George F. Will: When terrorism hysteria overtake constitutional precepts

*

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=images+habeas+corpus+suspension&qpvt=images+habeas+corpus+suspension&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=E57314499E2C67C36702103843AAFAF854F3354C&selectedIndex=36

*

spineless, cowardly judges & appeals justices

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=images+habeas+corpus+suspension&qpvt=images+habeas+corpus+suspension&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=B338CE9A228E7BA6E72F5271F7C7C84AD83AC0E0&selectedIndex=53

*

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=images+habeas+corpus+suspension&qpvt=images+habeas+corpus+suspension&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=6C414CB6C3DC8E7B9385F31A54C2041B8803AD6F&selectedIndex=8

*

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-korematsu-and-the-dangers-of-waiving-constitutional-rights/2013/04/24/75586ca6-ac3e-11e2-b6fd-ba6f5f26d70e_story.html

*

Two of the three most infamous Supreme Court decisions were erased by events. The Civil War and postwar constitutional amendments effectively overturned Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which held that blacks could never have rights that whites must respect. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which upheld legally enforced segregation, was undone by court decisions and legislation.

The third, Korematsu v. United States (1944), which affirmed the president’s wartime power to sweep Americans of disfavored racial groups into concentration camps, elicited a 1988 congressional apology. Now Peter Irons, founder of the Earl Warren Bill of Rights Project at the University of California at San Diego, is campaigning for a Supreme Court “repudiation” of the Korematsu decision and other Japanese internment rulings. Such repudiation, if it occurred, would be unprecedented.

*

The Korematsu decision reflected perennial dangers: panic and excessive deference, judicial and other, to presidents or others who would suspend constitutional protections in the name of wartime exigencies.

It is less important that the decision be repudiated than that it be remembered. Especially by those currently clamoring, since Boston, for a U.S. citizen — arrested in America and concerning whom there is no evidence of a connection with al-Qaeda, the Taliban or other terror network — to be detained by the military as an “enemy combatant.” The Korematsu case is a reminder that waiving constitutional rights is rarely necessary and rarely ends well.

*

*

*

An exception to Miranda?

*

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/04/tsarnaev_an_enemy_combatant_john_mccain_and_lindsey_graham_s_harmful_campaign.single.html

*

It’s the American way to extend to whatever suspect is currently the most hated man in the country the protections of our laws. Yes, it’s important to ask Tsarnaev the questions that could yield valuable intelligence or could prevent future harm. The FBI should ask him who influenced or perhaps trained him and his brother. They should ask him the whys and the hows. I’d rather see this happen after Tsarnaev has been read his Miranda rights or with the provision that much of what Tsarnaev says can’t be used against him at trial. (There’s plenty of evidence against him without his statement, after all.) If you don’t like my idea, here are three other proposals, from law professors Eric Posner and Akhil Amar and CBS’s Andrew Cohen for how to interrogate him legally, within the boundaries of the ordinary justice system.

The federal courts can and will sort this out, as they have many times since 9/11. Almost 500 times, to be exact—that’s the number of convictions for terrorism crimes since the attacks on the World Trade Centers. The number of convictions before military commissions, on the other hand, is just seven. (More related myths and facts here, from Human Rights First.)

That takes us back to Guantanamo and all the problems that have arisen there. In the two cases in which the government asked to indefinitely detain a U.S. citizen as an enemy combatant, it ended up backing down each time. Yaser Esam Hamdi was an American captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan carrying a weapon. After the Supreme Court said he had some rights to have his case heard by a federal court, in 2004 the Bush administration sent Hamdi back to Saudi Arabia, where he’d been raised. Then there’s Jose Padilla, an American held as an enemy combatant after being arrested in Chicago. After years of legal fighting, including accusations that Padilla had been subjected to stress positions and sleep deprivation tantamount to torture—and seriously psychologically harmed by prolonged solitary confinement—the Bush administration ducked a Supreme Court ruling and transferred Padilla to the civil courts.

Compare those sorry episodes with the straightforward and successful prosecutions of Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, and Eric Rudolph, the bomber at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. There was no move to declare either man an enemy combatant, or take away their right to a lawyer, or remove them from the federal courts. Both received the procedural protections that ensure the right to a fair trial for all of us. Rudolph pled guilty and is in prison for life. The same is true of Faisal Shahzad, who tried to bomb Times Square; Richard Reid, the attempted shoe bomber; and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the attempted Christmas Day bomber.

The fate of McVeigh is especially instructive. He was convicted on all 11 counts. The jury recommended the death penalty. Four years later, McVeigh was executed. McVeigh’s case showed the world that terrorists can’t snatch from the United States our tradition and belief in justice. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was indicted Monday on charges that also carry the death penalty. If he is executed, it should be with the same attention to fairness. That’s how we win this war.

*

*

*

*

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/204757471.html

*

Dzhokhar was interrogated in his hospital room Sunday and Monday over a period of 16 hours without being read his rights to remain silent and have an attorney present. He immediately stopped talking after a magistrate judge and a representative from the U.S. Attorney’s office entered the room and gave him his Miranda warning, according to a U.S. law enforcement official and others briefed on the interrogation.

Kelly and the mayor said they were briefed on the New York plot on Wednesday night by the task force investigating the Boston bombing.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said in a CNN interview that the city should have been told earlier.

“Even though this may or may not have been spontaneous, for all we know there could be other conspirators out there, and the city should have been alerted so it could go into its defensive mode,” he said.

Asked about the delay, Bloomberg said: “There’s no reason to think the FBI hides anything. The FBI does what they think is appropriate at the time, and you’ll have to ask them what they found and what the actual details of the interrogation were. We were not there.”

Kelly, citing the interrogations, said that four days after the Boston bombing, the

*

Tsarnaev brothers “planned to travel to Manhattan to detonate their remaining explosives in Times Square.”

*

“They discussed this while driving around in a Mercedes SUV that they hijacked after they shot and killed the officer at MIT,” the police commissioner said. “That plan, however, fell apart when they realized that the vehicle they hijacked was low on gas and ordered the driver to stop at a nearby gas station.”

A day earlier, Kelly said that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had talked about coming to New York “to party” after the attack and that there wasn’t evidence of a plot against the city. But Kelly said a later interview with the suspect turned up the information.

“He was a lot more lucid and gave more detail in the second interrogation,” Kelly said.

*

*

*

*

*

*

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/20130424_Officials_Bombing_suspect_confessed_before_being_read_rights.html?id=204613001

*

BOSTON >> The surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings acknowledged to the FBI his role in the attacks but did so before he was advised of his constitutional rights to keep quiet and seek a lawyer, officials said today.

It is unclear whether those statements before the Miranda rights warning would be admissible in a criminal trial and, if not, whether prosecutors even need them to win a conviction. Officials said physical evidence, including a 9 mm handgun and pieces of a remote-control device commonly used in toys, was recovered from the scene.

The suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, told authorities that his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, only recently recruited him to be part of the attack, two U.S. officials said.

*

Investigators have said the brothers appeared to have been radicalized through jihadist materials on the Internet and have found no evidence tying them to a terrorist group.

Dzhokhar told the FBI that they were angry about the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the killing of Muslims there, officials said.

How much of those conversations will end up in court is unclear. The FBI normally tells suspects they have the right to remain silent before questioning them so all their statements can be used against them.

Under pressure from Congress, however, the Department of Justice has said investigators may wait until they have gathered intelligence about other threats before reading those rights in terrorism cases. The American Civil Liberties Union has expressed concern about that.

Regardless, investigators have found pieces of remote-control equipment among the debris and were analyzing them, officials said. One official described the detonator as “close-controlled,” meaning it had to be triggered within several blocks of the bombs.

An FBI affidavit said one of the brothers told a carjacking victim during their getaway attempt, “Did you hear about the Boston explosion? I did that.”

Officials also recovered a 9 mm handgun believed to have been used by Tamerlan from the site of a Thursday night gunbattle that injured a Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority officer, two U.S. officials said.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

terrorists’ mother’s pre-existent nasty attitude vs. U.S.

*

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/204878451.html?id=204878451

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s