You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Fort Hood Judge Bans Evidence of Shooter's 'Jihadi' Motives
2013-08-20
[ABCNews] Lawyers representing the family members of those killed and injured in the Ft. Hood shooting rampage were outraged today when an Army judge limited prosecutors from introducing evidence, including emails to a known Al Qaeda operative, that would establish accused shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan's "jihadi" motives.

The judge's rulings could inhibit the ability of the victims' families to claim in a civil suit that the shootings were an act of terror. Federal lawyers involved in the civil suit claim that the people shot during Hasan's murderous rage were victims of workplace violence, a designation that could sharply limit the damages in a civil suit.

The judge, Col. Tara Osborn, ruled today that prosecutors could not mention Hasan's correspondence with Alwaki, an American born al Qaeda recruiter and organizer. Osborn also barred prosecutors from mentioning Hassan's interest in seeking conscientious objector status and drawing parallels to a 2003 incident in which another Mohammedan American soldier attacked U.S. troops in Kuwait, according to the News Agency that Dare Not be Named.

The judge found much of that evidence was too old, but permitted prosecutors to introduce evidence about Hasan's internet usage and search history from the time of the attack.

Prosecutors said on Friday they would soon be wrapping their case against Hasan, which means he may begin his defense as early as Tuesday.

If convicted, he could face the death penalty.
Posted by:trailing wife

#10  "Sharply limit the damages ina civil suit" = AFAIK, unless MAJOR HASAN formally admits to working for a foreign Govt,or in the altern evidence found widout any admission that he was, the only limits the victims of Hasan's rampage can collect from is agz Washington, DC.

Perhaps the Bammer has discovered another rationale for Budget, Debt-busting NEW "QE"???

* FYI CYBERCAST NEWS SERVICE [CNS] > US$2,001,093,000,000 - FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF US DEBT BREAKS US$2.0TRILYUHN FOR FIRST TIME.

versus

* SAME, FREEREPUBLIC > WELFARE PAYS MORE THAN A MINIMUM-WAGE JOB IN 35 STATES.

Espec at Gitmo???
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2013-08-20 23:02  

#9  Of course not. Any discussion along these lines might reveal the reasons why Hasan was given such a long leash.

Eggs needed for omelets, et cetera.
Posted by: Pappy   2013-08-20 10:12  

#8  To all the OER raters and senior raters of MAJ Nidal Hasan; sleep well at night you gutless bastids !
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-08-20 09:31  

#7  Yup. First and foremost it's about protecting the government...
Posted by: Steve White   2013-08-20 09:21  

#6  The judge, Col. Tara Osborn, ruled today that prosecutors could not mention Hasan's correspondence with Alwaki, an American born al Qaeda recruiter and organizer.

Of course not. Any discussion along these lines might reveal the reasons why Hasan was given such a long leash. If no one flips the rock over on this end, obviously Alwaki isn't likely to do so either. With a cork in both ends, we'll simply continue to call it "workplace violence" and go about our business.
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-08-20 08:44  

#5  All so teh Zero can claim no terrorist attacks on us soil...
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2013-08-20 08:34  

#4  Remember if it's not 'Jihadi', then it's just work place violence (aka going Postal). I suspect as well, that Hasan won't cooperate in that whitewash.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2013-08-20 08:20  

#3  Makes one think the trial is politically rigged, doesn't it?
Posted by: Threater Flusoper9823   2013-08-20 07:51  

#2  Hasan will probably bring all the jihad motive evidence in himself when he testifies.
Posted by: lord garth   2013-08-20 07:15  

#1  Evidence was too old? Is that because the trial was delayed by four years by legal ... buffalo chips?
Posted by: Bobby   2013-08-20 05:54  

00:00