|
Media Reports – February 4, 2007
Hamid Hayat trial:
Prosecutors downplay comments by juror
February 4, 2007 – Federal prosecutors have filed a 187-page brief opposing a new trial of Hamid Hayat, 23, a Pakistani American.
Defense attorneys, in their October motion, cited a statement by juror Alicia Lopez that jury foreman Joseph Cote made a "hangman gesture" and once said "hang him" in discussions with other jurors during the trial.
In opposition brief, prosecutors S. Robert Tice-Raskin and Laura Ferris, wrote that these bare bone allegations, on their face, are vague and ambiguous and do not constitute substantial evidence that Cote was actually biased against the defendant.
Defense attorneys also cited statements by jurors Lopez and Theresa Berkeley-Simmons that Cote used racial slurs during the trial, including his opinion that Pakistanis or Muslims all "look alike" if dressed the same.
The prosecutors said that it was far from clear whether Cote's reported statement was a 'acist statement. The statement does not seem to be aimed at "any individual or group in a marked or virulent derogatory fashion," the prosecutors wrote.
Also highlighted in the defense motion are Cote's post-trial statements to an Atlantic magazine reporter suggesting that, when deliberating, he likened Hayat to young Pakistani men responsible for London subway bombings.
The Atlantic article should be given little weight given its "double-hearsay nature," and testimony regarding jury deliberations is inadmissible, the prosecutors answered.
Beyond that, they said, the "mere fact that the foreperson recalled the London bombings or that some of the bombers were Pakistani does not suggest he is prejudiced against Pakistanis or Muslims; that recollection is simply a neutral recollection of widely reported and known information."
Cote spoke in the Atlantic article in 2006 of "new rules of engagement" that he viewed as applying in terrorism cases, and said he did "not want to see the government lose its case." The prosecutors said this statement "reflected nothing more than his belief that the intent and danger issues were difficult and complex for the jury."
It may be recalled that on April 25, the jury found Hayat guilty of undergoing terrorist training in Pakistan, returning to Lodi prepared to wage violent jihad -- or holy war -- against fellow Americans, and lying to the FBI when initially questioned.
The defense motion said Hayat truthfully told the FBI he did not attend a terrorist training camp, but he eventually was worn down by the agents' marathon interrogation.
Hayat faces up to 39 years in prison. Sentencing has been postponed while U.S. District Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. considers the motion for a new trial.
Oral arguments on the motion are scheduled for next month.
|
