15 years after the event, 6 years after the start of the trial, long awaited Judgment at the STL coming up at 11am.
Judge Re reading out of the summary of facts illustrates immediately that virtually all the Prosecutor's case relies on circumstantial evidence from telephone networks information.
Judge Re announces Judgment is 2000 pages! Did I hear that correctly???
Judge Re: "without the telecommunications evidence, there would be no case against the Accused..."
Judge Re gives a long crash course on telecommunications localisation technique and underlines limits of such an exercise. Seems very critical of the quality of Prosecution evidence so far...
Judge Re notes the entire circumstantial nature of the evidence.
Judge Re explains the approach adopted by the Chamber to evidence and to witness credibility. Drops the famous "evidence as a whole" phrase...
Judge Re: Role of the trial Chamber is not to correct history but simply to decide on the guilt or innocence of the Accused. The attack did not occur in a vaccum and was undoubtedly a political act. Mentions Syria's dominance in Lebanon at the time and opposition to it.
Judge Re sets assassination of Hariri squarely within the context of opposition to Syrian presence in Lebanon. Mentions other political attacks at the time. Seems obvious politically, but was there extensive discussion of the Accused's motives at trial or their relation to Syria?
Judge Re: No evidence of Hezbollah involvement in the assassination nor direct evidence of Syrian involvement. This will be a controversial finding most certainly.
Judge Nosworthy discusses impact of events on victims and addresses the question of reparations. Seems somewhat odd to discuss this as an interlude before continuing with the actual Judgment. A way to prepare an acquittal?
Judge Nosworthy moves on to describing the details of the attack itself and the size of the explosion which could be heard 25km away.
Judge Nosworthy notes the failings in the initial response to the attack, tainting the crime scene, and lack of coordination in the initial investigation. Explains lack of direct evidence at the Trial?
Judge Nosworthy now describing the explosion itself. The structure of the summary is puzzling: discussing the sequence that lead to the explosion, then the subsequent investigation, then coming back to the explosion... Hope this is not illustrative of the written Judgment...
Judge Nosworthy explains that the TC is satisfied it was a suicide attack, but could not identify the actual perpetrator.
Judge Nosworthy moves on to the findings of the Chamber on the mobile networks.
specifically discusses difficulty of attributing mobiles to the Accused.
Judge Braidy moves on to discussing the specific accused, starting with Ayyash.
Judge Braidy is discussing whether Ayyash left the country in January 2005, a key element in attributing the use of the mobile phones to him during that period.
Judge Braidy: TC finds that Ayyash did not leave Lebanon, which is essential to establish his involvment in the attack.
this seems to be leading up to a conviction for Ayyash...
Judge Braidy moving on to Merhi and discussing circumstantial nature of attribution of mobile use to him.
insufficient evidence that Merhi was using one of the key mobile networks used in the attack, if I understand correctly...
Moving on to Oneissi now. Only conclusion from "totality of evidence" is that he was using a purple network phone. Not sure what that means at this point to be honest... Shouldn't there be a connection with another network also?
now Sabra: Judge Braidy says weakest of any of the attributions led by the Prosecution. No information on his location or whereabouts apparently. No evidence of a geographical footprint to attribute use of phone to Sabra. Looks like an acquittal there.
"this is fatal to the case against Mr Sabra". That's pretty clear.
moving on to Baddredine, despite the fact that he was found dead by the TC years ago... This is odd, but I suppose that this is the beauty of trials in absentia: it doesn't matter whether he is alive or dead...
very disturbing that TC is making substantial findings on Baddredine's involvement in the attack. Raises an interesting question: shouldn't it be in the interest of justice for a procedural avenue to exist for this to be challenged on appeal?
30 minute break! stay tuned! #STLneverendingsummary
And we're back!
Judge Re moves on to discussing the surveillance of Hariri in the month prior to the attack, based on network patterns at his locations.
No direct evidence that users of the mobiles were engaged in surveillance of Hariri. Only patterns suggest that Hariri was being followed.
Again, not entirely clear about the structure of the summary: why was this section not before the discussion of the individual involvement of the Accused?
Judge Re: not enough evidence to link the green network to the events and that it was the "mission command" network with Baddredine at its peak. Other reasonable explanations exist.
TC not convinced beyond reasonsable doubt that Baddredine masterminded the attack.
Judge Re: Insufficient evidence that surveillance was wholly linked to the preparation of the attack. But Hariri was between observed by many.
TC is satisfied that evidence establishes that there was significant network activity around Hariri's movements showing a pattern of following him. During the absence of Hariri from Lebanon, network activity seized.
The TC cannot find that all the surveillance of Hariri was done as part of the planning his assassination, only some of it closer to the event.
Important point it seems: TC cannot conclude that all users of the networks knew about the assassination plan.
Judge Re moves on to the question of the vehicle used in the attack and lack of evidence of involvment of network users in that respect.
Judge Re now discusses the claim of responsibility after the attack, which the Prosecutor alleged was a false claims to divert responsibility of the attack organised by some of the Accused.
The TC cannot determine who called Al Jazeera and Reuters, nor who put the package with the video in a tree. Evidence unreliable due to problems with the networks that afternoon.
Apparently, according to Judge Re, the person who claimed the attack... could not drive (!), thus excluding him as the suicide bomber. If this is true, it seems the selection of the scapegoat was somewhat sloppy...
Judge Re discusses the hearsay nature of the evidence in addition introduced through written testimony that could not therefore be tested by the Defense.
Not sure what to conclude of this portion by Judge Re... help @IlariaZavoli!
Judge Nosworthy takes over to discuss whether some of the Accused were involved in the false claim. TC not convinced there is evidence Oneissi involvement, so OTP case is considerably weakened.
Seems this part of the OTP case is crumbling in a spectacular way! Seems so far there is no evidence of involvment in the false claim allegations from the Accused.
Judge Nosworthy: TC satisfied that the claim was a false claim. Most likely explanation is that those responsible for the assassination tried to divert attention. But the TC cannot positively determine whether participation in the video was voluntary or not.
Judge Nosworthy: no evidence of Oneissi, Mehri and Sabra's participation in the charges levelled against them, irrespective of the TC's findings on the false claims.
Judge Nosworthy: Prosecution narrative was contradictory: why would the Accused have used their personal phones in relation to such a covert operation, especially if the OTP claims the use of covert networks?
Judge Nosworthy moves on to discussing the charge of committing a terrorist act through an explosive device.
Seems a somewhat uncontroversial point here, maybe a right place to shorten the summary?
Although this conversation shows the limits of discussing motive-like aspects of the crime of terrorism. The TC seems to make common sense claims about the impact of such an explosion, but there is zero concrete discussion of the Accused's intent.
and yet Judge Nosworthy keeps using terms like "intended consequences", and "intent". Seems like misnomers in such a context...
Also, I would say that the perceptions of the victims is of limited use here: won't all victims of violent acts express a feeling a fear? This would make all acts of violence acts of terrorism...
Moving on the alleged conspiracy with Judge Braidy...
Judge Braidy: there was a conspiracy, not all people involved are known, not all needed to know they were participating in a conspiracy to kill Hariri, as long as they knew who they were tracking on the day of the attack.
Judge Braidy: After a long discussion on the theoretical scope of the conspiracy, a more concrete discussion on who was in it or not... Those surveilling Hariri could not have know why they were doing it.
I must admit I am slowly losing the plot on this conspiracy discussion (pun definitely intended). Did all this really need to be in the summary???
What I gather generally is that essentially, the OTP provided zero evidence on who was in the conspiracy, what they knew, when they knew it, or what they did concretely to advancve the conspiracy... I'm assuming we are actually going to hear about the Accused at some point!
Judge Braidy: we do not know who ordered the assassination.
Judge Re: only evidence against Ayyash is the use of the mobile network. Back to discuss the different networks and their use... sigh...
Judge Re: If I understood correctly, it is inconceivable that Ayyash did not know the conspiracy when using the red mobile network on the day of the attack.
I knew this would happen given the nature of the case, but I am still amazed at the amount of speculation the TC has to go into about so many aspects of the Prosecutor's narrative given the lack of crucial evidence...
This whole section is essentially some (albeit educated) guessing work from the TC... not even sure at this point why it is relevant...
TC cannot determine whether Ayyash was involved in the false claim, the preparation of the explosive device or the purchase of the vehicle. But he still has responsibility as a member of the conspiracy. Question is: for doing what exactly?
Judge Re: Ayyash guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the Hariri assassination and the other victims. He at least foresaw their death and accepted that risk. There is no other conclusion.
In other words, the connected cases are saved!
Judge Re moves on to Sabra and Oneissi. No evidence of knowledge of the terrorist attack.
Sabra and Oneissi cannot be found responsible for the conspiracy, so acquitted.
Judge Re moves on to Mehri now: repeats the lack of evidence about Mehri's involvement in the false claim.
Mehri acquitted. Now back to Baddredine, again despite the fact that the proceedings against him were terminated...
Apparently Judge Braidy dissented on whether the TC should make any legal findings on Baddredine.
And now the dispositive part confirming only Ayyash is convicted.
All Judges seem to have written separate/dissenting opinions, in addition to the 2000 page judgement! More work for @HemiMistry!
2641 pages to be precise (Judge Re). Do not expect a blogpost on my part anytime soon!
Judge Re: there will be distinct proceedings for the sentencing of Ayyash. Orders being issued on the conduct of those proceedings right now.
"that completes the proceedings". Final words to the victims are a little casual no? "we can't expect anything we say will satisfy you, but we hope you do take something out of this".
So, this concludes this crazy long summary. Hope this equally crazy long thread will have been useful to some of you and I look forward to seeing the debates sparked by this Judgment! #STL #Ayyash #overandout
