GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA—No. 2, a tanned U.S. Air Force colonel, Gulf War vet and father of three, volunteered to come to this island courthouse to serve as a juror for the war crimes trial of Canadian Omar Khadr.
“I think we owe it to our legal system to do it right,” he told the court.
To Army Lt.-Col. Jon Jackson, Khadr’s military-appointed lawyer, he said: “I actually have respect for you doing this.”
Nos. 3 and 5 said they were fans of the television series CSI. They raised their hands again when asked if they believed Pentagon prosecutors had to be able to present forensic evidence to prove Khadr was guilty of murder. The Army colonel with closely shorn white hair and combat experience in Iraq — No. 4 — lost two of his soldiers in a 2004 night ambush in Iraq.
“Do you feel a need for revenge?” asked Col. Patrick Parrish, the military judge presiding over the Khadr case. “No sir, I don’t,” answered No. 4.
The 15 members of the U.S. Air Force, Army, Navy and Marines were flown here this week from bases around the world to serve as the jury for the first war crimes trial to take place under the Obama administration. Lawyers for both the defence and prosecution questioned the service members Tuesday, challenging their biases, trying to weed out those who they believe would be unable to look at the case dispassionately.
Before them sat a very different looking Khadr. The 23-year-old came to court wearing a grey jacket and salmon-coloured tie — only the second time in the nearly two dozen appearances he has come to court not wearing prison garb.
Khadr’s Canadian lawyer Dennis Edney said Khadr agreed to the clothing change early Tuesday, sending him running out the holding cell and through rooms of the courthouse until he fortuitously stumbled on closet from which he “borrowed” a jacket, pants, tie and dress shoes.
“I was so enthused I found this closet and raided it,” he told reporters. More suits were bought for Khadr from a navy department store Tuesday night.
The only other time Khadr came not wearing the prison uniform was the first time he appeared before the military court on Jan. 11, 2006. The Canadian journalists in attendance snickered when they saw “Roots Athletics” emblazoned across the 19-year-old’s chest — his lawyers none too subtle attempt to dress him as a Canadian teenager.
Jackson began his address Tuesday to the potential jurors saying it was a privilege to represent Khadr. He asked Khadr to stand and address the jurors. “How are you?” Khadr said smiling to the solemn-faced panel.
A minimum of five jurors must be selected for trial to decide whether Khadr is guilty of the charges of murder in violation of the laws of war, attempted murder, spying, conspiracy and providing material support to terrorism.
The Pentagon alleges that Khadr threw a grenade during a July 2002 firefight that fatally wounded Delta Force soldier Christopher Speer. The jury selection not only provided a glimpse at the personalities of the men and women who will decide Khadr’s fate, but also the strengths and weaknesses of the prosecution’s case.
Prosecutor Jeff Groharing, a former Marine and the only American lawyer who has been with the case since the start, told the panel that the government would not present a witness who saw Khadr throw the grenade. After the judge explained the definition of circumstantial evidence, all 15 agreed that, hypothetically, Khadr could be convicted on this alone.
Groharing also focused on the “fog of war” concept, asking if they understood that sometimes conflicting accounts of battle occurred during armed conflict.
As for questions about CSI, the popular television drama of a Crime Scene Investigation units? It is a common lament among police who call it the “CSI factor” — meaning that the show has perpetrated the perception that every case must have scientific proof of the crime (something that appears to be lacking in Khadr case.)
Jackson’s questions suggested that Khadr’s defence would focus on his age and the influence of his father, reputed Al Qaeda financier Ahmed Said Khadr (Pakistani forces killed Khadr’s father in 2003). He asked how many jurors had strict parents? Only four of the potential jurors said their fathers were not the main presence in their upbringing.
Were children a product of their upbringing? No. 15 thought so, saying it mattered if people were raised in “Compton or Beverley Hills.”
The jury selection continues Wednesday. The trial is expected to last several weeks.
Be the first to comment