What happened to the 1,000's of abuse photos

[maxrandb]

that were supposed to be released on 15 December???

Wasn't the Pentagon ordered by a judge to turn them over? Didn't some in Congress already see them, and they almost made them puke?

I want these photos and videos released. We're finally starting to get the truth about these blood thirsty savages that now control all branches of our government, and it's not the time to stop showing the American people what's being done in our name.

It's time to step on the throat of this mis-administration.

[raysr]

1. They're being

reveiwed privately by Rummy, Coulter, Rove and Rice.

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. Good question! They've stalled long enough!

RELEASE THE DAMN PICTURES!

[racaulk]

3. They will never see the light of day.

The government has been stonewalling for months on the release of those photos. And if they are backed in a corner and finally forced to release the photos, they will be conveniently "lost" or "destroyed."

I hate to sound like a pessimist and a defeatist, but I honestly do not think the remaining prisoner abuse photos will ever be released.

[CarbonDate]

5. No, they won't.

But we can keep reminding people that they haven't been released, and ask why.

People have vivid imaginations. They'll put it together.

[Moochy]

8. Beware the Ides of March 2006

My understanding of the case, is that it is currently out of Judge Hellerstein's hands now, and in the hands of the 2nd appeals court. The DoD Lawyers filed an intent to appeal to the 2nd circuit appeals court on the 29th of November, which according to what I've read on some diaries in dKos (which seems to have the most up-to-date information, even better than the ACLU's site, sadly enough )This appeal starts the clock over with a panel of 3 judges.

If Maven's information is accurate about the time taken for the government to file a brief(2 months), then that date would be most likely near the end of January 2006, since the request for an expedited process requires the ACLU to prove this to the panel. Followed by 30 days for the ACLU to file another appeal, making it the end of Februrary, beginning of March. Then 14 days later, or roughly the 15th of March at the earliest. The Ides of March indeed.

If it goes to the supreme court, it could be another year before this is resolved, however I believe that no FOIA case has ever made it past the appeals court level, to the SC.

From http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/26/14471/096 diary on the subject, comments near the end:

My Two Cents (none / 1)

Warning: Although I work at a law firm, I am not myself a lawyer. Having said that, based on my experience with cases being appealed to the Second Circuit, unless the ACLU is able to convincingly make an argument that the matter needs to be heard on an expedited basis, it would take some time indeed.

Assuming no extensions to the appellate schedule, the government's brief would likely be due about two months after the notice of appeal, the ACLU's brief 30 days after that, and the government reply 14 days later. Oral argument before a three-judge panel could be held as soon as two weeks later, and a decision could be rendered at any time after that.

Realistically, however, there would probably be one or more extensions to the schedule for more comprehensive briefing, a significant gap between the end of briefing and oral argument, and another long gap before the decision. A grand total of a year or more wouldn't be at all surprising.

Given the chaos currently enveloping the Administration, I'm not sure it would be a bad thing at all from our standpoint to leave this out there until close to Election Day 2006. If the Second Circuit were to uphold Judge Hellerstein's ruling, it's a sure bet that the government would appeal further (both to the Second Circuit en banc -- essentially the entire court, rather than just the panel -- and to the Supreme Court). Final resolution might easily take another year or two; compare with how long it took the FOIA lawsuit regarding the Cheney energy task force materials.

by The Maven on Wed Oct 26, 2005 at 03:17:19 PM PDT
< Parent >

En Banc and Supreme Court Appeals (none / 0)

Would there be new delays for the government and ACLU to write new briefs for En Banc and Supreme Court appeals or do they just work with the existing briefs?

Let's hope that this case is expedited.

by ortcutt on Wed Oct 26, 2005 at 03:59:26 PM PDT
< Parent >

New Rounds, Generally (none / 1)

The en banc hearing could go either way, but usually there will be a supplemental round of briefing and another oral argument before the en banc court. There's a good chance though that the petition for rehearing en banc would be denied, leaving the Supreme Court as the only remaining option.

Anything going on up to the Supreme Court would take even longer. Since there is no appeal as of right to the Supreme Court, there would first be a round of briefing merely to convince the Court to accept the case (this would likely take 4-6 months after the final Second Circuit decision). If the Supreme Court were to agree to hear the case, the merits briefing would take several more months, followed by oral argument some months later, and then, finally, a decision. (If the Supreme Court refused to hear the case, the decision of the Second Circuit would stand, intact.)

And there's always the possibility that any appellate-level decision could direct that the case go back down to Judge Hellerstein for further consideration, restarting the entire process.

by The Maven on Wed Oct 26, 2005 at 04:13:28 PM PDT
< Parent >

[ComerPerro]

13. I don't think so either

[NYC]

4. Keep bringing up the question.

By now, many people have forgotten.

[Warren DeMontague]

6. AFAIUI, the case was appealed by the Gov't, as expected.

Given what some, like Sy Hersh, have alleged is in there, I seriously doubt the government will ever let them see the light of day, no matter what some 'activist judge' may say.


But that's no reason to stop asking about them. They would LOVE for everyone to forget that they're there.

[Smarmie Doofus]

7. Is anyone in Congress asking this question? n/t

[maxrandb]

10. If I Recall Correctly

Some in Congress saw these photos and videos. I remember, very vividly, that as they were photographed coming out of the room where they saw these pictures, that they had a look on their faces as if they had just been punched in the gut.

I recall some saying something about rape and murder. The entire government argument, as near as I can tell, is that we can't release these photos because they are so terrible it would cause a backlash throughout the world.

Now, at one point I lived in an America that was strong enough, and great enough, and dedicated enough to the integrity of our system of government, that we faced up to our mistakes. I remember living in an America that once prided itself to face the world without fear. I remember an America that took pains to hold those in violation of law and ethics accountable. I remember an America that didn't cower at the prospect of a few men in long beards that threatened us.

IMHO, 9/11 did not change any of the above. Yes it was a tragic day, but what has become of America as a result of that tragic day is even worse. We've become a bunch of snivelling, cowardly, yellow-bellied pussies. No wonder it's so easy for the Repubs to manipulate us.

I want my country back!!!

[Smarmie Doofus]

11. Me too. If you don't mind, I'm gonna email this thread...

to Hillary Clinton's primary opponent.

[Moochy]

9. See post #8

They were supposed to be released on nov.29th, but now are on appeal to the 2nd district appeals court.

The good news is that the decision by Hellerstein was very very forceful and must be considered in the appeals process, the judges in the appeals court must have definitive proof that his decision was in error, and from what I've read the appeals court has a very high burden of proof to ignore the findings of the lower court Judges.

The findings and decision given were a 50 page decision citing many reasons why the Govt's excuses were invalid.

[ComerPerro]

12. They were supposed to be released Dec 15, after being pushed back

from being pushed back from being pushed back from being pushed back...

I'm amazed you are still asking about it.