Superiors Hindered Terror Prosecutors

[Dover]

AP: Superiors Hindered Terror Prosecutors


By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON — Behind the scenes of the first major terror trial after Sept. 11, frontline prosecutors complained bitterly they had not received needed help from the Justice Department and were prevented from introducing some of their most dramatic evidence in the courtroom, internal memos show.

As a result, jurors in the trial of four men accused of operating a terror cell in Detroit never heard testimony from an Osama bin Laden lieutenant or saw video footage of European operatives casing U.S. landmarks. Prosecutors believed both would have connected the defendants to al-Qaida.

The department's terrorism unit "provided no help of any kind in this prosecution," the U.S. Attorney's office in Detroit wrote in one memo, claiming that superiors in Washington hindered the case and sent a lawyer who chose to play basketball rather than assist prosecutors at trial.

The Detroit case ended last summer with the convictions, hailed by the Bush administration, of three men who were accused of operating a sleeper terror cell that possessed plans for attacks around the world.

A fourth defendant was acquitted, however, and only two of the four men originally arrested were convicted of terrorism charges. Now the convictions are in jeopardy because of an internal investigation into allegations that defense lawyers were denied evidence that could have helped them.

Whatever the outcome, internal documents obtained by The Associated Press and more than three dozen interviews with current and former officials detail how the differences between Washington and the field office kept important evidence from being shown to jurors....cont'd

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/ats-ap_us10aug08,0,1408797.story?coll=sns-ap-topus


WHY all the dodging and weaving and obstruction? The 'incompetence' and 'bureacratic bog' excuse just doesn't cut it.

[The Traveler]

1. This is really bizarre

And very difficult to explain. Chimp logic at work again?

[Dover]

2. Is it really so difficult to understand? Why do you suppose Bushco

attempted to block ANY 9/11 investigation?

[The Traveler]

3. Occam's Razor

(Hope I spelled that right.) :shrug: Anyway, the least hypothesis principle: That explanation which involves the least number of external assumptions is most likely to be correct.

OK ... applying that principle to the stuff like this makes me want to run to the kitchen cabinet for the tin foil. It is more comfortable to seek refuge in the theory that, yes, Virginia, they really are that stupid. But I'm probably wrong.

[04petessake]

4. Incompetence

:dunce:

Government incompetence is rife at all levels. Example: During the first week of August 2001 I observed an SUV driving on the streets of Orlando, FL with a Michigan tag. It was a vanity tag which read "JIHAD". The occupants were 2 males, middle-eastern-looking types. I toyed with the idea of honking at them and giving them the finger, knowing the meaning of the term "jihad", but reconsidered out of fear of being harmed in some way. I thought nothing further of the incident until September 11th. That day I called the FBI to report what I had seen, wanting to be a responsible citizen and believing that there was a probable connection between the individuals I saw and the attack we had suffered that morning. The person I spoke with didn't have a clue what "jihad" meant!! This is someone charged with taking phone calls from the public regarding all matters of crime, terrorism, etc. and hadn't a fucking clue. I, an average citizen who cracks open a newspaper once in a while, had to educate the FBI employee as to the significance of two arab men driving around in a car advertising holy war on their bumper a mere 3 weeks before we were attacked by arab men engaged in a declared holy war!

I also made a call to local law enforcement. To this date neither agency has attempted to contact me.