Stone - de 123 DOJ Response To MTC Crowdstrike Reports

Case 1:19-cr-00018-ABJ Document 123 Filed 05/31/19 Page 1 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal No. 19-cr-18-ABJ
ROGER J. STONE, JR.,
Defendant.
GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO

COMPEL UNREDACTED CROWDSTRIKE REPORTS
Defendant Roger J. Stone has filed a motion seeking to compel production of certain
unredacted reports from the cybersecurity company CrowdStrike. Doc. 103. The government
has no reason to believe the redacted information constitutes Brady material and does not possess
the information the defendant seeks.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
By May 2016, the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) and the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee (“DCCC”) became aware that their computer systems had
been compromised by intrusions, and they hired the cybersecurity company CrowdStrike to
identify the extent of the intrusions and mitigate the threat. On June 14, 2016, the DNC, via
CrowdStrike, publicly announced that it had been hacked by Russian government actors. See,
Washington Post, D.N.C. Says Russian Hackers Penetrated Its Files, Including Dossier on Donald
Trump, June 14, 2016, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/us/politics/russian-
hackers-dnc-trump.html. At the direction of the DNC and DCCC’s legal counsel, CrowdStrike
prepared three draft reports. 1 Copies of these reports were subsequently produced voluntarily to
1
Although the reports produced to the defendant are marked “draft,” counsel for the DNC and DCCC informed the
government that they are the last version of the report produced.
the government by counsel for the DNC and DCCC. 2 At the time of the voluntary production,
counsel for the DNC told the government that the redacted material concerned steps taken to
remediate the attack and to harden the DNC and DCCC systems against future attack. According
to counsel, no redacted information concerned the attribution of the attack to Russian actors. The
government has also provided defense counsel the opportunity to review additional reports
obtained from CrowdStrike related to the hack.
On July 1, 2018, the government indicted twelve Russian intelligence officers for their role
in the hack of the DNC and various email accounts belonging to individuals associated with the
presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton. See United States v. Netyksho, 18-cr-215 (D.D.C.).
ARGUMENT
1. The Material the Defendant Seeks Is Not Discoverable
The defendant argues that he is entitled to the unredacted reports because they constitute
exculpatory evidence under Brady v. Maryland. 373 U.S. 83 (1963). However, there is no reason
to believe that the redacted information constitutes Brady material. The defendant is not charged
with conspiring to hack the DNC or DCCC. Cf. Netyksho, Doc. 1. The defendant is charged
with making false statements to Congress regarding his interactions with Organization 1 and the
Trump Campaign and intimidating a witness to cover up his criminal acts. Any information
regarding what remediation steps CrowdStrike took to remove the Russian threat from the system
and strengthen the DNC and DCCC computer systems against subsequent attacks is not relevant
2
The defendant describes the reports as “ heavily redacted documents,” Doc. 103, at 1. One report is thirty-one
pages; only five lines in the executive summary are redacted. Another runs sixty-two pages, and redactions appear
on twelve pages. The last report is fifty-four pages, and redactions appear on ten pages.
2
to these charges. And, in any case, the government does not need to prove at the defendant’s trial
that the Russians hacked the DNC in order to prove the defendant made false statements, tampered
with a witness, and obstructed justice into a congressional investigation regarding election
interference. See Doc. 94, at 6 (arguing that the government will prove that multiple congressional
bodies and the FBI opened investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election, and the
defendant interfered in those investigations). The defendant is thus not entitled to the information
he seeks.
2. The Government Does Not Possess the Requested Information
As the government has advised the defendant in a letter following the defendant’s filing,
the government does not possess the material the defendant seeks; the material was provided to
the government by counsel for the DNC with the remediation information redacted. However,
the government has provided defense counsel the opportunity to review additional unredacted
CrowdStrike reports it possesses, and defense counsel has done so. 3
3
These materials are likewise not covered by Brady, but the government produced them for defense counsel review
in an abundance of caution.
3
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the Government respectfully requests that the Defendant’s motion be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
JESSIE K. LIU
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
By: /s/
Jonathan Kravis
Michael J. Marando
Assistant United States Attorneys
Adam C. Jed
Aaron S.J. Zelinsky
Special Assistant United States Attorneys
555 4th Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20530

Stone - de 123 DOJ Response To MTC Crowdstrike Reports

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stone - de 123 DOJ Response To MTC Crowdstrike Reports

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stone - de 123 DOJ Response To MTC Crowdstrike Reports

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:19-cr-00018-ABJ Document 123 Filed 05/31/19 Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. Criminal No. 19-cr-18-ABJ

ROGER J. STONE, JR.,

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO

the information the defendant seeks.

Trump, June 14, 2016, available at https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/us/politics/russian-

obtained from CrowdStrike related to the hack.

1. The Material the Defendant Seeks Is Not Discoverable

2. The Government Does Not Possess the Requested Information

CrowdStrike reports it possesses, and defense counsel has done so. 3

You might also like