Reply
Wed 7 Dec, 2005 12:08 pm
Quote:The Justice Department's anti-terrorism campaign was dealt a defeat yester day when a jury in Tampa, Fla., refused to convict a former Florida college professor, Sami Al-Arian, and three other men who were on trial for operating an American wing of Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Mr. Al-Arian, 47, was found not guilty on eight counts, including one of the most serious, conspiracy to maim or murder outside America. After the five month-long trial and 13 days of deliberations, the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict on nine other counts against the former University of South Florida academic, including a charge of conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist group.
http://www.nysun.com/article/24074
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/12/07/Tampabay/Timeline__Events_in_t.shtml
This story had created quite a brouhaha in my neck of the woods. Apparently, Mr. Al Arian, a professor at the University of South Florida, had been accused of operating a wing of the Palestinian Islamic jihad.
There was a whole to-do about whether he should be fired, which raised the hackles of some professors, who were concerned about the fate of a tenured professor, and its possible impact on them.
So now he has been acquitted, although the jury was hung on a number of the counts. The Justice Department, having spent a fortune in the prosecution, no has a lot of egg on its face. Apparently, someone had said, all the "dots" were there. It was just that the Justice Department were unable to connect the dots sufficiently enough to convince a jury.
There is talk of stripping Mr. al Arian of his permanent resident status and deporting him, or possibly reindicting him on the counts that hung the jury. What do you think?
Ah, I've been waiting for this thread. (Too lazy to post it myself) I'm wondering if they will choose to retry him on those other counts. On the one hand, they have just been handed a defeat and have something to prove. On the other hand, if that's all they have and it was already presented, their odds don't look very good and another mistrial/acquittal would make them look even worse.
I'm curious how they'll be able to deport him without a conviction.
And where would they deport him to?
FreeDuck- I am wondering whether the Justice Department felt that they had enough evidence to convict, just on what information that they chose to make public. Perhaps, they had more, but did not want to show their hand, on account of possible ramifications to American operatives, etc.
I think that the last time that the government screwed up this badly, was in the O.J. trial. The difference was, that O.J. was not likely to cause any more harm than he already had.
There was just too much going on with this guy, to make me believe that he was innocent.
From what I understand, most of their evidence was from wire taps that were taken before Islamic Jihad was designated a terrorist organization.
Two of his codefendants were acquitted on every charge. That says something, I think.
It sounds like the justice department is admitting defeat. If this guy was the big wig they claimed, there is no way they would let him go. Give him a plea for time served and make him leave the country was the best they could do with all the odds in their favor and infinitely deep pockets. The defendent takes the deal or stays in prison trying to fight his case while his family is left in the lurch with mounting legal bills and no source of income. I don't think this is a ringing endorsement of our legal system.
I agree. The trial had gone on interminably, and then the jury was hung on many of the charges.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace