Justice delayed for over two decades is a phrase that barely covers the absolute mess surrounding the prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. If you think the legal system moves slowly, look at the military commission proceedings for the men accused of orchestrating the September 11 attacks. A U.S. military judge just scheduled the trial for June 2028. That means nearly twenty-seven years will have passed since hijacked planes slammed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Why does this case crawl at a snail's pace? The answer involves secret evidence, botched plea deals, and the lingering shadow of CIA torture.
The Endless Legal Quagmire
Air Force Lt. Col. Michael A. Schrama set the June 2028 trial date, tossing out the prosecution's overly aggressive proposal to start in January 2027. Why? Mountains of unresolved pretrial motions still exist. Both sides are fighting tooth and nail over what evidence is admissible.
Mohammed and three co-defendants—Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak bin 'Atash, Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi, and Ali Abdul Aziz Ali—remain locked up at the Guantanamo Bay naval base. They have been there for ages. Mohammed was captured in Pakistan way back in 2003. Since then, the case has bounced between different judges, shifting military commission rules, and endless appeals.
Every time a trial date finally looks real, something blows it up.
The Torture Taint Problem
The biggest roadblock in this entire prosecution isn't sloppy paperwork. It's torture.
After his capture, Mohammed was subjected to severe CIA interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. Defense attorneys have argued successfully for years that statements extracted through torture are legally tainted. If a confession happens under extreme physical duression, can a court accept it as voluntary evidence?
The law says no. Prosecutors want to use statements Mohammed made to FBI agents after the CIA black site period, arguing those were clean. The defense calls bullshit on that separation. This single evidentiary battle has consumed years of court hearings, motions, and closed-door debates.
The Collapsed Plea Deals
The case nearly avoided a trial entirely. Negotiations dragged on for two years over a potential plea agreement. Under that deal, Mohammed and two co-defendants agreed to plead guilty to conspiracy and murder charges in exchange for taking the death penalty off the table. They would have received life sentences without parole.
Victims' families had mixed reactions. Some hated the idea of sparing them execution. Others wanted closure and answers, because the deal required the defendants to answer written questions from family members about the plot.
Then politics crashed the party.
When news of the plea agreement broke, political blowback was immediate and ferocious. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin yanked his approval and revoked the deals. The issue bounced to the courts. Eventually, an appeals court blocked the plea agreements altogether, forcing the military commission back onto the path of a full, grueling capital trial.
What Happens Next in Court
Assuming the 2028 date actually sticks—which history tells us is a massive gamble—the trial won't look like a standard civilian courtroom proceeding.
The military judge's scheduling order maps out a precise framework. Jury selection, utilizing a panel of service members, is set to begin on June 5, 2028. Opening statements will follow thirty days later. Prosecutors will lay out their case for the death penalty across thousands of counts of murder, representing every single life lost on 9/11.
Defense teams will have their chance to move for dismissals, present rebuttal evidence, and challenge classified intelligence restrictions.
Don't hold your breath for a quick verdict. Expect more delays, more appeals, and more legal maneuvers before any gavel drops in Guantanamo. Keep track of upcoming pretrial conference filings to see if the June 2028 deadline holds up under the weight of classified document disputes.
