The Supreme Court ruled on June 28 that Guantanamo detainees can challenge the legality of their detentions. The Pentagon touted its compliance with the ruling by setting up a system of one-sided hearings. The hearings will be presided over by 3 military officials --and the detainees can't consult with or be represented by counsel.

The U.S. government should allow detainees access to lawyers and to their families and permit detainees to begin to challenge their detention in the federal court system," said Alexandra Arriaga, director of government relations for Amnesty International USA. "They've held people for over two years now. They should know at this point who they suspect of a crime, charge them, and try them in a fair court of justice in an open process. And the others should be released," Arriaga said.

Rachel Meeropol, a human rights lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, called the new procedures inadequate and illegal, and said they fall far short of satisfying the Supreme Court's ruling. "The fact is they're coming up with these procedures on the fly," said Meeropol, whose group has filed cases in federal court seeking the release of several Guantanamo prisoners.

Arriaga said that while the government should be doing everything possible in light of the court ruling to facilitate judicial review of the lawfulness of the detentions, it instead appears to be trying to narrow the scope of the review. Arriaga noted that the new process remains entirely within the U.S. military, and that all sorts of evidence will be admissible, including from anonymous witnesses and statements that may have been coerced.

Amnesty issued this press release yesterday.

Another four years of Bush and Ashcroft, and this will be America, not Jakaarta.

Seven more convicted drug traffickers on death row are facing imminent execution after President Megawati Soekarnoputri turned down their requests for clemency on Thursday. Last month, she also refused to grant clemency for four other convicted drug traffickers on death row...

Megawati admitted she took no pleasure in rejecting the appeals for clemency, but it was her obligation to protect the nation's youth from illicit drugs. "I have to stress here that it is my obligation to protect our children and youth from the threat of drug abuse and trafficking," she said. Megawati asked for understanding from foreign countries over the decision, as most of those convicted were foreigners.

Sorry, President Megawati, you will get no pass here with your lame excuse. May the guilt you feel from your complicity in these traffickers' executions be with you forever.

John Kerry supports the death penalty only for terrorists, and has said he supports a moratorium on the death penalty (pdf) at the federal level due to the number of persons on death row who have been found to be factually innocent of their crimes. In his own words:

“I support a moratorium on the death penalty, because I believe that there are serious systemic flaws in the death penalty system, which have resulted in the conviction of people who are innocent.”

The Judge in the Martha Stewart trial rejected Martha Stewar's motion for a new trial based on witness perjury.

Lawyers for Ms. Stewart, the former chairman and chief executive of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, had argued that her case should be retried because a government witness was charged with perjury several weeks ago. The witness, Larry Stewart, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of lying during his testimony about his role in analyzing ink notations on a document listing Ms. Stewart's stock holdings. Lawyers for Ms. Stewart and Mr. Bacanovic had sought a hearing to determine whether prosecutors knew that Mr. Stewart, who is not related to Martha Stewart, lied on the stand.

Martha will be sentenced July 16, most likely, to 10 to 16 months. At least half of the minimum, or 5 months, must be served in jail or a federal prison, most likely a camp. We wouldn't take anything for granted though, not after Lea Fastow's judge refused to recommend a camp for her, resulting in the Bureau of Prisons designating her to a downtown Houston federal detention center.

by TChris

Julie Rae Harper's conviction for a murder that occurred near Lawrenceville, Illinois was reversed on what some might call a technicality: she was prosecuted by an agency that lacked prosecutorial authority in her case. While convictions that are reversed for procedural error often lead to retrials, new evidence should have made the State of Illinois question the wisdom of putting Harper on trial a second time.

Attorneys that Newswatch spoke with Thursday, said one of the big issues facing a possible retrial is the admission of new evidence, in particular the admission of Tommy Lynn Sells, to the murder.

Nonetheless, Harper's freedom was momentary, as she was released after two years in prison only to be taken directly to the county jail on a warrant for the reinstated murder charge.

"This is not seeking justice," said Bill Clutter, an investigator for the Downstate Illinois Innocence Project. "This is just further torturing an innocent woman who should be released."

Congress has bowed to Bush. His threat of withholding funding worked. In a 210-210 vote in the House, extended by Republicans for 23 minutes so they could get a few vote-switchers, the bill to eliminate the Patriot Act provision authorizing the feds to obtain our library records was defeated.

The Republican-led House bowed to a White House veto threat Thursday and stood by the USA Patriot Act, defeating an effort to block the part of the anti-terrorism law that helps the government investigate people's reading habits. The effort to defy Bush and bridle the law's powers lost by 210-210, with a majority needed to prevail. The amendment appeared on its way to victory as the roll call's normal 15-minute time limit expired, but GOP leaders kept the vote open for 23 more minutes as they persuaded about 10 Republicans who initially supported the provision to change their votes.

"You win some, and some get stolen," Rep. C.L. Butch Otter, R-Idaho, a sponsor of the defeated provision and one of Congress' more conservative members, told a reporter.

Remember when Ashcroft told us they weren't using the library records provision of the Patriot Act? And libraries contradicted him? Seems Ashcroft is now singing a different tune:

Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., said he switched his initial "yes" vote to "no" after being shown Justice Department documents asserting that terrorists have communicated over the Internet via public library computers.

by TChris

Anne-Marie Cusac has been "reporting on abuse and mistreatment in our nation's jails and prisons for the last eight years." When Donald Rumsfeld claimed that the abuse at Abu Ghraib "doesn't represent American values," she wasn't convinced.

Reporters and commentators keep asking, how could this happen? My question is, why are we surprised when many of these same practices are occurring at home?

Writing for The Progressive, Cusac recounts some of the horror stories she's investigated, draws connections between those practices and the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, and asks whether "we have so dehumanized U.S. prisoners that we have become as distant from them as we are from foreign captives in faraway lands."

How could this happen? Apart from the tendency of prison administrators to adopt a military model of punishment (including "boot camps"), Cusak suggests that much of the public has accepted (and the media haven't challenged) the "tough on crime" assumptions about people serving sentences:

We have acquired a set of unexamined beliefs: 1) people who land in jail deserve to be there; 2) criminals are bad people--almost subhuman--who can't be rehabilitated; 3) therefore, punishment can be as harsh as possible; and 4) we don't need or want to know the details. These beliefs ... may help to explain why revelations of prison and jail abuse in the United States, which have been numerous in the past two decades, can fall on deaf ears in this country even as they prompt protest abroad. The revelations at Abu Ghraib shock us because our soldiers abroad seem to have acted out behaviors that we condone, yet don't face up to, at home.

Further TalkLeft discussion of the connection between abuse at Abu Ghraib and at home can be found here and here and here and here.

Ken Lay had a very productive first day in court. He only spent an hour in custody. He was released on a relatively minimal $500,000.00 bond. He can keep his passport because his work requires him to travel internationally. And, lucky for him, he needs no Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, because he did nothing wrong.

"It has been a tragic day for me and my family," Lay said at a news conference shortly after his court appearance. "An indictment came down that should not have occurred." While repeating his assertion that he took responsibility for Enron's collapse as chairman, "that does not mean I know everything that went on at Enron."

"I continue to grieve as does my family over the loss of the company, my failure to be able to save it," Lay said. "But failure does not equate to a crime. "I firmly reject any notion that I engaged in any wrongful or criminal activity," he added. "Not only are we ready to go to trial, but we are anxious to prove my innocence."

Mike Ramsey, Lay's lawyer, had a few choice words for the media as well:

Ramsey said he would push for the former Enron chief executive to go to trial ahead of other executives charged in the investigation. He maintains Lay did nothing wrong and cast blame on former chief financial officer Andrew Fastow, who pleaded guilty to two conspiracy counts in January. Fastow admitted to orchestrating partnerships and financial schemes to hide Enron debt and inflate profits while pocketing millions of dollars for himself. "Andy is obviously a liar and a thief," Ramsey said before entering the courthouse Thursday. "He admits that."

A paper trail will be required in Washington for electonic voting....by 2006. As SKBubba says, too bad it wont happen in time for November's election.

by TChris

As a service to its corporate readership, Forbes offers a tour of the best places to go to prison, complete with slide show. It also offers a brief recap of the alleged corporate criminals "who may have to trade Armani suits for jumpsuits."

We're off to court for the afternoon. Have some fun and speak your mind here.

Is this blackmail or what? American Progress reports on Veto Threat 'Hysteria':

Facing the prospect of an embarrassing defeat in the House of Representatives, the White House issued a rare veto threat last night of a major spending bill should amendments pass that restrict the Patriot Act. Ignoring concerns from scores of states, cities and towns across the country, the White House is targeting an amendment sponsored by Reps. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Butch Otter (R-ID) that, if passed, would limit the Justice Department's ability to "require book dealers, libraries or others to surrender records" about ordinary Americans. The president "has not yet vetoed a bill sent to him by Congress" – and the veto threat is seen as proof that the White House is worried the legislation has enough votes in both parties to pass. If the amendment passes, it will move to the Senate, where Sens. Larry Craig (R-ID) and Richard Durbin (D-IL) have sponsored similar legislation in the past. If the measure reaches the president's desk, he would have to kill it by rejecting a bill that funds the entire Departments of Commerce, Justice and State.

TELL YOUR MEMBER OF CONGRESS TO RESIST WHITE HOUSE THREATS: The vote on the amendment in the House is scheduled for today. Contact your members of Congress and tell them to resist the White House's veto threats and intimidation tactics on the Patriot Act. Also, tell them to support the broader Civil Liberties Restoration Act (Senate bill S. 2528 or House bill H.R. 4591) – comprehensive legislation to reform the Patriot Act by limiting the government's ability to conduct secret arrests, requiring individuals be advised of the charges brought against them, and upholding federal privacy laws.

The U.S. is investigating whether the kidnapping and threatened beheading of U.S. Marine Wassef Ali Hassoun may have been a hoax. He is believed to be alive and free in his native Lebanon.

Update: CNN reports Hassoun is at the U.S. embassy in Lebanon. (via Back Country Conservative.)

The Naval Criminal Investigation Service was put in charge of the investigation shortly after Hassoun was missing from his unit on June 20, the sources told CNN. Scarber said the NCIS is one step up from the military police and typically investigates missing persons cases. It was brought into the investigation as when it was thought that it was possible Hassoun fell victim to foul play, but no criminal investigation is under way, she said.

Hassoun reportedly called his family in Utah yesterday with a request to be picked up at an undisclosed location in Lebanon. This is one story that's going to get a lot stranger before it's over.