Alan Dershowitz

Alan Dershowitz

Born September 1, 1938 (1938-09-01) (age 72)
Brooklyn, New York, United States
Citizenship United States
Fields Criminal law
Institutions Harvard Law School
Alma mater Brooklyn College
Yale Law School

Alan Morton Dershowitz (born September 1, 1938) is an American lawyer, jurist, and political commentator. He is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. Dershowitz is known for his career as an attorney in several high-profile law cases and as a commentator on the Arab–Israeli conflict.[1] He has spent most of his career at Harvard University, where, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor of law in its history.

As a criminal appellate lawyer, Dershowitz has won thirteen out of the fifteen murder and attempted murder cases he has handled.[2] Notable cases include his successful argument that overturned the conviction of Claus von Bülow for the attempted murder of Bülow's wife, and his role as the appellate advisor for the defense in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson.

Contents

Early life, education, and family

Dershowitz was born to Orthodox Jewish parents,[3] in the Williamsburg neighborhood in the New York City borough of Brooklyn, and grew up in Borough Park.[4] His mother, Claire, died on August 12, 2008. His father, Harry Dershowitz (May 8, 1909 – April 26, 1984)[5] was a founder and president of the Young Israel Synagogue in the 1960s, served on the board of directors of the Etz Chaim School in Borough Park, and in retirement was co-owner of the Manhattan-based Merit Sales Company. His paternal grandfather, Louis Dershowitz, was an immigrant from Pilzno, Poland.[6] His brother Nathan, was counsel for the American Jewish Congress when their father died, and is a partner in the New York City law firm Dershowitz, Eiger & Adelson.[7]

Dershowitz's first job was at a deli factory on Manhattan's Lower East Side in 1952, at age 14. He recalls tying the strings that separated the hot dogs and once getting locked in the freezer.[8]

Dershowitz attended Yeshiva University High School, where he played on the basketball team. He was a rebellious student, often criticized by his teachers. The school's career placement center, however, told him that he had talent and was capable of becoming an advertising executive, funeral director, or salesman. In a video interview on Leadel.NET, a Jewish media portal, Dershowitz later said that his "teachers said I should do something that requires a big mouth and no brain ... so I became a lawyer."[9] In another interview, when asked what he considered to be his "big breaks," Dershowitz said that he "had never been very good in school," so they included being told by a camp counselor at age 14 or 15 that "I was smart but my mind operated a little differently."[8] In a Biography Channel programme on the life of Raymond Burr, the Canadian actor who played Perry Mason, Dershowitz stated that the Perry Mason character had inspired him in his youth - but that when practising law he found that, unlike Mason, many of his clients were guilty.

After graduation from high school, he attended Brooklyn College and received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1959. Next he attended Yale Law School, where he was editor-in-chief of the Yale Law Journal.[10] He graduated first in his class with a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) in 1962.[11]

Dershowitz attended yeshiva and reads Hebrew fluently. He has been a member of a Conservative minyan (Worship and Study Minyan) at Harvard Hillel, but is now a secular Jew.[3]

Career

After being admitted to the bar, Dershowitz served as a law clerk for David L. Bazelon, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Dershowitz has said that "Bazelon was my best and worst boss at once...He worked me to the bone; he didn't hesitate to call at 2 a.m. He taught me everything–how to be a civil libertarian, a Jewish activist, a mensch. He was halfway between a slave master and a father figure"[8]

During the 1963–1964 term, Dershowitz served as law clerk for U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Arthur Goldberg. Dershowitz has said that "getting a Supreme Court clerkship" was "probably" his second "big break"[8].

He joined the faculty of Harvard Law School as an assistant professor of law in 1964. He was made a full professor in 1967 at the age of 28, at that time the youngest full professor of law in the school's history.[12] He was appointed the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law in 1993, succeeding Abram Chayes.

Much of Dershowitz's legal career has focused on criminal law, and his clients have included high-profile figures such as Patricia Hearst, Harry Reems, Leona Helmsley, Jim Bakker, Mike Tyson, Michael Milken, O.J. Simpson and Kirtanananda Swami. While representing Claus von Bülow he had the conviction overturned on appeal; in a retrial, von Bülow was acquitted. Dershowitz told the story of the case in his book, Reversal of Fortune. In the movie version, Dershowitz was played by actor/activist Ron Silver, and Dershowitz himself had a cameo as a judge. Regarding the O.J. Simpson murder case, about which he wrote the book Reasonable Doubts (which includes "an extensive discussion of both the glove and the sock and the forensic evidence"), Dershowitz evaluates the importance of that case for jurisprudence and for his own overall career: "the Simpson case will not be remembered in the next century. It will not rank as one of the trials of the century. It will not rank with the Nuremberg trials, the Rosenberg trial, Sacco and Vanzetti. It is on par with Leopold and Loeb and the Lindbergh case, all involving celebrities. It is also not one of the most important cases of my own career. I would rank it somewhere in the middle in terms of interest and importance." [13]

Views on Israeli policy

Dershowitz comments regularly on issues related to Judaism, Israel, civil liberties, the War on Terror, and the First Amendment, and appears frequently in the mainstream media as a guest commentator. Dershowitz is an outspoken commentator on the history and politics of Israel. He has engaged in highly publicized media confrontations regarding torture and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict with Rabbi Meir Kahane, Norman Finkelstein, and former President Jimmy Carter, among others.[14][15] Dershowitz's frequently positive comments on Israel's actions have earned him a reputation as a vocal supporter of that nation.[16]

2002 Harvard-MIT divestment petition

In spring 2002, as reported later by the Harvard Crimson, a "petition, which calls for Harvard and MIT to divest from Israel and from American companies that sell arms to Israel, [and which] also calls for the U.S. government to stop supplying weapons until four specific conditions are met by the Israeli government," gathered over 600 signatures, including 74 from the Harvard faculty and 56 from MIT faculty members.[17] Among the signatures was that of Harvard's Winthrop House Master Paul D. Hanson, who "signed the petition as a professor of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations" and whom Dershowitz "publicly challenged...to a debate over the Israel divestment petition."[17] But "saying Hanson had turned down his offer, Dershowitz staged a solo debate in the Winthrop Junior Common Room [at Harvard]. Standing beside a chair with a copy of the petition taped to it, he said students and professors who had signed the petition were antisemitic and knew 'basically nothing about the Middle East.'" According to Adams, "'Your House master is a bigot and you ought to know that,' he told the crowd of about 200 students. 'Everyone else who signed that petition is also a bigot.'"[17] In his presentation to the students,

Dershowitz reviewed the four conditions demanded by the petition and argued Israel was already in compliance," saying "It’s a little bit strange that there should be such a huge debate about four issues which have already been resolved".... He said he personally supports a Palestinian state but argued that, compared with other groups seeking statehood, Palestinians hold a lower "moral priority" because they rejected a U.N. proposal for dividing the Middle East after the Second World War that included the creation of a Palestinian state. Dershowitz also said Israel should not be singled out as a violator of human rights. He said Israel stands among the top ten most rights-conscious nations in the world.... "By any criteria, Israel’s record on human rights is better than any country in the Middle East," he said.... He cited examples of human rights violations in countries that the U.S. supports, such as the execution of homosexuals in Egypt and the repression of women in Saudi Arabia.... Dershowitz said he distinguishes between criticizing the Israeli government and signing the divestment petition. He said criticism of the government, which he said he participates in, is not inherently anti-semitic, while signing the petition is.... He also threatened to sue any professor who votes against the tenure of another based on the candidate’s ties to Israel, calling them "ignoramuses with Ph.D.’s."[17]

According to Adams, "Many members of the audience, which generally supported Dershowitz and applauded for him several times, said they appreciated the presentation.... 'I thought it was great,' said Rachel S. Weinerman ’03, a student in Dunster House. 'This type of honest sentiment about the divestment petition has long been warranted.'"[17] However, many other students thought the attacks were simply offensive and without academic merit, 'It’s an offensive thing for a professor to say about a House master for a large number of Harvard students,' ... adding Dershowitz's agenda 'clearly overstepped his bounds as a professor."[17]

Dershowitz's 2002 article "New Response to Palestinian Terrorism"

On March 11, 2002 Dershowitz published an article in The Jerusalem Post entitled "New Response to Palestinian Terrorism."[18] In it, he says that "to succeed [in deterrence and retaliation], Israel must turn the Palestinian leadership and people against the use of terrorism and the terrorists themselves." He proposed that "Israel should announce an immediate unilateral cessation in retaliation," which would be a short moratorium "to give the Palestinian leadership an opportunity to respond to the new policy." Further:

Following the end of the moratorium, Israel would institute the following new policy if Palestinian terrorism were to resume. It will announce precisely what it will do in response to the next act of terrorism. For example, it could announce the first act of terrorism following the moratorium will result in the destruction of a small village which has been used as a base for terrorist operations. The residents would be given 24 hours to leave, and then troops will come in and bulldoze all of the buildings.

The response will be automatic. The order will have been given in advance of the terrorist attacks and there will be no discretion. The point is to make the automatic destruction of the village the fault of the Palestinian terrorists who had advance warnings of the specific consequences of their action.

He goes on to add that "[f]urther acts of terrorism would trigger further destruction of specifically named locations. The 'waiting list' targets would be made public and circulated throughout the Palestinian-controlled areas."

Dershowitz's proposal stimulated much criticism at Harvard University and beyond.[19] James Bamford, a columnist with The Washington Post, argued that "demolishing the homes of innocent relatives of those involved in suicide bombing," which Dershowitz "analyzed" in that book, is "a practice outlawed under international law."[20][21] Norman Finkelstein, in his book Beyond Chutzpah, went even further, commenting that "it is hard to make out any difference between the policy Dershowitz advocates and the Nazi destruction of Lidice, for which he expresses abhorrence-except that Jews, not Germans, would be implementing it."[22]

Noam Chomsky (1972–)

In 1972, according to his critics, Dershowitz attempted to discredit Israel Shahak (1933–2001), then president of the Israel League for Human and Civil Rights, who was an Israeli citizen and a Holocaust survivor who had sharply criticized Israeli treatment of Palestinians. Shahak was in the process of challenging contested election results for the chairmanship of the Israel League in a legal civil action. Dershowitz claimed that Judge Lovenburg, the judge presiding in Shahak's civil suit, had ruled that Shahak was properly unseated, and Dershowitz challenged anyone to provide evidence to the contrary. In response, Noam Chomsky argued that the court had opined that the elections had not been held properly, that no conclusions or actions were to be drawn from it, and that Shahak and his colleagues were to continue to function as "those who now direct" the Israel League for Human and Civil Rights.[23] The controversy initiated by this dispute has fuelled ongoing personal animosity between Dershowitz and Chomsky, both known as outspoken academics holding opposite positions on issues pertaining to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, for over 35 years.[24] An exchange concerning a letter about the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon signed by Chomsky and others was published in Z Magazine on September 6, 2006.[25] (See References: Alan Dershowitz and Noam Chomsky.)

Norman Finkelstein (2003–)

Shortly after the publication of Dershowitz's 2003 book The Case for Israel a debate was broadcast by Democracy Now!, a news radio and television program, where Norman Finkelstein, in what he called a "scholarly judgment," said that the book is "a collection of fraud, falsification, plagiarism and nonsense." To demonstrate his point, Finkelstein gave series of examples throughout the show, one of which was pointing out a long quote from Mark Twain appearing on pages 23–24 of The Case for Israel which was "an identical quote...With the ellipsis at the same places" directly taken from pages 159–160 of From Time Immemorial written by Joan Peters without making any reference to Joan Peters. Dershowitz argued that the quote was a correct quote by Mark Twain to whom he gave credit.

Frank J. Menetrez has identified twenty errors in Peters' quotation from Twain which are reproduced in Dershowitz's quotation (e.g. Peters and Dershowitz: "Jericho the accursed lies [in] a mouldering ruin today, even as Joshua's miracle left it ...." Twain: "Jericho the accursed, lies a mouldering ruin, to-day, even as Joshua's miracle left it ...." (Dershowitz omits Peters's italics, inserts 'in' not in Peters or Twain)) Menetrez comments: "the only reasonable inference seems to be that he [Dershowitz] copied the quotation from Peters. But Dershowitz does not cite Peters as his source for the quotation. He cites only Twain." Menetrez goes on: "Dershowitz has never, to my knowledge, responded to Finkelstein's argument concerning the identical errors ...."[26]

Since then, there have been number of reactions by various figures, such as Harvard University President Derek Bok who is said to have investigated the charges at the request of the Law School's dean, Elena Kagan. Bok is said to have determined that no plagiarism had occurred.[27] Frank Menetrez has suggested that the investigation by Harvard could not have taken into account the obvious reproduction of Peters' errors by Dershowitz in the quotation from Twain (what he calls the 'identical errors' argument for Dershowitz's plagiarism)

... I believe the evidence concerning the Twain quote independently establishes that Harvard did not know about the identical errors argument before conducting its investigation, because I take for granted that the Harvard administration is neither hopelessly corrupt nor intellectually incompetent. If the administration had known about the argument, they would have investigated it, because they are not corrupt. If they had investigated it, they would have found the same massive evidence that I found, because they are not incompetent. And if they had found that massive evidence, they would not have cleared Dershowitz, because they are not corrupt.[28]

Dershowitz and some of his prominent supporters assert that what Finkelstein calls plagiarism is in fact standard scholarly practice.[29][30] Dershowitz's defense here is that the Chicago Manual of Style says that references should be given to original sources, not to secondary sources, "since authors are expected to have examined the works they cite"[31] and that therefore he was correct to cite only Twain. The fact that he repeats typographical errors from Peters, however, suggests that he did not in fact examine Twain, so the argument about citation practice appears to be a non sequitur.

In an April 3, 2007 interview with the Harvard Crimson, "Dershowitz confirmed that he had sent a letter last September to DePaul faculty members lobbying against Finkelstein's tenure."[32] The De Paul University Liberal Arts and Sciences' Faculty Governance Council voted unanimously to send a letter to Harvard University expressing "the council's dismay at Professor Dershowitz's interference in Finkelstein's tenure and promotion case."[33] In June 2007, DePaul University denied Finkelstein tenure.[34]

"The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" (2006), by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt

In March 2006, John Mearsheimer, Wendell Harrison Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and author of The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, and Stephen Walt, Robert and Renee Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and author of Taming American Power: The Global Response to US Primacy, co-authored a controversial working paper entitled "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," about which an extensive debate was subsequently published in The London Review of Books.[35] In their working paper, Professors Mearsheimer and Walt criticize what they describe as "the Israel Lobby" for influencing U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East in a direction away from U.S. interests and toward Israel's interests. They refer to Dershowitz specifically as an “apologist” for the Israel lobby. In an interview conducted on March 20, 2006, cited in The Harvard Crimson, Dershowitz "vehemently disputed the article’s assertions, repeatedly calling it 'one-sided' and its authors 'liars' and 'bigots.'”[36] In an appearance on MSNBC's Scarborough Country televised the next day, Dershowitz suggested that the working paper was plagiarized from various hate sites: "every paragraph virtually is copied from a neo-Nazi Web site, from a radical Islamic Web site, from David Duke’s Web site."[37] Subsequently, Dershowitz wrote an extensive report challenging the factual basis of their essay, calling into question the motivations of the authors and their scholarship. His report claims that the "paper contains three types of major errors: quotations are wrenched out of context, important facts are misstated or omitted, and embarrassingly weak logic is employed."[38]

In a letter published in the London Review of Books in May 2006, Mearsheimer and Walt responded to Dershowitz's contention that they used racist sources for their article, stating that "Dershowitz offers no evidence to support this false claim."[39]

2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict

In July 2006, Dershowitz wrote a series of articles defending the conduct of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict against the international outcry regarding escalating Lebanese civilian deaths and the destruction of Lebanese civilian infrastructure resulting from Israel's stated attempt to weaken or to destroy Hezbollah which wields considerable political power and influence in Lebanon. After the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour indicated that Israeli officials might be investigated and indicted for possible war crimes, Dershowitz labeled Arbour's statement "bizarre" in an editorial, calling specifically for her dismissal and inveighing more generally against the "absurdity and counterproductive nature of current international law."[40]

In an editorial published in The Boston Globe several days later, Dershowitz argues that "the international community, the anti-Israel segment of the media, and human rights organizations" should not blame Israel for any dead civilians. "Israel has every self-interest in minimizing civilian casualties, whereas the terrorists have every self-interest in maximizing them– on both sides. Israel should not be condemned for doing what every democracy would and should do: taking every reasonable military step to stop the killing of their own civilians."[41]

Iran and Israel: 2006–2007

In his appearance at the Truth, Light and Freedom Rally at Beth Tzedec Synagogue in Toronto, Canada, "a rally...organized by the UJA [United Jewish Agency] Federation of Greater Toronto, Canadian Jewish Congress Ontario Region and the Holocaust Centre of Toronto," on December 21, 2006, Dershowitz spoke "about the danger Iran poses to Israel and the rest of the world" at this "held at the Beth Tzedec Synogogue in Toronto, Canada, Alan Dershowitz accused "Iran...of incitement to genocide," according to Sheri Shefa, a staff reporter for The Canadian Jewish News:

Speaking in response to the recent Holocaust denial conference in Iran and Iran’s goal to develop nuclear weapons, Dershowitz, an outspoken defender of Israel, said that although Holocaust denial is about the past, it is used to influence the present and the future.... “The purpose of Holocaust denial is to delegitimate Israel, to demonize Jews and to legitimate attacks on Israel and attacks on Jews,” Dershowitz said.... He added that because of the world’s obsession with Israel, Jews are not the only victims, as other issues in the world, such as the genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia, and the current genocide in Darfur, have been largely ignored by the international community.... “Six million additional people have died since the end of the Second World War because of this obsessive focus on Israel,” Dershowitz said....[42]

Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid (2006), by Jimmy Carter

In his 2006 book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, Jimmy Carter, former President of the United States and winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize, argues that "Israel's continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land."[43] Carter states in Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid that Israel's current policies in the Palestinian territories constitute "a system of apartheid, with two peoples occupying the same land but completely separated from each other, with Israelis totally dominant and suppressing violence by depriving Palestinians of their basic human rights."[44] Carter's self-defined purpose in writing the book is to "present facts about the Middle East that are largely unknown in America, to precipitate discussion and to help restart peace talks (now absent for six years) that can lead to permanent peace for Israel and its neighbors."[45]

In an op-ed, some newspaper articles, media appearances, and blog posts at The Huffington Post, Dershowitz has taken issue with President Carter's points of view and has challenged him to debate the matters in public at Brandeis University. Carter has publicly declined to visit Brandeis to discuss the book due to the request that he debate Dershowitz as a condition of the visit:

"I don't want to have a conversation even indirectly with Dershowitz," Carter said in Friday's [December 15, 2006] Boston Globe. "There is no need . . . to debate somebody who, in my opinion, knows nothing about the situation in Palestine."
The school's debate request, Carter said, is proof that many in the United States are unwilling to hear an alternative view on the nation's most taboo foreign policy issue, Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory. . . . "There is no debate in America about anything that would be critical of Israel," he said.
"President Carter said he wrote the book because he wanted to encourage more debate; then why won't he debate?" said Dershowitz. . . .[46]

He reiterates:

Carter’s refusal to debate wouldn’t be so strange if it weren’t for the fact that he claims that he wrote the book precisely so as to start debate over the issue of the Israel-Palestine peace process. If that were really true, Carter would be thrilled to have the opportunity to debate.... When Jimmy Carter's ready to speak at Brandeis, or anywhere else, I'll be there. If he refuses to debate, I will still be there––ready and willing to answer falsity with truth in the court of public opinion."[47]

Subsequently, Brandeis University and President Carter came to an agreement about his visit, which they said would have no pre-conditions. The event, which occurred on January 23, 2007, was open only to Brandeis students, faculty, and staff, and the university refused to make an exception allowing Dershowitz to attend the speech, although he was invited to present a response after Carter's speech concluded. The day after the speech, on January 24, 2007, The New York Times reported on Carter's speech in "At Brandeis, Jimmy Carter Responds to Critics":

Questions were preselected by the committee that invited Mr. Carter, and the questioners included an Israeli student and a Palestinian student... After Mr. Carter left, Mr. Dershowitz spoke in the same gymnasium, saying that the former president oversimplified the situation and that his conciliatory and sensible-sounding speech at Brandeis belied his words in some other interviews.... “There are two different Jimmy Carters,” Mr. Dershowitz said. “You heard the Brandeis Jimmy Carter today, and he was terrific. I support almost everything he said. But if you listen to the Al Jazeera Jimmy Carter, you’ll hear a very different perspective.”[48]

During his response, Dershowitz stated that, "if" he had "been allowed to be in the audience" of Carter's speech to ask a question or offer a rebuttal, he would have asked one question of Carter: "...were you ever asked to give your advice to Arafat as whether to accept or reject an offer [of a separate state for the Palestinians] at Camp David?"[49] Dershowitz went on to assert that, had President Carter done so, and had Arafat rejected such an offer on Carter's advice, Carter himself would have been responsible for the situation of the Palestinians today.

The Doha Debates

In April 2009, Dershowitz participated in the Doha Debates at Georgetown University in Washington DC, where he debated against the motion "this house believes that it is time for the USA to get tough on Israel" with fellow speaker Dore Gold, President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Speakers for the motion were Avraham Burg, former Chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel and former Speaker of the Knesset and Michael Scheuer, former Chief of the CIA Bin Laden Issue Station. He lost the debate, with 63% of the audience voting for the motion.[50]

Recognition

Dershowitz was named a Guggenheim Fellow in 1979, and was in 1983 a recipient of the William O. Douglas First Amendment Award from the Anti-Defamation League of the B'nai Brith for his work in civil rights. He has been awarded honorary doctorates in law from Yeshiva University, the Hebrew Union College, Monmouth College, University of Haifa, Syracuse University, Fitchburg State College, Bar-Ilan University, and Brooklyn College.[51]

He has been described by Newsweek as America's "most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer and one of its most distinguished defenders of individual rights" and by Corriere della Sera as "America's most famous progressive lawyer."[52]

In June 2005 he was among an "elite group" of twenty guests invited to participate in a "brain-storming session" on "Alternate Futures for the Jewish People," held at the Aspen Institute Wye River Conference Center (formerly "Wye Plantation"), near Washington, D.C.[53]

Dershowitz has been blogging at The Huffington Post since then.[1]

On November 18, 2007, Alan Dershowitz was awarded The Soviet Jewry Freedom Award by the Russian Jewish Community Foundation.[54]

Issues and controversies

Pornography (1976–)

In 1976, Dershowitz handled the successful appeal of Harry Reems, who had been convicted of distribution of obscenity resulting from his acting in the pornographic movie Deep Throat. In public debates, Dershowitz commonly argues against censorship of pornography on First Amendment grounds and maintains that consumption of pornography is not harmful.[55][56] For several years, Dershowitz has written the monthly column "Justice" and related articles in the pages of Penthouse magazine and testified on legal issues pertaining to pornography.[57] Dershowitz wrote around 75 articles published in various issues of Penthouse between 1977–1991, mainly between 1985–1988.[58][59][60][61]

Mike Barnicle (1990s)

In 1990, Dershowitz sued The Boston Globe over an alleged quotation that Mike Barnicle had attributed to him in that newspaper. Dershowitz allegedly said he preferred Oriental women because they are deferential to men. Dershowitz and The Boston Globe settled the suit out of court, and, reportedly, Dershowitz was awarded $75,000 as a result of the out-of-court settlement. Barnicle wrote his essay in response to Dershowitz's public feud with Massachusetts Senate President William M. Bulger (see below).[62]

Testilying

In a 1994 The New York Times article, "Accomplices to Perjury," he said:

As I read about the disbelief expressed by some prosecutors... I thought of Claude Rains's classic response, in Casablanca on being told there was gambling in Rick's place: "I'm shocked—shocked." For anyone who has practiced criminal law in the state or Federal courts, the disclosures about rampant police perjury cannot possibly come as a surprise. "Testilying"—as the police call it—has long been an open secret among prosecutors, defense lawyers, and judges.[63]

Animal rights (2002)

Dershowitz is one of a number of scholars at Harvard Law School who have expressed their support for limited animal rights.[64] In his Rights from Wrongs: A Secular Theory of the Origins of Rights, he writes that, in order to avoid human beings treating each other the way we treat animals, we have made what he calls the "somewhat arbitrary decision" to single out our own species for different and better treatment. "Does this subject us to the charge of speciesism? Of course it does, and we cannot justify it, except by the fact that in the world in which we live, humans make the rules. That reality imposes on us a special responsibility to be fair and compassionate to those on whom we impose our rules. Hence the argument for animal rights."[65]

Second Amendment and the U.S. Constitution

Dershowitz is strongly opposed to firearms ownership and the Second Amendment, saying that it is "an anachronistic drafting disaster that does not belong in any constitution or bill of rights."[66] However, he is opposed to repealing the amendment because he feels doing so would open the way for further revisions to the Bill of Rights and Constitution. In a telephone interview with reporter Dan Gifford, he stated that:

"Foolish liberals who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a public safety hazard don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don't like."[67]

William ("Bill") M. Bulger (2002)

While William ("Bill") M. Bulger served as Massachusetts Senate President (and afterwards), Alan Dershowitz was a prominent critic.[68] Dershowitz and fellow attorney Harvey Silverglate attended a Governor’s Council hearing on a Bulger associate, Paul Mahoney, who was nominated for a District Court judicial appointment. Bulger appeared at the meeting and questioned the integrity and motives of Dershowitz and Silverglate."[69][70]

Dershowitz's 2002 article "Want to Torture? Get a Warrant"

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Dershowitz published an essay in the San Francisco Chronicle entitled "Want to Torture? Get a Warrant," in which he advocates the issuance of warrants permitting the torture of terrorism suspects if there were an "absolute need to obtain immediate information in order to save lives coupled with probable cause that the suspect had such information and is unwilling to reveal it."[14][71]

Dershowitz says that he is personally against the use of torture, yet he argues that authorities should be permitted to use non-lethal torture in a "ticking bomb" scenario, regardless of international legal prohibitions; that it would be less destructive to the rule of law to regulate the process than to leave such permission to the discretion of individual law-enforcement agents. He favors preventing the government from prosecuting the subject of such torture based upon information revealed during such an interrogation. Moreover, he argues: "If torture is going to be administered as a last resort in the ticking-bomb case, to save enormous numbers of lives, [then] it ought to be done openly, with accountability, with approval by the president of the United States or by a Supreme Court justice."[14][72]

Criticism

Some other civil libertarians are "not persuaded" by Dershowitz's rationalization for the sanctioning of torture to extract information from uncooperative captured suspected terrorists in such a hypothetical "ticking bomb" scenario. For example, Harvey A. Silverglate, co-founder (with Alan Charles Kors) of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), asserts that because, in such cases, jury nullification and executive clemency could protect law enforcement; "our legal system is perfectly capable of dealing with the exceptional hard case without enshrining the notion that it is okay to torture a fellow human being."[73]

William F. Schulz, the Executive Director of the U.S. section of Amnesty International, finds Dershowitz's "hypothetical" ticking-bomb scenario unrealistic because, Schulz counters, it would require that "the authorities know that a bomb has been planted somewhere; know it is about to go off; know that the suspect in their custody has the information they need to stop it; know that the suspect will yield that information accurately in a matter of minutes if subjected to torture; and know that there is no other way to obtain it."[74] Bill Goodman of the Center for Constitutional Rights, debating Dershowitz on CNN, argues that Dershowitz's proposal would create a "very slippery slope" and that torture would "happen under more than those exceptional circumstances. It's going to start becoming the regular, rather than the unusual."[75]

James Bamford, in his column for The Washington Post of September 8, 2002, reviews Dershowitz's "idea of torture" and describes "[o]ne form of torture recommended by Dershowitz --'the sterilized needle being shoved under the fingernails'" as "chillingly Nazi-like."[20]

Response by Dershowitz

In a debate with David D. Cole, professor at Georgetown University Law Center, Dershowitz stated: "I want to make sure that if my government ever does this horrible, terrible, extraordinary thing, that somebody takes responsibility for it and that it be out there in the open and subject to accountability,” ... “Though I understand the danger of legitimating something that should not be legitimated, on balance in a democracy, I prefer accountability".[76]

The "ticking time bomb scenario" is subject of the drama The Dershowitz Protocol by Canadian author Robert Fothergill. In that play, the American government has established a protocol of "intensified interrogation" for terrorist suspects which requires participation of the FBI, CIA and the Department of Justice. The drama deals with the psychological pressure and the tense triangle of competences under the overriding importance that each participant has to negotiate the actions with his conscience. The play is directly linked to the debate caused by Dershowitz' article.

Eliot Spitzer prostitution scandal

Professor Dershowitz spoke on the television news regarding New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's alleged use of a prostitute, argued on CNN that reaction to the charges was overblown and not unordinary in American politics, saying, "This is a private sexual misconduct. And we know from history, from Thomas Jefferson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, from John Kennedy, from Bill Clinton, from Lyndon Johnson that people govern well during the day and act like children and adolescents during the night." [77] A few days later, on MSNBC, Dershowitz said, "You know, big deal ... In Europe this wouldn't even make the back pages of the newspaper."[78]

CNN defended the story, noting that Spitzer had been accused of transporting a woman across state lines for the purposes of prostitution, a felony punishable by ten years in federal prison under the Mann Act.[79] CNN also impugned Dershowitz's impartiality because Spitzer previously served as a research assistant to Dershowitz.[77]

Cardinal Józef Glemp of Poland

Cardinal Józef Glemp has been accused of antisemitism, most notably by Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz. "Cardinal Glemp has made a career out of blaming the Jews for all of Poland's ills, including 'spreading communism,' 'plying [Polish] peasants with alcohol' and even anti-Semitism," Dershowitz wrote in an article for the Jerusalem Post in 2007.[80]

In the late 1980s, Dershowitz filed a slander suit against Glemp, then the Archbishop of Warsaw, on behalf of Rabbi Avi Weiss. Glemp had accused Weiss and six other New York Jews of attacking nuns at a much-disputed convent on the site of the Auschwitz concentration camp. Two Polish courts rejected Rabbi Weiss’ claim that the speech at issue “caused serious harm” to his reputation.[81]

Cardinal Glemp's statement about Rabbi Weiss, made in July 1989, was coupled with suggestions that Jews control the world's news media and was seen as anti-semitic in tone by some Jewish leaders.[82] A full account of the lawsuit appears in Dershowitz's 1991 bestseller, Chutzpah.

Selected bibliography

Notes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 "Alan Dershowitz". The Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/. Retrieved August 2, 2009. 
  2. ↑ Dershowitz wins 13th murder case in the Harvard Law Record
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 Jonathan Rosen (March 30, 1997). "Abraham's Drifting Children". The New York Times Books. http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/03/30/reviews/970330.30rosent.html?_r=1&oref=slogin. Retrieved November 28, 2007. 
  4. ↑ Alan M. Dershowitz, Chutzpah (New York: Touchstone Books, 1992) 35.
  5. ↑ "Harry Dershowitz", "Social Security Death Index Search Results," n.d., accessed November 1, 2006.
  6. ↑ Louis Dershowitz WWII Draft Registration Card and 1930 Census, Ancestry.com
  7. ↑ "Obituary: Harry Dershowitz", The New York Times April 26, 1984; Nathan Z. Dershowitz, FindLaw.com, last updated December 31, 2005; both accessed November 1, 2006.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 Tom Van Riper, "First Job: Alan Dershowitz," Forbes May 23, 2006, accessed November 1, 2006.
  9. ↑ Elizabeth Stull, "Son of Brooklyn Brings Home Legacy of High-Profile Trials: Alan Dershowitz Donates Archives to Brooklyn College," Brooklyn Daily Eagle September 25, 2003, accessed August 12, 2006.
  10. ↑ Alan M. Dershowitz, Chutzpah (New York: Touchstone Books, 1992) 41.
  11. ↑ Detailed "Biographical Statement". AlanDershowitz.com, © Alan M. Dershowitz 2006, accessed January 25, 2007.
  12. ↑ Spero, Josh (March 14, 2006). No stranger to controversy, Dershowitz remains unapologetic. The Times. Retrieved August 27, 2010.
  13. ↑ "Looking Back at the OJ Trial: Chat Transcript from June 9, 1999". Transcript of interview with Dershowitz hosted by CourtTV, Yahoo, and Time Online. April 3, 1998. http://www.time.com/time/community/transcripts/1999/060999dershowitz.html. Retrieved March 14, 2008. 
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 "'If Not for 9/11, Bush's Approval Ratings Would Be Very Low': Alan Dershowitz interviewed by Suzy Hansen," Salon.com September 17, 2002, accessed March 6, 2007 (incl. links to five-page transcript of full interview and to audio excerpt). [Cf. featured links to other versions of this interview; e.g., Suzy Hansen, "Why Terrorism Works", Salon.com September 12, 2002, accessed March 6, 2007.]
  15. ↑ Michelle Goldberg, "Mau-mauing the Middle East." Salon.com September 30, 2002, accessed February 17, 2007, cites Dershowitz's perspective on his own support for Israel and Israeli-sponsored terror in the context of what some regarded then as a "chilly" academic environment for doing so in 2002: "'I'm one of the very, very few professors around the United States that vigorously speaks up on behalf of Israel, and I have gotten e-mails and calls from all over the world from students who feel chilled because no one speaks up for them.'" (page two of three pages).
  16. ↑ What is anti-Semitism? (Los Angeles Times, May 12, 2009) ("vehemently pro-Israel")
    Legal giants take on Israel boycotters (The Times, June 14, 2007) ("vocal supporter of Israel")
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 17.5 Randall T. Adams, "Dershowitz: Divestment Petitioners Are 'Bigots,'" Harvard Crimson October 8, 2002, accessed September 8, 2006.
  18. ↑ Alan M. Dershowitz, "New Response to Palestinian Terrorism."
  19. ↑ David Villarreal, "Dershowitz Editorial Draws Fire," The Harvard Crimson March 18, 2002, accessed January 25, 2007.
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 James Bamford, "Strategic Thinking: A year After Sept. 11, Students of U.S. policy Still Disagree about What Went Wrong and How to Fix It." The Washington Post September 8, 2002: BW03, accessed January 25, 2007.
  21. ↑ Cf. Nathan Lewin, "Detering (sic) Suicide Killers" (Reply to Arthur Green), Sh'ma May 2002, accessed January 25, 2007; Arthur Green, "A Stronger Moral Force," Sh'ma May 2002, accessed January 25, 2007. In the context of this debate between himself and Arthur Green, Nathan Lewin, a Washington, D.C. lawyer, writes: "The extremely modest proposals that some people are now willing to accept – national identity cards and roving eavesdrops (and even the "automatic" destruction of Palestinian villages that Alan Dershowitz proposed in The Jerusalem Post of March 11, 2002) – are the proverbial use of aspirin to treat brain cancer. They may occasionally disrupt terrorist plans but will have no major impact on the terrorist threat." In this reply to Green, Lewin proposes executions of family members of terrorists as "individual deterrence" to terrorism, which also, in the views of Bamford and other critics of Dershowitz's "modest proposal" already cited, violates "international law." ["Note: The debate between Nathan Lewin and Arthur Green on how to deter suicide killers, which appears below, are two parts of a whole. Please do not circulate one article without the other." (The journal title Sh'ma is explicated in Shema Yisrael.)]
  22. ↑ Norman Finkelstein, Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History (University of California Press, 2005) 176.
  23. ↑ See Alan M. Dershowitz, "Guest Column: Chomsky's Immoral Divestiture Petition", The Tech May 10, 2002; and Noam Chomsky, Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians, fwd. Edward W. Said, Classics Series, Vol. 3, 2nd rev. ed. (Boston: South End Press; Montreal: Black Rose Books, 1999), ISBN 0-89608-601-1, Electronic versionPDF (3.33 MiB); both accessed October 28, 2006.
  24. ↑ See Robert F. Barsky, "Provoking Ire," in Noam Chomsky: A Life of Dissent (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1997). (Searchable electronic version):

    As he already knew the details of the Shahak affair, Chomsky wasted no time in replying to Dershowitz's letter to the Globe, which, in turn, incited Dershowitz to denounce Chomsky and ask for proof in the form of court records. Chomsky happened to be in possession of these:

    I . . . wrote a letter quoting them, which showed that he was a complete liar, as well as a Stalinist-style thug (that was implicit; I didn't bother saying it). He continued to try to brazen his way out, and was finally told by the Globe ombudsman that they would publish no more of his lies on the matter (that was after I'd sent the original Court records and a translation to English to the Globe, who had requested documentation so they could assess Dershowitz's increasingly hysterical charges). Ever since then, Dershowitz has been on a crazed jihad, dedicating much of his life to trying to destroy my reputation. (March 31, 1995)
  25. ↑ Noam Chomsky, "Comments on Dershowitz," Z Magazine, ZNet September 6, 2006, accessed September 7, 2006.
  26. ↑ Frank J. Menetrez, "Dershowitz v. Finkelstein: Who's Right and Who's Wrong?" Epilogue to Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History (updated edition, 2005), Norman G. Finkelstein (London: Verso), pp. 379–384)
  27. ↑ See Marcella Bombardieri, "Academic Fight Heads to Print: Authorship Challenge Dropped from Text," The Boston Globe July 9, 2005, accessed September 10, 2006:

    Dershowitz sent letters, which he declined to provide to the Globe, to a variety of University of California Press officials, and even to California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is an ex officio member of the University of California's board of regents. "I told the UC press, 'If you say I didn't write the book or plagiarized it, I will own your company,'" said Dershowitz, who argued that Finkelstein's accusations are a ploy for publicity. "The First Amendment protects mistakes that are inadvertent, but it doesn't prevent willful lies." Finkelstein, who teaches at DePaul University in Chicago, wrote in an e-mail to Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan last year that his book would document that Dershowitz plagiarized The Case for Israel, and that Dershowitz "almost certainly didn't write the book, and perhaps didn't even read it prior to publication." Last year, Kagan asked former Harvard president Derek Bok to examine Finkelstein's plagiarism allegation. Bok determined no plagiarism had occurred, law school spokesman Michael Armini said yesterday. Dershowitz also said that he refutes Finkelstein's allegations in his own forthcoming book, The Case for Peace.

  28. ↑ Menetrez, "Epilogue," pp. 387–8
  29. ↑ One of the disputes involves Dershowitz's quoting what he says are genuine direct quotations accurately from primary sources (such as Mark Twain) without explicitly attributing the secondary sources citing these quotations in which he allegedly first encountered them (such as a 1984 book entitled From Time Immemorial, by Joan Peters). However, this argument is vitiated by the fact that Dershowitz's quotations are in fact inaccurate (see text). See "Statement of Alan Dershowitz" and another of Dershowitz's replies to Finkelstein et al. hosted on "New Challenge to Columbia and to Chomsky, Finkelstein, and Cockburn," FrontPagemag.com July 13, 2005, accessed September 10, 2006:

    For more than 20 years the terrible triumvirate of Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, and Alexander Cockburn have been falsely accusing pro-Israel writers of plagiarism and related academic offenses.[(embedded note) 2] I have been the most recent target of the selective vitriol. They have accused me of plagiarism for quoting Mark Twain and other well-known figures whose quotes appear in my book within quotation marks and properly cited to their original source. Their absurd accusation is that I should have cited these quotes not to their original source but rather to the secondary source in which they erroneously claim I first came across them. No one but anti-Israel zealots takes these biased charges seriously, as evidenced by the fact that not only was I cleared of all such charges by Harvard (after I brought them to the attention of the dean and president), but recently the dean awarded me a prize for “exceptional scholarship” for my current book Rights from Wrongs. [Italics added.]

  30. ↑ Another essay published in CounterPunch by Neve Gordon illustrates the ongoing battle between Dershowitz and his critics over these issues.
  31. ↑ Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition, para. 17.274.
  32. ↑ Zhou, Kevin. "Feud Weakens Prof's Tenure Bid" Harvard Crimson April 4, 2007
  33. ↑ Chronicle of Higher Education Thursday, April 5, 2007 "Harvard Law Professor Works to Disrupt Tenure Bid of Longtime Nemesis at DePaul U."
  34. ↑ "DePaul denies tenure to controversial professor", The Associated Press , June 11, 2007.
  35. ↑ John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," as linked in "The Israel Lobby," The London Review of Books, March 23, 2006, accessed February 2, 2007.
  36. ↑ Paras D. Bhayani and Rebecca R. Friedman, "Dean Attacks ‘Israel Lobby’: Article co-authored by KSG’s Walt stirs uproar; Dershowitz responds," The Harvard Crimson March 21, 2006: "In interviews with The Crimson yesterday [March 20, 2006], Dershowitz took issue with this characterization, stating that he does not consider himself a member of a monolithic lobby and that he has criticized Israel on several occasions in the past.... Dershowitz, who is one of Israel’s most prominent defenders, vehemently disputed the article’s assertions, repeatedly calling it 'one-sided' and its authors 'liars' and 'bigots.'.... He criticized three piece on three grounds, alleging parallels with neo-Nazi literature, saying that Walt and Mearsheimer’s characterization that Israeli citizenship is based on 'blood kinship' is a 'categorical lie,' and taking issue with the representation of the lobby as all-encompassing."
  37. ↑ Alan Dershowitz, transcript of "'Scarborough Country' for March 21," MSNBC, updated March 22, 2006, accessed September 8, 2006.
  38. ↑ Alan Dershowitz, "Debunking the Newest –– and Oldest –– Jewish Conspiracy:PDF (308 KiB) A Reply to the Mearsheimer Walt 'Working Paper,'" John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Law School, April 6, 2006, accessed April 6, 2006.
  39. ↑ John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, "The Israel Lobby," London Review of Books May 11, 2006, accessed September 8, 2006.
  40. ↑ Alan M. Dershowitz, "Arbour Must Go," National Post July 21, 2006, accessed September 7, 2006.
  41. ↑ Alan M. Dershowitz, "Blame the Terrorists Not Israel," The Boston Globe July 24, 2006, accessed September 7, 2006.
  42. ↑ Sheri Shefa, "Iran Accused of Incitement to Genocide," The Canadian Jewish News, online posting, January 25, 2007, accessed January 24, 2007. Other "[s]peakers at the rally, hosted by author and National Post columnist Linda Frum Sokolowski, included Canada’s minister of intergovernmental affairs Peter Van Loan; Ontario Attorney General Michael J. Bryant; Father Raymond De Souza, a Catholic priest, and Holocaust survivors Martin Maxwell and Max Eisen.
  43. ↑ "Excerpt: Carter's 'Palestine Peace Not Apartheid,'" [Chap. 17], ABC News November 27, 2006, accessed December 23, 2006.
  44. ↑ "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid...Jimmy Carter in His Own Words," interview conducted by Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! November 30, 2006, accessed December 23, 2006; incl. audio link to interview and "rush transcript."
  45. ↑ "Speaking frankly about Israel and Palestine," Los Angeles Times January 8, 2007.
  46. ↑ "Carter Nixes Debate with Outspoken Prof," Yahoo News December 15, 2006, accessed December 22, 2006.
  47. ↑ Alan Dershowitz, "Why Won't Carter Debate His Book?" (Op-Ed) The Boston Globe December 21, 2006, accessed December 23, 2006.
  48. ↑ Pam Belluck, "Jimmy Carter Responds to Critics at Brandeis," The New York Times January 24, 2007, accessed January 24, 2007.
  49. ↑ "Alan Dershowitz's Question to Jimmy Carter," video clip, online posting, YouTube January 23, 2007, accessed January 24, 2007.
  50. ↑ "This House believes it's time for the US to get tough on Israel – Transcript". The Doha Debates. March 25, 2009. http://www.thedohadebates.com/debates/debate.asp?d=48&s=5&mode=transcript. Retrieved April 7, 2009. 
  51. ↑ "Alan M[orton] Dershowitz," Crystal Reference Encyclopedia.
  52. ↑ Faculty biography for Alan M. Dershowitz, Harvard University Law School, redirected (automatically) to Alan M. Dershowitz Biography linked on Dershowitz's official website's welcome page, © Alan M. Dershowitz 2006, accessed January 25, 2007.
  53. ↑ Nathan Guttman, "Haaretz: The Future according to the 'Jewish Jules Verne,'" rpt. in "Brandeis President Part of Elite Group Brought Together to Formulate Plan for Jewish People," press release, Brandeis University June 9, 2005, accessed December 15, 2006.
  54. ↑ http://jta.org/news/article/2007/11/16/105360/dershowitzsovietjewry
  55. ↑ Charles McGrath, "An X-Rated Phenomenon Revisited," The New York Times, February 9, 2005 (TimesSelect subscription required), accessed December 17, 2006.
  56. ↑ Alan Dershowitz, "Saluting the Enemy: Alan Dershowitz responds to Anita Diamant," Boston Phoenix June 7, 2006, accessed December 17, 2006.
  57. ↑ See photograph caption in "Photographs," Edwin Meese, Attorney General's Commission on Pornography Final Report (Meese Report), U.S. Department of Justice, July 1986, accessed April 12, 2006: "Alan Dershowitz, professor of Law at Harvard Law School and columnist with Penthouse magazine, and Dottie Meyer, a former Penthouse model and coordinator involved with circulation and Pet production, testified before the Commission during the New York hearing on January 21, 1986."
  58. ↑ http://books.google.com/books?id=Opv9nz2M5c0C&lpg=PP1&pg=PA1029#v=onepage&q=&f=false
  59. ↑ http://www.philsp.com/homeville/fmi/s700.htm#A22999
  60. ↑ https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&doctype=cite&docid=71+Alb.+L.+Rev.+731&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&key=28bbdaf9020bb1b5acee539f371823ed
  61. ↑ http://www.magazine-empire.com/PENTmagPENT197701.htm
  62. ↑ Dan Kennedy, "Barnicle's Game: Why He Should Have Been Fired – and Why He Wasn't," Boston Phoenix August 13–20, 1998. The ombudsman for the Globe supported Dershowitz and questioned Barnicle's credibility. In 1998 Barnicle was "forced to resign" from the paper as a direct result of later controversies (See Mike Barnicle).
  63. ↑ Testimony on Testilying, Alan M. Dershowitz, House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, December 1, 1998. Online copy.
  64. ↑ "Darwin, Meet Dershowitz: Courting Legal Evolution at Harvard Law,"PDF The Animals' Advocate 21 (Winter 2002), accessed November 1, 2006.
  65. ↑ Alan Dershowitz, Rights from Wrongs: A Secular Theory of the Origins of Rights (2004) 198-99.
  66. ↑ Dershowitz, Alan. Jungle Law.
  67. ↑ Gifford, Dan. "The Conceptual Foundations of Anglo-American Jurisprudence in Religion and Reason" Tennessee Law Review. Vol. 62, No. 3, 1995: 759.
  68. ↑ "Editorial: Speak Up: Memo to John Kerry: Be Bold. Plus, What Goes Around Comes Around. Just Ask Billy Bulger," Boston Phoenix December 5–12, 2002; cf. "Billy Bulger's Obstruction of Justice," Boston Phoenix December 10, 2002, as posted online at the Harvard Law School.
  69. ↑ Seth Gitell, "Bulger's Denouement (Continued)," Boston Phoenix December 12–19, 2002, News & Features, accessed September 6, 2006. (3 pages)
  70. ↑ Howie Carr, "The Brothers Bulger" The Brothers Bulger (New York: Warner Books, 2006) 323.
  71. ↑ Alan M. Dershowitz, "Want to torture? Get a warrant," San Francisco Chronicle January 22, 2002.
  72. ↑ "Dershowitz: Torture could be justified", CNN March 4, 2003, accessed August 12, 2006.
  73. ↑ Harvey A. Silverglate, "Torture warrants?" Boston Phoenix December 6?"13, 2001, accessed August 12, 2006.
  74. ↑ William Schulz, "The Torturer's apprentice: Civil liberties in a turbulent age," The Nation May 13, 2002.
  75. ↑ Transcript, Anderson Cooper 360° November 8, 2005.
  76. ↑ Walsh, Colleen (Harvard News Office) (October 2007). "Pre-emption: Preventive, coercive, or both? Dershowitz of Harvard debates Cole of Georgetown about legitimacy of tactics". Harvard University Gazette. http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/10.04/13-hls.html. Retrieved October 4, 2007. 
  77. ↑ 77.0 77.1 Experts, colleagues weigh in on Spitzer scandal – CNN.com
  78. ↑ Roger L. Simon: Spitzer Update -Strange Doings on Planet Dershowitz
  79. ↑ Experts: Spitzer's potential troubles may include prison – CNN.com
  80. ↑ Double Standard Watch: The new blood libel | Blogs & Columns | Jerusalem Post
  81. ↑ Rabbi loses round in campaign against cardinal
  82. ↑ Cohen, Roger (July 17, 1991). "Jewish Group Attacks Author of 'Chutzpah'". The New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE1D6173CF934A25754C0A967958260. Retrieved April 23, 2010. 

References

Articles about Alan Dershowitz

Alan Dershowitz and Noam Chomsky

Alan Dershowitz and Norman Finkelstein

Alan Dershowitz and Jimmy Carter

Additional selected interviews and media programs featuring Dershowitz

In popular culture

In the television show Community, the main character Jeff Winger, says that compared to the rest of Greendale Community College, his law skills are akin to those of Alan Dershowitz.

In a draft of the script for the animated movie "South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut". At one point Sheila Broflovski (Kyle's Mother) mistakes Satan for Alan Dershowitz.

External links

O. J. Simpson murder trial
Key figures
O. J. Simpson · Nicole Brown Simpson · Ronald Goldman · Al Cowlings · Lance Ito
Prosecution figures
Marcia Clark · Christopher Darden · Gil Garcetti
Defense figures
F. Lee Bailey · Johnnie Cochran · Alan Dershowitz · Carl Douglas · Robert Kardashian · Barry Scheck · Robert Shapiro
Witnesses
Traci Adell · Michael Baden · Denise Brown · Pablo Fenjves · Mark Fuhrman · Fred Goldman · Kato Kaelin · Henry Lee · Faye Resnick
Other elements
Brentwood · Bruno Magli · Centinela Avenue · Ford Bronco · Fuhrman tapes · If I Did It