Liberty City 7 retrial

It's now the Liberty City 6, and the retrial starts today, three weeks after the jury hung in the last trial.

Here's coverage by the Herald and AP. What do you think is going to happen? Another mistrial? That's what some of the jurors from trial #1 think (from Jay Weaver's article):

''From now on, they are going to have a hung jury just as we did,'' said Jose Viola, 58, an audio-visual technician for Miami-Dade public schools, who sat on the first panel and thought all of the defendants were innocent.
''There are going to be people who won't have the stomach to send these men to prison because they were set up,'' Viola said. ``And there are going to be people who will want to send them to prison because of al Qaeda.''
Delorise Thompkins, 64, who works at South Miami Hospital, agreed with her colleague on the first jury.
''I think it may hang again,'' she said. ``You're going to find someone always afraid of terrorist groups, but then when you see the evidence, there's not a lot there -- no plans, no papers, no pictures, no nothing, connecting them to Osama bin Laden.''

If that happens, will they go for trial #3?

And while Liberty City starts up, the Padilla sentencing starts Tuesday. Here's Vanessa Blum's coverage.

Jose Padilla sentencing postponed

Due to a death in Judge Cooke's family, the Jose Padilla sentencing has been postponed until January. Our condolences to Judge Cooke and her family during this time.

Padilla co-defendant attempts suicide at FDC

Jay Weaver is reporting here that Jose Padilla co-defendant Adham Amin Hassoun attempted suicide last week at the Federal Detention Center. Sentencing on Padilla, Hassoun, and Jayoussi was supposed to begin tomorrow, but we're told that it has been pushed off until January.

In other news, the Liberty City 7 jury has the case (via Vanessa Blum). Over/under on verdict? As with the Padilla verdict, I say verdicts by the end of the week. (Rumpole never did send me my check...)

What is the appropriate sentence for Jose Padilla?

Judge Cooke is tasked with sentencing Jose Padilla next week. The Government is asking for life. The defense is asking for something much less.

Should Padilla get credit for time served in the brig?
Should he get extra credit because of his treatment?
Should the judge consider the fact that Padilla will likely serve his time at the worst federal prison in America -- ADX Florence?

Here is Caruso on that last point -- from the defense memo:

"By the Bureau of Prisons own admission, ADX Florence is 'hell.' Surely the Court, in arriving at a just sentence for Mr. Padilla, should take into account that he will serve his sentence in hell."

Now that's powerful stuff.

"You don't have to be crazy to be a criminal defense lawyer in this town- but it helps!!!!"

Jack Blumenfeld, a long-time criminal defense lawyer in Miami, who has represented Jose Battle, Sr. and one of the "Cuban spies", emailed us last night regarding the Padilla verdict and how criminal defense lawyers suffer from disease where you convince yourself that you have a shot at a NG verdict in impossible cases. With permission, we reprint his email here:

If you want to talk to some lawyers to get an idea what the defense is going through, talk to [the Cuban Spy lawyers] about the effect on us when the Cuban Spy jury came back with guilty verdicts. We may have been the only 5 people in Dade County who thought that we could win a NG for Cuban spies in Miami- and that included the defendants, all 5 of whom knew what the outcome would be. I think judge Lenard saw the devastation on our faces, as she cleared the courtroom and had the doors locked, so we could partially recover. Ironically, the defendants were consoling the lawyers. I was in a daze for a week.

These people will go through the same thing. It happens when you ABSOLUTELY know you won the trial but lost the verdict. Cuban Spies- Alleged AQ members- and we all fought our hearts out for a NG- doesn't that make you feel great you chose criminal defense? You don't have to be crazy to be a criminal defense lawyer in this town- but it helps!!!!

Jose Padilla verdicts

Well, there will now be a bunch of articles from the MSM about the verdict (with the scripts depending on what side you're on).

Here is what I saw in the courtroom and my initial reaction:

1. Court security officers were insufferable. It was almost impossible to get into the courtroom. This is the biggest trial and verdict in the country right now and you can barely get in the courthouse! Silly.

2. The media is not permitted to have cell phones with them in the courtroom. After the verdicts were read, no one was allowed out of the courtroom for a couple minutes. I don't know how CNN and the AP got the articles up so quickly. It's a neat trick.

3. My cell phone crashed with all the people text messaging me and emailing me to post the verdicts. So my post was a couple minutes late, after my phone rebooted!

4. The defense lawyers' voices were all cracking as they asked for more time to file post-trial motions. I feel so bad for them right now. To put your life into a case for years and to have a 5 month trial and then to have the verdict so quickly is horrible. My heart goes out to these lawyers...

5. Sentencing is set for December 5. The defendants will be interviewed by the probation office, who will prepare a presentence investigation report for the judge. It will detail the defendants' history and the guideline ranges. Based on the verdicts, I believe the guideline range is life.

6. The appellate process. The defense has some interesting issues, which I will detail in another post. This will take time -- about a year after sentencing. We're looking at late 2008 or early 2009.

7. The government. Congratulations to the government lawyers. They fought hard and won and deserve credit for their victory. After the verdicts were read, they all shook hands and walked out of the courthouse through the back entrance to avoid the press. I'm sure DOJ will have a press conference later, but these trial lawyers deserve the credit.

8. Judge Cooke and her chambers. I'm sure they are thrilled to have this trial behind them. Oftentimes, we all forget how hard the court personnel work on these trials. Congrats to them. Go have a beer...

Michael Caruso closes for Jose Padilla

I wasn't able to attend the closing arguments today, but reports back tell me that Padilla's lawyer, Michael Caruso, was incredible.

The initial AP coverage here.

I like the strong start:

"For five years, Jose Padilla has waited for this day," defense attorney Michael Caruso told jurors. "The day we could stand before you and ask for justice."

Then jabbing the government, while trying to humanize Padilla:

Some of his argument was delivered in front of a large screen featuring bright pictures of a smiling Padilla with two of his children, in stark contrast to the dark photo used by prosecutors of Padilla wearing a traditional Arab headdress.
Padilla's mother, Estela Lebron, looked on from a back row in the courtroom.
"They picked this picture to scare you, to instill fear," Caruso said.

And the theme, simple but strong:

"His intent was to study, not to murder," Caruso said.

What about the form:

The critical piece of physical evidence is a "mujahedeen data form" Padilla allegedly filled out in July 2000 to attend an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan. The form bears seven of Padilla's fingerprints, but Caruso said they are only found on the first page and the back of the final page - consistent with Padilla simply handling the form, rather than writing on it.
"It raises more questions than answers," Caruso said.

Similar defenses from the co-defendants' lawyers:

"Dr. Jayyousi wasn't buying bullets. Dr. Jayyousi wasn't buying ammunition. Dr. Jayyousi wasn't sending fighters over there," Swor said. "Dr. Jayyousi was providing relief."
Similar arguments were made Monday by lawyers for Hassoun, a Palestinian born in Lebanon who overstayed his U.S. visa and could be deported if found innocent or after his release from prison.
"Their passion was relief," Hassoun lawyer Kenneth Swartz said.

Now it's in the jury's hands. This is the worst time for trial lawyers, no? As soon as there is a verdict, we'll let you know.

BTW, what's with good reporters still referring to Padilla's lawyer as Andy Patel? He hasn't been Padilla's lawyer in a long time...

UPDATE -- more from Caruso's closing via the NYTimes and Reuters.

The challenge is issued:

“I defy the government to somehow argue that Jose had the intent to commit cold-blooded murder,” Mr. Caruso said.

It was important throughout the trial to distance Padilla from the other two defendants:

On Tuesday, Mr. Caruso sought to disassociate Mr. Padilla from the other defendants. The government secretly recorded thousands of their phone conversations from 1993 to 2001.
Mr. Padilla participated in seven wiretapped conversations presented at trial.
Prosecutors say Mr. Hassoun and Mr. Jayyousi used code words like “football” and “zucchini” to discuss plans to help violent jihad in places like Chechnya, Kosovo and Somalia. But, Mr. Caruso reminded jurors, they never said Mr. Padilla used such code.
Mr. Caruso also made a point of contrasting Mr. Padilla with the other defendants, emphasizing that he was younger, had less education and was a recent convert to Islam who did not speak fluent Arabic.
He even described Mr. Padilla as “slow” and reminded the jury that Mr. Padilla had worked at a Chicken Plus fast-food restaurant in Broward County before leaving for Egypt.
“These men are more different than they are alike,” Mr. Caruso said.

More re the form:

He conceded that seven of Mr. Padilla’s fingerprints were on the document, which the C.I.A. recovered in Afghanistan in 2001. But the fingerprints are on just the first page and the back of the last page, suggesting, Mr. Caruso said, that Mr. Padilla had merely handled the form, and had not filled it out.
He also pointed out that a palm print was found next to the signature line on the form, but that the government never requested Mr. Padilla’s palm print to see whether it matched.
“They were not trying to find the truth,” Mr. Caruso said. “They were trying to create a case.”

And finally, don't convict because of security:

"We don't achieve security by bringing these types of charges on this type of evidence."

"Padilla was the star recruit of a terrorist support cell and he was discovered right in our backyard.''

That was AUSA Brian Frazier describing Jose Padilla in his closing argument. Interesting way to put it -- "star recruit"; discovered in "our backyard." I didn't hear the closing, but these are terms that jurors relate to and are very easily understood...

Frazier, of course, hammered the application form and repeated al Qaida as much as he could:

"You are already inside the al-Qaida organization when you get this form to fill out," Frazier told jurors. "He provided himself to al-Qaida for training to learn how to murder, kidnap and maim."

Here's the Herald, the Sun-Sentinel, and the AP on the government's closings.

Michael Caruso for Jose Padilla responds tomorrow.

Jose Padilla closing arguments...

...are underway.

The Government is up first, followed by Adham Hassoun.

Tomorrow will be Kifah Wael Jayyousi and then Jose Padilla. The Government will finish up with rebuttal.

Judge Cooke has decided to read the jury instructions before closing argument. I've had this done a couple times and don't really have a preference... Any thoughts on whether this is a good or bad thing? Does it matter?

Padilla update

The government has rested after a short rebuttal. The rest of the week is legal issues without the jury. Closing arguments Monday and Tuesday next week.

Govt rebuttal in Padilla trial to start today

And closing arguments will start Monday the 13th!

Now when will we get a verdict? Any guesses on how long the jury will be out? The over/under is Friday the 17th at 5PM.

Go, Dore, Go!

As the Padilla trial winds down, we're happy to post another installment of Go, Dore, Go!



From all accounts, it was a good day for Kifah Wael Jayyousi in court yesterday. From the AP:

The testimony by Erol Bulur was aimed at bolstering claims by Padilla co-defendant Kifah Wael Jayyousi that his group, American Worldwide Relief, was focused on providing humanitarian aid to oppressed Muslims around the globe and not on assisting Islamic extremist warriors.
Bulur ran a warehouse in Paterson, New Jersey, that received and dispatched four large shipping containers containing about 25,000 pounds (11,340 kilograms) each of supplies to Chechen refugees in 1995 and 1996. Jurors were shown a video of the warehouse, including boxes of goods labeled "AWR" for Jayyousi's San Diego-based organization.
"These were shipments coming in from around the country?" asked Jayyousi attorney Marshall Dore Louis.
"Yes," the Turkish-born Bulur replied.
The testimony provided a counterpoint to prosecution witnesses and FBI wiretap intercepts that implicate Jayyousi and Adham Amin Hassoun, both 45, in a worldwide support network for Islamic jihadist groups, including al-Qaida. Hassoun allegedly recruited Padilla, 36, to become a mujahedeen fighter while both attended a mosque in Sunrise, Florida.

And the Miami Herald had an article, titled: "Witness for Padilla presents strong testimony":

With the end of the trial near, a defense team in the Jose Padilla terror case put on its strongest witness Thursday, when he testified that a suspected front for terrorists was actually a legitimate Islamic relief group.
Erol Bulur testified that he used his New Jersey warehouse to store tens of thousands of pounds of used clothes, canned foods and medicine donated by American Worldwide Relief, an organization run by a defendant in the Padilla trial.
Bulur said in Miami federal court that the relief group's efforts accounted for as much as two-thirds of all the supplies that he shipped from his warehouse through Turkey to Chechnya's embattled Muslims in 1995 and 1996.
''A lot more than two or three boxes were sent by American Worldwide Relief,'' said the Turkish-born Bulur [in response to direct questioning by Dore Louis], rebutting a prosecutor's attempt to downplay the group's significant humanitarian role in the Chechen conflict. Indeed, jurors were shown video of Bulur's warehouse and 40-foot cargo containers.
His testimony was powerful because it called into question a central theme in the U.S. government's case: that defendant Kifah Wael Jayyousi, a leader of American Worldwide Relief, used the group as a front to provide money, equipment and other supplies to Islamic terrorists overseas.

Next week, we get to the prosecution's rebuttal case. Here's the Sun-Sentinel discussing the Padilla strategy of not calling any witnesses.

Padilla trial wrapping up

The defense case will conclude by this Friday. Jose Padilla's lawyers said they will not be presenting any witnesses. That means the Government rebuttal case is next week and closing arguments will be the week of the 13th.

Maintain radio silence

Looks like the Jose Padilla defense is continuing its trial strategy of trying to distance itself from the other two defendants. As the other two mount their defense by presenting witnesses and evidence, Padilla's lawyers are keeping quiet. According to this interesting article by Curt Anderson:

The first week of the defense case in the Jose Padilla terrorism support trial came to a close Friday with Padilla's own lawyers taking virtually no role so far.
"No questions, your honor," said Padilla attorney Anthony Natale, neatly summing up the Padilla defense team's courtroom activity since Monday.
Attorneys for co-defendant Adham Amin Hassoun, who allegedly recruited Padilla for Islamic extremist causes, called four witnesses in the 11th week of testimony in the case. And lawyers for third defendant Kifah Wael Jayyousi actively questioned all four, as did federal prosecutors.

Anderson wonders whether Padilla will present any evidence:

It's been virtual silence from the Padilla corner, and it remains to be seen if Padilla's lawyers will put on any witnesses or ask any questions. Defendants accused of crimes are not legally required to testify or put on any kind of case, with the burden to prove the crimes squarely on the prosecution.
Michael Caruso, one of three federal public defenders representing Padilla, said at the close of the prosecution case that his client deserved acquittal because of lack of evidence. The three defendants are charged with conspiring to murder, kidnap and maim people overseas as part of a North American cell supporting al-Qaida and other Islamic extremist groups around the world.
"There is simply not enough evidence for any reasonable juror to conclude that Mr. Padilla was a willing participant," Caruso said.

We did hear from one interesting witness today regarding co-defendant Adham Hassoun:

For example, Hassoun's father-in-law Mohammed Wannous, 73, came all the way from Helsinki, Finland, to testify for about an hour Friday about one phone conversation he had with Hassoun in 1997. In the call, the two make reference to a Lebanese group, Usbat al-Ansar, that prosecutors say had connections to al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
Wannous said his son-in-law was only kidding around when he said on the call that "we are with" that group.
"He was joking with me, as usual," said Wannous, who testified in Arabic through a court translator. "Because I know he didn't belong to any of them."
Prosecutor John Shipley, however, noted that neither man was laughing when they discussed the matter, although they laughed loudly later in the call when talking about family issues.
"You didn't say in the conversation, 'Adham, you are only joking,'" Shipley said.
"He always jokes," Wannous answered.
Like much of the first week of defense testimony, Wannous had nothing to do with Padilla. Testimony resumes next week and is scheduled to continue through much of August.

11th Circuit vacates drug conviction

Extremely interesting case from the 11th Circuit today, United States v. Lopez-Vanegas. The issue is whether the U.S. drug laws reach conspiracies to distribute cocaine from one foreign country to another, where meetings occurred here in the U.S. The Court said no, reversing two convictions.

From the 11th:

Appellants assert that the agreement to ship cocaine from Colombia to Venezuela to Saudi Arabia to France for distribution throughout Europe does not violate 21 U.S.C. § 846 because the object of the conspiracy – the possession and distribution of cocaine on foreign soil – is not a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Thus, the district court should have granted defendants’ motion for acquittal at the close of the Government’s case. The Government asserts that the defendants’ conduct was encompassed by the prohibitions of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and § 841(a)(1), forbidding conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine. The issue of whether discussions occurring in the United States related to possession of controlled substances outside of the United States with intent to distribute those substances outside of the United States is a crime in the United States is res nova in the Eleventh Circuit. We squarely address that issue now.
***
Because the Court holds that 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846 do not apply extraterritorially, the conduct of Lopez and Salazar does not violate those statutes. The judgments of conviction and sentences issued by the district court are VACATED.

It will be interesting to see how this case is applied in a number of different prosecutions. First, the Padilla defense has raised this argument, saying that even if the Government is correct, the object of the conspiracy deals with conduct overseas. I'm not sure if the statute at issue there contemplates this sort of activity... but if not, watch out. (Second) Update -- I'm told that the statute at issue in the Padilla case does, in fact, address conduct overseas...

Also, what about the cases involving people going overseas to find underage sex. Typically, those cases involve a defendant talking to an undercover travel agent arranging for a trip to another country. To date, these convictions have been upheld even though all the intended activity is occurring in another country. UPDATE -- a helpful reader points out that the statute in these cases, 18 USC 2423, addresses people here travelling in interstate or foreign commerce, which makes it much different than the drug statute addressed above.

Very interesting...

Congrats to Scott Srebnick and Richard Strafer, the defense lawyers on this case.

It's getting hot in here

Apparently it got so contentious yesterday in the Jose Padilla trial that Judge Cooke had to call a timeout for the witness and the lawyers. Here's the AP:

But Awad, in a heated exchange with Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Frazier, said the money raised at the Florida mosque and elsewhere was not intended to fund terrorists. Awad drew a distinction between terrorism and Islamic mujahedeen who were fighting in defense of Muslims in places like Chechnya, Bosnia and Somalia.
"The mujahedeen were fighting, and in fighting there is killing," Awad testified. "The mujahedeen are honorable people. Terrorists are people who have no goal but to maim and kill."
***
There were several tense exchanges during cross-examination between Awad and Frazier, including one instance when Awad raised his voice and said people who commit atrocities against Muslims "should be killed and taken to justice."
U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke sent the jury out of the room at that point and told Awad to keep his cool.

More from the Sun-Sentinel:

To federal prosecutors, he is the central figure in a South Florida terror support cell.But Adham Amin Hassoun's lawyers claim their client, a former Sunrise computer programmer, was a philanthropist, not a terrorist.Both sides pushed their positions Tuesday in Miami federal court during heated testimony from the former imam of the Fort Lauderdale mosque that Hassoun and his co-defendant Jose Padilla attended in the mid-1990s.
The questioning grew so contentious, U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke twice asked jurors to step out of the courtroom so the imam and the attorneys could cool off.
***
Touching on what has been a hot-button issue in the case, Awad insisted those who resort to violence to protect Muslim communities from oppression or ethnic cleansing should not be considered terrorists."I would really appreciate if you do not imply mujahideen and terrorists are the same," Awad told Frazier. "The mujahideen are honorable people. ... Terrorists are people who have no aim and no goal but to maim and kill."
***
"We are required by our religion, by our faith, to help people in need, to help people under attack," Awad said."Did you ever preach an obligation to support mujahideen fighters?" Frazier asked."Mujahideen are people who are defending themselves," Awad said."The answer is yes?" Frazier pressed."No, the answer is no," Awad said.

Although Padilla's lawyers didn't ask any questions of this witness, Padilla was mentioned:

Awad said he bought an airline ticket to Cairo, Egypt, for Padilla with money collected from mosque members. Padilla was moving to the Middle East to study Islam and Arabic, Awad said.

News and Notes

1. Noriega doesn't want to be deported to France. (Miami Herald and pic from Herald)

2. Defense lawyers in Padilla are questioning the translations. (NY Times and AP)

3. "Coral Springs boy, 7, on no-fly list has been delayed at airport three times" (Sun-Sentinel) To the right is his picture, with his mother. How crazy!

Motions for JOA denied

I'm on the road today, but a reliable source emails me that the motions for judgment of acquittal as to all defendants in the Padilla case were denied.

Defense case to begin Thursday.

For an interesting discussion comparing the government action in Padilla to KPMG, check out www.discourse.net, Professor Froomkin's blog. I will post the exact link when I get back to town.

UPDATE -- here's the link to the interesting post.

Government rests in Padilla

Lots of coverage of the Government resting today in the Jose Padilla trial ON FRIDAY THE 13th!

USA Today has this about the final witness from today:

The final prosecution witness Friday was FBI linguist Joyce Kandalaft, who testified that Hassoun's name and telephone number were on a card containing various names and numbers that Padilla was carrying when he was arrested.
She also testified about notations in Arabic made on checks written by Hassoun to Muslim charities and other entities that included the word "tourism." The government contends the word was code for violent jihad. The notations also frequently mentioned support for "brothers."
"Have you ever known the word brother to mean mujahedeen brother?" asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Russell Killinger.
"Yes, I have," Kandalaft replied.
Kandalaft also testified that Hassoun had included a verse from the Quran on one check that translates to: "And those who do wrong should soon come to know what punishment awaits them."

Strong ending for the Government. It's a nice circle -- tie the defendants together and get back to the coded language.

Then, according to the Herald's Jay Weaver:

"The United States would rest its case in chief at this time,'' prosecutor Russell Killinger said.... U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke gave a stern warning to the 12 Miami-Dade jurors not to talk about the case with anyone, nor to read or watch anything about it. ''You will have to be extra super-duper cautious,'' Cooke advised the jurors, instructing them to return on Thursday, when the defense will begin its case.

Why do lawyers always talk in "woulds"? I would rest; I would argue; I would call so and so witness. It's weird, no? I do it too, I guess, and I don't know why. I like how Judge Cooke says to be "extra super-duper cautious." I always wonder whether jurors really listen to these instructions or whether they hop on the internet...

Here's the AP article by Curt Anderson, which talks about this blog's coverage. Here's the intro to the article:

For a star defendant whose name is known around the world, Jose Padilla has become almost a bit player in his terrorism support trial and some observers say the federal government may not have proved its case against him.
Prosecutors rested their case Friday after nine weeks, 22 witnesses and dozens of FBI wiretap intercepts played at trial, most of them in Arabic with written translations for jurors. Defense lawyers for Padilla and his two co-defendants begin presenting their case next week.

Despite the strong finish, I'm one of those observers:

"Although everyone has been referring to this case as the Padilla trial, the government's case against Padilla has been pretty thin," said David O. Markus, a Miami defense attorney who has frequently written about the case on his legal blog.

I say this because most of the Government's case, including the vast majority of the phone calls played for the jury, involved the other two defendants. As I said before, I think the case against Padilla really comes down to the terror camp form and whether the jury believes that Padilla filled it out and whether they believe he did so with the intent to murder. If yes on both, convicted. If no on either, NG.

The former U.S. Attorney, Guy Lewis, is another observer:

Former Miami U.S. Attorney Guy Lewis said prosecutors often are forced to present a "watered-down" case when much evidence is classified to protect national security. It's also a tougher case when there's no "smoking gun" or witness who can swear the defendants committed illegal acts.
"It's a loose-knit conspiracy with very few overt acts," Lewis said. "You didn't catch them committing a terrorist act. Talk only, and talk is cheap."

And, of course, there's the jurors dressing up:

Jurors have sometimes shown up for duty in coordinated clothing, most notably in rows of red, white and blue before the July 4 holiday. That has prompted much speculation among lawyers and legal bloggers about whether they are unified or sending a pro-government message.
"If everyone is thinking the same way at such an early stage, defense lawyers get nervous," Markus said. "Or the prosecution could be nervous because this is obviously a happy jury. Happy juries in a terrorism trial might not be good."
Or, he added, they might simply be bored.

Government to rest in Jose Padilla trial

By lunchtime today, the Government will rest its case in the Jose Padilla trial. Ten weeks, lots of phone calls, expert witnesses, CNN videos, mentions of Playboy, jurors dressing up, reporters being threatened with contempt.... What's next? The defense will argue for judgments of acquittal on Tuesday. If those motions are denied, the jury will return next Thursday.

UPDATED -- THE GOVERNMENT RESTED AROUND NOON TODAY.

Yesterday, an FBI agent said that Padilla was evasive when he was arrested. This from the NY Times:

On Thursday, the Federal Bureau of Investigation agents who arrested Mr. Padilla testified that he was evasive about the four years he spent in the Middle East and Pakistan. The agents said a lengthy interview in an airport conference room yielded nothing substantive about his time overseas.
Special Agent Russell Fincher said Mr. Padilla, an American born in Brooklyn, disclosed which neighborhood of Cairo he had lived in for two years and the first name of his roommate there. But he said he had forgotten the address and his roommate’s last name — a suspicious lapse, Mr. Fincher said, since Mr. Padilla, then 31, could recall where he had lived as a child in Chicago.
Mr. Padilla, who had just returned to the United States on a flight from Zurich, also told the agents that he had married an Egyptian woman but could not remember her telephone number.
“It led me to believe that Mr. Padilla was being evasive with regard to his answers about his travels overseas,” Mr. Fincher said.
Under defense questioning, Mr. Fincher conceded that Mr. Padilla could not recall his mother’s phone number or his most recent address in the United States.
Mr. Padilla was carrying a picture of his baby sons at the time of his arrest, Mr. Fincher said, and a piece of paper with his mother’s contact information. Mr. Padilla told the agents that he had never been to Afghanistan, but that he had gone to Pakistan to study Islam on the advice of a Pakistani he met in Saudi Arabia.

And the Government tried to shore up its position on the training camp form:

Earlier Thursday, a government expert in document analysis testified that Mr. Padilla could have filled out the training camp application in July 2000, the date written on it. But under defense questioning, the expert, Gerald LaPorte, acknowledged that there was no way to determine who filled it out or when.

“I can’t render a conclusion at all,” Mr. LaPorte said.

And this from the AP:

Also Thursday, a Secret Service document analyst testified that the form attributed to Padilla was consistent with others recovered by the CIA in a binder in Afghanistan in December 2001. The forms appeared to be authentic and to have been copied from a single original on the same copying equipment, analyst Jerry LaPorte testified.
There were two types of ink and two different pens used to fill out the supposed Padilla form, he added. LaPorte testified he couldn't tell when the entries were completed, although the form bears a date of July 24, 2000.
Prosecutors expect to rest their case Friday, the end of the ninth week of testimony. Defense lawyers are scheduled to begin next week on their case, which will likely continue into August.


I really think the case against Padilla comes down to whether the jury believes that he filled out this form with the intent to go overseas to join a terrorist camp. If the jury has doubt about how and when Padilla's prints were left on this form, he walks. Thoughts?