U.S. Lawyers Escape Prosecution for Torture -- Unethical?

David Cole, "The Case Against the Torture Memo Lawyers," in The New York Review of Books, October 8, 2009, at p. 14.
Scott Shane, "2 U.S. Architects of Harsh Tactics in 9/11's Wake," in The New York Times, August 12, 2009, at p. A1.
Eric Lichtblau & Eric Lipton, "E-Mail Reveals Rove's Key Role in '06 Dismissals," in The New York Times, August 12, 2009, at p. A1.
Scott Shane & David Johnston, "Lawyers Agreed on the Legality of Brutal Tactic," in The New York Times, June 7, 2009, at p. A1.
Adam Liptak, "Justices Void Ex-Detainee's Suit Against 2 Officials," The New York Times, May 19, 2009, at p. A16. (Torture, including beating of innocent detainee, not grounds for law suit against former Attorney General, John Ashcroft, but others may be sued.)
Scott Shane, "Ethics Complaint Is Filed Against Lawyers for Bush Over Torture Policy," The New York Times, May 19, 2009, at p. A16. (Ethics grievance will probably be dismissed because of lack of standing, one complaint has been dismissed already.)
David Johston & Scott Shane, "Toture Memos: Inquiry Suggests No Prosecutions," The New York Times, May 6, 2009, at p. A1.
Neil A. Lewis, "Official Defends Signing Interrogation Memos," The New York Times, April 9, 2009, at p. A12. (Jay S. Bybee, a U.S. Federal Circuit Court judge signed torture memos.)
"The State-Secrets Privilege, Tamed," (Editorial) The New York Times, April 30, 2009, at p. A26. (Abuse of state secrets power by government to "stone wall" and deny "free speech" rights to citizens.)
David Kocieniewski, "Report Finds Patronage Rife At a University: Federal Monitor Studies a New Jersey School," The New York Times, April 4, 2006, at p. B1.
Thomas Shaffer, "Christian Theories of Professional Responsibility," 48 So. Cal. L. Rev. 721, 752-759 (1975).
Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons (New York: Vintage, 1962).
Philippe Sands, Torture Team: Rumfeld's Memo and the Betrayal of American Values (New York: MacMillan, 2009).


" ... Get the legal people in on this Watergate Thing."
-- Richard M. Nixon, Esq.

"An internal Justice Department inquiry has concluded that Bush administration lawyers committed serious lapses in judgment in writing secret memorandums authorizing brutal interrogations but that they should not be prosecuted, according to government officials briefed on its findings."

"The report by the Office of Professional Responsibility, an internal ethics unit within the Justice Department, is also likely to ask state bar associations to consider possible disciplinary action, which could include reprimands or even disbarment, for some of the lawyers involved in writing the legal opinions, the officials said."

New Jersey's OAE is guilty of horrifying human rights violations and yet unethical actions by agency lawyers continue to go unpunished, every day, making a mockery and fraud of N.J. Supreme Court ethics decisions and contaminating all legal proceedings in that foul-smelling territory called, "the Garden State." Each day that the cover-up continues, Mr. Rabner, is a renewal of twenty-one years of torture for many victims. There is still time to prevent further suffering by many innocent persons. Your continued indifference to such suffering, Mr. Rabner, borders on evil.

Very little (if anything) will happen to these crooked and corrupt lawyers -- despite the broken lives and murdered victims at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, or in New Jersey. This is to say nothing of the damage to the integrity and well-deserved decline in respect worldwide for the U.S. legal system, along with trashing the priceless American Constitution. Censorship? Cybercrime? What does the "E" in "OAE" stand for, Mr. Rabner?

"The conclusions of the 220-page draft have not yet been approved by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. The officials said that it is possible that the final report might be subject to further revision but that they did not expect major alterations in its main findings or recommendations."

"The findings, growing out of an inquiry that started in 2004, would represent a stinging rebuke of the lawyers and their legal arguments."

Do you speak to me of legal ethics, Anne Milgram, Esq.? "Ass covering," Peter ("See-No-Evil") Harvey, Esq.?

"... but they would stop short of the criminal referral sought by human rights advocates, who have suggested that the lawyers could be prosecuted as part of a criminal conspiracy to violate the anti-torture statute. ..."

"The draft report is described as very detailed, tracing e-mail messages between the Justice Department lawyers and officials at the White House and the Central Intelligence Agency. Among the questions it is expected to consider is whether the memos were an independent judgment of the limits of the federal anti-torture statute or were deliberately skewed to justify the use of techniques proposed by the C.I.A."

"At issue is whether the lawyers acted ethically and competently in writing a series of Justice Department legal opinions from 2002 to 2007."

This episode is yet another black eye for America's compromised and discredited legal profession. It is indicative of a legal culture of "going along to get along" and of the massive HYPOCRISY that is characteristic of the nation's legal work-product.

The pretense of "holier-than-thou" ethics on the part of prominent members of the profession not only in America's legal dungeon, New Jersey, but also in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere (New York is probably the best place in the U.S. to practice law), is grating on the nerves of observers everywhere. Nations cannot accept the sincerity of America's alleged human rights concerns when this spectacle of legal corruption is ignored. ("New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal System.")

Bias in outcomes is the first word associated with American legal decisions, both within the U.S. and globally:

"A Pakistani Muslim who was arrested after the September 11 attacks may not sue John Ashcroft, the former attorney general, and Robert S. Mueller, III, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for abuses he says he suffered in a Brooklyn detention center, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday."

Among the things for which this Muslim man may not hold the Attorney General accountable are daily "beatings," various forms of psychological torture that involved insults of Islam, denigrations of the humanity of "little brown persons" -- presumably including the world's 1 BILLION Muslims -- and worse actions.

Ethics grievances brought by a coalition of Left-wing advocacy groups against Bush's torture lawyers -- who are still serving as judges and "prominent members of the bar" -- will probably be dismissed because of "lack of standing" on the part of litigants. Sure enough, they were dismissed.

On the other hand, New Jersey's OAE is rewarded by corrupt and tainted tribunals for soliciting grievances against secretly (and politically) targeted attorneys, like me, then allowed to "cover-up" their own unethical and possibly criminal actions, including theft and various assaults, together with obstructions of justice.

Censorship. Cybercrime. Theft. Slanders behind the back. Breaches of fiduciary relations. Solicitation and manufacturing of grievances, violations of the sanctity of attorney offices, bribery of employees, threats to generate complaints against a lawyer. Are those things unethical, Mr. Rabner? ("Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture" and "John McGill, Esq., the OAE, and New Jersey Corruption.")

Lawyers rationalize what is convenient or serves "our" national interest, find ways to circumvent the law as political lawyers, in order to serve personal or career interests, or for cold hard cash. Senator Bob? "We must protect the public!" These crooked lawyers are fond of such laughably absurd statements -- absurd when uttered by them. ("New Jersey is the Home of the Living Dead" and "New Jersey's Mafia Culture in Law and Politics.")

International human rights laws, international criminal laws, global forums and mechanisms are regarded, too often, as the playthings of the U.S. government. We are concerned with international law when it serves our political interests. We disregard those same laws when they are inconvenient or obstruct our purposes, sometimes criminal purposes. Much the same is true of legal ethics rules.

We are at center stage in the world in "promoting" principles of the rule of law and due process of law that we set aside, easily, when it is useful to do so. However, we insist that others respect these international legal principles, including prohibitions of torture whose violations are rationalized by America's lawyers with transparently false reasoning. I wonder how many Pakistani children have died today in drone attacks in our secret war in South Asia? Will India be next? China? Cuba? Korea? Syria?

We are, allegedly, against censorship and suppression of speech. However, I am censored and prevented from using images, my book is suppressed every day, publicly, and my requests for the truth concerning the tortures and rapes to which I have been subjected is ignored. ("How Censorship Works in America" and "Censorship and Cruelty in New Jersey.")

Mr. Rabner, each day that the cover-up continues is further defecation by your tribunal's "members" on the Constitution of the United States of America, especially the Bill of Rights. How can you wear those sullied judicial robes, Mr. Rabner? Does the stench of corruption in Trenton not bother you at all? Have you made an "accomodation" with evil, Mr. Rabner? ("Have you no shame, Mr. Rabner?")

We see ourselves as "superior" or "set apart" from the rest of the global community because we are the "embodiment" of ethics and legality, yet we condone with a patina of legitimacy provided by sold out lawyers "crimes against humanity" in order to accomplish our objectives, both at home and internationally. We often fail to detect a contradiction in this reality. The global community detects a contradiction. They are correct to do so. Mr. Rabner, is the OAE "ethical"? I do not think so. ("Mr. Putin's Advice to America.")

We have lost credibility with China, North Korea, Cuba, Russia, Middle East countries and billions of persons around the world who know that we censor and silence critics -- they can see it at my sites every day -- as we torture, rape, steal and call it "legal." The very people responsible for a massive criminal conspiracy against me, unfolding over several decades, feign outrage and shock at my alleged "ethical flaws" even as atrocities and heinous abuses of law are renewed with each day that New Jersey's cover-up and cybercrimes persist. The OAE's stone-walling defense is shameful, Ms. Milgram. Enjoy the lesbian "love-fest." ("Trenton's Nasty Lesbian Love-Fest!")

I am unable to reach my MSN group which is, allegedly, "closed" along with MSN to be replaced by something called, "Windows Live." Is "Windows Live" really part of "Microsoft.inc" and part of MSN replacing MSN Groups? Is MSN really in Mimi, Florida? What is the true number of visitors to my blogs and books? (Again: "How Censorship Works in America" and "Censorship and Cruelty in New Jersey.")

I am still denied the use of images. I cannot see my own books on-line, if they continue to exist. Why are you frightened of what those images depict if you believe that the U.S. has done nothing wrong?

President Obama should release all photographs of U.S. tortures under First Amendment principles. Over one thousand photographs of heinous abuses and sanctioned atrocities are being withheld from the people, even as the truth about my life is concealed from me.

Why does the voice of one tortured dissident -- curiously ignored by the so-called "free media" -- frighten powerful people in American society?

Prominent members of the bar and judiciary are protected from the consequences of obvious incompetence, at best, or malice and deliberate cruelty, theft, disappearing millions, racism, disdain for the consequences of their actions, together with cover-ups of unethical and criminal actions, for example, by N.J. lawyers and judges as well as Mr. Bush's misnamed "Justice Department." ("Law and Ethics in the Soprano State" and "New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal System" as well as "New Jersey is the Home of the Living Dead.")

" ... the report [by Judge Stern concerning New Jersey's Medical School and Hospital] details a broad range of financial irregularities that it said plague the university, including influence peddling, abuse of expense accounts, and sweetheart deals to steer contracts to politically powerful vendors."

The alleged "influence peddling" included prominent N.J. lawyer-politicians, like Senator Bob Menendez and others. When combined with New Jersey's usually protected child porn and prostitution rings, sexual favors as payoffs to officials, the largest influence for the mafia in any state political and legal system -- the very word "ethics" in the context of New Jersey's disgraced Supreme Court and tainted legal system, profession, and academy is disgusting and absurd.

As I recall, the total amount of "questionable billing" by this N.J. hospital was in the neighborhood of $400 MILLION. Ms. LaVecchia's vanishing $300 MILLION in the HIP scam is a trifle by comparison. ("Law and Ethics in the Soprano State" and "New Jersey's Feces-Covered Supreme Court.")

How do officials escape responsibility? By declaring evidence of criminality on the part of prominent judges and other legal officials "secret" and not subject to review by the public nor, at least, made available to their victims:

"Of the many ways that the Bush administration sought to evade accountability for its violations of the law and the Constitution under the cover of battling terrorism, one of the most appalling was its attempt to use inflated claims of state secrecy to slam shut the doors of the nation's courthouses." ("Obama Says Torture is a Secret.")

New Jersey's OAE and AG have tried to do the same for years, to cover the actions of state torturers and "service" providers, like Diana Lisa Riccioli (still keeping Debbie "happy"?) -- by declaring evidence "secret" and not subject to discovery in violation of both the federal and state constitutions, also statutory as well as case law. This is to describe as "ethical" lying and unethical or criminal conduct by state entities entrusted with enforcing the law. This means you, Anne Milgram, Esq. ("A Letter From the DRB, in New Jersey!" and "Another Letter From the DRB, in New Jersey!")

The bitter farce that is N.J.'s legal ethics process is derived from a twisted, Kafkaesque interpretation of government lawyers' responsibility to "protect the public" -- a public which needs to be protected from these would-be protectors.

Mr. Rabner, do you claim to be unaware of these facts? Again: each day that the cover-up continues is a renewal of the tortures experienced by many victims, not just me, and most especially harmful to the U.S. Constitution. Publish America?

This is a continuing injury that your legal system, Mr. Rabner, is perpetuating against many victims, on a daily basis, in a disgusting effort to find ass cover for a few politically connected offenders in New Jersey. ("New Jersey Lawyers' Ethics Farce.")

A fundamental principle of legal ethics is that judges -- especially Supreme Court justices -- should avoid "the appearance of impropriety." Despite the vanished $300 MILLION from the HIP deal Jaynee LaVecchia has the nerve to remain in office and to judge the ethics of others, others who must be ethically preferable to LaVecchia's duplicitous and mendacious self.

How can you presume to judge others when so many questions remain unanswered concerning the HIP deal and so many victims' medical bills were unpaid? Have you no shame, Ms. LaVecchia? Should you, Ms. LaVecchia, not resign from your judgeship immediately? Do you, Ms. LaVecchia, continue to judge the ethics of others with a straight face? Mr. Rabner, you cannot protect your friends and yourself while complying with ethics rules and the law in this matter. ("Have you no shame, Mr. Rabner?")

LaVecchia should have resigned from the judgeship that she has now disgraced years ago, before she voted to sanction a Latino colleague -- who will smile and say "thank you," of course, as he has been taught to do -- for giving someone his business card.

Was LaVecchia acting on behalf of unidentified political bosses when she cast that hypocritical vote? Perhaps she was doing a little favor for her "godfather"? Kay Luchese, Bob? Virginia Long? Debbie Poritz?

Is there any word other than "hypocrisy" to describe these events? "Justice" LaVecchia has befouled her office, to the amusement of Mr. Rabner and his cohorts, as well as the reputation of America's judiciary everywhere in the world? Do you speak to me of ethics, Mr. Rabner? Does Mr. Prisco approve of Rabner's "legal ethics"? Are these persons in New Jersey well placed to comment on the lives and ethics of others? Do they still presume to "judge" lawyers' or anyone's relationships and sex lives? 1988-today. ("Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture" and "An Open Letter to My Torturers in New Jersey, Terry Tuchin and Diana Lisa Riccioli.")

New Jersey judges and justices are ethically worse than most persons in the legal profession because of hypocrisy and self-love, but mostly because of the presumption in rearranging or prescribing the private lives of others. Further defacements and alterations of these writings must be expected at all times. ("Does Senator Menendez have mafia friends?" and "Senator Bob, the Babe, and the Big Bucks.") Give my regards to the "twins," Senator. ("Menendez Consorts With Underage Prostitutes.")

Who do you think you are to meddle in the private lives of others? Who authorized Mr. Tuchin's and Ms. Riccioli's entry into my life in 1988? I certainly did not do such a thing. Under what conditions and for how long were they to have contact with me?

There is no such thing, legally, as "therapy by adhesion." Nor "secret" treatments that involve theft and rape, along with the violation of "fiduciary relations." Where are those reports and records prepared by Tuchin and Riccioli? 1988-today? How many of you had sex with Marilyn Straus? Was Marilyn under hypnosis at the time of those rapes or assaults? Was that "therapy"? How many others in New Jersey are subjected to such secret "therapy"? I want all tapes, video and audio of hypnosis and interrogation sessions. How many inmates are raped in New Jersey? ("Abuse and Exploitation of Women in New Jersey.")

How much did you steal from my office, Diana? How many others were in on the thievery? How many lawyers and others (including family members) did you recruit to assist in your behind-the-back efforts against me, Terry?

You say: "It's for your own good." My Constitutional rights are for my good. I am confident that, for a fee, a so-called "psychoanalyst" like Tuchin will proclaim the Abu Ghraib tortures to be for the "good" of their victims. Are most of your victims African-Americans and Latinos, Terry? Do you see them as "slaves"? How many Palestinians have you tortured, Terry? How does a Jew, of all people, become Dr. Mengele? Try inserting some more "errors," Terry. Mr McGill?

"What seems to tie together these instances of [ethical] failure [by lawyers] is that they did what everyone else was doing. In every instance the plea in defense is vita temporis (everybody is doing it). And in every instance the moral destination of these undistinguished, unchosen professional lives is loss of responsibility and even of the ability to respond. This is the estate which is evil. These were the men [and women] whom Jesus judged -- who seemed to have condemned themselves, rather than to have been condemned. They were unable to respond to God when God chose to seek a response from them, and they were therefore unable to respond to God in more ethereal garb, when He proposed to welcome them to immortality [now]."

Will you come with me, then, for fellowship?

"At any rate, Thomas More, as I wrote about him, became for me a man with an adamantine sense of his own self. He knew where he began and left off, what area of himself he could yield to the encroachments of his enemies, and what to the encroachments of those he loved. It was a substantial area in both cases. Since he was a clever man and a great lawyer he was able to retire from those areas in wonderfully good order, but at length he was asked to retreat from that final area where he located his self. And there this supple, humorous, unassuming and sophisticated person set like metal, was overtaken by an absolutely primitive rigor, and could no more be budged than a cliff."

Mr. Holder, it is much worse than a mistake not to prosecute these lawyers, tacitly excusing torture, or to disregard their professional lapses in order to protect the CIA, Bush and Cheney, or your sadly discredited legal profession in America. The whole world is watching.