> Behalf Of Gary Nunn > > Suppose that the terrorist cell that was actually responsible for the WTC > attacks and the hijackings were caught. Also suppose that irrefutable > evidence was found with them to tie them to the attacks. > > Now suppose that it was disclosed that the terrorists were under illegal > surveillance and the evidence collected without a warrant or proper > procedure. > > Based on the US law and precedent, should the evidence be declared > inadmissible and the terrorists released? Should the same civil liberties > and protections cover the people that were responsible for killing 6000+ > people and billions of dollars of property damage? > > I thought that this was a stupid question at first, but it turned > out to be > very thought provoking among my coworkers.
The above really only applies if they are brought to face a US court. Probably would not apply if brought before a UN court. Actually, I'd be surprised if the irrefutable evidence was obtained in large part by anything other than military eavesdropping on various phone/radio and other comms lines. Australia has been faced with a similar sort of problem regarding providing evidence of Indonesian complicity in the massacres in East Timor following the vote for independence. In all likelihood, our Sigint has tapes of phone conversations from all over Indonesia, at all levels of government. The next decision, is how much is released to identify sources (and thus Australian signals capability) as against public good. Technically, ALL such information is illegally obtained - at least as far as Indonesia is concerned, but it isn't as far as Australia is concerned. Best course is to put it before an outside court (ie, UN) which can decide on legitimacy and relevance in an even handed fashion. I believe that was what has happened regarding US provided intelligence from Bosnia/Kosovo. I think the UN also used military intelligence provided information in some of the Rwandan trials. In short, I think this is another reason for justice being enacted at a UN, rather than US level. Brett
