(no subject)
Aug. 19th, 2006 11:35 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
More fuel for the fire for those of us suspicious of the war on terrorism...
An alleged Australian terrorist has had his conviction quashed because of how his confession was extracted. According to the news item, after his arrested, he was assaulted, threatened with castration, threatened that his wife would be raped, and essentially told that if he didn't give the Australian police interviewers what they wanted, he'd end up in Guantánamo. The twist in the case is that, in other circumstances, he has pretty much admitted the crimes of which he was accused. A retrial may return him to prison; if it doesn't, then an apparently guilty man will walk free because his interrogation was against the law. What could be more counterproductive?
flyingsauce links to commentaries which cast doubt on the alleged liquid explosives plot. If it's true that liquid explosives would be extremely unlikely to succeed as bombs, then of course the alleged plot could still be for real, and horrific - but not the "unimaginable" threat we were told about.
An alleged Australian terrorist has had his conviction quashed because of how his confession was extracted. According to the news item, after his arrested, he was assaulted, threatened with castration, threatened that his wife would be raped, and essentially told that if he didn't give the Australian police interviewers what they wanted, he'd end up in Guantánamo. The twist in the case is that, in other circumstances, he has pretty much admitted the crimes of which he was accused. A retrial may return him to prison; if it doesn't, then an apparently guilty man will walk free because his interrogation was against the law. What could be more counterproductive?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)