Sami Al-Arian indictments and trial

[2][3][4][5][6] A 50-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Tampa charged the defendants under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) with operating a racketeering enterprise from 1984 that engaged in violent activities, as well as: conspiracy within the U.S. to kill and maim persons abroad, conspiracy to provide material support and resources to PIJ, conspiracy to violate emergency economic sanctions, engaging in various acts of interstate extortion, perjury, obstruction of justice, and immigration fraud.

"[2] It alleged numerous PIJ-associated terrorist acts, resulting in the murders of over 100 people in Israel and the Occupied Territories.

[2][4] It also alleged that the defendants used USF, where some of them were teachers or students, as cover and as a means to bring other PIJ members into the U.S., purportedly for academic meetings and conferences.

[2][4] Attorney General John Ashcroft said that Al-Arian and his co-defendants played: a substantial role in international terrorism.

[8] At trial, FBI agent Kerry Myers testified that the PIJ had planned an attack inside the U.S., but that all information about the plot was classified and he could not discuss it.

At the end of the prosecution's case, Al-Arian's attorneys rested without offering a defense, and the trial concluded on November 14, 2005.

U.S. Justice Department officials said they were considering whether to retry Al-Arian and co-defendant Hatem Fariz on the jury deadlock charges, one of which carried a life sentence.

[13]On February 28, 2006, Al-Arian signed a plea agreement in which he agreed to plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to contribute services to or for the benefit of the PIJ, a Specially Designated Terrorist organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

[5][16] Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said: We have a responsibility not to allow our nation to become a safe haven for those who provide assistance to ... terrorists.

[15][19][20] On July 25, 2006, Fariz pleaded guilty to one count of providing nonviolent services to associates of Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

[21] Judge Moody sentenced al-Arian to the maximum 57 months in prison and three years of supervised release on May 1, 2006, and gave him credit for time served.

"[22] Reacting to Al-Arian's contention that he had raised money for charities, Moody said: "Your only connection to widows and orphans was that you create them.

He was imprisoned for 13 months for civil contempt for failing to testify in compliance with the first subpoena, later released on house arrest and eventually placed on daytime GPS monitoring.

[30] Finally, another explanation for his not testifying was presented by his wife, who said: My husband is a man of principle, and he will never turn into an informant.

[16] Thirteen months later, on December 14, 2007, the Virginia District Court lifted its contempt order, starting the clock ticking again on his days-served on his conspiracy guilty plea sentence.

[16] A Florida District Court also held that the plea agreement was not ambiguous, and did not prevent the government from issuing a subpoena requiring him to testify before a grand jury.

[16] The court therefore held the plea agreement to be clear, unambiguous, and to not grant Al-Arian immunity from the grand jury subpoena.

[35] On September 2, 2008, he was released from custody and put under house arrest at his daughter Laila's residence in Northern Virginia, where he is being monitored electronically while he awaits trial on criminal contempt charges.

[36][37][38] At a January 2009 hearing to schedule his trial, his attorneys filed documents saying Al-Arian "did cooperate and answer questions on IIIT" for federal prosecutors.

[39] This affirms sworn declarations submitted to the court by Al-Arian's Florida trial attorneys, Bill Moffitt[40] and Linda Moreno.

[41] On March 9, Judge Leonie Brinkema postponed the criminal contempt trial, pending a motion by defense attorneys to dismiss the charges in the case.

The controversy concerned remarks made by Hussain in 2004, criticizing procedural issues in the U.S. terror prosecution of Sami Al-Arian.

[44] He "drew sharp criticism from conservatives for calling the prosecution of some terror suspects 'politically motivated,' a comment both Hussain and The White House denied.

[20] According to recordings obtained by Politico in 2010, Hussain referred to the cases as examples of "politically motivated prosecutions."

[20] He was careful to say that he was not offering an opinion on whether Al-Arian was guilty of the charges that he was a top leader of the U.S. branch of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a "specially designated terrorist" organization.

[23] After the controversy over the statements, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs expressed continued White House confidence in Hussain, noting, "This is an individual that has written extensively on why some have used religious devices like the Qur'an to justify this [terrorism] and why that is absolutely wrong.

Later, in the April 2010 edition of WRMEA, Hanley wrote: Four or five years after the above item was published, this writer received a phone call or a phone message, I honestly can't remember, on a date I can't recall—we get so many calls I'm lucky if I can remember a conversation a week later!—saying Hussain had been misquoted in Kandil's article.

"[49] In his May 11, 2010 interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Hussain was asked, "During your studies in law college in University of Yale you have criticize Sami Al-Aryan's trial and you have considered it represents a kind of politically motivated prosecution.