LOS ANGELES: Zacarias Moussaoui’s indictment contains significant gaps that will test not only the definition of certain crimes but the meaning of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” Most of the 30-page indictment against Moussaoui focuses on other people and acts without reference to Moussaoui. Moussaoui stands accused of only inferred connections with the 19 hijackers.

Thus, while the government is pursuing well-based conspiracy charges for terrorism and aircraft piracy, the greatest controversy of the trial may be its effort to secure convictions specifically for the Sept 11 attacks. Moussaoui may claim to be something of the accidental terrorist, researching but not actually engaging in criminal acts. The question is the line between the terrorist wannabe and a criminal co-conspirator.

There are serious questions with a majority of the counts against Moussaoui. He is charged with conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction. However, the statutory definition of such a weapon expressly excludes “any device which is neither designed nor redesigned for use as a weapon.” That sounds a lot like an aeroplane. If an aeroplane is a weapon of mass destruction, the statute loses all meaning because any product from a car to a balloon could be such a weapon in a given case.

While Moussaoui may have met one hijacker, Hamza Alghamdi, in Afghanistan, the government has not alleged such a contact, and Moussaoui was not part of any known communications among the hijackers. As a result, most of Moussaoui’s trial will turn on a mysterious character who will not be present and has not been apprehended: Binalshibh. The government will likely argue that Binalshibh was the intended “20th hijacker” and that Moussaoui may have been a late replacement when Binalshibh was prevented from entering the country.

It is possible that Moussaoui was an “asset” who was never told of his possible role and, because of his failure to learn to fly, never activated as a sleeper agent. This possibility undermines the counts alleging conspiracy to murder US employees and to destroy aircraft. At this time, only two of the six counts appear squarely based on the evidence and offer the most justified basis for punishment. Moussaoui will appear more like a trophy than a terrorist unless more evidence is offered at trial. —Dawn/LAT-WP News Service (c) Los Angeles Times.