Habeas Mortis?

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

We have a right to know who is imprisoned and why they are held in custody and this right stems from false imprisonment. It allows prisoners the chance to get a fair trial. When a person is killed by the government (rightly or wrongly) this claim to know about fair imprisonment is circumvented. Moreover, there is no proof that justice has been served. Therefore, any time a person is killed by the government, the citizens are entitled to know what happened and to get the evidence that pertains to the citizen's death. There is no particular reason that this is by a Freedom of Information request since it is the right of the people to receive the information. The very persons who killed should not be deciding whether it is proper to and when information should be given to the public. The government should first give all information it has as a matter of practice.

Do you agree or disagree?

 

[untermensche]

This is reasonable but the problem is 911 ended all rational discussion of what should be done with criminals.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I tend to agree with you in principle, but I see pragmatic problems in releasing this information as it may compromise classified intelligence information, national security, etc. In attempting to justify someone killed by the government, the surrounding circumstances most likely should have to be known, and that could cause a problem. Perhaps, very strong judicial oversight is in order.

 

[Elixir]

... any time a person is killed by the government, the citizens are entitled to know what happened and to get the evidence that pertains to the citizen's death.

I think a different standard is (or should be) applied to a foreign national vs. a citizen... FOIA shold not have to be involved when a citizen is killed by the gov.

 

[JonA]

We have a right to know who is imprisoned and why they are held in custody ...

We do?