Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : COMS & the Ghost of USRX w/ other STUFF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (20704)	4/25/2000 3:20:00 PM
From: Scrapps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22053

Janet Reno, Greg Craig Denying Elian's Legal Rights; Landmark Files Friend of the Court Brief to Protect Boy's Right to Counsel HERNDON, Va., April 25 /PRNewswire/ -- Landmark Legal Foundation today filed a ``Friend of the Court'' brief with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta alleging that Greg Craig, attorney for Juan Miguel Gonzalez, and the Justice Department are denying Elian Gonzalez the right to pursue his claim for political asylum and to meet with the lawyers who have represented him throughout the appeal. ``The Justice Department may have transferred physical custody of Elian at gunpoint last Saturday,'' explained Landmark President Mark R. Levin, ``but they did not -- and do not have the right to -- prevent him from consulting with independent legal counsel. Greg Craig and the U.S. government are denying him those rights.'' In its ``Friend of the Court'' brief, Landmark notes that Juan Miguel Gonzalez, Elian's father, opposes Elian's request for political asylum. It is therefore impossible for Juan Miguel Gonzalez and his attorney to pursue Elian's application for political asylum. By allowing Mr. Craig and the government to restrict access to him, Elian cannot pursue his basic legal rights. Mr. Craig and the U.S. government, at a minimum, had a duty to petition a court to appoint a guardian ad litem to protect Elian's legal rights if they were going to deny him access to his current lawyers. Moreover, by having frequent, direct and exclusive contact with Elian rather than his lawyers, Landmark alleges that Craig may be violating the rules of professional responsibility prohibiting attorneys from attempting to obtain evidence or gain an advantage by directly influencing an opposing party. Landmark also noted that the Court has the power, on its initiative, to ask the Immigration and Naturalization Service Commissioner and the Attorney General to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of court. Landmark filed its brief today because, as Levin noted, ``the Justice Department is moving at warp speed to send this six year old back to Cuba. It is ignoring or attempting to circumvent every established legal procedure and precedent, and we don't believe it should be allowed to do so unchallenged. ``As the Court said in its April 19th order, it acted to prevent Elian from being deprived of his day in a court of law,'' Levin concluded. ``We've filed our brief to see that he is not deprived of something of equal importance -- his right to independent legal counsel.'' biz.yahoo.com