ILNews

Lawmakers: No Gitmo detainees to Indiana

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Northern Indiana lawmaker doesn't want any Guantanamo Bay Naval Base detainees to be sent to a high-security prison in Terre Haute once the Guantanamo camp is closed within a year.

Sen. Marlin Stutzman, R-Howe, on Monday introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 25, which urges President Barack Obama and his administration to recognize Indiana's position against accepting any detainees from the prison camp in Cuba, which currently houses about 245 prisoners. The president has vowed to close it.

The resolution notes that about 100 detainees are considered too dangerous to be released from U.S. custody; about 80 could face criminal charges in federal courts; and about 60 have been cleared for release but can't be sent to their own countries because they'd be harmed.

"For the safety of Indiana residents and to avoid making Indiana a target for future terrorist attacks, the Indiana General Assembly respectfully requests that those currently detained at Guantanamo Bay not be relocated to the Federal Correctional Complex in Terre Haute ... or any future facility within the State," the resolution states.

At issue is the Federal Correctional Complex, a maximum-security prison located about 2 miles southwest of Terre Haute and the home for high-security prisoners facing federal death sentences.

The resolution has been referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Transportation & Veterans Affairs. Also signing on to the legislation are: Sens. Jim Buck, R-Kokomo; Greg Walker, R-Columbus; Carlin Yoder, R-Middlebury; Reps. Milo Smith, R-Columbus; Jeff Thompson, R-Lizton; Bill Davis, R-Portland; Cindy Noe, R-Indianapolis; Jackie Walorski, R-Jimtown; Rich McClain, R-Logansport; Matt Lehman, R-Berne; David Yarde, R-Garrett; and Wes Culver, R-Goshen.

Read more in the Feb. 4, 2009, issue of Indiana Lawyer about the orders to close Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and how several Indiana attorneys representing detainees feel about the current events and policy changes.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT