Monday, May 01, 2006

Terrorism Updates—Sami al-Arian, Umer Hayat, Zacarias Moussaoui

There have been a number of small updates on terrorism cases which we have been following.

The first story is about the sentencing of , who pleaded guilty on April 14 to “providing support to members of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.”[1] Calling Mr. Al-Arian “a master manipulator,” the judge sentenced him to 57 months in prison, but since he has already served 3 years and 3 months, he will be released in 18 months.[2] Despite not being acquitted on any of the 17 charges facing him, Mr. Al-Arian said he pleaded guilty “to get out of jail and end [his family’s] suffering.”[3] He will be deported after he is released from prison, but it is not clear to where he will be sent; he was born in Kuwait to Palestinian parents, and reared mostly in Egypt.[4]

The second story is that may be released today, as a judge ruled on Friday that he can be released on bail “as he waits to find out whether he will be tried again.”[5] His is conditioned, however, on remaining under house arrest, surrendering his passport, and wearing an electronic monitoring device.[6]

Update: Mr. Hayat has indeed been released on $390,000 bond, and federal prosecutors have until Friday to decide whether they will retry him.[6a]

Finally, the third story is about jury deliberations in ’s trial. Deliberations have entered the second week, and jurors are “working their way through a 42-page verdict form that will guide their decision on whether the Sept. 11 conspirator should receive life or death.”[7] The jury has already deliberated for nearly 22 hours over four days, making only one request to Judge Brinkema.[8] The jury requested a dictionary, but Judge Brinkema refused to allow one into the jury room “saying it would be equivalent to placing in the jury room,” also warning the jury to not conduct their own research.[9] One of the jurors however, notified the judge that he had indeed looked up the word “aggravating” in a dictionary, earning him a “closed hearing about his conduct”; neither the judge, nor any of the attorneys felt that much damage had been done, and Judge Brinkema decided to allow deliberations to continue, providing the jury with a basic legal definition of “aggravating factors” and a dictionary definition of “aggravating.”[10]



[1] Mitch Stacy, , Associated Press (via ABC News), May 1, 2006.
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] Id.
[5] , KCRA (via Yahoo!), May 1, 2006.
[6] Id.
[6a] Don Thompson, , Associated Press (via Daily Comet), May 1, 2006.
[7] Matthew Barakat, , Associated Press (via ABC News), May 1, 2006.
[8] Id.
[9] Id.
[10] Id.