Libby Entitled to Summaries of Briefings, Judge Rules

Trying to avoid a prolonged battle over classified documents, a federal judge ruled Friday that I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby is was entitled to summaries of intelligence briefings he received while chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, but rejected his demand for a more extensive array of documents.

Libby, charged with perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with the July 2003 unmasking of CIA operative Valerie Plame, has been seeking the documents to show that he was immersed in important matters of state during the time he allegedly lied to FBI agents and a grand jury about his role in the Plame case.

Libby’s lawyers have indicated that they intend to argue at his trial, set for January 2007, that concern with his official duties may have led Libby to misspeak to investigators, but that any misstatements were inadvertent and unintentional.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton appeared to be an attempt to defuse an issue that could derail the trial.

In a related ruling, Walton ordered the government to turn over to Libby information bearing on inquiries that Libby made during his morning intelligence briefings while serving as Cheney’s top aide. But the judge said the information could be limited to a listing of the general topics of Libby’s inquiries rather than the documents themselves.

Special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald argued in federal court last month that the documents -- including copies of the super-secret president’s daily brief -- were irrelevant to the question of whether Libby had told the truth. Fitzgerald also argued that the documents weren’t in his possession but rather held by the CIA, and that he was not obligated to fetch them.

The prosecutor accused Libby and his legal team of seeking to force the government into the untenable position of having to choose between turning over some of the nation’s most closely held secrets or dismissing the case -- a defense tactic known as “graymail” that is common in classified-information cases.

A spokesman for Fitzgerald declined to comment on Friday’s ruling, as did a spokesman for the CIA. Libby’s attorneys could not be reached. The CIA previously has said the records demands could compromise national security and that even generalized summaries could take months to prepare.

The agency could appeal the judge’s order, and Walton, anticipating the possibility, set a March 24 deadline for the agency or the White House, which is also believed to have relevant documents, to resist.

Walton said that Fitzgerald had an obligation to turn over information even if it was in the possession of the CIA because the prosecutor had worked so closely with the agency in preparing the case against Libby. Walton also said that the documents were relevant, but that generalized descriptions would be enough to jog Libby’s memory about events in which he was involved.

“The court concludes that in order to refresh his recollection about those events and to provide credibility for his preoccupation defense, the defendant does not need the explicit details of the intelligence documents he desires to obtain,” Walton wrote.

“It is inconceivable that the defendant’s memory of matters of significance to him has totally vanished and would not be refreshed upon viewing the general descriptions of those matters,” the judge added.

Walton gave the government the option of turning over summaries of the topics covered in the briefings or copies of the reports with the classified information removed. The judge also narrowed the range of briefings about which the government must divulge information.

Libby’s lawyers originally had sought nearly a year’s worth of classified material. Walton ordered the CIA to turn over portions or summaries of briefings presented in the month and a half before Plame was first publicly identified as well as during periods when Libby spoke to the FBI and grand jury.

The government contends that Libby lied about disseminating information about Plame and her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV, a former U.S. envoy who had criticized the Bush administration over the Iraq war.