A first look at US case against Padilla
The trial begins Monday in US court for the American – and alleged terror conspirator – held for five years.
Jose Padilla has been held in solitary confinement for five years, enduring what experts say is some of the harshest treatment of any convicted criminal in the US. Yet he has not been convicted of a crime.Skip to next paragraph
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
On Monday, federal prosecutors will attempt to convince 12 jurors that Mr. Padilla is a criminal and that he deserves to remain behind bars for the rest of his life. In their opening statement to the jury at the start of an expected four-month trial in federal court here, prosecutors will for the first time publicly reveal their blueprint for the government's case against Padilla.
His alleged crime: becoming a willing recruit to participate in a violent Islamic holy war. Specifically, Padilla, a US citizen who converted to Islam in the 1990s, is charged with signing a "Mujahideen Data Form" and attending an Al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. He also made comments on the telephone overheard and recorded by US intelligence officials that prosecutors say are evidence of a criminal conspiracy.
For their part, defense lawyers for Padilla Padilla and two codefendants will use their opening statements to the jury to present a different story.
Much of the government's case is based on innuendo and misunderstandings about Muslims, they have said. The government seeks to capitalize on fear and distrust of Islam in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. Defense lawyers are expected to urge the jury to put aside any emotions about terrorism, keep an open mind, and carefully examine the character and quality of the government's evidence.
The Padilla trial is attracting international scrutiny, in part to see whether the high-profile terror trial will be conducted like any other public trial in federal court.
The case raises other questions as well.
Can the government make its case without jeopardizing sensitive intelligence sources and methods? Will the defense have a fair opportunity to investigate and challenge government methods in the war on terror used against their client?
Some legal analysts suggest that the criminal justice system isn't an appropriate forum to wage a war on terror. Others say the civilian court system is robust enough to prosecute terrorism suspects.
His history in custody
Padilla was held without charge as an enemy combatant for three years and eight months. Military interrogators questioned him about his alleged involvement in a plot to detonate a radiological "dirty bomb" in the US and about his suspected knowledge of Al Qaeda. After his indictment in November 2005, Padilla was transferred to the criminal justice system and is being held in pretrial detention in a special isolated, high-security wing of the Federal Detention Center in Miami.
Because Padilla's military detention and interrogation were conducted in violation of a string of his constitutional rights – such as his right to remain silent and consult counsel, and his right to due process – government officials have acknowledged that information obtained by the military would most likely be excluded from the trial. As a result, federal prosecutors have been forced to cobble together their case from evidence obtained through other means.