Court rules CIA is above the law

[Texashiker]

Court is not going to take action against the CIA for destroying evidence that the courts had ordered be preserved.

http://www.corbettreport.com/courts-rule-us-government-above-the-law/

In other words, the CIA committed crimes against humanity, and was allowed to destroy the evidence.

 

[blackangst1]

Wow. Frightening.

 

[FDF12389]

Wow. Just wow.

 

[Lithium381]

wtf!

 

[Atreus21]

This is um...disconcerting.

 

[al981]

business as usual. see sig.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.

 

[KGB]

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.

I'm not surprised that you're surprised.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

u mad bro? cry more. go protest with the other commie hippies.

 

[woolfe9999]

I'm not surprised. I recall the controversy over the destroyed tapes from media reports years ago.

The laws will need to change to make these kinds of things easier to prosecute. In this case there was too much confusion over who in the agency knew about the court orders and/or the existence of the tapes. Doubtless there was wrongdoing here, probably criminal wrongdoing, but prosecution was difficult.

It should be a crime for the agency to destroy any of its case related documents for a period of x years. That would simplify the issue, make documents destruction a lot less likely, and easier to prosecute where it does occur.

 

[guyver01]

IIRC, this was a "Freedom of Information Act" request...

it's not like they destroyed evidence in a case.

 

[woolfe9999]

IIRC, this was a "Freedom of Information Act" request...

it's not like they destroyed evidence in a case.

It was also a court order made purusant to the FOIA request. Actually several.

 

[palehorse]

It should be a crime for the agency to destroy any of its case related documents for a period of x years.

Well, the good news is that the CIA isn't normally in the business of building "cases;" so, any such law should/would have little or no effect on their ability to collect the intelligence necessary to defend our national interests and protect our people.

Hopefully, they're smart enough to simply stop filming their activities... problem solved.

 

[woolfe9999]

Well, the good news is that the CIA isn't normally in the business of building "cases;" so, any such law should/would have little or no effect on their ability to collect the intelligence necessary to defend our national interests and protect our people.

Hopefully, they're smart enough to simply stop filming their activities... problem solved.

What I meant by case related is relating to actual field work rather than just administrative stuff like employee vacation schedules.

I fail to see how precluding them from destroying such documents would cause them a problem so long as they are operating within the law.

 

[Thump553]

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.

Actually I'm very surprised. It's every lawyer's nightmare to face a judge in that situation, usually the hammer falls very hard.

 

[woolfe9999]

Actually I'm very surprised. It's every lawyer's nightmare to face a judge in that situation, usually the hammer falls very hard.

The CIA was ordered to pay the plaintiffs' attorney's fees.

Here is the judge's ruling which makes for some interesting reading:

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/10/cianocontempt.pdf

 

[JTsyo]

Was it actively destroyed to prevent being seen in court or was it a case of tapes usually are destroyed after so many years and it didn't make it down the line that these tapes shouldn't be?

 

[PrinceofWands]

~revolution calling, revolution calling...

Kill every government official and CIA employee. Leave their bodies on display as a warning to future generations about secrecy and authoritarianism. Problem solved.

Curb what I hope is your rhetoric, and please do not post in this manner again here.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[woolfe9999]

Was it actively destroyed to prevent being seen in court or was it a case of tapes usually are destroyed after so many years and it didn't make it down the line that these tapes shouldn't be?

Neither. The tapes were kept in a field office in Thailand where the interrogations had taken place. After the CIA's treatment of detainees started to come under media scrutiny, some people in the field office decided to destroy the tapes to avoid bad publicity. The tapes apparently depict 88 incidents of water boarding, some more severe than even what the Bush DoJ said was legal.

The trouble here is that it can't be established that the people in the field knew about the court orders, or that people who knew of the court orders authorizaed the destruction of the tapes. There is an e-mail from the CIA legal counsel a day after the destruction that shows him being outraged that it had happened without consulting him. It's distinctly possible that someone with knowledge of the order had advance knowledge of the intent to destroy the tapes. However, it isn't possible to prove it one way or the other.

- wolf

 

[shortylickens]

This is hardly a surprise but its nice to see the government openly state it, as opposed to bullshitting us like they've done for years.

 

[guyver01]

~revolution calling, revolution calling...

Kill every government official and CIA employee. Leave their bodies on display as a warning to future generations about secrecy and authoritarianism. Problem solved.

So... this is what Batshit insane looks like?

 

[palehorse]

So... this is what Batshit insane looks like?

Yes, it is. He probably posted that wonderful diatribe from the infield of OWS using the smartphone and data plan his parents bought for him...

 

[Texashiker]

~revolution calling, revolution calling...

Kill every government official and CIA employee. Leave their bodies on display as a warning to future generations about secrecy and authoritarianism. Problem solved.

You should be a little more careful of what you post.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I fail to see how precluding them from destroying such documents would cause them a problem so long as they are operating within the law.

I believe it was illegal for these tapes to be destroyed. Certainly there seems to be no Constitutional grounds which would allow them to ignore a court order.

The Obama administration argued that there should not be any penalty for doing so and the judge agreed. One can get away illegal acts if those who enforce the law refuse to do so.

 

[Moonbeam]

You should be a little more careful of what you post.

You should quote him so if he decides to be more careful and edit, he can't. So sweet of you.