Discourse.net

Apparently putting on no defense was interpreted by the jury as "he must be guilty because the defense has no evidence that he's innocent."

From Yahoo:

Padilla, 36, and his foreign-born co-defendants, Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi, were convicted by a jury of conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim people overseas, which carries a penalty of life in prison. All three were also convicted of two terrorism material support counts, which carry potential 15-year sentences each.

U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke set a Dec. 5 sentencing date for all three defendants.

In a three-month trial, the three men were accused of being part of a North American support cell that provided supplies, money and recruits to groups of Islamic extremists. The defense contended they were trying to help persecuted Muslims in war zones with relief and humanitarian aid.

Jared Beck felt the same way. http://beckandlee.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/live-report-from-the-padilla-trial/

If Clinton or Obama take office in 08, a full pardon should be at the top of their to-do list.

If Clinton or Obama take office in 08, a full pardon should be at the top of their to-do list.

Yes the evidence (that i've read) doesn't appear what you would call water tight. As ugh said, it's more of a "prove you didn't and if you can't you did it".

The old innocent until proven guilty seems to have evolved in to a guilty until you prove your innocent.

Carly,