Berkeley 2010 Forum

[SanBun]

the whole quote: "On May 20, 2009, the New York Times reported that some Spanish legislators were proposing a law to strip investigating magistrates of the authority to pursue international human rights cases. This law, however, would not retroactively put an end to the progress of current cases. It would merely have stopped the initiation of similar cases."

The fact that the Spaniards don't like their judges to meddle in affairs w/ American officials- oh well, that's a different story. Still, even if passed in Spain, that law will not preclude further proceedings by Garzon in this case

[Danneskjöld]

It's not dispositive, but it shows a lack of political support, no? They are basically saying this isn't what their country should be doing. And, the attorney general is against it--though unable to stop it by force.

But, if the case were so rock solid and righteous, why the dissent from his like-minded liberal countrymen?

[SanBun]

It's not dispositive, but it shows a lack of political support, no? They are basically saying this isn't what their country should be doing. And, the attorney general is against it--though unable to stop it by force.

But, if the case were so rock solid and righteous, why the dissent from his like-minded liberal countrymen?

Here's the article from March 2009: Spanish judge to hear torture case against six Bush officials
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ma ... re-inquiry

article from September 2009: Spanish Judge Resumes Torture Case Against Six Senior Bush Lawyers http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=ht ... 2009-09-08
When [the newspaper] Público spoke to Philippe Sands, the British lawyer, and author of Torture Team, which provided much of the first-hand evidence for Garzón's case, Sands explicitly stated that there was "no legal barrier" to prevent Judge Garzón's prosecution from proceeding. He explained that he believed the recent decision by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special investigator to investigate cases of torture by the CIA is related to the Spanish lawsuit and the importance it has acquired because of its instigation by Judge Garzón. Sands told Público, "The recent decision by Eric Holder emphasizes how appropriate the Spanish investigation is. Many commentators believe that this decision has had a significant and direct impact in the United States, reminding people that there is an obligation to investigate torture.
...
It is, at present, uncertain whether another attempt to stifle Judge Garzón will derail him from his pursuit of the Bush administration's lawyers, as he is not known for letting adversaries stand in his way. At the end of June, the Spanish Parliament passed legislation aimed at "ending the practice of letting its magistrates seek war-crime indictments against officials from any foreign country, including the United States," on the basis that no Spanish Court should be able to judge officials of foreign countries except when the victims are Spanish or the crimes were committed in Spain.
"
(Garzon's case involves Spanish nationals, so the law wouldn't apply here)

sure, there are controversies around the political nature of the lawsuit and the Spanish attorney general fears politicization. However, Garzon has been going forward and has international law on his side


here's the charge:
... the six former aides "participated actively and decisively in the creation, approval and execution of a judicial framework that allowed for the deprivation of fundamental rights of a large number of prisoners, the implementation of new interrogation techniques including torture, the legal cover for the treatment of those prisoners, the protection of the people who participated in illegal tortures and, above all, the establishment of impunity for all the government workers, military personnel, doctors and others who participated in the detention centre at Guantánamo." ...The 1984 UN Convention against Torture, signed and ratified by the US, requires states to investigate allegations of torture committed on their territory or by their nationals, or extradite them to stand trial elsewhere.


I'll admit I like arguing, and hey, for what it's worth, I think you do have some really good points.

PS: sorry to everyone who sees the pages exploded when they wake up. Berkeley did NOT issue surprise acceptances during the night

[frankjones]

I was so excited when I got the call that I pretty much didn't listen to anything that Dean Tom said. Does anyone know when scholarship/financial aid offers are made? That wouldn't have happened right then, right?

[0L Hoping for 1]

Hopefully more calls today!!

[kittenmittons]

Hopefully more calls today!!

+1

[Neelio]

hoping on more calls today as well... think there is a chance we get a mini-wave? I mean, last week's wave can't be sustained for another 5 days, can it?

[meownation]

I had a quick question and was wondering if this happened to anyone else here. Last week (I forget which day), I saw that I had a missed call from a 510 number, which I'm pretty sure was from UC Berkeley after some internet research. Unfortunately I was at work and my cell phone had been on silent. I didn't get a voicemail though, and haven't heard anything since then.

Any idea on what this could mean?? I hope they are not playing with my emotions!!

[somewhatwayward]

call back.

[kittenmittons]

call back.

+1. This probably means acceptance.

[Neelio]

call back... they have a twitter account that told students last week that they only call once, and don't leavea vm. if you call back, they will let you why they called... most likely an acceptance.

[0L Hoping for 1]

7 minutes

[GobiasIndustries]

7 minutes

3 minutes. I hope the entire thread gets accepted today.

[thorntll]

Honestly, I don't even have the energy to get excited about this. ALL last week I was on the edge of my seat, and nothing happened...

[Mr.Feeny]

7 minutes

3 minutes. I hope the entire thread gets accepted today.

im thinking that is definitely the plan.... 1 minute

[0L Hoping for 1]

And Dean Tom just walked into his office. Sat down with a cup of Coffee and says to himself "Okay, jokes over I will accept the TLS Berkeley Thread now!"






Oh wait, let me check my tweets.

[5ky]

.

[Mr.Feeny]

i will buy him a snuggie if he calls me

[Neelio]

hate to be neurotic... but we had at least one acceptance go up by this time in the day last week.

[AngryAvocado]

Is Berkeley typically very fast to put people under review?

I applied midway through last week and I'm already UR as of today. Just trying to gauge if that's normal or not.

[JollyGreenGiant]

^^ It is.

[AngryAvocado]

^^ It is.

Figured. My GPA isn't exactly outstanding for Berkeley, so I couldn't see why I would get prioritized anyhow.

Thanks!

[gymboree]

anyone read this article by a Boalt 2L yet?
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issu ... Law-School

"Death of a Public Law School" in the Berkeley Daily Planet, published last Thurs. 12/3.

[Kronk]

I'm pretty familiar with it, and I realize that technically he isn't any worse than a public defender who defends someone to the extent of the law that he or she knows to be guilty. The difference is that doing so is the public defender's job, and public defenders exist as a public service to people who cannot otherwise afford a lawyer. That's the reasoning behind it.

I can't find any reasoning for providing a "narrow" definition of torture that would condone acts such as waterboarding. At a certain point, a person should click out of analysis-mode and realize the consequences of their actions.

Exactly. And perhaps this is why it would be great to able to ask him yourself, no? Maybe he can explain it to you. If only he were a professor or something, with office hours where he could answer questions Why not come to Berkeley and ask him yourself, eh?

weaaaaaaak

+1. Very weak.

[OneKnight]

Nothing after an hour and a half...perhaps they're taking a break?