How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#1

Post by ljf » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 6:08 AM UTC

How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets
theguardian.com

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#2

Post by DoctorOetker » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 11:12 AM UTC

>Because Olson’s survivors had signed away their right to legal relief when they accepted their $750,000 compensation payment in 1975, they could not sue the CIA.

can someone clarify how this works? how does signing away a right work? isn't it just a contract?

am I correct that people in such a situation could in theory still seek legal relief, but that in doing so they "merely" violate this "contract"?

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#3

Post by neonate » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 9:34 PM UTC

Interesting that it doesn't mention Errol Morris' Wormwood: https://www.indiewire.com/2018/05/wormwood-errol-morris-use-...

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#4

Post by DoofusOfDeath » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 12:40 AM UTC

One quibble about the title: How would we know if these are the CIA's darkest secrets?

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#5

Post by lucasmullens » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 12:55 AM UTC

DoctorOetker wrote: post #2

>Because Olson’s survivors had signed away their right to legal relief when they accepted their $750,000 compensation payment in 1975, they could not sue the CIA. can someone clarify how this works? how does signing away a right work? isn't it just a contract? am I correct that people in such a situation could in theory still seek legal relief, but that in doing so they "merely" violate this "contract"?

I don't think so. Signing away your right to sue is pretty common.

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#6

Post by DoctorOetker » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 1:12 AM UTC

lucasmullens wrote: post #5

DoctorOetker wrote: post #2

>Because Olson’s survivors had signed away their right to legal relief when they accepted their $750,000 compensation payment in 1975, they could not sue the CIA. can someone clarify how this works? how does signing away a right work? isn't it just a contract? am I correct that people in such a situation could in theory still seek legal relief, but that in doing so they "merely" violate this "contract"?

I don't think so. Signing away your right to sue is pretty common.

as if breach of contract with the government never occurs?

as if such disputes are never settled by court?

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#7

Post by privateSFacct » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 1:16 AM UTC

Wow - that's a grim read. And this is what we know the CIA is up to plus I think some of the "war on terror" dark site work?

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#8

Post by tempsolution » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 1:36 AM UTC

Yes another great read, for the land of the free and brave.

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#9

Post by voldacar » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 2:05 AM UTC

Really makes you wonder what stuff they're doing now that will be declassified in a few decades

Re: How a deadly fall revealed CIA secrets

#10

Post by stordoff » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 2:06 AM UTC

DoctorOetker wrote: post #2

>Because Olson’s survivors had signed away their right to legal relief when they accepted their $750,000 compensation payment in 1975, they could not sue the CIA. can someone clarify how this works? how does signing away a right work? isn't it just a contract? am I correct that people in such a situation could in theory still seek legal relief, but that in doing so they "merely" violate this "contract"?

It's referred to earlier as a settlement. It's a form of pre-trial relief when both sides agree that this settles the matter and brings litigation to an end. It's not a contract per se, and to seek legal relief again, you would have to find new grounds - you have effectively used your legal relief. It's the usual end for lawsuits.