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

Skip to comments.

US suspends 'war on terror' trials after court ruling
Yahoo News ^ | 11/15/05

Posted on 11/15/2005 3:22:43 PM PST by Valin

The United States suspended its controversial military trials for 'war on terror' detainees after a ruling by a federal judge. Following the judge's action on Monday, the Defense Department said it had postponed the first trial hearing of accused "Australian Taliban" David Hicks, which was scheduled to start Friday at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba. "The courts have intervened, as I understand it, and things are off for a period until the courts sort through things," US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said.

Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said the government has not decided whether to appeal the ruling by US District Judge Colleen Kollar Kotelly. "This is something that happened last night. The government will obviously review the rulings of the court and make its decision from there," he said.

Kotelly ruled that the Hicks trial be suspended ahead of an anticipated ruling by the US Supreme Court on the legality of the special military tribunals set up after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Whitman stressed that the ruling applied only to Hicks, but no dates have been set for any other trials to start. Kotelly said the suspension would remain in effect "pending the issuance of a final and ultimate decision by the Supreme Court in that case." The Supreme Court has said it would give a ruling in 2006 on the military trials, which have faced criticism at home and abroad.

Hicks, 30, was the first of nine detainees to face trial by the special military commissions, which have been condemned by civil legal groups and even many of the military lawyers defending the detainees. A convert to Islam who was captured in Afghanistan in late 2001, Hicks faces charges of conspiracy to commit war crimes, attempted murder by an unprivileged belligerent and aiding the enemy. He has denied the charges.

Despite the Supreme Court intervention, the Pentagon had wanted Hicks' trial to proceed, while officials said they were aware that a court could order a suspension. The Supreme Court said last week it would rule next year on the legality of the military commissions in response to a challenge by lawyers for another detainee, Saleh Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni. There have been a series of court challenges to the tribunals.

A federal appeals court in July reaffirmed President George W. Bush's authority to order trials of "war on terror" detainees by the commissions in Hamdan's case. Hicks' lawyers filed a petition in federal court last week seeking a stay of his trial pending the Supreme Court ruling. The Pentagon brought war crimes charges against five more detainees a week ago, bringing to nine the number who face trial by military commission, on the same day that the Supreme Court said it would rule on the legality of the process.

Nearly 500 other detainees are being held without charge at the military-run prison at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Most of the inmates were captured in Afghanistan and Pakistan after a US-led offensive toppled the Taliban government in Kabul in late 2001. The United States has declared the detainees illegal enemy combatants who are not protected by the Geneva Conventions.


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: colleenkollarkotelly; davidhicks; detainees; gitmo; kollarkotelly; kotelly; ruling; terrortrials
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-152 next last
To: peyton randolph

He is a she.


41 posted on 11/15/2005 4:34:23 PM PST by La Enchiladita (Request or send care packages for/to troops at www.opgratitude.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: slapshot

Is that along with "the suspect shot himself 6 times in the back of the head. Apparently, he had a real 'death grip' on the pistol"?


42 posted on 11/15/2005 4:35:13 PM PST by VaGunGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: VaGunGuy

And MANY of the detained have been innocents--but that's to be expected when we give out bounties to get suspects and tribesmen can make cash at the same time that they remove rivals by fingering them.


43 posted on 11/15/2005 4:35:23 PM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Valin

Judges are becoming too power drunk these days...


44 posted on 11/15/2005 4:35:56 PM PST by Cinnamon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody; Syncro; kristinn; Former Military Chick; Zacs Mom; Brad's Gramma

ping


45 posted on 11/15/2005 4:36:31 PM PST by La Enchiladita (Request or send care packages for/to troops at www.opgratitude.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

(IMO) Sometimes a legalized lynching is just what's called for.


46 posted on 11/15/2005 4:36:50 PM PST by Valin (Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
And MANY of the detained have been innocents

That is pure nonsense. I doubt if more than a handfull if any are innocent. We don't operate that way.

47 posted on 11/15/2005 4:38:35 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Valin

Turn them all loose in Washington DC. That way they can be close to their supporters and brother insurgents.


48 posted on 11/15/2005 4:41:12 PM PST by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Enchiladita
He is a she.

Still works. I'm sure the terrorist detainees will treat her with all the respect they afford women under TROP.

49 posted on 11/15/2005 4:43:08 PM PST by peyton randolph (Warning! It is illegal to fatwah a camel in all 50 states)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

Okay...so call the Administration liars.


50 posted on 11/15/2005 4:43:24 PM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

If the administration said that, then they are liars. If not then you are.


51 posted on 11/15/2005 4:44:36 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Gondring

If they were in fact taken while under arms, they are not innocent, period. In the case at hand, involving the Australian Taliban, he was taken under arms, not even the defense argues that he wasn't.


52 posted on 11/15/2005 4:44:37 PM PST by VaGunGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
The courts can't make up wipe their minds behinds.


53 posted on 11/15/2005 4:46:11 PM PST by unixfox (AMERICA - 20 Million ILLEGALS Can't Be Wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VaGunGuy

To be clear we are talking about the terrorists in Guantanamo, not every single Iraqi held briefly and questioned then let go.


54 posted on 11/15/2005 4:46:38 PM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: peyton randolph

I wonder how she would like wearing a burka and eaiting on these guys hand and foot.


55 posted on 11/15/2005 4:46:53 PM PST by La Enchiladita (Request or send care packages for/to troops at www.opgratitude.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: peyton randolph

o my gosh.

I meant "waiting on these guys.."

I think I'll sign off for the night.


56 posted on 11/15/2005 4:48:16 PM PST by La Enchiladita (Request or send care packages for/to troops at www.opgratitude.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

Well, the Army did...see the Ryder report.


57 posted on 11/15/2005 4:48:58 PM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: VaGunGuy
If they were in fact taken while under arms, they are not innocent, period.

...implying that if they weren't under arms, they were innocent?

58 posted on 11/15/2005 4:55:05 PM PST by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: StarCMC

The tribunals aren't as concerned with civil liberties as the Nazi trials.


59 posted on 11/15/2005 4:57:30 PM PST by GraniteStateConservative (...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

"But my point was that that the trials are really going to be blocked - it's just that they don't reflect well on the U.S. done this way. The trials need to be more like the Nuremburg trials and less like a secret tribunal."

Uh, the Nuremburg trials were tribunals.

Here's a link:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/imt.htm

Perhaps the one difference is that the war was over and there was no need to keep much, if any, information secret. Not exactly the same situation today, don't you aggee?


60 posted on 11/15/2005 4:57:52 PM PST by DugwayDuke (Stupidity can be a self-correcting problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-152 next last

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.

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