Originally posted by Robber
Not so fast my friend.
First of all, Your Honor, I object to the reference of Mr. Lindh as "Johnny Taliban" or "JT" or any name other than his given name of John Walker Lindh.
Having said that, the gov't has just argued that at the time Mr. Lindh was arrested and taken into custody, they did not believe him to be an American citizen, so he wasn't accorded the rights of an American citizen, including the right to counsel. And over his repeated requests for counsel they coerced a confession. But as soon as they realized that he was a citizen, they quickly provided him with counsel. AFTER THE CONFESSION. And then they argue that even if he were a citizen, he waived his right to counsel prior to the confession.
Your Honor, this is a classic case of governmental abuse. Mr. Lindh was an American citizen at the time of his arrest and should have been provided his constitutional right to counsel upon his request. The government's refusal to provide him with counsel clearly violates the constitution. Having gotten a confession over Mr. Lindh's request for counsel, the government should not be allowed to mention or infer that Mr. Lindh, in any way, confessed to committing the acts of which he is accused.
The government makes a policy argument that every enemy of this nation would demand an attorney if Mr. Lindh's confession is quashed. Well, if those enemies are to be tried in our courts, then they should be accorded all the rights under the constitution. The 14th amendment to the constitution states that no PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Trying Mr. Lindh in U.S. courts makes U.S. laws applicable. They are applicable to all persons, and not just citizens.
Clearly, Mr. Lindh is an American citizen. He should have been provided counsel upon his first request. All interrogations should have ceased until after he had conferred with counsel. However, if the Court questions Mr. Lindh's citizenship, as previously stated, as this case is being pursued in U.S. courts, then U.S. law applies. In either event, Mr. Lindh was entitled to counsel. He was not provided with counsel. The confession was illegally and unlawfully obtained and should be thrown out. QUASHED!!!!