.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Born at the Crest of the Empire

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

How is this admissible?

The LATimes has a big story on the Zacarias Moussaoui trial and on the testimony supplied in writing by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed that he "told interrogators."

But, how in the hell is this admissible in court? I'm not a legal expert, but I would think there would be a very viable challenge to the testimony from a "witness"(?) whom the CIA has admitted to subjecting to waterboarding.

Also: In other court news, the Supreme Court seems likely to overturn the Bush administration's contention that Guantanamo detainees should be tried in the constitutionally dubious military tribunals and be denied access to the US Court system.

And, as I'm doing court news, government lawyers(notice the passive description in the article, it's not "the Bush adminsitration") have finally agreed to abide by the judges ruling release all the Abu Ghraib materials to the ACLU. Apparently there are still materials that weren't previously released by Salon last month.

2 Comments:

  • Pick pick pick... Everyone is a critic. LOL I thought it was becoming obvious that Zacarias Moussaoui was trying pretty hard for his position in 'Paradise'. Seems to me he wants to be a martyr and the authorities, CIA and all, are only too willing to assist his dream.
    Its shaping up as another monumental tactical blunder all round.

    By Blogger Cartledge, at 2:31 PM  

  • I agree. I think he figures he's going to jail for life at least, so he might as well go for the needle.

    Mike

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 3:01 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home