Don't miss Georgetown law professor Jonathan Turley's latest on Ashcroft's mishandling of the Moussaoui case. We don't always agree with Turley, but on Moussaoui, we've been on the same page since the case began. We even like his title and subtitle: Sanity and Justice Slipping Away: Ashcroft rolls over legal rights to pursue a demented terror suspect.

Here's a sample, but go read the whole thing:

Lacking any meaningful evidence linking Moussaoui to the 9/11 plot, the government wrote an indictment that reads like a bad dime-store novel, describing shadowy figures and loosely imputing their actions to Moussaoui. A central character in this criminal novelette is alleged 9/11 mastermind Ramzi bin al-Shibh, who figures so prominently in the indictment that the government named him an unindicted co-conspirator.

That made Bin al-Shibh a material witness in the case, but the Justice Department was not concerned about his being called to confirm these facts because Bin al-Shibh was at large and believed to be possibly dead. That changed last September when a very much alive Bin al-Shibh was arrested in Pakistan.

Under interrogation, Bin al-Shibh has reportedly given the CIA some valuable information, but also one highly unwelcome tidbit: Al Qaeda thinks Moussaoui is as crazy as we do.

Bin al-Shibh reportedly stated that he did send money to Moussaoui as a type of terrorist retainer. However, he also stated that no one trusted the unhinged Moussaoui for such an important mission and that Moussaoui was never made part of the 9/11 conspiracy.

Such evidence might prove Moussaoui was part of a terrorist group and even secure a lengthy sentence. But Ashcroft doesn't want to convict some terrorist wannabe with the dubious distinction of flunking out of suicide bomber school. He wants to execute the 20th hijacker and give Americans a sense of retribution for 9/11.

To access all of our Moussaoui posts in one place, go here.

The Sunday New York Times Magazine has a long, long profile of Aicha el-Wafi, the mother of Zacarias Moussaoui. Some highlights:

A divorced 56-year-old born in Morocco, el-Wafi has lived in France for close to 40 years. Having spent two and a half decades working for France Telecom, she now lives in a comfortable home, complete with deck, grill, sea view and a dog named Tango. One of her sons has admitted in court to being a member of Al Qaeda and will be tried for conspiracy in the Sept. 11 attacks. The other has written a tell-all condemning her for what he recalls as her unloving, harsh ways. It's unclear who has disappointed her more.

She also has a daughter, Nadia.

Zacaria's sister Nadia in the former neighborhood nightclub that barred Arabs. Nadia, who draws Stars of David on herself because "in my heart, I am Jewish," said he would be happy to see that the club had been destroyed.

El Wafi has been working closely with Moussaoui's court appointed lawyers, "helping them document the family's troubled history and trace Moussaoui's path during the years since he left the family." This will be important work in the death penalty phase of the trial, which for the defense, is all about mitigation. It seems they will have something to work with:

Aicha El-Wafi married in Morocco at 14 and moved, with her husband and two babies, to France five years later. By the time she was 22, she had four children, the youngest being Zacarias. After 10 years of making excuses about her children's bruises, as well as her own, she finally managed to leave her husband, putting the kids in an orphanage for a year while she stayed in a shelter. She worked a series of menial jobs -- in a factory, as a seamstress -- before starting work as a cleaning woman for France Telecom. She may have been sweeping floors, but she had secured that particularly prized French status of fonctionnaire, a government employee, with superior benefits, virtually guaranteed employment and reliable housing. "

In the Zacarias Moussaoui case, as anticipated, the Government has appealed the trial judge's order that Ramzi bin Al-Shibh be made available to defense counsel for an interview. It has also fied a motion to stay trial court proceedings in the case until the appeal has been decided.

If the Government loses, many are predicting the Government will terminate the federal prosecution of Moussaoui, label him an "enemy combatent" and try him before a military tribunal, rather than comply with the Court's order to make Bin al-Shibh available to the defense.

A federal law enforcement official said the Defense Department and intelligence agencies also did not want to interrupt the "psychological games that are being played" with Mr. bin al-Shibh, who is reported to be undergoing intensive interrogations overseas.

As expected, convicted "Shoe-bomber" Richard Reid has arrived at the Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado to begin serving his life sentence. Here is some information about Supermax, officially called the United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility ( ADX ) in Florence:

Inmates call it the Alcatraz of the Rockies. Advocates call it unfortunate but necessary, given an increasingly violent prison population. Critics call it a concept that didn't work in 19th-century America and is in danger of overuse now. In the arid, remote high desert, the triangular, two-story, high-tech ADX is almost invisible, as are its 417 male inmates. Many spend 23 of every 24 hours double-locked in an 8-by-12-foot cell behind a steel door and barred grate. Some spend the day's remaining hour alone as well, exercising in a small concrete recreation area and subjected to strip searches upon leaving and re-entering their cells. Except for the guards, there is no direct human contact.

Here is some more, from this article on a classroom website:

Unparalled in America, it is the only prison specifically designed to keep every occupant in near-total solitary confinement, rarely allowing inmates to see other prisoners.

....The ADX has a three-year program that keeps inmates in their cells 23 hours a day for the first year, then gradually ``socializes'' them with other inmates and staff. In their last year, prisoners can be out of their cells from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. and eat meals in a shared dining room, rather than having food shoved through a slot in their steel cell door.

...The average sentence is 36 years....

It is spent, typically, in a 12-by-7- foot cell. Beds, desks and stools are made of poured concrete. Toilets have a valve that shuts off the water if an inmate tries to flood his cell by stopping it up. Sinks have no taps, just buttons -- inmates used to unscrew the taps and use the plumbing parts as shanks.

A 42-inch window, 4 inches wide, looks out on a one-man concrete recreation yard, which prisoners with good behavior can eventually use.

The ADX goes to great lengths to bring everything into the cells -- books, food, television -- so that inmates never need to leave. A 12- inch black-and-white TV in each cell shows closed-circuit classes in psychology, education, anger management, parenting and literacy. Religious services of numerous denominations are piped in from a small chapel, where prison officials display for the videocamera the religious objects appropriate for a given faith.

Haney, the Santa Cruz psychologist who has testified as an expert witness in cases involving supermax confinement, said the effect of isolation in places like Florence is dramatic. Prisoners ``become extremely depressed and lethargic -- sleeping, lying on their bunks, staring at the ceiling, declining to go out and exercise,'' he said. They begin to lose memory, can't concentrate and suffer severe panic attacks, he said, or become uncontrollably enraged over insignificant things.

Here's an article about prisoner abuse by guards at the Florence Supermax.

Here's an analysis of Supermax prisons by Human Rights Watch

Here's the link to the Campaign to End Control Unit Prisons

Here's how the Bureau of Prisons describes supermax prisons.

Here are some of the more infamous inmates ADX Florence has housed:

During a closed-door hearing this past Thursday, the Judge in the Zacarias Moussouai case granted Moussaoui's motion for access to al Qaeda suspect Ramzi Bin-al-Shibh, who has been in military custody for some months now.

This is important because it may prompt the U.S. to dismiss the federal criminal case against Moussaoui in favor of trying him in a secret miltary tribunal proceeding. See here. For some background, see here .

From the evidence disclosed to date, we lean towards believing, as do the French, that Moussaoui was a member of al Qaeda but he was not part of the September 11 plans, rather, he was going to be used in some later or related attack. The evidence appears scant that he was intended to be the "20th hijacker" as charged by the Government. If this is the case, then the Government may not be able to prove its conspiracy charge against Moussaoui --and may not be able to obtain the death penalty for him. Bin-al-Shibh could corroborate this, thus Moussaoui has the right to approach him to determine if indeed this is what he would say if called as a witness in his trial--or to obtain information from him that might lead him to other evidence to support this.

We think the best resolution, as we said here,

...is for a compromise to be worked out where the Government drops the death penalty request against Moussaoui if Moussaoui pleads and agrees to a life sentence thereby avoiding the need to call Binalshibh at all. Whatever happens, it should occur publicly. The Government should not be allowed to hide behind a veil of secrecy in this case as it has with Padilla and Hamdi and the other detainees."

You can access all of our Moussaoui posts since last June here and prior to that, our almost daily CrimeLynx coverage here (scroll down to Moussaoui) and here.

There is a major lesson in the sentencing of "Shoe-Bomber" Richard Reid. It's not how much time he got, since whether he got 60 years or life, he is going out in a box. [60 years translates to 51 years actual time (85%). Reid is 29. Thus he'd be in prison until he was 80. Very few inmates make it that long in maximum security prisons, and Reid will be going to the Supermax at Florence, CO.]

The lesson is this: Our federal courts and our criminal justice system are well equipped to handle terror cases. There is no need to keep the suspects in military custody, cut off from lawyers --or to try them in secret military tribunals. Reid pleaded guilty to all counts and received no promises of leniency or other sentence concessions. Reid had excellent appointed counsel and a U.S. District Court Judge presiding over his case. The proceedings were open to the media and public. Important court filings by both the Prosecution and the Defense were available on the Internet. The Government got the conviction and the life sentence it sought.

Our criminal justice system and federal courts have succeeded in trying and convicting numerous terrorists. Yet the Justice Department is seriously considering dropping its federal case against Zacarias Moussaoui in favor of a military tribunal proceeding. It's not necessary and it's not right. We can't trust in the integrity of a secret proceeding conducted by the military. If we can't trust in the integrity of the proceeding, we can't trust the end result.

Richard Reid's case proves we can provide even the most unlikable defendant charged with a heinous crime the same constitutional rights we provide to all defendants, and get a conviction and a harsh sentence fair and square. We should insist all such cases be tried this way.

[comments now closed]

John Walker Lindh, known as the "American Taliban", has been transferred to Victorville, a medium security federal prison in the California desert, east of LA , to serve his 20 year sentence. There is an adjacent minimum security camp for female offenders. It has a lot of vocational and educational programs. The cells hold two prisoners. There is a law library and a leisure library.

The sentencing for "shoe-bomber" Richard Reid, who intended to blow up an American Airlines commecial flight in December, 2001 by lighting a match to an explosive in his shoe, is set for tomorrow at 2pm EST.

The range of his sentence will be between sixty years and life. We doubt anyone will be suprised if he gets life. It's very possible his lawyers may not ask for less. Reid will likely serve his time at Admax (the Supermax prison) in Florence, Colorado.

We think this case shows that our criminal justice system is well equipped to handle terror cases. There is no need to keep the suspects in military custody, cut off from lawyers --or to try them in military tribunals. Reid pleaded guilty to all counts and received no promises of leniency or other sentence concessions. This is a case we don't have a lot of complaints about. Reid had excellent counsel and a U.S. District Court Judge.

True, his conditions of confinement were a little too strict for our First Amendment sensibilities (denying him a radio, for example, and only allowing him censored copies of Time Magazine), but all in all, this case shows how adaptable our criminal justice system can be.

We'll be providing legal analysis of the proceedings live on Fox News Channel, between 2 and 3.

Well, it seems that despite the new coziness allowed by the Patriot Act and the secret FISA Review Court opinion between the Department of Justice (prosecutors) and the CIA/Pentagon (intelligence and military agents), things are not going too swimmingly in the terror trials. Take the case of James Ujaama-- he's the Denver native who supposedly helped an Al Qaeda honcho set up a website, sold some computers to them and "scouted" for a terror training camp in Bly, Oregon. [full details, here.]

He's been indicted in Seattle on charges including the ubiquitous "supplying material aid to terrorists" charge and is awaiting trial, in jail of course. Now it seems the Pentagon has refused to allow the Department of Justice to call three witnesses in its custody at Ujaama's trial.

As federal prosecutors in Seattle prepare their case against American terrorism suspect James Ujaama, their access to three key witnesses is being denied — by other federal officials.

The Justice Department and the Pentagon are in a tense standoff over the use of so-called "enemy combatants" who are in the custody of the Department of Defense at bases in Cuba, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Prosecutors want to be able to use some detainees as witnesses in terror-related criminal cases filed in U.S. courts — including the cases against Ujaama, the former Seattle man charged with conspiring to support al-Qaida terrorists, and Zacarias Moussaoui, the French citizen suspected as the "20th hijacker" in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the only man charged in the U.S. in connection with that terrorism.

But military officials are refusing to give the federal attorneys access to the detainees....

The U.S. Attorney's Office in Seattle asserts that the impasse is jeopardizing Ujaama's prosecution.

We understood (although we disagreed) when the Pentagon fought to prevent Zacarias Moussaoui from interviewing or calling witnesses in the custody of the military--for example, alleged "enemy combatant" Ramzi Binalshibh (aka bin al Shibh) (former roomate of Mohammed Attah) --but what's going on here that one agency of the Federal Government can't share with another agency?

The Judge has told the prosecutors that the two agencies will have to "figure it out." She is not likely to grant the Government a continuance of Ujaama's June trial date. So what happens then? Without witnesses, the case is dismissed, right? We doubt it, but still, it's an interesting development and one that bears watching.

Thanks to Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs for her track-back ping that led us to the Seattle Times article.

You can find more from us on Moussaoui and Binalshibh, and the Administration's conflicting positions here.

Some of our prior posts on Ujaama, are here, here, and here.

Faysal Galab, one of the Buffalo Six, is in Court this afternoon and has agreed to plead guilty to a criminal charge. Details available soon, check the AP wire.

In other news, as we expected, the Judge in the trial of accused sniper John Lee Malvo has refused to close next's week's preliminary hearing to the media and public.

The 4th Circuit ruled American Born Yaser Hamdi is being lawfully held by the Administration as an enemy combatent. 54 page opinion is here. We haven't read it yet, we're at work for several more hours yet, but we understand the Court ruled he had the right to judicial review of his detention and his status as an enemy combatent--but that the Court will give great deference to the Executive branch's decision.

"The court ruled that as an American citizen, Hamdi had the right to a judicial review of his detention and his status as an enemy combatant. But because the Constitution affords the executive branch the responsibility to wage war, the courts must show great deference to the military in making such determinations."

Update: Reader Stan K. astutely comments that "Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson just got himself some extra brownie points with the White House Re: the Supreme Court."

Nat Hentoff thankfully will not let up on the Yaser Hamdi case. Read his new column in the Village Voice titled, George W. Bush's Constitution: Does It Take a Lifetime to Question a Man? Hentoff begins,

The imprisonment of "enemy combatant" Yaser Esam Hamdi in a naval brig in the United States is not a matter of concern to most Americans, since they do not know of Mr. Hamdi's isolation from the Bill of Rights, and might not care if they did. But the Supreme Court will ultimately decide whether George W. Bush's Constitution will replace—in significant parts—the Constitution that most Americans are also not familiar with.

He quotes from the excellent amicus brief filed on behalf of Hamdi by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL):

Another point, this one entirely ignored by the media, is in an amicus brief to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers: [The government claims] that Mr. Hamdi 'surrendered' not to U.S. forces, but to a group of counter-insurgent Afghanis popularly called the 'Northern Alliance.' However, [the government then proceeds] to repeatedly claim that Hamdi was 'captured'—an important distinction when evaluating his legal status vis-à-vis the United States and under international law. One who surrenders before engaging in 'combat' can hardly be classified as a 'combatant' logically, much less legally."

Hentoff ends his column with

I will follow this case through the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and then, I expect, to the United States Supreme Court. Those nine men and women will decide whether the essential liberties in the Framers' Constitution have been removed by George W. Bush. It's a pity the Democratic Party cares much less about civil liberties than about Bush's tax cuts.

Hentoff is no liberal, but he is a staunch supporter of civil liberties, and we appreciate his dedication to the preservation of constitutional rights for all persons.

The issue in the Hamdi case essentially concerns the detaining of American citizens as so-called "enemy-combatants" when no criminal charges are brought, when Congress has not officially declared a war, and when they have not been declared "prisoners of war." Is it legal for the President, as chief executive, on his own to withold basic constitutional rights from these people, such as the right to consult with a lawyer?

The Judge in the case, Richard Doumar, has previously opined in a written order,

"This case appears to be the first in American jurisprudence where an American citizen has been held incommunicado and subjected to an indefinite detention in the continental United States without charges, without any findings by a military tribunal, and without access to a lawyer."

The Government may be using Hamdi as a test case to see just how far it can go. Let's hope the courts keep them on a tight leash.