* Illustration: Pietari Posti * At the Woolwich Crown Court, on the outskirts of London, Younis Tsouli stood accused recently of a series of online crimes, from disseminating propaganda on behalf of a terrorist organization to conspiring to commit a terrorist attack somewhere in the UK. The proceedings went smoothly at first, with prosecutor Mark Ellison describing how Tsouli — under the moniker Irhabi 007 (irhabi is Arabic for "terrorist") — helped Abu Musab al-Zarqawi spread the message of his group, al Qaeda in Iraq. But then, in the trial's fifth week, the case hit a glitch.
The day started like any other. As the barristers filed into the courtroom, they bowed to the crest of royal arms behind the judge's chair. The judge, Peter Openshaw, then entered, as usual, in his red robe and a white wig that rode low on his forehead, barely clearing his wire-rimmed spectacles. The 59-year-old Openshaw bowed to the court and took his seat.
Ellison's task in the afternoon was to detail Irhabi 007's activity on al-Ansar, a popular jihadist online forum where the accused had distributed some widely publicized — and gory — videos of the beheadings of Westerners. It was some of the most technical testimony thus far, and Ellison had barely begun questioning his witness, a translator, about Irhabi 007's posts. Suddenly, Openshaw cut in, asking the prosecutor whether al-Ansar was "itself a Web site." Not quite, Ellison responded. It was a forum that over time was hosted on several different Web sites.
"The trouble is, I don't understand the language," the judge said.
"Can I help?" Ellison offered.
Answered Openshaw, "I do not really understand what a Web site is."
With those 10 words, the judge entered the annals of British legal history, joining his predecessors who reportedly inquired "What are the Beatles?" and "What is a McDonald's?" And another who asked, understandably, "What is Linford's lunch box?" to which Linford Christie, an Olympic runner suing a journalist for libel, replied from across the courtroom, "They are making reference to my genitals, Your Honor."
Ellison patiently began defining a Web site as "a location on the Web, essentially, where files can be made available publicly." The prosecutor went on to explain that the al-Ansar forum was a "facility" within the Web sites where communication could take place, and that the translator had examined those very communications, or "posts," as evidence for the trial.
Ellison had just resumed questioning the translator when Openshaw chimed in again, asking whether Ellison had meant that the posts were "within" or "from" the al-Ansar forum. "Same thing," Ellison said, embarking on another explanation of what a forum is. "I have not quite grasped the concepts," the judge complained. So Ellison made a second attempt at defining a post. Understanding seemed to dawn on the judge, who said, "That is the chat."
"Well, it is not strictly speaking chat. It is called a forum post because it is in a slightly different format," Ellison said before giving up. "But Your Lordship could call it chat."
The Judiciary of England and Wales would later issue a press release claiming that Openshaw was merely trying to help other participants understand the testimony, a rather unpersuasive assertion given the full transcript. In the end, though, Tsouli must have decided the judge comprehended enough: He switched his plea to guilty and in early July was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
Posts Previous: Moondust Miners Dig for $250,000 in NASA Prize Money
