Dick Gregory going on hunger strike until NLG attorney Lynne Stewart is freed.

[G_j]

http://lynnestewart.org/2013/04/04/dick-gregory-supports-lynne-stewart/#more-503


Dick Gregory Supports Lynne Stewart

April 4th, 2013


DECLARATION BY DICK GREGORY — APRIL 4, 2013 (PDF Verison)

I hereby declare on this day commemorating the life and sacrifice of my friend and brother in struggle, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that in the spirit of his moral legacy, I demand the immediate release from prison of the legendary lawyer Lynne Stewart, who devoted her entire professional life to the poor, the oppressed and those targeted by the police and a vindictive State.

I further declare that from this day forth, I shall refuse all solid food until Lynne Stewart is freed and receives medical treatment in the care of her family and with physicians of her choice without which she will die.

There is no time to lose as cancer, which had been in remission, has metastasized since her imprisonment. It has spread to her lymph nodes, her shoulder and appears in her bones and in her lungs.

A criminal defense attorney in New York for over 30 years, Lynne Stewart’s unwavering dedication as a selfless advocate was acknowledged by the community as well as judges, prosecutors and the entire legal profession. Such has been her reputation as a fearless lawyer, ready to challenge those in power, that judges assigned her routinely to act for defendants whom no attorney was willing to represent.

In 2002, Lynne Stewart was targeted by then-President George Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft for providing a vigorous defense of her client, the blind Egyptian cleric Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. She was charged with conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist activity after she exercised both her and her client’s first amendment rights by presenting a press release to a Reuters journalist. She did nothing more than other attorneys, such as her co-counsel former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, have done on behalf of their clients.

The reason for the prosecution and persecution of Lynne Stewart is evident to us all. It was designed to intimidate the entire legal community so that few would dare to defend political clients whom the State demonizes and none would provide a vigorous defense. It also was designed to narrow the meaning of our cherished first amendment right to free speech, which the people of this country struggled to have added to the Constitution as the Bill of Rights.

The prosecution and imprisonment of Lynne Stewart is an ominous threat to the freedom, rights and dignity of each and every American. It is the agenda of a police state.

I ask you to join with me to demand freedom for Lynne Stewart. An international campaign has been launched with a petition that supports her application for compassionate release. Under the 1984 Sentencing Act, the Bureau of Prisons can file a motion with the Court to reduce sentences “for extraordinary and compelling reasons.” Life threatening illness is foremost among these and Lynne Stewart meets every rational and humane criterion for compassionate release.

Join with me, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Pete Seeger and 6,000 other people of conscience throughout the world who have signed this petition to compel the Warden of the Federal Medical Center, Carswell and the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to act. Act now. There is no time to lose.

The petition (below) can be found online at the Justice for Lynne Stewart website:
www.change.org/petitions/petition-to-free-lynne-stewart-save-her-life-release-her-now-2

Contacts: Lil Gregory at 508.746.7427 to schedule interviews with Dick Gregory and Ralph Schoenman at 707.552.9992 for follow up information on Dick Gregory and the Campaign to Save the Life of Lynne Stewart.

[KoKo]

1. K&R...Didn't know about Lynne Stewart.

So much was going on in Bush Administration it was often hard to keep up. I wonder why Obama didn't pardon her? The info in your post seems to show she was unjustly persecuted.

-----------------

"In 2002, Lynne Stewart was targeted by then-President George Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft for providing a vigorous defense of her client, the blind Egyptian cleric Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. She was charged with conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist activity after she exercised both her and her client’s first amendment rights by presenting a press release to a Reuters journalist. She did nothing more than other attorneys, such as her co-counsel former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, have done on behalf of their clients.

The reason for the prosecution and persecution of Lynne Stewart is evident to us all. It was designed to intimidate the entire legal community so that few would dare to defend political clients whom the State demonizes and none would provide a vigorous defense. It also was designed to narrow the meaning of our cherished first amendment right to free speech, which the people of this country struggled to have added to the Constitution as the Bill of Rights.

[bluedigger]

2. Petition signed. n/t

[dhill926]

3. signed....

thanks for this.

[Octafish]

4. Dick Gregory is profound.

Thank you for the heads-up, G_j.

Ms. Stewart has caught hell for being a good lawyer who opposed the Police State.

[G_j]

17. NLG lawyers

= integrity

[Babel_17]

5. Her perjury sentencing sound vindictive

IANAL but IIRC we've been told over and over about how prosecutors have tons of discretion when it comes to perjury. IIRC we've been told that if perjury was seriously gone after then that would consume all their time.

As to everything else, I have an open mind. Though she did admit she got careless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Stewart

Edit: I should have said "if all perjury was seriously gone after ..." And I should have said that I was talking about perjury in one's defense, not perjury to convict someone.

[msanthrope]

7. Perjury at trial by an attorney is pretty serious and I think the court

rightly considered it in her sentencing.

That's what got her the extended sentence...the trial judge had given her a pretty light sentence on the charges.

[Babel_17]

20. I thought it was her own testimony

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/conviction-disbarred-lawyer-lynne-stewart-upheld-smuggling-messages-jailed-terrorist-article-1.415941

I don't have any info that her perjury was in her capacity as a lawyer. As far as I can tell it was from her being a defendant, offering testimony.

[msanthrope]

21. Yes...it was perjury at testimony. This is a very, very serious

crime for an attorney to commit. It does not matter what 'capacity' she was in. President Bill Clinton suffered reprecussion at the Arkansas State Bar for his conduct during the Lewinsky deposition. He wasn't acting as an attorney.

The judge properly considered her lies in his sentencing.

[Dustlawyer]

6. If Obama ism truly a transformative President, he would Pardon her. Oh wait, he doesn't want to

look back, only forward! I am sick of his corporate ass! I am tired of voting corporate light! He should be pushing real Progressive legislation now that there are no more races to run, instead he continues the worst of the Bush practices. There is a disturbing trend where the cops intimidate people exercising their rights to peaceable assembly (OWS) and this case where an attorney who has given her life (maybe literally) to protecting the Constitutional rights for the less fortunate, the innocent, and the guilty. Attorneys like her are what helps to keep America living up to its lofty goals. Unfortunately, instead of a shining beacon of light for the rest of the world, we are a cesspool of corrupt politicians, corrupt elections, and increasingly marginalized populous!

[msanthrope]

8. What would be the basis of the pardon? nt

[noiretextatique]

9. humanitarian

the woman is dying of cancer. that and it was a malicious prosecution to begin with.

[msanthrope]

11. Apparently not anymore. There were delays due to her prior

bout of breast cancer, but that has been cured.

Should it return, she might be eligible for such a pardon.

[grantcart]

24. I haven't seen anything indicating a cure

(BTW I appreciated your link to the legal finding, I made it half way through)


It seems to me that there is reasons for release on compassionate grounds.

1) She was sentenced to 28 months and has done twice that

2) the original sentence was appealed by the government in a highly unusual "shock the conscience" ruling

However, in an unusual move, the government appealed the sentence and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals returned the case to Judge Koeltle’s courtroom with what attorney Shellow called an “unequivocal message” to extend Stewart’s sentence. One of the three judges stated that the short sentence was so unreasonable that the “shock-the-conscience” standard should be applied.

A legal rubric that has been criticized for its vague, arbitrary and subjective nature, the “shock-the-conscience” standard was originally invoked to protect individuals from the state’s breach of due process. The “conscience” was thus defined by the public’s sense of entitlement to due process and freedom from abuse of power. However, in Stewart’s case, the Court of Appeals inverted its use to advocate for longer sentencing and defend the government’s broadening scope of authority amidst the “war on terror”.

3) She appears to be terminally ill, or very ill at this stage

4) She respected the original verdict and thanked the judge, indicating some acceptance of guilt

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/03/2013328111526948368.html

[msanthrope]

25. The problem with using a journalist for legal commentary is that they often tend to show ignorance

over basic legal procedure.

Judge Cabranes---who wrote on the 'shocks the conscience' issue, was not a judge on the 3-member Appeals Court panel that directed Koetl on the resentencing.

Cabranes was part of the 9-member Appeals Court panel denying en banc review. He wanted the case heard en banc--as did Ms. Stewart, and wrote a minority opinion expressing why.

His writing carries no legal weight on the resentence itself. This is a strawman argument.

Lynne Stewart got 10 years because Lynn Stewart is a criminal who violated SAMs and helped a terrorist impermissibly. When she got a 28 month sentence, she took the opportunity to have a press conference:

In media interviews outside the courthouse after her original sentence, she reportedly said she wasn’t looking forward to serving two years in prison, but “I can do that standing on my head,” according to prosecutors.

In a later interview before she reported to prison in 2009, Stewart reportedly said that she “made these decisions based on my understanding of what the client needed, what a lawyer was expected to do” and had no criminal intent, according to prosecutors. “I think it was necessary. I would do it again. I might handle it a little differently, but I would do it again,” she reportedly said in the interview.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/02/29/second-circuit-mulls-lynne-stewart-case-again/

[grantcart]

27. well the "do it again" seals it.

Also her previous stated openness to use violence in general.


I have an inordinate amount of respect for Gregory but can't shed a tear for this one.

[Dustlawyer]

22. Ditto!

[sabrina 1]

10. It was a malicious prosecution, same as Don Siegelman's. Political, vicious and never

should have happened in a democratic society. But then we're talking the Bush gang when anyone who dared to go against their criminal policies which included no charges, no trials, straight to incarceration, indefinitely so in such an atmosphere of totalitarianism, she should have expected, and probably did, which makes her very courageous, what happened to her. At least they gave her some kind of 'trial' I suppose.

[msanthrope]

14. How would you prove that it was a malicious prosecution? Can you point to other

similarly situated lawyers who broke SAMs in the same manner and were not prosecuted?

The second circuit's ruling was pretty detailed as to the actions Ms. Stewart took. I presume you've read the ruling?

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1498462.html

[Bernardo de La Paz]

18. Ramsey Clark defended same terrorist & even urged indictment of W Bush. Never "targetted"

Ramsey Clark was never targeted the same way people are claiming in this case, despite providing tons more provocation. He didn't break the law the way she did.

All the same, she should be released on compassionate grounds. The prosecution secured the conviction and the sentence. Their point has been made. There is no benefit to anyone or to society from prolonging the woman's suffering.

[Egalitarian Thug]

23. A Presidential pardon requires no justification.

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.

"The President ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." That's it. "Because her eyes are brown is more than enough reason to pardon her.

[byeya]

12. Humanitarianism: It's that simple. The poor woman is probably dying and has carried on

Clarence Darrow's tradition of defending the unpopular and outcast(as far is I know).
She will have to ask to be pardoned.
National Lawyers Guild - scary; ACLU - mostly part of the mainstream.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. Release on humanitarian grounds. She has served serious time for a serious conviction. Point made.

No further precedent or benefit to society would ensue from retaining her behind bars at this time.

[byeya]

13. I've long been an admirer of Dick Gregory - he's been marginalized like many intellectuals and other

people who make the wealthy, and their employees, uncomfortable.

[iandhr]

15. She aided and abetted terrorism

In 2006, Ms. Stewart was sentenced to 28 months in prison by John G. Koeltl of Federal District Court. The appeals panel sent the case back to determine if Ms. Stewart deserved a longer term, given the seriousness of her conduct and the possibility that she had perjured herself at trial.

In 2010, Judge Koeltl, in sentencing Ms. Stewart to 10 years, cited comments that she had made, which he said showed a lack of remorse. In addition to the “standing on my head” comment, he noted another statement to an interviewer who had asked Ms. Stewart whether she would have done anything differently. “I might handle it a little differently,” Ms. Stewart had said, “but I would do it again.”

She was "Convicted in 2005 for smuggling messages from an imprisoned client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, to his violent followers in Egypt. He was convicted in a 1990s plot to blow up New York."

Why are we crying for her?

[msanthrope]

19. Only certain posters are crying for her. She will probably die in

prison, and her old client will, too.

[snot]

26. I don't know the details of this cas; but based on Stewart's history, I'm inclined to side with her.

[panader0]

28. Wow. I didn't think Dick Gregory was still with us.

He was born in '32. A great man.
K and R