ÿWPCã³ ÈfݳbR©YÂÿ±YÌÏoò †™„7¢^ßR;(&µœù±Èî Z?“…8ªÄ2üzõ'ÔÉŁºK‡¡*Â|…<`2'k ™ñ"¯u¹žM"4Yq>«¼3aá݉ÔÑø֌xpðþ\>šìjGr¥ÿ¢;ó'z[•nµÉš¯ýäëÉeÜ}¾6”)ëw9D ­n›£Å»èÝnj”÷©ðr9ØqÙ®lh™m2ƒHò^æ™Ö9d¢=E09‰5Èú½/ðŸÉr‡³o™ ¡Üµ¿¬G$ªì¦ó{2“¥0݇Òw±¤q yX0/$Rj) #ÓáUó€ì_N^|«È[ø3¿ñ¤€T瞧P„=~— þH¡ˆGn‡£Îó‚i×F1»ª„ë1¡2d 3žžÌ\iĤWF4"gœ[¼j{9L{94¼|rÊP涉\+˜uIiÐW*c·§=r#ä £Ô¢Æ–x5¶.ï.„híPt ³&Ýaw<x_¶×¾ñõµdW{°dÁv†K‰õoâêÚìùz3¾it˜‹é»Ä\³Å{º€mMÇ ¯þ˜#ÁP U0> %O 0ÃU w 4 0 UB:? Wy sÐ 0CC 0;DJ—ŽG%lÉÏLÓ (îž ´ Á³á!ܔ#Jp$$º'Þ)äß* RÃ+ R,Qg,û¸-º³/ Bm0ӊ0]1ê10w3Y§4(8˜(8À9âÞ:ëÀ<4«=éßAâÈB 0ªD JÚD N$E RrE HÄE 6 FBBFP„H BÔI 0JÔFJªM‹ÄN6OP…QR R.Sl€S?ìTÙ+V >X 8BX >zXV¸X ,[¸:[§ò[x™] 0ö`¶a F½b ,c R/c Pc RÑc :#d R]d H¯d ÷d e )e Ae_[eçºf/¡g@Ðišn˜ªqBs_`tQ¿vx¿!zà|Sæ}Ø9æ÷‚²ù‚«„óH†Ñ;ˆ4 ŠÄ@Œ{‘#’Í¢“`o•Wϗ R&š Rxš×ʚ m¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ¡œ R¸œ¸œN   ֜ D-ržUF>Ÿž^ ݞÝéž 0lÆ S2¡˜…¢Š¤‰§¥0¦hJ§C²¨õ©Q«Pd­d­4´®´®´®´®û貘WinFax (Photo Quality)0<è\( 9Z &Courier RegularX(›1E$¡¡ÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€X°KÓÔ€„XíÅXXXÔÔ€„XíÅXXXíÅÔ`,*3|x< Œ 9`("Courier 10cpi MÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝA€complaint€and€warrant€had€previously€been€issued€in€1985Ð ° Ðsimilarly€charging€Mr.€Rezaq€but€had€not€been€executed€because€theÏdefendant€was€prosecuted€in€Malta,€where€he€had€diverted€Flight€848Ïand€where€he€was€captured.€€(Tr.€€,€€€). iÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€sky€marshall€survived.(·(3hî$¤¤Ý ƒ1E!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€X°KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€defense€also€called€an€historian,€Dr.€Michael€Hudson,€who€ =Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Court€instructed€the€jury€that€one€of€the€elements€of€theÐ ° Ðmilitary€orders€defense€is€that€ò òFILL€INó 󀀀€€€€€€.€€(Tr.€€€€);€òòCfóó.€Ð xÈ ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Yunisóó,€CITE€€€€€€(D.C€.Cir.€€€).€€ Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€denying€the€defendant's€requested€instruction,€the€courtÐ ° V Ðstated€it€had€already€decided€the€issue.€(Tr.€3469„70).€Where,€asÏhere,€there€is€no€dispute€as€to€how€defendant€came€to€the€UnitedÏStates,€the€issues€coalesce.€€In€a€case€where€there€is€an€issue€asÏto€whether€the€defendant€came€voluntarily€to€the€United€States,Ïdenial€of€a€motion€to€dismiss€does€not€logically€precludeÏsubmitting€the€issue€to€the€jury€for€resolution. ¹Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýò òò òPERHAPS€OMIT€THIS€REFERENCE€TO€HAGUE€CONVENTION€IN€THISÐ ° ÐCONTEXT.€IF€NOT,€THEN€ó óWhile€defendant€has€relied€on€provisions€ofÐ  ð Ðthe€Hague€Convention,€he€has€not€asserted€rights€directlyÏthereunder.€€Instead,€the€defendant€argues€that€Congress€intendedÏto€adopt€the€jurisdiction€contemplated€by€the€Hague€Convention.ó ó ÅÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝMr.€Rezaq€had€been€released€from€Malta€with€a€ticket€thatÐ ° Ðtook€him€on€a€route€from€Malta€to€Accra,€Ghana€to€Lagos,€Nigeria,Ïto€Addis€Ababa,€Ethiopia€and€then€to€Khartoum,€Sudan.€(Tr.€36).€ÏUpon€his€arrival€in€Ghana€he€had€been€imprisoned€for€approximatelyÏfour€months.€€He€was€then€released€in€Ghana€and€put€on€a€planeÏbound€for€Lagos.€€ò ò(CITES).€€ó ó ÉÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝOn€witness€described€the€revolutionary€atmosphere€as€theÐ ° Ð"bread€and€butter"€of€the€camp.€€(Tr.€€1723).Proceedings Below ”Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡XÙàXXXÔAlthough,€the€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€treaty€itself€didÐ ° Ðnot€explicitly€bar€a€country€from€obtaining€the€presence€of€aÏfugitive€by€means€outside€of€the€treaty€where€the€treaty€did€notÏcontain€an€explicit€provision€barring€the€kidnapping€of€a€fugitiveÏto€face€trial.€€Ìà  àMr.€Rezaq's€claim€based€on€the€prosecutorial€bar€of€Article€4Ïof€the€extradition€treaty€between€the€United€States€and€Malta,ÏGhana,€and€Nigeria€is€clearly€distinguishable€from€that€advanced€byÏAlvarez„Machain.€€Unlike,€Alvarez„Machain,€Rezaq€does€òònotóó€argueÐ ð @ Ðthat€the€Court€lacks€jurisdiction€òòsolelyóó€because€he€was€abducted;×Ã×× C ׀Ð ¸   Ðrather€he€argues€that€Article€4€bars€the€prosecution€òòbecause€of€itsóóÐ € Ð  Ðòòexplicit€double€jeopardy€provisionóó€prohibiting€the€extraditionÐ H ˜  Ðwhere€a€person€"has€already€been€tried€and€discharged€or€punished."€×Ãð ×× C ×ÏThere€was€no€claim€in€òòAlvarez„Machainóó€that€there€was€a€doubleÐ Ø(  Ðjeopardy€provision€in€the€treaty€barring€the€defendant's€renditionÏto€the€United€States,€as€Alvarez„Machin€had€not€been€prosecutedÔ#†XÙàXXXÙàP#ԀinÐ h¸  ÐMexico€for€his€involvement€in€the€DEA€agent's€murder. Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú35Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝFor€instance,€the€defense€noted€that€two€of€the€claims€wereÐ ° Ðsimply€for€the€round€number€of€$100,000,€both€of€which€lackedÏsufficient€supporting€documentation.€ Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú36Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€government€argued€in€its€sentencing€memorandum€that€RezaqÐ ° Ðhad€$850€on€deposit€with€the€court€from€monies€taken€upon€hisÏarrest,€that€he€will€be€able€to€work€in€prison€and€earn€some€money,Ïand€that€is€was€"within€the€range€of€forseeability›€that€defendantÏcould€possibly€earn€substantial€monies€from€the€authorship€of€booksÏor€magazine€articles€in€the€future€or€other€œunforseeable›€means€ofÏacquiring€money."€€(R.€€€at€13„14).€€€€ ©Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòYunisóó'€conclusion€that€the€terms€of€the€Hague€ConventionÐ ° Ðinform€the€inquiry€of€Congress'€intent€is€reinforced€by€theÏlanguage€of€49€U.S.C.€App.€ðð€1472(n)(1),€which€prohibits€theÏcommission€of€"€'an€offense',€as€defined€in€the€Convention€for€theÐ X X ÐSuppression€of€Unlawful€Seizure€of€Aircraft."€€€ ÒÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€distinction€is€of€vital€importance€also€to€the€argumentÐ ° Ðthe€defendant€advances€in€Section€IV,€òòsupraóó. @Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝMr.€Rezaq€does€contend€that€the€Court€lacks€jurisdiction€toÐ ° Ðtry€him€for€violating€49€U.S.C.€App.€1472(n)(1)€for€reasonsÏunrelated€to€his€abduction.€òòSeeóó€Defendant's€Motion€To€Dismiss€ForÐ @ ÐLack€of€Jurisdiction.€€In€addition,€the€defendant€does€not€acceptÏthe€proposition€that€his€abudction€is€legally€insignificant€here,Ïinasmuch€as€the€particular€statue€with€which€he€is€charged€withÏviolating€requires€as€an€element€his€presence€in€the€United€States,Ìa€factor€not€present€in€òòAlvarez„Machainóó€or€any€of€the€cases€thatÐ ( x Ðdecision€relies€on.€òòSeeóó€Defendant's€Motion€To€Dismiss€On€GroundÐ ð @ ÐThat€The€Government€Has€Unlawfully€Manufactured€An€Element€Of€TheÏOffense.€ Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝA€defendant€who€claims€the€protection€of€double€jeopardy€doesÐ ° Ðnot€necessarily€contend€that€the€court€lacks€jurisdiction€over€him;Ïrather,€the€defendant€pleading€double€jeopardy€raises€the€legalÏargument€that€the€prosecution€is€barred€by€substantive€doubleÏjeopardy€provisions.€€The€power€to€punish€does€not€necessarilyÏinclude€the€power€to€punish€"yet€again."€€òòUnited€States€v.€Dixonóó,Ð ˜è Ð113€U.S.€2849,€2857€(1993). ÷Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€other€two€hijackers€died,€the€first€as€a€result€of€theÐ ° Ðshootout€that€occurred€on€the€way€to€Malta,€the€second€during€theÏstorming€of€the€plane.€ ÚÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝDefense€experts€would€later€testify€as€to€the€effect€of€thisÐ ° Ðdeath€"imprint"€on€the€defendant's€development.€€(Tr.€€€).(3) Where a statute recites a specificIV. THE "LIFE OR DEATH" PENALTY PROVIS GÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú26Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€òòBlockburgeróóòò€v.€United€Statesóó,€284€U.S.€299€(1932)(whenÐ ° Ðdefendant€charged€with€violating€two€different€statutes€doubleÏjeopardy€test€is€whether€each€has€an€element€not€contained€withinÏthe€other€statute).€€ ñÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡XÙàXXXÔAs€noted,€this€is€distinct€from€the€issue€of€whether€theÐ ° Ðdefendant€can€claim€a€bar€to€the€prosecution€òòsolelyóó€because€theÐ xÈ Ðextradition€process€was€not€used,€irrespective€of€any€specificÏprovision€in€the€treaty€that€would€have€barred€the€prosecution€ifÏthe€treaty€had€been€used.Ô#†XÙàXXXÙàP#Ԁò òò òperhaps€omit€thisó óó ó °Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú23Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€offense€was€unknown€to€the€Malta€criminal€code€at€thatÐ ° Ðtime.€€ò òCITEó ó d ÉÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýòòò òSeeóó€the€cases€cited€and€discussed€in€òòUnited€States€v.Ð ° ÐAlvarez„Machainóó,€òòsupraóó.ó ó ƒÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€òòUnited€States€v.€Curbelloóó€ò ò(see€card)ó ó ƒÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThough€the€defendant€is€not€in€possession€of€all€the€factsÐ ° Ðat€this€point,€it€appears€that€the€government€will€claim€that€theÏdefendant's€rendition€to€the€United€States€was€also€a€matter€ofÏcomity€between€the€United€States€and€Ghana,€Nigeria,€and€perhapsÐ X  ÐMalta.€€€ &Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝDespite€the€fact€that€Fiocconi€could€invoke€the€treaty'sÐ ° Ðprovisions,€the€Court€denied€him€relief,€holding€that€the€doctrineÏof€speciality€factually€did€not€apply€to€his€case.€€462€F.2d€atÏ481.€€ OÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú25Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡XÙàXXXÔIf€a€òòBlockburgeróó×Ã×× C ׀analysis€constituted€the€test,€then€theÐ ° Ðdefendant€would,€as€a€matter€of€course,€be€denied€the€doubleÏjeopardy€protection€contained€in€treaties€since€the€offenses€in€theÏrespective€signatories€to€the€treaty€would€almost€always€contain€atÏleast€a€jurisdictional€element€not€found€in€the€other€country'sÏlaw.€€For€instance,€here€49€U.S.C.€App.€Ô#†XÙàXXXÙàP#ÔððÔ‡XÙàXXXÙàԀ1472(n)€requires€that€theÐ ˜è Ðhijacked€flight€be€"in€flight€outside€the€special€aircraftÏjurisdiction€of€the€United€States."€€Obviously,€one€would€notÏexpect€to€find€this€element€in€any€Maltese€statute.Ô#†XÙàXXXÙà2#ÔAntihijacking ŽÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€Arab€States€Convention,€Article€V;€€European€Convention,Ð ° ÐArticle€9;€Inter„American€Convention,€Article€13;€€Afro„AsianÏConvention,€Article€11;€€Benelux€Convention,€Article€8,€cited€inÏBassiouni,€òòInternational€Extradition:€U.S.€Law€and€Practiceóó,€468„Ð X Ð469€(1987).€ Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Ð ° ÐArticle€14;€€American€Convention€on€Human€Rights,€Article€8„4,€alsoÏcited€in€Bassiouni,€òòsupraóó,€at€469„470. ØÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòUnited€States€v.€Yunisóó,€òòsupraóó,€makes€reference€to€theÐ ° Ðuniversal€theory€of€international€law€as€a€possible€jurisdictionalÏbasis€under€49€U.S.C.€App.€ðð€1472(n)(1),€though€holding€that€theÏissue€is€really€one€of€discerning€the€intent€of€Congress.€€924€F.2dÏat€1091.€€As€set€out€above,€òòYunisóó€does€not€control€this€case€in€anyÐ Ð  Ðevent.€€€ áÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú22Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€language€of€the€Malta€indictment€is€paraphrased€in€termsÐ ° Ðof€the€offenses€as€they€are€commonly€known€in€our€legal€system.€ *Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú33Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€"territorial"€principle€is€inapplicable€since€the€killingÐ ° Ðof€Ms.€Rogenkamp€and€Mr.€Mendelson€did€not€take€place€in€UnitedÏStates'€territory.€€The€power€of€a€country€to€pass€laws€governingÏthe€conduct€of€its€nationals,€under€the€"nationality"€theory,€alsoÏdoes€not€apply€here,€since€Mr.€Rezaq€is€not€a€citizen€of€the€UnitedÏStates.€€The€"protective"€theory€enables€a€country€to€giveÏextraterritorial€application€to€laws€proscribing€offenses€whichÏmight€have€an€adverse€effect€on€the€security€or€integrity€of€theÏnation.€€The€Restatement€gives€as€examples€the€counterfeiting€of€aÏstate's€seal€or€currency,€espionage€etc.€€Restatement,€òòsupraóó,€ððÐ ¸   Ð402,€comment€f.€€The€"universal"€principle€allow€states€toÏprosecute€certain€crimes€deemed€to€be€of€universal€concern.€ÏRestatement,€òòsupraóó,€ðð€404,€423.€€While€a€hijacking€offense€arguablyÐ `  Ðcomes€within€the€protective€or€universal€theories,€murder€does€not.€Ï€€€€€ ßÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݀òòYunisóó€did€not€address€this€issue€as€Yunis€had€not€beenÐ ° Ðpreviously€prosecuted€anywhere€for€his€role€in€that€hijacking. ØÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€ordering€disclosure€of€the€substituted€summaries,€theÐ ° Ðdistrict€court€had€apparently€determined€that€the€undeletedÏdocuments€contained€information€that€was€both€relevant€andÏmaterial.€€òòYunisóó,€867€F.2d€at€622„23.€€Thus,€the€only€issue€beforeÐ X Ðthis€Court€is€whether€the€substituted€material€was€equally€"helpfulÏto€the€defense."€€òòId.óó€at€623.Statement of EvidenceA. The Government's Case-in-chief(1) The events from Athens to Malta(2) The events from landing in Malta (3) The ill-fated rescue attemptB. The Defendant's Case 8Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú31Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€connection€with€a€motion€for€new€trial,€counsel€filedÐ ° Ðnumerous€articles€that€appeared€in€the€Washington€Post€andÏWashington€Times€newspapers€on€July€18€and€19,€1996,€and€which€hadÏbeen€referenced€in€the€mistrial€motion.€€Counsel€did€not€submitÏadditional€evidence€concerning€the€pervasive€television€and€radioÏcoverage€surrounding€this€incident.€The€Court€can€take€judicialÏnotice€of€the€extensive€publicity€in€all€news€media€concerning€theÏcrash€of€TWA€Flight€800. FÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú32Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€bombing€of€the€U.S.€military€barracks€in€Saudi€Arabia,Ð ° Ðwhich€similarly€generated€widespread€publicity,€had€also€occurredÏduring€this€trial.€€The€bombing€took€place€on€June€25,€during€theÏthird€day€of€testimony.€€(Tr.€€€€)€(1) The non-expert witnesses C - Gov Rebuttal Case ÊÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú34Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡XÙàXXXÔThe€United€States'€suspicion€of€the€passive€personality€basisÐ ° Ðof€jurisdiction€dates€back€to€the€last€century€when€the€executiveÏrefused€to€recognize€a€claim€of€jurisdiction€by€a€Mexican€courtÏover€a€United€States'€citizen€who€had€allegedly€committed€anÏoffense€in€the€United€States€against€a€Mexican€national.€òòSeeóó€òòTheÐ Ð  ÐCutting€Caseóó,€1887€Papers€Relating€to€the€Foreign€Relations€of€theÐ ˜è ÐUnited€States€751,€reprinted€in€2€J.€B.€Moore,€òòDigest€ofÐ ` ° ÐInternational€Lawóó,€ðð€201.Ô#†XÙàXXXÙàP#Ô  Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThus,€cases€such€as€òòÔ‡XÙàXXXÔKer€v.€Illinoisóó,€119€U.S.€436€(1886);Ð ° ÐòòFrisbie€v.€Collinsóó,€342€U.S.€519€(1952);€and€òòUnited€States€v.Ð xÈ ÐAlvarez„Machainóó,€112€S.Ct.€2188€(1992),€are€not€relevant€to€thisÐ @ Ðclaim.Ô#†XÙàXXXÙàg#Ԁ Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú26Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€so€holding,€the€court€was€adopting€the€position€maintainedÐ ° Ðby€the€government€in€response€to€the€defendant's€motions.€€"ThereÏare€two€offenses€prohibited€by€1472(n)(1):€air€piracy€and€airÏpiracy€with€a€resulting€death.€€Each€offense€has€its€own€prescribedÏpunishment."€(R.€54€at€11). ,Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú24Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€òòBlockburger€v.€United€Statesóó,€284€U.S.€299€(1932)€(whenÐ ° Ðdefendant€charged€with€violating€two€different€statutes,€doubleÏjeopardy€test€is€whether€each€has€an€element€the€other€does€not. …Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú27Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýò òWith€the€exception€of€some€autopsy€photographs.ó ó Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú28Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€district€court€actually€ruled€that€counsel€need€notÐ ° Ѐ€€€€€renew€objections€at€trial€concerning€matters€that€had̀€€€€€been€the€subject€of€pretrial€rulings.€€(Tr.€868).€(2) The Defendant Has Standing to Invo bÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú29Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€òòWilliamsóó,€the€district€court€redacted€the€language€fromÐ ° é Ðthe€indictment€referring€to€the€death€of€the€victim.€€After€theÏdefendant€was€found€guilty€of€carjacking,€a€forensic€pathologistÏtestified€about€the€cause€of€death.€€òòIdóó.€at€1007.€ 5Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú30Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݀à ` àòòRivera„Gomezóó€upheld€the€relevance€of€this€evidence€on€theÐ ° Ðtheory€that€the€shooting€and€subsequent€death€of€victim€was€part€ofÏthe€essential€element€of€"force€and€violence"€under€the€statute. ÏÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòYunisóó€left€open€the€question€of€whether€the€district€courtÐ ° Ðmust€order€disclosure€of€relevant€and€material€information€that€isÏhelpful€to€the€defense€or€whether€before€ordering€disclosure€theÏcourt€must€balance€the€defendant's€interest€in€disclosure€againstÏthe€government's€alleged€need€to€keep€the€information€secret.€€òòId.óóÐ Ð  Ðat€624.ARG II. B Standard of ReviewARG III. - C. DiscussionARG III C(1) Nigerian arrest LÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€denying€the€defendant's€requested€instruction,€the€courtÐ ° O Ðstated€it€had€already€decided€the€issue.€(Tr.€3469„70).€€In€thisÏparticular€case,€where€there€was€no€dispute€as€to€how€defendantÏcame€to€the€United€States,€the€issues€coalesce.€€In€a€case€whereÏthere€was€an€issue€as€to€whether€the€defendant€came€voluntarily€toÏthe€United€States,€denial€of€a€motion€to€dismiss€would€notÏlogically€preclude€submitting€the€issue€to€the€jury€for€resolutionÏof€the€underlying€factual€question.€€€iD. Malta Conviction ®Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý"Expensive€and€special€things€and€clothes€for€a€bride"€„Ð ° Ð$5,000.€€(A.€€€). Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThus,€cases€such€as€òòÔ‡XÉøXXXÔKer€v.€Illinoisóó,€119€U.S.€436€(1886);Ð ° ÐòòFrisbie€v.€Collinsóó,€342€U.S.€519€(1952);€and€òòUnited€States€v.Ð xÈ ÐAlvarez„Machainóó,€504€U.S.€655€(1992),€are€not€relevant€to€thisÐ @ Ðclaim.Ô#†XÉøXXXÉøf#Ԁ nÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThere€are€two€separate,€but€related,€issues.€€The€first€issueÐ ° Ðis€the€propriety€of€the€court€considering€and€deciding€theÏdeletions€and€substitutions€in€an€òòexóó€òòparteóó€proceeding.€€The€secondÐ @ Ðis€the€adequacy€of€the€substitutions.€€The€two€issues€are€closelyÏrelated,€in€part,€because€the€court€decided€the€adequacy€issueÏwithout€the€benefit€of€the€defendant's€representative€giving€inputÏfrom€the€perspective€of€the€defense,€which€is€always€a€dangerÏpresent€in€òòexóó€òòparteóó€proceedings.(·3ýl$¥¥Ý ƒ1E!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€X°KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÝ  ÝÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú. ¬Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝBy€a€wide€margin,€editors€of€the€Associated€Press€selected€Ð ° Ðthis€crash€as€the€"top€news€story"€of€1996,€outdistancing€the€U.S.Ïelection,€the€Olympics€bombing,€and€the€arrest€of€the€UnabomberÐ @ ó Ðamong€others.€€News€Tribune,€Tacoma€Washington,€Jan.€1,€1997,€Ï"Year€in€Review:€TWA€Crash€Tops€'96€News€List"€€€€E. The Crash of TWA Flight 800 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTSumm Arg. (1) The dismissal argumentsSumm Arg (2) The new trial argumentsSumm Arg (3) The sentencing argumentsSumm Arg (4) CIPA argumentARG I-error re lack of subject matter ARG II. err re dismiss indictmentARG I - A.ARG I - BARG I - CARG II - A UÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Court€instructed€the€jury€that€one€of€the€elements€of€theÐ ° Ðmilitary€orders€defense€is€that€the€accused€must€believe€the€order€Ïwas€lawful.€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Yunisóó,€924€F.2d€1087,€1097€Ð @ Ð(D.C.€Cir.€1991).€€ ÝÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€element€is€taken€from€the€"present€in€its€territory"Ð ° Ðlanguage€of€the€Hague€Convention.€òòYunisóó,€924€F.2d€at€1092. %Ý ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú3Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝòòYunisóó'€conclusion€that€the€terms€of€the€Hague€Convention€inform€the€inquiry€of€Congress'€intent€is€reinforced€by€the€languageÐ l l  Ðof€49€U.S.C.€App.€ðð€1472(n)(1)€&€(2),€which€prohibit€the€commission€of€"an€offense",€as€defined€in€the€Convention€for€theÐ P P  ÐSuppression€of€Unlawful€Seizure€of€Aircraft.€€€ 6Ý ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€Xà à KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú4Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔDouble€jeopardy€provisions€appear€in€numerous€multilateral€conventions€relatingÐ ¼ ¼  Ðnot€only€to€extradition×É°×× C ×,€but€also€to€human€rights.×Ï` ×× C ׀òòÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈÍ#ÔSeeóó€Arab€States€Convention,€Article€V;€Ð ¦¦ ÐEuropean€Convention,€Article€9;€Inter„American€Convention,€Article€13;€€Afro„Asian€Convention,€Article€11Ô‡XkÈXX„XáàÔ.€€"TheseÐ  Ðmultilateral€conventions,€as€well€as€bilateral€treaties,€national€laws€andÐ zz Ðcustomary€practice,€warrant€the€conclusion€that€the€principle€is€part€ofÐ RR Ðconventional€and€customary€international€law."€€Bassiouni,€òòInternationalÐ ** ÐExtradition:€U.S.€Law€and€Practiceóó€469€(1987).Ô#†„XáàXXXkȉ#Ô Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡XÉøXXXÔDouble€jeopardy€provisions€appear€in€numerous€multilateralÐ ° Ðconventions€relating€not€only€to€extradition×Ã_°×× C ×,€but€also€to€humanÏrights.×Ã`` ×× C ׀òòÔ#†XÉøXXXÉøO#ÔSeeóó€Arab€States€Convention,€Article€V;€€EuropeanÐ @ ÐConvention,€Article€9;€Inter„American€Convention,€Article€13;€ÏAfro„Asian€Convention,€Article€11Ô‡XÉøXXXÉøÔ.€€"These€multilateralÐ Ð  Ðconventions,€as€well€as€bilateral€treaties,€national€laws€andÏcustomary€practice,€warrant€the€conclusion€that€the€principle€isÏpart€of€conventional€and€customary€international€law."€€Bassiouni,Ð ( x ÐòòInternational€Extradition:€U.S.€Law€and€Practiceóó€469€(1987).Ô#†XÉøXXXÉø #Ô ŽÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€Arab€States€Convention,€Article€V;€€European€Convention,Ð ° ÐArticle€9;€Inter„American€Convention,€Article€13;€€Afro„AsianÏConvention,€Article€11;€€Benelux€Convention,€Article€8,€cited€inÏBassiouni,€òòInternational€Extradition:€U.S.€Law€and€Practiceóó,€468„Ð X Ð469€(1987).€ Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Ð ° ÐArticle€14;€€American€Convention€on€Human€Rights,€Article€8„4,€alsoÏcited€in€Bassiouni,€òòsupraóó,€at€469„470. UÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€X¢¢KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú5Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝUpon€his€release,€defendant€had€been€given€a€ticket€that€took€him€on€a€route€from€Malta€to€Accra,€Ghana€to€Lagos,€Nigeria,€toÐ ~~ ÐAddis€Ababa,€Ethiopia€and€then€to€Khartoum,€Sudan.€(Tr.€36).€€Upon€his€arrival€in€Ghana€he€had€been€imprisoned€forÐ bb Ðapproximately€four€months.€€He€was€then€released€in€Ghana€and€put€on€a€plane€bound€for€Lagos.€€ò ò(CITES).€€ó ó GÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XòòKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú6Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝThis€element€is€taken€from€the€"present€in€its€territory"€language€of€the€Hague€Convention.€òòYunisóó,€924€F.2d€at€1092. Ý ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XzzKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú7Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝThus,€cases€such€as€òòÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔKer€v.€Illinoisóó,€119€U.S.€436€(1886);€òòFrisbie€v.€Collinsóó,€342€U.S.Ð VV Ð519€(1952);€and€òòUnited€States€v.€Alvarez„Machainóó,€504€U.S.€655€(1992),€are€notÐ @@ Ðrelevant€to€this€claim.Ô#†„XáàXXXkÈä#Ԁ µÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XÊÊKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú8Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝIn€denying€the€defendant's€requested€instruction,€the€court€stated€it€had€already€decided€the€issue.€(Tr.€3469„70).€Where,€asÐ ¦ ¦  Ðhere,€there€is€no€dispute€as€to€how€defendant€came€to€the€United€States,€the€issues€coalesce.€€In€a€case€where€there€is€an€issue€asÐ Š!Š! Ðto€whether€the€defendant€came€voluntarily€to€the€United€States,€denial€of€a€motion€to€dismiss€does€not€logically€precludeÐ n"n" Ðsubmitting€the€issue€to€the€jury€for€resolution. üÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€Xþ$þ$KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú9Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝWith€the€exception€of€some€autopsy€photographs. IÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€X†'†'KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú10Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝTen€witnesses€related€their€account€of€the€shootings.€Several€testified€concerning€the€Mendelsohn€and€Rogenkamp€shootings.€ ÎÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€X**KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú11Ú  Ú.Ý  ݀"There€are€two€offenses€prohibited€by€1472(n)(1):€air€piracy€and€air€piracy€with€a€resulting€death.€€Each€offense€has€its€ownÐ ê*ê* Ðprescribed€punishment."€€Response€of€U.S.€in€Opposition€to€Motion€to€Strike€and€to€Bifurcate.€€(R.€54€at€11). ÜÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€Xz-z-KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú12Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝIn€òòWilliamsóó,€the€district€court€redacted€the€language€from€the€indictment€referring€to€the€death€of€the€victim.€€After€theÐ V.V. Ðdefendant€was€found€guilty€of€carjacking,€a€forensic€pathologist€testified€about€the€cause€of€death.€€òòIdóó.€at€1007.€ ¨Ý ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€Xæ0æ0KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú13Ú  Ú.Ý  ݀€òòRivera„Gomezóó€upheld€the€relevance€of€this€evidence€on€the€theory€that€the€shooting€and€subsequent€death€of€victim€was€partÐ Â1Â1 Ðof€the€essential€element€of€"force€and€violence"€under€the€statute. “Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòYunisóó'€conclusion€that€the€terms€of€the€Hague€ConventionÐ ° Ðinform€the€inquiry€of€Congress'€intent€is€reinforced€by€theÏlanguage€of€49€U.S.C.€App.€ðð€1472(n)(1)€&€(2),€which€prohibit€theÏcommission€of€"an€offense",€as€defined€in€the€Convention€for€theÏSuppression€of€Unlawful€Seizure€of€Aircraft.€€€ éÐ R4R4  ÐÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú14Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝIn€connection€with€a€motion€for€new€trial,€counsel€filed€numerous€articles€that€appeared€in€the€Washington€Post€andÐ ÜÜ ÐWashington€Times€newspapers€on€July€18€and€19,€1996,€and€which€had€been€referenced€in€the€mistrial€motion.€(A.€310„335).€€ ÇÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XllKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú15Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝThe€bombing€of€the€U.S.€military€barracks€in€Saudi€Arabia,€which€similarly€generated€widespread€publicity,€also€occurredÐ HH Ðduring€this€trial.€€The€bombing€took€place€on€June€25,€during€the€third€day€of€testimony.€€(Tr.€1077„1082).€ *Ý ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XØØKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú16Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝBy€a€wide€margin,€editors€of€the€Associated€Press€selected€€TWA€Flight€800€as€the€"top€news€story"€of€1996,€outdistancingÐ ´´ Ðthe€U.S.€election,€the€Olympics€bombing,€and€the€arrest€of€the€Unabomber€among€others.€€News€Tribune,€Tacoma€Washington,Ð ˜˜ ÐJan.€1,€1997,€€"Year€in€Review:€TWA€Crash€Tops€'96€News€List"€€€€ ºÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€X( ( KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú17Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝThe€"territorial"€principle€is€inapplicable€since€the€killing€of€Ms.€Rogenkamp€and€Mr.€Mendelson€did€not€take€place€inÐ    ÐUnited€States'€territory.€€The€power€of€a€country€to€pass€laws€governing€the€conduct€of€its€nationals,€under€the€"nationality"Ð è è  Ðtheory,€also€does€not€apply€here,€since€defendant€is€not€a€citizen€of€the€United€States.€€The€"protective"€theory€enables€a€countryÐ Ì Ì  Ðto€give€extraterritorial€application€to€laws€proscribing€offenses€which€might€have€an€adverse€effect€on€the€security€or€integrity€ofÐ °° Ðthe€nation,€such€as€counterfeiting€a€state's€seal€or€currency,€espionage€etc.€€Restatement,€òòsupraóó,€ðð€402,€comment€f.€€TheÐ ”” Ð"universal"€principle€allow€states€to€prosecute€certain€crimes€deemed€to€be€of€universal€concern.€€Restatement,€òòsupraóó,€ðð€404,Ð xx Ð423.€€While€a€hijacking€offense€€comes€within€the€protective€or€universal€theories,€murder€does€not.€€€€€€€ qÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú18Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝDefendant€noted€that€two€of€the€claims€were€simply€for€the€round€number€of€$100,000,€both€of€which€lacked€sufficientÐ ää Ðsupporting€documentation.€ Ý ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XttKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú19Ú  Ú.Ý  Ý"Expensive€and€special€things€and€clothes€for€a€bride"€„€$5,000.€€(A.€356). ÃÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝUpon€his€release,€defendant€had€been€given€a€ticket€that€tookÐ ° Ðhim€on€a€route€from€Malta€to€Accra,€Ghana€to€Lagos,€Nigeria,€toÏAddis€Ababa,€Ethiopia€and€then€to€Khartoum,€Sudan.€(Tr.€36).€€UponÏhis€arrival€in€Ghana€he€had€been€imprisoned€for€approximately€fourÏmonths.€€He€was€then€released€in€Ghana€and€put€on€a€plane€bound€forÏLagos.€€ò ò(CITES).€€ó ó VÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XüüKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú20Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝIn€ordering€disclosure€of€the€substituted€summaries,€the€district€court€had€apparently€determined€that€the€undeletedÐ ØØ Ðdocuments€contained€information€that€was€both€relevant€and€material.€€òòYunisóó,€867€F.2d€at€622„23.€€Thus,€the€only€issue€beforeÐ ¼¼ Ðthis€Court€is€whether€the€substituted€material€was€equally€"helpful€to€the€defense."€€òòId.óó€at€623. MÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XLLKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú21Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝòòYunisóó€left€open€the€question€of€whether€the€district€court€must€order€disclosure€of€relevant€and€material€information€that€isÐ (( Ðhelpful€to€the€defense€or€whether€before€ordering€disclosure€the€court€must€balance€the€defendant's€interest€in€disclosure€againstÐ    Ðthe€government's€alleged€need€to€keep€the€information€secret.€€òòId.óó€at€624.VI. THE COURT ERRED IN NOT DECLARING AVII. THE COURT ERRED IN CONDUCTING EX  ÍÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€Xœ!œ!KÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú22Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝTwo€issues€are€raised€by€the€òòexóó€òòparteóó€proceedings.€€The€first€is€the€propriety€of€the€issues€concerning€the€deletions€ofÐ x"x" Ðdiscoverable€material€without€the€input€of€a€party.€€The€second€is€the€adequacy€of€the€substitutions.€ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀVII. THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE T‚˜C:\DOCUME~1\stcamp\APPLIC~1\Corel\PERFEC~1\9\CUSTOM~1\Web\wp9web.wptC:\Documents and Settings\stcamp\Application Data\Corel\PerfectExpert\9\Custom WP Templates\Web\wp9web.wpt)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx&Öd9 Z‹&Times New Roman€iŠ*s  ÓÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XÜÜKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ý  ÝThe€Court€instructed€the€jury€that€one€of€the€elements€of€the€military€orders€defense€is€that€the€accused€must€believe€the€order€Ð ¸¸ Ðwas€lawful.€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Yunisóó,€924€F.2d€1087,€1097€Ð œœ Ð(D.C.€Cir.€1991).€€(.M)$‘‘ÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú1Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔ IÝ ƒLýl%ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú.Ý  ݀òòYunisóó€did€not€address€this€issue€as€Yunis€had€not€been€previously€prosecuted€anywhere€for€his€role€in€that€hijacking. ŽÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€Arab€States€Convention,€Article€V;€€European€Convention,Ð ° ÐArticle€9;€Inter„American€Convention,€Article€13;€€Afro„AsianÏConvention,€Article€11;€€Benelux€Convention,€Article€8,€cited€inÏBassiouni,€òòInternational€Extradition:€U.S.€Law€and€Practiceóó,€468„Ð X Ð469€(1987).€ €Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€so€holding,€the€court€was€adopting€the€position€maintainedÐ ° Ðby€the€government€in€response€to€the€defendant's€motions.€€"ThereÏare€two€offenses€prohibited€by€1472(n)(1):€air€piracy€and€airÏpiracy€with€a€resulting€death.€€Each€offense€has€its€own€prescribedÏpunishment."€(R.€54€at€11). Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝWith€the€exception€of€some€autopsy€photographs. Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€district€court€actually€ruled€that€counsel€need€notÐ ° Ѐ€€€€€renew€objections€at€trial€concerning€matters€that€had̀€€€€€been€the€subject€of€pretrial€rulings.€€(Tr.€868).€ ^Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€òòWilliamsóó,€the€district€court€redacted€the€language€fromÐ ° Ðthe€indictment€referring€to€the€death€of€the€victim.€€After€theÏdefendant€was€found€guilty€of€carjacking,€a€forensic€pathologistÏtestified€about€the€cause€of€death.€€òòIdóó.€at€1007.€ 9Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ݀à ` àòòRivera„Gomezóó€upheld€the€relevance€of€this€evidence€on€theÐ ° # Ðtheory€that€the€shooting€and€subsequent€death€of€victim€was€part€ofÏthe€essential€element€of€"force€and€violence"€under€the€statute. Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSeeóó€International€Covenant€on€Civil€and€Political€Rights,Ð ° ÐArticle€14;€€American€Convention€on€Human€Rights,€Article€8„4,€alsoÏcited€in€Bassiouni,€òòsupraóó,€at€469„470. GÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€connection€with€a€motion€for€new€trial,€counsel€filedÐ ° Ðnumerous€articles€that€appeared€in€the€Washington€Post€andÏWashington€Times€newspapers€on€July€18€and€19,€1996,€and€which€hadÏbeen€referenced€in€the€mistrial€motion.€(A.€310„335).€€€Counsel€didÏnot€submit€additional€evidence€concerning€the€pervasive€televisionÏand€radio€coverage€surrounding€this€incident.€The€Court€can€takeÏjudicial€notice€of€the€extensive€publicity€in€all€news€mediaÏconcerning€the€crash€of€TWA€Flight€800. FÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€bombing€of€the€U.S.€military€barracks€in€Saudi€Arabia,Ð ° Ðwhich€similarly€generated€widespread€publicity,€had€also€occurredÏduring€this€trial.€€The€bombing€took€place€on€June€25,€during€theÏthird€day€of€testimony.€€(Tr.€€€€)€ *Ý ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€"territorial"€principle€is€inapplicable€since€the€killingÐ ° Ðof€Ms.€Rogenkamp€and€Mr.€Mendelson€did€not€take€place€in€UnitedÏStates'€territory.€€The€power€of€a€country€to€pass€laws€governingÏthe€conduct€of€its€nationals,€under€the€"nationality"€theory,€alsoÏdoes€not€apply€here,€since€Mr.€Rezaq€is€not€a€citizen€of€the€UnitedÏStates.€€The€"protective"€theory€enables€a€country€to€giveÏextraterritorial€application€to€laws€proscribing€offenses€whichÏmight€have€an€adverse€effect€on€the€security€or€integrity€of€theÏnation.€€The€Restatement€gives€as€examples€the€counterfeiting€of€aÏstate's€seal€or€currency,€espionage€etc.€€Restatement,€òòsupraóó,€ððÐ ¸   Ð402,€comment€f.€€The€"universal"€principle€allow€states€toÏprosecute€certain€crimes€deemed€to€be€of€universal€concern.€ÏRestatement,€òòsupraóó,€ðð€404,€423.€€While€a€hijacking€offense€arguablyÐ `  Ðcomes€within€the€protective€or€universal€theories,€murder€does€not.€Ï€€€€€ ñÝ ƒ ¬5$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝDefense€noted€that€two€of€the€claims€were€simply€for€theÐ ° Ðround€number€of€$100,000,€both€of€which€lacked€sufficientÏsupporting€documentation.€Ý ƒ1E!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÓK€ƒ(€XKÓÔ€„XáàXXXÔÔ€„XáàXX„XáàÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ8ÀkÈXXdØdÈ8ÑÑ @ ÑÑ @ ÑÓ  ÓÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔò òà@Ù Ù áàUNITED€STATES€COURT€OF€APPEALSˆÐ ÜÜ Ðà@q q áàFOR€THE€DISTRICT€OF€COLUMBIA€CIRCUITˆÐ –– ÐÌà@áá*áàòòˆÌà@­ ­ áà€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ˆÐ ÄÄ ÐÌóóà@MM%áàNo.€96„3127ˆÐ 8 8  ÐÌà@­ ­ áàòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóˆÐ ¬¬ ÐÌUNITED€STATES€OF€AMERICA,€€Plaintiff„Appellee,Ð     ÐÌà @ àv.Ð ””  ÐÌOMAR€REZAQ,€€€€€Defendant„Appellant.Ð  ÐÌòòà@­ ­ áà€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ˆÐ || ÐÌóóà@‘ ‘ áàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€UNITED€STATES€DISTRICT€COURTˆÐ ðð Ðà@Q Q áàFOR€THE€DISTRICT€OF€COLUMBIAˆÐ ª!ª! ÐÌà@­ ­ áàòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóˆÐ %% ÐÌà@mm!áàBRIEF€FOR€APPELLANTòòˆÐ ’(’( ÐóóÌà @ àà @` àà @¸ àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ ,, ÐÌà@$áàÔ  ÔòòJURISDICTIONÔ Ý ZÔóóˆÐ z/z/ Ðâ âó óÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈ##ÔÐ 4141 ÐÓ@Óà @ àThe€District€Court€had€jurisdiction€over€this€case€pursuant€to€€18€U.S.C.€ðð€3231.Ð ÜÜ Ðâ âà @ àThis€Court€has€jurisdiction€under€28€U.S.C.€ðð€1291.€€A€timely€notice€of€appeal€was€filed€on€October€7,€1996.Ð œœ Ðà@‘‘!áàò òòòSTATUTES€AND€RULESóóó óˆÐ \\ Ðà @ àThe€pertinent€statutes€and€regulations€appear€in€the€addendum€to€this€brief.Ð  ÐÌÌà@ËË áàò òòòSTATEMENT€OF€THE€CASEó óóóˆÐ \ \  Ðò òI.€òòThe€Proceedings€Belowóóó óÐ    Ðà @ à€On€July€15,€1993,€while€en€route€to€the€United€States€after€€his€arrest€in€Nigeria,€€an€indictment€was€returned€chargingÐ ÜÜ Ðdefendant€with€the€€offense€of€air€piracy.€(A.€€44).€€A€superseding€indictment€was€returned€the€following€day.€(A.€46).€€€A€secondÐ ÀÀ  Ðsuperseding€indictment€was€returned€on€July€21,€1994.€(A.€49).Ð ¤¤  Ðà @ àThe€trial€of€this€case€commenced€on€June€17,€1996€before€the€Honorable€Royce€Lamberth.€€Defendant€interposed€an€insanityÐ dd  Ðdefense.€€On€July€19,€1996€a€jury€found€defendant€guilty.€€Defendant€was€sentenced€to€life€imprisonment€and€ordered€to€payÐ HH  Ðrestitution.€(A.€52).Ð ,,  Ðò òII.€€òòStatement€of€the€Evidenceóóó óÐ ìì Ðà @ àò òA.€€òòThe€Government's€Case„in„chiefóóó óÐ ¬¬ Ðà @ àOn€November€23,€1985€Egyptair€Flight€648€departed€Athens,€Greece€at€approximately€9€p.m.€bound€for€Cairo,€Egypt.€€(Tr.€Ð ll Ð666„667,€710).€€About€ten€minutes€after€takeoff€three€passengers€commandeered€Flight€648.€€Defendant€entered€the€cockpitÐ PP Ðwith€a€grenade€and€a€pistol,€announced€that€"the€airplane€is€hijacked,"€and€directed€the€pilot€to€change€course€to€Malta.€€(Tr.Ð 44 Ð669„671,€Ð  Ðà @ àWhile€en€route€to€Malta€shots€were€exchanged€between€an€Egyptian€plain€clothes€security€officer€and€the€hijackers.€€(Tr.€1277„Ð ØØ Ð80).€€As€a€result€the€first€hijacker€was€killed€during€the€shooting.€€(Tr.€1283).€Flight€648€landed€in€Malta€at€approximately€11Ð ¼¼ Ðp.m.€local€time€(Tr.€679,€710).€€€Ð    Ðà @ àAfter€the€Maltese€authorities€demanded€that€the€passengers€be€released€before€complying€with€defendantððs€request€that€the€planeÐ `!`! Ðbe€refueled,€defendant€threatened€to€shoot€passengers€unless€fuel€was€supplied.€€(Tr.€716„717).€€€Ð D"D" Ðà @ àOver€the€next€several€hours,€the€defendant€shot€two€Israelis,€Tamar€Artzi€and€Nitzan€Mendelsohn,€and€three€Americans,€PatrickÐ $$ ÐBaker,€Scarlett€Rogenkamp,€and€Jackie€Pflug.€(Tr.€723„36,€770„774).Ð è$è$ Ðà @ àMs.€Rogenkamp€and€Ms.€Mendelsohn€died€as€a€result€of€their€wounds.€€(Tr.€1389„93).Ð ¨&¨& Ðò òà @ àó óAt€approximately€8:00€p.m.€the€following€evening,€November€24,€after€no€progress€had€been€made€in€the€impasse,€EgyptianÐ h(h( Ðtroops€stormed€the€plane.€(Tr.€792).€€As€a€result€of€an€explosive€device€set€by€the€Egyptians€and€their€indiscriminate€firing€atÐ L)L) Ðpassengers€as€they€attempted€to€escape,€57€additional€pas€insanity€defense.€€THowever€sengers€died.Ð 0*0* Ðà @ àò òB.€€òòThe€Defendant's€Caseóóó óÐ ð+ð+ Ðà @ àThe€defendant€relied€primarily€on€an€insanity€defense.€Defendant€also€put€forth€a€defense€of€obedience€to€military€orders.€Ð °-°-  ÐDefendant€maintained€that€it€was€his€severe€mental€illness€which€prevented€him€from€understanding€the€illegality€of€the€order€heÐ ”.”.! Ðwas€given€to€hijack€Flight€648.׃†Ý ×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú1Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×Ý ×Ð x/x/" Ðò òòòà @ àó óóóIn€support€of€his€insanity€defense,€defendant€called€several€family€members,€including€his€mother,€sister,€brother,€and€brother„in„Ð 8181# Ðlaw,€who€testified€as€to€his€life€history.€€These€witnesses€related€the€familyððs€initial€dislocation€as€a€result€of€the€1948€war,€theirÐ 22$ Ðlife€in€a€poor€Palestinian€village€in€the€West€Bank€from€1948€until€1967,€events€surrounding€the€family€again€becomingÐ ÜÜ Ðrefugees€after€the€1967€Arab„Israeli€War,€their€subsequent€resettlemetn€in€a€Jordanian€refugee€camp,€the€harsh€conditions€underÐ ÀÀ Ðwhich€the€family€lived€for€several€years€in€the€Jordanian€desert,€the€revolutionary€atmosphere€in€the€€camp,€the€inculcation€intoÐ ¤¤ Ðthe€children€in€the€camp€of€their€duty€to€reclaim€their€Palestinian€homeland,€defendantððs€exposure€to€various€traumatic€eventsÐ ˆˆ Ðduring€this€period,€and€€defendantððs€departure€from€Jordan€in€1977€to€join€the€ð ðrevolution.ðð€(Tr.€1609„1761).€€€€€€€Ð ll Ðà @ à€When€he€left€Jordan€in€1977,€at€age€19,€defendant€was€described€as€well„behaved,€non„aggressive,€and€an€extrovert€who€gotÐ ,, Ðalong€with€everyone.€€He€was€highly€regarded€in€his€community.€(Tr.€1634,€1703„04,€1729).€€However,€when€seen€by€hisÐ  Ðfamily€in€the€aftermath€of€his€Lebanon€experiences,€things€had€changed€dramatically.€€He€looked€weaker€and€paler€and€hadÐ ôô Ðproblems€with€his€appetite.€(Tr.€1638).€€He€had€nightmares€and€woke€up€sweating.€€His€stomach€hurt.€€He€was€unusually€silentÐ ØØ Ðand€seemed€to€have€difficulty€following€conversations.€€To€his€mother€he€seemed€desperate€and€hopeless.€€(Tr.€1648„1651).€€HisÐ ¼ ¼  Ðbrother€noticed€that€defendant€appeared€tired€and€depressed.€€He€was€inattentive.€€When€he€did€talk€the€defendant€wouldÐ      Ðmention€the€deaths€and€destruction€that€he€had€experienced€in€Lebanon.€€His€brother€thought€defendant€was€acting€strangely.€Ð „ „  ÐHe€€€would€look€under€beds€immediately€upon€entering€hotel€rooms,€open€telephone€receivers€as€if€looking€for€listening€devices,Ð h h  Ðand€walk€the€streets€as€if€being€followed.€€Defendant€was€no€longer€social€and€seemed€to€have€lost€his€sense€of€humor.€€(Tr.€Ð L L  Ð1744„1754).€€Defense€experts€would€later€note€that€much€of€this€was€symptomatic€of€PTSD,€òòsupraóó.Ð 00 Ðà @ àDefendant€testified€as€to€his€movements€after€leaving€Jordan€in€1977.€€He€initially€went€to€Baghdad€where€he€joined€aÐ ðð ÐPalestinian€faction,€the€Fatah€Revolutionary€Council.€€He€was€put€in€a€camp€in€the€Iraqui€desert€for€military€and€politicalÐ ÔÔ Ðtraining.€€(Tr.€2655„62).€€In€1978€he€was€sent€with€a€group€to€southern€Lebanon€to€fight€the€Israelis,€but€was€captured€by€a€rivalÐ ¸¸ ÐPalestinian€group€and€returned€to€Iraq.€(Tr.€2665„70).€€He€€€returned€to€Lebanon€in€1979€and€joined€the€PLOððs€fight€against€theÐ œœ ÐIsraelis.€€With€the€exception€of€short€visits€to€Syria,€he€remained€in€Lebanon€until€he€was€sent€on€the€mission€in€1985.€€(Tr.Ð €€ Ð2672„74).Ð dd Ðà @ à€Defendant€also€testified€at€length€concerning€his€life€after€his€arrival€in€Lebanon.€€He€related€details€of€various€traumatic€eventsÐ $$ Ðto€which€he€had€been€exposed€there,€including€his€near„miss€in€a€car€bombing€when€he€witnessed€the€deaths€of€several€peopleÐ  Ð(Tr.€2681„85),€the€deaths€of€several€of€his€comrades€while€stationed€at€the€Beirut€Airport€during€the€siege€in€1982€(Tr.€2692„Ð ìì Ð2703),€the€massacres€of€hundreds€of€refugees€in€the€Sabra€and€Shatilla€refugee€camps€in€Beirut€in€September€1982€(Tr.€2728„Ð ÐÐ Ð37),€and€the€massacre€of€entire€villages€which€he€saw€when€fighting€in€the€Lebanese€mountains€in€1983„84.€€(Tr.2743„48).Ð ´´ Ðà @ àDefendant€also€testified€concerning€the€details€of€the€orders€that€he€was€given€in€respect€to€hijacking€Flight€648.€€(Tr.€2767„80).Ð tt Ðà @ àDefense€witnesses€corroborated€the€nature€of€the€traumas€the€defendant€had€experienced€in€Lebanon.€(Tr.€1779„95,€1807„23).€Ð 44 ÐAdditional€witnesses€testified€concerning€their€observations€of€the€defendantððs€mental€condition€during€the€early€years€he€was€inÐ  ÐMalta€and€his€dramatic€improvement€over€the€years.€€(Tr.€€1845„70,€1899„1916).Ð üü Ðà @ àThe€defense€called€three€mental€health€experts:€€Dr.€Nuha€Abudabbeh,€€Dr.€Harvey€Dondershine,€and€Dr.€John€Wilson.€€AllÐ ¼ ¼  Ðthree€testified€that€in€their€opinion€defendant€was€suffering€from€a€serious€mental€illness€on€November€23€and€24,€and€that€theÐ  ! ! Ðillness€was€post€traumatic€stress€syndrome€(PTSD),€accompanied€by€associated€depression.€€(Tr.€€1940„44,€2128„29,€2357„60).€Ð „"„"  ÐAll€three€rendered€their€opinion€that€his€actions€on€those€dates€were€the€result€of€that€mental€illness.€€(Tr.€1941,€2196„2207,Ð h#h#! Ð2327„2330,€2445„2447,€2453„54).Ð L$L$" Ðà @ àThe€defense€experts€testified€that€defendantððs€illness€was€triggered€as€a€result€of€his€exposure€to€several€extremely€traumaticÐ  & &# Ðevents,€€including€the€car€bombing€in€1981,€(Tr.€€1945„46,€1953,€2149„51,€2156„63,€2407„08),€the€siege€of€Beirut€by€theÐ ð&ð&$ ÐIsraelis€in€the€summer€of€1982€when€defendant€witnessed€the€violent€deaths€of€several€comrades,€(Tr.€2149,€2164„71,€2408„09),Ð Ô'Ô'% Ðthe€massacres€at€the€Sabra€and€Shatilla€refugee€camps€in€September€of€1982,€(Tr.€2149,€2171„81,€2424„25),€and€massacresÐ ¸(¸(& Ðdefendant€witnessed€while€fighting€in€the€mountains€of€Lebanon€(Tr.€2149,€2181„83).€€As€a€result€of€these€incidents€he€began€toÐ œ)œ)' Ðexperience€symptoms€classically€associated€with€PTSD,€including€hypervigilance,€startle€responses,€reliving,€and€withdrawalÐ €*€*( Ðsymptoms.€€(Tr.€1946„47,€2156„83,€2188„91,€2364„76,€2407„09,€2427„30,€2435„36,€2451„53).€€The€defense€experts€relied€notÐ d+d+) Ðonly€what€defendant€had€related€to€them,€but€also€the€testimony€of€the€lay€witnesses.€€(Tr.€1966„1968,€2193„96,€2210„2213).€€InÐ H,H,* Ðexplaining€the€etiology€of€the€defendant's€illness€the€defense€experts€noted€that€defendant's€early€background€of€deprivation€andÐ ,-,-+ Ðexposure€to€trauma€made€him,€particularly€vulnerable€to€developing€PTSD€upon€experiencing€the€severe€traumas€to€which€heÐ .., Ðwas€exposed€in€Lebanon,€and€traced€the€development€of€the€disease€in€light€of€his€experiences€in€Lebanon.€€(Tr.€1949,€1953„63,Ð ô.ô.- Ð2051,€2183„88,€2375„2389,€2420„25,€2431„33).Ð Ø/Ø/. Ðà @ àAll€three€also€testified€concerning€the€significance€of€the€fact€that€defendant€viewed€himself€as€a€soldier€and€regarded€hisÐ ˜1˜1/ Ðinstructions€to€hijack€the€airplane€as€an€order€given€by€his€military€superiors.€(Tr.€1965„66,€2208„2210,€2436„2440.€2444„45).€Ð |2|20 Ðà @ àò òC.€€òòThe€Government's€Rebuttal€Witnessesóóó óÐ ÜÜ Ðà @ àThe€government€called€two€experts€in€rebuttal.Ð œœ Ðà @ àWhile€admitting€that€defendant€had€experienced€several€major€stressors,€or€traumatic€events,€in€Lebanon€(Tr.€3183„92)€and€thatÐ \\ Ðhis€background€and€experiences€before€he€came€to€Lebanon€made€him€more€vulnerable€to€developing€PTSD€because€of€theseÐ @@ Ðtraumatic€events€(Tr.€3172„77,€3180,€3193),€nonetheless€Dr.€Terry€Keene€did€not€feel€that€defendant€ever€actually€developedÐ $$ ÐPTSD.€€(Tr.€3177„€77).€€Dr.€Keane€also€did€not€believe€that€defendant€was€suffering€from€a€serious€mental€disease€or€illness€atÐ  Ðthe€time€of€the€hijacking.€(Tr.€3121„24).€€He€believed€defendant€did€view€his€mission€as€a€military€one€and€that€defendantÐ ìì Ðbelieved€that€he€was€under€a€duty€to€follow€his€superiors'€orders.€(Tr.€3255„3256).€€Dr.€Keane€admitted€that€defendant€had€manyÐ ÐÐ Ðof€the€symptoms€commonly€associated€with€PTSD,€but€it€was€his€opinion€that€those€symptoms€were€not€of€the€intensityÐ ´ ´  Ðnormally€associated€with€the€disease.€€He€also€believed€that€they€were€more€reasonably€explained€by€other€causes.€(Tr.€3242„Ð ˜ ˜  Ð3255).Ð | |  Ðà @ àDr.€Patterson€Raymond€agreed€that€defendant€was€not€suffering€from€a€severe€mental€disease€or€defect€at€the€time€he€hijackedÐ < <  ÐEgyptair€Flight€648€in€November,€1985.€(Tr.€3348).€€Nor€did€he€believe€Mr.€Rezaq€hijacked€the€plane€as€a€result€of€PTSD.€Ð     Ð(Tr.€3358„59).€€In€€Patterson's€view,€defendant€made€several€deliberate€choices€that€indicated€his€ability€to€reason€and€makeÐ   Ðjudgments.€€Further,€Patterson€did€not€find€symptoms€of€the€degree€necessary€to€indicate€that€the€defendant's€cognitive€abilityÐ èè Ðwas€severely€impaired.€(Tr.€3349„51).Ð ÌÌ Ðà @ à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ò òòòSUMMARY€OF€ARGUMENTó óóóÐ ŒŒ Ðà @ àThe€defendant's€arguments€can€be€categorized€and€summarized€in€terms€of€the€relief€which€they€seek.€€Ð RR Ðà @ àò ò(1)€€òòThe€dismissal€argumentsóóó óÐ  Ðà @ àThe€defendant€first€contends€that€there€is€no€subject€matter€jurisdiction.€€In€enacting€49€U.S.C.€ðð€1472(n)€(Antihijacking€Act),Ð ÒÒ ÐCongress€expressly€stated€that€the€statute's€purpose€was€to€fulfill€the€nation's€responsibility€under€the€Convention€for€theÐ ¶¶ ÐSuppression€of€Unlawful€Seizure€of€Aircraft.€(hereinafter€ð ðHague€Conventionðð).€€òòUnited€States€v.€Yunisóó,€924€F.2d€1086€(D.C.Ð šš ÐCir.€1991)€held€that€under€such€circumstances€the€scope€of€jurisdiction€is€determined€by€examination€of€the€applicable€treaty'sÐ ~~ Ðintent.€€Here,€the€Hague€Convention€indicate€did€not€contemplate€serial€prosecutions,€after€the€offender€had€previously€beenÐ bb Ðprosecuted€in€one€country€in€connection€with€the€incident.€Ð FF Ðà @ àNext,€the€defendant€contends€that€the€court€should€have€dismissed€the€indictment€because€the€"found€in€the€United€States"Ð  Ðelement€of€the€Anithijacking€Act€is€not€satisfied€when€the€defendant€is€forcibly€brought€to€the€United€states€òòsolelyóó€to€face€airÐ êê Ðpiracy€charges.€€This€argument€does€not€assert€that€a€defendant,€in€general,€may€not€be€prosecuted€because€he€has€been€abductedÐ ÎÎ Ðand€brought€to€the€united€States€against€his€will,€as€that€is€forecosed€by€òòUnited€States€v.€Alvarez„Machainóó,€504€U.S.€655€(1992).€Ð ² ²  ÐNeither€does€the€defendant€contend€that€he€cannot€be€prosecuted€for€air€piracy€once€he€had€been€abducted€and€brought€to€thisÐ –!–! Ðcountry€to€face€other€charges,€as€that€argument€is€foreclosed€by€this€Court's€decision€in€òòYunisóó,€òòinfraóó.€€In€contrast,€the€defendantÐ z"z" Ðwas€brought€to€the€United€States€òòsolelyóó€to€face€charges€of€air€piracy,€which€requires€as€an€element€of€the€offense€that€he€beÐ ^#^# Ð"found€in€the€United€States."€€€Thus,€the€government€€unilaterally€created€the€jurisdictional€element€of€the€offense.Ð B$B$  Ðò òà @ à(2)€€òòThe€new€trial€argumentsóóó óÐ &&! Ðà @ àAlthough€the€defendant€was€charged€with€air€piracy€the€government€tried€this€case€as€if€it€was€a€murder,€introducing€not€onlyÐ Â'Â'" Ðevidence€of€the€deaths€of€Mendelsohn€and€Rogenkamp€but€also€€autopsy€photographs,€graphic€testimony€from€a€pathologist,€andÐ ¦(¦(# Ðenlarged€photographs€of€the€deceased.€€€The€problem€with€this€approach€is€that€the€"death€resulting"€language€of€the€air€piracyÐ Š)Š)$ Ðstatute€is€merely€a€penalty€provision.€€Much€of€this€evidence€was€therefore€irrelevant€to€any€issue€concerning€the€defendantððsÐ n*n*% Ðguilt€or€innocence.€€Even€if€€some€of€the€evidence€may€have€had€some€minimal€relevance,€the€probative€value€of€that€evidenceÐ R+R+& Ðwas€far€outweighed€by€its€prejudicial€effect.Ð 6,6,' Ðà @ àSimilarly,€the€government's€questioning€of€the€witnesses€in€a€manner€designed€to€inform€the€jury€that€50„60€people€died€whenÐ ö-ö-( Ðthe€Egyptian€troops€attempted€the€rescue€violated€both€FRE€401€&€403.€Ð Ú.Ú.) Ðà @ àDefendant's€also€seeks€retrial€as€a€result€of€the€crash€of€TWA€Flight€800€during€the€final€critical€stages€of€the€trial.€€TheÐ š0š0* Ðresulting€publicity€was€devastatingly€prejudicial€in€light€of€the€facts€of€this€case.€€The€denial€of€defendantððs€mistrial€motion€wasÐ ~1~1+ Ðerroneous€where€the€court€neither€instructed€the€jury€to€avoid€news€accounts€related€to€the€incident,€nor€individually€examinedÐ b2b2, Ðthe€jurors€as€to€their€exposure€to€and€the€effect€of€this€midtrial€publicity.€ò òÐ ÜÜ Ðà @ à(3)€€òòThe€sentencing€argumentsóóó óÐ œœ Ðà @ àArgument€7€is€closely€related€to€the€first€argument€in€that€it€is€based€on€the€Hague€Convention,€whose€contemplated€jurisdictinÐ \\ ÐCongress€intended€to€adopt.€€The€Convention€conferred€jurisdiction€over€violent€acts€associated€with€a€hijacking€only€in€limitedÐ @@ Ðcircumstances€not€present€here.€€Since€the€life€or€death€provision€of€Section€1472(n)(1)(B)€essentially€punishes€for€the€violentÐ $$ Ðacts€(deaths)€associated€with€the€hijacking,€that€provision€is€inapplicable€where,€as€here,€the€Convention€did€not€intend€to€conferÐ  Ðjurisdiction.€€€€Argument€8€maintains€that€the€court's€restitution€order€of€$264,000,€apportioned€among€seven€victims,€violatedÐ ìì Ðthe€provisions€of€the€Victim€and€Witness€Restitution€Act€in€several€ways.€€The€amounts€submitted€were€completelyÐ ÐÐ Ðunsubstantiated€as€to€amount,€payee,€or€purpose.€€Large€portions€of€the€award€were€items€that€are€non„recoverable€under€theÐ ´ ´  ÐAct,€including€pain€and€suffering.€€Further,€the€court€ignored€the€Act's€requirement€that€the€defendant's€ability€to€pay€be€takenÐ ˜ ˜  Ðinto€account,€imposing€the€large€award€without€inquiring€into€the€defendant's€financial€situation€and€in€spite€of€the€fact€that€Mr.Ð | |  ÐRezaq€had€been€declared€indigent,€the€PSI€indicated€that€he€had€no€financial€resources,€and€he€was€being€sentenced€to€life€inÐ ` `  Ðprison.€Ð D D  Ðà @ àò ò(4)€€òòThe€Classified€Information€argumentóóó óÐ   Ðà @ àDefendant's€last€argument€objects€to€the€òòexóó€òòparteóó€proceedings€that€were€conducted€pursuant€to€the€Classified€InformationÐ ÄÄ ÐProcedures€Act.€€Because€defendant€has€not€actually€seen€the€materials€that€were€deleted€in€discovery,€he€requests€that€this€courtÐ ¨¨ Ðreview€them€in€light€of€certain€governing€principles.€€€€€€€€Ð ŒŒ Ðà@mm!áàò òòòSTANDARD€OF€REVIEWó óóóˆÐ LL Ðà @ àArguments€1,2,€6,€and€7€present€pure€questions€of€law.€€The€standard€of€review€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóó.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Doeóó,€934€F.2d€353,Ð    Ð356€(D.C.Cir.€1991).€€The€same€standard€applies€to€whether€particular€items,€such€as€€pain€and€suffering,€are€subject€to€an€orderÐ ðð Ðof€restitution€under€the€Victim€and€Witness€Protection€Act.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Schinnellóó,€80€F.3d€1064€(5th€Cir.€1996).Ð ÔÔ Ðà @ àArguments€3,€and€4€address€the€relevance€of€evidence.€€The€standard€of€review€is€abuse€of€discretion.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Clarkeóó,Ð ”” Ð24€F.3d€257,€267€(D.C.€Cir.€1994).€€The€same€standard€€governs€issues€concerning€the€amount€or€restitution€ordered€and€the€Ð xx Ðability€to€pay,€€òòUnited€States€vs.€Lampienóó,€89€F.3d€1316,€1323€(7th€Cir.€1996),€the€refusal€to€declare€a€mistrial€because€ofÐ \\ Ðmidtrial€publicity,€òòUnited€States€v.€Holtonóó,€No.€96„3013€(D.C.€Cir.€slip€op.€6„27„97),€and€the€court's€ruling€on€discovery€ofÐ @@ Ðclassified€information.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Fernandezóó,€913€F.2d€148€(4th€Cir.€1990).€Ð $$ Ðà@••&áàò òòòARGUMENTó óóóˆÐ ää ÐÓ@Óò òI.€THE€COURT€ERRED€IN€DENYING€THE€DEFENDANT'S€MOTION€TO€DISMISS€THE€INDICTMENT€ONÐ ¤ ¤  ÐTHE€GROUND€OF€A€LACK€OF€SUBJECT€MATTER€JURISDICTION€WHERE€THE€CONGRESS€DIDN'TÐ ˆ!ˆ! ÐINTEND€TO€òòAUTHORIZE€A€DUAL€PROSECUTION€SUCH€AS€THAT€UNDERTAKEN€HERE€Ð l"l" Ðóóó óÌà @ àò òA.€€òòProcedural€Backgroundóóó óÐ ì%ì% ÐÌÓ@Óà @ àDefendant's€motion€to€dismiss€for€lack€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€was€denied.€€€òòUnited€States€v.€Rezaqóó,€889€F.Supp.€697Ð l)l)! Ð(D.D.C.€1996).Ð P*P*" Ðò òà @ àB.€òòDiscussionóóÐ ,,# ÐÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔÓ@Óà @ àà @` à(1)€Where€Congress€has€Enacted€a€Statute€Specifically€for€the€Purpose€ofÐ Ð-Ð-$ ÐImplementing€the€Provisions€of€a€Treaty,€the€Scope€of€the€Statute€is€Determined€byÐ ®.®.% Ðòòthe€Purpose€and€Language€of€the€Treaty€€€€€€€€€€€€óóó óÐ Œ/Œ/& Ðâ âÐ F1F1' ÐÓ@Óà @ àÌâ âà @ àTitle€49€U.S.C.€App.€ðð€1472(n)(1),€provides€that:Ð  ÐÓ@Óà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àWhoever€aboard€an€aircraft€in€flight€outside€the€special€aircraft€jurisdiction€ofÐ DD Ðthe€United€States€commits€"an€offense",€as€defined€in€the€Convention€for€theÐ  ÐSuppression€of€Unlawful€Seizure€of€Aircraft,€and€is€afterward€found€in€the€UnitedÐ ôô ÐStates€shall€be€punished„Ð ÌÌ ÐÌà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð à(A)€by€imprisonment€for€not€less€than€20€years;€orÐ 4 4  ÐÌà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð à(B)€notwithstanding€the€provisions€of€Section€€3559(b)€of€Title€18,€if€the€deathÐ œ œ  Ðof€anotherÐ tt  Ðà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àperson€results€from€the€commission€or€attempted€commissionÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈÊX#ÔÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàԀof€the€offense,€byÐ ((  Ðdeath€or€by€imprisonment€for€life.Ô#†„XáàXXXkÈÛ]#ÔÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔÐ   ÐÌÓ@ÓThis€statute€"was€enacted€to€fulfill€the€nation's€responsibilities€under€the€Ô#†„XáàXXXkÈg^#ÔÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔHagueÐ hh ÐConventionÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈ_#ÔÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔ.€Ô#†„XáàXXXkȄ_#ÔÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàԀÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈÈ_#ÔòòYunisóó,€924€F.2d€at€1092.€€When€Congress€expressly€enacts€a€statute€to€execute€treaty€obligations,€€courtsÐ @@ Ðshould€look€to€the€purpose€and€language€of€the€treaty€to€ascertain€the€scope€of€jurisdiction€which€Congress€intended€to€exercise.€Ð ** ÐòòIdóó.;€€òòUnited€States€v.€Laytonóó,€855€F.2d€1388€(9th€Cir.ò ò€ó ó1988).€€Following€this€principle€òòYunisóó€held€that€the€jurisdictional€scopeÐ  Ðof€49€U.S.C.€App.€ðð€1472(n)(1)€is€determined€by€the€terms€of€the€Hague€Convention,€the€treaty€which€Congress€sought€toÐ øø Ðimplement.€€€€Ð ÜÜ Ðà @ àBoth€òòYunisóó€and€òòLaytonóó€concluded€that€the€terms€of€the€applicable€treaty€required€the€signatories€to€assume€jurisdiction€over€theÐ œœ Ðrespective€offenses.€€Here,€the€treaty's€provisions€lead€to€the€opposite€conclusion.Ð €€ ÐÓ@Óà @ àà @` àò ò(2)€The€Hague€Convention€did€not€intend€to€confer€€jurisdiction€over€the€offense€of€air€piracy€where€the€defendant'sÐ @@ Ðconduct€had€previously€been€òòseverely€punished€in€another€country׃ˆXkÈ×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòŽò(Ú  Ú2Ú  Ú)óŽóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×XkÈ׀€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóó óÓ@ÓÐ $$ Ðà @ àIn€enacting€Section€1472(n)(1),€Congress€clearly€stated€its€intention€to€implement€the€jurisdiction€required€under€the€HagueÐ ää ÐConvention.€€òòYunisóó,€at€1092,€òòcitingóó€H.€Rep.€No.€885,€93d€Cong.,€2d€Sess.€10€(1975),€S.€Rep.€No.€13,€93d€Cong.,€1st€Sess.€1,3Ð È È  Ð(1973);€òòCfóó.€22€U.S.T.€1643;€T.I.A.S.€No.€7192.€€The€inquiry€thus€turns€to€the€purpose€and€language€of€the€Hague€ConventionÐ ¬!¬! Ðitself.Ð "" Ðà @ àArticle€1€of€the€Hague€Convention€defines€what€constitutes€an€"offense"€within€the€meaning€of€the€treaty.€€The€"offense"€is€theÐ P$P$ Ðforcible€seizure€of€control€of€the€aircraft,€i.e.€the€hijacking€of€the€airplane.׃\XkÈ×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú3Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×XkÈ׀€€€Article€2€requires€that€each€of€the€ContractingÐ 4%4% ÐStates€make€the€"offence"€[sic]€punishable€by€"severe€penalties."€€The€"substantive€obligation"€of€each€state€is€to€make€sure€theÐ && Ðoffense€is€appropriately€punished.€€S.€Rep.€at€54;€A.€88.€Ð ü&ü& Ðà @ àThe€key€jurisdictional€provision€is€Article€4,€which€requires€that€each€Contracting€State€take€jurisdiction€in€two€differentÐ ¼(¼(  Ðsituations.€€Paragraph€one€establishes€jurisdiction€over€both€"the€offense",€the€hijacking,€and€"any€other€act€of€violence€againstÐ  ) )! Ðpassengers€or€crew€committed€by€the€alleged€offender€in€connection€with€the€offense":Ð „*„*" ÐÓ@Óà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð à(a)€if€the€offense€was€committed€on€board€an€aircraft€registered€in€that€State.Ð D,D,# ÐÌà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð à(b)€if€the€hijacked€airliner€lands€in€the€State€with€the€hijacker€aboardÐ Ä/Ä/% Ðâ âÐ „1„1& Ðà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð à(c)€when€the€offense€is€committed€on€board€an€aircraft€leased€without€crew€to€a€lessee€who€has€his€principal€place€of€business€inÐ ÜÜ Ðâ âthe€State.Ð ÀÀ ÐÌÓ@ÓWhere€any€of€these€three€conditions€are€met,€Article€4€provides€that€the€Contracting€State€has€jurisdiction€over€òòbothóó€theÐ @@ Ð"offense"€of€hijacking€òòandóó€the€violent€acts€committed€in€connection€therewith.€€None€of€the€three€conditions€are€met€here.Ð $$ Ðà @ àParagraph€2€of€Article€4€provides€an€alternative€basis€for€jurisdiction€over€the€offense,€but€not€the€associated€violent€acts:Ð ää ÐÓ@Óà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àEach€Contracting€State€shall€likewise€take€such€measures€as€may€be€necessary€to€establish€its€jurisdiction€over€òòthe€offenseóó€in€theÐ ¤ ¤  Ðcase€where€the€alleged€offender€is€òòpresent€in€its€territoryóó€ò òandó ó€òòit€does€not€extradite€himóó€pursuant€to€Article€8€to€any€of€the€StatesÐ ˆ ˆ  Ðmentioned€in€paragraph€1€of€this€Article.Ð r r  ÐÌÓ@Ó(Emphasis€added).€€€Thus€when€the€jurisdiction€is€based€solely€on€the€offender€being€€"present€in€its€territory",€it€is€limited€to€theÐ òò  Ðhijacking€offense.€€€No€reference€is€made€to€the€associated€violent€acts.Ð ÖÖ  Ðà @ àThus,€the€Hague€Convention€allows€a€State€to€assume€jurisdiction€over€a€hijacking€offense€when€the€offender€was€"present€inÐ ––  Ðthe€territory,"€and€none€of€the€three€conditions€specified€in€Paragraph€1€of€Article€4€is€met,€only€if€that€State€does€not€intend€toÐ zz  Ðextradite€him€to€another€state€for€prosecution.€€Since€jurisdiction€does€not€lie€if€the€State€intends€to€extradite,€serial€punishmentÐ ^^ Ðis€not€contemplated.€€This€conclusion€is€reinforced€by€principles€of€double€jeopardy,€as€commonly€understood€in€theÐ BB Ðinternational€treaty€context.׃]XkÈ×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú4Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×XkÈ×Ð && Ðà @ àOther€provisions€of€the€Hague€Convention€support€its€intention€€that€an€offender€was€not€to€be€bounced€from€€country€to€countryÐ ææ Ðfor€prosecution.€€Article€6,€paragraph€1,€provides€that€when€the€offender€is€present€in€one€of€the€Contracting€States€he€shall€beÐ ÊÊ Ðtaken€into€custody€"to€enable€any€criminal€òòoróó€extradition€proceedings€to€be€instituted."€€(Emphasis€added).€€Article€7€providesÐ ®® Ðthat€the€Contracting€State€having€custody€of€the€offender€shall€prosecute€"if€it€does€not€extradite€him."€€The€€understanding€isÐ ’’ Ðthat€the€Contracting€States€shall€either€prosecute€or€extradite.€òòSeeóó€S.€Report€at€58„59,€A.€90.Ð vv Ðà @ àCongress€clearly€understood€these€jurisdictional€limitation.s€€The€Senate€Report€states€that€Article€4€"contains€the€basicÐ 66 Ðjurisdictional€provisions€of€the€Convention."€€€A.€89.€€€The€Report€analyzes€Article€4€jurisdiction€precisely€as€stated€above.€òòIdóó.€€Ð  ÐIn€language€conclusive€as€to€€Congress'€intent€to€enact€the€jurisdiction€contemplated€by€the€Convention,€the€Senate€ReportÐ þþ Ðstates:Ð ââ ÐÓ@Óà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àSecond,€òòin€order€to€satisfy€article€4,€paragraph€2€of€the€Conventionóó,€the€bill€includes€a€special€provision€establishing€jurisdictionÐ ¢ ¢  Ðover€the€offense€of€hijacking€when€it€occurs€anywhere€outside€the€special€aircraft€jurisdiction€of€the€United€States€but€the€allegedÐ †!†! Ðoffender€is€later€found€in€the€United€States.€€This€is€the€so„called€universal€jurisdiction€provision€which€makes€hijackers€outlawsÐ j"j" Ðwherever€they€are€found.Ð N#N# ЀÌÓ@ÓS.Rep.€13€at€3„4;€A.€63€(Emphasis€added).€€The€House€Report€accompanying€the€legislation€is€in€accord€as€to€its€purpose.€(A.€Ð Î&Î& Ð104).€€€Because€Article€4,€Paragraph€1€does€not€contemplate€dual€prosecutions,€€Congress'€intent€was€the€same.Ð ²'²'  Ѐ€€It€is€true€that€Rezaq€was€not€prosecuted€in€Malta€for€the€offense€of€hijacking.€€However,€he€was€prosecuted€for€other€crimesÐ r)r)! Ðthat€were€inseparably€linked€to€the€indictment€in€this€case,€which€alleges€that€the€hijacking€was€accomplished€by€"force€and€...Ð V*V*" Ðintimidation,€including€the€murder€of€Scarlett€M.€Rogenkamp€and€Nitzan€Mendelson,€and€the€attempted€murder€of€three€otherÐ :+:+# Ðpassengers€.€.€.€."€€€Defendant€was€convicted€in€Malta€for€the€referenced€murders€and€attempted€murders€as€well€as€for€theÐ ,,$ Ðunlawful€sequestration€of€the€passengers.€€Thus,€defendant€was€prosecuted€in€Malta€for€the€acts€constituting€the€essence€of€theÐ --% Ðhijacking.€€The€intent€of€the€Hague€Convention€was€to€prevent€hijackers€from€having€safe€havens€and€escaping€severeÐ æ-æ-& Ðpunishment.€Defendant€was€not€given€a€safe€haven€in€Malta.€€He€was€prosecuted€and€a€severe€penalty€was€imposed.€€In€thisÐ Ê.Ê.' Ðsituation€the€Hague€Convention€did€not€intend€successive€prosecutions€and€since€Congress€intended€only€to€invoke€theÐ ®/®/( Ðjurisdiction€contemplated€by€the€Convention,€the€indictment€should€have€been€dismissed.€Ð ’0’0) ÐÓ@Óò òII.€THE€COURT€ERRED€IN€DENYING€THE€MOTION€TO€DISMISS€THE€INDICTMENT€WHERE€THEÐ R2R2* ÐGOVERNMENT€MANUFACTURED€THE€JURISDICTIONAL€ELEMENT€OF€THE€OFFENSE,€AND,€INÐ ÜÜ ÐEFFECT,€IN€òòDIRECTING€A€VERDICT€ON€THE€JURISDICTIONAL€ELEMENT€€€€€€Ð ÀÀ Ðóóó óÌÓ@Óà @ àò òA.€€òòProcedural€Backgroundóó.ó óÐ @@ Ðà @ àThe€defendant€filed€a€pretrial€motion€to€dismiss€the€indictment€on€the€ground€that€the€government€unlawfully€manufactured€anÐ  Ðelement€of€the€offense€in€this€case€„€the€requirement€that€the€defendant€be€"found€in€the€United€States"€„€when€it€arrested€Mr.Ð ää ÐRezaq€in€Nigeria,€and€brought€him€to€the€United€States.€(R.€41).€€The€district€court€found€that€the€defendant's€argument€wasÐ ÈÈ Ðforeclosed€by€òòYunisóó.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Rezaqóó,€908€F.€Supp.€6,€7„8€(D.D.C.€1995).Ð ¬ ¬  Ðà @ àò òB.€€òòDiscussionóó€Ð l l  Ðó óà @ àò òà @` à(1)€òòThe€arrest€of€defendant€in€Nigeriaóóó óÐ , ,  Ðà @ àDefendant€was€released€from€prison€in€Malta€in€February€1993.€On€July€15,€1993,€FBI€agents€flew€to€Nigeria€and€arrested€himÐ ìì  Ðas€he€arrived€from€Ghana.€€He€was€then€flown€to€the€United€States.׃ae€es×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú5Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×e€es׀€Ð ÐÐ  ÐÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔà @ àà @` àò ò(2)€Ó@ÓThe€requirement€that€the€defendant€be€"found€in€the€òòUnited€States"€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð   Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóó óÓ@ÓÐ nn  Ðà @ àÔ#†„XáàXXXkȈ#ÔSectionÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàԀ1472(n)(1)€requires€as€an€element€of€the€offense€that€the€defendant€be€ð ðfoundÐ (( Ðin€the€United€States.ðð׃be€es×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú6Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×e€es׀€Ô#†„XáàXXXkÈ3‰#ÔThe€issue€is€whether€the€statute€is€violated€when€the€alleged€offender€is€forcibly€broughtÐ  Ðinto€the€United€States€solely€to€face€charges€under€this€statute.€Ð üü Ðà @ àThere€have€been€few€prosecutions€under€this€statute€and€consequently€little€judicial€interpretation.€€The€closest€case€€is€€òòYunisóó.€Ð ¼¼ ÐLike€defendant,€Yunis€was€abducted€and€brought€to€the€United€States.€€He€was€subsequently€convicted€of€violating€both€SectionÐ    ÐÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàԀ1472(n)€and€18€U.S.C.€ðð€1203,€the€Hostage€Taking€Act.€€Both€statutes€have€theÐ „„ Ð"found€in€the€United€States"€language.€€Yunis€contended€that€his€involuntaryÐ \\ Ðremoval€to€the€United€States€precluded€his€conviction€under€either€statute€becauseÐ 44 Ðhe€was€only€ð ðfound€in€the€United€Statesðð€as€a€result€of€the€FBIððs€actions.€€€Ð    Ðà @ àUnlike€Section€1472(n),€the€Hostage€Taking€Act€does€not€require€the€defendant€beÐ ÀÀ Ðð ðfound€in€the€United€States.ðð€€€In€rejecting€òòYunisóóðð€argument€this€Court€noted€thatÐ ˜˜ Ðthe€"found€in€the€United€States"€language€was€merely€one€of€three€òòalternativeóóÐ pp Ðjurisdictional€elements€of€18€U.S.C.€ðð€1203.ÓGÓÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈxŒ#ÔÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàԀ€ÓF®Ó924€F.2d€at€1090.€€To€establish€theÐ H H  Ðjurisdictional€element€under€Section€1203,€the€government€did€not€to€show€thatÐ  ! ! ÐYunis€was€"found€in€the€United€States"€because€an€alternative€basis€for€theÐ ø!ø! Ðjurisdictional€element€was€present€since€two€of€the€passengers€on€the€flight€wereÐ Ð"Ð" ÐU.S.€citizens.€€òòYunisóó€did€òònotóó€hold€that€the€"found€in€the€United€States"€elementÐ ¨#¨# Ðof€the€Hostage€Taking€Act€could€be€satisfied€by€the€forcible€removal€of€theÐ €$€$ Ðdefendant€to€the€United€States.€€Ð X%X%  Ðà @ àUnlike€the€Hostage€Taking€Act,€Section€1472(n)€does€not€have€alternative€bases€forÐ  ' '! Ðthe€jurisdictional€element.€€There€is€no€provision€attaching€jurisdiction€€solelyÐ ä'ä'" Ðon€the€basis€of€the€offender€or€hostage€being€a€national€of€the€United€States€orÐ ¼(¼(# Ðbecause€the€purpose€of€the€hijacking€was€to€compel€action€by€the€government€of€theÐ ”)”)$ ÐUnited€States.€€There€is€only€one€way€the€jurisdictional€element€may€be€satisfiedÐ l*l*% Ðand€that€is€if€the€defendant€is€"found€in€the€United€States."€€Ð D+D+& Ðà @ àòòYunisóó€did€not€reach€the€issue€of€whether€this€element€of€Section€1472(n)€can€beÐ ø,ø,' Ðsatisfied€by€the€forcible€removal€of€a€defendant€to€the€United€States,€as€YunisÐ Ð-Ð-( Ðhad€not€been€indicted€for€violating€this€statute€at€the€time€of€his€forcibleÐ ¨.¨.) Ðremoval€to€face€charges€under€the€Hostage€Taking€Act.Ð €/€/* ÐÓ@Óà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àBut€the€issue€before€us€is€more€fact„specific,€since€Yunis€was€indicted€for€airÐ 4141+ Ðpiracy€while€awaiting€trial€on€hostage„taking€and€other€charges;€òòwe€must€determineÐ  2 2, Ðwhether,€once€arrested€and€brought€to€this€country€on€those€other€charges,€YunisÐ ÜÜ Ðwas€subject€to€prosecution€under€the€Antihijacking€Act€as€wellóó.Ð ´´ ÐÌòòÓ@ÓIdóó.€at€1092€(emphasis€added).Ð  Ðà @ àThus,€contrary€to€the€opinion€of€the€district€court,€òòYunisóó€is€not€controlling.€Ð ÐÐ ÐThe€forcible€removal€of€Yunis€to€the€United€States€did€not€affect€his€prosecutionÐ ¨¨ Ðunder€Section€1203€because€being€"found€in€the€United€States"€was€not€the€òòsineóó€òòquaóóÐ €€ Ðòònonóó€for€a€conviction€under€that€statute.€€His€forcible€removal€did€not€barÐ X X  Ðprosecution€under€Section€1472(n)€because€he€was€not€abducted€to€face€chargesÐ 0 0  Ðunder€that€statute.€€When€he€was€later€indicted€for€violating€Section€1472(n)€heÐ    Ðwas€lawfully€"found€in€the€United€States",€having€been€brought€here€previously,Ð à à  Ðalbeit€involuntarily,€to€face€the€hostage„taking€charges.Ð ¸ ¸  Ðà @ àDefendant's€€situation€differs€in€this€crucial€aspect€from€òòYunis.óó€€Ð ll  ÐÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈã#Ôò òÓGÓà @ àà @` à(3)€Where€a€statute€recites€a€specific€jurisdictional€element€of€the€offense,€that€element€cannot€be€satisfied€through€theÐ     Ðunilateral€action€of€the€òògovernment€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ó óóóÐ  ÐÌÓF*œÓà @ àThe€requirement€that€the€defendant€be€"found€in€the€United€States"€appears€is€a€jurisdictional€element€such€as€that€required€forÐ „„ Ðthe€commission€of€many€federal€offenses.€€òòSeeóó€18€U.S.C.€ðð€1341€(requirement€of€use€of€the€Postal€Service€of€the€United€States);Ð hh Ð18€U.S.C.€1958€(requirement€of€use€of€interstate€commerce€facilities).€€This€element€can€no€more€be€ignored€for€a€violation€of€ððÐ LL Ð1472(n)(1)€than€can€the€use€of€the€Postal€Service€be€dispensed€with€in€a€mail€fraud€prosecution€or€the€use€of€interstateÐ 00 Ðcommerce€facilities€in€a€Travel€Act€prosecution.€€The€issue€is€not€the€power€of€the€court€to€try€the€defendant€but€whether€theÐ  Ðgovernment€can€prove€an€element€of€the€offense€which€it€has€unilaterally€created.׃ce€is×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú7Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×e€is׀Ó@ÓÐ øø Ѐ€ÌÓ@Óà @ àWhere€a€defendant€does€not€voluntarily€commit€an€element€of€an€offense€and€where€the€nature€of€the€crime€is€not€such€that€theÐ xx Ðelement€can€simply€be€inferred€from€its€commission,€the€element€cannot€be€supplied€òòsolelyóó€by€actions€taken€by€governmentalÐ \\ ÐagentsÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔ.€€Here,€the€government€did€not€show€that€defendant€voluntarily€was€"found€inÐ @@ Ðthe€United€States"€in€the€sense€that€he€knowingly€chose€to€come€into€this€country,Ð ** Ðthat€by€committing€the€charged€offense€he€necessarily€would€have€intended€to€beÐ    Ð"found€in€the€United€States,"€or€that,€like€Yunis,€he€was€otherwise€lawfullyÐ Ú Ú  Ð"found€in€the€United€States."€€€Instead,€the€specified€jurisdictional€element€ofÐ ²!²! Ðthe€offense€was€entirely€manufactured€by€the€government's€abduction€of€Mr.€RezaqÐ Š"Š" Ðfrom€Nigeria€„€an€act€undertaken€for€no€reason€other€than€to€create€the€finalÐ b#b# Ðelement€of€the€crime€which€Congress€has€proscribed.€Ð :$:$  Ðà @ àIn€òòUnited€States€v.€Coatesóó,€949€F.2d€104€(4th€Cir.€1991)€the€defendant€had€beenÐ î%î%! Ðconvicted€of€arranging€a€contract€murder€through€use€of€interstate€commerceÐ Æ&Æ&" Ðfacilities€in€violation€of€18€U.S.C.€ðð€1958,€which€proscribes€"the€use€of€anyÐ ž'ž'# Ðfacility€in€interstateÐ v(v($ Ð.€.€.€commerce,€with€the€intent€that€a€murder€be€committed€.€.€.€."€€FederalÐ ****% Ðagents,€working€with€local€detectives,€became€aware€that€the€defendant€wanted€toÐ ++& Ðhire€someone€to€kill€his€brother„in„law;€€however,€the€investigation€had€notÐ Ú+Ú+' Ðrevealed€any€evidence€that€the€defendant€had€used€any€interstate€facility€inÐ ²,²,( Ðattempting€to€execute€his€scheme.€€In€order€to€satisfy€the€jurisdictional€elementÐ Š-Š-) Ðof€the€statute€a€federal€agent€traveled€to€an€adjoining€state€and€placed€anÐ b.b.* Ðinterstate€phone€call€to€the€defendant.€€Since€18€U.S.C.€ðð€1958(b)(2)€specificallyÐ :/:/+ Ðincludes€interstate€telephone€use€as€a€"facility€of€interstate€commerce",€theÐ 00, Ðgovernment€argued€that€a€violation€of€the€statute€had€been€shown.€€The€FourthÐ ê0ê0- ÐCircuit€disagreed,€holding€that€where€the€facts€necessary€to€prove€theÐ Â1Â1. Ðjurisdictional€element€had€been€created€solely€by€the€government€€the€convictionÐ š2š2/ Ðmust€be€reversed.Ð ÜÜ Ðà @ àIn€òòUnited€States€v.€Archeróó,€486€F.2d€670€(2d€Cir.€1973)€the€defendants€wereÐ  Ðconvicted€of€violating€the€Travel€Act,€18€U.S.C.€€ðð€1952,€by€using€interstate€andÐ hh Ðforeign€telephone€services€in€execution€of€unlawful€activity€(arranging€to€"fix"€aÐ @@ Ðstate€criminal€charge).€€Suspecting€corruption€in€the€District€Attorney's€officeÐ  Ðin€Queens,€New€York,€federal€agents€initiated€an€undercover€operation.€€During€theÐ ðð Ðcourse€of€the€scheme,€a€federal€agent€traveled€from€New€York€to€New€Jersey€andÐ ÈÈ Ðplaced€a€phone€call€to€the€defendant€solely€for€the€purpose€of€creating€theÐ    Ðjurisdictional€element.€€At€the€behest€of€the€agent,€the€defendant€returned€theÐ xx Ðcall.€€€Finding€such€"manufactured€jurisdiction"€to€be€"offensive"€andÐ P P  Ðinappropriate,€the€Court€reversed€the€defendant's€convictions.€€òòIdóó.€at€682.€€Ð ( (  Ðà @ àThe€manufacturing€of€the€jurisdictional€element€is€even€more€egregious€here.€Ð Ü Ü  ÐUnlike€òòCoatesóó€€òòArcheróó,€Rezaq€in€no€way€voluntarily€participated€in€the€conductÐ ´ ´  Ðnecessary€to€prove€the€jurisdictional€element€of€the€offense.€€In€òòCoatesóó€theÐ Œ Œ  Ðdefendant€at€least€voluntarily€participated€in€the€phone€call€placed€to€him€by€theÐ dd Ðfederal€agent.€€In€òòArcheróó€the€defendant,€€returned€long„distance€phone€calls€thatÐ << Ðhad€been€made€to€him€for€the€express€purpose€of€creating€the€requiredÐ  Ðjurisdictional€element.Ð ìì ÐÓ@Óà @ àà @` àò ò(4)€The€Court€further€erred€in€rejecting€the€defendant's€proposed€jury€instructionÐ    Ðthat€this€element€is€not€satisfied€by€government„created€travel€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ~~ Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ó óÐ \\ ÐÌÓ@Óà @ àUnsuccessful€in€having€the€court€dismiss€the€indictment€on€the€basis€of€theÐ ÊÊ Ðmanufactured€jurisdictional€element,€the€defendant€requested€an€instruction€thatÐ ¢¢ Ðthe€ð ðfound€in€the€United€Statesðð€element€is€not€satisfied€when€the€government€hasÐ zz Ðcreated€the€travel.€€The€court€refused€to€give€the€instruction.€(A.€122).Ô#†„XáàXXXkÈ ¢#ÔÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàԀInstead,Ð RR Ðthe€court€instructed€the€jury€that:Ð ** ÐÓ@ÓÔ#†„XáàXXXkȵ#Ôà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àA€defendant€is€"afterward€found€in€the€United€States,"€if,€following€the€commission€of€the€offense,€he€is€present€in€the€UnitedÐ ÞÞ ÐStates.€€It€is€of€no€consequence€how€the€defendant€came€to€be€present€in€the€United€States.Р ÐÌà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àLet€me€repeat€that.€€It€is€of€no€legal€consequence,€I€instruct€you€as€a€matter€of€law,€as€to€how€the€defendant€came€to€be€present€inÐ B!B! Ðthe€United€States.Ð &"&" ÐÌÓ@ÓÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàÔ(A.€124).€€€Ð ¦%¦%! Ðà @ àBoth€the€Fifth€and€Sixth€Amendments€are€violated€when€a€court€removes€an€elementÐ Z'Z'" Ðof€the€offense€from€the€jury€by€instructing€as€a€matter€of€law€that€the€elementÐ 2(2(# Ðhas€been€proven.€òòUnited€States€v.€Gaudinóó,€115€S.Ct.€2310€(1995)(court€erred€inÐ  ) )$ Ðfalse€statements€prosecution€in€instructing€jury€that€the€question€of€materialityÐ â)â)% Ðwas€a€matter€of€law€for€the€court€to€decide).€€Though€not€directly€deciding€theÐ º*º*& Ðissue,€this€Court€has€assumed€that€òòGaudinóó€requires€that€jurisdictional€elementsÐ ’+’+' Ðalso€be€decided€by€the€jury.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Spriggsóó,€102€F.3d€1245,€1260Ð j,j,( Ð(D.C.Cir.€1996).€€€The€defendant's€instruction€accurately€reflected€the€principleÐ B-B-) Ðthat€the€government€does€not€meet€its€burden€of€proof€as€to€an€element€of€a€crimeÐ ..* Ðwhen€it€unilaterally€creates€that€element.׃de€is×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú8Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×e€is׀€òòUnited€States€v.€Coatesóó,€òòsupraóó.€€ByÐ ò.ò.+ Ðinstructing€the€jury€"as€a€matter€of€law"€€€the€court€essentially€directed€aÐ Ê/Ê/, Ðverdict€on€this€issue,€as€it€was€clear€the€defendant€was€sitting€in€the€courtroomÐ ¢0¢0- Ðâ âand€therefore€"found€in€the€United€States."€€Ô#†„XáàXXXkÈ·#Ԁ€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð z1z1. Ðò òÓ@ÓIII.€WHERE€THE€DEFENDANT€WAS€CHARGED€WITH€HIJACKING€AND€NOT€MURDER,€THE€COURTÐ ÜÜ Ðâ âERRED€IN€DENYING€THE€DEFENDANT'S€MOTION€TO€BIFURCATE€AND€IN€ALLOWING€THEÐ ÀÀ ÐGOVERNMENT€TO€INTRODUCE€EXTENSIVE€EVIDENCE€THAT€WAS€IRRELEVANT€OR€WHOSEÐ ¤¤ ÐMINIMAL€PROBATIVE€VALUE€WAS€SUBSTANTIALLY€OUTWEIGHED€BY€ITS€PREJUDICIAL€EFFECTÐ ˆˆ ÐINCLUDING€EVIDENCE€THAT€TWO€OF€THE€PASSENGERS€WHOM€THE€DEFENDANT€SHOT€DIED,Ð ll ÐAUTOPSY€PHOTOGRAPHS,€AND€TESTIMONY€OF€PATHOLOGISTS€DETAILING€THE€òòAUTOPSYÐ PP ÐPROCEDURES€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð 44 Ðóóó óÌÓ@Óà @ àò òA.€€òòProcedural€backgroundóóó óÐ ´ ´  Ðà @ à(1)€€Pretrial€motions€and€trial€objectionsÐ t t  Ѐ€Prior€to€trial€defendant€filed€a€motion€to€strike€that€part€of€the€indictment,€which€referenced€the€murders€of€Scarlett€RogenkampÐ 4 4  Ðand€Nitzan€Mendelson,€and€the€attempted€murder€of€three€other€passengers,€€(R.€37),€arguing€that€the€death€element€of€SectionÐ   Ð1472(n)1)(B)€was€simply€a€penalty€provision€and€that€the€inclusion€of€this€language€in€the€indictment€was€therefore€unnecessaryÐ üü  Ðsurplusage.€€€Defendant€also€moved€to€bifurcate€the€proceedings€and€have€the€jury€first€hear€the€evidence€as€to€whether€theÐ àà  Ðdefendant€committed€the€"offense"€of€air€piracy€as€that€term€is€defined€in€Section€1472(n)(1)€and€then,€if€the€jury€found€theÐ ÄÄ Ðdefendant€guilty,€hear€evidence€relating€to€any€deaths€resulting€from€the€hijacking.€€(R.€38).€Defendant€argued€that€evidenceÐ ¨¨ Ðrelating€to€the€deaths€of€the€passengers€was€irrelevant€in€light€of€the€statutory€definition€of€the€offense.€€Alernatively,€defendantÐ ŒŒ Ðargued€that€the€evidence€should€be€excluded€under€Rule€403€of€the€Federal€Rules€of€Evidence.€€(A.€186„192).€€The€courtÐ pp Ðrefused€to€bifurcate€and€held€the€evidence€was€relevant€because€the€jury€"must€be€made€aware€of€the€full€nature,€including€allÐ TT Ðthe€elements,€of€an€offense€charged€in€the€indictment."€€òòUnited€States€v.€Rezaqóó,€908€F.Supp.€at€10„11.€€The€defendant€renewedÐ 88 Ðthis€objection€at€trial€(R.€243,€Tr.€1067),€and€again€it€was€overruled.€(Tr.€1069).Ð  Ðà @ àThe€defendant€also€moved€to€exclude€evidence€of€autopsy€reports,€photos€taken€during€the€autopsy,€and€the€testimony€ofÐ ÜÜ Ðpathologists,€offering€to€stipulate€that€Mendelsohn€and€Rogenkamp€died€as€a€result€of€being€shot€in€the€head.€(R.€138;€A.€234).€Ð ÀÀ ÐThe€court€ruled€this€evidence€admissible.€(A.€229).׃eOLOG×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú9Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×OLOG׀€These€objections€were€renewed€at€trial.€(Tr.€1390,€1324,€1380„81).€Ð ¤¤ Ðà @ à(2)€€The€evidenceÐ dd Ðà @ àThe€government€informed€the€jury€in€opening€statement€that€Nitzan€Mendelsohn€and€Scarlett€Rogenkamp€died€after€being€shotÐ $$ Ðby€the€defendant.€€(Tr.€€591,€597).€€In€addition€to€the€repetitive€and€compelling€testimony€introduced€concerning€each€of€theÐ  Ðshootings€×ƒfOLOG×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú10Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×OLOG׀the€government€called€Nitzan€Mendelsohn's€father.€€Identifying€her€blownup€photograph€he€testified€that€hisÐ ìì Ðdaughter€left€in€November€1985€to€travel.€€After€being€notified€of€his€daughter's€shooting€he€and€his€wife€went€to€Malta.€€HisÐ ÐÐ Ðdaughter€was€unconscious€in€the€Intensive€Care€Unit.€€She€died€after€seven€days€in€a€coma.€(Tr.€1185„88).€€Heddie€Peterson,€theÐ ´ ´  Ðmother€of€Scarlett€Rogenkamp,€offered€similar€testimony.€€(Tr.€1218„1225).€€€€€€Ð ˜!˜! Ðà @ àThe€government€then€called€Dr.€Michael€Clarke,€a€pathologist,€whose€testimony€was€not€limited€to€the€cause€of€death,€but€alsoÐ X#X# Ðencompassed€the€procedures€he€followed€in€conducting€the€autopsy,€which€he€described€in€graphic€detail.€€(Tr.€1374„1390)€€InÐ <$<$  Ðconnection€with€Clarke's€testimony,€the€government€introduced€a€series€of€photographs€to€show€the€"progression€of€the€autopsy."€Ð  % %! Ð(Tr.€1381).€€Included€were€photographs€depicting€the€back€of€Scarlett€Rogenkamp's€head€showing:€an€entrance€wound€andÐ &&" Ðbullet€hole,€a€closeup€€of€the€back€of€Ms.€Rogenkamp's€shaved€head€with€the€same€entrance€wound,€forceps€with€the€bulletÐ è&è&# Ðremoved€from€her€head,€€the€incision€in€the€scalp€and€the€bullet€embedded€in€bone€of€her€skull,€and€an€X„ray€of€her€headÐ Ì'Ì'$ Ðshowing€the€bullets€sticking€through€the€outer€surface€of€the€skull€bone.€€(A.€266„273).€€In€addition€graphic€testimony€describingÐ °(°(% Ðthe€autopsy€procedure,€the€photographs€were€displayed€in€a€manner€calculated€to€maximize€the€prejudicial€impact€on€the€jury,Ð ”)”)& Ðbeing€placed€on€an€easel€located€within€a€few€feet€of€the€jury€box.€€(Tr.€1388)€€After€describing€the€photographs€and€the€autopsyÐ x*x*' Ðprocedure€he€followed,€Dr.€Clarke€testified€that€the€cause€of€death€was€a€gunshot€wound€to€the€head.€€(Tr.€1388„89)€€ClarkeÐ \+\+( Ðwent€on€to€testify€that€he€had€reviewed€an€autopsy€that€had€been€conducted€on€Nitzan€Mendelsohn,€and€explained€the€cause€ofÐ @,@,) Ðher€death.€€(Tr.€1392„93)€Ð $-$-* Ðà @ àò òB.€€DiscussionÐ ä.ä.+ Ðó óà @ àFederal€Rule€of€Evidence€(FRE)€401€defines€"relevant€evidence"€as€that€having€"any€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€any€factÐ ¤0¤0, Ðthat€is€of€consequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidence."€Ð ˆ1ˆ1- ÐHowever,€even€if€evidence€is€relevant,€it€still€must€comply€with€€Rule€403,€which€provides€that€"relevant€evidence€may€beÐ l2l2. Ðexcluded€if€its€probative€value€is€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice."€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Doeóó,€903Ð ÜÜ ÐF.2d€16,€20„21€(D.C.€Cir.€1990).€€Evidence€is€unfairly€prejudicial€if€it€has€a€tendency€to€suggest€a€decision€on€an€emotional€orÐ ÀÀ Ðotherwise€improper€basis.€€òòIdóó.;€òòOld€Chief€v.€United€Statesóó,€117€S.Ct.€644,€650€(1997).€€Stated€otherwise,€evidence€is€unfairlyÐ ¤¤ Ðprejudicial€if€it€"appeals€to€the€jury's€sympathies,€arouses€its€sense€of€horror,€provokes€its€instincts€to€punish,€or€triggers€otherÐ ˆˆ Ðmainsprings€of€human€action...."€€òòUnited€States€v.€Blackstoneóó,€56€F.3d€1143€(9th€Cir.€1995),€quoting€1€òòWeinstein's€Evidenceóó€ððÐ ll Ð403[3],€pp.€37„41.€€Unless€the€reasoning€is€readily€apparent€from€the€record,€the€trial€judge€should€perform€on€on„the„recordÐ PP Ðbalancing€of€the€prejudicial€effect€versus€probative€value€of€the€evidence€in€order€to€facillitate€appellate€review.€€òòUnited€States€v.Ð 44 ÐManneróó,€887€F.2d€317€(D.C.€Cir.€1989).Ð  Ðà @ àEvidence€that€Mendelsohn€and€Rogenkamp€died€was€irrelevant€to€€determining€Rezaq's€guilt€or€innocence€of€the€statutoryÐ ØØ Ðoffense€of€air€piracy.€€While€defendant€originally€argued€that€even€evidence€of€the€shootings€was€irrelevant,€irrespective€of€theÐ ¼ ¼  Ðensuing€deaths,€the€insanity€defense€admittedly€made€the€shooting€evidence€admissible,€as€defendant's€actions€and€conductÐ      Ðduring€the€entire€incident€bore€on€his€state€of€mind.€€However,€whether€any€of€the€individuals€shot€by€defendant€died€shed€noÐ „ „  Ðlight€on€defendant's€mental€condition.€€The€deaths€were€relevant€only€to€the€penalty.Ð h h  Ðà @ àIn€response€to€the€defendant's€argument,€the€government€maintained€that€Section€1472(n)€defined€two€separate€offenses:€airÐ ((  Ðpiracy€and€air€piracy€resulting€in€death.׃gOLOG×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú11Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×OLOG׀€This€position€has€been€consistently€rejected€by€courts€considering€similar€"deathÐ    Ðresulting"€provisions€€of€other€statutes.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Ryanóó,€9€F.3d€660€(8th€Cir.€1993)(interpreting€provision€of€federalÐ ðð Ðarson€statute€providing€for€€increased€punishment€of€any€terms€of€years€up€to€life€or€death€as€a€mere€sentencing€enhancementÐ ÔÔ Ðrather€than€creating€a€separate€offense€of€death€resulting€from€arson);€€òòFonfrias€v.€United€Statesóó,€951€F.2d€423€(1st€Cir.Ð ¸¸ Ð1991)(similar€holding€as€to€increased€penalty€of€"life€or€death"€under€civil€rights€statute).€€Congressðð€intent€determines€whetherÐ œœ Ðstatutory€language€increasing€the€penalty€for€certain€conduct€is€a€sentencing€enhancement€or€a€separate€offense.€€òòUnited€States€v.Ð €€ ÐJacksonóó,€824€F.2d€21,€23€(D.C.Cir.€1987);€òòUnited€States€v.€Michaelóó,€10€F.3d€838€(D.C.Cir.€1993).€€While€resolution€of€thisÐ dd Ðissue€may€require€resort€to€legislative€history€in€close€or€ambiguous€cases,€òòJacksonóó,€at€24„26,€here€the€factors€which€courts€haveÐ HH Ðtraditionally€looked€to€clearly€€establish€that€subsection€(n)(1)(B)€is€only€a€penalty€provision.€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Ryanóó.€9€F.3dÐ ,, Ðat€667„669.€€€€€€€€€€€€Defendant€recognizes€that€cases€have€upheld€the€admissibility€€of€evidence€concerningò ò€€ó óthe€death€of€a€victimÐ  Ðunder€a€statute€providing,€as€here,€an€increased€penalty€when€death€"results"€from€the€offense.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Rivera„Ð úú ÐGomezóó,€67€F.3d€993€(1st€Cir.€1995)(under€carjacking€statute€evidence€of€shooting€of€victim€admissible€at€guilt€phase€evenÐ ÞÞ Ðthough€the€"resulting"€language€is€a€sentencing€enhancement).€€However,€the€issue€is€not€free€from€doubt,€as€the€statute€does€notР Ðlogically€lead€to€the€conclusion€that€such€evidence€should€be€admitted.€€This€was,€at€least,€implicitly€recognized€in€òòUnited€StatesÐ ¦¦ Ðv.€Williamsóó,€51€F.3d€1004,€1010„11€(11th€Cir.€1995),€where,€in€a€carjacking€prosecution,€the€11th€Circuit€expressed€doubt€asÐ ŠŠ Ðto€whether€a€passing€reference€to€the€fact€that€the€victim€died,€was€relevant.€€Though€upholding€the€trial€court's€exercise€ofÐ nn Ðdiscretion,׃hreat×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú12Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×reat׀the€court€indicated€that€if€it€were€reviewing€the€issue€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€it€would€probably€not€admit€the€evidence.€€As€did€theÐ RR Ðdistrict€court€in€òòWilliamsóó€here€the€court€should€have€granted€the€defendant's€motion€to€strike€the€references€in€the€indictment€toÐ 66 Ðthe€deaths€of€Mendelsohn€and€Rogenkamp€and€bifurcated€the€issue€of€whether€the€defendant€was€guilty€of€committing€theÐ   Ð"offense"€of€air€piracy€from€that€of€whether€a€death€resulted€from€commission€of€the€offense.€€Ð þþ! Ðà @ àHowever,€even€if€limited€evidence€pertaining€to€the€shooting€of€the€passengers€was€admissible,€for€instance,€to€establish€theÐ ¾!¾!" Ð"force€and€intimidation"€element€of€the€statute,׃jreat×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú13Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×reat׀the€concerted€effort€€of€the€government€to€try€this€case€as€a€homicide,€withÐ ¢"¢"# Ðemphasis€on€not€only€the€shootings€but€also€the€deaths€of€the€passengers€cannot€be€justified€as€an€attempt€to€prove€a€violation€ofÐ †#†#$ ÐSection€1472(n).€Ð j$j$% Ðà @ àDetailed€testimony€concerning€autopsy€procedures,€accompanied€by€graphic€photos€showing€the€"progress€of€the€autopsy",€(Tr.Ð *&*&& Ð1381),€was€both€irrelevant€and€unfairly€prejudicial.€€There€€was€no€relevance€to€photographs€depicting€the€back€of€ScarlettÐ ''' ÐRogenkamp's€head€with€an€entrance€wound€caused€by€gun€shot,€the€closeup€photograph€of€the€back€of€her€shaved€head€showingÐ ò'ò'( Ðthe€same€entrance€wound,€the€photograph€of€forceps€showing€bullet€removed€from€head,€depiction€of€the€incision€in€the€scalpÐ Ö(Ö() Ðand€the€bullet€embedded€in€bone€in€Ms.€Rogencamp's€skull,€and€an€X„ray€of€her€head€showing€the€bullets€sticking€through€theÐ º)º)* Ðouter€surface€of€the€skull€bone.€€(Tr.€1383„87).€€Even€if€the€court€was€not€required€to€bifurcate€and€the€government€not€requiredÐ ž*ž*+ Ðto€accept€defendant's€stipulation€that€death€resulted€from€the€shootings,€neither€this€photographic€evidence€nor€the€accompanyingÐ ‚+‚+, Ðdetailed€testimony€of€Dr.€Clarke,€beyond€a€mere€statement€of€the€cause€of€death,€made€the€existence€of€any€fact€of€consequenceÐ f,f,- Ðmore€probable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidence.€òòSeeóó€FRE€401.€€òòUnited€States€ex€rel.€Gonzales€v.€DeTellaóó,Ð J-J-. Ð918€F.Supp.€1214€(N.D.Ill.€1996)(photographs€showing€in€detail€decedent's€injuries€improperly€admitted€where€unecessarilyÐ ..../ Ðcumulative€to€testimony€concerning€the€cause€of€death).€Ð //0 Ðà @ àAfter€describing€the€photographs€and€the€autopsy€procedure€he€followed,€Dr.€Clarke€concisely€stated€that€the€cause€of€death€wasÐ Ò0Ò01 Ða€gunshot€wound€to€the€head.€€(Tr.€1388„89)€€No€testimony€beyond€this€was€relevant.€€Clarke€also€testified€in€simple€termsÐ ¶1¶12 Ðconcerning€the€cause€of€Nitzan€Mendelsohnððs€death.€€(Tr.€1392„93)€€Again,€this€testimony€encompassed€all€that€was€necessary.Ð š2š23 Ðà @ àThat€the€government's€intent€was€to€arouse€the€jury's€sympathies€and€sense€of€horror€is€demonstrated€not€only€by€the€evidenceÐ ÜÜ Ðitself,€but€also€by€the€manner€in€which€the€evidence€was€used.€€òòSeeóó€òòGomez€v.€Ahitowóó,€29€F.3d€1128,€1139€(7th€Cir.Ð ÀÀ Ð1994)(photographs€showing€gunshots€wounds€were€improperly€admitted€as€neither€fact€nor€cause€of€death€was€in€issue€andÐ ¤¤ Ð"only€conceivable€reason€for€placing€them€in€evidence€was€to€inflame€the€jury€[citation€omitted]").€€During€Clarkeððs€testimonyÐ ˆˆ Ðthe€autopsy€photographs€were€placed€on€an€easel€located€within€a€few€feet€of€the€jury€box.€€(Tr.€1388).€€In€closing€argument,€theÐ ll Ðgovernment€placed€the€blownup€photograph€of€Mendelsohn€and€the€enlarged€autograph€showing€the€X„ray€of€Rogenkamp'sÐ PP Ðhead€with€the€bullet€lodged€inside€on€an€easel€a€few€feet€in€front€of€the€jury.€€(Tr.€€3557).€€€While€such€use€of€evidence€€may€beÐ 44 Ðappropriate€in€a€homicide€case€or€where€death€is€an€element€of€the€offense,€the€issue€is€on€a€different€footing€when€the€evidenceÐ  Ðrelates€only€to€a€sentencing€enhancement€that€had€been€stipulated€to€by€the€defense.€€Regardless€of€whether€the€government€hadÐ üü Ðto€accept€the€defendant's€stipulation,€òòseeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Crowderóó,€87€F.3d€1405€(D.C.Cir.€1996)(in€banc),€òòcertóó€òògrantedóó€òòandóóÐ àà  Ðòòremandedóó,€117€S.Ct.€760€€(1967),€Rule€403€barred€"proving"€the€death€in€this€manner.Ð Ä Ä  Ðò òÓ@ÓIV.€THE€COURT€ERRED€IN€ALLOWING€TESTIMONY€THAT€IN€ADDITION€TO€THE€TWO€PEOPLE€WHOÐ „ „  ÐDIED€AS€A€DIRECT€RESULT€OF€THE€DEFENDANT'S€ACTIONS,€50„60€ADDITIONAL€PEOPLE€DIED€WHENÐ h h  ÐTHE€EGYPTIAN€FORCES€STORMED€THE€PLANE€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ó óÐ L L  ÐÌÓ@Óà @ àò òA.€òòProcedural€Backgroundóóó óÐ ÌÌ Ðà @ à(1)€€The€objectionsÐ ŒŒ Ðà @ àThe€defendant€moved€to€exclude€evidence€of€the€fact€that€57€passengers€died€during€the€rescue€attempted€by€the€EgyptianÐ LL ÐSecurity€Forces.€(R.€139).€€The€issue€was€argued€at€length€in€pretrial€proceedings.€(A.€204,€214;€Tr.€6„20„96€[Classified]).€€TheÐ 00 ÐCourt€held€that€the€evidence€was€relevant:€(1)€because€the€offense€does€not€end€until€competent€authorities€take€responsibilityÐ  Ðfor€the€aircraft€and€(2)€€to€show€that€the€defendant's€PTSD€may€have€been€caused€by€intervening€events€after€the€hijacking€suchÐ øø Ðas€the€death€of€the€57€additional€passengers.€(A.€238)Ð ÜÜ Ðà @ àDefendant€also€moved€to€exclude€evidence€that€pregant€women€and€children€were€aboard€the€airplane,€as€evidence€concerningÐ œœ Ðthe€nature€of€the€rescue,€as€ultimately€highlighted€by€reference€to€the€number€of€deaths,€would€unmistakenly€lead€to€theÐ €€ Ðinference€that€among€the€deceased€were€the€pregnant€women€and€children.€(R.139).€€The€court€also€ruled€this€evidenceÐ dd Ðadmissible.€(A.€238).€€€€At€trial€defendant€objected€to€the€introduction€of€photographs€of€the€burned€out€interior€of€the€plane.€(Tr.Ð HH Ð805).Ð ,, Ðà @ à(2)€The€evidence€Ð ìì Ðà @ àThe€fact€that€50„60€people€died€during€the€rescue€attempt€was€twice€brought€to€the€jury's€attention€through€leading€questions.€Ð ¬ ¬  ÐOn€cross„examination€the€prosecutor€questioned€Dr.€Dondershine€as€follows:€Ð !! ÐÓ@Óà @ àà @` àQ.€He€also€knows€that€there€may€be€50,€60€other€people€who€died€on€the€plane,€and€he's€thinking€about€that?Ð P#P# ÐÌà @ àà @` àA.€I'm€not€sure€specifically€what€he€knew€about€that.€€I€just€don't€have€any€information€on€it.Ð Ð&Ð&  ÐÌà @ àà @` à.Ð P*P*" Ðà @ àà @` à.Ð ,,# Ðà @ àà @` à.Ð Ð-Ð-$ ÐÌâ âà @ àà @` àQ.€No.€€My€question€is€whether€these€events€happened€in€between€the€time€they€occurrred€and€you€first€get€to€him€10€years€later.Ð P1P1& Їâ âà @ àà @` àA.€Yes.Ð ÜÜ ÐÌ(Tr.€2244„45).Ð \\ ÐÌÓ@ÓOn€direct€examination€the€prosecutor€asked€the€following€questions€of€Dr.€Patterson:€€Ð ÜÜ ÐÓ@Óà @ àà @` àQ:€And€if€in€examining€such€a€person,€after€being€shot,€if€the€person€learned€that€connected€with€the€act€which€you€have€underÐ œ œ  Ðstudy,€that€50€to€60€people€had€died,€would€that€be€an€event€which€might€have€meaning€to€you€as€a€medical€health€professional,Ð € €  Ðin€trying€to€answer€that€question€about€what€the€indivdual's€mental€condition€was€at€the€time€of€the€act€that€you€are€called€uponÐ d d  Ðto€judge?Ð H H  ÐÌà @ àà @` àA.€Yes.€€I'd€certainly€conduct€that€as€well.€€It's€another€important€factor.Ð ÈÈ  ÐÌ(Tr.€3331).Ð HH  Ðà @ àÌÓ@Óà @ àMultiple€references€were€made€to€the€fact€that€children€and€pregnant€women€on€board.€(Tr.€709,€779„80,€867).€Ð ÈÈ Ðà @ àò òB.€€òòDiscussionó óóóÐ ˆˆ Ðà @ àIn€addition€to€the€evidence€concerning€the€shooting€of€the€passengers€by€defendant€and€the€resulting€two€deaths,€the€governmentÐ HH Ðwent€further€and€brought€out€irrelevant€and€highly€prejudicial€evidence€that€50„60€additional€passengers€died€during€the€abortedÐ ,, Ðrescue€attempt€of€the€Egyptians.€€Ð  Ðà @ à€Evidence€of€the€explosion,€indiscriminate€shooting,€and€smoke€filling€the€plane,€as€described€by€the€passengers€and€the€pilot,Ð ÐÐ Ðperhaps€had€a€limited€bearing€on€the€defendant's€ability€to€function€under€the€circumstances€and€his€efforts€to€exit€the€planeÐ ´´ Ðarguably€bore€on€his€mental€condition.€€€However,€the€evidence€of€the€50„60€resulting€deaths€is€quite€different.€€This€evidenceÐ ˜˜ Ðhad€no€realistic€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€any€fact€of€consequence€more€or€less€probable€than€without€the€evidence€ofÐ | |  Ðthe€number€of€deaths.€€Whether€1,€10,€or€57€died€as€a€result€of€the€storming€shed€no€light€on€the€defendant's€state€of€mind,€nor€onÐ `!`! Ðany€other€issue€in€the€case.€€However,€the€reference€to€50„60€additional€deaths€had€a€strong€potential€for€unduly€arousing€theÐ D"D" Ðemotions€and€"sense€of€horror"€of€the€jury€and€€suggesting€a€decision€on€an€improper€basis.€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Blackstoneóó,Ð (#(# Ðòòsupraóó.Ð  $ $ Ðà @ àEven€before€asking€the€questions€of€Doctors€Dondershine€and€Patterson,€the€government€attempted€to€have€the€jury€infer€that€theÐ Ì%Ì% Ðrescue€had€been€disastrous.€€Captain€Galal€had€alluded€to€bodies€he€saw€(Tr.€802),€and,€over€objection,€the€government€hadÐ °&°& Ðbeen€allowed€to€introduce€photographs€of€the€burned€out€interior€of€the€plane,€(A.€287„88).€€This,€and€similar€testimony€of€otherÐ ”'”' Ðpassengers,€may€have€led€the€jury€to€infer€that€more€deaths€had€occurred.€€The€government's€questioning€of€Dondershine€andÐ x(x( ÐPatterson,€however,€brought€this€highly€prejudicial€fact€directly€home.€€Ð \)\) Ðà @ àIn€ruling€that€the€evidence€was€relevant€because€the€hijacking€did€not€end€until€responsible€authorities€took€possession€of€theÐ ++  Ðplane,€the€court€did€not€explain€why€this€fact€would€make€reference€to€the€50„60€deaths€relevant.€€Assuming€this€theory€mightÐ ,,! Ðsupport€admissibility€of€evidence€describing€particulars€of€the€rescue,€it€does€not€make€the€òòresultsóó€relevant.Ð ä,ä," Ðà @ àThe€second€basis,€which€had€been€proffered€by€the€government€was€equally€specious.€€Defense€experts'€diagnosis€related€to€theÐ ¤.¤.# Ðdefendant's€mental€condition€in€1985,€not€at€a€subsequent€time.€€To€the€extent€that€an€unlikely€scenario€could€be€concoted€thatÐ ˆ/ˆ/$ Ðthe€diagnosis€of€the€defendant's€mental€condition€was€somehow€influenced€by€subsequent€events,€that€possibility€could€easilyÐ l0l0% Ðâ âhave€been€established€by€asking€a€far€less€prejudicial€question€did€not€€have€as€its€predicate€the€50„60€deaths.€€€€€€€€Ð P1P1& ÐÓ@Óò òV.€THE€COURT€ERRED€IN€NOT€DECLARING€A€MISTRIAL€WHEN€TWA€FLIGHT€800€CRASHED€THEÐ ÜÜ Ðâ âEVENING€BEFORE€DELIBERATIONS€WERE€TO€COMMENCE€AND€WHERE€THE€UNSEQUESTERED€JURYÐ ÀÀ ÐWAS€EXPOSED€TO€MASSIVE€PREJUDICIAL€PUBLICITY€THAT€THE€CRASH€WAS€THE€RESULT€OFÐ ¤¤ ÐTERRORISM€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ó óÐ ˆˆ ÐÌò òÓ@Óà @ àA.€òòProcedural€BackgroundóóÐ  Ðó óà @ àOn€Wednesday€July€17€€the€government€gave€the€opening€portion€of€its€closing€argument.€€The€unsequestered€jury€was€sentÐ ÈÈ Ðhome€for€the€night.€(Tr.€3556).€€The€defense€argument€was€scheduled€for€the€following€morning,€to€be€followed€by€theÐ ¬ ¬  Ðgovernment's€rebuttal€argument.€€Sometime€after€8€p.m.€on€Wednesday€night,€TWA€Flight€800€crashed€under€suspiciousÐ    Ðcircumstances.€€Almost€immediately€after€the€plane€was€reported€missing,€television€stations€interrupted€regular€programming€toÐ t t  Ðcontinuously€report€every€known€detail€concerning€the€flight.€€Media€speculation€immediately€focused€on€possible€terrorism.Ð X X  Ðà @ àThe€following€morning,€Thursday,€July€18,€a€large,€front„page€headline€of€the€Washington€Post€read:€€"747€EXPLODES€WITHÐ   Ð229€ABOARD;€WRECKAGE€BURNS€OFF€N.Y.€COAST."׃lthe€×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú14Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×the€׀(A.€310).€€After€recounting€eyewitness€accounts€of€the€planeÐ üü  Ðexploding€and€descending€in€a€fireball,€the€front€page€article€reported€that€U.S.€officials€"at€this€time€had€no€reason€to€suspectÐ àà  Ðterrorism."€€òòWashington€Postóó,€July€18,€1996.€(A.€311).€€However,€the€article€went€on€to€report€that€"[A]€bomb€is€always€aÐ ÄÄ Ðpossibility"€and€noted€that€the€plane's€previous€departure€point€was€Athens,€which€is€"known€as€a€base€for€terrorists."€€òòIdóó.€€InÐ ¨¨ Ðaddition€to€the€prominent€articles€that€day€concerning€the€crash€of€TWA€Flight€800,€another€article€appearing€on€page€12€of€theÐ ŒŒ ÐPost€noted€in€headlines€that€the€U.S.€was€moving€4000€troops€to€Saudi€Arabia€"to€guard€against€terrorists."׃mthe€×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú15Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×the€׀(A.€313)Ð pp Ðà @ àPrior€to€his€argument€to€the€jury,€defense€counsel€brought€the€matter€of€the€crash€of€Flight€800€to€the€Court's€attention.€€Tr.Ð 00 Ð3567.€€After€a€brief€discussion€concerning€the€dilemma€presented€by€this€development,€the€Court€gave€the€jury€€a€generalÐ  Ðadmonition€that€the€crash€had€nothing€to€do€with€this€case€and€that€they€should€not€be€affected€in€any€way€during€this€"criticalÐ øø Ðstage€of€this€trial."€€(A.€296„97).€€However,€the€Court€did€not€instruct€the€jury€to€avoid€further€news€coverage€concerning€thisÐ ÜÜ Ðincident.€€òòIdóó.Ð ÀÀ Ðà @ àAfter€completion€of€€arguments€and€the€Courtððs€instructions,€the€jury€commenced€deliberations€on€Thursday€afternoon.€€Again,Ð €€ Ðthe€jury€was€not€sequestered€and€again,€when€excused€for€the€night,€the€€jurors€were€not€instructed€to€avoid€news€coverage€of€theÐ dd Ðevents€surrounding€the€crash€of€Flight€800.€€Tr.€€3696„97.€€€Ð HH Ðà @ àThe€publicity€and€attendant€speculation€concerning€the€crash€continued€to€increase€Thursday€evening€as€more€details€becameÐ  Ðavailable.€€On€Friday,€July€19,€a€large€front„page€headline€in€the€Washington€Post€read:€"CRASH€PROBE€CONSIDERSÐ ìì ÐSABOTAGE."€òòWashington€Postóó,€July€19,€1996.€(A.€314).€€Several€articles€concerning€the€crash€appeared€in€the€first€section€ofÐ ÐÐ Ðthe€paper€that€morning.€€The€front€page€article€reported€that€the€crash€cite€was€being€"treated€like€a€crime€scene,"€with€the€sceneÐ ´ ´  Ðbeing€processed€by€a€joint€anti„terrorism€task€force€monitored€by€the€FBI.€€òòIdóó.€€Another€article€noted€in€its€headline€that€the€crashÐ ˜!˜! Ðhad€intensified€the€concern€of€possible€terroristic€activity€at€the€upcoming€Olympics.€€(A.€315).€€Articles€detailed€the€wrenchingÐ |"|" Ðpersonal€stories€of€many€who€had€perished.€€(A.316„18).€€The€main€article€that€began€on€the€front€page€noted€the€eyewitnessÐ `#`#  Ðaccounts€of€a€midair€explosion€were€more€consistent€with€sabotage€than€mechanical€failure,€that€a€London„based€ArabicÐ D$D$! Ðnewspaper€had€received€a€facsimile€before€the€crash€that€predicted€"something€was€going€to€happens€to€the€Americans,"€and€thatÐ (%(%" Ðthe€White€House€"situation€room€was€abuzz€with€activity"€as€a€result€of€the€incident.€€òòIdóó.€€Another€article€was€headlined:Ð  & &# Ð"Federal€Legal€Authorities€Treat€Site€As€Crime€Scene."€€(A.€325).€€Finally,€an€article€headlined€"Greek€Officials,€TWAÐ ð&ð&$ ÐCrewman€Say€747€Underwent€Strict€Security€Checks€In€Athens",€detailed€lax€security€procedures€at€the€Athens€airport€in€recentÐ Ô'Ô'% Ðyears€and€made€reference€to€several€terrorist€incidents€that€originated€in€flights€from€Athens,€including€the€instant€offense.€€(A.Ð ¸(¸(& Ð327).Ð œ)œ)' Ðà @ àThe€coverage€in€the€Washington€Times€on€Friday,€July€19€was€of€a€similar€ilk.€€The€headline€across€the€top€of€page€one€read€Ð \+\+( Ð"POSSIBLE€TERRORISM€PROBED€IN€JET€CRASH."€€òòWashington€Timesóó,€July€19,€1996.€€(A.€328).€€One€article,€captionedÐ @,@,) Ð"Students€Wanted€To€See€World,"€€recounted€the€deaths€of€16€teens€from€a€Pennsylvania€high€school.€€(A.€329).€€Another,Ð $-$-* Ðcaptioned€"At€Least€Five€From€Area€Among€Victims€Of€Crash",€detailed€the€local€dimension€to€the€tragedy€of€Flight€800.€€(A.Ð ..+ Ð331).€€Another€made€the€terrorism€connection€in€its€headline:€€"TWA€All€Too€Familiar€With€Acts€Of€Terrorism".€€(A.€333).€Ð ì.ì., ÐOther€articles€on€page€15€were€captioned,€respectively:€"Airline€Security€Still€Lags€8€Years€After€Pan€Am€103"€€and€"SuspicionÐ Ð/Ð/- ÐFalls€On€Athens'€Airport€Security."€€(A.€334).Ð ´0´0. Ðà @ àAs€a€result€of€the€continued€prejudicial€publicity,€the€defendant€moved€for€a€mistrial€on€Friday€morning.€€(A.€298„309).€€TheÐ t2t2/ Ðcourt€denied€the€motion.€€At€approximately€3:00€p.m.€the€jury€found€the€defendant€guilty.€(A.€309).Ð ÜÜ Ðò òà @ àB.€òòDiscussionóóó óÐ œœ Ðà @ àSeveral€circuits€have€addressed€the€procedure€to€be€followed€by€a€trial€court€when€confronted€with€the€problem€of€potentially€Ð \\ Ðprejudicial€publicity€reaching€the€jury€during€trial.€€This€Court€recently€adopted€the€procedure€set€out€by€the€Third€Circuit€inÐ @@ ÐòòWaldorf€v.€Shutaóó,€3€F.3d€705,€710€(3d€Cir.€1993),€and€directed€that€in€response€to€such€publicity€the€trial€court€should:Ð $$ ÐÓ@Óà8 @ à"(1)€determine€if€material€is€prejudicial;€(2)€determine€whether€jurors€were€exposed€to€it;€and€(3)€examine€exposed€jurors€toÐ ää Ðdetermine€if€their€impartiality€was€compromised."Ð ÈÈ ÐÌòòÓ@ÓWilliams„Davisóó,€90€F.3d€490,€501€(D.C.Cir.€1996);€òòcfóó.€òòUnited€States€v.€Holtonóó,€(D.C.Cir.€1997),€slip.€op.€6„27„97.€€OtherÐ H H  Ðcourts€have€essentially€utilized€the€same€€test:€€òòUnited€States€v.€Gaggióó,€811€F.2d€47,€51€(2d€Cir.€1987).€€òòUnited€States€v.Ð , ,  ÐManzellaóó,€782€F.2d€533,€542€(5th€Cir.€1986).Ð   Ðà @ à(1)€Prejudicial€nature€of€the€materialÐ ÐÐ  Ðà @ àIn€determining€the€likelihood€of€prejudice€the€Court€should€look€at€such€factors€as€the€nature€of€the€publicity,€its€relationship€toÐ   Ðthe€case,€the€timing€of€the€media€coverage,€and€its€possible€effects€on€legal€defenses.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Manzellaóó,€782€F.2d€atÐ tt  Ð542;€òòUnited€States€v.€Williamsóó,€809€F.2d€1072,€1092€(5th€Cir.€1987).€€Ð XX Ðà @ àThe€publicity€surrounding€the€crash€of€TWA€Flight€800€was€extremely€damaging€to€the€defense.€€This€case€involved€theÐ  Ðhijacking€of€an€airplane€where€several€innocent€passengers€died.€€The€news€articles€emphasized€the€personal€stories€of€many€ofÐ üü Ðthe€passengers€who€perished€on€Flight€800,€as€a€result€of€what€was€widely€suspected€to€be€a€similar€terroristic€act€by€Islamic€orÐ àà ÐPalestinian€militants.€€The€connection€was€exacerbated€by€the€references€to€the€Saudi€Arabia€attack,€which€had€also€occurredÐ ÄÄ Ðduring€the€trial.€€There€were€additional€aspects€of€this€particular€incident€that€made€it€devastatingly€prejudicial€in€light€of€theÐ ¨¨ Ðtrial€testimony.€€The€defendant€had€testified€that€he€had€been€ordered€to€blow€up€Egyptair€Flight€656€in€midair€if€approached€byÐ ŒŒ Ðhostile€forces,€a€fact€that€was€emphasized€by€the€government€in€the€cross„examination€of€the€defendant,€the€examinations€of€theÐ pp Ðexperts€for€both€sides,€and€in€closing€argument.€(Tr.€2540,€2544,€2903„04,€3657).€€Further,€the€news€coverage€emphasized€theÐ TT Ðconnection€of€TWA€Flight€800€with€the€Athens€airport€and€the€fact€that€terrorists€have€often€operated€out€of€this€airport.€€€€TheÐ 88 Ðdefendant€and€his€confederates€had€boarded€Flight€656€in€Athens€and€government€witnesses€had€been€examined€closelyÐ  Ðconcerning€what€had€taken€place€in€Athens.€€(Tr.€€€€€€€).€The€defendant€had€been€cross„examined€concerning€the€manner€in€whichÐ  Ðthe€weapons€had€been€brought€aboard€the€plane€in€Athens.€(Tr.€€€€).€€In€light€of€the€timing€and€the€fact€that€TWA€Flight€800€hadÐ ää Ðoriginated€in€Athens,€it€is€conceivable€that€some€of€the€jurors€may€have€thought€that€the€downing€of€Flight€800€had€someÐ ÈÈ Ðconnection€to€this€case.€€€Ð ¬ ¬  Ðà @ àThe€publicity€surrounding€TWA€Flight€800€emphasized€the€enormity€of€what€had€taken€place€in€this€case€and€would€naturallyÐ l"l" Ðtend€to€impede€the€jurorsðð€impartial€consideration€of€a€responsibility€defense.€€The€fact€that€the€publicity€does€not€relate€directlyÐ P#P# Ðto€the€defendant's€case€is€not€controlling€where€the€article€contains€potentially€prejudicial€material€concerning€a€similarÐ 4$4$ Ðsituation.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Littlefieldóó,€752€F.2d€1429€(9th€Cir.€1985)(jurors€exposed€to€Time€magazine€article€on€similar€taxÐ %%  Ðshelters€for€which€defendants€on€trial).Ð ü%ü%! Ðà @ àAs€to€timing,€prejudicial€publicity€occurring€during€a€trial€is€more€likely€to€have€a€negative€impact€than€that€occurring€pretrial.€Ð ¼'¼'" ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Bermeaóó,€30€F.3d€€1539,€1557€(5th€Cir.€1994).€€€€Here,€the€timing€of€the€publicity€was€magnified€by€not€only€theÐ  ( (# Ðfact€that€it€occurred€midtrial€but€that€it€occurred€the€night€before€the€defense€was€to€give€its€closing€argument.€€òòSeeóó€òòWilliamsóó,Ð „)„)$ Ð809€F.2d€at€1092€(court€notes€that€the€publicity€began€at€a€particularly€harmful€time,€when€the€"defense€presented€its€side€of€theÐ h*h*% Ðstory").€Ð L+L+& Ðà @ àAs€to€the€impact€on€potential€defenses,€the€publicity€was€more€likely€to€affect€a€mental€responsibility€defense,€where€theÐ  - -' Ðdefendant€was€asking€to€be€excused,€than€a€defense€denying€involvement.Ð ð-ð-( Ѐ€(2)€Likelihood€the€material€reached€the€juryÐ °/°/) Ðà @ àNext,€the€Court€must€assess€the€likelihood€that€the€prejudicial€publicity€has,€in€fact,€reached€the€jury.€€The€prominence€of€theÐ p1p1* Ðcoverage€and€the€nature€and€number€of€warnings€against€viewing€the€coverage€are€factors€which€bear€on€this€inquiry.€€òòUnitedÐ T2T2+ ÐStates€v.€Manzellaóó,€782€F.2d€at€542.€€Here,€the€nature€and€extent€of€the€publicity€makes€it€almost€certain€that€most,€if€not€all,Ð ÜÜ Ðjurors€were€exposed€to€the€prejudicial€media€coverage.€€In€òòWilliamsóó€the€court€noted€that€that€similar€factors€inescapably€led€toÐ ÀÀ Ðconclusion€that€jurors€were€exposed.Ð ¤¤ ÐÓ@Óà8 @ àà8@` Ð Ð àThe€media€coverage€was€extensive,€including€front„page€color€photographs€with€accompanying€headlines€visible€at€anyÐ dd Ðnewspaper€vending€machine.€€The€jury€was€not€sequestered€and€the€information€was€not€published€in€an€obscure€way.Ð HH ÐÌÓ@Ó809€F.2d€at€1093.€€These€factors€are€all€present€here€to€an€even€greater€degree.€€In€addition,€in€contrast€to€òòWilliamsóó,€the€juryÐ ÈÈ Ðhere€was€not€instructed€on€Wednesday€morning€to€avoid€reading€about€or€listening€to€news€coverage€of€the€crash€of€TWA€FlightÐ ¬ ¬  Ð800.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Aragonóó,€962€F.2d€439€(5th€Cir.€1992)€(reversal€for€exposure€to€prejudicial€publicity€during€trialÐ    Ðwhere€trial€judge€had€not€instructed€jury€to€avoid€reading€or€listening€to€news€coverage).€€€In€fact,€the€court€assumed€that€theÐ t t  Ðjury€had€been€exposed€to€some€publicity.€€(A.€296„97€).€€Finally,€this€court€can€take€judicial€notice€that€both€the€print€andÐ X X  Ðbroadcast€media€gave€extensive€coverage€to€the€story€during€the€relevant€period.׃nteri×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú16Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×teri׀€Ð < <  Ѐ€€These€circumstances€make€it€virtually€certain€that€the€jurors€in€this€case€were€exposed€to€substantial€prejudicial€publicityÐ üü  Ðsurrounding€the€crash€of€Flight€800.€Ð àà  Ðà @ à(3)€Likely€impact€on€impartialityÐ    Ðà @ àWhere€it€is€determined€that€the€jury€has€indeed€been€exposed€to€prejudicial€publicity€during€the€trial,€the€district€court€need€notÐ `` Ðautomatically€declare€a€mistrial.€€However,€irrespective€of€whether€a€general€presumption€of€prejudice€automatically€arises,€theÐ DD Ðcourt€€"must€€ultimately€[make]€some€judgment€as€to€the€likely€impact€on€impartiality."€€òòWilliams„Davisóó,€90€F.3d€at€502.€Ð (( ÐWhere€the€jurors€have€been€exposed€to€prejudicial€publicity€during€the€trial,€the€cases€agree€on€the€mechanism€by€which€thatÐ    Ðdetermination€is€made:€€the€trial€court€should€individually€examine€each€of€the€jurors€to€determine€whether€the€publicity€hasÐ ðð Ðprejudiced€the€juror€to€the€extent€that€he€or€she€is€no€longer€able€to€impartiality€decide€the€case.€òòId.óó€at€501;€€òòUnited€States€v.Ð ÔÔ ÐGaggióó,€811€F.2d€at€47;€òòWaldorfóó,€3€F.3d€at€709„10.€€€Here,€no€individual€voir€dire€was€conducted;€instead€only€a€general€inquiryÐ ¸¸ Ðwas€made€of€the€panel€on€Thursday€morning€and€none€on€Friday.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Lordóó,€565€F.2d€831,€838€(2d€Cir.Ð œœ Ð1977)(trial€court€erred€in€relying€solely€on€repetitive€admonitions€to€avoid€news€coverage€in€light€of€the€substantial€publicity).€€Ð €€ ÐWhile€a€defendant€may€need€to€show€actual€prejudice€where€the€prejudicial€effect€of€the€publicity€is€not€great€or€the€likelihoodÐ dd Ðof€its€reaching€the€jury€minimal,€òòUnited€States€v.€Manzellaóó,€782€F.2d€at€543,€where€the€likelihood€of€exposure€to€prejudicialÐ HH Ðpublicity€was€great,€and€the€jurors€were€not€individually€examined,€its€effect€on€the€jurors'€impartiality€must€be€presumed.€òòSeeóóÐ ,, ÐòòMarshall€v.€United€Statesóó,€€360€U.S.€310,€312€(1959);€òòcfóó.€òòUnited€States€v.€Holtonóó,€òòsupraóó,€slip€op.€at€19„20€(implying€"specialÐ  Ðcircumstances"€may€justify€finding€a€presumption€of€prejudice).Ð ôô Ðà @ àHere,€where€the€jury€was€undoubtedly€exposed€to€highly€prejudicial€publicity€at€a€critical€time€of€the€trial,€and€where€adequateÐ ´ ´  Ðprecautions€were€not€taken€to€ensure€the€jurors'€impartiality,€this€Court€should€order€a€new€trial.€€ò òÓ@ÓÐ ˜!˜! ÐÌVI.€WHERE€A€DEFENDANT€HAS€PREVIOUSLY€BEEN€CONVICTED€OF€VIOLENT€ACTS€ASSOCIATEDÐ %%  ÐWITH€THE€CRIME€OF€AIR€PIRACY€AND€SEVERELY€PUNISHED€FOR€THOSE€ACTS,€CONGRESS€DID€NOTÐ ü%ü%! ÐINTEND€THAT€THE€"LIFE€OR€DEATH"€PENALTY€PROVISION€OF€49€U.S.C.Ð à&à&" Ðà @ àððÔ‡XkÈXX„XáàԀ1472(N((1)(B)€WOULD€APPLY€€€€€€Ð  ( (# ÐÌÔ#†„XáàXXXkÈ4X#Ôó óà @ àò òA.€€Procedural€Backgroundó óÐ ,,,,% ÐÌÓ@Óà @ àThe€defendant€contended€that€Section€1742(n)(1)(B)€was€inapplicable€and€the€maximum€sentence€was€therefore€20€years.€Ð ¬/¬/' Ðâ âThe€court€disagreed.€òòUnited€States€v.€Rezaqóó,€899€F.€Supp.€697€(D.D.C.€1995).Ð l1l1( ÐÓ@Óà @ à(1)€In€Enacting€the€Antihijacking€Statute,€Congress€Ð ÜÜ Ðâ âà @ à€€€€€Only€Intended€to€Establish€Jurisdiction€ConsistentÐ œœ Ðà @ àà @` àWith€That€Contemplated€by€the€Hague€ConventionÐ \\ ÐÌÓ@Óà @ àEven€if€the€Hague€Convention,€and€consequently€Congress€in€adopting€its€contemplated€jurisdiction,€did€intend€to€authorize€€airÐ ÜÜ Ðpiracy€prosecutions€where€a€defendant€has€been€previously€convicted€of€related€crimes€in€another€country,€Paragraph€1€ofÐ ÀÀ ÐArticle€4€makes€it€clear€that€jurisdiction€was€not€contemplated€over€violent€crimes€associated€with€that€offense€except€under€theÐ ¤ ¤  Ðcircumstances€described€therein€„€none€of€which€are€present€here.€€òòSeeóó€Argument€I.€€The€application€of€subsection€(n)(1)(B)€to€aÐ ˆ ˆ  Ðsituation€not€authorized€by€Article€4,€Par.€1€is€outside€the€contemplated€jurisdiction€since€imposition€of€a€life€or€death€sentence€ifÐ l l  Ða€death€results€from€the€hijacking€essentially€amounts€to€an€assumption€of€jurisdiction€over€the€violent€acts€associated€with€theÐ P P  Ðhijacking.€€€Because€Congress€only€intended€to€adopt€jurisdiction€contemplated€by€the€Convention€and€the€latter€did€not€conferÐ 4 4  Ðsuch€jurisdiction,€the€"life€or€death"€provision€is€inapplicable.€€Thus,€in€sentencing€defendant€the€court€was€limited€to€the€20Ð   Ðyears€authorized€by€subsection€(n)(1)(a).Ð üü  ÐÓ@Óà @ à(2)€€The€Hague€Convention€Did€Not€Contemplate€Jurisdiction€€€€€€€€In€This€CaseÐ ¼¼  Ѐ€€Ð || ÐÓ@Óà @ àIn€addition€to€paragraphs€1€and€2,€paragraph€3€of€Article€4€provides€an€alternate€basis€for€jurisdiction.€€This€section€providesÐ << Ðthat€the€Convention€does€"not€exclude€any€criminal€jurisdiction€exercised€in€accordance€with€national€law."€€The€ConventionÐ    Ðthus€contemplated€that€the€Contracting€States€may€acquire€jurisdiction€over€the€associated€violent€crimes€under€their€own€lawÐ  Ðirrespective€of€the€jurisdiction€conferred€by€the€treaty.€€€Two€arguments€suggest€that€Congress€did€not€intend€to€invokeÐ èè Ðjurisdiction€under€Section€1472(n)(1)(B)€on€a€basis€independent€of€that€of€the€Convention.€€First,€although€òòYunisóó€recognizedÐ ÌÌ Ðthat€Congress€can€make€statutes€applicable€extraterritorially€even€if€such€jurisdiction€would€not€be€recognized€under€generallyÐ °° Ðaccepted€principles€of€international€law,€€924€F.2d€at€1091,€Congress€€specifically€stated€its€intention€was€to€invoke€theÐ ”” Ðjurisdiction€of€the€Convention.€€Though€enpowered€to€do€so,€it€did€not€indicate€an€alternative€basis.€€Ð xx Ðà @ àSecond,€the€part€of€the€statute€conferring€jurisdiction€over€the€deaths€of€civilians€overseas€does€not€appear€to€have€an€alternativeÐ 88 Ðjurisdictional€basis€that€is€generally€accepted€in€our€law.€€Though€Congress€was€not€restricted€by€such€principles,€òòidóó.,Ð  Ðinternational€law€generally€recognizes€five€distinct€bases€for€a€sovereign€to€assert€extraterritorial€jurisdiction.€€RestatementÐ  Ð(Third)€Of€The€Foreign€Relations€Of€The€United€States,€ðð€402,404€(1987)(hereinafter€"Restatement").€€Of€these€only€theÐ ää Ðpassive€personality€principle€might€be€applicable€to€justify€the€United€States'€taking€jurisdiction€over€the€death€of€€Ms.Ð ÈÈ ÐRogenkamp€in€Malta.׃oteri×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú17Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×teri׀€€This€theory€allows€a€state€to€assume€jurisdiction€of€crimes€committed€against€its€nationals€overseas.€Ð ¬ ¬  ÐRestatement,€òòsupraóó,€ðð€402.€€However,€Anglo„American€jurisdictions,€including€the€United€States,€have€traditionally€opposed€thisÐ !! Ðtheory€of€jurisdiction.€€Donnelly,€òòExtraterritorial€Jurisdiction€Over€Acts€of€Terrorism€Committed€Abroadóó,€72€Cornell€L.€Rev.Ð t"t" Ð599€(1987);€Abramovsky,€òòExtraterritorial€Jurisdiction:€The€United€States€Unwarranted€Attempt€To€Alter€International€Law€InÐ X#X# ÐUnited€States€v.€Yunisóó,€15€Yale€J.€International€Law€121€(1990).€€While€cases€can€be€found€articulating€the€passive€personalityÐ <$<$  Ðprinciple€as€an€òòalternativeóó€basis€of€jurisdiction,€òòseeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Benitezóó,€741€F.2d€1312€(11th€Cir.€1984),€it€does€not€appearÐ  % %! Ðthat€our€courts€have€accepted€this€theory€as€the€òòsoleóó€basis€of€jurisdiction.€Abramovsky,€òòsupraóó;€€òòUnited€States€v.€Columba„Ð &&" ÐColellaóó,€604€F.2d€356€(1979).€€The€Restatement€also€generally€rejects€this€basis€of€jurisdiction.€€Restatement,€òòsupraóó,€ðð€402(g).€Ð è&è&# ÐRejection€of€this€principle€explains€why€acts€of€violence,€including€murders€committed€against€United€States'€citizens€overseas,Ð Ì'Ì'$ Ðare€generally€not€prosecutable€in€the€courts€of€this€country€absent€a€showing€that€the€murdered€citizen€was€a€Congressman,€òòseeóóÐ °(°(% ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Laytonóó,€855€F.2d€1388€(9th€Cir.€1988)(Congressman€killed€in€Jonestown€incident€in€Guyana)€or€a€protectedÐ ”)”)& Ðofficial€of€the€United€States€government.€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Benitezóó,€òòsupraóó,€(DEA€agent).Ð x*x*' Ðà @ àFurther,€€the€fact€that€Congress€did€not€intend€to€justify€Section€1472(n)(1)(B)€under€a€passive€protective€principle€ofÐ 8,8,( Ðjurisdiction€is€evidenced€by€the€fact€that€the€statute€does€not€require€that€a€United€States'€citizen€lose€his€life,€which€would€be€theÐ --) Ðbasis€of€invoking€this€jurisdictional€theory.€Ð ..* Ðà @ àThe€"life€or€death"€penalty€of€subsection€(n)(1)(B)€applies€to€€those€cases€where€jurisdiction€lies€under€Article€4€for€the€violentÐ À/À/+ Ðacts€associated€with€the€hijacking.€€In€those€situations€where€a€death€results€from€the€associated€violent€acts,€a€sentence€of€life€orÐ ¤0¤0, Ðdeath€may€be€imposed.€€Where€Article€4€jurisdiction€does€not€lie,€the€maximum€sentence€is€20€years€pursuant€to€subsectionÐ ˆ1ˆ1- Ð(n)(1)(A).€€€Ð l2l2. ÐÓ@Óò òVII.€THERE€WAS€INSUFFICIENT€EVIDENCE€TO€SUPPORT€THE€COURT'S€RESTITUTION€ORDER€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ÜÜ Ѐ€€€€€€€ó óÐ ÀÀ ÐÌÓ@Óà @ àò òA.€€òòProcedural€backgroundóóó óÐ @@ Ðà @ àShortly€before€sentencing€the€Probation€Office€forwarded€a€memorandum€to€the€court€suggesting€restitution€in€the€amount€ofÐ  Ð$259,000,€broken€down€as€follows:Ð ää Ðà @ àTamar€Artzi€€€€$€€12,000Ð ¤ ¤  Ðà @ àElham€Mohamed€Diraz€€€$€100,000Ð d d  Ðà @ àAhmed€Mahmoud€Fouad€€€$€€32,000Ð $ $  Ðà @ àAnthony€Lyons€€€€$€€13,000Ð ää  Ðà @ àImad€Mounib€€€€€$€€€2,000Ð ¤¤  Ðà @ àJackie€Pflug€€€€$€100,000Ð dd  ÐÌThese€amounts€were€taken€from€Victim€Impact€Statements€(VIS),€which€were€attached€to€the€government's€sentencingÐ ää  Ðmemorandum.€€(A.€344).€€Later,€the€government€forwarded€the€court€a€VIS€for€Edward€Leonard€and€requested€that€he€beÐ ÈÈ Ðawarded€restitution€in€the€amount€of€$€5000.€€(Tr.€10„7„96,€17).Ð ¬¬ Ðà @ àDefendant€objected€that€the€submitted€amounts€were€too€vague€and€undocumented€to€justify€an€order€of€restitution.€(A.€337).׃pteri×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú18Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×hori׀Ð ll ÐThe€defendant€maintained€that€the€court€"should€require€more€specific€detail€and€itemization€of€the€losses€and/or€expensesÐ PP Ðclaimed€including€the€dates€of€payments,€the€payees,€and€the€purpose€of€the€services€to€ensure€that€any€claims€fall€within€what€isÐ 44 Ðallowable€restitution€under€the€statute."€€(A.€at€2).€The€defense€also€pointed€out€€that€the€statute€does€not€provide€for€an€awardÐ  Ðfor€pain€and€suffering,€which€appeared€to€be€the€basis€of€much€of€the€claims.€€òòIdóó.€€Further,€the€defendant€noted€that€Rezaq€didÐ üü Ðnot€have€financial€resources.€€€€€Ð àà Ðà @ àWithout€addressing€the€issues€raised€by€the€defense,€the€Court€simply€ordered€restitution€in€the€above€requested€amounts.€Ð    Ð(A.€340).€Ð `!`! Ðà @ àò òB.€€òòDiscussionóóÐ  # # ÐÓ@Óà @ àà @` à(1)€The€court€abused€its€discretion€in€ordering€restitution€in€amounts€that€were€not€adequately€established€to€beÐ à$à$ Ðsubject€to€an€order€of€restitution.ó óÐ Ä%Ä% ÐÌÓ@Óà @ àWhere€a€defendant€claims€the€PSI's€calculation€of€restitution€is€incorrect,€the€court€must€make€a€finding€of€the€correct€amountÐ D)D) Ðpursuant€to€the€procedures€of€Rule€32,€FRCrP.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Weichertóó,€836€F.2d€769,€772€(2d€Cir.€1988).€€Factfinding€mayÐ (*(* Ðnot€be€delegated€to€the€probation€officer.€€òòIdóó.€€at€772.€€€The€computation€of€restitution€must€be€accurate.€òòUnited€States€v.Ð  + + ÐForzeseóó,€756€F.2d€217€(1st€Cir.€1985).€€Unsubstantiated€claims€may€not€form€the€basis€of€a€restitution€order.€€òòWeichertóó,€836Ð ð+ð+ ÐF.2d€at€€771.€€Where€the€amount€is€contested,€the€mere€submission€of€a€list€of€amounts,€without€itemization,€is€insufficient€proof.€Ð Ô,Ô,  ÐòòForzeseóó,€€756€F.2d€at€222.€€Ð ¸-¸-! Ðà @ àThere€were€two€major€problems€with€the€amount€of€restitution€ordered.€€First,€the€amounts€requested€were€almost€totallyÐ x/x/" Ðunsubstantiated€not€only€as€to€the€figure,€but€also€as€to€the€payee€or€purpose.€€The€government€submitted€"Victim€ImpactÐ \0\0# ÐStatements"€for€the€€€victims€for€whom€restitution€was€ordered.€(A.€344„86).€€These€were€apparently€filled€out€by€the€victims.€Ð @1@1$ ÐWithout€critical€examination,€these€amounts€were€used€by€the€probation€officer€and€were€the€amounts€ordered€by€the€court,€alsoÐ $2$2% Ðwithout€further€inquiry.€€Ð ÜÜ Ðà @ àThe€statements€are€not€sufficiently€detailed€or€substantiated€to€support€the€order€of€restitution.€€For€instance,€restitution€ofÐ œœ Ð$32,000€was€ordered€to€Ahmed€Fouad.€€His€VIS€states€that€he€lost€$10,000€in€property€and€$20,000€in€income€or€wages.€€LikeÐ €€ Ðmost€of€the€claims€in€the€other€VISs€the€figures€are€in€round€numbers€indicating€an€estimation€or€approximation€with€no€attemptÐ dd Ðto€itemize€or€specify€the€basis€of€this€claim.€€There€is€no€indication€of€amounts€paid,€to€whom,€when€paid,€or€for€what€specificÐ HH Ðpurpose.€€This€provides€no€basis€to€determine€the€legitimacy€of€any€of€this€claim.€€Like€several€others,€it€appears€that€the€victimÐ ,, Ðmay€have€sought€compensation€for€pain€and€suffering.€(A.€344„46).€€Ð  Ðà @ àJackie€Pflug€was€awarded€$100,000€on€a€similarly€flawed€claim.€€She€initially€filled€out€a€VIS€that€simply€stated€she€hadÐ ÐÐ Ðincurred€"thousands"€in€hospital€and€medical€expenses.€€(A.€350„52).€€Later,€apparently€in€response€to€a€phone€call€€from€theÐ ´ ´  Ðprosecutor€she€wrote€in€a€letter€than€her€loss€was€over€$100,000,€again€with€no€supporting€detail€or€itemization.€€(A.€353).€€ThisÐ ˜ ˜  Ðformed€the€basis€for€her€restitution€award.Ð | |  Ðà @ àThe€VIS€statement€of€Elham€Diraz,€who€was€awarded€$100,000€is€even€more€problematic.€€Her€VIS€shows€lost€income€in€the€Ð < <  Ðamount€of€$84,000.€€(A.€356).€There€is€no€attempt€to€explain€how€she€would€have€lost€this€much€income,€which,€based€on€herÐ     Ð$3500€a€month€figure,€would€be€two€years€wages.€€Nothing€in€the€description€of€her€injuries€gives€any€€indication€why€sheÐ   Ðwould€€have€missed€work€for€two€years.€(A.€354).€€Some€of€her€other€unsubstantiated€amounts€are€also€questionable.׃qhori×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú19Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×hori×Ð èè Ðà @ àA€second€problem€with€the€restitution€order€is€that€some€of€the€VIS€apparently€sought€compensation€for€pain€and€suffering.€€Ð ¨¨ ÐAn€award€for€restitution€under€the€Victim€and€Witness€Protection€Act€of€1982€is€limited€to€the€specific€kinds€of€harmsÐ hh Ðenumerated€in€the€statute.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Keithóó,€754€F.2d€1388€(9th€Cir.€1988);€òòUnited€States€v.€Huskyóó,€924€F.2d€223€(11thÐ LL ÐCir.€1991);€òòUnited€States€v.€Casamentoóó,€887€F.2d€1141€(2d€Cir.€1989).€€Victims€cannot€be€compensated€for€mental€anguish€orÐ 00 Ðpain€and€suffering.€€òòHuskyóó,€924€F.2d€at€226.€€Ð  Ðà @ àCounsel€will€not€further€parse€the€VIS,€which€were€uncritically€used€as€the€basis€of€restitution.€€A€cursory€examination€showsÐ ÔÔ Ðthat€the€amounts€were€mostly€unsubstantiated,€often€appeared€to€be€mere€estimates,€and€in€several€cases€sought€restitution€forÐ ¸¸ Ðitems€not€subject€to€a€restitution€order€under€the€Victim€and€Witness€Protection€Act.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð œœ ÐÓ@Óò òà @ à(2)€The€court€abused€its€discretion€in€ordering€defendant€to€€€€€€pay€sums€of€restitution€for€which€there€was€no€showingÐ \\ Ðof€€€€€€an€ability€to€payÐ @@ Ðó óÌÓ@Óà @ àThe€Act€mandates€consideration€of€€defendant's€ability€to€pay€restitution,€taking€into€account€his€financial€needs€and€resources.€Ð ÀÀ ÐThough€detailed€findings€need€not€be€entered,€the€record€must€indicate€that€the€district€court€considered€the€defendant's€ability€toÐ ¤ ¤  Ðpay.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Sotoóó,€47€F.3d€546,€550„51€(2d€Cir.€1995);€òòUnited€States€v.€Remillongóó,€55€F.3d€572€(11th€Cir.€1995).€Ð ˆ!ˆ! ÐThe€mere€fact€that€the€PSR€contains€information€on€this€issue€is€not€sufficient.€€òòIdóó.;€òòbutóó€òòseeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Cannizzaroóó,€871Ð l"l" ÐF.2d€809€(9th€Cir.€1989).€€The€Court€should€make€€factual€findings€relevant€to€the€type€and€amount€of€restitution€andÐ P#P# Ðdefendant's€ability€to€pay€in€light€of€his€resources€and€needs.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Brucheyóó,€810€F.2d€456€(4th€Cir.€1987).€€An€orderÐ 4$4$ Ðof€restitution€with€which€the€defendant€cannot€possibly€comply€is€a€"sham"€and€will€be€reversed€for€abuse€of€discretion.€òòUnitedÐ %%  ÐStates€v.€Pattyóó,€992€F.2d€1045,€1052€(10th€Cir.€1993);€òòUnited€States€v.€Remillongóó,€òòsupraóó.€€€€€€€Here,€the€PSR€indicated€thatÐ ü%ü%! Ðdefendant€had€no€significant€resources.€€After€sentencing€defendant€to€life€imprisonment,€the€court€erred€in€giving€noÐ à&à&" Ðconsideration€to€defendantððs€ability€to€pay€the€ordered€restitution.€€€ò òÐ Ä'Ä'# ÐÓ@ÓIX.€THE€COURT€ERRED€IN€CONDUCTING€EX€PARTE€SUBSTITUTION€PROCEEDINGS€UNDER€THEÐ „)„)$ ÐCLASSIFIED€INFORMATION€PROCEDURES€ACTó óÐ h*h*% ÐÌÌÓ@Óà @ àò òA.€€òòProcedural€backgroundóóó óÐ ¨/¨/( Ðà @ àIn€response€to€discovery€requests€the€government€filed€a€motion€seeking€permission€to€make€òòexóó€òòparteóó€filings€pursuant€to€SectionÐ h1h1) Ð4€of€the€Classified€Information€Procedures€Act€("CIPA")€in€support€of€an€accompanying€motion€to€deny€or€limit€discovery€inÐ L2L2* Ðcertain€unspecified€aspects.€€(R.€61).€€€The€government€later€filed€similar€motions.€(R.€126).€€Defendant€opposed€the€attempt€toÐ ÜÜ Ðconduct€òòexóó€òòparteóó€proceedings.€€(R.€71).€€After€initially€indicating€a€reluctance€to€participate€in€òòexóó€òòparteóó€discussions,€the€Court€Ð ÀÀ Ðchanged€course€and€granted€the€government€permission€to€make€such€filings.€(R.€126).€€€€€Thereafter,€the€record€wouldÐ ¤¤ Ðperiodically€reflect€that€the€government€had€made€an€òòexóó€òòparteóó€filing€of€materials,€the€nature€of€which€were€unspecified.€(R.€126,Ð ˆˆ Ð159).€€òòExóó€òòparteóó€hearings€were€conducted€with€the€district€court€considering€whether€these€unspecified€materials€must€beÐ ll Ðdisclosed,€and,€if€so,€in€what€form.€€The€court€issued€a€classified€memorandum€opinion€that€was€apparently€initially€contrary€toÐ PP Ðthe€government's€interest,€as€the€trial€was€continued€to€allow€the€government€to€either€file€a€motion€to€reconsider€or€appeal€theÐ 44 Ðcourt's€ruling€on€an€"issue€of€first€impression."€(R.€218;€Tr.€3„21„96,€2).€€Apparently,€the€government€successfully€moved€toÐ  Ðreconsider,€as€no€appeal€was€taken.€Ð üü Ðà @ àAs€a€result€of€these€òòexóó€òòparteóó€proceedings€the€defense€was€given€several€short€summaries€of€what€was€apparently€discoverableÐ ¼ ¼  Ðinformation€in€its€original€form.€€Counsel€then€gave€notice€under€Section€5€of€CIPA€as€to€portions€of€the€classified€summariesÐ      Ðthe€defense€wanted€to€introduce.€€€Section€6€substitution€hearings€were€held€€and,€for€the€most€part,€counsel€was€allowed€to€useÐ „ „  Ðthe€summaries€in€the€redacted€form€that€they€were€given€to€the€defense.€€€Protective€orders€had€been€entered€(R.€82,€117),€andÐ h h  Ðdefense€counsel€signed€a€Memorandum€of€Understanding€concerning€limitations€on€the€use€of€classified€information.€€(A.€159).€Ð L L  Ðà @ àò òB.€€òòDiscussionó óóóÐ    Ðà @ àSection€4€of€CIPA€provides€that€the€court,€upon€a€sufficient€showing,€may€authorize€the€government€to€delete€specified€items€ofÐ ÌÌ Ðclassified€information€from€documents€that€are€otherwise€discoverable€by€the€defense.€€The€showing€may€be€made€òòexóó€òòparteóó.€Ð °° ÐCIPA€does€not€specify€what€constitutes€a€"sufficient€showing."€€However,€this€Court€has€held€that€a€showing€that€the€documentsÐ ”” Ðcontain€sensitive€information€about€intelligence€sources€and€methods€is€sufficient€to€justify€deletion€of€such€material.€€€òòUnitedÐ xx ÐStates€v.€Yunisóó,€867€F.2d€617€(D.C.€Cir.€1989).€€Ð \\ Ðà @ àSince€the€defendant€was€not€a€party€to€the€proceedings€which€resulted€in€the€substituted€summaries,€and€has€never€seen€theÐ  Ðmaterial,€he€is€not€in€a€position€to€argue€the€harm,€if€any,€he€suffered€from€the€deletions€and€substitutions.€€€Defendant€requestsÐ  Ðthat€this€Court€review€the€original€classified€information€and€the€proceedings€held€òòinóó€òòcameraóó€to€determine€whether€theÐ ää Ðsubstituted€summaries€were€as€"helpful€to€the€defense"€as€the€original€undeleted€documents€would€have€been.׃shori×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú20Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×hori׀€If€theÐ ÈÈ Ðsubstitutions€were€not€as€helpful,€then€the€district€court€should€have€ordered€disclosure€in€their€original€form€with€redactions€ofÐ ¬¬ Ðintelligence€sources€and€methods€or€other€equally€sensitive€material.׃thori×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú21Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×hori׀€Ð  Ðà @ àIn€reviewing€the€classified€material€and€evaluating€the€adequacy€of€the€substituted€summary,€defendant€asks€the€Court€toÐ PP Ðconsider€several€factors.׃whori×Ý ƒ‡M)ÝÔÿÔòòòò(Ú  Ú22Ú  Ú)óóóóÔÿÔÝ  Ý×hori׀€First,€òòexóó€òòparteóó€proceedings€are€generally€not€favored€in€our€adversarial€system,€as€counsel,€and€notÐ 44 Ðthe€court,€is€in€the€best€position€to€assert€the€defendant's€interest.ò ò€ó óòòUnited€States€v.€Aldermanóó,€394€U.S.€165,€181„84€(1969);Ð  ÐòòUnited€States€v.€Presseróó,€828€F.2d€330€(6th€Cir.€1987).€€Here,€counsel€was€unable€to€advance€the€defendant's€position,€even€onÐ üü Ðissues€of€"first€impression."€€Ð àà Ðà @ àSecond,€unlike€òòYunisóó,€where€the€deletions€related€to€conversations€to€which€the€defendant€had€been€a€party,€Rezaq€presumablyÐ  ! ! Ðdoes€not€have€personal€knowledge€of€the€deleted€information€and€thus€cannot€easily€demonstrate€with€specificity€how€theÐ „"„"  Ðdeleted€information€might€have€benefitted€him.Ð h#h#! Ðà @ àThird,€the€propriety€of€deletion€of€the€classified€material€should€be€discounted€where,€as€here,€defense€counsel€has€obtained€theÐ (%(%" Ðnecessary€security€clearance€and€where€the€court€has€entered€a€detailed€protective€order€prohibiting€unlawful€disclosures.€€GivenÐ  & &# Ðthis,€the€threshold€showing€authorizing€deletions€should€be€raised.Ð ð&ð&$ Ðà @ àFourth,€the€substituted€materials€consist€of€simple€statements€of€ultimate€facts€with€little€explanatory€or€enriching€detail.€€To€theÐ °(°(% Ðextent€that€deletions€are€appropriate,€they€should€be€limited€to€the€type€of€material€authorized€by€the€case€law,€such€asÐ ”)”)& Ðintelligence€sources€and€methods.€€Wholesale€deletions€of€the€substance€of€discoverable€material,€with€the€substitution€of€onlyÐ x*x*' Ðthe€ultimate€fact€that€may€be€of€relevance,€should€not€be€permitted.€€Discovery€cannot€be€avoided€by€"frivolous€claims€ofÐ \+\+( Ðprivilege."€€òòYunisóó,€867€F.2d€at€623.€€Ð @,@,) Ðà @ àLast,€the€adequacy€of€the€conclusory€substitutions€should€be€evaluated€in€terms€of€the€defendant's€need€for€"evidentiary€richnessÐ ..* Ðand€narrative€integrity."€òòOld€Chief€v.€United€Statesóó,€117€S.€Ct.€644,€651€(1997).Ð ä.ä.+ Ðà@>>%áàò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóˆÐ ¤0¤0, Ðà @ àFor€the€reasons€stated€above€defendant€requests€that€this€Court€remand€this€case€with€orders€to€dismiss€the€indictment.€Ð d2d2- ÐAlternatively,€defendant€requests€a€remand€for€a€new€trial€or€resentencing.€€Ð ÜÜ ÐÐ  œœ Ð