Posted on 08/17/2007 11:30:02 AM PDT by 300magnum
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The guilty verdict against Jose Padilla showed the Bush administration could win a high-profile terrorism conviction despite questions over whether it acted legally in detaining the U.S. citizen for 3-1/2 years without charges.
But critics and law experts called Thursday's verdict a messy win for the government, in which it was able to avoid answering for its long detention and interrogation of Padilla without the legal rights normally granted U.S. citizens, and, his lawyers said, for torturing him.
Some said it showed that the administration still lacks a workable system for trying terrorism suspects nearly six years after the September 11 attacks.
"The verdict is important because it provides cover. It validates the government's tactics in a way that the jury may not have necessarily meant to," said American University law professor Stephen Vladeck.
"Padilla has had his day in court, but only with respect to the charges, and not to his treatment and not the lawfulness of his detention for 3-1/2 years in a Navy brig," Vladeck said.
Amnesty International said "President Bush should not take (the verdict) as permission to continue to hold Americans outside the law at his whim."
The administration claimed victory in the verdict, in which a federal jury in Miami convicted Padilla and two co-defendants on charges of offering their services to terrorists.
Padilla, a U.S. convert to Islam, was arrested in 2002 and initially accused of plotting a radiological "dirty bomb" attack. President George W. Bush ordered him held in a military prison as an illegal "enemy combatant."
"A DIRT VICTORY"
But faced with legal challenges to Bush' authority to jail a person without charge, prosecutors added Padilla to an existing terrorism support case in Miami and never charged him with any bomb plot.
"It's kind of a dirty victory because of the way the case came about, but still it's a victory nonetheless," said Jeffrey Addicott, director of the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary's University in San Antonio, Texas.
"I think it was the right verdict," he said.
He said the administration is still trying to come up with an efficient system for trying terrorism suspects, after trying to rely on international "laws of war" to hold Padilla.
The Padilla case showed that U.S. terrorism suspects and foreigners such as those held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba can be tried in civilian courts, said Michael Greenberger, law professor and director of the Center for Health and Homeland security at the University of Maryland.
"A lot of resources were wasted ... by the attempt to expand executive power," he said.
Furthermore, U.S. prestige abroad was eroded by the administration's handling of the case, which was seen as an effort to circumvent constitutional protections, he said.
Bush has tried to implement a system of military commissions to try the Guantanamo suspects, but he has lost court challenges.
Acting Deputy U.S. Attorney General Craig Morford acknowledged after the verdict that civilian courts can handle some terrorism cases. But other cases involving national security, classified information or other complications may not be suited for civilian courts, he said.
White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said: "Each case has to be looked on an individual basis ... some might be an American citizen, but many are not, as are most held in Guantanamo Bay. And I think that's an important distinction."
I wonder if Randall Mikkelsen wishes he or one of his loved ones had been blown up by Padilla?
CNN tried the same spin yesterday. The MSM will support terrorists to bash Bush.
A win’s a win...........Tommy LaSorda(?)......
“Padilla case seen as a tainted victory for Bush”
Reuters, and the rest of the agenda-driven MSM, will never give GWB a victory, even if every jihadist in the world waved a white flag. When will the MSM realize that no one’s paying attention to anything they say but the whacked out left?
Yep, actually catching, convicting and imprisoning a real Islamonazi terrorist felon is “tainted”.
Silly me, and I thought it was a “good thing”. I must not be a “liberal”.
The man was guilty,and was found guilty.But knowing that he was guilty, suppose he still got off on a technicality...
Would the libs be happy ?
Sorry. Padilla being accorded “enemy combatant” status was and is pretty shady. His being a US citizen should have afforded him base line constitutional protections from the very start. Here’s to hoping that sort of executive branch power grabbing never occurs again.
What a stinker!
I used to watch Keith Olbermann, and I always found it interesting that he would disregard the numerous terror threats/plots because the terrorists were unable to carry out the attacks and therfore there is no threat. Then I saw Ellis Henican say that the American Taliban terrorist should be released from jail because he was just a misguided kid.
Then I became a conservative.
Jury nullification is FINE with the lefties when it benefits their cause, but they are given to clucking their tongues and mind-reading when it does not.
Reuters = Al Jazeera, Western Affiliate
I tend to agree with that, although I might apply a different rule to an American taken overseas bearing arms against U.S. forces. Even in the latter case, though, I think a citizen would be entitle to access to the courts if he had reason to challenge his POW status.
And we WON. We convicted this POS. He is going to prison FOREVER. The Bush administration did this, and "reporters" like you, Randall, can pound sand.
Let's fix that:
Padilla case seen as a tainted victory for Bush loss for MainStream Media
That's better.
That’s a rhetorical question, isn’t it?
I think the writer of this article is saddened that with a victory in this case, the government took away a club with which the MSM would have bludgeoned this administration for ‘incarcerating an innocent man for 3 years’, etc, etc.
The MSM is in full campaign mode. Prop up the dem/Progressive/Liberal line 24/7. Paint the President and republicans as evil. This nonsense will gp on nonstop until Nov. 2008. And when Fred wins, they’ll tear their hair out.
Personally I think all U.S. citizens regardless of location caught helping the enemy should be tried by civilian courts, unless it can be proved that they gave up their citizenship.
The flip side of that is that I think all foreigners caught committing terrorism regardless of location should be tried by military courts. The precedence for using military commissions to try acts committed inside the U.S. comes from WWII where German spies were tried for espionage.
A bad precedence was set when members of the first World Trade Center bombing were tried in civilian courts.
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.