2014 WL 1621277, 2014, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56027
United States District Court,
S.D. New York.
UNITED STATES of America
v.
MOSTAFA Kamel Mostafa a/k/a “Abu Hamza al-Masri,”
Defendant.
No. 04 Cr. 356(KBF).
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER
KATHERINE B. FORREST, District Judge.
*1 On April 15, 2014, the Court resolved
numerous objections to proposed
exhibits that the Government intended to offer at trial. (ECF No. 307.) Before
the Court are four additional objections to government exhibits 132, 133,
219, and 228 on the basis that the evidence is irrelevant
under Rule 401, prejudicial under Rule 403, or improper character evidence under Rule 404.
The Court assumes familiarity with the prior proceedings and factual
background of this matter
as set forth in the Indictment
and prior opinions of the Court. (ECF Nos. 1, 199,
216, 305.) The Court also incorporates
by reference its discussion
of the applicable legal principles
in its prior opinion. (ECF
No. 307 at 2–16.)
GX 132: In this undated video,
defendant states that, while it is
“haram” (forbidden) to kill a person whose
blood is preserved, “Killing a kaffir
[non-Muslim], who’s fighting you is
okay. Killing a kaffir for any reason, you
can say it’s
okay even if there’s no reason for it.” Like the statements
that the Court previously admitted regarding defendant’s attitude toward kaffirs as deserving targets, this statement
is relevant to defendant’s
motive and intent regarding
violent jihad as well as conspiring to provide
support and providing support to terrorists
and terrorist organizations.
It is therefore direct evidence or relevant “other act” evidence of the charged crimes. See United
States v. Farhane, 634 F.3d 127, 144 (2d
Cir.2011); United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88, 117–18 (2d Cir.1999). Furthermore, Rule 403 does not suggest preclusion.
While the statement is no doubt prejudicial,
it is no more prejudicial than the conduct with which defendant
is charged. See United States v. Curley,
639 F.3d 50, 59 (2d Cir.2011); United States v. Abu–Jihaad,
630 F.3d 102, 133 (2d Cir.2010); United States v. Roldan–Zapata,
916 F.2d 795, 804 (2d Cir.1990). This statement is admissible for substantially
the same reasons as GXs 104 (regarding selling a Kafir in the market or killing a Kafir), 107 (discussing “these dirty Jews,
Christians”), 126 (describing
three stages of jihad and defeating
Kafirs), and 130 (justifying
taking money from Kaffirs, capturing
or enslaving them, and selling them in the market).
GX 133: In this undated video,
defendant states, “The only
answer for it, when the people make peace treaty, is
to go into these Serbs’ land with your weapon in full.... If the Bosnians tell you, the war is finished
go out, then may Allah reward you [sic] good deed; this is
not your land.” Defendant lists four “reasons for fighting,” including “humiliat[ing] the kaffirs” (infidels). Defendant further describes people who “fight, so they
kill, they fight in the cause of Allah the Glorified
and Almighty, so you must, you must know the cause
of Allah, and you must help that
cause in fighting.” Defendant
then states that “what is needed
now, is people to, to, to,
to grow up in the mountains.”
Finally, defendant states, “Become a nation of the Koran and
the sword.”
*2 Like the other statements regarding kaffirs and fighting, this statement is direct evidence or relevant “other act” evidence
of the charged crimes of providing
support to terrorists and terrorist
organizations through creating a jihad training camp in Bly,
Oregon and facilitating violent jihad in Afghanistan.
See Farhane,
634 F.3d at 144; Rahman, 189 F.3d at 117–18. This statement
is admissible for substantially
the same reasons as GXs 102 (stating that Allah requires fighting, that fighting is obligatory,
and that jihad training is
an obligation to prepare for fighting),
104, 105 (stating that military and jihad training are for Muslims
to defend themselves and their principles), 106 (discussing jihad training), 107 (same),
109 (preaching jihad as an obligation), 110, 111 (urging listeners to “train your children” and to fight), 112 (discussing war and fighting), 122 (discussing fighting and training), and 126 (describing
three stages of jihad).
GX 219: This is an audio recording of an October 22, 2000 meeting at the Finsbury Park Mosque between Mary Quin, an alleged victim of the hostage-taking conspiracy charged in counts one and two of the Indictment, and defendant. In the
recording, Quin and defendant
discuss the hostage-taking
occurrence at length. Quin asks
defendant, “Do you think, given the situation, Abu
Hassan was in, um, do you think that
the decision to kidnap some foreigners was a good thing to do, um, under those
circumstances that he was facing?”
Defendant responds, “Islamically it is a good thing. What basically because we been giving warnings ‘Don’t come, don’t come.’ “ Defendant also states, “We’re going to war with
these people,” referring to
tourists who are “not welcome” in Yemen. Later during the recording, the following exchange
occurs:
Quin: Now how does Abu Hassan come to have that
satellite telephone, because
presumably the government would restrict their access to that technology?
Mustafa: It came from
outside.
Quin: From you?
Mustafa: Yeah, perhaps.
Later in the recording, defendant states that the bombing of the U .S.S. Cole in Yemen
was “a good message. I think
it’s a good thing. I think it’s something
for Muslims to, to, to rejoice.
Not only um, because of the operation, but also that the desire
to fight any force is there.” Defendant
also praises the Yemenis as fighters of Americans.
GX 219 is directly
relevant to defendant’s knowledge,
motive, intent, lack of mistake, and state of mind with regard to the first two counts of the Indictment, which charge a conspiracy to take hostages in Yemen and participation in the hostage
taking itself. Because it discusses
fighting and terrorist attacks more generally, the recording is also
probative of defendant’s knowledge, motive, intent, lack of mistake,
and state of mind related
to violent jihad as well as conspiring
to provide support and providing
support to terrorists and terrorist
organizations. See
Farhane, 634 F.3d at 144; Rahman, 189 F.3d
at 117–18. The statement is
no more prejudicial than
the conduct with which defendant is charged. See
Curley, 639 F.3d at 59; Abu–Jihaad, 630 F.3d at 133; Roldan–Zapata,
916 F.2d at 804.
*3 GX 228: In this undated video interview of defendant, defendant states that he received
a phone call from the head
of the team responsible for the kidnapping in Yemen, Sheikh Abu Hassan al Midhar,
“explaining and expressing his worries about the end of the
mission. And, uh, it basically say [sic ] if anything happened to us which he was
expecting, that please let people know.” Defendant
discusses his role as head of an organization called Supporters of
Sharia. The interviewer and defendant discuss the kidnapping as well as
a group of arrested British passport holders suspected of having bomb-making material; defendant acknowledges that two of the passport holders under arrest in Yemen were his
sons. He also states that he does not object
to his sons blowing up British
installations “if they believe
in it. If they know that they do it
for the sake of [G]od for anything and they believe that this
will stop state terrorism
of Britain and America, then it’s a try.”
Like the prior recording, GX 228 is directly relevant to defendant’s knowledge, motive, intent, lack of mistake, and state of mind with regard to the first two counts of the Indictment. Given the broader discussion of
violence, the recording is also probative of defendant’s knowledge, motive,
and intent related to
violent jihad as well as conspiring
to provide support and providing
support to terrorists and terrorist
organizations. See
Farhane, 634 F.3d at 144; Rahman, 189 F.3d
at 117–18. The statement is
no more prejudicial than
the conduct with which defendant is charged. See
Curley, 639 F.3d at 59; Abu–Jihaad, 630 F.3d at 133; Roldan–Zapata,
916 F.2d at 804.
For these reasons,
GXs 132, 133, 219, and 228 are
all admissible over defendant’s objections.
SO ORDERED.
Not Reported in F.Supp.3d, 2014
WL 1621277
End of Document |
© 2022 Thomson Reuters. No
claim to original U.S. Government Works. |