map terrorism update

faheem Lodhi, the architect on trial for downloading maps, has been found guilty in Australia of three out of four counts of "preparing to commit a terrorist act".

(Briefly: what the fuck? "Preparing to commit a terrorist act"? Is that the one that happens before "attempted terrorism"? This is a new law and Lodhi is the third person to go to trial to fight the accusation, the first to be convicted. Would any jury in the world convict a man for "preparing to murder" his wife by calling sporting goods stores to price handguns and downloading her work schedule? I mean, you know, even if he was actually planning on killing her?)

The story begins with some muddled account of prosecutors trying to accuse Lodhi of being the go-to guy at Pakistani training camps, but the evidence keeps melting away. One witness' testimony at a committal trial was interrupted and subsequently dropped from the case. Another's, Willy Brigitte (see below) seems to have suffered the same fate, since Brigitte was not called in the trial.

According to this article prosecutors:

went to trial armed with a circumstantial case that began with the arrival of the shadowy French terror suspect Willy Brigitte.

Brigitte was detained in Sydney at the request of the French in October 2003, and ASIO officers and police swooped on every aspect of his life.

Lodhi, a Pakistani-born architect who came to Australia in the late 1990s, was identified through phone records as being in contact with Brigitte before and after his arrival in Australia.

Lodhi told the jury in his trial an acquaintance in Pakistan named Sajid had asked him to look out for Brigitte when he arrived in Australia. He said he offered the Frenchman shelter and nothing more.

But police and security agencies raked over Lodhi's life, raiding his house and workplace, and found the evidence that would lead to him becoming the first person convicted of planning a bombing campaign in Australia.

According to this article:

Put simply, the charges against Lodhi said that in October 2003, five months after Brigitte arrived in the country, the mild-mannered architect set about preparing to commit a terrorist act. These preparations included buying several maps of the electricity grid and downloading maps of several military establishments, including HMAS Penguin, Victoria Barracks and Holsworthy army base.

At the same time, he also asked the Deltrex chemical company about the prices and availability of some 10 chemicals, while he had in his possession a document, written in his native Urdu, on how to make explosives and poisons.

Lodhi's defence, from his testimony and that of friends and family, offered these simple explanations for his actions. ... The electricity maps, he explained, were bought because he was considering setting up a business to export generators to Pakistan where many of his family still lived. Friends and relatives confirmed his discussions about the business plans.

Likewise, his inquiries about chemicals were aimed at potentially exporting them to Pakistan. He sent the fax to Deltrex from his office at the architectural firm with their return number on it. Had he wanted to make explosives, said his defence counsel, Phillip Boulten, SC, he could have bought the ingredients from a garden shop.

The photographs of the military bases, Lodhi explained, were for his resumé. He had worked at all the bases, either as a student or an architect. He openly discussed downloading the pictures with work colleagues. It was on this charge alone that he was found not guilty.

Lodhi offered no elaborate explanation for having what the prosecution called "a terrorism manual", with recipes for explosives, at his work station.

He simply said that he had written the notes from a website while at university years earlier. He slipped them into a book and forgot all about it until police discovered them when they raided his office.

And finally, the prosecution pointed out that "When Lodhi bought his electricity maps and inquired about the chemicals, he gave false names or false addresses ..." This would be problematic evidence if it weren't qualified by how he had done it, namely, "he left a digit off his post office box number or his telephone number, or misspelled his name." Hello. If you want to hide your identity you don't put your name, address and phone number down and then change them slightly. That's what a guy does when he doesn't want spam or junk mail. Duh. By that same argument, I'm a terrorist planning on blowing up every major newspaper in the country (not to mention hotmail and yahoo).

Now I'm not saying that I'm sure Lodhi isn't a terrorist-in-waiting. Could be he is. I don't know. The point is, no one else knows either, not by the ridiculous "evidence" that's been presented in this case. Is anyone in Australian jurisprudence gonna say anything about this? You know, like "wow, this trial is an embarrassment to common law" or something?