Questions unanswered in U.K. liquid bomb trial

[Peter Presland]

For the second time a jury has failed to reach verdicts on some of the charges against some of the accused so, a THIRD trial has been announced. Beggars belief doesn't it?

I listened to a 'legal spokesman' for the Crown Prosecution Service drone on for about 15 uninterrupted minutes on the BBC this morning. It was painful. The man was a conceited, 'superior', Oxford-accented bore, feigning 'grave concern' over this latest jury lapse, with the interviewer equally grave and ultra-respectful in tone, which actually made the piece rather amusing - in a Monty Python-like way. The thing is we are seriously supposed to nod along in an equally grave, respectful fashion and believe all this crap, which makes it very UN-funny.

You can bet your sweet life that the third jury will be VERY carefully vetted

This from the Telegraph:

Airline bomb plot accused to face retrial, DPP announces

Three men accused of planning a series of co-ordinated suicide bomb attacks on transatlantic airliners that could have killed up 10,000 people will face a third trial.

Ibrahim Savant, 28, Arafat Waheed Khan, 28, and Waheed Zaman, 25, will face a third trial, Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions announced.

The trio were acquitted earlier this week of the airlines plot and the jury failed to conclude whether they were guilty of conspiracy to murder.

The jury had decided the three did not know of the airline plot but could not determine whether they were planning another terrorist attack.

Three of their co-accused were convicted of plotting to cause mass murder by detonating home-made liquid explosives on board at least seven passenger flights bound for the US and Canada.

It had the potential to be three times as deadly as the 9/11 attacks of 2001.

The DPP argued it was in the public interest to take the unusual step of seeking a third trial.

Mr Starmer said there was a realistic prospect of gaining a conviction against the trio for conspiracy to murder.

“Although I recognise that it is common practice for prosecutors in England and Wales to offer no evidence against a defendant if two previous juries have been unable to agree, that is no more than a convention,” he said.

“My task is to judge whether, taking into account all relevant considerations, the public interest is better served in this particular case by offering no evidence or by seeking a further retrial.

"Having taken into account the views of the prosecution team, I am satisfied that, notwithstanding the failure of two juries to agree a verdict, there remains a realistic prospect of a conviction against each defendant on the charge of conspiracy to murder.”

He added: "Having regard to the very serious nature of the charge and the very considerable public interest in having the allegation determined by a jury one way or the other, I have concluded that, in this exceptional case, it is in the public interest to seek a further retrial.”

Abdulla Ahmed Ali, 28, Assad Sarwar, 29, and Tanvir Hussain, 28, were found guilty of conspiracy to murder by detonating bombs on airliners at the end of a six-month trial at Woolwich Crown Court in London.

A jury at their previous trial had failed to reach verdicts on whether such a plot existed.

The jury found a fourth man, Islamic convert Umar Islam, 31, guilty of conspiracy to murder but could not decide if he knew about the plan to blow up aircraft. He will not face a retrial.

An eighth man, Donald Stewart-Whyte, 23, was acquitted of all charges.

The group’s arrest in 2006 resulted in immediate worldwide restrictions on passengers carrying liquids in their hand luggage.

A ban on containers larger than 100ml is still in place.

The trio will face the retrial on a date to be set.

The convicted plotters will be sentenced next week.