Day 2 of Closing Arguments at Al Arian trial in Tampa

By Lorenzo Vidino

Brian Hecht of The Investigative Project on Terrorism has been in Tampa, FL, to cover the trial of former University of South Florida Professor Sami al-Arian and has written the following summary:

Sami al-Arian�s attorneys got their first crack to defend their client after refusing to call any witnesses during the trial, having rested their case immediately after the prosecution on November 1st. Linda Moreno summed up the defense strategy before a packed courtroom, telling the jury that �this is not a criminal case, this is a political case,� signaling that she was not going to spend much time arguing the law, the facts, or even the charges, but rather the political context in which the case arose.

Moreno frequently referred to the Israeli military occupation that �began in 1948,� and said that �the prosecution against Sami al-Arian is built entirely on his words, built on his beliefs, and that is un-American.� She compared the Palestinian struggle against the Israelis to the American Revolution, quoting Patrick Henry who said, �[i]f we wish to be free, we must fight.� Moreno also implored the jurors to "reject the government's cruel and cynical interpretation" of incriminating speeches and wiretapped phone conversations.

Al-Arian�s other attorney, Bill Moffitt, further wrapped his client in the American flag, giving an impassioned speech about the First Amendment and weaving in American themes such as he Declaration of Independence and Emma Lazarus� famous poem about the Statue of Liberty. Moffitt told the jury his modified version of the Declaration of Independence, saying, �[w]e hold these truths to be self evident, that all people are created equal � even Palestinians.� He continued with a passage that he felt applied to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, telling the jury, �[w]henever any form of government should be come destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to abolish it.�

Earlier in the morning, Cherie Krigsman finished up her closing argument, anticipating the defense�s First Amendment strategy. She told the jury that the First Amendment does not provide a shield for criminal activity. �When Tony Soprano calls his associates to talk about his �waste disposal� business,� said Krigsman, �that is not protected by the First Amendment.� She told the jury that words can fuel a criminal conspiracy and that conspiracies do not operate by pantomime. She called the defendants� actions �calculated and venal.� She said, �When you run with a pack as lethal as PIJ, it doesn�t matter if you�re in the rear guard of the vanguard.� Krigsman concluded, telling the jury that the defendants are entitled to their day in court, that they have been given it for five months now and that they are entitled to nothing else. �We are confident you will return a verdict of guilty.�

Moffitt has about one hour of time remaining for his closing argument, and he will be followed by the attorneys for the remaining three co-defendants. Each defense attorney has said they will take roughly two hours for their closing argument. After they are finished, prosecutor Terry Zitek will give a three hour rebuttal before the jury receives its instructions and begins its delibrerations.

For a full account of Tuesday�s events, click here: http://www.investigativeproject.org/closing_day2/

TrackBack