Skip to content

Category Archives: Event Coverage: Military Commissions: Al Nashiri Case

2/24 Motions Hearing #5: Medical Care

By
Wednesday, February 26, 2014 at 8:10 AM

Argument comes now on AE 199, a government motion seeking the court’s permission to conduct DNA testing on four hair samples in an FBI lab without the presence of the defense’s expert witness.  (It’s not exactly profound stuff, so we’ll mention it here only it passing.)  When that’s done, Judge Pohl turns to AE 205, . . .
Read more »

2/24 Motions Hearing #4: Visiting Camp 7

By
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 at 1:12 PM

The afternoon session kicks off with AE 171, a motion that would allow members of the defense team to visit the facility in which Al-Nashiri is housed, referred to as Camp 7, in order to assist the defense in making a sentence mitigation presentation if Al-Nashiri is ultimately convicted and faces the death penalty. While . . .
Read more »

2/24 Motions Hearing #3: Change of Venue

By
Monday, February 24, 2014 at 8:50 PM

The last matter for the court this morning is AE 187, a defense motion seeking to move the location of the military tribunal from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Norfolk, Virginia. Commander Mizer, for the defense, points the court to Rules for Courts-Martial (RCM) Rule 606(b)(11) as authority for the claim that the case for a present-day . . .
Read more »

2/24 Motions Hearing #2: Capital Punishment & Classified Evidence

By
Monday, February 24, 2014 at 7:51 PM

The next motion before the court is AE 181, a defense motion to dismiss the capital punishment referral for all the charges against Al-Nashiri on Due Process and Eighth Amendment grounds because he will not be granted access to classified evidence relevant both to the charges against him and, subject to conviction, to mitigation at . . .
Read more »

2/24 Motions Hearing #1: Things Limburg, Part Three

By
Monday, February 24, 2014 at 5:26 PM

The morning’s proceedings begin with a return to Al-Nashiri’s alleged role in the attack on the French oil tanker the M/V Limburg in Yemen in October 2002. In AE 168, CDR Brian Mizer, counsel for Al-Nashiri, seeks the dismissal of charges pertaining to the attack on the Limburg on the grounds that the commission lacks jurisdiction under . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #10: Sequestration and Judicial Notice

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 4:46 PM

There are two more significant motions up today, the first of which Navy Lt. Paul Morris presents ever briefly.  In AE200, prosecutors have asked the court, in advance, not to exclude victims from sequestration during the trial’s penalty phase.  The people in question wouldn’t be merits-phase witnesses, either—though they might wind up being penalty-phase witnesses. . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #9: Aggravating

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 4:33 PM

So what’s next?  A six-strong battery of defense attacks to various “aggravators”—allegations that, if endorsed by the panel after conviction, would call for a vastly greater measure of moral culpability, and thus make Al-Nashiri more likely to receive the ultimate punishment.  (RMC 1004(c) sets forth so-called “aggravating factors” for capital cases, at least one of . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #8: On Grand Juries and Global Norms

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 2:08 PM

Here is Air Force Maj. Allison Daniels, presenting AE183. Her motion seizes on the lack of grand jury indictment in this capital military commission case.  That’s contrary to the Eighth Amendment, in the defense’s view. The charges here were the product of a single individual’s discretion.  Well, that’s not good enough for the grand jury. . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Session #7: AE180, Part Two

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Before lunch, we were discussing the lack of narrowing provided by Rule for Military Commission 1004.  According to Al-Nashiri’s attorney, Richard Kammen, the rule broadens the availability of capital punishment.  But the law insists instead upon the narrowing of that possibility.  The unconstitutional defect—as the defense explains in motion AE180—requires the dismissal of capital charges in . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #6: AE180, Part One

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 12:27 PM

AE180 is our motion.  Richard Kammen presents it on Al-Nashiri’s behalf.  The gist: the charges in this case shouldn’t have been referred capital, because the Military Commissions Act’s sentencing scheme offends the Eighth Amendment and other authorities. This system is “fundamentally flawed,” says the detainee’s Learned Counsel, for it imposes punishments that are “cruel and . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #5: Hazarding a Vessel, and Perfidy, and Death

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 12:25 PM

Debated now: AE176, a defense motion to knock out the capital referral of Hazarding a Vessel and Perfidy charges against the accused. Those simply are categorically less deserving of punishment by death, says Al-Nashiri lawyer CDR Brian Mizer, than the offense of premeditated murder.  Mizer mentions some precedent, which has required substantial participation in the . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #4: Hamdan, Ex Post Facto

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 12:19 PM

In AE201, the defense seeks “Hamdan” credit for Al-Nashiri’s period of confinement, and thus to invalidate military commission rules that bar the court from doing so after a sentence has been imposed.  Judge Keith Allred famously did this some years back, by reducing the sentence imposed on Bin Laden’s former driver, by crediting him for . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #3: Death Formulas and Aggravators

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 12:13 PM

The next stop on our little Ex Post Facto Tour 2014 is AE179.  The defense theory here is roughly the same as earlier, but this time Al-Nashiri’s lawyers focus on capital sentencing.  In 2002, courts martial employed a more rigorous body of rules for death sentences, in the view of Al-Nashiri’s lawyers; but Congress opted for . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #2: Death For Certain Offenses

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Let’s push on to AE177, another Ex Post Facto motion.  This time around, Mizer and company ask Judge Pohl to take the death penalty off the table, so far as concerns the offense of “intentional murder or conduct evincing a wanton disregard for human life.”  Again, the lawyer emphasizes the 2002 Courts Martial rules.  At . . .
Read more »

2/21 Motions Hearing #1: Hearsay, After the Fact

By
Friday, February 21, 2014 at 10:31 AM

It’s on again, y’all.  All parties are present, including Al-Nashiri.  Yesterday, Judge Pohl explains, a Rule 505(h) hearing was held, regarding the parties’ ability to make use of classified evidence in open court.  In light of that discussion, the court has determined that, lo, a closed hearing will be required. It will go forward tomorrow, . . .
Read more »

2/19 Motions Session #8: More Jury Business

By
Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 5:07 PM

Our day concludes with a debate over AE173. The gist of this motion, says Army Maj. Thomas Hurley, is that Section 948i(b) of the Military Commissions Act is unconstitutional as applied to Al-Nashiri.  This provision sets rules for detailing members to military commission panels.) That raises the question of his client’s individual rights under the . . .
Read more »

2/19 Motions Session #7: Picking the Pool

By
Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 4:57 PM

n AE172, Richard Kammen challenges the Convening Authority’s power to select members of the military commission, come trial-time.  (This incorporates some arguments from another filing, AE117, regarding the officer’s impartiality—or lack thereof.)  So far, 37 possible panel members have been designated. The motion invokes a familiar defense theme:  in courts martial, convening officers are charged . . .
Read more »

2/19 Motions Session #6: Things Limburg, Part Two

By
Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 4:49 PM

Our prior motion challenged one charge relating to the attack on the Limburg—hazarding a vessel—and its status under international law.  Our next one, AE174, takes a somewhat different tack. It comprises a related bid to have all Limburg-related charges knocked out, for failure to state an offense.  The reason has to do with Limburg’s true status, as . . .
Read more »

2/19 Motions Session #5: Things Limburg, Part One

By
Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 4:40 PM

It’s boat time.  Recall that Al-Nashiri is charged with playing a role in the attack on the M/V Limburg, a French-flagged oil tanker, in Yemen; the episode resulted in the death of a Bulgarian national, among other things. The vessel is the subject of our next two motions.  In the first one, argues Al-Nashiri attorney CDR . . .
Read more »

2/19 Motions Session #4: Subpoena Power

By
Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 2:46 PM

Aaaaand we’re back.  In AE184, Al-Nashiri seeks the military judge’s assistance, in sending a subpoena to Jose Rodriguez pursuant to Rule 703. That’s the controversial former CIA officer and author of “Hard Measures”—a book describing and defending abuses inflicted on certain detainees by the CIA, during interrogation abroad.  Thus the issue implicated by the motion: . . .
Read more »