Terrorist found not guilty

[j-mac]

Ahmed Ghailani, was a member of al-Qaeda and one of the FBI’s most wanted terrorist since 2001. Ghailani was captured in 2004 and held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp for his acts of terrorism that include the bombing of two U.S. embassies.

The Obama administration made a controversial decision to have Ghailani stand trial in the U.S. District Court of New York, opting for a civilian trial over a military tribunal, despite the fact that Ghailani was captured on a battlefield and classified a “enemy combatant.”

On Wednesday, Ahmed Ghailani was found not guilty of all but one charge by a federal jury in New York.

Terrorist found not guilty - Atlantic City Government | Examiner.com

Yet another embarrassing defeat for this clown in the WH.


j-mac

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

Yet another embarrassing defeat for this clown in the WH.


j-mac

Yes, it's a defeat for Obama. It's also a defeat for America. At the present rate America is going to lose whatever war is being fought by Obama.

 

[OscarB63]

Yet another embarrassing defeat for this clown in the WH.


j-mac

I take comfort in the fact that the "one charge" they got him on carries a minimum 20 year sentence and a max of life. :shrug:

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

I take comfort in the fact that the "one charge" they got him on carries a minimum 20 year sentence and a max of life. :shrug:

The terrorist was acquited on all murder charges. He was convicted of conspiracy to damage govt. property. That is the same crime that gangbangers are convicted of when they tag an exterior wall of a federal bldg.

The terrorist will never serve twenty years in prison. He will be released early because he was only convicted of damaging property.

This is a major defeat for the US Justice Dept. The American criminal justice system is a joke when it comes to Jihadis.

 

[Chappy]

Yet another embarrassing defeat for this clown in the WH.

It was the clown who left the WH two years ago who brought about the 284 not guilty verdicts by allowing Ghailani to be abused while in detention and thereby prevented critical evidence from being entered into court.

And the judge, in rejecting the critical evidence, noted that Ghailani would likely remain in detention regardless of trial's outcome because of his enemy combatant status.

Plus, the single guilty verdict that the jury did return carries with it a maximum sentence of 20 years. Some justice was rescued from the malfeasance of the Bush administration.

But, more important, in a pre-trial judgment, the judge ruled that Ghailani could be tried despite having been abused while in custody.

It won't be easy going forward with other defendants because evidence obtained under torture will be excluded, but, the precedent has been established that the Bush administration has not completely undermined the American justice system.

 

[Red Crow]

Yet another embarrassing defeat for this clown in the WH.


j-mac

We can also thank Eric Holder for the outcome along with Obama. This is what happens when they are tried in civilian courts and get the same rights as American citizens. This is a circus.
Can Liberals do anything right???.
No they can't and they don't know how to produce positive and useful results.
So much for Liberal bright ideas.
Hurry up 2012!!!!!!

 

[Red Crow]

It was the clown who left the WH two years ago who brought about the 284 not guilty verdicts by allowing Ghailani to be abused while in detention and thereby prevented critical evidence from being entered into court.

And the judge, in rejecting the critical evidence, noted that Ghailani would likely remain in detention regardless of trial's outcome because of his enemy combatant status.

Plus, the single guilty verdict that the jury did return carries with it a maximum sentence of 20 years. Some justice was rescued from the malfeasance of the Bush administration.

But, more important, in a pre-trial judgment, the judge ruled that Ghailani could be tried despite having been abused while in custody.

It won't be easy going forward with other defendants because evidence obtained under torture will be excluded, but, the precedent has been established that the Bush administration has not completely undermined the American justice system.

I am so sick and tired of the same crap said over and over again:

It's all Bush's fault!!!!.

And the idiot that is in charge now is not responsible for anything.
What a bunch of crap.

 

[Jetboogieman]

I am so sick and tired of the same crap said over and over again:

It's all Bush's fault!!!!.

And the idiot that is in charge now is not responsible for anything.
What a bunch of crap.

Can you actually refute what Chappy Said?

Or do you prefer Show Trials?

Stalin Liked Show Trials...

Are you a communist sir?

 

[Harshaw]

It was the clown who left the WH two years ago who brought about the 284 not guilty verdicts by allowing Ghailani to be abused while in detention and thereby prevented critical evidence from being entered into court.

And the judge, in rejecting the critical evidence, noted that Ghailani would likely remain in detention regardless of trial's outcome because of his enemy combatant status.

Plus, the single guilty verdict that the jury did return carries with it a maximum sentence of 20 years. Some justice was rescued from the malfeasance of the Bush administration.

But, more important, in a pre-trial judgment, the judge ruled that Ghailani could be tried despite having been abused while in custody.

It won't be easy going forward with other defendants because evidence obtained under torture will be excluded, but, the precedent has been established that the Bush administration has not completely undermined the American justice system.

If someone were try to mine this statement for a consistent set of principles other than BUSH SUCKS OBAMA IS AWESOME, they're not going to find it.

 

[Harshaw]

Can you actually refute what Chappy Said?

Or do you prefer Show Trials?

What "show trials"? You mean like making all sorts of pomp and circumstance about trying these guys in civilian courts but then assuring everyone that they'd remain in prison no matter the verdict? That kind of thing?

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

It was the clown who left the WH two years ago who brought about the 284 not guilty verdicts by allowing Ghailani to be abused while in detention and thereby prevented critical evidence from being entered into court.

And the judge, in rejecting the critical evidence, noted that Ghailani would likely remain in detention regardless of trial's outcome because of his enemy combatant status.

Plus, the single guilty verdict that the jury did return carries with it a maximum sentence of 20 years. Some justice was rescued from the malfeasance of the Bush administration.

But, more important, in a pre-trial judgment, the judge ruled that Ghailani could be tried despite having been abused while in custody.

It won't be easy going forward with other defendants because evidence obtained under torture will be excluded, but, the precedent has been established that the Bush administration has not completely undermined the American justice system.

Obama should prepare himself for a whole series of similar court defeats. No attorney in America is describing this verdict as anything other than a calamitous legal defeat. Only non-attys are characterizing this verdict as something they can live with.

If the left wants to try these folks in US Courts then be prepared for acquittals in which the detainee is found innocent, but is still detained indefinitely. This will have a corrosive impact on the American criminal justice system and what remains of the American polity.

 

[liblady]

I am so sick and tired of the same crap said over and over again:

It's all Bush's fault!!!!.

And the idiot that is in charge now is not responsible for anything.
What a bunch of crap.

this particular issue is bush's fault, that's certain.

 

[Jetboogieman]

What "show trials"?

What i'm saying Harshaw, is should they just be found guilty?

Even if the evidence is inadmissible to make all of you happy?

 

[OscarB63]

this particular issue is bush's fault, that's certain.

any actual evidence of that?

 

[liblady]

any actual evidence of that?

On Wednesday, Ahmed Ghailani was found not guilty of all but one charge by a federal jury in New York. Ghailani was found guilty for only one charge of conspiracy to destroy government buildings. Ghailani dodged the over 280 charges of murder and terrorism, when several witnesses and evidence collected had to be denied admission in the trial. Evidence collected on the battlefield or in the intelligence gathering process was not permitted in the Ghailani trial.

why was evidence denied?

 

[OscarB63]

What i'm saying Harshaw, is should they just be found guilty?

Even if the evidence is inadmissible to make all of you happy?

I have always found the whole "inadmissible evidence" to be a crock.

are you any less of a drug dealer just because the cops didn't have a search warrant when they found 8 million $$$ of drugs in your house?

are you any less guilty of murder because the cop forgot to read you your rights before you confessed?

are you any less of a terrorist because they poured some water over your head to get you to confess?

people alway whine and cry about how the system sucks because sometimes an innocent person is convicted. how about all those times where some guilty POS is released due to some bull**** technicality?

 

[Harshaw]

What i'm saying Harshaw, is should they just be found guilty?

Even if the evidence is inadmissible to make all of you happy?

Who said that? No one I saw.

And if you'll take your own advice and read Chappy's statement, you'll find he's blaming Bush for these guys NOT being found guilty (implication being that they should have been), and that they'll remain in prison anyway, so anyone complaining about this shouldn't be.

In other words (as I said in my post after I edited it), there was much pomp made of trying this guy (and all these guys) in a civilian court, all the while assurances are made that no matter what the outcome, they'll stay in prison.

No, Jet, what actually HAPPENED was a "show trial." But apparently, for reasons I don't quite get because you don't have a stake in it, you don't see it that way because it's an Obama Administration show trial.

 

[OscarB63]

On Wednesday, Ahmed Ghailani was found not guilty of all but one charge by a federal jury in New York. Ghailani was found guilty for only one charge of conspiracy to destroy government buildings. Ghailani dodged the over 280 charges of murder and terrorism, when several witnesses and evidence collected had to be denied admission in the trial. Evidence collected on the battlefield or in the intelligence gathering process was not permitted in the Ghailani trial.

why was evidence denied?

you tell me...you are the one claiming it's Bush's fault. the onus is on you to provide the proof, not ask me to speculate.

 

[Red Crow]

On Wednesday, Ahmed Ghailani was found not guilty of all but one charge by a federal jury in New York. Ghailani was found guilty for only one charge of conspiracy to destroy government buildings. Ghailani dodged the over 280 charges of murder and terrorism, when several witnesses and evidence collected had to be denied admission in the trial. Evidence collected on the battlefield or in the intelligence gathering process was not permitted in the Ghailani trial.

why was evidence denied?

The evidence was denied because it was not admissible in a civilian court.

 

[winston53660]

On Wednesday, Ahmed Ghailani was found not guilty of all but one charge by a federal jury in New York. Ghailani was found guilty for only one charge of conspiracy to destroy government buildings. Ghailani dodged the over 280 charges of murder and terrorism, when several witnesses and evidence collected had to be denied admission in the trial. Evidence collected on the battlefield or in the intelligence gathering process was not permitted in the Ghailani trial.

why was evidence denied?

There is not enough info in this article to make any kind of determination. I'd wait for some more thorough reportage.

 

[Kandahar]

I have always found the whole "inadmissible evidence" to be a crock.

are you any less of a drug dealer just because the cops didn't have a search warrant when they found 8 million $$$ of drugs in your house?

are you any less guilty of murder because the cop forgot to read you your rights before you confessed?

are you any less of a terrorist because they poured some water over your head to get you to confess?

No...but if you allow those things to be used in court, then that's a pretty big incentive for cops to not get search warrants, to "forget" to read you your rights, and to pour water over your head to get you to confess.

 

[liblady]

I have always found the whole "inadmissible evidence" to be a crock.

are you any less of a drug dealer just because the cops didn't have a search warrant when they found 8 million $$$ of drugs in your house?

are you any less guilty of murder because the cop forgot to read you your rights before you confessed?

are you any less of a terrorist because they poured some water over your head to get you to confess?

people alway whine and cry about how the system sucks because sometimes an innocent person is convicted. how about all those times where some guilty POS is released due to some bull**** technicality?

your feelings don't matter, evidence obtained by abuse is not admissable. bush allowed the abuse. we have laws, and we don't get to forego them because it's convenient.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Who said that? No one I saw.

And if you'll take your own advice and read Chappy's statement, you'll find he's blaming Bush for these guys NOT being found guilty (implication being that they should have been), and that they'll remain in prison anyway, so anyone complaining about this shouldn't be.

In other words (as I said in my post after I edited it), there was much pomp made of trying this guy (and all these guys) in a civilian court, all the while assurances are made that no matter what the outcome, they'll stay in prison.

No, Jet, what actually HAPPENED was a "show trial." But apparently, for reasons I don't quite get because you don't have a stake in it, you don't see it that way because it's an Obama Administration show trial.

Tired, just finished a journey that started at 4:30 in the morning.

Well ****.

I knew they weren't just gonna release them if they were found not guilty.

Whatever. Do as you please America.

 

[liblady]

The evidence was denied because it was not admissible in a civilian court.

why not? please explain.

 

[liblady]

you tell me...you are the one claiming it's Bush's fault. the onus is on you to provide the proof, not ask me to speculate.

are you obtuse?