UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

_________________

United States of America, )

) No. 15-8378MJ

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Phoenix, Arizona

) August 28, 2015

Ahmed Mohammed El Gammal, ) 

)

Defendant. )

_____________________________ )

BEFORE: THE HONORABLE BRIDGET S. BADE, MAGISTRATE JUDGE

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

DETENTION HEARING

APPEARANCES:

For the Plaintiff:

U.S. Attorney's Office 

By: Ann B. Scheel, Esq.

40 North Central Avenue, Suite 1200 

Phoenix, Arizona 85004 

For the Defendant:

Mitchell Stein & Carey 

By: Michael T. Morrissey, Esq.

2 North Central Avenue, Suite 1900 

Phoenix, Arizona 85004 

Transcriptionist:

Candy L. Potter 

Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 312

401 West Washington Street, Spc 36

Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2151

(602) 322-7246

Proceedings Recorded by Electronic Sound Recording

Transcript Produced by Transcriptionist

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

THE CLERK: Magistrate docket 15-8378, United States 

of America versus Ahmed Mohammed El Gammal, on for a detention 

hearing. 

MS. SCHEEL: Good afternoon, Your Honor, Ann Scheel on 

behalf of the United States. 

THE COURT: Good afternoon, Miss Scheel. 

MR. MORRISSEY: Good afternoon, Your Honor, Michael

Morrissey on behalf of Mr. El Gammal, who is present. 

THE COURT: Good afternoon, Mr. Morrissey.

And good afternoon, Mr. El Gammal. 

This is the time set for a detention hearing. 

Miss Scheel, how does the Government wish to proceed? 

MS. SCHEEL: Your Honor, this case involves a 

presumption under 18 U.S.C. 3142(e)(3)(C). There's a -- there 

is a presumption of both flight and danger, and we would like 

to proceed under that understanding. 

THE COURT: All right. Do you have witnesses to call 

or are you proceeding by proffer? 

MS. SCHEEL: We will proceed by proffer. 

THE COURT: Please go ahead. 

MS. SCHEEL: Since this is strictly regarding the 

detention hearing, I'm sure the Court's aware that the 

defendant was indicted by the Southern District of New York 

yesterday. 

With regard to the issue of danger, if the 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 2 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

defendant -- if the Court finds the defendant is a danger to 

the community, then there are no conditions sufficient to 

ensure the safety of the community and a third-party custodian 

is not an appropriate release condition. 

Specifically, regarding danger we believe the Court

should consider the nature of the charges in this case, that 

the defendant is accused of helping an Islamic extremist 

American citizen travel to Syria to train and fight with ISIL. 

Based on the Complaint and the facts in the Complaint, 

the Court has sufficient evidence to evaluate the evidence that 

this individual, this American citizen has traveled to Syria 

and is currently training and fighting for ISIL. 

Additionally, the defendant's criminal activity in 

this case occurred mostly on-line through various social media 

websites. That can be conducted almost anywhere. That 

can -- that would be very hard for some -- for Pretrial 

Services to control his access to social media if he is 

released under any conditions. 

The defendant appears to be highly motivated to 

continue his support for ISIL. He continues to have contact 

with the individual who did travel to Syria. I think that he 

had contact with him as -- maybe two weeks ago on social media. 

He has other overseas ties that are related to ISIL, 

specifically a, I believe, co-conspirator 2 that was mentioned 

in the Indictment who lives in Turkey. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 3 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

He has posted numerous postings on various social 

media communications that discuss his support of ISIL. 

For example, the defendant has contacted this 

co-conspirator who is currently in Syria, and that was in May 

of this year. 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, I have an objection to 

this, if it's outside the scope of the Indictment, being the 

subject of a proffer. There's no way for the Court to test the 

reliability of it. And I would ask if they wish to put that 

evidence on that they proceed through a witness. If it is 

within the four corners of the Indictment, then I don't have an 

objection. 

MS. SCHEEL: Well, Your Honor, this has to do with 

defendant's dangerousness and his ability to flee. 

THE COURT: And what's the basis of the information

that you're offering by proffer? 

MS. SCHEEL: As stated in the Complaint, the FBI 

obtained a search warrant of the defendant's Facebook and the 

Facebook pages of his co-conspirators. They updated that 

Facebook page as recently as yesterday. This is one of the 

postings from his co-conspirator's Facebook page, it's a 

communication between that co-conspirator in Syria and this 

defendant. 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, then I would renew my 

objection. It's not in the Complaint if it's based on an 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 4 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

updated search warrant that was yesterday, because the 

Complaint is several days ago. The Indictment was yesterday. 

THE COURT: I'm going to overrule the objection. The 

Government can proceed by proffer. 

MS. SCHEEL: Thank you, Your Honor. 

Specifically in the posts, which is in English, the

defendant asks the co-conspirator, is it easy to park a car 

into your job parking lot? 

And as the Court will find in the Complaint, I believe 

it's paragraph 27 -- 26 in the Complaint, the co-conspirator 

refers to his joining ISIL as a job. He references bosses and 

supervisors in ISIL. 

So the Court can consider whether or not this 

discussion is his discussion about joining ISIL or coming to 

Syria for ISIL. 

The defendant -- or this co-conspirator responds, I

don't know, I need to ask my superiors at work first, 

inshallah. But I think it's risky because the parking lot 

these days is going under a lot of renovation, especially on 

the north side. Khair inshallah, you planning on driving any 

time soon? 

The defendant responds, yes, mid August, inshallah. 

Check Facebook more often. 

THE COURT: So -- 

MS. SCHEEL: Then the defendant asks the 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 5 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

co-conspirator to move to an encrypted social media platform 

called surespot. 

THE COURT: When you refer to the co-conspirator, is 

that the individual identified as CC-1 in the Complaint? 

MS. SCHEEL: I believe that -- that's the one that's 

in Syria, I think that's CC-1. 

THE COURT: Well, there was an individual identified 

in the Complaint as being in Turkey as CC-2. CC-1 was the 

American citizen who was alleged to have left the United 

States. 

MS. SCHEEL: Yes. I'm referring to CC-1. CC-2 is a 

resident of Turkey, he's an Egyptian citizen living in Turkey. 

THE COURT: So this information you're proffering is 

based on updated information received from a search warrant 

with respect to recent communications with CC-1? 

MS. SCHEEL: Yes. It was on May 14th of this year.

THE COURT: Was when the communication occurred? 

MS. SCHEEL: Yes. 

The indication was that he planned to travel to 

Turkey/Syria area in mid August. 

This is also confirmed by another posting of the 

defendant's Facebook, which we also obtained a search warrant 

on. It was communications with an individual named Marwa 

El Gammal. It was between March 1st, 2015, and April 28th, 

2015, where he indicates -- we believe it's a relative, because 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 6 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

the woman's name is El Gammal, the last name. Asking her if 

she has a separate bank account in her name only. She 

indicates that she does and wants -- he indicates he's planning 

on coming for a visit and wants to transfer money to her 

because he can only take $10,000 with him across the border -- 

or no more than $10,000. So he would like to transfer money to 

her account. 

Additionally, Your Honor, the defendant appears to 

have acquired the means to carry out acts of violence. He has 

obtained and the agents did seize a drone, a quadcopter drone, 

at the time of the search warrant of his residence. 

In December -- between December 2014 and February 2015 

he exchanged social media messages with an individual not named 

in the Complaint in which they discussed the remote control 

planes being able to carry cameras. 

He also indicated to this individual that the devices 

are good for Gaza, G-A-Z-A, the Gaza Strip, and that they can 

be loaded with bombs. 

The defendant -- or the FBI also recovered 100 rounds 

of nine millimeter ammunition and a magazine from the 

defendant's house at the time of the search warrant. 

THE COURT: Please state that again, Miss Scheel, 

agents recovered? 

MS. SCHEEL: 100 rounds of nine millimeter ammunition 

and a magazine from the defendant's house. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 7 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

THE COURT: Were there any firearms? 

MS. SCHEEL: I'm sorry, what? 

THE COURT: Were there firearms or just the 

ammunition? 

MS. SCHEEL: Just the ammunition. No firearms were

located. 

With regard to flight, the defendant's postings that 

I've already informed the Court about indicate that he does 

wish to travel. He does wish to leave the United States. He 

plans on taking his money. He has a substantial balance in his 

bank account, as the Court's aware, that he intended to 

transfer to a family member. 

The defendant has no real family ties here. His 

mother recently came from Egypt. She is a legal permanent 

resident, but spends much of her year in Egypt. 

His relatives, he indicated in the Pretrial Services' 

report that he has a sister that lives in Dubai. 

He apparently has some relative in Turkey that he 

feels comfortable enough to transfer a substantial amount of 

money to. 

He has CC-2, who is living in Turkey that he is 

continuing to have contact over social media. 

And what appears to be as one of his few friends here 

in the Phoenix area is planning on leaving and moving to 

Palestine on Monday, and so he will have another contact 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 8 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

overseas. 

His job is -- appears to be importing items from 

China, something that he can do from anywhere. It does not 

have to be done in Phoenix. It does not even have to be done 

in the United States. And he makes a substantial living doing 

that. 

The defendant is a naturalized citizen of the United 

States, but he also has dual citizenship in Egypt. 

He has no property here. Apparently he did not renew 

the lease on his apartment, it runs out either the end of this 

month or the end of September. Although I'm assuming he can 

rent month to month after that. 

The FBI did uncover evidence of other bank accounts

that were not known to them at the time of the search warrant. 

They have not had the opportunity to determine if there's any 

other funds in those accounts. 

Additionally, there is one additional post I'd like to 

let the Court know about. It was on July 13th of 2014 from his 

Facebook account. He was speaking to an individual -- 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, may I have a continuing

objection to the proffer covering anything after the time of 

the Indictment? 

THE COURT: I believe she said it was 2014. 

MS. SCHEEL: Yes. 

THE COURT: February 2014 -- or, I'm sorry, July 2014. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 9 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

MR. MORRISSEY: Nonetheless, it has not been disclosed 

to the defense, and so it is being proceeded by proffer, and it 

is new information for this Court's determination, for which we 

have no ability to test it by cross-examination. That's my 

objection. 

THE COURT: All right. Your objection is noted. 

Thank you. 

MS. SCHEEL: In this post the defendant wanted this

other individual, who apparently was out of the country, to 

join him in the United States, to go into business with him, 

and advised that he could go -- come into the United States 

through Mexico, because the borders are, quote, long and open. 

So he seems to be aware of the ability to cross the Mexican 

border both into and out of the United States fairly easily. 

Could I have a moment, Your Honor? 

THE COURT: Certainly. 

MS. SCHEEL: So, Your Honor, based on the facts that 

are in the Complaint and the additional facts that have been 

proffered today, the Government -- and the presumption that the 

defendant's both a flight and danger, the Government submits 

that this defendant -- there are no conditions reasonably -- to 

reasonably assure the defendant's appearance in court, either 

here or in the Southern District of New York. And there are no 

conditions sufficient to ensure the safety of the community 

based on these facts and the presumption. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 10 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

THE COURT: Thank you, Miss Scheel. 

When you began your remarks you indicated that the 

Government asserts that the presumption applies under 

3142(c)(3) -- did you say (C) or (B)? 

MS. SCHEEL: Let me see if I can find it again. 

(e)(3)(C). This is a crime of terrorism, and where -- 

I think it's Count 3 has a sentence of ten years or more. 

THE COURT: Thank you. 

Mr. Morrissey? 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, first as to the entirety 

of the Government's proffer of statements that were made that 

are not contained within the Complaint, and they're not 

contained within the Indictment, I believe the Court should 

give those very little weight. 

There is zero foundation tying the defendant to 

actually being the person who posted that -- those statements, 

if they were made at all, on his Facebook account. 

Dealing explicitly with what is in the Indictment and 

in the charges, what the Indictment says is that Mr. El Gammal 

communicated through social media. That, of course, is a First 

Amendment protected right. There's no statement as to what was 

said, or that Mr. El Gammal did anything more than exercise his 

First Amendment rights. 

There's no allegation that Mr. El Gammal received 

military training. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 11 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

There's no allegation that Mr. El Gammal knew that 

CC-1 was receiving military training. The Government does not 

even allege that Mr. El Gammal knew that CC-1 was traveling to 

Turkey or Syria. The Government merely says that Mr. El Gammal 

knew that the individual may travel -- or discussed the 

individual traveling to the Middle East. 

There is no specification of any overt act that 

Mr. El Gammal did with respect to any military type training. 

The statement today by Miss Scheel that the Complaint 

alleges that CC-1 referred to joining ISIL as a job, I believe 

that's a misstatement. In the Complaint at paragraph 30 it 

certainly refers to communications from CC-1, but then the 

affiant goes on to say it is his belief. In other words, it's 

his inference that CC-1 is making a reference to ISIL. 

On its face those statements certainly do not indicate 

any knowledge on the part of Mr. El Gammal that CC-1 was doing 

anything on behalf of ISIL. So that inference simply goes too 

far for today. 

There is a presumption in this case, but the 

presumption is defeated by the length of his residence in 

Arizona and in the United States, and his steady employment. 

And I have a cite for that, which is U.S. v. Giampa, 755 

F. Supp. 665, Western District of Pennsylvania, 1990. 

The defendant has lived lawfully in the United States 

for 18 years. He's a United States citizen, and has been a 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 12 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

citizen for seven years. He has stable employment. He's owned 

his own business for ten years. He was married for 15 years to 

a United States citizen. 

The Government has seized defendant's passport. He

has no ability to travel to a foreign country. 

Pretrial Services, in expressing concern about 

familial ties, doesn't specify in depth the extent of those 

familial ties. Because he has a sister in Dubai who he speaks 

to twice a year by telephone. And his mother. His mother's a 

lawful permanent resident of the United States. That is not a 

basis from which to conclude that Mr. El Gammal has a basis -- 

or a sanctuary in a foreign country. 

There are no issues of substance abuse. 

He's not on any other type of supervision. 

He has no failures to appear. 

He's proven he's able to maintain employment and has 

done so for the last ten years. 

The other new information from the Government is, 

apparently that Mr. El Gammal possesses a drone. There's no 

allegation that that's a drone with some type of military 

capability. And, in fact, hundreds of thousands of Americans 

now possess drones. 

There's no allegation he possessed a firearm. We will 

proffer that Mr. El Gammal does not, and that he shoots at the 

Scottsdale Gun Club. That's the explanation for the 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 13 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

ammunition. But there's no -- there's no -- there's no 

firearms and there's no weapons. 

The Court has before it knowledge of Mr. El Gammal's 

current and active ongoing business. Even the AUSA

acknowledges that he does business and he's currently doing 

business with China. This is not an individual who is in the 

process of ending his business commitments or his employment or 

leaving Arizona. 

The conditions then laid out by the Pretrial Services' 

report, which note that there should be a home assessment to 

determine if his residence is suitable for location monitoring 

for this United States citizen, who's not accused directly of 

doing anything more than participating on social media. It is 

entirely proper for this Court to find that Pretrial Services 

has gotten it right, and allow that evaluation of the home 

assessment. 

I would note that Pretrial Services has changed its

recommendation as to who is an appropriate third-party 

custodian. We were told Wednesday when we left court that 

there would not be an updated report, now there is. Okay. 

So the defense would ask, and has spoken with Pretrial 

Services, that if the Court permits an evaluation of the home 

assessment program to determine if it's suitable for location 

monitoring, that a new third-party custodian be appointed, 

which would be Mr. El Gammal's ex-mother-in-law. She is here 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 14 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

today. She is available to be interviewed. 

Pretrial Services has indicated -- I believe indicated 

that she can be interviewed today. I don't know when they 

would have the results of that report, but she's here and we 

can get that accomplished today. 

So the defense would ask the Court to follow the 

recommendations of Pretrial Services. There's been no showing 

that he's a flight risk. There's no showing certainly by clear 

and convincing evidence that he's a danger. This is a 

long-time citizen, long-time self-employed citizen of the 

United States. 

He will have to answer to these charges in New York, 

but he should be permitted to do so under his own power and to 

get to New York on his own. 

May I have one moment, Your Honor? 

THE COURT: Certainly.

(Discussion held off the record)

MR. MORRISSEY: My final point, Your Honor, is that we 

would proffer that, as proof that Mr. El Gammal has no plans to 

leave the United States, in addition to not having any 

passport, he does have three shipments from China coming in 

overseas within the next couple weeks. We believe 

investigation would show that his business is active and 

ongoing, and not in the process of ending. 

THE COURT: Mr. Morrissey, can you tell me more about 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 15 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

Mr. El Gammal's employment? The Pretrial Services' report 

indicates he's self employed buying and selling vehicles since 

2005. The Government made a reference to China, as you have as 

well. Can you explain more to me about this business and how 

it's tied to Phoenix? 

MR. MORRISSEY: Yes. He's, I believe -- 

Let me consult with him, because I want to make sure 

everything I say is accurate. 

(Discussion held off the record.) 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, the nature of the 

equipment coming from China tends to be machinery that enables 

Mr. El Gammal to work on cars that he then fixes and sells out 

of the physical structure noted in the Pretrial Services' 

report. 

THE COURT: And that is what's listed as his 

employment address -- 

MR. MORRISSEY: Yes, Cars R US. 

THE COURT: -- on 27th Avenue? 

MR. MORRISSEY: Yes, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: And that's a warehouse or a structure of 

some sort -- 

MR. MORRISSEY: Yes. 

THE COURT: -- where he maintains automobiles? 

MR. MORRISSEY: Yes.

THE COURT: Does he own that property or lease it? Or 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 16 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

what's his connection to it?

MR. MORRISSEY: I don't believe he owns it. May I 

check? 

(Discussion held off the record.) 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, he pays rent to the owner. 

THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Morrissey. 

Miss Scheel? 

MS. SCHEEL: Your Honor, I just want to clarify one

thing, that Mr. Morrissey indicated that there's no evidence 

that the defendant knew that CC-1 went to Syria to fight for 

ISIL. Specifically in the Complaint paragraph 36, the affiant, 

Agent Nguyen, viewed the publically available portion of CC-1's 

Facebook account, and in it is a picture of CC-1 standing in 

front of what appears to be a mural of a Syrian political 

figure which has been riddled with bullets. And in the 

photograph CC-1 is wearing camouflage pants and raising his 

index finger in a gesture which, based on the affiant's 

training and experience, he understands to be a sign of support 

for ISIL. 

In addition, in the search warrant of CC-1's Facebook 

account, in May of 2015 CC-1 had a conversation with the 

defendant in which he said that his training was progressing as 

expected. Specifically that he said, I'm doing well, and I 

just want to let you know I'm safe and secure and everything is 

going according to plan. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 17 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

18

THE COURT: Miss Scheel, you had referenced some 

social media exchanges from May 2015, and information that was 

updated pursuant to a search warrant as recently as yesterday 

or earlier this week. That information was not included in the 

Statement of Probable Cause in the Complaint, it was 

information with respect to transferring funds out of the 

country, or possibly doing so, and information that could be 

interpreted as coded communications indicating a plan or a 

willingness or a desire to travel out of the United States. 

That is fairly critical information if it can be 

substantiated. Can the Government disclose or produce that 

information to Mr. Morrissey, like today or Monday morning? 

MS. SCHEEL: I can produce especially the one that's 

in English. Some of them are in Arabic and have not -- have 

only had a preliminary translation and not a final translation. 

I can show him the preliminary translation. FBI has requested 

that the preliminary translation not be turned over for 

discovery purposes at this point. I'm just proffering what the 

preliminary translation was. 

THE COURT: And so which of those communications is

based on the preliminary translation? 

MS. SCHEEL: The one that is in English is the one 

about him wanting to go to Syria in mid August, and talking 

about the parking lot at CC-1's job. That's in English. 

THE COURT: All right. So I'm going to continue the 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 18 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

detention hearing. I'm going to direct Pretrial Services to do 

two things. 

First, interview Mr. El Gammal's former mother-in-law 

to see if she is an appropriate third-party custodian, and to 

conduct the necessary investigation. 

I'm also going to direct Pretrial Services to conduct 

an investigation of Mr. El Gammal's residence to determine if 

it is suitable for location monitoring. 

I'm going to ask them to make this a priority, as 

Mr. El Gammal has been detained since earlier this week. 

And I'm going to continue the detention hearing until 

Tuesday morning. It is Friday, late afternoon. That will give 

Pretrial Services one business day to accomplish this. And to 

provide supplemental report to the Court and to counsel with 

the results of both of those matters, whether there's an 

appropriate third-party custodian. The defendant has suggested 

his former mother-in-law. And whether his residence is 

suitable for location monitoring. 

I am not making any determination on release at this 

time. I don't think I can do so without that information. 

I'm also going to direct the Government to disclose to 

the defendant the communications that are in English. If you 

do not disclose to them the other preliminary translations, I'm 

not going to rely upon any information that has not been 

disclosed to them when we reconvene on Tuesday. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 19 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

20

And I'm not making a decision now, which I know 

prevents either party from appealing a decision because it 

doesn't exist at this point. So we'll deal with that issue on 

Tuesday. 

In the event that I should decide to release 

Mr. El Gammal, and the Government doesn't appeal or object that 

decision, I'm going to order that the hearing be bag and 

baggage, and that Mr. El Gammal's belongings be brought to the 

courthouse with him. If I don't order that he be released, 

then his belongings can be returned to CCA with him. If the 

Government seeks a stay and appeal we can address that at that 

time as well. 

As Judge Boyle advised the Government earlier this 

week, should I decide to release Mr. El Gammal and the 

Government seeks a stay, I'm not going to grant a long stay. 

So the Government needs to be prepared to file immediately. 

And I will probably give them 24 to 48 hours for a stay. 

MS. SCHEEL: That's fine, Your Honor. I've spoken to 

the Assistant U.S. Attorneys in the Southern District of 

New York. They've indicated they will be filing an appeal, and 

they have an appeal ready. 

THE COURT: They're ready to proceed? Okay. 

So we'll convene at 10:30, I believe, 10:30 Tuesday

morning. And that's early enough in the day that, depending on 

what occurs, the prosecutors in New York can take whatever 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 20 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

steps they wish to take that day. 

I see the Pretrial Services Officer. 

I've given you a short time frame, is that going to be 

sufficient for you to accomplish the task? 

MR. LARA: That's enough time, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Thank you, 

Mr. Lara.

Mr. Morrissey? 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, I'm going to ask two 

things. 

One, may I have a two-sentence rebuttal to the 

paragraph 36 allegation? 

THE COURT: Mr. Morrissey, I think I already know your 

rebuttal, which is that the paragraph 36 information relates to 

communications from July of 2015, which was long after CC-1 is 

alleged to have left the United States and traveled to Turkey, 

which means it would be long after the time frame in which the 

Government would be asserting that he knew -- that 

Mr. El Gammal knew that CC-1 was going to go to Turkey. 

MR. MORRISSEY: And there's no evidence that 

Mr. El Gammal saw it, as opposed to CC-1 posting it. The FBI 

saw it. There's no evidence that Mr. El Gammal saw it. 

May I confer with the AUSA? Because I'm going to ask 

the Court to modify its order in one respect, and I want to see 

if the Government objects. 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 21 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

22

THE COURT: Certainly. 

(Discussion held off the record.) 

MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honor, with respect to which 

house should be evaluated for home monitoring, since 

Mr. El Gammal's lease was up and he was in the process of 

moving, we don't have a residence to offer Pretrial to 

evaluate. 

Since we have proposed a third-party custodian, we 

would ask that that be the house that be evaluated for home 

monitoring. 

THE COURT: Mr. Morrissey, the Pretrial Services' 

report indicated that Mr. El Gammal's mother was residing with 

him. Is she residing with him in the leased property, which is 

-- apparently he's about to leave or vacate? 

MR. MORRISSEY: She is now residing with the ex-wife. 

But that's not the same location of the custodian we're 

proposing, who is the ex-mother-in-law. 

THE COURT: All right. And the other information that 

I will want from Pretrial Services is, who will be residing in 

that residence. Presumably Mr. El Gammal's former 

mother-in-law, and Mr. El Gammal if it's an approved residence, 

and anyone else who's going to be residing there, need to know 

that as well. 

All right. We'll modify that then. The Pretrial 

Services will investigate that residence and will obtain the 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 22 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

23

address information today from Mr. El Gammal's former 

mother-in-law, who you reported is here in the courtroom. 

Also, just to be clear, the detention hearing is 

continued until next Tuesday, September 1st, 2015, at 

10:30 a.m. It will be here in courtroom 304. 

Is there anything else that we need to address this

afternoon? 

MR. MORRISSEY: No, Your Honor. 

MS. SCHEEL: No, Your Honor. 

THE COURT: All right. Thank you. 

The hearing's adjourned. 

-oOoCase 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 23 of 24
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15-8378MJ - August 28, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

24

C E R T I F I C A T E

I, CANDY L. POTTER, court-approved transcriber, 

certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the 

official electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the 

above-entitled matter.

DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, this 18th day of 

September, 2015.

s/Candy L. Potter__

Candy L. Potter 

Case 2:15-mj-08378-JZB Document 26 Filed 09/18/15 Page 24 of 24