[BTW, while we're on the subject: the rule that allowed the Feds to monitor her lawyer/client conversations in the first place -- is that technically part of the Patriot Act? Or is it just one of many terrible laws passed in the wake of 9/11 that many of us think of as part of the Patriot Act but which are actually separate from it -- and not sunsetted?]
New York Times November 20, 2003
Lawyer Faces New Terror-Related Charges
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
F ederal prosecutors filed new charges yesterday against the defense
lawyer Lynne F. Stewart, who had succeeded in getting a federal judge
to dismiss earlier charges that she had helped one of her clients, a
convicted terrorist, pass messages from prison.
The new charges accuse Ms. Stewart of conspiring to provide material
support with a co-defendant, Mohammed Yousry, a translator, to the
same client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, who is serving a life sentence
in prison after being convicted of plotting to blow up New York
landmarks. Ms. Stewart and Mr. Yousry are also charged with concealing
their support for the sheik.
When Attorney General John Ashcroft announced the original charges in
2002, he called it the first use of a rule allowing the Bureau of
Prisons to monitor conversations between lawyers and inmates who are
threats to commit "future acts of violence or terrorism." The judge
who dismissed the charges in July found them to be constitutionally
vague.
The new charges are based on a different legal foundation and should
not face the same constitutional concerns as the original charges,
according to a statement issued by James B. Comey, the United States
attorney in Manhattan.
If convicted, Ms. Stewart and Mr. Yousry could each face 5 to 15 years
in prison.
Mr. Ashcroft said in a statement, "The government's decision to bring
additional charges against the defendants in this case is justified by
the evidence we obtained during our investigation, and reflects the
seriousness of the conduct allegedly engaged in by the defendants."
In a telephone interview, Ms. Stewart said she was perturbed.
"I'm just as emphatically not guilty as I was a year and a half ago,"
she said. "We're going to keep on keeping on."
She said the filing of new charges "seems like a pretty vindictive act
on the part of the government."
The government claims that during a prison visit in May 2000, Mr.
Abdel Rahman dictated letters to Mr. Yousry that gave instructions
intended for a terrorist group while Ms. Stewart distracted the
guards. "At one point," according to prosecutors, "Stewart and Yousry
explicitly discussed the fact that the guards were patrolling close to
the prison conference room and might notice that Stewart was not
involved in the conversation between Yousry and Abdel Rahman." Ms.
Stewart pretended to be part of the conversation "by making extraneous
comments such as `chocolate' and `heart attack,' " the prosecutors
said.
Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company