Finding that a Yemeni cleric and his assistant had been deprived of a fair trial because of errors by the presiding judge, a federal appeals panel in New York overturned their convictions in a prominent terrorism case once hailed by the Bush administration as a significant blow to Al Qaeda.
The appeals court judges found that the defendants, Sheik Mohammed Ali Hassan al-Moayad and his aide, Mohammed Mohsen Yahya Zayed, did not receive a fair trial because the trial judge, Sterling Johnson Jr., allowed the jury to hear inflammatory testimony and other evidence that prejudiced the defendants’ case.
Judge Johnson presided over the five-week trial in 2005. Both defendants were convicted of charges including conspiracy to support Al Qaeda and Hamas, and were sentenced to long prison terms.
Even before the trial, the case received wide attention when the government’s chief witness, a Yemeni informer, set himself on fire outside the White House. And in 2003, when John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, announced the charges against Sheik Moayad, he said the sheik had admitted to having given Osama bin Laden $20 million before the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
The three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in Manhattan, ruled that Judge Johnson erred in allowing the jury to hear evidence like the graphic testimony of a survivor of a fatal 2002 bus bombing in Tel Aviv, in which the defendants had not been implicated. Prosecutors had said the testimony was necessary to establish that the defendants knew that Hamas, which claimed responsibility for the bombing, engaged in terrorist activity, a point the defendants did not dispute.
Judge Barrington D. Parker Jr., writing for the appellate panel, said that the bombing, which killed six people, “was almost entirely unrelated” to the charges.
The appeals panel sent the case back to the lower court, Federal District Court in Brooklyn, but in a highly unusual step, directed that it be assigned to a different judge.
(Source: NY Times)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
12 Responses
There has to be something we can do to stop our liberal justice system. Everytime one judge does the right thing, it is thrown out in appeal. The worst circuit courts are PA (including NJ), NY and Calif. The Supreme Court is sometimes just as bad. Can we impeach these Judges due to lack of morals? At least stop giving them Kovod -why invite a Supreme Court Justice to the Agudah convention. They never overturned Roe vs. Wade or TWA v. Hardison. Both of these are K’neged the Torah & basic Judaism! And this is with a supposed Conservative Supreme Court.
#2:
1) Our justice system does strive to have rules of evidence, so tell me the rule that applies in this case to calling for a mistrial due to “allowing jurors to hear inflammatory testimony”. Why was it not valid to say, “Strike that comment from the record”? And please explain what kind of evidence “prejudices” the case? Does not all evidence persuade one way or the other? At what point was the prejudice claim appropriate?
2) You misunderstood the context of the poster which affects my trust of your understanding of this case. Torah principles are the cornerstone of American law. Of course, not line for line or word for word, but the “genetic” lineage is certainly evident. Considering this fact, the poster was contrasting that a conservative court, usually in line with Torah values, from where such views originate in American law, should have ruled in more of a proper way.
The bottom line is, and you have to agree, is that there is corruption in the legal system and any judge can slant any court documents in a way another judge would not.
Keep in mind, our justice system is part of the govermental system which is “of the people, for the people, and by the people.” And that includes Jews without doubt. I would imagine whatever your religion is, if you have a religion, that Torah, albeit misunderstood in another religion’s case, is at the root of its’ values and even yours. You are just ignorant of that fact.
to illini07..no matter how ‘right’ you are you are always on the wrong side..we have yet to see you should so vehemently fight for dass torah as you fight for every anti torah views with your excuses ‘we are in US’..we have gone thru all your postings from dec,non ziltch..so your are covering up for torah jews hate with this excuse..remeber ‘crown heights man..’ article with your non-excuse excuse..remember your vow not to respond, now keep your word !!
to #4illini07 your last line is pure kefira..
To Charlie Hall & Illini07,
You two seemed to be well versed in american law, but not the Torah. No one said these Judges broke any American Law with their decision. BTW, just because they were appointed by Bush- they can’t have liberal views? What you seem to be missing is that even though you learnt in College Philosophy 101 that you can have morals without religion- We Torah Jews don’t believe in that philosophy. Since they can judge differently and they don’t- this is because they are liberal. The original Judge had no problem with the testimony, just these clowns did. I know the presiding Judge knows more law than you Two. So if it isn’t so clear cut like you want us to believe, why was it overturned if not because of their liberal views? Yes, they don’t have to follow our torah but they are allowed to. And Jews like you, instead of defending their behavior should be shouting how disgusting their behavior is!
To Illini07,
I’ll try to answer you in your order.
To the first paragraph- I’ll repeat what I said -I also took Phil. 101 in college. I know that some goyim believe that there is morals without religion – We Torah Jews do NOT proscribe to that philosophy, whether it is logical or not!
Your 2nd: My theory is that there has to be an underlying reason why they went out of their way to overturn this case and that is because of their liberal thinking. You have tried to post the reason because it was clearly against the rules. This is a non-argument because any half-wit will tell you that if it was clearly against the rules, the presiding Judge would never have allowed it.
To the third one, You sound like a lawyer or someone like me who has been in court. The mistakes that appellate courts overturn are mistakes in interpretation or knowledge of law. Here was a case of interpretation. Why do you think the presiding judge interpreted the law differently than the appeals court? I believe it is in their way of thinking. The appeals court are liberal thinkers.
To the fourth one, Your statement is totally false even according to them. A true statement would be they can’t follow anything, whether it would be Torah or anything else, if it clearly contradicts the law. This is definitely not the case here, just ask the trial Judge.
To your last one, As Torah Jews we believe that goyim have 7 mitzvos bnai noach. This case is one of them -they support murderers. Any Torah Jew should be up in arms what this court did! The only excuse would be if it was something clearly against written or case law, then the court could say- it wasn’t me, it was him. Like I said before this was an interpretation case; anybody who supports this decision is as bad as this Court!
Replying to your last – You obviously don’t understand that just because a theory can’t be proven doesn’t make it illogical or false. I don’t have any proof that the first court’s reasoning was based on conservative thinking nor do I have any proof that the circuit court’s reasoning was based on liberal thinking. This is just my opinion. Again you repeat the illogical defense of their judgement was because they were just following the rules of procedure. They actually were following their interpretation of the rules of procedure. Their interpretation of the rules and subsequently their decision flies in the face of anyone with morals even ones who have morals not based on religion! I sincerely hope one day you’ll wake up and realize what these liberals do (or call them anything you want if you don’t like my definition of liberal) has eroded any sense of normalacy or justice in this country!
To illini07,
The truth finally came out, you’re partial to the judge. The Torah says “Bribery blinds smart people”. This bribery includes being a relative & it could include friends. But, because you suggested it, I skimmed through 68 pages of their opinion. I am now more than ever convinced that they are sick liberals. Poor terroist, Poor Hamas -they need money so they can kill Jews. The trial judge didn’t even let them see any bodies or maimed or injured people. All the jury saw was pictures of the bus with some blood stains in it. They also heard testimony from a survivor. Acc. to your friends the judges -even a little blood stains is going to make the jury so emotional that they found two innocent guys guilty. Poor muslims. Gimme a break – these LIBERAL Judges are almost as bad as the terrorists they protect. Please don’t respond anymore – because the more you respond- the more pathetic you look!
Dear Ill,
What is with you that you can’t stop defending these Judges? I did read some portions of all of it. Please tell me how you justify this thinking of – Jury saw a few blood stains, so now they are prejudice. Any normal thinking person will tell you this is absurd. I’m sure you believe OJ is innocent because that is what the jury ruled. And even if they do try these losers again, I’m sure your friends in the circuit court will find another reason to let them go. I wish you a refuah shlaimah and all these wicked people who protect these animals (even under the pretense of upholding our dear laws & constituion)should be destroyed in this new year. And we should be zocheh to see Moshiach quickly and in our days.
Dear Ill,
The only emotion that I’m clouded with is that I live in a country where Judges legislate from the bench. You know that wasn’t the purpose of our constituion for them to rewrite laws.
BTW, which law or rule states that if you stipulate to something and you bring it into testimony anyway with the permission of the presiding judge that you must declare a mistrial?
You’re in some sort of dream world.
You still haven’t answered my question- what made them predjudice – a few blood stains? Do these judges live in the US or some dream world like you? Do you even know how many acts of violence the avg. kid sees by the time he grows up?
And BTW if they were funding an org. that I like (eg. the KKK, JDL) and they were found guilty and then it was thrown out by the appeals court- I still would curse out the appeals court. These and other sick Judges have destroyed America. This is not just my opinion, the Reader’s Digest writes tons of articles on the sorry state of our Judicial system!
Mr. Ill,
Did your friend the circuit judge tell you that lie or is this something you dreamt up yourself? I hope you really don’t believe that the jury was shown the bus just to inflame & incense them. If this really was the case -why didn’t the judge show them the gory & graphic pictures (you know the ones with dead bodies and victim’s body parts)? Those pictures would do a lot better job of inflaming & incensing the jury.
BTW, I didn’t say this case was a case of legislating from the bench; the TWA case where they said you don’t have to accommodate religious beliefs if there is undue hardship is a case of legislating from the bench. I’m waiting with baited breath for your non-sensical reply. And by the way if they wanted to even things out for the employer, why didn’t they define what “undue hardship” means? More than “de minimis” is not a concrete definition. So what happened is- any Judge out there creates their own definition. But you’re right this not legislating from the bench!
Ill,
You’re the type of person that in a murder case in criminal court if they found the person guilty you would appeal on the grounds that the prosecution inflamed & incensed the jury. Why- “The prosecution didn’t have to show the jury the victim with all those bullet holes; we the defense have stipulated that it was true.”
Common sense is something they don’t teach in law school, just that it’s all about winning. Unfortuantly, this type of thinking is way too prevalent in our “Justice System”. Debunk your goyishe way of thinking and come back to the Torah.