MyDD :: UPDATED: Fascism grows in the dark of our current government

UPDATED: Fascism grows in the dark of our current government

by Andrew C White, Fri Mar 10, 2006 at 10:31:27 PM EST

A note from a friend involved in a local case challenging NSA spying was waiting for me when I got home tonight:

When I got back to my office after lunch today, I found out the government had submitted their "response" to our wiretap motion - it said, in its entirety: "classified." Their entire legal memo was classified! I got a call from the NYCLU immediately, and spoke to [snip], who said this is completely unprecedented and wrong and illegal. So then we were talking about objecting to it, etc, and THEN the order came in from Judge McAvoy summarily denying the whole motion! No hearing, no amicus, no reply, NOTHING! AND the actual order was classified!! [snip] wasn't there and then I had to leave, but I just spoke to him on the phone. He said the NYT already called him and he told them what happened. He definitely wants to fight this very strongly - it's just so insane that it's hard to know exactly what to do next. But we want to let people know. At this point any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks, [snip]"

More information on the case can be found in some of my old posts here and at The 10,000 Things.

More to come....

Peace,

Andrew

Update: Just received a copy of the order. All that is known of the governments legel memo is the one word...

classified

The Judge's decision:

United States District Court
Northern District of New York

United States of America
vs
Yassin Aref and
Mohammad Hossain

Crim No. 04-CR-402
(Hon. Thomas J. McAvoy)

Mar 10 2006
Lawrence K. Baerman, Clerk
Albany

Order Denying Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration

THIS MATTER is before the court pursuant to Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration seeking orders suppressing all evidence as tainted by illegal electronic surveillance, dismissing the indictment, and directing the government to affirm or deny the existence of electronic surveillance pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3504.

In response to Defenants' Motion, the government filed, on March 10, 2006, its in camera, exparte classified response.

Having considered the government's submission and entered a classified Order on it, it is hereby

ORDERED that the defendants' motion for reconsideration is denied.

ENTERED at Albany, New York this 10th day of March 2006.

Thomas J. McAvoy
The Honorable Thomas J. McAvoy
United States District Judge
Northern District of New York

cc: U.S. Attorney's Office
Defense Counsel

Tags: domestic spying (all tags)

Permalink :: 5 Comments :: Post a Comment

This Is Precisely What I Learned America Is Not (none / 0)

I'm just wondering if I can go back and sue my elementary school or something. Because I learned at a very early age that this is how they did things in the bad old days of the Inquisition and such. And that America was founded to make sure that nothing like that ever happened here.

I mean, I was not naive. I knew that a lot of injustices had been done. And I knew that everyone didn't get their day in court, but if they did, it would be open, they would get to face their accusers, and would not be tortured to confess. Just like I knew that there was still segregation (that didn't end till I was in high school), but there wasn't slavery.

So, my next question, I guess, is, "When did Bush reinstate slavery?"

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Mar 11, 2006 at 05:13:51 AM EST

Contrast the treatment (none / 0)

in this case versus this high profile case.

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"

by molly bloom on Sat Mar 11, 2006 at 10:18:02 AM EST

Re: Contrast the treatment (none / 0)

funny how that works.

The 10,000 Things

by Andrew C White on Sat Mar 11, 2006 at 12:38:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Updates posted... (none / 0)

in new diary here.

The 10,000 Things

by Andrew C White on Sat Mar 11, 2006 at 12:37:03 PM EST

Re: UPDATED: Fascism grows in the dark (none / 0)

I believe that this would give the defense grounds for an appeal. If the request to suppress was denied based on classified info, I believe the appellate court could reverse based on that fact alone. Any lawyers here that can clear that up for us? Thanks

by Demo Dan in Dayton on Sat Mar 11, 2006 at 12:50:56 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.