US Attorney Letter to Court

U. S. Department of Justice
Carmen M. Ortiz
United States Attorney
District of Massachusetts
John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse
1 Courthouse Way
Suite 9200
Boston, Massachusetts 02210

Margaret Carter, Esq.
Clerk of Court
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse
One Courthouse Way, Suite 2500
Boston, Massachusetts 02210

Re: In Re: Request from the United Kingdom Pursuant to the Treaty Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Kingdom on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters in the Matter of Delours Price, Appeal Nos. 11-2511 and 12-1159

Dear Ms. Carter:

This case was argued on April 4, 2012 before Chief Judge Lynch, and Judges Torruella and Boudin. Kindly bring this letter to the attention of the panel.

During appellants’ oral argument, counsel relied on a number of factual claims which are not in the record before this Court. One assertion is of particular concern. Counsel for the appellants argued to the Court that there is a “grave risk of physical harm to the appellants” from the disclosure to the United Kingdom of Belfast Project recordings. The government disputed this assertion in the district court, citing, among other things, the fact that there is no record of any reports to police in the Republic of Ireland or Northern Ireland regarding credible threats to Mr. McIntyre or his family. [D.7 at 16-18]. At oral argument, counsel for the appellants asserted that the United States Department of State takes the threat of harm to Mr. McIntyre and his family “much more seriously” than the Department of Justice and has “invited”Anthony McIntyre’s wife “in for a security assessment,” creating the misimpression that the Department of State has taken a position contrary to the Justice Department’s view of the matter.

Appellants’ claim of an agency disagreement is not supported by anything in the district court record. Moreover, the Department of Justice has been working closely with the Department of State and can assure this Court that the agencies’ views of the matter are compatible. The government would be happy to provide additional information on this issue should the Court wish – although such information would be outside the record of the case.

In any event, as the government has argued in its brief and at oral argument, appellants’ claim of potential harm from third parties, even if substantiated, would not entitle them to prevail in this appeal.

Respectfully submitted,

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Barbara Healy Smith
Assistant U.S. Attorney

cc: Eamonn Dornan, Esq., Dornan Associates, PLLC (via e-mail),
1040 Jackson Avenue, Suite 3B, Long Island City, New York 10017

James J. Cotter, III, Esq., Law Offices of James J Cotter (via e-mail),
Post Office Box 270, North Quincy, MA 01271

See response: Response to Department of Justice Letter to Court