It depends on what your definition of "competent" is

ok, so jose padilla is "competent" to stand trial...

A federal judge found Jose Padilla competent to stand trial on terrorism conspiracy charges Wednesday, granting a significant victory to the government in the high-profile criminal case of a United States citizen who was initially designated an “enemy combatant” and held without charges.

but "competent," in padilla's case, may not mean much...

The threshold for legal competency is low, requiring a criminal defendant to have the capacity, on a basic level, both to understand the proceedings and to communicate with his lawyers. Most incompetency claims in federal court are denied, said Christopher Slobogin, an expert in law and psychiatry at the University of Florida, and most defendants found incompetent are clearly psychotic.

interesting... incompetent = psychotic... also interesting...

Judge Marcia G. Cooke ... asked the government ... “If the defendant refuses to discuss vast sections of his case, is that in and of itself not inability to assist counsel?”

[...]

“It doesn’t make sense that if the root of the defendant’s hesitancy to talk” was his treatment in the brig, [John C. Shipley, an assistant United States attorney] said, that the brig would be the only thing he discussed with his lawyers.

i suppose it all depends on who you're talking TO...

then, stepping outside of the need to stay "fair and balanced," the nyt gives us this...

The government’s arguments at the hearing sounded ridiculous and shameful. Prosecutors said Mr. Padilla always seemed fine to his jailers, but it was his jailers who did things like standing on his bare feet with boots so they could shackle him. The brig psychologist testified that he had spoken to Mr. Padilla only twice, once when he was first detained, and two years later — through a slit in his cell door.

When a psychologist testified for the defense that Mr. Padilla was “an anxiety-ridden, broken individual,” the prosecution said her tests were invalid — because the jailers had kept Mr. Padilla handcuffed throughout.

We will probably never know if Mr. Padilla was a would-be terrorist. So far, this trial has been a reminder of how Mr. Bush’s policy on prisoners has compromised the judicial process. And it has confirmed the world’s suspicions of the United States’ stooping to the very behavior it once stood against.

imho, i don't think the "world's suspicions" needed any confirming...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet