What if the "official" version of events on 9/11 could be disproven solely on the basis of physics, mathematical equations, scientific formulas, physical evidence, and expert testimony - without the use of a single "conspiracy theory"? Might this dramatically alter your perspective on 9-11 and the war and "security" policies that are based on it? "9/11 on Trial" focuses on physics: the behavior of fire, steel, and falling bodies, to prove conclusively that the collapses of the three WTC towers were not caused by jet fuel, but were in fact exactly what they looked like: controlled demolitions. The approach is question, answer and cross-examination, in eighteen "witness statements" covering forensic aspects of the collapses. Each statement is constructed from citations from 48 different works by expert researchers. The inescapable verdict: government insiders were guilty of perpetrating 9/11 for their own ulterior motives.

Examines the efforts of lawful nations to impose justice on those responsible for crimes against humanity and the limited success of international courts, and discusses the legal and ethical issues surrounding the status of Al Qaeda plotter Khalid SheikhMohammed.

The shocking behind-the-scenes look at the biggest courtroom case in US history: the five Guantanamo Bay​ detainees accused of planning 9/11. America’s Trial documents in exceptional detail the forgotten era of Guantanamo Bay—the effort to prosecute the five detainees accused of planning the worst crime in US history, the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. While ignored by most media outlets, the result has been a riveting courtroom drama to determine if a democracy has the legal and moral authority to prosecute the men it previously tortured. Our government, so willing to break from norms and its own values with the CIA rendition program, has spent a maddening amount of time trying to fit the victims of illegal interrogations into a court of law. America’s Trial captures these events from the vantage point of one of only two journalists in the world to live part-time on the base over nearly fifty reporting trips. In telling this story, award-winning journalist John Ryan takes readers into an ecosystem that so few get to see, capturing the unique life experience of having one of the most notorious places on earth as a second home. The doomed legal effort is inseparable from the surreal context and the absurdities of hosting the biggest case in US history in what is effectively a small Caribbean beach town. America’s Trial, the only comprehensive account of the case, serves as a necessary bookend to events that have defined much of the war on terror.

Terrorists on Trial offers an unexpected--and productive--new perspective on terrorism trials, viewing them as a form of theater, in which the "show" that a trial offers can develop its own unexpected dynamics, aspects that occasionally inconvenience the prosecuting government and interfere with its aims. As a political construct, the crime of terrorism is an essentially contested act, and interpreting trials through this lens enables us to see their performative aspects more clearly than ever. With close analyses of trials in the United States, Spain, Russia, Germany, and the Netherlands, Terrorists on Trial breaks new ground for our understanding of a crucial contemporary problem.

Examines the rise of an American-run global detention system, including Guantâanamo Bay, Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, and secret CIA jails, and discusses efforts that are being made to challenge this new prison system through habeas corpus.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

Since the Nuremberg Trials of 1945, lawful nations have struggled to impose justice around the world, especially when confronted by tyrannical and genocidal regimes. But in Cambodia, the USSR, China, Bosnia, Rwanda, and beyond, justice has been served haltingly if at all in the face of colossal inhumanity. International Courts are not recognized worldwide. There is not a global consensus on how to punish transgressors. The war against Al Qaeda is a war like no other. Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda’s founder, was killed in Pakistan by Navy Seals. Few people in America felt anything other than that justice had been served. But what about the man who conceived and executed the 9/11 attacks on the US, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? What kind of justice does he deserve? The U.S. has tried to find the high ground by offering KSM a trial – albeit in the form of military tribunal. But is this hypocritical? Indecisive? Half-hearted? Or merely the best application of justice possible for a man who is implacably opposed to the civilization that the justice system supports and is derived from? In this book, William Shawcross explores the visceral debate that these questions have provoked over the proper application of democratic values in a time of war, and the enduring dilemma posed to all victors in war: how to treat the worst of your enemies.