- The Washington Times - Tuesday, November 17, 2009

NEW YORK | Hot sauce and a comb were all an al Qaeda suspect in New York needed to nearly kill one of his guards nine years ago. The bloody episode suggests that security worries in bringing Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other Sept. 11 suspects to trial here could be just as big inside the courthouse as outside.

Already, U.S. marshals are promising the highest security possible — an acknowledgment of how dangerous terrorism suspects have been in the past.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced Friday that Mohammed, the professed mastermind of the 2001 attacks, and four accused henchmen would be brought from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to New York to face a civilian federal trial.

The prosecution is planned for a court complex just blocks from where the World Trade Center towers once stood. The courthouse is among the most secure in the nation, ringed by closed-off streets, 24-hour guard posts, anti-truck-bomb barricades and street video cameras so powerful that they can read the print off a passerby’s newspaper.

The Sept. 11 case would be the most spectacular of a half-dozen major terrorism trials in New York that already have sent away the men blamed for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center complex, a plot to blow up five landmarks in New York City, a scheme to blow up a dozen U.S. airliners over the Far East and the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.

Mr. Holder’s decision to try the Sept. 11 suspects sparked debate over the security risks posed to densely populated Lower Manhattan, but far less has been said about attempted violence by the defendants themselves.

At the same federal lockup where Mohammed and the others are to be held, federal prison guard Louis Pepe was attacked in late 2000 by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, a former top aide to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden who was awaiting trial in the embassy bombings.

Salim surprised Mr. Pepe by using a squeezable plastic container filled with hot sauce as a kind of homemade pepper spray that temporarily blinded the guard.

The inmate then took a plastic comb ground into the shape of a dagger and plunged it into Mr. Pepe’s left eye. The point pierced deep into his brain, causing permanent, severe injury to his sight, speech and movement.

Prosecutors say papers found in the cell after the attack showed that Salim’s plan had been to take hostages inside the prison and free his co-defendants. Though such a “breakout” plot may sound far-fetched given the security of the federal buildings, in Salim’s case, the attempt alone nearly killed someone.

Salim’s lawyer in that case, Richard Lind, said he had “mixed feelings” about Mr. Holder’s decision because though he thinks the suspects should be tried in civilian court, he has security concerns.

“The prison is not very secure,” Mr. Lind said. “Maybe things have improved since then, but I think it would be very difficult to manage.”

Bureau of Prisons spokesman Edmond Ross said, “We ensure that the facility is secure and is run in a secure fashion, but I’m not aware that any particular heightened security procedures are going to be implemented.”

It is likely, though, that the attorney general will approve extra security called “special administrative measures” — reserved for the most dangerous prisoners. SAMs, as they are called, prohibit a defendant from communicating with other prisoners, the press or anyone not connected to the prisoners’ legal defense.

When Mohammed and the others are taken from their cells to the courtroom, U.S. marshals will provide security.

There, too, the last major al Qaeda trial serves as a warning.

During a pretrial hearing, al Qaeda terrorism suspect Wadih El-Hage leapt out of a jury box that held several defendants and raced toward the judge, who maneuvered his tall black chair in front of him as a shield. The defendant was tackled by a deputy U.S. marshal and slammed against a wall next to an American flag, about a dozen feet from the judge.

The trial was held in a large ceremonial courtroom with its own security check — a sort of perimeter within the perimeter. Outside the building, heavily armed marshals stood guard.

When hijacked airplanes slammed into the World Trade Center towers Sept. 11, those same marshals rushed to the scene to join rescue efforts.

Jeff Carter, a spokesman for the marshals, said the agency will provide the maximum possible security. Both the marshals and the Bureau of Prisons have “extensive experience managing the security of dangerous defendants and alleged terrorists in the U.S. judicial system,” he said.

Even with extra security, some are convinced trial in a civilian court is a bad idea. The most high-profile critic so far has been former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who said over the weekend that the decision displayed “a lack of concern for the rights of the public.”

New York Gov. David A. Paterson, a Democrat, said Monday that holding the trial in the city “is not a decision that I would have made.”

New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg tried to calm any fears.

“This is nothing new; we’ve done this a lot,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “Every time there’s a high-profile case, we provide enhanced security. A lot of it you don’t see, but it’s there.”

Josh Dratel, a lawyer who represented El-Hage, said it was right to bring Mohammed and others to trial in New York, both for legal reasons and because, he said, “there’s nothing that makes New York more of a target” than it already is.

Mike Gormley in Albany, N.Y., and Sara Kugler in New York contributed to this report.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2020 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide