home

Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution

by TChris

When the government's only witness in a criminal prosecution is a dead terrorist, the government might want to rethink its decision to prosecute. But the absence of reliable evidence that a crime was committed doesn't stop the Justice Department, which is asking a judge to detain Ahmed Omar Abu Ali without bail despite its apparent inability to prove its case.

Abu Ali was arrested in Saudi Arabia, where he had gone to study. His detention without charges in Saudi Arabia eventually provoked a lawsuit by his family against the United States on the ground that the U.S. engineered his arrest and continuing detention and acquiesced in his torture. The lawsuit evidently persuaded the government to bring Abu Ali to the United States so it could pursue terrorism charges against him. An indictment was unsealed this week in Virginia.

The government claims that Abu Ali discussed the assassination of President Bush while in Saudi Arabia, but the only witness to that alleged discussion was killed by Saudi authorities 17 months ago. The absence of evidence didn't stop the government from seeking to continue Abu Ali's detention without bail after his return to the United States. Even if it prevails in that request, the prosecution may ultimately be doomed.

[Federal] officials said they worried that the prosecution, by relying on information from overseas intelligence sources, could become bogged down in legal difficulties like those that have stalled the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, and could also become overshadowed by allegations from Mr. Abu Ali's family that he was tortured in Saudi custody with the knowledge of American officials. A federal terrorism prosecutor at the Justice Department said the defense is almost certain to raise accusations that the testimony of foreign detainees was tainted by alleged torture. The prosecutor added, "I think it's going to make it very difficult for the government to make its case."

< Tommy Chong Drops Out of Marijuana-Logues | Hawaii Paper Misquotes Churchill, Issues Correction >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 09:34:54 AM EST
    So, who needs proof? Just put him in the same cell as Jose Padilla.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 09:48:25 AM EST
    This one isn't shaky at all! There's a boatload of evidence against this traitor. My brother is one of the prosecuting attorneys. Oh yeah, this yahoo was evaluated by 3 doctors, 2 of his and one of the government's. They all agreed that his so called scars are birthmarks and the one was an appendectomy scar!!!! That was shot down pretty quick huh? This dude ain't never getting out of prison!

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 10:25:29 AM EST
    The prosecutor added, "I think it's going to make it very difficult for the government to make its case."
    what part of that leads you to believe "This dude ain't never getting out of prison!" what you wingnuts incessantly fail to grasp is that the rules have to be followed, if he's guilty or not if of no consequence to me, prove him guilty using all the legal precedents and maneuvers available. but as americans we should never abandon due process, after all it could be you. your unabashed trust in this republican government (a human group) is misplaced and quite dangerous.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 10:26:06 AM EST
    Shaky? I don't know. I read the full 16 page indictment, and the items found in his pad in VA were pretty inciminating indeed. We'll just hafta wait & see how this all plays out in Alexandria.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimcee on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 01:25:19 PM EST
    TCris, that should be "alleged torture", afterall no none has proven he was tortured. And relating to the singular witness who was killed by the Saudis I have just one question. What were the circumstances of his death? Killed during involvment in a terrorist attack?

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 02:06:40 PM EST
    Killed during involvement in a terrorist attack?
    you assume to much. killed while being tortured implicating everyone for anything in his quest to halt the pain.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimcee on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 02:46:17 PM EST
    HardLeft, You got proof of that or are you just speaking out of you arse? Mine was a legitmate question as I haven't seen either way how he was killed. Your answer was a bit snarky there my child. Any proof would be appreciated as I like to make my judgements on facts not rumour. Links please.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 03:25:40 PM EST
    As I stated earlier, I did read the 16-page indictment. It makes for a fine read on the on Mr. AbuAli's jaunts through Saudi Arabia. In his apartment in Virginia our government found the following academic materials: (Page 6, Criminal Nș 1:05CR53) a. A six-page document regarding various forms of surveillance by the government and private entities, and how to avoid such surveillance; b. An undated, two-page document praising the Taliban leader Mullah Omar and the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, and condemning U.S. military action in Afghanistan; c. An issue of the magazine "Handguns" bearing a subscription label in the name of "Ahmed Ali"; d. Audio tapes in Arabic promoting violent jihad, the killing of Jews, and a battle by Muslims against Christians and Jews; and e. A book written by al-Qaeda official Ayman al-Zawahiri, in which al- Zawahiri characterizes democracy as a new religion that must be destroyed by war, describes anyone who supports democracy as an infidel, and condemns the Muslim Brotherhood for renouncing violent jihad as a means to establish an Islamic state. In a vacuum, and by themselves, the above materials don't prove ill intention; but when taken into context with "Educational" travels through Saudi Arabia, and his lodged Visa petition to travel to Iran, a different picture starts to emerge.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 05:47:52 PM EST
    Boquisucio at February 24, 2005 04:25 PM so "This dude ain't never getting out of prison!"?

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#10)
    by john horse on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 07:48:01 PM EST
    Boquisucio, re: "In a vacuum, and by themselves, the above materials don't prove ill intention..." I went through all your "evidence" and kept on asking myself, what law Abu Ali broke. I am not familiar with any law against "ill intentions." He is charged with discussing plans to assasinate Bush. Do you have any evidence regarding this specific crime? Do you have any evidence that he committed any crime or is his crime what the Stalinists used to refer to as a thought crime? What you present reminds me of the movie Minority Report, where "precogs" know that a crime is going to be commited before it takes place. But that was fiction. In this country a person can only be convicted for what they do, not what they think, right?

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 09:20:22 PM EST
    Do we need any further proof that torture doesn't work? The Saudis, some of the best--or worst, depending on your perspective--torturers in the world held this guy for 20 months and all they have is some fuzzy talk about blowing up or shooting the president? They should have had elaborate plans, cells and designs for exploding mountain bikes and toxic brush all laid out. This is just one more crime committed by this lawless administration. If the documents listed and the activities claimed are illegal the Justice Department needs to get in touch with the Southern Poverty Law Center real quick because there are dozens of groups in Idaho and Colorado that talk about a lot worse things and read, publish and advocate violent acts against the government and minority groups every day.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 25, 2005 at 06:48:01 AM EST
    Posted by at February 24, 2005 06:47 PM so "This dude ain't never getting out of prison!"? Not necessarily. We'll have to wait for the trial to fully disclose the evidence, and witnesses statements, etc. john horse I went through all your "evidence" and kept on asking myself, what law Abu Ali broke. I am not familiar with any law against "ill intentions." First of all my quote above does not present any evidence; only the findings of the Grand Jury, based on allegations presented by the Federal Attourney. Evidence in the form of Exhibits, Witness Statements, ect., will surely come forward during the course of the trial. Anyone that claims at this early stage of the judicial process, to have "Evidence", is just full of hot air, and doesn't understand our judicial system. However, for the Federal Attourney to have brought charges to the Grand Jury, must mean that he has built-up a good case against Mr. Abu Ali. Again, we'll have to wait and see what transpires in Alexandria during the next months. On Ill Intentions: I am 110% with you. Thank God we do not live in a country that Proscribes Thought of any kind. Otherwise this Blog would have been banned years ago. And Freder Frederson, get a grip of your self. I do not know what water you drink our there in Idaho. Your rambles make no sense.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#13)
    by john horse on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 04:01:36 AM EST
    Boquisucio, Thanks for clearing that up. My confusion came from your use of the word "incriminating". That has a very specific meaning, having to do with implicating someone in a crime. Based on you last comments, what I think you were saying was that the items found on him were very interesting or maybe even suspicious. I think you would agree that if all the prosecution has is the facts that you present, this guy should walk.

    Re: Another Shaky Terrorism Prosecution (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Feb 26, 2005 at 05:23:50 AM EST
    john horse, ...think you would agree that if all the prosecution has is the facts that you present, this guy should walk. Agreed; but we'll have to wait and see what the Federal Attourney has under his/her belt. The findings presented to the Grand Jury, though they are to be presented as evidence to the Petty Jury, are still preliminary.