Email Between FBI Officials re: Forwarded Prisoner Abuse

.Message
FOGLE, TONI M. (INSD) (FBI)
Page 1 of2
ALL INFOPHATI ON C01VTAl NED
HEPEIN ~r LA IF
BATE 83 1 2 2009 BY 65179 DI1H/ l s c
From: FOGLE, TONI M. (INSD) (FBI)
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 3:15 PM
To: MERSHON, MARK J. (SF}(FBI); THORNTON, CHARLENE B. (PX) (FBI); GRANT, ROBERT D.
(INSD) (FBI)
Subject: FW: Prisoner Abuse
UNCLASSIFIED
NON·RECORD
Not the email that I was looking for, but this and ones to follow will provide further insight.
-----Original Message-----
From: THOMPSON, DONALD W. JR (RH) (FBI)
Sent: Friday, September 17,20041:02 PM
To: FOGLE, TONI M. (INSD) (FBI); GRANT, ROBERT D. (INSD) (FBI)~",--- I(INSD) (FBI);
I I(INSD) (FBI)
Subject: RE: PrisonerAbuse
UNCLASSIFIED
NON·RECORD
Toni, obviously, the issue as to who has proprietary ownership on this issue is fuzzy and I was not aware that
these interviews were expanding beyond GITMO. CTD and OGC have important equities here and it seems that
we need to get Pistole involved and clarify with him who has the lead on this so that someone has the ,
responsibility to get some coherent guidance out to those affected in the field and as well, go back to the Army
or DTFC and work out protocols. Among other things, the Army should not be going directly to the field without
prior coordination with HQ. I wonder if there is any parallel process ongoing or contemplated by the Navy as the
Marines were involved with detainees also? Lastly, how about detainees who were in the cantol of CIA/Special
Ops types? Does the DTFC have overarching control of this issue regardless of which entity controlled any given
detainees? If so, seems that we should be talking to these people and clarify what they want/need re
interviewing agents and to coordinate any actions related to same.
-----Origina( Message-----
From: FOGLE, TONI M. (INSD) (FBI)
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 12:34 PM '
To: THOMPSON. DONALD W. JR (RH) (FBI); GRANT, ROBERT D. (INSD) (FBI);I
(INSD) (FBI);I I(INSD) (FBI) "'--------
Subject: FW: Prisoner Abuse
UNCLASSIFIED
NON·RECORD
This is becoming very problematic - I'm going to forward some past communications I had with ELU and
what I asked ~o do in a very limited sense. I'm not sure how this is expanding - but I'd
like to relevant units meet to strategize.
b6
b 7C
b6
b 7C
b6
b7C
-----Original Message-----
From! ICINSD) (FBI)
Sent: Friday, September 17, 200411:18 AM
To: FOGLE, TONI M. (INSD) (FBI)
Subject: Prisoner Abuse
11/9/2004
b 6
b 7C
FBI001819CBT ACLU-RDI 6062 p.1
DOJOIG 001592
Message
UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
Page 2 of2
T - The agents in the NYO are receiving telcals directly from Army CID and the Detainee Task Force
Committee (DTFC) requesting interviews pertaining to Iraq and Afghanistan. NY mgmt wants to know
what is the protocol for dealing w/these entities. According to NY, the agents are considered witnesses
and Army CID and the DTFGwant to question them concerning investigations a~ainst militarv personnel
and/or contractors. This sounds like a broken record. I directed NY to ~GC ao~ I NY
contacted OGC for guidance. OGC (ELU) had no clue that Valerie and ere rOing dOVr this
path. ELUcontacted me andwanted to know wha~:; go~n~g on. I relayed Val's and position
and recommended course of action. ELU contacted 0 find out what was going on w/this project. I Itold ELU that his project only covered (GIT an not Iraq and Afghanistan. (This is news to
me) To make a long story short anq a short story long, no one wants to claim ownership of this issue and
the people that will suffer the consequences will be our agents.
Until this is sorted out, it is my recommendation that ARMY CID and/or DTFC should be told to put their
request in writing and send it to us and we can sort it out on a case by case basis. What a mess.
Let me know how you want to handle.
b 6
b 7C
ucj
ext '-- _
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
11/912004
b6
b7 C
FBI001820CBT ACLU-RDI 6062 p.2
DOJOIG 001593