{
	"id": "8cd3c5d9-9ee3-43b4-8e07-bc5e87badafc",
	"created_at": "2026-04-06T00:12:31.892689Z",
	"updated_at": "2026-04-10T03:21:41.406775Z",
	"deleted_at": null,
	"sha1_hash": "67dcfea7382b82d0e114bc7204e2bb171374e0a7",
	"title": "Vault 7 court case ends in mistrial on most serious charges",
	"llm_title": "",
	"authors": "",
	"file_creation_date": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
	"file_modification_date": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
	"file_size": 35578,
	"plain_text": "Vault 7 court case ends in mistrial on most serious charges\r\nBy Jeff Stone\r\nPublished: 2020-03-09 · Archived: 2026-04-05 14:44:50 UTC\r\nA New York City jury was unable to reach a verdict Monday on a number of charges against a former CIA\r\nengineer accused of orchestrating the largest leak in agency history.\r\nA federal jury in New York found Joshua Schulte guilty on charges of contempt of court and lying to the FBI after\r\na monthlong trial and four days of deliberation. Jurors could not reach a decision on more serious charges of\r\nillegally transferring national defense information; unauthorized access to classified information; and theft of\r\ngovernment property.\r\nA hearing will be held on March 26 to determine the next steps in the case.\r\nU.S. prosecutors argued that Schulte leaked a trove CIA hacking tools to WikiLeaks in 2016 to retaliate against\r\nco-workers and agency management for what he perceived as unfair treatment during his employment. Defense\r\nattorneys worked to convince jurors that the CIA had failed to secure its most sensitive networks, and that\r\nsomeone other than Schulte could have stolen documents that contained information on how the U.S. government\r\nhacked widely used consumer technology.\r\nThe government charged Schulte in 2018 with leaking vast details about secret CIA hacking programs to\r\nWikiLeaks, which spent six months publishing the so-called Vault 7 and Vault 8 files. Since his arrest Schulte also\r\nhad been charged with conspiring to leak more classified material from behind bars, and at one point sued the\r\ngovernment for $50 billion in lost wages.\r\nThis verdict, while significant, does not mark the end of Schulte’s saga. In addition to the March 26 hearing, he is\r\nalso awaiting trial on separate charges of possessing of child pornography. Those proceedings have not yet been\r\nscheduled.\r\nFor all the inherent sensationalism that comes with a former CIA employee allegedly leaking U.S. hacking tools,\r\nthis trial in the Southern District of New York mostly chronicled a long workplace dispute.\r\nWitnesses described an often unprofessional environment in the CIA’s Engineering Development Group, where\r\nemployees would spend weeks or months on tools meant to exploit software vulnerabilities in devices like smart\r\nTVs or mobile systems to spy on targets. Instead of cloak-and-dagger operations, though, the jury heard of Nerf\r\ngun fights, pranks and a competitive atmosphere that would escalate into physical altercations or racist diatribes.\r\nAs a developer, Schulte worked with a small team of CIA personnel on a project called Brutal Kangaroo, a suite of\r\nhacking tools meant to breach Windows computers via USB drives. One former co-worker who still works at the\r\nagency testified that other CIA agents referred to Schulte as “nuclear option” and “badass” because of his\r\npropensity to attack perceived office rivals when he was annoyed.\r\nhttps://www.cyberscoop.com/vault-7-mistrial-cia-joshua-schulte/\r\nPage 1 of 2\n\nAt one point, prosecutors said, Schulte became locked in an ongoing feud with another employee on his team,\r\nidentified only as “Amol.” Schulte fabricated a story in which Amol had threatened to kill Schulte, according to\r\none witness, while also urging CIA higher-ups to discipline Amol. When the agency determined the complaint was\r\nbaseless, Schulte was moved to a different project.\r\nAdditionally, another tool Schulte was working on was taking so long to complete that his superiors brought in a\r\ncontractor to finish the project. After expressing his displeasure with being removed from the project, prosecutors\r\nsaid, Schulte restored his access to a protected agency system and downloaded vast details about the agency’s\r\noffensive security capabilities.\r\nHowever, roughly halfway through the trial, the defense team requested a mistrial on the grounds that prosecutors\r\nhad failed to provide sufficient notice about an agency employee identified only as “Michael.” The CIA placed\r\nMichael on paid administrative leave in August “because of concerns he was not providing information about the\r\ndefendant.” Prosecutors stated in a filing they did not suspect that Michael had any involvement in stealing CIA\r\ndocuments, though defense attorneys said they didn’t have proper notice to understand the full implications of\r\nMichael’s involvement in the matter.\r\nSource: https://www.cyberscoop.com/vault-7-mistrial-cia-joshua-schulte/\r\nhttps://www.cyberscoop.com/vault-7-mistrial-cia-joshua-schulte/\r\nPage 2 of 2",
	"extraction_quality": 1,
	"language": "EN",
	"sources": [
		"ETDA"
	],
	"references": [
		"https://www.cyberscoop.com/vault-7-mistrial-cia-joshua-schulte/"
	],
	"report_names": [
		"vault-7-mistrial-cia-joshua-schulte"
	],
	"threat_actors": [],
	"ts_created_at": 1775434351,
	"ts_updated_at": 1775791301,
	"ts_creation_date": 0,
	"ts_modification_date": 0,
	"files": {
		"pdf": "https://archive.orkl.eu/67dcfea7382b82d0e114bc7204e2bb171374e0a7.pdf",
		"text": "https://archive.orkl.eu/67dcfea7382b82d0e114bc7204e2bb171374e0a7.txt",
		"img": "https://archive.orkl.eu/67dcfea7382b82d0e114bc7204e2bb171374e0a7.jpg"
	}
}