FC: Request for articles for "Civil Liberties and Criminal Defense"

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Thu Dec 12 2002 - 18:06:08 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Decrypting password-protected Microsoft Word .gov documents?"

    ---
    
    Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:22:06 -0800
    From: "Jordan" <editorat_private>
    To: declanat_private
    
    Hello Declan,
    
    On the off chance that your listees might be potential editorial 
    contributors to our
    '03 debut issue dealing with "Civil Liberties and Criminal Defense," may I 
    paste
    in our call for contributions? Let me know if there's something you might like
    to contribute as well.
    
    Best, Jordan
    
    
    Dear Friends of the Constitution!
    
    We very much share your concerns about the shredding of the Constitution 
    and the increasingly
    unfortunate nature of the diminishment of civil liberties (and criminal 
    defense) under the guise of the war
    against terrorism.
    
    —How on earth have we reached a point at which two American citizens can be 
    held incommunicado without
    right to an attorney? Or the right to know the evidence against them?
    
    —How is that an American attorney (Lynne Stewart) is facing 40 years in 
    prison for "providing material support
    to terrorists," by merely defending the interests of her client, who is in 
    prison, and with whom all her conversations
    have been monitored by the Dept. of Justice? WHAT IS HAPPENING TO 
    ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE?
    
    —Are the lower courts often defending the Constitution, while the higher 
    courts are more often siding with the Justice Dept
    (as legal writer Jennifer Van Bergen found in an article published in 
    CriminalDefense Weekly and truthout.org)?
    
    —What prevents the "terrorist" provisions of the PATRIOT and/or Homeland 
    Security Act(s) from rolling over (eventually)
    to random criminal felons? Just as California's "three strikes" legislation 
    was voted in as strict punishment against three "serious
    and violent felonies," but later prosecutors were making the third strike 
    merely a "serious" felony, opting at times
    to make wobblers like shoplifting the third strike—just as we saw that kind 
    of abuse on the government side,
    what would stop federal officials from taking advantage of these 
    anti-terrorist provisions and applying similar
    methods and punishments to American felons?
    
    Is there a feature article, a how-to, or an op-ed column you would like to 
    write for our "Civil Liberties and Criminal Defense" forum
    due out January 15? Please consider this and let me know. Deadline for 
    receipt is Friday, Jan. 3.
    
    
    Best, Jordan
    
    Jordan Elgrably, Editor
    CriminalDefense.com
    Publishers of CriminalDefense Weekly (1st & 15th of the month)
    and CriminalDefense Review (Quarterly digest of CriminalDefense Weekly)
    "Crime, Punishment and the Constitution"
    818/461-0937 ph.
    818/461-0939 fx.
    editorat_private
    12400 Ventura Blvd., Ste. 378
    Studio City, CA 91604
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q\clan
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Dec 13 2002 - 00:09:19 PST