海角大神

What started as a horrific attack, in which Maj. Nidal Hasan is accused of an act of ultimate treachery by shooting scores of unsuspecting fellow soldiers at Fort Hood in 2009, has by turns and twists emerged as a bizarre legal drama playing out in an ultra-fortified compound in Killeen, Texas.

The trial of Major Hasan, a radicalized psychiatrist who has elected to represent himself at trial and who admitted on Tuesday that 鈥淚 am the shooter,鈥� saw its first major delay on Wednesday after Hasan鈥檚 court-appointed standby defense lawyers raised new objections about his defense strategy.

Hasan鈥檚 lawyers suggestion that Hasan is ultimately not interested in defending himself added more complexity to a unique situation in which the Army鈥檚 main intent is to give Hasan a capital verdict that is iron-clad against appeals by coaxing him to defend himself.

Some Americans feared a circus atmosphere at the trial in which Hasan is given a jihadi soapbox while subjecting victims to cross-examination by their tormentor. While the trial is likely to take more turns, Hasan declined to cross-examine one of his victims on Tuesday, and has so far kept comments restrained and to a minimum.

But given his lawyers鈥� contention on Wednesday, the trial has become, if not a show trial, a strange sort of legal dance. The court wants to give Hasan every opportunity to avoid the death penalty in order to keep the expected death sentence from being overturned on appeal. (Eleven of the last 16 capital courts martial sentences have been overturned.) Hasan鈥檚 goal, meanwhile, may be martyrdom, to die at the hands of Uncle Sam, putting the Army into the position of having to convince Hasan to fight the death penalty in order to execute him.

鈥淭his is really one of the most bizarre proceedings in the annals of legal history,鈥� says Aitan Goelman, a government prosecutor in the Oklahoma City bombing trial of Timothy McVeigh. 鈥淚t sounds like [what we鈥檙e seeing] is a long guilty plea. As opposed to a trial where there鈥檚 actually material facts 鈥� and what his mindset was鈥� in dispute, 鈥渋t sounds to me like he doesn鈥檛 really disagree with the government鈥檚 allegations 鈥� he just thinks he was justified. The outcomes of those kinds of trials aren鈥檛 really in doubt.鈥�

The evidence is seemingly ironclad. Hasan, yelling 鈥淕od is great!鈥� in Arabic, is accused of firing more than 200 rounds from a semi-automatic rifle into throngs of troops at the Soldier Readiness Center at Fort Hood on Nov. 5, 2009, killing 13 and injuring scores more, many seriously.

The case has come to the court martial courtroom on Fort Hood after many delays and twists. A judge had to be dismissed because of a bureaucratic and philosophical argument about whether Hasan should be able to wear the beard he grew in custody to court, or shave per Army regulations. The beard won out.

Then as the trial was about to start in June, Hasan fired his appointed lawyers, and told the judge, Col. Tara Osborn, that he would use a 鈥渄efense of others鈥� argument in his own defense 鈥� that he was trying to protect the lives of Taliban soldiers and leaders by attacking deploying soldiers. The judge denied that motion.

Hasan also pleaded with the judge to let him admit his guilt, but she said no, largely because military prosecutors are pushing for the death penalty, which can鈥檛 be applied in plea deals.

The bulk of the rulings so far have been focused on giving Hasan every benefit of the doubt in order to serve military justice.

鈥淐apital trials are rare, and they鈥檙e even more rare in the military jurisdiction, and so you have that fact added to the unusual events in this case, such as the accused wants to represent himself,鈥� says Maj. Gen. (Ret.) John Altenburg, the former appointing authority for military commissions for Guant谩namo detainees. 鈥淭his puts pressure on the judge and prosecutors to exercise great care to ensure he gets a fair trial.鈥�

Hasan鈥檚 lawyers filed a motion Wednesday saying that they could no longer in good conscience serve as his back-up counsel, because they believe Hasan is actively vying for the death penalty. That motion led to an early end to a day of testimony as the judge considers her next move.

Hasan, however, argued that the attorneys were wrong. "That [assertion is] a twist of the facts," Hasan said.

The backdrop to the case is also intriguing, with many of the victims bitterly complaining that they鈥檝e been denied combat benefits after the Pentagon deemed the shooting an act of workplace violence instead of an act of war.

The official reasoning for not calling it an act of war is it would jeopardize the case because聽 鈥渄efense counsel will argue that Major Hasan cannot receive a fair trial because a branch of government has indirectly declared that Major Hasan is a terrorist 鈥� that he is criminally culpable,鈥� according to a Pentagon memo.

Also, victims鈥� lawyers have filed a lawsuit claiming that the Army failed to pick up on seemingly obvious signs of a problem with Hasan, including an incident in which Army colleagues booed him for defending the use of suicide bombers in a speech. The FBI also knew that Hasan had been in contact with Anwar al-Awlaki, the US-born radical cleric who was killed by a drone strike in Yemen, but bought his explanation that it was simple research.

The victims鈥� suit contends that the Army 鈥渒new or should have known that Hasan was abusing his patients, who were American soldiers returning from the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, by calling them 鈥榳ar criminals鈥� in the course of psychiatric treatment sessions, and promising criminal prosecution against them because these soldiers had killed Taliban and other terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq.鈥�

As far as the facts of the massacre, however, military prosecutors are charging that Hasan saw himself as a mujahid, a holy warrior who switched sides and killed his comrades, for which he has earned the death penalty.

"He came to believe he had a jihad duty to kill as many soldiers as possible," said Col. Steve Henricks, the lead prosecutor.