Civilian Court Clears Gitmo Detainee of 284 Terror Charges
Jury Acquits Ghailani in 'Setback' for Obama
A New York civilian court has acquitted long-time Guantanamo Bay detainee Ahmed Khaifan Ghailani of all 284 terror related charges, agreeing only to find him guilty of a single count of “conspiracy to damage or destroy US property.”
Ghailani had been one of the “FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists” since the inception of the list in 2001, accused of a role in the 1998 embassy bombings, and had been at Guantanamo Bay and assorted “Black Sites” from his capture in 2004 through 2009, when he was transferred to New York City to stand trial as a terrorist.
His trial first centered around the question of whether five years in secret detention subjected to enhanced interrogation counted as a “speedy trial” as guaranteed under the US Constitution. The prosecution argued that he had no such rights because of 9/11, even though Ghailani was never accused of having anything to do with 9/11.
The verdict is being called a “setback” for the Obama Administration, and is fueling speculation that they won’t allow any more civilian trials since they are not the virtually guaranteed victories the military tribunals have been.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- No Deal: US Restarted Pakistan Drone Strikes Despite Objections - February 22nd, 2012
- Syrian National Council Demands Foreign Invasion - February 22nd, 2012
- State Dept.: Pakistani Taliban 'Not Welcome' at Truce Talks - February 22nd, 2012
- Israeli FM: Our Decision to Attack Iran None of US, Russia's Business - February 22nd, 2012
- Hunger Strike Ends, but Adnan's Detention Without Charges Doesn't - February 22nd, 2012
John_Mohammad
November 18th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Part 1:
As I listen to the radio and television, the only thing I hear in abundance is the shrill shrieking of those saying the Ghailaini trial is a farce and he should have never been given a civilian trial, that the government's hands were tied by the disallowing of coerced confession, et al.
Okay fine, but who is going to recognize that the defendant was still found guilty of a charge that carries a 20-year sentence? One radio talk show host (Schnitt) was screaming this was a travesty and a slap in the face of all the victims that resulted from the defendants actions. How could they possibly find his not guilty of murder in the hundreds and find him guilty of just one charge of conspiracy? Well, here's a parallel if you want a quick dose of history: Al Capone, mob boss of Chicago during the Prohibition years, was responsible for MANY more deaths than Ghailani- yet what was he convicted on? TAX EVASION. Not conspiracy, not murder, not jaywalking- just tax evasion. We think of this as a triumph of American justice- get that guy by whatever you can make stick- and we got Capone for something totally unrelated to what he was responsible for. Yet when the same situation is applied to Ghailiani- get that guy by whatever you can make stick (and the jury did just that)- all of a sudden it's a travesty of justice? The same talk show host (Schnitt) was screaming that he should never have been allowed to stand trial in a civilian court, that he should have been handled in a military tribunal (implying that he would be found guilty there)- so what this is telling me is that in order to get a 'proper' finding of guilt we have to try people under a completely different set of legal standards. Is the American system of justice that broken that we can't trust our judges and juries in these cases, as we trust them in thousands of other cases each and every day?
(cont'd)
John_Mohammad
November 18th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Part 2:
Pipe down all you shrieking lunatics out there: have a better legal case next time. Preferably one that doesn't hinge on a confession illegally coerced from a prisoner years after the fact. I don't for one minute condone Ghailani's actions, or those of any terrorist or other common criminal, but we have our justice system for a reason. Think about it. Do you want to be tried in a court where all the rules are changed for the express purpose of finding you guilty, regardless of the facts, on evidence of dubious provenance- evidence you may not be allowed to refute or even review beforehand- and where you're already presumed to be guilty of whatever charge, real or made up, the prosecution can level at you? I thought not. Be careful about insisting on deciding who and who doesn't get this 'alternate justice system' treatment- before long, people will be deciding if YOU get this type of trial.
LBRT
November 18th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
All men are created equal. If ANTIWAR did less speculation they might get more donation.
boutet
November 18th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
20 years in a federal prison is a very long time. This extremist will be an old man and relatively harmless when and if he is released. Everyone calm down.
Rick
November 18th, 2010 at 7:47 pm
This is awesome!! Those civilians in New York should be proud of themselves! Way to give the finger to the B.O./G.W. regimes and strike a blow for liberty!