Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC Document 406 Filed 03/07/2007 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. SA CR 05-293(A)-CJC Date March 7, 2007 [attendee list snipped] (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATION INTO Proceedings: POSSIBLE RULE 6(E) VIOLATION On November 22, 2006, the Court entered an Order that required the government to submit in camera and under seal a status report detailing its investigation into any communications between government officials and Washington Times reporter William Gertz, or any other member of the public, that potentially disclosed grand jury information in violation of Rule 6(e). The Court also requested information regarding the steps taken by the government to ensure that no further communications would take place. Finally, the Court directed the government to submit any evidence it deemed necessary and appropriate to rebut Defendant Rebecca Chiu's prima facie case of a Rule 6(e) violation. This minute order will provide Ms. Chiu and the other defendants with a summary of the government's response as well as a report on the government's investigation into this matter. First, as a result of the Court's November 22, 2006 Order, the Department of Justice determined that the United States Attorney's Office for the Central District of California should be recused from handling the investigation into the leak of grand jury information and from any litigation arising from the investigation that the Court has ordered. The Department of Justice assigned the matter to the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia. Jay I. Bratt, an Assistant United States Attorney in that office, has been appointed a Special Attorney to the Attorney General to conduct the CR-11 (09/98) CRIMINAL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 2 Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC Document 406 Filed 03/07/2007 Page 2 of 2 investigation in this District and to handle all related court matters. The agents conducting the investigation are from the Washington Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The government has informed the Court that the scope of its investigation is broader than determining whether a violation of Rule 6(e) occurred. The government is also investigating possible violations of 18 U.S.C. � 793 (unlawful communication of classified information) arising from various publications in the media about this prosecution. The government also provided the Court with information concerning the steps it has taken to ensure that there are no improper leaks of information in the future. First, the Assistant United States Attorneys handling the underlying case have provided the agents with whom they are working the Court's November 22, 2006 Order and have directed them in writing to disseminate the Order to everyone within their respective offices who has access to information about the Chi Mak case and to make sure that all such persons understand the Order. Second, the investigative offices are to take all necessary steps to ensure that there are no improper communications with Mr. Gertz or any other members of the public concerning not only grand jury materials relating to the prosecution, but also any other materials that the Court has previously identified. The prosecutors have broadly defined "grand jury materials" to include government documents or discussions that refer to or relate to when and if an indictment is going to be returned, the nature of contemplated charges, the evidence presented or to be presented to a grand jury, and the nature or direction of any ongoing investigation. Last, the government informed the Court that it had not reached a point in its investigation where it was able to advise the Court as to whether it had information rebutting the prima facie case that a violation of Rule 6(e) occurred. Upon conclusion of the trial of Defendant Chi Mak, the Court will provide an updated status report to Ms. Chiu and the other defendants. CR-11 (09/98) CRIMINAL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 2 of 2
Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC Document 700 Filed 05/01/2008 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF cALIFoRNn CML MMUTES - GENERAL Case No. SACR 05-00293-c7c Date: May l, 2008 Title: LMITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CHI MAK et al. PRESENT: HONORABLE CORMAC J. C#RrVEY UNITED sTaTEs DISTRICT {rUDCE Michelle Urie N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter MTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT: None Present None Present PROGEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REGARDING INVESTIGATION INTO RULE 6(e_ NOLATION During Ule cowse ofproceedings in Ws case, Washington Times reporter Bill Gertz authored a May 16, 2006 article (Ule "May 16 article") Ulat revealed secret information before a federal &andjwy. 1 M. Gertz reported Ulat impendlng grandjury charges "will include a new indictment against Chi Mak, Tai Mak, Rebecca Chiu and a fouM Mak relative. All fow will be charged with conspiracy to export defense articles ! and attempted mawhl export ofdefense articles." Bill Gertz, New Charges Enpected in DefenseDatQ meftRing, THEWASHMGTON Tws, May 16, 2006. The ahcle Wer disclosed that "Tai Mak also will be charged wiUl aiding and abetting and possession of property to aid a foreign government." Id. Mr. Gertz atbibuted _he sowce ofWs information to "Senior Justice Department officials [who] have approved Ule new charges." Id. Based on Ule content ofWs _rticle, Defendant Rebecca Chiu brought a motion asserting that Ule Government _iolated Federal Rule ofCrirrlinal Procedwe 6(e). 2 In an order dated November 20, 2006, be Court found _hat Ms. Chiu had established aprimQfacie violatioo ofRule 6(e). Courts engage in a _wo-step analysis to deterrnine whe_her media reports establish apriMQfacie case ofa Rule 6(e) violation. --- 1 A copy ofthe May l� article _ediately follows Ulis Order_ 2 Rule 6(e)(2) sta_es, in relevaot part, that "an attomey for the gover_ment, or any person to whom discloswe is made under para_aph 3(A)(ii) ofthis subdi�sion shall not disclose mat_ers occ_Emng before the grandj_, except as oUlerwise provided for in these rmes." FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e)(2)_ Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC Document 700 Filed 05/01/2008 Page 2 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTR_CT COtrRT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNllA CML M_UTES - GENERAL Case No. sacR 05-00293-c_c Date: May l, 2008 Page 2 Bary v. UNited States, 865 F.2d 131_, 1321 (D.C. C�. 1989). First, courts must evaluate "wheUler Ule reports actually disclose information about what occwed before the grand jury," and second, "wheber be sowce ofioformation was likely one ofUlose persons listed in Ule rule." United States v. Lopez, 854 F. Supp. 4|, 46 (D.P.R. 1994). In Ulis case, Ule firSt element ofaprimafacie case was satisfied because the article "expressly identifIied] _he nahre ofUle crimes which would be charged and the nwber ofpersons who would be charged." See _n re GrandJuy INvestigQtion (Lance), 610 _.2d 202, 218 (5U_ Cir. 1980). M. Gertz directly atbibuted tbe information "to senior Tustice Department officials [who had] approved U_e new charges," thus establismg _he second element. See BQry, 865 F.2d at 1325-26. 3 Finding _hat Ms. Chiu had established aprimafacie Rule 6(e) violation, U_e Court was obligated to uncover Ule sowce ofUle grandjwy leak. See id. at 1321 ("Once a primafacie case is shown, U_e disb_ct court must conduct" Wer investigation . . . .} (emphasis added). Accordingly, Vhe Court ordered Ule United States Attomey's Office for Ule Cenbal DisWict ofCalifo_a ("C.D. Cal. USAO") to undertake a mll investigation. (See Order Granting io Part and DeDying in Part Defs.' Mot. for Disc. or OUler ReliefRelating to Gov't Misconduct, November 20, 2006 (Ule "November 20 Order"))- However, Ule Dep_ent of_ustice determined that Ule C.D. Cal. USAO should be recused hom han_iAg Ule investigation into _he leak ofgrandjwry information and hom any subsequent litigation. The investigation was U_erefore assigned to _he United States Attomey's Office for U_e Disbrict ofColumbia (_he "Government"). The Court's Nove_Dber 20 Order directed U_e Government to determine wheUler any government official disclosed secret gramdjury information to Mr. Gertz. Altematively, ifthe Government concluded Ulat government officials were not responsibte for the leak, it was inshcted to provide evidence to _hat effect. 4 (See id.) The Gove_oment conducted a c_omprebensive, yearnlong investigation and . ' interviewed over 500 persons ofinterest. In a recent report to Ule Court detailing Ule results ofits investigation, Ule Govemment conceded _hat a violation ofRule �e) had --- 3 See also FED. R_ CRIM. P. 6(e)(2)(B)(vi) (prohibiting discloswe by "an atto_ney for the government;" 6(e)(2_(B)(vii) (prohibiting discloswe by "any governmental persoMel" perrnissibly informed of grand jury lnformation pwsuant to subsection (e)(3)(A)). 4 In other words, the Court instwcted the Govern_nent to subn_t e�dence to rebut Ms. chiu'spnMafacie case_ Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC Document 700 Filed 05/01/2008 Page 3 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTR_CT OF CAIIFORNIA cMLM_uTEs-GENERaL Case No. SACR 05_00293-c_c Date: May l, 2008 Page 3 occurred. The Government, however, was unable to determine Ule identity ofthe person or persons who leaked the grandj_ ioformation contained in Ule May 16 article to Mr. Gertz. Based on Ule content ofbe May 16 awicle and Ule Government's coocession of an imperrnissible le�k, Ule Court f_nds that _he individual who leaked Ule grandjwy information to Mr. Gertz violated Rule 6(e). Accord_ngly, _le Court finds it necessary to subpoena Mr. Gertz to testiJ regarding Ule identity of_le sowce Ulat provided him witb Ule grandjwy information conta_oed io _he May 16 article. Pwsuant to a subpoena issued on April 30, 2008, M. Gertz shall appearbefore hs Court on Iune 13, 2008 at 9:00 a.m. rls MMUTES FORM Il Ioitials ofDeputy Clerk MU CINLnGEN Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC Document 700 Filed 05/01/2008 Page 4 of 5 Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC Document 700 Filed 05/01/2008 Page 5 of 5 [Pages 4 and 5 are the Washington Times article of May 16, 2006]
March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 March 2009 April 2009