Jury Trials

Today in federal court, a jury acquitted accused terrorist Ahmed Ghailani of 280 counts related to the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The jury convicted him of one count of conspiracy to blow up a government building, which carries a sentence of 20 years to life imprisonment.

Leave aside the fact that this was a show trial – our government planned to imprison Ghailani indefinitely, even if he was acquitted on all counts. The prosecution was hindered when the judge excluded a witness that our government discovered by torturing Ghailani. That ruling sent our growing cadre of authoritarians into a tizzy. No less than George Pataki, former governor of the state of New York and a potential republican presidential candidate, appeared on MSNBC to denounce the decision to tri Ghailani in federal court, rather than before a military tribunal - where the rules of evidence are more “flexible.”

Of course, Governor Pataki was misinformed. The evidentiary rules for military tribunals exclude evidence obtained by coercion or torture, just as the federal rules of evidence do. Far more disturbing was Governor Pataki’s eagerness to introduce evidence obtained by government torture. “Convictions at all costs” appears to be his motto. As long as government officials say you’re a terrorist, due process be damned. And Pataki is not alone. Scads of rightwing authoritarians joined his chorus.

What’s remarkable about this phenomenon is that those who embrace this motto most sincerely consider themselves to be uber-patriots who worship liberty above all else. They fulminate against the threat of “big government” seizing our “liberties” 24 hours a day (on Fox). Yet these same uber-patriots howl that our Justice Department would tri Ghailani in federal court before a judge that excluded evidence that the government obtained by torture.

Imagine that. Self described “patriots” complaining that our government is not allowed to win by torture. “Lovers of liberty” and “defenders against government tyranny,” complaining about the use of a jury. A jury! Doesn’t anyone remember that the accused’s right to a jury trial is the key limitation on executive power – the key constraint against government tyranny?

Look how far we’ve come in 10 short years. Wonder where we’ll be ten more years down the road.

Joe H.