UPDATE:

Thu, 04 Feb 2010

Aafia Siddiqui is a neuroscientist trained at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"Shock, Horror, Drama" That You Won't Read In The New York Times

By Yvonne Ridley in New York 

February 02, 2010 "Information Clearing House" -- Dr Aafia Siddiqui is a bright, intelligent woman who has been through hell having being kidnapped, tortured in secret prisons, gunned down by US soldiers and renditioned to America where she is now facing attempted murder charges against those who shot her .

Only in the cock-eyed crosshairs of George W Bush's War on Terror could this happen and I hope to God that the jurors who will go through the evidence during the next few hours, if not days, see through this rotten legacy and recognise the case for what it is ... a tissue of lies enveloped in a web of deceit.

The last seven years of Dr Aafia's life could have been penned by a Hollywood scriptwriter, but instead all the folk from Tinsel Town could come up with was the rather tame blockbuster movie Rendition starring Reese Witherspoon.

But several days ago those of us following the case closely were given a glimpse into the dark, mysterious world in which Dr Aafia has been forced to live since 2003. 

And more importantly the details were relayed in a hushed court not by any lawyer, but by the only person qualified to talk with any authority about dark prisons, interrogations and abuse - the account relayed to the courtroom in Manhattan, New York came from the mouth of Dr Aafia herself.

Running for more than two weeks there's been little or no record in the Western media of this shocking case other than some of the most ill-informed, embarrassingly skewed reports which indicate the noble profession of journalism is still in a narcotic malaise in the Big Apple.

That the New York Times had to apologise to its readers on the front page for selling them short on the build up to and the unfolding war in Iraq, one would have thought would have had an impact on the quality of future output.

That the US press corps, with the exception of The Baltimore Sun, had to play catch up after 'missing' the Abu Ghraib scandal speaks volumes.

Sadly it seems that huge swathes of the US media have learned nothing.

Just a few days ago an embarrassing wealth of riches in terms of soundbites which would have had most journalists salivating like a Pavlov Dog came tumbling out in the lower Manhattan court.

But like a gaggle of bald men fighting over a comb, the scribes present in the main courtroom could only focus on one irrelevant detail ... Dr Aafia Siddiqui had fired a pistol at a gun club. Excuse me? This is America ... where half the adult population live in houses where guns are kept. Let's keep it real - America has 80 million gun owners with a total of 258 million guns.

Possibly the most wronged woman in the entire War on Terror had just revealed how she was held in secret prisons, with no legal representation, cut off from the outside world since 2003 where brutal interrogation techniques were used to break her down. And, to make matters even worse when she was kidnapped from her home city in Karachi, Pakistan her three children were also snatched ... the fact two of those children are American citizens held no sway with the majority of the assembled press corps. One wondered if their pants had caught fire if they would have even smelled the smoke.

And so what held the Western media attention? Well, it transpired that Dr Aafia may have taken a pistol shooting course as part of her curriculum in an American university. That's a bit like an American tourist ordering fish and chips and a cup of tea on arrival in Britain. Hold the front page!

So for your benefit, let me tell you about the real "shock, horror, drama" that you won't read in the New York Times or the rest of the corporate media.

After two weeks of being baited and defamed, in a calm, articulate and precise manner Dr Aafia Siddiqui finally had her day - and her say - in court.

It should have been a moment of schadenfreude for the prosecution team as they prepared to sit back and enjoy the spectacle of the defendant rant and rave like a mad woman when she decided on her right to take the stand.

Perhaps Judge Richard Berman, a modest little man with much to be modest about, must have thought his rather unremarkable legal career would finally make more than just the current footnote in Wikipedia.

Most of her own legal team watched mortified in the belief that their reluctant client (she had dismissed them publicly many times to no effect) might destroy the robust defence they had built over two weeks.

Even her brother Muhammad, who has sat in court everyday watching and listening to the proceedings told me he wondered if his little sister was making the right decision.

Given the chance, I think I would have also advised her against speaking.

Well thank goodness Dr Aafia ignored us all - within minutes of giving evidence the prosecution wanted to shut her up, Judge Berman looked like he was sucking on the bitterest of lemons and the rest of the courtroom sat back aghast.

The Pakistan media, despatched into one of the two overspill rooms frantically scribbled down their notes so as not to miss one single word and her supporters sat back aghast watching a breathtaking spectacle.

One of the few community leaders who has been outstandingly vocal in his support, El-Hajj Mauri' Saalakhan, probably expressed himself better than any of the nitwits sleeping on the press benches when he wrote: "She testified that after completing her doctorate studies she taught in a school, and that her interest was in cultivating the capabilities of dyslexic and other special needs children.

"During this line of questioning, the monstrous image that the government had carefully crafted (with considerable support from mainstream media) of this petite young woman, had begun to be deconstructed. The real Dr Aafia Siddiqui - the committed muslimah, the humanity-loving nurturer and educator, the gentle yet resolute mujahid for truth and justice - began to emerge with full force".

As the evidence continued we learned that she didn't know where her three children were - it was sensational content. She talked of her dread and fear of being handed back to the Americans when she was arrested in Ghazni and was held by police.

Terrified that yet another secret prison was waiting for her she revealed how she peaked through the curtain into the part of the room where Afghans and Americans were talking, and how when a startled American soldier noticed her, he jumped up and yelled that the prisoner was loose, and shot her in the stomach. She described how she was also shot in the side by a second person. She also described how after falling back onto the bed in the room, she was violently thrown to the floor and lost consciousness.

This ties in exactly with what I was told by the counter terrorism police chief I interviewed in Afghanistan back in the autumn of 2008 - I remember him laughing as he told me how the US soldiers panicked, shot and most of them ran out of the room in a panic. Hmm, no wonder the prosecution didn't want him giving evidence in court.

Instead they chose to record his interview and voiced it over with a shoddy translator who has a long distance relationship with the Pashtu language ... defence team take note. Demand a real Pashtu translation because what was given out in court was misleading and not the words of the actual words of police chief - don't take my word for it ... speak to someone whose first language is Pashtu. it's hardly rocket science.

Of course there's no way a bunch of soldiers are going to admit they lost it, but according to those I interviewed for my film In search of Prisoner 650 in Afghanistan that's exactly what happened.

But let's return to Aafia and the cross examination which followed. When questioned on whether she had ever done any work with chemicals, her response was, “only when required.”

As Mauri remarked: "This opening line of questioning was significant for its prejudice producing potential in the minds of jurors. While Aafia is not being charged with any terrorism conspiracy counts, the threat of terrorism has been the pink elephant in the room throughout this troubling case!"

The prosecutor attempted to draw a sinister correlation between Aafia and her now ex-husband being questioned by the FBI in 2002, and leaving the US a week later. Aafia noted that there wasn’t anything sinister about the timing; they had already planned to make that trip home before the FBI visit. To underscore this point, she noted how she later returned to the US to attempt to find work in her field.

Mauri said one of the most heart-wrenching moments in the cross-examination was when Dr Aafia described how she was briefly re-united with a young boy in Ghazni (July 2008) who could have been her oldest son. She spoke of how she was mentally in a daze at that time, and had not seen any of her children in five years. As a result she could not definitively (then or now) determine if that was indeed her son, Ahmed.

When asked whether she had incriminating documents in her possession on the day she was arrested, Aafia testified that the bag in her possession on the day that she was re-detained was given to her. She didn’t know what was in the bag, nor could she definitively determine if the handwriting on some of the documents was hers or not. She also mentioned on a number of occasions (to the chagrin of the prosecutor) how she was repeatedly tortured by her captors at Bagram.

But the killer blow was delivered when Dr Aafia mildly challenged the prosecutor in a calm, crystal clear voice that was heard throughout her testimony: “You can’t build a case on hate; you should build it on fact!”

There were other sensation moments and revealing testimony and if anyone thought that she hated Americans she removed that idea from their minds when she talked of the “fake Americans, not real Americans” who held and tortured her in the secret prisons. They were fake, she explained because real Americans would not behave in such a way to bring shame on their country.

We also discovered how she was instructed to translate and copy something from a book while she was secretly imprisoned. During the course of this testimony which repeatedly drew the ire of an increasingly frustrated prosecutor, Aafia noted how she can now understand how people can be framed (for crimes they are not guilty of).

It all got too much for Judge Berman who ordered a brief recess.

The plan to goad and incite Dr Aafia to perform some incomprehensible, demonic rant had back-fired.

When testimony resumed, we learned through the star witness how she was often forced-fed information from one group of persons at the secret prison, and then made to regurgitate the same information before a different group of inquisitors. While it was presented to her as a type of “game,” she revealed of how she would be “punished” if she got something wrong.

Now, more than ever, this trial should be brought to an end. And if Judge Berman wants to go down in history for punctuating his lack lustre career as a member of the judiciary for standing up in the cause of truth and justice now is the time to do it.

The truth will out and the US Government’s case has been exposed for what it is ... a sham.

And it is a fitting tribute to the endurance of Dr Aafia, mother-of-three, that the sham has been exposed by her.

Let's see justice being carried out in 500 Pearl Street in lower Manhattan tomorrow. Over to you, your Honour Judge Berman.

NEWS OF AAFIA SIDDIQUE ATLAST!

My children were tortured, this trial is a sham: Aafia
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:18:01 GMT Font size :

Aafia Siddiqui

Pakistani citizen Aafia Siddiqui has told jurors at her trial that she was held in a secret prison in Afghanistan, her children were tortured, and the case against her is a sham.

On Tuesday, Siddiqui was thrown out of the New York courtroom where her trail is being held after shouting the remarks at the jurors.

The MIT-educated neuroscientist is currently on trial, facing charges of trying to kill US soldiers and FBI agents in Afghanistan in 2008 and connections with Al-Qaeda operatives.

She was ejected from her federal court trial after her second outburst, Bloomberg reported.

“Since I'll never get a chance to speak," she said in the courtroom. "If you were in a secret prison, or your children were tortured…"

She insisted that she knew nothing about a plan to carry out terrorist attacks on targets in New York, The New York Daily News reported.

"Give me a little credit, this is not a list of targets of New York," she said. "I was never planning to bomb it. You're lying."

Siddiqui vanished in Karachi, Pakistan with her three children on March 30, 2003. The next day it was reported in local newspapers that she had been taken into custody on terrorism charges.

US officials allege Aafia Siddiqui was seized on July 17, 2008 by Afghan security forces in Ghazni province and claim that documents, including formulas for explosives and chemical weapons, were found in her handbag.

They say that while she was being interrogated, she grabbed a US warrant officer's M-4 rifle and fired two shots at FBI agents and military personnel but missed and that the warrant officer then fired back, hitting her in the torso.

She was brought to the United States to face charges of attempted murder and assault. Siddiqui faces 20 years in prison if convicted.

However, human rights organizations have cast doubt on the accuracy of the US account of the event.

Many political activists believe she was Prisoner 650 of the US detention facility in Bagram, Afghanistan, where they say she was tortured for five years until one day US authorities announced that they had found her in Afghanistan.

JR/HGL

Aafia Siddique Trial Day One
20 January 2010

Yesterday the long awaited trial of Aafia Siddiqui began in a federal courtroom in Manhattan. Her case has been one of the most baffling in the annals of post-9/11 terrorism prosecutions. Siddiqui, as regular readers of this website know, is a 37-year-old, MIT-educated neuroscientist, who lived in the U.S. for ten years before mysteriously vanishing from Karachi, her hometown, in 2003, along with her three children, two of whom are American born. For five years her whereabouts remained unknown, while rumors swirled that she was an Al Qaeda operative, and that she had married Ammar al Baluchi, the nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and one of the five accused 9/11 plotters expected to face trial in the U.S. In July 2008 she was picked up in Ghazni, Afghanistan on suspicion of being a suicide bomber. The following day, as a team of U.S. soldiers and FBI agents arrived to question her at the police station where she was being held, she allegedly managed to get hold of an M-4 automatic rifle belonging to one of the soldiers, and, according to prosecutors, she opened fire. She hit no one but was herself hit in the abdomen by return fire. What is known is that the U.S. considered Siddiqui to be someone connected to a number of high level terrorism suspects. They say she went on the run and remained underground during her missing years. But human rights groups have long held that Siddiqui is no extremist and believe she was illegally detained and interrogated by Pakistani intelligence at the behest of the U.S. She now faces charges of attempted murder. Her trial is expected to last two weeks.

Jurors heard opening statements from the government and the defense, and the testimony of three government witnesses, U.S. Army Captain Robert Snyder, a former U.S. Army infantry captain named John Threadcraft, and an FBI agent, John Jefferson. Before the jurors were brought in Siddiqui once again protested against being forcibly brought to the courthouse. Judge Richard Berman gave her two options: come to the courthouse and be present during the proceedings, or come to the courthouse and remain in a holding cell next to the courtroom where she could view the proceedings via a television monitor with adjustable volume. But either way, she must come to the courthouse each day, which means undergoing a daily strip search. Despite pleas from both the defense and prosecution to excuse Siddiqui, the judge did not change his position. One of the prosecutors suggested that Siddiqui was being put in a Catch-22 situation, where if she abstained from the proceedings she would still have to go through the strip search which was her primary reason for not wanting to come to court.

Opening statements for the government were made by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jenna Dabbs, who recounted the events surrounding the shooting incident in Ghazni, Afghanistan in July 2008. She described how the group entered a room on the second floor that was divided by a curtain, and unbeknownst to them behind the curtain was the very woman they were there to see. Seconds later with no warning, the woman grabbed an automatic rifle and through a gap in the curtain she "raised the rifle to her shoulder, and in perfect English, she said, 'Get out of here!'"

"The defendant saw an opportunity and she acted on it. She picked up an assault rifle, pointed it at the soldiers, and tried to shoot them," said Dabbs. "Moments later they were looking down the barrel of a gun. As everyone in the room realized what was happening it was absolute chaos. Everyone ran, jumped, dove, and scrambled." The interpreter grabbed the rifle by the barrel and stock and tried to pry it out of Siddiqui's hands. She continued to struggle. She was shot once in the abdomen.

"But the defendant wasn't done yet," said Dabbs. Even after she was shot, she struggled and shouted, "I hate Americans," and "You will die by my blood," and "Death to America." She is being tried in the U.S. because the victims of her crime are Americans, said Dabbs.

Dabbs indicated the government would present six eyewitnesses to the shooting. A point of contention between defense and prosecutors has been the admission of the contents of the documents Siddiqui was allegedly found with in Ghazni. Last week the judge ruled these documents could be presented to the jury, and based on today's proceedings it's clear they are a centerpiece of the government's case.

"How are we going to prove the charges?" asked Dabbs. "You'll hear from soldiers and agents, from an army captain, who only when he saw the defendant slightly fumble with the gun he realized he had a chance to get out." Other witnesses will include a female Army medic who was seated by the curtain when she saw it move, "almost as if it had been blown by a gust of wind." The government will present documents that refer to chemical and biological weapons and to attacks on the U.S. The defendant's fingerprints are on the documents and they are written in her own hand."

Dabbs also mentioned a few things that the jurors would not see: fingerprints on the M-4 rifle Siddiqui is alleged to have shot, bullet fragments or shell casings from the M-4. The reason for this is that "the chaos that unfolded in that room was quickly matched by chaos at the compound," namely "dozens and dozens" of Afghan police who were holding automatic weapons and rocket propelled grenades. The U.S. soldiers, she said, were not able to return for a week to secure the scene. She said the prosecution will present an expert who will tell the jurors that it is not unusual for an M-4 rifle not to retain fingerprints.

"They'll never forget the moment they were convinced they were going to die," said Dubbs of the soldiers in the room where the shooting occurred.

Attorney Charles Swift presented the defense team's opening statements. "This case is going to come down to a single question," said Swift. "Did Aafia Siddiqui gain control of an M-4?" Through a series of diagrams of the room where the shooting occurred, Swift reconstructed the timeline of events in the room at the time of the shooting, demonstrating where each of the U.S. soldiers and FBI agents in the room was positioned. He also told the jury the defense would present the testimony of Abdul Qadeer, a detective with the Afghan police, who interviewed Siddiqui after she was brought to the police station. Qadeer questioned Siddiqui, and also apparently admitted to beating her with a cane. But Qadeer was also present when the U.S. team arrived to question Siddiqui, and says he saw a very different scene unfold than what the government alleges. He said he saw the U.S. warrant officer, "walk to the curtain and behind the curtain. What he heard was a struggle and then shots fired. He didn't see the defendant get a rifle. He saw the rifle near the wall and says he didn't see the defendant anywhere near it." Swift also said the defense would prove that while there was ample forensic evidence that Siddiqui was shot (including shell casings, her blood on the carpet, bullet holes in the wall behind her), there was no forensic evidence that Siddiqui fired any shots herself or ever touched the rifle.

Immediately after Swift's opening statements, the government called its first witness, U.S. Army Captain Robert Snyder, who was present in the room at the Ghazni police station when the shooting occurred. Snyder explained to jurors the basic layout of U.S. military operations in and around Ghazni. When he was asked to summarize the events of July 18, 2008, his response was, "I was almost killed." He recounted how at around 1 a.m. on July 18, he was awoken by his staff with the news that a woman had been captured with documents that indicated threats against the U.S. "According to Afghan police, the individual appeared to be conducting an attack at the governor's house," said Snyder. He said he was shown a series of documents allegedly found on Siddiqui at the time of her arrest. The author of the documents "appeared American or had lived in America." The documents "very clearly indicated types of attacks," and "what appeared to be targets in New York City."

As the prosecutor began to show some of the documents to the jury, Siddiqui raised her head and addressed the courtroom, saying she'd been held in a secret prison and that her children had been taken from her. "This is not a list of targets," she said in reference to the documents. "I never was planning to bomb anything. You have to give me credit." After that she was removed from the courtroom and did not return for the rest of the day.

Snyder recounted how he and his team were initially given the runaround by the Afghans and were told by the governor of Ghazni Province, Usman Usmani, that they could not take custody of Siddiqui as they had wanted to. The governor indicated that he had been personally called by President Karzai and told not to turn Siddiqui over. The U.S. team was instead given permission to question Siddiqui and to establish her identity. Snyder said that after the team was granted permission they were led to a room on the second floor of the police station. Upon entering he said there were a number of Afghans and that eventually most of the U.S. team came in. Snyder described how he sat against a wall with the curtain two seats to his right. The U.S. warrant officer was nearest to the curtain. Snyder indicated that the team was not aware that Siddiqui was behind the curtain and that he was speaking to one of the Afghan counterterrorism officials to explain the team's intentions to question her. "I heard noise to my right," he said. He described a female voice saying, "May the blood of something be on your head or hands." He couldn't recall exactly what the speaker said, but remembered that it was in English. "I was the only one seated with a good line of sight. I turned to the right. The curtain was opened wider. What I saw was a female sitting on the bed attempting to shoulder a rifle pointed at my head. I could see the barrel edges." Snyder was still seated. "I looked at the individual holding the rifle and at that time I was certain there was nothing I could do to get out of the line of fire. It was at that point that she hesitated for a second. I figured she didn't know all the components." In that split second, Snyder says, he launched himself out of his chair and began to flee the room. Before he was out the door he heard several shots go off. He got out of the room but returned a few seconds later when he'd been able to unholster his 9 mm revolver. When he returned he saw the U.S. warrant officer standing over Siddiqui's body.  "He said he'd hit her. At that point she was on the bed fighting."

Snyder then described how he and the warrant officer restrained Siddiqui and after she'd received medical aid they carried her down the stairs to a waiting vehicle and drove her to the U.S. forward operating base. Snyder said Siddiqui fought the soldiers even after she was shot. "She was very very resistant. She was pleading off and on for us to just kill her instead of detaining her. I said that's not going to happen."

Snyder said that after the shooting incident he did not see Siddiqui again. He said the U.S. warrant officer, whose M-4 Siddiqui allegedly took, appeared to believe he'd "saved the day" by shooting her. But Snyder said he disagreed and that he felt the warrant officer was partly to blame for the incident because he'd left his weapon unsecured. Snyder said that shortly after the incident he was approached by the warrant officer's captain who wanted to write the warrant officer up for a Silver Star for valorous conduct in the incident. Snyder said he "wouldn't support it."

The next witness for the prosecution was John Threadcraft, an infantry captain in Ghazni at the time of the shooting. Threadcraft said his primary duty was to serve as a liaison with the National Security Forces (which include the Afghan National Police, the Afghan National Army, and the National Security Directorate, which serves as Afghanistan's equivalent to the CIA).  Threadcraft also said he'd developed a close working relationship with Governor Usmani, who called him on Jan. 17 and said, "I captured a female bombmaker." Usmani brought Threadcraft a black handbag allegedly belonging to Siddiqui and turned the bag's contents over to him, including a women's clothing, a thumb drive, documents, and various jars of substances that looked like makeup. Threadcraft said he saw words written in English in the documents such as "dirty bomb," "bioweapons," and "Ebola." Threadcraft then attempted to broker an agreement with the Afghans to turn Siddiqui over to the U.S., but despite having the governor's support he was unable to gain custody of her. He was not part of the team that went to interview Siddiqui.

The third witness for the prosecution was FBI Special Agent John Jefferson, who was one of the agents sent to Ghazni shortly after Siddiqui was picked up. He and his partner, Special Agent Eric Negron, arrived in Ghazni by helicopter from Salerno, in the Khost Province on the morning of July 18. Like Snyder, he described the difficulties the team had in getting permission to take custody of Siddiqui. He was in the room when the shooting incident took place, but there were several differences in his version of events. Snyder had said the curtain behind which Siddiqui was located was partially open when he first came in, but Jefferson said it was closed to the wall. Jefferson also said that the warrant officer "pulled the curtain to his left," and looked to the left and right, but apparently did not see Siddiqui. (Note: According to the diagrams shown to the jury earlier in the day, the dimensions of the room are approximately 12' by 26' and the area in which Siddiqui was located was approximately 12' x 12', and was empty except for two cots.) Jefferson said the warrant officer "didn't walk back there." Approximately two minutes later he said the shooting started. He looked to the left and saw his partner, Negron and the warrant officer standing over Siddiqui, and that the two were attempting to subdue her. "JJ I need cuffs," Negron said to Jefferson. "We were on the ground with her and Eric was trying to apply some medical treatment."

Tomorrow, Day 2, USA v. Siddiqui, will begin with the government's continued direct examination of FBI Special Agent John Jefferson...

Testimony continued with the direct examination of FBI Special Agent John Jefferson. Jefferson, who was on the stand yesterday afternoon, continued to recount the scene of the shooting in Ghazni. He said that just after Siddiqui was shot, his partner Eric Negron called out to him for handcuffs. "There was a pool of blood on the right side," he said. Jefferson assisted Negron in subduing Siddiqui and cuffed her hands and her ankles. Jefferson said a stretcher was brought up to the room (an account that differs from that of Captain Snyder, who testified yesterday that the stairs were too narrow and so he had personally carried Siddiqui down to the Humvee). Jefferson said that by the time he and the others got downstairs a tense scene had unfolded as approximately twenty armed Afghan National Police officers had assembled outside. Jefferson said he remembers seeing a rocket propelled grenade launcher pointed at his head.

Siddiqui was then transported to the forward operating base in Ghazni and put in a small triage unit. Jefferson recalled that shortly afterwards he saw two Afghan intelligence officers who had been in the room at the time of the shooting. They had with them "a document stating that they did not have anything to do with what just occurred," and asked Jefferson and his partner to sign it to absolve them of any responsibility for the shooting. "We were like, we're not allowed to sign anything," said Jefferson.

At the Ghazni triage Siddiqui was given just enough medical attention "to sustain her," and was then flown by Black Hawk helicopter to another forward operating base in Afghanistan known as "Organ-E," where she underwent surgery. Jefferson and Negron were on the flight, along with the pilot and a crew chief who doubled as a medic. Afterwards Siddiqui was transported to Bagram Air Base, arriving at approximately 1 a.m. Jefferson brought with him brown paper bags containing the documents that Siddiqui was allegedly found with in Ghazni. The thumb drive, which had apparently gotten misplaced while in Ghazni was delivered to Bagram shortly after he arrived with Siddiqui.

On cross examination, defense attorney Linda Moreno asked if Jefferson had seen Siddiqui either touch or fire a weapon in Ghazni. He said no. She went over his statement to the FBI on July 21, 2008, just a few days after the shooting, where he said he heard four rounds fired in the room in Ghazni, but did not describe the nature of the rounds in his statement. On the previous day of testimony Jefferson had said he was certain that he heard two sets of shots that had each come from a different gun. Jefferson said that given his long experience with firearms, "there is no doubt in my mind that two rounds came from different weapons."

The government's next witness was Ahmad Gul, an Afghan translator present in the room in Ghazni. Gul, 27 years old, was born in Afghanistan and lived in Pakistan for a time before returning to his native country to work as a translator with the U.S Army. He speaks Dari, Farsi, Urdu, and English. Gul explained how translators are generally assigned to a specific person in a unit, mostly warrant officers and captains. In the summer of 2008, Gul "mostly went out with the chief warrant officer." He was with the warrant officer's team as they went into the room where Siddiqui was being held behind the curtain. Gul was positioned with the rest of the U.S. team and the other Afghans present to the right of the curtain. "I turned around and I hit the curtain with my left hand and I saw a female holding a gun pointed at the chief warrant officer and the ministry of interior representatives, and she shot the gun," he said. "Right away I lunged towards her and I pushed her towards the wall." Gul said he grabbed both the barrel and the stock of the gun and struggled to gain control of the weapon. "I was worried I'd get shot and at that time she shot again." The second bullet, he said, went in the same direction as the first. The struggle continued, and "she pushed me back into the middle of the room," he said. "The chief warrant officer was two meters behind me with his pistol shooting towards me while I was wrestling with the female detainee." The warrant officer then shot Siddiqui, despite the fact that she was using Gul as a shield. "As soon as she was shot, right away I snatched her gun. The chief warrant officer pushed her towards the bed."

The question of whether the warrant officer checked behind the curtain at some point before the shooting occurred was revisited on cross examination by Linda Moreno. Earlier Gul said the warrant officer did not look behind the curtain, but when asked the question by Moreno he said he didn't know. Moreno showed him a statement he gave to the FBI less than a week after the shooting, which apparently contradicted the answer he had just given her, but he said he did not remember giving the statement and later said he did remember giving the statement but that he did not telling the agents what was written there. She asked if he had read and initialed every paragraph at the time he gave the statement and he said he had. Moreno also asked Gul to elaborate on help he's received from the U.S. since the shooting. Gul said the U.S. sponsored his visa and his flight to the U.S. was paid for. He was given money for rent, food and transportation ("less than $4,000," he said). She also asked about his contact with the warrant officer since the shooting, which includes emails and phone calls. Gul said he considered the officer a "brother and a friend."

The government then introduced a series of forensic experts, FBI Special Agent Dale Hutson, who photographed the materials allegedly seized with Siddiqui in Ghazni. He also fingerprinted Siddiqui when she was at Bagram Air Base. Hutson said the M-4 rifle which Siddiqui allegedly fired was not among the materials he catalogued, but arrived some days later. FBI Special Agent Todd Schmitt told jurors he transported the materials from Bagram to Washington DC in his backpack, which he kept with him at all times during the flight. He did not bring the rifle back with him. Special Agent Shelly Sine took fingerprint impressions from Siddiqui in New York in August 2008, shortly after she was flown in from Ghazni.

The day's final witness, D.J. Fife, is a physical scientist and forensic examiner with the FBI. Fife was tasked with obtaining latent prints from the documents and other materials brought in from Ghazni, including the rifle, which was eventually flown to FBI headquarters in Quantico, VA. Fife described the various processes by which latent prints can be obtained and how a multitude of factors affect the ability to get a usable print. He told jurors that of 106 pages of documents he received from Ghazni, 33 pages had some kinds of fingerprints of value. He also described examining the rifle but said that he was unable to get any usable latent prints from it. Fife described the process, which includes exposing the surface to Superglue vapors that bind to any moisture on the surface and can sometimes reveal latent prints. He found no prints on the rifle. Fife said that it was not unusual for a gun to yield no usable prints, because any fingerprints on non-porous surfaces (like metal) can easily be smudged or wiped off, even by casual contact. He also said the rifle's surfaces are not smooth but "stibbled" to provide for easy grip, and that these types of surfaces do not yield good prints.

Cross examination of Fife's begins Jan 21, DAY 3, USA v. Siddiqui.

January 21, 2009 (DAY 3)

Government prosecutors continued to present their case today, shifting their focus from the testimony of eyewitnesses to the Ghazni shooting, to how evidence at the scene was secured. The day's testimony was dominated by FBI Special Agent Gordon Hurley, who made three trips to Ghazni in July, August and October 2008 to secure evidence at the scene of the shooting and interview U.S. and Afghan witnesses. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jenna Dabbs showed jurors numerous photographs and a video of the room on the second floor of the Afghan police station where the shooting took place, and a photo of the cell where Siddiqui was held when she was first brought to the station on July 17. Hurley's first trip was relatively short, but he said he took statements from witnesses at the scene, including Captain Snyder and his translator Ahmad Gul (both of whom gave testimony on day one of this trial), Staff Sergeant Lamont Williams, FBI Special Agents Eric Negron and John Jefferson, and the chief warrant officer. He did not conduct interviews with any Afghans during that first visit. While in Ghazni in July, Hurley also made a preliminary investigation of the room where the shooting took place. He said that on this visit U.S. Army Captain John Kendall gave him custody of both the M-4 automatic rifle that prosecutors say Siddiqui used to fire at the U.S. team and the 9 mm revolver that the chief warrant officer used to shoot her. The jurors were invited to handle both weapons as they were passed around the jury box. Hurley estimated the M-4 weighed 7.5 pounds and possibly as much as 9 pounds with the various scopes that had been attached to it at the time of the shooting. He said he left the three sighting scopes with the army after Kendall told him they did not have replacement devices and needed them for their ongoing combat operations.

Hurley returned to Ghazni again in August 2008 to conduct further interviews with witnesses, including Afghan military, civilian and police officials, as well as U.S. soldiers. He wanted to establish an evidentiary "chain of custody" for the evidence seized at the time of the shooting, which included not just the weapons but also the documents and other materials Siddiqui was allegedly arrested with. Hurley estimated he and his partner interviewed as many as 30 individuals. He was looking for any additional eyewitnesses and for friends or relatives of Siddiqui. He went to the local bazaar in Ghazni and interviewed shopkeepers there. On Aug 25 during this trip he also returned to the Ghazni police compound to do a more thorough investigation of the crime scene, where he made a more extensive examination of the room, including the area where bullets from the gun Siddiqui allegedly fired were thought to be lodged. Despite several probes, including removing a chunk of the wall itself, they were unable to locate any bullets from the area. Hurley inspected the back area where Siddiqui was standing just before the shooting and found a "projectile," or portion of a bullet there.

On cross examination, defense attorney Dawn Cardi questioned why Hurley did not return to Ghazni sooner after his first visit to continue his investigation and in order, for example, to retrieve evidence like the curtain that divided the room. Hurley said it wasn't easy to move around Afghanistan and that he hadn't tasked anyone with retrieving the curtain because there was "no one to call." He said that he and his partner returned as soon as they could get permission but that they didn't ask for any special dispensation to get there faster. Cardi also questioned Hurley about the inconsistencies in the various statements of the witnesses and why he didn't do more to resolve them. "Eyewitnesses see things very differently," said Hurley. "You don't want to force people to make their statements match." He rejected the suggestion that he had not been skeptical enough in receiving the accounts from the U.S. personnel he interviewed. "We're supposed to be skeptics," he said.

One of the major discrepancies in the testimony so far has been the question of whether the warrant officer looked behind the curtain before the shooting. Hurley recalled that FBI Special Agent John Jefferson said the chief warrant officer had checked behind the curtain just before the shooting and given the "all clear." FBI Special Agent Eric Negron, he said, told him that he recalled the warrant officer "glanced behind the curtain and saw no one was there." But Hurley could not remember what the other witnesses he interviewed said. He also said he didn't recall speaking with FBI agents about a letter the Afghan intelligence officials supposedly asked them to sign to absolve them of responsibility for the shooting (see day 2 testimony from Special Agent John Jefferson).

Hurley later said that securing the evidence at the scene was a relatively low priority for the U.S. military in Ghazni Province at the time. "They were doing other stuff, right?" asked Dabbs. "Fighting a war," said Hurley.

Although attendance at the trial dropped sharply after the first day, security has increasingly tightened as the trial has progressed. A metal detector was installed outside the courtroom door on the second day to screen all individuals sitting in the public gallery. Jurors were told not to make any adverse inferences from the added security. Today jurors were also required to pass through the metal detector and security guards made detailed searches of all bags brought into the courtroom. Members of the general public for the past two days have also been required to show photo identifications and court security guards have noted the name and address of each individual. At the conclusion of today's proceedings, defense attorney Charles Swift made note of the identification requirement and said that it is not in keeping with Siddiqui's right to a free and open trial. The judge said he would look into it, though attendees at the trial said a member of the court security detail told them the measures were on the direct order of the judge.

Tomorrow Jan 22, DAY 4, USA v. Siddiqui.

January 22, 2009 (DAY 4)

Testimony continued with a single witness called by the government. Carlo Rosati, a forensic expert in firearms and ballistics, formerly at the FBI and now a contractor working with the agency, described how he analyzed various materials taken from the crime scene at the Ghazni police station where the shooting took place on July 18, 2008. Rosati, who said he did not travel to Afghanistan or speak with any witnesses connected with the case, analyzed the gold curtain that divided the room, behind which Siddiqui was located just before the shooting. He did not find gun shot residue whose presence might have suggested a gun had been fired nearby. He was, however, able to link the bullet and shell casing found in the room in the Ghazni police station to the 9mm revolver that the chief warrant officer used to shoot Siddiqui.

Much of Rosati's testimony focused on the tests he conducted in an effort to find evidence of any bullets fired from the M-4 rifle Siddiqui allegedly grabbed from the warrant officer. He examined a bag of debris taken from a section of the wall where bullets from the rifle were thought to be lodged, and gave a detailed account of the various tests he performed. Despite these visual, microscopic and chemical tests, and despite inspecting photographs from the scene itself, Rosati was unable to say with any certainty that the section of the wall he examined had been damaged by bullets.

"You found no shell casings, no bullets, no bullet fragments, no evidence the gun was fired?" defense attorney Charles Swift asked.

"Correct," said Rosati.

"You examined the curtain and the debris and neither yielded evidence that a gun was fired in or in the proximity of the curtain?" Swift asked.

"Correct," said Rosati.

Immediately after that exchange, however, Rosati said he could not rule out that the gun was fired either.

"Does all of that mean to you that the weapon was not fired at the crime scene?" he was asked by Assistant U.S. Attorney David Roday.

"No," said Rosati.

"The bullet could have ricocheted or been deflected?" asked Rody.

"Yes," said Rosati.

As the trial opened this week with the Government's case, prosecutors called three eyewitnesses to the shooting in Ghazni. But despite vivid testimony from each of these individuals--a U.S. Army captain, an FBI agent, and a former U.S. Army translator--we have not yet gotten a clear account of what unfolded at the Afghan police station on July 18. The testimony has, in fact, highlighted the sharp divergence of the accounts on certain points, though prosecutors have highlighted the fact that the eyewitness accounts, though perhaps imprecise, match up sufficiently to confirm the allegations against Siddiqui.

On the forensic side of the case, however, testimony from a number of experts this week has, in fact, underscored the difficulty of proving the case with any scientific certainty. The fact that the shooting occurred in a remote city in a war zone clearly made securing the crime scene in a timely manner difficult, if not impossible. Eyewitnesses described a chaotic confrontation that concluded as the U.S. team beat a hasty retreat with Siddiqui just after the incident, leaving the crime scene unattended. The events unfolded in a foreign country whose procedures for preserving evidence like bullets and shell casings are unknown. The individuals present during the shooting were mostly Afghan and U.S. soldiers who were in a combat mentality that did not lend itself to a detailed criminal investigation after the incident.

At the close of the proceedings today Judge Richard Berman addressed the question of security measures outside the courtroom. During opening statements on Tuesday, individuals were permitted to enter the courtroom freely, though space for the general public was limited to just six seats (everyone else watched the proceedings on a video link in an overflow courtroom on a separate floor). But by Wednesday, the second day of the trial, a metal detector was posted outside the courtroom and individuals were asked for photo identification and their names and addresses were logged by court security officers. The measure came even though all individuals entering the courthouse are required to pass through a security check at the main doors, and despite the fact that attendance at the trial had dropped sharply from the prior day dropped sharply. At the close of proceedings yesterday, day three, defense attorney Charles Swift protested the identification check, suggesting that it was unconstitutional and would preclude Siddiqui from receiving a free and fair trial. "The suggestion is that the gallery may be a threat," said Swift, calling the measure "highly prejudicial." During today's proceedings Swift said he would submit a written briefing on the matter to the judge. Berman said he had not specifically ordered the names and addresses of attendees to be noted, but that he had instead merely agreed to the addition of the metal detector as a standard screening measure. Berman suggested that the U.S. Marshals had interpreted this instruction to include identification checks.

Berman said that the trial is proceeding on schedule, which means defense attorneys will likely begin presenting their case at some point next week. What remains unknown is whether Siddiqui will testify in her own defense. In recent weeks she has insisted that she is boycotting the trial and does not recognize her defense attorneys, who she says she has repeatedly tried to dismiss. She was ejected from the courtroom earlier this week after speaking out. During subsequent proceedings she remained silent in the jury's presence, until Friday, when she spoke out again to say she is being prevented from taking the stand. "They want to take away my right to testify. I've asked for it," she said. "I am not an enemy. I didn't shoot anyone. I can bring peace with Afghanistan and the Taliban in one day, God willing." The judge told Siddiqui she has a right to testify but is not obliged to do so, and then had her escorted from the courtroom by the U.S. Marshals.

The trial continues on Monday Jan 25, with DAY 5, USA v. Siddiqui.

January 25, 2009 (DAY 5)

The chief warrant officer whose M-4 automatic rifle Siddiqui is alleged to have grabbed, was called by the prosecution today. The officer, whose name was not revealed, was gravely wounded in September by a bomb blast near his vehicle in Afghanistan, which killed three of his fellow soldiers and one Afghan. He arrived in full dress uniform, walking with the assistance of a cane, and wept as he told jurors of the blast which left his body gravely wounded below the waist and with his hearing impaired and severe burns. "I've had several skin grafts and lost a couple of organs. Every bone, waist down to my feet, was broken," he said. While testifying he grimaced and appeared frequently to be in discomfort.

He said shortly after Siddiqui was arrested on July 17, 2008, he was shown the documents and various other materials she allegedly had in her possession and made the decision to contact the FBI to assist in the investigation.

During the warrant officer's testimony, Siddiqui spoke out and said she felt sorry for him and believed he said was covering for Captain Snyder. "Don't do that," she said, before being escorted from the courtroom. "It will make America look bad in international court."

Under direct examination by Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher LaVigne, the warrant officer described going to the governor's mansion in Ghazni on the morning of the shooting, July 18, 2008. "When I arrived, all I knew was that she was in captivity in a cell. I didn't know where." His instructions, he said, were to ascertain whether Siddiqui was a U.S. citizen or not. "I was doing most of the talking because there was a prior relationship," he said. "The FBI agents couldn't just go waltzing into the Afghan National Police headquarters . They wouldn't know who they were." The governor, the warrant officer said, gave them permission to see Siddiqui. He said he was told "she was in a jail cell, chained with all four limbs to the bars because they couldn't control her."

Upon entering the room where Siddiqui was being held, he told jurors he looked quickly behind the curtain where she was being held, but did not see her. "I kind of peeked behind it and didn't see nothing, so I sat down," he said. "It was just a junky messy room. It was very dark."

When asked why he put his rifle down, he said that he felt safe in the police station. "You're in a friendly place. You don't talk to people with an assault rifle around your neck," he said. "It's a show of trust. It's a show of respect. It's a part of the culture."

In the moments leading up to the shooting, the officer said that he set his gun down and began to talk to the Ministry of Interior officials present to explain the U.S. team's request to question Siddiqui. "At that point, I hear a loud scream of Allahu Akhbar. I hear my interpreter scream, 'Chief!' and at the same time I see Captain Snyder's eyes get wide. I look and there's this woman who has grabbed my rifle and is squaring off." The officer said he immediately reached for his 9 mm revolver as the interpreter, Ahmad Gul (who testified on Day 2) dove towards Siddiqui. "I fired two shots as she fired at the room." When asked why he shot Siddiqui, the officer said, because "she displayed hostile intent. I needed to stop this intent."

He said Siddiqui's stance was aggressive and not like his own after years of military training. "She knew what she was doing," he said.

The officer said everything happened very fast. After Siddiqui was shot, "the rifle fell, she fell back, and at this point I closed the distance." As the officer and another member of the U.S. team in the room, FBI Special Agent Eric Negron, attempted to subdue Siddiqui, he said she began shouting, "Death to America," and "I will kill all you motherfuckers." The officer said even after Siddiqui was shot she continued to struggle, so "she was hit a couple times to convince her" to stop struggling. "She continued to scream and be feisty even with the handcuffs on," he said.

On cross examination by defense attorney Charles Swift, the warrant officer was asked about several sworn statements he gave in the days following the shooting in which he said that he saw Siddiqui "lunge for her weapon," which was in contrast to his earlier testimony during the day when he said Siddiqui was already holding the rifle and pointing it in his direction when he first saw her. "I must have wrote it incorrectly," he said. "She had the weapon system." When asked why he noted that she "lunged" in two separate statements, the officer said, "It all all happened fast."

"When you first saw her, she had it or not?" Swift asked.

"Let's see here, it's all one fluid motion," said the officer. "She was diving for it, she had her hands on it."

"She certainly didn't have time to fumble with the gun," Swift said.

"As I look back it was certainly amazing she got it up that fast," the officer said.

Earlier testimony today came from another witness to the shooting, female army medic Dawn Card, who told jurors she remembers seeing Siddiqui pointing a gun in her direction before fleeing the room. But on cross examination Card was asked about a statement she later made to the FBI in which she suggested it was Captain Robert Snyder, not the warrant officer, who left the M-4 automatic rifle unattended. Snyder testified last week and said he was in the room but that it was the warrant officer who had left his weapon unattended (see Day 1 testimony). According to her statement to the FBI, Card said Snyder would get "fried" if it was discovered the rifle that Siddiqui seized was his. On the stand, Card said she did not recall making the statement.

During the morning session two jurors were dismissed after reporting to Judge Richard Berman that a man in the spectator gallery had motioned to them in an intimidating fashion. The man was questioned and later released.

After jurors were dismissed for the day, defense attorney Linda Moreno once again asked for a mistrial, saying that the U.S. Marshals had removed Siddiqui roughly from the courtroom in front of the jury in a manner that "denigrates the presumption of innocence." The judge declined Moreno's request and said that perhaps the defense should focus more on "reigning in" their client. "Dr. Siddiqui doesn't talk to us," Moreno said in reference to herself and the other members of the defense team. "I tried to talk to her today," said Moreno. "She indicated if I didn't leave immediately she was going to accuse me of harassment."

The judge also rejected a defense motion regarding the added security measures outside the courtroom. After the first day of proceedings last week, U.S. Marshals installed a metal detector and began to require all individuals entering the courtroom to show photo identification. Their names and addresses were then logged by court security officials. The judge today said the measures were "totally appropriate," citing prior cases like the Martha Stewart trial which had instituted similar security measures.

Testimony continues Tuesday, Jan 26, with Day 6, USA v Siddiqui.

January 26, 2009 (DAY 6)

Defense attorneys for Siddiqui asked the judge today that she be prohibited from taking the stand in her own defense, citing her mental instability. In recent weeks Siddiqui has said alternately that she is boycotting the trial and that she is being prevented from being allowed to testify. During court proceedings today Siddiqui once again signaled to the spectator gallery that she does not recognize her legal team, two of whom are court appointed attorneys and three of whom have been retained on her behalf by the government of Pakistan. Waving her hands towards the attorneys and shaking her head, she then essentially ejected herself from the proceedings, saying, "That's it, I'm going to boycott. I'm not going to come again. Bye everybody." She was escorted out by U.S. Marshals.

Since the beginning of the trial last week Siddiqui has made several outburst in the courtroom, saying, among other things, that she "can bring peace with Afghanistan and the Taliban in one day, God willing." The defense team's request came in open court but not in the presence of the jurors. In a letter submitted earlier today to Judge Berman, the attorneys argued that Siddiqui "suffers from diminished capacity," and that if she is permitted to "continue her irrational and bewildering insistence that she has the power to influence the Taliban, she will invite jurors to infer that she has terrorist associations."

Jurors heard testimony from FBI Special Agent Eric Negron, who flew to Ghazni on July 18, 2008, along with Special Agent John Jefferson and Staff Sergeant Lamont Williams. Negron recounted how he and Jefferson were initially told by the Afghans that they would not be permitted to interview Siddiqui, and that Afghan President Hamid Karzai was personally enroute to Ghazni "to attend to the matter." Negron said he called his supervising agent who told Negron to try to interview Siddiqui anyway, and to fingerprint her and obtain hair and DNA samples. It was during their second attempt to interview Siddiqui that the team went to the Afghan National Police headquarters in Ghazni where they encountered her. Negron testified that within seconds after the U.S. team entered the room where Siddiqui was being held, he saw the warrant officer's rifle raised near the edge of the curtain that divided the room. He testified he did not see Siddiqui's face from behind the curtain, but only the rifle, held "by two hands sticking from behind the curtain into the room. One hand was on the barrel and the other hand on the trigger." Negron said that after Siddiqui was shot by the warrant officer he helped restrain her, but she fought back. "I had to strike her several times with a closed fist across the face," he said. After she was subdued Siddiqui "either fainted or faked that she had fainted," and was handcuffed.

Once outside the Afghan National Police headquarters, Negron said the Americans encountered what he estimated were 50-70 armed Afghans in aggressive postures. He noticed one Afghan walking nearby with a handgun and told his interpreter to tell the man "to holster his weapon or I will kill him." The man turned and laughed, recalled Negron, but obeyed the order.

Under cross examination by defense attorney Linda Moreno, Negron was asked why he didn't do a crime scene investigation in the room where the shooting occurred. Negron said he didn't see the room as a crime scene and that the warrant officer "fired back in the defense of all in the room. At the time I saw it as a firefight with an enemy combatant."

Negron also spoke of how he felt the Americans might have been "set up" by the Afghans because they had been caught by surprise when Siddiqui emerged from behind the curtain. "We were told that the woman was in Afghan National Police custody, not free to roam around as she did into that room." Moreno questioned why Negron did not share this belief with the FBI agents who later interviewed him about the incident. Negron did not have an answer.

Jurors also heard from Sergeant Kenneth Cook, who was part of the U.S. team at the Afghan National Police Station. Cook recalled that when they arrived at the compound they encountered some 150-200 armed Afghans. "The were all pretty excited," said Cook. "They were huddled in little groups, talking amongst themselves and pointing at us." Cook, who was stationed outside the police station while the rest of the team went in to locate Siddiqui, said he told one of the other members of the team that "something bad is going to happen." Just after that he heard shots from the second floor.

Two final eyewitnesses to the shooting also testified. Ahmad Jawidami, a 25-year-old Afghan interpreter known by colleagues as "Dave," said he ran from the room as soon as he heard the first shot fired. Staff Sergeant Lamont Williams testified that he was posted outside the door to the room where the shooting took place. On cross examination by defense attorney Charles Swift, Williams said that just after he heard shots fired a number of individuals in the room came running out. But Williams said he did not recall that the U.S. Army medic, Dawn Card, was among them. Williams' testimony was in sharp contrast to Card's own testimony in court yesterday, when she said she was present in the room but ran out as soon as the shooting started. Williams, who stood at the only exit to the room, said he did not remember seeing Card enter the room before the incident or exit after.

"You're sure of that?" asked Swift.

"Yeah," said Williams.

On further questioning by Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher LaVigne, Williams was firm in his recollection. "No, she wasn't in the room," he said. "I was right outside the door."

The government is expected to call its final witnesses tomorrow morning, after which the defense will present its case. Attorneys for Siddiqui told Judge Richard Berman today they anticipate calling two witnesses and will possibly show a videotaped deposition taken in Afghanistan.

Testimony continues Wednesday, Jan 27, with Day 7, USA v Siddiqui.

Petra Bartosiewicz is a freelance journalist who has written for numerous publications, including The Nation, Mother Jones, and Salon.com. Her forthcoming book on terrorism trials in the U.S., The Best Terrorists We Could Find, will be published by Nation Books early next year. You can find her investigation of  Aafia Siddiqui's case in the November 2009 issue of Harper's magazine (www.harpers.org) and at her website www.petrabart.com She can be reached at petrabart@petrabart.com.