http://crookedtimber.org/2004/05/14/fingerprints/ Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made Mon, 13 Feb 2012 03:14:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://crookedtimber.org/2004/05/14/fingerprints/comment-page-1/#comment-28482 Zizka Fri, 14 May 2004 14:45:08 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=1562#comment-28482 The individual being held is an American convert to Islam who served as the lawyer for an American Muslim who was later convicted of involvement in terrorism. The case he was involved in was prior to and unrelated to the terrorism case. The lawyer was a military veteran so his fingerprints were on file. The Spanish police are uncertain about the fingerprint match and I believe that the US people just set their parameters loosely to get the most matches possible with the maximal database of people they already had their eyes on for some reason. There's no evidence that the man was ever in Spain, and pretty good evidence that he wasn't. Civil libertarians here in Portland are on the defensive because in the previous local terorism case all the defendant eventually pled guilty, including one whose guilt had initially seemed unlikely. (Of course, the threat of Guantanamo and/ or execution could extract guilty pleas from people, but at this point it seems unlikely that that's what happened -- the defendants had good representation). I believe that some aspects of the material witness law are new, either from the PATRIOT act or from RICO statutes. The anti-drug and anti-militia laws of the Clinton era made Ashcroft's work much easier. There's been a precipitous decline in civil liberties over the last 10-20 years. One of the witnesses in the Clinton fiasco, Susan McDougal, still claims that she was pressured to provide perjured testimony against Clinton, and served over a year in jail for refusing to testify. The material witness law certainly would be useful for a prosecutor in this kind of situation. There is substantial sentiment in the American judiciary to give police a free hand. The individual being held is an American convert to Islam who served as the lawyer for an American Muslim who was later convicted of involvement in terrorism. The case he was involved in was prior to and unrelated to the terrorism case. The lawyer was a military veteran so his fingerprints were on file. The Spanish police are uncertain about the fingerprint match and I believe that the US people just set their parameters loosely to get the most matches possible with the maximal database of people they already had their eyes on for some reason. There’s no evidence that the man was ever in Spain, and pretty good evidence that he wasn’t. Civil libertarians here in Portland are on the defensive because in the previous local terorism case all the defendant eventually pled guilty, including one whose guilt had initially seemed unlikely. (Of course, the threat of Guantanamo and/ or execution could extract guilty pleas from people, but at this point it seems unlikely that that’s what happened—the defendants had good representation). I believe that some aspects of the material witness law are new, either from the PATRIOT act or from RICO statutes. The anti-drug and anti-militia laws of the Clinton era made Ashcroft’s work much easier. There’s been a precipitous decline in civil liberties over the last 10-20 years. One of the witnesses in the Clinton fiasco, Susan McDougal, still claims that she was pressured to provide perjured testimony against Clinton, and served over a year in jail for refusing to testify. The material witness law certainly would be useful for a prosecutor in this kind of situation. There is substantial sentiment in the American judiciary to give police a free hand.

]]> http://crookedtimber.org/2004/05/14/fingerprints/comment-page-1/#comment-28481 mm Fri, 14 May 2004 13:36:39 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=1562#comment-28481 No, but I can tell you that the word is spelled habeas, being the (jussive) subjunctive form of habeo. No, but I can tell you that the word is spelled habeas, being the (jussive) subjunctive form of habeo.

]]> http://crookedtimber.org/2004/05/14/fingerprints/comment-page-1/#comment-28480 John Quiggin Fri, 14 May 2004 09:55:49 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/wp/?p=1562#comment-28480 I've been worried by this same case, but didn't chase down the info on matching odds. The other issue is the material witness rule under which it's apparently possible to be detained indefinitely - not as terrifying a status as "enemy combatant", but apparently firmly grounded in US law. Can anyone advise on when <i>habeus corpus</i> can be brought to bear in cases like this. I’ve been worried by this same case, but didn’t chase down the info on matching odds. The other issue is the material witness rule under which it’s apparently possible to be detained indefinitely – not as terrifying a status as “enemy combatant”, but apparently firmly grounded in US law. Can anyone advise on when habeus corpus can be brought to bear in cases like this.

]]>