Posted on 12/04/2005 8:32:23 AM PST by Kaslin
A FORMER American attorney-general advising Saddam Hussein’s legal team has helped to map out a defence strategy that includes prolonging the ousted dictator’s trial.
Ramsey Clark, 77, who has pursued a career as a human rights lawyer since serving under President Lyndon Johnson from 1967-69, met Saddam last week.
They discussed stalling the proceedings by inviting a new international lawyer to take part or by challenging the legitimacy of prosecution witnesses, many of whom have insisted on anonymity and will be screened off from the court.
Khalil al-Duleimi, Saddam’s top lawyer, said the meeting took place on Monday after Clark insisted that defence lawyers had the right to private time with their client.
“We were taken into the room where Saddam was sitting on a wooden chair alone, being guarded by US soldiers,” al-Duleimi said. “Ramsey entered first and when he reached the middle of the room Saddam stood up and they were suddenly shaking hands vigorously and greeting each other.”
Al-Duleimi and two other defence lawyers followed.
The soldiers guarding Saddam watched briefly and then withdrew.
Al-Duleimi said that the former Iraqi leader was in high spirits and impressed his lawyers with his knowledge.
“Saddam asked Clark to pass on his greetings to the American people, telling the former attorney-general, ‘We must distinguish between the people and the leadership. The majority of the people now know the truth about their leadership and how it lied to them’.”
This was taken as a reference to pre-war claims — which later proved unfounded — that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
Clark was one of several foreign lawyers who Saddam had hoped would take on his case. He visited Saddam in February 2003, just before the invasion of Iraq, and was also involved in the defence of Slobodan Milosevic, the former Yugoslav president who is now on trial for war crimes at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Hague.
Al-Duleimi said that even though the defence considered the court illegitimate under international and Iraqi laws, they were determined to follow through the process.
“Our aim is to prove to the world that those who are conducting the trial do not have the ability or the jurisdiction to do so,” al-Duleimi said.
In the first of a series of cases, Saddam is accused of killing more than 140 Shi’ite Muslims after a failed assassination attempt against him in the town of Dujail in 1982. He faces death if convicted.
Al-Duleimi said the defence has been encouraged by evidence given by the prosecution’s main witness, Wadah al-Sheikh, a former Iraqi intelligence officer, who recorded his testimony four days before he died of cancer.
The defence claims that al-Sheikh’s testimony does not link Saddam directly to any crime committed in Dujail. The team also intends to question the admissibility of his testimony on grounds that they did not have a chance to question him before his death.
The trial of Saddam and seven co-defendants will resume tomorrow after a break to allow the defence to replace two murdered lawyers.
A family friend revealed that Saddam had sent word to Raghad, his eldest daughter, telling her not to attend the trial. He has said that he does not want to put his family through such an ordeal.
# The US military command in Baghdad has admitted paying Iraqi newspapers to carry good news stories planted by the Lincoln Group, a Washington public relations firm which has a $6m contract with the Pentagon. It was part of an effort to “get the truth out”, according to General Peter Pace, the top US commander.
Misleading headline.
Should read "Communist, treasonous American lawyer"
Ramsey Clark was how LBJ gave the finger to Bobby Kennedy. He was only appointed for that single purpose.
You're being far too kind..
Mindboggling.
‘We must distinguish between the people and the leadership. The majority of the people now know the truth about their leadership and how it lied to them’.”
Who's feeding who the mantra? The Dems, MSM or Saddam?
That old fart just can't keep out of international matters. And talk about a liberal agenda; now, this takes it to an unheard of extreme: defending a murderous dictator.
Maybe we should be kind, though, after all, Clark is 77 and may be suffering from some kind of age-related dementia. Nah.
I really hope that he doesn't become the next defense counsel victim. I really, really hope that doesn't happen. Really.
Good old LBJ sure could pick 'em
Ramsey Clark had better watch his back over there. There are those who choose to make Saddam's lawyers quite dead!
Clark was Johnson's Attorney General. The only reason Clark reportedly has "since pursued a career in law" is so that the average reader won't make the connection that LBJ's (and THIS COUNTRY's) LAWYER is defending Saddam.
Talk about a conflict of interest....
".... after (Saddamn's) trial was delayed because defense lawyers were killed..."
Hmmmmmn.
Well, since Saddamn's defense team, and Saddamn himself, benefited directly (and implemented their strategy) by this delay, doesn't it make you wonder WHO actually killed his defense lawyers?
Besides, if they kill a couple of defense lawyers, the final legal bill goes down.
And the "international pressure" and the propaganda value of each newly dead "defense team" lawyer goes up!
Why should he watch his back? Everyone LOVES Saddam! They want him back! Oops, I mean they want him free, oops I mean they just LOVE Saddam! Clark is so totally safe!
Hey! I have an Idea;
Let's send the ENTIRE ACLU over to defend him! Yea! That's the ticket!!!Civil Rights you know!!!! Yea, send the ACLU!!!!
I just don't think the judge is going to
allow any more delays, especially after
this rocket explosion plot against the court
house has been unearthed! OTOH, in true
American Jurisprudence style, you can't
blame the Defense for trying to delay
until all witnesses have died of old age...
or unexpectedly!
Ramsey Clark's bio:
http://ramsey-clark.biography.ms/
Saddam is now using the RATS talking points. I am so sick of the dems putting party ahead of country.
It should indeed read that
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.