Courtroom Drama - update

For engaging and compelling, there's nothing like courtroom drama for me – in reports, books, movies, plays, and television, fiction and non-fiction (including embellished reconstructions), criminal and tort, dramatic and comedic – except for when I was in a jury box and on a witness stand (both are stressful) and I didn't watch one second of the OJ trial and have avoided the all the “Judge Judy” type TV fare.

(An aside on the death of Chadwick Boseman, he was excellent in “Marshall.” Perhaps now more people will bother to see it. He was also very good in “42.”)

This leads to Craig Murray's reports on Julian Assange's extradition hearing. Day6 is a bit of a slog to read because it was procedural. However, he exposes the massive limitations imposed on what should be a public hearing. Of equal, if not more importance, he exposes Magistrate Baraitser as the corrupt and rather incompetent judge that she is. She's almost a parody of a corrupt judge but without any comedic value.

Day 7 is when the action begins. The first witness for the defence, Clive Stafford Smith, is like a breath of fresh air. Wouldn't be surprising for those familiar with Stafford Smith:

Founder of Reprieve, one of the few worthwhile non-profit organisations around these days. From Clive Stafford Smith's resume

In total, Clive has represented over 300 prisoners facing the death penalty in the southern United States. While he only took on the cases of those who could not afford a lawyer – he has never been paid by a client – and always the most despised, he prevented the death penalty in all but six cases (a 98% “victory” rate). Few lawyers ever take a case to the US Supreme Court – Clive has taken five, and every one of these people prevailed.

To date, Clive has helped secure the release of 69 prisoners from Guantánamo Bay (including every British prisoner), and still acts for 15 more. This is a phenomenal number – far more than any other lawyer or law firm – and demonstrates Clive’s peerless ability in his field. More recently, Clive has turned a strategic eye to other secret detention sites, including Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan and the British island of Diego Garcia.
...

From Craig Murray:

…Mr Stafford Smith’s 30 minutes was now up. You can read his full statement here. There could not have been a clearer example from the first witness of why so much time yesterday was taken up with trying to block the evidence of defence witnesses from being heard. Stafford Smith’s evidence was breathtaking stuff and clearly illustrated the purpose of the time guillotine on defence evidence. This is not material governments wish to be widely aired.

The prosecutor, James Lewis QC, is not limited to thirty minutes. He in fact droned on for most of two hours during his cross of the second defence witness, Professor Mark Feldstein.

From the MSM reports on Feldstein's testimony, one wouldn't know that he was an excellent witness. Lewis badgered Feldstein to make irrelevant points and threw in some “gotchas” that Feldstein couldn't have known. Probably played well with the MSM and magistrate, but from my experience as a badgered witness, jurors can see through this, not that there is a jury for this hearing. (Repulsive was Lewis approvingly quoting from Lying Luke Harding.)

The drama yesterday was real. And fascinating. The decision is probably canned in Baraitser's laptop (and written by a clerk). Still read Murray's reports or at least read Day 7.

Update

Day 8 is now up. Starts out with editorial comments:

The great question after yesterday’s hearing was whether prosecution counsel James Lewis QC would continue to charge at defence witnesses like a deranged berserker (spoiler – he would), and more importantly, why?

QC’s representing governments usually seek to radiate calm control, and treat defence arguments as almost beneath their notice, certainly as no conceivable threat to the majestic thinking of the state. Lewis instead resembled a starving terrier kept away from a prime sausage by a steel fence whose manufacture and appearance was far beyond his comprehension.

Share
up
17 users have voted.

Comments

I am no slouch at creating it.
I got the latest on this travesty of justice from Consortium News, who has remote in court access. Seems the defense attorney witness tore a section of the PTB prosecutor's ass off.
The world is watching.

up
11 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

@on the cusp too much for me. Would have to give up one of the two.

Thanks for the reminder that I also wanted to read the Consortium report. Murray's are long; so, that's how I spent my time.

up
8 users have voted.

@Marie Either or. Both sources are above reproach.

up
9 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

@on the cusp Murray put more flesh on the bones. Enough that I could 'see' and hear Smith and Feldstein on a witness stand. CN's coverage was serviceable.

Murray hasn't yet submitted Day 3 (or 8), but CN has and did a much better job in reporting on Trevor Timm's testimony. Must have been impressive to watch, particularly on cross. Appreciated this interpretation:

Lewis was a shrunken man. All his bluster from the previous day had melted. He seemed to take it out on Magistrate Vanessa Baraitser in an argument over the time limit she imposed on him–one hour, when she gave the defense only 30 minutes.

Like a spoiled brat whining about only getting twice as much as the other kids.

Neglected to mention in my essay that I was impressed by how much the defence counsel and first two witnesses were able to cover in thirty minutes.

Also, from Murray's reports I got how weak the government's case is. Of course, if it were strong Lewis wouldn't be reduced to arguing over minutia, making false claims, and resorting to crap that Luke Harding has written. (In his very polite and understated manner Aaron Mate destroyed Harding. Would love to see someone like Smith go head to head with Harding.)

up
9 users have voted.

@Marie @Marie the two sources.
I have little time for a blow by blow, so just took it on faith that Consortium News truncated it appropriately.
Thanks for bringing your source to our attention.

up
9 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

Pluto's Republic's picture

@on the cusp
@Marie

Gives me an idea for a dramatic series concept.

up
7 users have voted.

____________________

The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato

@Pluto's Republic And we're not already having fun?

Let me know if I can be of any help with your concept. Any chance you can switch it up to a comedy?

up
9 users have voted.
usefewersyllables's picture

@Pluto's Republic

My dear wife, whom I love very much, has something of a tv addiction- to anything involving lawyers. Or lawyers and cops. Or lawyers, cops, and mobsters. Or cops and lawyers. Or......

We are currently rewatching all 157 episodes of "The Good Wife" for the 6th or 7th time, after rewatching every episode of Ally McBeal and Boston Legal and Blue Bloods and Perry Mason and *please dear God make it stop*. And now apparently there's a new Christine Baranski show that is yet more Good Wife.

Kill me now.

I still have PTSD from my last jury duty (internet sexual exploitation of a child, resulting in a conviction). If you're going to pitch a new legal procedural, just know that the plot twists have all been done already. And if the trailer features the words "Ripped from the headlines!", there are a lot of people out here who have had more than enough of the headlines, thanks very much. I guess that I'm simply not a fan of legal procedurals. All I can say is that they provide me a reason to leave the room...

Humor aside, I hope that Assange is allowed any chance at all at a fair trial. He won't be, and his head will still be on a US pike sometime soon, but I still allow myself some hope.

up
8 users have voted.

Twice bitten, permanently shy.

@usefewersyllables on lawyer entertainment overload.
I also agree that these procedural glitches in the Assange case are ridiculous. No matter how long they delay, the government's case does not get any better.
As for your jury duty, I have seen certain jurors looking at child porn with "interest", as it were.
Be glad you were spared pictures of murder victims. Those are the pictures that remain in your head forever.

up
5 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

usefewersyllables's picture

@on the cusp

deal with those in this trial, and I certainly don't envy you having to deal with them as a routine matter. On the other hand, I have had the experience of recovering the remains of some recently (and a couple of not particularly recently) deceased persons back in the time I spent in the volunteer fire service as a younger man. There's nothing like pulling a body out of a burned building, a motorcyclist out of a tree, or a floater out of a lake to make you reconsider your possible career choices.

With respect to the TV programming, at least I can occasionally retaliate in kind: when there's just been too much courtroom drama I can dust off "The President's Analyst", "Plan 9 from Outer Space", or one of the other classic unwatchable feature films. This is why Gawd gave us DVDs, and the bad intentions to use them...

up
6 users have voted.

Twice bitten, permanently shy.

snoopydawg's picture

@usefewersyllables

she would enjoy Revenge even though it isn't about law and courts. Christine Baranski's show went off the rails in the last season for some reason. I don't know if we were told why they sold their practice. I just remember the 1st half of the season was too political because they hated Trump and it's all through the script.

My 2 favorite British shows are Line of Duty and Silent Witness. Boy are crime dramas. LoD is from inside a cop house, but what I love about it is that when cops go to talk to someone or arrest them most of the times they are unarmed. They have to call in to get an armed unit to respond. SW is from inside the medical examiner's offices. Both have incredible writers and LoD will keep you hanging on knowing who the bad guy actually is. It takes until the last episode for them to spring the name on you and you go, "wow WTF just happened?"

up
3 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

@usefewersyllables From your list, I wouldn't qualify as an addict because other than Perry Mason (when I was a kid) and a couple of episodes of Boston Legal, I haven't seen any of those shows. OTOH, do any of them fit within the courtroom drama genre? Perry Mason was more murder mystery with a courtroom used as the setting for the reveal.

Don't know where Pluto's idea thoughts were running, but only on the cusp is an attorney.

up
5 users have voted.
Lookout's picture

...while a lawyer who appeared in court is tested for Covid-19.
https://consortiumnews.com/2020/09/10/assange-hearing-day-four-hearing-i...

Journalism on trial. Whatta sham!

Edit to add:
Today's witness was the fellow who wrote this piece...
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/julian-assange-wikileaks-extradite-...

The Department of Justice claims the First Amendment is not implicated because Assange was not a journalist. But the First Amendment does not distinguish who is and who is not a journalist. Journalists are not licensed by the government, nor should they be. Governments that want to restrict free speech delegitimize the publishers of information (as “enemies of the people”, in some cases) by limiting what is journalism and putting those who publish it on the outside of the definition. Calling Assange a non-journalist is a slippery slope to state-controlled media.

up
9 users have voted.

“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

snoopydawg's picture

He forced us in the West to look in the mirror. He exposed the official truth-tellers in the media as collaborators: those I would call Vichy journalists. None of these imposters believed Assange when he warned that his life was in danger: that the “sex scandal” in Sweden was a set up and an American hellhole was the ultimate destination. And he was right, and repeatedly right.

The extradition hearing in London this week is the final act of an Anglo-American campaign to bury Julian Assange. It is not due process. It is due revenge. The American indictment is clearly rigged, a demonstrable sham. So far, the hearings have been reminiscent of their Stalinist equivalents during the Cold War.

Today, the land that gave us Magna Carta, Great Britain, is distinguished by the abandonment of its own sovereignty in allowing a malign foreign power to manipulate justice and by the vicious psychological torture of Julian – a form of torture, as Nils Melzer, the UN expert has pointed out, that was refined by the Nazis because it was most effective in breaking its victims

Pilger goes on to explain what he saw when he visited Assange in the Gitmo of the UK. worth a full read.

Do we have a right to know when murder is done in our names? Do we have a right to know when our country bombs another in our name?

up
8 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

From Ian:

It is becoming obvious how desperately flailing the prosecution is, in terms of its case and its arguments. Rogers and Timm made Lewis look like the unprincipled lapdog that he is, not in command of his brief, his shallow bag of tricks exposed as a trite and dishonest repetition of Kromberg and unsupported allegations and hearsay. Their attempts to deny what is in their own indictment is astonishing in its complacency and its dishonesty, and explains clearly why they were so desperate to limit public scrutiny and discussion of what they are doing. The case looks more and more shambolic, incoherent and plainly so selective in its arguments, that only the briefest exposure to daylight destroys any credibility or justifiability. They have had to manufacture the most convoluted of arguments and charges, in order to avoid the overwhelming case for the defence, in terms of the first amendment, a political trial and the role of journalism, that they are making the law look absurd, ridiculous and afraid of public comment.

As others, i don’t believe Baraitser, on all the evidence, will care a jot about the arguments placed in front of her, and has already decided to grant the request, but it is fascinating how tawdry, unprincipled and malevolent they are. How the legal profession can support people like this, who undermine everything about their supposed standards and independence, their basic competence and commitment to justice, is hard to comprehend. The answer seems to be that they look away. How Baraitser can sleep at night I don’t know, but you would have to be made of stone to ignore what is being laid out in front of you.

Trump’s corruption, vindictiveness, ignorance and attempts to gerrymander the law are jawdropping, even by any past low standards. That the British allow themselves to be dragged into his moral degradation is a stain on all the institutions in this country which enable and abet him.

However, I don't think we should give the Obama DOJ a pass as they kept the GJ open for years and weren't uninvolved in Assange being effectively locked up since 2011.

up
5 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@Marie

in shame, but every politician there should too. They are witnessing the US tearing down their justice system and what Great Britain stood for. And where are the people there who knows what is happening to Assange? If they know then how can they stay silent?

up
5 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

@snoopydawg The people, media, and politicians were pleased to take down Corbyn with a total lie. A lie that he was anti-Semitic and those same people don't even care about most forms of racism, including anti-Semitism. They don't have a constitution. Are obsessed with class. Have hardly ever had a British monarch and royal family, but nevertheless take great pride in them regardless of how pathetic they are.

up
5 users have voted.