Extending Human Rights to Jihadis Dedicated to Koranic Jihad Counselling to Mass Murder
"The question here is not actual prejudice, which in these kinds of circumstances is impossible to gauge, but prejudice to the due administration of justice flowing from the denial of a jury selection method which was in law properly invoked."
"[The jury selection process allows defendants to make decisions whether prospective jurors may be questioned on impartiality]."
"It was an error of law for the trial judge to refuse to exercise a discretion based on a view that a remedy not sought by Jaser would have better achieved his ends."
"Here, one jury was selected for both appellants. In the circumstances of this case, as the jury was not properly constituted for Jaser, it cannot be considered to have been properly constituted for Esseghaier."
Ontario Court of Appeal
"The decision might be a bit hard for some people to get through, because there's a lot of technical language.""But the bottom line is the fair jury selection process is a hallmark of Canadian justice. Mr. Jaser has been in jail since 2013, and still hasn't had a trial in front of a jury that was chosen legally, so we think this is the right result."Megan Savard, one of Jaser's lawyers"Fair jury selection is especially important in cases with saturation-level publicity and it can be hard to find impartial jurors in a highly publicized case like this one.""So it is important to use the jury selection procedure created by Parliament. Jury selection is one of the few things that a defendant gets to choose around mode of trial and the courts are always protective of it."Frank Addario, one of Jaser's lawyers
The Ontario Court of Appeal has ordered a new trial for Raed Jaser, left, and Chiheb Esseghaier. The men were found guilty on terror-related charges in connection with a plot to derail a passenger train. (John Mantha/Chris Young/The Canadian Press) |
Found guilty at trial of terrorism in connection with a plot they
decided upon out of many discussed between the two men -- to derail a
Via Rail passenger train between Canada and the United States -- Raed
Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier have been the beneficiaries of the Ontario
Court of Appeal finding the jury that had convicted them in 2015 had not
been properly selected. It was the lawyers for Raed Jaser who had
challenged the legality of the jury makeup, but his victory in being
granted a new trial has been extended to his fellow jihadist Chiheb
Esseghaier.
During the trial that convicted him of terrorism charges,
Esseghaier scorned the Canadian justice system. It was only under Sharia
law that Koranic justice could be meted out. And since the Koran extols
the virtues of jihad and exhorts its faithful to embrace jihad, the man
held that he was fully justified in plotting a terrorist attack with
the co-defendant for the purpose of avenging Muslims in countries that
the West had identified as harbouring threats to the West through a
series of deadly attacks.
The trial that saw these men being found guilty on eight
terror-related charges between them saw them sentenced to life in
prison. Life in prison in Canada is nothing like a sentence of life
imprisonment; these two would-be slaughterers of innocent life under
Canadian law would have the opportunity of appearing before a parole
board in 2023, a decade after they were arrested, eight years after
being found guilty of terrorism, to plead for parole accelerating the
opportunity of becoming free men to roam the streets of Toronto and
Montreal to resume their psychotic fantasies of vengeance.
Following their convictions on terrorism charges, through the
lawyers representing their interests both challenged their convictions,
Esseghaier continuing to represent himself after firing his
court-appointed lawyers. According to the legal finding of the Ontario
Court of Appeal recently brought down, the trial judge had erred in
denying Jaser the method of jury selection he had stated was his
preference, that prospective members of the jury be questioned on their
impartiality.
Given that the news media were loud, front and centre for months
on end about this case and the two jihadis' actions and plots and the
testimony of a undercover FBI agent who had convinced them that he was
willing to aid and finance their plot as a sympathetic-to-the-cause
fellow Muslim, no one could possibly among the general public, fail to
have consumed the news where it was made clear that the case against the
two was fairly ironclad, as terrorists.
The sham that questioning would result in, to elicit from each
juror a self-professed capacity to remain neutral irrespective of having
been aware of the details of the case through daily reportage, was
dismissed out of hand by the presiding judge. He decided against having
the jury pool appointing 'triers' who would question the other jurors as
to their capacity to wipe their minds clean of impressions of guilt, to
view the accused neutrally, to arrive at an opinion as to guilt or
innocence.
The trial judge responded to Jaser's request for the jury to be
chosen by rotating triers with the intention of excluding any jurors who
professed an incapacity to be neutral when sitting in judgement at
trial by stating he was not prepared to grant the request since the
issue could be solved by the use of static triers, an alternative he
imposed, and now rejected by the Court of Appeal, which has ordered new
trials for both convicted terrorists.
With the presentation of the same evidence that had been used in
the original trial it is difficult to see what can be achieved in new
trials other than taxpayer expense in a situation that can only
logically result in a like finding of guilt on the part of both men. The
recording where they discuss terror plots to be carried out to
retaliate for military actions Canada took part in, in Muslim countries,
the photographs showing the two examining the likeliest site they would
use to derail a train full of people over an overpass for maximum
carnage, will all be re-presented.
This represents yet another instance where Western justice bends
over backward in an energetic, guilt-ridden, good-faith response to
deadly jihadist violence against its own civilian communities to ensure
that those who dedicate themselves to the annihilation of innocent lives
are still deserving of 'justice' untrammelled by any vestige of due
punishment accomplished by sidestepping the fine points of the law.
The situation is right in line with 'progressive' values that
punctiliously avoid identifying Islam with violence, Muslims with
terrorism, profiling and common sense observations that terrorism in
today's world is invariably linked to the grim pathology of Islamist
ideology of conquest. This is uncivil, and wildly unacceptable to draw
conclusions from reality to identify Muslims with terrorism. And so
subterfuges and delicate maneuvering is undertaken to avoid giving
offence while at the same time practising limp defence.
Obsequious and nerve-rattling conciliation that only results in
the Muslim world responding with contempt, recognizing the weakness of
the tolerance that the West sees as its strength and the world of Islam
identifies as fear and weak-willed responses from a non-Muslim world
community ripe for conquest.
The appeal in the case centres on the way the first trial's jury was selected. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press) |
Labels: Canada, Court of Appeal, Justice, Terrorism, Via Rail
<< Home