8/19 Motions Session #8: Doctor No. . . Name

Prosecutor Robert Swann confirms that the documents do not contain any truly hot-button national security information.  It’s all redacted material; thus he asks that certain information about the witness not be addressed: his true name, for example.  Judge Pohl agrees, and lays the ground rules. We won’t be naming the doctor, but we can learn about his background, his expertise, and his diagnosis and prognosis for Bin Attash, in open court. That satisfies Swann, but Bormann wants further clarification.  So she can, in fact, safely refer to the classified documents? Yes, prosecutor Johanna Baltes confirms, as there’s no classified information in them.

Our witness therefore returns and takes his oath.  Under questioning from Swann, the man confirms that he is indeed a Doctor---Doctor No-Name, for present purposes.  Swann reminds the fellow of statistics the prosecutor cited earlier; this draws objection from Cheryl Bormann, which the court sustains. We then learn more about Doctor No-Name’s C.V., and additional details of Bin Attash’s condition. It seems the latter has been ill for about three weeks, although Doctor No-Name didn’t learn of the man’s sickness until more recently than that. Bin Attash is taking a triple-therapy combo of antibiotics, in order to knock out the gastritis, and Doctor No-Name will refer his patient to a gastroenterologist if Bin Attash’s condition doesn’t soon improve. Can Bin Attash sit still for a period of time?  Well, sorta. The witness lastly cannot speak to Bin Attash’s level of discomfort and pain---though the latter still complains of both.

Now Judge Pohl has queries of his own.  Would re-examination by Doctor No-Name yield additional intelligence about Bin Attash’s condition?  It’s unlikely, says the witness.  With that, Doctor No-Name returns to his post.

For his part, Chief Prosecutor Brig. Gen. Mark Martins would prefer to wait until tomorrow to assess the accused’s condition, rather than to litigate the issue now.  The court is keen to work around any possible forced cell extraction problem---but that might be avoided going forward, if Bin Attash executes the usual voluntariness and waiver documentation.  There won’t be any forcible extraction if Bin Attash proceeds differently.

James Connell III, defense counsel for Al-Baluchi, then adds a few words about the impending courtroom closure.  In essence, the lawyer thinks this is premature.  The government, he argues, must articulate further its reasons for why the information in AE052 (that giving rise to the closure) has been classified; and why disclosure of that information in open session would really damage national security.  It’s a bit of a re-tread, to the court’s eye, given its prior ruling that, in fact, the accused lawfully can be excluded from classified pretrial sessions.

In any event, prosecutor Johanna Baltes finds no authority for Connell’s arguments---and, we quickly discover, neither does the court.  The latter denies Connell’s bid to have AE052 argued in open session.  Of course Judge Pohl acknowledges defense counsels’ ongoing objections to their clients’ exclusion.

With that, we are recessed for the day.  The CCTV feed blinks off, and the parties turn to closed-session, and discussion of AE052.