Lone juror saved Moussaoui from death: report

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Zacarias Moussaoui was saved from a death sentence by a single juror who never explained his vote to other members of the jury that sent the September 11 conspirator to prison for life, The Washington Post reported on Friday.

The foreman of the 12-person federal jury told the newspaper that the panel voted 11-1, 10-2 and 10-2 in favor of the death penalty on the three charges for which Moussaoui was eligible for execution.

snip/

The foreman, a Virginia math teacher who contacted the newspaper and spoke on condition of anonymity, said she voted for the death penalty because the government proved its case, the Post reported.

"I felt frustrated," the foreman said, "because I felt that many of us had been cheated by the anonymity of the 'no' voter. We will never know their reason. We will never be able to hold their reason up to the light and the scrutiny of evidence, fact, and law," she said.

More at: http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyID=2006-05-12T070606Z_01_N11221079_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-MOUSSAOUI-FOREMAN.xml

and was able to stand firm.

He didn't plead innocent, ya know.

Might as well go out with a bang.

We wanted revenge... The target was trivial. Fuck, Nader would have met the same fate. Hyperbole, sure, revenge was #1. All we could get is a wannabee al-queda.

he was threatened with deportation, among other things. a confession under duress, to say the least.

You can't be serious.

and what does the plea have to do with anything? This was a sentencing phase of the trial - completely separate.

Oh, and calling someone's opinion "baloney" suggests to me that you have bad manners.

Don't do that. It's not nice.

Now, go learn about "sentencing phases" of trials, and come back smart and polite.

He did not plead not guilty. He plead no contest.

"and what does the plea have to do with anything? "

It establishes that he didn't plead "not guilty".

"This was a sentencing phase of the trial - completely separate."

Yes, and?

You're not listening.

Not guilty is not the same as innocent.

Now, go tell the people who granted you that law degee that they fucked up.

"No contest" is not "Guilty".

I have confidence that the jury would judge in my favor in this case, sweetheart.

We will probably never know to what extent that stun belt influenced what he had to say.
However we do know that it injects doubt into the proceedings, and executing a person when there is doubt in the case is really not a very civilized thing to do.

And I guarantee not one of those jurors was aware that a stun belt was being used. If they had known that fact they may have all voted against the death penalty.

What sham?

he WAS a bad guy, but not remotely the bad guy they claimed him to be. basically, he was convicted of a thought crime.

going down the "1984" thought crime path.

I'm not being facetious here; I haven't followed this whole thing too closely. I have, however, heard from various places that he seemed crazy and barely competent.

You wanna let him off easy too? ;)

This could easily lead to a meandering tangent about culturally relative definitions of insanity, but I don't think that road would bring us closer to the point in this case.

It's clear that moussaoui has little in common with the humans illegally incarcerated at gitmo. I share your benefit of the doubt for them - not for moussaoui.

I also think the bush admin is provably more responsible than moussaoui for the events of 9/11 because of negligence, and that a la fox news propaganda, they are hoping to market a scapegoat. I don't buy that either.

First, I'm personally opposed to the death penalty no matter what crime the person may have committed. I hardly think that a life sentence in a maximum security federal prison is "easy". It sounds like hell on Earth to me.

But as to my main point, I asked a question which you completely and utterly avoided. What did Moussaoui do? (And again, I'm trying to be facetious here -- I really have no idea what crime the government is accusing him of -- except that he was the "20th hijacker" whatever that means.)

Fuckface's Justice Department was just trying to get at least ONE conviction related to 9/11. So they found this defective and trid to make a human sacrifice out of him.

They failed. The people saw through their shabby act, and justice was done.

The guy's mentally ill, he was no part of 9/11, and now he's gone away forever.

A sad, but just, ending.

The Justice Department, however, has been shown up for the slimes and cheats that they are. Their behavior during the trial was the kind of crap that gets regular lawyers suspended or disbarred.

Just what you'd expect from Alberto Gonzales and Fuckface.

The system worked. The article in the Post was great - the juror never explained, never defended, simply held fast to his/her (no gender is given) vote, and that did it.

When lawyers were finally allowed to serve on juries here in VA, I was thrilled when I was called to serve, and I ended up as the jury foreman. I held out, too, because the Commonwealth did not make its case, the other jurors HATED me, and we finally convicted on a nothing misdemeanor - a fine - which was the proper outcome.

The lone juror did his/her job, and we should all be glad there are people with that kind of intelligence, perseverance, and integrity in our system.

Refreshing isn't it.

They say we are a Christian nation, but few listen to the teachings of Jesus when it comes to forgiveness. No, we seek revenge instead, and I believe the death penalty is societal revenge.

Whoever this person is, he or she showed courage by taking a stand he or she believed in even though it was widely unpopular in the jury room.

I'm opposed to the death penalty on principle. If there is even a remote possibility that a person can be reformed, then he deserves a chance to atone for his wrong, and even if there is no possibility, I would say that it is not right that I should have the power to judge who lives and who dies. I am making the same decision murderers make when they decide someone is worthy of being killed.

But I see the hypocrisy in all the Xians who are in favor of the death penalty.

Appeals to Jesus ain't necessary.

So I think he'd agree--whether or not he was the Son of God.

There's more than one religion in this country, ya know.

Was the word "necessary" in my message?

Personally, I've known Christians (Catholic, Protestant & Orthodox), Jews, Muslims (Shia & Sunni), Buddhists, Sikhs & Jains. Plus many Atheists and/or Agnostics.

The sentence was too severe as it is. I can think of lots of people I'd rather see in prison for a long time. . .

he should be released. There's no room for punishment, including incarceration or fines, in Jesus' preaching? Commit adultery, a relatively serious death-penalty crime in the OT? "Go, and sin no more."

It's the reason many Xians refuse to serve on a jury. Some require repentance; others don't. Moussaoui didn't repent; for a Xian, this presents a problem, and s/he has to decide if Jesus would have supported the previously instituted punishment in the absence of repentance, or forgiven the person.

In the former case, you say Jesus would have punished the person, either by execution or maybe by incarceration, although that simply wasn't a valid option under Torah-based law; but, if you go that route, you can call it 'rehabilitation' or 're-education', the difference is usually one of perspective. In the latter case, you're letting out a guy who says he wants to kill Americans.

And some people seriously want to kill Americans.
And some people are criminals who deserve to be punished.

But these are 3 separate groups, despite some overlap.

Saying one wants to kill Americans does not make a person a criminal.

I think it's safe to say that Jesus wants you to obey the law, when it doesn't interfere with His teachings. If you break the law, you've kind of brought the punishment of man on yourself (I'm thinking of humane punishments here, not torture or death).

we win.

:applause:

He wanted to die... he kept goading the jury, did every hateful thing he could short of burning a flag in court, possibly even lied about his great importance. He wanted a martyrs death.

Instead, he will rot in a jail cell somewhere, eventually forgotten to all except most of his family. If he is truly guilty, that is a far worse punishment than death. If he is innocent, guilty only of lesser crimes, or eventually truly repents, there is a chance for getting out, down the road.

that 9/11 was a horrible crime.

There was no case that Moussaoui was culpable for it.

who treated my view point as intense, frustrating, and like I was vetoing their beliefs because I stood by mine I'd keep my reasons to myself too. The verdict is suppose to be unanimous not a majority.

has that right. There was no outcry when the verdict was announced - no taking to the streets. People accepted it. I think people would have had a harder time with death.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And I know just what sort of person never forgets Ted Kennedy.

enjoy your stay!

A complete non-sequitur, and blathering RW lie, on a thread that has nothing to do with Ted Kennedy. :wtf:

who wanted a martyr's death. Its so obvious from the show he put on during his trial. He was clearly goading the court to put him to death. He was clearly suffering from delusions of granduer.

It is a good thing that someone was smart enough to deny him that satisfaction.

I guess I should have known it was something like this, screw thoes other 10 wanna be murderers they are just as bad as Moussaoui.

Oh! Hypocrisy, thy name is stupid, American 29%. :(

I the fuck can the jury foreman feel cheated? No one wanted to execute her.

??

Or not. I think that's fair. If the foreman (or anybody else) wants to know the motive behind what is, in any case, a deeply personal decision -- that's actually not her business. Not knowing saves her from second-guessing herself (or, if she's so inclined, from attempting to rebuke or otherwise bother that other juror).

I'd think that even if the jury's verdict had gone the other way. Personally I'm pleased that Mr. "I wanna be a martyr" didn't get what he wanted. (Joseph Wambaugh once observed that control freaks with delusions of grandeur love to feel they've manipulated people ... even if it means they are executed, because "to die in control is to die in ecstasy", or words to that effect.)

1- How many people did MOUSAWI kill?

2- What the Hades were GIULIANI and 9-11 families doing testifying at this trial?

3- Why are mental impairments in defendants ignored when it is convenient to do so?

to have you killed I am guilty of a crime. If I know someone is going to kill you before they do and do nothing I am guilty.

Blind faith is not a mental illness.

He made his position clear. As an enemy combatant on our soil he should have had a military trial like german agents caught during ww2.

He got lucky with the venue.

who execute criminals, we are guilty of a crime?

Even if we have blind faith in the system?

I think you've proved quite nicely why supporting the death penalty is immoral.

There is a reason that the drafters of the Constitution require unanimous verdicts in criminal cases. Interestingly, if the vote tallies are mentioned in chronological order the lone hold-out somehow picked up another vote.

Good job! :thumbsup:

--Andrew Jackson

This sort of thing happens every day. Haven't these idiots seen Twelve Angry Men?

Which story was that, where some man bargained with God not to destroy a city if he could find one honest, good man?

The US should hope to be so lucky. To be saved, and to have at least one honest citizen.

chortling over sending this crazy person to a living hell for the rest of his life.

What kind of sick society can create a place like a supermax prison? Certainly not a "Christian" one. Only a hypocritical, sociopathic society could devise this kind of "punishment" for anyone. These places are a cancer on all of our souls for allowing them to exist.

Can you imagine it? Deprived of all contact with air, wind, sounds other than metallic clanks and screaming for the rest of your life. Imagine the only human contact some guard who is free to abuse or, even worse, totally ignore you -- treat you like a piece of meat -- for the rest of your life.

Where's the justice in treating ANYONE like this? Where's the humanity of any society that could conceive of building shit-holes like these?

"Do unto others as you would have done unto you."

Even if he was rational and one of the "worst of the worst" as the fucking criminal-injustice system would like you to believe are sentenced to places like this, it's still wrong to treat anyone that way for ANY reason.


I'm glad that one lone juror had the courage to realize that he was a pawn in the government's game of scapegoat.

I'm totally saddened and discouraged that there was only one.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~kastor/walking-steel-95/ws-florence.html

"the Administrative Maximum Unit Prison (ADX) in Florence intensifies the repressive techniques of isolation and sensory deprivation. As at Marion, prisoners are forced to eat, sleep, and defecate in their cells and are allowed out of their cells for an extremely limited amount of time. In D, F, and G units (considered general population), out-of-cell time is a total of nine hours a week -- three times a week for three hours with one other person. (He WON'T BE "GENERAL" Population) The lighting is designed to prohibit sunlight: a slit 3 inches wide and 3 feet long facing a wall or rec yard and a florescent light strip provide the only illumination. The furniture is gray concrete built into white walls with drab green trim. The cells are sealed off with two steel doors, one barred, and the other solid steel. This steel and cement cage prohibits any communication between prisoners. Even contact with prison officials is limited."

"Marion is a violent attack on human rights. Florence is even worse -- an outrage! As Oscar Lopez Rivera (Puerto Rican political prisoner) writes, "The demonization of the prisoner is the basis used by the jailers to justify this place. Both the physical environment and the mind set of the jailers have been created to treat the prisoner not as a human being but as a beast. Once the prisoner is stripped of his humanity any measure to incapacitate him is acceptable and justifiable." People of good will, people who want a society based on true human values, must work to end the lockdown at Marion and now Florence."

If anyone tried to treat a DOG like this, they'd be arrested for cruelty to animals. Why are they allowed to treat human beings like this?

It's SICK, SICK, SICK, SICK, SICK, SICK, SICK!!!



--------------

On edit: Read the article. Moussaoui was sent here because he's a POLITICAL prisoner, just as the innocent Cubans and the Puerto Rican seperatists are sent to these shit-holes.