Posted on 07/01/2008 11:55:27 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
Former University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian was arraigned Monday on two charges of criminal contempt for refusing to testify before a federal grand jury in Virginia. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Va., ordered Al-Arian transferred out of the custody of immigration authorities and into the custody of U.S. Marshals.
Al-Arian's attorney, Jonathan Turley, wrote on his blog that the court where Al-Arian is being prosecuted "is called the 'Rocket Docket' because it prides itself on moving these cases at a breakneck pace..."
At the arraignment, Al-Arian did not enter a plea, but the judge entered a not guilty plea for him, Turley wrote...Al-Arian's trial is scheduled for Aug. 13.
Al-Arian was prosecuted in Tampa on terrorism-related charges alleging he was a lead U.S. fundraiser for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a U.S.-designated terrorist organization in Israel. A federal jury in 2005 failed to convict him of any charge, but deadlocked on nine counts. He later struck a deal with prosecutors, pleading guilty to one count of providing assistance to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. He has completed his sentence for that charge, but has been held on successive civil contempt charges for refusing to testify before a Virginia grand jury investigating alleged terrorist financing by charities...
During the Tampa trial, the government presented evidence that Al-Arian's think tank, World and Islam Studies Enterprise, received funding from the International Institute of Islamic Thought, based in Herndon, Va...
Stetson Law School professor Charles Rose said criminal contempt charges such as these are rare.
"I just can't imagine that this is still around," Rose said. "You almost never see a charge of criminal contempt, historically, unless you're dealing with organized crime. They're treating Sami Al-Arian like he is a member of a criminal organization."
Contempt charges.
The feds can’t get a conviction (that damn right to a jury trial) so they keep up this harassment. Disgraceful.
Oh, and don’t think they won’t come after you.
I thought Palestinian Islamic Jihad was a criminal organization, specializing in terror?
He should not be in our country. What is disgraceful is his continuing presence on American soil.
Isn't that what muslim-terrorist apologists always claim should be the case? As opposed to the stricter and more protected (from the homeland security and intelligence aspect) than using terrorist statutes?
I sure will have to tune in to Bill O’Reilly tonight!
Uh, it was a deadlocked jury: Maybe our jury system needs to be tuned up:
One proposal for dealing with the difficulties associated with hung juries has been to introduce supermajority verdicts. This measure would allow juries to convict defendants without unanimous agreements amongst the jurors. Hence, a 12-member jury that would otherwise be deadlocked at 11 for conviction and 1 against, would be recorded as a guilty verdict for the defendant. The rationale for majority verdicts usually includes arguments involving so-called ‘rogue jurors’ who unreasonably impede the course of justice. Opponents of the introduction of majority verdicts argue that it undermines public confidence in criminal justice systems and results in a higher number of individuals convicted of crimes they did not commit.
In England and Wales a majority of 10-2 is needed for a verdict, failure to reach this may lead to a retrial.
In Scotland in criminal cases juries consist of 15, and 8 jurors are needed to arrive at a guilty verdict, even if the size of the jury drops below 15 e.g. because of illness. It is not possible to have a hung jury since if this number is not reached it is treated as an acquittal.
Jonathan Turley is the grinning-ear-to-ear attorney that goes on Keith Olbermann’s show a few times a month to tell Keith why & how he (Keith) is spot on an issue.
I don’t even think the losers that watch Countdown believe Turley but he makes for good excuses for their irrational ideas of law.
This is not England or Wales. And the 2 holdouts “rogues” as you call them were for conviction. The other 10 were for not guilty.
Well...just maybe...
Since the jury vote is not public information for this trial, whatever anyone says the votes were is guessing or perhaps even....... lying.
Turley
How disgusting
The votes, 10-2 (which you referred to) are viewable at Tampa Bay Online (the website for the Tampa Bay Tribune). Just google ‘sami al arian jury verdict.’
Jury votes are public information. The identity of jurors is not, unless they make it so.
What’s up amigo?
Had time to do your homework?
I await you response.
What’s up amigo?
Had time to do your homework?
I await your response.
Behind Closed Doors
She said her voice was often drowned out by the screams & shouts of several other jurors when she tried to explain her position. After a while, the argument devolved into people simply repeating points they had already made.
Only one other juror stayed with her by the time deliberations ended Dec. 6.
Other jurors told Moody they felt “whipped into submission” by those favoring acquittal.
“It was very difficult at times in the deliberation area,” she said. “It was hard. We would state the way we felt and vote the way we felt and continually we were asked, ‘Where do you come up with this?’ We would go over our points and other people couldn’t see that. It was frustrating. I’m glad there is a chance they can still do something.”
SOUNDS LIKE INTIMIDATION WON THE DAY; NOT JUSTICE.
Yeah, I’m sure this broad had everyone quaking in their boots.
My point has been made. Check your facts before accusing people of lying.
you write: Yeah, I’m sure this broad had everyone quaking in their boots. My point has been made. Check your facts before accusing people of lying.
Who did you make your point to? Certainly not me or anybody else that knows how people are intimidated. I am still not sure I am wrong about the vote...pre-intimidation anyway.
I hope the Government runs this guy al-arian into the ground and I bet the terrorists will finger his attorney(s)and get even.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.