DOJ-OGR-00022039.jpg

Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 33 Filed 04/09/20 Page 16 of 38 Bryan argued, conversely, that the ‘government’ under the Rule, included not only the prosecutors, but also any closely connected investigative agencies. The Court dispensed with the ‘out of District’ argument by the government, ruling that Rule 16 was not so limiting. With respect to the issue of production of items from other closely connected agencies, the Court found in favor of Bryan as far as discovery of items by such agencies. In setting forth the rule, the Court said: “The prosecutor will be deemed to have knowledge of and access to anything im the possession, custody and control of any federal agency participating in the same investigation of the defendant.” Jd.at 1036. The District Courts of New York have followed Bryan, supra. In United States of America v. Volpe, 42 F. Supp. 2d 204 (E.D.N.Y. 1999), also a corrections/police officer case, the Court found that the materials were discoverable from any other agencies “allied with the prosecution.” Jd. at 221, In addition, in citing to Bryan, supra, the Court stated that: “Another factor in the analysis is whether or not the prosecution has access to the materials.” Id In this matter, defendant, Thomas, has shown that other agencies ‘allied with the prosecution,” have and/or are, participating with each other. The statement of Attorney General, William Barr, confirms that a separate investigation was initiated by the Inspector General. Additionally, it seems more than obvious that the internal affairs division within the BOP conducted a separate investigation into the events in questions. Importantly, Rule 16 focuses on the preparation of the defense. Therefore, documents are material under Rule 16 and subject to disclosure if they help the defense to ascertain the strengths and weaknesses of the government’s case. Marshall, 132 F.3d at 67-68. Other Districts have also followed Bryan. In United States v. Libby, 432 F. Supp. 81 (D.D.C. 2006), the Court was faced with a motion to compel, by defendant, I. ‘Scooter’ Libby, in the Valerie Plame CIA leak case. The matter concerning Libby concerned whether he lied as to the disclosures as to Plame. Libby sought documents which, as the Court pointed out, were of a 12 DOJ-OGR-00022039