INMATE RELEASE PLAN MAY MAKE GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER "LAST PRISON HERO"

PROPHET HUMAN CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVE CONTACTS INFORMATION THAT IS SENT TO ALL MY CONTACTS HUMAN, CIVIL RIGHTS, EMBASSIES, NEWS REPORTERS, GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS NAACP INFORMATION ON TAKING ACTION AND ISSUES THE LATEST REAL BLOG THE LATEST REAL BLOG TWO MY SHARED FILES PHOTOS Sentencing: US Prison Population Medical Marijuana: Michigan Initiative Organizers Hand in Half a Million Signatures THE VIOLENCE OF THE ILLEGAL DRUG WAR AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL ON RACIAL PROFILING TOLERANCE ON HATE CRIMES HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH ON RACISM CANCER CURE HEMP LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST PROHIBITION AND U.S. PRISON EMPIRE SENTENCING LAW AND POLICY THE SPREAD OF RACIAL INSULTS AND PROFILING BY H.J. ANSLINGER INMATE RELEASE PLAN MAY MAKE GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER "LAST PRISON HERO" What's New Custom Rich-Text Page



 


SENTENCING LAW AND POLICY 

December 21, 2007

Inmate release plan may make Governor Schwarzenegger "Last Prison Hero"

 

http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2007/12/inmate-release.html

11svhvnn9tl
As detailed in this article from The Sacramento Bee, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appears to be proposing "the largest early release of inmates in U.S. history." Here are the particulars:

According to details of a budget proposal made available to The Sacramento Bee, the administration will ask the Legislature to authorize the release of certain nonserious, nonviolent, non-sex offenders who are in the final 20 months of their terms.

The proposal would cut the prison population by 22,159 inmates and save the cash-strapped state an estimated $256 million in the fiscal year that begins July 1 and more than $780 million through June 30, 2010. The proposal also calls for a reduction of more than 4,000 prison jobs, most of them involving correctional officers. A gubernatorial spokesman said no final decisions had been made.

The administration, which is looking at across-the-board budget cuts to stem a budget deficit pegged as high as $14 billion, is looking for more savings by shifting lower-risk parolees into what officials describe as a "summary" parole system. Such a shift also would require legislative approval.

This story is more evidence, of course, of how economic realities can serve as the most effective and urgent catalyst for sentencing reforms. Disconcertingly, had Schwarzenegger's administration done a better job managing prison growth since he became governor, this new extreme release solution would likely not be needed. This story also puts into perspective the over-wrought hand-wringing by some about the much small number of federal crack offenders that might be released nationwide each year as a result of the US Sentencing Commission's new crack guidelines.

December 21, 2007 at 09:55 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/26673/24411132

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Inmate release plan may make Governor Schwarzenegger "Last Prison Hero":

» Summary Parole: CA Eyes Releasing 20,000 Prisoners Early to Ease Budget Crunch from Drug Law Blog
California Gov. Schwarzenegger is proposing releasing 20,000 low-risk prison inmates early, but the release of those inmates would be subject so search and seizure waivers under a form of summary parole.The plan would cut the prison population by 22,15... [Read More]


 

SENTENCING LAW AND POLICY

January 25, 2005

Is there a "new right" on criminal sentencing issues?

I have noted in previous posts the interesting new reality that now Republicans, far more than Democrats, are promoting what might be called progressive sentencing reform. Recall that, as detailed here, it was Republican Senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee who were questioning AG nominee Alberto Gonzales about prison reform and rehabilitation. (Kansas Sen. Brownback spoke of prison reform as "a compassionate conservative topic"; Oklahoma Sen. Coburn said, "As a physician, I believe that we ought to be doing drug treatment rather than incarceration."; Pennsylvania Sen. Specter spoke of the importance of providing some prisoners with "literacy training and job training and drug rehabilitation.")

Moreover, as noted previously here and here, Republicans Governors have often led efforts in many states to cut back on harsh mandatory sentences and to expand treatment-centered alternatives to incarceration. (Recall, as just one recent example detailed in this LA Times article, that Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has announced a plan for California's prisons to "emphasize rehabilitation, marking a shift away from an era when punishment was the overriding mission.")

Part of what makes these issues so interesting and dynamic is that sentencing reform (especially in the federal system) can appeal in various ways to different wings of the Republican party. Republicans who favor small government (or at least small federal government) might well be distressed by the size and power of the federal criminal justice machine. Consider in this vein the advocacy of Timothy Lynch, director of the Cato Institute's Project on Criminal Justice, in this piece about Booker which appeared in Legal Times yesterday. Lynch urges President Bush and Congress in response to Booker "to consult the long-term, strategic vision that can be found in the legal opinions of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas." For Lynch this means, inter alia, that "Congress should jettison the real-offense sentencing paradigm and move to a convicted-offense model" and that "President Bush and Congress should appoint a blue-ribbon commission with a mandate to propose a rollback of the federal criminal code."

Meanwhile, for the religious wing of the Republican party, concepts of redemption and forgiveness have often made religion a progressive criminal justice force in areas ranging from advocating abolition of the death penalty to faith-based prison programming. (I touched on some of these issues in this prior post.) Consider in this vein the advocacy of Mark Early, the President of the Prison Fellowship. In this commentary praising Booker, Early asserts, based on his experiences counseling prisoners, that the federal guidelines "have not produced justice, only bitterness." He likewise calls upon Congress to do better and says "Christians, who understand that doing justice is a matter of wisdom, not fear, should give their representatives the permission they need to resist political posturing and undo past mistakes. Then, perhaps the fairness and wisdom of our system will also be beyond any reasonable doubt."

Of course, the coming debate over the post-Booker future of the federal sentencing system will be a dramatic and important test of whether there really is a new political order in the arena of sentencing reform. Perhaps BlakelyBooker, in the votes of Justices Scalia and Thomas, can be seen as an example of this "new right" in the judicial branch. It will be interesting to see if other examples may emerge in the legislative and executive branches in the days ahead. and

January 25, 2005 at 04:42 PM | Permalink
JUST CAUSE LEGAL COLLECTIVE

http://www.lawcollective.org/article.php?id=202

Definition of Legal Observing

A legal observer watches and records the actions of the police at demonstrations. Observers are important because they may deter police brutality and because they collect information that may be helpful in later court proceedings. In addition, legal observers can assist activists who are arrested unexpectedly or who need medical attention, by alerting the appropriate support teams associated with the demonstration.

The role of a legal observer differs in important ways from that of a peace monitor or spokesperson. Legal observers should not become involved in crowd control, conflict resolution, or speaking for the demonstrators. Police officers are always looking for leaders with whom to negotiate and the media are always looking for activists whom they can interview. Explain to them clearly that you are present as an observer, not as a spokesperson.

Types of Demonstrations

Make sure you understand the nature of the demonstration you’re observing. Is it an authorized march or rally, for which a permit was granted? Is it a spontaneous march or gathering? Is it an organized “nonviolent direct action” (civil disobedience)? Some demonstrations are planned as a hybrid of these. For example, groups may split off from a legal march to engage in nonviolent direct action, while the rest of the demonstrators watch or move on. Knowing which kind of demonstration you’re observing will help you position yourself safely and advantageously.

Safety Guidelines

To reduce the possibility that you may be arrested yourself, and to enhance your safety and credibility if you are arrested, follow these guidelines while you’re being a legal observer:

  • Use no violence, verbal or physical, toward anyone.
  • Do not damage or destroy property.
  • Neither use nor carry drugs or alcohol, other than prescription medication.
  • Do not carry weapons.

Working Together

Legal observers work in pairs, to corroborate each other’s testimony and to help keep each other safe. Normally, one person takes photographs or videotape, while the other makes written notes. The person using the camera should be guided and protected by his/her partner, who will be more alert to what’s going on in the periphery.

Preparation

Familiarize yourself with the general area you are going to be observing. Learn the street names and orient yourself so that you know which way is north, south, etc. Figure out where to find pay phones, bathrooms, food, batteries and film (some businesses may close during demonstrations, while others may go out of their way to offer sanctuary).

Know how to recognize people from groups such as the activists’ communications team, legal team, and medical team. Make sure that you have the phone numbers for any such groups. Find out exactly where any medical stations will be set up, and figure out in advance how to direct people to them. Know where the local police stations and jails are, and inquire about temporary holding facilities (such as a stadium, armory or gym—sometimes used during mass arrests).

Review the Police Misconduct Report form. Make sure you are familiar with all the types of information you should be collecting. Practice with your partner so that you become comfortable with logging the video or photographic data onto the Legal Observer Notes form. In addition, review typical charges and defenses, so that you know what will help prove that people have been unlawfully arrested.

Improve your ability to estimate distance by marking off increments (ten feet, fifteen feet, twenty feet, thirty feet, etc.) outside on the pavement, and fixing them in your memory. Figure out the standard width of the streets and the sidewalks in the vicinity in which you’ll be observing.

Equipment

One member of your pair will need an easy-to-read wristwatch, several pens, and a clipboard. On the clipboard, keep at least 30 copies of the Legal Observer Notes form. Keep handy at least five copies of the Police Misconduct Report (on which you will be consolidating the data from your field notes).

The other member of your pair will need a regular camera or video camera. Disposable cameras are fine, too. Get far more film, tape, and batteries than you think you’ll need. (You can return what you don’t use if you keep the receipt.)

You should have a cellular phone, radio or pager with you. Otherwise, it will be impossible for those coordinating the legal observers to direct you to the places where you’re most needed. If you don’t own a cell phone or radio, borrow one. Make sure the coordinators have your number(s).

Binoculars or a small telescope may be helpful, as well. Take notes about when you use such aids, so that your report remains credible; otherwise you might appear to be claiming that you spotted an officer’s badge number from 50 feet away.

You can dictate notes faster than you can write them, so it’s extremely helpful to have a recorder. Some PDAs and MP3 players can also be used for recording. And a cell phone is very useful for dictation, because you can record memos to your voice mail. Practice with every device available to you, because you may need to switch to a different system if your primary tool runs out of capacity or power.

You must bring extra batteries for your cameras, recording devices and cell phone.

Bring several sizes of zip-lock plastic bags, as well as stickers for labeling the bags, so that you can collect potential evidence; and keep clean tissue or disposable gloves with you, for handling the items you’re collecting.

Chalk is useful for marking your position on the sidewalk or street, so that you can come back and measure your distance from the incident you were observing. Bring a long measuring tape so that you don’t have to estimate. Take pictures of your chalk marks, in case they’re erased.

Safeguarding Materials

The office coordinating your activities may arrange to have runners who can pick up your notes, film, tapes, digital memory, etc. That way, if you are arrested, you won’t lose all your work. Alternatively, you may bring self-addressed, stamped envelopes with you (padded ones, for tapes or digital memory), and every time you’ve accumulated a reasonable amount of material you can drop it in the nearest mailbox.

If you did witness police misconduct, begin filling out the Police Misconduct Report as soon as possible, preferably within a few hours, before your memory fades. Review your written and recorded notes several times, while you’re preparing your report, to help you capture as much detail as possible.

Make sure you have clear instructions about where and how to deliver your photos, recordings, notes and reports. Under no circumstances should you hand them to anyone who cannot prove s/he has been designated by the legal observer coordinator to take custody of your work. It’s safer to deliver your materials, by hand or by mail, directly to the office that’s coordinating legal observers.

Clothing

Wear standardized clothing that identifies you as a legal observer. There should be a t-shirt, armband, hat or badge labeled “legal observer.” (The National Lawyers Guild, for example, uses florescent green baseball caps.) Check with the coordinator for your event.

Your credibility will be increased and you’ll be less likely to be arrested if you dress conservatively. Check out the mainstream journalists—they generally have comfortable, inconspicuous attire.

Bring extra clothing in a sealed plastic bag: you may need to replace items that have been contaminated by tear gas or pepper spray. Protect your feet by wearing broken-in shoes and thick socks. Wear an appropriate hat for protection against cold or sun. Bring sunglasses.

Do not wear ties, scarves or jewelry (especially piercings), which could be grabbed or snagged.

Supplies

Bring money for food, transportation and phone calls. Make sure you have adequate food and water—bring more water than you expect to drink, because you may need it for cleansing wounds or rinsing off tear gas or pepper spray. Keep the water in a squirt bottle. You should also have sunscreen and a personal first aid kit. If you use prescription medication, bring it in the original container, with the pharmacy’s label on it. Make sure to bring your medication with you if you have asthma or other respiratory problems, to help protect yourself against chemical weapons.

Chemical Weapons

There has been considerable increase in the use of tear gas and pepper spray against activists.

Do not wear contact lenses! Chemical irritants absorbed by or trapped under contact lenses may cause eye damage.

Some people bring gas masks to demonstrations, although these attract police attention. If you choose to bring a gas mask, get an M17A1 or the equivalent, with shatter resistant lenses and replaceable, non-asbestos filters. Alternatives to gas masks are a combination of (1) swim goggles (available with prescription lenses) and (2) a respirator with a filter (sold at hardware stores, for use with hazardous gas or paint stripper). Another covering for the mouth and nose is a damp bandanna (bring it in a heavy-duty plastic zip-lock bag). Avoid wearing any sort of mask or bandanna longer than absolutely necessary, because the police may be zealous in enforcing mask laws at demonstrations.

Keep your skin free of Vaseline, mineral oil, skin moisturizers and make-up. Use an oil-free sun-screen. Chemical weapons bind with oily substances and become harder to remove.

You’ll get better protection against chemical weapons from synthetic, water-resistant clothing (like wind-breakers and running pants), especially clothing which is snug around the neck, wrists and ankles. Once clothing has been contaminated with chemical weapons, it should be removed. Bring a change of clothing in a sealed plastic bag.

“Non-Lethal” Projectiles

At many demonstrations, law enforcement agencies have fired a variety of “non-lethal” projectiles, including rubber bullets (generally spherical, ranging from pea-sized to marble-sized), wooden bullets (one-inch dowels, about one-and-a-half inches long) and beanbags (three-inch by four-inch net bags, filled with plastic shavings).

The projectiles cause deep bruises and can break bones, but the most serious risk is to your eyes. For protection, bring the type of plastic visor or shield used by carpenters (available at hardware stores). These visors are important to use over glasses or swim goggles, either of which can shatter.


Note: At times, legal observers have found themselves in an emergency situation in which they felt ethically obliged to intervene. Typically, this has occurred when a legal observer witnesses an activist being badly injured by law enforcement and attempts to speak with the officers or nonviolently shield the victim. If you decide, as an act of conscience, that you must abandon the observer’s role, remember to:

1.
practice strict nonviolence;


2.
show that you are relinquishing your role as an observer by removing any legal observer insignia (hat, badge, etc.); and


3.
give your notes and equipment to another legal observer for safe removal.

 


© Katya Komisaruk
Content may be reproduced for non-commercial use, provided that the author is credited,
the original publication date is cited, and the text is altered.


NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD VOTES FOR IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT BUSH AND VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY
Tuesday, November 6, 2007, 09:27 AM


Monday, November 5, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
http://nlg.org/news/

Contact:
Marjorie Cohn, NLG President, Marjorie@tjsl.edu; 619-374-6923
Heidi Boghosian, NLG Executive Director, director@nlg.org 212-679-5100, ext. 11
James Marc Leas, NLG member who drafted the resolution, 802 864-1575 or 802 734-8811

November 5, Washington, D.C. The National Lawyers Guild voted unanimously and enthusiastically for the impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney at its national convention in Washington, DC. The resolution lists more than a dozen high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush and Cheney administration and "calls upon the U.S. House of Representatives to immediately initiate impeachment proceedings, to investigate the charges, and if the investigation supports the charges, to vote to impeach George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney as provided in the Constitution of the United States of America."

The resolution provides for an NLG Impeachment Committee open to all members that will help organize and coordinate events at the local, state, and national level to build public participation in the campaign to initiate impeachment investigation, impeachment, and removal of Bush and Cheney from office without further delay.

The resolution calls on all other state and national bar associations, state and local government bodies, community organizations, labor unions, and all other citizen associations to adopt similar resolutions and to use all their resources to build the campaign demanding that Congress initiate impeachment investigation, impeach, and remove Bush and Cheney from office.

The full text of the resolution can be found at http://nlg.org/convention/2007%20Resolu ... lution.pdf

National Lawyers Guild President Marjorie Cohn said, "The war of aggression, the secret prisons, the use of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, the use of evidence obtained by torture, and the surveillance of citizens without warrants, all initiated and carried out under the tenure of Bush and Cheney, are illegal under the U.S. Constitution and international law.”

Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association, which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD AND SOCIETY OF AMERICAN LAW TEACHERS STRONGLY OPPOSE HOMEGROWN TERRORISM PREVENTION ACT
Tuesday, November 27, 2007, 09:33 AM


Contacts: *Marjorie Cohn, NLG president, marjorie@tjsl.edu; 619-374-6923
*Eileen Kaufman & Tayyab Mahmud, SALT co-presidents, eileenk@tourolaw.edu, (631)761-7125; Mahmud@seattleu.edu, (206) 398-4148

On October 23, 2007, the House of Representatives passed the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 by a vote of 404-6. The bill will be referred out of committee this week and will then go to the Senate floor. The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers strongly oppose this legislation because it will likely lead to the criminalization of beliefs, dissent and protest, and invite more draconian surveillance of Internet communications.

This bill would establish a Commission to study and report on "facts and causes" of "violent radicalism" and "extremist belief systems." It defines "violent radicalism" as "adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change." The term "extremist belief system" is not defined; it could refer to liberalism, nationalism, socialism, anarchism, communism, etc.

"Ideologically based violence" is defined in the bill as the "use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs." Thus, "force" and "violence" are used interchangeably. If a group of people blocked the doorway of a corporation that manufactured weapons, or blocked a sidewalk during an anti-war demonstration, it might constitute the use of "force" to promote "political beliefs."

The bill charges that the Internet "has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens." This provision could be used to conduct more intrusive surveillance of our Internet communications without warrants.

This legislation does not criminalize conduct, but may well lead to criminalizing ideas or beliefs in violation of the First Amendment. By targeting the Internet, it may result in increased surveillance of Internet communications in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The National Lawyers Guild and the Society of American Law Teachers strongly urge the Senate to refuse to pass the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.

Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association, which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

The Society of American Law Teachers (SALT) is a community of progressive law teachers working for justice, diversity and academic excellence. SALT is the largest membership organization of law faculty and legal education professionals in the United States.

 

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD (NLG) URGES NEW ORLEANS and HUD TO STOP RACIALLY MOTIVATED DEMOLITIONS OF PUBLIC HOUSING
Wednesday, December 12, 2007, 01:56 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, December 12, 2007

Contact: Marjorie Cohn, NLG President, 858-204-3565
Heidi Boghosian, NLG Exec. Director, 212-679-5100, ext. 11

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD (NLG) URGES NEW ORLEANS and HUD TO STOP RACIALLY MOTIVATED DEMOLITIONS OF PUBLIC HOUSING

NLG Deplores Arrest of Attorney William Quigley for Efforts to Stop Demolitions

The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) condemns the arrest of Guild member and attorney Bill Quigley of New Orleans. He was shoved against a wall, handcuffed, and arrested for "disturbing the peace" during a spirited but non-violent protest in the New Orleans City Council by displaced residents of public housing in New Orleans. Residents were chanting "no demolition" and challenging plans of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to start demolishing over 4,000 much-needed apartments. After reviewing video of the arrest it is clear that the actions of law enforcement were wrong.

President Marjorie Cohn said, “The right to protest against governmental actions must be zealously protected. The people of the Gulf Coast have suffered through a terrible series of natural and governmental disasters. The NLG calls on HUD and the City of New Orleans to protect the constitutional rights of displaced public housing residents to dissent and to counsel, and the international human rights of the displaced to decent housing and the right to return."

On December 15, 2007, the Department of Urban Development intends to start the demolition of almost 5,000 units of public housing in New Orleans—spending over half a billion dollars and resulting in a dramatic decrease in subsidized apartments. This action will only exacerbate the affordable housing crisis in New Orleans which has existed since Katrina. Affordable housing is at a critical point along the Gulf Coast. Over 50,000 families still living in tiny FEMA trailers are being systematically forced out. Over 90,000 homeowners in Louisiana are still waiting to receive federal recovery funds from the Road Home. In New Orleans, hundreds of the estimated 12,000 homeless have taken up residence in small tents across the street from City Hall and under the I-10.

Despite efforts and legal challenges by the Coalition to Stop Demolition, the demolition is to begin very shortly. A federal court has refused to stop the scheduled demolitions.
According Quigley, who represents the Coalition, "residents offered evidence to show the three story garden-style buildings were structurally sound and pointed out that the local housing authority itself documented that it would cost much less to repair and retain the apartments than demolish and reconstruct a small fraction of them. The New York Times architecture critic described them as "low scale, narrow footprint and high quality construction." HUD promised to subject plans for demolition to 100 days of scrutiny - yet approved demolition with no public input in less than two days.

The NLG notes that every one of the displaced families who were living in public housing is African-American. Most all are headed by mothers and grandmothers working low-wage jobs or disabled or retired. Thousands of children lived in the neighborhoods. While no one will openly admit it, anyone with a good grasp of the obvious knows that the race of the residents of
public housing has everything to do with the decision to demolish these homes.

Marjorie Cohn, the President of the National Lawyers Guild, stated, "The NLG also deplores the assault on and arrest of attorney Bill Quigley who was with the Coalition when they attempted to
bring the matter of the demolitions before the City Council. Cohn emphasized, "The fundamental rights of the people, especially those who are poor and of color, cannot be protected without the strong advocacy of their lawyers. The National Lawyers Guild will devote our efforts to supporting the people of New Orleans to stop the demolitions, and we call on other bar associations to do the same."

Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association, which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE BUSH POLICIES THAT AMOUNT TO TORTURE
Tuesday, October 9, 2007, 01:14 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, October 9, 2007
http://nlg.org/news/index.php?m=10&y=07&d=29&entry=entry071029-143926

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE BUSH POLICIES THAT AMOUNT TO TORTURE

Contact: Marjorie Cohn, NLG President, marjorie@tjsl.edu; 858-204-3565
Heidi Boghosian, NLG Executive Director, director@nlg.org; 212 679-5100 x.11

In February 2005, the Justice Department issued a secret opinion endorsing the harshest interrogation techniques the CIA has ever used, according to an October 4, 2007 report in the New York Times.

The National Lawyers Guild calls for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration's authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques, including simulated drowning known as water boarding, exposing detainees to frigid temperatures, and head-slapping. While the Bush administration on Friday asserted that it did not approve torture techniques, and refused to make public classified Justice Department legal opinions, the New York Times reported that two secret Justice Department opinions in 2005 explicitly permitted the use of painful physical and psychological techniques. The authorized techniques amount to torture, and are unlawful in all circumstances, even in time of war. The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment provides: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture." The Torture Convention is a treaty ratified by the United States and therefore part of U.S. law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

Torture is a war crime. Those who commit or order torture can be convicted under the U.S. War Crimes Statute. Techniques that don't rise to the level of torture but constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment also violate U.S. law. Congress should provide for the appointment of a special independent counsel to fully investigate and prosecute all who are complicit in the torture and mistreatment of prisoners in U.S. custody.

Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

# # #


| permalink | related link

NLG and other Organizations Call on U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture and U.N. Human Rights Committee to Launch
Thursday, September 27, 2007, 07:23 AM
For Immediate Release, September 27, 2007


Contact:
Marjorie Cohn, NLG President, 858-204-3565, libertad48 at san.rr.com
Heidi Boghosian, NLG Executive Director, 212-679-5100, ext. 11, director at nlg.org

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS CALL ON U.N. SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON TORTURE AND U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TO LAUNCH FORMAL INVESTIGATION INTO CUBAN FIVE CASE

New York. The National Lawyers Guild and several legal and human rights organizations have called on the U.N. Human Rights Committee and the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture to launch a formal investigation of the United States government’s continuing violation of human rights of five political prisoners known as the Cuban Five.

In a letter to the High Commissioner for Human Rights the groups noted that “The case of the Five continues to reveal a pattern of reliably attested violations of human rights, as reviewed and affirmed by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. In 2005 the Working Group criticized the treatment of the Cuban Five as arbitrary in nature and in contravention of Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. There has been no meaningful progress in the intervening two years.”

The Five are Cuban Nationals who are being imprisoned without a fair trial or sufficient proof of culpability: Antonio Guerrero Rodriguez, Fernando Gonzalez Llort, Gerardo Hernandez Nordelo, Ramon Labañino Salazar and Rene Gonzales Sehwerert. They were arrested in 1998 and charged with conspiracy to commit espionage and conspiracy to commit murder, among other lesser counts.

The ability of the Five to make an effective defense was compromised, if not eliminated, by the actions of the United States government. First, following their arrest, the Five were kept in solitary confinement for 17 months, during which limited communication with their attorneys and restricted access to evidence inhibited their ability to mount an adequate legal defense. Second, access to documents containing evidence for their defense was impaired. Finally, the climate of anti-Cuban bias and prejudice in Miami against the accused rendered it an unsuitable place for a trial in violation of Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the United States is a party.

Guild President Marjorie Cohn said, "The treatment to which the Cuban Five have been subjected, especially being held incommunicado for 17 months awaiting trial, constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment which violates the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment, as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The United States has ratified both treaties, which makes them part of U.S. law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution."

Oral arguments in the appeal of the case of the Cuban Five were recently heard on August 20, 2007, in Atlanta, Georgia. The five Cuban nationals still remain under the same conditions and are each being held in different prisons throughout the country. Not only are they away from their family, which violates the sanctity of family, but two of the wives have repeatedly been denied visas to visit their husbands in the United States. These severe, prolonged systemic violations are in need of international attention, regardless of the outcome of the August 20 arguments.

According to Heidi Boghosian, Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild, “From arrest and conviction to imprisonment, treatment of the Cuban Five manifestly fails to meet standards enshrined in international law. The viability of a human rights legal framework rests on the demonstration of its effectiveness and impartiality, and it would be dealt a severe blow if these clear violations of norms of international law go unchallenged.”

Groups signing on to the letter are the American Association of Jurists, the Center for International Policy, Global Exchange, the International Association of Democratic Lawyers, the National Conference of Black Lawyers, and the National Organization of Legal Services Workers NOLSW/UAW Local 2320, AFL-CIO.

Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

# # #

| permalink | related link

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR RELEASE OF MYCHAL BELL, FOR ALL CHARGES AGAINST THE JENA 6 TO BE DROPPED, AND FOR FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO JENA 6 ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS / NLG STATEMENT ON JENA 6
Monday, September 24, 2007, 11:44 AM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, September 24, 2007


Contact: Kerry McLean, kerrymclean at gmail.com
Marjorie Cohn, NLG President, 858-204-3565, libertad48 at san.rr.com

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR RELEASE OF MYCHAL BELL, FOR ALL CHARGES AGAINST THE JENA 6 TO BE DROPPED, AND FOR FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO JENA 6 ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS

The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) calls for the immediate release of Mychal Bell, one of the six high school students who have come to be known as the “Jena 6.” The Guild also calls for all charges against the Jena 6 to be dropped, and for the investigation and disbarment of Judge J.P. Mauffray and District Attorney Reed Walters.

Judge J.P. Mauffray and DA Reed Walters have engaged in a string of egregious actions, the most recent of which was the denial of bail for Bell on Friday. The NLG urges that: 1) The United States Department of Justice convene an immediate inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the arrests and prosecutions of the Jena 6; 2) Judge Mauffray be recused from presiding over Bell’s juvenile court hearings or other proceedings; 3) The Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Counsel investigate Reed Walters for unethical and possibly illegal conduct; 4) The Louisiana Judiciary Commission investigate Judge Mauffray for unethical conduct; and 5) The Jena school district superintendent be removed from office.

“Contrary to what Reed Walters and J.P. Mauffray may think, Jena is subject to the same Constitution that the rest of the United States is,” remarked Kerry McLean, member of the executive board of the NLG.

“There have been numerous, brazen violations of the constitutional rights of the Jena 6.” McLean continued, “In addition to the constitutional violations, Walters and Mauffray have breached the ethical requirements of their offices. They should be made to answer for all of this.”

"The double standard of justice in Jena, one for black students and another for whites, is emblematic of the racism that still permeates many towns throughout the South and the country as a whole. There must be an immediate and full investigation of judicial and prosecutorial malfeasance in Jena, Louisiana," said Marjorie Cohn, President of the NLG.

There is an unequal justice system in Jena, where blacks are routinely the victims of discriminatory and oppressive treatment by officials.

Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

-30-

NLG STATEMENT ON THE JENA 6:

The story of the Jena 6 began in September 2006 when, seeking shade from the sun, three black high school students sat under a big, leafy tree in their school yard where usually only white students sat. The next day, white students hung nooses on the branches of the tree, because the black students had dared to sit underneath the “white tree.” Hanging nooses, a reference to the brutal lynching of African Americans in previous years, has constituted hate crimes in North Carolina and Maryland. Even so, DA Reed Walters claimed that he could find no Louisiana law to punish the white students responsible. The white students who hung the nooses instead received a three-day, in-school suspension. Notably, the school principal had recommended that the white students be expelled, but the superintendent of the school district overruled that recommendation.

The entire black student body protested the fact that the white students that hung the nooses received only a three-day, in-school suspension by staging a peaceful sit-in under the same tree. The principal and school district superintendent convened a school assembly, and invited Walters to speak. Walters arrived with police officers, and stated that he could take away the black students’ lives with a stroke of his pen.

Walters not only failed to file criminal charges against the students who hung the nooses, he also failed to file charges against a white teen who pulled a shotgun on three black students in the parking lot of a convenience store in December 2006. In a startling twist, the three black teens were arrested and charged with aggravated battery and theft when, exercising their right to self-defense, they managed to take the weapon from the gunman.

In December, shortly before the schoolyard fight for which the Jena 6 were arrested, a white man, Justin Sloan, attacked Robert Bailey with a bottle at a party. Robert Bailey is, coincidentally, one of the Jena 6. DA Walters charged Sloan with simple battery and released Sloan on probation.

Yet in staggering contrast, after a schoolyard fight erupted later that December where a white student was beaten, DA Walters charged six black students with second-degree attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder. The student who was beaten was released from the hospital after two hours, and attended a school function that same night. Walters eventually reduced the charges to aggravated battery for most of the boys because he would not be able satisfy in court the necessary legal elements for attempted murder. Bail for the Jena 6 ranged from $70,000 to $138,000. Most of the six boys remained in jail for months as their parents attempted to raise money for bail. Mychal Bell’s family was never able to raise the money for bail, and he has been in an adult jail since December 2006.

In addition to unequal treatment of blacks and whites under the law, DA Reed Walters has participated in decisions concerning the Jena 6 where there was a conflict of interest. The Jena 6 were immediately expelled from school after being arrested and charged. The six boys appealed their expulsion. The school district conducted an internal investigation regarding the Jena Six, but Walters would not allow the school board to review it before it voted to expel the six boys. Walters’ advice to the school board was likely a violation of the Louisiana State Bar Association’s rules regarding conflicts of interest.

Walters had charged Mychal Bell as an adult, even though Bell was a minor when the fight occurred. Judge Mauffray allowed the trial to proceed. An all-white jury, which included a family friend of the white student who was beaten, found Bell guilty. The Third Circuit vacated the conviction because Bell should not have been tried as an adult. DA Walters has vowed to appeal the Third Circuit’s ruling.

Since the Third Circuit vacated the conviction of Bell in September. Bell’s attorneys sought to have Bell released pending Walters’ appeal of the Third Circuit’s decision. Though Louisiana’s Code of Judicial Conduct requires a judge to “disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” Judge Mauffray, the same judge who presided over Mychal Bell’s trial in adult court, presided over Bell’s juvenile court bail hearing on Friday. Mauffray denied the request for bail.

At a separate hearing on Friday, a court denied Bell’s attorneys’ request to remove Mauffray from Bell’s case. Mauffray set an exceedingly high bail of $90,000 for Bell prior to his conviction. The day before Mauffray’s ruling, the case drew tens of thousands of protesters from all over the country to Jena to rally against the Jim Crow era practices.

"The double standard of justice in Jena, one for black students and another for whites, is emblematic of the racism that still permeates many towns throughout the South and the country as a whole. There must be an immediate and full investigation of judicial and prosecutorial malfeasance in Jena, Louisiana," said Marjorie Cohn, President of the NLG.