Showing posts with label Charles Taylor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charles Taylor. Show all posts

Friday, January 09, 2009

Chuckie Taylor sentenced

The government was asking for 147 years. The over-under was 100 years. So if you took the under, call your bookie -- he was sentenced to 97 years.... With good time, that's about 82 years.

Here's Jay Weaver's coverage.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Chuckie Taylor case to jury

Here's the AP account of closing arguments:

''The defendant acted with specific intent to cause severe pain and suffering,'' [Karen] Rochlin told the jury.
Emmanuel's attorney said some of the victims who testified were opponents of the ex-president's government who might have been motivated by a political vendetta. Others, he suggested, would say anything to escape Liberia.
''They all have a strong motive to get out of West Africa, to better the lives of their families and themselves,'' public defender Miguel Caridad said. ``My client has not been proven guilty of anything.''

Saturday, October 18, 2008

"Penis"

Big news to report -- according to accounts out of Judge Altonaga's courtroom, there is a new world record: the word "penis" has been used more times in the Chuckie Taylor trial than in any other criminal trial in American history.

If you haven't seen the Rolling Stone article on the case, you can read it here.

Our prior coverage here.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Chuckie Taylor case opens

The DOJ lawyer, Chris Graveline, spoke about the "Demon Forces", a unit that tortured people, including cutting a man's penis with a knife and dumping him in a pit.

Assistant Federal Defender John Wylie said if the case were a newspaper headline, it would read "Desperate and disgruntled Africans accuse American to escape wartorn Liberia".

Should be a very interesting trial. I will post media coverage shortly.

Monday, December 17, 2007

Defenders go to Liberia

Curt Anderson has this interesting story about the difficulties in investigating the Chuckie Taylor case -- the witnesses are scattered throughout Africa. Such problems raise the question about whether this sort of offense ought to be prosecuted in the United States. Here's the lead:

Witnesses are difficult or impossible to find, some moving to remote African villages accessible only by muddy roads rarely patrolled by police. Many who survived Liberia's bloody civil war and may have seen acts of torture are reluctant to talk to anyone about what happened, let alone a defense lawyer for the notorious son of former Liberian President Charles Taylor.
Then there are the language and cultural barriers. These and other problems have forced a delay until spring in the trial in Miami federal court of Taylor's son Charles McArthur Emmanuel or Chuckie Taylor, the first person to be prosecuted under a law making it a crime for a U.S. citizen to commit torture or war crimes overseas.

Monday, September 10, 2007

The Demon Forces


That was the name of Chuckie Taylor's "Antiterrorist Unit" in Liberia. According to the AP:


The goal of the Antiterrorist Unit, according to the indictment, was to ''intimidate, neutralize, punish, weaken, and eliminate actual and perceived opponents of and threats to'' the Taylor government.


Taylor's real name is Charles McArthur Emmanuel. He pleaded not guilty to a superceding indictment today in front of Judge Altonaga. Some of the new allegations:


Many of the seven victims described in the indictment were held in below-ground pits covered with iron bars and barbed wire. In fall 1999, one victim was forced naked into a pit while members of Emmanuel's ATU allegedly ''shoveled stinging ants'' on top of him, the indictment said.

Melted plastic, hot irons, scalding water, electric shocks, beatings with weapons and iron bars, lit cigarettes and molten candle wax were all allegedly used to torture the victims described in the eight-count indictment, which covers the span from spring 1999 to late 2002.





Friday, July 20, 2007

Oh boy...

I feel bad for the Kenny Nachwalter lawyer (the original post had her name, but I have since deleted it) who filed a notice to appear for the alleged victim in the Chuckie Taylor case (he's the son of former Liberian president Charles Taylor who has been accused of torture). The problem is that the pleading wasn't filed under seal and the name of this victim is supposed to be secret.

The DBR has the story here.

Any thoughts on whether this article should have been published. Seems newsworthy to me, but others have expressed that the article should not have been written or in the alternative should not have included the victim's name. Thoughts?

Monday, July 09, 2007

Two very interesting articles from today's papers:

1. Jay Weaver covers the Chuckie Taylor case and explains that the accuser's ID is going to be released:

For months, Miami prosecutors and defense lawyers representing the son of former Liberian president Charles Taylor have wrestled over one main issue: the identity of the man who accused the younger Taylor of torturing him five years ago in a police agent's home in Liberia.
Prosecutors have wanted the information kept a secret for the victim's safety; Taylor's attorneys have sought its disclosure to mount a defense for a September trial in federal court.
Thanks to a recent judge's order, Charles ''Chuckie'' Taylor Jr. and his defense team are finally going to learn his accuser's name.
But there's a catch. Taylor is only allowed to see the alleged victim's name. His lawyers cannot give him ''any tangible materials'' identifying his accuser. Nor can Taylor, who is in federal custody, disclose the accuser's name without his lawyers' approval.
And, his identity cannot be made public by either side until trial.
The strict rules about the alleged victim's name are yet another uncommon development in the unique Miami case against Taylor, a 30-year-old U.S. citizen born in Boston and raised in the Orlando area. It is the first U.S. prosecution of a human-rights violation committed in a foreign country.


2. Vanessa Blum has this article about Padilla co-defendant Amin Hassoun. Blum details how Hassoun is the focus of the government's case and that in the wiretapped calls "Padilla comes across as an almost peripheral figure." Here's a bit more:

In private, Hassoun's views were something less than neighborly.On a 1996 call played for jurors, Hassoun can be heard fuming over a photo published in an Islamic newsletter of a Muslim man shaking hands with Hillary Clinton."The only way to deal with those people is with the sword," he says.Hassoun's lawyers are the first to concede their client's words were sometimes offensive. But that, they say, does not make him a terrorist."He may have ranted and raved, he may have a big mouth, and yes, he did engage in provocative, passionate and political speech, but at all times he did so to help protect and defend Muslims under attack," attorney Jeanne Baker said in her opening remarks to the jury.Hassoun; Padilla, 36; and Kifah Wael Jayyousi, 45, are charged with taking part in a terror cell that sent money, equipment and human recruits to support violent Islamic groups overseas. All three have pleaded not guilty.Though Hassoun and Padilla both initially were arrested just weeks apart in 2002, Padilla's case has drawn more attention because of the "dirty bomber" label and high-profile legal challenges to his 3 ½ year detention without charges at a U.S. Navy brig.

Monday, February 05, 2007

Recovery

Still trying to recover from eating so much this weekend.....

In the meantime, there's some good stuff from our local reporters:

1. Vanessa Blum had this weekend story about Jose Padilla and torture.

2. Jay Weaver covers the Charles Taylor motion to dismiss (by AFPD Miguel Caridad; response by AUSA Karen Rochlin).

3. Julie Kay has the scoop on who has put in for Magistrate Judge in Ft. Lauderdale. So far, we have Assistant federal defenders Patrick Hunt, Stewart Abrams, and Dave Brannon. From the US Attorney's office we Robin Rosenbaum and Patty Diaz. There are rumors, according to the article, that a private practitioner has also put in. Anyone know who?