Alleged September 11, 2001 architect Khalid Shaikh Mohammed has never
hidden his crimes. He has often professed a desire to declare himself
guilty. But with news that he and four other suspects will be tried in New York City
civilian federal court, some observers are concerned that he might be acquitted. The fact that Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times by U.S. officials is fueling these fears, as it could be a significant asset for his defense lawyer. It seems incredibly unlikely that
President Obama would allow a high-profile terrorist to walk free, but Obama has no authority over the courts.
What if the judge rules in Mohammed's favor?
- Acquittal Maybe, But Release? Never Conservative blogger Allahpundit doubts Obama would ever allow Mohammed to be released. "My guess is that O's banking on a conviction to legitimize his 'try them in civilian courts' strategy, and that if the worst happens
and KSM is acquitted, O will simply bite the bullet and say, 'Sorry,
can't let him go.' ACLU will howl, but oh well. They'll come up with an excuse. 'Um, we found some new evidence of something else he did. Have to arrest him again.' I worry less
about acquitting KSM, who's notorious enough that it's highly unlikely,
than lesser jihadbot whom O might feel ok letting go."
- That's The Worst Scenario Hot Air's Ed Morrissey concedes
KSM will never walk, but Obama detaining him despite acquittal is what
makes a civilian trial so dangerous. "What happens if the judge throws
out key evidence over nitpicky technicalities? What happens if KSM and
others get found not guilty
because of gaps in the evidence chain resulting from national-security
issues or 'evidentiary issues'?" He asks. "And if Obama isn’t prepared to let them walk after
a potential acquittal, then it makes a mockery of the criminal trial,
and of the justice system itself." Powerline's John Hinderaker asks, if they have no plans to honor an acquittal, "why are they holding the trial?"
- The Risk Is a Good Thing Spencer Ackerman's guest-blogger M. LeBlanc argues
that the risk of acquittal is exactly why it's so important to try KSM
in a civilian court. "But that’s just it. The possibility of failure,
the possibility that
the evidence will all fall apart, or be thrown out if it’s tainted or
no good, that witnesses will recant or prove unreliable, that the
defendant will be acquitted—all those possibilities—make it the only
kind of justice worth having."
- What About a Hung Jury? RedState's Dan McLaughlin explores the scenarios. "I'm not seriously concerned that KSM stands any chance of being
acquitted, but a hung jury? It only takes one person with extreme
political or religious views, one juror who just can’t abide the death
penalty (even assuming Obama’s DOJ pursues it). Just imagine the
controversy, if there are Muslims in the jury pool, over what questions
prosecutors are permitted to ask them and whether they can be
Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments
or send an email to the author at
mfisher at theatlantic dot com.
You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.