Witness | US v Pfc. Manning, Captain Casey Martin (married name Fulton), Platoon Leader and Brigade Assistant S2, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division

posted December 17, 2011

UPDATE POST COURT-MARTIAL

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

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

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

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

General Description

Captain Casey Fulton, previously Casey Martin, was an officer in charge of squad’s intelligence section. She was the platoon leader and Brigade Assistant S2.

She testified that the main focus at F.O.B. Hammer, Iraq in March 2010 was election security. Prior to that it was disrupting enemy operations. Her job was was doing analysis of enemy threat for future operations; which included creating future operation orders for the commander to determine courses of action.

She was deployed twice: Afghanistan 2007 to 2009 and Iraq 2009 to 2010.

Capt. Casey Fulton, previously Casey Martin, arrived in Iraq in September 2009.

She met Pfc. Manning in September 2009.

She says that Pfc. Manning’s full time duties were “violent extremist threat”.

She deployed as an S2 Plans Officer and became Assistant S2 in late January 2010.

She recounts that Specialist Jihrleah Showman played a 2007 Baghdad airstrike video on her personal computer before April 2010. In April 2010, Capt. Casey Fulton, previously Casey Martin, “asked group if they had seen the video, and how that would affect us if it became public in a deployed environment.” She says that Pfc. Manning came up to her and said he thought it was the same video from our share drive.

Capt. Casey Fulton, previously Casey Martin, says that Pfc. Manning then sent an email to her comparing the 2007 Baghdad airstrike video and Collateral Murder.

Capt. Casey Fulton, previously Casey Martin, says that she was not in Pfc. Manning’s chain of command and that their relationship was merely counseling.

She was present, involved, and recounts, but did not see, when Pfc. Manning is said to have struck Specialist Jihrleah Showman. She informed then Master Sergeant Adkins [he was demoted in an administrative action, as a result of the U.S. Army 15-6 investigation]. She said she believed the incident should have resulted in a DEROG, and that it was then Master Sergeant Adkins duty to report the incident.

She says that she was aware of a December 2009 incident between Pfc. Manning and Sergeant Padgett.

She said she saw an incident between then Master Sergeant Adkins and Pfc. Manning where Manning was curled in the fetal position on the floor. She did not speak to then Master Sergeant Adkins about it.

She mentions that all soldiers signed a SF312, saying they wouldn’t release classified data.

Individuals mentioned in the testimony of Captain Casey Martin [married name is Fulton]

Unnamed person in the S2 shop who directed Capt. Casey Fulton, previously Casey Martin, to Bradley Manning, saying he knew about the Iraq threat.
Specialist Jihrleah Showman.
Commander
Group of unnamed soldiers who Captain Casey Martin [married name is Fulton] spoke to in April 2010 about Collateral Murder.
Staff Sergeant ~~[phonetic “Ballard”]~~ Kyle Balonek (promoted to Warrant Officer, One in September 2010), who was apparently the “go-to” analyst.
Unnamed soldiers in the T-SCIF who would pull music from the shared drive and put it on their D6 Computers, or buy pirated movies from Iraqis and play on their machines.
Lt. Elizabeth Fields

No. 22 on the December 2, 2011 Defense Request for Article 32 Witnesses

XXXXXXXXXX [Captain Casey Martin (married name Fulton), Assistant S2, S2 Section, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division] She will testify that XXXXXXXXXX [WHO IS THIS?] was in charge of the administrative details and supervision of the soldiers within the S2 section. She will testify that she was made aware of many of the issues surrounding PFC Manning when she arrived to the unit. In her opinion, PFC Manning should have been removed from his position in the T-SCIF early on in the deployment. However, she felt that the leadership within the S2 section was not really concerned with disciplining Soldiers. She will testify that she ask XXXXXXXXXX [WHO IS THIS?] why PFC Manning was not removed from his position in the T-SCIF earlier, and that he told her that it was a man power issue. She will testify that she believes that PFC Manning’s issues were not taken seriously and no one took any steps to help him or even recognize that he needed help. She believes the unit failed to take proper action and failed to properly respond to the issues that PFC Manning was obviously struggling with both before and during the deployment.

Article 32 Pretrial Transcript, 12/18/11

See Transcript of US v Pfc. Bradley Manning, Article 32 Pretrial Hearing, 12/18/11

[First witness. Captain Casey Martin [married name is Fulton]. In person. Sword in.]

Prosecution: Current job?

Fulton: Officer in Charge of Squadron Intelligence.

Prosecution: What do you do?

Fulton: Multiple Intel collection…analysis.

Prosecution: Are you an Intelligence Officer?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: That what you do?

Fulton: All Source Intel.

Prosecution: How long?

Fulton: Six years.

Prosecution: Training?

Fulton: Officer’s basic courses…then military Intel courses.

Prosecution: What was your previous position?

Fulton: Assistant Officer in charge as Lt. Platoon Leader…Brigade Officer in charge…Brigade Assistant S2.

Prosecution: How many times have you been deployed?

Fulton: Two times. Afghanistan from 2007 to 2008, and Iraq from 2009 to 2010. I arrived in Iraq in 2009, was deployed in October.

Prosecution: Why did you arrive so close?

Fulton: …just graduated.

Prosecution: What were your duties?

Fulton: S2…Intel Security for deployment operations order…instruction ordered to get in country…lay down of threat for the environment.

Prosecution: When did you first meet PFC Manning?

Fulton: September of 2009.

Prosecution: How did you meet him?

Fulton: Ask in the shop who knew about the threat in Iraq…I was directed to Pfc. Manning…told he had a good idea…

Prosecution: What do you mean?

Fulton: According to the person who directed me to him, he [Manning] had a better understanding than the others.

Prosecution: In your experience was that true?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What were his duties?

Fulton: All Source Analyst.

Prosecution: What is that?

Fulton: Gathered different Intel, disciplines, and filtered together…

Prosecution: So “all source”…?

Fulton: …pull together.

Prosecution: How does one become an “all source”?

Fulton: Higher score, TOP SECRET clearance…

Prosecution: What are the requirements for TOP SECRET clearance…?

Fulton: Background investigation…U.S. citizen…

Prosecution: Why do 35 Foxes have TOP SECRET clearance?

Fulton: Because in order to…they have to be able to pull information from different class levels.

Prosecution: Are you familiar with their training?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What is operational training?

Fulton: How basic things you may do can compromise security. For example, if you post a picture of yourself on base on FaceBook, although your intent might not be to compromise security, the enemy can use the information against U.S. forces.

Prosecution: 35 Foxes learn that?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What is infosec?

[Defense OBJECTION Coombs walks right up to the witness booth past prosecution at the center podium, and begins questioning Fulton.]

Defense (Coombs): Have you ever been an instructor of 35 Foxes?

Fulton: No. But, I have assisted in their training.

Defense: Ten day trainings?

I.O. to Prosecution: Do you have any additional questions to lay foundation?

Prosecution: How many new junior enlisted soldiers?

Fulton: At least seven currently…and I don’t know who else arrived.

Prosecution: Out of those ten, any receive AIT at your unit?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Did they receive other training?

[Defense OBJECTION Leading. I.O. OVERRULES.]

Prosecution: So any training they would receive from AIT [Advanced Individual Training]?

Fulton: Correct.

Prosecution: What is InfoSec?

Fulton: Basically means information…both classified and non classified management.

Prosecution: Can you be more specific?

Fulton: How to collect, mark, and destroy.

Prosecution: What do you mean by ‘marked’?

Fulton: TOP SECRET is top secret…SECRET has certain caveats…UNCLASSIFIED…CONFIDENTIAL.

Prosecution: Can you give me an example?

Fulton: UNCLASSIFIED has a green mark top and bottom…SECRET…top and bottom.

Prosecution: How about in a digital system?

Fulton: Same way…

Prosecution: As part of InfoSec training, what is presumption…?

[Defense OBJECTION Re: Training. I.O. OVERRULES.]

Prosecution: So as part of training what is taught about what a soldier is to presume?

Fulton: Unauthorized disclosure.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: …responsibility there is of no unauthorized disclosure of authorized info…

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Because if it’s marked CLASSIFIED, it is CLASSIFIED.

Prosecution: Is it the job of the analyst to determine classification?

Fulton: No. If it is marked CLASSIFIED, assume it is CLASSIFIED.

Prosecution: Why is that?

Fulton: [She pauses. Throughout the prosecutions questioning of her, she takes very long pauses to answer her questions. Like she has to search for answers.] Because that is done by someone in authority.

Prosecution: You have authority?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Anyone in your group?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Has to be appointed by the Secretary of the Army. Is that so?

Fulton: I believe so.

Prosecution: [Missed question]

Fulton: There is an ability to chat with other analysts…pulls database…provides map like diagram…personality based.

Prosecution: What does it pull from?

Fulton: CIDNE [Combined Information Data Network Exchange . That has become the database everyone uses.

Prosecution: Everyone?

Fulton: Military and other defense agencies.

Prosecution: Is CIDNE just an Intel platform?

Fulton: I don’t really think so. That is all I use it for.

Prosecution: Human Intel, Tack raps [Signal Intel reports], Significant Activity [SigActs] reports…Those reports have classification marks?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: How would you know that documents are classified?

Fulton: Marks. [She explains marks.]

Prosecution: When you pull…is it in a database…?

Fulton: Say again.

Prosecution: A dual user interface…does it require fields, or is it a blank slate…? [Prosecution searches for a way to explain the user interface intelligibly. He uses Microsoft Word as an example of a ‘blank slate’ …in my opinion his question was stated very unclearly…]

Fulton: I think fields.

Prosecution: Is there a classification field?

Fulton: I don’t know.

Prosecution: What sort of fields exist?

Fulton: Assassinations. Threats…

Prosecution: Dust worm procedures…?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What is that?

Fulton: When military are kidnapped.

Prosecution: Grid quadrants?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Sources of Intel provided to members of Army in Iraq?

Fulton: There could be…[She then asks…] Are you talking about CIDNE or Significant Activity?

Prosecution: Is there a difference?

Fulton: So CIDNE contains types…

Prosecution: So positions of U.S. forces is contained in the data…?

[Defense OBJECTION Also, Fulton is speaking with pauses and very low volume. I.O. says, her answer sounded like, “Maybe.”]

Prosecution: Does the CIDNE database contain information of the coordinates of US forces?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Between 2009 and 2010 how U.S. forces reacted to I.E.D. attacks?

Fulton: Yes.

[Defense OBJECTION Relevance.]

Defense: Pfc. Manning is not charged with CIDNE database…and as I understand…no SigActs…

[I.O. SUSTAINS…”Briefly.” Defense (Coombs) gets up and walks over to witness booth past prosecution who is standing at the center podium in the courtroom.]

Defense: CIDNE database has a lot of info…SigActs are a small part?

Fulton: I would say small.

Defense: SigActs won’t have source names?

Fulton: Depends on how it is written.

Defense: So the SigActs that my client is charged with…whole bunch…not other stuff?

[An argument between defense and prosecution ensues over what Pfc. Manning is charged with and how relevant prosecution’s questions are…defense or prosecution says, unclear who. Needs verification as to who is speaking, “He is charged with CIDNE-Iraq and SigAct-Iraq…”]

Prosecution: Charge Sheet… Spec 4, Charge 2… Compromise Iraq database… 382,000 documents…

Defense: Maybe prosecution can state what documents are, all SigActs.

[I.O. gets impatient with Defense. I.O. OVERRULED.]

Prosecution: So we are talking about different types of information…December 2009 to January 2010…different indirect fire methods, techniques, tactics, and procedures…?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: …for enemy attacks?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Different techniques for I.E.D. attacks?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Different techniques for rescue?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: When we stated…talk about the system? What is Intelink?

Fulton: It is a system.

Prosecution: Where do you find it?

Fulton: On SIPRnet.

Prosecution: How is it used?

Fulton: Where you would try to find information…not readily available.

Prosecution: What type of information would come back?

Fulton: PowerPoint presentations, reports, word documents which would be reports…

Prosecution: Was that undertaken by 35 Foxes on a daily basis?

Fulton: Maybe not.

Prosecution: Weekly?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: When you arrived in Iraq what were your duties?

Fulton: Doing all analysis of future threat.

Prosecution: What kind?

Fulton: When creating a future operations order…in order to help the commander, you need you need to understand what they are going to do first.

Prosecution: What kinds of things do you want to know?

Fulton: Everything you can know about the enemy.

Prosecution: Did 35 Foxes help?

Fulton: Yes. They are comprehensive projects in a condensed timeline. Easier to shop out (research parts)…

Prosecution: Who relied on these products?

Fulton: The commander.

Prosecution: Can you give an example? How would you give a question and get an answer from a 35 Fox?

Fulton: If we had a fire threat…use D6 to search all indirect fire threats to lay info of in operational environment…then take all human reporting…pull HUMINT [Human Intelligence] and the enemy threat network: Which routes? How they travel? Where they store munitions? And then would direct assets on the ground for collection of Intelligence…to disruption zones…enemy locations or prevent attacks.

Prosecution: Disruption zones?

Fulton: Enemy intends to disrupt but not to defeat.

Prosecution: Overlays?

Fulton: Taking information and overlaying it on top of each other.

Prosecution: Sit temp [I am not certain if this is the correct spelling of a word or if the word is slang]?

Fulton: Situational locations of the enemy.

Prosecution: Cache locations?

Fulton: Cache?

[Prosecutor apologizes for mispronouncing cache with two syllables.]

Fulton: Where they store munitions.

Prosecution: How would 35 Foxes get the information?

Fulton: …pull from CIDNE…most came from CIDNE.

Prosecution: Would a person not familiar with the system be able to pull information?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Because it has to be filtered. For example. Query-Tree uses boolean logic…combination of words…otherwise superfluous…same with CIDNE, needs to be filtered.

Prosecution: If you relied on “all source” they would have to pull it through…?

Fulton: Correct.

Prosecution: When did you become an Intel officer?

Fulton: Late January.

Prosecution: Mission?

Fulton: To provide best threat product to commander. Our focus was election security.

Prosecution: When?

Fulton: March.

Prosecution: Main focus March 2010 F.O.B. Hammer?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Other focuses?

Fulton: Before that?

Prosecution: Day to day?

Fulton: Disrupt enemy operations.

Prosecution: Where was your office?

Fulton: In S.C.I.F.

Prosecution: What is “S.C.I.F.”?

Fulton: Specialized Compartmentalized Information [She pauses.] I do not know.

[S.C.I.F. stands for “Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility”]

Prosecution: What does it stand for?

Fulton: Good question.

Prosecution: Did Manning work in the S.C.I.F.?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Your office was in the S.C.I.F.?

Fulton: Yes…Back room was [indecipherable] Signals.

Prosecution: What is NIPRnet?

Fulton: Unclassified. SIPRnet up to SECRET.

Prosecution: Did any “all source” analysts have access to higher access?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: …ability to discuss?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Highest level you could access was SECRET?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Requirement to burn C.D.s?

Fulton: The reason for the ability to burn C.D.’s was to share information with Iraqis. It was part of the mission.

Prosecution: Allowed for any other means?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: While deployed with Second Brigade… [indecipherable maybe “description] …of general security?

Fulton: Don’t release info to family. Don’t go on FaceBook.

Prosecution: What about InfoSec?

[Defense OBJECTION Unsure of I.O.’s ruling. Indecipherable.]

Prosecution: Were computers on shared network accessed by “all Source”?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Classification?

Fulton: SECRET.

Prosecution: What were rules of pulling information off network?

Fulton: [She asks] Accessing?

Prosecution: Yes.

Fulton: There weren’t any restrictions because it was a shared network. It was easier to move information back and forth.

Prosecution: Rules for pulling information off?

Fulton: No way you would pull off information that wasn’t pertinent.

Prosecution: What makes it appear classified?

Fulton: That it is on a classified system or a machine that is classified. If there is information on a classified system, once something is on a classified system, assumed classified and cannot put on an unclassified…

Prosecution: How was authorization for the 2nd Brigade tech…maintain [indecipherable]?

Fulton: Don’t know.

Prosecution: Pull to a personal computer?

Fulton: …because that is unauthorized disclosure.

Prosecution: Is that something 35 Foxes would know?

Fulton: At minimum they signed SF312 a Non Disclosure Agreement. They also have been trained.

Prosecution: Is that supervised one hundred percent of the time?

Fulton: Impossible.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Because of limited amount of supervision.

Prosecution: What do you rely on?

Fulton: That they have understanding of their job and take pride in their work.

Prosecution: What were Manning’s strengths?

Fulton: He was very good at compiling data.

Prosecution: Can you give me an example?

Fulton: I had him work with D6…laying Human Intel onto a map…He could import and export Excel spreadsheets… So looking at number of spreadsheets…easier to use excel than input one at a time.

Prosecution: How often?

Fulton: Occasionally.

Prosecution: Would he have to have an understanding of the data?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Full time duties?

Fulton: Violent extremist threat…

Prosecution: Based on that, was there a reason for him to be investigating G.T.M.O. S.O.P.’s?

Fulton: No. Not regarding Iraq.

Prosecution: A reason for him to be searching for Iceland?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: For Julian Assange on SIPRnet?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: 15-6 investigations?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: S.J.A. [Staff Judge Advocate] Web site?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Pulling all the data from the CIDNE-Afghanistan database?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Were you aware of the 2007 Apache video?

Fulton: [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman was playing on personal computer before April 1 [2010].

Prosecution: What computer?

Fulton: Her work station comp.

Prosecution: She had it on SIPRnet system?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: So a classified system?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: When did you become aware?

Fulton: Not sure. It wasn’t exactly… didn’t really know until Manning was arrested.

Prosecution: Did you ever have a conversation about the video?

Fulton: I asked group if they had seen the video, and how that would affect us if it became public in a deployed environment. Manning said, “No. That is the same video on our shared drive.” I said, “No. It is shorter.” I would have to compare…last verbal conversation…

Prosecution: Did you have non-verbal conversation about the video?

Fulton: He sent email with two video clips, one of the Apache video, both side by side.

Prosecution: Was the video released through the Internet the one on your shared drive?

Fulton: That was the indication. Not sure.

Prosecution: Email is on SIPRnet?

Fulton: Yes. SIPRnet.

Prosecution: Captain Fulton, were you aware of an Army investigation related to that video?

Fulton: Not sure.

[Defense cross-examines the witness.]

Defense (Coombs): Became part…2009?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Your duty was Assistant S2?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Deploy as S2 Plans Officer?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You worked out of the SCIF on operation orders for election security?

Fulton: Yes.

[Coombs would often use this style for cross-examination of witnesses. He would conduct a recap narrative-like, easy going exchange, which required a simple yes or no. More often, simply yes to his line of argument. He did this in the way a dog might urinate on a neighborhood fence, and not in a rude manner. He simply made the story his, so you forgot the prosecutors’ in his retelling. Coombs also used his intellect as much as he used physical space in the courtroom. In a confident and graceful manner, he simply asserted himself between the nervous prosecutors and the show dog I.O., the way a real alpha defense lawyer like Coombs could.]

Defense (Coombs): Election security…helping the commander make decisions?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Mission was related to elections?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Product was important?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Election security was the main mission?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You were not in the chain of command…your relationship with Manning was merely counseling?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): One soldier you relied on was Manning?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Manning was good for putting projects together?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Knew how to use excel, and could plot data points?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): N.D.M.P. [Network Data Management Protocol] …heavy Intel…you needed his assistance for steps?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): …lengthy and robust?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Asked him to create data-maps and slides?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): He completed them in a timely manner?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Assigning him frequently?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): …primary mission?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did a lot of work from November 2009 to 2010 that had to be completed in a timely manner?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You would go to him because he was good with computers?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Go to him because he was interested in the topics?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Sometimes he would find information for you based on discussions you had had?

Fulton: Yes. [Her voice got softer as Coombs line of questions continued, and I got the feeling she exhibited compassion, perhaps even liked Manning.]

Defense (Coombs): Exciting to have someone like Manning?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Didn’t believe he was a good analyst?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): …because they needed to grow?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Not like being an analyst is an easy thing?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): He was still learning?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So because he was still learning, he was just tasked to get the data?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Then you would do analysis?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Your way of training was to ask questions?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Not surprising, you would even go through the data, even though he was not an analyst [Need verification. I think this is where he asked her if she would go through the data with Manning.]?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Person who was Staff Sergeant ~~[I wrote phonetically “Ballard”]~~ [Kyle] Balonek [promoted to Warrant Officer, One in September 2010] …?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): People in the S.C.I.F. listen to music?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Soldiers would pull the music from the shared drive and put on the D6?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): That was common?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Not acceptable?

Fulton: What do you mean?

Defense (Coombs): Should they have had music on the shared drive? So no one ever told you music was a violation?

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): So they would pulled the music from the shared drive and put it on players, that ok?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): If people watched movies they purchased from Iraqi nationals, pirated versions, was that ok?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): There were games on the shared drive, soldiers played those games on the D6?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): D6 machines used primarily for…?

Fulton: Analysis.

Defense (Coombs): mIRC chat as a baseline?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): In fact, mIRC chat was installed on your machine as an executable desktop application?

Fulton: I think so.

[Defense (Coombs) explains that the program ran from the desktop and was executable. Downloaded and installed.]

Defense (Coombs): And you needed it, because it helped you communicate. As you also believed Google Earth was part of the program (of tools)?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): It was installed as a desktop application?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): And you would use Google Earth?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did you see Manning talk to [Master Sergeant] Adkins prior to the incident with [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): What did you see?

Fulton: Manning was upset and sitting on the floor.

Defense (Coombs): Arms around his knees, would it be correct to say he was curled up in a ball on the floor?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): That is not common, is it?

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): Did you speak to — to find out what was going on?

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): Were you present with the incident with [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You had released [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman, but you brought her back?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You were looking for information, and no one could find it, Manning had tried to find it, and you needed the information?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So you had instructed someone go and wake [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman up?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): And [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman was irritated?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You had your back to — because you were on the phone — and you heard [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman was irritated with Pfc. Manning?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): And she was irritated because he was playing a game?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You knew Manning had already looked for the information?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You heard Manning say, “You need to calm down,” to [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman…with [Specialist] ~~Schulman~~ [Jihrleah] Showman on the ground… [I did not write down the entire question, may have been two questions]?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): She had said he had struck her, and she had a red mark on her face?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You told [Master Sergeant] Adkins that — needed to be taken from him…needed to go to behavioral specialist because that was the standard response?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Why?

Fulton: What do you mean? When you have an interaction like that between soldiers…I wanted him removed…especially in a deployed environment…you want to find out what is wrong.

Defense (Coombs): Did you feel that a ‘derog’ was necessary?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Derog, his security clearance suspended, revoked?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Derog…call into question of whether they should have security clearance…some examples of reasons for derog are: Behavioral…lying to superiors…?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So obviously…derog process makes sure you track negative actions?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Soldiers and leaders have a responsibility to report behavioral issues with people who have security clearances?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So especially security persons had a responsibility for security clearance?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): And, it was [Master Sergeant] Adkins duty to report…?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So if a soldier exhibited behavior that was untrustworthy or if a soldier exhibited mental problems…?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Where you aware of the Manning [Sergeant] Padgett incident?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): 2009 end of …deployment ? [Not clear from my notes.]

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Based on a conversation with [Master Sergeant] Adkins, what were your thoughts on the derog, you agreed?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): How quickly can a persons access be pulled?

Fulton: Immediately.

Defense (Coombs): Once a soldier is ‘derog’ed’ do they have access?

Fulton: No.

[Prosecution re-examines Captain Casey Fulton]

Prosecution: Captain Fulton, after Manning assaulted — he was removed from the S.C.I.F. on May 7, 2010?

Fulton: I don’t know. [She may have added, “In May…” I believe she was saying she was not sure of exact date.]

Prosecution: Did he receive averse action?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: All soldiers, and especially 35 Foxes … not to disclose?

Fulton: Yes.

[Defense re-examines the witness.]

Defense: Your clearance is dependent on, ongoing behavior?

Fulton: Yes.

[Captain Fulton is excused. Recess…]

Additional Article 32 Pretrial, 12/18/11 (by an anonymous journalist, ed. by Alexa O’Brien)

See Transcript of US v Pfc. Bradley Manning, Article 32 Pretrial Hearing, 12/18/11 (Additional)

Below is an additional transcript by an anonymous journalist, ed. by Alexa O’Brien. It is a repeat of the session transcribed by hand above.

[Capt. Casey Fulton, previously Casey Martin, was an officer in charge of squad’s intelligence section. Collective fusion of intelligence, reconnaissance, analytical evaluation of intelligence, in order to answer questions from the commander.]

Prosecution: Intelligence officer?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: That is your specialty?

Fulton: Yes.

[Capt. Casey Fulton has been officer for six years.]

Prosecution: Training?

Fulton: Went to officer’s basic course as Lieutenant…

Prosecution: Previous positions?

Fulton: Assistant officer in charge of the battalion. Platoon leader. Brigade Assistant S2 officer. I was Brigade Assistant S2.

Prosecution: How many times were you deployed?

Fulton: Twice. Afghanistan 2007 – 2009. Iraq 2009 – 2010.

[Mid September 2009 is when she arrived. She was deployed in October. She had just graduated from the Captain’s Career Course. She contributed lay-down threat for the operating environment they were going to be assuming. In September 2009, she met Manning.]

Prosecution: How?

Fulton: I had asked the shop for info about the threat in Iraq. I was directed to hire Manning because he had a good understanding of the enemy threat. He gave me good idea of enemy threat groups.

Prosecution: [Missed.]

Fulton: According to the person who directed me. He [Manning] had a better understanding than the other operatives.

Prosecution: What was Manning’s S2 capacity?

Fulton: All-source analyst. They gather Intel from different disciplines and analyze it. There’s Human, Imagery, & Signals Intelligence.

Prosecution: What does an all-source Intel analyst do?

Fulton: Pulls all of the Intel together to create a more complete picture.

Prosecution: How are they selected?

Fulton: Usually they have higher scores on ASVAB [Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery], and they must have TOP SECRET clearance. You have to pass a background investigation.

Prosecution: Can anyone acquire that?

Fulton: No. In order to fuse intel… [Missed answer.]

Prosecution: Are you familiar with the training they receive?

Fulton: Believe so.

Prosecution: Operational security training is that what they receive? What is it?

Fulton: It’s training that illustrates how things you do day-to-day may compromise current operations. E.g. Facebook. You wouldn’t want that to compromise operational facility. If you take pic of yourself, that sort of thing…

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Cause intent may not be to compromise, but enemy could use that info against U.S. forces.

Prosecution: Is that something 35 Foxes learned?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What’s Info Sec?

Fulton: It’s how to safeguard information.

DEFENSE OBJECTION.

…

Defense (Coombs): Have you ever been an instructor?

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): Attended 35 Fox courses?

Fulton: Assisted in training, yes.

Defense (Coombs): How?

Defense (Coombs): We are pulled into attending exercise…help mentor them.

Defense (Coombs): I’m talking about classroom training.

Fulton: No.

DEFENSE OBJECTION: SHE SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SAY WHAT PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY TAUGHT.

Prosecution: Six years you’ve been an officer?

Fulton: Almost.

Prosecution: How many 35 Fox junior soldiers?

Fulton: 10.

Prosecution: Did they receive prior training?

Fulton: Yes. The training they get at AIT [Advanced Individual Training] is the only training they get.

Prosecution: So any info they come with they’ve already received at AIT [Advanced Individual Training]?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Explain InfoSec?

Fulton: Information Security Training: training on safeguard of information, whether classified or unclassified.

Prosecution: What’s the training consist of?

Fulton: Goes through classification levels. How it is marked, transported… How is it supposed to be destroyed?

Prosecution: What do you mean, “Properly marked…” ?

Fulton: There’s a marking system for classified & unclassified data: CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, TOP SECRET, and UNCLASSIFIED. All levels have certain caveats.

Prosecution: Explain the proper way to mark document?

Fulton: If we had UNCLASSIFIED, you mark top & bottom in green as UNCLASSIFIED.

Prosecution: Classified doc?

Fulton: If CONFIDENTIAL, marked that on top and bottom. Same for SECRET, TOP SECRET, etc.

Prosecution: What is the presumption when you receive a document?

DEFENSE OBJECTION: SHE CAN SPEAK TO HER EXPERIENCE, NOT THAT OF A PERSON GOING THROUGH TRAINING.

Investigating Officer: PROCEED.

Prosecution: Have you had InfoSec training?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What are you taught?

Fulton: Classified info has to be protected. No unauthorized disclosure.

Prosecution: Why is the presumption taught that if it says SECRET on the document, you’re supposed to presume it SECRET?

Fulton: If it’s marked classified, that’s what it is.

Prosecution: As part of InfoSec training, is it incumbent on the individual to determine whether something is classified?

Fulton: No. Because if it’s marked classified, that’s what it is.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: There are only certain people who have authority to classify documents.

Prosecution: Did you have that authorization?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Soldiers working for you?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Anyone in your Brigade?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Who?

Fulton: Um… Theater Commanding General.

Prosecution: Taking Iraq as example, what level?

Fulton: Corps or Division? They have to be appointed by the Secretary of Army.

Prosecution: Now lets talk about the systems used. What are some information systems used?

Fulton: Primarily DCGS [Distributed Common Ground Systems]. Don’t know what it stands for.

Prosecution: What’s it do?

Fulton: Number of things. Chat with other analysts. Pulls data from databases. Provides maps. Has link diagram program on it, personality-based.

Prosecution: Different types of databases?

Fulton: CIDNE [Combined Information Data Network Exchange] is primary.

Prosecution: Others?

Fulton: That’s the one it pulls from…cause that’s become the database everybody uses to streamline data.

Prosecution: Who?

Fulton: Military and other defense agencies.

Prosecution: CIDNE just intelligence platform?

Fulton: I don’t think so. Think it can be used for other non-intel based functions. Lot of Human Intel reporting. I believe there’s Tack raps [Signal Intel reports] in there. Significant Activity [SigActs] reports.

Prosecution: Do those reports have classification marking?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Evident?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What’s it look like? How would you know an entry in the database is classified or not?

Fulton: Would be marked SECRET or whatever classification in its caveats. Standard to put in top & bottom of reports.

Prosecution: In a database field? Where you fill in entries? In the user interface of CIDNE, does it require you to enter things into fields? Or is it a blank slate?

Fulton: Fields. Yes, there are titles.

Prosecution: Was “classification” of a document a field?

Fulton: Don’t know.

Prosecution: Was it marked?

Fulton: Should have been. I.E.D.’s, direct fire, indirect fire, assassinations, threats…easier to brief by exception than by type of event.

Prosecution: Details regarding casualties?

Fulton: Maybe.

Prosecution: Dust worm procedures…?

Fulton: Maybe. That’s when a U.S. military person gets kidnapped.

Prosecution: Techniques, tactics, procedures followed by military?

Fulton: Definitely in there.

Prosecution: Grid coordinates for operating bases?

Fulton: Might be in there, yes.

Prosecution: Different sources of information provided to members of the Army on the ground?

Fulton: Could be.

Prosecution: Different information regarding units currently operating?

Fulton: Are we talking about stuff in the docs or CIDNE in general?

Prosecution: Good question, answer.

Fulton: Sometimes reports will contain information…

Prosecution: SigActs [Significant Activities] are one. Know of others?

Fulton: Those are the main two types we use.

Prosecution: So, positions of U.S. forces are included in that data? Including info…

DEFENSE OBJECTION: SPECULATION

Defense (Coombs): Government elicit more than “could be” or “maybe”.

…

Prosecution: Did CIDNE, in December of 2009 and January of 2010, contain information about how U.S. forces react to I.E.D. attacks?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Used by your Intel analysts?

Fulton: Yes.

DEFENSE OBJECTION: RELEVENCE.

Defense (Coombs): He’s charged with nothing having to do with CIDNE database. It’s huge. But he’s not charged with that. Can I widen my objection?

Investigating Officer: Briefly.

Defense (Coombs): There are so many sources in the CIDNE database, one person couldn’t navigate whole thing, right? SigActs is a small part, right?

Fulton: I’d say it’s a part but not a small part.

Defense (Coombs): Won’t have names, will it?

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): So SigActs, as far as SigActs my client is charged with, there’s a whole bunch of other stuff in CIDNE database that’s not SigActs.

Investigating Officer: Mr. Coombs…

OBJECTION OVERRULED.

Prosecution: December 2009 & January 2010, did it include fire methods?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Techniques U.S. forces used to react?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: To I.E.D. attacks?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Rescues?

Fulton: That I don’t know.

Prosecution: We started talking about systems. Was intel link used?

Fulton: Yeah. Search engine. Find it on SIPRnet, our classified internet system.

Prosecution: How was Intellink used?

Fulton: If you’re trying to find info on something not readily available, Intellink is where you’d go.

Prosecution: What kind of info would come back?

Fulton: PowerPoint presentations, reports, etc.

Prosecution: Used on daily basis?

Fulton: Sure. Yes.

Prosecution: Daily?

Fulton: Probably not.

Prosecution: Weekly?

Fulton: I’d say yes.

Prosecution: When you deployed to Iraq, what was your job?

Fulton: I was [can’t understand]. Doing analysis of enemy threat for future operations. Included, when creating future ops order, in order for commander to determine course of action, you have to lay out enemy threat and understand what they’re going to do first.

Prosecution: Require you to understand enemy threat?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What else did you need to know?

Fulton: Everything we can know.

Prosecution: Did 35 Fox soldiers assist?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: To do mission analysis, which is step two of decision-making process. Robust project. When you have shop full of intel analysts, easier to farm out some of the information and have people compile.

Prosecution: Who relied on this compiling of info?

Fulton: Commander.

Prosecution: Give the Investigating Officer an idea of how you would question, how you’d answer, how you’d use a 35 Fox enlisted soldier?

Fulton: We had an indirect fire threat on a certain location. We’d take enemy current situational template – disruption zones, etc. – we’d use D6 [computer] to pool fire threats, overlay on enemy situational template in order to see how enemy was arrayed on battlefield. Then we’d take HUMINT [Human Intelligence] reporting to find what we know of enemy threat network or individuals associated to understand: what vehicles, which routes will they take, etc? Fuse on map in order to determine avenues of approach. Helps to refine reconnaissance to prevent attacks or disrupt enemy operations.

Prosecution: Disruption zones?

Fulton: Where enemy conducts attacks to disrupt but not necessarily defeat.

Prosecution: Overlays? Put into context?

Fulton: You just…taking info and overlaying on top of each other so you can see patterns.

Prosecution: Sit-temp. Situational template. Disposition of enemy forces. Where they’re located.

Fulton: Cache locations. Where they store munitions.

Prosecution: How would a 35 Fox Intel analyst get information of those categories to provide to you for your advice?

Fulton: They pool Significant Activity [SigActs] from CIDNE database.

Prosecution: Would you have to understand to pool info? Why?

Fulton: Because it has to be filtered. Certain way of using words in query in order to pull info you want, not everything. Pull what you need; don’t want superfluous info. E.g., might only want to pull indirect fire attacks.

Prosecution: If you’re relying on indirect analyst, they’d have to understand how to pull in order to assist?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: When did you become…

[Missed. In my own transcript I have an “Intel officer” but there was an atypical command change in the Brigade, during deployment. See Captain Steven Lim’s testimony on December 17, 2011.

Specifically: In late January 2010 Captain Lim was promoted. In his own words, he “replaced guy [Major Cliff Clausen] who could not communicate information to the commander in the way the commander needed.” Captain [Casey] Martin [married name is Fulton] made Lim Brigade S2. At the same time there is a change in command that commenced officially on February 6, 2010.]

…to brigade?

Fulton: Late January 2010.

Prosecution: What was your brigade office mission?

Fulton: To provide best threat product to commander. It was election security at the time.

Prosecution: When?

Fulton: March 2010.

Prosecution: That was main focus?

Fulton: Correct.

Prosecution: What were other focuses before that? Day-to-day?

Fulton: Constant enemy update to Intel assessment. Good Intel picture, disrupt enemy operations.

Prosecution: Where was your office?

Fulton: I was located in the S.C.I.F. It’s a facility where you compartmentalize information. It’s where classified…don’t know how to explain.

Prosecution: What’s it stand for?

Fulton: Great question.

Prosecution: Who else worked there?

Fulton: Whole Brigade S2 shop.

Prosecution: Did Pfc. Manning work in S.C.I.F?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Was your desk there?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What did it look like?

Fulton: Room with computers. Main section open. Additional section on the side.

Prosecution: The main portion where you and Manning worked, what were the networks?

Fulton: NIPRnet and SIPRnet. NIPRnet is unclassified, SIPRnet is classified up to SECRET.

Prosecution: Did you or any analysts have access to anything higher than SECRET?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Could you talk about or look at it?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: But couldn’t access?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Highest you could access was SECRET?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Did you have requirement to burn C.D.’s?

Fulton: Yes. Because we needed to share information with Iraqis.

Prosecution: Were soldiers allowed to burn C.D.’s for any other purpose?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Including personal use?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: While deployed with the 2nd Brigade, were there discussions in the S.C.I.F. regarding operational security?

Fulton: Yes. Don’t post pictures on Facebook, don’t release info to family that would compromise operations, that sort of thing.

Prosecution: What about InfoSec? Informational security?

Fulton: Could have been…

DEFENSE OBJECTION

Investigating Officer: SUSTAINED.

Prosecution: Were computers accessed by “all source” on shared network?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What type of information on it?

Fulton: All sorts.

Prosecution: Classified?

Fulton: Yes. SECRET.

Prosecution: Network on SIPRnet?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Rules for pulling information off network?

Fulton: As far as accessing shared network…? There weren’t any restrictions.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Because it was a shared network.

Prosecution: Was that an operational requirement?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Easier to move information back & forth.

Prosecution: What were the rules in your office as far as pulling info off the shared network? Could you pull anything?

Fulton: Usually you’d just pull info pertinent to your mission.

Prosecution: Was it classified if you pulled it off?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Because it was on a SECRET or classified system.

Prosecution: What makes it classified?

Fulton: Just that. Its markings.

Prosecution: Explain?

Fulton: If it’s on a classified system, rule of thumb is: you can go lower to higher but not higher to lower.

Prosecution: More detail?

Fulton: Once something is on a classified system, it’s assumed classified. You cant take it off a classified and put it on unclassified. That’s considered spillage.

Prosecution: Whose authority is it to say you can’t move something from classified to unclassified?

Fulton: Don’t know.

Prosecution: Was it 2nd [says name]?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: [Missed question.]

Fulton: You’re not allowed to put classified data on an unclassified system.

Prosecution: How do you know?

Fulton: At minimum, they signed an SF312, saying they wouldn’t release classified data. There are also procedures for coming in and out of S.C.I.F. Procedure.

Prosecution: Supervised 100 per cent of the time?

Fulton: No. Impossible.

Prosecution: Why?

Fulton: Only limited number of supervisors. Can’t supervise all day.

Prosecution: What did you rely on?

Fulton: That they have an understanding of the material and that they’ll protect the material the way they’ve been taught.

Prosecution: What were Manning’s strengths?

Fulton: He was good at researching and compiling data.

Prosecution: What did that include?

Fulton: Had him work with D6 – pulling Significant Activity, pull HUMINT [Human Intelligence] reports, etc. He was able to do that efficiently. Was able to import/export Excel spreadsheets. Especially if you’re looking at number of SigActs, it breaks it down by location, type, grid coordinates.

Prosecution: Do this often?

Fulton: Occasionally.

Prosecution: He’d have to understand what he was looking for.

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: What was his full-time duty?

Fulton: He was part of team that evaluated violent extremist threat.

Prosecution: Work-related reason for him to be researching G.T.M.O. S.O.P.?

DEFENSE OBJECTION

Investigating Officer: OVERRULED

Fulton: As it pertained to our mission in Iraq, no.

Prosecution: Reason for him to research Iceland?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Julian Assange?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: Work-related reason for him to research AR 15-6 [Army 15-6] investigations? CENTCOM? SJA [Staff Judge Advocate] website? Pulling all data from CIDNE-Afghanistan database?

Fulton: No to all.

Prosecution: Are you familiar with 2007 Apache video?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: How did you first come aware?

Fulton: Specialist [Jihrleah] Showman was playing it sometime during our deployment. Before April 1.

Prosecution: What computer?

Fulton: Her work station comp.

Prosecution: SIPRnet?

Fulton: Yes. Classified system.

Prosecution: When did you become aware of public release?

Fulton: After I had asked…at that time, I wasn’t sure actually. It wasn’t an actual – to actually know it had been released, it wasn’t till Manning was arrested and taken.

Prosecution: Did you ever have convo with Manning about the video?

Fulton: Yes. Around April. I’d asked the group, to engage them in current events, if they’d seen video. Cause it obviously doesn’t make environment look good. Engaged them in what they thought of it. He [Manning] came up to me and said he thought it was the same video from our share drive.

Prosecution: Response?

Fulton: I said, “No. No way, not same video.” Shorter in duration, maybe media was only showing clips of it. But I’d only seen it once. Said I’d have to see the two side-by-side.

Prosecution: Last conversation?

Fulton: Last verbal conversation, yes. He [Manning] sent an email with a link to our shared drive with two video clips: One video clip from share drive. One of the same video.

Prosecution: Was the video released through WikiLeaks on your share drive?

Fulton: I don’t know.

Prosecution: Did his video point to the original video on share drive?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: And that was on SIPRnet or NIPRnet?

Fulton: SIPRnet.

Prosecution: Captain Fulton, are you aware of an investigation conducted into that video?

Fulton: No.

Prosecution: And the video was on SIPRnet?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): to Investigating Officer: May I have a moment?

Defense (Coombs): 2nd BCT [Brigade Combat Team] September 2009?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Assistant S2 [Company Level Intelligence]?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Deployed Iraq November 2009?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Worked out of S.C.I.F, worked with operations orders for election security?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Created work products regarding election security? Helped commander make decisions?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): All for March 2010 election? Products important?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Election security one of the Brigade’s main missions?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You didn’t have chain of command responsibility – just counseling, detail them directly – over soldiers. One of soldiers you relied on was Pfc. Manning? Often went to him specifically because he was good at what he did? He understood D6 system? He did a good job plotting data points? Used those strengths as part of your S2 work? N.D.M.P. [Network Data Management Protocol] – step two – used Manning to pull data for step two?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Lengthy, robust process? He created data, put it on a map for you?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did good work?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Completed in a timely fashion? Got them done on time?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): During end of 2009 to March 2010 – he did a lot of work and stuff that had to be done on a timely basis?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): He was your go-to analyst?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Unlike other analysts, he would engage you on some of the topics?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Sometimes he would independently find info for you based upon your discussions?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So it was exciting to have someone like Pfc. Manning working for you?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Even though he did good work, you didn’t find him a good analyst. You weren’t able to get a good analytical product. Not like it’s easy. You have to grow into it. You’d agree that majority of American populace wouldn’t be good at it.

Fulton: When they first start, no.

Defense (Coombs): You never asked him to do analytical projects.

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): You would just have him gather data. You would take data and then do the analysis.

Fulton: Right.

Defense (Coombs): You would explain what you were doing…?

Fulton: Right.

Defense (Coombs): As part of his training…?

Fulton: Right.

Defense (Coombs): Understandable that he wasn’t that good at what he was doing…?

Fulton: Right.

Defense (Coombs): Staff Sergeant ~~[Balant. Name needs verification, written phonetically]~~ [Kyle] Balonek [promoted to Warrant Officer, One in September 2010] – he was the real go-to analyst in terms of actual analysis. He had greatest ability to do analysis. Did you ever hear soldiers listening to music in the S.C.I.F.?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): They would pull music from shared drive down to D6 machine. They’d do this regularly?

Fulton: Right.

Defense (Coombs): But not acceptable, right?

Fulton: Explain?

Defense (Coombs): From your understanding, if music was on the shared drive, it was ok?

Fulton: Right.

Defense (Coombs): So if a soldier pulled music from shared drive, put on their comp, that was ok?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did soldiers watch movies on their computers…that they pulled from share drives?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Some acquired from [Iraqi] nationals?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): That they watched on their SECRET computers?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Ever see them playing computer games?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Also pulled from shared drive, played on D6 machines?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): What were D6 machines used for?

Fulton: Analysis.

Defense (Coombs): They didn’t have mIRC Chat, did they?

Fulton: Don’t think so.

Defense (Coombs): You believed it was essential, right?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): It ran as a desktop application on your computer, right?

Fulton: Think so.

Defense (Coombs): You had it on your computer as a desktop application.

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Google Earth you also found essential, right?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): But that wasn’t part of package, was it?

Fulton: Don’t know.

Defense (Coombs): You would use it to do analysis on terrain?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Prior to incident, did you see Manning talking to Master Sergeant Adkins? Where?

Fulton: Saw them talking in the side room.

Defense (Coombs): What did you see?

Fulton: Manning was upset. Sitting on floor.

Defense (Coombs): How?

Fulton: Arms around knees.

Defense (Coombs): Curled into ball?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): On floor with [Master Sergeant] Atkins talking to him?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Not common sight?

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): Did you speak to [Master Sergeant] Atkins later to find out what was going on ?

Fulton: No.

Defense (Coombs): Present for Manning – Specialist [Jihrleah] Showman incident?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You brought her into S.C.I.F. later that night.

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): She needed to find a product?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): No one else could find that product?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So you instructed she be woken up and brought back into S.C.I.F.?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): She was irritated at being woken up?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): And at the time of the incident, you had your back to Specialist [Jihrleah] Showman and Manning.

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): But you heard Specialist [Jihrleah] Showman getting irritated with Manning. She was irritated at Manning because he was playing a game. But you knew Manning was looking for the product because you had seen him do it. You told [Specialist Jihrleah] Showman to calm down because [another person] had brought her in there. After awhile, you saw [Specialist Jihrleah] Showman with Pfc. Manning pinned on the ground.

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): And you heard he’d struck her?

Fulton: Yes. She said he had struck her.

Defense (Coombs): You told Master Sergeant Atkins that Manning needed to be removed, have his weapon taken, be taken to behavior health?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did you feel this was a standard response to an act of aggression by one soldier against another?

Fulton: Well, interaction between soldiers ended up in that result, so I wanted him to be removed – to not have an interaction with the solders. Anytime there’s a violent outburst, especially in deployed environment where you have a functioning weapon, you want to take that away. Behavioral health is the next step.

Defense (Coombs): Did you find a derog appropriate? Basically where you have derogatory information filed against someone with security clearance? Which could result in them having their security clearance suspended or revoked?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Could be for assaultive behavior? Lying to superior? Behavior problems most common reason?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Isn’t if a fact that you’re supposed to derog most events with soldier with security clearance? So that people with clearance can be kept track of? So process is to track negative actions by solders?

Fulton: Correct.

Defense (Coombs): Soldiers and leaders have obligation to report derogatory information?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Special security representative? Person responsible to make sure derogs are processed?

Fulton: ~~[Transcript has “Tempfields” ]~~ Lt. [Elizabeth] Fields or Master Sergeant Atkins.

Defense (Coombs): It was their duty to go and report that info?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): So if a soldier exhibited behavior making them seem untrustworthy or exhibiting behavior showing they might have mental problem, why report?

Fulton: Might show a pattern.

Defense (Coombs): Were you aware of 2009 – a December 2009 incident between Manning and Sergeant Padgett?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You thought a derog should have been filed?

Fulton: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): If a derog is filed, how quickly can that be enacted?

Fulton: Immediately.

PROSECUTION OBJECTION.

Investigating Officer: PERMIT LIMITED LINE OF QUESTIONING. KEEP IT BRIEF.

Defense (Coombs): I just have one more question. Once a soldier’s clearance is suspended or revoked, do they have access to classified info?

Fulton: No.

Investigating Officer: Government, any more questions?

PROSECUTION EXAMINES CAPTAIN CASEY FULTON

Prosecution: Yes. Do you recall that Manning was removed after incident with Specialist [Jihrleah] Showman?

Fulton: Yes.

Prosecution: Did it happen in May?

Fulton: Likely.

[Missed.]

DEFENSE EXAMINES CAPTAIN CASEY FULTON

[Missed.]

CAPT. FULTON PERMANENTLY EXCUSED.