Accused Fort Hood gunman cannot use defending Taliban defense

FORT HOOD, Texas Fri Jun 14, 2013 5:34pm EDT

Nidal Hasan, charged with killing 13 people and wounding 31 in a November 2009 shooting spree at Fort Hood, Texas, is pictured in an undated Bell County Sheriff's Office photograph. REUTERS/Bell County Sheriff's Office/Handout

Nidal Hasan, charged with killing 13 people and wounding 31 in a November 2009 shooting spree at Fort Hood, Texas, is pictured in an undated Bell County Sheriff's Office photograph.

Credit: Reuters/Bell County Sheriff's Office/Handout

Related Topics

FORT HOOD, Texas (Reuters) - Army psychiatrist Major Nidal Hasan cannot argue at trial that he was defending the Afghan Taliban when he opened fire in a 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, that killed 13 people, a military judge ruled on Friday.

"There was no evidence that there was any immediate threat to others from your fellow soldiers," Colonel Tara Osborn said, denying Hasan's request to use the defense as he represents himself at his upcoming trial on 13 counts of first-degree murder.

Hasan, a 42-year-old U.S.-born Muslim, is accused of killing 13 people and wounding 32 others in an attack on soldiers at a readiness facility where many of those shot were preparing to deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan.

Fort Hood was a major deployment point for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Hasan himself had been preparing to leave for Afghanistan with a unit assigned to help soldiers deal with mental issues.

"I object," Hasan said when the judge ruled that he could not use his chosen defense argument that he was justified in opening fire on soldiers because he was protecting the Taliban in Afghanistan.

After the hearing, Geoffrey Corn, an expert on military law at the South Texas College of Law in Houston, said Hasan's claim was a non starter.

"I can't see any conceivable set of facts that would raise this defense," Corn said.

Hasan has also asked Osborn to delay the court martial by three months to allow him to prepare a new defense strategy and add to the witness lists. Osborn could rule on that request at a hearing scheduled for Tuesday.

Earlier this month, Hasan was granted the right to represent himself at trial. The selection of a jury from a group of Army officers had been expected to begin two weeks ago, but was delayed while Osborn considered the "defense of others" argument and other issues. Opening statements are scheduled for July 1.

Hasan could face the death penalty if found guilty. He was shot by civilian base police during the attack and left paralyzed from the chest down.

Three military lawyers appointed to serve as standby counsel for Hasan at the trial while he leads his own defense have been trying to determine what their role would be in the proceedings.

The legal team, which he fired, has argued that their role is to be prepared to step back in as his defense attorneys if necessary and to answer his questions on points of law, but not to provide specific legal advice.

Osborn has set a goal of getting the trial schedule back on track after lengthy delays, some due to a dispute over whether Hasan should be allowed to wear a beard in the courtroom in violation of U.S. Army grooming regulations. She set that issue aside.

(Additional reporting by Jim Forsyth in San Antonio; Writing by David Bailey; Editing by Cynthia Johnston)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (7)
AlDorman wrote:
It’s a show-trial. Let him defend himself how he sees fit.

Jun 14, 2013 3:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
themanz34 wrote:
His onl defense should be which arm do you want the needle in? Left or Right?

Jun 14, 2013 3:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ginevsky wrote:
It is far to cynical to dismiss this as merely “a show trial”. If that were the case he would be subject to intentional humiliation such as being shaved, and being made to crawl into court without assistance despite his paralysis. He is not an attractive defendant we are bending over backward to give him a “decent” trial even though there is no dispute as to the facts of the shooting.

Jun 14, 2013 4:44pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.