News Articles about Lynne Stewart


Lynne Stewart Got 92 Extra Months in Prison for Saying This

Posted: 01/02/2014

Matt Sledge, HUFFINGTON POST

NEW YORK -- Disbarred civil rights attorney Lynne Stewart was released from a federal prison in Texas on Tuesday more than four years into a 10-year sentence after a judge ordered a compassionate release because of her terminal breast cancer.

But Stewart, who was convicted of providing material support to the terrorist Omar Abdel-Rahman by transmitting a message from him to Reuters in 2005, might have been freed long ago if she hadn't continued to speak out after she was first sentenced.

Immediately after receiving a 28-month sentence in October 2006, Stewart stood out in front of a federal courthouse and addressed reporters. One of them asked her if she had any regrets.

"Any regrets?" she responded. "I don't think anybody would say that going to jail for two years is something you look forward to, but as my clients have said to me, 'I can do that standing on my head.'"

Stewart's comment about doing the sentence standing on her head, and another in an interview with Democracy Now in which she said, "I would do it again," inflamed a federal appeals panel.  They ordered a district judge to reconsider her sentence, taking into account whether she had perjured herself on the stand in her trial and whether her statements showed that she had any remorse.

Stewart's lawyers appealed that resentencing.  Her lawyer, Herald Price Fahringer, told a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals that "One of the most cherished policies of this nation is that everybody should be allowed to speak freely."

"This case puts that principle to a very great test," he said.

The Los Angeles Times editorial board put it a little more bluntly, arguing that that Stewart didn't deserve "8 more years for mouthing off."

But the appeals court approved the resentencing of Stewart that it had ordered in the first place. She would likely have remained in prison until 2018, were it not for the cancer that federal lawyers estimated leave her with less than 18 months to live.

"Any regrets?" she responded.  "I don't think anybody would say that going to jail for two years is something you look forward to, but as my clients have said to me, 'I can do that standing on my head.'"

Stewart's comment about doing the sentence standing on her head, and another in an interview with Democracy Now in which she said, "I would do it again," inflamed a federal appeals panel.  They ordered a district judge to reconsider her sentence, taking into account whether she had perjured herself on the stand in her trial and whether her statements showed that she had any remorse.

Stewart's lawyers appealed that resentencing.  Her lawyer, Herald Price Fahringer, told a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals that "One of the most cherished policies of this nation is that everybody should be allowed to speak freely."

"This case puts that principle to a very great test," he said.

The Los Angeles Times editorial board put it a little more bluntly, arguing that that Stewart didn't deserve "8 more years for mouthing off."

But the appeals court approved the resentencing of Stewart that it had ordered in the first place.  She would likely have remained in prison until 2018, were it not for the cancer that federal lawyers estimated leave her with less than 18 months to live.

Source:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/02/lynne-stewart-resentencing_n_4532857.html


'Terror Lawyer' Lynne Stewart likely to stay in prison despite terminal cancer.

The 73-year-old disbarred attorney, who was recently given 18 months to live, is serving the fourth year of a decade-long sentence for helping Egyptian cleric Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman send messages to terrorists from behind bars.  Her supporters packed the courtroom during the hearing of her compassionate release request.

BY OREN YANIV    NEW YORK DAILY NEWS, Thursday, August 8, 2013, 7:17 PM

A New York federal judge all but said Thursday that locked-up radical lawyer Lynne Stewart — who asked him for early release because she's dying of cancer — has no legal leg to stand on.

The 73-year-old disbarred attorney was recently given 18 months to live after being diagnosed with terminal breast cancer.

She's serving the fourth year of a decade-long sentence for helping Egyptian cleric Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman send messages to terrorists from behind bars.

U.S. District Judge John Koeltl strongly suggested he had no authority to reduce Stewart's punishment without an application for compassionate release from the Bureau of Prisons — which denied a request to do that in June.

"If I granted your motion, I'll be violating the plain words of the statute," he told Stewart's lawyer Jill Shellow.  "Aren't you asking me to do something in plain derogation of the statute?"

Shellow claimed the director of prisons had no rational reason to deny the release request and argued that the judge still had discretion.  A new application for compassionate release was filed with the bureau on Wednesday.

Stewart, who's undergoing chemotherapy treatments in a Texas prison, wasn't present during the hearing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Koeltl didn't say when he would issue a decision.

The courtroom was packed with supporters of the so-called "terror lawyer."  They rallied outside before the hearing.

Stewart's husband, Ralph Poynter, addressed them after it was over.

"I'm not going to say that I'm hopeful," he said.  "I will say that we must continue the struggle and have hope in ourselves." 


No Tears for Lynne Stewart

Don’t release her from jail.

by MICHELLE MALKIN    April 10, 2013National Review

The jihadists’ favorite American lawyer, Lynne Stewart, reportedly has Stage 4 breast cancer. Her radical friends — ranging from the “Party of Socialism and Liberation” and “Workers World” to Pete Seeger, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal — want her freed from jail.  There’s only one decent response to the Lynne Stewart Fan Club’s criminal-coddling demand: No, hell, no.

The way the bleeding hearts tell it, this harmless grandma got thrown in the slammer by Big Bad Bush merely because she was “distributing press releases on behalf of her jailed client, Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman.”  Oh, the outrageous inhumanity!

How could America the Cruel do this to an innocent little old lady serving the cause of “social justice”?

How can they just let her suffer and perish behind bars?  All she did was “distribute press releases.”

Sixties leftover agitator Dick Gregory is now on a hunger strike until the feds order the “compassionate release” of the Left’s sweetheart “political prisoner” and she “receives medical treatment in the care of her family and with physicians of her choice.”

He and Stewart’s apologists claim she was prosecuted “to intimidate the entire legal community so that few would dare to defend political clients whom the state demonizes and none would provide a vigorous defense.”  Spare me the prog-lodyte pathos.

Allow me to smash the world’s smallest violin to bits. Lynne Stewart is no martyr, no heroine.  She’s a menace to peace-loving society who illegally conspired with killers. And there’s a very good reason her client was demonized.  He is a demon.

Refresher course for the clueless: Stewart was convicted in 2005 of helping terrorist Rahman — the blood-stained Blind Sheikh — smuggle coded messages of Islamic violence to outside followers in violation of an explicit pledge to abide by her client’s court-ordered isolation.  Rahman, Stewart’s “political client,” had called on Muslims to “destroy” the West, “burn their companies, eliminate their interests, sink their ships, shoot down their planes, and kill them on the sea, air or land.”

He issued bloody fatwas against U.S. “infidels” that inspired the 1993 WTC bombing, the 1997 massacre of Western tourists in Luxor, Egypt, and the 9/11 attacks.  Defying a judge’s communications ban, Stewart ferried messages to the Blind Sheikh from fellow jihadist Rifa’l Ahman Tara urging him to support a new wave of Islamic violence in Egypt — and then smuggled out a coded order to his followers lifting a ceasefire between his terrorist group and the Egyptian government.  Stewart personally delivered one of the messages to a Reuter’s reporter.

The Middle East Quarterly also described how Stewart created “covering noises” for the Blind Sheikh’s translator to evade the communications ban: “On some surveillance videos, Stewart could be seen shaking a water jar or tapping on the table while [the translator] and the sheikh exchanged communications that were then later disseminated to the sheikh’s followers.”  After receiving an initial paltry sentence of 28 months for abetting terrorism, the disbarred civil-rights attorney was resentenced to ten years in the slammer.  A federal panel of judges excoriated her for her sickening arrogance.

“From the moment she committed the first act for which she was convicted, through her trial, sentencing and appeals,” Judge Robert Sack of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals wrote, “Stewart has persisted in exhibiting what seems to be a stark inability to understand the seriousness of her crimes.”

Stewart failed to understand “the breadth and depth of the danger in which” her crimes had “placed the lives and safety of unknown innocents, and the extent to which they constituted an abuse of her trust and privilege as a member of the bar,” the panel found.

This case remains a shining example of just how dangerous it is for America to give foreign-born jihadists the full panoply of American constitutional rights and all the attendant benefits of a civilian trial.  Stewart’s treacherous collaboration with the Blind Sheikh endangered — and cost — innocent lives.  Stewart remains unrepentant. She called 9/11 an “armed struggle.”  Upon her initial sentencing, she boasted that she could serve the term “standing on her head.”

After she was convicted of aiding and abetting Rahman, she told an interviewer she “would do it again.”  Now she wants mercy, medical comforts, and freedom?  No, hell, no.  This messenger gal for murderous barbarians made her prison bed.  Die in it.

Source:  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/345173/no-tears-lynne-stewart-michelle-malkin


The Terrorist's Lawyer

Lynne Stewart Defends Herself

May 02,2002

CORRESPONDENT David Kohn

According to Attorney General John Ashcroft, radical activist attorney Lynne Stewart represents a new face of terrorism in America.

Ashcroft alleges that Stewart helped move messages from her client's jail cell in Minnesota to a terrorist cell in Egypt.

Her client is Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind cleric who was convicted of plotting to blow up New York City landmarks.  And the attorney general says that helping the sheik get a message to his followers makes Stewart a co-conspirator in terrorism.

But being indicted as a terrorist has made Stewart a martyr to many who think the government is using terrorism as an excuse to trample civil liberties.

In this report that originally aired in May 2002, Stewart - in her only television interview - acknowledged that she did pass a message from the sheik to his followers. But she maintained that the message was merely political advice, and that she was simply acting as his attorney and was in no way part of a terrorist conspiracy.  Correspondent Mike Wallace reports.

"I just really and truly believe that the American people really deserve to see live the person that Attorney General Ashcroft has said is aiding terrorists," says Stewart. "And to judge for themselves whether or not this government is now reaching way beyond what any of us would want it to do."

Over the years, Stewart has represented a flock of radical clients, including Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric who wants to replace Egypt's current government with an Islamic theocracy.  The sheik's followers were convicted of the first of the World Trade Center bombings back in 1993.  Then, two years later, he was convicted of plotting to blow up other New York landmarks, like the George Washington Bridge and the United Nations building.

When the sheik was found guilty, Lynne Stewart wept in court: "I believed, and I believe today, that he is wrongfully convicted."

She says the sheik did not plot against the U.S., but that he does want to overthrow the government of Egypt - and that she admires him:  "Very, very intelligent.  Very witty.  Very dedicated.  But dedicated to a free Egypt."

Attorney General Ashcroft says the sheik remains a powerful leader of a terrorist organization called the Islamic Group: "This Islamic group is a global terrorist organization which has forged an alliance with other terrorist groups including al Qaeda."

The U.S. Government is determined to prevent the sheik from plotting terrorism and passing messages to his followers in the U.S. or Egypt.  So, before she could see him, Stewart had to agree in writing that she would not talk about, nor pass on, anything of a political nature - that she'd discuss only his legal matters.

But here's where she got into trouble.  Ashcroft alleges that several times the sheik gave Stewart instructions through her U.S. government-approved interpreter, instructions that he wanted passed on to his people in Egypt.

Ashcroft said the government knew this happened because the Justice Department had gotten a court order to secretly tape all the sheik's conversations with Stewart, to pick up whatever intelligence they could about terrorism.

"Well, you know, we haven't seen anything yet, actually," says Stewart.  "I have to see those tapes and hear them."

The most important tapes would be from one weekend of meetings that Stewart had with the sheik in his Minnesota prison.  She told 60 Minutes that she believed her interpreter was asking the sheik questions about his prison conditions from a list she had prepared in advance.

"He would read to him," she says.  "I would not understand one word that was going on, back and forth."

But she admitted that at one point that she realized the conversation had turned political:  "He said he had a press release.  He gave me generally what should be in it."

The sheik wanted her to issue a press release telling his followers in Egypt that they had his permission to end their cease fire with the Egyptian government, and had his permission to resume their attacks.  Ashcroft's most serious charge is that Stewart gave the Sheik's statement to the press - and when she did, he says she became a co-conspirator in terrorism.

"I'm accused of materially aiding a terrorist organization based upon a press release … that I released," says Stewart.

But Stewart told 60 Minutes the message was merely political advice, not a military order:  "To me, it was not saying 'Take out the guns and mow them down.'  It was more like an advisory. "This is what I'm thinking about.'"

"Politically, more than it was a call to arms.  He hasn't been in Egypt since '89," she adds.  "He's hardly got his finger on the pulse of military operations."

Ashcroft did not allege that the press release led to any violence in Egypt, and Stewart told 60 Minutes that she wouldn't have done it if she'd thought it might have caused violence.  In fact, she says she felt the sheik had a right to get his thoughts to his people, but she knew that putting out his message would violate her agreement with the prison.

"I knew that there was a possibility that the government would cut me off from him for releasing this statement.  But he told me he wanted this statement to get out to his people," says Stewart.  "It's a mistake, but is it an indictable offense? Is this materially aiding a terrorist organization?"

Apparently, the Clinton administration didn't think it was all that serious.  Back then, the Justice Department barely slapped her wrist.  It simply had her sign another statement that she would abide by the rules, including "I shall not broadcast messages for Abdel Rahman ... to the media."  And then, they let her resume seeing the sheik.

"They apparently did not think it was so dangerous or so important, that they stopped me from visiting," she says.

And back then, the government was right, according to Stewart's friend, defense attorney Ron Kuby:  "If this was such an act of aiding and abetting terrorism, why wasn't she arrested two years ago when she allegedly made the statements to the press."

But that was before 9/11, and before Ashcroft became attorney general. And now that the government is going after terrorists' attorneys, Kuby says Ashcroft has gone too far.

"This was designed and certainly has the effect of sending a chilling message through the defense community.  You work hard as a defense lawyer.  Your family hates you.  The public hates you.  You don't make any money," says Kuby.  "And in the end, if you do a really good job, you get indicted.  After the indictment of Lynne Stewart, what kind of a lawyer in his or her right mind is going to take one of these cases?"

But Kuby gets no sympathy from Columbia University law professor, Richard Uviller, who told 60 Minutes that laws apply to lawyers, too.

"If she was, I should say a co-conspirator, then the fact that she's a lawyer makes no difference whatsoever," says Uviller. "There is no special status to lawyers under these circumstances, once they join or assist or co-conspire with their clients.  They become like everybody else.  Subject to surveillance and subject to prosecution."

And Uviller applauds Ashcroft's actions:  "I think that his actions with respect to law enforcement and criminal prosecution of terrorists and potential terrorists are exactly what I'd like it to be.  Just what I would expect from a careful, thoughtful, aggressive Department of Justice."

Ashcroft declined to talk with 60 Minutes, but he did go on "The David Letterman Show" to explain what he's trying to do:  "We simply aren't going to allow people who are convicted of terrorism to continue to achieve terrorist objectives by sending messages and directing activity from their prison."

"There was nothing clandestine or furtive here," says Kuby.  "But to indict somebody for aiding and abetting a terrorist organization because she spoke to the press and conveyed her client's views to the news media. That's never happened before in the history of this country."

Here's what Ashcroft said when he announced Stewart's indictment:  "We will not look the other way when our institutions of justice are subverted.  We will not ignore those who claim rights for themselves while they seek to destroy the rights of others."

"I don't think that indicting Lynne Stewart, lawyer, is the answer to the terrorist threat," says Stewart.

However, she says she relishes the fight:  "I have been fighting all my life."

She's been fighting all her life for a variety of radicals, but not really all her life.  The fact is, her upbringing was quite conventional.  She grew up a nice white, Protestant girl from Queens.

"It was a completely white, working class community.  And of course I was raised with the usual liberal, you know, all people are brothers.  Don't be prejudiced," she says.

Her parents were teachers, and when she began her first teaching job in Harlem, she saw the world as never before.

"It was as if I were in a foreign country.  I had never known that a place like Harlem existed," says Stewart.  "Children try to draw self-portraits.  And these self-portraits, instead of coming out as beautiful as those children were, were somehow grotesque.  They drew themselves as white, with blond hair. This made me weep."

In the '60s, she had demonstrated for civil rights and against the Vietnam War, and that's when she met her husband, Ralph, who was teaching in the same elementary school.  He calls her "a voice for the voiceless."

"She stood up for the black people when she didn't have to," says Ralph Stewart. "She could have gone off into white America and forget she ever saw Harlem.  But she didn't."

Instead, she's been a left wing radical ever since and proud of it.

If convicted, Stewart could spend decades in prison.  But she told a recent convention of socialist scholars that she has a more immediate problem within her family.  Her grandson, Arthur, asked her son, "Did Grandma really help the terrorists?"  His father said, 'No, they lied about her.'"

"But you know, when they put that 'T' label on you, that 'T' label sticks," says Stewart. "And even Arthur, who loves me beyond all things, had to ask, 'Did she do this?'"

In July, a federal judge took the "T-Label" off Lynne Stewart.  And in a major victory for her defense, Judge John Koetil threw out the terrorist charges against her, leaving instead less serious non-terrorist charges of violating government ground rules when she visited her client in prison.  Stewart, however, vows she will beat those charges too.

Source:  http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-terrorists-lawyer/