Justice Department processing pardon case for sailor
The Washington Examiner reports the US Justice Department is processing a pardon for former US Navy sailor Kristian Saucier, after denying an opportunity to apply last year. Saucier was sentenced for one year in prison and awarded an “Other Than Honorable” discharge for taking photos inside a nuclear submarine. The photos were classified “Confidential,” the lowest classification level.
People convicted of federal crimes generally have to wait five years after being sentenced before they can apply for a pardon, and a waiver request from Saucier was denied in May, even though Trump told Fox News days after taking office in January 2017 that he was considering a pardon.
In its waiver-denial letter to Saucier’s then-attorney Jeffrey Addicott, the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney wrote on May 30: “Upon careful review of the information you submitted, we have concluded that it would not be appropriate to grant a waiver of the waiting period in Mr. Saucier’s case to permit him to apply for a pardon at this time.”
“I can confirm there is a pending case open. We have no further comment,” said Justice Department spokeswoman Nicole Navas Oxman.
In late February, the Justice Department sent another letter, saying Saucier’s pardon application is now being processed. “We will now be processing the application for presidential pardon of your client, Kristian Saucier,” the Office of the Pardon Attorney wrote to Addicott, who forwarded the letter to Saucier’s current attorney, Ronald Daigle.
Spokespeople for the White House did not respond to requests for comment.
President Trump repeatedly mentioned Saucier during the 2016 campaign, after he was sentenced. He argued Saucier was punished for doing very little compared to Hillary Clinton. Clinton was judged to be “Grossly Negligent” in mishandling classified information when she and her aides transmitted 110 emails containing classified information through her non-secure server, among other violations.
Reduction in rate to E-1, loss of all pay and allowances, a year in prison and an OTH seem a bit steep to me for a Confidential act of stupidity; an example was made here. This pardon is rather obviously being fast tracked for political reasons- Trump will use it to bludgeon Clinton for her egregious, unpunished security violations.
And I’m OK with that.
Category: Legal
…AW1Ed,
Sir, I need to respectfully disagree here. Giving Saucier a pardon would be a bad idea for a number of reasons.
First, it appears he didn’t have just a few pics – he had enough that the FBI and NCIS started an espionage investigation on him (in fairness, they found nothing, but on the other hand the Bureau hasn’t exactly covered itself in glory lately and so one can’t be sure.) The only excuse he’s given is that he wanted his family to see what he worked on. Many of us have seen/done things in our service that we desperately wanted to share with our families and friends, but could not – and did not.
Second, when he got caught he lied through his teeth and then tried to destroy – and not at all well – the evidence. I get that when you think you’re going to be busted you want to do SOMETHING, but he seemed to want to be awfully thorough about it, not to mention that if he had told the truth up front he would almost have certainly faced Captain’s Mast/SCM, and a reduction in rank – but he might well have avoided prison.
Third is that it’s obvious he’s sorry – a year in Federal prison, and an OTH along with a felony conviction for what amounts to aggravated stupidity would make anyone sorry for their actions – but his pleas for the pardon seem to boil down to, “Others did it and never got in trouble, and Hilary.”
Hilary wasn’t in that engineering space, and neither were the others who supposedly took pics. Saucier was, and he not only blew an integrity gasket, he roared right past the backup safeguards. Giving him a Presidential pardon for this (even if just to poke Hilary in the eye) would open up a can of worms that the DOD and the services really don’t need right now.
Mike
It’s all good, Mike. You seem to have insight into aggravating circumstances that went unmentioned in the articles I researched. Sounds like he made a bad situation worse.
At any rate, this now is in the the political realm, where the elephants dance and we mere mortals fear to tread. As we all have seen, Trump will do what Trump will do, and everything else be damned.
Also, this is why I post- to generate thoughts and discussion. Thank you for your input.
PS, I hear “Sir” and I look around to see who walked into the room. *grin*
“[I]n fairness, they found nothing, but on the other hand the Bureau hasn’t exactly covered itself in glory lately and so one can’t be sure.” That’s being fair, to say that the FBI found no evidence of espionage but then suggesting that maybe the FBI screwed up the investigation?
“I get that when you think you’re going to be busted you want to do SOMETHING, but he seemed to want to be awfully thorough about it.” Thorough? Here’s the Navy times account oif how the evidence was found: “On a March day in 2012, the supervisor at the town dump in Hampton, Connecticut, saw an LG cellphone resting atop a dumpster. Deciding he needed a new cell phone, he powered it on.”
“[B]ut his pleas for the pardon seem to boil down to, “Others did it and never got in trouble, and Hilary.” I didn’t see his petition. You must have. Plaese share it. The Hillary business was not a defense. It was raised at the sentencing phase of his trial by his attorneys after Trump made it an issue publicly.
Other than those things, I guess we agree.
Abandoned phone atop a dumpster?
That sounds like a half-assed “dead drop” in a spy novel.
I am -now- suspicious that this is -not- some dipshit kid. Of course, “radioactive stupidity” is stil a possibility.
The rest of the story is that he made deposits at the dump and put his phone down on the dumpster during one of those runs. The phone was charged, unlocked, and undamaged when it was found. The supervisor who found it turned it over to a Navy friend (or Navy Veteran, I forget which) when he saw the pics. The rest, as they say, is history. Spy? No. Stupid? Yes.
In all fairness we don’t know what NCIS found because he copped the plea. I don’t see how it is possible for him NOT to have met the federal definition of espionage. The whole “reason to believe the information will be used to the advantage of a foreign nation…” language. He put the photos on unsecured electronic devices. I’m not naive enough to believe that their are not foreign operatives skimming as much data as they can from unsecured devices around military installation.
NEC338x: The mere fact that he took six pics he should not have does not allow one to conclude that he intended to injure the United States. Intent is an element of the crime of espionage. It can be inferred, but the inference still requires some factual support. As for his taking a plea, each pic is a separate offense. He plead to one. There’s your plea deal. That’s it.
Air Cav, Clearly my knowledge is limited to what is publicly known about the case and I’m biased by my personal and outdated knowledge of the NNPP. I do appreciate the insights of yourself and MSG, however.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-servicemember-admits-illegally-retaining-photos-taken-inside-nuclear-submarine-and
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2015/08/01/sailor-faces-charges-for-submarine-photos-on-cell-phone/
Even during the Cold War it was always a running joke that the Soviets could learn a lot more from college level textbooks and academic journals than they could from NNPP tech manuals and training documents. That doesn’t mean that control of the information was not taken absolutely seriously.
There is more than enough room on this for reasonable people to come to different conclusions based on the same facts. Some folks are squishy and some hard as they come. Most of us are in between. There’s also the experience factor and the pissedoffedness of those who abided by the no photo/no camera rules and this guy. I just loves me some good discussion.
True dat. And if they busted nukes based on the notes we carried around in our ubiquitous little green notebooks, most if not all of us would still be under the jail.
There has been considerable statement publicly that “intent” is -not- required under the espionage statute. (Unlike almost any other defined crime.)
Thus all the consternation when it was said officially tht no crime occurred because HRC “had no intent”.
Because that lack of intent never mattered -before- HRC broke the daylights out of the espionage statute.
See the next to lat paragraph of the authors text:
http://opiniojuris.org/2013/07/31/correcting-a-common-misperception-of-the-espionage-act/
The standard (to me) appears to be “has reason to believe it -could- be used to harm the US”.
There are also certain provisions of the espionage act that do NOT require any intent to injure the US or benefit another foreign nation whatsoever – or any delivery of information to a foreign power, for that matter. They only require that information be mishandled by authorized users and/or that a known mishandling be willingly unreported. See 18 USC 793(e) and (f).
IMO those provisions were the ones under which Clintoon were most culpable. I simply do not believe her claims that “she didn’t know” anything on her private email server was classified.
She knew; they all knew what they were doing wasn’t kosher. That is why they worked so hard at concealing it. Lying to the public is the stock in trade for the Clinton mob.
The statute Hillary violated did not require intent, only “gross negligence”. That is why Comey said “extremely careless” when he described Hillary’s “mistake”. Evidently he thinks there is a difference.
True. But mishandling of classified information, which those photos were, since they were of classified spaces on the boat, does not differentiate between intentional or unintentional mishandling of classified information or material. He got off very lightly since Title 10, which covers this offense, specifies 10 years in prison and a $10,000.00 fine per offense.
Was his punishment commensurate with others who had done the same thing?
He pled down to a single charge, which alone could (should) have gotten him ten years. Possession and retention of a photo. Since he took the photos he committed espionage. He also tried to destroy devices holding the files and impeded the investigation.
Real stellar upstanding boy. He has a nice career waiting for him in politics and/or reality television.
Espionage requires “intent to damage or harm the United States”.
There was no intent found, so in his case it wasn’t espionage. It was just stupidity.
Apparently, I took too much time posting my comment. Should have refreshed. That’s why my response is nearly identical to yours, MSG Eric.
Great minds…..even on a Sunday morning. lol
Espionage requires such intent. Unauthorized retention of classified materials does not. See 18 USC 1924. That is also a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison.
If he took the photo(s) with his cell phone and personally retained it, it would appear he’s guilty of at least that much – regardless of the level of classification of the material involved. Adding intent to deliver the materials to a foreign government would add a second crime: espionage (18 USC 793).
I would have thought “espionage” also did not require “intent” based on this article:
http://opiniojuris.org/2013/07/31/correcting-a-common-misperception-of-the-espionage-act/
“Reason to believe harm cold happen” versus “intent to cause harm”.
Am I misreading the next to last paragraph?
UCMJ Punitive Article 106: (Intent is required for the UCMJ, in this case he was court-martialed.)
(a) (1) Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any entity described in paragraph
(2), either directly or indirectly, any thing described in paragraph
(3) shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, except that if the accused is found guilty of an offense that directly concerns
(A) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack,
(B) war plans,
(C) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or
(D) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy, the accused shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court- martial may direct.
your quote, paragraph 1
“…Intent Or reason to believe…”
Seems to not -require- intent.
Mumble, mumble, something racist, mumble, mumble, something majorly stupid, mumble, mumble…CRAYONS!!!
Leave, Dane Brown, and please don’t come back.
I concur with you, 2/17 AC.
Be quiet, ignorant child. Adults are talking.
Brown: We never had a primate in the White House. I can’t recall having seen you here before (maybe I’m wrong) so hopefully this will be a one time visit. Racism has no place on this site.
This is Jonn’s house- I will not delete or even edit a comment here unless it’s mine, although theoretically I could. Sometimes holding myself to this standard is more difficult than others.
This is one of the difficult ones. Grrrr…
“Dane” “brown” …
Dogshit?
I’ve had the privilege of serving our country in the United States Navy with all colors of people. They were my fellow air crew members, aircraft maintainers, medical and admin staff, my brothers and sisters who worked so hard to put me in the air, and then mercilessly teased me for being a fukkin’ AW. “I see where you get flight pay, but dammed if I can figure out how you earn base pay!” Thanks for that.*grin*
So I have little patience for assholes like Dane.
There’s the door, don’t let it hit you in the ass, fucktard.
“Mumble, mumble, something racist, mumble, mumble, something majorly stupid, mumble, mumble…CRAYONS!!!”
Somehow I think this is the last we will hear from Dane Brown. AMF, Dane.
Dane Brown man are you real or a fake profile? Are you a 100% true actual real veteran?
Crayons is a Marine thing Dane. This dude is a squid. Catch up.
I’m sure that’s all he can come up with while he’s smoking generic cigarettes, guzzling Nasty light and T-bird while living in a beat up 40 year old single wide.
I have been tracking this case since the first day the charges were reported. Thanks to my Google news alert for “naval nuclear”, I was able to find the FBI statement that first week and dig into it.
This case starts and ends with the integrity violation. A duck dinner and five years in the federal pen would be what I consider the minimum in this case. Back in the early 80’s, when I was nothing but a push button in the pipeline, I would have expected a DD and time if I had fckd up and “merely” lost documents walking the guard mail between buildings 1 & 2. From day one in the pipeline, you (used to be) are hammered with the need for absolute personal integrity in the small sh’t as well as the big sh’t.
I was held back two classes in Nuke School on a Med hold. During that time I worked for NNPS Admin. Every week I saw integrity wash outs that were better than this piece of chum. Some were NJP’d, others ended up in the courts martial pipeline.
Can you tell I’m torqued? 😉
Then, what would you consider an appropriate sentence for the Hilldog? She had hundreds of highly classified docs on her home server and various devices, in an email system she deliberately set up to conceal her emails from the government records system. She had documents on her illegal system that were Top Secret and SCI (Special Compartmented Intelligence). Included in those emails and their attachments were documents disclosing he identities of our intel agents. She was sending documents to her unsecured home computer and having her maid (a foreign national) print them for her to read at home. We don’t know what was sent to her blackberries and Ipads because they were smashed by her aides. We do know that the Weiner aka Carlos Danger had classified State Department docs on his laptop. So, if several years in the pound are appropriate for the sailor, shouldn’t Hillary and her minions get 20 years or more? She and her staff certainly worked hard to conceal their violations of our classified information statutes.
Got no problem at all with the appropriate punishments you suggest, except that they may be too light.
I agree he should have been hammered, but more along the 45/45, lose a stripe, half for two, not a year in prison.
You and I know how overboard they get with NNPI and classifications, and the reasons why, which goes back to Rickover in the late 50’s/early 60’s.
Oh, many and varied are the ways a nuke can tapdance on their genitalia.
Interesting perspective from those of you who are more in the know, too bad none of our press weasles took the time to really see what the big deal is about this.
My first enlistment I was on sea duty working in the brig and guarding nukes and held a secret clearance and was on the PRP . It was constantly hammered into us about pictures being verboten and I do not think violating that ever crossed my mind.
He was not spying for a foreign government. There is no evidence whatsoever that he sought to harm the US. Why do a few of you want to make him out to be the second coming of John Anthony Walker. He phuked up. He went to prison. He is now on home detention, working as a garbageman to support his family. A pardon is not exoneration. It means he can vote again and not much more in his situation. He remains convicted and a pardon does not change that fact, legally or otherwise.
And why pardon this felon while not pardoning others, 2/17 AC?
Hey, I get it that you detest the Clintoons. So do I. But the fact that Hillary Clintoon skated because the prior SCoaMF of a POTUS and his corrupt Justice Department cut her a break has nothing to do with this case.
To me, the sentence seems about right. If the POTUS wants to commute any remaining probation, I’d be OK with that. But a pardon?
IMO that’s not apropos unless/until Hillary applies for one after being convicted of a similar offense.
A pardon changes little. His conviction cannot be expunged. It will remain on his record beyond his lifetime. As for Wide Load skating, as far as I know, she can still be charged with multiple crimes, although Trump has indicated that’s not going to happen. That sucks. We can amicably disagree as to whether his sentence was appropriate, but what happens in one case (or non-case, in the matter of Wide Load) has no bearing on what happens in another. My personal view is that the Wide Load business should never had factored into Saucier’s prosecution and sentencing, but Trump injected it, to my regret.
Fair enough. We’re not that far apart, actually.
FWIW: having worked with and around classified materials during the bulk of my time in uniform, I tend to be fairly forgiving of honest errors – but not willful violations. Had this been an “oops” on his part, I’d likely agree the sentence was too harsh and he might deserve a pardon.
However, this doesn’t seem to have been an honest error; instead, it seems to have been willful disregard of existing policy/regulation. That’s why I regard the sentence here as being about right.
I’d concur that I’ve seen stuff that was a mistake here n’ there myself. In this case he took pictures when he shouldn’t have and he knew he shouldn’t have. The problem with newer technology, it allows people to be dumber and provide evidence of how dumb they are.
I would contend that James Comey “injected” it into the Saucier case when he didn’t recommend charges AFTER explaining for 20 minutes all the things she did wrong. (Even before we knew that Comey wrote his first draft to not recommend charges against her two months before the case was over.)
Yeah the pardon part is a bit extreme if it goes full pardon.
It is tough though to see holding a lowly Sailor fully accountable while a member of the Cabinet gets a pass every single time they do something illegal, wrong, unethical, immoral, etc. One of the most frustrating parts of being in the military.
Depends on whether it is a full or conditional pardon;
“The granting of an unconditional pardon fully restores an individual’s civil rights forfeited upon conviction of a crime and restores the person’s innocence as though he or she had never committed a crime.”
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/pardon
My hard copy or online Navy Times mentioned that 30+ Female sailors are going to be assigned to one of the new Subs but of course I only remembered the 30+ and forgot the Subs name. Also no more “dirty” jokes, offensive behavior, harrasing, mocking, etc. Things have changed since my time on the Lady of the Seas LPH 3 back in time 1963-1966, or have they but back in the day, the only Females we had on board were for a Dependants cruise out of Guitmo, 1965 USO show during operation Power Pack and Family members visiting their Dads and the 1964 Worlds Fair open house in NYC.
I believe they’re Ohio Class SSBNs- they have the real estate for a co-ed crew the fast attack boats lack.
Help a brother out here, Bubbleheads.
Yup. Officers and senior enlisted have been on them for a decade, now along come the junior folks.
USS Michigan is first, I think.
Would Trump be so trollish as to offer HRC a pardon on any crimes to which she would publicly admit, excepting treason?
Would that not be -epic-?
I was a nuke for more than 20 years. We all knew, without a doubt, that there was to be no photography (other than official / classified for government use) allowed in the engineering spaces – NONE. Not even a friendly re-enlistment photo with the CO was allowed. This idiot got what he deserved and shame on him. Excusing his actions because of some failed presidential candidate’s equally illegal actions would harm the rules for securing classified information and set a precedent for others who would violate these rules and give them some hope of redemption. He played his silly game and received his richly deserved prize. I do not feel sorry at all for this piece of nuke waste.
I get that 100%, bullnuke. Rest assured, his conviction survives a pardon, IF he gets a pardon.
I think more than the pics it was covering his ass (poorly) that really screwed him.
It was the azz covering which illustrates exactly why he did not have what it takes to be a nuke. I’m sorry that it took until he was an E6 to find that out. You just can’t have people covering up the big sh’t or the small sh’t. During my time in I had two incidents reports that I was involved in. When investigators arrived it was never pleasant, but absolute truth was necessary and expected. That’s why personal integrity is sooooo important and a big reason why the safety record of the program is so good. It also why the training scandal a couple years ago was such a blow. As far as interactions with law enforcement, the rule was no matter what let the Chief and DivO know before it got back to them. Depending on the incident, you could still get NJP without getting de-nuked. I saw that happen a couple of times. I personally had a couple. Two were an administrative infraction and a traffic violation (different occasions.) No big deal, I got the dumb azz speech and got to give training on how I was a dumb azz so that others wouldn’t make the same mistake The third was a misdemeanor (not drug or alcohol related). That one I was more worried about because of potential effects on security clearance, but I got in front of it and nothing came of it. If it wasn’t drug or alcohol related, administrative violations were no big deal as long as you got in front of them . Misdemeanors could end up with NJP as well as the civil actions, depending on their nature. Felonies of any sort, like this bit of condenser chum, you were going to get completely hammered. The outcome was going to be bad no matter how he handled it. Had he gone to the Chain of Command before NCIS got involved I’d guessed he’d gotten a GCM , de-nuked, reduction in rate, and a big chicken dinner and avoided the civil judicial system altogether. But I’m an old phart. It may be different… Read more »
My step-daughter, a beautiful blond, was a teenager when I was serving aboard a boomer back in the 70s. I was stationed in Hawaii and, well, she was known to wear teeny bikinis while frequenting the beaches. When we were the “off crew” her date card was maxed out by the young sailors I served with. Some 30 years later my step-daughter told me that each and every time she went out with one of my shipmates she offered to make their dreams come true if they would simply tell her what we did on patrol. According to her, none of my shipmates did anything more than baffle her with the submariners standard lines of BS.
To this day she has no idea of what we did on patrol other than my claims to have been the head honcho in charge of the ice cream machine, the most accurate garbage gun shooter and the best dang shit tank blower in A Gang.
As far as I’m concerned, this sailor’s service was “other than honorable”.
We couldn’t possibly do that in this age of PC…….After all, bathhouse Barry thought, and I am certain he still does, that our military is just another job.
Amusing coming from someone who never held a real job, not even when he was lurking about the White House
Bernie Sanders is no different, he’s NEVER held a real job either.
but dipsticks who rallied for him here in Orygun (putrid Portland adored him) did not care.
When he failed to hoist the flag for the Dimwit party in the general election, 40% of them did not even bother to vote yet were sucking on pacifiers and shaking their rattles for four days on the streets of Portland because Hillary lost.
That is the lunacy that is Portland
BTW, the finale came when teens walked out of HS classes to join the riot in progress.
Liberalism is a Mental Disorder and liberals prove it day after day with their words and deeds. How often did Conservatives riot, loot and burn after the previous President won?
Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades……..given how Hillary violated protocol in handling classified not even close.
I say to hell with him being granted a Pardon given that he tried to lie and tap-dance his way out of facing up to what he did.
My point is you cannot be selective.
There is no intent clause in the handling of classified
No different than the tapdance Hillary did when she violated protocol nor when Ms ‘I just be a female really’ Manning did same
There is no get out of jail pass for any of it
Rules are rules.