MOSCOW, March 6 (RAPSI, Ingrid Burke) – Prosecutors filed documents Wednesday projecting that the US terrorism trial against Mostafa Kamel Mostafa, better known as Abu Hamza, would last approximately six weeks as a recently published letter to the judge handwritten by the defendant himself exposes a potential rift in the defense strategy. Abu Hamza’s jury trial is set to begin on April 14, 2014.

Prosecutors expect their case-in-chief to last approximately four weeks, depending on the length of cross-examination. The defense case is expected to take up to two weeks, according to the document.

In a handwritten letter to US District Judge Katherine B. Forrest released by the court last week, Abu Hamza expressed his desires to testify on his own behalf and to speak freely about the people, organizations, places, and terms referenced in his indictment.

The defense team filed a motion in January seeking to preclude prosecutors from referencing Osama Bin Laden or the September 11th terrorist attacks during the course of his upcoming trial, asserting: “The charges in this case relate broadly to alleged illegal conduct and material support for terrorism, but the charged acts are not alleged to have been connected in any way to the attacks of September 11, 2001, to Osama Bin Laden, or to any of the other individuals involved in the planning and execution of those attacks.”

The motion noted that the 9/11 attacks will remain heavy on the minds of those filling the jury boxes of every terrorism trial carried out in the US for quite some time. 
Accordingly, “to allow the government to make specific reference at trial to the events of September 11th, or to Bin Laden or his associates, would completely deprive [Abu Hamza] of a fair trial as to the actual charges and the specific acts that are alleged against him in the instant indictment.”

Abu Hamza’s letter stated to the contrary: “I was very surprised to notice, during the last two hearings, that you had not been informed that I am testifying, and that I do not want to exclude, or avoid mentioning, any of the… people, organizations, places or terms that have been mentioned in my indictment.”

The indictment makes numerous references to both Bin Laden and al Qaeda. As an example, Abu Hamza is charged in the indictment with having provided material support and resources “to a foreign terrorist organization, to wit, a terrorist organization known as ‘al Qaeda’ and led by [bin Laden], which was designated by the Secretary of State as a foreign terrorist organization on or about October 8, 1999.”

Emphasizing his surprise after having thought that the relevant information was made clear to his defense team, Abu Hamza reasoned that “a gap of no visits, as well as other factors might have contributed to such situation.”

Later in the letter, Abu Hamza expressed gratitude at having been afforded generous resources and a legal team consisting of professionals he described as very polite, kind, and hardworking, but added to this contention: “However, sometimes lack of [communication] causes delay and confusion. I hope the trial performance proves wow well [these] resources were optimized.”

Abu Hamza argued in his letter that the names of people, organizations, and terms referenced throughout his indictment have been tinged with new meaning in the years that have passed since the indictment was drafted.

He went on to explain that it would be “impossible” to provide a sound and coherent account of the events surrounding the charges filed against him without the ability to relevant references underpinning his indictment.

Abu Hamza further expressed hope that his testimony could prove vital to the historians, researchers, investigative journalists, and analysts that have been following the proceedings.

The indictment alleges that Abu Hamza conspired with others in December 1998 to take a group of Western tourists hostage in Yemen. The indictment explains:  “On or about December 28, 1998, the hostage-takers stormed a caravan of sport utility vehicles carrying sixteen Western tourists and took the tourists hostage by use of force.”

The Yemeni military then attempted to rescue the hostages, at which point the “hostage takers used the hostages as human shields and attempted to fight off the Yemeni military,” according to the indictment. Four hostages were killed and several wounded in the ensuing combat.

The indictment goes on to allege that Hamza conspired with others and provided material support for a “violent jihad training camp” in Oregon. These efforts included, among other things, the stockpiling of weapons and ammunition within the US. The indictment goes on to allege that Abu Hamza’s two co-defendants Oussama Abdullah Kassir and Haroom Rashid Aswat travelled to Bly, Oregon – telling individuals there that “they had been sent there by [Abu Hamza] to train people for jihad and to assess the suitability of the Bly, Oregon property for a Jihad training camp. [Kassir and Aswat] also both told individuals at the property that they supported [Bin Laden] and al Qaeda, and had received their own jihad training in Afghanistan.”

The indictment further alleges in part that Abu Hamza provided and concealed material support and resources to terrorists facilitating violent jihad in Afghanistan, and that Abu Hamza conspired to supply goods and services to the Taliban in violation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

With regard to the latter, the indictment alleges that Abu Hamza posted messages on the Supporters of Shariah (SOS) website urging his followers to donate money, goods, and services to Taliban programs in Afghanistan. This activity is alleged to have occurred between Spring 2000 and at least September 6, 2001.

According to the ECHR judgment, Abu Hamza is a British national and was born in 1958. The judgment goes on to describe his myriad health problems, including: type-two diabetes, high blood pressure, poor vision in his left eye, no vision in his right eye, psoriasis, excessive sweating, and two amputated forearms. He gained notoriety with UK tabloids for the fact that he frequently sported a hook in place of one of his hands. The London Evening Standard reported in March, however, that Abu Hamza had received new plastic prosthetics after having been extradited to the US. The newspaper predicted that the taxpayer-funded prosthetics cost upwards of $15,000.