International Law

Twist in terror trial

Odd developments in the Toronto 18 terror trial. Apparently the Crown yesterday accused its “star witness,” police mole Mubin Shaikh, of lying. Things started to unwind over what Thomas Walkom in the Star refers to as a “seemingly minor point” but which Isabel Teotonio refers to as a “crucial” discrepancy.

Why exactly did the four youths attending an alleged jihadi training camp near Washago in late 2005 clean up the campsite afterwards?

Earlier [at a preliminary inquiry], Shaikh had testified that they wanted to hide any evidence of their “nefarious” activities ? which included playing paintball and engaging in target practice with an illegal handgun.

But later, under cross-examination from defence lawyer Mitchell Chernovsky, Shaikh testified that some ? including the youth on trial ? were told they had to sweep up in order to protect wild animals from ingesting discarded bullet casings and pieces of plastic.

Unbelievable. Of course maybe they cleaned up the campsite because that’s just what you’re supposed to do when you leave a campsite. Or would that be too obvious?

Walkom’s piece suggests the larger significance of the Crown’s new direction.

When [the trials of the ten adults charged] eventually begin, the public could reasonably ask: If the government doesn’t believe its own undercover agent is telling the truth about this, why should it believe he is telling the truth about anything?

…

Paid $300,000 by the RCMP to infiltrate the cell of alleged terrorists, Shaikh is the sole source for many of the sensational charges levelled against them ? including claims that they wanted to blow up nuclear plants and storm Parliament.

If, as the Crown now suggests, this RCMP agent can’t be believed, what happens to the government’s case?

I have to admit, the photo of Shaikh they ran with the Teotonio story doesn’t inspire me with a lot of confidence. And $300,000! That’s a pretty big incentive to tell people what they want to hear. Meanwhile, I keep waiting to hear something from the Crown that tells me all this is worth it. And I haven’t heard it yet.

Full post as published by Criminal Review on June 19, 2008 (boomark / email).