What American Non-Lawyers Do Not Understand About the Snowden Case and the Espionage Act.

  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    May 31, 2014 2:04 AM GMT
    Under law, this is the ONLY WAY the following trial confrontation could take place, under the Espionage Act of 1917, as evidenced by Daniel Ellsberg in his own trial:

    Counsel for Snowden: Mr Snowden, did you take these documents?
    Snowden: Yes.
    Counsel for Snowden: WHY did you take these documents?
    Federal Prosecutor: Objection. Irrelevant.
    Judge: SUSTAINED.

    (Snowden has NO right, under the Act, to ACCOUNT for or give REASON for his actions).

    So, here's your legal comparison. You are charged with First Degree Murder.

    Counsel for You: Did you KILL Mr X?
    You: Yes
    Counsel for You: WHY did you kill Mr X?
    Prosecutor: Objection. Irrelevant.
    Judge: SUSTAINED.

    You have NO chance, under LAW, to explain that Mr X was armed with two axes and coming at your four young children to kill them...when you shot him.

    It is simply, under law, no more complicated than that. So, if you were Snowden, would you come back to
    face that "fair trial"???
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    May 31, 2014 2:15 AM GMT
    lol we all know the US judicial is nothing but bullshit and money (or the lack thereof)
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    May 31, 2014 2:17 AM GMT
    tj85016 saidlol we all know the US judicial is nothing but bullshit and money (or the lack thereof)


    Guilt under the Espionage Act of 1917 is a Capital Offense. This is no laughing matter, although most Americans seem to think it is.