US Government lawyers attempted to get Binyam Mohamed, the Ethopian detained at Guantanamo, to sign an aggreement not to discuss his treatment as a condition for his release.

Since Mohamed is alleging illegal torture, and the lawyers in question had reason to believe that there was a possibility of criminal prosecution, I do not see how this could be anything but a slam dunk case of obstruction of justice:

U.S. government lawyers tried to get a British resident held at Guantanamo Bay to sign a deal saying he had never been tortured and that he would not speak to the media as a condition of his release, according to documents presented in Britain’s High Court.

U.S. lawyers also wanted Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian citizen held at Guantanamo for more than 4 years, to plead guilty to secure his freedom, even though he was never charged with a crime, according to documents released by two judges who ruled in the High Court case.

The documents, relating to a ruling the judges made last October, reveal the U.S. military wanted Mohamed to agree not to sue the United States or any of its allies, and that any rights to compensation should be assigned to the U.S. government.

Any lawyers among my reader(s) want to weigh in on this?