New Ruling on Gitmo Detainee Release Offers Troubling Look at Things to Come

According to Robertson, the legal question at hand when considering the situation of terrorist detainees is when that detainee was considered “part of al-Qaida.” In this case, while “[t]he evidence does show that he provided some support to al-Qaida, or to people he knew to be al-Qaida,” Robertson noted that “[s]uch support was sporadic … and, at the time of his capture, non-existent.”

Here’s the important part, as it relates to the ongoing prosecution of the newly-acronymed operation formely known as the Global War on Terror as a routine criminal exercise. According to Robertson, the government’s attempts to prove Salahi’s involvement through his own now-retracted admissions failed because it was “so tainted by coercion and mistreatment, or so classified, that it cannot support a successful criminal prosecution.”

“There is ample evidence in this record that Salahi was subjected to extensive and severe mistreatment at Guantanamo from mid-June 2003 to September 2003,” Robertson states in the decision. “Salahi’s position is that every incriminating statement he made while in custody must therefore be disregarded.”

I believe this happens to the LEO’s on occasion. When a judge tosses information/evidence they either re-group and look for more (and get it re-entered as inevitable discovery) or let him go and walk away.

Only 2 choices I know of in building a case and prosecuting it.

Course we would not have this trouble if this Administration had an inkling of an idea. Bubba Clinton tried to handle terrorism as a Law Enforcement issue and it was incapable of meeting that task.

Now in this case if he provided support to AQ, then I would think that is aiding and abetting and enemy and under a different statute (treason) could continue if he is a US citizen. If he is not, he’s a foreign national subject to military tribunal.

Ask FRD and the 8 saboteur’s his FBI arrested and detained when they were sent to commit acts of terrorism against civilians/infrastructure.

This issue has been constitutionally decided. However this Administration ignores what they don’t like and proceeds on theirown course.

Pubbies need to remember this and come hell or high water prosecute the wrongdoers when they are back in office.

Robertson noted that “[s]uch support was sporadic … and, at the time of his capture, non-existent.”

So if we capture a terrorist while he is reloading or out of ammunition, so that his active resistance is "sporadic" or "non-existent" at the moment of capture, then we have to release him? Interesting perspective. It makes me wonder which moron thought this ditz should be a judge - traffic court would be over this guy's head.

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.