Six Suspects Will Be Tried a Third Time in Sears Plot - NYT April 24th

Six Suspects Will Be Tried a Third Time in Sears Plot

"These are the types of prosecutors Las Vegas is built on,” Mr. Turley said. “They keep returning to the table with the same losing hand.”

Published: April 24, 2008

MIAMI — Federal prosecutors said Wednesday that they would try for a third time to convict six men accused of conspiring to destroy the Sears Tower in Chicago and join the ranks of Al Qaeda.

Judge Joan A. Lenard said the next trial would proceed in “the late fall or early winter.”

In the previous trials, government lawyers contended that the men — Narseal Batiste, Patrick Abraham, Burson Augustine, Rotschild Augustine, Naudimar Herrera and Stanley G. Phanor — wanted to wage a “ground war” against American citizens and had pledged their loyalty for Islamic extremism to F.B.I. informants posing as members of Al Qaeda.

Defense lawyers asserted that their clients had been goaded into making radical remarks and vows of allegiance by the informants. Testimony in the trials revealed that an F.B.I. search of the group’s headquarters in the Liberty City neighborhood of Miami yielded no weapons or evidence of preparation for a large-scale attack.

In his appeal for a third trial, the prosecutor Richard Gregorie recalled how Mr. Batiste had been heard in taped conversations saying he “wanted to kill all the devils,” a reference to Americans, prosecutors say. “The United States has decided it is necessary to proceed one more time,” Mr. Gregorie said.

At the first trial, which ended in December 2007, a seventh defendant, Lyglenson Lemorin, was acquitted, and the jury was unable to come to a unanimous decision about the remaining six. A second trial ended last week with jurors again unable to decide.

On Tuesday, Mr. Herrera was released on $50,000 bond. Rotschild Augustine, an illegal immigrant, was denied bond. The other four had not filed applications for bond.

Prof. Jonathan Turley of George Washington Law School, a critic of the Bush administration’s handling of terrorism-related cases, said that by seeking a new trial the government was hoping to justify “previous headlines” about evidence — including wiretaps and informant reports — presented by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales after the suspects’ arrest in June 2006.

“These are the types of prosecutors Las Vegas is built on,” Mr. Turley said. “They keep returning to the table with the same losing hand.”

MP3 Audio Clips - Al Kida's Greatest Hits!

Monday December 3, 2007

ABC Good Morning America Finds Out That Pakistani Kids Believe Osama Works For The CIA

(2 Minutes - 1.75 Meg)

Wednesday March 12, 2008

One of Sandy Berger's greatest Freudian slips enhanced with classic spy music for your listening pleasure

(2 Minutes - 1.68 Meg)

Isn't there a law against this?

IANAL, but isn't there such a thing as a "double jeopardy" law in this country? Or doesn't that law apply to suspected terrorists, either?

Just how many bites are they going to get at the apple?

"nor shall any person be

"nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb"

Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

These defendents have been put in jeopardy twice already. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a mistrial doesn't count.

A "hung jury" is not a mistrial

and prosecutors can retry them at their discretion.

There is clearly some political pressure being applied here and some intrepid journalists should be looking into who is applying it.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

You're right on case law

But Galieo has a point on how whether the Constitution should be read that way:

Double Jeopardy Law Made Simple
Akhil Reed Amar; Yale Law Journal, Vol. 106, 1997

"Modern Supreme Court case law is full of double jeopardy double talk."

"Finally, consider the question of precisely when "jeopardy" attaches. The modern Court claims that once the jury is sworn, a defendant is in "jeopardy."(5) Thus, defendant A cannot be tried a second time if, say, her first jury is dismissed because of gross prosecutorial misconduct. But if defendant B's first jury is dismissed for some other reason--because it cannot reach a unanimous verdict or because some jurors fall ill during trial--then B can indeed be tried again.(6) Why, on the Court's premises, doesn't such a retrial likewise place a person twice in jeopardy--and for the identical offense--in obvious violation of the bright-line rule of the Clause?"

I don't think it should be read that way, actually,

I'm just commenting based on my own observations and experience.

I've served on three juries and was foreman on one that couldn't reach a decision. It was a case that never should have gone to court and some jurors immediately took sides in the case based on personalities, completely disregarding their mandate to judge the case purely on the facts and law.

Unfortunately, the fact that I was the foreman means I will probably never get seated on another jury, something I enjoy doing. I may go and talk to some judges about this and see what I can do.


The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Damn, how many attemps do they need to frame some hapless


Consider mass emailing truth messages. More info here:

MONDAY !!! MONDAY!!! MONDAY!!! Josh is on to something




Joshua Smith has been pointing out that something is up... up in the sky.

If one does not thoroughly LOOK, the TRUTH is not visible.

I am sorry I do not understand you.

Whare are you talking about?

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it mistake here...wrong forum

If one does not thoroughly LOOK, the TRUTH is not visible.

I Can't Believe This

There is a not so invisible political hand behind the scenes at the federal level pushing this.

There has to be.

A prosecution may be tied to pending 'Homegrown Terrorism' legislation



the best they can do?

This is the best they can do? They manufacture a sleeper cell of nitwit wannabes, then they provide all the money, the targets, the ceremonies, the supplies, virtually everything that could make this thing tangible. Now they want to prosecute the case for the third time because they didn't get the result they wanted the first 2 times. This would be a joke, if it weren't what is supposed to be America's elite law enforcement agency entrapping a bunch of borderline retards. They may indeed ruin these guys lives in the interest of propaganda.