Speaker 1: 0:00

Welcome to arrested the only local show that takes you into the belly of our criminal justice system, cohosted by Mike Brooks and Atlanta criminal defense attorney Dan conaway of Conway and strickler pc.

Speaker 2: 0:12

Good morning everybody. Welcome to arrested with your host, Mike Brooks and criminal defense

Speaker 3: 0:18

journey, Dan cutaway where we take a look at the criminal justice system here in America and maybe another country here, there. But today we've got some great topics way. Dan. How's it going buddy? It's good. Good to be her mic. Well, I tell you what, when, when we were talking about what we're gonna do this weekend on, arrested this one story that you, that you brought up, dead. I think, uh, I think it's just incredible to me that we're even talking about this particular group and that they're getting money from the federal government and what we're talking about folks. You're not gonna believe this. When I read this, I go, are you kidding me?

Speaker 4: 1:04

You're a federal tax dollars at work.

Speaker 3: 1:06

Exactly. Well, the nation of Islam. That's right. That nation of Islam, who is headed up by Reverend Louis Farrakhan? Well, the nature of Islam is leaders have received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the US government get this since 2008, 2008 to teach religious study programs for the federal prison inmates. And this is according to records that were reviewed by the Washington examiner. I, I, I tell your dad the nation of Islam. I look at them, you know, because I started the hate crimes program back when I was a cop in DC. And to me the nation of Islam is a hate group and one of the biggest hate, bonkers in the world is Louis Farrakhan. How in the hell are they getting federal dollars? It just because first amendment, you're, you're the attorney. You tell us why the hell they're getting money.

Speaker 4: 2:18

Well, it is amazing because we're talking about, um, a group which, uh, has, uh, said all sorts of things over the years that are just incredibly incendiary. Um, we're talking about, um, the nation Islam preaches. And I'm reading from an article from the Washington examiner by Elena Goodman. Uh, the nation of Islam preaches that white people are blue devils and Jews are the synagogue of Satan and yeah, they've, and they continue to receive money until today, right? This year

Speaker 3: 2:51

we, we, we talked, we talked a bit on, on, on my show, you know, noon to three everyday on the new talk. What is it, seven to Mike Brooks show. And he, he calls

Speaker 4: 3:01

Jews in Israel, termites. He called them just recently. Termites. So how does he get away with this and just, and just for some historical reference there these days, exactly the kinds of terms and references that were used by groups like the Nazis, the National Socialists back in the day for vermin, termites, things like this, things a, not humans, people that a person's that didn't even qualify as human, therefore they deserve extermination. Terminally he can't get any more hate filled such hate speech if you will. But, but so here we look at this and just to be clear, the nation of Islam has been labeled a hate group by both the Anti Defamation League and the southern poverty law center. Um, so, uh, this is someone who, this is a group that's been labeled a hate group and, uh, the money is going to basically support prison programs so that when you're in prison, uh, there is counseling, there is ministry available in a wide variety of religious backgrounds in this is a good thing, domination denominations and also, uh, also secular counseling as well. So this is all fine and good. This is, it's not that we're, I, I'm, what I'm trying to say, or just as I'm not against counseling and prisons. I think it's a very good thing and we need to have that, but there's a big button, uh, whether our federal tax dollars, you need to be going to this. This is a whole nother issue because this comes down to the issue that we've talked about before. Our bill of rights, and this falls under free speech, are negative rights negative. What does that mean? Negative rights means that it restricts government action, restricts government action, therefore, therefore it does. The Nation of Islam have every right to preach under the first amendment of the things that they preach. Sure. Including things like blue eyed devils and Yada, Yada, Yada. Right? Do they get away with this under, under the cloak of religious group, they have free speech, right? They have the right to free speech. They have a right. There is no. There are no hate crimes. There are no heat speech statutes in this country. We are not Europe. We are the United States. We have much greater freedom when it comes to the beach. So it restricts government action and therefore it's not, it's you can call it hate speech. I think it's eight speech, but hate speech is still legally protected speech. Uh, and as, as uh, it's been said many times, and I've said it many times, I may completely disagree with you and think what you're saying is despicable, but I will defend to death your right to say it under the First Amendment, but there's a big. But yeah, I would, I would hope so. There is. There's a big button. It's a negative, right? It restricts government action, right? It doesn't say that we have to provide our federal tax dollars to promote their speech by paying, by taking our tax money and giving it to the nation of Islam to conduct these in prison counseling sessions concerning these various concepts that they teach these hateful concepts. We are, the federal government is actively promoting hate speech that is not protected by the constitution. Right. And, and also my guess is the most tax payers out there have no stinking clue that their tax dollars are going to pay for nonsense like this. I had no idea. And you know, I talk about things like this all the time. I had, I had no idea that our tax money is going to the federal bureau prisons who basically are the ones who put together these programs. And the money that's being is coming to a, according to the article here in the Washington examiner by Ms Dot Goodman, uh, the, uh, the money is flowing through the bureau of prisons, which makes sense because again, the bureau prisons in charge of conducting these counseling programs, they have to make sure that for one thing, they have to make sure that they're not a danger that you, you couldn't have like help people escape or you know, they're not bringing their, not doing counseling but bringing cakes with a files and things like that. I write stuff like that. But, but yeah, um, uh, but you know, but you know, the where were the ideas that, you know, they're supposed to be overseeing all this and then providing the funding, which is fine and federal fundings fine. But, uh, do, and you know, I would pose it to our listeners, do you want your federal tax dollars, your hard earned dollars going to this kind of a program because the promotion of this program by the government through tax payments is not protected. That is not part of the constitution. It restricts government action. It doesn't say you have to, the government has to promote things by taking our money, our tax dollars and giving it to what is considered a hate group, not just buy a whole lot of other people but by people like the Anti Defamation League and the southern poverty law center. Right. But when we look at this is with the nation of Islam, let's say we go in and they're going to be teaching a class and maybe some people who were not a Muslim goes, go to this and you know, or is there anyone there to monitor what is being taught to make sure that. Because I'm sure if it's, I'm sure it's going to be probably incendiary a little bit even though it's, you know, could it be hate speech? Could it be, could they be radicalizing people inside? There could be a annual isn't who monitors this though, Dan. And just to give some historical reference. Uh, if you read the autobiography of Malcolm X, which I've read, which is a really neat book. It's a fascinating book about a fasting member in industry. What happens with Malcolm X is that he goes to prison on, I think it was a robbery charge of burglary or something like that, and um, he gets something like 10 years, five, 10 years, and while he's in there, he meets, um, I can't remember the man's name, but the man who I believe it's the person either the person, one of the persons that runs the nation of Islam and, uh, and I want to be clear here, this nation of Islam, this is an American organization that's not related, and I, I want to be careful here because I don't know all the specifics, but my understanding is it's rejected by and not certainly not specifically supported by Islamic, the Islamic community in the world, the global Islamic community. It's an offshoot. And the reason that it's an offshoot is that it deals in a antisemitism and racism on a regular basis. Um, and so what happened with the Malcolm x? He's recruited just what you're talking about. He's recruited while he's in prison. He talks about this in his book and sort of biography. At first he goes with it all, but then he goes to which as a Muslim is part of the ritual of being a Muslim. Uh, he goes on a pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia to do the, um, the hodges exactly. Yes. And when he goes to Saudi Arabia, he meets Muslims from all over the world, from all different ethnic and racial and cultural backgrounds. And he stunned because he sees pcs, blue devils, if you will, meaning people with Blue Eyes, right? Who are Islamic, who are, as long as he sees people of all different races, all different backgrounds who are members of Islam. And when he comes back he changes his message to one of inclusion and not exclusion on the basis of race and antisemetic hatred and these kinds of things, which is what the nation of Islam preaches. So when you talk about the radicalization, yes, it definitely exists and things should be. Things should be being monitored. It's a federal prison. Thanks. You were supposed to be monitored. So therefore they should be having an understanding of what's going on. But remember, it can be tough. I mean, you know this better than I do, uh, as a police officer it could. You can't control all the conversations, everything that's going on to prison. So is the radicalization going on behind the scenes? I'm not saying there is. I don't know. But is it possible? Certainly. Yeah. Well, I, I think people, I think our listeners are going to be shocked at the amount of money that has been spent. Our taxpayer money, all of the nation of Islam inside prisons. It'll, we'll talk about that and we got a whole lot more coming up on arrested with Mike Brooks and criminal defense attorney, gay conaway. Other new talk one. Oh, six seven.

Speaker 1: 11:39

This is arrested with Mike Brooks and Atlanta criminal defense attorney Dan conaway arrested with Pike, Russian criminal defense attorney. And folks,

Speaker 4: 11:50

before we get back talking about the nation Islam and

Speaker 3: 11:55

their religious programs in our federal prison being paid for by your money, you work hard and give to the irs. Let me tell you about Dan's book arrested badly to America's criminal justice system. Uh, if you have not picked up a copy of this from Amazon, from borders and Barnes and noble, Barnes and noble, I should say, or online at[inaudible] website. Dan www arrested book.com. Yeah, you, you, if you haven't picked up a copy of this, please do yourself a favor and pick it up. Look, even if you've never been arrested before, uh, if you want a inside look at the criminal justice system here in America. This is your guide to that criminal justice system and hopefully you never get wrapped up into criminal justice system, uh, in any, in any part of it. But should that happen to you? Uh, arrested the book would really, really help you understand what you may be going through a as a victim, uh, or it maybe as a juror, any part of the criminal justice system that, uh, that we've talked about in the past here on arrested. So do yourself a Chi. Do yourself a favor. Pick up a copy. Now, Dan, we were talking, we're been talking about that the nation of Islam and I had no idea that this was happening. It receives federal cash to teach prisoners within the federal criminal or within the federal prison system. And, and, and I was, I was really, I, this has been going on since 2008 and you know, it's amazing, but the highest spending year appears to have occurred under get this under former President Barack Obama in 2012 when the federal government gave over$47,000 in contract, excuse me, in contract to the nation of Islam programs. And then according to the article, funding has dropped under the trump administration and in 2018 the program's received 17,000 and the total obligation for 2019 is being dropped down to 8,250. That's better. Yeah. I mean going through during the Obama administration to$47,000 initial year 2019 to 88,250, I would say. So. So that's, that's a good step. Maybe 8,250. Still too much. We know it's interesting because in New York, Republican Peter King, who's the chairman of the House, Homeland Security Subcommittee on counterterrorism intelligence, um, you know, he told

Speaker 4: 14:52

the Washington examiner who did this exclusive article, uh, that the funding was quote beyond the Pale. But yeah, and you know, it's interesting because this is a situation where you've got a people who you were talking about our people are going through through these religious, through the guise of religious services or they're being recruited for terrorism. Uh, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2010, uh, released a report that found as many as three dozen US citizens who converted to Islam while in prison, uh, had traveled to Yemen possibly for al Qaeda training. Now again, there's nothing wrong whether one chooses to convert to Islam that are not as personally that person's decision. Right? And we respect that decision. But this is, we're talking about radicalization while you're in jail, while it's being backed up by government support here, when we're talking about people who are, I mean, just some of the language here and some of the things had been spoken about in the past. A Farah Khan, uh, once called Adolph Hitler, a quote, very great man, a routinely denounces Jews and white people's evil quote from Farrakhan. White folks are going down in St Louis going down and fair combat. God's grace has pulled the cover off of that Satanic Jew. I'm here to say, your time is up. Your world is through. Um, so, you know, these are the kinds of things that the, um, uh, the board of prisons needs to be looking at. And uh, you know, again, right? I support your right. I support your right to speak your mind and say whatever you want to say. I'll defend to the death your right to speak, but we don't have to be funding it through our federal government, right? Let me, let me ask you this, here's some, uh, here's some of the speech from fair cut. Well, white folks are going down and Satan is going down and fair by God's grace has pulled the cover off this agentic Jew and I'm here to say, your time is up, your world is through, and this is, this is from a speech just this past February and it's not ancient history and in what are the organization's key text, which is the secret relationship between blacks and Jews claims that Jews were responsible for the Trans Atlantic slave trade and rigged the world economic system to disenfranchise black people. And, and, and you, you're going. I mean, you, if you remind comp, yeah, Hillary's book, my struggle. I mean, it's right out of my comp. I mean that, that exact language is right out of my car. And, but I, I just, I just don't see a, you know, I just, I just don't see federal money going to a group like this. I mean, there's gotta be, there's gotta be some alternative alternative groups. Um, there's plenty of. I mean, that's the thing is that with, just with respect to the groups, again, there are a lot of groups and a lot of organizations that do provide and want to provide counseling to inmates in prison and inmates in prison need counseling. They need help, um, because, and it's for both sides. If I, if you want to look at it from the public safety side while then you want people to receive counseling while they're in prison because they're going to come out and come back into society to be part of society. Uh, on the other hand, looking at it from the inmates point of view, which has a criminal defense lawyers way. I'm normally looking at it, right? Um, you know, it's prison can be one of those things where if, if done right, and if, let's say you have a client, he says, look, comes to me, is like Mr Conway. I did what they're, they're accusing Marybeth. I did it. I want to. I want to own up to it. I'll accept the punishment and punishment because of serious crime. Just has to involve a period of time in either federal or state prison. Well, either one, I don't care what prison prison prison sucks. It sucks. Um, but it's an opportunity for someone to try to rebuild their life, to take a look at their life to say, hey, and I have these conversations with my clients and say, look, when you're in there, let's take see what you can do to improve yourself, see what you can do so that you don't end up back in there. And we try to do that right into the counseling services were really, really good and there's plenty of counseling services including for Islamic people or for persons, inmates who are interested in learning about Islam and possibly converting to Islam. That's fine. These all these groups exists, whether it's secular organizations, Christian organizations, Jewish organizations, Buddhist, so forth and so forth. So the support is there and there simply. Is there services for Buddhists and prison is for services for any type of background you have. Because the whole point is to bring the bring religion or religious teachings or philosophical teachings or secular counselor teaching. Right? But different types of, of, of thoughts and ideas to people who partly got in trouble, quite frankly, if they did what they're accused of, uh, you know, they, they got in trouble in part because they made bad decisions. And one of the best ways to not make bad decisions, especially as you get older, is to have more of a philosophical underpinning in life regardless of where it comes, whether it comes from the Bible or comes from the Talmud or other comes from a wherever, you know the core out. And you know where it comes from, a book on a secular counseling, right? We don't care. We care that the person is able to learn and get better and improve. And so certainly there's no reason for our tax dollars to be going to this particular project, run by the nation. Islam again, nation of Islam

Speaker 3: 20:48

has every right to speak. I support Louis. Fair comes right to speak. I hate speech is not against the constitution. We don't have hate speech laws in this country. Thank goodness. Because we are a free country. You can speak your mind. You even get to speak hatefully I will defend that to the death, but through our tax dollars have to go to support it. No, that's not part of the constitution. You know, it's interesting because in this article says that the bureau of prisons contracted with over a dozen organizations and individuals to specifically provide a nation of Islam programming for inmates and one of those individuals was verboten Muhammad a nation, a nation leader in Monroe, Louisiana who received$60,000 to provide nation of Islam religious services and will have been told a reporter at the Louisiana Neustar last year that white people were not allowed to attend nation of Islam religious services. Quote. We don't allow white people in our meetings said Mohammed. Now just to finish up here, here's my question. Yeah. How do they define white people? Because if you go with a Nazi code, it's two grandparents. Uh, it's two grandparents, right? But the Nazis, they got their concept of what it is Jew from the segregationist laws in the south. Back in the 19 thirties there you had the one drop rule. The Nazis thought the one drop rule was too harsh. So, you know, I don't how, how is he defining what's a white person? Exactly. Well, the nature of Islam apparently did not respond to a request for comment through the main office or through his attorney, uh, and uh, that they did not want to talk about that program of wonder why? Well, let me tell you, cut it up and appeals court in Virginia. Rules that a politician violated the constitution by blocking a critic on social media. And Paul Manafort is he being tortured by being in solitary confinement in federal prison. All that coming up, it's arrested with your host, Mike Brooks and criminal defense attorney Dan cutaway or the new talk six. Seven

Speaker 1: 23:08

is arrested with Mike Brooks and Atlanta criminal defense attorney. Damn conaway. Thanks

Speaker 3: 23:14

for joining us here on a respite with Mike Brooks and criminal defense attorney Dan Conway on the news talk one. Oh, six slash seven. And let me just remind you again, if you haven't picked up Dan's book arrested badly in America's criminal justice system, you are doing yourself an injustice by not picking it up. You can go, you can go to Amazon, you can go to a barnes and noble. Any place, good books or sold and the website www.arrestedbook.com. There you go. Okay, so a federal appeals appeals court reportedly rolled a this week that a Virginia politician violated the constitution, violated the constitution by blocking an individual from viewing her facebook page. Now, now Reuters reported that the fourth US circuit of appeals in a three to nothing ruling said that Phyllis Randal, the chair of the Loudon County Virginia Board of supervisors and broke the, broke the first amendment rights of Brian Davidson when she barred him from her facebook page for 12 hours. Are you kidding me, dad? Really,

Speaker 4: 24:39

really? Court of appeals is not kidding. And it was three. Oh, okay. So. And this is an interesting situation because yes, this does potentially relate to our president to president trump and his twitter feed and all that kind of stuff. He could, I don't know if it will be interesting, but it could cause it. It does. It definitely falls with respect to social media and public figures because at the heart of this issue is that, um, the, the website that I'm Brian Davidson, uh, the appellant was, was barred from a, was the facebook account for chair Phyllis j random. That was the name of the page who, uh, was apparently, I believe a school board. It was a board of supervisors, supervisors. So in other words, this was a website. There was an official website, a lit laid out as her, as a public figure. And so they're are a personal, not a personal facebook page, but this will make a difference. It does, it does under the constitution. In other words, if you put yourself out as a public person, right, right. Uh, people have the right to, uh, to review what you're talking about, to criticize it or to support it, right? They are a. and you have limited means if you're that public figure to restrict a that now your main defense would always be, um, you know, that the person's lying, that they're slandering you in some way. Um, but here, apparently the person was looking at the page Mr Davidson and uh, they're, they're Kinda, he's, he may have it says that, um, uh, you know, he was accusing members. Nigga, again, I'm reading from an article from the, from the hill, I'm a, so I don't know, this is correct, but according to this article that said that he was criticized and school board members, let's put it that way. Um, so he's a lot too. And so therefore he's allowed to be on the facebook page. Now think it really relates in. All these issues are coming up right now with respect to social media. Oh Gosh, it's so many. It's one after another because first of all, again, first of all, you've got like a private. Okay. Again, government speech, government action is restricted under our constitution. What a facebook is not the government. Facebook is an independent private company, therefore it's arguably not subject to the Constitution at all. And the bill of rights and these kinds of things. On the other hand, they're are regulated to some extent and they use the airwaves, they use the internet. So perhaps they are right, so you got to start up there and there's all these layers to go down. The bottom line for this case is that this gives to meet to the argument that legal argument that if you choose to be a public figure and like for instance president trump and you choose to use social media on a regular basis, uh, as part of promoting your self, your organization as a public figure, that the public and members of the public private citizens have a right to have access to the information and to a limited amount, have a right to push back. Well, Ms Dot randle. She argued that her facebook page was a private website, but the circuit court judge James when rejected that assertion, saying that quote interactive component was a public forum and that her move to band Davidson represented illegal viewpoint discrimination, which is exactly what the constitution, the first amendment is there to protect because it's not just freedom of speech. It's also freedom of press and freedom of assembly. And all of these things involve this idea that everyone is allowed to speak within our public forum. You can't shut people down and today because of technology, our public forum is partly facebook and the founding fathers. Guess what? They didn't, they couldn't have imagined that. So how this all works itself out the digital. So fuck it. It's a digital soapbox and how this all works out. We don't know yet. We're going to figure it out. Yeah. All right, well we will keep an eye on that to see if anything more comes out of the court of Appeals. But uh, I mean just everything with, with twitter, with facebook, instagram, it's just, it's crazy right now, but you know, we're a little bit like the caveman that, that first discovered fire, you know, like a million years ago. It's this powerful tool and it's really useful, but it's also can be dangerous and scary and quite frankly we're all sort of grappling with it. But does it fundamentally reach to free speech issues? Yes it does. And three. Oh, three. I was pretty strong. It is. It's real, real strong, but

Speaker 3: 29:42

we'll definitely keep an eye on what's going on up there in Virginia. Well, changing gears a little bit here, Dan. We know that Paul Manafort, the former campaign manager of Donald trump, you know, he got, he got wrapped up in the, uh, in the Russian investigation and he wasn't found that he was colluding with the Russians. I had to do with his finances, his personal finances, business dealings, that kind of thing. Fail the failure to register as a foreign agent and, and some other charges. Well, we know now that Paul Manafort is behind bars and apparently apparently he has been spending his jail tie of, sorry, his prison time in solitary confinement and, and some, and some people are looking at this, is saying that there are basically equating being in solitary confinement to torture for this man. How, how does that equate? Well, you know, it doesn't.

Speaker 4: 30:49

Well, first of all, you have to start with the bill of rights, right? You look at the Crowell what's cruel and unusual punishment, right? Um, and the argument and the particular article that I've found a was by Sydney Powell, who's a formal federal prosecutor,

Speaker 3: 31:03

right? Let's go. Let's go back and help and help our listeners understand that when Paul manafort or anyone, any other person in the federal system is found guilty or plead guilty and there is jail time or prison time involved in a federal facility, uh, who decides what facility that person's going to be going to at, first of all, what level of security in a particular, um, federal facility, whether it be a, a prison camp, a farm, uh, a medium security or maximum security supermatch who makes these determinations and then we'll talk about after the target determination was made on him, what, what he's going through now. But how is all that handles all that come about?

Speaker 4: 31:58

Well, there's a process involved where it usually starts at sentencing and that is, is that the attorney for the defendant will request a particular designation and a particular facility or any type of facility or within a geographical range, like someplace close to home for instance, or something like that.

Speaker 3: 32:18

That may be within a 400 5,500 mile radius. Yeah.

Speaker 4: 32:22

Uh, and then from there, uh, the entire package, which is everything for the pre sentence report to all the information about the client or the defendant is then sent off to Texas, to the Bureau of prisons, Federal Bureau of prisons there everything's vetted and reviewed and they determine what facility the person should be designated to. And you've got different levels of security, right? So in this particular case, this is white collar case, nonviolent offense. This would normally be a minimum security case just and end of story. Um, and then you know, then you, you move up from there. So this, and it's sort of like a, it's a prison camp. There's usually not, it's not like a prison when you think of it with the walls and the barbed wire and all that kind of stuff. It's more like a campus kind of setting. So, uh, I'm not saying it's a Shangri la or a piece of cake, you're still in prison. It's the euphemism for it is detention. Right, right. But the bottom line is still a detention center and it's a minimum detention center. So that is what it is. So that, that's how that process works. That's how you end up getting placed. Gotcha.

Speaker 3: 33:30

Oh well we're going to talk more about, uh, about how he got placed and why. If he's in a minimum facility, why is he now in solitary confinement that in a whole lot more coming up. You're listening to arrested with Mike Brooks. Incredible defense. Thirty Day cotton. Wait. Oh, the new talk.[inaudible] up

Speaker 1: 33:52

is arrested with Mike Brooks and Atlanta criminal defense attorney.

Speaker 3: 33:58

Graffito arrested with Brooklyn Criminal Defense Attorney Gang conaway on the new talk one. Oh, six seven. Thank you for staying with us. Well, we're talking about right now, dad, we're talking about Paul Manafort and you know, uh, you and I were talking at the break and apparently he is being held right now. He has not been sentenced to a federal facility as of yet. And from what I understand or what do you, what we can glean right now. It sounds like he's still being held at the El Xander Ia Virginia jail, which is actually just a number of blocks. You don't have it. No, no. In that area we are a. well, just a number of blocks from the courthouse for the eastern district of Virginia, the Federal Court House there in Alexandria where he is already, uh, been through one case with these kinds of, other federal cases pending. So that's the reason they haven't assigned him to a Federal Bureau of Prisons Facility as of yet. And so I guess for his own safety and because of the high profile cases that he's involved with and he's very high profile character himself, that is why he's being held in solitary. And could this possibly be torture air quotes for him and could they actually be using this solitary confinement, you know, being in a jail cell most hours of the day by yourself to

Speaker 4: 35:38

coerce him to, to just squeeze them, if you will, for information for these other cases. That's what it sounds like. Yeah. And uh, in my professional opinion, that's what it is. In other words, uh, and I'll quote partly from the article, a solitary does have a place in our prison system, but only for those people are simply too dangerous to be placed around others at all. And when you think about the term cruel and unusual punishment, um, there's nothing, uh, this is definitely cool because we are a, we are human beings, we're social animals and we need to be around other people. And this is a situation where you're put in a small space, uh, we're up to 23 hours a day, right? And according to this article that's got a slit of light, which president at our confined, caged essentially like a dog in a crate for 23 hours a day. And, uh, apparently they did the same thing to Maria Buthaina whom prosecutors, uh, knew or had reason to know according to the article, I was claustrophobic. So to be in this situation, month after month after month, and I'll give you a perfect example, uh, and it's on cable all the time. You watched the Shawshank Redemption A. There's a scene where the main character, Andy defrain, um, his tortured by the, by the prison, uh, andy different. Remember, uh, by, uh, the, uh, the warden and the warden wants him to shut up because the warden was involved in having another inmate killed, right? So he throws him in solitary confinement and so he gets in solitary confinement and uh, he's, he comes down and basically says, have you learned to keep your mouth shut and behave number. And apparently one of the reasons that, that metaphor is in solitary confinement, it has been for almost eight months is because he apparently attempted to contact someone to serve as a witness for his defense and the things with the judge. That's what she. Did you have it, the thing of it. Yeah. And that's, and I'm not gonna argue about whether it's bonds would have provoked to not. That's a whole nother issue. Right? Okay. Fine. I don't know the details that whatever, but what I do know is that again, it's definitely cool. There's no doubt this is cruel punishment, but it's also unusual because the white collar case, right, right. I don't see Mr Manafort running around, you know, create, getting, creating a blade out of, I don't know, a spork or something and then stabbing three people in the back with it or call me crazy. But I don't think so. So the reason for this issue then comes down to why are they doing this and logically it's the one conclusion only and that is they're using it as a way to squeeze him. Exactly. And they're using it to torture him to get information. And this is exactly the kind of thing that of someone like Dershowitz's about. Right? And same thing. Remember Bernie Kerrick? Yeah. Yeah. Birdie care, you know, was uh, the police commissioner at when nine slash 11 happened in New York City. And uh, he got, he got involved in some, uh, uh, we won't get into what he is, but he wound up serving some federal time and he, and he has written a book now. It's called from jailer to jail. And he thinks in his opinion, he said that Paul manafort quote is dying with his eyes open little by little every single day by being in solitary. And that's what happens because you're suffering complete sensory deprivation. It's completely dehumanizing. It's just like, it's just again, watch, watch the shawshank redemption. You know, the warden that says, give him another two weeks to think about it and slams the door. I mean, it's meant to break you completely so that you will do say what ever the government wants you to say. It's similar to the types of torture that were used in the Middle Ages. Is it as bad? No. Are you being racked on a rack? No. Okay. You know if that would be brave, right? You can watch that where they go to cut out as in trails and all I know, but still it's a terrible situation to be in and so therefore, and this is about Alan Dershowitz talks about a lot and I'm in complete agreement with him, is that it not only is it cruel and unhuman not only as a torture but on to a fellow American citizens, but also the information that you get out of this situation is complete land reliable in court. Because guess what, if you put thumbscrews on me, right, right. And squeeze those songs. Cruise look hard enough. I'm probably going to tell you that I saw the Easter Bunny yesterday at 5:00 PM driving a cadillac down peachtree road, but if that's what you want me to say, right, but could. The reason it being in solitary confinement, could it be for his own protection? That's nonsense. I'm sorry that I would use a stronger word if we weren't on there. That is nonsense. I'm just throwing that out there because a lot of times when you've got a high profile person like this, you know and you've got be. Has a pod system like this. Gail does, you know? Then you know what? That's fine. Then if he, if he is really a ginger, look, you're the government. You chose to revoke his bond. He was on bond. Apparently he tried to contact witness. I don't know the details of that. I do know that you're allowed to prepare for your defense and so therefore your lawyers can certainly contact witnesses and sometimes we have our clients help out some because guess what? They know the witness, right? So you know, so, but I'm not going to get into the merits of the bond issue here. The government and you're the judge. You chose to revoke this man's bond and stick them in a steel cage and now he's in there and now she's being punished for a crime that he was convicted on. That's fine. All understood, but you have a couple of very simple situations here you could do. One is you could edit them designated to a federal detention facility which has set up for longterm care. Therefore, and guess what, there's a thing called to bring back water, which means that the judge says, come on back. Well, he, I think you can do that at a federal facility, but they wanted him closer to the courthouse and that's why they put them into Alexandria and that's still. I believed that if you choose to have it there than it needs to be coordinated and worked with on both parties, by his lawyers, the judge and the prosecution in a hearing in open court where they decide what is safe and humane. Yes, Mr. Manafort needs to be punished. He was convicted. Now he could also have an appeal bond. That's whole nother issue, but the bottom line is that if you're going to put them in a prison, you don't torture the person in this is simply torture, solitary confinement, and if you don't believe me again, go back and watch shawshank redemption and as, as Bernie Kerik wrote, deprivation of freedom intensified by solitary confinement. Make you say and do and think things that you would never otherwise say do or thing which means that you're not promoting the ends of justice either from a prosecutorial point of view. Why? Because the testimony that you would elicit through Mr Manafort after shoving him in a in a box and solitary confinement months is not worth the paper it's printed on and therefore you're not helping to just process. You're not helping promote justice as the prosecution the government is supposed to do well. I do have to say, and we've got to wrap it up, there is a place for solitary confinement in our system. I just don't think that Paul manafort should be in solitary confinement is particular case. Agreed. All right. Well, Dan, thanks again so much and thank you to you for joining us on arrested

Speaker 3: 43:33

here on the new top one. Oh, six slash seven. We'll see you right back here at asf Saturday from I trust Dan conaway. Say Safe everybody. Thanks for listening to arrested with Mike Brooks in Atlanta, criminal defense attorney Dan conaway. Well, this show provides general information. It does not constitute legal advice. The best way to get guidance on your specific legal issue is to contact a lawyer. For more information or to schedule a meeting with an attorney, please visit[inaudible] dot com.