Two former prosecutors sharply criticize "rigged" Gitmo tribunals in leaked e-mails

[JURIST] Two former military prosecutors characterized the military tribunals at Guantanamo [JURIST news archive] as "a fraud" and rigged" in e-mails written last year and just obtained by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Major Robert Preston wrote to his superviser:

I consider the insistence on pressing ahead with cases that would be marginal even if properly prepared to be a severe threat to the reputation of the military justice system and even a fraud on the American people." Preston also detailed personal moral and ethical problems with working on the cases, and was later transferred out.
Captain John Carr, who also later left his position, wrote:
When I volunteered to assist with this process and was assigned to this office, I expected there would at least be a minimal effort to establish a fair process and diligently prepare cases against significant accused. Instead, I find a half-hearted and disorganised effort by a skeleton group of relatively inexperienced attorneys to prosecute fairly low-level accused in a process that appears to be rigged.
The e-mails have reignited debate over the case of Australian David Hicks [JURIST news archive], who is facing trial before the tribunals. Australian Attorney-General Philip Ruddock [official website] Monday promised to investigate concerns [ABC Radio report] raised by the emails, and Hick's US military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, said he was "very shocked" [ABC Radio report] to read them. ABC Australia has more.


 

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.