🔒 Locked

Moussaoui

Started by kdogg Jul 14, 2003 at 10:04 PM 5 replies 250+ views

Original Post

Jul 14, 2003 at 10:04 PM

What about this guy? It seems like denying him access to such a key witness in his trial means that those particular charges must be dropped. While he can be held for whatever charges come from his involvement with al quaeda, the specific allegation that he was supposed to be a 5th hijacker should be thrown out without testimony from Binalshibh. I''m not saying that we should put Binalshibh in the witness chair in a public trial, but we also cannot tear up the constitution and deprive a defendant of his right to due process in the interest of ''national security''. I''m sure the people in charge see this differently and, unfortunately, the case made by his lawyer will likely land him in guantanamo bay for a life sentence/execution without a fair trial.

LessBread

Jul 14, 2003 at 11:34 PM

Here''s the part the I think is a total crock

quote:

Prosecutors say allowing testimony from Binalshibh would damage national security, particularly because it would disclose classified information to Moussaoui and the public.

"The deposition, which would involve an admitted and unrepentant terrorist (the defendant) questioning one of his al Qaeda confederates, would necessarily result in the unauthorized disclosure of classified information," the Justice Department said in Monday''s three-page pleading.

"The enemy combatant [Binalshibh] is a source for intelligence, and the executive branch, in a decision entitled to deference ... has determined that everything he says ... is properly classified," prosecutors said in an earlier motion.

I don''t think it''s reasonable to classify what Binalshibh knows as a national security secrets. His secrets are al-queda security secrets not US security secrets. And while the feds don''t want al-quaeda to know that they know what they know - if al-queada is smart - and most think it is - any secrets that Binalshibh knew are moot now anyway.

Raduprv

Jul 14, 2003 at 11:38 PM

I don''t think that''s the actual reason.
They are just taking advantage of the USA PATRIOT act, because they can''t incriminate that guy otherwise.

Height Map Editor | Eternal Lands | Fast User Directory

Mithrandir

Jul 14, 2003 at 11:51 PM

I was mildly amused when I heard that they may be forced to drop the case if the The Justice Department refuses to produce the witness.

I was shocked and horrified when I learned that if they DO drop the case, then he would immediately be held by the military for a military tribunal, denied access to lawyers, the right to defend himself, access to anyone except a cold cell, and facing the possibility of the death penalty.

Hooray.

Mithrandir

Jul 14, 2003 at 11:56 PM

You know this country has gone fucking insane when they want to kill someone who hasn''t actually done anything wrong yet.

I''d love to see this guy get a fair trial after being called "The 20th Hijaker" for two years now.

kdogg

Jul 15, 2003 at 1:30 AM

OJ was called a wife murderer for a year before his trial ended. I don''t think he has any complaints. And he was definately guilty. Moussaoui just needs to get a bunch of militant muslims on the jury.

LessBread

Jul 15, 2003 at 9:57 PM

quote:
Original post by kdogg
OJ was called a wife murderer for a year before his trial ended. I don''t think he has any complaints. And he was definately guilty.

But was he? They didn''t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt...

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.