Judge Looking Into Alleged Destruction Of Exculpatory Evidence By Pentagon In Thomas Drake Prosecution

from the but,-but-he-broke-the-rules!-[breaks-doc-destruction-rules] dept

Tue, Jun 23rd 2015 2:47pm — Tim Cushing

More government malfeasance is being alleged in the all-over-but-the-Genius-Bar-employment prosecution of whistleblower Thomas Drake. Documents directly related to his whistleblowing efforts -- ones that would possibly have helped him fight the administration's efforts to punish him for supposedly-protected activities -- were allegedly destroyed by the Department of Defense.

Two government watchdog agencies are investigating whether the Pentagon inspector general destroyed evidence improperly during the high-profile leak investigation of former National Security Agency senior official Thomas Drake.

“DOD OIG’s handling of documents . . . is within the scope of an ongoing inquiry by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC),” Raymond Hulser, the chief of the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, wrote to U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephanie Gallagher in a letter dated June 11. “In the event that OSC finds evidence of criminal conduct during the course of its work, it will refer that evidence to the Department of Justice for appropriate action.”

Succinctly put, the "proper channels" for whistleblowing were used by Thomas Drake, who was prosecuted under the Espionage Act. The missing files are related to his attempt to utilize those proper channels. Obviously, following procedures can't really be considered "espionage." The government's case against Drake fell apart, resulting in Drake pleading guilty to a single "unauthorized computer use" charge. But the case went on long enough that it drained Drake's personal savings and his revoked security clearance pretty much barred him from further government employment, leading to his current position as an employee of an Apple store.

The government’s handling of documents first became an issue during the evidence-gathering stage of Drake’s prosecution, when his criminal defense lawyers sought records related to his whistleblower cooperation with the Pentagon inspector general’s office in order to defend him.

At the time, the Justice Department told the judge that most of the “hard copy documents” related to the Pentagon inspector general’s office audit that Drake had cooperated with couldn’t be provided to the defense because they’d been destroyed “pursuant to a standard document destruction policy.”

Drake’s current lawyers, who didn’t represent him in the criminal case, told the court in a letter in April that they learned otherwise while representing Drake in his recent whistleblower claim against the NSA.

Drake’s lawyers wrote that the Pentagon inspector general’s office destroyed the documents “outside of normal policy and to impede . . . the criminal case.”

Even if these documents do somehow materialize, there's not much they can do other than vindicate Drake's actions. It won't rebuild his personal finances or return him to his former government position. In fact, even if evidence of wrongdoing is uncovered, it's likely to result in no meaningful actions. The court itself can't do much more than refer the findings to the Department of Justice, which has already noted that it is looking into these allegations. But to what end? Proof of deliberate destruction of evidence is the sort thing routinely wrist-slapped by the DOJ and the administration, both of which will probably allow the DOD to investigate itself and offer various plans to prevent future malfeasance, should it somehow manage not to clear itself of any wrongdoing.

If evidence of document destruction comes to light, the only practical purpose it will serve is to further illustrate how rigged the "justice" card game is -- what with prosecutors playing with incomplete, marked decks provided to them by "victims" of government whistleblowing.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: defense department, evidence, nsa, thomas drake

14 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 3:19pm

he hasn't a hope! if the government or any of it's departments cant get someone for actually doing anything wrong, the saving evidence will be destroyed (unless it helps the governments case, of course) or/and manufactured to make that someone guilty even if the charges are dismissed except for the most minor of infractions possible. the government never loses! any fabrication that is needed,is fabricated, just as any planting of evidence needed, is planted!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 3:28pm

If evidence of destruction is found, it could potentially be used to vindicate Snowden's actions as well. He can then say, "Look at what would have happened to me if I did follow proper procedure."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- AnonyBabs, 24 Jun 2015 @ 12:00pm
  
  Re:
  Nope. Wouldn't be admissable in an espionage trial, which is what he's been promised should he return to the US.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Coyne Tibbets (profile), 23 Jun 2015 @ 4:16pm

Punishment a bit lower than indicated
I think one of the passages needs the corrections I have indicated, because it incorrectly indicates appropriate punishment:

Proof of deliberate destruction of evidence [needed by the defense] is the sort thing routinely [punished by the tickling feather] by the DOJ and the administration, both of which will probably allow the DOD to investigate itself and offer various plans to prevent future malfeasance, should it somehow manage not to clear itself of any wrongdoing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 10:46pm
  
  Re: Punishment a bit lower than indicated
  Which is the wrong way to go. DRake should actually have a slam-dunk case for harrassment in the workplace, as well as a criminalk case involving the clowns at the top who decided that destroying evidence was a good idea.
  
  This is what happens when people get to ignore the rule of law in government.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 4:33pm

bow down to criminal overlords as they screw you over daily and most people just kneel and accept it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 5:26pm

But, but, but, Sarbanes-Oxley!

"One of the stipulations of Sarbanes-Oxley is the preservation of evidence. Failing to do so, or purposefully destroying records, can result in felony criminal charges. This, unfortunately, doesn't even have to be willful destruction. The law forbids the destruction of evidence, regardless of personal knowledge of ongoing investigations, or even if no investigation has even commenced."

Nah.....will never happen!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 6:45pm

It appears I have to vote not guilty on all juries I sit on. With this level of corruption, how can any crime be proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 7:29pm
  
  Re:
  Nice to see someone that might become a fully informed juror if you are not one already.
  
  Do not ever DARE to tell the court that you intend to be a juror with integrity. Don't lie doing it either, just omit telling them anything they don't ask.
  
  Courts just HATE HATE HATE jurors with integrity and fully informed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Jun 2015 @ 7:23pm

One can only hope the Canadian government will offer him asylum, as he is obviously no longer safe stateside. Makes me wonder what two jokers the Republicrats and the Demicans will be offering in their next puppet show.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 24 Jun 2015 @ 12:26am

It is disgusting to see how far the system is willing to go to protect itself. Ignoring the supposed rule of law that we are all supposed to be bound by, unless you work for the system then you can do whatever you want with no concern.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 8:28am
  
  Re:
  funny how people still seem to think they can change corrupt governments like this by paperwork and asking them nicely to stop committing crimes and ignoring their citizens rights.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2015 @ 10:07am

E-X-E-M-P-T
“In the event that OSC finds evidence of criminal conduct during the course of its work, it will refer that evidence to the Department of Justice for appropriate action.”

Considering that the military is exempt from civilian law, I don't see them being too worried.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reality bites, 24 Jun 2015 @ 12:00pm

Not hard to tell who the real traitors are. they wear robes and wigs
The whore judge should have thrown the entire case back in the face of the traitors bringing it and charged them with contempt. Just proves the USA has a "justice" system a 3rd world cesspool would be completely ashamed of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]