Campers not terrorists: Lawyer

This is from the Star. It really sounds as if this group had grandiose schemes but little practical sense of how to carry them out. They sound like a bunch of incompetent blowhards who are such hardened disciplined jihadists that they can't even poop or piss outdoors.
This is the first information we are getting from the defence side. Of course just as the police wants to picture the group as very dangerous well organised terrorists the defence wants to give quite a different view. However, the contrast is certainly stark. Nevertheless it seems clear they certainly had violent plans in mind even though it sure looks as if they lacked the skill and means to carry them out. I don't quite understand why the names are withheld to ensure a fair trial. How would releasing names cause the trial to be unfair?



Campers not terrorists: Lawyer
TheStar.com - GTA - Campers not terrorists: Lawyer



March 27, 2008
Isabel Teotonio
Staff Reporter

In the dead of winter, the terror suspects ventured off on a camping trip without a proper tent.

They couldn't handle the cold, so they slept in their cars and marched around to keep warm.

They routinely trekked off to Tim Hortons for washroom breaks and coffee runs.

That was the picture that emerged yesterday in a Brampton court about the activities at a so-called jihadist camp that members of a homegrown terror cell are alleged to have attended.

It is a vastly different portrait than the one painted by the Crown on Tuesday at the opening of the trial of a youth who is charged with belonging to the Toronto 18, a group that is accused of plotting to bomb several targets in southern Ontario.

According to a Crown factum of expected evidence, some of the accused frequented a 12-day camp near the town of Washago, Ont., where they practised military-style exercises in camouflage gear and undertook firearms training with a 9-mm firearm.

But a different story surfaces in a factum filed by defence lawyer Michael Moon, who represents one of the 14 adults arrested with four youths in a massive police sweep in 2006 for belonging to an Al Qaeda-inspired cell.

"In fact this hapless `F-Troop,' who ventured into the deathly cold of winter without a proper tent, or in fact sufficient or proper supplies of any kind, was reduced to sleeping in the vehicles at night to prevent freezing to death; trooping off to Tim Hortons multiple times per day for coffee and use of the bathroom, tending the fire, and marching with the primary purpose of staying warm."

The factum marks the first time any document challenging the Crown's case has been made public by a member of the defence team. It was filed in response to a Crown application seeking a limited publication ban on the identities of the adults during the youth's trial.

The Crown argues the expected evidence could prejudice the future trials of the adults. Since the arrests, charges against three youths have been stayed. Of the adults, 10 are in jail and four are out on bail.

Moon supported lawyer Paul Schabas, who represented various media outlets including the Star, in blocking the ban. The "orgiastic and self-congratulatory" press conferences held by police and government officials after the arrests, but before any pre-trial publication bans were imposed, robbed the accused of a fair trial long ago, Moon said.

According to him, most of the men and youths who frequented the camp were not aware it was "a boot camp" to select a "few good men" for a future training camp.

He also alleged that police informant Mubin Shaikh purchased the ammunition used in the handgun and lied to his handlers about the presence of a firearm.

Moon also notes that the "jihadist ambitions" of one of the camp organizers were limited "by the fact that he has neither the means, skill or opportunity to put them in place."

"He has been described as `blowing smoke' ... and without `two cents to rub together'" reads the factum, describing that particular organizer as Walter Mitty. It went on to quote Shaikh as saying that individual had "fanciful plans" of storming Parliament and beheading politicians.

Arguments on the issue of a limited publication ban ended yesterday, with the judge reserving his decision. In the interim, the media can report on the proceedings without identifying the adults.

The trial resumes next week, with more motions to be debated before witnesses takes the stand in May.