Did the Jurors Contradict Themselves With Respect to Moussaouis Complicity?
What are we to make of the fact that when it came time to decide whether Moussaoui should be executed, three jurors had doubts about his complicity in the 9/11 plot? Such doubts seem to contradict their unanimous finding that he was death-eligible, for in making the death-eligibility determination, they unanimously found, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Moussaoui “knowingly created a grave risk of death to one or more persons in addition to the victims of the offense,” and that he “committed the offense after substantial planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person or to commit an act of terrorism.” Yet when it came time to choose a sentence, some jurors found him insufficiently complicit to warrant execution. Apparently, as former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy observed, at least three jurors “had buyer’s remorse.” Buyer’s remorse is a plausible account of the sentencing determination if one assumes that in finding Moussaoui death-eligible, the jurors believed beyond
Related Questions
- Is it necessary for a Party against whom a Complaint in respect of a CN domain name or Chinese domain name has been filed with the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) to respond?
- How is a Decision of a Panel in respect of a CN domain name and a Chinese domain name administrative proceeding carried out?
- What are an employers COBRA compliance requirements with respect to group health plans?
