creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Linda Chavez
Linda Chavez
17 Feb 2012
Raiding Social Security

Extending the payroll tax cut — as the GOP leadership has now agreed with Democrats to do — may … Read More.

10 Feb 2012
Referendum on the Incumbent

Conventional wisdom suggests that the current refusal of the GOP base to accept Mitt Romney as the de facto … Read More.

3 Feb 2012
Feminists Are Anti-Choice

Horror of horrors! Lego has introduced a new line of gender-specific toys aimed at girls. I might not even … Read More.

KSM and O.J.

Share Comment

If there was ever a more irresponsible decision by a U.S. attorney general than Eric Holder's decision to try the mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist attack and four others as common criminals in a civilian court in New York City, I can't recall it. He is gambling with the nation's security and providing a platform that will give aid and comfort to the enemy at a time of war. And he is doing so with no discernible benefit, least of all to showcase the strength of our judicial system.

Does Eric Holder remember the most infamous criminal trial of the 20th century, the 1995 trial of O.J. Simpson for the murder of his estranged wife, Nicole, and Ronald Goldman? There are obvious differences between a criminal murder trial in a state court and one tried in federal district court — and, the O.J. trial featured incompetent prosecutors who tried their case before an inept judge — but there are also problems inherent in the system that may not be avoided. No matter what Holder says about failure to convict not being an option, our entire legal system is based on the presumption of innocence of the accused and there are simply no guarantees.

A look back at what went wrong in the O.J. trial is chilling. The die was cast in favor of acquittal the moment the jurors were seated. They were not a cross-section of Los Angeles, where the trial was held: There were 10 women, two men; nine blacks, two whites, and one Hispanic. Their education was below average — nine had only a high school education and 1 lacked even that. According to the questionnaires they filled out before they were selected, none regularly read a newspaper, but eight regularly watched tabloid TV; five thought it was sometimes permissible to use physical force against a family member; and four reported they or a family member had had a negative experience with police. All were registered Democrats.

The first thing that defense attorneys will do when Khalid Sheikh Mohammed comes to trial is attempt to get a jury that looks very much like O.J.'s. Urban juries — especially those comprised disproportionately of African-Americans — are far more likely than suburban or rural juries to acquit criminal defendants.

In one recent study of Baltimore city conviction rates, compared to those in the surrounding county, city jurors were over 30 times more likely to acquit for the most serious charges in criminal trials than their suburban counterparts.

And those who are most likely to be screened out during the process known as voir dire are educated jurors who are well informed about current events. The defense will also object to any prospective juror who followed the events of 9/11 carefully; anyone who has family members who have ever worked in law enforcement, for the fire department, or in emergency medical services; and anyone with a high regard or trust in government or law enforcement. And that's just the beginning.

Once the trial starts, the defense will use a tactic that served O.J.'s "dream team" well: conspiracy theories meant to distract jurors from the actual evidence introduced. In O.J.'s case, Johnnie Cochran and company suggested none too subtly that racist police planted evidence. When KSM comes to trial, expect to hear defense witnesses and attorneys suggest that the U.S. knew in advance of the attacks and planted explosives in the World Trade Center that helped bring down the building. They may also revive the despicable canard that Israel was really responsible for the attack and that it warned Jews who worked at the WTC to stay home on Sept. 11. These conspiracy theories have fueled best-selling books in Europe, are widely accepted in the Arab world, and were even endorsed by presidential aide Van Jones (who resigned once his association with the so-called 9/11 truthers was exposed).

Are such theories too wild to be believed by any New Yorkers, especially those most likely to end up on a KSM jury? Don't bet on it. Several polls taken over the last 20 years show that between a quarter and a third of black Americans believe that AIDS was concocted in a laboratory by the U.S. government with the express purpose of committing genocide against blacks. And you can bet that KSM's defense attorneys will be looking for jurors every bit as paranoid and gullible. And remember, they need only one such juror to force a hung jury or even acquittal. Our attorney general is gambling with the nation's security, and the odds aren't reassuring.

Linda Chavez is the author of "An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal." To find out more about Linda Chavez, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM


Comments

6 Comments | Post Comment
WOW...the conservative ideology on race: we want to invoke one line of one MLK speech pleading judgement on chracter instead of race, but when it suits our purposes, insecurities, and hubris, we throw them all under the bus of racial judgement. Republicans and conservatives, through the words of one Linda Chavez, show their true monochromatics. So because a few select sub-demographic of blacks believe a certain thing, that means we ALL do? What a crock. Hate to tell you, lady, but the Atlanta child murders in the late 70s-early 80s were far more heinous than one man alledgedly bludgeoning two people. And guess what? a black jury CONVICTED that trial's defendant. Black juries convict black defendants all the time, and if it appears that black jurists seem more lenient to the defense, perhaps it's because they tend to be more OPEN-MINDED than their white counterparts, and thus uninhibited by the muck of stereotypes and racial generalizations. But I digress. I simply take great offense at any insinuation that any group of peole, especially black people, are unwilling or otherwise inacpable of practicing independent thought and rational judgement (we don't need racial paranoia to guide our thoughts, thank you very much). And tying a known terrorist with some washed-up athlete is as cheap a shot as I ever saw one. Thank you for continuing to put black folks in a frame of reference that makes us look sympathetic to a known enemy, or otherwise un-American. It's nice to know where we stand. When you again lament about how your ilk can never garner more than 8-10% of the black vote, reference your article and my reply. You can't judge people by their individual character and disparage them all as a group at the same time. What a dolt.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Therren Dunham
Fri Nov 20, 2009 9:37 AM
This is self-projectionism.The descendants of barbaric slaveholders ALL engaged in the very behaviors vs non-whites (NW) that U now want 2 project as what AfricanAmerican's (AA) will do.
White illiterates freed racist whites in trial after trial, 2 support their 'southern way of life'. It was bred in2 their blood not to convict their kind.. Now,U want to insist that AA's won't convict OTHER NW's, like KLM after hearing what WhiteAmericans (WA) did 2 the man in GITMO. That's all this is about.
You insist that AA's will not convict KLM. Cause, that is the American way YOU were taught. Accd'g 2Chavez, AA's are the group of people in this country most familiar with abusive power of the state, who were subjected 2 the full force of it's brutality&who are profiled 2 this day. So, no way could AA's ever uphold justice in the legal system, let you tell it.WA are guilty of having committed heinous acts against these 'enemy combatants' They also have a history of committing brutal heinous acts against AA's. U Chavez think of course, AA's will sympathize with KLM. U infer,why would AA's side with the US GOVMINT when AA's have been historically disenfranchised and victimized? What a nasty, hateful lie.
So, why in heavens name would AA ever convict this man?
O that's right, AA's are the most loyal patriotic Americans, serving this country faithfully in wars since the American Revolution. AA's are the ones who are the MORAL conscious of this nation, making her live up 2 her creed. AA's are the ones who fought for ALL Americans to have civil rights. AA's are TRUE Americans who know that injustice anywhere is a threat 2 justice everywhere.
U&yourkind Chavez think you can smear AA's and insinuate that AA's will unleash KLM on the world simply for revenge against the racism in America.
I got news for you. Black folks don't just go 2 church on Sunday. AA's actually believe in God and justice, just like we believed that statement 'all men are created equal' and fought for it.
Comment: #2
Posted by: predacious
Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:58 PM
This is self-projectionism.The descendants of barbaric slaveholders ALL engaged in the very behaviors vs non-whites (NW) that U now want 2 project as what AfricanAmerican's (AA) will do.
White illiterates freed racist whites in trial after trial, 2 support their 'southern way of life'. It was bred in2 their blood not to convict their kind.. Now,U want to insist that AA's won't convict OTHER NW's, like KLM after hearing what WhiteAmericans (WA) did 2 the man in GITMO. That's all this is about.
You insist that AA's will not convict KLM. Cause, that is the American way YOU were taught. Accd'g 2Chavez, AA's are the group of people in this country most familiar with abusive power of the state, who were subjected 2 the full force of it's brutality&who are profiled 2 this day. So, no way could AA's ever uphold justice in the legal system, let you tell it.WA are guilty of having committed heinous acts against these 'enemy combatants' They also have a history of committing brutal heinous acts against AA's. U Chavez think of course, AA's will sympathize with KLM. U infer,why would AA's side with the US GOVMINT when AA's have been historically disenfranchised and victimized? What a nasty, hateful lie.
So, why in heavens name would AA ever convict this man?
O that's right, AA's are the most loyal patriotic Americans, serving this country faithfully in wars since the American Revolution. AA's are the ones who are the MORAL conscious of this nation, making her live up 2 her creed. AA's are the ones who fought for ALL Americans to have civil rights. AA's are TRUE Americans who know that injustice anywhere is a threat 2 justice everywhere.
U&yourkind Chavez think you can smear AA's and insinuate that AA's will unleash KLM on the world simply for revenge against the racism in America.
I got news for you. Black folks don't just go 2 church on Sunday. AA's actually believe in God and justice, just like we believed that statement 'all men are created equal' and fought for it.
Comment: #3
Posted by: LaRapierWit
Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:00 PM
Chavez,
You need to get your facts straight regarding terrorism trials in NY there has been a 100% conviction rate

The single largest venue for terrorism trials is New York City, where 145 terrorism indictments have been filed. The center found in a previous study that the conviction rate in New York is higher than in the rest of the nation, and that sentencing in New York is also tougher. That is understandable—and may help to explain why the attorney general chose the Southern District of New York for the Mohammed prosecution. In the city's federal courts, the conviction rate of individuals charged with terrorism involving a U.S. target is 100 percent.

http://www.observer.com/2009/politics/what-are-they-afraid
Comment: #4
Posted by: predacious
Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:03 PM
BTW, Baltimore mayor Shelia Dixon, a black woman, was just convicted of embezzlement by a jury of her peers, one that was majority black. If that news doesn't fly in the face of Chavez's tripe, little will. Aside from again vindicating the fairness and loyalty of black Americans, there is another point of note: as correctly stated by the previous comments, Linda Chavez and those like her preface that the proclivity of blacks to deliberate trials through the prism of racial experience, that because of historical legacies of mistreatment ant a cultural distrust of the system, they will likely stick it to the Man as much as possible. For this reason, she implies that it is irresponsible for AG Holder to hold the trial in NYC. However, I submit that to hold this view is no less irresponsible than blacks believing the government created AIDS or academic excellence and speaking in standard business English is akin to "acting white." Further, is it not even more racist to disenfranchise black folks by steering the trial away from NYC (or any other area, for that matter--where would you hold the trial, Simi Valley?) just to ensure that you would get a jury that is less "sympathetic" (read: white) to the accused? Is it not assisting the defense to act on half-truths and false generalizations in order to prevent that from others? Do we not make ourselves hippocrites when we depict the worst of our citizenry while trying to show that the defendant is among the worst of his? How do you seek to defens and protect in theroy something you don't believe enough to actively practice?
Comment: #5
Posted by: Therren Dunham
Wed Dec 2, 2009 8:36 AM
Do the authors actually read these things?
Comment: #6
Posted by: Therren Dunham
Wed Dec 2, 2009 8:37 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Linda Chavez
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 27 Feb 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 20 Feb 2012
Mark Levy
Mark LevyUpdated 18 Feb 2012

31 Dec 2010 Good Governance

12 Nov 2010 Closing the Doors to Opportunity

29 Oct 2010 No on Early Voting