Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Judge Might Toss Out Moussaoui Death Penalty Case

Brian Doherty | 3.13.2006 6:16 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Apparently a TSA lawyer was coaching witnesses. The best result for Moussaoui would be life in prison, not that famous "let go on a technicality" thing America's courts are so well-known for; it is only the death penalty part that might be affected.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Attn, NYC Reasonoids: Bullock To You, Kelo Defenders! Tues. Mar. 14

Brian Doherty is a senior editor at Reason and author of Ron Paul's Revolution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired (Broadside Books).

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (24)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Deux ex Machina   19 years ago

    ...and this will be followed by a chorus of "We told you so" from the pro-Gitmo right.

  2. Ken Shultz   19 years ago

    This whole justice thing, with the non-coaching of witnesses, etc., it seems so 1990 now, doesn't it?

    "Doesn't this judge know there's a war going on?"... I can't wait till that seems so 2005.

  3. Brownie   19 years ago

    I'd say life in prison is a lot better than making a martyr out of him.

  4. Evan   19 years ago

    Ken: My favorite use of that little gem was by Idiot DeLay (or maybe it was Fristy Boy). Feingold introduced a bill that would censure Bush for the whole wiretapping fiasco. DeLay/Frist replied that it was dangerous to suggest such a thing, which would weaken our fragile nation during a time of war. JESUSfuckingCHRIST!

  5. jbd   19 years ago

    As someone who practiced criminal defense in federal court for 14 years, I can say that judges tossing out criminal cases based on "technicalities" happens a whole lot more on TV than it does in real life. So, Brian, you may be right that the U.S. justice system is "famous" for it, but that's mostly because of the understandable focus of entertainment and news media on the very rare and interesting cases. And it's odd to see a libertarian grousing about "techniclaities." Those would include your constitutional rights to protection against unreasonable searches, abusive interrogation, and the like.

  6. AC   19 years ago

    I've always heard it like this: when it happens to someone else, it's a technicality. When it happens to you, it's a vindication of your constitutional rights.

  7. Brian Doherty   19 years ago

    In case anyone else misread it, I'd like to note I was attempting a bit of (apparently failed) wry humor with that remark about technicalities, trying to imply the very same points jbd is making.

  8. methodman   19 years ago

    It really sucks that sarcasm doesn't translate well on blogs and in emails. The first person to invent an accurate Internet sarcasmometer is going to be filthy rich indeed.

  9. Ken Shultz   19 years ago

    Just in case anyone misread my comment about justice being "so 1990", I was trying to emulate Doherty's wry...

    ...oh come on! ...6 out of 7 people got it!

  10. Smappy   19 years ago

    The first person to invent an accurate Internet sarcasmometer is going to be filthy rich indeed.

    Better than that would be a way to note sarcasm in text. We've already got scare quotes. What should we bracket online sarcasm in (when scare quotes won't do)? My vote goes to the tilda (~), as in: ~My, Reason Online, what a fine Blog you have here!~

  11. mediageek   19 years ago

    "It really sucks that sarcasm doesn't translate well on blogs and in emails. The first person to invent an accurate Internet sarcasmometer is going to be filthy rich indeed."

    Not as rich as the guy who invents a method for inflicting physical pain via the internet.

  12. Eryk Boston   19 years ago

    Does this mean he's going to have to lick jelly from out of....?

  13. James   19 years ago

    methodman: that was one of the striking things I noticed about the internet and IMs and such when I got my first computer back in 1995. So much of our communication in person is non-verbal, involving tone of voice and facial expressions and body language. Yet our internet "conversations" are meant to mimic speech, not writing. Emails have the same rhythms as a phone message rather than a letter.

  14. thoreau   19 years ago

    I just hope that the judge gives him a furlough so he can attend the American Physical Society meeting in Baltimore this week. We traditionally let the paranoid crackpots give talks on their theories, just so that nobody can accuse us of stifling the open exchange of ideas. Moussaoui would fit right in among a certain element at the meeting.

    Believe it or not, there's a REAL Libertarian giving a talk tomorrow. Some woman was handing out fliers advertising that she'll be talking about the medicinal benefits of colloidal silver. Colloidal silver, you may recall, is what changed that LP candidate's skin blue.

  15. Douglas Fletcher   19 years ago

    The first person to invent an accurate Internet sarcasmometer is going to be filthy rich indeed.

    I'm confused -- was that ironic or sarcastic?

  16. Mr. F. Le Mur   19 years ago

    The judge said she had "never seen such an egregious violation of a rule on witnesses," and prosecutor David Novak agreed that Martin's actions were "horrendously wrong."

    And yet bribing witnesses (AKA "plea bargaining") has become commonplace and is A-OK.

  17. not so Mr. Nice Guy   19 years ago

    From what I get from the story, the stupid TSA lawyer was coaching her fellow employees so they wouldn't look like idiots on the stand.

    Typical, bureaucratic ass-covering. It trumps everything else, including common sense. This twit lawyer should be permanently disbarred and sent to work a Burger King.

    But yeah, I agree with Brownie. Let this fucker rot in jail, and rob him of his glory. Instead of having his 70 virgins, he's gonna get something else..

  18. Blank FOIA Form, Unused   19 years ago

    From what I get from the story, the stupid TSA lawyer was coaching her fellow employees so they wouldn't look like idiots on the stand.

    That is what you are supposed to think. The complete extent of what they were coached on remains secret, and probably includes documents (eg, tapes) that are not in the public domain.

  19. SR   19 years ago

    "That is what you are supposed to think. The complete extent of what they were coached on remains secret,"

    Yes, the judge's reaction, stating that she had "never seen such an egregious violation," suggests that the coaching was more extensive than what the media reports indicate.

  20. Blank FOIA   19 years ago

    Since it is FAA people, it is difficult they would need to be prepared for cross examination and all. Shouldn't it be really easy to testify that the planes crashed? If things are like they think they are, why would the FAA guys be vulnerable to hostile cross examination?

    I can see coaching the people who arrested Moussaoui and maybe could have raised more of an alarm. On the other hand, there would seem to be nothing an FAA person possibly say wrong now that the 9/11 Commission report has established exactly how the hi-jacking happened beyond all dispute. Certainly any FAA tapes would be surprise and trap free.

    Wouldn't they?

  21. Mr. Nice Guy   19 years ago

    I don't know. I'm as paranoid as the next blogger here, but oftimes the most obvious explanation is the correct one.

    I am quite familiar with how obsessive bureaucrats can get in covering their asses. Maybe this Martin broad got the screws put on her by higher-ups. But I still think it was to protect TSA's image against the scrutiny of the defense. And this adds yet another item to the endless list of bureaucratic fuck-ups.

  22. matt   19 years ago

    Blank FOIA,
    check out the analysis over at http://www.TalkLeft.com
    Jeralyn seems to think it's about covering the FAA's ass in the civil trials related to 9/11.

  23. Thanks, Matt   19 years ago

    Hopefully we will see some nice HnR dispatches on those civil trials. Talk Left was a little bit sketchy about them, but they seem like a fascinating topic.

  24. Isaac Bartram   19 years ago

    If Moussaoui gets life, it probably won't be long before he's wishing he got the Death Penalty.

    Imagine what life will be like for a french-speaking, Arab Muslim in an American prison.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

What Caused the Serial Killing Spike of the 1970s and '80s?

Philip Jenkins | 8.17.2025 7:00 AM

Hurricane Katrina Devastated New Orleans. Some of It Came Back Better.

Autumn Billings | From the August/September 2025 issue

The Final Vacation Frontier

Katherine Mangu-Ward | From the August/September 2025 issue

The Government Sent '20 Police Officers' With Riot Gear To Rearrest D.C. Sandwich Thrower, Says Attorney

Billy Binion | 8.15.2025 4:51 PM

D.C. Sues Pam Bondi and the Trump Administration for Replacing Police Commissioner

Tosin Akintola | 8.15.2025 3:15 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!