I wonder how much information about our various National Defenses were handed over in writing to Sami's lawyers... and how long it will take for various Terrorist Groups to learn to exploit it.

I'm not just referring to figuring out a way to avoid detection as it relates to legal prosecution... but being told flat out how to operate within the United States without being caught at all.

Criminals do not necessarily rise to the level of being our enemies... and our enemies should not be treated as Criminals; our enemies do not deserve the privileges that our criminals are due. That's not just an opinion, its the law. When are we, as a people, going to face this?

Deportation would be good for al-Arian. However, it would be preferable for al-Arian to spend some quality time in the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary before he flies to whatever country will accept him.

chsw

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa... gotta disagree with you, Dafydd. On this part:

"In any event, I will be very glad to see al-Arian out of the country, having pled to at least one terrorism-related charge... which no innocent person would ever agree to do. Any faint doubts I had about his guilt will be answered if he goes through with this plea bargain."

Do I like al-Arian? Heck no. Will I cheer when his repulsive ass is booted off American soil? Heck yes. Do I think he's guilty of the offenses with which he is charged? Probably, although I'm too unfamiliar with the evidence to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt.

But does his guilty plea prove his guilt beyond any doubt? Hardly. As you noted in your followup, al-Arian has already been incarcerated for over three years. His plea agreement will probably leave him free to celebrate New Year's Day 2007 with friends and family. Even if he is completely innocent and even if he fully expects to win acquittal on retrial, it's virtually certain that he'd spend longer in prison by waiting for a new trial than he would by just taking the plea.

Again, I'm not sayin' that he's innocent. I'm simply taking issue with your claim that no innocent person would ever agree to a plea in these circumstances. An innocent person in al-Arian's shoes could very well rationally decide to accept the plea bargain.

Jonathan HaasL

An innocent person in al-Arian's shoes could very well rationally decide to accept the plea bargain.

To theft or assault charges, I might agree with you; especially if the defendant is a lowlife who had already been legitimately convicted of criminal offenses in the past.

But conspiracy to raise money for a terrorist organization? Admitting a number of facts he denied (through his attorney) at trial?

Such a plea makes no sense for an innocent man with no previous conviction on any charge at any time in his past -- who had, in fact, already beaten half the rap at a previous trial. It's unthinkable for an innocent man who held a respected position in the community, and who had steadfastly denounced the charges as partisan attacks.

No; I don't buy it. Sami al-Arian pled out because he realized that the jury was hung on the last case because the prosecution overcharged... and because when a defendant is found not-guilty of half of a batch of serious charges, there are lots of people who leap to the conclusion that the whole case must be bogus.

In the upcoming trial, al-Arian knew that the prosecutors would be careful not to overcharge or overstate their case. And under those circumstances, al-Arian evidently had grave fears that he would be convicted... and was no longer concerned with protecting his "good name," which an adquittal of the remaining charges would surely have helped more than this plea barain.

To me, that means he knows he is guilty, and he knows his earlier acquittal was an aberration that will not be repeated. That's why he pled.

Dafydd

To theft or assault charges, I might agree with you; especially if the defendant is a lowlife who had already been legitimately convicted of criminal offenses in the past.

If al-Arian is innocent (which, again, I am not asserting), his calculus might've gone as follows: "I'm clearly not welcome in this country, which has just locked me up for three years. Millions will continue to believe in my guilt even if I'm acquitted. I may as well just take the option that'll get me out of this cell and out of this country as quickly as possible."

But conspiracy to raise money for a terrorist organization?

Why not? If he's given up on remaining in the United States, why not just agree to say whatever the prosecutors want him to say to get the heck out of here?

Admitting a number of facts he denied (through his attorney) at trial?

Any defendant who pleaded not guilty and proceeded through trial to a hung jury and then chose to plead guilty rather than risk a retrial would be in the same position.

Such a plea makes no sense for an innocent man with no previous conviction on any charge at any time in his past -- who had, in fact, already beaten half the rap at a previous trial.

I disagree. It makes perfect sense for an innocent man who's already languished in a cell for three years and can count on languishing in a cell for at least a year more while awaiting retrial. Especially if that retrial might again result in a hung jury, and leave the innocent man to rot in prison for another few years while waiting for the next trial.

It's unthinkable for an innocent man who held a respected position in the community, and who had steadfastly denounced the charges as partisan attacks.

Standing on principle has value, lots of value, but not infinite value. Freedom has value too, and eventually you have to weigh one against the other. At some point, one has to ask if holding onto one's integrity by continuing to proclaim one's innocence is worth sacrificing several more years in prison. I don't think it's at all "unthinkable" that an innocent man, who's already lost precious years that he can never regain, would admit to a crime he didn't commit if it meant he could escape his cell and escape the country that's so mistreated him.

No; I don't buy it. Sami al-Arian pled out because he realized that the jury was hung on the last case because the prosecution overcharged

Possibly. Probably, even. But certainly? No.

And under those circumstances, al-Arian evidently had grave fears that he would be convicted...

...or grave fears that he'd lose another few years of his life awaiting retrial, when the prosecutor was offering him the chance to go home by Eid al-Fitr.

and was no longer concerned with protecting his "good name,"

...or no longer valued his "good name" more highly than his freedom.

You've seen A Few Good Men, I assume. Remember the scene where LCpl Dawson refused to accept a plea bargain that would've gotten him home in six months because he believed he was not guilty? Sami al-Arian does not have the integrity of a United States Marine.

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)