| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front |
| U.S. Wants 9-11 Evidence in Moussaoui Case |
| 2003-11-01 |
| The government has asked an appellate court to restore its right to present the horror of Sept. 11, 2001, at the trial of al-Qaida defendant Zacarias Moussaoui. Not that the jury should need reminding. In a written brief released Friday, the Justice Department sought to reverse a lower court ruling that barred Sept. 11 evidence and the death penalty in the only U.S. case to arise from the suicide hijackings. Idiot judge: the whole blinkin’ case is about Zac and 9/11, and he bars 9/11 evidence? The lower court’s decision was punishment for the government’s refusal to allow Moussaoui to question three al-Qaida witnesses who might have helped his case. Prosecutors argue a person accused of terrorism has no right to question his al-Qaida colleagues, held abroad as enemy combatants. Apparently the judge didn’t learn anything from the 1993 WTC bombing trial. The edited government brief, from which references to the captives’ names were deleted, was filed with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., which will hear oral arguments Dec. 3 on the government’s appeal. The eventual decision could determine whether the government will be able to prosecute future terror cases in civilian courts or try the cases in military tribunals, which remains a possibility in Moussaoui’s case. Zac ought to take his chances with the civilian court. "Given that defendant’s preparation for his involvement in a hijacking mirrors the preparatory acts of the 19 hijackers, ... evidence of the Sept. 11 attacks is critical to demonstrating both the fully horrifying scope of the conspiracy .... and defendant’s intent and objectives in joining it," the government said. Prosecutors said they could prove Moussaoui was part of a broad al-Qaida conspiracy against the United States even without the Sept. 11 evidence. Elimination of the evidence, however, "sends a troubling message to the family members of the victims," who may be excluded from testifying about the impact of the attacks on their lives, the government said. Prosecutors also would lose their plans to present cockpit voice recordings of a hijacked airliner, show video footage of the attacks and introduce photographs of victims. Not that the jury needs reminding. The brief, originally filed Oct. 24, said that allowing Moussaoui to question captured terrorists "provides defendant a breathtaking right to interfere with the conduct of warfare." U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema had ruled that Moussaoui, who is charged with conspiracy to commit terrorism, has a constitutional right to witnesses who might reinforce his story that he was not involved in planning the Sept. 11 attacks. The government contended the court has no authority to apply the Constitution to enemy combatants captured in a war. "Indeed, as more and more high-level leaders of al-Qaida are detained by our forces, claims identical to the one in this case, if permitted, would undoubtedly become terrorist defendants’ favorite trump card, for they would guarantee either the hobbling of a prosecution or the hobbling of interrogation efforts," the government warned. Not to mention the boys would be able to pass info back and forth. The written brief gave hints of what the captives have said about Moussaoui in statements that are not always consistent. One prisoner suggested he was added to the Sept. 11 hijacking plan relatively late. Prosecutors said this would be devastating testimony against Moussaoui. Prisoners also told interrogators that Moussaoui may not have known precise details of the plan that became the Sept. 11 attacks. He could have lacked knowledge of the date, the final target list or the identities of the hijackers, they said. Some of the hijackers didn’t quite know what was going to happen. Moussaoui also was described as an intended participant in a second wave of attacks, a plan that was halted when he was arrested in August, 2001, on immigration violations. The defendant has made statements that he was training for an al-Qaida operation outside the United States against non-American targets. District Court or Gitmo, Zac. Your choice. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #2 There is no question our legal system, the people in it, have lost their way. This article with S.D. O'Conner yesterday is just another in a long line of examples of how our legalists are all too happy to sell our American ideals and our nation for liberal/socialist ones. |
| Posted by: badanov 2003-11-1 11:28:18 AM |
| #1 Just another indicator that our Judicial system needs a major overhaul, including the creation of term limits for judges, and the firing of judges who want to create law rather than uphold it. A nice piece of rope over a lamp post or two, with an idiot judge at the lower end, would work wonders for reform. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2003-11-1 10:15:21 AM |