Who’s Who at the 9/11 Court Case at Guantánamo Bay - The New York Times


Five men face charges at Guantanamo Bay for their alleged involvement in the 9/11 attacks, with the trial delayed due to various legal and procedural issues.
AI Summary available — skim the key points instantly. Show AI Generated Summary
Show AI Generated Summary

The Crime

Five men are facing charges in the United States military tribunal at Guantánamo Bay of aiding the 19 men who hijacked passenger planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center, Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field on Sept. 11, 2001. Four are being tried jointly, and the other had his case separated because he was found mentally incompetent to face trial and had his case severed from the others.

The charges, which carry the death penalty, include conspiracy, murder in violation of the law of war and terrorism. The defendants are accused of directing or training the hijackers or helping provide them money or assistance with travel. They were captured in 2002 and 2003, held incommunicado in a secret C.I.A. prison network and transferred to Guantánamo Bay in September 2006 for trial.

The Trial

No date has been set for a trial to begin. Before the coronavirus pandemic, a judge had set Jan. 11, 2021, to begin jury selection in a military trial that was estimated to last a year. Since then, the timetable has been abandoned because of personnel changes, plea negotiations and a sanity board finding that one of the defendants is not competent to stand trial.

The prosecution and defense have been litigating what evidence the United States government must provide defense lawyers and what laws apply at the court, which was created by President George W. Bush and subsequently overhauled by President Barack Obama and Congress.

Other issues to be decided before trial include what evidence is admissible at trial, notably F.B.I. accounts of what the five men said in individual interrogations at Guantánamo in 2007, months after their arrival from years in C.I.A. custody, when they were subjected to so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Defense lawyers want all evidence from the F.B.I. interrogations excluded as tainted by torture. They argue that their clients had been conditioned by that point to provide answers that would please their interrogators. Prosecutors call the 2007 questioning “clean-team” interrogations.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Was this article displayed correctly? Not happy with what you see?

Tabs Reminder: Tabs piling up in your browser? Set a reminder for them, close them and get notified at the right time.

Try our Chrome extension today!


Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more

Facebook

Save articles to reading lists
and access them on any device


Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more

Facebook

Save articles to reading lists
and access them on any device