[net-gold] Secrecy News -- 08/01/11
- From: "David P. Dillard" <jwne@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Net-Gold -- Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Net-Gold <Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K-12ADMINLIFE <K12ADMIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K12AdminLIFE <K12AdminLIFE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, MediaMentor <mediamentor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Digital Divide Diversity MLS <mls-digitaldivide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Platinum <net-platinum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sean Grigsby <myarchives1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <NetGold_general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple Gold Discussion Group <TEMPLE-GOLD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple University Net-Gold Archive <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:41:38 -0400 (EDT)
.
.
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:26:10 -0400
From: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@xxxxxxx>
To: Steven Aftergood <saftergood@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Secrecy News -- 08/01/11
.
.
SECRECY NEWS
.
.
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2011, Issue No. 73
August 1, 2011
.
.
Secrecy News Blog:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/
.
.
** REPORTER RISEN WILL NOT HAVE TO IDENTIFY SOURCE IN LEAK TRIAL
** MAIL FRAUD STATUTE SWEEPS BROADLY
** WIRELESS EVOLUTION AND CHALLENGES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
.
.
REPORTER RISEN WILL NOT HAVE TO IDENTIFY SOURCE IN LEAK TRIAL
.
.
A judge ruled on Friday that New York Times reporter James Risen will not
have to testify about the identity of a source in the upcoming trial of
former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling, who is accused of leaking classified
information to Risen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/30/us/politics/30judge.html
The July 29 court order said that Risen must testify only about certain
non-privileged information. Specifically, Mr. Risen was directed to appear
at trial in order to confirm: "(1) that Risen wrote a particular newspaper
article or chapter of a book; (2) that a particular newspaper article or
book chapter that Risen wrote is accurate; (3) that statements referred to
in Risen's newspaper article or book chapter as being made by an unnamed
source were in fact made to Risen by an unnamed source; and (4) that
statements referred to in Risen's newspaper article or book chapter as being
made by an identified source were in fact made by that identified source."
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling/072911-order.pdf
The court order by Judge Leonie M. Brinkema was framed as a "partial grant"
of the government's motion to subpoena Mr. Risen. But it was actually a
defeat for the prosecution and an unambiguous victory for Mr. Risen. This
is clear from the fact that the court's very language describing the
required scope of Mr. Risen's testimony was taken -- word for word -- from
the June 21 motion by Risen's attorneys to quash the subpoena, in which they
set forth the limits of his willingness to testify (pp. 45-46).
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling/062111-motion115.pdf
Beyond the four enumerated categories Risen voluntarily agreed to discuss,
"I cannot testify as to the Government's other questions," Mr. Risen wrote
in his own affidavit (paragraph 60).
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/sterling/062111-risen115.pdf
"To answer the Government's other questions would violate my agreement to
maintain in confidence not just the name(s) of my source(s), but information
that would tend to reveal the identity/ies of my source(s). If I provide the
testimony that has been requested of me, including the 'what,' 'how,'
'when,' and 'where' of acquiring each piece of confidential information,
doing so will reveal my confidential source(s), regardless of whether I
directly provide any name(s)," Mr. Risen wrote. "Accordingly, I cannot
comply with the subpoena."
Now the court said that he will not have to.
A memorandum opinion explaining the court order is still undergoing
declassification review.
MAIL FRAUD STATUTE SWEEPS BROADLY
One of the peculiar features of the prosecution of suspected leaker Jeffrey
Sterling is that he is charged with a seemingly unlikely count of "mail
fraud."
The government's contention (in Count Eight of the indictment) is that by
leaking information to author James Risen, whose books containing that
information were later sent by mail to bookstores, Mr. Sterling engaged in
mail fraud.
Mail fraud is no doubt a bad thing to do. But to a surprising extent the
opposite is also true. The law is so broadly written that many bad things
that a person may do could turn out to be mail fraud.
"The mail and wire fraud statutes essentially outlaw dishonesty," according
to a new survey of the subject prepared by the Congressional Research
Service which describes the statutes' astonishing breadth. (The CRS report
does not address the Sterling case.)
"A defendant need not personally have mailed or wired a communication," the
CRS report said; "it is enough that he 'caused' a mailing or transmission of
a wire communication in the sense that the mailing or transmission was the
reasonable foreseeable consequence of his intended scheme."
See "Mail and Wire Fraud: A Brief Overview of Federal Criminal Law," July
21, 2011:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41930.pdf
An abridged version of the same report is here:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41931.pdf
"The mail fraud statute was first enacted in the late nineteenth century in
order to prevent city slickers from using the mail to cheat guileless
country folks," the CRS report really says.
WIRELESS EVOLUTION AND CHALLENGES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
"The challenges facing LE [law enforcement] increase with the introduction
of each new wireless device," according to a newly disclosed FBI publication
which traces the development of wireless communications.
The publication, entitled "Wireless Evolution," was prepared by the FBI's
Operational Technology Division and published in Emerging Technologies
Research Bulletin in March 2011. A copy was obtained by the Federation of
American Scientists under the Freedom of Information Act.
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/wireless.pdf
Originally marked "Law Enforcement Sensitive," it was redacted for release
under FOIA and much of the discussion of the implications of new
technologies for law enforcement was withheld. But the remainder provides a
remarkably comprehensive (though jargon intensive) account of new
communications technologies of interest to law enforcement.
A reader who saw the original, unredacted report said "It does as good a job
as I have seen of laying out, in great detail, the evolution of mobile
communications from hardware, application, and network perspectives as might
be of implication to investigations and analysis. It also offers good
projections on future trends."
Portions of the report were described in Wired Threat Level on July 28.
A new report from the Congressional Research Service addresses related law
enforcement policy issues.
"The operational realities of 21st century crime and policing present
significant challenges to U.S. policy makers," the report said. "[P]olicies
directed toward countering crime in one reality will impact crime and law
enforcement countermeasures in other realities."
See "The Interplay of Borders, Turf, Cyberspace, and Jurisdiction: Issues
Confronting U.S. Law Enforcement," July 19, 2011:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41927.pdf
Congress has instructed CRS not to make its publications directly available
to the public. A copy of the new report was obtained by Secrecy News.
.
.
.
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation
of American Scientists.
The Secrecy News Blog is at:
http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/
To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, go to:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/subscribe.html
To UNSUBSCRIBE, go to
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/unsubscribe.html
OR email your request to saftergood@xxxxxxx
Secrecy News is archived at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html
Support the FAS Project on Government Secrecy with a donation:
http://www.fas.org/member/donate_today.html
.
.
.
_______________________
.
.
.
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email: saftergood@xxxxxxx
voice: (202) 454-4691
twitter: @saftergood
.
.
Other related posts:
- » [net-gold] Secrecy News -- 08/01/11 - David P. Dillard
