New York trial for 9/11 suspects poses legal, political risks

By Muriel Kane
Friday, November 13th, 2009 -- 8:58 pm
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

khalidmohammed New York trial for 9/11 suspects poses legal, political risksThe announcement on Friday that the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other alleged September 11 conspirators will be held just blocks from the former site of the Twin Towers has quickly given rise to complications.

One factor is the angry reception they are bound to receive in New York. "Hang them," a construction worker near the "ground zero' site told AFP. "Put them in a bird cage and hang it in the middle of Times Square," another man suggested.

A man who works in the area agreed that "It's the way it should have been from the beginning. This is where the crime happened," but was also concerned about "how they'll handle security."

The trial also poses legal and political risks for the Obama administration. As the Associated Press points out, "The case is likely to force the civilian federal court to confront a host of difficult issues, including rough treatment of detainees, sensitive intelligence gathering and the potential spectacle of defiant terrorists disrupting proceedings. U.S. civilian courts prohibit evidence obtained through coercion, and a number of detainees were questioned using harsh methods some call torture."

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has already objected that holding a trial in the United States "puts Americans unnecessarily at risk," and former Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey complained that "the plan seems to be to abandon the view that we are at war" and warned that the trial could turn into a circus.

Story continues below...

Attorney General Eric Holder insists, however, that there is enough untainted evidence to provide a solid case against the defendants. In addition, according to the AP, "the Justice Department, where Holder has spent most of his career, has long wanted to reassert the ability of federal courts to handle terrorism cases."

Although Holder appears confident in these five initial cases, evidence to try other Guantanamo detainees may be lacking. According to ProPublica, "Most of the remaining detainees are considered too difficult to prosecute, mostly because the evidence against them is thin or based on statements obtained through coercion." As a result, "federal and military prosecutors are racing each other to strike plea deals with at least a dozen additional Guantanamo detainees whose testimony could be used against some of the most notorious prisoners."

ProPublica describes this competition between the federal and military systems as reaching unseemly levels. "One defense attorney, who represents a high-value detainee held by the CIA in secret detention and then sent to Guantanamo, witnessed days of fighting between military and federal prosecutors over who had control of the case. 'We asked a simple procedural question and ended up bystanders to days of turf battles,' the attorney said."

It appears, for example, that Omar Khadr, the young Canadian who was captured in Afghanistan when he was only 15, will stand trial before a military tribunal. "We thought that the incoming Obama administration signalled a new day with respect to these cases," Khadr's lawyer charged. “I had thought this administration was better than that."

Officials told ProPublica that there may be winnable cases against 40 more detainees, but another 30 may never face former charges. "The government is fishing in very shallow water," one defense attorney said with reference to the remaining detainees. As a result, some detainees may eventually be released even without agreement from all intelligence agencies.

Share this article:
  • Print
  • email
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...

  • jeffersonperrin
    According to neocon republican independent members of our once non-torturing 'civilized' United States, the rest of America should cower as they do at the idea of holding 9-11 terrorists (in the true and legal sense of the word) accountable for their actions in an American court, in an American city, as set forth by our own Constitution of the United States.
    Oh, I know, neocons believe it's 'our Constitution' not theirs. That the example most of us hoped our Constitution set for others is, well, not for others. It's a case of, talk about how the world should follow the example of our Constitution but don't actually allow foreigners to experience it. It's not only now too risky to apply our example to others; to actually ourselves 'do' as we have said and 'done' for those 200+ years, we aren't even going to do it ourselves anymore.
    But many of us Americans don't believe our laws are so weak we can't trust them to protect us or in cowering at the very thought of applying those laws-which I've always thought would be 'Just' for everyone in the world- even those who would and have brought death and destruction to our shores. Many of us would not like it if other nations created a new way of prosecuting our people just because they were American. In fact, most of us only balk at an American being tried for commiting a crime in another country if they are not being treated as we expect to be treated here. But these folks seem to think it's 'patriotic' to create non-laws or, more accurate, revengeful, illegal laws to deal with these people.
    Frankly, I think a special court house should have been the very first thing constructed between where the two towers once stood so that these terrorists could have been tried not only by and in the spirit of the laws of the land we believe superior to any other but also surrounded by the spirits and souls of those whose lives ended there that day.
    These GOPers and their subjects are so 'patriotic' they have cheer the tossing aside of many of our our rights (via the Patriot Act) and want to replace many of our 'JUST' laws with something unrecognizable (except to Germans and the world c. 1939).
  • dave w
    so, are we gonna continue to act like the animals that we hate (torture), or shall we give these "fine gentlemen" a fair trial? what would caligula do? since that is who we have been imitating. jesus left the building years ago.
  • "TORTURE for 9/11 suspects poses legal, political risks" This is what the headline should have been.
  • Sonny
    This is not the change I voted for. This in no way fulfills Obama's campaign promise to restore the rule of law. Suggested reading: today's post by Glenn Greenwald at Politico.
  • dave w
    so, will these guys be waterboarded in court? that's legal, isnt it? isnt it?
  • Iconoclasm
    So, will this so called trial be public? I would really like to see this on tv like the O.J. trial. I don't trust the government any more than I can throw them. I want to see ALL the evidence including the Downing memos, the 28 redacted pages from the first 9-11 Report and ALL 9-11 testimonies including that of Bush and Cheney as well as the Cheney Energy Task Force documentation and PDB's!

    Put it ALL on the table
  • Name
    I hope the judge allows considerable leeway in the discovery phase of the trials. Perhaps some of the many lingering questions about 9/11 will be aired. Most likely the judge will be pressured to keep the trial in a narrow channel. We will likely be hearing from the Cheneys soon about all this as they sense a new threat to themselves by the trials- that is, if they've worked up their nerve again after their recent embarrassment by the "leaking' of the Plame grand jury transcripts.
  • bacalove
    I believe that this Trial is something that should have been impremented a long time ago -- like six years ago and that the GOP are fuming mad that they did not have the guts and courage to try these people in court -- any court, albeit they are terrorists and not military! May be Gound Zero can heal now after the trial of these terrorists which will surely be found guilty and possibly die -- right there so close to their dastardly deed.
  • dennycrane
    I guess when the bush crime family go down, they will go to Iraq?
  • jimbo92107
    Boy, it's gonna be hard to avoid mention of TORTURING HELPLESS PRISONERS.
  • BAC520
    Has anyone seen http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com ? So both Pakistani and American/Israeli Intelligence will be convicted of 9/11? What about the terrorists carrying the oversized shampoo bottles through the airport, the over 3 oz. exploding shampoo? I won't have closure and feel completely safe and secure until everyone in the Earth is in some sort of facility!!!!
  • rollandmiller
    We all know 9/11 was a False Flag Operation committed by the Bush Administration.

    Do your homework.
blog comments powered by Disqus