home

Jury Selection Begins in Lynne Stewart Terror Trial

By Jeralyn, Section Terror Trials
Posted on Thu May 20, 2004 at 12:14:37 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

New York Lawyer Lynne Stewart is charged with terror related offenses arising from her representation of blind Sheik Abdel Rahman, convicted in the 1995 UN bombing case. She is being defended by the impressive Michael Tigar. Jury selection began yesterday, and already, the spectre of 9/11 is raising its head, even though her case has nothing to do with it.

Ms. Stewart is accused, along with two other defendants, of helping Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman communicate messages from his jail cell to the Islamic Group, a terrorist organization he once headed. She is also accused of violating restrictions the government imposed on Mr. Abdel Rahman, her client, and making false statements about her actions.

Her lead defense lawyer, Michael E. Tigar, has said the government is trying to curb Ms. Stewart's rights to represent clients linked to terrorism. Mr. Abdel Rahman was convicted in 1995 of plotting to destroy the United Nations headquarters and other New York landmarks.

The jury will be anonymous. It will be an interesting trial, and it has consequences, not just for Ms. Stewart, but for all lawyers and their clients:

The government contends that Ms. Stewart went beyond her lawyer's role to actively assist terrorists. Prosecutors have said their evidence will include about 85,000 recordings of telephone calls and fax transmissions and 10,000 e-mail messages involving the defendants, as well as audio and video recordings of three visits Ms. Stewart paid to Mr. Abdel Rahman in the Minnesota prison where he is serving a life sentence for terrorism conspiracy.

The case has generated concern among lawyers that the government wants to impose new limits on confidential discussions with their clients. "Even with the most egregious offenses committed by clients, we still need to be able to communicate fully with them with the confidence that we will not be monitored," said Richard M. Maltz, a New York lawyer specializing in lawyers' ethics. "Once the camel gets its nose under the tent, the question is how far it will go."

We agree with journalist Geov Parris who wrote in the Seattle Weekly that Lynne Stewart is a guinea pig for the Bush Administration.

Lynne Stewart is a guinea pig--a chance for the Bush administration to see how far it can push its evisceration of the Bill of Rights. The attack on attorney representation is only one of a staggering number of its post-9/11 assaults on the Constitution, but it's one of the most important.

Invariably, the least sympathetic among us--the accused terrorists and the radical lawyers--are the first to lose basic rights. The rest of us follow.

On October 31, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft issued an emergency regulation, 66 Fed. Reg. 55062 (pdf), allowing the monitoring of attorney-client conversations when the Attorney General has "reasonable suspicion" to "believe that a particular inmate may use communications with attorneys or their agents to further or facilitate acts of violence or terrorism." The order recognizes that these communications would "traditionally be covered by the attorney-client privilege." 28 C.F.R. § 501.3(d).

Here are the reasons why defense lawyers and others consider this regulation to be unconstitutional and ethically improper.

You can access all of our past coverage of the case here.

< 16 Year Old Iraqi Abused by U.S. Soldiers | Vermont Okays Medical Marijuana >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Jury Selection Begins in Lynne Stewart Terror Trial | 0 comments (0 topical)