See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Darkness in America: Lynne Stewart's Resentencing
Source:
by author
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jul 16, 2010
Author: Stephen Lendman
Post Date: 2010-07-16 11:31:47 by Stephen Lendman
Keywords: None
Views: 125
Comments: 7
Darkness in America: Lynne Stewart's Resentencing - by Stephen Lendman Describing Lynne, one of this writer's previous articles said the following: She worked selfishly, tirelessly, and heroically for 30 years as a human rights champion, defending America's poor, underprivileged, and unwanted - people never afforded due process and judicial fairness without an advocate like her. She knew the risks, yet took them courageously until bogusly indicted on April 9, 2002 for: --"conspiring to defraud the United States; -- conspiring to provide and conceal material support to terrorist activity; -- providing and concealing material support to terrorist activity; and -- two counts of making false statements." Detailed information can be gotten from this writer's previous articles, accessed through the following links: http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2006/10/lynne-stewarts-crime-of-courage-honor.html http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2008/04/lynne-stewarts-long-struggle-for.html http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2009/11/lynne-stewart-heroic-human-rights.html http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2010/04/updating-lynne-stewarts-love-struggle.html http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2010/06/updating-lynne-stewarts-love-struggle.html A brief timeline was as follows: -- indicted on April 9, 2002; -- on February 10, 2005, convicted on all counts; -- on October, 17, 2006, sentenced to 28 months; -- on November 17, 2009, a US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit three-judge panel upheld the conviction, shamelessly accusing Lynne of "knowingly and willfully making false statements," redirecting her case to District Court Judge John Koeltl for resentencing, instructing him to consider enhancements for terrorism, perjury, and abuse of her position as a lawyer - an outrageous mandate intimidating Koeltl to comply. -- on November 19, 2009, Stewart jailed at MCC-NY, 150 Park Row, New York, NY; and -- on July 15, 2010, Stewart resentenced to 10 years imprisonment for doing her job honorably, ethically, and admirably with distinction for 30 years. New York Times writer John Eligon headlined the news, saying: "Sentence Is Sharply Increased for Lawyer Convicted of Aiding Terror," adding: After her sentence, a "collective gasp went up from (her) supporters, who packed the broad, high- ceilinged courtroom....followed by a few shrieks and sobs; some held their hands over their mouths." Allowed to speak, Lynne said: "I'm somewhat stunned, Judge, by the swift change in my outlook. We will continue to struggle on to take all available options to do what we need to do to change this. I feel like I let a lot of my good people down," after which supporters shouted, "We love you!" Stewart added: "Over the last eight months, prison has diminished me. Daily, I confront the prospect of death." So does her husband, Ralph Poynter, calling it "a death sentence," - a shocking miscarriage of justice, symbolizing America's descent to hell, its moral remnants lost, its democracy a convenient illusion, its despotic reality ruthless, corrupted, brutish and merciless, favoring power over populism under a Constitution political philosopher Sheldon Wolin describes as "conscripted to serve as (its) apprentice rather than its conscience." On July 16, New York Law Journal's Mark Hamblett headlined, "Lynne Stewart Gets a New 10-Year Prison Sentence," saying: Koeltl imposed a longer sentence, saying "comments by Stewart in 2006, including a statement in a television interview that she would do 'it' again and would not 'do anything differently' influenced his decision....indicat(ing) the original sentence 'was not sufficient' to reflect the goals of sentencing guidelines." Forgotten were Koeltl's October 2006 comment, calling Lynne's character "extraordinary," saying she was "a credit to her profession," and that a long imprisonment would be "an unreasonable result," citing "the somewhat atypical nature of her case (and) lack of evidence that any victim was harmed...." Calling terrorism enhancement "dramatically unreasonable (because it grossly) overstate(d) the seriousness of (her) conduct (and would equate her with) repeat felony offenders for the most serious offenses including murder and drug trafficking." He did consider Stewart's age (70), her health (poor), her distinguished career representing society's disadvantaged and unwanted, and the unlikelihood she'd commit another "crime." "But (he) clearly got the message from the 2nd Circuit," and complied, his own career perhaps on the line otherwise. The American Bar Association's Model Code of Judicial Conduct Updated in February 2007, its preamble calls for: -- "An independent, fair and impartial judiciary," calling it "indispensable to our system of justice, (composed of) men and women of integrity; -- Judges should....at all times (ensure) the greatest possible public confidence in their independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence; -- The Model Code....establishes standards (of) ethical conduct, (including) overarching principles of judicial ethics (and fairness), consistent with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules, and decisional law, and with due regard for all relevant circumstances;" above all, the truth, not a corrupted prosecutorial version of it, the kind sending innocent people to prison, including society's best, none better than Lynne. Mark the date - July 15, 2010, a day of infamy, activist/writer Elaine Brower saying "The Veil is Lifted, The Gloves Are off," Stewart's lynching showing America's true face - cruel, unfair, lawless and debauched, a nation no longer fit to live in. A Final Note Jeff Mackler, West Coast Director of the Lynne Stewart Defense Committee, reports she'll "serve her sentence in Danbury, Connecticut's minimum security prison....a brilliant and dedicated fighter sacrificed on the alter of an intolerant class-biased system of repression and war." A giant among us, she won't be forgotten, a Supreme Court appeal expected, despite little chance for compassion or judicial fairness, qualities absent in the Roberts court. Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening. http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
#1. To: Stephen Lendman (#0)
They should ALL be horse-whipped to death, in public.
What she did is unforgivable.
Just in case anybody doesn't know just exactly who and what she is, this one picture says everything you need to know about her:
However, one can disagree with her politics and still reject an unjust and corrupt judiciary.
She got caught breaking every law/rule that an officer of the court is supposed to uphold, she IS unjust and corrupt. She's the very worst example of the human species: "Over the course of her legal career, Stewart has defended many notorious figures, including Weather Underground bomber Kathy Boudin, Black Panther Willie Holder, and Mafia turncoat Sammy "The Bull" Gravano."
No, she did her job as an attorney in advocating for her client. Like the late Clarence Darrow, nicknamed "Attorney for the Damned", she took on a case that was to say the least daunting. However, under what our system of justice set out to be she had a responsibility to her client and was confronted with the choice of either obeying an unconstitutional administrative rule or being a vigorous advocate for her client. She chose the latter. Her violation was originally treated as nothing more than an administrative violation and then, apparently for political reasons, the foul and odious piece of human filth known as John Ashcroft turned it into a terrorism trial and an attempt to silence attorneys who defend clients which der State does not want to receive too vigorous of a defense. The principles at stake here extend far beyond her, and strikes to the heart of the right to a free and fair trial. The basic principle is that ALL accused have a right to a fair trial and not a Government Show Trial. Like free speech, you either have free speech or you do not, you either have a just trial or you do not. You either have a legal system which protects the rights of the accused, however damnable their actions, or you do not. Just as freedom of speech extends to protecting the speech of those whom we despise so does the principle of a just trial. Given her age the sentence is effectively a death sentence.
There are no replies to Comment # 7. End Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest"collective gasp went up from (her) supporters, who packed the broad, high- ceilinged courtroom....followed by a few shrieks and sobs; some held their hands over their mouths."
#2. To: X-15 (#1)
#3. To: Turtle, All (#2)
#5. To: X-15 (#3)
#6. To: Original_Intent (#5)
#7. To: X-15 (#6)
(Edited)
Replies to Comment # 7.