Opinion ID: 2575291
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Defendant's service in the Navy

Text: Joseph Armas, an expert in the interpretation of military service records and performance evaluations, testified regarding defendant's military record. According to Armas, several tests were administered to defendant during his first three weeks in the Navy. He performed well on the General Classification Test and on tests for mechanical abilities, electric selection, clerical abilities, arithmetic, sonar, and programming aptitude, but did not do well on the foreign language aptitude test. Defendant volunteered for submarine duty, and after taking extensive psychological and agility tests, was recommended for that duty. He graduated first in his class of six at Naval Submarine School, but did not remain in the submarine program, apparently withdrawing voluntarily. Defendant received high evaluations during his two enlistment periods (1968 to 1971 and 1971 to 1977) and was honorably discharged at the conclusion of each enlistment period. Kent Wells, a Navy personnel security specialist, testified concerning defendant's work in the military and at ESL. After finishing basic training, defendant was trained to be a cryptologic techniciana person who maintains electronic equipment. Wells testified that there were three levels of security clearance, the lowest being confidential, the middle being secret, and the highest being top-secret. Because the Navy's cryptologic function was a highly classified mission, the Office of Naval Intelligence investigated all cryptologic technicians to determine whether they could be granted not only top-secret clearance, but also access to very sensitive compartmented information that others with top-secret clearance could access on only a need to know basis. The security clearances received by defendant could be granted only to individuals who were found to be trustworthy, reliable, of unquestioned character, and loyal to the government of the United States. The investigation was repeated every five years to check for intervening disqualifying information. Defendant was granted top-secret clearance and access to sensitive compartmented information in November 1968, and throughout his naval career he performed work that required top-security clearances. Wells further testified that at the time defendant served in the Naval Security Group, the Group's national defense mission was to collect certain intelligence information about adversaries and to disseminate that information to the military and to various intelligence agencies. Defendant contributed to the security of the United States by maintaining the Naval Security Group's equipment, thereby enabling the gathering of information. Wells agreed with defense counsel that, in this context, defendant was vital to the national defense, testifying that much of defendant's work still was classified at the time of trial. Defendant also maintained equipment that assisted in search and rescue missions for aircraft or ships in distress, and thereby helped to save lives as well as ships and aircraft.