On 2001 Attacks Case US
Sudan Deal Pompeo Distinguishes Attacks and
Abraham Accords
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC
- Decrypt
- LightRead - Honduras
-
Source
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Dec 30 –
In ongoing lawsuit "In Re
Terrorist Attacks on September
11, 2001," originally filed in
2003, the COVID 19 pandemic of
2020 continues to having
proceedings made virtual, by
phone. On August 5 a
proceeding was held about
Sudan in the case. Inner City
Press covered it, below.
The deal
by the US Administration to
drop Sudan from its State
Sponsor of Terrorism list
threw the Sudan part of the
case into turmoil, for some.
Now on
December 30, US Secretary of
State Mike Pompeo has said,
"With the enactment of the
Consolidated Appropriations
Act on December 28, the way is
clear for victims of the 1998
East African Embassy bombings,
the 2000 attack on USS Cole,
and the 2008 murder of USAID
employee John Granville, to
receive long-awaited
compensation for their
immeasurable losses. The $335
million previously provided by
Sudan and to be released to
the United States from escrow
is in addition to the
compensation Sudan has already
paid to some victims of the
Cole attack as part of a
private settlement.
Achieving compensation for
these victims of terrorism has
been a top priority of the
Department. We are pleased to
have been able to work with
Congress on this legislation
while also preserving the
ability of 9/11 victims with
pending claims against Sudan
to continue to pursue those
claims.... We commend the
Sudanese people for their
continued insistence on
freedom, peace, and justice,
and we congratulate Prime
Minister Hamdok and the
civilian-led Transitional
Government for their courage
in advancing both the
aspirations of the people they
serve and the cause of
regional peace under the
Abraham Accords." Inner City
Press will continue to cover
this case - and the US State
Department.
Inner City Press
on October 19 had asked, If
the payment is made and Sudan
is removed from the list in
exchange for a payment to
victims of the Kenya and
Tanzania embassy bombing
attacks and a side-deal with
the victims of the U.S.S. Cole
bombing in Yemen, whither the
9/11 victims?
While long
time U.S. State Department
diplomat Donald Booth is
quoted alternately as being
dismissive to and as referring
the 9/11 Sudan claimants to
JASTA instead of the carve-out
from FSIA they have been
using, the wild card would
seem to Inner City Press to be
a recognition of Israel by
Sudan, in the wake of
recognitions by the UAE and
Bahrain and, some are saying,
Morocco (Western Saharans,
watch out). Watch this site.
Plaintiffs'
lawyer says there have been
default judgments against
Sudan, and that they should
remain even if the complaint
is amended. Sudan previously
said it would not participate
in a Virginia case. Today,
Sudan is represented by White
& Case.
Judge
Netburn: Iran has remained in
default and has never appeared
in this case. She asks
of case law about sovereigns
not being able to be held
liable on a default basis.
Lawyer
named Sean Carter replies with
cases about Syria and Iran,
that amending for theory of
legal liability or new facts
is not presenting a new claim
- so the defaults should
stand. "The gravamen remains,
Sudan's support of Al Qaeda."
Suddenly
the 9/11 case telephone
hearing is broken up by loud
and soaring music - hear comes
the bass line. It is *not*
Sudanese music.
The parties
have called back in and Judge
Netburn is taking names. "Are
you there, Sean Carter?"
Silence. And no, it was not
*his* music.
Now lawyer
is saying if Judge Netburn (or
Daniels) rules for
consolidated case against
Sudan, it moots all the
default judgments. Says "we
will appear" and accept
service through ECF.
Now a
second lawyer for Sudan says
it objects to amendment:
"Plaintiffs are bringing stale
claims... As to purported new
facts from 2018, they were not
included in the O'Neill
amendment. They are trying to
circumvent the law."
Court reporter: Slow down!
Judge Netburn recommends
White and Case file appearance
in each of the cases against
Sudan... "so we can address
all this in full motion
practice."
The pandemic is
being used by the Saudi
defendants, it emerged at a
telephone conference with some
300 attendees on May 21. Inner
City Press covered it.
U.S.
District Court for the
Southern District of New York
Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn
initially had some technical
issues with her computer,
which she described as from
the era computers were first
invented. But then things got
going.
lawyer is telling
SDNY Mag Judge Netburn that
some Saudi diplomats' immunity
was revoked. Judge says it's
not fair to ask State to
review immunity given 20 years
ago.
Next a defense
lawyer described a case where
a person associated with the
Morocco mission to the UN was
granted diplomatic immunity by
the U.S. State Department in
an email, he says that's
enough.
Turns out
that a man named Awad who on
9/11 worked in "Islamic
Affairs" at the Saudi mission
has suddenly retired the day
after he was listed as a
witness.
Next Saudi Arabia
said they can't make him
testify, he's retired.
It
reached 1:26 pm and the 9/11
case hearing was still going,
with the lawyer for Saudi
Arabia saying his - or his
client's? - integrity is being
besmirched by allegations they
"early retired" people on the
plaintiffs' witness list.
Judge
Netburn said, I don't think
the question is whether the
witnesses are aligned with
Kingdom or adverse to it.
A
plaintiffs' lawyer said, The
case I cited says "or with
adversary."
Judge
Netburn: I think we've
exhausted questions about
former officials. Let's take a
break. And they did. Inner
City Press will continue on
the case.
As Inner City
Press has reported, the SDNY
has moved to video
sentencings, and defense
attorney laptop links to their
clients in the MCC from the
Attorneys Lounge of 500 Pearl
Street.
Of such criminal
cases, Judge Netburn remarked,
something called CourtConnect
is being used. I'm inclined to
use it, since I think the
earliest we could get together
would be mid June and quite
possibly later. Next week
Ramadan begins which would
have delayed depositions
anyway.
One of the
plaintiffs' lawyers Steve
Pounian said, The families are
willing to have a delay
because of this exception
circumstance, in order to get
the depositions they need, in
person. There's language,
demeanor...
Another plaintiffs' lawyers,
Sean Carter, said We have
doubts about Saudi Arabia's
allegations, that they have
diplomatic immunity, that some
people are senior officials.
Pounian followed up: We took a
deposition in March under the
written question procedure.
Now we're going to file a
motion.
Carter resumed, We were told
last week the FBI is looking
for some additional documents.
I don't want to put Sarah
Normand on the spot--
Ms.
Norman confirmed, The FBI is
also slowed. We'd hoped to
have all of the records, but
because of tele-working, and
the documents being on
classified systems, that work
has stopped during the
pandemic.
Judge
Netburn asked, Does the
Kingdom want to be
heard? The
Saudis' lawyer offered, We're
willing to use
CourtConnect.
Judge
Netburn opined, The reviews
are not great.
We'll see:
there may be a video
conference in May,
presumptively public. Inner
City Press notes that in this
case, Docket Item 6122, Motion
for Conference dated April 14,
2020, says "You do not have
permission to view this
document." The case is In Re
Terrorist Attacks on September
11, 2001, 03-md-1570 (Daniels
/ Netburn).
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2020 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for
|