Prosecutors in the criminal case against Fmr FBI Dir James Comey have filed a response to defense's opposition to implementing a filter team.
Prosecutors want that team to review privileged materials seized from Daniel Richman during the Arctic Haze media leak investigation.
Prosecutors want that team to review privileged materials seized from Daniel Richman during the Arctic Haze media leak investigation.
The filing says that Comey has asserted privilege (atty-client) over five text threads of communications between him and Person 3 from the indictment, Daniel Richman, who was counsel to Comey at the time of the communications.
A filter team is the appropriate method of handling this issue.
The remaining evidence HAS ALREADY BEEN FILTERED and was provided by Richman.
A filter team is the appropriate method of handling this issue.
The remaining evidence HAS ALREADY BEEN FILTERED and was provided by Richman.
The defense has argued in their opposition that, while they are not opposed to a filter team being used, they want to challenge the underlying search warrants first and also want prosecutors to be more specific about what exactly they are seeking to extract from the seized material.
Prosecutors repond here:
"The government is not asking to look at the raw returns from prior search warrants. The government is simply asking for a judicially approved filter protocol as to a small and specific subset of evidence that was lawfully obtained consistent with the terms of a federal search warrant."
Prosecutors repond here:
"The government is not asking to look at the raw returns from prior search warrants. The government is simply asking for a judicially approved filter protocol as to a small and specific subset of evidence that was lawfully obtained consistent with the terms of a federal search warrant."
I have a thread on defense's filing here
https://x.com/realjusthuman/status/1982964945739203053
Defense has also raised, in more than one filing, their suspicion that an FBI agent had access to, viewed, and communicated to the grand jury, some information from the potentially attorney-client communications that prosecutors now want a filter team for.
Prosecutors acknowledge that an FBI agent, "[w]hile reviewing evidence that was previously filtered by the Defendant’s attorney, an FBI agent noted that some of the communications appeared to involve an attorney and client."
That would be communications between Comey and Richman.
"a prophylactic decision was made to remove the FBI agent from the investigative team and pause any further review of the evidence from the 2019 and 2020 search warrants."
Prosecutors acknowledge that an FBI agent, "[w]hile reviewing evidence that was previously filtered by the Defendant’s attorney, an FBI agent noted that some of the communications appeared to involve an attorney and client."
That would be communications between Comey and Richman.
"a prophylactic decision was made to remove the FBI agent from the investigative team and pause any further review of the evidence from the 2019 and 2020 search warrants."
"No members [of] the investigative team have been tainted by attorney-client privileged material. However, when undersigned counsel joined the prosecutorial team, a decision was made for the quarantined evidence to remain that way to allow the Court to implement a filter protocol that completely removes any concern."
So, no worries, please approve the protocol for a filter team.
In the Statement of Facts section we get a bit more history on the investigation that lead to the gov't acquiring these communications from Richman, a redacted timeline for the search warrants, and the news that prosecutors have filed to have the search warrant unsealed!
That investigation (Arctic Haze) was looking for evidence for violations of 18 USC 641 Theft and Conversion of Stolen Government Property and 18 USC 793 Unlawful Gathering or Transmission of National Defense Information.
Filing is here
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
I've have searched for a filing from prosecutors for the unsealing of a search warrant in another district (it's most likely going to be in DC or NY districts, I would think) but have not yet found it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
