6 February 2010
By El-Hajj Mauri’ Saalakhan
Aafia Siddiqui
– a daughter, a sister, a mother of three, committed
Muslim, social scientist, hafiz of Qur’an – needed to
be heard. For years she had suffered in virtual
silence…aching to be heard, to be understood, to have
certain malicious untruths corrected and exposed for
the lies they were. That day finally came on
Thursday, January 28, 2010!
The
high drama of that day’s proceedings revolved around
the question of whether or not U.S. District Judge
Richard Berman would grant Aafia’s repeated demand to
take the stand in her own defense.
Aafia’s lawyers appeared to be animate in their
opposition to her taking the stand, while the
prosecution appeared (on the surface) to be in
favor of Aafia being entitled to her Fifth
Amendment right. Her brother (Muhammad) was
apprehensive about her taking the stand, leaning more
in favor of her following the advice of her lawyers.
Even Pakistani Ambassador Hussain Haqqani became
involved. During a short visit he was allowed with the
defendant, he reportedly advised Aafia to follow the
advice of her lawyers.
Aafia’s response to this collective concern was that
she would make istiqara (a supplication to
ALLAH Almighty for guidance on the matter); and in the
end
Aafia Siddiqui
would be heard.
While
I understood the reservations of those who were
concerned about Aafia taking the stand (given all that
she had already been through), I fully supported our
sister’s right to be heard, and was guardedly
optimistic about the potential outcome. More than
anything, however, I knew that Aafia – like two young
Muslim men in an Atlanta courtroom, and several young
Muslim men in a New Jersey courtroom (who were eager,
but manipulated into not taking the stand in their own
defense not long ago) - needed to be heard!
Aafia needed to have her day in court!
The
process began with a preliminary (test) examination,
with Aafia taking the witness stand in the absence of
the jury – a kind of hearing within a hearing –
to see how she would respond to that type of intensive
and focused examination. After the judge determined
that she was capable enough to enjoy her
constitutional “right” to take the stand in her own
defense, the jury was brought back into the courtroom,
and it was on. (And what truly spectacular
courtroom drama it turned out to be!)
The
following summary is based on my notes from January
28th
Open court proceedings
began late in the morning, due to a number of
procedural issues that needed to be addressed behind
closed doors. Once proceedings began, it did so with
the judge explaining Aafia’s right, and the
possible risks, of her taking the stand. There was
extensive discussion about the course and extent of
cross examination should Aafia decide to testify.
The
government’s support of Aafia taking the stand was
full of irony, given the fact that the government had
repeatedly argued (during pre-trial and trial
proceedings) that Aafia should not even be allowed to
remain in the courtroom, because of her periodic
outbursts and “uncontrollable” nature (in their view).
The
First Witness
It was
noted by the government that over a 12 day period,
while Aafia was at the Craig Field Hospital at Bagram
for critical care medical treatment, following her
near fatal re-arrest in July 2008, two FBI agents had
continuous access to the injured prisoner (a male and
female who did not identify themselves to Aafia
as FBI personnel).
FBI
Special Agent Angela Sercer
was the first to testify. She spoke about how she
interrogated Aafia on a daily basis for the purpose of
gathering “intelligence.” She described how she sat
with Aafia for an average of eight hours each day, and
of how they discussed the shooting incident and other
related matters (discussions she said Aafia would
always initiate). Agent Sercer prepared written
reports, and disclosed during testimony that Aafia was
never Mirandized (i.e. informed of her rights to
remain silent and consult with an attorney before
questioning), nor did she have access to a Pakistani
consular official.
According to Sercer, Aafia mostly enjoyed her
discussions with this special agent. Sercer maintained
that she treated Aafia with respect and did her best
to respond to Aafia’s needs – i.e. when she requested
food, water, bathroom access, or when she requested a
Qur’an and a scarf, or when she would complain that
the “soft restraints” were too tight and needed to be
loosened, etc.
Between 7/../4/08, FBI agents were posted inside
and outside Aafia’s room 24 hours a day, ostensibly to
insure that Aafia could not escape and to provide
security for hospital personnel – despite the
“soft restraints” which secured her hands and legs to
the bed (in what Aafia later described as very
uncomfortable positions) during her stay at this field
hospital in Bagram.
The
second witness
The
second agent to testify was FBI Special Agent Bruce
Kamerman, who had reportedly been assigned on
7/21/08. He claimed that Aafia made numerous
statements, that she seemed lucid and to not be in
much pain. He also insisted that there was never any
coercion. He testified that Aafia had no visitors,
and that no Afghan staff attended to her. He
also claimed that there were occasions when Aafia
would declare that her children were dead, and other
times when she stated they might be living with her
sister.
Following the testimony of the second agent, a
hearing within the trial was held so that Aafia
could give testimony (in the absence of the jury).
Aafia
testified that when she first realized she was in a
hospital she had tubes everywhere. She was in a
narcotic state resulting from the administration of
powerful drugs (one or two she could remember by name,
others she couldn’t). She recalled how her hands and
feet were secured uncomfortably apart. She said the
agents never identified themselves as FBI, except for
“Mr. Hurley.”
Aafia
accused Agent Bruce Kamerman of subjecting her to
“psychological torture.” She accused him of being
immodest whenever he was present and medical personnel
needed to examine her, and complained of how he would
stand right outside the bathroom door whenever she
needed to use it. She testified that Kamerman would
sometimes come in the middle of the night (when he
wasn’t supposed to be there), and encourage the
person assigned to take a break. Aafia said she
remained in a sleep deprived state as a result of his
frequent presence.
During
this period she never had any contact with family, nor
with any Pakistani authorities. She thought that [FBI
Agent] “Angela was just a nice person.”
During
the cross examination Aafia spoke about being
“tortured in the secret prison,” and of how she kept
asking about her children. She insisted that she never
opined that they might be with her sister.
(I
should note here that Aafia’s testimony was consistent
with information contained on an audio CD that we’ve
produced on the case. On the CD, former Bagram and
Guantanamo prisoner Moazam Beg recounts how the
un-identified female prisoner at Bagram, known only
as Prisoner 650, was identified as a Pakistani
national who appeared to be in her 30s, and as someone
who had been torn away from her children and who
didn’t know where they were.)
Aafia
also testified that she had multiple gunshot
wounds; and that in addition to the gunshot wounds she
had a debilitating back condition (resulting from
being thrown on the floor after she was shot),
persistent headaches, and an intubation tube. She also
emphasized that she was in and out of consciousness;
and, at times, mentally incoherent.
The
video testimony of an Afghan security chief (by the
name of Qadeer) was received by the court. While I had
to briefly leave the court, and missed this testimony,
it is my understanding that what Qadeer had to say
about events at the Afghan National Police station in
Ghazni – leading up to the shooting of Aafia -
contradicted the testimony of a number of the
government’s main witnesses.
Later
in the afternoon, when Aafia testified in front of the
jury, the overflow courtroom (where I was seated) was
full of observers. The majority appeared to be
non-Muslims in professional attire - a probable mix of
court and Justice Department personnel (including
interns), law students, and a few journalists. I would
estimate that roughly a quarter of the observers in
this overflow courtroom were made up of solid Aafia
supporters – and yet the reaction to the testimony at
times was both interesting and edifying.
When I
returned to the courtroom (about 10 minutes into
Aafia’s testimony), she was describing her academic
work leading up to the achievement of her PhD at
Brandeis University. 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.
Testimony then proceeded to the events of July 17-18,
2008. Aafia testified that she remembered being
concerned about the whereabouts of her missing
children. She also remembered a press conference in an
Afghan compound.
She
testified about being tied down to a bed until she
vigorously protested, and was later untied and left
behind a curtain. She later heard American and Afghan
voices on the other side of the curtain, and concluded
that they [Americans] wanted to return her to a
“secret prison” again. She testified about how she had
pleaded with the Afghans not to let the Americans take
her away.
She
testified about peaking 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
had gotten 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.
She
testified that she was in and out of consciousness,
and vaguely recalled being placed on a stretcher, a
helicopter, and receiving a blood transfusion – which
she protested, drawing laughter in the courtroom when
she recounted how she had “threatened to sue” her
medical attendants if they gave her a blood
transfusion. During this testimony, Aafia animatedly
rejected the allegation that she picked up a [M-4]
rifle and fired it (or that she even attempted
to do so).
The
Cross Examination
This
is the time when every eye and every ear was riveted
on the proceedings. It was the moment that Aafia’s
defense attorneys, her brother, and a host of Muslim
and non-Muslim supporters (seated within both
courtrooms) dreaded. It was also the point in the
proceedings that had the prosecution salivating for
what opportunities would come there way – or so
they thought!
Cross
examination began with Aafia revisiting the degrees
that she received at MIT and Brandeis universities.
She acknowledged that she took a required
course in molecular biology; but emphasized that her
work was in cognitive neuroscience. When questioned on
whether she had ever done any work with chemicals, her
response was, “only when required.”
(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 [then] husband being questioned
by the FBI in 2002, and leaving the U.S. 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 U.S. to
attempt to find work in her field.
One of
the most heart-wrenching moments in the
cross-examination was when 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 (than 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.
She
was also questioned on whether she had taken a pistol
course at a firing range while a student in Boston.
Her initial reaction was that she did not have any
recollection of taking such a course, and when pressed
further, answered “No.” When the prosecutor continued
to press the issue (infusing sinister motivations in
the process), Aafia admonished the prosecutor in the
strong, clear voice that was heard throughout her
testimony: “You can’t build a case on hate; you
should build it on fact!”
Aafia
testified that all she was thinking about at the time
of her re-arrest in Ghazni, was “getting out of that
room and not being sent back to the secret prison.”
While discussions were going on between the Afghans
and Americans, Aafia was searching for a way out. She
repeated her assertion that she startled one of the
soldiers who hollered, “She’s free! - before shooting
her.
Aafia
also elicited an approving reaction in the courtroom
when she opined, in reaction to the government’s
narration of events, she could not believe a soldier
would be so irresponsible as to leave his M4 rifle on
the floor unsecured.
In
response to government questioning she again took the
opportunity to strongly rebuke Agent Kamerman, while
rejecting most of his testimony revisited by the
prosecutor.
Aafia
spoke highly of a number of nurses (and a doctor) who
took care of her at Bagram. There was one nurse in
particular that Aafia promised to mention favorably if
she ever wrote a book. She then produced laughter in
the courtroom again when she stated, “Since I don’t
think I’m going to write a book, I’m mentioning her
now.”
One of
the most powerful and revealing moments in the
testimony was when she spoke about the people who
systematically abused her in the “secret prison” –
denouncing them as “fake Americans, not real
Americans.” (Because of the way their actions both
violated and damaged America’s image!)
She
spoke again, under cross examination, about the strong
pain medication she was on, and some of the effects
this medication had on her.
Aafia
also mentioned 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).
At
this point in the proceedings, the judge ordered a
brief recess. Clearly the government had thought that
they would be able to control and manipulate Aafia in
manner that would work in their favor; this ended up
being a MAJOR MISCALCULATION. The purpose of this
break in the proceedings, in my humble opinion, was to
allow the prosecutor to regain her composure,
and consult with fellow prosecutors for a more
effective line of attack.
When
testimony resumed, Aafia spoke of 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 spoke of how she would be “punished” if
she got something wrong.
On
defense cross, Aafia was shown pictures and asked to
identify herself in them. She reluctantly did so, but
with a little levity, citing how unattractive and
immodest the photos were.
I
could not see the photos from the overflow courtroom
where I was sitting, but I assume that these were the
photos of an un-covered, emaciated and emotionally
disfigured
Aafia Siddiqui
- after her horrific ordeal at the hands of American
terrorists.
A
final note: I sincerely believe that
Aafia Siddiqui’s time spent on the
witness stand on January 28th was a cathartic
experience for her – but one that the prosecution, in
retrospect, now deeply regrets. For any truly
objective and fair-minded person who witnessed that
day’s proceedings, the U.S Government’s case against
Aafia Siddiqui was exposed for what it always
was…a horrific and profoundly tragic miscarriage of
justice!
The
struggle continues…
El-Hajj Mauri’ Saalakhan
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments
Save