Mohammed gets Miranda, praise Allah
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/17/nyregion/17TERR.html?pagewanted=all # # February 17, 2001 # # Judge Extends Legal Rights Beyond U.S. # # By BENJAMIN WEISER # # A federal judge in Manhattan has ruled that foreign suspects # who are interrogated abroad by American law enforcement officials # are entitled to the same Fifth Amendment right against # self-incrimination as suspects who are questioned in the United # States. # # The decision, which was unsealed yesterday in Federal District # Court in Manhattan, is the first to apply the Constitutional # standard to such interrogations, wrote the judge, Leonard B. # Sand. It could have a broad impact on the government's # investigations abroad, particularly in terrorism cases. # # Judge Sand also ruled that the familiar Miranda warnings, which # are traditionally read to all suspects in the United States, # must also be administered to foreign suspects who are interrogated # by American agents abroad. # [snip] # # "What he has done," said H. Richard Uviller, a law professor # at Columbia University, "is universalized this provision of the # Bill of Rights." # # Professor Uviller said the decision was "significant insofar # as it controls the trial of accused foreign terrorists in American # courts." # # "They are treated almost exactly as if the interrogation had # taken place at One Police Plaza," the professor said. # # "It's a sound opinion," he added, "on a novel subject justified # by all of the best authority, as well as good sense." # # The government will not appeal the ruling, said Herbert Hadad, # a spokesman for the United States attorney's office in Manhattan, # who refused further comment. # [snip] # # The judge found the question important because of the "increasing # regularity" with which American law enforcement officials "are # dispatched and stationed beyond our national borders."
hmm. does this mean le/intelligence agencies will soon need to have a warrant to perform wiretaps on overseas communications? And if no warrant, can collected evidence eventually be disallowed if foreign suspects are brought to us courts? slippery slope. -----Original Message----- From: owner-cypherpunks@Algebra.COM [mailto:owner-cypherpunks@Algebra.COM]On Behalf Of George@Orwellian.Org Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 9:47 PM To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Mohammed gets Miranda, praise Allah http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/17/nyregion/17TERR.html?pagewanted=all # # February 17, 2001 # # Judge Extends Legal Rights Beyond U.S. # # By BENJAMIN WEISER # # A federal judge in Manhattan has ruled that foreign suspects # who are interrogated abroad by American law enforcement officials # are entitled to the same Fifth Amendment right against # self-incrimination as suspects who are questioned in the United # States. # # The decision, which was unsealed yesterday in Federal District # Court in Manhattan, is the first to apply the Constitutional # standard to such interrogations, wrote the judge, Leonard B. # Sand. It could have a broad impact on the government's # investigations abroad, particularly in terrorism cases. # # Judge Sand also ruled that the familiar Miranda warnings, which # are traditionally read to all suspects in the United States, # must also be administered to foreign suspects who are interrogated # by American agents abroad. # [snip] # # "What he has done," said H. Richard Uviller, a law professor # at Columbia University, "is universalized this provision of the # Bill of Rights." # # Professor Uviller said the decision was "significant insofar # as it controls the trial of accused foreign terrorists in American # courts." # # "They are treated almost exactly as if the interrogation had # taken place at One Police Plaza," the professor said. # # "It's a sound opinion," he added, "on a novel subject justified # by all of the best authority, as well as good sense." # # The government will not appeal the ruling, said Herbert Hadad, # a spokesman for the United States attorney's office in Manhattan, # who refused further comment. # [snip] # # The judge found the question important because of the "increasing # regularity" with which American law enforcement officials "are # dispatched and stationed beyond our national borders."
[I refrained from posting yab, but Declan's latest Politech "FC: U.N. hopes to shut down accused Rwandan journalist's web site" gigged me.] Phillip H Zakas said:
hmm. does this mean le/intelligence agencies will soon need to have a warrant to perform wiretaps on overseas communications? And if no warrant, can collected evidence eventually be disallowed if foreign suspects are brought to us courts? slippery slope.
Or, no slope ... according to some people's opinions of the International Criminal Court. Many say we will be yielding our sovereignty, our Constitution, and our procedural protections to this Court. (ICC advocates, on the other hand, are quick to point out concord between the ICC and the US Constitution: http://www.wfa.org/issues/icc/usconst.html .) The ICC is an international court, judging _individuals_, not nation-states, in regard to: "the crime of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; and the crime of aggression." Many have expressed concern over subsequent extensions of the Court's subject matter jurisdiction. One commentator stated that even if a nation is not a party to the Rome Statute, the ICC can still investigate a crime within that nation according to ICC rules. [I haven't read all the documentation, and I'm not about to, so I can't say about such nuances....] Yet another ill wind for criminal nation-states, sheltering sovereigns, and putative techrepublics. A:mee
participants (3)
-
Aimee Farr -
Georgeï¼ Orwellian.Org -
Phillip H. Zakas