The lawyers’ reason is twofold, apparently: first, a possible lapse in the security of computer networks operated by military commission defense counsel; and second, the disclosure of privileged defense emails to prosecutors by court security personnel.
James Connell III, an … Read more »
Mark your calendars.
Here’s the agenda for the next hearing in the 9/11 case, which is set to begin on April 22 and to conclude on April 26. From that document:
3. The Commission will hear argument on the following
… Read more »
That’s the word from James Connell III, an attorney for 9/11 accused Ammar al-Baluchi.
The commission’s ruling—issued yesterday in connection with the case’s much-discussed “who pressed the button” episode—is not yet available, on account of the usual … Read more »
Your correspondent returns to Fort Meade’s Smallwood Hall, for Lawfare’s CCTV coverage of a second day of hearings in United States v. Mohammed et. al.
The day’s motions are different, but our format remains the same: you’ll find regular posts … Read more »
Here’s the word from James Connell III, lawyer for 9/11 accused Ammar al-Baluchi. Note his surmise that the “conspiracy charges issue” may not be up for argument before the military commission until later this spring:
Today, the D.C.
… Read more »
Fresh from a security scrub are these two items in United States v. Mohammed et. al.: first, an Amended Docketing order, wherein Judge James Pohl excises two previously scheduled defense motions to compel discovery from the agenda for … Read more »
As Wells noted, the Guantánamo Military Commission Convening Authority has declined to adopt Chief Prosecutor Brig. Gen. Mark Martins’s recommendation to withdraw the conspiracy charges against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 defendants. Withdrawal, which can be done … Read more »
Judge James Pohl apparently has rejected the defense’s bid, in the 9/11 case, to presume (subject to rebuttal) the Constitution’s application to military commission proceedings.
We don’t have the court’s order yet, but we do have this statement from James … Read more »
Fresh from the Guantanamo security scrub: an amended docketing order for the upcoming hearing, late this month, in United States v. Mohammed et. al.
Judge James Pohl has set forth 23 motions for argument:
a. AE 018: Government Motion for
… Read more »
The motions hearing that begins tomorrow in the 9/11 military commissions case is far too sprawling to preview motion by motion. Instead, we’ve broken it up thematically. Nearly all of the 25 motions on which Military Judge James Pohl will … Read more »
That’s the word from James Connell III, an attorney for 9/11 defendant Ammar al Baluchi, a.k.a. Ali Abdul Aziz Ali. The lawyer’s statement is below the fold.
Development the first: the defense’s objection to the upcoming August 8, 2012 hearing has cleared security review. You can read the defense’s arguments as to why that hearing must be postponed – it falls in the middle of Ramadan – … Read more »
Another development in commissions-land, apart from al-Qosi’s completion of his sentence and landing back in Sudan: the Miami Herald’s Carol Rosenberg also informs us (and the docket shows) that the 9/11 defendants wish to postpone their upcoming, August-12 hearing … Read more »
Reviewing the docket in United States v. Mohammed, we learn of two filings that have completed security screening and now are available to the public. Up first is the government’s “Reply to the Defense’s Response to Military Judge’s Order … Read more »
The Department of Defense has unsealed Khalid Sheik Mohammed’s response to Judge Pohl’s show cause order – in which the commission had asked the government to explain why the 9/11 defendants should not be tried separately. (At the moment, the … Read more »
You’ll recall that three 9/11 defendants earlier responded to Judge Pohl’s inquiry regarding separate trials for each of the five accused.
Of this group, only Ammar al-Baluchi (aka Ali Abdul Aziz Ali) had opposed a joint trial. His written opposition … Read more »
According to the Miami Herald’s Carol Rosenberg, only three of the 9/11 defendants weighed in on the question, put to the prosecution by Judge James Pohl, of why the men should not be tried separately.
Rosenberg reports that only … Read more »
The latest statement from the defense in United States v. Mohammed et al:
The prosecution in the 9/11 Guantanamo Bay case is seeking a gag order barring media or military commissions observers from reporting information about military officers the Pentagon
… Read more »
There apparently hasn’t been any press about this yet, but there’s a new lawsuit filed over Rear Admiral David Woods’ order last year requiring all attorney-client communications at Guantanamo to be reviewed before they are delivered to the detainee. We’ve … Read more »