Kieth, dear friend (truly)
I would not agree that the hungerstrikers were "tried and convicted" They were convicted without trial by most civil standards. The Diplock courts are hardly courts. My friend Tony O'Hara was given five years for driving a car in a bank robbery. At the time (and possibly presently, I have to ask him next time we speak) he never learned to drive. At the time of his "conviction," he did not know how to drive, after the beatings while being tortured by the British government's police and soldiers, the resulting brain damage made it impossible for him to drive. This brain damage was diagnosed in the United States in the late 1980s, and was typical of victims of torture who came to the US for treatment.

The Diplock courts accepted "evidence" gained under torture, from tortured defendants, or from "super grasses" who often after torture were paid large sums to inform on others. The "judiciary" in the northern counties of Ireland went on strike when it was suggested that the hearings would be more fair if three magistrates sat on each case. There were no juries, nor was there a right to a jury trial. In the case of Tony O'Hara, in small letters over his "confession" after weeks of torture, he wrote in small letters "This was signed under duress." Tony pointed this out to the magistrate, in hopes that even in a jury court, there would be some way of exposing the torture to which he had been subjected. Besides sleep deprivation and constant beatings to the head, Tony was placed by the Army in a helicopter, blindfolded. The helicopter took off at a high rate of speed, so he could feel the acceleration, and knew they had lifted off. It eased down to a few feet over the ground, where questions continued to be shouted out him. He was then thrown from the copter. The effect of this experience, such as guns being dry fired, or fired near to the head, has been seen to cause long term damage, sometimes life long damage.

To call this a conviction after trial is an obscenity. I agree with the earlier comment on the state of American prisons and jails. I would hold my juris doctorate very cheep indeed, if I did not say that the state of American justice is abominable and needs systemic change. However, that happened in Ireland is a different kind of wrong. At least, in spite of the assaults on basic rights here, such as Habeas Corpus, there is a right to see a jury, though of late this administration has eroded that by setting up island in our legal system where law does not apply ... not only in Cuba, but in the secret detention centers in other countries, and the acceptence of secret evidence withheld from defendants. This does not justify the support of the systemic use of torture and "courts" without due process in the northern counties of Ireland. And in that, I stand by my comments, that if well done, this is an important film, as we live in times when the basic concepts of rights and justice are in danger of being lost forever.

All the best
lor