Gitmo Ruling Altered to Hide Evidence of Dead, Tortured Witnesses

[G_j]

A Tale of 2 Gitmo Opinions: Ruling Altered to Hide Evidence of Dead, Tortured Witnesses
Guantanamo

The investigative news website ProPublica has revealed shocking details in the case of Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman, a Guantánamo prisoner ordered freed earlier this year. A day after the March 16 order was filed on the court’s electronic docket, the opinion vanished. Weeks later, a new ruling appeared in its place. While it reached the same conclusion, eight pages of material had been removed, including key passages in which Kennedy dismantled the government’s case against Uthman.

watch/listen/read:
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/13/a_tale_of_2_gitmo_opinions


JUAN GONZALEZ: Here in New York, opening statements were heard yesterday in the case of Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, the first Guantánamo Bay detainee to face a civilian trial. Ghailani appeared in a New York courtroom Tuesday on charges he was involved in the US embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, which killed 224 people.

The case is being closely followed by many in the legal community, as it could help determine how the government decides to try prisoners still being held at Guantánamo.

AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, the investigative news website ProPublica has revealed shocking details about another court case involving a Guantánamo prisoner. Earlier this year, a federal judge, Henry Kennedy, Jr., ordered the release of a Yemeni man named Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman. ProPublica reports, a day after Kennedy’s March 16th order was filed on the court’s electronic docket, Kennedy’s opinion vanished. Weeks later, a new ruling appeared in its place. While it reached the same conclusion, eight pages of material had been removed, including key passages in which Kennedy dismantled the government’s case against Uthman.

To talk more about this story, we’re joined by Dafna Linzer. She’s a senior reporter at ProPublica.

Dafna, explain this in detail. This is unprecedented?

DAFNA LINZER: I believe it is. And classification experts, legal ethicists, people who study secrecy and government secrecy, have never seen anything like this before. We have a situation in which we have two opinions. The first one comes out. The judge goes through the evidence offered by the government, really dismantles the weaknesses in the government’s own case, and that takes a look very, very deeply at the different kinds of evidence offered by the government to hold a detainee, really—and this is somebody who’s been held almost nine years, without charge or trial. The opinion vanishes. And suddenly a new one appears five weeks later. Huge elements—whole sentences are rewritten, footnotes vanished. The weakest elements of the government’s case are removed from the decision.


..more..

[FiveGoodMen]

1. K&R

[G_j]

2. ==

[Rex]

3. Well then we know how these cases are going to pan out.

Real court ruling replaced by kangaroo court ruling. Nothing to see here folks...

[Solly Mack]

4. K&R

[leftstreet]

5. K&R

Wow

Thanks for posting this

[G_j]

6. another major story covered by Democracy Now!,

another major story brushed aside by the corporate media.

[OnyxCollie]

7. K&R. nt

[Luminous Animal]

8. Every day and in many ways it gets curiouser and curiouser. And not in a good way.

[G_j]

9. agreed