Original subtitles

In the criminal justice system

the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups,

the police who investigate crime

and the district attorneys who prosecute the offenders.

These are their stories.

This is crazy. You can't leave.

I can't stay. Even with the work-study,

I won't make my next tuition installment.

Taxi!

I'll get you the money, okay?

I got something big lined up.

Don't worry about me. Just take care of yourself.

Excuse me, you spare something?

Beat it!

Everything's going to be all right.

I love you.

Call me, okay?

You a Marine?

Yeah.

Here, take it all. You serious?

Yeah.

Thanks, buddy.

God bless.

Two in the chest.

Student biking through the alley heard the shots around 21:10.

Patrol got here quick.

Faculty parking garage. Not exactly ground zero for gun crime.

You secure the area? First thing.

No ins or outs till you release the scene.

No wallet or ID, but we've got a dormitory keycard.

Let's see what else he's got.

Looks like he was a business major.

Yeah, minoring in herbology.

Looks like the campus dope dealer.

Mark his report card "D" for deceased.

Dealers. Good riddance.

There's a bunch of Latinos over on 125th,

my guys keep them off campus.

We're going to need the security videos for the garage.

Uh, there's only one camera.

It covers the exit.

But the rains this summer knocked it out of commission.

Okay, we'll need a list of all the faculty who park there.

That I got.

Okay, it's ready.

And your John Doe is...

Hayley Kozlow.

It's Greg. Greg Tanner.

He's been crashing here.

I can't believe this.

How do you know him?

We met at the cafeteria.

He's not a student or anything. He said he had a sister here.

He was mature and nice.

Really nice.

His duffel bag is military issue.

- Was he in the service? - Yeah.

Um, Greg said he had nightmares from it.

But we didn't talk much, you know?

You talk about this?

Oh, my God. If I knew about that, I swear, he would've been gone.

Was anyone giving him trouble?

I don't know.

Last Saturday, I saw him outside of Rocco's.

He was getting into it with some Hispanic guy,

but Greg said it was nothing.

We got a winner.

Wait here. Hey.

The M.E.'s confirming that there's no stippling or powder burns on Tanner,

so figure he was shot from at least three feet away.

Mmm-hmm.

There's a young woman downstairs, just in from Pittsburgh,

looks very upset.

That's the sister of our campus dealer.

Do we have any progress to report to her?

Uh, a witness picked out this guy as someone Tanner was having a beef with.

Manny Lopez, works with a drug crew on 125th.

So maybe this was a turf dispute.

Well, slugs came back to a.22, but they're fragmented.

Even if we do find a weapon, matching ballistics will be iffy.

All right. Let's go talk to Ms. Tanner.

Oh, my God, my big brother.

When was the last time you saw him?

It was two days ago.

I had to leave school. My financial aid fell through.

Greg said not to go, that he'd help me.

Megan, how did he end up living on campus?

It was because of me.

After he got out of the service, he had no place else to go.

My mom's at a home in Pittsburgh. She's got Parkinson's.

Dad died when I was 10.

Greg joined the Marines so he could be like him.

Here.

He never said where they sent him,

but me and my mom would get e-mails,

a phone call at Christmas.

Then he showed up at my dorm one day. He'd been discharged.

But he didn't come back the same guy.

How was he different?

He got anxious a lot.

He needed help, but I think he was having problems getting his Army benefits.

Megan, do you know what your brother was doing on campus?

I think auditing classes.

I didn't see him much the last few weeks.

Why?

We believe he was dealing drugs.

Oh, God.

Greg.

He met this girl. I wanted to give him space. I should've...

Oh, my God, I lost him.

Excuse me.

The last time you saw your brother,

what did the two of you talk about?

He said he'd get me money for school.

That he was working on something big.

The woman has seen it all.

Now one tale of woe and she suddenly goes soft?

You know, if she hears you talking like this,

you're gonna be eating through a straw.

Now, that's the Lieutenant I know.

The something big the sister mentioned could have been a drug score,

could be how Tanner got himself into a beef with the competition.

So they ambush him in the faculty garage?

Or maybe they followed him there?

Eh, could be he was meeting a client.

Professor Pothead.

Take this guy, for example,

a law professor by the name of Kevin Franklin.

In the garage every day at 1:00, out by 9:15,

except the day that Tanner's killed.

Yeah? Franklin breaks his pattern,

leaves his car in the garage overnight, drives it out the next day at noon.

He looks vaguely familiar.

I might've seen him around campus.

How about the faculty garage Wednesday night? Say, around 9:00?

I wasn't in the garage Wednesday.

If you'll excuse me, I have a class of law students waiting.

Actually, we have a few more questions.

You'll have to call me later.

Not so fast, Professor.

We believe that you were in that garage,

maybe to do a little business with Mr. Tanner.

Business?

Score a little pot for your weekend barbecue.

Are you kidding me? I used to work for the Department of Justice.

Look, we don't care if you like the occasional joint.

Well, I don't.

And if I saw something, I assure you, I know my obligations.

But I wasn't in the garage.

Then tell us why you left your car there overnight Wednesday.

I finished teaching my class around 9:00.

I went to Wordplay on Amsterdam to buy a book.

What book?

John Rawls' Theory of Justice, the new annotated edition.

You buy it? No. There was a line at the cashier,

so I walked back to the garage. But the police had already sealed it off.

What time was this?

Just after 9:30, I guess.

My wife was waiting up, so I got a cab to Grand Central

and caught the last Metro-North to Hastings.

Right, the new Rawls edition came in last week.

What kind of traffic did you have at the register Wednesday night?

Traffic? You're joking, right?

This place is dead after dinner.

Dead. Great.

Hey, just ran Kevin Franklin through the system.

He was arrested in Hastings last year,

get this, on a CPW.

A CPW. How sweet is that?

Mr. Franklin got into a fender-bender on North Street with a Max Epstein.

And the CPW?

Epstein claimed Franklin flashed a weapon.

That was an exaggeration, but Franklin was carrying a piece in a hip holster.

He said he had a carry permit, but he couldn't produce it, so the officer took him in.

- Did he have a permit? - Turns out he did.

Full carry for Westchester, and a special permit for New York City.

The charge was dropped.

What kind of weapon did he have?

.22 caliber Smith & Wesson.

Sweeter and sweeter.

Franklin's alibi doesn't hold up.

Plus, he got his timeline wrong.

Yeah, Franklin said he couldn't get his car at 9:30

because the garage was sealed off,

but the first unit wasn't on the scene until 9:45.

So tell me why he killed Greg Tanner.

Money. Greg told his sister he was working on something big.

Our guess is he tried his hand at blackmail.

Franklin's a tenure-track assistant professor of law.

Comes out he's buying pot, he's got a lot to lose.

Academic post, law license...

None of which adds up to probable cause for a warrant for his gun.

We can always say, "Pretty please with a cherry on top."

Call me when you have some PC.

Look, you guys need to tie Franklin to Tanner.

Calls, meetings, evidence of bad blood...

I have to take this.

Look, this case won't clear itself with you guys sitting on your ass.

Hey.

I never heard Greg mention a Professor Franklin.

Conflict of Laws. Civil Rights. You want to be a lawyer?

Those are Greg's.

Is there anything else up there that belongs to him?

That folder's not mine.

Hey, I gotta go to a spin class, okay?

Just don't mess with my stuff.

Got you. Have fun spinning.

Oh...

Look at this.

Course syllabus for Franklin's Con Law classes.

And this.

I need your help with the VA.

If you'll just go on record.

I don't know what you're talking about.

I can't do this without you. Please. You owe me.

Get that thing out of my face.

That bad blood seems to be about the Veterans' Administration.

Tanner's sister said he was having trouble getting benefits.

Sergeant Tanner received counseling for 30 days, post-discharge.

After that, his temporary benefits lapsed.

What was the counseling for?

Come on, you know I can't get into that.

How about what type of discharge he got? That's not classified.

He got a 513 discharge, separation from service

due to a pre-existing personality disorder.

Pre-existing, meaning whatever was wrong with him wasn't service-connected.

Meaning the military's not on the hook for his long-term care.

That's how it works.

Oh, man. A guy humps it for his country for eight years,

he comes home, and then Uncle Sam just kicks him to the curb.

Does that seem fair, Doc? No.

Not for a soldier who acquired post-traumatic stress disorder

from doing guard duty at Abu Ghraib.

Greg was guarding terrorists?

He said what he saw kept him up nights.

From the stuff that Tanner has underlined, looks like he was preparing a lawsuit

to have his benefits reinstated.

And he wanted Franklin to represent him?

Can I get your attention?

Please.

Uh...

Listen, last week, I was diagnosed with cancer.

It's manageable, but I have to start treatment immediately.

I'm telling you this because I'll be coming and going more than usual,

and I don't want any tongues wagging.

Oh, and before I forget, the Chief of Ds is coming down hard on the fives,

or should I say the lack of them.

You're all big boys and girls, so get them done on time.

Uh, Lieu?

Yeah, what you got?

It looks like Tanner was after Franklin

to help him sue the government over his veteran benefits.

Except Franklin's a constitutional scholar, not a benefits expert.

Well, talk to some of Franklin's colleagues, see what they know.

Hey, Lieu? Yeah?

Sorry.

Yeah.

Professor Franklin never mentioned a Greg Tanner.

I highly doubt that he'd have anything to do with a drug dealer.

He's wound tighter than a Swiss watch.

He sounds pretty tough to get along with.

He's very competitive.

We're both up for tenure, except I don't have his fancy government pedigree.

Not that I'm suggesting that he's unqualified, mind you.

Just that he's very well-connected.

He must be.

Not too many law professors carry permits for handguns.

That's because of the work he did for the Department of Justice.

What kind of work, drug enforcement?

No. All I can tell you

is that a number of Bush administration documents

have recently been declassified,

including a few memos that Franklin wrote.

And you didn't hear it from me.

"Techniques That May Be Used in Interrogation of High-value Al-Qaeda Detainees."

Now there's a sexy title.

These de-classified documents are all about handling terrorist suspects.

This one says

the President can send the Army into American neighborhoods to make arrests.

Now here's one that Franklin wrote.

"Legal Standards Governing the Detention and Interrogation

"of Unlawful Enemy Combatants,"

the entire playbook for GITMO and Abu Ghraib.

The playbook that set the working conditions for guards like Tanner,

the conditions that caused his post-traumatic stress.

Tanner might have seen it that way.

And blame Franklin. He said Franklin owed him,

maybe this was the payday Tanner was talking about,

money from Franklin for his pain and suffering.

There's your bad blood.

And our probable cause for a search.

Let's go.

Connie, I think we've got our PC on Franklin.

You guys are about five minutes late.

Come on in, Detectives.

Professor Franklin here just confessed to shooting Greg Tanner.

He even brought the gun.

Professor Franklin was being stalked

by a mentally disturbed lunatic who had accosted him in a stairwell.

If this office intends to file charges,

my client will be arguing self-defense.

Of myself and my country.

A plea?

First, you push for a million in bail, and now you expect us to take a plea?

We're here as a courtesy,

to give you a chance to drop this charge before we publicly embarrass you.

He shot an unarmed war veteran from three feet away,

and we're the ones who're supposed to be embarrassed?

He shot a trained killer who blamed him for his mental problems,

demanded money and then threatened him when he said no.

It's a perfect case of self-defense,

except for the running away, the lying.

All of which evinces a consciousness of guilt.

Now he can plead to manslaughter one

or starting tomorrow a grand jury will hear all about his deceptions.

No, they won't.

What's that? A writ of prohibition,

to exclude all statements my client made to the police

on the grounds that their interview with him was custodial

and he should've been Mirandized.

The judge threw it all out,

his phony alibi, his claims of not knowing Tanner.

I mean, in short everything that makes him look guilty.

I can count on the fingers of one hand the times I've seen a writ used

to keep evidence out of the grand jury.

Not just any writ, but one Franklin dashed off during a plea conference,

complete with citations, brilliant.

Any evidence he killed Tanner for reasons other than self-defense?

Nothing. The only one who'd know is Tanner and, well, he's not talking.

Thanks. Oh, it's from Franklin.

He's asserting his right to address the grand jury.

Sure. First get rid of as many inconvenient facts as possible,

and then spin what's left into a self-serving tale.

The law-abiding professor versus the deranged drug dealer.

Spin it the other way.

Make Greg Tanner as cuddly as a week-old puppy.

Greg was smart.

People liked him.

He believed in serving the greater good.

But when he was over there, in the war,

something inside him broke.

He suffered from post-traumatic stress.

That's what a psychiatrist told him.

He worked in the prisons,

he saw interrogations,

people being hurt, being hanged in a shower room.

He had nightmares. He couldn't keep a job.

Mr. Tanner approached me one night after class.

He told me about his grievance over his military discharge.

He wanted my help suing to have his benefits reinstated.

He thought because I worked for the Department of Justice

under the Bush administration, that I had some special expertise.

What work specifically did you do?

I wrote advisory memos

governing the manner in which suspected terrorists were held.

Because Mr. Tanner guarded those detainees,

he thought I had insights into the conditions

that had caused his post-traumatic stress.

I told him he needed a specialist in health care litigation.

I thought that that was the end of it, but a week later,

he confronted me at the garage.

He was agitated, he demanded money.

He said that I was responsible for his mental problems.

I tried to reason with him, but he wouldn't let me leave.

I was trapped by this deranged ex-soldier.

Did he actually threaten to kill you?

I was in fear for my life. He kept saying,

"You're not leaving."

And then he started toward me and...

That's...

That's when I shot him.

He fell,

he stopped moving.

What did you do then? Did you call the police?

Somebody else did.

I wish that I had had the presence of mind to stay calm,

but I was in shock.

And it took you four days to regain your composure

and turn yourself in to the police?

No. I was in contact with the police before the formality of my surrender.

You were "in contact"? Please describe those contacts.

Mr. Cutter, I would be happy to tell the grand jury

what I discussed with the police, but there's a judicial writ

prohibiting me from doing so

because of the misbehavior of your detectives.

He cooperated from the get-go. It's the police who misbehaved.

I let myself get bushwhacked.

Twice.

We got bushwhacked twice.

Tanner's sister told the police

that he never talked to her about his service in Iraq.

But she testified that he witnessed interrogations.

She might've gotten that from news reports on the case.

No. She said he saw people hanged in a shower room.

That wasn't in the news.

Thanks.

No bill. The grand jury bought Franklin's story.

Next stop, Megan Tanner?

I told the police the truth. Greg never said anything to me.

Well, then where did you hear about this shower room?

My mom needs to know that Greg served with honor,

like my dad.

She's very sick

and if she ever found out that he did that,

well, I don't think she could take it.

Why? What did he do?

When Greg was living with me, he made a video diary.

I found it on my computer after he died.

We walked the detainee into the shower room.

He was handcuffed and he was wearing a hood over his head.

The interrogator told us to hang him

by his wrists from the bars of a window, like this,

with his hands behind his back, up high

so the guy can't kneel or sit, and all the weight is on his arms and chest.

The 'gator said the guy

was an unlawful combatant

and under the rules, we could do whatever we want with him.

We hooked him up and we left him with the 'gator.

An hour later, the 'gator called us back in.

He wanted us to reposition the detainee.

The detainee was slumped forward.

His arms were almost out of their sockets, he wasn't responsive.

Then we took the hood off his head

and all this blood poured out of his mouth.

He was...

He was dead.

And those rules,

those damn rules were wrong.

We had to live by them and it messed us up.

I found one of the guys who wrote the rules, here at the college.

I got to get right with this.

I didn't join the service to murder people.

Can we confirm this story?

Tanner was stationed at Abu Ghraib in 2003,

and there was a death that fit his description in November of that year.

Yeah, he talks about other interrogations he witnessed

in Iraq and GITMO, enhanced interrogations, water-boardings,

what all kept him up at night.

Maybe that's what was going through Franklin's mind when he shot Tanner.

Maybe he thought Tanner was threatening to implicate him in a death by torture.

Franklin was bucking for tenure. Controversy's the last thing he wanted.

He shot Tanner in a panic,

not to defend his life but to protect his position.

Forget it. You had your bite at the grand jury.

Franklin is getting away with killing Tanner.

This memo he wrote for the Department of Justice

laid out the legal architecture

permitting the abuse of prisoners,

abuse that led directly to this death in Iraq.

You could argue this memo is an element in a conspiracy to commit assault

and depraved indifference murder.

Someone could try to argue it, if they had jurisdiction.

Have you looked at the time stamp on this?

"April 10th, 2003, 1 St. Andrews Plaza."

Franklin was working at the US Attorney's office downtown when he wrote it?

Right under our noses.

It's the jurisdictional nexus we need to prosecute him.

We already have the testimony of one of his co-conspirators.

Jack, you want to prosecute a member of the Bush administration

for assaulting suspected terrorists?

The word is torturing,

and, yes, it's about time somebody did.

Draw up a bill of indictment against Franklin.

Gladly.

The People have met their jurisdictional requirement, Mr. Granick.

Your motion's denied.

But, Your Honor,

a conspiracy charge requires an agreement between the conspirators.

There is no agreement between Mr. Tanner and my client

to assault prisoners in 2003.

The agreement is manifest by the fact the recommendations

in Mr. Franklin's memo were conveyed by intermediaries

to Mr. Tanner in the field and agreed to by him.

They haven't connected the dots.

Those intermediaries should be named in the indictment as co-conspirators

or the charge is legally insufficient.

Franklin's daring us to indict the whole chain of command.

Have you actually read Franklin's memo?

Cover to cover? No, not yet.

Read his advice to anyone

worried about being charged with torture.

"If a defendant has a good faith belief that his actions

"will not result in prolonged mental harm,

"he lacks the specific intent necessary for his actions to constitute torture.

"A defendant could show that he acted in good faith

"by surveying the professional literature

"or consulting with experts.

"Good faith is a complete defense

"to a charge of torture."

He's telling the interrogators how to circumvent the law.

Just remember, kids, if you're going to torture, read a book first!

They want co-conspirators?

I'll give them co-conspirators.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff?

Former Secretary of Defense? Vice-President Cheney?

In for a penny, in for a pound, Mr. Cutter?

The indictments are being served as we speak, Your Honor.

Mr. Franklin can consider the dots connected.

It's absurd. Mr. Cutter is making a mockery of the conspiracy statutes.

It's clear who's behind this.

Jack McCoy obviously took exception to my boss's conduct of the War on Terror,

and now he's politicizing this prosecution.

If Mr. Franklin is afraid a trial might embarrass his former colleagues,

he's always welcome to take a plea.

I see no reason for this indictment not to proceed.

See you all at trial.

So far so good. This was nothing.

The real hailstorm's going to come when those indictments

start landing on the co-conspirators' desks.

Our clients sent us here hoping we can talk some sense into you, Mr. McCoy.

You wouldn't be the first to try.

You're going to spark a constitutional crisis, and that's no threat.

Is that really the valediction you want for your career?

You let me worry about my career.

And now, unless you're all here to talk about a plea, there's the door.

A plea?

You actually believe that you, a county D.A., can prosecute a former Vice-President,

cabinet members, for their conduct of a war on foreign soil?

I prosecuted a Chilean colonel for the murder of a US citizen in Santiago.

So government officials who torture prisoners

on American military bases?

Sure, why not?

This is why not.

This is just the beginning.

We'll keep churning them out until your office is drowning in motions.

Motions for change of venue, motions to dismiss, to suppress.

The trial starts next week. We'll be lucky to get through just one of these bricks.

Strawn doesn't represent everybody.

We'll sever the trials. We'll try Franklin and his associates first.

We convict them,

then move up the chain of command.

Connie, assemble a team,

get them working on Strawn's motions.

Cards on the table, Jack,

I think we bit off more than we can chew.

And I'm not even convinced of our legal standing.

I know.

You value legalities over ethics,

but sometimes doing what's ethical is more important.

You can insult me all you want, Jack,

but maybe the ethical thing to do here is to save American lives.

We're at war with people who've sworn to kill us for who we are.

It doesn't matter if it's civilians, women, children,

as long as they kill Americans.

And if we have to use force to extract the information we need

to protect ourselves,

well, then maybe that's the right thing to do.

I see.

Maybe I should find somebody else to prosecute Franklin.

Oh, no. You can count on my obsession with legalities.

If there's a way to prove that Franklin broke the law,

I'm your man.

It's called a Palestinian hanging.

It's how the North Vietnamese tortured Senator John McCain when he was a POW.

It's one of the stress positions sanctioned by Mr. Franklin's memo.

What other harsh techniques are sanctioned by Mr. Franklin's memo?

The most well-known is water-boarding,

where a detainee is held down,

a cloth is placed over his face and water is poured

over his mouth and nose to simulate drowning.

And who, if anyone besides the US military,

has used this interrogation technique?

The Spanish Inquisition.

And after the Second World War,

we convicted Japanese officers of war crimes

for water-boarding our POWs.

Now you told us that during your career in the military,

you participated in over a thousand interrogations.

Did you ever use any of these harsh techniques?

No, sir. We took down terror networks with tools like respect,

rapport, cunning and deception.

Not the techniques in this memo?

Besides the fact I have a moral problem with torture, it doesn't work, sir.

In fact, it works against us.

It's hypocritical to defend our values with torture.

That hypocrisy

is the best recruiting tool you can give to the terrorists.

Thank you.

I want to be clear, Mr. Gardner.

If you had a terrorist

who you believed had information

about a dirty bomb set to go off

in this city within 24 hours,

you wouldn't avail yourself of every possible technique

to extract information from him?

A man in severe pain or mental anguish

will say anything to make it stop.

If you only have 24 hours,

the last thing you want to do is waste time chasing down false leads.

Torture just doesn't work.

No one here's advocating torture, Mr. Gardner.

We're talking about harsh techniques.

I know what we're talking about, sir.

I don't need a memo to tell me what torture is.

Jack?

David. What a nice surprise.

Come with me, I'm taking the stairs. I need the exercise.

So do you, kid.

How're they treating you in Washington?

Good. The Attorney General's no Jack McCoy, but I'm learning a lot.

Jack, they sent me here to talk to you about the Franklin case.

They want you to call it off.

The jury's empanelled, jeopardy has attached.

They don't care. They want the charges dismissed against all the defendants.

I don't get it. The new administration doesn't have a dog in this fight.

We can't let state prosecutors try to hold federal officials accountable

for their conduct of a war. It's a bad precedent.

In any event, the Attorney General's naming a special prosecutor

to investigate torture claims.

I heard. To go after the small fry, a couple of thugs in the field.

What about the policy-makers, the deciders?

Right. They get a free pass because

if you go after the previous administration's dirty laundry,

the next administration will go after yours.

That's the precedent you don't want to set.

It's just politics, Jack.

I don't know what you're learning over there, David,

but you've forgotten everything you learned here.

Tell the Attorney General no deal.

Information is perhaps

the most critical weapon for defeating the terrorist threat.

Our success rests on our ability to extract that information.

I was asked to advise the Defense Department as to the legal standards

governing the interrogation of terrorist suspects.

I put my findings in a memo

and sent it on to the relevant parties.

Thank you.

Mr. Franklin, isn't it fair to characterize the legal standards

you set governing the interrogations of suspects as "anything goes,

"so long as the President orders it,"

and in his capacity as Commander-in-chief in a time of war,

he has the authority to issue any order he deems appropriate?

The President can't break the law.

Well, according to your memo, what law is the President bound by in the War on Terror,

the Geneva and Hague Conventions?

Not applicable because terrorist detainees are illegal combatants.

The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment?

Not applicable to alien enemy combatants held abroad.

The Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment?

Not applicable because harsh interrogations are not punishment.

So you are saying, in war, the President is bound by no laws?

Yes, in war.

So if he deems he's got to torture somebody, for example,

by crushing the testicles of that person's child,

your memo says there is no law, no treaty that can stop him?

Well, it would depend on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

Now, your memo justifies these actions

because the detainees are not regular soldiers

in a national army as we understand it, correct?

Correct. Unlawful enemy combatants are not entitled to the usual protections.

Is it too much to assume they'd be protected by our own sense of decency?

That's not the task I was given, Mr. Cutter.

My memo addressed legal, not ethical standards.

Now, your memo says that, "Historically, nations and their sovereigns

"have been free to treat unlawful combatants as they wish."

Could you please give us such an historical example?

Well, off the top of my head...

What about this example?

The summary execution of a Vietcong guerilla

by a South Vietnamese general.

Or this,

the torture and murder of Polish resistance fighters by the German army?

Is this the historical right you say the President should avail himself of?

I didn't invent the right of sovereigns, Mr. Cutter. I simply defined it.

The right to do what they want with unlawful combatants.

Yes. Unlawful combatants like

the American militia after King George declared them rebels?

Yes, like that.

So you would defend the brutal treatment of American prisoners

by the British during the Revolutionary War?

From a legal standpoint, yes.

Mr. Franklin, what is it about this country that you don't get?

Withdrawn.

No more questions.

There was a state senator on just now calling for your removal as D.A.

You know, that day,

eight years ago, we could see the towers burn from Adam's window.

I remember.

Part of me says I don't care what you do to these detainees.

I don't want to know.

Just protect us.

The problem is,

now we do know.

Yeah, and I'm not sure that makes a difference.

We're wanted in federal court tomorrow.

The Attorney General is asking the court to issue an order

staying the District Attorney's prosecution

of Mr. Franklin and the other defendants.

They can't just step in and stop the trial.

Under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution,

actions taken by federal officials in pursuit of foreign policy

are not grist for state prosecutions.

If those actions are illegal, as torture clearly is,

there's no overriding federal interest

in shielding those who enabled such actions.

All right, gentlemen.

I'll take the motion under advisement.

I'll issue my ruling by the end of the day.

In the meantime, the state trial can proceed.

I never expected this of you.

You're way off the reservation, Jack.

Damn it, David.

I'm trying to save the reservation.

We're looking forward, not backward.

We're not looking to give aid and comfort to the enemy.

What are you accusing me of?

My client never tortured anybody.

He never ordered another or conspired with others to commit torture.

As a member of the Office of Legal Counsel

of the Department of Justice and in service

to his Commander-in-chief, he was asked to give a legal opinion.

It might not be the most

brilliant opinion ever written, but in the end,

it's just that, a legal opinion.

Whether or not we agree on the conduct

of the War on Terror, we can all still agree

that in this country,

you have to actually commit a crime

to be convicted of one.

Thank you.

This is no simple legal opinion, ladies and gentlemen.

This is an instruction on how to commit a crime and avoid prosecution,

a surgical parsing of words to draw hair-splitting distinctions

between severe pain and extreme pain.

The creation of a special class of prisoners

who are fair game for any suffering we might subject them to.

This is the legal grease

that enabled the conspirators to commit acts

that are immoral and illegal.

Hanging prisoners

by their wrists until their lungs collapse against their ribs,

water-boarding one detainee over 180 times.

Now, Mr. Franklin's defense is that he was just following orders

as a mere lawyer in the Justice Department.

Well, like all lawyers,

he was employed as the last and best defense against injustice,

to use the law as a shield to protect people.

But instead, he used it as a sword to injure them.

Where he was sworn to uphold the Constitution,

he used his legal education to subvert it,

to shame it

and betray its promise to the world.

Five days after 9/11,

Vice-President Cheney told us that we would have to "work the dark side"

to fight terrorists.

Well, we never imagined that to mean

that we would cede control to our own dark side.

The tactics justified in Mr. Franklin's memo draw

from the worst of our nature.

Even in the midst of the Revolutionary War,

in the midst of the Civil War,

Presidents Washington and Lincoln

admonished their troops not to injure their prisoners.

Now, some of you may feel

that it is not the place of this jury,

or even the People,

to question the actions of our government officials during a time of war.

That the premise of this trial itself somehow is

treasonous.

I would assure you,

ladies and gentlemen,

it is not disloyal

to hold our officials to the highest standards of conduct.

And it is not disloyal

to allow you, the People, to decide

what you want done in your name.

Thank you.

Has the jury reached a verdict?

We have, Your Honor.

The defendant will stand.

On the first count of the indictment,

Conspiracy in the...

What's going on, Eddie?

He's a Federal Marshal, with an order from the district court.

Bring it here.

The federal court for the southern district

has issued an order preempting this prosecution.

The trial is over.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your service.

We're adjourned.

Your Honor, the jury had a verdict.

There's no verdict until it's entered in the record. It's over, Mr. Cutter.

I'll start checking the case law, see what our next step is.

You won't find anything. There's no recourse.

The people who want you out, Jack, they'll use this to hammer you.

Good. At the end of the day, I hope to give them even more reason to be mad at me.

Come on, Mike.