Terrorists Win: Judge Declares Mistrial in Holy Land Case

October 22, 2007 · Filed Under Crime, Legal News, Terrorism, Terrorists

The federal government’s strategy for prosecuting alleged terrorist fund-raising in America is faltering after jurors failed to agree on most charges against five officials of what was once America’s largest Muslim charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development.

Judge Allen Joe Fish declared a mistrial on the bulk of the charges following a morning of confusing proceedings in which the jury returned written verdicts of not guilty on some counts, but three jurors told the judge that they disagreed with what was recorded on the verdict forms after 19 days of deliberations.

Ghassan Elashi, Shukri Abu Baker, Mufid Abdulqater, Abdulrahman Odeh, and Mohammed el-Mezain, each faced more than two dozen counts, including conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist group, namely, Hamas, conspiracy to evade an embargo, and money laundering. Some individual counts carried potential prison terms of up to 20 years, meaning that the men faced the possibility of life in prison if convicted.

The verdict sheets indicated that the jury could reach no agreement regarding the guilt or innocence of the two highest ranking foundation officials in the dock: Elashi, the foundation’s chairman, and Mr. Abu Baker, the charity’s secretary and chief executive officer. The jury also failed to reach any verdicts on the Holy Land Foundation itself, which was also charged as a defendant.

This is exactly the reason that terrorism cases should not be prosecuted in a civilian court. It’s politically correct to say how great jurors are and all that, but it’s just not true.

Our jury system is the best in the world, but most jurors are morons and have no business deciding the outcome of a complicated terrorism trial.

-Chris Jones