Nathan Newman wrote:
>...the original issue...is...how to handle lawyers who are involved in
>ongoing advice to clients who are still involved in the alleged illegal
>activity....
-But, but, the sheik, her client, was charged with conspiring to blow up -the World Trade Center, and the alleged criminal activity she is -charged with furthering is the publication of the sheik's opinion -about the political course to be followed by his former associates -in Egypt. The crime for which he was, rightly or wrongly, convicted -has nothing to do with the "crime" she is accused of conspiring to -help commit.
Caveat, to repeat-- I think the facts alleged in the Stewart case are shaky.
But the government's position is that the shiek not only was involved in the World Trade Center bombing, but is part of an ongoing terrorist network commiting further crimes. So just as anyone who facilitates a mob boss's management from prison of his criminal empire is liable for criminal indictment, so too is anyone who helps a terrorist leader maintain contact with his terrorist network.
-- nathan newman