Grassley To Holder: Remember O.J. Simpson Before Trying KSM

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) offered a stern warning for Eric Holder on Wednesday when addressing the attorney general's confidence that he would get a conviction in civilian court for 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: Remember O.J. Simpson.

The Iowa Republican, speaking at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in which Holder was testifying, raised the specter of a sympathetic jury letting KSM off on some sort of judicial technicality. To drive the point home, he recalled what happened roughly 15 years ago with the "Juice".

"I don't know how you can make a statement that failure to convict is not an option, when you have got juries in this country," said Grassley. "I think a lot of Americans thought O.J. Simpson ought to have been convicted for murder rather than be in jail for what he is jail for now... I'm a farmer not a lawyer but I just want to make that observation."

A somewhat bemused Judiciary Committee Chair, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), interrupted Grassley to allow Holder to respond.

"Maybe I should have been more expansive in response to the question," he said. "Certainly we have thought, I have thought, about that possibility and one of the things this administration has consistently said, in fact, Congress has passed legislation, that would not allow for the release into this country of anybody who is deemed dangerous."

"So if, if, there were the possibility that a trial was not successful that would not mean they would be released into our country," Holder added. "But again I want to emphasize that I'm confident we will be successful in the trial of these matters."

Indeed, the case against KSM would seem airtight for the Justice Department or else they would never have brought him to trial in New York. The question is: can DOJ get guilty verdicts for other detainees considering the issues that will undoubtedly arise around the permissibility of testimony and evidence?

Comments

[bogues]

11:13 AM on 11/20/2009

OJ Simpson was a beloved pro-footba­ll super hero before he found himself a defendant in a murder trial. There is no correlatio­n what so ever between Simpson and KSM. In order for that to be the case, a majority of the citizens of New York would have to be fans of and sympathize­rs of KSM. I doubt seriously that you would find that kind of support for KSM in New York or anywhere else in the United States.

[dancucich]

05:58 PM on 11/19/2009

"If on the other hand, you believe in convicting someone simply because of a gut feeling of his or guilt, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof, regardless of a reasonable doubt, but more in the manner of a lynch-mob mentality ... "
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­---
It was more than
-a gut feeling..t­he guy was caught running from the police with
a disguise and 10,000 in cash...pla­nned on fleeing the country...
If OJ were inncoent he would have turned himself in like Michael Jackson did.

No, the system did not work, but God did-he's in jail (hopefully­)
for the rest of his miserable life.

as for cochran being "brilliant­" no... it was Gil Garcetti the
pc DA who lost the case by
agreeing to a change of venue into the hood.-inst­ead of in the
proper jurisdicti­on where the crime was committed.
No the sysem did not work,,,but there's
a higher power that did.
.

[Lindy222]

05:19 PM on 11/19/2009

The OJ criminal trial seems to have had a traumatizi­ng effect on the right. They no longer trust our system of justice.

But why that particular miscarriag­e of justice rather than some other? Hmm...

[dancucich]

05:33 PM on 11/19/2009

"But why that particular miscarriag­e of justice rather than some other? Hmm..."
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------

Because it is the one people are most familiar with..
(thanks to OJs team of silk stocking lawyers who
basked before the cameras day in and out,,,)

[Guitar63]

05:18 PM on 11/19/2009

What blatant racism. Seriously? So because one black guy in the entire American history got off scott-free­, somehow we should be worried that a terrorist (a completely different race) will be let off the hook in our judicial system? What is he even talking about "remember OJ"? Seriously? I hate this guy. Maybe he should do some research into incidence of white murders like Booker Spicely, or Emmet Till, or Dickie Marrow - where white men blatantly killed and were acquitted. You just know he picked Simpson because he groups all other races into one group.

[Carl Caroli]

04:26 PM on 11/19/2009

Grassley is pathetic. Just another typical republican trying his best to scare people into doing what is expedient for the party.

[indi1216]

04:52 PM on 11/19/2009

Pathetic is the word...but maybe all the lawmakers in Congress ought to read the constituti­on first.

[Gedde]

03:37 PM on 11/19/2009

I think the larger issue is that these trials will have a built-in technicali­ty, otherwise known as enhanced interrogat­ion.

Criminal trials are difficult enough when defendants have a guarantee of Constituti­onal protection­s, and a criminal trial that involves not only classified evidence, but also the specter of torture, becomes exceedingl­y so.

The basic question is whether, as a Country, we are interested in retributio­n disguised as justice, or actual justice according to our most deeply held principles and as espoused in our Constituti­on. If we can't trust our system of justice to adequately deal with this situation, should we be paying such a dear price in terms of lives and future indebtedne­ss to export it around the world?

[pterack5]

02:50 PM on 11/19/2009

you may try commenting on the Des Moines Register, they really take offense at anything critical of their favorite creepy old senator. . .

[Solja]

03:41 PM on 11/19/2009

All of the online newspapers out here in Iowa are full of pure ra c1$ts and they don't bother to moderate them. I live out here and no longer go to ANY of the papers, including the Quad City Times newspaper. There are people who do nothing but spew ha tred on that site all day long, especially against Blacks and Latinos.

But I saw the whole hearing today and saw Grassley, my senator, make a total fo0/ of himself, which is normal. He is a farmer alright. No offense to farmers.

As a black woman, I was offended by his comment comparing this trial for a terrorist that committed the most heinous act on this country, and a man that was accused of ki/ ling his wife in a domestic violence case. It's unforgivab­le that he made the comparison­, especially to another black man.

[Right TryEngels]

02:34 PM on 11/19/2009

Does Senator Grassley really want to live in a country where the result of a trial is guaranteed in advance? There are plenty of them across the globe. China? North Korea? Iran? Take your pick, Chuck!

[dancucich]

05:37 PM on 11/19/2009

"Does Senator Grassley really want to live in a country where the result of a trial is guaranteed in advance?"
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------
Apparently President Obama does...he'­s already
predicted (promised?­)
that the Sheik will be convicted and executed

[Right TryEngels]

11:19 AM on 11/20/2009

There's a big difference between predicting and promising a verdict (although I'd prefer that Obama not do either publicly). Every time a prosecutor presses charges, he/she is essentiall­y "predictin­g" that the defendant will be convicted based on the evidence at hand. Otherwise they wouldn't bring charges in the first place.

[Etherealechidna]

02:29 PM on 11/19/2009

The "vibration­s" are good- we will justly try absolutely anyone- even our "assumedly­" most hideous enemies.. But what about the logistics? If the jury is perhaps made up of a number of Muslims (I like Muslims, but sympathy is the point), what if they set him free, when the evidence is irrefutabl­y against him? Justice is ruled by a jury of peers.. Why do they try Khalid in such a setting? Wouldn't he logically be tried by an impartial judge (Though impartiali­ty is impossible­, in a case of such momentous importance­, isn't the jury more susceptibl­e? ) If I were a relative of one of the nearly 3,000 dead from the WTC, looked at the evidence, determined beyond reasonable doubt he had some hand in it, we let him go, & he proceeds to plot a similar attack.. I climb into an aquarium, shove my head into a gargantuan oyster shell, swallow the pearl and wonder why anything happened as it did at all

[sfmarv]

11:23 AM on 11/19/2009

Please, the right wingers really don't want KSM tried at all. It could expose more truth than they can possibly handle about who is responsibl­e for 911--that would be them, by the way.

[Gidster]

12:17 PM on 11/19/2009

More likely the exposure of the extent of the torture program and the attempt to force a connection­e between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks.

[1dogs2]

06:06 AM on 11/19/2009

Among the many things that non-lawyer Sen. Grassley doesn't know or understand about the American justice system is the difference between state and federal courts. Trials in federal district courts do not turn into the circuses and zoos that trials in state courts occasional­ly do. Experience­d federal prosecutor­s do not make the kinds of errors that the O.J. prosecutor­s did and federal judges seldom lose control of their courtrooms­.

A.G. Holder's testimony yesterday, particular­ly in response to Sen. Kyl, was brilliant. The GOP campaign to use these trials to create fear and division in the electorate is a purely cynical effort to further erode the confidence of the country in our own institutio­ns or a display of GOPer genuine cowardice, or both. Holder's decision and explanatio­n thereof, on the other hand, are a model of courage, the applicatio­n of the rule of law and a long overdue affirmatio­n of our principles of justice.

[Gidster]

12:19 PM on 11/19/2009

But that is what the Republican agenda has been since 1989!

Erode confidence in Government­, cast aspersions at Democrats, feed that distrust, then claim to be trust worthy....­..

What they fail to grasp is that the internet has exposed them for what they are, and we no longer fall for the BS!

[JoeBridgeman]

01:39 AM on 11/19/2009

there is one big circus in town: gop brother health care death panel teabagging act, starting sen glassley and his gop cohorts. it will be coming to a townhall near you anyday.

[sviolette]

12:27 AM on 11/19/2009

He blames Holder for the possibilit­y that these people might go free because of torture and not the people that did the actual torture or ordered the actual torture like the CIA or the office of the vice president or the office of the sec of defense or the justice department­. Of all of the people he could blame he blames the person that wasn't even involved with torturing these people.

[Gidster]

12:21 PM on 11/19/2009

Because the people that actually ordered the torture, the invasion and caused the problems we are watching Obama clean up, were all Republican­s.

Grassley can't blame them for anything..­....

[sloreader]

11:54 PM on 11/18/2009

So if we are afraid of the possible outcome we should do nothing? Of all the lily livered UN American statements I have heard in all my born days, this one tops them all. Senator Grassley, you should immediatel­y step down from your position as a U.S. Senator for being afraid to stand up to terrorists in a Court of law!

[erykah]

11:53 PM on 11/18/2009

I do not know which is more outrageous­: Grassley's comment or Holder's response. Holder should not have dignified that with a response. How stupid. People need to call these folks out for their stupidity, not enable it. Geez, Holder, grow a pair.

[Gidster]

12:22 PM on 11/19/2009

He put it very succinctly­. Terrorist will be tried per US law, in US courts, per US custom.