Men accused of bomb plot against Somali refugees ask for more Trump voters on their jury
Defence attorneys claim the jury selection process is discriminatory
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Defence attorneys for men accused of plotting to bomb an apartment building filled with Somali refugees have requested more Trump voters in the jury pool.
Gavin Wright, Patrick Stein and Curtis Allen of Garden City, Kansas are charged with conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction for their alleged bomb plot, which they hoped would inspire others to attack Muslims, according to a complaint.
The men have pleaded not guilty.
Attorneys for the three men recently filed a motion claiming the jury selection procedure was discriminatory because it “exclud[ed] rural and conservative jurors,” according to the Kansas City Star.
Authorities planned to pull jurors from the areas around Wichita, where the trail is taking place, rather than from western Kansas, where the alleged plotting occurred. Attorney Kari Schmidt, who represents Mr Wright, told the judge that there is a difference in belief systems between western Kansas and Wichita.
“I don’t think I can say it’s legally recognizable, but factually recognizable,” Ms Schmidt said.
In their motion, the defence argued that pulling from more rural areas would ensure the jury represented a “fair cross-section of the community” and give residents of those areas their “civil right to serve as jurors”.
They also claimed that jurors from the western region are more likely to be conservative – and to have voted for Donald Trump.
“This case is uniquely political because much of the anticipated evidence will centre around, and was in reaction to, the 2016 presidential election,” the attorneys wrote. The men planned to carry out their attack on 9 November – the day after the election – according to authorities.
Prosecutors, however, argued that the defence was seeking to pick jurors based on ideology, which they claimed could open “a dangerous door” for future cases. They also cited prior cases finding that groups of prospective jurors defined by geographical location do not count as distinctive groups in these situations.
Judge Eric Melgren pointed out that most Kansans supported Mr Trump in the 2016 election, and questioned whether there was a difference between jurors in areas that voted two-thirds for Mr Trump, rather than three-quarters. Mr Melgren took the issue under consideration on Wednesday.
Investigators say the three men planned to detonate car bombs at an apartment complex and mosque in Garden City, specifically targeting Somalis and Muslims. They face up to life in prison if convicted.
The trial begins on 19 March.
Additional reporting by the Associate Press
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments