Among the many organizations working for truth and justice in matters pertaining to the attacks of September 2001 is the Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry.
What follows is a slightly edited report on the Committee’s petition to the U.S. Department of Justice for a Special Grand Jury Investigation of the collapse of the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers and Building 7.
– – –
On the morning of April 10 attorneys from the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, together with more than a dozen family members of 9/11 victims, filed a petition with the interim U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Geoffrey S. Berman, demanding that he present evidence of unprosecuted federal crimes at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, to a special grand jury.
According to the 52-page petition, which is accompanied by 57 exhibits, federal statute requires the U.S. Department of Justice to relay citizen reports of federal crimes to a special grand jury. The unprosecuted crime alleged to have taken place on 9/11 is the bombing of a place of public use or a government facility — as prohibited under the federal bombing statute or 18 U.S.C. § 2332f — as well as a conspiracy to commit, or the aiding and abetting of, said offense.
The petition states,
“The Lawyers’ Committee has reviewed the relevant available evidence . . . and has reached a consensus that there is not just substantial or persuasive evidence of yet-to-be-prosecuted crimes related to the use of pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries . . . on 9/11, but there is actually conclusive evidence that such federal crimes were committed.”
A federal grand jury has broad powers to investigate the alleged crimes and to return an indictment for signature and prosecution by the U.S. Attorney. The petition notes,
“If any crime ever warranted a full special grand jury inquiry, the mass murder of thousands on our nation’s soil on 9/11 clearly does.”
Lawyers’ Committee Executive Director Mick Harrison expressed “cautious optimism” that the U.S. Attorney would fulfill his mandatory duty to present the reported evidence to a grand jury, his optimism based on the fact that the law offers the U.S. Attorney no discretion in whether to do so. However, in the event the U.S. Attorney does not bring forth the evidence to a grand jury, Harrison said, the petitioners reserve the option of bringing a mandamus action in federal court. A mandamus action, if successful, would compel the U.S. Attorney to fulfill his legal obligation.
For the time being, the Lawyers’ Committee will let the process run its course.
“We intend to step back now for a reasonable time and be respectful of the confidential nature of the grand jury proceedings, although we have offered to assist in the presentation of this evidence to a special grand jury,” Harrison commented.
This is a major development, no question. However, I recall a previous effort years ago to bring the 9/11 matter before a court in Manhattan that was within walking distance of the World Trade Center, if I remember correctly, and the judge threw the case out, saying the court did not have jurisdiction. The tricks, twists, and absurdities of the legal profession are enough to drive a person to drink sometimes.
As to the present effort by Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, it looks rock-solid to me, but—many a slip twixt the cup and the lip. I desperately want the effort to succeed, but we’ve got to be prepared to carry on, I seriously think, with the campaign of going directly to the public in the event it doesn’t, no matter how disappointed, no matter how bitter.