Judge Recesses Moussaoui Trial (government coached witnesses?)

Judge Recesses Moussaoui Trial
By Michael J. Sniffen, Associated Press Writer
5 minutes ago


ALEXANDRIA, Va. - An angry federal judge unexpectedly recessed the death penalty trial of confessed al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui to consider whether government violations of her rules against coaching witnesses should remove the death penalty as an option.

On Monday, the Minneapolis FBI agent who arrested confessed Moussaoui — perhaps the key witness in Moussaoui's death-penalty trial — was to be the featured witness.

Special Agent Harry Samit's testimony is equally important to prosecutors and the defense. Samit, who has already testified for the prosecution, faces cross-examination by the defense.

Prosecutors say Samit and the FBI would have foiled the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks had Moussaoui confessed his membership in the al-Qaida terror network and his plans to hijack an airplane after he was arrested on Aug. 16, 2001, and interrogated by Samit.

The defense argues that Moussaoui's lies made no difference because Samit saw through them and was convinced that Moussaoui was a threat....


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060313/ap_on_re_us/moussaoui_2

:kick:

gov't coaching witnesses...whodathunkit!! :eyes:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2146415

This government can't do *anything* right.

Story is also here.

-Hoot

Edit to add clip:

Even prosecutor Novak conceded that the witness coaching was "horrendously wrong."

According to descriptions by the lawyers in court, it appeared that a female FAA attorney who had attended closed hearings in the case went over with four upcoming witnesses from her agency the opening statements at the trial, the government's strategy and even the transcript of the questioning of an FBI agent on the first day.

"She was at the Classified Information Act procedures hearing and she should have known it was wrong," Novak said.

MacMahon said the government had told the defense she had wanted the witnesses to be very careful in discussing the FBI agent's acknowledgment that the FBI knew long before Sept. 11, 2001 that al-Qaida terrorists in the Philippines were working on a plan to fly an airplane into CIA headquarters.

It had been reported in the M$M in 1996.


Terrorism trial begins in New York
3 men accused of plotting to bomb U.S. planes

May 13, 1996
Web posted at: 11:35 a.m. EDT

From Correspondent Brian Jenkins

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Jury selection began in New York Monday in the federal trial of three men accused of plotting to bomb 11 planes headed for the United States on a single day in 1995.

Ramzi Yousef is charged with masterminding the plot. He also will be tried later this year, accused of planning the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. Four men are already serving life in prison for that crime.

The alleged plot was discovered in the Philippines in January 1995, when a fire broke out in a Manila apartment 200 yards from the Vatican's embassy, a week before the arrival of Pope John Paul II.

Police were shocked by what they found inside: a smoking mixture of explosives in a sink, street maps and garments like those worn by the Pope's entourage, suggesting a plot to kill the Pontiff.

They also say they found computer disks containing detailed plans to blow up U.S. airliners.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9605/12/terror.plot/


If they didn't even know something that was public knowledge, then what the hell do we need a CIA for?

I'm sure they will find a way to replace this judge.

It has that first paragraph stating the "coaching" allegation, but then never mentions it again. What is the coaching thing?

An angry federal judge unexpectedly recessed the death penalty trial of confessed al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui to consider whether government violations of her rules against coaching witnesses should remove the death penalty as an option.

The stunning development came at the opening of the fifth day of the trial as the government had informed the judge and the defense over the weekend that a lawyer for the Federal Aviation Administration had coached four government FAA witnesses in violation of the rule set by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema. The rule was that no witness should hear trial testimony in advance.

"This is the second significant error by the government affecting the constitutional rights of the defendant and the criminal justice system in this country in the context of a death case," Brinkema told lawyers in the case outside the presence of the jury.

Defense attorney Edward MacMahon moved to have the judge dismiss the death penalty as a possible outcome, saying "this is not going to be a fair trial." In the alternative, he said, at least she should excuse the government's FAA witnesses from the case.

more:http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/03/13/ap2590389.html

:hi:

he's little more than an orwellian thought criminal really, the entire case is built on 'guilt by association', which isn't to say he's not a bad guy, just not the bad guy they are claiming him to be.

level of this trial. This whole trial is an attempt at scapegoating and to have it established in official court documents that Al-Qaeda was responsible for 9/11. There has been, to date, no criminal investigation into the 9/11 murders. No evidence and no substantiation of the government claims. I still don't understand how the government can justify no investigation of such a horrendous event and why the public and our mouth-pieces have never asked for one...

"This is the second significant error by the government affecting the constitutional rights of this defendant and more importantly the integrity of the criminal justice system of the United States in the context of a death case,"

"In all the years I've been on the bench, I have never seen such an egregious violation of a rule on witnesses,"

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MOUSSAOUI?SITE=SCAND&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&SECTION=HOME

The current government of tyrants does not respect the law. The more they abuse the so-called "War on Terror" the more convinced I am of MIHOP.

American citizens and change their status to "enemy combatents", then the US law would not apply and they could run all over these defendents.

Under Clinton they did successfully prosecute those that attacked the towers the first time and they are still in jail.

We will not see any of these defendents go to jail because the government has screwed up the cases so bad.

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/bda04402-b2ae-11da-ab3e-0000779e2340.html

SNIP: The sentencing trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, a self-confessed al-Qaeda operative, descended into chaos on Monday after it emerged that a government lawyer had jeopardised the government’s case for the death penalty by coaching witnesses.


SNIP

Over the weekend, government prosecutors told Judge Brinkema and the defence lawyers that that one of their lawyers from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) had coached four Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) witnesses in advance of their testimony, breaking the rule set by Judge Brinkema that witnesses should not hear trial testimony in advance.

“In all the years I’ve been on the bench, I have never seen such an egregious violation of a rule on witnesses,” Judge Brinkema said on Monday, on the fifth day of the sentencing trial.

“This is the second significant error by the government affecting the constitutional rights of the defendant and the criminal justice system in this country in the context of a death case,” Judge Brinkema said.

SNIP

David Novak, a government prosecutor, admitted that the TSA lawyer’s actions were “horrendously wrong” but he argued that preventing their testimony would “exclude half the government’s case”.


Comments: What a crock, the gov't legal team violates direct orders, then argues that exclusion would be wrong. WTF?

Sure keeps 9/11 alive and above the fold on the front page, doesn't it... :sarcasm:

Bonnieleezza-UAE

Hmm that was a silly thing to say, because that lawyer basically said that half of the governments case is based on coached and therefore possibly purjured testimony. The normal way to handle something like this is to claim that the witnesses affected do not change the overall solidity of the case. But this prosecutor is making it sound like without these witnesses' testimony the case falls over.

Not only did they screw up by coaching the witnesses, therefore making their testimony suspect, but now they are arguing that their case is heavily based on that suspect testimony, making the entire case suspect. What total fools. In fact this is so bad you'd think the lawyers WANT the case to fail.

Government goof could save would-be hijacker

An angry federal judge abruptly adjourned the sentencing trial of al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui today and is considering whether to declare a mistrial or drop the death penalty as an option. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema will hear testimony Tuesday from witnesses whose testimony was coached in violation of court rules.

note that the linked story has a more reasonable headline.

also note the language of the descriptor paragraph. the judge is "angry". Not that the witness's testimony has been coerced and coached.

they've got all these rules and stuff. Gitmo much better.

look at what happened to the detroit sleeper cell. the convictions were thrown out because the prosecutor engaged in gross misconduct.

Here's her actual quote from the BBC News Article: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4802412.stm>

"...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.

Prosecutor David Novak said the FAA lawyer "should have known it was wrong"....

(clip)

"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."...

(more at link above)

Plus: NPR had a very good report at this link: <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5260378>

Johnathan Turly, a National Security Lawyer
and Law Professor at George Washington University said, "This is a 'Sucking Chest Wound,' when it comes to litigation, I mean, this IS bad..." "The Question is not if the Government is going to get hit, but hit How Hard...?"

(more at the link below)

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5260378>

:kick: