When we last checked in with James Ujaama, the Denver native charged in Seattle with trying to establish an al-Qaeda training camp in Bly, Oregon, he had pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with the Government in exchange for reduced charges and a two year sentence. The charges of trying to set up a terror camp were dropped, and he pleaded to furnishing money, computer equipment and a recruit to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Thursday, Muslim Cleric Abu Hamza al-Masri, who has one eye and hooks for hands, was arrested in Britain on charges of trying to set up an al-Qaeda training camp in Bly, Oregon. He is also charged in the murder of four tourists in Yemen in a 1998 incident. The U.S. is seeking his extradition and has agreed with Britain not to seek the death penalty against him. Al Masri's London mosque was allegedly attended by Richard Reid, the "shoe-bomber" and Zacarias Moussoui.

Ujaama's sentence should be up about now. From our April 14, 2003 post:

New York Lawyer Lynne Stewart is charged with terror related offenses arising from her representation of blind Sheik Abdel Rahman, convicted in the 1995 UN bombing case. She is being defended by the impressive Michael Tigar. Jury selection began yesterday, and already, the spectre of 9/11 is raising its head, even though her case has nothing to do with it.

Ms. Stewart is accused, along with two other defendants, of helping Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman communicate messages from his jail cell to the Islamic Group, a terrorist organization he once headed. She is also accused of violating restrictions the government imposed on Mr. Abdel Rahman, her client, and making false statements about her actions.

Her lead defense lawyer, Michael E. Tigar, has said the government is trying to curb Ms. Stewart's rights to represent clients linked to terrorism. Mr. Abdel Rahman was convicted in 1995 of plotting to destroy the United Nations headquarters and other New York landmarks.

The jury will be anonymous. It will be an interesting trial, and it has consequences, not just for Ms. Stewart, but for all lawyers and their clients:

Officials already seem to be backtracking on their arrest of Brandon Mayfield, the Portland, Oregon immigration and family law attorney (and former lieutenant in the U.S. army) arrested on a material witness warrant in connection with the March, 2004 Spain train bombings:

The law enforcement officials said they were afraid that Mr. Mayfield, who is originally from Kansas, might become a fugitive if he knew he was under suspicion. So monitoring that was just getting started was abruptly halted. Mr. Mayfield was arrested before investigators had fully examined his phone records, before they knew if he had ever met with any of the bombing suspects, before they knew if he had ever traveled to Spain or elsewhere overseas. His relatives said he had not been out of the United States for 10 years.

As to the purported fingerprint of Mayfield on a plastic bag in a van containing detonators, it turns out the F.B.I. isn't sure it's a match:

This is a strange story. Portland lawyer Brandon Mayfield has been arrested on a material witness warrant because his fingerprints were on "materials related to the Madrid bombings." When we first read the article, we thought it said his fingerprints were on the bomb-making materials, as in materials used to make the bomb. It doesn't say that. It says "material related to the bomb." That could be anything from letters, to books, to internet articles. Mayfield's wife says he has never been to Spain.

In another twist, the article says Mayfield once represented one of the Portland terror defendants in a custody case. But authorities could find no links between Mayfield and any of the other Portland defendants.

Mayfield, a native of Oregon, converted to Islam in 1989. He served as an Officer in the U.S. Army.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in the Zacarias Moussaoui case, splitting the baby:

For the defense:

The government had asserted that Brinkema, in Alexandria, Va., exceeded her authority by ruling that Moussaoui - an acknowledged al-Qaida member - could have access to three prisoners from Osama bin Laden's terrorist organization. The three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the government's argument. Rather, the judges affirmed the trial judge's findings that "the enemy combatant witnesses could provide material, favorable testimony on Moussaoui's behalf."

However, the appeals judges rejected Brinkema's view that it was not possible to craft a compromise - saying that written statements from the prisoners could substitute for direct questioning of the witnesses.

For the Government:

Judge Brinkema sought to punish the government for refusing her orders allowing access to the prisoners - barring all evidence related to Sept. 11 and also banning the death penalty, which the government said it would seek if Moussaoui was convicted. The appeals judges rejected the sanctions.

You can read the opinion here.

A New York federal judge Monday refused to throw out revised charges against lawyer Lynne Stewart, who will stand trial in May on charges of improperly aiding her former client, blind Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman. The defense had argued the charges were brought vindictively after the Judge had dismissed terrrorism charges against her. Michael Tigar, Stewart's lawyer, remains upbeat:

Stewart's lawyer, Michael Tigar, said he was pleased that the judge in his ruling noted that the government might have a more difficult task proving its case than it did with charges he tossed out last year. Koeltl said prosecutors must prove that Stewart knew about or intended to support a conspiracy to kill or kidnap people in a foreign country. "He laid out the path that the government is going to have to try to take," Tigar said. "Now, we look forward to getting a jury and talking about these things."

Our prior coverage of the case can be accessed here.

The trial of Saudi graduate student Sami Omar Al-Hussayen, accused of operating web sites and raising money and recruits for terrorists, begins in Boise, Idaho tomorrow.

Al-Hussayen has been indicted on charges of terrorism and immigration fraud, accused of working his considerable computer skills for a jihadist network stretching from Saudi Arabia to the United States, from Chechnya to the occupied territories. The indictment says Al-Hussayen's efforts succeeded in inspiring Muslims to join the jihadist movement.

The Government once again is relying upon the "providing material support to a terrorist organization" statute to make its case. The case made the news in February of 2003 when the feds swooped down on the University of Idaho Campus. We wrote about it here, here and here.

What's unique about the case is that it will be the first time the Government tries to convict someone for providing material support to a terrorist organization chiefly for promoting militant Islam online. The Wall St. Journal reports (subscription required):

Why all the criticism of the German court's decision to release Mounir el Motassadeq on bail? Many of the articles we've seen make it sound like he was convicted of participating in the 9/11 attacks, sentenced to 15 years and released after 2 1/2--when, if you read the small print, he was convicted of participating in the 9/11 attacks, sentenced to fifteen years, and then his conviction was overturned because the U.S. denied access to a potentially exculpatory witness. If his conviction was overturned, it's like it never happened. The 15 year sentence is void, as if it was never imposed. Now he stands charged with, but not convicted of accessory to commit murder,so the Court released him on bail pending trial, with orders to stay in Hamburg and report to the police department twice a week. That's appropriate.

An appeals court last month threw out el Motassadeq's conviction and ordered a retrial starting June 16, saying he was denied a fair trial because the U.S. government refused access to his friend Ramzi Binalshibh - a Yemeni captured in Pakistan on the first anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

....El Motassadeq, 30, has acknowledged training at an al-Qaida camp in Afghanistan and being close friends with Hamburg-based suicide hijackers Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi and Ziad Jarrah. But he has denied knowing of the plot to attack the United States....[Prosecutors] say the former electrical engineering student used his power of attorney over al-Shehhi's bank account to pay rent, tuition and utility bills, allowing the plotters to keep up the appearance of being normal students in Germany. He also signed Atta's will. El Motassadeq explained both as things he simply did for friends.

Sounds to us like a defensible case. We agree with his lawyer that the U.S. should open its files and allow the defense access to the witnesses and related reports.

Perhaps the Judge's ruling on the defense motion to overturn the verdicts in the Detroit terror trial and dismiss the case is imminent. Via How Appealing:

The Detroit News focuses on Detroit's terror trial: Today's newspaper contains articles headlined "Con man key to terror convictions; Feds initially didn't believe admitted liar, scam artist who later became star witness" and "Detroit defendants showed no defiance; Four terror suspects never confessed, were never belligerent and showed no signs of extremist beliefs."

And yesterday's newspaper contained articles headlined "Fed missteps jeopardize terror case; Federal review finds government ignored own rules, withheld more than 100 documents from defense"; "Government leaks, remarks plagued case; Ashcroft, Justice Dept. sidestep federal judge's gag order leading to trial"; and "Infighting leaves Justice Dept. red-faced; Two key figures dumped in terrorist case accuse agency of politicking," along with a graphic headlined "Suspicious sketches.

You can access all of our coverage of the trial here.

by TChris

Saddam Hussein has a lawyer.

A French lawyer, known for defending terrorists and a Nazi leader, said Saturday he will defend Saddam Hussein.

Jacques Verges told France-Inter radio he had received a letter from Saddam's family requesting him to defend the former Iraqi leader in court. The letter read: "In my capacity as nephew of President Saddam Hussein, I commission you officially by this letter to assure the defense of my uncle," Verges said. He did not name the person who sent the letter.

Verges may have difficulty meeting with his new client, as the United States has not disclosed Hussein's location. Nor have decisions been made about the date or location of Hussein's trial, the charges he will face, or the nature of the court that will hear the charges.

by TChris

A court martial may be thwarted by the government's interference with the accused's right to discuss the evidence with his civilian lawyer. The government originally accused Senior Airman Ahmad Halabi of spying for Syria, although it dropped 13 of the original 30 counts, including espionage. The government claims that Halabi, a Syrian-American linguist who had been assigned to the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, tried to deliver messages from detainees to someone in Syria.

Today Halabi asked that the remaining counts (including charges that he mishandled classified information and attempted espionage) be dismissed. Halabi's civilian attorney, Donald Rehkopf Jr., complained that he cannot talk to his client or to Halabi's military attorneys about, and has been barred from seeing, classified evidence.

He also cannot talk with Halabi or the attorneys about such topics as the case of Army Capt. James Yee, who was arrested Sept. 10 on suspicion of espionage but charged with only two counts of mishandling classified information. Yee briefly supervised Halabi when he worked at Guantanamo.

Both the Washington Post and the New York Times have some sharp criticism for the Government's treatment of Guantanamo military chaplain Captain James Yee. From the Times' editorial, Military Injustice:

The damage this case did to Captain Yee is incalculable, but the military has also hurt itself. It has cast further doubt on its detention policies in Guantánamo. It has diminished public confidence in military justice. And it has weakened its own credibility for future cases when it tries to invoke national security. For Captain Yee's sake and its own, the military should apologize for its misguided prosecution and put in place procedures to prevent a case like this from happening again.