26 April 2001
Source: Digital file from the Court Reporters Office, Southern District of New York; (212) 805-0300.

This is the transcript of Day 34 of the trial, April 25, 2001.

See other transcripts: http://cryptome.org/usa-v-ubl-dt.htm


   2   ------------------------------x


   4              v.                           S(7)98CR1023

   5   USAMA BIN LADEN, et al.,

   6                  Defendants.

   7   ------------------------------x

                                               New York, N.Y.
   9                                           April 25, 2001
                                               9:50 a.m.


  12   Before:

  13                       HON. LEONARD B. SAND,

  14                                           District Judge













   1                            APPEARANCES

            United States Attorney for the
   3        Southern District of New York
   4        KENNETH KARAS
            PAUL BUTLER
   5        Assistant United States Attorneys

   8        Attorneys for defendant Wadih El Hage

            Attorneys for defendant Mohamed Sadeek Odeh
  13        Attorneys for defendant Mohamed Rashed Daoud Al-'Owhali

  15        Attorneys for defendant Khalfan Khamis Mohamed

  16   TOUFIC MAGED, Interpreter


  18            (In open court; jury not present.

  19            THE COURT:  Good morning.  Please be seated.  Please

  20   be quiet.  Reflecting in the wee hours of the morning with

  21   respect to yesterday's proceedings I have concluded that at

  22   least some portion of a line of questioning on

  23   cross-examination of Imam Wahhaj should be stricken and there

  24   is being distributed to you now, and I'll mark as Court

  25   Exhibit A of today's date, the proposed instruction to the


   1   jury.  I'll give you a moment to read it, and then let me know

   2   whether there are any objections.

   3            MR. SCHMIDT:  I object, your Honor.

   4            THE COURT:  On what ground and to what portion do you

   5   object?

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  I haven't gotten through the --

   7            THE COURT:  Take the time.  Get through it.  It's one

   8   page.

   9            MR. COHN:  I object because the material that you're

  10   striking, your Honor, was cross-examination and I do that in

  11   the absence of Mr. Baugh who would normally defend this, was

  12   here for your rules, but he's not here now.

  13            THE COURT:  Tell me what liability issue is covered

  14   or does the question with respect to the children in Iraq

  15   dying as a result of American sanctions relate to?

  16            MR. COHN:  The Imam testified that in essence that

  17   violence was never justified and he did that under certain

  18   nexus of relevance which is particularly relevant to Mr.

  19   Odeh's case because of what's in Mr. Odeh's statements as I

  20   read it.  But his offering that in fact impacted on the

  21   question of motivation and what conspiracy Mr. Al-'Owhali

  22   might have joined.  If this was a response to a particular

  23   kind of action then Mr. Al-'Owhali's joinder of a more limited

  24   conspiracy could be argued and the fact that was done, that

  25   Mr. Al-'Owhali may have had some sense of justification in --


   1            THE COURT:  That's relevant on liability phase?

   2            MR. COHN:  I think marginally, your Honor.  I

   3   can't --

   4            THE COURT:  You know the answers were no, and the

   5   question isn't evidence.  You are really objecting to the

   6   striking of an answer which was adverse to a position I think

   7   you ultimately will be taking.

   8            MR. COHN:  Yes.  But you know, your Honor, the jury

   9   can make it's assessment about the reliability of answers from

  10   a expert, and --

  11            THE COURT:  Thank you.  Mr. Schmidt, what's the basis

  12   of your objection?

  13            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, my concern is that your

  14   Honor's explanation of what your Honor is striking I have no

  15   objection to.  The paragraph above this I think goes into

  16   areas where it relates to possible defenses concerning conduct

  17   in Somalia.

  18            THE COURT:  You know I talk about whether it served

  19   as a provocation for any action they find the defendants may

  20   have taken.  To the extent to which they understand the issue

  21   with respect to the Abdi House incident, it is your point that

  22   the actions taken were taken by Somali people in response to

  23   that, and that it didn't involve al Qaeda and didn't involve

  24   your client.

  25            MR. SCHMIDT:  It didn't involve my client.  But there


   1   is some evidence which I will deal with on cross-examination

   2   that members of al Qaeda participated in some manner at some

   3   point dealing with the American and UN troops in Mogadishu,

   4   and that if, for example, a person trained by al Qaeda decides

   5   that because of the American military offensive and attack in

   6   Mogadishu that he's going to go help Aideed defend himself

   7   against offensive military attacks, then indeed the fact that

   8   American troops planes are coming and attacking an area that

   9   then brings a response of shooting at them, I don't think is

  10   part of a conspiracy to kill.  I think that's part of a

  11   reaction to a military campaign, and it's a military campaign

  12   reaction to an offensive military attack.

  13            THE COURT:  I think I'm understanding for the first

  14   time that your point is not that the actions in Somalia were

  15   not actions by persons with whom the defendant El Hage is said

  16   to be affiliated, but that if they were, they were justified?

  17   You are making an argument similar to the argument Mr. Baugh

  18   is advancing on the death penalty phase.

  19            MR. SCHMIDT:  No, I'm not, I'm not.  I'm talking

  20   about an ongoing military activity.

  21            THE COURT:  By saying, ongoing military activity,

  22   you're saying conduct which is not criminal?

  23            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'm not saying somebody does something

  24   bad and three years later or five years later they decide to

  25   get even with them.  I'm saying that if there is a military


   1   attack, the people who are getting attacked, I mean the

   2   testimony that apparently Harun was in the building that was

   3   getting fired at, is your Honor saying that if Harun was

   4   getting fired at he would not be allowed under law to fire

   5   back?

   6            THE COURT:  I don't think there is a self-defense

   7   claim that can be made here.

   8            MR. SCHMIDT:  I think, your Honor, it has to be

   9   parsed in two different ways.  There is the theory is that the

  10   people are being trained for the purpose of attacking the

  11   United States.

  12            THE COURT:  Suppose we strike the sentence that

  13   begins with, for, so that it will read, you are not now being

  14   asked to pass judgment on any questions relating to the

  15   possible motive or the morality of any of the defendants'

  16   actions accordingly.

  17            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, we would agree with that

  18   with one other suggestion in the prior sentence I think when

  19   we should delete the possible motives or, because one of the

  20   things the jury will be trying to decide is what was people's

  21   state of mind what were they trying to do.  I think we say any

  22   question relating to the morality of any defendants' actions,

  23   not whether it's moral or immoral.

  24            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, we would agree with the

  25   government's position with respect to that particular


   1   sentence.

   2            THE COURT:  All right.  So then what we will do then

   3   is we'll strike in the middle of the second paragraph,

   4   possible motives or the, and we'll strike the sentence

   5   beginning with, for, and the rest of it we'll give the jury.

   6   Anybody other than Mr. Schmidt, does that meet your objection?

   7            MR. SCHMIDT:  Which words are we leaving in from the

   8   prior sentence?

   9            THE COURT:  We are striking, possible motives or the,

  10   so it will read, any question relating to the morality of the

  11   defendants' actions.

  12            MR. SCHMIDT:  May I make a suggestion, your Honor?

  13   Instead of saying the morality, how about legality?

  14            THE COURT:  That doesn't make the point.  We'll

  15   strike the other sentence.  All right.  Let's bring in the

  16   jury.

  17            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, there is one matter.  I

  18   don't know if Mr. Schmidt is planning to get into pictures of

  19   Mr. El Hage's children through Mr. Kherchtou, but if he is, I

  20   ask there are pictures of ostriches and children and family

  21   photos, and if that is going to be coming up on the

  22   examination of Mr. Kherchtou I'd like to be heard first.

  23            MR. SCHMIDT:  I am not planning to put in any

  24   pictures of Mr. El Hage's children at this time though I would

  25   like to.  There may be a picture of the ostrich relating to


   1   the business of trying to sell ostriches involving with Abu

   2   Abdallah.

   3            THE COURT:  What will the picture of the ostrich,

   4   what will it show.

   5            MR. SCHMIDT:  It's part of showing the business

   6   contact with Mr. El Hage and the Sudanese people including

   7   this witness and Abu Abdallah.

   8            MR. FITZGERALD:  To be precise, I meant any pictures

   9   of children, not just Mr. El Hage's children but his nieces

  10   and nephews.

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  I am not planning to do that with this

  12   witness unless something comes up that I think makes it

  13   appropriate an I would not show it until I raise the issued

  14   the Court.

  15            THE COURT:  Let's bring in the jury.  The witness may

  16   take the stand and you've been sworn many times.

  17            (Witness resumed)

  18            THE COURT:  The question I have asked by the Marshals

  19   that is during the period of time when there are summations

  20   and during the period of time when the jury is deliberating do

  21   we sit on Friday?  We'll give that some thought and take it up

  22   at 4:30.

  23            (Witness resumed)

  24            MR. COHN:  While we're waiting, your Honor, is your

  25   Honor considering sequestration?


   1            THE COURT:  We'll take that up at 4:30 also.  Will

   2   Mr. Baugh be here at 4:30?

   3            MR. COHN:  Pardon me?

   4            THE COURT:  Will Mr. Baugh be here at 4:30?

   5            MR. COHN:  He's done, your Honor.  I thought he had

   6   told me you had moved his argument to Monday.  I hope I'm

   7   correct about that.

   8            THE COURT:  All right.  We'll just have the matter I

   9   just raised and the verdict format 4:30.

  10            MR. COHN:  Yes, I'll deal with those.

  11            (Continued on next page)
















   1            (Jury present)

   2            THE COURT:  Good morning.  Yesterday there was some

   3   discussion of the nature of the questions which you'll be

   4   called upon to decide, and as I stated yesterday the ultimate

   5   question which will be before you when all of the evidence you

   6   are now hearing has been received is whether or not the

   7   government will have proven as to each defendant on each

   8   charge of the indictment guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and

   9   in my detailed written instruction which you will have before

  10   you when you are deliberating, the issues which you will be

  11   called upon to decide will be set out and you will have a

  12   verdict form to complete.

  13            Let me remind you, as I did during opening

  14   statements, of some issues which are not now relevant.  You

  15   are not now being asked to pass judgment on any questions

  16   relating to the morality of any of the defendants' actions.

  17   Accordingly, the Court orders stricken from the record the

  18   questions asked of the Imam Wahhaj yesterday concerning the

  19   alleged impact of American sanctions on the children of Iraq.

  20            You are to understand that any evidence received at

  21   any time prior to your deliberations is to be considered by

  22   you solely with respect to whether or not the government

  23   sustains its burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt the

  24   guilt of the defendants of the charges set forth in the

  25   indictment.  It is not to be considered by you with respect to


   1   any other issues.

   2            Mr. Schmidt, you may resume your cross-examination on

   3   behalf of the defendant El Hage.

   4    L'HOUSSAINE KERCHTOU, resumed.


   6   BY MR. SCHMIDT:

   7   Q.  Good morning.  Is it pronounced Kherchtou?

   8   A.  Yes, correct.

   9   Q.  What names did you know Mr. Bin Laden by?

  10   A.  The common name is Usama Bin Laden or Abu Abdallah or

  11   Sheik Abdallah.

  12   Q.  Have you ever heard him called by any other names?

  13   A.  Maybe between the young men we might refer to him as El

  14   Hage.

  15   Q.  Now, lots of people are also referred to as El Hage in

  16   general conversation as well, isn't that right?

  17   A.  Do they call themselves or they are called by others?

  18   Q.  Well, somebody who's been on the pilgrimage, the hajj,

  19   sometimes he refers to himself or other people refer to him as

  20   El Hage because of the pilgrimage, isn't that correct?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  Have you ever heard Mr. Bin Laden called by -- withdrawn.

  23   Have you ever heard him called by or referred to by any other

  24   name?

  25   A.  That's all I remember.


   1   Q.  Now, were you ever in Somalia?

   2   A.  No.

   3   Q.  Therefore, it would be correct in saying that you were

   4   never in Mogadishu as well; is that correct?

   5   A.  Yes, correct.

   6   Q.  Everything that you have -- everything that you believe

   7   occurred in Somalia or Mogadishu is based on what someone else

   8   has told you.  Is that correct?

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  When you first were in -- withdrawn.  When you were in

  11   Pakistan before you came to Nairobi you were aware of the

  12   suffering in Somalia, weren't you?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  You were aware that there was starvation because of

  15   climate conditions; is that right?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  You were aware that there was death because of the

  18   fighting between Aideed and other militia leaders; is that

  19   correct?

  20   A.  Correct.

  21   Q.  That there were good Muslims in Somalia who were being

  22   mistreated by some militia leaders, including Aideed; is that

  23   correct?

  24   A.  Yes.

  25   Q.  You were also aware that members of al Qaeda in late 1991


   1   or early 1992 were going to different parts of Somalia to

   2   assist some of the Islamic Muslims, Islamic groups, Somali

   3   Islamic groups to help -- I'll withdraw that.  Let me rephrase

   4   that.

   5            Were you aware that in the end of 1991 or early 1992

   6   that al Qaeda members were going to Somalia to help some of

   7   these groups were who were victims?

   8   A.  What I heard is that some members of al Qaeda went to

   9   Somalia at that time, and established a training camp in the

  10   northern part of Somalia.  This at the request of the Islamic

  11   union in Somalia.

  12   Q.  The Islamic union being Al Itihad Al Islami?

  13   A.  Yes.

  14   Q.  Now, at some point while you were still in Afghanistan you

  15   heard discussions -- withdrawn.

  16            You testified yesterday that when you first were

  17   fighting in Afghanistan the Russians were the enemy.

  18   A.  It was more like the communists who were allies of the

  19   Russians.

  20   Q.  Thank you for your correction.

  21            And it was very clear there was no argument or

  22   dispute among al Qaeda that it was the communists that they

  23   were fighting?

  24   A.  Correct.

  25   Q.  Now, at some point approximately more than a year or so


   1   after al Qaeda first went to Somalia to help the Somalis, the

   2   Americans and the UN went to Somalia; is that correct?

   3   A.  Correct.

   4   Q.  After a while you and other members of al Qaeda in

   5   Afghanistan heard that the Americans were not treating the

   6   Somalis properly.  Isn't that correct?

   7   A.  It is not quite clear how you're phrasing your question.

   8   Q.  I apologize.  There was some -- al Qaeda members went into

   9   Somalia early on to help the Somalis, some Somalis protect

  10   themselves against other Somalis; is that right?

  11   A.  Correct.

  12   Q.  Then at some later point you learned that the United

  13   States -- withdrawn.

  14            You learned that the United Nations with help of many

  15   countries, including the United States, went into Somalia for

  16   humanitarian reasons, to help feed many starving Somalians, is

  17   that right?

  18   A.  Correct.

  19   Q.  Were you keeping track of what was happening at that time

  20   in Somalia through the media like CNN or the Arabic station?

  21   A.  Sometimes.

  22   Q.  And then among some of the members of al Qaeda they also

  23   were discussing the events in Somalia as well; is that

  24   correct?

  25   A.  Correct.


   1   Q.  At some point you understood that the humanitarian goals

   2   of the UN wasn't working so well; is that right?

   3   A.  Yes, because of the problems that were occurring between

   4   the different militias there.

   5   Q.  And one of the militias was the militia run by the person

   6   named Aideed; is that right?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  In fact, you're aware that Al Islami in southern Somalia

   9   in the Gedo region requested al Qaeda's help in training

  10   people to protect themselves specifically against Aideed and

  11   his militia, isn't that right?

  12   A.  Who, what is the Al Islami.

  13   Q.  Al Ittihad?

  14   A.  Yes.

  15   Q.  In fact, Ahmad Tawhil was married to the sister of one of

  16   the leaders of Al Ittihad in the Gedo region, wasn't he?

  17   A.  Correct.

  18   Q.  And Ahmad Tawhil was a strong supporter of Al Ittihad in

  19   the Gedo region of Somalia, wasn't he?

  20            THE INTERPRETER:  Can you repeat that question,

  21   please?

  22   Q.  Ahmad Tawhil was a strong supporter of Al Ittihad in the

  23   Gedo region?

  24   A.  Because he's from that region and he was giving assistance

  25   to the people in the area.  However, I'm not certain that he


   1   has a direct relationship to the jihad Islami.

   2   Q.  In other words, you're not sure if he's an actual member

   3   of Al Ittihad or he just simply helping them through the

   4   difficulties that they're having in the Gedo region; is that

   5   correct?

   6   A.  Correct.

   7   Q.  Ahmad Tawhil, when you met Ahmad Tawhil he was involved

   8   with the Mercy International Relief Agency; is that correct?

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  And he was helping members of Al Ittihad and others who

  11   were offering help to -- withdraw that question.

  12            Ahmad Tawhil was helping al Qaeda members and other

  13   people who wanted to go to the Gedo region to help Al Ittihad,

  14   isn't that correct?

  15   A.  Yes.

  16   Q.  And that help was to help Al Ittihad survive the shortage

  17   of food and to protect them from bandits and war lords who

  18   were attacking them; is that correct?

  19   A.  Yes, correct.

  20   Q.  And also to protect against the Ethiopians that were also

  21   causing problems in the Gedo region?

  22   A.  Ethiopia at that time was not entering into Gedo.

  23   Q.  It was later they entered?

  24   A.  I heard that.

  25   Q.  Now, when you're back in Pakistan not only did you hear


   1   that the humanitarian efforts were failing, but that American

   2   troops were mistreating Somalis; is that correct?

   3   A.  When I was in Pakistan I did not at that time hear that

   4   the Americans entered Somalia.

   5   Q.  The discussions that you heard about the Americans not

   6   treating Somalis properly, you heard that while you were in

   7   Nairobi?

   8            MR. FITZGERALD:  Object to form.

   9            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  10   A.  Probably.

  11   Q.  What did you hear?

  12   A.  I do not remember precisely what occurred.

  13   Q.  Do you recall hearing that American troops were launching

  14   offensive military actions against Somalis in Mogadishu?

  15   A.  I heard that the United Nations troops were having certain

  16   skirmishes with some of the militias there.

  17   Q.  Did you hear talk among al Qaeda members and others that

  18   the United States was not wanted any longer in Somalia; that

  19   the way they treated Americans was unacceptable, and what

  20   happened to the Americans was in response to that treatment?

  21            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection to form, your Honor.

  22            THE COURT:  It's contrary to the long question rule.

  23            MR. SCHMIDT:  I will adopt Mr. Fitzgerald's

  24   suggestion and break it down.

  25   Q.  When you were in Nairobi did you first -- withdrawn.


   1            When you were in Nairobi did you hear at some point

   2   that the manner that the Americans were treating Somalis were

   3   unacceptable?

   4   A.  It was not accepted by the Somalis.

   5   Q.  When you said you heard that the Americans were, the

   6   manner that the Americans were treating Somalis was

   7   unacceptable, did you understand what that meant?

   8            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection to form, Judge.

   9            MR. SCHMIDT:  It's to his state of mind only, your

  10   Honor.

  11            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection to form, misstating what

  12   his testimony was.

  13            THE COURT:  What his what?

  14            MR. FITZGERALD:  What his testimony was.

  15            THE COURT:  Ask the question again because it came

  16   out in a somewhat disjointed form.

  17            MR. SCHMIDT:  May I go back then to the question

  18   before then?

  19            THE COURT:  Yes.

  20   Q.  Okay.  Did you hear that the Somalis were complaining at

  21   that time treatment by the Americans was unacceptable?

  22   A.  Yes.

  23   Q.  Did you learn what was meant by the treatment was

  24   unacceptable?

  25   A.  No.


   1   Q.  Did you hear Somalis saying that what happened to

   2   Americans was in response to American treatment of Somalis?

   3            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection.  Clarify who is supposed

   4   to be speaking, al Qaeda or not al Qaeda?

   5            MR. SCHMIDT:  We can get to that after the answer to

   6   this question, because it's for his state of mind only, not as

   7   to who said it.

   8            THE COURT:  Did anyone tell you that?

   9   Q.  Did anyone tell you that what happened to the Americans in

  10   Somalia was the result of their unacceptable treatment of

  11   Somalis?

  12   A.  I don't remember anyone telling me that specifically.

  13   This was a reaction by the Somalis to the way that they were

  14   treated.

  15   Q.  When you were in Nairobi did you follow the news of what

  16   was happening in Somalia on CNN or the Arabic or local

  17   stations?

  18   A.  Yes, we used to follow them.

  19   Q.  Did you become aware of the UN American military attacks

  20   on groups of Somalis in Mogadishu?

  21   A.  Yes.

  22   Q.  Do you recall the nature of those attacks that you heard

  23   and saw about?

  24            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection, your Honor.  Relevance,

  25   scope.


   1            MR. SCHMIDT:  Only to his state of mind, your Honor.

   2            MR. FITZGERALD:  401 objection to his state of mind.

   3            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   4   Q.  You were told by a member of al Qaeda that only dark

   5   skinned members could go to Mogadishu and be safe.

   6   A.  Yes, because the Somalis tend to have darker skin.

   7   Q.  The al Qaeda members -- withdrawn.

   8            Now, al Qaeda members went into the Gedo region at

   9   the request of Al Ittihad and helped train people there; is

  10   that correct?

  11   A.  Yes.

  12   Q.  And the al Qaeda members who went into the Gedo region

  13   were al Qaeda members of all different skin tones; is that

  14   correct?

  15   A.  Correct.

  16   Q.  Because those people were invited to this Gedo region to

  17   help so they felt welcome; is that right?

  18   A.  Yes.

  19   Q.  Now, other al Qaeda members went into the Ogadon region at

  20   the request of the emir in the Ogadon region to help them

  21   there as well, is that correct?

  22            THE INTERPRETER:  At the request of --

  23   Q.  I'll break it up.  I apologize.

  24            Some al Qaeda members went to the Ogadon region.

  25   A.  Correct.


   1   Q.  And that was at the request of a leader in the Ogadon

   2   region, isn't that correct?

   3   A.  Correct.

   4   Q.  And the al Qaeda members who went there or other people

   5   who were not members of al Qaeda but were helping al Qaeda

   6   were of all skin tones.  Isn't that correct?

   7   A.  All those who went to Ogaden were from al Qaeda.

   8   Q.  But they were -- most members that you knew of al Qaeda

   9   were from Arabic countries, weren't they?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  Like Saudi, Arabia, Egypt, Sudan, Algeria, most of them

  12   were fair skinned?

  13            MR. RICCO:  Your Honor, I object to that

  14   characterization.

  15            MR. SCHMIDT:  I withdraw the fair skinned.

  16   Q.  Were most of the people were of --

  17            THE COURT:  Light complexion.

  18            MR. SCHMIDT:  Light complexion.  Thank you, your

  19   Honor.

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  There were a few al Qaeda members from either countries or

  22   parts of countries that were of darker complexions, is that

  23   correct?

  24   A.  Correct.

  25   Q.  Now, only the darker complexion -- withdrawn.


   1            There were only two or three al Qaeda members that

   2   ultimately went in -- withdrawn.

   3            In the al Qaeda members who went to the Ogadon were

   4   not afraid because they were asked to come to help; is that

   5   correct?

   6   A.  Yes, correct.

   7   Q.  The al Qaeda members there were a very few al Qaeda

   8   members who told you that they went to Mogadishu; is that

   9   correct?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11   Q.  One was Harun; is that correct?

  12   A.  Yes.

  13   Q.  One was Abu Mohammed el Masry?

  14   A.  It was one of them that had given me the information.

  15   Q.  Which one gave you the information about going into

  16   Mogadishu?

  17   A.  I don't remember precisely whether it was Abu Mohammed or

  18   Harun.  It was probably more likely Harun.

  19   Q.  At that time in 1993 or 4 how old were you -- withdrawn.

  20            How old are you now?

  21   A.  37 years old.

  22   Q.  So in 1993 or 4 you were about 29, 30 years old; is that

  23   right?

  24   A.  About, just about.

  25   Q.  Would you characterize Harun at the time that you met him


   1   in Nairobi as a kid?

   2   A.  He was mature at that time.

   3   Q.  In your conversations with the United States government

   4   last year when you were talking about Harun did you call him a

   5   kid?

   6   A.  Because of his maybe size and his age, but he was mature.

   7   Q.  Did you call him a kid?

   8   A.  Maybe.

   9   Q.  I am going to show you a document marked 3505-1.  I am

  10   going to ask you to read for yourself, if you can, in English,

  11   or ask the interpreter to read it to you, without the

  12   microphone a sentence to yourself, okay?

  13            MR. SCHMIDT:  My I approach, your Honor?

  14            THE COURT:  Yes.

  15            (Pause)

  16   Q.  Did that help you remember that on August 16, 2000 you

  17   called Harun a kid when describing him to the United States

  18   government agents?

  19   A.  I don't mean when I say a kid, I don't mean that he is a

  20   kid in that sense.  I mean that he is one of the youngest in

  21   the al Qaeda.  He was an adult actually.  Amongst us we used

  22   to refer to each other, hey boy, but we don't mean that this

  23   person is actually a kid.

  24   Q.  In what sense did you think I meant the question?

  25            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection.


   1            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   2   Q.  Now, Mr. Harun was an intelligent young man, wasn't he?

   3   A.  Yes.

   4   Q.  He also was somewhat of a practical joker, wasn't he?

   5   A.  Yes.

   6   Q.  He also liked to exaggerate things, didn't he?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  He liked to make up stories to make people laugh, right?

   9   A.  And that's why they call him the kid.

  10   Q.  He also liked to make himself more important, didn't he?

  11   A.  I don't know.

  12   Q.  He made up stories about himself, didn't he?

  13            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection, your Honor.  We've been

  14   over this.

  15            THE COURT:  I'll allow that.

  16   A.  Truly I don't remember any stories that he made up about

  17   himself.

  18   Q.  After you were in Nairobi for -- withdrawn.

  19            How long were you in Nairobi -- withdrawn.

  20            The first time that you came to Nairobi, before your

  21   trip back to the Sudan did you meet Harun?

  22   A.  No.

  23   Q.  You only met Harun the second time -- withdraw that

  24   question.

  25            After you returned -- withdrawn.


   1            After you were in Nairobi for a period of time you

   2   went to the Sudan; is that correct?

   3   A.  Correct.

   4   Q.  And you remained there a few weeks with your family; is

   5   that correct?

   6   A.  Yes.

   7   Q.  Was that a few weeks or a month?

   8            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection, your Honor, this has been

   9   asked an answered on two different occasions.

  10            THE COURT:  I assume this is --

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  This is just to set up timing, your

  12   Honor.

  13            THE COURT:  All right.

  14   A.  Less than a month approximately.

  15   Q.  And you came back to Nairobi; is that right?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  How long after you came back to Nairobi approximately did

  18   you meet Harun?

  19   A.  After a long period of time because he was in Somalia and

  20   I was studying, so it was a long period of time.

  21   Q.  When you say, a long period of time, would it be two,

  22   three months approximately?

  23   A.  Possibly, yes.

  24   Q.  Was it at that time that you met Harun that you received

  25   information from him about what happened in Mogadishu?


   1   A.  I don't remember precisely when he told me this

   2   information.

   3   Q.  But the first time that you met Harun was approximately

   4   two or three months from your return from the Sudan; is that

   5   correct?

   6   A.  Honest to God I don't remember quite precisely when that

   7   was.

   8   Q.  You've told us that you did not see Harun when you first

   9   came to Nairobi.  Is that correct?

  10   A.  Yes.

  11            (Continued on next page)
















   1   Q.  You didn't see Harun when you went to visit your family

   2   for a little less than a month in the Sudan; is that correct?

   3   A.  Yes, sir, that's correct.

   4   Q.  The first time you met Harun was sometime after that, but

   5   not immediately after your return to Nairobi, is that correct?

   6   A.  Correct.  Correct.

   7   Q.  Whenever that was, a month or two or whatever, that was

   8   the first time that you had a conversation with somebody about

   9   what happened in Mogadishu -- withdrawn.

  10            That was the first time that you had a conversation

  11   with Harun about what happened in Mogadishu; is that correct?

  12   A.  I don't remember whether we discussed it at our first

  13   meeting or at other meetings.

  14   Q.  Did you know at your first meeting when Harun had returned

  15   from Mogadishu?

  16   A.  I don't remember precisely the dates when he went and

  17   returned from Mogadishu, but I know that he went there and

  18   came back.

  19   Q.  Did he ever tell you when he came back?

  20   A.  Dates, is that what you are looking for?

  21   Q.  About, yes.

  22   A.  No, I don't remember.

  23   Q.  Did you have a conversation with anybody else in al Qaeda

  24   about Mogadishu?

  25   A.  All those members of al Qaeda who were in the southeastern


   1   part had gone to Mogadishu and come back.

   2   Q.  You've testified about people in the Gedo region; is that

   3   correct?

   4            THE INTERPRETER:  Say that again.  Repeat, please.

   5   Q.  You testified about people going from al Qaeda to the Gedo

   6   region?

   7   A.  Yes.

   8   Q.  And you have testified going into the Ogaden region; is

   9   that correct?

  10   A.  Correct.

  11   Q.  Now you are testifying that some people went in the

  12   Southern region of Somalia; is that correct?

  13            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection to form.

  14            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  15   A.  Those returning from Ogaden went to the South, Southern

  16   part of Somalia, close to the City of Kismayo.

  17   Q.  You have told us that to go to Mogadishu safe you had to

  18   be darker-skinned; is that correct?

  19   A.  It is preferable.

  20   Q.  Tell me the names of the people who have told you that

  21   they went to Mogadishu.

  22   A.  I told you Abu Mohamed el Masry and Harun, that they both

  23   went to Mogadishu.

  24   Q.  Anybody else?

  25   A.  From the group, no, I don't think there was any.


   1   Q.  In all of the information that you received or believed --

   2   withdrawn.

   3            The only people who told you about what happened in

   4   Mogadishu who said that they were there was Harun and Abu

   5   Mohamed el Masry; is that correct?

   6   A.  Yes.

   7   Q.  It is your understanding that Harun and Abu Mohamed el

   8   Masry went to Mogadishu after you came to Nairobi for the

   9   second time; isn't that correct?

  10            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection, your Honor; form.

  11            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  12   A.  Just about, yes.

  13   Q.  And one of those two told you that they were in a house

  14   next to one that was attacked by a helicopter; is that

  15   correct?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  And one of them told you that they knew a Somali who was

  18   shooting Howitzers at the United States or the United Nations;

  19   is that correct?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  One of them told you that they tried to help the Somalis

  22   with a truck bomb that didn't work to go into the U.N.

  23   building?

  24            THE INTERPRETER:  Against who was it?  I'm sorry.

  25            MR. SCHMIDT:  Against the U.N.


   1   A.  Yes, that's correct.

   2   Q.  And you have no personal knowledge that any of those

   3   events actually occurred, do you?

   4   A.  No, only what they told me orally, one of them told me

   5   orally.

   6   Q.  And the one who told you was Harun, wasn't it?

   7   A.  I cannot be quite certain.  They were both very close.  We

   8   were discussing this together and I don't know which one

   9   precisely.

  10   Q.  During the time that you were in Nairobi, you were

  11   helping -- withdrawn.  During the time that you were in

  12   Nairobi in the early months, you were in -- going to flight

  13   school; is that correct?

  14   A.  Correct.

  15   Q.  And you were also, as a helpful person, helping the Al

  16   Ittihad people and others who were coming from outside of

  17   Kenya into Nairobi to get into Somalia?

  18            I'll withdraw that question.

  19            You were providing some assistance to al Qaeda and

  20   others who were going through Kenya to get into Somalia; is

  21   that right?

  22            MR. WILFORD:  Objection.

  23            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  24            THE INTERPRETER:  I'm sorry, I said Nairobi.  To

  25   Somalia, I meant.


   1   A.  Yes, we used to assist the al Qaeda members in going to

   2   Somalia.

   3   Q.  And most of the assistance was helping them buy clothes

   4   or, on their return, buying gifts and things like that; is

   5   that correct?

   6            MR. WILFORD:  I'm going to object.  It's a question

   7   that was gone into.

   8            THE COURT:  Excuse me?

   9            MR. WILFORD:  That is a question that was gone into

  10   previously when this witness testified.

  11            THE COURT:  I'll see counsel and the reporter in the

  12   robing room.

  13            (Continued on next page)














   1            (In the robing room)

   2            THE COURT:  What is the basis for the objection?

   3            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, this line of questioning

   4   occurred the first time this witness was on the witness stand.

   5            THE COURT:  Where are you going?

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'm going into the area concerning what

   7   he did that caused him to plead guilty, which was went into

   8   when this witness was called.  That's why the Odeh team called

   9   him, to question him about what he did concerning his guilt in

  10   the conspiracy.  That's what I'm questioning him about.

  11            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, I object to the

  12   repetitiveness.  On the last section of questions, as an

  13   example, Mr. Schmidt in the prior appearance kept trying to

  14   have the trip by Saleh or Abu Mohamed and Harun happen in 1994

  15   when the witness was bad on dates, when he said they went into

  16   Mogadishu when the Americans were there.  We got it

  17   straightened out.

  18            Mr. Schmidt went back through all of that this time,

  19   establishing that when you saw Harun back from Somalia, he saw

  20   him when he, this witness, came back from the Sudan.  Then he

  21   throws in the last question to say they went to Mogadishu when

  22   you came back from the Sudan, and the witness agrees.

  23            We are just playing bingo with the witness until he

  24   says something different.  I think it is misleading and the

  25   it's second time of cross-examination of the witness.  We went


   1   through that issue before.  All we're doing is replowing old

   2   ground.

   3            THE COURT:  Now we're on two different subject

   4   matters.  That testimony has already been received and

   5   received without objection.  Your objection, I assume, relates

   6   to something particular to your client.

   7            MR. WILFORD:  Well, your Honor --

   8            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, just for the record,

   9   that was the nature of my objection to the last question, is

  10   it was phrased in a misleading manner and we're going through

  11   the interpreter, just replowing old ground in the hope that

  12   the witness slips.  Your Honor, this witness has already

  13   testified --

  14            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, if I may respond to the

  15   Court's question.  The reason that I objected, your Honor, was

  16   that I didn't know where Mr. Schmidt was going.  He's been an

  17   hour and ten minutes with the witness so far and he's going

  18   into a new area dealing with the plea agreement and the

  19   subject of the questions that were asked previously today -- I

  20   mean yesterday, and we don't have an objection to that.  But I

  21   just didn't know where he was going.

  22            THE COURT:  That's why I called you in here.  I

  23   didn't know where he was going either.

  24            Now, what is there with respect to his plea agreement

  25   that you wish to question him about which you have not already


   1   questioned him about?

   2            MR. SCHMIDT:  On the questioning basis by Mr. Baugh,

   3   all right, leaves, I think, the wrong impression as to what

   4   this person did that made him guilty.  I simply want to go

   5   into the fact that he believed, based on what Harun told him,

   6   that he was helping not al Qaeda members that were going to

   7   the Gedo region or to Ogaden, go against Americans, but

   8   specifically the people that went into Mogadishu, that he was

   9   helping them fight the Americans, and therefore that made him

  10   guilty.  He had that specific intent.  I want to show that,

  11   period.

  12            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, how long will we be

  13   doing this?

  14            THE COURT:  You're going to go directly to that,

  15   right?

  16            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'm going to go directly to that.

  17            THE COURT:  Directly to that.  Very well.

  18            MR. DRATEL:  Your Honor, just one second.

  19            THE COURT:  No.  No.  Let's go.  I don't like to

  20   leave the jury --

  21            MR. DRATEL:  I want to let you know that's not the

  22   end of the examination.

  23            THE COURT:  No, no, that's the end of that line of

  24   inquiry.

  25            (Continued on next page)


   1            (In open court)

   2   BY MR. SCHMIDT:

   3   Q.  It was either Harun or Abu Mohamed el Masry that told you

   4   that they, meaning those two, were fighting Americans in

   5   Mogadishu; is that correct?

   6   A.  Correct.

   7   Q.  And to your knowledge, there was no other people fighting

   8   Americans?

   9            Withdrawn.

  10            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection.

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'll rephrase that question.

  12   Q.  No one else told you that they --

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt, why don't you go -- why

  14   don't you follow what we have just agreed upon as your next

  15   line of inquiry and go directly to that.

  16   BY MR. SCHMIDT:

  17   Q.  You pled guilty to participating in a conspiracy to attack

  18   Americans; is that correct?

  19   A.  Correct.

  20   Q.  And you believed that by helping Harun and Abu Mohamed el

  21   Masry to go into Mogadishu and come out and assisting them,

  22   that you were helping them fight Americans; is that correct?

  23            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection to form, your Honor.

  24            THE COURT:  Overruled.

  25            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, I'm going to object on the


   1   grounds that it is argumentative, the question.

   2            THE COURT:  Excuse me?

   3            MR. WILFORD:  The question is argumentative.

   4            THE COURT:  Overruled.

   5   A.  Can you repeat your question again, please?

   6   Q.  You believed that by helping Harun and Abu Mohamed el

   7   Masry, that you were helping them fight Americans; is that

   8   correct?

   9   A.  My role was to provide assistance to them, and if it meant

  10   for them fighting the Americans, yes, then it was for that

  11   purpose.

  12   Q.  Before you came to Nairobi -- withdrawn.  Before you found

  13   out -- withdrawn.  When you helped Harun -- withdrawn.

  14            You pled guilty to a conspiracy to attack Americans;

  15   is that correct?

  16   A.  Yes.

  17   Q.  And you knew to plead guilty you had to have the specific

  18   intent to help attack Americans; is that correct?

  19   A.  The intent is not actually for me to take a gun out and

  20   use it, but it is maybe through my assistance that I gave to

  21   the others I was then doing that.

  22   Q.  And at the time that you say you gave the assistance, in

  23   your mind you wanted to help them accomplish what they said

  24   they wanted to do?

  25            MR. WILFORD:  Objection.  Asked and answered.


   1            THE COURT:  That is the last question on this line

   2   and then we'll move on, yes.

   3   A.  I was carrying out my duty, and whatever they did over

   4   there was -- they did.  I was doing my duty as a Muslim.

   5            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, I beg your Honor's

   6   indulgence, since that was not responsive, that I can repeat.

   7            THE COURT:  Yes, all right.

   8            MR. SCHMIDT:  Thank you.

   9   Q.  At the time that you helped Harun and Abu Mohamed el

  10   Masry, you believed that you were specifically helping them to

  11   attack Americans; is that correct?

  12            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection to form, Judge.

  13            THE COURT:  Sustained.

  14   Q.  You pled guilty to a conspiracy with the specific intent

  15   to attack Americans; isn't that correct?

  16            MR. FITZGERALD:  Asked and answered, Judge.

  17            THE COURT:  Yes, sustained.

  18   Q.  You testified just a few minutes ago about your Islamic

  19   duty; is that correct?

  20   A.  Yes.

  21   Q.  When you came to Nairobi, when you were in Nairobi, you

  22   did not hear any fatwah concerning Somalia issued by Bin

  23   Laden; isn't that correct?

  24            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection, your Honor.  This was

  25   covered the last time the witness was here.


   1            THE COURT:  This was?

   2            MR. FITZGERALD:  This was covered the last time the

   3   witness was here.

   4            MR. SCHMIDT:  Specifically in response to his last

   5   answer that was not responsive.

   6            MR. FITZGERALD:  It was covered the last time he was

   7   here.

   8            THE COURT:  Sustained.

   9   Q.  Now, Mr. Kherchtou, at some time you met Wadih El Hage; is

  10   that correct?

  11   A.  Correct.

  12   Q.  And that was some period after the arrest of Abu Ahmed el

  13   Masry and others at the apartment; is that correct?

  14   A.  Correct.

  15   Q.  And then at some point after that, you lived with Mr. El

  16   Hage at a hotel?

  17   A.  Correct.

  18   Q.  And ultimately you lived in the room just off of the main

  19   house in Fedha Estates; is that correct?

  20   A.  Correct.

  21   Q.  You learned about the different businesses that Mr. El

  22   Hage was doing living in Nairobi; is that right?

  23            MR. FITZGERALD:  Scope, your Honor.  This was covered

  24   last time.

  25            THE COURT:  Excuse me?


   1            MR. FITZGERALD:  Objection to scope.

   2            MR. SCHMIDT:  If I could address to your Honor, I

   3   will address that to your Honor why I am going into this

   4   material now.

   5            THE COURT:  No.  No.  Just ask questions that have

   6   not previously been asked.

   7            MR. SCHMIDT:  I am going to do that to set up for

   8   exhibits.

   9            THE COURT:  All right.  So you directed his attention

  10   to that subject matter and you now want to ask what question?

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  I don't think I had an answer to that

  12   question.

  13            THE COURT:  Directing your attention to your previous

  14   testimony with respect to that subject matter, you now want to

  15   ask what question?

  16            MR. SCHMIDT:  I need to do that, then I need to

  17   direct him to another time period, your Honor, before I can

  18   then go forward.

  19            THE COURT:  We'll have our morning recess.

  20            (Jury not present)

  21            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt, would you make a proffer as

  22   to what areas of inquiry -- you have been an hour and 25

  23   minutes -- what areas of inquiry you believe have not

  24   previously been addressed and that you wish to address?

  25            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, some of the areas actually


   1   were very casually covered the last time.  If your Honor

   2   recalls, the last time we were not given notice of this

   3   individual --

   4            THE COURT:  Just tell me -- don't give me an argument

   5   as to why -- tell me what it is that you want to go into.

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  I wish to just have him be familiarized

   7   with Mr. -- to testify that he was familiar with a number of

   8   businesses that Mr. El Hage was involved in when he was there.

   9            THE COURT:  All right.  We've done that.  You

  10   directed his attention to that subject matter.

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  I need a yes answer.  Then I'm --

  12            THE COURT:  You don't have to get answers.  He's

  13   already testified to that.  You don't have to repeat

  14   everything.

  15            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'm going to bring him then to when he

  16   returns to the Sudan and is working for Abu Abdallah al

  17   Yemeni.

  18            THE COURT:  Yes.

  19            MR. SCHMIDT:  And Mr. El Hage and Abdel Abdallah al

  20   Yemeni had many transactions, or attempted transactions,

  21   relating to different business interests that this witness is

  22   familiar with.  I would like to place --

  23            THE COURT:  That's five minutes of testimony that

  24   would be allowed.

  25            MR. SCHMIDT:  I would like to put in documents that


   1   we have that were seized from Mr. El Hage and seized from

   2   Mercy International that relate to those business.

   3            THE COURT:  That this witness is familiar with?

   4            MR. SCHMIDT:  He's familiar with these deals, yes.

   5            THE COURT:  With these deals or with these documents?

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  I don't know.  I haven't had access to

   7   him so I can't show -- I haven't had an opportunity to --

   8            THE COURT:  On the face of these documents do they

   9   reflect that he is involved?

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  Some of the documents reflect that he's

  11   been contacted or "have him call us" or something of that

  12   nature, and based on his previous testimony, he's testified

  13   that he's had contact with Mr. El Hage to --

  14            THE COURT:  One subject matter is his involvement in

  15   businesses with El Hage based on documents you did not

  16   previously have at the time of his first testimony.

  17            MR. SCHMIDT:  Documents that I physically had in the

  18   tens of thousands of documents that, since I did not know he

  19   was a witness, your Honor, it's literally impossible for me to

  20   collect all of them for that witness's testimony.

  21            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, may I be heard?

  22            THE COURT:  Yes.

  23            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, I understand what

  24   Mr. Schmidt wants to do.  However, the Court made a very

  25   interesting point.  The Court made a very interesting point --


   1            THE COURT:  Yes.

   2            MR. WILFORD:  -- a while ago in terms of the defense

   3   case going in.  We're in the midst of our case.  We're trying

   4   to present evidence relating to Mr. Odeh at this point for the

   5   jury's consideration.  Mr. Schmidt can call Mr. Kherchtou back

   6   on his case and present all that evidence if that's what he

   7   seeks to do.

   8            THE COURT:  I'm trying to find out how long we'll be,

   9   and it seems to me from what I have heard that's ten minutes.

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, there is --

  11            THE COURT:  Which means you are not going to show him

  12   document after document, did you see this, no, I didn't, no, I

  13   didn't know.  You can encompass that.

  14            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, I wish to put in --

  15   withdrawn.  The government has put in --

  16            THE COURT:  I'm aware of what the government put in.

  17   Tell me what else it is that you want to cover.

  18            MR. SCHMIDT:  I want to cover and have him tell us

  19   what those transactions being discussed are, because he's

  20   aware of what the transactions are between Mr. El Hage and Abu

  21   Abdallah el Yemeni.  So I want to show him the documents, ask

  22   him if he is familiar with the transaction, explain the

  23   transaction, and then I move on.  It's not a short process,

  24   it's a little bit longer because they involve documents.

  25            There's two tape recorded conversations that I want


   1   to play, also, for him to tell us --

   2            THE COURT:  What do those recorded conversations

   3   reflect?

   4            MR. SCHMIDT:  One of them is a recorded conversation

   5   that concerns a sugar deal that has been negotiated between --

   6   which Mr. El Hage and Abu Abdallah el Yemeni is trying to

   7   negotiate concerning the importation of sugar and some other

   8   possible other items to be sold.  That comes with documents

   9   that were seized by the government.

  10            THE COURT:  Okay, what else?  What else?

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  And the other conversation refers to

  12   stones and antelope and ostriches that --

  13            THE COURT:  And what other subject matter besides

  14   that?  What other subject matter?

  15            MR. SCHMIDT:  I believe we're dealing with the sale,

  16   generally, even though there is other items mentioned, of a

  17   sugar deal and a deal for --

  18            THE COURT:  The minutia of the deals, the point is to

  19   establish the fact that regardless of what other activities he

  20   may have been engaged in, Mr. El Hage was engaged in bone fide

  21   commercial transactions; is that correct?

  22            MR. SCHMIDT:  He was engaged in bone fide commercial

  23   transactions with people that the government claims are al

  24   Qaeda, whose goal is to kill Americans, and I am trying to

  25   show that they have put a very -- they have put a distorted


   1   picture on ambiguous conversations and that his conduct and

   2   contact with these people --

   3            THE COURT:  What else?

   4            MR. SCHMIDT:  -- is legitimate.

   5            THE COURT:  Is that it?

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  That's it for this witness.  And I'm

   7   willing to do this witness after.

   8            THE COURT:  And what do you think is a reasonable

   9   period of time for you to do that?

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  An hour.

  11            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, most respectfully, your

  12   Honor, this is impacting on my client's Sixth Amendment rights

  13   to present his case in a coherent fashion.  The information

  14   which Mr. Schmidt had, he had in discovery.  This is not a new

  15   revelation.  He had all this information.

  16            They made a decision not to call Mr. Kherchtou at

  17   that point in their case.  They were in their case.  They

  18   could have called him.  They made no attempt to do it.  Now

  19   they are attempting, in the middle of our case, in the middle

  20   of the presentation of our evidence, to conduct an

  21   interrogation of our witness.

  22            THE COURT:  This is your last witness, right?

  23            MR. WILFORD:  Yes.

  24            THE COURT:  So when this witness is finished you are

  25   going to rest?


   1            MR. WILFORD:  We have documents and other evidence we

   2   would seek to put in.  We wanted to put our entire case in

   3   without being interrupted.

   4            THE COURT:  Suppose we interrupt this now, let you

   5   finish, and then, after you rest, it will be Mr. Schmidt's

   6   case and Mr. Schmidt can call Mr. Kherchtou.

   7            MR. WILFORD:  That's fine, your Honor.  However, the

   8   government has --

   9            THE COURT:  How long will you be?

  10            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, I object.

  11   Mr. Kherchtou's security situation is --

  12            THE COURT:  I'm aware of that and I've been

  13   hesitating because of that.

  14            MR. FITZGERALD:  Can I put one thing on the record?

  15   If you look at the transcript, what Mr. Schmidt has outlined

  16   was covered the last time he testified, without challenge from

  17   the government.  He talked about Abu Abdallah being a

  18   businessman, that he knew he was working with Abu Abdallah on

  19   strictly business.  There was correspondence regarding hides,

  20   leather, sugar, seeds, tanzanite stones and the middleman.

  21   Later on, we even have the antelope and ostriches.  We have

  22   the faxes, they were working on bills.

  23            We didn't challenge that.  We still don't challenge

  24   it.  I have no doubt that at one point sugar deals were

  25   discussed with Abu Abdallah el Yemeni.  I don't put much


   1   weight or relevance to the fact of what that does about

   2   everything else in the case, but it hasn't been challenged.

   3   Mr. El Hage found somebody who had an ostrich farm who wanted

   4   to sell the eyes, talking about Abdel Abdallah el Yemeni.

   5   This has been covered.

   6            The materials Mr. Schmidt had before Mr. Kherchtou

   7   testified.  We took a break.  The 3500 was turned over early

   8   to be reviewed.  We took a break so he wasn't cross-examined

   9   until the next week.  And some of the documents are, I believe

  10   are documents we recently got back in reverse discovery, some

  11   contracts that we didn't give Mr. Schmidt he decided to wait

  12   until now to give us.  We have heard about ostriches.

  13            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt, I will --

  14            MR. SCHMIDT:  May I briefly just respond to that?

  15            THE COURT:  Yes.

  16            MR. SCHMIDT:  We received 1300 pages of 3500 material

  17   for this witness alone, and the government hadn't put in a

  18   single document --

  19            THE COURT:  I will permit you to introduce in one

  20   fell swoop, in one fell swoop, all of those documents.  I will

  21   permit you to play the two tapes.  And all of that should take

  22   no more than 25 minutes.

  23            We'll take a five-minute recess and then at 12:00

  24   your cross-examination will be concluded.  We'll take a

  25   five-minute recess.


   1            MR. COHN:  Your Honor, if I stand up, you yell at me,

   2   if I don't stand up, I don't get heard.

   3            THE COURT:  If I don't have an opportunity at least

   4   once a day to yell at you, you know --

   5            MR. COHN:  I know.

   6            THE COURT:  -- there has to be some compensation.

   7            MR. COHN:  Given the limited salaries of federal

   8   judges, I try to give you what compensation you can get.

   9            THE COURT:  I appreciate it.

  10            MR. COHN:  But I think that the dwelling on the plea

  11   to killing Americans requires your reiteration of your charge

  12   that the plea of a coconspirator is not usable against the

  13   other defendants.  I think that it's called for again at this

  14   time.

  15            THE COURT:  Again?

  16            MR. COHN:  I do.

  17            THE COURT:  All right.  We'll take a three-minute

  18   recess.

  19            (Recess)

  20            THE COURT:  The jury may be brought in.

  21            Ladies and gentlemen, let me just take a moment to

  22   remind you of something I have already told you and will tell

  23   you again in my charge with respect to the fact that a witness

  24   such as the witness now on the stand has pled guilty to

  25   charges arising out of circumstances related to the facts of


   1   this case.

   2            You are to draw no conclusions or inference of any

   3   kind about the guilt of the defendants on trial here from the

   4   fact that a witness pled guilty to similar charges.  The

   5   decision of the witness to plead guilty was based on a

   6   personal decision of his concerning his own guilt in light of

   7   benefits afforded by the government to someone who was

   8   cooperating, and so this witness's decision to plead guilty

   9   may not be used by you in any way as evidence against or

  10   unfavorable to the four defendants on trial here.

  11            Mr. Schmidt, you may resume.

  12            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, at this point, I wish to

  13   offer the following exhibits into evidence:  WEHX-M-7X-21, the

  14   original and the translation, which is the same number with a

  15   T at the end.

  16            THE COURT:  Yes.

  17            (Defendant El Hage Exhibits WEHX-M-7X-21 and

  18   WEHX-M-7X-21T received in evidence)

  19            MR. SCHMIDT:  The following M-7X exhibits are also

  20   offered into evidence:  11 and 11T, 10 and 10T, 19 and 19T, 12

  21   and 12T, 16 and 16T, 26 and 26T, 33 and 33T, 35 and 35T, and

  22   44 and 44T.  Those are documents that were seized from Mercy

  23   International, Room J.

  24            Also being offered into evidence are WEHX-K369 and

  25   367.  Those are two documents that were seized from -- that


   1   was discovered in the computer that was seized from the home

   2   of Wadih El Hage.

   3            Also being offered is WEHX-K384 and 385, also

   4   recovered from the computer seized from Mr. El Hage's home.

   5            We are also offering the tapes and the transcripts of

   6   the two following conversations:  WEHX-W40, which is the tape,

   7   and W40T, which is the transcript; WEHX-W46, the tape, and

   8   W-46T, the transcript.

   9            Also being offered into evidence is WEHX-WDAT56 to

  10   62, a document that was -- a fax document that was intercepted

  11   in the Kenyan wiretaps, along with WEHX-WW-2 and WW-3.

  12            MR. FITZGERALD:  If I may just see the stack, I'll

  13   run through --

  14            THE COURT:  They will be received subject to a motion

  15   to strike if, after the government reviews them, there are

  16   some issues.  Otherwise, they are received.

  17            (Defendant El Hage Exhibits WEHX-M-7X-10,

  18   23HX-M-7X-10T, WEHX-M-7X-11, WEHX-M-7X-11T, WEHX-M-7X-12,

  19   WEHX-M-7X-12T, WEHX-M-7X-16, WEHX-M-7X-16T, WEHX-M-7X-19,

  20   12HX-M-7X-19T, WEHX-M-7X-26, WEHX-M-7X-26T, WEHX-M-7X-33,

  21   WEHX-M-7X-33T, WEHX-M-7X-35, WEHX-M-7X-35T, WEHX-M-7X-44,

  22   WEHX-M-7X 44T, WEHX-K367, WEHX-K369, WEHX-K384, WEHX-385,

  23   WEHX-W40, WEHX-40T, WEHX-W46, WEHX-W46T, WEHX-WDAT56-62,

  24   WEHX-WW-2 and WEHX-WW3 received in evidence)

  25            MR. FITZGERALD:  And they won't be read unless I have


   1   seen them?

   2            THE COURT:  Yes.

   3            MR. SCHMIDT:  Also included is WEHX-P3, a photograph,

   4   and WEHX-WW62A, which is a combination of facsimile and

   5   photographs.

   6            At this time, your Honor, I wish to play -- excuse

   7   me, wish to have counsel read the transcript, the translation

   8   of WEHX-W40.

   9            THE COURT:  The photographs, are those being offered

  10   in evidence, P3 and 62A?

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  Yes.  They are not the photographs that

  12   we haven't discussed.

  13            THE COURT:  All right.  They are all received,

  14   subject to a motion to strike.  Unless the government moves to

  15   strike first thing tomorrow morning, then they are received.

  16   government off the government no objection to the reading of

  17   W40T.

  18            (Defendant El Hage Exhibits WEHX-P3 and WEHX-WW62A

  19   received in evidence)

  20            THE COURT:  Very well.

  21            (Transcript read)

  22            THE COURT:  Anything further?

  23            MR. SCHMIDT:  The next transcript is WEHX-W46-T.

  24            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.

  25            THE COURT:  And that will conclude the cross?


   1            MR. SCHMIDT:  There's a few questions I'm going to

   2   have to ask the witness.

   3            THE COURT:  How long is this?

   4            MR. DRATEL:  This is nine pages, your Honor.

   5            THE COURT:  Why don't you distribute copies of this

   6   to the jury and then just ask your questions.  Why don't you

   7   distribute copies of this transcript to the jury so the jury

   8   can read them and then ask your questions.  In other words,

   9   I'm suggesting that instead of reading them --

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  I don't have copies for all of the

  11   jurors.

  12            THE COURT:  Very well.  Go ahead.

  13            (Transcript read)

  14            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt, I understand you have two

  15   more questions of this witness.

  16            (Continued on next page)











   1   Q.  Mr. Kherchtou, is Abu Abdallah al Yemeni the same person

   2   that you worked for in the Sudan that you mentioned the last

   3   time that you testified?

   4   A.  Yes.

   5            MR. SCHMIDT:  I ask if we can put exhibit WEXM-44 on

   6   the screen just for counsel and the witness.

   7            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.

   8   Q.  Is this a letter that you sent through Mr. El Hage's fax?

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  Is it a request -- is this fax related to any of Mr. El

  11   Hage's business or is this for your own private business?

  12   A.  May I read the letter so I will --

  13   Q.  Please read the letter.

  14            THE INTERPRETER:  Can we put the beginning of the

  15   letter on the screen?

  16            (Witness handed a document)

  17            (Pause)

  18   A.  This is a letter from me to some friends in Italy.

  19   Q.  This is not relevant to anything that Mr. El Hage is doing

  20   at the time?  This is just your own personal business; is that

  21   correct?

  22   A.  I was asking for, this is, the context of this letter is

  23   that I was asking for some financial assistance from some

  24   friends in Italy.  It was difficult for me to send it to be ,

  25   for this letter to be transferred through Sudan, so I asked


   1   Mr. Hajj to receive the money for me.  I was in need of this

   2   money for my education and for when I was studying aeronautics

   3   in Kenya.

   4   Q.  You were using the bank account --

   5            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt, that's your last question.

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  I object.

   7            THE COURT:  Objection overruled.

   8   Q.  When you're using Mr. El Hage's bank account it was just

   9   for your convenience; is that correct?

  10   A.  This was the first and last time that I've asked Mr. Hajj

  11   to give me this kind of assistance and I was not able to

  12   receive the money.

  13            MR. SCHMIDT:  I have other questions, your Honor.

  14            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  15            You may be seated.  Anything further from any

  16   defendants?  Government?

  17            MR. FITZGERALD:  I have no questions, Judge.

  18            THE COURT:  The government has no questions.  Mr.

  19   Wilford?

  20            MR. WILFORD:  I have some questions, your Honor.

  21            THE COURT:  You may.


  23   BY MR. WILFORD:

  24   Q.  Good afternoon, Mr. Kherchtou.  How are you feeling today?

  25   A.  Well, thank you.


   1   Q.  Now, am I correct that you personally took a bayat to

   2   follow Bin Laden as long as his actions was Islamically

   3   correct?  Is that correct?

   4   A.  Yes.

   5   Q.  And, sir, when you testified previously yesterday you

   6   indicated that you allowed your apartment to be used by

   7   certain individuals, Al Riki and other people, you remember

   8   that?

   9   A.  Yes.

  10   Q.  Did you agree with them to allow your apartment to be used

  11   so that the American Embassy could be bombed and innocent

  12   people could be killed?

  13            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor.  Objection to scope.

  14            THE COURT:  Yes.

  15            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, if I may be heard on this

  16   issue?

  17            THE COURT:  Restate your question.

  18   Q.  Did you allow these individuals that you testified about

  19   to use your apartment with the knowledge of what they were

  20   using it for?

  21            MR. FITZGERALD:  Same objection, your Honor, covered

  22   yesterday.

  23            THE COURT:  Yes.  Sustained.

  24            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, may I please be heard with

  25   respect to this?


   1            THE COURT:  Yes.

   2            MR. WILFORD:  Thank you.

   3            (Continued on next page)
























   1            (In the robing room; all counsel present)

   2            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, there are two reasons why.

   3   First, the interpreter yesterday was found to be

   4   inappropriate.  We switched interpreters.  Your Honor, my

   5   entire examination the interpreter that was used yesterday is

   6   no longer being used.  I want to make this clear.  There may

   7   be some question.  I have three other questions that I want to

   8   ask.

   9            THE COURT:  What are the other questions?  How many

  10   questions?

  11            MR. WILFORD:  I have them written down.

  12            THE COURT:  Go get them.

  13            (Pause)

  14            MR. WILFORD:  The other aspect of it, your Honor, is

  15   that during Mr. Schmidt's cross-examination today he focused

  16   the allocution and plea of this particular witness on his

  17   involvement in Somalia.  I want to focus the jury back on the

  18   Nairobi issue, which is what I'm asking the questions about.

  19            MR. COHN:  What?

  20            THE COURT:  What are the questions?

  21            MR. WILFORD:  The questions that I want to read are

  22   the following:  The last two questions that I want to ask are

  23   this:

  24            Did you ever do anything in agreement with members of

  25   al Qaeda so that innocent men, women and children could be


   1   killed?  And the final question, finally, did you ever agree

   2   to follow any orders to participate in the action including

   3   the intentional killing of innocent men, women and children.

   4            MR. COHN:  I object to those questions.

   5            MR. FITZGERALD:  I object and I don't agree that the

   6   interpreter was at fault yesterday.  It was late in the day.

   7            MR. RICCO:  Your Honor, I disagree with that.  I've

   8   read yesterday's transcript and the transcript is very

   9   unclear.  And what Mr. Schmidt has done with his examination

  10   has turned our case into a referendum on Somalia and what we

  11   would like to have an opportunity to do this with witness --

  12            THE COURT:  Those are the four questions?  That's it.

  13            MR. WILFORD:  That's it.

  14            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, it shouldn't be a

  15   summation.  It's been covered yesterday.  The witness was

  16   brought back twice and this is the second time he covered this

  17   was yesterday.  That was the third run at this, and I think

  18   it's inappropriate.

  19            THE COURT:  How many questions?

  20            MR. WILFORD:  I have three questions.  The one I

  21   asked that was objected to and the other two.

  22            MR. COHN:  Which were also objected to.

  23            THE COURT:  Your objection is?

  24            MR. COHN:  My objection, your Honor, is to

  25   continually refocus on the killing of innocent women and


   1   children is not really an issue.  If there was a bombing,

   2   there is a bombing and who was killed is irrelevant.

   3            THE COURT:  I sustain the objection.  With respect to

   4   the point that was made by Mr. Ricco as to the El Hage cross

   5   changing the focus, I think further examination of this

   6   witness will only exacerbate that.

   7            Objection sustained.

   8            (Continued on next page)



















   1            (In open court)

   2            THE COURT:  Anything further of this witness?

   3            MR. WILFORD:  Of this witness?  No, your Honor.

   4            THE COURT:  Very well.

   5            (Witness excused)

   6            THE COURT:  Anything further on behalf of Defendant

   7   Odeh?

   8            MR. WILFORD:  Yes, there is, your Honor.  Just going

   9   to take a move to move stuff over to the Elmo.

  10            THE COURT:  Very well.

  11            (Pause)

  12            MR. HERMAN:  Judge, with the Court's permission and

  13   pursuant to stipulation, Judge, we move the admission of Odeh

  14   RR through XX and I think that Mr. Wilford has some --

  15            THE COURT:  Odeh exhibits RR through XX.

  16            MR. HERMAN:  That's correct, your Honor, the

  17   photographs.

  18            THE COURT:  Received.

  19            (Defendant Odeh Exhibits RR through XX received in

  20   evidence)

  21            MR. HERMAN:  With the Court's permission we will

  22   display them to the jury.

  23            THE COURT:  What are we looking at?

  24            MR. WILFORD:  Now displaying SS, your Honor.

  25            THE COURT:  Very well.


   1            MR. WILFORD:  We're now displaying TT, your Honor.

   2            We're now displaying UU, your Honor.

   3            We're now displaying Odeh VV.

   4            MR. HERMAN:  Judge, also with the Court's permission

   5   and pursuant to stipulation with the government, we move the

   6   admission of Odeh A-3 through Odeh N as in Nancy 3.

   7            THE COURT:  A-3 to N-3.

   8            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.

   9            (Defendant Odeh Exhibits A-3 to N-E received in

  10   evidence)

  11            MR. WILFORD:  With the Court's permission may we

  12   display those?

  13            THE COURT:  Yes.

  14            MR. WILFORD:  Starting with A-3, your Honor.

  15            MR. SCHMIDT:  Maybe, your Honor, I have a copy of E3.

  16   I don't have a copy of any of the other ones that are being

  17   offered.  I'd like to review them.

  18            MR. HERMAN:  They are physical objects, Judge.  There

  19   are no copies.  He's had the opportunity to review them.

  20            THE COURT:  Very well.

  21            MR. SCHMIDT:  If it's only physical objects, I have

  22   no objection.

  23            THE COURT:  I didn't hear your last --

  24            MR. SCHMIDT:  If it's only physical objects and not

  25   writing, then I have no objection.


   1            THE COURT:  Very well.

   2            MR. WILFORD:  As I was saying, your Honor, displaying

   3   A-3 to the jury at this point.  I'm going to move it because

   4   the screen doesn't give proper perspective.  The other side of

   5   that particular item.

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, I would like to review

   7   that, because it doesn't appear to be a physical object.  This

   8   appears to be writing.  I'd like to review that.

   9            THE COURT:  You may do so and also if you have a

  10   motion, you can make it after lunch.

  11            MR. WILFORD:  That's the final portion of that

  12   document.  I'm going to now display B-3, your Honor.  Your

  13   Honor, I'm going to display the interior contents of B-3.

  14   I'll move on to C-3.

  15            MR. HERMAN:  Mr. Wilford, I'm sorry, let me interrupt

  16   for just one second.  Your Honor, we'd also move the admission

  17   of Odeh A-8 which is a stipulation which explains these items

  18   and with the Court's permission I'd like to read that to the

  19   jury now so they can put it in context.

  20            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.

  21            (Defendant Odeh Exhibit A-8 received in evidence)

  22            MR. HERMAN:  It is hereby stipulated and agreed by

  23   and between the United States of America by Mary Jo White

  24   United States, Attorney for the Southern District of New York,

  25   Patrick Fitzgerald, Kenneth M.  Karas and Paul W.  Butler of


   1   counsel, and the defendant Mohamed Odeh by and with the

   2   consent of his attorneys as follows:

   3            1.  That if called, if recalled to the stand to

   4   testify Special Agent Howard Ledbetter of the FBI would

   5   testify that the items number Odeh A-3 through Odeh N-3 were

   6   among the various items that were recovered during a search of

   7   the home of Mohammed Sadik Odeh in Kenya on August 20, 1998.

   8            2.  That if recalled to the stand to testify Special

   9   Agent Howard Ledbetter would testify that the items numbered

  10   Odeh A-4 through Odeh F-4 are letters that were recovered

  11   during a search of the home of Mohammed Sadik Odeh in Kenya,

  12   on August 20, 1998.

  13            It is further stipulated and agreed this stipulation

  14   and the exhibits denoted herein may be received in evidence as

  15   defendant's exhibits at trial.

  16            And it is signed by the applicable parties, Judge.

  17            THE COURT:  Thank you.

  18            MR. WILFORD:  I'm not displaying Odeh C-3, your

  19   Honor, the cover, and a portion of the interior.

  20            I'll move on to D-3, your Honor, the cover of D3.

  21   I'm now displaying the interior of D3.

  22            I'm now going to move on to E-3.  This is another

  23   exercise book.  This is the cover.  I'm now displaying the

  24   interior.

  25            Moving on to F-3, your Honor, another exercise book,


   1   the cover, and I'm now displaying the interior.  I am also

   2   display the rear cover.  It's difficult to see, your Honor.

   3            I'm now displaying G-3, your Honor, another exercise

   4   book, the cover and now the interior.  I'm now displaying H-3,

   5   another exercise book, the cover and now the interior

   6   contents.

   7            I'm now displaying I-3, which is different from

   8   government 74 which is also a Crown exercise book, the

   9   exterior cover, now the interior.

  10            I'm now displaying J-3, your Honor.  This is the

  11   interior of J-3.  I'm now displaying to the jury, your Honor,

  12   K-3.

  13            Your Honor, I have an item which is Odeh L-3 which

  14   I'd like to publish to the jury.

  15            THE COURT:  Yes, you may.

  16            MR. WILFORD:  We're going to need gloves because of

  17   the nature of the item.  I have one more thing, so I'll do

  18   that first.

  19            THE COURT:  Yes.

  20            MR. WILFORD:  Display Odeh N-3, another exercise

  21   book.  It's the outside cover and now the interior.

  22            THE COURT:  Mr. Wilford, won't it be adequate if you

  23   stand right in front of the jury?

  24            MR. WILFORD:  I will.  No problem, Judge.

  25            THE COURT:  The book you're going to hold is L-3.


   1            MR. WILFORD:  The item is not a book, your Honor,

   2   I'll hold it.  I'd like to display M-3, your Honor.

   3            THE COURT:  Mr. Wilford is going to stand right in

   4   front of the jury with gloves on and is displaying.  You want

   5   to describe what that is?

   6            MR. WILFORD:  Yes.  The item is a box that's marked

   7   and said it's made in Indonesia.  There are other markings on

   8   the box I cannot read but they appear to be in Arabic.  The

   9   box is open.

  10            We do have a few more additional items.

  11            MR. HERMAN:  Judge, with the Court's permission the

  12   defendant Odeh seeks to move into evidence exhibit number O-3

  13   and the stipulation which pertains to it which we have marked

  14   A-6.

  15            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.

  16            THE COURT:  Received.

  17            (Defendant Odeh Exhibits O-3 and A-6 received in

  18   evidence)

  19            MR. HERMAN:  Judge, the stipulation pertaining to O-3

  20   which I would like to read at this time is marked Odeh A-6 and

  21   with the Court's permission it reads as follows:

  22            It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the

  23   United States of America by Mary Jo White, United States

  24   Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Patrick

  25   Fitzgerald, Kenneth M. Karas, Paul W.  Butler of counsel and


   1   defendant Mohammed Odeh by and with the consent of his

   2   attorneys as follows:

   3            1.  That if called to the stand to testify a Special

   4   Agent of the FBI would testify that the item numbered Odeh O-3

   5   is a photograph of the Crown exercise notebook (Government

   6   Exhibit 704) recovered during a search of the home of Mohammed

   7   Sadik Odeh in Witu, Kenya on August 20, 1998 taken at the FBI

   8   laboratory in Washington prior to the commencement of any

   9   testing.

  10            It is further stipulated and agreed this stipulation

  11   and the exhibit denoted herein may be received in evidence as

  12   defense exhibit Odeh O-3 at trial.  Signed by the appropriate

  13   parties.

  14            MR. WILFORD:  I'm going to display Odeh O-3 to the

  15   jury.

  16            MR. RICCO:  Your Honor, in plain terms what this is,

  17   it's a photograph of an item that is in evidence that was

  18   taken before it was examined by the FBI.

  19            THE COURT:  Yes.

  20            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, we need to discuss

  21   something with the government.  May we stop now?

  22            THE COURT:  We'll break for lunch and we will resume

  23   at 2 o'clock and promptly at 2 o'clock.

  24            (Jury not present)



   1            THE COURT:  Mr. Wilford, when do you anticipate,

   2   assuming you start promptly at 2?

   3            MR. RICCO:  We'll be done at ten minutes after 2 if

   4   we start at 2, providing we don't get cross from co-counsel.

   5   Maybe ten minutes, your Honor.

   6            THE COURT:  What are you going to have

   7   cross-examination of?

   8            MR. RICCO:  You never know, Judge.

   9            THE COURT:  Then, Mr. Schmidt, I take it you're going

  10   to resume playing those tapes.

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  Yes, your Honor, and we have additional

  12   documents that we're going to put in, and we're going to

  13   publish some of the documents, not all of them, and then we

  14   have other documents and the government has had copies of all

  15   those.  I'm going to go over and tell them specifically what

  16   order we're going to try to do that in.

  17            THE COURT:  Your next live witness?

  18            MR. SCHMIDT:  It's either going to be a brief one

  19   today or it would be tomorrow.

  20            MR. FITZGERALD:  Could we ask who that is?

  21            THE COURT:  Yes.  Who is that witness?

  22            MR. SCHMIDT:  The brief one today would be Agent

  23   Coleman if he's available and though we might be able to work

  24   this out with a stipulation, so it might not be necessary.

  25            MR. COHN:  Are we working this afternoon is what my


   1   question is?

   2            THE COURT:  Of course we're working this afternoon.

   3            MR. COHN:  Doesn't sound like it to me.

   4            THE COURT:  At what point is the defendant El Hage

   5   going to rest?

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  We have a series of documents that we

   7   want to put in.  There is a few more tape recordings we would

   8   like to play.  And we have that expert who is going to be

   9   available tomorrow morning.

  10            MR. FITZGERALD:  Is this the expert that we were told

  11   might testify for the first time yesterday?

  12            MR. SCHMIDT:  Yes, and he's actually en route.

  13            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, expert disclosure of

  14   what he is going to say?  This is another journalist.

  15            THE COURT:  We'll do that, but wait a moment.  Does

  16   the defendant El Hage intend resting tomorrow?

  17            MR. SCHMIDT:  We have one issue, your Honor, that we

  18   haven't resolved on discovery that could be taken care of

  19   perhaps by stipulation.  We have not.  Other than that, we're

  20   waiting for the completion of discovery on that issue.

  21            THE COURT:  Assuming that that is completed.

  22            MR. SCHMIDT:  As soon as that is completed, we will

  23   either finish tomorrow with a slight possibility of a little

  24   bit on Monday.

  25            THE COURT:  In terms of when summations can begin, is


   1   it fair to say that summations will begin on Tuesday?

   2            MR. SCHMIDT:  I don't know if the government is

   3   putting in a rebuttal case or not.

   4            MR. FITZGERALD:  That all depends on a number of

   5   things, including what it is that their expert is going to

   6   testify to tomorrow.

   7            THE COURT:  Short of that, as of this moment?

   8            MR. FITZGERALD:  It will be a brief rebuttal case.

   9   If he finishes Monday morning, we will be done on Monday.

  10            THE COURT:  I'm just trying to give counsel an

  11   opportunity to know how they can spend the weekend.  So that

  12   there is a strong probability that closing statements will

  13   begin on Tuesday.  All right.  We're adjourned to 2 o'clock.

  14            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, we've been given late

  15   disclosure, constantly most of the disclosure from experts is

  16   what we hear from the witness stand when they tell us what

  17   they heard on the radio when they went to London.

  18            THE COURT:  Not entirely, not entirely the fault of

  19   El Hage or his counsel, and that is because there have been

  20   some matters disclosed to the Court with respect to the sudden

  21   unavailability of other witnesses for reasons which are not

  22   the responsibility of El Hage's counsel.  Nevertheless,

  23   nevertheless, is there any reason why you can't give the

  24   government some information as to the scope of this expert

  25   testimony?


   1            MR. SCHMIDT:  No, your Honor.  In fact, I had hoped

   2   to have additional information for them this morning but it

   3   hasn't gotten over here yet.

   4            MR. COHN:  Could we be favored with that, too?

   5            MR. FITZGERALD:  Even those other witnesses who

   6   didn't show up, most of them we didn't receive notice of

   7   either and we get a resum‚ and we hear he's a journalist and

   8   we hear about all sorts of things the person heard on the

   9   radio or a journalist's opinion on military expertise.

  10            We're finding out what the expert testimony is going

  11   to be when the witness testifies, which puts us in a untenable

  12   position in front of the jury.  When Mr. Kherchtou testified

  13   they took a week down.  When Mr. Al Fadl testified -- we

  14   shouldn't be short changed, because they make late disclosure.

  15            MR. DRATEL:  Your Honor, I'm not going to respond to

  16   the witnesses who have already testified, but we do not agree

  17   with that characterization.  I don't think it needs any

  18   response.

  19            THE COURT:  I'll see.  We're adjourned except that

  20   I'll see counsel for El Hage and the government, anybody else

  21   who wants to in the robing room.

  22            (Continued on next page)





   1            (In the robing room)

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt, is your expert witness

   3   somebody.

   4            MR. SCHMIDT:  Yes.

   5            THE COURT:  Is your expert witness somebody whose

   6   testimony was not fully reviewed?

   7            MR. SCHMIDT:  That's very correct.  He's from out of

   8   the country, but we'll have a relevant chapter of the book on

   9   Somalia available this afternoon for the government.  I guess

  10   it's about twenty, thirty pages.

  11            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, for the record, even

  12   with the witnesses that were called, some of them were

  13   interviewed in September, we received notice last week.

  14            THE COURT:  I didn't want this in open court but I

  15   assume that was a problem that you don't have a summary of his

  16   testimony because he was very recently retained.  I think I

  17   probably cannot compel the defendant to do something which is

  18   not within its power to do.

  19            MR. FITZGERALD:  But, your Honor, they've been

  20   talking to other experts evidently and if they're going to

  21   call an expert as to a point, whether he's a journalist or

  22   something to do with Somalia or Ethiopia, they are trying to

  23   establish a point and we find out what the point is through

  24   the witness.

  25            THE COURT:  You don't know the point?


   1            MR. FITZGERALD:  I don't know what the point of this

   2   witness is.

   3            THE COURT:  It's not so easy to find, but I think Mr.

   4   Schmidt has been trying now for days and days to establish the

   5   significance of the attack on Abdi House and its impact on

   6   Somalia towards Americans.

   7            MR. FITZGERALD:  We can free up the issue.  I don't

   8   know what the relevance is at this point because the issue is

   9   a conspiracy of whether or not the defendants joined in a

  10   conspiracy to attack Americans, not what reaction was to the

  11   Abdi House assault.  We've already had testimony from the

  12   other expert, Mr. Samatar, so I don't know what it is that

  13   this expert is going to testify to.

  14            THE COURT:  Let me tell you what I understand it to

  15   be, and, please, Mr. Schmidt, if I'm incorrect, tell me,

  16   because defendant's statement by counsel as to the relevance

  17   have not always been crystal clear.  My understanding is the

  18   contention of El Hage that anti-Americanism in Somalia is

  19   traceable to the raid on the Abdi House and that anything that

  20   was done or said with respect to al Qaeda and Somalia prior to

  21   that critical event -- I'm stating what I understand the

  22   defendant's intention to be -- was not anti-American in its

  23   motive.  Is that accurate?

  24            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, I'm not saying that there

  25   wasn't anti-Americanism in existence.  There was nothing


   1   directed specifically towards the Americans until after the

   2   Abdi House by the Somalis in Mogadishu.

   3            THE COURT:  I have been sustaining objections because

   4   I thought I did not understand that it's a temporal issue.

   5   It's a question of when in Somalia there was an attitude which

   6   was hostile to Americans and that therefore aid to Somalia at

   7   a prior date could not be regarded as being anti-American.

   8            MR. SCHMIDT:  That's very accurate, your Honor.  It's

   9   not the totality of it, but it is accurate, and if I may add,

  10   we've been in negotiation with the government on the

  11   stipulation since January, and all these things that we've

  12   been talking about in Somalia were in the stipulation, and

  13   part of our discussions with the government concerning the

  14   stipulations, so it shouldn't be a surprise.

  15            THE COURT:  Are you still agreeable to a stipulation?

  16            MR. COHN:  It can't happen.  It just can't happen.

  17            MR. DRATEL:  We had reached agreement with the

  18   government.

  19            THE COURT:  I understand.

  20            MR. FITZGERALD:  On that point we've already heard

  21   from Dr. Samatar on that point and I don't know what it is

  22   that --

  23            THE COURT:  Yes, but the defendants have a right to

  24   call an expert.

  25            MR. FITZGERALD:  Dr. Samatar the geographer from BBC


   1   was told about the military capabilities of people in Somalia.

   2            MR. DRATEL:  Your Honor, they got an article from us

   3   by Dr. Samatar about War lord policies in Somalia.  They got

   4   that before.

   5            MR. SCHMIDT:  It covers basically Mogadishu and the

   6   Mogadishu issues.

   7            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, also 403 issue on Abdi

   8   House.  We have tried this case and part of what has been

   9   happening in front of the jury sometimes is questions are

  10   asked for the purpose of getting in casualties in Abdi House,

  11   and I'm very concerned about what is going to be --

  12            THE COURT:  I understand that the critical issue is

  13   the time, the event that there was American military action

  14   with respect to Abdi House.  We've had a lot of this already,

  15   and it is the defendant's contention that was the turning

  16   point in Somalia-American relations.

  17            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, one of the other things

  18   that is holding this up which is causing some problems in

  19   discovery is that this --

  20            THE COURT:  But the question is the time.

  21            MR. SCHMIDT:  Yes, but one of the problems has

  22   been --

  23            THE COURT:  There was a question of whether there was

  24   a video available.  You were going to make a telephone call.

  25            MR. FITZGERALD:  Yes, Judge, and we've been in court


   1   all morning.  I put a call in last night.

   2            MR. SCHMIDT:  Also, one of the things that is

   3   basically a fact that we're having difficulty because we

   4   haven't received this long document from the United States

   5   armed forces is that the first American casualty occurred on a

   6   date in August, 1993, after the Abdi House.

   7            The last casualty, though the helicopter witness was

   8   not completely clear was it August -- October 6th or 7th, and

   9   I'm desperately waiting for a document from the Army which

  10   should be there that gives the dates of the first American

  11   casualty and the last American casualty.  That would be a

  12   report from the Army that I'm entitled to put in.  I mean I'd

  13   like to have that document.

  14            THE COURT:  Maybe you should let Mr. Fitzgerald get

  15   on the telephone.

  16            MR. FITZGERALD:  No one is going to dispute dates of

  17   death.  We've never disputed that.

  18            MR. SCHMIDT:  The date that the Americans are out in

  19   March of 1994.

  20            THE COURT:  You won't agree to the stipulation of

  21   that.

  22            MR. COHN:  Judge, I am not allowed to stipulate to

  23   anything about Somalia.  I'm not captain of this.

  24            THE COURT:  I understand.

  25            MR. SCHMIDT:  These are very factual things, your


   1   Honor, that I'm waiting for.  The first American casualty

   2   occurred in August of 1993.  The last American casualty

   3   occurred October something 1993.  The last American troops are

   4   out in March, I think, 30th, 1994.  That's a factual thing

   5   that would be reflected in documents from the government.

   6            MR. FITZGERALD:  My concern is what we're getting

   7   into the details of the Abdi House assault in terms of

   8   casualties.  I don't see why the expert can't say the reaction

   9   to whatever happened in Abdi House was that --

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  We have to give the understanding of

  11   why there was these reactions.  Our purpose --

  12            THE COURT:  I looked at some of the subpoenas at some

  13   of the issues that we will have attempts to subpoena pictures

  14   of wounded people.  I'm just making a general statement.  To

  15   try and outgore the government is the most futile thing,

  16   because the government has been extremely restrained in

  17   showing that.  If you want to have the issue blood and guts,

  18   you lose.

  19            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, we don't have the video so

  20   we're not going to have any pictures of blood and guts.

  21            THE COURT:  Yes, but I'll permit a leading question

  22   as to whether that as a result of the raid on Abdi House there

  23   were significant casualties.  May I really, in an attempt to

  24   be helpful --

  25            MR. SCHMIDT:  I appreciate that, your Honor.


   1            THE COURT:  -- state that the more expeditiously you

   2   can conduct your examination of a witness, the more effective

   3   it will be?

   4            We're adjourned until 2 o'clock.

   5            (Luncheon recess)

   6            (Continued on next page)





















   1                 A F T E R N O O N   S E S S I O N

   2                             2:00 p.m.

   3            THE COURT:  I understand the government has asked for

   4   an adjournment of the review of the special verdict form, and

   5   we'll put that over until tomorrow.

   6            I would like to take up at 4:30 today one aspect on

   7   which the government I know is prepared -- the issue of

   8   unanimity with respect to aiding and abetting, that issue

   9   which the government has already briefed.  I would like to

  10   take that up because I have some questions about it.

  11            MR. FITZGERALD:  Thank you, Judge.

  12            THE COURT:  We're missing -- there's Mr. Schmidt.

  13            Okay, the next order of business is going to be the

  14   continued playing of the tapes.

  15            MR. HERMAN:  Judge?

  16            THE COURT:  Excuse me?

  17            MR. HERMAN:  The Odeh team is going to put in the

  18   rest of their exhibits and rest.

  19            THE COURT:  They're going to do that, then it's going

  20   to rest, then we go immediately to El Hage and the playing of

  21   the tape.

  22            MR. HERMAN:  Yes, your Honor.

  23            THE COURT:  All right.  So we can bring in the jury.

  24            I'm also going to try and resolve at 4:30 any

  25   outstanding El Hage discovery matters.


   1            (Jury present)

   2            THE COURT:  Good afternoon.

   3            Mr. Ricco.

   4            MR. RICCO:  Yes, thank you, your Honor.

   5            MR. HERMAN:  Judge, with the Court's permission, on

   6   behalf of Mohamed Odeh, we move into evidence exhibits Odeh

   7   A4, B4, C4, D4 and E4, which, pursuant to the stipulation A-8

   8   previously entered into evidence, were letters recovered

   9   during a search of the home of Mohamed Sadeek Odeh in Witu,

  10   Kenya on August 20, 1998, and the translations, which would be

  11   the T designations on each of those exhibits, Judge.

  12            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.

  13            THE COURT:  Received.

  14            THE COURT:  That's A4 through E4, A4-T through E4-T.

  15            MR. HERMAN:  Yes, your Honor.

  16            THE COURT:  Received.

  17            (Defendant Odeh Exhibits A4 through E4 and A4-T

  18   through E4-T received in evidence)

  19            MR. RICCO:  And in people's terms, that means that

  20   when Mr. Odeh's house was searched, they found various

  21   letters.  We're going to read you just three of those letters.

  22   Probably take us a couple of hours, but we'll get through

  23   them.

  24            The first letter is A4.

  25            MR. WILFORD:  May we display it to the jury?


   1            MR. RICCO:  The first letter is a letter to his

   2   brother.

   3            (Exhibit A4 read)

   4            THE COURT:  "Perpetuate something which is right."

   5   You misspoke.

   6            MR. RICCO:  I'm sorry, your Honor.

   7            (Odex Exhibit A4 continues)

   8            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, at this time we would like

   9   to display to the jury Odeh B4, and I'll be reading that.

  10            (Odeh Exhibit B4 read)

  11            MR. RICCO:  Your Honor, we're now going to read E4,

  12   which is the last letter and we will be completed for Mohamed

  13   Odeh.

  14            MR. RICCO:  This is a letter to various members of

  15   his family.

  16            (Odeh Exhibit E4 read)

  17            MR. RICCO:  Your Honor, with that, we have concluded

  18   the presentation of the evidence on behalf of Mohamed Odeh.

  19            Mr. Wilford is telling me that's not true.

  20            MR. WILFORD:  There's one final item which the

  21   government has agreed to stipulate to, and that is Odeh AA-T,

  22   which is a transparency of Odeh AA, which is already in

  23   evidence.

  24            MR. RICCO:  That's what I was going to say.

  25            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.


   1            THE COURT:  Received.

   2            (Defendant Odeh Exhibit AA-T received in evidence)

   3            THE COURT:  The defendant Odeh rests.

   4            You recall, ladies and gentlemen, we began with the

   5   defense case on behalf of El Hage and we interrupted it to

   6   accommodate some logistical concerns and went to the case on

   7   behalf of Odeh, which is now concluded, and so we're returning

   8   to the defense case on behalf of the defendant El Hage.

   9            You will also recall that when we stopped, we were in

  10   the process of playing some tapes and that I had told you that

  11   with respect to those tapes which are between El Hage and his

  12   wife with a representative of the United States, that those

  13   conversations are not being offered or received as evidence of

  14   the truth of anything said to the agents or to the El Hages.

  15   They are being offered and are being received solely to show

  16   that the El Hages were in communications with representatives

  17   of the United States while they were in Kenya, and to reflect

  18   the general tone and nature of the conversations.  They are

  19   being offered and received for no other purpose.

  20            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, we are going to be handing

  21   out the headsets.

  22            Your Honor, we now will play WEHX-W55 and place on

  23   the Elmo the transcript, also known as NB1-167, incoming

  24   telephone call on September 13, 1997 from Joseph to Wadih El

  25   Hage.


   1            (Audiotape WEHX-W55 played)

   2            MR. LARSEN:  The next conversation we'll be playing

   3   is Defendant's Exhibit WEHX-W56E, a September 15, 1997

   4   discussion between Wadih El Hage and an unidentified woman,

   5   who is a travel agent.

   6            (Audiotape WEHX-W56E played)

   7            MR. LARSEN:  The next conversation is WEHX-W49E,

   8   otherwise known as NB1-159.  It's a September 3, 1997

   9   conversation between Wadih El Hage and Joseph, the government

  10   agent.

  11            (Audiotape WEHX-W49E played)

  12            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, just for clarification,

  13   if we could have the record reflect that call was September 3,

  14   and the first call of the afternoon was September 13th.

  15            THE COURT:  That call preceded the others that we

  16   heard.

  17            MR. FITZGERALD:  Yes.

  18            MR. LARSEN:  The next conversation is Defendant's

  19   Exhibit WEHX-W57, it's tape number is NB1-172, September 18,

  20   1997 conversation at 20:21 hours between Wadih El Hage and

  21   Government Agent William.

  22            (Audiotape WEHX-W57 played)

  23            (Continued on next page)




   1            MR. FITZGERALD:  Can we just clarify that the

   2   transcript is only an aid.  I think there was a draft

   3   transcript displayed and the word cousin listed as target in

   4   the old draft.

   5            MR. SCHMIDT:  It was corrected.  Unfortunately didn't

   6   make it into the computer.

   7            MR. FITZGERALD:  That's fine, Judge.

   8            MR. LARSEN:  Last WEH69 August 26, 1997, NB1-153-1.

   9            (Exhibit WEH 69 played)

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  Next I'm going to be offering into

  11   evidence a number of documents that I will be reading or

  12   putting on the screen the selected portion of those documents.

  13            THE COURT:  Very well.

  14            MR. SCHMIDT:  Documents are note pads that were

  15   seized at Mercy International Relief Agency.  WEHX-M-7 A,

  16   WEHX-M-7*-38 and a translated version 38-T; WEHX-M-7*-110 and

  17   the translated version 110T; WEHX-M-7*-175 and the translated

  18   version, 175-T.

  19            THE COURT:  You don't have to repeat WEHX.

  20            MR. SCHMIDT:  The last one is M-7*252 and 252-T, the

  21   translated version.  If I may suggest, your Honor, it might be

  22   a good time to break to set up for the reading.

  23            (Defendant El Hage Exhibits WEHX-M-7 A, WEHX-M-7*-38

  24   38-T; WEHX-M-7*-110, 110T; WEHX-M-7*-175 and 175-T received in

  25   evidence)


   1            THE COURT:  We'll take our midafternoon break.

   2            (Continued on next page)

























   1            (Jury not present)

   2            MR. FITZGERALD:  Judge, if I could ask for an

   3   instruction to the jury that the legality of the techniques

   4   are not appropriate for them to consider.  I had objected to

   5   those conversations.  They're offered to show the state of

   6   mind of Mr. El Hage, but clearly we end up discussing these

   7   items, and it seems there are eight or nine offers, and now we

   8   have Mr. El Hage moved to suppress his statement made

   9   overseas.  He agreed not to offer them and he's putting in

  10   statements on the telephone.  And I'm concerned that he is

  11   going to argue in summation that he was being truthful and

  12   cooperative.

  13            THE COURT:  He argued that these were not, but you

  14   want an instruction that all of the evidence which is --

  15            MR. HERMAN:  Judge, the interpreters can't hear you

  16   apparently.

  17            THE COURT:  That all of the evidence which they will

  18   seize has been legally obtained.

  19            MR. FITZGERALD:  Yes, Judge.

  20            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, if I may, I'm clearly not

  21   making an argument of truthfulness depending on those tapes.

  22   That was never the intention.

  23            THE COURT:  Nevertheless.

  24            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'm not going to make any arguments

  25   related to the legality or illegality of the search.


   1            THE COURT:  Regardless of that, I think it's an

   2   appropriate instruction for me to give at this time.

   3            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, could I ask that you

   4   instruct the jury that neither the government nor the

   5   defendant is alleging that the --

   6            THE COURT:  No one is claiming otherwise?

   7            MR. SCHMIDT:  For the purpose of obviously the jury's

   8   determination, not for the purpose of if there is an appeal.

   9            THE COURT:  I'll tell the jury that all of the

  10   evidence which is presented before them has been legally

  11   obtained and no party is contending otherwise.  Very well.  I

  12   will do exactly that.

  13            (Pages 4857 through 4859 sealed)

  14            (Continued on next page)













   1            (Recess)

   2            (In open court; jury not present)

   3            THE COURT:  At 4:30 we're going to briefly go over

   4   some issues on the verdict form and I hope we'll take up the

   5   El Hage discovery matter.  I don't know how long that will be.

   6   If all of the defendants want to leave and waive their

   7   presence, then you do so.  If any of them want to stay, then

   8   they can stay.

   9            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, is it still your intention

  10   to discuss working Fridays?

  11            THE COURT:  Working Fridays, sequestration, and a few

  12   other things.  I could tell you my present thinking is not to

  13   sit on Friday during summation.  To sit on Friday during

  14   deliberation.

  15            MR. COHN:  Your Honor, we haven't raised the issue of

  16   interregnum between this and a possible penalty phase and

  17   Friday is the only time that we have to talk to our client.

  18            THE COURT:  That's a separate issue.  If interregnum,

  19   it will be a very brief one.

  20            (Continued on next page)







   1            (Jury present)

   2            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt.

   3            MR. FITZGERALD:  Judge, we do have a curative

   4   instruction.

   5            THE COURT:  Yes.  Ladies and gentlemen, I just want

   6   to advise you that all of the evidence which you have heard or

   7   seen has been legally obtained and is legally before you and

   8   no party contends otherwise.

   9            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, before we actually review

  10   the documents we're putting on another exhibit that is the

  11   receipt given to the wife of Mr. El Hage on the inventory of

  12   the items seized in his home and we offer that as exhibit

  13   WEHX-WW61.

  14            MR. FITZGERALD:  No objection.

  15            THE COURT:  Received.

  16            (Defendant El Hage Exhibit WEHX-WW61 received in

  17   evidence)

  18            MR. SCHMIDT:  Could we publish it now.  If I may just

  19   read that.

  20            (Exhibit read)

  21            MR. SCHMIDT:  Now if we may show the cover page of

  22   the original exhibit, and then the translation exhibit of

  23   M7*38, and the translated copy.

  24            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, just to clarify, we've

  25   now switched topics.  These are documents from Mercy


   1   International.

   2            MR. SCHMIDT:  That is correct.  These are the

   3   documents that I offered before the break, and with your

   4   Honor's permission, and if there is no objection, I will

   5   sometime just summarize what is found on the document as

   6   opposed to reading the entire document.

   7            THE COURT:  Yes.

   8            MR. SCHMIDT:  Obviously the document itself and the

   9   translation is in evidence and not how I describe them.

  10            THE COURT:  Yes.

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  I ask to place on page 39.

  12            (The following pages read from:  39, 40, 41)

  13            If we can skip, I'm skipping through, your Honor, the

  14   books.  Obviously, the whole book is in evidence and I'm only

  15   reading selected portions, not to keep us here for the next

  16   three weeks.

  17            If we can go to page 45, your Honor.

  18            (The following pages read from: 45, 48, 49, 50, 51)

  19            Now we will skip to page 64.

  20            (Following pages read from:  64, 65, 67, 68, 72, 74.

  21   75, 77, 80, 81, 83, 84, 90, 95, 96, 97, 102, 104, 105)

  22            Mr. Dratel can relieve me of reading some of these.

  23   While he's getting up, I will continue on page 113 from

  24   WEHX-M7*110-T.

  25            MR. DRATEL:  May I, your Honor?


   1            THE COURT:  Yes.

   2            MR. DRATEL:  Thank you.  On page 113.

   3            (Following pages read from:  113, 114, 117, 120, 123

   4   126, 127, 130, 127, 130, 132, 134, 138, 143, 144, 146, 149,

   5   151, 158)

   6            (Continued on next page)





















   1            MR. SCHMIDT:  159.

   2            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, I have an objection at this

   3   point on 403 grounds.

   4            THE COURT:  To 159?

   5            MR. WILFORD:  No, to this continued line as

   6   cumulative.

   7            THE COURT:  Objection it's cumulative.  How much more

   8   will there be?

   9            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'm trying to speed it up now since

  10   we've gotten through a lot of it, your Honor.  I'm hoping to

  11   try to complete this, if there are no interruptions, in about

  12   ten minutes.

  13            THE COURT:  All right.  I'll permit it for another

  14   ten minutes with the understanding that's the conclusion of

  15   this type of evidence.

  16            MR. SCHMIDT:  I'm sorry, I didn't hear your Honor.

  17            THE COURT:  I'm permit you another ten minutes on the

  18   assumption that is the end of this type of presentation.

  19            MR. SCHMIDT:  Of the notebooks.  It would be the end

  20   of the presentation of the notebooks, yes, indeed.

  21            THE COURT:  Well, why don't you proceed.

  22            MR. SCHMIDT:  Thank you, your Honor.

  23            MR. SCHMIDT:  Page 159, date September 22, 1993, from

  24   Hamburgh, Germany, indicating sugars and some men from

  25   Romania.


   1            161 discusses strategic decisions of products to

   2   sell, a visit to a check factory from Czechoslovakia and the

   3   discussion at the bottom, "Take information on the airplane to

   4   sell it to Saudi Arabia and photograph it as well.  Ask

   5   Abu-Tareq about the evaluation of the sale.  How much do we

   6   get it for it in America."

   7            171, 171 is a vacation schedule to Cyprus from 8/30

   8   to 9/3 and then later 9/13 to 9/24 concerning information

   9   pertaining to Lebanon, clothes, jeans, things that are related

  10   to vacation during that period of time.

  11            173 is a listing of in July 5, 1993, Jeddah Airport,

  12   with some items purchased and expenses that run from July 5,

  13   1993 to August 6 that indicates all expenses on the travel and

  14   different currencies that include Dutch, German, Slovakian,

  15   Greek and other currencies, exhibiting evidence of the trip.

  16            Then we're going on to Exhibit 175 and going on to

  17   page 180.  180, discussed a date 11/3 and determining "to send

  18   any fruit and vegetable to Lebanon, then export it again.

  19   Lebanon will be a cover for the Sudanese exporter."

  20            182, this concerns developing a fish farm in a salt

  21   field and it's dated May 4, 1993.

  22            185, it concerns the -- I'm sorry, 185 has

  23   information including, in the middle of the full page, "Take

  24   an appointment" -- excuse me, "We beg you to clarify your

  25   requests in a letter directed to the Laden International


   1   Company and the Russia Maz Company.  Master Ahmed Jebara wants

   2   an appointment with the Sheikh.  10/12 is possible.  1-2,30 is

   3   better.  Take an appointment during this time or other time."

   4            186, May 6, 1993, 9:00 in the morning.  There seems

   5   to be an appointment, and 5/8/93, "Make a paymaster check to

   6   the order of the Public Board for Investment, included with

   7   the study for the value of 5,000 pounds."

   8            187 is notes, including taking an appointment for

   9   Mohamed Jebara with the sheikh and notes about what different

  10   people should be doing.

  11            190 has information concerning the Maz Company again

  12   and some information about Saudi Arabia and a note,

  13   "Abu-Abdallah:  Sheik Ali Othman wants to consul with his

  14   friends concerning matter which you requested and he shall

  15   reply to you on Thursday."

  16            Then skip to 199.  This has a date of Sunday, May

  17   22nd.  There is an account number of Osama Mohamed Bin Laden

  18   in Jeddah and a telephone number of Abu al-Fadl, question of,

  19   "What about the bonus of the holiday?"  and other matters as

  20   well.

  21            208, please.  This talks about the Russians and the

  22   sugar company and trucks, refrigeration, shock absorbers,

  23   repair, spare parts should be free, the payment and other

  24   matters relating to the purchase of different products,

  25   including a truck.


   1            219, please.  This is July 4, 1993 concerning the

   2   unfeasibility of opening up an office.  It talks about

   3   presenting an application for the man present in Cyprus.  The

   4   factory through Abu-Al-Rida on the basis that he would be our

   5   representative whereas we come to him with the sesame.  It

   6   talks about other matters in Cyprus and the Zaytur people,

   7   about tractors and things about Holland.

   8            224, it says, "Send the subscription letter to," and

   9   in English it's Newsweek.  "Make business cards, visas."

  10            242, this is an indication concerning Abu Massaab

  11   either to sell the car or we negotiate to sell it to

  12   Moattasem.  Indicates things for Abu-Al-Rida, Jamal and

  13   others, including "the sales of oil is upon request to the

  14   local currency while watching the market prices."

  15            249, additional information concerning sesame and

  16   other people, other people named.

  17            Now to the last book, going to M-7A.  We'll skip the

  18   book M-7*252.  Page 2 has a date November 11, 1993 concerning

  19   leather in November 28, 1993.  We're going to skip to page 8,

  20   which has a date of November 17, 1993 relating to different

  21   products.

  22            We're going to go to page 10.  The entry for November

  23   22 says, Mottasaam goes tomorrow to the Embassy of Saudi

  24   Arabia to find out if they would notarize the papers of the

  25   health certificate to export cow's meat.  They are


   1   notarizing."

   2            14 has a date of November 27th, 1993 concerning

   3   lumber and has Abu Khadija and Abu Ibrahim's name concerning

   4   opening of bank account and sending telexes.

   5            THE COURT:  Mr. Schmidt, suppose you just summarize

   6   the balance.

   7            MR. SCHMIDT:  An example, then, 18 --

   8            THE COURT:  Are the other documents of a similar

   9   content as those that you have done?

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  I would just like to summarize

  11   especially because particularly the dates on the documents

  12   cover a period of time that's relevant in the case.

  13            It will take three minutes at most.

  14            THE COURT:  Three minutes?  Three minutes and then

  15   we'll adjourn.

  16            MR. SCHMIDT:  Thank you, your Honor.

  17            On page 20, the date is December 12, 1993, concerning

  18   the attorney and related to Taba.  21 is dated December 18,

  19   1993 concerning the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs

  20   relating to economics and Sayed Altelaib sending letters and a

  21   fax to Korea.  22 is dated December 20, 1993 concerning other

  22   business.  Page 25 is January 15, 1994 concerning leather and

  23   other matter.  Page 30 talks about, "What does the region need

  24   for the project of fighting malaria?"  And it concerns an

  25   execution of the project concerning malaria, and that


   1   continues on the discussion of that on page 30, 31, 32, 33 and

   2   34 concerning the area of malaria, concerning orphanages and a

   3   project to deal with the mosquito problem.  It also talks

   4   about on page 34 that AMREF has a malaria control project.

   5            On page 36 we have names of Ahmed, Chirchir, Wadih,

   6   Misoi and information on that on the side.  On page 39 there

   7   are entries concerning stones, including tanzanite and

   8   diamonds, and page 40 -- we are now in 1996 -- concerning

   9   stones and 44 also concerning stones and 45 through 50

  10   concerning stones.

  11            THE COURT:  Thank, Mr. Schmidt.

  12            MR. SCHMIDT:  Thank you, your Honor.

  13            THE COURT:  Ladies and gentlemen, a while ago I

  14   talked to you about the fact that all the evidence before you

  15   had been legally received and no parties contended otherwise,

  16   and what I had in mind was the physical exhibits and the

  17   documents and things of that sort.

  18            There is, I understand, a claim being made by defense

  19   counsel with respect to the voluntariness of statements that

  20   were made following the arrest, and that issue, that is,

  21   whether or not those statements were voluntary or not, is an

  22   issue which you will be called upon to decide and I did not

  23   mean to include that when I said "no party contends

  24   otherwise."

  25            Other than that, all I have to say to you is, good


   1   evening and we're adjourned until tomorrow morning.

   2            (Jury not present)

   3            THE COURT:  Here is the agenda which I propose for

   4   the rest of afternoon and evening.  We'll take a recess.

   5   During recess I want to confer with the government with

   6   respect to the outstanding discovery matters with respect to

   7   the defendant El Hage.  I then want to review the program for

   8   the next several days so that there are no surprises.

   9            I then want to deal with one of the issues with

  10   respect to the issue of whether unanimity is required with

  11   respect to aiding and abetting, and there are one or two other

  12   matters.  And I'm available if I have omitted anything.  As I

  13   say it's the discretion of the defendants whether they wish to

  14   stay or waive their presence.

  15            MR. WILFORD:  Yes, your Honor, with respect to the

  16   continued presentation of evidence by defendant El Hage, I

  17   think that this entire line of presentation was intended to

  18   establish that Mr. El Hage has business interests.

  19            THE COURT:  Yes.

  20            MR. WILFORD:  I think that that's been clearly

  21   established to the jury.

  22            THE COURT:  Are we finished with that now?

  23            MR. SCHMIDT:  We are finished with the book.

  24            THE COURT:  We're finished with the book.  Are we

  25   finished with the presentation on behalf of El Hage to the


   1   fact that a significant portion of his time was engaged in

   2   commercial business activity?  Is that finished?

   3            MR. SCHMIDT:  Let me tell your Honor there are two

   4   areas I have left.

   5            THE COURT:  That is capable being answered yes or no.

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  No.

   7            THE COURT:  Well, that may or may not be the case.

   8            MR. SCHMIDT:  If I can explain to your Honor what's

   9   left in the relevant portion.

  10            THE COURT:  Yes.

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  What's left as to the business

  12   interests is in 1995 Mr. El Hage conducted a series of

  13   business transactions and travels for the Bin Laden companies

  14   going to ZTS company in Slovakia and numerous correspondence

  15   that was all related to the business.  It's a matter of

  16   questioning in the Grand Jury concerning this.

  17            We want to make it absolutely clear to the jury, and

  18   in a terrorism case I think we have a right to show, that the

  19   quantity --

  20            THE COURT:  But just as a matter of trial advocacy,

  21   that requires ten minutes.  That doesn't require that you lose

  22   the attention of the jury by bogging the jury down in minutia

  23   so that they lose the whole picture.

  24            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, they are going to have the

  25   documents --


   1            THE COURT:  How much time do you require for that

   2   presentation?

   3            MR. SCHMIDT:  We have that presentation --

   4            THE COURT:  Tell me how much time you require for

   5   that presentation.

   6            MR. SCHMIDT:  That presentation is probably 45

   7   minutes.  It's documents that are taken from different places.

   8   Bringing it all together and showing them --

   9            THE COURT:  You put them all together and you

  10   introduce them as one exhibit and you make a statement

  11   summarizing the contents of those documents, and that will not

  12   only cover that issue but it will cover that issue in a manner

  13   in which the jury will understand and comprehend it.

  14            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, what it also does is

  15   shortens substantially my --

  16            THE COURT:  How much time in total do you need?

  17            MR. SCHMIDT:  What I have, two areas, that one and

  18   the Help Africa People NGO-related activity.  Those are the

  19   two areas that are left that are going to take time, I would

  20   say between the -- we're talking about probably an hour and a

  21   half presentation, maybe two hours, if there's a little

  22   glitch.

  23            THE COURT:  Two hours.  You have two hours, sir.  You

  24   can use it as you see fit.

  25            MR. SCHMIDT:  I appreciate it, your Honor.


   1            THE COURT:  You have two hours.

   2            MR. SCHMIDT:  I just want to remind your Honor that

   3   we have sat through the government's case which at times has

   4   been tedious.  We have stipulated to a tremendous amount of

   5   material to do that.

   6            THE COURT:  I'm sure the government would enter into

   7   a stipulation with respect to these documents and what they

   8   reflect.

   9            MR. SCHMIDT:  I would prefer not to show all my

  10   material at summation.

  11            THE COURT:  Two hours and use it as you wish.  Two

  12   hours.

  13            All right.  We'll take a five-minute recess and I

  14   want to see the government with respect to the discovery.

  15            MR. HERMAN:  Judge, can we make it a prayer break

  16   because Mr. Odeh wants to return for the argument.

  17            (Recess)

  18            (Pages 4874 through 4878 filed under seal)

  19            (Continued on next page)








   1            (In open court)

   2            THE COURT:  Are the defendants coming back?

   3            MR. COHN:  Allegedly, yes, your Honor.

   4            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, Mr. Odeh wishes to be

   5   present, as we informed Mr. Herman.

   6            THE COURT:  All right.  I just want to deal with

   7   logistics.

   8            Tomorrow, Mr. Schmidt, you have two hours of

   9   documents and you have possibly one live witness.

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  We have possibly the Somalia expert.

  11   There is also a handwriting expert concerning one, also a

  12   series of three, I think, small notebooks that we weren't

  13   going to read from that we wanted to put in evidence.

  14            THE COURT:  You are calling a handwriting expert?

  15            MR. SCHMIDT:  The government has notified me today

  16   that they are not going to stipulate to his report and I'm

  17   trying to reach him right now to see if he will be available

  18   to come in tomorrow briefly.

  19            THE COURT:  And if there are any other live

  20   witnesses, any other live witnesses as part of the El Hage

  21   case, they are to be called tomorrow.

  22            MR. SCHMIDT:  The only issue that we have left is the

  23   Somalia discovery issue.

  24            THE COURT:  Let me advise you that I have reviewed

  25   that material ex parte and I am satisfied that the government


   1   has furnished to you all with respect to that issue to which

   2   you are entitled.

   3            MR. SCHMIDT:  The only issue is that we're, the

   4   government and I, seemed not to disagree on some very salient

   5   facts of Somalia, that we just have to get the proper manner

   6   to get them in because we're informed that one of the parties

   7   won't -- would stipulate to this --

   8            THE COURT:  I thought that was a function of your

   9   expert.

  10            MR. SCHMIDT:  Probably not.

  11            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, if I could hand up the

  12   disclosure I got on the expert, just a copy of the books he

  13   wrote.  It's a very gory account of two events, one on the

  14   Abdi House raid and one on the raid in October 3, 1993.

  15            It seems this is a journalist who interviewed people

  16   about what happened.  It just seems classic hearsay.  It's a

  17   reporter coming in and telling you his version of a story from

  18   others and what he saw at Mogadishu.  I don't know what expert

  19   testimony he could offer in a case where there is no crime

  20   charged about killings in Somalia.

  21            The issue is whether or not the people in al Qaeda

  22   thought they were aiming to fight Americans in October '93.

  23   It seems that we're going into an area where we're going to

  24   get into the blood and gore from July of '93 to October of '93

  25   and bodies being dragged in the streets.


   1            I don't know, but that's the chapters that I read and

   2   that's why I wonder why -- he's not going to give us the facts

   3   because he's really more of a reporter telling us his story.

   4            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, if I may --

   5            THE COURT:  No.  No, I think I can cut through it.  I

   6   think I've already -- when we were having discovery disputes

   7   with respect to Somalia, I think I suggested that a possible

   8   shortcut and a way to overcome the difficulties in obtaining

   9   witnesses from Somalia, which I'm satisfied were very real

  10   problems that El Hage's counsel have, was to have an expert

  11   who could testify to the political climate in Somalia.

  12            Now, whether or not the author of this book

  13   qualifies, I don't know.  I don't know what constitutes an

  14   expert.  I'm trying to think of the name of the person who

  15   wrote the "Inside" books who -- Mitchner.  He spent two weeks

  16   in the country.

  17            MR. COHN:  John Gunther, I think it was, your Honor.

  18   "Inside Africa."

  19            THE COURT:  Was it Gunther?

  20            MR. FITZGERALD:  The chapters are entitled "Death

  21   Came from the Sky."

  22            THE COURT:  I thought we went through that.

  23            MR. SCHMIDT:  We don't plan to introduce blood and

  24   gore.

  25            THE COURT:  I understood that the purpose was to show


   1   that there came a fairly discrete point in time traceable to

   2   the Abdi military raid, or whatever it is, where attitudes of

   3   Somalians toward America changed and that events prior to that

   4   time could not be regarded as anti-American, and that was the

   5   function of it.  I thought we did all this in the robing room,

   6   and with some little hesitation in your voice, Mr. Schmidt,

   7   you agreed.  Isn't that correct?

   8            MR. SCHMIDT:  I agreed, and what I thought we agreed

   9   upon is that we're going to give a fairly -- as much as

  10   possible -- bloodless account of the Abdi House and the

  11   effects on the Somalis.  And I thought that's what was a

  12   concern, that we don't go --

  13            THE COURT:  It's the first part of that sentence

  14   which is giving Mr. Fitzgerald, understandably, some --

  15            MR. SCHMIDT:  We're not putting in photos.  I'm going

  16   to speak to our expert to basically talk about what the

  17   reported casualties were, not describing the casualties, what

  18   was the nature of the reported attack, not doing it in a

  19   manner that is any more gruesome than the helicopter pilot

  20   described the scene.

  21            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, we haven't challenged

  22   Dr. Samatar's testimony about the change in attitudes after

  23   July 1993.  To say it's going to be bloodless, of course, what

  24   is the relevance of what happened in July 1993?  We've heard

  25   it already and now we're opening the door where we have


   1   soldiers being dragged through streets.

   2            THE COURT:  I know that.

   3            MR. FITZGERALD:  If we're going down that road, we're

   4   going to hear other counsel object.  We've seen twice, your

   5   Honor, Mr. Schmidt --

   6            THE COURT:  I would think that the description of the

   7   raid on Abdi House should be a very brief description

   8   sufficient to make the point, which I understand is the

   9   defendant's contention -- that this was a major event in the

  10   thinking of the Somalians and was the starting point of the

  11   strong anti-American hostility.

  12            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, these things are never

  13   quite as black and white about the starting point as a real

  14   starting point, but, yes, it's going to be just sufficient to

  15   describe the change in the Somali attitude in Mogadishu

  16   towards the Americans as a result of that attack.

  17            THE COURT:  That's three or four questions and three

  18   or four answers, and I have to tell you that if you attempt to

  19   guild the lilly -- I don't know that that's the appropriate

  20   way -- to spill the blood -- more accurate, but less

  21   attractive -- then I'll cut you off.

  22            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, it might be better to have

  23   a few more questions so I can narrow the focus than to ask an

  24   open-ended question at the risk of expanding the focus.  So I

  25   understand what your Honor wants, and I plan to try to do it


   1   in a manner that will keep it narrow.

   2            THE COURT:  It's not very difficult to do.  I will

   3   not sustain objections to leading questions if they are

   4   designed to further this object.

   5            MR. SCHMIDT:  Thank you.

   6            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, if I could note three

   7   things.

   8            THE COURT:  Surely.

   9            MR. FITZGERALD:  The other day we had a picture put

  10   in of what Mr. El Hage's office looked like.  We had the legs

  11   of a chair with a computer with a toy on top for a screen for

  12   a few minutes.  We tried to get a picture in of a child with a

  13   dog.  We had the state of mind conversation, showing

  14   conversations about the legality of a phone tap.

  15            I don't want to be put in a position where we're

  16   going to get someone up here and we're going to go into -- I

  17   don't understand the relevance if we're not disagreeing that

  18   the Somalis were angry at the Americas and U.N. in July of

  19   1993.  We're talking about the state of mind of al Qaeda.

  20            THE COURT:  You know, I'm under the impression that

  21   it was the anticipation through almost all of this trial that

  22   this matter would be dealt with with a stipulation and that

  23   cannot be accomplished not because of any lack of cooperation

  24   on the part of any counsel.  So Mr. Schmidt is scrambling

  25   because the stipulation is not available to him and a witness


   1   he had anticipated is not available to him, through no fault

   2   of his own, and so he's being given some leeway and I think

   3   that's appropriate.

   4            MR. FITZGERALD:  But, your Honor, can we have a

   5   proffer of the questions and answers before we go forward with

   6   the witness tomorrow so we know what we're walking into?

   7            THE COURT:  You have more than that, because I think

   8   I suggested what the substance of the questions should be, and

   9   that is:  Did there come a time when there was a significant

  10   change in the attitude on the part of the Somalian people from

  11   being a neutral or receptive country with respect to the U.S.

  12   and U.N.?  Yes.  And did there come a time when that changed?

  13   And was there any particular event which signaled that change?

  14   And what was that event?  And tell us generally what was the

  15   nature of that event and what was the response to that event

  16   and what happened thereafter.

  17            Is that --

  18            MR. SCHMIDT:  Actually, I think, your Honor, to some

  19   extent these questions are too broad.  I'm going to actually

  20   try to make it even narrower than what your Honor indicated.

  21            MR. FITZGERALD:  Can we ask if any other defendant

  22   intends to examine this witness, including counsel for

  23   Al-'Owhali, as to issues on what happened at the Abdi House?

  24            MR. COHN:  Depends what he says.

  25            THE COURT:  Assume that he answers the questions


   1   which I hypothetically posed in the way which we anticipate,

   2   which is that there was a military operation involving the

   3   United States troops and the raid on Abdi House, civilians

   4   were killed and --

   5            MR. COHN:  Does he describe the military operation in

   6   any detail, or he just says generically there was some

   7   military operation?

   8            THE COURT:  I don't know.

   9            MR. COHN:  And therefore, I don't know either.

  10            THE COURT:  Well, but I'll tell you, when word one

  11   comes out of the witness's mouth which you believe will

  12   require you to go into further detail or cross-examination

  13   with respect to that, you alert the court.  You say, Judge,

  14   this is a matter which we wish to discuss, and I will

  15   understand and we will deal with it.

  16            MR. COHN:  So if I stand that time, you'll recognize

  17   me?

  18            THE COURT:  I always recognize you -- sometimes to

  19   say derogatory things, but I always recognize you.

  20            MR. COHN:  At least you say it to my face.

  21            THE COURT:  Again, I hope the record fully reflects

  22   that Mr. Cohn and I go back many, many years and that my

  23   facetious comments to him are indeed facetious.

  24            MR. COHN:  And again, I receive them in good humor,

  25   to which I know they are offered.


   1            THE COURT:  But you always worry, you know, as I

   2   worried when somebody said, "We now know who rules the

   3   courtroom," that somebody reading the cold record will not

   4   understand.

   5            All right.  Now, I want to make it clear with respect

   6   to all defendants who have not yet rested that when it is

   7   their turn, if they have a witness, the witness is to be

   8   called; that you cannot say, well, I suddenly discover that I

   9   have a witness of any nature but I need some time, because the

  10   answer is, if you have a witness, you call the witness.

  11            MR. SCHMIDT:  Your Honor, I have a problem and I just

  12   found out right now.

  13            THE COURT:  Yes.

  14            MR. SCHMIDT:  The handwriting expert said he's

  15   unavailable tomorrow.  The government indicates that they want

  16   to briefly question him.  I assume that his testimony will be

  17   a total of ten minutes and it's just another document I want

  18   to put in.  It's not a significant problem for his testimony,

  19   it's just that the government informed me today that they want

  20   to question him; they won't stipulate to the document and the

  21   report.

  22            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, we received discovery of

  23   the document days ago and we received discovery of the

  24   expert's report, I think, yesterday or something like that.

  25   So when we say we wanted the witness here, it's because we're


   1   getting documents that were never produced to us, despite the

   2   reverse discovery order.  They're going to be authenticated --

   3            MR. SCHMIDT:  These particular documents were

   4   produced about two, three weeks ago.

   5            MR. FITZGERALD:  Despite your Honor's order in

   6   November.

   7            THE COURT:  All right.  All right.  He's available

   8   Monday morning?

   9            MR. SCHMIDT:  He didn't say so, but it seems to

  10   indicate that -- I didn't speak to him.  He just can't do it

  11   tomorrow.  It sounds like he will be available Monday morning.

  12            THE COURT:  Don't do "sounds like."

  13            MR. SCHMIDT:  I have no --

  14            THE COURT:  But I'm telling you.

  15            MR. SCHMIDT:  Fine, your Honor.

  16            THE COURT:  If you can't call him tomorrow and you

  17   can't call him Monday, then you won't call him.  Okay?

  18            MR. SCHMIDT:  That is not an unreasonable position.

  19   Thank you.

  20            THE COURT:  There you go.

  21            MR. COHN:  The millennium.

  22            THE COURT:  The millennium.

  23            All right, let's assume all this happens tomorrow or

  24   Monday and so closing begins either Monday or Tuesday.  And

  25   the government wants two and a half hours?  Two and a half


   1   days?

   2            MR. FITZGERALD:  The latter would be correct.

   3            MR. WILFORD:  Wishful thinking.

   4            THE COURT:  There are logistics involved.  It's not

   5   just my being intrusive.

   6            Odeh, how long?

   7            MR. RICCO:  Judge, can we think about it for a

   8   second?

   9            (Pause)

  10            MR. RICCO:  Judge, I think that we probably would go

  11   a full morning and a little bit of the afternoon, but no more

  12   than that.

  13            THE COURT:  Okay.  So that would be ten to?

  14            MR. RICCO:  Ten to one, and maybe a half hour after

  15   lunch, but I doubt very seriously if we would be up that long.

  16            THE COURT:  Three and a half hours.

  17            MR. RICCO:  Yes.  We don't have that much to talk

  18   about.

  19            THE COURT:  Mr. Cohn?

  20            MR. COHN:  My guess is somewhere between two to three

  21   hours.  And it could be a little briefer than that, but it

  22   certainly won't be longer than that.

  23            THE COURT:  No, give yourself some margin.

  24            MR. COHN:  I am, Judge.

  25            THE COURT:  Because I do hold people to the margin.


   1   I tell them, you know, be generous to yourself.

   2            Okay.  Mr. Ruhnke, who is going to make the closing?

   3            MR. RUHNKE:  I will, Judge.  Probably, be generous

   4   with myself, two or three hours.

   5            THE COURT:  So the jury could be charged --

   6            MR. COHN:  Wait, we haven't --

   7            Talk about wishful thinking, Judge.

   8            THE COURT:  Didn't I?

   9            MR. SCHMIDT:  I was considering waiving, your Honor.

  10            THE COURT:  I should have asked.  I asked in the

  11   wrong sequence.  I'm sorry.  You go after the government,

  12   right?

  13            MR. SCHMIDT:  That's correct.  I was expecting

  14   approximately three to four hours, unless the government

  15   raises some issues that's going to require additional time.

  16            THE COURT:  Three to four hours.

  17            So the jury would be charged the earliest would be a

  18   week from Monday, and more likely a week from Tuesday.  Am I

  19   doing it wrong?

  20            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, you left out rebuttal.

  21            THE COURT:  Government rebuttal.  Yes.  I know that's

  22   hard to say, but give yourself a generous estimate of time for

  23   rebuttal.  Will you be making the rebuttal?

  24            MR. FITZGERALD:  Yes, Judge.

  25            Three, four hours.


   1            THE COURT:  Three or four hours.  All right, so the

   2   jury would be charged probably Tuesday or Wednesday of the

   3   week after next.  What I was suggesting is that --

   4            Does anybody wish the jury to be sequestered during

   5   deliberations?

   6            MR. COHN:  Not presently, unless something happens.

   7   But not presently.

   8            THE COURT:  Assuming that there is no event --

   9            MR. FITZGERALD:  I just wish to consult the United

  10   States Attorney on that matter.  If something changes, I will

  11   let your Honor know tomorrow morning.

  12            THE COURT:  Unless we're told otherwise, we will not

  13   sequester the jury.  My only experience with sequestration was

  14   a very negative one, and I think the regimen we have now is --

  15   I don't want to jinks it -- seems to be satisfactory, and not

  16   sit on Friday during summations.  When the jury begins

  17   deliberations, my inclination is to have them deliberate on

  18   Friday also and one of the reasons why I want to alert them to

  19   the fact that that would be the case.

  20            Does anybody have any problem with their deliberating

  21   on Friday?

  22            MR. COHN:  No.

  23            MR. HERMAN:  No, your Honor.

  24            MR. COHN:  Just one thought occurs, and I raise it

  25   warily, and that is we might want to think about sequestration


   1   for two days if we're running into May 16th.  I think it will

   2   be impossible to avoid McVeigh on the day he is executed, and

   3   I don't know how else --

   4            THE COURT:  It wasn't so easy today.  If you pick up

   5   the New York Times, it's page 1.

   6            MR. COHN:  I understand that, Judge.  But that's

   7   going to be the day of his execution and I just, you know, I

   8   mean, I raise it as a consideration.  It's not a motion, but I

   9   am concerned about it.

  10            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, there is another factor in

  11   the equation, and that is that Friday is a religious

  12   observance day.

  13            THE COURT:  Which Friday?

  14            MR. WILFORD:  Fridays are a religious observance day

  15   for the defendants.  So we will be talking about meeting on

  16   Fridays and there's a possibility with notice, etc., that that

  17   may pose a logistical problem on that end.  So something to be

  18   considered.  We're not sequestering the jury.

  19            MR. FITZGERALD:  My only comment in that regard, and

  20   I'm not claiming to be an imam, but I know that we have sat on

  21   Fridays in the past in cases where defendants wanted to have a

  22   jamaat prayer and we can work around that.

  23            THE COURT:  I don't have to resolve it now.  I would

  24   want, I would think, Monday to alert the jury to the fact that

  25   they should not be making plans for Fridays.


   1            Let me raise with you a matter concerning the charge

   2   and the verdict form, and I think it's a very interesting

   3   question.  The government urges at page 3 of the government's

   4   memo on the proposed jury instruction that the Court not

   5   require unanimity with respect to aiding and abetting as well

   6   as the substantive offense, and the government cites a number

   7   of cases.

   8            There is no Second Circuit case which holds that it

   9   is sufficient if the jury unanimously agrees that the

  10   defendant either committed the act or aided and abetted in its

  11   commission.  There is a very strong dictum, but it is a

  12   dictum, and it's a very strong dictum because it's a dictum of

  13   Judge Friendly, in which he says, although we need not decide

  14   the case, we need not decide the issue, in his view, unanimity

  15   would be satisfied if half the jurors believed that the

  16   defendant committed the act and the other jurors believed he

  17   aided and abetted the act.  That is Judge Friendly's opinion,

  18   U.S. v. Peterson, 768 F.2d 684, 686.

  19            Judge Friendly says, on the other hand, although we

  20   need not decide the point, as we subsequently discuss, I'm

  21   paraphrasing, the jury should be regarded as unanimous if some

  22   jurors believe that defendant one and the other jurors believe

  23   that defendant two was the aider or abettor.

  24            There are other Second Circuit cases which say you

  25   need not specifically instruct the jury that as to aiding and


   1   abetting they have to be unanimous, but they say a general

   2   requirement of unanimity would suffice, which I read to mean

   3   that it would suffice because the assumption is that there is

   4   a requirement of unanimity.

   5            There are two circuits which specifically have

   6   held -- I believe it's the Eighth and the Fourth -- that it is

   7   adequate that the jury is split on that.  In U.S. v. Elk,

   8   Eighth Circuit, 820 F.2d 959, the court says, "Even if the

   9   jury was divided on whether Eagle Elk committed the principal

  10   crime or aided and abetted its commission, there could be no

  11   question that the illegal act was murder...  Thus the jurors

  12   were in substantial agreement as to the nature of Eagle Elk's

  13   guilty act, as required by the Sixth Amendment."

  14            So that's the state of the law in non-death cases

  15   with respect to aiding and abetting.  The draft charge that

  16   you have and the draft verdict form specifically tells the

  17   jury that they have to be unanimous with respect to the theory

  18   on which they find the defendant guilty.  If you look at the

  19   special verdict form with respect, for example, to the murder

  20   counts, you will see that the form calls for them to say,

  21   guilty, not guilty, himself killed, aided, abetted or caused,

  22   and that they have to be unanimous.

  23            When you get -- if you get -- to the death penalty

  24   phase, then, if you look at 18 U.S.C. Section 3591(a)(2), it

  25   provides the defendant will be death-eligible if he, and then


   1   it lists four categories, intentionally killed, intentionally

   2   inflicted, intentionally participated in an act, intentionally

   3   and specifically engaged in an act of violence.

   4            Now, I confess that when I originally structured

   5   this, I didn't sufficiently focus on the fact that the

   6   language of 3591(a)(2) calls for the jury to resolve that

   7   question, if the defendant "has determined beyond a reasonable

   8   doubt at the hearing under Section 3593 finds," and then lists

   9   the four.  And that has caused me to re-think whether it's

  10   better to have the jury do it twice, once on the guilt phase

  11   and then again, as I think under the statute I must, at the

  12   3591(a)(2) proceeding, or whether it is more advantageous to

  13   follow Judge Friendly's dictum.

  14            And that's the question that I am wrestling with and

  15   which I might just leave with you.  And tomorrow we'll go

  16   through the whole verdict form.

  17            MS. BABCOCK:  Judge, I do have some comments to make

  18   on that point that you just addressed.

  19            THE COURT:  Yes.

  20            MS. BABCOCK:  There's a Second Circuit case, U.S. v. 

  21   Shift.

  22            THE COURT:  Yes.

  23            MS. BABCOCK:  That is cited I believe by Peterson,

  24   the Judge Friendly case.

  25            THE COURT:  Yes.


   1            MS. BABCOCK:  Or else by Harris.

   2            THE COURT:  I have it in front of me.

   3            MS. BABCOCK:  Where the court says that, "In general,

   4   the general instruction on unanimity is sufficient except in

   5   cases where the complexity of the evidence or other factors

   6   create a genuine danger of jury confusion."

   7            THE COURT:  Yes.

   8            MS. BABCOCK:  And I would point out that U.S. v. 

   9   Harris, the first case cited by the government, was an

  10   eight-count drug distribution conspiracy.

  11            THE COURT:  Yes.

  12            MS. BABCOCK:  Peterson, the Judge Friendly case, was

  13   a three-count indictment.  Horton, the Fourth Circuit case,

  14   was a run-in-the-mill murder, prison murder case, as was Eagle 

  15   Elk.  So each of those cases, I think, are distinguishable on

  16   their facts.

  17            THE COURT:  And indeed, I think Judge Friendly gets

  18   into a philosophical analysis of why it is that, using a lot

  19   of Latin that I don't understand, why it is that the acts

  20   which would be the substantive events and the acts which would

  21   be the aiding and abetting are so closely tied to each other

  22   that leads to that conclusion.

  23            MS. BABCOCK:  Exactly.  And it's the same analysis

  24   that the Fourth Circuit does in Horton.  In fact, in Horton,

  25   at footnote 1, the Fourth Circuit says, "We need not decide in


   1   this case whether charging the jury under separate theories of

   2   being a principal in aiding and abetting without a specific

   3   unanimity instruction can ever abridge the defendant's Sixth

   4   Amendment right to a unanimous verdict."  So the Fourth

   5   Circuit didn't go quite as far as what the government may

   6   have --

   7            THE COURT:  It's somewhat analogous for the reasons

   8   on which I declined to give a Pinkerton charge.  If you did

   9   not -- that in those cases where the courts have suggested

  10   that you could treat jurors who found the defendant committed

  11   the acts and the defendant aided and abetted, you can lump

  12   those jurors and say, whether they are unanimous or not, are

  13   cases in which it was a simple close nexus.

  14            You're quite right, and that is very much a factor.

  15            MS. BABCOCK:  And the complexity issue that is cited

  16   in Shift has been cited in numerous cases in other circuits as

  17   well.  Shift cited a Ninth Circuit case, Pezzane, and that's

  18   also cited by the Fourth and Fifth Circuits.  So that's still

  19   good law.  And even in Harris, which is the most recent Second

  20   Circuit case cited by the government, which goes back from

  21   Peterson and Shift, it's clear that the court can give this

  22   instruction.

  23            There's nothing, there's no case anywhere that says

  24   it's improper to give the instruction, and in fact, the

  25   available case law, again going back to Shift, indicates that


   1   in cases that are complex, that it is required that the Court

   2   give such an instruction.

   3            THE COURT:  All right, we'll reserve it until

   4   tomorrow.  I think the government ought to consider it in the

   5   light of the interplay.

   6            Let me just ask to what extent, if any, does a jury

   7   determine -- suppose the jury is told this and the jury

   8   unanimously picks one, does that impact on the death penalty

   9   phase?

  10            MR. COHN:  We're considering that.

  11            THE COURT:  You're considering that?

  12            MR. COHN:  Yes, it's occurred to me and I don't know

  13   what the answer is yet, but we're thinking about it.

  14            THE COURT:  One would assume it would be -- well, one

  15   shouldn't assume anything.  But that's an interesting

  16   question.  Since I haven't resolved it in my own mind, I just

  17   want to take the benefit of the legal scholarships sitting

  18   before me and defer to them on it.

  19            MR. FITZGERALD:  Putting the scholarship aside, I

  20   would like to speak for just a moment on not the issue of

  21   whether we need to have a special verdict as to aiding and

  22   abetting versus principal liability, I also think we need to

  23   think about whether, even if that were so, they're exclusive.

  24            A person could be part of an attack where they both

  25   carry out the attack and help someone else.  That's another


   1   concern we have.  You could drive a bomb truck into a building

   2   and help someone else drive a bomb truck into that same

   3   building.  You are committing the bombing, but you are aiding

   4   and abetting someone else.  And I think by having a form that

   5   says you can only pick one, I don't see where that's true.

   6   And I think what we could have is a jury could find facts

   7   establishing guilt and be confused about the characterization

   8   of guilt.  A person can commit a crime and aid and abet a

   9   colleague committing a crime.

  10            THE COURT:  I've never thought of it that way.  I

  11   think that if you commit the crime yourself, aiding and

  12   abetting somebody else to commit it with you is sort of

  13   subsumed within your doing it.  I never thought of it, but,

  14   you know, I think it's good that we all brood on it because

  15   it's important and I think one should -- I think the

  16   government should be sympathetic to the notion that we not

  17   take any unnecessary risks with respect to the integrity of

  18   the verdict and the process.

  19            All right, we'll take that up tomorrow.

  20            I received from counsel for Odeh a chart on Gaudin,

  21   the cross-examination and direct, and I'm not exactly sure I

  22   know what that relates to.

  23            MR. RICCO:  Judge, we just shared with you the chart

  24   that we, the government and I, had gone over, and basically we

  25   resolved the issue.  I think we've agreed that the testimony


   1   should remain as is.

   2            The Court's instructions would apply and we would

   3   argue from the evidence based upon the Court's instruction,

   4   and basically what we did with the chart was to show that the

   5   testimony came out on direct and was responded to on cross and

   6   it's set forth in the pages where those different events took

   7   place.

   8            THE COURT:  So that there would be no striking of the

   9   testimony but that the only reliance counsel would make of it

  10   on cross was with respect to the non-identification of Odeh

  11   and not showing the photograph, and the government would be

  12   able to say that Gaudin said that Al-'Owhali said he was not

  13   going to tell Gaudin, is that it?

  14            MR. RICCO:  Judge, no, everything remains as is.  The

  15   record will remain as is.

  16            THE COURT:  Yes.

  17            MR. RICCO:  Meaning that the testimony --

  18            THE COURT:  The record now is that the jury may not

  19   consider with respect to anyone other than Al-'Owhali what

  20   Al-'Owhali said to Gaudin.

  21            MR. RICCO:  That's correct.

  22            THE COURT:  Okay.  And that's acceptable to the

  23   government?

  24            MR. KARAS:  Yes, Judge.

  25            THE COURT:  Does anyone object to that?


   1            MR. COHN:  No.

   2            THE COURT:  Very well.  Is there anything else that

   3   anybody --

   4            MR. WILFORD:  Yes.  Your Honor, as you remember, at

   5   the last Rule 29 conference we had, at the end of the

   6   conference I indicated there were several overt acts that we

   7   were seeking to have dismissed.  The government in its

   8   revision of the indictment provided a revised indictment which

   9   addressed several of those particular overt acts.

  10            However, in the new indictment what was formerly

  11   Overt Act Y, which is now Overt Act H, and what was formerly

  12   Overt Act ZZ, which is in the government's new indictment

  13   Overt Act L, I still believe should be dismissed, your Honor,

  14   as well as --

  15            THE COURT:  I think Mr. Dratel submitted a letter

  16   with some objections to the --

  17            MR. DRATEL:  Yes, your Honor.

  18            THE COURT:  -- redacted indictment.  Is that one of

  19   them?

  20            MR. DRATEL:  No, your Honor.

  21            MR. WILFORD:  I'm sorry, your Honor.  I have one

  22   other point.  That is, with respect to --

  23            THE COURT:  Wait a minute.  I don't want to lose that

  24   and I don't want to get buried in the --

  25            MR. DRATEL:  You want another copy, your Honor?


   1            THE COURT:  Yes, please.

   2            Have you had an opportunity to consider this?

   3            MR. FITZGERALD:  I don't know if I have gotten

   4   Mr. Dratel's letter, or if we have, the government has gotten

   5   it, it hasn't made its way through.

   6            Could I suggest this?  Maybe we could get back to

   7   your Honor on both proposals first thing in the morning.

   8            THE COURT:  Very well.  Sure.

   9            MR. WILFORD:  I want I want to state that the

  10   government has also failed to establish the objective of the

  11   conspiracy in Count one, which is ii at page 10, paragraph 11.

  12            THE COURT:  Of the indictment?

  13            MR. WILFORD:  Yes.

  14            THE COURT:  And that says?

  15            MR. WILFORD:  Your Honor, that specifically says

  16   that --

  17            THE COURT:  What page?

  18            MR. WILFORD:  Page 10.  I'm working with version two,

  19   your Honor.

  20            THE COURT:  Okay.  What does it say?

  21            MR. WILFORD:  It's paragraph 11.

  22            THE COURT:  Paragraph 11, yes.

  23            MR. WILFORD:  Subdivision ii:  Two United States

  24   nationals employed by the United States military who were

  25   serving in the official capacity of Somalia on the Saudi


   1   Arabian peninsula.

   2            THE COURT:  Why is that not so, soldiers who were

   3   killed in Somalia?

   4            MR. WILFORD:  Soldiers who were skilled in Somalia,

   5   but there is no evidence linking those particular deaths to

   6   anybody at this table or to al Qaeda.  There's no evidence of

   7   that whatsoever.  The evidence that's before the jury doesn't

   8   indicate any responsibility from the witnesses who testified

   9   about those 18 dead servicemen.

  10            The fact that they are dead doesn't automatically

  11   link them to al Qaeda or to the conspiracy that is charged in

  12   Count one, and this is also, your Honor, what is now Count H,

  13   is the specific death -- I'm sorry, not Count H, Overt Act H

  14   is the specific death of the 18 servicemen.

  15            THE COURT:  We're dealing in Count One, right?

  16            MR. WILFORD:  Yes.

  17            THE COURT:  And you're saying that the government has

  18   not proven that an object of the Count One conspiracy was to

  19   kill United States nationals?

  20            MR. WILFORD:  In Somalia and Saudi Arabia.  I think

  21   this has to deal with Saudi Arabia first.  There's no evidence

  22   of that on the record.

  23            THE COURT:  It says and the Saudi Arabian Peninsula.

  24            MR. WILFORD:  Okay.  Now, there is still no real

  25   evidence of that, your Honor, and there is no evidence in


   1   terms of the deaths in Somalia that there is any causal

   2   connection between the fact that al Qaeda was in Somalia and

   3   the death of these 18 servicemen.  There's none whatsoever.

   4   We have dead servicemen, yes, unfortunately, but there is no

   5   connection by any testimony in this case to the conspiracy.

   6   We have the fact that they're dead.  We don't know who killed

   7   them.  The government has proffered to --

   8            THE COURT:  Why isn't Two really subsumed in One,

   9   "anywhere in the world"?

  10            MR. WILFORD:  I'll leave that to the government to

  11   argue, Judge.

  12            THE COURT:  Somebody want to respond?

  13            MR. COHN:  That's the problem with One.  Any dead

  14   American anywhere gets into that conspiracy.  That's really

  15   the major problem with One.

  16            THE COURT:  Well, but that may be a function of the

  17   nature of the fatwah which Bin Laden issued.

  18            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, first of all, we

  19   understand that U.S. nationals everywhere includes the other

  20   two objects that follow it, both Two, "killing the U.S.

  21   nationals employed by the military," and Three, "U.S.

  22   nationals employed at the embassies."  But also, one, we're

  23   allowed to specify in the objectives what it is that the group

  24   was trying to do, and secondly, to the extent that some

  25   defendants may argue that perhaps they were part of the


   1   conspiracy as it was framed in August of 1996 by Bin Laden and

   2   his declaration of Jihad to kill American soldiers and then

   3   would claim that they were not part of the conspiracy as it

   4   was publicly announced in February of 1998, the point is that,

   5   either way, they're violating the same statute.  They are just

   6   different objectives violating the same law.

   7            THE COURT:  The verdict we'll go over tomorrow, but

   8   it does call upon the jury to indicate which of the objectives

   9   of the conspiracies have been found, and it tells them they

  10   need only find one, but it calls upon them to respond to as

  11   many objectives as are stated for the conspiracy.  And that's

  12   not exactly happy, but I haven't thought of a better way to

  13   deal with it.

  14            You need only find one, but we would really like it

  15   if you would answer as to all of them, and have the nightmare

  16   of the jury saying, but we're hung because we can only agree

  17   unanimously on two out of the three objectives.  But I think

  18   it is somewhat helpful because of the overlap of the

  19   objectives to have the jury be as specific as possible with

  20   respect to the finding of the objectives.

  21            THE COURT:  Do you have a further response to

  22   Mr. Wilford's point?

  23            MR. FITZGERALD:  One moment.

  24            (Pause)

  25            MR. DRATEL:  This was on that point, your Honor, so


   1   maybe they want to respond to everything all at once.

   2            THE COURT:  I thought all the defendants had to be

   3   returned.

   4            MR. WILFORD:  I'm sorry, your Honor.  I neglected to

   5   inform the Court, there was a change of heart on the part of

   6   Mr. Odeh.  I apologize to the Court for not informing you.

   7   Mr. Odeh changed his mind.  I can't speak for anybody else,

   8   but that's the information that I have received.

   9            THE COURT:  No, the only thing -- no, I just thought

  10   that the marshals told us yesterday that they either all stay

  11   or all go back, but I take it that didn't happen today.

  12   That's fine.

  13            MR. WILFORD:  I think they're all still in the

  14   building.  Mr. al-'Owhali is only present in the courtroom.

  15            THE COURT:  I see.

  16            MR. FITZGERALD:  Your Honor, if we could, our

  17   response to the overt act, our thinking is if we were trying

  18   to collapse paragraph 11 into something shorter, Three and Two

  19   would fold into killing U.S. nationals but then not "U.S.

  20   nationals anywhere in the world," the objective of killing

  21   U.S. nationals would be one, but not one where the defense

  22   would argue if we're killing U.S. military anywhere in the

  23   world, we didn't join that conspiracy.

  24            THE COURT:  Let's again leave that to tomorrow.  And

  25   focus, if you would, please, on the concern I have expressed


   1   about telling the jury they need only find one, which is clear

   2   law, but also asking the jury to render a verdict with respect

   3   to all of the elements.

   4            MR. FITZGERALD:  There's just two other matters, one

   5   very brief.  In the charge conference yesterday, I believe

   6   your Honor struck the language regarding the fact that the

   7   jury should not consider the plea of a cooperating witness.

   8   There was some language saying "in light of benefits afforded

   9   by the government."

  10            THE COURT:  I think we were going to collapse two

  11   paragraphs.

  12            MR. FITZGERALD:  That was a different section about

  13   the plea, not about accomplice witnesses and cooperating

  14   witnesses.

  15            THE COURT:  Oh.

  16            MR. FITZGERALD:  The only point I have is I think

  17   when your Honor gave that charge after Kherchtou's testimony,

  18   you gave the old instruction.

  19            THE COURT:  I gave the old version.

  20            MR. FITZGERALD:  Which is not a big deal, other than

  21   if we could strike that from the record so that if there is a

  22   read-back, that isn't read back.  But more importantly, I

  23   don't want any defense counsel to argue to the jury in

  24   summation referring to your Honor's instruction about why he

  25   may have pled guilty.


   1            You said that you shouldn't consider someone's plea

   2   in light of benefits afforded to the government.

   3            THE COURT:  And we changed that in a later draft to

   4   take out the "in light of the benefits."

   5            MR. FITZGERALD:  Yes.  If counsel doesn't refer to

   6   that in summation, we can just leave it as is.

   7            THE COURT:  Any objection to counsel not referring to

   8   that in summation?  Silence is acquiescence.

   9            MR. COHN:  I don't understand what we are not

  10   referring to, to your charge or the argument that he gets

  11   benefits and therefore we can't believe him.

  12            THE COURT:  No.  No.  No.

  13            MR. COHN:  I'm sorry, it's late and I'm old and slow.

  14            THE COURT:  No.  No.  We agree or I determine that

  15   the language in the charge with respect to pleas would not

  16   contain language about in light of the benefits that the

  17   pleading defendant would receive.

  18            MR. COHN:  Yes, that's what you said in the charge.

  19   What I'm asking --

  20            THE COURT:  And when I gave, at your request,

  21   someone's request -- yes, your request -- I gave the

  22   admonition to the jury about the limited purpose for which

  23   evidence of a plea could be used, I inadvertently read the

  24   earlier version, and Mr. Fitzgerald is concerned that in

  25   summation counsel may use the language that I used earlier


   1   this afternoon rather than the language which is in fact in

   2   the instruction.

   3            MR. COHN:  Okay.

   4            THE COURT:  They won't.

   5            MR. FITZGERALD:  And there's one last matter I think

   6   we probably need to take up in the robing room with Mr. Ruhnke

   7   present, if your Honor had a moment.

   8            MR. DRATEL:  Your Honor, there are two things.  One

   9   is that we join in Mr. Wilford's request with respect to ii of

  10   Count One, paragraph 11, in that there really has not been any

  11   evidence in terms of the Saudi Arabian Peninsula, and in

  12   addition, we withdraw our request for the recantation charge.

  13            THE COURT:  All right.  I'll see Mr. Ruhnke and the

  14   reporter and the government, and I wish you all a good

  15   evening.

  16            (Continued on next page)

  17            (Pages 4910 through 4912 filed under seal)

  18            (Adjourned to 10:00 a.m. on April 25, 2001)








HTML by Cryptome.