D.C. Circuit on Obaydullah: New Evidence Unhelpful to Detainee's Case
The D.C. Circuit, in an exceedingly brief and quickly-issued per curiam judgment, has affirmed the district court's denial of Obaydullah's motion regarding newly-discovered evidence related to his habeas petition.
Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
The D.C. Circuit, in an exceedingly brief and quickly-issued per curiam judgment, has affirmed the district court's denial of Obaydullah's motion regarding newly-discovered evidence related to his habeas petition. Yours truly covered the oral arguments that took place in this Guantanamo habeas case only last week at the D.C. Circuit. That was fast.
Background: prior to the D.C. Circuit’s 2012 denial of Obaydullah's habeas petition, the detainee separately had filed a motion in the district court seeking relief under Rule 60(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. He said that new evidence demonstrated that one item used against him in his habeas case—blood splatter in his vehicle—had an innocuous explanation. That is, in Obaydullah's view, his proof made clear that his wife had given birth to Obaydullah's daughter in the car. And indeed, an investigation identified family member witnesses who could confirm that the blood did not come from al Qaeda fighters injured in an accidental IED explosion---as the government had argued earlier in the proceedings. The new evidence didn't change much for the detainee, in the end. District Court Judge Richard Leon denied Obaydullah's new-evidence motion in 2013, after the D.C. Circuit had affirmed the the lower court's rejection of habeas relief.
In its ruling today, the D.C. Circuit disagrees with Obaydullah's take on the new evidence, and agrees with Judge Leon's. The latter had concluded that other evidence supported a finding that Obaydullah was more likely than not a member of Al Qaeda---and further that such evidence was not affected by the detainee's showing regarding blood in his car. The appeals court also rejected Obaydullah's claim that new evidence calls into question the credibility of a government witness, a Staff Sergeant; on the contrary, writes the court, the newly-tendered evidence adds to the fellow's credibility, "because it confirms that blood was present where he said it was."
Raffaela Wakeman is a Senior Director at In-Q-Tel. She started her career at the Brookings Institution, where she spent five years conducting research on national security, election reform, and Congress. During this time she was also the Associate Editor of Lawfare. From there, Raffaela practiced law at the U.S. Department of Defense for four years, advising her clients on privacy and surveillance law, cybersecurity, and foreign liaison relationships. She departed DoD in 2019 to join the Majority Staff of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where she oversaw the Intelligence Community’s science and technology portfolios, cybersecurity, and surveillance activities. She left HPSCI in May 2021 to join IQT.
Raffaela received her BS and MS in Political Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2009 and her law degree from Georgetown University Law Center in 2015, where she was recognized for her commitment to public service with the Joyce Chiang Memorial Award. While at the Department of Defense, she was the inaugural recipient of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s General Counsel Award for exhibiting the highest standards of leadership, professional conduct, and integrity.
