Appeals court: military judge biased in 9-11 case
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled (PDF) Aug. 16 that Judge Scott Silliman should have recused himself in a case concerning multiple defendants who were charged with aiding in the 9-11 attacks. The petitioner, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, argued that Silliman was biased in the matter and cited a 2010 comment in which Silliman called Mohammad and his co-defendants the major conspirators in th attacks. The court found that because Silliman "expressed an opinion that Petitioner is guilty of the very crimes of which he is accused," he manifested an "apparent bias" and thus should have recused himself. The court granted the petition seeking recusal of Silliman and vacated a decision (PDF) by the US Court of Military Commission to reinstate charges for "attacking civilians and destroying property in violation of the law of war" against Mohammad and his co-defendants.
Mohammed allegedly met Osama bin Laden sometime in 1996. Following the 9-11 attacks, he was placed on the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists list in October of 2001. One year later, Mohammed was linked to the 2002 Bali nightclub bombing. He was captured in Pakistan along with other al-Qaeda operatives in 2003. In 2006, the United States acknowledged that Mohammad was being held in Guantánamo Bay with other 9-11 suspects. In February 2008 the US announced it will be seeking the death penalty against Mohammed and his co-defendants. In January 2009 then-president Barack Obama ordered a halt to the Guantánamo tribunals, delaying Mohammed's trail by 120 days. In April 2011, following more delays, the Department of Justice referred the case against Mohammed back to a military tribunal. The matter of Mohammed and his co-defendants is still pending today.
From Jurist, Aug. 11. Used with permission.