• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Court denies Israeli spy Pollard's appeal

Posted on: Monday, 20 March 2006, 10:43 CST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Monday an appeal by Jonathan Pollard, a former Navy intelligence analyst convicted of spying for Israel, who had sought access to classified documents in his sentencing file.

Without comment, the justices declined to review a U.S. appeals court ruling that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review claims for access to such documents for clemency petitions.

Pollard, 51, was sentenced to life in prison in 1987. His lawyers wanted access to classified documents in his sentencing file, including a declaration by then-Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, for the purpose of filing a clemency petition with President George W. Bush.

Pollard, who pleaded guilty, and his attorney were given access to the materials before he was sentenced. But the two lawyers he hired in 2000 have been denied access to the documents.

In rejecting Pollard's request for access, the appeals court said, "As a practical matter, granting Pollard or his counsel access to these materials would almost surely open a floodgate of similar requests."

Arrested in 1985 outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington, Pollard was sentenced for providing tens of thousands of pages of classified information to Israel. His former wife, Anne, was sentenced to five years in prison for assisting him.

His case, which initially strained relations between the United States and Israel, has become a cause celebre for some Jewish groups in the United States and for his supporters in Israel, who believe Pollard passed information that Israel should have been given by the United States.

Top Israeli government officials have urged the United States to let Pollard out of prison but his several requests for clemency have all been denied.

Pollard's lawyers did not seek Supreme Court review of the other main part of the appeals court ruling that he had waited too long and therefore could not challenge his life sentence on the grounds he had received ineffective legal advice.

Source: REUTERS

More News in this Category