Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Friday, March 02, 2007

Adverse Inferences In re Alleged Govt Destruction of War Crimes Evidence

The United States government has allegedly destroyed video evidence of prisoner of war interrogations. Allegedly the videos contain evidence the United States illegally abused prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Backup copies are available. American personnel do not realize that the backup copies substantially show details which raise questions about the other prisoner treatment policies.

Despite Congress, in the wake of Hamdan having a requirement to oversee this illegal prisoner abuse, Members of Congress failed to safeguard evidence; and did not adequately task the DoD and DOJ Inspector Generals to safeguard and gather other evidence of illegal war crimes.

* * *

Ref Small Problem Video has been transcribed. Here are still shots of the video. The video still exists outside US government control.

Ref There's more: Someone was able to upload still images from the video to the Internet.

Ref Fatal Assertion Before Court: Non credible claims the video has been lost.

Who To Talk To: Ref Item 6A identifies the DOJ personnel by name allegedly complicit with this illegal transcription process; and can shed light on the Government failure to respond to Court inquiry to the status of these tapes allegedly available through backup facilities connected with DOJ translation contracts.

Ref The only way that evidence can be fabricated is if someone knows the real evidence; and can be sure the falsified information leaves the desired impression, and does not overlap with the truthful information.

The government has fatally denied having access to evidence that can be obtained from other sources and reconstructed. The misleading information to the court is a fatal assertion that opens the bard door to exhaustive lawful inquiry into allegations the US government has attempted to hide evidence of illegal interrogations in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

All the uniforms, equipment, and personnel in the images can be linked with specific purchase orders, contractors, and funding codes. The equipment is used by specific people assigned on specific days, and have discrete heights relative to the prisoner, and are known.

* * *

This Is What Happened in re The "Missing" Video

After Padilla was interrogated, copies of the interrogation video and transcript went to multiple people within Counter Intelligence Field Activity [CIFA] for case study analysis. The Intelligence Community relies on these case studies for training, and information was provided to Fort Huachuca.

NSA intercept instructions were changed on a specific date after the instructions based on data only available from the Padilla interrogation video.

The DoJ transcription contractors were also brought into the nexus.

Once the government recorded the data, transcripts of the interrogations were used to update training.

White House counsel and personnel inside the Department of Justice have observed these interrogation videos. The data was used to independently validate the procedures and methods did or did not meet the requirements of Geneva.

Despite "concerns" with Hamdan, the US moved prisoners to Guantanamo to hide evidence of other illegal prisoner abuse in Eastern Europe.

Details of this evidence are available for the War Crimes prosecutors.

- -

It is possible for the FISA court to review the specific dates the NSA intercept instructions were changed; and identify by name the contractor employees assigned to the satellite support facilities who keep records of the times that the flight instructions are transmitted to the satellites; and determine by name who reviewed the video, what notes they made, and how the NSA intercept instructions were updated based on information only available from the video.

The information with the NSA contractors show the specific time the video was reviewed; which hand written notes were made; and how the analysts adjusted the NSA intercepts based on data only available on the video.

It can be determined to the exact second the time the NSA contractors uploaded the new information and flight instructions to the US satellites based on any information gleaned from the Padilla interrogations.

It can also be shown which specific NSA contractors received the intercept instructions, and how their interception profiles and minimization procedures were changed, reviewed, and modified based on the new information.

The interception instructions going into the contractor facilities can also be pinpointed to the exact information, target profile, and data gleaned from the interrogations, and show who specifically changed the interception parameters in the NSA STA 6400.

The NSA ground stations can also be traced to identify the specific personnel inside the faculties who knew the source of the data; and how they transferred the information from the original source to the updated filing system used to store, retain, catalog, and analyze the incoming information lined with information only gleaned from Padilla.

The medical licenses of the Psychiatrists involved can also be reviewed.

* * *

Available to German War Crimes Prosecutors

___ Any specific reason why Deutche Bank would be interested in these developments?

___ What did Bill Ludy plan to do once he was mentioned in relationship to the records?

___ Which National Security Council personnel on which date using which equipment reviewed the tape, and updated procedures to implement these classified plans, and have catalogued the video on the classified files? [ Joint Staff Checklists ]

___ Why is the GOP's Ken Mehlman assigned the same PO Box of someone who allegedly made illegal accusations about matters they are not lawfully qualified to assert, constituting an unauthorized practice of law? Ref

___ What is the plan of the National Security Council to provide a copy of the classified filing plan used to achieve, store, and organize the videos of the interrogations?

___ When did Brad Berenson first learn that the US treatment of prisoners in the videos did not meet the Geneva requirements

___ What is the relationship between Stimon’s resignation and his knowledge of the prisoner abuses depicted in the video?

___ Does Stimson not have a reason why he did not report, as required, evidence that the prisoners were being abused in violation of Geneva?

___ When SAIC was aware of the FOIAs related to war crimes, is there an explanation for their concern?

___ What does Brad Dayspring have to say about this "flurry" of activity as it related to the discussions in the White House counsels office on legal matters?

___ What review did Viet Dinh do of the interrogation procedures under “this program”?

___ Whose name is on the classified filing plan located in the National Security Council?

___ When Boeing received this interrogation information, is there an explanation how they specifically verified the prisoner upload times to schedule the aircraft?

___ What date did the personnel assigned the National Security Council affix the required "classified" sticker to the data file, video, and electronic images they knew had to be appropriately marked?

___ Where is a copy of the classified facility entry-exit log used to record the data, time, and names of personnel entering the secure room to review the tape?

___ When does the Attorney General plan to cooperate with the DOJ OPR to explain why the list of contractors used to update the facility access keys has not been appropriately reviewed in the wake of this mysterious "missing" evidence?

___ Who provided a copy of the CIA training manual used to train case officers in handling this data?

___ Who provided a copy of the contractor transcription used to create summary reports for the President?

___ After DOJ Staff counsel reviewed the procedures, when did the President and Attorney General plan to fully comply with the Title 28 and Title 50 reporting requirements?

___ Can the President explain why DOJ OPR was not permitted to review this process?

___ What information on these transcripts specifically prompted the DoJ Staff counsel to implement procedures to stonewall the FOIA process?

* * *

The error is to forget that once the video was recorded, then transferred, it's discoverable:

___ When did the CIA analysts working on the prisoner intelligence files review the video

___ Where are the copies of the NSA minimization waivers issued based on specific, discrete information only available on the videos

___ How was the NSA interception adjusted, updated, or modified based on data only available, gleaned from the Padilla interrogation

___ What was the plan of the Department of Justice, DIA, Department of Defense, or other legal counsel assigned to the government to share with the FISA court the problem with [a] using information from abusing interrogations; [b] explaining why the NSA interception instructions were updated based on data only gleaned from the interrogations; but [c] not explanation why the NSA intercepts did not fully coordinate the interception plan with the FISA Court?

___ Which firm associated with Abraxas transferred the data from the Department of Justice JTTF and physically moved the data from DIA to the CIA analysis

___ How were images from the video placed in various JTTF, CIA, DoD, DIA, and DOJ training manuals

___ When was the contract issued to which contractor to use the video images in US Attorney Training files in the Department of Justice

___ What was the method US DoJ Staff counsel reviewed the interrogations to determine whether the prisoner interrogation procedures did or did not fully comply with Geneva

___ What legal review did DoD General Counsel Haynes or Attorney Stimpson have of the DoD prisoner treatment procedures

___ How was it determined that the data from the interrogations was or was not appropriately being used for pursues of targeting American civilians under the NSA surveillance program

___ How many times have FBI agents lied to the FISA court about evidence

___ What copies of the interrogations in Syria and Iran did Berenson, Stimson, or the Attorney General review, access, and comment

___ When was the video recorded

___ Which machines transcribed the video

___ What was the process to record the images

___ How were the images recorded on video

___ Wow was the video transferred to digital disk

___ Which computers on which data transferred the data from video to digital format

___ How were the video clips used for other training, observation, and reviews

___ Where are the courier records inside the Department of Justice related to transfer of this video and digital data

___ Where are the sign-in logs for personnel entering and existing the facility where the video, digital, and transcription took place

___ Where are copies of the FBI and DOJ contract access to the facility where the interrogations took place

___ Where are the records of the FBI and DoJ Contractor entry, access, and exit from the interrogation rooms

___ Where are the key cards for personnel access to the interrogation rooms

___ During interrogation, which FBI agents had "cell phones" which were really recording devices to record data

___ Where are the FBI agent notes related to the interrogations

___ Who reviewed the video or digital recordings

___ Where are the notes, summaries, and other discussion material related to this review of the digital and analog data

___ When was the interrogation process last audited

___ Where are the policy memos on how the digital data shall be retained

___ Who last conducted the audit

___ What internal control problems did auditors find with the evidence retention policies, procedures, and how those procedures were or were not being followed

___ When was the last time there was a Brady request related to video or digital data

___ What was the response of the Department of Justice to those requests for digital data

___ Who is the contractor involved with the transfer of this data from the interrogation location

___ How do the procedures as implemented compare with the training requirements and standards interrogators learned at their training location

___ When did the Department of Justice hire the contractors to conduct this interrogation support

___ When did the contractor get copies of the interrogation data

___ Where are the transcription records

___ Who was on contract to transcribe the Guantanamo records

___ When the video was stored, what records of that video were kept

___ Which copies were issued to which contractors for the transcription

___ How was the video spliced or use for training

___ Who reviewed the video

___ Who inside the US Attorney's office viewed slides, sections, or clips of these interrogations

___ When was the video reviewed after the original recording


1. CIFA program of cycling through Guantanamo US government special agents and contractors to enhance training.

2. DoJ Has a transcription contract, as you can see at Item 6A

3. US government has failed to deny that they have incorporated into interrogation summaries quotes, comments, and evidence which were fabricated, did not occur, and misrepresent the prisoners' comments, answers, and statements.

4. The US government, despite the evidence supposedly gleaned from interrogations, cannot point to combat successes in Iraq

5. It is most likely that the evidence has been destroyed, because the adverse inferences related to war crimes; and failures of DOJ Staff personnel to report problems to the DOJ OPR as required

6. It appears the video evidence is not available because of the government concern that there would be evidence of war crimes, illegal abuse, and US government contractor that would justify dismissing the case

* * *

Adverse Inferences

Data that is destroyed, not available, or not produced that should be provided is subject to court adverse inferences.

The court is allowed to make adverse judgments when there are evidence control procedures in place, but those procedures have not been followed.

Brady also requires that all evidence of value to the defense must be provided.

Because the tape has not been provided, the court may make the following adverse inferences:

[1] Was the evidence and record retention policy in place, or were the procedures violated;

[2] Has evidence been destroyed;

[3] Is there evidence of the video evidence being available when the video was said to have been destroyed

[4] What is the reason for the destruction of the video

[5] Had the video been provided what information would it have shown about the US government compliance or non-compliance with legal requirements

[6] Was the information suppressed because there was evidence of war crimes

[7] Which record retention and internal control policies has the government failed to comply

[8] What information is most likely on the tape

[9] Has the government destroyed, not managed, or suppressed evidence of war crimes

[10] Who was most likely in possession of this material as it relates to war crimes, and did they have a duty to report this evidence of war crimes evidence related to prisoner abuse

[11] Was there a policy in place that the video evidence be retained, safeguarded, and made available for defense

[12] Was the information not properly classified, but classified to hide evidence of illegal activity

[13] Who reviewed the video evidence prior to its classification