Doctor of NVa Suspect to Look for Signs of Torture

[MountainLaurel]

An American student charged in a conspiracy to kill President Bush can have his own doctor examine him for evidence that he was tortured while in Saudi custody, a federal judge in Alexandria ruled yesterday.

In granting the defense request, the judge took no position on whether Ahmed Omar Abu Ali of Falls Church was, in fact, tortured in Saudi Arabia before being flown back to the United States and charged last month. Defense attorneys contend that he was -- and that he has the scars on his back to prove it. Prosecutors say a doctor who examined Abu Ali concluded he wasn't.

But what is killing me is this statement:

Even if the judge decides Abu Ali was tortured, legal experts have said the defense will face a series of hurdles in getting the case thrown out. Abu Ali would need to show, according to some experts, that U.S. personnel participated in the torture.

Have these fucking people ever heard of the Geneva Convention? Can someone explain to me why the fact that the suspect's statements were made while he was being tortured is not a reason to discount all of the evidence? Why does it matter if the Americans were doing it directly or if the operation was run by the Saudis? After all, all evidence shows that they were doing it at the U.S. government's request.

:grr: