This is a jury we'd love to have. First, it acquits the defendant of the charged crime. Then, it writes the judge and prosecutor and asks that the co-defendant who pleaded guilty in exchange for testifying against the defendant it acquitted be allowed to withdraw his plea because he didn't commit a crime either. To top it off, it was a terrorism-related case, where the defendant ran an anti-terrorism school.

Six of the jurors who acquitted David Hudak, owner of an anti-terrorism training school near Roswell, have asked a federal judge to allow Hudak's co-defendant to withdraw a guilty plea. As a condition of that plea, Michael Payne was a prosecution witness against Hudak, a Canadian charged with conspiracy and training foreign soldiers without State Department approval. Jurors said they found Payne "a loyal American without the slightest inclination whatsoever to do damage to our country."

Six jurors wrote U.S. District Judge John Edwards Conway to "beseech" him to let Payne withdraw his plea. They sent copies of the letter to New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. Payne, a decorated 20-year veteran of the Army Special Forces, last July pleaded guilty to violating federal law by teaching soldiers of the United Arab Emirates, a U.S. ally, classified anti-terrorism techniques, tactics and procedures at Hudak's school.

The link above is to an editorial in the Albuquerque Journal, supporting the withdrawal of the plea.

[Prosecutor] Iglesias has decided to oppose any withdrawal or change of plea while the U.S. Department of Defense investigates whether Payne's teachings damaged U.S. interests and security. That's a reasonable decision for now. But the government should expedite its investigation and, if there is no finding of harm, Iglesias should not oppose any plea withdrawal request....A jury clearly rejected the government's federal case against Hudak. In the interest of justice, Payne deserves the same consideration.