1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Federal Judge Rules Link Between Iraq/9-11; Families Awarded Millions

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by X-PAC, May 7, 2003.

  1. X-PAC

    X-PAC Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 1999
    Messages:
    1,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Judge Awards $104M to Families of Sept. 11 Victims
    Foxnews.com

    Wednesday, May 07, 2003

    NEW YORK -- A federal judge Wednesday awarded nearly $104 million in damages to the families of two victims of the Sept. 11 attacks, finding the plaintiffs had provided some evidence that Iraq provided support to Usama bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

    Judge Harold Baer outlined the damages against bin Laden, the Taliban and Saddam Hussein and his Iraqi government in a written decision in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

    Baer said he had concluded that lawyers for the two victims "have shown, albeit barely ... that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and Al Qaeda."

    The case was being closely watched by lawyers for plaintiffs in other lawsuits filed after the Sept. 11 attacks against Iraq, Al Qaeda and others because it was the first to reach the damages phase.

    James E. Easley, the lawyer who brought the case, said it was unclear how much in frozen Iraqi and Al Qaeda assets could be available to satisfy the judgment. To help pay for Iraq's revival, the Bush administration has started to use roughly $1.7 billion of Iraqi funds frozen in 1990.

    Still, Easley called the ruling a "significant victory."

    The judge heard evidence for two days in March to help him determine damages. In January, he had issued a default order against the Taliban, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and the Republic of Iraq.

    The default judgment was granted by Baer after public announcements of the lawsuits failed to attract a response from any of the defendants.

    He said lawyers relied heavily on "classically hearsay" evidence, including reports that a Sept. 11 hijacker met an Iraqi consul to Prague, Secretary of State Colin Powell's remarks to the United Nations about connections between Iraq and terrorism, and defectors' descriptions of the use of an Iraqi camp to train terrorists.

    Baer said the opinions of the lawyers' experts was sufficient to show that Iraq collaborated in or supported bin Laden's terrorist acts on Sept. 11.

    The judge noted that the experts provided few actual facts that Iraq provided support to the terrorists.

    But he said the experts "provide a sufficient basis for a reasonable jury to draw inferences which could lead to the conclusion that Iraq provided material support to Al Qaeda."

    The ruling stemmed from cases brought on behalf of the estate of George Eric Smith, 38, a senior business analyst for SunGard Asset Management, and Timothy Soulas, a senior managing director and partner at Cantor Fitzgerald Securities.

    The lawsuits relied in part on legal principles contained in a 1996 law that permitted lawsuits against countries identified by the State Department as sponsors of international terrorism.
     
  2. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    sounds to me like the judge really didn't love the evidence..but absent a response to the contrary, his hands were tied.
     
  3. ima_drummer2k

    ima_drummer2k Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Messages:
    36,425
    Likes Received:
    9,373
    Where there's smoke, there's fire IMO.

    Then again, I'm sure this will be quickly discredited. After all, it's coming from Fox, so it MUST be right-wing propoganda. :rolleyes:
     
  4. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    43,790
    Likes Received:
    3,708
    Read the post above yours. No one in their right mind was going to represent Al Queda and Saddam Huissen.
     
  5. Rileydog

    Rileydog Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,978
    Likes Received:
    6,998
    An expert's testimony can be enough weight to support a finding of damages and, as the article failed to explain, can be based on evidence that is otherwise inadmissible . . . such as hearsay.

    The article makes it sound like the judge made his damages finding based on hearsay only. Expert opinion is not hearsay.
     
  6. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    depends on what he's basing his opinion on. depends on the content of his testimony.

    yes...totally agreed that it can be enough to find damages...and can be based on otherwise inadmissible evidence...

    but the expert testimony mentioned in this article doesn't seem to be testimony related to damages...rather, the "hearsay" evidence seems to be related to factual assertions about dealings between Al Qaeda and Iraqi agents.

    journalists typically suck at reporting on legal issues...particularly when they attempt to explain what a court did in a proceeding. what they really fail to point out is that the evidence went unchallenged...and there are so many exceptions to the hearsay rule that very few pieces of evidence are ever really excluded as hearsay.
     
  7. Timing

    Timing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    5,308
    Likes Received:
    1

    That's great for these families who're probably looking for some type of closure but seriously, c'mon.
     

Share This Page