[2644] in peace2
Amer's Trial - continued to Sept 25, 2003
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Aimee L Smith)
Thu Jul 31 17:08:10 2003
Message-Id: <200307312102.h6VL2xjk017630@m12-182-24.mit.edu>
To: alsmith@mit.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:02:59 -0400
From: Aimee L Smith <alsmith@MIT.EDU>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Update on Amer's trial below - and *thank you* so much to all who came, wrote,
phoned or told others about the case - it is your sense of justice and
solidarity that inspires others to struggle and hope. The trial is continued
Sept. 25, 2003, so let's be sure to keep the pressure on.
In hope,
Aimee
This email has been bcc'd to the following lists, please fwd to your lists
as appropriate.
peace-announce, peace-women, greens-announce, aclu, anti-hate, paw-ac, msa-ec,
thistle, nowar-announce, dmse-nowar, mitai-exec
WORKING CLASS PUERTO RICAN WOMAN STANDS UP TO THE U.S. GOVERNMENT
U.S. Government Attempts to Railroad Palestinian Activist
No Evidence Supporting Its Claims, Government Drags Its Feet and Continues
Attack on Palestinian Activist
With hundreds of demonstrators outside and the hallway leading to the
court room packed with supporters, an INS Judge began the removal hearing of
Palestinian activist Amer Jubran on Thursday, July 24th.
The INS prosecutor Rick Neville appeared 10 minutes late and continued to
employ delaying tactics to insure that the hearing was not concluded that
afternoon. The INS Judge allowed endless questioning of Amer's ex-wife by the
prosecution even though the judge found many of the questions were not
relevant and would probably not have any bearing on the sole question of
whether Amer's previous marriage was valid. Taking the position that "we'll
see where this leads" and "allowing both sides to develop their case", the
Judge's refusal to conduct the hearing in a timely and orderly fashion allowed
the prosecutor to ask not only embarrassing questions of Amer's ex-wife, but
also questions that were solely of a political nature: what were Amer's
political views, what political discussions did Amer have with his ex-in-laws,
did Amer ever leave the country during your marriage. The prosecution merely
withdrew the most outrageous questions when Amer's attorney objected.
Similarly egregious, the prosecution presented to the Judge a report filed
by an FBI agent after questioning of Amer's ex last November. Neither a copy
of this report nor its contents had been previously revealed to Nelson Brill,
Amer's attorney, prior to July 24th even though he had formally requested
copies of all reports. Moreover, the Judge had required each side to submit
witness lists and all evidence/exhibits to the court no later than June 24,
2003. Again, the Judge failed to apply his own rules and allowed the late
submission of the report to the potential detriment of Amer's ability to
defend against false accusations.
Moreover, the Judge did not fairly implement his declaration of wanting
to give both sides ample leeway to develop their cases. Rather, the Judge cut
short Amer's counsel questions regarding INS/FBI harassment of other family
members, cautioned counsel to be very careful before lodging charges of
intimidation and obstruction of justice against the U.S. government and opened
the hearing declaring that no one in "this" country should be afraid to come
to court to testify.
One conclusion to be reached from the day's hearing is that the "fist
inside the velvet glove" of the facade of democracy and due process in this
country appeared in the form of a kindly, soft-spoken, gray haired judge.
Although a sharp conclusion, it is supported by the fact that the Judge was
aware and stated in court that if the hearing did not conclude that afternoon
his next available date for the rest of the hearing might not be until
September of 2004! The insensitivity of the Judge to the pressures and
limitations the pendency of this case puts upon Amer, his family and friends
was startling. To our great relief, as of this writing, the Court has
continued Amer's hearing until Thursday, September 25th, 2003. This still is
too long of a delay, but is better than waiting 14 months.
The most encouraging aspect of Thursday's hearing was the courageous
appearance of Amer's ex-wife. Defying FBI/INS very recent intimidation of her
sisters and parents, putting aside her family's fearful requests that she not
appear, she not only appeared in court but withstood two plus hours of
cross-examination by the INS attorney. The dignity and composure of this
working class Puerto Rican woman directly in the face of the U.S. government
was truly inspirational. She never wavered from the truth that she and Amer
married out of love and divorced due to financial pressures that face so many
young couples in this heartless capitalist system.
To give the Judge credit, he also concluded that Amer's ex-wife was a good
and credible witness. The Judge related to Amer's ex-wife's financial
situation when he cutoff part of the prosecution's questions regarding her
financial status and remarked that "There are people who just don't have
telephones." The Judge also stated that he had heard cases like this before
and a witness' inability to recall details from five years earlier did not
necessarily concern him. He also noted that it was not unusual for couples to
mistake a marriage license for a marriage certificate. At the conclusion of
the day the Judge even invited Amer into his chambers for an off the record
discussion with the attorneys. The Judge's unexpected show of respect for
Amer took the prosecution by surprise and apparently made them quite
uncomfortable. The Judge suggested that he had heard enough and that he was
prepared to rule that Amer's marriage was valid and to dismiss the charge. It
was the prosecution that insisted upon additional hearing time and continued
political harassment of Amer.
Unfortunately this case is not unique. Courts are often incredibly
insensitive to the impact a court proceeding has of the lives of people in
front of them. Court are more often than not more than generous to the
Government's abuse of the court system and the system's own rules. Attorneys
often resort to employing delay tactics in their court strategy. "Justice
delayed is justice denied" is not only an admonition but also often the game
plan.
However, the most significant "game plan" employed by the U.S. government
is to attempt to silence dissent and intimidate those who dare to speak out
for Palestine and speak out against injustice. The government's attack on
Arab and Muslims is an absolute ploy to divert attention away from the real
"trained killers" within the ranks of the U.S. ruling class, its client/puppet
states and its paid mercenaries. The more effective the voice of dissent,
the more relentless the government's attack.
Amer is a strong, clear voice for justice. Whether we are in the chorus,
singing a duet, studying the sheet music or sitting back and enjoying the
song, the music of resistance continues and will not be silenced. Long live
the Intifada!
For another article on the court the hearing:
Report on the July 24 Deportation Hearing of Palestinian Activist Amer Jubran
By Les Blough, Editor, Axis of Logic
http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_908.shtml
For more information from the Amer Jubran Defense Committee and for upcoming
actions: http://amerjubrandefense.org/
New England Committee to Defend Palestine
http://onepalestine.org/
