02-04-2010, 03:31 PM
Experts: Obama Administration’s Mishandling of 9/11 Trials Threatens Conviction
Thursday, 04 Feb 2010 12:50 PM
By: John Rossomando
The Obama administration’s mishandling of the upcoming trial of confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is tainting any potential jury pool and crippling the ability of the civilian criminal justice system to guarantee a fair trial, according to experts.
Not only has the administration backtracked from its initial insistence of holding the trail in New York City – a move that managed to unite both Democrats and Republicans who demanded it be moved elsewhere – but comments by President Obama and his press secretary have basically convicted Mohammed in the court of public opinion.
Both have said that Mohammed and his codefendants would be tried, convicted and executed.
Obama made comments to that effect last November, which reiterated a contention he had made in a Sept. 2006 Senate floor debate when he said the terrorist mastermind would be convicted and that justice would be carried out.
However, then-Sen. Obama advocated convicting Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a military trial “with all the bells and whistles” instead of the civilian trial he and Attorney General Eric Holder decided on.
Gibbs revived the issued on CNN’s “State of the Union With John King” on Jan. 31 when he said the terrorist mastermind would “meet his maker” and that he would “be likely to be executed” for his crimes.
His comments provoked outrage from both ends of the political spectrum, including from fellow liberals, that his comments could taint the terrorists’ ability to get a fair trial.
“Am I the only person left who still remembers a legal concept called presumption of innocence? Am I the only one who remembers that the whole point of a trial is that the outcome is not certain?,” Cynthia Kouril of the liberal blog Firedoglake.
“In a real trial, the outcome is not known before the trial occurs. Further, much of the information in the hands of the government which will be used at trial against KSM (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) should currently be Grand Jury Material, subject to secrecy under Rule 6e.
“Which means that you, Robert Gibbs, cannot legally know exactly what that evidence might be. So, how could you possibly know if KSM is going to be convicted? How do you know that?”
Judicial Watch President Thomas Fitton told Newsmax these comments could taint the jury pool and make it impossible for them to get a fair trial in a civilian court, which in turn could undermine the prosecution’s case.
“Under our system, the argument that KSM has before a court asking the case be thrown out would be substantial,” Fitton said.
The accused terrorist mastermind’s lawyers, he said, would be able to claim the comments taint the prosecution and that their clients’ rights under the Speedy Trial Act had been violated.
“The whole case could be thrown out on that alone,” Fitton said. “I’m not one who wants to see KSM out in the streets, but I could foresee circumstances where this case goes nowhere as a result of strong defense arguments that it shouldn’t.
“It’s a terrible, terrible risk, and that’s why to bring them into the civilian court system like this is so irresponsible.”
Obama’s comments are completely inappropriate within the context of a civilian criminal trial, Fitton told Newsmax.
“Common sense tells us he ought to be executed, but it shows the craziness of the situation in the administration’s court process,” he said. “This is about protecting the national security of the country, and our federal court system has aspects that in the case of criminal and civil litigation there are ways to do that, but in the end the defendant’s right to a fair trial could trump these national security concerns.”
Fitton believes the president’s comments have the potential to undermine the United States’ standing with the same countries in Europe and elsewhere in the world he claimed had been angered by the Bush administration’s handling of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others.
“They are undermining the court system,” Fitton said. “Our friends and enemies alike have got to be asking themselves what kind of trial KSM is going to get; Obama is trying to make it seem like it’s going to be a kangaroo court.
“These comments have tainted any civilian criminal trial against KSM and his co-conspirators.”
David B. Rivkin Jr., a Federalist Society member and former official in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, is less concerned the president’s comments will get Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants off the hook.
He says attempts by Mohammed’s lawyers to get the case thrown out because trying to prove comments by Gibbs and the president might have tainted the jury pool like likely will be fruitless.
“All you need to do is to define a jury pool or the members of a jury who are unaware of that statement by the president,” Rivkin said. “You can find a lot of people who don’t read newspaper or pay attention to radio or the TV who would be totally unaware of that statement made by the president.”
Rivkin compares talk that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s jury pool might be tainted to the buzz that preceded O.J. Simpson’s 1995 murder trial, when pundits worried Simpson would face a tainted jury due to pretrial publicity.
He says many good reasons exist not to try the terrorist mastermind and his codefendants in a civilian court, but the possibility comments by Obama and Gibbs might have tainted the jury pool are not among them.
“You should be able to find a jury that never heard about this,” Rivkin said. “[Their comments] are just icing on the cake; the vast majority of Americans know who Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is.
“They have read that he had proudly taken ownership of the 9/11 attacks, that he has bragged about it in his military and CIA interrogations and during his military detention.”
Rivkin said popular knowledge of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his confessed crimes make comments by Obama and Gibbs trivial by comparison and such popular knowledge does not necessarily keep a defendant from getting a fair trial because jurors who lack familiarity with their case can usually be found.
Rivkin believes this and other incidental questions in the case such as whether or not Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will receive a speedy trial will slow down the trial but not avert a conviction
Thursday, 04 Feb 2010 12:50 PM
By: John Rossomando
The Obama administration’s mishandling of the upcoming trial of confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is tainting any potential jury pool and crippling the ability of the civilian criminal justice system to guarantee a fair trial, according to experts.
Not only has the administration backtracked from its initial insistence of holding the trail in New York City – a move that managed to unite both Democrats and Republicans who demanded it be moved elsewhere – but comments by President Obama and his press secretary have basically convicted Mohammed in the court of public opinion.
Both have said that Mohammed and his codefendants would be tried, convicted and executed.
Obama made comments to that effect last November, which reiterated a contention he had made in a Sept. 2006 Senate floor debate when he said the terrorist mastermind would be convicted and that justice would be carried out.
However, then-Sen. Obama advocated convicting Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a military trial “with all the bells and whistles” instead of the civilian trial he and Attorney General Eric Holder decided on.
Gibbs revived the issued on CNN’s “State of the Union With John King” on Jan. 31 when he said the terrorist mastermind would “meet his maker” and that he would “be likely to be executed” for his crimes.
His comments provoked outrage from both ends of the political spectrum, including from fellow liberals, that his comments could taint the terrorists’ ability to get a fair trial.
“Am I the only person left who still remembers a legal concept called presumption of innocence? Am I the only one who remembers that the whole point of a trial is that the outcome is not certain?,” Cynthia Kouril of the liberal blog Firedoglake.
“In a real trial, the outcome is not known before the trial occurs. Further, much of the information in the hands of the government which will be used at trial against KSM (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) should currently be Grand Jury Material, subject to secrecy under Rule 6e.
“Which means that you, Robert Gibbs, cannot legally know exactly what that evidence might be. So, how could you possibly know if KSM is going to be convicted? How do you know that?”
Judicial Watch President Thomas Fitton told Newsmax these comments could taint the jury pool and make it impossible for them to get a fair trial in a civilian court, which in turn could undermine the prosecution’s case.
“Under our system, the argument that KSM has before a court asking the case be thrown out would be substantial,” Fitton said.
The accused terrorist mastermind’s lawyers, he said, would be able to claim the comments taint the prosecution and that their clients’ rights under the Speedy Trial Act had been violated.
“The whole case could be thrown out on that alone,” Fitton said. “I’m not one who wants to see KSM out in the streets, but I could foresee circumstances where this case goes nowhere as a result of strong defense arguments that it shouldn’t.
“It’s a terrible, terrible risk, and that’s why to bring them into the civilian court system like this is so irresponsible.”
Obama’s comments are completely inappropriate within the context of a civilian criminal trial, Fitton told Newsmax.
“Common sense tells us he ought to be executed, but it shows the craziness of the situation in the administration’s court process,” he said. “This is about protecting the national security of the country, and our federal court system has aspects that in the case of criminal and civil litigation there are ways to do that, but in the end the defendant’s right to a fair trial could trump these national security concerns.”
Fitton believes the president’s comments have the potential to undermine the United States’ standing with the same countries in Europe and elsewhere in the world he claimed had been angered by the Bush administration’s handling of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others.
“They are undermining the court system,” Fitton said. “Our friends and enemies alike have got to be asking themselves what kind of trial KSM is going to get; Obama is trying to make it seem like it’s going to be a kangaroo court.
“These comments have tainted any civilian criminal trial against KSM and his co-conspirators.”
David B. Rivkin Jr., a Federalist Society member and former official in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, is less concerned the president’s comments will get Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants off the hook.
He says attempts by Mohammed’s lawyers to get the case thrown out because trying to prove comments by Gibbs and the president might have tainted the jury pool like likely will be fruitless.
“All you need to do is to define a jury pool or the members of a jury who are unaware of that statement by the president,” Rivkin said. “You can find a lot of people who don’t read newspaper or pay attention to radio or the TV who would be totally unaware of that statement made by the president.”
Rivkin compares talk that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s jury pool might be tainted to the buzz that preceded O.J. Simpson’s 1995 murder trial, when pundits worried Simpson would face a tainted jury due to pretrial publicity.
He says many good reasons exist not to try the terrorist mastermind and his codefendants in a civilian court, but the possibility comments by Obama and Gibbs might have tainted the jury pool are not among them.
“You should be able to find a jury that never heard about this,” Rivkin said. “[Their comments] are just icing on the cake; the vast majority of Americans know who Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is.
“They have read that he had proudly taken ownership of the 9/11 attacks, that he has bragged about it in his military and CIA interrogations and during his military detention.”
Rivkin said popular knowledge of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his confessed crimes make comments by Obama and Gibbs trivial by comparison and such popular knowledge does not necessarily keep a defendant from getting a fair trial because jurors who lack familiarity with their case can usually be found.
Rivkin believes this and other incidental questions in the case such as whether or not Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will receive a speedy trial will slow down the trial but not avert a conviction