Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kattracks
Why in hell is this judge so adamant about getting this guy off? Lemme guess. A terrorist-hugging Clinton appointee.
8 posted on 07/25/2002 11:52:04 AM PDT by Thane_Banquo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Thane_Banquo
Subscribe to the Tech Law
Journal Daily E-Mail Alert

Tech Law Journal

dome.gif (2049 bytes)
News, records, and analysis of legislation, litigation, and
regulation affecting the computer and Internet industry

Home | Calendar | Subscribe to Daily E-Mail Alert | Back Issues of E-Mail
Antitrust | Broadband | Censorship | Education | Employment
Encryption | Intelpro | Internet | Politics | Privacy | Securities | Tax | Telecom


Leonie Brinkema Biography

U.S. District Court Judge, Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan Courthouse, 401 Courthouse Square, Alexandria, Virginia, 22314-5798.   703-299-2116.

Judge Brinkema recently presided in two Internet related cases which received wide publicity, Urofsky v. Allen and Mainstream Loudoun v. Loudoun County Library.

See, Summary of Mainstream Loudoun v. Loudoun County Library.

In the Loudoun case website operators and authors whose web pages may have been blocked asked the federal court to prevent the county public library from using Internet blocking software on public access computers in the library. All plaintiffs alleged that use of the software violated their First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Judge Brinkema agreed, and found the library's policy unconstitutional. The library decided not to appeal.

The Congress is very likely to pass a bill requiring schools and libraries receiving e-rate subsidies to use filtering software. In the inevitable legal challenge, the ACLU will rely heavily on Judge Brinkema's November 23, 1998 Opinion in the Loudoun case.

In the Urofsky case several Virginia state employees challenged the constitutionality of a state statute barring state employees from using their computers at work to view porn. Judge Brinkema agreed, and held the statute unconstitutional. Virginia appealed, and Judge Brinkema was reversed by a unanimous Opinion of a three judge Court of Appeals panel.

Education:

  • Douglass College, B.A., 1966.
  • University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, graduate studies in philosophy, 1966.
  • NYU, graduate studies in philosophy, 1967-1969.
  • Rutgers, M.L.S., 1970.
  • Cornell, J.D., 1976.

Work Experience.

  • U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division, 1976-1977.
  • U.S. Attorney's office, E.D. Virginia, Criminal Division, 1977-1983.
  • U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division, 1983-4.
  • Solo Practitioner, 1984-5.
  • U.S. Magistrate Judge, E.D. Virginia, 1985-1993.

U.S. District Court Judge.

  • Nominated by President Bill Clinton.

  • Entered duty 10/23/93.

10 posted on 07/25/2002 11:56:45 AM PDT by jern
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Thane_Banquo
With Brinkema as the judge, Moussaoui doesn't need any defense lawyers.
11 posted on 07/25/2002 11:57:35 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Thane_Banquo
Because this is one smart judge. She wants Moussaoui locked into a plea and sentence that cannot be reversed by the Court of Appeals.
12 posted on 07/25/2002 11:57:57 AM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Thane_Banquo
He's jerking around the USA criminal justice system. Just like everything else they do, this one will boomarang back at em. Military Tribunals will gain popularity. Ashcroft and company are loving this mockery.
13 posted on 07/25/2002 11:58:11 AM PDT by kinghorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Thane_Banquo
"Why in hell is this judge so adamant about getting this guy off? Lemme guess. A terrorist-hugging Clinton appointee."

It might be that she is following Plato's injunction to "Know thyself."

If so, she knows that as a magistrate judge, and now as a District Court Judge, she has a horrible reversal record.
Therefore, she might want to go very slowly, or she will end up doing it twice, ( or if jeopardy attaches) might inadvertently set him free.
16 posted on 07/25/2002 11:59:23 AM PDT by APBaer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Thane_Banquo
The judge is being adamant about making sure that the defendant is properly informed of his rights before he acts so as to minimize the basis for post-trial appeals.
20 posted on 07/25/2002 12:05:17 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Thane_Banquo
You ask "Why in hell is this judge so adamant about getting this guy off? Lemme guess. A terrorist-hugging Clinton appointee." Maybe, but more likely she doesn't want the whole thing to be overturned based on mental incompetence. Also, there would have to be a full trial anyway if the government wants to go for death, so it doesn't save much time or money to refuse to accept the pleas. Also, a judge has to ensure that the defendant is clear on what he's pleaing to; given this guy's language skills and changing stories, that's pretty hard.

The only upside to accepting his partial plea is that then we don't have to worry about him getting off scot-free -- and that, I hope, is pretty much out of the picture, especially now after his open-court admissions/attempted pleas.

36 posted on 07/25/2002 1:42:00 PM PDT by DWPittelli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson