From: Dehede011@aol.com
Date: Mon Dec 30 2002 - 10:48:36 MST
Amara,
I read the article you submitted: "Padilla isn't the only person in
prison under creative interpretations of US law. Many other suspects have
been thrown behind bars under a statute intended to ensure that witnesses in
criminal proceedings appear at trial. The Christian Science Monitor reported
that "[j]ust as a presidential designation of someone as an 'enemy combatant'
can trigger indefinite military detention without any formal charge, federal
prosecutors are accomplishing that same result of indefinite detention
without charge by relying on the material-witness statute."
You are attempting to apply criminal law to a battlefield with an
enemy army. It may well be true that once a prisoner is designated an "enemy
combatant" he can be held without charges but you don't tell us that an
American citizen still has to be presented to the court to appeal that
designation.
I know the term "enemy combatant" was applied to American Citizens as
far back as at least the 2nd world war. If I remember correctly those
"citizens" were eventually hung as enemy spies still under the title "enemy
combatant." I also believe that was a military court not a civilian court.
Ron h.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:57 MST