> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of P.J. Ponder
> Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 16:22
> To: Greg Broiles
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Why did White House change its mind on crypto?
> Would the courts allow the prosecution to admit evidence without
> recognizing the right of cross examination of witnesses or examination of
> evidence and its provenance? I helped defend a case in law school (as a
> clerk; I couldn't practice yet) that involved a wiretap, and the FBI and
> US Attorney's Office had to give us copies of the tapes, and the phone
> records, and everything. That was twenty years ago, but I don't think
> things have changed that much. Then again, I have never been involved
> with a case where secret government information gathering was an issue
> bearing on a significant piece of evidence.
Your argument is straight to the point. Since you are unfamiliar with the
operations of the current FISA court, you obviously can't be blamed for not
being aware of the fact that there is an US court in operation today that
conducts its proceedings quite differently from the way proceedings were
conducted back when you were in law school.
Under existing FISA court rules, the defense is not afforded the opportunity
to cross examine prosecution witnesses about evidence presented by the
prosecution deemed sensitive for national security reasons.
The current CESA proposal simply is an attempt to extend this
well-established practice to other courts of law.
I am afraid that "things" have changed vastly more in the last 20 years than
you may be aware of.
Just a hunch,
--Lucky
