cleIMC home

Cleveland Indy Media Center

cleveland indymedia
About Us Contact Us Subscribe Calendar Radio Show Publish
white themeblack themered themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themeblack themetheme help

Sep 20 Real Time Presentation Service from Money Maker Ma

Sep 25 Columbus Socialism Forum -- Why You Should Vote So

Add an Event

printable version - email this article

Interview with Terry Gilbert In Response to the Lynne Stewart Guilty Verdict
by elle ross Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2005 at 8:40 PM

Complete Interview and More Information

Cleveland Indymedia Center interviews renowned Cleveland Attorney Terry Gilbert in response to the guilty verdict in the Lynne Stewart trial. The National Lawyers Guild condemns the message the government is sending to defense lawyers who choose to represent unpopular clients. After deliberating for 13 days, a jury convicted Lynne Stewart, veteran civil rights attorney.

Read Terry Gilbert Biography

Interview with Cleveland Attorney Terry Gilbert regarding the Lynne Stewart guilty verdict. 2/15/04

elle ross = ER
terry gilbert = TG

What are you initial thoughts with the guilty verdict in the Lynne Stewart Trial?

Well, I think it's disturbing because the relationship between a lawyer and a client should be held with great sacredness in our justice system. The fact that she might have echoed some positions to her lawyer that her client expressed certainly should not be accepted as providing material support to terrorism. I think that the way it was spun was successfully done because of the prosecution because of the climate of fear that exists in this country that anybody who could even be perceived to be helping somebody who is a terrorist regardless of their role, in this case being a lawyer, should not be considered to be afforded protection under our law. I think that is scary and alarming.

The National Lawyers Guild has stated with the verdict of this case the government is bent on intimidating attorneys from providing representation to unpopular clients. That is similar to what you were just saying. Do you agree with this?

yeah I think it does. I don't think that lawyers in general, even criminal defense lawyers are breaking down doors to represent people who are being investigated for terrorism-related crimes, but those few who have been committed to the principal that everyone deserves a defense, a vigorous defense, may think twice before they decide to represent somebody knowing that every move you make, every discussion you have with your client, every strategy decision you may develop could be under scrutiny by the government. This is very intimidating. It is an ominous sign for the future.

In your career you have represented what is termed unpopular clients. Do you think this effects you personally or how do you feel this may effect attorneys in general?

I am pretty solid in my career, it is probably winding down at this point. So I am not going to waiver in my principals at this point. I don't feel intimated by the government. But I feel bad for the younger lawyers who are starting out who need to uphold the principals of zealous advocacy. I am wondering about those people who have young families, who are looking toward building their careers in law may think it's not worth it to get involved in this kind of dilemma. You know, we always are concerned about the government snooping in regarding our relationship with our clients particularly with respect to who is paying fees and that kind of thing. You know, the mob lawyers were always being intimidated by the government because of where money was coming from. So this is nothing new. But now it's a whole different scope of scrutiny and monitoring. This war on terrorism has so many tentacles of consequences, and now we have to worry about the attorney client relationship. Now, maybe Lynne Stewart, who is a firebrand lawyer, who I know by the way, and who has stood up against the government for many years and is not afraid to put herself at risk, maybe she did some things in this case that might have been done more discreetly and not broadcast to the world, but I don't think that takes away from what may be the insidious scope of the investigation against her. Had she had just represented somebody else they probably wouldn't even have cared, but because she was representing a high profile client they have made an example out of her.

How do you think the Lynne Stewart case will effect a citizens 6th amendment right to an attorney?

Well, I think it drives to wedge, in some sense, between the lawyer and the client. Because if the lawyer wants to feel comfortable confiding in a confidential manner with his or her lawyer, knowing that the government may be watching what goes on between the lawyer and the client, what communications take place, whether in the open area or in the prisons, they may not be willing to put their trust in the lawyer. And that's a scary proposition.

What, if any options, do you think are available to attorneys and citizens who are outraged at the Stewart decision? I work with Independent Media Center, and many of us are covering this story based from an independent news source because the corporate media is going with...a particular view. What options do you think are available for us?

I think that the civil rights community and legal organizations should join forces to present a coherent alternative to the Patriot Act-type impositions that we've been living under and get Congress to carve out some protections and spell it out, in no uncertain terms, about the fact that the client-attorney relationship has been violated. When you're dealing with a regime in this country that felt that it was certainly within human rights, to condone torture, to disallow any lawyers to see people that are being held as enemy noncombatants, so from their perspective, the people running the show, they don't feel there should be any balancing here. That the ends justify the means. When talking about terrorism all bets off regarding constitutional rights. The Civil Rights community, legal associations, bar associations, need to step up and demand a code of protections. Obviously there's certain things a lawyer cannot do. A lawyer cannot combine with their clients to fabricate evidence, to put out fraudulent strategy, get people to commit perjury, and more, the traditional things we live under that create professional responsibility and govern our conduct, but it seems to me that in situations like this there should be some kind of bill of rights somehow about how far the government can go in piercing the attorney client relationship.

I want to thank you and to say that I agree with what you have said. Your responses follow the guidelines of Cleveland Indymedia Center, which is why we appreciate you taking the time to talk with us. Do you have any final words you would like to add?

No, that's alright, I feel we covered everything.


National Lawyers Guild condemns verdict in Lynne Stewart Trial
In response to today’s guilty verdict in the Lynne Stewart trial, the National Lawyers Guild condemns the message that the government is sending to defense lawyers who choose to represent unpopular clients. After deliberating for 13 days, a jury convicted veteran civil rights attorney Stewart, a member of the Guild, on charges of conspiracy, providing material support to terrorists and defrauding the U.S. government. Sentencing is scheduled for July 15. The 65-year-old attorney faces up to 20 years in prison.
Read NLG Statement

Day of Outrage! In Support of Lynne Stewart
The National Executive Committee of the NLG calls on all Guild chapters to organize and to take part in local actions as part of a "National Day of Outrage" in response to yesterday's Lynne Stewart verdict, which we see as an attack not only on our cherished colleague and fellow NLG member but also on all members of the legal community who represent unpopular clients and causes. We are calling for this coordinated day of action to be held Thursday, February 17 in your cities, towns, and, if you are a law student, at your school.
Read The Call To Action

Democracy Now! Interview's Lynne Stewart
Convicted Attorney Lynne Stewart: "You Can't Lock Up the Lawyers"
Lynne Stewart and her attorney, Michael Tigar, join Democracy Now! in our firehouse studio for their first extended national broadcast interview following Thursday's jury decision to convict Stewart on all five counts of conspiring to aid terrorists and lying to the government.
Read Full Content

Who is Lynne Stewart?
Visit her website

add your comments

IMC Network: Projects print radio satellite tv video Africa ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq nigeria south africa Canada hamilton maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg East Asia burma jakarta japan manila qc Europe alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol bulgaria croatia cyprus estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege lille madrid malta marseille nantes netherlands nice norway oost-vlaanderen paris/île-de-france poland portugal romania russia scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia west vlaanderen Latin America argentina bolivia brasil chiapas chile chile sur colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso Oceania adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne oceania perth qc sydney South Asia india mumbai United States arizona arkansas atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado danbury, ct dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk idaho ithaca kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma omaha philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca seattle tallahassee-red hills tampa bay tennessee united states urbana-champaign utah vermont virginia beach western mass worcester West Asia armenia beirut israel palestine ukraine Topics biotech Process discussion fbi/legal updates indymedia faq mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer

© 2000-2006 Cleveland Indy Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Cleveland Indy Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy