On Saturday, January 19, 2013, Sam was a presenter at
“Defending Terrorism Cases: A Brainstorming Conference,” a seminar in
Philadelphia sponsored by the National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms
(NCPCF). The presenter list for the conference reads like a Who’s Who of the
best and brightest minds practicing criminal defense in the United States
today. Sam spoke about the voluminous discovery that often occurs in these
highly complex cases, and he gave practitioners concrete and useful advice
about how to handle that volume, as well as methods for enforcing a client’s
Sixth Amendment rights when important documentary evidence is withheld or
produced at a late date.
In the past twelve years, law enforcement across the United
States has made it a strong priority to identify and thwart terrorist plots
designed to harm American citizens and property. While this is a laudable goal,
the court watchers have observed a very disturbing trend: the use of
confidential informants who infiltrate Muslim communities and houses of
worship, offering large amounts of money and other incentives to individuals to
encourage them to engage in government-designed phony “plots.” Most members of
these communities are peaceful, law-abiding citizens of sound mind who cast out
the informants. Occasionally, however, offers of food and financial support to
the poorest and most disaffected are too attractive to resist, and vulnerable
members of the community find themselves charged with extremely serious crimes.
In some cases, individuals are charged with terrorism for
donating money to charities that have no obvious ties to overseas organizations
on the U.S. government’s terrorism watch list, but subsequently run afoul of
the United States Department of State. In one such case, the donations were
made as part of a major airlines' charity program for frequent flier miles. Such
donations made either on the defendant’s own or at the suggestion of law
enforcement cooperators can result in life-destroying prosecutions for the
unwary.
The government has nearly unlimited resources to deal with
these cases, but the accused are usually indigent, and the lawyers who take on
their cases are hard pressed to compete with the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s
office in terms of finances and manpower. Public opinion is still
overwhelmingly on the side of the government, and juries are frequently willing
to convict despite strong evidence of entrapment. Those who fight on behalf of
the accused also battle the public perception that they sympathize with
terrorists, and the stigma can be difficult to overcome.
The true meaning of “The Rule of Law” is that a government
of laws protects all its citizens, even those who would break the law, with
constitutionally guaranteed rights: the right to legal counsel, the right to
confront one’s accusers, and the right to prepare a defense. With all this in
mind, the NCPCF brought together professionals who have experience in this area
to allow them to share, and to teach, the strategies that worked for them, and to
allow them to brainstorm about strategies that could be improved. The attendees
left the conference feeling empowered, educated, and, perhaps most importantly,
connected to a broad network of experience and ability that will serve them
well the next time they are called upon to defend against unjust charges.
The NCPCF’s website, which lists many of the recent
terrorism cases discussed above, and provides resources for defendants,
families, and communities, is www.civilfreedoms.org.
If you have questions, comments, or concerns, or if you need
legal advice of any sort, do not hesitate to contact Sam at (718) 293-1977. He
and his associates have experience in handling some of the most complex
criminal cases in recent memory, and they would be happy to put their expertise
to work on your behalf, or to address your group or community about these
issues. (jba)
No comments:
Post a Comment