Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 170

Thread: Military Prosecutors Set To Open Major 9/11 Case

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    9/11 mastermind calls for death penalty

    http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...kUaI-JUUz74aUg

    1 hour ago

    GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba (AFP) — The alleged mastermind of the September 11, 2001 attacks Thursday called to be sentenced to death so he could become a martyr at the start of a US military hearing of five alleged plotters.

    "This is what I want, I'm looking to be a martyr for long time," Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, a Pakistani national, told the hearing at Guantanamo Bay as he was reminded by the military judge that he faced the death penalty.

    "God is all sufficient for me," he translated into English as he read verses from the Koran, the Muslim holy book. He also threw out his appointed military and civilian defense team, saying he would defend himself.

    Sheikh Mohammed, 43, has claimed to have been behind not just the September 11 attacks but also some 30 operations against the West in the past decade, according to transcripts of his interrogation released by the Pentagon.

    His appearance on Thursday is the first time he has been seen in public since his capture in Pakistan on March 1, 2003.

    Dressed in white but not handcuffed, he appeared along with four alleged co-conspirators at the hearing at the controversial US naval base in southern Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    He and his alleged co-conspirators, Ramzi Binalshibh , Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, Wallid bin Attash and Mustapha al-Hawsawi have been charged for their role in the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon which killed some 3,000 people.

    They all face the death penalty if convicted on charges including conspiracy, murder, attacking civilians, intentionally causing serious bodily injury, destruction of property, terrorism, and material support for terrorism.

    The men appeared relaxed as they chatted in Arabic before the hearing started at which the charges will be read by judge Colonel Ralph Kohlmann.

    The judge opened the military commission by saying the government would consider any statements by the five as confidential because of their detentions in secret CIA prisons.

    "Any statement by any of the detainees is presumptively classified," Kohlmann said.

    That means there would be a 20-second delay before the defendants statements are broadcast by video to the nearby purpose-built press room in order to allow prosecutors to cut any sensitive information.

    All five were to get the chance on Thursday to say if they accepted their military and civilian defense lawyers, and whether they wished to plead immediately on the charges.

    All the suspects were arrested between 2002 and 2003, and transferred to the controversial base on Cuba in 2006, allegedly after spending years in secret CIA prisons.

    The military tribunals have been mired in controversy since they were established by President George W. Bush at the end of 2001.

    In 2006, the US Supreme Court ruled they were illegal, but then Congress adopted a new law allowing for them to be re-established and allowing indirect witness statements or testimony won under duress to be submitted as evidence.Brigadier General Thomas Hartmann, legal advisor to the military commissions, said the defense team had been granted "extraordinary" rights.

    But he noted that if they are acquitted, the suspects could still continue to be held until the end of the so-called "war on terror."
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    9/11 mom: Grant self-proclaimed plotter death wish

    http://www.newsday.com/news/printedi...,5844389.story

    BY LAURA RIVERA
    June 6, 2008

    It may be the only point on which Sally Regenhard, whose firefighter son Christian was killed in the World Trade Center, agrees with the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.

    Though Regenhard is generally opposed to the death penalty, she said it may be justified in the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

    "If he's guilty," said Regenhard, of the Bronx, "a lot of 9/11 family members would be happy to see him get what he wants.

    "He should definitely meet his maker, be that the devil or be that something else," said Regenhard, a member of 9/11 Parents & Families of Firefighters.

    The accused al-Qaida operative's comments yesterday during his arraignment in Cuba that he hopes for a death sentence were part of what many see as his desire for martyrdom.

    Relatives of the victims of the defendant's alleged handiwork were notably absent from the proceedings in Cuba. They were given no option to view or attend the hearings.

    "That was a mistake," said Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann, the chief legal adviser for the military commissions. "We'll make sure that doesn't happen again."

    Carol Ashley, whose daughter Janice died on the 93rd floor of Tower One, said Mohammed's quest for martyrdom is precisely what should be denied to him and the four other defendants arraigned at the U.S. military prison yesterday.

    "Making them martyrs by executing them would further inflame radical jihadists," said Ashley, of Rockville Centre. "I would like to deny them that. I would rather see them sit in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives."

    This story was supplemented with a Washington Post report.
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    Eyewitness: 9/11 trial opens
    The BBC's Jonathan Beale describes the opening of the trial of the alleged mastermind of the 11 September 2001 attacks in the US and his four co-defendants in Guantanamo Bay.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7439550.stm

    6/7/2008

    The US military calls it Camp Justice - a $12m (£6m) legal complex situated down the road from the detention camp that human rights activists describe as a modern-day Gulag.

    The trial of the five so-called high-value detainees accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks was held at the now notorious Guantanamo Bay amid suffocating military security - the new courtroom was surrounded by razor wire fences.

    This is an unusual setting for an unusual process in which the US military is the jailer, judge and jury of the five detainees being tried.

    Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the attacks, was already sitting down when reporters were escorted into the building.

    Beside him were his mostly uniformed legal team and a translator. Behind him - the alleged four co-conspirators, accused of aiding and taking part in the plot that killed almost 3,000 people.

    'Enjoying the moment'
    The focus of attention, though, was on the man often referred to by just his initials - KSM. He gesticulated and pointed to get the attention of his co-defendants.

    We could not quite hear, but he was clearly passing on messages to the others facing trial.

    One of the defending military lawyers complained that Sheikh Mohammed was intimidating his detainee - Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi, a Saudi national.

    The lawyer said KSM had mocked his defendant in Arabic by asking if Mr al-Hawsawi was in the American army for at first agreeing to be represented by a US soldier.

    It reinforced the impression that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the leader. The US claims he was the third most senior figure in al-Qaeda.

    His appearance has changed dramatically since the photograph taken on an early morning raid that led to his arrest in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, in 2003. Then he looked dishevelled and overweight. Now he was thinner and wearing a long grey beard, a robe and a prayer hat.

    When he was addressed, he spoke in clear English, though it soon give way to a chant in Arabic in praise of Allah, which he occasionally interrupted to translate to the rest of the court.

    It was clear that he was not intimidated by his surroundings or the charges against him - he was enjoying the moment.

    He lectured the court that this was an inquisition, not a trial. He claimed that he had been tortured and then - much to the consternation of his legal team - he announced that he would be representing himself.

    When the judge, a marine colonel, asked if he understood the significance of that decision - as he was facing the death penalty - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed made clear that he understood very well.

    He said he had been looking to become a martyr for a very long time.

    'Decoy' lawyers
    This is a taste of what is going to be an extraordinary trial.

    The US military says that it has bent over backwards to make the proceedings transparent and fair.

    But at times the judge ordered that the audio feed to those listening to be cut off.

    It happened when Ramzi Binalshibh - a man who also said he wanted martyrdom - was asked about the medicine he had been taking. Even his own military lawyers had not been given those details.

    At times, it was difficult to tell who was running the proceedings.

    Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali - who is alleged to have helped finance the 9/11 hijackers - also denounced the trial in fluent English.

    He said even though the government "tortured me free of charge for all these years, I can't accept lawyers under the circumstances".

    He described the lawyers being offered to him as "decoys and decorations".

    'Shameful' trial
    Human rights groups observing the proceedings predictably denounced them as a farce.

    What is more surprising, is the condemnation coming from the men and women in American military uniform who have been given the task of defending the five men.

    At a news conference at the end of a long day, one of them described the proceedings as "shameful".

    What happened today, she said, tarnished the uniform. She added that it would not make the already difficult job of the judge any easier.
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    Criticism rages with accused 9/11 conspirators in court

    http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...3MrdVFSy2li5aA

    2 days ago

    GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba (AFP) — The appearance before a military judge of accused 9/11 conspirators has done little to quiet critics of the tribunal system conceived by the US government to try suspected terrorists.

    This is the first major test for the extraordinary military tribunals set up after the worst terror strike on US soil. The tribunals were called off in 2006 by the Supreme Court but then were set back up by the then Republican-led Congress.

    Since then the tribunals have faced a firestorm of international criticism, some US opposition and reverses that have delayed the opening of the first genuine trial.

    "It was not justice, it was ridiculous," the military attorney for Mustafa al-Hawsawi, Major Jon Jackson, said Thursday after a hearing in the ultramodern new court building set up at the US naval base on Cuba's southeastern tip.

    Appearances were kept up. The five accused appeared fit, each accompanied by a team of attorneys. And even if their exchanges with military judge Ralph Kohlmann at times veered toward the surreal, the tone remained polite.

    But one by one, the accused refused their lawyers' assistance, and some asked to be executed so they could be martyrs.

    "It hardly comes as any surprise that after holding individuals in solitary confinement for five years and subjecting them to torture, these detainees would reject the legal system and offers to represent them," said Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

    Earlier this year the CIA admitted that Khaled Sheikh Mohammed was subjected to the technique of simulated drowning known as "water-boarding" which has been widely denounced as torture.

    Chief military defense attorney Colonel Steven David slammed what he said was the judge's rush to hold the hearing without giving the lawyers time to win their clients' trust.

    Attorneys were able to spend little time with the accused, he alleged, while the prosecution has been preparing for years.

    Although the issue was only brought up at the end of the hearing, the defense also strongly attacked the judge's decision to allow the accused to talk among themselves during arguments -- while the government for years has worked to keep the men from communicating with each other.

    While the tone at times seemed light "it was clear that M. Mohammed was attempting to intimidate M. Hawasawi," argued Jackson.

    Visibly angry, Commander Suzanne Lachelier, attorney for Ramzi Binalshibh, lamented that "what we saw today was a lack of desire to honor the principles that those kids are fighting for over there in Afghanistan and Iraq."

    A former attorney of Frenchman Zacarias Moussaoui, who was convicted by a federal court to life in prison for aiding hijackers, Edward MacMahon came here to defend Wallid ben-Attash.

    Like the five accused Thursday, Moussaoui also tried to ditch his lawyers and steer the trial, but "not everybody in the courtroom thought it was a great idea.

    "The idea of the trial was to determine his sentence, it wasn't to allow the defendant to run the show, which is essentially what you saw in this courtroom," MacMahon said.

    Colonel Lawrence Morris, the lead prosecutor, disagreed.

    "Today you witnessed the continued, steady progress of the justice system," he said. "You stay here, and you watch every minute of this trial (...) and with that open mind, you will be impressed and stunned by the robustness of due process."

    The prosecution has asked the judge to fix the opening of the trial for mid-September, a date that falls at the heart of the US presidential campaign. Defense attorneys and rights groups allege the timing is designed to influence the November election.
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    Defense lawyer: U.S. urged interrogators to destroy notes

    http://www.abc4.com/news/world/story...0-9e8581f27853

    6/7/2008

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) - A military defense lawyer says the Pentagon urged interrogators at Guantanamo Bay to destroy handwritten notes in case they were called to testify about potentially harsh treatment of detainees.

    Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler says the instructions were included in an operations manual shown to him by prosecutors.

    The attorney for Canadian detainee Omar Khadr says the apparent destruction of evidence prevents him from challenging the reliability of any alleged confessions. He said Sunday he will use the document to seek a dismissal of charges against Khadr.

    A Pentagon spokesman said he was reviewing the matter.
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    In Gitmo's Legal Otherworld, 9/11 Trial Defendants Cry Torture

    http://www.alternet.org/rights/87503/

    By Andy Worthington, Andy Worthington's Blog. Posted June 9, 2008.

    While much reporting after last week's arraignments focused on KSM's desire to be executed, torture itself is on trial at Guantánamo Bay.

    Finally, almost seven years after the horrendous attacks of September 11, 2001, the arraignments of five prisoners allegedly responsible for orchestrating and facilitating the attacks took place at Guantánamo on June 5.

    Sixty reporters from around the world were in attendance, as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Mustafa al-Hawsawi, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and Walid bin Attash emerged from the shadows in which they have been held for the last five to six years.

    Although all five were transferred to Guantánamo in September 2006, they were previously held in secret prisons run by the CIA -- apparently in locations as diverse as Thailand and Eastern Europe -- where they were subjected to what the administration euphemistically refers to as "enhanced interrogation techniques." As these techniques include waterboarding, an ancient method of torture that involves controlled drowning, to which at least one of these men -- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed -- was subjected, it was unsurprising that both Mohammed and Ali Abdul Aziz Ali made a point of mentioning that they were tortured.

    According to the reporters who attended the arraignment, Mohammed -- often identified simply as KSM, who admitted during his tribunal at Guantánamo last year that he was "responsible for the 9/11 operation, from A to Z" -- effortlessly assumed a position of leadership within the group, as the men, who had all been held in total isolation for years before the arraignment, "laughed and chatted like old chums," according to the Los Angeles Times.

    Clearly baiting the judge, Marine Col. Ralph Kohlmann, KSM responded to a statement by Col. Kohlmann, who interrupted a session of chanting to remind him that he "was told what he can and can't say," by replying, "I know I can't cross that red line. I know I can't talk about torture," as ABC News described it. At another point in the ten-hour hearing, KSM called the proceedings "an inquisition, not a trial," and added, pointedly, "After five years of torturing … you transfer us to Inquisition Land in Guantánamo." At yet another point, as London's Times described it, he "accused the authorities of extracting his confession by force," saying, "All of this has been taken under torturing. You know that very well."

    KSM's nephew, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, who is accused of helping facilitate the attacks by transferring money to the 9/11 hijackers, also spoke about torture, while simultaneously mocking the proceedings. Speaking fluent English, he responded to Col. Kohlmann's assurance of his right to legal assistance by stating, "Everything that has happened here is unfair and unjust." He added, referring specifically to the offer of free legal representation, "Since the first time I was arrested, I might have appreciated that. The government is talking about lawyers free of charge. The government also tortured me free of charge all these years."

    Allegations of torture have haunted the arraignments and pre-trial hearings of other prisoners facing trial by Military Commission, but they are of particular concern to the administration in the cases of KSM and his co-accused. Evidence of torture would, of course, be inadmissible in a regular court, but although the judges in the Military Commissions are empowered to accept confessions obtained through "enhanced interrogations" (so long as they were obtained before the Military Commissions Act was passed in 2006), the authorities are so aware of how damaging revelations of torture would be to the Commissions' reputation that they recently reinterrogated these men -- and nine other "high-value detainees" transferred to Guantánamo with them in 2006 -- using "clean teams" of FBI agents to gain "new" confessions that are torture-free.

    The idea that the history of post-9/11 U.S. torture can be erased in this way is darkly risible, of course, and as the comments of KSM and Ali Abdul Aziz Ali make clear, it will be impossible to proceed with the trial without torture once more raising its ugly head to impugn America's moral standing, and to cast grave doubts about the quality of the "evidence" obtained from these men.

    It could all have been so different, as Dan Coleman of the FBI explained to the New Yorker's Jane Mayer in 2006. Now retired, Coleman was a senior interrogator, who worked on high-profile terror cases in the years before 9/11 without resorting to violence, and he remains fundamentally opposed to torture, because it is unreliable, and because it corrupts those who undertake it.

    Coleman told Mayer that "people don't do anything unless they're rewarded." He explained that if the FBI had beaten confessions out of suspects with what he called "all that alpha-male shit," it would have been self-defeating. "Brutality may yield a timely scrap of information," he conceded. "But in the longer fight against terrorism," as Mayer described it, "such an approach is 'completely insufficient.'" Coleman added, "You need to talk to people for weeks. Years."
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    Supreme Court accepts 9/11 detainee case

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/16/scotus.ashcroft/

    From Bill Mears
    CNN Supreme Court Producer
    6/17/2008

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether top government officials can be held personally liable for allegedly knowing of or condoning mistreatment of people detained after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

    Oral arguments will be held in the fall.

    The decision comes just days after the justices ruled accused terrorists and foreign fighters held overseas by the U.S. military can contest their detentions in civilian courts.

    The current appeal deals with Javaid Iqbal, a 40-year-old Pakistani man, who was arrested in New York two months after the 9/11 attacks. He was never charged with any terrorism offenses, although he was convicted of fraud for having false papers and eventually deported.

    He later filed a series of lawsuits against top Bush officials, alleging he was beaten by guards during his yearlong detention and that officials personally condoned isolating Muslim and Arab immigrants in a Brooklyn prison wing.

    Former Attorney General John Ashcroft and current FBI Director Robert Mueller were among those personally sued. They have denied holding and segregating anyone after the terror attacks because of their religious beliefs or ethnicity.

    Iqbal's suit was rejected by the federal District Court in New York, but a federal appeals court ruled the lawsuit could continue.

    Ashcroft and Mueller appealed that decision, saying their shouldn't be held liable for alleged actions by their subordinates. If the Supreme Court eventually rules that the case can go ahead, it would likely be sent back to the original court for a decision.

    The case is Ashcroft v. Iqbal (07-1015).

    In an unrelated case, the court rejected an appeal Monday from dozens of Illinois parents who say state officials threatened to take their children away based often only on anonymous tips of abuse or neglect. The justices declined to review the case without explanation.
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    Lawyer seeks clearance for 9/11 defendant

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h...F2vHwD91C1E700

    By ANDREW O. SELSKY – 1 hour ago

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — A military attorney for one of the Sept. 11 defendants at Guantanamo Bay predicted on Tuesday the Pakistani would at best see only a sliver of classified evidence and would be convicted in what amounts to "a top secret trial."

    Navy Lt. Cmdr. Brian Mizer told The Associated Press he will seek a security clearance for Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, a nephew and alleged lieutenant of confessed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, but expects it will be denied.

    Mizer noted that if the defendant lacks a security clearance, his defense team will be unable to share classified evidence with him unless and until the judge allows it to be discussed in open court.

    Air Force Brig. Gen. Tom Hartmann, a senior official with the Guantanamo trials, said in a telephone interview that he seriously doubts any of the five Sept. 11 defendants would be issued a security clearance. But Hartmann insisted that they will be able to see all the evidence presented to the jury.

    However, some classified information presented to the jury and the defendants may be censored or summarized, Hartmann said, touching on a key element in whether America's first war-crimes trials since the World War II era are seen as fair.

    Hartmann has repeatedly said the high-profile military trials will be as fair and transparent as possible. Mizer said such claims are "typical military commission showmanship."

    "The government provides the prisoners at GTMO with empty legal guarantees that are devoid of any practical benefit to the prisoner and then proclaims to the world that the trials at GTMO are a model of due process," Mizer said in an e-mail, using the military shorthand for Guantanamo.

    Mizer predicted that al-Aziz, also known as Ammar al-Baluchi, will "likely be convicted in a top secret trial where he has had access to only some of the government's evidence."

    Mizer said that on four occasions while defending another Guantanamo detainee, he himself was barred from seeing classified documents the government presented to a military judge, even though the Navy lawyer has security clearance.

    "I cannot rebut evidence that I cannot see, and we can lose legal motions based upon evidence that is not available to defense attorneys with the highest levels of security clearance," Mizer said.

    Hartmann acknowledged that on rare occasions, defense lawyers might be denied access to classified information presented to the judge, saying that the military trials must "balance national security interests with the accused needing to see the information."

    A June 5 arraignment was the first appearance for the five defendants since they were captured, held by the CIA and then moved to Guantanamo in 2006. All said they want to represent themselves. The military judge deferred a decision on whether two of the prisoners — Ramzi Binalshibh and Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi — could reject their attorneys.

    Still, Mizer said he intends to see al-Baluchi at the U.S. Naval base in southeast Cuba on Wednesday and give him the form to apply for a security clearance.

    "I intend to call the government on this bogus claim that the accused will be able to see the evidence against them," Mizer said.

    The judge hearing the Sept. 11 case, Marine Col. Ralph Kohlmann, has not yet set a trial date. All five face the death penalty if convicted of terrorism-related charges.

    Al-Baluchi is alleged to have sent approximately US$120,000 to the Sept. 11 hijackers for their expenses and flight training, and to have helped nine of them travel to the United States.
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    US asks to rewrite detainee evidence

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080620/...anamo_evidence

    6/20/2008

    WASHINGTON - The Bush administration wants to rewrite the official evidence against Guantanamo Bay detainees, allowing it to shore up its cases before they come under scrutiny by civilian judges for the first time.

    The government has stood behind the evidence for years. Military review boards relied on it to justify holding hundreds of prisoners indefinitely without charge. Justice Department attorneys said it was thoroughly and fairly reviewed.

    Now that federal judges are about to review the evidence, however, the government says it needs to make changes.

    The decision follows last week's Supreme Court ruling, which held that detainees have the right to challenge their detention in civilian court, not just before secret military panels. At a closed-door meeting with judges and defense attorneys this week, government lawyers said they needed time to add new evidence and make other changes to evidentiary documents known as "factual returns."

    Attorneys for the detainees criticized the idea, saying the government is basically asking for a last-minute do-over.

    "It's sort of an admission that the original returns were defective," said attorney David Remes, who represents many detainees and attended Wednesday's meeting. "It's also an admission that the government thinks it needs to beef up the evidence."

    Justice Department spokesman Erik Ablin declined to comment on the plan. The discussions were confirmed by several attorneys and officials who attended or were briefed on the meeting with the judges and defense lawyers.

    "It's a totally fishy maneuver that suggests that the government wants, at the 11th hour, to get its ducks in a row," said Jonathan Hafetz, an attorney representing several detainees. He was briefed on the plan.

    The documents include the government's accusations and summaries of the evidence that was presented to the military review panel. The records were filed in federal court in many detainee cases in 2004 and 2005, before Congress stripped those courts of the authority to hold hearings.

    Detainees' attorneys who have reviewed the records criticized much of the evidence as hearsay cobbled together from bounty hunters and border guards who accused people of being terrorists in exchange for reward money.

    At Guantanamo Bay, the traditional rules of evidence do not apply in trials run by the military. In a Washington federal courtroom, they would.

    The government wants to submit new records, which would allow it to add new intelligence and expand its reasoning for holding the detainees. Since the hearings will decide whether the detainees are lawfully being held now — not whether they were lawfully being held over the past several years — the government wants to provide the court its newest, best evidence.

    It will be up to federal judges to decide whether the Justice Department can rewrite those documents.

    The question is part of a broader dispute over what the upcoming hearings will look like. Attorneys for the detainees want judges to review all the evidence and decide whether each prisoner should be released. The government believes the judges should look only at limited evidence prepared by officials at Guantanamo Bay.

    That's why defense attorneys are troubled by the idea that authorities now want to rewrite that evidence. If the court limits arguments to just the government's record, and gives the government a chance to improve that record, they believe the detainees' chances will be hurt.

    "They're not just talking about making a little supplement where they've learned something new," said attorney Charles H. Carpenter, who was in the meeting. "They're talking about possibly amending every single one."
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    America
    Posts
    30,715
    Can you imagine?

    Evidence for military courts:

    This person was responsible for the murder of 2,973 people.

    Evidence for civilian courts:

    This person was responsible for the murder of 2,973 people, but everyone that ever knew anything about it is dead, all of the documentation to substantiate that claim burned up in a horrible fire, and oh yea, the actual detainee tried to escape yesterday, and was shot and killed.
    No One Knows Everything. Only Together May We Find The Truth JG


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-26-2007, 07:19 PM
  2. British PM Open To Military Role In Iran
    By Gold9472 in forum The New News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-13-2007, 08:03 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-09-2006, 10:06 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-21-2005, 06:19 AM
  5. ABC news just said maybe a major break in the case
    By beltman713 in forum The New News
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-08-2005, 01:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •