Jaoudat Abouazza's supporters say he was illegally arrested, held for
41 days and subjected to crude torture in the name of "dentistry" while
in police custody in Bristol County, MA in June. Here's how an op-ed
piece in the Brookline TAB describes his treatment (via UFO Breakfast):
Guards at the Bristol County Correctional Facility allegedly
punched the Palestinian and repeatedly taunted him with chants
of "Taliban." On June 16, according to Brill, Abouazza was
restrained while someone in a surgical mask forcibly extracted four
teeth. Without anesthetic. The next day, when he said he wanted his
lawyer to review a form they told him to sign, Abouazza says the
guards threw him into solitary. When it turned out one of his teeth
was only partially removed, it took pressure from the Canadian
Consulate and the ACLU to get him antibiotics and pain medication.
The Sheriff denies Abouazza's charges. But attorney Brill says
an independent review of the medical records supports the claim
that Abouazza never signed a consent form - and reveals that the
extraction proceeded without x-rays and other standard pre-op
procedures.
The story goes on to describe numerous bizarre legal abuses, including
one judge penalizing Abouazza for his absence from a hearing which
the INS refused to let him attend. Another source says he was finally
flown to Canada and released on July 9th.
What I find oddest about this case is that I can't find confirmation of
it from higher-profile mainstream sources. A search of the New York
Times, Google News, Yahoo News, etc. turns up nothing. The Boston
Globe seems to have one article (which I can't get to without paying,
sigh) but no followup coverage of the final outcome and no emphasis on
the torture allegations. I'd think that allegations of police torture,
whether true or false, would be considered a serious matter and get
something more than spotty local coverage. Consider the parallels
with the Abner Louima case. Or does the War on Terrorism somehow
change the rules?
Links and discussion at:
http://www.io.com/~riddle/causes/?item=20020722
-- Prentiss Riddle ("aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada") rid...@io.com
-- You are in a maze of twisty little weblogs. http://www.io.com/~riddle/
Yeah -- so? Make the bastard suffer, I say.
-- clipped--
This guy was arrested in Cambridge for some minor offense but was
detained because of possible ties to "terrorists". Whether it's true or
not, I can't say and I don't really care all that much. What appears to
be true is that this guy is a first-rate asshole.
What's more interesting to me is how the unexamined left made this guy
out to be some sort of oppressed hero. They spun every incident into a
tale of how the Big Bad USA was out to get him (and them).
The key question for me is whether there was probable cause to hold this
guy who was traveling between Canada and the USA to promote his favorite
causes. I think it is likely that there was cause to hold him. The only
questions I have pertain to how long he was held and whether, as his
supporters want to suggest, they yanked some teeth out of his head for
no good reason. This last incident still has not been adequately
explained, but my guess is that the truth will not line up with the
accounts from his supporters.
Robert Winters
And I admire the fact that you don't care how many people know you are an
idiot ("skepticism" and "skeptical", perhaps?).
1. Yes, someone's arguments come across more strongly if they can spell.
That does not mean what they have to say is wrong, or right.
(Was that only in ne.politics?)
2. There is the issue of whether the authorities should have held
Abouazza for as long as they did. While I don't know, I am
tentatively willing to give them the benefit of the doubt there.
3. As far as I understand it, the right of access to a lawyer applies
if one is an American citizen held by U.S. authorities, or being held
within U.S. by U.S. authorities. If Abouazza was denied a lawyer after
asking for one, the Mass police are in the wrong, and the media should
call them on it.
4. As far as I understand it, the right to be present at one's hearings
applies in the same way. Habeus Corpus. Same conclusion except that
idea pre-dates the Constitution.
5. I don't know what the formal definition of torture is. I am inclined
to guess that removing 4 teeth without anesthesia or the normal surgical
preparation against the will of the patient would count as torture. We
don't know whether that happened, but if it did, that not only violates
the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, but
likely also violates international law. Not only illegal but very much
illegal.
6. I suspect the reason for the lack of coverage is because the major
press mostly do what the government tells them, especially in time of
"war" (not formally declared by congress as far as I understand).
So, yes, the "War on Terrorism" changes the rules, which is a shame.
Mary-Anne
@--------------------
You got that right, Mary-Anne. Among other things, the name-calling
about supposed spelling errors only reveals the ignorance of the
name-caller. "Scepticism" is the standard spelling in Britain,
"skepticism" in the U.S.
More to the point, I found a bit more news coverage -- again
local and "alternative" -- which makes the story a bit murkier.
Boston's "Weekly Dig" published two articles with a lot of he said/she
said between Abouazza's supporters, various attorneys and the Feds.
Apparently Abouazza's original minor legal troubles began a year ago,
and his latest detention is based in part on warrant outstanding from
that time (due, his supporters say, to a linguistic misunderstanding
about the fine he was to pay). As for the dental torture, that may
be in part a misunderstanding as well -- one account from Abouazza's
court-appointed attorney makes it sound like some sloppy informed
consent procedures resulted in Abouazza panicking while in the
dental chair, but does not confirm the charges of malicious dentistry
without anaesthetic. See:
http://www.weeklydig.com/?ContentId=1096
http://www.weeklydig.com/?ContentId=1144
There's also a lengthy discussion of the case (with more heat than
light, but what do you expect?) at Kuro5hin:
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/7/4/05012/46905
I'm not sure we'll ever know the truth behind this story, but among
the various versions are some plausible ones in which the players
are mere bumblers rather than villains and heroes. If I had to bet
that's where I'd put my money.
Hello, fuckhead: these ngs all are US-based. FOAD, asshole.
> > Palestinian-Canadian tortured in Massachusetts jail?
> > Jaoudat Abouazza's supporters say he was illegally arrested, held for
> > 41 days and subjected to crude torture in the name of "dentistry" while
> > in police custody in Bristol County, MA in June. Here's how an op-ed
> This guy was arrested in Cambridge for some minor offense but was
> detained because of possible ties to "terrorists". Whether it's true or
> not, I can't say and I don't really care all that much. What appears to
> be true is that this guy is a first-rate asshole.
Doesn't even a "first-rate asshole" have a right not to be tortured,
to be informed of the charges against him, to a proper legal defense,
and so forth?
--
Ron Newman rne...@thecia.net
http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/
Citizens of the U.S. have such rights, but it is not clear that
non-citizens are entitled to the same rights.
FWIW, that dentistry may have been done without anaesthetic because
the patient may have refused the anaesthetic. If the man needed
medical attention, should he have been refused it because he may
later have called it torture?
I find it hard to believe that the Brookline police colluded with
some dentist to torture anyone. There is certainly a simpler
(and more likely) explanation.
Chuck Demas
--
Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all,
Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well,
Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it.
de...@tiac.net | \___/ | http://www.tiac.net/users/demas
He wasn't tortured, and I'm surprised that you're buying that nonsense.
He knew why he was detained, at least initially, and there was adequate
basis for detaining him. He had an unregistered car with stolen plates.
The Cambridge Chronicle reported this week:
*******
"Abou Azza was arrested outside of the Harvard Square Au Bon Pain on May
30 and charged with several counts of motor vehicle violations and a
firearms identification violation. Immediately following his release
from local custody on June 3, he was taken into INS custody where he
remained until July 11."
"Abou Azza had entered the United States on a six-month tourist visa but
stayed for more than a year."
*******
He had a lawyer. In fact, it would appear that you must have some faith
in this lawyer since she's the one who spread this nonsensical story to
the media.
And so forth.
Robert Winters
Not in this country, fuckwad. Dunk your head back in the barrel and see if
you can get a clue this time.
>> Jaoudat Abouazza's supporters say he was illegally arrested, held
>> for 41 days and subjected to crude torture in the name of
>> "dentistry" while in police custody in Bristol County, MA in
>> June. Here's how an op-ed piece in the Brookline TAB describes
>> his treatment (via UFO Breakfast):
>
>
> Yeah -- so? Make the bastard suffer, I say.
Hey, it's the Missing Link himself!
Nice to know that this monkey has learned how to type.
Can't see where. The only idiot I see here is someone called The Big
Kahuna.
Oh, hey -- good one. You'd better let Mom back on her computer now, or she
might get upset.
> Oh, hey -- good one. You'd better let Mom back on her computer
> now, or she might get upset.
I'd rather play with you, Kahuna baby.
It's always fun to whack the low IQ ones.
No running away, are ya? heheh!
Really? Who responded to who first? You're my little troll bitch, boy --
and I've been making you dance.
> Really? Who responded to who first? You're my little troll
> bitch, boy -- and I've been making you dance.
MUAHAHA!! You're really deluded, dumbo!
With your proven low intelligence, I doubt whther you could even move
your little finger.