Inner City Press

In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYTAzerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis

Share |   

Follow on TWITTER

Home -

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis


(FP Twitterati 100, 2013)

ICP on YouTube

More: InnerCityPro
Sept 24, 2013

UN: Sri Lanka


FOIA Finds  

Google, Asked at UN About Censorship, Moved to Censor the Questioner, Sources Say, Blaming UN - Update - Editorial

Support this work by buying this book

Click on cover for secure site orders

also includes "Toxic Credit in the Global Inner City"




Bank Beat

Freedom of Information

How to Contact Us

In CIA Leak Trial Jury Is Aligned On 2 Counts Schulte Asks Mistrial or This Allen Charge On Rest

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Thread
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Honduras - Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, March 9 – In the end game of the trial of accused CIA leaker Joshua Schulte, on the afternoon of Friday, March 6 the jury said it is aligned on two counts and at an impasse on the remaining counts: that is, on eight counts.  Live tweeted thread here.

  Whether the alignment is guilty or not guilty, this may be seen as a loss for the prosecutors. More on Patreon here.

  And now on March 9, Schulte's lawyer have asked a mistrial on the remaining counts, or for a specific "Allen charge" (or dynamic charge) - "Hon. Judge Crotty: The defense respectfully requests that the Court receive the jury’s verdict on two counts, declare a mistrial on the remaining counts, and discharge the jury. This jury has been sitting for five weeks. It has worked diligently and has submitted in excess of 20 notes. At this point, we believe that any Allen charge will bring undue pressure on the jury to reach a verdict. Nevertheless, if the Court wishes to give a supplemental instruction, the defense proposes the following language, which is adapted from Judge Sand’s treatise:  I understand that you have not been able to reach a verdict on eight of the counts. I am going to ask that you return to the jury room and continue your deliberations a bit longer to see whether a unanimous verdict is possible. The instructions which I previously gave still apply. Specifically, I remind you that you should discuss and consider the evidence, listen to the arguments of your fellow jurors, present your individual views, and consult with one another. You should not hesitate to change your views if you are convinced they are erroneous. However, you should not surrender a conscientiously held belief simply because you are outnumbered or merely in order to reach a verdict.  I also remind you that you must acquit the defendant unless the government has proven his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." Watch this.

  Judge Paul A. Crotty told the jurors to go home for the weekend (and to watch out for Coronavirus and crowds). He said things will resume on Monday, March 9. It is getting to end game.

 Back on the afternoon of February 28 the US in an emergency hearing dropped Count 2 against Schulte, and admitted that it can never be revived: jeopardy has attached. Inner City Press has obtained the transcript and tweeted and uploaded it here on Scribd, on Patreon here.

  On March 5, Judge Paul A. Crotty and both side's lawyers held a closed door proceeding in the judge's robing room. Afterward Assistant US Attorney Matthew Laroche said that the transcript should be sealed until after a verdict.

  Inner City Press immediately wrote to Judge Crotty and the docket, for the fifth time in this proceeding (here's III and IV): "Dear Judge Crotty:    This supplements the January 22, 23 and 26 and February 24, 2020 submissions on this topic on behalf of Inner City Press and in my personal capacity. Your Honor on Janaury 31 ruled inter alia that "[t]he Government is directed to make transcripts and exhibits available to the public no later than the evening after the day of testimony." Docket No. 293, at 15.   This morning after a robing room discussion about Juror Number 5 (and perhaps other matters) from which the press was excluded, AUSA Laroche urged your Honor to seal the transcript of that discussion until AFTER there is a verdict. That is unacceptable, and inconsistent with your previous order.  The purpose of this letter is to formally request at the earliest time - 10 minutes after AUSA Laroche's statement, your ruling on which is unclear - that the transcript of the robing room proceeding be made available immediately, as well as all other exhibits which Inner City Press has continued available to the public on"

  Meanwhile, as now excused Juror 5 left the courthouse, Inner City Press caught the tail / end of her comments to two intrepid tabloids. She specializes in buttocks sculpting - and most explosively, indicted that she believed Schulte was naughty but not guilty. This would seem at a minimum to provide fuel for a defense appeal in the event of a conviction. But first - the transcript. Watch this site.

  On March 4, the jury deliberated for a full second day without reaching a verdict. Or perhaps the whole jury did not deliberate - as Inner City Press first tweeted (thread here), the foreperson passed out a note that Juror Number Four (whose name was said) was refusing to deliberate with others, was conducting their own inquiry into the evidence. Schulte's lawyer Zas urged Judge Crotty to let time elapse before acting. Could this type of independent inquiry be more favorable to Schulte than that US? Thread here; Inner City Press is staying on the case.

  On March 3, the jury deliberated and asked at least nine questions. Inner City Press live tweeted it, thread here. There were questions about locking and unlocking computers, and if Schulte was ever diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, a matter raised in cross-examination. Perhaps of concern for the defense was the lack of questions about alternate suspect Michael.

  At day's end in Judge Crotty's courtroom gallery it was only Inner City Press and one of the Assistant US Attorneys, who waited to say he and Schulte's lawyers would try to answer some of the questions the next day, March 4. Inner City Press will be there - watch this site.

  On March 2 were the closing arguments, which Inner City Press tweeted, thread here.

AUSA Laroche: Joshua Schulte - King Josh, he thought he was - reinstated his privileges without authorization. It was a huge red flag. So the CIA acted - it tried to keep him out. But it left a backdoor, that he used...

Schulte was so focused on getting his privileges back he is willing to lie again. He's logging in and out all day. This is his IP address - he's logging in. He's using that key, that session, to view log files.

Let's recap what happened. At 7:17 pm he logged in again. Then 7:44 pm he's using that left-over key to view log files as an administrator with absolutely no reason. He was planning to steal the information.

The information WikiLeaks published must have come from back-up files, and we know the dates of the files... Defendant reverted the files to a time when he had full access. Minutes later, he steals the back ups. And he deletes log files.

AUSA Laroche: You know it was the defendant - this 766 number, it is his session. It was stored in his unallocated space. You will see that the defendant searches again and again for it....

Schulte's lawyer Sabrina Shroff: DEVLAN was wide open. Passwords were leaked. There were not audit logs. The witnesses told you DEVLAN was the Wild, Wild West.... They called DEVLAN a "dirty network." It had very easy passwords. Simply carrying the data out the door on a hard drive would not be difficult.

Shroff points at the AUSAs - "They don't know." They look down at their hands. Shroff: He tells you, the Alta backups were wide open.

Shroff: Michael was present at his desk when the government says the data was taken. The computer evidence they claim points to Mr. Schulte, it fails to support the government's case.... The thumb drive was removed 26 minutes *before* the reversion. And it was too small, and write-protected. Maybe the culprit is the one living at home on paid administrative leave.

Shroff: Let's look at Government Exhibit 1207-27. Mr Denton told you March 3 was the very day Mr Schulte felt the CIA had wronged him. But there's nothing in the evidence that Mr. Schulte viewed March 3, 2016 as particularly significant.

 Did he use a cell phone? Sure. But that's not what he's charged with. Your job as jurors is to put the government to these test. I told you at the beginning of the trial, Mr. Schulte was a difficult employee. That is all the government has shown in over the past four weeks....

AUSA Kamaraju: Ms Shroff spent a lot of time talking about this thumb drive, more time than we did. We told you he was nervous and wiped it even that it wasn't plugged in during the key time ... These is only one conclusion: Joshua Schulte is guilty of the charges.

Judge Crotty: We'll have a half an hour break then I'll instruct you on the law. 

Back when the trial set to begin February 3, a public hearing was held on January 27 about the US Attorney's requests to seal the courtroom for some witness and limited media attendance to a single pool reporter banned from reporting any physical characteristics of the CIA witnesses.

   On this issue, Inner City Press before the public hearing filed three one-page letters in opposition, the last one here. At the end U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Paul A. Crotty asked Assistant US Attorney Matthew Laroche if his Office objected to live video feed to the SDNY Press Room, not showing the witnesses' faces. AUSA Laroche said no objection - which should mean feeds for this all other proceedings, when requested. On February 4, Inner City Press live-tweeted the opening arguments, here. And here a song.

 On February 24, while an FBI agent testified about ham-handed interview of Schulte, Inner City Press live tweeted thread here, the US Attorney's Office as it is required made available some exhibits, which we'll make available without paywall here on Patreon. But it still did NOT provide the audio files it played the jury. This violated Judge Crotty's order.

 So on February 24 Inner City Press wrote another formal letter to Judge Crotty, here, cc-ing the US Attorney's Office and Schulte's lawyers, urging release of the audio and video exhibits.

 And lo and behold on February 25 some were released: a video Inner City Press published here, and here, and a series of audio exhibits, for example here and here. Now five more here.
And the February 26 exhibits, in near real time, here.

  On February 26 the US put in as exhibits emails involving journalist Shane Harris, some arbitrage of whether to send to him or NYT, while opposing admission of the CIA memo about suspending Michael. Feb 26 thread here. So will Michael be a witness? Watch this site.

  Early on February 26, Schulte's lawyers wrote to Judge Crotty that "the defense is unable to call its computer expert, Dr. Steven M. Bellovin, as a trial witness. As we have previously explained, Dr. Bellovin, despite repeated requests, was never permitted access to the full 'mirror images' of the CIA’s ESXi and FSO1 Servers—images to which the government’s expert has long been granted full and unrestricted access." Grounds for appeal, if necessary?

 On Febuary 25, a witness was whisked away to the US Attorney's Office, letter below; this after the Press was told to leave the 14th and 5th floors, and the complaint letter still not put in the docket.

 More on Patreon here.

See Inner City Press filing into the docket on Big Cases Bot, here. Watch this site. The case is US v. Schulte, 17-cr-548 (Crotty).


Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at]
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2020 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] for