He's innocent of 9/11.
He's guilty of a second wave attack, probably using cropdusters.
He admitted he was to be used in a second wave attack.
Dept. of Justice dropped the cropduster allegations from the charges - they conflict with the theory he was the 9/11 "20th man."
If govt. loses the appeal, they'll dismiss the charges for good.
Wouldn't want to worry us taxpaying folks about what was really going on.
IMO.
Feds won't make al-Qaida witness available to Moussaoui
an Associated Press report 7/15/03
WASHINGTON - The Justice Department acknowledges its defiance of a judge's order may cause dismissal of charges against accused Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, but says it won't produce an al-Qaida prisoner for questioning by the defendant.
The government notified the trial judge Monday that it wouldn't budge in its refusal to let Moussaoui, an acknowledged al-Qaida loyalist, interview a former superior -- suspected Sept. 11 attack coordinator Ramzi Binalshibh.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema can now penalize the government, but the ultimate sanction of dismissal is not her only option for disobedience of her order to allow the deposition.
While dismissal could ultimately lead to prosecution by a military tribunal -- where the government's national security concerns would be paramount -- the Alexandria, Va.-based judge could take less drastic steps. She could throw out some charges, exclude government evidence or instruct jurors that the government refused to provide certain evidence.
Prosecutors said they're banking on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold their argument that any comments by Binalshibh to Moussaoui would jeopardize national security, especially if they're played at Moussaoui's trial on charges of conspiring with the Sept. 11 hijackers to commit terrorism and hijack airplanes.
The Richmond, Va.-based 4th Circuit voted 7-5 on Monday to deny, for now, reconsideration of a three-judge panel's refusal to intervene in the case at this stage. The court is more likely to step in after Brinkema rules on sanctions against the government.
While the appellate ruling concerned the timing of the court's possible intervention, chief judge William Wilkins warned that the court would not blindly accept government claims of national security.
"Siding with the government in all cases where national security concerns are asserted would entail surrender of the independence of the judicial branch and abandonment of our sworn commitment to uphold the rule of law," Wilkins said.
The government said it recognizes that its objection means the deposition of Binalshibh cannot go forward, and that the decision "obligates the court now to dismiss the indictment unless the court finds that the interests of justice can be served by another action."
If the court considers an alternative to dismissal, prosecutors asked that they be heard before action is taken. The government also asked Brinkema to postpone any action pending a ruling by the appellate court.
Brinkema has ruled that Moussaoui, who is representing himself, should be allowed to question Binalshibh through a satellite hookup.
Brinkema had concluded Binalshibh may support Moussaoui's contention that he was not part of the Sept. 11 conspiracy, and said he had a constitutional right to witnesses who might help the defense.
Attorney General John Ashcroft has repeatedly said he wants to continue the prosecution in the civilian court system, although military tribunal rules would be more favorable to the government.
"The military commission approach is outside the constitutional system," said Robert Precht, assistant dean for public service at the University of Michigan law school and a defense lawyer in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing case.
"Once you take this out of the civilian system, all bets are off. All constitutional rights that are familiar to us are simply not applicable. What limited rights the military does give are totally at the government's mercy."
The eventual outcome of this dispute could affect future cases by deciding whether terrorism defendants will have access to enemy combatants, especially those, like Binalshibh, who are being held in secret locations overseas.
Should the courts decide a defendant's access to favorable witnesses trumps national security concerns, the government could bring all future terrorism proceedings before military tribunals.
Repeating earlier arguments, the government said Monday: "The deposition, which would involve an admitted and unrepentant terrorist (the defendant) questioning one of his al-Qaida confederates, would necessarily result in the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
"Such a scenario is unacceptable to the government, which not only carries the responsibility for prosecuting the defendant, but also of protecting this nation's security at a time of war with an enemy who already murdered thousands of our citizens."