U.S. District Court Judge John Koeltl in New York Oct. 25 upheld activist attorney Lynne Stewart’s conviction on terrorist conspiracy charges, finding that allegations by her lawyers were unfounded that a juror on the case feared for her life and was coerced. Koeltl denied Stewart’s request for a new trial or a hearing to investigate charges that jurors were either intimidated or prejudiced against Stewart to begin with.
Stewart’s lawyers cited letters from a female juror, identified only as Juror No. 39, who the defense claimed had written a letter saying she cast her guilty vote “only as a result of the fear and intimidation I was made to feel for my life” during deliberations. Koeltl concluded that the letter allegedly sent by Juror No. 39 a month after the verdict and “was plainly written with the assistance of somebody other than Juror No. 39.” He also dismissed the charge that Juror No. 82, a military veteran, was prejudiced against Stewart.
For reasons of security, the jury was anonymous and partially sequestered, escorted to and from court by U.S. marshals.
In a separate opinion upholding the convictions of Stewart, 65, and two co-defendants, Judge Koeltl also ruled that they were not protected by the First Amendment when they released a statement by her imprisoned client, Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, in violation of restrictions imposed by the federal authorities.
Stewart argued that statements she issued on the sheikh’s behalf were protected by the First Amendment because he was merely his expressing an “opinion.” But Koetl wrote: “This argument is without merit. Abdel Rahman was found to have participated in the … conspiracy to murder, rather than having merely engaged in advocacy. [The free speech] analysis does not apply to unlawful speech-acts such as conspiracy or aiding or abetting.”
Stewart and her co-defendants, Ahmed Sattar, a paralegal and Mohammed Yousry, an interpreter, were convicted of passing messages from Abdel-Rahman regarding a cease-fire in Egypt’s Islamic Group. (NOTE: Although Patricia Hurtado wrote in her Newsday acount that the defendants were convicted of passing “messages” to the Sheikh’s “followers,” in her June 2002 interview with WW4 REPORT, Stewart asserted that the only message that actually got out was a press release that went to a Reuters reporter in Egypt.)
Stewart, who was convicted in February, is scheduled to be sentenced by Koeltl on Dec. 22. (Newsday, Oct. 26)
See our last report on the Lynne Stewart case.
excellent news, bill. thanks
excellent news, bill. thanks for the update.
One detects some sarcasm…
…we hope.
[untitled]
Recently an attorney for a mafia hitman was convicted for smuggling out a message to collegues of the hitman about killing someone else. Now,as was reported in the papersthe FBI had wiretapped the mob attorney while he had the jail house meeting. I never once saw the NLG types ever blast the government for that !
Lynne Stewart collaborated with a ring of Jew-Hating Islamic Nazi types like Sattar who put out a Fatweh to murder and slaughter Jews right here in the USA.
Now, when these Al Quida worshippers do seriuos terror attacks 9-11 style on Jewish targets the next time around, and some of those self-hating Jews in the NLG lose family or loved ones, then and only then they will scream out, ” we should have let Lynne Stewart pay the ultimate price for her Jew-Hating terror-worship,and let the govt put het away ! “
Bogus arguments
First of all, we have no reason to believe anything you post if you don’t provide links or sources. More importantly, Lynne Stewart’s actions were not analogous to smuggling out a mafia hit order. She smuggled out a press release from the Blind Sheikh saying the Islamic Group should consider the possibility of breaking the ceasefire. Ahmed Sattar was a postal worker, not a shiekh, and had absolutely no authority to issue a fatwa. Why don’t you get your facts straight (and learn how to spell) before you tell other people what to think.