Here is an article that explains the letters written To:
Sen. Charles Schumer
Sen. Hillary Clinton.
Judge Rejects Jailing Of Material Witnesses
By Steve Fainaru and Amy Goldstein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, May 1, 2002; Page A01
NEW YORK, April 30 -- A key legal tactic employed by the government in its post-Sept. 11 war on terror is illegal, a federal judge ruled today, delivering a potential blow to the Justice Department's methods of detaining suspects and gathering evidence.
The judge, Shira A. Scheindlin, ruled that the Justice Department has overreached in imprisoning as "material witnesses" men the authorities believe might have information for grand juries investigating terrorism. She dismissed perjury charges against a Jordanian student, Osama Awadallah, 21, concluding that the information the government collected in its investigation must be suppressed because the suspect had been "unlawfully detained."
"If the government has probable cause to believe a person has committed a crime, it may arrest that person," Scheindlin wrote. "But since 1789, no Congress has granted the government the authority to imprison an innocent person in order to guarantee that he will testify before a grand jury conducting a criminal investigation."
Legal experts predicted the ruling could have far-reaching implications because the material-witness statute has emerged as a key tool in the government's investigation of terrorism after last year's attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. In addition to detaining people as material witnesses, authorities have arrested hundreds of others on charges of immigration violations and crimes unrelated to terrorism -- though the exact number is not known because of the Justice Department's policy of secrecy in the inquiry.
"Clearly, in the aftermath of Sept. 11, the government was looking for ways to keep people in custody and they seized upon the material-witness statute as a vehicle for that kind of indefinite detention," said Neal R. Sonnett, a former assistant U.S. attorney now in private practice in Miami. He said the ruling today puts the government "on notice that they can't use the material-witness statute in that way."
The Justice Department said it is considering an appeal. James B. Comey, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said, "The court's opinions are wrong on the facts and the law and we are reviewing our appellate options."
At a news conference this afternoon, Attorney General John D. Ashcroft called Scheindlin's decision "an anomaly." He noted that numerous other judges have authorized the detention of material witnesses and said the government's investigation is "fully consistent with law and with long-standing practices." This was the first case since Sept. 11 in which a judge has publicly challenged the use of the statute in this investigation.
At issue is the material-witness statute, last updated by Congress in 1984. The statute was designed to allow authorities to detain an individual believed to hold information critical to a "criminal proceeding" if the person could not be compelled to testify in any other way. The statute has been invoked rarely, usually in cases where an individual presented a flight risk.
Scheindlin, who was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton, ruled that the Justice Department had misapplied the statute. An individual can be detained as a material witness, she indicated, only after an indictment has been returned.
"Imprisoning a material witness for a grand jury investigation raises a serious constitutional question under the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits 'unreasonable . . . seizures,' " Scheindlin wrote.
Prosecutors argued that a 1971 decision, by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, authorized the detention of material witnesses for grand jury proceedings. That decision, Scheindlin wrote, was nonbinding and "wrong."
According to various news accounts and information compiled by The Washington Post, at least two dozen people have been taken into custody as material witnesses since the attacks, though the Justice Department has consistently declined to confirm such estimates.
Overall, the government has arrested more than 1,200 people, though new federal figures suggest the number of detainees who have been kept in custody on other charges, such as immigration violations, has declined markedly during the past few months.
A Justice Department official said last night that 104 foreign citizens, many of whom are considered connected to the investigation, are jailed on charges of violating Immigration and Naturalization Service laws. That is fewer than one-third of the 347 detainees who were in INS custody as of mid-February, when the department last released similar information.
The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said 750 people have been in INS custody since the probe began. The vast majority have been cleared of suspicion of terrorism. Of the 750, about 525 have been ordered deported. So far, about 350 of them actually have been removed.
Today's decision revolved around Awadallah, 21, a student at Grossmont College in El Cajon, Calif. He was initially questioned Sept. 20 after authorities found a note with his first name and an old phone number in a car abandoned by some of the hijackers at Dulles International Airport.
FBI agents searched his bedroom, where they found computer images of Osama bin Laden.
The next morning, Awadallahagreed to a lie-detector test. An FBI examiner testified the test showed Awadallah had responded untruthfully when he answered "no" to questions about whether he had advance knowledge of or participated in the attacks. Awadallah was arrested.
Over the next three weeks, Awadallah was in maximum security at four jails in Southern California, Oklahoma and Manhattan.
He alleged that guards physically and verbally abused him and threatened his life.
Scheindlin did not rule on those allegations, but she noted: "Having committed no crime -- indeed, without any claim that there was probable cause to believe he had violated any law -- Awadallah bore the full weight of a prison system designed to punish convicted criminals as well as incapacitate individuals arrested or indicted for criminal conduct."
Awadallah had admitted to authorities that he met one of the hijackers, Nawaf Alhazmi, about "40 times" while living in the San Diego area. But prosecutors charged that he lied to the grand jury when he repeatedly denied knowing the first name of another hijacker, Khalid Almihdhar. Almihdhar's first name was discovered in a notebook that Awadallah used for a course in English as a second language.
Awadallah was released on bail in December. One of his attorneys, Randall B. Hamud, said he learned of the decision from a teacher during an afternoon class at Grossmont.
Staff writer Dan Eggen and staff researchers Lynn Davis and Margot Williams contributed to this report.
Subject:
Impreachment of Judge Scheindlin(Fed. Judge)
To:
Sen. Charles Schumer
Sen. Hillary Clinton
June 7, 2002
I request that you start Impreachment proceedings against U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin. Since her short tenure of 7/28/94, she has repeatly made several conversational anti-government decisions.
Her latest decision was not mandated by the law, it adversely effected public safety.She granted bail to a potential terrorist, who conducted 40 telephone calls to the terrorists of 9/11/02, and meet occasionally with two of the 9/11/02 murders,and lied to federal officals.There were other charges I believe also,she arbitraily dismissed several!Her decison is under appeal by the Justice Dept.
As a New Yorker I am now more at risk in walking the streets of New York, and justice is not being served. A full investiagtion is the least we can do.All Americans should demand her impreachment due to her abuse of power. We are at war and justice must be upheld, no judge should be exempt due to a life long position.
All government employees should be held accountable, I implore you to initiate the impreachment proceedings immediately. Foxnews pinpointed this fallacy of justice and the need for action.
Rosedale , NY |
