you asked why was missed?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Ever reach out to OCA?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
What specificity of information where you relying on?
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel submitted request. If you were asking if I had specific… ’10 documents in 14 days’… I never got that level of detail.
Defense (Coombs)
To make sure I understand. You did not have specific information?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
[As long as] ‘OCA suppose to be doing what OCA is doing’?
Col. Carl Coffman
Correct.
Defense (Coombs)
Fifth delay request to delay Article 32 until earlier OCA disclosure reviews; [Army] CID [case file reviewed] by NSA…?
Col. Carl Coffman
That is what it says.
Defense (Coombs)
You did not type the document, presented by trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Know why that was listed?
Col. Carl Coffman
Back brief…determine of information back from you…make a decision. Don’t recall specifics of every detail.
Defense (Coombs)
Were you getting specific information?
Col. Carl Coffman
I never asked trial counsel, ‘How many files…dates?’ Never asked for that information.
Defense (Coombs)
Why not? Did there come a time that you wanted to? That is what i am trying to understand. What information are you getting?
Col. Carl Coffman
I did not get to that level of detail.
Defense (Coombs)
Didn’t think that would be required for executable delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
I knew we had classification reviews we needed to do.
Defense (Coombs)
Page six, tab [?]…15 September [2011]…basis is same as May, June, July, and August?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
On 15 September 2011…at this point you provided [147?] days of delays. Any idea how much longer?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. Did not have a date written on the wall.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab seven, page five. In your 29 August [memorandum?] you state trial counsel provide you no later than 23 September…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Okay.
Defense (Coombs)
See tab eight, page one. What date [do you see]? 26 September [2011]. Know why [the Government] missed your update [suspense date]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Memorialized from update. Don’t know specific date [trial counsel] called [on the telephone].
Defense (Coombs)
…earlier completion of OCA request… Improperly marked documents from NSA… Why did you sign protective orders from defense? [This question is not clear to the transcriber from the transcribers notes.]
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Recall any discussion why disks would be needed?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
…at any point what ‘improperly marked portions from the NSA’ meant?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
[Referring to] appellate exhibit 376(b)…7 September see that…28 July again…concern for speedy trial?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Did trial counsel tell you they resent memo?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall September 7 memo specifically.
Defense (Coombs)
in that memo…21 September 2011 the OCA failed to meet that?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. We don’t typically task another agency.
Defense (Coombs)
Why? …what the OCA failed to meet is months…, missed 2 September suspense date?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…will you [explain what you mean] by the term ‘require’. Have any discussions about going on [to the Article 32] without the classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
We had that each time.
Defense (Coombs)
What do you recall?
Col. Carl Coffman
I don’t recall specifics.
Defense (Coombs)
…you indicated you had discussions [with] trial counsel every time [you received a request] about classification reviews and the Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
Dont recall specifics. I did not track that recommendation [that they proceed with the Article 32 without classification reviews]. Now based on trial counsel…every month [there were] dynamic changes…different things happened…getting more information…from OCAs. I am not asking him, ’10 documents, five documents?’ I have more than one thing on my plate. If the trial counsel is doing a good job…
Defense (Coombs)
So, it is him just saying, ‘More information, more information from OCA’ …what you are saying from your discussions with trial counsel?
Col. Carl Coffman
At some point they got into more detail…other evidence…
Defense (Coombs)
…but with OCA you are not getting those [facts?] ?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Page four, tab eight. See 28 September 2011 approval for Government’s executable delay request, over defense objections?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
This 14 October 2011 executable delay memo basis was [same] as May, June, July,…?
Col. Carl Coffman
I trust you if you are telling me that is the case. I signed them.
Defense (Coombs)
No where is signed…None of those are basis for executable delay…178 days delay?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
If [you found out] derivative classification reviews were holding up the Article 32, would you have] given guidance to drive on with the Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
I made the decision I did make… primary concerns was classification reviews and [missed]
Defense (Coombs)
If you look at 25 October 2011 request to delay…seventh request… In this request, Article 32…final determination…protected order… Can you say why you needed a delay for a signed protective order?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall specifics. Still felt…OCA reviews and disclosure [were necessary for a fair and thorough Article 32].
Defense (Coombs)
You never considered putting pressure, by clocking [time to Government]?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
…find out the facts of the [OCA] classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
Page five, tab [?] this is 27 October approval… In that approval [listed as basis] OCA reviews… 28 November 2011… This memorandum is identical to previous… Other than date, it is cut and paste?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. Same information on it.
Defense (Coombs)
14 October 2011 basis was same as May, June, July, August, September, …October memo is the same?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
On this day 16 November [2011] trial counsel orders Article 32 to resume. Trial counsel requests that you order Article 32 for 16 December 2011…for OP PLAN BRAVO…30 days to set up to support the Article 32?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You testified [to that] on direct?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[You testified] …resume its work, you knew at the beginning of November, you knew they would have [completed the last classification review(s) in time for the Article 32]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You testified, ‘[wherever we could gain time],… we would gain time’ granted 2 November…and OP PLAN BRAVO…we have a week or two left?
Col. Carl Coffman
Potential…yes.
Defense (Coombs)
More than potential, nothing was preventing you?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
OP PLAN BRAVO didn’t go into effect until 16 November?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Thinking outside the box, could have started on 16 November [2012? Not sure if this question is a hypothetical trying to get Coffman to distinguish parameters and references for his decisions. So if 2012 was correctly notated by transcriber, Coombs appears to be proposing based on transcriber notes why not a year later in 2012] ?
Col. Carl Coffman
True.
Defense (Coombs)
Look at tab 10, page 49. 3 January 2012 memo basically excluded 15 December and that was real basis, [namely] to put OP PLAN BRAVO into [?]?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. …had I reviewed…so I think we can move on…we are going to… [Missed…] I made determination to do OP PLAN BRAVO when I restarted [for the] Article 32. They had 30 days. I don’t these guys and facilities.
Defense (Coombs)
We could have put planned …[missed]?
Col. Carl Coffman
We could have.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab one, page eight. Confusion on 706 delay to complete OCA… If you look at paragraph one, defense delay for 706 board…, we are not asking for. I wasn’t asking for the 706 board to be delayed.
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. You were asking for information about OCA classification reviews.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab three, page three. We objected to delay, paragraph one, we were not asking for OCA classification reviews, we were asking for information.
Col. Carl Coffman
You were asking to be properly provided information.
Defense (Coombs)
Not the classification reviews?
Col. Carl Coffman
Not the classification reviews.
Defense (Coombs)
Tab nine, page two. Email to [Major] Fein to you. ‘We received final 329,000 pages…’ Do you know what the forensic data consisted of?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
Defense (Coombs)
No the date of the authorization to turn over?
Col. Carl Coffman
No. Assume close to…
Defense (Coombs)
But you don’t know when?
Col. Carl Coffman
No.
[DEFENSE ENDS CROSS EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
[RECESS CALLED]
4:00 pm EST ALL RISE
Judge Lind
Please be seated. This Article 39(a) Session is called to order…
[PROSECUTION RE-EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Prosecution (Whyte)
[Government has a] few questions. On direct you spoke about process…?
Col. Carl Coffman
If the delay was requested by trial counsel or defense counsel, tried to confer with both and go through process of what was in request going forward…hand carried copy of delay…Captain or Major [was promoted] Fein would show up or email to me…called Ashden or our secretaries would link us up [Coffman called the lead military prosecutor by his first name during this answer]…Then we would sit down with Government for each request…depends on request…classification reviews, disclosure requests…go through document…reason for calling…forward to Coombs…Coombs would respond.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Trial counsel would brief you?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Tab eight, page one. 26 September 2010 when you got request…go each update?
Col. Carl Coffman
In person or over the phone.
Prosecution (Whyte)
…members would discuss update…would include update from OCAs?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
When you say you didn’t have facts, you mean you don’t remember specific details…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…depending on OCA and where we were at…[meaning] each OCA or document.
Prosecution (Whyte)
If you could just go to tab eight, page…14 October 2011 memo…paragraph there you outline basis, sub-paragraph (e)…did you consider Government request for delay in granting request?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Consider updates in granting request?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
What do you mean OP PLAN BRAVO…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…could have ben if we elected to…coordinating discussion…in order to get it done..most of the soldiers [not under his command. This answer was not noted in a clear enough way to be certain].
Prosecution (Whyte)
To say the Article 32 could have happened in early 2011…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…could have happened in 2010, though transportation plans, confinement facility, lots of things factored in…we could have executed it anytime.
Prosecution (Whyte)
[The decision] when to start the Article 32…classification review was important?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Government has no additional questions.
[PROSECUTION ENDS RE-EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Defense (Coombs)
Defense has no additional questions.
[COURT EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Judge Lind
Tab three, defense objection…[why did you not or did you ever consider] ordering Government to provide substitutes?
Col. Carl Coffman
i don’t know, but I opted not to.
Judge Lind
I know its a hypothetical but lets just assume…[Article 32] did not begin until your change of command…?
Col. Carl Coffman
…as we moved through process…getting Article 32 started…I did not have a speedy trial date on the wall. There is still information we don’t have that could have impact.
Judge Lind
Original charge sheet…5 July 2010…were they preferred before of after you had jurisdiction? [to prosecution] Counsel, can you give me original charge sheet and referred charges on 1 March, 2010 [she made a mistake, she meant 2011]?
[RECESS CALLED SO THAT GOVERNMENT CAN PRINT ORIGINAL 5 JULY 2010 and 1 MARCH 2011 CHARGE SHEETS]
ALL RISE
Judge Lind
Please be seated. This Article 39(a) Session is called to order…
Prosecution (Fein)
…appellate exhibit 380 [consisting of] new redacted and original redacted and un-redacted charge sheets…
Judge Lind
Do you remember when you were stationed [when he was instated as commander of US Army Garrison, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, and gained jurisdiction as Special Convening Authority]…?
Col. Carl Coffman
3 August 2010
Judge Lind
…original charges were before you had jurisdiction…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Judge Lind
…any discussions…original charges ‘Baghdad’ talks about 50 classified…classified Department of Defense PPT, classified video, classified…Reykjavik 13, more than 50 Department of State cables…at some point new charges… On 1 March 2011 had more broad scope of charge documents, CIDNE, etc… When you got case until new charges…when did Government find out about the new information [reflected in the new charges]?
Col. Carl Coffman
M’am…?
Judge Lind
You have a certain amount of information… Government became aware of more information out there… I guess when doing the delay request…or new information?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes. We had each of the charges… As far as what they were classified or not…had general understanding…wasn’t a discussion with numbers…time would take.
Judge Lind
When you have early delays for the 706 board…was also classification reviews…did the US Government come and talk to you…’Oh no, we just found out about…’?
Col. Carl Coffman
…in weekly update…if we find more info…
Judge Lind
Did trial counsel say, ‘We got new information’?
Col. Carl Coffman
Weekly updates.
Judge Lind
Documentation?
Col. Carl Coffman
Memos we went through today.
Judge Lind
Did they talk to you at some point about charges?
Col. Carl Coffman
I got the additional charge sheet. [Col. sounds like ‘micha’]
Judge Lind
When was CID investigation complete?
Col. Carl Coffman
No sure when.
[COURT ENDS EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
[PROSECUTION RE-EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Prosecution (Fein)
Court’s last question, are you aware if Army CID still investigating crime…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Do not know had been.
Prosecution (Fein)
Is WikiLeaks still releasing classified information?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t know. I think CID is [because] still leaking classified information.
Prosecution (Whyte)
Are all of the disclosures still in public [domain]…Army CID kept investigating, how would you know…?
Col. Carl Coffman
Trial counsel told me.
[PROSECUTION ENDS RE-EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Court asks a question. Unclear from transcribers notes.
[DEFENSE CROSS EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
Defense (Coombs)
Original charges 5 July 2010?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
…1 March 2011?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
You took case on 3 August 2010?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
Between time frame..and 1 March 2011, do you know when USG was aware of the information Pfc. Manning might have had?
Col. Carl Coffman
Don’t recall.
Defense (Coombs)
So 1 March 2011, not because of new information, could have gotten before referred date?
Col. Carl Coffman
Yes.
Defense (Coombs)
[Defense then addresses the Court] …authority to ask the Court [to brief on Military Rules for Evidence] MRE 505(d) [Under M.R.E. 505(d), the convening authority is in control of the discovery process before referral.]
Prosecution (Fein)
…we ask for this to be briefed. [Since Col. Coffman is on the witness stand.]
Judge Lind
[to defense] You are asking for his knowledge…?
[DEFENSE ENDS CROSS EXAMINATION OF COL. CARL COFFMAN]
[COL. CARL COFFMAN IS EXCUSED]
Judge Lind
Court question does Convening Authority have the authority to authorize substitutes in counsel wants to brief the Court… [Court would be happy to accept briefs.]
Defense (Coombs)
Yes, your Honor.
Prosecution (Fein)
Yes, your Honor.
Judge Lind
Speedy trial issue [missed].
Defense (Coombs)
No, your Honor.
Prosecution (Fein)
No, your Honor.
Judge Lind
MRE 505 protective order signed. number of documents are involved…vast sum…had Government print them for me…defense if you will have forensic [experts look at the evidence as under the parameters set up by the Court order granting the Government’s motion for a protective order]…with respect to relevance…same basis for 505(g)(2) request.
You emailed me something, not filed.
I will consider the same factors in previous MRE 505 [ex parte ] reviews.[as ruled by the Court when they granted defense motion for a series of questions the Court will consider when reviewing Government MRE 505 classified information limited disclosure reviews.]
Look at protective order and take a look at relevance…and address on record.
Defense (Coombs)
Yes, your Honor.
Prosecution (Fein)
Yes, your Honor.
Prosecution (Fein)
…45 minute recess for chronology and OCA participations…
Judge Lind
At some point we have to look at case calendar.
Defense (Coombs)
Plea and maximum, conditional plea for next session, your Honor.
Judge Lind
As far as I understand…Government has to go through Army regulation procedures, anything else for calendar.
[RECESS CALLED]
ALL RISE
Judge Lind
Please be seated. This Article 39(a) Session is called to order…
Prosecution (Fein)
[Fein mentions appellate exhibit 368, but not clear from my notes what that is.] Court protective order is appellate exhibit 381. Un-redacted [motion concerning the protective order] is 382. Appellate exhibit 383 is the speedy trial chronology.
Judge Lind
Is that different than the defense speedy trial chronology?
Prosecution (Fein)
Not much…
Updated defense interrogatory. Appellate exhibit 385 is updated Court calendar.
Judge Lind
…next session dates are the same 27 November 2012 [she mistakenly says 27 May then corrects herself] at 10:00am. Do we need to meet in an [RCM] 802 [conference]? Accurate?
Defense (Coombs)
Yes, your Honor.
Prosecution (Fein)
Yes, your Honor.
Judge Lind
Need to meet?
Defense (Coombs)
No, your Honor.
Prosecution (Fein)
No, your Honor.
Prosecution (Fein)
…because chronology filed with Court additional response about different response…
Judge Lind
When will I have it?
Prosecution (Fein)
Next week Thursday.
Judge Lind
Two volumes.
Prosecution (Fein)
A number of emails defense to prosecution. The majority have not been seen or presented before. …will be marked.
Judge Lind
As I said, I have been conducting an MRE 505 review…motion…almost finished reviewing…need another ex parte session for about a half an hour after Court.
Lind calls recess but defense interrupts and adds more Court related business to the record.
Defense (Coombs)
OCAs…five OCA’s answer to interrogatory.
Judge Lind
So, by interrogatory…[defense then will call] no additional witnesses?
Defense (Coombs)
That is correct.
[END OF DAY]