Moussaoui judge interrupts trial

Another miscarriage of justice?

No, no. It’s not the International Criminal Court screwing up this time.

[quote=“BBC”]Judge Leonie Brinkema is considering whether to rule out the possibility of executing Moussaoui because of “egregious” government misconduct.

The government said one of its lawyers had coached four witnesses, breaking rules set by the judge.

Moussaoui has pleaded guilty to six charges of conspiracy.

The prosecution has called for the death penalty, but defence lawyers are seeking a term of life imprisonment.

‘Unfair trial’

Judge Brinkema said she had been advised by the prosecution that a lawyer for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had breached her rule that no witness should hear trial testimony in advance.

The lawyer had read a transcript of the first day of the trial and discussed some of the testimony with four potential witnesses, Judge Brinkema said.

“In all the years I’ve been on the bench, I’ve never seen such an egregious violation of the court’s rule on witnesses,” she told the trial in Virginia, now into its second week.[…]

‘Second error’

The defence called for a mistrial last week after Judge Brinkema pulled up the prosecution over a line of questioning.

[b]“This is the second significant error by the government affecting the constitutional rights of this defendant,” Judge Brinkema said on Monday.

“More importantly, it affects the integrity of the criminal justice system of the United States.”[/b]

The prosecution are seeking to prove that Moussaoui knew about the 9/11 plot and kept deliberately silent while he was being held in US detention.

The 37-year-old Frenchman of Moroccan origin was arrested shortly before the attacks on New York and Washington after arousing suspicion at a flying school.

He initially told federal agents he was training as a pilot only for personal enjoyment.

A self-confessed member of al-Qaeda, Moussaoui has said he was not meant to be part of the 9/11 attacks, but was part of a broader conspiracy to use airplanes to strike the White House.[/quote]

Yes, it’s a miscarriage of justice. They should have taken him to the nearest tree and simply hung the bastard instead of wasting the taxpayers money. Let’s face it, Americans are just [i]too[/i] damn stupid to live without adult supervision.

Too bad Al-Qaida didn’t fly the planes into buildings in Vancouver and then the world could see how much better Canadians would handle things.

[quote=“Comrade Stalin”]Let’s face it, Americans are just [i]too[/i] damn stupid to live without adult supervision.[/quote]:lol: And where are your minders, sir?

I’m shocked that the judge is talking about his constitutional rights. As far as I knew, nobody related to Al-Qaida or the Taliban has consitutional rights because they are “enemy combatants”.

Yes, it’s a miscarriage of justice. They should have taken him to the nearest tree and simply hung the bastard instead of wasting the taxpayers money. Let’s face it, Americans are just [i]too[/i] damn stupid to live without adult supervision.

Too bad Al-Qaida didn’t fly the planes into buildings in Vancouver and then the world could see how much better Canadians would handle things.[/quote]

Can’t say I agree with you on this one. I realize you were just joking about the lynching thing, but if we were to do that then we’d be as bad as Moussaoui and his ilk. The conduct of the prosecutors in the case is not excusable simply because Moussaoui is a heinous criminal. The rules of criminal procedure aren’t optional.

The most ridiculous part of all this is that the prosecutors already had a strong case. They didn’t need to break the rules to get a conviction. I think the judge would be justified in reducing the penalty from death to life in prison.

[quote=“Comrade Stalin”]
[They should have taken him to the nearest tree and simply hung the bastard instead of wasting the taxpayers money.[/quote]

They may have gotten him to the gallows if they hadn’t fouled the ball. (Fumbled, in American-speak)
Stupid, stupid!

[quote=“Comrade Stalin”]
Too bad Al-Qaida didn’t fly the planes into buildings in Vancouver and then the world could see how much better Canadians would handle things.[/quote]

The entire commonwealth would now be in THE quagmire 'stead of the US. :smiley:

Too bad Al-Qaida didn’t fly the planes into buildings in Vancouver and then the world could see how much better Canadians would handle things.[/quote]

Somewhere around 2022 the government would launch a full inquiry into it…

[quote]Toews pledges full inquiry into Air India bombing

Updated Wed. Mar. 1 2006 11:24 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Federal Justice Minister Vic Toews has announced the government will follow through with an election promise to hold a full inquiry into the Air India disaster.[/quote]

More on the trial and prosecution screw up.

[quote=“Associated Press: U.S. tries to revise Moussaoui ruling”]
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - A judge was well within her rights to toss out half the prosecution’s death-penalty case against confessed al-Qaida terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui in response to government misconduct, defense lawyers argued Thursday.

Moussaoui’s lawyers said there was no reason for U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema to reconsider her ruling excluding what she called contaminated evidence about U.S. aviation security measures.

[b]On Wednesday, prosecutors asked her to reconsider. They have said it would be waste of time to proceed with the sentencing trial unless they are allowed to present some of the aviation evidence.

There was no indication when, or if, Brinkema would respond.[/b][/quote]

[quote=“Reuters”]
Lawyer who upset U.S. Moussaoui trial put on leave

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The government lawyer accused of improperly communicating with witnesses, hurting the U.S. case against September 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, has been put on administrative leave, officials said on Thursday.

Officials from the Transportation Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security said Carla Martin, 51, was placed on paid administrative leave on Wednesday. They did not say what disciplinary measures, if any, might be taken.
[…]
Martin e-mailed transcripts of the trial’s opening arguments to aviation witnesses who were to testify for both the government and the defence. She also attempted to coach some of the witnesses about their testimony.

She also told one of the witnesses, who had been called to testify for the defence, not to talk to Moussaoui’s lawyers before the trial, the witness said.

Due to Martin’s actions, Brinkema on Tuesday threw out all aviation-related testimony and evidence – about half of the government’s case against Moussaoui. She also warned Martin she might be held in civil or criminal contempt.
[…]
[b]In court papers to petition Brinkema to reconsider her decision, prosecutors said Martin’s actions were criminal but the actions of one person should not jeopardise the case.

“For over four years, scores of government agents and attorneys … have interviewed thousands of witnesses and assembled millions of documents,” prosecutors wrote. “In this sea of government attorneys and agents who have assiduously played by the rules, Ms. Martin stands as the lone miscreant.”

“Her aberrant and apparently criminal behaviour should not be the basis for undoing the good work of so many.”[/b][/quote]

[quote=“San Francisco Chronicle”]the government notified the court Monday that Carla Martin, a senior Transportation Safety Administration attorney, did just that by sending copies of court transcripts around to the witnesses as well as summaries of the testimony of FBI Special Agent Michael Anticev, the government’s lead-off witness, when the sentencing trial began March 6.

“We really are left speechless, frankly,” prosecutor David Novak told the judge, conceding that Martin’s actions were “wholly improper” and could seriously hamper the government’s case. “We’re really not in a position to defend her conduct.”

His boss, U.S. Attorney Paul McNulty in Alexandria, wrote the judge saying that, “We view Ms. Martin’s conduct as reprehensible, and we frankly cannot fathom why she engaged in such conduct.”

Without elaboration, prosecutors said Martin no longer works for the Transportation Safety Administration.
[…]
In Martin’s e-mails to witnesses, she repeatedly voiced concerns about whether prosecutors were overselling to the jury the FAA’s ability to stop the hijackers at the airports and prevent them from boarding the four planes – even if Moussaoui had tipped off the government that the attacks were coming. [b]Her e-mails appeared aimed at protecting the interests of the FAA.

“We need to be careful in describing how these measures would have impacted the attack and be prepared,” she advised the witnesses, noting that security measures like gate screening procedures are not infallible.

“You need to read this transcript of the prosecutor’s opening statements,” she e-mailed on March 7, the day after the trial began. “It is all about the FAA, and how it would have caught the hijackers and prevented 9/11.”

She advised witnesses that she and “all of us aviation lawyers were stunned by the opening. The opening has created a credibility gap that the defense can drive a truck through.”[/b]

“There is no way anyone could say that the carriers (the FAA and the airlines) could have prevented all short-bladed knives from going through (security gates).”

Martin could not be reached for comment.

Much of the Moussaoui case has been wrapped in secrecy for 4 1/2 years, but [b]Brinkema insisted Monday that the Martin e-mails be unsealed.

“If the death penalty winds up being dismissed,” she said, “the public has a right to know how and why it happened.”[/b]
[…]
As the judge left the bench at the close of the day Monday, Moussaoui was led away. At each break in the trial, he typically cries out, “God bless Osama bin Laden!” or “God curse America!”

This time he changed his tune.

“The show must go on!” he shouted.[/quote]

[quote][prosecuting attorney] Martin e-mailed transcripts of the trial’s opening arguments to aviation witnesses who were to testify for both the government and the defence. She also attempted to coach some of the witnesses about their testimony.

She also told one of the witnesses, who had been called to testify for the defence, not to talk to Moussaoui’s lawyers before the trial, the witness said.

Due to Martin’s actions, Brinkema on Tuesday threw out all aviation-related testimony and evidence – about half of the government’s case against Moussaoui. She also warned Martin she might be held in civil or criminal contempt. [/quote]

:bravo: Good for the judge, for doing the right thing.

If the case against Moussaoui is damaged, don’t blame the judge who is upholding the basic principles that make the US legal system the best in the World. Blame the overzealous prosecutor who apparently lacked faith in the strength of the government’s case and violated the law, court order, and her ethical obligations as an attorney, in order to try to gain an unfair and illegal advantage over the defendant. Admittedly, she’s not an experienced prosecutor and I can understand that she got caught up in the flag-waving excitement of standing up for her country and fighting the bad guys, but she broke the rules and America is supposedly a nation of laws, not lawless vigilantes.

Don’t you mean a nation of [i]lawyers?[/i]

The problem with this whole farce is that it should never have gone to trial. This is an intelligence matter for god’s sake. The US has never been able to wrap it head around the fact that intelligence operations are not on the same level as investigating auto theft. Read anything about the history and rivalry vetween the FBI and CIA. This goes all the way back to hoover and Donovan. The FBI always wants to get evidence, arrest, try and convict. The CIA has completely different objectives.

Moussaoui should have been taken in by the CIA, interrogated for as long and by whatever methods necessary to extract every shred of information then simply sent into the Twilight Zone forever. We did exactly the same thing in WWII with Nazi agents landed by Uboat in the US. Not a tear was shed.

Off with their heads!

First we should execute them, then find them guilty, then prosecute them, then arrest them.

We’ve got everything totally backwards, say I, and I’m not going to stand for it anymore!

Off with their heads!

[quote=“spook”]Off with their heads!

First we should execute them, then find them guilty, then prosecute them, then arrest them.

We’ve got everything totally backwards, say I, and I’m not going to stand for it anymore!

Off with their heads![/quote]

“The State has no fear of it’s engineers or geologists.” - Clemenceau

A fair trial is the Devil’s workshop! Stop the American legal system before we all end up wearing turbans on our heads!

The CIA doesn’t have the capacity to arrest anyone. Congress has never given the CIA any law enforcement capability, a police force, or jurisdiction over internal security. The PATRIOT Act did not change that. You’re right that this is partially an intelligence matter, but again the CIA’s mission is limited by Congress to foreign intelligence matters. The FBI, Homeland Security, NSA, and local police forces handle domestic intelligence. There is no legal argument that I know of which would place Moussaoui outside of federal jurisdiction.

Regarding this:

[quote]Moussaoui should have been taken in by the CIA, interrogated for as long and by whatever methods necessary to extract every shred of information then simply sent into the Twilight Zone forever. We did exactly the same thing in WWII with Nazi agents landed by Uboat in the US. Not a tear was shed.
[/quote]

Not in my America pal :raspberry:

That it was done in the past doesn’t make it right. I don’t want any of my tax dollars funding torture and murder :fume: