Moussaoui Trial Screwed

Posted on by

Bushie screwup du jour — the sentencing trial against September 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui was recessed today because the judge, U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema, learned that an attorney with the prosecution had violated court rules. Jerry Markon and Timothy Dwyer report for the Washington Post —

U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema called it “the most egregious violation of the court’s rules on witnesses” she had seen “in all the years I’ve been on the bench.”

Her comments came after prosecutors said a Federal Aviation Administration attorney had discussed the testimony of FAA witnesses with them before they took the stand and also arranged for them to read a transcript of the government’s opening statement in the case. Both actions were banned by the judge in a pre-trial order.

Isn’t that, like, coaching the witness? And isn’t that pretty much against the rules in any court?

Last year Moussaoui pleaded guilty to conspiring with al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks. The trial halted today by Judge Brinkema was to determine Moussaoui’s sentence. The Department of Justice is seeking the death penalty. The prosecutor’s screwup could ensure that Moussaoui gets a life sentence instead of execution.

Talk Left reminds us that the JD has been a tad over-eager to fry Moussaoui all along. On December 10, 2003, Talk Left quoted an Atlantic Monthly article (subscription required), “Moussaoui May Deserve to Die, but Not Without a Fair Trial ” by Stuart Taylor Jr.

But Attorney General John Ashcroft seems so eager to kill the man that he would shoot a hole in the Constitution to get him. Ashcroft wants to put Moussaoui on trial for the capital crime of complicity in the 9/11 plot, without letting his lawyers take the testimony of three captured Qaeda leaders who may have told interrogators that Moussaoui did not participate in it. That’s the watered-down notion of justice that an Ashcroft subordinate urged a federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., to endorse on December 3.

According to Markon and Dwyer of WaPo, Judge Brinkema threw out the death penalty in 2003, “after the government disobeyed her order to allow Moussaoui’s lawyers to interview captured al-Qaeda leaders who they said could clear him.” A higher court eventually overturned the judge’s decision.

Makes one wonder why the feds are so all-fire determined to dispatch Moussaoui.

I am personally opposed to the death penalty on religious and philosophical grounds, but I have another reason for not wanting Moussaoui to be executed. It may be that someday — next year, ten years, twenty years from now — Moussaoui may offer more information about the 9/11 plot and his part in it; stuff we don’t yet know. This will be important to historians.

Come to think of it, that may be why the feds are so all-fire determined to dispatch Moussaoui.

10 thoughts on “Moussaoui Trial Screwed”

  1. Moussaoui is bonkers and guilty of planning a crime but if he didn’t actually get around to doing it, do you put a person to death for planning? what precedent does that set?

  2. Judge Leonie M. Brinkema deserves an award for the professional and fair way that she has conducted this trial despite much pressure on her to do otherwise. The circumstances were extremely trying. Both sides were difficult to deal with. Moussaoui had to be pratically coached thru the trial, especially when he decided to represent himself. The prosecuting side on the other hand tries repeatedly skirt everyrule in the book, and deny things that defense would need. Thru it all judge Brinkema was fair professional.

  3. Judge Brinkema sounds like one of those activist judges I hear so much about…. mollycoddling terrorists?

  4. “Coaching the witnesses” by the attorney who’s calling them is absolutely standard practice – it’d be malpractice not to discuss their testimony with them before they appeared. Here it’s by the FAA’s attorney – not a party attorney – but it would still be not exceptionable EXCEPT that the judge ordered that it must not be done, in a pretrial order. So … the judge could properly hold the prosecutors in contempt, or rule that the coached witnesses could not appear, etc. But I don’t think that the judge CAN, properly, limit the possible penalties because of prosecutorial misconduct. Altogether, it does sound like the government is trying to railroad Moussaoui into the death cell, and the judge is trying to derail their efforts.

  5. “Prosecutors are arguing that Moussaoui should be executed because he lied to and misled the FBI”. Does it not appear that the bar for the death penalty has been lowered here? It is because someone must die for 911 and this poor sucker will do?

  6. “Coaching the witnesses” by the attorney who’s calling them is absolutely standard practice – it’d be malpractice not to discuss their testimony with them before they appeared.

    Of course lawyers prepare witnesses by reviewing their testinomy and advising them what to expect when they testify. But if the lawyer is shaping the testimony so that it works better for their case that’s crossing a line, IMO.

  9. If he’s convicted for withholding knowledge, the involved FBI agents should who were standing around trying to link him to terrorism before searching his laptop are more guilty of breaching their fudiciary duty to us citizians who write their checks every week expecting competence in our protection.Excuse me.,,.. If Samit figured it out, it’s figured out.RIGHT?! That makes Maltbie a conspirator for obstrugustion of justice.at least..”EQUAL JUSTICE FOR ALL”>>>BUT REALLY

Comments are closed.