Parts of the Act you should know: Torture? Sometimes.

[ryanus]

"b) EXCLUSION OF STATEMENTS OBTAINED BY
TORTURE.—A statement obtained by use of torture shall
not be admissible in a military commission under this
chapter, except against a person accused of torture as evidence
that the statement was made."

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h6166eh.txt.pdf

Read that one a few time.

[twilight_sailing]

1. I was an English major in college

and I have no idea what that sentence is supposed to mean.

[aikoaiko]

2. it means the statement can be used against the torturer.

:-)

[twilight_sailing]

3. "except against a person accused of torture"

Not to belabor this issue, I'm just interested in the subject.

To whom does "except against a person accused of torture" refer?

[ryanus]

4. This is how I read it

"A statement obtained by use of torture shall not be admissible...except against a person accused of torture"

[twilight_sailing]

5. Yes

That's what it looks like and yet, if that IS what it says, the rest of the the sentence doesn't make any sense.

Thanks for your reply. Maybe I am just being slow witted.


Let's look at it.

"A statement obtained by use of torture shall
not be admissible in a military commission under this
chapter, except against a person accused of torture"

as evidence that the statement was made.

Well, OK, maybe.

So, does that mean that if any "enemy combatat" is accused of torture then statements he made under torture can be used against him?

Well, hell, let's just accuse everyone of torture. There is NO RECOURSE for those accused, is there?

[ryanus]

6. And note that it doesn't prohibit torture!

It just says that evidence obtained from torture will not be admitted, unless the defendant is accused of torture.

[twilight_sailing]

7. OK

I'll agree.

"A statement obtained by use of torture shall not be admissible in a military commission under this chapter, except against a person accused of torture" as evidence that the statement was made.

We are talking about a person who has been TORTURED who is then "accused of torture." A person who is being tried in a kagaroo court American citizens will never be privy to! We will never know what the defendents were "accused" of, will we?


Edited for bad writing. It's been a very long time since school. ;)

[many a good man]

8. Does it define TORTURE?

What was the whole point of the bill again?
:grr: