Attorney sentenced to jail for aiding terrorists. Enjoy!

[chorpler]

@Loopydude

What part of SAM is not understood?

Well, first let me say that I wasn’t being sarcastic or snarky – I really was trying to ask what the details of this whole thing are, because this thread is the only place I’ve heard of the story. But since Richard Parker mentioned that Law and Order episode, I think I have a good understanding of what you meant by “special administrative meaures” and what happened. Let me summarize my understanding of what happened (in real life, that is, not in the L&O episode), and see if I got it right:

Some terrorist got arrested and tried and sentenced to life. At some point, he was put under “special administrative measures,” which, if the L&O episode is any guide, means that he basically kept in isolation except for his lawyer; he was prohibited from contacting people, since they were afraid he might set off terrorist attacks or order people killed or something (order people to kill attorneys, in the L&O episode, as I recall).

The attorney, however, thought this was cruel, or something, and helped him sneak a message out to some people – in the real life case, by giving a press conference where she mentioned that he was withdrawing support for a current cease fire. In other words, she basically said “By the way, the terrorist I represent said that he no longer thinks <whoever it was> should start shooting each other again,” which had the potential to set off a wave of violence somewhere (Egypt?).

Also, she was present while he and some other guys composed messages to somebody else, in Arabic. I still don’t understand this part; if he was under isolation thanks to the special administrative measures, who was he composing messages with in Arabic, and who were they to?

Now I understand what she did wrong (assuming my understanding above is correct): she knew the guy was supposed to be held in isolation so that he couldn’t contact anybody and perhaps order people killed or order terrorist attacks or whatever, but she violated the isolation because she felt it was cruel. As a result, people could have been killed. (Was anybody actually?)

So, is that any of that correct? At all?

[chorpler]

@Leaper

Actually, she was quite middle-aged.

But still hot, depending on your personal standards.

Heh heh … I knew somebody was going to call me on that. I meant young in relation to the real-life attorney, Lynne Stewart. But it appears she’s actually not that much younger than Lynne Stewart after all; I had no idea Tovah Feldshuh was 54. Still, she’s definitely still beautiful as far as my personal standards go. Look at that IMDb picture. What a hottie.

[Banquet_Bear]

…yay! Another conviction in The War Against Terror! So how many convictions has it been since 2001? Three?

[Zebra]

@Fear Itself

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.

You’re either with us or against us.

[rjung]

As someone who hasn’t followed this case at all, can someone explain to me what was so dangerous and inflammatory in the messages she passed? The CNN article merely says the messages were the usual “death to infidels” stuff, which IMO is as dangerous as damp toilet paper. Or was there some sort of gag order forbidding the sheik from communicating with anyone that was being violated here?

[lissener]

Does her intent come into it at all? I don’t mean it should override all other considerations; but shouldn’t be sentenced more if she fully intended to help terrorists commit murder, than if she had no such intention? Or would whatever leniency that engendered by counterbalanced by the extra penalties she deserves for stupidity?

[kaylasdad99]

@rjung

As someone who hasn’t followed this case at all, can someone explain to me what was so dangerous and inflammatory in the messages she passed? The CNN article merely says the messages were the usual “death to infidels” stuff, which IMO is as dangerous as damp toilet paper. Or was there some sort of gag order forbidding the sheik from communicating with anyone that was being violated here?

If chorpler’s precis is anything to go by, I think you’re on the right track with the “gag order” option.

And if that’s correct, I have to agree that she was likely in error in making public statements on his behalf. My understanding of the advocate role played by an attorney is that she acts as the client’s mouthpiece wrt the facts at issue in the court action, not any little thing he wants to communicate to the world outside the courtroom.

Although ISTM that her violation, in most other contexts, would earn her a contempt of court citation. Do the Special Administrative Measures elevate the limitations on Abdelrahman as being more stringent than a mere gag order, with the violation rising to the level of a felony?

I’d really appreciate anything that a lawyer familiar with the story can tell me wrt whether I’m talking out the side of my shirt…