The feds won’t have any trouble finding a “fair and impartial” New York jury to weigh the fate of 9/11 architect Khalid Sheik Mohammed, even in the courthouse just blocks from the killing ground where almost 3,000 people were murdered, legal experts agreed yesterday.
“Juries in New York are smart. They are skeptical. They scrutinize evidence carefully,” said former Manhattan US Attorney David Kelley, who, as an assistant prosecutor, put away Ramzi Yousef for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Change-of-venue “challenges in high-profile trials like this fall short because of the breadth and size and diversity of the jury pool in the New York area.”
Former federal prosecutor William Aronwald agreed, noting that any terrorist who would demand a change of venue should think twice.
“If you went out to the Midwest, you might have a jury that would be much more conservative,” he said. “I wouldn’t want to try this case in the Deep South or what used to be referred to as ‘redneck country.’ ”
The judge assigned to the case would most likely use an extensive questionnaire to weed out potential jurors biased or hostile toward the defendants, he said.
Additional reporting by Kati Cornell