Cerek the Barbaric |
06-19-2003 02:35 PM |
Quote:
Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric:
<font color=deepskyblue>And if these detainees do have attorneys representing them, doesn't that imply that they have been charged with some type of crime?? I may be wrong about that, but if they aren't facing charges, then they technically shouldn't need legal counsel...should they? Let me know if that is a correct assumption or not.</font>
|
The discussion quickly commingled NY detainees and Camp X-ray. We were discussing the apples with the oranges, so I got a bit mixed up. </font>[/QUOTE]<font color=deepskyblue>Fair enough. You're the legal expert here, not I. But it sounds to me as if the NY detainees ARE recieving "due process". It's just that the details of this process are being withheld from the general public. Personally, I don't see much wrong with that and I think the gov't voiced some legitimate concerns for keeping the information confidential.
Since Eric Robert Rudolph was mentioned, I will say that many of the same procedures are being followed in that case. The F.B.I., A.T.F., state, and local authorities are still combing the woods and searching various campsites he admitted to using...but other than a description of the general location of these campsites... no other information is being released to the public because it could interfere with the ongoing investigation. No details of items found, no names of friends or family that may have been brought in for questioning, no pertinent information at all. This is just S.O.P. for any ivestigation.</font>
|