Quote:
Originally Posted by Al-khiyal
|
July 4, 2008 -- The man accused of leading a terrorist group which intended to conduct violent jihad in Australia was a braggart who was ridiculed by some of his followers, according to his lawyer.
The Victorian Supreme Court today heard that Abdul Nacer Benbrika was well-regarded for the religious advice and instruction he offered to fellow Melbourne Muslims and also delivered sermons at mosques around the city.
But he was also a man with a variety of personal shortcomings, lawyer Remy Van de Wiel, QC, told the court.
"He doesn't seem to have many skills," Mr Van de Wiel told the jury.
The Algerian-born Benbrika, 48, who is also known to his associates as Abu Bakr and Sheikh, is charged with directing the activities of a terrorist organisation and other terrorism-related charges.
He is on trial with 11 other Melbourne men in Australia's largest ever terrorist case.
On the second day of his closing address, Mr Van de Wiel painted a picture of a man who lacked worldliness and certain basic knowledge, and who pandered to his audience of young devotees, who in turn mocked and ridiculed him.
"He seems to be under the impression that you can drive to Tasmania," Mr Van de Wiel said.
"He doesn't even have a great deal of knowledge about things you might think he should know about."
The bombing of the Australian Embassy in Jakarta in 2004 and the federal election that year, fitted that category.
Mr Van de Wiel said evidence presented during the five months of the trial suggested Benbrika was unaware of either event.
Benbrika also had scant knowledge of computers and "can't spell Google", his lawyer said.
"You might regard him as a 'gunna'," he said.
"People who talk but don't do anything.
"He loves being the font of knowledge .... he talks interminably.
"He is like a little rooster walking around."
While the men charged along with Benbrika regularly sought his advice on Islam and other matters, some of them laughed at him behind his back.
"Is this man a leader?" Mr Van de Wiel asked the jury.
Rather than promote jihad, Mr Van de Wiel said, his client was the one who regularly "hosed down" members of the group who seemed to express an interest in violent acts.
The jury heard Benbrika regularly "put the brake on" and didn't know where the "action pedal" was.
Mr Van de Wiel also pointed the jury to an interview conducted with Benbrika on
ABC Television as evidence of his client's inflated view of himself.
Benbrika had insisted that the station air the two-hour interview in its entirety.
"Two hours of Benbrika? You've got to be kidding," Mr Van de Wiel said.
The mere fact that Benbrika agreed to appear on the television program should raise further doubt about his alleged involvement in terrorism, Mr Van de Wiel told the jury.
"If he was genuinely involved in a terrorist organisation would he go on national television and [say] the sort of things he says," his lawyer said.
Mr Van de Wiel's closing address continues on Monday with counsel for the other 11 men to follow.
Favorites
Digg
Del.icio.us
Furl
Magnolia
StumbleUpon
Google
Yahoo MyWeb
Linear Mode
