PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Lawyer: 9/11 defendants want platform for views


Donger
11-22-2009, 10:39 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091122/ap_on_re_us/us_sept11_trial_defendants;_ylt=Am1CUYasqWdiy4NRhidcT7es0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTM4bXFjdHMwBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMD kxMTIyL3VzX3NlcHQxMV90cmlhbF9kZWZlbmRhbnRzBGNwb3MDMwRwb3MDOQRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQ RzbGsDbGF3eWVyOTExZGVm

NEW YORK – The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday.

Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but "would explain what happened and why they did it."

The U.S. Justice Department announced earlier this month that Ali and four other men accused of murdering nearly 3,000 people in the nation's deadliest terrorist attack will face a civilian federal trial just blocks from the World Trade Center site.

Ali, also known as Ammar al-Baluchi, is a nephew of professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Mohammed, Ali and the others will explain "their assessment of American foreign policy," Fenstermaker said.

"Their assessment is negative," he said.

Fenstermaker met with Ali last week at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. He has not spoken with the others but said the men have discussed the trial among themselves.

Critics of Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try the men in a New York City civilian courthourse have warned that the trial would provide the defendants with a propaganda platform.

Dean Boyd, a spokesman for the Department of Justice, said Sunday that while the men may attempt to use the trial to express their views, "we have full confidence in the ability of the courts and in particular the federal judge who may preside over the trial to ensure that the proceeding is conducted appropriately and with minimal disrupton, as federal courts have done in the past."

Ebolapox
11-22-2009, 10:42 AM
wait, they don't like our foreign policy? shocker.

Donger
11-22-2009, 10:44 AM
wait, they don't like our foreign policy? shocker.

Yeah, this made me giggle: "'Their assessment is negative,' he said." Should be a great show. I wonder if they'll televise it?

Ebolapox
11-22-2009, 10:46 AM
Yeah, this made me giggle: "'Their assessment is negative,' he said." Should be a great show. I wonder if they'll televise it?

of course they will... let's be honest, it'll be yet another way to strike at the former administration by the media. after all, regardless of the fact that we're still in iraq and afghanistan, it's all bush's fault that we're STILL there.

petegz28
11-22-2009, 10:50 AM
This is the whole point of Obama going about it in this way. It is nothing more than a circus to slam Bush and Amaerica's foreign policy. Pathetic.

Easy 6
11-22-2009, 10:50 AM
Hey, these guys deserve a platform, so here it is...

<script src="http://flash.revver.com/player/1.0/player.js?mediaId:157855;width:480;height:392;" type="text/javascript"></script>

banyon
11-22-2009, 10:50 AM
I think the civilian trials potentially set a bad precedent. Civilian jurors should not be asked to decide what the actions of a person caught on the battlefield were.

That said, KSM supposedly wanted a military tribunal so he could be seen as a "soldier of Islam who was being denied fundamental rights" as opposed to a coward who killed civilians.

petegz28
11-22-2009, 10:54 AM
I think the civilian trials potentially set a bad precedent. Civilian jurors should not be asked to decide what the actions of a person caught on the battlefield were.

That said, KSM supposedly wanted a military tribunal so he could be seen as a "soldier of Islam who was being denied fundamental rights" as opposed to a coward who killed civilians.

So we are to justfy this by saying we aren't giving him what he wants?

Donger
11-22-2009, 10:54 AM
I think the civilian trials potentially set a bad precedent. Civilian jurors should not be asked to decide what the actions of a person caught on the battlefield were.

That said, KSM supposedly wanted a military tribunal so he could be seen as a "soldier of Islam who was being denied fundamental rights" as opposed to a coward who killed civilians.

I don't really care what KSM wants, as long as he ends up dead.

Do you think that his defense will be allowed to cross examine?

petegz28
11-22-2009, 10:57 AM
I don't really care what KSM wants, as long as he ends up dead.

Do you think that his defense will be allowed to cross examine?

Civilian court means the defense will get to cross examine.

banyon
11-22-2009, 11:02 AM
I don't really care what KSM wants, as long as he ends up dead.

Do you think that his defense will be allowed to cross examine?

I don't care either, and I think I have said that before.

Yes, it would be unconstitutional to disallow cross-examination per the 6th amendment.

banyon
11-22-2009, 11:02 AM
So we are to justfy this by saying we aren't giving him what he wants?

I'm just saying it is a small consolation. It is not justified.

Donger
11-22-2009, 11:09 AM
I'm just saying it is a small consolation. It is not justified.

Thanks. Do you think that he stands a decent chance of acquittal? Now that it appears that he is going to enter a not guilty plea, do you think that the prosecution will be able to prove his guilt?

HonestChieffan
11-22-2009, 03:56 PM
Who is paying his lawyer?

banyon
11-22-2009, 04:06 PM
Who is paying his lawyer?

The same people that pay his lawyer in a military tribunal.

mlyonsd
11-22-2009, 04:07 PM
Holder is a F'ing idiot.

banyon
11-22-2009, 04:07 PM
Thanks. Do you think that he stands a decent chance of acquittal? Now that it appears that he is going to enter a not guilty plea, do you think that the prosecution will be able to prove his guilt?

They would not have taken this significat a legal and political risk unless they were already very confident of the outcome, so I believe there's probably an infinitesimal chance he is acquitted.

HonestChieffan
11-22-2009, 04:10 PM
Who is that?

banyon
11-22-2009, 04:14 PM
Who is that?

Do you not know?

HonestChieffan
11-22-2009, 04:15 PM
No, I have no idea.

mikey23545
11-22-2009, 04:19 PM
Barack Hussein Obama....Every terrorist's dream prez....

mlyonsd
11-22-2009, 04:19 PM
No, I have no idea.
He's some out of place DA

banyon
11-22-2009, 04:21 PM
He's some out of place DA

He asked "who paid" so he could get in some partisan zing about tax dollars and then he plays stupid.

HonestChieffan
11-22-2009, 04:25 PM
He's some out of place DA

With an office on Park Avenue? Thats not your basic work for the government staff flunky lawyer.

From his website:

"A criminal defense attorney and tax litigator in Manhattan, Mr. Fenstermaker has a diverse practice. He handles matters running the gamut from murder, robbery, theft, fraud, sexual misconduct, and federal and state tax-related crimes, among others. Mr. Fenstermaker is a member of the pool of Qualified Civilian Defense Counsel, authorized to represent the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba before the Military Commissions being conducted at Guantanamo Bay. He has a secret security clearance and is available to represent clients involved in national security-related issues. Mr. Fenstermaker has experience litigating pursuant to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and is prepared to assist service members confronted with issues within the military criminal justice system. "


so, back to my question...who is paying these types? How does a high end lawyer get picked to be "authorized to represent..."? Is he linked into the DOJ/Holder?

banyon
11-22-2009, 04:29 PM
so, back to my question...who is paying these types? How does a high end lawyer get picked to be "authorized to represent..."? Is he linked into the DOJ/Holder?

Qualified civilian defense counsel appointments:

http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title32/32-1.1.1.2.10.html

CoMoChief
11-22-2009, 04:43 PM
How can you be a lawyer, and live with yourself in wanting to defend these guys????

HonestChieffan
11-22-2009, 04:50 PM
OK, so there is an application process. I would have assumed that. But how are they paid? By whom?

banyon
11-22-2009, 05:04 PM
OK, so there is an application process. I would have assumed that. But how are they paid? By whom?

already stated.

Direckshun
11-22-2009, 07:13 PM
Please god, give them their platform.

Nothing will hurt their cause more than the planet hearing their ridiculous arguments in full.

Let the lunatics rave. We have nothing to fear.

KCWolfman
11-22-2009, 07:52 PM
I don't really care what KSM wants, as long as he ends up dead.


Precisely, Why does everyone always get caught up in the devil in the details?

Norman Einstein
11-22-2009, 08:40 PM
Let the lunatics rave.

Then give them a decent meal and give them a decent hanging.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 04:40 AM
already stated.

where is it stated

KC native
11-23-2009, 08:07 AM
Please god, give them their platform.

Nothing will hurt their cause more than the planet hearing their ridiculous arguments in full.

Let the lunatics rave. We have nothing to fear.

Exactly this.

banyon
11-23-2009, 08:41 AM
where is it stated

post 15

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 08:49 AM
post 15

Taxpayers yes, same pot of money no.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 09:02 AM
Taxpayers yes, same pot of money no.

Clearly the lawyer is paid out of the taxpayers pocket but what I would really like to know is who picks the lawyer from the pool, who establishes his or her fee? And in a case like this why doesnt the accused pay for his or her own lawyer or is it just assumed we want to foot the bill?

It seems odd that a destitute burglar gets some lawyer provided by the city or county not some high dollar Big City slick. So whay does a terrorist get a high priced Park Ave lawyer?

Maybe someone knows how all this works.

wild1
11-23-2009, 09:14 AM
I'm starting to fear more and more that these guys are going to walk.

Donger
11-23-2009, 09:17 AM
They would not have taken this significat a legal and political risk unless they were already very confident of the outcome, so I believe there's probably an infinitesimal chance he is acquitted.

I wonder how much evidence the prosecution will be able to present that is not classified. And, isn't the defense entitled to review all evidence? Is KSM really going to have access to our classified intel?

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 09:30 AM
Clearly the lawyer is paid out of the taxpayers pocket but what I would really like to know is who picks the lawyer from the pool, who establishes his or her fee? And in a case like this why doesnt the accused pay for his or her own lawyer or is it just assumed we want to foot the bill?

It seems odd that a destitute burglar gets some lawyer provided by the city or county not some high dollar Big City slick. So whay does a terrorist get a high priced Park Ave lawyer?

Maybe someone knows how all this works.

In a military tribunal the lawyers are paid their base pay and allowances. When the lawyers are selected in a civilian court they are not paid at the same rate the military lawyers are.

I'm not aware of the minimum pay civilian lawyers get, but the military guys you can look up on military.com and find how much they get for their service. There might be an extra amount some officers get, like those that are in a war zone get extra, those that are in the medical field get an extra pay, I'm not sure if lawyers are in the same class.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 09:33 AM
In a military tribunal, are the lawyers all military or are the defendants allowed to use a non military lawyer? Are the same rules in place as in a court martial?

banyon
11-23-2009, 09:33 AM
I wonder how much evidence the prosecution will be able to present that is not classified. And, isn't the defense entitled to review all evidence? Is KSM really going to have access to our classified intel?
The prosecution only has to disclose evidence that is both exculpatory AND relevant. They do not have to reveal classified intel that doesn't fall into that category.

banyon
11-23-2009, 09:39 AM
Clearly the lawyer is paid out of the taxpayers pocket but what I would really like to know is who picks the lawyer from the pool, who establishes his or her fee? And in a case like this why doesnt the accused pay for his or her own lawyer or is it just assumed we want to foot the bill?

It seems odd that a destitute burglar gets some lawyer provided by the city or county not some high dollar Big City slick. So whay does a terrorist get a high priced Park Ave lawyer?

Maybe someone knows how all this works.

The info you are asking about regarding the process was in the link.

They are entitled to a more qualified attorney because they are charged with complicated capital crimes.

even in state court capital defendants are entitled to an attorney who meets a more rigorous set of qualifications and will not be the most rookie public defender.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 10:44 AM
The only cost figures I can locate are the 100m that its expected to cost NYC not the cost for the taxpayers and i wonder why there is no information that explains what Mr Park Avenue Lawyer is being paid.

memyselfI
11-23-2009, 10:47 AM
This sucks but it is one of the risks of having the type of justice system we have in this country. As such, it's incumbent upon the MEDIA to proceed with caution on how they cover the trial.

mlyonsd
11-23-2009, 10:48 AM
Do they televise Federal Court trials?

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 10:55 AM
The only cost figures I can locate are the 100m that its expected to cost NYC not the cost for the taxpayers and i wonder why there is no information that explains what Mr Park Avenue Lawyer is being paid.

In my opinion it is just totally stupid to pay the money to have a civil trial when the military tribunal is the best course for prosecution in this case. It's more of a case of war crimes. The U.S. courts should not be involved as the detainee should have absolutely no rights of a U.S. citizen.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 10:57 AM
Do they televise Federal Court trials?

If they can at all swing it you can guarantee that Obama and his administration will want this televised so the U.S. people can see how nice of a guy KSM is so they feel better when he is acquitted because the Army didn't Mirandize him when they detained him.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 11:05 AM
In my opinion it is just totally stupid to pay the money to have a civil trial when the military tribunal is the best course for prosecution in this case. It's more of a case of war crimes. The U.S. courts should not be involved as the detainee should have absolutely no rights of a U.S. citizen.

It just seems very odd how they go about all this and no one seems to care a bit about the costs involved or who ends up paying the bill. Worse is you can tell they do not want anyone to know how the Park Ave dude got picked or how much he will be paid.

mlyonsd
11-23-2009, 11:09 AM
If they can at all swing it you can guarantee that Obama and his administration will want this televised so the U.S. people can see how nice of a guy KSM is so they feel better when he is acquitted because the Army didn't Mirandize him when they detained him.

Come on, even you don't believe that, right?

IMO the administration wants him to be tried and found guilty in our courts to prove they work, we are a society of laws, etc....not get them acquitted.

Acquittal would put democrats in a political box they might not recover from for 25 years.

dirk digler
11-23-2009, 11:15 AM
Come on, even you don't believe that, right?

IMO the administration wants him to be tried and found guilty in our courts to prove they work, we are a society of laws, etc....not get them acquitted.

Acquittal would put democrats in a political box they might not recover from for 25 years.

Yep and I respect you for making a honest post unlike others on here. I think it is laughable that anyone thinks that these terrorists or going to be acquitted and I also don't think a Federal Judge is going to allow any grandstanding or politicizing by the terrorists or their lawyers. From what I understand the NY federal judges are the toughest in the country.

dirk digler
11-23-2009, 11:18 AM
It just seems very odd how they go about all this and no one seems to care a bit about the costs involved or who ends up paying the bill. Worse is you can tell they do not want anyone to know how the Park Ave dude got picked or how much he will be paid.

Who gives a shit? We are paying for their military or civilian attorneys either way. Several of the Gitmo detainees have civilian lawyers who cares JFC.

mlyonsd
11-23-2009, 11:30 AM
Yep and I respect you for making a honest post unlike others on here. I think it is laughable that anyone thinks that these terrorists or going to be acquitted and I also don't think a Federal Judge is going to allow any grandstanding or politicizing by the terrorists or their lawyers. From what I understand the NY federal judges are the toughest in the country.

Thanks, but Holder is still an idiot. :p

Donger
11-23-2009, 11:32 AM
Yep and I respect you for making a honest post unlike others on here. I think it is laughable that anyone thinks that these terrorists or going to be acquitted and I also don't think a Federal Judge is going to allow any grandstanding or politicizing by the terrorists or their lawyers. From what I understand the NY federal judges are the toughest in the country.

Hey now, the prosecution has the burden of proof that he is guilty. What makes you so sure that they can do that?

Warrior5
11-23-2009, 11:47 AM
One of you legal gurus help me out here...

What prevents the judge from declaring mis-trial due to "hung jury" / inability to select unbiased jury members in New York?

I'm just asking...

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 11:53 AM
Come on, even you don't believe that, right?

IMO the administration wants him to be tried and found guilty in our courts to prove they work, we are a society of laws, etc....not get them acquitted.

Acquittal would put democrats in a political box they might not recover from for 25 years.

Either way it comes out the administration has a desire to prove to the country how good they are.

If there is an acquittal they need to be ready for all kinds of crap down the road. Face it, Obama is sensitive to the Muslims and most likely thinks the best chance for an acquittal would be in civil court because of all of the CS rules regarding self incrimination etc.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 12:02 PM
Who gives a shit? We are paying for their military or civilian attorneys either way. Several of the Gitmo detainees have civilian lawyers who cares JFC.

Inquiring minds want to know. Is it ok to ask what something costs?

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 12:03 PM
Who gives a shit? We are paying for their military or civilian attorneys either way. Several of the Gitmo detainees have civilian lawyers who cares JFC.

There is a very large cost difference. Hire a lawyer like KSM will most likely get, according to banyon, and see what kind of fee he demands. Then find out what the base pay for an O-4 through O-6 and see the differences.

What I find funny is that no attorney here would even guestimate what the high powered lawyer might get.

An O6 over 30 years gets a base pay of $9,910.80 a month.
An O4 over 18 years gets a base pay of $6,723.30 a month and is capped at that level.
http://www.military.com/military/benefits/0,15465,2009-Proposed-Military-Pay,00.html

Special Pay is not that grand, but can be found here:
http://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/special-pay/special-duty-assignment-pay

The range of fees charged by lawyers varies widely from one city to the next. Most large law firms in the United States bill between $200 and $1,000 per hour for their lawyers' time, though fees charged by smaller firms are much lower. The rate varies tremendously by location as well as the specific area of law practiced. Typically insurance defense firms have lower hourly rates than other non-insurance firms, but are compensated by having steady, regular paying work provided. Locations like Salt Lake City will average $150 per hour for an associate's time on a basic case, but will increase for larger firms. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney's_fee#Amount_of_fees)

Using the $200 an hour and the $1000 an hour you can expect to pay between $8,000 and $40,000 a week for a lawyer from a large law firm. From a law firm in Salt Lake City you can expect to pay $6,000 a week based on information from the same Wiki search.

KC native
11-23-2009, 12:06 PM
:spock:Are you guys seriously bitching about the cost to try KSM?

banyon
11-23-2009, 12:07 PM
One of you legal gurus help me out here...

What prevents the judge from declaring mis-trial due to "hung jury" / inability to select unbiased jury members in New York?

I'm just asking...

There is no "hung jury" until a trial is competed. If such happened, it would be retried until there was a verdict.

if people are unduly biased, the judge will strike them. If you cannot get a jury from the first panel, they will convene until they do get one.

Donger
11-23-2009, 12:08 PM
:spock:Are you guys seriously bitching about the cost to try KSM?

Why not? He was ready to plead guilty and be killed while in Gitmo. What does a bullet cost?

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 12:08 PM
:spock:Are you guys seriously bitching about the cost to try KSM?

I guess you aren't bothered by the estimated $100,000,000 price tag to try them in NYC vs something considerably lower by the Military Tribunal?

banyon
11-23-2009, 12:09 PM
Inquiring minds want to know. Is it ok to ask what something costs?

You don't want to know, or you wouldn't have had to be reminded twice about things that were already posted. You want to turn it into a partisan whine. You should admit what you are doing.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 12:10 PM
There is no "hung jury" until a trial is competed. If such happened, it would be retried until there was a verdict.

if people are unduly biased, the judge will strike them. If you cannot get a jury from the first panel, they will convene until they do get one.

What happens if they can't get a panel of jurists that does not have a bias one way or another? A panel of KSM's peers would all have to be made up of Muslim extremists, no?

banyon
11-23-2009, 12:10 PM
What happens if they can't get a panel of jurists that does not have a bias one way or another? A panel of KSM's peers would all have to be made up of Muslim extremists, no?

:spock: Er, no. You don't have a right to have a trial solely by your buddies.

And I already answered the first question in the first part of the same post you were replying to.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 12:11 PM
There is no post that answers the question of the cost of that lawyer or how he was selected vs others in the pool. Nor can we get a cost estimate for the trial, onoly the security costs attributed to NYC or State of NY.

banyon
11-23-2009, 12:14 PM
There is no post that answers the question of the cost of that lawyer or how he was selected vs others in the pool. Nor can we get a cost estimate for the trial, onoly the security costs attributed to NYC or State of NY.

It is done by an appointment list of qualified attorneys. Whoever is next on the list typically gets the case.

What do you think it should cost?

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 12:20 PM
I have no idea what it should cost. Id just like to know what we are paying.

So you say they just have a list and there is no selection process other than go down the list?

KC native
11-23-2009, 12:21 PM
I have no idea what it should cost. Id just like to know what we are paying.

So you say they just have a list and there is no selection process other than go down the list?

JFC, just read the fucking link he posted. Lazy bastard

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 12:21 PM
:spock: Er, no. You don't have a right to have a trial solely by your buddies.

And I already answered the first question in the first part of the same post you were replying to.

I understood what you said, I was just pointing out that we are tried by our peers, he has none here.

What happens if the judge cannot sit a jury out of the people of NYC? Would they all have a bug up their ass about 9/11? Could they actually sell themselves as impartial?

Donger
11-23-2009, 12:24 PM
I understood what you said, I was just pointing out that we are tried by our peers, he has none here.

What happens if the judge cannot sit a jury out of the people of NYC? Would they all have a bug up their ass about 9/11? Could they actually sell themselves as impartial?

I would imagine that a large number of potential jurors will present themselves as capable of being impartial, simply to get on the jury and deliver a guilty verdict. Is there some protection for the defendant in that scenario?

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 12:26 PM
I would imagine that a large number of potential jurors will present themselves as capable of being impartial, simply to get on the jury and deliver a guilty verdict. Is there some protection for the defendant in that scenario?

Probably not, but I don't think there is planned any other verdict other than guilty. As someone else said, if the dude is acquitted the democratic party will suffer a quick and painful death considering that KSM wouldn't be getting one.

banyon
11-23-2009, 12:31 PM
I would imagine that a large number of potential jurors will present themselves as capable of being impartial, simply to get on the jury and deliver a guilty verdict. Is there some protection for the defendant in that scenario?

No, that's always a risk when you pick jurors. Several of the OJ jurors reportedly exaggerated or denied things to get in the limelight.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 12:38 PM
JFC, just read the ****ing link he posted. Lazy bastard

I did. It explains who can apply to be on said list. Nothing regarding pay or expences.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 12:38 PM
No, that's always a risk when you pick jurors. Several of the OJ jurors reportedly exaggerated or denied things to get in the limelight.

How much of a background check will they do for the prospective jurors?

dirk digler
11-23-2009, 12:39 PM
Hey now, the prosecution has the burden of proof that he is guilty. What makes you so sure that they can do that?

They could probably rest their case without any witnesses and get a conviction

Donger
11-23-2009, 12:40 PM
They could probably rest their case without any witnesses and get a conviction

Sounds like a fair trial to me.

Warrior5
11-23-2009, 12:43 PM
There is no "hung jury" until a trial is competed. If such happened, it would be retried until there was a verdict.

if people are unduly biased, the judge will strike them. If you cannot get a jury from the first panel, they will convene until they do get one.

Ah... so it's actually two separate issues.

Thanks banyon.

dirk digler
11-23-2009, 12:48 PM
Sounds like a fair trial to me.

LMAO Whatever it takes to fry their ass

banyon
11-23-2009, 12:48 PM
I have no idea what it should cost. Id just like to know what we are paying.

So you say they just have a list and there is no selection process other than go down the list?

We are paying at the rate set by the court per hour. Looks like @ $175/hr. http://www.nynd.uscourts.gov/documents/CJA_Case_Compensation_Maximums.pdf (see 6.02 A) There's no way to know what the billed hours will be until it is completed. Got it?

banyon
11-23-2009, 12:48 PM
Ah... so it's actually two separate issues.

Thanks banyon.

Yes, you got it now. :)

Donger
11-23-2009, 12:50 PM
LMAO Whatever it takes to fry their ass

So you want a fair trial as long as a guilty verdict is assured?

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 12:57 PM
We are paying at the rate set by the court per hour. Looks like @ $175/hr. http://www.nynd.uscourts.gov/documents/CJA_Case_Compensation_Maximums.pdf (see 6.02 A) There's no way to know what the billed hours will be until it is completed. Got it?


Thanks.


Why would a high end guy with Park Ave office do this for that fee?

dirk digler
11-23-2009, 12:59 PM
So you want a fair trial as long as a guilty verdict is assured?

I don't give a shit either way. If it was up to me I would put them on a boat and send them out in the middle of the ocean and have them walk the plank.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 01:01 PM
We are paying at the rate set by the court per hour. Looks like @ $175/hr. http://www.nynd.uscourts.gov/documents/CJA_Case_Compensation_Maximums.pdf (see 6.02 A) There's no way to know what the billed hours will be until it is completed. Got it?

So it would be $7,000 a week based on 40 hours a week. Compare that to the $10,000 a year a military lawyer gets plus allowances and special pays if he gets them. Two weeks worth a civilian or considerably less by doing the military tribunal.

How much does the Judge get a year, how about the prosecutor? Overhead for the courtroom, etc.

I honestly doubt the military tribunal would cost more than $10,000,000 as compared to the circus atmosphere surrounding the $100,000,000 price tag for the civil trial in NYC.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 01:01 PM
But looking through what you sent, there may be some legal hocus pocus but I dont see anything that really fits the definitions. But they do have the "we can pay more clause" so we really still have no idea what this dudes getting paid.

banyon
11-23-2009, 01:33 PM
So it would be $7,000 a week based on 40 hours a week. Compare that to the $10,000 a year a military lawyer gets plus allowances and special pays if he gets them. Two weeks worth a civilian or considerably less by doing the military tribunal.

How much does the Judge get a year, how about the prosecutor? Overhead for the courtroom, etc.

I honestly doubt the military tribunal would cost more than $10,000,000 as compared to the circus atmosphere surrounding the $100,000,000 price tag for the civil trial in NYC.

JAG attorneys do not get paid $10k a year.

banyon
11-23-2009, 01:36 PM
Thanks.


Why would a high end guy with Park Ave office do this for that fee?

Because he wanted to be on the list and has to take what he's assigned?

banyon
11-23-2009, 01:37 PM
But looking through what you sent, there may be some legal hocus pocus but I dont see anything that really fits the definitions. But they do have the "we can pay more clause" so we really still have no idea what this dudes getting paid.

I don't know how much simpler I can spell it out for you than $175 an hour.

Chief Henry
11-23-2009, 01:38 PM
This is the whole point of Obama going about it in this way. It is nothing more than a circus to slam Bush and Amaerica's foreign policy. Pathetic.

qft


Nice job Obama...:rolleyes:

blaise
11-23-2009, 01:40 PM
JAG attorneys do not get paid $10k a year.

I don't know what they make but I would guess one that's been there for a while would be getting around $100,000 a year.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 01:45 PM
JAG attorneys do not get paid $10k a year.

Show me the listing you have then. Jag officers are only officers and get the same base pay as others. If there is a special pay added to their base it has to be public knowledge, no way around it. I found the listings by searching military pay, there was nothing shown for jag's.

the $10,000 a year is for an O-6 over 30 years. Check the link I provided, the base is there for all officers through 4 star generals.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 01:46 PM
I don't know what they make but I would guess one that's been there for a while would be getting around $100,000 a year.

Not military pay according to the lists available on military .com

blaise
11-23-2009, 01:54 PM
Show me the listing you have then. Jag officers are only officers and get the same base pay as others. If there is a special pay added to their base it has to be public knowledge, no way around it. I found the listings by searching military pay, there was nothing shown for jag's.

the $10,000 a year is for an O-6 over 30 years. Check the link I provided, the base is there for all officers through 4 star generals.

I think you can be JAG and not be an enlisted military. Someone I know did an internship with Army JAG in law school and was offered a job with them. She wasn't military. The pay would have started around GS 12 level pay I think, and then you would move up based on evaluations and time.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 02:04 PM
I think you can be JAG and not be an enlisted military. Someone I know did an internship with Army JAG in law school and was offered a job with them. She wasn't military. The pay would have started around GS 12 level pay I think, and then you would move up based on evaluations and time.

If you are a civilian JAG you still don't get $175 an hour. The Civil Service pay is good but not that good. It goes to GS15, with 10 levels then to Senior Executive Service (SES) and no JAG other than maybe the senior civilian JAG would be in that category. GS15-10 pay is $127,604.00 Annually. I've worked with GS types before. One scientist had a Phd. and quite a few years experience and was not at the top end.


No JAG is enlisted, they are all officer corps.

To be clear, I researched the pay scales and there are not any special pays for lawyers listed.

blaise
11-23-2009, 02:11 PM
If you are a civilian JAG you still don't get $175 an hour. The Civil Service pay is good but not that good. It goes to GS15, with 10 levels then to Senior Executive Service (SES) and no JAG other than maybe the senior civilian JAG would be in that category. GS15-10 pay is $127,604.00 Annually. I've worked with GS types before. One scientist had a Phd. and quite a few years experience and was not at the top end.


No JAG is enlisted, they are all officer corps.

To be clear, I researched the pay scales and there are not any special pays for lawyers listed.

That's why I said they probably get around $100,000/year after a few years. I'd guess they start near 75-80,000 and then move up to the ceiling of whatever pay grade they get to.
and there's probably cost of living adjustment depending on where they're stationed.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 02:38 PM
That's why I said they probably get around $100,000/year after a few years. I'd guess they start near 75-80,000 and then move up to the ceiling of whatever pay grade they get to.
and there's probably cost of living adjustment depending on where they're stationed.


But at $175 an hour they make nearly $366,000.00 Three times what government service lawyers would make as well as an officer with 30 years of service that is a full bird colonel.

dirk digler
11-23-2009, 02:43 PM
From Army.com forum

http://www.army.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1557

Sorry, I was wrong. They start right out of law school at 0-2 pay scale which is $ 53,000 to $ 60,000 the first year and then they are promoted after the first year to $ 60,000.00 +.

blaise
11-23-2009, 02:46 PM
But at $175 an hour they make nearly $366,000.00 Three times what government service lawyers would make as well as an officer with 30 years of service that is a full bird colonel.

That's fine. I never said they get $175 an hour. I was just guessing at their salary.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 02:50 PM
That's fine. I never said they get $175 an hour. I was just guessing at their salary.

That seems to be the going rate for civilian lawyers. Big time law firms charge between $200 and $1000 an hour. We can only guess how much the lawyers for the defense will be charging.

banyon
11-23-2009, 02:51 PM
If you are a civilian JAG you still don't get $175 an hour. The Civil Service pay is good but not that good. It goes to GS15, with 10 levels then to Senior Executive Service (SES) and no JAG other than maybe the senior civilian JAG would be in that category. GS15-10 pay is $127,604.00 Annually. I've worked with GS types before. One scientist had a Phd. and quite a few years experience and was not at the top end.


No JAG is enlisted, they are all officer corps.

To be clear, I researched the pay scales and there are not any special pays for lawyers listed.

Uh, you don't get to pocket your entire hourly rate as a private attorney.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 02:59 PM
From Army.com forum

That isn't a reliable source. They didn't link to anything that gave the listing. Nothing more than something my sister heard from her best friends ex-boyfriend.

It may be right, but there was nothing to validate the amounts.

From the 2009 Pay list the O2 pay for less than 2 years is $36705.60 and an O2 can only go as high as $50,799.60.

Promotions come automatically at 2 years and then again 2 years after that. so conceiveable they could be an O4 with less than 6 years in and make $56,674.80.

The allowances might bump it up, and if they get special pay for stuff they might make more.

Ref: http://www.military.com/military/benefits/0,15465,2009-Proposed-Military-Pay,00.html

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 03:00 PM
Uh, you don't get to pocket your entire hourly rate as a private attorney.

Uh, so what. They will be paid more than the typical military lawyer with the same level of experience.

banyon
11-23-2009, 03:02 PM
Uh, so what. They will be paid more than the typical military lawyer with the same level of experience.

Yeah and uh, so what? the Guantanamo detainees already had civilian appointed attorneys to do the tribunal pursuant to my earlier link.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 03:09 PM
Yeah and uh, so what? the Guantanamo detainees already had civilian appointed attorneys to do the tribunal pursuant to my earlier link.

The argument I was working was that the difference between civilian and military lawyers was a money issue. In a truly military tribunal the lawyers would be military. The case in GTMO is more of a political game now days. The cost of bringing them to the U.S. will cost the taxpayer significantly more than to just do the tribunal there and the outcome of the case will be the same one place or the other. All that will happen is that Obama will not get the press time he wants for the trial.

My opinion is the representation would not be significantly different if using military lawyers over civilian.

banyon
11-23-2009, 03:14 PM
The argument I was working was that the difference between civilian and military lawyers was a money issue. In a truly military tribunal the lawyers would be military. The case in GTMO is more of a political game now days. The cost of bringing them to the U.S. will cost the taxpayer significantly more than to just do the tribunal there and the outcome of the case will be the same one place or the other. All that will happen is that Obama will not get the press time he wants for the trial.

My opinion is the representation would not be significantly different if using military lawyers over civilian.

Significantly? You are bitching about 100k in wages or so, correct?

Obama's press time? You know he's not prosecuting the case, right? Why would he not be able to go before the press with a tribunal?

Calcountry
11-23-2009, 03:35 PM
wait, they don't like our foreign policy? shocker.Well shit. Obama should appologise to them immediately!

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 03:40 PM
Significantly? You are bitching about 100k in wages or so, correct?

Obama's press time? You know he's not prosecuting the case, right? Why would he not be able to go before the press with a tribunal?Watch the air time he gets related to the trials.

If you feel the wages of the lawyers is the only significant difference between the tribunals and a civil case in NYC you are totally out of the realm of reality. Nothing has to be added to have the trials in GTMO. Have a civil trial at GTMO, it will still cost more than the tribunals. How much more is the question and the U.S. Taxpayer will get the bill for the whole shooting match. And the worst part of the deal is the guy has plead guilty and wanted to be put to death. Now we stand the chance of having a being responsible for up to 3,000 deaths of Americans pleading his case and standing on his soapbox of hatred for the country on prime time news.

You might feel comforted that civilians will be doing a job that is better left to the military, but I promise you that more Americans are against having the trial in the U.S. than those like you that feel it's the best thing to do.

HonestChieffan
11-23-2009, 03:53 PM
Because he wanted to be on the list and has to take what he's assigned?

I doubt that is the case. Park Ave Rent wont support a Partner being paid $175/hour.

Perhaps that is why your provided link contains this:

"WAIVING CASE COMPENSATION MAXIMUMS.
Payments in excess of CJA Compensation maximums may be made to provide fair
compensation in cases involving extended or complex representation when so certified by the
court or United States magistrate judge and approved by the chief judge of the circuit (or by an
active circuit judge to whom excess compensation approval authority has been delegated.)
In determining if an excess payment is warranted, the court or United States magistrate
judge and the chief judge of the circuit (or an active circuit judge to whom excess compensation
approval authority has been delegated) should make a threshold determination as to whether the
case is either extended or complex. If the legal or factual issues in a case are unusual, thus
requiring the expenditure of more time, skill and effort by the lawyer than would normally be
required in an average case, the case is “complex.” If more time is reasonably required for total
processing than the average case, including pre-trial and post-trial hearings, the case is
“extended.”
After establishing that a case is extended or complex, the approving judicial officer
should determine if excess payment is necessary to provide fair compensation. The following
criteria, among others, may be useful in this regard: responsibilities involved measured by the
magnitude and importance of the case; manner in which duties were performed, knowledge, skill,
efficiency, professionalism, and judgment required of and used by counsel; nature of counsel’s
practice and injury thereto; any extraordinary pressure of time or other factors under which
services were rendered; and any other circumstances relevant and material to a determination of a
fair and reasonable fee."

banyon
11-23-2009, 06:31 PM
I doubt that is the case. Park Ave Rent wont support a Partner being paid $175/hour.

Perhaps that is why your provided link contains this:

"WAIVING CASE COMPENSATION MAXIMUMS.
Payments in excess of CJA Compensation maximums may be made to provide fair
compensation in cases involving extended or complex representation when so certified by the
court or United States magistrate judge and approved by the chief judge of the circuit (or by an
active circuit judge to whom excess compensation approval authority has been delegated.)
In determining if an excess payment is warranted, the court or United States magistrate
judge and the chief judge of the circuit (or an active circuit judge to whom excess compensation
approval authority has been delegated) should make a threshold determination as to whether the
case is either extended or complex. If the legal or factual issues in a case are unusual, thus
requiring the expenditure of more time, skill and effort by the lawyer than would normally be
required in an average case, the case is “complex.” If more time is reasonably required for total
processing than the average case, including pre-trial and post-trial hearings, the case is
“extended.”
After establishing that a case is extended or complex, the approving judicial officer
should determine if excess payment is necessary to provide fair compensation. The following
criteria, among others, may be useful in this regard: responsibilities involved measured by the
magnitude and importance of the case; manner in which duties were performed, knowledge, skill,
efficiency, professionalism, and judgment required of and used by counsel; nature of counsel’s
practice and injury thereto; any extraordinary pressure of time or other factors under which
services were rendered; and any other circumstances relevant and material to a determination of a
fair and reasonable fee."

You didn't apply this section correctly. No surprise. This applies to non-capital cases which are capped (@8000$ per trial, $2500 non trial). Capital cases by definition in the section don't require this waiver because they are uncapped in the first place.

You would have known that if you had read the title of the section I already quoted "Compensation of Appointed Counsel in Capital Cases: Inapplicability of CJA Hourly Rates and Compensation Maximums".

banyon
11-23-2009, 06:33 PM
Watch the air time he gets related to the trials.

If you feel the wages of the lawyers is the only significant difference between the tribunals and a civil case in NYC you are totally out of the realm of reality. Nothing has to be added to have the trials in GTMO. Have a civil trial at GTMO, it will still cost more than the tribunals. How much more is the question and the U.S. Taxpayer will get the bill for the whole shooting match. And the worst part of the deal is the guy has plead guilty and wanted to be put to death. Now we stand the chance of having a being responsible for up to 3,000 deaths of Americans pleading his case and standing on his soapbox of hatred for the country on prime time news.

You might feel comforted that civilians will be doing a job that is better left to the military, but I promise you that more Americans are against having the trial in the U.S. than those like you that feel it's the best thing to do.

I feel that whining about a perceived wage slight is one of the stupidest and most insignificant distractions you could conjure up your faux outrage about, Thomas R. Cash.

I don't even support having this trial in the civilian arena, it's just that your criticisms are the weakest and stupidest ones available.

Norman Einstein
11-23-2009, 08:12 PM
I feel that whining about a perceived wage slight is one of the stupidest and most insignificant distractions you could conjure up your faux outrage about, Thomas R. Cash.

I don't even support having this trial in the civilian arena, it's just that your criticisms are the weakest and stupidest ones available.


Are you a teenager? You seem to have some kind of disrespect for anyone that you feel is not up to your standards. You once posted that this forum was filled with hate. Have you ever figured out that you are the person full of hate? You are one of the first to start callilng someone stupid and attacking posts made. I'm not the only one that you attack, I just think you are someone that hates to lose and when it doesn't look good for you, the asshole comes out on the board.

Give it a rest.

BucEyedPea
11-23-2009, 08:48 PM
Are you a teenager? You seem to have some kind of disrespect for anyone that you feel is not up to your standards. You once posted that this forum was filled with hate. Have you ever figured out that you are the person full of hate? You are one of the first to start callilng someone stupid and attacking posts made. I'm not the only one that you attack, I just think you are someone that hates to lose and when it doesn't look good for you, the asshole comes out on the board.

Give it a rest.

You nailed that one! Very observant.

HonestChieffan
11-24-2009, 04:57 AM
You didn't apply this section correctly. No surprise. This applies to non-capital cases which are capped (@8000$ per trial, $2500 non trial). Capital cases by definition in the section don't require this waiver because they are uncapped in the first place.

You would have known that if you had read the title of the section I already quoted "Compensation of Appointed Counsel in Capital Cases: Inapplicability of CJA Hourly Rates and Compensation Maximums".

So, if I was in error and I may have been, then if I read what you posted correctly here..."Capital cases by definition in the section don't require this waiver because they are uncapped in the first place.".....then if there is no cap in capital cases how can we believe the rate is $175/hr?

Banyon, is it possible that you don't have any idea what the guy is getting paid?

HonestChieffan
11-24-2009, 04:59 AM
Here is this slezeball on O'Rielly last night. Proud if they get off. Isn't that just special?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VNOYzYNoOw0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VNOYzYNoOw0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>