Posted on 03/17/2006 3:23:20 PM PST by Cboldt
Prosecutors in the trial of al-Qaeda loyalist Zacarias Moussaoui will be allowed to present new witnesses about aviation security after the first witnesses were compromised, a federal judge ruled Friday.
Judge Leonie Brinkema initially decided to exclude all aviation security evidence after it was revealed earlier this week that lawyer Carla Martin had improperly contacted officials from the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) who were witnesses for the case.
But she partially reversed that decision Friday and said prosecutors could present exhibits and a witness or witnesses if they had no contact with Martin.
Moussaoui is on trial to see if he will be executed or get life in prison. Prosecutors had said their case would be severely hampered if they were not allowed to present some evidence about defensive aviation security measures leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbc.ca ...
Cue the Bart "Eat my shorts" pic
Follow up with the "HA HA" pic for good measure.
"Prosecutors had said their case would be severely hampered if they were not allowed to present some evidence about defensive aviation security measures leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."
The "FAA-It's Not Our Fault" show trial drags on..
By DAVID B. CARUSO - Associated Press Writer
March 17, 2006, 5:34 PM ESTNEW YORK -- A federal judge overseeing civil lawsuits related to the Sept. 11 attacks refused Friday to investigate whether those cases may have been tainted by a government attorney whose actions have come under scrutiny in the Zacarias Moussaoui trial.
Judge turns down tampering probe in 9/11 civil case -- Newsday.com
I'm so confused about this whole trial. The dude has stated that he was training to be a terrorist, that he wanted to be a terrorist, and that he still wants to kill americans.
And yet we have a judge who wants to stand in the way of his execution.
To me thats giving aid and comfort to the enemy so we ought to bring the judge up on sedition.
Only somewhat joking.
The defense is filing today a Motion to Reconvene the Evidentiary Hearing that was conducted on Tuesday, March 14, 2006. The purpose of the Motion is to attempt to complete the record as Mr. Howard has publicly indicated that Ms. Martin did not act alone, and that she is willing to tell the complete story regarding her conduct in this matter.I am therefore requesting that Ms. Martin be available to testify at the evidentiary hearing which we will suggest to Judge Brinkema be conducted after the conclusion of the taking of evidence on Monday the March 20, 2006. If we are informed that she will be produced we will not go through the effort and expense of subpoenaing her for the hearing.
http://notablecases.vaed.uscourts.gov/1:01-cr-00455/docs/71874/0.pdf
Yeah, it caught my eye that three filings had already been made since her ruling.
well, her lawyer had to defend her reputation, but he should have been more circumspect in his remarks. It won't do her reputation any good if his remarks are the straw that broke the case's back, so to speak.
Having been rejected as a juror for a death penalty case, I now expect him to get life from the jury because of the mess.
Check this out: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20060317/D8GD4IC8K.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.