Judge Declares Mistrial in Holy Land Case
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

DALLAS—The federal government’s strategy for prosecuting alleged terrorist fund-raising in America is faltering after jurors failed to agree on most charges against five officials of what was once America’s largest Muslim charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development.
Judge Allen Joe Fish declared a mistrial on the bulk of the charges following a morning of confusing proceedings in which the jury returned written verdicts of not guilty on some counts, but three jurors told the judge that they disagreed with what was recorded on the verdict forms after 19 days of deliberations.
“The law gives me no choice but to declare a mistrial as to all counts of the indictment as to which no unanimous verdict was reached,” the judge told a courtroom packed with security personnel, journalists, and family members of the accused.
The defendants, Ghassan Elashi, Shukri Abu Baker, Mufid Abdulqater, Abdulrahman Odeh, and Mohammed el-Mezain, each faced more than two dozen counts, including conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist group, namely, Hamas, conspiracy to evade an embargo, and money laundering. Some individual counts carried potential prison terms of up to 20 years, meaning that the men faced the possibility of life in prison if convicted.
The verdict forms indicated that Mr. Abdulqater was not guilty on all counts, Mr. El-Mezain was not guilty on all counts but one conspiracy charge, and Mr. Odeh was not guilty on all counts but the two conspiracy charges. The verdict sheets indicated that the jury could reach no agreement regarding the guilt or innocence of the two highest ranking foundation officials in the dock: Elashi, the foundation’s chairman, and Mr. Abu Baker, the charity’s secretary and chief executive officer. The jury also failed to reach any verdicts on the Holy Land Foundation itself, which was also charged as a defendant.
Judge Fish then polled the individual jurors, who have not been identified by name in court. The forewoman quickly confirmed that she agreed with the verdicts. But when the judge asked the next juror whether she agreed, the woman replied, “No.” In all, three jurors seemed at first to repudiate the verdicts, while the nine others accepted the decision.
The forewoman said she was taken aback by the dissent. “When we voted there was no issue in the vote. No one spoke up any different. I really don’t understand where it’s coming from,” the forewoman told the judge.
Judge Fish sent the jurors out for a brief recess to discuss whether further deliberations might produce unanimity. After 45 minutes, they returned with a note saying that 11 of 12 considered further discussions to be fruitless.
The judge then polled the dissenting jurors again, citing the possibility of “some ambiguity” in his earlier question about agreeing to the verdicts. The follow-up queries elicited continuing disagreement regarding Mr. Abdulqater and Mr. Odeh, though the dissenters seemed to agree with the listed not guilty verdicts for Mr. el-Mezain.
The judge then declared a mistrial as to all counts, except for those where Mr. el-Mezain was found not guilty.
Asked by Judge Fish whether the government would retry the case, the lead prosecutor, James Jacks, answered, “Yes, your honor, my expectation is we will.”
Families and supporters of the accused were initially muted in their reactions to the proceedings, but the confusion eventually turned to jubilation as the crowd gathered at the courthouse assessed the outcome as a defeat for the government.
The defendants and their attorneys were cheered as they emerged from the courthouse. Amid cries of “Allahu Akbar,” an attorney for Mr. Odeh, Greg Westfall, was hoisted into the air by those celebrating.
Some critics of the prosecution complained that the pivotal witness for the government was an Israeli intelligence official who testified under a pseudonym and in a courtroom cleared of spectators at the request of the American and Israeli governments.
“This was an Israeli trial tried on American soil,” the spokesman for a group supporting the defendants, Khalil Meek of the Hungry for Justice Coalition, said.
The muddled outcome is a blow to the Justice Department, which had highlighted the Holy Land Foundation case as one of its marquis efforts to disrupt the financial underpinnings of terrorism.
In 2004, the attorney general at the time, John Ashcroft, personally announced the indictment in the case. “This prosecution sends a clear message: There is no distinction between those who carry out terrorist attacks and those who knowingly finance terrorist attacks. The United States will ensure that both terrorists and their financiers meet the same, certain justice,” Mr. Ashcroft declared.
Now, regardless of whether the defendants are guilty or not of the crimes alleged, the unwavering message Mr. Ashcroft proclaimed seems to be anything but certain.