PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This Blog is interested in false confessions because of the disturbing number of exonerations in the USA, Canada and multiple other jurisdictions throughout the world, where, in the absence of incriminating forensic evidence the conviction is based on self-incrimination – and because of the growing body of scientific research showing how vulnerable suspects are to widely used interrogation methods such as the notorious ‘Reid Technique.’ As all too many of this Blog's post have shown, I also recognize that pressure for false confessions can take many forms, up to and including physical violence, even physical and mental torture.
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:
————————————————---
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: " Mr. Mohammed is accused of being the mastermind of the hijacking attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, Pennsylvania and the Pentagon. He was brutally interrogated by the C.I.A. in secret overseas prisons after his capture in 2003 and held incommunicado until his transfer to Guantánamo in 2006. Prosecutors excluded statements from those interrogations from the case. But the trial judge, Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, went further, concluding that Mr. Mohammed’s subsequent interrogations in 2007 at Guantánamo were also inadmissible."
---------------------------------------
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "“The prosecution has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Mohammad’s statements to the F.B.I. were voluntarily given,” Colonel Schrama wrote in the conclusion of his 45-page ruling, which was not immediately released to the public but whose unclassified contents were confirmed by several lawyers who had seen it. Colonel Schrama cited several factors, including an “unbroken continuation of the C.I.A.’s psychological conditioning and severe coercion” at the time of Mr. Mohammed’s questioning at Guantánamo in 2007. He also found that F.B.I. agents intentionally failed to explicitly tell Mr. Mohammed that he had a right to be silent and to consult a lawyer, and that what he told them could be used against him at a trial."
-----------------------------------------
PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Defense lawyers had argued that Mr. Mohammed was essentially conditioned by the C.I.A. through torture coupled with years of isolation and solitary confinement to later tell the F.B.I. what they wanted to hear. He was not allowed to consult a lawyer until long after he had confessed and was charged."
----------------------------------------
STORY: "Judge Excludes Key Confession in Sept. 11 Case," by Reporter Carol Rosenberg, published by The New York Times, on August 28, 2026.
SUB-HEADING: "Prosecutors argued the statements by the defendant, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, were crucial evidence for the eventual death-penalty trial." (Carol Rosenberg: "I report on national security related topics, including the U.S. Navy base at Guantánamo Bay with a focus on the wartime prison, policies and legal proceedings for The New York Times. I work for the Washington, D.C., bureau and I frequently report from Guantánamo Bay."..."Carol Rosenberg has been covering the Sept. 11 case at Guantánamo Bay for more than two decades."
SUB-HEADING: "Prosecutors argued the statements by the defendant, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, were crucial evidence for the eventual death-penalty trial." (Carol Rosenberg: "I report on national security related topics, including the U.S. Navy base at Guantánamo Bay with a focus on the wartime prison, policies and legal proceedings for The New York Times. I work for the Washington, D.C., bureau and I frequently report from Guantánamo Bay."..."Carol Rosenberg has been covering the Sept. 11 case at Guantánamo Bay for more than two decades."
GIST: "In a major blow to the U.S. case against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man accused of plotting the Sept. 11 attacks, a military judge ruled on Friday that the prisoner’s confessions to F.B.I. agents were not voluntary and cannot be used against him at trial.
Prosecutors have described Mr. Mohammed’s interrogations in 2007 at the U.S. Navy base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as the government’s most crucial evidence in the long-running death-penalty case.
The ruling, just before the 25th anniversary of the attacks, could further delay the start of a trial if prosecutors decide to appeal to reinstate it. Aging survivors and families of victims have said they worry they may never see a final resolution to the case.
Just this week, the judge set a trial date of June 5, 2028.
Mr. Mohammed is accused of being the mastermind of the hijacking attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, Pennsylvania and the Pentagon.
He was brutally interrogated by the C.I.A. in secret overseas prisons after his capture in 2003 and held incommunicado until his transfer to Guantánamo in 2006. Prosecutors excluded statements from those interrogations from the case.
But the trial judge, Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, went further, concluding that Mr. Mohammed’s subsequent interrogations in 2007 at Guantánamo were also inadmissible.
“The prosecution has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Mohammad’s statements to the F.B.I. were voluntarily given,” Colonel Schrama wrote in the conclusion of his 45-page ruling, which was not immediately released to the public but whose unclassified contents were confirmed by several lawyers who had seen it.
Colonel Schrama cited several factors, including an “unbroken continuation of the C.I.A.’s psychological conditioning and severe coercion” at the time of Mr. Mohammed’s questioning at Guantánamo in 2007.
He also found that F.B.I. agents intentionally failed to explicitly tell Mr. Mohammed that he had a right to be silent and to consult a lawyer, and that what he told them could be used against him at a trial.
The chief prosecutor, Rear Adm. Aaron C. Rugh, said his team would review the ruling “and will make a decision on whether to appeal in the near future.”
The judge gave prosecutors five days to decide but said they could request an additional five days.
The question of the taint of torture has hung over the case for years.
Defense lawyers had argued that Mr. Mohammed was essentially conditioned by the C.I.A. through torture coupled with years of isolation and solitary confinement to later tell the F.B.I. what they wanted to hear. He was not allowed to consult a lawyer until long after he had confessed and was charged.
Colonel Schrama has yet to rule on the confessions of two other defendants in the Sept. 11 case, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi. An earlier judge, Col. Matthew McCall, threw out the confessions of Mr. Mohammed’s nephew, Ammar al-Baluchi, who is accused of helping some of the 19 hijackers with finances and travel arrangements.
A different judge, Col. Lanny Acosta, suppressed the confession of the defendant in the U.S.S. Cole bombing case, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, in an explicit finding that he had been tortured by the C.I.A. His death-penalty trial in the 2000 attack, which killed 17 U.S. sailors, is scheduled to start in October.
The Sept. 11 case has been mired in pretrial proceedings since arraignment in 2012. Over the years, four other judges gathered evidence on the question Colonel Schrama decided on Friday. An earlier judge found a fifth man, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, mentally incompetent to stand trial, a condition the defendant’s lawyer
The Secretive World of Guantánamo Bay
Sept. 11 Torture Case: The trial for four men accused of conspiring in the terrorist attacks could begin in June 2028, according to an order issued by the military judge. Prosecutors had asked for an earlier start.
Prisoner With No Lawyer in Death Penalty Case: The episode at the war court alarmed death penalty lawyers, who argued that the judge had a duty to suspend the proceedings to protect the rights of the defendant.
U.S.S. Cole: The Army judge in the bombing case ordered the prosecution to do its “due diligence” in providing defense lawyers with any evidence the U.S. government might have “regarding Iran’s role” in the attack off Yemen 25 years ago. President Trump has said Iran was “probably involved.”
Cuban Deportees: The long, circuitous journey of dozens of Cuban men who were designated for deportation from the United States last year but instead taken to a prison at the U.S. base at Guantánamo Bay ended when they were repatriated to Cuba.
A Curious Collaboration: An unlikely collection of portraits has given the public its only glimpse inside the U.S. military prison at Guantánamo Bay.""
Prosecutors have described Mr. Mohammed’s interrogations in 2007 at the U.S. Navy base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as the government’s most crucial evidence in the long-running death-penalty case.
The ruling, just before the 25th anniversary of the attacks, could further delay the start of a trial if prosecutors decide to appeal to reinstate it. Aging survivors and families of victims have said they worry they may never see a final resolution to the case.
Just this week, the judge set a trial date of June 5, 2028.
Mr. Mohammed is accused of being the mastermind of the hijacking attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, Pennsylvania and the Pentagon.
He was brutally interrogated by the C.I.A. in secret overseas prisons after his capture in 2003 and held incommunicado until his transfer to Guantánamo in 2006. Prosecutors excluded statements from those interrogations from the case.
But the trial judge, Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, went further, concluding that Mr. Mohammed’s subsequent interrogations in 2007 at Guantánamo were also inadmissible.
“The prosecution has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Mohammad’s statements to the F.B.I. were voluntarily given,” Colonel Schrama wrote in the conclusion of his 45-page ruling, which was not immediately released to the public but whose unclassified contents were confirmed by several lawyers who had seen it.
Colonel Schrama cited several factors, including an “unbroken continuation of the C.I.A.’s psychological conditioning and severe coercion” at the time of Mr. Mohammed’s questioning at Guantánamo in 2007.
He also found that F.B.I. agents intentionally failed to explicitly tell Mr. Mohammed that he had a right to be silent and to consult a lawyer, and that what he told them could be used against him at a trial.
The chief prosecutor, Rear Adm. Aaron C. Rugh, said his team would review the ruling “and will make a decision on whether to appeal in the near future.”
The judge gave prosecutors five days to decide but said they could request an additional five days.
The question of the taint of torture has hung over the case for years.
Defense lawyers had argued that Mr. Mohammed was essentially conditioned by the C.I.A. through torture coupled with years of isolation and solitary confinement to later tell the F.B.I. what they wanted to hear. He was not allowed to consult a lawyer until long after he had confessed and was charged.
Colonel Schrama has yet to rule on the confessions of two other defendants in the Sept. 11 case, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi. An earlier judge, Col. Matthew McCall, threw out the confessions of Mr. Mohammed’s nephew, Ammar al-Baluchi, who is accused of helping some of the 19 hijackers with finances and travel arrangements.
A different judge, Col. Lanny Acosta, suppressed the confession of the defendant in the U.S.S. Cole bombing case, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, in an explicit finding that he had been tortured by the C.I.A. His death-penalty trial in the 2000 attack, which killed 17 U.S. sailors, is scheduled to start in October.
The Sept. 11 case has been mired in pretrial proceedings since arraignment in 2012. Over the years, four other judges gathered evidence on the question Colonel Schrama decided on Friday. An earlier judge found a fifth man, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, mentally incompetent to stand trial, a condition the defendant’s lawyer
The Secretive World of Guantánamo Bay
Sept. 11 Torture Case: The trial for four men accused of conspiring in the terrorist attacks could begin in June 2028, according to an order issued by the military judge. Prosecutors had asked for an earlier start.
Prisoner With No Lawyer in Death Penalty Case: The episode at the war court alarmed death penalty lawyers, who argued that the judge had a duty to suspend the proceedings to protect the rights of the defendant.
U.S.S. Cole: The Army judge in the bombing case ordered the prosecution to do its “due diligence” in providing defense lawyers with any evidence the U.S. government might have “regarding Iran’s role” in the attack off Yemen 25 years ago. President Trump has said Iran was “probably involved.”
Cuban Deportees: The long, circuitous journey of dozens of Cuban men who were designated for deportation from the United States last year but instead taken to a prison at the U.S. base at Guantánamo Bay ended when they were repatriated to Cuba.
A Curious Collaboration: An unlikely collection of portraits has given the public its only glimpse inside the U.S. military prison at Guantánamo Bay.""
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog. FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."Lawyer Radha Natarajan: Executive Director: New England Innocence Project; FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true;