IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIABENJAMIN MOHAMMED AL HABASHI, )(Binyam Mohamed) ))Petitioner, ))v. ) Civil Action No. 05-00765) Hon. Emmet G. SullivanROBERT GATES,
))Respondent. ) __________________________________________)
NOTICE OF SERVICE OF DISCOVERY
Petitioner Binyam Mohamed, through his undersigned attorneys, respectfully notifies theCourt that he has served the attached discovery requests today on Respondent’s counsel:1)
Amended Requests for Admissions, per FRCP 36;
Interrogatories, per FRCP 32;3)
Requests for Production of Documents and Tangible Things, per FRCP 34;4)
Deposition by Written Questions, per FRCP 31, of a)
Lt. Col. Darrell Vandeveld, prosecutor in the Military Commissions case against Mr.Mohamed until his resignation on or around September 24, 2008;
Mr. Mohamed is willing to toll the response deadline on the updated Requests for Admissions to today’s servicedate, provided Respondent represents that, at long last, he will make a good faith response.
Lt. Col. Vandeveld resigned over the same issue now confronting this Court: Respondent Secretary Gates’ effortsto obstruct the disclosure of exculpatory evidence, and particularly evidence that points to the serious abuse of a prisoner. “[N]ow testifying, remarkably, for the defense counsel in one of his own cases…Vandeveld said that hewent from being a “true believer” in the military commissions to feeling “truly deceived” about them. His deepethical qualms hinged foremost on the fact that potentially critical evidence had been withheld from the defense bythe government.”) Stacy Sullivan, “Confessions of a Former Guantánamo Prosecutor,” October 23, 2008, salon.com,
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/23/vandeveld/index.html (last accessed October 27, 2008).While many of his public statements have concerned the case against Mohammed Jawad, over the past severalmonths Vandeveld has had various conversations with counsel for Petitioner, as well as other counsel, where he hasrevealed – always strictly respecting the obligations of secrecy imposed upon him – some of the species of favorableevidence available in Petitioner’s case. His statements have made it very clear that the disclosures made to date inPetitioner’s case fall woefully short of compliance with the Court’s order. The questions in the proposed depositionare carefully tailored to prove the existence of additional evidence that remains undisclosed.
Case 1:05-cv-00765-EGS Document 103-2 Filed 10/28/2008 Page 1 of 43