Lindh Stayed in the Taliban Out of Fear, His Lawyers Say

Lawyers for John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban prisoner captured in Afghanistan, said in court papers released Friday that he never rejoiced over the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and that he remained with his front-line fighting unit only because he feared he would be killed if he tried to leave.

Providing the first detailed look at his defense, Lindh’s attorneys also rejected the government’s claim that Lindh attempted to kill Americans during the Afghan war, saying he was attempting to run away when shooting broke out in a prison camp and he was wounded in the leg.

Lindh never “intended or attempted to take any actions to attack U.S. military forces or did anything other than remain with Taliban forces in a defensive position,” the lawyers asserted.

The revelations, made public in federal court filings in Alexandria, Va., provide a preview of how defense attorneys for the son of a prominent Northern California lawyer hope to win his release.

Lindh’s trial on murder conspiracy charges is set to begin in August. If convicted, he faces a maximum prison term of life without parole.

The defense, while unveiling strategic points of their case, also complained that the government has known all along that Lindh, 21, never conspired or harmed any Americans and that, once he was captured, he told his U.S. interrogators that he was “disillusioned” by the Sept. 11 attacks.

But, the defense claimed, the government never released that side of the story, even though it would have helped the defense and, they said, would have provided a more balanced picture of Lindh when much of the U.S. was angry over his role in the war.

Instead, the defense argued, Washington was too busy generating public opinion against the man many Americans immediately viewed as a traitor.

Government prosecutors did not immediately respond in court to the defense assertions, and repeated requests for comment from the U.S. attorney’s office went unanswered.

Since Lindh was charged and then later indicted by a federal grand jury, the government has characterized him as a young man who tossed aside his American citizenship after he left the United States to study Islam in Central Asia.

Prosecutors have said he trained in a foreign terrorist camp, met with suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and pledged allegiance to the Taliban regime. The government has also released e-mails Lindh sent home to Marin County that prosecutors say show he had no remorse over the Sept. 11 attacks and had forsaken his American upbringing.

Further, the government has said Lindh conspired to kill Americans in the Afghan war, including CIA specialist Johnny “Mike” Spann, who died during an uprising at the Qala-i-Janghi prison there.

But the defense provided a starkly different story Friday.

Lindh’s lawyers said government officials have released only partial summaries of their interrogations with their client and have conveniently left out key portions of his statements that would tend to exonerate him.

“Significantly,” the lawyers said, “there are important inconsistencies between these two versions of what Mr. Lindh allegedly said to his interrogators in December.”

As a key instance, the defense pointed to Lindh’s statements about the Sept. 11 attacks in New York.

“The December summaries, for example, report that Mr. Lindh was obviously disillusioned when he learned of the attacks on the World Trade Center and wanted to leave his Taliban unit but could not do so for fear of death,” the defense said.

“Yet the reports in mid-January--at a time when Mr. Lindh’s case was the subject of frequent negative public commentary by government officials, intense media coverage and almost daily public opinion polls--omit reference to these statements.”

The defense said there are other government reports that are similarly “incomplete and inconsistent,” in which “names, dates, times, conditions and other relevant information are missing to varying degrees.”

To bolster their case that Lindh was not the sinister renegade depicted by the government, the defense also cited statements from some government officials that they said show their client tried to help the U.S. cause.

For instance, they said, Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated at one point that Lindh “has provided, at least from the Afghan viewpoints, some useful information and probably will continue to do so.”

The defense also sought to knock down the government’s argument that Lindh was among the prisoners trying to shoot their way out of the Qala-i-Janghi camp. Spann, who had just finished interviewing Lindh when the riot broke out, was killed.

“He had nothing to do with Mr. Spann’s death,” the defense said.

Rather, they quoted from an FBI affidavit by Special Agent Anne Asbury containing Lindh’s account of the uprising at the prison. Lindh told U.S. interrogators that “after the interview [with Spann], he was moved to a lawn where others whose interrogations had been completed had been moved,” according to the affidavit.

“Shortly thereafter, Walker [as he was known then] heard shots and screaming from the basement. Walker further stated that, upon hearing this, Walker got up and tried to run, but was shot in the leg and collapsed in the yard,” the affidavit said.

“Walker stated that he remained lying in the yard until he was brought to the basement by his comrades. Walker claims not to have seen what had happened to the two Americans who had interviewed him.”

Once he was captured, Lindh was kept in harsh conditions while he was being interrogated, including for a while stripped naked and placed in a large metal container, the documents said.

Later, the defense complained, he was paraded in front of U.S. military forces so that troops could pose for “souvenir photographs” with the now-famous prisoner.

Federal prosecutors must respond to the defense assertions by March 29. A pretrial hearing in the matter is scheduled for April 1.