The reader will kindly forgive any tendency to rough language or behavior on the part of the site owner...
TMGlogo2006-2007phs-copy.jpg
"Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
TMGbloglabel1 copy.gif

TMGbloglabel3 copy.gif
TMG MONTHLY ARCHIVES
[-]



TMGbloglabel10 copy.gif

TMGbloglabel2 copy.gif
The Mudville Gazette Feeds

 

Add to Technorati Favorites
Technorati Profile
add.gif
Add to Google
addtomyyahoo4.gif
ngsub1.gif sub_modern5.gif

xml.gif rdf.png atom feed.jpg

digg.jpg

Find the best blogs at Blogs.com.

pl-news.gif

tvc_logo_small.png

Mrsg- Greyhawk's Profile
Mrsg- Greyhawk's Facebook profile
Create Your Badge
TMGbloglabel5 copy.gif
TMGbloglabel6 copy.gif
350.jpg
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by!
« 232nd birthday of "Old Glory," the United States flag. | Main | "This is not going to beat me" »

June 14, 2009

greyhawk copy sm.png

Judge: "Yes, you can sue Yoo in America"

By Greyhawk

...but only in America.

A convicted terrorist can sue a former Bush administration lawyer for drafting the legal theories that led to his alleged torture, ruled a federal judge who said he was trying to balance a clash between war and the defense of personal freedoms.

In the past, terrorists would hijack a plane and demand release of their imprisoned comrades. One possible lesson learned for such groups from the Padilla story might be that such actions are counter-productive - an imprisoned terrorist can do much more damage to a target than those outside the walls.

*****

Padilla, who prefers to be called Abdullah al-Muhajir, alleges he was tortured by U.S. military members.

He is currently serving a 17-year sentence at the Colorado "Supermax" facility after being convicted on charges related to terrorism:

Evidence includes hundreds of FBI wiretap intercepts translated from Arabic, boxloads of documents ranging from bank records to passports and dozens of witnesses.
<...>
Padilla, a former Chicago gang member, has been in federal custody since his May 2002 arrest at O'Hare International Airport.
<...>
A key piece of evidence against Padilla - one that ties the other two to al-Qaida - is an application to attend an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan that prosecutors say he completed in July 2000 using the name "Abu Abdullah al-Mujahir." They also say that it bears his fingerprints, and that another alleged al-Qaida recruit will testify that he filled out an identical form.

The defense maintained that "his client's fingerprints appear on only the first and last pages on the outside, suggesting it may have simply been handed to him" and that Padilla/ al-Mujahir "was a peaceful Islamic convert interesting in studying his religion overseas."

Here's the Wikipedia explanation of the legal odyssey of Abu Abdullah al-Mujahir - clearly broader issues are at stake in this case - in which Padilla is seeking $1 - one dollar - in damages, and a ruling that his treatment was unconstitutional. (One could imagine a government 'counter-offer' of 25 cents with no acknowledgment of abuse but a written statement that "prison sucks".) But limiting our discussion to the question "did U.S. military members torture or abuse (by any reasonable definition) Abu Abdullah al-Mujahir" (an obvious pre-requisite determination to Yoo's alleged part therein) we now return to our first story for additional details of the lawsuit:

He was held in a Navy brig in Charleston, S.C., for three years and eight months as an enemy combatant. Padilla's lawsuit alleges Yoo personally approved his time and treatment in the brig.

His lawsuit alleges he was illegally detained and was subjected to sleep deprivation, temperature extremes, painful stress positions, and extended periods of bright lights and total darkness. Padilla also alleges he endured threats that he would be killed, that his family would be harmed, and that he would be transferred to another country to be tortured.

In fact he has alleged much more than that. At his sentencing in Miami, U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke stated:

...she was giving Padilla some credit -- over the objections of federal prosecutors -- for his lengthy military detention at a Navy brig in South Carolina. She agreed with defense lawyers that Padilla was subjected to "harsh conditions" and "extreme environmental stresses" while there.

"I do find that the conditions were so harsh for Mr. Padilla ... they warrant consideration in the sentencing in this case," the judge said. However, he did not get credit for time served.

Padilla's lawyers claimed his treatment amounted to torture, which U.S. officials have repeatedly denied. His attorneys say he was forced to stand in painful stress positions, given LSD or other drugs as "truth serum," deprived of sleep and even a mattress for extended periods and subjected to loud noises, extreme heat and cold and noxious odors.

In a pre-trial hearing, his lawyers had argued the defendant was mentally unfit to stand trial:
On February 22, 2007, at the competency hearing, Angela Hegarty, a psychiatrist hired by Padilla's defense, said that after 22 hours of examining Padilla it was her opinion that he was mentally unfit to stand trial. She said that he exhibited "a facial tic, problems with social contact, lack of concentration and a form of Stockholm syndrome." She diagnosed his condition as post-traumatic stress disorder.[33][34] She told the court "It's my opinion that he lacks the capacity to assist counsel. He has a great deal of difficulty talking about the current case before him."[34] In cross examination Federal prosecutor John Shipley pointed out that Padilla had a score of zero on Hegarty's post-traumatic stress disorder test and pointed out that this information was omitted in her final report. Hegarty responded that this omission was an error on her part.[34] Another psychiatrist hired by the defense testified along the same lines. The Miami Herald reported that a "U.S. Bureau of Prisons psychiatrist who believes Padilla is fit to face trial and Defense Department officials -- are expected to testify at the ongoing hearing before U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke."[34]
However, Cooke ruled that he was
...competent to stand trial on terrorism support charges, rejecting arguments that he was severely damaged by 3 1/2 years of interrogation and isolation in a military brig.
<...>
"This defendant clearly has the capacity to assist his attorneys," Cooke said just hours after she finished four days of competency hearings.
<...>
Bush administration officials vehemently deny that Padilla was mistreated, and Cooke said her decision on competency should not be read as a ruling on those claims. "That discussion is for another day," she said.
Judge Cooke had earlier considered a defense motion to dismiss based on outrageous government conduct (specifically, abuse while held at Charleston).
Padilla claims that the mistreatment he allegedly suffered while at the Naval Brig divests the government of its jurisdiction to prosecute him for the crimes charged in the indictment. Mr. Padilla's allegations with regard to his mistreatment stem exclusively from his time at the Naval Brig. Padilla makes no allegations regarding outrageous government conduct prior to his arrest, during the course of his arrest or during his civilian custodial detention in connection with the crimes charged in the indictment. Mr. Padilla also makes no claim of prosecutorial misconduct related to the government's efforts to try this case.
Judge Cooke noted that determining the validity of the motion to dismiss required her to rule under the still unproven assumption that the abuse claim was true:

In order to assess whether Padilla's motion is legally insufficient, this Court must accept its allegations as true, and determine whether he has stated a cognizable claim. Thus, while this Court has not held a hearing, nor made any findings with regard to Padilla's claims of abuse and torture at the Naval Brig, for the sake of this Order, this Court will accept Padilla's allegations as true.

And ultimately denied the motion:
Padilla claims that his charges should be dismissed due to outrageous governmental conduct perpetrated after the commission of his alleged crimes. Padilla seeks this relief despite the fact that the objectionable conduct occurred during his military detention in connection with his enemy combatant status. Padilla's argument contains numerous legal infirmities.

First, the fact that the governmental conduct occurred at a time and place removed from the crimes charged makes the remedy Padilla is seeking considerably more attenuated and arbitrary. Short of resorting to a 'two wrongs make a right' judicial process, it is difficult for this Court to ascertain how the remedy sought emanates from the infirmity defendant describes. This is considerably distinguishable from a government entrapment scenario, where the crime that the defendant is charged with is the crux of the outrageous government conduct claim.7

Second, the outrageous conduct occurred while Padilla was under military control at the Naval Brig in Charleston, South Carolina. At this time, Padilla was being held under Presidential orders in connection with his enemy combatant status and had not been charged with the crimes he is currently facing. This further attenuates Padilla's outrageous government conduct claim. Even if Padilla's due process rights were violated while being held at the Naval Brig as an enemy combatant, he fails to explain how this violation should result in the dismissal of distinct crimes that he was not charged with at that point.8

Third, Mr. Padilla fails to explain why suppressing governmental use of any evidence obtained from him at the Naval Brig is insufficient for purposes of this trial. In his motion, Padilla acknowledges that the government has already averred not to seek introduction of any of the Naval Brig evidence at trial.9 Despite summarily rejecting this remedy as "clearly inadequate," Padilla fails to support this contention or explain why his requested remedy is more appropriate.10 In fact, in his motion, Padilla relies heavily on United States v. Toscanino, 500 F.2d 267 (2d. Cir. 1974),11 a case where the Second Circuit sanctions this very approach. Padilla's Motion concedes that "the court in Toscanino noted that many cases involving due process violations center on unlawful government acquisition of evidence and that, in those instances, the proper remedy would be the exclusion of the tainted evidence." Def. Mot. at 11.

Mr. Padilla fails to present a cognizable claim of outrageous government conduct entitling him to dismissal of the indictment.12 The objectionable conduct Padilla claims violated his due process rights occurred during his military detainment in isolation of the crimes charged. Padilla also fails to adequately explain why excluding any unlawfully obtained evidence would not be an appropriate remedy in this case. Applying the exclusionary rule to bar inclusion of any illegally obtained evidence would sufficiently satisfy due process concerns. This may ultimately be a moot point since the government has averred not to utilize any Naval Brig evidence in its case. However, should the government decide to make use of any such evidence, an appropriate hearing will be scheduled to determine to what extent it is admissible.

To avoid misinterpretation of "Mr. Padilla fails to present a cognizable claim of outrageous government conduct..." Cooke reiterated (in footnote 12) that (bold emphasis added) "This Court makes no finding with regard to Mr. Padilla's treatment at the Naval Brig. By stating that Mr. Padilla has failed to state a claim of 'outrageous government conduct,' the Court is merely rejecting the merits of Mr. Padilla's legal argument. Within the framework of this Order, the phrase 'outrageous government conduct' should be interpreted as a legal term of art and not defined in a conventional sense."


Posted by Greyhawk / June 14, 2009 11:59 AM | Permalink

1 Comment

Comfortabl y, the post is really the sweetest on this laudable topic. I fit in with your conclusions and will thirstily look forward to your future updates. Saying thanks will not just be sufficient, for the great clarity in your writing. I will instantly grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates. Pleasant work and much success in your business efforts!

Leave a comment

350.jpg
Mrs G copy.png

November 26, 2010


America@war
[Greyhawk]
I think anyone who's ever pondered the "comment" option - once only available on blogs and bulletin boards, now ubiquitous on almost any web site - will appreciate this:
The so-called faculty of writing is not so much a faculty of writing as it is a faculty of thinking. When a man says, "I have an idea but I can't express it"; that man hasn't an idea but merely a vague feeling. If a man has a feeling of that kind, and will sit down for a half an hour and persistently try to put into writing what he feels, the probabilities are at least 90 percent that he will either be able to record it, or else realize that he has no idea at all. In either case, he will do himself a benefit.

That's wisdom from the past, captured for posterity at the US Naval Institute, shared via the web on the institute's 137th anniversary.

From their about page:

The Naval Institute shall remain

INDEPENDENT - A non-profit member association, with no government support, that does not lobby for special interests;

NON-PARTISAN - An independent, professional military association with a mission, goals and objectives that transcend political affiliations; and shall encourage

IDEAS - Through its respected journals Proceedings and Naval History, its conferences, its books and its online content, in support of those who serve.

"The Naval Institute has three core activities," among them, History and Preservation:

The Naval Institute also has recently introduced Americans at War, a living history of Americans at war in their own words and from their own experiences. These 90-second vignettes convey powerful stories of inspiration, pride, and patriotism.

Take a look at the collection, and you'll see it's not limited to accounts from those who served on ships at sea, members of the other branches are well-represented.

I'm fortunate to have met USNI's Mary Ripley, she's responsible for the institute's oral history program (and she's the daughter of the late John Ripley, whose story is told here). She also deserves much credit for their blog. ("We're not the Navy nor any government agency. Blog and comment freely.") We met at a milblog conference - Mary knew (and I would come to realize) that milbloggers are the 21st-century version of exactly what the US Naval Institute is all about. Once that light bulb came on in my head, I mentioned a vague idea for a project to her - milblogs as the 21st century oral history that they are.

"Put that in writing," she said (of course - see first paragraph above!) - and here's part of the result.

Shortly after the first tent was pitched by the American military in Iraq a wire was connected to a computer therein, and the internet was available to a generation of Americans at war - many of whom had grown up online. From that point on, at any given moment, somewhere in Iraq a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine was at a keyboard sharing the events of his or her day with the folks back home. While most would simply fire off an email, others took advantage of the (then) relatively new online blogging platforms to post their thoughts and experiences for the entire world to see. The milblog was born - and from that moment to this stories detailing everything from the most mundane aspects of camp life to intense combat action (often described within hours of the event) have been available on the web...

And et cetera - but since you're reading this on a milblog, you probably knew that. And you know that milblogs aren't just blogs written by troops at war, that many friends, family members, and supporters likewise documented their story of America at war online in near-real time, as those stories developed.

The diversity in membership of that group is broad, the one thing we all have in common is the impulse to make sense of the seemingly senseless, and communicate the tale - for each of us that impulse was strong enough to overcome whatever barriers prevent the vast majority of people from doing the same. Everyone at some point has some vague idea they believe should be shared - we were the people who, from some combination of internal and external urging, found and spent those many half hours persistently trying to write it down.

*****

But where will all that be in another 137 years? Or five or ten, for that matter. That's something I've asked myself since at least 2004 - when I wrote this:

Closing Blogs is nothing new. So many site's owners just give up on their own. They come and go, you know, these MilBloggers do. Like any other sort of blogger. Many post in the lonely down hours far from home, spill their guts for the world, then abandon their spots when the tour of duty is up. They have lives again somewhere in the world, and no need to share the details. So it goes.

Many are truly gone - no site left at all. "The page cannot be found." Other blogs remain, like abandoned defensive positions in shifting desert sands.

Membership in the ghost battalion has grown in the years since, and an ever growing majority of those abandoned-but-still-standing sites are vanishing. Have you checked out Lt Smash's site lately? How about Sgt Hook's? If you're a long-time milblog reader you know the first widely-read milblog from Operation Iraq Freedom and the first widely-read milblog from Afghanistan are both gone from the web. If you're a relative newcomer to this world you may never even have heard of them - or the dozens upon dozens of others who carried forth the standard they set down.

If you have a vague notion that something should be done about that, (a notion I've heard expressed more than once...) then you and I and the good folks at the US Naval Institute are in agreement. Preserving the history documented by the milbloggers is just one of the goals of the milblog project, the once-vague idea that we're now making real.

And it's a big idea, if I say so myself - too big to explain in one simple blog post, so stand by for more. Likewise, it's too big a task to be accomplished by just one person. So if you're a milblogger (and exactly what is a milblogger? is a topic for much further discussion on its own) I'm asking for your help. All I'll really need is just a little bit (maybe just one or two of those half hours...) of your time, and your willingness to tell the tale.

We've already made history, it's time to save it.

(More to follow...)




Posted 4:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) |

TMGbloglabel7copy.gif
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
TMGrecentcomments.gif
TMGbloglabel2 copy.gif
The Dawn Patrol Feeds

 

Add to Google Reader or Homepage Subscribe in NewsGator Online Add to netvibes Add to Plusmo myaol_cta1.gif

xml.gif rdf.png atom feed.jpg

TMGbloglabel8copy.gif

TMGbloglabel9 copy.gif
Blah Blah Blah
me220.JPG

The Mudville Gazette is written and produced by Greyhawk, who recently retired from 24 years of active duty in the US military, but will maintain this disclaimer: Unless otherwise credited, the opinions expressed are those of the author, and nothing here is to be taken as representing the official position of or endorsement by the United States Department of Defense or any of its subordinate components.

Furthermore, I will occasionally use satire or parody herein. The bottom line: it's my house.

I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email.

Original content copyright © 2003 - 2011 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed.

Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com

andsm.jpg

*****

Tending Distant
Fires


Far from hearth and home, watching
Cold alone but not alone
On distant shore and only wanting
Safe return and little more

What tales we'll tell
When that time comes
When tales can be told

When things grim
Seem far away
When other fires go cold

Some distant sunset, vision fading
Memories remain
And tired eyes gaze 'pon folded flags
While distant drums beat their refrain

Saluting fallen friends whose names
And youth will never fade
Here's to those on other shores,
for them live well, the price is paid

- Greyhawk,
Baghdad,
December 2004