comments_image -

U.S. Gov't to Re-Try Suspects in So-Called Sears Tower Plot. Again.

The Bush Administration won't let the facts get in the way in its desperate attempts to convict six men on terrorism charges.
April 24, 2008  |  
 
Advertisement
 

Last week, a Florida judge declared a mistrial in the case of six men accused of a terrorist plot to blow up the Sears Tower. The federal jury could not decide whether Patrick Abraham, Burson Augustine, Rothschild Augustine, Stanley Grant Phanor, Naudimar Herrera and Narseal Batiste (their seemingly delusional leader, who, among other quirks, had a reputation for wandering the streets in a bathrobe), were, as prosecutors claimed, engaged in a coordinated plot to wage a "ground war" on American soil.

It is not the first time this has happened. Last week marked the second time that the feds have tried and failed to convince a jury that the defendants are would-be terrorists guilty of, well, something. Which is pretty embarrassing if you're the White House or the Department of Justice. As the Washington Post reports, the Bush administration "had touted the case as an example of the government's ability to prevent terrorist attacks."

But from the start, the government's case against the men -- all but one of whom are in their 20s and previously known as the "Liberty City Seven" (one man has been found innocent) -- seemed a bit ... hasty. MSNBC reported in October:

FBI audio and video recordings show that the so-called "Liberty City Seven" hoped to use street gangs as soldiers who would stage attacks, ranging from large-scale bombings of major buildings to poisoning salt shakers in restaurants, Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Gregorie said.
Despite their wild claims of domestic destruction, the men did not get very far. As David Cole pointed out last fall, the defendant's so-called terrorist plot did not seem to stretch beyond ordering combat boots. Also: "Their only Al Qaeda 'connection' was to a federal informant pretending to be Al Qaeda."

So, after two high-profile prosecutorial failures, now might be a good time for the government to cut its losses and turn its attention to other cases in the ongoing "war on terror." Right?

Wrong.

As it turns out, when it comes to pre-emptive terror prosecutions based on dubious evidence, the Bush administration believes the third time's the charm. Yesterday the DoJ announced: "The United States has decided it's necessary to proceed … one more time."

It's an unprecedented situation. "Having two juries deadlocked over the same case has never happened in a major terrorism prosecution," reports the LA Times.

The two trials have cost several million dollars, including fees for court-appointed defense lawyers and prosecutors' salaries. Providing security for the two trials has cost more than $1 million, according to the U.S. Marshals Service.
"Enough is enough," said defense lawyer David O. Markus. "The feds are always saying that they don't have enough resources, so why are they clinging to this money-draining case?"
Good question. Looks like we'll find out later this year. In the meantime, no reason to be surprised. Turning politically-driven missions into costly failures is what the Bush administration does best.

Liliana Segura is an AlterNet staff writer.
submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: war on terror, doj, liberty city seven, sears tower
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
Shareholders, Top Doctors Demand McDonald's Assess its Health Impacts

By Sara Deon | Civil Eats

 
 
Republicans Block NY Minimum Wage Increase That Would Give 880,000 Workers a Raise

By Laura Clawson | Daily Kos

 
 
Why Don't TV Meteorologists Believe in Climate Change?

By Katherine Bagley, | Inside Climate News

 
 
New Book Says Teenage Obama Was a Huge Pot Head -- So Why Won't He Legalize It for the Rest of Us?!

By Kristen Gwynne | AlterNet

 
 
Pew Poll Finds Clean Energy Is A Political Wedge Issue for Republicans

By Stephen Lacey | Climate Progress

 
 
Mitt 'Not Concerned with the Very Poor' Romney Visits West Philly, Gets Lesson in Keeping it Real

By Kristen Gwynne | AlterNet

 
 
Corporate Media Stokes Racial Angst in Election Coverage

By Adele M. Stan | AlterNet

 
 
5 Things to Know About the Paycheck Fairness Act (The Next Big Legislative Battle for Women)

By Annie-Rose Strasser | Think Progress

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 2 ]