Hmm. That sure went well.

Capping today's news, a terrorist accused in the embassy bombings was acquitted on 284 counts by a New York City jury. His defense? He was duped into buying the explosives.
The only count that stuck was conspiracy, conspiracy to destroy buildings.
Oof. Ow! Punch. Pow!
The government's key witness against the defendant was a guy who said he sold this fellow the explosives. But, umm, this statement by the explosives-seller was suppressed. The jury never heard it.
Nonetheless, Holder's Justice Department said by the verdict, it is "pleased." Umm, wow, DOJ. How smart thou art. I suppose I should be pleased, too.
Alrighty then.

So what happened?
Well, at least one respected legal analyst says our bad boy walked because the judge was constrained by the federal rules of evidence. He was therefore compelled to suppress the statement of the explosives-seller, Hussein Abebe.
Abebe would have testified that he sold Ghailani the explosives to blow up buildings. But his statement didn't come into evidence because it was obtained by our people after alleged "torture." Thus, under our constitution, and our laws -- designed and intended to protect our citizens -- it was illegally obtained.
But if our terrorist (wait, am I allowed to say that?) had been tried in a military court, the statements would have been heard by the jury.
Because in a military tribunal, people carrying out acts of war against us don't get the same due-process protections we do. Had the statement of this witness been admitted, the terrorist man-made-disaster-causer would likely have been been convicted. On every count.
But of course, this outcome was entirely predictable.
Remember when Eric Holder proudly announced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be tried in a civilian court in NYC? New Yorkers were outraged. There was a great hue and cry. And, after several months, Holder heard them and "adjusted."
We know he did because it now appears KSM won't be tried at all. He'll just be held indefinitely in that wretched, inhumane Guantanamo Bay Bush prison. You know, the one The One eagerly spat upon and insisted -- at least on the campaign trail -- that he would immediately shut down.
As an aside, the childlike simplicity of this recent Obama statement: "Campaigning is different than governing" amuses me. This, he did not know?
There are so many reasons for keeping Guantanamo Bay open for military tribunals. And there are so many reasons civilian courts don't work well in terrorists cases.
For one thing, our soldiers aren't equipped with Sergeant Joe Friday's laminated "Miranda warnings" card, a card someone can whip out at a moment's notice while dodging bullets during battle on foreign soil -- even assuming, for the sake of argument, that these rights even applied to war-wagers. They don't.
The notion that terrorists on foreign soil who wage war against our country should get the same constitutional protections our grandparents and great-grandparents fought so hard for us to keep, is unfathomable. And insulting.
So if you want to try these guys in civilian courts, Mr. Holder, be careful what you wish for.

Labels: 1998 Embassy Bombings, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, Civilian Trials, Eric Holder, Federal Rules Of Evidence, Ksm, Rules Of Evidence In Military Tribunals