retry the case?

Well, GOOD!
I wouldn't let up on those predatory terrorist abettors either.

Posted by: jcom972 at October 22, 2007 1:19 PM

LGF has a link to the pdf of the verdict. Here's the short version.

The jury has found Defendant Mohammad El-Mezain NOT GUILTY on Counts 2-32. Chief Judge Fish has declared a mistrial as to Count 1 for this defendant and on all counts for each of the remaining defendants.

EL-Mezain will be retried on conspiracy to give material support to terrorists while the other five defendants face retrial on all other counts. The government may try to get the defendants to plead guilty to some of the charges rather then face another trial.I'd prefer guilty verdicts, but I'll take a mistrial over acquittal.

Posted by: Roxane at October 22, 2007 1:23 PM

Retry? Just deports these clowns already and save us taxpayers the money.

Posted by: Stinkyinfidel at October 22, 2007 1:26 PM

Debbie Schlussel says that she predicted a loss, given the lack of seriousness on the part of the Department of Justice.

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/10/sadly_another_s.html

Posted by: StillBreathing at October 22, 2007 1:57 PM

Let the trial begin again.

May the jury have on it some JW bloggers (Hoopers almost worst nightmare).

The revelations have been fantastic. Look for a lot more.

Posted by: dgene at October 22, 2007 2:01 PM

from the WFAA blog 11 am update "...The government’s evidence in the case was voluminous, and seemed to show at times that the defendants were not truthful about their feelings for Hamas and some of its associates. For example, the former CEO of Holy Land, Shukri Abu Baker, said that “war is deception” in a bugged meeting with Holy Land associates and other men linked to Hamas, speaking about how the charity needed to downplay its ties to keep operating in the cash-rich U.S. But much of the government’s evidence, peppered with a blizzard of Arabic names with various spellings, was delivered to jurors through often dry testimony of federal agents, who seldom were allowed to expand on the context of the hundreds of exhibits on which the prosecutors were querying them. In the end, it was up to jurors, chosen specifically because they had virtually no prior knowledge of the case or of Middle Eastern politics in general, to piece the government’s massive international jigsaw puzzle together. The found that after 19 days of deliberations, they could not."

Regular courtrooms and trials, with a juror requirement of "no knowledge" of Middle Eastern politics, or of islam, are inappropriate for the ongoing war, or for our defense in the ongoing jihad of islam.

Posted by: del at October 22, 2007 2:05 PM

Looks like David is off to a good start.

Horowitz's ill-researched and often nonsensical tirades reflect the content of his Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week.
http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2007/10/16/72163869

Spreading Awareness or Smearing a Religion?
http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp10102007.html

Say, when are all those "Islamofascists" actually going to get around to ridding our country of vile little sh*ts like Horowitz anyway? Whadda they waiting for, free truckloads of fertilizer?

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=10&year=2007&base_name=islamofascism_awareness_week_a

Google islamofacism awareness week and take statistics.... The leftard hippies are burning up their keyboards on this one.

Posted by: Abrog8 at October 22, 2007 2:15 PM

"Google islamofacism awareness week and take statistics.... The leftard hippies are burning up their keyboards on this one."

They should burn themselves up in the santa ana wild fires while they're at it.

Posted by: Stinkyinfidel at October 22, 2007 2:17 PM

Jihad in the federal courts.

I suppose it's better than hanging children in Iran, both are just as bad.

Posted by: cubano5 at October 22, 2007 4:04 PM

...in Muslim lands..i suspect there is no such thing as a hung jury...but there are hangings...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at October 22, 2007 4:56 PM

"So the campus Left is placing itself squarely on the side of those who want to implement the institutionalized oppression of women and religious minorities sanctioned by Islamic Sharia law, who deny the freedom of conscience, and want to impose upon the world a supremacist and totalitarian code".

The political Left alliance with IslamoFascism is very similar to the Nazi-Soviet alliance of 1939. Most of the so-called Communists at the time considered the West the enemy (for demented ideological reasons) and even Stalin refused to believe Churchill when Churchill warned Stalin that the Nazis were going to attack the USSR on June 22, 1941. (The British intelligence had Ultra which broke the Nazi code and "Lucy" a intelligence agent in Germany (Lucy was a devout anti-Nazi Christian who died in 1958) and both confirmed the attack as 6/22/1941.)

The left will be devoured by IslamoFascism as was Stalin in 1941 and only the "liberal" Western Democracies will save them from themselves. History is repeating itself here.

Posted by: Frank at October 22, 2007 5:49 PM

Let these HLF terds hop around and celebrate. Remember, Sami Al Arian was aquitted on many of his charges, ended up pleading guilty to a lesser charge,is or was in prison, and is supposed to be, or supposed to have been deported.

This ain't over.

Posted by: Prickzilla at October 22, 2007 6:31 PM

Wonder who threatened the jury.

Posted by: The Goobs at October 22, 2007 7:46 PM

Del,

Maybe some of this case could be tried in a tax court? I understand that due to the intricate nature of the tax laws, these courts do not use a jury. (Hope I have that correct.)

Magooey

Posted by: magooey at October 22, 2007 8:04 PM

The prosecution's key witness was a lawyer for the Israeli domestic security agency Shin Bet who testified under a false name. He said Palestinian charities that got Holy Land money were controlled by Hamas.

Neal, the juror, said he found the Shin Bet officer's testimony unconvincing — that he would expect an Israeli official to condemn an ally of Palestinians

This sounds like prejudice - distrusting sworn testimony because he would expect condemnation. Since any case will rely on testimony about what is done with the money in Palestine, this juror makes it almost impossible to get a conviction.

Posted by: davidp at October 22, 2007 8:51 PM

Maybe some of this case could be tried in a tax court? I understand that due to the intricate nature of the tax laws, these courts do not use a jury. (Hope I have that correct.)

Magooey

They finally got Capone for tax evasion, so there is a long history of getting the bad guys by going after their tax malfeasance.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at October 22, 2007 9:22 PM

The Goobs,

I wonder who was on the jury. It seems likely some Muslims, some stupid people and some others of indeterminate status. Remember the OJ case? This one at least had some (confused) dissenters. There's not much hard information, though.

"Jurors announced they were finished last Thursday after 19 days of deliberations. Judge Fish was out of town, however, delaying the announcement of the verdicts until this morning. Fish asked each juror if he or she agreed with the verdicts after reading them in court. Three stunned the courtroom by saying they did not.

"Your verdict must be unanimous and it's apparent to me from the answers of three members of the jury in respect to my question that the verdicts that I read earlier do not rep the unanimous view of the jury," Fish told the jury, initially sending them back to the jury room for more deliberations.

Fish declared a mistrial about an hour later, voiding announced acquittals for HLF itself and many counts against fundraiser Mufid Abdulqader and New Jersey representative Abdulrahman Odeh. HLF's original chairman Mohammed El-Mezain was acquitted on all counts, except one conspiracy charge involving material support for terrorists."

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2007/10/confusion_clouds_hlf_verdicts.php

"The outcome came after confusion in court, when three former leaders of the group were initially found not guilty. When jurors were polled, however, three said the verdicts were read incorrectly.

The judge sent the jury back to resolve the differences, but after about an hour, received a note saying 11 jurors felt further deliberation would not lead to a unanimous decision."

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/foreign/display.var.1778595.0.0.php

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at October 22, 2007 11:20 PM

I can live with the hope that, re-trying them will provide a better opportunity to reach unanimity on a verdict. Whereas, an acquittal, would have really p*ssed me off.

Posted by: tsarbomba29 at October 23, 2007 1:11 PM

Cowards, cowards, Dallas cowards! Yet another 12 American cowards don't dare to convict terrorists, not because they don't think those are terrorists, but because they know they are, and are afraid the jihadists will learn where they live and will go after them and their families. End the jury trial system, or it will end this country!
Vote for Rudy and pray it is not too late.

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Posted by: Enragedsince1999 at October 23, 2007 1:42 PM

Mistrial? I swore a blue and purple streak when I read that and I abhor profanity. As another blogger posted, I too wonder who paid them off.
Dallas has about 50,000 Muslims & more all the time. Girls in hijab working in banks, grocery stores etc. Makes me want to throw up! Can't we stop immigration?

Posted by: youngtimer at October 23, 2007 3:02 PM