8/3/2019 Wiretap.court.notes
1/2
Jonathan Paul, Daniel McGowan, Nathan Block and Joyanna Zacher
were all present August 22, 2006
federal court in Eugene to present arguments in support of
several motions.
At issue were the following:
Defenses motion for the release of surveillance discovery,
including NSA wiretaps and FISA
surveillance of the activist community in Eugene and elsewhere
for the past decade or more. - Change of
the trial date.
The unsealing of transcripts and plea agreements of cooperating
defendants - The unsealing of
transcripts for Jeff Hoggs grumbles hearing.
The repeal of a protective order placed on discovery of
cooperating defendants statements-
The removal of Daniel McGowans electronic monitoring device
Most of the issues remain unresolved after todays hearing.Judge
Ann Aiken presided over todays
hearing, following the recusal of Magistrate Judge Thomas Coffin
due to a conflict of interest relating to
a family member who is employed at the law firm of one of the
defense attorneys.
Stephen Peiffer of the US Attorneys office addressed the NSA
wiretap issue, saying that the US
Attorneys office doesnt have clearance to present that
discovery. He said he had contacted an attorney
in the Counterterrorism Division, and that it would take up to
three weeks for them to respond to the
brief. McGowans attorney, Amanda Lee, argued that the discovery
request was filed in March, and
specifically requested the NSA discovery. The US Attorney didnt
file a response to that brief until earlythis month (August). Lee
added that it was the US Attorneys responsibility to have a person
from the
NSA come to court and make representations. She said that the
FISA court and FBI surveillance
discovery had not been handed over, either. Peiffer responded by
saying that the US Attys office didnt
have clearance for dealing with FISA materials, either. He said
that witness impeachment discovery
(criminal and drug treatment records) were forthcoming, as well
as Eugene Police Department
recordings and videotapes. Judge Aiken told them to work out
what issues remain unresolved and let her
know in a few weeks. The government has sidestepped these
discovery issues since the request was filed
in March.
Amanda Lee then addressed the issue of unsealing the plea
agreements of the cooperating defendants.
She argued that the plea agreements are unavailable to the
public, that the government has made
numerous public statements about the plea agreements,
influencing the jury pool, and that the sealing of
the pleas are a disservice to the remaining defendants, the
public, and the press. She said that not even
the defense attorneys had seen the plea agreements. Judge Aiken
said she would unseal the transcripts
from the hearings, as well as the informations (the details of
what the defendants are pleading to), but
would redact the paragraphs that outline the nature of the
agreements made with the
government. Rick Fredericks, Stan Meyerhoffs attorney,
complained that his client had been labeled a
snitch, his picture posted on Indymedia with comments such as
Snitches get stitches, and that
someone had handed over tapes to Rolling Stone. Darren Thurstons
lawyer, Dan Feiner, echoed the
same sentiments. He said, There has been an outing, a
blacklisting of cooperating defendants
intended to compromise their safety. The US Attorney said that
all the cooperating defendants were
very concerned about the release of their plea agreements and
the possibility of anyone other thandefendants and their attorneys
viewing the discovery which contains the statements of the
cooperating
defendants. (Perhaps their concern stems more from worrying
about damage to their reputations than
"safety issues", which are exaggerrated.) Judge Aiken said she
would err on the side of caution and
release all but the redacted paragraphs from the plea hearings,
and that Daniel would have to hire an
attorney to view the discovery which contains the statements of
the cooperating defendants.
Judge Aiken then ruled to unseal the transcript from Jeff Hoggs
grumbles hearing, which the
government said it had not requested.
Jeff Robinson then asked the judge to review the conditions of
Daniels release, specifically
electronic monitoring. He said that pretrial services in Eugene
and in New York had no objections. The
