The Ones Left Behind

by Kathryn Casey

When you're a crime writer for a couple of decades, some things stick with you. In a prior lifetime, when I wrote for magazines, I jumped around from topic to topic. One month I'd be shadowing a criminal profiler for a couple of days, another time I'd be sitting in a courtroom covering a trial. Of course, it wasn't always crime. There were a few movie star interviews, some first ladies who welcomed me into their homes, and a couple of presidents who answered my questions. But for some reason, I kept getting drawn back to the crime reporting, and, in all honesty, those are the interviews that sometimes still keep me up at night.

I guess it was a year or so after the Oklahoma City bombing, when I was interviewing survivors and victims' families. What I remember from that assignment is the woman who described talking to her husband on the telephone that terrifying morning, fifteen years ago this past Monday. The woman's husband worked for the government in the Alfred P. Murrah building. They weren't discussing anything unusual, just your normal husband and wife early in the morning stuff, when all of a sudden the phone went dead. She didn't hear the explosion. In her living room on the outskirts of the city, she didn't feel the impact. That is, not until she got the phone call that her husband was dead. Then she screamed and fell to her knees.

Years later, after 9/11, I interviewed Lisa Beamer, the widow of Todd, (photo at the top left) the guy who said, "Let's roll!" on United Flight 93, the one the passengers took back, preventing it from being used as a bomb to blow up, experts believe, either the White House or the U.S. Capitol.

I spent much of a day with Lisa and her three children. The youngest, their only daughter, Morgan Kay, was still a baby. She was born four months after her father's death. But it's the middle child, Drew, I remember the most. I was in his father's office with him, talking about his dad. "My daddy taught me to ride a bike," he said. I think the boy was seven or eight at the time. "My daddy said he'd teach me to shoot baskets, but now he can't." A simple statement, true, but to that little boy it symbolized tremendous loss.

Perhaps the case I remember the most vividly is that of a little girl who disappeared at a small town softball park. Her mom was in the stands with her younger son, talking to neighbors, cheering on her oldest out on the softball diamond, and keeping an eye on the little girl who played with a group of children on the grass beside the field. The mom watched the little girl, but as the game broke up, the crowd stood, and for a matter of a minute or less, she couldn't see her child. By the time the mother's field of vision cleared, the little girl was gone. Parents later reported a suspicious looking man lurking around watching the children play. The girl was never found.

When I went to see them, the family still lived in the same house, and although it had been five years or so after the girl's disappearance, her bedroom was still as she'd left it on that awful afternoon they hurried to the ballpark. It was a difficult interview, filled with questions I hated to ask. The mother couldn't bring herself to talk as if her child was dead or, if the girl was still alive, what might have happened to her. "I just have to believe one day she'll come home," she told me. "I have to believe that she's somewhere and she's safe."

But more than the mother, it's the missing girl's little brother I remember. A freckle-faced kid with big blue eyes, he stared up at me with a furrowed brow. "I'm worried my mom might lose me, that someone will take me," he confided. "And I'm mad that my mom didn't find my sister."

Too young to comprehend that his mother had searched and worked for years to recover her missing daughter, the boy only understood that she had failed.

Tweet

Terrorists on Trial

by Diane Dimond

So, the so-called 9/11 Gang of Five will go on trial in a federal court as opposed to before a military commission. The bottom line question then has to be: Are you ready for the possibility that Khalid Sheik Mohammed or any of his fellow collaborators might walk free on a sly defense attorney’s manipulation of our system?

Don’t think it couldn’t happen?

Millionaire Robert Durst walked free even after he admitted to killing a neighbor and cutting up his body. In my opinion O.J. Simpson got a free pass too after taking the lives of his ex-wife, Nicole and her friend Ron Goldman. I could cite other cases in which juries, again in my opinion, did not come to the right conclusion. Take it from me it happens.

As you sit reading this column there are American lawyers preparing and strategizing how to secure the freedom of Mohammed, Ramzi Binalshibh, Ali Abd Al-Aziz Ali, Mustafa Ahmad Al-Hawsawi, and Waleed Bin Attash. This, after Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) has repeatedly proclaimed he was the mastermind who planned the attacks onAmerica that claimed nearly 3000 lives that horrible day in September 2001. KSM gleefully brags about hating and murdering Americans. His followers, some of whom will be in court with him, do the same. This is what they live for – to kill us – and to go down in history as martyrs.

Let me be perfectly clear about why I think these trials should have been conducted in a military court: September 11, 2001 was not the beginning of some temporary crime wave. What happened at the World Trade Towers, the Pentagon and over the skies of Pennsylvania wasn’t just a criminal act – it was an act of war. Don’t be fooled just because these terrorists don’t wear proper military uniforms. These men, who will go on trial in New York soon, aren’t mere criminals. They are enemy combatants and should be treated as the soldiers they are.

Being brought before a civilian court these men will be afforded all the rights and privileges they excoriate America for. The fact that ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ (read that: water boarding) was used on some of them as our agents tried to extract vital information will be used as a reason to try to toss out crucial evidence. Their long detention in secret locations and then at Guantanamo Bay will surely be highlighted as their defense attorneys try to play the “poor-them” card. And it goes without saying these defendants will try to use our open justice system as a platform to spew their warped sense of how the world should be. Even with the most diligent judge at the helm there will most likely be anti-American outbursts in the courtroom. Their free-of-charge American lawyers, will stage-manage the system toward mistrial by demanding classified information be released to “prove their case.”

America will bend over backward and spend multiple millions of dollars to demonstrate we can stage a secure and fair trial for even our most vilified enemies. We’ll hire the accused the best available lawyers and some believe this will show the rest of the world we are virtuous people. But guess what? The radical Muslim world will still call us “The Great Satan” and worse.

I have to wonder how any American defense attorney could feel comfortable taking such a case so I called my friend Mickey Sherman who wrote a book entitled, “How Can You Defend Those People?” As a defense lawyer Sherman firmly believes every human being deserves good representation in court no matter what they’ve done. But even he admitted to me he would never agree to go to court with these terror loving jihadists. He called the Gang of Five “the defendants we love to hate.” Sherman believes any lawyer that takes one of the terrorist cases will be vilified and do permanent damage to both their professional and personal life.

Defense Attorney Ron Kuby, never a man to shy away from representing controversial figures (he practiced with the late William Kuntsler), calls the whole trial process into question. “KSM has been standing before a military commission admitting he did it, saying he wants the government to kill him. The government wants to kill him. The mockery comes,” according to Kuby (photo left), “because the military commission didn’t accept the guilty plea in the first place…the trial becomes a long form of assisted suicide.”

In the end the defendants will likely be glad to admit in civilian court what they did and say they are ready to die. The question then becomes what does the court do? Does it give the terrorists what they want most in life – death? Or are they sentenced to what I see as their worst nightmare – life – in an American maximum security prison?

I say give them life.

Tweet

Crime Happens When We Least Expect It

by Diane Dimond

Crime happens when we least expect it. Criminal activity festers in places we can’t imagine and in the minds of those we least expect. We shouldn't be surprised when it's discovered.

The recent arrest of three seemingly low-key, nondescript men on charges of lying to federal agents about a plot to blow up American targets sounds like the stuff Hollywood makes movies about. But these arrests were all too real and should go to remind us that America’s fight against terrorism is far from over. The battlefield is worldwide.

These most recent suspects … all foreign-born Muslims, include a 24-year-old Denver airport shuttle driver, his father and an alleged accomplice in New York. They have not, of course, been found guilty of anything. But their case seems destined to go to trial.

FBI Agents on Watch

Before he stopped talking to the FBI, the suspected ring-leader, 24-year-old Najibullah Zazi, a native Afghani, allegedly told agents he received Al Qaeda weapons training in Pakistan last year. An FBI document claims Zazi’s laptop contained a recipe for making bombs and information about important New York-area targets like transportation hubs and sports and entertainment venues. They tied Zazi’s recent trip to New York (ominously on September 10th, the day before the nation marked the 9-11 anniversary) to his fingerprints on bomb-making ingredients found in apartments he visited in Queens. Media reports and FBI documents mentioned suspicions that Zazi planned to place bombs in rented vans or back packs. Authorities felt the plot had developed to include at least three separate teams of four men each preparing to carry out various U.S. attacks.

The round up of Zazi and his cohorts didn't happen in a vacuum. Every day in this country – as far removed as we are from the day the towers fell, the Pentagon was struck and the jetliner crashed into the ground in rural Pennsylvania – special government agents actively pursue leads to thwart more terror attacks on American soil. So far, they've done a hell of a job. Operatives within the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, your state, local police and other agencies know things about plots against our country that would curl your hair. They invisibly investigate countless cases we will never hear about, many times acting on tips from observant citizens.

This week in Illinois, an American ex-con who converted to Islam in prison was arrested on charges he tried to blow up the federal building in Springfield. Michael Finton, also known as Talib Islam, was unknowingly working with local and federal law enforcement agents as he chose his target. He faces life in prison.

Fountain Place: The Dallas Target

A day later, in Dallas, a Jordanian citizen was charged with trying to blow up a 60-story building with what he thought was an active car bomb. Actually, an FBI undercover agent posing as a fellow terrorist led 19-year-old Hosam Maher Husein Smadi to believe he had genuine explosives. The suspect reportedly idolized Osama bin Laden.

In May, New York authorities and the FBI arrested three U.S. citizens and a Haitian man on charges that they planned to bomb multiple synagogues in the Bronx and shoot down airplanes using surface-to-air missiles. In a meeting with a government informant, one of the suspects revealed his parents lived in Afghanistan, and he was angry about the U.S. war there. He said he an interest in “doing something to America.”

All this talk about suspected terror plots in New York, Dallas and Springfield, Ill., might seem far removed from where you live. But as we were all reminded on Sept. 11, 2001, terrorism that touches one American city touches us all.

All these years later, our leaders are still trying to figure out how to stop the terror at its source – Al Qaeda-sponsored training centers that pockmark the landscape in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We've spent billions of dollars, yet they survive. Why is that – are they smarter than us, or do we lack conviction and a definitive plan for their eradication?

I'll go with the latter. Our leaders can't seem to get it together to stop this monster of all crimes.

Generals on the front line say they need another 30,000 troops to mortally cripple Al Qaeda and install some sort of democracy in the region. The President has said he’s prepared to allocate about 17,000 more soldiers, although he’s now considering some alternatives. Many members of Congress seem focused only on blaming the past for the quagmire and offer no suggestions on going forward. Others on Capitol Hill support pulling out of the region right now, abandoning the mission altogether.

Democrats vs. Republicans, military leaders vs. civilian experts, soldier warriors vs. pacifists. America is strong enough and smart enough to figure it out. All we need is the right leadership.

So after an eight-year war, when do we begin to demand that?

Tweet

Freedom Behind Bars

by Vanessa Leggett

We all remember where we were on 9/11. I’ve often wished I could forget. I was in jail—Day 53 of an open-ended incarceration. That summer, a federal judge had found me in contempt of court for my refusal to give a grand jury confidential source material gathered for a book. Surrendering my research would have meant burning sources. I could not do it. And so the judge ordered me jailed for as long as the grand jury was in session. That turned into a 168-day stay at the Federal Detention Center in downtown Houston. When I rejoined society a few months after September eleventh, we were a nation at war and the world I had known was not the same place.

The morning the world changed, I was in my cell, nursing a cold and reading Omerta by Mario Puzo. It was my third day back in general population after a night in solitary. I had made the mistake of questioning the enforceability of a jail policy. Guards made sure I understood what enforcement was all about. The Bureau of Prisons calls segregation blocks the Special Housing Unit, or "SHU" (pronounced shew), fedspeak for what inmates know as "The Hole."

The day I emerged from The Hole was the freest I’d felt during my incarceration. A night in solitary showed me that I'd taken for granted simple freedoms allowed the general population in jail.

For example, outside of SHU, I was free to roam the common area during designated hours. From the dayroom and library, I had several windows with views to the streets below. I considered this privilege a kind of glass-partition visitation with the outside world.

Every day until 9/11, I had watched Houstonians talk on their cell phones, check their watches and PDAs, and sip coffee from Starbucks. (I could spot the cardboard-sleeved cups from blocks away.) By day's end on 9/11, there was little sign of life in downtown Houston, the fourth largest city in the nation.

Another window to the world unavailable to those in solitary was the television. The morning of 9/11, a fellow inmate summoned me to the lower recreation room minutes before the second jet hit the World Trade Center. The north tower was smoking from the impact of the first aircraft. We watched in stunned silence.

Later, I held hands with a group of women in a circle as a chaplain led us in prayer. I remember the inmate to my right squeezing my hand and not letting go immediately. Her home was in another country.

I did not need to speak her language to understand. Each of us wanted to connect with family, with those we loved, and with the people who loved us, to make sure they were safe, and to tell them we were okay. But visitation would be out of the question. For security, the entire detention center went into lockdown mode. My world shrunk to the size of my cell.

I've often thought of how my day on 9/11 would have been no different from my day on the tenth had I remained in solitary confinement. I would not have had access to television. Guards who checked on me would have had no obligation to tell me America was under attack. For my own safety, jail staff might have been ordered not to inform segregated inmates of the national disaster; it didn't take much to lose it in solitary.

Though I was in jail, separated from the world, at least I had been released from The Hole, and was able to see, however horrific, history unfold in real time. My only conduit to the outside world that day was the TV screen, which gave me a sense of connection to other Americans.

That connection was broken once the detention center went into lockdown. All I knew of what was going on in the world was what I had seen through the celluloid window that day: The World Trade Center, our twin trophies of commerce, had disintegrated. Our seat of military might, the Pentagon, had been hit. And another aircraft appeared to have been headed for the Capitol. When I saw members of Congress join hands and sing "God Bless America,” I must admit I feared the end was near.

It wasn't. My incarceration felt like it would never come to an end . . . but it did, eventually, when the grand jury disbanded in early January. For months I'd lived under fluorescent lights, without a single trip outside. As I emerged from the jail, the transition felt as disorienting as walking out of a matinée.

Over the next few weeks, I saw evidence of how the world had changed: metal detectors and pat-downs, building barricades, Middle Eastern cabbies whose well-worn taxis sported crisp, new American flags. Fear was everywhere.

It did not take long for me to realize I was about as free as I had been when I rejoined general population from solitary. Though I was part of the free world again, among my fellow Americans, none of us was truly free. Not like we used to be.

Tweet

The Anthrax Suspect the FBI Refused to Investigate

by Pat Brown

I can vouch for Stephen Hatfill's claim that the FBI over-focused on him as the one and only possible Anthrax suspect. They downright refused to investigate the man I brought to them, in spite of the fact the evidence I presented was extremely interesting and concerning.

My suspect evolved following a FOX interview I gave in which I profiled the Anthrax suspect. I believe I said something along these lines:

1. He would be connected with Rutgers University in New Jersey or the area surrounding it.

2. He would be extremely obsessed with the media and politics.

3. He would have written many letters prior to the Anthrax attacks to editors of newspapers and politicians telling them answers to world problems and getting miffed he was not receiving proper responses to his "helpful" opinions.

4. He would ride the train between Trenton and Baltimore/Washington DC.

5. He would have some strong connection to America Media, where the first Anthrax letter hit.

A few days after this interview, I received the first of two letters, addressed in block handwriting and containing copies of bizarre letters to the media. Much of the content was how to solve crime and political problems.

The signature had been left off. The name of the sender was a fake, as was the return address in Tom's River, New Jersey. It wasn't until I ripped open the envelope (in my car) and then saw the label, I realized it could be the Anthrax guy. I battled with myself over going to the Emergency Room of the local hospital for Anthrax prevention medicine but I ended up being too embarrassed to go ask for it. (I crossed my fingers, instead.)

I survived the contents of the two letters and I was able to track down the writer. Here's what I found:

1. He was connected with Rutgers University in New Jersey. He was a Ph.D. in Biology working with soil.

2. He was extremely obsessed with the media, politics, and crime.

3. He had written many letters prior to the Anthrax attacks to editors of newspapers and politicians telling them answers to world problems and getting miffed he was not receiving proper responses to his "helpful" opinions.

4. He rode the train between Trenton and Baltimore/Washington DC where he had relatives. He did not drive.

5. He had a strong connection to America Media, where the first Anthrax letter hit. He was a regular subscriber to their Star tabloid magazine.

Furthermore, the man had many psychopath traits including pathological lying and grandiose ideation. He claimed previously to coworkers that he had worked covertly with the military to fight insurgents in Nicaragua and that after 9/11 the government had helicoptered him down to Washington, DC as part of a special undercover team of agents on a secret mission.

He also had a mentally unstable girlfriend over at Princeton, who used to be a student at Duke. She also was a Biology Ph.D. The Anthrax letters were dropped in a mailbox near Princeton University.

Am I saying my suspect is absolutely the Anthrax UNSUB? Of course not. But I will tell you that if you put his profile and links up against Stephen Hatfill, I would have sent 99 agents to check this guy out and let the other one see if he could find anything of note to justify a further look at Hatfill.

Tweet