InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 406
Next 10
Followers 86
Posts 32901
Boards Moderated 4
Alias Born 06/08/2000

Re: gp100357 post# 330

Wednesday, 12/19/2007 10:52:08 PM

Wednesday, December 19, 2007 10:52:08 PM

Post# of 406
I have a problem with anything which subverts American rule of law.

The Patriot Act and many of Bushs "laws" are in direct violation of the Constitution.

Start off with a false and baseless premise and you can bet the rest is equally on a poor footing.

Example?

Brandon Mayfield.

Familiar with the story?

"A bag containing detonating devices, found by Spanish authorities following the Madrid commuter train bombings, had fingerprints that were initially identified by the FBI as belonging to Mayfield ("100% verified"). According to the court documents in Ann Akien's decision, this information was largely "fabricated and concocted by the FBI and DOJ". When the FBI finally sent Brandon's fingerprints to the Spanish authorities, they contested the matching of the finger prints from Brandon Mayfield to the ones associated with the Madrid bombing. Further, the Spanish authorities informed the FBI that they had other suspects who were Moroccan immigrants in the case that were not linked to anyone in the USA. The FBI completely disregarded all of the information from the Spanish authorities, and proceeded to spy on Brandon and his family further.
As was discovered during the court case, even the FBI's own records show that this finger print, despite the sworn testimony of FBI and DOJ agents, was in all reality not an exact match but only one of 20 "similar" prints to the ones that were retrieved from Madrid. Based on that list of people with "similar prints" the FBI launched an extensive investigation in to all 20 individuals using Letters of National Security. The investigation included medical records, financial records, employment records, etc on all 20 people and their families. It was during this time that Brandon Mayfield's name rose to the top of the list most likely simply because he is Muslim. His wife, whom he met in Germany, is an Egyptian national and he converted not long after their marriage.
The FBI arrested Mayfield at his offices in West Slope, an unincorporated suburb of Portland, Oregon, in a manner similar to the then-recent Mike Hawash case, under a material witness warrant rather than under charge, and held him with no access to family and limited access, if any, to legal counsel. The FBI initially refused to inform either Brandon or his family as to why he was being arrested or where he was being held - a direct violation of the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution.
Later, the FBI leaked the nature of the charges to the local media and the family discovered what the charges were by watching the local news. He was at first held at a Multnomah County jail under a false name; he was later transferred to an unidentified location. His family protested that Mayfield had no connection with the bombings, nor had he been to Spain in over 11 years.
The court documents clearly state that Spanish authorities informed the FBI on May 19, 2004 that they arrested an Algerian national named Ouhane Daoud who was an exact match for the fingerprints. Despite this, the FBI refused to release Brandon Mayfield until the story was broken by the international press the next day.
[edit]Release

Following his arrest, Spanish authorities relayed their increasing doubts that the fingerprint on the bag was actually his to the FBI, though these concerns were not communicated to Mayfield's attorneys. On May 19 the Spanish authorities at last announced that the fingerprints actually belonged to an Algerian national, Ouhnane Daoud; Brandon Mayfield was still not released from prison until the international press broke the story the next day - May 20, 2004, [2] although a gag order remained in force for the next few days. By May 25, the case was dismissed by the judge, who ordered the return of seized evidence and unsealing of documents pertaining to his arrest.
The FBI conducted an internal review of Mayfield's arrest and detention, concluding that although he was not arrested solely due to his religious beliefs, they may have contributed to investigator's failure to take into account the Spanish concerns over fingerprint identification.[1] The FBI issued a press release announcing the report's conclusion that they had not misused the Patriot Act in the investigation.[2] Civil libertarians and the ACLU nonetheless consider Mayfield's detention a misuse of the material witness statute.[3]
Although the FBI afterwards apologized for their acts, Mayfield has filed several lawsuits over this invasion of his privacy. One sought to force the government to return or destroy copies of items seized from his home. Another, which was argued before U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken on July 15, 2005, challenged the law which was used against him as unconstitutional. The Federal Government filed several motions to have Mayfield's case dismissed as a matter of national security, or national secrets, but these were denied by Judge Aiken.
The case was heard by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Among the issues on appeal, are whether materials removed from Mayfield's house, including DNA samples taken from his family's personal toothbrushes, are to be destroyed or preserved. The Federal Government has assumed the position that materials must be preserved so that they can be referred to, if more lawsuits are brought in the future.

On November 29, 2006, the U.S. government settled part of the lawsuit with Mayfield for a reported 2 million dollars. The United States government issued a formal apology to Mayfield as part of the settlement. The settlement allowed Mayfield to pursue a legal challenge against the Patriot Act.[4] The FBI was also cleared of wrongdoing in an earlier internal investigation.

On September 26, 2007, two provisions of the U.S. Patriot Act were declared unconstitutional. Finding in Mayfield's favor, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as amended by the Patriot Act, "now permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment," which violates the Constitution of the United States.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield




Buena Vista que amanece el sol!

http://www.ronpaul2008.com


Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.