United States of America v. Abdulmutallab

MOTION to Strike Juror Number 144 For Cause

E.D. Mich.October 5, 2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO ~EASTERN DISTRICT OF MI~mG SOUTHERN DIVISIO$ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CRIMIN~INO. 21:10-CR-20005 HONO~r-E N4Ncy, G. EDMUNDSPlaintiff, v. D-l, UMAR F AROUK ABDULMUT ALLAB, Defendant. / DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STmg JUROR NUMBER 144 FOR CAUSE COMES NOW standby/advisory counsel, ANTHONJY T.I CHAMBERS, for UMAR FAROUK ABDULMUT~LA$Defendant ("Defendant ABDULMUTALLAB"), and moves this Honorable Court fct an order striking juror number 144 for cause. Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB fiI~ a supporting Brief and further states: That Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB is charged with tnuItiple counts under the1 First Superseding Indictment: Conspiracy to Commit at} Act or Terrorism Transcending National Boundaries, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2332b(a)(I) and 2332b(a)(2) (Count One); Possession of a FirearmlDestructive Device in Furtherance of ~ Crime of Violence, in violation of 18 V.S.C. §§ 924(c)(I)(A), 924(c)(I)(B*ii), ~ 924(c)(I)(C)(ii) (Count Two); Attempted Murder within the Special Aircraft JurisdiC!i'1n of the United States, in violation of 18 V.S.C. §1113 and 49 V.S.C. §46506 (C9unt ~); Use and Carrying of a FirearmlDestructive Device During and in Relation to ~ Crim~ ofV1iolence, in violation of 18 V.S.C. §§ 924(c)(I)(A), 924(c)(I)(B)(ii), and! 924(c)(I)(C~(ii) (Count Four); 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 1 of 8 Pg ID 623 Willfully Placing a Destructive Device in, Upon and ~ Pro~ty! to a Civil Aircraft which was Used and Operated in Interstate, Overseas an~ Foreign Mr Commerce, which was Likely to have Endangered the Safety of Such Aifcraft, ~ viollation o~ 18 V.S.C. §32(a)(2) (Count Five); Possession of a Firearm/Destru~tive Qevice lin Furtherance of a Crime of Violence, in violation of 18 V.S..C. §§ 924(c)(I>CjA), 9~4(c)(1)(B)(ii), and 924(c)(I)(C)(ii) (Count Six); Attempted Use of a Weapon lof Mass Destruction, in violation of 18 V.S.C. §2332a(a)(2) (Count Seven); andl Willful A~pt to Destroy and Wreck a Civil Aircraft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 32(ai(8) and 32(a}(I) (Co$t Eight). 2. That the potential jurors completed Jury Questionnaires on $eptember 14, 2011 and September 15,2011 3 That juror number 144 was questioned individually on October 4, 201 I That based upon the answers she provided in ~er Jufy Questionnaire and the4. responses she gave during individual jury selection, it is without I question that juror number 144 cannot decide this case fairly nor can she be impartial. 5 That standby/advisory counsel challenged juror nFber 144 for cause. That the Court "disallowed" standby/advisory counsel's challt1nge. 6 preconc~ived notion that7. That number 144 has Defendantajuror ABDULMUT ALLAB is a terrorist who is guilty of the cfimes charged That juror number 144 should have been excus,d for cause Isimply because she 8 expressed her incapacity to accept the proposition that I "a defendan~ is presumed to be 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 2 of 8 Pg ID 624 innocent despite the fact that he has been accused in an indictment[. Jr See United States v. Hill, 738 F.2d 152, 154 (6th Cir. 1984). 9. That the Court did not excuse juror number 144 f9r cause. 10. That Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB has a ~uscule am~unt of preemptory challenges. 11. That Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB should nqt be forced 10 use a preemptory challenge on a juror who is clearly biased. 12. That the Court's failure to strike juror number 144 absolutel~ violates Defendant , ABDULMUTALLAB's constitutional right to a fair ~a1. Se~ U.SI. Const. amend. VI ("In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to ~ speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury") (emphasis added). 13. WHEREFORE, Defendant ABDULMVTALLAB lrequests that this Honorable Court strike juror number 144 for cause. ~b Dated: October 5, 2011 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 3 of 8 Pg ID 625 UNITED STATES DISTRICT i OURT EAS RN DISTRICT OF MI mGi\.N SOUTHERN DI.VISIO I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CRIMIN~NO. 2:10-CR-20005 HONO~LE NANCYI G. EDMuNDSPlaintiff, v. D-l, UMAR F AROUK ABDULMUT ALLAB, Defendant. I DEFENDANT'S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ms MOTION TO STRIKE JUROR 1441FOR CAUSE This brief is filed pursuant to the Sixth Amendm~t of the Uni~ed States Constitution and is submitted by standby/advisory co.l AN11H°Ntl T. CHAMBERS, for Defendant UMAR F AROUK ABDULMUT ALLAB ("Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB "). The Sixth Amendment of the United States Co~tution provides that "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right tq a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury") (emphasis added). An impartial jury is qne in which each individual juror is free from all bias and preconceptions, and who c4n decide the I case solely on the evidence presented at trial. Juror number 144 took an oath that she would honestly answer all questions put to her. Based on the honest answers she provided in the JmtY Questionnaire as well as during individual questioning, it is clear that she has a Prfconceived ~tion that Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB is a terrorist who is ~lty of the ~es charged: A. Jury Questionnaire 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 4 of 8 Pg ID 626 QUESnON NUMBER 82: Based on what Y ~ have read, f d or s~en in the media, please tell us if you have formed an feelings or opinions, about this case or about the defendant, Umar F uk Abdulm tallab, 0 1about what the appropriate outcome of the case s ouId be? ! ANS~R: When I first heard about it I figured he wasguil~ ofbein~ a terronst. l .1 QUESTION NUMBER 83: Based on what YOthave read,iard, or s~n in the media, is there any reason why you could t sit as at' and ! Iimpartial juror in this case? I I ANS~R: Unsure. From what I have heard it f unds like hJ is gui~ of the cnme. , I B. Individual Questioning M~ ~HAMBERS: In 2009, you were of the opinion 1!hat h1must be gUIlty. I I I I THE JUROR: Exact -yeah, yes. MR. C~ERS: Okay. But if someone had tasked you if* Our I opinion had changed from that initial date right ill before y came ~ here to fill out the questionnaire, it wouldn't haV~ changed, w uld it? I THE JUROR: Probably. MR. CHAMBERS: You probably would have111 thought hrwas ' I .gh?gUl ty,n t. ' r THE JUROR: I guess. MR. CHAMBERS: Let me ask you something specific. ~ ve talked about whether or not you may think that he's guil w of the c. e charged. You also made a statement that you figured that was guilty f being a terrorist, that he was a terrorist. Remember that? THE JUROR: That's what they said, basi~ly what th t media implied at the time, yes. Ii I I , t 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 5 of 8 Pg ID 627 MR. CHAMBERS: And iliat was your true andl honest feel~g at the time iliat you filled out the questionnaire, correct~ I THE JUROR: Yes, especially after 9/11, tes. MR. CHAMBERS: [I]n your mind particularly. ..9/11, the idea of a terrorist, as you put in your questionnaire, is so~thing that sti~ks out t$ you, correct? I I I I THE JUROR: Yeab, I guess, yes. MR. CHAMBERS: And before you filled out tiis questionnaire and before you came here and answered questions ~y, that's w~t you thought Mr. Abdulmutallab was without hearing any evidence~ correct? THE JUROR: Probably from the media, YFs' COWlt One charges a Conspiracy to Commit an AFt ofTerrori~m Transcending National Boundaries. Pursuant o that count, the governInent is required to prove that Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB "conspired to engage in an act of te*orism." Based on the answers provided in the Jury Questionnaire and dming individual questioning, it is quite clear that juror number 144 has relieved the governlnent of its b*den; she has already decided that Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB is a terrorist who is guilty of the crimes charged. This is a juror is not impartial and must be removed for cause. In addition, during individual questioning, the Coprt thoroughly explained to juror number 144 the meaning of the "presumption of innocen~e." After thfs extensive explanation, the following exchange occurred between the Court and juror number 144: THE COURT: So if I said, okay, juror number 144, you haVr tO vote right now, today, is this defendant guilty or not ~lty, what Wi uld yout t' vote be? I I . THE JUROR: Neutral. 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 6 of 8 Pg ID 628 Clearly, juror number 144 does not understand th~ presumptiop of innocence. She must be excused on this basis. See United States v.lfill, 738 F.24152, 154 ("Certainly, a challenge for cause would be sustained if~juror expres~ed [her] incapacity to accept he proposition that a defendant is presumed to be innocent 4espite the fact that he has been accused in an indictment[. ]"), Finally, juror number 144 admitted that she cannot be fair to qefendant ABDULMUTALLAB, and that in order to change her opinion that helis guilty~ Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAB would need to present $ome evidenqe: MR. C~EB§: And as you honestly sit hen!: today ~ ha~ had that opinion for quite sometime that Mr. AbdulmUtall f was guilty do you now sit here and think that you could be fair? I I THE JUROR: Depending on the facts, yes. (Enipbasis added). MR. CHAMBERS: And when you say depen,g upon ther ' do you expect that he or the defense will provide you wi some info .on to change your opinion? I THE JUROR: Well, I hope there will be more t4 it, evidence. The answer juror nwnber 144 provided is proof that she does not respect he fundamental principle that the government has the burden to prove Defendant ABqULMUlIALLAB' s guilt. She also does not respect his constitutional right ~ remain siletit; she believes Defendant ABDULMUTALLAB must prove his innoceqce. This is ~juror who is not impartial and must be removed for cause. WHEREFORE, Defendant ABDULMUT ALLAjB requests that this Honorable Court strike juror number 144 for cause. 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 7 of 8 Pg ID 629 ..- Dated: October 5, 2011 ~I~l-'\ l:&./(c 1 2:10-cr-20005-NGE-DAS Doc # 106 Filed 10/05/11 Pg 8 of 8 Pg ID 630