Lawyer Is Guilty of Aiding Terror

This story in the NYT's contains the typical slant they are famous for. It's evident here, in this out take:

"In a startlingly sweeping verdict, Ms. Stewart was convicted on all five counts of providing material aid to terrorism and of lying to the government when she pledged to obey federal rules that barred her client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, from communicating with his followers. Her co-defendants, Ahmed Abdel Sattar and Mohamed Yousry, were also convicted of all the charges against them."

"Startlingly sweeping verdict...?" Come on. The trial lasted seven months with twelve days over four weeks of jury deliberation. Do you really think they got it wrong? (I suppose there is precedent - since the OJ jurors blew it.)

Ms. Stewart goes on to make her case in public opinion after the verdict:

"'I see myself as being a symbol of what people rail against when they say our civil liberties are eroded,' she said to a small cluster of her supporters outside the federal district courthouse. 'I hope this will be a wake-up call to all the citizens of this country, that you can't lock up the lawyers, you can't tell the lawyers how to do their jobs.'"

Since when? Why is a lawyer any different than any other citizen who breaks the law? If they break the law while doing their job, they deserve to be punished for it. The law is the law. A lawyer should understand that fact. If they disagree with the law, work to change it - don't break it and claim professional immunity.

This woman seems to deserve what she got. By the following statement, she admits her actions were intentional:

"Testifying on her own behalf, Ms. Stewart said the press release was part of a legal strategy that involved provoking the government if necessary in order to keep the sheik in the public eye. Ms. Stewart said she was acting within an unwritten lawyer's "bubble" in the prison rules that allowed her to defend her client as she thought best."

She is not above the law - especially when her premeditated actions directly impacted the lives of others that she helped place in jeopardy! For the entire time she represented these clients, her goal was to stay "in the public eye". Was this for publicity for herself, or her client? Was it to raise awareness of the cause her clients believed in and she supported? The killing of innocent people. Good riddance!