Alleged mastermind of 9/11 will finally head to trial, a judge declares nearly 25 years after terror attacks
Developed over time first seen 2 months ago
A military judge has set 5 June 2028 for the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, accused of masterminding the 11 September 2001 attacks, alongside three alleged co-conspirators. The ruling rejects prosecutors’ proposed January 2027 date and establishes a timetable for one of the longest-running terrorism cases in US history, though the trial remains conditional on procedural deadlines and unresolved appeals.
Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, Mustafa al-Hawasawi and Ammar al-Baluchi have been held at Guantanamo Bay since the early 2000s. Legal disputes over evidence obtained during CIA detention, including torture, have repeatedly delayed proceedings; an appeals court must still consider the suppression of al-Baluchi’s confession. The case also follows the cancellation of 2024 plea agreements that would have resulted in life sentences, leaving the defendants potentially eligible for the death penalty.
- Trial date set for 5 June 2028
- Torture-related evidence disputes still require appeals
- Cancelled plea deals reopened possible death penalties
New here? Start with this
The 11 September 2001 attacks were carried out by al-Qaeda, a militant Islamist network then led by Osama bin Laden. Hijacked passenger planes were flown into the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon near Washington, while a fourth crashed in Pennsylvania; nearly 3,000 people were killed.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is accused by the United States of planning the operation, alongside several other men alleged to have helped organise travel, money and communications. They have been held at the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay, in Cuba, for many years and face trial before a military commission rather than an ordinary civilian court.
The case has been delayed by disputes over evidence, including the treatment of detainees in CIA custody before they arrived at Guantanamo. These arguments matter because prosecutors have sought to use statements made by the accused, while defence lawyers argue that some were obtained after torture or other unlawful coercion.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Setting a firm 2028 trial date is a necessary step towards accountability for the nearly 3,000 people killed on 11 September and their families, who have waited decades for a lawful resolution. Prosecutors can reasonably argue that the alleged scale and planning of the attacks warrant a full capital trial if the evidence supports it, rather than plea deals that many victims’ relatives may see as insufficient. A structured timetable also gives both sides time to address complex evidence and ensure any verdict is durable.
The case against
Critics can reasonably argue that a military commission has already failed to deliver timely justice, and that another years-long process risks compounding the harm to victims’ families and defendants alike. The alleged use of torture and the continuing disputes over resulting evidence raise serious due-process concerns, particularly where the death penalty is possible; a conviction must not depend on unreliable or unlawfully obtained material. They may favour life-sentence agreements or civilian-court proceedings as more certain ways to secure accountability while upholding legal standards.
Full account
A US military judge has set 5 June 2028 as the trial date for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is accused of orchestrating the 11 September 2001 attacks, and three other men accused of involvement. Lieutenant Colonel Michael Schrama rejected prosecutors’ request to begin in January 2027, meaning the proceedings are scheduled to start almost 27 years after the attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people.
The defendants named in the reports are Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, Mustafa al-Hawasawi and Ammar al-Baluchi. They have been held at the Guantánamo Bay detention facility since 2003, while the capital case has been repeatedly delayed by procedural disputes and pre-trial litigation. The proposed timetable depends on both sides completing specified stages of preparation.
According to the more detailed report, opening statements would follow 30 days after the military jury is selected. The defence could wait until after the prosecution’s evidence before making its opening, and the order sets periods for applications seeking acquittal and for replies. Prosecutors may also seek to reopen their case after presenting their initial evidence if necessary.
The ruling follows a protracted dispute over plea agreements reached in 2024. Those agreements would have seen Mohammed, bin Attash and al-Hawasawi plead guilty in return for life sentences, but then Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin cancelled them, leaving open the prospect of capital punishment. Separately, an appeals court is expected to consider an earlier ruling concerning the admissibility of al-Baluchi’s confession.
Where outlets differ
Fox News gives a short breaking-news account, focusing on the 2028 date, the judge’s rejection of a January 2027 start and the length of the defendants’ detention.
Source 1 adds the detailed proposed trial schedule, the earlier plea-deal dispute, the potential death-penalty consequences and the pending issue over Ammar al-Baluchi’s confession.
Source 1 describes the date as coming shortly before the 25th anniversary of the attacks, whereas the scheduled trial itself would take place nearly 27 years after them.