Can This Be A Fair Process? (Send Me Names Of Millionaires)

CNN.com - U.S. soldier successfully sues al Qaeda suspect - Feb 19, 2006

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (AP) -- A soldier wounded in Afghanistan and the widow of his slain comrade were awarded a $102.6 million judgment from the estate of a suspected al Qaeda financier. U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell said the lawsuit may be the first filed by an American soldier against terrorists under the Patriot Act.

But Sgt. Layne Morris, of West Jordan, and the family of medic Christopher Speer, could have a difficult time collecting their award, because the assets of the suspected financier are unknown. Other soldiers have difficulty identifying their attackers, making it difficult to hold individuals responsible.

Okay folks, let's all cheer for Judge Cassell for his astute decision and congress for putting this provision in the USA Patriot Act. Okay, is the cheer over?

Let us be realistic. This is essential an asinine case. The defendant of the case was tried in absentia. Then we are trying the father for the sins of the son, which goes against the very principles of our laws. I am not saying that the father of this boy isn't guilty of financing various attacks, I am saying that it is a great stretch of logic and a breach of long-established principles of law to make this adjudication without first demonstrating a direct link between the father's actions and the son's action. While many of the details of this case were not included in the article, it is clear that the case was handled rather expdeitiously, otherwise a case of this type would have been widely reported in the MSM.

Ask yourself if we want to abandon the principle of allowing a defendant--even one accused of heinous actions and under civil law--to have their day in court. If we do, then send me your name and I will file suit against you, making outrageous claims against you, seeking millions of dollars in damages, and have you tried without you being able to properly defend yourself. Of course, when you send me the e-mail, please indicate whether or not you have millions of dollars or assets worth that amount so that I won't waste the court's time with suing those that do not have that kind of wealth.

Further, if the accused in this case is acting as the director or executive of a charity, US law would recognize that the said charity is a corporation and there would be certain protections provided to the directors and executives of the corporation unless DIRECT CAUSE and CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE could be proven.

I am going to try to find the court transcipt for this case online. If anyone reading this post can find it, please drop a comment with the reference. It just doesn't seem quite right in terms of principle and law.

I am no fan of the bastards that finance the criminal acts of terrorists, but I am also no fan of abandoning the first principles of justice and liberty that our nation is founded on.