NEW INDICTMENT AGAINST J ASSANGE

Blackwood thinks suicide isn't as common in U.S. prisons. Now talking about what Assange would endure in a U.S. detention facility

Fitzgerald talking about SAMs, former prison warden suggesting high risk of suicide in supermax prison. Blackwood: "this is the most pessimistic end of the spectrum"

Fitzgerald for the defense: "but this is a prison warden." Blackwood then cites (prosecution's affidavit) assistant US attorney Gordon Kromberg

Blackwood drew on (US govt witness) Kromberg's submission to find that there is no solitary confinement in supermax prisons.

Correction not necessarily supermax - this was about prospective pre-trial detention in Alexandria Detention Center)


But Eric Lewis (Reprieve lawyer) testified about solitary confinement at this facility. Blackwood accepts there is a range of opinion on the matter.

The key question is whether it would be "unjust or oppressive to extradite" Assange. Blackwood takes the US govt claims that the ADC doesn't use solitary confinement at face value.

Hour-long recess now for lunch. #AssangeCase

Legal background for Blackwood's assessment of the question of whether it's "unjust or oppressive to extradite" to the US include: 

USA v Turner: [size=0]https://casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff72760d03e7f57ea8bab…

USA v Lauri Love: https://judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/lauri-love-v-usa.pdf…[/size]

The lower court judge in Lauri's case found that "there is substantial risk Mr Love will commit suicide" in a US prison but an appeals court found that the judge was too credulous of US claims they could protect prisoners:




Reminder: at issue are both Assange's prospective pre-trial & prospective post-trial prison conditions. Defense & prosecution agree he'd be held pre-trial at ADC in Alexandria, VA. Prosecution claims there is no solitary confinement at the ADC. Defense testimony contradicts that.

Post-trial, defense argues he'd be held at ADX Florence, a supermax prison in Colorado. Prosecution says they don't know where he'd be detained post-trial, but they also say even admin-segregation at ADX doesn't constitute solitary confinement.


In general, the US government always says that there is no solitary confinement in US prisons, always referring only to "ad-seg" (administrative segregation). See this report by 

@theCCR
: Solitary Confinement: Torture in U.S. Prisons


https://ccrjustice.org/home/get-involved/tools-resources/fact-sheets-and-faqs/torture-use-solitary-confinement-us-prisons

Prosecution complaining about late evidence, "enough is enough." [Yes the same prosecution which brought a 2nd superseding indictment halfway through the case.]

Defense says they haven't been able to cross-examine prosecution affidavits from Gordon Kromberg, others, so the prosecution shouldn't complain about this.

Defense just wants its witnesses to be allowed to referred to these reports.
Includes report from Dr Thomas Kucharski which defense says directly contradicts prosecution arguments on US prison conditions 

Judge saying she received files from defense last night, she's warned both parties previously about late evidence. "A line must be drawn" judge says on filing timing, these issues (US prison conditions) have already been covered, so the defense submissions will not be accepted.


Patrick Eller now taking the stand by remote video. 
Eller, who served in the US Army for 20 years as a criminal investigator, is president of Metadata Forensics, which provides digital investigation and forensic examination in both civil and criminal cases.

Eller has been asked to examine a jabber chat regarding a password hash from March 2010

Eller: the chat didn't tell him anything about the computer to which it related, or even whether it related to a government computer.

Any indication to 'Nathaniel Frank' that the password hash they were told about referred to a government computer?

No

Explaining hash values: encryption programs "hashes the password", turning plaintext into hash value and stores it.

To change it back to plaintext, in this instance, you would need both the SAM file and the system file.
Based on this chat and the Manning court transcripts: 
Manning did not have the entire portion required, could not obtain the password2010, computer was running Windows XP.

Defense: Assume that what you just said is not the case, hypothetically if the hash cracking *was* successful -- want to talk about what intent was if it was successful 

Manning had a username on this government computer.
Had a local account specific to the computer, not the domain, no access to the wider network within the SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility)

By March 2010, Manning had used her own domain to access and download materials later leaked and in this case -- the GTMO detainee assessment briefs, the war diaries, the rules of engagement

This is important ^ -- the government alleges a conspiracy to access and download more information, but Manning had already sent most of the releases to WikiLeaks by the time of this conversation.


If the hash cracking was successful, it would have given 'FTP access', local computer account. No access to the T-drive.

Eller: "govt allegation that there was an attempt to gain anonymity is greatly undermined by the tracking system which identified users.
 
Databases like the Net Centric Diplomacy database & Intelink could be accessed from any account on the computer, including local user accounts"

"But the account on the computer that the user logged into was not used in any way to identify the user to the database.
 Instead, access was tracked using IP addresses."

"Firstly, many databases were accessible to anyone with a SIPRNet connection. 
These databases did not require any additional log in information or account based access control. 
Access was not controlled with accounts

"The Cables and the Detainee Assessment Briefs "were databases that anyone with SIPRNet access could use without any further authentication or login at that time

"If Manning had been able to access the ftpuser account, it would not have given her access to the CIDNE database (where the war logs were held)

If you were trying not to be traced, there were other means available to Chelsea Manning. 
Defense wants to unpack this - again establishes even with the 'ftp username' (instead of her own personal login), downloading docs would've been traceable by IP address

Manning booted a Linux CD to access the SAM file in the first place, before this jabber chat, to actually be anonymous. 
So she knew of ways to use computer anonymously that did not require hash cracking (which she knew wouldn't anonymize her)
Films/music files/computer games were on the T-drive. 
These were unauthorized programs. 
Users did not have local access to this drive (this is why Manning would want to crack a password, to download programs like *this* from an account other than her own)

Defense established Manning's computer was reimaged: 
"The consequences of reimaging would be that unauthorized files and programs may have been lost. 
Soldiers would have to go through the same processes again in order to reinstall them.
It may be notable that this reimaging took place a few days before the portion of the Jabber chat log in which Manning sent a password hash.
"End of defense questioning,

now James Lewis cross-examining for the prosecution.

Lewis challenges Eller's claim that the password was not cracked -- 
Eller deduces that from the conversations he's seen, saw no evidence that it was.
 Lewis says but you don't have evidence that it wasn't
Lewis reading from jabber chats:
Manning "any good at lm hash cracking?
"He replied “we have rainbow tables for lm”.

Manning sent hexadecimal string she found in SAM file

Assange: “passed it on to our lm guy”, “any more hints about this lm hash?”, 
“no luck so far”.

Lewis is running through complex technical background of LM hashes and how encrypted passwords work
Lewis picks up on phrase "at the time" from Eller sentence: "At the time, it would not have been possible to crack an encrypted password hash such as the one Manning obtained." 

Lewis wants to show him evidence to see if he changes his mind
Lewis reads from a Microsoft announcement about hashes, 
"LM hash is an old and weak" system because password length is only 14-characters, breaks into 2 separate files 
"so if your password is less than 7 characters it should be a breeze" to crack by penetrative attacks

Asks Eller about his sentence "at the time" would have been impossible. 
Better to say "very difficult" or "might not have been possible" or still say "impossible"?

Eller: In 1999 (time of Microsoft announcement) there was a patch this vulnerability, makes it computationally impossible to use brute force when Sys key has been applied.

Lewis: Right. Well rather than debate the issue with you on this...
Lewis (cont'd): Manning and Assange *thought* they could crack the password and agreed to try to password?

Eller: it never said where the hash if from, and I didn't get to finish my previous answer

Eller (cont'd): The government witness in the Manning court martial said it was not feasible
Aware Assange described himself as a 'fantastic hacker'? (allegedly said this as a teenager)
No
And agree even the strongest encryption can be cracked by an expert hacker?

Yes - Eller wants to add a comment but Lewis moves on

Lewis: we agree an IP address will only identify a computer, not a user?
Yes
And on computer you can log on as a domain user or a local user?
Yes
Evidence at Manning's trial was she logged on as a user in her name?
Yes
In fact the user profile contained forensic evidence used against her at her trial?
That is correct(Lewis reading from Manning trial transcript, working to establish the above. 
Cites page 8,300 within the appendix, shows massive scale of the material in the case)

Lewis on program 'wget' found in Manning's profile, scripted to automate downloading. 
Lots of discussion of wget in Manning trial
Lewis: use of Manning's profile was used to prove what she had done?
Yes
If you use the same computer with a ftpuser account, you could hide all that activity from your domain user account?
That is correct
Can access SIPRNet from ftp user account?
Yes (his statement says didn't require any log in details)Any forensic evidence from a ftp user account would not be available on an image of the bradley.manning user account?
No, it would be available on the computer
Lewis: the defense argument is one reason she'd want to access ftp account is to download video games/similar programs?
Yes
Lewis: You said it could be assumed that an ftp account had administrative privileges, but how do you know that?

Eller: Local accounts tend to have admin privileges
Lewis: But you don't know, and we'd say it didn't
Eller: Don't see how you could say it didn't
Lewis: If it did not have local admin privileges, it could not be used to install programs/computer games?
Eller: That is correct
Lewis: So it's essential to know that
End of cross-examination, 10-minute recess to see if the defense has more questions

They'll need more time to confer about defense re-examination questioning, so we'll start the lunch break now and return at 2:00pm London time. 
#AssangeCaseBack from recess.
 Mark Summers for the defense re-examining Patrick Eller.
The jabber chat has one user as 'Nobody', we know that's Manning because she said so at her trial, right?
Yes
Were you asked to determine who 'Nathaniel Frank' is?
No

So why attribute that name to 'Assange' in your statement?
That was just assumed
So can't know whether that's Assange?
No
Or whether multiple users were behind that username?
Can't know that

Do you stand by your assessment that cracking the hash as alleged would have been impossible?
Yes I do
Microsoft's assessment was that it was computationally infeasible for a password hash to be cracked as such?
That is correct
Because of a patch on that vulnerability?
Yes
That software remained in place on all MS Windows applications for the next 2 decades?
Correct

Would a skilled hacker be able to achieve something that is computationally infeasible?
I would assume no.
Do you resile [deviate] from your opinion that this would have been impossible?
No, and I note this is in line with the government's own expert in Manning's trial

Confirmed that SIPRNet is an intranet, not 'the internet'?
Yes
How many people had access to SIPRNet?
Anyone tasked with using a secret government database/computer
Can you give a number?
Probably in the millions
(Judge seems surprised, "in the millions?" 
Mark Summers: yes)
Establishing that wget is a common program. 
If she'd logged in with ftp user account she wouldn't access any domain (like the T-drive, CIDNE database)?
Correct 


Access to wget?
Not the wget in her bradley.manning profile
Summers: Lewis confirmed, and everyone agreed, accessing Intellink and the like -- that's tracked by IP address?
Yes
Would ID the specific computer being used?
That is correct
How many people used each SCIF computer terminal?
Day shift and night shift, so 2 on each computer
So it would specify the computer and the time, from which one could work out who was on shift.


Linux CD provided anonymity -- so the benefit that Kromberg suggests (from using ftpuser account) was already available to Chelsea Manning because she already had the Linux CD

Would ftpuser benefits achieve anything by disguising activity of accessing documents from the databases originally?
No   it would not - 
because the IP trail would have led back to the same computer anyway

ftpuser account was found on which machine? 
Both machines, both of Chelsea Manning's computers
Defense establishes: Computer placed on a domain that has local accounts installed on it would have administrative privileges. 
Also establishes that FTP stands for file transfer protocol.
End of re-examination, end of Patrick Eller's testimony. 

#AssangeCaseNow returning to discussing potential release of medical report to the press. 

"Open justice would not be advanced" by the disclosure of this information, Ed Fitzgerald says, 
we've already had several days of testimony on it

Dialogue b/w representative of Press Association and judge over release of medical records. 
PA speaking for the press at large, would accept a redacted report, wants to understand this key plank of defense case. 
Judge says she (PA) needs to show legal basis to release
No more witness statements today --

 end of proceedings, adjourned until Monday at 10:00am London time. #AssangeCase (Source: https://threader.app/thread/1309417725333327872)

28 Sept 2020
I hope you've had a chance to read along.  So God may know, over and above all, Julian the man, is important to us and we seek His Mercy for him.  
https://threader.app/thread/1310501897552490496

Defense position: Report so far: Julian Assange would face solitary confinement and extreme restrictions if sent to the United States


Day 15 of Julian Assange's extradition hearing and the beginning of the last week of testimony. 
See all of our daily #AssangeCase reports collected here:  https://assangedefense.org/live-blog/ 

Today we expect testimony from Joel Sickler and Yancey Ellis, on the prison conditions Assange would face pre- and post-trial in the United States if he is extradited.
At issue in their testimony is whether extraditing Assange to the U.S. would be "unjust or oppressive" and whether he would be subjected to "torture" or "inhuman or degrading treatment of punishment". 

From our report on Dr. Kopelman's testimony on day 11: (Source: https://threader.app/thread/1310501897552490496)


Up first will be Yancey Ellis, a lawyer in Alexandria, Virginia, the jurisdiction where Assange would be tried and where he would be detained pre-trial if extradited, connected by remote video.
First the judge addresses the issue of releasing Assange's medical reports to the media (Press Association requests them, defense and prosecution both oppose their release), judge says she'll find in favor of withholding them (except for one which was read out in court last week)

Now Yancey Ellis is sworn in. He made two witness statements for the court.
 Ellis was a judge advocate in the the US Marines for 5 years, then was a public defender in Alexandria, now has a private practice there.
Ellis is very familiar with the Alexandria Detention Center, where Assange would go -- has many clients there, has visited many times, has been in the admin-segregation unitsAs a pre-trial defendant, Assange would be detained in the ADC for months or potentially years. Ellis: "I believe it's most likely" Assange would be held in administrative segregation (ad-seg)

Ad-seg in ADC referred to as the 'X Block'. 
Ellis describing prison cells there, maybe 50' sq, shelf bed, metal toilet. 22-23 hours/day in cell. Sometimes the 2nd hour out of the cell would be in the middle of the night so prisoners can't/don't take it.
"The whole point of this unit is to keep you away from other inmates."
Sometimes there's not even other prisoners in the inmate. 
Very difficult to hear through the doors to speak from one cell to another, would have to scream.
Each inmate on X block gets 1 hour at a time out of the cell and can't communicate with other prisoners.
Prosecution evidence includes an affidavit from AUSA Gordon Kromberg alleging that prisoners in ad-seg can communicate to one another through doors and windows. 
Ellis says this sounds like a claim from someone who hasn't been there before and tried it.
Especially if he's talking about 2 inmates in their cell at the same time, "I just don't see how that's possible.
"Effectively no communication with other prisoners. "That's the point of ad-seg." 

Ellis thinks ad-seg on these terms could be called solitary confinement. 
No redress of your conditions in the courts, they defer to the jail.
These are the basic minimum physical conditions of the unit. 
Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) impose additional restrictions on communications on top of that.
Medical care for someone suffering a psychological disability? 
Very limited. 
They have social workers & counselors on staff but the jail doesn't employ a doctor.
They have a contract with a part-time psychiatrist. Some inmates would go many weeks between visits. 
No psycho-therapyThe extent of mental health care is that a social worker or counselor comes around to check on you every once in a while to ensure basic functioning.
End of defense questioning, now James Lewis cross-examining for the prosecution.
Lewis: In your opinion, Kromberg's evidence is "inaccurate or incomplete"?
Yes
How many prisoners at ADC?
I think around it can hold 300 or so, not sure what the number is now
Only room for 4-6 inmates in the X block. 
United States Marshall service utilizes the ADC for [federal] pre-trial defendants

Lewis establishes Ellis is basing his testimony on his own experience. 
"You haven't interviewed the warden?" 
No. 
"Interviewed the correction staff?" 
No"
Interviewed the psychiatrist who attends the jail?" 
Haven't met them"Interviewed the psychologist?"
No
Lewis: So you're giving one side and another side could be given by those individuals?
Ellis: "You're asking if there are 2 sides to every story? 
Sure"

Lewis establishes that there is a visitation system at the jail. 
Asks if the Marshall service inspects that system?
"Do they inspect their policy? 
I'm not sure"
Don't know how often the jail is inspected or who conducts inspections 

During last inspection they found no suicides?

"They do have a good track record when it comes to actually completed suicides I believe" 
Don't know how Assange would be assessed for housing?

I've requested those records before I've never been able to get a hold of them 
Don't know whether he'd be placed in administrative segregation do you?

I can't predict the future but I bet that he would be held in administrative segregation 
Lewis: were you asked to put the phrase "solitary confinement" in your statement by the defense?

No, I was asked to talk about the conditions and they constitute solitary 
References 
Eric Lewis saying he spent 6 hours with an inmate, 
Ellis says that doesn't happen continuously.
Did you exclude interaction with your lawyer in saying this is solitary confinement? 
Yes, 
I don't include that, even if they do see lawyer every other day is in isolation 
Talking about how the ADC deals with suicide risk. 
Several clients have been moved to the medical unit or some sent to state psychiatric hospital. 
Explains ad-seg units in the ADC. 
Says he doesn't know if Assane would be considered a security risk. 
Ellis: going by the jail's track record, they don't put high profile inmates in general population

Lewis: you're aware Mr Assange's case has attracted huge publicity and public support?

Ellis: I would agree with the publicity 
Will he not have a phalanx of lawyers of looking out for him?

I don't know.

If he did wouldn't they be able to make the minutist criticism of every detail of the conditions?

I guess they could, I don't know what it would do 
And wouldn't he be able to get special treatment?

Short vid on Supermax in Colorado.

Final notes from yesterday:

Replying to
@DefenseAssange
Baird thinks it likely Assange would be placed under SAMs before trial, for 'national security' reasons

Inmates she oversaw who were under SAMs spent 23-24 hours in their cells a day and were allowed no communication with other inmates at all.

-----------------
29 Sept 2020  (Source: https://threader.app/thread/1310868173323939840)


T'oday we'll first have remote testimony from Maureen Baird, a former warden at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York. Baird has testified in other extradition cases about the inhumane conditions of US prisons and the inability to keep prisoners safe.




In the Lauri Love case, the U.K.’s High Court overturned the lower court judge’s ruling because the judge relied too heavily on the assurances that the U.S. Bureau of Prisons could provide adequate mental health care. (See more from day 13  https://assangedefense.org/live-blog-entry/day-13-september-24-2020-assangecase/ …)
Baird has been sworn in, Ed Fitzgerald questioning for the defense.
Baird worked in the Bureau of Prisons for more than 20 years.
Has experience with prisoners under Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) [which render inmates essentially incommunicado]
Baird thinks it likely Assange would be placed under SAMs before trial, for 'national security' reasons
Inmates she oversaw who were under SAMs spent 23-24 hours in their cells a day and were allowed no communication with other inmates at all.
All mail incoming or outgoing to anyone under SAMs is screened.
Takes months to receive a piece of mail.
30 mins of phone call time a month, always monitored by an FBI agent,
inmates have to request a call 2 weeks ahead of time
SAMs inmates were held in a special unit in the MCC.
Designed after 9/11, intended for inmates to come from Guantanamo Bay, evolved into a SAMs unit, several alleged terrorists in that unit




Baird testifies that the SAMs regime applied to one prisoner is applied to all -- can't be changed by a warden, very black & white.
If someone's in pre-trial for terrorism and someone's in for a different type of national security case, they're all held the same.
SAMs are imposed by the Attorney General, same regime of conditions from one prison to the next
.If anyone is a SAMs inmate in federal system, would likely go post-trial to ADX Florence in Colorado.
Prosecution's witness Mr Kromberg has said inmates under SAMs can challenge the conditions.
Baird says a warden and the BOP can't assist, and inmate has to exhaust the Administrative Remedy process before suing in court.
Baird has never seen an Administrative Remedy overturn SAMsAuthority for imposing and renewing SAMs lie with the Attorney General




.Baird: SAMs are more isolating than restrictive housing.
No contact with anyone else.
Causes severe depression, anxiety, paranoia, weight loss detrimental to their physical health, it's detrimental to their mental health.




Baird: if under SAMs post-trial, the only place for Assange to go would be ADX Florence in Colorado
Baird agrees with Joel Sickler's assessment that Assange could spend the rest of his life in the H unit at ADX Florence.
Baird agrees with former ADX Florence warden Robert Hood that the prison is "not built for humanity."





Baird challenges Kromberg's assertion that ADX has a step-down program for inmates to reduce restrictions.
Also says any program ADX offered would still be in isolation.
Not just physically - no type of communication with other inmates. No physical contact during family visits.
Baird discusses the Bureau of Prison's suicide prevention program -- relies on inmates self-reporting, so signs are often missed.




End of questioning, now Clair Dobbin cross-examines for the prosecution.
First question: "are you independent?"
Dobbin notes Baird consults a law firm which advocates for defendants, always advocates for lower sentences.
Baird explains she helps more in things like trying to get home confinement.
Dobbin establishes Baird's SAMs experience is limited to pre-trial defendants.
Were any other SAMs inmates imprisoned for espionage?
No
Dobbin challenges Baird assumption that Assange would get SAMs
Baird: it appears to be very much on the table,
Mr Kromberg references SAMs quite a bit in his statement, indicates to me it's likely.

Dobbin stresses that it's speculative, that Kromberg was only saying it's possible
Dobbin arguing there are good reasons for SAMs, an intelligence agency & US attorney office are involved in the decision to prevent the disclosure of national security information.
Dobbin: how can you say the risk of disclosure exists?
Baird: He's being charged with espionage
Dobbin also questioning Baird's claim that all SAMs are applied the same across the board, says they often vary and can be modified.
Baird: I'd say that's very rare, any modification wouldn't change the isolation
Dobbin at length trying to challenge Baird's claim that SAMs can't be challenged/appealed
Dobbin says Baird was in a position to change these conditions at the MCC, like getting correctional officers to talk to isolated inmates under SAMs. 

Baird says that isn't in their job description. 
"That's not something that's done in the prison"Dobbin lengthily trying to establish Baird didn't complain about SAMs when a warden
Baird: if you've been to one of these facilities you'd know that isn't what's done
Dobbin: this all suggests these conditions didn't concern you at the time 

Baird: I honestly didn't believe I had any control over it at all, it was at such a high level.
Baird was involved in placing inmates in specific facilities, including the ADX. 
Dobbin trying to argue there's a multi-layer review process, people are placed there for good reason / exceptional security concerns, that Baird's experience from the 90s isn't sufficiently relevant

Dobbin also trying to argue SAMs inmates can go to other facilities than the ADX. Baird saying some of these referenced could be pre-trial, one of the facilities mentioned is all-female. 
Also says even if at other facilities would be in special segregated housing.
Dobbin again suggesting SAMs can be amended to eventually allow inmates to associate with others. 
Baird says she sees it on paper but doesn't believe it happens in practice, if so extremely rare.
Baird on the idea that you could appeal to be able to speak with other inmates, says the isolation is the whole point of SAMs, if they can speak to other inmates why would they need to be on SAMs?
Dobbin has been trying to establish that inmates on the H unit at the ADX Florence in Colorado have the potential to get off of SAMs. (Spent far more time on this than on the argument that he might not go there.)

Dobbin moves to suicide risk in prison, suggesting the rate is very low. 
"One is too many," Baird says, though she agrees suicide prevention is usually effective.

Ed Fitzgerald re-questioning for the defense.
 Establishes that a judge has referred to conditions for inmates under SAMs as "solitary confinement"
Defense establishes that Assange's conditions could be indefinite. 
Also that suicide risk is higher in pre-trial detention and in solitary confinement
Baird confirms that CIA and the DOJ's office of enforcement operations would be involved in the decision to place Assange under SAMs, and that AG William Barr would have the final decision
End of Maureen Baird's testimony. 

Lunch break now, then we're scheduled to have testimony from US attorney Lindsey A Lewis, and then we'll have discussion of anonymous witnesses. 
Court back in an hour. 
U.S. attorney Lindsay A Lewis is testifying by remote video now.
Lewis is on the board of directors for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. 
Lewis worked on the case of Mostafa Kamel Mostafa, who was extradited to the US and is imprisoned at the ADX Florence.

Mostafa is also known as and is referred to here as Abu Hamza
Lewis testifies that in Hamza's case, the US told European courts that Hamza wouldn't be detained at ADX Florence -- that is where he has been detained for the last 5 years
UK and European high courts relied on US representations that Hamza wouldn't get placed in ADX Florence in deciding to extradite him
Hamza was held in solitary confinement before trial. 

Lewis testifies that "almost certainly" Assange would be subject to Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) before and after trial
Lewis discusses the psychological effects of SAMs + solitary confinement -- references the CCR's report
( https://ccrjustice.org/sams-report )

Lewis says that the Cunningham settlement is lauded because mentally ill patients were moved out of ADX but it hasn't resolved the problem of ADX still detaining severely depressed inmates and others with psychiatric issues requiring therapeutic services
Lewis says if you are in the H unit at ADX and are under SAMs, you get no benefit from the Cunningham settlement
Lewis says the restrictions SAMs imposes on lawyers too means she can only discuss Hamza's case because some of it is in public records 

Lewis confirms SAMs conditions: 
extremely limited communication with the outside world, 
no interaction with other inmates, 
solitary confinement 'for sometimes years at a time'

Kromberg suggested SAMs could be lifted after a year. 
Lewis says this is Hamza's 8th year under SAMs. 
"Extremely difficult" to challenge SAMs, must go through long drawn-out Admin. Remedy process before getting to court. 
Doesn't know of any successful Admin Remedy attempts
Judge's in el-Hage case referred to the first 15 months of his detention as "solitary confinement",
Lewis confirms this is the right term to use
End of questioning, 

now Clair Dobbin cross-examines for the prosecution 
Dobbin is recounting the details of Abu Hamza's terrorism convictions, asking Lewis to confirm each part [presumably to implicitly justify extraditing him and detaining him at ADX Florence]

Then Dobbin recounts his subsequent legal issues, requested new trial, filed appeal - asks, he was able to do all this while in ADX Florence?
Lewis says yes but w/ significant difficulty, says Dobbin is dismissive of these substantial difficulties working with lawyers under SAMs
Lewis says the US assured UK courts that if Hamza was sent to ADX he'd get full medical evaluation and if he couldn't manage daily activities he wouldn't be placed there.

UK courts thought at every stage it was highly unlikely, one said "impossible", that he'd be placed at ADX

Dobbin & Lewis disagreeing about whether the UK court was misled by the US over whether Hamza would be sent to ADX Florence
Long disagreement continued but wasn't resolved, Lewis maintains that the US did not stick to assurances it made to UK courts

Lewis says there is an "extreme shortage" of medical care at the ADX Florence
Dobbin reading Dr Leukenfield's description of therapy services offered at ADX, 
Lewis looks astonished, says if this is her position on mental health treatment at ADX it discounts the rest of her testimony because it's just not the reality, 
SAMs mean no services like this

Dobbin said 'yes but if a prisoner gets taken off of SAMs...', 
Lewis reiterates can't get off SAMs

Dobbin said did Hamza violate SAMs?
Lewis says yes and how that happened is a good example of the absurdity of SAMs
Hamza said on the phone to tell his 1-year-old grandchild 'happy birthday' and was written up for talking to a 3rd party, the 1-year-old wasn't an approved party. 
Lewis says this shows how SAMs tears families apart

Dobbin said the purpose of this SAMs restriction is to stop terrorists from communicating coded messages
End of cross-examination. 
Fitzgerald re-examines for the defense.
Fitzgerald asked about the deference to the executive in the SAMs process, 
judge asks if he is challenging the impartiality of American courts, 
he says no but asking about constraints on courts. 
Lewis reads from case where court deferred to the executive
Fitzgerald says Assange's current UK conditions allow him to see other inmates and pre-COVID regular sessions with a psychologist. 
If under SAMs would he get the same?Lewis: if under SAMs wouldn't get anywhere near what he gets in the UK

End of Lindsay Lewis' testimony. 
Now dealing with issue of defense requesting anonymity of 2 witnesses. 
Prosecution is neutral, says up to the judge but the defense must prove harm would be caused if names released. 
Defense says both parties would know the name.
Judge notes that these 2 witnesses have already been granted anonymity in a Spanish court, so we can deduce they are 2 former employees of UC Global and can testify about the surveillance company spying on Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy

Background: Three protected witnesses accuse Spanish ex-marine of spying on Julian Assange 
https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2020/01/21/inenglish/1579611351_198492.html …

"Former employees of David Morales tell a judge in Spain that his company was making recordings of the cyberactivist and his lawyers for the CIA.


In Spanish case, US has stalled the proceedings: "American prosecutors want to know the judge’s sources before cooperating in an investigation into whether UC Global gave intelligence services sensitive material on the cyber-activist" 
https://english.elpais.com/spanish_news/2020-09-10/us-demands-hinder-spanish-probe-into-alleged-cia-ties-to-security-firm-that-spied-on-assange.html …

Conclusion of testimony from 29 Sept 2020

Defense explains witnesses taking measures to stay safe, fearing retaliation from military-trained David Morales. Guns found at Morales' home with serial numbers missing.

Judge suggests the employment details in testimony already make it easy for Morales to know who they are 


Defense lawyer Mark Summers discussing Morales' reference to his "American friends", plans to kidnap or poison Assange. 


More US background: '"The American friends": New court files expose Sheldon Adelson’s security team in US spy operation against Julian Assange'
(Sheldon Adelson has his own thread)


Summers explaining that the aim of the Spanish proceedings is to determine chain of command, who Morales was taking direction from (who the 'American friends' are). 

Summers: the duty of this court is to reduce the risk to witnesses such as these even if we can't remove it entirely. Morales may well know who they are but the fact that he alone may know could be what is currently protecting them. As it stands it is working. 

Judge says no need to continue, "I am with you" on need to anonymize. Says the fact that Spanish court already granted anonymity means UK court will respect their decision 

Now that judge has agreed to anonymity, the procedure is for defense to pass the statements privately to the prosecution and US confirms their identity and then they can be read. Hopes it won't take more than 24 hours. 

Defense and prosecution have agreed on several witness statements, including those of Noam Chomsky, Stefania Mauritzi, Cockburn, several others. Leaves just Andy Worthington and Jameel Jaffer to potentially be called live, and 2 other witnesses still need to be agreed 

Statements will be read in court tomorrow morning and Andy Worthington will be called live tomorrow afternoon. Jaffer was scheduled to testify Friday but may be able to be agreed to or may testify Thurs. 
Prosecution can't receive instruction from the US government on the 2 anonymous witnesses because they don't yet know who they are, prosecution intends to argue their evidence is irrelevant 

Adjourned for today, back tomorrow at 10:00am London time

30 Sept 2020   Day 17:

Julian Assange's resumed extradition hearing.
We expect multiple witness statements will be read aloud this morning, and then Guantanamo Bay prison expert @GuantanamoAndy will be called in the afternoon session. 
Defense is reading from/summarizing a witness statement from war reporter Patrick Cockburn. 
He was in Kabul when the war logs were released and he says they confirmed civilian casualties he and other journalists suspected.
Cockburn's statement includes the importance of the war logs and Collateral Murder video to prove these incidents in the face of official denial.
As background, read Patrick Cockburn 'Julian Assange in Limbo' 
https://lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v42/n12/patrick-cockburn/julian-assange-in-limbo … 



Cockburn in June 2020: The WikiLeaks cables collectively "convey [the war's] reality far better than even the most well-informed journalistic accounts" 

Cockburn's witness statement calls WikiLeaks releases a great victory for freedom of expression in the face of government secrecy.

Now defense will read from a statement of a Ian Cobain, investigative journalist who was at The Guardian in 2010. 
His focus had been on uncovering British collusion with US rendition / mistreatment of detainees in the wars following 9/11
Cobain talks about the near-impossibility of uncovering these crimes -- it's always known that those with knowledge of them face fear of reprisal if they disclose. 

Cobain talking about how difficult it was to report on rendition before WikiLeaks documents were released
Cobain refers to danger to journalists for reporting on these abuses: 
2005 
plan to attack Al Jazeera office, 
threats of prosecution,
threats in N. Ireland.
Media scrutiny is more important than ever, & leaks & whistleblowing remain a vital means for state crimes to be exposed.
Now reading from a statement from @SMaurizi, an Italian journalist with a background in mathematics who became interested in WikiLeaks' use of encryption.
2009 releases on Naples. 

Assange called WikiLeaks scientific journalism
Maurizi was working with L'espresso at the time of Collateral Murder. 
Was given access to the Afghan War Logs and was able to work on the documents. Then joined a new agreement on the State Dept. cables in Jan 2011 to provide local expertise on Italian documents 

Maurizi's statement deals with the cables' public interest value. 
Talks about Sy Hersh's release of Abu Ghraib, was able to be dismissed ultimately because they could be framed as a few bad apples.
Talking about Italy prosecuting CIA/other US officials for extraordinary rendition. 
"Had it not been for the US diplomatic cables" these prosecutions would have been impossible.
Maurizi's statement also covers Assange/WikiLeaks' redaction of the State Dept cables. 
"I worked with WikiLeaks on appropriate redactions." 
The objective was to document state crimes, educate the public, and change government policy.
When names were identified, the local media partner would weigh in and redact with 12 X's so that even the number of characters in a name couldn't be used to identify someone.
Maurizi talks about lengths gone to to keep the documents protected/encrypted, far more strict than any other journalists she'd worked with. 
"Unprecedented", agrees with John Goetz calling it the "most careful" he'd seen. 
Even reporting on Italian mafia never reached these levels
Maurizi is surprised at how much Kromberg relies on David Leigh's book, says all other journalists knew not to share passwords (hers was different than his) and he appears not to have understood the agreement.
On the 2011 release of unredacted cables, Maurizi says Wikileaks could not have done something to prevent it and Assange himself was acutely concern with the impending release

Maurizi was present at Ellingham Hall when Assange called the State Department to warn them about the impending release of unredacted cables.
Defense will now read from a witness statement from Robert Boyle, US attorney, has sought to educate the public on use & misuse of grand juries
Boyle talks about Chelsea Manning's allocution statement and her belief that the release of these documents could educate the public and possibly change the course of the war

(Full text of Manning's statement at her court-martial:  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/01/bradley-manning-wikileaks-statement-full-text …)

"Although I stopped sending documents to WLO, no one associated with the WLO pressured me into giving more information. 
The decisions that I made to send documents and information to the WLO and the website were my own decisions, and I take full responsibility for my actions.
"Boyle's statement talks about grand juries, known widely as little more than a rubber stamp, indicting or failing to indict as the prosecutor wants it to

Boyle talking about Manning refusing to testify in a grand jury (against WikiLeaks), believed it punishment for her releasing docs to WikiLeaks, was imprisoned in Alexandria and held in solitary confinement.
Boyle relays Manning: "The government is still intent on punishing me" despite imprisonment and commutation 
Now defense reading a statement from Bridget Prince, Executive Director of One World Research 
( https://oneworldresearch.com/what-we-do )
Prince's statement discusses the jury pool that would be called in Assange's case, if extradited, in the Eastern District of Virginia -- large concentration of government agencies
Defense now moves on to the anonymous witnesses from the Embassy spying case. 

From yesterday's thread for background: 

[size=15][size=15]Assange Defense
@DefenseAssange[/size]
Sep 29, 2020
Replying to @DefenseAssange
Judge notes that these 2 witnesses have already been granted anonymity in a Spanish court, so we can deduce they are 2 former employees of UC Global and can testify about the surveillance company spying on Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy[/size]

[size=15][size=15]Assange Defense @DefenseAssange[/size]
[/size]
Background: Three protected witnesses accuse Spanish ex-marine of spying on Julian Assange
https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2020/01/21/inenglish/1579611351_198492.html
---------------------------------
Witness 1 explaining what UC Global does, how it obtained a "flashy contract" with Las Vegas Sands, owned by Sheldon Adelson whose financial ties to Trump are well-knownUC Global director David Morales, after securing the contract, said the spying company would now be "playing in the big leagues" and had "moved over to the dark side"Witness 1 recounting the spying operation on Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Morales said he was providing reports to a US intelligence agency, particular zeal in recording Assange's conversations with his lawyersWitness 2 talking about spying operation as well, intention was to provide Embassy recordings to the US in real time. Witness refused because it was "manifestly illegal". 

Microphone was installed on the fire extinguisher. 
Especially wanted to record conversations with lawyers
Witness 2: Morales asked me to take a diaper from a baby in the Embassy to determine if Assange was the father. 
US was particularly interested
According to Morales, Americans had asked him to personally control and monitor everything surrounding a visit from a California politician to the Embassy
Assange lawyer Baltasar Garzon was followed, spied on, men in balaclavas entered his office
Fitzgerald will now read from statement of Noam Chomsky
Chomsky's statement will deal with whether the prosecution is political and that Assange is being prosecuted for his political opinions

Chomsky: Assange's words and actions should be understood in relation to the priorities of government. 
His actions exposed power to sunlight
Chomsky's statement provides an academic recounting of the role of information in the relationship between government and the governed -- all goes to whether this extradition is for a political offense

Recess now until 2:00pm London time for the parties to agree to more statements. 
Court back in session.
 Mark Summers for the defense updating on witness statements, nearing agreement on the statement of Jameel Jaffer
Defense requests a further half hour break to continue working on witness statement agreements. Court adjourned until 2:30pm London time.
Back in session.
 Defense & prosecution agreed on statements from Andy Worthington and Jameel Jaffer which can now be read from.
Mark Summers is now summarizing Worthington's statement, which deals with the Guantanamo Detainee Assessment Briefs (DABs)
Worthington: the GTMO revelations were of extremely high importance, still find them useful & important in 2020. 
Details the supposed intelligence used to justify the detainees' imprisonment. 
The majority of cases were based on testimony from fellow detainees who'd been tortured

See Worthington's reporting from 2011:
WikiLeaks Reveals Secret Guantánamo Files, Exposes Detention Policy as a Construct of Lies

http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2011/04/25/wikileaks-reveals-secret-guantanamo-files-exposes-detention-policy-as-a-construct-of-lies/ …
I'll post excerpts from Worthington's statement shortly. 
Next Summers will read from Jameel Jaffer's statement. 
Dobbin for the prosecution is telling the judge this overlaps with Shenkman's testimony, and similarly he would've been asked about case law he cites
Jameel Jaffer is the director of the @knightcolumbia First Amendment Institute.
Last year @JameelJaffer joined @jeremyscahill's podcast: 
'Prosecuting Julian Assange for Espionage is a Coup Attempt Against the First Amendment' 

https://theintercept.com/2019/05/29/prosecuting-julian-assange-for-espionage-is-a-coup-attempt-against-the-first-amendment/ …
Jaffer also joined Courage's panel at the National Press Club: The Prosecution of Julian Assange and Its Impact on the Freedom of the Press 
https://defend.wikileaks.org/2020/02/01/the-prosecution-of-julian-assange-its-impact-on-the-freedom-of-the-press/ …
Done with Jaffer's statement - I'll share excerpts in my report. 

Adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10:00am London time for potentially just one more statement.

E posted this excellent 'tell it like it is' summary of why this case against Julian really exists.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/surreal-us-case-against-assange

Day 18: Julian Assange's resumed extradition hearing. Expecting final witness statements today

Defense is explaining to the judge that the parties need a little more time to agree to 2 witnesses' statements, then give an update on the Spanish case (Embassy spying), then make a final submission on the additions to the latest indictment.

Recess and discussions continued till 2pm London time, followed by another 40 minute recess.
-------
Back again. Defense can now read a witness statement from Professor Michael Tigar

Tigar gives an overview of whistleblowing and journalism preventing injustice, "essential to achieving important social reforms", gives examples including Woodward & Bernstein reporting on the Nixon admin, Seymour Hersh

Tigar notes that the prosecution's opening included the word "journalistic" whereas the indictment calls WikiLeaks an "intelligence service for the people" and doesn't use the term "journalism"

Tigar talks about how common/routine it is for journalists to work with sources, soliciting information

Tigar talks about the importance of journalism in documenting war crimes. Then discusses overclassification — US law doesn’t allow challenging classification status. Recounts Ellsberg’s prosecution which was dismissed

Several Gareth Peirce statements, first one lays out the history of Assange securing Ecuadorian asylum because he feared US extradition, recaps the Embassy spying case, Assange’s legally privileged property seized from Embassy

Background: Ecuador to hand over Assange's entire legal defense to the United States https://wikileaks.org/Ecuador-to-hand-over.html…

Peirce statement discusses her own legal meetings with Assange in the Embassy being spied on, "chilling effect" on preparing for these proceedings

A second statement from Bridget Prince includes the full transcript of Assange's 2010 speech at the Frontline Club, which the prosecution quoted from in cross-examination. This would give proper context. Prosecution objects to the statement being submitted

The defense also wants to include new comments from US Attorney General William Barr which were made during these proceedings (Sept 16th)

The Frontline Club appearance is from the 2010 Q&A Assange conducted by video -- the prosecution tried to say that Assange's answer contradicted testimony about his mental/psychiatric health

Judge says the witness (Dr Deeley) didn't agree that the video contradicted the diagnosis, so it won't be accepted.

Judge also says the Barr speech (of Sept 16th) doesn't reference Assange by name, it's not a significant enough development to include here


In that speech, Washington Post on the William Barr speech: "The attorney general said it was he, not career officials, who has the ultimate authority to decide how cases should be handled..."

"...and he derided less-experienced, less-senior bureaucrats who current and former prosecutors have long insisted should be left to handle their cases free from interference from political appointees."


Back from recess. Difficult to follow exchange (because we don't have statements under discussion) in which a defense submission ultimately wasn't accepted. Now Mark Summers speaking about another Gareth Peirce statement (there are 5 in total).

The statement includes defense relaying that it has been insufficiently able to present its arguments about 'abuse of process' due to the very late second superseding indictment


Judge's ruling will come on January 4, 2021, 10:00am London time. Done with the evidence phase of the hearing. Defense gets 4 weeks to submit closing arguments, then the prosecution gets 2 weeks to submit in response. Julian will remain in custody until the ruling. 
End of these proceedings. #AssangeCase


Julian will have an obligatory admin court appearance by video on Oct 29th (won't be substantive, he just has to appear in court every 28 days by law). 

2 minute Free Assange video at the twitter link that Dove found and sent me. Worth seeing. Wish I could find a way to make twitter video play on this forum. It just ain’t happenin’ I guess. Go to twit link to see.
 
https://twitter.com/starbabie1111/status/1296272715771453440
 
 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/1175

A bill introduced by Tulsi Gabbard on October 2, 2020

H.Res.1175 - Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that newsgathering activities are protected under the First Amendment, and that the United States should drop all charges against and attempts to extradite Julian Assange.

Some endure so much for our liberties:

Christine Assange
@MrsC_Assange


Many thanks to everybody fighting to protect & free my son, journalist Julian #Assange

You are drawing an historical line in the sand for:
* Free Speech
* Free Press
* Govt /corp accountability
* Fair legal process
* Sovereignty
* Humane treatnent
* Human decency
* Freedom

https://consortiumnews.com/2020/10/26/the-revelations-of-wikileaks-no-9-opening-the-cias-vault/

More backstory to the sabotage against Julian as wikileaks publishes vault 7.

One of the cia tricks, called MARBLE, was implanting false docs into any timeline to twist the narrative.

Running out of time for a Christmas pardon for Julian:

Contact the White House | The White House
https://whitehouse.gov/contact/
White House 1-202-456-1414
William Levi (DOJ CofS) 1-202-514-3892
DoJ Natl Sec Div 1-202-514-1057
WH Liaison& Coun to AG 1-202-514-9665
Capital Switchboard for Senators 1-202-224-3121
#FreeAssangeNOW

.
New from E.  "The 11th Hour"