The wrong court for terror trials

Judge Lewis Kaplan yesterday deliv ered strong evidence of why terrorist trials don't belong in civilian court. He brought the federal trial of accused al Qaeda bomber Ahmed Ghailani to a halt on its opening day by barring the testimony of the government's key witness.

Ghailani faces life in prison for his role in the 1998 bombings of three US embassies in Africa. The witness, Hussein Abebe, sold Ghailani the TNT used in the deadly bombings, and prosecutors say his testimony is critical to their case.

But Kaplan ruled that, because the government only learned about Abebe from Ghailani himself during CIA questioning, he can't be allowed to testify.

Kaplan ruled that Abebe's testimony would be unconstitutional, and that the Constitution must be followed "not only when it is convenient, but when fear and danger beckon in a different direction."

That would be fine if Ghailani were, say, a mugger. But it's nonsense in the context of the war on Islamist terrorism: Ghailani is not a US citizen, and the crimes didn't occur on US territory.

The blame resides with the Obama administration, which ignored all warnings that trying terrorists like Ghailani in civilian court would invite such rulings.

That’s why terror communist Billy Ayers and his terror communist wife Bernadine Dorhn are walking free today.

If they had gone before a military tribunal, they may have been executed.

After all, their Weather Underground did declare war on the United States.

This was all predicted on FR the moment Holder/Obama came up with the absurd idea of trying enemy combatants in civilian criminal court. Any statements out of an accused which are not voluntary or are the result if any coersion, however, slight, are not usable. And any evidence garnered as a result of those “coerced” statements is suppressed as “fruit of the poisoned tree”. This is basic criminal law. So it was no surprise to anyone familiar with USA criminal courts that these cases would not fly. We also felt that “speedy trial” rights would be raised to bar these prosecutions since many of these clowns have been held for years at Gitmo and elsewhere. Defense attorneys have many weapons in their arsenal. The idea that federal prosecutors were “stunned” is not credible. They are either fools or are lying, or the media is mis-reporting their reactions. Holder is a former federal judge so he knows better. Bambi attended law school so has to know better, unless he missed every day of his criminal law class. They are either (a) trying to get these guys off, or (b) trying to force federal judges to dilute established federal law to go after these thugs. The latter choice would harm established rights set up for all Americans who come before the court. The judge here has elected to keep those rights in place for all who come before his court. Therefore, this guy’s case will be dismissed. Holder thinks (and has said) he can then continue to detain the guy at Gitmo and hold him indefinitely. However, I believe a habeas corpus petition would free him because grounds to hold him have officially evaporated. It is a mess and no one will hold Holder/Obama accountable on it.

That’s exactly right.

It was known what would happen in this trial.
The Government knew that most evidence would be thrown out.
The intention from the start was to turn this fellow loose.

THIS is our new Justice Department at work. Turning loose people who would threaten others at the polls because they are black and turning loose terrorists who should be executed.

Thank You Eric holder. Thank You Mf. President.

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.