Why is a statement of belief about the evidence against Condoleezza Rice not included in the petition?
We want everyone in the Stanford community who believes in the principle articulated in the petition to sign it. That principle can then be applied by, in the words of the petition, “appropriate legal authorities” to the specific evidence against Condoleezza Rice and others. We think it is unreasonable to expect everyone who believes that the Law applies to high government officials to be familiar enough with specific evidence to render a public judgment on it. That is what the legal process is for, and the petition affirms that legal investigation and prosecution are the correct ways to render judgment in specific cases. Q: What about members of the U.S. Congress, such as Nancy Pelosi, who were briefed about the use of torture? Does signing the petition entail advocating that they be investigated and, if the facts warrant, prosecuted? A: The perspective of the petition is that no one is above the Law, and that anyone in the Government who may have violated the Law in a serious way sho