Binyam Mohamed’s Case Follows Familiar Pattern
According to his attorney, Binyam Mohamed was arrested on little evidence, accused of being a terrorist but held without formal charges for nearly seven years, tortured, coerced into false confessions (successfully) and waivers of legal rights (unsuccessfully), then released with all charges dropped, due to the fact that there was little evidence against him in the first place, and any evidence that was gained during his detention is unreliable and inadmissable in a U.S. court.
That’s how our government fights terrorism.
Lest you think those bad old days are over, keep in mind that the Obama administration has yet to affirm that all prisoners in U.S. custody will be tried in a recognized court of law, instead fooling with the idea of creating yet another separate “commission” similar to those the Bush administration tried to use to circumvent due process requirements. Such courts have already been declared unconstitutional, but without skirting the constitution, the prisoners that are indeed guilty of some crime (it is impossible to tell at this point how many such prisoners there are at Guantanamo), will never be convicted, due to the illegal way that they’ve been treated and the destruction of evidence by their captors.
The destruction of evidence is particularly interesting. Not only did the Bush Cheney interrogators destroy the factual and legal validity of the evidence they had by torturing suspects, they also destroyed video of their interrogations, and failed to maintain the most basic kinds of organization of documents (see previous post). It seems they thought they would never have to prove anything to anyone.
Now Obama and the Department of Justice have to decide what to do with the whole ugly, tragic mess.