Mr. Ghailani's appointed counsel could not care less about his mental state. They merely want to keep him from announcing that he wants to remove them as his defense team. Furthermore, should Mr. Ghailani be successful in his efforts to announce his desire to remove his attorneys, appointed counsel want the effect of that announcement to be negated by a finding that he is unfit to proceed. Appointed counsels' efforts to have Mr. Ghailani declared unfit result from their efforts to protect themselves, not him.
I do not know anything about the letter you reference, even to the extent that I was unaware of it until you mentioned it.
I strongly suggest that you contact Peter Quijano, Greg Cooper, and Michael Bachrach, and ask them whether Mr. Ghailani is attempting to terminate their involvement in his case and whether his efforts to do so led to their "competency" concerns.
TP: I called Mr. Quijano, and asked him if Mr. Ghailani was attempting to remove him as counsel. He stated that he had no comment, then hung up on me. Can you tell us anything about Peter Quijano, Greg Cooper, and Michael Bachrach?
SF: I do not know any of these three men personally, although I am acquainted with Peter Quijano. Mr. Quijano is a somewhat flamboyant attorney who is long on style and short on substance. The Southern District's CJA Panel selection committee has been aggressively attempting to diversify the Panel's membership, and Mr. Quijano is an example of their efforts. It does not surprise me that Mr. Quijano hung up on you when you asked whether Mr. Ghailani is trying to remove him as counsel. The answer is yes, and Mr. Quijano would not want to give that answer in a public forum.
Mr. Bachrach is a protege of the Southern District CJA Panel's power brokers. Although I know nothing about him, I am sure he was added to Mr. Ghailani's defense team to provide the demographic background I alluded to in one of my previous answers. He is a graduate of Cardozo Law School, which is a law school in New York with a student body consisting largely of Jewish students who did not perform well enough academically to be competitive to attend a more prestigious law school.
I know nothing of Greg Cooper, except what he looks like.
You should be aware that these men have been actively enlisted in the government's war on terror. As such, they may one day be treated like the soldiers that they are. While I will make a plea to those who may harm them to allow their behavior to be dealt in accordance with law, they are definitely in danger. Al Qaeda is well-aware of the identities and the activities of the defense attorneys who served in the 2001 Embassy bombing trial in New York. Similarly, it will be well-aware of the attorneys participating in the defense of the defendants in the upcoming terror trials in New York, including Messrs. Quijano, Bachrach and Cooper. Again, I urge those who would do them harm to allow their misconduct to handled in accordance with law. Unfortunately, I am not in control of what may ensue from the attorneys' illegal conduct.
TP: You stated that Messrs. Quijano, Bachrach, and Cooper, "have been actively enlisted in the government's war on terror". As such, you've implied that they could be in danger. "Al Qaeda is well-aware of the identities and the activities of the defense attorneys who served in the 2001 Embassy bombing trial in New York."
I must tell our readers, I do not believe in Al Qaeda. I think "the base" is simply a database of CIA criminals, bogeymen who are useful for perpetuating this false war on terror. Can you tell us what you know of any Al Qaeda operations or assassinations? Also, could you provide some background information on this 2001 Embassy bombing trial?
SF: You may well be right that al Qaeda does not exist. However, Mr. al-Baluchi, or the person who I believe to be Mr. al-Baluchi, seems to think that it does and that it carried out the 9/11 attacks and that he is a member. Maybe he is lying, mistaken, or maybe the person with whom I've been meeting is not really Mr. al-Baluchi and is merely a government plant. Either way, for the purpose of our discussion, I don't think it matters. What does matter is the detainees' opinion of appointed counsel and, irrespective of the existence, or lack thereof, of al Qaeda, the detainees have formed a negative opinion about appointed counsel, and for good reason.
Mr. al-Baluchi is well-aware of the attorneys' behavior both during the 2001 Embassy bombing trial, and at Guantanamo Bay. He is aware of the identities of the attorneys who took part in the 2001 trial, and their performance, which he and his fellow detainees found deficient. That doesn't prove that he is a member of al Qaeda, but it does demonstrate that he was interested in the 2001 trial before his capture in 2003, unless you think the government provided him with the transcripts of the 2001 trial to bone him up on the attorneys or for some other reason. I doubt that.
I don't know anything about al Qaeda assassinations or any other operations, for that matter, except for the 9/11 operation. I do, however, know about the conduct of the attorneys assigned to represent the detainees at Guantanamo Bay before the military commissions, and I now know about Messrs. Quijano, Cooper, and Bachrach's efforts to frustrate Mr. Ghailani's right to counsel in his Southern District matter. Based upon my knowledge of the behavior of the defense attorneys at Guantanamo Bay and the behavior of Mr. Ghailani's attorneys, I have reason to believe that any appointed attorney's life would be in danger. There is no greater corruption in my mind than an attorney whose job it is to frustrate his own client's rights. That is the reason these attorneys are on these cases. The detainees know that and are not happy about it, to say the least.
I don't know much about the 2001 Embassy bombing trial. I do know that Mr. al-Baluchi is not happy with the attorneys who served on that matter or those attorneys who represented his cousin Ramzi Yousef. Mr. al-Baluchi's experience with appointed counsel at Guantanamo Bay has only served to confirm his suspicions about government-appointed counsel.
This concludes our interview.
Scott Fenstermaker has been in the news since it was announced that five suspects would stand trial in New York for their part in the 9/11 attacks. He has been slandered by the ACLU, Bill O'Reilly called him a "weasel", and most Americans think he is a traitor. Yet in every venue where he has appeared, Mr. Fenstermaker has defended the rights of these detainees.
