HLF trial, CAIR & Steven Emerson

Three names missing from the headline news. Contributors over at Steven Emerson's Counterterrorism Blog are all over the Holy Land Foundation trial taking place in Texas, where CAIR is one of many un-indicted co-conspirators. Being named un-indicted co-conspirators means the prosecution can use out-of-court statements made by the co-conspirators. Normally, out-of-court statements are considered hearsay. But under the federal rules of evidence, a statement is not hearsay if it is made "by a co-conspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.


Needless to say, the muslim civil rights organization is not happy about how the trial is proceeding. Despite the daily whine-o-grams crying foul and an entire website devoted to covering the case from "The Family's Perspective", the evidence against HLF appears solid.

CAIR filed an Amicus Curiae brief (friend of the court) with the U.S. District Court claiming their good name and reputation are bring smeared. The un-indicted co-conspirator label and "extreme rhetoric" from anti-terror weblogs (like Counterterrorism Blog & LGF) seem to be hurting business because the greater muslim community in America refuses to support CAIR. If CAIR succeeds and is removed from the list, the repercussions are 2 fold. First, the governemnt would be forced to throw out substantial evidence presented under the hearsay exclusion. Second, it would complicate future prosecutions – throwing into question a basic tool in the prosecutor’s arsenal.

This case will show the overlapping membership between the muslim brotherhood, hamas and the HLF charity, who's defendants are former CAIR founders and board members. At the center of this spider web is the IAP, CAIRs parent organization. If allowed to go forward in using the hearsay evidence, a conviction is in the bag. It may also lead to CAIRs demise.