• Home
  • News
  • Firms & Lawyers
  • Courts
  • Judges
  • Surveys/lists
  • Columns
  • Verdicts
  • Public Notices
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe

Home > U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Appeal From Somali Pirates

Font Size: increase font decrease font

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Appeal From Somali Pirates

The Associated Press

January 24, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down an appeal from Somali men who were the first people convicted on federal piracy charges in nearly 200 years.

The justices did not comment in refusing to go into the convictions and sentences of life in prison.

The five defendants were prosecuted in Norfolk, Va., the first in a series of government prosecutions aimed at slowing the spread of piracy off Africa. It was the first piracy conviction in a U.S. courtroom since 1819.

The attacks came as pirates increased assaults in the waters off East Africa despite an international flotilla of warships dedicated to protecting vessels and stopping the pirate assaults.

The Nicholas, which was part of the flotilla, was mistaken for a merchant ship because the Navy used a lighting array to disguise the 453-foot warship and attract pirates. Three pirates in a skiff fired rocket-propelled grenades and raked the ship with AK-47 fire in the Indian Ocean north of the Seychelles Islands. No sailors were injured in the attack.

Defense lawyers had argued the men were innocent fishermen who had been abducted by pirates and forced to fire their weapons at the Virginia-based USS Nicholas.

But the government said that the Somalis had confessed to attacking the U.S. Navy ship after mistaking it for a merchant ship.

The court also rejected a separate appeal from another group of Somalis who have yet to be tried on piracy charges.

In that case, a lower court judge had dismissed charges against five Somalis in an attack on the USS Ashland, ruling since the men had not taken control or robbed the ship, their actions did not rise to the definition of piracy.

But a federal appeals court ruled last year that an armed attack on a U.S. vessel constituted piracy. That ruling sent the case back to U.S. District Court for trial.

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2

Next

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Associated Press
  • US District Court
  • U.S. Navy
  • Supreme Court of the United States

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Perelman's Case Against Arlin Adams Thrown Out
    •      
  2. Judge Orders Parties to Hire Neutral Expert to Probe Facebook
    •      
  3. Lawsuit Testing Federal Porn Regulation Allowed to Survive
    •      
  4. Ex-College QB Can Press Claim Over EA's Video Game
    •      
  5. Leave-of-Absence Issues Managers Need to Know
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid for 'Unconscionable' Fees

New York's Martin Act Faces Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media