Biden administration asks court to block plea deal for alleged 
		mastermind of 9/11 attacks
		
		 
		Send a link to a friend  
 
		
		
		 [January 08, 2025]  
		By ERIC TUCKER and ELLEN KNICKMEYER 
		
		WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration asked a federal appeals court 
		on Tuesday to block a plea agreement for accused 9/11 mastermind Khalid 
		Sheikh Mohammed that would spare him the risk of the death penalty in 
		one of the deadliest attacks ever on the United States. 
		 
		The Justice Department argued in a brief filed with a federal appeals 
		court in the District of Columbia that the government would be 
		irreparably harmed if the guilty pleas were accepted for Mohammed and 
		two co-defendants in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. 
		 
		It said the government would be denied a chance for a public trial and 
		the opportunity to “seek capital punishment against three men charged 
		with a heinous act of mass murder that caused the death of thousands of 
		people and shocked the nation and the world.” 
		 
		The Defense Department negotiated and approved the plea deal but later 
		repudiated it. Attorneys for the defendants argue the deal is already 
		legally in effect and that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who began the 
		administration's efforts to throw it out, acted too late. 
		
		
		  
		
		When the appeal was filed Tuesday, family members of some the nearly 
		3,000 people killed in the al-Qaida attacks already were gathered at the 
		U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to hear Mohammed's scheduled 
		guilty plea Friday. The other two men, accused of lesser roles in 9/11, 
		were due to enter them next week. 
		 
		Family members have been split on the deal, with some calling it the 
		best resolution possible for a prosecution mired for more than a decade 
		in pretrial hearings and legal and logistical difficulties. Others 
		demanded a trial and — they hoped — execution. 
		 
		Some legal experts have warned that the legal challenges posed by the 
		case, including the men’s torture under CIA custody after their capture, 
		could keep the aging detainees from ever facing verdicts and any 
		possible sentences. 
		 
		Military prosecutors this summer notified families of the victims that 
		the senior Pentagon official overseeing Guantanamo had approved a plea 
		deal after more than two years of negotiations. The deal was “the best 
		path to finality and justice,” military prosecutors said. 
		 
		[to top of second column] 
			 | 
            
             
            
			  
            This Monday, Dec. 8, 2008 courtroom drawing by artist Janet Hamlin 
			and reviewed by the U.S. military, shows Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, 
			center, and co-defendant Walid Bin Attash, left, attending a 
			pre-trial session at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. (AP 
			Photo/Janet Hamlin, Pool, File) 
            
			  
            But some family members and Republican lawmakers condemned the deal 
			and the Biden administration for reaching it. 
			 
			Austin has fought unsuccessfully since August to throw out the 
			agreement, saying that a decision on death penalties in an attack as 
			grave as the Sept. 11 plot should only be made by the defense 
			secretary. 
			 
			A military judge at Guantanamo and a military appeals panel rejected 
			those efforts, saying he had no power to throw out the agreement 
			after it had been approved by the senior Pentagon official for 
			Guantanamo. 
			 
			Defense attorneys say the plea agreement was approved by Austin's 
			own officials and military prosecutors and that his intervention was 
			unlawful political interference in the justice system. 
			 
			The Justice Department brief Tuesday said the defendants would not 
			be harmed by a short delay, given that the prosecution has been 
			ongoing since 2012 and the plea agreements would likely result in 
			them serving long prison sentences, potentially for the rest of 
			their lives. 
			 
			"A short delay to allow this Court to weigh the merits of the 
			government’s request in this momentous case will not materially harm 
			the respondents,” the government argued. 
			 
			The Justice Department criticized the military commission judge for 
			a ruling that it said “improperly curtailed” the defense secretary’s 
			authority in a “case of unique national importance.” Preserving that 
			authority "is a matter of critical importance warranting the 
			issuance of extraordinary relief,” the government’s filing said. 
			
			All contents © copyright 2024 Associated Press. All rights reserved 
			
			   |