Jose Padilla sentenced to 17 years
A federal judge in Miami sentenced the alleged Islamic terrorist, Jose Padilla, to 17 years and four months for conspiring with terrorist cells around the world. Padilla and two others received convictions in August for conspiracy to kidnap and kill citizens abroad and two lesser charges of material support. Judge Marcia Cooke of the Federal District Court in Miami sentenced Padilla and his alleged co-conspirators Tuesday, imposing far less stringent sentences than the life terms sought by the federal government.
“There is no evidence that these defendants personally, killed maimed or kidnapped” anyone, Cook said before unveiling her decision.
Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft said Padilla was part of an “unfolding terrorist plot to attack the United States by exploding a radioactive dirty bomb” intended to cause “mass death and injury” in April 2002. The U.S. government detained Padilla in solitary confinement for three and a half years at a naval brig in South Carolina. Authorities transferred him to civilian custody in Miami in 2006, adding his case to the pending conspiracy charges filed against his alleged co-conspirators. The Padilla case runs counter to the claims by Bush administration officials who said only military detention and trial by military commissions, such as in the tribunal established at Guantanamo Bay, could handle cases of suspected terrorists.
This is one of many recent cases in which the civilian court systems proved an adequate venue for alleged terrorists. The legal precedent says the civilian court systems should be used so long as they are open and functional. This case, among others, testifies to that status quo doctrine. What’s even more astounding is that Padilla was arrested on U.S. soil and is himself a U.S. citizen. A New York court recently sentenced a Canadian born suspect to similar charges, but he was not transferred to military custody either. I’ve made the argument here before suggesting U.S. law is not up to speed with cases in the new seemingly trans-national face of modern warfare, but in this case, and the others that precede it, the long standing and evolving face of jurisprudence proved its durability once again.