The team of lawyers defending Ammar al-Baluchi, a suspect in the case of planning the 9/11 terror attacks in the US, is complaining that they had less access to the materials regarding the detention of their client and the torture he allegedly endured at a CIA "black site" than Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal, the filmmakers of Zero Dark Thirty.
Al-Baluchi's defence team said that they were stunned to see the torture methods that were allegedly used against their client in such detail in the film, while they were denied access to the materials about his time at the secret CIA prison, The Guardian reported. Among the methods shown in the film, which were allegedly used against Ammar al-Baluchi, were beatings, suspension from manacles and waterboarding.
"A movie director gets greater access than a defence counsel", managing defence counsel Sterling Thomas said.
The film Zero Dark Thirty raised questions in the US about whether its directors had received unauthorised access to secret CIA and Defence Department documents, as the motion picture showed the process of pinning down the location of Osama bin Laden very accurately when compared to how it actually happened in real life. The filmmakers denied having access to secret materials and several official inquiries into the matter have failed to prove the allegations.
The film itself has faced severe criticism for its realistic depiction of torture, with many suggesting that it might end up justifying the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" as an effective method for obtaining information in the eyes of some viewers. Still, Zero Dark Thirty was nominated for an Oscar in five categories, including "Best Picture", but only wound up receiving an award for "Best Sound Editing".