Ghost of BiB Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Mistrial? Ironically, as an aside, he proved to be too stupid and uncoordinated to fly an airplane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Ironically, as an aside, he proved to be too stupid and uncoordinated to fly an airplane. 626799[/snapback] What a shocker. He's proving to be too stupid and uncoordinated to defend himself as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Might be more expediate to drop him off in downtown NYC or the Pentagon Parking lot. Just let people know the time and place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 What a shocker. He's proving to be too stupid and uncoordinated to defend himself as well. 626827[/snapback] And the prosecution is looking to trump him in that regards... Half a case Exasperated by mounting government missteps, Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled that no testimony about aviation security measures would be allowed during the trial into whether Moussaoui is executed or spends life in prison. That could damage the government's case because prosecutors had said previously that testimony from aviation officials comprised half their case. I'm thinking this is pretty much the definition of witness tampering... Among those [new] problems: -Government lawyers sent a letter Feb. 14 saying that at least three federal aviation officials sought as defense witnesses refused to talk to defense lawyers. The three said they had never seen the letter and one of them said he would have been willing to talk to the defense. -Martin [the Transportation Security Administration attorney who is at the root of this] told one official, sought as a defense witness, that he was not to have contact with defense attorneys. -Two of the witnesses read and watched news coverage of the week-old trial despite the judge’s order they not follow the case. The government admitted it did not advise witnesses of the judge’s order governing their conduct. -Martin not only e-mailed seven witnesses about trial events but also told one person that the defense was trying to portray Moussaoui as “cuckoo.” There's actually much, much more, but I'd have to quote the entire article. How this is not a mistrial is outside my understanding of court procedure...but I don't see how you could blow this even more if you just had all the witnesses lie? ScotusBlog has some analysis...Setback for U.S. on Moussaoui The evidence excluded Tuesday had been described by government lawyers on Monday as making up about half of their case. The main theory on which the government is seeking to have Moussaoui sentenced to death is that, when captured before Sept. 11, he lied to federal agents, and his lies kept officials from being able to take steps to head off the attacks that ensued at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and in rural Pennsylvania. As a result, the government contends, Moussaoui is responsible for the 9/11 deaths that occurred, and thus is eligible for and should be executed. Aviation security experts were to be called by the government to show that, had Moussaoui not lied, the government could have been able to prevent some of the terrorist hijackers from boarding jets to do violence. The defense also was seeking to call some government employees to counter that testimony. The judge reportedly said in open court that this evidence was now "irremediably contaminated." As an aside for a possible seperate discussion...What does this "win at all costs, rights be damned" say about the death penalty in the US in general (taking Moussaoui out of the equation)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted March 14, 2006 Author Share Posted March 14, 2006 And the prosecution is looking to trump him in that regards...Half a case I'm thinking this is pretty much the definition of witness tampering... There's actually much, much more, but I'd have to quote the entire article. How this is not a mistrial is outside my understanding of court procedure...but I don't see how you could blow this even more if you just had all the witnesses lie? ScotusBlog has some analysis...Setback for U.S. on Moussaoui As an aside for a possible seperate discussion...What does this "win at all costs, rights be damned" say about the death penalty in the US in general (taking Moussaoui out of the equation)? 629622[/snapback] You are mixing idea threads. Big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 And the prosecution is looking to trump him in that regards...Half a case I'm thinking this is pretty much the definition of witness tampering... There's actually much, much more, but I'd have to quote the entire article. How this is not a mistrial is outside my understanding of court procedure...but I don't see how you could blow this even more if you just had all the witnesses lie? As far as I can tell, the judge didn't want to declare a mistrial and be responsible for the decision that took the death penalty off the table. So she did the next best thing: took all the government's evidence and testimony away, but told them they could try the case without it. Same effect: he gets life, as the government now has NO case whatsoever. But now the prosecution gets to fumble around and look like idiots for a little longer, and the judge isn't a lightning rod. I'm not sure if the decision is creative and elegant, or craven and cowardly. As an aside for a possible seperate discussion...What does this "win at all costs, rights be damned" say about the death penalty in the US in general (taking Moussaoui out of the equation)? 629622[/snapback] I don't know...but the key thing to note is that the system in this case worked: the judge very properly laid the ground rules as to what could and couldn't be done, and very properly slapped the prosecution down hard for their "win at all costs" attitude. I'm just waiting for someone to jump up and scream about this judge "legislating from the bench" for effectively avoiding the death penalty statute that "should be" applied in this case. You know one of our resident uber-right wackos here is thinking that right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts