--------------------
Suspected Terrorist Padilla Indicted
--------------------

By Richard B. Schmitt
Times Staff Writer

November 22 2005, 11:21 AM PST

WASHINGTON -- Jose Padilla, whose case has been one of the central tests of the power of the Bush Administration to hold suspected terrorists without criminal charges or a trial, was indicted by a federal grand jury in Florida, the Justice Department announced today.

The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...-home-headlines

Padilla's Lawyers Suggest Indictment Helps Government Avoid Court Fight

By Fred Barbash

The indictment of Jose Padilla came days before the Bush administration was due to respond to his appeal to the Supreme Court of his lengthy detention, prompting his lawyers to suggest that the government is trying to avoid another potentially losing confrontation in the high court over its anti-terror detention policies.

Indeed, as the indictment was announced, administration lawyers notified Padilla's legal team that they now regard his Supreme Court challenge as moot, not requiring any Supreme Court intervention.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who announced Padilla's indictment today, declined to comment on the Supreme Court case during his news conference. Gonzales was asked if the charges were related to Padilla's Supreme Court petition. He responded that "we are bringing this prosecution at this time because it is the appropriate thing to do."

Padilla, a U.S. citizen seized on U.S. soil, had asked the justices to consider the constitutionality of detaining him for 28 months without any charge being filed. Since he is now charged and is no longer a designated "enemy combatant," the government contends that there is nothing left to argue about.

Traditionally, such a situation usually results in the court declining to hear a case or dismissing it as moot. On some occasions, however, the court has gone ahead with a review on the grounds that a situation, while "evading review" for the time being, is "capable of repetition."

Jenny Martinez, a Stanford Law School professor who is helping to represent Padilla, said his lawyers will make that argument, based on the fact the government can return Padilla to enemy combatant status at any time, especially if it fails to get a conviction against him or gets a conviction but not a satisfactory sentence.

This is the second time the government has apparently acted to avoid appellate review in Padilla's case by doing something at the last minute. In December 2003, the government avoided a contest over Padilla's right to a lawyer by allowing him to have one after denying him counsel for more than a year.

Padilla's case has followed a complicated path, starting with his seizure by the government on May 8, 2002, as the so-called "dirty bomber." After being held in a civilian jail in New York, the government moved him to a military brig in South Carolina.

Thus, by the time his petition for relief, originally filed in New York, reached the Supreme Court, the justices sent it back without a ruling on the merits, saying he should have filed his papers against the military jailer in South Carolina, which he then did.

In September, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, reversing a lower court, held that Padilla's detention was a lawful exercise of presidential authority to indefinitely detain a U.S. citizen captured on American soil without any criminal charges. Such authority, it ruled is vital during wartime to protect the nation from terrorist attacks.

Padilla's challenge to that ruling is the case awaiting Supreme Court review. If the justices decline to hear his appeal and let stand the Fourth Circuit ruling, the government will be able to continue to argue that its position has passed constitutional muster.

His lawyers argue that Padilla's detention is unconstitutional under the court's previous decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld . In that 2004 case, the justices ruled that a U.S. citizen, Yaser Hamdi, captured on a battlefield has a right to contest his incarceration. Among the differences between the Padilla case and Hamdi's is that Padilla was arrested on U.S. soil, giving him an even better chance of prevailing at the high court, in the view of many legal experts.

"If I were the government, I would not have expected to win" in the Supreme Court, said Martinez. "I think the government is clearly trying to evade Supreme Court review."


Would you like to send this article to a friend? Go to
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/e...er=emailarticle

Text of Prepared Remarks of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at Press Conference Regarding Indictment of Jose Padilla

11/22/2005 11:23:00 AM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: National Desk, Legal Reporter

Contact: U.S. Department of Justice, 202-514-2007; Web: http://www.usdoj.gov

WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following are prepared remarks of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at the press conference regarding the indictment of Jose Padilla:

Good morning.

I am joined by Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta of the Southern District of Florida, and Deputy Director of the FBI John Pistole.

Earlier today, a superseding indictment was unsealed in federal court in the Southern District of Florida charging Jose Padilla with providing - and conspiring to provide - material support to terrorists, and conspiring to murder individuals who are overseas.

The indictment alleges that Padilla traveled overseas to train as a terrorist with the intention of fighting in "violent jihad" -- a short hand term to describe a radical Islamic fundamentalist ideology that advocates using physical force and violence to oppose governments, institutions, and individuals who do not share their view of Islam. These groups routinely engage in acts of physical violence such as murder, maiming, kidnapping, and hostage-taking against innocent civilians.

Mr. Padilla is now a new co-defendant -- along with Canadian national Kassem Daher -- in a criminal prosecution that previously charged defendants Adham Hassoun, Mohomed Youssef, and Kifah Jayyousi with terrorism-related crimes. All of these defendants are alleged members of a violent terrorist support cell that operated in the United States and Canada. As you know, under our criminal justice system all defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

As alleged in the indictment, this cell supported terrorists by sending money, physical assets, and new recruits to overseas jihad conflicts. These defendants also allegedly took steps to disguise their fundraising and recruitment activities by speaking in code and using non-Governmental organizations as a front for illegitimate activities.

As outlined in the indictment, Mr. Padilla was one of the individuals recruited by this terrorist support cell to fight in violent jihad overseas. With the assistance of co-defendant Hassoun and others, Mr. Padilla allegedly left the United States in September 1998 and traveled overseas for that purpose, where he met up with co-defendant Youssef in Egypt. While overseas, Mr. Padilla continued to advise and seek assistance from co-defendant Hassoun in the United States, as he sought to obtain the necessary training to pursue these violent jihad activities. The indictment specifically alleges that, as part of the conspiracy, Mr. Padilla filled out a terrorist training camp application form in July 2000 in preparation for his violent jihad training in Afghanistan and, shortly thereafter in September 2000, was reported to have arrived in Afghanistan by his co-conspirators.

The criminal case brought against these defendants will involve the use of declassified Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- or FISA -- intercepts that chronicle jihad recruitment in the United States and travel overseas for the purposes of fighting violent jihad.

The Department of Justice is prosecuting this case in part because prosecutors and law enforcement agents were able to share information and use declassified FISA material from a multi- district intelligence investigation under the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act. By tearing down the artificial wall that would have prevented this kind of investigation in the past, we're able to bring terrorists to justice.

President Bush has directed his administration to utilize all available tools to protect America from acts of terrorism. This case, which began as an intelligence investigation, is a classic example of why the criminal justice system is one of those important tools. This investigation has been underway for quite a while now -- and has resulted in charges against Padilla, which he will now face in a court of law. If convicted of these charges, he could face a sentence of life in prison.

Before answering a few questions, I'd like to thank Assistant Attorney General Fisher, U.S. Attorney Acosta, and the team of prosecutors handling this case: Russell Killinger, Stephanie Pell, Brian Frazier, and Julia Paylor. I also want to thank the many investigators from the Department of Justice, the FBI, ICE, and ATF for their work on this case -- and their continued determination to help protect Americans from the threat of terrorism.

Thank you.

http://www.usnewswire.com/