Some friends of mine recently attended a legal seminar on the “interviews” that the FBI frequently conducts in Muslim communities here in the United States. Many interviewees come forward, hoping to help the U.S. Government in terror investigations and to clear their families’ names. What often happens, instead, is that tiny discrepancies in their statements can be used by law enforcement as leverage into the most private areas of people’s lives. The immigration implications for many of these people are huge.

Read on for some notes that my friends jotted down. Note, of course, that none of this should be taken in lieu of legal counsel.

Based on the information people give in these interviews they are often deported and/or prosecuted as felons based on a loophole (section 1001) in the law that makes it possible for the government to prosecute you for failing to mention something as minor as a speeding ticket in the interview… So, 1. If FBI approaches you to “talk” ask, “am I being detained?” If No, then WALK AWAY!!! DO NOT TALK TO THEM. If Yes, then tell the FBI that you will not answer their questions. And that you want to talk to your lawyer. 2. If you get a note on your doorstep from the FBI requesting an interview. DO NOT GO! You do not have to go to these interviews. Contact your lawyer. If you decide that you do want to go to the interview, bring an immigration lawyer and a criminal defense lawyer with you to the interview. Also, they [the defense lawyer] should never mention the word MIRANDA in the interviews - b/c as long as FBI doesn’t mirandize them theoretically what they say in the interview can’t be used against them. But you should not go to these interviews. You don’t have to and it will only bring you and your loved ones a lot of misery. 3. If you get a Grand Jury WITNESS subpoena to testify about a friend or family member: Get a lawyer. If your lawyer gets you immunity make sure that it is DERIVATIVE immunity not just LIMITED USE immunity. If they wont give you derivative immunity then don’t accept limited use immunity and assert your right to REMAIN Silent.

More:

just some other thoughts on this I thought some might be interested in. First, for those who don’t already know this, the citation for the section mentioned below is 18 U.S.C. 1001, if you are interested in reading up on it. Clients can be prosecuted under this for statements made in these “voluntary” interviews, even when the staements didn’t pertain to a crime, or if the client later corrects the statement as having previously mispoken or misunderstood the question, et. al. Read Brogan v. United States, 522 U.S. 398 (1998) for a deeper analysis on how the Court views these situations. This goes over how there are no longer any exculpatory “no’s” in the field in these situations (i.e., where in the past someone asked something in the field not under oath could merely deny knowledge of something). Also, section 1001 is a federal crime. So often times local authorities will be talking to a client, but they will have a federal officer (ATF, FBI) standing back and just listening who can then hold a given statement over the client later. Just something to be aware of and to make clients aware of. Second, as to what to look for in behavior and questioning from the feds in these interviews, and in reference to the comment on the mention of Miranda. You can download or print a very good memo from the AG on interrogation procedure (8 C.F.R. secs. 287.3, 287.5) at : http://www.usdoj.gov/dag/readingroom/terrorism2.htm . Finally (well, not really, but I’ll spare you reading a book here so noone gets mad at me), a very useful case to read regarding securing immunity for your client in exchange for grand jury testimony and protecting them from future prosecution is, Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972). I believe this is the same ruling that shielded Ollie North from prosecution after his testimony before the Iran-Contra Commission.

Related Posts:

• My Submission to StopTheSpying.org (January, 2008)
• Feingold on the D.R. Congo (October, 2007)
• United States Using Chemical Weapons Against Iraqi Civilians (November, 2005)
• Bill O’Reilly Loathes SF (November, 2005)
• franchisers over enfranchisement (January, 2006)

This entry was posted on Monday, November 14th, 2005 at 1:21 pm and is filed under politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.