Controversial Trial of 4 Terrorist Suspects Begins in New York

26 August 2010

In this courtroom sketch, defendants Onta Williams, left, Laguerre Payen, center in white shirt, David Williams, third from right, and James Cromitie, right, sit with their attorneys at federal court in White Plains, N.Y. Four Muslim men charged with trying to blow up New York synagogues and shoot down military planes, (File).

There is a mountain of evidence the jury will be asked to consider in the trial of the Newburgh Four, as prosecutors and the defense try to frame that evidence in ways that lead to conviction or acquittal for the men, all of whom have criminal pasts.

In their opening statements, a prosecutor alleged that the leader of the plot spewed hatred and said he wanted to do something to America. A defense attorney indicated that the men were merely the hapless and ineffectual victims of their own poverty and ignorance.

However, there is no dispute about the broad outlines of the case. All four attended the same mosque, and were recruited by a smooth-talking government informant to commit terrorist acts in exchange for travel, money and other goods.

Alicia McWilliams, the aunt of one defendant, admitted that the men were wrong to participate, but also said that they were treated unfairly and should go free.

"Were they right? No," she admitted. "Was the government right? No. The government is not above the law. You cannot use a person getting away from crime to create crimes. And then to go into the community and sow unconstructive seeds. I don't understand that. And as a government we should be ashamed. Is the world going mad?"