Sheesh! (As Gomer would probably put it.) I'm betting he'll be a hit on Australian TV, he's just one of those Americans you can't help liking, sort of the loveable earnest type. Comes across as absolutely fair-dinkum (sincere), an innocent, cross-eyed bucolic, accusing his government of gross injustice in a more-in-sorrow-than-anger tone.
I think he'll be hitting the national airwaves here again tomorrow, the legal strategy appears to be to shame the Australian Government into getting off its satrap arse and trying to extricate these Aussies the hell out of the clutches of the US legal system, as all other civilised countries have done.
Anyhow, I love the bloke. I just can't wait for the movie.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
TV PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT
LOCATION: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1064158.htm
Broadcast: 11/03/2004 Hicks' lawyer visits Adelaide
Reporter:
KERRY O'BRIEN: While Australian Guantanamo Bay captive David Hicks continues to be held in his wire cage waiting for news of his military trial, his Pentagon-appointed counsel, Marine Major Michael Mori, has come to Australia to collect evidence from ASIO and the Federal Police.
In a press conference in Adelaide today, Major Mori said if Hicks does have to answer charges for alleged connections with the Taliban government in Afghanistan or with the Al Qaeda terrorist network, they should be heard under Australian law.
But he still doesn't know what charges the US Government intends to bring.
I spoke with Major Mori from Adelaide late today.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Michael Mori, David Hicks has been captive for more than two years.
You've been his lawyer since November.
You've established one thing he won't be charged with, that is, killing any US soldier or any civilian, but do you yet have any idea what he will be charged with?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: US MARINE DEFENCE COUNSEL: Um, I haven't received any charges yet.
So I really don't want to guess at that or speculate.
That's really up to the Government to charge him.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Have you asked why the delay?
Have you asked when it's likely to be brought on?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: No, I'm not really pushing it.
I think it could be two days from now or two months.
I don't think it will be very long, I think it will be within the next several months, if there's going to be charges against him.
I don't think he should be charged.
KERRY O'BRIEN: So in the absence of charges, is there any light that you can shed on what David Hicks' defence would be, even in the broad?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: Well, right now I think it's most important to focus on the process, before you even get to the facts, is what kind of process is going to be used to try David Hicks and is it going to be a fair process?
If it's not a fair process, the facts are almost second irrelevant.
KERRY O'BRIEN: You're saying that you'd prefer the US court martial system to the system that has so far been laid out for any trial that David Hicks might face?
What is the fundamental difference that you would want?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: The fundamental differences are that in a court martial you have an independent judge directing the trail, ensuring that both sides are allowed to present their evidence in an unbiased manner, that the jury doesn't hear evidence that they shouldn't be admitted.
You have in the court martial system an appeal to civilian court of review, even all the way up to the Supreme Court.
The judge also, in a court martial, would rule on motions by the defence.
All those protections have been removed from the commission process and there is no independent judge.
There is no independent civilian review and even the person that has to rule on defence motions is the same person who approves the charges in the first place.
KERRY O'BRIEN: And is it true that the person who has the last word would be the President of the United States?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: Yes, true, the process.
My biggest fear is also the use of people's statements made to an investigator.
The prosecution may offer that some investigator spoke to a witness and here's the written document by that investigator containing the substance of his discussion without providing the defence the opportunity to cross-examine that witness in front of the commission.
KERRY O'BRIEN: The British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, as you pointed out, has said that any trials of British citizens at Guantanamo Bay should meet international legal standards.
Does the process that David Hicks faces as you know it at this stage meet international legal standards?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: No it doesn't, and obviously Jack Straw was looking for the system to be moved to meet those standards.
Hopefully, if the four British detainees receive those standards, David Hicks should as well.
KERRY O'BRIEN: You've said that Hicks has been falsely portrayed in the Australian media.
In what way?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: Well, when the case first broke - and I've just been reviewing some of the other old news reports and newspapers - they talked about David Hicks threatening to kill a guard, slipping out of handcuffs, accused him of being aggressive and those are not true at all, they're completely false.
David Hicks did none of those things.
The media's use of the photograph where he's holding that weapon - the media likes to use just the very close-in focus of David's head and just a little bit of the weapon and not attributing that to Kosovo where that photo was taken because if you'd zoomed out and looked at the whole picture, you'd see David was holding part of a weapon that wasn't even loaded and he had two buddies standing there with their guns as well and it was basically just a posed photo.
It didn't have anything to do with Afghanistan at all.
KERRY O'BRIEN: But David Hicks was fighting with the Taliban when he was captured, was he not?
Do you dispute that?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: I can't confirm any facts that have been given to me because of the protective order, sir.
KERRY O'BRIEN: There is speculation, of course, that Hicks attended an Al Qaeda training camp in Pakistan.
How do you feel, as a US marine officer, about the possibility that you might - and I'm stressing 'might' - be defending a dangerous terrorist and potentially getting him out of captivity?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: Well, you're taking two facts and putting them together.
One, you're saying David Hicks attended a training camp and then you're making the leap that he's a dangerous person.
KERRY O'BRIEN: I stressed 'might'?
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: Or that he would be dangerous.
I think if David Hicks attended any sort of training - and, again, if that was not against the law of the country he's from, where the country he owes allegiance to and it's not against the country where he's at, I don't understand why the US has any more interest to try him than Australia would.
KERRY O'BRIEN: Michael Mori, thank you very much for talking with us.
MAJOR MICHAEL MORI: Thank you sir.