- The Washington Times - Wednesday, February 13, 2002

John Walker Lindh pleaded innocent today to a 10-count federal indictment that charged him with conspiring to kill Americans and aiding Osama bin Laden's terrorist network. The widow of a CIA officer killed shortly after questioning Lindh called him a traitor.
"Not guilty, sir," Lindh answered, after U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III asked, "How do you plead to all the charges."
It was Lindh's third appearance at the federal courthouse since he was brought back to the United States by military aircraft on Jan. 24. His parents, Frank Lindh and Marilyn Walker, were there for the arraignment, as they had been for his previous court appearances. Also present were Johnny and Gail Spann, the parents of CIA officer Johnny "Mike" Spann, killed in a prison uprising in Mazar e-Sharif in November, and his widow, Shannon Spann.
Lindh no longer has the shaved head that he had in his initial appearances and his black hair, still closely cropped, was starting to grow back. He was clean-shaven, a sharp contrast from the long beard and long hair seen in televised images of him from Afghanistan.
Lindh answered, "Yes" and "Yes" and "Correct, sir," when the judge asked whether he had seen the indictment and had reviewed it with his attorneys.
If convicted on the charges, the 21-year-old Lindh could face life imprisonment. Shannon Spann, talking to reporters outside the courthouse, said she thinks he should get the death penalty.
"We expect Mr. Walker to be personally held responsible for all the things he's done," she said.
"John Walker was a traitor because of the way he lived," Gail Spann said.
After the hearing, Lindh's father attempted to speak to Johnny Spann, but several officials from the U.S. attorney's office intervened and prevented the conversation, according to Sam Dibbley, a spokeswoman for U.S. attorney's office, who was there. Mr. Dibbley said the officials told everyone in the area "we were trying to get the family out without anyone speaking to them."
Johnny Spann said before the hearing, on ABC's "Good Morning America," that he feels Lindh was an accomplice in his son's death because he was present during the uprising that resulted in the killing of the CIA officer.
"If you and I went out to rob a store and I shot someone in the process of that, it is my understanding you would be an accomplice and you would feel the same price I pay," Mr. Spann said.
Judge Ellis did not set a trial date, but said that as a target, he would like jury selection to begin in late August. He scheduled a hearing for Friday to set a trial date and go over a pretrial schedule, which would likely include hearings on handling classified information in the case.
The government and defense counsel had suggested in motions yesterday that the trial not begin before mid-November, but Judge Ellis said that was too long to wait.
"November is too far," Judge Ellis said, adding that he was thinking of a trial in September.
Outside the courthouse, Mr. Spann's parents said they were there to see justice done.
"Tell them, Americans will not tolerate traitors," Mr. Spann told reporters on the courthouse steps.
"We sent our son … to a faraway land to fight against evil so we could continue to live and enjoy the freedom that we live in today," he said. "But as we all know, freedom is not free. Bodies have come home draped in flags, and Mike's was the first."
Assistant U.S. Attorney Randy Bellows said he expected the government's case to take two weeks.
In asking for a November trial, the defense had said it would need time to conduct overseas investigations, handle classified information, argue for suppression of evidence and allow the effects of prejudicial publicity to fade.
Federal prosecutors said they disagreed with a delay due to publicity, but accepted the other reasons for a November date.
Until now the two sides have agreed on little, with prosecutors portraying Lindh as a cold-blooded killer who hated America, and the defense contending he signed up to fight the anti-Taliban northern alliance, not the United States.
The defense said in the motion that "due to the high level of prejudicial publicity, passage of time will be necessary in order that the defendant receive a fair and impartial trial."

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide