# If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Is Acquitted Will He Be Released? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 16, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791 "2009-11-16T17:08:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/21 "2009-11-16T18:27:02Z")
You seem to be obfuscating the point that his campaign promise didn’t say a peep about releasing acquitted terrorists. But let’s get real: there is no chance whatsoever that KSM is going to be released. Zero. I think the most plausible scenario that doesn’t involve his conviction would be defense motions to the inadmissibility of crucial evidence, whether due to it being the result of waterboarding, or sensitive intelligence that cannot be released to the court, or hearsay, or a million other reasons. If that were to happen, and he was found not guilty of his 9-11 crimes, I have a hard time believing that the President could not continue to hold him as a danger to the country because he is part of an organization that the US has essentially declared war on. I have a hard time seeing the courts suddenly becoming so active as to repudiate the ability of the President to detain members of Al Qaeda, even after a criminal trial. As much as I support putting these types of guys on trial for their specific crimes related to 9-11, I see this as a “heads: the government wins and convicts you of your crimes; and tails: you lose because you’re a member of Al Qaeda.” This may not apply to every single person who had been sent to Guantanamo, but I bet it does to the principals like KSM. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/22 "2009-11-16T18:27:15Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > You were expressing outrage at the notion that this President might have a commitment to following the law. What are you basing this on, precisely? It seems pretty obvious to me that any “outrage” in the OP is because Gibbs is refusing to explicitly state that they _do_ have a commitment to following the law. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/23 "2009-11-16T18:37:19Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > You were expressing outrage at the notion that this President might have a commitment to following the law. Now THAT deserves all the :rolleyes:'s the SDMB’s servers can handle. I don’t speak for **Bricker** , but I read his concern as being that the POTUS might not release KSM or other gitmo detainees if they are found not-guilty. That’s a concern many lawyers share, on either side of the aisle. We are either a nation of laws, or we are not. If we are, then defendants found not guilty get to walk. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/24 "2009-11-16T18:39:03Z")
He should have just said “Yes. We’ll let him go. We’re a nation of laws. If he’s found to be innocent, he should not be held.” Who cares what hay Fox makes out of it? I somehow doubt that if the question were asked, “What will happen to KSM if he’s found guilty?” that Gibbs would have dodged it as a hypothetical. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/25 "2009-11-16T18:41:28Z")
Tapper is just a douchebag looking to create a scare headline. Garrett too. It’s not like it would be the Press Secretary’s decision to make about how to handle an acquittal anyway, but there is no chance whatsoever of an acquittal, so the question is disingenuous. The answer to the question, by the way, is that if they were acquitted, they could still be tried in other jurisdictions or held for other reasons. It’s a bullshit question not to designed to elicit information, but to scare whitey into thinking there’s going to be terrorists walking the streets. Two things, though: 1. If they were “set free” (which is about as likely as Charlie Manson getting paroled), it wouldn’t be in the US, they’d be shipped out somewhere else. Even if they were turned loose in the US, they’d last about as long as an ice cream cone in an Iraqi sumer. 2. If they’re acquitted, it will be because the government couldn’t prove they were guilty. If the government can’t prove they did anything, then why SHOULDN’T they be set free? Do Jake Tapper and Fox News have a problem with the Constitution? If they don’t like America, they’re free to leave. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/26 "2009-11-16T18:43:24Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > I don’t speak for **Bricker** , but I read his concern as being that the POTUS might not release KSM or other gitmo detainees if they are found not-guilty. That’s the hypothetical he’s manufacturedly-outraged over - “If he were to do that, he’d be BREAKING the LAW!” Obama’s spokesman does not, as several have pointed out already, have any responsibility to give the creators of RNC/Fox talking points, or the habitual repeaters of them, anything to work with. Gibbs’ refusal to do so is the real source of this “outrage”, apparently. ---
**Author:** ![spazattak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@spazattak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazattak)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/27 "2009-11-16T18:46:42Z")
Seriously? He’s just playing the game. Gibbs would loose his job if he answered that question. Sure he should have answered the question with an ‘of course we will you dip-shit’. But you know the minute he did the press would run headlines such as “Obama Administration Commits to Releasing 9/11 Mastermind” etc. It’s juvenile and playing to the lowest common denominator. They should be willing to take that BS on instead of playing the game, but unfortunately they’re not willing to fight everything that’s stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/28 "2009-11-16T18:54:10Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > That’s the hypothetical he’s manufacturedly-outraged over - “If he were to do that, he’d be BREAKING the LAW!” Obama’s spokesman does not, as several have pointed out already, have any responsibility to give the creators of RNC/Fox talking points, or the habitual repeaters of them, anything to work with. Gibbs’ refusal to do so is the real source of this “outrage”, apparently. Obama does, however, have an obligation to follow the law. And hell, he oughta be good at it. The guy used to teach Con Law. The question of what happens after a not guilty verdict is entirely legitimate, and deserves an honest answer. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/29 "2009-11-16T18:54:35Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Bullshit. It’s a perfectly legitimate issue, with significant legal ramifications. Obama is going all-in on this one. Granted, he’s holding a strong hand, but there is a real chance that one or more defendants could be found not guilty. The time to plan for that possibility is now. It isn’t bullshit, the bs is the GOP/Fox News nonsense, what I sais is a factual statement that he’s going to plead guilty and that nobody being put on trial in court has an chance of avoiding a guilty verdict. And Obama isn’t remotely going “all in” either. - Holder will also announce that a major suspect in the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, **will face justice before a military commission, as will a handful of other detainees to be identified at the same announcement** , the official said. It was not immediately clear where commission-bound detainees like al-Nashiri might be sent, but a military brig in South Carolina has been high on the list of considered sites. \* Spain, Britain, India all managed to put their terrorists on trial without half their populations wetting the bed over the prospect of doing it, I think some Americans could do with showing some European-style moral fortitude and faith in their democratic institutions. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/30 "2009-11-16T18:56:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > We won’t put him on trial if there’s a chance he might actually be acquitted. > > And this is manufactured outrage from the **Right**? > > Um… huh? What part of what I said don’t you understand? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/31 "2009-11-16T18:57:13Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > The question of what happens after a not guilty verdict is entirely legitimate, and deserves an honest answer. It’s a legitimate question, however obvious the answer, in a court or other \*legal \*environment. In the White House press room or on Fox, the “legitimacy” of questions and the “honesty” of the presentation of the answers are, shall we say, very different concepts. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/32 "2009-11-16T18:58:08Z")
> [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > What part of what I said don’t you understand? During the previous administration, it seemed that the Left was the side outraged by the failure to try the detainees. This admission that a trial, if permitted, would only be a show trial seems extraordinary. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/33 "2009-11-16T18:58:51Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > I’m confused. Is he a citizen? Does he have residency? If he’s acquitted, who is claiming that he’ll get twenty bucks and a Greyhound Bus ticket? This says nothing about releasing him to X, Y, or Z _other_country, but is there a serious suggestion that an acquittal would see him released into the US? No, there’s zero chance any of the four will be found innocent, it’s just the right wing noise machine using terrorist tactics on their own people. They’re targeting the same people they got to wet the bed over Saddam Hussein and his fearsome WMD. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/34 "2009-11-16T19:00:18Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Do Jake Tapper and Fox News have a problem with the Constitution? If they don’t like America, they’re free to leave. What does Fox News have to do with Jake Tapper? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/35 "2009-11-16T19:01:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > During the previous administration, it seemed that the Left was the side outraged by the failure to try the detainees. And why weren’t you, Counselor? > [@](#): > > This admission that a trial, if permitted, would only be a show trial seems extraordinary. Where the flying fuck do you see _that_? :dubious: Remember the First Rule of Holes. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/36 "2009-11-16T19:01:18Z")
> [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > No, there’s zero chance any of the four will be found innocent… Why, precisely, is that? ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/37 "2009-11-16T19:01:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > During the previous administration, it seemed that the Left was the side outraged by the failure to try the detainees. This admission that a trial, if permitted, would only be a show trial seems extraordinary. Yes, Obama is only putting people on trial that he’s certain he’ll see convicted. It’s not “all in”, it’s just cynical. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/38 "2009-11-16T19:01:43Z")
It won’t be a show trial, just a sure conviction on the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/39 "2009-11-16T19:03:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why, precisely, is that? The ones that aren’t going to plead guilty (maybe they all will) have cast-iron evidence against them, to the extent that they’re safe to put on trial. Anybody not certain of being convicted won’t be put on trial. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791/40 "2009-11-16T19:03:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What does Fox News have to do with Jake Tapper? I was referring to Major Garrett from Fox News was teaming up with Tapper on the bullshit questioning of Gibbs. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-is-acquitted-will-he-be-released/517791.md?page=3)