Jonathan TurleyBy Facsimile Transmission and Overnight Mail
George Washington University Law School
2000 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20052
October 23, 2000
The Honorable George J. Tenet
The Director of Central Intelligence
Washington, D.C. 20505
Re: United States v. CTRI Daniel M. King, USN Dear Sir:
On October 16, 2000, I reported a series of violations of national security procedures and protections in proceedings related to the above referenced matter. I stated that violations were occurring on a daily basis and that immediate action was necessary to conduct an outside review of the lax security in the handling of program information.
Last week, additional violations were uncovered by the defense involving unauthorized disclosures of program information and the continued failure to safeguard TS/SCI material. This weekend, additional violations were uncovered, including unauthorized disclosures of program information as unclassified information. Once again these violations were found by the defense and not security staff including two additional programs for which no security staffer attorney had been previously given access. Additional officials were responsible for these violations. These officials include program security official Ms. Mary Rose McCaffrey and Navy LT Tim Orr. In the case of LT Orr, the defense repeatedly challenged LT Orr on his access. Not only did he falsely represent that he was cleared for all programs but had to be reprimanded twice by the judge for laughing during these inquiries. It has now been confirmed that he was not cleared for access to at least one such program.
I will be submitting a report on these violations as soon as I am able to break away from proceedings in the case. However, I wanted to immediately notify you that continued violations are occurring in this case. My repeated requests for a hearing on the level of security and on-going violations were denied by Commander Winthrop. I further requested that outside experts review the procedures in the case and the possible need to assign new security staff. This review was also denied. Commander Winthrop stated that, as one of the individuals responsible for these violations, it was not "appropriate" for him to call for such a review. He stated that such a request would have to come from your office. This misconception of the security responsibilities of a challenged individual is indicative of the problems in this case. However, it is now clear that disclosures and violations will continue without your immediate intervention.
There are now over three dozen violations of national security rules and regulations in this case, including the unauthorized disclosure of program information and repeated refusals to take minimal prophylactic measures in the face of rampant violations. These violations now include the entire management staff of the program security office, including Ms. McCaffrey who heads the office.
I would like to meet with security staff in a SCIF to disclose additional violations and explain some of the areas of lax and careless security. I would like to have the entire defense team participate in such a meeting. I ask that you contact Commander Winthrop to avoid further disclosure of program information until the security procedures in this case can be evaluated by an outside expert.
Defense Counsel for Petty Officer Daniel King
The Hon. William S. Cohen
The Hon. Richard Danzig
RADM Donald Guter