Attorney sentenced to jail for aiding terrorists. Enjoy!

I hope Lynne Stewart enjoys prison as much as she is enjoying playing the martyr after being sentenced to 28 months in prison for aiding terrorists.

She represented Omar Abdel-Rahman, a blind sheik sentenced to life in prison for plotting to blow up five New York landmarks and assassinate Egypt’s president.

Stewart apparently passed messages between the sheik and top members of an Egypt-based terrorist organization, helping spread Abdel-Rahman’s call to kill those who did not subscribe to his extremist interpretation of Islamic law.

Oh what a thrill it must have been for her to “stick it to the man” by helping her client pass messages along calling for the murder of others. Perhaps someone should inform her that the 60’s are over and that these guys are a little more dangerous than the black panthers.

Yes, I know that Rahman was handled as a law-enforcement issue, and is therefore entitled to representation. Had Stewart done that, she would have played her part in the justice system and could have gone back to spouting conspriacy theories and socialist nonsense.

But no. She had to cross the line into actively supporting his cause. Idiot.

I don’t really see this as a great victory. The sentencing guidelines for her crime would have given her thirty years. Instead, the judge gave her a 28 month sentence and is letting her stay free while she appeals the decision.

Gonna be interesting on appeal. Might reach SCOTUS…

Should’ve thrown the book at her. Preferably an unabridged dictionary.
Bitch got off too easy.

Without which it would have never occured to them. :rolleyes:

Are you excusing her behavior?

Is that what sarcasm sounds like to you? I was mocking your hyperbolic description of the effect of her actions. You apparently find it politically convenient to stoke the “Terrorists will gitcha if you don’t watch out” hysteria promoted by the right wing. She broke the law, but I don’t equate her with her clients.

I’m not sure what the issues are going to be. From the very little I looked it, it seemed a pretty cut and dried case, without a whole lot of issues. While I think her sentence was way too lenient, she’s an accomplice, so the 20 years the government asked for was too much. Still, she’s guilty, from what I’ve read, and everything I know about her makes her out to be one of the most annoying people in the world. I’m pretty sure annoying is not a statutory enhancer, but maybe it should be.

What exactly was in the notes she passed along? The article didn’t say, but it sounded like it was basically, “Kill the infidels,” and not, “Kill Joe Smith on Tuesday so he can’t testify against me on Wednesday,” or “I left the spare C-4 in the jar by the fridge, please use to blow up Lincoln Memorial.” I’m not saying that makes it okay, I’m just not seeing the “major blow to terrorism” angle.

She is 68 and has cancer. She may not make it the 28 months anyway. She made some statement about how she is “ill and elderly” and how tough prison will be.

My 70 year old step-mother who incidentilly survived two bouts with breast cancer would slap you upside the head if you called her elderly.

It seems pretty obvious that she got 28 months because she’s a 67-year-old grandmother with cancer whose “material support” of terrorism was being present at a conversation between two arabic-speakers and releasing a press statement (a statement which Reuters then released to Arab newspapers and is not tied to any violence or specific crimes).

What she did may have been wrong, but I don’t think it is unreasonable to say that it stretches the limits of the law to call it “material support of terrorism.” It’s certainly not a stretch to say that she shouldn’t be given 20 years for it.

Also, much of the evidence obtained for her conviction was gained by warrantless eavesdropping on attorney-client exchanges that should be confidential. This eavesdropping, part of the Special Administrative Measures passed after 9/11 may violate the 6th Amendment. So there may be grounds for further appeal.

I’m confused. Could somebody explain precisely what she did?

She released to Reuters a statement saying that the Sheihk was “withdrawing his support for a ceasefire that currently exists.”

She was present when other co-defendants helped the Sheik compose letters that served as communications to his followers (in arabic).

She deserves everything she get’s. Like with Cops I think Lawyers who break the law as part of their job and abuse rights given to them by the state should be punished far more harshly than the average Joe due to the breach of trust element.

She of all people should have known she needed to be careful. Must admit though idea of evesdropping on lawyer client conferences strikes a bit of a sour note with me.

Let’s see, so cancerous granny was present at a conversation between arabic speakers she probably shouldn’t have been at, and she released an innocuous letter. Oh, yeah, she’s a fiend alrighty. You with the torches and pitchforks are doing the right thing alrighty, yup, yup.

Look I know you’re mad at the frickin’ sheik but her lawyer sounds like she was just doing her job. TAke a chill pill, the lot of you.

Chill? She broke the law, plain and simple. Why should anyone chill, other than granny of course?

I don’t think there’s any way to view her actions as anything but a severe breach of conduct and the law, and I find her pathetic attempts to express a sense of contrition (I’m just too compassionate for my own good! Spare me!) rather nauseating. That said, I just don’t see her as a bona fide “terrorist sympathizer”. I see her as an anti-establishment idiot of the highest order who only focuses on the idea of a nice old blind guy getting hassled by The Man. I think should have gotten a stiffer sentence, and should have had to serve the time of her appeal behind bars, but the full 30 years would have been a misapplication of the full weight of the law, as it was intended.

RE:Omar Abdel-Rahman, a blind sheik sentenced to life in prison for plotting to blow up five New York landmarks . I understand this guy is an egyptian national, living (illegally) in the USA-why can’t we DEPORT this SOB? he is currently a guest opf the US taxpayers-why can’t we ship him back to Egypt? The actions of this country never cease to amaze me-we allow this worthless POS to stay here, then we wonder why we get attacked. Now we have to provide lawyers so that he can defend his "right’ to stay here and call for the deaths of Americans. I say, send him to some arabic country, where he can meet with an unfortunate “accident”. :smiley:

Um, Omar Abdel-Rahman doesn’t have any “right” to stay here in the US, and I’m sure he’d be only to happy to leave. The reason he’s staying here is that he’s serving a life sentence in US federal prison for seditious conspiracy.

And yes, as part of the process of putting him in prison, he had lawyers to defend him at his trial. That’s the way the US legal system works, y’know? (AFAIK, however, his lawyers were not “provided” by the government; he retained and paid for the services of his own legal team.)

If you were arrested on charges of seditious conspiracy, would you be willing to be summarily deported to another country where you could meet with an “accident”, instead of receiving a fair trial with a lawyer to defend you? Didn’t think so.

Moreover, Abdel-Rahman’s followers would be only too delighted if he were released from prison and deported to an Arab country. That’s exactly what they’ve been demanding, in fact. If the US government were foolish enough to send him overseas, I seriously doubt that he’d meet with any “accident” as a result, but a lot of innocent people might.

Yeah, because it would be so much safer to return him to Egypt where his followers in the terrorist organization Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya are clamoring for his release than to keep him under lock and key here in the US. :rolleyes:

It’s quite likely deporting him to Egypt would have been a death sentence. They probably would have tortured him to death, actually, to get whatever they could out of him. The govt. of Egypt doesn’t like radicals they can’t control. At all.

Given that, there’s no way we would have deported him. We at least had some humanitarian standards back then.