UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES, No. 06-cr-89 (RDM) NIZAR TRABELSI, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In April 2006, a grand jury returned an indictment against Defendant Nizar Trabelsi containing four counts, two of which the government later dismissed. Dkt. 3. The two remaining counts allege that Trabelsi conspired to kill U.S. nationals outside the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2332(b)(2) and 1111(a), and conspired and attempted to use weapons of mass destruction, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2332a and 2.! Dkt. 6 at 1-9. Among other overt acts, the indictment alleges that Trabelsi “met with Osama bin Laden” in the Spring of 2001 near Kandahar, Afghanistan “and offered to carry out a suicide bomb attack against United States interests,” Dkt. 6 at 6; that he “obtained money from an al Qaeda associate for use in carrying out his mission to bomb a United States target,” id. at 7; that in July and August 2001, Trabelsi “bought quantities of chemicals” in Belgium “to be used in manufacturing a 1,000- kilogram bomb,” id. at 8; and that he “traveled at night with conspirators to scout the Kleine- ' The indictment also charged Trabelsi with conspiring to provide material support and resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2339B, and with providing material support and resources to a foreign terrorist organization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2339B and 2. Dkt. 3 at 9-10. On the government’s motion and with the consent of Trabelsi, these two counts were dismissed with prejudice in 2019. See Dkt. 231; Min. Order (June 10, 2019). Brogel Air Force Base—a facility used by the United States and the United States Department of the Air Force, and at which United States nationals were present—as a target for a suicide bomb attack,” id. In 2013, after serving a ten-year sentence in Belgium for, among other things, attempting to destroy the Kleine-Brogel Air Force Base, see Dkt. 367-3 at 24, Trabelsi was extradited to the United States on the instant charges. Trial commenced with jury selection on May 8, 2023. Before trial began, the Court authorized the government to take a videotaped deposition of a foreign-national witness living in France “in order to preserve [her] testimony for trial.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 15(a)(1); see Dkt. 578. The government now moves to admit that video-taped deposition at trial, Dkt. 588, and Trabelsi has cross-moved to strike that testimony from the record, Dkt. 590.” Trabelsi argues that admitting this testimony would violate his Sixth Amendment right to “be confronted with the witnesses against him,” U.S. Const. amend. VI, because, among other things, the deposition occurred via videoconference and because he was provided, in his view, an insufficient opportunity to cross-examine the witness during the time allotted for the deposition. For the reasons that follow, the Court will GRANT the government’s motion, Dkt. 588, and will DENY the defendant’s cross-motion, Dkt. 590. > Although Trabelsi’s motion is styled …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals