IN RE: GUANTANAMO BAY DETAINEE LITIGATION

Filing 1664

MOTION RENEWED MOTION FOR DIRECT CONTACT WITH CLIENT by GUANTANAMO BAY DETAINEE LITIGATION, HAMOUD ABDULLAH HAMOUD HASSAN AL WADY (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D)(Gunn, Carlton)

EXHIBIT A

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144 Filed 02/19/2009 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

AHMED ZAID SALEM ZUHAIR,
Petitioner,
v.

Civil Action No. 08-CV-0864 (EGS)

BARACK OBAMA, et at.,
Respondents.

RESPONDENTS' NOTICE OF FILING TWO DECLARTIONS REGARING PETITIONER'S FEBRUARY 11 AN 12 MEETING WITH COUNSEL AN HIS CURENT MEDICAL STATUS
Respondents hereby provide notice of the filing of

two declarations regarding the

circumstances surrounding Petitioner's Februar 11 and 12 meeting with his counsel and his

current medical status. In his Februar 16,2009 Status Report (dkt. no. 143), Petitioner's

counsel alleges, inter alia, that his client's health has "deteriorated significantly" since their last meeting in December 2008. The Status Report also states that Petitioner was confined to a
gurney during his meeting with counsel and that he was provided large quantities of painkilers
by medical personneL. Petitioner alleges that Respondents improperly obstructed counsel's visit,

resulting in the loss of over seven hours of planned attorney-client meetings.

Captain Bruce C. Meneley, M.D., and Commander Don A. Martin categorically refute

these allegations in their respective declarations (attached hereto as Exhibits 1 and 2).
Specifically, these declarations explain that, although Petitioner claimed that he fainted in his

cell on February 9 and that he injured his hip and knee when he fell to the ground, he was
evaluated by medical staff, who determined that he had not suffered any significant injury.

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 2 of 3

Neverteless, even though it was not medically necessary, Petitioner insisted he would only

attend his counsel appointments on February 11 and 12 ifhe was carried there on a gurney or
backboard.

As Commander Martin explains, Petitioner's refusal to attend his counsel appointment

unless these conditions were met constituted a refusal to meet with his counsel under Joint Task
Force - Guantanamo protocols. However, in reviewing the situation and in order to faciltate a

meeting with counsel, the decision was subsequently made to transport Petitioner by ambulance

and gurney. Petitioner's counsel also was advised that Guantanamo Bay was facilitating the
meeting under these conditions even though Petitioner's x-rays were negative for any injuries
and he was believed to be ambulatory. On February 1 I, Petitioner was allowed to meet with his

counsel for an additional two-and-a-halfhours past the typical close time of counsel meetings.

In addition, the meeting on Februar 12 was terminated by counsel and not by Guantaamo staff.
Dr. Meneley's declaration also explains the reasons for Petitioner's continued
hospitalization and his administering of

painkilers. It also explains Petitioner's current health

status and the efforts of

the Guantanamo Bay medical staff

to keep his weight up. In direct

contradiction to the characterizations made by Petitioner's counsel, Dr. Meneley's declaration
refutes that Petitioner's health has deteriorated significantly, and demonstrates that the medical
staff continues to closely monitor his enteral feedings and overall health.

Dated: Februar 19, 2009

Respectfully submitted,

MICHAEL F. HERTZ Acting Assistant Attorney General

2

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144 Filed 02/19/2009 Page 3 of 3

JOSEPH H. HUNT Director
VINCENT M. GARVEY
Deputy Director

TERRY M. HENRY Assistant Branch Director
Isl Scott D. Levin

ANDREW i. WARDEN SCOTT D. LEVIN (D.C. Bar No. 494844) TIMOTHY S. LAFFREDI Attorneys

United States Departent of Justice
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Rm. 5134 Washington, D.C. 20530
Tel: [phone]

Fax: [phone]

Attorneys for Respondents

3

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-E GS Docu ment 144-2 Filed 02/19/2009 Page 1 of 9

EXHIBIT 1

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144-2 Filed 02/19/2009 Page 2 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRCT OF COLUMBIA

AHMED ZAID SALEM ZUHAIR,
Petitioner,
v.
GEORGE W. BUSH, President of

) )

) )

) Civil Action No. 08-CV-0864 (EGS)
)

the United

States, et ai.,

Respondents.

) ) ) ) ) )

DECLARTION OF CAPTAIN BRUCE C. MENELEY, M.D.
Pursuat to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I, Bruce C. Meneley, M.D., hereby declare:

1. I am a Captain in the United States Navy with over 32 years of active and reserve
service. I currently serve as the Commander, Joint Medical Group, Guantaamo Bay and Joint

Task Force Surgeon, Joint Task Force-Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO), at Naval Station Guatanamo
Bay, Cuba. I am responsible for the medical care provided to personnel stationed at Guantanamo
Bay and oversee the operation of

the Joint Medical Group (JMG) that provides medical care to

the detainees currently held at Guantaamo Bay. I have served in this position since 6 July 2007.

2. I have personal knowledge of the procedures that are in place for the operation of the Detention Hospital, and I am responsible for ensuring that they are followed. Due to my
responsibilities, I have personal knowledge of, or have received information concerning, the

most recent allegations made by Ahed laid Salem Zuhair (ISN 669), the petitioner in the
above-captioned case, through his counseL. This declaration is based on information made

available to me through my offcial duties and from the medical records of ISN 669.

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144-2

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 3 of 9

3. I am aware that ISN 669's counsel has stated that durng his meetings with ISN 669
on I I and 12 Februar 2009, ISN 669 "appeared unable to walk or do more than slightly lift his
upper body and lift his ar," that he could only talk "in a whisper" and was in "great pain"

throughout the meetings with "any movement appearing to cause him excruciating pain" with

"his eyes rollng back in pain at any break in the conversation." That information is not
consistent with ISN 669's medical condition or his behavior in front of JMG staff.

4. During ISN 669's morning feed on 9 Februar, 2009, he told the physician that he had
fāllen in the recreation yard the day before and had hit his right hip and knee. No guard staff had

observed this incident in the recreation yard. Because of this report, medical personnel began
making arrangements for ISN 669 to be examined for this issue later in the day. The enteral feed
physician noted, however, that ISN 669 walked normally from the feeding chair to his cell,
without limping.
5. Shortly after he returned to his cell following the morning enteral feeding, one of

the

JTF-GTMO guards observed ISN 669 at approximately 1100 hours lying face down in his cell
and not immediately responding to query. ISN 669 claimed that he fainted in his cell and injured

his hip and knee when he fell to the ground. Consistent with JTF-GTMO standard operating
procedure, ISN 669 was brought to the Detention Hospital for evaluation after an initial

assessment by a physician in the cell block and furter assessment in the Camp 6 Medical Clinic.
6. ISN 669 told medical personnel that a~ he stood up from his bunk to go outside for

recreation, he had a momentary blackout, which resulted in a fall to the floor. He stated that he

was awake after hitting the floor. lSN 669 complaincd to the physician of right hip and knce
pain, as he had earlicr that day to thc physician who administered his enteral fcedings.

2

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-2

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 4 of 9

7. On 9 February, ISN 669's right hip, right knee and chest were x-rayed, and no fracture
or other intern damage was noted. Follow-up x-rays of

the right hip and abdomen performed

on 17 Februar 2009 confirmed the normal results. Initial lab testing was also performed on 9
Februar, including blood count and chemistries, which indicated good hydration but was

otherwise unremarkable. An orthopedic surgeon reviewed the x-ray fims on 9 Februar and

followed up with a clinical assessment later on 13 Febru while rSN 669 was in the Detention
HospitaL. Following a physical examination of ISN 669 and a review of

the medical testing, the

ortopedic surgeon concluded that ISN 669 had not suffered any significant injury and that there
were no medical or structural reasons why the detainee could or should not walk. (lSN 669
would not allow medical personnel to move his limbs in order to be able to assess his passive
range of motion.) Furthermore, no bruising or skin changes were observed in the area of

the

reported injury on initial asscssment or upon serial reassessment at later times. Additionally,
ISN 669 has made no complaits of a sore throat during ths inpatient period and has generally

spken to JMG personnel in a normal tone during assessments.
8. Based on the comprehensive evaluation performed by JMG physicians, it was
deterined that ISN 669's complaints of pain were out of

proportion to the reported mechanism

of his injury and that there appeared to be no medical rcason tht he should be feeling the level
of pain that he stated he was feeling. He has no medical condition that would cause him to be in
excruciating pain, to be barely able to move his upper body, or to only talk in a whisper.
9. Because ISN 669 appeared to have no medical condition that prevents him from being

ambulatory, JMG personnel informed JlF-GTMO guard personnel that he did not need to be
transportd via a stretcher. He is physically capable of walking without human or mechanical

3

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-2

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 5 of 9

assistace but is choosing not to. He currently elects to use a walker tor assisted movement but

it is not required for any medica condition.

10. Because complaints of pain are always subjective, JMG personnel take these
complaints of

pain by detainees at face value and offer treatment for the detanee's stated

complaints, followed by periodic reassessment of symptoms. It is possible some degree of pain

is present as a result ofISN 669's alleged fall to the ground, independent of his abilty or
inabilty to walk but there is no medical reason for the level of acute pain he claims to be
experiencing in his hip and knee from the falL. Nonetheless, 1SN 669 has been administered the
anti-inflamtory medication Celebrex, as well as Ultram and Tylenol, all of which were

prescribed to treat his claim of acute pain. He has also been offered a topical pain relieving rub,

as well as ice, to be applied directly on the area of perceived pain.

i 1. On 11 and 12 February 2009, ISN 669 was transported to his legal appointments at

Camp Echo on a gurney after he refused to attempt to sit or stad. Although also not medically
necessar, ISN 669 was offered the use of a walker or a wheelchair for thc transport to the

appointment, but he insisted he would only attend the appointments if he were caried there on a
gurney or backboard. Given ISN 669's condition, even if he was uncomfortable walking, there

was no medically justifiable reason to use a gurey or backboard when a wheelchair was
available. The gurney was only used upon 1SN 669's insistence. Although not medically
required based on ISN 669's condition, a nurse accompanied the detainee to Camp Echo for his visit, in order to provide the capability of rapid reassessment of the situation and to be able to

provide pain medications ifISN 669 requested them.

i 2. Prior to the attorney visits on both days, ISN 669 received a scheduled dose of
Celebrex, Ultram and TylenoL. The Ultram and Tylenol were readministered during the legal
4

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144-2

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 6 of 9

appointments on both days afer ISN 669's attorney called the nurse into the interview room and
stated tht the detainee was in pain and asked if

the nurse had any medicine. These medications

were provided according to their standard schedule and were acceptable to re-administer at the
requested time due to the long duration of

the legal appointments. The nurse had Tylenol with

him and called for a delivery ofUltram from Camp 6. The Tylenol was given first, and when the
Ultram arved, it was also given. There was no requirement that any legal appointment be cut

short so ISN 669 could return to the clinic for medical treatment or medication.

13. Prior to his attorney visit on i I Februry 2009, ISN 669 also received a dose of
Toradol, a non-narcotic pain medication. On 12 February 2009, immediately following his legal

appointment, ISN 669 received a single low dose (2 millgrams) of morphine, due to his
continued complaint of

uncontrolled pain. ISN 669 was also offered ice for topical use during

the appointment, but it was declined. Again, although there is no medical problem that would
cause ISN 669 to experience the amount of

pain he claims to be feeling, JMG policy is to take

his complaints at face value and treat the symptoms he is reporting. Accordingly, pain
medication is administered to him upon demand, within medically appropriate limits for such
medications.

14. At various times ISN 669 has declined available pain medication offered on
schedule. Around the time of the legal visit, ISN 669 declined 8 of the 12 doses of

Tylenol

offered frm 10- 12 Februar and declined I of 4 doses oftJltram on i 2 February.
15. 1SN 669 has been regularly re-evaluated since 9 February 2009, and these evaluations and all medical testing continue to reveal no apparent mcdical reason for his
continued complaints regarding persistcnt pain.

5

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-2

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 7 of 9

16. As discussed in my prior declarations, 1SN 669 continues to be enterally fed.
Consistent with JTF-GTMO stadard operating procedure, he is regularly weighed as par of

the

enteral feeding regime.
i 7. Since 20 Janua 2009, ISN 669's weight has fluctuated between a low of 107

pounds on 21 January to a high of 1 17 pounds on 25 Januay. A recent maximum weight of i 18

pounds was observed on 7 Februry 2009, followed by a declining trend to i 15 pounds on
admission to the Detention Hospital on 9 Februar. As of 16 February, ISN 669's weight was

108.7 pounds (76. i percent ofIdeal Body Weight (IBW)), and it improved to 1 12 pounds on 17
Febru. The detainee's weight trend as an inpatient has been diffcult to assess due to ISN
669's refusal to get out of

bed during the first several days of admission. As a result, no weight

was obtaned for the detainee's first few days in the hospitaL. Hydration issues can account for a

several pound degree of weight change; ISN 669 has significantly reduced his water intae

durng the inpatient period. He also argued strongly against receiving increased feed and would
intermittently spit up small amounts offormula while awake. The spitting behavior has
decreased significantly in the more recent few days.

18. ISN 669's overall medical condition is good; however, there remain concerns related
to his chronic low body weight, prolonged hunger stre, and his failure to voluntarily consume

food, which increase risk for multiple complications. JMG personnel continue to monitor his
medical condition with appropriate testing.

19. ISN 669 was admitted to the Detention Hospital on 9 Febniary 2009 and remains
admitted for increased monitoring of his weight and adjustment of his enteral feeding (due to

concern for a recent resurgence in his complaints of vomiting and diffculty tolerating his usual
feed), as well as for further assessment of his recent reported injury and support for activities of
6

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144-2

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 8 of 9

daily living. Prior to ISN 669's hospital admission, the medical team was discussing various
alteratives to address the detanee's low body weight and inadequate caloric intake. One option

under consideration was admission to the hospital for inpatient treatment, although a date had not

yet been finalized. Hospitaization was one of many options, including changing formulas to

increase his caloric intae, increasing the number of enteral feedings per day, volunta
consumption, and the addition of small amounts of olive oil to his feeding, all of

which were

discussed with ISN 669 as possible options about a week prior to admission. The decision to
admit ISN 669 to the hospital was ultimately made following his reported fainting episode and
subsequent falL.

20. Since being admitted to the hospital, ISN 669 is receiving treatment for his pain and

is encouraged to ambulate. A physica therapy consultation was completed on 19 Feb 2009. The
physical therapist suggested ISN 669 may have experienced son tissue injury with possible
muscle spasm in the right hip area and recommended the detainee practice specific stretches
several times each day. ISN 669's feed composition and timing of

his feedings are stil being

adjusted as evaluations continue regarding increasing his caloric intake and weight.
21. While at the Detention Hospital prior to his legal visit on 12 Febrar 2009, ISN 669

was observed easily moving his head and shoulders off of his bed, spontaneously and without

discomfort. On 16 February 2009, ISN 669 sat up fully in bed, with his back away from support,

while he did some writing, and then he leaned farher forward, without difficulty, to permit
respiratory assessment. On i 7 February 2009, ISN 669 had no significant problems moving to

and using the shower with the assistance of a walker. That same day, ISN 669 was offered the
opportunity to be transported by wheelchair to the x-ray room for a planned reassessment;
however, he declined this a~sistance and chose to move the approximately i OO-foot distance
7

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-2

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 9 of 9

using a walker. He has also used the walker to move to and from the shower and for each use of
the toilet. Other than at his insistence and to facilitate his meeting with his counsel and on his
initial admission to the hospital, ISN 669 has not otherwise been transported by gurney or
backboard.

22. According to the attending physician who saw him on i 0 February and throughout his inpatient stay, ISN 669 has stated that pain would come and go. Pain was relieved with

medications but would come back with certin right leg movement. No complaints of constant
pain have been noted. The physician also stated that ISN 669 looked alert and very clear and did

not appea fatigued.

1 declare under penalty ofpeijury under the laws of

the United States of America that the

forgoing is true, accurate, and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Dated: February 19,2009

(JEc /'L.,L-J BRUC C. MENELEY CCaptain, Medical Corps, U.S. Navy

8

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-3 Filed 02/19/2009 Page 1 of 6

EXHIBIT 2

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-3 Filed 02/19/2009 Page 2 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

AHMED ZAID SALEM ZUHAIR

) )

Petitioner,

) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 08-CV -864 (EGS) ) ) )

v.

DECLARATION OF COMMANDER DON A. MARTIN

BARACK H. OBAMA, et aI.,
Respondents.

..

) ) ) )

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § I 746, I, Commander Don A. Martin, declare as follows:

1. I am a Commander in the United States Navy, with 17 years of active duty service. I
currently serve as the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) of

Joint Task Force. Guantanamo (.TF-

GTMO), at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 1 have held this position since 25 July 2008. As such, I am the principal legal advisor to the JTF-GTMO Commander and his subordinate
commanders.

2. This declaration is based on information made available to me through my offcial
duties, including information regarding the petitioncr, Ahmed Zaid Salem Zuhair, Internment

Serial Number (lSN) 669.

3. JTF-GTMO takes very seriously the matter of counsel visits with detainees. These
mectings occur on a daily basis and occur in the contcxt of

habeas, Detanee Treatment Act, and

Militar Commissions cases. In 2008, .lTF-GTMO facilitatcd over 1,850 counscl visits with

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-3

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 3 of 6

their detainee clients. It is JTF -GTMO policy to allow cOWlsel access to their clients consistent
with established stadard operating procedures and the terms of

the various protective orders

issued by the courts. During their stay at JTF-GTMO, counsel are provided with
accommodations and appropriate facilities to meet with their clients.

4. JTF-GTMO has established a specific procedure to facilitate habeas counsel visits
with clients. In every instance, detainee cscort personnel advise the detainee that counsel has

arived, generally about 15 minutes prior to the meeting. Should the detainee refuse to go to the

visit, a milta attorney from my otfce, the JTF -GTMO Offce of the Staff Judge Advocat, wil
then meet with counsel and advise hi or her of

the detainee's refual to mcet with counseL. At

that time, counsel is provided the opportWlity to write a note to the detainee, which is promptly

delivered to the detainee by the SJA attorney.

5. To deliver the note, the SJA attorney ensures an appropriate translator is present, and

then immediately goes to the detainee's physical location within the camps. Upon locting the
detainee, the SJA attorney informs him that his counsel has wrtten a note and asks the detainee
jfhe wants it. If

requested by the detainee, the SJA attorney will read the letter aloud to the

detainee (through the trnslator, if appropriate). If

the detainee has a verbal or wrtten respnse

to the letter, that wil be relayed to the cOWlsel by the SJA attorney. Ifthe detainee wishes to
read the letter himself, the SJA attorney will wait for the detanee to finish reading the letter and
provide a response. If the detanee refuses to tae possession of

the lettr or ifhe continues to

decline to attend the counsel meeting, those actions are considered a full and final refusal by the
detainee to meet with counseL.

6. Alternatively, if

the detainee clccts to meet with counsel, the detainee is transported

from his current location to the meeting place. Normally. counsel/detainee meetings take place

2

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144-3

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 4 of 6

at Camp Echo, a location speifically designated to facilitate such meetings. Because of security
and safety concerns for both JTF -GTMO personnel and the detainee, transportation of detainees
between caps at JTF -GTMO requires substantial logistical coordination. The detainee is then

promptly traported to the meeting place.
7. In certin situations, JTF-GTMO may consider the actions of a detainee to constitute a
refusal to attnd the visit. This would include a situation where the detainee states tht he wil

only attend his counsel visit if certain preconditions are met by JTF -GTMO personnel. Acceding

to such demands can create a discipline problem within the detention facility as it encourgcs
detainees to engage in such behavior in an effort to manipulate JTF-GTMO personnel and/or the
detention system.

COUNSEL MEETINGS WITH ISN 669
8. I am aware that counsel represented he was schedulcd to meet with ISN 669 for 14
hours during his visit

on 11-12 Februry 2009. That is incorrt. Pursuant to counsel's own visit

request, which was submitted and approved prior to his arval at Guantanamo, he was scheduled
to meet with 1SN 669 for 13 hours over the two days (he had requested to meet during thc

meeting times of9:00 am until I i :30 am and 1 :00 pm until 5:00 pm). This would total 13
hours over the two day period.

9. On 11 February 2009, counsel for ISN 669 was scheduled to meet with the detaince.
JTF-GTMO personncl, acting in accordance with establishcd procedure described abovc,

informed ISN 669 that thc counsel had arved to meet with him. The meeting was scheduled to
occur at Camp Echo. ISN 669, who was a patient in the Detention Hospital, refused to stand or
walk when the detainee escorts went to notify him of his legal visit. As discussed in Dr.
Meneley's declaration, the Joint Medical Group had dctermincd that ISN 669 had no medical

3

Case 1 :08-cv-00864-EGS Documenf144-3

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 5 of 6

condition that prevented him from being ambulatory. Consequently, ISN 669's refusal to walk

to and from the transport van was deemed a refusaL. Counsel was informed that the detainee
refused to attend the meeting, but at that time, counsel wus not advised of ISN 669' s location or

medical condition.

10. After counsel was informed otthe refusal, he chose to send a note to ISN 669. In
accordance with procedure, the SJA attorney went to thc Detention Hospital to deliver the note.

ISN 669 read the note and indicated to the SJA attorney that he could not stand and asked ifhis
counsel could come to him in the Detention HospitaL. The SJA attorney told 1SN 669 that the

meeting could not occur in the hospital and that his continued refusal to stand and walk would be
deemed a refusal to meet with his counseL.

1 i. The SJA attorney advised counsel that 1SN 669, who was in the Detention Hospital,
refused the meeting. Counsel was advised that ISN 669 was in the Detention Hospital and

claimed to be non-ambulatory. Counsel then requested that JTF-GTMO allow him to meet with
1SN 669 in the Detention HospitaL. The SJA attorney advised counsel that he would pass

counsel's request to JTF-GTMO leadership.

12. In reviewing counsel's request, JTF-GTMO could not operationally support a legal
visit to occur within the Detention Hospital, the primary medical facility supporting thc entire
detanee population of nearly 250 individuals. However, in keeping with our efforts to facilitate

counsel meetings, again a high priority for JTF -GTMO, thc decision was madc that ISN 669

could bc transportcd to Camp Echo (by ambulance and in a gurncy) without otherwise advcrsely

impacting JTF-GTMO operations and without endangering the guard force or the detainee. The
dccision was not based on any change to the medical determination thĄit ISN 669 was

umbulatory, and in tact, counscl was advised that.JTF-GTMO was tācilitating the mediiig under

4

Case 1:08-cv-00864-EGS Document 144-3

Filed 02/19/2009 Page 6 of 6

these conditions despite the fact that ISN 669's x-rays were negative for any injuries and ISN
669 was believed to be ambulatory.

13. ISN 669 was subsequently moved to Camp Echo by ambulance at approximately
3:00 pm and counsel was allowed to meet with him for four hours until 7:00 pm (two hours past
the scheduled ending time of 5:00 pm).

14. Additionally, on i I February 2009, prior to meeting with ISN 669, counsel requested
that he be able to meet with ISN 669 during lunch both on 11 and 12 Februar 2009. JTF-

GTMO advised counsel that his request was approved provided ISN 669 attended the legal visits.

As the 1 i Februar 2009 visit did not occur until mid-afternoon, counsel's request was moot.
However, counsel was allowed to meet with ISN 669 during the lunch period on 12 February
2009.

15. At approximately 9:00 am the following mornng, 12 February 2009, JlF-GTMO
again transported ISN 669 to Camp Echo for another meeting with counsel. Counsel did not
meet with ISN 669 for the entire day (9:00 am until 5:00 pm) on 12 February 2009 as counsel

terminated the meeting early. ISN 669 was transported back to the Detention Hospital at approximately 2:00 pm, after having met with counsel for five hours. Counsel did not request
additional time or another meeting with ISN 669 on the following day. Had counsel requested
such additional time or meetings, JTF-GTMO would have accommodated such requests.
1 declare under penalty of pe~jury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date: 19 February 2009

\)JA
D. A. MARTIN
Commander, JAGC, U.S. Navy

Staff Judge Advocate, JTF-GTMO

5