US To Appeal Judge’s Ruling That 9/11 Defendants Can Plead Guilty To Avoid Death Penalty
The Department of Defense will appeal a military judge’s decision affirming the validity of plea agreements
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged orchestrator of the September 11, 2001 attacks, and two co-defendants plea deals are in question.
Last week’s ruling nullified Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s order to dismiss these plea deals, with the judge determining the agreements to be valid. The judge approved motions allowing the three men to enter guilty pleas, with a hearing to be scheduled by the military commission at a later date.
The Defense Department also plans to request a delay for any hearing on these pleas, according to the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to discuss the legal proceedings publicly. Rear Adm. Aaron Rugh, the chief prosecutor, notified the families of 9/11 victims of this decision in a letter on Friday.
The ruling by Air Force Col. Matthew McCall would permit the three defendants to plead guilty in the U.S. military courtroom at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, sparing them from the possibility of a death sentence. Guilty pleas from Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, and Mustafa al-Hawsawi would mark a significant step toward resolving a long-delayed and legally complex prosecution for the attacks that claimed nearly 3,000 lives.
Prosecutors had initially negotiated the deals with defense attorneys under government supervision, with the agreements ultimately receiving approval from the lead military commission official at Guantanamo. However, the deals faced strong opposition from Republican lawmakers and others after becoming public over the summer.
Just days later, Secretary Austin issued an order nullifying the agreements, stating that plea bargains in potential death penalty cases linked to one of the gravest crimes on U.S. soil should only proceed with the defense secretary’s explicit approval.
The judge ruled that Austin lacked the authority to rescind the plea deals.
(Now you know where you've seen a picture of Khalid before)
The plea agreements, along with Austin’s attempt to reverse them, have become one of the most contentious developments in a prosecution marked by delays and legal hurdles. These include prolonged pretrial hearings on the admissibility of the defendants’ statements due to their prior treatment in CIA custody.
While some 9/11 victims’ families and others insist that the prosecution should continue to a full trial with the possibility of death sentences, legal experts are uncertain if that outcome is feasible. If the cases proceed to trial, with potential verdicts and sentencing, any appeals over the death penalty would likely end up before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The unresolved issues include the CIA’s destruction of interrogation tapes, questions about whether Austin’s reversal of the plea deals was unlawful interference, and whether the defendants’ prior torture compromised later interrogations conducted by “clean teams” of FBI agents who avoided using force.
