ABSTRACT
In April 2006, after a nine-week trial and nine days’ deliberation by a jury, a young Californian man was found guilty of providing material support to terrorists. The conviction could carry up to 39 years in prison. The government had a videotaped confession from 22-year-old Hamid Hayat, as well as hours of surreptitiously recorded conversation between him and Nassim Khan, an FBI “cooperating witness.” In addition to “material support,” Hayat was convicted of three counts of making false statements to the FBI, denying on three occasions that he had been to a militant training camp in Pakistan, been trained there, and returned to the United States with the intent to commit violent jihad. But we have cause to wonder whether in fact those three alleged denials actually told the true story of Hayat’s time in Pakistan, and whether the confession upon which the case was built told a story that was false.
