Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Rick Diaz and Lou Guerra to Washington

At 10 a.m today, the United States Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral argument in United States v. Williams (06-694), asking whether a federal ban on pandering material believed to be child pornography is unconstitutional. Solicitor General Paul Clement will argue for the petitioner, and Richard J. Diaz -- yes, that Rick Diaz -- will argue for the respondent. Louis Guerra will be joining Rick at counsel table.

Initially Judge Middlebrooks denied Diaz & Guerra's motion to dismiss. The 11th Circuit reversed. And the High Court granted cert.

Go get em Rick and Lou.

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Should Liberty City 7 jury hear from "radicalization" expert?

Yes, says Judge Lenard who is going to permit the government expert Raymond Tanter to testify as to how regular people become terrorists. From Vanessa Blum's article in the Sun-Sentinel:

The federal government's leading expert witness in its terrorism case against seven Miami men will take the stand this week to answer what may be the most pressing question facing law enforcement since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: How do ordinary individuals become terrorists?

In what will be the first testimony of its kind in a U.S. terrorism trial, Raymond Tanter is expected to tell jurors that most would-be terrorists start off as unremarkable individuals seeking a sense of belonging and purpose within an extremist group.Prosecutors want Tanter, a political science professor at Georgetown University, to tell jurors the seven defendants accused of plotting to bomb the Sears Tower in Chicago fit that profile and were on a path likely to end in violence.

Tanter's testimony is based on a theory called the radicalization process. It is important to the government's case because the defendants — who have no Middle Eastern roots, mostly grew up in South Florida and practiced a blend of religions — may not fit jurors' notions about terrorists.Defense lawyers tried unsuccessfully to block Tanter from testifying, describing his theories as unscientific and too new to be considered reliable.

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Joe Cool case to Judge Huck

The parties better get ready for trial!

Say hello to my little friend


You're gonna love this. Here's the AP coverage of yesterday's exchange between Albert Levin and star government witness Elie Assad:
The star prosecution witness in a terrorism conspiracy case against seven Miami men said he liked the gangster film "Scarface" so much he frequently used the main character's last name.
The witness, Elie Assad, acknowledged Wednesday under questioning from a defense lawyer that he was often known as Elie Assad Montana after arriving in the United States from the Middle East in the late 1990s. When asked why by defense attorney Albert Levin, Assad replied, "'Scarface.'"
"Like Tony Montana?" Levin asked.
"I liked maybe the movie, sir," Assad responded.
The 1983 film, directed by Brian De Palma and written by Oliver Stone, features Al Pacino as Tony Montana, a Cuban refugee who rises with spectacular violence to become lord of a Miami cocaine empire. The movie spawned many indelible lines, such as Tony's "Say hello to my little friend!" while brandishing an assault weapon.
So, who is this guy?
Working covertly for the FBI, Assad acted as an emissary from al-Qaida who was supposedly sent to help the group of seven Miami men, led by 33-year-old Narseal Batiste, realize their alleged goal of destroying the Sears Tower in Chicago and attacking five FBI offices around the country.
Assad filed a lawsuit in Broward County against a rental car company as a result of the trunk incident, which was ultimately settled, according to court records. The "Montana" references came up in a November 2006 deposition Assad gave in that case - a statement he refused Wednesday to acknowledge as truthful because he did not sign it.
"It's possible not everything is accurate," Assad said.
Can you imagine Albert Levin's glee when he found out that government witness thought he was Scarface...

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Broward state court

JAABlog, Rumpole, the Sun-Sentinel and others are covering a Broward state court story where a high-school football player was a victim of (corrected, the original post said defendant; that's what you get for relying on Rumpole) sexual battery. Judge Levenson (a former AUSA* and a good guy) asked what position the victim played. The prosecutor responded, Linebacker. The public defender imprudently responded, Tight-end. The judge then insensitively joked "Wide Receiver?"

To his credit, the prosecutor said the comments were inappropriate. And to the judge's credit, he immediately (and repeatedly) apologized.**

This is the great benefit of blogs -- and the big trouble with them. Stupid comments like this have been going on for a very long time. They obviously aren't right, but blogs make the reaction angrier and more volatile than probably necessary.

I agree with Rumpole that Levenson should be forgiven. (I took out my comment about the PD because it wasn't his client that he was talking about. Obviously still inappropriate, but not in the same way.)

*I have to justify the post on the "federal blog" or Rumpole gets all upset.
**We previously have commented on Judge Levenson's good acts as judge here.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

No bond for the Joe Cool defendants

Today, Magistrate Judge Bandstra denied the bond requests by the Joe Cool defendants. (via Miami Herald , AP and Sun-Sentinel).


"In this courtroom sketch, Kirby Logan Archer, 35, of Strawberry, Ark., left, and Guillermo Zarabozo, 19, of Hialeah, right, appear in federal court in Miami. The men, who were picked up in a life raft after hiring a charter boat to take them to the Bahamas, have been charged with murder in the incident. The boat's four crew members are still missing. (AP/Shirley Henderson / September 26, 2007) "

Restaveks in Federal Court

The front page of the Herald today has this article about a child Haitain slave (called a Restavek, here's the Wikipedia page):

Federal court documents paint a grim picture of a slave-like life for Simone Celestin -- 15-hour work days, seven days a week, no schooling and no freedom. An orphan smuggled into Miami from Haiti at age 14, she lived in a Southwest Miami home for almost six years, fearful of being deported, under conditions that amounted to involuntary servitude, prosecutors say.

Looks like an interesting case, which is headed to trial:

Four people -- a mother, two daughters and one ex-husband of a daughter -- were indicted in connection with the case in April. Charges include human trafficking and forced labor.

The indictment said Evelyn Theodore and her daughters, Maude Paulin and Claire Telasco, hit the girl with hands, fists and ''other objects'' to force her to work as a servant in their house in South Miami-Dade and in other houses.

''The prosecution of individuals involved in human trafficking is a top priority of the Justice Department,'' a U.S attorney's office statement said at the time of indictment.


The defense responds:

''These were well-intentioned people who had high hopes for improving Simone's future lifestyle,'' said Richard Dansoh, the Coral Gables lawyer defending Maude Paulin. ``They did not put any restrictions on her. They did try to advise her that, as she came of age, she needed to be careful about running around with men.''

As further proof, he cited a Miami-Dade police report showing that an anonymous abuse complaint lodged in 2000 was investigated at the home -- and determined to be unfounded.

The police report noted that the complaint involved the 14-year-old girl who reportedly had been ``smuggled into the country from Haiti and was being forced to work in the home as a maid.''

The report said a state investigator found the child to be in good health, that she spoke only Creole and there were ''no signs of child abuse/neglect.'' The report also noted that police had notified immigration officials about a ``possible illegal immigrant.''

"Lawyers for Liberty City 7 having tough time"

That's the headline in today's Miami Herald article about the Liberty City 7 case. Not exactly the article you want if you are sitting at the defense table....

A couple of exchanges from the article between Ana Jhones (the lawyer for the lead defendant) and the informant:

"It's all about the money, isn't it?" Jhones asked aggressively.

"No, ma'am," Assad answered calmly. "There is a list, too."

"If I remember, I never promised him anything," he continued. "I only promised I would give the list to my big brother."

The FBI informant then lost touch with Batiste for one month.

Batiste and his followers in the local branch of the Moorish Science Temple -- a religion that combines Muslim, Christian and Jewish faiths -- began to suspect that Assad was working undercover for law enforcement. They also had their doubts about the other FBI informant, al-Saidi.

In late January 2006, a few of Batiste's men met the two informants at the group's warehouse in Liberty City, changed their clothes and drove them to Islamorada.

There, inside a tent, Assad and al-Saidi met with Batiste in a tense confrontation. Assad salvaged the FBI's undercover probe when he blurted out to Batiste that he was a representative of al Qaeda, winning his trust again. Assad was allowed to keep his cellphone, which recorded the conversation.

"You're doing all the talking," Jhones told Assad on the witness stand.

The lawyer reiterated that Batiste said his group was "suffering" because it lacked money, suggesting he was only trying to con the informant for big bucks.

"He doesn't say he needs the money because he hates the United States," Jhones said on cross-examination.

But Assad fired back: "He says he needs the money to destroy the United States."

The informant only gave Batiste and his followers boots, supplied by the FBI. Assad later offered to provide them with a second warehouse in Miami, where they could plan their alleged terror mission.