home

Defense Closes in Lynne Stewart Terrorism Trial

Defense Lawyer Michael Tigar began his closing argument yesterday in the trial of attorney Lynne Stewart, charged with providing material aid to terrorists by disseminating messages from her imprisoned client.

Attorney Michael Tigar suggested Wednesday in a closing argument that the prosecution of a "courageous, brash and feisty" Manhattan defense lawyer on terrorism charges was an insult to the nation's other defense lawyers. "The government of the United States has the arrogance to tell the defense bar how to practice law," Tigar told a federal jury as he underscored a threat felt by defense lawyers that had received little mention in the 6-month-old trial.

Tigar called the prosecution's closing "cruel and reckless and inaccurate." Some more snippets:

Tigar said none of the conversations, most of which were translated for the jury from Arabic, suggested Stewart was part of a conspiracy "if one existed." And he said Stewart could not be faulted for differing with the government over how to interpret prison rules imposed on Abdel-Rahman to keep the blind sheik from communicating with anyone except his wife and his lawyers.

He noted that Ramsey Clark, another lawyer for the sheik, had spoken to the media about Abdel-Rahman's opinions, setting a precedent that was followed by Stewart when she told the media in 2000 that the sheik was reconsidering his support for a cease-fire by militant followers in Egypt.

He promised the jurors that before he finished his summation Thursday or Monday, he would show them that Stewart "never communicated a message to the outside world that called for violence."

The prosecution will get the final opportunity to address the jury. Stay tuned, and our best wishes go out to Ms. Stewart. All of our coverage is accessible here.

< Dick Durbin Outs Gonzales as Disingenous, At Best | Chip Off the Old Block? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    What a political joke, the system need its enemies and if it can't find enemies it will make ones up just to do a number on all of us. This case, if you can call it a case is nothing but political "make-up for the show" I can be charged with that Left can be charged with that we can all be charged at helping some kind of terrorists for just about anything the government of rats want. stewart is just one of many, see people we have no laws only the rule of our Oligarchies and that rule is prison and death of a nation and its people for the ideals of control. The system talks about global terror and its doing it here, the date is 1936 and you will see camps, soon real soon. Long live the old and dead usa. see why 1775, ask what can you do to help stop the evil of this new nightmare of a dictator and the pan american ideals of control. Last thing, al qaeda was used and al qada is still being used by this evil elite to do you that old number, remember the waco mass murder, it can happen to you. Long live the bill of right's.

    jeralyn, i just got kicked from the blogpac conference call and can't get back in. were you kicked as well?

    Anna, no I wasn't kicked. I just hung up after Simon Rosenberg said goodbye. What point did you get kicked? Email me and I'll fill you in on anything you missed. To everyone else, I'll be writing about the blogger conference call that just ended with DNC Chair hopeful Simon Rosenberg this evening.

    Re: Defense Closes in Lynne Stewart Terrorism Tria (none / 0) (#4)
    by cp on Thu Jan 06, 2005 at 02:54:11 PM EST
    tell mr. rosenberg, should he become the new dnc chair, that the dems need to start kicking ass and taking names. unless, of course, they prefer to be the minority party in this country. it could start with the big social security lie that the prez and his goofballs are passing off as fiscal reality. scary story, scary story! much like "nightmare on elm street", it is fiction.

    For some inexplicable reason, I'm looking forward to seeing Lynn Stewart behind bars.

    "For some inexplicable reason, I'm looking forward to seeing Lynn Stewart behind bars." It wouldn't have anything to do with your being a royalist at heart would it?

    Just saw Lynne Stewart on Democracy Now!, and she didn't look anywhere near as much of a terrorist as most of Bush's staff. Defense lawyers are just about sacred anyhow. Why don't you guys pick on the guys at Barrett -- THEY'RE the ones encouraging terrorism. [Cliff, I promoted this from the bottom of the page so you would be sure to see it. Hope TL doesn't mind the indulgence.] ""The cost-effectiveness of the Model 82A1 cannot be overemphasized when a round of ammunition purchased for less than 10 USD [U.S. dollars] can be used to destroy or disable a modern jet aircraft." Pigwiggle: "Anything from the violence policy center should be viewed as highly suspect." That ISN'T from VPC. It's from a manufacturer. Posted by Cliff at January 5, 2005 09:10 PM "Paul - Barrett is a brand, and sniper rigle, like assault rifle, is a term of art that is often used by marketing people for different purposes." Yeah, you're saying that manufacturers REFER to the gun as a SNIPER rifle that shoots down planes in order to sell them to people who think that's neat. You really don't get what's wrong with that, do you? "As to the destroying things meme, I'll just note that in one infamous jello shot weekend someone (ahem) used a can of hairspray to torch a car." Yeah, but when the guy opens up with the .50 from a high window, the people will be pretty sure to notice it isn't hairspray. "Again, without being familiar (which you are clearly not - a shell and a bullet are different) with firearms perhaps you should choose a weapon with which you are familiar?" Hilarious. "Familiarity" with .50 cal sniper rifles will make the statement by the manufacturer ANY better. The marketing of these guns to people EXPLICITLY referencing terrorist acts...that doesn't bother you at all, Cliff. And you want ME to get a better understanding? "Please let me know if you're ever in NC..." Yeah, thanks for the offer, Cliff, but I've already fired most of those, and big F deal. I'm not antigun, nor am I opposed to personal safety. I AIN'T TALKING ABOUT EITHER OF THOSE THINGS, AND NEITHER IS THE MANUFACTURER. There are a lot of unstable people in the world. Marketing violence to society is the PRIMARY fault that I find with corporate Hollywood, not showing Janet Jackson's black breast. You guys are goosing people who are arming themselves as a result. That's not responsible gun ownership, and those people should NOT be allowed to own .50 cal rifles that can fire exploding rounds, etc. --