|
Excerpts from pages 132-136
America’s sense of security was seriously shaken on
September 11, 2001, when terrorists, using three
hijacked commercial airliners as flying bombs, attacked
New York City’s World Trade Center and the Pentagon in
Washington, D.C. The reality of the attack became even
more numbing when CNN told the world, in early December,
that a young American had been captured among Taliban
and al Qaeda fighters in the ensuing armed conflict in
Afghanistan.
When John Philip Walker Lindh’s bedraggled figure began
to appear on television monitors all over the country,
it was to the horror of a people who had just come to
sense that, despite all their divisiveness, they were
truly a society united by common ideals and facing a
common foe. And Lindh, in the minds of most Americans,
was betraying his country at the very time when
patriotism was most needed. It did not seem unjustified
when the Washington Post headline blared “Walker
Charged with Treason,” and, in slightly smaller print,
noted “He Could Be Sentenced to Life for Fighting
Alongside Taliban.”
It was also inevitable that Lindh quickly became nearly
as hated in the United States as Osama bin Laden, and
many were happy to oblige his apparent renunciation of
American citizenship. Legally, however, the idea that he
was anything other than an American and thus potentially
not subject to American justice, on American soil, was
equally distasteful. Thus, while other Taliban fighters
who may have participated in the reign of terror against
America would face military tribunals outside the United
States, Lindh, the so-called “American Taliban,” would
have a chance to exercise his privilege as an American
citizen: his right to be tried in an American court,
with the aid of counsel and the right to remain silent.
The case at first seemed simple enough. Lindh was
charged with conspiracy to kill nationals of the United
States overseas, providing material support and
resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations,
including al Qaeda, and engaging in prohibited
transactions with the Taliban. As evidence the
prosecution would have Lindh’s own confession, given
freely to the FBI after he had been informed of his
Miranda rights, including his right to speak to
counsel. Furthermore, he had acknowledged that he
understood each of his rights and he had chosen to waive
them, both verbally and in a signed document. As
Attorney General John Ashcroft told the nation on
January 15, 2002, “The charges filed against Walker are
based on voluntary statements made by Walker himself.”
....
On July 15, 2002, USA Today reported, “The
biggest battle in United States of America vs. John
Walker Lindh begins today as defense attorneys and
prosecutors face off over using the American Taliban
fighter’s incriminating statements to the military,
media, and FBI against him.”
The trial - the arguments on both sides to determine
just how Miranda should apply in this
extraordinary situation - would have been interesting,
to say the least. On July 15, 2002, however, Lindh
himself rendered moot his pending motion to suppress his
confessions and in so doing rendered his Miranda
challenge unnecessary as well: He pled guilty to reduced
charges in exchange for a stipulated prison term, and
Judge Ellis accepted the plea and signed an appropriate
order to that effect.
|
