Posted on February 1, 2010 by Chuck Peterson

In Haiti There Is No Presumption of Innocence

 I was struck by the irony of it all - abandoned and orphaned children being delivered to another orphanage by apparently well meaning Americans - while the government of Haiti cannot deliver even the most basic essentials to its people. They cannot take so much as water to their own but they presume American missionaries are trafficking in children. Sick. That is the single word to describe their miserable failure. And these missionaries who have traveled from thousands of miles away and were simply taking helpless children to another orphanage are - by the government of Haiti - presumed to be criminals. Here is how it was reported:

"But the prime minister said some legal system needs to determine whether the Americans were acting in good faith - as they claim - or are child traffickers in a nation that has struggled to fight exploitation of children."

I will not presume the guilt of Americans who spent their own money to go to the aid of children, and neither would our judicial system. Not in our country. Not in America. And that is just one of the important differences between the greatest justice system in the world and every other. We do not presume guilt, we require proof. And no criminal defendant in this country has to prove innocence. We presume you are innocent unless proven otherwise in a court of law. Yes - people are arrested and held before trial, but they are not used by the government to shift focus away from their own failings.

America. Filled with people who would give up their money for others and travel to tragedy to try and save children. We do not have to apologize here.  And maybe the government of Haiti should spend a little more time trying to save its own children.

Tags: , ,
Posted on November 13, 2009 by Chuck Peterson

911 Mastermind To Be Tried In Federal Court

Here's how the New York Times announced it:

"Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, and four other men accused in the plot will be prosecuted in federal court in New York City, a federal law enforcement official said early on Friday."

And of course the talking heads will be weighing in on how this course of action will impact on other Gitmo detainees.  Four others are reportedly also headed to NY to face trial, but some of those prosecutions may still occur before military commissions.  The biggest concern for prosecutors has reportedly been the fact that KSM has been water-boarded some 170 times.  Evidence (confessions) that is the result of torture is generally not admitted in criminal trials, and any defense lawyer tasked with defending the man accused of killing 3000 people will have to make the government meet its burdens under the Constitution.  Still, a show trial in NY seems right to me.  The towers came down in NY.  New Yorkers lived with the terror.  Ground Zero remains a work in progress. The federal courts there are used to handling big cases and providing great security.  And this is a country dedicated to the proposition that we try these cases in public, before the people of this country.  And did I mention the 3000 or so who died that day in NY?  Their children, spouses and families deserve the chance to see the system at work.  That won't make the case easy for the United States - quite the contrary.  That collision of personal rights and public anger will lead to hours of interesting "education" for Americans and others as they watch the court system in action. 

Tags: , ,
Posted on February 23, 2009 by Chuck Peterson

Idaho Supreme Court Blog Reports AG Wants to End Firing Squad

 Idaho's distinction as one of two states (the other is Oklahoma) that still permits the use of the firing squad as a lawful means of execution, appears to be in jeopardy.  Deputy Attorney General Bill von Tagen is pushing a bill before the legislature to get rid of the bullet as a means of "lethal injection."  So what is the big deal? Aside from Keith Wells (who volunteered to be executed in the 90s) there hasn't been an execution in decades.  Three of my clients who were on death row (I did not represent them at trial, just on appeal and habeas) are all off the row and now serving life.  That is the norm - people sentenced to die do - but mostly of natural causes.  So no more firing squad? I wonder when the last person was executed by firing squad.  In any event, the State would like to end that possibility.  Check out my friends Idaho Supreme Court Blog for more on this, and other absurdities - at scoidblog.blogspot.com/ .

Tags: