Muhanad Al Farekh’s Sham Trial
During Muhanad’s trial, many irregularities happened that would not have been permitted during ordinary trials. In this section, we highlight some of the irregularities, which if happened during other trials, a mistrial would be called for. Some of these issues appear on Muhanad’s appeal:
- Ex parte deliberations. The government lawyers deliberated with the judge without the presence of Muhanad’s lawyer.
- Concealed evidence. The Judge decided to conceal evidence from Muhanad’s own lawyer, and ordered the evidence be “summarized.”
- Paying off the star witness. The government paid the star witness, the only witness to claim to have seen Muhanad in the Al-Qaida controlled area, over $30,000.00 dollars.
- The government’s star witness did not appear in person, rather he was deposed in video. Additionally, the video was not made public to the court attendees, only to the jury. Furthermore, the court did not include the content of the deposition of the government’s star witness in the trial transcripts. Essentially, leaving the only testimony that implicates Muahnad and physically places him in the area of the alleged crime hidden and un-challengeable.
- Lack of authentication of the evidence. The judge permitted a USB device, and its contents, to be included in the evidence. No explanation of where the USB device came from or how to was preserved was provided.
- Irrelevant hearsay evidence that he had no connection with the trial. The judge permitted evidence on Muhanad’s friends to be presented, which Muahand had no connection to. The evidence itself was also hearsay evidence that should not have been permitted to appear even if connected to Muhanad.
- Excluding exculpatory evidence: Muhanad’s lawyers intended to confront the government with a Justice Department Report on the case of Brandon Mayfield who was erroneously linked through FBI fingerprint comparison, to the Madrid attack, to challenge the reliability of finger print evidence presented against him. The judge decided to exclude this important exculpatory evidence from the jury’s view.
- Framing Muhanad by the FBI agent. An FBI informant or agent took a video of Muhanad watching online video document a US soldiers life. This was clearly a setup that the FBI had in mind even before any wrong doing was committed.
- The emails that Muhanad sent that were never received by his family. An email asking Muhanad’s father to look at Awlaki’s videos was never received by his family, and the authenticity of which was challenged. Additinally, another email that is signed as “Saif Allah” was also never received and the authenticity of it was also challenged.
- Capture by the Pakistani authorities notorious for torturing prisoners.
- The video Emad Salem took was specifically taken to frame Muhannad, Muhanad was watching a video wherein the USA is accused of committing war crimes in Iraq. This video had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 events.