This case was big news in Denver when it happened in 1994. A Jewish couple and a non-Jewish couple were neighbors and didn't get along. The Jewish couple, the Aronson's, thought that their neighbors, the Quigley's, were trying to run them out of town because they were Jewish. The Aronson's took their beef to the Anti-Defamation League:

At a 1994 news conference, the ADL accused the Quigleys of perpetrating the worst anti- Semitic incident in the area since the slaying of Jewish talk-show host Alan Berg 10 years earlier. They were accused of launching "Operation Aronson," an effort to run their Jewish neighbors, Mitchell and Candace Aronson, out of town. Criminal and civil complaints filed by the Aronsons against the Quigleys, however, were eventually dropped by prosecutors or dismissed, and the Quigleys countersued the ADL, which had championed the Aronsons.

The Quigleys claimed that the Aronsons, upon the advice of the ADL, began tape-recording the Quigleys' cordless telephone calls and making notes of other clashes....[they] said the ADL "orchestrated a monstrous invasion of their privacy and a destruction of their good name."

The ADL and Aronson's had received legal advice that it was legal to tape cordless telephone calls. Their lawyers and the Deputy District Attorney with whom they conferred had been unaware that the statute had recently been changed to require a court wiretap order for cordless phone calls. There was a lot of embarassment all around, as the DA in Colorado dropped the criminal intimidation charges against the Quigleys. The lawyers were sued and settled. The ADL did not settle, and the case went to trial in 2000. The Quigley's were represented by one of Denver's finest civil litigators, Jay Horowitz. They won. The case has been on appeal since, and last week the Supreme Court refused to accept the case for review. The ADL has just paid up:

Thursday's payout of $12,169,557.61 represents the largest defamation verdict in the history of Colorado and the largest Federal Wiretap Act verdict in the history of the United States, Horowitz said.

A 2000 New York Times article has more details of the case and allegations. You can read all the ugly details in this 10th court opinion (html) upholding the judgment against the ADL.

Rep. Tom Feeney is back -- this time with an effort to draw adverse attention to the Supreme Court's use of foreign cases in their decisions .

Stick to U.S. law or risk impeachment, Rep. Tom Feeney is warning the Supreme Court. The Florida Republican and fellow House Judiciary Committee member Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., plan next week to propose a resolution that judicial decisions should not be based on foreign precedents. The lawmakers say they have 50 co-sponsors for the resolution, which will be non-binding, though Feeney warned that justices who flout it risk "the ultimate remedy ... impeachment" ...

Lawrence Goldman, past President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), has this reaction (received by email):

The latest Feeney bill, as amended today, would suggest that the U.S. Supreme Court not consider any legal rulings, statutes, declarations, edicts and regulations of any foreign nation, the United Nations or any international body, or any United States state or commonwealth court in which there is a Democratic majority or of which more than 3 members are judges or graduates of accredited law schools. Exceptions are made for the laws, etc. of South Africa during the apartheid area, Pinochet Chile, the Shah's Iran, Somoza Nicaragua or any other nation that is certified by the Department of Justice not to allow judges any sentencing discretion.

In 1990, former Panamian dictator Manuel Noriega was sentenced in federal court in Florida to 30 years in prison for drug smuggling. Because his crimes pre-dated 1987, he wasn't sentenced under federal guidelines but was given a sentence that included release on parole. He was denied parole twice, and requested another consideration.

He has just been denied parole again. This time, the federal judge who sentenced him, William Hoeveler, wrote a letter to the Parole Commission advocating parole for Noriega, who is now 70 years old. It is the first time the Judge made such a recommendation in his 27years as a Judge.

Under the old parole guidelines, Noriega can be made to serve 20 of his 30 years. However, the parole commission, in its discretion, can grant him early release Noriega's attorney, Frank Rubino, has promised to appeal:

Rubino said the U.S. attorney's office in Miami and the Department of Justice in Washington continue to politicize Noriega's case. Noriega was arrested in late 1989 on orders from President George Bush.

Noriega has a private apartment-style cell in Florida. He's 70 years old. Do we really need to continue paying for his upkeep and medical care? We say, parole Mr. Noriega now.

Bump and Update: The Mirrorhas more details of the released Guantanamo detainee's charges of mistreatment:

Their "cells" were wire cages with concrete floors and open to the elements - giving no privacy or protection from the rats, snakes and scorpions loose around the American base. He claims punishment beatings were handed out by guards known as the Extreme Reaction Force. They waded into inmates in full riot-gear, raining blows on them. Prisoners faced psychological torture and mind-games in attempts to make them confess to acts they had never committed. Medical treatment was sparse and brutal and amputations of limbs were more drastic than required, claimed Jamal. A diet of foul water and food up to 10 years out-of-date left inmates malnourished.

******************
Original post

One of the British detainees sent back to Britain from Guantanamo and subsequently released is sharing very unflattering details of his confinement with the media:

Jamal al-Harith told how US soldiers brought in prostitutes to the camp, and paraded them naked in front of the many devout Muslims. The 37-year-old also claimed he was kicked, punched and assaulted with batons. He told the Daily Mirror that detainees were shackled for up to 15 hours at a time in hand and leg cuffs with metal links to the skin. Mr Harith said punishment beatings were meted out by guards and prisoners were subjected to pyschological torture and mind games in an effort to break them.

Update: Here's more.

SKBubba has the latest on a proposed Tennessee constitutional amendment:

''Nothing in this constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or the funding thereof; except the legislature shall have the authority to make such exceptions as the legislature deems necessary, including the authority to make exceptions in the case of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.''

SK adds:

At least the founding fathers had the foresight to make it pretty hard to change the Tennessee Constitution. An amendment has to pass both the House and Senate, not once, but twice in consecutive General Assemblies before being put on the ballot for the voters to decide in the next general election for Governor. That means that the issue can't be put to the voters until at least 2010, and the women of Tennessee are without protection from being forced to have abortions by liberal judges until then.

Noah at Defense Tech reports that while Total Information Awareness may be dea, DARPA has even bigger plans in store for the destruction of our privacy rights--a blimp that is three times bigger than the Goodyear blimp that can watch an entire city.

Update: More on DARPA and planned privacy intrusions.

This is absurd--and a dangerous precedent. A mentally ill woman refused a C-section while carrying twins and one was stillborn. She's now charged with first degree murder.

The case could affect abortion rights and open the door to the prosecution of mothers who smoke or don't follow their obstetrician's diet, said Marguerite Driessen, a law professor at Brigham Young University. "It's very troubling to have somebody come in and say we're going to charge this mother for murder because we don't like the choices she made," she said.

A federal court in Alabama has rejected a government effort to obtain a protective order, under 18 U.S.C. § 1514(b)(1), to prohibit a defendant from maintaining a web site that will provide news about his case and ask witnesses to come forward if they can assist his defense.

The defendant plans to feature information that has been made public, including identities of the lawyers, witnesses (snitches), agents, etc. The government claimed that it could possibly result in retaliation against witnesses and/or law enforcement and wanted the court to order it shut down,or severely restrict what could be posted. After an evidentiary hearing, the Magistrate Judge issued an eleven page opinion denying relief.

Magistrate Judge Delores R. Boyd, in an opinion made public Wednesday, said Carmichael has constitutional rights to freedom of speech and a speedy trial. The judge also said the court is not free to simply embrace a governmental belief that an intent to post identities and photographs is an obvious attempt to intimidate or harass informants. [Defense Attorney Stephen] Glassroth also said his client wants residents to be able to read documents and transcripts at their convenience because deadlines limit newspapers and radio and television stations in their reporting. The defense also said it wants to receive information via the Internet about people Carmichael believes are lying about him and are not trustworthy.

New York Magazine this week has a section with comments by friends of Martha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic. One thing we learned was that Martha and Peter had their own rooms on the 4th floor of the courthouse, where they could visit with friends, have food brought in, etc. Christopher Mason, a loyal friend of Bacanovic's who expected to testify but was not called as a witness, had this to say:

For five weeks, Peter’s and Martha’s friends and family had been crowded into the front left row of the courtroom, which was reserved for guests of the defendants. ....Upstairs in adjoining private lunchrooms on the fourth floor, there was a notable class divide when it came to refreshments. The fare in Peter’s room extended only to chicken salad and cheesecake. In Martha’s room, there was a veritable emporium of goods supplied by Russ & Daughters, the famous Lower East Side deli that’s been featured on Martha’s TV show. Here we found brisket, corned beef, and pastrami sandwiches; coleslaw; and delicious green-tomato pickles. The domestic diva wandered from room to room, chatting with Peter’s distraught parents, inviting everybody to try the macaroons.

We wonder what kind of clout it takes and with whom to be able to get two rooms in a courthouse set aside for use of the defendants. We didn't have it for the Don King trial in the same NY courthouse--we all went up to the cafeteria, same as everyone else. During the McVeigh and Nichols' trials, we had attorney's lounge rooms set aside where we could also eat, but the defendants were in cells, not with us. We find it interesting to read about special arrangements made for some defendants. It clues us in on what to ask for the next time around.

We've seen some criticism of the media's mention that Susan Lindauer, accused of spying for the Iraqis, is related to Bush advisor Andrew Card. Some accounts say they are distant relatives, others say they are second cousins. It's obvious that Card is crucial to the case--he's the one who reported her to authorities:

The indictment said Ms. Lindauer delivered a letter early last year to a United States government official listing her access to and contacts with Saddam Hussein's government. Investigators said the official was Mr. Card, one of President Bush's closest associates and a participant in nearly every high-level Oval Office meeting. White House and law enforcement officials described Ms. Lindauer as either a second cousin or a distant relative of Mr. Card.

....Investigators said Ms. Lindauer had gone to Mr. Card's home in Washington around Jan. 8, 2003, more than two months before Mr. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, and dropped off the letter in what the indictment said was "an unsuccessful attempt to influence United States foreign policy." Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said that Mr. Card had not seen Ms. Lindauer since around the time of Mr. Bush's inauguration in 2001 but that Ms. Lindauer had tried to reach him a number of times subsequently. Mr. McClellan said Mr. Card "brought to the attention of the appropriate officials the various attempts by her to contact him."

The case sounds like much ado about nothing to us--so far:

Federal law enforcement officials said that despite Ms. Lindauer's extensive contacts with the Iraqis, there was little evidence to suggest that she had harmed national security by passing any sensitive intelligence to the Hussein government. Instead, she was largely perceived, even by some law enforcement officials, as a woman who fancied herself a peacemaker. "She thought maybe she could do more than she really could as an intermediary" between Washington and Baghdad, said a law enforcement official.

We hope you all like our new text box. We've been wanting to make one for a long time, but every time we tried, we got stumped by the coding. We owe a huge thanks to Meg of Mandarin Design for helping us out. Their site has more good blogging tricks and tips than any other we've come across and they are all free. We'll be tweaking it some more in the coming days, but so far we are very happy with it. For some reason, we don't see it in AOL, only in Internet Explorer, so if you're using the AOL browser, you may not get it.

We've gotten some e-mails that after our rebuild, commenters are having to re-type their user info with each comment. Let us know in the comments or by email if that's happened to you recently--or if you are getting popup ads for video surveillance cameras when you open TL, and we'll try to get it fixed.

Enough about us. Check out Mad Kane who's got an ombudsman fact-checking her anti-Dubya work.

Hesiod at Counterspin has the latest on the arrest of former Congressional staffer and journalist Susan Lindauer. We've read elsewhere that she's waiting for a lawyer to be appointed for her, which would indicate she's indigent, but heard on the news that she was released on a $500,000.00 bond. Seems a little inconsistent.

Instapundit suggests sending flowers to the Spanish embassy at 2375 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. - Washington, D.C. 20037. The Embassy phone number, which you'll need to enter for Internet orders is 202.452.0100. Glenn used 1-800-Flowers.com. We'd like to see an address for sending money for blood, supplies, funerals, family aid, etc., so if you come across such info, please leave it in the comments. Also per Glenn, here's a list of all the Spanish consulates in the U.S. so you can see if there's one in your area.

Finally, if you're going to be in Washington, DC, tomorrow:

The Embassy of Spain convenes a silent demonstration tomorrow, Friday, March 12th, to express its outrage for today's terrorist attack perpetrated in Madrid, in which approximately 200 people have died and 900 have been injured. The demonstration will take place at the Washington Circle (Pennsylvania Ave and 23rd St NW) at 12 pm.

This is a jury we'd love to have. First, it acquits the defendant of the charged crime. Then, it writes the judge and prosecutor and asks that the co-defendant who pleaded guilty in exchange for testifying against the defendant it acquitted be allowed to withdraw his plea because he didn't commit a crime either. To top it off, it was a terrorism-related case, where the defendant ran an anti-terrorism school.

Six of the jurors who acquitted David Hudak, owner of an anti-terrorism training school near Roswell, have asked a federal judge to allow Hudak's co-defendant to withdraw a guilty plea. As a condition of that plea, Michael Payne was a prosecution witness against Hudak, a Canadian charged with conspiracy and training foreign soldiers without State Department approval. Jurors said they found Payne "a loyal American without the slightest inclination whatsoever to do damage to our country."

Six jurors wrote U.S. District Judge John Edwards Conway to "beseech" him to let Payne withdraw his plea. They sent copies of the letter to New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. Payne, a decorated 20-year veteran of the Army Special Forces, last July pleaded guilty to violating federal law by teaching soldiers of the United Arab Emirates, a U.S. ally, classified anti-terrorism techniques, tactics and procedures at Hudak's school.

The link above is to an editorial in the Albuquerque Journal, supporting the withdrawal of the plea.

[Prosecutor] Iglesias has decided to oppose any withdrawal or change of plea while the U.S. Department of Defense investigates whether Payne's teachings damaged U.S. interests and security. That's a reasonable decision for now. But the government should expedite its investigation and, if there is no finding of harm, Iglesias should not oppose any plea withdrawal request....A jury clearly rejected the government's federal case against Hudak. In the interest of justice, Payne deserves the same consideration.