What will happen at KSM's trial?

Fri, 11/13/2009 - 4:03pm

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is undoubtedly one of the most murderous people in U.S. custody today, a self-proclaimed terrorist "to the bone." He masterminded the 9/11 attacks and the 2002 Bali bombing. He has confessed to a number of crimes, and will go on trial in federal court for 2,973 counts of murder as well as terrorism and conspiracy charges, the Justice Department announced today. But because he was tortured, is the U.S. evidence against him inadmissible? Could the case be thrown out? Could KSM walk free?

Well, the U.S. and Pakistani forces who captured KSM on March 1, 2003, certainly didn't read him his Miranda rights. (In his book At the Center of the Storm, former CIA director George Tenet says that KSM told his captors, "I'll talk to you guys after I get to New York and see my lawyer.") He did not have access to legal counsel until after his months-long and utterly brutal interrogation, rendering what he said during his detention inadmissible. But the government is trying him in a federal court rather than a military tribunal precisely because the intelligence evidence against him is strong.

At a press conference today, Attorney General Eric Holder said, "I would not have authorized the bringing of these prosecutions unless I thought that the outcome -- in the outcome we would ultimately be successful.  I will say that I have access to information that has not been publicly released that gives me great confidence that we will be successful in the prosecution of these cases in federal court."

It's things like jury selection that might pose a thorny issue. Under U.S. law, prosecutors in the southern district of New York will need to find an impartial group of jurors to determine his innocence or guilt -- a daunting task given KSM's high and rising profile.

Annie Lowrey | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register


Advertisement

 

My prediction: The trial will

by blue13326 on Sat, 11/14/2009 - 6:37am

My prediction: The trial will radicalize more Muslims than 7 years of occupying Afghanistan and 5 years of occupying Iraq combined.

It will be al-Queda's greatest recruiting tool since 9/11.

Quizas, quizas, quizas

by B. Elli Cose on Sat, 11/14/2009 - 10:36am

Perhaps you are correct. However, that, in and of itself, is no reason not to hold a courtroom trial. I would also add that the trial would be much less inflammatory if Mr. Mohammed had not been tortured and had instead been treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention. Incidentally, whether the Geneva Convention applies here is a technical point that is in fact irrelevant to the larger point that torture is uncivilized and, more importantly, that it is hardly designed to make us more popular in other parts of the world (not just the Muslim parts, by the way).

In other words, if you are correct that the trial will be Al Qaida's "greatest recruiting tool since 9/11" (and I do think there is some truth to your assertion), that will in part be due to the torture policies of the previous administration.

Crime and punishment

by B. Elli Cose on Sat, 11/14/2009 - 10:28am

I admire Holder, and more generally the Obama Administration, for trying to thread the needle here. We do need to try these people in regular courts, but that has been made immeasurably more difficult by the Bush Administration's torture policy, which, apart from being inhumane and completely unbecoming of a civilized country, yields evidence that is of uncertain but probably over-sold validity (I will stop short of saying "no validity") and that is inadmissible is court.

And, yes, let nobody doubt that what was done to Mr. Mohammed constitutes torture.

But let me also say that I am surprised and unimpressed that the Obama administration has not stopped the policy of "extraordinary rendition" (which, due to the high frequency with which it is alleged to have been used, does not, by definition, appear to be very "extraordinary" at all). Apart from the highly dubious morality of outsourcing torture to other countries (I might even go so far as to say that if we do decide to torture people we should have the courage to do it ourselves), this is a shortsighted policy that, like torture itself, will predictably make prosecutions more difficult and do little to make us safer in the long term.

Well Enough

by gallahad on Mon, 11/16/2009 - 9:17am

I'm glad they're trying him in civilian courts, even if just for those pesky ideals we tend to hold dear, although I have a hard time seeing it go good, especially in NYC (or, really, anywhere in the US). It might be nice if something was set up like the Lockerbie Bombing trial -- held in a neutral country, but run under the prosecuting country's laws -- but there's a fat chance in hell of that ever happening.

Lower Expectations

by C_House on Mon, 11/16/2009 - 1:54pm

If I were the administration, I would begin to lower everyone's expectations for justice here. My thought is that he will be found guilty, but it will be for far fewer deaths than the several thousand on 9/11. I wouldn't be surprised if he is found guilty for just the deaths of the sailors on the USS Cole bombing, and still sentenced to death. Just like with Saddam Hussein, he may be guilty of the deaths of thousands, but I think he will be judged, convicted, and sentenced based on only a fraction of those deaths because of the question of torture and interrogations.

The Biggest Show Trial on

by Pat8 on Thu, 11/19/2009 - 7:17pm

The Biggest Show Trial on Earth! The Big Show will feature endless days or weeks of Jihadist ranting and raving by KSM, interspersed with Al Qaeda recruiting of suicide bombers to attack the Big Tent (NYC), and the trial of Busy, Cheney and the CIA by KSM's defense team, while Holder and Obama lean back and grin.

Provided the Big Tent isn't wiped off the face of the earth by terrorists, the circus will go on and on, financed by you and me, the U.S. taxpayers.