FBI Seized Legally Privileged Materials From Julian Assange After Arrest In
Ecuador Embassy
"One record of [Assanges] entire archive was effectively purloined, and
without it, attorney Gareth Peirce mentioned it has made putting together a
defense in his extradition case more difficult.
Kevin Gosztola
Oct 3
Photo by groovysoup on Flickr.
The FBI in the United Kingdom enlisted the Ecuador governments help in
seizing legally privileged materials from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
after he was arrested and expelled from the Ecuador embassy in London on
April 11, 2019.
According to Gareth Peirce, one of Assanges attorneys, that day she made
immediate contact with the embassy in regard to legally privileged material,
an issue of huge concern. Assange wanted the materialin addition to
confidential medical data"identified and released to his lawyers.
Repeated requests by telephone, email and recorded delivery mail were
entirely ignored by the embassy, and in testimony submitted during the
final day of evidence in Assanges extradition trial, the embassy has never
responded.
One record of [Assanges] entire archive was effectively purloined, and
without it, Peirce mentioned it has made putting together a defense in his
extradition case more difficult because the initial allegations relate to
communications, meetings, and events from 2010 and 2011.
Proceedings in the evidentiary portion of Assanges extradition trial
concluded on October 1, and Judge Vanessa Baraitser announced she would rule
on the request from the United States government on January 4, 2021.
Before the last day wrapped, multiple statements from Peirce related to
abuses of process in the case were entered into the record. They included
details related to the espionage operation the Spanish security company UC
Global carried out against Assange with the support of U.S. intelligence.
Peirces law firm Birnberg, Pierce & Partners asked the Australian Consulate
in London for intervention because Assange is an Australian citizen. The
Metropolitan Police in the United Kingdom claimed they played no role in the
seizure or retention of any legally privileged materials.
On May 20, 2019, the Australian Consulate received a request for Assanges
property to be transferred to Ecuador. The firm was invited to collect any
remaining possessions that were not seized.
When Assanges property was collected shortly after, Peirce stated, All
legally privileged material was missing save for two volumes of Supreme
Court documents and a number of pages of loose correspondence.
Gordon Kromberg, assistant United States attorney for the Eastern District
of Virginia, where Assange was indicted, stated that a taint team would
excise material so it was not used in any trial in the United States.
However, Peirce stated, no suggestions have been made for the return of
that material by the DOJ in these proceedings, even though attention has
been drawn to the existence of recordings of meetings that could play an
evidential part in the extradition hearing. Nor has any reassurance been
given that the ongoing representation of Mr. Assange has not been, is not
being, and will not be the subject of unlawful intrusion by U.S. agencies.
Exceptionally High Level Of Anxiety And Fear Has Prevailed
Peirce was spied upon when she attended legal meetings that occurred on
December 6 and 19 in 2017 and January 14, 2018.
I was wholly unaware of that surveillance, although I was aware that Mr.
Assange maintained suspicions throughout that period, fearing intrusion,
Peirce declared. I do not comment here upon my own reactions to the
discovery, but comment only generally that there has prevailed as a
consequence an exceptionally high level of anxiety and fear that legal
interviews with Mr. Assange are continuing to be monitored.
This fear, triggered by the clear evidence that had been taking place over
a number of years has had a chilling effect upon preparation for these
extradition proceedings.
Assange was charged by the U.S. Justice Department with 17 counts of
violating the Espionage Act and one count of conspiracy to commit a computer
intrusion that, as alleged in the indictment, is written like an Espionage
Act offense.
The charges criminalize the act of merely receiving classified information,
as well as the publication of state secrets from the U.S. government. It
targets common practices in newsgathering, which is why the case is widely
opposed by press freedom organizations throughout the world.
In July 2012, weeks after entering the Ecuador embassy to request asylum,
Spanish lawyer Baltasar Garzón was appointed by Assange to coordinate legal
advice. His legal team included lawyers in Ecuador, Spain, the United
Kingdom, Sweden, the USA, Australia and a number of other European
countries, Peirce recalled
Assange met on numerous occasions during the years that followed whilst he
remained in the embassy until his arrest on April 11, 2019, with lawyers and
other visitors including his doctors, his health requiring treatment
throughout the period in which he was in the embassy.
UC Global handled security for the embassy from 2015 to mid-2018, and an
email from September 29, 2017, shows UC Global director David Morales
instructed employees to create and update profiles on at least three of
Assanges lawyerstheir relationship with the guest (Assange), telephone
numbers, emails, number of visits, and any personal data.
All of them appear in the lists and entry records, you have to do your best
to know their data, Morales wrote.
As Peirce described, Morales requested extreme caution with the
transmitted information because Senain, which is Ecuadorian intelligence,
was investigating the company. He asked his employees to map out the
internal structure of the embassy and collect photos of embassy employees.
He wanted profiles that included their functions or activities in the
headquarters as well.
Witness #1, a former UC Global employee, told the court in submitted
testimony that Morales showed at times a real obsession in relation to
monitoring and recording the lawyers who met with the guest (Julian
Assange) because our American friends were requesting it.
UC Global established a security protocol that obliged all visitors
including lawyers to leave personal ID documents as well as telephones and
electronic devices with belongings at the entry desk, Peirce described.
Thus, operators could ensure that they could scan and photocopy the
individuals personal documentation, search their belongings, photograph the
contents, and potentially intrude and obtain the potential for future
intrusion into the electronic devices.
Subsequently, detailed reports were made of those who visited Mr Assange,
sent to the companys headquarters in the form of reports. A web portal was
established that could be accessed remotely from May 2017.
Morales insisted upon exhaustive detailed profiles of all visitors as well
as embassy staff that could be accessed remotely from the United States,
Peirce noted.
Details of telephones were photographed, as well as photographs of messages
within telephones whilst their owners were attending meetings.
On two occasions, Peirce highlighted, visiting doctors observed that
after they had left the Embassy briefly and then returned notes had been
taken into the office of the security workers. The personal details of Mr.
Assanges visiting [doctor] were specifically requested and collected
including the details from his telephone.
Separately surveillance was conducted on senior Ecuadorian diplomats when
they visited the embassy as well as the head of Ecuadorian intelligence.
