Holy Land Foundation: From unindicted to unconvicted

Last updated on: October 22, 2007 at 6:00 pm by Shahed Amanullah

Holy Land Foundation: From unindicted to unconvicted 2007-10-22T18:00:00-04:00 Shahed Amanullah

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Free (until next time)

Albert Einstein once said that the “definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” For a modern example, witness the trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation (HLF), once the largest Muslim-American charity and the latest bellweather for the US Justice Department’s legal pursuit of alleged supporters and sponsors of terror.

In the past few weeks, both supporters and detractors slowly came to the realization that the high-profile court case might collapse. And as expected (even if no one expected how), District Judge Joe Fish declared a mistrial in the case this week, leaving defendants jubilant. Prosecutors were left to contemplate why what they thought was a surefire case became just another in a string of lackluster – and failed – anti-terror cases brought against Muslim-Americans and US-based Muslim charities. With so much experience behind them, they should have known better.

From the early days of the trial, there were signs of shakiness from within a prosecution egged on by zealous opponents of the HLF. As in previous cases, the prosecution overwhelmed the jury with circumstantial evidence (much of it related to the linking of 300 “unindicted co-conspirators”) and hoped for an aggregate impression of guilt in the minds of jurors. Courtroom onlookers noted looks of confusion on faces in the jury, and further news of behind-the-scenes drama in deliberations (rumor had it that one juror refused to vote) resulted in Judge Fish issuing an “Allen charge” in order to pressure jurors to reach a verdict. By this time, prosecutors feared the worst.

In the end, most of the jury didn’t accept the charges and many verdicts were not rendered (the mistrial itself was due to the recall of the otherwise unanimous verdict by two jurors). “I thought they were not guilty across the board,” commented juror William Neal. “There was so little evidence.” Two of the Holy Land Foundation’s leaders, Shukri Abu Baker and Ghassan Elashi, had no decision made on a collective 69 charges made against them, while the remaining defendants were found not guilty on 93 of 96 charges – though the mistrial declaration ironically wiped out 62 of those not-guilty verdicts.

Part of the reason why guilty verdicts were so hard to come by is because the prosecution attempted to argue that moral support for the Palestinian people in certain areas where Hamas operates is “effective support” for terrorist acts committed by that group. But even though recent history showed the futility of this approach – witness the extensive and expensive trial against Sami al-Arian, which had similar results – prosecutors may not have had a choice, since there was never a “smoking gun” that directly connected any of the named individuals with actual acts of terrorism. By overreaching yet again, the case was almost certainly doomed from the start.

Theoretically, a mistrial means that the case can be tried again with the hope of reaching a unanimous verdict. But the mistrial outcome obscures the fact that not a single “guilty” verdict was offered, which does not bode well for a future conviction. As in previous terror-related cases, the prosecution showed all their cards for the Holy Land trial, which leaves the defense with a significant advantage in finding weaknesses in any future case, which – barring new information coming to light – will have to be prosecuted the same way.

Beyond this, the Holy Land trial involved more than just the five indicted men – namely the hundreds of so-called “unindicted co-conspirators” publicly named in the case in order to allow hearsay and to create the impression of a vast Muslim-American conspiracy to support terror. After struggling to understand exactly what that status means (other than a stain on reputations), those named – include ISNA, CAIR, and other Muslim-American groups – are continuing their efforts to find legal means to remove their names from the list. Despite being accused of conspiring with individuals who have now been de-facto vindicated of nearly 200 charges, much public relations damage has already been done.

The first time a Muslim or Islamic charity was acquitted (or convicted of technicalities), pundits brushed it off as an anomaly. With a few more failed attempts, some grumbled about gullible jurors or the ineffectiveness of the court. Now with the Holy Land case all but written off, many should pause to consider the efficacy of current anti-terror strategy. But if recent history is any judge, the Holy Land case will be followed by similar indictments (and un-indictments) with sketchy evidence and familiar results. Sadly, the insanity is set to continue.

Shahed Amanullah is editor-in-chief of altmuslim.com.

Briefings

Previous Post

October 19, 2007

Karachi suicide attacks: Not the same Pakistan

Next Post

October 24, 2007 Movie "Rendition": Nothing ordinary about “Rendition”

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2012 Elections 30 Dayd 30 Writers (2017) 30 Days 30 Writers 30 Days 30 Writers (2015) 30 Days 30 Writers (2016) 30 Days 30 Writers (2018) 30 Days 30 Writers 2017 Ali Asadullah Ali Eteraz Alper Bilgili Arthur Richards Asides Asma Uddin Black History Month Briefings Charles Turner Commentary Cyrus McGoldrick Eman H Aly Fatimah Popal Hajj Hajj and Dhul Hijjah Hesham Hassaballa Hisham Hellyer Ibrahim Abusharif Inas Younis Irfan Yusuf Jalal Baig Junaid Afeef Laila Alawa Laila Alwala Mas'ood Cajee Muqtedar Khan Nakia Jackson Newsmakers Parvez Ahmed Podcasts Rabia Chaudry Rafia Zakaria Ramadan Reviews Safiyyah Ally Saud Inam Shahed Amanullah Svend White The Opinionated Oncologist Visions Wajahat Ali Zahed Amanullah Zahir Janmohamed Zainab Khan

Select a Month November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which parable shows a king forgiving a huge debt?

Select your answer to see how you score.

The Prodigal Son The Unforgiving Servant The Sower The Good Samaritan