Shenanigans Continue at Aafia Siddqui Trial in NYC

But Aafia promised no more outbursts in court! The shenanigans continue at the Aafia Siddiqui trial in NYC. From the New York Times:

"The defendant was ejected from a Lower Manhattan courtroom — not once, but twice — on Monday (1-25-2010) for loudly proclaiming her innocence. And, in a separate episode between the two ejections, a spectator who pointed his thumb and index finger like a gun at the jury while mouthing an expletive was taken into custody and later released."

Isnt that contempt of court or something like that? Juror intimidation? They should have kept him in custody for the remainder of the trial.  The two jurors who said they felt threatened were dismissed by Judge Berman, and replaced by alternates. 

"The trial, which is in its second week, is taking place under heavy security in United States District Court, with a metal detector and guards at the courtroom door. Still, there have been breaches. On Monday, Judge Richard M. Berman noted some of them in explaining his ruling against a defense motion for greater public access to the court."

"So far, three people have sneaked recording devices into the courtroom, said Judge Berman, adding that one audience member had even passed a cellphone, which is also banned, to a member of the defense team."

The defense asked Judge Richard Berman for a mistrial on Monday, "saying her (Aafia's) constitutional rights to a fair trial and presumption of innocence have been violated."  AP of Pakistan provides more details on the court case:

"Other grounds for a mistrial cited by (defense lawyer) Ms. Moreno were beefed up security measures outside the courtroom requiring visitors to the trial to provide personal identification and sign in."

Judge Berman denied the motion. More details on this matter from a Caged Prisoners article on Day 5:

"After jurors were dismissed for the day, defense attorney Linda Moreno once again asked for a mistrial, saying that the U.S. Marshals had removed Siddiqui roughly from the 'courtroom in front of the jury in a manner that 'denigrates the presumption of innocence.' The judge declined Moreno's request and said that perhaps the defense should focus more on 'reigning in' their client. 'Dr. Siddiqui doesn't talk to us,' Moreno said in reference to herself and the other members of the defense team. 'I tried to talk to her today,' said Moreno. 'She indicated if I didn't leave immediately she was going to accuse me of harassment.' "

This is a zoo, a fiasco and an outrage. As Michelle Malkin notes:

"Now, imagine the scene being repeated in 12 or 20 or 25 more courtrooms across America simultaneously with similar high-value suspects and the jihadi dregs of Gitmo."

Petra Bartosiewicz, a free lance journalist who recently published an article about Siddiqui for Harper's Magazine, is closely following the trial.  Bartosiewicz is posting daily reports at Caged Prisoners.  

These are very detailed reports of the trial and testimonies, and you really get a feel for the craziness of the court room. As always, stay tuned.

Comments

[peace]

I think one should be weary quoting APP (Associated press of Pakistan) mainly because no Pakistani journalists or news media has been allowed inside the courtroom, which makes their often detailed news quite puzzling and very suspicious. Where do they get details from, especially which none of the other media, who is actually present in court has mentioned? Strange don't you think?

If you look at most muslim/Pakistani blogs, news media (i.e. Iranian Presstv) they are all citing APP.

I am not saying APP is lying but I would like to know their source. They may be quoting other media like cageprisoner, New York news media etc, but then they should state that or at least credit/link/cite that.

They do not. In fact the only way one can contact APP is by phone. It is very common for online news to have at least one email through which readers may comment, contact or suggest.

[Kelly]

Peace, thanks for the comment. It's not uncommon for Pakistani media to crib other sources without giving credit. I've used a few different media sources in the blogpost.

[peace]

Hi Kelly,

No problem. It wasn't a critique but just pointing out. It is a bit misleading of APP to report things when APP then does not source or credit the source. I just try to double check and you would be amazed how some news and quotes have variations.

Like the one of late where she said something like "I feel sorry for you. Don’t do that. It will make America look bad".

Now some Pakistani/Iranian Muslim blogs/sources have changed and quoted this as "I feel sorry for you. Don’t do take the blame for Captain Robert Snyder".

Major difference.

I also have not been able to verify some of the details of APP's reporting. I find that strange. I have also been looking at multiple media sources.

One Pakistani blog reports that 2 jurors were excused because they were approached by a man énquiring about the trial. (Can jurors in the US be contacted just like that by other people in the court for chats?) Again no sources or links are attached.

Media however reports that 2 jurors felt threatened by the presence of a man, who mouthed rude words and a signal simulating a gun. They felt they could not longer be objective and hence withdrew.

Big omission of details and very detrimental to the portrayal of reality. It only (unfortunately) adds to the conspiracy theories already flourishing where truth and facts play little role.

[Kelly]

Yes, I've also noticed big differences in what details are reported from the trial. I find Caged Prisoners daily reports to be the most informative. The NY Times seems to focus on some court drama, wihtout giving much detail about the witnesses and evidence. Regarding the two jurors who were excused, that person in the courtroom wasn't just asking them about the trial, he was (by some accounts) threatening them. What an abomination that happened in a courtroom!

[peace]

Well there you go then. I actually find the new yorks ok. It is mostly summarized though whereas cp are more detailed. However I still find information on APP which every muslim media and blog will cite, but which nobody else has cited. That comes across dubious as they may be relying on fuelling the emotions of people.

What do you think the verdict will be? The lack of evidence considered that is at least from what I have been reading.

On a different note I am a bit puzzled as to why her oldest son, now back with his family in Pakistan, does not talk to the press. I mean he holds the key to a lot of information and ould even prove a valuable witness for Aafia?

Secondly on youtube I am told there is a short interview with Aafia's husband claiming Aafia was with the FBI and safe as conveyed by her family to him. Does not make sense, does it?

What happened to the remaining two kids? On was just a baby?