[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----VA., FLA., LA., IND., US MIL.

[Rick Halperin]

April 10



VIRGINIA:

Virginia governor has hours to decide on return of compulsory electric chair 
---- As state faces drug shortage, Clinton ally Terry McAuliffe has until 
midnight to decide whether chair should again be compulsory method of execution 
- while f1st inmate who could face it, Ivan Teleguz, has strong claim to 
innoncence


The governor of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, has until midnight on Sunday to 
decide whether to bring back the electric chair as a compulsory method of 
execution.

Should the Democratic governor sign the bill currently sitting on his desk, the 
Virginia department of corrections would be empowered to kill condemned 
prisoners using a contraption known macabrely in the state as "Old Sparky".

Should McAuliffe abstain tonight from doing anything, the law will come into 
effect on 1 July - only his active veto would stop it.

As a final twist in the governor's decision, the first inmate who might be 
killed by electrocution under the new law is a man, Ivan Teleguz, with a highly 
credible claim to innocence.

The decision confronting the governor is a fraught one, given the dark track 
record of the electric chair in Virginia's racially skewed history. The chair 
was first used in 1908 to kill a black man convicted of the rape of a white 
woman. Since then, 217 of the 267 people who have died by electrocution have 
been African American.

The dilemma is further intensified by McAuliffe's close ties to Hillary 
Clinton, and the likelihood that any decision to facilitate the return of the 
electric chair will reverberate on the presidential campaign trail. McAuliffe 
was chairman of Clinton's last presidential campaign, in 2008, and before that 
helped Bill Clinton earn a second term in the White House in 1996.

Hillary Clinton's views on capital punishment have already impinged on her race 
for the presidency. In October she declared she was in favor of executions in 
"very limited and rare" cases. That sets her apart from her rival Bernie 
Sanders, who is adamantly opposed to the practice.

The issue welled up again in March, when Clinton was confronted at a 
presidential town hall debate by a former death row prisoner who was exonerated 
after his innocence was proved.

"I came perilously close to my own execution," Ricky Jackson told her, so "I 
would like to know how you can still take your stance on the death penalty."

So far, McAuliffe has given no indication of his thinking. Last week, 300 
Virginia religious leaders wrote a joint letter urging the governor to veto the 
bill and prevent the compulsory return of a "barbarous relic" that kills with 
"unspeakable cruelty".

On the other side of the argument, the department of corrections has long been 
calling for a change in procedures given that its stockpile of lethal injection 
drugs - the prevalent form of execution for 40 years - has run dry.

Like most death penalty states, Virginia has struggled in the face of a tight 
boycott imposed by the European Union and major drug companies that refuse to 
send medical drugs used in executions to the US on ethical grounds.

Virginia has indicated that it has only 2 vials left of compounded 
pentobarbital, a sedative often used in the triple lethal injection, and its 
own protocols require it to have 3 vials available for any execution.

On 10 March, the department of corrections changed its death protocols, but did 
so in secret without revealing to the public what the change involved.

As the law currently stands, the state's hands are tied because the only 
permitted form of execution other than lethal injection is the electric chair. 
But "Old Sparky" can only be used where a condemned inmate chooses it - hence 
the bill sitting on McAuliffe's desk that would allow the state to impose 
electrocution compulsorily.

Ivan Teleguz was sentenced to death in 2006 for a "hit job" - he was accused of 
hiring other men to murder his former girlfriend.

Since then, 2 of the 3 main witnesses in the state's case against him have 
issued affidavits in which they recanted their testimony. Edwin Gilkes wrote 
that most of his testimony was fabricated under duress from prosecutors who 
threatened to put him on death row himself if he failed to cooperate.

The 2nd witness, Aleksey Saronov, said he made up testimony on a promise from 
prosecutors that they would help him with immigration papers.

Transcripts of an interview with the shooter in the case, Michael Hetrick, 
reveal that he was put under intense pressure by investigators to implicate 
Teleguz.

"Ivan is the guy that I want. I'm going to get Ivan," the investigator said, 
adding: "If you cooperate, no death penalty. If you don't cooperate, [the 
district attorney] will go after the death penalty."

A death warrant ordering the execution of Teleguz was set for 13 April but it 
has been postponed by the courts to give time for his lawyers to petition the 
US supreme court.

Michael Williams, a litigation partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP who is part of 
the legal team representing Teleguz, said that the trial had been "so littered 
with constitutional errors that of all the cases in the US where the government 
plans to reenact a barbaric method of execution like the electric chair, this 
should inspire the governor to think twice".

Teleguz's co-counsel Elizabeth Peiffer, a staff attorney with the Virginia 
Capital Representation Resource Center, said a return to the electric chair 
would be "an incredible step backwards" and a "very embarrassing legacy" for 
the governor who enacted it.

(source: The Guardian)

***************

RTD's Frank Green named VPA's 2015 Outstanding Journalist


Richmond Times-Dispatch reporter Frank Green was named the Virginia Press 
Association's Outstanding Journalist for 2015 at its awards ceremony Saturday.

Green was cited for dogged reporting that led to the freeing of an innocent man 
last year and for the deft storytelling skills he brings to his coverage of 
police, courts, prisons and the death penalty.

"As he has for many years, Frank Green continued to turn the spotlight of his 
reporting on the human consequences of our flawed justice system," the VPA 
committee judging the competition wrote.

It is rare for a journalist to see an innocent man freed by his reporting and 
"practically unheard of for both a prosecutor and the man's lawyers to applaud 
that journalist as the cause of the release," the committee said.

Green's investigative reporting during the past 13 years led to the release in 
May of Michael Kenneth McAlister, who was convicted of a 1986 abduction and 
attempted rape in South Richmond and served 29 years in prison before his 
exoneration.

Green last week also received the 2015 Innocence Network Journalism Award at a 
national conference in San Antonio for his work on the case.

A Times-Dispatch reporter since 1980, Green received a call in 2002 from 
McAlister's mother seeking help for her son. His reporting brought the case to 
the attention of the Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project.

Green found that an undercover police task force had been tracking Norman Bruce 
Derr, a serial rapist and lookalike for McAlister, in the mid-1980s.

Derr, serving a life sentence for other attacks, confessed to the South 
Richmond case, resulting in McAlister's pardon by Gov. Terry McAuliffe.

"Mr. Green's work took me and my family from doom and despair to what can only 
be described as a dream come true," McAlister wrote in a letter to the VPA 
committee.

"Absent Frank Green's reporting, we likely never would have become aware of Mr. 
McAlister, let alone the information about the task force that proved so 
crucial to his eventual exoneration," wrote James A. Bensfield and Jonathan D. 
Kossak, the attorneys who took up the case after they had successfully freed a 
Maryland man imprisoned for a rape committed by Derr.

"There is no better example of his work, and work ethic, than his tireless, 
decade-spanning coverage of the wrongful conviction of Michael McAlister," 
wrote Richmond Commonwealth's Attorney Michael N. Herring. "Frank's work was so 
thorough that I frequently found myself turning to his stories for an accurate 
chronology of events and the roles of the various actors."

Green's reporting last year also included coverage of illegal cigarette 
trafficking that highlighted how traffickers work and take advantage of state 
laws and regulations.

He reported on a former Richmond police detective's flawed search warrant 
requests, which have led to convictions against a dozen people being 
overturned.

And Green wrote a 3-part series on a former U.S. paratrooper who testified at 
the federal trial in Richmond of an insurgent whom he had wounded in 
Afghanistan.

His in-depth reporting also has helped gain the freedom of another innocent 
man. On Friday, Keith Allen Harward gave credit to Green as he was released 
from Nottoway Correctional Center after serving 33 years after being wrongly 
convicted of the 1982 rape of a Newport News woman and the murder of her 
husband.

Green is a captivating narrative writer, Paige Mudd, editor of The 
Times-Dispatch, wrote in her nomination. "A lot of outstanding reporters aren't 
also great storytellers. Frank is an exception."

(source: richmond.com)






FLORIDA:

The death sentence nightmare


Imagine having a dream - a nightmare really - in which you are locked in a 
cage, guilty of nothing other than perhaps being at the wrong place at the 
wrong time. Your pleas for release are all but ignored, your family can do 
nothing and all the money in the world couldn't set you free. You are condemned 
to death. Your faith in your government is lost; your faith in God may be your 
only salvation.

But in this nightmare, you aren't a hostage being held by 3rd-world terrorists 
seeking global anarchy or religious domination. Rather, you are an American 
being held in a Florida state prison awaiting execution for a crime you did not 
commit. You know it. Perhaps your family knows it. Your God certainly knows it. 
Your defense attorney is relatively certain she knows it, but your appeals 
through the legal system have been exhausted and the death chamber looms.

Here in Florida, state-sanctioned executions used to be conducted by using the 
rather crude electric chair. Considered somewhat cruel and unusual, if not 
medieval in a modern sort of way, the state stopped zapping the condemned in 
1999 when it added the option of a more humane cocktail of drugs that stops the 
accused's heart. The accused are given the choice of method of execution.

I had to put my 14-year-old black Labrador retriever to sleep using a similar 
drug several years ago. I was there when the vet administered 2 injections - 1 
to put Bonnie to sleep, the other to stop her heart. As painful as it was to 
see her go, it was one of the most peaceful moments I have ever experienced, 
and in fact made me think that is the way I would like to go if facing a 
terminal illness or imminent death full of pain and misery.

For me, government-sanctioned executions are not so much about the form of the 
execution; rather, the issue is government being in the business of killing as 
punishment when there is even a remote chance of executing someone who is 
innocent.

This is neither a conservative nor liberal view. If anything, it's rather 
libertarian. Edward Crane, founder of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think 
tank, says: "[T]he government is often so inept and corrupt that innocent 
people might die as a result. Thus, I personally oppose the death penalty."

Have you ever gotten a speeding ticket, red-light violation, parking ticket, 
code enforcement notice of violation, IRS penalty or some other form of 
government penalty that was unjust? I have. It made me feel angry, and the maze 
of bureaucracy required to fix such a seemingly benign injustice makes 
challenging the government almost a pointless waste of time. In fact, the 
government knows this, and counts on the masses - even those who legitimately 
are not guilty - to just pay the fine and be done with it.

Now imagine for a moment that the injustice for which you are wrongly accused 
and convicted is a murder or other capital crime for which the punishment is 
death (such as capital drug-trafficking). After your sentencing, while sitting 
in your cell, you realize the last time you were able to hug your family has 
long since passed. You will never throw another softball to your daughter or go 
fishing with your son. You won't ever again lie on the beach, pick a flower or 
walk into a store and roam the aisles before deciding on a purchase. When your 
children graduate from school years from now, you will be but a faded memory to 
them. When your parents die, you will shed a tear for their passing, but the 
state will laugh at your request to attend their funeral.

You are one of the condemned. Florida law permits execution by electric chair 
or lethal injection - the condemned gets to pick. Prior to 1999, the electric 
chair was the only method. Death row inmate Wayne Doty has asked the state to 
use 'Ol' Sparky," as the chair is known, to execute him.

Florida has executed only 2 women since 1976. There are 5 women on death row in 
the state.

As a resident of death row, you are considered among the scummiest members of 
society for committing a heinous crime. You are to be ridiculed and shamed. 
People will celebrate your death; some will show up outside the prison walls 
and chant for it. In a sardonic twist, the state will, after condemning you to 
death, allow you an indulgence of your last meal. Steaks and fries. Shrimp and 
grits. You name it. Want to wash it down with a Cherry Coke and a piece of 
coconut-creme cake? They'll oblige you that as well.

The public will be angered that you get such a fanciful request. They will 
write letters to the editor venting that your victim didn't get a last meal 
before you (supposedly) killed them. But the public doesn't realize you also 
are a victim, condemned to death for a crime you did not commit.

It happens. And for that reason, the death penalty should cease and desist.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not some liberal who wants to put hardened criminals on 
some reform program to return to civilized society. Lots of people belong in 
prison forever, and that's where they should stay.

But our criminal justice and legal systems are run by humans, and therefore 
they are fallible. No doubt, innocent people are executed in our country - 
which we boastfully say is civilized.

Since 1971 in Florida, 26 people have been exonerated of their death-row 
convictions, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. According to 
DPIC, in order to be on the list, the accused must have been convicted, 
sentenced to death and subsequently either: been acquitted of all charges 
related to the crime that placed them on death row; or had all charges related 
to the crime that placed them on death row dismissed by the prosecution; or 
been granted a complete pardon based on evidence of innocence.

26 times the system nearly failed the accused with unretractable consequences. 
The condemned - all men - sat on death row for one to 21 years, with an average 
of 7 years, before being freed with "oops" scribbled on a post-it note and a 
bus ticket back to wherever they came from. No amount of money or apologies 
will get what would have been back for them. The horror of being locked up and 
facing death for a crime you did not commit cannot be made up with money or 
apologies.

The longest-serving wrongly-accused inmate in Florida was James Richardson, who 
served 21 years. Here is what DPIC says about his case:

"James Richardson Florida Conviction: 1968, Charges Dismissed: 1989.

"Richardson was convicted and sentenced to death for the poisoning of one of 
his children. The prosecution argued that Richardson committed the crime to 
obtain insurance money, despite the fact that no such policy existed. The 
primary witnesses against Richardson were 2 jail-house snitches whom Richardson 
was said to have confessed to. Post-conviction investigation found that the 
neighbor who was caring for Richardson's children had a prior homicide 
conviction, and the defense provided affidavits from people to whom he had 
confessed.

"Richardson's conviction was thrown into further doubt when the governor 
appointed then-Dade County District Attorney Janet Reno to conduct a special 
investigation. She concluded Richardson's conviction should be vacated. At a 
subsequent court hearing, the court overturned his conviction, and no further 
charges were raised in the case."

21 years in a cell for 23 hours a day facing the electric chair knowing he was 
innocent - it is anyone's worst nightmare. But in essence, Richardson and the 
25 others are lucky. The system failed them before it worked for them, and that 
is something to be thankful for.

But flaws remain, and no doubt some innocents have been executed. How many of 
the 92 people Florida has executed since the death penalty was reinstated by 
the Supreme Court were innocent? How many of the current 396 people on the 
state's death row didn't commit the crime for which they were convicted?

It doesn't really matter what the answer is. Think about it from the standpoint 
of what if you were the one sentenced to die for a crime you did not commit. It 
happens, and it could be you.

The death penalty should be put to rest.

(source: Commentary: Chris Ingram is a columnist, political strategist and 
analyst for Bay News 9----Tampa Tribune)

******************

Gay Miami Beach man found stabbed to death, his partner has been charged


A Miami Beach gay male in his 60s, who has been identified as financial 
executive Louis Piper, was found brutally murdered by Miami Beach Police 
officers on Wednesday.

His partner Jonathan Alonso, who declined to give a statement to police, is 
charged and being held in connection with Piper's murder, which is a 
non-bondable offense, said department spokesman Ernesto Rodriguez.

Alonso is charged with 1 count of murder in the 1st degree, and 1 count of 
felony criminal mischief for destruction of police property. Alonso faces the 
death penalty or life without parole if convicted of Piper's murder, according 
to Florida Statutes.

Alonso's arraignment will be scheduled and held at the Miami-Dade County 
Courthouse, and the Miami-Dade Office of the State Attorney will handle 
prosecution of the case, Rodriguez said.

On April 6, officers responded to a call from concerned acquaintances of Piper, 
who lived at 1800 Sunset Harbour South Tower on Miami Beach with Alonso, 30, 
according to the incident report.

A co-worker, according to the report, had not seen Piper in several days nor 
had he returned phone calls. The co-worker "contacted the building management 
and requested they check on victim's welfare," the report states.

After knocking on the door several times, and hearing a dog barking from the 
inside of the apartment, building management entered the residence with a spare 
key.

Upon entry, they saw Alonso, who initially stated he had not seen the victim in 
four days and then stated "he saw him yesterday morning."

Witnesses, who were denied access to the apartment by Alonso, became suspicious 
and called police, according to the report. Alonso left shortly after this.

When responding officers arrived to the apartment, they entered the residence 
"fearing for the safety of the victim or anyone else inside the apartment... 
The officers saw the following: suspect blood in the hallway leading to the 
bedrooms, suspect bloody footprints leading into the bedrooms...

"Additionally, they saw a deceased unidentifiable male in an advanced state of 
decomposition in a bathroom. The deceased was lying in a large pool of blood 
and had sustained possible trauma to his neck area. Officers saw signs of a 
struggle in the bathroom. They saw blood on the walls, bed and floor."

>From the crime scene, several bloodied knives were collected, according to the 
report. Piper's body was transferred to the medical examiner's office and 
positively identified. The determined cause of death was "stab wounds to the 
head and neck, and the manner of death as homicide."

Alonso was found on the afternoon of Friday, April 8, at Museum Park on NE 10th 
Street and Biscayne Blvd after a police bulletin was issued to the public.

The report stated that Alonso was in possession of the victim's credit cards 
and had noticeable cuts on his body and hands.

(source: southfloridagaynews.com)






LOUISIANA:

No Lawyers, No Jail----Judge Demands Constitution Be Respected in Louisiana 
Public Defender Catastrophe


New Orleans Criminal Court Judge Arthur Hunter, a former police officer, ruled 
that 7 people awaiting trial in jail without adequate legal defense must be 
released. The law is clear. The US Supreme Court, in their 1963 case Gideon v 
Wainwright, ruled that everyone who is accused of a crime has a Constitutional 
right to a lawyer at the state's expense if they cannot afford one. However, 
Louisiana, in the middle of big budget problems, has been disregarding the 
constitutional right of thousands of people facing trial in its most recent 
statewide public defender meltdown. Judge Hunter ruled that the Constitution 
makes it clear: no lawyer, no jail.

In an 11 page ruling, Judge Hunter explained that since Louisiana has failed to 
adequately fund indigent defense it has violated the Sixth Amendment right to 
effective assistance of counsel and the Fourteenth Amendment right to Due 
Process of 7 men. The men appearing before Judge Hunter could not be 
represented by the public defender because of budget cutbacks and private 
lawyers appointed by the court, who were denied funds for investigation and 
preparation of the cases, asked that the prosecutions be stopped and their 
clients released. Hunter ordered the men released but stayed their release 
until his order could be reviewed on appeal.

The Louisiana public defender system appears to be in the worst crisis of any 
state in the US. It is a "disaster" according to The Economist, "broken" 
according to National Public Radio, in "free fall" according to the New York 
Times, "dire" according to the Chief Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court, 
and facing further cutbacks "on a scale unprecedented in the history of 
American public defense" according to the American Bar Association.

While Louisiana incarcerates more of its people than any of the other 50 
states, prosecutions across the state are starting to slow down because of 
inadequate public defense.

33 of Louisiana's 42 local public defender offices have started waiting lists 
for those accused of crimes due to office cutbacks according to the Louisiana 
Supreme Court. In some death penalty cases there are no lawyers to represent 
the accused so the cases are being stopped. Volunteer lawyers for those left in 
jail without public defenders are asking their clients be released.

The problem is that Louisiana refuses to adequately fund its public defender 
system resulting in layoffs of public defenders. The remaining public defenders 
who have excessive caseloads are ethically required to stop accepting new cases 
according to the American Bar Association.

For example, the New Orleans Public Defender office had 78 lawyers in its 
office in 2009 and has 36 fewer lawyers today. That office has quit taking 
serious cases resulting in over 100 people with serious crimes having no 
lawyer, more than 60 sitting in jail. 4 years ago the Orleans Public Defender 
had a budget of $9.5 million, today it is down to $6 million.

The problem is state-wide. Another example is the Lafayette Louisiana Public 
Defender which now has 11 fewer full-time attorneys, down to 15 from 26. Their 
office also cancelled contracts with 26 part-time attorneys, laid off two 
social workers and everyone who was left were hit with a 20 % pay cut. That 
eliminated 37 of their 52 lawyers. Vermillion Parish, which employed 10 public 
defenders now is down to 1.

Although some suggest private lawyers should volunteer or be appointed to take 
on these cases, the Louisiana State Bar Association passed a resolution 
objecting. They outlined ethical problems to courts appointing lawyers without 
criminal experience to represent indigent defendants and further challenged the 
constitutionality of courts forcing private attorneys to provide uncompensated 
services for those whom the State should be providing representation.

Volunteer lawyers are also hard to find because those who take up the work of 
public defenders are not provided malpractice coverage, will likely never be 
paid, are responsible for their client's files for 10 years, and are held to 
high standards in representation.

In Judge Hunter's case 1 New Orleans prosecutor accused private lawyers of 
being anarchists because they asked for release of people facing trial until 
the lawyers can get reimbursed for their costs and overhead, as the Louisiana 
Supreme Court has demanded since 1993. In reaction to Judge Hunter's ruling the 
prosecutor's office said they disagree and plan to appeal to the Louisiana 
Supreme Court.

Other prosecutors are quite unhappy as well. A Baton Rouge prosecutor accused 
the public defender of manipulating this crisis to "get rid of the death 
penalty."

Judge Hunter concluded his ruling with these words:

The defendants' constitutional rights are not contingent upon budget demands, 
waiting lists, and the failure of the legislature to adequately fund indigent 
defense ...We are not faced with a fundamental question, not only in New 
Orleans, but across Louisiana: What kind of criminal justice system do we want? 
One based on fairness or injustice, equality of prejudice, efficiency or chaos, 
right or wrong?

Realistically, the problem is getting worse soon because the Louisiana Public 
Defender, which last year handled more than 241,000 cases, is facing a 66 % 
reduction in funding beginning in several months, a drop from $33 million to 
$12 million.

It seems the only way Louisiana will respect the Constitution is to follow 
Judge Hunter's ultimatum. No lawyers? No jail.

(source: Bill Quigley is a professor of law at Loyola University New Orleans 
and Associate Legal Director at the Center for Constitutional 
Rights----dissidentvoice.org)






INDIANA:

Man accused of killing officer wants to represent himself


The Indianapolis man accused of killing a police officer would like to 
represent himself in the murder trial.

Major Davis Jr. is facing the death penalty. He is accused of fatally shooting 
Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department officer Perry Renn in 2014, Marion 
Superior Court records show.

On Friday, Davis told Marion Superior Court Judge Marc Rothenberg that he 
wasn't getting along with his attorneys, Ray Casanova and Eric Koselke, and 
wanted them withdrawn from the case.

"You're saying you want to represent yourself in a death penalty case where 
your life is on the line?" Rothenberg asked.

"Yes," Davis replied.

It is the latest in a series of requests by Davis in the case. He previously 
asked for - and was denied - a fast and speedy trial and the dismissal of his 
murder charge. His motion for a fast and speedy trial was denied because it 
wasn't signed by Davis' public defenders. Indiana's trial rules require 
pleadings and motions be signed by an attorney.

Rothenberg refused to consider Davis' latest request until he properly filed 
the motion to represent himself. At that point, Rothenberg said he would tell 
Davis "every reason why he shouldn't" represent himself. The judge referenced 
the adage that a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.

Davis' next court hearing is scheduled for 1 p.m. May 20.

(source: Indianapolis Star)






US MILITARY:

Navy Officer Charged with Espionage by Military Court at Norfolk


A US Navy officer assigned to a patrol and reconnaissance group has been 
charged in military court with 2 counts of espionage, punishable by the death 
penalty under certain conditions.

The lieutenant commander is being held at the brig in Chesapeake and appeared 
at the military equivalent of a preliminary hearing at Norfolk Naval Station on 
Friday, according to the Navy. The officer's identity has not been released, 
and charge sheets detailing his alleged crimes were heavily redacted.

The charge sheets say the officer communicated secret information "relating to 
the national defense to representatives of a foreign government." The documents 
do not specify what information was provided, when it was provided or to which 
nation it was provided.

The officer belongs to a unit that provides airborne anti-submarine warfare, 
anti-surface warfare and maritime intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance 
operations from planes such as the P-8A Poseidon, P-3C Orion and unmanned MQ-4C 
Triton. The command is headquartered at Hampton Roads Naval Support Activity in 
Norfolk, although it's not clear whether he was stationed there.

The Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Force is organized into three air wings 
at Jacksonville Naval Air Station in Florida, Whidbey Island Naval Air Station 
in Washington and Marine Corps Base Hawaii.

The officer also is charged with three counts of attempted espionage, three 
counts of making false official statements, five counts of communicating 
defense information, prostitution-patronizing, adultery and multiple violations 
of a lawful general order and failure to obey a lawful order.

It wasn't immediately clear whether the officer has entered a plea in the case.

Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, a service member is eligible for 
the death penalty for espionage if found "guilty of an offense that directly 
concerns nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning 
systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack, 
war plans, communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or any 
other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy."

The charge sheets say the officer wrongfully transported classified material, 
failed to properly store classified material and failed to report the 
compromise of information classified as secret. The officer also failed to 
report foreign contacts, according to the charge sheets.

The charges accuse the officer of failing to sign a record that included 
foreign travel and providing a false address for when he was on leave, "rather 
than the actual foreign destination."

The information the officer provided was such that he had reason to believe it 
"could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a 
foreign nation."

It wasn't clear when a ruling will be made on whether the case will proceed.

(source: military.com)