-
Judge Pohl re-convenes the military commission, and tallies the show-ups and no-shows. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is in the house, as is Ammar al-Baluchi; their three co-accused are not.
-
The prosecutor Edward Ryan stands at the mic as the judge reconvenes the commission. Visibly impassioned, Ryan presents the government’s argument on AE018. He mentions some attention-grabbing examples o...
-
Audio technical difficulties apparently resolved, the commission reconvenes, with David Nevin still out front.
-
Your correspondents bid goodbye to Burba’s lakeside picnic tables, just before the military judge announces the resumption of proceedings. One accused, Ramzi Binal Shibh, has joined the group at the ELC...
-
A mish-mash-y discussion follows on motions to compel, the mish-mash being necessary for many reasons: because many substantive motions overlap, and thus call for interrelated but separate compulsion req...
-
Ruiz remains at the podium to argue another compulsion motion, AE031F (which also is styled 032H and 133E, given its relevance not merely to AE031, but to other motions, too).
-
Another series of motions to compel awaits us, this one bearing on AE031, the defense’s motion to dismiss the case for unlawful influence.
-
Motion to compel number two (AE008M) pertains, like the day’s earlier motion, to the former Convening Authority’s testimony. Retired Vice Admiral MacDonald told the commission that, during his pre-refer...
-
Motion to compel time---beginning with those regarding AE008, the defense’s motion to dismiss for defective referral. First is a bid to compel testimony from Michael Breslin, legal advisor to the Conven...
-
And we’re off.
-
The day’s final protective order motion: AE013JJ, Connell’s motion to amend the order, so as to permit an accused to participate in his own defense. By this, Connell refers to the extent to which an acc...
-
James Connell III, an attorney for Ammar al-Baluchi and the day’s undisputed protective order maven, returns. Now his subject is AE013II, wherein counsel has moved to clarify the protective order’s rule...
