OPENING STATEMENT
Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury. The prosecution team wants you to believe that Edward Snowden is a traitor to this country. Someone who abused his position by unlawfully communicating classified surveillance related information. But part of their argument is simply untrue; that is, their argument that Edward Snowden had malintent. Edward Snowden’s intent was not malicious in any way shape or form. Snowden was disgusted by injustice to American people enacted by none other than the NSA — an organization intended to to protect them. At the beginning of his service, Snowden swore an oath that to protect the constitution. The exact portion of this oath that is as follows:
“I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.”
The surveillance programs that Snowden revealed in June of 2013 are a violation of the 4th amendment in which all American citizens are protected from unlawful (and unwarranted) search and seizure. Which is exactly what the NSA did to the people of this nation under the guise of protecting them from harm. Punishing an individual under these circumstances will set a negative precedent for future whistleblower cases and discourage government employees from coming forward to expose further injustices against the American people.
EXAMINATIONS
The following questions will be posed by the Defense:
Edward Snowden
- Before going to the press, did you try bringing your concerns about the NSA’s surveillance program to your superiors?
- Why bring these revelations to the press?
- Why did you decide to take the risk to yourself to bring it to the public?
- What does the NSA use the data collected for?
Expert Witness Title: Agent from the National Security Agency
- Since the Snowden revelations, have the NSA’s protocols changed?
- Is there evidence that mass surveillance helps the NSA prevent acts of terrorism more than selective data collection?
- What does the NSA do with the information they collect?
- Is data collection a presumption of guilt, which violates the Fourth Amendment rights of all affected American citizens?
Expert Witness Title: Whistleblower Expert
- What does a whistleblower in the public interest defense entail and what purpose does it serve?
- Is this the same as federal whistleblower protection?
- Do you feel that Edward Snowden should be afforded whistleblower in the public interest as a defense?
CLOSING STATEMENT
As the defense has made its case, Mr. Edward Snowden worked for the people and their best interests. He went above and beyond to give us, the public, an opportunity to make our Government accountable for its actions, the core of what it means to be a democratic nation.
Whistleblowing has a history and has a motive. It has helped to make people aware of what has been carried out under our noses.
Edward Snowden tried to make this information available the right way and was defeated by the system. This entitles him to a whistleblowing defense: a fair trial.
Our justice system allows for our citizens to be innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, the mosaic theory can be used to establish guilt as much as it can establish innocence, so it has a null purpose in this trial.
What he did allowed the NSA not to overrule this Nation’s Justice System pertaining to the unlawful exchange of information. The Government is violating our Fourth Amendment and has been able to reduce our lives to pieces of a puzzle.
Over the last few years,Mr. Edward Snowden has been called a traitor, a criminal, and a snitch. But he has never been called what he actually is: courageous. He saw questionable practices being carried out by the National Security Agency and when his voice was silenced he spoke louder. He fought to make this information public all while he was perfectly aware of the difficult days that would lay ahead of him. Now, ladies of the jury, it is your turn to make his voice heard and not silenced again.