Moussaoui 'Cooked His Own Goose'

March 27, 2006 — -- Confessed al Qaeda co-conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui testified in court today that he knew of plans to fly planes into the World Trade Center and that he had planned to fly a plane into the White House. Since he has already confessed to being part of a terrorist plot designed to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings in the United States, the only question before the jury is whether or not he should be sentenced to death.

ABC News asked former federal defense attorney Jonathan Turley, now a professor at George Washington Law School, and former federal defender Barry Boss, now a partner at Cozen O'Connor law firm, to weigh in on Moussaoui's testimony.

Question: Is his goose cooked?

Turley: This is becoming a legal version of suicide by cop. Once again, Moussaoui has saved the government from the brink of defeat. Earlier, the government's case was falling apart on some counts because even American intelligence was admitting that he was never the 20th hijacker. Just when the government was looking increasing ridiculous, Moussaoui pleaded guilty to all counts, including the 20th hijacker count. Notably, he testified clearly and convincingly that he never was the 20th hijacker and just pleaded guilty to that count for kicks.

Now, with the government clearly losing its bid for the death penalty, he has saved the prosecution again. It is hard to imagine that the jury will not vote for death after such a performance.

The problem is that this testimony only highlights questions about his mental incompetence. Moussaoui is clearly a hateful, deranged individual who honestly believes that he is being clever. Every attorney who has spent any time with him has sought an insanity defense, but he has blocked those efforts. For years, we have all had to watch this lunatic engage in a series of self-inflicted wounds. Now, he has not only cooked his goose but served it up to the prosecutors with a signature garnish.

Question: How significant is his admission he lied to federal agents because he wanted his mission to go ahead?

Turley: It is the first real break for the government. His testimony could not have been written better by the prosecutors themselves. He all but confessed to the elements needed to secure the death penalty. The government has long argued that "Moussaoui lied and people died." He has now confirmed the first part, and the second part will be treated as a historical fact.

Question: How significant is his admission he was aware of two flights intended to hit the World Trade Center some time after August?

Turley: He shared information that we have not previously seen in the various investigations. This greater detail reinforces the government's claims that it would have acted had he been truthful. This is far less speculative due to his incriminating statements.

Question: How significant is his apparent admission that his part of the plot was part of what happened on 9/11?

Turley: Moussaoui seemed to take pride in his knowledge of the crime and admitted that he had hoped to fly a plane to achieve the same end. He admitted that he wanted the mission to succeed. Because of the details, it was even worse that we anticipated. The jury could always deadlock on death, but Moussaoui has done all he possibly could do to assist the prosecutors.

Question: Is his goose cooked and has he essentially made the prosecution's case?

Boss: Obviously, Moussaoui's goals in this case are not necessarily the same as his defense team. The defense team is dedicated to saving his life, and it would appear that Moussaoui's dedicated to being a martyr.

Before anything else, the prosecutors have to prove a threshold question -- they have to prove that Moussaoui, by his lies, caused somebody's death. And for this, it doesn't matter what his intentions were. He may have wanted to, but it doesn't mean he did it. On the threshold issue, Moussaoui's lawyers have done a phenomenal job at demonstrating that even if he had told the truth, it would appear unlikely from the testimony that it would have made a difference.

But if they get by that threshold question, then the jury is going to consider -- is this a person who deserves to live or is he somebody that should die? Do the aggravating circumstances sufficiently outweigh the mitigating ones.

Question: Did he serve them the answer on a silver platter?

Boss: In many ways, Moussaoui made a very compelling case. But I had the feeling the defense was trying to bring out how much this guy wants to be a martyr. He didn't get to be a martyr by flying a plane into the World Trade Center so he wants to become a martyr by getting the death penalty. You can be sure that the defense argument in closing is going to be, don't make him a martyr. The defense will likely argue that you can do more to subvert terrorism and deter others by not letting Moussaoui carry out his suicide plot under your watch -- and not to let him become a martyr within the terrorist community.