I think it can be fairly said that we are a people who believe in a better future. That the ideals of America are founded on building prosperity and expanding prospects — not only for ourselves, but for our fellows and for those generations that are to follow.
Americans have often been described as a ‘can-do’ kind of people. A people who will undertake any challenge to advance or protect our nation and to graciously extend her kind virtues to the huddled masses of a troubled world. Be it the freeing of slaves, the emancipation of women, the facing down of tyrannical dictators, the liberation of scientific inquiry, or the exploration of our Earth and the vast realm of space we have doggedly decided to march forward and on.
But today we are confronted by a new trouble. A trouble that was, in many ways, an unintended consequence of past progress. For as we industrialized, as a nation and as a global society, we also burned ancient carbon deposits long buried beneath the Earth. And so we expelled a great cloud of the most dangerous of gasses into the Earth’s atmosphere.
We didn’t know it so well at the time. But the carbon dioxide spewing from William Blake’s dark Satanic Mills was the same gas that in excess produced the worst and most horrific global die-offs in the great and deep, deep history of our Earth. Times of great mass extinction due to rising global heat that bear the infamous names — Permian, Triassic, Paleocene, Devonian and Ordovician. Blake, living today, would be terrified how right he was to call those mills Satanic. To learn what our scientists now have told us. But even then, he surely had an inkling. For the Bible itself warns — those who destroy the Earth shall be destroyed. And in 1808 the wanton destruction of the Earth and its airs by the pollution caused by fossil fuel burning was visibly evident if not so scientifically proven and explored as it is today.
Today, if we continue to burn fossil fuels as we have for the past 200 years or so, the world will again surely experience another such extinction. We already see the outliers of this crisis now — in the growing number of people bereft of land and home and livelihood as seas rose, or crops were destroyed by worsening storms and droughts, or lands and animals were lost to wildfires, or as reefs and fisheries were killed off by the warming, acidifying waters of our oceans. But what will come over the years and decades and centuries if we do not turn back from this horrid burning of fossil fuels and the dumping of their carbon into the atmosphere will be far, far worse.
What kind of world is this to make for our fellow human beings? What kind of future to leave for the generations that follow? Surely not the better one that we all work and hope for. Surely not one that honors the can-do, make the world a better place spirit of America.
But despite our worsening prospects and the dark and heavy clouds that now hang over the global climate, we have a window of opportunity in which to act. Our tools to confront climate change in the form of renewable energy systems like wind and solar and electrified transportation are growing more capable. And further innovation and change in our actions as people and nations can yet enable us to draw down the awful pall of heat trapping gasses that now hangs above us. These are things we can and must do if we are a moral people with any kind of vision, foresight and compassion.
This is our moment. The moment when we decide to make the choice to act and to save so many of the very precious things we all hold dear or to turn away from action and condemn each and every person and being now living or that will live to an age of terror and darkness the likes of which Earth has not seen in all of half a billion years.
So I’m asking you for your help. I’m asking you to make the choice to act. To join the People in their march for climate justice tomorrow. To support all the voices that are now speaking out. To lift your own voice to our growing chorus.
For the love of life and of all good things — we simply must act now.
April 29, 2017 Uncategorized Baxter Dmitry, double-garroting, George Webb, Hillary watch, Macron, Major Major, MS-13, Nikki Haley, North Korea, Obama’s pay day, Operation Condor, Presidential language, Putin, square clouds
Unless the president intervenes, we’ll soon know more secrets about the Kennedy assassination.
4/30/17, 4:01 AM CET
Updated 4/30/17, 4:26 PM CET
The nation’s conspiracy-theorist-in-chief is facing a momentous decision. Will President Donald Trump allow the public to see a trove of thousands of long-secret government files about the event that, more than any other in modern American history, has fueled conspiracy theories — the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy?
The answer must come within months. And, according to a new timeline offered by the National Archives, it could come within weeks.
Under the deadline set by a 1992 law, Trump has six months left to decide whether he will block the release of an estimated 3,600 files related to the assassination that are still under seal at the Archives. From what is known of the JFK documents, most come from the CIA and FBI, and a number may help resolve lingering questions about whether those agencies missed evidence of a conspiracy in Kennedy’s death. As with every http://boydownthelane.com/2017/04/26/something-wrong-something-right/earlier release of JFK assassination documents in the 53 years since shots rang out in Dealey Plaza in Dallas, it is virtually certain that some of the files will be seized on to support popular conspiracy theories about Kennedy’s murder; other documents are likely to undermine them.
There is no little irony in the fact that decision will be left to Trump, long a promoter of so many baseless conspiracy theories about everything from his predecessor’s birthplace to the notion that the father of one of his campaign-trail rivals was in league with JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald.
For the first time, the Trump White House is acknowledging that it is focused on the issue, even if it offers no hint about what the President will do. A White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Politico last week that the Trump administration “is familiar with the requirements” of the 1992 law and that White House is working with the National Archives “to enable a smooth process in anticipation of the October deadline.”
There is no little irony in the fact that the decision will be left to Trump, long a promoter of so many baseless conspiracy theories about everything.
Under the 1992 JFK Assassination Records Collection Act, the library of documents about Kennedy’s death must be made public in full by the deadline of this October 26, the law’s 25th anniversary, unless Trump decides otherwise. It is his decision alone.
The prospect of the release of the last of the government’s long-secret JFK assassination files has long tantalized historians and other scholars, to say nothing of the nation’s armies of conspiracy theorists, since no one can claim to know exactly what is in there.
Martha W. Murphy, the Archives official who oversees the records, said in an interview last month that a team of researchers with high-level security clearances is at work to prepare the JFK files for release and hopes to begin unsealing them in batches much earlier than October — possibly as early as summer.
Beyond releasing the 3,600 never-before-seen JFK files, the Archives is reviewing another 35,000 assassination-related documents, previously released in part, so they can be unsealed in full. Short of an order from the president, Murphy said, the Archives is committed to making everything public this year: “There’s very little decision-making for us.”
Many of the documents are known to come from the files of CIA officials who monitored a mysterious trip that Oswald paid to Mexico City several weeks before the assassination – a trip that brought Kennedy’s future killer under intense surveillance by the spy agency as he paid visits to both the Soviet and Cuban embassies there. The CIA said it monitored all visitors to the embassies and opened surveillance of Oswald as soon as he was detected inside the Soviet compound for the first time.
Other documents are known to identify, by name, American and foreign spies and law-enforcement sources who had previously been granted anonymity for information about Oswald and the assassination. At least 400 pages of the files involve E. Howard Hunt, the former CIA operative turned Watergate conspirator who claimed on his deathbed that he had advance knowledge of Kennedy’s murder.
The documents were gathered together by a temporary federal agency, the Assassination Records Review Board, that was established under the 1992 law. In an interview last month, its former chairman, Judge John R. Tunheim of the Federal District Court in Minnesota, said he “wouldn’t be surprised if there’s something important” in the documents, especially given how much of the history of the Kennedy assassination has had to be rewritten in recent decades.
He said he knew of “no bombshells” in the files when the board agreed to keep them secret two decades ago, but names, places and events described in the documents could have significance now, given what has been learned about the assassination since the board went out of business. “Today, with a broader understanding of history, certain things may be far more relevant,” he said.
Murphy, the Archives official, said she, too, knew of no shocking information in the documents – but she said her researchers were not in a position to judge their significance. “As you can imagine, we’re not reading them for that, so we’re probably not the best people to tell you,” she said. “I will say this: This collection is really interesting as a snapshot of the Cold War.”
The Review Board, created by Congress to show transparency in response to the public furor created by Oliver Stone’s conspiracy-minded 1991 film “JFK,” did force the release of a massive library of other long-secret documents from the CIA, FBI, Secret Service and other federal agencies, as well as from congressional investigations of the assassination.
Many showed how much evidence was withheld from the Warren Commission, the independent panel led by Chief Justice Earl Warren that investigated the assassination and concluded in 1964 that there was no evidence of a conspiracy in Kennedy’s death.
The documents showed that both the CIA and FBI had much more extensive information about Oswald — and the danger he posed to JFK — before the assassination than the agencies admitted to Warren’s investigation. The evidence appeared to have been withheld from the commission out of fear that it would expose how the CIA and FBI had bungled the opportunity to stop Oswald.
The documents showed that both the CIA and FBI had much more extensive information about Oswald — and the danger he posed to JFK — before the assassination than the agencies admitted to Warren’s investigation.
Under the 1992 law, agencies may make a final appeal to try to stop the unsealing of specific documents on national security grounds. But the law grants only one person the power to actually block the release: the president. The law allows Trump to keep a document secret beyond the 25-year deadline if he certifies to the National Archives that secrecy was “made necessary by an identifiable harm to military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement or conduct of foreign relations” and that “the identifiable harm is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure.”
Both the CIA and FBI acknowledged in written statements last month that they are reviewing the documents scheduled for release; neither agency would say if it planned to appeal to the White House to block the unsealing of any of the records. “CIA continues to review the remaining CIA documents in the collection to determine the appropriate next steps with respect to any previously-unreleased CIA information,” said agency spokesperson Heather Fritz Horniak. The FBI said it had a team of 21 researchers assigned to the document review.
According to a skeletal index of the documents prepared by the Archives, some of the files appear to involve, at least indirectly, a set of conspiracy theories that Trump himself promoted during the 2016 campaign – about possible ties between Cuban exile groups in the United States and Oswald.
On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly promoted an article published last April in the National Enquirer that suggested a connection between Oswald and the Cuban-born father of Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, one of Trump’s rivals for the Republican nomination. The article was based entirely on a 1963 photograph that showed Oswald, a self-proclaimed Marxist and champion of Fidel Castro’s Communist revolution in Cuba, handing out pro-Castro leaflets in New Orleans with a man who, the tabloid suggested, was Cruz’s father, Rafael.
The Cruz family denied that the senator’s family was the man depicted in the photo and that Rafael Cruz had any connection to Oswald; there is no other evidence of any connection. The National Archives index shows that the documents to be released this year include a 86-page file on a prominent CIA-backed anti-Castro exile group that Oswald appears to have tried to infiltrate in New Orleans, his hometown, in order to gather information that might be of use to the Castro government.
Judge Tunheim said that Oswald’s trip to Mexico City in September and October 1963 figures directly or indirectly in many of the documents that remain under seal, including the internal files of CIA operatives who worked at the American embassy there.
Historians agree that the trip, which Oswald apparently undertook in hopes of obtaining a visa to defect to Castro’s Cuba, much as he had once tried to defect to the Soviet Union, has never been fully investigated.
“I still think there are loose threads in Mexico City that no one has ever explored,” Tunheim said. “It was a bizarre chapter – there’s no question about it.” Previously declassified CIA and FBI documents suggest that Oswald openly boasted to Cuban officials there about his intention to kill Kennedy and that he had a brief affair with a Mexican woman who worked in Cuba’s consulate. The American ambassador to Mexico at the time of the assassination said later that he believed the woman had probably been working for the CIA.
Tunheim said the Review Board agreed to keep the Mexico-related documents secret in the 1990s at the request of the State Department, the CIA and other agencies that warned that their release could do damage
2017/04/26 Uncategorized ‘flying a flag’, Chaukeedar, concentration of forces, Deep Work, joy, TED talks
something wrong something right
“… The idea that we informed people, who can see behind the curtain of the power elite, as well as all peace-loving people who feel intuitively that there simply is something wrong in the world, can recognize each other, talk, exchange ideas and encourage each other, seems very uplifting and joyful. To me it is thus not simply a matter of “flying a flag”, but to be able to better interconnect also in real life….
I launch something.
Neighbor Gabriel has put me the idea.
The white flag is swung in wars, and who waves the white flag, sais: I have laid down my arms. I want peace and I am ready for a dialogue.
All the world is full of white flags.
I was at a Monday meeting at the Brandenburg Gate [note by Chaukeedaar: In Berlin and 50 other german cities there were public meetings for peace every monday night for the last couple of weeks, mainly initiated by people from the truth movement and alternative media, see one of the great speeches of Ken Jebsen]. It was full of people there who want to change things. The people stood there and waited for things to come. When Ken Jebsen put his concise words, they clapped enthusiastically.
That’s good, that’s okay. And it is not enough .
The same people go home and feel alone with their concerns…..
Imagine. In Munich, cars are driving with white flags. In Washington, white cloths are hanging in the windows. When shopping you will see a fellow-man with a white bracelet.
Everywhere is white. White contains it all. It needs no explanation. I know: This guy flags. She shows white. I can talk to him about anything even remotely related to the world situation, to politics, to monetary problems, to corruption.
And, more importantly, I can talk to him about everything that has to do with a joyful, healthy, creative life.
Please imagine that vividly. Through the means of a simple symbol a massive concentration of forces can be achieved.
Pass on this idea with your own inner fire.
I will poke other bloggers with it…..”
← Russian Oligarch in Election Probe Linked to Drug Cartel
Posted on April 28, 2017 by Daniel Hopsicker
Russian Peter Levashov would have fared better if his wife was a gangster’s moll, who knew when to keep her mouth shut. Instead, she’s a socialite in St. Petersburg, Russia, who told journalists her hacker hubby was busted for “creating a virus linked to Trump winning the election.”
Almost immediately The New York Times began walking the story back.
When Russian Spam Lord Peter Levashov ankled off to jail in Barcelona two weeks ago, his wife was left alone—not home alone in St. Petersburg, where she and her husband live, but in a strange country, Spain. Approached by a Russian-speaking reporter, she perhaps understandably talked freely, volubly, and emotionally.
One day later, The New York Times did everything but accuse her of lying. As they say in scripts for bad TV comedy TV pilots, “Hilarity ensued.”The immediate ntroversy was over whether Levashov was peddling dick pills, get-rich-quick schemes, counterfeit drugs, work-at-home scams and pump-and-dump penny stock scams.. . or was he instead using his powerful algorithmic bots to hack the U.S. election? Could he have been doing both at the same time? Opinion varied.
What doesn’t vary: the names of Levashov’s American partners. These so-far-unidentified names — when made public, as they undoubtedly soon will be— will prove useful to puzzling out the big question about the Trump campaign’s alleged collusion in the Russian hacking of the 2016 Presidential election.
Sifting the real from the fake news in coverage of Levashov’s arrest in Spain, was the immediate priority. Capturing elite Russian hacker Peter Levashov is a milestone in the quest to bust open the current public embarrassment, which appears —in one man’s opinion—capable of becoming the biggest American scandal since Watergate.
In the Russian election probe the question is whether—given the intrigue swirling around Levashov’s arrest — the fix may already be in.
Peter’s wife, Maria Levashova, is a socialite in St. Petersburg, where she and her husband live, one of the beautiful people, a sought-after high-end wedding planner.
She’s on Facebook, where she likes Bob Marley, the movie Melancholia, and the classic JD Salinger book “Catcher in the Rye.”
Hardly adequate preparation for a 3 a.m. raid by a dozen grim Spanish policemen wearing funny hats. When Russian Today found her and interviewed her, they headlined it “Wife of Russian programmer ‘suspected of cyber attacks on US’ shares details about his arrest.”
“The wife of detained Russian programmer Pyotr Levashov spoke to Russia Today (the official Russian TV channel) of her anguish at the prospect of never seei
According to the LA Times and echoed by many other outlets,
"France’s foreign ministry says deadly sarin gas used in a chemical attack in Syria this month that killed 87 people “bears the signature” of President Bashar Assad’s government.
A six-page report by French intelligence services claims the nerve agent came from hidden stockpiles of chemical weapons that Damascus was supposed to have destroyed under an U.S.- and Russian-brokered deal in 2013."
Here is what you should be aware of as you sift this latest news: 1. Assad gave up 1300 tons (2,600,000 pounds) of his chemical weapons in 2013-14. They were moved out of Syria, loaded on ships, and destroyed by portable shipboard factories far offshore. The process lent itself to skullduggery. And Damascus was not given the option of destroying its own weapons, nor was it even considered safe to do so in a war zone. They had to be handed over to the West. How many countries and people had access to Syria's sarin and mustard gas during that process? Was any sarin withheld from destruction? (We should more realistically ask, how much was withheld and who got it?) Who might subsequently have been given some of that material? 2. Since chemical and biological weapons may leave a chemical or genetic signature, and since a major advantage of such weapons is the difficulty of identifying a perpetrator, the smart players do their best to create chem/bio weapons that leave the signature of someone else. 3. If you know the chemical signature of a chemical or biological weapon, even if you cannot obtain someone else's material, you may be able to reverse engineer a specific signature and impute an attack to your enemy. 4. Seymour Hersh and others have noted that weapons from Gaddafi's stockpile were sent from Libya through Turkey to Syria to be given to anti-Assad rebel forces, in a complicated maneuver engineered by the CIA. Sarin was alleged to have been found by police, who arrested al-Nusra rebels in Turkey with 2 kg. of sarin. Using Gaddifi's arms gave the CIA plausible deniability of involvement. It should not be lost on the reader that anyone giving sarin to Syrian 'rebels' would expect its use to be attributed to Assad. 5. The UN report on chemical weapons in 2013 did not blame Syria, and the UN's Carla del Ponte described evidence favoring the rebels as the perpetrators. 6. Since no Syrian sarin attacks have ever been demonstrated conclusively to be due to Assad or to anyone else (rumors and claims abound, but definite proof has been elusive), France's claim that the recent sarin is from Assad because it matched sarin from an earlier attack is utter nonsense, since we don't know the source of the earlier sarin signature. 7. The French intelligence service authored this report. And the US intelligence services authored the 2003 report of Iraq's WMD, and claimed the 2013 sarin attacks were due to Assad (without proof, read the report here). US and UK intelligence services had something to do with the Trump "golden showers" dossier of trash. These intelligence services were all carrying out their missions, which sadly have become propaganda, not intelligence. 8. There was no motive for Assad to use chemical weapons in 2013, and no motive today. Instead, strategically, he had much to lose. Read what a former State Department insider had to say about the unlikelihood Assad used chemical weapons in 2013, in an article in the Atlantic. 9. When you consider the background to the claims about Syria's chemical weapons, the series of stories blaming Assad for attacking his people with sarin this month make less and less sense. Instead, it seems we are reliving Judith Miller's series of NY Times stories that provided the drumbeat to war in Iraq, in 2002-3. We should not be fooled again.
Posted by Meryl Nass, M.D. at 11:00 PM 0 comments
April 27, 2017 | Dan Wise and Russ Baker
Government Must Tell if Trump Associate Had Russian Mob Ties
Several weeks ago, WhoWhatWhy published an investigative story on Donald Trump, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Russian mob. It addressed challenges the FBI faces in fully investigating and reporting to the public what it knows about Trump’s past and his relationships.
One of the figures in that story — and in a followup piece — is a former Trump business associate named Felix Sater. Our article pointed out that Sater, a man with a criminal past, had become a “cooperating witness” for the FBI and had been so while he worked in Trump Tower. He had been high
Detroit Free Press-
And when the FBI raided the Highwaymen's Michigan Avenue clubhouse in southwest Detroit in 2007, they discovered a photograph of one of their two ...
When the U.S. Attorney's Office indicted 91 alleged members and associates of Detroit's Highwaymen Motorcycle Club on allegations of racketeering, drug trafficking, theft and murder for hire, a central thread in the case was gang leader Aref (Steve) Nagi's attempts to root out suspected snitches.
Nagi's preoccupation with informants inside the storied and homegrown motorcycle gang — whose violent history is credited with keeping the Hells Angels out of Detroit — was evident in his rambling, late-night phone conversations, which were secretly recorded by the FBI and introduced as evidence at the 2010 trial in federal court in Detroit.
And when the FBI raided the Highwaymen's Michigan Avenue clubhouse in southwest Detroit in 2007, they discovered a photograph of one of their two confidential informants —with the word "rat" scrawled in black marker across his face.
The case sent more than 30 Highwaymen to prison —- many, including Nagi, for lengthy sentences.
Gangster gets 13.5 years for revenge; ordered AK-47 hit on mom, 3 kids
FBI: Gang members arrested in phone thefts from 9 states
But some of those convictions are now being challenged because of new revelations that Nagi himself — a former Highwaymen vice president and the lead defendant — had worked as a confidential informant for federal and local police agencies.
Convicted Highwayman Gary (Junior) Ball Jr., who from his federal prison cell used Michigan's Freedom of Information Act to uncover Nagi's hidden past, says Nagi and his Detroit attorney
Wisconsin, U.S. used flawed hair evidence to convict innocent people
FBI admits errors in 90 percent of cases
Posted: Apr 30, 2017 10:55 AM CDT
Updated: Apr 30, 2017 10:55 AM CDT
Los Alamos Daily Post-
FBI Director James Comey formally recognized 58 individuals and organizations from around the country Friday for their efforts to build stronger, safer, and more ...
I attended two meetings this week that highlight the dark side of technology. The first was the monthly FBI InfraGard meeting of the New Hampshire Chapter and ...
The FBI's Future Agents in Training (FAIT) 2017 program is not only giving area high school students an in-depth look into the FBI, but is also setting them on the ...
Audit of misused sheriff's fund indicated no problems
Since the first Nassar accuser went public last September, however, evidence has emerged suggesting Michigan State officials missed far more potential warning signs than officials at USA Gymnastics did. Michigan State employed Nassar and funded his volunteer work for USA Gymnastics, and the majority of his alleged victims encountered him in connection with his work for the school. In lawsuits, victims have alleged making verbal complaints about Nassar to Michigan State officials as far back as the late 1990s. In 2014, both Michigan State police and the university’s Title IX office cleared Nassar of wrongdoing after an assault complaint.
* Only two places left for the Southern Patrol
* Russian Spy Ship Sinks
* Intel on the projected World's Largest Aircraft Carrier
* Big Contract to General Dynamics
* New Class of American Submarines
* Deck Tugs Launched off Flight Deck
* Carrier Killer in Taiwan Navy
* German Facility Just Found
Naturally there is more - there are just the headlines. The full stories were sent to our Members
unsubscribe - to be removed from our roster, simply reply to this email and say - remove
The World's ONLY International Source of U-Boat History
EarthLink Revolves Around You.
FBI agents block access to Boston Marathon bomber. Why?He can show bombing was a FBI Operation
OCTOBER 25, 2017 | JAMES HENRYDOJ CONTINUES TO BLOCK MEDIA ACCESS TO TSARNAEV
For over two years now, WhoWhatWhy has been trying to get the government to give us the details of the justification behind incarcerating convicted Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev under a repressive confinement regime known as Special Administrative Measures (SAMs). SAMs make it nearly impossible for the media to have any access to prisoners.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) refuses to budge and continues to deploy the dubious logic that to confirm or deny the existence of SAMs would be an unwarranted invasion of Tsarnaev’s privacy. This was in response to a request we filed back in 2015 through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), seeking documents about the conditions of Tsarnaev’s confinement. The DOJ denied our request and subsequent appeal.
And yet, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), a division of DOJ, readily confirms that Tsarnaev is in fact being held under SAMs.
WhoWhatWhy twice submitted requests to interview Tsarnaev to the warden of the maximum-security federal penitentiary in Florence, Colorado, referred to as ADX Florence. We sent one in October 2015, and another in August 2017; both times we were told we could not interview him because “Inmate Tsarnaev has Special Administrative Measures,” which, among other things, “restricts [his] communication, to include contact with the media.”
Essentially a form of solitary confinement, SAMs typically bar prisoners from communicating with anybody outside their prison cells, except for a very small number of pre-approved individuals, such as attorneys and inmates’ family members. SAMs were originally justified as a way to prevent members of organized crime from sending to compatriots outside the prison messages that could conceivably result in death or serious bodily injury. In the case of Tsarnaev, this justification rings hollow since DOJ insists that he and his brother Tamerlan had no “nexus” to any terrorist group and acted completely on their own.
But it also has the effect of giving the government total control over the narrative and backstory of a troubling event like the Boston Marathon bombing. No one from the media can speak with Tsarnaev and even his defense team and family are severely restricted in what they can reveal about their communications with him.
ADX FlorenceThe US Penitentiary, Administrative Maximum Facility in Florence, Colorado. (ADX Florence) Photo credit: FBP / Wikimedia.
Back in April 2016, we highlighted the Kafkaesque situation for a prisoner under SAMs.
We wrote about how DOJ denied our first request under FOIA exemption 7(C); the department stated that “lacking [Tsarnaev’s] consent … even to acknowledge the existence of such records … could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of his personal privacy.” 7(C) is meant to protect the privacy of individuals whose records are held by law enforcement agencies.
We appealed, pointing out that BOP had already confirmed the existence of the SAMs, and it was the very existence of the SAMs that prevented us from getting Tsarnaev’s “consent.” However, DOJ affirmed the denial of our initial request under a slightly modified “categorical” invocation of exemption 7(C) and added for good measure that it was not even “required to conduct a search for the requested records.”
The day after our article ran, officials in the DOJ’s Office of Information Policy (OIP) emailed each other links to the article. How do we know? Because we FOIA’d our FOIA request.
.We had hoped to gain some insight into the decision-making process behind the rejection of our FOIA request and appeal. The results were not very enlightening.
We obtained 29 pages from the DOJ’s OIP in total — 10 of which are the requests and appeals we sent, with their corresponding responses. Another three and a half pages are blacked out and labeled “Non-Responsive Records.” We’re still waiting on records related to the initial request, which are processed by a different office.
It’s not clear what, if anything, OIP officials had to say about our article other than linking to it. Most of the substance of each email between OIP officials is redacted.
Melanie Ann Pustay, OIPOIP Director Melanie Ann Pustay. Photo credit: DoJ
The balance of the heavily redacted records are processing worksheets and emails between OIP employees. Anything related to decision-making about the appeal is blacked out under (b)(5), the infamous “withhold it because you want to” exemption. FOIA experts roundly criticize the exemption because of its broad language and its increasing use by executive branch agencies.
It’s Who You Know?.In our ongoing effort to chip away at the wall of silence surrounding Tsarnaev, we also sent him a letter asking if he was willing to be interviewed. We were hoping to preempt any “without his consent” reasoning that we had encountered previously. The envelope was returned — opened — and accompanied by a notice indicating that the “correspondence was not delivered to the inmate because the inmate is not approved to correspond from [sic] you.”
Interestingly, director Peter Berg of Patriots Day, the Hollywood production about the Boston Marathon bombing, was quoted as saying he had corresponded with the incarcerated Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.
“I did a lot of research on them,” director Peter Berg supposedly told Total Film magazine. “I met women who had dated them. I met the boxing coach of the older brother. I met the landlord. I wrote two letters to Dzhokhar in prison; he wrote one back [emphasis added].”
FBI agents block access to Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols. Why?He can show it was a FBI Operation.As of October 23 2017 case is still before Judge Kimball.
FBI Fights Order For Deposition Of Oklahoma City Bombing Conspirator
...... Attorney Jesse Trentdue is seeking to show that his brother Kenneth, a convicted bank robber picked up on a parole violation, was mistaken for an associate of Timothy McVeigh's and killed during an interrogation that got out of hand. ......David Goodhue - AHN ReporterNovember 9, 2008The FBI said this week that it disagrees with U.S. District Court Judge Dale A. Kimball's decision in September to allow Nichols and David Paul Hammer to make a videotaped interview regarding the case and the death of Kenneth Trentdue.The Justice Department filed notice Nov. 4 that it is asking the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver to reverse Kimball's order.Attorney Jesse Trentdue is seeking to show that his brother Kenneth, a convicted bank robber picked up on a parole violation, was mistaken for an associate of Timothy McVeigh 's and killed during an interrogation that got out of hand.McVeigh carried out the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City that killed 168 people. He was executed in 2001.Kenneth Trentdue died at the Federal Transfer Station in Oklahoma City a few months after McVeigh and Nichols were arrested for their roles in the bombing. The government says Kenneth Trentdue committed suicide.Nichols and Hammer, who is on death row at the federal penitentiary at Terre Haute, Ind., have both supplied Jesse Trentdue with written affidavits concerning McVeigh .Nichols is serving a life sentence at the U.S. Penitentiary Administration Maximum Security Facility in Florence, Colo. He is now claiming a high-ranking FBI official "apparently" was directing McVeigh in the bombing plot, the Salt Lake Tribune reported this week.
FindLawCaselawUnited StatesUS 10th Cir.TRENTADUE v. FEDERAL BUREAU INVESTIGATIONTRENTADUE v. FEDERAL BUREAU INVESTIGATIONResetAAFont size:Print 19United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit.Jesse C. TRENTADUE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FEDERAL BUREAU of INVESTIGATION; Federal Bureau of Investigation's Oklahoma City Field Office, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 08-4207. Decided: July 02, 2009Before TACHA, EBEL, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.Nicholas Bagley, Assistant United States Attorney, Appellate Staff Civil Division, (Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General, Brett L. Tolman, United States Attorney, and Mark B. Stern, Assistant United States Attorney, Appellate Staff Civil Division, with him on the brief), of Washington, D.C. for Defendants-Appellants. Jesse C. Trentadue, pro se.Jesse Trentadue, apparently spurred by concern about the death of his brother in federal custody, has vigorously sought information concerning investigations conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).1 This appeal arises out of his suit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, to obtain records of the FBI's investigation into the infamous bombing of the Alfred R. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995. His request is limited to records that relate to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and its founder Morris Dees. After initially producing no records, the FBI eventually provided 19 redacted documents, and the district court ruled that the agency need not conduct any further searches of its records. Several months later, however, Mr. Trentadue moved the court for permission to depose Terry Nichols, a convicted conspirator in the Oklahoma City bombing, and David Paul Hammer, a death-row inmate who purportedly had discussed the bombing with a fellow inmate, Timothy McVeigh, who was executed for his role in the bombing. In support of the motion, Mr. Trentadue submitted declarations by Nichols and Hammer. The court granted the motion over the FBI's objections.
The FBI appeals the discovery order, and we reverse. The FBI submitted declarations to the district court that provide a consistent and uncontradicted showing that it has conducted an adequate search for the records requested by Mr. Trentadue, and there is no reason to believe that depositions of Nichols and Hammer would produce evidence relevant to this FOIA case.
FOIA was enacted to enable the public to examine government records. See Campaign for Responsible Transplantation v. FDA, 511 F.3d 187, 190 (D.C.Cir.2007) (“FOIA is a disclosure statute enacted to facilitate public access to Government documents.” (internal quotation marks omitted)). The general rule under FOIA is that a person is entitled to copies of a federal agency's records upon making a request that “reasonably describes such records” and that complies with required procedures for such requests. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(A)(i). Certain categories of records, however, are exempt from disclosure. See id. § 552(b)(1)-(b)(9) and § 552(c)(1)-(c)(3). When a request is made, the agency ordinarily must “determine within 20 [business] days ․ whether to comply with such request and shall immediately notify the person making such request of such determination and the reasons therefor․” Id. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i). If the agency decides to comply with the request, “the records shall be made promptly available” to the requester. Id. § 552(a)(6)(C)(i). If the agency decides not to comply, the requester can seek relief in federal court. District courts have “jurisdiction to enjoin the agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant.” Id. § 552(a)(4)(B).
FOIA does not set forth a general standard regarding how hard an agency must look to find requested records. On that issue the sole relevant provision, which was added in 1996, states: “In responding under this paragraph to a request for records, an agency shall make reasonable efforts to search for the records in electronic form or format, except when such efforts would significantly interfere with the operation of the agency's automated information system.” Id. § 552(a)(3)(C) (emphasis added); Pub.L. 104-231, § 5(4), 110 Stat. 3048 (1996). Although § 552(a)(3)(C) concerns only electronic searches, it appears to reflect an implicit assumption by Congress that an agency's search for records need only be “reasonable” in scope and intensity. The circuit courts to address the issue have so construed FOIA-both in its original form, see Nat'l Cable Television Ass'n, Inc. v. FCC, 479 F.2d 183, 192 (D.C.Cir.1973), and since § 552(a)(3)(A) acquired its present form in 1974, see Meeropol v. Meese, 790 F.2d 942, 956 (D.C.Cir.1986) (adequacy of search “is measured by the reasonableness of the effort in light of the specific request”); Weisberg v. Dep't of Justice, 705 F.2d 1344, 1351 (D.C.Cir.1983); Goland v. CIA, 607 F.2d 339, 352 & n. 78, 369-70 (D.C.Cir.1978); Gillin v. IRS, 980 F.2d 819, 822 (1st Cir.1992) (following Meeropol); Ruotolo v. Dep't of Justice, Tax Div., 53 F.3d 4, 9 (2d Cir.1995) (agency need not perform search that is “unreasonably burdensome”); Abdelfattah v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 488 F.3d 178, 182 (3d Cir.2007) (per curiam); Rein v. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, 553 F.3d 353, 362 (4th Cir.2009) (following Meeropol); Patterson v. IRS, 56 F.3d 832, 841 (7th Cir.1995) (following Meeropol); Miller v. U.S. Dep't of State, 779 F.2d 1378, 1383 (8th Cir.1985) (“[T]he search need only be reasonable; it does not have to be exhaustive.”); Zemansky v. U.S. EPA, 767 F.2d 569, 571 (9th Cir.1985) (“[A]dequacy of the search ․ is judged by a standard of reasonableness ․”) (internal quotation marks omitted); Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. United States, 516 F.3d 1235, 1257 (11th Cir.2008) (following Meeropol ).
We follow our sibling circuits. Their “reasonableness” rule is a realistic interpretation of FOIA. Although FOIA might be read to demand that an agency provide every nonexempt requested document regardless of the cost of locating it, we doubt that Congress would have chosen to impose “unreasonable” burdens on agencies in that regard.
In light of the reasonable-search requirement, the focal point of the judicial inquiry is the agency's search process, not the outcome of its search. “The issue is not whether any further documents might conceivably exist but rather whether the government's search for responsive documents was adequate[,] ․ [which is determined under] a standard of reasonableness, and is dependent upon the circumstances of the case.” Weisberg, 705 F.2d at 1351 (brackets, citations, and internal quotation marks omitted); see Rugiero v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 257 F.3d 534, 547 (6th Cir.2001) (“The question focuses on the agency's search, not on whether additional documents exist that might satisfy the request.”); Office of Info. & Privacy, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Freedom of Information Act Guide at 103-13, 954-58 (2007); 1 James T. O'Reilly, Federal Information Disclosure § 7:4 at 164 (3d ed. 2000) (“The courts require reasonable, not extraordinary, searches by the agency․ The test is adequacy of the search, not existence of any record.”). The reasonableness of an agency's search turns on “the likelihood that it will yield the sought-after information, the existence of readily available alternatives, and the burden of employing those alternatives.” Davis v. Dep't of Justice, 460 F.3d 92, 105 (D.C.Cir.2006).
II. BACKGROUND AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW
A. The FOIA Request
On July 19, 2004, Mr. Trentadue submitted a letter to the FBI and its Oklahoma City Field Office, making two requests under FOIA. The first request was for a January 4, 1996, “memorandum from former FBI Director [Louis] Freeh concerning Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center (‘SPLC’)” (which we will call “the Freeh Memorandum”). J.A. Vol 1 at 39. The memorandum, according to Mr. Trentadue, referenced an “SPLC informant at Elohim City,” id., the site of what he characterizes as a “white supremacist paramilitary camp compound” in Oklahoma that included persons purportedly involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, id. Vol. 4 at 986. Mr. Trentadue's letter attached a newspaper article describing the Freeh Memorandum.
Mr. Trentadue's second request was for records
which, directly or indirectly, report upon, concern, reference or refer to Morris Dees' and/or the SPLC's involvement with and/or connection to the following: Elohim City, OKBOMB, BOMBROB, Tim McVeigh, Richard Guthrie, Terry Nichols, Dennis Mahon,[ ] Robert Millar, Michael Brescia, Peter Langan and/or Andreas Strassmeir including all contacts Dees or the SPLC may have indirectly had with the foregoing through informants.
Id. Vol. 1 at 40. OKBOMB is a reference to the FBI's investigation of the Oklahoma City Bombing. BOMBROB refers to the FBI's investigation of the Mid-West Bank Robbery Gang, a group of neo-Nazis who, according to Mr. Trentadue, were “suspected by the FBI of being involved in the robbery of banks to fund attacks upon the government of the United States.” Id. at 47. The request continued:
In searching for documents-records responsive to this Freedom of In [f]ormation Act request, I want you to look beyond the official files at FBI Headquarters and the Oklahoma City Field Office. Specifically, in addition to all responsive documents-records from the FBI's official files, I want all responsive documents-records from the I-Drive, S-Drive and/or any other electronic device used for purposes of document-evidence storage, retention, holding, review, etc. at FBI Headquarters and/or the Oklahoma City Field Office, including any responsive documents-records from temporary document, record, data and/or evidence storage locations, files and/or facilities regardless of where such storage files or facilities are located.
Id. at 23.
One week later the FBI sent to Mr. Trentadue a form letter confirming receipt of his FOIA request.
B. Mr. Trentadue's Suit
1. The Claim and Summary-Judgment Motions
Because the FBI had not produced the requested records within 20 business days, see 28 C.F.R. § 16.6(b), Mr. Trentadue initiated a FOIA suit against the FBI and the FBI Oklahoma City Field Office on August 20, 2004, in the United States District Court for the District of Utah. (We will refer to the defendants jointly as the FBI.) He alleged that the FBI had a duty under FOIA to produce the requested documents and that there was no legal basis to withhold them. (Mr. Trentadue later amended his complaint to pursue an additional FOIA request. For simplicity, we will address that request only when relevant to this appeal.)
The FBI answered on September 20. It sought dismissal of the complaint, asserting that it was “exercising due diligence to process [Mr. Trentadue's] requests as quickly as possible.” J.A. at 55.
Mr. Trentadue then moved for partial summary judgment with respect to the Freeh Memorandum, arguing that he had already seen the memorandum, which the FBI had produced in response to a FOIA request from someone else. He also argued that the FBI had waived any exemptions to production under FOIA by failing to assert them in the letter to him or in its answer to the complaint.
On November 22 the FBI responded to Mr. Trentadue's partial-summary-judgment motion and filed its own summary-judgment motion, contending that it had responded to his request and that his claims were now moot. It said that it could not provide documents concerning Morris Dees unless it received proof of his death or a privacy waiver signed by him. As for the remainder of Mr. Trentadue's FOIA request, the FBI said that it could not find any requested documents. Its memorandum attached a letter to Mr. Trentadue sent by the FBI on November 18. The letter stated, “Based on the information you provided, we have not located [the Freeh] memorandum through a search of our indices of our Central Records System․” Id. at 77. And with respect to the remainder of Mr. Trentadue's request (other than the allegedly protected information regarding Dees), the letter said that a search “of the indices in our Central Records System files both at FBI Headquarters and in the Oklahoma City Field Office[ ] has revealed no responsive records.” Id. at 78.
2. Mr. Trentadue's Allegations of Bad Faith and the FBI Responses
Mr. Trentadue responded to the FBI's memorandum by arguing that the FBI was intentionally withholding documents and acting in bad faith. To support this allegation, he submitted a redacted copy of the Freeh Memorandum that he had requested and a redacted teletype (which he terms the “BOMBROB-Funding Memorandum”) that he claimed to be “from FBI Director Louie Freeh dealing with the very subjects of Plaintiff's FOIA Request.” Pl.'s Combined Mem. in Opp'n to FBI Defs. Mot. for Summ. J. & Pl.'s Rule 56(f) Mot. for Continuance Pending Disc. at 5-6, Trentadue v. FBI, No. 2:04 CV 00772 DAK, 2004 WL 3482786 (D.Utah Nov. 30, 2004). He asserted that these two documents revealed that “FBI Defendants and/or the SPLC had an informant at Elohim City who reported that two weeks before the bombing of the Murrah Building Tim McVeigh contacted Elohim City trying to recruit others to assist him in carrying out that attack․” J.A. 82. Thus, according to Mr. Trentadue, the “FBI Defendants knew about and fail[ed] to prevent the attack upon the Murrah Building,” and therefore had an incentive to withhold documents showing such knowledge. Id. at 82-83 (emphasis omitted). Mr. Trentadue also submitted a declaration from a retired FBI agent, stating his belief (1) that the teletypes were authentic, and (2) that “it would be a simple matter to retrieve either of these teletypes” through searches of the “respective case files for the serial[ ] [numbers] entered on or about the date of each teletype.” Id. at 96. As the former FBI agent observed, the Freeh Memorandum listed two file numbers belonging to the OKBOMB investigation, 174A-OC-56120 and 91A-OM-41859, and the BOMBROB-Funding Memorandum listed a third file number belonging to that investigation, 100A-PH-79375. In addition, Mr. Trentadue argued that Dees's privacy interest was outweighed by the substantial public interest in disclosure. Finally, Mr. Trentadue filed a request under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f) for a continuance “until Plaintiff has completed limited discovery on the existence of the documents and/or records in question.” Pl.'s Combined Mem. in Opp'n at 3, Trentadue, No. 2:04 CV 00772 DAK, 2004 WL 3482786 (Nov. 30, 2004).
On January 4, 2005, the FBI replied. It clarified that its position was not “that responsive documents do not exist, only that [its] search did not locate any documents responsive to Plaintiff's request.” The Federal Defs. Reply Mem. in Supp. of their Mot. for Summ. J. & in Opp'n to Pl.'s Mot. to Strike & Stay Dis. (Defs.Reply) at 6, id. (Jan. 4, 2005). It maintained that it had made a good-faith effort to search for the requested documents, warranting summary judgment. To establish its good-faith search efforts, it attached to its reply a December 9, 2004, declaration of David Hardy, Section Chief of the Record/Information Dissemination Section of the FBI's Records Management Division in Washington, D.C. The declaration explained that the FBI's indices to its Central Records System (CRS) generally refer only to subjects of investigations, suspects, and victims, although other names may be indexed by an investigator or supervisor if considered relevant or necessary for later retrieval.2 It then described the search for the records requested by Mr. Trentadue, stating that the search for records referring to Dees was awaiting a proper privacy waiver and that the search for the other records, using “Southern Poverty Law Center” as the search term, was fruitless.3
On February 17, 2005, the FBI submitted a second declaration by Mr. Hardy. Attached to the declaration was a redacted copy of the Freeh Memorandum. The declaration explained why the FBI was now able to produce the document:
(7) The initial search of the CRS indices at FBIHQ and the Oklahoma City Field Office, (“OCFO”) for [the Freeh Memorandum] revealed that, based on the information provided in plaintiff's initial request letter to FBIHQ and the OCFO, the FBI could not locate the original document.
(8) The initial search of the CRS indices at FBIHQ and the OCFO for the [Freeh Memorandum] was conducted by using the search term “Southern Poverty Law Center” as described in the Hardy Declaration ¶ 12. Additionally, a search for the memorandum using the name “Timothy McVeigh,” failed to reveal the [Freeh Memorandum].
(9) Based on new information [the redacted version of the Freeh Memorandum submitted by Mr. Trentadue] attached as Exhibit A to plaintiff's November 23, 2004 REPLY MEMORANDUM IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, it was determined that the document was a teletype dated January 4, 1996. An electronic search of file 174A-OC-56120 for teletypes dated January 4, 1996, was conducted. This additional search revealed the teletype in question which was contained within the FBI's OKBOMB investigative file which investigation was conducted pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 844(d).
Second Decl. of David M. Hardy at 3-4 (footnote omitted), Trentadue, No. 2:04 CV 00772 DAK (Feb. 17, 2005). The declaration did not detail search efforts to find the so-called BOMBROB-Funding Memorandum.
3. The District Court's Initial Ruling
On May 5, 2005, the district court denied the FBI's summary-judgment motion, and granted Mr. Trentadue's partial-summary-judgment motion. “Given the specific nature of [Mr. Trentadue's] requests ․ and [his] specific evidence that at least some of the requested documents do exist and reasonably should have been found by the FBI,” the district court found that the FBI's search “was not reasonably calculated to discover[ ] the requested documents.” J.A. Vol. 1 at 159. It concluded that “[w]hen the FBI's computer search did not identify any responsive documents, it was incumbent upon the FBI to review the actual files for such documents.” Id. at 160.
In a footnote the district court provided further reason why it doubted the adequacy of the FBI's search. It cited documents provided by Mr. Trentadue regarding his FOIA request for records relating to the FBI investigation of his brother's death. One document was a teletype from FBI headquarters to its field offices instructing that documents prepared for the investigation “must not be uploaded into the Automated Case Support [ (ACS) ] system” without prior approval. Id. at 159 n. 2 (emphasis omitted). Two other documents were FBI teletypes that the court characterized as indicating that “the FBI lobbied former Senator Don Nickels of Oklahoma to obtain his assurances that no Senate Judiciary Committee oversight would take place with respect to the FBI's handling of the Trentadue investigation.” Id. at 159-60 n. 2.
The district court also ruled that privacy concerns did not justify withholding or redacting documents because the public interest in the information outweighed any privacy interests of the individuals involved. Accordingly, the court ordered that by June 15 the FBI must (1) produce unredacted versions of the Freeh Memorandum and the BOMBROB-Funding Memorandum, and (2) manually search the OKBOMB files numbered 100A-PH-79375, 174A-OC-56120, and 91A-OM-41859-the file numbers listed on the redacted copies of the teletypes that Mr. Trentadue had provided the court-for documents responsive to Mr. Trentadue's FOIA request. The court denied as moot Mr. Trentadue's motion for a continuance pending further discovery, but added that “[u]pon motion, the court will permit Plaintiff to conduct discovery should the FBI fail to produce documents and/or records responsive to his FOIA request.” Id. at 160.
4. FBI's Motion for Reconsideration and District Court's Revised Order
The FBI moved for reconsideration of the district court's order. It claimed that (1) the redacted material in the Freeh Memorandum was exempt from disclosure because it would compromise the identity of and information provided by a confidential informant; (2) the BOMBROB-Funding Memorandum did not reference the SPLC and therefore was not responsive to Mr. Trentadue's initial FOIA request; and (3) the additional search ordered by the court would be unduly burdensome.
In support of its motion, the FBI submitted a third declaration from David Hardy. Hardy stated that file number 174-OC-56120, one of the three files to be searched under the court's order, contained about 1,152,000 pages. He asserted that the manual search ordered by the court would be “extremely time consuming and unprecedented in the history of the FBI FOIA Program.” Id. at 204. (The agency's brief below estimated that such a manual search would require “thousands of work hours to complete.” Id. at 192.) Mr. Hardy also described interim search efforts that the FBI had conducted in an attempt to comply with the order. He said that the FBI had manually searched two of the three files named in the order, which contained about 4,100 pages. And with respect to the 174A-OC56120 file, the agency had performed an electronic search. He described that search as a
“text search” of the ZyIndex which is not a shared drive, but rather is an automated system component which has been used by the OKBOMB Task Force. ZyIndex is an off-the[-]shelf software application that indexes words and phrases to allow an electronic retrieval of documents. An initial “text search” conducted on the ZyIndex indicates that there are approximately 340 documents that are potentially responsive to plaintiff's request. It took two individuals two days to conduct this burdensome search of the index for the terms “Elohim/Poverty;” “Elhoim/Poverty;” “OKBOMB/Poverty;” “BOMBROB/Poverty;” “McVeigh/Poverty;” “Guthrie/Poverty;” “Nichols/Poverty;” “Mahon/Poverty;” “Millar/Poverty;” “Brescia/Poverty;” “Langan/Poverty;” and “Strassmeir/Poverty.”
Id. at 205 (footnotes omitted). The 340 potentially responsive documents had not yet been reviewed by the agency to weed out duplicates and to determine whether the documents were responsive and not covered by FOIA exemptions.
In addition, Mr. Hardy provided the context behind the FBI's teletype instructing its field offices not to upload into the ACS system any documents from the investigation into the death of Mr. Trentadue's brother. Such uploading, Mr. Hardy explained, would have made the text of these classified documents available electronically, thereby jeopardizing the security and privacy of FBI employees. (Apparently, some FBI employees were subjects of the investigation and others were witnesses.) The documents would still be retrievable through an electronic search of the FBI's computerized indices.
The district court stayed its initial order pending further briefing. It added that “[t]o the extent that [the FBI has] discovered documents that are responsive to Plaintiffs's FOIA requests (as interpreted by [the FBI] ) and to which [the FBI does] not assert any FOIA exemption, [it] shall produce such documents as they become available.” Id. at 239. On July 22, 2005, the FBI produced 17 documents and filed a “Notice of Release of Documents to Plaintiff” with the court. Id. at 240.
Still unsatisfied, Mr. Trentadue filed a response to this notice on July 28, 2005. He claimed that the documents produced were improperly redacted and that the FBI could have produced more documents because (1) the documents produced referenced other responsive documents (e.g., enclosures with teletypes) that were not produced; (2) the oldest document produced was generated a week after the Oklahoma City Bombing, even though the FBI's undercover investigations had allegedly begun before the bombing; and (3) the FBI still had not yet performed searches using the terms “Morris Dees” or the initials “SPLC.”
The FBI responded that its production of the 17 documents was not in bad faith. It maintained that it had not omitted documents that were referenced by the documents it had produced. Another declaration from David Hardy explained that “[i]f a released document referred to or referenced another document, the referred to or referenced document was also released if it, too, was responsive to plaintiff's FOIA requests․” Id. Vol. 2 at 497. Likewise, “[e]nclosures referred to by a released document were included in the July 21 release, if the enclosures were located in the FBI's search. There were two such enclosures.” Id. at 498. Hardy noted that follow-up searches were sometimes necessary to locate these enclosures, because “[a]s a general matter, in the filing process, enclosures often become separated from their cover documents.” Id. Two enclosures were not located. One was a floppy disk; Hardy stated that “[f]loppy disk enclosures are destroyed in the ordinary course.” Id. The other was a newspaper article, although the article was “identified [in the released document] with sufficient specificity for [Mr. Trentadue] to obtain the document from public sources, should he so desire.” Id.
In an order issued on March 30, 2006, the district court declined to reconsider its earlier finding that the FBI's initial search had not been reasonably calculated to uncover responsive documents. The court did, however, agree with the FBI that it need not produce the BOMBROB-Funding Memorandum, whose failure to mention either Dees or the SPLC made it nonresponsive to Mr. Trentadue's initial FOIA requests. And it agreed with almost all the FBI's redactions. Most relevant to this appeal, it “relieved [the FBI] of conducting a manual search of the OKBOMB file․” Id. Vol. 3 at 902. Instead, the court ordered the FBI to conduct searches like those already conducted but using the names “Morris Dees” (overruling the FBI's privacy contention) and “SPLC” (the FBI had employed the search term poverty in its ZyIndex to cull documents mentioning the Southern Poverty Law Center). The court noted:
[I]t is so troubling that ․ the disclosed documents also refer to other attachments that at one time appear to have accompanied the document, yet these documents have not been produced. While the FBI's failure to discover documents is not necessarily an indication of bad faith, it is puzzling that so many documents could be referenced but not produced. But given the nature of Plaintiff's initial FOIA request and the searches that have been conducted by the FBI thus far, the court declines to order further searches beyond what the court has ordered above. It appears likely, however, that the FBI has not seen the last FOIA request from Plaintiff.
Id. at 901. After further searching, the FBI produced one additional document.
5. Mr. Trentadue's Motion for Discovery and District Court's Ruling
In February 2007, eight months after the FBI's production of the additional document, Mr. Trentadue filed the motion that generated this appeal. The motion seeks authorization to take videotaped depositions of Terry Nichols, who was convicted for his role in the Oklahoma City Bombing, and David Paul Hammer, a death-row inmate who claimed to have discussed the bombing in detail with Timothy McVeigh while the latter was on death row. In the motion Mr. Trentadue reiterated his allegation that the FBI's production of documents had been in bad faith because other responsive documents-especially ones created before the bombing-had to be in FBI files. The depositions of Nichols and Hammer, he asserted, would “set forth facts establishing a link between Elohim City and the Murrah Building bombing,” thereby “establishing FBI Defendants' apparent complicity in that crime through informants,” id. Vol. 4 at 988, and would provide evidence of “FBI Defendants' bad faith response to Plaintiff's FOIA requests,” id. at 1008. To support his motion, Mr. Trentadue submitted declarations by Hammer and Nichols, both of whom gave accounts of alleged involvement of government informants in the bombing.
The FBI opposed the motion, arguing: (1) the district court lacked jurisdiction to grant discovery because the district court had already resolved all issues in the case and had no authority under FOIA to order discovery designed only to further a private investigation into terrorism; and (2) Mr. Trentadue had provided no grounds for reopening the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and had presented no evidence to support a suspicion that Defendants had inadequately responded to his FOIA request.
Stating that it had never closed the case, the district court granted Mr. Trentadue's discovery request. With respect to the merits of the discovery request, the court cited its earlier order stating that “[u]pon motion, the court will allow Plaintiff to conduct discovery should the FBI fail to produce documents and/or records responsive to [his] FOIA requests.” Id. at 1155 (internal quotation marks omitted; first brackets in original). The court then explained:
In light of (1) the court's previous finding that the FBI's original search was not reasonably calculated to locate responsive documents; (2) the troubling absence of documents to which other documents referred; and (3) the information that Plaintiff has thus far discovered from Terry Lynn Nichols and David Paul Hammer, the court is persuaded that it continues to maintain jurisdiction over this action, and, furthermore, that by allowing the requested depositions, Plaintiff may be better able to identify the existence of other records responsive to his FOIA request that have not yet been produced.
The FBI filed a motion for reconsideration. It reiterated its earlier arguments, but also stressed that discovery in a FOIA action should be limited to “the scope of the agency's search for responsive documents and its indexing and classification procedures,” not expanded into “a fishing expedition into the investigatory action taken by the agency․” Id. at 1161. Because Nichols and Hammer lacked any knowledge of the FBI's search for records, the FBI argued, deposing them would be tantamount to “conduct[ing] discovery into the Oklahoma City bombing investigation,” an unprecedented move given that neither Mr. Trentadue, nor the court, cited any authority allowing for depositions of nonagency personnel. Id. The FBI also argued, alternatively, that the court should prohibit video recording of the depositions out of concern for prison security.
The district court denied Defendants' motion except that it ordered that the video show only the deponents and placed other restrictions on the use of video-recording equipment. The court closed the case, but added that “[i]f Plaintiff is correct and through these depositions he discovers the existence of records responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA request, he may file a motion to reopen the case.” Id. at 1313.
The issue before us on appeal is whether the district court properly authorized the depositions of Nichols and Hammer. The FBI argues that such discovery is inappropriate because (1) the FBI has submitted detailed affidavits establishing the reasonableness of its search, and the district court never found the described search to be inadequate or to have been conducted in bad faith; (2) discovery in FOIA proceedings is limited to the adequacy of the agency's search processes, not its outcome; (3) the depositions of Nichols and Hammer can provide no information about the nature or scope of the agency's search; (4) the declarations of Nichols and Hammer do not even mention the Southern Poverty Law Center or Morris Dees, which are the subjects of the FOIA request; and (5) videotaped depositions of federal prisoners present substantial security concerns.
We review the district court's discovery order for abuse of discretion. See Wood v. FBI, 432 F.3d 78, 82 (2d Cir.2005) (discovery in FOIA case). “A district court abuses its discretion where it commits a legal error or relies on clearly erroneous factual findings, or where there is no rational basis in the evidence for its ruling.” Breaux v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 554 F.3d 854, 866 (10th Cir.2009) (internal quotation marks omitted).
In our view, issuance of the discovery order was an abuse of discretion. The only proper purpose that we can see for the depositions of the two prisoners, Nichols and Hammer, would be to establish that the FBI likely possesses documents encompassed by Mr. Trentadue's request. But taking the depositions for that purpose would be improper because (1) Mr. Trentadue has provided no reason to doubt (a) that the FBI has performed the searches described in the declarations submitted by it and (b) that there are no reasonable methods by which the FBI could locate the requested records beyond those described in the declarations; and (2) there is no reason to believe that the depositions could produce evidence of the existence of unproduced responsive records.
First, as we explained at the outset of this opinion, the issue in a FOIA lawsuit challenging an agency's search for records is not whether there exist further documents responsive to a FOIA request but whether the agency conducted a reasonable search for responsive documents. Perhaps the FBI's initial search was inadequate (an issue we need not address), but the searches ultimately conducted were very thorough. Not only did it search its CRS indices for records described in Mr. Trentadue's FOIA request, but it manually searched two files and conducted a ZyIndex search of the principal file relating to the Oklahoma City Bombing. Apparently, the only additional search that could have been conducted would have been a manual search of more than one million pages in that principal file-a search that, according to the FBI, would be an unprecedented FOIA effort by the agency that would take thousands of hours of work. To be sure, the FBI's description of its search effort was in the form of a declaration, not cross-examined testimony. But declarations and affidavits are the widely accepted, even the preferable, means for an agency to respond to concerns about the adequacy of a FOIA search. We agree with the Sixth Circuit:
In discharging this burden [to show the adequacy of its search], the agency may rely on affidavits or declarations that provide reasonable detail of the scope of the search. In the absence of countervailing evidence or apparent inconsistency of proof, such affidavits will suffice to demonstrate compliance with the obligations imposed by the FOIA.
Rugiero, 257 F.3d at 547 (citations, brackets, and internal quotation marks omitted). See Becker v. IRS, 34 F.3d 398, 405 (7th Cir.1994) (“An agency may establish the reasonableness of its search through affidavits.”); Church of Scientology of Cal. v. IRS, 792 F.2d 146, 151 (D.C.Cir.1986) (Scalia, J.) (“Summary judgment ․ would require an affidavit reciting facts which enable the District Court to satisfy itself that all appropriate files have been searched, i.e., that further searches would be unreasonably burdensome. Such an affidavit would presumably identify the searched files and describe at least generally the structure of the agency's file system which makes further search difficult.”); Perry v. Block, 684 F.2d 121, 126 (D.C.Cir.1982) (per curiam) (“The peculiarities inherent in FOIA litigation, with the responding agencies often in sole possession of requested records and with information searches conducted only by agency personnel, have led federal courts to rely on government affidavits to determine whether the statutory obligations of the FOIA have been met.”); James T. O'Reilly, supra § 7:5 at 165 (“In general, an agency search is adequate where the affidavit shows a good faith effort to use reasonable means to produce the information sought.”). “Discovery relating to the agency's search and the exemptions it claims for withholding records generally is unnecessary if the agency's submissions are adequate on their face, and a district court may forgo discovery and award summary judgment on the basis of submitted affidavits or declarations.” Wood, 432 F.3d at 85 (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted).
An agency “is not required to reorganize its filing system in response to each FOIA request,” Goland, 607 F.2d at 370; and Mr. Trentadue has failed to suggest any search method that the FBI has not used other than a manual search of the primary Oklahoma City Bombing file-an unreasonably burdensome search that the district court ultimately relieved the FBI from undertaking. Nor has Mr. Trentadue presented any reason to believe that the FBI's descriptions of its searches have been flawed in any respect. He and the district court have expressed surprise and concern that the agency did not produce enclosures and other documents referenced in disclosed documents; but the declaration from the section chief of the FBI's Record/Information Dissemination Section explained that only two enclosures (a floppy disk destroyed in the ordinary course and a newspaper article) were missing and the undisclosed cross-referenced documents were not covered by Mr. Trentadue's FOIA request. In sum, the FBI's declarations provide an internally consistent and uncontradicted record that it conducted an adequate search for the documents requested by Mr. Trentadue. See SafeCard Servs., Inc. v. SEC, 926 F.2d 1197, 1200 (D.C.Cir.1991) (“Agency affidavits are accorded a presumption of good faith, which cannot be rebutted by purely speculative claims about the existence and discoverability of other documents.” (internal quotation marks omitted)).
In this light, the discovery sought by Mr. Trentadue cannot be justified. He has failed to show any possibility that the depositions of Nichols and Hammer would produce relevant evidence in this case. See Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 351-52, 98 S.Ct. 2380, 57 L.Ed.2d 253 (1978) (“Discovery of matter not ‘reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence’ is not within the scope of Rule 26(b)(1).”); Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1) (discovery permitted if it is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”); see also id. 26(b)(2)(C)(iii) (courts must limit otherwise-permissible discovery if “the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties' resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues”). Nichols is a convicted coconspirator in the Oklahoma City Bombing and Hammer is a death-row inmate and alleged confidant of Timothy McVeigh, who has been executed for the offense. Nichols and Hammer clearly have no knowledge regarding FBI procedures in filing and searching for records-which are the only relevant matters in FOIA litigation challenging an agency's records search. Only present or past agency employees would have knowledge of those matters, which readily explains why we have been cited to no precedent for deposing nonagency personnel in FOIA cases. Mr. Trentadue (and apparently the district court) may have supposed that the depositions would reveal that the FBI must have created a record that has not been produced in response to Mr. Trentadue's FOIA request. But even if the existence of such a record were relevant, it is pure speculation that such a revelation would be forthcoming. After all, Mr. Trentadue's FOIA request was limited to records relating to Morris Dees and the SPLC, yet the declarations of Nichols and Hammer submitted by Mr. Trentadue to the district court make no mention of either Dees or the SPLC.
To conduct the discovery requested by Mr. Trentadue would be an abuse of judicial process.
We REVERSE the district court's order granting Mr. Trentadue's motion to conduct discovery. The parties' motions to supplement the appendix and the record are DENIED.
1. We see no purpose in expanding upon Mr. Trentadue's beliefs concerning the connection between the investigations and his brother's death.
2. Mr. Hardy described the CRS as follows:(10) The Central Records System (“CRS”), which is utilized by the FBI to conduct searches in response to FOIA and Privacy Act requests, enables it to maintain all information which it has acquired in the course of fulfilling mandated law enforcement responsibilities. The records consist of administrative, applicant, criminal, personnel, and other files compiled for law enforcement purposes. This system consists of a numerical sequence of files broken down according to subject matter. The subject matter of a file may relate to an individual, organization, company, publication, activity, or foreign intelligence matter. Certain records in this system are maintained at FBIHQ [FBI headquarters]. Records that are pertinent to specific field offices are maintained in those field offices.Access to the CRS is afforded by the General Indices, which are arranged in alphabetical order. The General Indices consist of index cards on various subject matters that are searched either manually or through the automated indices. The entries in the General Indices fall into two categories:(a) A “main” entry-A “main” entry carries the name corresponding with a subject of a file contained in the CRS.(a) A “reference” entry-“Reference” entries, sometimes called “cross-references,” are generally only a mere mention or reference to an individual, organization, etc., contained in a document located in another “main” file.(12) Access to the CRS files at FBI field divisions is also afforded by the General Indices (automated and manual), which are likewise arranged in alphabetical order, and consist of an index on various subjects, including the names of individuals and organizations. Searches made in the General Indices to locate records concerning a particular subject, such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, are made by searching the subject requested in the index. FBI field divisions have automated indexing functions.(13) On October 16, 1995, the Automated Case Support (“ACS”) was implemented for all Field Divisions, Legal Attaches (“Legats”), and FBIHQ. Over 105 million records were converted from automated systems previously utilized by the FBI. ACS consists of three integrated, yet separately functional, automated applications that support case management functions for all FBI investigative and administrative cases, which are:(a) Investigative Case Management (“ICM”)-ICM provides the ability to open, assign, and close investigative and administrative cases as well as set, assign, and track leads. The Office of Origin (“OO”), which sets leads for itself and other divisions, as needed, opens a case. The offices that receive leads are referred to as Lead Offices (“LOs”), formerly known as Auxiliary Offices. When a case is opened, it is assigned a Universal Case File Number (“OCFN”), such as “12-SU-34567,” which is utilized by all FBI offices, including FBIHQ, that are conducting or assisting in the investigation. The “12” indicates the type of investigation, “SU” indicates the Office of Origin of the investigation, and “34567” denotes the individual case file number for that particular investigation.(b) Electronic Case File (“ECF”)-ECF serves as the central electronic repository for the FBI's official text-based documents. ECF supports the universal serial concept, where only the creator of a document serializes it into a file, providing single source entry of serials into the computerized system. All original serials are maintained in the OO case file.(c) Universal Index (“UNI”)-UNI continues the universal concepts of ACS by providing a complete subject/case index to all investigative and administrative cases. Only the OO is required to index; however, the LOs may index additional information as needed. UNI, an 84.5 million record index, provides functions to index names to cases and to search names and cases for the FBI's investigative and administrative cases. Names of individuals or non-individuals are recorded with identifying information, such as sex, race, event date, date or place of birth, locality, Social Security number, or address.(14) The decision to index names other than subjects, suspects, and victims is a discretionary decision made by the investigative FBI Special Agent (“SA”), the supervisor in the field division conducting the investigation, and supervising FBI SA at FBIHQ. The FBI does not index every name in its files; rather, it indexes only that information considered pertinent, relevant, or essential for future retrieval. Without a “key” (index) to this mass of information, information essential to ongoing investigations could not be readily retrieved. The FBI files would thus be merely archival in nature and could not be effectively used to serve the mandated mission of the FBI, which is to investigate violations of federal criminal statutes. Therefore, the General Indices to the CRS files are the means by which the FBI can determine what retrievable information, if any, the FBI may have in its CRS files on a particular subject matter or individualDecl. of David M. Hardy at 4-7, Attach. to Defs. Reply, Trentadue, No. 2:04 CV 00772 DAK.
3. The declaration stated:(16) A search of the CRS indices at FBIHQ and the Oklahoma City Field Office, and the search of the I and S drives at the Oklahoma City Field Office for records which directly or indirectly, report upon, concern, reference or refer to the SPLC's involvement with and/or connection to Elohim City, BOMBROB, OKBOMB, Timothy McVeigh, Richard Guthrie, Terry Nichols, Dennis Mahon, Robert Millar, Michael Brescia, Peter Langan and/or Andreas Strassmeir including all contacts the SPLC may have indirectly had with the foregoing through informants revealed that FBIHQ and the Oklahoma City Field Office have no records responsive to plaintiff's request. The search was performed using the search term “Southern Poverty Law Center” as that would be the file containing the information sought. The search was performed using the search term “OKBOMB” as that is [the] file under which the memorandum would have been placed.(17) A search for records pertaining to Morris Dees will be conducted upon receipt of the completed Privacy Waiver and Certification Form which the FBI provided to plaintiff by letter dated November 18, 2004. In the absence of this privacy waiver, the records, if they exist, are exempt from disclosure pursuant to Exemptions 6 and/or 7(C), 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(6), (b)(7)(C). To date, plaintiff has not submitted this form to the FBI.Id. at 8-9.
Has the FBI been successful in weapoinizng the phrase " conspiracy"
'I hope someone truly shoots you': online conspiracy theorists harass Vegas victimsThose who lived to describe the mass shooting face flood of abuse on social media accusing them of being actors, as hoax claims flourish on YouTube
Democrats push bill to stop a Trump pre-emptive strike on North Korea
Denver hit a record high of 84 degrees Wednesday. Thursday’s forecast predicts snow.Snow is expected to fly Thursday afternoon, but it won’t stick around
Congressional Committee Threatens DEA with Subpoena Over ‘Pill DumpingGrowing impatient with the DEA dragging its feet on the opioid epidemic, members of the Energy and Commerce Committee are threatening to subpoena the agency for information on “pill dumping” in West Virginia.
Chairman of the committee, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., blasted the DEA for its failure to fully respond to a May 8 request for data on drug suppliers sending millions of opioids into the state, the Hill reports.
“Enough is enough. Will you, on behalf of the DEA, commit today to producing the documents and information we requested, and soon? Or do we simply need to issue a subpoena? Because we are done waiting,” Walden said to DEA Deputy Assistant Administrator Neil Doherty at a hearing.
West Virginia has been at the center of the opioid crisis, leading the nation in drug overdose deaths.
Drug suppliers pumped 780 million hydrocodone and oxycodone pills into the state in six years, according to an investigation by the Charleston Gazette-Mail.
Rochester LGBTQ Gun Group launched: 'We have each others back'
Kansas City attorney shot dead on his porch as man he recently defeated in court is tied to case BY TERENCE CULLEN
Writing wrongs: the pioneering New York prison program transforming lives – video
Link du jourhttp://theknow.denverpost.com/2017/10/25/colorado-tv-news-one-chip-challenge-carolina-reaper/163548/
Georgia sheriff who ordered schoolwide drug search interrupted own son’s drug arrest, authorities sayBY CASSIDY GROMNEW YORK DAILY NEWS Wednesday, October 25, 2017, 6:05 PM
Larry Nassar reportedly molested 27 additional victims after FBI launched slow-moving probe
BY LARRY MCSHANE
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Saturday, February 3, 2018, 2:35 PM
Why I Am Leaving the F.B.I.
One of the greatest honors of my life was walking across the stage at the F.B.I. Academy and receiving my special agent badge from the director at the time, Robert Mueller. After 21 weeks of intensive training, my class swore an oath and became federal agents entrusted with the solemn duty of protecting Americans and upholding the Constitution.
After more than a decade of service, which included investigating terrorism, working to rescue kidnapping victims overseas and being special assistant to the director, I am reluctantly turning in my badge and leaving an organization I love. Why? So I can join the growing chorus of people who believe that the relentless attacks on the bureau undermine not just America’s premier law enforcement agency but also the nation’s security. My resignation is painful, but the alternative of remaining quiet while the bureau is tarnished for political gain is impossible.
A small number of my current and retired colleagues have said that we should simply keep our heads down until the storm passes. I say this with the greatest respect: They are wrong. If those who know the agency best remain silent, it will be defined by those with partisan agendas.
F.B.I. agents are dogged people who do not care about the direction of political winds. But to succeed in their work, they need public backing. Scorched-earth attacks from politicians with partisan goals now threaten that support, raising corrosive doubts about the integrity of the F.B.I. that could last for generations.
When the F.B.I. knocks on s
New York Times Runs FBI Agent’s Angry Resignation Column, Neglects To Inform Readers Of Agent’s Ties To Democrats
By Evan Lips | February 3, 2018, 17:40 EST
The FBI: political punching bag or in need of reform?
February 04, 2018
As FBI dragged its feet, dozens of gymnasts were molested
For more than a year, an FBI inquiry into allegations that Lawrence G. Nassar, a respected sports doctor, had molested three elite teenage gymnasts followed a plodding pace as it moved back and forth among agents in three cities. The accumulating information included instructional videos of the doctor's unusual treatment ...
Nunes memo released: FBI objections lacked credibility given ...
In 2002, The FISA court complained that FBI agents made more than 75 false or misleading claims to secure warrants; a top FBI counterrorism official was prohibited from ever appearing there again. The court also rebuffed Attorney General John Ashcroft's proposal to radically transform its purpose by making it easier for ...
General Michael Flynn Framed By The FBI, Mike Cernovich Claims ...
The same senior FBI agent played a role in both the Trump and Clinton investigations. Cernovich also highlighted that the Democrats and various media outlets aggressively opposed the release of the Devin Nunes memo because it would reveal classified information, yet after its release claimed it was a “nothingburger.
FBI Requested No Body Cameras During Malheur Leaders' 2016 ...
KUOW News and Information-
Federal prosecutors outlined portions of their case in a court filing Friday against an FBI agent charged with lying about firing his weapon during a traffic stop that led to the arrests — and one death — of the leaders of the 2016 Malheur Wildlife Refuge occupation. Prosecutors say W. Joseph Astarita, a member of the FBI's ...
The Best Book on Immigration You Will Read This Year Comes From a Former Border Patrol Agent
Francisco Cantú’s “The Line Becomes a River” is honest, gripping, and wonderfully written.
DEA and FBI looking for students to take part in poster contest
News 5 Cleveland-
DEA and FBI looking for students to take part in poster contest. Tracy Carloss. 11:20 PM, Feb ... The contest is designed to draw attention to the DEA and FBI documentary, Chasing the Dragon. ... The FBI points to statistics that show the average age of the first time opiate user is between the ages of 12 and 17. Teenagers in ...
Friends of Scouting
Cleveland Daily Banne
The chosen speaker is Marcus D. Veazey, a former FBI agent and supervisor. Retiring from the FBI in 2013, Veazey now works as an investigative consultant for Unum. The Ocoee District's scouting highlights include more than 600 registered youth, over 350 adult volunteers serving as positive role models for the youth and ...
Prosecutors move to dismiss charges against former Scout leader
January 3, 2007
NEW HAVEN, Conn. --Federal prosecutors have moved to dismiss charges
against a retired FBI agent who was indicted on child sex charges dating
back more than a decade when he was a Boy Scout leader, in response to
the death of his accuser.
William Hutton, 63, of Killingworth, was arrested in February on charges
he enticed a member of his Scout troop to Maine for the purpose of sexual
activity in 1994 and 1995.
Former Scout leader, FBI agent indicted on child sex charges
News-Times, The (Danbury, CT)
Saturday, February 4, 2006
NEW HAVEN A retired FBI agent was indicted Friday on federal child
sex charges dating back more than a decade when he was a Boy Scout
William Hutton, 63, of Killingworth, was arrested Friday. The federal
grand jury indictment accuses Hutton of enticing a member of his Scout
troop to Maine for the purpose of sexual activity in 1994 and 1995.
"It's obviously devastating. He was an FBI agent in this district and was
reputed in this district," defense attorney Hugh Keefe said.
"The people who worked with him in the U.S. attorney's office and FBI
Keefe said the investigation has been going on for years. He would not
discuss the details of the case or how the allegations surfaced.
— The grandmother of an unarmed black man killed by Sacramento police called Monday for changes in the way police confront suspects, such as sending in a police dog, using a Taser, or aiming for an arm or leg when shots are fired.
Sequita Thompson said at an emotional news conference that police didn’t need to shoot at 22-year-old Stephon Clark 20 times, killing him in her darkened backyard March 18.
“They didn’t have to kill him like that, they didn’t have to shoot him that many times,” she said through sobs, recounting the night of his slaying. She believes Clark was in the backyard trying to get into the house he shared with his grandparents and other family members when he was shot.
Our View: County should have postponed sheriff’s spending
A few months from now, when Mohave County is trying to figure out how it’s going to pay for its 2018-19 budget, remember that supervisors just approved $600,000 in unbudgeted spending by the sheriff’s department. That’s not to say the sheriff’s department didn’t need 87 gun suppressors, or a body and iris scanner, or lie detector equipment — we’ll leave those qualitative judgments to people who know the police business better than we do — but it’s clear that a majority of county supervisors weren’t very concerned about spending more than a half-million dollars on things that the sheriff’s department has done just fine without until now. It wouldn’t have hurt to wait a few months for the new budget planning process to begin.
y, March 23, 2018
Ten Million Americans Could Bring H.R. 676 into Reality Land—Relief for Anxiety, Dread and Fear
Medicare for all is what the Pentagon does. It is what President Harry Truman wanted from Congress back in the nineteen forties. It is time.
ASHEVILLE, N.C— A North Carolina judge has ruled all video in the case of a white police officer accused of using excessive force against a black man accused of jaywalking should be released.
Local news outlets report Buncombe County Superior Court Judge Mark Powell said Monday it was in the public interest for footage captured by police body cameras to be made public. Powell set an April 2 release date.
District Attorney Todd Williams said the release would threaten his ability to prosecute the case.
Video footage captures former Asheville Police Officer Christopher Hickman ordering Johnnie Jermaine Rush to put his hands behind his back. It shows Hickman punching Rush’s head and using a stun gun while holding him to the ground last Aug. 25.
FBI informants collected hundreds of thousands of dollars as government witnesses 'while continuing to commit murder for the mafia' Read more:
A Mississippi police chief says his officers will stop following what he called an “unwritten rule” that gives fellow law enforcement officers a break not offered to civilians suspected of driving under the influence.
Starkville Police Chief Frank Nichols made this announcement on Thursday after his department decided not to ticket a drunken Columbus police officer during a traffic stop. He calls that a bad judgment call.
Friday, 23 March 2018
Injured Victim Suing FBI — for Allowing Terrorist Attack to Happen
It’s perhaps one of the biggest, and most underreported, stories of the last few years. It involves two different allegations, the first being that the FBI allowed a terrorist attack to happen. More damning still, the second is that the FBI actually encouraged it. And now a man injured in the attack is suing the bureau.
The incident was the jihadist attack on the “Draw Mohammed” free-speech event in Garland, Texas, in 2015. The plaintiff is the security guard wounded in the gunfire, Bruce Joiner, who charges that an FBI agent “solicited, encouraged, directed and aided members of
Supported videos include:
Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.