• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« D.C. Circuit Approves Internet Ban on Defendant Who Solicited Sex with Minor | Main | NRA Will Argue in Second Amendment Case »

January 25, 2010



If forensics can determine which gun fired by which Blackwater mercenary killed which Iraqi civilian, why not try them separately or in divided groups? Then the statement of one mercenary can be used against the other mercenaries. The supposed suppression of a statement against interest is an individual protection, not a group protection.

Furthermore, Judge Urbina was working from a false presumption. The case law cited in support of dismissal talks about "employees." The Blackwater mercenaries were not employees of the government. They were employees of Blackwater, and there is no evidence that their jobs were ever in jeopardy if they did not make statements. Reassignment off the State Department security detail does not equate to the loss of a job.

Except for the facts that we have five corporate whores on the now less than Supreme Court and this case is widely seen as an indictment of the lawlessness of the Blackwater corporation, Urbina's erroneous ruling, based on a flight of fancy false premise, would quickly be reversed.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad