Naturally the thin legal fiction of having a lawyer technically representing you, no matter whether you've been able to speak with him or exchange any useful information, makes any brutal prison regime an acceptable one. No matter that the Washington Post article, which started this thread, did not say that all post-Sep.11 detainees have lawyers, and there is reason to believe some do not. -Declan On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 12:55:00PM -0700, Anonymous wrote:
They HAVE representation, and I don't THINK the Bill of Rights says anywhere that you get to see Mommy if you're arrested, but that you can obtain representation, you are not required to incriminate yourself, and so forth. In theory.
Get a clue. The issue is not "get to see Mommy."
Rather, the issue is the holding of 600+ various persons, some of whom are very vaguely claimed to be "material witnesses."
Note too that many of the detained may not have lawyers.
How about we play "let's hypothesize the conditions that make our argument true." That saves having to ground your reasoning in reality.
The Washington Post article says "and limited access to their lawyers".... and "The Justice Department has also refused to reveal the names of the lawyers representing them."
At least they have lawyers, don't you get the point? The dead had no lawyers to argue for thier lives.
"That process is supervised by a court." The dead had no judge supervising their execution.
Most of them are not being held on criminal charges. They are held as material witnesses or on immigration holds. I don't know if a material witness has a right to an
Then you don't know what you're arguing, do you? Pick your battles.
Wiretapping expansion, big problem,
Lack of luxury accomodations for material witnesses who are at the least crucial information resources and may be co-conspirators, little problem.