Skip to content

Tag Archives: James Pohl

Judge Pohl Rules on Classification Motions in 9/11 Case

By
Thursday, December 19, 2013 at 9:57 AM

Earlier this week, Military Judge James Pohl, the presiding judge at the military commission case United States v. Mohammed et al, issued three orders that relate to secrecy in the military commissions. In essence, the protective order which defense counsel are required to sign prior to being given access to classified discovery obligates counsel to treat . . .
Read more »

Overview of Restrictions on Counsel in the Tsarnaev and 9/11 Cases

By and
Monday, December 2, 2013 at 3:00 PM

From the defense’s standpoint, which are more onerous: restrictions on lawyers in civilian terrorism cases or restrictions used in military commissions? Accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is currently challenging Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) imposed on him and his attorneys; Judge George O’Toole of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts heard argument on . . .
Read more »

10/25 Motions Session #6: When to Talk About When the Case Will Go to Trial

By
Friday, October 25, 2013 at 3:56 PM

Next is AE175.  It is perhaps the prosecution’s most hotly anticipated item, and for good reason.  The motion asks the military judge to enter the prosecution’s proposed trial scheduling order.  Among other things, the filing seeks a trial date in September 2014. “A schedule,” says the Chief Prosecutor Mark Martins, can help us all get . . .
Read more »

10/25 Session #3: KSM’s ThinkPad

By
Friday, October 25, 2013 at 12:33 PM

In our next item, AE149, the defense seeks the return of computer hard drives and DVDs.  These contain information—discovery and materials KSM and company prepared themselves— generated during the old days, when the government furnished the 9/11 detainees with laptops.  The court notes that the accused were pro se at the time, during the case’s first go-round . . .
Read more »

10/25 Motions Session #1: Discovery Channel

By
Friday, October 25, 2013 at 10:00 AM

Sox and Cards gear donned, game faces on, the parties and military judge reconvene.  Lo and behold, four of the five accused are in the courtroom, the sole absentee being Mustafa Al-Hawsawi.  He is so lawfully, having knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to be present, according to prosecution witness CDR George Massucco, Staff Judge . . .
Read more »

10/24 Motions Session #3: More Massucco

By
Thursday, October 24, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Lunch is done.  The buffet and fixin’s are put aside here at Smallwood, as attention returns to the CCTV screen, and CDR George Massucco once more in the witness stand. Prosecutor Jeffrey Groharing questions Massucco.  Generally, have attorneys been able to send privileged materials to detainees?  Yes, he says, by presenting materials to the privilege . . .
Read more »

Reminder: Hearings Resume Tomorrow in the 9/11 Case

By
Sunday, February 10, 2013 at 9:59 PM

Folks, at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow, pre-trial hearings resume in the 9/11 case.  As always, Lawfare will cover the four-day session, which we’ll observe remotely, via closed-circuit television. The day reportedly will commence with AE133.  That’s the much-discussed emergency motion, brought by all five accused, to prohibit the monitoring and recording of attorney-client conversations—in “any location, . . .
Read more »

What to Make of Judge Pohl’s Ruling? Letter Filings in Al-Nashiri v. MacDonald

By
Friday, January 25, 2013 at 3:50 PM

What, if anything, do developments in the military commission case of United States v. al-Nashiri portend for Al-Nashiri v. MacDonald, an ongoing, civil challenge to the accused’s war crimes prosecution?  The question arises in letters filed in the civil case, one by the United States last Friday, and another by al-Nashiri’s lawyers  today. Some quick background: . . .
Read more »

An Amended Hearing Agenda, and More Conspiracy Charge News in the 9/11 Case

By
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 12:14 PM

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 next week’s hearing, and adds in five other defense requests—including one to compel discovery related to “White . . .
Read more »

What the Convening Authority’s Decision Means: Withdrawal Is off the Table, but Dismissal Is Still an Option

By
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 5:23 PM

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 for any reason and at any time prior to trial findings being announced, would normally lead . . .
Read more »

Political Branch Determinations and Conflict Pre-9/11: Motion to Dismiss Denied in Al-Nashiri

By
Wednesday, January 16, 2013 at 11:56 AM

This is interesting. Judge James Pohl yesterday denied—without prejudice—a key motion to dismiss (AE 104) brought by lawyers for Abd al Rahim Hussayn Muhammad al-Nashiri. In summary, the defense had claimed, first, that al-Nashiri was charged with offenses that were not committed in the context of and associated with “hostilities,” as they had to be . . .
Read more »

On the Constitution’s Presumptive Application in the 9/11 Case

By
Tuesday, January 15, 2013 at 5:31 PM

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 Connell III, lawyer for 9/11 accused Ammar al-Baluchi.  It provides, in full: Today, the military . . .
Read more »

Agenda for the Next Session in the 9/11 Case

By
Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 2:09 PM

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 Privileged Written Communications Order/AE 049: Government’s Renewed Motion for Privileged Written Communication. b. AE 032: Joint . . .
Read more »

Upcoming Hearings in Al-Nashiri and the 9/11 Case

By
Monday, January 7, 2013 at 1:30 PM

By way of reminder, this month we’ll cover military commission sessions in both of the capital cases pending at Guantanamo.   The commission will hear argument in United States v. Al-Nashiri from Tuesday through Thursday of next week, i.e. from January 15 through January 17.  Judge James Pohl’s docketing order identifies nine agenda items for that . . .
Read more »

Recent Orders in the 9/11 Case

By
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Done with security review: four recent orders from the military judge, James Pohl, in United States v. Mohammed et al.    The first, AE60A, rejects a defense bid to uncover more information about Judge Pohl’s detailing of himself to the 9/11 case.  Among other things, the defense had inquired about the workloads and qualifications of . . .
Read more »

Procedural Orders in Al-Nashiri

By
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Last week, Judge James Pohl handed down five orders in the military commission case of United States v. Al-Nashiri—the capital case arising from, among other things, the attack on the USS Cole.   The rulings concern mostly minor issues of procedure and evidence.  Two of them (AE 112c and 113b) conclude, respectively, that the defense’s motions to “end . . .
Read more »

9/11 Military Commission Motions Hearing Preview

By and
Tuesday, August 21, 2012 at 3:07 PM

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 hear arguments fall into one of three categories. There are, first, a series of threshold . . .
Read more »

Monster Motions Hearing Coming Up Wednesday in 9/11 Case

By
Monday, August 20, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Hold onto your chairs. The motions hearing in the 9/11 military commissions case scheduled to begin on Wednesday promises to be a monster. The latest version of the docketing order is not yet public. The last one actually unsealed, however, has more than two dozen motions scheduled for consideration over up to six days. I . . .
Read more »

Amended Schedule for Upcoming Hearing in the 9/11 Case

By
Monday, August 13, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Last Wednesday, Judge James L. Pohl issued an amended docketing order in United States v. Mohammed et al.  That order has now been unsealed, and appears to set a slightly different agenda than the one Judge Pohl had set earlier.  The commission’s prior docketing order described 27 different matters, and the order in which Judge . . .
Read more »

Agenda for Upcoming Hearing in the 9/11 Case

By
Wednesday, July 25, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Judge Pohl’s docketing order, in which he adjusts the calendar in United States v. Mohammed et al. and announces the agenda for August’s motions hearing, is now available.