Wednesday, January 14, 2009

NIMJ to hold conference on military commission jurisprudence

NIMJ has asked me to post a link to the schedule for its 23 January conference on military commission jurisprudence to be held at AU's Washington College of Law. I'm happy to do so but, sorry F.T. Cat, Esq., despite your overly generous remarks, I'm not going to blog about commissions. :-)

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Maybe they can comment on Judge Crawford's practice of not convening a prosecution against a detainee once he has been tortured. At least she's honest about it at the administration's 11th hour, yes?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011303372.html?hpid=topnews

The Cat said...

I had sent CAAFLog a link to the article. What I think is very interesting, and something the article did not note, is that she did approve and refer charges against KSM, who was waterboarded. I am sure she knew everything that happened to him just as she knew with Qatani. That could lead to the inference that she believes KSM was not tortured. (Disclaimer: When I was at the commissions, I did work on KSM's case.)

Anonymous said...

Also note how she tries to deflect responsibility onto Rumsfeld and Bush -- I guess that's one way to look for a job with the new boss?

Anonymous said...

OMG. Loud music, cold, bras, naked women, water. Break my heart. Hey, Ms Crawford, if you want pain, go on a tactical exercise to Northern Europe in the snow for a week. Real torture would have been reading Crawford's CAAF opinions to the detainees.

Dew_Process said...

Real torture would have been reading Crawford's CAAF opinions to the detainees.
___________________________________

ANON 0700, gets my SALUTE of the day!

Anonymous said...

Completely agree. Judge Crawford usually sided with the government so she was clearly wrong.

egn said...

As many gripes as I may have had with J. Crawford's opinions (in most cases not just with the results, but the reasoning as well) -- that was a pretty much unwarranted attack.

In answer to the Cat's comment, Crawford could very well have found that despite having been previously tortured, KSM made subsequent statements that were sufficiently attenuated from the prior coercive techniques. Not saying this is so; just saying this could be so.

Anonymous said...

In violation of my new year's resolution, I read the comments to this posting. Now I regret it and am going back to SCOTUS. Do Anonymous Personal attacks on Ms. Crawford accurately reflect the position of the NIMJ membership?