After the verdict was pronounced, Tahawwur Rana’s attorney Patrick Blegan said he would file post-trial motions that there was not enough evidence to convict him and that there was an error in the trial.
“Obviously we are extremely disappointed. We believe in Rana. We believe he was not guilty. The jury came to another decision. We respect their decision, but we think they got it wrong,” Mr Blegan said.
The jurors, who were not identified, declined to speak to the media to explain their split verdict, which defence attorneys called conflicting.
United States attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald said the acquittal of Rana, who was a co-accused in the Mumbai attacks with Headley, from charges that he was involved in the 26/11 terror attacks was disappointing.
“We are disappointed in the not-guilty verdict on the Mumbai attacks,” he told reporters. At the same time, he said they were “gratified” that the jury found Rana guilty of involvement in plotting a terror attack in Denmark and providing material support to LeT, designated by the US as a foreign terrorist organisation.
He also justified the controversial plea bargain deal cut with Headley that spared him the death penalty and extradition to India, saying that not doing the pact would have been a “terrible mistake”.
Each of the counts, for which Rana has been convicted, carries a maximum imprisonment of 15 years, Rana’s attorney Blegan said.
“Because the jury found no death resulting for the final count 12 (providing material support to LeT) there is no maximum of life sentence. Maximum is 15 (years) for each count,” he said.
He said the government emphasised on the secretly taped car conversation between Rana and Headley, the star witness during the trial.
Mr Blegan said there is a huge contradiction in the verdict as LeT is primarily involved in Mumbai and not in Denmark. —PTI