Update on Ali al-Timimi’s Hearing Last Tuesday

12 Comments

1. 

   AmatulWadood

   October 28, 2008 at 4:45 PM

   Ameen.

   (12:21) وَاللّهُ غَالِبٌ عَلَى أَمْرِهِ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ

   Reply
2. 

   ibn alHyderabadee

   October 28, 2008 at 4:56 PM

   Ameen

   Reply
3. 

   ilmsummitee

   October 28, 2008 at 7:36 PM

   وَيَمْكُرُونَ وَيَمْكُرُ اللّهُ وَاللّهُ خَيْرُ الْمَاكِرِينَ (8:30)

   Reply
4. 

   ilmsummitee

   October 28, 2008 at 7:39 PM

   وَاللَّهُ وَلِيُّ الْمُتَّقِينَ

   Reply
5. 

   aarij

   October 28, 2008 at 10:38 PM

   It’s so painful to read this about our beloved Shaikh. Subhan Allah, what a test this has been.

   Reply
6. 

   abu abdAllah, the Houstonian

   October 29, 2008 at 1:25 AM

   bismillah. AllahoMusta’aan! this update paints the results of the trial in the best light in my opinion (as an observer, not as an attorney). perhaps the single most redeeming quality of the US Judiciary (as a whole, but especially at its highest levels of appeal) in criminal cases has been the way in which cases of Prosecutorial misconduct have been treated. especially when exculpatory evidence has been suppressed (sorry about the law-speak: especially when a prosecutor has deliberately withheld and/or conspired (with police, politicians, or even lower-court-judges) to withhold evidence that would prove or help to prove the innocence of a defendant) — in such situations relief for the defendant has extended so far as to void the prior conviction(s) and then to further punish the government/prosecutor by declaring that the defendant cannot be retried on those charges.

   i pray that Allah will give such “extraordinary” relief to Shaykh Dr. Ali Al-Timimi, or even better than what i can imagine, for that would be easy for Him.

   a few aspects of the first trial may affect the amount of hope to express here: was the first trial a jury trial? if it was a jury trial, then the role of the jury is to decide whether evidence is exculpatory or not — in other words only a jury could declare “that these [missing] conversations [mentioned in the article] would have not helped him.”

   but if Dr. Al-Timimi waived his right to a jury trial… then he would have thereby given that power of the jury to his trial judge. in which case, the judge’s ruling in his appeal may be wrong but still legally binding, wAllaho’Alim.

   with regard to:

   1- She said she would not de-classify the calls thereby allowing Dr. Al Timimis’ attorneys to show that they would have been useful in his defense.

   is there no attorney on his defense team with a high enough security clearance to see the evidence (and then, if necessary, to argue to the judge in closed and classified hearings with the govt. present)?

   it shows we need more Muslims to pursue careers that give them such a security clearance that they could help avert evil in a case like this. wAllaho’Alim.

   Reply
7. 

   abu abdAllah, the Houstonian

   October 29, 2008 at 4:30 AM

   bismillah. and the… [edited by abu AbdAllah: the post to which i replied has been disapproved/withdrawn… so my reply is unnecessary, too… for now.]

   Reply
8. 

   AbuZakariyya

   October 31, 2008 at 6:16 PM

   those going for hajj, please make dua for him and other Muslim prisoners on the day of Arafah (and ofcourse at other times too)!

   Reply
9. 

   Ziyana Al-Rawahi

   November 2, 2008 at 10:22 PM

   Dr. Ali Al-Timimi had a trial by jury. Both his main trial attorney Edward MacMahon and his main appeals attorney Jonathan Turley have very high security clearance, higher than the prosecutor. The problem is that the government purposely abusing the law by using exparte filings (eleven so far) and over classified material such as pure legal arguments. This has effectively created a one way communication the government and the judge for the last four years. Thereby denying Dr. Al-Timimi the ability to assist his lawyers and denying his lawyers the ability to prove his innocence.

   In the October 23rd hearing it was established that the government did violate his constitutional and legal rights by illegally wiretapping him without a warrant and by withholding evidence that he asked for prior to the trial. However, the judge is still denying relief in this case and has asked the government to go back and search (NSA, FBI, CIA, DOD) for five phone conversations which will prove his innocence.

   The question is how we can be certain the government will produce these conversations given its track record of five years of lying in court.

   Reply
10. 

    Anonymous

    November 3, 2008 at 10:12 AM

    Ziyana,

    1. Bamford’s recent book on the NSA wiretapping is a must-read.

    2. Why would those 5 conversations prove his innocence?

    Reply
11. 

    zaki

    February 14, 2009 at 1:25 PM

    We hope this fitnah that Shaykh Ali is going through will remove his sins and elevate his station in Jannah ‘inshaa Allaah.

    Reply
12. 

    Salih Muhammad

    November 10, 2009 at 6:29 AM

    Is there an address that we may send letters to?

    Reply