Prosecuting Torture: Is Time Really Running Out?

[BlueJessamine]

Prosecuting Torture: Is Time Really Running Out?

By Elizabeth de la Vega

When the highest officials of our nation flung open the gates of law and morality and let the wild dogs of torture run, they set in motion a constellation of potentially-indictable federal crimes. While I do not think a grand jury investigation into those violations should be publicly initiated right now, (for strategic reasons discussed here), I do agree entirely with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse that the Attorney General must not rule out prosecutions for these violations. In the May 4, 2009, National Law Journal, the Democrat from Rhode Island writes: "The factual record ... has not been fully developed and reviewed - and no good prosecutor would make a final determination until all the facts are in." As usual, the former US Attorney has it exactly right. No responsible prosecutor would do that and, indeed, as long as the record is unfolding, the Attorney General wouldn't be able to render any meaningful final "verdict" of no prosecution even if he wanted to. (And, certainly, no potential defendant could hold him to it.) So - regardless of what the prognosis for prosecution appears to be on any given day - it is critical to keep those revelations coming, as well as to support proposals for a non-partisan commission that will publicly air all the facts, and, most important, not give up on eventual indictments.

So Many Crimes, but How Much Time?

Won't it be too late if we wait much longer? Absolutely not. There's a lot of misinformation out there on this topic, mainly as a result of gross oversimplification of the law. However, notwithstanding anything you may have heard - about charges disappearing in 2010 and all hope being lost after 2011 - time is not running out to prosecute Bush administration officials either for torture itself or for the many crimes they committed to keep their program alive throughout their tenure.

To understand how statutes of limitation would apply to any indictment arising out of the Bush White House's torture operation, you need to know how a case is evaluated for prosecution. It's a whole-concept approach. The prosecutor considers all relevant information in light of the elements of possibly-applicable crimes, and then decides whether probable cause exists to believe a certain violation has occurred, by whom, and whether it can be proved through admissible evidence. Oftentimes, even a fairly simple set of facts can give rise to several different crimes.

Obviously, if the rampage of prisoner abuse that the Bush White House triggered in the fall of 2001 - along with the ongoing concealment of the program - were a "case," it would not involve a simple set of facts. On the contrary, it encompasses a huge universe of evidence - eight years' worth - and scores of possible defendants. There is a raft of possible federal crimes and each would have to be analyzed separately, first to make a charging decision and then to determine the statutory indictment deadline.

snip :

The facts we do know provide ample probable cause to believe that, sometime after September 11, 2001, the Bush administration began a massive criminal conspiracy to, among other things: (1) commit torture in violation of 18 U.S. C. Section 2340A; and (2) defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 371. Now, I do not know if these former White House officials are finally listening to attorneys who give them legal advice they don't want to hear. But if they are, they well know by now that their defense can never rest.



Ms. de la Vega writes that there are many charging possibilities and statutory time limits.

http://www.truthout.org/051009A

[csziggy]

1. There is no statute of limitation on murder - so time is not running out

Bastards killed prisoners = murder.

[HopeHoops]

2. War crimes have no limit on time to prosecute.

It is an international crime and we've got a shitload of BushCo people who are guilty.

[bemildred]

3. Ask Pinochet. nt

[DRoseDARs]

6. Ask John Demjanjuk. He just got deported back to Germany today.

eom

[Atticus]

4. There may be plenty of time, but a shortage of political will.

And, there is not so much a shortage of will as a lack of focus brought on by "outrage fatigue". Despite what some are calling recent "revelations", nothing has been revealed in the past couple of weeks that most vitally interested (i.e., truly patriotic) people did not KNOW in their heart of hearts for these past several years.
Our nation's "leaders" were unelected criminals who wiretapped us, stole our votes, used our courts to prosecute political enemies, lied us into war, impugned the integrity and challenged the patriotism of those who questioned their war, employed torture and murder against prisoners of war and committed genocide on a scale not seen since Pol Pot.
As each new outrage became known, we were pissed and we ranted and swore and called for intervention, divine or Congressional. Intervention never came and many decided it just would never come. The barbarians, the neo-Nazis, the neo-cons just wore down the nation's capacity to give a shit.
And, now, too many are unwilling to get their hearts broken---again.

[MasonJar]

5. If there is a statute of limitation on torture, illegal eavesdropping and

especially war crimes, then that is unacceptable. However, how much proof is needed. Cheney has admitted several times on national tv that torture was committed and he and Bush were both culpable.