Padilla: The Tortured Verdict

Our own government tortured a man until he was declared insane by an expert, overrode her opinion and then barred the jury from even hearing about the torture so they could get a conviction.  This is not justice.  This is tyranny.


15 Responses

  1. “experts” say in court that which they are paid to say. Why do you choose to believe Padilla when he says he was tortured? Your post says more about you than him. He was planning to murder millions of people with a nuclear “dirty” bomb. He and his buds were and are still planning to kill as many Americans as possible. What twist in your brain would lead you to choose Padilla as your “running mate”?

  2. Busboy,
    Why do you choose to believe our government? I hope my post says a lot about me, just as your comment says a lot about you. What kind of evidence do you require? Do you still believe the war in Iraq is going well? That there were WMD’s? That Saddam was responsible for 9/11? Is there any lie our government has fed you that doesn’t slide down a complacent throat?

    Even the guilty deserve justice. Especially the guilty, because if they never receive justice, what hope is there for the innocent? We’ve just made a leap to “presumed guilty and tortured until proven so”. It is that horrific fall from democratic principle that I lament.

    And yes, I am willing to take the words of a psychiatrist, lawyers, family, etc, over that of the government lawyers who were so afraid of the effect of his incarceration on the jury they moved to bar his torture from the case.

    I don’t know what you are talking about with regard to a “running mate”, but the “twist” in my brain that screams out at this travesty of justice is my strong sense of ethics.

    Torture is something to oppose. Always.

  3. He was used and abused. The man could not defend himself in court, thus invalidating the whole process. Why keep him jailed for three years if the evidence was so overwhelming? Try him, convict him and move on. At least that should be the SOP, but the new rules say that if you come from a forgettable minority group with no power or presence within the American political machine then they can exploit you and bury you. The man saw the inside of a court room only because his lawyers forced the issue. Think about that for a second, if you can.

  4. Tim McVeigh was a terrorist. He got a waaaaay too speedy trial. The building he blew up was razed before the trial. Is the government involved in some of these cases? Hell yes! In Padilla’s case? I say no. What do you say? Do any of the people on this blog have any kids or grandkids? What the hell kind of world do you want them to live in?

  5. Not one where because of their race, color or ethnicity they can be locked up for years, without being charged, at the mercy of their captors. The question, again, if you have the goods, put them on trial. If your hoping that they will cooperate, the threat of sharing a cell with Klan members or axe murders or the death penalty should be enough to elicit that. If that fails, I doubt anything else will succeed.

  6. The guy was put on trial and convicted. That’s what you wanted; that’s what you got. I sense that you have some inordinate compassion for this man who planned to basically wipe out the city of Chicago. Why inject race and color into a planned mass murderer’s conviction? You think if he was white or black he would have gotten off? Maybe in downtown L.A., nowhere else.

  7. The whole was tainted by his torture and prior imprisonments. The ends do not justify the means. And besides he was accused of trying to wipe out Chicago and then those charges where dropped, because the goverment could not prove it. Its not if he had gotten off, its whether the trial was fair or not, and it was not. Why the two years of detention, why did the White House claim that they could unilaterally suspend Habeas Corpus? They didn’t do that to that Lind punk in Afghanistan. I am informed by my history and I know what I am talking about.

    Last time I heard, U.S. citizens have a right to a speedy trial, do they not? And why do they have that right, to prevent things like this.

  8. “The whole thing”….

    And I get the impression that you automatically assume that because the U.S. goverment points the finger at someone, that makes them guilty as charged.

  9. Its also interesting where the trial was held, in Miami. No love for Puerto Ricans among the Cuban-exile community down there.

  10. Rafael summed this up, perfectly:

    He was used and abused. The man could not defend himself in court, thus invalidating the whole process.

    . Its that simple. The use of torture utterly destroys the legitimacy of a case.


    Is the government involved in some of these cases? Hell yes! In Padilla’s case? I say no.

    What are you talking about? The government was clearly involved in both cases.

    Do any of the people on this blog have any kids or grandkids? What the hell kind of world do you want them to live in?

    An appeal to “won’t somebody think of the children?!”? Please.
    The world I want to live in now, and the world I want for every generate thereafter, is one in which the government is not allowed to torture people to obtain a conviction. Such a world is one in which both the guilty and the innocent suffer and are punished for crimes, whether or not they committed them.

    What you don’t seem to get is this isn’t about what Padilla planned to do. It is about whether or not we use torture on people we suspect of crimes.

    And as Rafael notes, when the government points the finger, it does mean that person is guilty. That’s what a speedy trial is for. And this trial was a sham. It was built on torture the jury wasn’t even made aware of. It was prosecuted against a man our government tortured until he was no longer able to defend himself. There is nothing just in that.

  11. How was Padilla tortured? You seem to assume everything. If I was Padilla; I would claim torture, starvation, sodomy, Abu Ghraib syndrome, or anything else to get the “go home” card. You are making excuses for a man who would kill you in cold blood and walk over your dead body to his next victim.

  12. And you are making excuses for a government that could have you thrown in jail, kept there indefinitely, and tortured to the point that you hate your lawyers and profess loyalty towards your guards, the prosecution, and the President.

    Do we really know Padilla was tortured? Objectively? What we do know is that a forensic psychiatrist found him unfit to stand trial. We know that friends and family said he had been “changed”. We know the stated attitude he had towards his lawyers and towards the U.S. government. Either he was tortured, or he was severely psychotic from the start.

    What I wonder is, why keep details of his detention from the jury? If he was just lying about his torture, why keep a jury of his peers from even hearing testimony to that effect?

    How can you find the possibility of torture so surprising? Given Abu Ghraib, and the methods of interrogation employed by our government, you’d think you’d be at least open to the possibility.

    But you seem to have shut your mind to any reality other than Padilla being the big bad terrorist, and our government being the wise administrator of justice.

    Let me ask you this. If Padilla had been tortured, would the trial have still been just?

    Even if we accept that Padilla was not in any way tortured, and we ignore the fact that his trial was anything but speedy, we are left with the dark and bloody stain upon our justice system: That torture is a viable explanation for the observable effects Padilla exhibited, and that it is not past the current government to employ torture as a means to an end.

  13. Actually he was so messed up that he claimed the opposite. That his jailers where protecting him and that his lawyers where part of a conspiracy to make him talk.

    I want clean open trial, where after is all said and done, killers or would be killers can’t dance around the truth and have no excuses to hide behind. the question, again, is why did this goverment went through all that it did (besides the question of torture) to claim the power to detain and incarcerate an American citizen without due process while making wild accusations about him, accusations that looked great as newspaper banner headlines but had no wish to test in open court.

    The trial only happened because the goverment was facing a slap down by the Supreme Court.

  14. Do you seriously not think that Padilla’s lawyers would let slide an action against the USA or incarcerator’s working for USA if there was probable cause? I would ask that you acquaint yourself with the “Trentadue” case, where the man was basically butchured in federal prison in El Reno, OK, and whose family will probably exact millions of dollars from our government, and rightly so, IMHO.

  15. They may try, but I am sure that the goverment will hide behind the “state’s secrets” doctrine and/or national security (‘we can not divulged methods of interrogation).

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: