There have been further developments in the case of Ali Mohamed Ali which we have followed¬†here,¬†here, and¬†here. Two weeks ago a jury acquitted Ali of the piracy charges. Of course, juries aren‚Äôt compelled to give the reasons for their decisions, but the¬†competing narratives¬†indicate that the crucial issue was one of¬†mens rea,whether Ali intended to personally profit from the negotiation or whether he instead was attempting to help free the captives. The jury was having trouble reaching a verdict on the separate hostage-taking charges and has now indicated that it¬†could not reach unanimity, thereby rendering a mistrial. The prosecution will likely indicate next week whether it intends to retry the latter charges. But double jeopardy prevents a retrial on the piracy charges.
As an aside, an interesting point of law developed prior to the jury verdict regarding the legal requirement that piracy be perpetrated on the high seas.¬†In this decision, the US district court found, based on the continuing offence doctrine, that ‚Äúso long as the illegal acts of violence, detention, or depredation for private ends continue, the offense of piracy continues even after the perpetrators leave the high seas.‚Äù There will be no appeal of this decision since Ali was acquitted of the piracy charge.