Durham Torture Tape Case Dies, US Duplicity in Geneva & The Press Snoozes

[chill_wind]

Durham Torture Tape Case Dies, US Duplicity in Geneva & The Press Snoozes
By: bmaz Tuesday November 9, 2010 12:27 am


From the best available information as to the original destruction date of the infamous “Torture Tapes” having been on November 8, 2005, the statute of limitations for charging any general crime by employees and/or agents of the US Government for said destruction will expire at midnight Monday November 8, 2010 as the general statute of limitation is five years. By operation of law, the statute would have run yesterday were it not a Sunday. So, by the time you are reading this, it is over. Absent something extraordinary, and I mean really extraordinary, a criminal statute of limitation is effectively a bar to subject matter jurisdiction and that is that. Ding dong, the John Durham torture tape investigation is thus dead.

Last week, I wrote a letter to the DOJ and saw to it that it was delivered to the main contacts, Dean Boyd and Tracy Schmaler, as well as John Durham’s office. None of them responded. Finally, late Monday afternoon I called Durham’s office, and they acknowledged having received the letter.

(snipping)

Oh, there was one thing; when I asked why there had been no formal response to my letter, I was told perhaps it was a “little edgy”. Apparently actually phrasing an inquiry with legal specificity and facts makes it too “edgy” for the United States Department Of Justice.

(more)

see the rest about the DOJ (non)response and the nature of the US media coverage at the link.

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/11/09/durham-torture-tape-case-dies-us-duplicity-in-geneva-the-press-snoozes/

Yesterday: DOJ Mum As Deadline Passes To Prosecute CIA Torture Tapes Destruction (TPM)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9518127

[Solly Mack]

1. K&R

[struggle4progress]

2. Are you sure the statute of limitations didn't begin at the moment the authorities became

aware of the crime, rather than at the moment the crime was committed?

[chill_wind]

3. It's dead. No charges for destroying the tapes.

But fwiw, it would appear both TPM and bmaz had their date calculations right about when a decision would have been due.

Well now we have one. Just don't write any "edgy" letters to the DOJ asking about it.

The decision not to prosecute anyone in the videotape destruction came five years to the day after the CIA destroyed its cache of 92 videos of two al-Qaida operatives, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Nashiri, being subjected to waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning. The deadline for prosecuting someone under most federal laws is five years.

No charges for destroying CIA interrogation videos
Tuesday, November 9, 2010; 3:56 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/09/AR2010110903696.html?wpisrc=nl_natlalert

[struggle4progress]

5. Thanks. I had seen that. My question was specific, and it is relevant because

if one wants charges brought one ought not to push for the earlier tolling of the limitation

[chill_wind]

4. Update:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4608028

[maryf]

6. K&Rnt