US seeks reversal of Moussaoui ruling (AP) Updated: 2006-03-16 08:48
Prosecutors asked a judge Wednesday to reconsider her decision to toss out
half of the government's case against confessed terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui.
They acknowledged that altering the judge's ruling is their only hope of
salvaging the death-penalty case.
In this artist's
rendering, US District Judge Leonie Brinkema listens to testimony from
attorney Carla Martin, regarding the coaching of witnesses, as Zacarius
Moussaoui sits in federal court in Alexandria, Va., Tuesday, March 14,
2006. [AP] | In a motion filed with U.S. District
Judge Leonie Brinkema, prosecutors said the aviation security evidence she
barred because a government lawyer coached the witnesses "goes to the very core
of our theory of the case."
At the very least, the prosecutors argued they should be allowed to present a
newly designated aviation security witness who had no contact with the offending
lawyer. They said this would "allow us to present our complete theory of the
case, albeit in imperfect form."
"The public has a strong interest in seeing and hearing it (aviation security
evidence), and the court should not eliminate it from the case, particularly not
... where other remedies are available," they wrote Brinkema.
There was no immediate response from the judge, but she had indicated late
Tuesday that she had time available Thursday to consider such a motion if it
were made.
Prosecutors argued the sanctions imposed Tuesday were unnecessarily severe.
The judge barred several key witnesses from testifying as punishment for the
government's misconduct.
Brinkema's sanctions make it "impossible for us to present our theory of the
case to the jury," the prosecutors said, adding that the barred testimony "is
one of the two essential and interconnected components of our case."
They also emphasized that all the witnesses improperly coached by
Transportation Security Administration lawyer Carla Martin testified at an
evidentiary hearing Tuesday that their testimony would not be influenced by her
actions.
The aviation security evidence was one of two parts of the prosecution's
case: offensive and defensive measures they argue the government would have
taken if Moussaoui had not lied to FBI agents about his terrorist connections
when arrested in Minnesota three weeks before al-Qaida's Sept. 11, 2001, attack
on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. They say these measures combined
would have prevented at least one death that day on which nearly 3,000 were
killed as four hijacked jetliners were flown into the buildings.
They remain free to enter the offensive steps they believed the FBI would
have taken in those three weeks to locate 9/11 hijackers in this country. But
Brinkema barred them from presenting witnesses or exhibits about what defensive
steps federal aviation officials might have taken to enhance airport security
during that period.
In their compromise proposal, prosecutors suggested they would drop efforts
to argue the Federal Aviation Administration would have barred small knives,
like those used by the hijackers, from planes and would have altered its
terrorist screening profiles to catch the terrorists.
Instead, they would call one witness, whom they did not identify, who worked
at the FAA in August 2001 and could discuss the government's use of "no-fly"
lists to bar specific terrorists from planes and how those lists evolved over
the years. They said Martin had had no contact with this witness.
|