On Day 4, the TV and radio folks finally got fed. Specifically – in what one TV reporter described as "the worst television story ever" because of its complete lack of video elements – the Sami Al-Arian terrorism trial kicked into high gear on its fourth day with a noon press conference held by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), complete with protesters and signs.
CAIR's Ahmed Bedier stepped up to the microphones in front of an easel full of polling data showing Floridians' bias against Muslims, and began a reasoned argument as to why the trial against Al-Arian and three others accused of running and aiding Palestinian Islamic Jihad should be moved out of Tampa.
"We're calling for a change of venue in the trial of Sami Al-Arian," Bedier started. He didn't get too far down the road on that thought, however, before he lost his crowd of reporters to Al-Arian's lawyer, William Moffitt, who had chosen this exact second to exit the federal courthouse in downtown Tampa and make his first statement since jury selection began on May 16. Up until that Thursday, Moffitt had been silent, pleading that to feed the press would harm his chances of winning a change of venue.
Moffitt was careful in choosing his words so as not to insult the 6-man, 6-woman jury that had been selected earlier that morning. But he clearly continued to believe that the Tampa Bay area has been tainted against his client.
But he'll have to live with it, he said – and a few days later, on May 23, Judge James S. Moody Jr. confirmed that the trial would stay in Tampa.
"It is a jury panel I believe has some preconceived notions about my client. I've never felt that way before." -William MoffittThe defendants – Al-Arian, Hatem Naji Fariz of Spring Hill, Sameeh Hammoudeh (a former USF student) and Ghassan Zayed Ballut of Tinley Park, Ill. – are accused of using Al-Arian's USF think tank and a Palestinian charity to raise and funnel money to Palestinian Islamic Jihad, allowing it to continue terrorist attacks that resulted in 100 deaths in Israel and the occupied territories.
Those attacks are certain to form the emotional fulcrum of the trial. On May 18, the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz reported that the U.S. government is flying 100 Israeli terror attack survivors, relatives of those killed, paramedics, police and clean-up volunteers to testify in Tampa early in June. That testimony, combined with police reports, video of the aftermath of the attacks and forensic evidence, will surely be used by the prosecution to jolt the jury early.
During three days of juror questioning, the court heard from plenty of people who had heard of the case against Al-Arian, which paints him as a mastermind for Palestinian Islamic Jihad and a fundraiser for its terrorist activities. Many of those folks said they had formed an opinion. Some said they'd been influenced by the 9/11 attacks, even though neither Al-Arian nor Palestinians in general have ever been linked to those terrorist acts. Other potential jurors had sons or nephews or brothers serving in Iraq. "I admire the FBI," one said. Some had heard about the case during Betty Castor's unsuccessful U.S. Senate campaign, in which Al-Arian was vilified and Castor criticized for her handling of his employment at the University of South Florida while she was president. Many prospective jurors said they didn't believe most of what they read in newspapers or heard on television.I heard only two people strongly insist that they already believed the defendants not guilty, that they suspected the government of trumping these charges in support of the "War on Terrorism." Those two prospective jurors were excused.
All of the ones who survived the cut, however, said the magic words: They could set aside any opinions or bias and render a fair verdict. The jury seems fairly representative; mostly white, evenly split among men and women, with one African-American and one Asian. Several had ties to the military; almost half said they don't pay attention to the news.
In the end, Moody seated a 12-member jury with as many as 10 alternates. Moffitt and other defense counsel used up all the peremptory challenges, or strikes, they had. One juror stricken off the alternate list, a flight attendant, choked up during her account of being in the air on 9/11.
The jury includes a Vietnamese woman with a brother who served in Iraq; an account manager at a physician's office; an 18-year reservist; a man whose wife is a retired sheriff's deputy; and an Air Force veteran who served in Vietnam in a non-combat role. Under Moody's orders – which he loosened somewhat after media outlets including the Weekly Planet filed a legal challenge – the media is not allowed to name any of the anonymous jurors, give their workplaces or any details that would allow them to be identified.
Moody, for his part, was extremely suspicious of the press during jury selection week, and it wasn't just because media lawyers pushed for more access to information about jurors and their biases. On the first day of the trial, a photographer followed prospective jurors to lunch downtown and took their photos. In his order modifying his gag rule on publishing information about jurors, Moody mischaracterized the media's position on getting the information, insisting that the press "made clear that publication of the names of jurors in this case was their principle concern." (For the record, none of the media lawyers argued to get the names of the anonymous jurors, just to be allowed to publish accounts of anything that is said in open court.)
It was also an interesting week for the St. Petersburg Times. First, it hired a "big gun" from the Miami Herald, Meg Laughlin, to cover the trial, helping out its shorthanded Tampa office. But due to a moving snafu, she could not be in Tampa for jury selection. Laughlin has covered such big stories for the Herald as the Iraq War and allegations of ballot fraud in the 2004 presidential election in Florida. The Times' Bill Varian filled in capably.During the week and largely unnoticed by most, the New York Sun – a strongly pro-Israel right-wing broadsheet – reported that FBI documents released in February as the result of a lawsuit filed by Al-Arian's brother-in-law, Mazen Al-Najjar, alleged that "an ally of Mr. Al-Najjar" has co-opted one local media, the St. Petersburg Times newspaper." That ally, according to the newspaper's assessment of the FBI agent's 1997 report, was Al-Arian. The Sun quoted the documents as saying Al-Arian "will muster legal and media support from his liberal political contacts."
In a conversation with the Sun, Times President and Editor Paul Tash denied any infiltration by Al-Arian, adding, " 'We haven't been in the tank for either the cops or the crooks. We've very much tried to play it straight, and we'll continue to do so.'"
The Tampa Tribune got this ball rolling with its 1995 series on Al-Arian and allegations of his ties to terrorism. For the trial, the paper is fully geared up. During most of jury selection, the Trib had two reporters in the courtroom (original series writer Michael Fechter and federal courts beat writer Elaine Silvestrini) as well as two researchers whose job was to take down as much as possible about every prospective juror. That allowed the Trib to publish a graphic that listed backgound information and quotes from the 12 chosen jurors.
The trial of Sami Al-Arian and three other defendants on terrorism-related conspiracy charges is set to begin on Monday, June 6, at the federal courthouse in downtown Tampa, 801 N. Florida Ave. Limited space is available for those who wish to observe the trial in person, including an overflow room that shows the trial by video link. Seating in both the courtroom and overflow room is first-come, first-served.
This article appears in May 25-31, 2005.
