U.S. Department of Justice

Carmen M. OrtizUnited States AttorneyDistrict of Massachusetts

Main Reception: (617) 748-3100 John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse 1 Courthouse Way

Suite 9200Boston, Massachusetts 02210

Margaret Carter, Esq.Clerk of CourtCourt of Appeals for the First CircuitJohn Joseph Moakley United States CourthouseOne Courthouse Way, Suite 2500Boston, Massachusetts 02210

Re: In Re: Request from the United Kingdom Pursuant to the Treaty Between the Government of the United States of America and theGovernment of te United Kingdom on Mutual Assistance inCriminal Matters in the Matter of Delours Price,Appeal Nos. 11-2511 and 12-1159

Dear Ms. Carter:

This case was argued on April 4, 2012 before Chief Judge Lynch, andJudges Torruella and Boudin. Kindly bring this letter to the attention of the panel.

During appellants’ oral argument, counsel relied on a number of factualclaims which are not in the record before this Court. One assertion is of particularconcern. Counsel for the appellants argued to the Court that there is a “grave riskof physical harm to the appellants” from the disclosure to the United Kingdom ofBelfast Project recordings. The government disputed this assertion in the districtcourt, citing, among other things, the fact that there is no record of any reports topolice in the Republic of Ireland or Northern Ireland regarding credible threats toMr. McIntyre or his family. [D.7 at 16-18]. At oral argument, counsel for theappellants asserted that the United States Department of State takes the threat ofharm to Mr. McIntyre and his family “much more seriously” than the Departmentof Justice and has “invited”Anthony McIntyre’s wife “in for a security

Case: 11-2511 Document: 00116362438 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2012 Entry ID: 5633670

assessment,” creating the misimpression that the Department of State has taken aposition contrary to the Justice Department’s view of the matter.

Appellants' claim of an agency disagreement is not supported by anything inthe district court record. Moreover, the Department of Justice has been workingclosely with the Department of State and can assure this Court that the agencies'views of the matter are compatible. The government would be happy to provideadditional information on this issue should the Court wish - although suchinformation would be outside the record of the case.

In any event, as the government has argued in its brief and at oral argument,appellants' claim of potential harm from third parties, even if substantiated, wouldnot entitle them to prevail in this appeal.

Respectfully submitted,

CARMEN M. ORTIZ United States Attorney

By: /s/ Barbara Healy SmithBARBARA HEALY SMITHAssistant U.S. Attorney

cc: Eamonn Dornan, Esq., Dornan Associates, PLLC (via e-mail),1040 Jackson Avenue, Suite 3B, Long Island City, New York 10017

James J. Cotter, III, Esq., Law Offices of James J Cotter (via e-mail),Post Office Box 270, North Quincy, MA 01271

2

Case: 11-2511 Document: 00116362438 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2012 Entry ID: 5633670