Posted on 08/13/2007 7:02:36 PM PDT by SandRat
TUCSON — Two priests contend their attempt to enter Fort Huachuca in November is a protected right because they were not trespassing but protesting the alleged teaching of torture on the post.
However, an Army prosecutor states the case is about the illegal entry of Franciscan Louis Vitale and Jesuit Steve Kelly and not the alleged teaching of torture, which Capt. Evan Seamone, and leaders of the Intelligence Center, have constantly said is neither done nor condoned.
The two Catholic priests and their attorney William Quigley are attempting to change the trespass case into a human rights issue with Vitale and Kelly becoming, in effect, prosecutors, and the government, specifically the operations at the Intelligence Center, as the defendant.
The priests, their attorney and their supporters are trying to turn the legal tables in a Tucson federal courthouse.
Today a pretrial hearing will be held in federal magistrate Judge Héctor Estrada’s courtroom beginning at 9 a.m. where he will listen to arguments from both sides. The judge has set aside two days for the hearing.
On June 6, there was a heated exchanged between the judge and Kelly over whether or not the priests would be sworn in then be questioned about the Jesuit’s desire to defend himself.
After a short series of back and forth between the two, the judge would not allow Kelly to defend himself which led the priest to say he wanted Quigley to be his attorney, which Estrada finally agreed to after determining there would be no conflict of interest since Quigley already was Vitale’s lawyer.
During the June hearing, both priests declined to rise when the judge entered and left the courtroom, which many in the gallery considered to be disrespectful.
Both priests have previous convictions for trespassing and have spent time in federal prisons for their various protests at military and nuclear facilities.
However, in the current case, the defense contends the priests were illegally charged with trespass when the two men attempted to deliver a letter on Nov. 19 to Maj. Gen. Barbara Fast, then the commander of the Intelligence Center.
Vitale and Kelly took part in a protest outside the fort’s Main Gate, an event held the past few years as part of a larger annual one outside the gates of Fort Benning Ga., the location of the former School of the Americas. Founded in 1946 by the U.S. in Panama and moved to Fort Benning in the 1980s, since 2001 it has been called the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation.
Fort Benning is the location where protesters claim torture was taught to Central and South American military members. The connection to Fort Huachuca is the Intelligence Center, where interrogation procedures are taught and which local protesters believe is the incubator for such courses at places like Fort Benning.
Officials at the Arizona post have opened the training to local, state, national and international media, as well as congressional and human rights investigators.
In a motion, Quigley, of the Loyola University New Orleans College of Law, seeks dismissal of the trespassing charges against his two clients. Both men were released on their own recognizance after being charged in November.
The reasons for the dismissal request, according to the motion, includes:
* Torture is illegal under U.S. and international law.
* Despite its illegality, the U.S. has an extensive history of use of torture in interrogations and intelligence gathering before Sept. 11, 2001.
* After Sept. 11, 2001, the U.S. has tried politically to redefine torture to allow torture in interrogations and intelligence gathering.
* After Sept., 11, 2001, the U.S. has tried politically to redefine who are prisoners of war to allow the use of torture in interrogations and intelligence gathering.
* After Sept. 11, 2001, the U.S. has used torture in interrogations and intelligence gathering at Guantanamo, Afghanistan and Iraq.
* Legal doctrines protect non-violent protests against the illegal use of torture and this prosecution should be dismissed.
Previously, Quigley said it was part of the defense strategy to put the government on trial, and with the two priests being charged illegally for trespassing, in his view, the opportunity to exists “to turn the tables.”
In a written response to Quigley’s motion, Seamone, a special assistant U.S. attorney in this matter who is working with U.S. Attorney Daniel G. Knauss, is seeking to have the defense’s motion denied.
Post leaders have a right to deny entry to anyone on to fort property and that was done in the case of the two priests, the prosecution states.
Additionally, the defense’s view that the action of the Military Police in enforcing identification verification “may have interfered with the defendants’ First Amendment rights,” is without merit.
The two priests refused an order to stop as they continued to walk on military property and were warned that if they did not, they would be arrested for trespassing, Seamone’s response to the defense motion states.
The response cites numerous federal cases in which courts have sided with the military in who may or may not be allowed access to a military installation.
As for trying to make a connection of interrogator training on the post and alleged torture committed, Seamone said the defense’s arguments “boils down to the position that some persons who may have attended training at Fort Huachuca subsequently went on to commit atrocities while deployed with units in Guantanamo Bay (Cuba), Iraq and Afghanistan.”
There is no proof of such actions related to students receiving “interrogation training at Fort Huachuca on Nov. 19, 2006, the date of the defendants’ criminal acts,” Seamone’s response states.
As part of background material, the Army prosecutor, and special U.S. attorney, provided portions of Field Manual 2-22.3, Human Intelligence Collector Operations, outlining the techniques allowed. The manual is unclassified.
It is expected Seamone will call some post personnel involved in training soldiers to become interrogators, as well as others familiar with the two priests to testify in the case.
Herald/Review senior reporter Bill Hess can be reached at 515-4615 or by e-mail at bill.hess@svherald.com.
They seriously think that is going to fly?
They seriously think that is going to fly?
dee-dee-dee eee-Yup.
They are nuts
ping
Jesuits...that explains everything. Thank God for Opus Dei.
I was told, though cannot personally confirm, that Fidel Castro was educated by Jesuits. Though he later left the faith of his birth, it is believed he patterned the personnel structure of his military and later his government of Cuba on the Jesuit model. I am not blaming Jesuits for Castro, but I am noting what an knowledgeable anti-castro (but not anti-Catholic) Cuban contends.
The Church of Rome has issued a stand on these LT’s(Liberation Theologists). Ex-communicate them and be done with it.
Yep, that’s right...they taught my hubby to be an animal at Ft Huachuca...he’s a raging blood thirsty interrogator, with torture on his mind constantly, not fit to have a family and associate with common society. It is just like it is in the movies I tell ya!
/sarc
2 priests that recognize nor respect no authority but their own. Happily, the tide is turning.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.