You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
9/11 Defense Attorney Calls For women To Wear 'Appropriate' Clothing
2012-05-07
The defense attorney who wore a traditional Islamic outfit during the rowdy arraignment of the accused Sept. 11 terrorists is defending her courtroom appeal that other women in the room wear more "appropriate" clothing to the proceedings -- out of respect for her client's Muslim beliefs.
Appropriate attire for a woman attorney in a U.S. courtroom is a dark blue or gray business jacket and skirt (slacks okay, I'm told) with a white or pastel-colored blouse. Conservative cut, of course, and tailored. An American flag lapel pin is a nice touch.
Cheryl Bormann, counsel for defendant Walid bin Attash, attended the arraignment Saturday dressed in a hijab, apparently because her client insisted on making the proceedings a circus it. She further requested that the court order other women to follow that example so that the defendants can make the proceedings even more of a circus do not have to avert their eyes "for fear of committing a sin under their faith."
Imagine all this playing out in a New York federal courtroom...
At a press conference Sunday at Guantanamo Bay, Bormann said she dresses in a hijab at "all times" when she meets with her client "out of respect" for his beliefs. Asked why she requested other women do the same, Bormann said, "When you're on trial for your life, you need to be focused."
She's just begging to antagonize the court, and all this does is further her clients' goals of turning the proceedings into a travesty.
Bormann, who is not Muslim, claimed the issue came up several years ago, when a paralegal wore "very short skirts" and it became a distraction for the defendants.
They were rolling their eyes like mad, and they couldn't even have gun sex...
And their right hands weren't working?
She said that on Saturday, "somebody" was also dressed "in a way that was not in keeping with my client's religious beliefs."
Her clients need to get a thicker skin. And blinders...
Posted by:Steve White

#26  I've sat on a couple of General Courts Martial and I guarantee you the mean old SOB Colonels that normally chaired those things would have told her to STFU in those exact words and to sit down and not say another word unless it was pertinent to the case.

LOL, totally! I never tried a case before Pohl, so I don't know how squishy he is. Probably a bit twitchy because it's so political and high-profile. I'm just sad it's not Barto. Kind of guy who didn't allow gum-chewing in his courtroom. If he caught you, he'd call a recess, announce what color it was, and require silence so everyone could watch you frantically search for someplace other than your hand or your notepad to dispose of it. There'd be nothing left of Ms. Bormann's ego but a smoking crater.
Posted by: RandomJD   2012-05-07 20:28  

#25  I wouldn't worry too much about her "client" sinning. He probably won't see a woman again after his trial is over. He'll face grey empy walls for the next 20 years before he'll meet his destiny in a certain chamber.

I mean, NEVER see a woman again.

as or "respecting" the "beliefs" of her client, this sounds like asking Holocaust surviors to respect zthe Nazi beliefs of Eichmann in that Jerusalem courtroom.
Posted by: European Conservative   2012-05-07 19:23  

#24  When in Saudi Arabia, you follow the rules there. When in the USA, you follow the rules here. He's messing with us, softening us up, trying to figure out where the lines are so the next guy can take advantage of it. This is crap. Maybe we can accommodate him when it's not inconvenient, but there should be no bending the rules based on anything. When he attacked us he gave himself to our rules if he got caught. This stupid attorney of his needs to stop kissing his feet.
Posted by: gorb   2012-05-07 19:20  

#23  I went and read Thisainthell's little liveblog. She actually was in the BACK of the courtroom rather than beside her client! That Judge has the Patience of a Saint to put up with that, among other things.
Posted by: Charles   2012-05-07 16:24  

#22  But I don't respect your client's beliefs, darlin' - I think he's a depraved mass-murderer and follower of a death cult. So LET him be offended, I give not one single damn.
Posted by: mojo   2012-05-07 12:46  

#21  Shot him, the lawyer and any other snot nosed twerp that whines about being "offended".

Problem solved.
Posted by: DarthVader   2012-05-07 12:24  

#20  Perhaps we could interest him in a blindfold.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2012-05-07 11:53  

#19  Ok, I'm shocked Attash is allowing a Woman to represent him. Seems more the type to charge at her before being beaten by MP's.
Posted by: Charles   2012-05-07 10:51  

#18  procopius. You are so twentieth-century. You have no empathy.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey   2012-05-07 10:38  

#17  Appropriate clothing would be that prescribed by the relevant uniform regulations of the applicable service per regulation [e.g. - AR 670-1], per law, per Constitution [Article I, Section 8 Congressional authority to make all laws governing land and naval forces].
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-05-07 10:01  

#16  Coupla possibilities here.
One is the clowns are convicted but there is an appeal based on the failure of other women to wear hijabs in court unfairly prejudiced, or demonstrated existing prejudice and islamophobia.
That's a win, even if the appeal is refused. It goes into the record books as persecution of Muslims by the rotten US.
Or, the women on the prosecution team start dressing "appropriately" and that's a win because the entire US military is buffaloed by the fear of being accused of islamophobia--again, see Hasan's greased slide to Ft. Hood--and the left laughs. Also ratchets the power of the threat of accusation of islamophobia.
The trial becomes so confused by Ms. Borman and her Stockholmed ilk that it ends up a mistrial.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey   2012-05-07 09:57  

#15  It would appear that Ms. Bormann is a true progressive believer. Loyola Law and Chicago Kent are mid second-tier law schools (#67 and #61 respectively).

How she went from defending death penalty-eligible thugs in Chicago to Gitmo is an interesting question.
Posted by: Steve White   2012-05-07 08:30  

#14  More from the Chicago-Kent Law School

Adjunct Faculty Biographies
Cheryl T. Bormann
Joined the Law Office of the Cook County Public Defender: 1989 Joined its leadership: 2003

Cheryl Bormann is an Attorney Supervisor at the Third Municipal District, Rolling Meadows Criminal Courthouse. As the only representative of Office leadership at Rolling Meadows, Cheryl supervises the work of 18 Assistant Public Defenders, who staff both felony and misdemeanor courtrooms. Cheryl’s duties include, in addition to administering day-to-day supervision, all the responsibilities that would normally adhere to being a work site Chief – ensuring the proper staffing and handling of all courtrooms and cases, acting as a liaison between the Office and other agencies, and attending regular meetings with judges and other court personnel. Cheryl also maintains her own active caseload which primarily consists of capital and noncapital homicide cases.

Cheryl is certified by the Illinois Supreme Court to serve as lead counsel in death penalty trials as a member of the Capital Litigation Trial Bar. She is also an active speaker and teacher. At Loyola University School of Law, she was an adjunct professor where she has served as head coach of the Philip Corboy trial team. Cheryl teaches trial advocacy for the annual program sponsored by the Office of the State Appellate Defender. She is a frequent lecturer for many local bar associations on the subject of criminal law. Cheryl is actively involved with the Constitutional Rights Foundation of Chicago, where she volunteers her time teaching public school students.

Cheryl became an Attorney Supervisor in 2003. Before serving in her current position, Cheryl was an Attorney Supervisor at the Sixth Municipal District, Markham Criminal Courthouse. This is CherylÂ’s second time working for the Public Defender. When Cheryl first joined in the Office in 1989, she worked as an Assistant Public Defender at the Juvenile Justice Division. After four years, she transferred to the Felony Trial Division at 26th Street. She briefly left the Office in 1999, and maintained a private practice specializing in serious criminal defense litigation, but then returned to the Office in 2003. Cheryl has defended clients in excess of 50 jury trials and hundreds of bench trials, many of those facing murder and capital murder charges.

Cheryl received both her BachelorÂ’s degree and law degree from Loyola University.
Posted by: Steve White   2012-05-07 08:22  

#13  From Wiki:

Cheryl Bormann is an attorney from Chicago best known for defending Waleed bin Attash during his trial before the Guantanamo military commission in 2012. Bormann studied law at Loyola University Chicago. From 2008 through 2011 she headed the Capital Trial Assistant Unit at the Illinois State Appellate Defender, the state agency responsible for providing legal assistance to defendants in death penalty cases in Illinois. The abolition of the death penalty in Illinois in 2011 rendered Bormann's position redundant.
Posted by: Steve White   2012-05-07 08:17  

#12  If the hijab fits, you must acquit!
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-05-07 07:59  

#11  I'm waiting for her to introduce a motion that the defendant's faith requires that they be acquitted.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia   2012-05-07 07:57  

#10  Thisainthell was live-blogging it
Posted by: Frank G   2012-05-07 07:44  

#9  #3 If you swore an Oath and had faith in the Military system, this must be an eye opener. Do not tell me POTUS has not corrupted the system almost beyond repair.
Posted by newc

It began long before Obama, but he's behind the wheel in the victory lap.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-05-07 07:18  

#8  Your clients appearances offend me, honey. I think they'd look better with bullet holes in their foreheads.
And...oh, yeah. Go suck ass.
Posted by: tu3031   2012-05-07 01:26  

#7  Gitmo being a Navy base, keel-hauling would be the appropriate sanction. But let's get to the Islamo-point: what is this woman doing outside, unaccompanied by a male relative? Git in the kitchen and make us some falafal, woman!
Posted by: SteveS   2012-05-07 01:20  

#6  Well you know the saying...

If your eyes offend thee.... pluck them out.

(however I think that is from the Bible...)
Posted by: CrazyFool   2012-05-07 01:18  

#5  How about tar & feathers, missi?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2012-05-07 00:52  

#4  Boy Howdy,

I've sat on a couple of General Courts Martial and I guarantee you the mean old SOB Colonels that normally chaired those things would have told her to STFU in those exact words and to sit down and not say another word unless it was pertinent to the case.

Good Lord the tenacles of the lefts appropriation of law schools throughout the US has hit the Military.

Maybe we could have her flogged since she was not being appropriately respectful to the Presiding officer?
Posted by: Bill Clinton   2012-05-07 00:49  

#3  If you swore an Oath and had faith in the Military system, this must be an eye opener. Do not tell me POTUS has not corrupted the system almost beyond repair.
Posted by: newc   2012-05-07 00:18  

#2  
Posted by: Water Modem   2012-05-07 00:08  

#1  Martin Bormann's daughter?
Posted by: Water Modem   2012-05-07 00:07  

00:00