Defense attorneys for two of the men charged in an alleged bomb plot in western Kansas argued their clients were manipulated by the FBI into remaining part of the conspiracy.

Cross examination of Dan Day, the paid FBI informant in the case, wrapped up Wednesday, with the defense asking him why he didn’t put a stop to the plot earlier when he had the chance.

Day recorded hundreds of hours of meetings and phone calls with Curtis Allen, Patrick Stein and Gavin Wright. Prosecutors say the three men planned to attack Somali Muslim immigrants in Garden City in November 2016, going so far as to pick a target and gather materials for a bomb.

All three have pleaded not guilty.

Day testified earlier in the trial in Wichita’s federal courthouse that he maintained a “persona” as a member of the Kansas Security Force — a militia the men belonged to — but wasn’t working to further the plan.

James Pratt, Stein’s attorney, argued Day went out of bounds. He pointed to a recorded phone call in early September when Stein expresses frustration with the planning process and suggests backing out of the plan; Day urges him to stay.

“You were doing everything you could,” Pratt said Wednesday, “to make sure the defendants stayed together and worked toward your goal.”

Day responded he was trying to prevent any of the members from leaving and potentially doing “their own thing,” without the FBI knowing about it.

“What if they wanted to go off and do nothing?” Pratt asked. “You weren’t working toward that end, were you? You were working toward them doing something.”

Wright’s attorney, Kari Schmidt, distanced her client from the rest of the group entirely, pointing out that he was absent from several key events included in Day’s testimony, including recruiting meetings.

Though Wright’s business, G&G Home Center in Liberal, was frequently used as a meeting place, Schmidt says Wright was often busy answering the phone, or wasn’t participating in conversations regarding the alleged plot.

“All we know from those recordings is that you were there,” she told Day.

Schmidt played a phone call between Wright and Day from Oct. 11, the day Allen was arrested on domestic abuse charges. During the call, Wright says he is quitting the plan.

“I don’t need to be involved in this,” he says. “I want to be part of changing this country constitutionally, but I don’t want to be involved in that.”

Still, countered federal prosecutor Risa Berkower, Wright did sign on to the plan.

“When you discussed blowing up the Mary Street building,” she asked Day, “did Gavin Wright say ‘No, no, no,’ or, ‘Yeah, yeah, yeah’?”

Day said that unlike other militia members who were aware of the plan, Wright was working to execute it.

Day said it was Allen’s unexpected arrest that eventually put an end to the planning; his ex-girlfriend told law enforcement she thought the men were making explosives, and soon after Wright and Stein were also arrested.

“If that hadn’t happened, they would have built a bomb and blown up the building,” he said.



Nadya Faulx is a reporter for KMUW and the Kansas News Service, a collaboration of KMUW, Kansas Public Radio, KCUR and High Plains Public Radio covering health, education and politics. Follow her on Twitter @NadyaFaulx. Kansas News Service stories and photos may be republished at no cost with proper attribution and a link back to the original post.



To contact KMUW News or to send in a news tip, reach us at news@kmuw.org. </s> An FBI informant’s account of the investigation into an alleged bomb plot in western Kansas was called into question Tuesday.

Defense attorneys in the ongoing trial in Wichita’s federal courthouse had the chance to cross-examine Dan Day after two days of direct testimony. Day worked as an informant for the FBI for several months in 2016 as agents investigated Patrick Stein, Gavin Wright and Curtis Allen. The three men are accused of planning an attack on an apartment complex and mosque in Garden City.

As an informant, Day posed as a member of the Kansas Security Force militia. He recorded hundreds of hours of phone calls and meetings with the defendants at G&G Home Center, the business owned by Wright.

Day told prosecutors that by mid-September, a few weeks before their arrests, the men had all the materials they needed to make an explosive. The state is arguing the men were preparing to take action to carry out the attack.

But Allen’s attorney insists there was never a bomb.

“You said they had a bomb ready, put together and ready to set off?” Melody Brannon asked Day.

“They said they had everything they needed to do it,” Day responded.

“That’s different than having a bomb ready,” Brannon said.

Questioned further, Day said he never saw any equipment, except for the mortar and pestle he had provided.

Day was also unclear on what kind of bomb the men had planned to make and didn’t know what ingredients it would need. A sergeant with the Liberal Police Department testified a hotplate magnetic stirrer was found in Wright’s pickup as police executed a search warrant, but he couldn’t say with certainty whom the item belonged to, or who had put it in the truck.

Brannon acknowledged her client was “seriously worried” about the federal government, Islamic law and the upcoming election 2016 presidential election.

“In the end, though, Mr. Day, there was never any bomb at G&G, was there?” she said.

Attorneys for the three defendants have argued that Day is less a hero and more of a paid bounty hunter working for the FBI.

Day first came into contact with the FBI in July 2015, several months before he met the defendants. Shortly after, he joined a militia known as the Three Percenters. It was his choice to join, he said, but the FBI “asked me to follow them, and I agreed.”

James Pratt, an attorney for Stein, said Day had been providing the FBI information “for a while before they, for lack of a better word, ‘signed you up’ as an informant.”

Pratt provided as evidence a contract signed in October 2015, when Day formally became a paid informant while also serving as the militia group’s vetting officer. Day said he agreed to become an informant because he was concerned with extremists in the organization.

The defense will continue to cross-examine Day on Wednesday.

Nadya Faulx is a reporter for the Kansas News Service. Follow her on Twitter @NadyaFaulx. </s> A Canadian appeals court on Tuesday ordered a new trial for two men accused of plotting to derail a passenger train travelling between Toronto and New York, citing errors in the jury selection.

Tunisian national Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser, a Canadian resident of Palestinian descent, were convicted in 2015 of an Al-Qaeda-backed conspiracy to commit murders and sentenced to life in prison.

But the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the trial judge mishandled the jury selection process, resulting in an "improperly constituted jury," which means their verdict cannot stand.

The trial heard that the pair were "motivated by Islamic extremism and had planned terrorist attacks on non-Muslim targets or victims."

The attack allegedly would have marked the start of a campaign of terror to try to convince Canada and its allies to leave Muslim lands.

Prosecutors said the pair had planned to cut a large hole in a railway bridge to derail a Via Rail train, with the aim of killing and injuring passengers and crew.

Esseghaier, who was doing doctoral research in Canada, acted on instructions from overseas extremists, they alleged.

Key evidence came in the form of recordings by an undercover FBI agent who befriended the pair. </s> TORONTO — Ontario’s highest court has ordered a new trial for two men found guilty of terrorism charges in connection with a plot to derail a passenger train.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario says the jury that convicted Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier was improperly selected, which means its verdict cannot stand.

Jaser and Esseghaier were found guilty in 2015 on a total of eight terror-related charges between them. They were sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole until 2023.

Lawyers for Jaser argued the trial judge mistakenly rejected their client’s request regarding the method of jury selection.

The lawyer appointed to assist Esseghaier — who continues to be self-represented — agreed in written arguments that a new trial must be ordered on that ground.

The law regarding jury selection was in flux during the trial but the appeal court says the approach used by the judge has since been deemed wrong.

Several other cases have been overturned due to similar errors in recent years.

Jaser had also raised other grounds for appeal but the jury issue was heard first.

Both men also previously indicated they wished to challenge their sentences, but the call for a new trial makes that unnecessary.
• Via Rail plotters weren’t sick or addicted — they were evil, FBI undercover agent says
• Undercover FBI agent who helped Canada nab railway terror plotters has one big regret
• ‘Delusional’ Via Rail plotter now on anti-psychotics, plans appeal </s> TORONTO -- Two men found guilty of terrorism charges in connection with a plot to derail a passenger train between Canada and the U.S. were granted a new trial Tuesday after Ontario's highest court found the jury that convicted them was improperly selected.

Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier were found guilty in 2015 on a total of eight terror-related charges between them. They were sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole until 2023.

The two challenged their convictions, and lawyers for Jaser argued the trial judge mistakenly rejected their client's request regarding the method of jury selection.

The lawyer appointed to assist Esseghaier -- who continues to be self-represented -- agreed in written arguments that a new trial had to be ordered on that ground.

The law regarding jury selection was in flux during the trial but the appeal court said in its ruling that the approach used by the judge has since been deemed wrong. Several other cases have been overturned due to similar errors in recent years.

Though Esseghaier, who largely chose not to participate in the trial proceedings, had not expressed a preference as to jury selection, he should receive a new trial, the appeal court said Tuesday.

"Here, one jury was selected for both appellants. In the circumstances of this case, as the jury was not properly constituted for Jaser, it cannot be considered to have been properly constituted for Esseghaier," the court said in a unanimous decision.

Jaser had also raised other grounds for appeal but the jury issue was heard first. Both men also previously indicated they wished to challenge their sentences, but the call for a new trial makes that unnecessary.

The pair was arrested in April 2013 after a months-long investigation that involved an undercover FBI agent who gained their trust and secretly recorded hours of their conversations.

The two were recorded speaking about terror plots they would conduct in retaliation for Canada's military actions in Muslim countries, including the derailment of a Via Rail train travelling between New York and Toronto.

Those recordings made up the bulk of the evidence in the case. </s> New trial ordered in alleged plot to derail Canada-US train

A Canadian appeals court on Tuesday ordered a new trial for two men accused of plotting to derail a passenger train travelling between Toronto and New York, citing errors in the jury selection.



Tunisian national Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser, a Canadian resident of Palestinian descent, were convicted in 2015 of a conspiracy to commit murders and sentenced to life in prison.

But the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the trial judge mishandled the jury selection process, resulting in an "improperly constituted jury," which means their verdict cannot stand.

Prosecutors said the pair had planned to cut a large hole in a railway bridge to derail a Via Rail train, with the aim of killing and injuring passengers and crew.

Esseghaier, who was doing doctoral research in Canada, acted on instructions from extremists, they alleged.

Key evidence came in the form of recordings by an undercover FBI agent who befriended the pair. </s> Authorities in Bloomington said no one was injured in the blast at the city’s Dar Al-Farooq Islamic Center.

An improvised explosive device caused the explosion, the FBI office in Minneapolis tweeted Saturday afternoon.

Another tweet said the FBI is working on determining who set off the explosive and why.

The FBI is the lead investigative agency. Police are asking anyone with information to contact the FBI.

Deputy Chief Mike Hartley of the Bloomington Police Department said officers received a report about the explosion around 5 a.m. (6 a.m. ET) Saturday. Responding officers found damage to the building and smoke in the area, the police department said in a tweet.

At a news conference Saturday, a witness said the explosion happened around the time of morning prayers. The witness described running outside after the blast and seeing a car driving away.

A spokesman for the Muslim American Society of Minnesota told CNN affiliate WCCO the group believes someone may have thrown something into the window of the mosque imam’s office.

The society’s executive director, Asad Zaman, said the imam’s window was broken and cited a witness who saw someone standing by the window before the explosion.

The Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations is offering a $10,000 reward in the case.

“If a bias motive is proven, this attack would represent another in a long list of hate incidents targeting Islamic institutions nationwide in recent months,” said Amir Malik, CAIR’s civil rights director in Minnesota.

Law enforcement authorities have not said whether they are investigating the mosque explosion as a hate crime.

The US Department of Homeland Security said it “fully supports the rights of all to freely and safely worship the faith of their choosing and we vigorously condemn such attacks on any religious institution. We are thankful that there were no injuries, but that does not diminish the serious nature of this act.” </s> TORONTO — Two men found guilty of terrorism charges in connection with a plot to derail a passenger train between Canada and the U.S. were granted a new trial Tuesday after Ontario’s highest court found the jury that convicted them was improperly selected.

Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier were found guilty in 2015 on a total of eight terror-related charges between them. They were sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole until 2023.

The two challenged their convictions, and lawyers for Jaser argued the trial judge mistakenly rejected their client’s request regarding the method of jury selection. The lawyer appointed to assist Esseghaier — who continues to be self-represented — agreed in written arguments that a new trial had to be ordered on that ground.

Ontario’s Court of Appeal said the trial judge had made an error in denying Jaser his preferred method of jury selection.

“The question here is not actual prejudice, which in these kinds of circumstances is impossible to gauge, but prejudice to the due administration of justice flowing from the denial of a jury selection method which was in law properly invoked,” it wrote.

As part of the jury selection process, prospective jurors may face questions regarding their ability to remain impartial.

Given the nature of the accusations against Jaser and Esseghaier, and the significant media attention leading up to the trial, this questioning was deemed necessary in this case, the appeal court said.

Prospective jurors were to be asked whether their ability to weigh the case based on the evidence would be affected by the fact that both accused are members of a visible minority and Muslim.

During this questioning, two people from the jury pool are given the role of “triers,” which means they consider the answer and determine whether there is sign of bias. Lawyers for both the Crown and the defence then decide whether to allow the person on the jury.

In a process called “rotating triers” — which is the default method — each newly appointed juror replaces one of the two triers so that the responsibility is shared.

While not laid out in the Criminal Code, common law granted the court the discretion to exclude from the room all other prospective jurors during this process or both prospective jurors and those already selected who were not currently acting as triers.

An alternative process known as “static triers” was created in the Criminal Code in 2008, allowing the accused to ask the court to exclude prospective and selected jurors during the questioning, as long as they could show it was necessary to ensure the jury remained impartial. If the court agreed, it would then choose two people — the static triers — to assess all the prospective jurors. Static triers do not get to serve on the jury.

Jaser had requested to have the jury chosen by rotating triers with any prospective jurors excluded from the room, but the trial judge said he no longer had the discretion to make that order, according to court documents.

What’s more, the judge said he would not have granted Jaser’s request even if he could, since the issue could be remedied by using static triers, which he then imposed even though Jaser had not formally applied to use them, the documents said.

There was debate at the time of the trial over whether judges retained the discretion to exclude prospective and some selected jurors when using rotating triers, but it has since been determined that they do, the appeal court said.

“It was an error of law for the trial judge to refuse to exercise a discretion based on a view that a remedy not sought by Jaser would have better achieved his ends,” the appeal court said.

Though Esseghaier, who largely chose not to participate in the trial proceedings, did not weigh in on the issue of jury selection at the time, he should also receive a new trial, the appeal court said Tuesday.

“Here, one jury was selected for both appellants. In the circumstances of this case, as the jury was not properly constituted for Jaser, it cannot be considered to have been properly constituted for Esseghaier,” the court said in a unanimous decision.

Several other verdicts have been overturned due to similar errors in recent years, including a conviction on two counts of second-degree murder for Christopher Husbands, the man who opened fire at Toronto’s Eaton Centre in 2012. Husbands also underwent a new trial and was found guilty of manslaughter earlier this year.

Jaser had also raised other grounds for appeal but the jury issue was heard first. Both men also previously indicated they wished to challenge their sentences, but the call for a new trial makes that unnecessary.

The Public Prosecution Service of Canada said in a statement it will proceed with a new trial, and noted it has 60 days to decide whether to seek leave to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Jaser and Esseghaier were arrested in April 2013 after a months-long investigation that involved an undercover FBI agent who gained their trust and secretly recorded hours of their conversations.

The two were recorded speaking about terror plots they would carry out in retaliation for Canada’s military actions in Muslim countries, including the planned derailment of a Via Rail train travelling between New York and Toronto. </s> FBI investigating explosion described as 'fire-bombing' at Minnesota mosque

FBI investigators are seeking suspects after an explosive device tore through part of a suburban Minneapolis mosque as people were preparing for morning prayers.

The blast happened at around 5:00am on Saturday (local time) at the Dar al-Farooq Islamic Centre in the town of Bloomington, according to the Bloomington Police Department.

Windows of the imam's office were shattered but there were no injuries, authorities and witnesses said.

The centre's executive director, Mohamed Omar, said one worshipper saw a pick-up truck speeding away shortly after the explosion and the mosque, which primarily serves people from the area's large Somali community, occasionally receives threatening calls and emails.

"We came to this country for the same reason everyone else came here — freedom to worship — and that freedom is under threat," Yasir Abdalrahman, a worshipper at the mosque, told the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Asad Zaman, director of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, described the attack as a fire-bombing.

Investigators will try to determine whether the incident was a hate crime and who may have been behind it, according to Richard Thornton, special agent in charge of the FBI's Minneapolis division.

Thornton said during an afternoon news conference the explosion was caused by an "improvised explosive device", and investigators had recovered components of the device to figure out how it was put together.

The mosque serves as a religious centre and community organising platform for Muslim activists and leaders in the area the Muslim American Society of Minnesota is offering a $10,000 reward for information that leads to an arrest or conviction.

The same reward is also being offered by the Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The group said its national office was urging Islamic centres and mosques to step up security.

"If a biased motive is proven, this attack would represent another in a long list of hate incidents targeting Islamic institutions nationwide in recent months," said Amir Malik, the local chapter's civil rights director.
Lawyers representing two of the three defendants in a Kansas case alleging a Christian extremist plot to bomb a mosque tell jurors the FBI manipulated and encouraged the actions of the accused.