NationStates Jolt Archive

Commment: The one 9/11 terrorist we have. Who has plead guilty and is mostly defendning himself may not get the death penalty because prosecutors couldn't keep from cheating.

U.S. blunder may save Moussaoui (U.S. blunder may save Moussaoui)
E-mail reveals lawyer's attempt to coach seven witnesses
From Phil Hirschkorn
CNN

onday, March 13, 2006; Posted: 6:31 p.m. EST (23:31 GMT)


U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema was upset Monday that witnesses had been coached.
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia (CNN) -- A federal judge threatened to throw out the death penalty at the sentencing trial of al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui after prosecutors disclosed Monday that a government lawyer tried to coach seven witnesses.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema sent the jury home and scheduled a hearing Tuesday to investigate what she said could be a "very serious taint of a key portion of this case."

Prosecutors disclosed Monday that seven current and former Federal Aviation Administration employees were sent transcripts from last week's opening statements and testimony.

Brinkema said that "blatantly" violated her February 22 order that witnesses "may not attend or otherwise follow trial proceedings; for example, may not read transcripts, before being called to testify."

The judge voiced her clear displeasure: "In all the years I've been on the bench, I have never seen such an egregious violation of a rule on witnesses."

A lawyer for the Transportation Security Administration, Carla Martin, e-mailed the transcripts, prosecutors told the judge in a letter.

Three of the FAA witnesses are on the government's witness list, and four are on the defense witness list.

Martin, who was admitted to the federal bar in 1990, was not a member of the prosecution team and is no longer the TSA liaison.

Defense attorneys asked for a mistrial, or for Brinkema to sanction the government by taking the death penalty off the table.

"This isn't going to be a fair trial," Moussaoui lawyer Edward MacMahon said.

Two witnesses read transcripts
The witnesses affected include Lynne Osmus, who became the FAA's assistant administrator for security and hazardous materials in 2003, and her deputy, Claudio Manno.

All seven witnesses read the e-mails sent by Martin, but only two of them said they read the attached transcripts, according to documents filed with the court.

"We view Ms. Martin's conduct as reprehensible, and frankly we cannot fathom why she engaged in such conduct," prosecutors wrote in their letter disclosing the violations. They called Martin's comments "misguided opinions."

Although they had been filed under seal, Brinkema made public the full contents of the government's disclosure, including Martin's e-mail and responses from the witnesses.

Several exchanges dealt with the heart of the government's case, as laid out in opening statements.

Prosecutor Robert Spencer told the jury the attacks could have been averted if Moussaoui had revealed he was preparing for hijackings with the short knives he possessed when arrested in mid-August 2001.

The FAA would have alerted security agents to screen passengers for knives shorter than four inches long, which the 9/11 hijackers used to commandeer four passenger jets, Spencer said.

E-mail: 'Big gaps'
Referring to Spencer's opening statement, Martin told witness Pat McDonnell, the FAA's head of intelligence on 9/11, "There are big gaps that the defense can exploit."

"The opening (statement) has created a credibility gap the defense can drive a truck through," Martin wrote to Osmus. "There is no way anyone could say carriers could have prevented all short knives from going through."

"That's all it would take to prevent the 9/11 attacks from happening? I don't think so," Martin wrote.

"Got your message," a reply from Osmus was titled. "And agree (we) need to be careful in describing how these (security) measures would have impacted the attack."

Martin advised witnesses how FBI counterterrorism agent Michael Anticev "got tripped up" on a past terrorism plotter who conceived before his capture in the mid-1990s of crashing an explosives-laden plane into the CIA headquarters.

"I will go over this with you," Martin wrote to Manno. "The issue of, did we ever explore the scenario of flying planes into buildings."

Brinkema explained the problem to jurors, telling them her order keeping witnesses away from others' trial testimony is a "very important protection of the truth-seeking process of a trial."

Moussaoui pleaded guilty 11 months ago to taking part in an al Qaeda conspiracy to hijack planes and fly them into buildings. But he denies any role in 9/11.

Trial decides punishment
The trial is being held to determine his punishment.

Prosecutors argue that Moussaoui deserves to be executed because he lied to the FBI in August 2001, covering up his al Qaeda membership and the real reason he was attending U.S. flight schools. Those lies, prosecutors allege, contributed to nearly 3,000 murders on September 11.

If Brinkema declares a mistrial or sanctions the government by striking the death penalty, she would sentence Moussaoui to life in prison without possibility of parole.

"I do not want to act precipitously," Brinkema said. She noted that she and the attorneys involved with Moussaoui for more than four years have "too much time invested in this case."

But, she said, the witness coaching controversy is not the government's first misstep in the week-old trial.

"This is the second significant error of the government affecting the constitutional rights of this defendant, and more importantly, it affects the integrity of the criminal justice system in the United States."

The defense asked for a mistrial last week, after a prosecutor posed an improper question to an FBI agent.

At that time, Brinkema warned prosecutors they were heading toward "delicate" legal ground.

See also Judge recesses Moussaoui trial amid disclosure of prosecutorial violation of witness coaching rule (http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/03-13-2006/29660027000f129b.html)

well you know why the're coaching witnessess don't you? it's because rumsfield and his cia bankrolled, trained and for all practical purposes CREATED ben lauden and al-cia-da. just like they did sadam hussain and the talliban.

and the paper trail to prove it, even with the parts of the documents blacked out for "national security" is a matter of public record.

"national security" itself, for most of my life if not longer, has been a euphamise for the security of elected officials to get away with malpheasance in office, and i think anyone with half a brain who isn't some kind of right wing fanatic already realizes this anyway.

=^^=
.../\...

Good on the judge though. Shows that at least the judicial system (cue rants about "activist judges") is still hanging on to some principles.

Oy. And since the witnesses are tainted, they can't just start over with new proceedings. Crap, what a ball to drop.

Is it really all this TSA liaison's fault (Martin, I think it said), or is she taking the heat for something the main prosecutors knew was being done?

Wasn't he aware of the plot but actually played no part in it?

Wasn't he aware of the plot but actually played no part in it?

I think that's part of his defense. Bah, we'll see some neocon come out and protect this kind of horseplay sooner or later by playing the "evil terrorist" card and "any means neccessary" I bet.

So who ever thought that government employees were competent? We have a District Attorney in Atlanta that has never won a death penalty case. I suspect these guys are practicing law for the government because they couldn't hack it in the personal injury field.

Wasn't he aware of the plot but actually played no part in it?
From what I read about this case yesterday, the prosecution was going to have a tough time making a death penalty case anyway because they were going to stretch a theory really tight to make it fit.

In essence, they were arguing that Moussaoui, because he didn't confess to his part in the 9/11 attacks before 9/11 while he was in FBI custody, remained a part of the conspiracy to commit the attacks, and is therefore worthy of the death penalty, as opposed to life in prison. How that theory holds up in the face of the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination is beyond me.

But even so, you'd think that in a case as high-profile as this one, the prosecutors would be making sure that everything was done by-the-book, since it will undoubtedly come under intense scrutiny.

If ever there were an effective argument against the death penalty, the issue of prosecutorial misconduct is it. If a defendant in a high-profile, high-visibility case can be threatened by a rogue prosecutor, what chance does a poor slob in an underfunded state court with rookie defense counsel have?

What should strike people as sad if not outrageous is the prosecution's basis for their case: That because Moussaoui didn't tell the truth about his visit that 9-11 occurred and therefore he should deserve the death penalty.

What the fuck? Since when does the United States government expect terrorists to be frank about why they're coming over here? Saying that 9-11 could have been prevented if Moussaoui fessed up is the biggest bullshit and copout I've heard to date. The man is a terrorist and they were expecting him to spill all the details to prevent those deaths!? Jesus Christ, didn't Clinton leave behind some detailed briefings warning Shrub, "Hey, this Bin Ladin guy's talked a lot about trying to hit America, might want to keep everyone's eyes open"?

If ever there were an effective argument against the death penalty, the issue of prosecutorial misconduct is it. If a defendant in a high-profile, high-visibility case can be threatened by a rogue prosecutor, what chance does a poor slob in an underfunded state court with rookie defense counsel have?

That's an interesting thought. What kind of penalty for such misconduct do prosecutors/defense usually get?

What should strike people as sad if not outrageous is the prosecution's basis for their case: That because Moussaoui didn't tell the truth about his visit that 9-11 occurred and therefore he should deserve the death penalty.

Heh. It is starting to sound a lot like "If you keep information from the government/police, it is a crime."

A hell lot of people are going to go to jail then.


What the fuck? Since when does the United States government expect terrorists to be frank about why they're coming over here?

Ever see the visa forms for the US? Admittedly, Australia has the same kind of dumb questions.

"Are you, or have you ever been, affiliated with a known terrorist organization?"

That's an interesting thought. What kind of penalty for such misconduct do prosecutors/defense usually get?

Disbarment, generally.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema sent the jury home and scheduled a hearing Tuesday to investigate what she said could be a "very serious taint of a key portion of this case."
Hey, whose taint isn't serious?

Oh, wait. He's using the old meaning of 'taint', isn't he?

Does conjure up some interesting visions though.

Disbarment, generally.

Think it will happen in this case?

Think it will happen in this case?
Not a chance. Any disciplinary action, if there is any at all, will come because he failed to get the death penalty (if that indeed happens). In other words, it's not the cheating, it's the getting caught that's the problem.

The prosecutors should consider themselves lucky. Imagine if there was a mistrial and those witnesses were barred?

WOuld there even be a case left?

The prosecutors should consider themselves lucky. magine if there was a mistial and those witnesses were barred?

WOuld there even be a case left?
Well, the damage that can be done is limited, because Moussaoui pled guilty, so no matter what happens, he's locked up. The only part of this that can be a mistrial is the sentencing phase, and it looks like the only options are life without parole and the death penalty. He won't be walking because of this screwup--but the administration may not get their "we got revenge on the 9/11 terrorists" photo-op either.

Well, the damage that can be done is limited, because Moussaoui pled guilty, so no matter what happens, he's locked up. The only part of this that can be a mistrial is the sentencing phase, and it looks like the only options are life without parole and the death penalty. He won't be walking because of this screwup--but the administration may not get their "we got revenge on the 9/11 terrorists" photo-op either.

Considering this part of the trial was moved out of NY (too 'liberal') to Virginia in the expectation of getting an easier death penalty verdict...

That just shows you how much of a screw up it was. :rolleyes:

I was fishing with our in-house counsel last night and asked him about coaching witnesses. He said it was just part of the whole trial thing. When he was practicing trial law, he'd tell a witness "If they ask you about ..., say 'yes'." He always figured the next question would be "What did your attorney tell you to say?" The answer that he prepared them with for that question was "He told me to tell the truth." He claimed the second question always followed the first and left the other side helpless.

On the other hand, emailing testimony and statements to witnesses sounds like a screw-up that only a government lawyer could manage.

Commment: The one 9/11 terrorist we have. Who has plead guilty and is mostly defendning himself may not get the death penalty because prosecutors couldn't keep from cheating.

I feel this is terrible, but I thought you were against the death penalty anyway?

I feel this is terrible, but I thought you were against the death penalty anyway?

I think he was more upset about the fact that the legal counsel was really breaking court orders with both hands here.

Al-Qaeda is largely a fabrication and Bin Laden was not involved with 9/11. They have forced this man’s testimony in order to further perpetuate the greatest lie of the century.

Good thing the man won’t get death row; no one should be denied the right to inconvenience the government with appeal after appeal ad infinitum.