Political Hotsheet
CBS News/ November 16, 2009, 9:00 PM

David Paterson: New York Terrorism Trial a Mistake

This post was written by WCBS' Marcia Kramer.

(AP Photo/Mike Groll)
Gov. David Paterson openly criticized the White House on Monday, saying he thought it was a terrible idea to move alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other suspected terrorists to New York for trial.

"This is not a decision that I would have made. I think terrorism isn't just attack, it's anxiety and I think you feel the anxiety and frustration of New Yorkers who took the bullet for the rest of the country," he said.

Paterson's comments break with Democrats, who generally support the President's decision.

"Our country was attacked on its own soil on September 11, 2001 and New York was very much the epicenter of that attack. Over 2,700 lives were lost," he said. "It's very painful. We're still having trouble getting over it. We still have been unable to rebuild that site and having those terrorists so close to the attack is gonna be an encumbrance on all New Yorkers."

Paterson also said that the White House warned him six months ago this very situation would happen. He said while he disagrees with the decision, he will do everything in his power to make sure that the state's Department of Homeland Security will keep New Yorkers as safe as possible.

Republicans, including former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, have said the group should be tried in a different location under military tribunal because the attacks are considered an act of war.

Instead, the five suspects will be tried at the federal court house, just steps from Ground Zero.

Attorney General Eric Holder said he decided to bring the suspects, currently detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to trial in New York because of the nature of the undisclosed evidence against them, because the 9/11 victims were mostly civilians, and because the attacks took place on U.S. soil.

New Yorkers are taking sides over the terror trial for the accused mastermind of the September 11 attacks. "I think it's a logistical and security nightmare for the American People," Alice Hoagland, mother of a 9/11 victim, said.

Hoagland's son was a passenger on United Flight 93 when terrorists crashed it into a Pennsylvania field on that tragic day. Hoagland worries that bringing the self-proclaimed mastermind of the attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, and his accomplices to New York would make the city an even bigger target – and some security experts agree.

"Keeping the courthouse secure, keeping downtown secure, we've got the manpower to do that, but what we worry about is suicide bombers, something that could attract other terrorists like the ones that are being tried," Robert Strang, of Investigative Management Group, said.

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said the NYPD is fully prepared.

"We've handled high profile events, certainly high profile trials in the past, and we'll be able to do it," Kelly said.

"I am pleased that they're moving these trials to New York near the scene of the crime, giving the families that were most affected [the opportunity] to see the trials," Lorie Van Auken, wife of a 9/11 victim, said.

Van Auken lost her husband, Kenneth, on September 11, and she said she'll be in the federal courtroom for the terror trial. She said the military court proceedings in Guantanamo Bay were not open enough.

"It would be very assuring to me and a lot of others to see the American system of justice work," Van Auken said.

Some relatives fear the suspects could be freed on a technicality that a defense attorney could challenge Mohammed's confession to planning the attacks. The government admitted to using water-boarding interrogation techniques on him 183 times in 2003.

"But ultimately, the administration would not have put these five individuals into the federal system, I think, if they weren't convinced they could get a conviction," CBS News security consultant Juan Zarate said.

Defense lawyers could argue that Mohammed's six years in detention have already violated his right to a fair trial. They could also challenge if it's possible to get an impartial jury in New York, where nearly 3,000 people were killed on September 11.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
30 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
hungry1968-17 says:
by endurorob_5 November 17, 2009 8:34 AM EST
I don't think anyone is following Patterson. The repubs who are apposed to this debacle came out and said so long before this dem opened his mout about the situation.






The republicans oppose it, because a democrat proposed it.

If a democrat opposed the trials altogether, and said that Guantanamo should stay open forever, the republicans would be crying about that too.

There's NOTHING the democrats can do, that the republicans won't oppose - except for tax breaks for the wealthy.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
hungry1968-17 says:
The worst governor in the country said something?

Is anyone supposed to care?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
bubbadubba says:
Well by all means if that nut case governor says the trial is a mistake we must do what he says.
Too funny, Republicans are following and agreeing with the suggestions of Paterson like little blind puppies.
It is funny who the Republicans will suck up to these days.
LOL
reply
endurorob_5 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
I don't think anyone is following Patterson. The repubs who are apposed to this debacle came out and said so long before this dem opened his mout about the situation.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
searingtruth says:
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."
Thomas Paine, Dissertation on First Principles of Government, December 23, 1791

A Future of the Brave
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
DSR_57 says:
AndyMaxo ,

You should tryout for cheerleading ! That way you can get a little closer to Obama's Nutz.
reply
billards53 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Thank you . Why after six years plus for some of these detainees didn't the Bush administration charge and try these terrorists , why has this problem been dumped on a new administration and why the torture of suspects that have so much evidence against them . Mindless stupidity .KSM's guilt is undeniable and yet the government uses torture to learn more intelligence ? Now the left will be blamed for the weakness of providing a fair trial in accordance with the US constitution and international law . When we abrogate the Geneva Conventions you are throwing the baby out with the bath water .
linkicon reporticon emailicon
searingtruth says:
"The indefinite detention of extra judicially abducted American and foreign citizens in secret prisons without charge or representation where they are subject to institutionalized torture and murder is not only illegal, it is abhorrent, disgusting, and disgraceful to the nature and soul of any American."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
rank_n_file says:
For reasons few people understand, Paterson has turned into a money grubbing misanthrope. When he first took over as gov I supported him. He had a candor that was refreshing. Then he slowly drifted away, into an oppressive, money-grabbing malcontent whose sanctimonious drivel attempts to bleed the state to death with pointless charges and surcharges while justifying it all as a sin tax attempt to clean up the neighborhood. Meanwhile, he has been instrumental in squandering precious federal dollars repairing roads that don't need repairs, while ignoring the more complex infrastructure repairs that are desperately needed. Paterson needs the voters to show him where the exits are located.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
sl3_007 says:
Last declared war was WWII. What was the war in Korea or Vietnam? Kind of difficult to declare war against the terrorists as they are religious extremists with no country. I think most reasonable people will agree that what happened on 9/11 was an act of war, declared or not. It should be a military trial. It should have occurred much faster than this with film footage of a firing squad at the end.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
sl3_007 says:
Can we ever get a decent Attorney General inthis country. Holder is an idiot. Bush had Gonzales and Clinton had Reno. With all the oversupply of lawyers out there can't they find anyone better? The only good decision I have heard out of Holder's office is the one not to waste gov't resources on marijuana in states that have more or less legalized it. How much gov't time and money is being spent on that preliminary investigation on the CIA? How about coming out with the results of that about the same time the trial starts in NYC?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
cwdfreedom says:
obama is just crazy for bringing these american murders to our soil. obama has made a ton of bad decisions and hard to rank which is worse but this one is up at the top sum where. these terrorists committed an act of war and so therefore are war criminals and should never be tried in a civilian court. That is why we have military tribunals. what is wrong with obama? there is something seriously wrong with this mans mind
reply
patocc123 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
They are enemy combatants. Its kinda of a grey area with no define grey area on protocol. However that being said its up to the AG to determine the next way to proceed. I believe it should be a Tribunal but since former President Bush screwed up by not expediting the trials, President Obama is going to use this as a political opertunity. If the defendants use the trial to self promote themselves and thier agenda then Obama looks like a genius. If the trials get dragged out and if anyone of them are set free then Obama looses.

Its all politics not about Justice or about the Image of the US.
See all 30 Comments