November 18, 2010 4:51PM # The Ghailani Verdict By [David Rittgers](https://www.cato.org/people/david-rittgers) --- SHARE You’ve probably heard that a jury found Al Qaeda bomber Ahmed Ghailani guilty on only [one out of 286 charges](http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?id=1202475037766&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1) associated with the 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. A predictable debate followed. Glenn Greenwald cited the outcome as [proof that the system works](http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/11/18/trials/index.html), while Liz Cheney, Debra Burlingame and Bill Kristol described the trial as a [reckless experiment](http://www.keepamericasafe.com/?page_id=6398). Thomas Joscelyn called the trial a [miscarriage of justice](http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ghailani-verdict-miscarriage-justice_518140.html). The most insightful commentary I’ve seen is over at [Lawfare](http://www.lawfareblog.com/). Benjamin Wittes and Robert Chesney [summed things up pretty well](http://www.lawfareblog.com/2010/11/the-politics-of-the-ghailani-verdict/): “Trial in federal court didn’t work out the way the Obama administration wanted, but it wasn’t a disaster–and we can’t honestly say it worked out worse than the military commission alternative would likely have done.” I’ve [disagreed](https://www.cato.org/try-the-911-conspirators-in-both-federal-courts-and-military-commissions/) with Wittes on lawfare issues before, but he and Chesney are right on this case: (1) the defendant will serve a minimum of twenty years in jail, possibly life; (2) it’s not certain that the military commissions would have allowed evidence obtained by coercion (Charlie Savage also made this point in [his article](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/nyregion/19detainees.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp) for the *New York Times*), (3) the conspiracy conviction in civilian court is solid on appeal, but not necessarily so in a military commission (conspiracy is not a traditional law of war violation, and three sitting Supreme Court justices have questioned its application in that forum); (4) the forum of conviction is less ripe for attack in courts of law and public opinion. That’s a good outcome. ##### Related Tags [Defense and Foreign Policy](https://www.cato.org/defense-foreign-policy), [Constitutional Law](https://www.cato.org/constitutional-law), [Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies](https://www.cato.org/robert-levy-center-constitutional-studies) [![Creative Commons License](/build/cato_2020/images/creative-commons.svg)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).